BCC Minutes 11/12/2013 R BCC
WORKSHOP
MEETING
MINUTES
November 12, 2013
November 12, 2013
TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING
OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Naples, Florida, November 12, 2013
LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Collier County
Commissioners, in and for the County of Collier, also acting as the
Board of Zoning Appeals and 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:
CHAIRWOMAN: Georgia Hiller
Fred Coyle
Donna Fiala
Tom Henning
Tim Nance
ALSO PRESENT:
Jeffrey Klatzkow, County Attorney
Leo E. Ochs, Jr., County Manager
Tim Durham, Executive Manager, Corp. Business Operations
Crystal Kinzel, Finance Department
Page 1
COLLIER COUNTY
Board of County Commissioners
Community Redevelopment Agency Board (CRAB)
Airport Authority
`l� I ti
2
-!cf 'rf 'N
(Ji NA
AGENDA
Board of County Commission Chambers
Collier County Government Center
3299 Tamiami Trail East, 3rd Floor
Naples FL 34112
November 12, 2013
9:00 AM
Georgia Hiller - BCC Chairwoman; BCC Commissioner, District 2
Tom Henning - BCC Vice-Chairman; BCC Commissioner, District 3
Donna Fiala - BCC Commissioner, District 1; CRAB Vice- Chairman
Fred W. Coyle - BCC Commissioner, District 4
Tim Nance - BCC Commissioner, District 5; CRAB Chairman
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 12,2013
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 LOCATED AT 3335 EAST TAMIAMI TRAIL,
SUITE 1, NAPLES, FLORIDA, 34112-5356, (239) 252-8380; ASSISTED
LISTENING DEVICES FOR THE HEARING IMPAIRED ARE AVAILABLE IN
THE FACILITIES MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT.
LUNCH RECESS SCHEDULED FOR 12:00 NOON TO 1:00 P.M
1. INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
A. Reverend Beverly Duncan - Naples United Church of Christ
B. The Star Spangled Banner, sung by Tori Osceola
2. AGENDA AND MINUTES
A. Approval of today's consent agenda as amended (Ex Parte Disclosure
provided by Commission members for consent agenda.)
B. Approval of today's summary agenda as amended (Ex Parte Disclosure
provided by Commission members for summary agenda.)
Page 2
November 12, 2013
C. Approval of today's regular agenda as amended.
D. October 8, 2013 - BCC/Regular Meeting
3. SERVICE AWARDS
4. PROCLAMATIONS
A. Proclamation designating October 18, 2013 as the Earl G. Hodges Day of
Remembrance in Collier County in recognition of his significant
contributions to the community. To be accepted by Thelma Hodges.
Sponsored by Commissioner Hiller.
B. Proclamation designating November 2013 as Diabetes Awareness Month in
Collier County. To be accepted by Black Affairs Advisory Board Members
LaVerne Franklin, Vaughn Young, Frank Cummings, Debra Johnson
Hubbard, Diann Keeys, Jennifer Williams and Darling Smith. Sponsored
by the Board of County Commissioners.
C. Proclamation designating November 12, 2013 as Chief Kingman Schuldt
Day in Collier County in honor of his 2013 Florida Fire Chief of the Year
Award. To be accepted by Chief Kingman Schuldt. Sponsored by
Commissioner Fiala.
D. Proclamation recognizing November 16, 2013 as Florida Panther Festival
Day and acknowledging the festival goals of educating attendees about the
Florida panther while promoting the safe coexistence of people, pets,
livestock and wildlife through a fun and family-oriented event. To be
accepted by Tom Trotta, President and Amber Crooks, Secretary, Friends of
the Florida Panther Refuge and Brad Cornell of Collier County Audubon
Society. Sponsored by Commissioner Nance.
E. Proclamation designating November 10-16, 2013 as Hunger & Homeless
Awareness Week in Collier County. To be accepted by Debra Mahr,
Executive Director, Hunger & Homeless Coalition and David Flood, Faith
Communities to End Homelessness. Sponsored by Commissioner Nance.
F. Proclamation designating November 24-30, 2013 as Farm City Week in
Collier County. To be accepted by Sheriff Kevin Rambosk, Chair, 2013
Page 3
November 12, 2013
Farm City Executive Committee, and Farm City BBQ board members.
Sponsored by Commissioner Coyle.
G. Proclamation designating November 11-17, 2013 as Florida Veterans
Foundation week in Collier County. To be accepted by Lieutenant Colonel
Tony Colmenares, USMC (Ret); Technical Sergeant Cindy Soriano,
USAFR; and Ms. Kelly Landry, MSW. Sponsored by Commissioner Nance.
H. Proclamation designating November 2013 as "Local Organic Food Month"
in Collier County, to celebrate and honor local organic farms and local
restaurants that serve locally grown organic food. To be accepted by Alfie
Oakes, CEO of Oakes Farms and Food & Thought Café; Jeff Mitchell,
Owner of the Local Restaurant; Nick and Angela Batty, Owners, Inyoni
Farm; Ken Alaimo, Owner, Wild Heritage Farm; and Danielle Reinertsen,
Hen Keeper, Wild Heritage Farm. Sponsored by Commissioner Hiller.
5. PRESENTATIONS
A. Recognition of O. B. Osceola Sr. and the Osceola family of the Seminole
Tribe of Florida, for their commitment to preserving Collier County's rich
Native American heritage, culture, and traditions. Accepting the recognition
are three generations of the Osceola family: O.B. Osceola, Sr., Joanne
Osceola, O.B. Osceola, Angela Osceola, Bryce Osceola, Tori Osceola, O.B.
Osceola III, Tina Marie Osceola, Dakota Osceola, and Brody Osceola.
(Commissioner Hiller)
B. Presentation of the Collier County Business of the Month for November
2013 to the Harmon-Meek Gallery. To be accepted by Kristine Meek,
Barbara Meek, William Meek III and Juliana Meek.
C. Recommendation to recognize John Hayes, Instrumentation & Electrical
Technician, Wastewater as the Employee of the Month for October 2013.
D. Update and discussion regarding recent developments in the permit
application to drill for oil in Golden Gate Estates.
6. PUBLIC PETITIONS
Page 4
November 12,2013
Item 7 to be heard no sooner than 1:00 pm unless otherwise noted.
7. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS NOT ON THE CURRENT
OR FUTURE AGENDA
Item #8 and Item #9 to be heard no sooner than 1:30 pm unless otherwise noted.
8. BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
9. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Recommendation to consider approving the 2013 Cycle 1 of Growth
Management Plan Amendments for transmittal to the Florida Department of
Economic Opportunity for review and Comments response. (Transmittal
Hearing)
B. Recommendation to review and approve the 2013 combined Annual Update
and Inventory Report (AUIR) on Public Facilities and Capital Improvements
Element (CIE) amendment as provided for in Chapter 6.02.02 of the Collier
County Land Development Code and Section 163.3177(3)(b), Florida
Statutes.
10. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
A. Appointment of member to the Immokalee Beautification MSTU Advisory
Committee.
B. Appointment of member to the Collier County Coastal Advisory Committee.
C. Recommend that staff be directed to review the potential for a new private
natural gas utility opportunity to service the Immokalee Area and report
back to the Board for further consideration and possible action.
(Commissioner Nance)
11. COUNTY MANAGER'S REPORT
A. Recommendation to award Invitation to Bid (ITB) #13-6142 EKG Monitors
to Physio-Control, Inc., authorize the trade-in of 50 EKG monitors and
accessories, and authorize the Chairwoman to sign a lease-purchase
Page 5
November 12,2013
agreement with US Bancorp for a total financing amount of$1,547,884 for
the equipment as well as other necessary lease-purchase documents. (EMS
Chief Walter Kopka)
B. Recommendation to consider an offer to purchase privately held property
located east and adjacent to the Collier Area Transit Operations Facility at
8300 Radio Road. (Steve Carnell, Interim Public Services Administrator)
C. This item to be heard at 2:30 p.m. Recommendation to accept the results
of a public opinion survey regarding provision of fire services in the Isles of
Capri Fire District and provide any direction deemed appropriate. (Len
Price, Administrative Services Administrator)
12. COUNTY ATTORNEY'S REPORT
A. This item to be heard at 11:00 a.m. Recommendation that the Board of
County Commissioners authorizes the County Attorney to advertise and
bring back for a future public hearing a Purchasing Ordinance.
13. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
14. AIRPORT AUTHORITY AND/OR COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY
A. AIRPORT
B. COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
1) This item continued from the October 22, 2013 BCC Meeting.
Recommend the Collier County Community Redevelopment Agency
(CRA) review and approve the Immokalee and Bayshore Gateway
Triangle CRA's 2013 Supplemental Status Reports.
2) Recommendation for the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA)
to approve and execute the attached Lease with Greenway Landscape
Supply, LLC, a Limited Liability Company to operate a commercial
and residential landscape service on CRA owned property located at
1936 Davis Boulevard, in the Gateway Mini-Triangle for an annual
rent of$18,000 to be paid in equal monthly installments of$1500 for
Page 6
November 12, 2013
a term of three (3) years.
15. STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS
A. Current BCC Workshop Schedule.
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 an extension for completion of site
development plan improvements associated with The Executive
Center, originally known as 'N Magazine' (SDP AR-7432) pursuant to
Section 10.02.03 B.4 of the Collier County Land Development Code.
2) Recommendation to authorize the Clerk of Courts to release two
securities in the aggregate amount of$114,760 which were posted as a
development guaranty for work associated with Lantana Excavation
Permit No.'s 60.076 and 60.076-1, PL20100001536 and
PL20120001528.
3) 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 for recording the final plat of Raffia Preserve Phase 1,
(Application Number PPL-PL20130000232) approval of the standard
form Construction and Maintenance Agreement and approval of the
amount of the performance security.
4) 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 for recording the final plat of Esplanade Golf and Country
Club of Naples Phase 2, (Application Number PPL-PL2010002897)
Page 7
November 12, 2013
approval of the standard form Construction and Maintenance
Agreement and approval of the amount of the performance security.
5) Recommendation to approve the release of four liens in the combined
accrued amount of$629,662.82 for payment of$3,320, in the Code
Enforcement actions entitled Board of County Commissioners vs.
Timothy Nelson, Special Magistrate Case Numbers
CENA20090015974, CESD20090015977, CEPM20090015979, and
CEV20090015983, relating to property located at 3461 Verity Lane,
Collier County, Florida.
6) Recommendation to approve the release of a code enforcement lien in
the amount of$145,612.82 for payment of$562.82, in the Code
Enforcement Action entitled Board of County Commissioners vs.
Michael Ughi, Code Enforcement Case Number CEPM20120017264,
relating to property located at 168 Coral Vine Drive, Collier County,
Florida.
7) Recommendation to award Bid #13-6118 "Golden Gate Parkway
Sidewalk Improvements" for construction of sidewalk improvements
from Sunshine Boulevard east to Collier Boulevard to Quality
Enterprises USA, Inc. in the amount of$225,771.17 (Project #33206).
8) Recommendation to approve Agreement No. 4600002940 with the
South Florida Water Management District in the amount not to exceed
$75,000 for the continued collection of ground water quality samples
in Collier County.
9) Recommendation to approve an Agreement with the Collier County
School District to convey Right-of-Way to Collier County for the
construction of a sidewalk along the west side of Andrew Drive from
the southerly boundary of Shadowlawn Elementary School to
Caledonia Avenue. Fiscal Impact: $27 from Fund 101
10) Recommendation to approve a Work Order under the Agreement for
"Fixed Term Professional Engineering Services," Contract #09-5262,
in the amount of$95,740, to RWA Consulting, Inc., for Professional
Engineering Services for the design and permitting of the Lake
Trafford Road at North 19th Street Intersection Improvements, Project
Page 8
November 12,2013
No. 60016.
11) Recommendation to reject the sole bid for Invitation to Bid (ITB)
#13-6170 Storm Drain Maintenance and authorize the continuation of
ITB #10-5507 Storm Drain Cleaning, Documenting & Repairs to
Shenandoah General Construction Company for an additional one
year term.
12) Recommendation to accept a corrected Resolution establishing a
speed limit of forty (40) mph for Rattlesnake Hammock Road (CR
864) from Collier Boulevard (CR 951) east to the future Benfield
Road.
13) Recommendation to approve a funding agreement between Collier
County and the Pelican Bay Foundation, Inc. for truck haul beach
renourishment for Pelican Bay beach segment R-35 and R-36. This
renourishment is subject to Florida Department of Environmental
Protection's (FDEP) timely issuance of a Notice to Proceed (NTP) for
this work as defined in Permit Modification #0222355-013-JN. Fiscal
Impact: $374,227 from the Pelican Bay Foundation.
14) Recommendation to approve a Resolution superseding Resolution
Number 01-247 to revise the County's Access Management Policy to
add an easterly extension of Rattlesnake Hammock Road (CR 864),
east of Collier Boulevard (CR-951), upon acceptance by Collier
County for ownership and maintenance, while simultaneously
establishing the access class designation for the roadway.
B. COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
1) Request for authorization to advertise for future consideration an
ordinance amending Ordinance No. 97-82, as amended, which created
the Bayshore Beautification Municipal Service Taxing Unit, so as to
allow for additional right-of-way improvements.
2) Recommendation to award Invitation to Bid #13-6175 to Quality
Enterprises, Inc. in the amount of$879,630.60, for the renovation of
Bayview Drive and Lunar Street.
Page 9
November 12,2013
C. PUBLIC UTILITIES DIVISION
1) Recommendation to approve the Agreement for Fire Department
Accessible Raw Water Connections between Big Corkscrew Island
Fire Control and Rescue District, Golden Gate Fire Control District,
and Collier County Water-Sewer District to provide access to
supplemental water sources for fighting fires.
2) Recommendation to direct the County Manager or his designee to
advertise an ordinance amending Ordinance No. 2001-73, as
amended, the Collier County Water-Sewer District Uniform Billing,
Operating, and Regulatory Standards Ordinance, to maintain
compatibility with the Collier County Consolidated Impact Fee
Ordinance, as amended.
3) Recommendation to authorize the Key Marco Community
Development District to connect a pump to an on-site Collier County
Water-Sewer District-owned flushing device to allow the capture of
the potable water used to flush and maintain water distribution lines to
be reused for irrigation purposes in the community, subject to
payment of the base monthly user rate for 4-inch meters.
D. PUBLIC SERVICES DIVISION
1) Recommendation to approve a standard Collier County Parks and
Recreation Instructor Contract Services Agreement form and
authorize the County Manager or his designee to enter into these
Agreements with the Instructors, issue Purchase Orders and authorize
payments without additional Board approval.
2) Recommendation to approve five (5) releases of Affordable Housing
Density Bonus liens due to properties being sold at less than the
original purchase price.
3) Recommendation to accept a donation of 10 slash pine tree seedlings
for planting in the Nancy Payton Preserve.
4) Recommendation to approve a budget amendment in the amount of
$4,229.47 and recognize revenue generated from case management
Page 10
November 12, 2013
and case aid from the Medicaid Waiver program.
5) Recommendation to approve and execute the document necessary to
convey an airspace easement to the City of Naples Airport Authority
over County property at the Gordon River Greenway Park.
6) Recommendation to revise the Freedom Park and Gordon River
Greenway Park Land Management Plan to reflect accurate height
limitations for structural and natural obstructions.
7) Recommendation to authorize the Chair to execute an agreement
between the County and Sunshine State BMX Association, Inc. to
host the BMX Florida Cup Series Qualifier at the County's Naples
Wheels park facility in February 2014.
8) Recommendation to approve an Assignment and Assumption of Lease
Agreement allowing NWNG LLC, new owner of Waldorf Astoria
Naples, to use the gatehouse and boardwalk/concession stand and
operate the tram located at the Clam Pass Park.
9) Recommendation to approve the FY 13-14 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.
10) Recommendation to accept funds from Friends of the Library, a non-
profit 501(c)(3) corporation, in the amount of$28,200. Funds will be
used for the Library Electronic Assistance Program (LEAP),
providing temporary, seasonal employment to high-school students to
provide assistance for Library users needing help using computers and
electronic devices, and approve the necessary budget amendment.
11) Recommendation to approve three (3) Subrecipient Agreements for
the U.S. Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Community
Development Block Grant (CDBG) projects previously approved for
funding in amended FY2011-2012 and FY2012-2013 HUD Annual
Action Plans approved by the Board on October 8, 2013.
12) Recommendation to accept and execute the attached FY13-14 Florida
Commission for the Transportation Disadvantaged Shirley Conroy
Page 11
November 12,2013
Rural Area Capital Assistance Program Grant award in the amount of
$96,125, which includes a local match of$9,613, and authorize the
necessary budget amendments and approve the purchase of one (1)
paratransit vehicle utilizing those funds.
13) Recommendation to approve an agreement in the amount of$191,515
with the Agency for Health Care Administration and an agreement
with Collier Health Services (CHS) to participate in the Medicaid
Low Income Pool Program. Participation in this program will
generate $271,866 in Federal matching funds that will provide
additional health services for the citizens of Collier County.
14) Recommendation to recognize FY 2013/2014 Federal Transit
Administration Section 5311 additional revenue in the amount of
$295,600 and authorize all necessary budget amendments.
15) Recommendation to recognize FY 2013/2014 State Public Transit
Block Grant additional revenue in the amount of$907,341 and
authorize all necessary budget amendments.
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
renew the North Naples Fire Control and Rescue District's Certificate
of Public Convenience and Necessity for Advanced Life Support non-
transport services for one year and authorize the Chairwoman to
execute the Permit and Certificate.
2) Recommendation to ratify 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 13.
3) Recommendation to adopt a resolution authorizing the removal of
9,577 ambulance service accounts and their respective accounts
receivable balances totaling $5,769,953.33, which were recorded as
Bad Debt Expense during Fiscal Year 2010, from the general ledger
Page 12
November 12,2013
of Collier County Fund 490 (Emergency Medical Services).
4) Recommendation to approve the Department of Homeland Security
(DHS) Federally-Funded Subgrant Agreement #14DS-L5-09-21-01-
in the amount of$14,200 for Emergency Management training.
5) Recommendation to accept reports and ratify staff-approved change
orders and changes to work orders.
6) 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 Collier County's Certificate of Public Convenience and
Necessity for Advanced Life Support Transport for one year and
authorize the Chairwoman to execute the Permit and Certificate.
7) Recommendation to approve an award for Invitation to Bid (ITB)
#13-6049, "Protective Footwear (Shoes and Boots)" to Vic's Boot and
Shoe, Inc. and to authorize the use of the National Joint Powers
Alliance Contract (NJPA) for Payless Shoe Source as an alternate
contract source.
8) Recommendation to approve an Assumption Agreement with Orlando
Telephone Company, Inc., d/b/a Summit Broadband, as it relates to
Contract #11-5606 to provide voice and data communication services.
9) Recommendation to approve an Assumption Agreement with
Conestoga-Rovers & Associates Inc., as it relates to Contract #09-
5262 for County-wide engineering services.
10) Recommendation to acknowledge and approve the transfer of
ownership to Progressive Waste Solutions of FL, Inc., as it relates to a
Franchise Agreement for solid waste, recyclable materials, and yard
trash collection services in Franchise Service District 2 (Immokalee
Area).
11) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairwoman to
execute an Interlocal Agreement for an Advanced Life Support
Partnership between Collier County and the East Naples Fire Control
Page 13
November 12, 2013
and Rescue District.
12) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chair to execute
Amendment #2 to Agreement #11-5649-NS with CS STARS, LLC to
include an additional three year term for the lease of Risk
Management Information Systems software services in the amount of
$120,000 annually.
13) Recommendation that the Board authorize the County Manager to
proceed with the development of a grant modification within the
Department of Emergency Management to receive up to $600,000
from the Florida Division of Emergency Management for the
purchase of up to two (2) mass medical multi-patient ambulance
buses.
14) Recommendation to authorize the County Manager and staff to use
the Federal GSA schedules (i.e. Schedule 70 and 1122 Program); the
State of Florida Contracts, Agreements and Price Lists; competitively
solicited contracts by US Communities, Western States Contracting
Alliance, National Intergovernmental Purchasing Alliance (NIPA),
National Joint Powers Alliance (NJPA) public purchasing
consortiums; and, competitive solicitations from State of Florida
cities, counties, and other public municipalities (i.e. Sherriff's
Association) for the efficient purchase of goods and services for the
delivery of public services and for which funds were approved in
operating budgets.
F. COUNTY MANAGER OPERATIONS
1) Recommendation to approve the selection and contract of Aviareps
for tourism representation services in Brazil, authorize the Chair to
sign a County Attorney approved contract, and make a finding that
this expenditure promotes tourism.
2) Recommendation to adopt a resolution approving amendments
(appropriating grants, donations, contributions or insurance proceeds)
to the Fiscal Year 2013-14 Adopted Budget.
Page 14
November 12, 2013
3) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chair to execute
Amendment #1 to FY14 Category B Tourism Agreement with Old
Naples Waterfront Association, Inc. for the Stone Crab Festival and
ratify the effective date of the Agreement and the Amendment to the
date of Board approval on October 8, 2013.
4) Recommendation to adopt a resolution approving Collier County's
promotion of an international in-bound trade mission organized by the
French/PACA Collaborative, hosting the RETIS FACE 5 Executive
Training Program in Collier County, and providing funding in the
amount of up to $10,000 for financial support in facilitating the event
planned for the spring of 2014.
G. AIRPORT AUTHORITY
H. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
1) Commissioner Fiala requests Board approval for reimbursement
regarding attendance at a function serving a Valid Public Purpose.
Attended the Heart of the 23rd Annual Distinguished Citizen "Good
Scout" Award Dinner & Silent Auction on November 4, 2013. The
sum of$100 to be paid from Commissioner Fiala's travel budget.
2) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approve a
Diabetes Awareness Day Fair that will be hosted by the Collier
County Black Affairs Advisory Board to be held at the Golden Gate
Aquatics Center Park, January 25, 2014.
3) Commissioner Hiller requests Board approval for reimbursement
regarding attendance at a function serving a valid public purpose.
I. MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
J. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
1) To obtain Board approval for disbursements for the period of October
11, 2013 through October 17, 2013 and for submission into the
official records of the Board.
Page 15
November 12,2013
2) To obtain Board approval for disbursements for the period of October
18, 2013 through October 24, 2013 and for submission into the
official records of the Board.
3) To obtain Board approval for disbursements for the period of October
25, 2013 through October 31, 2013 and for submission into the
official record of the Board.
4) Recommendation to endorse the United States Department of Justice
and United States Department of Treasury combined Equitable
Sharing Agreement and Certification through September 2014.
K. COUNTY ATTORNEY
1) Recommendation to approve a Final Judgment concerning the taking
of Parcels 102FEE and 102TCE, in the lawsuit styled Collier County
v. LDJ Associates, LTD, et al, Case No. 2013-CA-1238 for the Collier
Boulevard expansion (Project No. 68056). Fiscal Impact $29,671.30.
2) Recommendation to authorize the County Attorney to file a lawsuit on
behalf of the Collier County Board Of County Commissioners, against
Bay Electric of Collier, Inc. and Bentley Electric Company of Naples,
FL, Inc. In The County Court Of The Twentieth Judicial Circuit In
And For Collier County, Florida, to recover damages to the County's
8" force main line in the Kensington Development, in the amount of
$7,569.68, plus the costs of suit.
3) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners adopts the
attached Resolution to amend the current policy regarding
reimbursement of travel and expenses incurred by County
Commissioners in the performance of their official duties.
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
Page 16
November 12, 2013
OBJECTIONS TO THE ITEM RECEIVED BY STAFF, THE COLLIER
COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION, OTHER AUTHORIZING
AGENCIES OR THE BOARD, PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF
THE BCC MEETING ON WHICH THE ITEMS ARE SCHEDULED TO BE
HEARD; AND 4) NO INDIVIDUALS ARE REGISTERED TO SPEAK IN
OPPOSITION TO THE ITEM. FOR THOSE ITEMS WHICH ARE QUASI-
JUDICIAL IN NATURE, ALL PARTICIPANTS MUST BE SWORN IN.
A. Recommendation to adopt a resolution approving amendments
(appropriating carry forward, transfers and supplemental revenue) to the
Fiscal Year 2013-14 Adopted Budget.
B. Recommendation to adopt an Ordinance repealing the ordinances which
created the Animal Services Advisory Board, the Solid Waste Management
Advisory Committee, the Collier County Public Health Unit Advisory
Board, the Collier County Council of Economic Advisors, the Marco Island
Vision Planning Advisory Committee, and the County Government
Productivity Committee.
C. Recommendation to adopt an ordinance amending Chapter 74 of the Collier
County Code of Laws and Ordinances, which is the Collier County
Consolidated Impact Fee Ordinance, providing for modifications directed by
the Board of County Commissioners related to a change in the timing of
payment of impact fees to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the
inclusion of Water and Wastewater Impact Fees as eligible for the "Impact
Fee Program for Existing Commercial Redevelopment" and including
additional minor updates or corrections related to "Adult Only
Communities," obsolete refund provisions, reimbursement agreements and
the "former" Goodland Water District.
18. ADJOURN
INQUIRIES CONCERNING CHANGES TO THE BOARD'S AGENDA SHOULD
BE MADE TO THE COUNTY MANAGER'S OFFICE AT 252-8383.
Page 17
November 12, 2013
November 12, 2013
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Good morning, ladies and
gentlemen. I'd like to begin by wishing you all happy holidays,
Thanksgiving is around the corner. And special thanks to Mr. Oakes.
Alfie, would you stand up a for a moment? This beautiful cornucopia
that we have in front of the dais today represents all locally grown
vegetables from Oakes Farms, and we are very grateful to you for
what you have done and how you're bringing the spirit of the holidays
to the Board and to the community.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Could we all come down there and
see?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yes, let's all go down and take a
look.
(Applause)
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: In fact, you know what? Before we
get started, could we have a quick photograph with Alfie and the
Board and the cornucopia?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Put it on the screen.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yeah, put it on the screen so
everybody can see it.
Hi, Eric.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, my goodness. I didn't even
realize you had a table full of stuff. So we have something to munch
on during the meeting, right?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Let's go down there and have a
photograph taken.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, that's all right, we can --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Are you sure?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Just flash it up on the screen, that
will be good.
Commissioner Coyle, you need to come up here too. It's not that
this is a command performance, but get up here.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you. Thank you,
Page 2
November 12, 2013
Commissioner Fiala.
Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you for all you've
done.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's so -- do it again.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Can you take us off the screens,
please?
MR. OCHS: Yes, ma'am.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: It's a little distracting to watch
yourself.
Yes, and we're so grateful to the farming community of Collier
County. They are a significant contributor to the local economy, and
we really appreciate the agricultural industry, especially in this month.
To begin, if we could all rise for the invocation, to be led by
Reverend Beverly Duncan from Naples United Church of Christ.
Item #1A
INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
REVEREND DUNCAN: Good morning, Commissioners and
staff and guests. Let us be in prayer.
Creator and creating God, let your Spirit be and work among this
body this morning. Guide these Commissioners in their deliberations.
Give them wisdom in the questions they ask and the decisions they
make. And most of all, we give thanks for their willingness to serve as
diligent leaders. Help them identify and do the things that most need
to be done. Grant that the way they work together today toward
ordering life in Collier County might be an example to us all to be
ever more effective citizens, showing love and caring for our
community and our neighbors.
We look to you this morning and give thanks for all who will be
honored today and celebrated for their legacy and generosity on behalf
Page 3
November 12, 2013
of the welfare of this corner of Florida.
In all that we say and do, may we all be a people shaped in both
values and words by a peace-seeking Creator. And grant our
Commissioners the kind of spirit that looks for blessings in the
business items, looks for new ways of hearing, thinking and seeing,
and shows the kind of spirit and debate that leans towards life. Bless
their work together today, and though perhaps tiring, may it bring
them satisfaction and even a little joy. May it be so by your grace.
Amen.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Commissioner Fiala, would you
lead us in the pledge?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You bet.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Hands over your hearts, please.
(Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison)
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: County Manager?
Item #2A
APPROVAL OF TODAY'S CONSENT AGENDA (EX PARTE
DISCLOSURE PROVIDED BY COMMISSION MEMBERS FOR
CONSENT AGENDA) — APPROVED AND/OR ADOPTED
W/CHANGES
MR. OCHS: Good morning, Madam Chair, Commissioners.
These are your proposed agenda changes for the Board of County
Commissioners meeting of November 12th, 2013.
The first proposed change is to add Item 11 .D to the regular
agenda. It's a discussion of a staff proposal to amend the excavation
hours at the sand mine that is providing sand for the beach
renourishment project.
Next proposed change is to move Item 16.C.2 to become Item
Page 4
November 12, 2013
11 .E on your regular agenda. It is a proposed amendment to your
impact fee ordinance related to the water and sewer utilities.
The next proposed change is to withdraw Item 16.D.2 from your
consent agenda. That change is made at the staffs request.
Next proposed change is to continue Item 16.D.11 to the next
meeting which will be December 10th, 2013. That is made at the staff
request.
The next proposed change is to move Item 16.F.1 from the
consent agenda to become Item 11 .F on your regular agenda. That
item is moved at Commissioner Henning's request.
The next proposed change is to move Item 16.K.3 from the
County Attorney consent agenda to become Item 12.B on your regular
agenda. That item is moved at both Commissioner Coyle and
Commissioner Fiala's separate request.
Next proposed change is to move Item 17.B to become Item 9.0
on your advertised public hearings. It's a recommendation to repeal
several advisory board ordinances. That move is made at
Commissioner Coyle's request.
Next proposed change is to move Item 17.0 to Item 9.D. That is
also a discussion of a proposed amendment to your county impact fee
ordinance.
And we have one agenda note this morning, Commissioners. It's
on Item 16.E.4. It's reflected on your change sheet. Page 6 of the
federally funded sub-grant agreement, Section 11, Remedies, should
read: In an event the default occurs, then the division shall, instead of
may, after 30 calendar days, written notice to the recipient, and upon
the recipient's failure to cure within those 30 days exercise any one or
more of the following remedies either concurrently or consecutively.
That's made at the staffs request.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: County Manager, shouldn't we add
the word "provide" written notice to the recipient to make this
grammatically correct?
Page 5
November 12, 2013
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir. Thank you.
Should read then the division shall, after 30 calendar days,
provide written notice. Thank you.
And we have three time certain items today, Commissioners.
The first is Item 12.A which will be heard at 11 :00 a.m. That's a
discussion of your county purchasing policy.
The next proposed time certain is 2:30 p.m. And that is for Item
11 .0 to hear the results of the survey from the Isles of Capri residents
regarding their preferences on future discussions and potential merger
with the East Naples Fire Control and Rescue District.
And the final time certain hearing relates to Item 11 .E, which
was part of your change.
16.C.2 is related to the move for 17.C. They're both related to
impact fee ordinances. And we need to hear 16.C.2, which will now
be 11 .E after you hear Item 9.D this afternoon.
Those are all the changes that I have, Madam Chair.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: County Manager, can you give us
time certains for the court reporter breaks, both the morning and the
afternoon, so we can reflect that as part of this agenda?
MR. OCHS: Sure.
The morning break will be at 10:30 p.m. for the court reporter.
And the afternoon break will be at 3:00 p.m., if that's agreeable. 3:00
p.m., ma'am.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: In the instance of all time certains
and as well as the breaks for the court reporter, County Manager, can
you ensure that the Board is given five minutes notice so that we can
wrap up whatever discussion we're in the middle of to ensure that the
time certains and the breaks are respected?
MR. OCHS: Yes, will do.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you.
With that, County Manager, let's move to the approval of the
consent agenda as amended.
Page 6
November 12, 2013
MS. KINZEL: Excuse me, Commissioner Hiller?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yes.
MS. KINZEL: We would request that 16.E.14 regarding the
state contract issue associated with the purchasing discussion be
moved forward to be included with that or after that purchasing
discussion on 12.A.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Could you repeat that?
MS. KINZEL: 16.E.14 to be heard after 12.A when we talk
about the purchasing, please. Thank you.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: 12.A. Okay, so -- and that's -- so
16.E.14 to be heard on the general agenda moved from consent after
the presentation on the purchasing ordinance.
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, that would be Item 11 .G under
County Manager's regular agenda. And we'll hear that, if that's the
Board's preference, after the 12.A.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yeah, that's fine.
Any other modifications?
(No response)
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Go ahead, County Manager.
MR. OCHS: Thank you, ma'am.
Item 2.A is approval of today's consent agenda as amended.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Members of the Board, any ex parte
communication?
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes, ma'am. On 16.E.1 I spoke
to North Naples Fire Chief and staff. And that's the only ex parte
communication I have.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you.
Commissioner Nance?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I have no ex parte on today's
consent agenda.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Commissioner Coyle?
Page 7
November 12, 2013
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I have no ex parte on any item on
the agenda.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, I have -- I'd better get this thing
closer. I have a few things to declare. On 16.A.3 I had some
correspondence and updates from staff. On 16.A.4 I had some emails.
On -- no, and that's it.
And then I wanted to make a comment and just to get some input
from the Board. On 16.D.3, not that I want to pull it or change it or
anything, but 16.D.3 is authorization to accept a donation of 10 slash
pine tree seedlings that are two inches to 10 inches tall and a total
value of approximately $10. And, you know, it takes a lot of staff
time to write something like that up to accept a $10 donation. Do we
really need to get that detailed, or were you not allowed to even accept
$10 worth of donation?
MR. OCHS: No, ma'am, we're governed by your state statute
that any donation needs to go through this process, as I understand it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I see. Okay. That's a lot of money
to spend from staff time to accept $10. But if that be the case, thank
you.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Notwithstanding, we very much
appreciate the donation and we think it's really wonderful that trees
are being donated to the preserves. And we hope that continues.
Thank you for your comment, Commissioner Fiala.
And for my part, I have no ex parte communication with respect
to the consent.
Is there any discussion on the consent?
MR. MILLER: Madam Chairwoman, I do have one registered
public speaker on this item.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Let's go ahead and hear the speaker
then.
MR. MILLER: Bob Krasowski.
Page 8
November 12, 2013
MR. KRASOWSKI: Good morning, Commissioners. Bob
Krasowski, for the record.
I'm here to request an item on the consent agenda be moved to
the regular agenda, and that would be Item 16.A.13. It involves a
contract with the county with Pelican Bay for the sand truck haul.
And being I've been following this for quite some time, it's been a
public issue, a lot of people have taken interest in it. I'd like to hear
the presentation and particulars of that. It identifies in the agenda that
it's for the sections of the beach R-35 and R-36, but the actual entire
project in that section of Pelican Bay Beach, but saying Pelican Bay
meaning that area of the county. But that section of the beach there
goes from I think 30.5 all the way to 30.7. So I'd like to know how
that works in. Are they paying for a portion of it, are they -- is the rest
of it being done? Have things changed? Waiting for a move forward
permit from the DEP? I'd like to hear about what the circumstances
are there. And that's my request, that you move 16.A.13 to the regular
agenda.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you.
County Manager, is the information requested by the constituent
included in the backup material? Would all the information that he's
addressing be incorporated in there, or is there a need to bring this
forward for discussion?
MR. OCHS: Commissioner, I believe all the pertinent
information about the entire stretch of the proposed renourishment of
the Pelican Bay beaches in that executive summary, both the cost and
the parameters of the project, if you will, the only thing that may not
be addressed in there in any degree of specificity is the reference to
the status of the appeal that was filed by Lee County effecting that
permit for that stretch of the beach renourishment.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: That can be addressed under County
Attorney's communications.
County Attorney, can you bring that forward in --
Page 9
November 12, 2013
MR. KLATZKOW: I can tell you right now, the petition was
dismissed with leave to amend. So at this point in time there's nothing
pending in Tallahassee.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Might I add, Commissioner, I
thought it was very clear, very plain. I read the entire thing and they
stated specifically which accounts would be paying all out of the
Pelican Bay community and not out of any taxpayer dollars nor any
TDC dollars. So I thought it was very clearly written.
If you'd like, I could give him my backup material and be happy
to share that with him and he can keep it, if you'd like.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And County Manager, if you could
have staff work with Bob, if he has any additional questions, to make
sure he has them answered?
MR. OCHS: We'd be happy to do that, Madam Chair.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: We appreciate that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Move to approve the consent
agenda as amended.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Second.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: There being no further discussion,
all in favor?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Motion carries unanimously.
Page 10
Proposed Agenda Changes
Board of County Commissioners Meeting
November 12,2013
Add On Item 11D: Recommendation to approve an emergency declaration extending the hours
associated with excavation and hauling activities for the Stewart Mine in order to facilitate the
expedited completion of the current beach renourishment project. (Staff's request)
Move Item 16C2 to Item 11E: Recommendation to direct the County Manager or his designee to
advertise an ordinance amending Ordinance No. 2001-73,as amended,the Collier County Water-
Sewer District Uniform Billing,Operating,and Regulatory Standards Ordinance,to maintain
compatibility with the Collier County Consolidated Impact Fee Ordinance,as amended. (Staff s
request)
Withdraw Item 16D2: Recommendation to approve five(5) releases of Affordable Housing
Density Bonus liens due to properties being sold at less than the original purchase price. (Staff s
request)
Continue Item 16D11 to December 10,2013 BCC Meeting: Recommendation to approve three
(3) Subrecipient Agreements for the U.S.Housing and Urban Development(HUD) Community
Development Block Grant(CDBG) projects previously approved for funding in amended FY2011-
2012 and FY2012-2013 HUD Annual Action Plans approved by the Board on October 8,2013.
(Staffs request)
Move Item 16F1 to Item 11F: Recommendation to approve the selection and contract of Aviareps
for tourism representation services in Brazil,authorize the Chair to sign a County Attorney
approved contract, and make a finding that this expenditure promotes tourism. (Commissioner
Henning's request)
Move Item 16K3 to Item 12B: Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners adopts
the attached Resolution to amend the current policy regarding reimbursement of travel and
expenses incurred by County Commissioners in the performance of their official duties.
(Commissioner Coyle and Commissioner Fiala's separate requests)
Move Item 17B to Item 9C: Recommendation to adopt an Ordinance repealing the ordinances
which created the Animal Services Advisory Board,the Solid Waste Management Advisory
Committee,the Collier County Public Health Unit Advisory Board,the Collier County Council of
Economic Advisors,the Marco Island Vision Planning Advisory Committee,and the County
Government Productivity Committee. (Commissioner Coyle's request)
Move Item 17C to Item 9D: Recommendation to adopt an ordinance amending Chapter 74 of the
Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances,which is the Collier County Consolidated Impact
Fee Ordinance, providing for modifications directed by the Board of County Commissioners
related to a change in the timing of payment of impact fees to issuance of a certificate of occupancy,
the inclusion of Water and Wastewater Impact Fees as eligible for the "Impact Fee Program for
Existing Commercial Redevelopment"and including additional minor updates or corrections
related to "Adult Only Communities,"obsolete refund provisions, reimbursement agreements and
the"former" Goodland Water District. (Staffs request)
Proposed Agenda Changes
Board of County Commissioners Meeting
November 12,2013
Page 2
Note:
Item 16E4: Page 6 of the Federally Funded Subgrant Agreement,Section 11 Remedies,should
read: If an Event of Default occurs,then the Division may shall,after thirty calendar days
written notice to the Recipient and upon the Recipient's failure to cure within those thirty days,
exercise any one or more of the following remedies,either concurrently or consecutively. (State's
request)
Time Certain Items:
Item 12A to be heard at 11:00 a.m.
Item 11C to be heard at 2:30 p.m.
Item 11E to be heard immediately following Item 9D
11/12/2013 8:42 AM
November 12, 2013
Item #2B
APPROVAL OF TODAY'S SUMMARY AGENDA AS AMENDED
(EX PARTE DISCLOSURE PROVIDED BY COMMISSION
MEMBERS FOR SUMMARY AGENDA) — ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: Item 2.B is approval of today's summary agenda as
amended.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Motion to approve.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you. May I have a second?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Second.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Can we -- County Attorney, we
prefer to do the ex parte -- County Attorney? Shall we do the ex parte
now on this?
MR. KLATZKOW: Yes.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Okay. So Commissioner Henning,
ex parte?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: None.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Commissioner Nance?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: None.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No ex parte.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: None.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And I also have no ex parte
communication on this matter.
There being no further discussion, all in favor?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
Page 11
November 12, 2013
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Motion carries unanimously.
Item #2C
APPROVAL OF TODAY'S REGULAR AGENDA AS AMENDED
— APPROVED AND/OR ADOPTED W/CHANGES
MR. OCHS: Item 2.0 is approval of today's regular agenda as
amended.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you. May I --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So moved.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you.
May I have a second?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Second.
MR. MILLER: Madam Chair, I do have a registered speaker on
this item.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Can you allow the speaker to come
forward.
MR. MILLER: Bob Krasowski.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Wait a minute.
MR. OCHS: Whoa, whoa, whoa.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Wait a minute.
MR. OCHS: It's a regular agenda.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It's a regular agenda and we
have ample time for the public comment on each of the items.
MR. MILLER: That's my mistake. You're correct, sir.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I have one comment before we
approve today's regular agenda. I'll just point out to my fellow
commissioners, I've included one informational item that kind of
outlines a discussion that I would like to have and a motion I will be
making on Item 9.B. And I provided it to you as one-way
communication. I've also supplied it to Mr. Ochs, County Attorney,
Page 12
November 12, 2013
and I will be providing it to the court reporter for inclusion in the
public record. This is just to ease my discussion on that item.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Madam Chair, a point of order?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yeah, go ahead.
MR. KRASOWSKI: On the regular agenda under presentation,
you have Item S.D. This doesn't allow for public comment. And my
request under regular agenda would be to have that moved. So don't I
have an opportunity to address that under 2.0 regular -- approval of
regular agenda as amended? You know, that's kind of lost
somewhere. I don't know where it goes.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So your request is essentially to ask
the Board to move an item from presentations to the general agenda,
that's your --
MR. KRASOWSKI: Yeah, yeah, right, correct.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And I think that's a fair question to
be asked under --
MR. KRASOWSKI: Regular agenda.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: -- this point. But because we're not
-- Bob is not actually addressing anything on the general agenda, but
again, as he did in his previous comment, requesting that something be
moved.
County Manager, would you like to address why that is under
presentations?
MR. OCHS: Yes, ma'am. It was just a quick update to advise
the Board of the status of the staffs work with the community and the
state on the proposed oil drilling issue.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: It's not an action item?
MR. OCHS: Well, no, ma'am. And quite frankly, subsequent to
the agenda going to print we learned that the state has now scheduled
an administrative hearing on that matter and I think the staff remarks
will be very limited at this point.
Page 13
November 12, 2013
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I think it's appropriate to remain
under presentations, and the public speakers have the opportunity to
address anything that's brought up in the presentation during the
public comment portion of the meeting which occurs in the afternoon
after lunch.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Commissioners, if I --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Commissioner Henning --
MR. KRASOWSKI: -- just address quickly.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: No, point of order. I'm sorry.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Okay.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, you pretty much
addressed it's not an action item. Usually if anything we might give
guidance, but there's no final action.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: You're absolutely correct.
Thank you very much, Bob.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Could I --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Move to approve --
MR. KRASOWSKI: -- just make one point about --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- as amended.
MR. KRASOWSKI: -- listed as a discussion item?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Second.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Okay, silencing the public once again.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: No, we're not silencing the public at
all. We're giving you the opportunity to address this under public
comment.
I have the motion. Do I have a second?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Second.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Is there any further discussion?
(No response)
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: There being no further discussion,
all in favor?
Page 14
November 12, 2013
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Motion carries unanimously.
Item #2D
MINUTES FROM THE OCTOBER 8, 2013 BCC/REGULAR
MEETING — APPROVED AS PRESENTED
MR. OCHS: Item 2.D is approval of the regular meeting minutes
of the Board of County Commissioners meeting of October 8th, 2013.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Moved.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I have a motion and a second.
Any discussion?
(No response)
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: There being no discussion, all in
favor?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Motion carries unanimously.
Item #4
PROCLAMATIONS — ONE MOTION TAKEN TO ADOPT ALL
PROCLAMATIONS (#4A THRU #4H)
Page 15
November 12, 2013
Item #4A
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING OCTOBER 18, 2013 AS THE
EARL G. HODGES DAY OF REMEMBRANCE IN COLLIER
COUNTY IN RECOGNITION OF HIS SIGNIFICANT
CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE COMMUNITY. ACCEPTED BY
THELMA HODGES — ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, that takes us to Item 4 on your
agenda this morning, proclamations. Item 4.A is a proclamation
designating October 18th, 2013 as the Earl G. Hodges Day of
Remembrance in Collier County in recognition of his significant
contributions to the community. To be accepted by Thelma Hodges.
This item is sponsored by Commissioner Hiller.
Ms. Hodges, if you'd please step forward.
(Applause)
MR. OCHS: Could we please get a photo?
(Applause)
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Earl Hodges was an incredible
member of our community, and he did too much for Collier County. I
can't even begin to possibly sit here and list out the many, many
positive contributions he made to make Collier County the great place
it is today. So we're going to really miss him.
Item #4B
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING NOVEMBER 2013 AS
DIABETES AWARENESS MONTH IN COLLIER COUNTY.
ACCEPTED BY BLACK AFFAIRS ADVISORY BOARD
MEMBERS LAVERNE FRANKLIN, VAUGHN YOUNG, FRANK
CUMMINGS, DEBRA JOHNSON HUBBARD, DIANN KEEYS,
Page 16
November 12, 2013
JENNIFER WILLIAMS AND DARLING SMITH — ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: Item 4.B is a proclamation designating November,
2013 as Diabetes Awareness Month in Collier County. To be
accepted by Black Affairs Advisory Board members LaVerne
Franklin, Vaughn Young, Frank Cummings, Debra Johnson Hubbard,
Diane Keeys, Jennifer Williams, and Darling Smith. And this item is
sponsored by the entire Board of County Commissioners.
(Applause)
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I think this is tangible evidence
here that fruit and vegetables have a substantial impact on diabetes.
MS. FRANKLIN: I haven't done this in a while.
Well, thank you so much, County Commissioners. The Black
Advisory Board wants to thank all of you for allowing us to serve. We
live here in paradise, but we also realize that there's things that need to
be done to improve it. So we're willing and able to do that.
We're going to have an expo for awareness on diabetes. It's an
epidemic here in Collier County and throughout the country. And we
on the Black Advisory Board is willing and able to assist in any way
possible to educate, to identify some of the problems that exist
because of diabetes. And this is a great opportunity for everyone, and
we invite our County Commissioners and all of our citizens here in
Collier County to join us on January 25th, 2014 from 10:00 to 2:00,
and at the Golden Gate Recreational Park on Santa Barbara
Boulevard.
We realize -- and we've done an awful lot of research on this, and
it doesn't only impact the African-American community, but it doesn't
discriminate at all. It crosses all lines. And what we realize is that we
collectively have to work together to stop diabetes.
There was an article in the newspaper from the economic forum
and it says that African -- I'm sorry, Americans are fat, that we're
stressed out and that we're prone to have heart attacks. And what
Page 17
November 12, 2013
we're saying, you know, not only African-Americans, but everyone
here needs to really consider how to change our behaviors, to eat
better, to move. And we're suggesting that you are our advocates, that
you should take the lead in addressing the needs to prevent people
here in our county from having diabetes. And most of the people don't
even realize they have it. So we are saying with our expo that it's an
educational forum that people will come together under one roof and
learn about how to control it, how to identify it and how to educate
themselves so they won't be fat, stressed and having a heart attack.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Very well said.
And just so you know that the county is very much supportive of
exactly the type of lifestyle that you're describing with respect to our
employees. We actually have a program to educate our employees on
the importance of exercise, you know, what to eat, how to prepare that
food. So, you know, we optimize our health and how to live so you
do minimize stress and not have heart attacks.
MS. FRANKLIN: That's it.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So we do that. And Leo, through
our Health Department and through our Risk Management Division
has done an outstanding job on helping many of our employees who
have diabetes find a healthy lifestyle and get better.
MS. FRANKLIN: That's great.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So yeah, thank you so much.
MS. FRANKLIN: So you have our support and we're going to
do everything that we can, you know, so we can educate people.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And you have our support.
MS. FRANKLIN: Thank you very much.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: We appreciate all you're doing.
(Applause)
Item #4C
Page 18
November 12, 2013
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING NOVEMBER 12, 2013 AS
CHIEF KINGMAN SCHULDT DAY IN COLLIER COUNTY IN
HONOR OF HIS 2013 FLORIDA FIRE CHIEF OF THE YEAR
AWARD. ACCEPTED BY CHIEF KINGMAN SCHULDT —
ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, Item 4.0 is a proclamation
designating November 12th, 2013 as Chief Kingman Schuldt Day in
Collier County, in honor of his 2013 Florida Fire Chief of the Year
Award. To be accepted by Chief Kingman Schuldt. This item is
sponsored by Commissioner Fiala.
Chief, if you would please step forward.
(Applause)
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Congratulations.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Take a picture, though.
CHIEF SCHULDT: Thank you, Madam Chairwoman,
Commissioners, Mr. Manager.
This is very much appreciative and not necessary, but I have to
tell you that any amount of success that I'm being recognized for is
really a direct reflection on the efforts of my organization that I
represent. And under the leadership of Chairman Page and Chairman
Stedman, my Executive Staff, Assistant Chief Nolan Sapp, Deputy
Chief Biando, Director Bishop, my Administrative Assistant Nicole
Chesser, and the leadership of President Chris Tobin and Local 2396
we're really, really proud of what we've accomplished over the last
year or so as a team, and we're just so proud to be a part of Collier
County. And we look forward to continuing that effort and being
leaders in the fire rescue service. So thank you very much on behalf
of all my members.
(Applause)
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Madam Chair, I would just like to
make one further comment in our congratulations to Chief Schuldt that
Page 19
November 12, 2013
he, Chief Schuldt together with Chief Nolan Sapp are going to be
further honored by their community because they've been selected in
the Collier County Estates area communities as Public Servant
Citizens of the Year for the year 2013, and they will be so honored on
this Thursday, November 14th.
So congratulations to both you gentlemen for your continued
service. Thank you so much.
(Applause)
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Chief Schuldt? Chief, do you want
to have a picture with your -- I mean, your whole team is here. Would
you like to bring them up? Because I'm sure they would love to have
this day as a memory for them once they retire. They'll remember it
fondly.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Spread yourself amongst vegetables.
(Applause)
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Madam Chair? Madam Chair?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: May I further say with the
leadership of the Chief and the joint commissioners, they're on a way
of total savings to almost opening up another station.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Oh, that's great.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And manning it with
firefighters. So that's really exciting.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: That's great. Thank you. Thank
you for letting us know that Commissioner.
MR. OCHS: Madam Chair, while we're on this subject, if you
don't mind just one more --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yeah, absolutely.
MR. OCHS: -- comment on the consent agenda this morning that
you just approved is a new advanced life support engine agreement
between county EMS and the East Naples Fire Control and Rescue
District which we're very excited about, very appreciative of. And
Page 20
November 12, 2013
again, is continuing the trend to do more with less and provide higher
level of service to --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And you know how I feel about that
when it comes to saving lives and cardiac arrest. So great job, thank
you.
MR. OCHS: We appreciate the Chief and his staff--
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yep.
MR. OCHS: -- working with us on that.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Outstanding. Thank you.
MR. OCHS: Thank you.
Item #4D
PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING NOVEMBER 16, 2013 AS
FLORIDA PANTHER FESTIVAL DAY AND
ACKNOWLEDGING THE FESTIVAL GOALS OF EDUCATING
ATTENDEES ABOUT THE FLORIDA PANTHER WHILE
PROMOTING THE SAFE COEXISTENCE OF PEOPLE, PETS,
LIVESTOCK AND WILDLIFE THROUGH A FUN AND
FAMILY-ORIENTED EVENT. ACCEPTED BY TOM TROTTA,
PRESIDENT AND AMBER CROOKS, SECRETARY, FRIENDS
OF THE FLORIDA PANTHER REFUGE AND BRAD CORNELL
OF COLLIER COUNTY AUDUBON SOCIETY — ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: That takes us to Item 4.D. It's a proclamation
recognizing November 16th, 2013 as Florida Panther Festival Day,
and acknowledging the festival goals of educating attendees about the
Florida panther while promoting the safe coexistence of people, pets,
livestock and wildlife through a fun and family oriented event. To be
accepted by Mr. Tom Trotta, President, and Amber Crooks, Secretary,
Friends of the Florida Panther Refuge, and Brad Cornell of Collier
County Audubon Society. This item is sponsored by Commissioner
Page 21
November 12, 2013
Nance.
(Applause)
MR. TROTTA: Thank you, Commissioner Nance, for
sponsoring this proclamation, and thank all the Board for supporting
the festival, the Florida Panther Festival, which will be held November
16th at the North Collier Regional Park. And it will be a fun event.
It'll be family oriented, there'll be live entertainment, exhibits, local
food, children's activities. And the festival is a great way to promote
living with wildlife. A pavilion with information on how to live safely
with wildlife will be available for residents. And I want to thank you
again.
(Applause)
Item #4E
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING NOVEMBER 10-16, 2013 AS
HUNGER & HOMELESS AWARENESS WEEK IN COLLIER
COUNTY. ACCEPTED BY DEBRA MAHR, EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR, HUNGER & HOMELESS COALITION AND DAVID
FLOOD, FAITH COMMUNITIES TO END HOMELESSNESS —
ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: Item 4.E is a proclamation designating November
10th through the 16th, 2013 as Hunger and Homeless Awareness
Week in Collier County. To be accepted by Debra Mahr, Executive
Director, Hunger and Homeless Coalition, and David Flood, Faith
Communities to End Homelessness. This item is sponsored by
Commissioner Nance.
(Applause)
MR. MARTEL: Could we have representatives of Hunger and
Homeless Coalition and Faith Communities here for the picture?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Come on up. Or I should say come
Page 22
November 12, 2013
on down.
MR. MARTEL: My name is Debby Mahr. I'm the executive
director of the Hunger and Homeless Coalition, and I'd like to thank
the Board of County Commissioners and Commissioner Nance for this
proclamation.
Activities this week have been planned by two organizations:
The Hunger and Homeless Coalition and also the Faith Communities
to End Homelessness, our partners.
Homelessness is a complex problem and it extends beyond those
stereotypes that we often associate with homelessness. So this week
presents an opportunity to confront those many phases of
homelessness in our community, including the rising number of
working families with children and our unaccompanied youth.
And I know David wanted to say --
MR. FLOOD: Thank you, Commissioners.
If you'd indulge me, I want to say thank you very much. Faith
Communities to End Homelessness was formed only in the last year as
a group of concerned people from a wide variety of faith organizations
to advocate for the homeless and to elevate a level of awareness of
homeless issues in existence in Collier County.
Homeless realities exist from downtown Naples to Immokalee,
and the presence of homelessness is evident in every single school in
our county.
The success of our economy in Collier County accentuates the
fact that there is a serious lack of affordable housing. We have an
incredible opportunity to educate our citizens, that there are indeed
individuals working to make our county a viable destination for
visitors and vacationers, and these people actually lack housing.
Some are considered to be temporarily homeless while others need
emergency shelter. And we would like to see everyone have access to
permanent supportive housing.
The upcoming week this week is our first attempt to raise that
Page 23
November 12, 2013
awareness. We hope you and many others can join us on Saturday at
Vanderbilt Presbyterian Church to see a showing of the academy
award-winning documentary, Inocente, about a young homeless teen
who finds hope in her life and seeks success. That is from -- at 2:00 to
4:00 p.m. on Saturday.
We sincerely thank the Board of County Commissioners for their
recognition of this issue and that this week will be one of education
and action. Thank you.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you.
(Applause)
Item #4F
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING NOVEMBER 24-30, 2013 AS
FARM CITY WEEK IN COLLIER COUNTY. ACCEPTED BY
SHERIFF KEVIN RAMBOSK, CHAIR, 2013 FARM CITY
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE, AND FARM CITY BBQ BOARD
MEMBERS — ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: Item 4.F is a proclamation designating November
24th through the 30th, 2013 as Farm City Week in Collier County, to
be accepted by Sheriff Kevin Rambosk, Chair, 2013 Farm City
Executive Committee, and Farm City Barbecue board members. And
this item is sponsored by Commissioner Coyle. Please come forward.
(Applause)
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And Commissioner, before they
either take the speaking podium or however that's going to be, let me
suggest to the audience, anybody who hasn't bought their tickets yet,
or even who have, the tickets are only $20. But 15 of that dollars -- of
those dollars go to the Kiwanis -- well, I guess it depends on where
you buy it -- go to the Kiwanis Key Clubs. And this helps them
throughout the year. Kiwanis Key Clubs are the teenage Kiwanians
Page 24
November 12, 2013
coming up. And many -- most of the schools have Key Clubs. So if
you buy them, 15 of those dollars goes to helping those young people.
SHERIFF RAMBOSK: Thank you, Commissioner.
Good morning, Commissioners, Madam Chair, and celebrity
servers. Thank you for having us with you here this morning.
As you know, honoring Farm City Week and supporting the
future leaders of our communities is what this is all about. We rotate
between city and farm areas. This year in particular we're down in the
city at the Naples Airport. And it's really to get agriculture and
business together. And we always have a great time.
Following one of our previous speakers, we do have a healthy
menu, vegetables, very lean terrific steak, a couple other surprises, but
-- and there's no sugar in any of that.
We'd like to thank our host and the cattle bearing sponsors, the
Naples Airport for one, Waste Management, Arthrex. You know, in
the spirit of developing our future leaders, we get the opportunity to
work with young people. We have a lot of representation here from
different groups. All of what we do in putting this event together goes
to sponsoring those young people for the future and those
organizations. They include 4-H Association, Youth Leadership, the
Junior Deputy League and the Key Clubs, as the Commissioner said,
all for a great and terrific cause.
Last year more than $45,000 was contributed to scholarships for
our young people right in Collier County. We invite everybody here
on the podium. We invite everybody out here to come to what is to be
the biggest Farm City barbecue. So thank you very much for all of
your support and we'll see you on the serving line.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Oh, absolutely. I know for myself, I
have not only committed to serve, but I'm also bringing my two kids
to serve. I'm going to be flanked by one on either side. And I would
ask the whole Board to participate and be servers this year.
Commissioner Coyle, I'd love to see you in an apron. It's one of
Page 25
November 12, 2013
those things I've been dreaming of. In fact, I'd love to pull your apron
springs.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's better than a Speedo.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I move from --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You're not going to have a dunk
tank, are you?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: -- as the seasons pass --
SHERIFF RAMBOSK: No dunk tanks.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Oh, why not?
SHERIFF RAMBOSK: Thank you very much, Commissioners.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you.
(Applause)
Item #4G
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING NOVEMBER 11-17, 2013 AS
FLORIDA VETERANS FOUNDATION WEEK IN COLLIER
COUNTY. ACCEPTED BY LIEUTENANT COLONEL TONY
COLMENARES, USMC (RET); TECHNICAL SERGEANT
CINDY SORIANO, USAFR; AND MS. KELLY LANDRY, MSW —
ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: Item 4-G is a proclamation designating November
11th through the 17th, 2013 as Florida Veterans Foundation Week in
Collier County. To be accepted by Lieutenant Colonel Tony
Colmenares, United States Marine Corps, Retired; Technical Sergeant
Cindy Soriano, United States Air Force, Retired; and Ms. Kelly
Landry. And this item is sponsored by Commissioner Nance.
(Applause)
LIEUTENANT COLONEL COLMENARES: I'd like if I could
get our partners --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Absolutely.
Page 26
November 12, 2013
LIEUTENANT COLONEL COLMENARES: -- John and Mary.
Mary, come on up. And Ann. It's only fitting; we're only able to do
this as a result of the community foundation.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: That's wonderful.
LIEUTENANT COLONEL COLMENARES: Madam Chair,
Commissioners, thank you so much for this amazing recognition. I've
got to tell you, I've only been in Collier County for a few weeks and
already, you know, I'm amazed at just the warm welcome and the
rolling out of the carpet.
I am truly blessed, after serving 31 years in the United States
Marine Corps and retiring a few years back and coming home to south
Florida, now serving with one of the amazing foundations, the Florida
Veterans Foundation created by the State of Florida, based out of
Tallahassee. We're honored to be here in Collier County. Thank you
for opening the doors and the warm welcome.
But we're also very honored to be able to do this project. We
have an amazing donor here in Collier County, as you have many I'm
sure in Collier County. But I want to recognize Skip and Nancy
Potter. They have provided an amazing gift to truly focus on helping
our veterans acquire permanent housing, get the necessary health care
they need, and also to ensure they get meaningful employment. I can't
tell you what that means for those that have served.
I want to first of all congratulate all veterans that have served,
especially Commissioner Coyle, thank you for your service, sir, and
for those out here that have also served and worn our country's
uniforms.
This is going to be an exciting -- an amazing project. We have
incredible partners. As you saw some of them represented here today
in our incredible Collier County community foundation, led by Lena.
She couldn't be here today, but she sent her right-hand folks here. So
I'm glad that I could make it, as well as Ann and Mary. Thank you for
choosing us to be your partners.
Page 27
November 12, 2013
Also recognize Habitat for Humanity and others in the
community that truly have stepped up, and the Commissioners
themselves, a few that I've already met with, and I promise Madam
Chair, I'll be back to see you.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you.
LIEUTENANT COLONEL COLMENARES: And also
Commissioner Henning. We're just trying to do a scheduling there.
But I'll come by so we could have a chance to discuss what we're
doing here.
But again, we're privileged to be part of this. We're privileged to
be part of your community.
The Florida Veterans Foundation again was created by the State
of Florida back in 2008 to provide direct support to the Florida
Department of Veteran Affairs. And to advocate on behalf of our
veterans, there are 1 .6 million veterans that we have here in our great
state. Today we live in an era where we have 22 million veterans
living in this great country of ours. The State of Florida at any given
night is number two or number three, depending on who you talk to,
as having the largest population, right behind Texas and California.
But it's projected in the next five years the State of Florida will
become the number one state in the country having veterans living
amongst us.
So again, this is a beginning. So I thank you so much for the
support. We're getting ready to get working now. Normally the
proclamations come after we do the great stuff, but hey, we'll take it as
they come. So again, I'm privileged to be here. And already a week
into this thing already we're being recognized. So thank you Madam
Chair, thank you, Commissioner, thank you, Commissioner Nance for
immediately saying let's recognize you guys. How fitting right after
Veteran's Day weekend that this is delivered to the Florida Veterans
Foundation. So thank you again, Commissioners. Thank you to all.
(Applause)
Page 28
November 12, 2013
Item #4H
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING NOVEMBER 2013 AS
"LOCAL ORGANIC FOOD MONTH" IN COLLIER COUNTY, TO
CELEBRATE AND HONOR LOCAL ORGANIC FARMS AND
LOCAL RESTAURANTS THAT SERVE LOCALLY GROWN
ORGANIC FOOD. ACCEPTED BY ALFIE OAKES, CEO OF
OAKES FARMS AND FOOD & THOUGHT CAFÉ; JEFF
MITCHELL, OWNER OF THE LOCAL RESTAURANT; NICK
AND ANGELA BATTY, OWNERS, INYONI FARM; KEN
ALAIMO, OWNER, WILD HERITAGE FARM; AND DANIELLE
REINERTSEN, HEN KEEPER, WILD HERITAGE FARM —
ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: Item 4.H is a proclamation designated November,
2013 as Local Organic Food Month in Collier County to celebrate and
honor local organic farms and local restaurants that serve locally
grown organic food. To be accepted by Alfie Oakes, CEO of Oakes
Farms and Food & Thought Cafe; Jeff Mitchell, owner of The Local
Restaurant; Nick and Angela Batty, Owners Inyoni Farm; Ken
Alaimo, Owner, Wild Heritage Farm; and Daniel Reinertsen, Hen
Keeper, Wild Heritage Farm.
This item is sponsored by Commissioner Hiller. If you'd please
step forward.
(Applause)
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Would you like to speak on behalf
of the local community, the organic farmers and all the restaurants that
are committed to buying locally?
MR. OAKES: Okay. My name is Alfie Oakes, owner of Oakes
Farms and now Food & Thought. And this -- we are totally
committed, as we have been for the last 18 years here in Collier
Page 29
November 12, 2013
County, to provide all of our customers in the community with locally
grown produce, at Food & Thought, my father's dream there,
specifically organic products, and just wanted to thank the County
Commissioners and the community for supporting us.
We started here, you know, 18 years ago as just a few people on
board, and we've grown to over 400 employees now. So we're really
excited about where this has brought us and committed more than ever
to providing the community with good organic locally grown product.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you.
(Applause)
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Can you speak into the mic?
Leo, can you be sure the mic is working? It doesn't sound like it.
MR. MILLER: It is.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Oh, is it? All right.
MR. MITCHELL: Hello, my name is Jeff Mitchell. I'm the
owner of The Local Restaurant here in Naples.
First of all, I wanted to just say thank you very much for
acknowledging what everybody's trying to do with agricultural. I
think in the news we've seen a lot how scary a lot of the large
agricultural is turning out. And first of all, I just want to really
acknowledge and say thanks to all of the farmers, because that's really
where all of the work is done. We're just translating what they're
doing and making good food out of it.
So we really appreciate you getting up early in the morning and
doing everything you're doing with fruits and vegetables and making
us all happy and healthy.
And then this is sort of off the subject, but I also want to thank
the teachers everywhere. We wouldn't be here without any of them.
And they're really important. I know my wife's a teacher and she goes
to work every day and tries hard. And all of us really are educating
ourselves about quality food and so it really is a beautiful thing. We're
really -- we're in paradise in Collier County over here, and it's great
Page 30
November 12, 2013
that -- it's great to be part of this community.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And like Food and Thought, The
Local is another local restaurant. Actually, it's on Pine Ridge Road
right across from the Target plaza, on the north side, on the corner of
Airport Pulling and Pine Ridge; is that correct?
MR. MITCHELL: Correct.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yeah. The Bed, Bath and Beyond
plaza.
MR. MITCHELL: Correct, yeah.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And everything on the menu is
locally produced or raised. And it's really incredible. So it's -- and
those are the kind of restaurants like Food and Thought and like The
Local that we're really excited about in Collier County. We should
definitely call Mark Bittman up at the New York Times and let him
know what's going on, because he actually visited Immokalee several
years ago and commented on, you know, what a tremendous
opportunity we had with respect to the culinary growth in Collier
County because of the abundance of organically grown vegetables that
we have literally on our doorstep.
So it's very exciting. So I encourage everyone in the community
to go to these great places and eat our locally grown produce prepared
in the most delicious fashion imaginable.
MR. MITCHELL: Thank you for your support.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you.
MR. ALAIMO: And thank you, Madam Chair and
Commissioners. You can see all over the country that county support
of what we're all trying to do is extremely important and it does work
when we have that kind of support. Obviously thank you to the
community who buys our food. Thank you to Jeff and Rich who do
create amazing things with our food. Nick himself was a major cog in
me becoming a farmer, on our Saturday talks at the Third Street
Market where he's at, I'd go visit him. All those talks definitely were a
Page 31
November 12, 2013
major influence. And Alfie's father, Frank, who he mentioned was
probably the most influential person in encouraging me to become a
farmer and that it could work and that you could live off it. So thank
you all. And we appreciate it, thank you.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you.
And thank you --
(Applause)
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you again to Oakes Farm for
the beautiful cornucopia that you've presented here today to remind us
all of the harvest.
Commissioner Fiala has a comment.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Just a quick comment. Dr. Todd
Vedder is working with the young people, especially those in the
lower income strata, in trying to get their parents to understand the
importance of serving fresh fruits and vegetables to them, rather than
candies and so forth. And I know he's been trying to find somebody
in that community to work with him on this project. And if anybody
is interested in calling him, it would be a great help. His name is Dr.
Todd Vedder. V-E-D-D-E-R. Thank you.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And also, have you noticed -- I have
to say this, have you noticed how many of these different
organizations that have been here before today are all having festivals
or informational things this early in the year? And the calendar is
already loaded. That says what are we going to be expecting in this
coming year. It's going to be great.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: It is, without a doubt.
Commissioner Nance?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes, I would just like to make a
remark to everybody today. Today's proclamations have been
wonderful as showcasing agricultural and its importance in Collier
County. Through the kickoff of Farm City Week to the recognition of
Page 32
November 12, 2013
how important food is to our children, to making sure that we don't get
overrun with diseases like diabetes and other health issues, and just the
great resources that we have here in Collier County. I'll remind you,
within the next five months Collier County is strategic in our nation
for these sorts of healthy foods. We will have things, for example,
like tomatoes where our region produces approximately 40 percent of
our nation's supply of fresh tomatoes and other vegetables. And fresh
products are right behind that. So it is important in Collier County, we
have the ability to do great things. It's important to the health of our
nation. And I'm delighted to the see these proclamations, and I'll make
a motion that we accept these proclamations.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you. Thanks for the motion
and second.
And just before we go to the vote on accepting these
proclamations, I also want to comment that Commissioner Henning is
an organic farmer. So we actually have you as one of our own.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I was. This year I retired from
it.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Did you really? That's unfortunate.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I know, it is very unfortunate.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: That is too bad, because I know you
really loved it, right?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I did. Maybe I'll go to Alfie's
farm and work over there.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Oh, there you go. Alfie, you got at
new hire. That's 401 .
With that, we have a motion and a second. All in favor?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
Page 33
November 12, 2013
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Motion carries unanimously.
Item #5A
RECOGNITION OF O. B. OSCEOLA SR. AND THE OSCEOLA
FAMILY OF THE SEMINOLE TRIBE OF FLORIDA, FOR THEIR
COMMITMENT TO PRESERVING COLLIER COUNTY'S RICH
NATIVE AMERICAN HERITAGE, CULTURE, AND
TRADITIONS. ACCEPTING THE RECOGNITION ARE THREE
GENERATIONS OF THE OSCEOLA FAMILY: O.B. OSCEOLA,
SR., JOANNE OSCEOLA, O.B. OSCEOLA, ANGELA OSCEOLA,
BRYCE OSCEOLA, TORI OSCEOLA, O.B. OSCEOLA III, TINA
MARIE OSCEOLA, DAKOTA OSCEOLA, AND BRODY
OSCEOLA — RECOGNIZED
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, that takes us to Item 5 on your
agenda this morning, presentations.
Item 5.A is recognition to O.B. Osceola Sr. and the Osceola
family of the Seminole Tribe of Florida for their commitment to
preserving Collier County's rich native American heritage, culture and
traditions.
Accepting the recognition are three generations of the Osceola
family: O.B. Osceola, Sr., Joanne Osceola, O.B. Osceola, Angela
Osceola, Bryce Osceola, Tori Osceola, O.B. Osceola, III, Tina Marie
Osceola, Dakota Osceola and Brody Osceola. This item is brought
forward by Commissioner Hiller. Congratulations to all of you.
(Applause)
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I love that the whole clan is here.
MR. OCHS: Good morning. Congratulations.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you so much. So happy to
have you here.
Page 34
November 12, 2013
(Applause)
MS. OSCEOLA: Thank you, Chairwoman and County
Commissioners.
I'm the designated spokesperson of the family for the day, for the
hour. And I really am honored to be here with you with the family.
We have three generations of O.B. Osceolas here. We have O.B.
Osceola, III, O.B. Osceola, Jr., and of course my dad, O.B. Osceola,
Sr. And he wanted to make sure that -- and, you know, the pictures set
me -- it distracted me. I'm like oh, my gosh, where did those come
from?
And, you know, it really reminds us of the importance of legacy
and the importance of being here in Collier County.
You know, my dad was born under a palm tree in Ochopee. And
the rest of us were all born in a hospital. And the Seminole story is
one of challenge and struggle and survival. And here in Collier
County, as a native person, we have the anomaly in terms of
experience between native people and the surrounding communities
and the pioneers. And this commission has been an integral part in
our growing up. And we've been in this commission since I was a
little girl, to be honest. And I grew up and watched my brother and
my dad and -- attend all of these events and to host these events in
Collier. And the entrepreneurial spirit that marks the Seminoles is
very much a life within our family and within the relationship of this
commission. And it was great to see that one of the people in
attendance was Burt Saunders. And under Burt's leadership of the
commission and Max Haas and Mike Volpe, you know, it's been
wonderful to be part of your community and to call it home and to
know that each one of us has a role.
And so, you know, we grew up dancing for the public and
performing at the Collier County museum for Ron Jamro and
attending private school at St. Ann's. And we did all of that and it's
just really remarkable to look back and to realize that the legacy that
Page 35
November 12, 2013
we're building for O.B. Osceola, III over there is one that we can say
we're proudly doing in Collier.
So, you know, we've come along way from having a village on
the East Trail to having a national construction company that's
building, you know -- and not to be stereo typical but, you know, that's
doing casino development around the world. And so it's very, very
remarkable to be before you today. Being a Seminole, being an
Osceola and building a legacy that our grandchildren and children that
we will never meet that will call us grandmother and grandfather, and
to know that we're doing it here in Collier County. So thank you.
(Applause)
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: We are grateful to the Osceola
family for their contribution to the community in the most significant
way. And we really wanted to honor you as a Board, and so thank
you for being here. We're very grateful.
MS. OSCEOLA: Thank you.
(Applause)
Item #5B
PRESENTATION OF THE COLLIER COUNTY BUSINESS OF
THE MONTH FOR NOVEMBER 2013 TO THE HARMON-MEEK
GALLERY. ACCEPTED BY KRISTINE MEEK, BARBARA
MEEK, WILLIAM MEEK III AND JULIANA MEEK —
PRESENTED
MR. OCHS: Item 5.B is a presentation of the Collier County
Business of the Month for November, 2013 to the Harmon-Meek
Gallery. To be accepted by Kristine Meek, Barbara Meek, William
Meek, III and Juliana Meek. If you'd please step forward.
(Applause)
MR. MEEK: If I may have a few minutes. Thank you, Madam
Page 36
November 12, 2013
Chair and Commissioners. And also thank you for the Chamber of
Commerce for presenting us.
We've been in town for a long time. January is our 50th
anniversary in Naples. And to think of any businesses that survive
that long, particularly art galleries that's quite an accomplishment. Let
me take you back in time a little bit to 1964. January, 1964, Junkie
Fleischmann asked Foster Harmon to come down from Sarasota where
he was the assistant director of a gallery in Sarasota, and he wanted a
fine art gallery in his new shopping area called Third Street South. He
owned 42 percent of the land. And Foster Harmon agreed to a
three-year lease.
And that's where it all started. He brought in a gallery touting
American masters, contemporary American masters, and it changed
the art scene in Naples forever.
It led us to where we are today, having three collections in town,
having probably over 60 art galleries. The Bayshore Center is starting
up. There's all sorts of things that are exciting happening. And you
have to go back to where did it all start. There were two galleries
prior to Harmon starting up, but they were showing kind of local
color, Nick Nichols Art Gallery and the Robinson Gallery. But
everything since then has been as a result of the success of the
Harmon Gallery.
And then when I came in, I was a Naples High graduate.
Unfortunately my wife left because she had to open up the gallery at
10:00. But she's a '72 graduate, Naples High. I'm a '68 graduate
Naples High. Our eldest daughter Christine is a Naples High graduate
and we have one copout, Juliana, went to Naples High and finished up
at Pinecrest in Fort Lauderdale, boarding school. So we have kind of
a local flavor here.
But we have been very instrumental in bringing forth major
exhibitions, so much that 300 exhibitions that we've created have gone
on to more than 80 museums in 27 states since I bought the gallery in
Page 37
November 12, 2013
1978 from Harmon.
We have been very active in doing youth programs and older
education programs as well. We have had --just this past summer we
had Grace Place come, and coming up this winter we have groups
coming in from Williams Cultural Alliance. So since the Sixties,
actually, we've had -- we played the role of a museum in this area.
And we've turned over the reins partially to the facilities that are better
suited for it, have more capability, but we haven't given up on it. We
still do it.
But the -- I started three collections here in town. I started the
collection that's at the Philharmonic Center of the Arts in 1996, which
later, five years later became the Naples Museum of Art, and it's now
called the Baker Museum at Artis, Naples.
I started a collection of Collier County artists dating from 1950 to
2000 at the Von Leibig Arts Center in the late Nineties, and then most
recently, about eight years ago, I started a collection of art of
American art of children and animals in American art at the Golisano
Children's Museum of Naples.
So all of these things that we do for the community prove that
we're more than just an art gallery selling pictures. And I thank you
for recognizing us.
In January we're going to celebrate the 50th anniversary with a
visionary, a visual arts award. We're going to be giving out awards.
We selected three people to receive those awards, and we're going to
continue this in the future. Thank you very much for your time.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you.
(Applause)
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And art is obviously a very
significant part of our life here in Collier County, so we applaud you
for your contribution to that community.
And your daughters are amazing. They're -- are they both Eagle
Scouts? Right. And the wonderful things you do for the Girl Scouts --
Page 38
November 12, 2013
not the Eagle Scouts, right, the Girl Scouts. Wrong sex.
You're amazing. I mean, these girls are just amazing, what
you've done this in this community over the years. Like just to show
that a business that has a family involved in the community as yours
has been is just, you know, priceless.
MR. MEEK: She's on the zoo board now.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Oh, she's on the zoo board now?
That's awesome. Congratulations. Congratulations to all of you.
Thank you.
Item #5C
RECOGNIZING JOHN HAYES, INSTRUMENTATION &
ELECTRICAL TECHNICIAN, WASTEWATER AS THE
EMPLOYEE OF THE MONTH FOR OCTOBER 2013 —
PRESENTED
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, Item 5.0 is a recommendation to
recognize John Hayes, Instrumentation and Electrical Technician in
the Wastewater Department as the Employee of the Month for
October, 2013.
John, please come forward.
(Applause)
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Congratulations and thank you for
all you've done.
MR. OCHS: John, as you stand there and get your picture, I'm
going to tell the Board a little bit more about you.
Commissioners, John's been an employee of the county for more
than 11 years working with our wastewater department and public
utilities. His normal responsibilities include performing specialized
electrical work associated with installation, programming and repair of
equipment and machinery at our wastewater treatment plants, our
Page 39
November 12, 2013
collection facilities, many of our off-site operations and related
facilities.
John's well known throughout the department as having the
ability to fix just about anything. And that's a valuable commodity for
us. He for example is able to repair a gear train on a motor to get it
back into operation rather than having to spend several thousand
dollars on a new piece of equipment.
He has a vast knowledge of wastewater operations, having served
in positions with the power systems in north and south wastewater
plants. His ingenuity and technical skills have saved the county time
and money, and he's always willing to step up and help the department
to the best of his ability. He is truly deserving of this award.
And Commissioners, it's my honor to present John Hayes as your
Employee of the Month for October, 2013. Congratulations, John.
(Applause)
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Would you like to have a
photograph with Dr. George and all the employees that have honored
you? Come on, Dr. George. Dr. George.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Come on up. Frank, the rest of the
team.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yeah, the rest of the team,
everybody's who's here.
MR. OCHS: Try to center yourselves. Don't squash the squash.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you.
(Applause)
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you so much.
Item #5D
UPDATE AND DISCUSSION REGARDING RECENT
DEVELOPMENTS IN THE PERMIT APPLICATION TO DRILL
FOR OIL IN GOLDEN GATE ESTATES - UPDATE GIVEN
Page 40
November 12, 2013
MR. OCHS: Item 5.D is the update and discussion regarding
recent developments in the permit application to drill for oil near the
Golden Gate Estates, not in the Golden Gate Estates.
Commissioners, Mr. Summers was prepared to give a few
summary update remarks on the staff work to date, based on the
Board's prior direction working with the community and the
stakeholders. As I mentioned at the beginning of the meeting, we
have been advised by the state that they have scheduled an
administrative hearing to hear this particular petition or this
application. We suspect that will take somewhere in the vicinity of 60
to 90 days before that is all said and done. In the meantime staff
continues to work with the stakeholders and the community and with
other officials in state government that have jurisdiction over this
matter to make sure obviously that we are providing to the extent of
the Board's ability for the health, safety and welfare of the residents in
and around the proposed mine, including emergency notification plans
and other plans for monitoring and detecting potentially dangerous
emissions from that well.
As I said, that's essentially the summary. I know that
Commissioner Nance is leading the effort in his district and in the
community to address this issue, both with state officials and local
stakeholders. He may wish to make a few comments at this point.
But we have no further presentation, given the pendency of the
administrative hearing, unless the Board would like to hear in more
detail what Mr. Summers is working on. But it's essentially the
planning outline for you when he was here a few weeks ago.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes, Mr. Ochs and Mr. Summers, I
just wanted to -- I wanted to offer this opportunity. I think in view of
recent developments, we have to wait now to see what direction and
what action the permitting and regulatory agencies are going to take,
while understanding that this Board is doing everything we can at the
Page 41
November 12, 2013
local government level to make sure that the impacts of any future
activity are going to be minimized and that the safety and welfare of
the citizens is guaranteed.
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Absolutely, thank you.
Item #10A
RESOLUTION 2013-262: RE-APPOINTING CHERRYLE
THOMAS TO THE IMMOKALEE BEAUTIFICATION MSTU
ADVISORY COMMITTEE — ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: Commissioners that would move us now to Item 10
on your agenda this morning, which is Board of County
Commissioners. Item 10.A is appointment of member to the
Immokalee Beautification MSTU Advisory Committee.
Recommendation is to reappoint Cherryle Thomas.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: May I have a motion?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: So moved.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I have a motion and second.
There being no discussion, all in favor?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Motion carries unanimously.
Item #10B
RESOLUTION 2013- 263: APPOINTING NICHOLAS G.
Page 42
November 12, 2013
PENNIMAN, IV TO THE COLLIER COUNTY COASTAL
ADVISORY COMMITTEE — ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: Item 10.B is appointment of member to the Collier
County Coastal Advisory Committee. The committee
recommendation is for appointment of Nicholas Penniman.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I have a motion and a second. Any
discussion?
(No response)
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: There being no suggestion
discussion, all in favor?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Motion carries unanimously.
Item #10C
STAFF DIRECTED TO REVIEW THE POTENTIAL FOR A NEW
PRIVATE NATURAL GAS UTILITY OPPORTUNITY TO
SERVICE THE IMMOKALEE AREA AND REPORT BACK TO
THE BOARD FOR FURTHER CONSIDERATION AND
POSSIBLE ACTION - DISCUSSED; MOTION FOR STAFF TO
EXPLORE THE NEED AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR A
POTENTIAL PRIVATE NATURAL GAS UTILITY TO SERVICE
THE IMMOKALEE AREA AND BRING FINDINGS BACK TO
THE BOARD NO LATER THAN AT THEIR SECOND MEETING
IN JANUARY, 2014 — APPROVED
Page 43
November 12, 2013
MR. OCHS: 10.0 is an item to recommend that the staff be
directed to review the potential for a new private natural gas utility
opportunity to service the Immokalee area and report back to the
Board for further consideration and possible action. This item was
placed on the agenda by Commissioner Nance.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Commissioner Nance?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes, I think this is a very exciting
opportunity for us to add some very critical infrastructure into the
Immokalee and Eastern Collier County area. This agenda item was
prepared just in order to introduce this topic. I believe Mr. Saunders is
here today to give us a little bit of update on it. But the agenda item is
for the purpose of allowing staff to work with Immokalee Natural Gas,
LLC to see if we can come to agreement on bringing this
infrastructure into our growing industrial area.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Can I ask a quick question before
we get into any further presentation by Burt?
This is a private company, right? This is a private company?
And what exactly does Collier County government have to do with
this private company? Why should we be promoting them over any
other company? You know, why -- I mean, there are a lot of
companies out there that --
MR. SAUNDERS: Those are very good questions.
My name for the record is Burt Saunders with the Grey Robinson
Law Firm. And thank you, Commissioner Nance, for bringing this
forward.
This is a private company. However, your question is why
should Collier County be dealing with Immokalee Natural Gas, and
the simple answer is that no one else has had any desire to bring
natural gas to Immokalee. It's an expensive venture to run the pipeline
to Immokalee. And so we're asking for the opportunity to have an
exclusive franchise in the Immokalee area to do just that. And that's
Page 44
November 12, 2013
the reason why you should be dealing --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: An exclusive franchise?
MR. SAUNDERS: That is correct, yes.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And can that legally be done?
MR. SAUNDERS: Yes. And of course that would be a legal
issue for the County Attorney to evaluate. Our request today is for
you to direct staff to bring this back with an ordinance at your meeting
in December, after they've done their evaluation of the proposed
franchise. It's very similar -- the franchise agreement you have in
front which you is almost identical to the franchise agreements that are
approved by cities and counties around the state, so there's nothing
unique about the particular franchise agreement. And there's nothing
unique about the request.
As you know, I sit as a city attorney for Marco Island, for
example, and we just approved a natural gas franchise for the City of
Marco Island. Again, the same sort of agreement.
And the reason for exclusivity is simply that it will cost
somewhere between seven and $10 million to build a pipeline just to
get to Immokalee just to get gas to the area. Then there is an expense
obviously of providing that service to customers throughout your
county roads. No one is going to build a pipeline there if everybody
else -- if somebody else can do the same thing. In order to finance it,
in order to justify the expenditures, there has to be an exclusive
franchise. And so that's the reason for that request.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Commissioner --
MR. SAUNDERS: I also have Mr. John Knight here who can
answer any technical questions for you.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Madam Chair, I think this is a good
idea, but I think it's being approached in the wrong manner. I think
negotiating a contract with a private firm without competitive
procurement and without even looking at what's available in the
Page 45
November 12, 2013
market raises more questions than it answers. And it's going to lead to
a lot of unfortunate perceptions in the community. And I am really
surprised and disappointed that it's being presented in this manner.
But I think it's entirely appropriate for the staff to evaluate the need for
these services and also to determine what companies are available
who would be willing to bid on providing those services.
But to just start out with a directed negotiation with a particular
company without taking into consideration the possibility of
competitive procurement, I think is a very, very bad strategy.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Commissioner Nance?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes, Commissioner Coyle, the
agenda item does not call for us to enter into negotiation with anybody
in specific. It requests the ability of staff to explore the opportunity.
And if that was to include seeking other providers, I think it would be
completely appropriate. But I believe that the offers that this
particular company brings to us and the opportunity to explore that
more than justifies the staff time required to review what's being
discussed here.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, actually, the executive
summary says it directs the staff to review the potential for a new
private natural gas utility opportunity to service the Immokalee area.
It doesn't say to evaluate the natural gas companies that would be
willing to serve this area, which would be a more appropriate direction
to staff. This -- and in fact, Senator Saunders' opening remarks were
that we want to negotiate an exclusive agreement. And there's no
reason to make that demand unless you're asking the staff to enter into
a negotiation of a contract.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Well, that --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I think this is -- could be solved by
rephrasing the question and the direction to staff. But the way it is
phrased in the executive summary is very, very, very troublesome to
me.
Page 46
November 12, 2013
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Well, I don't think it's anything
different than arrangements that have been made throughout other
areas of the county and counties throughout the state and, you know,
at the state level. So I don't think -- there's nothing intended here to be
sinister or preferential to anyone in particular. But when you get the
opportunity to have somebody offer to bring service, utility service
into an area at tremendous upfront cost, I do believe it's worthy of
consideration.
MR. SAUNDERS: And Madam Chair, if I might just comment
in reference to that particular issue? I'm not aware of a competitive
selection that's taken place in reference to the provision of a pipeline
to serve an area. Again, I'll refer back to Marco Island and the City of
Naples. There was no competitive selection. A company appeared
before the City Council at both cities and asked for a franchise to
bring this pipeline in and the franchise was provided. These
franchises typically provide for a percentage of the revenue to go to
the county or the city as a franchise fee. But there's not been an effort
to do competitive bidding for this type of service. So if Collier
County elects to work with Immokalee Natural Gas to bring a pipeline
there, it's not an issue of whether or not you have to competitively bid,
that's typically not done on these.
And, you know, Immokalee's been here for a long, long time. No
one's come forward to say we want to serve the Immokalee area. We
now have a company that's willing to do it, we're willing to agree to
performance standards in terms of how long it takes to get the
permitting done, how long it takes to get the pipeline built, we're
willing to do all that. But you now have a company that's willing to
step forward and do something in the Immokalee area. No other
company has come to you to suggest that.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Well, I really think -- by the way,
do you have the information that shows the demand exists that there's
actually a desire to have the natural gas out there and that you're going
Page 47
November 12, 2013
to see the hookups that will support the capital investment you're
proposing?
MR. SAUNDERS: The company's done that research. Again, I
will refer to Mr. John Knight for any questions like that. They're not
going to invest $10 million in bringing -- and that's the cost to bring
the pipeline to Immokalee. They're not going to invest $10 million to
do that without knowing that there's a market there for that.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So the due diligence has been done
and so you have that documentation and you're going to present that to
staff and allow staff to review the assumptions that you're making that
are the predicate for this investment that you're proposing?
MR. SAUNDERS: That is correct. And I will tell you that in
terms of the major cost, the major cost involves bringing the pipeline
from the natural gas source to the Immokalee area. So that's all on
state highways. The state requires simply a permit for that. There's no
franchise, there's no exclusivity, they simply require a permit. We
will obtain those permits. The $10 million will be spent to bring the
line to Immokalee and then the franchise area only impacts roads that
are owned by Collier County. And that's where we need the exclusive
franchise.
The financial work has been done. That will be presented to your
staff. So we are asking for you to negotiate with the Immokalee
Natural Gas Company to bring that pipeline there. And as I said, any
performance standards that your attorneys deem appropriate, that's
fine. But this is not a competitive bidding situation from our
perspective.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Burt, it seems that the time table
you're proposing is very aggressive. And I think for the county to
have ample time to review this both from a legal standpoint and from
the standpoint of concerns that staff might have, to be able to properly
educate the Board about this new issue, I don't see December as being
realistic as a time frame for any negotiation or any ordinance to be
Page 48
November 12, 2013
brought forward. So I think that should be taken on the table.
MR. SAUNDERS: That's fine. If the county needs more time,
that's fine. We're anxious to get started, but we certainly understand
the need to evaluate this, and for your attorneys to evaluate the
franchise agreement.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Do we have a franchise
agreement with TECO? Leo, Nick?
MR. KLATZKOW: I don't think we have a franchise agreement
with TECO or really anybody.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And they're in our right-of-way
now, right? So why didn't we go out to bid on that? I mean --
MR. KLATZKOW: Commissioner, this is a request, that's all it
is.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I know. What we're doing is
above and beyond what we have practiced in the past. Is there's no
RFP for -- or any other competition? Here you have somebody -- the
only reason that you want a franchise agreement is so you have a
longer period of time of exclusiveness in the right-of-way; is that a fair
statement?
MR. SAUNDERS: That's absolutely correct. And it would be
the right-of-ways owned by Collier County in the Immokalee area.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
MR. SAUNDERS: That is correct.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I don't see what the big deal is
personally. The -- and quite frankly, I don't see anybody else going
out there. TECO would already be out there if they wanted to go out
there, correct?
MR. SAUNDERS: That's the point I was making. Immokalee's
been there for a long time. The need for natural gas has been out there
for a long time. No one's come forward. We now have a company
that's willing to do it, and we're set to start.
Page 49
November 12, 2013
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And through their franchise
agreement we can regulate unlike we do TECO in our right-of-way.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I think we still can regulate TECO
in the right-of-way.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I'll tell you, there's more
problems with their gas lines out there than anything else. I mean,
there's no as-builts or anything where their lines are. And it's always a
problem. Here you can address those things if we need to expand
roads. So I don't see where the heartburn is, personally.
MR. SAUNDERS: Madam Chair?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Commissioner Fiala -- hang on a
second, I've got a lot of commissioners that want to speak.
MR. OCHS: Madam Chair? I'm sorry to interrupt, but you
asked me to let you know when you're approaching your 10:30 break,
so --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yeah, so we will have to take a
10-minute break and then resume this item after the break because our
court reporter's fingers need a rest.
(Recess)
MR. OCHS: Madam Chair, you have a live mic.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you.
MR. OCHS: We are continuing the discussion on item 10.C.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yes, Commissioner Nance?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes, I think this is a very worthy
opportunity for energy in Immokalee, particularly supported by
agribusiness. Most of our large packing houses, our liquid fertilizer
plants, restaurants and other businesses are all desirous of natural gas
because it is extremely efficient energy and it's an energy that we're
going to increasingly have available in the United States. So with the
view toward that, I'm going to go ahead and make a motion that we
recommend that staff, including County Attorney, be directed to
review the potential for natural gas utility opportunities in the
Page 50
November 12, 2013
Immokalee area and report back to this Board for further consideration
and possible action.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, that was a good motion
because you didn't limit it to just one company. Because how many
times we have over the many years rejected something because we
didn't have any other bidders. And we don't want to have this come
back and bite us.
I think it's a great idea that you do this. And probably nobody
else would ever want to do it. But if we close the door and then
somebody sues us, we just wouldn't want that. Maybe we could open
it for a month and see if anybody else is even interested, and then
meanwhile the staff will do, as Commissioner Nance suggested, and
do their due diligence and put something together. But I don't think
we should show any preferential treatment.
So the motion as it stands from Commissioner Nance, I would
approve.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you. Are you making that a
second?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you.
Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes, and I would agree, that is an
appropriate change to the executive summary's recommendation. And
it's the one which I was recommending in the beginning.
It will avoid a lot of problems but still give you the opportunity
to determine what the opportunities are to get natural gas service in
Immokalee area. So I too will support the modified motion.
MR. SAUNDERS: Madam Chair, can I comment on the
motion?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Not right now. Just a moment,
please.
Page 51
November 12, 2013
Leo?
MR. OCHS: Yes, ma'am.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And Jeff, I think what's necessary is
after you do your research to bring that information by way of a
presentation back to the Board. If necessary it could be part of a
workshop if the presentation merits it. If you think there would be a
great deal of discussion then please recommend that it be a workshop
presentation rather than a Board presentation. And you can come up
with a list of proposed action options in conjunction with that
presentation.
MR. OCHS: Yes, ma'am.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Is that acceptable?
MR. KLATZKOW: Yes, ma'am.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you.
Yes, sir?
MR. SAUNDERS: Madam Chair and members of the
Commission, in reference to the motion, there's no time period in the
motion. It's simply to bring it back. I think there's some discussion
about some competitiveness. We do need to have a time table. And
what I would ask the council to consider -- the Commission to
consider is to bring this back at your first meeting in January. Staff
has an opportunity to reach out to other natural gas providers. There
aren't very many. I can name one. I don't think anybody else will
name any others. Let them know that this issue is going to be brought
back in January. If they have an interest in pursuing it, then they can
express that interest to you. But if they don't express an interest in it,
I'd ask you to move forward with this in January. This is not an issue
where you advertise and you do a competitive selection and you get
10 firms that are going to come here and say we want to do this.
There's --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Burt, let me --
MR. SAUNDERS: -- only one other potential provider.
Page 52
November 12, 2013
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you for your comment.
Burt, let me defer to our County Manager.
County Manager, what time table would work for you? Our staff
has a lot of projects on the table. The Board has directed that they do
a whole host of research projects for us, even the oil drilling being one
of them, which is a priority. But what's your feel on that? When
would you be able to bring it back?
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, I'd be comfortable committing to
no later than the second meeting in January.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Okay.
MR. OCHS: We can shoot for the first, but we only have one
meeting in December and we have quite a few holiday scheduling
issues to work through at the end of this year and the beginning
obviously of the new year. So I would certainly commit to the second
meeting. I will try for the first but I don't want to make a firm
commitment on the first meeting in January.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And let me turn to the County
Attorney. What about your time table?
MR. KLATZKOW: I've had preliminary conversations with
Jamie French who's very knowledgeable on this, as well as outside
counsel. I think January is very, very doable.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: All right. So no later than the
second meeting in January. Is that --
MR. SAUNDERS: Yes.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: -- acceptable?
MR. SAUNDERS: And the request is for staff to reach out to the
other natural gas provider, you know who that is, and if they have an
interest, they can present that interest. And if not, let's move forward
with it. There's a company that wants to -- I have a company in
Immokalee that wants to expand. They will hire 40 new people if they
can get natural gas. If they can't, they can't expand. We have those
opportunities.
Page 53
November 12, 2013
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Let me defer back to the County
Manager.
County Manager, what's your position on reaching out to other
natural gas providers? I think that's problematic. I think it's jumping
the gun on the issue. I mean, as of right now staff needs to research,
you know, whether there is demand and whether it does make sense
for the county to provide an exclusive franchise and whether, you
know, that is the right approach. I'm not sure that staff should be
going out soliciting, you know, other suppliers before we have the
questions answered to the research.
Go ahead.
MR. OCHS: Well, what I heard the Board say or the motion
from the Board was that the staff and the County Attorney were to do
the analysis and come back with a report to the Board on the analysis,
including perhaps some action options for the Board based on the
research and analysis that the staff does. Whether that will be
sufficient for Mr. Saunders and his client, I can't predict at this point in
time.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Well, reaching out to other
companies is the question. Because Mr. Saunders would like you to
reach out to other firms at this point, and I'm just not sure that's the
appropriate step.
How do you feel?
MR. OCHS: Yeah, I don't mind having that discussion. He's
correct, there's, you know, a fairly limited number, at least right now.
I don't have a problem doing that, if that's the desire of the majority of
the Board.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Members of the Board, are you
okay with that?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I think we could just advertise it.
And if somebody -- I don't care. Just to make sure --
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Madam Chair, I don't think this
Page 54
November 12, 2013
Board should start engaging in an analysis on whether there's a need
for the gas -- you know, if a company wants to go ahead and offer a
service into the marketplace, I don't think this Board needs to evaluate
whether there's an ample need to allow that person to engage in this
sort of industry --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That is --
MR. KLATZKOW: You can't advertise yet --
COMMISSIONER NANCE: This is a utility, and it's just like
FP&L. FP&L wants to put up a new power line, you know, they have
an exclusive and they have a right to engage in a franchise.
MR. KLATZKOW: You can't advertise yet for the simple reason
I don't even know what the service territory is. You know, I hear
Immokalee, I don't know what that means. Does that include Ave
Maria, does it include -- what does it include?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Well, that needs to be evaluated.
MR. KLATZKOW: So that needs to be evaluated.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Sure.
MR. KLATZKOW: So before we can even think about putting
this out, we need to firm up what the territory is that we're offering a
franchise.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Right. And you can never tell what
the needs are until the very service is provided. Build it and they will
come. So if this opens up opportunities for not only the company that
they're talking about but other companies as well, who could then
operate but using gas only for more efficiently with gas only, that just
might bring more businesses. I'm interested in doing that anytime,
anyplace, anywhere. But I just want to make sure that we do it
properly.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Well, my motion is purposely
general so that we can engage in whatever information staff feels like
needs to be presented back to the Board based on how this is typically
done elsewhere and the way we've done it in the past.
Page 55
November 12, 2013
MR. SAUNDERS: Let me point out one thing I think is pretty
clear, but I just want to make sure you understand this. The company
is going to invest their money in bringing the pipeline to Immokalee.
It's purely their risk. If they don't have customers, that's a problem for
them, it's not a problem for the county. They wouldn't be making the
investment if they didn't already do the research and know that there's
a demand out there for this.
We want to get started as quickly as possible. We don't want to
see a six-month delay, eight-month delay.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: The only issue is the exclusivity.
Because the exclusivity means that it will have -- there will be a direct
effect on the price to the consumer in Immokalee and, you know, if
we're going to basically create a monopoly for this one company in
that area of the market, then there are a lot of considerations that have
to go into that with respect to the end users. And I don't know, you
know, how, you know, prices are regulated in this situation. I don't
know enough about this to comment. And I have a lot of questions
that I think really need to be addressed before -- you know, before we
take the next step in this. It might be a great idea, but I think, you
know, when you move into the realm of, you know, providing any
service by way of a monopoly franchise, you have to proceed with
caution.
MR. KLATZKOW: We'll come back.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you. Thank you very much.
MR. SAUNDERS: Do you want to hear from --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: No, I think we've had enough
discussion on this. You're welcome to --
MR. SAUNDERS: Talking about the exclusivity and the reason
for --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: No, but you can discuss that with
staff, because staff is going to come back and educate us. We're not
debating that issue here and now.
Page 56
November 12, 2013
MR. SAUNDERS: As far as the Board is concerned --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: No, I appreciate that. But as I said,
you can clarify that issue with staff and make sure that we have the
right understanding. But at this point there's not going to be any
further discussion on this matter. But thank you for presenting and
being here today.
MR. OCHS: That takes us to Item 11 .A --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Wait a minute. We have to take a
vote.
MR. OCHS: Sony.
MR. MILLER: Madam Chair, we do technically have three
registered public speakers. Mr. Saunders, Johns Knight and Dick
Klaas.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Well, they're the presenters on this
item, so they've all spoken.
MR. MILLER: Thank you, ma'am.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you very much.
So with that, is there any further discussion on this matter? Any
thoughts Commissioner Coyle? Commissioner Fiala? Commissioner
Henning? Commissioner Nance?
(No response)
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: There being no further discussion,
all in favor?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Motion carries unanimously.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Are you opposed?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm opposed.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Sorry, forgive me. I assumed that
Page 57
November 12, 2013
you were in support.
All right, so the motion carries 4-1 with Commissioner Henning
dissenting.
My apologies, Commissioner Henning, I wrongly presumed that
you were in favor.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You're doing a great job.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you, you're very kind.
Item #11A
INVITATION TO BID (ITB) #13-6142 EKG MONITORS TO
PHYSIO-CONTROL, INC., AUTHORIZE TRADE-IN OF 50 EKG
MONITORS AND ACCESSORIES AND AUTHORIZE THE
CHAIRWOMAN TO SIGN A LEASE-PURCHASE AGREEMENT
WITH US BANCORP FOR A TOTAL FINANCING AMOUNT OF
$1,547,884 FOR EQUIPMENT AS WELL AS OTHER
NECESSARY LEASE-PURCHASE DOCUMENTS — APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Item 11 .A is a recommendation --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: He meant that.
MR. OCHS: I know he did.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I saw that smirk on your face.
MR. OCHS: Just my natural look, Commissioner.
It's a recommendation to --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So true.
MR. OCHS: -- to award Invitation to Bid 13-6142 EKG
Monitors to Physio-Control, Incorporated, authorize the trade-in of 50
EKG monitors and accessories, and authorize the Chairwoman to sign
a lease/purchase agreement with U.S. Bank Corp. for a total financing
amount of$1,547,884 for the equipment, as well as the other
necessary lease/purchase documents. EMS Chief Walter Kopka is
available to present.
Page 58
November 12, 2013
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Before any presentation is made,
Commissioner Fiala would like to speak.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I was just going to say, I could see
all the work that you went through to put this thing together and all of
the, you know, comparing everything and negotiating a much lower
price, and I think it's a very good thing and I would just make a
motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And I'll second that. And I like the
fact that it's a lease/purchase agreement.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'd like to have the entire
presentation.
CHIEF KOPKA: We could probably finish before lunch.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Good.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: You are so bad.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I just have one question for Chief
Kopka, Madam Chair.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yes, please.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Chief, how many of these EKG
monitors do we own in total?
CHIEF KOPKA: We own 50 currently that are -- we are trading
in for 50 new models.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Okay, so we're trading in all of
them at one time?
CHIEF KOPKA: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Okay, thank you.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: There being no further questions,
we have no public speakers on this item, all in favor?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
Page 59
November 12, 2013
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Any opposed?
(No response)
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Motion carries unanimously.
CHIEF KOPKA: Thank you.
Item #11B
AN OFFER TO PURCHASE PRIVATELY HELD PROPERTY
LOCATED EAST AND ADJACENT TO THE COLLIER AREA
TRANSIT OPERATIONS FACILITY AT 8300 RADIO ROAD -
MOTION TO DENY PROCEEDING WITH ANY OFFER TO
PURCHASE THIS PROPERTY — APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Item 11.B is a recommendation to consider an offer
to purchase privately held property located east and adjacent to the
Collier Area Transit Operation facility at 8300 Radio Road. Mr. Steve
Carnell will present.
MR. CARNELL: Good morning, members of the Board. Steve
Carnell on behalf of your Public Services Division.
Staff has received an offer from the owner of property adjacent to
our CAT operations facility to sell the property to Collier County.
And I wanted to -- staff wanted to advise the Board of this offer today
and see if there was interest on the part of Board in pursuing this
further.
The property is owned by Davis Radio, LLC. It is an
eight-and-a-half acre wooded area east of the existing CAT facility. It
is undeveloped at this time. It's zoned commercial. And the zoning
does allow for most governmental uses.
This is a quick survey sketch of the property location. You'll see
Davis Boulevard coming in from the west on what would be the
right-hand side of the property from this view. East is at the top of the
Page 60
November 12, 2013
screen, Radio Road coming in from the other side. Rather, the
property is at the intersection of those two roadways.
The first offer staff received was last year and was offered to the
county for $3 million as an outright purchase with two other options,
the second being to purchase/finance the property over a 15-year
period; or a third option was just to lease the property for a period of
10 years.
Now, at the time we -- the county did not have any designated
funds for the land purchase or lease for that matter. We did as a staff
look at the opportunity of trying to find grant funding possibly for the
property but were unsuccessful at the time. And effectively we
declined the offer.
The property owners' representative came back to us about a
month ago and made another -- renewed their offer, this time for two
and a half million dollars as an outright purchase, or a
purchase/finance option as well for again that same price that would
include a $295,000 deposit paid at contract signing and $375,000 to
follow at closing, and then the balance to be financed by the seller via
mortgage over a 10-year period using a commercial interest rate of
between five and six percent.
Now, staff has done a cursory analysis of this offer, and I'm just
going to briefly summarize, that we -- our real property section had
done an evaluation of the property earlier this year and their valuation
produced the price or value of$1,829,000. That's a delta of almost
$700,000 from what's being offered to us presently.
And as I said a moment ago, there is no dedicated funding source
for this purchase at this time. The seller in good faith offered finance
options which we don't believe are comparable or as favorable as other
options that the county would have available to it.
Maybe the most central point here is that's about as far as the
staff analysis has gone, because this would by county ordinance
require an independent appraisal before moving forward any further,
Page 61
November 12, 2013
and we would also need to do an environmental site review of the
property in question.
Now, a little more information. This site does have some
potential value to Collier County. As we said, it's located immediately
to the east of the existing CAT facility. The facility right now, we are
out to bid for some significant improvements on the existing property,
grant funded improvements. When those improvements are
completed the next -- sometime next year, the existing site will be
more or less built out. So we do look at the opportunity -- the first
three needs of your possible uses that you see here are all related to
the CAT operations. There is a possibility down the road that we'll
need to expand our bus maintenance facility. This would be a logical
place to relocate that particular function.
In addition, we have done some study internally and through the
help of a consultant and looking at the option of constructing a natural
gas fueling site and converting our buses to natural gas, there's a good
deal of economies, benefits of doing that. This will be a logical place
to house that fueling site.
Additionally, there are plans being tentatively discussed for as
potentially a park and ride facility for commuters eventually down the
road.
So all three of these are possible uses of this property by CAT
operations.
Now, in addition to that, elsewhere in the county agency, our
emergency management staff has advised that this property could be
highly strategic as a disaster response staging area, given its proximity
to I-75, Collier Boulevard, Davis Boulevard, Radio Road
thoroughfares.
Additionally, we have road maintenance and transportation staff
that are storing equipment at the present site. We're actually
displacing them as with the purchasing department, who's responsible
for surplus property, both of them use the existing site. They're being
Page 62
November 12, 2013
displaced during the construction improvements that we're making
shortly here, starting in the spring, and we really need to try to find a
more permanent home for them.
Additionally, the Sheriffs agency has advised that they would
like the Board to consider funding the construction of an evidence and
crime scene storage facility, and this was a potential site that this
could fit into and be deployed and constructed at.
And then last, the Supervisor of Elections is looking for an
opportunity to centralize her operations at one location with not just
office space but storage space as well.
Now, the important thing to understand about this slide is none of
these uses have been thoroughly vetted by staff. And staff is not
prepared to recommend any of these uses today and suggest we go and
pursue that vis-a-vis the -- in tandem with the purchase of this
property. All we're trying to convey here is that if the Board wished
to consider the purchase of this property, there are some very practical
functional uses that we could vet and come back to the Board and
make some ultimate decisions on, and this property would go to good
use.
All right, if the Board is interested in pursuing this, staff will first
and foremost need to obtain a formal appraisal, independent appraisal.
As you saw, perhaps quickly from my slide, there's an almost
$700,000 delta between what we believe the property is worth versus
what the selling offer is, has been extended to us. We would need to
complete the site review, I mentioned. We would also identify the
appropriate financing mechanisms. There's a number available to us.
And it just needs to be clear that if we were going to pursue this
purchase, it would need to come out of the general fund reserves.
We can do that work and we can come back to the Board with all
that information for a final decision. Really just need to know if the
five of you would like us to pursue this further.
Mr. Rich Yovanovich is here this morning on behalf of the
Page 63
November 12, 2013
property owner. If you have any questions of Rich regarding the offer
or any questions of staff, please let us know.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: We have three commissioners that
would like to speak.
I would just like to say before I call on the commissioners that I
think before anything is done we need to evaluate if the county has a
need, staff needs to make the determination of what that site could be
used for and bring that back before we get into the details of
everything else.
Because quite frankly, if-- you know, if it doesn't work for any
of the proposed possible projects that you've identified, should we
consider going to the next step?
And with that, I'll ask Commissioner Coyle to speak.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, the -- that was my -- one of
my primary concerns. You've made some fairly broad justifications in
the executive summary as to what it could be used for. We need to get
your recommendation. That's what we need to do. But beyond that,
buying a piece of property for this price and then giving the seller the
right to approve any improvements to the property is absolute insanity.
You would be buying a piece of property that you really could not
use unless the seller approves of it.
The proper way to do that is to identify those things that would
not be permitted there. But I wouldn't even bother to negotiate with
somebody who wanted to have exclusive approval rights over what we
do with the property.
MR. YOVANOVICH: May I?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Just say yes, you agree.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Well, let me, if I can. For the record,
Rich Yovanovich, and I do agree.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
MR. YOVANOVICH: But can I just -- can I fill in a little
history gap, just so --
Page 64
November 12, 2013
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Very briefly, because we have time
certain at 11 :00.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Okay, I'm sorry.
As you can see, I wrote this letter on October 11th. The
sequence of events that occurred was my client originally had made a
proposal to the county. Staff said thank you but no thank you. We
were getting ready to do an auction on the property. Said county, hey,
we have access. We have accessories across your property. Open it
up so we can have our auction.
Staff said well, oh, you really are going to sell the property. Can
we talk about our interest in maybe buying the property. And my
client basically said sure, here's what I would do, we would like two
and a half million but we'll blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
My client basically canceled the auction after spending all the
money to do the auction in good faith to go through this process today.
We had actually thought that we were a little further along, that there
would actually be a recommendation to you all as to whether or not to
go forward or not with the purchase of the property. And we also, if
you looked at the last line in my letter, said there may be other options
out there. The only reason we kept the -- we wanted to be able to
approve what you put on that site is if you did elect seller financing,
we just wanted to make sure whatever you put on that property made
sense if in some unfortunate event we ended up getting the property
back. That was the only --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Collier County defaulting on a $1 .8
million loan?
MR. YOVANOVICH: I didn't think that would ever happen, so
all you had to say was we're not -- you know what, we're going to buy
it outright or we'll get our own financing, recognizing you could
probably do better than five percent financing based on your own
terms. That's the only reason that was in there.
We don't have any interest in telling you what you can or can't do
Page 65
November 12, 2013
on the property, if you elect to go forward. That was just, you know,
worst case scenario that none of us envisioned would really happen. I
actually thought we were going to have a purchase contract on the
property today with the terms already negotiated between us and staff
with a recommendation as to whether to go forward or not. Seems
like we're back a few steps, which is fine. I just need to tell my client
that. If you all are interested in the property to evaluate the property,
that's great by us. If not, then we'll go back like we had originally
rescheduled the auction and go forth with the disposal of the property.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: He answered my question, but it
doesn't mean I'm finished asking questions.
I understand what you say, but in order for us to decide to tell
you to draw up a contract or negotiate a contract, I need to have a
very, very clear recommendation by staff that yes, we need this
property, it would serve a very useful purpose, and we encourage the
Board of County Commissioners to pursue a purchase at the price of
our recent appraisal.
MR. YOVANOVICH: I agree 100 percent. And I thought you
were going to have that more specific recommendation today. You
don't. I understand that. And you're saying staff, please come back
and tell us can we use it or not?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, can staff tell us now?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: No, I think that would be
inappropriate. We need the backup material and staff needs time to
get it done.
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, I'm having a real problem with
this, to be honest with you. First thing is we had an opportunity to buy
the DeVoe property right next door for $4.5 million, which had a
two-story building on it which we pointed out the Supervisor of
Elections truly needed. It would give us an immediate bus station.
Page 66
November 12, 2013
We wouldn't have to take part of our parking garage from the -- from
citizens who used it and instead devote it to a bus system which seems
to have outgrown that facility already.
On top of that we would have been able to have the 12 bays to
work on vehicles which we need, as you have heard, and they would
have been right there on the property and all for $4.5 million. And we
stupidly turned our back on this great opportunity to have this facility
adjoining our property right here at home. And now we're going to
spend two and a half million dollars for a piece of property that has
nothing on it and they can't use it for anything anyway? I'm certainly
against that.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, in part I agree with
Commissioner Fiala. The existing CAT facility is 10 acres. That is a
lot of acreage for a CAT facility that you say that is going to be
limited, it's going to be built out. I find that very questionable, since
we were told that it would house the buses, it would be there for the
maintenance of the buses and so on and so forth.
Furthermore, this property in question that doesn't have a buyer
that's looking for a buyer, okay, it's C-3. The listed potential uses
wouldn't have to have a rezone, new bus maintenance building, to
replace an aging building on Radio Road, compressed natural fueling
facility, park and ride facility for commuters, disaster response
staging. I'm not sure about the zoning on that. Storage for
transportation. Storage for road maintenance. Storage for surplus
equipment. I don't think any of those are applicable to the retail
zoning that is applied to the property today. So not only do you have
to purchase it but you have to get a rezone. I don't think there's been a
lot of this in this item, so I can't support it.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So do we have a motion on the
table?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Motion to -- I hate to use the
Page 67
November 12, 2013
strong words of denial, but not to pursue this property.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'll second the motion.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Can I just say one more thing for the
record, just to clarify something? And ifs not -- I understand the
motion. We did have a buyer for the property that we turned -- just so
you know, we did turn the buyer down because we had already talked
to staff about going forward with it. I just want to make sure that's on
the record we did have a buyer. I just want that fact.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you.
We have a motion and a second. If there's no further discussion
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, I'd just like to make a
comment before you take a vote.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Absolutely.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: The motion doesn't really provide
the staff with an opportunity to answer the questions we've asked
them, do you really need this and how would it be used and what
would be an appropriate price for pay, how would it be financed and
all of those kinds of things. And that's really what should have been
done in the first place. But to just stop the process and not provide
staff an opportunity to proceed to evaluate a piece of property that
might be worthwhile at an appropriate price is I think the wrong way
to go. So I wish there would be some consideration given to just
instructing the staff to go back and do a little bit of homework, then
come back and make another recommendation to us.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Commissioner Nance? And this is
the last question, because we have to take a --
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes, I just think that this process is
upside down. We're just coming out of a newly approved budget for
the coming year. And, you know, if we have needs for properties in
the future, we should be identifying those needs in our capital asset
Page 68
November 12, 2013
program so that staff can go out and be prepared to take advantage of
opportunities that may present themselves. But I think this whole
thing is upside down, I think we're trying to justify buying a piece of
property. May well be a good one, but I think we've got a whole
process backwards.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Well, just in conclusion, and I'm
going to call the question, Commissioner Henning and Commissioner
Coyle are both correct. And at this point in time there should be no
further action on this item. But Commissioner Coyle -- actually
Commissioner Coyle and Commissioner Nance are correct on the
back side and that is that staff should be evaluating all available lands
for sale in light of the various projects that have a need for additional
space. Whether it's the evidence room or the supervisor of election or
any other project out there where we have a need for land.
So nothing that we're voting on today precludes staff from, you
know, looking at site options with respect to projects that have site
needs and bringing a list of alternatives back to us. Whether that does
or doesn't include this site is up to staffs determination, because it has
to be financially feasible as well. And so we have a motion and a
second on the table.
And with that, all in favor?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
Any opposed?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Motion carries 4-1 with
Commissioner Coyle dissenting.
Item #12A
Page 69
November 12, 2013
AUTHORIZING THE COUNTY ATTORNEY TO ADVERTISE
AND BRING BACK FOR A FUTURE PUBLIC HEARING A
PURCHASING ORDINANCE — DISCUSSED AND CONTINUED
TO AFTER THE LUNCH BREAK
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, that takes you to your 11 :00 a.m.
time certain. It's Item 12.A on your agenda. It's a recommendation
that the Board of County Commissioners authorizes the County
Attorney to advertise and bring back for a future public hearing a
purchasing ordinance.
MR. KLATZKOW: Briefly, Commissioners, as an overview
mostly to the public, as you're all aware of this I was tasked to work
with the Clerk's Office and staff to come up with a purchasing
ordinance. What I did was I took our current purchasing policy and I
put it into ordinance form. Staff has some changes they wanted, Clerk
has some changes that he wanted. Many of those changes were agreed
upon and are part of the purchasing ordinance being presented.
There are a number of issues, however, that despite I think really
good efforts by both the Clerk's people and staff, they were unable to
come to agreement on. And with the best of intentions on both
parties. Therefore, the way I think they should be set up is talk about
the areas of differences, to focus on that and get Board direction from
you as to what you want in your purchasing ordinance.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: All right, thank you.
So basically all we're going to address as part of this discussion is
where there is a difference of position within the proposed ordinance,
and we are going to support where staff and the Clerk's Office are in
agreement, and there will be no further discussion on that, since it's
pulled from the policy which we support historically.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Let me ask a question.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: We were just handed this. I haven't
Page 70
November 12, 2013
been able to look through it or see anything. Is this the same as what's
in here or is it a new document?
MR. BROCK: It is my talking point.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Pardon me?
MR. BROCK: It is the power point of my talking points.
I mean, Commissioners, you know, so we can narrow this down
from the perspective of the Clerk, your purchasing policy is your
purchase policy, not mine. My role is separate and distinct from the
Board of County Commissioners as the Clerk of the Circuit Court.
The problem I have with the current practices and purchasing in
Collier County is its attempt to delegate discretionary decisions to
staff, which by both my reading of the Florida Statute and the
Attorney General's reading of the Florida Statute cannot be done. And
as a consequence of that, my focus is predominantly almost
exclusively with regard to you can't do what you're attempting to do.
And the Clerk's Office as a consequence can't pay the bills.
The thing that -- and the only reason that I'm really here is from
the perspective of I want to work with the Board and try to work out a
solution that works for everyone. County staffs position is one of
well, we just cannot operate without having that discretion. And, you
know, when I'm confronted with that, you know, you put me between
a rock and a hard place.
You know, the thing that brought this to my attention was I'm
sitting at a state required ethics conference that all elected officials are
now having to go to, and the president of the Senate stands at a
luncheon with a key note speech and makes the astute observation that
the Clerk of the Circuit Court in Okaloosa County is living in disgrace
as a consequence of him not following the law.
I sent to you a copy of the Attorney General's opinion with
regard to their audit of that situation in Okaloosa County.
The scenario there was basically that the Board had delegated its
responsibility to others. And as a consequence, what transpired was
Page 71
November 12, 2013
the Tourist Development Council coordinator was buying houses all
over the place, buying yachts in which the bill came through defined
as advertising. When this was discovered, the legislative -- joint
legislative auditing committee directed the Auditor General to go audit
them. Shortly after this particular audit report came out they sent
them out on another task to audit the additional items and to audit the
Clerk's Office with regard to their activity.
I don't know about anybody else, but nobody has to slap me but
once and I get the message. We won't be doing this anymore in
Collier County. The Clerk will follow the law.
There are ways to do this that minimizes the impact on everyone.
When I look through the process that has been enumerated by county
staff, the common thread or theme or mantra is oh, it's going to cost us
so much money to do this. Well, I mean, yeah, I mean, if you have an
objective out there to try to make it cost as much as possible, yeah,
you're going to run into those types of problems. But cost can't
circumvent the law. But there are ways to do this in such a way as to
minimize the impact and still protect the taxpayers. That's my
objective here, and that's where we're going to be coming from.
And I'm going to show you some of the things that have been
going on in this county that we have caught, we have dealt with. And
you have one coming from the Board today that I asked to be pulled
with regard to a tourist development contract for advertising in which
the language in the proposal that is being submitted says we're going
to delegate to the Tourist Development Council --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We know.
MR. BROCK: -- through some language the authority to enter
into the contract.
Commissioners, you know, the problem with that is that's not
authorized either by state statute and that has been not recognized by
this Board in as late as 2013 in the passage of the County
Administrator's Act in which you basically regurgitated in your
Page 72
November 12, 2013
ordinance the language right out of the statute.
And we'll go from there and I'll let them present.
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, I have a fundamental and serious
concern with the Clerk's position on your purchasing policy. What he
said to you a minute ago was you can't do what you're attempting to
do. What we're attempting to do is no different than what we've been
doing for at least the past 30 years. In my conversation with the
Clerk, he has told me that your policy is illegal based on his
interpretation of a provision in a Florida statute that was passed in
1974. Almost 40 years ago.
Ironically, that statute that he's referring to was the statute that
the legislature adopted establishing a county administrator position in
the State of Florida, specifically to allow the administrator to run the
day-to-day operations of the county and to allow the Board of County
Commissioners to focus on their primary objectives of setting public
policy and taking care of constituent concerns.
I don't know how you conclude that your current policy is illegal
when you look in your executive summary and the person that you
pay to give you legal advice tells you that the current policy is not
illegal.
So we have this fundamental difference. And if it's illegal based
on a provision in the 1974 statute and yet there's been disbursements
of hundreds of millions of dollars over that period of time, I don't
know at what point it got illegal today when we have been operating
as a county under that policy, which by the way is very similar to
almost every other policy that we've reviewed across the State of
Florida.
So if it was illegal in 1974, I don't know how we waited 'til 2013
to have this debate.
I will say that with regard to if you do modify this policy, I will
in fact need more resources. This policy provision as adopted, or
proposed, I should say, by the Clerk, in my view doesn't add any value
Page 73
November 12, 2013
to either the taxpayers or your vendors. In fact, it's going to create
additional expense because I'm going to need more people in my
purchasing department to take care of all of the solicitation and the
paperwork and the reporting to the Board and the executive
summaries and the other things that are going to be required if you
accept the proposition that in an $887 million corporation that only the
board of directors can approve any purchase at any level and must
convene in public to do that in advance. And I'll leave it at that,
ma'am.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: If I may, before we -- we've got two
commissioners that would like to speak, Commissioner Henning and
Commissioner Fiala.
Is there a presentation that you were going to make?
MR. BROCK: Yes.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Can we hold the questions 'til both
the Clerk and the County Manager make their respective presentations
to the extent that they would like? Would that be acceptable or would
you like --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I just have one question that Leo
-- Leo you mentioned that you'd have to have more staff for these
solicitations. You are soliciting it now under the bids, right, on the
$50,000 threshold?
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir. But the Clerk wants us to bring all of
those individually, if they're not on a standard contract before the
Board which requires an executive summary.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Well, it's not going to be
any more solicitations than it is now because you're required to get
three bids. That's a solicitation.
MR. OCHS: Yes, we get three quotes --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Three quotes.
MR. OCHS: -- below $50,000, yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. So the only added
Page 74
November 12, 2013
expense would be to create an executive summary to bring it back to
the Board; is that a correct statement?
MR. OCHS: No, sir. And the staff has that as part of their
evaluation if we're allowed to present it and they can go into more
detail on that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, I would.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So let's go ahead with the
presentations. Who would like to begin?
MR. BROCK: I'll let them go. They analyzed it. I analyzed
what they analyzed.
MS. PRICE: Good morning, Commissioners. For the record, Len
Price, Administrative Services Division Administrator.
I'm just going to go through the differences as suggested by our
County Attorney, and we can answer any other questions as we go
along.
Now, I have to tell you that from the time we put this item on the
agenda 'til today, I think that we've resolved a few more of these
differences.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Well, I would like you to only focus
on what you have not resolved.
MS. PRICE: Absolutely.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Do not address anything you have --
MS. PRICE: Absolutely.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: -- agreed to.
MS. PRICE: And I just need to double check with Crystal and/or
Dwight to make sure that my understanding that we've come to an
agreement is accurate. Because we did spend countless hours trying
to get to narrow it down to just --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And I really want to say --
MR. BROCK: You know, this has not been a knock-down
drag-out. We worked cooperatively --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yeah, you have.
Page 75
November 12, 2013
MS. PRICE: Absolutely.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And I think the Board recognizes
that staff, the County Attorney's Office and the Clerk's Office have all
worked very hard and in a very cooperative spirit to try to --
MR. BROCK: Don't throw Jeff in here.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I'm throwing him in. All right,
forget Jeff, let's get going.
MS. PRICE: This was all us.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Let's get going.
MR. OCHS: Commissioner, just one quick thing. What's
reflected in our analysis is based on the submission in your backup of
the proposed ordinance by the Clerk's Office. That's what we're
reacting to.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Could we begin with what you
believe you now agree to and just confirm that and take that off the
table so we can focus on the differences?
MS. PRICE: I'll just take them one at a time.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: All right, go ahead.
MS. PRICE: Just because I don't think I could remember them
all out of order.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Okay, go ahead.
MS. PRICE: The first area, the Clerk's Office wanted us to say
that only the Board has the authority to enter into any contracts. We
prefer to use the language from the statutes that says that the
Commissioners adopts ordinances in the exercise of its powers. This
is not something I'm going to fall on my sword over except to say that
there are contracts that oftentimes need to be signed in between Board
meetings that failure of staff to be able to sign some of these will
cause delays. I'm talking about things like obtaining truck cans
through Waste Management, times where we've approved the
purchase of software but then need to sign the user agreement. There's
probably about 200 different instances in which staff has signed those
Page 76
November 12, 2013
contracts under the set of parameters given to us in the purchasing
policy. It would be my preference that so long as we are operating
within a very I'll call it a box, and I guess here's where the
fundamental difference between the Clerk's interpretation of
delegation and staffs interpretation lies. And that is clearly the statutes
say that the Board can't delegate its authority. However, I believe that
if you tell me to operate within the black lines of a box, then I'm not
accepting delegated authority, I'm not using independent discretion, I
am simply using your interpretation and staying within my lines. If
I'm going to cross outside the lines, I need to come back to you for
approval. And that to me is what we've been doing when we've made
purchases under $50,000 all this time. The rules said if it is under
50,000, over 3,000, we get three quotes, we go to the lowest quote,
unless there's any good reason for quality purposes, and then we look
for quality.
I would like to point out to you, and I put this chart up here, the
whole pie is all the County Manager's spending. The piece that we're
speaking about right now is that little piece of the pie.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Can we get that on the overhead so
everyone in the audience can see that, please.
MR. OCHS: We have to get the camera from the control room to
pan behind me.
MS. PRICE: So I'm really addressing that little red piece of the
big pie and how to efficiently operate within there. And again, it is
my belief that so long as we stay within the thick black lines of your
policy, that we're not exercising discretion, we are operating
administratively following your guidelines.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Can you tell me what it says for that
little piece of the pie? I can't read it.
MS. PRICE: It's $17.5 million and it's about 12 percent --
MR. OCHS: Eight percent.
MS. PRICE: I'm sorry, eight percent. I can't read it either.
Page 77
November 12, 2013
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You can't read it either.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: The audience --
MS. PRICE: There you have it.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, don't you have a copy of that
in the presentation?
MS. PRICE: I do.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Why don't you show it to us.
MR. OCHS: There it is.
MS. PRICE: There it is right there. Eight percent. And I
apologize it was 12, almost 13,000 individual transactions. And that's
where the cost comes in. If those independent transactions, even to
the degree that we can consolidate a few of them, we still couldn't
bring it down to too much less than maybe 10,000 transactions. Those
are executive summaries that have to come to you, they're going to
have to be reviewed two or three times before they get there, work
their way through the Sire agenda and be part of your packet to
include all the copies of the quotes so that you can see what you're
voting on.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So what you actually said was there
were 12,692 transactions involved with this eight percent and that
we're talking about. And the other part that says contract, there are
5,412 transactions spending $201 million, which is 92 percent of our
spending.
MS. PRICE: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay, I just wanted to -- because I
don't know if the audience can see this either. Thank you.
MS. PRICE: Moving back to the areas where we are -- have our
major differences. And here's item number one, small purchases. Our
current purchasing ordinance and the ordinance that we support would
allow staff with one quote to spend under $3,000. The cost of
obtaining those quotes, the time involved doesn't equal taking those
items individually to the Board. While we do a lot of our purchasing
Page 78
November 12, 2013
through contracts and bids, through RFPs, there are a wide variety of
times when we just need to be able to do something. And the thought
crossed my mind earlier today when I was having a problem with my
iPad that we buy a service pack when we buy the iPads, but there's a
$50 deductible, if you will, if we need to make a repair on it.
If I needed a repair under a new ordinance, I would have to go
down, find out is it reparable? Yes. Do I have to spend the $50? Yes,
I do. Come back, write an executive summary, bring it to the Board.
As soon as you guys approved it then we could take the iPad down to
the Apple store so they could send it out to be worked on. That's just
one small example of times where things come up, and in order to
operate quickly it behooves us to be able to operate within the black
box that I referred to where we have the ability to administer your
policy.
From three to $50,000 we have always gone and had three
quotes. Purchasing reviews those three quotes and we cut a purchase
order to the lowest quote.
We have opposed -- I understand that the Clerk and their staff
have some questions and concerns about no quotes. There are times
when we can't get the third quote. What we've proposed to increase
accountability is that any time there's a no quote that would have to go
to the purchasing director to have it reviewed to ensure that there is in
fact no other firm that could quote. So the new policy would say if
you can't get three quotes from the first three you ask, keep on going
until you've got three solid quotes. And if you truly can't find
anymore, then you're going to have to have Joanne look at it and say
yes, in fact there is no other service provider out there who can or will
-- sometimes they aren't interested in proposing on something that's,
you know, very low in dollars, do that work. That would give I think
a little bit of extra control that the finance is looking for and we've got
no objections to doing that.
But in order to take each of those items to the Board, again,
Page 79
November 12, 2013
you're talking about considerable amount of time, of energy, of paper,
of approvals.
You were talking earlier about another item where you said gee,
it seemed like it took an awful lot of money to put this item on the
agenda. We would be talking about doing that at least 10,000 more
times a year.
We've always had the ability to waive the quotes when it's a sole
source or a single provider under $50,000. That was something that
was removed in the Clerk's proposed -- or I say the Clerk's proposed
ordinance, and he is correct, he did not propose an ordinance. We
showed him one and he and his staff looked at it and made some
revisions. So I want to fix those words, because I see her squirming
over there, and she's right to do so. This was their proposed change to
our proposed ordinance. But we still feel that there are a number of
times where it would just be administratively effective to allow
purchasing staff to make those calls rather than taking it to the Board.
There's about 200 of those each year.
Under the cooperative purchasing, I believe that we may have
come to an agreement on this, but I just -- I just need to verify. We
talked about the Board on an annual basis, and there's an
accompanying item where we're asking to do this, would authorize
staff to use cooperative purchasing agreements, state purchasing
agreements and the ability to piggyback with other agencies that have
done competitive procurements. And we think that that might be a
way to help us in these endeavors.
Where we disagreed is that we felt that that provided the
underlying approval of the Board, and finance department wanted us
to bring each purchase under those agreements back to you
individually. And to my way of thinking, that sort of takes out the
benefit of having the underlying contract.
Now, we go out on an -- every three years, every four years for
an office supplies contract. And essentially it says for all office
Page 80
November 12, 2013
supplies that we need, we're going to use this contract and departments
buy whatever office supplies they need off of those contracts
throughout the year without having to come back and ask each time
and get an approval for each purchase order. I would say the use of
these cooperative purchasing agreements is basically the same way.
You know, we've got a budget that's been approved by the Board.
Once these contracts are in place, that would help us at least work
towards not having to bring all these executive summaries back to the
Board, places additional work on our staff behind the scenes to
validate all of those contract amounts, but at least it wouldn't be
coming to the Board each time. That was the only place I think that
we had disagreement on how we would use those items.
MR. BROCK: Can I address a --
MS. PRICE: Yes, please.
MR. BROCK: -- couple of the issues?
Let's start out with her representation of our complaint. I'm not
suggesting to you, them or anyone else that someone bring every
purchase to the Board of County Commissioners. That's not what the
law requires and it's for all practical purposes nonsensical. What I'm
suggesting to you is that you plan and you make a determination of
the things that you are going to need and you enter into a master
contract that encompasses those. And you issue P.O.'s off of those
based upon items that the Board has approved.
There are two requirements for the Board to make: One is you
must make the determination that the expenditure has a public
purpose, okay. That's one of the required determinations that you as
the discretionary body in this county.
Two, you then must make a determination of the expenditure.
You can do that with a master contract. You do it with office supplies
every day. You can do it with all sorts of different broad categories of
contract. All you have to do then is issue a P.O. off of that contract
and you have -- assuming you have made the determination that it
Page 81
November 12, 2013
serves a public purpose, which you can do through your budget, you
can do through approval of project, you can do through any process
you want to use as long as you give me the guidance. I look to you for
the guidance. I have to have direction from you as to how to audit,
what is it that I am auditing to, what is it I'm looking to.
The first determination that the courts have determined the Clerk
must make is what is it the Board has approved. That's my first
determination. If I can't determine what it is you've approved,
obviously then I've got a problem in making the payment.
With regard to the iPad, very simple. You go down to the Mac
store and you enter into a collective agreement, or if the Board so
chooses, you get their catalog and say this is what you can pay. How
you make that determination is none of my business as long as I can
look to what you're directing me to do. I'm looking for direction from
you as the discretionary body.
Then she made the observation that, you know, if you put it in a
box and they do it, that ought to be good enough. And that is
absolutely correct, as long as that box excludes all discretion. For
example, you say go buy me an X, Y, Z and you bid it. And you bring
back X, Y, Z, based upon the lowest bid, lowest price. Nothing else,
lowest price. You have now accomplished something that's
eliminated all discretion. When you put into it reasonableness of the
bid then you have inserted an element of discretion. The law says,
and I will show you momentarily, you're the only discretionary body
here. Okay? I have to look to the law in making the determination of
whether I can pay. That's totally different from what you do. I don't
have a problem working with them and refining the process to make it
easily operational. But that's not what they want. They want absolute
and total discretionary autonomy. That I cannot pay.
One more was the state contracts or these contracts that you go
out there on -- the state has out there. I mean, I'm not sure who she's
been talking to on my staff. She certainly hasn't been talking to me
Page 82
November 12, 2013
that would suggest that once you approve the contract, the state
contract or any other agency contract that has purchasing authority,
we want you to bring it back to the Board. I mean, as long as the
Board has through some process made the determination that what
they're expending it for is for a public purpose, you don't have to bring
it back for the Board. And this is the reason why I pulled this.
Let's think about that. The state contract, for example, and I'm
going to show you some detail later on, that state contract is out there
on the Internet for everybody in the world to see. If you can't beat that
90 plus percent of the proposals that are out there that you send out,
you must be sending them to idiots. Because they know what the
contract price is under the state. So all they've got to do is just
undercut it a little and they're going to get the proposal -- get the bid.
So, you know -- and I'm going to show you a comparative here in a
little bit with regard to that.
All I'm trying to say to you, Commissioners, is you cannot
delegate discretion. If you have created the parameters so that all
discretion has been eliminated, go to it. I'm happy. As long as you've
told me what I'm to audit to.
Go ahead.
MR. OCHS: And am I to presume that the current policy doesn't
do that?
MR. BROCK: You're absolutely correct, it does not. Absolutely
not. I'll show you an example of where it did occur.
MR. OCHS: Okay.
MS. PRICE: Then I would say that this is an area that we don't
have complete approval of. We're in agreement.
MR. OCHS: Well said. Exactly.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: As they say, you agree to disagree.
MS. PRICE: We agree to disagree.
The next area deals with contract administration, and what we're
asking for here, and I believe that we do have agreement here, and that
Page 83
November 12, 2013
is to go back to the way that we have been handling change orders so
that we -- change orders under 10 percent we handle administratively
and bring back to you in a report, as opposed to having to stop work
and wait until we can bring it to the Board. I believe that we all
agreed that within those parameters, providing that you were willing
to accept the fact that there's some risk involved, we will have already
done the work and you'd be approving it after the fact. We've been
operating this way for at least the 10 years that I've been with the
county, and I don't believe that we've had any that we couldn't resolve,
you know, favorably for everybody. Even the few times that one has
been pulled for some more questions, we've generally been able to
answer those questions so we have not had any change orders that we
issued administratively under these rules that you all were not able to
approve.
MR. BROCK: My only objection with this was you've got to put
it in the bid that you can spend over the 10 percent. And it has to be
included in the contract. If you do those two things, I don't have a
problem. You've already approved it.
MS. PRICE: It's in there.
So if that's the case, I think that we've got an agreement to work
reverting back to the way we've been handling contract changes.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: The provision -- where does it
provide what Dwight just said? Because in C it doesn't provide for
that.
MS. PRICE: It's actually in the contracts. When we put out the
bids --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: But as a matter of this purchasing
ordinance, it should provide that these contract changes will -- in other
words, any of the changes that are approved will be changes that fall
within the scope identified in the original contract. We're not
engaging in contract amendments, we're doing what is within the
scope of the contract and we're willing to spend up to 10 percent more
Page 84
November 12, 2013
on that scope. We're not changing the scope of the contract and
changing the price. Because that is a material difference.
MR. BROCK: And that was my only objection to this was it's
not in the contract -- I mean, it's not in the policy. It has to be a send
-- assuming you're going out with a bid, it has to be included in the bid
so that everybody's playing on a level playing field.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: It has to be. Otherwise you --
MR. BROCK: And two, it must be included in the contract
language that you approve. I'm looking to you for my direction.
That's all I'm doing, I'm looking for you.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I'm not reading this wording to
provide for that.
MR. BROCK: I didn't either.
MS. PRICE: The last sentence says all material changes in scope
of agreements must be approved by the Board in advance.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yeah, but that's not the issue. We're
not talking about material changes. The change has to be within -- in
other words, the dollar amount paid out has to be for work that falls
within the scope of what was bid.
MS. PRICE: Sometimes that's not going to be possible,
Commissioners. We have unforeseen conditions that come up from
time to time.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: That's still within the scope of what
was bid. In other words, the specific project as to A, B, C, you know,
if doing A requires that you dig a deeper hole and that's going to
increase your cost by two percent, that's still within --
MS. PRICE: Then we're in agreement.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: -- the scope of the contract. The
issue is, is where you now add, you know, services or, you know,
change the design or something like that that the Board did not agree
to and you increase the price of the project for this new scope where
you've got a problem.
Page 85
November 12, 2013
MS. PRICE: And I have no disagreement with what you're
saying.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I see a foot making its way out. Did
you want to say something?
MS. PRICE: It's a matter of how you define scope.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Well, let's define it. Because --
MS. PRICE: If we're building a road and everything it takes to
build the road is part of scope, even if we find changes in conditions
or what have you, then I don't think there's a problem. We're building
a road, we're building a road. We're not going to add a swimming
pool. You know, I mean a road --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: We're not adding a lane.
MS. PRICE: I'm not sure that --
MR. OCHS: Don't go there.
MS. PRICE: Let's just don't go there.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Nick, did you want to say
something? Because this is really your area.
The wording as presented here, I think you are in agreement. I
just don't think the wording clearly expresses your mutual
understanding.
MR. BROCK: And if Nick says anything other than what we
discussed with him, I'm going to go over there and start wailing on
him.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: For the record, Nick Casalanguida.
We met with -- Dwight and Crystal and I went over a Gantt chart
and we talked about changes and work orders. It's that narrow
language when you say scope. A road project is 24 to 36 months. So
when you approve the contract, they begin work, they dig up a hole. If
your interpretation is we find check valve or drainage system when we
dig it up to be a little different than the line item that's within the scope
of the contract but the broader scope is to repair or replace the
drainage system and we can tell a vendor no, don't put in pipe A, B, C,
Page 86
November 12, 2013
put in pipe C, D, E, because it's a better product or there's an issue
with pipe B, C, E, and that's not a line item within the contract, I just
-- as long as we can understand that the broader scope we're
complying with that. But I don't want to get hung up with a particular
line item.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: All you have to do is put in the
contract unforeseen circumstances, and have a dollar value in it. That's
-- the Board approves that contract.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: That's right.
MR. BROCK: Absolutely. And that's all I look to.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So let's keep it simple stupid
and move on to the next item.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: It's called a contingency. But it
needs to be clearly expressed because that is not provided in here.
Contingencies within the same scope are permissible up to 10 percent.
And then ratified after the fact. And the ratification has to occur
before the Clerk pays, and that's the other issue.
MR. BROCK: Let me point out one additional thing here that
may be getting missed.
I'm going to look to your approval at the point in time that that
bill comes across my desk for payment. When you approve it is not
germane to the issue. I think Mr. Klatzkow will tell you there's a case
in Escambia County that said you can retroactively approve things, so
long as it is presented formally to the Board of County Commissioners
and the Board of County Commissioners is made fully aware of the
facts with regard to it. So, you know, any of those little things can be
dealt with in that particular manner. But all you have to do is insert
that language. I then have the direction of what I'm to audit to. And
that's all I'm asking for.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So can the County Attorney just
afterwards take a minute to clarify the wording to reflect the
discussion that both parties agreed to?
Page 87
November 12, 2013
MS. PRICE: I'm sure that we can add something in there.
And for the record, that specific language is in the bid documents
and in the contract as well.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Let's get it in here.
MR. OCHS: Well, are we going to try to amend two documents
into one on the fly here today? Is that the goal?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: No.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Not on the fly. This has to come
back.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: The particular issue -- I mean, if
you can't resolve it and bring it back today, you can bring it back in
December with respect to where you have agreement and bring back
the wording just specifically on that issue.
MR. OCHS: Thank you.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: But you just want the County
Attorney to clarify.
So this issue we do have agreement on.
MS. PRICE: Yes, yes, I believe we do.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Great.
MS. PRICE: Contract approval under 50,000, we clearly do not
have any kind of agreement whatsoever. I guess we're just going to
talk about that further as we move out. Under the emergencies, I think
we've got agreement that we would add the language exigent
circumstance so that it doesn't have to rise to the level of a valid public
emergency.
We need to act in between Board meetings and then bring
something to the Board for approval.
MR. BROCK: And Commissioners, I don't care who approves it.
I mean, the only reason that I'm -- I threw that language in there, the
chairman or the vice-chairman should be consulted at the point in time
when that's done. You know, it says it has to be brought back within
the next Board -- next available Board meeting for consideration by
Page 88
November 12, 2013
the Board. All I'm suggesting is you do this knowing the risk you are
taking, because if it does not get approved, I suspect that vendor may
be looking to you personally for the problems that has been created by
you not approving it. Okay? All I'm trying to do is say, you know, go
into this understanding and accepting the issues that are there.
MS. PRICE: For that reason, obviously we would expect that
this would be a procedure that would be used sparingly and only when
absolutely necessary. My concern is that if-- if the purchasing
ordinance is approved in such a manner that the staff has no ability to
make purchases, off contract purchases under 50,000, that this process
might become the rule and not the exception. There are just so many
instances where while we would love to be able to plan out everything
that we do, it is absolutely not feasible to do so.
Additionally, there are a number of purchases that we make only
one time in a year. If we attempted to put out a formal solicitation for
that one time, we wouldn't get anybody submitting bids for it. It's
small dollars and it's -- it's a one-time affair. When people -- when
vendors put forth a proposal or a bid offer, it takes time and money for
them to do so. And they generally won't do something like that for a
four or $500 or $1,000 purchase. And so I'm concerned that if this
becomes a routine manner in which we get work accomplished in the
county, it is going to be very cumbersome on the County Manager to
make himself available for all of those approvals and for us to make
sure that every time he's given approval that we've got the
documentation that we need to bring it back to you so it doesn't
somehow fall through the cracks. As I say, for your standard
unforeseen situation that comes up a couple of times a year, I think
this is an excellent process that would serve us well and it would serve
you well. But as a standard way of operating in between Board
meetings, I think it's very cumbersome upon everybody involved and
can -- will become very difficult for us to operate under.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So where are we on emergencies?
Page 89
November 12, 2013
Do we agree or disagree?
MS. PRICE: To the extent that this language was written, I think
the Clerk has no objection to this little bit of rewrite. We've made it
the County Manager who would do the approval, we added the words
exigent circumstance as well as valid public emergency. And I don't
believe that we've got any disagreements on how to use that. It's
really just how often this is going to be used, based on some of those
other factors that we're going to have to come to some resolution on.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Well, I think first of all exigent
circumstances should be defined. And then it does become the burden
of the County Manager to approve it and bring it to the Board for
ratification before it goes to the Clerk for payment.
And again, one thing that's missing from this policy is that, you
know, the ratification has to occur before it goes to the Clerk for
payment. And as long as the County Manager has the discretion, I
mean, we will defer to the County Manager for, you know, properly
administering the decision to make a purchase which falls under an
exigent circumstance. But just define it. Can that be defined?
MR. KLATZKOW: Exigent? You could use the dictionary
definition. I mean --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Come up with -- so there has to be
some common understanding as to, you know, what is considered
extreme to justify triggering this.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Like for instance one of the pipes
that blew up underground in the water department, that was --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Like for example -- right, like
exigent would be something that compromises public health and
safety.
MR. BROCK: That's an emergency under the statute.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I was going to say --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Right.
MR. BROCK: All of the purchasing policy statutes have the
Page 90
November 12, 2013
emergency.
The only thing that is important in this to me is that it gets
approved by the Board when the bill comes to me.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So again, so let's just add, you
know, the statutory definition of emergency, and then make sure that
we add that it comes to the Board for ratification prior to going to the
Clerk for payment. And then that resolves that issue, doesn't it,
because it gives the County Manager the discretion to handle that
issue as it arises and then the Board ratifies your judgment.
MR. OCHS: Yes, ma'am. As long as you know that it's --
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Doesn't the Board commonly do
this with the County Manager when the Board is on sabbatical over
the summer on numerous decisions, not particularly related to
spending?
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir. Your current policy says in effect that if
there's an emergency purchase made that we have the authority to do
that and bring it back for Board ratification at the next available
meeting.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So it basically -- so there should be
no problem, there should be no disagreement on this issue. We're just,
you know, making it clear as to --
MS. PRICE: Correct.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: -- the timing and the definition of an
emergency.
MR. OCHS: I don't know about -- if the payment issue has
cropped up or not.
MS. PRICE: Well, we were certainly aware that by bringing it to
the first available Board meeting we'd be bringing it as soon as we
possibly can. More often than not it would be well within time to
make the payment. The only time that that would be an issue would
be during the Board's recess which we've managed to deal with for the
last umpty ump years, so I'm sure we can continue with that.
Page 91
November 12, 2013
Like I say, my only issue with this item is that if every purchase
under 50,000 becomes exigent --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: But that's not possible, because
there's a clear definition of what exigent is. And it's --
MR. BROCK: Emergency. I'm not aware of anything other than
a dictionary definition of exigent. That was -- state wanted that
thrown in there, and it certainly doesn't bother me.
MS. PRICE: The next area, actually the Clerk staff and we agree
that this does not belong in the purchasing ordinance. Has absolutely
nothing to do with purchasing and it's our recommendation that we
take it out of here and that I work with the County Attorney to write a
resolution that deals specifically with the sale and donation of surplus
goods.
MR. BROCK: The only reason I --
MS. PRICE: I have no idea how it wound up in here to begin
with.
MR. BROCK: The only reason I even commented on this
particular provision was in the purchasing policy currently showed up
there and when I started looking at it I saw a trend that there seemed to
be certain not-for-profits that were getting a large amount of the what
do you call it, surplus good, and I thought the Board should at least
take a look at it. This has nothing to do with me.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So remove this item from the
purchasing ordinance and have a separate ordinance regarding the sale
of surplus property.
MS. PRICE: Correct.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Okay. So let's go ahead --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Let me ask a question on that.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Okay go ahead.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: If you don't mind.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: No, go ahead.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: For something simple, like for
Page 92
November 12, 2013
instance we have a surplus of--
MR. BROCK: Computer equipment.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, I don't want to go that big, I just
want to talk about library --
MR. BROCK: But there's just a ton of computer equipment that
goes to what seemingly is one particular person or entity gets almost
all of them. That's what was puzzling to us.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Is that a not-for-profit agency who
then distributes it to families in need or something like that?
MR. BROCK: I did not go behind that transaction. All I did was
I saw on the list -- what was the name of it, Crystal?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Look, those items --
MR. BROCK: Inglesia.
MR. OCHS: That has nothing to do with --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: They should be auctioned off.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, maybe there are times when it
would be -- can we ever take a tax deduction on things?
MR. BROCK: We don't pay taxes, Commissioner.
MS. PRICE: We don't pay taxes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, yeah, that's right. Sorry about
that.
But maybe there's organizations that cannot obtain these things in
any other way and we find that there's no use for them.
MR. BROCK: And that has been done. My only --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You don't have a problem with that,
right?
MR. BROCK: -- point for pointing this out was to bring to your
attention, you go look at -- and we prepared the surplus list and who it
goes to. If you go and look at it, Inglesia something seems to be
getting almost all of the computer equipment. Now, it's not universal,
but it just seems to be a lot more than anybody else. And we touched
on does the public know that they are entitled to come get this if you
Page 93
November 12, 2013
were a not-for-profit? What process do you use to make them aware
of it? And, you know, and that's your issue, not mine. Leave me out
of it.
MS. PRICE: This is all covered by statute, so we can bring you
an ordinance that would address it specifically. And then I think we
can address all of those issues.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I want to see this --
MR. BROCK: There's no suggestion on my part that they're not
totally complying with statute price.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Great.
MS. PRICE: No, no, I understand that.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So just -- and I'm keeping notes
because I have to summarize all of this at the end so we know what
we're doing --
MS. PRICE: Right, so we --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: -- and what we're not doing.
MS. PRICE: We would suggest we take it out.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: On surplus we're going to pull this
out of this ordinance and we're going to address it by a separate
ordinance. And you'll address this issue of this --
MS. PRICE: Yes.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: -- church --
MS. PRICE: Yes.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: -- who got all this equipment --
MS. PRICE: Yes.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: -- and tell us how they were
selected as an example. So that could be brought back for example at
the December meeting as an agenda item.
MS. PRICE: Absolutely.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Okay, so that takes care of that. So
that's for the December meeting.
Next?
Page 94
November 12, 2013
MS. PRICE: Next is our purchasing card program. If we are to
use current contracts and get approval for the use of the P card in
advance, essentially we have shut down the purchasing card program.
It can't function in that manner. We had specifically designed it not to
use our contracts to be certain that out in the field the staff members
who are making a purchase against a contract item would know what
those contract terms are. If we issue contracts, we use purchase orders
to buy off of those contracts. The P cards were for small purchases
that were off contract. We use them for Internet purchases, we use
them for travel. They are a wide number of uses. We have
approximately 9,000 small transactions each year on the purchasing
cards. In order to get approval in advance for each of these, there --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Can I ask a quick question? Of the
12,000 --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I want to ask questions
too.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Okay, go ahead, go ahead. I was
just going to ask on that 12,000 versus the 9,000.
MS. PRICE: 9,000 of those 12,000 are --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Are you saying you're buying
purchases with the P card that we have a contract, existing contract
for?
MS. PRICE: No, no, we do not.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Do not, okay. Because it was
very confusing what you're --
MS. PRICE: I apologize. I've been up here for a long time, I
think I'm probably confused.
No.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And it's travel that you're doing
and we don't have to approve that?
MS. PRICE: Travel is one of the uses for the P cards. There's a
number of others, but not for contract purchases.
Page 95
November 12, 2013
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay, let me ask about that.
Because today I'm leaving after this meeting in a company car, along
with another employee, to drive up to the Florida Association of
Counties conference as representing Collier County at that conference.
I have no idea how much gas you've put into this thing, and of course
when you get up there how much gas do you need to get back. Now, I
don't keep a P card. I don't really have one. But they loan me one
when I travel up there. Is there some --
MS. PRICE: That's actually a gas card that was specifically
approved by the Board for the use of purchase of gasoline products.
So you're fine with that. That's really not part of what we're talking
about here.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. And then when we get to the
hotel, you have to present your card to them and then, you know --
now, if you have any extra purchases, of course you present your own,
but I never have any extra purchases. I'm just there to do my thing and
leave. So is there a problem with that?
MS. PRICE: If we have to get pre-approval for all of our P card
uses, then my answer would have to be yes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So then does that mean that I can't
go today or --
MS. PRICE: No, of course not.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- I just don't understand.
MS. PRICE: Today you can go. You've got your --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: As long as you have someone
taking you, you'll be --
MS. PRICE: -- policy and practice.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Debbie White is taking me.
MR. BROCK: There's no one suggesting that you can't use the
credit card to buy your gas.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, I don't know because we were
just talking about it.
Page 96
November 12, 2013
MR. BROCK: That is specifically provided for by statute. I
don't have a -- no, I take that back. I have a credit card in my
organization that is issued in my name as the Clerk of the Circuit
Court. I have one credit card. I don't keep it. It is held by my
purchasing director, and she gives it out as the need arises and we use
it for those types of purchases such as travel, making reservations for
travel. Those are all defined by statute, so no, you don't --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay, I just wanted to make sure
that I'm still going today. Okay.
And I do have a big question, but I'll wait. Can I ask another
question?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Related to this issue. Because we
want to stay focused.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Not related to purchasing card, just
about purchasing in general.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Can we wait for the general
question after --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Sure.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: -- because we want to go through
and eliminate, you know, what everyone agrees to and what they don't
agree to.
Can I ask a question? I mean, the statement you made, Len, is of
concern to me. Because where we talk about the discretionary -- the
delegation of discretionary spending authority and you highlighted
that it relates to that piece of the pie worth about, what did you say, 18
million or thereabouts, and you said there were 12,000 transactions,
and everyone went wow, 12,000 transactions. Now you're saying of
that 12,000 transactions 9,000 of those transactions, approximately --
MS. PRICE: Approximately 9,000 --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Approximately.
MS. PRICE: And that comes to approximately two million of
that.
Page 97
November 12, 2013
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Okay. So $2 million is 9,000
transactions on P cards.
MS. PRICE: Correct.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And then -- so 3,000 transactions --
or 3,000 transactions is the balance of-- is that 18 million? How
much is that?
MS. PRICE: 17.5.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So let's say 18 million. So basically
16 million is 3,000 transactions.
MS. PRICE: Approximately, yes.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: That changes the discussion about
the discretionary spending materially. Because what's obvious is that,
you know, if we look at the -- at least the transaction side where you
were talking about executive summaries. If you change how you give
out P cards and you, you know, start changing the way you handle
these P card transactions, you have, for example, these blanket
contracts like, you know, contract with a supplier, you know, like an
Office Depot or a Home Depot or whoever, you're going to eliminate
a lot of these transactions that you said would take a lot of time to get
approval for.
MS. PRICE: Generally speaking, with the exception of I think
hardware, I can't think of any others. Those transactions are unique
transactions for a wide variety of different things. Hardware we had
actually come to the Board and gotten approval to use retail hardware
outlets because the last time that we tried to get a hardware contract
none of the major retailers chose to submit proposals. So some of that
would be hardware.
Outside of that, these are unique, different types of transactions
that there may or may not be a contract.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: But when we reviewed these
transactions together, it seemed that there weren't that many unique
transactions that a lot of these transactions could have been, you
Page 98
November 12, 2013
know, rolled into master contracts and been acquired under these
master contracts. So I'm not sure -- I mean, it sounds to me like maybe
we have more P card transactions than we actually need to have, and
maybe there aren't as many employees that should have P cards as
have P cards. So maybe evaluating the P card program would be a
good idea, which would eliminate at least the volume of transactions
as being an issue.
On the other hand, with the 3,000 transactions remaining, we'll
address those separately, because that just goes to the general
discretionary spending. And that is a significantly smaller volume
than what we understood earlier as like the total of the 12 million. So
basically 3,000 transactions cover 16 million as it relates to the
discretionary spending. And I think we do need to look at that, but
later on.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I have a question.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: When are we going to take a
lunch? Are we going to get through this item first or are we --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Well, that -- I'd like to ask the
Board. Because I'm looking at the time and we are now at 12: 13. So
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, I'd like to finish this after
lunch, if the Clerk doesn't mind.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Is that acceptable?
MR. BROCK: That's acceptable to me. I mean, your pleasure.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: What are our time certains beyond
that? We have a 2:30 time certain, I believe.
MR. OCHS: You have a 2:30, ma'am. You have your public
comment section at 1 :00 and then you have 2:30 time certain, and you
have three, four now, advertised public hearing items that begin
sometime after 1 :30.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So why don't we --
Page 99
November 12, 2013
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Take public comment.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: -- take public comment, if that's
acceptable. Maybe you can start working together on some of the
issues that we've already started addressing.
MR. BROCK: I'm going to run through these real quick. If you
have questions predominantly I'm going to let you ask the question. I
mean, my presentation is sort of like a sore thumb.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I don't think we can run through
this. I don't think that's acceptable. I think Commissioner Henning is
correct, I think we're going to have to take a break, have public
comment and then come back right after public comment. How many
-- do we have public speakers signed up for public comment?
MR. MILLER: At this point I have two registered public
speakers for public comment.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So then if everyone could be back
here by 1 :14. Is that acceptable, Leo?
MR. OCHS: Pleasure of the Board, Madam Chair.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Then we could have the two public
speakers and then go straight back to this agenda item which we
should have concluded before the next time certain, which is at 2:30.
MR. BROCK: I'll be here.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you very much.
MR. OCHS: Yes, ma'am.
(Luncheon recess)
MR. OCHS: Madam Chair, you have a live mic.
Item #7
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS NOT ON THE
CURRENT OR FUTURE AGENDA
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you.
Page 100
November 12, 2013
We have public comment. I believe --
MR. MILLER: Yes, ma'am.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: -- you said we had two speakers.
MR. MILLER: We have had -- received one additional slip.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: That's fine. Could we hear all the
speakers?
MR. MILLER: Sure, certainly. Your first speaker is Pete Flood.
He'll be speaking about artificial reefs. He'll be followed by Bob
Krasowski.
MR. FLOOD: Hello. My name is Peter Flood and I'm in charge
of the artificial reef program, appointed by some of my volunteers.
Just to give you a quick update, our permits are in, we're
processing along. We're in the Army Corps of Engineers. 45 percent
of the material has been accumulated to cleaning the reefs out at the
landfill. Things are moving along real good.
The one item that we -- one loose end that we basically have out
there is back in May the executive summary was adopted to use the
Community Foundation to receive the artificial funds. Our group
doesn't receive any funds, or no expenditures. Anything that is
expended in our group, any cost, is borne by me personally. So there's
no money that we receive for expenses.
Per that executive summary, I've met with Mr. Brock and Crystal
and they've met with Jeff and there's an agreement, MOU, that's been
circulated. And I'm just here today to request real quick that we'd like
to get that -- see if we can get that item on the next agenda for the next
meeting in December. That's really my purpose of my meeting. And
at that time I can bring a real good update as to where we are with the
project.
I know you've got a lot of stuff going on today so I really don't
want, you know -- take some time next month, bring in some visuals
and things and show you what's going on. It's really great.
I've got to thank the county and Marco Island, the city and
Page 101
November 12, 2013
everybody that worked together. It's a tremendous asset to those
people. And they've got done a great job. We've really come a long
way. So I'm just trying to get this on to clarify next month.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Did you have a problem getting it
on the agenda?
MR. FLOOD: No, here's one reason. And I tried -- I know that
there was probably other pressing issues. We're coming up to tax
season here, you know, and we'd like to get -- really go out with a
promotion over the holidays for people to get their donations in. And
I've had people in my law office that are basically in the process of
starting commencing donating and things along those lines. So I just
wanted to get this clarified. It's just a mechanism for the county to
withdraw the funds per the executive summary.
So that's all I'm here for. I don't want to take up a lot of time. I
would just request the Board that if we could get it on the next agenda,
I'd appreciate it. That's all.
MR. OCHS: Ma'am, I would ask the Board maybe to hear
briefly from the Clerk or Ms. Kinzel. You know, I looked at the MOU
and frankly, I held it off the agenda because I wasn't quite sure what
the nature of the agreement was. The Board was being asked to enter
into an MOU and I wasn't sure exactly what the --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Why does the Board even have to
be involved in the agreement between your entity and the community
foundation?
MR. FLOOD: It's not our -- it's an agreement between the
county. It's just a mechanism to withdraw the funds in accordance
with the executive summary. You have to have a mechanism for
requesting the funds, that's all. That's all it is. It's not between our
group or --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: But it didn't seem to be that. Wasn't
there something more to it than that?
MR. OCHS: Well, the agreement as originally approved by the
Page 102
November 12, 2013
Board was that you received a grant, along with, you know, Marco
and the City of Naples to build these reefs, and then Mr. Flood and the
group came forward generously offering to raise some additional
private funds to help supplement or expand those reefs. And we have
a -- we talked about it this morning, we have a statute that governs
donations to the Board, and I didn't know exactly why we needed an
additional MOU with the Community Foundation.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: We don't.
MR. OCHS: But again, I just needed some clarification working
with our County Attorney and the Clerk.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: We don't need -- and we certainly
shouldn't have an MOU with the Community Foundation. I mean,
there's no reason for us to. I don't understand --
MR. FLOOD: Well, that's the mechanism to get the funds out of
the 501c3 that they're requesting in regards to each community.
Marco Island's already executed it. City of Naples is waiting for the
county to execute it. It's not a legally binding document, it's just that
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: It's essentially a contract.
MR. FLOOD: Well, it's just if you request --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: It is a legally binding --
MR. FLOOD: If you request the funds, if you would like the
funds, this is how you go and get them. It's basically --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Well, let me just say that this is not
on the agenda and we shouldn't be --
MR. FLOOD: No, no, I --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: -- discussing it now, so I don't think
we should address this. I think, you know, the determination as to
whether it should be brought forward on the agenda will be a function
as to whether or not it has merit to be brought forward legally, if
there's a need or not. So why don't we just let staff, the County
Attorney and you and the Clerk work all -- work it all out. Because it
Page 103
November 12, 2013
-- I mean, just superficially listening to what you were saying, it
doesn't make a lot of sense. But it's not on the agenda so we're not
going to debate it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Do you need a motion from us at the
end of the meeting or something to do this, Leo?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: No.
MR. OCHS: No, ma'am. No.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: No.
MR. BROCK: No, I can't --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: No. We're not discussing it.
MR. BROCK: No. Sounds good to me.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: This can be addressed, you know,
appropriately, you know, by staff. Thank you very much.
MR. MILLER: Your next public speaker is Bob Krasowski.
Bob would like to talk about the beach renourishment project. He has
some presentations, some visuals he'd like that have him with some
concerns on the project. He'll be followed by Doug Fee.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Sure. Thank you.
Go ahead, Bob.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Good afternoon, Commissioners again.
Are we good, Troy? Double click, okay. Thanks.
Yeah, I got it.
MR. MILLER: Hold off, let me see if I can get it to go from
here, Bob.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Okay. My three minutes are up.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yeah. I mean, just wait to start his
time --
MR. KRASOWSKI: Thank you.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: -- 'til he gets the screen up.
MR. MILLER: Your thumb drive is not inserted. You need to
put your thumb drive back.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Oh, I thought I put it on your computer.
Page 104
November 12, 2013
MR. MILLER: I don't -- that's not the indication it's giving me,
sir.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Okay, sorry. All right, high tech. We're
going high tech. Thank you very much, Troy.
Now should I double click on it?
MR. MILLER: Give it just a second to function here.
All right, I've gone to the other one, Bob.
MR. KRASOWSKI: The one on the bottom?
MR. MILLER: No, I went to the top one first. Let's go with --
MR. KRASOWSKI: Okay, that's fine.
So here what we have is Vanderbilt Beach, okay. This was taken
around October 21st or 20th. There's the Turtle Club. Here's the nest,
the last remaining nest.
This is the condition of the beach. This is where the turtles are
supposed to crawl over this and get to the Gulf of Mexico.
I was going to play this one second, I'll show it first. But here
you'll see how close the trucks are to that nest. And they're going for
about -- this is about 10 days' worth of this stuff going on now.
I'd like to switch to the other one, Troy. Can you control that?
MR. MILLER: Yeah, let me see if I can get this.
MR. KRASOWSKI: It's right below it.
MR. MILLER: There you go.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Okay, this is taken about the same time.
Now, I have videos from every day, okay. My concern was the first
two days my wife Janet and I were there and we just kicked the sand
down with our feet to try to create a path. After that I brought a rake
or I brought my carpenter's level and at sunset -- after sunset I leveled
all of this all the way to the beach.
This was in the contract that the service provider was supposed to
restore the beach in specific language to its native condition, I'm
paraphrasing a little, and every night after work. And it was not done.
And I notice in the Naples Daily News article one of the reporters
Page 105
November 12, 2013
there -- look at that. How are baby turtles supposed to get over that,
you know. So in the Naples Daily News they spoke to somebody at
the county, they didn't know about our work and stuff. But they said
that the project was fine, the trucks avoided the nests.
They didn't. The trucks are supposed to, according to the permit,
go as close to the beach as they can, but most of the days -- there's Jan
walking to show you how deep that is -- most of the time the Turtle
Club had their chairs out there right at the water's edge, so the trucks
tried to avoid them.
So they said the county -- in the Naples Daily News said that the
project went fine, the nest wasn't disturbed by the trucks. I differ. The
nest was disoriented. There was 10 days of this going on before the
hatch of the nest. So I suggest that the nest might have been -- like
these are little critters that orientate themselves to where they hatch
and grow up and come back -- they'll come back there 25 years from
now. So they use earth magnetism and all sorts of stuff that's
disturbed by this. This didn't have to be this way. It could have been
-- they were closer and they should have leveled it and all that kind of
stuff.
I just wanted -- I don't want to see this project become a
whitewash where at the end of the project, the end of the day, the end
of the year it says oh, this was a wonderful project, there was no
negative aspect to it. And as I said, I have the videotape from every
day we went up there, and after the second day we raked the beach.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you.
MR. KRASOWSKI: So I wanted to --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you very much.
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's all right, you're done.
Can staff, the one managing the contract, tell the contractor to do
some leveling, okay?
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir.
Page 106
November 12, 2013
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It should be done every night --
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Are there any turtle nests
remaining?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- in that particular areas of
turtle nesting. And that's --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: No question.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah.
MR. MILLER: Your final public speaker is Doug Fee. Mr. Fee
would like to speak about the placement of the public comment item
on the agenda.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Is this just for me? Thank you.
MR. FEE: For each one of you. But you can keep them all, if
you'd like.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Do you want me to take care of
this?
MR. FEE: If you would, thank you. Thank you. Sorry about
that.
Good afternoon, Commissioners. For the record, my name is
Doug Fee. I live in North Naples. Thank you for the opportunity to
speak.
I have two comments to make. The first comment has to do with
the situation that I became aware of and many in the county in
reference to a county administrator and Channel 2. I think many of us
here in this audience saw the video, and it involves drinking and
driving. And as a citizen, as a taxpayer, I just have my concerns about
that. I know that there's -- if you're a faith believing person, there's a
saying that says he without sin cast the first stone, and I would stand
here and tell you, I have done that very same thing before. And I
know the gentleman in question, and he is excellent. He's a great staff
member. And we've all made mistakes.
And I just have two suggestions: One is I think the Board of
County Commission might take the opportunity to submit some kind
Page 107
November 12, 2013
of a letter, an op-ed piece saying to the citizens here that that really
isn't acceptable and that you don't want your employees to be doing
this.
The second thing is maybe have an employee who this comes to
light do some kind of a community service, like 20 hours outside of
work so that they realize there's some ramifications to it. That's my
comment on that, thank you.
The second item is I --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Hang on a second.
First of all, the Board of County Commissioners does not have
jurisdiction over the management of staff. So anything that you're
addressing is to the County Manager, not to the Board of County
Commissioners.
Second of all, you seem to be accusing this member of staff of
having done something illegal, and there is absolutely nothing illegal
that this employee did, and you're very strongly implying that. And,
you know, that employee is not a public figure, so I would ask you to
retract that statement, because it's inappropriate.
If you'd like to talk about how the County Manager develops his
internal policies that you can do with him. And again, we don't have
jurisdiction over that. But I would caution you, because the employee
in question did nothing illegal and nothing against the County
Manager's internal policies.
MR. FEE: Okay. I'm sorry if I offended anyone. My --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: It's not a matter of offense, it's
you've got to be accurate, factually accurate, because otherwise it's
defamatory.
MR. FEE: My comments would be to anyone in that situation.
And so you as the Board of County Commission, you actually set
guidelines, policies and all that. So I'll leave it at that. I'm not trying
to impugn anyone --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Talk to the County Manager.
Page 108
November 12, 2013
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay, thank you.
The second item is I handed out a spreadsheet, and very quickly
what you have is these are the meeting dates in 2013. And the second
column has total meeting time, and you can see that the meetings have
gone from three hours, 58 minutes to 11 hours to 16 hours for a
two-day meeting.
My point here is at the last meeting you did set public comment
at 1 :00. And I thank you for that. That really helps, I believe, the
public. When it was at the end of the meeting, unfortunately the
residents or the citizens would have to sit through the meeting, not
knowing when public comment was. And so I wanted to put this in
front of you so at least you can see what the effect would be on that.
The third column is when the public comment actually occurred
in those meetings. And it goes from very quick 21 minutes all the way
to a two-day delay.
I speak about this because I live up in Wiggins Pass. It's a half an
hour for me to get down here, half an hour back. And when you have
a two-day meeting and public comment is at the end of the meeting,
then in essence I might have to come back twice.
I also -- those people that live in Immokalee, obviously they
would have to be here too. So I thank you for your time and those are
my comments, thank you.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you very much, Doug. Nice
to see you again.
Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, regardless of the vehicle
use, I talked with the County Manager and asked him if he had a
problem with if the Board directed him to create -- update the CMA
policy on those vehicles. He says Commissioner, I'm working on it
right now. And I said well, I just want to make sure it complies to all
laws. And he didn't have a problem with that.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: That's great.
Page 109
November 12, 2013
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So, I mean, he's doing it because
of perception and not reality. So I commend him for that. So I won't
bring that up at the end of the meeting.
MR. OCHS: Thank you, sir.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you very much for taking the
initiative to do what you're supposed to do.
MR. OCHS: Yes, ma'am.
MR. MILLER: And you have no further public comment.
Item #12A — Continued from earlier in the meeting
AUTHORIZING THE COUNTY ATTORNEY TO ADVERTISE
AND BRING BACK FOR A FUTURE PUBLIC HEARING A
PURCHASING ORDINANCE - THE COUNTY ATTORNEY,
COUNTY MANAGER, STAFF AND THE CLERK ARE TO
WORK TOGETHER TO BRING FORWARD A PURCHASING
ORDINANCE, A PURCHASING MANUAL WITH PROCESSES
AND PROCEDURES, AS WELL AS THE PROCEDURE FOR
THE P-CARDS AND P-CARD THRESHOLDS AND BRING
BACK AT THE DECEMBER 10, 2013, BOARD MEETING —
APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Commissioners that brings you back to 12.A. I
believe you wanted to try to --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yes, back to the Clerk of Courts.
MR. OCHS: I think Ms. Price was just finishing up her --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: We were on the P card program
talking about the number of transactions that were out of the -- that
total pie that involves the delegated discretionary spending, that 9,000
transactions out of the 12,000 transactions were P card related for
about two million.
MS. PRICE: If you would indulge me for just a moment, the
Page 110
November 12, 2013
purchasing director has some more solid data I think that can help put
this into better perspective for you. I'm going to ask her to do that
while I queue up the presentation back to where we were.
MS. MARKIEWICZ: Joanne Markiewicz, Interim Purchasing
Director.
I do have a few comments I want to make sure are on the record.
First of all, I want you to know, in fiscal year 2012 there were
2,300 unique suppliers. Approximately 62 percent of the purchase
orders that we issued in fiscal year 12 went to local vendors. 600
contracts, or approximately 560 vendors, had pre-established contracts
for construction services, architect and engineering services, office
supplies, booths and a number of other goods and services used by the
county.
Use of the county contracts are vigorous and aggressive. Use of
other contracts, for example, U.S. Communities, WISKA and the State
of Florida, are selectively used by the county.
And what I mean by selectively used, if we're buying one item,
generally those contracts are written so that they're guaranteed best
pricing. If we're using -- if we're buying multiple items, frequently
we'll go out for bid and we won't use the State of Florida contract or a
U.S. Community contracts. It's what's in the best interest of the
county.
Those 600 contracts -- and many of you are business people,
those 600 contracts took care of 92 percent of the county spent. For
business people the rule of them is 80/20. Oftentimes when we go out
for bid we lift out 80 percent of our supplies, at least 80 percent of our
supplies. Sometimes we don't get bids from vendors. Sometimes we
find ourselves with obscure parts, sprinkler supplies, pesticides that we
only use in extremely hot conditions or extremely wet conditions.
Those sometimes are missed on some of the bids that we do.
EMS or animal vaccines that are recently developed, those aren't
included in bids and sometimes we use those for off-- or we have
Page 111
November 12, 2013
those off contract purchases as well. And there are times when
vendors have not submitted pricing for some of our line item bids;
therefore, we need to go off contract.
We have used the credit card for contract purchases and
non-contract purchases. We've sparingly used the credit card for
contract purchases because our colleagues have told us, the Clerk's
Office has told us it's sometimes been hard to reconcile those
transactions. We've used them sparingly -- we've used them very
sparingly, and when we do we assure that those contract purchases are
made in accordance with the contract. Now, let me take just a second
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Someone has to turn their phone off,
please.
MEMBER OF THE AUDIENCE: I didn't know it wasn't off.
MR. OCHS: Push.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Wait a moment, please.
Everyone, can you make sure your phone is silenced? I mean,
just as an afterthought. We should start every meeting with that, you
know, please silence your phone. Sounds like a movie theater.
Silence your phone, don't throw popcorn on the floor as you're
watching these proceedings.
Go ahead.
MS. MARKIEWICZ: Purchasing cards. Commissioner Fiala,
you brought up travel. We often think of purchasing cards being used
for travel. That really is only one portion of why we use purchasing
cards.
And let me remind the Board, the average size transaction on a
purchasing card is $236. We use purchasing cards for subscriptions,
for registrations, for classes, for books, for miscellaneous hardware
supplies, for minor computer supplies like covers for iPads and
iPhones.
We do that because it's streamlined, it saves us money, it saves
Page 112
November 12, 2013
the taxpayer money. Our goal in these smaller purchases is not to
usurp anyone's authority but rather to provide efficient and
streamlined services, not only for the county but for the vendors.
Our goal for cooperative purchases is not to usurp or look for
higher prices or make it easy. It's just to have an available set of tools
in our tool cabinet if we need to use those.
Commissioners, I just want to remind you, there are a number of
checks and balances in place. Have we made mistakes? Absolutely.
Will there be mistakes in the future? Probably. But there are checks
and balances. And let me just highlight a couple of those.
Our operating departments are strengthening their fiscal staff.
Their operating department directors or senior fiscal staff officers
review every transaction. Central purchasing reviews every
transaction before it goes to a vendor.
And last but not least, our Clerk of Courts performs pre-audits
and post-audits for us. Our goal, again, is not to usurp anybody's
authority.
One final comment I wanted to make on donations. In addition
to the Inglesia Church, we've also donated computers that are really
scrap metal, Commissioners, because we've removed the hard drive
and the memory out of them to -- to the New Life Apostolic Church to
the Messiah Lutheran Church, to the Shelter For Abused Women, to
Guardian Ad Litem, to Centers for Learning, Catholic Church
Charities, and we just recently received a request from the Wounded
Warriors. And once we see their 501c3 status, they also will become a
member of that portfolio.
So I just wanted to review that data before we get back into the
formal presentation. And thank you.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Let's hold off on any discussion
about no surplus 'til we bring that back before the Board and the Board
has the opportunity to review the transactions and ask questions of
staff.
Page 113
November 12, 2013
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Just a simple question just on --
could you forward me -- forward your notes to me so I can fully
comprehend that, please?
MS. MARKOWITZ: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: If you have wifi. Thanks.
MS. PRICE: I think we had run down the purchasing card
matter. Like I say, the issue here was whether or not we were going to
require pre-approval for each of the purchases on the card and whether
or not we were going to use these for contract or for non-contract.
It is my strong preference that using them for contract purchases
creates problems for us and opens up a plethora of opportunities for
failure.
We did come to agreement with the Clerk of Courts to leave in
the policy the fact that if a person is charged sales tax for a sale under
$300, that sales tax comes to approximately $18. Takes us between
two and three hours to try and get that money refunded. It's been in
our current policy for the last six years that if at first we don't succeed
in getting that refunded, we don't spend a lot of time trying to have
that done.
We found that this is two, three times a year where we have this
situation, and in speaking with the Clerk, he agreed that this is de
minimis and wasn't to be problematic. So I think that that resolved
that piece of it.
And with regard to the rebates, we have traditionally put the
rebate money back into the general fund. The time and energy to go
through 9,000 transactions to determine the funds that were expended
are tremendous. We receive about $35,000 annually in revenue from
our P card program, and we would prefer to just allow the Board when
we receive that money to allow the Board to put it into the general
fund.
That takes care of all the areas where we have differences with
the Clerk of Courts. And I think we probably need to really talk that
Page 114
November 12, 2013
through. But I just want to make sure that before I forget we address
this one thing dealing with the local vendor preference.
We put into your policy two options, and we're going to need you
at the end of today to tell us which of the two options you want us to
put into our policy.
The first is basically what we do right now with the local vendor
preference, which is a price match. So long as a local vendor comes
within 10 percent of a non-local vendor's bid, we offer that local
vendor the opportunity to match that price. This has been challenged
once or twice and so we're providing you with perhaps a second
option that would be going for a best and final offer. We would take
the lowest -- provided it was within 10 percent, we would take the
lowest non-local bid, the lowest local bid and ask them for a best and
final offer. That has been working well in a number of other counties
and has withstood challenges. So that's going to be up to you to guide
us which direction you want to take.
And like I say, at this point I think the Clerk of Courts wants to
make his presentation, and then I guess we've got some talking to do.
MR. BROCK: I have a couple comments. While I expect there
will be instances in which you run into problems with sales tax, you
make a policy that says that you are going to pay sales tax. I have a
little proclamation in finding a public purpose for something that does
not exist since government is not subject to sales tax. Obviously there
are exceptions. My only problem is with you stating an emphatic
policy to that effect. That we can deal with, and I think there are
occasions -- are there occasions in which we pay that? When people
come to us with circumstances that, you know, they can't get them to
take it off or you run into that problem. And all I'm saying is to create
a policy that you can pay sales tax. I mean, I'm struggling with the
public purpose that you can --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Jeff, can you comment on that?
MR. BROCK: There are always exceptions.
Page 115
November 12, 2013
Yes, ma'am.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: No, no, Jeff needs to comment on
that.
MR. KLATZKOW: Yeah, I agree with the Clerk.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, I do too. I think there are
sometimes some crazy thing comes up like for instance you walk in --
I've only traveled a couple times a year for the county and we always
take along our tax exempt thing and you hand it to the Clerk who
checks you in. They put it with your stuff, right, and you go to check
out and you say you have my tax exempt? Yes, we do. And you're
driving home and you see that they didn't -- they billed you tax
anyway.
Now, the first time that happened to me I didn't realize 'til the
next day. They said it would take me 30 days to get that back. And I
said but it was just last night. Well, it was too bad. But the next time
I didn't leave the hotel until I checked out, even though I checked with
them, it was still added. So I went back to the thing and said you
didn't do that, and I got it. But, I mean, sometimes crazy things like
that do happen. And I think that's the only thing they're talking about
is just in a circumstance where you do your best and still they didn't
do their best.
MR. BROCK: And all I'm saying is, you know, that needs to be
dealt with informally as opposed to in a policy statement. And I think
Jeff agrees with me.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So can the policy be modified to
eliminate that statement, please? As part of the directions. Thank you.
Go ahead, sir.
MR. BROCK: Okay. You have in front of you a slide
presentation that we will go through.
Real quick, this is Attorney General opinion, 2001.29, which I
can find absolutely nothing which has interpreted the law any different
to this. You read it, it says -- it was basically -- the Clerk asked you
Page 116
November 12, 2013
whether or not the county could pay -- the Clerk could pay a bill in a
non-chartered county that had not been approved by the Board. And it
was very succinct in my opinion that the Clerk of Court in a
non-chartered county is not authorized to pay a county bill that has not
been previously approved for payment by the county commission.
Okay?
Sort of hard to get around that one. But there are other ones that
talk about the Board has to approve the public purpose and the county
expenditure.
The next slide is an excerpt from an additional Attorney
General's opinion. The Attorney General's Opinion 8861 . In the
absence of the statutory authority, and I have it highlighted, I'm unable
to conclude the power to execute contracts on behalf of the County
Commission may be delegated to a county administrator. Okay, I find
absolutely nothing that changes that.
Then if you turn to the Florida Statute, this 1974 statute that has
been modified many times after '74, you will see that the county
administrator, in subsection A. Says his purpose or function is to
administer and carry out the directives and policy of the Board of
County Commissioners and enforce all ordinances, resolutions,
regulations to the Board to ensure they are fully executed.
Negotiate leases, contracts and other agreements including
consultant services for the county subject to approval by the Board.
That's the only thing I'm asking that take place is that the Board
approve them and make recommendations concerning the nature and
location of county improvements.
The next section of that particular statute which clearly
enumerates the legislative intent: It is the intent of the legislator -- this
is subsection two, it's not highlighted. I know, go back one to the
statute. Okay. Go to section two, right under the highlighted portion
-- it is the intent of the legislature -- this is the legislative intent as
enumerated by the statute -- to grant to the county administrator only
Page 117
November 12, 2013
those powers and duties which are administrative or ministerial in
nature and not to delegate any governmental power imbued to the
Board of County Commissioners practice as the governing body of the
county prudent to the constitution.
To that end, these above specifically enumerated powers are to
be construed as administrative in nature and in any exercise of
governmental power the administrator shall only be performing the
duty of advising the Board of County Commissioners.
Now, that's the 1974 statute which has been amended many times
since. 2013 and 2013-40, that's this year, ladies and gentlemen, this
Board of County Commissioners adopted the County Administrator's
Ordinance which says in keeping with Florida Statute 12959, grants to
the county administrator only those powers and duties which are
administrative in nature and not to delegate any governmental power
imbued to the Board of County Commissioners pursuant to the
constitution.
One, they have authorized and you have authorized to delegate to
negotiate leases is basically the same language right out of the statute.
They can negotiate, they can work them out. All they have to do is
work them out to you and give you to give them this number, okay?
And that's purely a policy decision that you must make.
The next slide is the P activity card, or P card activity. In 2011
we had 5,917 transactions. In 2012 we had 10,224. If I'm not
mistaken, we took it directly from the county's numbers. We didn't
calculate or generate this ourselves.
The total dollars was about $2.4 million.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: If I understand correctly, are you
saying that you actually had a transaction on a purchasing card? And
a P card is a purchasing card. It's a credit card.
MR. BROCK: Correct.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: For almost $20,000?
MR. BROCK: We're going to get to that in just a minute, okay?
Page 118
November 12, 2013
You've got the total number of county employees in this county.
There's 1,800 employees. Based upon the information that they've
provided us, they have 450 P cards or credit cards out there that your
county staff is buying off of. That's a limit of$1,000 per transaction
for $10,000 per month times 450 employees.
Now, we checked, the Sheriffs Department has zero credit cards;
is that correct, Crystal? Zero credit cards. I have one, it's controlled
exclusively. You've got 450. Now, if you multiply the potential
exposure that we have out there from the P cards, that's 450 times
10,000 per month, or $4 million a month.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Four million, 500 a month.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Okay, just 1,000.
Now, these -- pardon my comment, but these are things that you
all never see. Have you all ever -- even though you've approved them,
have you ever thought about potential ethical ramifications that could
be created as a consequence of buying stuff from people you know
nothing about that you've approved through a policy? You've
approved it, okay. Think about that, ladies and gentlemen.
Under the current -- go to the next one. Under the current
process, purchases without Board approval in zero to $3,000 comes to
4.2 in 2012. From 3,000 to 50,000 is 14 million, 811 . For a total of
$19,54,478. That is basically transactions that you never see. You do
not approve. Just think, that's -- between 53.4 percent and 59.6
percent with purchases up to $50,000, this Board of County
Commissioners, which is the only discretionary body in this county,
doesn't see. Does not approve. That's not legal, I would suggest to
you. It is ultimately the responsibility of the Clerk to determine the
legality of the expenditure, and I will not pay them in the future. I
want to work with you to come to an amicable solution that works for
us all. Now, this can be done in a multitude of ways. For example,
you can adopt a project budget. By doing that, you have then
determined the public purpose. You can, through the process of
Page 119
November 12, 2013
whatever means you want to do it, identify how you wish to expend
the funds. I don't care how you do it, as long as I know you have
determined that there is a public purpose. But I'm going to be looking
to you to give me that direction, not somebody else.
And then you can adopt broad contracts. Just like you do for
office supplies, you can do it for small stores. You can do it for
anything. All you have to do is manage a little bit and figure out
where you're going and do it in that particular manner.
And then all you have to do is issue a purchase order. It becomes
a relatively ministerial function to issue that purchase order, based
upon the contracts you do.
For example, I do not care. This is purely a policy question that
you have to answer as elected officials. You want to allow the county
staff to go over to Home Depot and purchase at Home Depot. Your
policy and your approval process can be you can go over to Home
Depot and purchase anything that Home Depot sells at the price that
they have posted or charge you for. That gives me the direction of the
Board. Then all you've got to do is I have to know what project or
what the public purpose for that expenditure is. That is totally up to
you, not to me.
I just need direction as to what I'm supposed to audit to to ensure
compliance with your directive.
If you look at the next slide, which is purchases of zero to
$3,000, this is a list of purchases or vendors that we have purchased
from zero to $3,000. Okay? Now, in 2011 we purchased $42,000.
Divide that by three, we've got, what, a minimum of eight purchases.
You know, by the time we get to the second, it looks like somebody
figured out that we probably ought to figure out a way to
competitively do that. But that is the problem that we are
experiencing.
The same thing with the rest of these. The reason the three are
highlighted is because they're also purchased -- the next page is just a
Page 120
November 12, 2013
continuation of the list. But then you go over to Page 14 and you will
see there is an additional purchase of 3 to $50,000. And we have
$281,000, okay? With Communications International, Inc. Looks
like somebody would have figured out that, you know, we need their
goods and services quite frequently, maybe we ought to be bidding.
When I saw this when my staff brought this to me, I went to my
IT Department, okay. And I said to them, I want you to compare
purchasing card purchases that I'm seeing here, because we did some
relatively large computer contracts at the end of last year. I want you
to pull out the items that we can identify as computer related that you
can find.
And what we went to was the state contract for CDWG, okay.
And we bid those items. Out of those that we bid, we paid a total --
and this was over four contracts that we could pull items out of. And
Commissioners, I'm not trying to suggest to you that this is a
representative sample. It's not a statistically random several. It's
certainly not a statistical sample based upon some statistical model. I
mean, it was just me wanting to see what was going on.
The extended cost of the items that we could pull out of CDWG
was $85,555.58, okay.
We then went to the Florida State Contract for CDWG and pulled
the items out of there. And out of that, it was $109,000. We then went
to the Florida State contract for CDWG and pulled the items out of
there. And out of that it was $109,000. $109,520. That's the
differential by us going out for bid from the state contract.
The point I'm trying to make here is twofold: One is everybody
in the world knows what the state contract is. All you have to do to
get a better deal is to go to the marketplace. Because all of the
vendors can go look and they know that governments are going --
have the ability to buy off the state contract, if you want.
So, you know, underprice it. That's the one point I'm trying to
make there.
Page 121
November 12, 2013
But the other point is you have an item on the agenda today. And
that's for cooperative agreements. What page? Page 12? Okay, go to
Page 12. If you look at that, the -- I'm assuming that this is a list of
the cooperative purchases that they made last year. Okay, you take
the 21 .9 percent that we save by competitively bidding those, just with
CDWG. And please, I do not want anybody to think that this is
anything other than I'm just going in and looking. This is not a
random sample. We've not used any, you know, precision auditing
techniques to do this. But the differential was 21 .9 percent.
If we apply that across the entire board, you're talking about over
a million dollars, okay? That is the point of those slides.
Page 13, go to 13. You can see it, it's 1,292,870, just with what
they've listed that they've purchased over competitive contracts. Not
my numbers, I'm pulling them from them.
You then have on 14 the competitive -- now, the process that you
use in your budget today is you budget by fund. All you have is that
budget by fund. There's no detail in it. I cannot glean from the
purchase from which you budget today anything with regard to what
you're approving as a public purpose. There's no project in here. You
do some project budgeting, but it's very limited.
If you go and look at the audit report from Okaloosa County,
there was an absolutely scathing report with regard to the county
activity there for not using project budgeting. Okay.
That gives me the direction that I need to determine public
purpose. Then once you've approved that general contract, I'm cool, I
don't have a problem, okay?
The other slide on 16 is just an example of the detail that's in the
book. But it's never approved by the Board. And that doesn't give us
the -- you've just got operating expenses; you need to break that down
a little better for me to know what to pay, okay.
We went to -- you know, when I began looking at what was the
position of the county, the position was one of oh, we're going to have
Page 122
November 12, 2013
a hire a lot of new people. But you've got 17 plus employees in
purchasing. You've got fiscal people, probably hundreds of them, in
the various and sundry departments. All I'm saying is you do what
you're tell me you do now, and all you have to do is bring it to the
Board and get them to bless it. That is the only thing that I am saying.
That's the only thing that the law allows. Or that's the only thing the
law requires.
So think about what you're doing here today, Commissioners.
Why are you sitting here in the Sunshine? The purpose is to do
government's business before the people, not in the private rooms.
And what you have essentially done is with all of these transactions
that are being handled off the Board's approval, you are delegating
that to be done outside of the public purview. Now, that's almost $19
million.
With regard to the cooperative agreements that you're going to be
considering today, one of the things that I found most amusing, and
the only reason I was asking this to be pulled off last time was for it to
be discussed in conjunction with the entire purchasing policy. I mean,
I just could not let it go without comment.
You know, you look at the agenda item on 10.8 that we discussed
to be pulled, okay, it says solicitations are in fact competitive in the
market with pricing offered being guaranteed the lowest price for the
quantity. More streamlined process for vendor community.
Today's agenda said will divert staff from using local vendors. I
felt that appeared to being a little bit inconsistent.
The next one -- the first one was aggregate buying power of
public agency, okay.
The next one is the cost of an item will be eclipsed by the
administrative cost of the transaction.
The one that we asked to be pulled back in October, generally
more timely buying event.
The one today says will delay receipt of goods and services.
Page 123
November 12, 2013
Appears to be just a little bit inconsistent.
More favorable terms to the county which respect to freight and
shipping. The one today is may result in additional freight and
shipping costs.
Streamlining process for both purchasing and operating staff.
The one today says will still require significant oversight by
purchasing to review the methods used to invalidate the pricing of
these purchases, okay.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Can I just ask a quick question?
Who prepared this?
MR. BROCK: Who prepared what, my slides?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Leo -- no, who prepared the
executive summary that took the description of cooperative
agreements on 10.8 and literally turned it on its head in 11.12?
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, I don't know that it got turned on
its head. You know, you have little phrases as usual being pulled out
of context and being used to spin a yarn here.
I mean, if you want us to come back with some complete
analysis, I'll be happy to do it, but we need some time to respond.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I think it would be worth your while
to look into that.
MR. OCHS: And you're comparing cooperative purchasing
agreements with I think purchases for small dollars, maybe two
separate things, but --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: It would be good to get clarification
on that.
MR. OCHS: That's fine.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: May I ask, how much have they --
how much of our total budget every year, the taxpayer money that
comes in, how much of that goes to the County Manager's Office and
how much, say, goes to the Sheriffs Office, being that you mentioned
Sheriff a couple times. How much of that? Is it like 17 percent or 19
Page 124
November 12, 2013
percent comes to the County Manager's Office and is it about 43
percent that goes to the Sheriffs Office? Anybody know that?
MR. OCHS: I beg your pardon, Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You haven't been weighing on every
one of my words, Leo?
MR. OCHS: Could you ask it again, please.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. Of the total budget that comes
to the county from the taxpayers every year, just to the county, not to
the school board or anything else, not to MSTUs, just the county, of
that budget, how much of that budget comes to, percentage-wise,
comes to the County Manager's Office and how much goes to, say,
percentage-wise, goes to the Sheriffs Office? Because the Clerk
mentioned the Sheriffs Office a couple times.
MR. OCHS: Well, I think about 29 percent of the tax bill comes
to the County Commission and then you split that up.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's the total tax bill?
MR. OCHS: Yes, ma'am. And then you split that up between --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Of that 29 percent? How much then
goes to --
MR. OCHS: About 14 I think to your agency, 13 to the
Constitutionals, the Sheriff being the biggest recipient of your general
fund.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. Okay, fine.
The reason I'm asking that is I was just wondering, being that we
don't have as much purchasing or anything, or taxpayer dollars that
come in, does everybody have to report to the Clerk of Courts and do
they also have to go through this rigorous routine so that everybody
has the same criteria what they're purchasing and before they get paid
and so forth.
MR. BROCK: I'll be more than happy to answer that for you,
Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
Page 125
November 12, 2013
MR. BROCK: The answer to that is the Clerk of the Circuit
Court is directed by statute to employ the statutes related to the Board
of County Commissioners and auditing expenditures of the Board, not
to any other agency, either the Constitutional officers, the school
board, the independent district --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Who does that?
MR. BROCK: That is a decision that was made by the
legislature. So if you get elected to that you can change that and we'll
play by a different rule book.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, but what I then want to know is
being that we have a pretty small part of the pie, who does oversee all
of that, or who do they -- you know, for all of these different
purchases and everything, who oversees that for all of the other
departments?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It's not on the agenda.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Hm?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It's not on the agenda.
MR. BROCK: I'm assuming that the Sheriff follows the laws
regarding the Sheriffs purchases, but I don't know that. I have no
idea. That's not my job.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay, I just wanted to know that.
And by the way, we just got this handed to us as we were -- as
you started this subject, so I'm sorry but I have not been able to study
it or anything. You know, I'll take it home with --
MR. BROCK: If you have any questions, I'll be more than happy
to answer them as we go through. It's not really complicated.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
MR. BROCK: The next one, 19. I'm just going to show you
some examples of what we deal with, okay. Board of County
Commissioners, okay, entered into a contract to engage in trenching a
water system and rehabilitation services. Okay, the Board -- this goes
to your question, Commissioner Henning. The Board entered into the
Page 126
November 12, 2013
contract.
We then get bills submitted to us for items that were not in your
contract. So what transpired into -- bring this down to a very
simplistic explanation of what transpired was after we discovered that
they were trying to get us to pay for things that you had not approved
in your contract, they then went to Boca Raton and tried to find a
contract over there with the items that they were trying to get us to pay
for in the contract. It didn't work either. But this was after it had been
submitted to us before they ever went to Boca Raton.
And how do we know that? Because we called Boca Raton and
talked to the people over there.
Any questions?
(No response)
MR. BROCK: Next. Suncoast Movers. This county had entered
into a contract with multiple vendors for moving, okay, and had
delineated the process by which they were to be chosen.
At the end of the contract period the county staff decided now
you had approved the contract. Not them, you had approved the
contract. During the contract period county staff decided that they
wanted to enter into another contract for moving and went to Suncoast
Movers.
Now, when we questioned staff with regard to this, we were told
that oh, we put it out for bid and all of the people that were on contract
with the county had an opportunity to bid.
Now, we don't know the truth of the matter with regard with
regard to this, but we contacted the vendors. And one of the vendors
told us that I'm the only person that does this, we never saw it. But
they entered into a contract to pay more than what you had already
authorized in your contract. And we refuse to pay any more than what
was already authorized in the contract.
Okay, any questions?
(No response)
Page 127
November 12, 2013
MR. BROCK: Next.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Wait, Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, I was just talking to the CRA
people. You know, you've been here most of the day and it looks like
we're never going to get to it. And it was just a report to just tell us
how the CRAs are doing, I'm pretty proud of you, but I don't think you
should have to stay any longer. How does the rest -- we can just pull
that off the agenda. Because it was my idea to put it on in the first
place. If that meets with everybody's approval, we can get these
people -- yes, ma'am?
MS. JOURDAN: I have one more item on the agenda.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, okay, I'm sorry. Thank you.
I'm sorry to change the subject there for a moment.
MR. BROCK: No problem.
The next item on Page 21 is we have P card transactions to Best
Buy for computer stuff. Looks like we could figure out some point in
time that we're going to be buying computer stuff and get a master
contract for all that, as opposed to just going out to Best Buy and
buying it.
CDWG, we've already seen the example that I showed you with
regard to my purchasing.
The Page 22, you've got 68 plus thousand dollars to FGCU for
education of your employees that to my knowledge you've never
approved. If you have, I stand corrected. But I'm totally unaware of.
You have 5,100 from Wal-Mart, Old Marco Lodging, Print House.
That's just examples of your P card transactions.
Then we have Paradise invoice for photography, okay?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Why are we paying $6,000?
MR. BROCK: I'm sorry?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Why are we paying for the
Destination Marketing Association meeting?
MR. BROCK: That's a tourism expenditure?
Page 128
November 12, 2013
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes.
MR. BROCK: I have no idea. Okay? Paradise inventory for
photography, okay. You have a contract out there that, you know,
quite frankly, you know, I can't figure out what it is you've approved,
but we've been paying it.
Let's give you the example with regard to what transpired in
Okaloosa County. In Okaloosa County the tourist development
manager purchased a yacht for him and had the vendor put the yacht
in his name and put it for advertising, okay?
Now, to give you a very recent scenario of where I encountered a
similar thing here in Collier County, do you remember the airport?
There was a -- what was it we were looking for in the airport? The
dirt? What was it called? No, no, what was the report that we were
looking for with the fill dirt -- the engineers were supposed to do a --
what's that -- what was it called?
(Commissioner Henning exited the boardroom)
MR. BROCK: Anyway, they were supposed to do analysis of
how much dirt came out of the hole. Well, when we got to looking at
it, what it amounted to was it came out almost to the penny to what
was in the contract. And we could find nothing where an engineer had
gone out there and measured how much dirt was removed from the
hole. The next thing we know, we get a copy of a document, I cannot
remember the name of that document. But I mean, it's a term of art.
And when we were beginning to look at that, we're going well, this is
the same thing that was on the contract too.
So I contacted the vendor, and the vendor sends me a copy of the
pay request. And all they were doing was comparing what was
submitted as a bill to the contract, but the contract with the engineer or
the agreement with the engineer was we're going to put on it and call it
this term of art, even though it's really not what it is.
So ladies and gentlemen, you can get anybody to put anything
you want to on something. That is my problem with it not being aired
Page 129
November 12, 2013
in public.
One of the other criticisms in Okaloosa was that the vendor was
in fact making the determination of what should be purchased. We've
got a very similar situation in Collier County. When we began
looking at this, we determined that the county was paying for a
wardrobe costing almost $6,000, so we immediately began inquiring,
well, where's the wardrobe? And we discovered at that point in time,
oh, we will get it for you. Well, then they couldn't get it and we later
discovered that oh, we gave it away. Okay?
But catering costs of$6,000 charged with no receipt. When we
began looking at this, we discovered that obviously local talent is not
as valuable as East Coast talent. I mean, it was almost twice the cost
for them to hire East Coast models over West Coast models.
So we went to the people to ask them why they did that, and we
were told, Paradise told us to. In all, we refused to pay and they
reduced their bills by $19,800. These are the problems I encounter on
a daily basis, okay.
You have an agenda item today dealing with a tourism contract
for AVIA reps. The agenda item itself says, ladies and gentlemen,
that the Collier County Visitors Bureau, not the Collier County Board
of County Commissioners, they're asking you to approve a contract
for the Collier County Visitors Bureau.
Now, when we first got that particular agenda item, it had in
there that that was done by the tourism director, not the purchasing
department. Purchasing department didn't have anything to do with it.
If you look at your agenda item today, that language is not there.
Okay? That's the original. Purchasing staff was not included. Go to
the one for today.
MS. KINZEL: It's side by side.
MR. BROCK: Oh, okay. It's not there.
But this is a three-year contract. And the language says that the
tourism director will create the contract. So I'm assuming -- now, this
Page 130
November 12, 2013
is a $50,000 contract for a three-year period, which is by my
calculations $150,000. And the tourism director is going to establish
what it is that they contracted for by developing the contract himself
and entering into the contract with the Collier County Visitors
Bureau? Hm. If he does, let me assure you, ladies and gentlemen, the
bill won't get paid.
Next.
If you look at the transmittal sheet, it says that this went through
the purchasing department, okay? When in fact based upon all of the
information that we received from purchasing, it did not. It went to
the TDC and they stood before the TDC and told them it didn't. And
if you look at the TDC agenda, they acknowledged that it didn't.
You're not seeing it and it's put on the consent agenda, okay?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And Joanne, did you see this? Did
you see that they took out --
MS. MARKIEWICZ: When I approved it, ma'am, it had the
language from the purchasing staff in it.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And then it was deleted?
Leo, who would have deleted it?
MR. OCHS: Well, that was an original draft by Joanne and then
it goes through several other routings, including mine.
Now, this was a purchasing for under $50,000, so there are
different rules applied to procurements below 50 than there are over
50.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: But they deleted Joanne's remarks.
MR. OCHS: Commissioner, it's not unusual for drafts to be
amended before they get to final form and printed on the agenda.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So if I understand correctly,
purchasing looks at something and subsequently thinks -- and she
signs off on it and then subsequently staff can go back and modify
what she's approved?
MR. OCHS: No, I can go back and modify what's she's
Page 131
November 12, 2013
approved, or her division administrator can modify if it's been routed
to her.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Then she shouldn't be signing off on
this. Because if she signs off on something, she's signing off on a
version and we're assuming -- you know, purchasing is a -- I mean,
she has responsibilities. And when she signs off, we're assuming that
it meets with her compliance as presented. And very clearly it didn't,
based on her comment in here. She -- I mean, if--
MR. OCHS: Commissioner, if we're going to start taking draft
documents now prepared a week before the final agenda and prepare
those for final product --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: This exact item was on the
TDC's agenda.
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I mean, written verbatim it was
on the TDC. So --
MR. OCHS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- that's what they approved.
And in fact there was a contract back there.
MR. OCHS: Okay.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: What was on the TDC agenda? Just
out of curiosity.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I mean, I --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: With or without Joanne's remarks?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, not with her remarks. It
stated: The purchasing staff was not involved in the solicitation due to
the department's conduct of their own informal process. However,
given that the contract is near the Board's competitive threshold of
50,000, staff believes that it meets the best interest to seek the Board's
approval.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Where is that?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, that was on the TDC's
Page 132
November 12, 2013
agenda, Tourist Development Council. I mean, if you want to see it,
but I want it back. But here's all the backup for the TDC. There's
actually a contract --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: For how many years?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- back here for you to sign.
But we're going to be dealing with this. That's coming off the
consent agenda, so we're going to be dealing with that. If you want a
copy of it, I'll direct Camden to print it --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yeah, go ahead.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- forward it.
MR. BROCK: The next item on Page 29. Okay, now this was
actually an award for copy. Now, you see, you have an award,
category A, black-and-white/color copying service. Print platforms,
one color, carbonless. Primary award is Intech.
Next one is category D, color copy printing, rack, brochures,
booklets, newspapers and posters. The award is Intech, okay. That's
what was approved.
Now, the next page, you see -- I got them color coded. Category
A goes to Cecil's Copy Express. It's yellow, okay. They just bought
from whoever they wanted to. And it does not meet what was
approved.
Next one, this is taking a lot too long. There's another contract
you approved. This is a contract for paint, basically. The last item in
the agenda is for miscellaneous percent discount for all other paint
related items. We get a bill. Bill is the next item. This is -- the
handwriting is what we discovered, okay?
Now, if you look in here, it was 40 percent discount, okay. We
get the bill, it didn't have a 40 percent discount. And this was their
response: The pricing on some of our spray equipment is sold just
above cost and cannot be discounted. If you need those items to show
a 40 percent discount, we will have to raise the price accordingly.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Haven't you ever bought a car?
Page 133
November 12, 2013
MR. BROCK: I mean, this one was almost more than I could
take when my staff showed me this one.
I have -- we have a -- the going out for bid, okay, we discovered
they're letting the bid to the greatest discount, not the lowest price. So
we've got a $100 item with a 20 percent discount which you can get it
for 80 bucks. But the same item, if you could get it for $70 at a 10
percent discount, it would only cost you 63. But we were getting it
submitted as the lowest bidder based upon the lowest discount,
without taking into consideration the item.
Commissioners, you know, here's the bottom line, you know, I
want to work in conjunction with this Board. You have a totally
different role than the Clerk of the Circuit Court. It was created that
way for a purpose by our forefathers in the Constitution. And it has
been fostered through the statutes for the same purpose. It is as a
check and balance.
I want to work with you. I will work with you to develop the
least costly process to comply with the law. But two things. And all
future expenditures in this county will meet the following two
requirements: One is you have a public purpose determination by the
Board through some method. And that's certainly -- if you take that to
mean you have to bring every item to the Board, you know, that's
nonsensical. That's not what that means. You've got to do it in some
formal process that you make the determination of what has a public
purpose.
And two is that you must approve the expenditures. County staff
can negotiate, can recommend, can bring it to you, but you're the ones
that have to make the determination. The law tells me the first thing I
do before anything else is I must make the determination that the
Board has approved it.
And in addition to that there is a statute, ladies and gentlemen,
which says that if you approve an unlawful expenditure, knowing that
to be so, you are personally liable for it, or you have the potential for
Page 134
November 12, 2013
being personally liable for it.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Okay. Well, Commissioner Fiala
and Commissioner Henning. Commissioner Fiala, you wanted to
make a comment first?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, I was going to say that we've
been able to -- we've been able to work very closely with the Clerk
over these many years, and have been able to pay most of these things.
I wish we could have known about all of this before so we could have
changed it years ago. We've been paying these bills for 25 years and
never realized we weren't paying them legally. But then again, I think
the other 66 counties already -- pay just as we did. We're going to be
the only one that changes in the State of Florida, but if that's what the
Clerk insists on, then we're going to have to do that. I just wish we
would have known about it a little -- you know, a few years earlier.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, I don't know where to
start. We're purchasing Apple, you know, products all the time. I
would imagine it's under contract. I don't know why we don't have a
repair contract with Apple.
But $19 million is a lot of money. And I'm sure that we can find
duplicate vendors over the years that we should do the checks and
balances and see if we're getting the best value. That's the ultimate
goal is the best value. And I question whether we're getting the best
value. In fact, evidence shows that we're not getting the best value. I
understand that purchasing cards are being used for existing contracts
should be allowed to do (sic).
MR. BROCK: I don't have a problem with that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The Board approves the budget
at a macro level, not a micro level. Because within the budget you
have budget numbers within a fund such as travel, okay. However, we
also approve large amounts in the budget for capital improvements
that come to the Board; road projects or buildings or whatever.
Page 135
November 12, 2013
I would like to direct the County Manager to bring back a
proposed tightened purchasing policy and tell us how he's going to
provide a system to where if we're using an item year after year after
year how can we be assured that we're getting the best value. And the
only way you're going to do that is if it goes out to bid.
Now, I understand there's unforeseen things. And I think that we
can create a policy to identify those unforeseen things. But, you know,
let's work a little smarter. It might take a little bit more time, it might
take a lot more effort; however, I think that we can do a better job,
provide a better product to the citizens.
MR. BROCK: Commissioner, along those lines, I commit to you
that -- and I'll do it right now, I direct the finance department people to
get with the purchasing department and come up with the least costly
way we can figure out how to comply with those two statutory
requirements to make it work to the benefit of the taxpayer. That's
what those are designed to do. They're designed to make it
unpalatable for you to do anything other than to get the best deal for
the taxpayer.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And that's what the Florida
statutes --
MR. BROCK: Require.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- require is the best value, the
lowest price. Exactly what it says. So we don't know if we're getting
the lowest price if we're continuing to do the same thing, that's all.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Commissioner Nance?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes. You know, I think we have --
I think the Board of County Commissioners makes policy at a number
of different levels. And each one of those policy arenas is designed to
set the tone on down the road.
For example, you know, we just went through the budgetary
process. It was a first for me. And of course you need to plan your
spending. And of course in the budgetary arena the spending is
Page 136
November 12, 2013
planned relative to the revenue that's anticipated you have. And of
course it's allocated by division, account and project and so on and so
forth with various levels of detail, I guess depending on where you
are. The Board of County Commissioners doesn't see a lot of that
detail.
In my view the amount of detail that's present for the people then
called upon to spend that money does indeed frame that policy and
determines the intent of the Board as the Board approves that budget.
Down a notch, not only do you have to plan for spending but you
have to plan for purchasing. That's where we get these bid and
contract processes. For projects, for large purchases, guidelines and
thresholds, delegation of authority down to the people that make the
decisions on a daily basis because the necessary spending that's
approved requires decision-making. And vice versa, decision-making
requires the necessary spending to put those decisions into action.
So, you know, we've seen evidence today from the Clerk
requesting that all these purchases for example be put under contracts,
be they fixed term or purchasing cooperatives, when indeed the
evidence shows that those purchasing cooperatives may not be indeed
delivering to us the best price. So we're on the horns of a dilemma
here. Because as we structure our process to meet some of these
requirements, we find that the process itself may well be eliminating
us from the very best deal.
So I don't think you can eliminate human decision-making from
this process. I think if you do there's going to be a tremendous cost
for that. I think ifs actually probably easiest on these small purchases.
I think fixed term contracts for a lot of these small purchases is
probably the easiest way to go.
And I will agree, I do believe that the purchasing card program
can indeed be tightened up and you can have some more guidelines
and framework. But I'm not certain that relying upon purchasing
cooperatives and fixed term contracts as an out to reaching these
Page 137
November 12, 2013
points that the Clerk is suggesting we need to get to is necessarily
going to meet the requirements to give us the lowest price.
So, you know, perhaps we need to have as many different fixed
term contracts and purchase cooperatives that we can thereby compare
one against the other, take into account our local purchasing
preference which I'm sure is driving a lot of this. I don't personally for
one minute think that we have county employees that are out there
trying to do anything except getting the lowest price. I just -- I don't
believe that. There may be a little of that floating around, but I don't
believe that's an issue that this Board needs to address, I don't think
that's the case at all. I'm not suggesting that.
But, you know, we've got to be careful that our process doesn't
drive us to spend $5.00 to try to save a dollar. And I hope we can get
there.
I don't know exactly what the answer is. I would just encourage
everybody to go back and review what's been said today. And I have
no doubt that, you know, we can find instances where the results are
not what we want to do. We're making thousands and thousands of
purchases here and there's many, many people involved with
purchases on behalf of the county and the citizens at many, many
levels. So you can certainly take potshots at people and nobody likes
to see that. I understand that. I get it. I get it.
So what we have to do is try to do the very best to come back and
minimize the effort that we have doing this. Perhaps it needs to be
done by fewer people, I don't know.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Okay, I'm going to go ahead and try
to summarize.
First of all, purchasing is county government's Achilles heel
when it comes to fraud and waste. I mean, obviously if we don't have
good purchasing practices and if we don't have good controls over the
approval of the purchases made, I mean, we very, very reasonably can
anticipate that we're going to have, you know, both those problems.
Page 138
November 12, 2013
So to go over and summarize what we've agreed to here today,
with respect -- and staff and the County Attorney, can you take notes
so you know what to work on to get --
MR. KLATZKOW: I'm taking the transcript.
THE WITNESS: You'll take the transcript?
MR. KLATZKOW: It's as good as your notes are, ma'am. I
think the transcripts are better.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Okay, skip the notes, go straight to
the transcripts.
Court reporter, do your best job possible, because these guys are
going to ultimately look to you for guidance.
All right, with respect to contract administration, both the Clerk
and the county are in agreement. The only thing that needs to be
defined is that the 10 percent in additional expenses for contingencies
are contingencies which would fall within the overall scope of the
contract as approved by the Board.
With respect to emergency expenditures, you know, look to the
statute for the definition of, you know, emergency. And again -- and
also with respect to the contract administration, as with emergencies,
the expenditure has to be brought to the Board for approval prior to
requesting the Clerk to pay for approval. So you've got agreement on
emergencies as well.
With respect to surplus, we're not dealing with that here today.
You're going to bring that back separately and we'll deal with how to
deal with the disposition of surplus property.
The two issues that clearly remain open, and really they overlap,
because the issue is one in the same, is the P card program and
basically purchases under 50,000. From 0 to three and then three to
50.
And they're -- what the Clerk is saying simply is that these
expenditures have to have a Board approved public purpose and the
expenditure has to be approved by the Board before it's presented for
Page 139
November 12, 2013
payment to the Clerk. And that can be achieved by I think reducing --
I mean, for one, you can certainly work on the P card program and
reduce the number of cards you have distributed. I mean, 450 cards is
a lot of cards to manage.
And the process for approval of expenditures on those cards is in
most corporations, you know, for example, the employee says I'm
going to go out and buy something, the supervisor signs off, says
okay, and then ultimately it goes to Leo and, you know, Leo approves
it, you know, it's bundled and, you know, sent in a lump sum to the
Board, you know, with a detail as a schedule and the backup. I mean,
that can easily be simplified so you don't have the problem with
respect to the 9,000 transactions equaling about two million.
And then with respect to the balance of the 3,000 transactions
equaling about 16 million, what's obvious from looking at the detail, I
mean, a lot of these transactions I'm sure relate to existing contracts
that for some reason should have been incorporated as a master
contract. Like if you look at Dell, I was looking at that as one
example -- if you bear with me, and I'll just take the 2011 numbers,
because they were quite large -- Dell for transactions in 2011 under --
between zero and 3,000 was 40,000, and between 3,000 and 50,000
was 180,000. So in 2011 you spent 220,000 on Dell. I'm sure you
had additional contracts with Dell. If that was all, you know,
consolidated and you had some sort of an agreement with Dell that
said, you know, including purchase such as with the following price of
X, Y and Z, then you could just go out and have that authorization by
the Board to buy from Dell that would then allow the Clear to pay and
it would be, you know, relatively a simple process.
So I think on the purchases up to 50,000 which are being made
with staff discretion and without Board approval, I think that needs to
be revisited. Because obviously the Clerk has made it clear that he's
just not going to pay that anymore.
MR. OCHS: Well, Chair, there's a question between whether it's
Page 140
November 12, 2013
illegal and whether the Clerk isn't going to pay on it, so --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: It sounds -- I mean, and this is, you
know, reading this as I have today, it sounds like it's illegal. I mean --
MR. OCHS: Your County Attorney, Madam, you can ask him.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I know, but I'm reading the statute
straight up. I mean, I'm just -- I'm reading what was presented here
today.
MR. OCHS: Well, what that presented were two Attorney
General's opinion in a couple --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And the statute. It says: Negotiated
leases, contracts and other agreements, including consultant services
for the county, subject to the approval of the Board.
MR. OCHS: Right. Negotiate. There's nothing negotiated about
three quotes and paying the low quote, okay?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: No, no, no, but it's --
MR. OCHS: And that's under guidelines prescribed by the Board
as a policy matter.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Well, I think any purchase --
MR. OCHS: No, that's not what it says, Ma'am.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: -- is a contract. I mean, if they --
MR. OCHS: Yes.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: -- agree to buy something, I mean,
whether it's an oral contract to buy services, to buy product. I mean,
every time I go to use my credit card and buy something, you know,
from a vendor, it's a type of contract. It may be a little contract but --
MS. PRICE: But certainly --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: -- it's a contract.
MS. PRICE: -- it's been negotiated.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I'm sorry?
MS. PRICE: And I think that's the distinction we're trying to --
THE COURT REPORTER: I'm sorry, I didn't catch the first part
of your statement.
Page 141
November 12, 2013
MS. PRICE: I said I don't see where that is negotiated. If we
walk in to Wal-Mart and purchase some item --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So what you're saying is --
MS. PRICE: -- it's not negotiated, it's a price.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: -- if something has a stated price
that it's okay for an employee to buy it, and the Board hasn't approved
the public purpose, the Board hasn't approved the expenditure?
MS. PRICE: Within the framework of the purchasing policy,
that is my position, that is the black box that I referred to before that
we get to operate in administratively. You give us all the guidance,
and then we don't negotiate, we don't really use judgment other than to
purchase or not to purchase. And we follow those guidelines just like
every other county does and as a matter of fact as the way the state
allows state employees.
MR. BROCK: Commissioners, I've heard that's every other
county. We actually contacted other counties, and they're all over the
board, okay?
But I will be willing to bet you after the Okaloosa County
Auditor General and them getting called before the Joint Legislative
Audit Committee in Tallahassee that we will begin to see changes in
that.
But be that as it may, Commissioners, I have to make a
determination of the legality of the expenditure. That's -- and as the
Supreme Court says, that's my discretionary call. And Attorney
General's opinions have acknowledged that, court cases have
acknowledged that. The Attorney General has specifically
acknowledged that, and inquiries that I have made, that I'm the one
that has to make that call and nobody else.
But I guess, ladies and gentlemen, there's another alternative.
You know, you want to throw down the gauntlet, throw down the
gauntlet. We did that for seven years, now where did that one get
you? Okay, I want to work --
Page 142
November 12, 2013
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, I am not interested in throwing
down the gauntlet. Whatever you decide as a policy matter is
obviously your discretion. I just don't want you deciding to change
your policy because someone says it's illegal. If you want to change it
to get more efficient or more competitive or whatever other policy
decision you have, I respect that.
But, you know, again, I'll say it for the third time, look at your
executive summary and tell me where it says the policy that you've
been operating under is illegal.
And I'm not saying that, your County Attorney writes the legal
considerations for you, not me.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: In Statute 125.74 it doesn't give
the authority of the county administrator to approve any contract, all
right. So tell me where it says in law that it gives the administration to
approve contract. I'm disappointed to hear that you feel a purchase is a
contract.
MR. OCHS: No, sir, that's not our position.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, that's what I just heard.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I said that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. A purchase of an item is
a contract between the county and whoever we're purchasing from.
MR. OCHS: That's what we've been told, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Well, that's what I just
heard up here.
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: However, I think that we can
provide some guidance with the purchasing. If, you know, you all feel
it is a contract, I think we could provide some parameters to do that,
okay.
But yeah, it's -- I think you're going to bring something back that
is going to be a lot less than the thresholds that were provided, so --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Well, again, you know, what the
Page 143
November 12, 2013
statute says is what staff can do is limited to what's administrative or
ministerial in nature.
MR. OCHS: And the Board has the discretion to determine what
that is.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: But then what happens when they're
out like repairing some of these things in the hallway or in our office
or whatever and they don't have a tool or they don't have enough nails.
Do they have to wait to finish the repair 'til they can get approval to
use their P card to go buy the nails?
MR. BROCK: No, Commissioner, you don't have to approve
every paperclip either.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, I don't under -- where is the
distinction then?
MR. BROCK: That is an often used cliche of absurdity. And
let's talk about the contracts, Commissioner. You go purchase an item
from Home Depot or anybody you want to, okay. What you have
done is you have said to Home Depot, you give me that item and the
county will pay you after audit and approval by the Clerk. That's a
contract. Any way you look at it, that's a contract.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So I don't know how you just
answered me. Tell me what you're --
MR. BROCK: The answer to is you can take anything to the
point of absurdity, Commissioners. That's not what we're trying to do.
You know, you just enter into a blanket contract for small stores.
Easy way to do it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, that's what I asked was how
would you handle this. So you --
MR. BROCK: Same way you do it with office supplies. And
you then have a -- and you can do it as simply as saying you can go
down to Home Depot and buy at the off-shelf price. That then gives
me direction as to what to audit to.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: So let me understand, sir. What
Page 144
November 12, 2013
you're saying is that if we have -- if the Board of County
Commissioners together with staff is to arrive at a pre-approved list of
vendors that will be used for accounts and their divisions for those
purchases that can't be covered by a fixed term account or a
purchasing cooperative, then you'd be satisfied with that?
MR. BROCK: As long as they're expending it for an item that
you have determined to be a public purpose.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: So if it falls within their budgeted
accounts --
MR. BROCK: If you have it line item detailed to where I can
determine that you have budgeted it, yes.
MR. OCHS: That's another new rule, sir. Now we need a line
item detail budget that's about this big --
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Wait a second, I'm talking about a
list of accounts in your different administrative divisions. I mean, you
probably have a short list of accounts that each one of them used, do
they not?
MS. PRICE: Commissioner, we've got 2,300 vendors that we
use.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Can I give an example?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: No, wait a second, wait a second.
You know, in your budgeting when you go through and make up
your budget, Ms. Price, how many accounts do you have in your
division that you're assigning cost to?
MS. PRICE: Twenty, maybe 25. You're talking about line
items?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes, yes.
MS. PRICE: Probably 20 or 25 different line items.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: So if somebody was to go from
your division and make a purchase and assign it to line -- you know,
account number X, Y, Z, which is administrative materials and it goes
to a pre-approved vendor, is that going to be sufficient for the Clerk?
Page 145
November 12, 2013
MR. BROCK: Yeah. As long as you have identified for me that
it's being expended for a public purpose. If you have identified the
method by which they're purchasing it and what I can audit back to to
ensure that they're complying with what you directed, I'm a happy
camper. That answer your question?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: It's very easy to do.
MR. BROCK: It's very easy.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: It's extremely easy.
MR. BROCK: This is not a real complicated -- I mean, you
know, this is a battle over discretion. This is not a complicated
process.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Not at all. And like to give you an
example, let's say for example we make repairs around our buildings
and we need to buy basic supplies, we run out of nails. You have a
list of approved vendors that the board approves to purchase nails;
Home Depot, Lowe's, Ace Hardware, and that you're allowed to
purchase, you know, nails or, you know, basically building supplies to
make improvements to county property, purchasing from any of those
three vendors, hypothetically.
The bottom line is there has to be some sort of evidence that
these employees are making these purchases for a valid public purpose
and are not buying like drills to take home to build a boat. And that's
where you have to have some sort of control.
MR. OCHS: And we do, Commissioners.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: But let me give you an example --
MR. OCHS: You can't expect 12 ideas or 12 anecdotal incidents
that range over the last seven or eight years and conclude that your
purchasing policy is out of control --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: No, no.
MR. OCHS: -- and I resent that.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And I don't believe that anyone is
drawing that conclusion. What's very clear is that controls over P card
Page 146
November 12, 2013
purchases and consolidation of, you know, identified vendors that the
county should be buying from for, you know, certain purposes needs
to be tightened up.
MR. OCHS: I agree.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And to give you an example --
MR. OCHS: I agree.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: -- computers. Right.
MR. OCHS: I agree. But that's a far cry from saying that every
single purchase made here has to come in front of this Board to get
pre-approval. And that's the basic bottom line argument.
MR. BROCK: And I never said that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, we're getting our nose out
of joint here.
What -- I think what was said, and it is provided under each of
the fund (sic) is the more micro budgeting that your budget
department has, travel, you know, materials and things of that nature.
So it's already there. He's just saying that we approve it.
However, I don't know where we're going with this. We can, just
like Commissioner Hiller said, it's real simple. Let's get a policy
contract or a policy that you can go to Home Depot, you can go to
Lowe's or you can go to Ace Hardware.
However, we had a contract with Ace Hardware to do purchases
and it was 10 percent over cost or something like that. I don't know if
that's still in effect or not. We should try to get that.
But anyways, we could still get there, okay? And I'm glad you
heard that let's try to provide best value, best pricing. So in the
meantime I think that we can do those general purchases through
okay, you can go to Wynn's Market and buy sandwiches for
volunteers or something like that, you know, in the purchasing.
MR. BROCK: You know, I heard during the discussions about
this that, you know, what do we do if an employee wants to go to
7-Eleven and purchase a soda at lunch? I mean, the first thing that I
Page 147
November 12, 2013
thought about when I heard that was wait, why would an employee be
purchasing that at lunch? And so we went and looked, see if we could
find any employees purchasing a soda at lunch, and we couldn't, okay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Did you check beers?
MR. BROCK: No, we didn't check beers.
But, you know, there is a way to get there that is much less
onerous that gives us the ability to do our legal job as the law tells us
to do it, you know, with regard to P card purchases.
You know, P cards are a new event here in Collier County. We
were able to get along without P cards for a long time. And now they
have become something that we just can't live without.
But let me give you an example of the problems that type of lack
of control creates. And we have not gotten to the bottom of this
completely, so -- I mean, but we see a large number of $15
membership purchases to Sam's Club. I mean, it was just a huge
number of them. And we're going why?
So we called Sam's. Now, this was -- and I'm not telling you we
have gotten to the bottom of this but, I mean, this causes us some
concern. They say you can buy a membership that is a corporate
membership that entitles as many card members as you want on that
membership. The only limitation is it has to be paid by a business
credit card or a business check. But there's another one that you can
buy a $15 membership and you don't have to pay for it with a
company credit card or a company check. So what's the first thing
that crossed your mind, Commissioners?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I didn't get one.
MR. BROCK: Are we paying for somebody's ability to go to
Sam's and purchase their personal stuff? If we are, that causes me
some concern. So we will be looking at that further. But that's the
type of stuff we're constantly trying to chase down.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Well, one of the concerns you
raised was the ethics, right? And for example, one of the things that,
Page 148
November 12, 2013
you know, we're prohibited from doing for example is selecting a
vendor who's a family remember to purchase something from them as
opposed to going to, you know, let's say the lowest priced vendor out
there. So if you have these very -- you know, if you have a limit of up
to, you know, 10,000 per month or 1,000 per transaction, an employee
could be going to purchase stuff from their brother's business as
opposed to, you know, the lowest priced business out there. I mean,
these are just things you just want to avoid.
MR. BROCK: It becomes much more than just family.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I understand. But the --
MR. BROCK: Business associates.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: -- bottom line is -- look, the bottom
line is it's very simple. The purchasing ordinance should simply state
the following: That the Board of County Commissioners shall
approve all expenditures and shall further approve that all these
expenditures serve a valid public purpose. And that's it.
And then with respect to this policy of zero to 50 being
discretionary, that is completely eliminated. And then a policy -- an
internal procedure is developed between staff and the Clerk's Office to
determine how to accomplish that objective so that you can pay that
bill.
MR. BROCK: And that is all I'm saying here today.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And that's all you need to do. That
doesn't have to be in the actual purchasing ordinance. How that is
satisfied is a procedural issue between purchasing -- you know, the
county obviously would -- you know, approval by the County
Manager and the Clerk so that he can sign off on these. And quite
frankly, I don't think it's that difficult to do, I really don't.
MR. OCHS: Madam Chair, forgive me, I promised at 3:00 that I
would advise you that your court reporter is --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yes. All right, we're done.
MR. OCHS: Wait a minute. We're done?
Page 149
November 12, 2013
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yeah. I think we're done. Because
here's my suggestion. Like I said, we have certain things that we have
agreed to that is going to be brought back with modification, so we're
directing that the County Attorney and staff, like I said, address the
definition of scope and contract administration. Otherwise
everything's fine.
Address the definition of emergency in -- you know, emergency
payments. Otherwise everything's fine.
That as a blanket rule that everything has to be approved by the
Board before submission to the Clerk.
And that as a blanket rule the Board has to approve that any
expenditure that's made serves a valid public purpose. And that's
basically it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Talking about the nails again, right?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Whatever it is. And then we don't
need a specific procedure -- we don't need a specific ordinance on P
cards. You need to come up with an internal --
COMMISSIONER NANCE: We're going to develop a policy for
that?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Our policy is really simple. The
internal procedure for P cards will be developed by staff in
conformance with the policy that we are adopting. The procedure for
expenditures under 50,000 will be adopted by staff in conformance
with the policy we're adopting. And how you do that procedurally,
you can work with the Clerk so he can help you and say yeah, that
satisfies it, you're done. And then you just work out those details.
MR. BROCK: I'm a happy camper. That's all I need.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I just have one concern, and I will
say it. I wanted to get -- you know, we've gone down and crawled
around in the mud on some these different examples and so on and so
forth, and that's good, I appreciate it and your message is received
clearly. But these people have to be able to work on a day-to-day
Page 150
November 12, 2013
basis. If we come up with a policy so onerous that we can't get people
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: It's not an onerous policy. You're
mistaken.
MR. OCHS: We have resources to get it done.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Just let me finish.
We can't have something that so onerous that we can't deal with
it and our vendor development suffers because of it. So I hope we can
work together in that spirit. Because we have to be able to work on a
day-to-day basis. If we can't, all the rest of the legality, you can shoot
it out the window, because the public is going to be incensed because
we're wasting their money.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: You're not going to waste money
and it can be done effectively and efficiently. You know, I think now
that we have a new purchasing director who is, you know, committed
to, you know, improving the system and, you know, getting things
done right with the help of the Clerk and everyone working in a
cooperative spirit setting the standard and allowing them -- or the
policy, I should say, and letting them develop the procedure to be in
conformance really is not going to have a negative effect. I mean, the
Clerk has already made recommendations to staff which were very
reasonable and would allow for efficiencies to continue.
Yes, sir, Commissioner?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I just have one question. And I
think the staff needs to have the answer to this question in order to
develop the policy.
As an example, let's suppose we go to Home Depot and negotiate
the purchasing agreement. That gives us a good price for whatever it is
we want to buy there. And a workman needs a tool and the workman
goes there to buy it. We've satisfied the two problems of price and
contract. Who makes a determination that that tool serves a valid
public purpose before he purchases it? The Board of County
Page 151
November 12, 2013
Commissioners.
So what he's got to do under your proposal is to get that approved
by the Board of County Commissioners or we delegate that --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: No.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- decision to the County Manager.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: No. You know how it's done?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Wait a minute, I have the floor.
People have been representing this as a very simple process. It is
not simple. It is extremely complex. It is unlikely that we will be able
to devise any purchasing process that is efficient and timely under any
of the proposals that have been thrown out here today. And when they
-- you do develop that process, we will find that the criteria will
change, just as it always has changed as we go forward. We'll find
another statement in a law somewhere that forbids that kind of
purchasing process.
So the answers haven't been provided. But I wish you all the
luck in the world, because the only way you're ever going to be able to
get anything done here is to do exactly what he tells you to do, okay?
Because he interprets the law. Nobody here has the authority to say
that he is wrong. You believe he's wrong, our County Attorney
believes he's wrong, so -- but there is no alternative. You have to do
exactly what Mr. Brock tells you to do. So good luck to you.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: All righty.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Okay, so basically as I said, the
motion I'm going to make is what I said, that we eliminate the P card
as part of the purchasing ordinance, you know, the P card discussion;
that we eliminate the policy between zero and 50 with respect to
purchases as part of the ordinance, and simply state that, you know, all
purchases shall be approved by the Board of County Commissioners
before submission to the Clerk. And that the Board shall further, prior
to submission of an expenditure for payment by the Clerk, state that
the expenditure serves a valid public purpose.
Page 152
November 12, 2013
And as I said, contract administration, definition of scope;
emergency, definition of emergency; and that surplus will be brought
back separately.
The only remaining issue that we haven't addressed is local
vendor preference. And I think we should have a separate discussion
on that to make sure that's properly being addressed and implemented.
And we do have to have that codified in order for it to be valid. So we
should bring that back as a separate agenda item and have a separate
discussion, because there are alternatives. So just suspend that for
another meeting.
MS. PRICE: Did you want it to be a separate ordinance or --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: No, it should be part of the
purchasing ordinance and we'll just amend the purchasing ordinance to
include the local vendor preference as we approve it after we have a
discussion on the Board with respect to that. But we won't address
that today, so just leave that out. So that's how it would be approved.
MR. OCHS: Commissioner, could you enlighten me on the
process that the Board will use to declare what I believe to be a new
requirement now, to have you declare a public purchase in advance of
any purchase? I know the Clerk is required to determine that as part
of his pre-audit before disbursement, but we seem to now invent a new
process to front end load that --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: No, there's no --
MR. OCHS: I don't see any reference in the statute to that.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Everything, every expenditure we
make as a matter of law has to serve a valid public purpose. There's
case law --
MR. OCHS: Subject to the audit of the Clerk, yes.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Wait a minute, it's not him
determining that it has a valid public --
MR. OCHS: Yes, it is.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: We are the first --
Page 153
November 12, 2013
MR. OCHS: Through your budget, yes.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: -- threshold determining whether
something has a valid public purpose. He is second. And what he
does is he tests through his pre-audit that it serves a valid public
purpose. But that is determined by what we say and what we do with
respect to approval of that expenditure and then actually, you know,
what we're going to apply those funds to. So --
MR. BROCK: And may I add one additional thing? Courts have
given me guidance as to how I make my determination. And that is
absent -- proof beyond a reasonable doubt. I followed your
determination of public purpose.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Right. And that's -- to give you an
example, Leo, when we make expenditures, for example, for tourism,
when we expend tourist dollars, we always say, you know, this serves
tourism. So we're defining that the public purpose of the expenditure
of those tourist dollars is validly towards tourism.
And we don't have to say this serves a valid public purpose.
Whenever Jeff, you know, does his legal underwriting, he basically
says and the expenditure serves -- you know, it's like legally
sufficient, serves a valid public purpose.
So satisfying that requirement is done by us every single time we
are approving a contract, every time we are approving a lease, every
time we approve --
MR. OCHS: Yes, and now it will done another 10,000 times or
however many it takes.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: No, it's not going to be done any
differently --
MR. OCHS: Yes, it is, ma'am.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: No.
MR. OCHS: Excuse me, it is.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It will.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: No, I don't think, so.
Page 154
November 12, 2013
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And then let me raise a question.
The guidance that has been given to the County Manager clearly says
that the determination concerning the public purpose will be
determined prior to submission of the invoice to the Clerk.
To me that seems to be putting the horse before the cart -- or the
cart before the horse. We should be making that determination before
the expenditure is made. You can't have someone go make an
expenditure and then when you're getting ready to make pay the
invoice bring it to the Board of County Commissioners to say that it
was -- it serves a valid public purpose. We should do that in advance.
And if we do that in advance, it is going to be extremely cumbersome.
But there's no question about which way this is going to go. So
you've got to do it the way the majority will instruct you.
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So anyway, that's the motion. And
let's just keep it as simple as that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Is there a second to the motion?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I don't know, I'm waiting.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay, would you accept a
friendly amendment.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Why aren't you looking this way?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Because he's talking to me. Unless
you want to --
MR. OCHS: Madam Chair?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Do you want to second?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, you --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: No, he just said he wanted to amend
it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, here's my thought. I
think there's a value to the P cards, but I think there could be a policy
for the Board to consider on what the P cards are used for. I think
there's a value of staff entering into agreements for contracts as long as
Page 155
November 12, 2013
there's a clear guidance in the policy. And those should be determined
on what is being brought back with a cooperative effort between the
County Attorney, County Manager's agency and the Clerk's Office.
So that's my friendly amendment to your motion.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So for purposes of adopting the
ordinance, putting in there that, you know, that there has to be
approval by the Board and a valid public purpose and then adding to
that that as to P cards, that you want -- you want to basically
incorporate the procedure in the law --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Correct.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: -- for P cards.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Correct. And what can be
expended. Such as existing contracts, such as travel for staff, okay?
Because we don't approve --
MR. BROCK: From my perspective you have an existing
contract that's been approved by the Board. You can use your P cards,
no problem.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right, but we have not approved
things like travel.
MR. BROCK: Travel is approved by statute.
MR. OCHS: No, travel -- per diems are approved by statute.
The process by which you procure travel is not spelled out in the
statute.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So yeah, those things I think
between the Clerk and the County Manager can be done.
And the same thing with smaller purchases. $50,000 and if we
take a look at an average of$19,000 -- 19 -- I'm sorry, $16 million a
year, well, that's a lot of purchases.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: 19 million.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Between the P card and the --
MR. OCHS: It's eight percent of your purchases.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right, eight percent of the
Page 156
November 12, 2013
purchases.
I think there's some room for some improvements there. And
that's my friendly amendment.
MR. BROCK: Commissioner, I'm of the opinion, you give staff
direction, you bid it and you award it based solely on price without
discretion, it's a ministerial act. All you have to do then is determine
the public purpose. It's when you start interjecting things other than
price into it that cause -- for discretion with county staff that you
create the problems that I'm having to deal with. I have told county
staff this.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I don't -- I'm happy to make the
amendment, I don't have a problem with it. But I don't know why we
need to strap Leo's hands with -- because what we're basically saying
is as long as what's used on the P card serves a valid public purpose
and as long as that expenditure is approved by the Board, it's an okay
method to purchase.
MR. BROCK: And he can develop the policy --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And let him develop the procedure
on how that end is achieved. I don't think you necessarily want to put
that procedure in there unless you want to say okay, the only people
that can have P cards, for example, is upper level management to
make emergency purchases, but otherwise everything has to go
through purchasing. I mean, you know, you could incorporate
something like that.
But I just really think that if you set the broad parameter, you're
providing enough -- you're setting enough of a control in place to
allow the County Manager to develop the internal purchasing practices
to consider the efficiency of his operation as well as ensuring that the
expenditure is done in a way that the Clerk will reimburse and that we
haven't breached our fiduciary duty either.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, I think we're saying the
same thing.
Page 157
November 12, 2013
MR. BROCK: We can -- within the broad framework that she
set out, okay, we can then work with county staff for them to establish
the procedure by which they implement that, that we feel comfortable
with.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, and I think the Board
needs to bless that.
MR. BROCK: And that's fine, but they can bring that back to
you in terms of the policy for the purchasing. The only thing I'm
looking for --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Let's just ask this --
MR. BROCK: -- is for county staff-- Board of County
Commissioners to make those two determinations.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- extra step. Because first of all,
you never pay anything unless you audit it anyway.
MR. BROCK: Oh, I do it all the time.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: He audits it before he pays? He
audits it again after he pays. Now this seems like another step to audit
before you spend anything but he doesn't pay it anyway until after he
audits it. It seems like we're going through a long, long process when
we already still have the procedures in place audited before and
audited afterwards, and he doesn't pay unless the audit comes out fine
with him. I just don't understand why we're going through all of this
stuff.
MR. BROCK: You don't like my audits yet, do you?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, that's fine with me.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: We have a -- if I may, we have a lot
of people waiting and we're long overdue our 2:30. I mean, it's one
hour beyond that. So I think --
COMMISSIONER NANCE: We have to take a break for the
reporter.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: We have to take a break for the
court reporter, we've got people waiting, we really need to move on.
Page 158
November 12, 2013
But this is a very serious issue and one that needs to be addressed. So
unfortunately the extra time was necessary.
How would you like to modify that amendment again? I mean,
what's the amendment again?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The amendment is to direct staff
to work with the Clerk agency, with the assistance of the County
Attorney to bring back a purchasing ordinance and provide the
policies under what can be purchased under a P card --
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Procedures.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: The procedures for P cards.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Correct.
And set a threshold for in what staff-- smaller threshold, I should
say -- in what staff can enter into an agreement for purchase. I think
that $50,000 is -- it was a time when it was adopted, Commissioner,
when we were making large purchases, a lot of purchases. We had
what they call vufers (sic) who had so much money that staff created
these things that, you know, they needed.
But anyways, I don't think there's a need for it right now.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And I feel confident in the
County Manager's staff to take a look at the expenditures and find out
what we can try to get best value.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Jeff, can I ask a quick question?
Can we have a blanket ordinance that addresses the general policy like
I stated? Could we separately have purchasing rules which address
the details like what Commissioner Hiller -- I mean Commissioner
Henning is drilling down to? I'm like --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm not going to adopt her.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Everybody starts with age, right?
Could that be done so that --
MR. KLATZKOW: I set up the purchasing coordinates --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Right.
Page 159
November 12, 2013
MR. KLATZKOW: -- to specifically provide for a purchasing
manual.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Okay, perfect.
MR. KLATZKOW: There's no reason why this can't be part of
your purchasing manual.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So let's do that, if you don't mind,
Commissioner Henning. Because what I would like to do is allow Leo
the flexibility. Because let's say they sit down, they adopt a series of
procedures today, they refine the procedures, they start changing those
procedures. And -- you know what I'm saying?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Okay. So basically the
recommendation -- I will adopt the amendment made by
Commissioner Henning modifying it to bringing back a -- you know,
the recommended procedures with respect to these purchases under
50,000 and the P cards which will be placed in the purchasing manual
and will serve as guidance for how these transactions will be executed.
MR. KLATZKOW: And I would recommend that the
purchasing manual come forward along with the purchasing ordinance
at the same time, because they're going to have to mesh.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yeah. And that's fine. So we'll put
the broad policy in the ordinance and have the details in the
purchasing manual and direct staff to bring both back say the first
meeting -- or the second meeting in January?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I don't know if I'd give it a time
frame at all.
MR. OCHS: Yeah, we need --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Well, we have to, because the Clerk
is not going to pay if we don't adopt the ordinance.
MS. PRICE: I would hope that so long as we're working and
moving forward that the Clerk would give us some leeway.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: We have to adopt the ordinance. I
Page 160
November 12, 2013
mean, we haven't --
MR. OCHS: We've been paying it for 22 years this way. I don't
know why we have to change it --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Well, he said he's not going to pay.
MR. OCHS: Why now?
MR. BROCK: You adopt the ordinance and we'll work out the --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: The details.
MR. BROCK: -- details.
MR. OCHS: There's no ordinance on the floor, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, later on, later on when it
comes back.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, but what happens between
now and then?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Nothing. Everything business as
usual.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So let's bring --
MR. BROCK: I'm hanging out there now. I don't know that a
little more is going to kill me.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Bring the ordinance back to the
December meeting. I mean, the modifications to the ordinance, you
know, where the differences are basically being addressed, bring that
back. And then bring the manual back after. Because the manual
does not have to come concurrent with the ordinance, given that the
manual can be developed after the fact once the ordinance is
established. Because the manual has to conform to the ordinance, and
the ordinance is broad enough.
MR. BROCK: Let me say this with the following caveat: If I
see inundation of attempts to go out there and enter into all these
contracts from county staff, you know, all the -- yeah, I mean, we'll
put a stop to it. And that's understood.
But, you know, business as usual, let's move on. Let's get this
solved so that we all feel comfortable with it so that we all are able to
Page 161
November 12, 2013
work and get our job done.
I'm not trying to, you know, bring the county to its knees. That's
not my objective. I'm simply trying to clean up what I perceive to be a
mess.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Are you going to pay the bills now?
MR. BROCK: Yes.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Let's bring the ordinance back as
modified based on the four issues that we discussed today.
MR. OCHS: Hold on, hold on. Because I -- well,
Commissioner, I'm sorry, this is important. I did not hear
Commissioner Henning second --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I'm waiting.
MR. OCHS: -- the same motion that you made, particularly as it
relates to small purchases. He said he wants a lower threshold, if I
understood him.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Correct.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: That was a suggestion.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So you can work that out as part of
the manual. Because all you --
MR. OCHS: No, there's a fundamental difference between what
Commissioner Henning said and the Clerk has been saying since the
beginning of this discussion.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Commissioner Henning is now
saying that he wants discretionary spending at a lower threshold. He
just said that.
MR. BROCK: Commissioners, I sat in a meeting with county
staff a week or so ago and we had a discussion. And the discussion
went something like this: You know, there are imprest funds all over
this county. I see absolutely no authorization in this statute for
imprest funds. But it has worked everywhere. I see absolutely no
authorization for credit cards, but it's worked all over. We can
continue that within the confines. You get with my staff and work out
Page 162
November 12, 2013
something that we can all deal with. And we have not heard word
one.
We're willing to work. They are just -- I don't know what it is,
but I mean, we want to work with them, but we want the controls in
place that gives you the ability to approve the purchases. That doesn't
mean that you have to approve every one of them, you can do it in a
multitude of ways and I will work with county staff to accomplish
that.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Again, the purpose of the ordinance
is to set the policy, and the procedures can come in the manual to
follow through with that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, the -- just to correct the
threshold, it's not a blanket, it's to set a policy on what can be done
under a smaller threshold. It's not a blanket approval.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Understood. No, I understand.
So can we -- do you want that as part of the ordinance or do you
want that as part of the manual?
MR. OCHS: Commissioners --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You know, the format of the
two documents, we have a county attorney that works with that all the
time.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Doesn't it make more sense to have
it as part of the manual so that as time changes we don't have to amend
the ordinance, which is a much more difficult process?
MR. KLATZKOW: My view is like --
MR. OCHS: I'm sorry, but --
MR. KLATZKOW: -- you have a GMP and an LDC.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Exactly.
MR. KLATZKOW: Okay? And that your purchasing ordinance
should be like the GMP --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Correct.
MR. KLATZKOW: -- there's the general rules, and the minutia
Page 163
November 12, 2013
goes in the purchasing manual.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Right.
MR. KLATZKOW: In my view.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So in terms of Commissioner
Henning's position, where would his concern about the P cards and the
purchasing threshold practices be? Would that be in the ordinance or
in the manual?
MR. KLATZKOW: It could go either place.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: What would be --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It would be a --
MR. BROCK: Can I make a suggestion?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It would be a reference within
the ordinance.
MR. BROCK: To give county staff the ability to work with
changing circumstances --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So I like the --
THE COURT REPORTER: I have two conversations going on.
MR. BROCK: I'm sorry.
To give county staff the ability to deal with changing
circumstances, if you put it in an ordinance, there is time
requirements, advertising requirements and all of those other things.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Right.
MR. BROCK: If you just put it in a policy, it's a much easier
change. You can direct that that policy be brought to you, but you
don't have to go through those formal statutory requirements of
amending an ordinance.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Right. And that's why the actual
procedures should be developed by the County Manager in the
purchasing manual.
MR. KLATZKOW: Correct. Approved by the Board.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: County Manager is trying to show
us something right here. Maybe you want to see it.
Page 164
November 12, 2013
MR. OCHS: This is out of Florida Statute. I'm drawing your
attention to 125-.74(I). These are county administrator powers and
duties. Develop, install and maintain centralized budgeting personnel,
legal and purchasing procedures.
So I would hope I would be allowed to carry out that
responsibility.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Absolutely. And again, just like for
example, it says develop, install and maintain centralized budgeting.
Well, we adopt the budget.
MR. OCHS: Yes, you do.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So to the same extend that you put it
together, we adopt it. And to the same extent that -- Jeff, can you help
-- does that mean that we should not even be involved in the
purchasing procedures?
MR. KLATZKOW: No, no, no. Your analogy with the
budgeting was spot on. Your County Manager developments the
budget. It then goes through hearings and you approve it. He will
develop the personnel pol -- or the purchasing policies and it will
come back to you.
MR. OCHS: Purchasing procedures, Commissioners. I don't
develop policy.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Right, we'll develop the policy as
we are right now through the purchasing ordinance. You develop the
procedures and you bring it back.
Jeff, do we approve those procedures?
MR. KLATZKOW: I think you should.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Okay. Okay.
MR. KLATZKOW: I mean, you have an administrative code
too, you know, ordinance that says that all this stuff goes to you for
approval. I don't know what the difference is.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Okay. Got it.
MR. OCHS: That's --
Page 165
November 12, 2013
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Is that acceptable --
MR. OCHS: -- specific.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: -- Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: (Nods head affirmatively.)
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: All right, so we have a motion and a
second on the table.
Is there any further discussion?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, just --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- let me say, it was Commissioner
Henning's suggestion then a friendly way to approach it, was that the
one that we are now adopting?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: There's been so much talk I don't
even know anymore.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Do you want me to repeat the
motion?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, that's all right. Just I wanted to
know what --
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Get it out of the transcript.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Don't make me laugh. Oh, my God.
MS. PRICE: Commissioners, if I might --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yes.
MS. PRICE: --just for a moment. I'm not sure if I heard
correctly that the Clerk said that staff has been unwilling to move and
to add increased controls. I just want to make sure that that wasn't
mischaracterized. We actually talked about reducing the thresholds if
we thought that we could get a better handle on things. We laid out a
list of about six or seven different improved controls that we think are
important to get a better handle on such things as the P cards and some
of the other combining purchases to try -- you know, to try and put
them together.
Page 166
November 12, 2013
I just want to make sure that there's no misunderstanding that
there hasn't been a good cooperative working relationship between the
two parties.
MR. BROCK: If anybody could -- is of the opinion that I said
that this has not been a collaborative effort, let me clear that up. We
have worked together. The only comment was, you know, as we were
going through with the P cards, you know, I tried to get them to work
with our staff to figure out a way that would work for them and we
didn't get any feedback with regard to that. That's the only thing that I
have any question about was, you know, I wish they had worked with
us after the meeting. But other than that, I want to applaud the efforts
that the purchasing and Leo's office did with working with us.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you for saying that.
So -- and then bring -- so the motion is on the table, we have a
second to be brought back at the December meeting for approval, and
then Leo can work on the procedures subsequent to that, once that
ordinance has been adopted.
MR. KLATZKOW: So you want me to advertise it?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yes, absolutely.
So we have a motion and a second.
MR. OCHS: Hold on. What are we advertising?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The ordinance.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: The ordinance.
MR. OCHS: Because normally an ordinance is a two-step
process.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Right, we're going to --
MR. OCHS: It comes to the Board on the agenda --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Right.
MR. OCHS: -- for approval and then it gets advertised at the
second scheduled hearing for the actual adoption. Is that what we're
following here as our standard process?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: What we're --
Page 167
November 12, 2013
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It's on our agenda today.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Right. And it's going to be brought
back. The advertised format will be brought back in December with
the first advertising in December, and then the second advertising at
the first meeting in January.
MR. KLATZKOW: No, no, no, no. One advertising.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'm sorry?
MR. KLATZKOW: We do one advertising. Do you want -- my
question is --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Oh, I didn't -- I thought you did two.
MR. KLATZKOW: No, City of Naples does two, we do one.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Okay, sorry.
MR. KLATZKOW: Do you want me to advertise? I mean, I've
got the title. It's in your packet. That's the title.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Right.
MR. KLATZKOW: All right? The rest of the ordinance you can
change on the floor.
So the question I have is because the item was to ask you to
direct whether or not you wanted to advertise this.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yeah. I mean, the changes are like I
said, you agree on contract administration; you're adding the definition
of scope; you agree on emergency; you're adding the definition of
exigent; you're eliminating surplus; you're eliminating contracts under
50; you're eliminating P card; you're not including the local vendor
because we'll make that a modification in the future; and you're adding
one policy that basically provides it has to be approved by the Board
and the Board has to find a valid legal purpose.
MR. BROCK: You're not suggesting that they have to not use P
cards.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: No, that's -- for the 25th time, I'm
saying that how you make a purchase will be determined in the
purchasing manual by staff. If they want to use P cards, they can use
Page 168
November 12, 2013
P cards. If they want to not use P cards, they cannot use P cards. If
they want to use half the P cards for only certain purchases, that's up
to Leo. And whatever he comes up with as his procedure he will bring
back to the Board for our ratification after he develops the manual. So
he can work with you on that process.
All we're doing in the ordinance is setting the global policy to
conform with the law and then the details will be in the manual as
developed by Leo with your support ratified by us in a separate step
that has nothing to do with the ordinance down the road, other than to
conform with the objective of the ordinance.
MR. BROCK: I'm a happy camper.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Is that acceptable?
MR. BROCK: Yes, ma'am.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Jeff?
MR. KLATZKOW: I'll bring back an ordinance. These two are
not going to agree on it, but --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: But the ordinance will be really
simple. Again, it's going to eliminate all these --
MR. KLATZKOW: I'm telling you right now, you're not going
to get those two to agree with it.
MR. OCHS: Madam Chair, my only question is did the second
agree to the part of what you just read where you're eliminating all
purchases below $50,000?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yeah, because you're going to come
back and develop a policy on that. Or a procedure on that.
MR. KLATZKOW: No, no, no, no. We're not eliminating
purchases under 50,000. I think what I heard was that you're going to
develop a procedure for purchase on your P cards.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And for purchases under 50,000.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes. With a lower threshold.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: But that's up to him in his
procedures. There doesn't have to be --
Page 169
November 12, 2013
MR. OCHS: Will the lower threshold --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: -- any ordinance.
MR. OCHS: -- allow staff to make procurements under your new
policy under that lower threshold.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right.
MR. BROCK: With approval of the Board.
MR. OCHS: That's not what he said.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right. I mean, the policy -- the
specific policy, yes. And it's -- but the individual purchases, no. As
long as we have a policy of what, when and how and --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Right.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- things like that.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Which you were going to develop
at your discretion.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: To give you an example --
MR. OCHS: Yes, I understand, Commissioners. I don't believe
that's the intent of your Clerk.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Well, we will work with him so that
he understands that it is the intent.
Like to give you an example, purchases for repairs and
maintenances under 50,000 can be made at the following vendors for
the following public purpose, and you list out, you know, to repair the
building, da da da, however you want to define it.
MR. BROCK: I have no problem.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll help you.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I'll help you too. We'll all help you,
Leo.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We're here to help.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: We're the government and we're
here to help.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: All right. So there's a motion,
Page 170
November 12, 2013
there's a second. Jeff will bring back the ordinance, the advertised
ordinance, at the December meeting for approval.
MR. KLATZKOW: Yes, ma'am.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Okay.
MR. BROCK: Thank you.
MR. KLATZKOW: You still need to vote.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Let's vote.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Commissioner Coyle, did you want
to speak?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No, I'm only going to tell you that
I'm going to vote no, because I don't have the slightest idea what is
going to happen here and I don't believe anybody else in this room
does either. But go ahead and do it, and I sure hope it turns out okay.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So do I.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I was having the same problem. I
just didn't -- you know, it's been changed. Every time everyone adds,
they add something different. And I don't even know where we're
going anymore. So it was hard for me to vote yes when I'm not sure.
When Commissioner Henning said his thing before that was fine.
Then it seemed to change, then it seemed to change. I don't know
where we are anymore either.
MS. PRICE: And my concern is that if you adopt it in December
before we've written those policies, you've made some bro -- you
know, you're going to have a very broad purchasing ordinance. But
until I have the opportunity to work with the County Manager to get
those procedures in place, I've got a policy that I can't act on.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: That's not true. Because once it's
adopted you can be working -- you know what the policy is now, as
we had our discussion here. Once that is adopted, you develop your
procedures accordingly. I mean, you know what the law requires you
to do.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That sounds like the Obamacare
Page 171
November 12, 2013
thing, we'll find out what it is after we vote on it.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's right.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: It's not.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Just what Commissioner Coyle just
got done saying.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: No, that's not true, that's not true.
And the difference here is, it's the role of the Board of County
Commissioners to set policy. It's the role of staff to develop the
procedures to implement that policy once it's been directed by the
Board. This is no different than all other policy direction we give.
There is no difference.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Could I just offer one other --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- bit of advice? You're going to
advertise an ordinance without even knowing what it is we're going to
be changing and how we're going to be changing it. And as the County
Attorney says, well, you can just change it during the meeting. Can
you imagine? If you think this meeting has been confusing, just wait
'til you have that meeting.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Can I make it really --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: The proper way to do this, and I'll
only say it once, is to say to the County Manager take a look at your
ordinance -- or take a look at your purchasing policies and procedures
and see what you can do to modify them to deal with the problems
that the Clerk seems to have. If you're able to do that, give us an
assessment of its impact on your organization and we will then make a
decision as to what we do and we will advertise for an ordinance to
make the change and it will be concurrent with the purchasing manual.
That is the proper way to proceed with this stuff.
But we've already got a motion on the floor, so let's vote on it.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: All right, we have a motion on the
floor and we have a second.
Page 172
November 12, 2013
There being no further discussion, all in favor.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Any opposed?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, I voted aye with Commissioner
Coyle.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Nay? Okay.
So motion carries 3-2 with Commissioner Fiala and
Commissioner Coyle dissenting.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And before we leave, I'm supposed
to be leaving on a trip at 2:30, I don't think I made it, and driving up to
represent Collier County at the Florida Association of Counties. I'm
on the board of directors for the Florida Association of Counties. But
now after all of this, can I please have approval to use the P card when
I get there?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: In February.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, right now today.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I don't think that serves a valid
public purpose anyway.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: They didn't want it to reduce the
pay.
MR. OCHS: Madam chair, the court reporter needs a break.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: We need a take a break for the court
reporter, and then after that we have to go to the 2:30.
MR. OCHS: How long, Madam Chair, 10 minutes?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: What does the court reporter need?
THE COURT REPORTER: Just a bit longer, please?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yeah, can we -- 15 minutes, please.
MR. OCHS: Thank you.
Page 173
November 12, 2013
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you.
(Recess)
MR. OCHS: Madam Chair, you have a live mic.
Commissioner Fiala -- you know, we have people waiting,
Commissioner Fiala, for a time certain. But I understand you want to
listen to the travel issue, the agenda item that relates to travel?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, but after the 2:30 time
certain.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: All right. So let's go ahead with the
2:30 time certain.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
MR. OCHS: Madam Chair, is there anything beyond that that
you want to reprioritize?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yes, we have to. We have -- Mr.
Yovanovich is here representing which project? Could you come to
the podium?
MR. YOVANOVICH: It's for two of the comp. plan
amendments: One's for Naples Reserve and one is for Olde Florida.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Can you tell me the agenda items?
MR. YOVANOVICH: I believe they're Item 9, right?
MR. OCHS: It's 9.A, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, let's deal with the Animal
Control Ordinance before that.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: We have -- hang on a second. 9.A
and what?
MR. YOVANOVICH: They're both under 9.A.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Oh, both under 9.A?
MR. OCHS: The Animal Control Ordinance is 9.C.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Comp. plan amendments shouldn't
be a problem anyway.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: No, I don't see either one of those as
Page 174
November 12, 2013
an issue.
I think what we need to do, because we made some commitment,
so I think we have to go from Isles of Capri to 9.A to 9.C.
And Commissioner Fiala, what was the one you wanted to hear?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: 12.B -- wait a minute. Now, what
was it? Was it 12.B? I had taken it off consent.
MR. OCHS: Yes, ma'am, it's 12.B.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Right.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Okay. So we'll go -- we'll hear the
Isles of Capri, then 9.A, 9.0 and 12.B.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Leo, can you bring forward the next
agenda item, which is the 2:30 time certain?
Item #11C
RESULTS OF A PUBLIC OPINION SURVEY REGARDING
PROVISION OF FIRE SERVICES IN THE ISLES OF CAPRI FIRE
DISTRICT AND PROVIDE ANY DIRECTION DEEMED
APPROPRIATE - ISLES OF CAPRI TO CONTINUE WORKING
WITH ENFD; THE BCC & THE COUNTY ACCEPTS THE
SURVEY RESULTS, TO BRING BACK THE MANAGEMENT
AGREEMENT TO A FUTURE BOARD MEETING, AND
DIRECTING THE BCC CHAIRWOMAN TO WRITE THE STATE
DELEGATION — APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Yes, ma'am, thank you. It's Item 11 .0 on your
agenda, Commissioners. This is a recommendation to accept the
results of a public opinion survey regarding provision of fire services
in the Isles of Capri Fire District and provide any direction deemed
appropriate.
Ms. Price will present.
Page 175
November 12, 2013
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: How many public speakers do we
have?
MR. OCHS: Troy, 11 .C?
MR. MILLER: 11 .C, we have six public speakers for this item,
ma'am.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Can you turn the light on, please.
MR. MILLER: I'm sorry.
MS. PRICE: Good afternoon, Commissioners. For the report,
Len Price, Administrative Services Division Administrator. I had to
think. Yes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: At this moment.
MS. PRICE: At this moment.
Commissioners, you authorized a public opinion survey. We
sent out approximately 2,300 surveys to the community and we
received 679 responses that we could count. There were also 28
where they either voted twice or voted no times.
That represents about a 30 percent response rate, which honestly
is an incredible number. We don't usually see that except in
presidential elections. So I think the fact that there was a lot of
interest in this is clearly evident and people took out the time to
provide their opinion.
I know a lot of people are looking for this number and so I'm
going to give it to you quickly.
To stay with the Isles of Capri as their fire district, 235 responses.
To consolidate with East Naples, 444. It was a ratio of approximately
two-to-one to move with East Naples.
I can give you a little bit more of how it's broken down, if you're
interested. Beyond that, I'm just waiting for your direction.
The deadline was yesterday to submit legislation to the
delegation and so we have not done that. I do believe that the
legislation for Fiddler's Creek to merge into the East Naples district is
going to be presented to the delegation on the 26th when we meet.
Page 176
November 12, 2013
We could potentially talk to the delegation and see if they would
entertain something else, we could look at waiting a year to do it. It's
at your direction where we go from here.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Commissioner Fiala, Commissioner
Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, the -- actually East
Naples Fire and Rescue is submitting language to -- for the
codification of Fiddler's Creek into East Naples; is that correct?
MS. PRICE: That's my understanding. And I think the --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And what we can --
MS. PRICE: -- people here can answer that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: What we can do is request that
East Naples Fire and Rescue include the entire boundaries of the Isles
of Capri Fire District. Simple. It's their request. We can get a letter
from the Chair. Depending on -- of course it all depends on what the
majority of the Board does here.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, I think that we've heard from
the people. There was a lot of talk going on; a lot of people had a lot
to say. We have six speakers. I'd like to hear from them. But I'm
listening to what they said, and almost double said they wanted to go
with East Naples Fire Department. And I respect that, and so I will
make a motion to that effect once we've heard our speakers.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Can we go ahead and bring those
speakers?
MR. MILLER: Yeah, Madam Chairwoman --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm sorry, we're only addressing
the issuing on the agenda; is that correct?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yes.
Would you like to define that so everybody knows?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, it's review the survey
results and give staff direction.
Page 177
November 12, 2013
COMMISSIONER FIALA: On how to proceed.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: On how to proceed about the
merging or not merging.
MR. MILLER: Okay, and first of all, Madam Chair, one slip
came in while we were at the break, so it's seven. I had counted them
before the break.
Your first speaker is John Rogers. He'll be followed by Lenore
Brakefield. If we could have you use both podiums and be waiting,
the next speaker will be waiting for when the previous speaker
finishes, please.
MR. ROGERS: I don't need to say anything, thank you.
MR. MILLER: Okay. Lenore Brakefield? She'll be followed by
David Thomas.
MS. BRAKEFIELD: Good afternoon, Commissioners. I
understand that the vote did come in and that is probably going to
weigh heavily in your vote. However, I'm still going to make my
statement.
Why have you cut the funding for emergency services on Isles of
Capri? The total budget for the fire department has declined from 1 .8
million in 2010 to 1 .2 million in 2014. This is a cut of 31 percent.
This is life safety we're talking about. These are emergency medical
services and all fire related services, including emergencies on the
water, brush fires and vehicle accidents.
You and only you have approved the fire department's past
budgets and you have approved this cut in funding. Did you ask the
voters in any of the last five years if they wanted to cut the funding to
their fire department?
Now you have sent out a survey asking residents of the Isles of
Capri Fire District if they would like to go with the fire service from
East Naples. Assuming the annexation with East Naples is approved,
East Naples is earmarking only 820,000 for the residents of the Isles
of Capri Fire District, a whopping cut of 55 percent in funding since
Page 178
November 12, 2013
2010.
Why didn't the information sheet provided to Capris property
owners contain details of the cuts and emergency service revenues and
funding? How could the residents of the Isles of Capri Fire District
get anywhere near the same level of emergency services that they
received in 2010 by paying 55 percent less in fire taxes today? How
could you even consider such a cut in funding for life safety services?
The bottom line is if the residents of Isles of Capri are willing to
pay the same total amount of fire taxes today, not percentage but the
total amount as they did in 2010, the fire department could be fully
staffed as it was in 2010 and be financially stable for the foreseeable
future.
With our growing aging population and the baby-boomers
reaching retirement age, now is not the time to cut funding for
emergency services. Thank you.
(Applause)
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is David Thomas. He'll be
followed by Chris Tomei.
MR. THOMAS: Hello. I'm David Thomas with Local 4719
IAFF, representing the firefighters union.
Basically we have come to a point where there have been a lot of
misinformation passed out. We need to go through the proper process
for the residents of the Capri Fire District in order to provide the best
service for the best value.
Capris has -- was established in 1977 as a volunteer department
and was created by the residents of that district reaching out to the
Board of County Commissioners and everything else to create this fire
service.
They didn't go with East Naples, they didn't go with Marco, they
created their own for a reason.
The community has stepped behind the fire department for all
these years, providing support to the firefighters, the community and
Page 179
November 12, 2013
vice versa, the fire department back to them.
Now with this possible merger, staffing levels will change.
Where's the benefits to the residents there? The millage has already
been set at two with no effect to the current Capri budget.
Has anybody looked into East Naples and Golden Gate's
budgets? Has any of the commissioners looked at that for the next
three years like it was asked for Isles of Capri? Now there's about 24
people that are on SAFER grants currently between East Naples and
Golden Gate. Now if they don't get those renewed over the next year,
what kind of budget impact is that going to have for 24 extra salaries?
Where are they going to bring in extra personnel to service the Capri
district if they lose those? Going to have to add that to their budget.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: What's the value of the SAFER
grants?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's not on the agenda.
MR. THOMAS: It's regarding the whole merger impact.
You need to do the proper due diligence as commissioner and
weigh out all your facts.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We're always going to have
excuses not to take action. I understand that.
MR. THOMAS: And I'm hearing lots of yours, thank you.
Obviously we've been accused of lying in the past and using
bullying tactics. Now with this survey you guys sent out not all the
correct facts were sent out. Not even all the residents or property
owners were given the amount of votes that they were entitled to. Now
also they were supposed to break down the Fiddler's Creek and give
you numbers for that as far as that goes, what percentage of the
Fiddler's Creek residents wanted to go out compared to the rest of the
district. I didn't hear those numbers from Len price, I don't know if
she has those available.
The fact is basically if we're being accused of bullying tactics by
putting out misinformation, which nothing was ever disproved of what
Page 180
November 12, 2013
we have said by any of the commissioners or anybody for that matter,
now you guys go ahead and put this misinformation in the survey and
what is that considered? That's not bullying tactics or forcing
somebody's vote? That seems like a, I don't know --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Excuse me, let me just say, I was
sitting at that meeting. Len Price was there, he was there, most of the
people here were at that meeting. We discussed all the facts. We said
does anybody have any adjustments, anything to object to, any
changes? No one said anything. These were the things they were
approving at the time. So I just want to state just for my other fellow
commissioners that this was exactly what had taken place. I'm not
quite sure how we could say otherwise, but thank you.
MR. THOMAS: I also have an email from you, Commissioner
Fiala, stating the fact that you didn't support this. And now I don't
know where your changes come from. But you said basically due to
the interlocal agreement you couldn't agree with any of that.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, that was a long, long time ago
MR. THOMAS: What has changed?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- and that was definitely before the
vote. Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next public speaker is Chris Tomei. He'll
be followed by Michael Graham.
MR. TOMEI: Yeah, hello. I'm Christopher Tomei, I'm a
property owner of Isles of Capri. I'm also an employee at Isles of
Capri Fire and Rescue.
I guess the issue that I face with this is that it's brought me to an
understanding to realize that when you really do own the information
you can bend it all you want. Because I am -- it's depressing to me and
I'm upset to see the facts that have been brought forth, the survey that
has went out. To tell the residents that 2,400 properties and you make
the mistake in a survey and say 24,000 and then send a correction five
Page 181
November 12, 2013
days later, I don't know how you can consider any of the survey valid.
Number one, I know I'm not going anywhere with it. I know I'm
not even a voice compared to the people that own the information and
that can change it.
Mrs. Fiala, when you say that people addressed things at that
meeting and it was perfect, that wasn't perfect. Because people said
things and things were not changed, people were not given attention. I
know Beau Middlebrook said can we put in this thing to show -- in a
survey to show the residents that it's going to be four percent of their
call volume of a total East Naples district, but we're going to be almost
eight percent of their budget. Can we put that in there? No, we have
to change the information and make it say East Naples has 53,000
properties and they get this much of a budget and Isles of Capri has
2,400 properties and they get this much of a budget. Okay, we went
with you guys on that. But then you changed the number to 24,000
when the survey goes out and expect it to be valid. That being said,
that's where I stand.
The other thing, if this does go, we know that we will -- hiring to
the new station coming in at Ochopee on I-75, that will be in-house
hiring. If we can stay with the county for the year, and we have the
funding for 2014 to keep everything as status quo, there's a lot higher
percentage of the firefighters of Isles of Capri getting jobs in -- staying
in the county working with Ochopee. I just want everybody to
consider that before they get rid of nine firefighters and nine county
employees.
I left Golden Gate Fire Department and came to the county for
the security of the county. And now where's the security in this when
you can basically just say listen, you're completely expendable and we
have no concern for you? That's where I'm at with it.
I just -- I hope that the Commissioners will pay close attention to
this matter and do their own research on the matter and show integrity
in the facts that they are standing behind. Thank you.
Page 182
November 12, 2013
(Applause)
MR. MILLER: Your next public speaker is Michael Graham.
He'll be followed by George Lara.
MR. GRAHAM: I'm just going to give my time to George Lara.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is George Lara. He'll be
followed by your final speaker, Jeri Neuhaus.
MS. NEUHAUS: I'm waiving mine.
MR. MILLER: Then this will be your final public speaker.
MR. LARA: Hello, Commissioners. George Lara, Local 4719
member and Lieutenant at Isles of Capri Fire Rescue.
A lot has happened since the inception of this. And I'd like to
take this opportunity with my best judgment to apologize to my union,
to the East Naples union, to Kingman Schuldt for my knee-jerk
reaction at the beginning of this. With that said, I'd like to offer you a
solution.
Our difference in this is not one of method -- it's of method and
not of purpose. East Naples Fire Rescue, the Board of County
Commissioners and we at Isles of Capri Fire Rescue have one purpose
in mind and that is to provide the best possible service to the people
living in Isles of Capri, transiting through Isles of Capri, boating
through the Isles of Capri district to providing the best emergency
service as possible. And we all have that at heart. I can honestly say
we all agree on that, the Commissioners, East Naples, the Isles of
Capri fellows.
With that said, we would like to respectfully request that you not
terminate the Isles of Capri Fire Rescue employees on December 31st,
2013 by instituting a management plan with East Naples January 1st.
Why do I say that? If you institute the management plan, we get
terminated January 1st. If we get terminated we are no longer county
employees.
In May, according to Chief McLaughlin, there will be nine
positions opening up at the station on the Alley. There's a possibility
Page 183
November 12, 2013
for lateral transfers. You know, you could save jobs. You could still,
you know, make lemonade out of this.
You know, we have families. We have committed many years,
many hours of education to serve the community. Whether we serve it
at Isles of Capri or on the Alley, we're in the same county, we're still
fulfilling our purpose.
You have the opportunity to keep us on board a few more
months, not turn into a management agreement, and give us the
opportunity in May to apply for those positions on the Alley. If we're
not kept on as staff-- I called Chief McLaughlin and said that these
postings will be internal. If they are internal for the county only, we
will no longer be county employees. We will not have the opportunity
to apply. We don't won't even get a chance to see the application, you
know.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: May I ask --
MR. LARA: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- when that new fire station is
supposed to open? They're building it now, right?
MR. LARA: Yeah, according to Chief Alan McLaughlin, in
May they'll be hiring, nine positions. Which is exactly the number of
people you'll be laying off right now.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Leo?
MR. OCHS: Yes, Commissioner.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: As far as applications go, couldn't
we make an exception and add that even if these gentlemen would no
longer be working for the county that under the circumstances these
nine would have the opportunity to apply and be considered the same
as applying from within?
MR. OCHS: Yes, ma'am. It's exactly our existing policy for
reduction in force personnel. They're considered as internal
employees for purposes of reapplying for jobs.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So in other words --
Page 184
November 12, 2013
MS. PRICE: One year.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: -- they could apply in May --
MR. OCHS: For one year. I'm sorry.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: -- and would be considered as
internal.
MR. OCHS: That's correct.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So we'll make that clear on the
record. So even if the decision is made to adopt that management plan
and you don't have a position as of January 1st, you still will be
considered internal for purposes of applying to those nine positions
that are opening up on the Alley.
MR. LARA: And we greatly appreciate that thought and that
suggestion.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So how long would that stay open
for? Like, for example, if the -- and that's a very good question,
Commissioner Coyle. If it takes longer than May to open up that
station, how long are we going to -- I mean, will we just consider them
as internal to the county until that station opens up to allow them to
apply to that what that opens?
MR. OCHS: The current rule is for one year after the date that
they would be laid off.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Okay.
MR. OCHS: So if that happens at the end of this calendar year, it
would be good through the end of--
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Why not say the later of-- or just
say either one year or the opening of that station.
MR. OCHS: That's fine with me, Commissioner. I don't have a
problem --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And that way because if it opens
with the year, they're protected. But if it's after a year, it's -- they're
protected for purposes of applying -- beyond that one-year period, for
purposes of applying to that station.
Page 185
November 12, 2013
MR. OCHS: Yes, ma'am. We're happy to do that.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: If I could, there might be a
possibility that they could apply to a vacancy from another fire
department where a member of that fire department has obtained one
of the jobs at the new station. So can we make sure that they will have
the ability to be considered for any position in Collier County as an
internal transfer or hire for a period of 12 months?
MS. PRICE: That's our policy.
MR. OCHS: Anywhere in our agency, yes, sir.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: My concern is, is that if a station
opens after that one-year period, they're protected through the opening
of that new station. So like let's say if they opened the station month
14 and then they want to come back and say oh, well, you know, your
12-month period is up and therefore you can't apply. So they basically
will have the ability to apply for that position or a position that's
vacated as related to that position up until that station is opened.
MS. PRICE: Yes, ma'am.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And understanding that the
Board members or the Board is not directing staff who to hire or fire.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Oh, no, no, no, we can't. We cannot
absolutely do that. That's again Chapter 125. Not at all. That is your
discretion.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: But if you had vacancies available
for them to fill in so at least they can earn a living until the new station
opens, or even allow them to go into Ochopee to begin help or
something, you would be looking for that, right?
MR. OCHS: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Just so they don't lose their wages.
MR. OCHS: Correct.
MR. LARA: Well, thank you very much for that.
But in the interim, 90 percent of us are the primary breadwinners
Page 186
November 12, 2013
in our homes. We're still going to have bills to pay. With that said, in
case you didn't know in this, the Isles of Capri millage rate has already
been set at two percent for 2014. You're financially solvent for that
entire year. You're not going to run in the red, you're going to have the
same levels of services, why not keep us on board until May or maybe
another month when that station opens up and give us a sporting
opportunity to do a lateral transfer?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Here's the answer. This Board
of Commissioners is not allowed to interfere --
MR. LARA: And that's not what I'm saying. Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- with hiring or firing, okay.
MR. LARA: I'm not -- I don't --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You're asking us to keep you on
board.
MR. LARA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We're not allowed to interfere
with that process.
MR. LARA: But you can abstain from coming into a managerial
agreement with East Naples for a few months. That you can do,
correct?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Can't we then ask you, Len, or you
Leo, but I would guess Len, to meet with these fellows and see what
you can work out as far as employment and so forth? But we can't tell
you what to do but we can suggest that maybe you meet with them
and see if there's some way that you can keep them working.
MR. LARA: Do a skills test assessment with us. See what we
qualify for.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Hang on a second.
But the point made is that if that management agreement is dated,
for example, you know, March 31st as opposed to December 31st,
then that keeps them employed until the station opens, or whatever
that date is.
Page 187
November 12, 2013
MS. PRICE: Commissioners, we have a lot of latitude right now
in terms of what we can do so that we can make sure that we've got
the smoothest transition with no interruption in employment.
That management agreement at this point would have to be
re-dusted off. I don't know if East Naples is still interested in doing it
at this -- you know, because it's gotten so late, I don't know how they
could make the transition in January. So we would probably have to
do some retooling, if anything at all.
We could consider keeping the station open as-is for, you know,
until the next October when the merger could take place.
You've got a lot of latitude open to you. You know, the level of
service that you've been getting from our firefighters has never been in
question. Not before and it won't be afterwards. So there --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So, you know, why not bring back
options to us at the next Board meeting in December --
MS. PRICE: Absolutely.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: -- and let the Board consider the
options. Like delaying -- like revising the management agreement,
bringing it back and so forth.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: But be sure that you coordinate
with East Naples Fire District.
MS. PRICE: I've been working --
MR. OCHS: That's our first phone call.
MS. PRICE: -- with them extremely well.
MR. OCHS: Our first meeting.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's right. That's exactly the
thing you should do is bring back some alternatives about what we can
do for these people. But it must be consistent with the goals of the
other people involved.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Right. Which I think it can be
achieved. I think that's readily doable.
I think -- from what I'm hearing you say, Len, I think the time
Page 188
November 12, 2013
table of, say, the management plan, the opening of that other station
seemed to -- they sound like they could readily coincide. Because it
sounds like you need time to develop that management plan, East
Naples needs time to make its own internal arrangements to take over,
you know, the management, if you will. I mean, there's going to be a
lot of prep work. And a few months goes by very quickly for all the
work they have to do. They're probably going to be grateful for a few
months.
MS. PRICE: I'm positive that we can come up with some really
good recommendations for all of you and continuing to take care of
our folks as well.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So just bring that back at the next
meeting since that's not the issue for the agenda today. But if you
could bring that back, that would be great.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And I'd just like to add, they're a
great resource as far as they know the people on the Island, they know
who has heart problems, who has nobody living with them. I mean,
they really know where all the streets and everything are, so it's great
you will be working closely with them.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Did you want to speak again,
Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No, no.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Commissioner Henning, did you
want to say something?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. Are we done with
speakers?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I believe we are.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: He still has time though.
MR. LARA: Still have like a minute, but go ahead.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, you go ahead. I'll wait until
you're done.
Page 189
November 12, 2013
MR. LARA: All right. Well, we just want the opportunity to
continue doing what we do, what we're trained to do. It's in our blood,
it's in our D.N.A. It's what we want to do. You know, give us the
opportunity to laterally transfer. We're not saying for you to conserve
our jobs, but we're financially solvent. It's not going to cost anybody
anything --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: You've made your point. You're
repeating.
MR. LARA: Okay. Well, thank you.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I mean, you can speak --
MR. LARA: No, no, no.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: -- but we got the message.
MR. LARA: And I promised myself I wouldn't fluster
Commissioner Henning. Thank you.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yeah, that's good. That's a very
good decision.
(Applause)
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioner Fiala, I think the
motion needs to incorporate what East Naples needs for the
delegation. If we can ask the Chief or the Fire Commissioner,
Chairman for East Naples to come up and give us some guidance on
what you need for the delegation so we can incorporate it into the
motion.
MR. PAGE: Good afternoon, Commissioners. For the record,
Jeff Page with East Naples. And I've got Chief Schuldt here if there's
an operational issue.
Just to be clear, we're pretty much acceptable to letting the
county continue to run the district. You've already budgeted for it.
There's no management plan in our review that we feel a need to jump
in right now. So that's fine with us.
I would have to take back to the Board any management plan
down the road, but if it works out better for the employees, that's
Page 190
November 12, 2013
certainly fine with us.
I would like to see if I could get the Board's support to include all
of the area of the district, and we will try to approach the legislative
delegation to see if we can make an amendment to that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. And that would be
effective in May --
MR. PAGE: Right.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- correct? Okay, so that's --
basically it addresses everything that we discussed here is to get a
letter from the Chair of the Board of Commissioners stating --
requesting the legislators to consider the amendment of the request of
East Naples to include all of Isles of Capri Fire District effective in
May of 2014, correct?
MR. PAGE: Is that correct? November, 2014.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
MR. PAGE: I think that's what the legislative --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Leo, would you prepare a letter to
that effect? I mean, I believe the Board is going to vote on that now,
but please prepare it for my signature.
MR. OCHS: I'd be happy to.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: When we review the presentation
for the legislative delegation, we will go over that and I'll read it into
the record at that meeting.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Secondly, Commissioner, you were
saying before that yesterday was the deadline but we were going to try
and see if we couldn't ask them to include this.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yeah. I don't think that will be a
problem.
Leo, if you could talk to the legislative delegation and make sure
that they incorporate that letter, that change?
MR. OCHS: I'll be happy to work with East Naples to --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I don't think that's going to be an
Page 191
November 12, 2013
issue. It's a minor modification to what's already being presented. So I
don't see any reason, since it's already a matter that they're willing to
consider. I don't see an issue.
Commissioner Henning, would you like to make a motion?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, I'll --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Commissioner Fiala want to make a
motion?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
Yes, I would like to make a motion --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Trying to move this on.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- to right now do everything
possible we can to keep these people employed and work with the
East Naples Fire Department and the County Manager and Len Price
to work out an arrangement where they're all continuing to be
employed until we can find new jobs for them. And that we accept the
fact that the vote from the Isles of Capri Fire District have said two to
one they would like to join the East Naples Fire Department and we
accept that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Would you accept a friendly
amendment to your motion?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Sure.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That we accept the survey. That
we direct staff to write a -- or direct the Chair to write a letter to the
Collier County delegation -- state delegation to include the Isles of
Capri Fire District to be effective for codification in the East Naples
November of 2014.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I accept that friendly addition to my
motion and I include it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay, the -- however, you're
including things that we are unable to do, and that's as far as staff, the
staffing of the Isles of Capri.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, we can't do that, but I've
Page 192
November 12, 2013
asked them to work with them, right, and work with the East Naples
Fire.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, if we're not --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: County Manager, can you address
the motion? Do you have a problem with the motion as presented
with respect to the direction? Does it cause you --
MR. OCHS: No, ma'am, I don't, based on the statement from --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Kingman Schuldt.
MR. OCHS: -- it's Chairman Page who indicated that --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: November.
MR. OCHS: -- from his board's standpoint they don't have any
urgency in entering into a management agreement, so --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So maintaining the employment up
to the consolidation of November 14th, or if these employees want to
move forward to transfer, that they have the ability to do that.
MR. OCHS: Yes, ma'am. Until there's a management agreement
with another district, the Isles of Capri --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Cannot enter --
MR. OCHS: -- is a dependent district of the Board. We manage
it and manage the personnel --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Until a consolidation takes place in
November of 2014.
MR. OCHS: Right. And if there's another opportunity for those
people to transfer during that time to another station or another
department, we will help facilitate that if they believe that's in their
best interest.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, the bottom line is the
management agreement with East Naples is going to dictate. It's not --
should not be dictated in this motion.
So Commissioner Fiala, your issue of concern about the
employees will be addressed in a future meeting.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Right. I just asked if our people
Page 193
November 12, 2013
would meet with the East Naples Fire. Is that wrong?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, it's not wrong.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's why I said it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It will come back to us in the
management agreement. Okay.
MR. OCHS: One point of clarification.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I just want to --
MR. DUNNUCK: I'm sorry, go ahead, ma'am.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Well, the point of clarification is
that what Commissioner Page said is that they're not looking to
develop a management agreement. Because they believe that what's
going to happen is that they're going to shift from where they are
today to consolidation of the Isles of Capri with East Naples in total
November of 2014. So between now and 2014 it's not expected that
there will be a management agreement. That's what I understood --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, he's shaking his head yes.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: What is he saying, yes he agrees
with me or yes, there is going to be a management agreement? I
mean, there's many yeses out there.
MR. OCHS: The other point of clarification, while he's coming
up. Did you want that letter from the Chair to go to East Naples or to
the delegation?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: To the delegation.
MR. OCHS: Because East Naples has to bring them in first.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Before we leave that letter, can I
ask a question? Have we sent a letter to our delegations supporting
the East Naples annexation of the Fiddler's Creek portion already, or
that is beneficial?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, we haven't.
MR. OCHS: I don't believe --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Do you want to us do that?
MR. PAGE: Sure.
Page 194
November 12, 2013
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Then why don't we do both things
at once.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Why not just send one letter that
says all of Isles of Capri?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Because it's part of Isles of
Capri Fire District, Fiddler's Creek.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: But what we're saying is we're
recommending to the delegation to accept a consolidation of the entire
Isles of Capri Fire District. We don't have to single out Fiddler's
Creek, because it's --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: -- part and parcel of it.
So one letter that states the consolidation of the Isles of Capri
Fire District in total with East Naples covers everything.
MR. PAGE: Let me -- again, Jeff Page for the record.
Let me just address two things: Number one is, is that we would
be happy -- there's no reason for us to enter into a management
agreement. However, if your station opens up sooner and you need us
to come in sooner, we'll be glad to do that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Great.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So that's a backup plan to help us
out --
MR. PAGE: Right, right.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: -- for transition, but it's not that any
management plan is intended that would cause any concern for the
ongoing existence of the Isles of Capri.
MR. PAGE: Correct. Now, let me give you one little piece here
though. One thing that was made very clear to myself and to the
Chief was that from Representative Hudson was that there not be any
late changes. So if he were to say look, it's too late, you have to just
go on with the parcel at Fiddler's Creek that you've settled with, that's
all we're going to do.
Page 195
November 12, 2013
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Well, you know what, I can't
believe he would do that, because that would be like complete
inflexibility. I mean, he's a bigger guy than that. And we'll work on it
and do everything to help you get it done.
MR. PAGE: I just wanted to make sure that you were aware of
that.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Well, you know, I'm sure they say
that to everybody. Just like, you know --
MR. PAGE: We just don't want to do anything to jeopardize
that, so --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: It's not going to happen. I'll make
sure the right thing is said. And I know where you're going --
MR. PAGE: I appreciate it.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: -- I get it.
So we have a motion, we have a second. We have Commissioner
Coyle who wants to say something?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Good.
So there being no further discussion, all in favor?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Any opposed?
(No response)
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Motion carries unanimously.
9.A?
Item #9A
RESOLUTION 2013-264 (COLLIER BOULEVARD/CP-2013-1),
Page 196
November 12, 2013
RESOLUTION 2013-265 (VANDERBILT BEACH RD EXT/CP-
2013-4) AND RESOLUTION 2013-266 (AIRPORT ROAD/CP-
2013-3): 2013 CYCLE 1 OF GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN
AMENDMENTS FOR TRANSMITTAL TO THE FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY FOR REVIEW
AND COMMENTS RESPONSE — ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: Yes, ma'am, 9.A is a recommendation to consider
approving the 2013 Cycle 1 Growth Management Plan Amendments
for transmittal to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity for
review and comments response. Mr. Weeks will open the discussion.
MR. WEEKS: Good afternoon, Commissioners. I'm David
Weeks of your Comprehensive Planning staff.
Just a few introductory remarks and then as usual the petitioners
will go first.
First of all, just to remind you that these are Growth Management
Plan Amendments, not rezonings. You don't see these all that often,
whereas you do see rezones more frequently.
Secondly, these types of amendments before you today require a
double set of public hearings. So this is your transmittal hearing
today. You could think of it as a preliminary approval for any petition
that you approve for transmittal. It will be sent up to the Florida
Department of Economic Opportunity and other state agencies for
review. And then subsequently we would be back in a few months for
adoption hearings, at which time you would take final action.
Conversely, if you do not approve a petition today for
transmittal, then that petition is denied.
Next, this is a legislative action, not quasi judicial, so it's at the
Board's discretion, that is, it's not a requirement, that you swear in
participants or offer your notice of ex parte communications.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And then we only need three votes
if it's legislative, right?
Page 197
November 12, 2013
(At which time, Commissioner Fiala exits the boardroom)
MR. WEEKS: That is correct. For transmittal, it's a three-vote
requirement by simple majority, whereas at adoption it's a
supermajority.
And after the applicants have made their presentation, staff will
either make a very brief presentation or simply be available for
questions.
And finally, as always, after the meeting or perhaps tomorrow,
we would like to collect your binders, if you don't want to keep them,
we'd like to reuse them to send to those state agencies.
And with that, Commissioners, I'll turn it over to the first
petitioner. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Did you want to collect them today,
David?
MR. WEEKS: Tomorrow would be fine. I'm not sure when you
all are going to finish.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: 5:30. Just saying.
MR. MULHERE: Good afternoon. My name's Bob Mulhere.
I'll try to be very brief, I know how busy your agenda's been and you
still have more business to take care of
I'm here this afternoon representing the applicants on this
petition. And here with me is Rich Yovanovich, Don Mears with iStar
and David Torres with Wilton Land Company.
Let me just give you a quick little bit of background as to where
the property is.
If you look on the visualizer, or on your computer, this exhibit
shows the subject property, which I'll point out. Which is right here.
That's the Naples Reserve PUD. It's located in Section 1, Range 26,
Township 51 South. It's just to the east of the intersection of Collier
Boulevard and U.S. 41. And it's on the north side of East Tamiami
Trail.
This is an approved PUD. It covers all of that section one, which
Page 198
November 12, 2013
is an over-sized section. It's got 688 acres in it.
This PUD, this section, this parcel is unique in that it falls both
within the Future Land Use Element designation of Rural Fringe
Mixed Use District and the urban residential fringe. And I'll just point
that out to you over here.
The area in blue here of the subject PUD is the Rural Fringe
Mixed Use District receiving area. And that's the majority, about
two-thirds, plus or minus, of the PUD.
The balance shown in white on this exhibit here is within the
urban residential fringe, it's urban designated.
This PUD is approved for a maximum of 1,154 dwelling units,
which translates to about two units per acre gross density. And that
maximum 1,154 units can be achieved based on the following: 542 of
those units are generated by the base density that's allowed within the
urban residential fringe or within the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District
receiving lands. The remaining 612 units are permitted. They come
from TDRs.
The applicant, in order to achieve that maximum density, still
would have to a -- he's acquired some TDRs but still would have to
acquire 281 TDRs to achieve that 1,154 dwelling units.
The Rural Fringe Mixed Use District contained a policy -- when
it was approved contained a policy that said if you wanted to use
TDRs within the urban residential fringe, and again, this portion of the
project is within the urban residential fringe, if you wanted to use
TDRs to take the density in the urban residential fringe from 1.5
dwelling units per acre to 2.5, and of course that's a desirable
condition because it would consume TDRs, those TDRs would have to
come from sending lands within one mile of this urban boundary.
Generally the purpose of that policy was that at the time that this
was approved, an argument was made that those sending lands within
one mile of the urban boundary had more value because they were
closer to the urban boundary and that they should have a higher TDR
Page 199
November 12, 2013
ratio.
But the program wasn't approved with a higher ratio, it simply
was approved with a condition that said if you want to use those TDR
credits within that urban residential fringe area, you have to acquire
them from within that one-mile area. And it was thought that that
would generate use more quickly than the more remote lands.
In this case the applicant is proposing to purchase the TDRs from
lands outside of that one-mile boundary, although still very close to
the urban boundary.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And then you have the issue of
price.
MR. MULHERE: This would allow free market decision in the
process, absolutely.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Because right now the price is fixed
within that boundary of 25,000 as a maximum.
MR. MULHERE: Well, you know, the price is -- the price, the
way that the program works, there's a $25,000 base TDR price. So the
county, the way that was -- that's something else that needs to be
fixed. We're not dealing with this issue as far as this amendment
because this is very site specific and minor.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: But it would deal with this
amendment because if you're buying from anywhere else in the county
and if there's no minimum elsewhere in the county, then price does
become an issue.
MR. MULHERE: It is an issue, but in a different way. The
25,000 is only applied by the county to that base TDR. But you can
get bonus credits and that 25,000 does not apply.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So are we dealing strictly with
bonus and not base?
MR. MULHERE: No, you're dealing with both here. All that
you're dealing with here is the fact that absent this amendment, those
TDRs would have to be purchased from that one-mile corridor.
Page 200
November 12, 2013
There's an agreement and there's a co-applicant to this petition, Wilton
Land Company. Wilton Land Company has TDRs but they're located
just outside of that one-mile boundary. So --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And are they selling it at a different
price?
MR. MULHERE: They're selling it -- I'll defer to Rich. They're
selling it at a negotiated price and I --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So probably a lesser price.
MR. MULHERE: I assume that to be the case.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So the real incentive here to move
outside of that boundary is because the price will be cheaper. Because
there's no other reason.
MR. MULHERE: The incentive is that -- and also the fact that
you can get all the TDRs that you need from a singular location, you
don't have to go and aggregate other TDRs, you don't have to deal
with a bunch of different landowners.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yeah, but that doesn't matter.
But I guess the issue, before we have any further discussion, this
is very much of a legal question.
County Attorney, I mean, you basically -- the previous Board
adopted a program, set a base value at 25, guaranteed a market and in
exchange the landowners in that corridor gave up property rights. So
essentially there was, you know, a specific value given to those
landowners in that one-mile corridor. Now all of a sudden if this all
changes you're basically not giving those landowners the value that
you promised as government.
The problem though is that it would appear that what was
promised to those landowners by way of this TDR program, and I'm
talking within that one-mile radius, I question as being legal in the
first place.
So, you know, how is county government going to make those
landowners whole if we change the program, reduce the base price or
Page 201
November 12, 2013
allow them to, you know, allow Naples Reserve to buy from
Wilmington (sic)? I mean, you have a very difficult situation here.
MR. MULHERE: I just need to get one item straight though.
All of the sending lands, not just within the one mile, the base price of
25,000 applies to all of the sending lands. Not just sending lands
within this one-mile corridor.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: No, I understand.
The only difference is, is that this particular parcel has to buy
from within that one-mile corridor, and 25,000 is the base price. And
what you're asking is to give them the opportunity to buy from outside
of the corridor at a base price that is market negotiated.
And so obviously the issue here is --
MR. MULHERE: It's still going to be the --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: It's still 25,000?
MR. YOVANOVICH: No, no.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: That's for the base. But for anything
above is negotiated. If you had to buy all the TDRs, both base and in
addition from that one-mile corridor, would it be negotiated above the
25?
MR. YOVANOVICH: Here's the issue. There are a limited
number of property owners that have TDRs with the one-mile area.
We refer those as the qualified TDRs.
Regardless, we're going to have to get some TDRs beyond the
qualified area because they don't have enough to sell us.
Second, the problem is, is since you've created a very limited
area --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Can you go back to that first
statement? You're now saying that there's not enough TDRs in that
one-mile sending corridor to make up for what Naples Reserve wants?
MR. YOVANOVICH: There -- we would have to cobble
together so many small parcel owners, it just becomes almost an
impossibility to make it happen.
Page 202
November 12, 2013
There are a couple of property owners that have more than, I'll
call them, in the 60 range. And that number varies between 60 and 90,
I'm not really sure.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: That's a matter of convenience. The
availability is there, you just don't want to have to deal with individual
MR. YOVANOVICH: Globally there's not enough TDRs to
service everybody in the urban residential fringe. You're going to
have to -- there's not enough TDRs within the one-mile area to service
all the people who will need TDRs. So you're going to have to expand
the area regardless.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So in other words, the program
wasn't properly designed because there's supposed to be a matching.
MR. YOVANOVICH: There's supposed to be enough sending
areas to support the receiving area. There's not enough
mathematically. And that's all in the backup.
Second of all --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Wait. Is there enough for this
particular developer?
MR. YOVANOVICH: The problem we run into is this: You
have a $25,000 price for the first TDR and everything else is
negotiable. The average blended rate that makes sense from a market
standpoint is in the 12 to $15,000 range. That's what you can afford to
pay for a TDR for you to make it make sense to acquire the TDR.
Otherwise it costs you too much money, you can't sell the house so
you won't buy the TDR.
What we're running into is there's a limited universe of people
who can sell to you. It's not a monopoly, but it's similar. So they're
asking for a price, which is basically $25,000 per TDR for all the
TDRs. We simply can't afford to pay that price. We can't develop a
home and sell it by paying the $25,000 a unit.
Now that number came from the Board originally at 25,000. So
Page 203
November 12, 2013
that number's in people's heads. So what we've asked is for the ability
to expand the area that we can go ahead and get TDRs from, keeping
in mind that the whole goal of the sending lands program was to
provide a hole for those TDRs. We are a buyer of TDRs.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: The problem is, is that what the
government did is give those people who gave up their property rights
in effect a guaranteed market for their TDRs because of the swap
within the region. It's --
MR. YOVANOVICH: They didn't.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: -- kind of like the RLSA. And you
have to go within the RLSA.
MR. YOVANOVICH: They only gave them a guarantee for the
first TDR, not the bonus TDRs. We're willing to pay the 25,000 for
the first TDR. But they want 25,000 not only for the first TDR but for
the second, third and fourth TDRs, which is the bonus --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Did the --
MR. YOVANOVICH: -- TDR.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: -- law provide a set price for the
bonus TDRs or did it own -- I mean --
MR. KLATZKOW: My recollection is the same as Rich's, what
we're just telling you.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Which is what?
MR. KLATZKOW: 25,000 for the first.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And free market for the balance?
MR. KLATZKOW: Yes.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Right. And we're willing to do that but
again, that will result in a blended price.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: But if-- so what you're saying is
you could still buy from that one-mile corridor but the only
guaranteed price -- again, I don't know that that guaranteed 25,000 is
legitimate.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, we need to take that off.
Page 204
November 12, 2013
I mean, that's really not the issue.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: But it is in terms of the
compensation to those people who gave up rights and got TDRs in
exchange in that one-mile corridor.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: They had a guaranteed fixed by
a bogus number from government. And --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: But they detrimentally relied on us.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Then we should --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Not me, but the previous Board.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We should let the free market
rule.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I totally agree with you. But we
gave them compensation. We basically said we're giving you -- if the
government attributed a certain value to those TDRs for purposes of
the exchange, for purposes of saying okay, you're going to be sending
and in exchange we're going to compensate you with TDRs and we're
going to --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Let me give you a --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: -- the value of 25.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- comparable. Who was it,
President Reagan came in and said okay, we're going to give you
welfare for a number of years, but in that time you're going to get
training for another job. It's the same thing. So it was an entitlement
and the entitlement needs to go away and let the free market rain.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Oh, I don't disagree with you. The
only problem is, is in exchange for requiring them to make their lands
sending, we gave them compensation. The compensation was X
number of TDRs for, you know, whatever parcel they designated as
sending with a value of 25,000 per TDR. That's how the
compensation was established.
MR. YOVANOVICH: But when it was first established, you
only gave them one TDR. Okay, so you've tinkered with the program
Page 205
November 12, 2013
since that point. You only gave them one TDR and 25,000. Now they
have four TDRs per five-acre parcel. You only gave them one before,
so you have increased the --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: How did they get the other three?
MR. YOVANOVICH: Later on we made changes to the
program --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And they got more compensation?
MR. YOVANOVICH: They got more TDRs. But the original
program was one TDR per five acres, $25,000.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And let me ask --
MR. YOVANOVICH: But now they have four.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So was that the compensation, just
one TDR --
MR. YOVANOVICH: Yes.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: -- per five acres?
MR. YOVANOVICH: When the program was first established.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And then you got -- you were
designated sending --
MR. YOVANOVICH: Yes, ma'am.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: -- and that was the compensation.
MR. YOVANOVICH: This was the original compensation. It
has evolved over time.
And keep in mind, when the program first went --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: The evolution is for later
participants in the program, those later participants got more than one
TDR, they got four TDRs?
MR. YOVANOVICH: All participants. All participants got --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: They got bonuses?
MR. YOVANOVICH: The program wasn't working. We were
trying to find ways to make the program work. And keep in mind, the
$25,000 figure --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So the compensation was one per
Page 206
November 12, 2013
five --
MR. YOVANOVICH: One per five.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: -- and then they got a bonus which
wasn't attributable to the compensation for being designated sending.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Correct.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Okay.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Correct.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: That's significant.
MR. MULHERE: I mean, just maybe it helps to read it. This
comes right out of the policy.
The primary purpose of the TDR process within the Rural Fringe
District is to establish an equitable method of protecting and
preserving environmental lands while allowing property owners of
such lands to recoup loss value and development --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So the second issue then is the area
where you can buy those TDRs from. And you basically created a
guaranteed market for these people so they were ensured they would
get --
MR. MULHERE: The first.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: -- the first. So you're going to go
and buy the first from these guys and the balance from -- you're asking
for the balance from outside of that area?
MR. YOVANOVICH: What I'm saying is, you have a -- first of
all, the $25,000 figure came about when the economic times were very
different and houses were selling at a much higher price. So, frankly,
$25,000 could be absorbed at that time into a house price. That's
changed dramatically since the original program.
So that's kind of-- the 25,000, I agree with Commissioner
Henning and Commissioner Coyle, it just kind of came out from
somewhere, but I don't know that there was any magic study to that to
where that number came from in the first place.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Well, it should have been the
Page 207
November 12, 2013
compensation. Otherwise you have a taking. I mean, it should have
been the fair market value for the land taken.
MR. YOVANOVICH: But what I want to say to you is what
we're saying is we can afford to pay a blended rate of between 12 and
$15,000 per TDR. We can't say to somebody we'll give you 25,000,
then go outside the area and try to get that blended rate down.
So if someone in the area, the limited area wants to meet with us
and give us the blended rate we can afford to pay, we'd be happy to
buy it from them. But the market hasn't worked that way because
they've heard the $25,000 figure per TDR.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Was the 25,000 supposed to be
fixed into perpetuity as the base price?
MR. KLATZKOW: There's no such thing as perpetuity. I mean,
this is a Comp. Plan Amendment. We're going to change the original
deal to begin with. There's no such thing as perpetuity. As time goes
on the Board of County Commissioners makes their decisions in an
evolving world.
MR. MULHERE: It was always intended that --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: There's your spirit into perpetuity.
MR. MULHERE: It was always intended this would be
revisited, because as those TDRs within that one-mile boundary began
to get consumed, there would still be demand. You'd have to revisit --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I have a very simple question. Was
the 25,000 the value attributed for purposes of compensating so it
wouldn't be deemed a taking? And was it deemed that subsequent to
that time it was going to be a free market of TDRs?
MR. MULHERE: There was a -- we hired a professional from
the University of Florida who had expertise -- an economist who had
expertise and looked at the value. That $25,000 was not very closely
related to the research and work that he did. It came up at the time of
the hearing by one of the commissioners at the time to protect the little
guy who was losing his property values, which was -- you know, we
Page 208
November 12, 2013
were taking away their development rights. We went from one
dwelling unit per five acres to one per 40 in the sending lands. And he
said I want it to be a minimum of$25,000 and that's what got
approved.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: But again, that was the value of the
TDR at the time to compensate for the takings.
MR. MULHERE: That was the established value, yes.
MR. YOVANOVICH: But it was only one TDR.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I understand that. But my --
MR. YOVANOVICH: Since then now they have four.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: -- question is, was it intended at that
time that that would be the value as a fixed price or that was merely
the value for purposes of establishing that there was fair
compensation? There's two different issues there.
MR. MULHERE: It was the latter, because it was only a
minimum. At that time they were thinking they might even fetch
more.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Okay. So in other words, that was
nothing more that the value established by government for the TDRs
to show that there was fair compensation and that there could not be
an accusation of a takings. And in fact what you're saying is the value
was higher than the actual value, that government was actually giving
more value than what the appraised value would have been for that
land. In other words, five acres of land was worth 25,000 at that time?
MR. MULHERE: The staff recommendation at the time and the
expert recommendation was, do not establish any fixed value, simply
let the free market system, you know, create whatever is the
appropriate market value. But that's not how it got adopted.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Commissioner, it's very complicated,
because you have sending lands that are way out east that may have
gone for $5,000 for a five-acre piece and you had sending lands closer
in that could have been a little higher than that. So a number was
Page 209
November 12, 2013
picked, and it was universally applied throughout Collier County to all
sending lands. I don't believe that the Commission ever --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So some people --
MR. YOVANOVICH: -- intended to say this is going to be it
forever.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So some people got
overcompensated and some people got under-compensated?
MR. YOVANOVICH: I don't know that anybody -- there was
never an appraisal done to determine that. It was a program that was
established that said your sending lands and the compensation you got
was a TDR, and the original recommendation was let the fair market
decide if it made sense for you to go ahead and sell your property for
sending lands, you would. And if not, you'd build a house on it.
Because you still had your right to build a house --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So basically there's no
compensation established.
MR. YOVANOVICH: There's compensation. The amount of the
compensation --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So the people can come back and
sue and claim that --
MR. YOVANOVICH: No.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: -- we took their property.
MR. YOVANOVICH: No, ma'am, they still have a right to build
a house. They still are given a TDR. There was -- the question
became -- someone decided we needed to establish a floor. It was not
your legal staff and it was not your consultant. Someone decided to
establish a floor.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: This was put into law?
MR. MULHERE: If I could, I mean, your question about, you
know, an expectation about the 25,000, I think equally the opposite
holds true. For a long time there wasn't any movement in the TDRs
because that 25,000 was so high. So arguably those landowners were
Page 210
November 12, 2013
not being compensated under that scenario either. The opportunity for
them to be compensated through the TDR program is best served by a
market rate scenario, but we didn't have that. And so as soon as
property values and the market demand dropped, there wasn't any
compensation for those landowners because nobody was going to pay
the 25,000.
When we went back in and added the three bonus units -- and by
the way, each of those bonus units had a performance criteria
associated with them. So they weren't free. You had to do certain
things.
That gave the opportunity to blend the price and reduce the cost.
And then some movement started to occur, because we really started
to allow the free market system to come back into play.
So those landowners are being compensated and will be
compensated as soon as the market and it's beginning to come back,
that's why we're here, as soon as the market comes back for those
TDRs.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So the government guaranteed these
guys in that one-mile corridor a guaranteed market.
MR. YOVANOVICH: No.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: They did. They said you will -- all
your clients, all your potential buyers will come from a certain radius.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Or the buyers may elect not to buy at all.
So they didn't guarantee them a buyer, all they did is saddle them with
a price.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: No, they guaranteed them a market.
Whether the buyer chose to perform or not is irrelevant, but they
guaranteed them a market radius.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Let's look at this slightly
differently. I apologize for butting in.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: But if their compensation was
Page 211
November 12, 2013
originally let's say $25,000, now it is using the market rate, it is
$60,000.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Right.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So you've actually increased the
amount of compensation people are getting by increasing the number
of TDRs that they're permitted to use. And if they don't like either of
those, they can build a house on those five acres.
So there's nothing being taken away from anyone here. And
there was no guarantee by the government. The government maybe
foolishly tried to establish some floor under these TDR values so that
people would get something for placing their properties into a
protected category. But nothing has been removed from them. They
are actually getting more money, four times, almost. Well, three
times, almost what they would have gotten otherwise. But there's
nothing being taken away from anybody here.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, I don't want to get stuck
on the TDR program because that's not what is on the agenda. I
understand your point is part and parcel. But, you know, it's -- the
overall program is not on the agenda.
This development, the original density prior to the fringe was --
MR. MULHERE: This PUD was approved at that 1,154 units, I
think it is, since its -- it was approved and always allowed to achieve
that density.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It hasn't been -- I thought it was
amended down.
MR. MULHERE: Not that I recall.
MR. YOVANOVICH: No, what we did is we eliminated the
golf courses and we went to more of a lakes type of recreational
community. That was --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Oh, that's what it was?
MR. YOVANOVICH: -- the change.
Page 212
November 12, 2013
Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So the only thing is, is
broadened where you can buy the TDRs.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Correct.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So can I ask the County Attorney a
question? How can we -- how could government have legally
restricted the exchange of the TDRs between sending and receiving to
that radius? How could they have legally done that?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Actually, ask Bob Mulhere
because he's the one that --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: No, no, I want the County Attorney
to answer this. This is a legal question.
MR. KLATZKOW: You know, government restricts land all the
time. It's called zoning. I mean, so --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: No, no, I'm asking --
MR. KLATZKOW: Well, but I'm getting to the point that your
legislative process puts restrictions on land. This was this particular
restriction, which if memory serves me right, pretty much everybody
agreed with at the time.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I don't care.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Who's the --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: That's not the question. I've got a
situation where we have given certain property owners property rights
called TDRs, and we have basically restricted where they can sell
those TDRs --
MR. YOVANOVICH: No.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: -- or -- yeah, who they can sell
those TDRs to or who the receiving lands can purchase those TDRs
from. Either way you look at it, there is a limited market radius that
government has imposed. And basically it's like saying, you know, I
can only buy all my clothes from J Crew.
MR. KLATZKOW: I can only put an activity center in this area.
Page 213
November 12, 2013
I don't know what to tell you, we do this all the time.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Well, but there's a difference
between alienation, the right to alienate. Does government have the
right to restrict the alienation of property rights by limiting the market
that someone that owns that property right can sell it? That's what this
issue is.
MR. YOVANOVICH: There's not a limit on the sale, it's only on
the buy.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Well, can the guy in that one-mile
radius sell to anyone else outside?
MR. YOVANOVICH: Yes.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So then my question is can you
restrict the receiving land to only purchasing?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Motion to approve.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: You've got a lot of legal issues here.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Let me add a couple things to the
discussion.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Big legal issues here.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: To transmit.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Or to transmit.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I'd like to make a comment.
Some of the text that was included with information that was
submitted by staff to the county -- to the Planning Commission said
this: The consultant who assisted in development of the Rural Fringe
Mixed Use District TDR program found a correlation between the
proximity of properties lying east of County Road 951 and their land
values. The higher transitional residential densities allowed in the
urban residential fringe affected these nearer lands with higher
property values while more distant sending lands which are less dense,
Page 214
November 12, 2013
further removed from the urban services, less acceptable and so forth
revealed notably lower values. This geographical relationship was
recognized and specific limitations established to bolster TDR values
for the more approximate lands and provided special arrangements for
the transfer, redemption and use of these TDRs.
Another interesting fact is that the co-applicant in this petition is
the original owner of Hacienda Lakes, who maintains ownerships of
the TDR credits from Hacienda Lakes, will sell for -- supposedly is
offering to sell 406 TDR credits to the Naples Reserve developer if
this amendment is successful. Accordingly, this amendment could be
viewed as self-serving. Nonetheless, it may further the success of the
TDR program and so on and so forth.
Objectors who are -- who have contacted me who are people who
own TDRs within this one-mile radius agree from some of the
findings and conclusions that said the impact upon the TDR program
could be noteworthy. A number of TDR credits originally intended
for use in the areas of designated receiving lands will be redirected to
the urban residential fringe and a relocation of TDR credits. This
Growth Management Plan amendment could potentially devalue TDR
credits generated from sending lands within one mile of the urban
fringe.
So that's the issue that we're contending with here in my view.
And, you know, I understand, Mr. Yovanovich, you say your client
can't withstand the cost. But it seems a very convenient arrangement.
MR. YOVANOVICH: And you're right. And that arrangement
is at the price we could afford to pay.
Secondly, I'd like to address a couple of comments.
First of all, I don't think we mentioned that the Planning
Commission unanimously recommended support of this change to the
program and they've been --
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Taken comments from staff.
MR. YOVANOVICH: I understand.
Page 215
November 12, 2013
And staff is also recommending approval of this change, despite
their history.
But I would go back to the original program was one TDR for
25,000. What we're saying is four TDRs will pay you 60. We're not
in any way limiting the value that those property owners were
originally given when the program was established. They have a very
limited universe of-- we have a very limited universe of where we can
buy TDRs. That doesn't mean we pay whatever they ask.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Right.
MR. YOVANOVICH: So what you end up is that you have a
sending program. If we can't buy TDRs beyond the one mile, we'll
simply develop less units in the project and there will be less TDRs
consumed in the universe of TDRs, because we will be no longer part
of the marketplace as the buyer of TDRs.
And the overall program was there are a lot of people with
sending lands imposed upon them. They didn't volunteer for it, it was
imposed upon them. And we're saying we're willing to pay a fair
price to people who have TDRs imposed upon them. We're saying let
the market dictate what that fair price is. And respecting that if you're
in that one-mile area, you're still getting more than the 25,000 that was
originally promised to you when the program was established.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: The only problem I have, and I
agree with you. Hey listen, I agree this whole program is broken.
You know that I know that. I've said that to Mr. Mulhere, I've said
that to yourself, I've said it to Mr. Anderson, I've said it to everybody.
But what I don't want to see is I don't want to see a Growth
Management Plan Amendment that diminishes the values of TDRs as
a whole, because there's a whole lot of people out there that own these
little parcels that you were talking about that are problematic for you,
they're still on the hook. I'm not worried about -- I'm really not
worried about Wilton Land Company who's got a big block of them
that can go out there and make a good deal. I'm worried about these
Page 216
November 12, 2013
little people who are left constantly swinging in the wind and, you
know, have relied on the county to provide them an opportunity to get
their money out of their property against their will. And it keeps on
being a changing target, a changing target for them. I just want to
understand what we're going to do to get these people out of the trap,
because it's a bad one.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I have to agree with Commissioner
Nance and Commissioner Henning. I mean, on the one hand this
should be a free market system and, you know, you shouldn't have any
restrictions as to where you have the opportunity to buy.
On the other side, the property owners in that one-mile strip, you
know, detrimentally relied on the promise that they were basically
going to have a guaranteed pool of buyers sometime in the future
when development took place for those TDRs.
So when you eliminate that guaranteed pool of buyers, you're
dramatically diminishing the value of the TDRs they hold because,
you know, now all of a sudden the competition for buyers becomes the
universe which basically changes. You have all this demand and yeah,
it's -- and in other words, all this demand with a much larger market.
And they don't have, you know, a small pool of buyers. And they're
limited supply. I mean, it's -- the dynamic changes very significantly.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Again, I go back to they're going to still
get their 25,000 and more that was originally promised to them.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: But who's going to buy it?
MR. YOVANOVICH: We would buy it today if they would sell
it to us at an average price of 12 to 15,000. They want 25,000 for all
of them. So they want for -- for what you promised them originally,
25,000, they want 100,000. We're willing to pay them 60, okay?
That's -- I can offer to sell you my car for a million dollars and you
may be the only buyer that's eligible to buy my car. If you can't afford
a million dollars, you're not buying my car.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I understand --
Page 217
November 12, 2013
MR. YOVANOVICH: And that's where we are. You've put us in
a position where the seller is trying to dictate to us a price we can't
afford and they're saying you've devalued what you gave them. You
haven't --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I get it. You're both hurt. I totally
get it. The system doesn't work.
MR. YOVANOVICH: We're trying to --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I mean, the game -- the rules that
were established around this program don't work. They don't work for
the people who have sending lands, and they don't work for the people
who have receiving lands. And that's why we have that problem here.
The problem we have is that these people in the sending lands
detrimentally relied on a certain expectation and now we're changing
the rules of the game after they made a commitment to be sending.
MR. YOVANOVICH: They didn't make a commitment.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: To be sending?
MR. YOVANOVICH: They didn't volunteer for that program.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Well, they didn't volunteer? It was
a taking.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: That's what they got.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Right, they got TDRs.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: It's even worse because --
MR. YOVANOVICH: I'm not saying the program's a good
program.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Let me tell you something, it's even
worse if they didn't.
MR. YOVANOVICH: But you need -- again, you gave them
$25,000 for that parcel. We're willing to give them 60. I don't know
how you're hurting them by this decision. And you never boxed
yourself into a corner where you couldn't make changes to the
program to try to make it better. And that's all we're simply asking.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I think we need to hear from the
Page 218
November 12, 2013
people in that one-mile radius. Do we have anyone from there?
MR. MILLER: Yes, ma'am, we have -- well, I have three public
speakers. First speaker would be Tyler Day, followed by Maureen
Bonness and then John Bonness.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: But Tyler is not speaking to this
issue.
MR. DAY: I'm not speaking to this issue.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: To this issue?
MR. DAY: No.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: No, to -- you're speaking to a --
MR. DAY: No, not this issue.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: To a different issue.
MR. MILLER: So this item, different issue in this item, yes.
MR. DAY: In the estate.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Right. Which will be -- it's part of
the amendment but it's the next one in the cycle.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: How late are we going tonight?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I don't know.
MR. MILLER: Well, then we'll go with Maureen Bonness and
Joe Bonness. I think they do want to speak on this particular part of
this item.
MS. BONNESS: Maureen Bonness. I am an owner of TDRs in
that area, but I am also the manager of the Willow Run Preserve
which straddles the urban zone and the sending rural fringe area.
So today's issue, it's a geographic location of TDRs that are being
used in the urban area. Right now the rule is that 100 percent of those
TDRs are intended to -- or can go into the urban, or the urban projects
require 100 percent. They're asking for zero percent of their TDRs
required to come from that area. And I would like to see a
compromise, somewhere in between. Maybe 50 percent, whatever it
is. So that maybe you can adjust it so that it works for both parties.
The reason why I want that to have some requirement of using
Page 219
November 12, 2013
the TDRs from the near urban area is I want an early market and a
short market for the small parcels in that area. Between my preserve
and the Picayune are about 40 parcels, most of which are five acres,
some as many as 40. And I would like to see those owners sever their
TDRs and be fairly compensated for their property.
So that's my goal is to have my neighbors to the east sever their
lands.
Those lands are different than the far eastern sending lands in that
they have closer access to roads and more likelihood of having that
access in the near future. And they are closer so they do have more
value. So I would like to see this amendment today go forward with a
percentage of their TDRs being required to come from the urban. I
want to guarantee the market and an early market for those.
And also this amendment will set the precedence for the rest of
the development in the urban area as well.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: There's no question. This is a very
significant precedent for this whole program.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You know, I bought a lot in
Golden Gate Estates for 50,000. It's probably worth 8,000. When are
you going to compensate me for my loss?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Well, I'm not -- it's not a question of
compensation. We're changing the rules of the game. We're saying
that the sending lands have to buy from that area. Guaranteeing that
the sending land's a given market. Now we're all of a sudden
changing the rules of the game and saying that's not the case. That's a
material difference. That's not compensating for the loss, that is
changing the rules of the game that these people relied on not to sue us
for a takings. You got major legal issues here.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, you have a value of it was
25,000 guaranteed. Now you got a compensation because you have
more credits of, you know, like Commissioner Coyle said, up to
60,000. So I want to get out of the business of setting --
Page 220
November 12, 2013
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Then why don't we just reverse the
whole program? I mean, just --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's not on the agenda right
now.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: -- get rid of sending, get rid of
receiving.
But we have to -- you know, we have to consider the legal
implications of this. And they're very serious.
MR. KLATZKOW: This program was put in place a long time
ago. I'm not too concerned about that, Madam Chair.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: But the problem is, is once you start
doing this, whatever statute of limitation has expired, you're creating
everything in you now. I mean, you're just -- you're reopening the can
of worms.
MR. KLATZKOW: You can say no, or you can transmit.
Because it's going to come back to you, and it's going to come back to
the Planning Commission. And you can direct the Planning
Commission to look at this issue before it comes back to you.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I think you need to look at this
issue. I think you need to -- I think the legal staff--
MR. KLATZKOW: Ma'am, I can't do the ordinance. It's on the
books --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yeah, you can.
MR. KLATZKOW: -- for years and years and years.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: If the ordinance is illegal you most
certainly can propose that it be reversed. Because we can't have --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: This is not the agenda item,
Madam Chair. You're going to spend all night debating an issue
purely on a personal opinion --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: It's not a personal opinion.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- and that is inappropriate. Let's
get on with business.
Page 221
November 12, 2013
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I have a very big concern.
Go ahead.
MS. BONNESS: My argument is to bolster the people that have
small acres and have TDRs for sale, because I think they are
completely left out of the equation. I don't know how many owners
the petitioners have asked, the people that own 40 acres, 20 acres, 10.
It's really the 40-acre parcel owners that are hurting, because they get
one house for their 40 acres.
But anyway, I'd like to see that market increased for those people
who own smaller sized lots. Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Joe Bonness.
MR. BONNESS: Good afternoon, Commissioners.
Representing basically the same parcels that Maureen was also talking
about.
We've got four 40-acre parcels. We were reduced from being
able to put one unit per five acres on that, down to being able to build
only four units on 140 acres.
I've got another 100 acres that's farther out. Same thing. Ran on
down from the standpoint of I would have been able to build 20
houses, now I can only build two houses, one unit per 40 acres. So
yeah, we have been cut. At the same time our mining rights are
restricted and stripped from these sending lands. So, you know, we've
had a bunch of takes that were given to us at that point.
We thought that we were being compensated by having a captive
purchasing group that was going to have to come to us. It's obvious
that the stuff that is right alongside 951, the urban fringe, would be the
first area to be developed before the other receiving areas throughout
the rest of the rural fringe. That meant that we would be compensated
soon to be able to transfer our TDRs.
And now we see that the -- you know, they're trying to be able to
get around that and being able to, you know, put us back onto the back
burner that now we're competing against properties that are worth a
Page 222
November 12, 2013
few hundred dollars an acre off in the far ends of the urban fringe. Yet
we thought we had a captive market at the time when this was being
transmitted.
We were of the idea that those -- our TDRs up in the front end
there were probably worth in the 40 to $50,000 a unit at the time. So,
you know, the market is just starting to get a hold. There hasn't been
much going on with the TDR program because what's been going on
with the economy. We haven't been seeing developments come out of
the ground until just now. It's just getting started.
And now as it's just getting started we're going to start changing
the rules as quick as we can. And that's, from what I can see from my
standpoint, and I think Yovanovich and these guys have already kind
of portrayed that it is basically reducing my value and it's a taking.
And you're opening the door right now for me to be able to come back
and say hey, this is a taking, it's being legislated right now. I've
opened the door again for a Burt Harris.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: There's no question.
MR. BONNESS: So if you transmit this, basically you have
opened again for me to be able to come back and get the
compensations that I've been denied through this whole Rural Fringe
Mixed Use District. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Madam Chair?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: A taking is a use of somebody's
property, not the value of his property.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Can I respond to some of those
comments real briefly? Because I know there's a motion on the table.
I don't know which way it's going to go.
But the -- one of the things is I don't think you ever guaranteed
anybody other than the $25,000 for one TDR. The program has
evolved over time. So with respect to the last comment, I don't know
that you're opening anything up. Second of all --
Page 223
November 12, 2013
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: You are because of the market.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Second of all, you're transmitting, you're
not adopting. That means we have a period of time between now and
the adoption to talk about the program further.
One of the -- we received a proposal today from Maureen, which
if I understand it correctly was that we be required to get 40 percent of
our qualified TDRs from the one-mile area. Is that correct? Forty
percent. So they're will to compromise at 40 percent, meaning we can
get 60 percent of what we need beyond that area.
What I'm asking is if you transmit it the way it is, give us an
opportunity to talk to them and see if that is something than can work.
That also gives us an opportunity to go look at other property owners
within that qualified area to see if we can make something work with
them to get the 40 percent.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: We would --
MR. YOVANOVICH: If not, we'll come back to you.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: We would have to retransmit. So
why don't you --
MR. YOVANOVICH: No, you can always become more
restrictive after transmittal. You cannot become more open. If you
were to say you can go get 100 percent from beyond this area today
and you decided to limit us to 40 percent in the future, you can make
that change. You can't say 40 percent today and then we're going to
go to 100 percent later. That's when you would have to transmit.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: If we do this for this one project,
and I mean transmit on the terms that you're proposing, any other
project in that area that wants to do this, I mean, what basis would we
have to deny?
MR. YOVANOVICH: Well, first of all --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And we would have to do this for
everyone. In other words, if we're dong this, why are we doing it just
for you. Why aren't we just doing it for everyone in that radius?
Page 224
November 12, 2013
MR. YOVANOVICH: Let me tell you why this property is
different than any other property out there. This is the only property
that's both blue, which means I can get these from anywhere I want to
get them, anywhere in Collier County; any of this orange I can bring
to this piece of the property.
I've got this -- less than half of my property is yellow that now is
restricting me to only this area. There are no other pieces of property
that have the same characteristics.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: But we're only concerned about the
yellow. That's the issue here before us.
MR. YOVANOVICH: But what I'm saying is there's no other --
you're asking me, anybody else who's in this same mix. There is no
somebody else that's in the same mix.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: All we care about is everyone that's
in the yellow. Because you said you can take what's in green and you
can exchange it with that whole orange area.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: You can get TDRs from anywhere.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Right. But the concern is, is we're
opening up the box for everyone that's yellow. Because what we're
addressing for you is the yellow. The problem you have is what's
yellow.
MR. YOVANOVICH: And if someone else wants to go through
this process of doing a private sector Comp. Plan Amendment because
the government hasn't decided to take it upon itself to restudy the
entire program, we can't just stay frozen in time. We need to move
forward. We're already moving dirt on the project. We need to know
which way we're going. What I'm saying is --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Well, can I make a suggestion?
Why don't you instead of transmitting now bring this back in
December. I mean, we can transmit in December. Why don't you
work it out and then see if you can't get it done negotiating, you know,
whatever Maureen is proposing.
Page 225
November 12, 2013
MR. YOVANOVICH: Well, why don't I just take the 40 percent
right now?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I mean, if you're willing to do that,
then do that. And do we still have to transmit?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: What percentage of your property
is yellow, Mr. Yovanovich?
MR. YOVANOVICH: Less than half. I don't know the exact
acreage.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Do you still have to transmit?
MR. KLATZKOW: Why don't we --
MR. YOVANOVICH: No, I'll get 40 percent of my required
qualified TDRs.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: No, I'm just --
THE COURT REPORTER: I have several people talking at
once.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: -- trying to divide it fairly.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: One person at a time.
MR. KLATZKOW: For some logic on this, why don't you just
take the percentage of your land in yellow --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Right.
MR. KLATZKOW: -- and use that, whatever it is, 38 percent, 43
percent.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Look, they've already offered 40, so why
not just say we'll get 40 percent of our qualified -- of the TDRs that
have to go on the yellow from the one-mile area and we can get the
other 60 percent from wherever we want to get them.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Do we have to do a transmittal if we
do that? If this is a negotiated arrangement between the two, do we
still have to go through a transmittal if they --
MR. YOVANOVICH: Yes.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: -- can do that kind of-- if they can
make that kind of arrangement?
Page 226
November 12, 2013
MR. KLATZKOW: I'm not sure that negotiation gets rid of your
concerns, to be honest, as far as opening this up. That's why --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Well, I mean, but let me explain
that if you have a negotiated -- if you have these two parties freely and
willingly negotiating this as opposed to us dictating that they --
MR. KLATZKOW: You're still changing to 40 percent. So is
that going to be the role?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Well, it's whatever they -- by
mutual agreement have entered into an agreement. You know, by
mutual agreement they have entered into a contract, if you will, with
respect to how they want to get it done. I don't think that's a
transmittal. I don't think it's an amendment. I mean, it's basically the
two parties agreeing among themselves --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, why don't we see if the
vote will carry, the motion on the floor. And if it doesn't carry, we can
continue the conversation, address some of the other issues on the
agenda.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Why don't we do this, before we
take a vote, because --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I think the motion maker
can call the question.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Who's the motion -- do we have a
motion?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioner Coyle. Are you
calling the motion?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Did you make a motion?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes, I made the motion.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: To transmit.
Did you second it?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Call it.
MR. OCHS: Madam Chair, could the staff make quick remarks?
Page 227
November 12, 2013
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Did Commissioner Fiala leave?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yes, she did.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'm leaving at 6:00.
MR. SCHMIDT: Good afternoon. For the record, Corby
Schmidt, one of your Principal Planners, Comprehensive Planning
Department.
What you see on the screen is simply an exhibit which shows the
language with that 60 percent, 60/40 split limitation written into it.
And that's how it would appear if you would decide to transmit it that
way today.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So you've already contemplated that
agreement?
MR. SCHMIDT: That's correct. Not that I hadn't heard from
concerned citizens or the applicants and we knew that there were a
number of alternatives that might be proposed.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So you actually considered that that
could be on the table. So we would change the transmittal from what
you've put in the agenda to this.
MR. SCHMIDT: That might be your prerogative this afternoon,
yes.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And why do you still have to
transmit that?
MR. SCHMIDT: It's just the kind of process that the state
requires.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Even though this is a privately
negotiated arrangement, we still would have to transmit this?
MR. SCHMIDT: It would not be a private arrangement. This is
an amendment to the Comp. Plan --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Okay.
MR. SCHMIDT: -- regardless.
MR. KLATZKOW: Before you take your vote, you still have
one registered speaker.
Page 228
November 12, 2013
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Who else?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, it's something else.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: No, we don't. It's on a different
issue.
MR. KLATZKOW: On this item.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: No, not on this issue.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We're confused enough, we
don't need anymore.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: We don't have -- it's not --
MR. KLATZKOW: Motion is to transmit, right?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Motion to transmit.
MR. KLATZKOW: If it passes, we're done.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Pardon me?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I suggest we transmit it and let the
parties go ahead and negotiate, and if--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We have three votes.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: -- to the second one, we can deal
with it at that time. I'll give Mr. Yovanovich and the other people a
good opportunity to do the right thing.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Well, they already said they would
agree to that second --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: All you're doing is you're creating
a band (sic) for TDRs which hasn't existed in the past. So this is an
excellent opportunity to do that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Did you call the motion?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes, I did.
All in favor, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Any opposed by like sign.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Aye.
Page 229
November 12, 2013
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay, let the record show that it
passed 3-1, with Commissioner Hiller dissenting.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I don't know why --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Now we're moving --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: -- you're not transmitting with the
thing that you both agreed to.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: They will.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I mean, why are you going to come
back and change this again? I mean, if you're going to transmit, you
know that you're going to agree to this 60/40, why aren't we
transmitting the 60/40 as opposed to this? Where these people are
going to come back and now claim a takings.
MR. YOVANOVICH: But something else can come about in the
discussions.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: But you're going to have to
retransmit.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We're not on this item anymore,
we're done with it.
MR. SCHMIDT: Just to clarify, in adoption phase we can be
more restrictive. And moving to a percentage split for the property
would be a more restrictive approach.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Understood.
MR. SCHMIDT: So we would not need to retransmit.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I just think this is like Pandora's
box. And my feeling is --
COMMISSIONER NANCE: If it doesn't get straightened out I'll
not vote for it next time, I can tell you that right now.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: My feeling is the whole thing
should be reversed.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, we'd need four, four votes
next time.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: That's right.
Page 230
November 12, 2013
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Just stop it and let's move on.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Okay. It's a big deal.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Now we're moving on to Petition
2013-what, 2?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Go ahead.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Could we jump to Old Florida?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, no. You know, we have
some --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Hang on a second.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- citizens here that are not paid,
okay, they're not going to profit, that wants input on our advisory
boards.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Right. Well, I'm sorry, we did have
a time certain set for that --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We do?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: -- and we have to take these items.
County Manager?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We don't have a time certain on
that.
MR. OCHS: No, when you reconvened after your last break, I
believe you said you were going to hear four items in order --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: That's correct.
MR. OCHS: -- 11 .C, 9.A, 12.B and then 9.C. Those were the
four in order that --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Correct.
MR. OCHS: -- the Chair had indicated.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yep. So go to the next item then.
MR. OCHS: You're part of the way through 9.A.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So we have to finish 9.A.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Technically Mr. Anderson is in front of
me but I think he said it would be okay if I went first, because I need
Page 231
November 12, 2013
to get back up to --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: That's fine.
MR. YOVANOVICH: -- Sarasota, if that's okay.
For the record, Rich Yovanovich. And this pertains to the Olde
Florida Golf Club amendment.
With me today is Bill Barton, Margaret Perry, Tom Treddis, Ray
Piasente and Jeff Perry to answer any questions that I can't answer
regarding the Growth Management Plan amendment in front of you.
The request is to redesignate the Olde Florida Gulf Club
property. Do I have that right? The Olde Florida Golf Club property
is currently designated neutral under the Growth Management Plan.
And the Olde Florida Golf Club property is this property right here.
As you can see, it's basically surrounded by receiving lands
property. I have a longer version presentation or a shorter version
presentation.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Short.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Okay. Our request is to go to -- have the
property redesignated to receiving lands, which is consistent with the
property that abuts it and is around it.
From an environmental standpoint we went through a long
presentation in front of the Planning Commission. The property has
the same characteristics from a listed species standpoint to all the
other receiving lands around it. Planning Commission unanimously
recommended approval. We've worked closely with the different --
the typical environmental groups. I don't believe they have any
concerns about our request to go to receiving lands on this particular
piece of property --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I make a motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: We have a motion and a second.
Any further discussion?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Let's hear the speakers.
Page 232
November 12, 2013
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Do we have any speakers on this?
MR. MILLER: Well, yes. Mr. Day, is this the item you're --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: No, no.
MR. MILLER: And I do have someone registered for 9.B, but it
says Olde Florida. Jeffrey Kohn. Is that this item?
MR. KOHN: Yes.
MR. MILLER: You have one speaker, ma'am.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Okay.
MR. KOHN: Thank you all. I'll try to be brief. Jeffrey Kohn.
I live near Olde Florida, and I'm concerned that the impact of the
increased density will have on the safety of the roads in the area.
The area around Olde Florida is rural agricultural land, and these
quiet rural dead-end roads will be significantly impacted by the higher
density.
Both Vanderbilt Beach Road and Douglas Street, which will
serve as the entrances for the new development, are dead-end roads.
And both of these roads are narrow two-lane roads with no sidewalks,
shoulders, breakdown lanes or bike lines of any kind.
Right now the people and the kids that live in the area are able to
walk down to the bus stop and ride their bikes on these roads, and
people are able to safely walk and ride their bikes in the area. And I'm
concerned that unless there are some significant safety improvements
made to Vanderbilt Beach Road and Douglas Street that this will not
be the case and that this increased density will significantly impact
these quiet rural dead-end roads. Thank you.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Just one comment. Could you --
could we ask the staff to get together with the gentleman, tell him the
road that is going to be put in this area.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Leo, can you make sure that staff
works with this gentleman and explain what's going on with the roads.
Thank you.
Page 233
November 12, 2013
MR. OCHS: Yes, will do.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: All right, so we have a motion and a
second.
No further discussion, no more public speakers, all in favor?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Any opposed?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Motion carries 3-1 with
Commissioner Nance dissenting.
Next item under 9.A. Mr. Anderson? A fresh face. We're really
looking forward to hearing a voice other than Rich's.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I wouldn't exactly call that face
fresh.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yikes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It's almost spoiled.
MR. ANDERSON: I'm not the one with the beard.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Oh, my goodness. It's getting
obviously late in the day.
Go ahead.
MR. ANDERSON: Good afternoon, Commissioners. For the
record, my name is Bruce Anderson from the Roetzel and Andress
Law Firm.
I have with me today Mr. Jim Dentinger, the President of
McGuire Development, and also Tim Hancock, the Planning Director
at Davidson Engineering, and Norm Tribilcock, our Transportation
Engineer for the record.
I'm going to be very brief.
This is a Growth Management Plan amendment for the Buckley
mixed use subdistrict. It was approved 11 years ago in 2002.
As you can see from this photo, it abuts the north county library.
Page 234
November 12, 2013
It's on the south of the subject property. And on the west side and the
north side is the Emerald Lakes residential community.
The president of Emerald Lakes Homeowners Association spoke
at the Planning Commission hearing in favor of this change. She
cannot be here because of a prior commitment. But they do want to
see this property developed as commercial.
I do want to emphasize, this is not a request for new commercial
zoning. The property's already zoned for 162,000 square feet of
commercial uses and no increase is proposed.
The chief purpose of this amendment is to eliminate the
requirement that both residential and commercial must be built on this
project and that it must be built in the same building.
What we're proposing is simply rearranging what's already been
approved and moving some of the zoning level details to the PUD
where it belongs.
The PUD amendment is currently under review by your staff and
would come before you at the time of final adoption of this
amendment so you would see a complete package.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Just to clarify, Bruce, you're not
increasing the residential density within the PUD, you're keeping the
total density the same and you're simply eliminating the residential
units over the commercial portion.
MR. ANDERSON: And making commercial and residential
optional.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Commercial and residential
optional. What do you mean by commercial and residential --
MR. ANDERSON: Well, it could be developed all commercially
or in theory it could be developed all residentially. Our indications are
that the market for the property is for commercial, and that's what is
anticipated.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So you're going to eliminate the
residential -- on the portion that's -- you've got two parts to the project,
Page 235
November 12, 2013
you've got a commercial piece and a residential piece, correct?
MR. ANDERSON: Well, it was all mixed together.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Okay.
MR. ANDERSON: It wasn't --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So you want the option of doing
either 100 percent commercial or 100 percent residential?
MR. ANDERSON: Yes, yes. And would also still have that
middle ground as well, if there, you know, was some demand for that.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: As you explained it to me before
was that you wanted to eliminate the mixed use, keep the residential
and have residential over here and commercial over here. You never
indicated that you wanted all commercial or all residential. That was
not what you indicated to me as your preference.
MR. ANDERSON: Well, I'm sorry if there was a
misunderstanding.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: There was.
MR. ANDERSON: The Planning Commission, which
unanimously recommended approval, fashioned a compromise
language that was a blend of what we had originally proposed and
what staff had proposed, were perfectly satisfied with the Planning
Commission's recommended language. And I'm not certain but I think
staff is fine with it as well.
And thank you very much for your time.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you.
MR. HANCOCK: Commissioners, for the record, Tim Hancock,
also representing the petitioner.
Commissioner, this is a concept master plan that mirrors the
master plan currently under review by your planning staff as a part of
the PUD rezone.
As Mr. Anderson indicated, what we're really doing here is
decoupling, if you will, the residential from commercial. The existing
language requires that you do both on the same acre of land.
Page 236
November 12, 2013
What we're saying is on each acre of land, pick one. It's either
commercial or residential but not both. And the reason is that the
market does not support mixed use fully integrated of this size.
There's no indication for that.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: That's clear. But the issue is, is
there a potential that this entire parcel be 100 percent commercial?
MR. HANCOCK: Yes. And that possibility has been discussed
at length with the Emerald Lakes residents. In fact, to quote Clare
Goff, when we discussed it being 100 percent commercial, she said
hurry up and build it before you change your mind. They actually are
okay with the commercial.
It's the residential that bothers them. It's third-story residences
looking into their neighborhood that concerns them the most. We
have support from that association. And you each received two
e-mails today and yesterday from the president of the association and
Ms. Goff, who was here 12 years ago when this went through the first
time. And they both are supportive of the project. We've been fully
integrated with them before the neighborhood information meeting,
having several meetings with them, and we're pleased to have their
support and continue working with them.
And yes, they support the project. Actually, they prefer it to go
100 percent commercial. And as the zoning comes before you, if at
that time we feel there's no market for residential whatsoever, you
may see a rezone that reflects that.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: The traffic impact on Orange
Blossom and Airport Pulling will be difference if it's all commercial.
MR. HANCOCK: Yes. In fact, the existing -- and Mr.
Trabilcock is here and can speak in detail. But let me give you the
broad brush to this.
The existing approved 162,000 plus square feet of commercial
plus the opportunity for 326 residential units all in total on this project
is what is currently zoned. The difference is we're saying well, if it's
Page 237
November 12, 2013
all commercial then it's only 162,000 square feet of commercial. You
don't have to be a rocket scientist, no offense, Mr. Trabilcock, to
figure out that that's going to be less.
And in all likelihood -- we ran multiple scenarios. We ran the
worst case scenario of two 80,000 square foot super centers. And the
difference was percentage points. And that is likely not the result for
this project. What you will probably see is a few out-parcels, banks,
family restaurants and so forth and one or two midsized boxes. You
can't fit a Target here. You can't fit Home Depot here.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And you're not going to go through
the library and use that as a cut-through to Orange Blossom?
MR. HANCOCK: That will be decided at time of zoning.
Candidly, ma'am, if the county promotes interconnection, if you all
want it, great. If you don't want it, fine too.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Okay. That's good.
MR. HANCOCK: But yes, your traffic question is very
important because when we ran -- from this amendment the bottom
line is there is no significant net impact resulting from this change to
the transportation network. And in the PM peak hour, actually the
number of trips westbound on Orange Blossom Road are shown to be
no different from one scenario to the next.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: All right. I believe we have a
public speaker. Tyler?
MR. DAY: Hi there. Long wait for a short haul here.
My name is Tyler Day. I'm the Vice President of the Master
Association at Monteray, and also the Vice President of the Orange
Blossom/Pine Ridge Community Alliance.
The Alliance's mission is to address the mutual benefit, safety
and environmental beauty of the Orange Blossom communities, right
around the corner from where this proposed development is going to
be.
I'm at somewhat of a disadvantage because the information that I
Page 238
November 12, 2013
had, came from the people who went to these meetings that they had
held, and they're not all 100 percent in favor of it, by the way, and also
the staff report of the Collier County Planning Commission, which is
apparently dated because there have been some changes since then.
So my comments -- the general comments are still correct, but some of
the details might be slightly dated here.
As far as our Alliance, we joined with the Collier County staff in
their original proposal in opposition to the proposed changes to
eliminate the mixed use development requirement and replace it with
a high density residential option and/or a big box retail unit and strip
mall with mall developments. So in effect we still do not favor a strip
mall arrangement or a big box arrangement.
There's three basic reasons for that: One, there are at least eight
big box stores within a radius of a mile to a mile and a half of this
development. There is absolutely no need for a store of that size.
There are a lot better locations within the county.
Also, point two, with attractive upscale residential developments
to the east and the west, particularly the west where all these
developments on Orange Blossom are, there's no need for high
density, high-rise residences and a strip mall which are totally
incompatible with the upscale residential area.
Thirdly, the idea of trying to run an exit road from the proposed
development to the -- to pump up more traffic on Orange Blossom,
which is now becoming a highly trafficked road anyway. Is not only a
bad but an unsafe idea. Which we would fight as Alliance, we would
fight that very, very strongly. It is just not the right thing to do.
So in summary, we support the original proposal of the staff who
finds that the data and analysis provided did not support the proposed
changes in the Growth Management Plan agreement and -- as it
currently stands.
Now, it appears that with the Planning Commission approval to
move it on to the next step here we have got a high-speed locomotive
Page 239
November 12, 2013
going toward a destination. All we ask is that you get it on the right
track and have something that's compatible with the environment. So
I don't think it's too late to make any changes. Thank you.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you.
MR. DAY: Are there any questions?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: No. Not at least from my part. Do
you have any questions?
MR. OCHS: Commissioner, would you like to hear the staff
presentation?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Sure.
MS. MOSCA: Good afternoon, Madam Chair, Commissioners.
For the record, Michele Mosca, with your Comprehensive Planning
Staff. Time's getting late so I'll be very, very brief.
Commissioners, staff did -- and as you know, staff did not
support the petition as proposed by the applicant. However, we did
offer two alternatives that are noted in your staff report for the CCPC.
Generally staff had two concerns with the proposal: The first
being that a numerical needs analysis was not submitted with the
application to demonstrate additional retail square feet is needed
within the area.
The proposal less the office square feet potentially allows more
than doubling of the commercial retail square feet on the site. This
may result in an over-allocation of retail commercial square feet
within the Airport Road corridor as well as the surrounding areas.
Any such over over-allocation may have an effect on commercial
demand within the area, potentially impacting the absorption of
existing commercial square feet both within the vacant store fronts and
the reuse of standalone buildings, and may also affect the absorption
and viability of existing vacant commercial properties within the same
area.
And secondly, the proposal is not consistent with the vision of
the county's Growth Management Plan, which is to locate most new
Page 240
November 12, 2013
commercial development such as is proposed the big box development
within activity centers. Thank you.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: You know, I have to apologize,
because I really misunderstood when I met with Mr. Anderson and
Mr. Casalanguida and we discussed this. I did not understand what I
now understand clearly. And so while my initial feeling was to
support this transmittal, at this time I would have a real problem
supporting it because of what staff said, as well as what Tyler Day
said.
I mean, you know, my concern was that you were being forced to
have essentially mixed use from the standpoint of commercial with,
you know, residential on top and we were talking about projects like
Mercado and the problems associated with that and how, you know,
that kind of development wouldn't work.
It was not clear to me that, you know, the intent would be to
basically transfer the development rights from the residential to
substantially increase the commercial on that parcel. And I certainly
could not support using the library as a cut-through to Orange
Blossom. That library where my satellite office is is so congested
with respect to traffic that to add a cut-through and allow traffic from
a major commercial project to go through that government project
above and beyond the traffic that that project already experiences
would be unfathomable to me. I mean, it is a nightmare right now
with what we've got. Adding more to it would be a real problem.
I really -- I'm very sad to say I can't support this.
MR. HANCOCK: Commissioner, I apologize, but there's a gross
misunderstanding in what is actually before you today. And I'm afraid
the late day and the brevity of our presentation in trying to respect the
time frame that everyone else here is trying to get to may have
contributed to that. And I certainly don't want to prolong things
unnecessarily, but let me try and characterize things a little more
succinctly for you.
Page 241
November 12, 2013
Number one, the current zoning approved is 10 pounds in a
five-pound bag. We're asking you to let us have the opportunity to do
five pounds of one or five pounds of the other.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So you are not going to transfer the
density that you're giving up to commercial? I mean, are you --
MR. HANCOCK: No, ma'am.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: -- limiting -- well --
MR. HANCOCK: I think I can answer your question.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I want staff to come up. Can you
come up and clarify? Because that just contradicts what my
understanding of what staff just said.
MR. HANCOCK: The current GMP allows for 162,750 square
feet. It's actually higher than that, it's 7,500 square feet per acre, some
in office, some in retail. It also allows up to 15 units per acre
combined, both. No distinct -- and you have to put them in the same
buildings. But you can do both on the same acre of land.
What we're proposing is 7,500 square feet per acre, and it can be
office or retail, whatever the market decides. We have reduced the
maximum density from 15 units per acre to 11 . And on top of that we
have said for every acre that is developed for residential we lose 7,500
square feet of commercial. For every acre that is developed
commercial we lose 11 units per acre. So not only are we not
converting something, we actually are putting a ratio in that says if we
use one, we can't use the other on the same acre of land.
What's going to result from this is less intensity, less traffic, less
density.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Well, that was my original
understanding. So how come I'm misunderstanding what Ms. Mosca
is saying? And this is very material to that whole area.
MR. HANCOCK: If what I just indicated is not factually correct,
I'm happy to let staff correct me.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yeah, can you -- do you agree with
Page 242
November 12, 2013
what --
MS. MOSCA: For the record, again, Michele Mosca.
What Mr. Hancock stated is correct.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Okay.
MS. MOSCA: The -- to understand the project you have to
understand the original approval, which was for a mixed use
development. The project was capped at 15 dwelling units per acre,
the office was capped at roughly 90,000 square feet, and the retail was
capped at about 70,000 square feet. So the project has changed with
this proposal. They can do either/or.
They have reduced their density based on a recommendation by
the Planning Commission to 11 dwelling units per acre. So generally
Mr. Hancock is correct in what he stated.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, except for you can build
more commercial than 70,000, correct?
MS. MOSCA: Well, you could always build the 162,750 square
feet.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Of just commercial?
MS. MOSCA: Of-- no, there was a cap. There was a cap on the
office of over 90,000 and a cap on the retail for roughly 70,000.
They've combined the two, which would allow for additional -- which
would allow for a greater retail commercial on the site. So it could be
all retail at 162,750 --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right.
MS. MOSCA: -- rather than the two separate caps.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So my statement was correct.
MS. MOSCA: Which was? I'm sorry.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, you could increase the
commercial from 70,000 to 160,000.
MS. MOSCA: The retail, yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You could.
MS. MOSCA: Yes.
Page 243
November 12, 2013
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The commercial.
MS. MOSCA: Commercial retail. Office is also considered --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: They have a total of commercial of
160 --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: 160.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: -- broken down between retail and
office.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: But you had caps on it before.
MS. MOSCA: That's right, yes.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And they had caps on the two
different uses within commercial. And now they're saying it could be
all retail or all office.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Or a combination of.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Or a combination of within that 160.
So you're not increasing the total square footage of commercial,
it's staying at 160. You're not transferring the residential development
rights to increase the commercial.
MS. MOSCA: No, no.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Okay. So you're reducing -- you're
eliminating the residential. If you choose to, you could eliminate the
residential and just leave the commercial, which would reduce the
impact.
MR. HANCOCK: Yes, ma'am.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: All right.
MR. HANCOCK: And by eliminating the distinction between
retail and office we're simply saying to the marketplace, what's most
appropriate here. As opposed to having some artificial cap that
somebody picked out of the air we're saying this project is in no way
more intensive than what's existing and approved. And we have the
support of the immediate adjacent neighborhood. And I'm happy to
provide the emails that were sent to each of you indicating that.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yeah, we all saw it.
Page 244
November 12, 2013
MR. HANCOCK: So Commissioners, again, we're trying to be
as brief as we can.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: No, I understand. The key is, is that
we're not increasing commercial.
MR. HANCOCK: No, ma'am, we're changing the ability and --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Configuration.
MR. HANCOCK: -- opportunity.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I'll make a motion to transmit,
provided you eliminate the access through the library as part of that
transmittal.
MR. HANCOCK: And we agree to that, yes, ma'am.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: All right, thank you.
Yes?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Second.
MR. DAY: I have one question --
THE COURT REPORTER: Do you want this on the record?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yeah, you have to stand to the mic.
MR. DAY: Originally there was a proposal for 15 residential
units per acre. We're hearing now that it could go down to 11 units
per acre. The norm for that area, residential, is three to four units per
acre.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: But they already have the higher
density. They're reducing the density.
MR. DAY: Yeah, I know, I know. But it's still not anywhere
near the norm for the community areas around it, which is three to
four, so --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: But they're will to go lower, which
is favorable.
MR. DAY: Yeah, I understand.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: But they're from -- I believe they're
going to go commercial.
MR. DAY: With a big box as well?
Page 245
November 12, 2013
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So as I said, a motion to transmit
without the cut-through.
MR. HANCOCK: Yes, ma'am.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And we have a second.
Any more discussion?
(No response)
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: There being no further discussion,
all in favor?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Any opposed?
(No response)
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Motion carries unanimously.
And with respect to the uses, you know, when they develop the
plan, Tyler, you need to go to the Planning Commission and address
your concerns.
MR. DAY: I'm sorry, I didn't hear that.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: When -- you need to address your
concerns when it comes back. If the state accepts this transmittal, you
know, after whatever they recommend, when it comes back and goes
to the Planning Commission, you need to work with staff, the
Planning Commission and the developer with respect to what type of
commercial they develop. No more discussion.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Let's move on.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Can we go to 9.C? We've got
people waiting.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yeah, let's go to 9.C.
Page 246
November 12, 2013
Item #9C
ORDINANCE 2013-62: REPEALING THE ORDINANCES
WHICH CREATED THE ANIMAL SERVICES ADVISORY
BOARD, THE SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT ADVISORY
COMMITTEE, THE COLLIER COUNTY PUBLIC HEALTH UNIT
ADVISORY BOARD, THE COLLIER COUNTY COUNCIL OF
ECONOMIC ADVISORS, THE MARCO ISLAND VISION
PLANNING ADVISORY COMMITTEE, AND THE COUNTY
GOVERNMENT PRODUCTIVITY COMMITTEE — ADOPTED
W/THE EXCEPTION OF THE ANIMAL SERVICES ADVISORY
BOARD
MR. OCHS: Yes, ma'am. 9.0 was previously 17.B. It's a
recommendation to adopt an ordinance repealing the ordinances which
created the Animal Services Advisory Board, the Solid Waste
Management Advisory Committee, Collier County Public Health Unit
Advisory Board, the Collier County Council of Economic Advisers,
Marco Island Vision Planning Advisory Committee, and the County
Government Productivity Committee.
This item was brought forward by Commissioner Coyle.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I just wanted to -- I didn't want this
to be done on a consent agenda, okay. The issues were discussed at a
workshop. Of course no decisions can be made at a workshop. And I
wanted to make sure that this was placed on the regular agenda so it
could be discussed.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm going to make a motion to
move to approve except for the repeal of the Animal Service Advisory
Board.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay, that would make me very
happy.
Page 247
November 12, 2013
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, glad to make you very
happy.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. I would also argue that the
Productivity Committee could serve a useful purpose, and rather than
eliminating it right now, let's -- you know, if you want to wait a while
before you appoint --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: No.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- some more new members to it?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: They haven't met in over a year.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, I know.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I'm going to support Commissioner
Henning's motion, but I want to discuss the Animal Services Advisory
Board and, you know, what the county is doing with respect to
advisory boards and why the new proposed structure be far superior to
the existing structure for purposes of animal protection.
I made my motion. Do you want to hear the public speakers
first? Gentlemen?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm confused.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'm ready to vote on the motion.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: There's already a motion. I
seconded.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: We have public speakers, don't we?
MR. MILLER: Yes, ma'am, I have 11 registered public speakers
on this item.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: How many are opposed to the
motion?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: How many are in favor of the
motion?
MR. OCHS: Could you repeat the motion.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The motion is to repeal all of the
advisory boards except for the Animal Control Advisory Board.
Page 248
November 12, 2013
COMMISSIONER COYLE: In other words, leave it in place.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So do you all still want to speak?
AUDIENCE MEMBER: I'd like to speak.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Just call their names.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: We have a gentleman that would
like to speak.
MR. MILLER: Should I just run through these names to official
the process?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You want to snatch defeat from the
jaws of victory?
MR. MILLER: Marcia Breithaupt.
MS. BREITHAUPT: Has the motion passed or not?
MR. MILLER: They haven't voted yet, ma'am.
MS. BREITHAUPT: Oh.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: She waives.
MR. MILLER: Thomas Breithaupt.
MS. BREITHAUPT: I didn't waive.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: She wants to speak.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Oh, so we're going to have
speakers anyway, huh? Okay.
MS. BREITHAUPT: Hi, I'm Marcia Breithaupt. I'm actually the
chair of the board.
As you know, in 2004 the ordinance was established to create the
Animal Services Advisory Board which was to offer oversight of the
Domestic Animal Services operation, and that was to assist them in
providing the best services possible for the community.
At the time of its formation DAS was simply known as the dog
pound, unfortunately, and had really lost a lot of the confidence of the
community. The animal and employee conditions were such that it
could have been shut down if it were in just about any other state.
I have been on this board for all of two of the years. I've seen
many improvements but also stagnation of improvements. Thanks to
Page 249
November 12, 2013
the Board oversight this facility was taken from a disastrous to a
Grade C facility which meets all of the standards of the state but
nothing more.
Considering the incredible money that is spent at this facility
every year, it should be a Grade A plus.
This Board should not be dissolved, but the inverse should
happen, where it be given more control over the operation.
There has been pushback from the facility regarding higher
expectation of adoptions, reduced euthanasia and meeting much
higher success rates of neighboring counties.
According to Amanda, one of the concerns was no vet would
take a position on the Board. You asked her but did you ask anyone on
the board? Have you asked any of the vets that turned it down?
Your communications challenges seem to be one path, which
isn't really a good way to run a business or an operation, because the
Collier vets work a lot with DAS, which is a conflict of interest, or
have negative things to say about DAS, thus their distancing from the
operation, and that has been one thing that I have mentioned over and
over with is DAS rebuilding the relationships with the vets in town,
because of that position on the Board.
Of course we all heard that it was proposed that a master board
be used to review the operation, which I don't know how that would
be better than the current board or what insight they would have that
the current board would not. And who would appoint these people? I
actually just learned in the hallway today from a news reporter that
Amanda doesn't feel the current board is able to improve the operation
of DAS. You know, why hasn't she discussed this with the board?
It's not the board holding back the facility, it's their day-to-day
operation. And we feel that any proposal of course to take away
citizen oversight of a facility like DAS falls into that classic
government, we know better than the people. And it shows disdain
and distrust of our current board. It also builds negative community
Page 250
November 12, 2013
view of the Commissioners as classic big government, little town
thinking. And I just think they're wrong to not speak to other people.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker, Linda Boccio -- did you want
to speak?
AUDIENCE MEMBER: She's not here.
MR. MILLER: Tom Kepp?
MR. KEPP: No, I'm good.
MR. MILLER: Stephen Wright?
MR. WRIGHT: No, thanks.
MR. MILLER: Marjorie Bloom?
MS. BLOOM: I'm going to pass.
MR. MILLER: Colleen MacAlister?
MS. MacALISTER: I'm good with the pending motion.
MR. MILLER: Brad Estes?
MR. ESTES: Waive.
MR. MILLER: Nancy Woodbury?
MS. WOODBURY: I pass.
MR. MILLER: Charles Danielian.
MEMBER OF THE AUDIENCE: He had to leave.
MR. MILLER: And Kelly Hyland.
MS. HYLAND: Pass.
MR. BREITHAUPT: Where's my name? Thomas Breithaupt.
MR. MILLER: Oh, I'm sorry. Mr. Breithaupt.
MR. BREITHAUPT: I'll be very brief.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Can you just speak on the
motion?
MR. BREITHAUPT: I'll be very quick.
Thomas Breithaupt, for the record.
Today I think we witnessed not making sausage, we watched the
butchering of the pig, okay, in many areas. And I was glad to watch
this.
I think my message very briefly to you folks today -- I appreciate
Page 251
November 12, 2013
the motion. But I also want to emphasize that you have 42 boards in
this county, oversight boards. 334 members. Okay. This is 334
people that want to watch what's going on in the county. And based
upon the overall population, that's roughly one to 1,000 ratio, which is
really good compared to other states and communities.
Discussions to get rid of oversight boards when you've got people
that want to be involved should never even be on the table. That's the
lesson and the statement that I want to say today, that this is
participation that normally you guys would beg for. We're giving it to
you, we're offering it to you. And the board today is not trying to stop
anything in the day-to-day operations; they're trying to promote it,
okay.
And based upon what I've heard and what I've read of what has
been suggested and desired, the board has not tried to impede any of
this. And if there are other examples that would like to be offered, I
think that's great. I think that the public and the board will support
this.
So the bottom line today, very -- in summary, people are here
and want to be involved. This is a stunning turnout for a little thing
like this, okay? So I appreciate the motion and hopefully we can close
this issue which has been brought up multiple times, formally and
informally, to get rid of the board. Thank you.
MR. MULHERE: That is all the registered speakers I have,
Madam Chairwoman.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you.
There being no further discussion, all in favor?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Any opposed?
(No response)
Page 252
November 12, 2013
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Motion carries unanimously.
I just want to clarify one thing for the record, and that is the
intent is not to eliminate Animal Services but rather to bolster
participation. One of the problems is right now you are governed by
Sunshine, you can't speak to each other, it's very ineffective. The
proposal that we discussed at the workshop is that every division
would have a master board and that the master board would have -- for
example, if the Board of County Commissioners has an issue, for
example the animal ordinance, would -- the Board would direct that
the master board, what's the division that --
MR. OCHS: Public services.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Public services.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: That public services -- that the
public services advisory board would create a sub-committee, a
fact-finding committee of participants that would investigate and bring
all the facts forward regarding the ordinance.
And then let's say there was an issue with respect to animal
cruelty, we create another committee that would be a fact-finding
committee regarding animal cruelty. And we would have more
participation than we would have now. We would have
communications between members so that they could work together,
because Sunshine does not cover a fact-finding committee but it does
address an advisory board.
And all these facts would be pulled together by these groups and
given to the advisory board that would present in front of the Board of
County Commissioners every single month as to the findings of these
ad hoc, you know, topic specific investigative groups.
So you would increase communications, it would be far more
timely, you would have more participants than just one advisory
board, you would eliminate the problem of Sunshine, and you would
actually have more oversight because you'd have more of these
fact-finding investigative groups looking into the various issues. Like
Page 253
November 12, 2013
someone is a specialist in law, like you've got an attorney back there.
She would say, for example, on the group involved with the
ordinance, you've got people that care about animal cruelty. Like I
know Nancy Woodbury is very concerned about animal abuse. So,
you know, she would be like on that committee.
So the intent actually is not to eliminate the entity but really to
restructure it to allow for more communication and more involvement
than what we have now and, quite frankly, more oversight.
So I think that the animal -- the current advisory board should
stay in place. But when this new proposal is brought out, you need to
look at it and see how many more people you'll get involved. You
know, the ability to communicate together without worrying about
violating Sunshine and making sure that your position gets to the
Board every month, not like, you know, when an issue comes up a
year later.
So keep that in mind. So it's not intended as an elimination. It's
actually intended as an improvement and an enhancement of
community involvement and community oversight into county
operations. Just a different structure. Because we're not getting the
information timely.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Madam Chair, I'd like to just make
one other statement.
I think another thing that needs to be examined and appreciated is
that I believe the majority on the Board is very focused and very
results driven on some of the changes that you've seen in management
and in ordinance and in our approaches that frankly I think we've
taken some pretty harsh criticism. But I believe that our success is
determined by the results that we achieve. So I know we spend a
tremendous amount of time on our animal care related ordinances, and
I think we need to let them develop, have a chance to them go down
the road a little bit and see what sort of results we're able to get.
Hopefully we'll get the results we're hoping for. And I look forward to
Page 254
November 12, 2013
that. But I think we need to be very results oriented.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Absolutely. Always. We should
always look to deliverables.
County Manager, we're going -- I'm going to make a motion that
we continue two items; that we continue the AUIR to the next Board
meeting and that we continue the presentation on the --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Can we dispose of this motion
first?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: We already did. We voted on it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We didn't vote.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yeah, we did. We voted
unanimously.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Yeah, let's --
COMMISSIONER NANCE: You're so forward looking,
Commissioner Henning, you missed the grand event.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I'm going to make a motion to
continue the AUIR and I'm going to make a motion to continue the
presentation of the CRAs.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'll second that.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Is there anything else that could be
continued to the next meeting?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I can get two things off of this
agenda.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Okay, that's why we're making
motions to continue. Is there anything else that we can continue?
Item #14B1
THE IMMOKALEE AND BAYSHORE GATEWAY TRIANGLE
CRA'S 2013 SUPPLEMENTAL STATUS REPORTS - MOTION
TO ACCEPT STATUS REPORT WITHOUT PRESENTATION —
APPROVED
Page 255
November 12, 2013
MR. OCHS: Madam Chair, if I might, on 14.B.1, if the Board
would just be willing to make a motion to accept the reports, I
wouldn't have to schedule them again for a personal briefing.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: All right, we could do that.
MR. OCHS: There's good information in there. I think if you
have any questions, we can answer them for you.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Is that okay? Yeah, that's fine.
So we have a motion to continue the AUIR and we have a motion
to accept the CRA status report.
MR. OCHS: Yes, ma'am.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Is there anything else that we can
continue or accept?
MR. OCHS: Well, you may want to continue the item on
cooperative purchases until we bring this purchasing ordinance back.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Which is item what?
MR. OCHS: It's 11 .G. It was previously 16.E.14.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: 11 .G?
MR. OCHS: We can bring that back when we bring the
purchasing ordinances back.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yeah. So we'll continue 11 .G as
well.
Is there anything else?
MR. OCHS: No, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: 9.D?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: 9.D, can that be continued?
MR. OCHS: Well, that was Commissioner --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Says staffs request.
MR. OCHS: Yeah, this was the item about moving the impact
fee payments.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: There's two of those.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: That can be moved. That can be
Page 256
November 12, 2013
continued.
MR. OCHS: Yeah, we can push those out.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Okay, continue 9.D.
What's the other one?
MR. OCHS: Well, the other one related to that was 11 .E.
All right, I'm advised by staff we have permits in process that
may be impacted by deferring this discussion on your impact fee
amendment, Commissioners.
I think we can answer Commissioner questions here. It's one
item that we just wanted to clarify with the Board and we could move
through it fairly quickly. But I need at least four Board members here.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Why don't you want to do the one
on extending the hours of the --
MR. OCHS: I would like to do that right now, sir, if we could.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Can we do that right now?
MR. OCHS: Yes.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: All right. Well, we have a motion
to continue a number of items and a motion --
MR. OCHS: Could I take these individually, ma'am?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Let's take them individually and
we'll just vote to continue them.
Item #9B
THE 2013 COMBINED ANNUAL UPDATE AND INVENTORY
REPORT (AUIR) ON PUBLIC FACILITIES AND CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT (CIE) AMENDMENT AS
PROVIDED FOR IN CHAPTER 6.02.02 OF THE COLLIER
COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AND SECTION
163.3177(3)(B), FLORIDA STATUTES - MOTION TO
CONTINUE TO THE NEXT BCC MEETING — APPROVED
Page 257
November 12, 2013
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: All right, go ahead.
MR. OCHS: Okay, there's a motion to continue Item 9.B to the
next Board meeting of December 10th, correct?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: So moved.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Second.
All in favor?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Next?
MR. OCHS: Okay, we have a motion.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: 9.D?
MR. OCHS: I'm sorry?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: What about 9.D?
MR. OCHS: Well, again, that's the one that I think we need to
talk about. Two of those we're going to wait.
Item #11G
COUNTY MANAGER AND STAFF TO USE THE FEDERAL
GSA SCHEDULES (I.E. SCHEDULE 70 AND 1 122 PROGRAM);
THE STATE OF FLORIDA CONTRACTS, AGREEMENTS AND
PRICE LISTS; COMPETITIVELY SOLICITED CONTRACTS BY
US COMMUNITIES, WESTERN STATES CONTRACTING
ALLIANCE, NATIONAL INTERGOVERNMENTAL
PURCHASING ALLIANCE (NIPA), NATIONAL JOINT POWERS
ALLIANCE (NJPA) PUBLIC PURCHASING CONSORTIUMS;
AND, COMPETITIVE SOLICITATIONS FROM STATE OF
FLORIDA CITIES, COUNTIES, AND OTHER PUBLIC
MUNICIPALITIES (I.E. SHERRIFF'S ASSOCIATION) FOR THE
EFFICIENT PURCHASE OF GOODS AND SERVICES FOR THE
Page 258
November 12, 2013
DELIVERY OF PUBLIC SERVICES AND FOR WHICH FUNDS
WERE APPROVED IN OPERATING BUDGETS - MOTION TO
CONTINUE AND BRING BACK W/PURCHASING ORDINANCE
— APPROVED
MR. OCHS: I did suggest continuing Item 11 .G, which was the
cooperative purchasing item.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So moved.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Second.
MR. OCHS: So we'll bring that back when the purchasing policy
comes back?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: All in favor?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Motion carries unanimously.
Item #11F
THE SELECTION AND CONTRACT OF AVIAREPS FOR
TOURISM REPRESENTATION SERVICES IN BRAZIL,
AUTHORIZE THE CHAIR TO SIGN A COUNTY ATTORNEY
APPROVED CONTRACT, AND MAKE A FINDING THAT THIS
EXPENDITURE PROMOTES TOURISM - MOTION TO
CONTINUE TO THE NEXT BCC MEETING — APPROVED
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Commissioner Coyle, did you pull
16.F.1?
MR. OCHS: That was Commissioner Henning pulled that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, I think you ought to --
yeah, you need to continue that and straighten it out like it was
Page 259
November 12, 2013
presented to the TDC.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Have a person, staff take a look
at the agreement.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: You want to move to continue
that?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, that's the direction.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Okay, motion to continue 11 .F.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Second.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Aye.
All in favor? Passes unanimously.
Next?
MR. OCHS: That's all I have. Unless you want to continue the
discussion on the BCC travel policy, which is 12.B.
Item #12B
RESOLUTION 2013-267: AMEND THE CURRENT POLICY
REGARDING REIMBURSEMENT OF TRAVEL AND
EXPENSES INCURRED BY COUNTY COMMISSIONERS IN
THE PERFORMANCE OF THEIR OFFICIAL DUTIES —
ADOPTED W/THE OPTION OF AN ANNUAL REPORT
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I was one of those pulling that.
Can I just dispose of it real quickly?
All I want to do is to register my opposition to it. I think it's
entirely appropriate that these things be included in the packet for the
public to see. And I object to just having them paid without being
placed in the agenda. I just want to register my objection to that, and
Page 260
November 12, 2013
we can get that off of the agenda very quickly. All you've got to do is
take the vote.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Commissioner Henning, since this
was your item, do you want to make a motion regarding that?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, it really wasn't my item.
It was just an observation. If you take a look at the resolution, it's
saying in one part that, you know, the Board -- therefore the Board
finds that a valid public purpose to do such things as attend civic
functions and so on and so forth.
So it's really taking two resolutions and putting it in one. And
however, if we follow Commissioner Coyle's objection, we should be
approving all the travel.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Absolutely.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And we haven't been approving
staffs travel.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: No question, it's exactly the same.
There's no difference -- none of these expenditures are any different
for staff or for the Commission.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, and we already have a
line item budget for each of the Commissioners travel.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I think we should maybe consider
putting one in there for civic attendance.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It is in there; is that correct?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: A line item?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, the dinner, the president's
award on Thursday, that is acceptable. So I mean, it's just like --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: What president's award on
Thursday?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You're going to a function on
Thursday night.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Oh, yeah, for the Golden Gate Civic
Association.
Page 261
November 12, 2013
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yes, yes. Of course.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And quite frankly, I've had it on
the agenda forever. Nobody's ever pulled it off and objected to it.
Nobody's ever pulled any of these items off and objected to it.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes. And I independently had
talked to the County Attorney about a similar move to gain a little
efficiency.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So it's just codifying what the
Board has in its existing resolution. So there's no question about it for
the Clerk to pay for it or not pay for it.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: If you're making a motion to
approve, I'll second it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: County Attorney, do you have an
issue with that?
MR. KLATZKOW: Issue with what, ma'am?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: With what's being proposed.
MR. KLATZKOW: Not at all.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Okay.
County Manager, do you have any issue with that?
MR. OCHS: No, ma'am.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: How do we do it for staff? I mean,
we should handle everything consistently.
MR. KLATZKOW: You have a -- as your Clerk said, you have a
state statute on this. I'll just speak for myself. I get a travel budget as
part of my contract. And everything I do gets reported to finance.
They make sure there's a public purpose and it's appropriate and I will
be compensated, you know, accordingly. Same thing I'm sure with
Leo's staff.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Because it's all done within the
purviews of the statute and the budget.
Page 262
November 12, 2013
MR. OCHS: Well, that's what we thought 'til this morning, but I
don't want to dredge that up again.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, that will finish next time.
MR. OCHS: No, I mean, seriously, I don't know what happens
now.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: No, I don't disagree with you. I
want to make sure that the travel --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: My only concern is that there's
nothing wrong with putting it in the agenda.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Let's put it all in the agenda.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: There's nothing wrong with putting
it there. And my interpretation of this item was that it would no
longer appear in the agenda, that it would just be -- the invoices would
be forwarded to finance for payment. And now I don't have a problem
with that either. But I believe that expenses, particularly
commissioners, should be included in the agenda.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Well, maybe instead of doing it
every month, maybe do a quarterly, you know, summary of events
attended or something like that, or travel incurred as opposed to
writing an executive summary. Because what they're doing now,
what's very inefficient, is one executive summary for every single
charge. So if you go to, you know, five events, you've got five
executive summaries, which is ridiculous. I consolidated. I basically
disclose it but I have one executive summary that says, okay, these are
all the events we attended for this, you know, reporting period and
then just do it all at once.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'm just looking for transparency.
However is most convenient to report it is fine.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Well, I mean, I think we can adopt
what you're saying, Commissioner Henning, and allow every
commissioner who wants to post it to post it if they would like to. I
personally would like to post it. I don't see any reason not to.
Page 263
November 12, 2013
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You do it in your miscellaneous
correspondence. Put your calendar in there, if you want.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I'm going to go ahead and just
report it in a consolidated fashion --
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Well, they can report it --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Listing everything out.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: -- end of the year for everybody,
just like they our net worth, if they like. That's their freedom to do
that, if they care to.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yeah.
Do you want to do an annual summary? Would that work for
you?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, if you want to do that.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Why not.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's an option.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I'm trying to cut down on work,
not make work. I mean, anybody wants to know --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: You want to cut down on
non-productive work.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I want to cut down on
non-productive work.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So why don't we do an annual
report of, you know, events attended and, you know, travel expenses
and that way everything is listed out. And require, you know, the
County Attorney.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Correspondence. That would be
correspondence for Commissioners.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: You can just -- but do like an annual
report of travel and entertainment so that everyone can see in detail
what was expended in that budget.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: From public money.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: From -- yeah.
Page 264
November 12, 2013
Is that okay?
MR. KLATZKOW: It's the Board's policy. Whatever you guys
want.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Okay.
MR. KLATZKOW: But who does that encompass?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I'm sorry?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Brett Batton.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I agree.
MR. KLATZKOW: Who do you want encompassed by the
policy, just the Board of County Commissioners? Everybody?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I think everyone should. I think
there should be -- you know, everybody should be held to the same
standard. I think there should be transparency for the Board of County
Commissioners, for the County Manager, for the County Attorney.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: There is, ma'am. It's a matter of
public record. Anybody that asks --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I know, but you want to make it
easy. So why not just an annual report at the end of the year where
you just take the sum total of your events and your travel and just list
it and anyone can look at it.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'm sorry I brought this up. It
keeps getting worse and worse as we go along.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Well, I mean, it has to be consistent
for everybody.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No, it doesn't. There -- elected
officials are not treated like everybody else. We have disclosure
requirements that other people don't have.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Well, that's because of conflicts.
That's to make sure --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I don't have conflicts.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I know, you're special.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: But nevertheless.
Page 265
November 12, 2013
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Well, we've got a motion and a
second here.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And what's the motion again?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: To approve.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: All right. Would you accept a
friendly amendment of an annual report for everyone?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: As an option, yes.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: As an option. Okay.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Second's good.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: All right. All in favor?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Any opposed?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Motion carries 3-1 with
Commissioner --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Coyle.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Coyle.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: C-O-Y-L-E.
MR. OCHS: Commissioner, that takes us to --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I have my pride.
Item #11D
RESOLUTION 2013-268: AN EMERGENCY DECLARATION
EXTENDING THE HOURS ASSOCIATED WITH EXCAVATION
AND HAULING ACTIVITIES FOR THE STEWART MINE IN
ORDER TO FACILITATE THE EXPEDITED COMPLETION OF
THE CURRENT BEACH RENOURISHMENT PROJECT —
ADOPTED
Page 266
November 12, 2013
MR. OCHS: -- Item 11 .D, which was an add-on. It's a
recommendation to approve an emergency declaration extending the
hours associated with excavation and hauling activity for the Stuart
Mine in order to facilitate the expedited completion of the current
beach renourishment project.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Move to approve.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: All in favor?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Motion carries unanimously.
Item #9D
ORDINANCE 2013-63: AMENDING CHAPTER 74 OF THE
COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES,
WHICH IS THE COLLIER COUNTY CONSOLIDATED IMPACT
FEE ORDINANCE, PROVIDING FOR MODIFICATIONS
DIRECTED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
RELATED TO A CHANGE IN THE TIMING OF PAYMENT OF
IMPACT FEES TO ISSUANCE OF A CERTIFICATE OF
OCCUPANCY, THE INCLUSION OF WATER AND
WASTEWATER IMPACT FEES AS ELIGIBLE FOR THE
"IMPACT FEE PROGRAM FOR EXISTING COMMERCIAL
REDEVELOPMENT" AND INCLUDING ADDITIONAL MINOR
UPDATES OR CORRECTIONS RELATED TO "ADULT ONLY
COMMUNITIES," OBSOLETE REFUND PROVISIONS,
REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENTS AND THE "FORMER"
GOODLAND WATER DISTRICT — ADOPTED W/DENYING
Page 267
November 12, 2013
THE TIMING PAYMENT MODIFICATION AND APPROVE THE
REMAINING MODIFICATIONS
MR. OCHS: Takes you to Item 9.D, which was previously Item
17.C. And this is a recommendation to adopt an ordinance that
amends your consolidated impact fee ordinance.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: What's your problem with it?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Just an announcement. Please
record my vote as opposed to moving the payment of impact fee to
certificate of occupancy. I believe you're making a huge mistake,
because it takes too long to build capital projects. If you don't collect
the impact fees early enough you're going to be right back in the same
position the Board was in a decade or more ago. So that's it.
(At which time, Commissioner Coyle exits the boardroom)
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: There's another issue with respect to
that and that is the danger that the homeowner doesn't know that the
impact fee is an expense and a part of the contract. You get to the end
of the project and then suddenly what could happen is that the builder
walks away, doesn't pay the impact fee and the homeowner suddenly
is faced with an expense they don't know they had because it wasn't
built into the project. And so there is a risk because then, you know,
what do we do and what if the homeowner doesn't have the funds?
You know, do we put a lien on the property and then how we -- you
know, do we have to foreclose to collect on that lien? I mean, there
are a lot of problems associated with that.
MR. OCHS: Commissioner, just a real quick history. The Board
brought this forward as an option during the commercial impact fee
workshop in the summer, and we were asked at that time to bring this
back for formal action, and that's what we've done. We're not
advocating for or against the --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Amy doesn't look like she's
advocating for it.
Page 268
November 12, 2013
MS. PATTERSON: I'm not advocating against it either.
I'm sorry, Amy --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: No comment.
MS. PATTERSON: -- Patterson for the record.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I've got to leave in five minutes.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: That's fine.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Make a motion.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So would you like to -- I'm going to
make a motion to deny at this time because I think this really requires
further investigation in terms of both cash flow and assurances of
having the ability to collect at that point in time and not being left high
and dry.
And my concern is that while I believe the majority of builders
would be honorable, the few that are not could really hurt the
homeowners and could in turn hurt the county. So at this time I don't
think this is an option to consider, so I make a motion to deny.
MS. PATTERSON: Are we denying the entire ordinance?
There are other provisions being brought forward as part of this
ordinance amendment. Or do you want just the provisions related to
timing of payment to C.O. being stripped out, leaving the water and
sewer impact fees moving to -- into the change of use program, as well
as some just cleanup language related to --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Just the timing.
MS. PATTERSON: Just the timing.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yeah, denial of the timing,
acceptance of the balance.
MR. OCHS: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Second.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Any discussion?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: What was the -- why did staff
Page 269
November 12, 2013
pull this item?
MR. OCHS: Actually, that was an error on the change sheet.
Commissioner Coyle had asked to pull this for the reason that he just
stated. It somehow got listed as a staff request. It was actually
Commissioner Coyle's request.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
MR. OCHS: I apologize for that, sir.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So we have a motion to deny in part
and accept in part. And we have a second. All in favor?
Aye.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Motion carries 2-1 with --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioner Henning
opposing the motion.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yeah, Commissioner Henning
opposing.
Next?
Item #1 l E
ADVERTISING AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE
NO. 2001-73, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY WATER-
SEWER DISTRICT UNIFORM BILLING, OPERATING, AND
REGULATORY STANDARDS ORDINANCE, TO MAINTAIN
COMPATIBILITY WITH THE COLLIER COUNTY
CONSOLIDATED IMPACT FEE ORDINANCE, AS AMENDED -
MOTION TO WITHDRAW ITEM — APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Yes, ma'am, that takes us to 11 .E, which was
previously 16.C.2. And Mr. Bellone will present. This is an
ordinance amendment modifying the --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I'm going to make a motion that we
Page 270
November 12, 2013
advertise. You know, when we bring it back after having advertised,
we can make a determination if-- you know, with the rest of the
Board here. I don't think it's appropriate to have a discussion with two
members of the Board not being here.
MR. BELLONE: Madam Chair, the only thing this requested
was to really accompany the changes and the timing of the impact fees
from permit to -- so we can withdraw this and we wouldn't have to
advertise it at all --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Okay, then --
MR. BELLONE: -- until Amy brings back the consolidated
impact fee.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Okay. So then withdraw. So no
action. That's fine.
MR. BELLONE: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Are we going to vote on that?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I don't think we have to, because
we're withdrawing it. We're not even addressing it. Do we have to
vote on it?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, no, it was approved on the
agenda.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Do we have to take action?
MR. KLATZKOW: Let's make a motion to withdraw.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: All right, motion to withdraw.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Second.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: All in favor?
Aye.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Motion carries unanimously.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Two to one.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Two to one. Commissioner
Henning opposing.
Page 271
November 12, 2013
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: All right, scratch that.
Commissioner Henning opposing.
Is that going to be the new pattern?
Okay, next item?
Item #14B2
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA) LEASE
WITH GREENWAY LANDSCAPE SUPPLY, LLC, A LIMITED
LIABILITY COMPANY TO OPERATE A COMMERCIAL AND
RESIDENTIAL LANDSCAPE SERVICE ON CRA OWNED
PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1936 DAVIS BOULEVARD, IN THE
GATEWAY MINI-TRIANGLE FOR AN ANNUAL RENT OF
$18,000 TO BE PAID IN EQUAL MONTHLY INSTALLMENTS
OF $1500 FOR A TERM OF THREE (3) YEARS — APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Next item is 14.B.2 under your CRA. It's a
recommendation for the Community Redevelopment Agency to
approve and execute the attached lease with Greenway Landscape
Supply for CRA owned property located at 1936 --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Second.
MR. OCHS: We need to convene this to CRA? No?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Who is the CRA?
CRA CHAIRMAN NANCE: Convening as CRA.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Chair, you have a motion
and second.
CRA CHAIRMAN NANCE: Motion and a second.
Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CRA CHAIRMAN NANCE: Hearing none, all those in favor,
signify by saying aye.
Page 272
November 12, 2013
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
CRA CHAIRMAN NANCE: Aye.
All those opposed?
(No response)
CRA CHAIRMAN NANCE: Nobody? 3-0, unanimously.
Unconvening (sic) the CRA.
MR. KLATZKOW: Just for clarification, 14.B.1, did the Board
actually vote on that?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: No, we should. And that is a
motion to accept the staff report.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Without presentation.
MR. OCHS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Second.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Any discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: There being no discussion, all in
favor?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Motion carries unanimously.
Item #15
STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS
MR. OCHS: Madam Chair, I believe that takes us to staff and
commissioner communications.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yep.
MR. OCHS: I wouldn't dare at this point.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Put that hat on. Where did it go?
Page 273
November 12, 2013
MR. OCHS: I have no idea.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I'm not even going to torture you
with that. I'm like going to totally look over that.
MR. OCHS: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: He threw his visor to the ground a
long time ago today.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Sir?
MR. KLATZKOW: I need to get to Daytona, so nothing.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Nothing? Okay.
Crystal?
MS. KINZEL: No, thank you.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Nothing.
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Leo --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I just want you to know you said
you were leaving in five minutes and that was five minutes ago. But
just go ahead anyway. Just saying.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, thanks.
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Would you communicate to Deb
White that I will not be going to the Gulf Coast Consortium which is
tomorrow morning. I believe it's at 11 :00.
MR. KLATZKOW: Nine to eleven.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, is it nine to eleven? And
either Commissioner Fiala or Deb can represent.
The reason I decided not to go is they don't have anything on
their agenda and there's no sense spending travel dollars, which I don't
report anyways, to go up there and approve of a consent item.
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir. Understood.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I forgot all the rest of the stuff
that I was going to say.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Awesome.
Page 274
November 12, 2013
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Happy Thanksgiving.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Hey, happy Thanksgiving to you.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Are you making the pies this
year or do you want me to make them?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I want you to make them. Gluten
free.
Listen, I -- hey, I got standards.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Are you proposing that we're going
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: -- going down to diet food for
Thanksgiving? This is definitely a non-diet holiday by declaration of
this Board.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Declaration of Independence.
What are your comments?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll make you a hot pie.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I'd like that. Hot tamale.
Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I'm just looking forward. I know
our December 3rd workshop, which I think will be the next time we
get together, is going to include a discussion of economic
development in the rural parts of the county, and I look forward to a
brisk discussion about all sorts of opportunities to allow business a
little more freedom in our eastern part of the county and some of the
other interrelated things that we've touched on today, including some
of the re-planning and restudying of some of our Growth Management
Plan elements and special overlays to move that forward. I hope Mr.
Register is here with his thinking cap on.
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yeah, and I would like to say I
really commend you, Leo, on, you know, carrying yourself very well
during the purchasing ordinance discussion. I know it's been a very
Page 275
November 12, 2013
long time in the making and I really think you handled yourself very
professionally, and I think it's going to resolve itself favorably in
everyone's best interest.
MR. OCHS: Thank you.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I thank you for your good attitude.
And thank you, Jeff, for working on it forever.
And Crystal, thank you for working on it forever. And I think it
was truly a spirit of cooperation on a very difficult debate.
Unfortunately it took much longer than expected, but I would say not
that much longer than expected. I'll qualify that.
Court Reporter, you're amazing. I mean, I don't know how your
fingers stand up to all this discussion, but thank you for your service.
Your brain also. So thank you very much.
And happy Thanksgiving to all the staff, the community,
members of the Board, and everybody in general, right? Happy
Thanksgiving.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Hope to see you at the Farm City
Barbecue.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yeah, Farm City Barbecue.
And the December meeting is going to be a very happy meeting.
There's a lot of wonderful things coming forward. So it should be a
very good one. We're looking forward to seeing you then.
MR. OCHS: Thank you.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you.
Motion to adjourn.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Second.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Uh-huh. No quorum. I guess we
just have to keep going.
Page 276
November 12, 2013
**** Commissioner Henning moved, seconded by Commissioner
Nance and carried unanimously that the following items under the
Consent Agenda be approved as amended ****
Item #16A1
AN EXTENSION FOR COMPLETION OF SITE DEVELOPMENT
PLAN IMPROVEMENTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE
EXECUTIVE CENTER, ORIGINALLY KNOWN AS 'N
MAGAZINE' (SDP AR-7432) PURSUANT TO SECTION 10.02.03
B.4 OF THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE
— AN EXTENSION AND EXTENSION FEES FOR AN
ADDITIONAL YEAR HAS BEEN REQUESTED BY THE
DEVELOPER TO MEET COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS WITH
THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE
Item #16A2
CLERK OF COURTS TO RELEASE TWO SECURITIES IN THE
AGGREGATE AMOUNT OF $114,760 WHICH WERE POSTED
AS A DEVELOPMENT GUARANTY FOR WORK ASSOCIATED
WITH LANTANA EXCAVATION PERMIT NO.'S 60.076 AND
60.076-1, PL20100001536 AND PL20120001528 — THE
ASSOCIATED WORK WAS COMPLETED AND INSPECTED ON
JUNE 25, 2013 FOR THE BONDS POSTED WITH THE
EXCAVATION PROJECT
Item #16A3
RECORD THE FINAL PLAT OF RAFFIA PRESERVE PHASE 1,
(APPLICATION NUMBER PPL-PL20130000232) APPROVAL OF
THE STANDARD FORM CONSTRUCTION AND
Page 277
November 12, 2013
MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT AND APPROVAL OF THE
AMOUNT OF THE PERFORMANCE SECURITY — LOCATED IN
SECTION 34, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST
Item #16A4
RECORD THE FINAL PLAT OF ESPLANADE GOLF AND
COUNTRY CLUB OF NAPLES PHASE 2, (APPLICATION
NUMBER PPL-PL2010002897) APPROVING THE STANDARD
FORM CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT
AND THE AMOUNT OF THE PERFORMANCE SECURITY —
W/STIPULATIONS
Item #16A5
RELEASE OF FOUR LIENS IN THE COMBINED ACCRUED
AMOUNT OF $629,662.82 FOR PAYMENT OF $3,320, IN THE
CODE ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS ENTITLED BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS VS. TIMOTHY NELSON,
SPECIAL MAGISTRATE CASE NUMBERS CENA20090015974,
CESD20090015977, CEPM20090015979, AND CEV20090015983,
RELATING TO PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3461 VERITY LANE,
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA — CENA20090015974 WAS FOR
LITTER AND BROUGHT INTO COMPLIANCE ON APRIL 26,
2012; CESD20090015977 WAS FOR AN UNPERMITTED
SCREENED PORCH AND A SHED THAT WERE BROUGHT
INTO COMPLIANCE ON FEBRUARY 22, 2011 ;
CEPM20090015979 WAS FOR PROPERTY MAINTENANCE
AND BROUGHT INTO COMPLIANCE ON OR ABOUT APRIL
15, 2013, AND THE CEV20090015983 WAS FOR AN
UNLICENSED BOAT TRAILER BROUGHT INTO
COMPLIANCE ON FEBRUARY 22, 2011
Page 278
November 12, 2013
Item #16A6
A RELEASE OF A CODE ENFORCEMENT LIEN IN THE
AMOUNT OF $145,612.82 FOR PAYMENT OF $562.82, IN THE
CODE ENFORCEMENT ACTION ENTITLED BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS VS. MICHAEL UGHI, CODE
ENFORCEMENT CASE NUMBER CEPM20120017264,
RELATING TO PROPERTY LOCATED AT 168 CORAL VINE
DRIVE, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA — FOR A NON-
COMPLIANCE PERIOD OF 582 DAYS PERTAINING TO A
DAMAGED GARAGE DOOR, BROKEN GLASS WINDOWS,
BROKEN AND MISSING GLASS PIECES ON SIDE DOORS,
UNSECURED DOOR AND WINDOWS AND AN
UNMAINTAINED POOL THAT WAS BROUGHT INTO
COMPLIANCE ON SEPTEMBER 5, 2013
Item #16A7
AWARDING BID #13-6118 "GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY
SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENTS" FOR CONSTRUCTION OF
SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENTS FROM SUNSHINE
BOULEVARD EAST TO COLLIER BOULEVARD TO QUALITY
ENTERPRISES USA, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $225,771 .17
(PROJECT #33206) — FOR FIVE FOOT WIDE SIDEWALKS AND
DRIVEWAY RECONSTRUCTION NECESSARY THROUGHOUT
THE PROJECT TO COMPLY WITH ADA REQUIREMENTS
Item #16A8
AGREEMENT NO. 4600002940 WITH THE SOUTH FLORIDA
WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT IN THE AMOUNT NOT TO
Page 279
November 12, 2013
EXCEED $75,000 FOR THE CONTINUED COLLECTION OF
GROUND WATER QUALITY SAMPLES IN COLLIER COUNTY
— CONTINUING A PARTNERSHIP COLLECTING WATER
SAMPLES IN 45 GROUND WATER SITES SEMIANNUALLY
Item #16A9
AN AGREEMENT WITH THE COLLIER COUNTY SCHOOL
DISTRICT TO CONVEY A RIGHT-OF-WAY TO COLLIER
COUNTY FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A SIDEWALK
ALONG THE WEST SIDE OF ANDREW DRIVE FROM THE
SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY OF SHADOWLAWN
ELEMENTARY SCHOOL TO CALEDONIA AVENUE. (FISCAL
IMPACT: $27 FROM FUND 101) — FOLIO #61842800009,
PARCEL 276RDUE
Item #16A10
A WORK ORDER UNDER AGREEMENT FOR "FIXED TERM
PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING SERVICES," CONTRACT #09-
5262, IN THE AMOUNT OF $95,740, TO RWA CONSULTING,
INC., FOR PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR
DESIGN AND PERMITTING OF THE LAKE TRAFFORD ROAD
AT NORTH 19TH STREET INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS,
PROJECT NO. 60016 — THE SCHEDULE INDICATES WORK IS
TO BE COMPLETED 365 DAYS FROM THE DATE ON THE
NOTICE TO PROCEED
Item #16A11
REJECT THE SOLE BID FOR INVITATION TO BID (ITB) #13-
6170 STORM DRAIN MAINTENANCE AND AUTHORIZE THE
Page 280
November 12, 2013
CONTINUATION OF ITB #10-5507 STORM DRAIN CLEANING,
DOCUMENTING & REPAIRS TO SHENANDOAH GENERAL
CONSTRUCTION COMPANY FOR AN ADDITIONAL 1-YEAR
TERM — EXTENDING CONTRACT #10-5507 TO DECEMBER
13, 2014 AND REBIDDING FOR THIS SERVICE IN 2014
BECAUSE OF THE LACK OF BIDDERS ON ITB #13-6170
Item #16Al2
RESOLUTION 2013-256: ACCEPT A CORRECTED
RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING A SPEED LIMIT OF FORTY (40)
MPH FOR RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK ROAD (CR 864) FROM
COLLIER BOULEVARD (CR 951) EAST TO THE FUTURE
BENFIELD ROAD EXTENSION
Item #16A13
A FUNDING AGREEMENT BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY
AND THE PELICAN BAY FOUNDATION, INC. FOR TRUCK
HAUL BEACH RENOURISHMENT FOR PELICAN BAY BEACH
SEGMENT R-35 AND R-36. THIS RENOURISHMENT IS
SUBJECT TO FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION'S (FDEP) TIMELY ISSUANCE OF A NOTICE TO
PROCEED (NTP) FOR THIS WORK AS DEFINED IN PERMIT
MODIFICATION #0222355-013-JN. FISCAL IMPACT: $374,227
FROM THE PELICAN BAY FOUNDATION — AS DETAILED IN
THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item #16A14
RESOLUTION 2013-257: SUPERSEDING RESOLUTION
NUMBER 01-247 TO REVISE THE COUNTY'S ACCESS
Page 281
November 12, 2013
MANAGEMENT POLICY TO ADD AN EASTERLY EXTENSION
OF RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK ROAD (CR 864), EAST OF
COLLIER BOULEVARD (CR-951), UPON ACCEPTANCE BY
COLLIER COUNTY FOR OWNERSHIP AND MAINTENANCE,
WHILE SIMULTANEOUSLY ESTABLISHING THE ACCESS
CLASS DESIGNATION FOR THE ROADWAY
Item #16B1
ADVERTISE FOR FUTURE CONSIDERATION AN
ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 97-82, AS
AMENDED, WHICH CREATED THE BAYSHORE
BEAUTIFICATION MUNICIPAL SERVICE TAXING UNIT, SO
AS TO ALLOW FOR ADDITIONAL RIGHT-OF-WAY
IMPROVEMENTS
Item #16B2
AWARDING INVITATION TO BID #13-6175 TO QUALITY
ENTERPRISES, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $879,630.60, FOR
THE RENOVATION OF BAYVIEW DRIVE AND LUNAR
STREET
Item #16C1
AN AGREEMENT FOR FIRE DEPARTMENT ACCESSIBLE
RAW WATER CONNECTIONS BETWEEN BIG CORKSCREW
ISLAND FIRE CONTROL AND RESCUE DISTRICT, GOLDEN
GATE FIRE CONTROL DISTRICT, AND COLLIER COUNTY
WATER-SEWER DISTRICT TO PROVIDE ACCESS TO
SUPPLEMENTAL WATER SOURCES FOR FIGHTING FIRES —
FOR THE RURAL AREAS OF COLLIER COUNTY
Page 282
November 12, 2013
Item #16C2 — Moved to Item #11E (Per Agenda Change Sheet)
Item #16C3
AUTHORIZE THE KEY MARCO COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT TO CONNECT A PUMP TO AN ON-
SITE COLLIER COUNTY WATER-SEWER DISTRICT-OWNED
FLUSHING DEVICE TO ALLOW THE CAPTURE OF THE
POTABLE WATER USED TO FLUSH AND MAINTAIN WATER
DISTRIBUTION LINES TO BE REUSED FOR IRRIGATION
PURPOSES IN THE COMMUNITY, SUBJECT TO PAYMENT OF
THE BASE MONTHLY USER RATE FOR 4-INCH METERS
Item #16D1
A STANDARD COLLIER COUNTY PARKS AND RECREATION
INSTRUCTOR CONTRACT SERVICES AGREEMENT FORM
AND AUTHORIZE THE COUNTY MANAGER OR HIS
DESIGNEE TO ENTER INTO THESE AGREEMENTS WITH THE
INSTRUCTORS, ISSUE PURCHASE ORDERS AND
AUTHORIZE PAYMENTS WITHOUT ADDITIONAL BOARD
APPROVAL — WAIVING COMPETITION FOR THE LIST OF 120
2013 INSTRUCTOR AGREEMENTS LISTED IN THE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item #16D2 — Withdrawn (Per Agenda Change Sheet)
RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE FIVE (5) RELEASES OF
AFFORDABLE HOUSING DENSITY BONUS LIENS DUE TO
PROPERTIES BEING SOLD AT LESS THAN THE ORIGINAL
PURCHASE PRICE
Page 283
November 12, 2013
Item #16D3
A DONATION OF 10 SLASH PINE TREE SEEDLINGS FOR
PLANTING IN THE NANCY PAYTON PRESERVE — THE
SEEDLINGS RANGE FROM 2" TO 10" TALL
Item #16D4
A BUDGET AMENDMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $4,229.47
AND RECOGNIZE REVENUE GENERATED FROM CASE
MANAGEMENT AND CASE AID FROM THE MEDICAID
WAIVER PROGRAM — FOR THE PERIOD OF JUNE 1, 2013
THROUGH SEPTEMBER 30, 2013
Item #16D5
EXECUTE THE DOCUMENT NECESSARY TO CONVEY AN
AIRSPACE EASEMENT TO THE CITY OF NAPLES AIRPORT
AUTHORITY OVER COUNTY PROPERTY AT THE GORDON
RIVER GREENWAY PARK — THE AVIGATION EASEMENT IS
DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item #16D6
REVISE THE FREEDOM PARK AND GORDON RIVER
GREENWAY PARK LAND MANAGEMENT PLAN TO
REFLECT ACCURATE HEIGHT LIMITATIONS FOR
STRUCTURAL AND NATURAL OBSTRUCTIONS
Item #16D7
Page 284
November 12, 2013
EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE COUNTY AND
SUNSHINE STATE BMX ASSOCIATION, INC. TO HOST THE
BMX FLORIDA CUP SERIES QUALIFIER AT THE COUNTY'S
NAPLES WHEELS PARK FACILITY IN FEBRUARY 2014 —
HELD ON FEBRUARY 7TH THROUGH FEBRUARY 9TH, 2014
AT 4701 GOLDEN GATE PKWY
Item #16D8
AN ASSIGNMENT AND ASSUMPTION OF LEASE
AGREEMENT ALLOWING NWNG LLC, NEW OWNER OF
WALDORF ASTORIA NAPLES, TO USE THE GATEHOUSE
AND BOARDWALK/CONCESSION STAND AND OPERATE
THE TRAM LOCATED AT THE CLAM PASS PARK
Item #16D9
FY13-14 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 — FOR PUBLIC
HEALTH SERVICES PROVIDED TO RESIDENTS OF
COLLIER COUNTY
Item #16D10
ACCEPTING FUNDS FROM FRIENDS OF THE LIBRARY, A
NON-PROFIT 501(C)(3) CORPORATION, IN THE AMOUNT OF
$28,200. FUNDS WILL BE USED FOR THE LIBRARY
ELECTRONIC ASSISTANCE PROGRAM (LEAP), PROVIDING
TEMPORARY, SEASONAL EMPLOYMENT TO HIGH-SCHOOL
STUDENTS TO PROVIDE ASSISTANCE FOR LIBRARY USERS
Page 285
November 12, 2013
NEEDING HELP USING COMPUTERS AND ELECTRONIC
DEVICES, AND APPROVE THE NECESSARY BUDGET
AMENDMENT — THE STUDENTS WILL WORK UP TO 10
HOURS PER WEEK
Item #16D11 — Continued to the December 10, 2013 BCC Meeting
(Per Agenda Change Sheet)
RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE THREE (3)
SUBRECIPIENT AGREEMENTS FOR THE U.S. HOUSING AND
URBAN DEVELOPMENT (HUD) COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) PROJECTS
PREVIOUSLY APPROVED FOR FUNDING IN AMENDED
FY2011-2012 AND FY2012-2013 HUD ANNUAL ACTION
PLANS APPROVED BY THE BOARD ON OCTOBER 8, 2013
Item #16D12
ACCEPT AND EXECUTE THE ATTACHED FY 13-14 FLORIDA
COMMISSION FOR THE TRANSPORTATION
DISADVANTAGED SHIRLEY CONROY RURAL AREA
CAPITAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM GRANT AWARD IN THE
AMOUNT OF $96,125, WHICH INCLUDES A LOCAL MATCH
OF $9,613, AND AUTHORIZE THE NECESSARY BUDGET
AMENDMENTS AND APPROVE THE PURCHASE OF ONE (1)
PARATRANSIT VEHICLE UTILIZING THOSE FUNDS
Item #16D13
AN AGREEMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $191,515 WITH THE
AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION AND AN
AGREEMENT WITH COLLIER HEALTH SERVICES (CHS) TO
Page 286
November 12, 2013
PARTICIPATE IN THE MEDICAID LOW INCOME POOL
PROGRAM. PARTICIPATION IN THIS PROGRAM WILL
GENERATE $271,866 IN FEDERAL MATCHING FUNDS THAT
WILL PROVIDE ADDITIONAL HEALTH SERVICES FOR THE
CITIZENS OF COLLIER COUNTY
Item #16D14
RECOGNIZING FY 2013/2014 FEDERAL TRANSIT
ADMINISTRATION SECTION 5311 ADDITIONAL REVENUE
IN THE AMOUNT OF $295,600 AND AUTHORIZE ALL
NECESSARY BUDGET AMENDMENTS — PROVIDING PUBLIC
TRANSPORTATION SERVICES TO THE RURAL AREAS OF
IMMOKALEE
Item #16D15
RECOGNIZING FY 2013/2014 STATE PUBLIC TRANSIT
BLOCK GRANT ADDITIONAL REVENUE IN THE AMOUNT
OF $907,341 AND AUTHORIZE ALL NECESSARY BUDGET
AMENDMENTS — FOR THE OPERATION OF THE COLLIER
AREA TRANSIT (CAT) SYSTEM
Item #16E1
RENEWING THE NORTH NAPLES FIRE CONTROL AND
RESCUE DISTRICT'S CERTIFICATE OF PUBLIC
CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY FOR ADVANCED LIFE
SUPPORT NON-TRANSPORT SERVICES FOR ONE YEAR AND
AUTHORIZE THE CHAIRWOMAN TO EXECUTE THE PERMIT
AND CERTIFICATE — AND TO ACCEPT THE DIRECTOR OF
EMERGENCY SERVICES FINDINGS
Page 287
November 12, 2013
Item #16E2
RATIFY PROPERTY, CASUALTY, WORKER'S
COMPENSATION AND SUBROGATION CLAIMS SETTLED
AND/OR CLOSED BY THE RISK MANAGEMENT DIRECTOR
PURSUANT TO RESOLUTION #2004-15 FOR THE FOURTH
QUARTER OF FY 13 — AS DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
Item #16E3
RESOLUTION 2013-258: AUTHORIZING THE REMOVAL OF
9,577 AMBULANCE SERVICE ACCOUNTS AND THEIR
RESPECTIVE ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE BALANCES
TOTALING $5,769,953.33, WHICH WERE RECORDED AS BAD
DEBT EXPENSE DURING FISCAL YEAR 2010, FROM THE
GENERAL LEDGER OF COLLIER COUNTY FUND 490
(EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES)
Item #16E4 — With Change to the Agreement
(Per Agenda Change Sheet)
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY (DHS)
FEDERALLY-FUNDED SUBGRANT AGREEMENT #14DS-L5-
09-21-01- IN THE AMOUNT OF $14,200 FOR EMERGENCY
MANAGEMENT TRAINING
Item #16E5
ACCEPT REPORTS AND RATIFY STAFF-APPROVED
CHANGE ORDERS AND CHANGES TO WORK ORDERS — FOR
Page 288
November 12, 2013
THE PERIOD BETWEEN SEPTEMBER 18, 2013 THROUGH
OCTOBER 17, 2013
Item #16E6
RENEWING COLLIER COUNTY'S CERTIFICATE OF PUBLIC
CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY FOR ADVANCED LIFE
SUPPORT TRANSPORT FOR ONE YEAR AND AUTHORIZE
THE CHAIRWOMAN TO EXECUTE THE PERMIT AND
CERTIFICATE — AND TO ACCEPT THE DIRECTOR OF
EMERGENCY SERVICES FINDINGS
Item #16E7
AWARDING INVITATION TO BID (ITB) #13-6049,
"PROTECTIVE FOOTWEAR (SHOES AND BOOTS)" TO VIC'S
BOOT AND SHOE, INC. AND TO AUTHORIZE THE USE OF
THE NATIONAL JOINT POWERS ALLIANCE CONTRACT
(NJPA) FOR PAYLESS SHOE SOURCE AS AN ALTERNATE
CONTRACT SOURCE — FOR COUNTY STAFF IN ORDER TO
MINIMIZE FOOT AND ANKLE INJURIES
Item #16E8
AN ASSUMPTION AGREEMENT WITH ORLANDO
TELEPHONE COMPANY, INC., D/B/A SUMMIT BROADBAND,
AS IT RELATES TO CONTRACT #11-5606 TO PROVIDE VOICE
AND DATA COMMUNICATION SERVICES
Item #16E9
AN ASSUMPTION AGREEMENT WITH CONESTOGA-ROVERS
Page 289
November 12, 2013
& ASSOCIATES INC., AS IT RELATES TO CONTRACT #09-
5262 FOR COUNTY-WIDE ENGINEERING SERVICES
Item #16E10
TRANSFERRING OWNERSHIP TO PROGRESSIVE WASTE
SOLUTIONS OF FL, INC., AS IT RELATES TO A FRANCHISE
AGREEMENT FOR SOLID WASTE, RECYCLABLE
MATERIALS, AND YARD TRASH COLLECTION SERVICES IN
FRANCHISE SERVICE DISTRICT 2 (IMMOKALEE AREA)
Item #16E11
EXECUTE AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR AN
ADVANCED LIFE SUPPORT PARTNERSHIP BETWEEN
COLLIER COUNTY AND THE EAST NAPLES FIRE CONTROL
AND RESCUE DISTRICT
Item #16E12
EXECUTE AMENDMENT #2 TO AGREEMENT #11-5649-NS
WITH CS STARS, LLC TO INCLUDE AN ADDITIONAL THREE
YEAR TERM FOR THE LEASE OF RISK MANAGEMENT
INFORMATION SYSTEMS SOFTWARE SERVICES IN THE
AMOUNT OF $120,000 ANNUALLY
Item #16E13
PROCEED WITH THE DEVELOPMENT OF A GRANT
MODIFICATION WITHIN THE DEPARTMENT OF
EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT TO RECEIVE UP TO $600,000
FROM THE FLORIDA DIVISION OF EMERGENCY
Page 290
November 12, 2013
MANAGEMENT FOR THE PURCHASE OF UP TO TWO (2)
MASS MEDICAL MULTI-PATIENT AMBULANCE BUSES
Item #16E14 — Moved to Item #11G (Per Clerk's Finance Office
during Agenda Changes)
Item #16F1 — Moved to Item #11F (Per Agenda Change Sheet)
Item #16F2
RESOLUTION 2013-259: APPROVING AMENDMENTS
(APPROPRIATING GRANTS, DONATIONS, CONTRIBUTIONS
OR INSURANCE PROCEEDS) TO THE FISCAL YEAR 2013-14
ADOPTED BUDGET
Item #16F3
AMENDMENT #1 TO THE FY 14 CATEGORY B TOURISM
AGREEMENT WITH OLD NAPLES WATERFRONT
ASSOCIATION, INC. FOR THE STONE CRAB FESTIVAL AND
RATIFY THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE AGREEMENT AND
THE AMENDMENT TO THE DATE OF BOARD APPROVAL ON
OCTOBER 8, 2013
Item #16F4
RESOLUTION 2013-260: COLLIER COUNTY'S PROMOTION
OF AN INTERNATIONAL IN-BOUND TRADE MISSION
ORGANIZED BY THE FRENCH/PACA COLLABORATIVE,
HOSTING THE RETIS FACE 5 EXECUTIVE TRAINING
PROGRAM IN COLLIER COUNTY, AND PROVIDING
FUNDING IN THE AMOUNT OF UP TO $10,000 FOR
Page 291
November 12, 2013
FINANCIAL SUPPORT IN FACILITATING THE EVENT
PLANNED FOR THE SPRING OF 2014
Item #16H1
COMMISSIONER FIALA'S REIMBURSEMENT FOR
ATTENDANCE AT A FUNCTION SERVING A VALID PUBLIC
PURPOSE. SHE ATTENDED THE HEART OF THE 23RD
ANNUAL DISTINGUISHED CITIZEN "GOOD SCOUT" AWARD
DINNER & SILENT AUCTION ON NOVEMBER 4, 2013. THE
SUM OF $100 TO BE PAID FROM COMMISSIONER FIALA'S
TRAVEL BUDGET — LOCATED AT 5001 COCONUT RD,
BONITA SPRINGS
Item #16H2
DIABETES AWARENESS DAY FAIR THAT WILL BE HOSTED
BY THE COLLIER COUNTY BLACK AFFAIRS ADVISORY
BOARD TO BE HELD AT THE GOLDEN GATE AQUATICS
CENTER PARK, JANUARY 25, 2014
Item #16H3
COMMISSIONER HILLER'S REIMBURSEMENT FOR
ATTENDANCE AT A FUNCTION SERVING A VALID PUBLIC
PURPOSE — SHE WILL ATTEND THE GOLDEN GATE
PRESIDENT'S COUNCIL 22ND ANNUAL CITIZEN OF THE
YEAR BANQUET THAT WILL BE HELD ON NOVEMBER 14,
2013, AT THE NAPLES HILTON, 5111 TAMIAMI TRAIL
NORTH, NAPLES
Item #16J1
Page 292
November 12, 2013
DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD OF OCTOBER 11, 2013
THROUGH OCTOBER 17, 2013 AND FOR SUBMISSION INTO
THE OFFICIAL RECORDS OF THE BOARD
Item #16J2
DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD OF OCTOBER 18, 2013
THROUGH OCTOBER 24, 2013 AND FOR SUBMISSION INTO
THE OFFICIAL RECORDS OF THE BOARD
Item #16J3
DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD OF OCTOBER 25, 2013
THROUGH OCTOBER 31, 2013 AND FOR SUBMISSION INTO
THE OFFICIAL RECORD OF THE BOARD
Item #16J4
ENDORSING THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF
JUSTICE AND UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF
TREASURY COMBINED EQUITABLE SHARING AGREEMENT
AND CERTIFICATION THROUGH SEPTEMBER 2014
Item #16K1
FINAL JUDGMENT CONCERNING THE TAKING OF PARCELS
102FEE AND 102TCE, IN THE LAWSUIT STYLED COLLIER
COUNTY V. LDJ ASSOCIATES, LTD, ET AL, CASE NO. 2013-
CA-1238 FOR THE COLLIER BOULEVARD EXPANSION
(PROJECT NO. 68056) (FISCAL IMPACT $29,671 .30)
Page 293
November 12, 2013
Item #16K2
THE COUNTY ATTORNEY TO FILE A LAWSUIT ON BEHALF
OF THE COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS, AGAINST BAY ELECTRIC OF COLLIER,
INC. AND BENTLEY ELECTRIC COMPANY OF NAPLES, FL,
INC. IN THE COUNTY COURT OF THE TWENTIETH
JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR COLLIER COUNTY,
FLORIDA, TO RECOVER DAMAGES TO THE COUNTY'S 8"
FORCE MAIN LINE IN THE KENSINGTON DEVELOPMENT,
IN THE AMOUNT OF $7,569.68, PLUS THE COSTS OF SUIT
Item #16K3 — Moved to Item #12B (Per Agenda Change Sheet)
**** Commissioner Fiala moved, seconded by Commissioner Nance
and carried unanimously that the following items under the Summary
Agenda be approved as amended ****
Item #17A
RESOLUTION 2013-261 : APPROVING AMENDMENTS
(APPROPRIATING CARRY FORWARD, TRANSFERS AND
SUPPLEMENTAL REVENUE) TO THE FISCAL YEAR 2013-14
ADOPTED BUDGET
Item #17B — Moved to Item #9C (Per Agenda Change Sheet)
Item #17C — Moved to Item #9D (Per Agenda Change Sheet)
Page 294
November 12, 2013
*****
There being no further business for the good of the County, the
meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 6:39 p.m.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS/EX
OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF
SPECK ISTRICTS UNDER ITS CONTROL
i / /( /
GEORGIA A. ILLER, ESQ, CHAIRWOMAN
ATTEST:
DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK
((Q.k-LliAttest as to Chairman's
signature only.
These minutes appro by the Board on I, t0 (t/- , as
presented or as correcte .
Transcript prepared on behalf of Gregory Court Reporting,
Incorporated by Cherie' R. Nottingham, CSR.
Page 295