BCC Minutes 01/09/2001 RJanuary 9, 20001
TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
JANUARY 9, 2001
LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Board of County
Commissioners in and for the County of Collier, and also acting
as the Board of Zoning Appeals and as the governing board(s) of
such special districts as have been created according to law and
having conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:08 a.m.
in REGULAR SESSION in Building F of the Government Complex,
East Naples, Florida, with the following members present:
CHAIRMAN:
VICE-CHAIRMAN:
ALSO PRESENT:
James D. Carter, Ph.D
Pamela S. Mac'Kie
Jim Coletta
Donna Fiala
Tom Henning
Tom Olliff, County Manager
David Weigel, County Attorney
Sue Filson, Administrative Assistant
Page I
COLLIER COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
AGENDA
Tuesday, January 9, 2001
9:00 a.m.
NOTICE: ALL PERSONS WISHING TO SPEAK ON ANY AGENDA ITEM MUST
REGISTER PRIOR TO SPEAKING. SPEAKERS MUST REGISTER WITH THE COUNTY
MANAGER PRIOR TO THE PRESENTATION OF THE AGENDA ITEM TO BE
ADDRESSED.
COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 99-22 REQUIRES THAT ALL LOBBYISTS
SHALL, BEFORE ENGAGING IN ANY LOBBYING ACTIVITIES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT
LIMITED TO, ADDRESSING THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS), REGISTER
WITH THE CLERK TO THE BOARD AT THE BOARD MINUTES AND RECORDS
DEPARTMENT.
REQUESTS TO ADDRESS THE BOARD ON SUBJECTS WHICH ARE NOT ON THIS
AGENDA MUST BE SUBMITTED IN WRITING WITH EXPLANATION TO THE
COUNTY MANAGER AT LEAST 13 DAYS PRIOR TO THE DATE OF THE MEETING
AND WILL BE HEARD UNDER "PUBLIC PETITIONS".
ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THIS BOARD WILL NEED
A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS PERTAINING THERETO, AND THEREFORE MAY
NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE,
WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE
APPEAL IS TO BE BASED.
ALL REGISTERED PUBLIC SPEAKERS WILL BE LIMITED TO FIVE (5) MINUTES
UNLESS PERMISSION FOR ADDITIONAL TIME IS GRANTED BY THE CHAIRMAN.
IF YOU ARE A PERSON WITH A DISABILITY WHO NEEDS ANY ACCOMMODATION
IN ORDER TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS PROCEEDING, YOU ARE ENTITLED, AT NO
COST TO YOU, TO THE PROVISION OF CERTAIN ASSISTANCE. PLEASE CONTACT
THE COLLIER COUNTY FACILITIES MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT LOCATED AT
3301 EAST TAMIAMI TRAIL, NAPLES, FLORIDA, 34112, (941) 774-8380; ASSISTED
LISTENING DEVICES FOR THE HEARING IMPAIRED ARE AVAILABLE IN THE
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' OFFICE.
LUNCH RECESS SCHEDULED FOR 12:00 NOON TO 1:00 P.M.
1. INVOCATION - Father Tim Navin, St. Peter the Apostle Catholic Church
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
1
January 9, 2001
o
APPROVAL OF AGENDAS
A. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA.
B. APPROVAL OF SUMMARY AGENDA.
C. APPROVAL OF REGULAR AGENDA.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. November 28, 2000 - Regular Meeting
B. November 29, 2000 - Special Meeting
C. December 12, 2000 - Regular Meeting
D. December 13, 2000 - Special Meeting
E. December 20, 2000 - Workshop Meeting
PROCLAMATIONS AND SERVICE AWARDS
A. PROCLAMATIONS
1) Proclamation proclaiming January 14-21, 2001 to be designated as "Purple Martin
Week" in Collier County. To be accepted by Mr. Carter Smith, President, Purple
Martin Society of Collier County.
2) Proclamation proclaiming that the Collier County Domestic Animal Services
Department is recognizing January, 2001 as the official grand opening and Pet
Adoption Month. To be accepted by Jodi Walters and Terry Tilley of the Humane
Society.
3) Proclamation proclaiming the week of January 8, 2001 to be designated as Collier
County Safe Boating Week. To be accepted by Mr. Phil Osborne, President of the
Marine Industries Association of Collier County.
B. SERVICE AWARDS
Five Year Attendees:
1. Natalie Kelly, Vanderbiit Library - 5 Years
2. Abraham Hernandez, Pelican Bay - 5 Years
3. Jerry Loughridge, Solid Waste - 5 Years
4. Luis Trujillo, Utility Billing - 5 Years
5. Timothy McGeary, EMS- 5 Years
Ten Year Attendees:
2
January 9, 2001
6. Alan Ott, Water Distribution- 10 Years
7. Joan Young, Utility Billing - 10 Years
C. PRESENTATIONS
SELECTION OF CHAIRMAN AND VICE-CHAIRMAN
6. APPROVAL OF CLERK'S REPORT
A. ANALYSIS OF CHANGES TO RESERVES FOR CONTINGENCIES..
7. PUBLIC PETITIONS
A. Request for Public Petition by Naples Junior Chamber of Commerce regarding public
seating community service project.
8. COUNTY MANAGER'SREPORT
A. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
1)
THIS ITEM WAS CONTINUED FROM THE DECEMBER 12~ 2000 MEETING
AND IS FURTHER CONTINUED INDEFINITELY. Consideration of an
alternative road impact fee calculation for a self-serve car wash facility in
Immokalee.
B. TRANSPORTATION SERVICES
1)
Authorize the Transportation Administrator to proceed with the design and
construction of Vanderbilt Beach Road as a six-lane facility from Airport-Pulling
Road to Logan Boulevard and as a four-lane facility from Logan Boulevard to
Collier Boulevard, Project Number 63051, CIE #24.
C. PUBLIC UTILITIES
1)
Authorize staff to implement the Directors of the Board to solve the County's short
and intermediate term solid waste disposal needs. This is a direct result of the
December 20, 2000 Solid Waste Workshop.
D. PUBLIC SERVICES
1) Award a Contract for RFP #00-3176, Production of Beach Compatible Sand to E.
R. Jahna Industries Inc.
2) Award a Contract for Bid No. 00-3181, Collier Bay Entrance Dredging to
Subaqueous Services, Inc.
3) Award a Contract for Bid No. 00-3182, Hideaway Beach T-Groin Construction to
Subaqueous Services, Inc.
4) Approve a Tourist Development Council Category "A" Grant Application for the
Production, Transport and Placement of Beach Compatible Sand.
3
January 9, 2001
5) Approve a Tourist Development Council Category "A" Grant Application for a
Feasibility Study for Hideaway Beach Renourishment.
6) Approve a Tourist Development Council Category "A" Grant Application for
Additional T-Groins at Hideaway Beach.
7) Approve a Tourist Development Council Category "A" Grant Application for the
Collier Bay Entrance Dredging Project.
E. SUPPORT SERVICES
F. EMERGENCY SERVICES
G. COUNTY MANAGER
H. AIRPORT AUTHORITY
9. COUNTY ATTORNEY'SREPORT
10. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
A. Appointment of member to the Isles of Capri Fire Control District Advisory
Committee.
B. Appointment of member to the Library Advisory Board.
C. Appointment of member to the Ochopee Fire Control District Advisory Committee.
D. Appointment of member to the Collier County School Readiness Coalition.
E. Appointment of member to the Hispanic Affairs Advisory Board.
F. Appointment of member to the Affordable Housing Commission.
G. Appointment of member to the Rural Lands Assessment Area Oversight Committee.
Reconsideration of vote taken on December 12, 2000, Agenda Item 12 (C) (1), adopt an
ordinance to amend the Collier County Educational Facilities System Impact Fee
Ordinance by adding a provision for an exemption for adult-only communities.
Ordinance 2000-90 Adopted 3/2 (Commissioner Fiala and Coletta (opposed).
Commissioner Mac'Kie and Commissioner Henning.
I. Recommendation to approve an action plan for the County Manager to provide written
expectations for performance for FY-01.
J. Resolution supporting the endorsement/co-sponsorship of Southwest Florida
Transportation Outreach Program applications. (Commissioner Carter)
K. Resolution supporting the new Immokalee Customs Facility. (Commissioner Carter)
4
January 9, 2001
11. OTHER ITEMS
A. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
1)
That the Board of County Commissioners adopt a Resolution designating the Clerk
of the Circuit Court as the Representative of Collier County in the Collection of
Costs, Fees, and Fines, to Defend Bond Forfeitures, to Prosecute Civil Restitution
Liens, and Collect a Reasonable Fee for those services.
B. COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
C. PUBLIC COMMENT ON GENERAL TOPICS
PUBLIC HEARINGS WILL BE HEARD IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING STAFF ITEMS
12. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS - BCC
A. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS
B. ZONING AMENDMENTS
C. OTHER
13. BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
A. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS
1)
This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be
provided by Commission Members. V-2000-25, Joseph Sabatino requesting a
variance of 7.5 feet from the required side yard of 7.5 feet to 0 feet along the East
side yard of Lots 44, 45 and 46; a variance of 7.5 feet from the required 7.5 feet to 0
feet for accessory structures along the side lot lines and within the courtyard walls;
and a variance of 10 feet from the required rear yard of 10 feet to 0 feet for
accessory structures along the rear lot lines and within the courtyard walls for
property located on Illth Avenue North, further described as Lots 44, 45, 46 and 47,
Naples Park Unit 6, in Section 28, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier
County, Florida.
2)
This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be
provided by Commission Members. V-2000-23, Tom Masters, P.E., representing
Vineyards Development Corporation, requesting an after-the-fact variance of 1.34
feet from the required 5 foot rear yard setback to 3.66 feet for property located at
1006 Fountain Run, further described as Lot 112, Fountainhead, in Section 5,
Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida.
3)
This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be
provided by Commission Members. V-2000-21, Chris Allen requesting a 7.5 foot
side yard after-the-fact variance from the required 30 feet to 22.5 feet for property
5
January 9, 2001
located at 555 Hickory Road, further described as Lot 21, Block Y, Pine Ridge
Extension.
4)
This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be
provided by Commission Members. V-2000-30, Schenkel and Shultz, Inc.,
representing the District School Board of Collier County, requesting a variance
from the 35 foot maximum building height restriction for principal structures in
RSF-3 Zoning District to 5 stories, not to exceed 80 feet for property located on
Cougar Drive, in Section 12, Township 49 South, Range 25 East, Collier County,
Florida.
B. OTHER
14. STAFF'S COMMUNICATIONS
15. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' COMMUNICATIONS
16. CONSENT AGENDA - All matters listed under this item are considered to be routine and
action will be taken by one motion without separate discussion of each item. If discussion is
desired by a member of the Board, that item(s) will be removed from the Consent Agenda
and considered separately.
A. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
1) Accept and approve Annual Advisory Board Review for the Collier County Water
and Wastewater Authority.
z)
Approve a Tourist Development Council Category "A" Grant Application to sand
tighten the Gordon Pass Jetty in accordance with the Gordon Pass Inlet
Management Plan.
3) Approve a Tourist Development Council Category "A" Grant Application to
renovate and upgrade four beach accesses in the City of Naples.
4) Final acceptance of Water and Sewer Utility Franchise for Pelican Strand, Tract
14.
5) Request to grant final acceptance of the roadway, drainage, water and sewer
improvements for the final plat of "Autumn Woods Unit One."
6) Tourist Development Funding for Champion Sports Productions, Inc., $6000.
7) Waive the competitive bid process and authorize the Chairman to sign the
agreement with the Florida International University.
6
January 9, 2001
8) Recommendation that the Board of Collier County Commissioners approve the
release of Purported Lien for Public Nuisance Resolution 98-312.
9)
Approve a Tourist Development Council Category "A" Grant Application to
renovate and expand the Lowdermilk Park Pavilion/Concession/Restroom
Structures.
10)
Approve a Resolution adopting a Citizen Participation Plan that will guide the
development of Collier County's five-year consolidated plan for the Community
Development Block Grant Program.
11) Recommendation that the Board of Collier County Commissioners approve the
Satisfaction of Lien for Public Nuisance Abatement Resolution 93-319.
12)
Petition C-2000-12, Collier County Fair and Exposition, Inc., requesting Permit to
conduct a Fair from February 2 through 10, 2001, on County owned property at the
Collier County Fair Grounds on lmmokalee Road (CR 846) North Golden Gate.
B. TRANSPORTATION SERVICES
1)
Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners reject RFP #00-3158
and authorize the extension of the current contract for management services for the
Pelican Bay Services Division.
2) Requesting Board direction for staff to review the millage of the Lely Golf Estates
Municipal Services Taxing Unit (MSTU) Beautification for an increase.
3)
Authorize the Transportation Division to solicit the services of a consultant for the
purpose of conducting a Transportation Corridor Study of the options to address
the North/South traffic demand South of Radio Road including but not limited to
the potential extension of Livingston Road.
4)
Authorize the Transportation Division to solicit the services of a consultant for the
purpose of conducting a Transportation Corridor Study of the Vanderbilt Drive
area.
5) Approve a Budget Amendment for purchase of a replacement tractor mower for
the Immokalee Road and Bridge section.
6) Requesting that the Board authorize the Chairman to execute the attached Federal
Transit Administration Section 5310 Grant Application and applicable documents.
7) Requesting that the Board authorize the Chairman to execute the attached Federal
Transit Administration Section 5311 Grant Application and applicable documents.
8)
Approve a Budget Transfer for the continuation of landscape improvements on
Davis Boulevard (SR 84) from County Barn Road West for approximately six
hundred fifty feet.
9) Approve contract for professional engineering services by Hole Montes, Inc., for
Immokalee Road six-laning design from U.S. 41 to 1-75, Project No. 66042.
7
January 9, 2001
lO)
Approve Amendment No. 3 to Agreement No. 91-1763 for Phase IV
Engineering/Environmental Services with Wilson Miller, Inc., for the Gordon River
Extension Basin Study (County Project No. 31005).
11)
Award a Construction Contract to Better Roads, Inc., for the widening of Airport-
Pulling Road from Pine Ridge Road to Vanderbilt Beach Road, Collier County
Project #62031; Bid #00-3159.
12)
Approve Work Order No. ABB-FT-01-02 with Agnoli, Barber and Brundage, Inc.,
for the preparation of Contract Documents for intersection improvements at Radio
Road and Davis Boulevard (SR 84), Project No. 65031, CIE #16.
13)
To transfer funds within the Golden Gate Municipal Services Taxing Unit (MSTU)
from the Santa Barbara Boulevard Project to the Tropicana Boulevard Project for
improvements.
14)
Request for speed limit reductions from thirty miles per hour (30 mph) to twenty-
five miles per hour (25 mph) on Gulf Shore Drive from Vanderbilt Beach Road to
Bluebill Avenue.
15)
Approve Change Order No. 3 to the Construction Contract #00-3039. Golden Gate
Boulevard widening from CR 951 to Wilson Boulevard; Collier County Project No.
63041; Bid No. 00-3039, CIE No. 62
16)
Approve Amendment No. 1 to Professional Services Agreement Contract with
Wilson Miller Inc., for the widening of Golden Gate Boulevard, Collier County
Project No. 63041, CIE No. 62, RFP #99-3022
17)
Request that the Board of County Commissioners adopt the Final Public
Transportation Operation Plan (PTOP); copies of which will be provided to the
Commissioners.
C. PUBLIC UTILITIES
1) Approval to rent two Integrated Mail Systems for Processing Water and Sewer
Bills.
2)
Approve Professional Services Agreement with Wilson Miller for Engineering
Services related to the new County Barn Site Development, RFP 00-3114, Project
70059 and 73072.
3) Adopt Resolution to approve the Public Utilities procedure of billing customers who
have been under billed for effluent.
4) Amend Professional Services Agreement for Master Pump Station 1.02, Contract
89-1506, Project 73924.
5) Award Bid #00-3148 - "Annual Contract for Sale of Corrugated and White
Goods", Scrap Metals.
6) Approve carry forward budget amendments for the North County Regional Water
Treatment Plant Odor Control Modifications, Projects 70072 and 70073.
8
January9,2001
D. PUBLIC SERVICES
1)
Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approve a Historic
Preservation Grant Agreement of $20,000 from the State Division of Historical
Resources for the Roberts Ranch Restoration, and approve the Associated Budget
Amendment.
2)
Approval of Budget Amendments necessary to reimburse the Friends of the
Museum for the demolition and removal of the salvageable parts of the Ice House at
Naples Airport.
3) Approve a Work Order for Vineyards Community Park, Storage Building.
4)
Approve the Amendment to the Older Americans Act Grant Contract and
authorize the Chairman to sign the amended contract between Collier County
Board of County Commissioners and the Area Agency on Aging for Southwest
Florida, Inc., D/B/A Senior Solutions of Southwest Florida.
5)
Approve the Medicaid Waiver Revised Continuation Contract and authorize the
Chairman to sign the contract between Collier County Board of County
Commissioners and Area Agency on Aging for Southwest Florida, Inc. D/B/A
Senior Solutions of Southwest Florida.
E. SUPPORT SERVICES
1)
Approve Budget Amendment to increase appropriations for Personnel, Operating
Costs, and Fuel in Fleet Management Fund (521) to support maintenance and
operations of the new Collier County Public Transit System.
2)
Approval of a Budget Amendment in the amount of $12,000 to transfer funds from
the Operating Budget to the Capital Budget of the Group Health and Life Fund for
the purchase of a Wellness Program Software and Scanner.
3)
Approval of an amendment to the contract between Robey Barber Insurance
Services Corporation and Collier County to recognize their acquisition by
Corporate Benefit Services of America, Inc., and their associated change of name.
4)
Adopt a Resolution authorizing the cancellation of current taxes upon a fee-simple
interest Collier County acquired by warranty deed for public use and without
monetary compensation.
5) Authorize termination of Arthur Anderson Contract for a Position Classification
Study.
6) Recommendation to Award Bid No. 00-3179 for the advertising of Delinquent Real
Estate and Personal Property Taxes to Tuff Publications Inc.
F. EMERGENCY SERVICES
G. COUNTY MANAGER
9
January 9, 2001
1) Approval of Budget Amendment Report.
2)
Authorize the Southwest Florida Crime Stoppers Inc., a Non-Profit Agency, to act
as permanent agent for Collier County for the purpose of applying for and
receiving monies from the Crime Stoppers Trust Fund.
H. AIRPORT AUTHORITY
I. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
J. MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
1) Miscellaneous items to file for record with action as directed.
K. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
1) Request Board of County Commissioners approval to recognize Wireless 911
Revenues and approve a Fiscal Year 2001 Wireless 911 Budget.
2)
Request that the Board of County Commissioners authorize expenditure of
Budgeted Funds for the purchase of 800 MHz Mobile Radios for the Sheriff's
Office.
L. COUNTY ATTORNEY
1)
Approve the Stipulated Final Judgment pertaining to the eminent domain lawsuit
entitled Collier County v. Faith Bible Church of Naples, Inc., et al. (Immokalee Road
Project).
2) Legislative clarification regarding "Ex-Officio" members of the Community Health
Care Planning and Finance Committee.
3)
Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approve a continuing
Retention Agreement for Legal Services on an "As Needed" basis with the Law
Firm of Landers and Parsons, P.A., particularly relating to County Solid Waste
Management.
4)
Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners authorize its Chairman
to execute an Interlocal Agreement with the City of Naples Airport Authority
related to future construction in Unincorporated Collier County that could be an
obstruction or hazard to navigation at the City of Naples Airport.
17.
SUMMARY AGENDA - THIS SECTION IS FOR ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS
AND MUST MEET THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA: 1) A RECOMMENDATION FOR
APPROVAL FROM STAFF; 2) UNANIMOUS RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL
BY THE COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION OR OTHER AUTHORIZING
AGENCIES OF ALL MEMBERS PRESENT AND VOTING; 3) NO WRITTEN OR
ORAL OBJECTIONS TO THE ITEM RECEIVED BY STAFF, THE COLLIER
COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION, OTHER AUTHORIZING AGENCIES OR THE
BOARD, PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF THE BCC MEETING ON WHICH
lO
January 9, 2001
THE ITEMS ARE SCHEDULED TO BE HEARD; AND 4) NO INDIVIDUALS ARE
REGISTERED TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION TO THE ITEM.
This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be provided
by Commission Members. Petition VAC 00-019 to Disclaim, Renounce and Vacate the
County's and the Public's interest in a portion of a road right of way for Pelican Street
which was dedicated to the County by the Plat of "Isles of Capri No. 1", as recorded in
Plat Book 3, Page 41, Public Records of Collier County, Florida, Located in Section 31,
Township 51 South, Range 26 East.
Be
This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be provided
by Commission Members. V-2000-24, Michael and Lorraine LaPlatte requesting an
after-the-fact variance of 25.6 feet from the required 30 foot side yard setback for an
accessory structure to 4.4 feet for property located at 5075 Tamarind Ridge Drive,
further described as the East 180 Feet of Tract 84, Golden Gate Estates Unit 32, in
Section 9, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida.
18. ADJOURN
INQUIRIES CONCERNING CHANGES TO THE BOARD'S AGENDA SHOULD BE MADE
TO THE COUNTY MANAGER'S OFFICE AT 774-8383.
11
January 9, 200l
January 9, 20001
Item #3A, B,&C
CONSENT AGENDA, SUMMARY AGENDA, AND REGULAR AGENDA
- APPROVED AND/OR ADOPTED WITH CHANGES
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Good morning. Welcome to the Board
of County Commissioners' meeting for January 9.
If you will loin with us in the invocation by Father Tim Navin
and stay standing for the Pledge of Allegiance. FATHER NAVIN: Let us pray.
Oh, God of new beginnings and wonderful surprises. Thank
you for the gift of a new year. May it be a time of grace for us, a
time to grow in faith and love, a time to renew our commitment
to following the ways of justice and peace. May it be a year of
blessing for us, a time to cherish our families and our friends, a
time to renew our efforts at work, a time to embrace our faith
more fully.
Walk with us, please, in every day and every hour of this
new year, that the light of grace might shine through us in spite
of our weaknesses and failings. Above all, may we remember
this year that we are all pilgrimage, we are all pilgrims on this
sacred path to you. Amen.
(The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Mr. Olliff, you have changes for us this
morning?
MR. OLLIFF: I do. Good morning and welcome,
commissioners, to the first meeting of 2001. We've got a fairly
abbreviated agenda change list for you this morning, and I'll walk
you through it fairly quickly.
The first item I have is an addition. It's Item 5A(4). It's a
proclamation at Commissioner Carter's request for a Celtic
Festival weekend.
The next item is also a proclamation. It is Item 5A(5), and it
is a proclamation designating Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King,
Jr.'s birthday.
The next item is 10L. It's a discussion of a joint meeting
with the county commission and the city council regarding ASR
issues at Commissioner Mac'Kie's request.
The next item is a deletion. It's 8D(1), which was the award
Page 2
January 9, 20001
of RFP 00-3176. It was for production of beach compatible sand,
and that's being deleted at staff's request.
And the last item which you don't see on your change list
this
morning is a request that we continue for -- until the next
meeting Item 16A(6) -- I'm sorry, Item 16A(16) -- 16B(16), I'm
sorry, off your consent agenda under transportation. We just
need to relook that a little bit, and we'll try and have that back to
you for your next meeting at the end of January.
Mr. Chairman, that's all the changes I have.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Mr. Weigel.
MR. WEIGEL: None, thank you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Mr. Henning, Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes, I'd like to pull 16B(3) to
interject on that contract.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: You have questions on that or do you
have additional --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Questions -- possible questions
and insert some things in the end of the contract that deals with
the corridor study on Radio Road and Davis Boulevard, the
north-south corridor study.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: That's 16B(3).
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Three.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: And that will go to --
MR. OL. LIFF: That will become 8B(2).
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Commissioner-- anything else,
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I have a conflict on the consent
agenda. I'm sure you're going to ask about that.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Just announce the number.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Just announce the number.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. It's E6, so when I vote on
that consent agenda, I'm not voting on that item.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay, fine.
Commissioner Mac'Kie.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE-' Nothing.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, I'd just like to bring up -- and I
need Mr. Weigel's guidance here a little bit. I -- when we voted
on the tax thing the last meeting, I'm afraid that I was -- I was
Page 3
January 9, 20001
under some wrong interpretations, and I was wondering if
somehow I might be able to bring that up for discussion at some
time?
MR. WEIGEL: Thank you. Commissioner, you can bring that
up as general discussion with the board today under board
discussion at the end of the meeting. It would not be a formal
agenda item today.
You have not specifically asked in regard to reconsideration.
Under the constraints of the reconsideration ordinance, there is
a requirement for a memo to go to the county manager at least
six days prior to the board meeting that you would be looking to
bring it forward for actual reconsideration.
This -- because the board meets approximately twice a
month, to attempt to go for reconsideration at the next board
meeting would put it beyond the 30 day limitation for a motion to
reconsider. I can tell you that aside from outright
reconsideration, however, general items of the board can be
brought back for discussion and for additional action or
modification separate and apart from reconsideration.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: So, can we do that under Board of
County Commissioners or should we do that under board
communications?
MR. WEIGEL.' Communications, I think, would probably be
the way to do it.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: So, when we get to board
communications today, perhaps a discussion there will answer
your question.
Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, I'd like to pull 16B(16),
professional agreement with Wilson Miller.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: And that will go under--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That -- that was the item
continued.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Continued.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Oh, it was. Forgive me.
Is this the appropriate time to ask for something to be added
to the agenda?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I would like to add one item to
the agenda to direct staff to come back at the next meeting to
Page 4
January 9, 20001
provide for the whereas to reconvene the Golden Gate master
plan.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: You want to bring that up under board
-- you want it under board communications?
MR. WEIGEL'- A full discussion at that point.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. So, we'll bring that up under
board communications.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I have no -- I have no additions to the
agenda.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Motion to approve consent,
summary and regular agenda as amended.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Do we have any speakers on the
consent or summary agenda?
MR. OLLIFF: No, sir.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay.
aye.
All in favor, signify by saying
Opposed by the same sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Motion carries.
Page 5
AGENDA CHANGES
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' MEETING
January 9~ 2001
ADD: ITEM 5A4: Proclamation that January 20 and 21, 2001 be designated as
Celtic Festival Weekend. (Commissioner Carter request.)
ADD: ITEM 5A5: Proclaiming January 2000 be designated as Reverend Dr.
Martin Luther King, Jr.'s Birthday Celebration. To be accepted by Mr. Paul
Franklin, Mrs. Laverne Franklin, Mr. Rufas Watson and Mr. Elijah Bell.
(Commissioner Carter request.)
ADD: ITEM 10L: Discussion of joint meeting of the County Commission and
City Council regarding the ASR issue. (Commissioner Mac'Kie request.)
DELETE ITEM 8(D)1: Award a contract for RFP #00-3176, Production of Beach
Compatible Sand to E. R. Jahna Industries, Inc. (Staff request.)
Note:
January 9, 20001
Item #4
MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 28, 2000 REGULAR MEETING;
NOVEMBER 29, 2000 SPECIAL MEETING; DECEMBER 12, 2000
REGULAR MEETING, DECEMBER 13, 2000, SPECIAL MEETING,
AND DECEMBER 20, 2000 WORKSHOP MEETING - APPROVED AS
PRESENTED
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Motion to approve the minutes of
November 28th, the 29th, December 12th, December 13th and
December 20th.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Second?
I'll second it.
All in favor, signify by saying aye.
Opposed by the same sign?
(No response.}
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Motion carries five-oh.
Item #5A1
PROCLAMATION PROCLAIMING JANUARY 14-21, 2001 AS
"PURPLE MARTIN WEEK" IN COLLIER COUNTY - ADOPTED
It moves us to proclamations and service awards.
Proclamations for the Purple Martin Week in Collier County,
Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
WHEREAS, in a very short time, thousands of our very
beautiful feathered friends, the Purple Martins, will return from
their winter home in Brazil; and
WHEREAS, these birds will be searching for suitable housing
to enable them to nest and rear their young; and
WHEREAS, the Florida Legislature has designated Collier
County the Purple Martin capital of Florida; and
WHEREAS, the Purple Martin Society of Collier County is
desirous of urging the public to erect proper housing for these
very valuable winged creatures by placing said houses on their
property; and
WHEREAS, during the period of January 14th to the 21st, the
Purple Martin Society of Collier County will endeavor to alert the
Page 6
January 9, 20001
public to how valuable these birds are in helping diminish the
insect and mosquito population.
NOW THEREFORE be it proclaimed by the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida that the week of
January 14th to the 21st, 2001 be designated as Purple Martin
Week in Collier County and urge all citizens to loin with the
Purple Martin Society of Collier County to show their concern for
these valuable and friendly winged creatures and learn to protect
and preserve them.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Have we asked Carter Smith to
come --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Carter Smith to come forward this
morning.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And I'll move approval of the
proclamation.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll second that motion.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All in favor, signify by saying aye.
Motion is approved.
Carter Smith, you have some words for us about our
leathered friends.
MR. SMITH: Just a few.
Mr. Chairman, commissioners of Collier County, it gives me
much pleasure to accept this proclamation on behalf of the good
citizens of Collier County and the Purple Martin Society of Collier
County.
Please be seated, ladies and gentlemen.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: This is going to be a long comment,
right?
MR. SMITH: The Purple Martin is the largest member of the
swallow bird family, and as such, you would think that it should
be able to defend itself, but the truth of the matter is the Purple
Martin has many enemies, most of whom are larger than the bird
itself. Who are these enemies; English sparrows and starlings,
both of whom, by the way, are not native Americans while the
Purple Martin is a good old American bird. Other enemies are
fish, crows, various hawks, many snakes and owls.
How do we deal with the enemies? We trap English
sparrows. We exclude starlings by use of restricting entrance
holes. We have a system of prison bars protecting the entrance
holes to prevent attacks by crows, hawks and owls. For snakes,
Page 7
January 9, 20001
we use eight inches to ten inch diameter stove pipes, three feet
high wrapped around the base of the 15 foot pole upon which the
Purple Martin house is mounted.
There are many stories about attacks by their enemies. One
documented tale concerns an owl, and this was before the use of
these protecting prison bars. An owl approached a Purple Martin
house from the front. With one talon, he grasped the side of the
house. Using its wings, the owl beat the house until the baby
birds came out to see what the commotion was all about, and
with its free talon, the owl simply picked off and devoured the
helpless baby Martins in its own good pleasure.
Why do we Purple Martin lovers choose a hobby which has
so many inherent obstacles in addition to the sheer expense of
the house and its equipment? Crazy as it sounds, it's fascinating
and challenging fun.
The birds are a beautiful dark, iridescent blue. They have a
charming infectious sound -- song. They are very friendly and
permit you to be as close as ten feet from them. They are
exquisite aerial acrobats and love to soar high above their house
for an hour or so before retiring. My wife and I frequently have
cocktails out on our deck while watching the aerial show. It's
great end of the day therapy. I recommend it, and now many
thanks to you, the commissioners of Collier County for your
support of the Purple Martin program.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you very much.
Item #5A2
PROCLAMATION PROCLAIMING JANUARY, 2001 AS THE
OFFICIAL GRAND OPENING AND PET ADOPTION MONTH FOR
THE COLLIER COUNTY DOMESTIC ANIMAL SERVICES
DEPARTMENT - ADOPTED
All right. We now have a proclamation for the Collier County
Domestic Animal Services Department in recognizing January
2001 as the official grand opening in pet adoption month,
Commissioner Coletta, and we have Jodi Walters and Terry Tilly
of the Humane Society here with us this morning with friends.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, would you please come
forward, Jodi? '
Page 8
January 9, 20001
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE'. They're coming.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: They're coming. They've got to bring
the --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA.' Oh, yes, yes, by all means.
Collier County is a big place. We take care of our wildlife. We
take care of our domestic animals, and we even take care of our
people.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Sometimes.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Ohhh.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Let's hear ohhhh.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: You can't help it.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Let's hear all the ohhhh's, right.
Got room at your house for another pet, Sue?
MS. WALTERS: It's adopt a dog, and the bigger one is ready
--wanting to be adopted, so --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Jodi just said the bigger dog is
available for adoption if anybody is tuning in.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: How old is he; about three months?
Look at the size of the feet on that dude.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Actually, he's full grown.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: He's full grown.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: He's full grown. Oh, wow, he's a cool
dog.
It's all right, Jane, if you're watching, I'm not bringing him
home.
MS. WALTERS: He's cute.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: WHEREAS, the Collier County
Domestic Animal Service Department is celebrating the grand
opening of its long-awaited facility during the month of January,
2001; and
WHEREAS, this state-of-the-art facility has been designed
and constructed to provide the utmost in care for the County's
domestic animal population; and
WHEREAS, it has taken a substantial effort on the part of
staff, volunteers and the support of the community to accomplish
this endeavor; and
WHEREAS, we have been endowed not only with the
blessing and benefit of our animal friends, who give us
companionship and great pleasure in our daily lives, but also
with a firm responsibility to protect these fellow creatures from
Page 9
January 9, 20001
need, pain, fear and suffering; and
WHEREAS, the Collier County Domestic Animal Services
makes every effort to locate suitable homes for its needy
animals and promote its pet adoption program.
AND THEREFORE, be it proclaimed by the Board of Collier
County Commissioners, Collier County, Florida that the Collier
County Domestic Animal Service Department has recognized
January 2001 as its official grand opening and pet adoption
month.
DONE AND ORDERED this 9th day of January, 2001.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I'll move adoption of that
proclamation.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Second.
All in favor, signify by saying aye.
All opposed by the same sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Motion carries.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Okay, one dog and three cats at
my house already, so it just --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: They don't have a real live dog in
them or anything, do they?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: If you guys look in this bag, this
is so cute.
MS. WALTERS: These are promotional items for our grand
opening this weekend, so we thought that we'd share those with
you.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And the adopt-a-pet number is
530-7387.
MS. WALTERS: Good morning. And for those of you who
don't know me, my name is Jodi Walters, and I am your Collier
County Domestic Animal Services director.
Last year we took a giant step in Collier County when we
began to build a new animal shelter for the county. This week
we are moving into that facility. I would like to personally thank
the citizens of Collier County and especially the Board of County
Commissioners for their support in the project. I'd also like to
thank you for the proclamation for the month of January for
adopt-a-pet month.
We would like to invite you to our dedication ceremony,
which is Friday morning at 10:00 a.m., and also to our grand
Page 10
January 9, 20001
opening, which will be January 13th from 10:00 to 4:00. We're
going to have something for everyone at our grand opening and
plenty of puppy love to go around, and I think that everyone
should also realize that we do have two great shelters now in
Collier County.
Thank you.
Item #5A3
PROCLAMATION PROCLAIMING THE WEEK OF JANUARY 8, 2001,
AS COLLIER COUNTY SAFE BOATING WEEK - ADOPTED
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All right. Commissioner Henning, and
we're going to have County Safe Boating Week. Mr. Phil Osborne,
president of Marine Industries, is here this morning. If you would
come up here and stand in front of the camera so everybody gets
to see you, and Mr. Henning is going to read the proclamation.
MR. OSBORNE: It's tough to follow up on the -- I didn't bring
the dogs or no bags of gifts, so I'll have to wing it.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: These are not gifts. These are just --
well, I don't know, whatever.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Samples of their grand opening
packet.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Good.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: If I might say before I start, I
must say it's an honor for me to read this because boating is my
passion, the 10,000 Islands, and I consider this a real honor, so
let's -- let's go for it.
MR. OSBORNE: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Proclamation, WHEREAS,
boating is the major recreation activity in Collier County; and
WHEREAS, boating is enjoyed by citizens of all ages; and
WHEREAS, boating is participated by the residents and
visitors alike; and
WHEREAS, boaters -- boating is deserving the attention of
safety on the water; and
WHEREAS, boating is enhanced by the practice of safety on
the water; and
WHEREAS, boating is a safety matter benefit to everyone;
and
Page 11
January 9, 20001
WHEREAS, it is appropriate to recognize the value of boating
-- safety boating education.
NOW THEREFORE, be it proclaimed by the Board of Collier --
by the Board of Commissioners of Collier County, Florida that
January 8th through 14th, 2001 is designated as Collier County
Safe Boating Week, and I want to thank you for being here.
MR. OSBORNE: Thank you for having me here.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I'll move acceptance of the
proclamation.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Second.
All in favor, signify by saying aye.
MR. OSBORNE: I'll be--
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Words of wisdom.
MR. OSBORNE: I'll be brief. I do want to thank the county
commissioners, and on behalf of all the Marine Industries
Association people and the tens of thousands of boaters who
enjoy the waters of Collier County.
I do want to thank the commissioners for recognizing the
value of boating and safe boating in our county. We look forward
as an association to working with you on issues that are of
concern to our boaters in the county in the future.
Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you.
Item #5A4
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING JANUARY 20 AND 21, 2001 AS
CELTIC FESTIVAL WEEKEND - ADOPTED
Commissioner Mac'Kie, we have a proclamation for the
Celtic Festival, a little bit of the Irish and all the appropriate that
you read this.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: It's -- if I could have Mike Joint
and Mike Ward -- I almost called you O. Joint and Mack Ward, but
they get the idea. If you'll come forward, I'll read this
proclamation.
Okay, and I say Celtic. How do you guys say it?
MR. WARD: Celtic.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: That's what I say, all right.
WHEREAS, the Irish American Club of Naples, Inc., a Florida
Page12
January 9, 20001
corporation established to promote Irish culture and education in
Collier County, has recently established high school scholarships
and is now working to support other charities in Collier County;
and
WHEREAS, over the past ten years, the Irish American Club
of Naples, Inc. has provided entertainment concerts each year at
our local high schools with proceeds distributed to "Concern,"
which is a national organization that works with emergency
victims in Honduras and other parts of the world; and
WHEREAS, this new year, the Irish American Club of Naples,
Inc. has decided it could do a lot more for our community by
bringing a Celtic Festival to Collier County, raising larger funds
for charities in need in our local area; and
WHEREAS, the Irish American Club of Naples, Inc. will truly
make a difference through unselfish community involvement.
NOW THEREFORE, be it proclaimed by the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida that January 20 and 21,
2001 be designated as Celtic Festival Weekend.
DONE AND ORDERED THIS 9th day of January, 2001, Board
of County Commissioners, Collier County.
I'd like to move we accept this proclamation.
COMMISSIONER FIALA.' Second.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Second.
All in favor, signify by saying aye.
MR. WARD: I just want to say a few words on behalf of the
Irish American Club. We would want to thank the Board of
County Commissioners for this proclamation.
The Celtic Festival coming up the third week of January, we
really believe it's going to be one of the largest tourist
attractions on an annual event in Collier County. As the Celtic
Festivals are going on around the country right now, they're
larger than any other festivals. If you'll get on the Internet right
now, you'll see that.
So, we really are excited about this. I think we're going to
do a lot for the County. We've got a lot of hard working people,
so thank you again.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Could I get you just to say your
name for the record, sir, before you go? MR. WARD: Pardon me?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Name for the record, please.
Page 13
January 9, 20001
This
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: For the court reporter.
MR. WARD: The Celtic Festival.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: No, your name.
MR. WARD: Michael Ward, I'm sorry.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you very much.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: You guys get this information.
looks like fun.
MR. WARD: They'll be all over.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Good.
Item #5A5
PROCLAMATION PROCLAIMING JANUARY, 2001 AS REVEREND
DR. MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR.'S BIRTHDAY CELEBRATION -
ADOPTED
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All right. I have a proclamation for the
Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King. Is there a representative here
this morning from --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I see Ms. Franklin here.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Ms. Franklin is here. If you will step
up front and face the cameras, it would be my pleasure to read
this proclamation.
WHEREAS, the Congress of the United States of America has
designated the birthday of the Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King,
Jr. as a national holiday; and
WHEREAS, the president of the United States signed
legislation authorizing that Reverend Dr. King's birthday is a
national holiday with observances to commence on January 15
of 2001; and
WHEREAS, the Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. received
national and international recognition for his stirring struggle
against injustice and his leadership in the espousing of
brotherhood, self-discipline and non-violence; and
WHEREAS, the Collier County branch of the National
Association for the Advancement of Colored People, NAACP will
hold commemorative celebrations of the Reverend Dr. King's
birthday by sponsoring community activities and events
throughout the month of January 2001.
NOW THEREFORE be it proclaimed by the Board of County
Page 14
January 9, 20001
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida that January 2001 be
designated as the Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.'s birthday
celebration in Collier County, Florida and urge all citizens to
remember the Reverend Dr. King's outstanding accomplishments
by participating in commemorative celebrations to be held
throughout the month of January.
DONE AND ORDERED THIS 9th day of January, 2001, Board
of County Commissioners, Collier County, Florida, James D.
Carter, PhD., Chairman.
I move for approval.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Second.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Are you going to tell us a little bit
about what's scheduled?
MS. FRANKLIN: I will.
Good morning, and thank you, commissioners, very much for
this wonderful honor, this proclamation.
I am Laverne Franklin, the president of the NAACP.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Congratulations. I hadn't heard
that.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I didn't know that.
MS. FRANKLIN: As of January 1; two year term.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE.' Good choice on their part.
MS. FRANKLIN: Yes, it is, I think so.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: You'll do a great job.
MS. FRANKLIN: We are, indeed, honored and very pleased
with this proclamation, and what we decided to do this year,
which I think is leading towards and keeping Dr. King's dream
alive, is doing community service throughout the entire month of
January.
The first thing we're going to do is paint the Friendship
House, three rooms of the Friendship House in Immokalee.
That's going to take place January 13th at nine o'clock in the
morning, so if you want to get the paintbrushes out and come
help us, fine.
The next event will be the 15th on Dr. King's birthday. We
will do the traditional walk from Triumph Church to Anthony
Park, and after that, we have a cleanup of River Park. Also, you
can come with us and help, and that will take place right after
the dedication at Anthony Park.
Page 15
January 9, 20001
On the 27th of January, we're going to have another paint
your house, and that's going to be in River Park, and we are
going to conclude our celebration of Dr. King January the 28th at
Macedonia Baptist Church at three o'clock in the afternoon, and
put that on your calendars, and we'd love to see all of you there.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: You couldn't have a better
Sunday afternoon, I'll tell you, than that Macedonia afternoon on
Sunday. I've really enjoyed it in the past.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: What time does it start?
MS. FRANKLIN: Three o'clock.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And the other -- the traditional --
the walk, which is also really special, you guys, because
Reverend Perry leads it through River Park down to the -- down to
the park--
MS. FRANKLIN: Anthony Park.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: -- down to Anthony Park, I'm
sorry, I get that wrong every time. What time is that again?
MS. FRANKLIN: That's going to take place at nine o'clock.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: On his birthday?
MS. FRANKLIN: On his birthday, and after that, we're going
to paint a -- do a cleanup of River Park.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Excellent.
MS. FRANKLIN: So, the King family feels that we should not
only celebrate and relax on his birthday, because he didn't do
that, we're going to honor him by providing community service,
to do something that's going to impact someone else's life, in
keeping with Dr. King's dream.
Thank you very much for this, indeed, honor.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. Thank you very much.
I really think it's great how they're going to celebrate that in
terms of community service, and I'm very proud of our NAACP
chapter for taking that initiative and doing it in Collier County. I
think they should be commended for that effort.
Item #5B
EMPLOYEE SERVICE AWARDS - PRESENTED
It moves us to service awards. We're going to do it a little
Page 16
January 9, 20001
different this morning. I'm going to step down with a mike and,
assisted by Ms. Filson, we are going to do them from the front.
So, as part of the physical fitness program for the sheriff, we'll
come down here and do this.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: The Wellness program they
started, I get you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: This is great. This is like working in a
good old management session.
Here we go. We have five year awards, first of all this
morning, and I always like to bring them up here as a group so
you get to see people who have already spent five years with
Collier County, and first I would like to invite up Natalie Kelly and
then Jerry Loughridge and Luis Trujillo and Timothy McGeary.
So, if you would all come up, we would like to present these and
your pins because we are very proud of you and glad of the time
that you have spent with Collier County.
And our ten year attendee is Alan Ott, water distribution.
Alan, if you would step up here this morning; ten years at Collier
County.
All right, that's it. Thank you very much.
All right. That was a nice idea. I don't know who decided --
Tom, was that your idea to do this with service awards? That's
very good.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: As part of the orientation, we
came up with that, and I think that we need to get down on a
personal level with our staff and thank them for the years of
service that they dedicated to us.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, I agree. I think it's a great idea,
and it's a good thing to do. One of these days, we'll probably
eliminate this base under the dais when we get down there so
we're not sitting here like the Supreme Court.
Item #5C
COMMISSIONER CARTER SELECTED AS CHAIRMAN AND
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE SELECTED AS VICE-CHAIRMAN
All right. Next item on the agenda, this is an annual process
for the Board of County Commissioners where we elect a chair
and a vice chair.
Page 17
January 9, 20001
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I'd like to move that we elect
Commissioner Carter as the chairman.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll second that.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'll second.
~COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'll second that.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All in favor, signify by saying aye.
Opposed by the same sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you very much.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'd like to make a nomination for
vice chair. I'd like to nominate Pam.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And I second that.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Great.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Boy, that was simple.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: That was quick. All right, here we are.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Congratulations.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you very much for your service.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Thanks, guys. We don't even
have to change chairs.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Don't have to change chairs this year,
just keep rolling it out, all right.
Item #7A
REQUEST FOR PUBLIC PETITION BY NAPLES JUNION CHAMBER
OF COMMERCE REGARDING PUBLIC SEATING COMMUNITY
SERVICE PROJECT- NO ACTION
Okay. Public petitions, Item Number 7, Naples Chamber of
Commerce -- Junior Chamber of Commerce, subsequently known
to me as the Jaycees.
MS. DOUGLASS: Good morning. For the record, my name is
Lisa Douglass. I am the chairman of the board, last year's
president. To my side is Angela Robinson, incoming president for
the year 2001, and seated we have Matt Campbell who is
member at large -- first year you can say that, right?
We come before you today to talk about a community
service project that -- if I can get this to run -- a community
service project that is going across -- actually, I'm sorry, Andrew.
Page 18
January 9, 20001
Also with me today is Andrew Moose representing MetroBench.
Andrew, come on up here -- across the State of Florida this
project runs simultaneously with -- the history of the Jaycees and
public seating is pretty simple.
The Jaycees across Florida have been providing community
service for over 77 years in Florida. For over 50 of those years,
Jaycees have been conducting public seating projects in local
cities and counties, and the information we just gave you are
some letters that Andrew provided us from counties and cities
commending the Jaycees' efforts across Florida.
Florida Statutes 337.408 was originally known as the Jaycee
bench bill. It provides authority for this particular program.
Here's a picture on your monitor of the actual first bus bench
that the Jaycees provided.
What we know is going to be happening from county staff is
the buses are beginning to run in mid February. Currently,
federal grants total greater than $75,000 to install bus benches
and shelters. My understanding from county staff is it does not
cover all bus stops, and it does not include the annual
maintenance and liability for those seatings.
We propose, in part with the MetroBench and the Alliance
Club, for installation of bus benches, to install 57 benches at
locations identified outside the city limits. We are not talking
inside the city limits. I think that we are pretty safe to say that's
probably off limits.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Just say no.
MS. DOUGLASS: Yes, just say no.
But that particular number will change. I did speak with
David Hope just yesterday, and the numbers are changing a little
bit, so that number might be a little off, a little more or a little
less.
We want to work with the local businesses to offset the cost
of this project through advertisements on approximately 20 of
these benches. Remaining benches will have a Jaycee project or
a Lions Club project. Actually, that number will change as well
with the additional benches that we need.
Overall, we propose to work with county staff to allow for
this project to happen. David and I and one of the guys in the
sign department and I, Michael, have been speaking over the last
two months and been very receptive to this project. We know
Page 19
January 9, 20001
that it does have some ill feelings of the advertisement parts of
it, but we think that working together for a common goal of
community service and saving the county money with regard to
this project, we can all come out winners. We want to
partner with MetroBench and the Lions Club to work with the
transit staff to provide this free community service project, and
we recommend that possibly in three weeks or four weeks,
whatever the commission wants, that we can come back with
our collective thoughts from the transit authority and the
Jaycees staff and the Lions Club staff and bring those things
back to you with regard to this project.
The overall benefits are sort of out there and pretty
explanatory on their own. We'd reduce the annual maintenance
expense to the taxpayers of Collier County. The federal grant
money can be allocated elsewhere in the transit authority, which
we have been told.
The public seating is at every location as identified, and at
the Naples Jaycees and the Lions Club, members provide this
valuable community service and obtain public relations through
this project.
And you also were given a package of information in a
binder, and I just would like to draw your attention to the last
couple of pages. The information that we know, there's a
facsimile from the building department regarding the signage,
and I'd like to bring that fax to your attention so that you can
read the verbiage on the front of that fax as to what the
downfalls we know already are and then also draw your attention
to the pictures in the back. I do think that there's a precedent
already set in the county regarding advertising, off-site
advertising that don't meet the restrictions of the seven
conditions that were faxed to us.
So, if you have any questions, we'd be glad to answer those.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I would have some questions on the
signage, Mr. Mulhere. What is there that's -- we're waiting to
eventually evolve away from our community to changes. As
we've said, we never put in an amortization schedule, but if a
business does change, then they have to comply with the new
sign ordinance, and I don't know whether these particular
pictures are representative or not.
MR. MULHERE: I'm sorry, excuse me for interrupting. I
Page 20
January 9, 20001
apologize. Bob Mulhere, planning director. I have not seen those
pictures, and, of course, we'd have to evaluate those signs.
Actually, there is a date certain by which all signs must
comply, and I'm not sure of the exact date, but there is a date
certain in the future -- but I'm not going to be able to take a look
at those right now and evaluate them.
MS. DOUGLASS: That's okay.
MR. MULHERE: Thank you.
Obviously, the staff supports the efforts of the Jaycees in
this community project. However, we -- in looking at the land
development code, there are numerous sections in the code that
would prohibit the placement of these types of signs, off premise
signs, advertising signs within the right-of-way, both by the sign
ordinance and the right-of-way ordinance.
We do believe that a plaque, a relatively small plaque or
something that recognizes the commercial entity that perhaps
provided the funding for the sign would be appropriate, but that
plaque should be visible really by the pedestrian or the person
seated on the bench and not by the passing motorists. We've all
seen park benches with fairly large signs. We don't have to go
too far north of here to see that. Our code does not currently
allow that. To allow that, we would have to amend the code.
We, obviously, don't support that as staff.
We do support the plaques though.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: If I can just speak up and say -- I
mean, I absolutely -- you know, I don't have to worry about it
because the city council of the City of Naples would not permit
this in the city, but unless there's something that's much more
discreet -- you know, if there's a way that the Jaycees can
provide us with free benches and free maintenance and we have
no liability and it's fitting with the character of Collier County in
what we hope to see it continue to be and to enhance, then I can
support that, but what I know of for benches with advertising, I
couldn't be more opposed to.
MS. DOUGLASS: And one of the things, I think, that we meet
-- all of us have met individually and on blanket statement,
everyone has had that comment. I think Commissioner Mac'Kie
and Commissioner Fiala both, we talked about the neat little
things that we could do to make it fit with the character of this
community.
Page 21
January 9, 20001
I've lived here since I was 18 months old. I think I sort of
have a good idea as to what the community actually would
accept or not accept; not myself alone, but knowing that big old
fluorescent green is not going to work. You know, some artwork
and some nice little graphics in soft colors and those kinds of
things are what we're asking the commission for us to be able to
go back to the transit authority and work with those ideas to
come back with a solution, if we can. Maybe we can't, and
maybe the ultimate solution is that we can't, but at least give us
the opportunity to work with staff for that particular thing.
Andrew did want to comment on his particular authority
thing, because that also is one of the reasons why we put the
Florida statute rule in there for your review.
MR. MOOSE: My name is Andrew Moose, and I'm with
MetroBench Advertising and with the Jaycees. I've got ten
years' experience working with this program. I'm the state
coordinator for it for the Jaycees statewide.
All throughout the State of Florida in the past we have been
working with county commissions to amend their sign
ordinances, and they've been received very well because of this
being a public service project of the Jaycees, and as far as I
know, all we're asking today is to be able to work out a possible
arrangement that we could bring back to you in a few weeks for
you to take another look at. We're not asking for approval today.
We're just asking for an opportunity to --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: See, in a public petition, you would not
get approval here today. We could only give staff direction to
pursue this if it was the desire of the board.
I have to tell you that we have very strict sign ordinances in
Collier County. I personally think the Jaycees do a tremendous
job here. I'm an advocate of the Jaycess. I was a Jaycee, but I
cannot or will not amend a sign ordinance for this particular
situation just because I think you're a great service group.
If it was a plaque on the bench that was very discreet, as
Commissioner Mac'Kie said, that's fine, but --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: But that wouldn't amount -- that
wouldn't require any amendment, would it, Bob?
MR. MULHERE.' No, no, that would be permissible.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: So, if you want to work in that
framework, I have no problem. If it's going to get into a bigger
Page 22
January 9, 20001
picture, I can't support it personally, even though I admire what
you do as a group.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I just want to add a couple of
notes on this. These signs that we're seeing as an example are
on school property, and, of course, they are exempt from our
permitting and our statutes.
There might be a need for this type of service in Immokalee
if we can't provide shelter there, because there's where the bus
system is going to receiving a maximum demand.
MS. DOUGLASS: With the cost of the project, we still have
to have advertising on the signs, and we don't have the -- we
don't have $75,000, we're a nonprofit organization, to offset that.
That's the reason we have those -- if the County, you know,
wants to have the $75,000 expenditure and the annual
maintenance fee, that's -- that's -- you know, that's your
choosing.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So, we're trying to reach out
globally and reach all of Collier County, and we've had some
serious problems with the City of Naples accepting our bus idea
and bus program for all various reasons, and this is why the bus
has been changed numerous times as far as its design, its color,
its route to try to accommodate the people there, and I know if
this ever came through and we tried to put them anywhere near
the west of Airport Road, there would be a backlash that could
seriously endanger the whole program.
MS. DOUGLASS: Right, and we actually are not asking for
that. What we're asking for is the unincorporated Collier County.
On top of that, we were asking for just the opportunity to be able
to brainstorm ideas like we did in Commissioner Fiala's office. I
think we came up with some very great solutions that still were
viable solutions that provided somewhat of commercial
advertising but still were soft enough that probably would not be
non-accepted, and so that's what we were asking for is to at
least provide the opportunity for county staff and for us to give it
a shot to save you $75,000 plus the annual maintenance fees.
MR. MULHERE.' Mr. Chairman, may I just add two other
comments that I neglected to mention earlier. One, there's a
little bit of a concern on the part of staff related to a precedence
and further -- future requests for similar types of nonprofit,
community efforts looking for some signs within the right-of-way.
Page 23
January 9, 20001
The second issue I would raise is that perhaps some of these
commercial entities who, as part of their commercial outreach,
would be sponsoring these benches, might be willing to do so
simply for the recognition provided by a plaque as opposed to a
larger commercial sign.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's why I think it might be a
good idea -- I am a former Jaycee, and I'm very supportive of the
Jaycees' efforts.
Although I do have a problem with the commercialization of
the benches, this might be a way for nonprofit organizations to
promote their efforts here in Collier County on the benches.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA-' And serve the community.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And it might not be fitting in all
parts of our community, and we need to design it -- if we are
going to go forward, we need to design it the right way so it's
fitting to the character for --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, what I need to know is if there's
three commissioners here who want to pursue it based on the
presentation this morning or not, that's what I need to know.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: May I ask, when you say pursue,
does that mean even pursue just a plaque or something? Does
that count?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: No, no, the plaque is not -- a plaque is
not a problem.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: This would be an amendment to
the sign ordinance is what we're talking about here, and I can't
support that.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I'm not going to go with an
amendment to the sign ordinance, but if -- what I need to know,
when we say pursue it, we have to give staff direction to
continue to discuss this with them.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And we're talking about staff
time too which is very limited, and we're asking for many
different projects to be accomplished, and they're running out of
space.
MS. DOUGLASS: I will say too that --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I would agree. I really can't go to
amending the sign ordinance either.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: So, it sounds like it's a thank
you, we appreciate it, because, you know, you have offered --
Page 24
January 9, 20001
made us an offer, and we appreciate all that you do in the
community, and this is one that doesn't particularly fit with us.
MS. DOUGLASS: That's fine.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. Thank you so much.
Item #8B1
TRANSPORTATION ADMINISTRATOR TO PROCEED WITH THE
DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD AS
A SIX-LANE FACILITY FROM AIRPORT-PULLING ROAD TO LOGAN
BOULEVARD AND AS A FOUR-LANE FACILITY FROM LOGAN
BOULEVARD TO COLLIER BOULEVARD - APPROVED
All right. That takes us to Item 8, county manager's report.
MR. OLLIFF: Eight B one.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: B(1).
MR. FEDER: Mr. Chairman, commissioners, for the record,
Norman Feder, transportation administrator.
The item we have before you is a request to move forward
on consulting and design for Vanderbilt Beach Drive, basically to
go six lanes from Airport Pulling to Logan Boulevard and then
continue --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Chairman -- Mr. Chairman,
excuse me, Norman, I see this as a no brainer, and I move to
approve.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Second.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All in favor, signify by saying aye.
Opposed by the same sign?
Motion carries. Thank you for a great presentation, Norman.
You know, just for the public's input on this, we meet with
Norman Feder and review these projects. What we have done is
saved the public an enormous amount of money. We're not going
to tear up this road twice. We're going to do it once, and you've
got a good ten year period, and you won't see anything happen
out there but the fact you've got six lanes to drive on.
So, it's doing it right. It's long-range planning, and it's
efficient management and cost effectiveness, so thank you,
Norm.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: May I add one comment, Jim,
before we close this? I just want to compliment you, Norm, for
Page 25
January 9, 20001
sharing with me, I asked who the opposition would be, and he
gave me -- possibly, it might be the Dover-Kohl study, Jim
Whitehouse. I called Jim, and Jim had no problems with it after
he reviewed it.
MR. FEDER: We had met with them, and I appreciate that,
Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And I thank you very much for
putting me in the direction so I could see what the opposition
had to say.
Item #8B2
TRANSPORTATION DIVISION TO SOLICIT THE SERVICES OF A
CONSULTANT FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONDUCTING A
TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR STUDY OF THE OPTIONS TO
ADDRESS THE NORTH/SOUTH TRAFFIC DEMAND SOUTH OF
RADIO ROAD INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE POTENTIAL
EXTENSION OF LIVINGSTON ROAD -APPROVED
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All right. That takes us to Item B2,
which was 16B(3), corridor study on Davis Boulevard, I believe.
hat's Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: If I might just want to say, this
is a study for a needs for a north-south for extending Livingston
Road or the traffic that's going to end up on Radio Road.
Is there going to be a social and economical aspect of that
study?
MR. FEDER: Yes, there will, commissioners, as well as
environmental. We're going to parallel much like the state does
in their project development environment study, look at the
social, economic and environmental aspects of alternative
alignments, not only the extension to some degree but
alternatives, whether it be the north bridge crossing south of the
light.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Chairman, I'll make a motion
that we approve this item.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Second.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: We have a second by Commissioner
Mac'Kie. All in favor, signify by saying aye.
Opposed by the same sign?
Page 26
January 9, 20001
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Motion carries five-oh.
Item #8Cl
STAFF TO IMPLEMENT THE DIRECTIONS OF THE BOARD TO
SOLVE THE COUNTY'S SHORT AND INTERMEDIATE TERM SOLID
WASTE DISPOSAL NEEDS - STAFF RECOMMENDATION
APPROVED
It takes us to Item 8C(1) in regards from the workshop that
we did on our waste management stream, and we have a
presentation to be made by Mr. James Mudd.
MR. MUDD: Mr. Chairman, commissioners, for the record,
I'm Jim Mudd, the public utilities administrator for Collier County.
The item before you today is to solidify the direction that
you gave us out on the hill. It was a brisk day, but you gave us
some pretty good direction and to make sure we have a quorum
on that direction before we go out and get into some serious
negotiation for the alternatives.
On the slide, it's the same slide we showed you on the hill
for the recommendations, and you basically told us to work the
short term and the intermediate term. The staff's
recommendation for the short-intermediate term is to authorize
the staff to negotiate with Waste Management, Inc. under
current contractual arrangements to haul a portion of the waste
stream to provide a contingency solution for short-term solid
waste disposal while cells one and two of the Naples Landfill are
being reconstructed as proposed in the paragraph below;
authorize the staff to negotiate with Waste Management, Inc.
under current contractual obligations to apply for permits for and
reconstruct existing cells one and two of the Naples Landfill.
The third recommendation is to authorize the staff to implement
a comprehensive odor monitoring plan that has been developed
by the staff and Malcolm Pirnie, our consultant, with public
participation.
The fourth recommendation is to authorize the staff to
negotiate with Waste Management, Inc. under current
contractual arrangements to implement additional odor control
measures recommended by Malcolm Pirnie to provide a prudent
Page 27
January 9, 20001
redundancy out on the landfill instead of the just on time or just
enough, to make sure that we've got some backup systems so if
something fails, that we have some redundancies there that will
handle any problems with the odor; to authorize the staff -- the
fifth is to authorize the staff to negotiate with Waste
Management, Inc. and Immokalee Disposal to expand the
County's recycling program. It -- right now, garbage is picked up
twice a week, recycling is picked up once. We've talked about it
before. Probably we have it backwards. We should be picking up
recycling twice and garbage once if we're going to be doing our
job.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Thank you. Say that again. Love
that.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: And we really should have the big
containers for the recycling versus the baskets that are out there
and blows papers all over the neighborhood.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Right. I couldn't resist an
interruption there.
MR. MUDD: And as you look at those first five items that we
talked about, in keeping with that is to start developing with our
county consultant a solid and hazardous waste master plan so
that we can blend in the short, intermediate and long-term as we
have a plan for the future. We haven't had one developed in
many, many years; to bring that on board, and the last and final
piece is to figure out how to fund all of this, and that's the
financial master plan that we need to get after in order to do
that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Mudd.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Reconstruction of cells one and
two, are you going down to the dirt, reclaiming all that stuff --
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- that was put in there years
ago?
MR. MUDD: We have -- cells one and two were used many
years ago by Collier County in the Naples community to deposit
their solid waste. That -- those cells weren't lined. They have no
leachate collection system underneath, and there is a -- the
prudent thing to do is to take that disposal or that solid waste
disposal and move it, bring it down to virgin earth before we put
Page 28
January 9, 20001
the lined cells in and to basically put that solid waste from years
and years ago on a lined -- on a lined facility. That's prudent for
our grandkids and our grandkids' grandkids, to make sure that
there isn't a potential hazard out there in the future.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second question, you stated
that -- to negotiate with Waste Management on the odor control.
MR. MUDD'- Yes, sir, we're going to basically go back to
them and say this is what we need and figure out if we can -- if
we can find some common ground there and limit any -- under the
contractual agreement, limit any obligations that the County
should have in order to get those things implemented.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I think what's key here --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, in the contract right now,
it states that Waste Management is in control, should be in
control of the odor problem. MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I don't think that's --
MR. MUDD: Sir, I'd like to get the -- I'd like to get the
lawyers on that line with that process, okay, to make sure that
we've got it locked and it's on a piece of paper and it's hard and
fast in that negotiation.
There are some -- the contract, I wish, was more set piece,
and it was more direct. There's -- there's a lot of area for
interpretation there, but that's one of the reasons on the consent
agenda that the county attorney has got Mr. Deez (phonetic) and
that law firm on hold for us so that we can use them. They are
very expert at negotiation processes, and they do quite well for
other counties in Florida, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So, what you're saying is that
we need to rework the contract because Waste Management is
not living up to the standards of controlling the odor that they
promised the citizens and this board in 19957
MR. MUDD: I don't think I'd go that far, sir. What I'm -- in
this particular case, for instance, they're bringing three phase --
let's take the power issue. They're bringing -- they've got two
phase power in there now. They've got Florida Power & Light
coming in with three phase power, and that should give them a
more standard, a more reliable system in case there's electrical
storms, to make sure that the power and the flare are working.
In the County's mind and Malcolm Pirnie's mind, maybe a
Page 29
January 9, 20001
standby generator on top of the three phase power -- three phase
power would provide a better redundancy so that if it does get
hit and it goes out, then the generator kicks in, and then there's
no gas that escapes, and it's basically burned off on the flare.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE.' No matter what.
MR. MUDD: Is that necessarily in the contract or is there
some room there to negotiate some -- some -- some process, so
that's what we need to accomplish.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: You know what I think he's
saying, Commissioner Henning, because I -- you've heard me beat
this drum as hard as I can about Waste Management. The
promises that were made to us in the room on the night that we
approved the contract with Waste Management were, I
understood them to be that whatever it takes, they would fix the
smell, and I think what I have learned now from Jim is that the
contract didn't use those exact words. You know, the contract
said they'll use best management practices, and now we're
fighting over exactly what is it that is required of Waste
Management, and I've got to tell you that I trust Mr. Mudd to fight
to the death for the County not to pay a nickel more than we
have to pay, if we have to pay anything, to cause them to live up
to the verbal promises that they made that aren't detailed in the
contract the way I wish they were.
MR. WEIGEI.: In addition to that --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, in the state statutes, it
says that landfill odors -- outside landfill odors from the site
should not be objectionable.
Who -- who -- who's responsible for those objectionable
odors; are we or is Waste Management?
MR. MUDD: On the objectionable -- well, first of all,
objectionable odor is a relative term, okay, and that's another--
that's another fuzzy item, and I think the Florida Department of
Environmental Protection sets those standards, and to try to get
a consistent standard in that particular arena is quite difficult,
too, sir.
What we need to do is to make sure that -- you're right, that
Waste Management does not let objectionable odor leave the
landfill, and that's why the odor monitoring program, to make
sure that we're getting -- we're finding out where the odor is
coming from, what it -- what particular substance, if it's coming
Page 30
January 9, 20001
from the landfill, what is it, is it sludge, is it animal carcasses, is
it the regular household garbage. What's causing those odors so
that we can try to find the right answer to that particular issue
and --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Mr. Mudd --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I hear you say, but I just have a
problem with us paying for the odor that Waste Management
should be taking care of under state statutes.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, Commissioner Henning, I
understand what you're saying, but when we say that we want
prudent redundancies, that's what it means. A minimal standard
may be acceptable by state law, and how do you define that, how
do you define best management practice, because in the arena
of management, I can give you a whole wide range of definition
for that. What we want are specifics for Collier County's landfill
with the person that we're doing the contract with, which
happens to be Waste Management, and like Commissioner
Mac'Kie, I believe that we have the people now who are going to
go there and say, look, we're not talking minimal standards. We
are talking what we want. This may be a standard way above
minimal, and that has not been clearly defined contractually,
only verbally in commission meetings, and what does that mean,
and who's held accountable, and I think what we're going to do is
tighten up the process.
So, that's the purpose here, is to tighten the process, and
that's where we want to go.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Is there anything here -- I'm
sorry, but I just want to ask this real quickly. Is there anything
here that would -- Mr. Mudd can't go and agree to the County
spending money without it coming back to this county
commission; is that correct?
MR. OLLIFF: No, ma'am. You're exactly right.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: So, before -- you know, after he
cuts whatever deal he can, it comes back to us.
MR. MUDD: And we plan to have the negotiations finished,
and if it turns out we can't come up to negotiation, we'll come to
you sooner than that to give us another -- to go into another
option.
We plan to come back to you in the March time frame. We
should be finished with our negotiations in February, come back
Page 31
January 9, 20001
to you in March and give you the results of the negotiation and
ask you for some decisions, and you'll know the monetary
amounts and everything else that happens from that negotiation.
All we're asking for today is the ability to go out there and
start negotiation.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you very much. I'm glad I
got a word in edgewise over here.
Mr. Mudd, you've inherited quite a problem, and I know that
you're walking into it, and I think that you have the best
intentions to work this out, but our success rate of working with
Waste Management, and I think we've said the same words over
and over again, has been next to nothing.
I'd like to see a chronological listing of all the expenses that
we have incurred trying to correct this problem at the landfill,
including the fans that we purchased as the greatest idea in the
world, that they were going to solve all of the problems and that
are sitting in the back of the property now unused. I think we
spent what, a half million dollars on them?
MR. MUDD: Three hundred seventy thousand, sir.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Oh, good, I'm glad it wasn't a
half million dollars, but all these things added together, I think
we're going to find out that we're going absolutely nowhere with
it, and so I recommend to you that you deal with this with a firm
hand, that all we're doing is getting the run-around to buy more
time, more time and more time. It's been an ongoing problem
that seems to never end, and I'm glad you're aboard, and I'm sure
that you'll exert yourself to the point that we'll reach a resolution
to this in months if not weeks. MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Just a question. Will we be
investigating incineration while you're going along with the
process?
MR. MUDD: Ma'am, the intent--
CHAIRMAN CARTER: That's part two. He's going to get
there.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, oh, I'm so sorry.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: That's okay. No, but he's trying to say,
here's the short term, here's what we're going to do, and give
Page 32
January 9, 20001
Jim the credit for understanding the whole picture, as Tom Olliff
understands the whole picture, of what it means when you have
a contract with someone to manage the landfill as long as it is in
operation. We can't just look at little pieces of this and say,
we're going to do this. We have to look at the total picture. We
have to have confidence in our professional staff and consulting
firm of Malcolm Pirnie to come back and say, here is what we're
dealing with and here's what we can negotiate, and then we
have to make the decision collectively as a board, but I think at
this point, we would be wrong to try to micromanage this
process. Let these guys go do what they need to do.
Now, we do have how many speakers on this, Mr. Olliff?
MR. OLLIFF.' Mr. Chairman, you have two registered
speakers.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. I think we need to go -- well,
let's take -- do you want to do this in sections --
MR. MUDD.' Can I answer her question real fast, sir?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Yeah.
MR. MUDD: Just because we plan to come back to you, the
request for information is still out there. We've done some
advertising. We mentioned that to you at the workshop on the
landfill. We plan to come back to you around the 24th of April,
the last meeting in April to tell you how that came out, sort out
the wheat from the chaff, use the litmus paper test that we want
to see -- we want to see it actually happening some place where
it's getting results instead of in some laboratory. If it's in a
laboratory, we're into the risk business, we want to kind of stay
away from that. We want to have stuff that's actually working
with landfill odors, gas, volumes, reduction and those kind of
things, and that's the test that we'll use.
We'll get back with you and let you know those things that
fall off, those things that stay on the plate, and then ask for your
guidance and your permission to go out there and go out for bid
on those particular items, and then the last -- the last meeting in
June, we plan to come back to the commissioners with a
long-term plan.
COMMISSIONER FIALA.' Thanks, Mr. Mudd.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So, the answer is yes.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: And that's great, Commissioner Fiala,
what you're asking is, because that's what I've been looking for
Page 33
January 9, 20001
ever since I've been on this board. I want the long-term solution
to this, and there's some beautiful programs in place, and I agree
with you, Mr. Mudd, I don't want a test laboratory deal. I want
somebody that's doing it, making it work and has answered all of
those questions.
I further feel that the commissioners here, when they come
back and we go through this and we finally say, we've got some
options, we individual commissioners, however we do it, we need
to go out there and see where it is. I don't care where it is. We
have been short-sighted in the past. We had people worry about
nickels and dimes versus spending the dollars to go and find a
long-term solution, and when you run a half billion dollar a year
corporation, I have never understood that mentality, and I don't
think this board has it.
You're great. We're going to get there, and it's time that we
get it done.
So, we have one speaker -- two speakers.
MR. OLLIFF: You have two speakers. The first is Tim
Constantine representing the Golden Gate Civic Association, and
then Bob Prasowski.
MR. CONSTANTINE: Good morning.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Good morning.
MR. CONSTANTINE: I'm Tim Constantine. I'm president
elect of the Golden Gate Civic Association, and I am here
representing the Golden Gate community today.
First, I want to compliment you, and I think just echo
Commissioner Carter's comments there, I want to compliment
you on the long-term direction here, the goals, looking at the 50
year solution rather than the 10 year solution or 15 year solution.
It eluded us for a number of years when I sat on the board, and I
think that is absolutely the answer here, is there are some
short-term things that need to be dealt with, but long-term, I
think you are absolutely on the right track, whether that's
incineration or whether that's hauling it out of county or
whatever it be, there has to be some long-term fix.
I like most of what Mr. Mudd has put up on that screen with
the exception of one part, and that is reconstructing cells one
and two. I think that is a bad idea for a short-term fix for a
couple of reasons, and the Golden Gate community is very
concerned.
Page 34
January 9, 20001
One, it will require extensive permitting. There will be
objections along that way. It will require permitting, not quite as
extensive, but nearly so as permitting a new cell. There's going
to be a lot of problems along the way, and I will elaborate on that
momentarily.
The big thing for the Golden Gate community is odor still
exists, and the Board of County Commissioners has repeatedly
promised, even Commissioner Mac'Kie, who has differed on what
the direction should go and how long the landfill should be at its
existing site, has promised on more than one occasion that we
must fix that odor problem before we expand on this site, and
reconstructing cells one and two is exactly that, make no
mistake. That is expanding. the use of this site as a landfill.
Most importantly, the County commissioned a two year, one
million dollar study. Commissioner Coletta, asking how much
money have we spent on various fixes over the past several
years, we spent over a million dollars on a study that had a
citizens group. It had people on there that were appointed by
each commissioner, had representatives from each of the
environmental groups in town, had a scientific formula to it, was
done in a double blind study and came back legally defensible.
Ironically, it was created specifically to be legally defensible to
protect the County.
As part of that process, it ranked 46 sites around the county
for their appropriateness for getting rid of solid waste. Out of
those 46, the existing site ranked number 45. Not one, not two,
not five, not ten, it ranked next to last, and so expanding by
reconstructing cells one and two goes directly contrary to the
two year, one million dollar study that is crafted as a legally
defensible document, and I think if there's litigation and if the
board chooses to go forward with reconstructing cells one and
two, I would say on behalf of the Golden Gate community there's
a very high likelihood of litigation, that that document will go
very far on behalf of the people of East Naples and Golden Gate
and Golden Gate Estates in showing that is not the right place,
and cells one and two expansion is not the right way.
So, I would hope that you will look at some other
alternatives for that short-term fix such as hauling or something
other than trying to do more on that existing site. I think it's
contrary to what that study says. I think it's contrary to the best
Page 35
January 9, 20001
interest to the community, and while we certainly don't relish the
opportunity of litigation, beware that the Golden Gate community
will litigate if you choose to go ahead and reconstruct cells one
and two, and I think we've got a very strong case, and I think
we'll prevail.
Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Next speaker.
MR. OLLIFF: Next speaker is Bob Prasowski.
MR. PRASOWSKI: Good morning, commissioners. My name
is Bob Prasowski. I'm a citizen of Collier County.
The waste issue has been something of a hobby for me for
the past 15, 20 years. I'm interested in it because of its need for
an efficient handling. I'd like to first start off though by
congratulating Mr. Henning and the other two commissioners,
Mr. Coletta, Ms. Fiala, on their new positions here on the board.
I came today concerned that there might be something of a
rush or a push to cite an incinerator as the ultimate solution in
the waste handling problem in Collier County. I don't think that's
going to happen right now, and I'm somewhat relieved, because I
have been somewhat remiss as a private citizen to stay up to
speed on this issue over the past ten years. I followed it after
the last incineration effort was defeated, and I like much of what
I've seen on the board. I just arrived. I believe this is the new
solid waste director; is that so?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: He's the public utilities director.
MR. PRASOWSKI: Public utilities director.
Could I see the --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: You should get to know him, I
really commend it to you. He's an excellent, excellent addition
to our staff. You're going to have a lot of confidence in him. I
did.
MR. PRASOWSKI: Great. Yeah, I think I will. I have a good
feeling about the people I see involved here, and I don't want to
paint myself into a corner being critical of any specific solution,
but I am somewhat biased against incineration, as some of you
know already, but my concern here today would be the meaning
of the -- negotiating the out-of-county disposal of the waste
stream, which, to me, is maybe -- has the behind the scenes
implication of delivering waste to an incinerator somewhere
other than Collier County. Is that at all being considered?
Page 36
January 9, 20001
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Are you talking about then the
short-term --
MR. PRASOWSKI: In the short term, yeah.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Short term.
MR. MUDD: In the short term, I don't throw out the option
that if Lee County had some capacity that they could use, that
we would take it there, but right now, the out-of-county that
we're looking at are going to landfills.
MR. PRASOWSKI: Okay. And then on the five to 50 years,
you have waste to energy there. Now, when would that be
started, an analysis of that be started?
MR. MUDD: Sir, we're doing that -- we put that on the -- on
the sheet to give the commissioners up at the workshop an
opportunity to see what we had so far with our request for
information and the analysis that we did on the information that
we got from private contractors.
At the time of the workshop, the commissioners said we
don't want to go there yet. You still have information
forthcoming from the industry as far as other options. So, that's
what I talked about coming back to the board in the March --
excuse me, in the latter part of April at the end of our request for
information, our formal request, that we have put our ads out in
national magazines, solid waste magazines, that's where you're
going to find any interest, get that information back and then do
an analysis of the alternatives that are really usable that are in
use in the country, and, you know, we've heard about Toronto,
I've heard about Australia, different mass -- not mass burned, but
cornposting facilities, things like that that we need to basically
take a look at.
MR. PRASOWSKI: Yeah, there's so many other things out
there. I can appreciate your desire to visit them, just as long as
it doesn't turn into like these trips around the world and to
Sweden and other places that were considered 15 years ago.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: We would be prudent with the
expenditure of taxpayers' dollars, but we also have an obligation
to know what we're looking at.
MR. PRASOWSKI: Excellent.
You know, the long-term solution is definitely, you know, a
good idea. I agree with yourself and Mr. Constantine, but as you
do that, we have to remain flexible because who knows what's
Page 37
January 9, 20001
going to be available 45 years from now. We are locked into 50
years, you know.
A problem with the previous effort of constructing an
incinerator identified a certain price per kilowatt hour, which
never-- never happened. So, the taxpayers would have been
saddled with the difference there.
Lee County, which has been referred to as a successful
incinerator, and I'm not sure either way what's happening there,
but those people had to pay a dear price for their incinerator, you
know, above and beyond. So, I'll be watching and trying to learn
more about this whole process, but I hope we have independent
analysis, comparative analysis of all the systems that are
available, and we don't just listen to people, salesmen coming up
here trying to sell us various forms of waste processing.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Bob, I appreciate your input on
all this. You know, what might be a good idea is maybe if it was
arranged for you to visit some other sites, including like
Okeechobee, the landfill there and also the incinerator in Fort
Myers, of course, at your own expense, but we could arrange for
that --
MR. PRASOWSKI: I was thinking maybe we're going to
maybe go to Japan or Australia like the County --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Notice I said at your own
expense. You can go and report back to us, but it might be a
good idea for you to come back with a second opinion separate
from everyone else. I would welcome it.
MR. PRASOWSKI: I appreciate that, and that's -- I certainly
appreciate that, and maybe I can do that.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA:
that?
MR. MUDD: I certainly can.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA:
COMMISSIONER HENNING:
Mr. Mudd, could you arrange for
Thank you.
Can I say something?
Bob, I've been invited to the incinerator. I haven't been up
there. I'm not fully aware of incineration, and I'd love for both of
us to go up there, and I can arrange that.
MR. PRASOWSKI: That would be great. I'll give your office a
call and leave my number. Okay, excellent.
Nice to speak with you-all on --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you, and there's three
Page 38
January 9, 20001
commissioners already, myself, Commissioner Fiala and
Commissioner Coletta that have been to the Lee County
incineration process, and I will tell you, it's an operation you
need to see. I think all citizens who have any interest in waste
streams and how they're dealt with, you should take that
opportunity to visit a facility like that. It will change your
thinking.
MR. PRASOWSKI: Possibly, although -- and one last word,
my concern with the Lee County facility, like other facilities,
would be what is coming out of the smokestacks and being
dispersed, you know, into the environment.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, you go there and they can
answer those questions. I'm not a scientist, but --
MR. PRASOWSKI: We'll wait for the scientists to tell us.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Right. You go talk to them. I think
you'll be pleasantly pleased with what's taking place.
MR. PRASOWSKI: Thank you. Nice to speak with you.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Bob, thank you very much.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I'd like to move approval of the
staff's recommendations. There are several of them, so I won't
read them into the record, but I move their approval.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I'll second that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well -- okay. There are a lot of
concerns that I have with the recommendations from staff. Tell
you, historically, the odor problem is not in March. It is in the
summertime. So, I would like to move that comprehensive
monitoring of odors to during the heat of the summer.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I believe that is already in the plan to
do that, Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: It is.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Mr. Mudd, you might want to comment
on that, but it was my understanding that this is not something
we do for a couple of months. This is the long-range, ongoing
program through the summer months.
MR. MUDD'. When we do the monitoring program, because of
the consent order, we -- the Florida Department of Environmental
Protection, when we initially went for an extension to the
consent order because of the increase in the flare and the blower
size to burn off the gas, it was six months. We went out in the
first part of August so we get a good portion of the hot season
Page 39
January 9, 20001
and the wet season in there so we can do the monitoring. We
are going to have to get the citizen group to help us in the dry
season for a couple of weeks, and then we're going to ask their
indulgence when we go into the wet season, if they'd help us
then too and take their expert noses that we're going to help
train to detect the different kinds of odors, if they'd be diligent
enough to help us through the wet season to make sure that we
have it under control, sir, and that we get at that wet season and
make sure that it is under control.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: What I read here, it says,
execution of this plan will commence March 1st, 2001, and this
is the Malcolm Pirnie monitoring of the odor with the citizens.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: It will begin then.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: It will begin.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It will begin, so you're saying
it's going to be a long -- I thought -- when we met with the
citizens in Golden Gate, it was going to be like a three week
study.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: No.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. When -- it was when we met in the
Golden Gate community with you, sir, but since that time, the
Florida Department of Environmental Protection has pushed the
consent order out into the summertime. In order to give them
satisfaction it is under control, we're going to have to break it up
into digestible doses with the citizens group, get a two week
window when they look at it in the dry season and get them at a
two week window in the wet season when you can also look at
that.
Now, the instrumentation monitoring, the increase there will
be continuous, and we'll keep that -- we'll keep it surrounding the
landfill, increase it from three to eight and then have two places
within the Golden Gate community as we briefed you, and we
haven't yet figured out those places that somebody's going to
watch it to make sure it doesn't disappear on us after we put it
down, but we'll lay those out. That will be a continuous process.
So, we'll increase the instrumentation, and we'll get the
citizens group to look at it in the two different seasons. It was
going to be three weeks. We'll try to get two weeks one time
and two weeks the next and ask them if they'll give us an extra
Page 40
January 9, 20001
week to make sure we're getting both season.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you very much for this
opportunity.
I just wanted to say, I approve of the motion that's been
made, but there's one thing I wish we could give some
consideration to, and that's the 300 acres that we are sitting on,
and that's land that belongs to the public, and I wish we could
turn it into a passive park that could be used for horseback
riding, ATVs, Scouts to have campgrounds there. This would be
land in reserve for some future contingency also, but meanwhile,
the public has paid for this land. It's just sitting there without
any use at all, and I think we've got a right to be able to exploit it
in some way.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, in all due respect, Commissioner,
until we get the long-term proposals in front of us, we may well
need that land for whatever we do on a long-term basis, and I will
not -- I will not support giving up that land, in fact, at a later date.
I think it should be removed out of surplus and put back to
where we can truly control it until we're done with this process.
Then there may be a lot of that that can be used. You know,
there are some other satellite kind of programs we're looking at
that may need part of that land to deal with some of the issues.
We have -- we have a gem. We have a jewel sitting there in
land that is an asset that communities would kill for, and I
cannot understand why we wouldn't want to protect that until we
were finally done with all the discovery on that.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I don't think you understood my
proposal. It wasn't to take and convert the land over for a
permanent use. It was to put it into the public inventory for their
use until that point of time that we need it for some other
purpose. Meanwhile, it's sitting without any use at all.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Aren't there -- isn't there ATV
usage out there, Tom?
MR. OLLIFF: We did have one ATV event probably five
months ago, and since then, we've -- I think they've cleared a
pathway, but I don't know of any other events instant, and I
think, frankly, in terms of our discussion today, that's probably a
separate issue, what to do with the 300 acres, and if the board
wants us to have that separate item brought back for a
Page 41
January 9, 20001
discussion item, because I know there are some other ideas from
board members for use of that property as well, but I think the
key consistent theme I hear is use of that property so that it's
not going to be --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: As long as we don't lose it and it says
that we need to use it for waste stream management, I have no
problem with temporary uses of that, Commissioner Coletta --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's what I was saying.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: -- and if I misunderstood you, I
apologize, but I don't want to endanger someone saying, oh, well,
you put it into that use and now you're taking it away from us. I
don't want to hear that discussion, but I will -- I think as a
separate item, as the county manager suggested, we bring that
back, but clearly understand if we do do something with it, first
priority will be for waste stream management until we get to the
solutions of where we're going with this.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Carter, with all due respect,
at our workshop, the commissioners were polled, each and every
one of us, and we all agreed not to expand the landfill. Now
what I hear you saying --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: No, I never agreed to that,
Commissioner. That may be your interpretation, but I didn't go
there.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I don't know what you're talking
about, that we agreed not to expand the landfill.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Not in my mind, we never did.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Create a new landfill, and that's
what --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Right.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: We're not talking a new landfill. We're
talking about using property where you may have to create
whatever, it's a mass burn facility, on. Now, that's not a new
landfill. They haven't permitted a new landfill in the State of
Florida since 1991 is my understanding.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: What we eliminated was the new
landfill site that Mr. Constantine was referring to in his study that
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Would have been out around
Orangetree, right?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: That's what we eliminated.
Page 42
January 9, 20001
CHAIRMAN CARTER: That was killed a long time ago.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Let me understand this. Your
motion is that we gave direction to create -- reconstruct cells
one and two.
Now, do we reconstruct it for an ash landfill or do we
construct it as a solid waste cell?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I think that's yet to be determined.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And Mr. Mudd, you have plenty of
work to do. You have to go dig up all of that garbage. You have
to line the cell. You have to get the permits. What we're telling
them at this point is to start that process. CHAIRMAN CARTER: Exactly.
MR. MUDD: Sir, what you're getting at is do you mix ash
with garbage, if that's an alternative. As we're -- as we're lining
those things, I don't see that there's a difference, and I have my
expert behind me, that there's a difference in lining that you
would do for ash or for regular garbage, and yes, you try to keep
those separate in that process, but I don't think we're there yet
in the mass burn, and we won't have to deal with ash versus
garbage in the next six months, so I'd like to be able to get the
request for information information, give you an opportunity to
tell us where we need to go out and concur, go out there and get
some heavy bids from these folks or at least a little bit more
solid bids from them so we have an idea and then come back to
you in June and say, here's what we have for long term, here are
the alternatives that we weighed, here was the criteria that we
weighed them against and here's a recommendation and then
open the floor.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I just believe that constructing --
reconstructing cells one and two is very premature, and --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, Commissioner, we're going to
agree to disagree on that one. I'm going to call the motion.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: May I finish, please?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Sure.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I have spent a lot of time
between our workshop and today with staff, George Yilmaz, who
is our solid waste director, and around the State of Florida on
what they are doing and different contracts, and Mr. Yilmaz had
reported to me there are some options, and I think our motion
today is going to jeopardize those options of what we can do for
Page 43
January 9, 20001
long-term solid waste, and I'm sure he would be willing to explain
some of those options that we do have out there.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Is there any action, Mr. Olliff,
that we're taking today with these staff recommendations that
would jeopardize our options in the future with regard to solid
waste?
MR. OLLIFF: I don't believe so, and, in fact, I think -- I know
one of the options that we've been talking about is alternative
landfill sites, and I think that's one of the options that we have
talked about with George and our options that are out there, and
I think number three in your short-term list of recommendations
here on the screen talks about negotiation with County for out of
county disposal of solid waste, and I think we will look at all of
those options that are out there, and if some of them show up as
long-term possibilities, the board will be presented with that as
options as well to consider for long-term disposal.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I think it gives us a lot of flexibility to
move, and that's why I'm going to call the motion.
All in favor, signify by saying aye.
Opposed?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Motion carries four to one.
Thank you, Mr. Mudd.
Item #8D2 & 8D7
CONTRACT FOR BID #00-3181, COLLIER BAY ENTRANCE
DREDGING TO SUBAQUEOUS SERVICES, INC. - AWARDED IN THE
AMOUNT OF $236,920.67 AND TOURIST DEVELOPMENT
COUNCIL CATEGORY "A" GRANT APPLICATION FOR THE
COLLIER BAY ENTRANCE DREDGING PROJECT - APPROVED
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Court reporter, how are you doing?
You're fine, okay, let us move then to the next item, which will
be D, public services, D.
Mr. Leo Ochs, you have some things you would like to
combine on this.
MR. OCHS: Yes.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: We deleted number one, so we're
looking at items two through seven.
Page 44
January 9, 20001
MR. OCHS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Good morning,
commissioners. For the record, Leo Ochs, public services
administrator.
Agenda Item 8D(2) and its companion item, 8D(7), I would
like to combine those two and address them as one item.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: What were the numbers again,
Leo?
MR. OCHS: 8D(2)--
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And 7.
MR. OCHS: -- and 8D(7), yes, Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Chairman, if there's no
questions from the board, I'd make a motion to approve.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I'll second that motion.
Any questions from the board?
All in favor, signify by -- whoop, whoop, whoop, we have a
speaker.
MR. OLLIFF: I think it's a clarification on which this item
was about. It is Dick Lydon who would like to speak on -- I think
CHAIRMAN CARTER: We're talking items two and seven, am
I correct, Mr. --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Which are Collier Bay.
MR. LYDON: Good morning. Dick Lydon from Vanderbilt
Beach, former chair of the Collier City -- County Beach
Renourishment Committee.
Everything on the beach end of it that I wanted to talk about
this morning is already on the consent agenda, so I'll stick my
oar in here. First of all, yes, let's get Collier Bay straightened
away so those people can get around the corner down there, but
secondly, would you-all think back to when we were talking
about the third penny and look at the things that you are
approving on the consent agenda today and look at those that
have nothing to do with beach renourishment or pass. The
faucet on the cow continues to grow larger and larger and more
plentiful. Please take a look and save some of the money for
beach renourishment and pass measures. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you, Dick.
All right. We have a motion. We have a second.
All in favor, signify by saying aye.
Page 45
January 9, 20001
Opposed by the same sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Motion carries five-oh.
MR. OCHS: Thank you.
Item #8D3 & 8D6
CONTRACT FOR BID #00-3182, HIDEAWAY BEACH T-GROIN
CONSTRUCTION TO SUBAQUEOUS SERVICES, INC. - AWARDED
IN THE AMOUNT OF $166,370.69 AND A TOURIST DEVELOPMENT
COUNCIL CATEGORY "A" GRANT APPLICATION FOR ADDITIONAL
T-GROINS AT HIDEAWAY BEACH - APPROVED. FINDING THAT
THIS ITEM SERVICES AS A PUBLIC PURPOSE. STAFF TO COME
BACK WITH A PROGRAM TO ENHANCE PUBLIC ACCESS.
The next two items that I would like to combine at the
board's pleasure is agenda item 8D --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Excuse me, last one carried 4-oh. Mr.
Coletta was absent. Thank you.
MR. OCHS: Item 8D(3) and 8D(6) are companion items.
That's a recommendation to award a contract for construction of
two additional T-goins on Hideaway Beach and to approve a
category "A" TDC funding budget in the amount of $258,345 to
cover the expenses associated with that project. That funding
has been recommended by both your Beach Renourishment
Committee and your Tourist Development Council.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Motion to approve both those
items.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll second that motion.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All in favor, signify by saying -- do we
have any speakers, Mr. Olliff? MR. OLLIFF: No, sir.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All in favor, signify by saying aye.
MR. MANALICH: Mr. Chairman.
MR. OLLIFF: Oh, I'm sorry.
MR. MANALICH: Mr. Chairman, if I may just make one
comment for the record --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Yes.
MR. MANALICH: -- it will assist the board.
Ramiro Manalich, chief assistant county attorney.
Page 46
January 9, 20001
Very briefly, our office has been asked to review this during
the course of events with regard to the priority of the tourist
development funding for these purposes. Our conclusion is that
you do have the ability legally to use these funds. The reason
the question arose was one of, the T-groins are located on
Hideaway Beach. Obviously, the public access there is only
through the Tigertail Beach access point. However, it is
complete and throughout, and for that reason, we feel there is
sufficient public access. You can find that, and the other
question that arose was because some of the homes that border
from the development onto the beach will be benefitted by these
T-groins, was it only a private purpose, and I believe that the
information we've been presented, you can find that it benefits
the beach as a whole, and I think for the record, you should make
a finding that the public purpose of the statute is satisfied as to
both and that these points are covered as I explained them to
you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you, Ramiro, and that was
presented to the Tourist Development Council, and they also
concurred with Mr. Ramiro's legal opinion.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: When I -- I think we ought to go
take the tour of Hideaway Beach, if I'm not mistaken. At that
time, I raised some questions about access across Little Clam
Pass, and there was a generous offer on the part of the
development down there to put a bridge in, and also, there was
an offer on the part of the development down there to put a
boardwalk in through the mangroves where they grow to the
water's edge, and I think we should take advantage of that at
this time.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, I would concur that if they are
willing to do that, it's a good offer and one that could be
incorporated into the project.
MR. MANALICH: I'm not saying that's required for purposes
of this approval, but I think it's a fine idea, however staff and
manager wish to work on that.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Public access is of the utmost
importance. I think we never have enough of it, and basically,
you're talking about a section of beach that's over a mile away
from public access, and it's -- I think we need to make it as
available to the public as possible before we spend a dollar of
Page 47
January 9, 20001
the public's money on it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, I think this is the only way we
can do that also, is by preparing to put the sand on there.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, you know, if -- do we have
speakers on this?
MR. OLLIFF: You have two speakers here who are
representatives of Hideaway Beach who may be able to help you
answer some of those questions.
Bruce Anderson will be followed by David Somers.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Trying to talk us out of it, Bruce?
You're still under anesthesia if you are.
MR. ANDERSON: Mr. Chairman, for the record, my name is
Bruce Anderson. I represent the Hideaway Beach Association. I
just did not want there to be any misunderstanding.
The Hideaway Beach Association has fronted the money for
a feasibility study for putting in a little cross bridge over Little
Clam Pass and possibility of a boardwalk, slash, fishing pier. We
had not and are not in a position to offer to pay those costs, and I
didn't want there to be a misunderstanding about that. We're
supportive of those efforts, and we'd also be supportive of
bringing the beach back to the way it was.
I'd like to show you a 1973 photograph. This is how the
beach used to be here. Tigertail Beach would be down here, and
you see there was a nice stretch of beach. The people could
walk all the way around here, and, in fact, that's how many of the
residents of Hideaway Beach first got there and decided that
they wanted to build a home there, was to walk around this
stretch. Right here, it has eroded, and this is the area where the
boardwalk could go over the water or sand be put back the way
it was. Hideaway Beach would certainly be supportive of that
occurring, but I did not want there to be a misunderstanding
about their ability to foot that bill on their own. I have no idea
what the cost might be.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I think that clarifies the situation.
So, it's a feasibility study because that is a dynamic, moving
area in terms of sand and water and currents and everything that
nature is going to do and nature does and just have to wait and
see, so thank you for sharing that.
Any questions of Mr. Anderson?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So, from what I understand now
Page 48
January 9, 20001
is that we -- we're going to have public -- we're going to have
public monies spent on sand on an isolated beach with limited
public access.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I don't think that's -- I think they're
saying a feasibility study. They don't know yet what it would
cost and whether they could participate. I mean, they're going to
front the feasibility study, so we've got to find out.
You could get through there today. It's not easy, but you
can do it.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Do we have a chicken and an egg
problem here then --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Yeah, I think that's what we have.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: -- you know, because it sounds --
I mean, it's one thing to say that we're legally permitted, and I
would like to restore this beach, not so much even for the
recreational aspect, but because it is a safety issue. It's what
protects our property from hurricane damage. It's the buffer, and
you'll be hearing more from me about that because there's some
sand that still is due on the Naples beaches that we didn't get in
the earlier widening.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Pam, I think also when we're
talking about that, access, if we don't have the sand there to fill
in between Tigertail and Hideway, there is no access~ so we
need to put that sand there, just like your beaches. You can't
walk it if there's no sand there.
So, we're hoping that we get to a point where that sand can
be renourished, and it will be accessible to all of the public.
The Hideaway Beach people have no problem with having
public access. It's just that it's hard to get there right now
without any sand.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioner Coletta, if I may
interject and let you know that when I was 11 years old, visiting
Tigertail, I walked that whole beach around by Big Marco Pass,
and it was passable, and I -- this is what I see as the first
attempt of restoring that, and restoring the area around that cut
there or putting a bridge, I think, is a public benefit.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So, there definitely would be a
limited public benefit, but we can't really compare this to Naples
where you have access every street to the beach. This is a place
of limited access to begin with, and it will probably remain that.
Page 49
January 9, 20001
I'm just trying to make this a little bit more available to the
public for the funds that we're spending for it, and tourist tax
dollars are spent to build or promote beaches, and this is an
isolated instance, and I agree with you, it will, as secondary,
offer protection for the homes there, but I don't believe that
that's the primary purpose of putting the beach sand down. It's
for tourism, for the residents to be able to enjoy the beaches,
and I think every effort should be made to maximize the effort for
people to be able to enjoy it.
If we go ahead with the feasibility study and then come
back to it about the bridge over the pass -- now right now, at this
point in time, you can cross, but some of the residents have told
me that at times there's as much as three feet of water in the
pass, which would limit it completely from your average person
trying to get across there.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Are tourist development tax
funds available for constructing such an access facility if one is
deemed to be feasible?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Mr. Mihalic.
MR. MIHALIC'- Good morning, commissioners. Greg Mihalic,
director of housing and urban improvement.
Yes, as part of any beach park facility, that's an eligible use.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: So, maybe we need to, you know,
thank Hideaway and take them up on their participation in paying
for this --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: For paying for the feasibility
study, I could go with that.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: The feasibility study, and then if it --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Come back and address the
bridge at one of the times we're talking about TDC money.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Yeah, because I agree with you,
Mr. Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you for that, Pam. I'm
glad you got us through that.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Good point though. The points were
good. They were all healthy discussion. Mr. Manalich.
MR. MANALICH: Mr. Chairman, my only comment is, again,
as several of the commissioners observed, obviously, there are
some judgments that need to be made here. Our point is that we
Page 50
January 9, 20001
believe that if your judgment is that it is a primary public
purpose, you can legally fund it, and you should make that
finding for the record, that there is that prime public purpose per
the statute enhancing tourism.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, thank you, because that same
point was made to the TDC last evening before we approved
these so everyone understands that all the people approving this
know what our boundaries are in which we can operate.
We have a second speaker, Mr. Olliff?
MR. OLLIFF: They waived.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Did we have a motion already?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Yeah, we have a motion and a second.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I think the motion maker then
might want to amend it, or I would offer an amendment that we
particularly make the finding that Mr. Manalich has suggested we
make, and I would ask that we amend the motion also to instruct
staff to come back with a program for enhancing the already
existing public access but to enhance that public access with a
TDC funded boardwalk, bridge, whatever is appropriate. Did you make the motion?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I seconded your motion, but I'm
more in favor of restoring the beach to its natural state.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Oh, I'm for both.
I mean -- who made the motion?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You did.
COMMISSIONER FIALA'. You did.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Who made this motion?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: You made the motion, so you can
amend it to anything you want.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Then I amend it as I just stated.
Will the second agree?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And I'll agree to that.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. All in favor, signify by saying
aye.
Opposed by the same sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Motion carries five-oh.
How are we doing? You okay?
Then let's do a few things --
Page 51
January 9, 20001
Item #8D4
TOURIST DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL CATEGORY "A" GRANT
APPLICATION FOR THE PRODUCITON, TRANSPORT AND
PLACEMENT OF BEACH COMPATIBLE SAND - APPROVED
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Don't we have 8D(4)?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Oh, I'm sorry, we've got a couple more
here. I'm just trying to move this thing along. Okay, we've got
four and five, Mr. Ochs, right?
I'm sorry, Ms. Ramsey, will you take us through four and
five?
MS. RAMSEY: For the record, Maria Ramsey, director of
parks and recreation.
Each year it is estimated that 50,000 cubic yards of sand is
lost due to erosion from our beaches. This TDC application that
you have in front of you is to provide the funding needed to
produce transport and place sand along our beaches pursuant to
the County's incremental beach maintenance program. Through
our annual monitoring program, Park Shore and Hideaway
Beaches have been identified for sand placement this year.
Funding assistance has also been secured from the State of
Florida in a matching grant for a total of $321,930 for Collier
County and $69,862.00 for Marco Island for work that can be
performed from July I of 2000 to June 30th of 2001.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Excuse me, Ms. Ramsey, does anyone
have any questions on this?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I have one.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: The method of transport is what?
MS. RAMSEY: Trucking.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And what's the path? Where are
the trucks actually going to go in Park Shore, and has the City of
Naples seen -- has the city council seen that?
MS. RAMSEY: I'm not sure that the city council has seen
that, and I'm not exactly sure that the pathway itself has been
designated, but I do know that the city is placing two truckloads
of sand today or tomorrow down there on Horizon Way for us to
Page 52
January 9, 20001
take a look at the existing sand samples that we have, and so
I'm assuming that there are access points through there and
they're coming in --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: There are access points. It's just
I'm -- respectfully, I thought that the backup was inadequate for
this item, because I need to know more about what is the quality
of sand, because we took off the item where we were going to
authorize the sand source, and I was glad because there wasn't
enough information, but I don't know enough here about -- I
mean, I desperately want this sand on Park Shore Beach. We
need it badly, and I definitely don't want to lose this grant, but I
don't know anything about what the sand is going to look like
and where the trucks are going to drive.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Maybe we can help you a little bit with
the sand. If it's my understanding, we have one source, and that
sand is the quality of which we can use. That was at the TDC
last night. Greg, am I correct on that? MR. MIHALIC: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: And we're going to move --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I mean, is it wonderful or is it
acceptable?
MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Chairman, we will find that out. We ended
up having one bid to our RFP. There are bid proposals that went
out. We are going to take a look at it physically at the beach,
and that's the two trucks that Maria was referring to, to actually
see it placed on-site.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: It's this sand, and it's there now?
MR. OLLIFF: It is this sand. It will be there. It is not there
right now.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: When will it be there?
MS. RAMSEY: It's being trucked in either today or tomorrow
morning, and the beach committee is convening at ten o'clock on
Thursday morning at Horizon Way to actually see it in place.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: So, Sue, will you get that on my
calendar, because I'd like to be there for that too, and if
somehow we can make a conditional approval, conditioned on
the acceptance of that sand and of the route --
MR. OLLIFF: You will see the approval again, because the
item that we pulled off the agenda was the approval of that
contract because we are not going to approve anything that's
Page 53
January 9, 20001
even questionable in terms of sand on the beach down there, and
if it doesn't meet the spec., then it's either going to be agreeable
to everyone or we may go back out to bid and break it down into
smaller bids, do whatever it takes to get the right kind of sand on
the beach.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And as to the routing, could we
get the approval of, at least, the mayor, the city council, I don't
know -- you know, we need to be really attentive to that.
MR. OLLIFF: We will, by all means, show them a routing
schedule in advance of whatever we do, but as you know, there
are fairly limited numbers of ways to get to that beach.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Where -- this is actually
physically going to go -- you're taking it -- MS. RAMSEY: Park Shore.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I know Park Shore, but it's a long
stretch. It's going to go from where to where?
MS. RAMSEY: I think Harry can give you the actual condo to
condo in that area.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Okay, that will do.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Condo to condo, Harry.
MR. HUBER: Good morning. For the record, Harry Huber
with the parks and recreation department.
I can't tell you condo to condo, but I can tell you length,
about a thousand feet north of Horizon Way and 2,000 feet south
of Horizon Way, and it's all within --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: That's not that far.
MR. HUBER: -- it's all within the original permit boundaries
for the beach renourishment projects.
So, it's not coming all the way
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
down to Naples Cay?
MR. HUBER: No.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
There's a terrible need there. I
mean, it's just completely washed away because of that rock
groin.
MR. HUBER: Well, we do have a -- and I don't know if it's
expired at this point, but we had, about a year ago, a field permit
to put some sand in there, but that is not part of this proposed
project.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, that may be another item, but
right now, I think we only have -- four and five are grant
Page 54
January 9, 20001
applications to deal with, and then we'll talk -- then the quality --
we'll have an opportunity to approve the quality. You'll have a
chance to see the quality, and everybody can get on board with
it.
So, if we could stay with these items, I think that's where
we need to be.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: We will see this -- we will have a
later
opportunity to approve the sand -- MR. OLLIFF: Yes.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: -- and we will coordinate with the
City on the most convenient route for trucks, because that's a
really sensitive question in there for residential areas.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I would agree.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All right. All in favor of the motion,
signify by saying aye.
Opposed by the same sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Motion carries five-oh.
Thank you very much.
Item #8D5
TOURIST DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL CATEGORY "A" GRANT
APPLICATION FOR A FEASIBILITY STUDY FOR HIDEAWAY
BEACH RENOURISHMENT - APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Last item, Mr. Chairman, Item 8D(5) is a
recommendation to approve a category "A" TDC funding
appropriation in the amount of $22,000 to conduct a feasibility
study to determine the best long-term solution to the erosion
problems that are occurring on Hideaway Beach.
The study will focus primarily on identifying the best sand
source for future renourishment of that Hideaway Beach area,
and, again, this project has been recommended by both your
Beach Renourishment Committee as well as your Tourist
Development Council, and staff would recommend approval.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Questions?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'd like to make a motion to
Page 55
January 9, 20001
approve.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All in favor, signify by saying aye.
Motion carries five-oh.
Thank you very much.
Item #10A
If we could move to Item 10, Board of County
Commissioners, and take Items A through G, and then we can
call for a break, because I think the next portion of this may --
one item there may have a little more discussion, and our court
reporter will need a break, and so will this Chair.
Item #10A
RESOLUTION 20001-08 REAPPOINTING DAVID EILER, JERILYN
NEUHAUS AND GARY GRIFFES TO THE ISLES OF CAPRI FIRE
CONTROL DISTRICT ADVISORY COMMITTEE - ADOPTED
Item t 0A, appointment of a member to the Isle of Capri Fire
Control.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I move approval of the three
applicants.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And I second that.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Second. All in favor, signify by saying
aye.
Motion carries five-oh
Item #10B
RESOLUTION 2001-09 REAPPOINTING JACULYN DERING, DIANE
WILLIAMS AND DORIS LEWIS TO THE LIBRARY ADVISORY
BOARD - ADOPTED
Appointment of a member to the library --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I make a motion that we
approve it.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Second.
Page 56
January 9, 20001
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Is this on 10B?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: 10B.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And then we have to also make
that a unanimous vote, that waiver for Ms. Dering, but I hope we
would agree to do that.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Everybody is --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's in my second.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: That's in the second.
We had a first by Commissioner Coletta, a second by
Commissioner Fiala.
All in favor, signify by saying aye.
Opposed, same sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Motion carries five-oh.
Item #10C
RESOLUTION 2001-10 REAPPOINTING KENT ORNER TO THE
OCHOPEE FIRE CONTROL DISTRICT ADVISORY COMMITTEE -
ADOPTED
Appointment of member to the Ochopee Fire Control District
Advisory Committee.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Motion to approve Mr. Orner.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Make a motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Second.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, we had a whole bunch of motions
to approve. Motion to approve by Commissioner Mac'Kie,
seconded by Commissioner Coletta.
All in favor, signify by saying aye.
Motion carries five-oh.
Item #10D
RESOLUTION 2001-11 APPOINTING BARBARA LEWIS MAINSTER
TO THE COLLIER COUNTY SCHOOL READINESS COALITION -
ADOPTED
Page 57
January 9, 20001
Appointment of a member to the Collier County Public --
Collier County School Readiness Coalition.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Motion to approve.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Motion by--
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Second.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: -- Commissioner Henning, second by
Commissioner Mac'Kie.
All in favor, signify by saying aye.
Opposed by the same sign?
(No response.}
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Motion carries five-oh.
Item #10E
RESOLUTION 2001-12 APPOINTING ELVIN SANTIAGO TO THE
HISPANIC AFFAIRS ADVISORY BOARD - ADOPTED
Appointment of a member to the Hispanic Affairs --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Motion to approve.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Motion to approve by Commissioner--
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: -- Mac'Kie, second by Commissioner
Fiala.
All in favor, signify by saying aye.
Motion carries five-oh.
Item #10F
RESOLUTION 2001-13 APPOINTING DAVID ELLIS TO THE
AFFORDABLE HOUSING COMMISSION -ADOPTED
Appointment of a member to the Affordable Housing
Commission.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Make a motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: A motion to approve by Commissioner
Coletta, second by Commissioner Henning.
All in favor, signify by saying aye.
Motion approved.
Page 58
January 9, 20001
Item #10G
RESOLUTION 2001-14 APPOINTING JOSEPH BOGGS TO THE
RURAL LANDS ASSESSMENT AREA OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE -
ADOPTED
Item 10G, appointment of a member to the Rural Lands
Assessment Area Oversight --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Make a motion we approve.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Motion by Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Second.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Second by Commissioner Mac'Kie.
All in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Jim, may I add one thing. Just
so that the audience out there doesn't think we're ignoring our
job, we've been through this material over and over again, and so
it wasn't a case of just an automatic thing that we were passing
through in the night.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, they gave us complete
accounts of all of these different people.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: We have all this in front of us. It's a
situation where the board has to approve these, and we don't --
and there's usually just one person for one position.
Commissioner Coletta is absolutely correct, we do have to move
it through the agenda because that's what we're challenged with
as our role and responsibilities as the Board of County
Commissioners.
Therefore, saying what I've just said, we're going to take a
ten minute break.
(Small break was held}.
Item #1 OH
RECONSIDERATION OF VOTE TAKEN ON DECEMBER 12, 2000,
AGENDA ITEM #12C1, RE ADOPTING AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND
THE COLLIER COUNTY EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES SYSTEM
IMPACT FEE ORDINANCE BY ADDING A PROVISION FOR AN
EXEMPTION FOR ADULT-ONLY COMMUNITIES - COMMISSIONER
MAC'KIE TO WORK WITH COUNTY ATTORNEY
Page 59
January 9, 20001
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. We are ready to resume, if I
could get all the commissioners back here on the dais, we're
back in session.
If you have private conversations, ladies and gentlemen, you
may continue those in the hall. We have resumed the board
meeting. You've all been very good and turned off your cell
phones this morning. In case there's any new arrivals, please
keep those off so they don't disrupt the meeting. We appreciate
your cooperation.
Let me go to the next item, which is H, and that is
reconsideration of a vote taken December 12 in regards to the
Collier County ordinance impact fee, assisted living facilities, et
cetera, et cetera.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Commissioner Carter, the reason
I put that on the agenda is that I have questions about this item,
about whether or not perhaps our ordinance could be more
narrow than it is, and as I understand the process, today would
not be the substantive discussion of that issue but would be the
point which the board agrees or disagrees with my request and
also Commissioner Henning's request to put this item back on for
our next agenda for a substantive discussion.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, let me ask you this,
Commissioner, if your question was answered today, would you
want to still consider reconsideration?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: No, but I think my question is
more complicated than can be answered today.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: If I may, I voted against it the
last time. I didn't have all the information in front of me that I
have now. I also visited a number of these communities. I
talked to several people in the state legislative branch, and I
came to the conclusion we have no defensible position, and if it
came to a vote, I would have to vote for it, accepting it at this
point in time rather than denying it.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: The question I have -- we have no
defensible position. It's just absolutely true that with regard to
deed restricted communities with over 55, we cannot, whether
we want to or not, require them to pay educational impact fees
because the Florida Supreme Court says so.
My question is with regard to assisted living facilities and
similar -- things that are not -- you know, our ordinance did more
Page 60
January 9, 20001
than that. Our ordinance did more than over 55 deed restricted
neighborhoods. It was broader, and I would like to be sure that
it's focused as narrowly as it possibly can be, and that on a case
by case basis, we look at anything other than an over 55 deed
restricted community. We look at those on a case by case basis
to see whether or not there is any actual impact that can be
assessed. That's what I would ask -- that's what I had in mind for
reconsideration.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Why don't I go to Mr. Weigel and ask if
that can be answered for you, Commissioner, and are we really
hunting ants with an elephant gun here?
MR. WEIGEL: Thank you.
No, I don't think so.
I'd note that the ordinance, when it makes its reference to
assisted care living facilities, that's just by example, and they
have to -- they, such as any other, call it community or
subdivision --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: David, can you get closer to the
mike. I'm just having bad hearing. I need to get a hearing aid.
MR. WEIGEL: Sorry. I can speak up too.
The ordinance uses an assisted care living facility only as
an example, but the assisted care living facility, as any other
facility or construction, mobile home park, which was the
Volusia County Supreme Court case, they have to have in place
almost immutable restrictions that's for a 55 and over, an adults
only living arrangement. It seems to me that staff, with new
construction, has the ability, and, in fact, the requirement to
make the inquiry, and if the deed restrictions are not in place or
something on the plat, which is what the Supreme Court case
utilized as a tool in its review, is not in place, then the staff
doesn't -- doesn't provide for an exemption from the school
impact fee.
However, it must be noted that our ordinance never
conceptualized that the school impact -- public school impact fee
would be assessed against these type of facilities. In essence,
it's always been constitutional in its application, I would state,
and the mere removal or reconsideration resulting in the repeal
of what the board adopted on December 12 would not put in
place the automatic assessment of impact fees for these
facilities that meet these high restricted standards.
Page 61
January 9, 20001
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: So, David, if we didn't have -- if
we had not amended the ordinance, what the staff would do is on
a case by case basis, look and see whether or not
constitutionally a school impact fee can be assessed on an
individual application, and if I'm right about that, my -- my -- my
concern is, did the ordinance do anything to limit their ability to
do that?
MR. WEIGEL: The ordinance gave them no further ability
than the law absolutely says is constitutional to do.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: But can they still -- how will we
know -- if an assisted living facility that is for the purpose of or
includes facilities for children who require, while it may be one
child or two children, a very expensive education, and, therefore,
clearly has an impact on this system, how -- what is the
methodology by which we can collect the school impact fee in
that case?
MR. WEIGEL'- Well, very good, and what the Florida Supreme
Court said is, does the facility or the construction or the
development or the subdivision, and they used all of those words,
because in the case before them, it was a mobile home park, age
restricted 55 and over, does any of those facilities, those land
use developments create a need for new schools, and if the
answer is no substantively, then it is inappropriate, in fact,
unconstitutional to assess an impact fee against that facility or
that land use -- that land use.
So, they also looked and said -- because Volusia County
argued very, very strongly, four very significant arguments here,
and Volusia County said, well, what about if there's like a
sporadic child or two that comes through and lives within the
facility, the Supreme Court said, no, that's not really what we're
talking about. We're talking about a substantive requirement for
school facilities to be built based upon the people living within
that facility or that park, and they noted that there was in place,
however, very restrictive deed restrictions or covenants, and
these are different than just corporate bylaws and things of that
nature that exist, and if -- if the County applies the Florida
Supreme Court standard, which is all that they are looking to do,
I think that there will be no application, no ability to assess the
fee when it shouldn't be assessed, but at the same time, where it
must be assessed, it will be assessed.
Page 62
January 9, 20001
I will reiterate, however, that for the County to attempt to
assess a school impact fee against an assisted care living
facility would be difficult without further amendment to the
ordinance because that was not contemplated in the initial study
done in the first place, taking into account that they are not the
kind of facility that has school age children living in them.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: And if I'm understanding this correctly,
even if there were one or two there, it would not be a significant
impact to --
MR. WEIGEL: That's what the Court said.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: What the Court is telling -- at least I as
a lay person hearing this is saying -- the Court is going to say,
you haven't demonstrated impact.
MR. WEIGEL: Yeah, you'll see that on Page 5 and Pages 14
and 15 of the court opinion that I provided you.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I wasn't prepared today for--
with citations to give you. I thought today we would just do the
procedural issue and that later we would have the substantive
discussion.
I also can bow to the will of the majority, but I am
concerned -- I wonder if rather than -- I mean, God, the domino
effect of this is very troubling. You know, this is a worrisome
case, and there are times when this County files declaratory
judgment suits, appeals lawsuits, intervenes in lawsuits, does
things instead of going along with. This is one of those that
troubles me and --
MR. WEIGEL: Could you iljustrate the dominoes that might
come from this? I think it's pretty circumscribed to adult
restricted -- adult age restricted communities.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Oh, no, I'm not concerned about
those dominoes, David. The ones that I mean are with the
concept of you only have to pay an impact fee if you can show a
demonstrated -- if you would trigger the need for a new school is
the only reason you have to pay a school impact fee.
MR. WEIGEL: Okay. Well, they may --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: That's just troubling.
MR. WEIGEL: I think one part, and Mr. Coletta raised a very
good point during the consideration on December 12th, was,
well, what about homes and other dwellings that people that are
living in them don't have children, things of that nature --
Page 63
January 9, 20001
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: That's different.
MR. WEIGEL: -- or their agent and they're living in single
family dwellings, and the Court looked at that also, and they
said, well, if you get into that kind of discussion, we're talking
about a user fee, and the impact fee concept is not a user fee,
and, in fact, a user fee is not appropriate for public school
construction, at least at this point under their jurisprudence.
There are two or three -- obviously, two or three different
funding sources to fund the need for schools and capital
facilities for schools. The tax is, of course, the easiest one to do
because the relationship is very -- almost tenuous. You can tax
and then just spend the money for the good of the people, and
there doesn't have to be a definite benefit relationship, but for
these age restricted communities where they have no school age
children or essentially no school age children in there, the Court
said, there's no benefit for these people paying school impact
fees. If they do pay a school impact fee, it's to benefit children
somewhere else, and that makes it like a tax, and so that would
be an illegal assessment against them.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All right. There's already three
members of the board who want to bring this back to reconsider.
How many do we need for reconsideration?
MR. WEIGEL: Three would be fine, and aside from
reconsideration though, another tool the board could use, if they
wanted to come back, is just we could always amend this further
as far as that goes. Reconsideration typically is throwing off the
previous decision that's been made by the board, but you can
come back and amend it or chip away at it, address it again and
again if you'd like to.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: What is the pleasure of the board; to
leave it as it is or to ask for an amendment or -- that's really your
choices here.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I would say leave it as it is.
My concerns -- and thanks to Pam for bringing those
questions forward, because they answered my questions. I just
want to make sure that we have trigger points to identify certain
communities or certain uses to make sure that growth truly pays
for growth, and I'll get together with Mr. Mulhere in the planning
to make sure that's there.
MR. WEIGEL: Absolutely. The county attorney can help
Page 64
January 9, 20001
there, and I provided to all the commissioners the Broward
County address of this, which they did in September, and what
they did was they said -- the County attorney, in their ordinance,
it specifically said for the county attorney to have the final word
in reviewing whether the deed restrictions or notations on a plat,
these developmental documents were sufficient or not for the
non-assessment of this school impact fee.
We don't have that detail in ours, and I'm not really
concerned that we don't, but it seems to me that the county
attorney may take it as an obligation, working with staff and
assist staff to put in various trigger and review points so that any
facility that doesn't receive or have assessed the school impact
fee at construction in the permit phase, that they be subject to
periodic review, and this can be done with a computer program, I
think, very logically, so that every six months we target the
review. If we don't get the kind of information we need from the
people who are benefiting from not paying it, the owners of the
facilities, well, at that point and forward, we have the
constitutional ability and the legal ability to assess that.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: We can assess after the fact if
we determine that they've amended, they've changed the
restrictions, David?
MR. WEIGEL: Yes, the Supreme Court gave us that option.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Five years after completion of
construction?
MR. WEIGEL: Because the use has changed.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Well, that gives me some
comfort, too.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Again, if everyone is basically
comfortable with the ordinance as is, unless there's some
different direction, the questions have been answered --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: My questions are answered to a
great degree, and probably the best approach at this point
instead of overturning it would be, if I could work with David and
maybe if there's some tweaking that needs to be done to bring
back maybe an amendment to the ordinance for the board's
consideration.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Fine. If everyone is comfortable with
that, then that suffices the process that we'll go through.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Okay.
Page 65
January 9, 20001
MR. WEIGEL: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you.
Thank you, Commissioner Mac'Kie, for bringing that up for
discussion.
Item #101
ACTION PLAN FOR THE COUNTY MANAGER TO PROVIDE
WRITTEN EXPECTATIONS FOR PERFORMANCE FOR FY-01 -
APPROVED
We go to Item I, which is a recommendation to approve an
action plan for the county manager to provide written
expectations for performance for FY-01. I think we probably can
share -- a little bit with that is, Commissioner Mac'Kie can, as
that in the past, we did not have, in my judgment, a solid
program for doing the review of the county manager or the
county attorney, and under past boards, we set up a process and
a system where we can get consensus on what we were going to
evaluate and how we were going to do it. We went through and
did a list of management abilities which were rank ordered by
the board, and that became the catalyst for the county manager
then to present what he is presenting this morning that says, this
is how I would expect the Board of County Commissioners to
evaluate me, and unless you have specific questions about this --
I would tell you, this is the first time since I've sat here that we
have a solid system where there's no questions when I bring this
to you as the chair and say, commissioners, we need to evaluate
the county manager, you have it now to use as an ongoing tool in
your discussions with him, to see whether or not he's performing
according to expectations.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: In the six years that I've been
here, I promise there's never been a system. This look fabulous,
and I move its acceptance.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second that.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All in favor, signify--discussion?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I just want to thank you and the
county manager for bringing this forward. It's a great process.
Page 66
January 9, 20001
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, thank you, and I will tell you, one
of the most painful things that I have found as a commissioner is
we have to do a public evaluation of the county manager, the
county attorney, and, you know, I don't know how anybody out
there feels, but how would you like to have your performance
discussed in public, and it's not one of those pleasurable things
we have to do.
At least this keeps us focused objectively on what we're
going to do and how we're going to do it, so we take a lot of pain
out of the process.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Well, let's see if there's pain in it
or not, Tom, depending on how you're performing.
MR. OLLIFF: Just for the board's -- for the board's
information, by contract, you will then be doing an evaluation of
me for my annual review in September of this year, so it gives
you a full period of time to be able to have this action plan in
hand and then be able to judge my performance until we get to
that point in September.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And I'm confident that you won't
let it be just sort of up to the chairman to remember to do the
evaluation, because that's a problem we've had in the past too,
and, David, I hope the same thing on yours.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Just trigger those points for us,
because we want to keep it in the system and on time. We really
did not do it as well as we wanted to in the past, and the new
direction here from this board is we're going to do our
management side of this effectively and efficiently. MR. OLLIFF: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All in favor, signify by saying aye.
Opposed by the same sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Motion carries five-oh.
Item #10J
RESOLUTION 2001-t5 SUPPORTING THE ENDORSEMENT/CO-
SPONSORSHIP OF SOUTHWEST FLORIDA TRANSPORTATION
OUTREACH PROGRAM APPLICATIONS - ADOPTED
That moves us to Item J, a resolution supporting the
Page 67
January 9, 20001
endorsement/co-sponsorship of Southwest Florida Transportation
Outreach Program initiatives. I'm bringing this to the board
because the Southwest Regional Planning Council,
Commissioner Coletta who also sits there -- this is an opportunity
for us to go on record in support to the legislatures that we're
going to do our best to try to get some of this money here for
these specific programs.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Motion to approve.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Second.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All in favor, signify by saying aye.
Motion carries.
Item #10K
RESOLUTION 2001-16 SUPPORTING THE NEW IMMOKALEE
CUSTOMS FACILITY - ADOPTED
The next one is a refinement of that motion saying that one
item on that list that would help Collier County the most would
be the Immokalee customs facility, and so I put a resolution in
there supporting that.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I make that motion.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Second.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And I'll second that.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. We have a motion and a pair of
seconds. All in favor, signify by saying aye.
Opposed by the same sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Motion carries five-oh. Thank you very
much.
Item #10L
STAFF TO PURSUE SCHEDULING OF JOINT WORKSHOP WITH
THE CITY OF NAPLES AND CHAIRMAN TO WRITE A LETTER TO
SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT REGARDING
THE ASR ISSUE
Now, we move to the add on, which is L, joint meeting of the
Page 68
January 9, 20001
city and county on the ASR issue.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: This is pursuant to a letter that
was delivered to our chairman, and I hope everybody has gotten
a copy of it by now, from the mayor of the city of Naples. I think
there's been a communication problem here with regard to this
ASR issue because there was earlier correspondence from the
City of Naples that upon review does request a joint meeting, and
what we did in response to it was have a staff workshop, and I
attended it, and it was very informative and a great amount of
information, and the only attendee, not that -- I didn't mean that
as if there should have been more, but the attendee from the City
of Naples was Councilman Tarrant, and at that meeting, they
made a request for a joint meeting, again on the ASR issue, and
we tabled that, as I understood it, at the meeting pending the
response to some specific questions that had been asked, and
those -- by the expert for the City of Naples, and I have now a
January 4th letter that's going to Kevin Rambosk from Mr. Oilill
that is answering those questions, but in the meantime what has
happened is that the City of Naples, as I understand it, is going
to send out a card, a questionnaire in all of its water bills saying,
do you support or oppose the County's ASR project.
I'm concerned about this because that would -- as a
customer who will receive that notice, that would frighten me. It
would make me think there's something wrong. It's not the norm
to get that -- I think the City would do its very best to avoid
scaring people. I think they'll do their very best to avoid
misleading people, but I'm telling you all of that background for
the purpose of saying we've really got a communication gap
here.
We need to -- we are on the right side of the science here on
the ASR issue. We are on the right side. The ASR is going to be
the backbone of the Everglades restoration. It's --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Three hundred wells will be put in as
part of that restoration.
Just for information, how many people in the audience know
what an ASR well is?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Well, besides our staff.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: The staff knows.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Okay, two.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: See, I'm with--
Page 69
January 9, 20001
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Three.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: -- Commissioner Mac'Kie. See, most
people getting this will say, an ASR well, and they're going to
frankly say, what the hell is that, and then they're going to call,
depending on who they call, they're going to get --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Hopefully me.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, I wish they would.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Just call me.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I wish they would call Commissioner
Mac'Kie --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Please call me, please.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: -- because I think you will -- what
we're saying is, and tagging on to this, Commissioner, if I might, I
have communicated with the mayor on this issue, and I believe
that what they need to do is have the full presentation, which we
have offered by our county staff and the expertise with James
Mudd, to go to them and go through this and answer the
questions about what it is, how it works and does it in any way
negatively affect their wells.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: For example, just -- I couldn't
agree with you more, but one of the things that's most
persuasive or that I hear being mentioned over and over again in
the city council meetings is, well, the State of Georgia, the
legislature has opposed a moratorium on these. As I understand
it, the State of Georgia is a giant rock with a layer of clay on the
top. Therefore, ASR has real potential for fissures in the rock
and a lot of lateral movement that's -- it's just not relevant to the
discussion for us.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Right. When we -- and I'll bring this up
later, but in a meeting yesterday, he went through this, and I
thought, hey, well, that's great.
I don't think any of us are experts on ASR wells, and I will
assure you the city council, as individual members, are not
experts. What they -- what we all need to do is listen to the
experts and find out, would we, any one of us threaten any of the
water systems in Collier County. I will tell you, absolutely and
unequivocally no. What we want to do is present to them,
through our staff, this is the issue.
Now, if the City of Naples wants to have a meeting with us
and this is one of the agenda items, I am all in favor of that, but I
Page 70
January 9, 20001
do not want to meet with any organization on a singular issue
because that sets a precedent that every time somebody
disagrees with somebody, they want all of the politically -- the
elected officials to sit down at the highest level of ignorance and
have a discussion, and I say that because we are not experts in
these areas. We are policy setters, and we give staff direction.
That is our job as a board. We are not elected as, quote, experts
in any given area. If I was an expert in an area, I would come to
the County and apply for a job in one of those areas, but I'm not.
So, that's where I see this, and correct me, Tom, if I'm
wrong, is I think we want to do everything we can to make the
City of Naples comfortable with this, but I think there's a
process, and I think the next step is to hear our staff at their
council meeting and go through it. After that, if they want to
meet with us with an agenda of items, I would be more -- it would
be our pleasure to sit with them.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And I think we should be having
quarterly meetings with the City.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I have no problem with that at all.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And maybe with both city
councils, Ms. Fiala, and I would just -- for your information, I
spoke with Mayor MacKenzie yesterday and urged, begged,
cajoled that these notices please not go out until there's further
information. I read in today's newspaper that that -- you know,
assuming that was all appropriately reported, that they are going
to go forward with the notice. So, I guess there's nothing to be
done about that unless we can just continue to beg and cajole,
which I will do.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, I think, Commissioner Mac'Kie,
you've done an excellent job in trying to communicate this.
I have tried as the chairman of -- person of the commission
to state that I felt it needed to go through the process of
listening to the professionals and have not suggested to them
that we have a joint meeting on the single issue, and that's
where I have been, and I have the greatest respect for the mayor
of the city. I think there are a couple of council people there
who are driving this process, and no matter what you say to
them about ASR wells, they are not going to change their minds.
They are convinced that it's the devil at work, and, you know,
it's not going to change it.
Page 71
January 9, 20001
COMMISSIONER FIALA: The sad thing is, they're sending
out these cards, as you said, assuming that every person they
send that card to is an expert, so these people are going to fill
out these cards and they don't even know what an ASR is.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: What it does is it promotes fear and
negativity. I am really concerned about that, but we can listen to
the issue, and we will continue to try to communicate all this to
them.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'll be happy to meet.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Well, I've asked the mayor if we
could be on the next available agenda for a workshop for -- in any
format, a special meeting, a special workshop, asked her to give
us a few hours' notice, but other than that, we would show up to
meet with whoever would listen about this, and she has assured
me she's very willing to do that, very interested in that, however,
their -- a week from today, their workshop is a very full agenda,
and she was not optimistic that we could get on that agenda.
So, I'll continue to make the offer. I would ask, would this --
would we as a board formally invite or make an invitation, set up
some regular series of meetings?
I have asked to be on the city council, the City of Naples, on
their workshop agenda once a month just to go sit there, and if
there's nothing to talk about, there's nothing to talk about, but --
because we have, obviously, had some lapses in communication,
and I think with this new board -- let me just say it this way. The
relationship with the City of Naples city council with our former
county commission was an unpleasant one, and there was
actually, you know, personal dislike, and it was an unpleasant
situation, and people were insulting to each other. If nothing
else except for sort of reaching out a friendship hand and making
nice with people who we respect and represent, I wish we would
schedule a joint meeting on several topics; the buses, this and
others.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I would concur, Commissioner, and I
would be more than willing to support us doing that, and I think
we need to do that, and if it's the pleasure of this board, I'd be
the first one to say, let's do it with a list of topics that are of
concern to both communities, and we can have that total
discussion, and I think that would work fine.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: If I might suggest, we might
Page 72
January 9, 20001
want to look at an ambassador program where one of the
representatives of this commission to go to some of these
meetings, because we also have Everglades City and Marco
Island who we should be bonding with a little closer than we are
at present, and I also suggest that we take a look at a meeting
twice a year, a workshop meeting with Lee County.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Absolutely.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, that's on this agenda. I know our
county manager is working on a joint meeting with Lee, and all
these items are great.
I meet informally with the mayors of Marco and Naples. We
just rotate it. There's no agenda. It's like sitting down and
having coffee together and what's on your mind, and as those --
when those take place, then I will come back to the board in the
board communications and say, we had a meeting. We talked.
Here's some of the things that were kicked around, but this is -- I
think we're doing the outreach. I really truly believe that we are,
and there's -- there is a spirit of cooperation with both cities, and
I agree, Everglades City -- you know, that is your -- that is your
area, and I think that, Commissioner, where the city sets is -- I
think it's great if you go to the workshops and keep us informed.
I don't think that's my judgment, the role of the chair to go to all
these workshops. I think it falls within the district, and I, frankly,
would welcome help. I mean, I don't think the chair needs to be
doing these things. You need to do it across the whole Board of
County Commissioners, so wherever it's appropriate.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: So, can we direct staff to arrange
for a joint City of Naples and Collier County Commission meeting,
and perhaps if we're interested in inviting the other city -- the
other municipal governments as well, but as soon as possible I
would like to see that.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, I think we ought to take it city by
city, because each has its own set of situations is what I'm
finding out in informal discussions, and I think that would
probably be appropriate.
MR. OLLIFF: My suggestion would be that we don't establish
a standing meeting only because we did that in years past, and
we ended up having meetings without having an agenda of
anything to discuss, but if we can maybe make a note that once
every whatever, how many number of months, we'll at least
Page 73
January 9, 20001
contact each other and find out if there's a need to have a
meeting, so there will be a regular reminder of that.
My other suggestion in terms of this immediate meeting
would be that we at least offer for the City to have the
opportunity to have the staff make that presentation to their
council prior to us having that joint meeting, because I think it
would help to answer a bunch of their questions before we sit
down together.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: For that particular issue, and if you
would be comfortable with that, Commissioner Mac'Kie, I would
like us to direct staff to arrange that meeting after this particular
issue of ASR wells has had a full presentation by professional
staff where any and all the council members can ask questions
and they feel a lot better after hearing that presentation.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I would agree with that.
I have an additional kind of touchy question that I need to
ask, and that is, I think, based again on what I read in the
newspaper this morning, that the only possibility that we might
be able to avoid having those questionnaires, those cards, those
notices go out is if we put this permit back in abeyance pending
that workshop. If we said -- I mean, would it kill us -- I know, Mr.
Mudd, I know you've got a grant, and you've got money that we're
going to lose if we don't meet some deadlines.
I guess my question is, could we add an additional month to
the process to allow -- give me a month to go try to have this
workshop with the city council and say, we are not going to
pursue our permit for one month while we do that?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I think I would like Mr. Mudd to
comment on that.
MR. OLLIFF: I'll do that for Mr. Mudd, and I suggest, no, that
we not. I will tell you that I firmly believe that we are doing the
absolutely right thing here, that we're doing the environmentally
sound thing here. We are talking about a test well, and if we
start talking about delaying processes and subjecting grants to
possible -- outside the time frame of when we have the grant
monies available, I think we're setting a poor precedent. The
board can make the decision if it wants to, but my suggestion
would be that you go ahead and proceed.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I would also encourage the City of
Naples that if they want to have a special workshop in between
Page 74
January 9, 20001
their other workshops, you know, if they're fully loaded on this
next one --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: We'll go.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: -- we'll go. You just schedule it,
because I candidly have to tell you, if you're going to send cards
out to water users, that's kind of like blackmail. It says, if you
don't do what we want you to do, then this is what we're going to
do to you, and I'm saying to the community, we're not doing
anything to anybody. We're trying to do what is right, and we
want to cooperate, and I think if we give everybody an
opportunity to hear the facts and the information from the
scientific people who can answer those questions, and then we
can go forward, and we'll do what we need to do on the other
agenda, because I do respect the mayor, and I respect the
council, but, ladies and gentlemen, let's be ladies and gentlemen,
and let's take the emotion out of this and deal with the scientific
facts.
MR. PETTIT: Commissioners, Mike Pettit from the county
attorney's office. I just want the commission to be aware that
the City has filed a motion. There's an administrative proceeding
that is pending on this matter, and the City has filed a motion
seeking a 60 day continued advance of any action on the
administrative proceeding, and the issue they have raised is they
want to see what the outcome will be of their request for a joint
meeting. I just think you need to be aware of that.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: When was the determination of
that motion? How is that motion dealt with?
MR. PETTIT-' I need to respond to it tomorrow. That's why I
came down, because, obviously, I didn't want to respond in the
way I was intending to respond until I understood what the
commission's pleasure was on that issue, and I think if I
understood, and I just want to make sure I understood what's
already been discussed, other than there's been no action yet,
the idea of a staff presentation followed by a joint meeting to
include ASR issues as one of the topics, and so I guess, to some
degree, I'm looking for some direction on the response to the
City's motion.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, if I'm understanding, what I
heard from the board this morning is two things: One, at
whatever time the City of Naples wants the full presentation by
Page 75
January 9, 20001
our staff from the experts, the people who have the knowledge to
answer any and all questions, we will do that. Secondly, we
want to schedule a joint meeting with the City of Naples to
discuss a number of issues from either side that can be put on an
agenda in which this could -- this certainly would be one.
MR. PETTIT: The administrative process as it stands now is
the County has requested that a hearing be scheduled and a
briefing schedule be established, and the context of the City's
request for a 60 day delay is to allow for the joint meeting.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Question, who will make a
determination on -- after you file a response to this motion, the
administrative -- the hearing officer will decide whether or not to
grant the abeyance?
MR. PETTIT: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And historically, do people get
them for asking or -- I mean, here's -- let me be practical here. If
the hearing officer is going to grant them 60 days, why don't we
be smart and graciously grant 60 days -- or 30 days instead? I'm
asking what are the odds that's it going to be approved if we
oppose it?
MR. PETTIT: I'm not sure I can assess this without tipping
my hand on some issues. I -- I feel like they are going to get
some sort of extension of time.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Well, so, if they're going to
maybe get something anyway, guys, let's -- let's hold up for 30
days.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: How much would it cost us on a delay,
that's what I would like to know? Would the City of Naples like
to pay for the delay?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: What's going to happen in the
next :30 days? I think this is for Mr. Mudd. I'll ask Mr. Olliff.
What's going to happen in the next 30 days that won't happen if
this County Commission says the permit is in abeyance for 30
days?
MR. MUDD: I'm into Mike's business a little bit. I'm Jim
Mudd, for the record, public utilities administrator.
The administrative hearing, the judge has been identified.
They haven't set a date yet. Normally how that process works is
the City will have 30 days to do their brief for the administrative
hearing. It was their request to have the administrative hearing,
Page 76
January 9, 20001
and we, back in June, decided to put this in abeyance because
that's when the permit was last year, and to go into October, to
have a joint staff meeting that we had in this chamber the first
part of October.
After they do their 30 day brief, we have 15 days to review,
and then I would surmise that the judge that has been identified
will have a week or so to do his homework and look at both
briefs before that court date.
So, we haven't even set a date yet, and it's going to take 60
days, in my opinion and in Mike's opinion, to get that process
going. So, we are in a fuzzy time right now anyway, and as a
laymen, I'm not even too sure that any kind of delay would even
impact that process.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Because -- because this -- you
know, not to be overly optimistic here, but I am -- I -- I went with
as jaundiced an eye as I could have, looking at the science and
getting briefed on this ASR issue, and went knowing that the city
council, who I represent, opposed it, so I'm going in there guns
blaring against it and couldn't leave the meeting against it, I
couldn't.
So, maybe if we would -- if we would delay for 30 days, this
whole -- then the whole administrative hearing goes away if the
City withdraws their request; am I right about that?
MR. PETTIT'- As I understand it, if they withdraw their
challenge to the notice of intent to issue, then there would be no
hearing and the process would come to an end, at least just the
exploratory law permit process.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I mean, it's a gamble, but it might
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I still think they need to hear -- you
know, whatever we do hear, if they're not willing to listen to the
experts, and they're going to call for an administrative hearing
and they go in there and say, well, we want to have a hearing
when we weren't willing to listen to the experts talk to us about
it--
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Jim, if I may.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: -- that really -- that really frustrates
me.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Now, they're willing to listen.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I understand your frustration,
Page 77
January 9, 20001
and I'm listening to you, and I'm hearing a whole bunch of mixed
messages. We're using -- we're using some language that almost
makes it sound aggressive, hostage, blackmail. I know you
meant it in context of what you're saying, but it would be
misunderstood, and I'm sure that's not how we feel.
What I would suggest is that we try to look at this as our
equals out there, and then what we do is we meet them on their
own turf, and maybe they'll feel a little bit more comfortable, and
see if we can approach this from an avenue of understanding
that we're dealing with our own kind, our own people, our own
relatives and our neighbors and friends, and I think we'll be able
to come to a resolution on this pretty quick.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Probably in that meeting, if we
can establish a little mini workshop or be briefed by the experts
of ASR, then the board and the council can have discussion at
that time.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And when we have this
workshop, it will be advertised so if any board members who
wanted to come could come, and that might, you know, be close
enough to a joint meeting, that if we also do that, if we commit
to do that within the next 30 days, and they will respond to that,
I'm confident, and we hold off -- we agree to 30 of the 60 days
they're asking for, then I think we've got a little bit of opportunity
here to come to the middle instead of to --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I don't have a problem with the :30
days, but I think that they have an obligation to hear the experts
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: They will.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: -- and my promise to them is, schedule
it, hear it, and we'll delay this for 30 days. We can have a joint
meeting with an agenda. This can be included on it. I have no
problem with that.
Maybe my language is a little strong, but any time somebody
-- and believe me, sending out cards, when I asked this question
of this audience, when nobody knows anything about the subject,
creates fear, and it creates negativity, and I don't believe that is
an appropriate action, and if we did the same thing to them on
some issue, I think they would say the same reactions. That's
why I'm asking them, don't do this until you hear all of the
information. If we have this as a joint meeting agenda item, and
Page 78
January 9, 20001
we have a thorough discussion, then if you're not satisfied, that
is your privilege as an elected body to do whatever you choose
to do.
In the interim, let's pull back and let's try to work
cooperatively, and that's what I'm asking for, and I'm waiting for
them to say, yes, we will hear this; yes, because you'll delay this
for 30 days; and yes, we could have a joint meeting with this as
an agenda item, let's all go in harmony-- let's all go in harmony
and sit around the table and talk. That's what I'm asking.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Sounds good.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: So, if we --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: But we have to be wary that they're
going to look at our experts as skeptical because it isn't their
experts.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, they have their own consultants,
and they've had a lot of opportunity to ask questions and there
have been responses to it, so I don't think it's a stacked deck,
and I would ask them to have their experts there so we can have
the discussion.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Can we then tell Mr. Pettit that
we won't agree to the 30 days, and in the meantime -- I've
already sent a letter offering to bring staff for the workshop, and
I would be sure that board members know when that offer
invitation is accepted so that if any of you want to be near to
hear this, and I commend it to you, it's very informative, but that
we would agree to that 30 days. I know that's tight, Mr. Mudd,
and I'm sorry to ask for it, but I really think we need to. Is that the board's direction?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Last question, will we still have an
opportunity for matching funds or are we going to lose that
window of opportunity?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I'm going to say this as he's
coming up, my gamble here is that we can persuade a majority of
the city council to withdraw their objection, and that will make
time under the process we're currently in.
MR. MUDD: We're already -- Jim Mudd, public utilities
administrator, for the record.
We're already in trouble for that $200,000 for the South
Florida Water Management District. The ASR well was supposed
to start last year and be finished by July of this year, and
Page 79
January 9, 20001
because of all the postponements and putting this issue in
abatement, that over the -- the same issue you're discussing
right now and the objections to it, we put that money at risk.
We'll do everything we can to ask them to give us an extension
so that we can keep that in this program.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Would it be helpful if this board
wrote -- authorized its chairman to write a letter to the chair of
the governing board of the management -- the Water
Management District to ask them -- sort of explain our
circumstances and ask them to be lenient?
MR. MUDD: Any help that the board could give us would be
greatly appreciated.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I would be happy to do that. I really,
really hate to lose $200,000 which comes out of everybody's
pocket out there.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Could we make this conditional,
where if we're going to lose it, we move forward on it? I'm sure
the City of Naples would understand that.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I don't think -- well, will we
know?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: We may have already lost it,
Commissioner Coletta.
MR. MUDD: You don't lose it until the time expires --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: July.
MR. MUDD: -- I have a chance to give them bills.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, again, maybe I'm --would be
applying the same techniques that I just complained about. I
think -- let me develop with you the letter requesting that, and if
it's the pleasure of this board, let's go with what's on the table
and do everything we can to resolve this, and if we do have a
time line -- and I think we'll have to evaluate coming out of those,
and if we don't withdraw and we haven't satisfied it, then that
becomes another issue.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I agree with that.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All right. Do we have to state the
motion again or are we clear?.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: It's just direction.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Just our direction. Is everyone clear
on the direction? Everybody is okay with that? Well, let's go for
it.
Page 80
January 9, 20001
this.
Thank you.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Thank you, board.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, thank you for all your work on
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I'm trying.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: We really appreciate it, Commissioner
Mac'Kie, and I know in my conversations with the mayor that she
is very, very cooperative and wants to get this resolved.
Item #11A1
RESOLUTION 2001-17 DESIGNATING THE CLERK OF THE
CIRCUIT COURT AS THE REPRESENTATIVE OF COLLIER COUNTY
IN THE COLLECTION OF COSTS, FEES, AND FINES, TO DEFEND
BOND FORFEITURES, TO PROSECUTE CIVIL RESTITUTION
LIENS, AND COLLECT A REASONABLE FEE FOR THOSE
SERVICES - ADOPTED
All right. That takes us to Item 11A(1), other constitutional
officers.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: You mean we're going to go sic
Dwight Brock on some more bad guys to collect some more
money to bring it into the County. Motion to approve.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Second that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: There's a second -- motion by
Commissioner Mac'Kie and second by Commissioner Henning to
follow staff's recommendation that the Clerk of the Courts as the
representative of Collier County, et cetera, et cetera, be allowed
to collect reasonable fees for the collection services provided by
the law, abbreviated statement of that, and we'll read the whole
thing into the public record, and all in favor, signify by saying
aye.
Opposed by the same sign?
Wonderful presentation, Mr. Brock.
MR. BROCK: Very good. I have one thing I want to say, and
I want to say -- let me identify myself first. Dwight Brock, clerk
of the circuit court.
People have asked me questions, and I want to make sure
that no one leaves here of the belief that this is being presented
Page 81
January 9, 20001
to the Board of County Commissioners because the county
attorney's office in some way failed in their efforts. This is a
cooperative effort that took place with my office and the county
attorney's office that is our best effort to try to utilize resources
as best as we can, and because one part of it takes place in my
office and then it gets shipped over-- there's an educational
process -- over to the county attorney's office, we all came to the
conclusion that this would be more efficient and more effective if
it were handled by the party that had the original knowledge and
there was not a training process.
So, I don't want anyone to leave, the general public or
otherwise, with the belief that this was done because there was
some perception on our part that the county attorney's office had
faltered in any way.
Having said that, I thank you for your consideration and
approval. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, thank you, Mr. Clerk, and again,
in our continued efforts of cooperation with the constitutional
officers, I'm going to tell you it's just another notch on our
holster that says we're doing the right thing.
Item #13A1
PETITION V-2000-25, JOSEPH SABATINO REQUESTING A
VARIANCE OF 7.5 FEET FROM THE REQUIRES SIDE YARD OF 7.5
FEET TO 0 FEET ALONG THE EAST SIDE YARD OF LOTS 44, 45,
AND 46; A VARIANCE OF 7.5 FEET FROM THE REQUIRES 7.5
FEET TO 0 FOR ACCESSORY STRUCTURES ALONG THE SIDE LOT
LINES AND WITHIN THE COURTYARD WALLS; AND A VARIANCE
OF 10 FEET FROM THE REQUIRED REAR YARD OF 10 FEET TO 0
FEET FOR ACCESSORY STRUCTURES ALONG THE REAR LOT
LINES AND WITHIN THE COURTYARD WALLS FOR PROPERTY
LOCATED ON 111TM AVENUE NORTH~ NAPLES PARK - DENIED
Okay. This takes us to our afternoon, and it's high noon, to
zoning appeals, and remember that as we go through this, that
all of us here will have to make disclosure and all people who are
going to participate in this need to be sworn in.
So, that moves us to Item 13A(1), V-2000-25, with Joseph
Sabatino requesting a variance, et cetera, et cetera on this.
Page 82
January 9, 20001
We need to have any people being involved in this to be
sworn.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: If you're going to speak on this,
you'll need to be sworn in.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Anybody that's going to speak to this
issue needs to stand and be sworn.
THE COURT REPORTER: Commissioner, can I get a five-
minute break?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Yes, ma'am.
THE COURT REPORTER: We're only going to change court
reporters. It might not even take that long.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Can you swear them in first?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Can you swear them first?
THE COURT REPORTER: I can do that.
(The speakers were sworn).
(Small break was held).
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. All right. Are we live again?
We're back in session. Mr. Reischl.
MR. REISCHL: Good afternoon, commissioners. Fred
Reischl, planning services.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Oh, wait a minute, we have to have
disclosure on this board. If anyone who has met with anyone --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I've met with the applicant, I've
met with two ladies this morning from Naples Park.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Vera Fitz-Gerald and Erica Lynne?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Yes, and I've heard from
numerous others.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I too, Mr. Chairman, heard from
the applicant and many of the residents of Naples Park.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I have also received numerous
letters.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Me too.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Likewise I have met with the
petitioner, I have met with the leadership of Naples Park and
with staff in a meeting, in a pretty extensive meeting covering
both projects that he is considering, but this morning, we're only
looking at one and prior to his presentation --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: There's another one coming?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Yeah, there's another one coming, not
today, but there is another one on 95th, I believe.
Page 83
January 9, 20001
I would -- I'd like to poll the board and just see what you're
thinking based on everything that has taken place at this point.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I think this is premature. We
should be waiting for the Dover-Kohl Society to come back. I
know they're taking a look at Naples Park. That whole thing is
gonna set the standards for Naples Park.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, I understand what you're saying,
Commissioner, but I believe legally we can't make decisions on
what might happen in the future. We have to deal with existing
conditions today; am I correct, Ramiro, or Ms. Student, Marjorie,
you want to --
MS. STUDENT: For the record, Marjorie Student, assistant
county attorney. Yes, we have to go with the rules as they exist
today, and I might add that if there's gonna be any holding up, a
moratorium, with an advertised public hearing on the moratorium
ordinance, would be the proper way to do that, rather than just
de facto.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: But we can make that decision today
based on whether there's hardship and there's six other criteria,
and that's just one of them?
MS. STUDENT: That's correct, based on the criteria that are
enumerated in the land code and they're in your staff report and
executive summary and the testimony that's presented to you
today.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you, but again based on that,
Commissioner Henning, are you still feeling the same?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE.' Feel negative toward this?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I liked the first project that we
did grant a variance on and I thought this was more of the same,
but as I look more carefully at this, there's a really important
piece that is different, and that is, the other one encroached -- its
zero lot line encroached only on itself, but in this one, the
backyards are gonna encroach on the neighbors and that's not
something -- if I misunderstand that, somebody needs to correct
me, because as I met with Mr. $abatino that was not the way we
discussed it, but as I looked at it, it appears to be that way.
I also, I understand that our decision today would not be
based on the Dover-Kohl study because we have to wait and see
what it says, but I wondered -- I asked Mr. Sabatino if he would
Page 84
January 9, 20001
please inquire of Dover-Kohl, get their opinion about his project
which is a different thing altogether than waiting, and I
wondered if there was a response -- do you have anything from
them, Mr. Reischl, from Dover-Kohl?
MR. REISCHL: Fred Reischl, planning services. We had a
meeting, I believe it was last week, with myself, Mr. Sabatino,
two representatives of Naples Park and Amy Taylor, who's the
liaison with the community character committee, and she
submitted Mr. Sabatino's plan to Victor Dover, it was a mixed
response. He, on one hand, didn't like the, I guess you call it
dominance of the garage door. He would have preferred
side-entry or rear-entry, which on a 50 foot lot is very difficult to
do. In favor, he said that one of the things that they are
proposing in the study is yard variances, so there may be a menu
of setback variances that will be proposed with the community
character study.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: So are you saying that just -- and
we appreciate his willingness to just look at it for us, you know,
but he's saying he liked it except for the garages?
MR. REISCHL: To be fair to Mr. Dover, he -- according to
Amy Taylor -- looked at it for about 20 minutes and, you know,
didn't do a full study on it.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Is Amy here? I don't see her.
MR. REISCHL: No, she's not.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I'm understanding we've got a cursory
review by Dover-Kohl, and again, it's not come forward yet, but
kind of a mixed reaction, I guess? MR. REISCHL: Correct.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Well, I'd like to say I'm not
feeling real positive towards this, and I don't see any positives
here.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: My concern also was it was going
to change the character of the community and the way it is, and I
think the people are trying to hold their community together.
The same thing like -- as Goodlette, so I'm not favorable.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: When I talked to the petitioner,
I told him he would have to do a considerable amount of work
within the community to see if they would accept it, and I can't
see where he's done that, judging by the number of phone calls
and letters that have been coming through. I, on that basis
Page 85
January 9, 20001
alone, would not be in favor of this project. It just doesn't meet
the standards of what this community expects.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Gosh, that doesn't sound too
good.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: That doesn't sound encouraging. Mr.
Mulhere.
MR. MULHERE: I just wanted -- Bob Mulhere, planning
services director. I just wanted to add some information relative
to perhaps what might be expectations of Dover-Kohl as it
relates to Naples Park and what they will bring back, and what
they will bring back would be utilizing Naples Park as an
example of an existing or open subdivision and how it could be
retrofitted for the use of certain development standards to
revitalize the neighborhood, and there will actually be another
step in there.
While we're talking premature, I want you to also be aware
of the next step, which would be for us to work with the
community to determine how we'll implement certain land
development code amendments to cause those changes to occur
in Naples Park, and that will obviously take some time. So I
didn't want to leave you with an expectation that, you know, that
the Dover-Kohl study when it comes back will automatically have
very specific -- we're still gonna need to work with the
community a little bit and I know the community is anxious to
see that but --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: But I think more importantly--
and I appreciate that because, you know, there's a lot yet to go,
but I think what I'm hearing with regard to the variance criteria
is that the board members don't see a hardship and don't see
particularly that this complies with the community character,
and that's one of the things you try to be careful with in a
variance, is that you're not imposing -- the variance won't impose
a hardship on its surrounding neighbors and we're concerned
that this one does.
So I would think, you know, we might want to hear from the
applicant and then see if he can change any of our -- well, he'd
have to change, what, four minds; is that right, Ramiro, you just
need four votes in a variance or you just need three?
MR. OLLIFF: Three. Mr. Chairman, my suggestion would be,
is you seem to be familiar enough with the project that the staff
Page 86
January 9, 20001
presentation is probably not necessary, but we probably ought to
hear from the petitioner, Mr. Sabatino.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Yeah.
(Mr. Sabatino was duly sworn.)
MR. SABATINO: My name is Joseph Sabatino, I am the
petitioner. I've done a lot of work with the community over the
last year and a half. There are some misconceptions that have
been expressed by the board members, in particular the rear
yard situation.
The letters and telephone calls that commissioners may
have received are obviously those who are objecting to it and
they may be objecting to the project for reasons that may be
subjective regarding the community character.
The direct landowners -- the landowners that are adjacent to
the subject variance, one gentleman objected to it, he received
additional information from me and has rescinded his letter of
objection and is now supporting it.
Where is he? Is he behind you?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
MR. SABATINO: Helgeson.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
the property--
I don't know the names. Is he
MR. SABATINO: He would be east, the two blocks east of
the four, he has rescinded his objection. Mr. Wrights (phonetic},
who is on the western side --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I'm sorry, and I know better than
this, is there a letter from him or some indication?
MR. SABATINO: Yes, we have that -- those exhibits.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: We're talking about people that live on
the east and west, and 111th is an east/west street, so if that
helps position it in your minds --
MR. SABATINO: Yes, the property owner immediately to the
west has given me a letter of support in addition.
You know, I don't mind continuing this matter, but I would
just like to show some testimony that it is relatively simple, that
there are some -- there are very many misconceptions and I
would simply like to have a fair shake.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Maybe a continuance is the right
thing to do then, so that this -- I've got to have some more
education about -- like the little guest houses or whatever they
are, I'm concerned about those.
Page 87
January 9, 20001
MR. SABATINO: Can we continue this to the 23rd? I will
give all the commissioners a packet.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: That doesn't feel fair to the
people who are here. I was thinking more -- I thought you meant
a continuance, like a six month continuance or some long time.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I think what we're looking at
here is a PR problem, you need enough time to be able to
convince your neighbors.
MR. SABATINO: I've tried that for a year.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, then possibly your project
doesn't fit in.
MR. SABATINO: Well, what I have said to the neighborhood
-- what I have said to the neighborhood, I've made some specific
recommendations, I've had a meeting with them and I am willing
to totally dedicate my time to their interests in a professional
manner for the project that exists on 95th Avenue North,
because there are certain applications that are directly related
to that where --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: But that's not in front of us today, Mr.
Sabatino.
MR. SABATINO: No, that's not in -- that's true.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Your efforts probably are there,
I don't argue with you on that, but obviously it hasn't gone quite
far enough.
We've seen numerous cases like this in the past, where it
went back and the neighbors and the petitioner would reach an
agreement and an understanding down the road and everybody
was happy with what they had, and I don't think you're dealing
with unreasonable people here, and I don't think you're
unreasonable. I just think you need a little more time with it.
Thirty days isn't realistic, that you're going to change their
opinion.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, I think, Commissioner Coletta,
that you're right, and I would tell you candidly what the difficulty
is, is the first project was approved, you stated to the community
you were going to live in the project, which you currently are.
They were under the impression that this was something you
were going to live in, and you are, and the rest of it you were
marketing, is fine, but the perception now is that you are a
developer and you want to do several projects in the park and
Page 88
January 9, 20001
until there can be a clear understanding of what you are going to
do overall or what you're anticipating on doing, what kind of
design, what kind of standards, et cetera, I think that is their
greatest concern, and when you look at trying to do some of the
things that you want to do, it will require variances unless other
things are changed, and I'm not gonna sit here and judge how
you go about doing that, but I agree with Commissioner Coletta.
You have a PR problem and an image problem, in terms of
what you want to do in terms of design and development of units
within Naples Park that would fit in with where they think the
community thinks they are and what might come down in total.
So I agree with Commissioner Coletta, I don't think you can
resolve this in 30 days.
I think you may request for it to be continued indefinitely
until you can ascertain and put testimony together.
MR. SABATINO: I have the ability to do that on the 95th
Avenue project, and with the landowner's consent, I have no
problem with continuing that effort to achieve the community
goals. However, this particular petition, I would like to be heard
today and the only reason I say that is that I would like to -- it
has time constraints in terms of the contract landowner. I am
not -- I have a contract landowner and acceptance of --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, if you can develop your project
within the existing codes, no one's going to object to that.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: But if you're heard today --
MR. SABATINO: Yes.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: -- you're gonna -- if you're heard
today and if you're turned down, that prohibits your reapplying
for something similar on this property for six months; am I right
about that? I just want you to know -- MR. MANALICH: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: -- of the repercussions. It's your
option, it's your petition.
MR. SABATINO: No, I would like to be heard today on this
particular project. The 23rd is -- is another issue and --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, you need to clearly understand if
you want to be heard today and it's denied, you can't bring it
back on the 23rd, not this one.
MR. SABATINO: I understand.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. I want to be sure we're okay,
Page 89
January 9, 20001
and you understand.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
So while you're there -- I'm sorry
MR. SABATINO: Pardon me?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: So while you're there, will you
please make me understand then -- if we're gonna go forward,
then I have some questions. Are we gonna go forward today?
MR. SABATINO: Yes, I would like to go forward.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: The rear yard set --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Maybe you would like a minute to
caucus because your significant other is shaking her head in the
back. You're going like this and she's going like that and in my --
with my wife that may be trouble in River City.
MR. SABATINO: She is an important part of this
presentation, however, is it my understanding that the board
does not want to hear Mr. Reischl's present --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: We don't need to hear it.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: We don't need to hear it because we
have read all the information and no board member had any
questions.
MR. SABATINO: Okay. Can I have one moment?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Yes.
MR. $ABATINO: We would like to make a presentation today
on the petition with that understanding.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Uh-huh.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Mr. Chairman?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Yes, you want to go --
MR. SABATINO: We would like to make a presentation today
on the petition with the understanding of presenting certain
testimony and documents of the reasons why a variance should
be granted.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: And you have a right to do that.
MR. SABATINO: And it's certainly the board's option to
make a decision today or even continue it till next week if they
haven't heard all of the issues, but that's just the board's option.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: It's your turn, you're up.
MR. SABATINO: I understand.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Oh.
THE COURT REPORTER: What is your name?
Page 90
January 9, 20001
MS. SABATINO: Carol Sabatino.
(Ms. Sabatino was duly sworn.)
MS. SABATINO: Good afternoon. There won't be any trouble
at my house. We've agreed, I just want to make that really clear.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Good, we're glad, and there is
some reasonable time limitations, you'll want to get started.
MS. SABATINO: I beg your pardon?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Are you going to ~get started?
MS. SABATINO.' Yes. Is that all right with you?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Okay. Yes, ma'am.
MS. SABATINO.' What we'd like to do and what we had
intended to do today was show you the project that we currently
have under construction, and one of the things that we've
learned today, as well as other days, before we got here, is that
there's so many misconceptions about what we're doing that -- if
you have a copy of the black and white of our home under
construction.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: It's on the visualizer?
MS. SABATINO: Yes, it's up there now.
This is what's currently standing as of today. The bottom
part of the picture shows the courtyard between ourselves and
our neighbors. The wall in front isn't up, it will be approximately
a 15 foot wide wall, or somewhat less, because of their cabana.
One of the misconceptions I've heard today is that there
would be no green area. That's totally erroneous. We'll have lots
of plantings. The whole purpose of the courtyard design is to
make the home a more hospitable environment. By code, we're
required to put landscaping in the front of the house. It's a code
issue, we must put green -- greenery in front of the house.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Do you have a presentation or
would you mind if I asked you questions? I don't want to
interrupt you, and if you have something --
MS. SABATINO: A short presentation.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Go right ahead.
MS. SABATINO: Because in the interest of everybody's --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: No, no.
MS. SABATINO.' What I'd just like to address is that we have
lots of educated opinions that have been put into writing. The
first one is the contract owner. I don't want to read all of these
letters, because we have taken the time to print them for you
Page 91
January 9, 20001
and you can certainly review them, but one of the points that the
contract owner on the four lots makes is that he's intending to
come down here in another month or so and build -- construct a
house for himself very much like we did, and he intends to do
that, and he will do that according to the permits. All he needs
to do is get his uplifts, his truss layout, the rest of it and go in for
a permit. What's he's proposing to do -- he does want to build a
traditional, middle of the lot home. It's out of the question for
him, there's no room for a pool. He's coming from the north, he
wants a pool, he wants the Florida lifestyle. May I finish?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: He wants the pool, part of the
reason for the need for the --
MS. SABATINO: That's correct. That's correct. The way
he'll achieve the pool on his lot, on the current four lots will be to
build a plan that is -- to build the plan scheme C, which is at the
bottom of the page. I hope you can see that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes, we can see it just fine,
thank you.
MS. SABATINO: Okay. That's a large three story home, but
it utilizes the vertical space, not the yard, and it does allow him --
Mr. Sabatino will show you what that's going to do in terms of
allowing him some room to put in a pool.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: What you're saying is, he can
build that without a variance?
MS. SABATINO: That's exactly right, and I think-- I think
there's a misconception about that, that he can by right just go
in for a permit without coming before the board and create those
four houses as soon as he collects his permit. That's his legal
right to do so, he's intending to do that and he stated so in the
letter.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I see that.
MS. SABATINO: Okay. That's his choice to do that.
The other point I wanted to make -- Mr. Sabatino will present
the site plan; but the point I wanted to make is that the
neighbors on our current project where we're building for our
own personal residence, they had absolutely no idea, they did
not take the time to come and oppose us, they just took a wait
and see attitude.
People who live two miles away in Naples Park have been
Page 92
January 9, 20001
very vociferous about their objections and that's their right to do
-- that's perfectly within their rights.
Our neighbors, however, have actually come to love what
we're doing and very, very specifically encourage us and
compliment us and thank us for coming there and doing what
we're doing, and their letters are there also.
They would be -- on the front page, you have a list of the
letters which are enclosed, and incidentally, we just took the
time this weekend, as a matter of fact, and I'll just run through
this with you so as not to have you sit for hours.
The adjacent landowner, number four on your sheet, is Mr.
Wrights. Mr. Wrights was at the community meeting, which my
husband and I attended in December, and he approached us, as
did many other people at that meeting who were actually brought
there in opposition. They came to us and said we had no idea
you were doing this. It really doesn't look any different, what's
the objection? I still don't have the answer to that, but I'm sure
that wiser people than me will come up with the answers. Mr.
Wrights has written a letter for you.
Mr. Helgeson, who is the landowner to the north of us, was
against it too and wrote a letter stating that he was against it.
Mr. Sabatino called Mr. Helgeson and faxed him all the
information that you have here today and he promptly wrote a
letter and said I didn't understand the facts. It's there for you to
see, that's letter number five. Didn't have all the facts, I love
what you're doing, in fact I encourage it and I support it and I'm
glad to write the letter for you.
Letter number six is Mr. David Summers, he's our next door
neighbor to the west on 110th Avenue and his letter is in there
for you to see also.
Am I supposed to put these letters up so the public can see
them?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: No, that's okay.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: They're here for them, if anyone
desires.
MS. SABATINO: Okay. Item number seven is a woman
named Leigh Angelito (phonetic), who couldn't come today, she's
80 years old or thereabouts, she has a problem with her back, or
she would have come in support, and what Ms. Angelito states is
that she's been a resident of Naples Park for 27 years, and I don't
Page 93
January 9, 20001
want to quote her without her letter, but she conveyed to me --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I can read it.
MS. SABATINO: -- that she was very much in favor, she
knows this has been necessary, she's very happy that her
property value without her doing anything to help it is going to
increase, she's thrilled and she would have been here today, and
that's a direct quote from her, and she's well known to the
people who are here complaining today. They know who she is.
She's not a quiet woman, very capable of speaking her mind and
she does and this is what she has stated in writing to you today.
David Summerton is an interior designer, he's a fellow
professional and he's written a letter in support also. That's item
number eight.
The Doughertys or Doughertys, however you choose to say
it, live down on Vanderbilt Drive, close to us, they were also
present at the meeting in December and there -- they were very
excited and that's putting it -- that's an understatement, that we
were creating a new -- a new look or creating a new way of
dealing with 50 foot wide building lots.
Mr. Rick Mercer, item number ten. Mr. Mercer has lived in
Naples Park for seven years to date, he still lives in Naples Park.
He's a professional engineer and you can read his letter. He's
very, very, very supportive.
These are samplings of people who live in different parts of
the park, people who crossed our paths. We have not solicited
them, we haven't called them and asked them to do this, they
just approached us and many of them were at the last
community meeting.
Mr. Blum is a neighbor on 94th. The Alvarez family, that's
item number 12, the Alvarez family have lived on 110th Avenue
North, one block up from where we're currently building, I think
for 30 years and could not be more pleased that we're building.
These are neighbors, these are people who clearly can see
what we're doing. Two houses are well defined, they're up to the
second story. People are coming through our houses at the rate
of -- I was there Sunday -- every five minutes, new cars are
pulling up, people are coming out, this is wonderful, why don't --
why doesn't everybody do this, it makes good use, it utilizes the
land, it's not affecting anybody visually at all. They -- where's the
courtyard, where's the wall, what's the problem. We don't
Page 94
January 9, 20001
answer, because we don't know what that problem might be.
Anthony Cobart (phonetic) is somebody who contacted us
with support. I don't personally know him, didn't know he knew
of us, but -- Daniel Enright (phonetic) was also a person who
approached us at the last meeting in December and you can
clearly see that he's in full support too.
So these people may not -- and I'm sure you haven't seen
any of these letters because they've been written in the last
couple of days.
We told them in December that we were coming before the
Collier County Commissioners, and they said we're unable to
come because we're working, can we do something? Yes, write
a letter, and they have contacted us and faxed us letters, and
they are the letters (sic), so I think you may be received a
one-sided view of what actually is going on.
You're free to contact any of these people, I'm sure they will
voice their opinions freely whether we're there or not, and that's
pretty much all I have to say, and I would like to just say that at
the end of the public comments, I would like very much to have a
chance to correct any misconceptions. I think that would be a
fair -- a fair thing and I'll try to make it very brief.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Let me ask you a question. Is the
major objection the rear yard setback by the community, where
you're going to zero lot line, and if you adhere to a rear yard
setback, was that the primary objection?
MS. SABATINO: Mr. Sabatino is the professional in terms of
the planning and I prefer that he answers. CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. Fine.
MR. SABATINO: Yes, I would like to answer that question.
One of the misconceptions has been, is there a rear yard
setback requested for the main structure? The answer to that
question is no. There is -- we are maintaining the required 20
feet in the rear yard.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: It's just where this little house
thing --
MR. SABATINO: There was a request in the variances up to
-- create a variance for an accessory structure from ten feet to
zero within the courtyard walls. Now, the courtyard walls do
surround the entire house, both on the side yard and the front --
not the front yard, but the front projection of the house, and in
Page 95
January 9, 20001
the rear, not at the property line, in fact, at the FPL --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Easement.
MR. SABATINO: -- easement line, and staff's
recommendation regarding the accessory uses, such as pools,
fountains, coy ponds, what have you, staff's recommendation
was specifically that because you're building a wall, these
accessory structures would not be visible or impact the adjoining
neighbor to the rear.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: It all goes on the property line?
MR. SABATINO: Yes -- well, not in the rear, it would be on
the easement line, five feet from the property.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Understood, but any
encroachment would be within that wall, so that's -- why would
anybody care?
MR. SABATINO: That's my point.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, what about the easement, is that
easement there for power lines or for --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: It's not being touched, the
easement's still --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: The easement is still staying.
MR. SABATINO: Yeah, the property of these four houses
goes -- it is the property line. Five feet into the property is
where the wall would be, because we need to create the ten foot
easement, five foot on either side of the property, for FPL
facilities, the poles and whatnot.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: And normally, if I went down to
scheme C, you would not encroach and you would -- it would stay
within your setbacks, if I looked at scheme C where you're
building four homes, where there's no -- where you're permitted
by right?
MR. SABATINO: I'm not understanding your question on
scheme C.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: This one.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Scheme C, you do that within the
permitted right. If you do A or B, you have to a get a variance for
the wall?
MR. SABATINO: No variance for the wall.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, you have to get a variance.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: The wall's permitted.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: The wall's permitted, but you have to
Page 96
January 9, 20001
get a variance because you're going to exceed what is the
setback, as I understand.
Here's your standard site, here's your zero lot line site, the
question I really want to ask you is, is there a way to do what
you want to do in A or B without coming in for a variance on the
rear setbacks?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: But you know what,
Commissioner Carter --
MR. SABATINO: There is no Variance requested on the rear
setback for the principal structure. We are maintaining a front
yard setback of 25 feet in all schemes, whether you do it the
standard, whether you do it the lot line or whether you do it --
there's two features I just want to point out that are really
important.
If you look at these two diagrams, the one on the left shows
a traditional single family home as it appears in Naples Park on
very long narrow lots, they're 50 foot wide, they generally run
about 135 feet deep.
There is a slight hardship with regard to these four lots,
because we only have 110 feet, and the reason we do is they
took an additional ten foot off of what already was a substandard
lot of 120 feet, for the ultimate right of way of 80 feet for some
four lane widening of Immokalee, but we know that's not going to
happen, we believe that's not going to happen, and we hope that
the cartway -- we hope that the cartway remains the same on the
south side of the street, if you're going to do a planted island
with a turning lane and three lane -- and three lane solution.
However --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Wait, you know what's not going
to happen?
MR. SABATINO: We hope that --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: The Immokalee widening?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: No, he's talking about --
MR. SABATINO: West of 41, I'm sorry.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: That's one that we've been through
and right now it's a three lane, but I can't say what will happen --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Sure can't.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: -- ten years from now. I mean, in all
possibility (sic) -- I mean, who knows what will happen, so you've
factored that into your --
Page 97
January 9, 20001
MR. SABATINO: I understand, but what we do have is a
substandard lot in depth, and the iljustration that I just wanted to
point out is that, on the left, the standard house sited to the
maximum building envelope, where they used the required seven
and a half foot side yards on either side, the rear yard is shown
crosshatched, and the area of the house that appreciates that
outdoor amenity is that little dotted area.
The side yards of seven and a half feet are virtually
unusable. Many people treat that -- they treat that -- if you want
to find a photograph with fences -- many people just simply fence
that in and they're left with seven and a half foot fenced
alleyways.
What we're proposing -- what we're proposing is a shift in
the building envelope only, and that appears in this diagram, a
shift in the building envelope only. This petition is only about
that shift. It is not about -- it is not about increasing the rear
yard.
Well, I just wanted to show in a photograph, which is hard,
what happens when you have the two seven and a half feet. In
Naples Park, eight out of ten homes, if you drive down the street,
will have the fences at the seven and a half foot line. It is not an
outdoor-- I mean, it's not -- it's planning that occurred 50 years
ago when the plan for Naples Park was arranged, it was drawn, it
was designed, it's a gridiron.
This diagram on the right, in contrast, okay, there is no rear
or front yard setback requested. This petition is only about a
shift of the building envelope to the property line in each of the
four -- in each of the three lots with the remaining one adjoining
Mr. Helgeson's property in the center of the property, in respect
for his property (sic), and as recommended by the commissioners
when our project was approved last May, that we want to have
all internal variances.
So this diagram on the right is about creating an additional
outdoor amenity space on a relatively small lot, and it's less than
a quarter of an acre, where you can not only enjoy the rear yard
amenity, but design a house in a C shape design, much as we
have done on our own property that's under construction, and I
invite anybody in this room to go see it, they'll be delighted, but
what it does, it takes advantage of much more of the lot for an
outdoor amenity space of 15 feet, rather than seven and a half
Page 98
January 9, 20001
feet. It's a very simple request.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Of the east/west ends of this, you're
still not asking for a variance? MR. SABATINO: Correct.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Because that would protect the
properties on the east or west side under the standard setbacks.
You're trying to move this on your four lots into an internal
configuration, eliminating the setback to get to the other -- the
little diagram you had up here -- I'm going through this in my
mind one more time, and the only setback -- I'm not saying the
only setback, the setback that seems to have caused some
heartburn, if I can use that term, is the rear yard setback, there
was concern about the wall and what it does to the neighbors
who would be to the south.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And what I'm learning, that was
apparently misconception on my part, is that that setback
variance, I know it was not for the principal structure, but I
thought -- it hadn't occurred to me that the rear yard -- anything
you put inside the rear yard is also going to be inside that wall
and so nobody can see it. So I don't particularly care and we'll
hear from people that are saying no, I'm wrong about that, so
we'll hear about it, but a staff question, because would you tell
me, if you would, Mr. Sabatino, what you intend to build for
accessory structures, because these variances run with the land,
my question for staff would be, is what accessory structures are
permitted in the district that could in the future be built with a
zero -- you know, without a variance, and the fact that the wall is
there now, would make the existence of the wall a condition of
the variance, if we were to grant it, because we have to think of
more than just this project since variances run with the land?
We have to think if this wall falls down and the homeowner
doesn't want to put it back up, what might be in the setback
then, you understand? We have to think forward, so what are
permitted accessory structures?
MR. REISCHL: Well, I think there is a protection in the way
the resolution is worded, because the variances are for
structures within the courtyard wall, therefore if the courtyard
wall goes away then the accessory structure -- the variance
would not apply to it, and my mind just went blank on the first
part of your question.
Page 99
January 9, 20001
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: No, you answered it.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: We just want to make sure just to
tackle what Commissioner Mac'Kie is saying, if the variance runs
with that structure, if that structure is removed then --
MR. REISCHL: Thank you, that refreshed my memory.
Another part of the resolution is that a site development plan or
a site improvement plan would be approved and the first project
from last May, that has already occurred and basically we use
the conceptual site plan that's also in the resolution, and with
extremely minor changes, if even those, that was approved
according to the conceptual site plan that was in there.
Anything that was more than just a tweaking of that plan, me or
a future planning department employee would bring it back to
the board.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Well, I didn't think it could be
done, but you've opened my mind.
MS. SABATINO: Isn't that what this hearing is about?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: That's what it's about.
MR. SABATINO: I know we're not to make references to
Dover-Kohl, but I've had to really study what they're all about,
what they're trying to do in our community. I am now a
homeowner in that community and I truly want to help achieve
the goals, if I can.
I did want to bring up this picture, which seems to be
typifying the community character of Naples Park, and please
understand how the picture came to be. The picture came to be,
it was a series of photographs that were taken by
representatives of Dover-Kohl, chose to gather perceptions and
from those perceptions, we have reactions. I wanted to point out
the differences in the two.
The house on the right is predominantly a garage door, it is
offensive to me, it is offensive to a lot of people, and that's why it
rated low.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: That's the 1.5, is its rate?
MR. SABATINO: The house on the left could have been on a
double-wide lot. There could be a garage in the rear. It is a very
old home. I don't know if a garage was ever required of that
home. It could have just been -- you know, you're walking to the
beach or you're walking, whatever, bicycling to the corner store.
The Dover-Kohl -- Dover-Kohl has solicited reactions to
Page 100
January 9, 20001
these photos, it received a higher grade, and I can understand
why. However, let's talk about the reality of Naples Park lots.
They are 50 feet wide. Today's buyers do require a garage to put
their belongings in. In fact, there are ordinances that say you
can't leave your stuff out, and to put a double-wide garage on a
single -- on a 50 foot wide lot, you cannot side load that garage,
you cannot side load so that the garage door goes to the side,
because in a typical lot of 50 feet, if you start the garage at
seven and a half feet away, you just physically can't do it. Take
it from me, I've been in the business long enough, you cannot do
it.
However, you can side load a garage if you pushed it to the
property line, because now the 50 feet turns into a 20 foot
garage deep and a 30 foot turnaround or back up area, that you
can maneuver your car into your garage.
You can never achieve it on a typical 50 foot wide lot,
standard solutions, two seven and a half foot side yards.
However, the reason I'm bringing this photograph as part of
our testimony is I want to offer another photograph, and that
photograph is also in the study and this one seriously -- I mean, it
is a multi-family example, true, but it elicits a feeling of this is
what Naples is all about. We don't like aluminum siding, we don't
like gable roofs, we like interest in architecture.
I had put something together for an early study of the
courtyard homes, and I don't see a predominance of garage door
in this picture and that's what the community is talking about.
They do not like this picture because the garages are facing the
front. It is out of character. What is the character?. The
character is being referenced to (sic) the two photographs that I
showed you initially. I think that's a bit unfair. I think
Dover-Kohl needs to quantify a little more what the community
character is and not just throw out photographs and have as
many people who look at it, have that many variances of opinion
as to what community character is, but we're all hanging our
hats on it right now, and I think that's totally unfair.
I'm just trying to do a good job, to do something quality in
the neighborhood. I'm trying to -- I have brought some
photographs of two-story newer homes in Naples Park and some
we like, some we don't like, but, you know, these are all major
investments for the property owners, and including our property.
Page 101
January 9, 20001
There's a lot of pressure on this ground to be redeveloped,
tremendous pressure, and I went to a meeting with the planners
late last week in an effort to be more sensitized to the
Dover-Kohl study and I presented to -- is the mike still on?
Well, I'll still talk. I went to a meeting to express my
interest in how we might achieve the porch in the front, the
garage in the rear on a typical 50 foot wide lot and I came up
with a solution which I threw on the table and said there is a way
to do this, let's work on it on the other project, and the reason I
did that is because -- you know, unless you have creative site
planning on a 50 wide lot and relax the setbacks and the
standards, but create architectural review and create a
redevelopment authority for Naples Park and a method of having
a menu of things that you can do that are approvable, and these
are the things about architecture, that's what I do, and unless
you can do that, it will be willy-nilly, but you need to do that, and
I put forward a document to Amy Taylor and I said, you know,
consider that, and that may be part of what the residents are
going to present, but I did want to clarify, I have a -- that was
only a planning session. It really doesn't have any relevance to
this particular application. I would enjoy very much to share
ideas on future applications.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: What you're really talking about is a
future project and we're going to stick with this since and that's
not a part of it.
MR. SABATINO: Well, they were going to bring it up, so I
thought I'd address it.
MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Chairman, I need to remind you, you have
20 registered speakers on this particular item.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I understand, and thank you very
much.
What's the feeling of the board at this point? I mean, I'm
going to poll the board again. You made your presentation. I
need to get some --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'd like to hear the speakers.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: We've got 20 of them, that's 100
minutes.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Well, I'm more -- I was persuaded
that the rear lot line variance was the killer for this project, and I
am less persuaded by that now, and so I think it's only fair to
Page102
January 9, 20001
hear --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: The petitioner said that he
wanted to go ahead and I think we have to give them all the time
we need to hear all the speakers --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. All I would ask the speakers is
that if you are going to be redundant -- COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Don't.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: -- we hear it once, we've got your
message, so if you've got yourself organized in the way you
present it, it's most appreciated by the board so that we get a
concise picture of how you feel, pro or con, on this project. So
let's start the speakers, and each person gets five minutes and,
ladies and gentlemen, I will hold you to five minutes with 20
people coming to the podium.
MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Chairman, I'm going to call two speakers at
a time. The first speaker can come to the podium and the
second speaker can go ahead and stand waiting by the door and
be ready.
The first speaker is Marie Sourbeer followed by Vera
Fitz-Gerald.
MS. SOURBEER: Good afternoon, my name is Marie
Sourbeer. I do have a small presentation that I'll leave a copy
with your -- I live at 736 100th Avenue in Naples Park. I've been
there 31 years, so you know I've seen a lot of changes. My name
-- and I reside in the park and I am immediate past president of
the Naples Park Area Association for ten years. However, I am
here on behalf of the second district, a group of 34 property
owners' associations that meet in North Collier County, and on
their behalf I ask that you withhold any approval to the request
for the several variances that Mr. Sabatino is asking for the four
lots today that is located in Naples Park and which will back up
to already developed homes on sites that are 50 by 135 feet,
which include the five foot setback, the utility easement.
Mr. Sabatino will proceed to purchase these lands, though
there's no real hardship there, because I don't think he owns the
properties yet, if he's granted all the changes to the existing
restrictions that you now have that would (sic) build a home as
we speak, the setbacks, the walled properties, the zero lot line
construction is something we're not looking forward to in the
Naples Park .area.
Page 103
January 9, 20001
The six homes under construction on 110th and t 11th
Avenue are already drawing concerns by some of the nearby
neighbors who are driving by and wondering what's gonna
happen when he puts up that ten -- that six foot concrete wall on
that easement boundary. You're gonna have ten feet back there
with a wall on both sides of that, how are they gonna access
that, how is it going to be maintained -- well, whatever.
We have also asked -- they have also asked that you would
give the Dover-Kohl study, which was paid for by tax dollars, an
opportunity to present what improvement plans they could make
for Naples Park and not chop it up into little gated confines. This
seems what it will be like if you approve these requests today for
variances. Thank you. Marie Sourbeer.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you, Marie.
MR. OLLIFF: The next speaker is Vera Fitz-Gerald followed
by Loretta Leleux.
MS. FITZ-GERALD: Hello, I'm Vera Fitz-Gerald. I'm speaking
here as the president of the Property Owners of Naples Park, of
which there are several hundred. The message I get here is that
if you don't agree, then you don't understand.
Well, I've been dealing with blueprints for 30 years. All of
my working life, I've used blueprints, and believe me, I can look
at a blueprint and I can build a house in my mind and I can walk
from room to room.
The one thing here is the sugarcoating. I wish I had a half
an hour to spend to do the sugarcoating that's been going on
here. It's just amazing. They've spent a good week phoning
umpteen people to try to get those few letters they managed to
get, and I know they have, because people have been calling me
and said you'll never guess who just phoned me, it's quite
amusing, and you can fool some of the people some of the time,
but believe me, you can't fool all of the people, and we're the
majority, and it is the zero lot line. It is the zero lot line on one
side and it's zero for the accessory in the back.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: But the wall, Vera, what about
that?
MS. FITZ-GERALD: The accessory -- accessories are not six
feet high.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: But why do you care? Oh, they're
going to be taller than the wall?
Page 104
January 9, 20001
MS. FITZ-GERALD: Well, of course they are. The cabanas
are going to end up with kitchenettes with bathrooms.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Hold it up, we've got 20 people here.
Let her talk.
MS. FITZ-GERALD: So it's gonna be an absolute mess
because these little cabanas can suddenly become something
very, very livable, guest suites, and guess what people in Naples
Park, guess what people in east Naples, guess what people in
Golden Gate do, they rent the cabanas. Okay. And I guess if you
build a wall -- based on that, if you build a wall, then you can just
simply build anything within that wall you want and the heck
with the required setbacks and that's not right.
What I fought for for the last 13 or 14 years, what our
organization has stood for is the right of ordinary people to live in
ordinary neighborhoods in an extraordinary location, and this has
happened. We have a wonderful mix of folks in there, and by the
way, all of our houses were built to code, almost all of them, and
I don't know why we have to have something special just for
development or this developer.
His ideas are not consistent with what we have fought for
over these many years. He claims to live in Naples Park, yet to
my knowledge has not lived a day or spent a night living in our
community. He apparently thinks Naples Park is not good
enough, that it needs to be redeveloped. We think it's pretty
darn fine and was even finer before he wormed his way past
commissioners in the previous 110th and 111th variance,
claiming, along with his wife, that all they wanted was a nice
place to live with a coy pond.
We have -- oh, the one thing I'd like you to do is to ask
yourself this. If this scheme was plunked down, this sort of
fortress mentality was plunked down in the middle of Willoughby
Acres, would you even be giving it a passing thought? What if he
was coming up with this scheme in Victoria Park? I don't think
that you would even spend a minute thinking about it, but I don't
know why then it has to be made for Naples Park. We don't want
it any more than the people who live in Willoughby Acres want it.
One of the problems we've had over the years is with some,
now just some, in the planning department who have considered
Naples Park a dumping ground for every wild-eyed scheme to
come down.
Page 105
January 9, 20001
A few years ago I sat here in this chamber along with 40
neighbors listening to a young man in the planning department
telling the county commissioners that the current weird idea on
the table was being recommended by the planning department
because Naples Park was such a mess, I'm quoting, that it didn't
really matter what anybody did in there. Then Commissioner
Volpe looked down and he said there are many folks here from
Naples Park today and they might take offense to your remarks.
Fortunately, the crazy idea was voted down, but the PONP has
had to be so active in trying to protect our community from these
assaults and it's ongoing and no other community that I know of
other than Naples Park has to constantly fight off these get rich
quick schemes and that's all they are, and we beg you send a
loud no to everyone else who wants to come forward with one of
these crazy ideas.
Mr. Sabatino was merely fronting for people.
Now, I've got here, we, the residents of Naples Park have --
uh-oh -- have our own plans with what we want to happen in
Naples Park and we want to build within the current LDC.
There's no hardship here -- darn, I'm out of time.
If somebody asks you for a variance, it doesn't mean you
have to grant it, and we ask you please, don't do this to our
community, don't give in to another get rich scheme. We're
going to develop a plan, we're working on it now. It may not be
what Dover-Kohl has. It will be an overlay. Please, give us that
chance. Deny this variance. It's the zero lot line. CHAIRMAN CARTER: Next speaker, please.
MR. OLLIFF: The next speaker is Loretta Leleux, followed
by Nancy Brown.
MS. LELEUX: Thank you for pronouncing the name
correctly, it's Loretta Leleux, I'm the treasurer with the Property
Owners of Naples Park. I'm a resident at 800 104th Avenue
North and I've been there for ten years.
I have to say up front that what Mr. Sabatino is doing is
quite attractive. I've looked at courtyard homes in other areas
before, however, those areas were developed specifically for
courtyard homes and the utilities there supported them, i.e.,
they're underground. However, in Naples Park, we have an open
area, we have an old neighborhood and, unfortunately, we don't
have underground utilities. As a result, the transformers blow
Page 106
January 9, 20001
quite often and we see FPL in the cherry pickers out there.
One of the concerns we have is that when there is a
problem, FPL has to be able to access the rear yard, and if he's
going to have solid courtyard for four yards across in this project,
then he will have -- FPL will have to trample on the neighbors
adjoining him to be able to access the utility easement. Even
though it's ten foot, the boxes are in the middle. A truck is really
going to have a hard time maneuvering to be able to accomplish
that fact. So that's a big concern, is that they're always going to
have to rely on the neighbors, and I know there are other
neighbors in Naples Park that have fences that go all the way
and they're secluded and everything, but they're not strung out in
a row. You have alternate neighbors.
The other thing that we have a concern with is drainage in
Naples Park. Thanks to the commissioners, our main drainage is
working quite well now, thank you very much, however, we do
still have problems with secondary drainage, and since most of
this plan seems to be an impermeable surface, where is the
water going to go?
With the new zoning laws and the new code, the properties
have to be built up and Naples Park is an old neighborhood, so a
lot of the properties are quite low because they were built before
the time they had to bring in all the fill and bring them up. As a
result, we have to accommodate the neighbors not to flood them,
but if you're gonna have that much of a surface that's going to be
not absorbable, non porous, the water is going to spill out on
your neighbors.
You know, I had to do special things to accommodate my
neighbor when I had my house built ten years ago, because his
house was built probably 25 or 30 years ago, otherwise we'd
drown him. So that's a concern about, where is all this water
going to go, and the other concern I have is that the Sabatinos
have contacted me to see if I would support them in this, and I
don't think what he's planning is in character with Naples Park.
We have a very diverse -- we have from what used to be a
beach shack built right next to a really nice house, but that's
typical Florida. That's -- you see that all over. I mean, I saw it
when I went to Tampa, I saw it in Clearwater. You have a little
teeny tiny house built next to a real nice one, but you have such
a diversity of neighbors and we're all open to each other, we all
Page 107
January 9, 20001
have access to each other. Whether or not you talk to each
other and utilize that, it's there. You're not walled off, you're not
putting yourself aside and not considering yourself a part of the
community, because in essence, that's what's happening. You're
walling yourself off, and I know that in certain communities that
would be really nice.
You know, like I said, I've looked at these before and they
usually have planned community accessories, like a clubhouse or
a meeting place for the residents. We don't really have that
much in Naples Park. We have an association building, but that's
minimal.
Cabanas can be rented so easily. All the rest of us had to
build according to the setbacks and everything, and I think he
can build a nice house without it, and you know, that's perfectly
his privilege to do so. He lives in America, he lives in Collier
County, he lives in Florida. Thank you very much.
MR. OLLIFF: The next speaker is Nancy Brown, followed by
Erica Lynne.
MS. BROWN: I'll try to be brief too, but anybody that knows
me, knows I'm not very brief, but I'll try real hard.
Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, my name is Nancy Brown. I
live in Naples Park and I've been a realtor in Naples for 21 years.
Naples Park and its residents are really my neighbors, they're
my friends.
I was privileged this last year to market and sell 47 of their
properties right there in the park. Over the past three years, as
we've seen all over Naples, again, I reached over 40 homes in the
park that I was able to market and sell for people. I believe I
have a sincere interest and certainly a dedication to this
community.
I had a meeting with A-Noble Construction, the owners are
Tony Freezer (phonetic), Sal Dimaggio (phonetic), they build
there. I had a meeting with Nikki Lebrasda (phonetic) before I
came here this morning. That was at 7:00 this morning because
I thought I was going to be here at 9:00 and be gone, but anyway,
Lebrasda is a name of course you'll all recognize, they're a
positive influence certainly in Naples Park for over 20 years and
in North Naples. So on behalf of them I will try to give it maybe a
professional slant on this, if I could.
We are very, very concerned about the density and the
Page 108
January 9, 20001
property values, no question about it. For all of ourselves and for
all of our -- the people that own here. We've all worked very, very
hard for 20 years, we continue to strive every day to clean up the
housing one by one, especially the older multi-family units. We're
putting in beautiful new 1,700, 2,200 square foot homes which
attract young professionals and their families and of course our
treasured retirees.
In regards to the density and the property values, I speak
hopefully with some authority on that. I cite for example on
110th, 500 block, there are four duplexes on the south side of the
street, anyone that's ever been down there will certainly
remember what I'm talking about. They're the brightest colors
you can ever imagine, but anyway, they're are 10 to 14 cars out
in that yard with assorted noise and whatever every single night.
Across the street, 561 110th, is a beautiful one year old home.
It has a value of over 265,000, as it sits right now today. There's
an elderly couple there that must sell for health reasons. We as
professionals have not been able to market this property even at
229,900, we cannot market this property, that's $35,000 less
than the market value it should be, simply because of the
density.
I can cite many instances of beautiful homes in the park
that are adversely affected clearly by this, you know, densely
populated residences that are either behind or beside them,
whatever. The property values have been very much diminished
in my estimation and they're very, very hard to market that way.
I refer to, and I had the privilege of meeting Mr. and Mrs.
Sabatino just an hour ago. I had not met the people before. I
knew what was going on, but I had not met them.
I am very concerned about the courtyards with walls. I am
very concerned about zero lot lining, but more importantly, I am
very, very concerned about the second paragraph, which I
brought to their attention to have some clarification, and that
was one additional unit on the site to be inhabited by not more
than two individuals not to be more than two stories high,
additional unit, additional rental property for an owner or an
investment.
That bothers me a great deal, because I have really spent
the last 20 years, and I know many of my colleagues, trying to
get rid of-- I'm sorry, to diminish maybe is a better word, the
Page 109
January 9, 20001
duplexes, the multi-family and whatever, I have worked very,
very hard to get these people into a community where they're
more suited and not in Naples Park and then I managed to sell
those properties to young people just starting out. It really
makes our community a whole lot nicer.
So if this proposal is (sic) as it is stated, the density will
accelerate, the property values will diminish, believe me, I know
that for a fact, at a time when Naples Park is finally experiencing
appreciation, just like the rest of Naples. I don't think that's too
fair.
I'm totally opposed to increasing the density, if that's what
we're all talking about here, on a 50 by 100 foot lot for reasons
that I've stated.
I believe Mr. and Mrs. Sabatino's concept is very attractive,
it's very alive in Collier County, no question about it, however, as
an owner, as a professional realtor in my community, I wish them
a tremendous amount of success, but perhaps in another area of
Collier County, not in Naples Park. I thank you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you. Next speaker.
MR. OLLIFF: The next speaker is Erica Lynne, followed by
Jacques Millot.
UNKNOWN SPEAKER: Jacques Millot had to leave.
MR. OLLIFF: Okay. Next speaker will be Sophie Prete.
MS. LYNNE: Hi, I'm Erica Lynne, and I'm a year-round
resident and property owner in Naples Park and I'm a member of
Property Owners of Naples Park and Naples Park Area
Association.
Commissioner Mac'Kie, the rear lot line, there will be a wall
on there and then the cabana will be built right up against the
wall. As far as I know, there aren't any cabanas that are under
six feet.
In addition, if there's a pool within that another (sic)
accessory structure, I don't know of any pools, especially in
upscale houses, that don't have pool cages, and I suspect that's
going to be over six feet as well.
Mrs. Sabatino stated that the people who live in the area
next to their development that's currently permitted took a wait
and see attitude and also now approve. I'm here to say that I'm
one of the people in that neighborhood across from them, that I
was involved in objecting to these plans from the first time they
Page 110
January 9, 20001
came up before the planning commission, and that there are
people on all sides of me and down the road in front of me who
do not like it. One gentleman was here today to speak, he had to
leave at noon because he had an appointment. My next door
neighbors are just -- who are an elderly couple, been here for 30
years, they think it's awful.
Thirdly, the Dover-Kohl response to Mr. Sabatino's plan was
not the way it was characterized by either Mr. Reischl or by Mr.
Sabatino. I am sorry, that is about the only thing that I don't
have a copy of with me today.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE.' Is there something in writing?
MS. LYNNE: It is in writing. Amy Taylor has it, I've got it at
home, Mr. Sabatino has it, Mr. Reischl has it.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Thank you. Go ahead, I didn't
mean to interrupt you.
MS. LYNNE: Fourth, they touched on the drainage problem.
I just wanted to point out that Bill Bowers, who's another
landscape architect who lives in Naples Park, said courtyard
homes have very little permeable surface, this causes major
drainage problems.
We're not talking about permitting just one property. We're
talking about permitting four in a row, five in a row in another
section.
In the meeting last week with Amy Taylor and Mr. Reischl
and Mr. Sabatino and Mr. -- let's see, Vera and another member of
the planning staff, Mr. Sabatino had his diagrams out there. We
went over them very carefully and he admitted there is very little
permeable surface in his courtyard homes and Mr. Reischl
admitted in that meeting that drainage was a problem and that it
has not been addressed, and Mr. Sabatino also admitted that
there was no on-site drainage and that the problem had not been
addressed.
Finally, what I really came here to tell you about was that
Naples Park is my home and I'm invested not only in the
property, but in the people and the relaxed and friendly lifestyle
that constitutes open neighborhoods. There is a richness of life
and experience in a diverse community that speaks to my soul,
my life and those of many of my neighbors.
Individuality is what gives Naples Park its charm. I love
living in a neighborhood where some houses are tiny old Florida
Page 1tl
January 9, 20001
cracker homes. Others are large, expensive homes, and there's
everything in between.
Naples Park is a neighborhood without walls. Nowhere in
Naples Park do you see house after house joined by six foot
fences forming an impermeable barrier to the rest of the
community. Some people do have side or back fences, but these
are not the norm.
On my street 80 percent of the home have no fence across
the front of the property and I'm talking about where it's allowed
at the --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: At the street?
MS. LYNNE: -- no, not at the street. I'm talking back at the
house line.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I see.
MS. LYNNE: The people who live there are as diverse as the
homes and the architecture. I love it that there are families,
children and schools. I love it that kids' baseballs end up in my
yard. I pick them up out of the driveway swale and garden and
leave them piled up in a corner of my yard where the kids
retrieve them.
I love it that a neighborhood child I don't even know shows
up in my backyard asking questions about butterflies and I
shared some butterfly eggs and crystals from my butterfly garden
with him.
My elderly neighbors sit on their porch every day. Other
neighbors stop by to chat and I love to loin them there. I love it
that there are sheriff's deputies living in the park, as well as
teachers, nurses, cashiers, clerks, lawyers, landscape
architects, local business owners and others.
Not everyone wants to live in a diverse neighborhood, and
for those people there are numerous gated PUD's where
sameness of architecture and demographics is assured. Like
many homeowners in Naples Park, I could have purchased
property in an upscale gated community, but I didn't. I prefer the
diversity and please, please, refuse the petitioner's requests.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Next speaker, please.
MS. LYNNE: Can I get to -- here's another from Hank Faye.
By the way, I have a doctorate, Hank Faye has a doctorate. We
are not uneducated people. We've been working on this a long
Page 112
January 9, 20001
time.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I understand, and I know Hank Faye
and we know his credentials, and you have made your point very
well. We would like to move to the next speaker. Thank you.
MR. OLLIFF: Next speaker is Sophie Prete, followed by Jack
Sodergren.
MS. PRETE: I'm going to be very, very brief, because they've
said everything that I wanted to say, so I'm not gonna -- the only
thing I have here is a petition. Now, I'm not gonna go through
every name one by one, like somebody else did, because I don't
think it's necessary. May I present the petition?
And again, Mr. and Mrs. Sabatino, a year and a half ago,
whenever I first met you, were gonna build one house. Now
you're doing six houses, now you want four houses and January
23rd, they want five houses that would be across the way from
me on 95th Avenue. I'm against it. I don't want to see five walls.
I want to see greenery, I want to see children, I want to see the
park, I want to see my neighbors, and I'm against tall tenements
three stories high, because my house is only one story. Okay?
My name is Sophie Prete. Very brief.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you, Sophie. Next speaker,
please.
MR. OLLIFF.' Next speaker is Jack Sodergren.
UNKNOWN SPEAKER: He had to leave.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. Next speaker.
MR. OLLIFF: Next speaker is Julia Crowley.
UNKNOWN SPEAKER: Julia Crowley had to go, but she
supports the position of the PONP.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. Thank you. Next speaker.
MR. OLLIFF: Next speaker is Doris N. Ford.
UNKNOWN SPEAKER: Ditto.
MR. OLLIFF: Next speaker is John Hickey, followed by Joan
Babinsky.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Is Joan here?
MS. BABINSKY: Yes.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay.
MR. HICKEY: I am John Hickey, a resident and homeowner
in Beachwalk Residents' Association, which abuts Naples Park
on its southern boundary along the south side of 91st Avenue.
I am presently chairperson of the community relations
Page113
January 9, 20001
committee in Beachwalk with our 356 condos, villas and homes.
The owners and residents of Beachwalk support all of the
objections being expressed by the property owners of Naples
Park to the plans and variances being submitted by Mr. Sabatino
and the county planning staff. We do not want to see the Naples
Park neighborhood split up by irresponsible development along
its streets and avenues.
Naples Park is an open neighborhood and a walled entity in
its midst is not in keeping with the present, quote, character,
unquote, of this neighborhood. Such a project as proposed,
increases the risk of drainage problems and possible flooding, as
well as the potential density increase with cabanas.
The building code requires setbacks and these should be
fully enforced on this proposed project. Permits and variances
should not be granted on this project.
Naples Park is on the brink of achieving a comprehensive
neighborhood plan thanks to the Dover-Kohl study and it makes
absolutely no sense for the county to approve such a project and
its variances which are so directly at odds with the Naples Park
neighborhood as it exists today.
We in Beachwalk believe Naples Park should have the
opportunity to view the comprehensive study when completed
and act on it for their betterment without being subjected to a
walled milestone -- millstone around their necks.
We strongly urge the commissioners to reject this project
and its requested variances. Thank you.
MR. OLLIFF: The next speaker is Joan Babinsky followed by
James Corcoran.
MR. REISCHL: Mr. Chairman, I've just handed you the
comments from Victor Dover. I just wanted to let you know that
the handwritten comments are Mr. Sabatino's, the typewritten is
Mr. Dover's.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you.
MS. BABINSKY: My name is Joan Babinsky and I live at 519
95th Avenue North, and I'm not going to take any of your time,
it's all been said. Can't top it. Other --just no walls, please. I
love my neighbors and I know them and that's why I know them,
and thank you for your time.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you.
Page 114
January 9, 20001
MS. BABINSKY: And I support the Property Owners Of
Naples Park. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you very much.
MR. OLLIFF.' The next speaker is James Corcoran, followed
by Marian Corcoran, followed by Barbara Morgan.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Is Barbara Morgan here? Thank you.
MS. CORCORAN: Commissioners, my name is Marian
Corcoran. I have been a landowner for 35 years in Naples Park
and I've lived there for 16 years and I support the position of the
Property Owners of Naples Park.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you very much.
MS. CORCORAN: My husband had to leave and he also
supports --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I believe you're a team on that effort.
MS. CORCORAN: Yes, we are.
MR. OLLIFF.' Next speaker is Barbara Morgan, followed by
Page, and I believe it's Giland.
MS. MORGAN: I'm here also to support the position of the
Naples Park property owners. Glad to hear we don't want a
childless society.
MR. OLLIFF.' Mr. Giland will be followed by Dick Lydon.
MR. GILAND: Mr. Chairman and members of the board, my
name is Page Giland. I've lived in Naples Park 23 years in the
500 block on 106th Avenue, and I wholly support the position of
this association of property owners in Naples Park. I feel that
what Mr. $abatino has presented is detrimental to the character
of our park which is a home community.
I have one more comment, which I think is personal. I own
the lot next to my house and I daresay that if I built a house and
came to you and wanted to waive that seven and a half foot
clearance on the side, you would turn me down flat, and I hope
you do the same for Mr. Sabatino's development program. Thank
you,
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Appreciate that, Page. He's kind of
one of my sounding boards in the park, and he's been with me for
a long time. Doesn't always agree with me, but he's great.
MR. OLLIFF: Following Mr. Lydon will be AI Newman.
MR. LYDON: I'm Dick Lydon, live in Vanderbilt Beach and
have been a property owner there for 25 years. Those of us in
Vanderbilt Beach are delighted to see what's happening over in
Page 115
January 9, 20001
Naples Park. The continued growth, we're getting it big time and
it's spinning off and the people in Naples Park should be proud of
what's happening over there.
In looking at this particular project, and much -- and
everything has been said, but I'd just like to add the fact that
during my career I had an opportunity to travel the world and I
spent a lot of time in embassies and consulates all over the
world and most of those were surrounded by a brick wall or a
concrete wall, and there was a reason for that, people kept
driving by and shooting machine guns into those complexes. I
don't think we have that problem in Naples Park. We don't need
any zero lot lines and we don't need any concrete walls. Thank
you.
MR. OLLIFF: Next speaker is AI Newman, followed by James
LeSage.
MR. NEWMAN: Good afternoon, Commissioners. AI
Newman, I live in Naples Park, been there ten years. I like this
project. Sorry to say it, but I love that project. The house looks
good, it looks good where it sits, it's a beautiful courtyard home,
and I've been in courtyard homes in Pelican Marsh, they have
them over there and they are beautiful homes. This house, I've
just seen it without the walls up, but I've walked through it, this
house is a lovely house, and the misconception about the zero lot
lines, everybody's talking zero lot lines for the back lot, they've
still got their five foot easement, then they put their stone fence
up, not a wall, he's got a fence, it's a six foot fence, it's not a
wall. Everybody's saying it's -- you can't see through a wall, no,
you can't, but there's a lot of wooden fences in Naples Park that
you can't see through either, and I can guarantee you, some of
those fences go right up to the front of the house and they're
seven and a half foot easements and have a gate on that and
they've got a seven and a half foot alley to go walk back to the
backyard, but I do love the house. It's a nice one. CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thanks AI.
MR. OLLIFF: Next speaker is James LeSage, followed by the
last registered speaker, Joe Dunnabeck.
MR. LeSAGE: Well, I'm James LeSage, and I live in one of
those little cracker houses that people have been talking about
and I love it. I looked all over Florida, loved Naples Park for all
the reasons that, you know, everything everybody said, and I
Page 116
January 9, 20001
came here very neutral and just, you know, an observation.
I mean, it seems that Mr. Sabatino came here with letters
and the people that -- this doesn't seem to be, you know, that are
opposing this, came here with people, so that's one point.
The other point is that when I first moved to Naples Park
four years ago, Naples Park was just a hokey place. I remember
a friend came and visited and called a friend from one of those
gated communities and said that he wanted to -- you know, that
he was in Naples Park and there was this most -- you know, it
was just not the place to be. Well, Naples Park now is the place
to be, and I'm really happy to be there, and I also feel that you
guys -- you, the commission, has come up with this study, which
makes a lot of sense to me, maybe it's not perfect, I don't know,
but the idea of planning makes sense, and I also live on a double
lot, so as someone mentioned too then, does that mean that, you
know, I have an area right next to my house where I'm going to
be putting in a little lanai, and does that mean I can push that
lanai down right to my neighbor's property, you know, right next
to it, because I have that seven feet strip too, that yeah, I'd like
to do something with as well.
So it seems like everybody should just take a breath, relax
about all this, spend the next six months or however long to get
this done and then plan Naples Park, that yes, development is
gonna come in there and we're going to lose some of that
character that it has now, there's no doubt about that, but let's
do it in a forthright, thoughtful manner with the support of the
people that live there. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
MR. OLLIFF: The next and last speaker is Joe Dunnabeck.
MR. DUNNABECK: Mr. Chairman, members of the board, Joe
Dunnabeck, 6948 96th Avenue. We've lived here from -- well,
we've been here 15 years, and when we came here as a -- as
some builders saw it, it was a slum, and with our builders, like
Mario and some of the other ones, they're building it up gradually
and we've got a unit that is acceptable to all of the people as
they come through, now we've got this monstrosity, as I called it
to Mr. Sabatino and he thought that was an insult, so I apologize
to him for it, but here the problem is very easy,
Just deny any variances on setbacks. We've lived with
this thing for 15 years, we've obeyed all of them. I was involved
Page 117
January 9, 20001
in one where we wanted to put a shed in the back, they had to
have that setback. We couldn't put it right in the corner, even
though everything -- neighbors were all agreeable to it, so you
can't violate what -- the people that have wanted these things
and now give it to somebody else that's going to put up
something that's entirely out of the character of the neighbors.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. That concludes our public
speakers. I thank all of you for participating with us in the
discussion. I will come back to the board and say what is your --
what is your thinking?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I have questions for staff. Is the
public hearing still open?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Is the public hearing still open? I can
close it.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Well, I have a series of questions
that came up from speakers, so if I can just ask, first of all, can a
-- can an accessory structure exceed the height of the wall?
MR. REISCHL: Accessory structures in RMF-6 are limited to
15 feet in height, so yes, they can.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: So, yes. Could, for example, a
pool cage exceed the height of the wall? MR. REISCHL: Yes.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Could the cabana, or whatever
it's called, be built in the rear setback? MR. REISCHL: Yes--
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Then it's an accessory structure,
is it?
MR. REISCHL: The cabana that's shown on the site plan is
not within any of the setbacks. The only thing that --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I understand that. I know it's not
currently as shown. My question is, if they decide they want to
put the cabanas in the rear setback, don't know why, just asking,
because it was a question that was raised, could they?.
MR. REISCHL: I would leave it up to Mr. Mulhere, but my
decision would be no, that it would have to come back to the
board because the conceptual site plan you were presented with
shows it not within a setback, but just the chickee, I think it's
called.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: So, Mr. Mulhere, I saw you
Page 118
January 9, 20001
shaking your head. Do you agree with Mr. Reischl?
MR. MULHERE: Yes, the conceptual site plan doesn't show
the cabanas in the setback here. We would not permit them
without coming back for another variance.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Thanks. So no cabanas in the
rear setback, but a 15 foot high structure that is an accessory
structure, like a pool cage, could be in that rear setback? MR. REISCHL: Yes.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Let's see, does FPL have to -- is
there an access -- problem to the FPL easement?
MR. REISCHL: I'm not familiar with that. I -- there is five
feet on each rear property line from the abutting properties.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Well, if everybody did what
they're doing, would FPL object? What is the process by which
FPL protects their easements and access to it?
MR. REISCHL: Well, the easement is -- they have right of
passage and right of maintenance over the five feet on each
property line. Apparently, because that's an easement, my
assumption would be that that's all they need for maintenance.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: So they could traverse it by
starting it -- its beginning somewhere and going all the way along
it to get to it if they needed to?
MR. REISCHL: According to the easement, that's true. I
don't know in real life if that's what happens or not.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: So -- Mr. Mulhere is standing
behind you, you might want to see if he's got something on that.
MR. MULHERE: I just wanted to add, I had some discussions
with several of the residents in Naples Park. We haven't been
able to verify whether there is any dedicated easements through
an individual's side yard --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Sometimes there are.
MR. MULHERE: -- to get -- right, and in most cases there are.
However, we're not aware of that at this point in time.
Obviously, you are correct, FP&L would have a problem, and
currently, under the current regulations every single property
owner could build a fence, and therefore, prohibit FP&L from
accessing the rear yard easement unless there is some other
access, they may have to acquire some right of way in an
existing or vacant lot.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And while it's easy for us to say,
Page119
January 9, 20001
and it's tempting for me to say, well, FP&L, they're a big
company, they know how to protect themselves, what's more
important here is can they get access to provide the service to
the community, so that becomes my interest too.
MR. MULHERE'- Right, and I think Fred indicates that there
are cross streets where they would access that linear easement,
but I don't know -- I can't verify that.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Are there, Fred, cross street
easements?
MR. REISCHL: As shown on the plat, the utility easements.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Okay. Then I'm less worried
about the FP&L issue. Can the cabanas be rented? MR. REISCHL: Not legally.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I got the same giggle. So my
question is--
MR. REISCHL: If I can explain more about a cabana, what --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Let me ask you a question first.
Is there a kitchenette in a cabana?
MR. REISCHL: What -- this is a building department
question, what the building department allows in an accessory
structure would be electrical hookups for what I would call bar,
refrigerator and a microwave, but not for a stove or a full size
refrigerator.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, on this plan it says kitchenette.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Right. I mean, my kid has a little
refrigerator in his room and never comes out, you know, so --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: That may be a blessing.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Yeah, that's sometimes the good
news. Give him a microwave, you would never see him.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Right.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: But, no, kitchenette, that needs
to come off there, that needs to come off that drawing. MR. REISCHL: The term kitchenette?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Okay? I mean, if it's going to go
forward.
MR. REISCHL: Well, again, that's not part of the conceptual
site plan. That's Mr. Sabatino's sketch.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Oh, okay. So on this stuff, if we
were to approve anything, there's nothing today that says
kitchenette on it?
Page 120
January 9, 20001
MR. REISCHL: No, cabana, which to my knowledge, includes
bathroom, changing room, sitting room with the electrical
hookups for a bar, fridge --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: If you want to put electric, an
electric skillet, if you want to put -- you know, but you can put
what you want to by code in there, that you just -- they won't
have plumbing for a sink and you won't have wiring for a stove, I
mean --
MR. REISCHL: Yes, you can have a sink.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: You can have a sink?
MR. REISCHL: Yes.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: So what makes it not a
kitchenette?
MR. REISCHL: Well, again, I don't know what the definition
of a kitchenette is, but if you can have a microwave and a bar,
refrigerator --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: What can you not have, a stove
top?
MR. REISCHL: A stove and a full refrigerator.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: You can't have a whole
refrigerator?
MR. REISCHL: Correct.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Okay. Drainage, who permits the
drainage?
MR. MULHERE: Every-- these lots, I apologize, I stepped in
for Fred, he can easily as well answer this, but every single
family lot in the county as of over two years ago now is required
to retain and to submit with their building permit a site drainage
plan to do two things. One, to adhere that it's consistent with
the comprehensive water management for the subdivision, and
two, to ensure that it retains water under the South Florida
Water Management District guidelines on-site for a 25 year
storm.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: How does that happen in a site
like this when there's so much impermeable surface?
MR. MULHERE: They'll have to create some sort of-- they're
usually fairly low, but some sort of berming action to hold that
into the side yards.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: So they're probably --
MR. MULHERE: And the water drains, you know -- now, if
Page 121
January 9, 20001
you have an exceedingly large storm event, they're not designed
to hold that water.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE'- Is it designed for a 15 year
storm?
MR, MULHERE: Twenty-five.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Twenty-five year storm. I mean --
and that's with everybody. Okay.
So of the issues that I heard raised, the one that I have the
most concern about, because I'm back to watching that rear yard
setback variance, is if what you're gonna build inside that -- if
what you're gonna build inside the setback can't be viewed from
outside the wall, then I don't care so much, but if it can be taller
than, then I care.
So just for what it's worth, I wouldn't support it, if you can
see it. That's just the end of my questions.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I had a comment. One of my
concerns is I'm very sensitive to owner-occupied, retirement and
work-force housing, and I'm afraid that this is going to change --
change that.
According to some of the things that we got in our analysis,
it says it's non-traditional in this neighborhood, it says it's a
different style from the surrounding neighborhood and it says
smaller rear and side yards than would be permitted, and so it
seems to me that this would not fit into the neighborhood as is,
and not only that, but we're -- we're in desperate need of housing
for our work force and our retirement community.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. What I think I need to do at this
point, I'm going to close the public hearings, and any questions
or comments from the board, let's find out what your thinking is,
and then if it is negative on this, then the petitioner will have the
right to withdraw for future -- let's say, he can withdraw
indefinitely, or we can vote on it -- and we can vote on it --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: We agreed to go forward and
vote if he went to this point with it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We gave him the option on
pulling it before, so I'm ready to make a motion, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. Fine with me.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I don't see a public --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I apologize, I thought we--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I don't see a public hardship in
Page 122
January 9, 20001
this case and, therefore, I move we deny the petitioner.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And I'll second that.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All in favor, signify by saying aye.
Opposed by the same sign?
Motion carries 5-0.
The petition is denied and cannot come back in front of us
for six months.
All right. We need to take five minutes. Our -- I'm sorry,
Court Reporter, I know that you've been giving me the eye.
(A brief recess was had.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Back in session.
Item #13A2
RESOLUTION 2001-18 RE PETITION V-2000-23, TOM MASTERS,
P.E., REPRESENTING VINEYARDS DEVELOPMENT
CORPORATION, REQUESTING AN AFTER-THE-FACT VARIANCE
OF 1.34 FEET FROM THE REQUIRED 5 FOOT REAR YARD
SETBACK TO 3.66 FEET FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1006
FOUNTAIN RUN, LOT 112, FOUNTAINHEAD -ADOPTED
That takes us to the next item under public hearings, and
that would be item two, and all persons have to be sworn on
V-2000-23, and this is Vineyards Development Corporation.
Where if I understand, everybody needs to be sworn. (All speakers 'were sworn.)
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I have no disclosure on this, Mr.
Chairman.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I have met with both the -- I have met
with the petitioner on this issue.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Anybody else?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Including the fact, I just said
hello to him, nothing.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, I met with him, he voiced his
concerns about the situation, wanted clarification. The only
reason he came here is we had one planning commissioner
person object and it was pointed towards Nassau Pools, the
subcontractor, where in effect the owner of the property is
Vineyards Development Corporation, and that was his
conversation with me that -- about that issue. The planning
Page123
January 9, 20001
commission, the person who objected, and I have sent a memo
to staff about this, was objecting to what's the track record of
Nassau Pools, how many times have they come in for variances
and not done their job, and what I subsequently sent to staff, I
requested to take a look at -- we have the old 80/20 rule in effect
here, that 20 percent of the contractors are giving us 80 percent
of our problems with variances and I'm waiting for that to come
back, but that's kind of what's -- as a prelude, what's going on
here.
MR. REISCHL: Fred Reischl, planning services. The -- I
enclosed the track record for Nassau in the planning commission
staff report, so that should be included in that.
This is a request for an after the fact variance for a pool
screen enclosure in the Fountainhead section of the Vineyards.
It is a 1.35 foot encroachment into the required five foot rear
yard, and I'll zoom in on this.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: And that bumps up against a lake, if
I'm correct?
MR. REISCHL: Against a stormwater management lake, and
you can see that it encroaches over a foot, however, that
encroachment is along an area that is approximately four feet in
length and is approximately centered on the lot, you can see
over here that the only encroachment is that little four foot
section right about there. It's approximately located in the
center of the lot.
There is no land-related hardship, however, it does abut the
stormwater management lake and it is a very small distance, not
immediately adjacent to either of the neighbors. Therefore, staff
was constrained from recommending approval.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: If it would have been a foot, you could
have made this decision administratively?
MR. REISCHL: Six inches, we could have handled this
administratively.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: That would have stopped it from
coming to us?
MR. REISCHL'- Right. The planning commission, as you
mentioned, did vote to approve by a vote of 5 to 1.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Comments from the board?
COMMISSIONER FIALA.' Question; would it impair that lake
in any way, or the stormwater retention?
Page 124
January 9, 20001
MR. REISCHL: No. There was a letter of no objection from
the association saying they could maintain the lake.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Is there any speakers? Any public
speakers?
MR. OLLIFF: No public speakers, but the petitioner is here,
I'm sure he could answer questions if you have any.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Any questions of the petitioner?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No. I have a question of the
chairman. What was the answer to your question about Nassau
Pools?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: That's in here.
MR. OLLIFF: On page 11 of that package.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: You know, that's really--
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: They've had four in two years.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Chairman, I see this as such
after the fact variance, I'd make a motion
a small amount of an
to approve.
COMMISSIONER
FIALA: I second that.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: If the public hearings are closed.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I have to close the public hearings.
Public hearings are closed. Now we can take a motion.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Now you got your motion.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Chairman, I'd make a motion
that we approve.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second that motion.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: And I have a second. All in favor,
signify by saying aye.
Motion approved 5-0.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: You know, if we get that hearing
officer approved by our legislative delegation, we might not have
to spend time on items like this.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: And the reason I'd asked the other
question, Commissioner Henning, is I really like to know who the
most frequent violators are that we have to end up looking at
variances, as far as contractors and subcontractors and, you
know, we'll deal with that as we go along, but I want to send a
message to them, if you're not doing the job and I have to hear
from you often, you're not standing in good favor with this
commissioner.
Page125
January 9, 20001
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right, very good.
Item #13A3
RESOLUTION 2001-19 RE V-2000-21, CHRIS ALLEN REQUESTING
A 7.5 FOOT SIDE YARD AFTER-THE-FACT VARIANCE FROM THE
REQUIRED 30 FEET TO 22.5 FEET FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT
555 HICKORY ROAD, LOT 21, BLOCK Y, PINE RIDGE EXTENSION
- ADOPTED
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All right. We can go to the next item,
which would be item three, V-2000-21, in regards to an after the
fact variance in regards to 555 Hickory Road, Pine Ridge
Extension.
All those who are going to be involved here need to be
sworn,
(All speakers were sworn.)
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: No disclosure.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Any disclosures?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: None.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Oh, none.
MR. REISCHL: Fred Reischl, planning services. This is also
a request for an after the fact variance. This one is in the Pine
Ridge subdivision and it involves a side yard.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Am I on the wrong thing?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I am out of order, but since I've
already sworn them -- I'm on three, I hadn't done two. So let me
stay with three, take them out of order.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: No, you were fine.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. You're right, you're right, that's
the Vineyards' one. It looks -- I apologize.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: No, you're doing great.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I'm all right. I thought for a moment, I
looked at it, wait a minute, I got out of order.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Is this also Nassau Pools?
MR. REISCHL: Yes, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Is this one of the four?
MR. REISCHL: No, but I did mention in there it's also the
subject of the two variances we're hearing today. So these are
two different ones.
Page126
January 9, 20001
CHAIRMAN CARTER: So it's four plus two?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: If they get this one. It's right
now four plus one.
MR. DORRILL: In fairness to Nassau Pools, who I'm not
acquainted with, they're not the subject of the variances.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: She doesn't know you.
MR. DORRILL: Neil Dorrill. It's nice to not be recognized.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: We're all right, everybody's -- there's
no -- I mean, we've all disclosed we've had no contact. Now, Mr.
Reischl, we're back to you to present this.
MR. REISCHL: This is a request for an after the fact
variance in RSF-1, Pine Ridge. In Pine Ridge, the side yard
requirement is 30 feet and this is an encroachment of 7.5 feet
into that 30 foot side yard.
Apparently, there was confusion on the building plans. The
original plans that were submitted showed a less than what is
required side yard setback for the patio. Now, a patio can
encroach, a patio doesn't have to meet setbacks, however, then
the building plans that were submitted with the pool and screen
enclosure building permit showed the 30 foot side yard setback.
These are the building plans.
The planning commission was convinced that there was
misreading of the building plans and it was inadvertent
construction error. I received a phone call from the property
owner on this side, the most affected property owner and she
had no objection, and yesterday afternoon, I received a letter
from the Pine Ridge Civic Association stating there's no
objection. I have copies if you want to read that.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: This would be another one, it
seems to me, that we can make a mountain out of a molehill or
we can approve it.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: My question is, whose fault was it in
regards to the confusion here? Was that our error or was that
the contractor's error?
MR. REISCHL: If I can speak for Mr. Allen, I -- Mr. Dorrill or
Mr. Allen could speak, but at the planning commission, I believe
he took responsibility for the error.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: But it's an old error, if the
neighbors don't object, it's a small problem, you know, these are
Page 127
January 9, 20001
big lots in Pine Ridge. This is something that I think -- MR. REISCHL: And the planning commission voted 7-0 in
favor.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: So --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Questions of the members of the board
for staff?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Just a little question, yes.
According to what you were mentioning before, being that
there -- it seems to be a problem with a few -- 20 percent that do
80 percent of the problem, is there some way that we can ever
force them when -- if they continually do this and figure that
we're just gonna approve every variance, is there a way we can
make them pay for it, not the property owner?
MR. REISCHL: I don't know if we could. That would be more
the property owner would take action, but just so you know,
when a variance application comes into the county, the first
thing we do at the pre-application meeting is basically try to talk
the petitioner out of it. It's -- there's no guarantee that the board
is going to approve the variance, they're taking a risk. They're
risking -- well, as of January 2nd, they're risking $1,000 -- $2,000
for an after the fact, so they are taking a risk and we explore
other options; moving the structure, things like that.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Put everything in perspective,
there's, what, hundreds of houses built for every variance or a
thousand houses or something like that?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Thousands.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So, I mean, it's something that
just happens occasionally and you can easily spot if it was an
intentional error.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: If this public hearing were
closed, I'd make a motion to approve.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Close the public hearing.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: So move.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All in favor, signify by saying aye.
Motion goes 5-0.
Nice presentation, Neil.
MR. DORRILL: Only because I was asked to identify myself,
I was here today only in the capacity as a friend. I was not an
agent for, nor receiving any compensation.
Page 128
January 9, 20001
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you.
Item #13A4
RESOLUTION 2001-20 RE V-2000-30, SCHENKEL AND SHULTZ,
INC., REPRESENTING THE DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD OF
COLLIER COUNTY, REQUESTING A VARIANCE FROM THE 35
FOOT MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT RESTRICTION FOR
PRINCIPAL STRUCUTRES IN RSF-3 ZONING DISTRICT TO 5
STORIES, NOT TO EXCEED 80 FEET FOR PROPERTY LOCATED
ON COUGAR DRIVE - ADOPTED SUBJECT TO LANDSCAPE TYPE B
BUFFER REQUIREMENTS AROUND TALL PINES TO THE EXTENT
REASONABLE AND PRACTICAL
All right. That takes us then to item number four, V-2000-30
in regards to the District School Board of Collier County
requesting a variance from the 35 foot maximum building height,
et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.
We have to have everybody sworn.
(All speakers were sworn on this issue.}
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I've met with representatives of
the school board and school administration and I have heard
from many neighbors in the area.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Mr. Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I -- the same, the exact same.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I met with the representatives
of the school board.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Commissioner Fi --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I've met with representatives of the
school board, as well as received phone calls and letters.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Likewise, I have met with members of
the school board and received letters and phone calls from the
community of Tall Pines and others who are having a quarrel
about the money being spent by the school board which is not in
our jurisdiction.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Correction, I did receive a phone
call, 10:00 last night.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: So we may proceed. Mr. Reischl.
MR. REISCHL: Once again, Fred Reischl, planning services.
This is a request for a height variance for the school board
Page 129
January 9, 20001
administration building. The zoning district is RSF-3, where the
required maximum is 35 feet in height and the proposed is five
stories with a maximum of 80 feet. I believe the petitioner is
going to amend that, I'll leave that up to the petitioner.
The location, I'm sure you're all familiar with, is what
everybody knows as Barron Collier High School. It is the
northeast corner of the intersection of Pine Ridge Road and
Airport Road, accessed through Pine Ridge Road and then the
two entrances on Airport Road.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: We're paying attention, we're also
feeding people's sugar needs up here.
MR. REISCHL: And I've highlighted on here, the blue is the
property boundaries. I've highlighted the proposed building in
pink. I can show you an exhibit that the petitioner prepared,
which is -- using a lot better graphics than I have. You can see,
again, here's the proposed administration building, this is the
school bus maintenance facility, Barron Collier High School, a
proposed elementary school, and then as you can see in green,
wetlands that come down along the east side of the property and
even down towards the Pine Ridge Road side.
The neighbors include undeveloped agricultural property to
the east. The residential neighborhoods to the south --
multi-family residential neighborhoods, and also Fountain View
Apartments to the north and the Tall Pines single family
subdivision to the west.
The petitioner states that the taller building, as you read in
the staff report and executive summary, with a smaller footprint
will have a tax -- have a financial savings of approximately 1.5
million dollars. That is a financial hardship, which we don't
consider and that's why we said there was no land-related
hardship. It's a financial hardship.
However, keep in mind that this is also the school board,
therefore, there are tax dollars that we're dealing with. There's a
consideration there, whether or not it's considered a hardship or
not.
Also, the proposed building is buffered from the surrounding
properties. There is the preserve to the east, which will buffer it
from any future development along that side. The wetlands in
this area of the parcel, which from this property, will buffer the
view. Barron Collier High School, which basically will buffer the
Page 130
January 9, 20001
view.
The petitioner has also -- have a line of sight, which I may
not be able to get as large as I'd like to on the visualizer, but
here you can see the houses in Tall Pines and the tall pines i.n
Tall Pines. The bus facility, another area of pines and the
proposed, I believe this is drawn to scale of a 70 foot tall
building, and you can see that the 70 foot tall building would not
be visible to the residents of Tall Pines over the pines on their
parcel and the pines on the school board property.
And again, I'll leave this up to the petitioner to say
definitely, but in conversations between the planning
commission and this meeting, they have discussed the
preservation of that stand of pines as an additional buffer, but I'll
leave that up to them to make that determination.
We did receive two letters and approximately six phone
calls in opposition from residents of Tall Pines.
Again, there is the taxpayer savings, however, there's no
land-related hardship, so staff was constrained from
recommending approval.
At the planning commission, they voted 7 to 0 to deny
because there was no land-related hardship, their feeling was
the building could be built as a three story building, maximum of
35 feet. The school board disagreed, saying that the future
elementary school and other proposals including the wetlands
restrained them and gave them a land-related hardship.
Again, this is a call that is gonna come to you with two
recommendations of denial, but we were again constrained,
judging the public benefit of the tax savings versus the
land-related hardship.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, how many speakers do we have
on this, Mr. Olliff?
MR. OLLIFF: We have one.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: One?
MR. OLLIFF: One.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. All right. Any questions of
staff? We can hear from the petitioner.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I have a staff question.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Yes, staff question.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I am -- as I told Ms. Goodnight
before this meeting, I'm not gonna begin to substitute my
Page 131
January 9, 20001
judgment for the school board's about what's appropriate for
them for their structure, and I know that they probably wish they
had more flexibility in how they spend their money, but you guys
know this, and I wish the newspaper would report it more
accurately with how they're constrained, with what they can
build and when.
This, as I understand it, isn't money that they can use to
build to replace the portables at Poinciana if they wanted to, but
that's neither here nor there for this purpose.
My only mission today is to look at the land-related issues
and I'm concerned about the height, and I -- that concern was
allayed somewhat by an understanding that I want you to
confirm, and that is, what is the height of the Baptist church in
the area? There's a site map in our packet that the school board
gave us, and if this is gonna be the highest building and the first
variance in the area, that would be troubling to me. Is there
already a variance for the Baptist church?
MR. REISCHL: Technically not, it's not a variance, but it's a
PUD, and the maximum height allowed of the building of that
PUD is 85 feet.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: So they are gonna have an 85
foot building there? Is that a roof line or is that a steeple or a
cross or what?
MR. REISCHL.' Steeples are exempt from height.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: So that would be -- they're going
to put an 85 foot tall building, and if you put up -- if you have that
area map, because that was very -. in case the other board
members are worried about this being a giant thumb, not that it
would be a sore one, but giant thumb sticking out in the area,
show us where this building would be.
MR. REISCHL: Here's the proposed administration center
and here's the Baptist church.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE.' And the height of the
administration center, one more time, if we grant the variance,
the height it will be?
MR. REISCHL-'
MR. DWAYNE:
MR. REISCHL--
M R. DWAYN E:
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
It's five stories with a maximum of --
Seventy feet.
Thank you.
Robert Dwayne, for the record.
So 70 there and 85 at the Baptist
Page 132
January 9, 20001
church across the way gave me a great deal of comfort. It was
very -- you know, it's troubling, it's hard to grant a height
variance.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I asked the question about 70 feet,
because first I was -- I read 80 feet. MR. REISCHL: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And then when you were in my
office, Mr. Simms, you said 70. I said this says 80, well, actually
it is 80, but they say 70. Would you explain that to us, please?
MR. SIMMS: And I'll get some -- Jim Simms, for the record.
I'll get some help from Mr. Reischl. Our initial request was
indeed for 80 feet, but we arrived at that number through
consultation with your planning staff.
We subsequently learned to our benefit that the penthouse
on top, which houses the elevator units is not part of whatever
variance we would seek. As a result of that, all we really need is
a variance to 70 feet. There'll still be a penthouse on top and a
small screen to screen off whatever utilities might be up there,
but it's our understanding, and you will confirm this I believe,
that that's not part of the variance that we would be requiring.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Kind of like the steeple on the
Baptist church?
MR. REISCHL: That's correct.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Good analogy.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: You didn't say penthouse, did
you?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: He did.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Talk to your PR people, that's a
bad thing to say.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: People are going to say, what,
they've got a penthouse on top of the --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: But is it really, is it something for
utilities or something?
MR. REISCHL: It's mechanical.
MR. SIMMS: It's a mechanical room.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
have mercy.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA:
when you hear that.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
It's a mechanical room, lord,
Penthouse sort of scares you,
I was thinking did he say
Page 133
January 9, 20001
henhouse?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You'll see the Daily News
tomorrow.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Other questions of the petitioner.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I have questions of the
petitioner.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Let's hear from the petitioner or
maybe we can just go to questions.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That would be great.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Who is speaking for the petitioner?.
Ms. Goodnight?
MS. GOODNIGHT: Yes. Good afternoon, commissioners.
For the record, my name is Anne Goodnight, I'm the chair of the
Collier County Public School Board and I have been asked by the
school board to come and represent them today in this height
variance for the administrative center. I have brought with me
Mr. Simms, Jim Simms, who you've already met, he's the
associate superintendent for operational services. Dave
Lesansky is here, the director of facilities planning and
construction. Michael Kirk, our long range planner and then I
also have consultants of Gary Krueger, who's our project
architect from Schenkelshultz, and also Bob Dwayne, our planner
from Hole, Montes, and we're here to answer any questions, and
if it's all right with you, under the time restraints, we won't make
any more presentation, we'll just answer questions. CHAIRMAN CARTER: Mr. Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes, and first of all, I want to
thank you and Mr. Simms for going to the residents of Tall Pines
last night to address their concerns, and I met with Mr. Simms
this morning, we had a conversation about that. The -- I'm
looking on -- let's see, section eight of the material that you
provided to us and it's -- it's a drawing of the proposed building.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Why don't you put that on the
visualizer, Fred?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And I'm looking at the first floor,
and that first floor area looks to be utilized by -- well, the first
and second floor is actually one big floor, there is no second floor
on that drawing.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Are they just really high ceilings
or--
Page134
January 9, 20001
MS. GOODNIGHT: If you'll look at the one that looks like --
where it comes out there, that's going to actually be our board
room and it's going to also be a multipurpose room to where we
can actually partition it off, very similar to what you can partition
yours off, to where there can actually be two meetings taking
place in there at the same time, and that's the reason why that it
looks like it's two stories there.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So it is or is not -- is it ten foot
ceilings or--
MS. GOODNIGHT: Well, it's going to have a higher ceiling to
it, but it's not going to be two stories all the way across. It's
only that portion there, that's going to be the board room and the
meeting room.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Show us that again, Fred, what
part? So that portion has a high ceiling, but the rest of it is
actually two floors?
MS. GOODNIGHT: Yes, the rest of it is actually the five story
building. It's only the portion -- I'm sorry, go ahead. No, you go
ahead.
MR. KRUEGER: Gary Krueger, I'm from Schenkelshultz
Architects, that's correct. The board room here on the right is a
two story space, but the remainder of the -- the remainder of the
area here to the left is the first two floors; the first and second
floor. The exterior facade gives the illusion of the one floor
because the panels are extended up to encompass the two
floors. It was done to reduce the character -- the visual
character of the building.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: A second question; in the
meeting room, how big is the meeting room, how many seats?
MR. KRUEGER: The board room is approximately 238 at this
point.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Two hundred thirty-eight?
MR. KRUEGER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Comparable to this size room --
MR. KRUEGER: Slightly larger, I'd say.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. You know, I understand
that we always want to look for future planning and that. Is that
really anticipated that you're going to have that many (sic) public
come to the meetings?
MS. GOODNIGHT: Yes, sir. There's a very good possibility.
Page 135
January 9, 20001
For example, at our first meeting in December, we cannot house
the people at the ad. center. We had to go to a school where it
meant that we had to take our cameras and have everything set
up with microphones and everything, but the biggest part of it is
going to be not for the board meetings, but for training of our
staff members and so the room will actually be set up more for
training than it would be actually for the board meetings.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: So you can divide this room off?
MS. GOODNIGHT: We can divide the room off and have two
meeting -- to have staff meetings at the same time or we can
have one large staff meet -- room, and most of the time we're
having to go to one of the schools where the auditorium is,
mostly Gulf Coast, because they're the ones that's large enough
to actually hold the staff, because when we do training, we try to
do it in elementary, middle and high. So we take each one and
try to do the training in there or we take departments, such as
English, math and they're -- the numbers are quite substantial
with that.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Question.
MS. GOODNIGHT: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: To what building standards is
this going to be built? I know that you don't utilize the county
planning or county inspections. How do you go about doing that?
Since we're brought into the picture, it's only fair to ask the
question.
MS. GOODNIGHT: I've anticipated that question, because of
the publicity, so I'm going to turn that over to Mr. Simms,
because he's the one who's in charge of that and he can answer
in detail.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you.
MR. SIMMS: Yes, sir. The department of education --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Your name, for the record, sir?
MR. SIMMS: Jim Simms, for the record, thank you, sir. The
department of education publishes a guide called the SFEF,
standards for educational facilities with which we have to
comply. It includes in it, for example, the fire codes, the national
fire codes, so we have to comply with all of those.
I'll speak also to plan review, since I'm here. The -- of
course, we pay our architect to ensure we're in compliance with
all the codes. We have our own internal review process, the
Page 136
January 9, 20001
department of education has its own internal review process.
We also seek outside review. For example, the North Naples Fire
District, in this case, will review the plans to ensure that we're
consistent with the fire codes as they see them. We have our
own fire code inspector, who will also review those plans. I
believe that answers your question, but I'll defer to Mr. Krueger
for any additional detail that he may care to provide.
MR. KRUEGER: That's right, we do submit the plans to the
state department of education for plan review and for their
review and approval and comments and comply with any
mandatory comments they have.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I think the question though was
inspections. Everybody has to get the plans approved. Who
inspects for compliance with the plans, just out of curiosity?.
MR. MULHERE: Through our interlocal agreement with the
school board, the school board will submit their site plans to us,
and in the past, we have performed courtesy -- they're only
courtesy inspections, but courtesy inspections at the request of
the school board, our staff, our building staff and site engineering
review staff have gone out and done inspections and I assume
we can do that again here.
MR. SIMMS: We certainly could, and we would welcome
that.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Mr. Simms, I was just -- I was
bringing this question up to see if it might be a cost-saving
measure where you can better utilize our county resources and
save on your own, and that was the reason for it, and I beg your
pardon for bringing it up for this particular issue because it really
doesn't fit in.
MR. SIMMS: Well, it is a relevant question, sir, if only
because the department of education has adopted a new building
code which requires us to do one of three things. First, have our
own in-house inspection team and building inspectors. Two,
cooperate with other school districts to that end or, three, utilize
the services of county staff to that end.
Our approach is to utilize the services which are readily
available here with the county and we've approached the county
staff about that, and so that's gonna happen consistently in the
future.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Good.
Page 137
January 9, 20001
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Mr. Simms, do you think it might
be advantage (sic} sometimes in the future if we plan a workshop
together? We're planning them with just about every other entity
going. This is something that's been a hot issue for a number of
years, you know, people want to know what kind of interrelations
there are between our government agencies, and it would be a
great time to maybe get it out in front, just some thoughts.
MR. SIMMS: We would certainly support that. We work very
closely with your staff now on a number of items and I'll mention
the recreation department, we work very closely with them.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I commend you on that.
MR. SIMMS: And others, but we would look forward and we
would welcome that opportunity.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Just while we're asking
questions that aren't relevant, would you like to answer this one
on the record? We've talked about it already. The money that
you're spending on this administration center, could you spend it
on school construction if you chose to?
MR. SIMMS: It's capital funds, we can spend it on other
things as well. We have, we believe, of course sufficient money
in our budget to handle the administrative center and take care
of future needs.
You mentioned the portables, and there was an article in the
paper with a picture of Poinciana. What the article did not say is
that we have a plan to add on to the Poinciana School, as a
matter of fact at our Thursday board meeting, we will ask our
board to approve the guaranteed maximum price for that project.
When complete, that will remove approximately, I'll say 13 -- 13
portables from that site.
Mr. Reischl showed you a site plan, which has a new
elementary school in the vicinity of Barron Collier. When we
complete that, and have it opened by August of 2002 and do the
appropriate rezoning, that, in our view, will eliminate the rest of
the portables at Poinciana.
So we have a plan, we have 5, 10 and 20 year plans that
address these issues and it becomes a matter of timing and
funding and everything else, as you're all aware.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: But my question was the one I
asked you in my office, and that was, if you chose to take this
money and put off -- you didn't want the admin. center until you
Page 138
January 9, 20001
got rid of all the portables, could you use this money and choose
to build a new elementary school today instead of --
MR. SIMMS: No, not at this time. There are very strict
guidelines published by the department of education. We have to
do a facility survey, for example, every five years, and in that we
have to document the need for certain schools, for anything for
that matter, and that survey in turn goes to DOE and it's
approved by them, and that becomes then the basis for our
construction program.
We have an approved survey now, which includes the
administrative center. We have in that approved survey the
addition projects that I mentioned, for example, Poinciana as one
of them.
So to answer your question, at this time, no, we cannot use
that money for anything else. Could we bank it for future years?
Sure.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Understood.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Understood, and if you do that, it still
doesn't address your administrative --
MR. SIMMS: It doesn't address the administrative center at
all.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: -- which you have to have to run any
kind of agency or corporation or whatever it is. You have to have
an administrative facility.
MR. SIMMS: Our current building, as you probably are
aware, is very cramped and we have staff that extends out into
15 portables, we have staff at the Lorenzo Walker Institute of
Technology, we have Mr. Lesansky's staff, who really should be
in the administrative center, but they're in six portables up near
the transportation facility. That's just existing staff. Our current
student population is around 36,400. We expect to grow by 2020
to 57,500. There'll be a proportionate increase in staff. We need
to build now.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Any other questions for the petitioner?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Just thank you for your courtesy
in answering questions that aren't relevant to the petition, just
for our information.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: And I appreciate that, and also the
question Commissioner Coletta brought up about board
communication and we can address that at that time,
Page 139
January 9, 20001
Commissioner, but staying with this issue, what's the pleasure of
the board?
MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Chairman, you may want to hear from the --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Oh, I apologize, we have one speaker.
MR. OLLIFF: Malcolm Kutash.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: You wait all this time and afraid
you're gonna get overlooked and not even get to speak. Either
podium you're welcome --
MR. KUTASH: My name is Malcolm Kutash. I'm a member of
the board of directors representing the community Tall Pines.
We are a community of 117 families, there are about 400 citizens
that are being impacted by the decisions you're gonna make
today, and I'd like to reprise basically the meeting that we had
yesterday with the board so you understand what our main
concerns are and to go on the record what we did discuss.
For more than ten years, we've maintained a cordial
relationship with our large neighbor to the east, the Collier
County School Board. We met last evening with representatives
of the school board to discuss three major concerns of our
community, all of which are a direct result of the construction
project which faces us.
First, we discussed the increased traffic resulting in
significant noise pollution to the north, south and east of our
community. This comes on the heels of the county's widening of
Airport-Pulling Road, which affects our western boundary. So on
all sides we have increased traffic; three sides from the school
board and one side from Airport-Pulling.
Secondly, our significant decrease in property values if we
were to have a skyscraper towering 30 feet above our 50 foot
pine tree canopy. We want to be very clear on that.
Regarding the first two concerns, we all agreed that the
most appropriate method to mitigate these two problems was for
both sides to commit to maintain and increase existing
landscape buffers, to include planting of screening vegetation
such as slash pines, waxmyrtles and Ficus trees. We discussed
the areas particularly on the eastern boundary, and particularly
on the trees which are partially screening, as you see in the
drawing -- you may not know, but there's a section over there.
Now, I'd also just like to, for the record, do you have a -- put
these up here, just two exhibits, two pictures. Put this one first
Page 140
January 9, 20001
and then that one.
Okay. That basically is Tall Pines the way it is right now.
We're a community. We're one of the most unique communities
in Naples I think, because we live in the middle of a very, very
developed area, two lakes surrounded by pine trees and we want
to keep that ambience.
If you go to the next, I don't know if you can see that, but if
you see right through those trees, you're looking directly --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Put your hand on top of the light
there.
MR. KUTASH: That's right. What you're going to see is
there's a school bus over there, there's a school bus right over
there, that's the view facing the proposed development, which is
why we're so concerned about the buffer. We need to get
additional vegetation in there, because otherwise it's going to
affect us greatly, so that's the reason for that.
So I think we've come pretty much to an accommodation
that the school board's interested in working with us, because
we're committing our funds and we'd like to see some
cooperation on their part to help us protect our community.
Now, the last issue of concern really is not with the school
board, but as citizens of Collier County and residents of North
Naples, and this is purely personal, but we feel very strongly and
we'd like to go on the record.
We think our greatest issue of concern is the precedent that
would be set for development in the Livingston Road Area. You
mentioned the church, the 85 foot steeple. Well, you want to
keep in mind that this is basically a two story structure with an
85 foot church steeple, it's not quite the same thing.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: No, they told me though -- sir, the
speaker's behind you, but it's me, and we need to move that
some day, Tom, it drives people crazy. There's bound to be a
way where we can get the speaker where people don't get
confused, but they told me the actual church itself, not the
steeple, that's going to be 85 feet.
MR. REISCHL: That's the church on the visualizer right now.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: There it is.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And then the steeple's on top of the
85 feet.
MR. KUTASH: Oh, my God, we missed that one, we missed
Page 141
January 9, 20001
it. Well, what we're doing -- these two variances are basically
sending out the message that there is no such thing as a height
restriction. I'm appalled basically that this variance has had very
little controversy in spite of the fact that we're trying to maintain
the character of the community.
I have no issue with the school board and it's really not -- as
long as we continue to maintain 'the buffers in our community,
it's not going to affect us as a community, I want to make that
clear. My only concern is that the Livingston Road area project,
that the build up is precisely what happened to the Kendall area
when I moved there 26 years ago. I came to Naples two years
ago and I see the same thing happening.
I just want to go on record that we strongly urge the
commission to deny the request of the variance, but we feel that
they're probably going to go ahead and build it anyway, so we
just wanted to go on record with our feelings.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I understand your concerns, sir, and
what I'm going to really tune into is future development in that
area and environmentally sensitive lands and there's a real
message there and anything that comes in front of us, I will
assure you that this board will give it very careful scrutiny to
make sure that we preserve and that we do the right things.
If I was a part of approving this, and if I was, I'm sitting here
saying when did that happen, and I can't answer that, but it
raises concerns in my mind that in the future, I certainly will be
very judicious in looking at any of these things.
MR. KUTASH: And we're also very concerned, sir, about -- if
you look -- there is that maintenance facility, which borders right
on our property. We'd be very concerned if any sort of
development where to take place in (sic} that, because it would
really impact us dramatically, over there, the transportation
maintenance.
Now, at the present time there is no plans, according to the
school board, to develop that area, other than put low lying
buildings, but if they were to go over the canopy, as I said, that
we'd be very, very concerned, a parking garage and any other
large structures.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: And again, any of those things, they'd
have to come back to us if it's higher than 35 feet -- MR. KUTASH: Sure.
Page 142
January 9, 20001
CHAIRMAN CARTER: -- and so we'd have an opportunity to
review that, but I understand your concerns. I understand what
they're telling us. I guess at -- my point, I'm looking at how a
million and a half dollars are gonna need administration and will
a needle be better than spreading it over the ground.
MR. KUTASH: We're just a little bit disappointed we didn't
have a greater opportunity to at least, in the planning stages, to
be involved, because our community's been there for ten years
and our homeowner's association was never given, I think,
adequate notice, and I think going forward, we're gonna be much
greater watchdogs of any further development.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: And I think Mr. Simms again will, for
the public record, if he will verify that you are working with this
community, that you will work with the buffering. I don't know
who's paying for whatever, but whatever you-all agree to, I would
like it a part of public record that you committed to do that with
the Tall Pines Community.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And, obviously, staff can't fine
the school board, but the staff member could tell us what they
are gonna propose to the school board.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: You can tell us what you proposed and
what you -- I mean, it's just there so everybody knows that we've
raised that question.
MS. GOODNIGHT: For the record, Anne Goodnight, chairman
of the school board, and I pledge that I will work with the school
board and staff to make sure that this buffer area of trees and
everything gets in there, and also I can assure you that our plans
are going out to 2020 and we have no plans to do anything with
the piece of property you're talking about, except for it to be a
maintenance building for buses and what it is today. We may
move some of the portables out, but we're not going to build any
more buildings in that area.
MR. KUTASH: Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Does that conclude our public
speakers, Mr. Olliff?
MR. OLLIFF: It does.
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
COMMISSIONER COLETTA:
and grant the variance.
COMMISSIONER HENNING:
Close the public hearing.
I'll make a motion to go ahead
And I will second your motion if
Page143
January 9, 20001
we interject the landscaping buffering, to hold the feet of the
school board around that community and --
MR. REISCHL: Mr. Chairman, a type B buffer is the most
stringent, if you want to have a reference to something solid in
the code.
So conditioned on installation of
COMMISSIONER MAC'KI E.'
a type B buffer where exactly?
COMMISSIONER HENNING:
Community.
Around the Tall Pines
MR. REISCHL: Adjacent to Tall Pines.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Is that fair to everybody?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Jim, can we impose at our will
upon the school board with this?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: We can certainly do that.
MR. MANALICH.' I think that's a condition you can request. I
think the motion will need to be amended to reflect that
stipulation.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Right. Will the motioner amend?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, I'll amend it for the
request.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: For the request, and does that satisfy
the previous second?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That satisfies the second.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I wonder if we just want to take
a second in deference to the school folks to give them a second
to think about this. They don't know what a type B buffer is and
what the expense is, et cetera.
MR. SIMMS: Thank you, Commissioner. I think we can
comply with that. We are concerned, however, and that's what
we were discussing here, as you saw us, with the southern end
of the Tall Pines property where we have our road going into
Barron Collier, there's not a lot of room there between the road
and the property line. I'm not sure of exactly what would be
required for a type B buffer, but that's a concern to us and that's
why we raised the question.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE.' I wonder if we said to the extent
reasonable and practical, a type B buffer.
MR. SIMMS: That would be fine, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That is fine with me, as long as
they work with Tall Pines, and if you need me to be there to work
Page144
January 9, 20001
with the citizens, I'd be happy to do that.
MR. SIMMS: Thank you, sir, we appreciate that help.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I do -- I agree.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: The motion has been amended, it has
been included in the second.
All in favor signify by saying aye.
Opposed by the same sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Motion carries 5-0.
All right. This takes us down to staff communication.
Item #1 lC
PUBLIC COMMENT - JEANNETTE SHOWALTER REGARDING
MEDIA ONE AND THEIR CONTRACT
MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Chairman, I need to back you up a little bit.
We kind of missed the public comment portion of the agenda,
and even though it wasn't registered at the time, we do have one
registered public speaker.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, I apologize for that, and that
person certainly may come forward and speak to us at this time.
MR. OLLIFF: Jeanette Showalter. I think she's trying to get
to school to pick up her child, so timing wise, she needs to --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: And I apologize.
MS. SHOWALTER: Oh, that's okay. I'm glad that you're
letting me speak.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Oh, I think we've e-mailed,
haven't we?
MS. SHOWALTER: Pardon?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Have we corresponded on
e-mail?
MS. SHOWALTER: No, we haven't, but I would look forward
to that.
Do you need to swear me in or anything like that?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: No, all you have to do is talk. You
have five minutes.
Golf
And
MS. SHOWALTER: I'm Jeanette Showalter. I live in Imperial
Estates. And I have spoken to the commissioners before.
Commissioner Carter has been responsive and he's been
Page 145
January 9, 20001
concerned. But I really need the commissioners to begin to work
and to do something to ruminate over this and figure out how to
solve a problem. I don't know all the answers, but I know when
something's going in the wrong direction.
I have a big problem with Media One/Comcast. I spoke in
September and told you that I am an objector to cable services.
I haven't used cable since 1996. I made a decision, I thought it
was a bunch of trash, or largely trash, and I wasn't going to buy
it and bring it in my home. Then you get in the communities and
the communities are all entering these bulk cable contracts,
okay?
All right. Now, let's talk a little bit about that. These
contracts are not standard contracts. I've talked to the FCC
attorneys, and they've said lady, you got it wrong. It doesn't
have to be mandatory with everyone signed up. It's 65 percent,
and then as you get more people on, the price drops even more.
I said, no, you don't understand. And it's true, in all of
Florida, Media One had a policy everyone had to sign up. Now,
they were limited under condominium law that they couldn't
force the handicapped. But I've been even told my Media One, if
you're in a homeowner's association and you're handicapped,
visually or hearing impaired, you're not excluded from the
contract. There is no exclusion from that contract.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: So they have to pay for cable,
even though they can't see it?
MS. SHOWALTER: I was told that by Media One's lawyers in
Jacksonville, and I was also told that by my own homeowner's
association president.
And they also felt that my objection and conscious was
superior to that of a handicapped person, and still I have to pay.
Now, that type of contract to me is unnecessarily
aggressive in such an attractive market such as Naples. Media
One has severely damaged future competition. Who in their right
mind would want to come in and do an over-build situation here
in Naples, Florida, with Pelican Bay under huge bulk cable
contract and all your major homeowners' associations under
these contracts? It isn't an attractive market. You're talking
about that they've got us locked up for five to ten years, okay?.
I think it discriminates. You look at who's under these
contracts. It's not the Blacks and Hispanics and the poor people,
Page 146
January 9, 20001
it's the Whites and the upper income people.
And I've said to you before, would you lease land on the
beach and say okay, you guys can have a concession stand and
the concession stand can offer two lines: Homeowners'
associations half-price hot dogs, and non homeowners'
association people full-price hot dogs. I don't think you'd put up
with that for one minute. You'd say there's something wrong.
We don't want to be in the business of leasing land to a company
that's going to do something like that. Because you know who's
going to be on one line and who's going to be on the other?. We
all know who's going to be on those lines.
Okay, the other thing is that I don't think that they're
competitive. Now, the people in the franchise department have
just been dreams to work with. Very, very cooperative. Given
me the information. I bother them a lot. They're very nice to me.
But this is where I think we are: 1998 or in the late Nineties,
there was some study where they have to prove to the FCC that
they're competitive. 15 percent of the market is held by other
competitors and, therefore, they're not subject to pricing, or
pricing approval by you.
But it also happens that they have a whole bunch of ways of
calculating these different formulas. And when you're in a
homeowner association, you're not a real one customer, you're a
half customer. So if you're in Pelican Bay and all these other
places, I don't know that it's exactly a half, Bleu you can correct
me, but they have different pricing -- different ways of
calculating.
And when I asked Gaspen (phonetic) recently just tell me,
how many customers are there, how many customers are
covered under cable, under bulk contract and not under bulk
contract, he says, "1 can't tell you. They won't give me the
information."
Now, from -- if I was a commissioner, I would have a real
problem with that. And I really want to be taking a look at how
these competitive statistics are calculated. Because I don't
think we really have a competitive situation in Naples, Florida
anymore.
Okay, I have a problem with their level of accountability.
Now, there have been a lot of things going on with this
commission, and people get upset when tickets are given to
Page t47
January 9, 20001
somebody, okay? Well, this is a company that when in the
springtime there was an audit, there was a very, very substantive
shortfall, and I don't remember the numbers, between 40 and 50
or $60,000, okay? Come the fall and you people are presiding
over the merger with Comcast. It isn't that number, it's a big, big
number. It's several hundred thousand. You want me to finish, or not?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I'm going to ask you to wrap up.
MS. SHOWALTER: Okay. I think you need to get involved in
the issue. I don't think you can just say we can't get involved.
And if in fact you really think that I don't have any rights under
this, then with all these homeowner associations, you should not
take any complaints from the individual homeowners on their
cable problems. You should just say sorry, Charlie, we don't
recognize you, you have to go through your managing agent,
because they are the ones who've entered under this contract. I
think you have to decide really what's at place here in the
county. And I'd like you to respond.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Ms. Showalter, I thank you for your
presentation. I believe our county attorney, David Weigel, has
spent time with you and Bleu Wallace. I'm not sure there's
anything that's within our domain to answer very specific
questions you have, but I would defer to Mr. Wallace or to our
county attorney to respond to that, because --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: When I was first elected, I
thought I was going to be able to solve every problem and that it
was all my business. But since then I've learned that there are
things that I just don't have any authority over. I mean -- and this
seems to be one of those things.
MS. SHOWALTER: Well, let me respond. I think you have
tremendous power in the form of moral suasion, and you have a
new entity called Comcast. And you can go and sit down and tell
them we just don't like the practice.
And the second thing is that the legal opinion rendered was
a very -- to me it was not a balanced legal opinion. It was one
court case that was cited and boom, that's our decision, we're
not getting involved. And I've seen the internal correspondence
which has said stay out of this, this is not an issue you want to
get involved with. I think the legal department stonewalled me.
That's my personal opinion.
Page 148
January 9, 20001
it?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Legal can comment, if they'd like.
Mr. Wallace, any comments that you would like to make to
MR. WALLACE: For the record, Bleu Wallace.
We do have a new player here in Comcast. And so far,
they've been very good to work with. I think they're going to be
much better to work with than Media One in the past.
I am meeting with the Comcast general manager next week
and after I broach that issue about Ms. Showalter's concerns
with that general manager, I'll be happy to get back to Ms.
Showalter and provide the board a status report. It could be that
Comcast has a different view of the bulk agreements.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Well, that's a step in the right
direction.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Step in the right direction and it's
encouraging, and perhaps a better answer to your question.
Any comments from the county attorney's office?
MR. MANALICH: Mr. Chairman, this is one item I have not
personally been involved in, so I'm not briefed to be able to give
you any comment. But obviously I'd be happy to coordinate with
Mr. Wallace and bring back some kind of report on this --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, I think--
MR. MANALICH: -- in the future.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: -- we would appreciate that, because I
know it's been an issue, and I think it's really the attitude of the
player now. Because if they want to take -- in my experience in
the past, if they want to take a hard line with this, they can do it,
and there's really not much we can do in that area. We don't
have as much power as people may think we have.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: If the county attorney is looking
into it, the question that I have is with regard to cable issues
generally, what authority do I have? I mean, from when I
approve the franchise agreement from one time to the next, I
have been told in the past I don't have any other authority. If I'm
wrong and if there is something that I have some muscle on, I'd
like to know. There are a lot of things I'd like to get the cable
company to do differently.
MR. MANALICH: I think you're correct, that it is very limited.
But I will make that part of our response in the near future.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Good. Thank you.
Page 149
January 9, 20001
Board comments -- or let me go to staff communications,
then we'll go to board communication.
MR. OLLIFF: I have none.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: None.
Item #15A
STAFF TO LOOK AT MASTER PLAN REGARDING COMMERCIAL
USE IN GOLDEN GATE ESTATES AND BRING BACK TO THE BCC
THE FIRST MEETING IN FEBRUARY
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I just want to support
Commissioner Coletta on the growth management study for
Golden Gate.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, I'm kind of surprised it
didn't come up. I thought we put it on the agenda.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Oh, yeah, it --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You can bring it up right now.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Oh, fine.
Basically what I'm looking for is the fact that if you noticed,
we had one try for -- a couple of tries now for commercialism in
the Estates, because there's a desperate need for it. And rather
than cave in and start to issue changes to the zoning there to
accommodate any given area for commercial development, I'd
like to see a more comprehensive study done to bring the master
plan back into play where we can get all the players in there, we
can come up with something, get Dover/Kohl involved, work the
road network into it, and come up with something that will really
work before the strip malls take over in that particular area.
It's still a virgin area, and we can really do a wonderful job
with it, but I need the assistance from this board to direct staff
to start the proceedings going to get the master plan up and
going.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I'm certainly interested in master
planning as many areas as we possibly can. I'd be interested in
knowing what that would push off the front burner at this -- you
know, I want to know, but I --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, let Mr. Olliff--
MR. OLLIFF: That would be my suggestion to you, let us
come back at the next meeting and let you know what it would
Page 150
January 9, 20001
take for us to accelerate that, and let you know what the current
workload is versus the current planning staffing level, and let you
know what we would have to take off of what burner in order to
try and --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Or who would we have to hire.
MR. OLLIFF: -- make that happen. Or could we contract it
out.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: But like I say, we're in a critical
period in the future --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: And wouldn't this be part of our whole
discussion in growth management in a workshop?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It would be an amendment to
the Golden Gate Master Plan.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Assuming that's true, how does that
affect all of our growth management activities? So I guess what
I'm saying is we have a workshop scheduled not too far in the
future. Would this be an item that should be there -- MS. FILSON: March 16th.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: -- so that we get all the pieces on the
table at the same time? That's my only question. And I concur --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Usually this runs separate from
that, and it comes back into play, if I remember correctly. Of
course this is a revision of it. I'm not too sure. I was in on the
original master plan but not on the revision.
MR. OLLIFF: It would require a full comp. plan amendment
in that process. I guess Bob is suggesting to you that we come
back to you your first meeting in February and then that would
give us enough time to actually do a decent job to tell you what
it would take to do it right.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I'd support that.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Sure. I'm okay with it.
Permission for staff direction?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Is everybody comfortable with that?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Make that motion that we give
staff --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, you don't have to make a motion,
just give staff direction and they'll do it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's great.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: We hereby direct you. How's
Page 151
January 9, 20001
that?
MR. OLLIFF: Consider myself directed.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Commissioner Mac'Kie?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I have nothing today.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Commissioner Coletta, you had your
item. Do you have other items?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Right at this point in time, no. I
don't want to -- I'll bring some other ones at the future meetings.
Item #15B
DISCUSSION REGARDING TAXICAB RATE REVIEW
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. There was -- as a fledgling
commissioner, if you will, there was some confusion on my part
when we voted on the taxis the last time. And I -- I mistook
some of the signs for other signs. Gee, I should be a little more
clear.
I thought that staff had changed. I thought Bleu Wallace,
when he gave a presentation in my office for $2.65, was the
person who was staff. And when we read our summary and it
said $2.15, I was kind of surprised staff had changed their
position. But then I thought there must have been some good
reason for it. I saw Bleu sitting there and I thought he must have
-- by his presence in the room, I thought he must have been
saying this is what we've decided to do instead.
I realize that the cab drivers were looking for 2.65. I thought
it was a good thing. But then I thought maybe there -- I did not
understand. And so my vote was not -- my vote was not a good
vote, in my opinion. I would have preferred to vote for the 2.65.
What can I do about that?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, let's go to staff and ask if there
was some -- because I think their association asked -- somebody
asked, I don't know, they wanted it. But anyhow, I'll let staff,
somebody comment.
MR. OLLIFF: I'll tell you that that item may have been a little
confusing for a new commissioner. In some cases with some of
the advisory boards the staff report that you get in your agenda
package, by the way the advisory committee is developed,
Page 152
January 9, 20001
requires us to provide to you the recommendation from the
advisory committee as the recommendation within the staff
report, as does the Planning Commission and in this case the
Public Vehicle Advisory Committee. Recommendation was what
you saw.
The staff recommendation was actually a $2.65
recommendation. That went to what's called the PVAC. The
PVAC recommendation then was for less than that, and that's
what you saw in the actual executive summary.
So I think if there was some confusion and the board would
like to look at that rate again, by all means, you have the
opportunity and right to do that.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Well, thank you for saying that
that would be confusing to a new commissioner, because -- but
that's confusing to me and I'm the oldest one here. CHAIRMAN CARTER: That's right.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE.' And it was my birthday, so I'm
really old. But I thought that was a staff recommendation.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'm so glad you said that. I was so
surprised when I found out that I wasn't voting on a staff
recommendation.
MR. OLLIFF: And if there's--
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I'd be interested in looking at a
revision to that, based on staff recommendation. I mean, we
don't have to reconsider it, but we could direct staff to look at it
again.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Because there were two different
proposals, one from the advisory committee -- MR. OLLIFF: Right.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: -- and one from staff. When we did it, I
did not get Bleu Wallace jumping up and saying, you know, I want
to come up here and talk about it.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: No, give 'em more.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: And maybe that's my fault. I should
have invited him to give his comparison.
MR. OLLIFF: I hear that as consensus. I'll just look to
Michelle to tell me when we can bring it back in terms of timing.
MS. ARNOLD: For the record, Michelle Arnold --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And be generous about that,
because I want to get -- there's also been some correspondence
Page t53
January 9, 20001
going on about who's who in this whole process, and we'd want
to get public input.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: They'd have to put signs on their cab
or do something, and maybe they've started down that path? We
MS. ARNOLD: Yeah, we have to be -- we have to look into
that, because the ordinance actually has already been adopted
or changed to reflect the 2.15 and 35 cents. And what that
affects then is the meters for the taxicabs, and that's a costly
adventure for the cabs.
So if we want to change this again after we've already
changed it, that could affect -- it's going to cost them more to
then change their meters again.
We -- you have at that time that we heard this particular
item, you did direct us to come back with a report to this board.
And at that time we could probably look at the rate issue, if you
would like, just to minimize the costs of the taxicab companies.
I believe it's in November of this year when we're coming back
with that item.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Well, how about, you know, we
survey the affected parties and see if they're interested.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Yeah, I don't know how far down the
line they are in their changes.
MR. OLLIFF: I don't know, but I've yet to see an industry
that was unwilling to pay whatever it would take to have a rate
increase.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Get more money, right.
MS. ARNOLD: We are right now -- we're going through the
renewal process for the cab companies and the different charter
companies, so we could, you know, do an assessment or, you
know, a questionnaire at that particular time. Because our
renewal period is in January and runs through February. So we
can --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: You could bring us back something in
February --
MS. ARNOLD: Sure.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: -- based on your renewal and survey.
And I'm with Tom, if we could -- if everyone wants to charge
more money and that's where we are, fine. Except their advisory
council came to us with a lower rate. And that's what I was
Page 154
January 9, 20001
basing my decision on, because that, to me, was the makeup of
the industry. And if they wanted to charge less, I wasn't going to
object to that.
MS. ARNOLD: What the utility regulation department was
charged with is coming up with some sort of methodology,
because currently there isn't any hard and fast rule as to how to
determine what the appropriate increase should be, if there is
supposed to be a recommendation for increase.
So when Bleu's office came up with that announcement,
that is one of possibly many that could be used. And the board,
the public vehicle for hire committee, thought that the more
appropriate way to look at it was another way, and hence the
recommendation for 2.15 and 35 cents.
So of course the cab company is more inclined to a higher
rate, but, you know, that was the decision. And Tom is actually --
what Tom indicated as to what our recommendation would be,
we look to the advisory boards to, you know, support their
particular recommendation --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: So all right, let me get this one
more time. So it isn't like Mr. Wallace disagreed with the
recommendation.
MS. ARNOLD: No.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: It isn't like staff's -- would have
recommended something different from what was in our report.
Their initial study said 2.65. But after consulting with PVAC and
others, this was a staff recommendation. MS. ARNOLD: Correct.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: It was a joint staff and public
vehicle for hire committee recommendation; is that true? MS. ARNOLD: Correct.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Then leave it alone. I mean,
that's --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I'm all right with it. That's the way I
understood it, is that it was a joint process and that this
committee and its advisory group had looked at everything and
came back, and that's what I was basing my decision on. Not to
go against staff. I figure staff had made their input and they
chose to take a lower rate.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So staff and PVAC all said 2.15 --
MS. ARNOLD: Yes.
Page155
January 9, 20001
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- is that correct?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: See, Mr. Dunnick's saying yes.
MS. ARNOLD: We --
MR. DUNNICK: Yes.
MS. ARNOLD: -- staff's -- utility regulation staff came up with
a method of -- or justification for a fare increase. And it resulted
into 2.65 and 35 cents.
After discussion, during that public hearing, the final
conclusion was $2.15 would be the appropriate amount.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Okay.
MS. ARNOLD: And we brought that as our recommendation.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: So Bleu's number was what
would be the highest number, and the overall committee and
staff together came back with a more -- with a number that was
recommended, and we approved that.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And we're okay.
MR. OLLIFF: And you do have direction for us to come back
within a 12-month period and give you a report about what if any
additional regulations we ought to be doing in terms of taxicabs.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: And I think we -- if everyone's
comfortable with that, I would stay with that.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Yeah, let's do.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I wasn't going to move on my
position anyway. And I think that we must keep in mind that the
public is affected by it, too.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, absolutely.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, absolutely. I just thought that
my vote was erroneous, because I didn't understand. But
apparently --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You did.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I did what I --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: You did understand.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- was supposed to do.
Item #15C
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE TO DISCUSS A REPLACEMENT FOR
HERSELF ON THE PRODUCTIVITY COMMITTEE AT THE NEXT
BCC MEETING
Page 156
January 9, 20001
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Mr. Chairman, I just remember I
had one item.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I don't know if anybody wants to
lump at this or if they want to just think about this and maybe we
can get suggestion later, but it is normal that the vice chair
serve on the productivity committee?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE.' The current schedule of the
productivity committee is an extreme problem for me, and I
wonder if there's anybody who has been anxious to serve on
productivity committee or would like to volunteer to serve as the
board's representative there. I'd be interested to hear it.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Looking around, who wants --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE.' If not, I'll work it out. I just want
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I think you being a
commissioner, that you can ask the productivity committee to
change --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Well, I could, but I'd prefer not to
do that. If somebody was anxious to serve, I just thought I would
ask.
COMMISSIONER FIALA.' I don't know what the productivity --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I didn't either when I went there, but
boy, you really learn a lot. It's a great experience.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: What is it?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I can talk to you about that off
the record, can't I, Mr. Attorney? Can I tell Donna about the
productivity committee off the record?
MR. MANALICH: In this meeting or--
CHAIRMAN CARTER: No, later, in the office. What's the
productivity committee doing.
MR. MANALICH: As long as it's not --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Yeah, we're not going to vote on
it.
MR. MANALICH: -- anything that might be coming before
them. Just the nature of the committee.
MR. OLLIFF: We'll provide a copy --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Based on that, Commissioner Fiala,
Page157
January 9, 20001
would you like to volunteer?.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Not until I know what it does.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: We could make it a conditional.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Look at him jumping on that.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Why don't you all have a conversation,
Commissioner, and then bring it back.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: That's great.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: And if that's acceptable, you know,
fine, I don't have any problem with that.
I just have a couple of quick items. Number one, I alluded to
it earlier in my conversations this morning, is that I'm not doing
this secretive and I'm not doing it behind the board's back, but I
do have informal coffee kinds of meetings with the mayors to see
what kinds of issues that may be lurking out there.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That would be your job.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: And I will bring them back to you. But
I certainly don't do this with a clandestine kind of operation --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: That's traditional.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: It's a traditional thing. But I figured
for the new commissioners, they need to understand --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'm delighted that you're doing it.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: -- that I do this, and I will keep you
posted. But there's no agendas, there's no -- it's not publicly
advertised because we just -- we meet infrequently, and whoever
wants to call a meeting does it.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Make sure they buy their own
coffee.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Yeah, well, we -- that's not a problem.
Everybody understands the rules.
The other is the regional meetings that Commissioner
Coletta and I attend, you got an opportunity to see a couple of
those things this morning, we will continue to update you on any
significant things that come out of Southwest Florida Planning
Council and/or any of the subcommittees.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Appreciate that. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: But, you all, I am really pleased with
this board. I want to thank you for having the privilege to serve
as Chair. And I think we're just going to do some wonderful
things this year and restore public confidence in the Board of--
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I agree.
Page 158
January 9, 20001
CHAIRMAN CARTER: -- County Commissioners and county
government. We're going to do that. We want -- not everybody's
going to agree with us, not everybody's going to love us, but at
the end of the day they're going to say there's a group of people
who are really trying to make this a better community.
So thank you. If there's not anything further, we stand
adjourned.
***** Commissioner Mac'Kie moved, seconded by Commissioner
Henning and carried unanimously, with the exception of Item
#16E6 - 4/0 (Commissioner Henning abstained), that the following
items under the Consent and Summary Agendas be approved
and/or adopted: *****
Item #16A1
ACCEPTANCE OF THE ANNUAL ADVISORY BOARD REVIEW
SUBMITTED BY THE COLLIER COUNTY WATER AND
WASTEWATER AUTHORITY
Item #16A2
TOURIST DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL CATEGORY "A" GRANT
APPLICATION TO SAND TIGHTEN THE GORDON PASS JETTY IN
ACCORDANCE WITH THE GORDON PASS INLET MANAGEMENT
PLAN - IN THE AMOUNT OF $325,000
Item #t6A3
TOURIST DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL CATEGORY "A" GRANT
APPLICATION TO RENOVATE AND UPGRADE FOUR BEACH
ACCESS AREAS IN THE CITY OF NAPLES - IN THE AMOUNT OF
$507000
Item #16A4
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF WATER AND SEWER UTILITY FACILITIES
FOR PELICAN STRAND~ TRACT 14
Item #16A5
Page 159
January 9, 20001
RESOLUTION 2001-01, AUTHORIZING FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF
ROADWAY, DRAINAGE, WATER AND SEWER IMPROVEMENTS IN
AUTUMN WOODS UNIT ONE
Item #16A6
2001 TOURISM AGREEMENT BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY AND
CHAMPION SPORTS PRODUCTIONS, INC. REGARDING
ADVERTISING/PROMOTION OF THE NAPLES SPORTS FESTIVAL
IN THE AMOUNT OF $6,000
Item #16A7
COMPETITIVE BID PROCESS WAIVED; AGREEMENT WITH
FLORIDA INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY TO SAMPLE, ANALYZE
AND REPORT ON THE ESTUARINE SEDIMENT QUALITY IN
COLLIER COUNTY - IN THE AMOUNT OF $88,000
Item #16A8
RELEASE OF PURPORTED LIEN FOR PUBLIC NUISANCE
RESOLUTION 98-312, RECORDED IN O.R. BOOK 2466, PAGE
29567 REGARDING LOT 5~ BLOCK C~ GULF ACRES
Item #16A9
2001 TOURISM AGREEMENT BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY AND
THE CITY OF NAPLES REGARDING THE RENOVATION AND
EXPANSION OF THE LOWDERMILK PARK PAVILION/CONCESSION
RESTROOM STRUCTURE - IN THE AMOUNT OF $216~425
Item #16A10
RESOLUTION 2001-02, ADOPTING THE CITIZEN PARTICIPATION
PLAN TO GUIDE THE DEVELOPMENT OF COLLIER COUNTY'S
FIVE-YEAR CONSOLIDATED PLAN FOR THE COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM
Item #16A11
Page 160
January 9, 20001
SATISFACTION OF LIEN FOR PUBLIC NUISANCE ABATEMENT
RESOLUTION 93-319, RECORDED IN O.R. BOOK 1862, PAGE
2329, REGARDING THE EAST 1/4 OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP
52S~ RANGE 29E
Item #16A12
CARNIVAL PERMIT 2001-01, RE PETITION C-2000-12, COLLIER
COUNTY FAIR AND EXPOSITION, INC., REQUESTING PERMIT TO
CONDUCT A FAIR FROM FEBRUARY 2 THROUGH 10, 2001, ON
COUNTY OWNED PROPERTY AT THE COLLIER COUNTY FAIR
GROUNDS ON IMMOKALEE ROAD (C.R. 846), NORTH GOLDEN
GATE
Item #16B1
RFP #00-3158 REJECTED; EXTENSION OF CURRENT CONTRACT
ON A MONTH-TO-MONTH BASIS WITH SEVERN TRENT
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES~ INC. FOR MANAGEMENT SERVICES
FOR THE PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION
Item #16B2
STAFF TO REVIEW THE MILLAGE OF THE LELY GOLF ESTATES
MUNICIPAL SERVICES TAXING UNIT (MSTU) BEAUTIFICATION
AND PREPARE A RECOMMENDATION FOR FUTURE
CONSIDERATION BY THE BOARD
Item #16B3 - Moved to Item #8B2
Item #16B4
AUTHORIZATION FOR THE TRANSPORTATION DIVISION TO
SOLICIT THE SERVICES OF A CONSULTANT FOR THE PURPOSE
OF CONDUCTING A TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR STUDY OF
THE VANDERBILT DRIVE AREA
Item #16B5
BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR THE PURCHASE OF A REPLACEMENT
Page 161
January 9, 20001
TRACTOR MOWER FOR THE IMMOKALEE ROAD AND BRIDGE
SECTION OF THE TRANSPORTATION OPERATIONS DEPARTMENT
Item #1 6B6
FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION SECTION 5310 GRANT
APPLICATION AND APPLICABLE DOCUMENTS FOR EXECUTION
BY THE CHAIRMAN
Item #16B7
FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION SECTION 5311 GRANT
APPLICATION AND APPLICABLE DOCUMENTS FOR EXECUTION
BY THE CHAIRMAN
Item #16B8
BUDGET TRANSFER FOR THE CONTINUATION OF LANDSCAPE
IMPROVEMENTS ON DAVIS BOULEVARD (S.R. 84) FROM COUNTY
BARN ROAD WEST FOR APPROXIMATELY SIX HUNDRED FIFTY
FEET
Item #1 6B9
CONTRACT FOR PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING SERVICES BY
HOLE MONTES, INC. FOR IMMOKALEE ROAD SIX-LANING DESIGN
FROM U.S. 41 TO 1-75, PROJECT NO. 66042
Item #16B10
AMENDMENT NO. 3 TO AGREEMENT NO. 91-1763 FOR PHASE IV
ENGINEERING/ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES WITH
WILSONMILLER, INC., FOR THE GORDON RIVER EXTENSION
BASIN STUDY (COUNTY PROJECT NO. 31005)
Item #16B11
BID #00-3159, FOR THE WIDENING OF AIRPORT-PULLING ROAD
FROM PINE RIDGE ROAD TO VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD,
COLLIER COUNTY PROJECT #62031 - AWARDED TO BETTER
Page 162
January 9, 20001
ROADST INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $6,784,788.74
Item #16B12
WORK ORDER NO. ABB-FT-01-02 WITH AGNOLI, BARBER &
BRUNDAGE, INC. FOR THE PREPARATION OF CONTRACT
DOCUMENTS FOR INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS AT RADIO
ROAD AND DAVIS BOULEVARD - IN THE AMOUNT OF $83~676.50
Item #16B13
TRANSFER OF FUNDS WITHIN THE GOLDEN GATE MUNICIPAL
SERVICES TAXING UNIT (MSTU) FROM THE SANTA BARBARA
BLVD. PROJECT TO THE TROPICANA BLVD. PROJECT FOR
IMPROVEMENTS
Item #16B14
RESOLUTION 2001-03~ AUTHORIZING SPEED LIMIT REDUCTION
FROM THIRTY MILES PER HOUR (30 MPH) TO TWENTY-FIVE
MILES PER HOUR (25 MPH) ON GULF SHORE DRIVE FROM
VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD TO BLUEBILL AVENUE
Item #16B15
CHANGE ORDER NO. 3 TO THE CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT #00-
3039, WITH WILSONMILLER, INC. FOR GOLDEN GATE
BOULEVARD WIDENING FROM CR 951 TO WILSON BOULEVARD~
COLLIER COUNTY PROJECT NO. 63041 - IN THE AMOUNT OF
$110~0t 9
Item #16B16 - Continued to January 23, 2001
AMENDMENT NO. I TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
CONTRACT WITH WILSON, MILLER, INC., FOR THE WIDENING OF
GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD, COLLIER COUNTY PROJECT NO.
63041, CIE NO. 62 RFP #99-3022
Item #16B17
Page 163
January 9, 20001
ACCEPTANCE OF TINDALE-OLIVER AND ASSOCIATES FINAL
REPORT OF THE PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION OPERATION PLAN
Item #16Cl
RENTAL OF TWO PITNEY-BOWES DOCUMATCH INTEGRATED
MAIL CREATION SYSTEMS FOR PROCESSING WATER AND
SEWER BILLS FOR THREE YEARS - IN THE AMOUNT OF $43,258
PER YEAR
Item #16C2
RFP 00-3114, RE ENGINEERING SERVICES RELATED TO THE
NEW COUNTY BARN SITE DEVELOPMENT FACILITY-
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH WILSON MILLER
TO PROVIDE PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING IN THE AMOUNT OF
$244,200
Item #16C3
RESOLUTION 2001-04, PUBLIC UTILITIES PROCEDURE OF
BILLING CUSTOMERS WHO HAVE BEEN UNDER BILLED FOR
EFFLUENT
Item #16C4
AMENDMENT NO. 5 TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
WITH HOLE, MONTES, AND ASSOCIATES, INC. FOR MASTER
PUMP STATION 1.02 - IN THE AMOUNT OF $14,888
Item #16C5
BID #00-3148, "ANNUAL CONTRACT FOR SALE OF CORRUGATED
& WHITE GOODS", SCRAP METALS - AWARDED TO GARDEN
STREET PAPER PRODUCTS, CORP. AS PRIMARY AND ALLIED
RECYCLING, INC. AS SECONDARY FOR THE SALE OF
CORRUGATED, AND TO ASHLEY & SONS AS PRIMARY AND MIKE
ANDERSON'S HAULING AS SECONDARY FOR THE SALE OF
WHITE GOODS
Page 164
January 9, 20001
Item #16C6
CARRY FORWARD BUDGET AMENDMENTS FOR THE NORTH
COUNTY REGIONAL WATER TREATMENT PLANT ODOR CONTROL
MODIFICATIONS AND STAFF TO ISSUE A REPLACEMENT
PURCHASE ORDER IN THE AMOUNT OF $993,700 TO BEACH
CONSTRUCTION COMPANY FOR PROJECTS 70072 AND 70073
Item #t6D1
HISTORIC PRESERVATION GRANT AGREEMENT OF $20,000
FROM THE STATE DIVISION OF HISTORICAL RESOURCES FOR
THE ROBERTS RANCH RESTORATION AND ASSOCIATED BUDGET
AMENDMENT
Item #16D2
BUDGET AMENDMENTS NECESSARY TO REIMBURSE THE
FRIENDS OF THE MUSEUM FOR PAYMENT TO ABBOTT
CONSTRUCTION FOR THE DEMOLITION AND REMOVAL OF THE
SALVAGEABLE PARTS OF THE ICE HOUSE AT NAPLES AIRPORT
Item #16D3
WORK ORDER #VC-00-17 TO VARIAN CONSTRUCTION COMPANY
FOR VINEYARDS COMMUNITY PARK, STORAGE BUILDING
Item #16D4
AMENDMENT TO THE OLDER AMERICANS ACT GRANT
CONTRACT #0AA 203.00 BETWEEN THE AREA AGENCY ON
AGING FOR SOUTHWEST FLORIDA, INC., D/B/A SENIOR
SOLUTIONS OF SOUTHWEST FLORIDA AND THE BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Item #16D5
MEDICAID WAIVER REVISED CONTINUATION CONTRACT
BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS AND THE AREA AGENCY ON AGING FOR
Page 165
January 9, 20001
SOUTHWEST FLORIDA, INC. D/B/A SENIOR SOLUTIONS OF
SOUTHWEST FLORIDA
Item #16E1
BUDGET AMENDMENT TO INCREASE APPROPRIATIONS FOR
PERSONNEL, OPERATING COSTS, AND FUEL IN FLEET
MANAGEMENT FUND (521 } TO SUPPORT MAINTENANCE AND
OPERATIONS OF THE NEW COLLIER COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSIT
SYSTEM
Item #16E2
BUDGET AMENDMENT TO TRANSFER FUNDS FROM THE
OPERATING BUDGET TO THE CAPITAL BUDGET OF THE GROUP
HEALTH AND LIFE FUND FOR THE PURCHASE OF A WELLNESS
PROGRAM SOFTWARE AND SCANNER
Item #16E3
AMENDMENT TO THE CONTRACT BETWEEN ROBEY BARBER
INSURANCE SERVICES CORPORATION AND COLLIER COUNTY
RECOGNIZING THE CHANGE OF THE CORPORATE NAME TO
CORPORATE BENEFIT SERVICES OF AMERICA~ INC.
Item #16E4
RESOLUTION 2001-05, AUTHORIZING THE CANCELLATION OF
CURRENT TAXES UPON A FEE-SIMPLE INTEREST COLLIER
COUNTY ACQUIRED BY WARRANTY DEED FOR PUBLIC USE AND
WITHOUT MONETARY COMPENSATION
Item #16E5
CONTRA'CT 99-2999 WITH ARTHUR ANDERSEN CONSULTANTS
TERMINATED; STAFF TO TAKE ALTERNATIVE ACTION TO BE
PRESENTED TO THE BOARD IN PUBLIC SESSION
Item #16E6
Page166
January 9, 20001
BID NO. 00-3179, FOR THE ADVERTISING OF DELINQUENT REAL
ESTATE AND PERSONAL PROPERTY TAXES FOR 2000 -
AWARDED TO TUFF PUBLICATIONS, INC.
Commissioner Henning abstained.
Item #16G1
BUDGET AMENDMENT #01-071
Item #t6G2
AUTHORIZATION FOR THE SOUTHWEST FLORIDA
CRIMESTOPPERS, INC., A NON-PROFIT AGENCY, TO ACT AS
PERMANENT AGENT FOR COLLIER COUNTY FOR THE PURPOSE
OF APPLYING FOR AND RECEIVING MONIES FROM THE
CRIMESTOPPERS TRUST FUND
Item #16J1
SATISFACTIONS OF LIEN FOR SERVICES OF THE PUBLIC
DEFENDER
Item #16J2
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE - FILED AND/OR REFERRED
The following miscellaneous correspondence, as presented
by the Board of County Commissioners, has been directed to the
various departments as indicated:
Page t67
FOR BOARD ACTION:
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
January 9, 2001
e
Satisfaction of Lien: NEED MOTION authorizing the Chairman to sign Satisfaction of
Lien for Services of the Public Defender for Case Nos.: 97-10249-COA, 98-6724-
MMA RECOMMEND APPROVAL.
MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS TO FILE FOR RECORD WITH ACTION AS DIRECTED:
Ao
Clerk of Courts: Submitted for public record, pursuant to Florida Statutes,
Chapter 136.06(1), the disbursements for the Board of County Commissioners for
the period:
1) November 22 through November 28, 2000
2) November 29 through December 5, 2000
3) December 6 through December 12, 2000
Districts:
1) Big Cypress Basin Board of the South Florida Water Management District -
Agenda for December 7, 2000 and Minutes of October 20, 2000 meeting
2) South Florida Water Management District - Five-Year Capital
Improvements Plan and Fiscal Year 1999-2000 Fiscal Report
3) Fiddler's Creek Community Development District - Minutes of August 23,
2000 meeting
1) Pelican Bay MSTBU Advisory Committee - Agenda for December 6, 2000
meeting and Minntes of November 1, 2000 meeting
2) Historic & Archaeological Preservation Board - Agenda for November 17,
and December 15, 2000 meetings and Minutes of October 20, 2000 meeting
3)
Parks and Recreation Advisory Board - Agenda of October 25, and
November 15, 2000 meetings and Minutes of September 27, and October 25,
2000 meetings and the Collier County Community Character Plan,
Greenspaee Element, Working Draft
4) Bayshore Streetscape Construction - Minutes of October 19, 2000 meeting
H:Data/Format
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
January 9, 2000 continued:
5)
6)
7)
8)
Rural Fringe Area Assessment Oversight Committee - Notice of October 25,
and December 13, 2000 meetings, Agenda for October 25, and November 29,
2000 meetings and Minutes of October 11, and October 25, 2000 meetings
Library Advisory Board - Minutes of September 27, 2000 meeting
Pelican Bay MSTBU Advisory Committee - Agenda for November 1, 2000
meeting
Rural Lands Assessment Area Oversight Committee - Agenda for November
20, 2000 meeting and Minutes of October 16, September 18, 2000 meetings
9) Collier County Water & Wastewater Authority - Minutes of August 28, 2000
meeting
Other:
1)
Guy L. Carlton, Collier County Tax Collector - Constitutional Officers
Financial Report for 1999-2000 Form DBF-AA-405, Combined Statement
of Position Form DBF-AA402 and Fund Group Form DBF-AA403
Revenues and Expenditures/Expenses
2) Collier County Property Appraiser, Abe Skinner, CFA - Annual Reports for
year ending September 30, 2000
3) Big Cypress Basin Board - Schedule of 2001 Board Meetings
4)
City of Naples Airport Authority - Agenda for November 16, 2000 meeting
and Minnte~ of October 19, 2000 meeting and Minutes of October 23 Audit
Committee meeting
H:Data/Format
January 9, 20001
Item #16K1
BUDGET AMENDMENTS TO RECOGNIZE WIRELESS 911
REVENUES AND FISCAL YEAR 2001 WIRELESS 911 BUDGET
Item #16K2
AUTHORIZATION OF THE EXPENDITURE OF BUDGETED FUNDS
FOR THE PURCHASE OF 800 MHZ MOBILE RADIOS FOR THE
SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Item #16L1
STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT PERTAINING TO THE EMINENT
DOMAIN LAWSUIT ENTITLED COLLIER COUNTY V. FAITH BIBLE
CHURCH OF NAPLES, INC., ET AL. (IMMOKALEE ROAD PROJECT)
- STAFF TO DEPOSIT THE SUM OF $12,850 INTO THE REGISTRY
OF THE COURT
Item #16L2
LEGISLATIVE CLARIFICATION REGARDING "EX-OFFICIO"
MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY HEALTH CARE PLANNING AND
FINANCE COMMITTEE
Item #16L3
CONTINUING RETENTION AGREEMENT FOR LEGAL SERVICES
ON AN "AS NEEDED" BASIS WITH THE LAW FIRM OF LANDERS
AND PARSONS, P.A., PARTICULARLY RELATING TO COUNTY
SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT
Item #16L4
INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF NAPLES AIRPORT
AUTHORITY RELATED TO FUTURE CONSTRUCTION IN
UNINCORPORATED COLLIER COUNTY THAT COULD BE AN
OBSTRUCTION OR HAZARD TO NAVIGATION AT THE CITY OF
NAPLES AIRPORT
Page 168
January 9, 20001
Item #17A
RESOLUTION 2001-06~ RE PETITION VAC-00-019, VACATION OF
A PORTION OF A ROAD RIGHT OF WAY FOR PELICAN STREET
WHICH WAS DEDICATED TO THE COUNTY BY THE PLAT OF
"ISLES OF CAPRI NO. 1"~ LOCATED IN SECTION 31, TOWNSHIP
51 SOUTH~ RANGE 26 EAST
Item #17B
RESOLUTION 2001-07~ RE PETITION V-2000-24, MICHAEL AND
LORRAINE LAPLATTE REQUESTING AN AFTER-THE-FACT
VARIANCE OF 25.6 FEET FROM THE REQUIRED 30 FOOT SIDE
YARD SETBACK FOR AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE TO 4.4 FEET
FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 5075 TAMARIND RIDGE DRIVE,
GOLDEN GATE ESTATES UNIT 32~ IN SECTION 9, TOWNSHIP 49
SOUTH= RANGE 26 EAST
There being no further business for the good of the County,
the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 2:55 p.m.
ATTEST:".
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS/EX
OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF
SPECIAL DISTRICTS UNDER ITS
CONTROL
JAMES .<~ARTER, cHAIRMAN',' F;h.-D .....
"D.W~IGHT .E"~BROCK, CLERK
- Artiest ~ ,to
Page 169
January 9, 20001
These minutes approved by the Board on
as presented_ ~// or as corrected
TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF GREGORY COURT
REPORTING SERVlCE~ INC.~ BY DAWN BREEHNE, SHERRIE
RADIN AND CHERIE' R. LEONE~ NOTARY PUBLIC
Page 170