BCC Minutes 06/12/2001 RJune 12, 2001
REGULAR MEETING OF THE
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Naples, Florida, June 12, 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 a.m. in
REGULAR SESSION in Building "F" of the Government Complex,
East Naples, Florida, with the following members present:
CHAIRMAN:
VICE-CHAIRMAN:
JAMES D. CARTER, Ph.D
PAMELA S. MAC'KIE
JIM COLETTA
DONNA FIALA
TOM HENNING
ALSO PRESENT: Tom Olliff, County Administrator
David C. Weigel, County Attorney
Page 1
COLLIER COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
AGENDA
June 12, 2001
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
June 12, 2001
INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
A. Father Tim Navin, St. Peter the Apostle Catholic Church
AGENDA AND MINUTES
A. Approval of today's regular, consent and summary agenda as amended
B. Approval of the May 8, 2001 Regular BCC Meeting.
C. Approval of the May 15, 2001 BCC/Affordable Housing Workshop Meeting.
D. Approval of May 22, 2001 Regular BCC Meeting.
PROCLAMATIONS
A. Proclamation proclaiming the week of June 9th through June 16th, 2001 as Collier
County Homeownership Expansion Week. To be accepted by Greg Mihalic, HUI
Director. (Sue Filson, Administrative Assistant to BCC)
B. Proclamation recognizing Collier County Emergency Management Director, Ken
Pineau, as the recipient of the 2001 Governor's Hurricane Conference,
Emergency Management Award. (Tom Olliff, County Manager)
C. Proclamation proclaiming June 18-24 as Amateur Radio Week. To be accepted
by Alex Randolph of the Amateur Radio Association. (Sue Filson, Administrative
Assistant to BCC)
SERVICE AWARDS
Five Year Awards:
1) Tanya Williams, Library
2) Donald Layman, Parks and Recreation
3) Thomas Nohl, Utilities Regulation Franchise
Ten Year Award:
2
June 12, 2001
1) Laurie Behrens, EMS
C. Fifteen Year Award:
1) Vickie Wilson, Parks and Recreation
D. Twenty Year Award:
Skip Camp, Facilities Management
2) Joseph Corbo, Road and Bridge
PRESENTATIONS
Collier County Emergency Medical Services Phoenix Award Presentation. (Jeff
Page, Director of Operations, EMS)
Recommendation to recognize Brian Sansone as Employee of the Month for
June 2001. (George P. Bradley, Director, Human Resources)
PUBLIC PETITIONS AND COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS
Am
Ms. Lois Selfon, President, Von Liebig Art Guild regarding a fundraising event
called "Gators Galore".
Mr. Robert Troesch regarding Collier County Students Working Against Tobacco
(SWAT) Proposed Ordinance for Placement of Tobacco Products.
Ms. Joy Lelonek, Executive Director, of United Arts Council of Collier County,
regarding support for a County-Wide Cultural Needs Assessment and Strategic
Plan.
D. This item has been deleted.
Mr. Jim Weeks regarding the City of Naples well field location in the Eastern
Golden Gate Area.
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure
be provided by Commission members. Petition VA-2001-AR-374, Todd and
Lisa Mastro requesting a 1.7 foot after-the-fact variance from the required side
yard setback of 7.5 feet to 5.8 feet for a children's playhouse for a property
located at 5036 28th Avenue SW in Golden Gate City. (John Dunnuck, Interim
Administrator, Community Development)
3
June 12, 2001
8. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS
Am
This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure
be provided by Commission members. Petition PUDZ-2001-AR-348, Mr.
Richard D. Yovanovich of Goodlette, Coleman and Johnson, representing
Goodlyn, LLC, requesting a rezone from "VR" Village Residential, "RSF-4"
residential single family, and "C-4" General Commercial to "PUD" Planned Unit
Development to be known as Goodland Gateway PUD allowing for 47 dwelling
units and a mix of commercial retail uses for property located south side of
Goodland Drive (C.R. 892), and west of Sunset Drive, in Sections 18 and 19,
Township 52 South, Range 27 East, Collier County, Florida, consisting of 6.55
acres more or less. (John Dunnuck, Interim Administrator, Community
Development)
This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure
be provided by Commission members. Petition PUDA-01-AR-531, Mr. Kevin
Higginson, representing Transeastern Properties, Inc., requesting an amendment
to the Bretonne Park PUD having the effect of reducing the minimum rear yard
setback from 20 feet to 12 feet within Tract "J" for lots abutting a lake or golf
course for property located North side of Davis Boulevard (SR 84) and opposite
County Barn Road in Section 5, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier
County, Florida. (John Dunnuck, Interim Administrator, Community
Development)
An Ordinance of Collier County, Florida, adding a new subsection (4) to Section
130-66 of the Code of Laws and Ordinances (Ordinance No. 80-47, as amended)
making it a parking violation to park any boat launching vehicle on any public
road right-of-way within one mile of a county park or other county facility that
includes a boat ramp if the vehicle is not displayed a paid launch receipt or
county permit to launch boats from that facility; providing for inclusion into the
Code of Laws and Ordinances; providing for conflict and severability; providing
an effective date. (Leo Ochs, Administrator, Public Services)
An Ordinance amending Section 126-83 of the Collier County Code of Laws and
Ordinances, also cited as Ordinance No. 92-60, as amended, relating to the levy
of a 2% Tourist Development Tax and an additional 1% Tax throughout Collier
County pursuant to the Local Option Tourist Development Act, Section 125.0104,
Florida Statutes, as amended, providing for amendment concerning the use of
tax revenues to expand the use of the 1% tax encompassing, but not limited it to
the same uses as the 2% tax; changing the allocations of the 2% tax. Providing
for conflict and severability; providing for inclusion in Code of Laws and
Ordinances; and providing for an effective date. (John Dunnuck, Interim
Administrator, Community Development)
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
4
June 12, 2001
10.
11.
12.
A. This item has been deleted.
Confirmation of member to the Rural Lands Assessment Area Oversight
Committee. (Sue Filson, Administrative Assistant to BCC).
Appointment of 1 member to the Airport Authority. (Sue Filson, Administrative
Assistant to the BCC)
Appointment of members to the Industrial Development Authority. (Sue Filson,
Administrative Assistant to BCC)
Appointment of member to the Housing Finance Authority. (Sue Filson,
Administrative Assistant to the BCC)
Fw
Appointment of members to the Educational Facilities Authority. (Sue Filson,
Administrative Assistant to BCC)
Appointment of alternate Commissioner to attend June/July Canvassing Board
meetings in Elections Office. (Sue Filson, Administrative Assistant to BCC)
COUNTY MANAGER'S REPORT
Authorize an impact fee waiver program for private not-for-profit agencies that
provide health and safety related services. (Tom Olliff, County Manager)
Request by Ocean Boulevard Partnership (Granada Shoppes PUD) to delay
construction of East/West Connector thru Granada Shoppes PUD until
completion of US 41 Highway Improvements and Proposed Intersection of
East/VVest Connector with US 41. (John Dunnuck, Interim Administrator,
Community Development)
Authorize Chairman to sign negotiated agreements with WMI and IDC pursuant
to the Board's direction on March 27, 2001. (Jim Mudd, Administrator, Public
Utilities)
Presentation of the 2000 Thirteenth Annual Citizens Telephone Survey by Fraser
and Mohlke Associates Inc. (Chuck Mohlke, Fraser and Mohlke Associates Inc.)
Recommendation to Award Bid No. 01-3201, Pump and Motor Repair for County-
Wide Maintenance of Equipment. (Jo-Anne Varcoe-Leamer, Administrator,
Support Services)
AIRPORT AUTHORITY
COUNTY ATTORNEY'S REPORT
5
June 12, 2001
13.
14.
15.
Recommendation to approve settlement of Board of County Commissioners for
Collier County v. Boyle Engineering Corporation, Case No. 98-4456-CA, now
pending in the Circuit Court for Collier County, Florida for $900,000.00 (David C.
Weigel, County Attorney)
OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS
FUTURE AGENDAS
Discussion regarding the display of Truly Nolen antique restored classic cars.
(Due to time constraints, it is requested this item be heard 6/12-Commissioner
Coletta)
Discussion of Airport Authority Capital Program. (Due to time constraints, it is
requested this item be heard 6/12-Commissioner Henning and Dwight Brock)
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)
Adopt resolutions enforcing liens on properties for code violations. (John
Dunnuck, Interim Administrator, Community Development)
2)
Request to grant final acceptance of the roadway, drainage, water and
sewer improvements for the final plat of "Naples Walk". (John Dunnuck,
Interim Administrator, Community Development)
3)
Request to approve for recording the final plat of "Naples Shopping
Center" and approval of the standard form construction and maintenance
agreement and approval of the amount of the performance security. (John
Dunnuck, Interim Administrator, Community Development)
4)
Request to approve for recording the final plat of "Island Walk Phase Six"
and approval of the standard form construction and maintenance
agreement and approval of the amount of the performance security. (John
Dunnuck, Interim Administrator, Community Development)
6
June 12, 2001
B. TRANSPORTATION SERVICES
1)
Approve Bid #01-3221, "Radio Road Beautification MSTU Roadway
Grounds Maintenance". (Norman Feder, Administrator, Transportation)
2)
Approve ranking of firms for contract negotiations for the Haldeman Creek
Basin Restoration Project, RFP #01-3216 (Project No. 31011). (Norman
Feder, Administrator, Transportation)
3)
Approve Work Order No. RCS-FT-01-02 with Better Roads Inc., for
resurfacing a portion of Forest Lakes Boulevard, for the Forest Lakes
Municipal Services Taxing Unit (MSTU). (Norman Feder, Administrator,
Transportation)
4)
Approve Change Order No. 1 to Work Order No. WD-129 with Mitchell
and Stark Construction Co., Inc., (Project No. 31803). (Norman Feder,
Administrator, Transportation)
5)
Approve a Resolution authorizing the Chairman to enter into a
Landscaping Installation and Maintenance Highway Agreement with the
Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) within the Unincorporated
Area of Collier County, Florida. (Norman Feder, Administrator,
Transportation)
6)
Approve a Resolution authorizing the Chairman to enter into a
Landscaping Installation and Maintenance Highway Agreement with the
Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) within the Unincorporated
Area of Collier County, Florida. (Norman Feder, Administrator,
Transportation)
7)
Approve Petition TM 00-02 for the Neighborhood Traffic Management
Project (NTMP) on Becca Avenue between Bayshore Drive and Pine
Street (Project No. 66076). (Norman Feder, Administrator,
Transportation)
8)
Approve Contract Amendment No. 3 for Professional Engineering
Services by Johnson Engineering, Inc., for Immokalee Road Construction
Project, Project No. 69101. (Norman Feder, Administrator,
Transportation)
9)
lo)
Alternative Road Impact Fee Calculation for Self-Service Car Wash.
(Norman Feder, Administrator, Transportation)
Award Work Order No. WD-077 to Mitchell and Stark Construction Co.,
Inc., for Lake Kelly Poplar Way Ditch Improvements (Project No. 31801).
7
June 12, 2001
(Norman Feder, Administrator, Transportation)
Approve the acquisition of certain property interest from Collier
Development Corporation for Traffic Signal Equipment at the offset
intersection of Enterprise and Transfer Roads with Airport-Pulling Road.
(Norman Feder, Administrator, Transportation)
12)
Approve staff ranking of firms for contract negotiations for design/build
services for 13th Street SW Bridge, RFP #01-3223, Project No. 60012.
(Norman Feder, Administrator, Transportation)
13)
A Resolution of the Collier County Board of County Commissioners
authorizing the execution of a supplemental JPA for the purchase of one
Paratransit Vehicle. (Norman Feder, Administrator, Transportation)
PUBLIC UTILITIES
1)
Request approval to use funds from Waste Tire Grant for recycled tire
material overlay on athletic tracks at Naples High School and Immokalee
High School. (Jim Mudd, Administrator, Public Utilities)
2)
To Award Bid #01-3214 for Backflow Cross Connection Program (Project
No. 70881). (Jim Mudd, Administrator, Public Utilities)
3)
Authorize funds for additional engineering services during construction of
County Utility Relocations in conjunction with US 41 road widening from
Myrtle Road to Old US 41, Projects 70047 and 70048. (Jim Mudd,
Administrator, Public Utilities)
4)
Accelerate construction of a segment of the North-South Reclaimed Water
Interconnect in advance of Livingston Road Phase 2 Construction, Project
74012. (Jim Mudd, Administrator, Public Utilities)
5)
Approve funding, waive contract dollar thresholds, and authorize the
execution of agreements for engineering and construction services related
to sewer interconnects, Project 73076. (Jim Mudd, Administrator, Public
Utilities)
6)
Approve a Purchase Agreement for land required to re-align the Landfill
Access Road (NWA White Lake Boulevard), Project No. 70054. (Jim
Mudd, Administrator, Public Utilities)
PUBLIC SERVICES
1)
Award of Bid 01-3232 for the construction of Vineyards Elementary School
parking lot expansion (Project No. 80013). (Leo Ochs, Administrator,
8
June 12, 2001
Ea
Public Services)
2)
Give approval for Resolution affirming two applications for two separate
Grants from the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commissions,
Florida Boating Improvement Program. (Leo Ochs, Administrator, Public
Services)
SUPPORT SERVICES
Approve and execute documents necessary for the conveyance to Florida
Governmental Utility Authority Water Utility Facilities located at the Golden
Gate Satellite Services Center. (Jo-Anne Varcoe-Leamer, Administrator,
Support Services)
2)
Approval of a Budget Amendment for Emergency and Unanticipated
Expenditures for Building Maintenance. (Jo-Anne Varcoe-Leamer,
Administrator, Support Services)
3)
Approval of a Budget Amendment in the amount of $600,000 to fund
claims in the Property and Casualty Insurance Fund through the
remainder of Fiscal Year 2001. (Jo-Anne Varcoe-Leamer, Administrator,
Support Services)
4)
Approve staff's selection of real estate appraisal firms and the awarding of
appraisal agreements in accordance with request for proposals (RFP) 01-
3204 Real Estate Appraisal Services. (Jo-Anne Varcoe-Leamer,
Administrator, Support Services)
5)
Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners award Bid
#01-3219 "Purchase and Delivery of Fertilizer". (Jo-Anne Varcoe-Leamer,
Administrator, Support Services)
6)
Recommendation to award Bid #01-3210-Small Landscape Equipment
and Small Equipment Parts and Service, and Associated Quotes. (Jo-
Anne Varcoe-Leamer, Administrator, Support Services)
7)
Recommendation to enter into a cooperative purchase master agreement
with Office Depot Business Services Division for purchase/delivery of
office supplies. (Jo-Anne Varcoe-Leamer, Administrator, Support
Services)
8) This item has been deleted.
9)
Approve a Budget Amendment for the emergency replacement of the
Judges Security and Card Access System in the Naples and Immokalee
Courthouses (Project No. 80525). (Jo-Anne Varcoe-Leamer,
9
June 12, 2001
Administrator, Support Services)
EMERGENCY SERVICES
COUNTY MANAGER
1)
Approval of Budget Amendment Report - Budget Amendment #01-322;
#01-327; #01-334. (Tom Olliff, County Manager)
2)
Approve Termination of Collier County Interest & Sinking Fund (201)in its
Entirety. (Tom Olliff, County Manager)
3)
Approve Termination of Collier County Capital Outlay Fund (196) in its
Entirety. (Tom Olliff, County Manager)
4)
Approve Termination of Collier County Water Management Fund (110) in
its Entirety. (Tom Olliff, County Manager)
AIRPORT AUTHORITY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
1)
Request for Board approval for payment for Commissioner Carter and
Coletta to attend the American Specialty Contractors of FL Annual
Installation Dinner. (Sue Filson, Administrative Assistant)
2)
Request for Board approval for payment for Commissioner Carter's
Attorney/Client dinner meeting at Collier Athletic Club regarding Beach
Rocks mediation. (Sue Filson, Administrative Assistant)
3)
Request for Board approval for payment for Commissioner Carter to
attend Latin American Business and Professional Association Scholarship
Gala. (Sue Filson, Administrative Assistant)
4)
Request for Board approval for payment for Commissioner Coletta to
attend Latin American Saboor. (Sue Filson, Administrative Assistant to
BCC)
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
l)
Miscellaneous items to file for record with action as directed. (Sue Filson,
Administrative Assistant to BCC)
OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
10
June 12, 2001
17.
1)
Present to the Board of County Commissioners the State Revenue
Sharing Application for Fiscal Year 2001-2002. (James L. Mitchell,
Director of Finance and Accounting)
L. COUNTY ATTORNEY
1)
Agreements with Ford Motor Company and Collier County Veterans
Council, Inc., for Veterans Transportation Services. (David C. Weigel,
County Attorney)
2)
Approve the Stipulated Final Judgment relative to the easement
acquisition of Parcel 248 in the Lawsuit Entitled Collier County v. Jose
Alvarado, et al., (Golden Gate Boulevard, Project No. 63041). (Norman
Feder, Administrator, Transportation)
3)
Request by the Collier County Industrial Development authority for
approval of a Resolution authorizing the authority to issue revenue bonds
to be used to Finance Educational and Social Services Facilities for
Redlands Christian Migrant Association. (David C. Weigel, County
Attorney)
4)
Approve the agreed order awarding expert fees, attorney's fees and costs
relative to the Easement Acquisition of Parcels 105A and 105B in the
Lawsuit entitled Collier County v. Marianne i. Bendo~t, et al, Case No. 92-
2045-CA (Radio Road Project No. 65031). (Norman Feder, Administrator,
Transportation)
s)
Approve the agreed order awarding expert fees relative to the Easement
Acquisition of Parcel 2-T in the Lawsuit entitled Collier County v. John B.
Fassett, Trustee of the Anne M. Fassett Trust dated June 5, 1986, et al,
Case No. 99-3040-CA (Livingston Road, Project No. 65041). (David C.
Weigel, County Attorney)
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 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. PE-2001-^R-467, Cindy Penney of
11
June 12, 2001
PMS, Inc., of Naples, representing Krehling Industries, Inc., requesting a parking
exemption for an off-site parking for the Krehling Industries site on East Wiggins
Pass Road. (John Dunnuck, Interim Administrator, Community Development)
Approve Repeal of Collier County Ordinance 86-40 that established the North
Naples Roadway Municipal Services Taxing and Benefit Unit in its entirety.
(Michael Smykowski, Director, Office of Management and Budget)
Approve Repeal of Collier County Ordinance 80-43, The Goodland Water
Municipal Services Taxing District, in its entirety. (Michael Smykowski, Director,
Office of Management and Budget)
18. ADJOURN
INQUIRIES CONCERNING CHANGES TO THE BOARD'S AGENDA SHOULD BE MADE
TO THE COUNTY MANAGER'S OFFICE AT 774-8383.
12
June 12, 2001
June 12, 2001
Item #2A
REGULAR, CONSENT AND SUMMARY AGENDA-
APPROVED AND/OR ADOPTED WITH CHANGES
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you. If you have cell phones,
please disengage those. Appreciate that. Good morning.
AUDIENCE: Good morning.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I have spent most of my last 24 hours
here. So, Commissioners, nice to see you 11 hours later.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: And welcome all of you to this June
12, 2001, Board of County Commissioners meeting. If you'll all join
with me by standing for the invocation and pledge of allegiance by
Father Tim Navin.
FATHER NAVIN: Let us pray. Blessed are you God. You
have created us and given us life. Blessed are you who have shed
light on our visions and aspirations and given us the means to find
sustenance. Blessed are you who have given us marvelous ways to
work and also the challenge and ability to overcome obstacles.
Blessed are you God of the universe. You guide and direct us and
make it possible for us to work together.
Be merciful with those who have created. Give us peace,
harmony, and love in this life. Be merciful and benevolent with all
those who need your guidance and love. Be merciful in your infinite
understanding so that we may be united in our shared hopes and
dreams. Be merciful so that all may live in hope in your light and
under your blessing. Amen.
(The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Good morning, Mr. Olliff.
MR. OLLIFF: Good morning, Mr. Chairman, Commissioners.
Page 2
June 12, 2001
Welcome back.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Long time no see.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah.
MR. OLLIFF: If we keep this up, we're going to have to change
the zoning on this site to RT, I think.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Right.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You ought to tell them what we're
talking about. Who all would sit up till ten o'clock at night watching
us; right?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: We had a long discussion on the
landfill last night.
MR. OLLIFF: I'll walk you through your change list this
morning. In addition to the change list that you have, there are a
number of items that I've been handed at the last minute that I just
need to read into the record.
Beginning at the top of your change list, however, there is an
item which is actually moving -- 10-B -- off of your regular agenda.
It was inadvertently put on your regular agenda to 16-A-5 on your
consent agenda with the additional stipulation on that item, "that an
approval action shall be limited to the postponement of the
requirement to construct the east/west road to 150 days following the
issuance of the first certificate of occupancy, which commences with
the date of September 17, 2001." With that note, Mr. Chairman, that
item can be part of your consent agenda.
Adding Item 10-D to your presentations and proclamations, and
timing-wise we didn't want to put this on there to let them know, but
we have a proclamation for the League of Women Voters thanking
them for all their hard work as part of our annual citizen survey.
Item 10-E is requested by the petitioner to be heard at 1:30
Page 3
June 12, 2001
p.m., a time certain, and that's just up to the board's discretion. But,
generally, if there's a request like that, we try and honor that.
Item 12-B as in boy is an addition. It's an approvement (sic) of a
settlement agreement between Collier County and the Strand
Development Corporation for the delinquent road impact fees relating
to golf course development. And I believe it's part of your back-up
package; you have that settlement agreement.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: We got it this morning, actually.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes.
MR. OLLIFF: Move Item 16-B-9 off of your consent agenda, B
as in boy, to 10-F, F as in Frank. It's an alternative road impact fee
calculation for a self-service car wash. And that's being moved at
staff's request.
Next change is actually a deletion of Item 16-E, as in Edward, 7.
And that was a recommendation to enter into a purchase agreement
with Office Depot Business Service Division. That's being requested
to be deleted by your staff.
Next item is a continuance, and it doesn't actually even show on
your agenda index, but it was an item that was continued to this
meeting of June 12th and is being further continued to June 26th. It
is the Airport Plaza PUD, and that item will be heard on your next
board meeting on the 26th.
A note on one item on your consent agenda is most of the board
members are aware the Ford Motor Company enters into an
agreement to provide a van to the Veterans Services Department.
The agreement is 16-L-1 on your agenda. We just need to make a
little note that that approval of that contract is subject to the final
review and approval of the county attorney and risk management
office regarding the coverage for the van. There is some question
about the coverage, but I think between those two departments they
can work out that detail and have the chairman sign that agreement.
Page 4
June 12, 2001
The last item is a language change, again, at the county
attorney's request for Agenda Item 16-C-6. The current language in
that agreement -- it's a negotiation for some property. The current
language says "authorize payment to Citygate Commercial, Inc. in
the amount of $49,650." We're changing that to, "authorize payment
by check or warrant to Quarles & Brady LLP Trust Account in the
amount of 50,457 to cover disbursement in the amount of $49,650 to
seller, paren, Citygate Commercial, Inc., end parens, and
disbursements for documentary stamp taxes, pro rata advalorem
taxes, title insurance, and recording fees." So there's a minor
adjustment to the actual amount paid and in the seller who's actually
being paid.
So with that correction, Mr. Chairman, I believe I worked my
way through all of your changes this morning.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you, sir.
MR. WEIGEL: Tom's done all the work.
thank you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: That's good news.
Coletta.
with
Mr. Weigel.
Nothing further,
Commissioner
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Any changes this morning.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No. Just I think we should go
that time certain at 1:30.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Sure.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: We'll do our best to do that.
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No changes.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No changes.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: No changes.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I have one change, consent agenda
Page 5
June 12, 2001
Item No. 16. I'm asking that to be -- not consent, I'm sorry, summary
agenda. Let me get the right part of the book. Summary agenda, I'm
asking that to be pulled. I will explain to the board, 16 --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Seventeen.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Item 17 --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- A.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: A, 17-A. It involves Krehling
Industries. It's a -- looking for off-site parking. I will tell the board
right now, I want to review that PUD, its utilizations, where we are in
capacities. I want an update from code enforcement in regards to the
noise ordinance and how is it applying to Krehling. And I don't want
this to take place until the neighborhood is fully aware of what it is
and what it means and doesn't mean. I've been through numerous
meetings with the neighborhood and Krehling over the last couple of
years and I don't want to light the fuse again over something that
probably through briefings and updates may well be addressed. But
I'm not going to risk. That's why I pulled it.
MR. OLLIFF: I believe that item would become 8-E on your
agenda, "E" as in Edward.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I make a motion to approve the
regular consent and summary agenda as amended.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And I'll second that.
MR. OLLIFF: All in favor signify by saying aye.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER
COMMISSIONER
COMMISSIONER
COLETTA: Aye.
FIALA: Aye.
HENNING: Aye.
MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Chairman, I needed to note that there was
one public speaker registered for your consent agenda.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Well, how unusual.
Page 6
June 12, 2001
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you. Thank you, sir. I
apologize. We have one public speaker for consent agenda. Would
you please state that.
MR. OLLIFF: I think I caught you mid-ayes --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: You did.
MR. OLLIFF: So Robert Jenkins.
MR. JENKINS: Good morning, Robert Jenkins. I just -- it's
pretty much a question -- it's on request for the approval of the final
plat of Island Walk 6. They've been blasting. I live right near there.
They've been blasting lately, and it's affected everybody's well. The
water stinks real bad. I was wondering if there was any -- how we
could question that to get this so that they would rectify or investigate
to see if it was actually the result of the blasting or whether it was just
the water being so low and them adding lakes and doing so much.
It seems to be directly impacting my home and the street along
7th Avenue Northwest, and I was wondering if approving this
wouldn't give them carte blanche or whether we can -- whether it
would give us something to do that we can say, "Before we approve
this, can we investigate this?"
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: This is on the consent agenda;
is that correct?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Yes, sir. It can be pulled for
discussion?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. I'd like to make a
motion that we pull --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All you have to do is -- we'll remove it
from consent -- and what was the item? MR. JENKINS: 16-A-4, sir.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: 16 -A-4, and that would go to where,
Mr. Olliff?
MR. OLLIFF: That will become 10-F under the county
Page 7
June 12, 2001
manager's report.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
MR. OLLIFF: 10-F.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: 10-F.
COMMISSIONER HENNING:
be here for discussion on this?
I'm sorry, that will become --
Mr. Jenkins, are you going to
MR. JENKINS: What time is it going be?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Actually, we already have a 10-
CHAIRMAN CARTER: That's 10-G.
MR. JENKINS: 10-G. Do you know what time it will be or
right about what time because I can be here.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: It will be in the afternoon, I would
suspect.
MR. JENKINS: Okay. I'll be here.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. Thank you. Again, I
apologize. I usually call for--
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Sure do.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All right. Would you want to amend
your --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I'll amend my motion to approve
today's regular consent and summary agenda as it is now amended.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And I'll second that again.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. All in favor signify by saying
aye.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Opposed by the same sign.
Page 8
June 12, 2001
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Motion carried. 5-0.
All right. That moves us to proclamations.
Page 9
AGENDA CHANGES
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' MEETING
June 12, 2001
MOVE 10(B) TO 16(A)5 with the following stipulation: An approval action
shall be limited to the postponement of the requirement to construct the
east/west road to 150 days following the issuance of the first Certificate of
Occupancy' which commences with the date of September 17, 2001.
Request by Ocean Boulevard Partnership (Granada Shoppes PUD) to delay
construction of East/West Connector thru Granada Shoppes PUD until
completion of US 41 highway improvements and proposed intersection of
East/West Connector with US 41 (Staff request.)
ADDITION TO ITEM 10(D): A proclamation in recognition of the League of
Women Voters for their outstandinq contributions to Collier County and the
Annual Phone Survey. Presentation of the 2000 Thirteenth Annual Citizens
Telephone Survey by Fraser and Mohlke Associates, Inc. (Staff request.)
ITEM 10E: Petitioner requests that this item be heard at 1:30 p.m.
Recommendation to award Bid No. 01-3201, Pump and Motor Repair for
County-Wide Maintenance of Equipment.
ADD ITEM 12(B): Approve settlement agreement between Collier County
and the Strand Development Corporation for delinquent road impact fees
relating to golf course development. (Staff request.)
MOVE: ITEM 16(B)9 TO 10F: Alternative Road Impact Fee Calculation for
self-service car wash. (Staff request.)
DELETE: Item 16(E)7 - Recommendation to enter into a cooperative
purchase master agreement with Office Depot Business Services Division
for purchase/delivery of office supplies. (Staff request.)
CONTINUE: May 22, 2001 ITEM 16(A)5: Continued to June 12, 2001 and i-~
further continued to June 26, 2001 meeting. Staff review and
recommendations relative to Ordinance No. 95-68, as amended, also known
as Airport. Plaza PUD, which according to the required PUD Status Report
submitted by the Property Owner/Agent, has not commenced construction,
as defined in Section 2.7.3.4 of.t. he Collier County Land Development Code,
resulting in several possible courses of action for the Board of County
Commissioners to consider. (Staff request.)
June 12, 2001
Item #2B,C &D
MINUTES OF THE MAY 8, 2001 REGULAR MEETING, MAY
15,2001 WORKSHOP AND MAY 22, 2001 REGULAR MEETING
- APPROVED AS PRESENTED
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Actually, I want to make a
motion to approve the minutes of May 8, May 15, and May 22nd.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, that's a good idea.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I second that.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: We have a first; we have a second.
All in favor signify by saying aye.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
Now we'll go to proclamations.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
Opposed by the same sign.
Motion carries.
I'll wake up here pretty quick.
That's all right.
Item #3A
PROCLAMATION PROCLAIMING THE WEEK OF JUNE 9,
THROUGH JUNE 16, 2001 AS COLLIER COUNTY
HOMEOWNERSHIP EXPANSION WEEK- ADOPTED
CHAIRMAN CARTER: That is 3-A, Commissioner Henning.
Page 10
June 12, 2001
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I
call up David Allison. I believe he's the chairman of the Advisory
Board of Affordable Housing. And it's quite ironic that we're reading
this piece of proclamation this morning when the President of the
United States in his radio address on Saturday recognized the
importance of home ownership and the benefit it is to the community.
So I will go forward with this proclamation, "Whereas, the
Board of County Commissioners of Collier County supports home
ownership opportunities for all citizens of Collier County; and,
Whereas, the Board of Commissioners of Collier County
supports housing assistance to the very low and low income families;
and,
Whereas, the Board of Commissioners of Collier County works
cooperatively with other public and private sector organizations to
create an adequate supply of decent, safe, sanitary, and affordable
housing for all citizens of Collier County; and,
Whereas, the Board of Commissioners of Collier County
recognizes that the United States is one of the first countries in the
world to make home ownership a reality for the majority of its
people. Thanks to effective cooperation between industry and
government, the doors of home ownership have been opened to
millions of families over the last six decades.
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that the week of June 9th
through June 16th be recognized as Collier County Home Ownership
Expansion Week and urge all residents to make the most of the home
ownership opportunities available to them.
Done on this day, the 12th day of June 2001.
Mr. Chairman, I make a motion that we accept and move this
proclamation.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Second.
Page 11
June 12, 2001
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I have a motion to accept.
second. All in favor signify by saying aye.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Opposed by the same sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Motion carries.
David.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: David.
MR. ALLISON: Thank you.
I have a
Congratulations,
Item #3B
PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING COLLIER COUNTY
EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT DIRECTOR, KEN PINEAU, AS
RECIPIENT OF THE 2001 GOVERNOR'S HURRICANE
CONFERENCE, EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AWARD -
ADOPTED
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. Our second proclamation this
morning is by Commissioner Mac'Kie --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, Coletta.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Actually, Coletta wanted to do
that.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Did Coletta want to do that?
okay. Mr. -- Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA:
front.
Well,
I'd like to call Ken Pineau up
Page 12
June 12, 2001
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Actually, we all wanted to do it.
We ought to get to read it in unison.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'll tell you something right
now. If I asked somebody to come up front that had something to do
with Ken Pineau, the building would tip over.
Whereas, Collier County Emergency Management Director, Ken
Pineau was nominated for the 2001 Governr's Hurricane Conference
Emergency Management Award; and,
Whereas, this award is presented to the individual whose
primary responsibilities are in emergency management for
outstanding progress and accomplishment in the field of hurricane
preparedness, planning, or research in the State of Florida; and,
Whereas, Ken Pineau has been named as the recipient of this
award in recognition of his professional qualities in managing the
Emergency Management Department for Collier County; and,
Whereas, Ken has been the cornerstone of the emergency
management program for Collier County and his influence and
commitment not only to Collier County, but the entire State of
Florida have been extraordinary, particularly his efforts to encourage
the participation of all entities to every training and exercise
opportunity, and under his leadership the entire southwest region of
Florida has been transformed into an area with progressive
management emergency programs.
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of Collier County
Commissioners, Collier County, Florida, that Ken Pineau be
applauded for his outstanding contribution in the field of hurricane
preparedness and congratulated as the recipient of the coveted 2001
Governor's Hurricane Conference Emergency Management Award.
Done and ordered this 12th day of June 2001.
And I'd like to make the motion.
Page 13
June 12, 2001
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Seconded.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Seconded.
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
favor signify by saying aye.
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
We have a pair of seconds. All in
Ken.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Motion carried.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Standing ovation.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You've got a standing ovation,
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Talk about people you're proud
to be associated with; Ken Pineau's one of them.
MR. PINEAU: Well, if I may say a couple of words, anyway.
certainly appreciate the acknowledgment, but I certainly would like
to thank and acknowledge the person who put me in for this award,
Joanie Vandertil, our volunteer and donations coordinator, the 15 or
20 people who actually sent in letters of support. I really appreciate
the time that they took, but I'm just a small piece of the emergency
management equation. I think that most of the work was actually
done by all of the public safety folks here today with us as well as
Joanie Vandertil, our volunteer and donations coordinator, the late
Gary Arnold, most importantly, and Jim von Rintein.
So we've had a tremendous amount of support here, and I'm
humbled by the award here, and I hope I can live up to it.
very much.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you.
I
Thank you
Item #3C
Page 14
June 12, 2001
PROCLAMATION PROCLAIMING JUNE 18-24 AS AMATEUR
RADIO WEEK- ADOPTED
All right. Now, Commissioner Mac'Kie, for the Amateur Radio
Association.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Yes, thank you. I'd like to get --
to ask Alex Randolph of the Amateur Radio Association to come
forward, and can't help but harken to our own Gary Arnold when I
read this too. I just want to do this in his honor as well.
Proclamation. "Whereas, there are more than 100 amateur
licensed amateur radio operators residing in Collier County, Florida,
who, from time to time, have demonstrated their value in public
assistance by providing public service and emergency radio
communications; and,
Whereas, the amateur radio operators donate these services free
of any charge to local government or the citizens assisted by such
services; and, whereas, these amateur radio operators are on alert for
any emergency, local or worldwide, and practice their radio
communications skills during the American Radio Relay League
Field Day Exercise; and,
Whereas, Field Day is an annual 24-hour amateur radio
communications event held nationwide by amateur radio operators to
practice technical and operational skills, and provide for emergency
preparedness of local radio amateurs. Field Day is generally
recognized as a community service to the benefit of the public and in
the interests of the health and welfare of the residents of Collier
County; and,
Whereas, this year's national and Collier County Amateur Radio
Field Day Exercise will take place on June 23 and June 24, 2001.
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of County
Page 15
June 12, 2001
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that the week of June 18
through 24, 2001, be designated as Amateur Radio Week, done and
ordered this 12th day of June 2001, Board of County Commissioners.
I'd like to move to accept this as a proclamation.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll second that.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. Motion by Commission
Mac'Kie. A pair of seconds. All in favor signify by saying aye.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Congratulations.
Okay. Commissioner Fiala, I believe you have -- okay.
Probably a good place to go.
Item #4A
EMPLOYEE SERVICE AWARDS - PRESENTED
MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Chairman, while you're working your way
down to the floor, we have the good opportunity this morning of
recognizing three employees with five years of service, and I'll go
ahead and call those to the front if I can.
The first is Tanya Williams with the Library Department;
second is Donald Layman with Parks and Recreation; and the third is
Tom Nohl with Utilities Regulation.
The next service award is a ten-year award, and it's Laurie
Behrens with your EMS Department.
With 15 years, Mr. Chairman, we have Vickie Wilson with your
Page 16
June 12,2001
Parks and Recreation Department.
And, again, this morning, Mr. Chairman, we have the rare
privilege of recognizing two, 20-year awardees. The first is Skip
Camp and the second is Joe Corbo from Road and Bridge.
Mr. Chairman, that's all your service awards this morning.
Thank you. (Applause.)
Item #5A
EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES PHOENIX AWARD
PRESENTATION- RECOGNIZED
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All right. The next part of our awards
program is a very special opportunity for us where we recognize our
emergency medical services personnel and also all of our firefighters.
This is the one I just got. Is this a new edition than five minutes
ago?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. We'll get this right yet. Keep
practicing.
Each year we have the opportunity to do some very personal and
very important awards to the people who serve this county so well,
whether you are a fire fighter, whether you're EMS, whether you are
a public services officer. These are the people that I call the unsung
heroes of the community, and only when we're in dire need or a
tragic situation do we suddenly recognize how important these people
are to us. But day in and day out they are always there for us.
And so it's my privilege this morning, first of all, to award the
Medical Services Colleague Award -- each year they have a
"Paramedic of the Year," and this year is being presented to
Lieutenant Mary Gitner. And, Mary, where are you this morning? I
Page 17
June 12, 2001
would like you to come up here. Now, you mm around and face TV
land. We're not finished yet. I have to tell you a few things about
this wonderful person.
Here's the situation. It was 7 a.m. On March 7th, 2001, at 2447
Washington Street. Rebekah Esquival, who had taken CPR class,
offered the -- the class offered by the EMS and Tommy Harris, Jr.,
heard a crash in the front yard. Running out to investigate, they
found a car in some bushes and Mr. Keith Bradley behind the wheel
unconscious, pulseless, and not breathing.
They carefully pulled him from the vehicle and began CPR.
Minutes later Collier County Sheriffs Officer Corporal Cullman and
Deputy Davidson arrived and applied an Automatic External
Defibrillator. Lieutenant Mary Ginter and the paramedic Maryann
Calero of the Collier County EMS Department arrived at the same
scene and initiated advanced life-support procedures. Mr. Keith
Bradley, who eight minutes earlier, had been pulseless and not
breathing, began to breath on his own and his heart beat was restored.
So this is the kind of person that gets there along with the others
and really does the job. He is here this morning, and -- Keith Bradley
-- to present awards to the individual who aided him in this event also
along with Mary. So first of all, Mary, this wonderful plaque to you
to thank you for your dedication to this county and everything that
you've done. And now I would like to invite the other folks to come
forward to -- who assisted in this process.
And so -- is Mr. Keith Bradley here this morning? I would like
you to come up here, sir. And I am going to read off the names, and
they are in order, sir, and you can hand out the awards.
MR. BRADLEY: Approximately 40 years ago as a young
teenager, my brother and I learned CPR at a boat club our family
belonged. CPR had just started to become a popular emergency
procedure back then. Little did I know I would be receiving CPR 40
Page 18
June 12, 2001
years later. I believe everyone should receive instruction in CPR.
The technique is easy to perform and very effective. I am
overwhelming grateful to Rebekah Esquival, Tommy Harris --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Come on up.
MR. BRADLEY: -- for their fast action in initiating CPR --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: That's for you, Rebekah.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Glad to have people like you on
board.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Congratulations.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thanks for being there.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: You stay here. Don't you go away.
MR. BRADLEY: To Corporal Brian Cullman and Deputy John
Davidson who first arrived at the scene and successfully defibrillated
me. I would also like to thank these officers or Officer Cullman
again for performing CPR on me at my in home in April again.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Wow.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Wow.
MR. BRADLEY: I would also like to thank the EMS personnel
for stabilizing and safely transporting me to Naples Community
Hospital on both occasions. I would not be here today, and I would
not be alive today if it weren't for the efforts of all of you.
Again, I thank all of you so very much. (Applause.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. I need Corporal Brian
Cullman; I need Deputy John Davidson; and, of course, Mary Gitner
is already here. I want the rest of you right up here.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Marty.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Marty.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Marty, I'm sorry. And the other
people listed on page 2, as Paul Harvey would say: Mr. Bruce
Bradley, Lieutenant Paramedic Jackie Loy, Lieutenant Dave Becker,
and Lieutenant Paramedic Frank Millot who taught Rebekah's CPR
Page 19
June 12,2001
class. So we need these people up here because they were the life-
saving team that made it possible for this gentleman to be up here
speaking to us this morning.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Marty, John, and Brian.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All right. I'd like to say a couple
words here about one person in particular in this room, a gentleman
that I'm very proud of because not only is he a paramedic today
working and doing all this, but Tommy Harris, Jr. is a graduate of the
boot camp. He's a man who had re-established his life and well in
this community, and he to me is a role model for people who have
gone the wrong direction and turned themselves around said, "This is
the right way." So I am so proud of him that I can't say any more that
could be complimentary without just probably falling all over myself
up here, Tommy, but you are wonderful, God bless you, and thank
you. When you have support like that, you know that you're certainly
going down the right road.
Okay. Let me continue with some other really good awards here
and things that they have done to help people in this community.
This is again one that took place on March 7th, 2001. Rebekah
Esquival, who had taken CPR, EMS, and Tommy again, and I think I
should get to page 2.
Let me go to the next group who really has done a great job for
us. The following EMS paramedics also responded to a number of
the community who had suffered sudden death and through their
skills and expertise they restored their heartbeat of breathing and life.
And I would like to recognize these individuals this morning who
have served our community so well.
So would Paramedic Oscar Duran come forward, Paramedic
Juan Camps -- and if you'd hold your applause, this is a long list;
these are great people -- Paramedic Juan Camps, Paramedic Ronald
DuBock, Paramedic Bradley Fox, Paramedic Valerie Ouilette,
Page 20
June 12, 2001
Paramedic Heather Spieth, Paramedic Georgeanne Turano,
Paramedic Sandra Watt, Paramedic Tony DelaTorre, EMS Pilot Bric
Baker, EMS Pilot Mark Holmes, Lieutenant Paramedic Alan Pitts,
Lieutenant Paramedic Dave Becker, Lieutenant Paramedic Tabatha
Butcher, Lieutenant Paramedic Bill Chipps, Lieutenant Paramedic
Jonathan Harraden, Lieutenant Paramedic Jacqueline Loy, Lieutenant
Paramedic Tim McGeary, Lieutenant Paramedic Doug Roberts,
Lieutenant Paramedic Scott Wernert, Lieutenant Paramedic Paul
Passaretti, Lieutenant Paramedic Eva Weeks, Lieutenant Paramedic
Mike Goguen, and Lieutenant Paramedic Kelly West. I think I've got
them all. Let's give them a round of applause for all their work.
All right, folks. (Applause) Now, I would like to recognize the
firefighters. First of all, from the East Naples firefighters'
department, would firefighter Scott Hogan, Sean Hunt, Randy Lyon,
Steve Riley, Andy Gomex, Chris Rasmussen, Mike Jones. Rescue
Lieutenant Joey Crato will accept for Driver/Engine er William
Douglass, Driver/Engineer C. J. Melheim, Driver/Engineer Dale Van
Der Ploeg. So if those folks will come up, this is the East Naples
group.
All right. The City of Naples firefighters and Police Officers:
Firefighter Christopher Clissold, firefighter Jonathan Nash, Otto
Ortega, Abel Ortiz, Bill Warren, Linda Lines, Lonnie Kennedy, Jim
McEvoy.
And the following firefighters from North Naples come forward:
Firefighter David Butler and Firefighter/Paramedic Robert Smith.
And will the firefighters and really the public service personnel
from Marco Island City -- we have firefighter Dave Batiato, Eric
Gonzales, Lieutenant firefighter Tim Braden, Police Officer Hector
Diaz, Police Officer Kevin Henning.
This represents all of the police, public service officers, and
firefighters, paramedics, in Collier County who service each and
Page 21
June 12, 2001
every day. Give them a wonderful round of applause. (Applause.)
Does anyone want to speak for your group? I guess they are all
silent this morning. Again, thank you all so very much.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Thank you so much.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Our appreciation as the Board of
County Commissioners, county government, and the citizens of
Collier County --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: God bless you. Thank you so
very much--
CHAIRMAN CARTER: -- we thank you for everything.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Thank you, sir. Appreciate it.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you, sir.
MR. OLLIFF: She'll be Mary the rest of her life now.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Congratulations. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Thanks. Absolutely.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thanks for a job well done. Great job.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Congratulations.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Congratulations.
MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Chairman, as the rest of the public safety
officials are making their way out of the room, for the public's sake,
I'm not sure that they understand what a Phoenix Award is. But for
every person who was standing here, that represented a life in this
community that was saved by these people, and these people, every
certificate that you handed out, represented someone's life whose
heart had ceased, and these people had brought them back. So there
are that many people living in this community today because those
people were active and out there on the street and well trained.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Whoa.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, that's great.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Wow.
MR. OLLIFF: That's really one of the really good things that
Page 22
June 12, 2001
this county commission gets to do every year.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: It is. It's truly a wonderful experience
and is what you said. It represents, each one, a life saved. And, you
know, we never think about that until that time when you get the
challenge.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And you see that many people up
here representing the life that they saved, it really is an eye opener.
Item #5B
BRIAN SANSONE, EMPLOYEE OF THE MONTH FOR JUNE,
2001 - RECOGNIZED
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All right. We have another great
award to make this morning, and it's to Brian Sansone, who is the
employee of the month, another great county employee. Brian works
for the Wastewater Collection Department.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Where are you, Brian?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Where is Brian?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Come on down.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: There he is, hiding back there. Come
on up here. Brian, I want you to turn around and face TV land. We
also have a little check here; I'm sure you'll find a good use for. We
are so very proud of you, and what you have accomplished, and
another unsung hero. You don't think too much about the people who
go out and test your water samples and do this kind of stuff; we just
take it for granted. And you turn on the spigot, and you've got safe
water. But he's the gentleman that works to make sure and ensures
that you have those kinds of things taking place.
So we thank you so much for your efforts and the fact that you
were recognized by your peers as the employee of the month has
Page 23
June 12, 2001
indeed got to be a great honor. So thank you very much, sir.
MR. SANSONE: Thank you. (Applause.)
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Congratulations.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Chairman, if I might add to
that, I've known Brian Sansone for a number of years. And I can say
that he's a dedicated person to our county here and a great citizen to
have. So thank you.
MR. SANSONE: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: We even have an official document
here.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: A letter for your personnel file.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Right.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Yeah.
Item #6A
MS. LOIS SELFON, PRESIDENT, VON LIEBIG ART GUILD,
REGARDING A FUNDRAISING EVENT CALLED "GATORS
GALORE" - STAFF TO MEET WITH APPROPRIATE PARTIES
AND RETURN TO BOARD FOR REVIEW
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All right, Commissioners. This moves
us to Item 6-A, which will be public petitions. And for our listening
audience, we have revamped our agenda for Collier County
Commission meetings, and you'll see we have public petitions and
comments, and then we move to Board of Zoning Appeals. We're
doing all our business up front in the meeting hopefully so people
don't have to sit around here all day to be heard from the Board of
County Commissioners.
So if we go to 6-A, Mrs. Lois Selfon of The von Liebig Art
Guild regarding a fund-raising event called "Gators Galore."
Page 24
June 12, 2001
MS. SELFON: Thank you, County Commissioners. It's good to
be here. I'm here as the president of The von Liebig Art Guild, also
as a partner with the Boys and Girls Club of Collier County. We are
doing this as a joint fund-raising venture.
We each bring our strengths and somehow are so complimentary
that we augment each other beautifully. And I'd like to start by
recognizing four very dedicated ladies from The von Liebig Art
Center. Please rise. Appreciate them being here.
And next with great pride I would like to introduce to you
Natasha Alveshire, who is the creator of the title, "Gators Galore," so
she, of course, is one of our great strengths. Natasha, please come
up.
MS. ALVESHIRE: Good morning, Commissioners.
COURT REPORTER: Could you please spell your last name
for the record.
MS. ALVESHIRE: A-l-v-e-s-h-i-r-e.
COURT REPORTER: Thank you.
MS. ALVESHIRE: Good morning and thank you for the
opportunity to present Gators Galore to you. As Lois had said, this is
a joint venture between both of us as a fund-raising effort. What we
are proposing is a public art display, a museum without walls. This is
following the same structure as the Cows in Chicago, Cow Parade in
New York, Festival of Fins in New Orleans. It's a very successful
idea that we have decided to do more of a fund raiser rather than
seeking tourism dollars or anything as most cities have done.
This proposal would have us place between 50 and 100 six-foot
fiberglass alligators that have been decorated by various artists
throughout our community and nationally. They will be placed in
prominent areas of pedestrian travel as well as regular automobile
traffic.
The reason that we want to have these in the public is to show
Page 25
June 12, 2001
off that art can be accessible to all. This will be benefitting the youth
programs from both of our organizations, and what we are seeking is
that we will be contacting possible patrons to sponsor these alligators,
and they will have to place these alligators in front of their businesses
or to other public places within the city and the county.
We are hoping to have the launch on the first week of January.
We are accepting the delivery of the alligators in November for the
artist to decorate. Then in January we will place them into the
community and have a huge launch of this project. The alligators
will remain in the public viewing at this time to decorate, then in
January we'll place them into the community and have a huge launch
of this project. The alligators will remain in the public viewing
between January and April of 2002, and in the first week of April, we
will be auctioning off each of the alligators that have been decorated
by the artist.
Our hopes today is to ask for your blessing and any guidance on
our project and answer any questions that you may have.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I'd just like to say what a great
idea this is and how creative and how fun and how wonderful for our
community, what great charities you're working for, and if there's
anything I can do to help, I'd sure be glad to help in any way I can.
It's a wonderful program.
MS. ALVESHIRE: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Questions by any other
commissioners? Any questions or comments by staff?
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: These alligators are going to be
displayed in the City of Naples? Throughout the county?
MS. ALVESHIRE: Both. We're giving the patrons the option
to place them in front of their businesses, and then we're also seeking
some other public venues that may be available for other of our
Page 26
June 12, 2001
patrons who do not have businesses or do not wish to have them
displayed in front of their businesses.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Kind of like the Lely horses or
something at the entrance -- like a tourist attraction?
MS. ALVESHIRE: Yes, ma'am. For example, the Naples Pier,
possibly here at the Courthouse.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Oh, I hope so.
MS. ALVESHIRE: Some along Fifth Avenue, Third Street.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Any on Marco Island?
MS. ALVESHIRE: As of right now, we are seeking a few
sponsors down in Marco. We are hoping to keep them within a nice
trolley tour so that people can go around and see them, but we are not
excluding Marco Island at all.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: This is a great idea, Natasha, as
always.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Right.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: This is in front of businesses or
it's going to be on light poles?
MS. ALVESHIRE: No. They'll be on a 300-pound base.
They're about this high (indicating), maybe a little bit higher than
that. And they will be placed on the sidewalk or in front of the
business if it's -- for example, if it's inside the mall, it would be in
front of their retail location in the mall, wherever they have
designated on their property to have it.
We are also seeking approval from the city council to have the
public places on the sidewalks of 5th Avenue and Third Street
approved as well as the pier.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I think on the comer right out
there at the intersection of Airport and U.S. 41 would be a nice place.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Uh-huh.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, the only thing that I would
Page 27
June 12, 2001
suggest is that you meet with John Dunnuck and Michelle Arnold to
make sure that we are okay within our code framework. And, John, I
would like you to speak to that. I think it's a great idea, but I don't
want to get into a questionable area that --
MR. DUNNUCK: Good morning, Commissioners. For the
record, John Dunnuck, Community Development/Environmental
Services Administrator.
The only recommendation I would make to you today is based --
since we really haven't seen what they look like, to make sure that we
look at them on a sight-by-sight basis, that we don't have any
violations of our sign ordinance from an advertising perspective, but
that, you know, we're taking care of the health and safety and welfare
of the community by where they're located.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Could I just comment on that?
Certainly we want to coordinate with the transportation department
and others to be sure we are not in any way causing a safety problem,
and I'm sure these guys would not want to -- wouldn't consider such
a thing. But to the extent that there's a variance needed or something
like that for a sign or code, I'd be happy to sponsor that or help
process that through. And I hope staff could just do that for them if
that's necessary. It shouldn't be. It's not a sign for heaven's sake; it's
art.
MS. ALVESHIRE: There would be no advertising on the
pieces. Although they will be sponsored by patrons, we do have the
right -- we have a review committee; we have all of the artists
submitting their drawings ahead of time, and we are discouraging any
kinds of signage on the alligators.
The only signage we will have is a plaque approximately this
size (indicating) which will have the name of the patron, the name of
the artist, and the name of the alligator.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Commissioner Coletta.
Page 28
June 12, 2001
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I just want to draw a similarity
between this and the Truly Nolen cars --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Oh, I knew you were going to go
there. I knew you were going to go there.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Art is art to everyone, and I
appreciate where you're coming from.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: You're a master, Coletta.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: He never gives up.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: You're a master.
MR. OLLIFF: I'll just ask that the art guild representatives just
get with John, and then if there's anything that we need to do
codewise, we'll take care of that internally and bring that back for the
board's review, and we'll provide you by way of memo whatever
follow-up might be necessary.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Excellent.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I think that's great, and I really value
that you came to us, told us what you wanted to do, how you are
going to do it, rather than going out and doing it and then somebody
raises an issue, and then we're into something we didn't want to be.
So I compliment you on that and wish you all of the success -- and
are very successful with "Gators Galore."
MS. ALVESHIRE: Thank you very much.
Item #6B
MR. ROBERT TROESCH REGARDING COLLIER COUNTY
STUDENTS WORKING AGAINST TOBACCO (SWAT)
PROPOSED ORDINANCE FOR PLACEMENT OF TOBACCO
PRODUCTS - STAFF TO PREPARE ORDINANCE FOR
ADVERTISING (CONSENSUS)
Page 29
June 12, 2001
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All right. The next public petition is
by Mr. Robert Troesch regarding Collier County Students Working
Against Tobacco (SWAT).
COMMISSIONER COLETTA:
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
Good boy, Bob.
Yea.
MR. TROESCH: Good morning.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I hope those orange shirts are
all going to come line up here across the front.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Sure. Come right up here.
MR. TROESCH: They can if you want them there.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Sure.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Sure.
role models.
We do.
Bring them up here. I like the
MR. TROESCH: Those of you who are not familiar with
Students Working Against Tobacco, this is an anti-tobacco campaign
that began three years ago. And the reason that this program has
been effective is because it is youth oriented and the youth are
driving it.
A little bit ago in our meeting here this morning you recognized
people for saving lives. Those are adults who are hired to do that job,
and I'll never minimize that because they do a fabulous job. These
are youth who are volunteering to help save lives, and because they
are so empowered, I'm going to shut up and let me them tell you why
they're here.
MS. HENNESSY: Hello. My name is Stephanie Hennessy, and
I live at 6660 Beach Resort Drive, Naples, Florida.
Dr. Carter and Chairman and Members of the Board of County
Commissioners, this fall I will be a junior at Lely High School and
the vice president of Collier County Students Working Against
Tobacco, both of which I am very proud. This past year one of my
Page 30
June 12, 2001
best and biggest accomplishments in SWAT was working on the
smoke-free dining guide, thanks to Jackie Hagerman, my school
sponsor, along with the help of Bob Troesch.
On a more personal note, I have had the horrible experience of
watching a loved one face the gruesome consequences of smoking
and tobacco. My grandfather started smoking when he was 15 years
old and quit around the age of 35. The past two years of my life I
have watched a vigorous and energetic man go from golfing six days
out of a seven-day week, working at a family golf range, and walking
every morning at five o'clock, to a man that cannot shave without
stopping every 30 seconds to breathe from an oxygen tank, who can
no longer bathe himself or drive a car, who can't even walk from the
living room to the kitchen table without gasping for air.
Yes, he has emphysema. Yes, he has lung cancer. Yes, he
dying, and, yes, tobacco caused this. So now tell me why any of you
want to watch your parents, your significant other, your child, or your
best friend suffer like that. This is not cool, glamorous, popular,
beautiful, handsome, but least of all, this is not rebellious. This is
exactly what the tobacco companies want. This is why we, the youth,
need your help and guidance to place all tobacco products behind the
counter.
We had Playboy Magazine and pornographic pictures put behind
the counter because we don't want our children's minds to be filled
with those images, images that they will see sooner or later, images
of the human body. Yet we place chewing tobacco, cigars, and
cigarettes next to the candy on top of the counter and out for
everyone to see. Why are we filling their minds with images that are
addictive and that can kill them?
It is human nature to make mistakes. People make them every
day. But should you have to die for a mistake that you made when
you were 9, 10, 11, or 12, maybe even younger? These tobacco
Page 31
June 12, 2001
companies are targeting the children and our society at the ages of
nine and younger, more of the reason why we, the youth, need your
help in concealing these products. Or would you rather see your
child, niece, grandchild, or the little boy down the street become a
statistic? One of a thousand people die a day because they made the
wrong choice along their way. Our job is to change the attitudes of
the youth of this county, state, and nation so that no teenager ever
sees any advantage in using a tobacco product.
I'm confident that we can do that. If we were to place these
products behind the counters and out of the sight, it would give them
an off-limits image that society doesn't feel they are safe for teen
usage. It is very important that we pass this ordinance to help protect
the upcoming generations and maybe send a wake-up call to the
present generations. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. I do have another
presentation.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I do think there's another
speaker.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Go ahead, please. I'll do it
when they're finished.
MR. STEWART: Hello. My name is Reinert Stewart, and I'm
here today representing SWAT, which is an acronym for Students
Working Against Tobacco. I'm from Sunshine School. I'm here
today to talk to you about the placement of tobacco products in retail
stores.
Underage sale is prohibited by law. This is stated as a fact as
though there's no way around it, as it if were inadmissible for a minor
to get his or her hands on a tobacco product. For example, the first
cigarette I smoked came from a stolen pack. Why I smoked that
cigarette is besides the point, but how I got that cigarette is quite
Page 32
June 12, 2001
relevant. The kid who had given me the cigarette later told me that it
came from a stolen pack. This surprised me for two reasons. First, I
still had my innocence at the time. I was nine years old. Secondly, it
was because of all the things that could be stolen, I didn't think
cigarettes was one of them. I figured that they'd be kept out of the
reach of minors. Later I was told how easy it actually was to get
these products. I was told you just walk up and grab the pack.
Later on in my life I found out for myself just how easy it really
was to steal cigarettes. I was 12 when I stole my first pack. It was so
easy. It was so easy that I started doing it regularly. Most of the kids
in my neighborhood would steal the cigarettes they smoked as well.
When some of the stores started putting the tobacco products behind
the counter, our hearts would sink, but there were always other stores
that did not keep them behind the counter. We would simply go to
these stores.
The point that I'm trying to make is that I may never have had
that first cigarette if they had been behind the counter, and my habit
definitely would not have been so easy to keep up with. So I ask you,
would it be so hard to keep the tobacco products behind the counter?
Would it be so hard to allow a new generation to have a healthy start,
this new generation, the same generation that your children and
grandchildren are a part of, the generation that will follow in your
very footsteps?
MS. STRONG: Good morning. My name is Morgan Strong,
and I'm the Collier County President for Students Working Against
Tobacco. I'm here this morning about tobacco placement. We're not
here to try to change a law. The United States Government had
already declared that it is illegal for anyone under the age of 18 to
have cigarettes or chewing tobacco or anything else that is made of
tobacco. All we want to do is help enforce that law.
For the last two years, kids like us have been standing in front of
Page 33
June 12, 2001
commissioners like you helping you and helping our community to
enforce this law. All we would like to do is ensure that if you are
legally unable to buy tobacco, you cannot go in and steal it. In doing
research for this ordinance, we talked to dozens of distributors of
tobacco, 7-Eleven, Hess, everywhere. And almost all of them were
so supportive of this because we're not only helping the youth of our
county, but we're also helping the people who sell it, who make a
legitimate profit off of selling tobacco. Why would they want
tobacco to be able to be stolen? They have to be able to make a
living. Therefore, moving the cigarettes and chew behind the counter
does not only help us, it helps them as well.
This bill hurts no one. It only helps. So in considering this I ask
you to consider one important fact: that 89 percent of adult smokers
started before the age of 18, 89 percent. One in three of those will
die of a tobacco-related illness. Of those 89 percent who started
before the age of 18, how do you think they found the cigarettes?
And how can we stop future people under the age of 18 from
acquiring those cigarettes? Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you. Okay.
MR. TROESCH: If you're looking at me to say something,
forget it.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: No, no. I'm just making sure that we
had heard from all of the young people, and I am duly impressed at
what you said this morning going to Commissioner Coletta, but I
truly hope my oldest son, Stuart, is listening to this this morning as
well as his wife, Jackie. Are you out there folks? They just gave me
the message that your dad's been trying to give you for so long.
You're playing with the wrong stuff. So thank you. Commissioner
Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I just wanted to say I've known
Bob Troesch for probably seven, eight years. I was with him when
Page 34
June 12, 2001
he started this movement when he was associated with Catholic
Charities as their director. And I can tell you one thing, there's two
things in this world -- two people you'll never argue with in this
world or you shouldn't argue with and that's a bom-again Christian or
a reformed smoker.
My wife works for Hospice, and 14 years ago she came to me
and she said, 'Tve never asked you for anything, but I'm going to ask
you for one thing." I said, "What's that?" She said, "I want you to
quit smoking." Up to that point in time, it never even occurred to me
that I was even going to consider it. Well, I quit.
And the reason she asked me to quit is she seen so many people
dying early, dying before their time, 10, 20 years before they should.
And she seen the spouse of these people, and how they regretted very
much what had happened. They wished they could go back and
undue what was done. And for this reason I'm going to ask the
commissioners to direct staff to bring this particular resolution -- this
ordinance back to us for a vote in the very near future.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I very much support that.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I don't think you'll find anybody up
here that's against it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Just one comment. I think it's a
great idea, Commissioner Coletta and my colleagues, but we need to
get the sense of the business community and how this will affect
them, and hopefully we won't have any opposition so we can move it
forward to create an ordinance to put all these tobacco products away
from children.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: If we bring this back for an
ordinance, they'll have the opportunity to show up and object --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's for sure.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: -- if they want to.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: And legal will be involved in this
Page 35
June 12, 2001
because there may be legal implications here.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's the reason I asked for it
to be brought back.
MS. STRONG: I have some further information that might help
you-all. These are list of other counties and communities that have
gone ahead and passed this ordinance anywhere between this year up
until '99, 2000, and this present year. This might be something that
you-all might want to consider because all these communities have
gone ahead and passed this ordinance, and they seen a lot of positive
impact in their communities. And although Collier is, of course, a
very unique and wonderful county, this information might help you-
all, if you have any further questions.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you. If you introduce that into
the public record and give that to Mr. Weigel, he'll be very
appreciative of that and save us a lot of work. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: God bless.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: You really do your homework. If I
can get my constituents to do the homework that you do, I'd be light
years ahead. Let's give them a big hand. Thank you. Okay. You got
it, guys. Keep doing it.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Thanks, guys. Great idea.
MR. OLLIFF: We'll take that as direction and bring back an
ordinance.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Absolutely.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Yes, sir.
Item #6C
MS. JOY LELONEK, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, OF UNITED
ARTS COUNCIL OF COLLIER COUNTY, REGARDING
Page 36
June 12, 2001
SUPPORT FOR A COUNTY-WIDE CULTURAL NEEDS
ASSESSMENT AND STRATEGIC PLAN- BCC SUPPORT
ENDORSED (CONSENSUS
Next request for public petition is a county-wide cultural needs
assessment and strategic plan by Ms. Joy Lelonek, if I've got that
correctly. Is she here?
MR. OLLIFF: I think Mr. William O'Neill is actually going to
be here to make the presenta -- CHAIRMAN CARTER:
come forward, please.
Ah, Mr. William O'Neill. If he will
MR. O'NEILL: Good morning. I'm Bill O'Neill. I'm the
president-elect of the United Arts Council. With me this morning are
President Jean Gansel and our executive director, Joy Lelonek.
I'm here to talk to about a cultural needs assessment that we
propose to have operated under the auspices of the United Arts
Council. If you'll indulge me in an aside just for one moment, I was
interested to hear about the Gators this morning. In one of my other
hats, I serve on the City of Naples Public Arts Advisory Committee.
We considered the Gators Galore a couple of weeks ago, and it looks
like a lot of fun --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Doesn't it?
MR. O'NEILL: We did -- city council hasn't acted on it yet, but
we have recommended to city council that we go -- that they give
their approval to that project and to the use of public property for it.
It looks like a lot of fun.
But today I'm really here to talk about a cultural needs
assessment, to request the support of the commission generally for a
cultural needs assessment that we plan to do and to plant the seed of a
request for support. I understand that wouldn't be acted on today, but
we will be looking for financial support to help us conduct that
Page 37
June 12, 2001
assessment.
The United Arts Council is actually -- it's a private
organization, but it is also a statute as well. It is the County Arts
Council under Florida Statute Section 265.32. And it was authorized
to serve as such by Resolution 84-81 of this commission.
The goals of a County Arts Council as set forth in that resolution
and as set forth in the legislation includes surveying and assessing the
needs of the arts, artist, art institution, and people of the state for the
purpose of supporting the arts. We think the timing is right for us to
do a cultural needs assessment at this point. The arts offerings in
Collier County, of course, have exploded over the last dozen years or
so. They are substantial, and the quality has also improved
substantially, as well as the number. Yet many feel that our arts
offerings are skewed in terms of the audience that they attract or
incomplete. At least one survey ranks the county's artistic offerings
relatively low in terms of quality-of-life issues.
At this point we feel that there's a strong base in terms of arts
offerings and interest in the arts. The resources are there and the
energy is there. We feel that a needs assessment such as is suggested
by the statute would be helpful in terms of directing those energies
and directing the use of public resources in the future. Other counties
have done this with some success, and we have been in touch with
them. Our plan is to assemble a stakeholders' committee involving
interested members of the communities and representatives of
community organizations to give direction to the assessment.
We will be looking to hire a consulting firm to do the actual
work of surveying and preparing the written document for us. Based
on our discussions with other counties, we've estimated a cost of
about $775,000 for this. We do have approximately $35,000 of that -
- actually $40,000 of that committed already from the Community
Foundation, the United Arts Council itself, which is going to
Page 38
June 12, 2001
financially support this, and from some private gifts. And we're
approaching the City of Naples and other private donors as well.
That's what it's about, and we'd appreciate your positive
consideration.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I think it's an exciting new
adventure for us. Thank you very much for bringing this forward.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you. Working with
Tom Olliff in the budget constraints that we are looking at in this
next fiscal year-- and I know a lot of projects that I would like to do
just in maintenance in the community and besides the capital needs
that we have, I think it's going to be very difficult to support this
endeavor this year, and, hopefully, next year we'll come forward and
support a study of the needs here in Collier County.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Commissioner Mac'Kie.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: My thought would be that as I
understand the request today, it's that we endorse the undertaking and
that financial support request will be forthcoming, and we can make
that decision in the future. But certainly it's important for the official
arts group for Collier County to have the blessing of the Collier
County Commission as it undertakes this endeavor, and I would
certainly want to offer that and consider financial issues as they come
forward.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Uh -huh.
MR. O'NEILL: That's all we're asking today. Thank you,
Commissioner Mac'Kie. That's what we're looking for is for the
general support. We will look for financial support. I would point
out that this is a nonrecurring issue. This is a one-time assessment
that we're planning to do.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And there will be a cost-benefit
analysis, you know, as everything else has when we decide whether
Page 39
June 12, 2001
or not to spend money on it, but you certainly have my endorsement
and I would hope that of the whole board.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'd certainly second that one.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I just want to say that we
sometimes forget the fact that art is an important part of our everyday
lives. I think we need to keep these people very close to us in the
coming year.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
COMMISSIONER HENNING:
Absolutely.
And I can tell you my credit
card will tell you how important art is to -- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I didn't say anything about
money, I just said keep them close.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, I think what you're asking is for
us to support your effort in what you want to get done and how we
can lend financial support. What has to be done is what
Commissioner Mac'Kie said on a cost-benefit analysis, and perhaps
there's some staff support services internally that could lend you a
hand in this, which I would call an in-kind donation, which when we
get there, we could look at all of that. But I think you're going to get
three nods up here this morning that says we endorse your effort of
doing the assessment and that we can all benefit from this as a
community.
Commissioner Mac'Kie?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Just a question, Bill. Would a
resolution to that effect be useful in any way, or do you just need this
MR. O'NEILL: I don't think it's even necessary. You've done
what we asked you to do this morning.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Good luck. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You're going to get five nods.
Page 40
June 12, 2001
MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Chairman, I think if it's your desire as part of
your general fund budget review, we'll bring the exact dollar request
for this particular survey and let you consider that alongside the other
general fund requests that you have.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you.
All right. Do we have any public comment this morning?
MR. OLLIFF: We do.
Item #6D - Deleted
Item #6E
MR. JIM WEEKS REGARDING THE CITY OF NAPLES WELL
FIELD LOCATION IN THE EASTERN GOLDEN GATE AREA-
STAFF TO WORK WITH VARIOUS ENTITIES AND MR.
WEEKS (CONSENSUS)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Why does that surprise me?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And I'm confused about -- I had
just that one question on the agenda, Tom. We have this Mr. Weeks.
Is he going to --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Oh, I'm sorry.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: -- be heard?
MR. OLLIFF: (Nodded head.)
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And then will there be an item --
I would hope that there would be a notice there on the agenda so
people know they're welcome to make a public comment on a general
topic of any kind of communication they want to make.
MR. OLLIFF: I think in the future -- for this agenda, for
example, we should have included a 6-F that would have been
"public comments," just general comments.
Page 41
June 12, 2001
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay--
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Just sort of explains --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, that was a point of clarification
for me. I realize we've got one other petition yet, and that's from Mr.
Jim Weeks.
MR. OLLIFF: As Mr. Weeks is coming forward, you do have
two registered speakers on Mr. Weeks's item, and that's up to the
board's discretion to hear them, but one is from the City of Naples
who I think is directly on point here.
MR. WEEKS: Hi. I'm Jim Weeks. I'm a Golden Gate resident
out in extreme easterly Golden Gate. I'm basically looking for
general support also in this matter. After living in the area for about 5
1/2, 6 years, I began noticing extreme fluctuations in our water table,
our surface water. As I investigated the issue with Development
Services, they were leading me on to the truth that there's a City of
Naples well field directly in my area.
I've gone to water management with this, and I've come up dry,
figuratively speaking. They have turned a cheek to it. The facts are
there. We have a water table a half a mile to the north of my house,
which is 3 1/2, 4 feet down. In front of my house right now as of this
morning it's 9 1/2 feet down. That's open to public inspection. It's a
fact. It's there. It's happened.
I have proof from county staff that the zone of influence of the
well field is where my house is. The State of Florida has a
requirement that you can only affect the ground water table with a
well field a foot or less, no more than. Obviously, just not being a
professional but just able to see with my own eyes, I'm noticing a six-
, seven-, eight-foot fluctuation. And the first thing that's going to
come up out of the mouth of anybody that's opposing this is going to
say, "Well, you're just in a drought."
It's not just the drought because bodies of water to the north are
Page 42
June 12,2001
full; bodies of water to the south are full. It's just in this area of
influence from this well field. As I questioned them on it at water
management, they told me, "Well, the policing issue of this is we take
the report from the City of Naples as to how much they're drawing
out of that well field, and we then annually review it."
The problem is, a self-policing issue here -- it's a hard one to
regulate. I mean, the IRS has a mechanism in place where we self-
police what we use financially, and then they have a mechanism there
to come back and check us. There is no such mechanism right now
to check the City of Naples as to how much they are drawing out of
this well field.
I by no means am an authority on this. There are some with
Development Services. I hope you would ask them. An engineer
named Stan Chrzanowski is particularly familiar with this. Get their
input. I would like if you would. My plea would be: Please direct
staff to please look into this and determine whether or not it really is
an issue because we are having new permit signs pop up daily out
there. And local Golden Gate residents are beginning to draw off the
same water table for irrigation, for hOme wells, and as we develop,
it's just going to exponentially worsen the situation.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Weeks, how shallow is this
well in depth, the City of Naples, how deep is the well?
MR. WEEKS: There are those here that are in a position to tell
you the actual mechanics of it. I can't tell you how they're cased and
what not.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And I would love to hear, if the
chairman would indulge us, from the City of Naples representative.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I will. Mr. Weeks, I thank you for
bringing that to our attention here. I see Stan is here to speak to the
issue, and we have the City of Naples. So I would like all of those
people to address it, if they would.
Page 43
June 12, 2001
MR. OLLIFF: Your two registered speakers are Dan Mercer
from the City of Naples, and Ty Agoston is also registered on this
item.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Hi, Dan.
MR. MERCER: Good morning.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Thanks for being here.
MR. MERCER: Good morning, Chairman Carter, members of
the Board of Collier Commissioners. For the record, my name is Dan
Mercer, Public Works Director for the City of Naples. I live also at
45 37th Avenue Southwest. I am a Collier County resident also.
Love to be here; been here 49 years to be exact. I have grandchildren
here.
So to start off, I will get on a personal level. You know, I was
bom and raised here. I am very concerned about what happens here.
For anybody to think I'm just going to brush this off, please throw
that out of your mind because, you know, for my grandchildren's sake
and their kids, it's not going to happen. I commit that and the City of
Naples to that concern right now.
Some months ago, I don't remember the exact date, but it's been
at least three, four, five months ago, in a public meeting we heard a
comment from a member -- I won't use the name, but it wasn't -- no,
it wasn't you, Jim; you're the good guy here -- a representative from
the Big Cypress Basin, to be exact, make a statement that the City of
Naples wells was having a major impact, as much as a 15 percent
drawdown on the water table in Golden Gate.
I'll tell you here today that shocked us very much. That
concerned me because our test and data -- I apologize to Mr. Weeks.
I don't know him. I look forward to working with him in the future,
but self-policing or not, we take our data real serious. And if my staff
does not do that, that's my job to handle that, and I will.
Page 44
June 12, 2001
But the data we're looking at and the technology we have to
measure drawdowns that's called on our wells is to draw -- you know,
to evaluate the drawdowns. We do that every month. The data we
went back and looked at immediately was showing that actually since
1998, for the last two years, our drawdown levels on the wells have
decreased -- meaning the drawdown of what used to be maybe 10
feet, 8 feet, 4 feet, depending on the well and the -- elevation actually
has decreased to a smaller distance because of our rotation and
management plan.
We have good staff. The South Florida Management District
does police us. They do come out. They test the swim wells. They
do everything. So it's not just us policing this. So I know anything
we turn in erroneous, they will correct that for us, and we try not to
do that.
Another thing just technically on the wells, I won't get real
technical on it, but the wells are drilled anywhere from 60 to 120 feet
deep. The concern out there is the water table. I mean, drive out
there and look at the canal. You can see it. The canal is dry. Believe
it or not -- and, again, I've seen it 49 years here; I was even here
when Donna came through -- drought will affect the water table.
You don't have to be a rocket scientist to understand that. We have
very little to no impact on that water table. We do not draw from the
water table. Our wells are in the lower Tamiami aquifer, some 60 to
120 feet down.
We immediately -- concerned about this also -- we went and
hired a professional because I agree with Mr. Weeks, I'm not a
professional either. So I'm not gonna sit there and try to analyze this.
We hired a hydrologist, a state certified specialist, paid some nice
money to bring him down from Orlando to study this for us. He did
that. I have him here today, Chuck Drake, Department of Associates.
I didn't ask him to come up and speak, but any technical questions
Page 45
June 12, 2001
that arise from this, he'll be more than happy to address that because
I'll probably butcher it if I try to address it.
But basically to summarize that report, believe it or not, this is
the worst recorded drought in history in the state of Florida. In '83 it
was bad but not as bad as what we're going through now. Trust me,
that will affect the water table. All the residents in that area are
drawing from the water table. They have more of an impact on the
water table than the City of Naples does. The water table -- we have
at the most less than one foot drawdown. We plugged in the
maximum capacity we can -- permitted to draw out of that well field,
which is 25.5 million gallons a day. Based on that max number, we
would have less than a one-foot drawdown, to be exact a.73 foot
drawdown.
Over the last year, we've averaged 15 million gallons out of that
well field. So if you proportionally deduct that drawdown of less
than a foot, you're probably going to see less than a half a foot
drawdown to the well field and some natural percolation. I won't tell
you we have no impact on it.
So we're going to continue to look at this. Until the rains start --
let me transgress back a little bit. We went out there before the rain
started a few weeks ago. We have pictures. You're welcome to see
them anybody wants to see them. And there was about a six-block
area that was dry. I mean bone dry. As a matter of fact, we could
drive there in the canal bed. If you stand on the bridge on Golden
Gate and look both ways, you could see the mound. That's the rock
bed out there. They probably couldn't dig or blast through there
when they put the canal in, so they left it high.
North and south just below inside of both weirs there was water.
The south side, there was no bleed over the weir. That tells me that
was water table. There was water there then. On the north side, there
was some bleed over from the north. Most of the time there always is
Page 46
June 12, 2001
even during a fairly dry period, but not as dry as it is.
Since the rains last week, we went out there and took more
pictures, last Friday morning to be exact. There was no dry spots.
The narrowest level of water in that canal where our 20 wells are is
somewhere -- I'm going to guess with the naked eye it was at least
30-feet wide and a minimum of about 4-feet deep in the driest spot
where that mound was. So just from a couple of days of fairly good
rain out there, the canal has brought the level back up. So I'm here to
tell you just by the naked eye, the unprofessional eye, the drought and
the water conditions will affect the water table.
So, again, we do take this serious. I have half of my 60,000
customers are Collier County residents. I love it here. I'm not about
to blow my job out of the water and go work someplace else. I love
it here. I plan on retiring here. My grandkids are here. I commit the
city and myself to do whatever's necessary.
At a meeting yesterday, Jim Mudd -- do I need to quit talking
now?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Just kind of wind up. I think I know
where you are.
MR. MERCER: Okay. Just 30 seconds. Jim Mudd brought up
a good idea yesterday. We are in the process of doing a 20-year
master plan right now. Council approved it two weeks ago. We've
issued the contract, and it's 5-year increments for 20 years. I will add
the task of looking at the levels, the casing levels and the drill levels
of the wells. Jim brought up yesterday that look at that. Maybe if
they're low in our opinion or if we can get rid of that one-foot
drawdown, if we can get rid of that by just dropping wall casings or
doing a little drill casing, I think that's an excellent idea. We're going
to add that to our study.
So whatever we will continue. The master plan is also going to
look at reverse osmosis going out further and deeper into some six-,
Page 47
June 12, 2001
seven-, eight-hundred feet deep to look at brackish water, lesser
quality but be treated by the same process you do in the county
already.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Right.
MR. MERCER: And that will take a major strain off that well
field also because that will become a blended system, and we won't
have to use that water as much. So some of the future things will
have a major impact, but, again, you know, we're not the real bad
guys here. The little bit of impact we have, we promise and commit
to trying to take care of that.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. Thank you very much, and we
have questions, Commissioners?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: If I may comment, I was also at
that meeting yesterday. I've been at every meeting that's had to do
with this subject and been in continuous contact with Jim Weeks.
I've been out there. I've seen the levels of the ponds, the lakes, and
everything. And I know the statistics out there supposedly that prove
your point that they were only down a foot.
But I don't agree with it. I really think that the level is quite a bit
more than that. And as far as the people in Golden Gate Estates
impacting that well field more than the City of Naples is totally
untrue. The population density just wouldn't warrant that.
I appreciate the fact, you know, you're going to be looking at
this long range and making plans as far as the depth of the well goes.
And there is some concern on my part about how close the wells are
together. I know it's economically feasible when you're running
power to be able to keep them close together, but also it increases the
cone of influence tremendously in that condensed area. And I kind of
hope that as we go into this and we see a long-range plan -- in no way
do we want to deny the City of Naples the rights for water. I'll
protect that to my dying day, but we want to make sure we protect
Page 48
June 12, 2001
everybody's water source because this is a very precious water
supply, and it is limited.
So I kind of hope you'll be able to work with staff here, and
maybe we'll get reports back on a regular basis to find out where
we're going over a period of time so that we can try to alleviate some
of the problems that do exist.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Mercer, does DEP monitor
the water table from municipal wells?
MR. MERCER: No, sir. That's South Florida Management
District, right. It belongs to the State of Florida, and the local district
is the one that monitors it. Our well field is permitted properly. DEP
monitors basically the treatment process at the plant to make sure it's
treated properly before it's distributed.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: In the meeting that you referred
to, was that Southwest Florida Management or Big Cypress?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: South Florida.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: South Florida?
MR. MERCER: The meeting yesterday you mean? I'm sorry,
which meeting?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You said somebody from water
MR. MERCER: Oh, it was dealing with actually -- I think it had
something to do with our -- with our -- the wells you-all were going
to put in in the county, and it was a meeting in the commission
chambers, and the representative from the Big Cypress Basin stepped
up and made that statement about the wells having an impact. And,
again, it took my breath, and we reacted to that immediately.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. And I must agree with
Commissioner Coletta, his statement about having the City of Naples
having less impact on it than the residents around there. It just
doesn't compute to me.
Page 49
June 12, 2001
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I'm not an expert in water, but I'm
going to take one more comment, but I think we need to get staff
direction here to work with the various entities and with Mr. Weeks.
And somewhere in all of this there must be a formulation or plan that
all people here can live with each other and work out acceptable for
the areas.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Commissioner Mac'Kie.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Respectfully, my colleagues,
none of us sitting up here are experts, but we do have one in the room
that the City of Naples paid to evaluate this circumstance, and, you
know, we may have a feeling that the impacts are different. But I'd
like to hear from the expert, if we could, just briefly because science
is science, and, you know, this is a to-be-expected if you look at
nationally and internationally even when there's been drought
conditions. Water wars get started, and we're not going to do that in
this county. I know we're not going to do that, but we as the leaders
of the county need to be very careful that we stick with the facts
instead of our feelings.
And so I would hope that we could hear from the expert just
generally, just as an introduction to us about why the basis for his
evaluation on who has what impact on the --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: And in all due respect for this, I could
put ten experts up there, and I'm not qualifying who's the most expert.
I really think this is a staff issue to work through with Mr. Weeks.
MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Chairman, just to remind the board, this is a
public petition item, and your general policy is to decide whether
there's enough support on the board to have this back as a regular
item at some other point. And if the board wants to get into a
discussion about this particular issue, it would probably serve you to
have Mr. Tiers here. It would probably serve you to have some of
your own utility staff having prepped and have some knowledge
Page 50
June 12, 2001
about it to actually have something to talk to you about.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I'd be willing to wait. I just
would like for us to get real science instead of our feelings.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I agree, and I think that's the purpose
here is to give direction. And if we've got the nods here, we'll give
direction so we can get all the knowledgeable people together and
help Mr. Weeks. And I thank you for bringing that to our attention,
and I empathize with your situation, and let's see if we can't find a
workable solution.
MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Chairman--
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I thank also, Mr. Mercer, if we
could for being here and for his very sincere commitment to work
with us. And we know that you would already based on our
experience with you, so we appreciate that.
MR. OLLIFF: And, Dan, thank you. We also do have one other
registered speaker, Ty Agoston.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Ty's got some science to give us
on this or some feeling?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, he's got five minutes on this
under subject or under public comment?
MR. AGOSTON: Good morning.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: This subject.
MR. OLLIFF: He has registered on this subject.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay.
MR. AGOSTON: Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. My
name is Ty Agoston. I live in that endangered Golden Gate Estates,
and I'm speaking for myself.
I stood here maybe a couple of years ago when this board had
turned down staff's suggestion to extend water and sewer services
into the Estates. At that time the claim was made that it would make
the Estates too attractive. I'm not quite sure whether that's even an
Page 51
June 12, 2001
ethically accurate statement to make, but the fact of the matter is,
that's what happened.
I remember this Nancy Payton from the Wildlife Federation
standing here claiming that a septic system was just as good as any
other, including a central sewer system. And I countered the
argument being that I had five children at one time, and a central
sewer was very nice when you have a bunch of kids taking showers
or what have you.
Coming back to today's topic, it disturbs me when an individual
dweller in the Estates has to complain to you that a city, a
municipality -- let me add a wealthy municipality -- drawing water
away from them. Maybe our coastal brethren should follow the
Tampa Bay example and buy some desalination equipment.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: They just told you they are
going to Ty, and they also told you the plant shows they are not doing
that.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, let's not argue with Ty this
morning.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
COMMISSIONER COLETTA:
I know, but--
I don't want to argue with him,
but I do want to inform him. This is for your information, Ty. Jim
Weeks is coming forward at my guidance and more or less direction.
I arranged the conferences with the different news media. I helped
prepare the petition. This hasn't been something the government's
been sitting aside with. We bring people in from the outside all the
time; we get involved. And he's been an instrument that's very much
been meaningful for moving forward. So government's been
involved. He hasn't -- we're not sitting back and letting it happen
their own.
MR. AGOSTON: This is not a new issue. For you, it is a new
issue. But Ms. Mac'Kie's been on the board at a time the event
Page 52
June 12,2001
happened that I'm referring to. And to be perfectly honest with you, I
feel that Mr. Weeks -- and that's the reason I came and brushed my
teeth and walked down here this early in the morning -- was because
I felt that it was important for someone to support him because this is
kind of a David/Goliath issue for an individual property owner to
fight against a wealthy -- as a matter of fact, according to Baron's,
Naples is ranked among the top ten wealthiest communities. So in all
fairness, if anybody should be under a hardship, it should be the City
of Naples. Under no condition should the hardship extend to
individual property owners in the Estates. It's just not fair.
Additionally, I want to make a comment that I see that you have
removed my favorite agenda item -- what is that -- "general public
comments on general topics"? I don't see it in the agenda--
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Excuse me, Ty. It comes after this. If
you're speaking to this issue, stay at this issue. If you want to speak
on any item on the agenda, public comment comes next.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And we didn't. It's a mistake in
our new format. We're going to get it on there next time.
MR. AGOSTON: I just didn't see it.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Right.
MR. AGOSTON: In due respect to Mr. Carter here, obviously if
I only see what is available, this is my only available time.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Ty, if you have anything else to say,
you can finish on this subject, and then we'll go to public comment,
and you can come back again.
MR. AGOSTON: I don't want to waste my time. Thank you,
anyway.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you.
Item #6F
Page 53
June 12, 2001
ALEX BROWN REGARDING CAT BUS SCHEDULE AND
SHELTERS
Do we have any public comment, Mr. Olliff?.
MR. OLLIFF: We do. And just in follow-up to that item, we'll
work with both the city and Mr. Weeks and bring something back as
a regular item for you to discuss.
Alex Brown is the registered public comment. Right after this
comment, Mr. Chairman --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Yeah, we're going to break. I just
wanted to finish this agenda item.
MR. BROWN: Good morning.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Good morning.
MR. BROWN: Well, I guess I might as well throw my two
cents in on the well issue as everybody else seems to be doing. Seems
like the residential wells seem to be 20 -, 30-feet deep, and the city
wells seem to be 60- or 100-feet deep. Everybody seems to be
leaving out the basic cause; it's called gravity. So if you're drilling
water from 100 feet deep, and these guys who have wells that are 30-
feet and 20-feet deep, no wonder their wells are fine at 60- and 100-
feet deep. I'll pass on that, but it's just a little thing called gravity.
Okay. One thing I was back to issue about is the cornrnents on
the bus line. It is supposed to be a public service, and the red line is
still only running -- what, 9 a.m.? It leaves vo-tech at 9 a.m. And
then stops running at 3 p.m., which is really not much help to the
shoppers or anybody using it for work. Anybody that needs
transportation to that end of town, you're stuck. Or if you need to get
out of there after 3 p.m. Or you need to get there at 9:00 or before
9:00, you know, you're not gonna get there because the bus doesn't
leave the station till 9 and doesn't get to that end of the town till 9:30
Page 54
June 12, 2001
or so.
The other thing was to the -- there's the -- many people the only
day they have off is on Sundays. And a lot of people, you know,
that's the time they'd like to use the bus. They'd like to go visit their
friends in the hospital, and they'd like to go to the Coastland Mall or
go to Wal-Mart and K-Mart and do their grocery shopping and
everything else and use the bus lines on Sunday. And I understand
the county's -- the one who schedules the buses, it's not the
McDonald's Corporation. Here's where the buses get done. So I was
wondering why the buses never run on Sunday because that's a lot of
opportunity -- revenues for the buses would be coming in on
Sundays.
And last but not least, I'm sad to see that the board rejected the
free bus stop shelters from Lamar Advertising and the ability of the
individual areas to conduct their motifs or designs for their own
separate areas, like Marco or Naples wish to have their own done
deal for if they'd like to say -- like I said-- you know, like if they
wanted to have -- fill fish or paint each individual bus stop in Naples,
by all means, you know, and they wanted to import coral rock or--
and the same thing with Marco Island.
But I'm sure the communities of Golden Gate and East Naples
and Immoka -- you know, and North Naples, and, etc., all the other
parts of Collier County, why should they be tied down to that when
I'm sure a poster or two here or there would not be so offensive to
anybody, you know. And here we are. Lamar Advertising has
offered to put up these shelters for free, but it has unilaterally been
turned down that the entire bus system should have this one simple
shelter or designed shelter that fits everything that would be
acceptable to the City of Naples.
And it seems that the -- you know, despite all this, that the poor,
the elderly, the disabled, pregnant, the small children are exposed to
Page 55
June 12, 2001
the elements, all the sun and the rain and everything, seems to be
going on, you know, seem to be ignored. They simply want to be
provided some shelter from the elements, and it seems that the rich,
who evidently do not use any of the bus systems or anything, have
more to say about what -- you know, what should be done about
them, and how it's being used.
And it seems to be a-- turning into a bureaucratic display of,
you know, how to spend the taxpayers' money by buying all these
shelters and everything instead of getting the free ones. You know,
logically-- you know, it's a beautification of the property and not for
the well-being of the people. I mean, the people of the community
would rather -- much rather have the well-being of their grandmother
and their children and their everything to have --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: You need to wrap up, sir.
MR. BROWN: -- to have these shelters than to wait for the
bureaucracy to find something and spend their tax monies -- tax
dollars on something that the City of Naples would approve. Thank
you very much.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: For a point of clarification, any
shelters will be under the auspices of the Department of
Transportation. We have uniform sign codes in this county. So that
is all a part of the mix, sir. So I don't want anybody out there to
believe that it is an economic area that is controlling how bus shelters
are established in this county. And if you have questions you can talk
with Mr. Norman Feder, Director of the Department of
Transportation.
All right. It's time for us to take a quick break, and we'll be
back, and we'll go to the next subject which is Board of Zoning
Appeals.
(A short break was held.)
Page 56
June 12, 2001
Item #7A
RESOLUTION 2001-234, RE PETITION VA-2001-AR-374, TODD
AND LISA MASTRO REQUESTING A 1.7 FOOT AFTER-THE-
FACT VARIANCE FROM THE REQUIRED SIDE YARD
SETBACK OF 7.5 FEET TO 5.8 FEET FOR A CHILDREN'S
PLAYHOUSE FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 5036 28TM
AVENUE SW IN GOLDEN GATE CITY- ADOPTED
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you. Board of County
Commissioners is now back in session. We are at Item No. 7, Board
of Zoning Appeals. Item No. A, Petition VA-2001-AR-374, Todd
and Lisa Mastro. Mr. -- Dr. --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Badamtchiam.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Badamtchiam.
seen you in so long, I forgot your smiling face.
have to swear everybody in.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Would you swear in the
witnesses? If you're going speak on this, you're going to need to
stand and be sworn.
DR. BADAMTCHIAM: Just this item?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Just this item.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Each item we have to stand to and
swear you in if you're going to participate.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And this is 7-A.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: 7-A.
(The oath was administered.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Disclosures on the part of county
commissioners.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: None.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: None.
I'll be okay. I haven't
Come forward. We
Page 57
June 12, 2001
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: None.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: None.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Uh, Mr. Chairman, I did meet
with Mr. and Mrs. -- Todd and Lisa Mastro, was out at the site, was
on the treehouse --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: You lucky dog.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- out there with the local radio
shows talking about this issue, and I also spoke to Mr. and Mrs.
Tully who is residents in the neighborhood, abutting residents who
are opposed to this variance.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I make a motion to approve the
variance.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll second that motion.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Any discussion? Any speakers?
MR. OLLIFF: No, sir.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Anybody want to talk us out of it?
The only question I will ever ask you is, it is my understanding when
this is built it will be as long as the current people own the property
and the building is in existence. But if it came through in a tornado
and tore it down, could they effectively move it and get it into --
DR. BADAMTCHIAM: If it's removed they cannot rebuild, but
the variance goes with the land. If the ownership changes, the
structure stays.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: But as long as the structure's there,
but if it's destroyed, then it would have to be redone --
DR. BADAMTCHIAM: Within the required setbacks.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And, actually, that's probably
the part you want to understand. I mean, this variance runs with the
land; right, Chahram?
DR. BADAMTCHIAM: Right.
Page 58
June 12,2001
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: So if this falls down, they could
build something else within -- a playhouse within this setback. They
could continue to have a variance. The variance will be there as long
as the land is there unless we do something different.
DR. BADAMTCHIAM: We have a stipulation saying that this
variance is for this structure as shown on the map and nothing else.
So if this structure is removed, the variance should be removed too.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I guess I'll incorporate that in
my motion then.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. We had a second on that by
Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Sorry.
MR. MASTRO: No problem. Sorry to be here.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I'm sorry you're here, too, sir.
MR. MASTRO: It cost me a lot of money for me to be here.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. and Mrs. Mastro have to
go also before the Code Enforcement Board. It is a violation. They
have many a fines, and my understanding of-- the civic association is
going to work with them in support to reduce those fines. And I also
must say that not only is this for the Mastros' children, it is for the
neighborhood residents providing a safe place for the neighborhood
kids to play under supervision. And I think it is fitting to the area of
Golden Gate.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, I wouldn't disagree with that. I
think it's wonderful, and I'm sorry it ended up in such a small
situation that you had to spend a lot of time, energy, and money and
bring it to the board.
MR. MASTRO: Well, I'm up over 15,000 in fines right now.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Is that through the Board of County
Commissioners?
Page 59
June 12, 2001
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: No.
MR. MASTRO: That's through code enforcement, but I do want
to state on the record that the Tully family has no problem with my
tree fort stated on the record May 3rd in front of the Code
Enforcement Board other than they want to see me pay. It's a county
employee, and I definitely have a problem with something like that.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: But that is the separate issue than just
the variance this morning.
MR. MASTRO: It is, but I just want to state that.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: You paid a lot of money to get
to at least get to say something; right? MR. MASTRO: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I just wanted to say one thing.
This is in the same place it was at before; right? I mean, you just
rebuilt it--
MR. MASTRO: No. Actually, I had a crane come in and move
it. I tried to come into compliance to fall outside the variance.
Unfortunately, we had professional footers installed, and they were
installed wrong. And so when the crane came in and moved it, it
wasn't -- because there was a hedge and a fence in the way. And the
fence is about four-feet wide, that it was hard to actually justify
where the property line was. We thought we were in compliance. So
I went through that expense.
Now I'm infringing on my home setback. I need to attach it to
my home where I could have actually went and got the variance,
because I do have letters stating from both neighbors that surround
the complex that they do not have a problem. I asked for permission
prior to this. I could have actually left it where it was.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. Do we have public speakers?
MR. OLLIFF: No, sir.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. If you are not signed up as a
Page 60
June 12, 2001
public speaker, I can't recognize you.
MR. JENKINS' I did sign up.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: For this item?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: On this item?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Robert Jenkins?
MR. OLLIFF' Yes, he did. Robert Jenkins. My fault.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Well, while he's coming up, I
wonder, Mr. Olliff, when would be the appropriate time for this board
to give direction about code enforcement and its plan of operations?
Basically, what I wish we could change is that we are purely
complaint driven or almost purely complaint driven and that if a
complaint is lodged, our officers don't have discretion to rank it in
importance with the other items that might be -- you know, if a police
officer gets called, and it's a cat in a tree, he can say, "Yes, I'll come
and help you" -- that's a bad example. If it's a small violation of law,
he can attend to it or he can prioritize his work based on what's the
more important violation.
Our code enforcement department doesn't have the opportunity
to do that, or it hasn't appeared that way to me, since this is our
second treehouse. We're going to talk about lovely antique cars.
You guys hang the moon. I think you're as wonderful as you could
possibly be, but it must be that we have a bad policy because we have
been investigating every complaint regardless of the priority of
importance. And I think that policy needs to be changed, and this is
just an opportune time for me to bring it up. Tell me how to address
that policy. I want it changed.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, I don't know how you're going
to change and make a judgement about what gets investigated and
what doesn't. That's a judgement call.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Just -- but that's the point. They
don't use judgement. They investigate -- if it gets reported, it gets
Page 61
June 12, 2001
investigated, and it--
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, the next time I have one of
those, Commissioner, then I'll say it was common sense not to
investigate it, and I'll send the call to you.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: That'll be fine. I'll be happy--
MS. ARNOLD: For the record, Michelle Arnold, Code
Enforcement Director.
I think the most opportune time to talk about these issues would
be at the workshop that's scheduled in September, so we can --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Long time off.
MS. ARNOLD: -- provide for you information as to how we do
make, you know, calls as to what's important and prioritize our
efforts, so we can--
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: As far as I'm concerned, with
the number of sign violations that we have, the number of ugly
buildings, the number of PUDs that we have that aren't in compliance
with their regulations -- I mean, I would love to be able to prioritize
the work of your staff. That would get me put in jail because I'm not
allowed to do that because that's your job, but I'm extremely unhappy
with the way that goes, and I've been unhappy with it for six years,
and I don't know how to change it.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I think the workshop--
MR. OLLIFF: Well, we can talk about that at the workshop, but
I will defend it because I do think that we do respond to every single
citizen's complaint that comes in. And I'm not sure that you have
much of a choice but to do that --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: The police do.
MR. OLLIFF: If a citizen calls in -- I doubt that.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: The police cannot selectively
determine I'm not going to your house or mine.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: No, but --
Page 62
June 12, 2001
MR. OLLIFF: But at some point they will respond.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Exactly.
MR. OLLIFF: And at some point this variance would still need
to be investigated.
MS. ARNOLD: Right. And this is not -- this is something
that's been going on for a couple years. So it's not something that we
responded to last month and it's before you today. This has been
something that we've been working with Mr. Mastro on and trying to
come into compliance. It's not a matter of us saying, "You're not able
to keep your treehouse." It's a matter of us saying, "This is how you
can keep your treehouse and make sure it's safe for the children that
are going to be playing on it." .
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And I understand you have to
respond to citizen complaints. I'm suggesting that you could
prioritize the time spent by the staff, and it would take me longer than
two years to get to this complaint when I look at what's out there
right now as code violations.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I have another public speaker. I need
to address that, sir. May I have Mr. Jenkins come to the podium,
please. Thank you.
MR. JENKINS: How you doing? Robert Jenkins, again. This
is why I came here today.
Todd and Lisa are real nice people, like you said. And speaking
to what Ms. Mac'Kie said, there's got to be a mechanism in place
where people look at us and go, "This is really ridiculous. This is a
waste of the county's time."
Now, if a person had to go out there -- I've been to Todd's house
several times, and I never noticed that was in violation. This person
had to actually go out there, look at it, and determine it. And Todd
moved it once already. So it's not actually 1.7. So we have to put a
mechanism in there where you can look at it -- she said prioritize. If
Page 63
June 12, 2001
you're going to go for a cat in a tree or if you're going to go for an
assault, you're going to go for the assault first, and then you're going
to get to the cat in the tree if you have time. This is a cat in the tree.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Amen.
MR. JENKINS: It does not impact the neighbors. The
neighbors are for it. And the damage, where families are in
dissolution, you have a guy here that loves his children so much and
loves the neighborhood so much that he built something to keep them
safe, to keep them happy, and to keep them occupied, to keep them
off the street. And then to be fined $15,000 for something so petty,
so stupid, that could be forgiven without this much of a problem. He
should have called it art because if he called it art, then we wouldn't
be in this situation here today.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Hmmm.
MR. JENKINS: This has been going on for two years. Mr.
Nolen's cars came into question in March. So this has been going on
for two years, and Mr. Nolen's -- I think it's ridiculous. I think it's a
ridiculous waste of the county's time. Code enforcement does a great
job, but this is one of them things -- fall through the cracks or
whatever the case may be. We need to address it. We need to stop
the government from infringing on the people. This amounts to
nothing. Like I said, a cat in the tree is all this is. Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you, sir. I think we have a
motion on the floor.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And we have a second.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: And we have a second. Is there any
further discussion?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'd just like to say there's more
of this story than is represented, but we need to call a motion.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I would like to do that. All in favor
Page 64
June 12, 2001
signify by saying aye.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
Opposed by the same sign.
Motion carries 5-0.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: God speed, Todd.
MR. MASTRO: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: And other issues will be addressed at
the code enforcement workshop, and also maybe a hearing officer
would be effective in dealing with some of these things.
MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Chairman, just to try to again manage the
agenda a little again and provide some recommendations here, on --
Item 8-A and Item 8-D are the two items where you have the
majority of your registered speakers. Item 8-A you have 7 registered
speakers, and on Item 8-D, which is your tourist tax item, you have
21 registered speakers.
If it's the pleasure of the board, I'd suggest that you try and
maybe tackle both of those items prior to lunch, have a little late
lunch, but then for the balance of those people who are here to speak
to any of the items, 8-B and C, or anything after 8, this would be
good warning for them just to know that that's probably all we're
going to be able to get to before lunch.
Item #8A
ORDINANCE 2001-30, RE PETITION PUDZ-2001-AR-348, MR.
RICHARD D. YOVANOVICH OF GOODLETTE, COLEMAN
Page 65
June 12,2001
AND JOHNSON, REPRESENTING GOODLYN, LLC,
REQUESTING A REZONE FROM "VR" VILLAGE
RESIDENTIAL, "RSF-4" RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY, AND
"C-4" GENERAL COMMERCIAL TO "PUD" PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENT TO BE KNOWN AS GOODLAND GATEWAY
PUD, LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF GOODLAND DRIVE
(C.R. 892), AND WEST OF SUNSET DRIVE, CONSISTING OF
6.55 ACRES, MORE OR LESS - ADOPTED WITH CHANGES
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you, sir. Let's go to 8-A.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: So if you're here for anything
other than 8-A or 8-B, you might as well take a long lunch.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Do you need to swear them in, Mr.
Chairman?
MR. OLLIFF: 8-B.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: This is the Goodland PUD.
(The oath was administered.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Disclosures on this item.
Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I have it here.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you very much. I met
with the representatives of the Goodland community, and I have to
mention with who I didn't meet with, though, because it's important
in this case -- they requested a meeting. Because of our aggressive
schedule with meetings, I was unable to take care of the petitioner's
request, so I did not meet with the petitioner, and I think it needs to
be noted, that fact.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I've met with Connie and Ed
Fullmer from Goodland. I've attended Goodland Civic Association
Page 66
June 12, 2001
meetings. Actually, I've been doing that for about a year, so, you
know, I've talked to people or whoever is attending Goodland Civic
Association meetings.
I've spoken with Rich Yovanovich, and I received many e-mails
and letters and so forth. And they are all here on the record.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. I met with the Fullmers. I met
with the petitioner and received e-mails on the subject.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I met with Mr. Yovanovich. I
met with representatives of the Goodland Association. I received a
lot of correspondence and e-mails that are available in the file.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I have met with representatives
to the Goodland Civic Association and the petitioner, Mr.
Yovanovich, and also received e-mails that are in the file.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And, Chairman Carter, I'd like
to clarify my declaration. Prior to the last meeting, I did meet with
the petitioner, and I have received e-mails also.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. I think that covers us all. It's
all a matter of record. They are in the files. Let's proceed, Mr.
Bellows.
MR. BELLOWS: Good morning, Ray Bellows with Planning
Services.
The petitioner is requesting to rezone approximately 6.55 acres
from Village Residential RSF-4 and C-4 to a Planned Unit
Development to be known as the Goodland Gateway PUD.
Petitioner's requesting 47 dwelling units and 15,000 square feet of
commercial retail uses.
As you can see on the location map, the subject site is located on
the south side of Goodland Drive, west of Sunset Drive, borders
along a canalway on the east and the Goodland Marina to the west.
As you can see on the future land-use map, Goodland is located in the
urban coastal fringe. The maximum density is four units per acre
Page 67
June 12, 2001
unless there is a vested density. In this case, the Village Residential
is vested at 4.5 units per acre. The overall density then is -- on this
site that is allowed, 7.86. Petitioner is proposing a density of 7.7
units. So it is consistent with the future land-use element.
The existing commercial site C-4 is pre-existing, and the
proposed commercial within this PUD is on the site that's already
zoned C-4.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Let me ask this, Ray, before you go
forward. Do the commissioners have questions of staff on this?
Have you-all been briefed? Do you have particular items you would
like to address staff on this?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Not at this time.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Not at this time. So I think perhaps,
Ray, what we could do is go to the petitioner, and at any point in time
there's a staff question, we'll come back to you, sir. Thank you.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Good morning, Commissioners. Rich
Yovanovich representing the petitioner. I have with me Wayne
Arnold and Dave Corbin, the architect on the project.
Just as a brief-- brief history of how we got here today, as you
will recall, in December the Goodland Civic Association was the
proponent of an overlay that would reduce the number of residential
floors that can be constructed over parking on the VR zone property
on Goodland from three residential floors to one over parking. The
concern was the size of the buildings on Goodland. What we had
proposed was let's go with the PUD concept on the entire property
owned by the petitioner; that would assure the people of Goodland
their concern of going down to two residential floors over one of
parking and to assure our clients that they would not be reduced in
density. And we came to the board in December after meeting with
the Goodland Civic Association, and, I believe, jointly agreed to go
through the PUD process, which included rezoning all of the
Page 68
June 12, 2001
property, the C-4 piece, the VR piece, and the RSF-4 piece into one
PUD with the understanding that the RSF-4 piece would now be
eligible for multifamily housing on that piece.
The civic association voted 73 to 1 to support the PUD concept,
and that's where we were today going through the PUD process. So I
hope we're beyond the stage of debating whether or not the concept
should be here at all. We should be at the stage of getting into the
details of what will the PUD be. And that's what we're prepared to go
forward with.
I do want to point out that when we went forward with the
concept and we met with you and explained to you that we were
going to have a concept, it was a concept. And, in fact, there were
some changes on both sides. It's been an evolving process. But what
we understood the goals of the PUD process to be was address the
architecture on the island, make sure it was compatible, and they
wanted Olde Florida-type architecture.
There was a concern about the size of buildings on the VR
parcel. We were not limited as to the size of the buildings we could
construct, and there were some concerns over the commercial parcel
and some of the uses. That's the frame of mind we went into when
meeting with the board of directors for the civic association and the
membership. We committed to the commission that we would
involve the people of Goodland in our development process in
formulating the PUD. We lived up to that commitment.
We had five meetings with either the individual membership or
the board of directors. And we took their input into consideration
and agreed to incorporate the vast majority of the comments we
received from the membership and board of directors. In fact, if you
will recall, in December the board of directors -- we proposed two
alternative: leave the C-4 parcel as currently configured or extend
the C -4 parcel to Siena Court. In December the civic association
Page 69
June 12, 2001
reported to you-all that they favored bringing the C-4 piece over to
Siena Court. When we submitted the PUD originally in that
configuration, it would be to extend over to here. This would all
become C-4.
We committed the PUD under that concept, but we were
requested to go back to the original C-4 configuration.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Why?
MR. YOVANOVICH: The civic association felt that they
didn't want to extend -- they had a change of mind. They felt that it
wasn't appropriate to give us more commercial --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I heard it was a transportation
issue.
MR. YOVANOVICH: That's -- we never got to that point. We
never got into the details of that. What had happened was they asked
us -- they had a change of heart and we agreed, fine, we'll go back to
the C -4. We always said to them it was their choice. Extend the C-4
or leave it as is. But that's a change from what was reported to the
board in December.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: They are, like, rolling on the
floor laughing at that that they so disagree.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Well, if you want to get into the nitty-
gritty of the minutes, I do have the minutes handy. And if you want
me to read to you Pam Stoppelbien's comment about we prefer the C-
4 being extended, I'll be happy to do that.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Probably a good idea because
that was a big issue with my meeting with them yesterday or the day
before or whenever it was.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Okay. If you'll bear with me -- perhaps
-- I'll find that for you, Commissioner, when Wayne is speaking, and
I'll address that concern for you in the minutes.
So anyway, we had the meeting -- we had the first meeting with
Page 70
June 12, 2001
the board of directors. And we did -- we thought the priority concern
was architecture. So we wanted to get to the tough issue first, which
was what will the buildings look like on Goodland. And we were
told, "We want Olde Florida architecture." And we brought to them a
rendition of Olde Florida architecture that includes eight-, six-, and
four-unit configurations. What I have in front of you today are the
eight and six because those are the -- the crux of the issue today is
eight-unit buildings maximum or four-unit buildings maximum and
potentially some six-unit buildings as I understand the Goodland
proposal. This is a worst-case scenario, the eight-unit buildings.
You'll see that I think we've met our commitment of nice-looking
architecture. I don't think we've had any complaints about the
architecture.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Do you mind if I interrupt you
as you go?
MR. YOVANOVICH: Sure.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: If you'd rather we wait, I will.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Whatever, it's up to you.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Is there -- the PUD has a
commitment for this kind of architecture for something similar to this
conceptual elevation?
MR. YOVANOVICH: Down to the type of roof and types of
railings, and I think that -- we never heard a concern that the PUD
was not detailed enough to assure them Olde Florida architecture.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Okay.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. If I'm understanding this
correctly, I've heard four, six, and eight in this whole formulation. It
was my impression from the meeting of Goodland Association they
would be satisfied with four or six units, and they can accept
everything else. Is that where we are going to end up at the end of all
this discussion?
Page 71
June 12, 2001
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Yes.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Yes. We are going to get down to that
point.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, I'm the kind of a guy that likes
to cut right to the heart --
MR. YOVANOVICH: Well, I --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: -- slit the arteries any time you get a
chance, and find out what we do here.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Unfortunately, it's not that simple
because I think you have to hear all of the issues we took into
consideration and the process we went through to get us to where we
are.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Rich, before you start. Mr.
Chairman, if I remember right, in December when the decision to
work with the community on a PUD instead of the VR zoning and
spread out the density, and I think Commissioner Mac'Kie addressed
what she would like to see was four units per building. And so at
some time I'd like to address that.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Well, Commissioners, what had
happened was there was a commitment on both sides to work with
each other on the PUD concept. Pam Stoppelbien had said they
would like four- and six-unit buildings. I got up and said, "We're not
there yet. We don't know what types of buildings we're going to
have, and we need to work through the architectural issues." We
never committed to four- or six-unit buildings, and I don't think the
board ever committed to four- or six-unit buildings. I think what the
board said was, "Go work together, come back with a proposal, and
we'll vote on the proposal."
There was absolutely no mandate that we had to limit ourselves
to four- or six-unit buildings. That's my reading of the minutes, and
Page 72
June 12, 2001
I'll let Commissioner Mac'Kie speak for herself when she was talking
about how we were working together. And to put that in context, it
was in the context where I asked let's wait on the overlay vote from
going to three-over-one to two-over-one until the PUD and the
overlay can be before you at the same meeting. What they asked for
was, "No, let's get the overlay vote now to go to two-over-one, and
we'll deal with the PUD later." Okay?
What happened was they got what they wanted. They got the
two-over-one, and we're talking about the PUD later. And that's what
we're here to discuss, and so I'm hoping we're not going to get back
into the debate of whether or not we're going to have a PUD.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Well, who-- I can't imagine we
are. I mean, we're here to approve a PUD.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Right. And I think what we're
talking -- you guys kind of have skirted right around what you think
is the actual issue, and I agree with you, and that is these people now
have something happening to their community that's going to change
it forever. What they want to do is change it for the best that it can
possibly be for their community. It's a tiny, small, little fishing
village, and they want to keep it that way, and they want to keep the
units small, and their big issue is four and six units.
I don't think they are objecting at all to the PUD. They are
working with them and everything else. They just want to keep it to
four and six units. The whole town is a tiny town. They even have
tiny little lots.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: They have tiny little lots with
million dollar houses on them, though. Let's don't get too --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, there's a lot -- Pam, they have
trailers in there.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And there's a lot of that too.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Right, a lot.
Page 73
June 12, 2001
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And I have no debate with you
about preserving the character. I don't under -- well.
MR. YOVANOVICH: If I can, remember the location of this
property. It's as you come on the island and it's next to a marina.
Okay? It's not in the heart of Goodland. So we were asked to
eliminate hotels and marinas as uses on the C-4 parcel. We agreed to
do that.
They didn't want a gated community. As you know, most
developers are doing gated communities, but we committed to them it
would not be a gated community, so the PUD was revised to
eliminate any opportunity for a gated community.
The original draft of the PUD contained a standard unit size
minimum of 800 square feet; that's pretty typical. They said, "We
want to make sure this is not a transient type of use. Would you go to
1200 square foot units at a minimum?" we did that; we went to 1200
square feet.
They wanted to make sure that the commercial piece and the
residential piece would be uniform in architectural theme. It was
always our intent to do that, and it was in the PUD as originally
proposed. The commercial piece must also be Olde Florida
architectural.
We volunteered to reduce the height on the commercial piece to
42 feet. Currently, C-4 can go to a maximum of 100; practically on
our piece 75 was our limit, but we agreed to go down to 42 feet.
So we have tried to meet the goal, and the goal was to keep the
character of Goodland without harming my client's property rights,
which meant taking away density. What we are -- and the only thing
we have asked for -- and I think Commissioner Fiala will back me up
on this -- we have been steadfast in requesting flexibility in our
development. We have always said, "We have to have a flexibility to
have some eight-unit buildings." we have never backed down from
Page 74
June 12, 2001
that position. We have never hinted that we could go any other place.
We said, "We've given you everything else. Please work with us in
maintaining flexibility because we are not -- we may be" -- but we're
not the ultimate developer at this point.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: But when you were mentioning
harming property rights and reducing density -- and all along I think
everybody's worked on the fact that you're going to have 47 units --
it's just the configuration of those 47 units; right? It really won't
harm the density.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Well, it may because, candidly, we don't
know if we can do a project with the proper amenities, pool and
clubhouse, in four-unit buildings or in a combination of four - and
six-unit buildings. We don't know at this point. We need some
flexibility. Now, remember--
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You don't know what the purchaser
would want to do; is that correct?
MR. YOVANOVICH: Right, correct.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Because this is just property that
you're going to sell; right?
MR. YOVANOVICH: Well, we may develop it ourselves. But
the point is, there is an unknown. I can't commit to them on a
specific project. I told them that right from the beginning. My goal
was to protect them to make sure they ended up with Olde Florida;
that they had buildings that were not greater than eight units in size;
that they have staggered setbacks so you don't have a uniform
building; all the issues we heard that we wanted I needed to make
sure were in the PUD so whoever developed it they were protected.
And we have done that. We have done that. We have not given in or
given to them the eight units down to four or six.
And I think, before we go much further, it's important that you
know that we did have two meetings of which there was a specific
Page 75
June 12, 2001
vote, which you attended the night meeting. But we met at 10:00 in
the morning on April 3rd and again at 7:30 p.m. On April 3rd to
make sure that the maximum number of Goodlanders could be there
to hear our proposal and vote yeah or nay. And there was a ballot
that was distributed, and I'd like to hand out the ballot to everybody.
And I want to work out through some of the points on that ballot that
I think are very telling. And you'll see it's a two-page ballot. I want
to draw the board's attention to where it says "sample ballot," see on
the first page, just above that there's some bolded language?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Oh, yeah.
MR. YOVANOVICH: It says (as read): "Please review the
attached plot plan and compare the two choices carefully before you
vote." if you look at the attached plot plan, you will see how they
described our PUD -- "they" being the Goodland Civic Association --
four-, six-, and eight-unit buildings. I was emphatic that we would
not give up on the option or ability to do eight-unit buildings --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: What was the vote?
MR. YOVANOVICH: -- when the vote occurred.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: What was the vote on the ballot?
MR. YOVANOVICH: The vote was 65 in favor of the PUD, 35
against the PUD.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: So basically what we have today
are people among the 35?
MR. YOVANOVICH: I'm assuming -- and we'll get to what
happened was is then after the vote, which I thought we were done
with because I was willing -- my client was willing to live or die by
the vote. If they said, "We don't want eight-unit buildings," and they
voted the other way, I'd be here trying to persuade you to go against
the vote. I'm not here to do that. We believe we won the vote. And
we walked away saying, "Okay. The issue was there," because there
was no ambiguity in our position on the eight-unit building.
Page 76
June 12, 2001
What happened after that was a letter with a new list of demands
that was put together by the board of directors, I'm assuming based
upon the comments that occurred at the meeting after the vote
occurred. But, unfortunately, the vote had occurred. The vote was
on our PUD that included eight-unit buildings. I don't think the
board, one, had the authority or, two, could fairly add to and pick
apart and say, "We're going to ignore the vote and then add this list of
demands that came up in the discussion." so with that, we got the
letter. Wayne and I both specifically spoke to Ed Fullmer and
Connie Fullmer, told them the issues we could agree to, and there
were a few that we could work with them on, but there were a few
that were -- you know, frankly, had been rehashed and the vote was
what the vote was.
I'll go through the list. The list came back with: We want no
more than four-unit buildings, however, if you're going to have six-
unit buildings, you can have three of them; it's got to be on the VR
piece. I told them out -- eight units is eight units. We've always said
we have to have eight units. We've always said, "We have to have
eight units, and we cannot give you that point."
They said, "We don't want you to have a wall 12 feet in height
between you and the marina," and if Ray will put up the pictures --
one, I don't understand the logic for that opposition to our having a
wall that separates us from a marina when all we're trying to do is
buffer ourselves from a fairly intense and industrial use. We will
landscape the wall on our side so that it doesn't affect the people of
Goodland one way or the other if we have a wall to buffer ourselves
from the marina.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I'm sorry. What was your
response to the wall issue?
MR. YOVANOVICH: We said, "No, we want the wall." We've
always said that.
Page 77
June 12, 2001
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Could I -- I'd like to see where
on the -- it would be on the water side?
MR. YOVANOVICH: No. It's going to be here right adjacent
to the marina. Not even over here. It's going to be here (indicating).
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Oh.
MR. YOVANOVICH: So it's internal to our project. We've
always said, "We want the wall. Please let us keep the wall."
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Would the wall be visible off
your property? I mean --
MR. YOVANOVICH: I doubt it. We're going to landscape on
our side of the wall.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: From the marina it would
clearly be visible, but from --
MR. YOVANOVICH: From the residences, from the RSF-4,
no. You're going to have not only landscaping, you're going to have
buildings.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You know, I understand how you
feel about the wall. I went down there and looked at the end, and I
can understand that. I'm going back. I'm sorry that I'm going
backwards, but you're talking about what was on here and on their
vote. But I notice on the page where we're talking about-- now, I
understood the vote to be 65 in favor of your PUD; right? But as you
read this thing, it specifically states four- and six-unit buildings are
much preferable. So I think that the people thought that that's what
they were voting on was four and six. Right here on the front page.
MR. YOVANOVICH: I understand that, Commissioner. But
that's why I pointed to you that when you say, "Please review the
attached plot plan carefully and compare the two choices," in bold,
that really tells you, "Look at the plot plan and figure out what's
going on." Okay? It's not that difficult. And coupled with the fact
that I was there, Commissioner, and I said it's eight-unit buildings,
Page 78
June 12, 2001
there was no ambiguity. That's what the PUD said. I said that on
many occasions. So when they voted for the PUD, there was no
doubt what I had said.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Uh-huh. I know you said that. I
was there. I heard you say it. I don't think that they realized that that
was inflexible. I think that they were thinking more of the four to six,
but, anyway, go ahead. I'm sorry.
MR. YOVANOVICH: As an aside my wife says I'm fairly
inflexible at times, and I think I was pretty clear on being inflexible
on that issue.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: So we can get testimony on your
inflexibility.
MR. YOVANOVICH: I can bring that in to show, I think, I was
pretty clear that there was no flexibility on that issue.
The next issue was they wanted no zero lot lines along the
water, which you may or may not be familiar with. Under the code
you can go the zero along the water. And importantly for that is that
allowed us to stagger the buildings. They said they wanted a ten-foot
setback. We said if that's really what you want, we'll give you the
ten-foot setback, but you need to understand that that diminishes the
window and our ability to stagger. So if they want the ten-foot
setback, we revised the PUD to give them the ten-foot setback.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: So if we were to accept the PUD
as it's drafted today, you would not have that staggering because -- I
wonder if we ought to explore that.
MR. YOVANOVICH: It would diminish our ability to stagger
because the envelope -- you have a front setback and you have a rear
setback now--
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Right.
MR. YOVANOVICH: -- there's less ability for a building
envelope.
Page 79
June 12, 2001
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: When as far as visually this
looking less like a monolith, the opportunity to shift the buildings
around is a positive for the community. So I want to make sure we
don't lose sight of that and be sure that people understood that issue.
MR. YOVANOVICH: And that also goes to numbers of units
in a building. The fewer buildings, the more ability to stagger and
give them other issues. It's not just a setback issue. So if that's what
they want, that's what they can have.
They said they didn't want us to trim a single mangrove. Well,
we all know that's regulated by state statute, and we just said we can't
agree to that.
They wanted us to donate a portion of our property on the comer
for a park. The site has enough problems to work with as far as our
ability to do that, so we could not agree to give them a park.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Do you have any plans for, like,
a landscape feature on that end? Is there something you could do -- MR. YOVANOVICH: We plan on having a very nice and
attractive project, and that was our commitment.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: But on that -- I wish I were
familiar enough, but that piece that's right next to the commercial is
along a street. What's the name of it?
MR. YOVANOVICH: Goodland Drive.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Is there a plan to make
something nice there? I mean, will they be looking at the back of a
building on Goodland Drive, or will they be looking at some nice
hedging --
MR. YOVANOVICH: Obviously, most developments in
Collier County include nice landscaping at the front when you're
coming in.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I just wanted you to make that
assurance to them on the record that you can't give them a park, but
Page 80
June 12, 2001
you are going to give them something green to see at that comer.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Yes.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: The question becomes will that stay
green space --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: No.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: -- stuff, or what are you going to put
in there?
MR. YOVANOVICH: It's going to be incorporated into our
development. We haven't got the site plan yet, Commissioner. That's
my point. We have --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I've been here -- I've seen a few trees
and heard a few owls. Now let's get this straight. I want to know
what's going to happen there. Either it's going to have to come back
for a site plan review. I don't want a piece of property sitting there,
and you're going to tell me it looks nice. Nice as defined by whom?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Nice as defined by the code --
MR. YOVANOVICH: By the PUD.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: -- because the site development
plan will have to comply with our code on the setbacks and the -- I'm
sorry, the native preservation and on the landscape buffering and
those issues. I just wanted him to make this statement on the record
that they would be sure there was landscaping at that intersection.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Absolutely. We can commit to
landscaping.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: It definitely needs to be there, and
most of the developments today, that are the developers that I work
with, exceed the standards of the county, particularly in areas that are
very visible to the public. So I understand you may not develop this,
and that troubles me more than anything else, not because you don't
want to develop. I want it nailed down what's in there. I don't want
Mr. X buying this thing and coming in and saying, "Well, the PUD
Page 81
June 12, 2001
said this," and he does it, and we have been hammered enough by
that.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Commissioners, this is the first I've
heard about a concern about landscaping. If you want to give me a
landscaping regulation as far as what we have to plant out front -- I
think we've shown you that our commitment to deliver a nice project
is set forth in those standards. And we're not planning on putting up
a mn-of-the-mill project. We've delivered on that, and we promised
them a nice-looking project. And the proof is in the PUD as currently
written that addresses all of those issues.
The final comment they said to us is they don't want us to have
any boat lifts to serve our docks. Now, boat lifts are permitted use
for people on the water. They have boat lifts. We're not asking for a
boat dock extension. We're just asking to be able to do what
everybody else does, which is they have boat lifts to use the dock.
The docks will be there to serve the residential community, and we'll
deal with -- if we need an extension, we'll deal with that through a
public hearing process. But right now we are just asking for what the
code allows, which is no more than 20 feet including the boat into the
water, and the boat lift has to meet that requirement. Otherwise, if
they want to give up their boat lifts, we'll talk about giving up our
boat lifts, but that really doesn't make any sense for either one of us.
We understand that there are some people who are not happy
that there is a change in zoning going on here, that the RSF-4 lots
now will have some multifamily buildings on that. This process was
an effort to compromise on issues for a win-win situation for the
people of Goodland and for the property owner. Remember, it was
our zoning that was being changed. The VR zoning when we bought
the property permitted three residential floors over one of parking. If
you remember even further back when that bad word came up,
another project on the island was able to get four residential floors
Page 82
June 12, 2001
over parking, there was a Land Development Code provision that was
brought forward to try to get down to two-over-one, and we
voluntarily agreed to go to three-over-one, and that was approved by
the commission. So this is for everybody. There has been a change
in the zoning on the property, and this was always intended to be a
compromise. And the definition of compromise is not everybody
gets what they want. You get as close as you can for the good of the
community and fairness to the property owner.
The Planning Commission voted unanimously to approve our
project. Your staff recommended approval with eight-unit buildings.
What I would hope is in my going through this rendition of the
evolution of the PUD and the input we did incorporate, and the only
point that we've steadfastly had to stay firm to is the eight-unit
building, we hope that you will see that we have come forward in the
spirit of compromise and delivering on our promise to you in
December, we would give them and assure them a high-quality
project as the gateway and the entrance to Goodland, that there would
be smaller-scale buildings because remember, the VR piece, that was
no limit on the scale of our building. Now, we could have done one
32-unit building. Now we're saying the worst you're getting is a
building one-fourth the size of what can be there today. And we
would hope that you'll follow the Planning Commission's
recommendation, your staff recommendation, and you will vote to
approve the PUD as in front of you.
I'll let Wayne take you through some of the compatibility issues,
and if you have any questions of Dave Corbin, he'll take you through
the architectural issues. And I will find the provisions in the minutes
on the C-4 issue, and if you have any specific questions of me, I'm
happy to answer the questions.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Mr. Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The commercial zoning, can
Page 83
June 12, 2001
you commit to keeping the -- if there is going to be dock space there
-- keeping it to the area around it and not spread it out throughout the
project? What I mean is, you know, if there's going to be a small
marina or a restaurant there, can you keep it --
MR. YOVANOVICH: We eliminated the marina. They asked
us to eliminate any marina.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Or a restaurant with docks, can
you keep into the commercial and not spread it out into the residential
-- yes.
MR. YOVANOVICH: To serve the commercial use?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Yes. Now, the residential docks,
obviously, will serve the residential docks.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Can you limit the dock space to
the residential for one dock per residential unit?
MR. YOVANOVICH: Sure.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All right. Mr. Arnold, we have a lot
of public speakers on this. Unless there's specific questions of Mr.
Arnold, I would really like to go and hear from the public speakers.
MR. ARNOLD: If I could offer just a comment --
COURT REPORTER: Could you please state your name for the
record.
MR. ARNOLD: My name is Wayne Arnold, Grady Minor
Engineering. And I would like to address just a couple of points and
sort of picking up where Mr. Yovanovich left off about compatibility
and going right to the specifics of the eight-unit building, if I might.
If I could spend just a very few minutes on that, and I think that
might wrap up our presentation, and then we can certainly hear from
the balance of those public speakers.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Let's do it. I want to get to public
Page 84
June 12, 2001
speakers. I think I understand your points.
MR. ARNOLD: I'm going to go ahead and speak from over
here, and I'll address your attention to the aerial photograph of
Goodland.
You come in the island. This is our piece of property right here
as you come on the island. This is the Goodland Marina that is our
adjacent neighbor to the west. This property truly is an infill parcel.
We have the existing commercial property. On one side of our
property we have the other developing marina on our southwest
comer. We have two zoning districts that are the residential zoning
districts on this particular piece of property. Clearly, we're infilling.
Your Land Development Code encourages people to develop infill
parcels. One of things that they do is increase density. They want
you to increase density. They ask for more flexibility because it's
much tougher to develop these parcels.
This site is 130 feet wide between canal and it's western
property line, 130 feet that we have to put infrastructure to serve the
project, building envelopes and setbacks, and all the other accessory
uses that have to go along with the project. We have a very active
heavy marina use as our neighbor. We've asked for a wall to buffer
ourselves from that marina. It's landscaped. I don't think you're
going to see through the mangrove preserve down to this area of the
project to see a wall. It's a nonissue.
The other issue, we have a mangrove fringe on the southern tip
of this project that's immediately adjacent to the RSF-4 property.
There are strict guidelines by the state on how you can trim and
manage mangroves. The other side of that issue is the VR zoning
district is about right here (indicating). It's about 700 feet in length
from Goodland Drive. It's about 2 1/4 acres. It's designated for VR.
As Mr. Yovanovich said, there is no current managing standard in
VR about how big or how a building has to look. It simply says you
Page 85
June 12, 2001
have a maximum height and a maximum number of stories. There's
no minimum unit size. There is no requirement in the VR that
mandates that this look an Olde Florida building, that it's attractive,
that it has appropriate setbacks.
So you could theoretically end up with a 32-unit building on
this portion of the project. And what we have simply asked to do is
to take this and varying unit types with a maximum of eight and
spread them out throughout our property. What I'm going to tell you
is that from a compatibility standpoint we're transitioning. We have a
100-foot canal separating up from the nearest residential single-
family home. I counted them. There are nine homes that have a
potential view of this project that are zoned for single-family
development, nine homes. There are 171 recorded single-family lots
on the island, not including ours --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: How many?
MR. ARNOLD: 171 RSF-4 platted lots. So out of 171
homeowners, 9 have the potential to look at this piece of property.
We have a height restriction of 35 feet. Guess what the height
restriction is on single-family land? It's 35 feet. We are exactly the
same height, and what we've said is, we are looking in this narrow
window of building opportunity to have a maximum of eight-unit
buildings.
This parcel in Goodland is zoned VR. Right there is an acre that
theoretically can come back through with a unified development and
build 14 1/2 units on that one acre of property with zero regulations
other than are in your code today. And what I'm telling you is that by
committing to the character of Goodland, which they told us was
Olde Florida, looking at our relationship to adjoining properties, the
eight-unit building is a good compromise.
I mean, land-use planning principles will tell you that when you
transition from commercial to single-family you have transitional
Page 86
June 12, 2001
uses, and typically that's multifamily. And in Collier County an
eight-unit building is not uncommon when you look at a PUD where
you have multiple building types. In this particular project, we've
said we're going to have at least two building types. You're not going
to get all eight-unit buildings. You're not going to get all six-unit
buildings. You have to have at least two types.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: The PUD requires there be at
least two?.
MR. ARNOLD: Yes, it does.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Okay.
MR. ARNOLD: One of the other things that I think I'm very
emphatic about, I've looked at just about every PUD in Collier
County over the 12 years I've been here, and I can tell you that there's
no other PUD in Collier County that contains architectural standards
for residential properties as significant as this one, no other one. As
Mr. Yovanovich said, this details everything. It talks about railings;
their color, their height. We can only have galvanized metal roofs. It
tells that 50 percent of the facade on the water has to have
architectural elements and treatments because we're trying very hard
to reduce the massing of the building, present a good face to our
neighbors who will have a very restricted and limited view of us.
Keep in mind you end up with about a 125-foot building
separation between the nearest single-family home. All these lots are
single-family (indicating). These are VR. These are single-family.
They are separated by a 45-foot wide road. But there are no
restrictions on these VR pieces of property. There are no restrictions
down on the other marina and the adjacent VR property. So I think
when you look at what we've attempted to do between the
architecture, our own site constraints, and when you look at
Goodland as a whole, we have a situation where the eight-unit
building is a good transitional use, and it certainly doesn't represent
Page 87
June 12, 2001
the maximum building size that could have been developed without
this PUD.
So to me, I think that's cutting to the chase of where we could
have been. I think it's also important to note for the record that the
county staff has calculated our density. We could have asked for a
maximum of 48 dwelling units. We asked for 47 because when we
first started this, we told the people in Goodland that we had a 47
dwelling unit potential. When we actually went back to get down to
the specifics of the survey and the other details when you can look at
this on an auto CAD program and really get to the nitty-gritty of the
calculations, we qualified for little over 48 units. We stuck with our
47, which again you've effectively reduced the density by one over
what we can build today.
I know it was said, but we voluntarily reduced the building
height in the commercial to be more consistent with what's happening
in Goodland. We didn't ask for the 100 feet that C-4 currently
allows. We didn't ask for the 70 feet that we think we can
realistically put there under your building setback requirements. We
said we'll agree to 42. We said the City of Naples seems to think
that's a good standard. We'll say it too. So that's what we committed
to.
So I think when you look at it in combination, we have a very
compatible project with Goodland. We understand there's resistance
to change, but the fact of the matter is, change occurs, and I think the
question is, have we done the right thing by bringing you forward a
project that makes these significant commitments, and I think we
have.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you, Mr. Arnold. I guess at the
end of day whatever's decided, your're going to end up with one
building that's three, five, or a seven if you get 47 units.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Commissioner Mac'Kie, if I can I'll go
Page 88
June 12, 2001
ahead and show you on the record -- CHAIRMAN CARTER: At what point?
MR. YOVANOVICH: It's found on page -- I think's it's 6 on the
December 13, 2000, meeting minutes, and I'm reading from a portion
of Pam Stoppelbien's testimony on behalf of the civil association, and
it says (as read): "We also agree that the commercial area would be
confined to the County Road 892 roadway but expanded along the
entire frontage to accommodate sufficient parking for a low-profile
traditional neighborhood design commercial building with the
possibility of residential over business rather than a tall 50- to 70-foot
building."
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And that's Ms. Stoppelbien?
MR. YOVANOVICH: That was Pam Stoppelbien speaking as
to their preference at the time.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Was she an officer of the
association or something?
MR. YOVANOVICH: Yes. And she was the individual
speaking to assure you that the 73 to 1 vote was an informed
decision.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Ah, I remember now.
MR. YOVANOVICH: And, again, the only reason I bring up
that point is they asked to change something they said they perhaps
wanted, and we accommodated that. That's the reason I brought up
that point. And again, it was an evolution of how we got to where we
are today.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Uh -huh.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All right. Thank you, Mr.
Yovanovich. We need to go to public speakers. Call one at a time
with somebody being on deck.
MR. OLLIFF: The first two speakers are Connie Stegall-
Fullmer followed by Ed Fullmer.
Page 89
June 12, 2001
MS. STEGALL-FULLMER: My name is Connie Stegall-
Fullmer. I am here speaking as an officer of Goodland Civic
Association, and just as a brief comment before I get into the text of
my prepared comments, I thought at the beginning of these meetings
when we raised our right hand to give testimony that we are swearing
to tell the truth and nothing but the truth. I just have a comment
regarding that with some testimony that's just been given.
We are here today to talk about --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I'm sorry. What was your
comment regarding that?
MS. STEGALL-FULMER: Because of some comments made
by Mr. Yovanovich regarding C-4 and our position on what we gave
or wanted or did not want on C-4. He's totally inaccurate, and Mr.
Ray Bellows can make a comment on that as well.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Okay.
MS. STEGALL-FULLMER: But before-- again, before getting
into comments, I'd like to recognize the Goodland residents that have
taken time to come here today. Some of them have already left this
morning because of work issues, having to get back to work. If they
could I would ask them to stand to be recognized.
These are individuals that are here in the middle of the
summertime when most residents are up north. This is a very
particular pointed issue for us, and we are showing up to let you
know that.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: We thank you for being here.
MS. STEGALL-FULLMER: We're here today to talk about the
Goodland Gateway PUD application submitted by Goodland LLC
and what brought us to where we are today. Mr. Yovanovich and Mr.
Arnold have gone through some of these issues, but this is from our
point of view.
Residents of Goodland and the county staff worked through two
Page 90
June 12, 2001
years of Land Development Code meetings, which finally culminated
December 13th, 2001 (sic), in the passing of the initial stages of the
Goodland overlay district. The item in the overlay of particular
consequence to Goodland LLC, which they fought for a two-year
time frame, was our request to limit the number of floors in VR from
three to two -- three-over-one to two-over-one.
We voted on that date in favor of our request. The reason
Goodland LLC fought so vigorously against the change was because
they stood to potentially lose density of 10 to 12 units on their VR
parcel. They hired a professional property appraiser who told us all
at the November 29th meeting that the minimum marketable square
foot for VR property was 1500 square feet, and that equated to an
economic -- potential economic loss of $500,000. Keep that in mind
when we talk about there giving us -- going from 800 up to 1200
square feet as one of the give items.
Armed with that information, the property owner requested that
they be allowed to rezone the property as a planned unit
development, which would allow them to spread their density over
lots currently zoned RSF-4 and VR and therefore not lose any of their
density. Typically, to be approved for a PUD, the land must at least
ten acres. This tract is only 6.55 acres, so from the get-go they are
actually getting a little bit on that side.
The request for the PUD was made at the November 29th LDC
meeting. The GCA representatives welcomed the opportunity to
work with the property owners on the concept of the PUD. A
spreading of the units across the available land resulting in smaller
buildings was much preferable than to have density of 32 units in the
VR equating to large buildings.
The community met with the property owner and its attorney
and architect on December 12th, and assurances were made that
density would be spread out over the land and that the owner would
Page 91
June 12, 2001
work closely with the community to achieve a product that was
acceptable to both parties. After these assurances were made, the
members made a good-faith vote of 73 to 1 to support the concept of
the PUD and to get to work on the details.
On December 13th at the LDC meeting, parameters of the PUD
were outlined by our secretary at the time, and the property owner
gave assurances to the board that those parameters were acceptable to
them. The main item in that list of parameters that continues to be
the stumbling block is our stated preference that buildings have a
small footprint and be of only four and six units in size.
We have had five meetings since December 13th for various
issues in the PUD have been discussed, and our preferences have
been stated. We have communicated our list of issues to Planning
Services and to each of you commissioners. In the hopes of coming
to a resolution on the PUD, we invited the owner, owner's attorney,
and architect to attend our April 3rd membership meeting at which a
vote was to be taken to poll the attendees regarding their position on
the PUD.
Question-and-answer sessions made up most of the meetings.
We held a morning and evening meeting to accommodate individuals'
work schedules. Two worksheets were distributed. One was
prepared by opponents of the PUD. The second was prepared by the
GCA to present the facts. You have on your desks those two
worksheets and the ballot that Mr. Yovanovich passed out.
The worksheets prepared by the GCA showed a layout of the
Goodland LLC tract of land and the zoning as it is today and the
proposals as they stood in the PUD at that time. A major contention
regarding the PUD and highly vocalized at that meeting was the
owner's desire to build buildings with up to eight units, which using a
minimum square foot of 1200 square feet, equates to a minimum
footprint of 9600 square feet--
Page 92
June 12, 2001
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I'm going to have to ask you to wrap
up, please.
MS. STEGALL-FULLMER: -- a very large footprint which
takes us out of the realm of the current character of the village of
Goodland.
We assured the attendees that as a board we would continue to
push -- it's important to note that at that meeting we assured the
attendees that as a board we would continue to push for their wishes
for the PUD, the main issue being size of buildings. The attendees in
good faith showed a collective vote of 65 to 35 in favor to continue to
work for a product that could be acceptable. The ballot that was
voted specifically stated that four- to six-unit buildings were
preferable to larger identical production units.
Immediately following the meeting, we sent the list of additional
items that Mr. Yovanovich went down in the matter of priority. The
first item was no eight-unit buildings. The balance of those items on
that list are issues that we can live with.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Ma'am, I have to ask you to wrap up,
please. I've got six other speakers on the subject.
MS. STEGALL-FULLMER: Asked why buildings of eight
units were required in the PUD by the builder and that was something
they were hard on, the attorney responded, "For economies of scale
and flexibility." the community character is the subject that
thousands of dollars and hundreds of manhours are spent on here in
Collier County. This is a community characteristic issue. We need
you to be fair to Goodland. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
MR. OLLIFF: Edward Fullmer is the next speaker followed by
Judith Wages.
MR. FULLMER: This is one year's work. My name is Edward
J. Fullmer, F-u-l-l-m-e-r, president of the Goodland Civic
Page 93
June 12, 2001
Association. This is only one year's work out of the last three that
we've been working with the same people no matter what
development they are trying to put in Goodland.
I am here representing the village of Goodland. On November
28th you commissioners made history and helped save a very
important part of Florida, Goodland, when you pulled that permit.
Overnight the game plan changed for the Goodland LLC. It changed
overnight. We have quotes on the record from Mr. Yovanovich
agreeing to Pam Stoppelbien's when she stated we would have small
footprints, four and six. They're talking about flexibility. They can
build one, two, three, four, five, six. The new land -- I picked up the
PUD yesterday after asking for it three or four times from Wayne
Arnold. And in it it says, "masking." Masking, no building shall
contain no more than eight dwelling units. The PUD will be
developed with a minimum combination of two building types, i.e.,
eights, sixes, etc. Right here they -- they -- with this here, there's no
guarantee that we have less than four eights and one six. There's no
guarantee that we'll have a combination of fours, threes, ones, or
anything else. There's no footprint. There's no site plan. This is not
a guarantee.
So we have to ask you today to vote no against this PUD, or we
put a maximum of no more than 7200 square feet per building no
matter what the number of units are, or table this PUD until we have
a percentage of how many, how big, or how small the footprints will
be in the PUD.
We are one small word from the Goodland Civic Association
and village of Goodland of approving this, and the word is "eight."
It's on the record. It's in the meeting. Pam Stoppelbien, it's on it, and
he said that we're in agreement generally with what Pam Stoppelbien
said. We never knew about an eight until I read the original PUD. It
was handed to me the night of the 24th of January, and I read it on
Page 94
June 12, 2001
the 25th. Immediately we had a meeting, and we sent the letter on
February 14th to Planning Services with a copy to you with four
items that we could not live with. And it was with eights. It's been
the eights, and it's the eights today, and it will be the eights
tomorrow, and it will be eights if we have to go to court. We do not
want eights in Goodland. We want sixes, no more than sixes.
We are giving a lot by letting them have RSF-4 to use as village
resident. We are letting them have multihomes on sacred ground in
Goodland. And that is sacred ground to the people of Goodland. The
planning board don't live there, Development Services don't live
there, the owner don't live there, and certainly I'm glad the lawyer
don't live there because of some of his comments.
You see over here we have a layout by our architect with 11
four-unit buildings that can be staggered. They could be anywhere.
They also have a clubhouse, and they have a pool, and they have a
tennis court, and you have one being with three over.
Now, as far as his comment that Goodland Civic Association
wanted that commercial property taken away from them, we agreed
to it. He even read it, and he can't understand it. Per his quote, it
says that we would continue the commercial property down to the
end along 892. We gave that to him. They found out -- and I talked
to Bob Mulhere about it -- that they couldn't use it that way. That's
why they came back and changed it at the January meeting. He
twists and he turns, but everything's in them records that we gave to
you yesterday.
We're for the PUD if there's no eights. Other than that we want
it tabled or voted down. I hate to see it voted down because these
people from Goodland and myself for three years we've been
harassed by this lawyer, and I don't think it's fair, so please vote the
right way --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And I hope --
Page 95
June 12, 2001
MR. FULLMER: Vote no or take the eights out of the PUD.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Let him finish, please. Thank you, sir.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I hope that the future speakers
will stick to the issues and not the personalities.
MR. FULLMER: I'm sorry about that.
The next speaker is Judith Wages followed by
MR. OLLIFF:
Sandy Yount.
MS. WAGES:
Hi. Good morning, Commissioners. My name
is Judith Wages, and four years ago I purchased 654 East Palm
Avenue in Goodland in Collier County.
Before buying I had been 25 years in Broward County working
for a large New York corporation, moved to Alaska, and then I
wanted to come back to South Florida. When I purchased 654 East
Palm Avenue, I moved all of my furnishings there. I intended to stay
here, but before purchasing it, I walked the area, I talked to all of the
residents, I talked to every one of the business owners. I found out
whether or not the people there would want me there. I mean, I didn't
have any idea whether the people there would be congenial to me and
my lifestyle, which is a quiet lifestyle after being in a New York
corporation for so many years and being in growing Broward County.
I wanted Goodland. I wanted Goodland. After listening to the old
people, after walking the streets and talking to the residents that were
pioneers that you don't see here, they're too old to be here, I talked to
them. I talked to them as much as I can walk now. The historical
nature of this part of Collier County is why I purchased with cash.
The frontier families that still existed, I wanted to be near them. The
unique past of Goodland, the very unique past, I wanted to be there to
learn from the old folks, the pioneer history of Goodland. That's why
I purchased in Goodland.
I did not build a dock. My place does not have a dock. I have
an Intrepid, a 32-foot Intrepid in Fort Lauderdale. I have a 22-foot
Page 96
June 12, 2001
Boston Whaler. But in order to build my dock, you know, for one of
the docks to pull my boat up out of the water, I choose not to because
there are seven living manatees right on (sic) my dock with all the
babies, and you can see those every night. So, therefore, four years
ago I saw my neighbors had docks. But I said, "No, I want to
preserve this area. I don't want to disturb underneath that with the
drilling. I do not want to have a dock there, not to have a lift."
There are a lot of considerations that I think that the owners, me
having developed other pieces of property in Alaska and other parts
of the state and in western North Carolina, that you really need to
find out the environment before you purchase, before you plan where
you want to be. I did that, and my VR lot -- that's 45-foot wide. I
wanted to find out what can I do here. Can I live here? Will I be
harassed by these neighbors? Will the neighbors be congenial with
me living here having been in New York for so many years, being in
Broward County so many years? How would I impact the lives of
the old pioneer history of Goodland? How would I, me, one person,
one family, me and my husband and my grandchildren, impact the
life of these people that are living here.
These old houses that are run down, these people love these old
houses. They love this lifestyle. I came from a big oceanfront home
in Broward County that's leased out, two of them, because ! don't
want to live there. I don't want to live in a big, oceanfront 5,000-
square-foot home.
I would ask today if you would appreciate -- I would ask for the
consideration to turn down this petition. Go back to the planning
stages with their civic center-- civic association. I personally would
like to see owner occupied. I would like to see no more than 1200
square foot units. I lived through Lauderdale-by-the-Sea. This is
what this is coming to. I left there. And I would appreciate
consideration to disapprove this petition at this time. Thank you very
Page 97
June 12, 2001
much.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
MR. OLLIFF: The next speaker is Sandy Yount followed by
James Graham.
MR. OLLIFF: Sandy Yount doesn't seem to be here. James
Graham will be your next speaker followed by Matt Finn.
MR. GRAHAM: My name is James Graham, G-r-a-h-a-m. I
live in Goodland, and I'm on the Goodland Association board, and I
just have a few points of information, I think, I would call this.
I've been hearing here -- I'm glad I brought this with me. I've
been hearing here about this attached petition -- worksheet, I call it a
worksheet because that's what it is -- to the ballot. This is the ballot,
which you read which says four, six.
But what no one is talking about, that was attached to the things
so that you inform the citizens what's going on. But there was
another one, No. 2, which was passed out, which the No. 2 on here
says -- it informs the people of the C-4, what it's about, you know, the
heights, this and that, what it can do, and VR, what it can do, what it
can do, what it can do, bah, bah, bah. And down here it says, "Vote
no on PUD." Pound the PUD. So anyways -- and it has a map on it,
too, because you only have a one mile by one mile community, which
you know and I -- as I'm moving along here -- and, of course, you
know the ballot, which you saw what it says, you know. Anyways, it
says -- really says four and six. This is what we've been talking about
all the way down the road.
So that's why I'm going to request to vote the PUD down, even
though I personally voted for the PUD because I voted on good faith
that we would continue to work on this to get to a point so our
community could stay somewhat similar to what it is today and
realize there is growth, and they have property rights. The property
rights just spread these people out. They have all the property rights
Page 98
June 12, 2001
as far as the number of people can go on, but I don't have to get into
that.
But I'd like to get to another point. Another fact that really
disturbs me is I've been to all these meetings which people here
know. And every single one of these meetings pertaining to this, the
opposition I guess we'll call it -- I don't want to call names -- they've
been presenting this all the time, which is four, six, and eight. Okay?
I showed up -- so we're all going under the idea that this is what they
want, but we all know what we want, okay, which is understandable.
So I'm going on the idea that that's what's going on. So I showed up
at the planning commissioner's thing, which I guess is a process of
how this stuff works to how you get to this point. And guess what?
These gentlemen, how do you say his name? Y-o-u-v --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Yovanovich.
MR. GRAHAM: Yeah. That guy there. And the planning
fellow, here, right, show up. And guess what? They got this. They
deleted the four units. They deleted the four units in the planning
commissioners.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: But the four is still in the PUD.
It's still there.
MR. GRAHAM: And the next thing is -- they eliminated that,
and now they come here, and they say that this is what they voted on
to come up to here. The eight and the six, but we've been talking
about the four and six. It got twisted. And then yesterday we went
and picked up that information on PUD that's been presented, and
guess what? It doesn't have four in there anymore; it has -- yeah.
They reworded it. It has six and eight.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: No.
MR. GRAHAM: It doesn't have four, and, you know, two and
four or two, four, and six, whatever was in there. They changed it,
and they deleted the four units. I mean, this is the way I perceive
Page 99
June 12, 2001
this. So I -- the only thing I'm trying to say here is -- I don't know,
we're been snookered, you know.
So because of that reason, No. 1, eight units, all the other stuff
I've heard today I've been hearing over and over and over again. It's
all part of the negotiation. It's all by the board. It's all in the past.
We're right now in the present, and the present is number eight. We
do not want eight units with that size footprint. So if that's what they
insist to have, I personally -- and I represent a lot of people -- don't
vote for the PUD. Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
MR. OLLIFF: Next speaker is Matt Finn followed by Howard
Isaacson.
MR. FINN: Hi. My name is Matt Finn, Huckleberry Fisheries.
I live and work out of Goodland. I'm out of there. I do commercial
fishing and some scientific research and other projects. I've never
been to any of those Goodland Civic Association meetings, but sort --
of the Goodland Civic Association sort of took hero status to me
when the Dolphin Cove project came crumbling down, because that
was right near my house. I'm was going to lose my view of the river
and everything else.
And then the other day I was out there working on my boat, and
Connie came by and said that they've made these changes to the PUD
thing, which I didn't vote either. Probably missed that one, too, but
they made these changes to the PUD. They're all upset about that,
would you please come say how I felt. And I felt -- when I read in
the newspaper when it came out about the Goodland Gateway, I said,
"Oh, my gosh, how did they let us down?" And then I thought the
land has to be developed. Maybe this is their way of compromising.
So they were doing a good-faith thing. Let's help these people do
something to work with their land and still try to preserve the nature
of Goodland.
Page 100
June 12, 2001
When they came by and said, "Well this isn't happening," I said,
"Well, I have to come up there," say I don't like what I see, and I
didn't like what I read in the newspaper, these shops, these huge
buildings, you know, we're threated by these people -- "Well, if you
don't do this, we're going to build a 75-foot tall building and really
ruin your life. So you better do what we want or we're going to whip
you with that one."
So I'd have to say at this point from everyone I heard there's a
problem in the community. Now we're feeling like we're being
hornswaggled or whatever. There's great concern, the feeling of
working togetherness on this has fallen apart, and I think with your
vote today on the PUD that you-all should either table it until we can
get together again and work out these things so we can be good
neighbors or just vote no against it. I'm not sure which way you'd go,
but those would be my two choices. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you, sir. Next speaker, please.
MR. OLLIFF: Next speaker is Howard Isaacson followed by
the last registered speaker, Nicolette Bauer.
MR. ISAACSON: Good morning or good afternoon. I'm
Howard Isaacson, I-s-a-a-c-s-o-n. Between my wife and three-year-
old son, we're property owners on Goodland, and I'd like to thank the
board of commissioners for the opportunity to speak this morning.
Given what I've heard this morning and the debate that's been
going on, as a property owner and the person that represents my
family and the small community of Goodland, I've got to voice my
opinion and say that four or six units would be acceptable. The
flexibility to go to eight with no assurances as to who the developers
will be I find unacceptable. I look at the approval of the PUD
without actually knowing who the developers are with certainty as
basically a license to increase the property value, unfortunately for
the property owner.
Page 101
June 12, 2001
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: To increase what, the value--
MR. ISAACSON: The property value of the current owner.
And I'm certainly not against that, but I would like to know what the
project is going to look like and what it will be. So, anyway, I
support four to six units. If it's not negotiable, then I kindly ask that
the board not approve the request for the rezone.
It's interesting, the planning services staff, I really have to
commend them on their hard work and diligence in developing the
overlay for Goodland, which as an outsider looking in at that point in
time seemed to be a phenomenal -- what I would consider to be a
landmark process -- and how the community, residents, property
owners, the county, and outside owners can actually come together
and develop basically a game plan. What's interesting is that in the
language for the zoning overlay, they talk about -- well, they talk
about providing development standards that maintain, quote, the
small-town fishing village environment of Goodland. And that is
what all the residents, the people who own Goodland, seek for it.
The current overlay -- which was tremendously supported, of course,
by the current property owners and the county planners -- was to,
quote, assure the orderly and appropriate development of Goodland.
It was intended, and I quote, to provide regulation and direction
under which the growth and development of Goodland can occur
with assurances that -- and these are the key words -- tropical fishing
village and small town environment is protected. And that's really
what we're looking to do, protect the environment, protect the
manatees, protect Goodland as it is. Everybody in Collier County
would be hard-pressed to find another community that's similar to it
in Collier and in other places, and it's something that needs to be
protected, not necessarily entombed, but protected and developed and
developed accordingly, and I'm all for that.
So with that said, I encourage the commission and the board to
Page 102
June 12, 2001
support further development on Goodland, but to support
development with reason that the residents and property owners of
Goodland can agree to and that seems to be consistent with what the
thoughts were, at least to the planning group, in drafting up the
overlay. So with that said, I thank you very much and appreciate the
opportunity.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you.
MR. OLLIFF: The last registered speaker is Nicolette Bauer.
MS. BAUER: Hello. My name is Nicolette Bauer, that's B-a-u-
e-r. I'm going to probably save you-all some time because
everybody's covered pretty much what I was going to say. I do live
across the canal from the development where it is zoned residential
right now. I would like it to stay that way. I would actually like to
look at a bigger home than a condo type of unit. They did, I believe,
agree to the four to six units, and now it's up to eight that we're
hearing. It's the same thing that you're going to hear over, so I'll just
save time.
Thank you for letting me speak today.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you, ma'am.
Mr. Yovanovich, you wanted to correct a couple of statements.9
I could see your face.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I do pay attention up here folks,
believe me.
MR. YOVANOVICH: I've got to say from the outset I never
committed to four- or six-unit buildings. I have always said we want
eight-unit buildings. I don't know how clearer I can be. I certainly
know the difference between the word "eight," "six," and "four."
Okay?
We have never committed to four- to six-unit buildings. With
that being said, let's go beyond that and talk about what we did
Page 103
June 12, 2001
commit to do, give them a nice-looking project. Remember, we
didn't want to be here in the first place. It was a change to our zoning
that got us here. If you would have left it alone at three-over-one, we
were happy. There was a change to our zoning that affected our
development standard, and what we purchased, and we asked for a
compromose. So please don't paint my client as the bad person here.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Was this board seated at the
time, or was it the prior board?
MR. YOVANOVICH: Which one?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: This county commission--
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: We were here.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: We were all here.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: This was when we changed at the
end of November.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Right, it was three-over-one. I need to --
I'm on a roll. And I've got to go through my list because I'll be
honest. I've never had my credibility challenged and my honesty
challenged in a public meeting. And I do not take kindly to that and,
frankly, I never -- and I challenge anybody to find where I misstated
a fact as to what we committed to.
Our opinion is we could have done C-4 on that comer piece. I
know the law, and I know what I could do under the code. And we
believe we could have done it. We were asked not to do it. That's
my version of the facts. Mr. Fullmer obviously has his version of the
facts. Whatever it is, we believe we could do it, and we never talked
to Mr. Bellows about whether we could or could not do it. We were
asked not to do it, and we didn't, and the bottom line was Mr. Fullmer
told me he felt that they gave us something by giving us extra
commercial, and they didn't want to give us anything, so we backed
off. Okay?
Page 104
June 12, 2001
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You sound mad, Mr.
Yovanovich.
MR. YOVANOVICH: I'm angry.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'd like to, if I may, bring this back
to one of the first words you said and that was "compromise." I think
that's where we need to go with this. There were a lot of things that
might have improved the property values, for instance, boat lifts. I
have to agree with you. I would think you would have to have boat
lifts if you have a dock. And so I would want to see the Goodlanders
give that up. The same with the wall. To look at all of this mess over
there, I understand why you would want a wall.
Conversely, I can understand why they want four to six because
they want to keep the small character. So maybe you could give up
the eight and they could give up the wall and the boat lifts and--
MR. YOVANOVICH: Let's go back to three-over-one. Let's go
back to three-over-one. The compromise was we had three-over-one,
and that changed.
And I am angry, Mr. Coletta, because there were some things
said that were inappropriate, and I feel like I need to --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: All right. You're going to have
to put that behind you now because --
MR. YOVANOVICH: I will and I'll move on --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: If we keep this up --
MR. YOVANOVICH: I'm going to be done in five minutes.
I'm going to go through the issues that were inaccurate.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And I want to ask some
questions.
MR. YOVANOVICH: You can.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Do you want to ask them now or --.
MR. YOVANOVICH: First of all, Connie's statement that the
footprint was 9600 square feet is flat out inaccurate. That would
Page 105
June 12, 2001
mean that they are not two-story buildings. They are two-story
buildings. So she's wrong about the footprint.
The Worksheet No. 2 that Mr. Graham held up was prepared by
someone who was not a civic association representative. The
worksheet I handed out was prepared by the civic association itself.
This overlay that went into effect was to correct all the illegal
properties on Goodland to make them legal, not to protect people
who had already violated the standards. We have always been
willing to live under the standards. The standards just keep getting
changed. So the compromise is to allow them to change some
standards, which was three-over-one, and maintain our flexibility to
develop the project so that when the compromise that is proposed is
that we give up an eight-unit building, it's not a compromise.
Good faith is, too, defined as we give up everything, and they
get what they want. The compromise -- the reason it's not a
compromise is -- first of all, boat docks and boat lifts are a permitted
use right now. So you haven't given me anything that I'm not legally
entitled to. The wall is a nonissue. We all know that. That's a
throwaway. All the issues are throwaways to try to get us down to
four-over-six (sic). That's the negotiating style that's going on here.
The change is that we could have put a 32-unit building on the
VR piece. The compromise is we committed to at least buildings that
are one-fourth the size of that. That site plan, the top one, you permit
that today, I'll take it. But you can't permit that site plan. You can't
dig into that property and create that waterfront property. That's a
site plan that's a non -- that's a nonsite plan. So please don't be
persuaded into believing that that's even doable. That's not an
alternative.
The old-timers have been here on many occasion supporting
"Leave it alone. Don't change the zoning." I want to know what the
definition of"old-timer" is, because Mr. Isaacson's owned property
Page 106
June 12, 2001
there for two weeks.
Fullmer have been there.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
personalities either, though.
And I don't know how long Connie and Ed
You're not going to get into
MR. YOVANOVICH: No. But just a little bit. But by their
definition of old-timer, I'm an old-timer in Naples. I've been here in
Naples since 1990. Am I an old-timer? I don't think so. Connie and
Ed are not old-timers. They came in, and they're the ones changing
the existing rules. And that's the civic association leadership, and
they were speaking on behalf of that.
We are asked for the compromise. The compromise is our
flexibility. The fact that I'm not developing the project today should
not be held against us. You read the PUD. You tell me whether or
not I protected them. Did I protect them on architectural standards?
Yes. Did I protect them on maximum unit size? Yes. The building
can't be greater than eight units.
If their concern is -- another point, that PUD never said there
would be four -, six -, and eight-unit buildings. It always said, "not to
exceed eight units." If they can find a draft that said there was a
reference to four-unit buildings, I'll eat the paper. It doesn't exist. If
you want a commitment that there will be a combination of four-, six-
, and eight-unit buildings, we'll revise the PUD to commit to a
combination of four-, six-, and eight-unit buildings. Is that what you
want? That's what we'll give them. But we have to have the eight-
unit buildings. I have been adamant to that from the beginning.
It is much smaller in scale than what we can currently do on the
project. Ask yourself the question, is this PUD better than what I can
do or my client can do on the property today under the existing
regulations, and you've got to answer that question, yes, it is better.
And I don't understand the big issue from the community.
We have given and given and given. We have been called
Page 107
June 12,2001
names and we have been vilified, and that is inappropriate. It is not
honest, and we have compromised. Now that I've gotten off the
soapbox, please, Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Do you feel better now?
MR. YOVANOVICH: I do; I vented. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: How many units of eight do
you want to put on there as opposed to sixes?
MR. YOVANOVICH: We have not -- we don't have a specific
site plan. I can't.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Could we get something that
could be specific to find out what direction would be? I think they're
looking for some direction that that you're planning to go. In other
words, maybe if you told us what you're looking to do. How many
units all together are you looking at?
MR. YOVANOVICH: Forty-seven.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Forty-seven.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Into the blocks of sixes or
eights?
MR. YOVANOVICH: Commissioner Coletta, I'm being as
honest with you as I've been with the people. I don't know.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You don't know.
MR. YOVANOVICH: I don't know.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay.
MR. YOVANOVICH: I really don't know. I'll commit to fours,
sixes, and eights so at least you know you're going to have three
different building types.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: May I comment, Commissioner,
just on that subject?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Please.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I won't interrupt your line of
questions, but, you know, there are two things that trouble me here.
Page 108
June 12, 2001
One is that sometimes we get away from that this is zoning, and the
site plan will be coming later, and, you know, we don't have
regulations like the City of Naples where they have to submit their
site plan to the county commission for approval. If we want to
change our regulations to require that, then we need to do it. But
zoning is just a very broad general description of what's allowed, and
that's what you sell. That's what they have to sell, and that's why they
don't want to be very specific. If we want to make them give us a site
plan, we could do that, but not under the regs we have today.
But more importantly the issue I want to comment on is -- I'm
trying to think how to say this appropriately, but I have appreciated
Mr. Yovanovich's client, and you guys know that I went to the mat
for Goodland and went to the mat and love Goodland and want to
protect Goodland. I think it's a gem. It's the unique -- it's the last bit
of Florida we've got left, but if we don't play nice with these guys,
they aren't ever going to offer us the compromise like they did again.
I'm afraid that the development community in this county -- and don't
you be going in trying to compromise because compromise means
give the community everything that they want, not half of what they
want because they've already got C-4, no hotel, no marina, no gates,
they've got larger units, they've got height changes. They gave up a
lot. We have to acknowledge that. They really did have rights they
have waived, and if we don't -- I'm still hopeful that we can come to
some mix of units that's appropriate and everybody can be reasonable
or equally unhappy. But this county commission's got to be careful
sending a message to developers not to try to compromise.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Commissioner Coletta needs to finish
and then you, Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I think Pam picked it up quite
well. I'd be interested to hear from our attorney as to any directions
Page 109
June 12, 2001
he might have for us.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. And before that, let me --
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I just wanted to say I think I
understand what you're saying about the message, Pam.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Uh-huh.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I also understand that this tiny little
unique community I feel shouldn't -- we shouldn't worry about selling
the sale rights -- the sale -- purchase price of the property -- that's
what I'm trying to say -- as much as preserving the character of that
one-mile by one-mile community. We'll never have it again. And if
we give that away, we can never get it back.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Dave Weigel, do you have any
comments? I am not taking any more comments from the Goodland
Association so you might as well sit down and rest, folks.
MR. YOVANOVICH: I'm the petitioner and I'm allowed.
Commissioner Fiala, what I need to -- in response to that
comment, if you look at what you approved in your recent overlay,
you didn't accomplish any of the things you just said. The oversay
simply changed some setbacks so that people who had already had
some illegal lots are now legal. There's been no architectural
standards set forth in the overlay. I doubt that anybody on that island
is going to sit there and freeze in time the development they have on
their property. Tell everybody to keep their -- when the mobile home
blows away, replace it with a mobile home. They're not going to do
that.
There's going to be change out there. We have assured the
character. We were told to do Olde Florida. We've assured that in
the PUD. There's no change that you made that addresses any of the
issues on building size. We've done that voluntarily in the spirit of
compromise. We have -- we have worked and worked and worked to
Page 110
June 12, 2001
try to come up with what will work. We are at the point where, you
know, it's eight versus six. I hope that -- if you tip the balance of the
scale that you'll see that all the things that we did do, tipping the
balance of saying provide the flexibility of doing eight-unit buildings.
I've already told you if the concern was four, six, and eights, four,
six, and eights are in.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Could I -- because I don't know
anything at all about planning or, you know, real estate, land use, or
anything like that, why is eight so important versus four and six?
MR. YOVANOVICH: Wayne?
MR. ARNOLD: If I might, Commissioner Fiala, Wayne Arnold
again.
I think what we've attempted to -- as Mr. Yovanovich has said
on a number of occasions, we've looked at a maximum building
footprint size of eight units. Eight-unit buildings are very typical.
There's a certain economy of scale. One of things you look at, you
don't come in and typically do a project with a single unit type, single
building type, single unit size.
So what we've said is, our minimum building size will be 1200
square feet. There may be some 1500 square foot units. When you
have an eight-unit building, you end up with two interior units in a
two-story configuration. You end up with four interior, four exterior
units. The interior units command a different price point than a
comer unit would, as in any typical condominium project does. The
comer units have the value. You offer an entry price range. You
offer the high-end price point. That way you try to hit the different
scales so that you're not identifying one purchaser.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Wayne, again, I'm just on a fact-
finding mission here because I'm only six months old. So in other
words, these eight-unit facilities that could be 2200 square feet for
each unit, right, or larger, so in other words, for an eight-unit place
Page 111
June 12, 2001
we don't have? So in other words, for an eight-unit place -- we don't
have a maximum for square feet inside of one of these things -- this
thing could be a monster; right? Even though it's not tall, it could be
very long; right?
MR. ARNOLD: I think -- under the current regulation, I think
you're right. There is not a restriction on the maximum unit size.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah. I think I remember that, but
then --
MR. ARNOLD: I'm not sure that I've seen too many residential
PUDs that have maximum unit sizes in them. We're always
concerned with minimu. Keep in mind your overlay just adopted VR
and RSF-4 standards that have no minimum unit size requirements in
them.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Uh-huh. I needed to know that.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All right. Close of public hearings.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I'm going to make a motion to
approve the PUD as it's submitted--
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Whoa, whoa. Before you do that, I
want Mr. Weigel to comment or Commissioner Coletta again.
MR. WEIGEL: Thank you. Mr. Chairman, you asked me to
make a comment in response, particularly to Commissioner
Mac'Kie's statements. And her statements in regard to board
approach and policy concerning working with the development
community and the affected community and also in regard to matters
of law, and being asked a broad question, I will respond broadly that
she was absolutely correct in all of her response, both in regard to the
matter of approach that you need to consider when these issues come
before you as well as the fact that she stated there are certainly
property rights that are in place, and PUD is a type zoning. It is not
the end-all, be-all of site development. So she was absolutely correct
in all of those statements.
Page 112
June 12, 2001
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. Commissioner Mac'Kie, you
wanted to make a motion?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Yeah. I'm going to to make a
motion to approve the PUD as it's submitted. I think it's a
compromise.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And I'll second that.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: And I have a second by Commissioner
Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: But I need to put what I think is
comfortable language in it. But I also must state that I'm afraid that if
this PUD doesn't come forward, then we're back to where we were
before where we're three-over-one, and it's not conducive to what we
want in Goodland and, I think, what the people want. And I wish that
we could go back to 1973 when I moved down here, but, damn it, we
have these property rights, and we must go forward with it. But I
would like to see the mixed use of the four, six, and eight.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I would incorporate that into my
motion.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And not to exceed 47 units, and
the commercial to wrap around the comer there like the residents are
in agreement with, and only one boat dock per unit --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I don't think -- I think
everybody's given up on the commercial going around the comer.
unit,
COMMISSIONER
COMMISSIONER
COMMISSIONER
COMMISSIONER
I like that.
HENNING:
COLETTA:
HENNING:
MAC'KIE:
COMMISSIONER HENN1NG:
landscaping on the comer--
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
Right. Okay.
Yeah.
I was mistaken on that.
One boat dock per residential
Per residential unit, and
Yes.
Page 113
June 12,2001
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- to fit the character of the
village, the island. You know, we're talking palm trees and sea
grapes and things of that nature.
MR. BELLOWS: Yeah. I think we can work out some
language with our landscape architect.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I like your ideas, Commissioners
Mac'Kie and Henning. I want to ask the petitioner just one other
question. Would you be willing to restrict eights to 50 percent,
otherwise three eights in that mix, everything else being fours and
sixes? You cannot exceed three units --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Three buildings.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Three buildings that would have eight
buildings (sic), otherwise you could do four, eights, and sixes, but
roughly 50 percent could not exceed eights.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Could you give me one second?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Sure.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Commissioners, so what you're basically
saying is no more than three eight-unit buildings? CHAIRMAN CARTER: Yes.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Anywhere on the property?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: No restricting where you put it. I'm
just saying--
MR. YOVANOVICH: We can agree to no more than three
eight-unit buildings.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Great. Then I'll incorporate that
in my motion.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And I'll second that.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: And that's a second to that. Any other
discussion by the board?
All in favor signify by saying aye.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Aye.
Page 114
June 12, 2001
B?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Opposed by the same sign.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Motion carries 4-1.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Thank you, Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: How long is it going to take to do 8-
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Twenty-one registered speakers.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. Could everybody leave
quitely? I want to do, if we can, the next one in front of the
commission before we break for lunch. That is 8-B. All the people
involved in this need to stand and be sworn.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Mr. Chairman, could I just
comment? I'm afraid we told people -- I know I said and I think Mr.
Olliff did -- that if you were going to be doing -- if you're here for
any item other than 7-A or 8-A to go ahead and go to lunch.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Oh, did we say that? Was that clear?
MR. OLLIFF: (Nodded head.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Then I stand --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I'm not sure.
MR. OLLIFF: We did.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Check with the county man.
MR. OLLIFF: We did. The schedule was going to be to try to
cover 8-A and 8-D, as in "dog."
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Oh, "D" as in "dog." Well, we're
never going to cover "D" as in "dog" before we eat, I don't think.
Well, how many speakers do you have? MR. OLLIFF: Twenty-two.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: They're still here?
Page 115
June 12, 2001
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: They are here. They waited.
Item #8D
ORDINANCE 2001-31, AMENDING SECTION 126-83 OF THE
COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES,
ALSO CITED AS ORDINANCE NO. 92-60, AS AMENDED,
RELATING TO THE LEVY OF A 2% TOURIST DEVELOPMENT
AX AND AN ADDITIONAL 1% TAX THROUGHOUT COLLIER
COUNTY- ADOPTED WITH CHANGES
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All right. Then we'll roll. Let's go to
8-D as in "dog."
MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Chairman, I think you have enough
background that we can probably go straight to public speakers. I
think you're familiar enough with the ordinance, amendments -- CHAIRMAN CARTER: I have no questions. I would be
prepared to go to public speakers.
MR. MIHALIC: A couple of things for the record,
Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Or do I have to dispose --
COURT REPORTER: Your name, sir?
MR. MIHALIC: Excuse me, I'm Greg Mihalic, Department of
Housing and Urban Improvement.
This particular ordinance takes four votes to amend any section
of it. We really have three issues: One issue whether to consolidate
all the Category A funding under the same definition of uses, and
that's a request by staff and the clerk's office.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And I'll just go ahead and say,
so the speakers can know positions if they want to before they come
up, I am very strongly opposed to what came out of the TDC and
Page 116
June 12, 2001
very supportive of what came from staff. Frankly, to be blunt, I
would put more money in a museum and less in advertising, so there
you go.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And if I could just say that my
number one majority (sic) is to put sand on the beach --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Of course.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- and support tourism here in
Collier County because I think that's what's going to bring the dollars
in for the museum.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, I agree with you, Commissioner
Henning, and I will tell you why it came -- it didn't pass the TDC
because staff was unprepared to answer the questions that night. I
have said it privately. I will say it publicly, you don't go to a TDC or
any other advisory group thinking because the Board of County
Commissioners gave direction that you waltz in there and blow them
off. And that's exactly what happened that night. And if you think
I'm still angry about it, you read my lips. You got it. I never want to
see that happen again as long as I'm a county commissioner. So that's
why you have three options here today.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Oh.
MR. MIHALIC: And, Commissioners, the second issue is
whether to change the 2 percent funding from 70 beach, 30 percent
other to 50-50. And the third option, of course, is how you will
distribute that 50-50 money. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And, basically, the first two
options, there's no debate. It's in the third option--
MR. MIHALIC: You just have three decisions to make, that's
all.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And we can make them all in
one motion, I assume, Mr. Weigel?
MR. WEIGEL: Yes, you may.
Page 117
June 12, 2001
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: This one ordinance --
MR. WEIGEL: One item.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: If the chairman agrees, it sounds
like there is only one issue for debate and that is, how do we split the
money. Is anybody questioning either of the first two items.'?
COMMISSIONER HENNING:
supermajority vote here.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
COMMISSIONER HENNING:
might become a separate vote --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
What I heard is, is we need a
Right.
So we might not get it, and it
Oh, that's a good idea.
MR. MIHALIC: That may be required.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: But we could try it.
MR. MIHALIC: You need four votes on any change, obviously.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: But at this point the only
controversial issue is the third one.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Correct.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Okay.
MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Chairman, the first speaker is Nancy Olson
followed by Hildegard Nickel.
MS. OLSON: For the record, my name is Nancy Olson, O-l-s-
o-n. My background is antropology and archeology, and I'm
currently employed by Rookery Bay. One of my jobs is to assess
nonrenewable cultural resources within the Ten Thousand Islands.
I'm here to tell you a little bit about the archeology and historical
significance of Collier County, Florida. A lot of people move here
for the beaches, for the golf course, for the hotels, and the resorts.
They think there's no history here.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Right.
MS. OLSON: In the spring of 1895, the father of Marco Island,
while digging muck in his front yard, made one of the most
Page 118
June 12, 2001
significant archeological discoveries in North America. He
discovered a culture known as the Calusa.
At the same time Mr. Collier -- Captain Collier was doing this, a
British colonel was in Naples. There used to be an ancient canal that
cut through the City of Naples. And he was collecting artifacts. The
colonel heard about Collier's find, got in a boat, went to Marco, and
dug up some more artifacts.
On his way back to England, he went to the University of
Pennsylvania to see see Mercer, the head of the anthropology
department. Mercer wasn't there, but a very charismatic
ethnographer named Frank Hamilton Cushing was, saw the artifacts,
got very excited, and launched, with the help of William Randolph
Hearst what has become known known as the Pepper-Hearst
Expedition to Marco.
The site on Marco that is known today as the "Court of the Pile
Dwellers" is the most significant archeological discovery in the
Southeastern United States. The sheer quanity and quality of the
artifacts uncovered there have never been equaled in North American
archaeology. Over a thousand artifacts were discovered, wooden
masks of a people that no longer exist who have lived in Southwest
Florida, or did, for 5,000 years.
We have an incredible county museum system. I've been a
museum educator for 25 years. I have visited museums all over the
the country. The Collier County Museum is one of the finest county
local history museums I have seen. You have a branch facility in
Immokalee, which is going to be a ranching facility, a facility on
Marco Island that could highlight the archeological significance of
Collier County, talk to the people about where it was born, where our
history started. If you even look at Visit Florida or Florida USA and
you look at statistics, there is a cultural tourism, ecotourism
component.
Page 119
June 12, 2001
People visit an area because they have museums and they have
art galleries. And all you have to to is look at the figures. They
spend more money. That money stays in your community longer. It
is spent out of your community later. They stay longer. They spend
money, $200 more. You just have to type it up on the computer.
I urge you to support the Collier County Museum. They do
wonderful work there for tourists and for the locals. I encourage you
to think about opening a branch facility on Marco Island to highlight
the Caloosa culture. I think it would pay for itself. Thank you very
much.
MR. OLLIFF: The next speaker, Hildegard Nickel, has
requested that William Tyson speak before she does, so William
Tyson.
MR. TYSON: Thank you, Commissioners.
My name is Bill Tyson. I'm the immediate past-president of the
Marco Island Historical Socity and a member of the Collier County
Archeological and Historical and Preservation Board.
I would urge you to fully fund the museums as formulated by
your staff as we, the Marco Island Historical Society, submit an
application to the TDC in March for $350,000. $250,000 of our
request was earmarked to purchase property as a future museum site.
As you can imagine, property on Marco Island is becoming more
expensive and scarce as each week goes by. We were shut out
completely by the TDC, and I do not believe our application will be
forwarded to you for your consideration. Fortunately, I met with
each of you and have discussed our situation. When the TDC
recommendations are presented to you, it's your choice to give the
botanical garden the $250,000 for property acquisition that we ask
for, and if you do that, I have a viable alternative and that is to
designate Tract D on Marco Island, which is adjacent but across the
little street, Mistletoe Court, from the present Collier County Library
Page 120
June 12, 2001
and designate that as a future Collier County museum site.
We, as we've stated before, are most happy to join forces with
the museum system, be part of it, and support it to the utmost. And I
want you to keep in mind as far as Tract D is concerned that was
donated by the Deltona Corporation to Collier County in the mid-'70s
for use as an educational site.
Few people are aware of the archeological significance and
uniqueness of Marco Island. If you were able to review, peruse the
red packet that I dropped off for you on Friday morning, you'll see
that this is just not a bunch of local people who think this is so. We
have some noted reputable academicians who substantiate our
thinking on this issue, and they seem to feel that Marco Island is the
ideal setting for an archeological setting to iljustrate the history of the
south coast of Southwest Florida. And, again, I would venture to say
that we would spearhead a capital fund drive to put a building on that
site.
When you go to solicit funds from somebody, you can't say,
"Well, we'd like you to donate funds because we want to have a
museum someday." whereas, if we can go and say there's a site so
designated, then the dollars are more apt to come our way. And
whatever you would give us at this time reverts back to the Collier
County system anyway, so it won't cost you anything to do it that
way.
And just as a gentle reminder before I close, that 30 percent of
all of TDC taxes that are accumulated come from Marco Island. And
if the current prediction is true of $9,660,000, that would amount to
approximately $2.7 million contributed by Marco Island hostelries.
Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you, sir. We have a question
from Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No. It's not a question, just a
Page 121
June 12, 2001
comment. I just wanted to say that I thank you for your fine
presentation. And I've been working closely with Leo Ochs, and Leo
has been working with the libraries and museums to see if we can't
somehow get that land to become a part of the museum system and
dedicated strictly to the Marco Island Historical Society, which
would then become a part of the Collier County museum system.
We're working very closely. We might not be able to give you all of
the TDC dollars, but I think the land would at least get you on your
way to fund rasing for a building, and I think that would be even
more important.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: If I may, I've been taking a
great interest in museums. I'm not too sure why, but I think I got
sucked into it. But, in any case, excuse the language, the Marco
Island museum, I can see that as a great vision for the future. I think
we should take a look at it -- just as recommendations so that we can
go from there backwards.
The botanical garden, their original request was $750,000. They
rounded it off with the percentages, so it came up to $772,800, that
we break off $2,800; is that right? Am I doing that right?
MR. MIHALIC: Yes. In the staff proposal, the amount that can
go to any noncounty-owned museum would be $772,000.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, what I was thinking was
is coming up with enough money from this fund here to be able to
use for a feasibility study and to be able to offset the cost for staff to
be able to get this thing moving with a little more direction, a little
more push.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Feasibility study for the land for
Marco, you mean?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. You're going to have to
inventory. You're going to have to get a value on it. You're going to
Page 122
June 12, 2001
have to move forward. There's going to be staff time. There's going
to be quite a bit of time spent laying out the particulars about this
because we're going to be looking for a fund drive. There's going to
be some funds that are going to be needed to get this going, and right
now we're talking about just the grounds, which is great. But, I
mean, you're going to have to make that happen. And to make that
happen you're going to have some in the way of capital to move it
forward.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: The only concern I would have
is I wasn't going to talke about this publicly today, but I wonder if
there might also be some City of Naples museums that should be
incorporated in under the system. And the way I've been
approaching that -- I mean the Depot and Palm Cottage and some of
those things, I've been just encouraging those people to talk to each
other, and I'm not sure they really need us yet to do this whole
feasibility study or if it might get too complicated because there's
more to it --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: They might like their autonomy --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: They might.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- and not want to be a part of the
Collier County museum system. Excuse me, go ahead, Jim.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And at this point we have the
Marco people in front of us asking us for assistance. We've already
identified land that we can assist them with, and we'll only be able to
do one at a time. And I'm sure once we get this under way, we can
go back and look at Naples. I don't want to ignore Naples' needs
because they are real.
MR. OLLIFF: If the board is inclined to give some straw idea
where they are on this idea, there are over ten registered speakers
from the Marco Island Historical Society, and that might at least help
them -- I will tell you that the property that Mr. Tyson referred to is
Page 123
June 12, 2001
actually a county-owned piece of property. It is directly across the
street from the county-owned library, so there's not a lot of appraisal
or work that needs to be done should we decide to move that property
from library inventory to museum inventory. It's from one county
pocket to another county pocket. So there's not a lot of actual
assessment work or things that need to be done, but if it's the board's
desire for the county staff along with Mr. Ochs and Mr. Jamro to
work with Marco Island Historical Society and bring something back
as a regular board item that at least to discuss what are the potentials
for agreements and in future relationships, I think that might be
something that we can do.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I think that's a great idea.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I think that's a great idea, and that
would assure the Marco Island Museum people that we're moving in
a positive direction.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, should we break off a
certain amount of cash now to make sure we can cover it --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I don't think they need cash.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I don't think they need it,
Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So you need a motion on that to
give you direction?
MR. OLLIFF: No. I think as long as the historical society
people see that many heads moving up and down, they probably take
that as some positive direction.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: If I get three nods on that one, can we
move forward?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Yes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: (Nodded.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All right. Good. Thank you. I hope
Page 124
June 12, 2001
that will help the Marco Island Historical Society with that issue
unless you want to talk us out of that. Next speaker, please.
MR. OLLIFF: Next speak is Hildegard Nickel followed by
Helmut Nickel, and, please, anybody from the Marco Island
Historical Society that would choose to waive, please feel free.
MRS. NICKEL: Good afternoon, Commissioners. My name is
Hildegard Nickel, N-i-c-k-e-1. I'm a resident of Marco Island, and I
would like to refer to a recommendation that was made during the
workshop in May to allocate 18 percent of TDS funds to the Collier
County Museum. Also a proposal was made to create a separate fund
of the TDC money to support other museums not owned by the
county. I urge you, ladies and gentlemen, to adhere to these
recommendation.
Every government has the obligation to further and patronize
cultural institutions. Please take this obligation seriously when
deciding about the distribution of the TDC funds. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you.
MR. OLLIFF: Thank you. The next speaker is Helmut Nickel
followed by Kathleen Prutos.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: As we move through, I did make some
statements about staff not being prepared. Mr. Mihalic, that had no
reference to you at all. It was not your division, although you chaired
the meeting. It was public service division where I feel the director
was publicly embarrassed. You never let the boss be surprised.
MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Chairman, your point's well made. We've
already made note of that.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, I just wanted to make sure Mr.
Mihalic didn't think --
MR. OLLIFF: I heard it loud and clear.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay.
MR. NICKEL: My name is Helmut Nickel. H-e-l-m-u-t, N-i-c-
Page 125
June 12, 2001
k-e-1.
I am an art historian. I have been with the Metropolitan
Museum in New York for 30 years. For 12 years we were living on
Marco Island. Hildegard is my wife, and I, of course, fully agree
with her. We both are more or less responsible for that branch
museum on Marco Island, and we would be happy if we could join
the system of Collier County as a branch and would be overjoyed if
we could set up a museum right next to the library which would be a
unique opportunity to create a cultural center. And as the Historical
Society, we are for history, and we are also for art.
It has been said before here that art is a very important part of
life, but history and heritage are too. And as Ms. Olson has told you,
Marco Island is a very important archeological historical site.
Personally, I can say I heard about the Marco cat in American
Archeology 101 in the free university in Berlin in 1950. Marco is
internationally famous as an archeological and historical site, and,
therefore, a museum in connection with the Collier County Museum
would be of greatest importance. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you, sir. Next speaker, please.
Next speaker is Kathleen Prutos followed by
MR. OLLIFF:
Matthew Grabinski.
MS. PRUTOS:
Good afternoon, Commissioners. My name is
Kathleen Prutos, P-r-u-t-o-s, and I'm the president of the Tourism
Alliance of Collier County and proud to be it. I certainly want to
thank you and the county staff for giving the Tourism Alliance the
opportunity to talk about our favority subject, tourism.
Tourism as you well know is big business here in Collier
County. Tourism, in fact, is the largest business here in Collier
County. It fuels our economy. Last year we hosted more than 1.4
million visitors and collected more than $8.7 million in bed tax. This
data is based on the economic models developed by Dr. Walter
Page 126
June 12, 2001
Klages of Research Data Services, a Fulbright scholar, who not only
conducts these estimates for Collier County, but also for many other
tourism-related counties throughout Florida.
Last year direct expenditures from tourism in Collier County
were $578 million. These expenditures, in turn, have a multiplier
effect on other nonrelated-tourism businesses throughout our county,
which adds another $240 million in indirect benefit. Overall then,
tourism has more than a billion dollar industry in Collier County.
The Bureau of Labor Statistic -- in the year 2000, more than 25,000
Collier County residents are directly employed by the tourism
industry. That's not counting the people who are affected by tourism;
those are people who are directly employed, 25,000 people.
This year the Tourism Alliance operating budget comes from
$750,000 directly from the bed-tax revenues, which represents about
8.6 percent of the nearly $8.7 million bed-tax collection. This is the
lowest budget for any major tourist destination here in Florida.
Commissioners, I do need to point out that while the Tourism
Alliance is very grateful for your ongoing financial support, our
budget to promote Collier County tourism is consideraly less than
that of our neighbors.
In addition to all the other major Florida competitors, Collier
must also compete with all the Caribbean destinations for the United
States, the European, and South American travelers. Foreign
investors are beginning to develop tourism facilities in Cuba, and
most experts predict that it will soon lure a significant number of
vacation travelers away from Florida destinations. Every year
marketing communications spending goes up. Not only are there
there more destinations promoting themselves, but those that have
been marketing their destinations far longer than Collier County are
spending more money.
At the time media and production costs continue to increase at a
Page 127
June 12, 2001
predictable 5 to 8 percent per year, despite this onslaught of
competitive spending and rising costs, it is the responsibility of the
Tourism Alliance that we secure as large a share of future growth as
possible. In order to achieve a greater share, we must not only design
innovative programs that reach more travelers, but we must convey a
message that positions Collier County as both unique and superior to
the ulterior (sic) destinations in Florida and everywhere.
Each day more and more consumers and travel professionals are
looking for places to visit. Our goal is to level out Collier's visitor
seasonality so that our hotels, our restaurants, our shopping areas, and
many of the other business and their employees enjoy year-round
activity and prosperity. At the same time, year-round marketing
through our web site and year-round public relation efforts will
continue to tell the story.
Collier County has more than two thousand square miles in total
surface area. It is the second largest county in the state of Florida in
total surface area, and it is the eighth largest county east of the
Mississippi River. In short, we're pretty big. We have a big story to
tell. We need to differentiate ourselves, and how do we do that?
Lifestyle opportunity represents a significant area of differentiation
for Collier County and its tourism. One of the factors that make
diversity such an important theme for Collier County tourism is the
lifestyle diversity it offers. Lifestyles tend to attract people with
similar lifestyles, both in terms of residents and tourists.
There's an opportunity for both visitors and residents who are
ecobased. In fact, ecotourism is the fastest growing segment of the
tourism industry growing at 25 percent annually. The United Nations
has, in fact, declared 2002 as the International Year of Ecotourism.
Other travel segments that are increasing are cultural tourism,
historical tourism, as well as our ecotourism. For the lovers of
culture, they will find we are a pretty civilized place here with music
Page 128
June 12, 2001
and literature and the arts that are abundant and easy to access.
There's an opportunity here in Collier County to position ourselves in
the year of ecotourists, but without the proper funding levels, we will
not be able to compete with other markets.
Therefore, in good conscious, I am asking -- or I should say the
the Tourism Alliance is asking this commission to consider the
Tourist Development Council's recommendation to realign the
allocation of funding from the bed tax to 50 percent for the beaches
and share -- share 25 percent with the Tourism Alliance and 25
percent with the museums.
Commissioners, the Tourism Alliance is committed to keeping
Collier County ahead of the competition --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: We need to have you wrap up, please.
MS. PRUTOS: -- and all of us would like to thank you for the
quality of life and your continued support. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Next speaker, please.
MR. OLLIFF: Next speaker is Matthew Grabinski followed by
Herb Savage.
MR. GRABINSKI: Good afternoon, Commissioners. My name
is Matthew Grabinski here on behalf of the Ritz-Carlton, Naples.
We're here to voice for the Tourist Development Council's
recommendation that the allocation be split 50-25-25, and I'll try to
be brief and just make three points with respect to the reason for
supporting this allocation.
First of all, the staff recommended allocation, basically a 50-19
and then 31 percent going toward the museums. This is in direct
conflict with the current intect of this ordinance. I'd like to direct
your attention to page 2 of the ordinance, the first paragraph where it
states, "That the categories of use of the 2 and 1 percent tax revenues
are listed in order of priority."
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: We're amending the ordinance,
Page 129
June 12, 2001
though, Matt. I mean, that's what's in front of us today.
MR. GRABINSKI: Right. If you're suggesting, Commissioner
Mac'Kie, that when it comes to allocating funds the purpose of which
-- the county was given the authority under state statute to raise these
funds to tax people in order to spend them on projects and activities
that would promote tourism and bring them to Collier County.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Uh -huh.
MR. GRABINSKI: If you're suggesting that building these
museums will have more of a direct effect on getting Mr. Smith from
Ohio to come down here than direct marketing and advertising, then I
respect your opinion. But I think I agree with the current structure of
the ordinance, that after our beaches, which are our most valuable
natural resource, that the next thing we need to do is market that, and
let people know that we're here, and you do that by direct marketing
and advertising.
The current -- the language that we're proposing to change -- if
you notice, it used to say 70 percent in Category B, 30 percent
reduced by what was spent on the museums. Okay? When you get
to Category C, they cap the amount that could be spent on museums
at 15 percent. In other words, the way the ordinance was originally
structured they weren't going to allow a lower-priority category to
receive more money than a higher-priority category.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: They used to think --
MR. GRABINSKI: It just doesn't make sense.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Well, they used to think-- the
prior board -- and we'll see if today's board agrees, but the board who
adopted that ordinance prioritized them that way, and we'll see if this
board continues to prioritize them that way. That's the question --
MR. GRABINSKI: And that's your decision to make.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Right.
MR. GRABINSKI: I just wanted to point that out. The second
Page 130
June 12, 2001
point that I would like to make -- and it will be touched upon again --
is that as Commissioner Henning and Commission Carter both
recognized, we need to continue to feed the fire and to feed the pot,
and you do that by direct marketing and advertising. You know, the
bed tax raised almost 9 million last year. A million of that came from
the Ritz-Carlton alone. And so we ask that you kindly give deference
to our recommendations as to how this money should be raised and
what projects it should go to.
By lowering the allocation from 31 percent back to 25 percent
for the museums, if you spend more money on marketing and
advertising, you're going to increase the pie, you're going to increase
the amount of bed tax that is generating, so they're getting a smaller
percentage of a greater piece of pie, so to speak.
And the third point ! would like to make addresses and issues of
concern and frustration that I've seen the county commissioners
express time and time again. Even this morning you were
commenting, Chairman Carter, on issues that were coming before
you that you felt could be handled at the staff level. And time and
time again, we hear our county commissioners saying that they would
rather govern on a more broader-based policy platform. You have a
decision here today that can be based on policy and that can have an
affect, not only on the current issue, but on the actions of your staff
and the citizens of this county depending on the issue that you make.
I have in front of me a--
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
your light--
You need to wrap up because I can see
MR. GRABINSKI: I'm wrapping up. I have in front of me a
copy of the Collier County Governmental Tourist Development
Council grant application that was submitted on March 1 st by the
Collier County museums. Item No. 18 asks the applicant to list the
other sources and amounts of confirmed matching funds. Museums
Page 131
June 12, 2001
are important, but they have other sources of funding available to
them; federal grants, state grants, private sources. The amount listed
here, none. Now I ask you, when it comes to make a policy decision
and it's a decision that will not only effect this issue, but that will
send a proper message to your staff and to the rest of Collier County.
When someone comes to you and asks you to allocate funds for
projects, don't you want to encourage them to first go and and seek
out federal funds, state funds, private funds, before they come to you
for these funds, which could be spend on other things? Yet why
would they if all they have to do is walk in here and hold out their
hand.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I could probably answer that if
you like.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Yeah. I've got an answer, too,
but it's probably better if we don't debate.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Let's not then.
MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Chairman, Mr. Savage has left already, and
the court reporter has requested that we provide five minutes for them
to switch out.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All right.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Will it take a whole five
minutes, or could we sit still while you--
CHAIRMAN CARTER: We're not going to leave the dais.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Okay. Just do the switch.
(After short recess meeting continued as follows at
1:30 p.m.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you, ma'am. We're back.
MR. OLLIFF: The next two registered speakers, Mr. Chairman,
are Claudia Davenport and Patricia Huff.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. We need to have it quiet, folks,
please.
Page 132
June 12, 2001
MS. DAVENPORT: Good morning. Thank you for the
opportunity on a very busy day to say a few words to you. First of
all, my name is Claudia Davenport. I am currently the president of
the Friends of the Museum of the Everglades, but my remarks will go
a little out of my boundaries there.
The original Ordinance 19 that was presented in 1992-60, I think
it was, under the original ordinance the county Department of
Museums was not thought as to be included in the original ordinance.
It was subsequent about a year to 18 months that the Collier County
museum system was grouped in with the tourist development system.
The original museums that were earmarked and other cultural events
excluded it. I want to make that clear.
It's extremely difficult to ask for matching funds when you don't
know how many funds you can match, and there was a comment
made just before me that there was no money requested for matching
funds. It's kind of like wanting a Cadillac, but you don't know if your
uncle's going to die. So that's what I would like to equate that to.
The Museum of the Everglades is a unique situation for the Board
of County Commissioners. It's the second museum in the system.
The building and land was donated by the Everglades Women's Club,
and then the Friends of the Museum got the grant from the State of
Florida to completely restore it. As a part of that grant, we agreed to
provide the docents for the museum for a period of ten years. We
have done that so far to date, fulfilled our obligation, not always with
grace and ease, but we have fulfilled it.
We have, on the other hand, had to ask on several occasions that
the repairs of leaky roofs and things like that be made that were also
taken as part of the original historic preservation grant as a
responsibility of the county. So we really don't -- haven't impacted
the system too much. We have a museum manager, Donna
Ridewood, and most of this year she has been gone. She's had to do
Page 133
June 12,2001
the Civil War exhibit and the majority of her time has been spent on
Roberts Ranch, and we certainly understand that. We have a 32-hour
person who is also a county employee in addition to Donna
Ridewood who is there. So you can see how important the docent
provision by the Friends is in keeping the museum open to the public.
When the TDC the other day recommended that there be a 25/25
split, it took the museums down from 19 percent to 13. If you're
going to split it down to 25, give the museums 19 and the rest of the
museums 6. This would still keep the county able to fulfill its
obligation to the people of Immokalee with Roberts Ranch, but also
provide money for the people of Marco to start their project, and this
is my request today. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you.
MR. OLLIFF: The next speaker is Patricia Huff followed by
Kerrie, and I believe, it's Chobot.
MS. HUFF: My name is Patricia Huff, and I live in Everglades
City. I'm a member of the Friends and volunteer at the museum of
the Everglades. I've watched the Women's Club and the Friends of
the Museum work hard for five years before receiving the grant to
renovate the building that Barron Collier built as part of his new town
75 years ago. Our museum is the only place in Everglades City were
the tourists learn about our heritage.
Barron Collier chose Everglades City to be the center of his
development corporation and established it as the county seat when
the state legislature approved separating Collier County from Lee
County in 1923.
The Museum of the Everglades has been open for only three
years, but we have educated thousands of visitors in the history of our
town and the beginnings of Collier County. The small staff and the
many volunteers who work at the museum every day operate a first-
class museum, and cutting back the funding of such a valuable asset
Page 134
June 12, 2001
to this county would be a tragedy. Please give us and Ban:on Collier
your support.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you, ma'am.
MR. OLLIFF: Kerrie Chobot followed by Virginia Carlin.
MS. CHOBOT: My name is Kerrie Chobot. I'll spell both
names. It's K-e-r-r-i-e, C-h-o-b-o-t.
I and many others in Everglades City, Plantation
Island, and Chokoloskee Island donote many hours as Friends of the
Museum of the Everglades to help operate the museum and make it
more enjoyable and informative experience for our citizens and
visitors. It is already difficult to keep the museum open the limited
hours we have, and many volunteers work double shifts and take out
special projects often using personal funds to make things happen.
At our last Friends meeting, it was brought to our attention that the
TDC recommends further cuts in our already stressed and stretched
budget.
I'm appearing to plead with you to deny approval of this added
hardship. It seems inappropriate that the hotel owners now find
themselves in competition with museums for hotel advertising funds.
The Museum of the Everglades was a major tourist attraction by it's
own right in the Everglades area and should not have to compete in
this way. As a volunteer I ask myself, if our commissioners don't
care about doing what it takes for funding to keep our doors open,
why should the volunteers care about donating their time? It's very
discouraging to think that our representatives could even consider
wasting such a valuable resource as our volunteers who bring with
them many talents from a variety of backgrounds and so generously
and tirelessly have worked to achieve what we have. I urge you as
our representatives to follow your own recommendations from your
May Workshop and overrule this latest TDC recommendation.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Page 135
June 12, 2001
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you. Next speaker.
MR. OLLIFF: Virginia Carlin is your next speaker and
reknown Marco citizen tells you how important this is, Ms. Jane
Hittler, is your next speaker.
MS. CARLIN: I am on the board of the historical society in
Marco Island. I would like to waive my time and give it to Eleanor
Burnham, please.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I can't waive -- transfer times, but Ms.
Hittler.
MS. HITTLER: Yes?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: You're next.
MS. HITTLER: Thank you.
MR. OLLIFF: Followed by Eleanor Burnham.
MS. HITTLER: It's afternoon, so I'll make it short. My name is
Jane Hittler, and I live on Nassau Court, Marco Island, which I'm
proud of.
It is a beautiful community. I've lived there and came in '65 when
there was nothing but beach and a couple of trees. I worked in the
beautification committee for 21 years, and I'm proud to say that all
the flowers, the trees I have loved and help to put there, but I'm
interested in history, and I have worked in the cemetary where I
found the history of the first founders there.
We need a place where we can put a museum. We have thoughts
along this line. We have collected things. We need help in
displaying it. Maybe we can get it from the county? We need other
resources, but let's think about a museum on Marco, and the land
provided by the county is adjacent to the Collier County Library.
Let's make a cultural center of that. It would be beautiful. It would
be necessary, and we can bring in money, and we can teach the
people about early Florida, and there's so much history here that is
worthwhile. Thank you.
Page 136
June 12, 2001
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you.
MR. OLLIFF: The next speaker is Eleanor Burnham followed
by Marion Nicolay.
MS. BURNHAM: Good afternoon. My name is Eleanor
Burnham, B-u-r-n-h-a-m. I'm on the board of the Historical Society
of Marco Island, and I've been particularly interested in education.
That has sort of been my job until this year. Today I have in my hand
two letters from the schools of Marco Island which I would like
distributed to you, and I just want to read a couple of little
paragraphs. (As read): "The opportunity for students to have a
hands-on multi-sensory learning experience outside of the traditional
classroom will have a significant affect on our students learning.
This kind of curriculum-based educational programming will
promote critical thinking and enhance the awareness and importance
of protecting Marco Island's culture resources while instilling in the
children a sense of pride in their community."
I'll let you read the rest of it. There's one from the Charter
School and one from the Tommy Barfield School and they are all in
favor of our having a museum, as I am, and thank you for today.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you, ma'am.
MR. OLLIFF: The next speaker is Marion Nicolay followed by
August Fischer.
MS. NICOLAY: My name is Marion Nicolay, N-i-c-o-l-a-y.
I'm on the board of the Historical Society of Marco, and I sent a letter
to you last week with an enclosure with a ten-point outline of our
program, and I hope you've had time to read it. The copy that I sent
was endorsed by 30 or 40 people who happened to be at a meeting we
had last week.
Having said that, I would like to give the rest of my time to Kris
Helland, our president.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: No, ma'am. You can't-- you can't
Page 137
June 12, 2001
give up time. You can speak five, and she can speak five. The time
limit's for five minutes per person.
MS. NICOLAY: No, I'm through.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you.
MR. OLLIFF: The next speaker is August Fischer followed by
Elizabeth Perdichizzi.
MR. FISCHER: Thank you to the Commission for the
opportunity to address you I hope for a very short basis, because I
know the time is growing late and none of us have had lunch yet. But
I do want to remind you, first of all that I am a member -- my name's
August Fischer, and I am from La Peninsula Boulevard in Naples.
I am active in the Marco Island Historical Society, but both my
wife and I feel very strongly about the history, particularly about the
history of the Collier County area, and we have enjoyed so much the
time we have spent at the museum that you have so kindly provided
for your citizens here at the county center, and we have really found
remarkable the new museum that has sprung from the Everglades
City's -- yes. It's been a wonderful resource, and we have enjoyed
that, and we do go to Everglades City specifically to see that museum
once or twice a year.
We hope to duplicate that on Marco Island. We have a group of
people who are enthusiastic about that. You have heard at some
length the-- I'm sure you know already-- the historical significance
of Marco Island and its importance to Collier County, and the
importance of all of these things to those people who come and visit
this beautiful county. Certainly, tourists come here mostly to enjoy
the sunlight and the sand, but there are rainy days, and there are
opportunities on other days when you don't want to be at the shore to
find out about the area that you are visiting or the area that you're
thinking about moving into, and we do want to attract people to move
into Collier County. And as some wise man once said, if you're
Page 138
June 12, 2001
going to find out where you're going, you better know where you've
been, and these wonderful institutions give us that opportunity.
Please help them grow. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you, sir.
MR. OLLIFF: Ms. Perdichizzi has kindly waived her time.
Kris Helland is the next speaker followed by Fiori Perdichizzi.
MR. HELLAND: My name is Kris Helland, currently president
of the Marco Island Historical Society.
Thank you for -- first of all, thank you for the museum site, and I
wanted to mention that we already have $35,000 set aside for the
museum fund. If we can get this museum built, a number of
universities have indicated that they will loan us artifacts from the
Cushing dig to display in this museum. With this kind of display in a
museum on Marco, the Marco Island museum could become a
destination for travelers worldwide.
You heard Helmut Nichel tell us that he had first learned about
the Marco cat and the -- and the artifacts that were found on Marco in
1950 in Germany. This is well known throughout the world as a
significant archaeological site, and a museum with these artifacts
could become a destination site. We will help with the building of
the museum, raising funds, grants, whatever we can do, but I think
what -- the current funding for museums to support both the kind of
museum system as it is plus the Marco Island Museum, I don't think
is going to be enough. So I urge you to follow your staff
recommendation on changing the distribution for the funds. Thank
you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you, sir.
MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Perdichizzi has waived his time. The next
speaker is Ron Albeit followed by William R. Doyle.
MR. ALBEIT: Good afternoon, thank you. Ron Albeit,
manager of the Registry Resort.
Page 139
June 12, 2001
COURT REPORTER: Could you spell your last name, please.
MR. ALBEIT: A-l-b, as in boy, e-i-t, Albeit. Although,
actually, I would like to make a comment regarding, you know, the
museum's actually are benefiting now. This change that has been
proposed, decrease the percentage of the two percent so that
everybody wins. This has not been in effect yet, so there's nothing
being cut. This was a proposal to an ordinance which when we
discovered that there was an inequity between the balance of the 50
percent that was left with 31 percent being given to museums and 19
to tourism, we felt that was a little bit unequal.
It's really our belief and -- and we represent the Naples Visitors
Bureau, by the way, which represents five resorts, beach-front
properties. I don't know if you're familiar with the Naples Visitors
Bureau, but it consists of La Playa, the Ritz-Carlton, the Registry
Resort, Naples Beach Hotel, and the Edgewater. Between the five
properties we raise about 3 million of the $9 million that's raised in
bed tax, and so as Mr. Grobinski said it would be -- it's sort of
important to us how these funds are spent, and I would think we
should have some say in how they be spent as well. We do support
the Tourist Alliance Council as well and their movements with
Classic Florida and some nice things that they've done, but that takes
money.
The amount of money that is given to the tourism, to TAC right
now is less than the Registry alone spends in advertising for the
Registry. There is something missing there. When we ask the
question of our travel staff, why do people come to the Registry
Resort? When they go knocking on doors in Chicago, in Ohio,
knocking on travel agents' doors finding out why do they come to
Naples, Florida, it's not for museums everybody. I'm -- I don't want
to disappoint you, but it's not museums. It is -- it is what we already
expected. It is our beaches. It's our golf. It's our community.
Page 140
June 12, 2001
And that's not to say that we don't believe in adding value
through our museums. We are strongly in favor of upgrading our
museums and making them a venue for our guests. We promote
Naples altogether. Everything that we have to offer in Naples is
important as part of the whole package of why some people travel to
this area. So a museum is one part of that, very important and we
would love to work with them.
In fact, subsequent to the TDC meeting we had last week, we've
already had visitors coming to the concierge desk from the museums
to introduce themselves, so there's a contact and relationship so that if
our guests and collateral -- but that's all of what it takes and if you let
the TAC promote Naples tourism along with museums, I think it's
better use of the funds, which the funds will grow. The point being if
we promote more tourism -- and I think Mr. Henning made that
comment earlier and Mr. Coletta-- that if you promote tourism and
grow the -- the funds, there would be more funds available for
everyone to enjoy and more funds to the museums. But we have to
grow it. We have to grow it together. You have to allow tourism to
grow in order for this bed-tax money to grow.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Could I just with the Chairman's
indulgence just -- I'm glad you're here because I wanted to get to
explain my change in priorities because I've -- I've previously
supported this ranking or this way that we split the tourism money
and for my vote what's changed is, I would like to see us use the
tourism dollars to promote emerging tourism opportunities. I -- I
don't think I have a majority on the board who would agree with me
on this, but if I could I would have the Tourism Alliance focus on
eco-tourism and those emerging markets exclusively instead of in
general promoting Collier County, because I believe that you guys,
particularly the MVB because you're the big guys with the real
money could, and do pool your money to promote tourism in the
Page 141
June 12, 2001
county generally, and this is the bottom line, to let me say succinctly.
The statute allows a different approach to the -- to the expenditure of
the tourism dollars. We could choose to spend it all on promoting the
county in general, or we can chose to spend on any of the other legal
uses, and for my vote it's going to be to prioritize emerging markets,
emerging industries like our historical and ecological tourism.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioner, and the alliance
is going to do that. They did a presentation, and it's a -- well, mix of
SO...
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: But my -- my vote would be
exclusively there, and let the big hotels who can afford to do it
already market themselves. It's these little guys who need help with
marketing.
MR. ALBEIT: Well, I -- I -- I appreciate your comment, and I
clearly do and I think we do -- we live for that every day, by the way.
The Registry Resort being attached to the estuary, we talk ecosystem
every day. That's one of our selling strategies is that we're not right
on the beach, however, we have a beautiful estuary that we're
adjacent to, and it is very important to us, and I think you're
absolutely right that that is a selling point within itself, but we are just
asking for an equal share, that I think there is not enough of us
promoting, and remember we promote the Registry. We don't
promote Naples in general, so we don't -- even though we stick in the
venues and all these other opportunities, that's clearly -- let me just
bring out something.
We called a few other counties of how they distribute their funds,
and in Lee County, which is our neighbors to the north who happen
to have a visitors bureau and do very well up there in tourism, 54
percent of their money is spent, on the bed tax, is spent on tourism,
13 percent on sport complex, and 33 percent-- this is of the entire
amount, 33 percent of that is spent on the beach. Palm Beach
Page 142
June 12, 2001
County, major competitor to our market here, Palm Beach County,
East Coast travelers, 54 percent of the money is spent on tourism, 23
percent on cultural events, 14 percent on beaches, 5 percent on sports,
committees, film and television. Broward County, another major
competitor for Naples, 40 percent of the funds are used on area
promotions, sports, and games; and 60 percent is a mix between
cultural events and others.
So I think to fit more in line with our neighbors that do compete
with us in the marketplace for tourism -- and I want you to know
when that tourism is significantly impacted we are talking off season,
off-season competition. That's when we need it, and that's what I'm
talking about right now, that those funds would be beneficial between
the months of May and October, November, which we could really
use here to get more tourism and I -- it would behoove us to spend
those monies in a way that we can attract more visitors here and then
increase the funds and the bed tax to have more to share. Thank you
very much.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay.
MR. OLLIFF: The next speaker is William Doyle followed by
Sondra Quinn.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: How many more after this?
MR. OLLIFF: We have four total speakers left.
MR. DOYLE: Good afternoon. I'm William Doyle, D-o-y-l-e,
from the Edgewater Beach Hotel. I think-- I sort of changed my
focus and comments, Ms. Mac'Kie, about what is is it that we're
doing, and I think-- it seems like we're sort of in a debate over
dollars, and it's really not. I think we're really in a debate about
visitation to Naples, and in my opinion -- and those that we all work
for in hospitality and tourism -- we're all about bringing visitors to
the area, and the museums are an important part of that.
There's no doubt that our destination is important for a lot of
Page 143
June 12, 2001
reasons. The beaches, of course, are a wonderful part of it, but the
museums can be a bigger part of it, too, and I think in our last TDC
meeting afterwards we made some progress in deciding that in terms
of marketing are looking for the same thing and we really haven't
worked that well together, and I think that there's probably going to
be a new start there. If you look at the marketing plan for Tourism
Alliance that was proposed and is in play, it is to bring people here
during the months that we all know we don't need any more. There is
no argument there, and that's where our own marketing dollars are
spent, but collectively we need to come up with better ideas of how to
market this destination in the off months.
These museums can be part of that and I think what we need to
chase here is an agreement that let's us lay over our marketing plans
and see where there's commonality, there is. I haven't seen a
marketing plan, if there is one, for the museum of how they're going
to get visitors there. I would imagine that they need dollars and
cooperation of the Tourism Alliance, and the monies that come from
the tourist tax can help them do that. And that would be my proposal
to you is to take ownership in the TDC recommendation that was
given, because I think if once they are overlaid on top of each other,
you can bring more dollars to the top and that's -- there won't be an
argument for the museums. There will be more money for them to
spend and more money for us in terms of tourism dollars spent on the
off-season months, so my recommendation strongly to you is to take
the TDC recommendation and speaking on behalf of the Edgewater
as well as a Collier County resident. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Did the hotels use the museums as
spouse programs during conventions?
MR. DOYLE: Absolutely. I think that especially if we talked
about weather-related days where the other venues get spoiled, the
museums become a big part of that and particularly in hotels like the
Page 144
June 12, 2001
Registry and the Ritz-Carlton where you have such high convention
volume and group -- group business it can be a huge part of it. But I
think it's combining, and I feel like we're sort of competing rather
than coming together on it, and I think with this TDC
recommendation we can do that. There's probably some additional
dollars that will come from that that we can just truly devote to the
museum promotion, and it's very simple. It starts at the concierge
desk, as Ron Albeit mentioned. And that's something that maybe the
museum hasn't done and needs to, to come to the resorts instead of
and -- really just have collateral. I can tell you that in our hotel we do
not have collateral from the museum.
Certainly, I would -- if I was a promoter of-- whatever venue I
had to give to the residents and visitors of this county, I need to get
the word out and so that starts at the front door and walking in with
the promotional material. We can help them. We would be more
than happy to have -- the number one comment from our guests when
the weather turns is, "What do we do now"? I think we can certainly
help them in that respect.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Our county manager I bet will
get right on getting some brochures to the hotels. MR. DOYLE: Thank you.
MR. OLLIFF: Next speaker is Sondra Quinn followed by Dawn
Jantsch.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Speaking of great things, great
opportunities, emerging opportunities, new stuff coming to Collier
County.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you, Commissioner. Looking at
the time of day, I prefer no commercials.
MS. QUINN: Sondra Quinn, President, CEO of the Naples
Botanical Garden, new to Naples but 30-year veteran of the museum
industry, and I just briefly wanted to summarize the TDC request for
Page 145
June 12, 2001
the Naples Botanical Garden. The recommended $750,000 from the
TDC investment in this public-private partnership would provide
funds that would allow the Naples Botanical Garden to plant 3.5
acres of preview gardens which would showcase Florida's unique
environment in the Florida Discovery Garden also supporting the
theme, Classic Florida and creating the Children's Adventure Garden.
It would allow us to complete a 4,000 square foot world garden room
in the existing building that will present traveling exhibitions and a
host traveling -- and provide event space for the tourist industry. Also
it would allow us to renovate 3,200 square feet in the existing
building to create lab classrooms for lifelong learning programs and
workshops that we can work in conjunction with the hotel industry to
define audiences and the best schedules and work together to offer
those opportunities for tourists.
As a destination for tourism, we are going to be able to offer these
changing exhibitions and also shoulder-season events, year-round
collaborative partnerships with the hotels, and also compete with
other cities that have gardens, such as Miami and Sarasota and, I
think, enhance the Collier County eco-tourism destination.
The matching funds that we bring to this project total $713,000
that match the $750,000 request and those break down our requests
for five hundred for the gardens we're matching with one hundred
fifty thousand; a request for 100,000 for the garden room, we're
matching with $395,000; the lab classroom match is a request for one
hundred, and a match of one hundred sixty-eight; and the furniture
and equipment request of 50,000. So completement -- completement
-- completion of this project will enable the Naples Botanical Garden
to present previews of coming attractions, partner with the hotel and
convention trade to provide spouse and children programs which are -
- and also unique spaces for events and services for tourists, and we
can begin doing this next year.
Page 146
June 12, 2001
So I request that you support the TDC recommendation of
$750,000 and also the change that will allow us to receive 12 percent
for noncounty museums. Thank you.
MR. OLLIFF: Chairman, that's all your registered speakers
besides Dawn Jantsch.
MS. JANTSCH:
c-h. Good afternoon.
here.
My feelings are hurt. Dawn Jantsch, J-a-n-t-s-
Boy am I hungry. I can't wait to get out of
CHAIRMAN CARTER: That'll be up to you.
MS. JANTSCH: Several years -- several years ago, sir, the
Board asked -- the Board of County Commissioners asked that a
broad-based community effort be formed to monitor the marketing
and promotion of this fine community, this absolutely beautiful
community that we have.
A study was done. I believe it cost around $25,000. That was out
of which came the recommendation to form a broad-based
community effort which soon became the Tourism Alliance. I was
on the steering committee that formed the Tourism Alliance. I've
also been a board member for almost two years. In the two years that
that Tourism Alliance was founded, I've seen a lot of very positive
change in what is happening, and I'm very pleased to say that though
I missed our last meeting, I noticed in our minutes, in fact, I think I
was in meetings with some of you that day, I noticed in our minutes
that the Tourism Alliance is really focusing in on eco-tourism -- eco-
tourism in addition to the fact that they're focusing in on small-group
business, something that I've been supporting for a long time.
I'd like to remind you, just for a moment, what happens when a
tourist comes here. All right. We do have to wait in line in our
favorite restaurants, but in addition to that, we can watch a tourist
dollar turn over four times, four times. Let me talk a little bit about
some of the other counties. We have seen some studies recently, and
Page 147
June 12,2001
I've talked to you about them that these studies are showing that the
sales tax revenue in other Florida counties similar to ours is raised by
one-third by tourists. In Pinellas I believe the estimate is as far as 50
percent, 50 percent. The Tourism Alliance recently did a study that
showed that 33 percent of sales tax is raised by tourists, 33 percent of
the sales tax is raised by tourists. Kind of gives you a whole new
perspective.
I like to look at things as the whole picture and looking at this as
a very rounded picture we do recognize that as we continue promote
and market our community we will see that the dollars will continue
to go up. We're seeing that on other issues throughout the county,
and I just want to remind you of that today. CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Chairman, if you don't
mind --
MR. OLLIFF: I'm -- I'm getting lightheaded over here. You
have one last speaker, Jon Berry. He'll pass.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And he passes. Our favorite
speaker of the day.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: One thing that wasn't
mentioned here today is what we're trying to create is year-round
tourism, tourism in the summertime, therefore, what it does to the
employment base is it offers full-time employment instead of
seasonal employment for constituents in Commissioner Fiala's
district and my district, Mr. -- I guess all of our districts.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Yeah, mine.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So if we promote Collier
County we're going to provide so many things, full-time employment,
more money coming into Collier County so that we can do things for
the museum, and the list just goes on and on, the benefits from it, and
I think if-- let's do what the TDC recommends and then next year
Page 148
June 12, 2001
let's take a look at it and see -- look at it and see what a benefit it has
been or if it's been a benefit and if we need to reallocate it. I think
that's something that we should try and give the Alliance time to
promote Collier County.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Commissioner Mac'Kie.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I disagree. As I said at the -- at
the outset, I think that one thing that we know is that free enterprise
will take care of itself, and we have a very successful tourism
industry in this county. I don't know what would keep them from
making contributions to the Tourism Alliance Fund if they think it
should be higher in order to do a greater amount of advertising.
They have a lot of money. They're making a lot of money. They
could spend more of their own money on promotion if they choose.
The museums are scraping every nickel they can scrape because
Collier County doesn't fund them with property taxes, so, you know,
if we're going to make up the difference with property tax, that's one
thing, but if we're not -- and I hope we don't because I think this is a
valid appropriate expenditure of emerging tourism opportunity just
like we used to -- to spend.
Think back with the film festival. The Marco Film Festival came
here and everybody said, no, don't give them anymore money
because we're going to spend this money on sort of seed money,
starter money, kick-off money for new events. Similarly, we need to
be spending our promotion money on new enterprises and new
growth opportunities because existing extremely successful
enterprises will spend their own money to promote their own
business, and we need to use this money for the purposes that I
described, and based on that I'm going to make a motion that we
approve staff's recommendation.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'll second that.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I have a motion and a second,
Page 149
June 12, 2001
Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, I can't say I agree with
any of you yet. You know, I see -- I see a very big importance with
the tourist industry. I'm very concerned about it. I think our
priorities -- we're starting to lose a little bit of-- we're losing a little
balance here. What are we looking at, the Botanical Gardens, which
is coming in from nowheres for $772,800. My recommendation
would be to take the Botanical Gardens, reduce them down to
$500,000. That would take care of that half that they have for the
original buildings they're talking about. They have a matching grant
for the five hundred. Take the balance of that money, and we put it
into the Tourist Alliance which would give us $1,496,400 which is a
little bit closer to the number that they were aiming for and keep the
museums right where they are. That would be my recommendation.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: The only problem with that is
that we more -- we more than double our money. We so -- it's so
heavily leveraged at the Botanical Garden because of the matching
grants. I mean --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, Pam, you're right, but
you're going to kill the goose that lays the golden egg. Your first
priority is the museums that need the repair out there. You've got to
be on top of that at all times, and here you have a newcomer coming
in that's taking a heck of a big bite out of the whole thing.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Three-quarters of a million dollars.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, and I don't agree with
that, and I won't vote for your motion when the time does come. I'm
going to hopefully be able to fail and I can entertain this motion.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'd like to comment also. It's been
most difficult for me because I come from the tourist industry, and I-
- I have a great love for it. I was delighted to see that they're -- that
they're increasing their funds by $257,000 this year, and that's good
Page 150
June 12, 2001
and it will probably be more. They have done a great job. I've also
been very happy to read that because of their efforts our tourism has
increased a tremendous amount. In fact, I believe we're one of the
largest tourist destinations in Florida, I just read in the paper recently.
So it proves that they are effective.
I think we need to give our tourism industry places to visit like
the museums and like the botanical garden. I know people that travel
around the world just going from one botanical garden to another,
and we have to help these people get their feet on the ground and so
that's why I seconded that, as difficult as it was for me coming from
that industry.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I'm going to call the motion.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Can I just make a comment
before so people will know before they vote just -- it takes four votes,
and I'm not going to vote for a motion that cuts money out of
botanical garden so just --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Let's let it run it's course.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Call the motion. All in favor of
Commissioner Mac'Kie's motion signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Opposed.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Nay.
COMMISSIONER HENN1NG: Aye.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Aye. Opposed 3 to 2. Now,
Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, let's give it a try. I
recommend that we give the Tourist Alliance $1,496,400, the County
Museum $1,223,600, and the Botanical Garden $500,000 for the
same reasons that I already stated.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Do I have a second? I'll second the
Page 151
June 12, 2001
motion for discussion. Any closings?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: What is the percentage of split
on that, roughly, I'm hearing --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: You want to know if you take that
what is it -- increase it from 19 percent of something. I don't know
what it would be.
MR. OLLIFF: I don't know. It's going to be roughly over 20
percent, small amount over 20 percent, and the Botanical Garden then
would be probably in the 10 to 11 percent range, about 10 percent.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Roughly about 20 percent. It would
go for the Tourism Alliance.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm a big proponent of the
Botanical Gardens, but, again, I think that if we can get more beds
filled here in Collier County, the more dollars that we can bring in for
next year.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. I know what Commissioner
Mac'Kie is. Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Boy, this is tough. I'm -- yes, I'm
still studying what Jim has here. The museums still stay the same.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: The Botanical Garden gets half--
the half funding that they needed; right? So that they get the half and
half match.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Yeah. They get $500,000, right.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And they're on their way.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: That's probably 75 percent of what
they asked for.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Originally wanted one hundred
-- $1,610,000.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: This is not a game of ask for a
lot and then it'll look like you're getting -- I mean, that's not the way
Page 152
June 12, 2001
to do this.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: It's priorities.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I -- I agree. I just think that the
Tourism Alliance -- for heaven's sake, talk about killing the goose.
It's the most successful industry in this county, if they want to spend
money on marketing, they've got it. They can spend it.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: No. A lot of people like to stick their
hands in other folks' pockets and tell them how to spend the money,
and I'm not going there.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Well, that's what we do with the
tax so ...
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well -- well, you've got a choice. You
can raise ad valorem taxes and pay for botanical gardens or anything
you want, but this -- you've got to stay within the TDC dollars. This
is formula.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Can we ask the Botanical
Garden what this would do to their grants or, you know, what
programs would be cut if we lost --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Fine. Then we can ask
everyone from the Tourist Alliance to come up and talk to us also in
all fairness.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I'm not going to go there.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I call -- we got a second.
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
CHAIRMAN MAC'KIE:
Carter?
Okay. I call the question.
Are you the second, Commissioner
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Yes, I am.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Okay.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All in favor signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
Page 153
June 12, 2001
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Opposed by the same sign.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Motion--
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, I haven't voted yet.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I'm -- I'm in favor of the motion.
We've got one, two, three votes. Your call, wherever you want to do.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'll go with it.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. Motion passes 4-1.
MR. MIHALIC: Can we amend the ordinance per your
direction?
MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Mihalic, I think there's two other items they
needed to vote on.
MR. MIHALIC: No. I think they've taken care of all of them
with that.
MR. OLLIFF: Okay.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. Now, we have a situation.
MR. OLLIFF: Yes, we do.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: We had a time sensitive of 1:30. We
have people coming back. They had lunch. We have to break. I
would say, what happens -- what happens if we break until three
o'clock and come back and do what we need to do, or does that cause
us more problems? We've got the clerk here. We've got a choice.
Either run to about three o'clock and then --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Honestly, we're not going to be
doing our best work.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. Everybody wants to break.
We're going to break from now until three o'clock.
(Recess taken from 2:15 p.m. until 3:00 p.m.)
Item # 10E
Page 154
June 12, 2001
RECOMMENDATION TO AWARD BID NO. 01-3201, PUMP
AND MOTOR REPAIR FOR COUNTY-WIDE MAINTENANCE
OF EQUIPMENT - BID PROTEST UPHELD; BID AWARDED TO
HORVATH ELECTIRC MOTORS, INC.
(Commissioners Coletta and Mac'Kie not present.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All right. Board of County
Commissioners is back in session. We have a time-certain item that
was -- we apologize, a little late but we're going to go to that. I have
three commissioners on the dais.
issue.
COMMISSIONER FIALA:
It's --
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
MR. OLLIFF: It's 10-E.
That's all I need to discuss this
We are at-- no. No. No. Here it is.
Help me, Tom. Somewhere--
Mr. Carnell--
MR. CARNELL: Mr. Chairman, Steve Carnell, Purchasing
General Services Director. I'm here to address Item 10-E, the
recommendation to award the annual pump and motor repair contract.
The scope and work of this contract is for retaining a contractor to
pick up, repair, and return to delivery on pump and motors that fail in
our water and wastewater plants.
The -- we received seven bids on this solicitation. The bids were
opened by the purchasing department. Water department staff
reviewed them, in tandem with purchasing made recommendation for
Naples Armature to be awarded as the primary vendor and Horvath
Electric Motors as the secondary awardee available in the event that
we needed additional contract coverage beyond one single contractor.
This is a recommendation that was evaluated and posted on a
previous board agenda, however, we received a protest of the bid
award, and so the item was removed from the agenda and the protest
Page 155
June 12, 2001
heard. You should have a copy of the vendors, the bidder's protest,
and the purchasing director's decision in your backup.
Just briefly, the protest pertained to the incident of the bid
opening itself, and it was really something of an unprecedented
situation for us in the purchasing department where the bids were
scheduled to be due at 2:30 p.m. Several of the bidders arrived prior
to the 2:30 deadline, including Naples Armature, the apparent low
bidder. However, the bidder from Naples Armature did not
physically submit their bid opening -- their bid until after the bid
opening had commenced. And at that point objection was raised by
the eventual protester of the bid. The purchasing agent conferred
with me, and we reviewed the situation in terms of what we were
seeing at that moment in terms of what was in front of us and what
appeared to us was an inadvertent error by the bidder prompted us to
proceed with the bid opening and tender-- tabulate the bid offer that
came from Naples Armature.
Subsequent to that we had a meeting at the request of Horvath
Electric Motors, the apparent second low bidder, who questioned our
decision to accept that bid and to tabulate it. We discussed the issues,
and subsequent to that we did receive a protest from Horvath Motors,
and at this point in time I wanted to just finish reviewing the bid
event for you and then give you a little rationale as to why we select -
- we elected the course we did in the protest decision. Basically what
happened, from our point of view, the protest to raise the issue that
the language of the bid document prohibited the submission of late
bids, and it does say the late bids will not be accepted, and we have
had precedents for not accepting late bids. We rarely ever do accept
late bids. However, typically when I'm referring to a late bid, I'm
talking about a bidder and a bid that walk in the door both after
2:30 p.m.
(Commissioner Coletta and Mac'Kie present.)
Page 156
June 12, 2001
MR. CARNELL: In this case, the bid -- bidder in question was in
the door some ten minutes before the opening physically sitting in
our conference room where the bid opening took place, and the error
was that the bidder failed to submit or hand their envelope to the
agent before the bids -- the bidding began and the physical opening of
the bids commenced. So taking that into consideration, we did do
some legal research, and I asked, met, and conferred with the
protestor, asked him for any legal case citations that he was aware of
that might speak to this.
We did our own research in tandem with the County
Attorney's Office. We did find one case in Florida that spoke to this
where the Board of County Commissioners -- actually it was a airport
authority was given the discretion -- had elected a discretion of
accepting a bid that was received late, and the court upheld that on
appeal. So given that and given plus the fact that the board's
purchasing resolution states that the board may waive any and all
irregularities in any bids that occur in the bidding process, we felt
that the discretion does exist for the board to accept this bid, and we
felt -- as it turned out, the bid was the low bid offer -- and we thought
it was in the County's interest to accept this bid.
We also found no evidence of any impropriety that
occurred with regard to how the bid was submitted, any advantage --
material advantage gained by Naples Armature in what they did.
Admittedly, it was a mistake on their part, but it's your staff's
recommendation that we accept the bid and proceed with award as
recommended.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA:
this time?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Yeah.
here.
Can we make a comment at
We have the petitioners also
So whatever you would like to do, Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, I would. Very much so.
Page 157
June 12, 2001
I'm sorry. I don't agree with staff on this. I think we're setting a
dangerous precedent that will carry on forever. I think we need to
bring this to a halt real quick. Just the idea that this could ever
happen and then be repeated again sometime -- sometime in the
future leaves everything uncertain. When you go into a bid process,
there's a given routine that shouldn't be varied from one inch, one
iota. You have to follow it without-- without fail. I've been through
some bidding processes before, and I would never have accepted it if
I was in this one.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And I just wanted to ask two
questions while we're at it. Number one, did the ladies who were
sitting there know that they were holding the bid in their hand? I
mean, did they?
MR. CARNELL: Yes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. And then when Lyn Wood -
- according to this she said to the group -- I can't find it in here but
anyway -- she said to the group, 'Tll give you a couple extra minutes
just to make sure we have all the bids in." I read that someplace in
here, and if the ladies knew they were holding their bids, and they
still didn't hand it in, then I would think that they choose not to hand
it in.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Well, frankly, I don't even care,
to be blunt about it, whether they knew or they didn't know or -- and I
don't for a second -- Steve, you absolutely had the discretion to do
what you did, and I'm -- I don't mean to be in any way disparaging of
your choice. Just as a policy matter, I'd rather pull back and say,
we're going to be conservative. We're not gonna -- we're not gonna
go there, even though it costs us a little bit more money.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And if-- I must say that with
all due respect to Steve, I think he's very valuable for what he does
and does a very good job with the county, but I think there was a
Page 158
June 12, 2001
procedure that was put in place, and that procedure wasn't followed
by Naples Armature.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, I think I count three votes that
are not going to support staff's position. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: So how do we -- do we need a
motion to do something?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I need to hear from Mr. Carr.
MR. CARR: I agree with the majority of the county
commissioners --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: There you go.
MR. CARR: -- and suggest that they follow through with a
motion that will accept my client as the low bidder and reject out of
hand the untimely bid that was submitted in violation of the county's
own rules and procedures, specifically general bidding requirements
No. 8 and No. 9.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: So moved.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Wait a minute. Wait a minute. Public
speakers.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
motion.
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
do that, so I'm going to wait.
Well, but you can make a
Well, everybody gets all upset when I
Public speaker.
MR. CARR: Thank you. I agree with you. I'm going to make
one comment while I'm up here just because --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Is that on the same subject?
MR. CARR: Related subject, yes; it's direct tie-in. You've got
an executive summary here that I think was lacking in candor, and
I'm going to make this comment in public because it's something
that's bothered me. I think that you're all entitled to get fair, accurate,
and complete information that honestly reflects all the facts that staff
Page 159
June 12, 2001
has available, and over the years I have observed sometimes the staff
is not completely full of candor in their presentation to you.
I'm going to refer you specifically on their executive summary --
and I'm sure they want to have an opportunity to respond, which is
why I'm doing it in public. On the back page of their comments, this
is the May 10, 2001, letter to "Dear Mr. Horvath," on the back page
they say (as read): "With regard to the second issue raised in the
protest, a protestor provides no specific dates, times, but these events
allegedly occurred, therefore, it's not possible to address the
particulars to each situation." We're talking about Item No. 2. (As
read): "The county has refused on at least three occasions to accept
bid offers submitted after the deadline -- published deadline." I will
submit to you -- and he can contradict me if he wants to -- routinely
dozens of times in the last few years the county has turned down late
bids.
Specifically, when they crafted this memo, he knew and they
knew that the day before -- and you've got these in front of you -- that
there was a bid from Sunland Recreational Products that was seven
minutes late. So for them to do a summary to you guys that seems to
reflect they don't know anything about late bids or what the policy is
when, in fact, the day before they rejected a late bid is lacking in
candor. And whatever else happens on this I think they owe you a
duty to speak the simple, honest truth so that you can make decisions
based on having all the information and the most accurate package
available. That's something that I personally feel strongly about, and
I want to get that out, and I'm sure you've got a chance to respond
now.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All right. I will let him respond to
that. I have public speakers?
MR. OLLIFF: Yes, sir, you do. The first one is Robert
Weissenborn representing Naples Armature Works.
Page 160
June 12, 2001
MR. WEISSENBORN: Good afternoon, Collier County
Commissioners. My name is Robert Weissenbom, and I have been in
the pump and motor business since 1948, for the last 53 years in
Collier County. My company name is Naples Armature Works
located in two buildings at 1101 Fifth Avenue South.
I would like to clarify County Bid No. 01-3201, Pump and Motor
Repair. I instructed my people not to mail this bid in but hand deliver
it at the bid opening, which they did. They hand-delivered it at the
bid opening. Our bid was in the premises of your purchasing
department 45 minutes before the bids were opened. Forty-five
minutes before the bids were open they were sitting there. No one
said, "Let us have your bid. What are you bidding on? We're
bidding on pumps and motors but let us have your bid. Put it on the
table."
They were standing there holding the bid in their hand for 45
minutes. Forty-five minutes before the bids were open your people
saw this. He saw it. Everyone saw it. He's an honest man. He saw
it. Our bid was then hand-delivered to your purchasing department
agent. While she's opening the bids, Janet says, "Here's mine." After
sitting there for 45 minutes, "Here's mine." Our bid was then hand-
delivered to your purchasing department agent as I instructed. It was
written in ink, not in pencil, not altered in any way. It was read aloud
and tabulated with the other bids. It was not thrown out. It was read
aloud and tabulated with the other bids. Our bid had the lowest
legitimate prices. All other bidders and the county purchasing
department accepted this low bid. They accepted it. There were no
complaints.
However, last year's low bidder has decided to bring his lawyer
and threaten the county into awarding this bid to him again. He is
threatening you now to give it to him again. He had it last year. Now
he wants it again, after we're sitting there for 45 minutes with our bid
Page 161
June 12, 2001
in our hand. His complaint is groundless and without merit. It is
libelous and slanderous and should be thrown out. Thank you for
your time.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you, sir. Commissioner
Mac'Kie.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: May I -- I just wanted to say to
this gentleman that I -- I don't think anybody on the board -- and
certainly I can speak for myself-- don't for second think there was
anything underhanded. I think this was a technical little mess-up, a
little hiccough, and I'm so sorry that it cost you business. I'm, frankly,
sorrier if it cost the county extra money, but -- but I think the
integrity of that code is so important that we have to be just strict and
-- but please know that nobody thinks that there was anything
underhanded happening on behalf of your company. We appreciate
your business.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Chairman?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Steve Carnell has a chance to respond
to Mr. Carr's remarks.
MR. CARNELL: Well, first off, Mr. Carr is characterizing a
statement in the protest decision. I made that protest decision based
on the protest that was submitted to me. The protest named no
examples of late bids. Secondly, we have had instances of late bids
which as I explained earlier were different than this one. In those
cases the bidders and the bids showed up after 2:30 p.m. In this case
the bidder was there prior to -- with the envelope in hand prior to the
deadline. That's what makes this different.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All right. The statement just made by
the gentleman at the podium, he said they were sitting there with it,
and you called for the bids and then they handed it in. I mean--
MR. CARNELL: They went into the bidding area, the physical
room where the bid took place with their bid still in hand.
Page 162
June 12, 2001
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I see.
MR. CARNELL: The other bidders had physically turned them
into the front office, which is the standard procedure. Then no
argument with Mr. Carr. The documents say you are to turn your bid
in prior to 2:30 p.m.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And they're supposed to be sealed
also; right?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All right.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I will repeat my earlier motion.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: And I'm also going to make a
comment before that starts. Steve, I value you. I think you are a
straight-up, straightforward individual.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Absolutely.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: And I believe to my core that
everything I get from you is on the record and accurate. If I
questioned it, I would call you. I think the disparaging remarks made
by Mr. Carr were totally out of line, and I'm going to support your
department to do in any and every way that I can. Whereas in this
case because of a technicality I feel justified to stay with the policy
and the direction because I think that's the right thing to do. I in no
way feel that you have done anything underhanded or wrong in this
process. Call the motion.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Did it have a second?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. I have a motion to accept the --
the low bid and -- not the low bid. I have a motion to accept the
lowest bid turned in at the point when this went forward. What's the
name of the company?
MR. OLLIFF: I think you're actually upholding the protest.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Huh?
Page 163
June 12, 2001
MR. OLLIFF: I think you're actually upholding the protest.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: My motion was to uphold the
bid protest.
MR. CARNELL: We suggest you make recommendation to
award to Horvath Electric Motors -- (Multiple voices.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Second agrees with that?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. All in favor signify by saying
aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Opposed by the same sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Motion carries 5-0. Thank you.
MR. CARR: Thank you.
Item #15B
DISCUSSION OF AIRPORT AUTHORITY CAPITAL PROGRAM
- DISCUSSED
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All right. We can move back.
MR. OLLIFF: The only other item,
Mr. Chairman, that you may want to take out of order simply,
because I think the Clerk of Courts is here and has some scheduling
issues, is the discussion regarding the airport authority on their future
agendas requested by Commissioner Henning.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All right. Let's -- let's move to that
Page 164
June 12, 2001
item, and appreciate the Clerk's patience this afternoon. I'm just -- I
understand what we need to do. I will -- this is a request by
Commissioner Henning and the Clerk of Courts, and everyone is
present so, Mr. Brock, it's your podium.
MR. BROCK: Good afternoon, Commissioners. My name's
Dwight Brock. I'm the Clerk of the Circuit Court here in Collier
County, Florida.
I've got a couple of good items -- good-news items. One is I'm
not going to talk about tourist tax and the other one is that we had a
meeting this morning with Mr. Drury from the Airport Authority, and
I think we moved from a mode of travel from shopping cart to
satellite. So this, I think, is going to be a very brief presentation here
this morning, but in order to point out to the Board of County
Commissioners the concern that I have and why I have it.
Let me first start out by saying to everyone so there's not a
missunderstanding here, I have not suggested and I'm not suggesting
at this point in time that the Clerk of the Circuit Court has discovered
any defalcation with the Airport Authority. That is not what we are
saying in any way, and without going back and reconstructing the
entire projects of the Airport Authority we're not going to be able to
tell you where we are with all of the projects. But we have a
commitment from Mr. Drury this morning and the Clerk of Courts
and the County Administrator's Office and the budget department that
just as soon as we can Mr. Drury and my staff is going to get together
and start working on reconstructing those.
Once the budget season is somewhat behind the budget
department and the budget department and the County
Administrator's Office will then begin trying to come up with a plan
to deal with what we see in the financial records.
I'm going to pass out the document that first brought this issue to
light.
Page 165
June 12, 2001
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: You can let David do it.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Thank you, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING. My pleasure.
MR. BROCK: You will see, Commissioners, that this is an
executive summary that came before the Board of County
Commissioners, Item -- Agenda Item No. 8-H-1 on February the
13th, 2001. It was a request by the Airport Authority for the Airport
Authority to give $233,000 out of the General Fund Reserve to the
Airport Authority and to move an additional $302,000 from projects
that you'd had already given the money for into a new project called
Federal Inspection Station U.S. Customs Office. And this particular
project, all of the $233,000 went into a fund called Fund 4 -- what is
it, Jim, 496. Now, that is the Capital Projects Fund for the Airport
Authority that all capital projects go into.
When we pulled the cash balance from that particular fund, which
has all of the projects in it that had been approved this year and
carried forward from prior years, in the first or second week in May,
there was $143,000 plus a few dollars, whereas there had not been
one penny spent on this project, but we had just given them or you
had just given them $233,000 and had been asked to transfer three
hundred two, or a total of $535,000 into this project.
Now, there's not been a penny spent on this project. So one
would think at a minimum there would be $535,000 in that fund, not
looking even at the other projects in which you had given them
money for during this budget cycle. But there was only $143,000
which said there is a problem. At that point in time, we went back
and did a snapshot analysis of the money that was given to the
Airport Authority for projects in this budget year. Jim Mitchell,
Page 166
June 12, 2001
Finance Director of my office, will present that to you.
MR. MITCHELL: I was prepared to say good morning, but
good afternoon, Commissioners. For the record, my name is Jim
Mitchell. I'm the Director of the Finance and Accounting
Department, and if I could be so brave to ask David to pass these out.
You are brave to pass these out.
When this first came to light, one of the things that we wanted to
do is to go back and look at the entire environment of Fund 496, and
that's when we created this particular document right here, and as you
can see, it very clearly states on there "draft." So we knew that there
was some problems that we had with this, and we knew it was going
to take a lot of time. And fortunately but based on the meeting we
had with Mr. Drury this morning, we're going to have the opportunity
to work with his office and also with Tom's staff to get this particular
one in a-- in a manner that it should be.
But to demonstrate the problem, what I want to do is take you
back to the original budget for Fund 496 and John -- MR. OLLIFF: Katie, yeah, there we go.
MR. MITCHELL: If I could take you back to your original
budget, and basically what this budget is telling you is that you're
going to be bringing eight projects on-line or starting eight projects
for fiscal year 2000-2001. In addition to that, you're also going to
have other nonproject, new project related expenditures, one being
debt service, one being interest related to debt service, and the other
one being a reserve for capital outlay. But the most important thing
to look at this one right here is there was a transfer from the general
fund of $874,700 that's going to Fund 496, and that's what I want to
focus. I want a starting point. I want to be able to capture a number
that we're going to be controlling.
So what we want to do is we want to take a snapshot of the cash
at that particular point. This is the way the fund looked as of January
Page 167
June 12, 2001
31st, 2001, and there is a couple of things that are important on this
particular document. At the bottom you can see that it shows on
11/15/2000, 12/1/2000, and January 1st of 2001 the transfers of cash
from the General Fund had gone to Fund 496. Now, keep in mind
that these transfers are designed to be quarterly transfers, but they
hadn't -- there was a request for them to have all their transfer monies
before -- right at the end of the calendar year. What I want to focus
on here is the highlighted part, that is the General Fund component of
it.
Now, two things have happened between the time that the budget
was adopted and this particular date, and that is two budget
amendments. One of them, which is the bottom one there that's
highlighted, the Reserve for Capital Outlay, they actually recognized
$35,500 of reserve to put it into an expenditure line item to do a
noncapital project at Immokalee Airport. And the other thing that
they did is they recognized a -- a new grant and that is the EDA
Industrial Park Grant which has for this particular budget cycle no
General Fund transfer component. So we can see that they received
$874,700. They should have received $874,000.
Now we have to look at it from the expense standpoint. How
much of that money that was received, the $874,700 was spent on
those projects that were outlined in your budget document and
adopted by you as the budget for the airport. You come over here
where it says, "Expenses as of 1/31/01", that's the second-to-the-
right-hand column. And, basically, from a project standpoint you had
no expenses. From nonproject expenditures you had $9,124 from the
debt service interest and miscellaneous payments which would be
your arbitrage payments, and it also recognized the $35,500 reserve
component that was recognized, so the question is how much cash
should we have in the bank on January 31st, 2001, and that's right
there at the bottom, $830,075.87.
Page 168
June 12, 2001
MR. BROCK: Now, Commissioners, so you understand, this is
money that you have given them this year for purposes of the projects
that are on this page.
MR. MITCHELL: So if we take a look on that same date,
January 31st, 2001, at the cash in Fund 496, this is our general ledger,
after this highlighted number right here, the cash position of Fund
496 on that date was $161,681, which basically says that we have
spent the monies that we had received for those projects on other
projects. That's exactly what that tells you.
We went ahead and went a little further because of the budget
amendment that Dwight has talked to you about, the one we
recognize the $535,000. So we took a snapshot of the fund again on
March 16th, and basically the only thing that you see here that's
different is we've recognized that budget amendment. We have gone
in and reduced the transfer of three projects and increased the transfer
on another project. The net effect was 233,000 additional dollars that
went into Fund 496. So the total amount that Fund 496 had received
of taxpayers' dollars was $1,107,700. We did the same exercise. We
said, okay, how much has been spent? How much cash do we expect
to see in that fund on that particular day? There had been no
additional dollars spent on those projects. There had been no
additional dollars spent on either the Reserve for Capital Outlay or
the debt service interest.
Now, keep in mind, I'm only talking about the General Fund
component of this. From debt service, yeah, they did make a debt
service payment, actually a very large one, 835,000, but that was not
General Fund dollars. So on that particular date the cash expectation
is $1,063,075.87. So we go into the general ledger to see exactly
what our cash position is on that -- that particular date. Keep it for
me. That position is $299,489.91. There, again, what it tells us is
that the cash that was received on specific projects was spent on other
Page 169
June 12, 2001
projects that were not included in this particular budget.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Jim, is there anything in there
that makes you think that that money might have been spent on
something other than an Airport Authority project? MR. BROCK: No.
MR. MITCHELL: Absolutely not.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And didn't we --
MR. BROCK: But, Commissioner, having said that, until we go
back and reconstruct each project, we're not going to know that for
sure. Mr. Drury assures me that that has not occurred. I have no
reason to question that.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I agree. I have every confidence
that this is going to be one of those matters where we are very
grateful -- I am and I'm sure everybody is to the Clerk for showing us
procedural problems with the way we have been handling Airport
Authority money. I'm so grateful, though, that it isn't anything more
than that. It appears to be how -- what should the process be by
which the Airport moves money within it's different projects in the
Airport Authority Fund, and I think, you know, I have opinions about
that. I think that the administrative code that they have adopted --
and, frankly, that was approved by our County Attorney's Office --
clearly gave them permission to do what they did and shouldn't have.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Really.
MR. BROCK: What we have at this point in time is an
assurance from Mr. Drury and the Airport Authority. I thank the
Chairman here that we're going to work together. We're not going to
get in this scenario again that we're going to work through these
issues, try to deal with these issues, and then work with the County
Administrator's Office and the budget department to come up with a
solution to ensure that nothing like this happens again.
Page 170
June 12, 2001
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And we're so grateful to both of
you that you're willing to do that because you're both public servants,
both trying to accomplish, you know, the good of the community.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Mr. Drury.
MR. DRURY: For the record, John Drury, Executive Director
of the Collier County Airport Authority. I'm not an accountant and
I'm not a CPA. I'm an airport manager doing my job building
airports. I rely on a capable staff to implement the rules that you set
before us in managing funds.
My staff has spent the last three days all weekend long, 12 hours
a day, 8 in the morning to 8 at night, reconstruction -- reconstructing
the Authority's budgets from 1994 from it's inception. We are
reconstructing the last year now. We are going to be working with
the Clerk's staff resolving any of the issues that are outstanding. I
thank him for pointing out some of the things we need to be looking
at and focusing on, and we will be doing that.
I think this issue will be resolved sooner rather than later. We've
done an awful lot of work on our end. We want to make it easier for
the Clerk of Courts to conclude what they're doing, and I think we'll
have this resolved very soon. That's all I have. CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Great work on both your parts.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I think both parties are in agreement
that's what we need to do, and then we'll let that evolve back through
Tom's office with a recommendation to us for future management
control.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Chairman, I went to the
Airport Authority and sat down at the table with the members and
John Drury, and it was a great experience. One of the
recommendations from the Airport Executive Director was to hire a
CPA, you know, for cases like this, and I offered the -- we have an
Page 171
June 12, 2001
outside auditor, KPMG, that we use, not only to audit our
departments but also the Airport Authority, and my offer was to the
Airport Authority members -- and I don't know how the other
members of the board feels -- of using our auditor at their request
instead of expending their monies on a CPA to do auditing or other
things.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: My -- my thought would be if
they don't come to a successful conclusion, then we're going to need
another avenue.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: What I'm saying in the future,
you know, if anything arises in the future of questions or if they're
not sure about numbering is to use the independent auditor besides --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I think it can all be framed back when
we get to that point. I think at this point we just need to deal with
what's on the table, and then we'll go forward.
MR. BROCK: We had -- all I can say is we had a great meeting
with Mr. Drury this morning. We came to an understanding and a
sincere desire, I think, on Mr. Drury's part to move beyond this.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I thank everybody's cooperation for
working through this issue. You all have been excellent in doing
what needs to be done. Thank you very much, Mr. Brock. Thank
you, Mr. Drury, and the Chairman of the Airport Authority, et cetera.
Thank you very much. Let's move on.
Item #8B
ORDINANCE 2001-32, RE PETITION PUDA-01-AR-531, MR.
KEVIN HIGGINSON, REPRESENTING TRANSEASTERN
PROPERTIES, INC., REQUESTING AN AMENDMENT TO THE
BRETONNE PARK PUD, REDUCING THE MINIMUM REAR
YARD SETBACK FROM 20 FEET TO 12 FEET WITHIN TRACT
Page 172
June 12, 2001
"J" FOR LOTS ABUTTING A LAKE OR GOLF COURSE FOR
PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF DAVIS
BOULEVARD (SR 84) AND OPPOSITE COUNTY BARN ROAD
- ADOPTED
All right. We'll go back to regular agenda schedule. We would
be at 8-B.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Wow, is that where we are?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: And that's Petition PUDA-01-AR-531.
Mr. Bellows.
Anyone who needs to swear in, you need to stand up if you're
going to participate and swear yourself in. The oath was administered.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All right. Let's proceed,
Mr. Bellows.
MR. BELLOWS: For the record, Ray Bellows. The Petitioner,
Kevin Higginson, is requesting amendment to the Bretonne Park
PUD. As you can see on the master plan, we're dealing with Tract
"J" within the PUD and requesting to amend the development
standards to change the setbacks -- the minimum rear yard setback
from 20 feet to 12 feet.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Who objects to this?
MR. BELLOWS: There were some residents that showed up at
Planning Commission. They were concerned about reducing
setbacks along the fairways. At that time we agreed to limit the
setbacks on those sites 17 feet and on the lake side they could go
down to 12 feet. That's the reason we're here today.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Did they continue to object after
that change?
MR. BELLOWS: I don't believe so, no.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Are they here today, any
Page 173
June 12, 2001
registered speakers? Did the applicant agree with the change --
MR. BELLOWS: Yes, they did.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: -- proposed at Planning
Commission? Sounds like a motion to approve to me. Well, there's a
public hearing open.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Wait a minute. Wait a minute. Are
there any public speakers?
MR. OLLIFF: No, sir, other than petitioner.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All right. Was there not a group of
people that originally represented them that said they would not take
this forward? What happened to all that?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: They've made a compromise to
Planning Commission is what it sounds like.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Then review what that compromise is
for to make sure I clearly understand it.
MR. BELLOWS: Yes. The compromise was on the golf course
side of Building 31. Instead of going to 12 feet, we would have a 17-
foot setback, and that was agreeable.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. What was it originally?
MR. BELLOWS: Twenty feet.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All right.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: So if you'll close the public
hearing.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I will close the public hearing.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Make a motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll second it.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All in favor signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
Page 174
June 12, 2001
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Opposed by the same sign.
No response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Let's step forward to --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Mr. Chairman, could I ask in
deference to the schedule of a mother waiting -- okay. Never mind, I
won't ask. Never mind.
Item #8C
ORDINANCE 2001-33, ADDING A NEW SUBSECTION (4) TO
SECTION 130-66 OF THE CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES
(ORDINANCE 80-47, AS AMENDED) MAKING IT A PARKING
VIOLATION TO PARK ANY BOAT LAUNCHING VEHICLE ON
ANY PUBLIC ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY WITHIN ONE MILE OF
A COUNTY PARK OR OTHER COUNTY FACILITY THAT
INCLUDES A BOAT RAMP IF THE VEHICLE IS NOT
DISPLAYED A PAID LAUNCH RECEIPT OR COUNTY PERMIT
TO LAUNCH BOATS FROM THAT FACILITY - ADOPTED
CHAIRMAN CARTER: More than one in the room. Okay, 8-
C, an Ordinance of Collier County, Florida, adding a new subsection
to Section 130-66 of the Code allows an ordinance blah, blah, blah.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Is this 8-C --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: This is 8-C.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: -- boat fees. I have a real
fundamental question about this. Why are we charging for parking
and not launching? Because they park all over the street. We hate
that, but still we'd be making a lot of money if we charge them to
launch instead of to park because a lot more launch than park.
(Multiple speakers.)
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aren't we charging $3 to launch?
Page 175
June 12, 2001
MR. SMITH: Commissioners, if I may. I'm Murdo Smith with
the Parks and Recreation Department.
COURT REPORTER: Could you spell that, please.
MR. SMITH: M-u-r-d-o.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Smith.
MR. SMITH: Smith's the easy part.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: You never know.
MR. SMITH: I know. Previously the board approved the
charge of a launch fee at boat ramps.
It's a $3 fee for boaters, and you also approved a commercial permit
of a hundred dollar fee plus a $3 launch fee. So what this amendment
is to the Collier County Park Amendment makes it a violation to park
a boat launching vehicle adjacent to a county boat launch and park
without displaying a paid receipt or permit. So what it is is once
you've paid the receipt, if you don't have the receipt on your window
or a permit on your vehicle, you can get a violation, and that would --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I'm sorry.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, go ahead. I'm waiting for
the chairman to recognize me.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I recommend the motion. Move for
approval.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I've got a question.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I've got a second. Okay. Now,
Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: What happens if the vehicle
that I'm towing the trailer breaks down within one mile of the ramp?
MR. SMITH: The park rangers have some leeway in taking the
situation into consideration.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: They could tell if it was broken
down.
Page 176
June 12, 2001
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Can you? Really, you know,
I've been working on 'em for years, and sometimes I can't figure it
out.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
COMMISSIONER HENNING:
Well, I mean, if it won't crank.
Park ranger have a key?
So what you're saying they have some latitude.
MR. SMITH: Yes. They have some latitude. We try to educate
versus issuing violations and citations first, so we would definitely
talk to the people and if anything warn them and explain to them
you're supposed to pay the launch fee, at least the first time or so.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Now, is this a fine -- the
money goes to the Clerk of Court, or do you pay it there, or do you
come to Parks and Rec?
MR. SMITH: You can pay it.
fine,
You can send it in. It's a $30
and it goes to the Clerk.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. I just don't know who
they protest to if--
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Judge.
MR. SMITH: They go to a judge.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: It's like a parking ticket.
MR. SMITH: Yeah, parking ticket.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. That's what -- I didn't
know if it was an internal Parks and Rec that you pay it there.
MR. SMITH: No. Go through a judge because the sheriff's
department and the park rangers can issue citations.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. I'll call a motion. All in favor
signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Aye. Opposed by the same sign.
Page 177
June 12, 2001
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Motion carries 4-1. All right.
Item #8E
RESOLUTION 2001-240, RE PETITION PE-2001-AR-467, CINDY
PENNEY OF PMS, INC., OF NAPLES, REPRESENTING
KREHL1NG INDUSTRIES, INC., REQUESTING A PARKING
EXEMPTION FOR AN OFF-SITE PARKING FOR THE
KREHLING INDUSTRIES SITE ON EAST WIGGINS PASS
ROAD- ADOPTED
Krehling which has been moved to 8-E. I pulled that this
morning.
MR. OLLIFF: What was the number again?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: It was on the --
MR. OLLIFF: 17-A?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: -- summary agenda, and that would
have been Item Number--
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Yeah.
Summary Agenda.
17-A.
It's 2000-AR-467 on the
Dr. Badamtchian.
DR. BADAMTCHIAN:
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
DR. BADAMTCHIAN:
Badamtchian.
Badamtchian, right.
B-a-d-a-m-t-c-h-i-a-n.
Good
afternoon, Commissioners, Chahram Badamtchian.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Is this --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Oh, it's a public hearing. Swear in
everybody. Sorry.
(The oath was administered.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Any disclosures on the part of
Page 178
June 12, 2001
Commissioners? Probably not. None from me.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Me neither.
DR. BADAMTCHIAN: Karen Bishop representing Krehling
Industries is requesting parking exception for offsite parking for the
Krehling Industries. The site is located on East Wiggins Pass Road.
They have a concrete plant which requires 193 parking spaces.
Currently they have 129 parking spaces. They own a property which
is zoned agricultural, 8.5 acres property zoned agricultural, and they
are planning to build 90 parking spaces on that site to accommodate
the employees.
Basically, it's going to be for employee parking and, basically,
that's the extent of the request. They are not adding any more
industrial uses. They are just building a parking lot. Staff
recommended that the CCPC work this for recommendation for
approval for which they unanimously did. Staff did not receive any
letters or phone calls in opposition to this request.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Question, this is part of the approved
PUD?
DR. BADAMTCHIAN: Krehling is partially on a PUD,
partially on industrially zoned property, and this is on agriculturally
zoned property for the same use, which is on the industrial -- on the
PUD property.
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
attorney on that, but go ahead.
MR. WEIGEL: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
I got a technical question for the
Mr. Weigel?
Ready.
Where are we on that? Is this a
technicality that can be approved, or is this something that requires
more on that? I'm not clear.
MR. WEIGEL: If your question is, is this matter before you
today, a technicality can be approved, or do you have other things to
talk about?
Page 179
June 12, 2001
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I'm not really concerned about it, I just
want to know can it technically be approved, is it a violation of the
PUD, or industrial use. It's zoned agriculture. Can you create
parking lots in agriculture?
MR. WEIGEL: Okay. I understand. Marge, do you want to
address -- and Chahram, you want to stay close.
MS. STUDENT: I'm going to defer to staff on the one question
about the parking and ag, but in our code we have provisions for
parking exceptions, and there are 12 criteria that are to guide the
board as to whether or not they should grant the parking exemption.
COURT REPORTER: Could you state your name, please.
MS. STUDENT: I beg your pardon, Marjorie Student, Assistant
County Attorney. S-t-u-d-e-n-t.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: But this is not a parking
exception matter. This is an off-site parking, isn't it?
MS. STUDENT: Commissioner Mac'Kie, it's a parking
exception. We amended the code. When was that, Chahram, where -
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: This is an application
DR. BADAMTCHIAN: Either in year 2000 or year 1999 we
amended, and the new language is called "parking exception." Under
parking exception we have off-site partial and shared parking.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: When was this amended?
DR. BADAMTCHIAN: I believe it was in 1999. I don't really
recall the date.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Because I had an experience
with something like this, but in a former life.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All right. So what you're telling me,
that it's permissible under the situation.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Well, we've got staff
Page 180
June 12, 2001
recommendation of approval. That's a pretty good sign.
MS. STUDENT: Yes. And their criteria and this criteria should
appear in the staff report with the staff findings, and then it's up to the
board to take evidence as to whether or not those criteria have been
met, and those are what guide the board in making its decision.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, I could look to "No. E," the
character and quality of the neighborhood and the future development
and surrounding properties. I don't know what's -- what's protecting
that place when you start parking cars over there today versus what's
not there today. I don't feel comfortable with it to tell you quite
truthfully.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Actually, Commissioner, it says
that the parking lot would be separated from a mobile home park by a
hundred-foot-wide FPL easement, so we're going to have parking and
a hundred foot FPL easement and then a mobile home park. I don't
see --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: But there's nothing that buffers and
you see cars where before you probably didn't see anything.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: You going to buffer the FPL
easement or--
CHAIRMAN CARTER: On the side that they're on. I mean,
FPL, it's up to them. Look, I've had all kinds of problems with this
issue, and I'm not -- and I have not been -- no one sat down and said,
"Commissioner, this is what this is." I have not had an update on
code enforcement in terms of the new sound in terms of what's taken
place in that operation. The minute we approved the last
amendments to the noise ordinance in this county and it did not get
quite to a certain level. Everybody went away from the table. The
community wasn't happy; Krehling seemed to be happy. I have heard
nothing since then that we're going to pursue making sure that we've
got a resolution in the community. I have people that call me. They
Page 181
June 12, 2001
can hardly wait to get back this fall so they can crank the engine
again. They come back and see this, it's nothing but a red flag.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Would you like to have this
continued?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I would like it continued until we get a
full review.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Guys, that's so unfair, frankly, to
this petitioner. I mean, Hank Krehling's not a bad guy. He doesn't --
maybe -- maybe we should allow them to have -- give us whatever
update it is you need right here on the record, but, you know, Hank--
he's a good community citizen, and he's got -- he meets every single
criteria for this. If we're mad at him about something else, I don't
think it's fair to hold him up on this off-site parking. He's trying to
provide parking for his staff.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Michelle Arnold.
MS. ARNOLD: For the record, Michelle Arnold, Code
Enforcement Director. We do have some information with respect to
what we've done since the adoption of the ordinance. My staff has
received the equipment that you so kindly authorized with the
adoption of the ordinance, was trained on that, and as of February
through as late as last week we're monitoring the site, and we have
been meeting and corresponding with some of the adjacent property
owners, that expressed concern with that whole ordinance process.
So we have been coordinating with the property owners and we have
been conducting readings of the site and have not found any
violations with respect to the operations of the Krehling property.
We -- we do want to set up some additional meetings with the
property owners to make sure that they understand how the readings
are being conducted and, you know, how everything is to be operated
and continually be monitored because that's something I think that we
promised the board that we would do after the adoption of the --
Page 182
June 12,2001
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Has Krehling been a part of those
meetings -- those discussions so there's communications between
Krehling Industries and the community?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: He's complying with the code.
MS. ARNOLD: Well, we have --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, you know, yeah, he's complying
with the code, but, look, it's a difficult situation. You can go beyond
just saying, 'Tm going to comply to the code." I got developers that
say, "I'm building according to code" and monstrosities go up. I'm
sorry. I want communication between interested parties in this very
difficult situation.
MS. ARNOLD: We have suggested a meeting with property
owners and Krehlings at the request of the property owners, however,
they wanted us to hold off on that cooperative meeting. There is --
some of the property owners that were very involved in this process
that are now out of town. So we are --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Who wanted you to hold off?.
MS. ARNOLD: The property owners.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Oh.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: The property owners.
MS. ARNOLD: So once we have a joint meeting with my staff
and them so we are getting them comfortable with the process, I
would like to have a meeting with everybody because the Krehling
Industry has been wanting to coordinate with this effort and
monitoring.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. All I need then is in public
record.
Ms. Bishop.
MS. BISHOP: Karen Bishop, for the record. We have made
ourselves available to Michelle's office at any time that she has
wanted to see us. We actually had a meeting with our attorneys and
Page 183
June 12, 2001
compliance officers to discuss the meeting that the homeowners
wanted. We were happy to be there.
They didn't want us to be there. So we have to wait until they
want us to be there. We have, of course -- as we told you we would
do during the noise ordinance discussion, we have made
improvements to our plant. We have built a concrete block wall. We
have replaced motors. We've replaced vibrators. We have done all
the things that we said we would do to make sure that we were in
compliance. Plus Michelle's office has done the vigil of constant
monitoring to make sure that we were, so we have done all the things
that we were supposed to do, and we are just waiting for that time
when these people come back and are willing and ready to speak with
US.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All right. My little message is, you
ought to call me up and told me this before the meeting. I wouldn't
have pulled it from the agenda.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Question for Item 17-A.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: A motion to approve item.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
MR. OLLIFF: You need to close the public hearing, Mr.
Chairman.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All right. I have a second from
Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I'm sorry. We need the public
hearing closed.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Public hearing closed.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Now I move to approve 17-A.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: And I have a second from
Commissioner Coletta. All in favor -- Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioner Carter, I'm
trying to grasp on what you're trying to accomplish here. Continue
Page 184
June 12, 2001
the meeting for a public --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: No. No. I don't need to do that now.
I've been assured of public record that they're doing everything that it
was my understanding would be done. Since then I really haven't
heard much of anything from anybody until I saw this, and I had no
indication. Petitioner didn't come to me and say, "We're all pretty
much on the same page. This is where we're going." I've been stung
more than once and stung once, shame on me, twice, I need to get
stung the third time, so I'm okay with this.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: All right.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All in favor of the motion signify by
saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
MS. ARNOLD: He's gone.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
Opposed by the same sign.
Motion carries 5-0. Thank you.
Tell Devin good luck in college.
Item #9B
RESOLUTION 2001-235, CONFIRMING KATHY PROSSER AS
A MEMBER TO THE RURAL LANDS ASSESSMENT AREA
OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE - ADOPTED
CHAIRMAN CARTER: We're moving to the Board of County
Commissioners Item "B."
Page 185
June 12, 2001
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I thought that I had previously in
my earlier motion moved to approve Kathy Prosser as a member of
the Rural Lands Committee, but in an abundance of caution I so
move again.
MS. FILSON:
meeting.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
everything.
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
That was Rural Fringe Committee at the last
See, I just want to put her on
All right. All in favor of the motion
Opposed by the same sign.
Motion carries 5-0.
Item #9C
RESOLUTION 2001-236, APPOINTING E. RAYMOND REWIS
TO THE AIRPORT AUTHORITY- ADOPTED
Takes us to Item 9-C.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'd like to nominate Nick Salm for
the Airport Authority filling the one vacancy.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm sorry, but they're looking
for a person from Everglades City.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's where he lives.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Commissioner Coletta, it's your area.
I'm going to let you speak to it.
Page 186
June 12, 2001
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
COMMISSIONER COLETTA:
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
I'm sorry, but --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm sorry. You go ahead.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Actually, this is a county-wide
position.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Nomination, I have one also, a
gentleman.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I need to ask --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, I know it's a county-wide issue,
but I would like to defer to the commissioner in the district to get his
or her input.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: But it's not a district -- he
doesn't --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, from my own input with
Everglades, where I go down to about twice a month and meet
various people, I was quite impressed with Raymond -- forgive me if
I mispronounce -- Reswith?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Revis?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Lewis?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: R-e-w-i-s?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: He seemed to be very active in
the community for a long time, Chokoloskee, Everglades City -- very
involved with the airport down there and involved with the
government, and he also comes with a recommendation of Sammy
Hamilton.
And is he the old-timer?
Yeah.
That's the one I want.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: It pays to be old, okay.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Not old. He's been around a
while. He knows the area.
Page 187
June 12, 2001
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All right.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You better second that.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I'll second that.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. So we have a motion by
Commissioner Coletta for Raymond Rewis, a second by
Commissioner Mac'Kie.
COMMISSIONER
COMMISSIONER
COMMISSIONER
COMMISSIONER HENNING:
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Aye.
(No response.)
All in favor signify by saying aye.
COLETTA: Aye.
FIALA: Aye.
MAC'KIE: Aye.
Aye.
Opposed by the same sign.
Item #9D
RESOLUTION 2001-237, APPOINTING JOHN AGNELLI AND
ROSS P. OBLEY TO THE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY- ADOPTED
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Motion carries 5-0.
Thank you. That takes us to Item 8-D (sic), appointment of members
to the Industrial Development Authority.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
move their approval.
COMMISSIONER HENNING:
Two applicants, two openings. I
Second.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I have motion by Commissioner
Mac'Kie, second by Commissioner Henning. All in favor signify by
saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Aye.
Page 188
June 12, 2001
COMMISSIONER HENNING:
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Aye.
Item 8-E (sic), appointment--
Aye.
Motion carries 5-0. Moves us to
Item #9E
RESOLUTION 2001-238, APPOINTING JOANNE M. KUEHNER
TO THE HOUSING FINANCE AUTHORITY- ADOPTED
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Joanne Keener, who's a
wonderfully qualified woman who's applied for that position. I
would like to move for approval.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I second it.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I have a second -- a motion by
Commissioner Mac'Kie, a second by Commissioner Henning. All in
favor signify by say aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
COMMISSIONER HENNING:
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Aye.
(No response.)
Aye.
Aye.
Opposed by the same sign.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Motion carries 5-0. That takes us to
Item F, appointment to the Educational Facilities Authority.
Item #9F
RESOLUTION 2001-239, RE-APPOINTING JOHN AGNELLI
AND ROSS P. OBLEY TO THE EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES
AUTHORITY- ADOPTED
Page 189
June 12, 2001
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Motion to recommend -- or
motion to approve the committee's recommendations.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Second.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I have a motion by Commissioner
Henning, a second by Commissioner Mac'Kie to approve committee's
recommendations. All in favor signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Aye. Motion carries 5-0.
Item #9G
COMMISSIONER HENNING APPOINTED AS ALTERNATE
COMMISSIONER TO ATTEND JUNE/JUNE CANVASSING
BOARD MEETINGS IN ELECTIONS OFFICE - APPROVED
Appointment of an alternate commissioner to attend the
June/July Canvassing Board. Commissioner Mac'Kie and I, because
year 2002 we get onto track again, disqualifies us from participating
in the Canvassing Board.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I -- if nobody else has a
burning desire, I'll be volunteering my services.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'd like to nominate
Mr. Henning for that.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Second.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, I'm just glad he wanted to do
that, so all in favor signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
Page 190
June 12, 2001
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Aye. Motion approves. Commissioner
Henning will now go to the Canvassing Board.
Item #10A
IMPACT FEE WAIVER PROGRAM FOR PRIVATE NOT-FOR-
PROFIT AGENCIES THAT PROVIDE HEALTH AND SAFETY
RELATED SERVICES - RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY
MANAGER APPROVED
That takes me to County Manager report, Item 10-A.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Chairman, we had one
more land-use item that was on the consent agenda that was pulled
off. Are we still on track with that?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I believe was --
here.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
COMMISSIONER HENNING:
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
It's under 10. We're okay.
That car wash impact fee?
No, it was the --
Island Walk, it's down under
CHAIRMAN CARTER: It's under 10.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay, thank you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: We're getting there, Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: We're getting there.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Going to Item 10-A, authorize an
impact fee waiver program for private not-for-profit agencies,
provide health and safety-related services. Mr. Tom Olliff, the
County Manager.
MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Chairman, it was obvious as part of a couple
of long and difficult hearings where their were some not-for-profit
Page 191
June 12, 2001
agencies here requesting impact fee waivers, and as part of the
consolidated effort to coordinate all your impact fees into a single
ordinance where the health-facilities exception was eliminated from
the transportation road impact fee, that the board was interested in
pursuing some type of impact fee waiver program. Your staff has
always been opposed to an unprogrammed, unbudgeted case-by-case
impact fee waiver program where the monies would be coming from
your ad valorem tax fund because there just isn't -- didn't seem to be a
lot of rationale or reason for which projects were being awarded,
waivers, and why the ad valorem tax fund would be the appropriate
fund. Just there wasn't a lot of sense to that.
We did find that statutorily and through some opinions from the
Attorney General's Office that interest earned off of your existing
collected impact fees can be used as long as they continue to be used
for the purpose for which they were collected. So outlined in your
executive summary is a proposal for you to consider and for use to
put some meat on the bones, if you will, and bring you back an actual
program. But it would provide an opportunity for you on a case-by-
case basis to provide -- and we're trying to limit this, and our
recommendation would be for health and safety-related services, and
we would need to define that so that those agencies that provided
what you could almost consider quasi-governmental type functions
who had capital projects in the system and were within the budgeted
amount that you appropriated annually could come in and request an
exemption from you.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I'd support that direction to staff.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Commissioner Fiala -- I mean,
Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. The one thing I want to
check on -- and I know it requires some paperwork, keeping track of
it -- I would like to have something added to this that at any point in
Page 192
June 12, 2001
time that the facility is sold and it's going to a -- other than
organization itself-- that the fee be paid, be held responsible be paid.
And, Tom, I can't thank you enough for this. I know I've been
unmerciful in beating you up and using Hospice and everybody else
that held you hostage on this. Thank you for coming through.
MR. OLLIFF: I've got the scars to prove it too.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: One other thing I would just put in
there for consideration by the board is participative arrangement like
90/10 -- 90 percent to the agency that we would waive, 10 percent
paid by -- by the agency. It's sort of like a co-pay on insurance
programs. You still have a committment to do something. It may not
be much, but it's there.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Commissioner Carter, they're
still going to have to pay the school impact fees. They are still going
to have unrelated fees that we don't require impact fees.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Building permits fees.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So there will be a committment
on their part, and we're talking about some organizations that are
severely strapped such as Friendship House out in Immokalee.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: It's a thought. No support for that one.
So I guess we'll move forward, and if it's -- give Tom a direction to
follow this -- this proposal. Bring it back with the meat around the
bones.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Motion moved.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I heard two.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Is everybody okay? Three nods, four
nods, anybody not in favor of it? Okay. You've got direction.
MR. OLLIFF: Waiting for final approval then.
Item # 10C
Page 193
June 12, 2001
AUTHORIZATION FOR CHAIRMAN TO SIGN NEGOTIATED
AGREEMENTS WITH WASTE MANAGEMENT INC. (WMI)
AND IMMOKALEE DISPOSAL COMPANY (IDC), PURSUANT
TO THE BOARD'S DIRECTION ON MARCH 27, 2001-
APPROVED WITH CHANGES
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you, sir. That takes us to Item
10-B.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: C?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: B is more --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: B or C?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: B we moved.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I'm sorry.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: We're ready for more garbage
talk.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Authorize chair. Yes. We're back to
the WMI and the IDC contracts. Mr. Mudd.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: My kids said we were talking
trash till 10:30 last night.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Garbage in, garbage out.
MR. MUDD: We have a technical issue here. Jim Mudd,
Public Utilities Administrator. My last name's M-u-d-d. If you spell
it backwards, it's "dumb" with a stutter. A little levity here, you
know.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Good. You're as good as -- you and
Andy Stokes get together.
MR. MUDD: Yeah.
the screen. Turn this off.
You're getting better here.
Now, if we could just get it to show up on
MR. OLLIFF: You start giving them an overview, I'll get Katie
to come take a look at it.
MR. MUDD: The objective is to create and expand the
Page 194
June 12, 2001
recycling program in this agenda item, to undertake additional odor
control measures at the Naples Landfill, and to obtain the lined
landfill disposal capability at the Okeechobee Landfill to fulfill our
growth management obligation of two years of lined capability and to
implement other solid waste management initiatives as directed by
the Board of County Commissioners on March 27th, 2001. MR. OLLIFF' I think you're on-line.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I think you're working now.
Hotdog.
MR. MUDD: Okay. Okay. It's pretty much what I briefed you
on the 27th of March, but we'll go through it as briefly as you like or
as long as you'd like. Within the theme of shared responsibility, we
went into negotiations -- "we," being Malcolm Pirnie, David Deis,
our attorney -- consulting attorney, our assistant attorneys within
staff, my staff, with waste management in Immokalee Disposal, and
we're trying to come up with ways to make sure we have prudent
odor control redundancies, the restoration of Cells 1 and 2, the
reconstruction of Cells 1 and 2, contingency disposal and recycling
program. That was basically the theme. Ma'am.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I just wanted to ask if you
maybe -- maybe since we have memorized this having seen it so
many times, you could point out to us if there are any items that
changed since March, and if they did then we should talk about those,
but otherwise the board's already given direction.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Yeah. I -- yeah, I would like to know
those, and how many public speakers do we have, Mr. Olliff?. We
have two. So maybe that's what we need to do.
MR. MUDD' On those particular items, they remain the same.
We've added the redundancies within the contract for three-phase
power to make sure we have odor control on the open face as per the
negotiations. The big issue you asked us to go and your direction was
Page 195
June 12, 2001
to make sure that we put a hammer in our contract, and one of the
things we did do is we listened to Mr. Bob Krasowski, and we put the
Krasowski clause in each one, and he came up on the 27th of March
and said, "You must maintain your flexibility."
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: He's right.
MR. MUDD: And in each one of those contracts we made sure
that if it's recyclables, that those recyclables could go into a county
facility and they remain ours, and the garbage that we collect in
Collier County doesn't necessarily have to go across the scales if the
county decides that it needs to go to a different facility. And that
gives us the flexibility that we need in order to do whatever you
choose on the 26th of June as far as guidance to the staff is
concerned.
The good news -- and I think we need to let the public know that
we are going to have a recycling program that's going to be
expanded. The residential mixed fibers, corrugated cardboard, and
we'll put out direction that you've got to get it down to about three
foot by four foot laying flat by the curb. They'll pick that up. They'll
get all the glossies, all the third-class mail, the newspapers,
whatever's out there. Plastics, you don't have to figure out what's at
the bottom anymore and look for the 1 or 2. If it looks like plastic, it
smells like plastic, it's plastic, and you recycle it, 1 through 7.
The -- we've got an agreement or a clause in there that talks about
what they'll charge if-- if a commercial organization wants to have
them pick up commercial glass or plastic bottles, and that's in a 60
gallon container and it's $5 a week that's in there. That is no way,
shape, or form providing them a monopoly. That's all contracts that
are done with the commercial.
One thing I told you in March is that we would get back you -- I
would get back to you with a commercial ordinance by the end of
April, and-- and David Weigel in infinite wisdom -- okay, even
Page 196
June 12, 2001
though he passes stuff out to the Commissioners, basically told me
that trying to get it done in two weeks was probably a little bit too
quick. He said a month would probably even be too fast, and he was
right. It takes two meetings to address it, to lay that stuff out, and
we've been -- we've been meeting with the Chamber of Commerce
and a task force together to come up with that ordinance. We're still
working on it. We plan to have it to you, and I'm shooting for the
July meeting in order to have it, but it got to be a bridge too far, and I
guess that's the only promise -- and maybe ! was too new or too green
behind the ears to tell you to know better that I couldn't pull the
ordinance off that fast. It wasn't because we didn't try.
And electronic scrap, the good news is we're going to recycle that
stuff. We're going to make sure that those CRT screens and those TV
screens that contain over 50 percent lead don't make it to the landfill,
that they're corrected -- they're collected correctly. In the Immokalee
area, they'll be collected curbside, and in Collier County we'll have a
-- we'll have a rodeo. I call it a rodeo where you gather it two times a
year at a designated area, and you bring those things in, and one of
the things that I've talked to my director about is, let's see if the
people when they bring the stuff to us tell us it works or not and if it
works, let's see if we can't do the zero waste thing at the other end
and for a minimal price, at less than $5, okay, be able to give it to
somebody, a working TV or a working computer. It might not be the
fastest thing on one leg as far as computer is concerned, but there's a
lot of folks out there that could use it for their school kids.
And that -- that's working out fine as far as recycling. The
recycling contract's pretty much the same. The flexibility I said
before. The garbage is ours, the recyclables are ours, and it's in those
contracts, the hammers that you asked me to put in there. Waste
Management will provide written estimates the remaining life of the
landfill by 1 October, and I don't think I need to address the
Page 197
June 12, 2001
predicament we got ourselves in earlier this year. They have to
provide that report to us registered and verified by a professional
engineer by 1 October of every year. There's a $500-a-day late fee if
they're late with their written estimate, and I will use our consultant,
Malcolm Pirnie, to check their numbers to make sure that we get an
independent technical review on that process.
Waste Management also has to give us written notice of three
years of lined capability remaining. No more, "Well, this is what we
thought we had." They're going to give us notice three years in
advance of the lined capability that's remaining. If they miss that it's
$500 a day. Waste Management has six months once we give them a
letter to tell them to initiate the permit for a new liner. They have six
months to get the permit in to the Florida Department of
Environmental Protection, and if they don't do that after we've give
them written notice -- and we gave them written notice in February of
this year because it's part of the '95 contract that they do so, if they
don't get it in within six months, they're fined a thousand dollars a
day for permit not being there.
Waste Management shall start construction within
30 days of receiving a permit from the Florida Department of
Environmental Protection for any lined capability that they must
construct. If they don't start within 30 days, they've got $2,000-a-day
fine. If they can't build it or they don't build -- well, put it this way:
They shouldn't be permitting something they can't build within 12
months. Twelve months they don't get their construction done on
what they've been permitted for, it's $5,000-a-day fine for being late
in their construction.
If the landfill has less than 2.5 years of lined capability the
Okeechobee landfill agreement kicks in. And there's something in the
Okeechobee -- there's three -- there's four contracts. There's two
extensions to the collection contract for Waste Management, and for
Page 198
June 12, 2001
Immokalee Disposal they are pretty much identical and similar
except for one clause and that one clause has to do with long-term
recycling contracts and how they break them and if there's any profits
then we go into binding arbitration to figure that process out, and
that's in the Waste Management contract. The other one for
Okeechobee basically to get the capability, the lined capability put
aside guaranteed to us by Waste Management so that we can forego
the cost of having to transport our garbage out of county until we can
get additional lined capability put into our present line -- landfill.
And the last one is odor control in the -- in the landfill contract in
that process, but the 2 1/2 years, there's something in the Okeechobee
contract that says, "Hey, it's good till 2011," okay, and ways to get
out of it. Well, if it gets to be 2011 and we're still in the landfill
business, if our landfill has 2.5 years of lined capability, the
Okeechobee Landfill kicks in no matter if it's 2011 or not. Well, we
initiate that other contract, and it's in -- it's in both so we've got
ourselves some redundancy in two different documents.
Continuing on hammers, Waste Management has 90
days to come up with a proposed plan and applicable protocols for
odor control with the landfill. That in no way, shape, or form
basically says that we're not going to monitor and have our own odor
control within our own staff and our own machines in that process.
We need a little redundancy in that process. They need to have their
part looking at it. We need to have our part and to make sure that we
get an honest evaluation of the odor issue. Objectionable odors in the
contract are defined by objectionable to the county and -- or excuse
me -- or there is no "and," to the county or the Department, and the
Department is referenced in the contract, the Florida Department of
Environmental Protection.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Can I just pause you, what good
is that?
Page 199
June 12, 2001
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Excuse me, Mr. Mudd.
MR. MUDD: If they have 48 hours and that doesn't-- it isn't 48
hours of constant, it's -- if it smells on Saturday morning, Russell,
okay? And it smells Sunday morning, and we can attribute that to the
landfill, guess what? That's 48 hour's worth of smell. At that time
their fines kick in, and the fine's $5,000 a day until they get it
corrected.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And it's if we think it smells?
We can't argue about it. If the county says it smells bad, it does.
MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am, and we've goner--we've gone
through an odor -- an odor-testing process with approximately 20
people now that have been school trained by Malcolm Pirnie's
experts out of California to determine what the odors are, where they
came from, and the -- and the degree of the odor. Sir?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I really need to understand
what this objectionable odor for 24 hours means.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Forty-eight.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Forty-eight.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It means 48 hours, yeah, 48
hours. Does that mean it's got to smell for 48 hours?
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. It doesn't have to be a continuous smell
for 48 hours. It's a 48-hour time period. For instance --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You smell it once in a 48 time
period --
MR. MUDD: And then you smell it again within that 48-hour
time period the next day or so, then you've 48 hours of it smelling.
For instance, let me give you an example.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
MR. MUDD: Since Thursday of last week we've had a problem
on the north slope of the landfill.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Believe me, I can tell you that
Page 200
June 12, 2001
you have.
MR. MUDD: It's been welling up, and we've had a problem
with the blockage in the -- in the odor collection system. Since
Thursday of last week they've had a problem, okay? They fixed it
last night, okay. Well, my clock works right. I'm looking at a week
and a half. Well, that's over 48 hours, and we would have collected
about twenty-five or thirty thousand dollars in penalties because of
the odor, if this instance happens.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So if you smell it and they get a
fine -- a new fine -- 48-hour clock starts again? MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. That's what that all
means?
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. It's got to be -- it's got to an instance
where -- for instance, if they got a smell one day and say Russell Tuff
or Katie calls me -- Katie calls me on the phone and says -- and both
of them are in our group of sensitized odor sniffers, okay --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: What a title.
MR. MUDD: -- and they call me and they're part of the
volunteer group, and I call them the "odor police." Okay? They're
going to help me in the process. They're school trained. If they call
me up and say, "Hey, I'm getting that musty odor or whatever" and
they lay it in that process. They do that report, that's -- that's one
instance in 48 hours. They give me the same one the next day, there's
my 48-hour time period, okay, and as soon as I get it I'm notifying
Waste Management that they have a problem and to get it solved.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: What about if Joe Blow calls
you and says, "I smell the --
MR. MUDD: Sir, as soon as -- as soon as I get that process, I
get out there with part of-- our staff has been school trained in the
odor police too. They go out there, respond to that process, and try to
Page 201
June 12, 2001
-- try to back that process up and make sure it isn't a prank call, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So it needs to be substantiated?
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: By the county.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: By the county or the trained
odor sniffers.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. They're part of our-- they're part of our
county staff because we trained them, and they are part of that, and
they're part of our odor control process.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: In the next campaign, you can put it
on your flier, "I was -- "I'm a trained odor sniffer."
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Odorologist, his name.
MR. MUDD: Sir, I think what I think they need to say is we
solved an odor problem in Collier County that's persisted for ten
years.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Can you -- can you give me the
length of this contract, the duration of this contract?
MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am. The landfill contract is for the life of
the landfill.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: It always has been.
MR. MUDD: It always has been. It's -- it's a 21-year time
frame or it's 9.3 million tons. That's what they guess it on. You'll see
the 9.3 million tons in one of our calculations when you get into the
amendment here to try to make sure that we're not paying for air
space lost after they've already received that much, and that's
basically a way to make sure everybody stays honest in that process,
and no way, shape, or form does 9.3 million tons obligate us to the
life time. Okay? That was just a check in here to make sure we don't
continue to calculate air space lost in that process, but it's a 21-year
contract. We haven't changed that one bit with this amendment for
Page 202
June 12, 2001
the landfill contract. We're basically getting into odor issues. We're
basically having the latitude if the County gets itself in a bind where
it has to ship trash out there are some clauses in there that we can
execute in order to get that trash out, of here so we can stay within
our Growth MANAGEMENT plan.
Now, with the Okeechobee contract that cost us $1 a year to
execute, we're not going to have to ship trash out. We can continue
to use the lined capability at Cell 6 until Cells 2 -- 2 would be the first
one that gets done -- until that gets up and running and we stay within
our growth management.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Commissioner, were you really
asking about the hauling contract?
MR. MUDD: Now, the hauling contract--
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No. Not the hauling contract.
MR. MUDD: Okay. That's the landfill contract. The hauling
contracts are a three year-- the hauling contract, both contracts, the
Immokalee Disposal and Waste Management have extension clauses
for two years. We're giving them an extra three years on top of that.
Both of them close in 2006.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: The reason I asked that question --
and I don't know if anybody else had this same question in their head,
but I was wondering why we were -- I think, by the way, the contract
is wonderful. I have no problem with the contract, so I'll state that up
front --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Good.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- but here we are dealing with
marathon meetings at night to find out what we're going to do with
our garbage, and yet we have a contract in place, and I got a little
confused with, you know, if we're already putting together a contract,
then what are we holding the workshops for, but --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: The other is a long-term solution.
Page 203
June 12, 2001
You're not going to build the solution in five years.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, I asked that question of Tom,
and Tom actually answered that just as you did, Commissioner, but I
thought if I had that confusion possibly people out in the audience
have it.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA:
COMMISSIONER HENNING:
That's why you brought it up.
Commissioner Fiala and I
agree. It depends on this board how fast they want to move on a
long-term solution or they want to still continue to landfill at this site
that -- that we're on a -- we don't -- we have a problem with DEP
because of odor problems, and we're going to continue it on and on
and on. So I think what I want to see is some latitude to get out of
this contract and to do the long term.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Reopen in 2004, I believe, and God
forbid --
MR. MUDD: 2004 and the collection contracts, we plan to go
out to bid on both.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm talking about--
MR. MUDD: The landfill contract, sir, has -- has clauses in
here. The get-out-early clauses, basically, the time period in order for
the county to execute either one of those Option A or B has expired.
If you're -- if you're going to cease this contract for convenience,
there are -- there are stipulations in the contract where we'll have to
pay them for capital cost incurred that they never got a chance to
amortize over the profits that they were going to get over that 21
years, so we're basically going to have to go into a negotiation in
order to get out of that process, but there's nothing in that contract
that says we can't get out of it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Is there -- was there any
negotiations in this amendment for early option out?
MR. MUDD: No, sir.
Page 204
June 12, 2001
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. If, you know, that's
what I would like to see in the contract is early option out. We had it
in there before. We -- the county has passed that time because the
Board of County Commissioners at that time was wrestling with what
are we going to do about solid waste, and I think that we're just about
there in what we're going to do long term, and I hate to close that
door to what we're going to be doing at long term.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Correct me if I'm wrong,
Mr. Mudd, we can do that separately at any time outside of this.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Because it already had expired.
MR. MUDD: Either party -- the previous Options A or B would
let you out. Option A was you could get out as soon as 6 filled up,
Cell 6, and Option B, you could get out after the 8th anniversary.
You can get out of this contract. You negotiate the -- again, you kill
the contract for convenience, and you negotiate that process, and
there's facts within the contract that talk about those things that need
to be itemized as you -- as you cancel that contract.
COMMISSIONER HENNING:
feasible to do that?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
This going to be economically
It'll be the same -- if-- if we
instructed Mr. Mudd to go forward and do that today or if we tell him
to do it in a year, or in five years, the formula is still the same.
MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am. Five years from now it'll probably
be cheaper because they would have amortized their profit margin
over those five years whereas if we did it today.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So let me see if I understood what
you just said. So say, for instance, next year this magnificent
composting method comes about and we find that we can not only
save odor but save space and compost all of our lawn debris. We can
then jump on that, and we won't harm the contract any and it's all
Page 205
June 12, 2001
legal; right?
MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am. In the contract it says all the
garbage is ours, okay, and it doesn't have to go across their scales,
and there is an inverted scale for tip fees based on the amount of
tonnage we provide to the landfill in any given year.
MR. OLLIFF: But I need to make sure the Board's clear on that.
If you want to get out of that contract, the contractor is making a
capital investment up front in terms of his landfill construction, and
it's a major investment. And if we decide to get out of this business
three years from now and not have a landfill whatsoever, the
contractor will be owed something for the investment that he's made.
And that's what we're telling you. You can get out, but you're going
to have to pay the contractor back.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: All right. I didn't hear that part
because --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Plus -- plus the profits, as Jim
Mudd said. So it's getting into a situation like you said,
Commissioner, is we're going through this exercise on the long term
and yet we're entering into this contract then --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: For 21 years.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: May I finish, please? -- is the
caviar is the hauling for Waste Management. The landfill they do
make money but -- and we need to tie all this together, but separate
contracts tie it all together if you know what I mean is if you wanted
to continue the hauling contract of 2006, I think that we need some
kind of break on their profits on the future or put this off until we
decide -- this board decides what we're going to do with our long-
term solid waste needs.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: We can't do that. We have an
obligation to DEP, don't we?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No. We're still under a consent
Page 206
June 12, 2001
order because the odor problem has not been solved.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Our obligation is to the DCA
because we have to have a comp plan with lined capacity.
MR. MUDD: You didn't -- you didn't get the Okeechobee
landfill for a dollar because they haven't conceded some of their
profits. You still have a problem with landfill space. If we want to
delay this, then I need to start and I need to get your permission to
start hauling out of county because I'm going to run out of lined
capability.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I was told by a reporter we
already are hauling out of county, the sludge.
MR. MUDD: We're hauling the sludge out. Yes, sir, and I will
start that by 1 July. We haven't started. We're setting the contracts
up right now in order to get the haulers so we can send it to
Okeechobee landfill and get it out of our landfill, and that was one of
the recommendations that the -- that Mr. -- Mr. Tuff and Ms.
Newman and the -- and the interest group had brought to our
attention about three months ago, and we have been trying to set that
in motion in order to get it out of landfill.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I would like to continue with your
presentation, sir, and bring a close to that, take public speakers and
then --
MR. MUDD: The other hammers are -- let's talk about litter
control. They've got six hours to pick up the litter. Litter is defined
as three pieces, may it be paper, cardboard, plastic, or whatever that
comes out of-- that comes out of their -- their picking up or their
collection business. If they don't pick it up within six hours after
notified and we go back and look, that we start charging a hundred
dollars an incident. Litter control, if their vehicles aren't covered
correctly and litter comes out of them, we do the same thing. It's a
hundred dollars per incident. If they -- if they have 15 incidents in a
Page 207
June 12, 2001
month, we go into double jeopardy where all the fines double and
they stay doubled for a three-month consecutive period of time or
they can show me that they have or the county manager or you that
they have less than 15 incidents in a month for three consecutive
months to get out of double jeopardy.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: May I just say something -- I
mean, I don't want to interrupt you anymore -- litter is considered
three or more pieces of paper, cardboard, or solid waste. Any
objections to plastic bags?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: That's solid waste, isn't it?
MR. MUDD: That's solid waste.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Is it?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: It's all junk.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Anything that they pick up is
solid waste.
MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So cardboard is too.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: If it flies it counts.
MR. MUDD: Or if it doesn't and it comes out of a container it
counts.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: That's right.
MR. MUDD: The recommendations before the board that the
board authorize the chairman to sign the attached -- there's four
contracts to collection; one with Waste Management, one with
Immokalee Disposal, the Landfill Amendment which talks about
odor control and the penalties and the penalties -- there are penalties
in that contract, and then the final one is the Okeechobee contract
where Waste Management lays out two years of lined capability for
us so we can get back in terms with our Growth Management Plan.
Of a positive note, the county manager sent a letter to Secretary
Page 208
June 12, 2001
Siebert. It's come back that he does not object to our plan to use the
Okeechobee Landfill for lined capability.
The next one is that the board authorize the staff-- and it was
something you approved on the 27th of March and wanted to bring it
up again the tipping fee to $4 a ton as approved on March 27th, 2001,
and the dates to start August 1 st, 2001, for nonresidential and
October 1 st for residential.
Number three, the board authorized staff to implement the odor
control measures recommended by Malcolm Pirnie and the staff and
begin paying Waste Management for these odor control measures
promptly after the attached agreements are signed by the chairman
and that the board reconfirm and approve the 1.5 percent increase in
the Immokalee Disposal Service Area residential rate effective
October 1 st, 2001, to implement the cart program, and that is the
program where they don't have standardized garbage carts in the
Immokalee area where the contractor said that he would suck 1
percent of the difference and the County would come up with the
other 1.5 percent. That's about $1.75 on the annual fee for residential
in order to get standardized carts for garbage pickup in the
Immokalee area. And he would bring those in starting on January 1,
2002 and have the total area outfitted by, I think it was June -- the
June time frame. 1 July or 1 June. I can't recollect the exact date, but
he was going to bring it in a couple of months at a time in order to
bring the whole -- his whole collection area.
And those are the four recommendations in front of the Board
today.
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
need to say?
MR. MUDD: No, sir.
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
questions.
Thank you, sir. Anything else you
Okay. I'll have you stand by for
I need to go to public speakers.
Page 209
June 12, 2001
MR. OLLIFF: You have two, Russell Tuff and Bob Krasowski.
(Off the record for paper change by court reporter.)
MR. TUFF: I'm Russell Tuff, and I'm representing myself
today, and we had just found out about this late yesterday, so the
civic association was all unable here to meet to do anything formally,
so I'm representing me. And I've been coming before this
commission body for many years, and I believe that the groups before
this group and all along that they've all been sincere about stopping
the odors, and the last time I think that eventually the Commissioners
wore down of trying to get it fixed, trying to get it fixed, trying to get
it fixed, trying to get it fixed, and they gave up. They said, "Okay,
we're going to do something different." And they spent a lot of
money to find what we can do to do something different. And I
believe that all of you have been very sincere in your efforts, your
work, and I don't question Jim Mudd's sincerity. I don't question
John Wong's sincerity. I think everybody is trying very, very hard.
New systems have been implemented. We've done this, we've
done this, we've done all these different things, and the sad part is it
still smells, and I would say it smelled worse -- as bad or worse lately
than it has with all the new things in place. And what I'm hoping is
that finally that you are now wore down to realize that a landfill
smells and it will probably continue to smell. And I would hate to
see us sign another long-term agreement for a system that does not
work.
I think the 48 hours -- the only thing I was concerned on that
contract, you know, they have expensive attorneys that do a lot, and it
doesn't specify consecutive or periodically in there; that would be a
concern of mine that we would have a hard time holding that.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I think that's a very good catch,
that it should say periodically within 48 hours.
MR. TUFF: Because otherwise we'll lose that one.
Page 210
June 12, 2001
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Except for that this record
would be supplemental and would help us, but it's better to put the
word in.
MR. TUFF: Okay. And the other-- the program we're moving
under, you know, it goes for 15 years. We had 21, and now it will be
15 that will be left, and we're going to be digging up new things and
putting new things in there, and that's all under the assumption that
the land -- the odor will stop and it hasn't yet. You know, odor
solutions have never happened. We've done all brand-new things,
and they still haven't happened.
And the other thing I had a concern, we're asking the contract to
deliver the data -- the data for the odor control, and I know we've
been down that road before, and data has disappeared when it was
objectionable, and so I have concerns that we're -- we're doing that
data as well as someone else because that -- it's a real thing. And
right now we're operating under a consent order because we haven't
been able to get rid of the smells, and it's unacceptable by us, and it's
unacceptable by the regulating bodies, and to go forward you will
need a permit. And, with sincerity, I will do my best effort to make
sure a permit is not issued unless the odors are down first, because
we're moving ahead and I think it's wrong.
And the most recent efforts to reduce the odors -- we talked about
cover. I was told that we're going to get cover out there. We've been
talking about the soil cover to stop the odors, and the DEP on March,
I believe, 23rd turned down our request because it wasn't a soil cover
that we're trying to get done. It was a mixture of soil and compost.
So even today efforts are being made to chintz out and in making the
odors go away or whether it's chintz out or the line, I don't know what
it is. What it is it's not working, and it still smells, and we're trying to
save money at all the surrounding resident's expense. I don't believe
this would happen in any other part of the county.
Page 211
June 12, 2001
To continue to do the same thing many people say is insanity.
Hauling garbage out temporarily will reduce the smell temporarily. I
guess I like that better than anything else. If it goes away, it'll quit
smelling. And I had some concerns last night because if we can take
everybody at their word, dioxins whether it's in an incinerator, a
landfill, or in compost are very, very strong. I guess knowing what I
smell I think I'm more concerned about that than what's there existing
right now than what we had -- or what we may get in the future but --
and it would be my recommendation that we still hold -- hold still.
Everything is in place that they said they are going to do, so if we
wait for three months, we're going to be in the rainy season. We can
wait for any amount of time, but let's make sure that the odors are
gone before we go and add another 15 years digging up new things
and have all the same problems for another 15 years.
I ask that as knowing I've looked at all of you all these years and
nothing's different, and I believe they really mean well, and I heard
just before this meeting and I believe them. Jim Mudd said, "I by
doggone it we're going to do the best that we can to get rid of those
odors." And I think we're past the best we can because we haven't --
we can't do it, and we haven't done it, and yet we're going to go
forward and do 15 more years of it, and that's an injustice to our
community. That's all I have. Thanks.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
And, Mr. Mudd, you may want to comment on any of these
comments.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I would like to address Mr.
Tuff's comments, if you would, please, about the odor controls,
nothing's changed, 15 more years.
MR. MUDD: The odor control we switched over to the new
flare on Thursday of last week from the old flare to the new flare.
We got the flare -- we got the flare up and running, and Thursday
Page 212
June 12, 2001
afternoon we noticed we started getting some wellings on the north
slope over in Cell 6. We need to figure out what the blockage is.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: You started to get some what?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Wellings.
MR. MUDD: Wellings, bubbles at the top where the gas goes
up, and it looks like sand dunes on the top instead of-- remember I
said you got to get it under a vacuum so it sucks down. What you
have is you have a series of pipes underneath laterally and vertically
in the landfill. The garbage shifts because it's at 105 foot high. It's
what the height of the landfill is and in the -- in the contract it says
108 feet, but it's around 105 right now, and the weight of the garbage
starts to shrink down, and it starts moving down in that process.
Those pipes aren't rigid steel. They're PVC pipe, and if you get a
bow into the process, it collects water especially in the air control
vacuum control side of the house, and when you get water down
there it seals it up, and you get a blockage.
So what Waste Management has been doing for the last three
days is trying to find out and isolate where that blockage is and to
redivert until they can go down there and clear it up, redivert the gas.
They were successful in that operation last night, and the wells are
gone that we had on the top, and it's now -- it's now sucking on the
entire Cell 6 where it was missing one section. That can happen no
matter if I have the most or the biggest blower and flare or I've got
DTE sucking the mound trying to make gas-to-energy that you heard
about last night. If you have a blockage in one place, you got to go
fix it, and then you're going to get that incidental type process.
Now, the part that disturbs me -- and I brought that up to Waste
Management senior management the other day -- is why did it take us
a week, okay. And I think the fine piece in the landfill gives them
incentive to get hot on it now instead of waiting for a week, because
after 48 hours the fines kick in and they kick in for the first incident.
Page 213
June 12, 2001
So it's 48 hours you go back two days, you grab ten and you're
starting at fifteen the day -- the day that it kicks in that process. So I
think there's some -- some hammers, incentives -- hammers in your
terms in order to make that happen.
When you say 15 years, this is a 21-year contract. You're not
signing a 21-year contract today. The Board of County
Commissioners signed that on 2 February 1995. That contract's been
in place. It is in place. What you have in the amendment in some
particular areas are those things that weren't very clear in the
contract, that we went back to bid proposal like who's going to
construct any additional lined capability in the landfill.
When we started the negotiations, if you asked Waste
Management and that crew, they said the county is. You ask the
county, they said, No. No. It's you. Then we went back to the bid
proposal and showed them, indeed, it is their responsibility to put in
new lined capability into the landfill. Now, that lined capability has a
price tag of around $30 million. It's not cheap. So that was a big
opportunity for us to show them that -- so we put it in there, the lined
capabilities are your responsibility. I don't want no one in future
generations after -- if for some strange reason I die tomorrow --
because I plan to be here for 15 years until whenever, okay,
whenever, when Tom Olliff really starts getting to be gray. The -- I
plan to be here for a very long time, so if I die tomorrow I didn't want
somebody to go through the same pain that we had to go for 2 1/2
months, so we were very clear about those things that we found and
specified to make sure that nobody had to sit there and say, "Well, I
think it's this way." "No, it's this way." It's very precise language in
this contract.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Mr. Mudd, Mr. Tuff has been
probably the most biggest activist in Golden Gate on this particular
issue. He's been on it for so many years now he knows it as well as
Page 214
June 12, 2001
he knows anything, but the last thing you brought up with -- can you
address the situation-- (phone rang) -- I don't believe that. Would
you address what the situation would be if we didn't renew this -- do
this contract? Suppose we -- we filed Mr. Tuff's suggestion that we -
- we -- we just stop right where we are and don't do the contract.
What would be the ramification of that?
MR. MUDD: Well, you're going to have to -- because there's
the Okeechobee contract is -- is -- is not separable. What I -- what I
would say is we would have to get moving on hauling trash out, set
up a regime to start that sometime midsummer.
I would also tell you that you're got going to start your recyclable
program. You're going to be doing what you're doing right now. I'm
not saying it's bad, the situation is normal, but we're going to have to
stay within our Growth Management Plan. I've got to conserve two
years of lined capability at that landfill, and what we're going to have
to do is we're going to have to divert the trash in order to -- in order
to maintain that. So you're talking about $15 million a year probably
for the next two years until we can get that lined capability
constructed.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Or we can reserve space at the
Okeechobee landfill like this contract says here.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. At a price. It won't be $1 a year. It's
going to be -- it's going to be a lot higher than that.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: And what about --
MR. MUDD: Because the one -- the $1-a-year contract in
Okeechobee is because in the negotiations we put a finger in their
chest and said, "You have a shared responsibility for this business.
You were supposed to make sure that the lined capability was there,
okay, and there is some processes now." If we were slow at
responding to Mr. Bigelow's letter that said, "You should have been
hopping in July of last year," and we should have been moving in that
Page 215
June 12, 2001
particular case, then the County staff was slow to react to that letter,
okay.
When you -- when you get it in July and it's February when you
finally give him the letter, we had a problem as far as slowness to
react. So we have a shared responsibility at sleeping at the switch for
about ten months, but they had a responsibility at the juncture where
they should have been jumping on our heads and chests and whatever
else they needed to do in order to get that. So I laid that shared
responsibility on them and tried to get the price of hauling out to be
cheaper, but got them to guarantee us air space in a contract and also
guarantee us air space in case we have a natural disaster that isn't
counted against our two years of lined capability for the nominal cost
of a dollar a year.
And I figured that's pretty good shared responsibility so that we
didn't have to -- it was an opportunity cost we didn't have to take.
We -- it was cost avoidance in that particular case.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Then you got your transporting those
trucks, where do they go? How many trucks a day? Look at your
road system. I'm not even going to try to answer that at this point,
but that is a major consideration.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I was going through this
particular little thing so he could -- Mr. Tuffs --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Sure, but I think that's the other side of
the equation.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I understand.
MR. MUDD: You're talking about 60 20-ton trucks a day
moving from transfer stations going to Okeechobee. It's the big
trucks.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: If-- if we had to do it.
MR. MUDD: If we had to do it.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: We don't expect that to have --
Page 216
June 12,2001
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I'm not going there.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So the only complaint we really
hear from Russell or from any other Golden Gate people is the odor;
right?
MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's a pretty big complaint.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And it's a huge complaint, and I
think what they're saying is, yes, you've written some things in here
48 hours and if it smells it's $5,000 a day. So there's some type of
incentive for odor control. I think what they're asking is if there isn't
-- if there still continues to be a problem, is there a way to terminate
this, or is there a way to put, like, a limit on this contract?
MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am. I can tell you a limit that's coming
real close. On 1 August of this year if you don't get your landfill
permit, then-- then Waste Management defaults on the landfill
contract because they didn't keep under their obligation, okay. We
can terminate. We can terminate that for cause which is a whole lot
different than for convenience.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And, Mr. Mudd, if the smell
problem were to be solved periodically but then to raise itself again
so that the DEP gave us another consent order, I mean, basically, as I
understand it we can get out of this contract for free without
negotiating a deal if they get us a consent order again and don't solve
it.
MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am, you can. There is language in there
that says it's repetitive and you can document it and I think we can
document it since 1995.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Consent orders --
MR. MUDD: And you can -- and consent orders pretty much
you can't meet the permit requirements of your particular facility.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And then we get out and then
Page 217
June 12, 2001
we walk.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Believe me, Waste Management
doesn't want another consent order. Not only does it make them look
bad here, this is not their sole operation. There's no win for anybody
not to get this resolved.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Except where we've been on a
consent order for two years.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, you had-- you didn't have Jim
Mudd two years ago. You didn't have a lot of things two years ago.
It makes a huge difference in the changes in management on both
sides of the fence and in my estimation one hell of negotiator on our
side. I want to go to the next public speaker, if I might.
MR. OLLIFF: Next public speaker is Bob Krasowski, and, Mr.
Chairman, I got a late speaker slip from Dr. Paul Connett, and it's
your call.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I hope so.
MR. KRASOWSKI: It's running, 4:59, 4:58. Hello, I'm Bob
Krasowski for the record. Gee, I'm so honored by Mr. Mudd to have
the Krasowski Clause included in the contract.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: You did good.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Yeah, hey. I raised to speak on a couple
issues. The flexibility thing, I'm all for it, you know, it sounds good.
I read through this amendment and the collection clause and the
contract thing as much as I could understand. And in relation to the
existing contract that I've read, I'm -- see a lot of favorable -- I have
more favorable point of view to it than -- than others, but I would like
to for the sake of Mr. Tuff and in particular Mr. Henning, I'd like to
make the point that I'm very sensitive to the -- the situation in regards
to people of Golden Gate and empathize with them. I live further
from the landfill, don't experience the odors as often but have
experienced it in the past in evenings where the air moved very
Page 218
June 12, 2001
slowly from the landfill area over to my house near 41.
But I think there's two main reasons in regards to flexibility in
regards to the collection contract. We have to stay flexible so that we
can tweak the system if need be, and in an earlier conversation with
Mr. Mudd I -- it's been explained to me that flexibility does exist. As
you heard from Dr. Connett last night, at some locations there are two
-- well, we have a two-can system now. There are three separation --
separated sources of materials to be collected, and if we can go to
that, why we'd be better off. I have -- it's -- if it's determined that the
county enter into an agreement with Canadian Compost -- and,
Commissioner Henning, if you want to pay attention to this piece of
information.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm listening, Bob.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Okay. Good. I see you're reading. I'm
making an effort here to speak directly to your issue. But if you
remember last night that Canadian Composting has a method of
taking the organic waste from the stream, and that's what causes the
odor in the landfill. If Cells 1 and 2 are identified as organic-free
landfill cells, and Canadian Compost were to perform their task, there
would be no organic matter going into the landfill at Naples, and
there would be no odor coming out of there. So, you know, I know
you've reviewed various methods for handling this and dealing with
this issue including moving the landfill, and that's certainly a good
situation.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Can you tell me that compost
doesn't smell, there's no odor to compost?
MR. KRASOWSKI: No. Not to the Canadian Composting.
And I'll respond after this so I don't lose my one minute and 53
seconds, 51, 50, 49.
Let's see. So I'd like to answer that afterwards. Let's see.
Something I have circled in dark pencil here. The final contract, if
Page 219
June 12, 2001
you decide to sign this today, I would like to hear you mention that
this would be contingent on hard-copy contract that's made available
to everyone so we don't have a situation where, like in the past, we
thought we were getting certain things included in the contract, but
when we actually got the contract or it came back to us, some of the
provisions that were supposed to be in there, it was worded a little
differently or it was unclear.
So if you can make that effort so that we can all see the final
draft, not these amendments and then have it in different pieces. I'd
really appreciate that. Okay?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: You're right, Bob, and when it's totally
done, signed, sealed, and delivered it is public record and you --
anyone and everyone can have a copy.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Wonderful. Wonderful. But,
Mr. Henning, I'd like to stick to this because I think it's real important
in regards to the incineration issue. I know you're dead serious about
getting rid of the odor because of all these runarounds you've been
getting over the years, and I respect that, but with these alternate --
what was called alternate technologies that presented here last night
that is available -- and comp -- there's a lot of different ways in types
of composting. I hope that you'll give time -- I hope the board will
have another workshop, as I asked for last night, that would -- well,
you've got to do it until you get it right. Two hundred million dollars
for an incinerator. No up-front cost other than tipping fees for this
composting thing that takes the organic smelly element thing out.
Give it a chance, man. Give it a chance. Same with you,
Commissioner. Good talking with you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you. Appreciate your
comments. Dr. Paul Connett.
MR. MUDD: I've got one thing to make sure that you've got the
whole picture. Jim Mudd for the record, again. One thing, Cell 6 is
Page 220
June 12, 2001
bioreactor. Okay? It's going to smell, and we're going to have to do
gas collection on that big huge cell for at least 15 years. You've got to
understand that. He said 1 and 2. I want to make sure you
differentiate that in your mind. If you make that organic-flee, you
still got 6 to deal with once it's covered in order to take care of that
and still collect those gases and bum it off and make energy out of it
and whatever.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Jim, thank you for that, because it's so
critical to understand all of that.
You still have to live with that. You still have to do everything. It's
there no matter what you change in the other cells.
COMMISSIONER HENN1NG: Mr. Mudd, you said that you're
going to ask Waste Management to get the permits or apply for the
permits in August of this year for the --
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. In February we told them to initiate
design and permit actions for Cells 1 and 2 for additional lined
process. That's part of the original contract.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Reclamation of those cells.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And if I could finish my
question, please.
MR. MUDD: I'm sorry, sir.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I just meant to be supporting
your information. I'm sorry.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The-- and it's going-- and
you're saying that in the contract it says it must be completed within
six months of getting the permit?
MR. MUDD: You have to -- from the time they initiate and we
give them the letter, they have to have the permit submitted to the
Florida Department of Environmental Protection within 180 days, six
months. Now, I've also talked to the Florida Department of
Environmental Protection, and until we have a permit, a valid permit,
Page 221
June 12, 2001
not under consent order, they will -- they will favorably look at our
permit application.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So we can go through this
process of-- of trying to get a construct one and two for however
long it's being contested--
MR. MUDD: Mr. -- Mr. Tuff has made it clear a couple of
times that he would sue me until the day he was blue, so what I
would say to you is, the six months it's submitted and then it goes
through administrative hearings and whatnot in the Florida
Department of Environmental Protection and they go through their
procedures before they issue the permit, that could take -- that could
be as easy as about 45 to 60 days, and if it gets contested, that could
be years.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And that's why we're glad we
have the backup with the out-of-county hauling.
MR. OLLIFF: That's why we have to have the backup.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: We have to. It's no choice. Dr.
Connett.
DR. CONNETT: Thank you, Commissioners. I hope I'm not
outstaying my welcome here. Just to underline what Bob Krasowski
has said and also to address our friend's comments over here.
The system that the Canadian company was offering last night --
and we talked to them in the afternoon before the hearing -- is an
enclosed system. It's anaerobic digestion. It's not windrow
composting which if it's done badly will smell. Not all the time, but
some of the time. You-- you cannot eliminate the odors on an
outside composting operation, especially when food waste is
involved.
But this system that they're talking about is an invessel system,
it's an enclosed system anaerobic digestion which produces
essentially methane gas, then the methane gas is burnt as a fuel, and
Page 222
June 12, 2001
that's used to generate electricity. You're left, then-- if you have a
high-grade input, if you had source-separated organics which will
cost you $30 a ton, you also would get a high-grade compost out of
that which can be used.
They are also offering to deal with a low-grade input, a mixed-
waste organic stream, which will produce a lower-grade compost
which may be used as you're using right now, compost for daily
cover. But I'm pretty convinced in my experience that that is
essentially an odorless operation. And looking to the future, as
you've heard, No. 6 is a bioreactor. That problem is not going to go
away. If Waste Management goes away tomorrow, you're still going
to have to contend with that for 15 years, unfortunately. You can do
something about Cells No. 1 and 2. You can make -- put into this -- I
would hope you would want to put into this contract the notion that
no organic waste goes into Cells No. 1 and 2. That is the best way
you can guarantee that you're going to get no odors in the future.
And what you're getting is a very cost effective way of doing that and
certainly a way that most citizens, I think, around the country would
support.
And while I'm still at the platform, I do hope -- I know that you
can't make the meeting tonight in Golden Gate, but I will -- I hope
that some of your members will come, because in the airport solution
that I mentioned last time when you envisage -- the new vision of a
landfill of the future. It's not a landfill. It's a resource recovery
industrial-type park constructed like an airport which is owned
essentially by the government that has the ownership and
responsibility for it, but you franchise out to companies like this
Canadian company who can take different materials. In some cases
they may be paid to take them. In other cases they may take them for
free and then they make products out of that. That is a job-generating
situation and so rather than -- at the moment you're thinking in terms
Page 223
June 12, 2001
of very, very negative towards the old landfill and, rightly so, but I'm
hoping that I can persuade some of your members tonight that there's
a new vision of a landfill for tomorrow, which is already in existence
in some places, which is going to create hundreds of jobs and small
businesses which could be of immense value particularly for people
in the Golden Gate City.
In fact, I learned about some of these things in the other Golden
Gate in San Francisco, and I've got that on video. It's called "Zero
Waste, Idealistic Dream or Realistic Goal." So there is some
positive, positive -- there's a positive future here if people like Bob
Krasowski and Jim Mudd know -- I'm very, very impressed with. I
think this combination of citizens and government officials working
together is really critical. It's really critical the way they're not
fighting one another, but we're working together to a positive vision.
It can be done. It is being done in other places, and it's very exciting
when it happens.
On the other hand, to jump out of the smelly pan into the fire is a
tremendous mistake. To think that these old-fashioned dinosaurs that
first came in existence in 1895 in Germany -- there's nothing modem
about an incinerator making electricity. The first ones were built in
Hamburg in 1895. They have been rejected in the United States.
They haven't built one for seven years in the United States. They
haven't built one in Canada for 13 years. We have enormous
economic downside to this. In New Jersey they built five. They
wanted to build 22. The citizens stopped 17. Citizens like your
group stopped 17. They built five and those five have an
accumulated debt now of $1.6 billion because they can't pay for
them, because it's cheaper for the waste haulers to take the trash to a
landfill in Pennsylvania than to the incinerators.
So not only have we got environmental concerns, we've got
economic concerns -- and I will stop there.
Page 224
June 12, 2001
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you, sir.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: May I ask, did we make a
decision about whether or not we could videotape the meeting this
evening and replay it on Channel 54?
Could we make that decision?
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
of contracts?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
COMMISSIONER HENNING:
Could we handle that after we get out
Okay.
I have a question for the
vendor, Waste Management. The -- if the board decides to go ahead
with the constructions of 1 and 2, what would be different that you
would be doing as far as controlling odor? That's to the vendor.
MR. WONG: Good afternoon. My name is John Wong,
District Manager, Collier County Landfill.
Commissioner Henning, could you repeat that question for me,
please.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: If the board decides to go
ahead with the contracts and Waste Management goes forward to
construct Cells 1 and 2 or reconstruct, what would you do different to
control the odor?
MR. WONG: Okay. That's a very good question.
In terms of the waste stream that's going into the Class 1 lined space
area, the gypsum board, drywall will continue to be removed; it
would not go into the landfill. Number two is the sludge material, the
sludge, as Mr. Mudd stated, that we will start shipping it out July 1 st,
and the county has some plans to use that sludge and turn it into a
Class AA sludge so that there's composting opportunities involved to
use that. So the characteristic of the waste stream that will be going to
Cells 1 and 2 will be different compared to what we're receiving
today. Number two, in terms of some of the technologies involved,
we will install as stated in the contract that's in front of you, amended
Page 225
June 12, 2001
contract, we will have horizontal collector trenches installed every so
many feet so that if we have an opportunity to collect any landfill gas
in the working phases earlier compared to the current practice of
waiting until you reach it's final grade, then install the vertical wells,
that Mr. Mudd has mentioned before. Okay, so those are the couple
of things that will change compared to today what we're doing.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: What about the gas
management system? Are you hooking up to the present flare
system?
MR. WONG: The upgraded flare system, is that the question?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The system that's been
installed.
MR. WONG: Yes. Yes. The gas management system will be
tied together, okay. Down the road as your waste mass at the landfill
increases in size, obviously, you will have to increase your capacity
of your flare and blower system as well. So it will be tied together, if
that's your question.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, no, is the flare that you
have on site now, we're just going to stay with that flare and there
will be no modifications to it?
MR. WONG: No, sir. As the landfill grows in size, okay, there
will be gas produced over time and you would have to increase the
capacity of your flare and blower system as you go.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: All right. I understand now.
Now, because the reason I ask that is Malcolm Pirnie the -- our
consultant -- has stated that even with the new flare system that was
just installed it will -- has just enough capacity for Cell 6.
MR. WONG: I beg to differ with their study.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Well, I just don't want
business as usual.
MR. WONG: No, sir.
Page 226
June 12, 2001
MR. MUDD: Sir, you have the capability in the contract where
they're going to provide studies on the flare process and, again, we're
going to keep Malcolm Pirnie as an independent technical review to
make sure that we're having a meeting of the minds when the flare
needs to come in so we don't have a repeat of the flares just making it
and producing 2000 cubic feet per minute versus -- and you only
have a eighteen or seventeen hundred cubic feet per minute capacity
on a flare system where you've got one that's able to take the gas
that's being produced.
Now, the Commission could in June -- the letter -- at the next
meeting tell us that they would like us to start converting that gas into
electricity, at which time the vendor would come on board. And last
night we heard one from Detroit Edison would come on board, and
they would use their blowers -- blower is a bad term. You're really
looking for a vacuum, okay, but it's blowing air the other way and it's
sucking out, but they would bring their blowers in and move that gas
into their facility so that they could heat their boilers or if they decide
to go to a turbine engine, heat the gas, so the turbine moves to create
that electricity, and that would be their responsibility and the odor
control for that process. Okay. And that would be part of a contract
that we would have to get in with a vendor similar to that.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Commissioner--
MR. MUDD: Odor would be an issue that would affect that.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I'll go to Commissioner Mac'Kie. I
have one other question. Under your recommendations 1 through 4,
is there anything that needs to be changed here because I'm going to
make a motion we accept your recommendation?
MR. MUDD: Sir, there's one word that you wanted to put in,
and Mr. Tuff had mentioned it, and the Commission said, and it's
"periodic" in that 48 hours. Okay. "Periodic odor in a 48-hour period
of time."
Page 227
June 12, 2001
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Cari I ask a question before the
motion?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. I will -- I will add that. Yes,
you may ask a question.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: My question, Mr. Mudd, is if
during the -- is it too late if we sign this contract that during the
reclamation of Cells 1 and 2, what if we should decide to take up, for
example, the gasification, you know, let them use the material
coming out of Cells 1 and 2 during the reclamation.
Can we sell that material to another vendor to produce gas?
MR. MUDD: Sure. Ma'am, that gas belongs to you. Right now
you burn it off into the air.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I thought so, but I just wanted to
make sure. And then my other question is, what's the timing on -- I'm
really very interested in -- in removing the organics from Cells 1 and
2 as we reclaim those cells. We were going to be moving this
garbage. As we move it back into the cells, I wish that we would not
include the organics and that we would use that material for one of
these vendors who said they can produce electricity. What's the
timing? How -- when would we have to make that decision in order
to be able to do that?
MR. MUDD: Ma'am, that's going to be a decision that you're
going to have to get into in the next year or so after you --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: But we have time.
MR. MUDD: When you say you want to get into organics -- for
instance, you've got about -- last time I looked it was two, ten and
that was back in November as far as years are concerned -- two years,
ten months. You've got over two years. You could keep putting
organics in to that two years lined capability that's already got the gas
producing in 6 and -- and you could-- you could call 1 and 2
nonorganic cells to get into the furniture disposal. If you take the
Page 228
June 12, 2001
wood out, you still got cushions and stuff; you can't recycle them.
You get the metal out, you still got something that you're going to
have to dispose of.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Absolutely.
MR. MUDD: You got time to do that. We're going to have to
sell the populace. Okay. You're going to have to sort. You're going
to have to get that organic stuff out.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: But that's going to be nasty
anyway; right? I mean, as we're digging out Cells 1 and 2, that's
going to be a nasty process, so while we've got it all dug up, why
don't we also separate it and use it for a purpose so that then when we
bury it we don't have another Cell 6 that we have to always live with?
MR. MUDD: The stuff that we're digging up out of Cells 1 and
2, the organic piece of that is long gone. And it still reeks because
you've got gypsum board in there 'cause when they pulled it and they
mined it, they replaced it with gypsum and C&D, okay, and that's
why it smells, so I guess what I'm saying when you start talking
organic compost you've got to talk about separation.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And you can't do that coming
out of 1 and 2.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: He said the organic stuff's already
gone and that's going to be smelly stuff going on.
MR. MUDD: We're talking about separation of organics before
it ever gets to the landfill.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I understand. I understand that.
It's just the Doctor was here - I thought that was what he was
describing. As we were reclaiming Cells 1 and 2, we would try to
use the organics for one of these new methodologies. MR. MUDD: No, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I misunderstood.
MR. MUDD: But Dr. Connett, if I heard him correctly,
Page 229
June 12, 2001
basically said that Cells 1 and 2 you could declare them as
nonorganic cells in -- in -- in your landfill. Therefore, it wouldn't
take any organics. You wouldn't take sludge. You wouldn't take food
Waste or any of those other things, and it would be very inert
materials that you would put in there that couldn't be recycled in
some way or composted in another. At that point it becomes a very --
I call it -- a clean cell, where it doesn't smell as far as odor is
concemed.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And then -- and then Cell 6
would be continuing our 15-year problem, but assuming we come up
with a solution to organics in our cells other than 6, we don't have to
have a smell problem anywhere except for there. I mean, that's bad
enough, but at least we've identified where the problem is and we've
limited it to that one cell.
MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am. You still -- you still have some
odors coming off of cells -- Cells 3 and 4, even though it's mounded
and they're passive. They're not as strong as what's coming out of 6.
Six is a very unusual case. It's more like a bio-reactor because of the
sludge and the organic waste that have been going into it.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. I've made the motion.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Second.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: And I have a second by Commissioner
Mac'Kie. Any further discussion?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. I would just like to say
if we do a long-term contract and we decide to, for example, go to
incineration and, for an example, we do it at the site, Waste
Management could get the -- the tipping fee of whatever it is, $21,
and make a very good profit when they are just taking ash and putting
it -- moving it a few yards and dumping it in there. And then on page
10 of the landfill contract it states, landfill expansion, and I remember
each one of these board members up here has stated individually that
Page 230
June 12, 2001
they are not interested in expanding the landfill. So I would hope that
we would postpone that until we decide what we're going to do long
term and then, you know, if-- if we need to stay at the present site for
five years or whatever and then initiate the contracts.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: You lost me, Commissioner, but I've
got a motion. Taking your comments. I have a second.
Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'll just comment. I'll pledge to you
that I'll work with you on trying to do everything we can to eliminate
that odor, if we can find other ways to distribute the garbage, the
C&D, the composting so that we -- and so forth so that we find new
and innovative ways, some of the things that we learned last night,
and so that we don't continue same old, same old, same old.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Everybody -- did everybody
remember their commitment now not to expand the landfill at the
workshop on the hill? That's what it says on this contract so ...
CHAIRMAN CARTER: It depends on how you define it. I'm
not going there. Want me to call the motion? All in favor signify by
saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING:
Aye.
Opposed by the same sign.
Aye.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Motion carries 4-1. Thank you, Mr.
Mudd.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Mr. Chairman, could we resolve
the issue of videotaping the presentation this evening?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Yes, you may, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I just would like to suggest if
there is anybody who has information on the topic that -- I bet every
Page 231
June 12, 2001
incinerator provider in the country has a videotape they'd be happy to
provide to Channel 54, and we should play it. And I bet every one of
those vendors who showed up last night has a marketing videotape
they want to provide, and we should play them. And I think,
likewise, we ought to play -- bring out a videotape and play the
discussion tonight. So I would make a motion to that effect.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And I can just say that's one
side of the stow--
MR. KRASOWSKI: So what?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- and it's not other sides. Can
I finish, please? And, you know, I would like to know from Mr.
Connett in these -- all these providing all these jobs we still haven't
got the answer to, are they high-paying jobs or low-paying jobs? So
there's still a lot of questions. It wouldn't be fair to every other
person who has an idea of what would -- anybody should do with
waste.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Actually, talking -- what I just
said is we should open it up and any provider who has a marketing
videotape, if it's incineration, if it's gasification, whatever anybody --
let's invite -- let's use Channel 54 to educate people about garbage.
What's wrong with that idea?
MR. OLLIFF: Well, my only concern about that is it becomes a
commercial venture, because every one of those information videos
that you're talking about primarily ends up being what you saw last
night, a troop of sales people ending up trying to sell their particular
company. And I'd rather not try and get our staff in the position of
trying to decide what's educational, what's a sales pitch for a private
disposal technology.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I do have a question for you,
Para.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Yes.
Page 232
June 12, 2001
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Would you ever be interested
in going to Nova Scotia to check out that plant? (Chairman Carter leaves.)
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I could do that. There's one in
Australia I was interested in checking out too.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I know some people in Nova Scotia
you could stay with.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No. That's Pam.
MR. OLLIFF: Commissioner Fiala is going to be close enough
to Beijing. She could look at that one site.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's right. I'll be announcing that
at the end of this meeting.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Was there a second for that
motion? If not, it dies for a lack of one, and we will move on to the
next item which is --
MR. OLLIFF: Madam Chair, before we move on, I just publicly
need to thank Jim Mudd.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: The man's a gem.
(Chairman Carter returns.)
MR. OLLIFF: I cannot tell you how much work is involved in
bringing contracts of this technicality and magnitude back to you.
This is something we've been dealing with for years, and Russell is
very, very honest and sincere in his frustration about our ability to get
that odor under control, but I just wanted to publicly tell him. On the
behalf of Jim Mudd, the staff, and everybody else we are committed
as part of this county to try and get that -- that landfill to where it is
an odorless operation for the residents who live around there.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Thank you. And a
commodation from the board too. Having been here for six years, I'll
have to just tell you guys I've never had -- I'm sorry to all the other
wonderful county employees -- but I've never had a county employee
Page 233
June 12, 2001
to work with as good as Jim Mudd. I'm just extremely grateful.
we'll move to item --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I'll second that.
So,
Item # 1 OD
PRESENTATION OF THE 2000 THIRTEENTH ANNUAL
CITIZENS TELEPHONE SURVEY BY FRASER AND MOHLKE
ASSOCIATES, INC. (CHUCK MOHLKE, FRASER AND
MOHLKE ASSOCIATES, INC.) AND PROCLAMATION IN
RECOGNITION OF THE LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS FOR
THEIR OUTSTANDING CONTRIBUTIONS TO COLLIER
COUNTY AND THE ANNUAL PHONE SURVEY- SURVEY
PRESENTED AND PROCLAMATION ADOPTED
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Move to Item 10-D, Mr.
Chairman. We're ready to start on the presentation of the 13th annual
survey.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All right. Let's do it. Commissioner
Fiala has a proclamation.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. Before we begin,
Mr. Mohlke, I would like to read this proclamation.
Whereas, the League of Women Voters has
generously donated countless hours to query the residents of Collier
County and,
Whereas, the Collier County annual phone survey provides
valuable input and feedback from our citizens regarding government
services; and,
Whereas, the league has provided invaluable assistance in
conducting the annual phone survey in a courteous, professional
manner assuring opportunities for citizen participation in government
Page 234
June 12, 2001
decision making; and,
Whereas, the Collier County Board of County Commissioners
would like to show their sincere appreciation to the League of
Women Voters for the ongoing commitment to serving the citizens of
Collier County.
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed that the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that the League of
Women Voters is to be commended for their outstanding
contributions to Collier County in the annual phone survey.
Done and ordered. Congratulations.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I second.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: We have motion by Commissioner
Henning and a second by Commissioner Mac'Kie. All in favor
signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Aye. Opposed by the same sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Motion carries 5-0.
MR. OLLIFF: We have to take our hats off to Pat Clark with
the League who has been patient in waiting for this item for the
balance of the afternoon.
MS. CLARK: Thank you so much. Is it all right if I speak?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Oh, yes, ma'am.
MS. CLARK: Thank you very much. I'm Pat Clark and I'm
speaking for the League this afternoon. And I thank the
Commissioners for this honor and this proclamation recognizing the
League's efforts in the survey. This -- our survey 2001 is well under
way at this point, but we're just about a little over halfway through.
Page 235
June 12, 2001
We expect to have the interviews completed hopefully by the end of
this month and ready to be analyzed and tabulated. It would be
premature for me to even comment briefly on how the survey is
going for this year because you're going to be hearing a report from
last year. We have to wait until all of the results are in for that. But I
can tell you a little bit about the folks, in general, that we are talking
to this year.
First of all, because of the time we are conducting this survey,
most of the people we reach are going to have been -- who are full-
time residents. Another thing that's important for you to be aware of,
too, is that these citizens are all registered voters in all five of the
county districts, and they are probably unlikely, if ever, to be inclined
to come and appear before you, to speak out in favor of a -- some
campaign or champion a cause or request something or even protest
something. These folks are quietly busy working and living their
everyday lives, and they are your constituents and, believe me, they
do have opinions. We find them more than interesting.
Thank you, again, for this recognition. We appreciate it
tremendously.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Thank you for your work.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you. Mr. Mohlke, you have
some comments for us, sir?
MR. MOHLKE: For the record, my name is Chuck Mohlke, M-
o-h-l-k-e. In the spirit of Mr. Mudd's remarks, that would make me
Elkhom (phonetic). If you enliven your discussion a little bit with
those kinds of comments.
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Board, I just want to make
some generalized comments, if I may, and call your attention to one
or two tables particularly that I think might demonstrate for you the
value of doing this kind of work over time. When you have a
program that persists year to year, it permits you to establish some
Page 236
June 12, 2001
baseline information which when there is a fundamental change as
reflected in the attitudes of those responding to questions, it's a clear
indication of how a particular question may influence a response to
that bell weather overall question the people evidence so much
interest in each year namely, "Collier County Government is
operating in an efficient and cost effective manner."
If that number is affected in some material way, it's always
desirable to go back to some other bell weather questions and see
whether or not these timelines which we've provided in the study may
provide an indication of what is disturbing the respondents and why
they might be responding differently in the year that we're reporting
here, namely, the year 2000, that would cause them to give you the
views that they did -- which we reported both in terms of the tables
describing statistically the outcome -- and also provided you with the
voluntary spoken comments unprompted of persons who at the very
end of the survey were asked to provide in answer to the question,
"what one or two things that concern you right now do you want to
comment on in respect to Collier County Government?"
Now, some time ago Assistant County Manager Mike
McNees reports that you receive this larger complete report which
includes all the survey tables. And our effort this time, which we
took the initiative to provide Mr. McNees, and I gave you summary
comments of that in a clip format, that I hope would give you because
the table that I want to concentrate on here, if I may, Mr. Chairman,
was not as clear as I would like it to be. So we enhanced it somewhat
and improved the type to size and made it a little bit more readable.
You have a little red tab on page 5, and I thought with your
permission I'll limit the remainder of my remarks to indicating what -
- from the standpoint of someone who's done 13 of these -- is a good
indicator of what you might look for, not just in this table, but in
other tables as well, as ways of better understanding what voters are
Page 237
June 12, 2001
trying to communicate to you.
As you recall, the eight questions which are iljustrated here
beginning with, "Trash and garbage collection in your neighborhood
is as good as can reasonably be expected," and going on down to the
8th position item, "When you drive through the county, traffic signals
keep the cars moving fairly well." You have interestingly and
perhaps serendipitously at the top of this list with almost a 96 percent
agreeable that trash and garbage collection in your neighborhood is as
good as can be reasonably expected. That's been a consistently
highly rated or agreed-on item and has crept into first position this
year.
It's traditional competitor, "The overall appearance of
neighborhoods and shopping areas in Collier County is generally
good," still retains a strong position in the mid 90s but has been
temporarily overtaken by people's interest in and agreeableness
toward trash and garbage collection. But as you look down the table,
you'll find some items that do indicate that these trendlines have been
disturbed for reasons that I think are evident to this Board that you
became very well aware of for new board members during a very
energized campaign season in the year 2000 which took place just
after the interviews for this study were completed.
And you'll notice that "Roads and highways are well maintained
in Collier County" had had a consistent record in the high 70s or
lower middle 80s for five years and then dropped from an 84 percent
rating to a 69 percent agreeable rating, which is a good indicator of
where people are sensitive to essential services that the county is
responsible for and are responding to them differently than they had
historically during the previous five years.
And then you have, "When you drive through the county, traffic
signals keep the cars moving fairly well," which had a high rating of
almost 70 percent five years ago and today, that is the today of this
Page 238
June 12, 2001
survey, is a 55 percent agreeable rating. Now, these are strong
indications of the things that people are experiencing that may cause
them to believe that on an overall basis when they rate the
performance of county government in the summer of last year. That's
important to state. In the spring and summer of last year, that these
may have been dispositive from their point of view in making a
determination about how they responded to that key bell weather
question about efficiency and cost effectiveness.
Now, because you had the fundamental survey complete with
tables for a period of months, I think it would probably be
inappropriate for me to march you through material that you're very
familiar with, Mr. Chairman, but I would like to comment on a
question which my guess is is a more than modest interest to a group
of sitting commissioners. And that's the one that is described on page
12 of this summary report, the identifying -- the identification of the
voters' county commissioners.
Now, this is not the first time this question has
been asked, and in the past whenever it's been asked there appears to
be a pattern here, and I will share with you my perspective on this,
and you will evaluate that as you see fit. If an elected official -- and
this applies with a wide range of elected officials because this
question is not unique to county government surveys, but is asked in
muncipalities and at the state level as well -- if a sitting elected
official has not appeared on the ballot -- not appeared on the ballot
the last time that they were elected to office, it affects significantly
the response to a question like this.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Gosh, that makes me feel better.
MR. MOHLKE: Well, the first time we observed that was when
this question was first asked in the 1991 survey. Commissioner
Saunders had not appeared on the ballot in 1990. No one had filed to
run against him, and he had a very vigorous primary race in 1986
Page 239
June 12, 2001
when first elected, and as a consequence he was not as well
recognized or identified as the county commissioner within that
district, because we count this for those who are residents, voters
within the respective five county commission districts. We don't
count it on an overall basis. We can't presume necessarily that
somebody who lives in District 5 would know the name of a county
commissioner who lives in a more distant district where they are not
a resident.
And you'll also recall that in this particular -- during this
particular survey, the new District 1 commissioner had been
appointed by the Governor during the period of time that the survey
was taking place.
So those kinds of considerations I hope you'll be mindful of when
you see the recording for this year's survey.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Mohlke?
MR. MOHLKE: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: District 3 commissioner--
MR. MOHLKE: Pardon me?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The District 3 commissioner, at
the time of this survey, did we have a sitting commissioner?
MR. MOHLKE: You had --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Oh, yes.
MR. MOHLKE: Oh, yes. You were anticipating that that
commissioner had a career decision to make thereafter, but --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Is he the king of tact or what?
MR. MOHLKE: During the period at the onset of the survey,
there was a sitting commissioner in District 3. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
MR. MOHLKE: At the onset, not at the conclusion.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Was there a lot of publicity at
the time?
Page 240
June 12, 2001
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Oh, yes. Well, look, 1, 3 and, 5 were
where the races were. Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. I was wondering,
Mr. Mohlke, if you could comment on page 11.
MR. MOHLKE: I'd be happy to, Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: On two items, one and two
under rank.
MR. MOHLKE: Yes. The top of the page in Table 9-A?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No. It's down farther, Table
1X-B.
MR. MOHLKE: Yes, 9-B, uh-huh. The questions there are
fairly recent. We began asking the question: "Shouls Collier County
be saving more land from future development in order to preserve our
natural environment?" That question was first asked in 1998 and had
not been asked in previous questionnaires and: "Collier County
should provide financial support to agencies that provide health care
and mental health services, assistance to victims of domestic
violence, and other social services," was asked only for the prior two
years. And, of course, our bell weather question which has always
been asked since 1989: "Generally speaking, Collier County does an
efficient, cost-effective job of running its local government." Until
last year that ranked consistently in the low to middle 50s.
The other two questions seem to be particularly with saving more
land from future development to be potential bell weathers which are
absolutely consistent year to year.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Eighty-six up percent, 86
percent.
MR. MOHLKE: Yes. Yes. And the -- it's remarkable the
consistency of response here remembering, Commissioners, that no
one is ever questioned more than once. We look at each year's
questionnaire and each year's list of registered voters which are
Page 241
June 12, 2001
carefully screened by county commission district in a random
manner. And we have never had anyone interviewed more than once.
So it's not as if we're going back to a panel of individuals and asking
them their views over time.
And whenever you get a consistent response like that it seems to
indicate, one, that our sampling method is probably as disciplined as
we could make it. And, secondarily, because we randomized the
questions -- they're not ever asked in the same order year to year --
that so-called order bias does not enter into the way the response
comes out. So I think that those questions which were designed by
the former administrator and the current manager as indicators of
issues which were on the policy agenda of the board our hope will be
of use to you in your decision-making process.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: One question.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Sure.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: My question has to do with the
survey that's currently ongoing. MR. MOHLKE: Yes.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Are the questions identical to
this year?
MR. MOHLKE: No, they're not.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Could you tell us what --
MR. MOHLKE: They are quite different -- they're quite
different and I will further characterize them as more aggressive.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Okay.
MR. MOHLKE: We have drawn particularly on three sources
for these questions. One, we have asked deliberately questions about
election administration. The legislature and this board have decisions
to make about election technology and election administration. And
we worked closely with the Supervisor of Elections and harmonized
our work with that of Susan McMannis, the professor at the
Page 242
June 12, 2001
University of South Florida who conducted the survey for the Florida
Legislature that helped guide them toward making some of their
suggestions.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And ifI may interrupt, is that
information we will have in time for this budget cycle?
MR. MOHLKE: We have not completed the interviews yet.
We begin the interviews, as we always do, right after tax time and
Easter. We found if we do it prior to that time, we have a great deal
of difficulty occupying people's interest when we contact them on the
phone. Folks are busy. They have guests. They have a variety of
other things to do. We have tried that in the past, and in the early 90s
we did a fair amount of interviewing during February and March and
guess what, we were still interviewing in May because these are
volunteer interviews. And they are donating their time to this effort,
and they were increasingly frustrated by the fact that people were not
at home or not willing to be interviewed if contacted by telephone.
So for the last six years consistently with what the timeline show
on the tables that you've reviewed, we have begun the interviewing
always immediately after tax time and following Easter. That's been
our pattern.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And I interrupted you, but I was
interested on the other more aggressive questions.
MR. MOHLKE: And we also have devoted a number of
questions based upon the community character study and tried to
incorporate those to the best of our ability, and they have all been
thoroughly reviewed by the manager's office and by the League, and
we will be reporting on them in a timely manner in the late summer.
Can I respond in any other way? Certainly would appreciate you
contacting us as you re-review the larger study that you had since this
last fall and see issues of interest to you, particularly, because as you
recall we break out everything by Postal Zip Code and you will easily
Page 243
June 12, 2001
be able to identify -- we provide a map with each table -- easily be
able to identify those ZIP Codes within your respective districts, and
if you have any questions about that, we'd be very pleased to respond
to them.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I'd just like to say thank you. I
find the larger book and the details to just be fascinating and how it
paints such a clear picture of people's opinions in Collier County, and
it's an extremely useful tool. I just wanted to say thank you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you very much.
MR. OLLIFF: Two things I wanted to point out. One, I asked
Chuck to come especially at this time just prior to sitting down with
your budgets and your budget workshops to just refresh for you that
that survey is sitting in your office. And, two, that it is a statistically
valid sample. So, I mean, this can be taken as a good representation
of what the registered voters think and feel about issues out there
because more often than not, you're faced with a room where there
may be six or seven registered speakers that are giving you their
opinion of something and you, I think, oftentimes are left wondering
"what does the general voter out there in my district think?" And
because Mr. Mohlke and Ms. Frasier have broken this down by ZIP
Code areas, you can look pretty much and tell what the voters in your
particular district think about the major issues that we're dealing with,
and I hope that can provide you with some real guidance as we walk
into the budget process this year.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, I certainly appreciate that, Tom.
And thank you again, Mr. Mohlke, for your diligence and, League of
Women Voters, for being such a major part of making this happen.
MR. MOHLKE: Well, Commissioner, your comments are very
well taken, and I regret the fact that our little company had some
business today that caused my business partner, Alice Frasier, to have
to leave here over an hour ago. She regrets that she was not able to
Page 244
June 12, 2001
stay to hear these comments, but I know -- she knows that you
understand that from time to time there's a compelling interest to be
at the office for at least a part of the day.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I can't understand why after nine
and a half hours she would want to leave.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I can.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, I can understand why I'd like to
leave, so I'd like to move forward to the next item on the agenda.
Thank you.
MR. MOHLKE: Thank you.
Item #1 OF
ALTERNATIVE ROAD IMPACT FEE CALCULATION FOR A
SELF-SERVICE CAR WASH LOCATED ON S.R. 29 IN
IMMOKALEE - APPROVED
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
F. It was formerly 16-B-9.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
what this is?
COMMISSIONER HENNING:
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
car wash impact fees, isn't it?
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
done. Okay.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
I think.
Let's go to item -- it's now become 10-
Car wash impact fees, is that
No. This is a -- it's a plat.
No. We got a plat next. This is
Okay.
I got D.
We went to E. We've already
You were right, Commissioner,
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Don't confuse me. All right.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We have Dawn.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Dawn Wolfe.
Page 245
June 12, 2001
MS. WOLFE: Good afternoon. This item is in regards to an
alternative impact fee conducted for a self-service car wash. Dawn
Wolfe, Transportation Planning Director.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And, Dawn, before you go
again, could somebody remind me who pulled this from the agenda?
Yes, ma'am.
MS. WOLFE: It was pulled from the agenda because it was
inadvertently put on consent. Prior policy has determined that any
alternative impact fee analysis to be presented for board approval will
be on regular so you may ask your questions fully of staff.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: What's your recommendation?
MS. WOLFE: Recommendation is for approval.
There is a reduction --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Motion to approve.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I have a motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And a second. I just have a
question and just more for the record than anything else. Every detail
of the Alternate Impact Fee Ordinance was met? MS. WOLFE: And exceeded.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And exceeded. So the study
was correct. Everything was thorough and absolutely I's were dotted
and T's were crossed.
MS. WOLFE: I think you're getting to know me well enough, I
wouldn't come here with a reduction unless it was.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay.
in favor signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA:
So I second the motion.
I have a first and second. All
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
Page 246
June 12, 2001
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
Opposed by the same sign.
Motion carries 5-0. Thank you. Now -
Item # 10G
FINAL PLAT OF "ISLAND WALK PHASE SIX" AND
STANDARD FORM CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE
AGREEMENT AND PERFORMANCE SECURITY- APPROVED
WITH STIPULATIONS
plat.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Now a plat.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Now we have a plat.
MR. OLLIFF: Item was 16-A-4, it was the Island Walk final
COMMISSIONER HENN1NG: Mr. Chairman, if I can help
walk us through and I can -- I think just a couple months ago we had
experience with this with Briarwood.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Why was this pulled,
Commissioner?
MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Jenkins.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Jenkins pulled it, but from
the bad advice that I got at that time and Mr. Weigel straightened it
out is that this is just a plat, and it has nothing to do with the
operation of the PUD. So we cannot take action on it, but I can tell
you that I've been monitoring the blasting that's been happening at the
Regus (phonetic) PUD and also Island Walk and working with staff,
and they're telling me everything is within the guidelines of the
ordinance. You know, we feel tremors in that and that's -- you know,
that's part of the nature of the business is -- is excavating and and
Page 247
June 12, 2001
earth mining and that. So --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: So we could use this as an
opportunity to talk about whatever problem we have, but we couldn't
use it as a reason to down the plat.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: You have to come to the microphone,
sir.
o-b.
MR. OLLIFF: Robert Jenkins, J-e-n-k-i-n-s.
MR. JENKINS: Spell it Bob, B-o-b, or spell it backwards it's B-
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: You started something.
MR. JENKINS: No, actually, I had a question. I didn't -- didn't
mean to actually pull it off the agenda. It was a question I was going
to ask about when they're blasting. Right after they're blasting, the
water in my neighborhood started smelling real bad, the pool
deckings and a couple of the recently poured pools were cracking and
stuff, so this is a question I was having to ask. And like I said, the
water smells so bad that even when it comes through my system, and
my brother-in-law has a reverse osmosis system, it's still smells so
bad you can't drink it, you can't use it to cook. You can't wash your
clothes with it. It was a serious problem that I -- that was the
question that I had.
I didn't mean to throw a wrench into the monkey works and have
it pulled off the agenda as -- as -- as it resulted, but now that it has
and I spoke with a couple people out there and they said they would
monitor the well after the blast. They would monitor now, and if
they do any more blasting, monitor again and see if that is actually
impactive on the well system or whether the fact that they are putting
in the ponds out there and pulling the water and to fill their ponds is
impacting on the well fill that we draw our water from. So that was
pretty much the question.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Who -- with whom did you
Page 248
June 12, 2001
speak? I mean, who on our staff, Mr. Kuck?
MR. KUCK: For the record, Tom Kuck, Engineering Director.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And it's spelled K-u-c-k. That
would've been--
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I'm not going there.
MR. KUCK: Yes. I had a discussion with
Mr. Jenkins out in the hallway, I guess, a couple hours ago to see
really what his concerns were, and I think I pretty well addressed
them. I told him if he thought he was experiencing problems with the
water quality and I also talked in the interim with the blasting
contractor. He's willing to do some water-quality check prior to
blasting and then a couple days afterwards, and if we do find out that
there's a problem related to that, we will instruct the blasting
contractor to reduce his charges, and then we will also look into
future LDC amendments if we need to tighten some things up.
I think-- been on the board every LD cycle with the exception to
this one we've come forward and made more stringent regulations
and I will say I think Collier County has the most rigid regulations on
blasting of any county in the State of Florida, but we still receive a lot
of complaints.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And it is because of that we're
having infill within the urban area and neighbors finally developing
their lot.
MR. JENKINS: I'm progrowth, I really am, and anybody that
says you-all don't earn your money is dead way off base 'cause you
guys work your hinneys off. I appreciate that. CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Motion to approve the PUD.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I have a motion to approve. I have a
second. All in favor signify --
Page 249
June 12, 2001
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Plat.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Plat.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Plat.
signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
(No response.)
COMMISSIONER COLETTA:
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
MR. OLLIFF: Two items left.
I said PUD and -- I'm sorry, plat.
Corrected, plat. All in favor
Opposed by the same sign.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Motions carries 5-0. I need to give--
she needs time. She signaled me a few minutes ago and I apologize.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: We've got like nothing left.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: We hardly have anything to go.
We're getting there.
We -- I mean, two items left.
half.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: How are you? You okay? All right.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Probably be another hour and a
very lonely, Commissioner.
Attorney.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: No.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: It better not be. You're going to be
All right. That takes us to County
Item # 12A
SETTLEMENT OF BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
FOR COLLIER COUNTY V. BOYLE ENGINEERING
CORPORATION, CASE NO. 98-4456-CA, NOW PENDING IN
Page 250
June 12, 2001
THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA FOR
$900,000 - APPROVED
MR. OLLIFF: County Attorney.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Motion to approve the
settlement recommended in Item 12-A.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Second. Is the discussion-- all in
favor signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Motion is passed 5-0. Item B,
agreement of settlement with The Strand.
Item # 12B
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY
AND THE STRAND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION FOR
DELINQUENT ROAD IMPACT FEES RELATING TO GOLF
COURSE DEVELOPMENT - APPROVED; 10% PENALTY FEE
NOT TO BE WAIVED
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Oh, motion -- motion to
approve. We collected all the money?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
get to read it carefully.
COMMISSIONER HENNING:
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
MR. DUNNUCK:
That was my question. I didn't
I'm sorry.
Did we get every nickel?
For the record, John Dunnuck, Interim
Page 251
June 12, 2001
Community Development Environmental Services, D-u-n-n-u-c-k.
The answer is -- the answer is this agreement actually is saying that
they will pay by July 15th. They're doing a final appraisal as part of
this agreement. They have an outstanding -- they're looking for an
impact fee credit on a dedicated PUD. We're doing the appraisal of
the 1997 right-of-way to see how that works against this -- this
agreement. Part of this agreement says that in no circumstance will
we end up actually giving them money back, but that, in fact, we will
have an agreement and have it collected when it's all said and done.
We've done the net acreage B per the board's direction, and this is
just kind of really working out the details of how they're going to pay
US.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Could we get to see that? I'm
just going to be -- like I'm going to be curious to know what are the
assumptions in the appraisal for the road right-of-way. Are you using
as of whatever year it was constructed, et cetera?
MR. DUNNUCK: It's actually the year of the PUDs so it's 1997
appraisal.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: As far back as you could go.
MR. DUNNUCK: Yeah. We went back as far as we could go.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: What else might we need to
know? After -- okay. So you're going to aggressively compute the
number for the impact fee credit for the road. That's basically what
this appraisal's for?
MR. DUNNUCK: Correct. And it's at no charge to the county
to do this appraisal.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: At no charge. And then they
will pay everything they owe. What -- there's something in this staff
report, though, about $10,000 fees or--
MR. DUNNUCK: There's a -- as part of your ordinance, there's
a penalty provision that they didn't pay on time per -- per last fall's
Page 252
June 12, 2001
direction. We've included that as a charge and the fee, and I think
you probably have the representative from developer requesting
waiver of that 10 percent penalty. We're recommending in favor of
that 10 percent penalty as part of the cost.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And what was the second
condition in your staff report? In addition to that $10,000, there was
MR. DUNNUCK: The second condition was to allow the
developer to use a $30,000 bond that had already been posted for the
project as part of that.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And that's the same amount of
cash to us.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Right.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Well, I'm not interested in
waiving the $10,000 fee, and other than that I would support --
MR. OLLIFF: Actually a 10 percent, not a $10,000.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Sorry, 10 percent penalty for
late payment 'cause this is a developer who knows the process around
here probably better than we wish they did sometimes but quite
thoroughly.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I have to let him speak. I have no
interest in it, but I still have to let him speak for the record.
MR. SALVATORI: Thank you. For the record, my name is
Leo Salvatori, S-a-l-v-a-t-o-r-i. I'm a partner with the law firm of
Quarles & Brady and our Naples office is at 4501 North U.S. 41.
And for the record, actually, we paid this fee.
We paid this fee $32,000 in 1998 when it was originally assessed
when we presented an alternative impact fee analysis. Apparently,
the staff did not present this report to you for approval unbeknowst to
our client and it was afterwards we were asked to come forward
again. You may recall last fall we did then attempt to come forward
Page 253
June 12, 2001
and ask -- let us present another alternative impact fee ordinance so it
could be handled in proper course, and initially the board said, "Yes."
I believe the board said "No" which resulted in our being here.
The number that's before you today to settle this matter is for full
amount of the impact fee as though this was a public course. No one
in this room believes for a second that the impacts of Pelican Strand's
golf course is going to be $172,000. It's not. It's a private course.
It'll be primarily member owned and, in fact, and surely will only be
residents that are playing. Eventually, as the membership continues
to mature as the membership base is one-half of the total amount of
units that are allowed out there, and indeed we are already seeing that
process flip over.
But, nonetheless, for purposes of getting this resolved, we agree
we would give a donation of land to the county in return for impact
fee credits determined in accordance with your formula utilizing one
of your appraisers, and we've already retained that appraiser. We're
waiting for that figure to come in. The waiver of the penalty, frankly,
may be Monopoly money. We don't have the appraised value yet. If
it appraises out as everyone is suggesting, it probably will be. To me
it may not matter, but it matters to our client, and it matters in part to
our client for several reasons.
COURT REPORTER: Sir, please slow down.
MR. SALVATORI: I'm sorry.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: He's Italian.
MR. SALVATORI: At least I'm not waving my hands. One, we
paid the fee in 1998, but in good faith we have come forward to try to
get this resolved. Two, the number that we are agreeing to pay to
assess against the land, his full impact fee credit without going
through any alternative impact fee analysis -- again, being a private
course, we feel like we probably are overpaying. We don't care,
because we think the land's going to come out, but then to add a
Page 254
June 12, 2001
penalty on that when it was -- apparently what I'm told -- through no
fault of our client that they got into this problem, frankly, we thought
it was unfair. We paid this. We paid it three years ago. We're being
asked to pay again. We're paying $140,000 more than we paid three
years ago when you-all said that was okay. So for that reason we're
asking for a waiver of penalty.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
Anybody feel any differently?
We appreciate your consideration.
Thank you, sir. Any change of heart?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I make a motion to approve
staff's recommendation which excludes the penalty waiver.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Which excludes the penalty?
MR. DUNNUCK: Correct.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: In other words, you do not
support waiving the penalty, and that's my motion.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'll second that.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All in favor signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
Opposed by the same sign.
Motion carries 5-0. Thank you.
MR. SALVATORI: Before we go, I have to discuss with my
client then whether they want to proceed with the settlement on that
basis. I do not have the authority to settle on that basis. And what I
might suggest is a way to avoid this because I do suspect it's going to
appraise out. If you wouldn't mind giving John the authority to
suspend negotiations for the time being until we get the appraised
value in, this may be a non-issue. We have no --
Page 255
June 12, 2001
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I think that's appropriate. Let's
find out. It becomes a non-issue if the value of the land is higher than
what you owe us in impact fees plus penalty.
MR. SALVATORI: That is correct. The total amount that
John's looking for comes out to about $186,000 roughly. The amount
of acreage involved that's being conveyed is about five acres, and I'm
told the value's going to come in probably somewhere between forty
and sixty thousand dollars an acre. I don't know what the '97 values
are, but if that's all accurate, it's going to appraise out to no cash out
of our client's pocket.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: In other words, we're-- we're
going to get land that has a value higher than the full impact fee plus
MR. SALVATORI: Plus interest, plus penalties. That's correct.
So if you wouldn't mind giving John the authority to suspend doing
anything until we get that figure in, if we then agree, we can then sign
off on it.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And if you can't agree, then it
comes back to us?
MR. SALVATORI: That is correct.
MR. OLLIFF: I would be more comfortable if there were a time
frame involved in that.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Well, the plats are still on hold
until that happens.
MR. SALVATORI: Well, in fact, you have some of our money
from utilities, but we can do this. We've already instructed Julian
Stokes to appraise it, and we needed an answer by July 15th because
that is the number that we committed to the county attorney's office
and John, so I presume we'll have a number by July 15th. We can
operate on that basis.
MR. WEIGEL: July 31st date.
Page 256
June 12, 2001
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: July 31st we have a meeting so
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. July 31 we're back in session.
Fine. If everybody's comfortable with that, you want to amend your
motion to, I guess, staff direction sufficient? MR. OLLIFF: Yes.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Fine. Thank you very much.
MR. SALVATORI: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you, Mr. Dunnuck.
Item #13A
COMMISSIONER FIALA TO BE ABSENT FOR TWO WEEKS
AND WILL RETURN ON JUNE 30, 2001
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Let's talk about old cars.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: We have staff and commission,
general communications by staff.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Staff goes first?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: On 14th. Okay. Staff first.
MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Chairman, as many times as I've seen you-
all over the last 24 hours, I wouldn't have anything else to say.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: We'll be back tomorrow.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: That's all right. We'll see you first
thing in the morning. Okay. Any other staff communications? All
right. Communications from the Commissioners? Mr. Henning.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA:
COMMISSIONER HENNING:
bugs and Truly Nolen.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: That's next.
staying with the new agenda, folks.
Forgive me.
Yeah. I want to talk about
That's next. I was just
Page 257
June 12, 2001
COMMISSIONER COLETTA:
COMMISSIONER HENNING:
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
COMMISSIONER HENNING:
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
Forgive me.
Forgive me.
Oh, no. Forgive me.
I'll pass it.
I have nothing.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I only have one item, and it's good
news from Florida Power and Light. I will not read the whole letter,
but I'll enter it into the public record. They are assuring us that
specifically FPL projects a 20 percent reserve margin for the summer,
up from 15 percent a year ago, and for longer range FPL is adding
2,500 megawatts at projects currently under way in Fort Myers,
Sanford, and Martin, et cetera et cetera.
The whole letter really indicates that the State of Florida in their
service areas are certainly in good shape. They probably could sell
excess energy, so I will enter it into the public record, and if anyone's
concerned that we're going to have a California in Florida, the answer
is no. And that's all I have. Commissioner Fiala. No. Yes,
Commissioner Fiala. Staying in order.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, I do. And this is for you,
Commissioners, oh, except Tom isn't here. I wanted to tell you
officially on the record that between three and four years ago my
husband and I ever -- before I ever thought of running for office
decided to -- we go every year to the Kiwanis International
Convention, and so we signed up to go. That one is in Taipei and it's
for this year. So we've been paying our money on it every month
since then and whoever believed that I would actually become a
commissioner. When becoming a commissioner first thing I had to do
was find out what's happening, but our money has been paid on the
trip, and so what we've done is to at least be represented here on the
Commission, I have a budget committee that's been working with me.
I am preparing everything to submit for the workshops, and I will be
Page 258
June 12,2001
submitting them to you in writing on Friday. I sought approval from
the county attorney, the county manager, and the budget director, and
I will have a member of my committee sitting in the audience at all
times to answer any questions.
Also, I've given my schedule to my secretary and also to the
county attorney's office in case at any time we are voting at a
meeting. I'm going to be carrying my cell phone, if they can reach
me in Taipei -- I don't know if it goes that far -- so that you can get a
hold of me. If there's ever a tie vote and you need me, I will be at the
other end of the phone. I'll be gone for two weeks, back here on the
30th of June.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, we wish you bon voyage and
have a happy trip. I think that's -- be wonderful experience to stay
out of the reconnaissance planes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, yes. There are 12,000
Kiwanians going over there. I just --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Congratulations. I'm glad you're
going to go.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All right. Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you, Dr. Carter.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Known as "Boom Boom Ja-boom,"
no.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: A little punchy.
Item #13B
COMMISSIONER COLETTA TO TALK WITH SCHOOL BOARD
AND URGE A 50/50 PROPOSITION TO MATCH SCHOOL
NURSING PROGRAM NOT TO EXCEED $600,000 SUBJECT TO
FINAL APPROVAL BY THE BCC
Page 259
June 12, 2001
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I can tell at this point I'm going
to be able to talk about the healthcare initiative. Some time ago the
commission, in their infinite wisdom, put me in the front, told me to
go out there and go to work on it and see what I can come up with
and negotiate with some of the interested parties per se. I can't delay
any longer. The school system is going to be coming up into their
budget cycle. On the 21st I would like to go before them and carry
an initiative to them, and that's a 50/50 proposition where they'll
match what we do on the school nursing program.
And my proposal would be, well, simply what they're doing right
at this moment in time they have $200,000 that they have down on
paper. It was originally three, they went down to two hundred. Of
course, they didn't know about our initiative at that time. Where they
-- $200,000 which would replace the money from Naples Hospital
which was lost, and this particular fund was totally inaccurate. We
all agreed about that previously. And where we are at this point in
time is I go to that meeting, and they agree to the $200,000. I'll tell
them that I'll carry back to the commission with a recommendation
that we put in $200,000.
But I would like to go a step further and see if
I could move -- because we'll have a partner in this whole thing,
move it up to the next year or the year after with an offer as high as
$600,000 where we still match $600,000. That will be putting us
close to our ultimate goal of a nurse in every school so the children
can be properly cared for in a time of need.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: What is the total cost of a nurse
in every school; do you know?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, I don't, but I do know that
it'll take about -- a total of about $1.3 million per year to do it.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: That's -- that's what I was
Page 260
June 12, 2001
looking for.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioner Coletta, the
school system has the highest rate of adminitration per student in the
State of Florida. So maybe they could look at how they can redirect
their staff into, you know, provide for the students which they should
be doing anyways. We shouldn't be meddling in school board.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Let me put it to you this way,
Commissioner Henning. Nothing's happened up to this point in time.
I see this commission as a catalyst to get something done and make it
go forward. Someone has to provide for the children, and us coming
in as an equal player will be able to move this forward.
COMMISSIONER HENNING:
be thinking about the kids first so ...
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
would support the $200,000 match.
for is up to $600,000 this year?
And the school system should
I would support -- I certainly
The other -- what you're asking
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I would bring -- of course, any
proposal that would happen would have to come back here, but there
are some other things that are taking place that are going back and
forth between other boards of other entities, and we have reached a
point where there's anything substantial that I can report back to you.
The dollar amount we're going to need on some of the other ends is
nowheres near what we originally anticipated.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I would certainly--
MR. OLLIFF: I think what's being proposed is for fiscal year
'02. That's why he's talking about going to the school board prior to
their budget deliberations this summer.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. But you wouldn't be
committed until that point in time that you actually vote on the
budget.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I certainly support you going
Page 261
June 12, 2001
and trying to urge them to do whatever they're willing to do. If you
would just plead the case on behalf of the county commission that we
really don't think this is our job. I don't, but --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I tell you we've all felt that same
way, and our constituents -- and I know I've gotten many comments
from constituents saying they felt that the school board should at least
be a part of that. So I'm delighted that you're aggressively seeking it
out at this time.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Whatever you request you want to be
able to recommend the $200,000 commitment by the Board of
County Commissioners?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No. I wanted to go a step
further. Well, two -- two ends of this whole thing.
If they come back and they say, "Well, since you're coming in, we're
only going to put $100,000 in," I do not want to enter into that
agreement. My idea is to make the situation better, not to hold the
status quo. Their two hundred is what they're approaching their Board
for right now. That would be our minimum amount. If they would
like to come in with $300,000, that would move us up to a point that
it's going to be more realistic. We're talking about a situation that's --
that could be very severe in some cases. We have diabetics out there
that are being given insulin by staff members. We have medication
that's in the -- in the hospital --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: So you'd really like to do a 50/50
match not to exceed $600,000.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That is correct. I don't think
the school system's going to be able to come up with anything near
that, but I want to give them the incentive to move forward.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Subject to our final vote.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Subject to the Board of County
Commissioners.
Page 262
June 12, 2001
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Of course. Of course.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All right.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: So. What does that require? A
motion on the part of the board or just direction to the
Commissioner?
MR. WEIGEL: I think the direction you're giving is clear
enough for him and, obviously, what you have indicated, as I
understand it, is that any true committment of the board has to come
back before this board, and so at this time it's just a negotiation and a
recommendation that this board is ostensibly authorizing
Commissioner Coletta to offer.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Commissioner Coletta, the only
reason I have hesitancy to say, you know, go forth and commit us, is
because I'm trying to be very attendant to the public concerns over
the healthcare tax issue and hope that we can be really responsive to
some of the concerns about, do you know exactly what you're going
to spend the money on and who's going to be eligible and that kind of
stuff, so I -- I kind of see that evolving into something where we will
be paying for school nurses at some level and some Healthy Kids
Programs and, you know, something like that. Some real concrete
specific expenditures because we've got to, as we said from the
beginning on this healthcare tax, not only do it; well we've got to do
it perfectly.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: We certainly do, Commissioner
Mac'Kie. You couldn't be farther from the point. That's one of the
reasons why I'm working with the medical providers out there. And
the cooperation I'm getting at this point in time is quite remarkable,
and I think you're going to be amazed.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I think so too.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. I think you got sufficient board
Page 263
June 12, 2001
direction here by three, four nods, whatever to go and enter into those
discussions. I also would ask that as you do that, that you keep the
healthcare committee advised of your progress with
Mr. Snyder.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Of course.
Item #15A
DISCUSSION REGARDING THE DISPLAY OF TRULY NOLEN
ANTIQUE RESTORED CLASSIC CARS - COUNTY
ATTORNEY'S OFFICE TO PROPOSE A SETTLEMENT WITH
REGARDS TO PREPARING A VARIANCE TO ALLOW
EXEMPTION FROM THE SIGN ORDINANCE- APPROVED
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Could we please talk about
buggie cars.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Is that where we're going?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, we're there already.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All right. Let's talk about cars and
bugs.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. It's remarkable. I'm a
little tired, so I tossed out my speech about mice and men, and I'm
going to get down to real basics.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Go for it.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: What we're talking about is a --
I think an ordinance that's -- I'm not going to say it wasn't well
written, but I think the intent of it was never to cover classic cars with
the name of an individual on 'em. In this particular hobby which is
quite well known throughout this area, I think we probably have more
classic cars than any other place other than Cuba.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: This is not by choice.
Page 264
June 12, 2001
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: The truth of the matter is it's
common practice for people to put their names on the car. Now, the
fact that the man's name and his business is one and the same, I say
it's immaterial. What I would like to have this board do is give
direction to staff to have them go and prepare a variance that will
allow us to be able to exempt this from the sign ordinance.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Well, you've brought-- you've
added a new twist to it for me today. I was fully prepared to support
that variance, but I wonder if we couldn't, Mr. Weigel, make an
interpretation that the sign rules don't effect to -- don't relate to an
individual's name on his car, therefore, we can interpret that this
doesn't need a variance. Could we do that?
MR. WEIGEL: Well, one thing is about an ordinance change or
a variance with the ordinance in place, but a variance for this
particular situation based upon the particular and special facts that
seem to relate to this situation. Anytime that we make an ordinance
change or interpretation of the ordinance, we talk about the intended
or unintended consequences. I think that it would be very difficult to
legislate quickly today by interpretation. You might run into a
problem there.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Well, I'll support the variance,
then, Commissioner Coletta.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA:
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay.
Mr. Pettit, do you want to give us some --
MR. PETTIT: I do want to interfere a minute.
I'm Mike Pettit, Assistant County Attorney. I just want to remind the
board that there is a lawsuit pending, and it may be that the approach
you're taking would be appropriate to consider as a settlement
proposal.
You want to make that motion?
Yes, I will.
I have a second.
Page 265
June 12, 2001
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: There you go.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Yes. I would want the lawsuit to go
away.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I would too.
MR. PETTIT: Now, I can -- I have already had some
conversations with Mr. Nolen's attorney about variance and, of
course, the time I had the conversation I suggested that was the route
he may want to consider and that he would pay that fee.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I was suggesting that we handle
it at this end. By the way, just for --
MR. PETTIT: I understand that. I just wanted to let you know.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Go ahead and waive the fee. It's
cheaper in court.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That wasn't the reason why I
started this whole process. When I started it at that point in time, I
never knew there was a lawsuit or else I would never have
approached the subject, period.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Now that we know it, maybe the
direction we should be giving is for Mr. Pettit to make an offer of
settlement in that lawsuit, that the county staff would process the
necessary variance to make these cars compliant with our code in
settlement of the lawsuit.
MR. OLLIFF: That's fine. But you need to recognize that
you're also the board that hears this, so you need to be withholding
judgment on that variance until you hear the variance. The offer is
simply to process the variance, and he will get a fair opportunity to
present that variance for this board to make a decision.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: But our staff will be the
proponents of the variance.
MR. OLLIFF: Yes, preparers of.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All right. The way Mr. Olliff said that
Page 266
June 12, 2001
then I guess we've entertained a motion. We have a second.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Discussion, please. Thank you.
What I see on some of these vehicles is just Truly Nolen on the
vehicles, but I do see some vehicles where it is clearly, my opinion,
it's advertising for a company. I cannot support the motion, and I -- I
think the -- Mr. Nolen should be paying for it just like everybody
else, whether they want a sign variance application or, you know, a
setback. The applicant should pay for it, and Mr. Master is a good
example of that today with the treehouse. He came up with the
money, and it took him a long time, came up with the money for a
treehouse for kids. You know, this is something different, even
though I think that the vehicles that he is advertising are very nice,
and
Mr. Master had to pay for it. So I can't support the motion.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I would tell you this,
Commissioner Henning, if I was aware of the plight that was going
on, I would have interceded on his behalf and prevented that the same
as I am for Truly Nolen.
COMMISSIONER HENNING' And -- and I know that you
want to help everybody out there you can. I understand that and I
appreciate where you are. We're just different in that way.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: May I just say, the only concern I
had -- I mean, we all like the cars, and I miss them truly, Nolen, I
miss them, but anyway -- but what I am concerned with is any other
companies that have their name as the name of the company.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No. That's not where we're
going. We're talking about individual names. Anyone that has a
business. Suppose you had a Donna Fiala Restaurant and came up
with a classic pink little car and you wrote "Donna Fiala" on it. You
would comply same way he did as long as you don't say
"Restaurant," as long as you don't have any advertising on it.
Page 267
June 12, 2001
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Whoops, that's not what I
thought. What I was supporting was a variance because these cars
are so well restored.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's true.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: These are classic cars. It's a situation-
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: That we won't judge that
variance today, but we will -- based on the circumstances
surrounding this particular situation, we'll ask our staff to process a
variance because of the circumstances evolving around this particular
-- these cars. Not that we're making a variance for people who's
businesses are the same as their name or anything like that 'cause that
-- that would go too far.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: And I'm not so sure. I think
Commissioner Henning makes an excellent point. I'm not so sure I
want to waive the fee at this point until the negotiations take place to
find out where we are. I would just love to keep it all on the table.
We're offering a variance to drop a lawsuit. Who pays what on the
variance. I think that's negotiation.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'll amend my motion to
include that.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Is that acceptable to you,
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm sorry. I was --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: We're going to take the waiving of the
variance fee away and let it be part of the negotiation.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You have my support.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you, sir. Good catch.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And before we vote, same
speech as I made earlier in the day. How in the heck did code
enforcement get involved in this in the first place? And is this an
Page 268
June 12, 2001
appropriate prioritization of their time? Not in my judgment. Not
when I can drive up and down just -- I'll take you over to Bayshore to
some of these side streets, and you'll see where there's some serious
health safety code violations that we ought to be spending our time
on, not on nice pretty little cars.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, maybe Mr. Dunnuck-- maybe
somebody complained, I don't know.
MR. DUNNUCK: For the record, John Dunnuck here on
Community Development and Environmental Services
Administrator. You're correct. I think this is one of those issues
where we're out there starting to enforce the sign ordinance on
commercial vehicles and everybody starts pointing the finger saying,
"Well, what about Truly Nolen?" You know, we sent out to the
people that we know, we sent a letter out saying, "Here's what the
new ordinance states," and that's when we started getting the
feedback, and we did receive complaints about Truly Nolen, and we
responded.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: It was a complaint-driven process. I
agree. It probably wouldn't have happened except that so ...
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Dunnuck, may I say I'm in
support of code enforcement in their efforts. I know they get a bum
rap on both sides of the issue. So I want to say that.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: You did the right thing. Okay. Any
further business? See you at nine o'clock, folks.
***** Commissioner Mac'Kie moved, seconded by Commissioner
Fiala, and carried unanimously, that the following items under the
Consent and Summary Agendas be approved and/or adopted: *****
Item #16Al
Page 269
June 12,2001
RESOLUTIONS 2001-204 THROUGH 2001-224, PROVIDING
FOR THE ASSESSMENT OF LIEN FOR THE COST OF THE
ABATEMENT OF PUBLIC NUISANCES AGAINST OWNER-
BUILDER ALLIANCE, INC., RE LOT 64, LEAWOOD LAKES;
OWNER-BUILDER ALLIANCE, INC., RE LOT 64, LEAWOOD
LAKES; CAL MONTENEGRO, RE LOT 7, BLOCK 155, GOLDEN
GATE UNIT 5; CAL MONTENEGRO, RE LOT 6, BLOCK 155,
GOLDEN GATE UNIT 5; MARTIN I. & LILLIAN E.
BENJAMSON, RE LOT 13, BLOCK 224, UNIT 6, PART 1,
GOLDEN GATE; MARTIN I. & LILLIAN E. BENJAMSON, RE
LOT 13, BLOCK 224, UNIT 6, PART 1, GOLDEN GATE; MIMON
BARON, RE LOT 6, LELY COUNTRY CLUB, MUIRFIELD;
LLOYD G. SHEEHAN, RE LOTS 9 AND 10, BLOCK 10, NAPLES
MANOR ADDITION; LLOYD G. SHEEHAN, RE LOTS 9 AND
10, BLOCK 10, NAPLES MANOR ADDITION; ALFREDO L. &
ANNE C. RAMIREZ, LOT 16, BLOCK 169, UNIT 5 PART -
GOLDEN GATE; JULIO DOMINGUEZ, RE LOT 8, BLOCK 175,
UNIT 5 PART - GOLDEN GATE; J.B. GADSEN, JR. & ALTHEA
GADSEN RE THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE EAST ONE-
HALF OF THE NORTHEAST ONE-QUARTER OF THE
SOUTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST ONE-
QUARTER OF SECTION 9, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29
EAST; JAMES L. WALKER, RE GOLDEN GATE UNIT 4,
BLOCK 135, LOT 12; HS PARTNERSHIP, RE THE SOUTH 50
FEET OF THE NORTH 248.5 FEET OF THE WEST 165 FEET OF
THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE
SOUTHWEST 1/4, SECTION 3, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE
29 EAST; KARL-HEINZ & HEIDI LEISTER RE LOT(S) 81,
IMPERIAL GOLF ESTATES, PHASE V; JACQUES & DANIELE
ABLINE, % AMERICAN EXPRESS BANK, RE LOT 95,
IMPERIAL GOLF ESTATES PHASE 1; JOSEPH
Page 270
June 12, 2001
DEFRANCESCO, RE LOT 30, BLOCK 188, GOLDEN GATE,
UNIT 6; JULIO DOMINGUEZ, RE LOT 8, BLOCK 175, UNIT 5
PART - GOLDEN GATE; JMK INDUSTRIES, INC., RE LOT 22,
BLOCK M, EMBASSY WOODS GOLF & COUNTRY CLUB AT
BRETTONE PARK, PHASE ONE; DANIEL THOMAS & DONNA
M. LEE, RE LOT 10, BLOCK 13, GOLDEN GATE, UNIT NO. 1;
CHARLES C. & CHRISTINE C. MORRISON, RE LOT 9,
IMPERIAL GOLF ESTATES PHASE I
Item gl 6A2
RESOLUTION 2001-225, AUTHORIZING FINAL ACCEPTANCE
OF ROADWAY, DRAINAGE, WATER AND SEWER
IMPROVEMENTS IN "NAPLES WALK" AND RELEASE OF
THE MAINTENANCE SECURITY
Item gl 6A3
FINAL PLAT OF "NAPLES LAKES SHOPPING CENTER" -
WITH CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT,
PERFORMANCE SECURITY AND STIPULATIONS
Item g 16A4 - Moved to Item g 10G
Item gl 6A5 - Moved from Item gl OB
REQUEST BY OCEAN BOULEVARD PARTNERSHIP
(GRANADA SHOPPES PUD) TO DELAY CONSTRUCTION OF
EAST/WEST CONNECTOR THROUGH GRANADA SHOPPES
PUD UNTIL COMPLETION OF U.S. 41 HIGHWAY
IMPROVEMENTS AND PROPOSED INTERSECTION OF
Page 271
June 12, 2001
EAST/WEST CONNECTOR WITH U.S. 41 - WITH
STIPULATION AS INDICATED ON THE CHANGE SHEET
Item #16B 1
BID #01-3221, "RADIO ROAD BEAUTIFICATION MSTU
ROADWAY GROUNDS MAINTENANCE"- AWARDED TO
COMMERCIAL LAND MAINTENANCE, INC.
Item # 16B2
RFP #01-3216, HALDEMAN CREEK BASIN RESTORATION
PROJECT NEGOTIATIONS TO BEGIN WITH WOODS HOLE
GROUP, HANS WILSON & ASSOCIATES; AND CUTCHER &
ASSOCIATES
Item #16B3
WORK ORDER NO. RCS-FT-01-02 WITH BETTER ROADS, INC.
FOR RESURFACING A PORTION OF FOREST LAKES BLVD.
FOR THE FOREST LAKES MUNICIPAL SERVICES TAXING
UNIT (MSTU) - IN THE AMOUNT OF $59,053.30
Item # 16B4
CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 TO WORK ORDER NO. WD-129 WITH
MITCHELL AND STARK CONSTRUCTION CO., INC.
(PROJECT NO. 31803) FOR INSTALLATION OF STORM DRAIN
PIPE AND INLET BOXES ALONG KIRKWOOD AVENUE - IN
THE AMOUNT OF $10,389
Page 272
June 12, 2001
Item #16B5
RESOLUTION 2001-226, AUTHORIZING THE CHAIRMAN TO
ENTER INTO A HIGHWAY LANDSCAPING INSTALLATION
AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT WITH THE FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FOR THE
CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE OF LANDSCAPING
AND RELATED BEAUTIFICATION IMPROVEMENTS
LOCATED ON A PORTION OF STATE ROAD 45 (U.S. 41,
TAMIAMI TRAIL) BETWEEN CR 896 (PINE RIDGE ROAD)
AND GULF PARK DRIVE
Item # 16B6
RESOLUTION 2001-227, AUTHORIZING THE CHAIRMAN TO
ENTER INTO A HIGHWAY LANDSCAPING INSTALLATION
AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT WITH THE FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FOR THE
CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE OF PHASE "B"
LANDSCAPING AND RELATED BEAUTIFICATION
IMPROVEMENTS LOCATED ON A PORTION OF STATE
ROAD 90 (U.S. 41, TAMIAMI TRAIL) BETWEEN CR 31
(AIRPORT-PULLING ROAD) AND CR 864 (RATTLESNAKE
HAMMOCK ROAD)
Item #16B7
PETITION TM-00-02 RE THE NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC
MANAGEMENT PROGRAM INSTALLATION OF TRAFFIC
CALMING DEVICES ON BECCA AVENUE BETWEEN
BAYSHORE DRIVE AND PINE STREET
Page 273
June 12, 2001
Item # 16B8
CONTRACT AMENDMENT NO. 3 FOR PROFESSIONAL
ENGINEERING SERVICES BY JOHNSON ENGINEERING, INC.
FOR IMMOKALEE ROAD CONSTRUCTION PROJECT
(PROJECT NO. 69101) - IN THE AMOUNT OF $465,196.25
Item #16B9 - Moved to Item # 1 OF
Item # 16B 10
WORK ORDER NO. WD-077 FOR LAKE KELLY POPLAR WAY
DITCH IMPROVEMENTS (PROJECT NO. 31801) - AWARDED
TO MITCHELL & STARK CONSTRUCTION CO., INC., IN THE
AMOUNT OF $97,174
Item #16B 11
ACCEPTANCE OF WARRANTY DEED AND AERIAL
EASEMENT GRANTED BY COLLIER DEVELOPMENT
CORPORATION FOR TRAFFIC SIGNAL EQUIPMENT AT THE
OFFSET INTERSECTION OF ENTERPRISE AND TRANSFER
ROADS WITH AIRPORT-PULLING ROAD; COMPENSATION
TO COLLIER DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION IN THE
AMOUNT OF $6,938.35 AND WAIVER OF REQUIREMENT FOR
A FORMAL, INDEPENDENT APPRAISAL REPORT
Item # 16B 12
Page 274
June 12, 2001
RFP #01-3223 FOR DESIGN/BUILD SERVICES FOR 13TM ST.SW
BRIDGE - STAFF TO BEGIN CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONS
WITH KELLEY BROTHERS, INC. - AMERICAN CONSULTING
ENGINEERS, PLC; PCI CIVIL CONSTRUCTORS, INC. -
BEISWENGER HOCH AND ASSOC., INC.; KISINGER CAMPO
& ASSOC. CORP. - ZEP CONSTRUCTION, INC.
Item # 16B 13
RESOLUTION 2001-228, AUTHORIZING A SUPPLEMENTAL
JOINT PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT WITH THE FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FOR THE PURCHASE
OF FIVE PARATRANSIT VEHICLES
Item # 16C 1
AUTHORIZATION FOR THE USE OF STATE WASTE TIRE
GRANT FUNDS FOR RECYCLED TIRE MATERIAL OVERLAY
ON THE ATHLETIC TRACKS AT NAPLES HIGH SCHOOL AND
IMMOKALEE HIGH SCHOOL
Item # 16C2
BID g01-3214, FOR BACKFLOW CROSS CONNECTION
PROGRAM (PROJECT NO. 70881) - AWARDED TO NORTH
AMERICAN OPERATING & MAINTENANCE
Item # 16C3
ADDITIONAL ENGINEERING SERVICES DURING
CONSTRUCTION OF COUNTY UTILITY RELOCATIONS IN
Page 275
June 12, 2001
CONJUNCTION WITH U.S. 41 ROAD WIDENING FROM
MYRTLE ROAD TO OLD U.S. 41 (PROJECTS 70047 AND 70048)
- PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH TAMPA
BAY ENGINEERING, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $17,680
Item # 16C4
PURCHASING POLICY REQUIREMENTS FOR FORMAL
COMPETITION WAIVED; WORK ORDER TO MITCHELL AND
STARK CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC. FOR
ACCELERATING CONSTRUCTION OF THE LIVINGSTON
ROAD RECLAIMED WATER MAIN, PHASE 2 - IN THE
AMOUNT OF $544,552
Item #16C5
PURCHASING POLICY REQUIREMENTS FOR FORMAL
COMPETITION WAIVED; PUBLIC UTILITIES
ADMINISTRATOR TO EXECUTE THE NECESSARY
AGREEMENT, WORK ORDERS, AND/OR PURCHASES
RELATED TO THE NORTH-SOUTH SEWER
INTERCONNECTS; AND RATIFICATION OF PREVIOUS
AUTHORIZATION TO KYLE CONSTRUCTION, INC. FOR
CONSTRUCTION OF THE EMERGENCY SEWER
INTERCONNECT BETWEEN THE NORTH COUNTY SYSTEM
AND THE CITY OF NAPLES SYSTEM AS INDICATED IN THE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item # 16C6
Page 276
June 12, 2001
REQUIREMENT FOR APPRAISAL FOR A REAL ESTATE
PURCHASE WAIVED; PURCHASE AGREEMENT BETWEEN
CITYGATE COMMERCIAL INC. AND COLLIER COUNTY,
FLORIDA FOR LAND REQUIRED TO RE-ALIGN THE
LANDFILL ACCESS ROAD (A/K/A/WHITE LAKE
BOULEVARD), PROJECT NO. 70054 - IN THE AMOUNT OF
$50,000
Item # 16D 1
BID #01-3232 FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF VINEYARDS
ELEMENTARY SCHOOL PARKING LOT EXPANSION
(PROJECT #80013) - AWARDED TO FLORIDA STATE
UNDERGROUND, INC., IN THE MODIFIED AMOUNT OF
$161,860.65
Item #16D2
RESOLUTION 2001-229, AFFIRMING TWO APPLICATIONS
FOR TWO SEPARATE GRANTS FROM THE FLORIDA FISH
AND WILDLIFE CONSERVATION COMMISSION, FLORIDA
BOATING IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
Item # 16E 1
TRANSACTION AND EXECUTION OF OWNER'S AFFIDAVIT,
DEED/BILL OF SALE, UTILITY EASEMENT, AND WATER
AND SEWER UTILITY INFRASTRUCTURE CONVEYANCE
AND SERVICE AGREEMENT RELATIVE TO THE
CONVEYANCE TO FLORIDA GOVERNMENTAL UTILITY
Page 277
June 12, 2001
AUTHORITY (FGUA) WATER UTILITY FACILITIES LOCATED
AT THE GOLDEN GATE SATELLITE SERVICE CENTER
Item # 16E2
BUDGET AMENDMENT TO REIMBURSE THE DEPARTMENT
OF FACILITIES MANAGEMENT FOR EMERGENCY AND
UNANTICIPATED EXPENSES INCURRED IN THE FIRST TWO
QUARTERS OF FISCAL YEAR 2000-01
Item # 16E3
BUDGET AMENDMENT TO FUND CLAIMS IN THE
PROPERTY & CASUALTY INSURANCE FUND THROUGH
THE REMAINDER OF FISCAL YEAR 2001
Item # 16E4
RFP g01-3204, REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL SERVICES - STAFF
TO ENTER INTO APPRAISAL AGREEMENTS WITH COASTAL
APPRAISAL SERVICES; SEWELL, VALENTICH, TILLIS &
ASSOC.; GALLION WILSON; ANDERSON & CARR;
QUINLIVAN APPRAISAL; GALLOWAY & PRICE; OMNI
APPRAISAL GROUP; W.H. REEVE & ASSOCIATES; R & W
ENTERPRISES; WILCOX APPRAISAL SERVICES; GEORGE P.
KMETZ APPRAISAL SERVICES; AND APPRAISAL RESEARCH
CORP. OF NAPLES
Item # 16E5
Page 278
June 12, 2001
BID #01-3219, "PURCHASE AND DELIVERY OF FERTILIZER"-
AWARDED TO AGRO DISTRIBUTION DBA PRO SOURCE
ONE; LESCO, INC.; AND HOWARD FERTILIZER
Item # 16E6
BID #01-3210 "SMALL LANDSCAPE EQUIPMENT AND
SMALL ENGINE EQUIPMENT PARTS AND SERVICE"-
AWARDED TO FIRMS AS DETAILED ON THE BID MATRIX
IN THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item #16E7 - Deleted
COOPERATIVE PURCHASE MASTER AGREEMENT WITH
OFFICE DEPOT BUSINESS SERVICES DIVISION FOR OFFICE
SUPPLIES
Item # 16E8 - Deleted
Item #16E9
BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR THE EMERGENCY
REPLACEMENT OF THE JUDGE'S SECURITY AND CARD
ACCESS SYSTEM IN THE NAPLES AND IMMOKALEE
COURTHOUSES (PROJECT 80525)
Item # 16G 1
BUDGET AMENDMENTS 01-322, 01-327 AND 01-334
Item # 16G2
Page 279
June 12, 2001
RESOLUTION 2001-230, TERMINATING THE "INTEREST &
SINKING FUND (201)" IN THE BUDGET OF COLLIER
COUNTY
Item # 16G3
RESOLUTION 2001-231, TERMINATING THE "CAPITAL
OUTLAY" FUND (196) IN THE BUDGET OF COLLIER
COUNTY
Item # 16G4
RESOLUTION 2001-232, TERMINATING THE "WATER
MANAGEMENT" FUND (110) IN THE BUDGET OF COLLIER
COUNTY
Item # 1611
PAYMENT FOR COMMISSIONERS CARTER AND COLETTA
TO ATTEND THE AMERICAN SPECIALTY CONTRACTORS
OF FLORIDA ANNUAL INSTALLATION DINNER ON JUNE 15,
2001 - IN THE AMOUNT OF $30 PER COMMISSIONER
Item #1612
PAYMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $20 FOR COMMISSIONER
CARTER'S ATTORNEY/CLIENT DINNER MEETING AT
COLLIER ATHLETIC CLUB REGARDING BEACH ROCKS
MEDIATION
Page 280
June 12, 2001
Item # 1613
PAYMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $60 FOR COMMISSIONER
CARTER TO ATTEND THE LATIN AMERICAN BUSINESS
AND PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION SCHOLARSHIP GALA
AT HILTON NAPLES & TOWERS ON JUNE 23,2001
Item #1614
PAYMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $60 FOR COMMISSIONER
COLETTA TO ATTEND THE LATIN AMERICAN SABOOR AT
HILTON NAPLES & TOWERS ON JUNE 23,2001
Item # 16J 1
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 281
FOR BOARD ACTION:
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
June 12, 2001
1. 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. May 2, 2001 through May g, 2001
2. May 9, 2001 through May 15,2001
3. May 16, 2001 through May 22, 2001
B. Districts:
Collier Soil and Water Conservation District - Agenda for May 2, 2001
and March 21, 2001 and Minutes of March 21, 2001 and February 15,
2001
Lely Community Development District - Management Letter, Financial
Statements - September 30, 2000 and Local Government Annual Financial
Report
East Naples Fire Control And Rescue District - Audited Financial
Statements - September 30, 2000 and Management Letter
Mediterra South Community Development District - Minutes of Meeting
held February 28, 2001 approved at March 28, 2001 meeting and Financial
Statements - Unaudited January 31,2001
Heritage Greens Community Development District - Agenda for and
Minutes of January 8, 2001 meeting
o
Naples Heritage Community Development District - Minutes of March
12, 2001 meeting and Financial Statements - February 28, 2001 -
Unaudited
H:Data/Format
Key Marco Community Development District - Financial Statements -
Unaudited - July 31, 2000 and Minutes of Meeting held September 6,
2000 and Notice of Scheduled Meetings - AG~I~D_I~,..I~I£M
Ho. 3 ~ ,4~
JUN 12 2001
C. Minutes:
Pelican Marsh Community Development District - Financial Statemems -
September 30, 2000 and Annual Financial Report and Management
Letting included in the audited financial statements
Pelican Bay MSTBU Advisory Committee - Agenda for May 2, 2001,
Clam Bay Restoration Program Information, Applicant Resumes, Budget-
In-Brief Fiscal Year 2002 and Proposed Budget Fiscal Year 2002 and
Minutes of March 7, 2001
Collier County Airport Amhority - Agenda for May 14, 2001
Environmental Advisory Council - Agenda for May 2, 2001 and Minutes
of April 4, 2001
Collier County Library Advisory Board- Agenda for April 25, 2001 and
Minutes of March 28, 2001
Developmental Services Advisory Committee- Agenda for May 02, 2001
and Minutes of April 4, 2001
Hispanic Affairs Advisory Board - Minutes of March 22, 2001 and
Agenda for Wednesday, May 23,2001
Rural Fringe Area Assessment Oversight Committee - Agenda for May
23,2001
H:Data/Format
June 12, 2001
Item # 16K1
STATE REVENUE SHARING APPLICATION FOR FISCAL
YEAR 2001-2002
Item #16L 1
AGREEMENTS WITH FORD MOTOR COMPANY AND
COLLIER COUNTY VETERANS COUNCIL, INC. FOR
VETERANS TRANSPORTATION SERVICES - IN THE
AMOUNT OF $10,100 PER YEAR
Item # 16L2
STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT RELATIVE TO THE
EASEMENT ACQUISITION OF PARCEL 248 IN THE LAWSUIT
ENTITLED COLLIER COUNTY V. JOSE ALVARADO, ET AL.,
(GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD, PROJECT NO. 63041) - STAFF
TO DEPOSIT $250 INTO THE REGISTRY OF THE COURT
Item #16L3
RESOLUTION 2001-233, APPROVING THE ISSUANCE OF
REVENUE BONDS IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED
$4,500,000 BY THE COLLIER COUNTY INDUSTRIAL
DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Item # 16L4
AGREED ORDER AWARDING EXPERT FEES, ATTORNEY'S
FEES AND COSTS RELATIVE TO THE EASEMENT
Page 282
June 12, 2001
ACQUISITION OF PARCELS 105A AND 105B IN THE
LAWSUIT ENTITLED COLLIER COUNTY V. MARIANNE L.
BENDOTT, ET. AL., CASE NO. 92-2045-CA (RADIO ROAD
PROJECT NO. 65031) - IN THE AMOUNT OF $22,521
Item # 16L5
AGREED ORDER AWARDING EXPERT FEES RELATIVE TO
THE EASEMENT ACQUISITION OF PARCEL 2-T IN THE
LAWSUIT ENTITLED COLLIER COUNTY V. JOHN B.
FASSETT, TRUSTEE OF THE ANNE M. FASSETT TRUST
DATED JUNE 5, 1986, ET. AL., CASE NO. 99-3040-CA
(LIVINGSTON ROAD, PROJECT NO. 65041) - STAFF TO
DEPOSIT $9,997.50 INTO THE REGISTRY OF THE COURT
Item #17A- Moved to Item #8E
Item # 17B
ORDINANCE 2001-28, REPEALING ORDINANCE 86-40, THE
NORTH NAPLES ROADWAY MUNICIPAL SERVICES TAXING
AND BENEFIT UNIT
Item # 17C
ORDINANCE 2001-29, REPEALING ORDINANCE 80-43, THE
GOODLAND WATER DISTRICT MUNICIPAL SERVICES
TAXING DISTRICT
Page 283
June 12, 2001
There being no further business for the good of the County, the
meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 6 p.m.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS/EX OFFICIO
GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF SPECIAL
DISTRICTS UNDER_ITS CONTROL
JAMES lJ5'. CARTER, Ph.D., CHAIRMAN
ATTEST:
:DWIGHT E.".BROCK, CLERK
These minutes approved by the Board on
as presented c,~
, or as corrected
TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF DONOVAN COURT
REPORTING, INC., BY PAMELA HOLDEN AND CAROLYN J.
FORD, COURT REPORTERS
Page 284