BCC Minutes 07/31/2001 RJuly 31,2001
REGULAR MEETING OF July 31,2001
OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
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 9:12 a.m. in
REGULAR SESSION in Building "F" of the Government Complex,
East Naples, Florida, with the following members present:
CHAIRMAN: JAMES D. CARTER, PH.D
VICE CHAIRMAN: PAMELA S. MAC'KIE JIM COLETTA
DONNA FIALA (Via Speakerphone)
TOM HENNING
ALSO PRESENT:
Tom Olliff, County Manager
Ramiro Manalich, Assistant County Attorney
Tom Storrar, Emergency Services Administrator
James V. Mudd, Public Utilities Administrator
Norman Feder, Transportation Administrator
John M. Dunnuck, III, Community Development
Page 1
COLLIER COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONER
CLERK TO BOARD
4ra FLOOR
FP: 3 IND: I CV:0
AGENDA
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
July 31, 2001
1. INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
A. Reverend Susan Diamond, First Christian Church
2. AGENDA AND MINUTES
A. Approval
B. Approval
C. Approval
D. Approval
E. Approval
F. Approval
of today's regular, consent and summary agenda aa amended
of June 11, 2001 BCC/Workshop.
of June 12, 2001 BCC Regular Meeting.
of June 13, 2001 BCC Special Meeting.
of June 20, 2001 BCC Special Meeting.
of June 21 and June 22, 2001 BCC Budget Workshop.
G. Approval of June 26, 2001 BCC Regular Meeting.
PROCLAMATIONS
Proclamation recognizing August 2001 as World Breastfeeding Month and
proclaims August 2001 as Breastfeeding Month in Collier County.
Proclamation to be accepted by Ms. Laurie Owens, WlC and Health Services,
Collier County Government.
Proclamation recognizing the Guadalupe Center and the Immokalee
Community for applying to the U.S. Department of Justice for official Weed
and Seed site recognition. Proclamation to be accepted by Nora Benevides,
John Lawson.
Proclamation proclaiming the month of September as Ovarian Cancer
Awareness Month. Proclamation to be accepted by Carolyn Benivegna,
President and Founder, Southwest Florida Division, National Ovarian Cancer
Coalition and Jane Pfaender.
Proclamation recognizing Sunday, August 12th, 2001 aa "Undy Sunday", the
fifth annual collection date for new underclothes for children In need in our
community. Proclamation to be accepted by George Drobinski, Catholic
Charities District Director, John Fitzgerald, Catholic Charities Advisory Board
Chairman and Reverend Susan Diamond, Pastor of the First Christian Church
Disciples of Christ.
Proclamation recognizing Dr. Audre Levy for her outstanding contributions to
our community in her tenure as Provost at the Collier County Campus of
Edison Community College. Acceptor TBA.
SERVICE AWARDS
Five-Year Attendee~:
2
July 31, 2001
1) James Fitzek, Parks and Recreation Department
2) Jeffrey Bolen, Information Technology Department
3) Susan Satow, Parks and Recreation Department
4) Robert Pierce, Facilities Management Department
5) Bernice Forester, Emergency Medical Services
6) Kathryne Warren, Emergency Medical Services
7) Jason Valinsky, Facilities Management Department
5. PRESENTATIONS
Presentation from the Collier County Board of County Commissioners to
Tiarra Myers, Sophomore from Lely High School, for her contributions to
encourage waste reduction and recycling in Collier County.
B. Recommendation to recognize Michelle Hondzinski, Secretary I, University
Extension Services, as Employee of the Month for July 2001.
C. THIS ITEM TIME CERTAIN 9:30 A.M. Check presentation by FDOT to
Commissioner James D. Carter for Livingston Road Improvements.
PUBLIC PETITIONS AND COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS
A. Public Petition regarding Las Naciones News Community Forum scheduled in
the Board of County Commissioners Boardroom August 9 and 10, 2001.
B. This item has been deleted.
C. Public Petition regarding redistricting of Collier County by the Citizens for Fair
Redistricting.
~ 7. BOARD OFZONING APPEALS
3
July 31, 2001
Am
This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be
provided by Commission members. Petition VA-2001-AR-688, Jim Hudson
representing Stoneburner-Hudaon Trust requesting a 27-foot aide yard
variance from the required 40-foot side yard setback established for
automobile service stations to 13 feet for an existing automobile service
station located at the corner of Airport Pulling Road and Davis Boulevard in
Section 11, Township 50 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida.
(Chahram Badamtchian, Principal Planner, Planning Services)
8. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. This item has been deleted.
An Ordinance of Collier County, Florida; to be entitled Merchandising of
Tobacco Products in Collier County; providing for findings of fact, intent and
definitions; prohibiting placement of tobacco products in open display units
directly accessible to minors; providing for exceptions; providing for
enforcement; and providing for an effective date. (David Weigel, County
Attorney)
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
A. Appointment of member to the Historical/Archaeological Preservation Board.
(Sue Filson, Administrative Assistant to the BCC)
10. COUNTY MANAGER'S REPORT
THIS ITEM TIME SENSITIVE-T~) BE HEARD AT 2:00 P.M. Discussion of the
Federal Emergency Management Agency's Proposed Flood Insurance Rate
Maps for Collier County. (Gene Chartrand, FEMA Coordinator)
The Community Development and Environmental Services Division providing
a summary of a previous interpretation of the Land Development Code
specifically as it relates to outdoor storage as a use permitted by right in
association with a principal permitted use in the C-4, General Commercial
Zoning District, for discussion purposes as directed by the Board of County
Commissioners. (Susan Murray, Current Planning Manager, Planning
Services)
C. This item has been deleted.
4
July 31, 2001
To adopt the proposed Millage rates as the maximum property tax rates to be
levied in FY 2002. (Mike Smykowski, Director, Office of Management and
Budget)
Approve an Interlocal Agreement between the City of Marco Island and Collier
County for an Advanced Life Support (ALS) Engine Partnership Program.
(Tom Storrar, Emergency Services Administrator)
Fe
Approve an Interlocal Agreement between the East Naples Fire Control and
Rescue District and Collier County for an Advanced Life Support (ALS) Engine
Partnership Program. (Tom Storrar, Emergency Services Administrator)
Request the Board to designate a Commissioner to accompany consultant
and the staff for Field Assessment of Innovative Solid Waste Facilities in
Australia. (Jim Mudd, Public Utilities Administrator)
H. Consideration of Issues for the Board's 2002 Legislative Agenda.
McNees, Assistant County Manager)
(Mike
Summary of Glades and Collier Counties Joint Workshop. (Jim Mudd, Public
Utilities Administrator)
Request Board of County Commissioners approval to memorialize the
proposed 13= Street SW Bridge by naming the structure in honor of Richard J.
Hellrlegel, P.E., Transportation Operations Department Design Manager.
(Norman Feder, Administrator Transportation Services)
It is requested that this item be heard as the first regular item on the Agenda.
Follow-Up Report to the Board of County Commissioners to the Public
Petition regarding a Human Rights Commission made by Ms. Laverne
Franklin, President of the NAACP. (Thomas W. Olliff, County Manager)
Review Petition TM99-01 requesting the installation of a temporary traffic
diverter at the intersection of Donna Street and Gall Boulevard sa part of the
Neighborhood Traffic Management Plan for the Coconut Creek Estates
Neighborhood. (Norman Feder, Transportation Services Administrator)
5
July 31, 2001
11.
12.
AIRPORT AUTHORITY
COUNTY ATTORNEY'S REPORT
A. Agreement between Collier County and the South Florida Water Management
District for use of Tourist Development Tax monies for the Lake Trafford
Restoration Project.
This item has been deleted.
Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners authorize
Retention of Don Hemke, Esquire, of the Law Firm of Carlton, Fields, Ward,
Emmanuel, Smith and Cutler, P.A. to represent each of the Board members in
their Individual capacities In the Lawsuit styled Aquaport, L.C., et al, v. Collier
County, et aL, Case Number 2:01-CV-341-FTM-29DNF, now pending in the
United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida. (David Weigel,
County Attorney)
13. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFiCERS/ELECTED OFFICIALS
Board approval of an Amendment to Collier County Resolution 99-328;
specifically to replace "Exhibit B"; providing for Fire Prevention and Control
Fees assessed for Fire Inspection on Building Permits.
14.
15.
STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS
FUTURE AGENDAS
A. Discussion of reimbursement for charges related to the Pelican Bay MSTBU
Town Hall Meeting and straw vote. (Commissioner Carter)
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.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
1) Acceptance of assignment agreement for Fiddler's Creek, Phase 2-A, Unit
Three.
6
July 31, 2001
2)
Request to grant final acceptance of the roadway, drainage, water and
sewer Improvements for the final plat of 'Tierra Lago".
3) Request to grant final acceptance of the roadway, drainage, water and
sewer improvements for the final plat of 'Wedgewood Subdivision".
4) Final acceptance of Water Utility Facilities for Capri Commercial Center.
5} Final acceptance of Water Utility Facilitlee for Regatta.
6} Approve a Budget Amendment to appropriate reserves from the
Unincorporated General Fund to remove dilapidated mobile homes from
the Immokalee Community.
7)
S)
9)
11)
12)
13)
14)
16)
17)
18)
Sewer facilities acceptance for Grey Oaks, Unit Six, Phase Two.
Request to grant final acceptance of the roadway, drainage, water and
sewer Improvements for the final plat of "Maplewood Unit Three".
Request to grant final acceptance of the roadway, drainage, water and
sewer improvements for the final plat of "Tamiami Professional Center".
Adopt resolutions enforcing liens on properties for Code Violations.
Authorize staff to hire a consultant to review and clarify/simplify the Land
Development Code.
Authorize a Special Cycle of the Land Development Code.
Request to enter into a Maintenance Agreement for privacy wall
improvements within Galleria Drive (Pelican Marsh Unit Twenty-Two).
Request to approve for recording the final plat of "Jubilation", and to
waive Section 3.2.6.3.4 (2) of the Collier County Land Development Code
(posting of subdivision performance security) until the first Certificate of
Occupancy is requested.
Request to approve for recording the final plat of "Olde Cypress Tract 12".
Recommendation to adopt a revised Version of Division 3.5 (Excavations)
of the Land Development Code (Ord. 92-73 as amended) to serve as an
Interim Policy during the formal review and approval process.
Request to approve and fund of an Engineering Techni(~ian to assist the
tracking and processing of development projects and utility conveyances.
Board of County Commissioners servin.q as the Communitl~
Redevelopment A.qencv: Recommendation that the Community
Redevelopment Agency Adopt a Resolution to amend the bylaws of the
Local Redevelopment Advisory Boards.
19) Extension of Building Permit Application for Malibu Lakes.
7
July 31, 2001
20)
21)
Adoption of a Resolution establishing an Official Administrative
Procedures Manual for the Collier County Consolidated Impact Fee
Ordinance. (Copies of the Administrative Procedures Manual are
available at the Community Development Services Center~ County
Manager's Office and the Office of Public Information.)
Approval and Execution of a Lease Agreement between Collier County
and CPOC Realty, L.L.C., for office space to be utilized by the Housing
and Urban Improvement Department.
B. TRANSPORTATION SERVICES
1)
Approve Amendment No. 11 to the Professional Services Agreement with
Hole, Montes, Inc. for Livingston Road, Phase IV, Project No. 65041, and
the Livingston East-West Connector, Project No. 60036.
2)
Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners award Bid
#01-3246 for the purchase and delivery of pine straw mulch to Central
Florida Mulches.
3) Approve Professional Consulting Services Agreement with Wilson Miller
for the Vanderbilt Area Corridor Study (RFP #01-3227).
4) Approve Professional Consulting Services Agreement with TBE Group,
Inc., for the North-South Planning Corridor Study (RFP #01-3227).
5) Approve Work Order No. BRC-FT-01-08 with Better Roads Inc., for
sidewalk improvements on Donna Street, Project No. 60025.
6)
Adopt a Resolution authorizing the acquisition by gift or purchase of
perpetual, non-exclusive sidewalk easements for the construction of a
sidewalk from Golden Gate Boulevard to the Golden Gate Main Canal
(Project No. 60171).
7)
This item continued from the June 267 2001 Bcc Meeting. Approve
Developer Contribution Agreement with First Baptist Church for Road
Impact Credits subject to Developer complying with all conditions of the
agreements imposed by the County.
8) Adopt a Resolution to expand authorization to all Division Administrators
to execute Grant Applications, Permit Applications and other Documents
pertaining to the Construction of Capital Improvement Projects.
9) Approve Award of a Construction Contract to the lowest bidder, Bonness,
Inc., for the 2000-2001 Pathways Program, Bid No. 01-3248.
10) Award Bid No. 01-3244, "Purchase and Delivery of One Road Widener
Attachment".
11)
Accept an Easement from the Board of Trustees of the Internal
Improvement Trust Fund of the State of Florida to be used for Tower Road
Right-of-Way, and Utility, Drainage, and Maintenance purposes.
8
July 31, 2001
12)
13)
14)
15)
16)
17)
Approve Supplement Agreement No. 3 to the Professional Services
Agreement with Johnson Engineering Inc., for Goodlette-Frank Road
Improvements between Pine Ridge Road and Vanderbilt Beach Road,
Project No. 60134.
Approve an Interlocal Agreement among Collier County, the City of
Naples and the City of Naples Airport Authority for the construction and
maintenance of Enterprise Avenue Extension (FKA Transfer Station
Road).
Advise Board of County Commissioners of request for Landscaping
Maintenance Agreement among Collier County, the City of Naples and the
Estuary at Grey Oaks and request approval of early start for construction
of improvements.
Approve Amendment No. 2 to the contract for Professional Engineering
Services by Hole, Montes, Inc., for Immokalee Road six-laning design
from U.S. 41 to 1-75, Project No. 66042.
Approve Contract Amendment No. 15 for Professional Engineering
Servlces by Hole, Montes, Inc., for Immokalee Road Construction Project,
Project No. 69101.
Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners adopt a
Resolution fixing the date, time and place for the Public Hearing for
approving the Special Assessment (Non Ad Valorem Assessment) to be
levied against the properties within the Pelican Bay Municipal Service
Taxing and Benefit Unit for maintenance of the Water Management
System, Beautification of Recreational Facilities and Median Areas, and
Maintenance of Conservation or Preserve Areas, and Establishment of
Capital Reserve Funds for the Maintenance of Conservation or Preserve
Areas, U.S. 41 Berms, Street Signage Replacements within the Median
Areas and Landscaping Improvements to U.S. 41 Entrances, all within the
Pelican Bay Municipal Service Taxing and Benefit Unit.
C. PUBLIC UTILITIES
1)
2)
3)
Adopt a Resolution approving the Satisfaction of Liens for Solid Waste
Residential Accounts wherein the County has received payment and said
liens are satisfied in full for the 1996 Solid Waste Collection and Disposal
Services Special Assessments.
Adopt a Resolution approving the Satisfaction of Liens for Solid Waste
Residential Accounts wherein the County has received payment and said
liens are satisfied in full for the 1995 Solid Waste Collection and Disposal
Services Special Assessments.
Request that neighborhood clean-up events excc. cding $2,000.00 in
waived tipping fees receive prior Board approval and limit events to one
quarterly event per neighborhood.
9
July 31, 2001
4)
5)
6)
7)
a)
9)
10)
11)
12)
13)
14)
15)
16)
17)
Approval to use State Waste Tire Grant Funds for playground surfacing
for YMCA, Youth Haven, Farmworker Village, Salvation Army and walking
surfaces at 4-H Children's Garden.
Recommendation to award Surplus Sealed Bid #S01-3243, surplus bid for
one (1) Boat, Motor and Trailer to Christopher F. Slaby.
Waive Contract Dollar Thresholds, and authorize the execution of a Work
Order for construction services related to the development of a
supplemental water source to augment the reclaimed water supply,
Project 74125.
Authorize funds for a.feasibility study to provide potable water service
through a Municipal Services Benefit Unit to Price Street and Barefoot
Williams Road.
Approval of a billing agreement with Cocobay Condominium, Inc., for
utility customer billing.
Approval of an agreement with the Florida Department of Environmental
Protection for electronics recycling.
Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approve the
resolutions setting the date, time and place for a Public Hearing to
approve a Special Assessment (Non Ad Valorem Assessment) to be
levied against the properties within the Solid Waste District I and District II
Municipal Service Benefit Unit for Solid Waste Collection and Disposal
Services and approve the first class notice to be sent to all assessable
units as well as approving the postage and mailing costs.
Approval of Amendment No. 2 for Contract GC526 with the Florida
Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP).
Award RFP00-3185-South Central Regional Water Treatment Plant
concrete leak and spall repairs.
Approval and Execution for Satisfaction of Notice of Claim of Lien for
Sanitary Sewer System Impact Fee.
Approval to piggyback Bid No. 00-103 from Polk County for the purchase
of fire hydrants.
Approval and Execution of Satisfactions of Notice of Promise to pay and
agreement to extend payment of Water and/or Sewer System Impact Fees.
Approve the Satisfaction of Lien Documents filed against Real Property
for Abatement of Nuisance and direct the Clerk of Courts to record same
in the Public Records of Collier County, Florida.
This item was continued from the June 26, 2001 BCC Mc.tinc~ Award a
Contract to Mitchell and Stark Construction Company, Inc., to upgrade the
Pelican Bay Wellfield, Booster Station and Master Flow Meter, Bid 01-
3238, Project 74039.
10
July 31, 2001
18) Provide initial readiness funding for hurricane debris planning end
management In the 2001 Hurricane Season.
19) Approval of Work Order Numbers WD-034 and WD-035 for installation of
fire hydrants within the Pelican Bay Subdivision.
D. PUBLIC SERVICES
1)
Approve the Home Care for the Elderly Continuation Grant and authorize
the Chairman to sign the contract between Collier County Board of
County Commissioners and Area Agency on Aging for Southwest Florida,
Inc., D/B/A Senior Solutions of Southwest Florida.
2) Authorize staff to utilize the Collier Area Transit (CAT) for Trolley Services
at the Summer Barbeque and Blues Event.
3)
4)
Award RFP#01-3236 for a 3-Year Contract for Fitness Center Equipment.
Approve the Alzheimer's Disease Initiative Continuation Grant and
authorize the Chairman to sign the contract between Collier County Board
of County Commissioners and Area Agency on Aging for Southwest
Florida, Inc. D/B/A Senior Solutions of Southwest Florida.
s)
Approve the Community Care for the Elderly Continuation Grant and
authorize the Chairman to sign the contract between Collier County Board
of County Commissioners and Area Agency on Aging for Southwest
Florida, Inc. D/B/A Senior Solutions of Southwest Florida.
6)
7)
Approve award of RFP00-3168 for a concessionaire at Barefoot Beach.
Request by Henry Brehm, representing Net Assets, to construct a
Tournament Facility and use Vineyards Community Park to host the
Nuveen Champions Tournament.
E. SUPPORT SERVICES
1)
2)
3)
4)
s)
Approve an Agreement for Sale and Purchase to acquire property and
building located at 2373 Horseshoe Drive South, Naples.
To re-appropriate $50,000 previously approved in Fiscal Year 2000 from
the GAC Land Trust to purchase fitness equipment for the new
Community Center at Max A. Hasse Community Park. ~
Approval and execution of a Lease Agreement between Collier County
and Richard B. Lansdale for space occupied by the Sheriff's Office.
Approval and execution of a Lease Agreement between Collier County
and Alan and Patricla Boole for space to expand the Sheriff's Office
Vehicle Maintenance Facility.
Approve the use of 301 Project Funds to improve and upgrade fiber optic
communication lines and equipment on the Main Government Complex.
11
July 31, 2001
8)
7)
Approve an Agreement for the conveyance of GAC Trust Reserved Lands
to the District School Board of Collier County, Florida, for the future
construction of an Elementary School in Golden Gate Estates.
e)
Request authorization for the Department of Human Resources to bring
back to the Board of County Commissioners proposed additions and
modifications to Ordinance No. 96-40 which is known as the Collier
County Personnel Ordinance.
Approval of a Letter of Agreement between the Board of County
Commissioners and Community Health Partners, Inc., reducing the
Physician Fee Schedule and Outpatient Fee Schedule, and modifying the
In-Hospital Stop Loss Agreement under the Existing Group Health
Insurance Fee Agreement.
9) Approval of Resolution No. 2001- establishing a Community of
Character Committee.
10) Approve Master Purchase Agreements for the Purchase of Regulated and
De-Regulated Services from Sprint.
11)
Approval of Resolution No. 2001- which will revise the Employee
Service Award Program and supersede Resolution No. 87-80 effective
October 1, 2001.
12)
Authorization to enter into a five-year contract with Sprint, subject to
appropriation, for existing circuit services in exchange for Sprint's
installation of a fiber-optic sonnet ring around the Main Government
Complex.
F. EMERGENCY SERVICES
1)
Approve and Execute an Agreement with the Golden Gate Fire Control
and Rescue District providing for a maximum expenditure of $110,000
from the GAC Land Trust to purchase a water tanker fire truck.
G. COUNTY MANAGER
1) Approval of a Resolution terminating the Old Marco Village Water and
Sewer District Fund in its entirety.
2) Approval of the Florida Association of Counties State Legislative Survey.
(Thomas W. Olliff, County Manager) ~
AIRPORT AUTHORITY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
1)
Satisfaction of Lien: NEED MOTION authorizing the Chairman to sign
Satisfaction of Lien for Services of the Public Defender for Case Nos.: 98-
2334-CFA, 98-2548-CFA, 99-1613-CFA, 94-408-CFA, 97-2696-CFA.
RECOMMEND APPROVAL.
12
July 31, 2001
2) Miscellaneous Items to file for record with action as directed.
OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
COUNTY ATTORNEY
1)
Recommendation to approve a Budget Amendment in the amount of no
more than $16,700.00 for outside counsel and professional services
Including expert witness fees for services rendered in concluding the
County's litigation relating to the 1995-96 Beach Restoration Project in the
Lawsuit styled Board of County Commissioners of Collier County v.
Coastal Engineering Consultants, Inc. et al, Case No. 00-1901-CA.
2)
To authorize the County Attorney to draft an Ordinance to amend the
Collier County False Alarm Ordinance and schedule a Public Hearing
before the Board of County Commissioners to consider adoption of the
proposed ordinance.
3)
Approve the Stipulated Final Judgment relative to the easement
acquisition of Parcel No. 316 in the Lawsuit entitled Collier County v.
Wilfredo Maribona, et si, (Golden Gate Boulevard, Project No. 63041).
4)
Request by the Housing Finance Authority of Collier County for approval
of a Resolution authorizing the Lee County Housing Finance Authority to
Issue single-family mortgage revenue bends to assist qualified buyers of
single family homes in participating counties, including Collier County,
and authorizing the Collier Authority to enter into an Interlocal Agreement
with the Lee Authority.
5)
Recommendation that the Board authorize the Office of the County
Attorney and the Risk Management Department pursuant to Resolution
No. 95-632 to retain counsel to represent EMS Employee Frederick F.
Gonzalez in a traffic ticket case arising out of an accident Mr. Gonzalez
had while driving a County ambulance.
6)
Approve settlement agreement between Collier County and the Strand
Development Corporation for delinquent road impact fees relating to golf
course development.
7)
8)
Approve a continuing retention agreement for legal services on an "as
needed" basis with the Law Firm of Fixel and Maguire, particularly relating
to eminent domain proceedings.
..
Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approve the
Settlement in Water Equipment Services, Inc. v. Collier County, Florida,
Case No. 97-4453-CA-01, now pending in the Twentieth Judicial Circuit in
and for Collier County, Florida, pursuant to which the County would pay
$6,500 and all claims against the County would be dismissed with
prejudice. Said $6,500 settlement was arrived at during settlement
negotiations.
9) Approve 'the Stipulated Final Judgment relative to the Easement
Acquisition of Parcels 171 and 771 in the Lawsuit entitled Collier County
13
July 31, 2001
17.
v. Dominique C. Rihs, as Trustee, et al, Case No. 01-0758-CA (Livingston
Road, Project No. 60071).
10)
Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approve the
Stipulated Final Judgment relative to the Easement Acquisition on Parcel
Nos 703A, 803A and 803B In the Lawsuit entitled Collier County v. Naples
Italian American Club, et al, Case No. 98-1672-CA-01 (Airport Road six-
laning project from Pine Ridge Road to Vanderbiit Beach Road).
11)
Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approve the
Stipulated Final Judgment relative to the Easement Acquisition on Parcel
No. 909 in the Lawsuit entitled Collier County v. Radio Road Joint Venture,
et al, Case No. 98-1396-CA (Livingston Road Extension-Golden Gate
Boulevard to Radio Road) Project.
12)
Authorize the making of an Offer of Judgment to respondents, Michael H.
and Linda M. Baum, for Parcel 123 in the amount of $2,100.00 in the
Lawsuit styled Collier County v. Michael A. Baum, et al, Case No. 99-3687-
CA (Golden Gate Boulevard Project 63041).
13)
Approve the agreed order awarding expert fees in the amount of
$11,160.27, relative to the Easement Acquisition of Parcel 145 in the
Lawsuit entitled Collier County v. Owen M. Ward, Trustee, et al, Case No.
99-1291-CA, Project No. 65031 (Radio Road, Santa Barbara Boulevard to
Davis Boulevard).
14)
Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approve the
agreed order awarding expert fees and attorney's fees and costs relating
to Parcel No. 131 in the Lawsuit entitled Collier County v. R.A.K.
Development Company Inc., et al, Case No. 92-2791-CA-01-HDH (widening
of Immokalee Road 66043).
15)
Approve the Stipulated Final Judgment relative to the Easement
Acquisition of Parcel 168 in the Lawsuit entitled Collier County v. James
R. Nash, et al, (Livingston Road, Project No. 60071).
16) This item has been deleted.
17) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approve
Amendment Number 3 to Legal Services Agreement with the Law Firm of
Carlton, Fields, Ward, Emmanuel, Smith and Cutler, P.A. (David 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.
14
July 31, 2001
This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be
provided by commission members. Petition SNR-2001-AR-997, Collier County
Community Development and Environmental Services, representing Collier
County, requesting a street name change for a portion of Antigua Street to
Samar Lane, located in Isles of Capri No. 3, in Section 32, Township 51 South,
Range 26 East..
This item requires that all participants be sworn In and ex parte disclosure be
provided by commi~sion members. Petition AVPLAT2001-AR710 to disclaim,
renounce and vacate the County's and the Public's interest In the 10' wide
easement located along the lot line common to Lots 5 and 6, Block 1,
according to the plat of "Naples Manor Lakes" ss recorded in Plat Book 3,
Page 86 through 87, Public Records of Collier County, Florida, located in
Section 29, Township 50 South, Range 26 East.
This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be
provided by commission members. Petition VAC00-024 to vacate a portion of
"Gator Gate" ss recorded in Plat Book 7, Page 2 and to vacate s portion of
"Gator Gate Unit 1" as recorded in Plat Book 7, Page 54, Public Records of
Collier County, Florida, located in Section 3, Township 50 South, Range 26
East.
D. Adopt Resolution to disband Water Management District No. 7
This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be
provided by commission members. Petition VA-2001-AR-848, Scott A.
Lincoln, P.E., from L.A. Civil Engineering Group representing Marathon
Ashland Petroleum, LLC, requesting s 3.25 foot side yard variance from the 40
foot required side yard and a 7.6 foot front yard variance from the 50 foot
required front yard established for automobile service stations for the
rebuilding of an existing automobile service station for a property located on
East side of Tamlami Trail East at the intersection of Tamiami Trail East and
Thomasson Drive in Section 13, Township 50 South, Range 25 East, Collier
County, Florida.
This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex perte disclosure be
provided by commission members. Petition VA-2001-AR-814, McAnly
Engineering and Design Inc., representing Gulf Coast Development Group,
LLC, requesting a 10 foot variance from the 25 foot rear yard requirement for
commercial properties when abutting a residential property, to 15 feet for a
property located on East side of Tamiami Trail North approximately one half
mile North of Tamiami Trail and Old US-41 intersection in Section 9, Township
48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida.
This item requires that all participants be sworn In and ex parte disclosure be
provided by commission members. Petition SNR2001-AR-1017, Collier
County Community Development and Environmental Services Division,
representing Collier County, requesting a street name change for the
proposed Extension of Livingston Road from Uvingston Road to Livingston
Parkway, located in Sections 1, 12, 13, 24, 25 and 36, Township 49 South,
Range 25 East and in Sections 12, 13, 24, 25 and 36, Township 48 South,
Range 25 East.
15
July 31, 2001
An Ordinance creating the Vanderbilt Beach Beautification Municipal Service
Taxing Unit; providing the authority; providing for the creation; providing a
purpose and governing body; providing funding and the levy of not to exceed
0.5 mils of ad valorem taxes per year; providing for the collection of taxes;
providing for creation of the Vanderbilt Beach Beautification Advisory
Committee; appointment and composition; providing for terms of office of the
advisory committee; quorum; rules of procedure; providing for functions,
powers and duties of the advisory committee; providing for duties of the
County Manager or his designee; providing for review process of advisory
committee; providing for conflict and severability; providing for inclusion in
the Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances; providing for an effective
date. (Norman Feder, Transportation Services Administrator)
Public Hearing to consider adoption of an Ordinance establishing the Pine Air
Lakes Community Development District (CDD) pursuant to Section 190.055,
Florida Statutes. (Stan Litsinger, Comprehensive Planning Manager, Planning
Services)
An Ordinance amending Chapter 38, Civil Emergencies, Article III, Declaration
of State of Emergency, of the Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances,
also known as Ordinance No. 84-37, as amended, adding Sections 38.57
Definitions, 38.61 Use of Public Facilities as Shelters, 38.62 Power of
Employees Rendering Outside Aid, 38.63 Mutual Aid Agreements, 38.64
Compensation, 38.65 Emergency Liability; amending Sections 38.59 Extent of
State of Emergency and 38.68 Authorized Emergency Laws and Ordinances;
providing for Conflict and Severability; and providing for an Effective Date.
(Tom Storrar, Emergency Services Administrator)
18. ADJOURN
INQUIRIES CONCERNING CHANGES TO THE BOARD'S AGENDA ~HOULD BE MADE
TO THE COUNTY MANAGER'S OFFICE AT 774-83;~3.
16
July 31, 2001
July 31,2001
Item #2A
REGULAR, CONSENT AND SUMMARY AGENDAS -
APPROVED AND/OR ADOPTED WITH CHANGES
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Good morning, ladies and gentlemen.
Welcome to the August 31 --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: No.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: -- Board of County Commissioners.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I hope it's July.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Ahh. See, I was just checking to see if
you were awake up here this morning -- July 31 Board of County
Commissioners. It is about 9:11. If Miss Susan Diamond from the
First Christian Church will lead us in the invocation followed by the
Pledge of Allegiance. We also would like to have a moment of
silence for the passing of Louise Hasse, a very important person in
our community and a former COMMISSIONER'S wife and that of
one of our engineers who also passed away since our last meeting, so
if we could honor both of those people, a moment of silence followed
by the invocation.
(Moment of silence.)
MS. DIAMOND: Loving and eternal God, this day we begin by
acknowledging the gifts of your creation which we enjoy, the wonder
of the land with its rich systems of plant and animal life, for the
splendor of the sea producing a source of recreation in body and
spirit, for community where people of different race and gender and
age and perspective live and work and play.
Oh, God, we begin this day with thanksgiving for all of the
possibilities that lay before us. You have placed each of us as
stewards of the gifts you have given. May we care for that which you
have placed in our trust.
Page 2
July 31,2001
Oh, God, we begin this day remembering those who have been
good stewards and of the gifts you have given, for Louise Hasse and
her family who have made such an impact on this community and for
all of those who serve you through the many faceted areas of service
in this community.
God, we especially today would pray for these, the leaders of
our county for whom have been entrusted with a tremendous
stewardship. They are to make important decisions this day that will
impact our community in significant ways for years to come. Please
give each one of them a special portion of wisdom and guidance that
the decisions that are made today might reflect your will for the
stewardship of land and sea, for the care of the people of this
community, that we might work together for a place that reflects your
justice and your mercy and your peace. Be with us this day, great
God, and bless us all with your spirit, Amen.
(The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. Again, I would ask that anyone
that has a cell phone, if you would please turn those off so we don't
disrupt the meeting. And if you have any conversations that you
need to have among each other, we always ask that you be polite to
the audience and take those conversations to the hall. Mr. Olliff.
MR. OLLIFF: Commissioner, good morning. Good morning,
board members. Welcome back. I believe for the record we
probably need to make a note that Commissioner Fiala is
participating in this meeting. We probably ought to do a little voice
check just to make sure she's -- she's hearing the meeting and if
maybe we can hear back from her.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Good morning, Tom. And a nice
tie, huh?
MR. OLLIFF: Thank you. I guess you can see us as well.
Page 3
July 31,2001
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, not only is she with us by voice,
but she is watching in TV-land. Good morning, Donna. Pleased to
have you with us.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Good morning. And thank you so
much for your kind note. I really appreciate it.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: You're more than welcome.
MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Chairman, I'm going to walk you through a
change 'list this morning that one of my staff members asked whether
or not we were going to have to take a break after I got done with the
change list. I apologize for the number of changes to this agenda. I
will tell you that inadvertently some of the backup for some of the
minor items did not get included, so you've been handed that as part
of your change package.
The first item is an addition. It is Item 3-F as in Frank. It is a
proclamation honoring Louise Hasse.
The second item is also an addition. It is Item 9-B, as in boy. It
is a request to temporarily extend the terms of four Airport Authority
board members for 60 days. That is only necessary due to the board's
meeting schedule and the time necessary to review
applicants that have already been submitted.
The next item is -- is different from your change list. At the
petitioner's request, the item regarding the Nuveen Champions
tournament, which is Item 16-D, as in David, 7, has been requested to
be continued to the meeting of September 11 th.
The next item is a move. It is Item 16-E from your consent
agenda, E as in Edward, 9, to 10-O. It's a resolution establishing a
Community of Character Committee. That's being moved at staff's
request.
The next two are also addition items to your consent agenda. It
is 16-A -
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Tom, on that last one --
Page 4
July 31,2001
10.
MR. OLLIFF: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: -- I can't find anything after L on
What's M and N? It's just the last Item under 10 is, I guess, the
point.
MR. OLLIFF: Yes.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: And summary of consent agenda
items. It is -- and N was a request, and that's been removed. 16-D -- COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Oh, thank you. I forget the
chairman has the cheat sheet.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Now everybody knows,
Commissioner. Gosh. They destroyed my image one more time.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Never mind. I'm sorry.
MR. OLLIFF: Okay. We're back to the addition of 16-A-22
which is a request to accelerate the addition of a senior planner for
the Immokalee housing initiative. It was something you already
reviewed as part of your budget workshops. But the number of the
site improvement plans have accelerated to the point where we need
the planning assistance. That's, frankly, good news, from my
perspective.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: That's great news.
MR. OLLIFF: The next item is Item 16-G-3. We've added the
items which have been approved in the board's absence to date.
Those are minor items which the board authorizes and gives the
county manager authorization to approve. Some of those are
contractual in nature. However, I need formal ratification by the
board before progress can -- can move forward.
We're actually just moving one item from one section of the
consent agenda to the other. And, frankly, I can't tell you why we're
doing that. But it's 16-F-1 is moving to 16-E-1 on your consent
agenda. I think that's just for better recordkeeping on our part, and
Page 5
July 31,2001
we've added some additional backup to that item.
We are withdrawing from your consent agenda 16-L-1, which is
a budget amendment for outside counsel and professional services.
There's a note for -- there is some additional backup, again,
added to Item 16-B-8, 16-B, as in boy, 8, on your consent agenda;
16-B, as in boy, 12, on your consent agenda; and 16-E, as in Edward,
5, on your consent agenda.
The next two items are continuances. Item 17-A, it's being
requested that that item be moved to the September 11 th agenda;
that's a street name change. And Item 17-G has also been requested
to be heard at your September 1 lth meeting. It's also a street name
change.
The next two items are simply items that I need to read into the
record. Associated with Item 16-E, as in Edward, 1, which was a
property purchase for a property on Horseshoe Drive. I'm reading
into the record that the seller has requested that the closing date be
rescheduled for August 6th, 2001, and the county will not be
penalized for the delay in closing as per the lease agreement; and the
recently approved agreement has been revised to reflect that the
county will accept the property with an existing curbing
encroachment on the property.
The next item I need to read into the record-- and -- and,
thankfully, Mr. Chairman, I believe this is the last item I've got on
my change list. Item 16:A-20, pursuant to discussions between
county attorn -- county staff and the staff of the Clerk of the Circuit
Court, the administrative procedures manual for the Collier County
Consolidated Impact Fee Ordinance, Section 74-108 titled "General
Definitions" has been revised. Language has been added to the
second paragraph titled "Staff/Applicant Actions" to ensure that staff
may not add, delete, or revise any definitions without approval and
Page 6
July 31,2001
adoption of an ordinance by the Board of County Commissioners.
The revision affects only one page of the document and shall be
considered to be an integrated part of the document adopted by
resolution in Item 16-A-20 of today's agenda. The revised page has
been provided to each commissioner this morning and is available for
public review in the hallway outside the commission chambers. The
revised page shall be promptly delivered to all parties on staff's
distribution list of the manual.
Mr. Chairman, with that, I have worked my way through your
change list this morning, and that's all the changes I have.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you. Mr. Ramiro Manalich.
MR. MANALICH: None, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you. Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I wouldn't dare.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Commissioner Mac'Kie.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: No. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: None for me. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. I'd like to pull the one on
excavation, 16-A- 16.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: 16-A- 16. That will become --
MR. OLLIFF: Become 10-P under the county manager's
portion of the agenda 10-P, as in Paul.
MR. MANALICH: Mr. Chairman, one of the items came to my
attention, 16-B-7. That is being requested by our office to be
continued, 16-B-7.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All right. Thank you. Anything else,
Mr. Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA:
No. That's it.
Thank you.
Page 7
July 31,2001
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All right. I have none. Thank you
very much.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE' Motion to approve agenda,
consent agenda, and summary agenda.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I will second.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. Motion by Commissioner
Mac'Kie, second by Commissioner Henning. All in favor signify by
saying aye.
(Unanimous response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
Opposed by the same sign.
Motion carries.
Page 8
AGENDA CHANGES
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' MEETING
July 31, 2001
.ADD: ITEM 3(Fi: Proclamation in honor of Louise Hasse.
ADD: I_TEM 9(Bi; Request to temporarily extend the terms of four (4)
~,irport Authority Board Member for 60 days.
MOVE: ITEM 16(D)7 TO 10(N~ Request by Henry Brehm, representing Net
Assets, to construct a Tournament Facility and use Vine ards Com
Park to host the Nuveen Champions Tournament. (Staff R~uest) munity
MOVE: ITEM 16(E)9 TO 10(O). Approval of Resolution No. 2001-..__
~stablishing a Community of Character Committee. (Staff Request)
ADD: IT. EM 16(A)pp: Request to approve and fund a Senior Planner to
assist ~mmokalee Housing Initiative with processing site improvement
plans.
ADD: ITEM 16(G)3: Summary of Consent and Emergency Agenda Items
~pproved by the County Manager during the Board's Scheduled Recess.
MOVE WITH ADDITIONAL BACKUP: ITEM 16'F~1 TO 16~'E'13: Approve and
Execute an Agreement with the Golden Gate Fire Control and Rescue
District providing for a maximum expenditure of $110,000 from the GAC
Land Trust to purchase s water tanker fire truck.
..WITHDRAW: ITEM 16(L)1~ Recommendation to approve a Budget
Amendment in the amount Of no more than $16,700.00 for outside counsel
and professional services Including expert witness fees
, for services
rendered in concluding the County s litigation relating to the 1995-96 B
?.es..to.r..ation Project in_ the Lawsuit styled Board of County ~nm--,oo,~e-a~c.-h
o! I.;OIIler t;oun[v v. C;oa-.,,-~ =--,--- , ..... ~ ........
- o,o, '=-tlmeermg c;onsulzants, Inc. et al Case N
00-1901-CA. (Staff Request) , o.
ADDITIONAL BACKUP: ITEM 16(B)8: Adol~t a Resolution to expand
authorization to all Division Administr~tors to execute Grant Applications,
Permit Applications and other Documents pertaining to the Construction of
Capital Improvement Projects.
ADDITIONAL BACKUP: ITEM 16(B)12: Approve Supplement Agreement No.
to the Profe.;ssional Services Agreement with Johnson Engineering Inc.,
for Goodlette Frank Road Improvements between Pine Ridge Road and
Vanderbilt Beach Road, Project No. 60134.
ADDITIONAL BACKUP: ITEM 16(E)5, Approve the use of 301 Project Funds
to Improve and upgrade fiber optic ~ommunication lines and equipment on
the Main Government Complex.
CONTINUED: ITEM 17A-REQUESTED AGENDA DATE SE~¥EMBER 11
2001: Petition SNR-2001-AR-997, Collier County Community Developmen~
and Environmental Services, representing Collier County, requesting a
street name change for a portion of Antigua Street to Samar Lane, located
in Isles of Capri No. 3, in Section 32, Township 51 South, Range 26 East.
.CONTINUED: ITEM 17G-REQUESTED AGENDA DATE SE~¥~MBER 11
.2001: Petition SNR2001-AR-1017, Collier CoUnty Community DeVelopment
and Environmental Services Division, representing Collier County,
requesting a street name change for the proposed extension of Livin ston
Road from Livingston Road to Livingston Parkway, located in Sectiogns 1
12, 13, 24, 25 and 36, Township 49 South, Range 25 Eas. t and in Section~
12, 13, 24, 25 and 36, Township 48 South, Range 25 East.
.T.O BE READ INTO RECORD:
The Seller has requested that the closing date be rescheduled for August 6'
2001 and the Co..unty will not be penalized for the delay in closing as per the
lease agreement, and
The recently approved Agreement has been revised to reflect that the
County will accept the property with an existing curbing encroachment on
the property.
.!TEM16(A)20:
Pursuant to discussions between County Staff and the staff of the Clerk of
the Circuit Court, the Administrative Procedures Manual for the Collier
County Consolidated Impact Fee Ordinance, Section 74-108, titled General
Definitions, has been revised.
Language has been added to the second
paragraph, titled Staff/Applicant Actions, to ensure that staff may not add,
delete, or revise any definitions without
approval and adoption of an
ordinance by the Board of County Commleeioners. The revision affects
only one page of the document, and shall be co~sidered to be an Integrated
part of the document adopted by resolution in item 16.A.20 of today's
agenda. The revised page has been provided to each commissioner this
morning and is available for public review in the hallway outside the
Commission chambers. The revised page shall be promptly delivered to all
parties on staff's distribution list for the Manual.
July 31,2001
Items #2B, 2C, 2D, 2E, 2F & 2G
MINUTES OF THE JUNE 11, 2001 WORKSHOP, JUNE 12, 2001
REGULAR, JUNE 13 AND 20, 2001 SPECIAL, JUNE 21 AND 22,
2001 BUDGET WORKSHOP AND JUNE 26, 2001 REGULAR
MEETINGS - APPROVED AS PRESENTED
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Motion to approve the minutes
of June 11, 12, 13, 20, 21, 22, and 26.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Motion by Commissioner Mac'Kie,
second by Commissioner Coletta. All in favor signify by saying aye.
(Unanimous response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Opposed by the same sign.
(No response.)
Item #3A
PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING AUGUST 2001 AS WORLD
BREASTFEEDING MONTH AND PROCLAIMING AUGUST,
2001 AS BREASTFEEDING MONTH IN COLLIER COUNTY -
ADOPTED
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Motion carries. Moves us to
proclamations, A, World Breast-feeding Month, Commissioner
Mac'Kie.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Yes, I'm honored to read this.
I'd like to ask Miss Laurie Owens if she's here to come forward.
Laurie is -- Ms. Owens is with WIC and Health Services for Collier
County Government. And if you'd just come right up here while I
read it, I'd appreciate it.
Page 9
July 31,2001
MS. OWENS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: The proclamation reads:
Whereas, breast-feeding is an important and basic act of nurture
and a basic standard for health, growth, and development for mothers
and babies; and, Whereas, in order to receive the greatest benefits
from breast-feeding women should be encouraged and supported to
breast-feed their children exclusively for about six months and to
continue breast-feeding with complimentary food well into the
second year; and, Whereas, mothers and babies must learn how to
breast-feed and be supported so that they feel secure and empowered;
and, Whereas, women and families need accurate and evidence-based
facts concerning breast-feeding in order to make informed and
thoughtful choices about infant feeding; and, Whereas, commercial
interests and cultural attitudes often undermine family's breast-
feeding practices by promoting incomplete information and playing
on emotional issues; and, Whereas, governments and communities
have the legal and/or moral duty to ensure that there are no obstacles
for women who wish to breast-feed; and, Whereas, World Breast-
feeding Month highlights the importance of accurate data and the
need for protections against misinformation through its annual
celebration with the theme for 2001 of breast-feeding in the
information age.
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that the month of August
2001 be designated as Breast-feeding Month in Collier County.
Done and ordered this 31st day of July 2001, Board of County
Commissioners, James D. Carter, chairman.
I'd like to move acceptance of this proclamation.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
Page 10
July 31, 2001
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All right. I have a motion by
Commissioner Mac'Kie, a second by Commissioner Fiala. All in
favor signify by saying aye.
(Unanimous response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Motion approved.
(Applause.)
Item #3C
PROCLAMATION PROCLAIMING THE MONTH OF
SEPTEMBER AS OVARIAN CANCER AWARENESS MONTH-
ADOPTED
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All right. Second proclamation is by
Commissioner Henning in regards to the Guadalupe Center.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I believe I have the Weed and
Seed.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Who has the Guadalupe?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I have T.H. after -- on my agenda.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
that one.
COMMISSIONER HENNING:
of me. Anyways...
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
it.
Well, maybe we'll come back to
That's -- I don't have it in front
Miss Filson's gone looking for
CHAIRMAN CARTER: She's gone looking for it. Well,
moving on -- nevermind, Guadalupe. We will come back as soon as
we find it.
Let me move to presentation -- for a proclamation regards to
Ovarian Cancer Awareness Month. That is to be read by myself.
And it is as follows: And would Carolyn Benivegna, president and
Page 11
July 31,2001
founder of the Southwest Florida Division of National Ovarian
Cancer Coalition, if you would come forward, face TV-land so
everyone can see your smiling face this morning. Thank you.
Whereas, the incidence of ovarian cancer is increasing due to
vague symptoms and nonscreening tests for early detection; and,
Whereas, the majority of ovarian cancer cases are detected at an
advanced stage, and the survival rate for women with advanced
ovarian cancer has been minimal -- has shown minimal improvement
over the last 15 years; and, Whereas, the American Cancer Society
estimates this year more than 23,000 new cases are diagnosed and
almost 14,000 fatalities; and, Whereas, the National Ovarian Cancer
Co -- Coalition is committed to promoting education about ovarian
cancer; and, Whereas, all American women and their families are
urged to learn more about ovarian cancer, its symptoms and available
methods that may reduce the risk of developing it.
Now, therefore be it proclaimed by the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that September be
designated as Ovarian Cancer Awareness Month.
Done and ordered this 31st day of July 2001, Board of County
Commissioners, Collier County, Florida. James D. Carter, chairman.
I move for acceptance.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Second.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I have a motion. I have an acceptance,
a second. All in favor signify by saying aye.
(Unanimous response.)
(Applause.)
MS. BENIVEGNA: Excuse us while we get a real photo for our
newsletter.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Hold this right up here in TV-land.
Okay. One of the two. Thank you so much.
Page 12
July 31,2001
MS. BENIVEGNA: I'd like to take just a couple of moments to
tell you about ovarian cancer and why you should know about it. As
-- as the proclamation indicates, 23,000 women in this country will
get this disease this year. Actually, they'll be diagnosed with it.
Some will be misdiagnosed. Some won't be diagnosed at all. We'll
lose 14,000 women this year to this disease. We have created these
cards, and anybody who owns a business is welcome to contact us
and obtain these cards for their employee paycheck envelopes. These
list all the risk factors and the symptoms of ovarian cancer. You can
contact us at 455-0554. These are totally free. We'll provide them to
any and every business in the community for your employees.
It's important -- it's important that everyone know about this
because many of you have misconceptions about ovarian cancer, as I
did before I got it. Number 1, it's not just a disease of older women.
Nine-year-old girls are getting this disease, nine-year-old girls.. It's
not just a disease. That's hereditary. It's only hereditary in 5 to 10
percent of the cases. That means 90 to 95 percent just happen. And
the last, and my all-time favorite, you don't even need to have ovaries
to get it. I did not have ovaries. They were long gone, and I got it
anyway.
Please contact us for more information, 455-0554. I'll be
putting some of these cards on the table outside for those of you who
wish to pick them up on your way out.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you.
(Applause.)
Item #3B
PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING THE GUADALUPE CENTER
AND THE IMMOKALEE COMMUNITY FOR APPLYING TO
Page 13
July 31,2001
THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE FOR OFFICIAL WEED
AND SEED SITE RECOGNITION- ADOPTED
CHAIRMAN CARTER: And now, Commissioner Henning,
we'll move back for the proclamation recognizing the Guadalupe
Center.
COMMISSIONER HENN1NG: And I apologize for the delay.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All right.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Guadalupe.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I call up Nora Benvides, John
Larson -- Lawson, William Daniels, honorable Sheriff Don Hunter,
Deputy Martha Bucholtz, Lieutenant Baker. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Hi.
SHERIFF HUNTER: I always got to stand by the tall guys.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Whereas, Operation
Weed and Seed is a national program throughout the United States
Department of Justice; and, Whereas, Operation Weed and Seed is a
comprehensive strategy to help communities bring people and
resources together to prevent the control -- and control crime and
improve the quality of life. There is over 230 neighborhoods across
the country working -- who are officially recognized as Weed and
Seed community; and, Whereas, Weed and Seed operation is a
community-based strategy that addresses four critical elements: law
enforcement, community policing, prevention, intervention, and
neighborhood restoration; and, Whereas, Operation Weed and Seed
aims to prevent, control, and reduce violent crimes and drug abuse, it
recognizes the paramount importance of community involvement.
Most importantly, the Weed and Seed strat -- strategy empowers
community and residents to assist in identifying and solving
problems in their neighborhood; and, Whereas, the Guadalupe
Center, a not-for-profit community-based organization serving
Page 14
July 31,2001
Collier County in partnership with Immokalee residents, community
agents, and school serving the Immokalee area, the United States
Attorney's Office, and Collier County Sheriff's Department have
come together to plan their comprehensive Weed and Seed strategy
for Immokalee community; and, Whereas, the process of-- for-- the
strategy is to empower residents to improve -- to move forward a
five-year plan to address crime, enhance community policing efforts,
provide safe havens to prevent and intervene and restore the
neighborhood. This plan is to be submitted to the United States
Department of Justice executive office for Weed and Seed in
November for an official Weed and Seed recognition.
Now, there -- therefore, let it be claim (sic) by the Board of
County Commissioners, recognize the efforts of the Guadalupe
Center, residents, and agencies strategically planning their vision to
improve the quality of life for Immokalee and support their efforts to
move forward their application to the United States Department of
Justice of Weed and Seed site recognition.
Done on this day, 31st day of July 2001, signed by our
chairman. And I move that we move this proclamation.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Second.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I have a motion by Commissioner
Henning, a second by Commissioner Mac'Kie. All in favor signify
by saying aye.
(Unanimous response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Motion approved.
(Applause.)
MR. LAWSON: Hello. I'm John Lawson with the Guadalupe
Center, and it's a pleasure being here. This is a special collaboration
between the Guadalupe Center, who you probably know as the
people that help feed Immokalee. So we're moving from feeding and
reading to weeding and seeding. So I want to introduce to you Will
Page 15
July 31,2001
Daniels and our partnership with the -- the sheriffs department. So I
think Will has a few words.
MR. DANIELS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Commissioners.
I'd just like to say we are honored to be here. We were contacted
some time ago about representation from the residents of the
Immokalee area with regard to employing some restorative efforts.
The Weed and Seed strategy has been an effective tool around the
country. Currently there are about 250 sites, starting in its two-year
anniversary, up from three original sites in 1991. We found that the
strategy when residents, law enforcement, businesses, communities,
and social organizations come together, has been an effective strategy
to revitalize our communities, employ community-policing strategies,
provide for enforcement initiatives, as well as prevention and-- and
treatment. So we're proud and honored in our U.S. attorney's office
here in the Middle District of Florida already with 13 Weed and Seed
sites in the Middle District, more than any other in the country.
We're working to try to add a 14th to our table and pledge our
support as our co-chairs and co-sponsors with law enforcement in the
community.
The key elements of this program are strategy, I should say, is
that it is community based and resident driven, so we're looking to
bring residents and community back to the table to resolve some of
those issues and whatever they find in their assessment. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you.
(Applause.)
SHERIFF HUNTER: Good morning. Don Hunter, Sheriff,
Collier County, Florida. Commission, thank you for the proc --
proclamation. You have our word that Collier County Sheriffs
Office will certainly work with U.S. Attorney's office.
Our -- I would like to mention that Nora Benevides and Mr.
Lawson have pushed very hard on this program to get this started.
Page 16
July 31,2001
And I believe it will be a benefit. It will refine and focus us so that
our umbrella programs, we hope, will be of more benefit to the
community of Immokalee.
I would also like to thank the U.S. Attorney's Office, especially
Mr. Will Daniels, because without his leadership I believe we
wouldn't be standing here this morning. I believe it's highly unusual
that a rural area such as Immokalee would be designated as a Weed
and Seed area. Normally these are highly urbanized large centers that
receive the support of the federal government. So I would like to
thank Mr. Daniels especially for putting us on the map, if you will, in
the Weed and Seed program. Thank you again, Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you.
(Applause.)
Item #3D
PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING SUNDAY, AUGUST 12TM,
2001, AS "UNDY SUNDAY"- ADOPTED
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All right. That moves us to
Proclamation D, Undy Sunday. We have done it from top to bottom
this morning. All right. Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you, Commissioner
Carter. I'd like to call up George Drobinski, the director of Catholic
Charities; John Fitzgerald, the chairperson for the Undy Sunday
drive; and Sue Diamond, who is a driving force for this particular
venture. Whereas, thousands of young children in our community
live in families that experience economic hardship and difficulty
meeting many of their basic needs, including providing their children
with clean underwear; and, Whereas, Catholic Charities of Collier
County has an ongoing mission to fight poverty, strengthen families,
Page 17
July 31,2001
and build communities and has provided a variety of social services
to Collier County citizens for over 30 years regardless of race, creed,
or religion; and, Whereas, Catholic Charities, along with over 50 area
churches and synagogues, has joined together to collect new
underwear for children in need in our community; and, Whereas, last
year for two weeks over 40,000 pairs of new underwear, including
cash contributions were collected and distributed to area -- area
elementary schools and organizations that help children; and,
Whereas, the fifth annual Undy Sunday collection dates are
scheduled for the weekends of August 12th and August 19th at
participating houses of worship; and, Whereas, Undy Sunday is a
wonderful example of the positive action and results that occur when
ecumenical collaboration take place.
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that Sunday August 12th,
2001, be designated as Undy Sunday. Done -- done and ordered this
31st day of July 2001, signed by our chairman, James D. Carter.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Move for approval?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I make a motion.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Second?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Second.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: We have a second by Commissioner
Mac'Kie. All in favor signify by saying aye.
(Unanimous response.)
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Motion approved.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: So don't forget your underwear
when you go to church.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Wear clean underwear in case you're
in an accident.
Page 18
July 31,2001
MR. DROBINSKI: Commissioners, George Drobinski,
Catholic Charities. I just want to emphasize again that for over 32
years Catholic Charities have been serving the needy in Collier'
County. Those services are available to everyone, regardless of race,
creed, or religion. And this is just another one of those programs that
exemplify that, what happens when ideologies dissolve and all these
churches get together for one single purpose, and that's to help the
children.
One of the driving forces -- John Fitzgerald is our chairman on
the advisory committee.
MR. FITZGERALD: I'd like to thank the county commission
for this proclamation, and I must say that this program is a plus-
happy program. The churches involved are very pleased about it.
The volunteers are pleased about it. The schools are pleased about it,
and the recipients are pleased about it. So this is probably a very
pleasant program, and I thank you again very much for this honor.
Thank you.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Thank you, sir.
(Applause.)
Item #3E
PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING DR. AUDRE LEVY FOR HER
OUTSTANDING CONTRIBUTIONS TO OUR COMMUNITY IN
HER TENURE AS PROVOST AT THE COLLIER COUNTY
CAMPUS OF EDISON COMMUNITY COLLEGE- ADOPTED
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All right. Our next proclamation will
be read by Commissioner Fiala, who is going to do this by -- on a
phone this morning. And it is for Dr. Audre Levy who is leaving the
Collier County campus of Edison Community College, but we want
Page 19
July 31,2001
to recognize her. And to accept the proclamation this morning, Mr.
Warren Heltsley, the interim provost is here. And, Warren, if you
would step forward and-- Commissioner Fiala, you may proceed.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you so much. I had
requested to do this. Hi, Warren, how are you?
MR. HELTSLEY: Fine. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I had requested to read this
proclamation because Audre and I are -- are special friends, I -- I
believe. Is she still in town, Warren?
MR. HELTSLEY: No, ma'am. She left on Saturday and started
her new job on Monday, yesterday.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, my -- my goodness. We have
lunch scheduled. I'll have to go to California, I guess, to carry that
one out. Whereas, Dr. Audre Levy began her tenure as provost at the
Collier County campus of Edison Community College July 1998;
and, Whereas, her professional experience also includes faculty,
counseling, and administrative positions with the Los Angeles
Community College system and the Inglewood Unified School
District in California; and, Whereas, Dr. Audre Levy holds a
bachelor's degree in public speech from Michigan State University, a
master's degree in education from the University of Michigan, a
master's degree in educational psychology, and a master's degree in
administration, both from the California State University; and,
Whereas, Dr. Levy also holds a doctoral degree in institutional
management from the Pepperdine University; and, Whereas, her
community involvement includes seats on the following boards: The
YMCA, the Naples Community Hospital, the Collier County
Education Foundation, the Community Foundation of Collier County,
and ed-- Economic Development Council; and, Whereas, Collier
County government supports higher education and the people who
represent it and Dr. Audre Levy's presence will be missed as she
Page 20
July 31, 2001
prepares to leave to assume the position of president of Southwest
College in Los Angeles, California.
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that Dr. Audrey Levy be
recognized for her outstanding contributions to our community in her
tenure as provost at the community -- at the Collier campus of Edison
Community College.
Done and ordered this 31 st day of July. Give her my
congratulations, please.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Move for approval.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: So move.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. All in favor signify by saying
aye.
(Unanimous response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
(Applause.)
Opposed by the same sign.
Motion carries.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Congratulations on your interim
position.
Item #3F
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING JULY 31,2001, AS LOUISE
HASSE DAY- ADOPTED
All right. That moves us to proclamation for Louise Hasse to be
read by Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you, Dr. Carter. And I'd
like to recognize the efforts of Commissioner Tom Henning in-- in
Page 21
July 31,2001
being the driving force in pulling this particular proclamation
together. I thank him for that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I think that came from our staff,
but I think we all participated in the involvement of it. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No. Thank you, Tom. You
were the person that initiated it. And it's an honor to read it.
Whereas, Louise Hasse appreciated and exercised her-- her
patriotic rights to better the community and local government for
over six (sic) years in both her home of New Jersey and Collier
County; and, Whereas, in Collier Coney -- County alone, Louise
dedicated an estimated 35,000 hours, four entire years' worth of time,
to bettering the community through her activities participating in the
Golden Gate Women's Club; Scouts of America; Kiwanis Club,
Golden Gate City and Estate Civic Association; Chamber of
Commerce; Women's Republican Club; the American Association of
Retired People, and countless other organizations; and, Whereas,
beyond her civic stewardship, she was a compassionate friend to all
those she touched, always willing to lend a helping hand, words of
kindness or words of truth for those who needed it; and, Whereas,
when not actively serving on a committee or attending a community
event, she was seen beside her other half, Max, giving him guidance
as he made decisions that positively influenced Collier County; and,
Whereas, together, this husband and wife duo were named citizen
of the year in 1991 by the Golden Gate Civic Association for their
dedication to the betterment of the community; and, Whereas,
together, this husband and wife duo, will always be considered the
grand patriarchs of Golden Gate; and, Whereas, the community was
saddened by Louise's recent passing on July 28th, 2001, but joyful
that Max and Louise will once again be reunited; and, Whereas, in
honor of this team and Louise's contributions to the community, it is
only fitting that the county name the community center at Max Hasse,
Page 22
July 31, 2001
Jr., Park after Louise Hasse. Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the
Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that July
31st, 2001, be designated as Louise Hasse Day and that, furthermore,
the community center at Max Hasse, Jr., Community Park be named
in honor of Louise Hasse upon completion later this summer.
Done and ordered this 31st day of July 2001, James D. Carter,
chairman.
COMMISSIONER HENN1NG: And I proudly move that we
accept this proclamation.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And I second that.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: We have four seconds.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
(Unanimous response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
(Applause.)
All in favor signify by saying aye.
Opposed by the same sign.
Motion carries.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioner Coletta, I hope
that maybe you can get that proclamation to the family of the Hasses.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. And the reason why there
isn't a family member available today is the services were just
yesterday. There's -- there's still a lot of work that had to be done
today, and a lot of the relatives were going to be leaving, so it was
very inappropriate for them to be able to make this meeting. But I
know this will be greatly appreciated, to be able to go to that park and
see it honored for both those individuals that have meant so much to
the Golden Gate community. It speaks well for what we have done
today.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Commissioners, I-- I am
confident that when we do dedicate the community center, we'll have
Page 23
July 31,2001
the opportunity to invite the family then and have a ceremony
honoring their family's commitment and contribution to the
community.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And possibly we can put a very
nice classy picture in the community center that will have both Max
and Louise --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Great idea.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: A very classy lady. And I'd
just like to say that the whole community has benefitted from the
Hasses' involvement in Collier County and especially Golden Gate
and Golden Gate city. It's an honor and a privilege to know them and
work with them throughout their tenure.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Wonderful people. I will never forget
either one of them. In fact, my last conversation with Max was I had
addressed a group and I had told a particular story which I cannot
remember that Max liked so much. He said, "I have to speak tonight.
I want to use that story." And I wrote it out for him, the punch lines.
And he was just a wonderful guy. I really enjoyed him. I loved them
both. Great people, and as everyone said, they were truly the kinds of
people that give so much to the community, and we could all learn
from that, is that so many of us complain about where we live. These
people did nothing but support where we live and give back to the
community. That's what they stand for, and I think all of us can learn
from that.
And now we get to move to another important part of our
program, and that is service awards.
MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Chairman--
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Commissioner Henning, you have the
honors this morning.
MR. OLLIFF: I'm going --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I'm sorry.
Page 24
July 31,2001
MR. OLLIFF: I'm going to stop you a little quickly. I forgot
that we had a speaker who had registered to speak on two of the
consent agenda items. And if you would give us the opportunity to
call him, I think he had registered to speak on Item 16-C-3 regarding
neighborhood cleanup and also 16-E-12 regarding Sprint contract.
Tom --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Yes. I apologize for that because I
always ask for speakers on the consent or summary agenda, and it's
my error. And maybe I'm out of practice this morning, but please
step forward.
*** The discussion regarding Item #16C3 is incorporated
within the Consent Agenda ***
This item has to do with the authorization to enter into a
five-year contract with Sprint for circuit voice data circuits in the
county complex, not only here but, I guess, throughout the county. In
the executive summary, I believe, on page 1, paragraph 2, sentence 1,
it says, "Over the past five years most government agencies located
in the main government complex have experienced repeated issues
with Sprint service."
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: You bet.
MR. STASKO: Now, everybody in the county knows what
Sprint service is like. Anyone on Sprint's network knows what
Sprint's service is like because they consolidated because they were
looking to get bought out, and they did bottom line, restructured, put
13 states into one office where nobody knew anyone. So that's,
hence, the problem for them.
Now, on page 2 it refers to Exhibit A which is page 3. On page
3, paragraph 1, the last sentence, "In regards to the five-year
contract and allowing Sprint rather than a third competitor, which is
called local exchange carrier but an alternative, ALEC, which resells
Page 25
July 31, 2001
Sprint." That's true. However, they are allowed by tariff to undercut
Sprint by a certain percentage. So in the options, again, on the fiscal
impact, it refers to savings. It doesn't refer to total contract.
They say, "Well, you can save $200,000." $200,000 on what?
Five million? Twenty million? Voice data? You know, I don't
know. I do know that I've bid on a contract with the county ten years
ago, and I suggested to the county, regardless whether I won it or
who won it, to put in their own conduit and put their own fiber in,
pay for it once, even if you got to borrow the money. At least you're
not paying lease upon lease upon lease upon lease to the local
telephone company. I mean, that's absurd.
Anyhow, under the options it says to implement this Sonet
(phonetic) solution, and that's just a big ring of copper or fiberoptics
with equipment hung on it, equipment that the county can purchase,
the equipment that another company can purchase and lease back
with option to buy. This, I think, needs to be looked at a little bit
more closely.
I would suggest that under the options on the third page of this,
page -- I'm sorry. Page 2 of this that says to implement the S-net
solution, I ask the commissioners to not do that at this time. And
option 4, do nothing. I do not want the commissioners to do nothing
with this. I want them to do something. But I think, really, for
the -- again, the biggest bang for the buck is going to be a
combination of 2 and 3, which is that you can enter into service
agreements either with Sprint or another reseller. You can also put
in your own conduit, which this document says put in your own
2-inch pipes between these buildings. And then somebody wants to
pull in fiberoptics for a dollar a foot. A dollar a foot is what 12-
strand fiber costs.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Oh, really.
Page 26
July 31,2001
MR. STASKO: Pull in that pipe, and you already put a string in
there, and it just pulls right through. And then they're going to charge
a dollar, maybe three dollars a foot for every year from now
on. So I would suggest that the two together, Items 2 and 3, would be
the logical solution and that more research be done and bidding or a
bid procedure other than -- that says only service resellers and
Sprint could bid at this time, which is not true. You can have several
entities bid on this, several.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: That's a question for Ramiro.
I'm going to have -- is that -- CHAIRMAN CARTER:
I'm with you, Commissioner.
That's a technical/legal question that
I don't mean to step on your lines, but
that's what in my mind. Legal and technical, where are we on this
and what do we need to do?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: It makes a lot of common sense,
what I'm hearing from Tom and --
MR. BERRIOS: For the record, Mike Berrios, information
technology. This agreement isn't for the installation of fiberoptics
that the county is going to use. Basically, what it's for is Sprint
installing fiberoptics for Sprint's use over which they will provide
us voice and data services. So the dial tone -- I'm sorry.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: What's the difference? What's
the difference between -- if it's the fiberoptics that we're going to use,
why isn't it exactly what Tom described?
MR. BERRIOS: Well, we have to get dial tone to the public
network for telephone calls from the public onto the campus, and that
dial tone has to be provided by a phone company, and this changes
the mechanism by which they provide that dial tone and other leased
circuits. We actually do have fiberoptics on the campus that the
county owns and has installed that we use for data services on the
campus where we control it, we maintain it, we buy all the electronics
Page 27
July 31, 2001
and all those things. This is actually Sprint's electronics that is going
to be used for Sprint to provide us with services to connect to remote
sites for data services, as well as providing telephone services.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And the other question, I guess,
was the legal one that, you know, I just have to agree with Tom that
the service really stinks. I mean, everybody knows that it does.
There's nothing -- I mean, I apologize to the personalities that I
probably just offended, but that's just the truth. Do we have other
options besides the -- are there other potential bidders?
MR. BERRIOS: Well, there would be. We -- the concern that
we had raised when we put this together was that at this time there's
no other competitive companies that have their own telephone
network within Collier County itself. And so we've been approached
by several companies who are resellers of Sprint services, and we felt
that removing the county one more step away from the provider of
the services would make resolving issues with service more difficult
for the county. And since some of the services that are going to be
provided are mission critical services such as 911 we felt it was
probably not in the best interest of the public to remove that
service --
MR. OLLIFF: And just so you know, this is an agreement that
had to be reviewed and approved by every separate agency on the
campus, so every constitutional officer, IT director, has reviewed the
proposal that's here, and they all had to sign off on this before we
could bring it to you, and it was fairly time sensitive because this is
an item that Sprint had within their budget, and it's over a million
dollars that I believe Sprint has within their budget which is not
going to be available as their new fiscal year starts, and they needed
to have a commitment from us one way or the other.
Page 28
July 31, 2001
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: You'd sure think if we've got a
million dollars item with Sprint that we could get better service than
we've got.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I think once we get the
fiberoptics in, it's going to enhance the communication within the
campus. Am I right or wrong?
MR. BERRIOS: Yes. Sprint's position is that by replacing the
copper technology that currently provides services to the campus, it
will make troubleshooting easier and increase the level of service
because the equipment is more reliable, and the fiberoptics is less
prone to problem than copper cabling is. Also, in a separately
approved agenda item, we have requested that Sprint provide a
dedicated person to the county agencies to help us to resolve
service-level issues, and it's actually part of the master purchase
agreement that was on the consent agenda earlier.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: That's a real positive there. Just
while, you know, the subject's on the floor, I'm going to go ahead and
take a shot, and that is that, you know, the ecodo -- economic
development in this community is hinging to a great extent on
whether or not we can get improved service and improved
opportunities. And Sprint as our provider really is holding the
community hostage on economic development until the pressure can
be put on to get them to move forward and provide us with some
better service and some better opportunities in this community.
Unfortunately for this county commission, we don't have any
authority over that. That's a state issue with the public service
commission. But I just wanted to use the forum to get to say we need
some help. We need it bad.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Commissioner Mac'Kie, you're
correct. And those discussions have gone on in the Economic
Development Council. And I think as we improve and get the
Page 29
July 31,2001
fiberoptics in here, we're -- I think it's kind of a wait-and-see. But if
that doesn't begin to do what it needs to do, the feeling in the EDC is
that we will take the business leaders of this community -- we need
government, constitutional officers collectively, go to Kansas City,
sit down with their chief executives, and say, "Look, here's the deal.
This is where we are. This is what we need, and if you can't do it
enmasse, we're going to find options to deal with this." And so that's
the feeling that I gather from the business community is, all right, if
you're going to deliver-- because we're at the end of the railroad.
If you're going to deliver all this and you're going to make it work,
I'm just suggesting the way to invest a million dollars which is a
step in the right direction. I couldn't agree with you more,
Commissioner Mac'Kie; it is a community-wide problem. And, Tom,
you're right. We're trying to get some of these things done.
MR. STASKO: Commissioners, I have one or two comments.
One is, as I had mentioned, I believe an additional layer of
complexity where you enter into a third party or a fourth party.
Please, you know, you have to -- I look at that a lot differently. I'm in
the telephone business, and yet I have several customers that called
me in because they had software people with their computers and
hardware people pointing their fingers and saying, "It's not our
problem; it's your problem. It's not our problem; it's your problem."
Well, I like challenges, so I -- ! went in there, test the equipment. I
says, "Hey, look it, see the light right there and the light right here?
It's not here -- between here and there. Do you see this computer?
It works." Every -- all the other programs it works, so it's software.
Or vice versa; I troubleshot.
So the point I'm trying to make is sometimes a third party that
has more of a commitment to service for his customers is far more
important than a large company, well, with offices throughout the
world, because if you don't get service, you don't get
Page 30
July 31, 2001
communications. Excuse me. You know. So, again, I would like --
even though I know that it was time consuming for the officers
throughout the county to put this package together, I would -- I would
just like the time for review of that and see if the suggestions made
by any citizen can better improve not only the service but the quality
of communications and be more cost competitive.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Tom, what would be the fallout
if we were to continue this to our next meeting?
MR. OLLIFF: We wouldn't have the opportunity to have this
agreement with Sprint. From what we've been told, the ability for
Sprint to be able to do this project is within their current fiscal
year budget, and this was the last agenda within their fiscal year
budget in order to be able to get this done.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Hostage once again.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I'm going to move the plan as it is.
appreciate the comments of the speaker. I don't disagree with you,
sir, but I think at this point we need to move forward and accomplish
this piece. It doesn't get us where we want to be. There's going to
be more pressure put on Sprint--
MR. OLLIFF: To help Mr. Stasko a little bit, this is for the
government center only. It is only a ring around this particular
facility, and I will tell Mr. Stasko and the public and the board as
well, that we are looking at a number of different options to help
improve us in terms of communications abilities, and we will
continue to look for that. And I think Mr. Stasko can -- can be a part
of that as we move forward.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And the last thing I want to say
on this, I know our local reps, local Sprint people are, you know, the
salt of the earth. They do the very best they can for us. But
hopefully maybe they can take the transcript of this meeting to
Kansas City and get us a little help.
Page 31
July 31, 2001
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Particularly since it affects their
bonuses. All right. Yes, sir.
MR. STASKO: I've just got one question. Do you know what
the total value of that five-year contract is?
MR. OLLIFF: No, I don't. It's actually a reduction to the rate
that we pay on a monthly basis or the actual time charged. So it
depends on what our usage is. But, Michael, you may be able to give
some estimation from a campus-only phone charge of what we pay
on an annual basis.
MR. BERRIOS: If you look in the executive summary under
the fiscal impact, it gives you the annual commitment of the county
for those services. That includes the commitment for the Board of
County Commissioners, the Sheriff's Office, and the Clerk of the
Circuit Court. So the annual outlay currently is 287,000 just for the
circuits that are contemplated in this agreement. Regular phone
service, like a fax line or something, is not part of this agreement, nor
long distance charges or anything like that. So it's going to go from
287,000 to $247,000 annually.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So that we're going to be
saving a little money?
MR. BERRIOS: I'm sorry?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So we're going to be saving a
little money?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: About forty grand.
MR. BERRIOS: Yes, sir. It's contemplated we'll save $200,000
over the course of five years.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I would like to move forward.
And I appreciate your input on -- on this item.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. Thank you very much, sir. We
Do we have any other speakers
need to return to our regular agenda.
that I missed, Mr. Olliff?
Page 32
July 31, 2001
MR. OLLIFF: No.
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
will move to awards.
Okay.
Thank you.
Mr. Henning, we
Item #4
EMPLOYEE SERVICE AWARDS- PRESENTED
MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Chairman, as you are making your way
down to the floor, I'll begin to call the seven employees that are
listed. And each has a five-year service award this morning. The
first is James Fitzek with your Parks and Recreation Department
followed by Jeff Bolen from your IT department, followed by Susan
Satow from Parks and Recreation, and Bob Pierce from Facilities
Management, followed by Bernice Forester from your Emergency
Medical Services Department, followed by Katherine Warren from
your Emergency Medical Services Department. And the last
recipient this morning would be Jason Valinsky from Facilities
Management Department. And these are your employees who have
been with us for five years, Mr. Chairman. (Applause.)
MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Chairman, those are all the employees that
are receiving service awards this morning. Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. Thank you.
Item #5C
CHECK PRESENTATION BY FDOT TO COMMISSIONER
JAMES D. CARTER FOR LIVINGSTON ROAD
IMPROVEMENTS - PRESENTED
Page 33
July 31,2001
MR. OLLIFF: As the board's making their way back to the dias,
I would like to point out that we did have an item for a time certain at
9:30 to have Mr. Mike Rippe from the DOT make a check
presentation to the board and just to try and get Mr. Rippe back out
on -- and meet his commitments, if we could maybe have that item.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Yes.
MR. RIPPE: Thank you very much. For the record, my name is
Mike Rippe. I'm the district director with the Florida Department of
Transportation. In the famous words of Commissioner Carter, be
brilliant, be brief, be gone. On behalf of Secretary Tom Berry --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And bring money.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: That's good, Commissioner.
MR. RIPPE: -- myself and the department of transportation, I'm
pleased to announce that Collier County is the recipient of $3.7
million through the county incentive grant program. This is a
matching program. It varies on the facility type. In the case of
Livingston, Phase 4, it is a 35 percent match. So it's basically a third
of a $10 million-plus project. And, Commissioner, always a pleasure
working with you and your staff.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. Thank you, Mike. And we
always like money. (Applause.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thanks.
MR. RIPPE: Thank you, sir.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. But I think we really want to --
we want to congratulate our staff too.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: You bet.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Give them a hand.
Thank you so much, Mike.
MR. OLLIFF: Thank you, Mike.
Page 34
July 31,2001
CHAIRMAN CARTER: While I'm down here, I think
everybody can hear me from the microphones. We have had a lot of
conversation about U.S. 41 north. And if you go up there, you will
see that progress is moving along very well. And I hope in another
60 days you're going to see even more where that is open and running
and -- and doing the things that we anticipated.
Mike, I want to publicly thank you for the extended effort that you
and the FDOT are making to keep that on schedule.
MR. RIPPE: Thank you.
Item #5B
MICHELLE HONDZINSKI, SECRETARY I, UNIVERSITY
EXTENSION SERVICES RECOGNIZED AS EMPLOYEE OF
THE MONTH FOR JULY, 2001
CHAIRMAN CARTER: It is my pleasure at this time to do a
couple of very important awards. And that is to -- while I have --
MR. OLLIFF: Yes. Go right ahead.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: First is the employee of-- of the
month. And will Michelle Hondzinski -- will you come forward this
morning, Michelle.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Michelle, thank you so much. I want
you to turn around here and face TV-land. MS. HONZINSKI: Okay.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Michelle has worked diligently in our
extension department. And she has done just an amazing job out
there working with a lot of people and working with computer
systems and programs and all of that would have a tendency to baffle
this commissioner, but you have done that so well and have been
Page 35
July 31, 2001
duly now recognized for your contributions to the county and your
work with the university extension department. And as a token of
our appreciation, we would like to give you this plaque this morning,
employee of the month, July 2001, which you can proudly display
and be recognized for your contributions to Collier County and also a
check which I'm sure that you will find that you'll have good use for
and our letter of accommodation to you thanking you so much for
what you have done for us. So congratulations, and thank you for
your service.
(Applause.)
Item #5A
PRESENTATION FROM THE COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS TO TIARRA MYERS,
SOPHOMORE FROM LELY HIGH SCHOOL, FOR HER
CONTRIBUTIONS TO ENCOURAGE WASTE REDUCTION
AND RECYCLING IN COLLIER COUNTY- PRESENTED
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Also I have an award this morning.
It's under-- it's under-- so she can get this on the record, under 5-A
for Tiarra Myers -- is Tiarra here this morning? Thank you. If you
would come forward. This young lady is a sophomore at Lely High
School. And you turn around here. We want all your classmates and
everybody to hear what you have to say. Mom and Dad, are you
seeing your daughter? Are they here with you this morning? MS. MYERS: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, I'd like to have them stand up
and be recognized. Mom and Dad, you've got to be proud of this girl.
Thank you.
(Applause.)
Page 36
July 31,2001
CHAIRMAN CARTER: She is a sophomore at Lely and a
scholar with the Take Stock in Children mentoring program. And her
appearance as a talent of our commercial announcing the expanded
recycling program was very professional and quite impressive. And
we greatly appreciate her time and youthful responsibility in creating
such a positive impact.
And this is -- you know, I just love it when I see young people
doing these things in the community. These are the people that need
to be headlines in the Naples Daily News. These are the people that
should be written about in the editorial page. These are the people
that should be getting the recognition more than anyone else.
So this television commercial is part of our solid waste
management department's public relations and marketing action plan.
And this has been very valuable in our success. So, again, we thank
you, Tiarra, for your great contribution. And as a small token of our
appreciation, we would like you to have this certificate, which you'd
like to frame. And you can put that up at home or display it in the
halls of Lely High School so everyone will know how great you are.
So thank you so much. And we're really proud of you, and I know
that Mom and Dad is too. So thank you so much for being here this
morning.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
MS. MYERS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
MS. MYERS: Bye.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
Incoming as a sophomore?
All right.
Bye. Thank you so much.
Item # 1 OK
Page 37
July 31,2001
FOLLOW-UP REPORT TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS TO THE PUBLIC PETITION REGARDING A
HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION MADE BY MS. LAVERNE
FRANKLIN, PRESIDENT OF THE NAACP - STAFF TO MOVE
FORWARD WITH HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All right. We have another time
certain -- well, it's a time-certain item that we wanted to move up
early on the agenda this morning because it has significance in our
community, and there are some people who waited patiently to do
this. And I would like to move to this item. It's under the county
manager's report, and that is in regards to taking a look at the
subject of a human -- a human rights commission for Collier County.
And there wanted to be some discussion on that. So, I think, Mr.
Olliff, we would like to have your report back to us on this this
morning and also take input and discussion from the board.
MR. OLLIFF: Good morning. If the board will recall at our last
board meeting, Ms. Franklin, who is the current president of the local
NAACP chapter, made a public petition presentation to the board
regarding the possibility or the consideration of a human rights or a
humans relation commission.
We have since had two separate meetings that included
representatives of a number of different groups, including the City of
Naples and the Riverpark Coalition for Justice, the members of the
actual federal HUD, Housing and Urban Development department,
were kind enough to attend on one occasion. We had some
assistance and input from Lee County who has a Lee County office of
equal opportunity that's part of the county government, frankly, just
looking at a number of different options for the board to consider this
morning. And listed in your executive summary are a number of
them which range from fairly formalized what are called Fair
Page 38
July 31,2001
Housing Assistance Programs actually under the department of HUD
all the way down to an informal type advisory board.
What the group recommends that the board consider this
morning is the creation of a human rights or human relations
commission and also consideration that the county currently has two
advisory boards in the way of a black affairs advisory board and a
Hispanic affairs advisory board. And I believe in each case both of
the advisory boards in considering this item have recommended to
the board that they would be willing to have the board abolish those
two advisory boards subject to their ability to be able to review the
final board should the board want to create some sort of a human
rights or relation commission.
The commission backup information provided by the
Department of Justice is included in the executive summary package.
And as you'll see, it can include any number of items, depending on
what are important and pertinent items for the community. Human
relations commission con -- can consider anything from media events
to education to housing issues to employment issues. And it sort of
depends more, I think, on what's important and necessary and needed
in the community in which the commission is created. So while there
is a -- a recommendation that the board consider the creation of this
type of a commission, there is not a lot of formal framework in this
executive summary that says that the group would target specific
areas.
The only area that the group decided not to include for your
consideration was actually law enforcement. And the reason for that
was that there are actually two different efforts ongoing right now.
There is a commission or a committee being considered by the City
of Naples to work with its local police department. And there's also
an informal group that has been meeting on a regular basis with
Sheriff Don Hunter. And I believe that everyone there felt that both
Page 39
July 31,2001
of those groups were probably a little more specifically targeted to
law enforcement and were doing a fine job in the efforts that they
were already making.
There are a number of speakers here who can give you probably
a lot better information than I, frankly, can on the housing -- or on a
human relations commission. But, if you see fit, the direction that we
are looking for this morning is simply an opportunity to go back and
continue to work with the communities because I think if we're going
to do this right, we want wide representation of not only
different races, but we also want wide representation of different
geographic areas within this county because there are different issues
as you reach from the east part of the county to the west to north to
south. We would try and work to develop some sort of a enabe --
enabling legislation, probably in an ordinance format for you to
consider sometime later this fall.
With that, Mr. Chairman, I don't have a whole lot more
presentation, but I think it would be worth our while to go to a
number of registered speakers that you have.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I'd just like to say I have never
seen faster action, Miss Franklin. You really must be pulling a lot of
weight around here because to have a request at one meeting and
action at the next is not always the way things go with the public
petitions. So congratulations, and we're moving in the right direction.
I can't wait to hear from everybody.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: If at the board's pleasure, I will move
to public speakers so that we can get input from the community this
morning.
MR. OLLIFF: I think, Mr. Chairman, just because of the format
of this item, I'd suggest that you hear from Miss Franklin first.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I would hope.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Yes.
Page 40
July 31,2001
MR. OLLIFF: Thank you.
MS. FRANKLIN: Good morning. Sounds encouraging.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Yeah. It is encouraging.
MS. FRANKLIN: I took the liberty to pull together an overview
of what we would like to have addressed this morning. And I think
you-all have copies of that.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: We do now.
MS. FRANKLIN: Okay. For the record, my name is Laverne
Franklin. I am the president of the NAACP of Collier County. And I
was here in June With some -- some concerns, and we dealt primarily
with racial profiling and some issues under Don Hunter's jurisdiction
and also asking to be put on the agenda for today to -- for you to
consider establishing a human relations commission with or without
the City of Naples.
Since that time the NAACP and representatives from the Haitian
community, Hispanic community, and the Riverpark Coalition for
Justice have been meeting monthly with Don Hunter. And we also
have met with Chief Moore, the City of Naples Police Department.
The dialogue is ongoing, and we are working on policies and
procedures that may and hopefully will reduce racial tension,
improve police and citizen relations.
Today on behalf of the NAACP we are requesting you to
approve the establishment of a human relations commission as an
arm of the government by local ordinance and partnership with the
City of Naples. The City of Naples has already approved the Human
Relations Commission, and the mayor, Bonnie MacKenzie, has
endorsed that basic concept. Minority leaders have met with county
and city repre -- representatives and concluded that there is a definite
need for a commission. Its focus should be on a lot of different
issues, but the general consensus of the group was to improve a
diverse relationship with the community, implement conflict--
Page 41
July 31, 2001
conflict management policies and procedures that would foster,
respect, and promote intergroup cooperation.
The commission would have the right to address future social
injustices based on need. The NAACP recognizes the need for a
commission because it receives numerous phone calls per week
regarding police misconduct, employment issues, business infractions
where a lot of times what happens people call and say that they're in a
store, they're -- they're being ignored, or they don't receive the proper
service, or they may be viewed as a shoplifter. We also get calls
about racial materials and many other injustices. Real or perceived,
some people feel their civil rights are being eroded. Many of our
members and other concerned citizens who are white also inform us
about social injustice. We are all aware of the Marvin Harris
shooting in Riverpark, and it has escalated racial tensions. Similar
problems exist in Golden Gate, Immokalee, East Naples, and other
areas of the county. The dissention flows from the city to the county
and vice versa.
Collier County has no agency at all to handle discriminatory
citizen complaints. The complaints are sent from the county --
they're sent out of the county, really. And it takes sometimes two
years or more to get service. Collier County, the City of Naples owes
its citizens a base, a home base human relations commission that will
expedite equal treatment.
The Human Relations Commission overarching theme is to
provide a bridge amongst various groups by offering neutral
environment in which to interact and to create a vehicle of dialogue
and enforcement powers that will foster harmony, respect, and
cohesiveness. It will benefit our community if it is organized
properly. We need a cross-section of diverse input from all of our
citizens and not just minorities. We have to think about our elderly.
We must think about our physically challenged people because they
Page 42
July 31, 2001
are -- believe it or not, our seniors are more than 50 percent. We
need to consider their needs. So this commission is not just for
minorities; it's for everyone.
We need to think about permanent seats on this commission
from African-Americans, Haitians, Hispanics, members from
businesses, churches, the media, and other social action groups. The
Department of Justice, Community Relations Service, and the Florida
Commission on Human Relations are experts, and they have provided
us guidelines. To facilitate the process, it makes sense, good sense,
common sense to review their framework and other successful
models which the City of Naples is apparently doing.
With your approval, this monumental task can move forward to
address the issue of today: how to build positive relationships
between police and our citizens, erase the distrust between
governmental officials and its citizens, diffuse racial conflict in our
neighborhoods, and how to protect the civil rights of everyone in this
growing and expanding and changing community.
Collier County is indeed rapidly changing, it's growing.
Hispanics -- or blacks make up about 12 percent. Hispanics make up
roughly 23 percent, and others make up about 1 percent, and people
are coming every single day. They're arriving every day. The
NAACP is the largest and the oldest civil rights organization in the
United States. They've been here in Collier County for over 25 years
and has witnessed population explosion. And, consequently, its
membership has increased greatly. Newcomers support our local and
national programs. Growth, however, comes with its problems,
different values, and added responsibilities.
Today we're asking you to consider the diversity of the county,
manage its growth, and provide a vehicle where human beings can
coexist in peace. This proposed commission must be built on a
strong foundation. It should be allowed to conduct research, develop
Page 43
July 31,2001
services, have the flexibility to reform based on need. Number 1, to
be an arm of the government by local ordinance which will allow it to
act as an official unit. Two, have powers and responsibilities that
will guarantee equal treatment for all of its citizens. Three,
recommend equal opportunity in civic, economic development,
education, politics, housing, employment, and conflict management.
Four, study and make recommendations regarding county programs
and policies that will ensure inclusion for all of its citizens. Five,
find ways to build trust in government and solve problems that will
bring people together, have the means to carry out its
recommendations. Seven, assist in hiring of minorities. Consider
disbanding the black advisory board and Hispanic board. Nine, be
involved in acceptance of public/private grants, funding and
contributions. And, ten, permanent seats on the commission should
be held by representatives of the NAACP, the Haitian community,
Hispanics, the Riverpark Coalition for Justice, African-Americans,
other minorities, the disabled, the senior citizens, and other social
groups. It will take many hours of work by dedicated citizens and a
cooperative effort to establish an effective human relations
commission that will serve our diverse and expanding population.
The NAACP is asking you to approve a human relations commission
with the City of Naples. It needs to start its mission. It needs to start
now. It needs to show equality for all its citizens. And I thank you
for your consideration.
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
Thank you very much.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
Okay. Thank you, Miss Franklin.
A very thorough, well organized,
articulated-- and I do appreciate that. Some people say, well, Miss
Franklin's got more time than I get. Miss Franklin has initiated that.
She's worked very hard in this, and I wanted to give her every
Page 44
July 31,2001
opportunity to present the information from the NAACP this
morning. The rest of the speakers, I must remind you, I must limit
you to five minutes for your comments.
So let us move forward, Mr. Olliff, if we might. And how many
speakers do we have, sir?
MR. OLLIFF: We have ten speakers, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: She needs a break, and if ten speakers,
that's, like, 50 minutes. So -- but, Miss Franklin, please go ahead.
MS. FRANKLIN: Mr. Carter, may I say that some people have
decided that they will relinquish their time to me, so you won't have
actually ten people. Okay? MR. OLLIFF: Okay.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: How many -- well, she needs a break.
So let me -- let me just take ten so I can let my recorder have a break.
We will resume back here at 10:45.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: 10:457
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, I've got about 25 till; 10:50.
Ten minutes. Ten minutes.
(A short break was held.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: We are live. Thank you for your
patience, and we'll resume with the agenda. We're at 10-K talking
about the human relations commission, and we will go on with our
public speakers. Mr. Olliff.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Could I just -- before the first
speaker, could I ask a question for the interest of the speakers. If we
just took a consensus of the board if there's going to be support in
general for moving this forward, I'm absolutely supportive of this.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You got support. You got
support here.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: That's two.
Page 45
July 31, 2001
CHAIRMAN CARTER: What I would like us to do, and my
personal feeling is, I want to make sure that all of the representative
group, the Haitian community, Hispanic community, all -- if we go
into, like, drafting an ordinance to begin to embrace this, that all have
a participation and discussion with -- under the guidance and
direction of our county manager so that that type of thing can be
brought back and reviewed by the commission at a future date.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Well, that-- I think today's
request is do we support giving staff direction to continue meeting, to
work with the City of Naples, and to work together to create
something that would come back to us. And I absolutely support
that. I have one little addition I haven't seen, Native Americans and
the tribe particularly mentioned, and I think that should be --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I would agree.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Certainly be included.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I want it all inclusive. I don't want
any group left out, and I would like us to thoughtfully go through it
and make sure that we don't duplicate but truly achieve what we're
trying to accomplish here.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: So that just gives a flavor
anyway to the speakers that you're speaking to a receptive group.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: You know that we're not sitting here
and saying we're not going to do it. We just want to make sure that
we do it right.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I don't want to duplicate
our laws and ordinances from the state -- federal and state
government.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I couldn't agree with you more,
Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And also I have a little concern
abolishing the committees that we already do have because I feel that
Page 46
July 31, 2001
they have a distinct difference of needs, Mr. Chairman. And I don't
want to jump ahead forward and do that.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, that would embrace my thoughts
too. I want to make sure that the advisory boards are comfortable in
that direction too. So that's why I'm a person that says take it a step
at a time. Let's make sure that we do it right. Let's get everybody
folded in and get everyone expressing where they are and how they
want to approach this. And, like you, if they want to be independent
from, fine, make sure we don't have a duplication of laws and
ordinances. And I would leave that under the direction of legal
counsel and our county manager to -- to work the process.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I understand that the sheriff is
meeting with the minority groups to deal with those law enforcement
issues. And that's a duplication that I don't think that we need to get
into at this time neither.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That was going to be separate
under this particular directive.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: So let -- speakers, you know where --
where we're coming from. May we move forward, please.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA:
followed by Serge Thebaud.
MR. CORREA: Good morning.
Next speaker is David Correa
Mr. Chairman, members of the
-- honored members of the commission, I'm here to speak on behalf
of the proposed human relations commission that is being considered
this morning. The Hispanic Affairs Advisory Board of which I am
chairman has agreed to endorse the proposal of which -- has agreed to
endorse the proposal. In the past our board has repeatedly requested
similar type of organization to be appointed. We have long been a
con -- a proponent of the human relations commission concept.
We do have a major concern. We do not believe it is in the best
interests of the Hispanic community to dissolve the Hispanic Affairs
Page 47
July 31,2001
Advisory Board, as we are the liaison to the Hispanic community
from this board, and we do not wish to give up that function without
a thorough and complete discussion with our board members and the
community. There are many issues to be considered and numerous
challenges to address. We believe it is a golden opportunity to assist
the community at large, for it is not only the Hispanic community but
also the entire community which will gain by this resolution.
We ask that persons be appointed to this board who are free
from bias. We request that the composition of the committee be
citizens acceptable to the entire community. We expect a selections
committee to be composed of the major components, including the
bar association, the sheriff's office, the public school sector, the
religious groups, the black and Hispanic community, the business
community, and any other parties as you see proper.
In conclusion, I wish to reiterate the Hispanic Affairs Advisory
Board is in favor of the human relations resolution but protests
strongly -- I must say that again -- protests very strongly the
dissolution and the dissolvement of the Hispanic Affairs Advisory
Board. Okay. ! want to thank you for your time and your
consideration.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
MR. OLLIFF: Next speaker is Serge Thebaud followed by
Edward Dixon. Next speaker would be Rufus Watson-- Edward
Dixon followed by Rufus Watson.
MR. DIXON: Good morning, Mr. Chairman and
Commissioners. I'm Edward Dixon. I'm with the Florida
Commission on Human Relations, community relations service. We
are actually statutorily mandated to help local governments
implement human relations commissions should they desire. We
have worked with your community, worked with the City of Naples
during this time and certainly present -- presented information to any
Page 48
July 31, 2001
and all who would like to have that information. I also am a county
commissioner and chairman of the board in Gaston County, former
president of the Association of Counties, so I really understand what
you're going through here.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Yes, you do then.
MR. DIXON: And this is a golden opportunity. And those
advisory boards really don't have to be dissolved. Certainly, they can
make great recommendations to the human relations commission as
to their cultural and eth -- ethnical needs in the community. I'm sure
more advisory kind of boards, formal and informal, will grow out of
this should you see the need to approve it. We worked with
communities across the state. I think you will hear from Tom Battles
from the Department of Justice, community relations service. He and
I work closely together, and these boards have many different facets
depending upon the community needs. There are fair housing
elements. There are employment elements, public accommodations
kind of elements which strongly speak to those who are -- are
handicapped or disabled. In terms of making -- but all the laws have
one theme in common. They work to make communities more
inclusive, more inviting, and to give people and -- an opportunity at
the table. It doesn't make promises, but it gives you an opportunity at
the table. And we're here to provide Collier County with any
assistance it may need during this time. Thank you for the
opportunity, Mr. Chairman and Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. Thank you, Commissioner.
Good to see you again.
MR. OLLIFF: Next speaker is Rufus Watson followed by Kemi
Reed.
MR. WATSON: Good morning. For the record, Rufus Watson,
first vice-president of NAACP and also past chairman and member of
the Black Affairs Advisory Board. I'll make my comments brief.
Page 49
July 31,2001
This -- Black Affairs Advisory Board has endorsed this concept of a
human relations commission for the county. We feel that in the past
advisory board suggestions have been just suggestions and
discussions without any action to follow up. And we feel that this
concept will give us -- let us go beyond the discussion phase of issues
that affect the community into action phase. So we have --
wholeheartedly support this attempt to establish a human relation --
human relations commission, and we hope the commission will
follow up, so forth. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. Thank you, sir. Next speaker.
MR. OLLIFF: Next speaker's Kemi Reed followed by Victor
Valdes.
MS. REED: Good morning. My name is Kemi Reed, and I am
cofounder of the Riverpark Coalition for Justice. This is my first
opportunity to appear before the commission, and I want to thank you
for scheduling this matter so expeditiously, Chairman Carter. I'd also
like to commend the county manager, Tom Olliff, for an outstanding
job in meeting with the coalition and the other minority
representatives on such short notice.
As a matter of history, I think it's very important that the entire
community understand the context in which this matter appears
before you today. In the aftermath of the shooting of Marvin Harris,
the Riverpark coalition was formed because the people in Riverpark
needed an orderly way to express their feelings about the incident.
We were formed on April 29th, the day after the shooting, and we
immediately began a series of peaceful protests. As a result of that,
Mayor MacKenzie and the Naples City Council reached out to the
coalition and invited us to meet with them to find out what could be
done to heal the community.
And I want to commend the mayor, who is here today, and Mr.
Rambosk, as well as the entire Naples City Council, for their
Page 50
July 31,2001
foresight and leadership and their support of the community. We met
with the mayor, myself, Mr. Charleston, who is here today, who is
our chairman, Victor Valdes representing the Hispanic community,
Serge Thebaud representing the Haitian community, Reverend Baker
representing the Haitian community, as well as Laverne Franklin and
Rufus Watson representing the NAACP. Out of those discussions
came the decision that there was a need for both a human rights
commission or human relations commission and a police review
board composed of citizens. The Naples City Council has tentatively
given approval on June 20th to both ideas. They instructed us or
suggested that we meet with you to also obtain your endorsement of
both concepts. We are working with Sheriff Hunter in exploring --
replicating a police review board on the county level similar to what
is being considered at the Naples level. And we are now meeting
with you today to explore the adoption of a legislation creating a
human relations commission.
I would like to add that the Riverpark Coalition for Justice is the
one who brought in Mr. Battles from the justice department. We
invited Mr. Dixon in from Florida, as well as Candace Tapscott from
the Miami HUD office and Cami Corbett, both of whom have
authorized me to make representations to you, Miss Corbett and Miss
Tabscott, that they are available to help the county in any way as you
implement this new legislation if that is your wish, and we certainly
hope that it will be.
I am going to stand in support with the NAACP and Miss
Franklin in terms of her statement. We fully support that, except for
that aspect dealing with the Hispanic -- the disbanding of the
Hispanic Advisory Board. I will not support that since I have just
this morning heard that the board does not wish that, so I was -- of
course, honor their wishes on that. We have formed a united fund of
minority organizations representing over 34 percent of the population
Page 51
July 31, 2001
of Collier County. We will, of course, reach out to the Native
American population as suggested by Commissioner Mac'Kie. I
hope I'm pronouncing that right.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: You are.
MS. REED: Okay. And the only addition that we have to what
Miss Franklin said is that we want this commission, once it's created,
to have very, very strong enforcement authority. HUD cautioned us
to make sure that the fair housing component is able to be enforced.
And in order to do that, it must have subpoena authority, and it must
have the authority to litigate for damages on behalf of agreed --
aggrieved complainants. Right now the way it's envisioned, I assume
according to what Mr. Olliff said -- Olliff said is that it's going to be
an advisory, sort of like a study commission is what I'm hearing.
And I would ask that a 90-day, perhaps, at longest, 120-day sunset
clause be inserted in the creation of this commission so that it's very
clear that just as you have moved quickly and Mr. Olliff and his staff
have moved quickly, that this commission must move quickly and
come back to the county with a proposal that has a strong
enforcement component. I see I have about 12 seconds to sum up,
and I'm going to honor the time frame, and I would just, again, thank
you on behalf of the community for hearing us.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
MR. OLLIFF: Next speaker is Victor Valdes followed by
Bonnie MacKenzie.
MR. VALDES: Good morning. For the record, my name is
Victor Valdes, Hispanic speaker, the newspaper editor and member
of the board of coalition-- Riverpark Coalition for Justice.
I am here to support the presentation of the petition of the
NAACP. I only have one concern; that is that I don't like -- I think
the Hispanic community don't like to see the Hispanic board
disappear because anyway they are something to handle with the
Page 52
July 31,2001
human right commission and something that we can handle with the
advise board for Hispanic. I think maybe in the future the board of
commission will be -- pay attention to the Hispanic affairs and black
board -- black affairs advice board because in the past we have bad
impression, but now I think that we, as well as you, the Naples city
included, the mayor, the -- Mr. Rambosk, the city manager, Mr.
Olliff, we are all together working to reach a good understanding, a
good reach in our community because all are here to stay, you and us.
Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you, sir. Next speaker, please.
MR. OLLIFF: Next speaker is Mayor Bonnie MacKenzie
followed by Fred Thomas.
MAYOR MACKENZIE: Good morning. My name is Bonnie
MacKenzie. And I certainly am not going to talk you out of what
you had already decided. I did want to explain to you how fruitful
and helpful the discussions between representatives of your staff, Mr.
Olliff's staff, and Mr. Rambosk and the city staff have been.
Clearly, the issues that are in front of us are community-wide. The
city has made commitments, and we intend to honor those
commitments, but I think that we would work smart, which would be
good for us if, in fact, we joined forces and worked together and had
community issues addressed with the community-wide participation.
And I thank you very much for considering it.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you, Mayor.
MR. OLLIFF: Fred Thomas will be your next speaker, followed
by the last registered speaker, Kevin Rambosk.
MR. THOMAS: Good morning, Commissioners. Thank you
for this opportunity. My name is Fred Thomas for the record. I'm a
citizen of Immokalee, member of the executive committee of the
NAACP. I'm going to give you a different spin on what this
commission can do for us.
Page 53
July 31,2001
There is right now being embarked by the Florida Chambers
Leadership Florida and a program to show an appreciation and a
value to our diversity. Our county being the largest growth county in
the state, bringing people from all over the world here, need to learn
and develop vehicles where we can appreciate and value our
diversity, that we can only do that when everybody is seen and
respected as equal parts of-- of this great tropic of ours.
You know, I've said this before, and I'll say it again, I think I'll
say it for many more times. We're not trying to take a gallon of white
milk, throw in some chocolate milk, throw in a little orange juice and
tomato juice and make a mix. But we need to have some fine linen,
some fine wool, some red silk, some orange tapestry or whatever, and
create a great patchwork quilt to protect us all. But we've got to be
able to look at that quilt and see that fine black cloth and the fine
white cloth and that fine red cloth -- that joy and that -- that value of
the diversity that makes us a great organization.
My agency is great because we have diversity of intellect, ideas
so that we can be so many things for so many people. We need to
make this county -- ensure that this county continues to do that.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you.
MR. OLLIFF: The next speaker is Kevin Rambosk, the city
manager from the City of Naples.
MR. RAMBOSK: Good morning. I'm here on behalf of the
city, and I just want to give you a brief overview as to what we have
been working on and tell you, more importantly, that the City of
Naples, as well as our community, is and has been facing some
challenges and ones that are important and critically important to all
of us in the community. From that we provided information to city
council; they've directed us to work together to resolve those. We
have done that, along with your staff. And I would like to just tell
Page 54
July 31,2001
you that the mayor and city council are committed to moving forward
and making positive changes for the quality of life of our residents.
And we'd like to be able to do that along with your staff, and I would
like to tell you that I am in full support of your staff report and upon
your decision today would recommend that to the city council at our
coming meeting. Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you, sir.
MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Chairman, while there are no other speakers,
I do need to note that Thomas Battles who is with the Miami office
of the U.S. Department of Justice, is here and if you have any
questions, I'm sure he would be happy to answer those in terms of the
human relations commission and the creation of such.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Just that I would like to express
our gratitude for your support and your willingness to help us while
we try to figure out how to do this best.
MR. OLLIFF: I need to point out for the record, he's offered his
assistance for free, so we will most likely be tapping him.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: You mean the federal government's
going to give us something for free. Well --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Something we want.
MR. BATTLES: You earned it. Thank you very much. I'm
Tom Battles with the community relations service out of Miami. I'm
the director of the field office, and I cover the eight-state region of
the country. And our primary role is to mediate racial and ethnic
disputes, real and/or perceived. We don't represent any one interest
but communities, government trying to develop programs and
projects to help the communities move forth. And I want to
commend you for -- for this challenge and encourage you to -- to
move forward with it. And whatever resources we can bring to this
process, we would be happy to do it free of charge. Thank you very
much.
Page 55
July 31,2001
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. Thank you for your-- your--
for being here and willing to -- to work with us.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make a
motion that we move forward and incorporate all of the
recommendations and staff report with the exception of the one with
regard to the disbanding of both the Black Affairs Advisory and
Hispanics Affairs Advisory Boards. We may find that they serve as
subsets or subcommittees or in some other way continue to have
some viability. So with the exception of those -- with that one
exception, I'd like to move approval of the staff's recommendation
that we go forward and begin creation of a human rights commission
in Collier County. What a great day.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'll second that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: In your motion we're not going
to repeat our eight government agencies.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: You know, the good news is is
we have expert help here to help us avoid pitfalls of previous -- you
know, we're not the first ones doing this by the grace of God, and
we're going to get some help. So I think-- and certainly,
Commissioner Henning, whatever is eventually recommended will
come back to us to vote on, so that's when we'll get to see the details
and blow by blow, so to speak.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Gotcha.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Is Commissioner Fiala with us?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, I sure am.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Do you have any comments,
Commissioner?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No. I just think we're heading in
the right direction, and I'm so pleased to see that we're all working
together as a team.
Page 56
July 31,2001
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
other discussions, members of the board?
saying aye.
(Unanimous response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
much.
(Applause.)
Okay. Thank you. All in favor -- any
All in favor signify by
Opposed by the same sign.
Motion carries 5-0. Thank you very
Item #6A
PUBLIC PETITION REGARDING LAS NACIONES NEWS
COMMUNITY FORUM SCHEDULED 1N THE BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS BOARDROOM AUGUST 9 AND
10, 2001 - TO BE BROUGHT BACK ON SEPTEMBER 11,2001
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Now we will return to our regular
agenda. And that would take me to Item No. 6, public petitions and
comments on general topics. And now we'll start with Item A, and
Mr. Valdes, I believe, will be our first person to speak to us this
morning.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Victor?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Victor, are you still here?
(Chairman Carter left the dais.)
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Mr. Valdes, are you still going
to speak to us? You're up.
MR. VALDES: I am here again, Victor Valdes. I am here to
request the proclamation for the forum that will be held here August
9 and 10, will be follow with the participation of the City of Naples.
They will send officers. The sheriff's department will send officer to
Page 57
July 31,2001
observe and participate in the board of governor. We will have 20
people dealing with complaint, recommendation, ideas, and we will
have some city members from Naples councilwoman, Miss Taylor,
will be with us. Well, too many good people from the community we
will be with us. We invite you, the commission -- well, and
especially the big interest for Mr. Coletta that has a big minority
representation and Miss Fiala, Commissioner Fiala --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
MR. VALDES: -- that lives in my district, please be with us, pay
attention to the complaint from the people to the idea, changes of
opinion. And now I request a proclamation for this date. I will give
you some example that --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
MR. VALDES:
give it to us.
If you would give it to Ramiro,
This is a proclamation that Naples city have
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Okay.
MR. VALDES: Okay. And this is a copy for petition to the
chairman and a copy for each of-- one of you.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Mr. Manalich, can we take
action today? I mean, certainly this is an event that is going forward.
It's going to be held in these chambers? Am I correct? MR. OLLIFF: Yes.
MR. VALDES: Yes, here.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I'm afraid that we, under public
petition, don't have the authority to pass a resolution. But if-- if I'm
instructed to the contrary, we could certainly bring it back. But
whatever-- if we can endorse, you know, the concept, endorse what
you're doing, tell you that we support it, tell you that we'll be there --
I'm going to be out of town -- darn it -- but tell you, you know, that
we -- we appreciate the effort of bringing the people together for this
Page 58
July 31, 2001
purpose, that may be all we're able to do today unless Mr. Manalich
gives me some other advice.
MR. MANALICH: Well, you're correct. In a public petition,
we normally cannot take any action. However, I suppose that as a
Board of County Commissioners item you could, as you add to the
agenda frequently under that auspices, perhaps, direct something.
COMMISSIONER
COMMISSIONER
COMMISSIONER
MAC'KIE: Well--
COLETTA: I see no harm in--
MAC'KIE: No. Me either.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: We should have a few minutes,
though, to read it over. I don't think we accept any petition that
comes before us in five minutes' time. Possibly we can add this to
the agenda and discuss it a little bit later-- you have time to review it
and make your suggestions. But I think -- I'm sure we can give it an
endorsement of some type. It's a wonderful thing you're doing. And
anytime we can get the community to step forward and intercede with
government and work with us, that -- that's all the better. We need
more interaction.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: What might be a more efficient
approach would just to be -- if we had a consensus right now of our
support for it. We wouldn't have an official proclamation, but we
could certainly give him an indication right now of our support for
this, our appreciation for your scheduling it, and our willingness to
work with you just by consensus of the board, since we can't
officially do a proclamation, and you certainly have that from me.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, we can still put it on the
agenda. I don't think it would hurt
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
able to draft it up that fast.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA:
impossible?
to bring it back and discuss it.
I'm not sure that they'll even be
Am I asking for the
Page 59
July 31,2001
MR. VALDES:
for the next meeting.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
MR. VALDES: A yearly--
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
MR. VALDES: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA:
September.
US --
John, we have the proclaim -- the proclamation
It would be after the fact.
Oh.
Oh, okay. That will be in
MR. VALDES: This is the second. We have it in 1995 the first.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Okay.
MR. VALDES: Now we are building -- we said we. We; you,
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Yes.
MR. VALDES: -- Sheriff Hunter, and the City of Naples, we are
trying to build a better base of communication. It is the opportunity
listing (sic) the people, their concern. They make mistake from some
law department of enforcement, and we can fix it.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: So that's easy now that I
understand, Mr. Valdes. We can certainly have that put on our next
agenda. Either -- Commissioner Coletta, either one of us, our staff,
I'm sure, would support that. And we'll have that put on our next
agenda.
MR. VALDES: With the rules that you support our forum?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Yes, sir.
MR. VALDES: Those people will be in the table of governor,
20 people, including Mr. Mihalic? Mohlke? He will be in -- plenty
of people -- members. Good peoples.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Oh, of course. And the last
comment I would have would be to ask if we could have this
televised on Channel 54. That would be an excellent community
service.
Page 60
July 31,2001
MR. VALDES: Good, good, good.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: It will be in this same room, and
we'll have the facilities available, so let's use them-- MR. VALDES: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: -- and look forward to working
with you more. Anything else from the board or--
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I just would like to add that I feel
that the lines of communication are finally opening up. And I am so -
- so happy. And, Mr. Valdes, thank you very much for being with us.
Laverne, you're just a special person in my heart, as you well know,
and I'm so glad that we're all working together. And this is a board
that, as you can see, is very responsive. So I think we'll continue to
move forward.
MR. VALDES: Thank you very much.
MR. OLLIFF: Ms. Mac'Kie, you don't normally take public
speakers under public comment, but you have two registered
speakers, Kemi Reed and Serge Thebaud, and it's up to you-- your
discretion.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: If there's something you need to
add, we'd be happy to hear it, if not we --
MS. REED: Just very briefly just like to strongly support the
forum and Mr. Valdes and his long history in this county. And thank
you for issuing the proclamation recognizing his work. He has been
an invaluable ally to the community throughout our struggles for
many, many years. And I think that that should be recognized, and I
appreciate your recognition.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Thank you. Okay. Well, thank
you very much.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you.
Item #6C
Page 61
July 31,2001
PUBLIC PETITION REGARDING REDISTRICTING OF
COLLIER COUNTY BY THE CITIZENS FOR FAIR
REDISTRICTING - STAFF TO WORK WITH LEE AND
CHARLOTTE COUNTIES
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: We'll move to our next item
which is also a public petition, Mr. Mike Carr. I assume also Mr.
Chuck Mohlke, request for a public petition regarding redistricting in
Collier County. If you could come on up here, I bet you'll be willing
to, and then you could go back and earn a living.
MR. CARR: That would be good. Chuck, come on. You can't
hide back there. I want you up here with me to take the heat.
First of all, we're not going to ask you for money, which should make
everybody feel better. Secondly, what we've got is, as you know, is
an operation. We've got bipartisan committee with Democrats,
Republicans working together. We've also got Burt Saunders and
Dudley Goodlette as part of our bipartisan effort.
What we're trying to do is to make the best possible preparation
for the September 24th and 25th public hearings on redistricting in
order to ensure that Collier County doesn't find itself a part of Fort
Lauderdale or Miami. I don't think we belong there. We belong with
Lee County and on our side of the state. In conjunction with that, I
talked to Jennifer Edwards, and she's willing to allow the use of some
of her staff to help design the demographics. Chuck can talk about
this. They've got -- when we did the work on selecting the election
equipment, we got a chance to watch their computer-- computer
programs do its stuff. They can mix and match and do a--
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: It's fascinating, isn't it?
MR. CARR: -- a wonderful job. And it's kind of her to offer
that help. We're going to ask that community development loan
Page 62
July 31,2001
somebody to work with Jennifer to help work on the demographic --
demographics, and we'll have a proposal. Dudley Goodlette has
loaned us his -- his software that the state has prepared. I think it's
fair to say it's not a final version. It does things like crash computers.
But obviously there's -- yeah, there's going to be some real effort
from people that know a lot more about computers than I do, which is
-- I know just enough to get in trouble. It will take some time.
I did have some talks with a gentleman on staff in community
development, and it sounds like it wouldn't hurt them either to get a
chance to work with Jennifer's programs. The state is doing a lot of
stuff manually. Jennifer's got a program that you can sit there and --
it's wonderful. I mean, they can create maps and add, subtract
factors.
All we really want today is -- oh, is a chance to utilize somebody
to work with Jennifer and get it going. This is a bipartisan multi-
county effort. We have -- in Lee County we've got the
Democratic/Republican chairman on board there. You know, all ! get
is positive vibrations. I think we're going to succeed. I just talked
with Burt Saunders. He said he's been spreading the word that we're
serious about demanding that we get -- keep our territorial integrity
and not be farmed out. So if you could ask the county manager to
instruct the staff to work with us, that's all we're asking for today.
And, Chuck, jump in there.
MR. MOHLKE: If it please this honorable board, it's an
enormous pleasure on the part of the Democratic County Chairman to
be able to appear at the same podium for the same purpose with my
Republican colleague, Mike Carr.
This is one of these circumstances in which there really is a true
community of interest that does not involve just persons with a very
enhanced political interest in decisions and outcomes, but rather, a
community-wide interest that tries to take account the best we can of
Page 63
July 31, 2001
all of those in the population in Collier County who are often ignored
in decisions having to do with redistricting. We're hoping to reach
out to as many as wish to join us in this effort.
And I remember back in 1988 when we spent so much time on
the issue of the single-member district referendum. And there there
was kind of a mantra which essentially was fairness and
accountability. And, board members, that's what we're talking about
here is people with a clear community of interest who are joining
together in an effort not to be separated but, rather, to be a part of a
holistic effort at the congressional, the legislative, and the county
commission and school board levels to be sure that we have a district
system in which districts are equal in population, compact and
contiguous, and that we protect our incumbents to the greatest degree
possible. I regret to say that some of the proposals made by east
coast members of both political parties do not include the same
agenda. And we're very hopeful that we can raise public awareness,
and we're so pleased at the very forthcoming attitude of staff
members, particularly those working for John Dunnuck in
community development and Supervisor of Elections, Jennifer
Edwards. And we're very hopeful that this effort will go forward.
I have really nothing else to add to the discussion except to hope
that board members will continue to have the enhanced interest in
this that they've expressed thus far and will be persons who we can
call upon in the various public hearings that will begin on the 24th of
September in LaBelle. And in that evening we'll also be at Naples
High School and the next day at one o'clock at Florida Gulf Coast
University. And I'm hopeful that we'll get a good response from local
elected officials that will reinforce the concerns we're trying to the
best of our ability to express here today and in the future. And we
thank you for this opportunity.
Page 64
July 31, 2001
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Mohlke, Mr. Carr, I just
want to commend you for coming together, the two parties, local
parties here in Collier County, to work on this one issue that is so
important to the west coast of Florida, southern west coast.
MR. CARR: It's easy to work with Chuck. He's a gentleman.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes, he is truly a gentleman.
MR. MOHLKE: Well, united we stand.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: There you go.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Amen.
MR. MOHLKE: A comment in the recent editorial of the
Naples Daily News. And I think Mike and I have agreed from the
outset that that's crucial to the integrity of the process.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Do you think it's in fitting order
to write up a proclamation and adopt it by the board in -- and move it
forward to the powers to be?
MR. CARR: That would certainly be a wonderful thought, and
I'm glad you thought of it.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And we could do that prior to
the September redistricting meeting.
MR. MOHLKE: It would be exactly 12 days before the first
public hearing.
MR. CARR: It couldn't be more timely. That would be great.
MR. MOHLKE: To have that -- perhaps have that presented by
a board member.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Absolutely.
MR. CARR: Public -- that's a public meeting. We would be
honored to have -- have you make that contribution. That's a great
idea.
MR. MOHLKE: If Michael would permit me, there's one last
thing that I think is very important to say about the public hearings
Page 65
July 31,2001
that we've commented on here briefly. There is no substitute for a
good public record, no substitute whatsoever.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: That's right.
MR. MOHLKE: And one of the reasons that I believe so
strongly in that is what happened ten years ago. After an awful lot of
jawboning with a very unresponsive legislative leadership in
Tallahassee in 1991, 1992 that didn't have a lot of interest in
Southwest Florida's problems, we were able to find a little window in
the congressional redistricting committee in the Florida house
through then State Representative Peter Deutsch, now Congressman
Peter Deutsch, and he created for the public record a congressional
district plan at that time called Plan 305 that is exactly the boundaries
of Congressional District 14 as it exists today. It went through all of
the legislative reviews. It went through all of the public hearings. It
was supported strongly in local comments here. So when the
inevitable happened and the court system became involved, the
special master had a recommendation which he could work with
which ended up by becoming then Congressman Mack's district, now
Congressman Goss's district. And we're hopeful that people
understand the very considerable importance of these public hearing
remarks to build a strong record that can be relied on just in case it
ends up by going to the court system as it did ten years ago.
MR. CARR: We want to win before that. We are going to win
before that. My conversations with Mr. Dudley and Burt indicate
that the message is getting out. They have been very forceful. Porter
Goss has been very blunt about his desire to work with us to preserve
this district. I would think the folks that are doing the backroom
deals understand that we are not going away and we are going to
fight for this district.
Page 66
July 31,2001
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I, for one, will be there in
September for the meetings. I will also make myself available to go
to Tallahassee and lobby on-- in this effort.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And I'll help too.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
COMMISSIONER COLETTA:
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
Ditto.
Thank you, Donna.
So should we consider direction
being given to Mr. Olliff to have his staff work with our Supervisor
of Elections? And we will have a proclamation on our next agenda
so we have that ready for the first public hearing.
MR. OLLIFF: We might -- we might also consider requesting
that both of the cities in this county do the same and send a letter
from our chair requesting that they adopt similar proclamations to the
one we would adopt.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: All three of the cities.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We could send that out to a -- a
request to Lee County.
MR. OLLIFF: -- as well.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Charlotte County.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Let's do that. Excellent.
Gentlemen, thank you for your patience today, and thank you for
your work on our behalf.
MR. CARR: Thanks for having us here.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Absolutely.
Our next item is item --
MR. OLLIFF: Actually, you have one public comment.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Oh.
MR. OLLIFF: A person registered. And I'm sorry. It, again,
did not show up on this index --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Okay.
MR. OLLIFF: -- but Lola Overton is registered.
Page 67
July 31,2001
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Be happy to hear from her.
MS. OVERTON: Thank you very much. I have been here since
1957 in Naples. Lola Overton is my name. I just come in concern
because I want to see if we can keep something in the future from
happening that should not happen. I will be leaving a packet with
you which will have much of what I am going to say.
This is the -- as a citizen -- and several citizens are concerned.
The Collier County -- we submit the following to be read into the
record and receive the board's due consideration as a result of many
outstanding concerns and unanswered questions about activities on
public property by the vendor Gulf Coast Skimmers Club. We urge
the board to take immediate action on these two requests: Number 1,
conduct an in-depth review of the lease between the Gulf Coast
Skimmer Water Club and Collier County, including its purpose,
content, and feasibility, as well as the fulfillment of or failure to
fulfill its stipulations. Two, order a forensic audit of the club's
financial records for all to see. It has not been presented, and we are
missing out on something that needs to be correct for all Collier
County, not just a small group.
I will leave these with you, and I hope that you will look over
the many pages. There's some articles that came from the newspaper
in here. But basically three for the others. If you'll give that to the
board.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Thank you, ma'am. And I guess
the appropriate -- would be if a board member wants to put this on
under the Item 15 for our next agenda, that would be how it could get
to an actual vote if it --
MS. OVERTON: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
information.
Good.
Appreciate it.
We appreciate you providing us
It looks like we have another speaker perhaps? No?
Page 68
July 31, 2001
Item #7A
PETITION VA-2001-AR-688, JIM HUDSON REPRESENTING
STONEBURNER-HUDSON TRUST REQUESTING A 27-FOOT
SIDE YARD VARIANCE FROM THE REQUIRED 40-FOOT SIDE
YARD SETBACK ESTABLISHED FOR AUTOMOBILE
SERVICE STATIONS TO 13 FEET FOR AN EXISTING
AUTOMOBILE SERVICE STATION LOCATED AT THE
CORNER OF AIRPORT PULLING ROAD AND DAVIS
BOULEVARD- DENIED
Then we will move on to Item 7-A under the Board of Zoning
Appeals. This is the -- a variance petition for Stonebumer-Hudson
trust. Anybody who wants to speak on this item needs to stand and
raise your right hand and be sworn by the court reporter. (The oath was administered.)
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And we need to have ex parte --
Mr. Chairman's back. We were to the point of disclosure.
(Commissioner Carter returned to the dais.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you. Any disclosures upon the
part of the members of the board?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Not I.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: None.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: None.
MR. BADAMTCHIAN: Good morning, Commissioners.
Chahram Badamtchian from planning services staff.
This is a request for a variance for a gas station located at the comer
of Davis and Airport Road on the southwest comer of Davis and
Airport Road. And there is an existent Hess gas station and a
commercial building housing tattoo parlor and, I believe, a temporary
Page 69
July 31, 2001
employment agency, a labor pool. What they are planning to do is
subdivide the property and sell one of the buildings with a portion of
the land.
Staff reviewed this variance, and staff is having some difficulty
with this. For one thing, they are requesting a 67 percent reduction in
side-yard requirement. This project was built as a unified plan -- as a
unified development. Now going back and subdividing and selling
half of it will create problems in the future. And this is also within
the triangle area that we are trying to redevelop. And one of the
problems we are having is the existence of multitude of small
nonconforming lots which we are going to create one more with this
variance, if granted.
Planning Commission reviewed this variance request. They
unanimously recommended approval subject to landscape
enhancement. The argument was that since people will not be able to
see any difference in the ground, it's just that half of the parcel is
going to be owned by somebody else, then there is no reason for
denial. However, as I mentioned, we are creating problem for the
future. We are creating nonconforming properties.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Can I jump in on that --
MR. BADAMTCHIAN: Sure.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: -- Badamtchian (sic), that if we
were only concerned with the existence of this current development
of the property, then a trade, you know, of a variance in exchange for
landscaping and some architectural improvements or some
beautification there might be worth considering. But the problem is
is the tiny -- the small nonconforming lots, the small lot sizes in here
is the biggest impediment to the appropriate redevelopment of the
area. And if we create additional small lots, God forbid, a hurricane,
but something comes down, and then these are redeveloped in a way,
because they're two small lots instead of one large lot that would
Page 70
July 31, 2001
facilitate a nicer development. So this is something I have -- I have a
great deal of hesitation supporting.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'd like to join in and say that I
don't think it's a good direction as far as the East Naples
redevelopment goes. We're trying to -- well, first of all, I think that
we want to enhance the landscaping, and that's a major corridor there,
a major comer in that corridor. I think the lot would be -- become too
small, too restrictive, and I just don't think it's to the betterment of the
public.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: So unless you have more
specific comments from staff, maybe it would be good for us to go
ahead --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Let's go to -- go to the petitioner.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Tell us some compelling reason
why this is going to do so much good for the community that we
ought to approve it.
MR. HUDSON: For the record, my name is Jim Hudson. I
represent the Hudson-Stonebumer trust -- trusts -- Stonebumer-
Hudson trust. I represent my wife and two family members that own
the -- own the property.
As you see, there's two commercial buildings. We're not
looking to add, change anything at all. No one will know the
difference of any visual, you know, look at the property at all. The
fellow that owned -- is renting the south building has requested to
purchase that building, and to do that we would have to sell it off.
Well, right now, you see the existing property line when it was built
goes right through the Hess station.
It's not a gas station. It's a convenience store, like a -- like a 7-
Eleven or whatever. Just the way it's written here looks like it's a gas
station/service station with lifts and all that other. It's certainly not.
It's a convenience store where people come in and buy things, buy
Page 71
July 31,2001
gas. And the south portion of the building -- or the property, excuse
me, presently has a building. Both these buildings were built in '86 at
that point -- right around '85 or '86. At that point they did fit the
zoning and so forth. And, obviously, the zoning has changed, but we
-- we're not looking to -- we don't think this would harm anything at
all. It's not going to change -- no one would know the difference.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Except for in the future when
redevelopment happens.
MR. HUDSON: In the future then-- then there's plenty of room
on the -- there's 300 feet, roughly, from north to south. Now, if we
would ever rebuild that building or whatever, then we would have to
then conform to -- to the present zoning.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, we're hoping to see a
difference for the positive. I think that's what's most important here.
That's what we're going for. The shop that's on there right now, the
auto repair, he does a wonderful job. We never want to lose him.
But the appearance of the property, when you say we're not going to
see a difference, we'd love to see a change for the better to enhance
that comer.
MR. HUDSON: Well, that is one of the newer buildings on the
comer. There's a -- there's a really old gas station on the north
comer.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: On the other side of the street.
MR. HUDSON: We constantly get requests, and -- and we
always fulfill to keep the landscaping and keep it clean and all that.
And it's as nice as any convenience store that has a comer property.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: This is the Hess store.
MR. HUDSON: Yes, ma'am. Originally when it was built, if
you-all recall, it used to -- it was a Stoney's store --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Right.
Page 72
July 31,2001
MR. HUDSON: -- originally back in '86, '85-'86, and then
leased -- and then we leased it to -- to another. But it's a very
attractive building. It's not -- I don't think it's an eyesore of any kind.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Not really an eyesore. I'd have to
mention to you the darkness of it at night make it looks like it's
closed. I probably shouldn't even mention this as a sideline. There's
a lot of people that hang out there because it's so dark, and I don't
think that's good for the safety of the community, but anyway...
MR. HUDSON: It has canopies on the -- the gas portions, and
it's got to be fairly -- fairly bright. The --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, I know.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: This isn't the property, is it, that
has the tattoo and body-branding emporium?
MR. HUDSON: The building-- the south building, yes, yes.
That one is. That is the building that we're presently --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I have to admit, I always
wondered what was the appropriate zoning district for body branding.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I think they call it a ranch.
(Laughter.)
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I -- I just -- I've got to tell you
that I'll not going to support a variance. If you were to come in here
with some improvement, some plan, something that made this so
beneficial -- I can't even think, frankly, what it would be, but it would
have to be really, really positive.
MR. HUDSON: If we don't do this, it's going to just stay the
same. No one will ever see any change at all if we leave it --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And if you do approve it, what
change would we see?
MR. HUDSON: None, until we would-- we have had requests
that people buy -- commercial people -- I'm a realtor, by the way.
And I've had requests -- people are looking for that comer property.
Page 73
July 31,2001
Well, if that be the case, they would just knock that building down
and then build it to con -- you know, whatever would conform to
today's zoning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, we have a -- sir, we have
-- over here.
MR. HUDSON: I'm sorry.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: The speaker is behind you, so
it's confusing. Sorry.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: If we split up the property, we
diminish the possibilities of a larger unified development. And that's
-- that's -- I think that's what we're all talking about here is -- is more
of unified. So I have to agree with staff.
MR. HUDSON: Well, the remaining property would be roughly
200 feet from-- frontage and 128 deep, which is -- which is a pretty
good size. They're a lot of smaller ones around town.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Yeah. But we really want to
make a change. We're really -- I've made my sales --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: You've made your point,
Commissioner. Looking at a redevelopment area, selfishly, if I want
to redevelop an area, I want to work with one owner every time I can
on a piece of property. The more parcels, the more owners, the more
difficult to put it together. For me, sir, that just does not -- does not
work. I cannot support the variance. I have to go with staff.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Are there other speakers.'?
MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Chairman, we have no registered speakers.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I make a motion --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Well, guys --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, wait. We have-- we have
public speakers. We have to go there first.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: No, we don't have any.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: We don't have any, okay.
Page 74
July 31,2001
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
needs to be closed.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Yes.
move we close the public hearing.
But there is a public hearing that
I -- if there are no speakers, I
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I make a motion that we
recognize staff's recommendations of denial.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Second.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: We have a motion by Commissioner
Henning. We have a pair of seconds by Commissioner Fiala and --
and Mac'Kie. Any further discussion?
MR. MANALICH: Mr. Chairman, is that -- I just want to add
for the record, is that motion based on the staff presentation of the
criteria that are not satisfied under the variance --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
MR. MANALICH: -- regulations?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Yes. All in favor signify by saying
aye.
(Unanimous response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
Opposed by the same sign.
Motion carries 5-0.
Item #8B
ORDINANCE 2001-46, RE MERCHANDISING OF TOBACCO
PRODUCTS IN COLLIER COUNTY, PROHIBITING
PLACEMENT OF TOBACCO PRODUCTS IN OPEN DISPLAY
UNITS DIRECTLY ACCESSIBLE TO MINORS - ADOPTED
That moves us to the next item which will be --
Page 75
July 31,2001
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Finally the green shirts.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: -- advertised public hearings, Item 8-B
an ordinance for Collier County entitled "Merchandising of Tobacco
Products."
Mr. Manalich, I believe that would be your area.
MR. MANALICH: Yes. Attorney-- Assistant County Attorney
Jacqueline Hubbard Robinson will present that item.
MS. HUBBARD ROBINSON: Good morning.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Good morning, Ms. Hubbard.
MS. HUBBARD ROBINSON: This is -- this is an ordinance
that is very similar to ordinances that have been adopted throughout
the State of Florida. And essentially what it does is it places the
cigarette machines behind the counter.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll second that.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Second.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Motion-- a motion by Commissioner
Henning, a second by Commissioner Mac'Kie.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Okay.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay? Will that be okay?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: That's fine.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All in favor-- any discussion?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: We have -- we have speakers?
MR. MANALICH: We have in the audience today members of
the group from, I believe, the students or schools that supported this
proposal and brought it to you before.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Can we at least get them up
here?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, I'd like to have them come up.
And if they will like to speak, I would certainly welcome that.
They're a wonderful group of young people. And I -- we can't thank
Page 76
July 31,2001
you enough. Come on up here, folks. Get right in front of the TV
cameras.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Just for a minute.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Just for a minute. These are young
people who are working diligently to encourage others not to pick up
any tobacco products of any kind, shape, form, etc.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Speaking of working diligently,
I think we need to recognize that Bob Troesch (phonetice) is no
longer in our employment, but he has still come back to take care of
this unfinished business on his own time.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Call the question while they're
up here. That would be nice.
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
(Unanimous response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
All in favor signify by saying aye.
Opposed by the same sign.
Motion carries 5-0.
Would you want to say anything this
morning? You're more than welcome. We'd love to have you do it.
Bob, thank you.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Thanks, guys.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you. Thank you. Keep up the
good work.
Before we leave that topic, just quickly I have responded to a
letter because it was an issue raised in current -- it had nothing to do
with this ordinance, but there was an issue raised about pension funds
and money management and how fund managers operate and why
would we not disqualify any company like a Phillip Morris from a
pension fund. That is not in our-- that is not under our prerogative.
Page 77
July 31,2001
But I made the statement that I would not get in the way of what fund
managers do in terms of investing in pension funds, and I think all the
young people here today probably have parents who are working and
invest in pension funds in some shape or another.
And the job of a money manager is to get the highest possible
return on dollars there for the fund. And that was the purpose for my
statement because they will look at any company, and Phillip Morris,
by the way, also has Kraft Foods division. And they will look at
what is that company contributing in terms of dollars for the
investment to that fund. And some people could say, "Well, tobacco
is terrible," and others might say, "Well, what about Budweiser" -- I
mean, invest in Budweiser, too, or what about a chemical company
because they do things that we don't like.
I think it's an issue of a fund manager investing where they can
get the best possible return because that is their fiduciary job to
protect the fund and to get the best possible return on that investment
so that the people eventually are going to have those monies for a
pension fund. The market will drive the success of a company.
What you're doing here in encouraging people not to use
tobacco products is the right thing to do. I am not a user. I am not an
advocate of anybody using. I quit a long time ago. But at the same
time it will not interfere with the private sector in terms of how they
invest dollars to maximize returns in a pension fund. So I wanted to
clarify that publicly so that maybe you have a better understanding.
It's two different issues. And sometimes it's hard to understand that.
But that's where I was coming from. I was not supporting the
company.
There's an economy in this country. We subsidize the growers.
We tax the product, and then we sue the companies who -- who are
selling the product. So it really is a goofy system, but it needs to be
dealt with on the federal level primarily, and there ought to be a point
Page 78
July 31,2001
in time where we say we don't tax it, we don't subsidize it; you know,
it's going to have to survive or not survive on its own. I'm done with
my speech. But thank you, young people, for the opportunity to
clarify that.
Item #9A
RESOLUTION 2001-309 APPOINTING THOMAS FRANCHINO
TO THE HISTORICAL/ARCHAEOLOGICAL PRESERVATION
BOARD- ADOPTED
If we could move then to the next item on the agenda, it would
be 9-A, an appointment of member to the Historical/Archeological
Preservation Board.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: There's one applicant, I believe,
for one position. I move for approval.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. I have a motion by
Commissioner Mac'Kie, a second by Commissioner Henning. All in
favor signify by saying aye.
(Unanimous response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
Opposed by the same sign.
Motion carries.
Item #9B
RESOLUTION 2001-310 TEMPORARILY EXTENDING THE
TERMS OF FOUR AIRPORT AUTHORITY BOARD MEMBERS
FOR 60 DAYS - ADOPTED
Page 79
July 31,2001
The next item--
MR. OLLIFF: That would be the Airport Authority item.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Airport Authority.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I make a motion that we extend
the --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Second.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I have a motion. I have a second. All
in favor signify by saying aye. (Unanimous response.)
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Excuse me.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Opposed by the same sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Motion-- 5-0.
MS. FILSON: And I just want to mention that you may want to
direct the county attorney to prepare a resolution indicating that their
terms have been extended for 60 days.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll go ahead and amend my
motion to give staff direction.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay.
with that?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Fine.
second agrees. The motion stands.
Will the second also go along
Yes.
The amendment is there. The
Item # 1 OD
RESOLUTION 2001-311, PROPOSED MILLAGE RATES AS THE
MAXIMUM PROPERTY TAX RATES TO BE LEVIED IN FY
2002 - ADOPTED
Page 80
July 31, 2001
Okay. That takes us, then, to 10, Item A, will be heard
specifically at two o'clock with regard to FEMA.
That moves us to Item B, as in boy, which is adopting the
community development and environmental services division, Land
Development Code. Susan Murray.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: This might be a lengthy item.
I'm not sure. No?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. And I know the civic
association, Golden Gate Civic Association, has hired a land planner
to represent the association, and I don't -- do not see him in the room.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Maybe we could go to the next
one, then.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. We could then -- what I'm
doing is working up -- well, we might be able to do a couple of other
things before lunch, and so I will just defer that at the pleasure of the
board until after one o'clock.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA:
COMMISSIONER HENNING:
Please.
Yes, thank you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Item C has been deleted. We will be
at Item D, to adopt proposed millage rate, Mr. Smykowski.
MR. SMYKOWSKI: Good morning, Mr. Chairman, members
of the board. I'm Michael Smykowski, your county budget director.
We're here today to adopt the proposed millage rates as the maximum
property tax rates to be levied for the fiscal year 2002 budget.
The tax rates included in the executive summary must be
provided to the property appraiser by August 4th of this year for his
use in preparing the notice of proposed taxes which are then
distributed according to Florida Truth in Millage Law by August
24th. The board does have -- at the -- subsequent to today's adoption,
the board cannot raise the millages without meeting additional public
notice and advertising requirements. This is essentially the maximum
Page 81
July 31,2001
rate. Obviously, during the September public hearings, the board can
adjust the millage rate downward in each taxing unit. And with that
we would need a -- a motion to adopt the resolution, adopt the million
-- millage rates for fiscal year 2002.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. Before we do that, do we have
any public speakers, Mr. Olliff?.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I would move for the adoption of the
millage.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Second.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I have a second by Commissioner
Mac'Kie. Any discussion?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Adoption of the ordinance
also? Is that what you're saying?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: The resolution.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: The resolution to go forward. This is
the max. We can reduce it in the September hearings, but we can't --
we could increase it, but it's a very difficult process.
MR. SMYKOWSKI: That's correct. You have to send certified
mail.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: What you're really doing is setting the
max of which you can fall downward, which is better to say this is
the worst-possible-case scenario and from every indication is I'm
going to say that I think it's going to get better at the end.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, that's good to hear.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's encouraging.
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
(Unanimous response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
MR. SMYKOWSKI:
All in favor signify by saying aye.
Opposed by the same sign.
Motion carries 5-0.
Thank you.
Page 82
July 31, 2001
Item # 10E
INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF MARCO
ISLAND AND COLLIER COUNTY FOR AN ADVANCED LIFE
SUPPORT (ALS) ENGINE PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM-
APPROVED
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you. Item E.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All in favor signify by saying aye.
(Unanimous response.)
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Great job.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Motion carries.
Item # 1 OF
INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE EAST NAPLES
FIRE CONTROL AND RESCUE DISTRICT AND COLLIER
COUNTY FOR AN ADVANCED LIFE SUPPORT (ALS) ENGINE
PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM- APPROVED
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Second-- I have a motion by
Commissioner Mac'Kie, a second by Commissioner Coletta. All in
favor signify by saying aye.
(Unanimous response.)
MR. OLLIFF: I need to point out on those two items, that is a
very good thing.
Page 83
July 31,2001
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I was going to say it, fabulous,
fabulous work, something we've really been trying to get done, and
that is this joint agreement, one with the City of Marco and the other
with the East Naples Fire. I really want to commend Mr. Storrar for
getting that done. It's hard not to call you captain when you
accomplish something like that because we know you used a lot of
those skills and contacts. We really appreciate it.
MR. OLLIFF: And our thanks also to the City of Marco and
East Naples for working with us and helping us to get these
agreements to you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I just wanted to add that it is a great
accomplishment. And, Ken, you said it beautifully.
Item # 10G
REQUEST TO DESIGNATE A COMMISSIONER TO
ACCOMPANY CONSULTANT AND THE STAFF FOR FIELD
ASSESSMENT OF INNOVATIVE SOLID WASTE FACILITIES
IN AUSTRALIA - COMMISSIONER COLETTA TO REPRESENT
THE COMMISSION; VALID PUBLIC PURPOSE DETERMINED
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Are we to you, Mr. Mudd, on the
Glades County report?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I heard Australia.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I thought we were to Australia. Yes.
We're at Item G, request the board to designate a commissioner to
accompany a consultant and staff for the field assessment of
innovative solid waste facilities in Australia. This is the
biogasification.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Can I ask you a question?
MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am.
Page 84
July 31,2001
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Well, just from your -- from Mr.
Olliff or maybe from board members, what in particular is the benefit
of having a county commissioner go in addition to our expert staff?. I
mean, I think our staff has to go. God bless you. I'm glad it's you
and not me but --
MR. MUDD: Ma'am, the question before us today is, is a
commissioner going? And if you decide a commissioner is going,
who's that going to be?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Because the staff report seemed
to sort of presume that a commissioner was going. So I didn't know
if there was a strong opinion on staff that you need a commissioner to
go or you're just leaving it to us.
MR. MUDD: Ma'am, based on the conversations that happened
on 26 June, there was a bit of bantering on the dais about the
Australia trip, and because of that we need to get some clarification.
I -- I've put the agenda up on the -- on the overhead. We leave on a
Friday, the 17th. And I wanted you to see the agenda because this
isn't for the faint at heart. We leave on Friday. We lose a day. We
end up in Sidney on Sunday. We hit Willabong hot on Monday, hit
all the neighborhoods, the mayor. Then we hit the -- the regional,
because Sidney's not the -- not the country capital, but we hit all the
regional regulatory agencies on Tuesday, try to hit the Sierra Club,
the green party, see what they think about the process, to get that full
process out, finish up Wednesday morning, fly to Honolulu, gain a
day, get to relive Wednesday over again--
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Are you going to work
Wednesday twice?
MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: All right.
MR. MUDD: -- finish up -- look at the -- the grease tap -- grease
trap waste biodiesel plant, the only one in the United States, and talk
Page 85
July 31,2001
to the neighbors again, then talk to all the state regulatory agencies
about that process, talk to the neighborhoods, make sure that there's
no civic-type issues like odor, noise in that process, finish up
Thursday morning, fly out Thursday afternoon, arrive back in Naples
1:30 on Friday.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: These are, what, 36-hour
flights?
MR. MUDD: Sir, they're miserable, yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: My -- my thoughts on this
whole thing, if I may, is that we have taken the time to go to every
other conceivable waste facility that we could think of. And when
the end decision comes down, it's going to be a serious one that's
going to commit this county for a long time, and it's our ultimate
responsibility. So I think there should be a commissioner going to
represent us.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I have my passport.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, I couldn't agree more,
Commissioner Coletta. I don't care what we finally end up doing. I
believe a commissioner needs to go and see this final -- kind of final
things that we're looking at. I really need -- think we need to be there
to witness it, get a firsthand from the government agencies, the
public, so they get a feel for communities -- or communities that are
involved in this kind of operation. And I-- I agree with you,
Commissioner Coletta. It's a -- it's a gruesome trip, but that's the job.
One of the commissioners ought to be there with staff to go through
this.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I would further suggest that the
commissioner that goes be prepared to make daily reports back to the
rest of us with photos, in other words, he has to be computer literate
enough to be able to do this, work with a digital camera, send videos,
whatever.
Page 86
July 31,2001
CHAIRMAN CARTER: That's great, Commissioner, because
that takes me right out of the picture.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: They can receive direction --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: You're down to four.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: No. You're down to three.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: You're down to three.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Down to two. And I was just going
to mention, if it pleases the -- the commissioner, seeing that this is in
Jim Coletta's district and he's been so involved in it, I -- I would like
to nominate him as the person to go.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, I--
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: If he's willing.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: -- I -- I would say because it is his
district, I made a note that Jim C's district has the right of first
refusal. That is my own opinion.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: But I would very much like to
go, but I would like to keep the discussion open just a little bit longer
so that not only do we get everybody a chance to be able to offer
what they had for thought process, but also to receive a little more in
the way of directions.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: We have three out of the picture in
terms of don't want to go. It's up to you.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No. I know that. But I think
Commissioner Henning might have an interest in this also.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, I know he does. It's up to you
guys to do what you need to do, and we'll tell you what we're looking
for. We can do that by memorandum to you, any key points that we
want to cover. It's all public record.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I -- I know that I could
stay home here and catch up on a few items that I've been putting on
Page 87
July 31,2001
the backbumer, so I'm all in favor of Commissioner Coletta going to
Australia and Hawaii.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Besides, he's got another agenda
which we said we wouldn't speak about. But that's all right,
Commissioner, we understand.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: What a trooper, Tom.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: You ought to see him. He just lit up
like a Christmas tree, Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: So we do want to ask a
commissioner to go, and we're going to ask Commissioner Coletta if
he would do that. I'll make that a motion.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'll second that.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Because our manager has a point.
MR. OLLIFF: I have three public speakers on the item, Mr.
Chairman.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. Before we take a vote, we will
let the public speakers come and talk.
MR. OLLIFF: The first speaker is Bob Krasowski followed by
Jan Krasowski. And as they're coming to the podium, I'm going to
make sure a good manager who's going to send a commissioner on a
trip this ugly, I want you to go in eyes wide open; this is a bad trip.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I've been to Sidney-- not
Sidney, but I've been to Singapore which is -- MR. OLLIFF: You're flying economy.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: This is a perfect fit, I'll tell you
that.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: If you get the right flight, maybe you'll
get two.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Good afternoon, Commissioners. For the
record, my name is Bob Krasowski. And I'm here on a number of
things to speak--
Page 88
July 31,2001
CHAIRMAN CARTER: You have to speak to this issue, sir.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Oh, okay.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: This item right here.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Yeah. Well, all of this is interconnected
and interrelated.
I'd first like to -- to say that, myself and the organization that
we're in the process of still forming -- we have not achieved a
501 (c)3 status. We're waiting to see what our funding options are
and what umbrella group we'd probably work under that I and we
have absolutely no commercial interest in any of these companies
that are vying to be included in this solid waste situation here in
Collier County. So I just want to make that really clear, okay, we're
not -- we are not lobbying for anybody.
And then an issue regarding Nova Scotia. I have noticed that
there has been no attention given to visiting Halifax or Nova Scotia,
and I had become aware of a rumor about what Dr. Paul Connett had
said regarding Nova Scotia has been circulating, and that is that in
Halifax, Nova Scotia, there are three incinerators. So what Connett
said as far as them rejecting incineration and going with these
alternate programs, some people believe is not true because they've
been told that Nova Scotia has three incinerators.
Well, that's not true. I've shared the number and address and e-
mail address of the person in charge of the Nova Scotia operation
with Mr. Mudd and with Commissioner Mac'Kie. It's available to all
of you. I'll prepare it and get it to you so we can dispel that rumor
because our position is you should also be going to Nova Scotia. A
commissioner should go to Nova Scotia. A commissioner-- if you're
going to Australia, you should go to visit the in-vessel composting of
whatever company you want to see. But the CCI people were here,
and that's why we had representatives of that.
Page 89
July 31,2001
So -- and -- and then -- and then I'm here also to speak against
the -- going to Australia, and Jan will speak further about why it is
that we think you should go to Europe rather than Australia, because
pyrolysis is in Europe as well as the mother company for the CCI-
type process. There's three or four companies in Europe that use this
in-vessel composting, have been doing it for ten years. So, you
know, we -- that's a better option, we believe.
I also think that if you're going to send this group to Australia,
that a representative from Zero Waste should go as well so that we
can continue to provide stereoscopic vision, the same vision that we
benefited from over the last few months so that the -- there will be a
diverse understanding of what's being presented in Australia, rather
than having just some people go and come back, although originally
were against the trip, but as far as, you know, if you're going to go -- CHAIRMAN CARTER: If you want to pay for the trip, be our
guest.
MR. KRASOWSKI: I was thinking that you could pay for the
trip out of the hundreds of millions of dollars that have been saved
since January. But all we need is a vote, a majority vote, I
understand.
Also in the brief time I have left, although it seems pretty
adequate, on June 26th the Malcolm Pirnie consultants evaluated our
flow chart, and we were all here for that. And I feel satisfied, as I've
expressed in a letter to you-all, that we had an opportunity to address
the issue on the videotape and in the transcripts. But Malcolm Pirnie
created a document that identified Zero Waste as being the creator of
Scenario No. 6 which they had modified. So I've written to you. I'm
waiting for a response regarding the issue from the commissioners.
I've gotten a response from Mr. Mudd and the staff, and they have set
up for August 1st, tomorrow afternoon, a meeting where we could
work on these various points that we had asked to be addressed.
Page 90
July 31,2001
That's that the Zero Waste name be taken off of any identification in
the document that associates us with the Malcolm Pirnie Scenario
No. 6. But I'll talk to you more about that.
But the point is, if this evaluation had occurred properly
evaluating Scenario No. 6 as we had submitted it, then the Zero
Waste concept, the elements in that proposal or suggestions,
suggested scenario, would have ranked higher than even the pyrolysis
facility. I do not understand why you're going to Australia. I mean,
are you into -- you know, I guess I can't say it. But good to see you
again, and we'll speak more later, I guess.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you.
MR. KRASOWSKI: I'd like a decision on that--
CHAIRMAN CARTER: To answer your other question about
responding to your letter, I have -- this commissioner, I took your
letter, and I sent it down to Jim Mudd to respond to you. He assured
me that you-all were meeting. So that's the action I took.
MR. KRASOWSKI: I wasn't aware of that, but thank you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: You're going to accomplish where you
need to be. Thank you.
MR. OLLIFF: Next speaker is Jan Krasowski, followed by the
last speaker registered, which would be Ruth Delate.
MS. KRASOWSKI: Good morning. Jan Krasowski for the
record. I can't say long time no see, that's for sure.
The reason that I am opposed to you going to Australia, first of
all, is because Malcolm Pirnie are the people that suggested that you
go to Australia. Malcolm Pirnie have over and over again proven
themselves to not give very good information. In Lee County they're
telling the Lee County -- the Lee County citizens that they're
supposed to spend $80 million on another burner for their trash
incinerator. Here they're telling you, no, let's not build a trash
incinerator; let's go with pyrolysis. Maybe they have two different
Page 91
July 31, 2001
camps of Malcolm Pirnie, and maybe they don't communicate with
each other, but I think that they are contradicting themselves to begin
with. And, believe me, I'm not saying that we should build an
incinerator by any means, but I'm just saying that the consultant is
working on this particular project has over and over again provided
misinformation.
Secondly, I have been doing a little research myself. Now, let
me say, this list that I am going -- that I have here is not by any
means a promotion of the above companies, by myself as a private
citizen or by Zero Waste Collier, which is a group of citizens
working for the reduction, recycling, and other waste-handling
processes.
The above sites, our interested persons can find information that
are not provided to them by the county staff and the county
consultants. I have here -- I have a consulting service from the UK
that rates pyrolysis operations. This pyrolysis operation in Bright
Star is not the only one that's working with municipal solid waste. I
have a pyrolysis company in Germany that has been operating for
five years that is using municipal solid waste. Five years, not five
months, as the Bright Star -- which the Bright Star Company -- which
you are going to spend how much? How much is it going to cost to
go over to Australia to look at this Bright Star pyrolysis? Does
anybody know? Can somebody give me a cost? How much is it
going to cost you guys to go over there -- MR. MUDD: Approximately--
MS. KRASOWSKI: -- with Malcolm Pirnie, your consultant?
MR. MUDD: Are you asking a -- ma'am?
MS. KRASOWSKI: Yes.
MR. MUDD: Let me finish.
MS. KRASOWSKI: Thank you.
Page 92
July 31, 2001
MR. MUDD: You asked the question; let me answer it, please.
About $3,000 a person, sir (sic).
CHAIRMAN CARTER: And, also, Malcolm Pirnie pays their
own way. They do not charge us.
MS. KRASOWSKI: Malcolm Pirnie --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: That is their own idea. If they want to
go, they're free to go just like your group or any group wants to. But
they're on their own budget.
MS. KRASOWSKI: Okay. Malcolm Pirnie is paying their own
way for this.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Yes, ma'am.
MS. KRASOWSKI: All right. Thank you for clarifying that.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I'm surprised by that.
MS. KRASOWSKI: Yeah. I am too. But not only is there this
pyrolysis company in Germany that has been operating for five years,
when you look at their schematic, it's almost the same as the Bright
Star pyrolysis, except they don't have an autoclave up front; they
don't use a jet engine. But they do do one thing: They take the char,
which they admit in their report has heavy metals in it, and they fix
the char before it goes into a landfill. And I have seen nothing in the
Bright Star report about that.
The other thing about Germany -- in going to Germany is that
there are other in-vessel anaerobic composting biogas operations over
there that have been in operation for ten years. You can see two
plants for the price of one if you go to Germany. It's right across the
pond. It doesn't take 23 hours to fly there and back. And I'm just --
I'm just really disappointed in the quality of work that you're getting.
You're not getting -- you're not getting your money's worth through
your -- your consultant. And neither are the citizens. I'm just trying
to make this point. I really don't think you should be going to
Australia when you have other things that you could be looking at
Page 93
July 31,2001
that look just as attractive that probably cost a lot less.
yOU.
That's -- thank
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Next speaker, please.
MR. MANALICH: Next speaker is Ruth Delate. I hope I
pronounced that right.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: She'll correct us if we're wrong.
MS. DELATE: Good afternoon, Commissioners. And thank
you for letting me speak. Yes, Delate is the name. Ruth Delate for
the record. And I just wanted to say that if anyone goes on this trip, a
citizen of our county should go with them because I think we should
all be represented. Government, it sounds like, is going to be totally
represented, but why not have someone of the citizenry that is
interested in this and go and see for themselves and help with this
selection.
I also would recommend, as Jan said about going to Europe,
instead, save the money, save the citizens, save our taxes, and let -- I
think if you just looked on the web, you'll find a lot more information
even than what Jan just gave you, the initial thing. And check it out
before you decide to go to Australia. Look at the whole picture.
That's my advice, and thank you for letting me speak.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Ruth, if I might say,
Commissioner Coletta, who is a District 5 commissioner, is
representing the people, and he does work very hard at it.
MS. DELATE: But he represents the government here. You are
part of the --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, our staff represents the
county. And if you want to call that a government -- Commissioner
Coletta is an elected official who the people voted on to represent
them. And I can tell you also that I'm going to Vermont to take a
look at the Ferco operation in Burlington. It's not going to be any
Page 94
July 31,2001
charge to the citizens of Collier County because I rearranged my
schedule of my vacation to go there. And from that we have some
very competent staff to go to CCI in Canada to take a look at that
operation. We are bending over backwards for these -- the green
people to accommodate them for their input in this. We're taking this
very seriously and their input very seriously.
MS. DELATE: Thank you, Tom. And I do appreciate your
efforts.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All right. Any further questions?
Perhaps the board, Mr. --
MR. MANALICH: Mr. Chairman, just a comment before you
vote. If you're inclined to approve this, I would ask that you make a -
- for the benefit of the clerk -- a public-purpose finding, both as to the
public purpose served by the trip, as well as by those you designate to
go on it as serving the public purpose addressing solid waste issues.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I'll incorporate that into my
motion.
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
saying aye.
(Unanimous response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
All in favor of the motion signify by
Opposed by the same sign.
Motion carries 5-0. All right.
Item # 1 OH
CONSIDERATION OF ISSUES FOR THE BOARD'S 2002
LEGISLATIVE AGENDA- APPROVED
Page 95
July 31, 2001
We are at 12:20. And, Mr. McNees, you would like to address
us on this issue?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Motion to approve the
legislative agenda for 2001.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Some other things --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: 2002, I mean.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Something that we might want
to add just in consideration is we -- I know the governor was talking -
- the governor on growth management was talking about true cost of
development.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Full-cost accounting.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Full-cost accounting, some of
those items, if we could encourage the delegation. I don't know what
the thought is of my colleagues. We do need to try to find some
avenues to have growth pay for growth.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Those are all -- Commissioner, those
are all under consideration at both the regional and state level.
There's a lot of effort by-- the Southwest Regional Planning Council
also is developing a legislative agenda. And -- and we're looking at
in the next legislative session where they're going to be primarily
focused on redistricting, what we can make sure doesn't fall
backwards, slip backwards, and address some issues that has been
outlined for us by staff and which we can continue to add to, by the
way, so that we could make sure that those things don't fall
backwards. But I don't think you're going to see a lot of movement in
this legislature to take any significant action in some of those other
areas during this session. They're going to continue, yes. They want
the cost accounting done, yes. That is, I believe, a two-year-- if I
remember right, two-year study to get that done. So that's -- that's in
place. That is moving, but it's not going to be an acceleration, I don't
think, in this -- in this legislative session, any of that stuff. This is
Page 96
July 31,2001
kind of-- in some respect by saying what can we do defensively so
we don't lose ground.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Isn't that a shame that we have
to do that with our --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: They're going to start January 22, all
of the subcommittees now are meet-- will be meeting in September,
October, and November in which there's active meetings scheduled,
and I'm going to encourage all of us to participate as much as
possible. That's where the work is done and to get these things
presented.
As I talked to you, Mike, the only thing I would add to it is the
billboard industry is relentless, and although that was vetoed by the
governor as a part of a total transportation bill this time, they will be
back next session. And what we want as a local option that the
county has a right to say we want them or don't want them, and we
have taken them out of our -- our ordinances, and we've got it on a
schedule where they're just about done in Collier. And if we don't do
that, they're going to turn right around and they're going to come back
in and say, "Yeah, we want to change it. And then if you want to
take it through eminent domain and pay thousands and thousands and
thousands of dollars, then, you know, you can do that." we've got to
keep fighting them. They never give up.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: If I may add, what's in here I
have no problem with. What isn't here I do, and that's those dealing
with the social services and the mandated services that have been
passed down to us. There's no mention here about going back and try
to recover those funds and turn any services back over to the state
rather than having them at a county level. They're all missing, every
single one of them.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And I think that, Commissioner
Coletta, just from my experience is that those agencies make their
Page 97
July 31,2001
particular budget request of the delegation separate from this is a
county agenda, county commission, county government agenda but
certainly not everything we hope to see the legislature do. I mean,
you're right. Those are very important issues, but I don't think if
they're not on our list they're not going to get there. They get there
from the agencies is historically the case.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Mr. McNees, what do you have
to say about that?
MR. McNEES: Mike McNees from the county manager's
office. As Commissioner Mac'Kie stated, these are items that staff
feels like you-- we would recommend you take a position on for
purposes of the government. If there are others that you would like to
add to your own legislative agenda as a commission, we'll put
anything on this list that you want to see that you can then adopt and
go forward to present to the legislative --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Mike, when do you have to have your
final list together?
MR. McNEES: What we'll do is, once you've adopted this list
of items today, we'll flush them out into actual policy statements that
we'll bring back to you on September 1 1 th, which you can formally
adopt as your legislative agenda. You will then present those to the
legislative delegation on October the 5th. I'll add, as we're having
this discussion, there is one more item staff would like to add. They
will probably bring back to you on October 5th some proposed
changes to the areas of critical state concern. We'd like to add that to
this list today and have you give us that -- that you'd like to see that
included.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA:
October, would you meet with Mrs.
concerns are?
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
Mike, between now and
Skinner and -~ and see what her
She retired.
Page 98
July 31, 2001
MR. McNEES: I certainly can.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, she'll never retire. We
won't let her do that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Just say no unfunded mandates.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Oh, yeah.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Yeah. I think that's -- that's great. No
unfunded mandates.
MR. McNEES: We'll include for the September 1 lth meeting a
list of Martha's items that she would identify, and you can decide at
that time whether you want that to become a part of your agenda or
whether you don't.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And since we're heading in that
direction, could you possibly take a moment to talk to Dr. Colfer and
see if there's something there that we might have missed?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: With those changes I'll move or
move again the legislative agenda for 2002.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll second it.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I have a motion by Commissioner
Mac'Kie. I have a second by Commissioner Henning on the
legislative agenda proposals. All in favor signify by saying aye.
(Unanimous response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
Opposed by the same sign.
Motion carries 5-0.
Item # 10I
SUMMARY OF GLADES AND COLLIER COUNTIES JOINT
WORKSHOP- PRESENTED
Page 99
July 31,2001
I'm going to stop at 12:30. Can we do another one in five
minutes?
MR. OLLIFF: I think we can do the Glades update, Mr.
Chairman.
MR. MUDD: For the record, I'm Jim Mudd, public utilities
administrator. That is just to summarize what happened yesterday at
the workshop so that our citizens have an opportunity to -- to make
public comment. We had a joint county workshop between Glades
County and Collier County yesterday at four o'clock in Moore Haven
in their courthouse. At that meeting we discussed the -- the
proposition to -- to form in a joint endeavor for a -- for a -- a joint
county landfill in areas where we could benefit with either export or
import or different kinds of wastes between the two counties.
Our consultant, Camp Dresser McKee, and in particular their
vice president, Robert Hauser, gave a presentation with that concept
on it on those slides. The Camp Dresser McKee also did a study for
us at no expense to the county where they looked at the initial
concept in a 19-page paper, concept paper, which you have been
provided with prior to the workshop.
At the meeting there, the Glades County board basically told
their staff to come back to their 14 August meeting with a four-point
paper. It was itemized in today's Naples news at great -- in great
depth. But they're basically wanting their staff to get into the details
with us on a joint venture. An RFP for a consultant to negotiate
who's going to pay for that consultant. We still have to work that out
with the staffs.
I would propose that they pay part of it. We don't want to do it
all and then just have them blow us off at the end, leave us hanging.
We'll work through that process, and as we get closer to that
negotiation, I'll let you know what their proposal is and get your
guidance. But that is a -- that is a move in the right direction for both
Page 100
July 31,2001
counties to analyze and examine the different possibilities that the
counties can have. With this we'll get in details, look at their books,
they'll look at our books, we'll start looking at the quantities, exact
quantities of trash they get rid of every year, and they'll take a look at
ours. And then we'll start taking a look at different sites.
In the meantime, I think their commission will have some
conversations with the Lykes brothers, who own a great portion of
their county, as far as the land is concerned, over 60 percent. Plus
they will also get into some discussion about the one caveat in the
present landfill agreement that they have when they purchased the
land about not taking any outside-of-county trash to be deposited in
that facility.
All of those things will have to be worked out, and no -- and--
and no agreement was reached, and it -- and it has a lot of work as far
as the details are concerned in order to be gathered. When all of that
has transpired, we'll get back to this board, as will their staff with
their board. There might be the possibility of a joint meeting in the
future in the fall, but we've got some work to do. You gave direction
to your staff on the 26th of June to stay engaged with Glades County
and work out the details. So that's basically a summary of what
happened yesterday.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I just want to comment for board
members who weren't there for the public, that it was a very nice and
very positive and very pleasant meeting. I -- I will tell you my
personal assessment is I don't think anything is going to come from it.
They have a restriction in the -- in their purchase agreement with
their -- with the company who sold them their land for their landfill
that says no out-of-county garbage. That person, that company, owns
the surrounding property. Why they would want to say, "Yes, please,
give us more garbage," I can't imagine.
Page 101
July 31,2001
I just think we need to be practical about this that we not spend a
great amount of staff time and money and expertise because I think --
well, I'm just personally very pessimistic about this being a realistic
opportunity. It was certainly worth exploring. It was the right thing
to do. And I think our staff should continue to look to be sure, you
know, that we've looked under every rock, so to speak.
But from a practical standpoint I think the commissioner who
sort of got this rolling, what he had in mind was they have maybe six
years of capacity at their -- or, no. They -- he thought that they might
be able to provide us an interim solution, a three-year fix while we try
to find a long-term solution. That's real different from what I went
there to talk about, which is if there's some possibility of a joint
landfill, if that might be part of our long-term solution. But, you
know, we adopted our short-term and mid-term policies, and now
we're looking for long term. And I just think the board needs to be
realistic about the odds, and the odds are slim, I think. And so we
shouldn't spend too much time and money on the further pushing in
that direction.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Commissioner Mac'Kie, I can
understand sitting through and hearing the same thing that you did. I
guess my take on it is August meeting -- their meeting in August,
that's where they're going to end up eating fish or cut bait because it's
all on public record over there. They had a number of people in the
audience. I think by then they're going to have a pretty good idea of
whether they're going to get into the landfill business or whether
they're going to have a short-term situation, and then they're going to
have to deal with that accordingly on their own merits. So I am
saying I'm a wait-and-see person, and I think staff is doing the right
thing. We'll listen, we'll talk. And I think that's going to flush out
real early because the Lykes brothers say no, then it's all over.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: "flush" being the operative term.
Page 102
July 31,2001
MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Chairman, you've got two registered
speakers on this item.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I thought this was an information
report, but I guess we can take them. I'm really trying to get through
so that we can go off to -- and stay on a schedule. How many
speakers do we have? We have two? MR. OLLIFF: Two.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, let's hear them.
MR. OLLIFF: Jan Krasowski followed by Bob Krasowski.
MS. KRASOWSKI: Hello. Jan Krasowski again. I was at the
Glades County -- I was at the Glades County Commission meeting
yesterday. It was interesting. I agree with Pam. I really don't think
that it's really going to go anywhere, but not to be an antagonistic to
Mr. Mudd, I was wondering, like, where was the char landfill in the
plan that you presented the Glades County when you presented the
landfill scenario?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Let's not.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: No. I'm not going to go there.
MS. KRASOWSKI: Well, all right.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Ma'am, I'm not going to go there.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: That's distasteful.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: You can make comments on that
meeting --
MS. KRASOWSKI: All right. Excuse me. Okay.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: But I'm not going to get in a
discussion.
MS. KRASOWSKI: All right. Well, I'm just saying that here
we set up this plan and everything, but then it doesn't have all of--
every -- all of the information in it.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: A good plan starts with a framework,
and any new information that comes in is injected.
Page 103
July 31,2001
MS. KRASOWSKI: All right. Okay. I was talking to some of
the Glades County citizens, and what they were wondering is why
doesn't Collier want to have a landfill in its own county.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's not -- the fact of the
matter is, is that Glades has the needs; Collier has the needs. And
wouldn't it be nice to help out a -- one county or help out both
counties and solve one problem.
MS. KRASOWSKI: You were at the meeting. They were also
suggesting that they could bring their trash down here to our landfill.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's a possibility.
MS. KRASOWSKI: Okay.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: We'll find that out, ma'am. I'm not
here to --
MS. KRASOWSKI: Okay. Those are just --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I'm sorry. Just please make your
comments, Miss Krasowski.
MS. KRASOWSKI: Okay. Well, those were the two
comments. I was kind of surprised that the plan that Camp Dresser
McKee had made, and I was just talking to some of the people that
live in Glades County, and that was their question.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Their commissioners will answer that.
Their commissioners will answer that.
MS. KRASOWSKI: All right. Thank you.
MR. OLLIFF: Next speaker is Bob Krasowski.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Hello again, Commissioners. Bob
Krasowski for the record. I was a bit surprised yesterday when I
went to that meeting because Camp Dresser McGee -- McKee
produced this very elaborate presentation. Now, I understand that it
was -- it cost nothing. They did it for free. But, I mean, you must
think everybody is born yesterday to think that these consulting firms
are doing all this work for free. They get paid somewhere along the
Page 104
July 31, 2001
line or they're prepaid with work they've already done and this is
extracted from it, or later on they hope to maybe get an engineer--
engineering position in building a pyrolysis plant or whatever. Every
-- every project has a certain set commission that they -- it's very
lucrative if, in fact, their process is adopted.
In regards to what Jan said a minute ago, this -- what was
presented by Camp Dresser McKee was, as you know -- but the
citizens of this community don't know-- was, like, an entire elaborate
process of composting in a large vessel and-- and then drawing gas
off of it and generate electricity as one option. But it is very
interesting to us. They have one consultant going up there and
promoting one type of project, and you have another consultant here
promoting something else. And then when we identify what we
might do, we don't even include what the by-product of what we
might do is here. So it just doesn't make sense.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Bob, you know that I have been
one of your biggest supporters. I think you guys have provided a
great service to this community. And I hope that you won't move
from being a positive force to just being negative about everything
that comes up, because we're in the mode of looking at everything.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Well, you know, that's nice to hear, but
when you're sending commissioners to Australia and no
commissioners are going to see the in-vessel composting and the one
that only staff and your consultant-- which we are not comfortable
with. And I've been up here under public petition for ten minutes
addressing every aspect of things I think are inaccurate trying to
straighten things out again, okay.'? So we'd like a little more
cooperation from you in helping us advance what we're trying to
develop and understand and some support from you, and that's why
we ask today for some type of discussion or to be included in visits or
to switch to Europe. Maybe we'll go out to the public and ask for
Page 105
July 31,2001
them to pick up our ticket to go to Europe. Well, you should go to
Europe. The county should go to Europe because there are pyrolysis
plants there.
But in regards to the Glades County situation, even the people in
Glades, the one consultant gentleman they had there said, "Gee,
you've sure put a lot of work into doing this" when you've just said
now any plan begins with an infrastructure. Why didn't we start with
that basic infrastructure and say, "Well, we know of various options,"
but all this time and energy is spent in being so elaborate when it was
the first meeting with them at Glades. It just doesn't add up. Why
are we going to -- to Australia, you know, the biggest reef in the
world? Does somebody want to go skin -diving over there?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I have to take issue with you on this.
We have been extremely cooperative with you from day one. We
have been -- we have done everything possible to try to bring you
into the process and because we wanted to keep the process open.
All of sudden because the process isn't following your exact
direction, you're finding fault with it. You're finding fault with us
going to Australia, but you want to go. Hey, Bob, where are you?
Give me a break.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Yeah, I know. It's a complicated thing.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Let's set our direction. Let's
find out where we're going. We still got an open mind. We still
might end up looking at some of these other processes, but don't fault
every single person along the way that's trying to come up with an
answer. We haven't come up with anything yet. We're still moving
forward.
MR. KRASOWSKI: I'm not trying --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: One at a time.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No. You go ahead.
Page 106
July 31,2001
MR. KRASOWSKI: We're -- we don't want to be painted as
faulting everything. We went through that before. We do see
benefits to certain things over other things. And like we tried to
explain earlier today, we find that more can be gained by visiting
numerous facilities in Europe than going so far to see this one facility
in Australia which is very hard for us, the citizens, to participate in.
When they get back from Australia, you included, or the consultants
or whomever, which have promoted other things, including
incineration in the past, the short list was five incinerators, one
shipped to Georgia. Okay. We did away with that. Now they're
promoting pyrolysis. You know, the guy that represents CCI was --
was in town. He spoke to a -- a -- a civic group, and he's going to be
here tomorrow. We're going to meet with him. How come you don't
have him here and talk to him? You know, it doesn't make sense.
I've used my time.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Can I just say that we are going
to CCI in Canada, and we are going to Ferco in Vermont. And this is
what Bob brought up, was to see. So we're being very
accommodating.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: He's going to Ferco.
MR. KRASOWSKI: He's not going to CCI, though.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I think he's overstepping his
bounds. We have a direction that our staff has given us of companies
to look at, and I think we ought to stick to it.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Are you going to CCI, Commissioner
Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Our staff is.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Yeah. Well, that's the point. The
commissioner is not, so that -- you know, our-- our scenario, if rated
properly, would have been the number-one scenario. All of the
money --
Page 107
July 31,2001
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Mr. Krasowski, I think that you have
worn out the patience of this board this morning. Your issues are
being addressed by staff. We tried to be ladies and gentlemen and
listen to everything. We appreciate your points, your comments.
But, sir, I think it's reached the point where I have to say we have
listened, we have heard, we're going to move forward. And thank
you very much.
MR. KRASOWSKI: I just want to address that one point that
Commissioner Henning stated about we are going. The
commissioners are going to Australia, are not going to Canada as of-
- as of right now, and nobody is going to Halifax.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you.
MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Chairman, there is no action required on this
item.
Item # 10J
REQUEST TO MEMORIALIZE THE PROPOSED 13TM STREET
SW BRIDGE BY NAMING THE STRUCTURE IN HONOR OF
RICHARD J. HELLRIEGEL, P.E., TRANSPORTATION
OPERATIONS DEPARTMENT DESIGN MANAGER-
APPROVED
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you very much. I would like
to, because of our people here, to deal with Item L. And that is to --
no, I'm sorry. Ain't going there. I want to take J because it's just a
matter of a dedication.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'd like to make a motion that
we do what staff suggested.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Second.
Page 108
July 31,2001
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Name the bridge, the 13th
Street Bridge when it's done, after Richard--
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Hellriegel.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Hellriegel.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And our -- our thank you, Mr.
Kant, for suggesting this or whoever did, and your staff, because it's a
fabulous idea. We absolutely need to -- to honor him for his
commitment and service to our county. I don't know if any members
of his family are here or could be if we had a dedication ceremony of
some kind when that project's completed. But we owe a great deal of
gratitude to Richard, and I think this is a very appropriate memorial
to him and our-- our sadness and condolences go, again, to his
family.
MR. KANT: For the record, Edward Kant, transportation
operations director. Thank you, Commissioners. I know you're
anxious to move forward. I -- and I appreciate, Mr. Chairman, your
mentioning Mr. Hellriegel during the opening ceremony. Thank you
again. On behalf of staff, we would like to make one additional
request. In the fiscal impact, we indicated that we initially were
going to include -- if the board approved it in the budget for the
project -- however, in talking with his professional colleagues on
staff and some other members on staff, we would prefer that we at
staff level pay for that plaque ourselves.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: How nice. That's beautiful.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: That's really great. And again, thank you,
Mr. Kant.
MR. KANT: Thank you, Commissioners, and I will be speaking
with Mrs. Hellriegel, and she and her family -- her daughters will be
invited to the ribbon cutting. Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you. You've made a motion.
Do I have a second?
Page 109
July 31,2001
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Second.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I have a motion by Commissioner
Coletta, a second by Commissioner Mac'Kie. All in favor signify by
saying aye.
(Unanimous response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Motion to approve 5-0. Thank you
very much. It is now 20 to the hour, and we will resume again here at
20 to two and take -- the first item will be the diverter issue, which is
No. L. We'll try to do that as expeditiously before we move to the
time certain. Thank you.
(A lunch break was held from 12:20 p.m. To 1:50 p.m.)
Item #10L
REVIEW PETITION TM-99-01, REQUESTING THE
INSTALLATION OF A TEMPORARY TRAFFIC DIVERTER AT
THE INTERSECTION OF DONNA STREET AND GAIL
BOULEVARD AS PART OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC
MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE COCONUT CREEK ESTATES
NEIGHBORHOOD - STAFF RECOMMENDATION ACCORDING
TO MR. FEDER WHICH IS NOT TO PUT IN TRAFFIC
DIVERTERS BUT TO INSTALL SIDEWALKS AND SPEED
BUMPS
CHAIRMAN CARTER: We are live. Back in session, Board
of County Commissioners, this July 31st date at 1:50. We move to
the item in regards to diverters, which is Item L.
MR. FEDER: Mr. Chairman, for the record,
Norman Feder, Transportation Administrator. What you have in
front of you is an item that the board asked your staff to look at some
time ago. I'm sure you will recall that shortly after Kings Way was
Page 110
July 31,2001
closed, there was a lot of concern about diversion of traffic through
some of the other neighbors. In particular, there was an effort to put
up some flex stakes at the end of Donna and then a request for staff to
look at that and see what happened out of that effort and to come
back to you with recommendations.
What we have is we have looked at that issue. Over time the
flex stakes were not very effective. People were driving through
them. They weren't something that stopped the traffic.
We tried to evaluate what could possibly work as a diverter that
would possibly not be used as the flex stakes as a way to go through
it. There was a recommendation made of a concept of a diverter.
That was brought up to the community to see their interest as part of
the neighborhood traffic calming. A good portion of the
neighborhood, basically, two-thirds or over 70 percent actually were
interested in the diverter being installed at Donna Street and Gail.
It would provide for emergency vehicle passage, but at the same
time, it does raise a broad policy question that's been brought before
this board many times in the past. And that is, while there is some
traffic there beyond the localized traffic, that volume is not that high.
The community feels it's high, but we're talking volumes under 2000
vehicles a day. And the more we close off the collector road option,
the more and more pressure we put on the arterial and the more
demand for seeking alteratives and, therefore, the more streets to be
closed off. So consistent with what we told you in the past, our
recommendation would be that since the volumes, although they are
greater than just the local traffic, are not that high that we not move
in the diverter at this time.
However, there is another issue that's been raised by these folks,
and that is once Livingston, the new section is opened, between
Golden Gate and Radio, what kind of diversionary traffic might be
experienced then. We put a triple left at Airport that's functioning
Page 111
July 31,2001
fairly well, but what we would recommend to you is that you direct
staff to look at traffic volumes pre- and post-Livingston Road
opening. If we find that there is significant -- and by that I don't
mean just ten percent or 200 vehicles but significant increases in
volume -- that we come back to you possibly with consideration as to
divert on a temporary basis. As you know, for the longer haul, we
are looking at a study to evaluate what our options are to address that
demand south of Radio even before Radio Road or south of Radio
Road.
So that's a very quick shot. Questions or I'm sure there are a
number of people who want to speak to this issue as well.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Mr. Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You said that there has been
increased traffic that is not -- that's local traffic. What is due to the
increase?
MR. FEDER: Basically, you have right now less than 2000
vehicles a day, which is just in the top end of the local facility, not
even necessarily a collector road. I can have Ed Kant speak to the
figures. I've had him look to those issues, but, essentially, you do
have more than just the traffic that's within that neighborhood. I've
met with this group a number of times since I came on board in this
position. Their concerns are very, very significant for their
community. There's a lot of issues that I was presented that they felt
these roads need to be retained pretty exclusively for their use and
their concern. There is some additional traffic beyond the just the
local traffic, but it is a public roadway. Again, the volumes are not
that extreme right now, and that's why we're not recommending the
diverter, even a temporary diverter at this time.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I've never heard anybody say in
that community they just want to use through roads for their use.
Page 112
July 31,2001
MR. FEDER: No. Their concern is they feel that the volumes,
which are under 2000 today, are more volume than they should have
to experience in their neighborhood.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And looking at that
community, you're talking, like, a hundred homes, and you're saying
just that one street alone you're looking at around 1000 trips a day or
2000 trips a day?
MR. FEDER: Under 2000. It's actually gone down just a little
bit from one year to the next probably with the flex stakes, yes.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
may, Chairman Carter.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Yes.
Mac'Kie.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
I appreciate staff giving us -- if I
Go right ahead, Commissioner
I appreciate their giving us a
recommendation on this that in the future, if, you know, with
Livingston, if it becomes a problem then we'll have to address it, but
this board, I hope, is going to have backbone and do the right thing.
We said public roads are for public transportation. And this is hard
when the neighborhood is here and doesn't want it.
And, you know, I'm just -- I can't support a diverter. It's the
wrong thing to do. And I hope that the majority of the board is going
to go along with it. If you don't, then you're going to be hearing
about some in my district. Nobody is going to want to do it in their
own district, but we have to do the right thing.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I've been in that
neighborhood and experienced it, and I wasn't the one going to bring
it forward, so I knew that it is a problem, and I see a huge potential
problem with Livingston Road opening up in that area. It is a family
community, and I have a lot of concerns.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: You know, Commissioner, I just
so understand that because I have in my district, you know, Solana. I
Page 113
July 31, 2001
have several cut-through roads. I could make a list of them for you
between Goodlette and 41, that are salt-of-the-earth, working-class,
good-people neighborhoods where families live, where children are,
and those are streets that get cut through on. And we're doing some
of the speed humps and doing some things to try to control the speed,
but we cannot have public roads that are not available for public
drivers.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I was wondering if
Commissioner Fiala had any comments.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Actually, I'm listening to it, and
although this isn't in my district, you know I have a strong interest in
East Naples. And I thought Norm brought up a good point and that
is, once Livingston Road is opened, what the people are really
concerned with is what impact it will be on their community. And if
we have a diverter in place, we won't know. And if we don't have a
diverter now we will be able to then measure what it is now and what
is after Livingston Road opens, and then we'll be able to move on
from there. I felt Norm was right in presenting this limitation.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And I support that if we find out
that we are going to have to protect local roads from collector roads
and arterial road impacts.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Uh-huh.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: But we have to keep them
available unless we find--
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah. We can't -- I know still this
day places that are still pretty prickley -- like, you know, Pine Ridge.
And you can't go through there. And we all get upset about not being
able to use these roads -- not that we want a rash of traffic going
through there. And I am fearful of what Livingston Road will do, but
we'll never know unless we have a base right now of traffic, and then
we can measure what Livingston Road does. We need to do that.
Page 114
July 31,2001
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Mr. Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I can sympathize with
Commissioner Henning in that we have to remain protective of our
districts. However, I know in five -- of course, we're not going to
have as many opportunities and worry about interconnectivity at this
time as they do in the urban area. Still there is places like 13th we
had to take on, I understand in the not-too-distant future. 17th
Avenue, which I live in, might become a through road right to 16th in
the estates out there, which will change our way of life. But some of
these things are going to be necessary to keep going forward. Even
though I favor this, I hope when the day comes I may not speak in
favor of this and something that affects my own district, that you
people have the fortitude to stand up to me and tell me I'm wrong.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: That's right, have to.
MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Chairman, you have ten registered speakers.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Go to public speakers.
MR. OLLIFF: The first speaker is -- I believe it's Heather
Baker. Following Ms. Baker will beTom Beaver.
MS. BAKER: Heather Baker, 4161 Cathy Avenue. I've lived in
the neighborhood two years, and over the course of the two years, I
have seen efforts on the Commission's part and the city -- county part
to answer some of the requests that the neighbors have had related to
public safety.
Some of my other neighbors are -- have been more active on
this. I'm here in support of them today and support of my own
household today. I think many of you may have known that one of
our children was hit on a bicycle on that roadway. We don't need to
have more examples such as that. But this being my first commission
meeting that I ever attended, I have to say that I'm overwhelmed by
the magnitude of your agenda today -- (Interruption.)
Page 115
July 31,2001
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Sorry.
MS. BAKER: -- and the amount of-- the magnitude of your
agenda today and of the amount of--
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I apologize very much for that
interruption.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: It's a little commercial for Gilligan's
Island, but go right ahead.
MS. BAKER: I'm impressed with the magnitude of your agenda
today and the amount of responsibility that you have in making
decisions for our community, but also decisions that have a lot of
impact on how our public monies are spent.
This neighborhood is not one that has a big corporation behind it
and a big development company behind it. It is not one that is gated.
It is not-- it is a public road just like the Foxfire road was a public
road and, to my knowledge, is still a public road, but it's gated.
These are the issues that are forefront in my mind as I look at the
very complicated situation. What it is -- what the situation is not is a
"make everyone happy situation." it's not like Sunday Undies." I
was here this morning and saw that presentation. It's one that has
divided our neighborhood.
But you as a board have asked us on several occasions as a
community to come together. We've held neighborhood meetings.
We've had petitions. We've been asked to respond to mailings asking
for us as a community to vote on this issue. And on record at this
point is a two-thirds majority in our neighborhood, that this is what
we as the neighborhood of Coconut Creek feel is in our best interests.
They say that you are defined by how you take care of your
weakest member of your society. This is a weak, little neighborhood.
We have a lot of advocates that live in that neighborhood that feel
very heart strong about this issue. But this is not a Pelican Bay that's
asking for sewer line access. This is a little neighborhood that just
Page 116
July 31,2001
simply wants a $10,000 barricade put in. And I have to take issue
that the barricade that's currently there is not effective. It's not
effective for those people who break laws all the time and run stop
signs and so forth, but I don't run through the barricade anymore. I'm
willing to make a personal sacrifice for the safety of my two children
and that neighborhood.
And I encourage you as a board to revisit your position because
you will be defined by how you take care of this issue.
MR. OLLIFF: The next speaker is Tom Beaver.
AUDIENCE: Ted Travis and Tom Beaver request a change in
order.
MR. OLLIFF: Next speaker is Ted Travis followed by Tom
Beaver.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Can we get the next speaker on deck,
please?
MR. TRAVIS: Good afternoon, Commissioners. My name is
Ted Travis, and when I'm not working on traffic issues related to our
community, I'm the administrator for the maternity clinic and the
partnership of the Health Department and NCH.
We are neighbors, members of the Coconut Creek traffic
committee, and constituents writing to bring you up-to-date regarding
activity with our community's traffic problems.
As you recall, Foxfire back in August of 1999 diverted all of the
traffic from our community. The action lost for us the ambience of
peace and quiet, the safety, and we are now under siege. We are now
under siege. We are not going to be under siege, Mr. Feder, when
Livingston opens.
We are now the only north/south cut-through between the
airport and Santa Barbara. And I know you don't need me to be
defending you, but you meant well, you intended well to protect
Foxfire, but, in fact, even the May-- the often quoted local news --
Page 117
July 31, 2001
Naples news indicated back on May 27th, wrongly as well, that
Kings Way was the only public road linking Radio and Davis, a little
oversight.
So we got 37,000 vehicles coming down Livingston, I
understand, but that's still tomorrow. Our problem's today. What has
been done? You've accepted this responsibility before. Then on
January 25th you authorized a temporary trial solution to calm this.
This was where this stick thing was the brainstorm of our former
representative.
The solution has -- as I just mentioned -- has failed, and also the
traffic counts are not over 2000. The traffic counts done over two
months ago were over 2500, Mr. Feder. We can pull those out and
get those exact numbers if you like. But very, very importantly, this
traffic, 75 percent of them according to survey, are speeding. It's the
character of the traffic, and it's happening now. It will not happen to
us with Livingston. That's a whole other problem. These aren't
drivers who have our neighborhood and our families and our street
safety in mind.
The traffic committee met with the transportation and Collier
County representatives on March 5th. It included a whole lot of
folks, and it was -- as before with the petition that Commissioner
Henning did-- there was a large support for the diverter. We also
have -- in addition to the support of the community, we have, of
course, Commissioner Henning -- we have still some factions of the
transportation department that they're now, of course, split
themselves. And we have, certainly, the adjacent areas because of all
of the traffic issues related to East Naples Middle School.
In summary, our traffic problems continue now. They are not
going to happen. They've already happened. They happened when
Foxfire got closed. The problem significantly affects the safety of the
children in our adjacent neighborhoods because this traffic is now
Page 118
July 31,2001
going right by East Naples Middle. If you look at the picture of this
back page I handed you, you can see that the bottom page is
East Naples Middle School. Instead of a nice straight shot through
Kings Way, what we gave all these people is a very circumvented
route up and down through our neighborhoods.
Incidentally, also the picture of our, again, very esteemed
solution, Donna Street looking north. As you can see, it's a little
weather worn, Commissioners. And -- I'm sorry -- I managed to get
most of the whiskey bottles out of the driveway, but I missed one.
We didn't cause Naples' traffic problems, Mr. Feder. And I
really resent that you want to use our neighborhood to take as a
scapegoat and take some credit for solving them. So, I'm sorry, but I
wish you would -- you know, we're not the problem, and we're not
going to be your solution.
There's nothing wrong with mowing this traffic over to Airport
and to Radio where you Commissioners, which you originally
intended to do with Foxfire. You just, again, got bad information.
You didn't know about us. Now you know about us.
Foxfire is history. They're going to have -- they've got their
gates. They're going to keep them. And I might add about some of
the discussions prior to our speaking, that last January you voted 5 to
0 in favor of helping us. And the statement that you made, Ms.
Mac'Kie, was that we need to mitigate the mistake that we made.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I know.
MR. TRAVIS: With your support, the installation of the
diagonal diverter will -- I know, but I need just another minute -- to
provide a long-term solution and accomplish what you set out to do.
It can be resolved now if you continue to accept accountability for
this. If you don't, we'll become a major commercial thoroughfare,
and we'll lose the personal use of our streets. We will have increased
physical risk to our children, increase in the amount of waste
Page 119
July 31,2001
discarded by the passing drivers, and certain decrease in property
value. I have more, but -- where down to just really -- it's a tough
decision, but it's a simple issue.
We said a prayer this morning. We said a prayer. Executive
summary originally produced by the transportation department
indicated that the root problem in this neighborhood is the volume
and the speed of the cut-through traffic, not tomorrow, not next week,
not next month. But this is what they said in this signed executive
summary, Gerald Morris, Project Manager, Dale Bathon, Traffic
Operations Manager--
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I'm going to have to ask you to wind
up because I have a number of other speakers.
MR. TRAVIS: My final statement is we had a prayer this
morning. So the question really is, are we going to honor that prayer
and are we going to make decisions to respect our communities, or
are you going to turn our community over to Mr. Feder? And are we
going to be the payment in full for the Foxfire gates? Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Next speaker.
MR. OLLIFF: Next speaker is Tom Beaver followed by
Christine Gamble.
MR. BEAVER: Good afternoon, Commissioners. My name is
Tom Beaver. I live at 345 Esther Street in Coconut Creek, and I've
lived there for 25 years.
I would like to mention a few facts here that 1000 cars a day on
a residential street is considered to be a qualifier for traffic-counting
measures as identified in your Neighborhood Traffic Management
Program, which was written by the Collier County staff.
In the fall of'99, our neighborhood perceived we had this kind
of a problem back then. Within a few months, this will become a
two-year project that our neighborhood has been working with the
Page 120
July 31,2001
traffic department on in trying to come up with ways to solve the
high-traffic problem.
In the past we have noted counts as high as 3400 cars a day on
Donna Street alone. Okay. The traffic volume is not only too high,
but the speed of the traffic exceeds the posted limit. One of the
surveys I noted tracked 80 percent or more of the traffic was over 35
miles an hour. This is dangerous for the residents of the
neighborhood as well as dangerous for the drivers of the vehicles that
are passing through the area.
The streets are narrow, and the path through the neighborhood
is convoluted. We've got many sharp curves, decreasing radius turns,
which are blind. As a matter of fact, we had a car in the ditch about
60 days ago that did exactly what we're talking about, exceeded the
speed limit and managed to miss the curve completely.
Donna, Gail, and North Roads are narrow. There's no place for
a pedestrian to walk on the side of the road. They must be on the
paved area. There are no berms there. About the time you have a car
and a pedestrian passing, it becomes a dangerous situation. I won't
rollerblade, bicycle, or walk on any one of those three streets myself
just for preservation.
If I have house guests come, I immediately warn them. "The
first thing you do is don't step on those streets and decide to go
running or rollerblading or take a casual walk."
I appreciate that the residents of Coconut Creek moved there because
it was a nice, quiet, secluded little neighborhood, and nobody knew
about that. This has ceased to be true unfortunately. The problem
was generated, as we all well know, by the closing of
Foxfire. All the traffic just moved a little bit west and continued on
the cut-through. The problem is now extreme.
The further problem we're looking at is Livingston Road is
going to open up. We all know the location of that. They are talking
Page 121
July 31,2001
about dumping 32,000 or more cars a day onto Airport Road. We've
got to assume half of those are going west and quite a few of them
are going to head south. They are going to figure out that Coconut
Creek is a little cut-through. As convoluted as it is and as difficult as
it is to go through, they're going to perceive that that is a better way
to go. That traffic does belong out on Airport Road.
The situation is now unacceptable. Making a decision to not
deal with the problem now and to wait for more traffic counts is
really not in the best interest of the residents of Collier County, and
that includes us. Personal safety, security, and livability of a
neighborhood are our major concerns, as pointed out in your traffic
management program. As Commissioners, your responsibility is to
help increase the safety, security, and livability of Collier County.
This can only be done by dealing with one area at a time. Coconut
Creek is the area. Now is the time, before one of our children is
killed in the neighborhood.
In summary, I'd like to just mention the traffic volumes need to
be reduced, the usefulness and safety restored to the residents of
Coconut Creek. The proposed traffic diverter needs to be installed
now. Please do the right thing as Commissioners. Solve the
problem. The problem is ongoing and will only get worse. We don't
need to injure people to take action. The neighborhood has been
surveyed and overwhelmingly approves the installation of the
diverter. I would urge you to all vote yes on the installation of this
diverter. Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you. Next speaker, please, with
an on -deck person.
MR. OLLIFF: Next speaker is Christine Gamble, followed by
Debra Cully.
MS. GAMBLE: My name is Christine Gamble. I live at
441210. I am for the diverter. I'm a resident, a homeowner, and a
Page 122
July 31, 2001
registered voter. The back of my property fronts Gail, which is no
street for through traffic. There are some walkers, bikers, joggers,
and so forth. Gail has only one shoulder to walk on, one county ditch
on the other side of it, and there are nine children in four homes that I
know of. I want the quality of our neighborhood to remain and I'm
for the diverter. Thank you. I'm very nervous.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: You did a wonderful job.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you. Next speaker.
MR. OLLIFF: Next speaker is Debra Cully, followed by A. W.
Clardy.
MS. CULLY: My name is Debra Cully, and I live at 303 Esther
Street, better known as the drag strip road. I am a 19-year resident of
this community. Today, sitting here, I heard the word "community"
and "neighborhood" spoken a hundred times. That's because we all
live in a community or a neighborhood, and we understand they are a
backbone to any society or culture.
I am for the traffic diverter, not because I want to inconvenience
my good neighbors or myself or take away anyone else's rights, but
it's because it's the salvation of a community and a way of life being
destroyed by thousands of cars a day. We have spent nearly two
years working with staff, Mr. Kant, Mr. Morris, trying to find viable
solutions to this problem. It wasn't created just overnight, the
concept of the diverter. The very reason we are here before you is
because so many people have lost respect for other's property and for
the welfare of others and for the traffic laws.
Uncontrolled traffic is like flood waters. It goes where it wants;
it cares nothing for the lives it damages; it causes this damage and
leaves its destruction for the residents to live with. An example is the
fact that Coconut Creek Estate was established in the '50s, making it
one of Collier's older communities. The roads are still narrow, curvy,
steep, and below standards, and many of its residents were here
Page 123
July 31,2001
before any other building ever existed on Radio. We ignorantly
believed that when growth came the county and others would care
enough to protect our rights. Sadly, we were wrong because they
didn't.
We are now the only open-to-the-public community on Radio
Road with a cut-through access to Davis. And while thousands of
residents up and down Radio enjoy their quiet little neighborhoods,
lifestyle, biking and walking, we experience thousands of cars a day
that speed, run into our signs and mailboxes, throw their trash and
garbage on our roads and yards, run into the ditches, run over county
barriers, use us as a dump site, and have total disregard for the traffic
laws, our property, and the speed signs.
People cut through residential communities because they believe
they can get from Point A to Point B faster. Well, I'm going to prove
to you today that by cutting through our community, a driver is
actually going farther. I selected the top ten -- six points of business
that traffic typically cuts through in our neighborhood; East Naples
Middle School, Lorenzo Walker Institute, the Courthouse, Wal-Mart,
Home Depot, and Davis Boulevard.
I used the stop sign at Esther and Radio as the starting point, and
I have several witnesses who can verify them. To the vo-tech,
Lorenzo Walker, using Radio and Airport, which it should be, is 1.5
miles. Cutting through two neighborhoods, Coconut Circle and ours
is 1.8 miles. The driver went 3/10s of a mile farther.
To Davis Boulevard light using Airport to Radio, 1.8 miles.
Cutting through our neighborhood, through Flamingo Estates, as
well, is 2.5 miles. The driver went 7/10s of a mile farther.
To the Courthouse from Radio to Airport Road, which is the
way they should go, 2.5 miles. No, cut through our neighborhood
and then through the Glades entrance, and you go 2.9 miles, 4/1 Os of
a mile farther went the driver.
Page 124
July 31,2001
To Wal-Mart using Radio and Airport Road, they go 2.8 miles.
To Wal-Mart cutting through our neighborhood and then using
Lakewood and Glades, 3.2 miles. The driver went 4/10s farther.
To Home Depot from Airport, two miles. To Home Depot
cutting through our neighborhood and several others, 2.7 miles for a
total of 7/10s farther.
The only one that had any savings at all was East Naples Middle
School, which was a savings of 1/10 of a mile.
Why do drivers think it saves time? Because they don't take
time to think. They can speed because there isn't anything to stop
them. Traffic surveys reveal that 75 percent of the cars speed. There
are no traffic lights, so there's a false impression that it's shorter.
There's no accountability because there's no one there to keep track
that they are going to stay the speed limit. They don't live there, so
they don't care.
Those opposed to the diverter mostly voice that it's an
inconvenience that forces them to change their lifestyle, or they don't
want to have to travel the main roads. Many in opposition don't even
live in the interior of the neighborhood. It causes every single
member of our community to be inconvenienced some way. But it's
an equalizer. It plays no favoritism. It equally distributes
inconvenience to all. If the neighborhood should be inconvenienced,
then the drivers who don't live there can be inconvenienced as well.
There's nothing wrong with diverting traffic to use our multi-million
dollar newly designed roads equipped with turn lanes, traffic signs,
and enforced speed limit controls. No community in our county
should bear the burden of thousands of cut-through cars. The sanctity
of a community should unquestionably be valued over some driver
wanting to save a minute or two. If we don't value communities over
traffic, we have joined the ranks of those who simply only care for
themselves. Thank you.
Page 125
July 31,2001
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: This was brought to light a few
years ago -- actually, I think it was three years ago. This child was
hit on a bicycle and this is what the cut-through traffic -- and a good
example of what she pointed out is really not saving time, but you're
endangering our children, and that school over there is going to start
up here in September. So I hope by delaying --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Actually, August.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- this is going to -- because I
think it's going to be inevitable that a diverter is going to be there,
and by delaying it are we putting children at risk?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aren't we going to be installing
sidewalks on Donna Street real quickly here? I think that's on the
agenda or in the consent agenda or something.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you, Commissioner Fiala. Mr.
Feder is coming forward to answer that.
MR. FEDER: Yes. You took action earlier today on the
consent agenda. We are adding sidewalks, again, to respond to some
of the issues that have been raised in this review, in this analysis.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Mr. Feder, while you're up
there, one more time. I would just like to revisit this. I know it's
probably going to go nowheres, but I'm going to give it one more try.
What would be the chances of ever getting Foxfire to open up again
so we could have day traffic go through there?
MR. FEDER: ! would like to think that that would be the case.
My understanding is not only was the gates placed, but it is turned
over as a private street. I'm told -- and I've asked the question of a
couple of sources -- I'm told that ownership is now in each abutting
property, which would then make it even harder because you'd have
to buy it from every single property along there.
Page 126
July 31,2001
But, in any event, I understand that the public ownership in that
was given away at the same time.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I really resent it that it ever
happened. I wasn't on the commission at the time, and maybe I
would have gone right along with what happened. If there's any way
we could ever correct that mistake, it would help to solve an awful lot
of--
MR. FEDER: That's the reason I asked those questions. What I
just gave you is the answer I received back.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And it's correctable. It's a
question of how much money.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And is it worth it for the
amount of money that you want to spend in putting another
community in turmoil? So I hope that we don't go there.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Next, we have a couple more
speakers, I believe, Mr. Olliff?
MR. OLLIFF: Yes, sir. The next speaker is A.W. Clardy
AUDIENCE: That's my father.
MR. OLLIFF: Okay.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
He's elderly. He's left.
Thank you, ma'am.
MR. OLLIFF: The next speaker will be Doreen Vachon,
followed by Diane Gamble.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Is Ms. Gamble here? If you would be
up here and ready, please.
MS. VACHON: I have copies for everybody. My name is
Doreen Vachon.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: We'll pass them down. Thank you,
ma'am.
MS. VACHON: I've lived in Coconut Creek since 1980. It
used to be a lime-rock road community. I, with the neighbors
organized,~ we paid for our roads to be paved and have city water put
Page 127
July 31,2001
through our neighborhood. We have experienced horrendous traffic
problems, not just on some streets, but all streets.
The papers that I gave you are correspondence dating back from
August of '99, which I would like to let you know that the county --
those letters right there that you're looking at are from Dan White, the
Transportation Department of the school that recognizes that our
roads are so hazardous that they are busing our children from -- we
live three blocks away from a public school. And I think it's pretty
pathetic that a kid can't walk three blocks to a facility that has play
areas that the kids -- the kids that are in band normally do not like to
ride the bus; they'd rather walk and carry their instruments. They're
on an overcrowded bus.
Every year -- because of-- you gave us a diverter. What
happened was that Tim Constantine -- we had a meeting -- this is
how the whole thing went down. We were all told that, "get two-
thirds of your neighborhood together. We're sorry. We understand
that Foxfire was a mistake. We understand that there's some things" -
- I do think there was a conspiracy to some extent because it's
amazing that all of our roads, our perimeter roads, like, two weeks
after Foxfire closed, were paved. We all of a sudden started get
lining, we started to get reflectors.
And if you look at the last page that I sent you, this is a study
that was done a year later that they decided that they were willing to
spend $240,000 for guardrails. I mean, we're just a little country
road. We have substandard roads. They're not even normal widths.
We have ditches so big you could throw a school bus in them, and
you wouldn't even see them.
I have been petitioning -- my daughter is 24 years old -- I have
letters I can show you that I wrote Tim Constantine back in 1997, and
I have letters from before then asking for sidewalks in this
community. I have letters in that pile from three years ago saying
Page 128
July 31,2001
we're getting.sidewalks. I know it's on the petition today, but the kids
in the neighborhood, they have no place to run to be able to use the
neighborhood.
The increased traffic has been horrendous. We have had -- we
have skid marks on every section of our road. Just last Wednesday a
car flipped, went on its backside, and in the water. I was on vacation,
and I came home, and that was on my recorder. And that's not the
first car in the water and in the ditch.
We have mailboxes that are constantly being taken out by cars.
I'm waiting for the kid that's going to be taken out by the car. And
we already have had one kid hit. That's when they started the busing,
shortly afterwards. And all this did happen right after Foxfire.
I really have been to meetings with Mr. Feder. He basically has
said he's hired by the county to promote road building and road
traffic moving. We are not the solution. He's come out to our
neighborhood and looked and said, "Gee, I like how the traffic moves
through here. Where are they all going?"
This is my community. This is my home. This is not where
you're going to solve Naples' problem. I mean, you've got
substandard roads. You have no place to widen our roads. Now you
want to spend $240,000 on guardrails? Why, so you can smash a kid
against a guardrail? Please give me a $10,000 diverter and let -- you
know, there was a wall taken out in Flamingo 'cause people can't
make the comer. Since we've changed the diverter, we've got the
traffic on a different end, but we have -- we've lost walls in the next
community because people can't drive at a normal speed, and they are
in a rush to go.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: May I ask a question,
Mrs. Vachon?
MS. VACHON: Sure.
Page 129
July 31,2001
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You had said that neighborhoods
get together to pave those streets? In other words, it wasn't the
county that did it; it was yours?
MS. VACHON: We were assessed for it. We are always
county roads. They were accepted as lime-rock roads, and we were
taxed every year for lime-rock maintenance.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So that --
MS. VACHON: And until we petitioned the county and we
were all assessed, we paid somewhere in the neighborhood of $3500,
I believe, per household.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. So, Mr. Feder, then, does
that mean that these are county roads, or are these private roads being
that they've paid for their own roads?
MS. VACHON: I can answer that. I know they are county
roads because we had to pave them to county specifications. There
was no money set aside from the county to help us, so what the deal
was cut was -- because originally they told us it was going to be
$5000, but the county agreed that part -- when they looked at their
whole plan, was to dig out some of the drainage ditches on the
comers, and most of the expense was drainage, that they were going
to come back in the next three years and redo some of the drainage
for us for free. But we were assessed for those roads. And we have
worse roads than Foxfire, let me tell you. Come look.
MR. OLLIFF: Next speaker is Diane Gamble, followed by
Dennis Vachon.
MS. GAMBLE: I'm Diane Gamble. I live at 4443 Cathy
Avenue, and I appreciate the Commissioners' time today.
I'm speaking -- I just, basically, have a few notes, and I won't belabor
the point, but I appreciate your attention in that I know that it is an
issue that is -- that can be politically charged, especially when we're
dealing with closure of roads, or in this case, a temporary diverter.
Page 130
July 31, 2001
But I just ask that you listen and take into consideration this
particular neighborhood because I believe each individual situation is
unique. And this is, indeed, a unique community and, please, don't
have your mind set yet.
Again, I won't belabor the point, but I think a couple of major
issues are that as it's already been articulated, these roads are
substandard roads. They are not roads that have been made up to the
current county standards because of the ditches that are there and
because of the width of the road. They are very, very dangerous
roads, both for the kids in the neighborhood, the pedestrians, and also
for the vehicles that are traveling and using it as a cut-through.
Also, with it, as Doreen said, the danger that is inherent in these
roads has been recognized by other county agencies, including the
Collier County School Board that does provide buses to bus, as she
said, three blocks away.
And the third point that I'd like to address is that prior to today
and prior to the new director, Mr. Feder, we have had meetings with
county staff, his staff, and the transportation department. And it was
their recommendation at that point in time that the diverter be
installed and that the diverter was a viable management technique for
the problems that we faced. That was based on the traffic count as it
existed at that time before Mr. Feder came in. And it was also based
on the analysis of the speed and of the vehicles that were using the
road and the fact that the roads were substandard.
To that end there's been no studies that's changed those facts as
far as the amount of vehicles on the road. We have, indeed, well
beyond what is even reasonable for that area, even considering also
that the roads have not been up to current standards. So we still have
the 'traffic on the road that was an issue two years ago. We also have
the roads being substandard. So the only question -- in fact, the
Page 131
July 31,2001
traffic is anticipated to increase with Livingston Road beyond the
2500 count that was -- that had already been counted there.
So the question now is, why does staff now support -- not
support the diverter? Why has there been a change in staff position?
And the only thing that we can look at is that there's a change in the
philosophy of the transportation director. He has articulated to
members of our transportation committee that he wants as much
traffic flowing on the roads, the public roads of Collier County as
possible. And that's flowing through all streets, not just the main
thoroughfares of Airport and Radio. He believes that they flow
throughout.
This is a change in his philosophy, not in the change of the
circumstances of the facts that had staff recommending the closure
and the diverter, not in changing of the facts that we were before the
Commissioners on over a year ago when we had the temporary
installation of the road closure. That has not been successful. The
closure has not been successful. And so the facts remain the same.
This is not a philosophical debate. This is a practical issue. The road
is still unsafe, the traffic volume is still unsafe and looks to increase,
and the director's own staff previously has recommended that the
diverter be in place.
This is a practical solution. The diverter is a practical solution
to a neighborhood that has had problems with this for quite some
time. Just with regard to Mr. Feder's recommendation that we wait
until we see what the traffic count is, may I suggest to you if we wait
until after Livingston Road goes through and you have thousands of
more people that begin to use this roadway and become accustomed
to it as a cut-through, then we are going to have a significant problem
in bringing this before you again. You'll have significant opposition,
and then it will be extremely difficult for you to make this decision
then saying that we're going to cut the road off, and we're going to
Page 132
July 31,2001
place the diverter then, because then it's going to be even more
politically distasteful for you to be able to make that decision.
I pray and ask that you'll do the right thing as you ask, Mrs. Mac'Kie,
that you'll go ahead and that you'll endorse the diverter, please.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I think that's a very good point
is when the local people start using those cut-throughs, which they
think is a shortcut, but it isn't, it is going to be more difficult for the
safety of these people putting up a diverter.
MR. OLLIFF: Dennis Vachon will be followed by the last
registered speaker, Linda Heims.
MR. VACHON: Dennis Vachon. I've lived in the
neighborhood for 21 years. Thank you for your support, Mr.
Henning.
When are we going to be getting sidewalks that we're talking
about today?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Somebody tell us that. I've got
some questions. How long does it take?
MR. OLLIFF: I want it to be on the record, Norman.
MR. KANT: Ed Kant, Transportation Operations Director. You
just approved in the consent agenda this morning the awarding of that
contract. Typically, by the time we go through the process, it takes
approximately 60 days. So that should be started before the end of
this fiscal year, and the sidewalk, again, depending on how the
contractor schedules it, it should be in before the end of the calendar
year.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: So -- I'm sorry, Mr. Kant, but if
it's 60 days from today, then it'd be in October 1st.
MR. KANT: I'm estimating based on what typically it takes
from the time we get an approval tilt the time we can actually give
the contractor a notice to proceed.
Page 133
July 31,2001
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Oh, I see.
MR. KANT: If, in fact, we can do that in 30, 45 days -- you
know, whatever it takes, it takes.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: But then it takes another --
MR. KANT: But then it's going to take the contractor probably
anywhere from 120 to 150 days to actually do the work.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I see.
MR. VACHON: Well, we've been begging for sidewalks for
years, so now the kids can be walking down the middle of the road
when school's on while they are doing these sidewalks. This is what's
going to happen. And if the board's got any backbone, they'll vote for
this.
You said you made a mistake a long time ago. Now's your
chance to redeem yourself. I'd appreciate it. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you, sir. Next speaker, please.
MR. OLLIFF: That speaker's Linda Heims.
MS. HEIMS: Good evening. I know you're probably getting
bored with hearing all of this. I don't blame you, but these are our
homes and our lives, and they have been destroyed.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I just have to tell you, this is
anything but boring; it's heart wrenching.
MS. HEIMS: Well, I'm sure you've heard the story. I don't
know if you've all driven out and looked at this property.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I have.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I have.
MS. HEIMS: It's the front of-- you come in on Hazel. It's sort
of a horseshoe. Those two curves between Gail and North are totally
blind. You cannot see anybody coming around them. These are
substandard county roads. They are not even seven feet across. They
have ditches on one side and on the other side is nothing. And I gave
some pictures to the gentleman.
Page 134
July 31,2001
The people run off of these roads so much now that the county is
coming in every two or three months to put in blacktop where the
people are being run off the roads. They come by my house at least
two, three months because there's a ditch on the side of my road.
We have no lighting -- no street lighting whatsoever. Oh, after the
last board closed off Foxfire, they came through and put some little
things up that glitter at night, which is our total lighting system.
We have no curbs; we have no gutters; we have no sewers; we
have no sidewalks, yet they closed off Foxfire which had all of these.
And all of a sudden we're hearing all of the emergency vehicles need
to have this access. Where were they when they closed Foxfire that
had good access? If you have one car on that road that's broken
down, an emergency vehicle cannot get there to begin with.
It's a death trap out there now. I cannot get in -- oh, let me tell
you where I live. I live at the corner of Gail and Donna. I cannot get
in to my own driveway. If I come around Donna and have to make a
left mrn into my driveway; people can't wait two seconds for me to
turn; they pass me. I have almost been hit I don't know how many
times. At night and in the morning, I invite any of you to come sit in
my living room for ten minutes, and you would close this road. It is
horrendous.
We have 18-wheelers using substandard county roads. One of
them tried to mrn around at the front of Gall, blocked Gail Boulevard
all day long. The dump trucks that were up and down, the school
buses, the Waste Management had to back all the way down Gall
Boulevard because they couldn't turn around. Another 18-wheeler
came through, tore down the TV cables that run across the street. I
went without TV for two days, very unhappy two days.
There has been a major mistake made in this area. I don't
believe that anybody ever intended for it to be this way. It was a
mistake. It was not this board. We are not blaming this board.
Page 135
July 31, 2001
However, I always thought the Board of County Commissioners
represented all of the county. We feel at this point, that because we
are an extremely small community, that nothing will be done for our
area because we don't have the strength behind us. And, also, I think
that everybody on this board knows this is a mistake. Will we get
representation? Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I'm going to ask Mr. Feder to come
up. There's been a number of questions raised from the last speaker.
Yes, ma'am, we do represent all of the county. That's why our
decisions are often so difficult because we have overall policies that
we're trying to implement and make work. What we have is a
community -- in a lot of respects, many, many respects, and you're
not a singular community -- where we get into what we call
retrofitting. How do we correct what was never planned well to
begin with? And I'm not talking just Foxfire. I'm talking at the
beginning. And I don't know the answers to that. But I certainly --
and Mr. Feder will address some of this -- and I don't know what can
be done to correct the substandard, to change drainage ditches, to put
wings on them so that you've got bike paths and all that. I don't know
the answers to that.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Can I say something, though,
before you ask that question --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: -- because it's a fundamental
issue is, do we want to -- okay. In the streets in my district that are
cut-through streets, the balancing concern is, if you make the streets
too nice, make them wide and broad and no ditches, and then you're
inviting cars.
We're doing the opposite on the streets in my district that are
cut-through streets. We're trying to make them feel narrower; we're
Page 136
July 31,2001
trying to make them bumpier; we're trying to make them curvier;
we're trying to do things to prevent -- to make them less attractive.
So as much-- I mean -- and I would listen to the neighbors on
this one. You know, if you want these streets improved, then, you
know, I'll listen to that. But, please, don't -- you can't say -- but that's
sort of the good news is that it's not very comfortable driving down
these streets because maybe a few people try it and don't repeat it
because of those curves and because of the narrow roads. I mean --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I think the only thing they are
asking is for their neighborhood streets to be safe.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Well, I want the same thing.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Then let's do it, then.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, let me go to Mr. Feder and my
comments only addressed on making sure you have sidewalks and
ways for people to bicycle and walk and do these things. I have the
same problem in Naples Park, so it is not a singular issue here.
MR. FEDER: Mr. Chairman, I --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I do have a question here.
Forgive me, I'm not a traffic engineer. I was looking at this thing,
and I was looking at the pictures I saw. I'm sure you've looked at this
option before. What would happen if we took and we turned the
streets into one-way streets and blocked them off as far as putting
stripes on the roads and everything to prevent people from -- more
that one car-- come down from Westview as two way, and when they
turn into Donna, be one way to the very end, then a right-hand turn
one way all the way out to Hazel which would be two way?
AUDIENCE: (Overlapping discussion.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Ladies and gentlemen, we cannot have
a discourse between the commissioner and the audience.
MR. FEDER: If I could, let me try and respond to a few things
that have been raised.
Page 13 7
July 31,2001
First of all, we very much appreciate the concerns. I've heard
them around, and if the note is because of philosophy on my part at
this change of venue, the only thing I'll tell you is I think that change
of venue was coming even before I came, and I do need to bring to
your attention the need for that issue. And that is that the prior venue
that brought us Foxfire closing is not the approach that we can take
throughout the county. I don't want these facilities to work as
arterials. I don't want them to be unsafe. At the same time I can't
encourage closure unless there is such severe volumes of problems
that we can't keep them open. That's why we said let's look at it in
case it does get much worse than it is today, whether it's under 2000
or 2500 vehicles in that discussion.
We are looking -- and I think Commission Mac'Kie raised a very
good point. We are not looking to design them to arterial status, but
we are always looking at trying to make the facilities work well. It is
noted that they were built to county standards, but there are some
areas there -- you've got retention pond on a curb, and that's why we
recommend putting up guardrails for safety. Even if I don't put a
single vehicle beyond the neighborhood vehicles on that street, I will
recommend the guardrail because you've got a turn there, and you've
got a ditch.
So I don't know if it was somebody from the neighborhood,
somebody outside. It doesn't matter to me if somebody ended up in
that ditch, and that's something that's a concern to us.
We're looking at sidewalks. Be it maybe later than folks wanted it,
but we're moving on sidewalks. I'm very pleased to note that.
So we'll look at some of the safety issues. I would also point out
to you a lot of comments about speeding beyond the volume. We
already have speed humps out there. Unfortunately, that hasn't
stopped the speeding, and noting that the percentage of people are
speeding, I would almost venture to say that, unfortunately -- I don't
Page 138
July 31, 2001
like this statement, but I find many roadways where that percentage is
probably not exceeded or less.
Essentially, what we're trying to do is we're trying to balance the
neighborhood's concern with the overall traffic in the area. My
recommendation still stands that we pull out the flex stakes. They
have not done what was hoped. They are creating a bit of a diverter,
which I'm not recommending, yet at the same time they're
encouraging people to run over them and giving people a false sense.
We should look at traffic volumes before and after removal of those
and before we open Livingston and look at it after we open
Livingston to see if, in fact, we induce quite a bit more traffic and
then consider what our approach is. Continue with the sidewalks;
continue with improvements on the streets without trying to turn
them into an encouragement.
And the last thing -- and I will ask the board for assistance on
this one -- is encourage enforcement out there, whether it be now or
whatever the choice be, that we encourage some enforcement, if we,
in fact, having as reported here today, that much problem with
speeding in the area. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I think enforcement is under the
constitutional office of Sheriff Hunter, and I've requested his
assistance in the past in other troubled areas, as we know in Burning
Tree, and even your own family had the experience of getting a ticket
after we did that. So it does work if you ask, and they will
incorporate it, and there's some ways to address some of those issues.
Commissioner Fiala, do you have any questions.9
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, I don't have any questions, but
I did have a comment. I thought maybe when Ms. Vachon mentioned
that they paid for the road, I thought possibly it was a private road,
and that would end the discussion because that would mean it was
their own road. But then she pointed out that, no, I was wrong there,
Page 139
July 31, 2001
that it was a county road. I was thinking maybe there was an answer
-- a simple answer.
I know that the closing of Foxfire really hurt this community,
and it hurt my community. It hurt East Naples Middle School and
Flamingo Estates. But one thing we did learn from that bad mistake
is don't close a neighborhood. Promote interconnectivity. Now we
have to protect these people's children, their bikes, the bikers and so
forth. We've got to get these pathways, bikewalks -- or sidewalks in.
We have to do this quickly.
But I think that this isn't the end of this subject. I think this is
the beginning of data collection. We need to have a baseline so that
when Livingston Road opens we have something to measure by so
that when these people come back before us and they can say, "This
is what we had, this is what we have. Even though we have
sidewalks, we still feel that it's unsafe." But I think we need to at
least begin to establish a baseline.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I'm going to move staff's
recommendation as articulated by Mr. Feder at the beginning in his
presentation.
MS. VACHON: We are getting one sidewalk. We have six
roads.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Ma'am, you had your opportunity--
ma'am, please, you had an opportunity to speak. We have listened to
you all. We have heard everything. You cannot have a conversation
with the board out there.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I'm going to make --
MS. VACHON: I'll call you when we have a dead child. I can't
take any more of this. It's been three years of sickening, sickening...
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Go ahead, Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I was just going to add as
additional instruction to staff that they look at the safety concerns
Page 140
July 31,2001
generally. If there's one sidewalk and six roads, maybe -- you know,
we've children who need to be able to walk to school. School busing
shouldn't be appropriate within two miles of a school. And it doesn't
address the concerns. I have school kids. I know that they don't go
and come to school only at the time that the buses are running.
We've got to address that safety concern first. And, frankly, if we
have to bump it ahead on a schedule of something else, then we
should do that because school is about to start. This ought to be --
this ought to be addressed as quickly as it possibly can. And that's
my motion.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And maximum law
enforcement.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Absolutely, and I'll personally
call Sheriff Hunter. I'm sure everybody will.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'll second that motion.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I have a motion by Commissioner
Mac'Kie. I have a second by Commissioner Coletta. Is there any
further discussion by members of the board? (No response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. We'll take a roll call.
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Uhmmm.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Why are you going to do it that
way?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Pardon me?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Curiosity.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, you know, everybody said their
speech.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Okay. You're the chair.
Page 141
July 31,2001
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All in favor of the motion made by
Commissioner Mac'Kie and seconded by Commissioner Coletta, I
was asking for a roll call, which says whether you voted for or
against the motion.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Does that mean individually you
want our votes or just all in favor say aye?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, it will come down either way.
Let's take a roll call.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: It's a very difficult aye because I
feel protective towards this neighborhood, but we have to give it a
chance. Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Nay.
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
Commissioner Mac'Kie?
Aye.
I vote nay. The motion carries 3 -2.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I must say before we continue,
I don't bring things from the citizens forward to this board working
on it with the neighborhood to lose. And if I knew that I didn't have
the support from the Transportation Department at the 11 th hour, it
just never would have happened. So I apologize to you, and I hope
that we can avoid this in the future.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All right. Moving--
MR. OLLIFF: I need to jump in here. That was my fault. If
there is someone to be blamed on that one, when the executive
summary came out to my office, the executive summary
recommendation wasn't consistent. I thought with the transportation
policies that we have provided in the past, the recommendation on
that executive summary then was left to the board's decision this
morning. And I asked Mr. Feder as part of the presentation to try to
Page 142
July 31,2001
make as consistent a presentation with what policies we have been
promoting to this board as we possibly could.
So if there's some blame in terms of confusion between
transportation staff and what ultimately was reported to this board, I'll
take the blame for that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, then, Mr. Olliff, I need to
ask you if the traffic management plan that we have, in fact, that Mr.
Beaver brought up that is in direct opposite of what we need to do on
this road where we have over ! 000 cars going down this local road.
So it's probably inconsistency that we have in our own plans, just like
the Land Development Code.
MR. OLLIFF: I believe that there are some triggers in terms of
traffic-calming measures. But I don't know that we will ever,
hopefully, in the future, be in a position of recommending that we
close any public roads. If the board sees the necessity to see a
distinction in terms of one of these public roads that needs to be
different than the policy, then that's going to be the board's decision.
But, hopefully, you can count on the staff for consistent
recommendations in that regard in the future.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Chairman, can we move
back to item 10-B.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: And what would be the purpose of
that, sir?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, we skipped that to try to
get through some stuff before lunch.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Oh, we did miss that, didn't we?
We have to get the time -certain at two o'clock.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: We have a time certain --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Good thing we have a young
person here who has a good memory.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: What is 1 OB?
Page 143
July 31,2001
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That is, Community
Development Environmental Service on interpretation of C-4 outside
storage.
Item # 10A
RESOLUTION 2001-312, REJECTING CHANGES TO THE
FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY'S
PROPOSED FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAPS FOR COLLIER
COUNTY- ADOPTED
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I will take that next after I deal with --
have the FEMA presentation. They have not -- I believe been here.
I'm over an hour late on that. And I really need to, I think, do that
issue and then come back and deal with all the other issues on the
agenda.
So is FEMA here? I apologize for the lateness. We need to
have that presentation.
MR. CHARTRAND: Good afternoon, Commissioners. My
name is Gene Chartrand. I'm the FEMA coordinator for Collier
County.
Approximately two-and-a-half years ago FEMA proposed map
revisions for Collier County on incorporated areas, City of Naples,
Marco Island, and Everglades City. In reviewing those proposed
changes in the flood rate insurance maps, there were discrepancies
noted. Street locations, other things that were not correct on the
maps. FEMA did, however, correct those requirements due to more
inconsistencies in the maps.
We organized a committee to review the maps and made a
proposal to the board, which was approved to hire a study contractor,
Mr. Dick Tomasello. There were areas in Golden Gate, Golden Gate
Page 144
July 31,2001
Estates, that FEMA was proposing to take out of D zones, put into
the A zones, eliminating some of the X zones, and the A zones were
not given any elevations, which would not help the people out in
Golden Gate at all.
So through the committee, Mr. Tomasello has done 2D a study
for the Golden Gate area and has come up with elevations and
different calculations, and those have been presented to FEMA.
We are in a process now where we are entering into an appeal
process. We have asked the board at this time through a resolution
that we would need passed that we are urging the passing of the
resolution. I believe you also have in front of you an executive
summary.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I'm going to just interrupt to
move approval of the resolution and thank our State Representative
Goodlette for going to visit with Congressmen Goss who said that
he's going to continue to fight hard for us. The resolution says it all,
and I'm happy to -- I've been briefed on this. So if we need to have a
more thorough presentation, I'm happy to sit, but we need to pass the
resolution and send people off to work as far as I'm concerned.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, I'm going to second your
motion, Commissioner Mac'Kie, so that we can continue.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Pardon my interruption.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I think we need a little more
detail for Channel 54. This is an item of great concern, not only to
Golden Gate Estates but to the coastal region.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: City of Naples desparately
concerned about it.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: And I think our position is,
Commissioner-- and you're right. And maybe I can summarize this
is that it's my understanding from the briefing is that we -- you know,
we are going to support the resolution the same as the City of Naples,
Page 145
July 31,2001
which says we are not accepting the numbers by FEMA, that we want
our own data incorporated into this study, into the model. We are
therefore -- want to take it to the appeal process to do that. We're
willing to support what it takes to accomplish that and continue the
efforts through Congressman Goss, Representative Goodlette to
pursue and make sure that we are well heard and represented as we
bring this forward because we feel that FEMA's data is flawed
because of what they incorporate into this does not affect the west
coast of Florida in terms of storm surges. If the surge is on the east
coast, it does not affect us on the west coast, and we feel that this is
flawed data, and, therefore, we are asking for those incorporations.
MR. CHARTRAND: That's correct.
Mr. Dick Tomasello, our study contractor that is doing the
studies in the coastal areas where we're having the V zones extended
-- which is going to cause an impact on the esthetics of the existing
structures that are there. New structures coming in would have to be
elevated well above those that are existing.
And Mr. Dick Tomasello is here to answer any technical
questions that the board may have.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I have just one question for him,
if I could.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Go right ahead.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Pretty simple one. Is there
anything we could do to be more aggressive in our fighting on this
issue?
MR. TOMASELLO: Good question. I believe we did what we
had to do to this point. I mean, we raised these issues to FEMA and
their contractors. They began to be very cooperative, I think, a year-
and-a-half, two-years ago when we started it. And we -- the
questions we raised were directly toward the issues that they
addressed in their restudy, in particular the wave setup, although
Page 146
July 31,2001
there were a number of other issues that were brought up that would
affect the stillwater flood levels, in that they pointed out the various
things that made those elevations that were established back in 1984
and '86. We made those -- the point that these elevations were
conservative for a number of reasons, and I don't believe that FEMA
really addressed the issues outside of direct issues we made on the
wave setup.
The wave setup issue, we really didn't have any qualms with
adding the wave setup onto flood elevations because it is -- it is a
parameter that really wasn't taken into account in the original studies.
The wave setup is an additional increase in water surface elevations
on the open coast due to the wave action, and that's been well
documented in the Corps of Engineers documents.
However, we felt like the model that was established years ago
in these FEMA studies may have already incorporated wave setup
into it implicitly, even though, physically in the physics of the model
itself, it wasn't represented, but the calibration of the models may
already implicitly include wave setup. We simply--
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I'm going to interrupt you. I
appreciate all that information, and I remember when we sat in this
room and had quite a thorough, you know -- I actually understood a
lot of what you said, which is scary. But my question was, is there
anything we can do right now to be more aggressive in our fight with
FEMA?
MR. TOMASELLO: No. I think we've got it addressed to this
point, and I think we've got the proposal in hand that -- how to
address it in the 90-day appeals period.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Then I'm going to move
approval of the resolution.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
Page 147
July 31,2001
CHAIRMAN CARTER: We have a motion; we have a second.
Do we have any speakers?
MR. OLLIFF: Yes, sir. Actually, you have some FEMA
representatives here who I think would like to address the Board and
answer any questions that you might have. Dino Longo is also here
as your only registered speaker.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Then to FEMA I'd like to
apologize for using the word "fight with."
MR. BELLOMO: I was going to ask you about that.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: What I mean is --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: She meant that she would like to have
our data incorporated and discussed in the process, sir.
MR. BELLOMO: Yes, yes. My name is Doug Bellomo, B-e-1-
1-o-m-o. I'm with the Federal Emergency Management Agency. I'm
with the mitigation directorate now-- the Federal Insurance
Administration and Mitigation Directorate in Washington, D.C. I
have a number of other FEMA folks with me as well from our
regional office in Atlanta, Todd Davidson behind me. Also, Mark
Vieira --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Excuse me. Do you have
business cards for all of these people? If you could give those to the
court reporter.
MR. BELLOMO: And Todd's going to say a few words after I
talk.
First, I want to thank the members of your staff and the board
for providing us with this opportunity to talk about the new maps and
the importance they play in local development practices as well as
flood insurance for the folks who live in Collier County. What I'd like
to do is talk a little bit about some of the benefits of new proposed
maps versus the old maps. I think we've heard a lot about some of
the maybe not so tasteful sides of the maps, but there's some benefits
Page 148
July 31,2001
I think are worth mentioning before the county approves the
resolution that was just put forward.
I'd like to talk about outstanding technical issue of wave setup,
talk about the national flood insurance program in general and how
the program works, a little bit about the appeals process, and then I'd
like to summarize by giving you seven things I think you need to
consider before you make your decision today.
First, the new maps over the old. The new maps are in digital
format. The old maps are in paper. They were literally scratched
into plastic. That was the methodology back in 1986. So we have
digital maps that can be used in your GIS systems today to help in
evacuation and preparedness, studies to help in response, to help in
recovery, and also to help you implement successful mitigation
programs for reducing flood losses.
Second, there are no more Zone D's. We've talked about Zone
D and how they are going from Zone D to approximate Zone A
without any flood elevations. We are working with the county, but
the fact of the matter is, there are no more Zone D's on the proposed
maps, which means the insurance rates for people who purchased
insurance in that area will go down. They will be required to
purchase insurance if they have federally backed loans, but those
rates will actually be significantly less.
Third, as was already previously mentioned, the road locations,
the road names, the corporate limits have all been updated since
1986. I think that's important to recognize.
Fourth, we've come to agreement on the vertical datum, and that
is the base from which flood elevations are measured. We're now
going to show both datums on the flood maps, which is going to
alleviate a lot of confusion with the surveyors and the engineers and
the planners and the other people who are associated with working
with these maps.
Page 149
July 31,2001
And fifth, although some may disagree, the methodologies that
are being used to generate flood hazards in these areas are better than
they were in 1986. And they are more up -to -date.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: But they may have some flaws.
MR. BELLOMO: They may have some flaws. Although I
would beg to differ. There is that possibility, I guess.
I'd like to extend some credit to the committee. Two-and-a-half
years ago we entered into this process, and a lot of those
improvements I just mentioned would not have been possible without
their help. So I would like to thank them for all their diligence. We
are currently working -- I think Tomasello is working on improving
the now analysis in Golden Gate Estates. We hope to get flood
elevations on the maps for that area, and I'm optimistic that we'll be
able to do that.
Some of the outstanding technical issues; there are a lot of
details. We just got a flavor for them a few minutes ago, and I don't
want to get into a lot of detail, but it does boil down, essentially, to a
disagreement over the wave setup magnitude. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Right.
MR. BELLOMO: What is the wave setup? Dick described it.
Super elevation of the water surface elevations due to waves
propagating inland.
There are really three main components to flood elevation. I'm
sure you've heard this before. You've already been briefed. The
main component is the surge elevation. In Collier County that ranges
from 10 to 12 feet. The second component is the wave setup
component, which ranges anywhere from one to three feet in Collier
County.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: The surge numbers are what,
again, one to ten?
MR. BELLOMO: Ten to twelve feet.
Page 150
July 31,2001
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Ten to twelve.
MR. BELLOMO: Ten to twelve. The wave setup magnitude is
one to three feet, and the wave crest magnitude varies, depending on
where you are from anywhere from zero to five. So in terms of
magnitude you get a good idea of what wave setup means in terms of
the final flood elevation. I think that's important.
We did -- FEMA did start adding wave setup to its standard
methodologies back in 1989. In 1986 they were not part of the
standard methodologies. And they are considered nationwide for all
open coast. So things are not different here than they are in the rest
of the country.
If I can sort of try and simplify the issues and express what I
understand to be the issues that the committee has brought up. They
believe that anywhere from a half a foot to a foot of wave setup was
what they're calling implicitly included in the 1986 study. It was not
directly included. It's very well documented in the methodology that
the models do not incorporate that additional consideration. But
they're saying in how the model was implemented, it was implicitly
included. They've actually recommended using a half a foot of wave
setup for this study, and they basically derive that elevation by taking
the 1.4 feet that we've recommended and subtracting out the implicit
conclusions in 1986. So that's my simplified understanding of what
the issue is.
We have searched all of our administrative record dating back to
1986 and prior. We have looked at all our documentations, all our
manuals, all those other things, and we have, quite honestly, hoped to
find proof that this implicit conclusion was in that documentation so
we could move forward. But we've been unsuccessful. We haven't
been able to find anything. Nor have we been provided with any kind
of documentation that it was implicitly included when it was run. So
it's very difficult from a scientific standpoint to just take this
Page 151
July 31,2001
argument and run with it as much as I would like to. We haven't
been provided with any documentation.
So really there are three things that prevent us from using this
argument. One is that it's undocumented.
Second, we've had three consultants look at this issue. We have
engineering methods and applications. We have had Dewberry and
Davis in Fairfax, and we have had Baird look at the technical issues
involved. And all three of them have concluded not only is wave
setup appropriate, as Dick Tomsasello has already admitted today,
but the results that we obtained are reasonable.
So I think it's important that the county understand that we have done
diligence on this issue. It's not that we did this in a vacuum overnight
with a couple of people in a closet. We have had three separate
consulting firms look at it.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Review the same data?
MR. BELLOMO: Baird Consulting actually reviewed what
Tomasello had prepared on behalf of the county and What FEMA,
our original study and contractor had prepared, and did that with very
little guidance from me in terms of FEMA at all. We just said here,
"Here's this argument; here's that argument; compare the two and
generate a report." They prepared that report, and we have that report
available if you'd like to see it. It's a very objective study. And we
did that partially for selfish reasons because we wanted to make sure
we were on sound technical footing when we moved into the appeals
process.
The third reason I would like to mention is that the half a foot is
not scientifically defendable. And that's important for the program.
I've been around this stuff long enough to know that people argue the
elevations up; they argue them down for whatever agenda they have
on their mind. So it's important that what we put on the map is
Page 152
July 31,2001
scientifically defendable. And saying it was implicitly included
without any documentation is not a scientific argument.
I would like to talk briefly about the program and how it works,
the National Flood Insurance Program. It was created in 1968, and it
was basically created for two reasons. The general taxpayers in the
United States were tired of footing the bill for disaster recovery, and
they were tired of watching people build right in harm's way. The
other reason was because the private sector was not paying flood
insurance claims. They couldn't keep up. They were going under.
As soon as a big event would hit, they couldn't afford to pay the
claims. They would go bankrupt, and people were left literally high
and dry.
So the root of the program is pretty simple. The federal
government underwrites the flood risk. The local government agrees
to manage development in its flood plains, and together we create the
flood map. That basically is the key link in those two things. So the
maps essentially affect people in two ways. They affect their
insurance rates, and they affect building practices, and that's
important to understand.
I'd like to correct some misunderstandings, I believe, just based
on some newspaper articles I've read here locally about the flood
program and insurance and how it all works. If you look at the
insurance program on different scales, you get different answers. If
you look at a national scale, we're about even. The premiums that we
collect versus the payments we pay out over the 30 years the program
was conceived is about even until Allison hit. That actually -- we
may end up having to borrow a little bit of money to pay some of the
claim that are resulting from that event.
But, nonetheless, to date we're about even. If you look just at
Florida, over the life of the program of 30 years, we are about $800
million in the hole. And that's important because going from the
Page 153
July 31,2001
national we're even, going to Florida itself we're about $800 million
in the hole. So you can see if you were a private company who only
underwrote flood insurance in Florida, you'd be in big trouble; you'd
probably be bankrupt and in court fighting claims battles.
Now, if you focus down even further to Collier County, you'll
find out we're $25 million ahead --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Right.
MR. BELLOMO: -- and you may -- on the surface, as a private
company, you'd say, hey, we're doing real well for 30 years with $25
million. That's great. But you need to consider the fact that the
average claim in Florida is about $10,000. There are about 73,000
policies in Collier County and incorporated areas. If 3-1/2 percent of
those 73,000 policies were to file a claim in any one year because of
one event, two events, three events, whatever the case may be, that
$25 million is gone. As a matter of fact, what it's taken you 30 years
to generate is gone literally overnight.
Just as a point of context, Allison -- the damages from Allison --
the claims that we're getting, the projections are at about $650
million, and they are climbing. So, to put into context what one
single event can do, I think it's important to recognize that and not to
base decisions solely on a couple of numbers that are generated from
our web site.
So the bottom line is that the flood insurance program was
created because the private sector wasn't making any money on
it. And I think that's important to recognize.
There also are, I think, some misconceptions about
grandfathering. Insurance -- I'm an engineer, and insurance is more
complicated than anything I've ever run into, underwriting and the
rating and all the other things that go into it. But the bottom line on
grandfathering is that if you have built in compliance with the flood
map at the time it was in effect when you built, you can use either the
Page 154
July 31, 2001
new map or the old map to rate your policy. That's an option. You
can use whichever is more beneficial. So I think that's important to
recognize. Claims that, "Well, the maps are going to be changed and
insurance rates are going to go up," are not accurate. You may not be
required to purchase insurance now and have to buy it when the new
maps come out because you're finding yourself in a Zone A, where
before you were in a Zone X, but your rates should not change if you
were built in compliance.
I'd like to talk a little bit about the appeals process. Collier
County has the right to appeal, and I think that's important for the
county to have that right, and that right is actually coded into the
federal regulations for the program. The burden of proof will fall on
the county. Since scientific correctness can often be a matter of
degree, what the county will have to do is prove that they are more
correct. And I don't know if you've had opportunities to work with
scientists and engineers, but it can sometimes be difficult to get them
to agree which methodology is more correct because one may be
better at this component and one may be better at that component,
and when you combine it all together, it can be sometimes difficult.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Excuse me for interrupting you,
but is it true that any time you've been challenged on this particular
point FEMA has always been successful in defeating that claim?
MR. BELLOMO: No. I wouldn't say we've always been
successful. I wouldn't say we've always lost. I mean, you used the
term "fight" early on. I mean, I think that generally is sort of what is
felt when we enter into the appeals process. But really I think it's a
healthy process. It provides the county with an opportunity to feel
comfortable with the process. We -- it's hard for me to say "won"
and "lost" because I really don't look at it that way. Usually there's
some concession. I'll talk a little bit about -- let me get to that issue.
I'll touch on it in a little bit.
Page 155
July 31, 2001
Basically, once the appeal period starts, you have 90 days to file
your appeal and support your appeal with scientific and technical
data. And we anticipate starting that process within the next couple
of weeks to a month. Then you'll have 90 days to submit the
information to essentially prove that the analysis you're putting
forward is more correct.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Could I ask you a direct
question then, not that I want to take you away from the direction
you're going.
MR. BELLOMO: Uh-huh.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: At this point in time, is there a
map that exists that is more or less final for Golden Gate Estates?
MR. BELLOMO: The current map that we have is preliminary.
It went out in December of 1998. That map -- it's my understanding
that Dick Tomasello Consulting is working on updating the flood
hazards for that area. And if the timing is right, we may be able to
fold that into the appeals process and update the maps. I think it's
important to mention, though, that the maps can be revised at any
time. Before they were carved in plastic; now they are not.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And at this point in time, we
should not have any insurance agents out there trying to charge for
flood insurance?
MR. BELLOMO: No.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And this has been happening
on a regular basis.
MR. BELLOMO: Yes. There are a lot of different reasons
maybe I could go into and try to explain it if you want. But the
bottom line is that the map that you have, your 1986 map, is what's
currently effective. And that's what the lenders and insurance agents
should be using. They should not be using that preliminary map.
Page 156
July 31,2001
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I hope all the realtors out there
and all the home buyers are taking note of this.
MR. BELLOMO: They should take note of that. But at the
same time I think the homeowners, the potential homebuyers, and
real estate agents review the preliminary map because it's important
for them to see, well, there's this old map that shows us in Zone D.
There's a new map that shows us in Zone A. There may be another
map, and we could end up in or out.
But I think that information is important when making --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And if I understand you
correctly, too, if the map does change where it's less favorable,
anyone that now has a dwelling built will be able to come under the
old map?
MR. BELLOMO: As long as they were built in compliance;
that's right.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Compliance at that time?
MR. BELLOMO: That's right.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And when will that period of
time divide the line, when the new map is approved?
MR. BELLOMO: When the new map becomes effective.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So in other words, the existing
homeowners would be no worse off than they were before?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Well, yes. That's true to the
extent they were built to code, but --
MR. BELLOMO: Right.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: That's only one small piece of
this issue.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I understand. I'm just trying to
feel my way through it.
MR. BELLOMO: Right. Right. You will have a constituency
of people who do not have to buy flood insurance right now that have
Page 157
July 31,2001
to buy it tomorrow because they are in Zone D or they're in Zone X
and they now find themselves in an A zone. But if you want my
slightly biased opinion, it's important to have that coverage. You're
in a flood hazard area. And I would suggest, saving them $3 or $400
today at the expense of $100,000 tomorrow is not a good idea.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: We were told there were
differences as much as $2000 a year in premiums.
MR. BELLOMO: Between Zone D and Zone A?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Yes.
MR. BELLOMO: There may be, but I would think that it's
cheaper in Zone A. That's my understanding because Zone D is what
we call an undetermined flood hazard.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: But you don't have to have it all;
right?
MR. BELLOMO: You don't have to have it in Zone D. So
what you're getting when you go to Zone A is the mandatory
requirement if you have a federally backed loan with cheaper rates.
So which is worse? It depends on who you ask, I would suggest
Once the appeal is received, we have three ways, essentially, of
resolving it. We can resolve it through community consultation, and
that's really the preferred method and most often used. We can
resolve it by going to an independent scientific body, another federal
agency, private company. Generally, it's another federal agency. Or
we can send it to an administrative law judge and have them decide.
After the appeal resolution, we'll issue a final resolution, and we will
generally provide a 30-day comment period so the county can review
the maps and review the resolution. And then we'll issue what we
call a "letter of final determination" essentially finalizing the maps.
At that point the county and any aggrieved appellants that there may
be on the books will have 60 days to file in federal district court, and
the whole process will move forward in default, i.e., the community
Page 158
July 31,2001
would then have to adopt the maps into local ordinances. They have
six months to do that unless it goes to federal district court and the
judge decides, no, we need to cease on these maps, but the default
position is to actually move forward with the process.
Before I wrap up with the seven points I think are important that
you should consider before you adopt the resolution, I wanted to let
the board know that I understand the decision that you face today. I,
myself, am a public servant, and believe it or not, I know a lot of
people in the audience may laugh at this, but I find it a lot harder to
spend other people's money than I do my own. It's much easier for
me to write a check and take the consequences with my personal
finances.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Absolutely.
MR. BELLOMO: And it's a more difficult decision for you, and
I sympathize.
Nonetheless, I think as public servants we have the same goal in
mind and that is to provide the best service for the people we
represent that we can. And I feel very strongly that what FEMA has
done to date to create these maps and the two-and-a-half years since
they've gone preliminary is a reflection of that. I think we have --
FEMA has done the best they can in serving the people, not only in
Collier County, but the other policyholders nationwide in putting
forward the best map that we can for the money that we have.
With that, the seven things I think you should consider:
Number 1, don't be swayed by the argument we've put in more
money than we received, therefore, the map must be wrong, appeal it.
It just doesn't float. If you look at different time scales, you look at
different geographical levels, and you simply consider the fact that
the private sector does not underwrite flood insurance, you'll
understand that it's not a moneymaker.
Page 159
July 31, 2001
Two, don't forget the good things I've mentioned about the
product, the improvements over the 1986 study. You've got new
roads; you got new corporate limits; it's in digital format; it's in
county-wide format, you don't have any more Zone D's, and the
methods that we used to analyze the hazards are more up-to-date.
And they are sound based on the consultants that we've used.
Recognize that there's more than one outcome to the appeal.
The elevations won't necessarily go down. They could stay the same.
In some areas they could go up. It all depends on how the process
shakes out. So I think it's important that you consider elevations
going down and flood plains getting smaller is not the only outcome.
Fourth, based on the information that we received over the last
two-and-a-half years on wave setup, we have not been compelled to
change the maps. So before you choose to appeal this study, I think
you need to ask yourself what's different today or what will be
different during the appeals process then what's occurred over the
past two-and-a-half years. I think that's important.
Fifth, FEMA is very comfortable on the process to date and the
technical data that we've put forward to date. We feel we are on
pretty good procedural and technical footing here. So I think it's
important that the board recognize that as well.
Sixth, the insurance rates won't change for people who are built
in compliance. You're right. That's a small contingency, but the fact
of the matter is that if they built in compliance, they can use the old
map if that's most beneficial to them.
Seventh, and I think most importantly, these maps are not carved
in stone. We have processes. We can change the maps by letter, and
we can change them again, and we will change them again. Flood
hazards change for three reasons: because the science has improved,
because we collect more weather data, or because physical changes
within the watersheds or along in the landscape have changed the
Page 160
July 31, 2001
flood hazards. There are a lot of different reasons and the maps
change fairly frequently. This is not the "end all-be all" flood study
for Collier County, I can assure you.
And with that, I'd like to turn it over to any questions, but also to
give Todd a chance to talk.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Should we, Commissioner
Carter -- should we stick to the five-minute rule?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, in all courtesy to FEMA, I've let
them speak, but we really would like you to keep it -- if there's no
questions...
MR. DAVISON: Very briefly, my name is Todd Davison. I'm
the division director for the Mitigation Programs for FEMA's Region
Four Office.
Just to let you know, we have been in constant dialogue with
Congressman Goss's office.
don't look at this as a fight.
collaborative process.
They are very apprised of the issue. We
We look at it as very much of a
Secondly, what you really care about is not the maps
themselves, in all honesty, you care about the consequences of the
maps.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Absolutely.
MR. DAVISON: Okay. And we have life-safety issues versus
esthetic issues. I think we all understand the balance of those. One
important point that wasn't touched on is, though, is there is a six-
month period after the time that the map goes in effect before the
insurance provisions change.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Six months?
MR. DAVISON: Six months. It's a six-month adoption, which
you as a board have a six-month window in which to adopt that map
into your ordinance. Okay. During that six-month period,
essentially, as a grace period, a homeowner can -- if they don't have a
Page 161
July 31, 2001
policy of flood insurance -- can buy the policy at a more favorable
rate, if you will, or the old rate, if that's the more favorable rate. It's a
very important consideration in your determination whether to appeal
the map.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I just have to tell you, though,
that as important as that is, the one that's keeping me awake at night
is the building implications, you know, the elevation for construction,
and what it would do to our coastal community. You would
absolutely -- I mean, I don't think I'm overstating this that you'd
change the character of Naples. We'd have to change -- I mean, we'd
lose what we have as far as the small town quaint character. We'd
just have to be building everything up on stilts, and it scares me to
death.
MR. DAVISON: Let me just elaborate on that a bit, and I'll ask
Doug to correct. But what we're really talking about here is not a
drastic change in those wave heights. We're talking -- we're arguing
a matter of a foot, a foot-and-a-half, two feet of water that's already
over your head.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: But you're changing so many
areas that weren't previously in a zone now will be, so that the maps
will apply to areas that they didn't previously apply to.
MR. DAVISON: That's correct. And the idea is that FEMA is
not creating these flood hazards by just publishing a map. Those
flood hazards exist as a physical phenomenon.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: If your scientific assumptions
are right and in particular about the wave setup; right? Wave setup,
wave surge?
MR. DAVISON: Well, that only applies to one area of the
county.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And the part that -- my part,
which is my district.
Page 162
July 31,2001
CHAIRMAN CARTER: And my part.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Yeah.
MR. DAVISON: Which again, the issue is, do you err on being
more conservative when it's life safety, or do you err on being more
esthetic? And that's a really compelling issue that you have to
grapple with, and I think we're very comfortable with the science as
Doug said. And you just have to ask yourself if you want to go
though the 90-day appeals process based on what we already know.
And we would encourage you to do that if you're so compelled.
That's what the process is set up to do. It's not a fight. It's a very
collaborative process.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I'm sorry to interrupt you again,
but just so that I can understand. The 90-day appeal process, what
would happen is we would get to make our case -- I mean, I don't
suggest that we should make our case to you again. We've made it to
you for two-and-a-half years, and you haven't changed your mind.
And I respect that you're doing that based on your very best
professional opinion.
If we go through the process, though, we get to make our case to
somebody new, whether it's a private agency or a --
MR. DAVISON: That is not correct. You are still making that
argument to the agency. And as Doug mentioned, at such point,
we're going to have to make the decision, and once we issue that
letter of final determination, based on the formal appeal process, then
you have another course of action, which goes essentially to federal
court --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: So -- and this is a question I
should be asking our lawyers and/or our advisors, but H1 go ahead
and ask it of you, if I may.
Is there anything in the process that -- if I were convinced, for
example, that I -- my best approach is to appeal somewhere over
Page 163
July 31,2001
FEMA, separate from FEMA, different-- I don't, frankly, see a great
deal of positive benefit of saying the same thing to you that we have
been saying for two-and-a-half years and hoping that we'll say it a
way that changes your mind -- do I lose any rights if I don't exercise
this 90-day process and instead go straight to whatever appeal is
available?
MR. DAVISON: Let me step back. I'm violating your five-
minute rule, but that I'm assuming, because of the questions, you'll
accommodate that.
First of all, there are several different ways the agency can enter
into an appeal process. The one we typically use and the one we
prefer is called "community consultation" where you will appeal it to
us, and we'll try to, based on the best science and engineering that we
have at hand, try to resolve the matter. If that is not a course of
action that is decided upon, then we have one approach would be
alternative dispute resolution, which I am sure you-all are generally
familiar with.
The other one is --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Which is a process that I very
much endorse, frankly. I think that could be exactly where we ought
to go. But, pardon the interruption, but I just wanted to say that.
MR. DAVISON: Another process that can be used in our code
of federal regulations is a third-party arbitrator. You take this to a
higher scientific body, whatever that is, an objective third party.
Quite frankly -- we thought and we do think -- and we're making a
case to you today that we've already done that, that we've taken this
to several third parties, and we haven't changed our mind based on
the engineering information that we've gotten. Doug mentioned the
three independent groups that have looked at it for Us. You've got a
fourth group that's looked at it for you. They differ. You have to ask
yourself if we go to that process is the result any different.
Page 164
July 31,2001
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Can you identify those three
different groups, those four different groups for us?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: He did, actually.
MR. BELLOMO: Yes. We had Engineering Methods and
Applications, Esthetic Contractor, Dewbarry & Davis, which is an
engineering and architectural firm in Fairfax, Virginia.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So these are not individual and
not government agencies.
MR. BELLOMO: These are private companies -- and Baird and
Associates.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Contracted by FEMA?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And we contracted with one that
agreed with us.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, Mr. White, can you answer
more directly Commissioner Mac'Kie's question?
MR. WHITE: I'll certainly attempt to. Assistant County
Attorney Patrick White.
I think one of the things to keep in mind is what Mr. Bellomo
had said with regards to those three avenues, but before you get there,
the thing is he indicated that there hadn't been, if you will, sufficient
demonstration on the county's part with respect to one of the
technical matters.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Right.
MR. WHITE: I think we're going to be able to incorporate a
more precise answer into what we're going to provide --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: So we have new information to
share?
MR. WHITE: -- by the end of-- not at this point, but by the end
of the 90-day window.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Okay.
Page 165
July 31,2001
MR. WHITE: That's what the second element of the
presentation to you today is about with respect to Mr. Tomasello's
firm and bringing them under contract to, if you will, get us the last
step in this process, which is to create maps that we can then submit
to FEMA so that hopefully we'll have met the threshhold to
demonstrate that.
But regardless of whether we do or not to their satisfaction, I
think we still have at least from what I've heard you say, and the
other commissioners, two opportunities; one through the community
consultation process to maybe meet some mutually acceptable
accommodations, and, perhaps, if not through that, then mediation or
arbitration options with other federal agencies, whatever the case may
be. I don't think we'll know the answer to those questions until we
actually see the science that comes out and the results we get at the
end of this 90- to 120-day period we're going to have to have
Mr. Tomasello's firm do, if you will, this last step and create the
maps.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I have a question for
Mr. Tomasello
MR. OLLIFF: While Mr. Tomasello's coming, I would feel
very comfortable, though, if we were to get some written description
to protect -- normally, before I have a case that I can take to court, I
have got to have demonstrated that I have exhausted our --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Right.
MR. OLLIFF: -- administrative remedies. I want to make sure
that I protect our ability to be able to go to court should we choose to
making sure that I have not forfeited some administrative remedy
along the way that I needed to take care of. And so I would like for
our attorneys' office to work with FEMA to make sure that we protect
that position.
Page 166
July 31,2001
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And that's exactly what my
question is, frankly. But before you go through there, let me ask Mr.
Tomasello, are you producing new data? If we go through this 90-
day process, are you going to get some information that they haven't
seen so far, or are you just going to plot the same information on a
map?
MR. TOMASELLO: No, ma'am. We're actually going to be
producing some information that we can present to them, whether or
not they're going to look at it or not.
No. I wanted to clear up some misconceptions that I think Mr.
Bellomo presented. I was really kind of set back by some of the
descriptions as to what went on here in the past two -and-a-half-- or
year-and-a-half, at least.
He mentioned the fact that we came up with an implicit
reduction of wave setup that went from 0.4 feet to 1 -- one foot, I
think is the range -- half a foot to a foot. I mean, that was not at all --
I mean, there were never any numbers attached to this implicit
reduction we're talking about. We were referring to the fact that the
model that's used to calculate storm surge may implicitly already
include setup. We didn't even say it absolutely did, but it just goes to
common sense that if you're turning knobs on a model -- and that's
basically what you do with models -- you have to insert the
coefficients and exponents in the model -- you have to turn the knob
to get your water levels to match what was actually observed. And I
don't know how many FEMA studies have been done along the
Atlantic and Gulf Coast, but it's probably well over a hundred. And
every one of those, at least that I'm aware of, have had hind-cast
storms simulated with a model that they set up to simulate the coast
that they're looking at. And they'll go back and look at the storm
surges that were created by these storms that actually went through
the area.
Page 167
July 31,2001
And in the case of Collier County, we only had one really that
had any significance storm surge, and that was Donna. And we
turned the knobs and got the water levels on the inside particularly to
match, because you didn't really have much in the way of open coast
flood elevation.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Uh-huh.
MR. TOMASELLO: They matched fairly well. There were a
couple of them that there consultants pointed out we were a little bit
low on, but actually one of them was down on Marco Island where
wave setup probably was the culprit, and we'll concede to that. But
the other areas back inside Naples where we were right in the range
of observed flood levels, according to their calculations, the setup
would go -- well, that's another concern we have.
The wave setup would be unimpeded going inland because of
their assumptions were that the setup -- it was inconsistent from one
place to the next within the county, but, for example, on the north end
of the county, their setup projected straight on in without any
attenuation. And we -- again, we didn't really object to that. We just
said, "Hey, show us the documentation." Well, that went on for a
year, and we didn't get any documentation. Finally, it was produced,
and we shot it full of holes. We said that this doesn't make any sense.
"This doesn't make any sense." So they went back and regrouped,
and they had their consultant, EMA, produce some documentation
finally. And it just went to show that they didn't calculate this stuff.
They backed into it. They didn't have calculations to show what their
setup was.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: We know that much.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. Look, look. Here's what I'm
hearing. Let me see if I can cut right to this. We have an
opportunity, Mr. Olliff, to take all of this, go through the process with
it, and that's where we want to go, and that's why we'll retain you to
Page 168
July 31,2001
get that done and present it and take it forward. And I think that's
what you're asking the board, and that's what we're supporting, and
that's what we want to do. So unless there's some real burning
question here that gets outside of that framework, I just say why not
do it.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Well, that's the way I started, but
then after the speaker -- I'm sorry, I've forgotten -- didn't get your
name -- but he made some good points. And if this was a wasted
exercise of 90 days, then I don't want to go through it --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I understand.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I'd like to accelerate and move
beyond and go to court or mediation or wherever we have to go. But
it sounds like we, in fact, are going to, and I trust you're to be open
when you receive the information and that you will consider what we
think will be good data, good scientific data, because our common
sense -- frankly, every now and then, you know, scientific data and
common sense come together. And common sense makes us believe
that those maps are poorly, inappropriately drawn for our community.
And I can speak strongly to the coastal area that you can just see that
it's not -- it doesn't make sense.
So I'm going to restate my motion to approve the resolution.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: We have a second to that, I believe.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Chairman, you still have that one registered
speaker, Dino Longo.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: He's here.
MR. OLLIFF: IfDino's still --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: He's here.
MR. OLLIFF: Yes, there's Dino.
MR. LONGO: Commissioners, thank you. A little bit over two
years ago -- my name is Dino Longo. I am the vice chair of the
Page 169
July 31, 2001
Development Services Advisory Committee. I am also on the
Citizens' Advisory Committee for the FEMA Study Maps and a
number of other committees.
A little over two years ago, we started our Collier County
Disaster Recovery Awareness revisions, our coastal setback
revisions, and our flood ordinance. At that time we had -- we saw the
proposed maps come out, and we saw basic map-making mistakes.
And I am a layman; I'm not an physicist; I'm not a hydrologist; I'm
not an engineer. And it came to question -- if basic mistakes on a
map, like streets being in the wrong place, not on the right place on
the map, so forth and so on, could be made, the complicated issues of
the methodology and calculations might possibly be wrong,
especially since we were looking at additional 1.4 to over 3 foot of
increased elevations.
And as John Remington just pointed out to me, that ten-foot
flood elevation on Gordon Drive at eleven foot where his house is,
with that additional 1.4 and the change of datum, places those houses
up four additional feet.
I can't get into all the specifics and the mechanics of everything,
but you asked to pass a resolution to go to the appeals process. Over
two years we've had a board of advisory citizens; engineers,
attorneys, hydrologists, insurance people, mortgage bankers, all of
those that are involved in the industry of how this affects our
community from having homes that are 20 years old at this level to
homes that were at '86 at this level to the homes that could possibly
be at this level. It changes the topography of your community, as
well.
We're not asking to fight FEMA. What we're asking for is to do
the right thing. We are charged as a committee at the Development
Services Advisory Committee to try and do the right thing for our
citizens in our community. And what we're asking is a better
Page 170
July 31,2001
process, I guess, than what we got. Obviously, we've butted heads.
We've hired Dick Tomasello to refute or at least look at similar
findings. His company -- his firm has found some, we believe. We
wholeheartedly on the advice of our committee and asking me to
come up here and speak support Mr. Tomasello on some of his
findings.
You do have the opportunity in this appeal process to go through
the communications to start with. At the very end, if heads still butt
and we can't find a common ground, then, I guess, it can go to court.
Obviously, we don't want to go that way. If flood elevations have to
go up in some areas of the community because the methodology's
right, so be it.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Amen.
MR. LONGO: If it goes down in other areas, so be it. But we
want to make sure that the methodology is correct. To this point we
don't think so. I have to go to another meeting so...
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you. Any further questions or
comments from the board.'? I'm going to call the motion.
MR. WHITE: Before you do, Mr. Chairman -- I apologize for
interrupting. Again, Assistant County Attorney Patrick White.
The thing that I think to keep in mind is that staff is going to
infer from the approval of the resolution and the approval, hopefully,
of the proposed not to exceed 67,500 for Mr. Tomasello and we're to
do a cost sharing with that, the other jurisdictions, but the thing to
keep in mind is that we're looking to take direction from the board
today that we're going to prepare ourselves for that point in time
sometime down the road, 90 days, 120, whatever it may be, to come
back to you once we've had the results of that study and then ask you
to make a final decision of whether we're going to submit that or not
and at that point make, if you will, a determination whether we're
going to appeal.
Page 171
July 31, 2001
We have 90 days to basically come to that decision once the
window opens. Before it closes we have to make that decision, and
we need to come back to you for that. And I suggest that --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Why would we not submit the
information after we've accumulated it?
MR. WHITE: Well, we don't know precisely how it's going to
turn out in every detail. And all I'm saying is that if there's any
comfort level for you in believing that we are going to give you that
information that validates making a choice to appeal, let's await that
date.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, I think what we're saying to you
is we're going to go the whole nine yards, and you can give us report
and where we are, and we don't --
MR. OLLIFF: The worst case is you get information you don't
believe justifies going through the process, and if you don't feel our
case is strong enough, then you would give us direction not to
proceed.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Okay. Goodpoint.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: So I'm going to modify my
motion to incorporate the items that Mr. White just described.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And I'll incorporate that in my
second.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you. I'll call the motion. All in
favor signify by saying aye.
Aye.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
Page 172
July 31,2001
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Motion approved 5-0. Thank you very
much everyone that participated in the discussion.
Reporter, how are you doing?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Could I say something quickly,
before we break, that we really do appreciate FEMA, all of you being
here --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Very much.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And I think it's a really good
sign that this is going to be some -- a way that we work together.
And I apologize, again, for my "fight" comment.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: We're going to take ten, and we'll be right
back. Then we're going to move to Item 10 -B.
(A break was held.)
Item # 1 OB
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL
SERVICES DIVISION PROVIDING A SUMMARY OF A
PREVIOUS INTERPRETATION OF THE LAND
DEVELOPMENT CODE SPECIFICALLY AS IT RELATES TO
OUTDOOR STORAGE AS A USE PERMITTED BY RIGHT IN
ASSOCIATION WITH A PRINCIPAL PERMITTED USE IN THE
C-4, GENERAL COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICT - STAFF TO
REVIEW CODES REGARDING ACCESSORY USES TO
OUTSIDE STORAGE AND GIVE A RECOMMENDATION FOR
THE NEXT LDC CYCLE
CHAIRMAN CARTER: We're live and we're back in session.
We're at Item 10-B. For those who -- we tried to take it earlier this
morning but were not successful, so we apologize for the delay, but
we are there. 10-B as in boy. Ms. Murray.
Page 173
July 31,2001
MS. MURRAY: Good afternoon, Commissioners. Susan
Murray, Current Planning Manager. I have about a four-minute
presentation if you'll indulge me.
The issue as I understand it is whether or not outdoor storage is
permitted by right in the C-4 zoning district as an accessory use to a
principal use, which is permitted by right in the district. And I think
it's important, probably more so for the new board members, to
distinguish between a principal use and an accessory use.
Real briefly, a principal use is an activity which is defined as a use
listed in the table of permitted uses in the zoning district -- in each
zoning district and is the primary use existing or permitted on a
parcel of land. An accessory use is an activity that is conducted in
conjunction with a principal use, is integrally related to it, and is
commonly associated with a principal use.
Whenever an activity, which may or may not be separately listed
as a principal use in the zoning district, is conducted in conjunction
with a principal use and is commonly associated with it, then the
former use may be regarded as an accessory to the principal use and
may be carried on underneath the umbrella of the permit issued for
the principal use.
So I think it's real important to make the distinction between the
two. Let me give you some examples. Now, for example, in a
residential zoning district where the principal or primary use would
be residential, an example of an accessory use would be, for example,
recreational facilities. An example of an accessory structure
contained within that accessory would be, for example, a swimming
pool, a tennis court, a golf course, golf maintenance facilities, that
sort of thing. As well, our residential zoning districts allow you to
store boats and vehicles in the -- on your private property. And that
would also be considered an accessory use.
Page 174
July 31,2001
A good example in the commercial zoning districts would be,
for example, automotive repair. And commonly what we see with
automotive repair is we have some -- maybe some towing services
and some automotive storage as an accessory use. Another good
example would be automotive sales. Usually associated as accessory
use with automotive auto sales would be automotive repair, towing,
and storage, as well.
The organization of the commercial zoning districts in the Land
Development Code is such that the intensity of the uses in each
district increases as you move through the range of the districts. So
the C-1 zoning district contains the least intense commercial uses,
and the C-5 zoning district contains the most intense commercial
uses.
And I've taken the liberty to summarize the vehicular and
automotive-related uses because I know that's of particular interest to
you, Commissioner Henning. And I gave you a handout earlier today
when we thought we would be coming forward, so you should have
that in front of you. And the point of the handout -- and, again, this is
just structured around the automotive -related uses -- is if you'll
notice the uses, the SIC uses, which are bolded, those are all the uses
which staff has identified as potential principal primary permitted
uses which could have accessory uses related to outdoor storage.
And my point in showing you that is there are quite a few of them.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: May I ask you a question,
please. In C-1 use of 7521, what is tow-in parking lots?
MS. MURRAY: Tow-in parking lots are parking lots
designated for -- I would call it vehicular -- temporary vehicular
storage of vehicles that have been towed to a specific location.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So --
Page 175
July 31,2001
MS. MURRAY: They would be like a destination point at
which you would store a vehicle on a temporary basis until it was
either towed somewhere else or picked up by an owner.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So a towing company could
locate in C-1, pick up a car that was in a wreck, and tow it into a C-1
district?
MS. MURRAY: Possibly, but may I finish my presentation and
then perhaps go through questions, because I may answer some of
your questions --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
MS. MURRAY: -- as I finish up, and it's just about two
minutes more.
I do want to point out that it's really important to note that the C-
4 district is not silent to the prohibition of outdoor storage or outdoor
activities which may be incompatible to abutting land uses. It's also
not silent to the prohibition of outdoor display and storage of
merchandise, and merchandise could be described as tangible goods
which are offered for sale.
In summary, it is staff's opinion that outdoor storage can be
considered a use permitted,by right as an accessory use to a principal
use permitted by right in the C-4 zoning district.
And let me just go back to the portion of the code where I said
it's not silent to the prohibition of some outdoor storage or outdoor
types of activities. Specifically, the C-4 zoning district does not
allow outdoor storage in the following instances: that being outdoor
display and storage of merchandise; outdoor storage as a principal
use; and outdoor storage and outdoor activities as specifically listed
and prohibited in the code either as a principal or as an accessory use.
In summary, we recognize that the board may opine that
outdoor storage as an accessory use is not appropriate in commercial
zoning districts. And I am here to offer our assistance to you in
Page 176
July 31,2001
helping you accomplish your goal. We feel that the proper forum to
do that is through the LDC amendment process, and to that end, we
have committed to you to analyze -- do a comprehensive anaylsis of
the C-1 through C-5 zoning district and bring that forward to you in
the regular second cycle this year. As well, you have also committed
to us and to the public today some funds to hire an outside source to
examine our Land Development Code or certain regulations may be
redundant, or it may not be clear, or there may be inconsistencies
within the code.
So we believe between those two processes we can help you
accomplish your goal. But my point in handing out that handout and
one of the strong points I want to make today is that you need to be
looking at the big picture of how you want to address this situation if
you find it not to your liking or if you disagree with our opinion,
because the potential impacts to some of the uses out there are great.
The list of uses I provided you could potentially be impacted by any
decision you make, and we would attempt to bring that information
forward to you through the LDC cycle. So I did just want to point
that out to you. And that's all I have.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Mr. Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I think what really brought this
up -- and, I guess, I've got to give the board a little background -- is a
towing company located in Golden Gate in the C-4 district, and I
know that Code Enforcement has always interpreted that automotive
uses -- there's no outside storage for the automotive uses. And I think
this is what is brought up light. Myself, I have a hard time
comprehending the point that Susan Murray is trying to bring, and I
guess I have a bunch of questions. And one was starting with that C-
1 and tow-in parking lots.
MS. MURRAY: Could you repeat your question?
Page 177
July 31,2001
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, if-- what you're saying --
and I guess I'll ask it -- is a wrecking service allowed to have a tow-in
parking lot to store wrecked vehicles that are waiting for repair in C -
1 district?
MS. MURRAY: Generally, Commissioner, we look at things on
a case-by-case basis. So if somebody brings to us, for example, a site
development plan for administrative approval, or they walk through
the door and they want to obtain an occupational license, we ask
several -- many questions on what they plan on doing, especially
where it's the type of accessory use that may be questionable or may
have some negative implications or negative perceptions by the
public, specifically.
So what we attempt to do, then, is put specific regulations on the
permitted use if it's not specifically spelled out by the code, or if it is
spelled out by the code in other areas of the code. For example, the
C-5 zoning district, and what we may attempt to do is if we feel the
use is permitted by right based on our interpretation of the code and if
we feel that the accessory right is permitted by right, we will
condition the approval, and one of those conditions may be -- and in
this case the towing service that you were referencing -- was that the
vehicles -- wrecked vehicles -- not be stored there.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Not be stored in C-1 ?
MS. MURRAY: In C-1 ? No, this was C-4.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, well --
MS. MURRAY: And we would make -- and, obviously, we
would make that same recommendation for C-1 being that's a less
intense zoning district.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Commissioner Mac'Kie.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I am -- I think you've done us a
great service because you're getting us out ahead of-- I mean, we
have one problem right here, and I don't think anybody would argue
Page 178
July 31, 2001
about. Nobody wants to see it. I don't want to see it happen. I think
in addition to that one, which you've shown us -- or what I've learned
today from'this spreadsheet is that the problem may have only arisen
in this one location so far, but the potential for it to arise is
significant, and we need to send staff out on amending that code as
fast as possible.
The one bit of good news that I have brought with me is the
nonconforming ordinance, you know, that, basically, if we -- once we
have amended the code to address the problem, you know, businesses
beware because you are going to have to undo whatever you put in
there. You got one year from the date that we amend the code to
continue to use that we deem to be obnoxious. And in this particular
case nonconformities not involving the use of principal structures
including open storage shall be discontinued within one year of the
effective date of the relevant amendment of this code.
So it seems to me the approach is quickly, staff, as fast as we
can, let's amend our code to address this problem, and then all of the
relevant business will know they've got one year. If you want to
waste your money on a one-year proposition, I guess that's your
option, but we're not going to live with it any longer than that, one
year from when we adopt amendments to the code.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: What is open storage? I guess
we need a definition in there. Is that something that is in a pegged
area? Is that something that is in a walled area?
MS. MURRAY: It would be -- open storage, in my opinion
would be something that could be contained within a walled area but
would be roofed over. So it would be considered outside.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Or it could be just in a vacant
lot, or it could be --
MS. MURRAY: Roofed over, but no sides. I'm sorry. It could
be roofed over with no sides. In other words, it was open on all sides,
Page 179
July 31, 2001
or it could be nonroofed over with walls. It could be in an open lot
with no walls.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: It could be a cyclone fence?
MS. MURRAY: It could be a parking lot. And in many of the
automotive cases that you see, that's exactly what it is. It's a parking
lot with stripes, and it's a designated area where you go park your car
or if the car is towed and it awaits service or it awaits towing to
another location.
Another point I wanted to make that I didn't bring out was that
you have actually today already directed staff to look at through the
amendment cycle -- the second special amendment cycle revisiting
the issue of automotive uses in C-3.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Can I ask you about that7
MS. MURRAY: Sure.
COMMISSIONER HENNING:
comes in, which is some lights like window tinting, the -- I'm sorry.
don't have it right in front of me -- Jiffy Lubes, those types of
services that communities do need, but the one in there is a wrecker
towing service.
MS. MURRAY: Right.
COMMISSIONER HENN1NG: And we can disagree on what
the interpretation of standard industrial code classification is, and I
don't know if we really want to get into that, but would you allow
outside storage as an accessory use in C-37 MS. MURRAY: Yes. Today, yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And it says in here, in C-3, that
outside storage is not allowed in the Land Development Code.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: As a primary principal use --
MS. MURRAY: As a primary principal use --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: As opposed to an accessory use
that serves a principal use.
Because in C-3 where this 7549
I
Page 180
July 31,2001
MS. MURRAY:
COMMISSIONER HENNING:
MS. MURRAY: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
MS. MURRAY:
Right. Under the list of--
Well, it doesn't say that.
But it's under-- it's under...
It's actually -- you're looking in C-3. It would
be --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
intent section under C-3.
He's looking in the purpose and
MS. MURRAY: Okay. You actually should be looking at
2.2.14.2.2, which says, "Uses accessory to permit uses." And it
says --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: It goes on to be more specific.
MS. MURRAY: Right. And it's actually a subset of the
Permitted Uses section. And it says, "Uses and struc" -- this is
implying that these are permitted by right -- "Uses and structures that
are accessory and incidental to the uses permitted as of right in the
C-3 district."
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Even though the purposes and
intents says something totally different?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE'
that so far in the --
COMMISSIONER HENNING:
I'm afraid we learned a lesson on
We don't have to bring that up.
MS. MURRAY: Part of staff's -- one of the things we're going
to be -- we've discussed about this outside consultant is the purpose
and intent of many of our districts aren't reflective of the permitted
uses that are allowed, and we recognize that and --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
agenda today.
MS. MURRAY: Correct.
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
correctly, we have one issue to resolve today.
That's why we got that consent
So if I'm understanding this all
But we have bigger
Page 181
July 31,2001
issues that we're addressing in the cycle to get consistency through
this within some frame work because it gets down to me a lot of it is
esthetics and the positioning. If you're going to store vehicles, it can
really look terrible, or you can have an enclosed wall with
landscaping around it where no one would even know they were
being stored in there. It's -- to me it's architectural design. To me it's
landscaping issues. To me it's esthetics. All of that begins to run
together in my head, and I'm asking, how do we sort that out so we
protect the communities and we don't have bay doors open on a road,
which if we'd a been -- really had our lights on, we'd have moved
them to the side or to the back. Those things are the things that to me
just drive everybody crazy.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Commissioner, we have got two
issues, and one is do we agree with the staffs interpretation of the
code that it doesn't do today what we'd like for it to do. I mean, I
wish that it prohibited this one particular one that's gotten everybody
excited. I think staff's telling us it doesn't. You're going to have to
let that one go.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: What?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And we have to either agree or
disagree with that, and then we have to give staff direction to go
amend the code quickly so that the one-year period for cutting it out
or stopping it starts running. That's my --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I think the Golden Gate Civic
Association is the one that brought this to light, and they hired a land
planner, and I would hope that we would listen to --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Sure.
COMMISSIONER HENNING:
Of course.
-- that person.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, can we take the existing
situation? Is there a way to address that to work with that person to
Page 182
July 31,2001
incorporate the things that protect and doesn't become, oh, well, he
did it, now we've got 20 cookie cutters appearing all over the county?
MS. MURRAY: Part of the way we have done that already is
by requiring the erection of a six-foot high architecturally designed
masonry wall and then the placement of the required landscaping on
the outside of that wall and then some restrictions as well on the
amount of time and the type of vehicles that can be stored and the
type of uses that could be allowed in the area.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: So living with the one we have to live
with, we've done everything to protect so it's where we want to be.
MS. MURRAY: I would think so.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: The other issue is as Commissioner
Mac'Kie's related -- I'm beginning to sort this all out. Excuse me.
I'm having a little trouble trying to get through all this. Probably just
me.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Maybe we could hear from the
planner for the --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: There's a planner here for the Golden
Gate Association?
MR. OLLIFF: Bill Hoover?
MR. HOOVER: Good afternoon, Commissioners.
Bill Hoover of Hoover Planning. I'm representing Golden Gate
City Civic Association.
Some of the stuff I'll bring up -- generally, I'm pretty much
agreeing with the county staff on a lot of this. And one of the things
is the -- I think we sort of have a conflict in there, and I think it's
important that the intent of a zoning district, stuff underneath that,
should meet the intent of that zoning district, or it should be amended
that way. And the -- what Commissioner Henning has pointed out in
the C-3 zoning district it says, quote (as read): "This district is
intended to be compatible with residential areas, and it's not intended
Page 183
July 31,2001
to permit wholesaling or activities which require outdoor storage of
merchandise and equipment."
And then if you go -- in both the C-3 and C-4 districts, as you
get below the accessory uses, it says (as read): "Unless specifically
permitted for a use, outdoor storage or display of merchandise is
prohibitive."
And I really think what the important thing is to determine what
type of vehicles are allowed to be stored in each zoning district. And,
obviously, in the industrial zoning district, a car that was just in a
major accident can be towed in there and no problem at all. In -- we
also have that 7549 SIC code permits tow-in parking. And I think
Susan hit the nail on the head. That's where somebody parked
illegally and brought the car in, and the Civic Association doesn't
have a problem with vehicle parking for that until the owner comes
and picks the car up. So -- and that's under that 7521. It's real
obvious that's allowed.
I think as you look at that more importantly, the C-3 and C-4
zoning district does not allow automotive repair, nor does it allow
body shops. So let's say you have a car that was in a wreck. What
we're saying is the car needs to go to the C-5 zoning district or the
industrial zoning district to sit outside for the insurance appraisers
and adjusters to come, which may take 30 days or something. That
should not be towed to the C-4 lot today, based on my interpretation
of the Land Development Code.
What I see there -- and I think maybe the county commission
and staff should add a little bit more in there, and that's probably
what's going to come in this Land Development Code. But I think
we determine in the codes a lot of time that we separate vehicles from
light-duty trucks from heavy-duty trucks. And then cars go with
light-duty trucks, so if you go down to the Toyota or Ford dealership,
that's a one-ton truck or a 350 or below. But if you go out and buy a
Page 184
July 31,2001
big motor home that's 55 feet long, should that be considered a tow-in
parking? I don't think so in the C-3 or C-4 zoning district; C-5
probably so. Same with buses, concrete-mixing trucks, and stuff like
that.
So I think we can -- if we look at the zoning district and see
what's allowed, I think that's going to tell us, and I think where we
need to cut the line is probably between the C-4 and the C-5 and put
the heavier trucks in the C-5, in the industrial district and keep the
cars below that.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Mr. Hoover, would you be
willing to continue to work with Ms. Murray as we go forward in this
land development cycle and try to get some -- address these concerns
because Golden Gate is deserving of our respect? We want to show
our respect. We're glad that they are bringing this to our attention,
and we're willing, I think, without question, to make these changes so
that they can protect the character of their neighborhood.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, boy, I agree with that, Pam,
and we have to stand in support of Tom. This is good that he's
brought this to our attention, and we are going to nip it in the bud
now.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Mr. Hoover, what would be the
basis for us to refuse it right now, in other words, not allow this to go
forward?
MR. HOOVER: Well, I think-- let me read one real important
thing from the C-5 zoning district and outdoor storage's permitted
uses. And it has a whole paragraph, and I just want to read you about
one sentence of this, and I think it's going to tell us -- it's going to set
a threshold a little bit that we can work off so we've got something
fixed rather than stuff moving around.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Let me make sure I understand
this question. The question is, the particular parking lot that we're
Page 185
July 31,2001
worried about today, the one instance that's apparently coming in
behind the restaurant over there, behind the Gathering -- MR. HOOVER: Uh-huh.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Are you going to tell us a way
that we try to prevent that outdoor storage?
MR. HOOVER: I think this may -- I don't know if it will solve
the whole issue, but I think it's going to do part of it.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Okay.
MR. HOOVER: Or we may be able to use it for a stepping-
stone to base actually your land development amendment on it.
What this says under the outdoor storage is (as read): "this provision
shall not allow as a permitted or accessory use wrecking yards,
junkyards, or yards used in whole or in part for scrap or salvage
operations, or for processing, storage, display, or sales of any scrap,
salvage, or secondhand building materials, junk automotive vehicles
or secondhand automotive vehicle parts."
So I think that's -- to me, if a vehicle's been wrecked, I don't think we
can tow it into that C-4 based on this thing in the C-5 then because
we can't tow it into C-5 I think it's got to go to the industrial.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Can we get a definition from
our own legal...
MR. MANALICH: I think Commissioner Henning wanted to
speak.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I appreciate your efforts of
separating light towing and heavy towing, but I can just tell you I
don't think it's going to work. First of all, we're creating a code
enforcement problem, and, second, is the business is going to -- for
the most part going to want to store and to -- tow and store all
different kinds of vehicles.
So my question, I guess, to you would be if we amend the 7549
and put in place in a zoning district -- commercial zoning district
Page 186
July 31,2001
that's more fitting to the character of Collier County, do you feel that
the nonconforming uses that Commissioner Mac'Kie brought up will
take care of the concern of this particular issue?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: We could shut them down in a
year if we just get busy amending the code instead of talking. Sorry.
MR. HOOVER: May I bring this to you?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: He knows that nonconforming
ordinance, don't you?
MR. HOOVER: I know-- I wrote some of that section ten years
ago. I didn't write that specific section there. And I agree with what
Commissioner Mac'Kie's pointing out that it's -- if you change the
Land Development Code on October 21 st, October 21st, 2002,
they've got to be conforming.
And I neglected to point out that the Civic Association is
requesting that the 7549 be split up and the part with the wrecker
service and towing service be taken out of C-3 and C-4 zoning
district, which I think would get rid of some of that problem.
MR. MANALICH: Mr. Chairman, in response to
Commissioner Coletta, I've had occasion to agonize over these
different provisions a number of times in the recent few days, and
I've discussed with Commissioner Henning back and forth. I'm not
sure we fully agree, but be that as it may, after all of that analysis, I
think my position is that staff and Mr. White have correctly analyzed
it under the current codes.
It's my advice you not act upon the specific case because,
frankly, it's not properly before you today. It really isn't. I mean, I
think this matter here today is more in the big picture of an
amendment to the code. I don't think we have the ability
procedurally to act on that case today. The only thing I've identified
is under Section 1.6 of the LDC, an interpretation process, and if an
affected party wishes to pursue that.
Page 187
July 31, 2001
Now, we've also received correspondence from the law firm of
Cheffy, Passidomo that represents the particular business interest in
this specific case, and they've indicated very substantial monetary
reliance that they claim to have on this particular matter but --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: They're entitled to it, but they're
going to rely on the whole code, and the whole code says that we can
amend the code, and within a year of an amendment they are out.
MR. MANALICH: Right. I'm not taking issue with that. What
I'm saying, though, is that I don't think you can somehow retract your
approvals or anything today.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: No.
MR. MANALICH: I think we're talking about amendments to
the code and how they might come into play.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And I think there are some
things in the code to defend the board's decision if they so choose to
act on this one incident, but I feel fairly comfortable that we can fix
this situation in a LDC amendment.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: We have to live with it for a
little while, but we can get rid of it. MR. OLLIFF: Maybe.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Right. Now, what you are telling me
is that the specific incident would have to come back under a separate
agenda item in a future meeting to be dealt with.
MR. MANALICH: Well, I think that the only way that this
specific case would be before you would be if there was an
interpretation filed by an affected party. Now, the interpretation was
made and went through an appeal process to you as the zoning appeal
process for this specific case. Now, it may be that if we go ahead and
amend the code as Commissioner Mac'Kie was saying that we may
be able to, under the nonconformity provision, one-year time frame,
that may apply to them.
Page 188
July 31, 2001
Now, I don't know. Mr. White, have you come to a final
conclusion on that or has staff on the applicability of that provision if
these amendments are made? MR. WHITE: Of 1.87
MR. MANALICH: Correct.
MR. WHITE: Regarding nonconformities. We've only had the
most initial of discussions, Commissioners.
MR. MANALICH: And potentially that may apply, but I don't
know -- I don't think at this point either staff or our office has come
to a final conclusion on that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'd like an answer on that
before we make a decision.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Well, okay. Can I make a
recommendation to the board just that we give direction to staff that
we want them to aggressively review our ordinances to determine if
there is a method by which we can immediately remove the offending
use, taking into account everybody's legal position; that we have our
lawyers and our planners look at that and see if there's a way we
could get rid of that use. We don't like it. But in the event they can't
make a recommendation to us that they are willing to defend in court,
and, in addition, frankly, whether they can or not, we direct our staff
to begin amending the codes to correct this problem and do it in the
next available cycle so we can trigger the one-year nonconformity
that would require it to be removed.
MR. HENNING: And Mr. White needs to make that
interpretation whether the nonconformity will take care of this
particular case.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Ah.
MR. WHITE: Assuming, of course, that Mr. Dunnuck or one of
his staff direct me -- there is lots to do, so I certainly would be happy
to make that interpretation in conjunction with staff, but I think the
Page 189
July 31,2001
thing that you're looking to do today -- Ramiro's indicated that the
only process that exists that I'm aware of is one that indicates that
either a resident or some affected person --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Patrick, that's not the question I
think he's asking, forgive me. The question he's asking is -- I'm
going to read you some language and ask you a question about it. It's
Section 1.8.3.5.
MR. WHITE: 1.8, I have it right here.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Okay. It says (as read):
"nonconformities not involving the use of a principal structure
including, but not limited to, open storage, shall be discontinued
within one year of the effective date of the relevant amendment of
this code."
If we amend the code to say that open storage of the manner
we've been describing today is prohibited in certain areas, if there's
an existing open storage lot, do they have to take it out within one
year of the effective date of the code amendment?
MR. WHITE: I think the answer is only dependent upon
whether or not it involves the use of a principal structure because
there's that limited text in there.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Assuming that because all of
this that we're talking about today is not principal structures. It's
principal use, it's not permitted. It's only accessory use. So if we
prohibit an accessory use for open storage, how long can it continue
to exist after that amendment?
MR. WHITE: For this provision, 1.8.3.5, one year.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
MR. WHITE: Unless of course that provision itself is
amended.
MR. COLETTA: I think we got the message.
MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Chairman, that's all your registered speakers.
Page 190
July 31, 2001
COMMISSIONER HENNING: If everybody's comfortable
with that, I'm fairly comfortable on where we want to go with it.
MS. MURRAY: Would you mind repeating it so I'm sure I have
it.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: And repeat it for me. I'm probably...
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We are going to amend the
cycle -- or the Land Development Code through the cycle of 7549,
which is in the consent agenda, to correct this problem.
MS. MURRAY: You want to remove 7549 from the C-3 and
C-4 zoning districts?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, not necessarily.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: We want you to review the
codes generally as we've already asked you to do in the consent
agenda item, but now with particular attention to the problem of
outside storage in these commercial areas. MS. MURRAY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Accessory usage outside
storage, and give us your recommendations on where we might need
to make changes.
MS. MURRAY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Is that acceptable?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, I'll second that.
MR. OLLIFF: In the next available cycle.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: At the earliest possible date.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: We have a motion by Commissioner
Mac'Kie, second by Commissioner Fiala. And further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All in favor signify by saying aye.
Aye.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Aye.
Page 191
July 31, 2001
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Opposed by the same sign.
(No response.)
Motion carries 5 -0. Thank you.
Item # 100
RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING A COMMUNITY OF
CHARACTER COMMITTEE - STAFF TO BRING BACK AN
ORDINANCE CHANGING "COMMITTEE" TO "COUNCIL" AND
MAKING THE COUNCIL EXIST FOR AN INDEFINITE TIME
PERIOD
That takes us to item 10-M as in Mary, summary of consent and
emergency items supplied by--
MR. OLLIFF: Actually, that item was moved to the consent
agenda. Your next item is Item O, Community Character, I believe.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay, Item O. Okay.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: You did have that Community
Character thing. Is that the one?
MR. OLLIFF: That's it.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Is it?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: 16 -E-7, I believe.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: E-9, I think.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Somebody's telling me it's E-9.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: The Community of Character
Committee is 16-E-9. I've got it in my hand.
Page 192
July 31,2001
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
corrected.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
consent?
16-E-9. Thank you. I stand
Why was that removed from
MR. OLLIFF: Only because the staffhad some questions
because it was unclear the way, frankly, I wrote the executive
summary as to whether or not the board wanted that to be a one-year
committee, and just to try and give us a little more specificity about
some of the --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: It was certainly my goal that this
would be a continuing committee and not the one-year kind.
My understanding was that we
COMMISSIONER HENNING:
were going to find out costs.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
But that's a separate thing. This
is just the committee. They're working on costs. Right now this is a
volunteer advisory committee that I would ask if we could change the
name of it to Community of Character Council so that it doesn't get
confused with the Community Character Committee because this --
and this is just a volunteer advisory board. And if staff is still going
to yet be coming back to us with the possibilities of spending money
but...
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And I guess something I didn't
think about and I want to apologize when this came up -- and I know
during the no-gifts ordinance that -- and I remember Commissioner
Berry saying we cannot regulate ethics. And I believe that this
applies -- we can regulate it to ourselves and hopefully that we are all
in ethical proportion here, and I believe that I am and my colleagues
are.
But, again, it's difficult to regulate. And how can we regulate
morals to --
Page 193
July 31,2001
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: We're not seeking to -- ifI may
just say that I hope the board's not going to change its minds about
just at least the creation of the council because this is just to raise the
awareness of character in the community, to try to -- we're not going
to make bad people into good people, but the evaluation of character
and how it affects particular decisions.
Frankly, it's a lot like the DARE program for grown-ups. You
know, the DARE program. You haven't had kids go through that, but
it's practical application of-- if you get the opportunity -- somebody
offers you drugs, what might you say. Well, this is sort of like that.
This is how do character issues arise in our daily life, in our work
life, and how might we respond to them.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So we are teaching morals
then.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I think we're teaching behavior skills.
I think we're teaching and reviewing what those are, Commissioner.
You cannot force anybody to change their behavior, but you can
create awareness. And if they're in that awareness process, if they
fall outside of the spectrum, usually the disciplinary process in an
organization will deal with that.
So what you're trying to do here is create the awareness for
leadership and interpersonal skills in creating optimism and achieving
professional excellence, and it's a discussion process around material
that helps people better assimilate that, because I found often people
feel like they're standing alone. They say, "I'm the only here that
really thinks this way?" Maybe they find a half dozen people in the
room that have the same concerns. So they reinforce each other to
doing what we all often say is the right thing, and it's a helping hand.
But if somebody's going to be a bad apple, I couldn't agree with you
more; they're just going to be one.
Page 194
July 31,2001
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I'm going to make a motion to
approve Item 16-E -9 with changing the name to the Community of
Character Council and with the understanding that it is a continuing
committee.
MR. OLLIFF: And I need to do that by ordinance, and we'll
bring back an ordinance with specific memberships at your next
meeting.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I'll second that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: A continuing committee, like,
forever and ever?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Uh-huh. Just like every other
advisory committee.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Comment?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Discussion?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Is there a possibility we might
want to consider it for one year and then renew it again just to make
sure it's going to have a continuance life? I'm sure it's everything we
anticipate it to be, that it will be continuing forever.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: You can always trash it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And you want it to be
successful.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: You can always undo it if you
don't like it. You can undo it the second month. You can undo it the
second day if you don't like how it's going.
I would like to say, for God's sake, that this county is going to
take a stand as a community of character, and that we aren't going to
just have character for a year. We're going to be committed to being
a community of character in perpetuity. If we find this is a waste --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: If you feel that strong about it,
I'll support you.
Page 195
July 31,2001
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
about it.
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
Aye.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
COMMISSIONER COLETTA:
Thank you. I feel very strongly
Any further discussion?
All in favor signify by saying aye.
Aye.
Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
Opposed by the same sign.
Motion carries 5-0. Thank you.
Item # 10P
REVISED VERSION OF DIVISION 3.5 (EXCAVATIONS) OF
THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE (ORD. 92-73, AS
AMENDED) TO SERVE AS AN INTERIM POLICY DURING
THE FORMAL REVIEW AND APPROVAL PROCESS -
APPROVED
CHAIRMAN CARTER: We're now at item -- the excavation--
MR. OLLIFF: The excavation which was 16-A-16 on your
consent agenda, now Item 10-P. Stan Chrzanowski.
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: Good afternoon, Commissioners, Stan
Chrzanowski with Development Services.
I'm told that this item was pulled because you had a public
speaker. In the interest of brevity, if you listen to what she has to say
-- I already have. I think I can answer her questions, and you can
consider the item.
Page 196
July 31, 2001
MR. OLLIFF: The speaker is Rebecca Winans.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: We thank you for waiting so
long for this moment.
MS. WINANS: No problem. I'm determined. I'm Rebecca
Winans, and thank you very much for pulling this agenda so I can
speak. What I want to ask -- this came out of the Golden Gate on
code enforcement, and it says that if you want to build a lot -- build
on your lot out in Golden Gate Estates, you have to have a building
permit and a clearing permit and that you are only allowed to clear
one acre of your land. And they have to retain 12 native trees, and if
you want to clear any more, you have to ask for a special variance
and that they have to go through the Army Corps of Engineers and
Southwest Water Management and all of the other groups to make
sure that they are not in environmentally sensitive areas.
And that's all I want to know is, are you going to go through this
process with the lakes, also, or is it only going to be for the builders?
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: A short answer is "yes." The long
answer is that most of these excavations are in the northeast portion
of Golden Gate Estates because that's the only place where you can
dig because the sand is deep there. It's an area that if you look at the
old United States Geological survey maps that were done in the '50s
and '70s, it shows as Big Corkscrew Island.
We have maps that were prepared by Natural Resources that
show the wetlands, and the newest map prepared by them shows the
deep soils and the hydric soils. We plot these petitions on this map.
Some of the commissioners have seen those -- the copies of that map.
I had them at the Golden Gate Estates Civic Association meeting, and
if you look, the area where these things are are all out of the wetlands
so far. The reason they're not usually in the wetlands is those soils are
not conducive to a commercially viable operation like this. We have
limited the amount of land that you can clear to 40 percent.
Page 197
July 31,2001
Now, on a one-and-a-quarter lot, we allow you to clear an acre
of land, which is 80 percent of the lot. A lot of the lots out there in
these areas are an acre and a quarter. So people have been clearing
substantial portions, and if you look at the aerial photos, you'll see
large patches cleared.
The area in the northeast is a lot of old farms. The land is
already cleared. A lot of-- and we make them obtain tree-removal
permits. If the environmentalists issuing the tree-removal permits
saw that this was being done on a wetland -- which for previous
reasons it's hard to do -- they would make this person go to the Corps
or the DEP, and we already have a DEP person on staff in our
building. We can send her out if need be.
I would be glad to put something into here saying that you have
to obtain a DEP permit. As far as exceeding the one acre of clearing,
these are, well, generally five -, ten-acre lots. Some of them are two
and a half. You can get permission to exceed that and that's -- the
item is coming as a conditional use. The board can do anything they
want.
Does that answer the question?
MS. WINANS: That answers my questions, but ifI had my
way, you wouldn't get a lake unless you had a house on your
property. Thank you.
MR. COLETTA: Thank you. Since we're on the issue,
3.5.5.7.2, commercial-type 3 and development excavation permits
will be of a definite duration or until the excavation reaches the limits
of the permitted size.
Can we change that to be reviewed yearly for automatic renewal
unless violations or objections are made?
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: Does that mean that the Commission
wants every large, commercial excavation like Willow Run or-- to
come back yearly? I think the old ones are all approved.
Page 198
July 31,2001
COMMISSIONER COLETTA:
that they would come back.
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: Okay.
be from, a member of the public?
No violations for objections
And who would the objection
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Who would be --
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: Well, it's like the APAC pit out by
Golden Gate Estates. If-- those people for a long time have not liked
that pit being there. They could come in every year and object, and
the APAC pit would have to keep coming in --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And we could automatically
approve and put it right on through if their objections didn't have any
merit.
The thing is is that to give them an unlimited license to proceed
without being able to bring an end to it concerns me very much. I
don't know how the rest of the board feels about that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I think that we're talking about
a code enforcement matter. If there's a complaint then put it through
code enforcement and make sure that the permit or the approval that
the board in the conditions that the board has approved is conformed
by the company that's doing the excavating.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We have had numerous
complaints in the past. I'm sure this new ordinance is going to
address a lot of them, but whatever the will of the board is, I think
that was --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I'm inclined to believe, Commissioner
-- I understand your concerns -- my concerns, but I do believe, like
Commissioner Henning is pointing out, we have mechanisms in place
to deal with that. We get, you know, repeat complaints from an area,
I think we could step up the process to get them in front of us.
I'm a little reluctant to say every year I've got to go through this.
I don't know how many permits are out there or how many pits. It
Page 199
July 31,2001
could be substantial. And you're right. There's always somebody
that doesn't like something, and that just says every year they're going
to be in here.
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: All you're doing is approving this as a
temporary policy because the present excavations -- CHAIRMAN CARTER: Right.
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: -- are a permanent conditional use, and
the rules that are there are not as strict as the new rules. This is going
to go through every -- to the EAC, to the CCPC, to the DSAC, and to
yourselves as a Land Development Code amendment in this next
cycle. You can add anything you want at that point. I'm sure a lot of
this will come up.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'll be monitoring the situation,
and if it so warrants, I'll bring this back for reconsideration.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I'd appreciate that, Commissioner.
Thank you.
All right. Can we have a motion for approval?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion made.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Motion made by Commissioner
Coletta; second made by Commissioner Henning. All in favor
signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
Opposed by same sign.
Motion carries 5-0. Thank you.
Page 200
July 31, 2001
Item # 12A
AGREEMENT BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY AND THE
SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT FOR
USE OF TOURIST DEVELOPMENT TAX MONIES FOR THE
LAKE TRAFFORD RESTORATION PROJECT - APPROVED
That takes us to Item 12-A. Is there any questions --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Motion to approve.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I'll second that.
Any discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All in favor signify by saying aye.
Aye.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Opposed by the same sign.
(No response.)
MR. OLLIFF: You have one registered speaker in Clarence
Tears, but I think he is only here to answer questions, I believe.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And maybe not even here at the
moment.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I don't see him.
MR. MANALICH: I think he had to leave, but we've worked
with his office. He's in agreement with what has been presented.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. Fine, thank you.
Item # 12C
Page 201
July 31,2001
RECOMMENDATION THAT THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS AUTHORIZE RETENTION OF DON
HEMKE, ESQUIRE, OF THE LAW FIRM OF CARLTON,
FIELDS, WARD, EMMANUEL, SMITH AND CUTLER, P.A. TO
REPRESENT EACH OF THE BOARD MEMBERS IN THEIR
INDIVIDUAL CAPACITIES IN THE LAWSUIT STYLED
AQUAPORT, L.C., ET AL, V. COLLIER COUNTY, ET AL., CASE
NUMBER 2:01-CV-341-FTM-29DNF NOW PENDING IN THE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE
DISTRICT OF FLORIDA- APPROVED
Moving to Item 12-C.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I have a motion by Commissioner
Mac'Kie; a second by Commissioner Henning.
All in favor signify by saying aye.
Aye.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
COMMISSIONER COLETTA:
Aye.
Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Motion carries 5-0.
13A.
Thank you.
Item # 13A
RESOLUTION 2001-313, AMENDING RESOLUTION 99-328, BY
REPLACING "EXHIBIT B", PROVIDING FOR FIRE
PREVENTION AND CONTROL FEES AND ASSESSED FOR
FIRE INSPECTION ON BUILDING PERMITS - ADOPTED
Page 202
July 31,2001
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I would second that as long as
there's no dissenting -- everybody's in favor as far as speakers.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I don't see anybody jumping up here.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll second that motion.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. Motion by Commissioner
Mac'Kie; second by Commission Henning.
All in favor signify by saying aye.
Aye.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
COMMISSIONER COLETTE:
Aye.
Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENN1NG: Aye.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Opposed by the same sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Motion carries 5-0.
Item #14A
DISCUSSION RE LELY DRI AND TRAFFIC IMPACT
Takes us to 14, I believe, where we have a staff review.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Sorry to have wasted so much of
your time, but we really do appreciate the work you guys are doing.
Tremendous improvements in this area. I really, really wanted to
take a chance to publicly commend the improvements and the
cooperation. It's just wonderful. You're doing a great job. Thank
you very much for that.
MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Chairman, we've got three brief, hopefully,
items under staff communication.
Page 203
July 31,2001
One is -- in fact, the first two are transportation related. An
update on Lely and then an update on a Whippoorwill DCA. And
then when Mr. Feder's done, I've got a little item regarding the South
Florida Transportation Initiative Group request for some board
representation. Norman.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay.
MR. FEDER: For the record, Norman Feder, Transportation
Administrator. I'll try to be brief. I do have some people here that
have been waiting all day; counsel for Lely, Mr. Anderson and Mr.
Peasy, as well as residents from the Lely Development.
Basically, what I want to do is give you a very quick briefing on
where we stood. As you know, the board asked me to look at this
issue. I did come back to you on March 21st, provided some
correspondence, and then got direction from the board for that to try
and work with Lely Corporation on whether or not an alternative to C
and A, the current approved and maintained alignment were viable.
That direction was to stay with A and C unless a viable alternative
were to be brought forward. Since that time you've received now
correspondence after a couple of meetings with the folks from Lely.
They have sent correspondence. You have in your records from Mr.
Bob Mulhere who is representing Lely, a letter. I bring to your
attention just a couple of things relative to that.
First of all, he notes in there that, essentially, the provision of
six lanes on 951, which we've noted need to be highly controlled,
would allow four lanes to be on Lely Resorts Drive, Lely Drive.
What I would note is we have not said that that meets all the traffic
needs; rather that we were trying to work with a number of issues out
there.
The other thing I would point out in that correspondence is the
fact that basically it notes that they reluctantly accept that maybe six
lanes is a requirement on their internal road system. That's very
Page 204
July 31,2001
specifically part of the DRI,DON, and the PUD. They note that any
DO or PUD credits for non--DRI traffic, those issues and the other
references in there basically reflect to the fact that beyond the internal
road system that they were to develop, they were to cover their
proportion or fair-share impacts to the external road system 41/951,
and then if an impact fee credit process or if an impact fee process
came into effect, that they would be allowed to apply that to credits to
that off-site development. It had not really anything to do with the
commitment to the internal road system.
That being as it may, what they've identified as a concern about
the right-of-way on 951 -- that's important; I'll go back to that in a
minute -- but they have said is that they agree with the concept. They
agree that they'd like to go four lanes to the community. I think
there's a lot of people that have that feeling. But what we haven't
seen is them stepping forward and telling us how they will help meet
the transportation needs and demands of the area.
With that in mind, they note that they would like to look at the
issue again. I'll point to your attention also, provided to you by Mr.
Cuyler, for the property owners that rendered an opinion. I think he
very succinctly noted basically both parties' issues on the second
page of that. He noted why the county would have reasonable
expectation that the six lanes would be built or, in fact, some
alternative be provided for noted that the developer might look at it
that if they reduce their density, maybe they would reduce some of
their impacts.
To that end, though, I will call your attention to the fact that as
we look at this, the Lely development's DRI, therefore, it's DO and
it's PUD DO, basically show traffic volumes that for the year 2020
have already been well exceeded today at a time when the project --
which is supposed to be in 1990 to have developed into Phase II and
completion, not necessarily all six lanes up to Rattlesnake Hammock,
Page 205
July 31, 2001
hasn't evolved into Phase II even, 11 years past that time. Even
without all that DRI traffic, which is considered here with DRI and
with the local traffic, there's a statement that essentially -- in the DRI
that at 951 total traffic will be about 8,450 vehicles in 2000. And, of
course, traffic volume in 2000 was 27,486 or essentially about three
times -- more than three times the volumes that are shown in the DO.
The same with 41, which shows a total of traffic of 17,2 with the DRI
and background traffic in the year 2000, 25,288 current traffic on 41.
And if you look at it further, basically, what they call 2020 -- as I
mentioned already exceeded by those 1998 traffic volumes or 2000
traffic volumes.
The concern that I want to raise to you is that I haven't seen real
strong progress towards an alternative. There is concern on the right-
of-way, and that's extremely important to us because Tract 22 is
coming in from Lely Corporation now. Tract 22 is proposing a new
set at a new entrance there on 951, another building all of which
would be within the footprint of the additional 75 feet needed for
right-of-way on 951.
As well we've got another development outside of Lely going to
Rattlesnake and 951, who using our own pipe process, claims that
they've got access approval to Sierra Meadows for a full-signalized
intersection some one-eighth of a mile south of Rattlesnake
Hammock.
I bring this up just to show you that this corridor, if we are going
to protect is -- if we're going to try to find an alternative that allows
us to reduce the lane call through Lely, we need to be very aggressive
on it, not take two months and not make any progress.
The board has directed us to stay with the six lane through Lely
until there's an alternative. We will do that. The developer has
expressed some interest in looking at reducing the density and
possibly reevaluating. If they want to do that, what my
Page 206
July 31,2001
recommendation is to you as a board is that we go back to the DRI
process; that we very formally do that; and we look at what the traffic
impacts are, noting, though, that if we do that, out of that analysis
lane calls need to be made, and those lane calls may well be that six
lanes of 951 and only four lanes on Lely -- Lely Resorts will not meet
the demands.
Remember, originally,, it was six lanes and going through St.
Andrews. We got pretty well precluded by the development there.
Now, we're looking at six lanes through as part of their own DRI.
Lely Resort, Grand Lely Drive and the development pattern's already
moving away from that, and we're even starting to get precluded over
at 951.
But I think it's very important that we hold to Alternatives A and
C; that if we want to proceed on that, that we bring that about. I think
that some of the desires to modify that, then we move quickly
through the DRI process and understand that that will open up the
whole issue to what the overall configuration ends up having to be.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Questions for Mr. Feder?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: No. Just continued endorsement
of the way it's going and hope that we'll be able to settle on
something and maybe -- you know, maybe we should consider some
sort of a mediated settlement or something because -- well, you have
a whole pile of speakers. I'll wait till you finish.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And I'll make a comment. I don't
know if you'd like me to make it now or not. I had a couple of
questions for Mr. Feder. One of them was, is there any other
community in Collier County that has six lanes of traffic -- through
traffic -- from one end of the county to the other that is concentrated
into their community or plans to do so? This is something that we
can avoid having happen and not impact the community. What we're
Page 207
July 31,2001
talking about here actually is in this Route C that was created in
1992, then shovel six lanes of traffic through an existing community.
Route C already has homes in that area. We'd have to mow those
down. And we'd have to put them through that area in order to then
concentrate them into the Lely Resort area, on top of which, by the
way, we're building a 12,000-seat amphitheater in there. I don't know
how any community could handle all of that devastation.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: You know, ifI could just say --
absolutely, Commissioner Fiala. That's the goal, and if the developer
cooperates, the goal will be accomplished.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: May I say that Golden Gate
Parkway is slated for six lanes all the way from 41 to Collier
Boulevard and Santa Barbara also through Golden Gate.
MR. FEDER: Not only those examples, but I think it's
important also to point out Vineyards as an example. While theirs is
not six lanes, they developed a four lane, but in doing so you
developed it in a manner that that impact wasn't felt on the
development that proceeded.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, Mr. Feder, but I don't know of
any -- even four lanes that are funneling into the Vineyards. I think
the Vineyards, you have to turn in order to go in. You don't have
traffic actually focusing into that community.
MR. FEDER: Commissioner, precisely my comment. When
the development order came through and the developers themselves
said that rather than improving 41, 951, and Rattlesnake Hammock,
they were going to build an internal arterial road system, including a
six-lane facility to handle the traffic. They, therefore, got the
agreement that you build your internal road system and don't have to
make other improvements because you'll keep that open and expand
part of the community system, but in doing so they didn't develop
their land pattern around that, and that's the issue that you're raising.
Page 208
July 31,2001
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, I'm raising the issue that
when they put this DRI and DO together, there was no C even
planned for it at that point in time.
MR. FEDER: They still had six lanes planned between 41 and
Rattlesnake Hammock through the center of their development as
part of their development order.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. But they didn't plan to move
that traffic to the other end of the county or back into their
community either.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: But, Commissioner, if the
developer cooperates with us, we accomplish your goal and the area's
goal and, you know, that seems to me to be the approach we should
take.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, let's hear what they have to
say. Right now, as you can see -- what I want to do is avert any
further errors like we've had-- like we've been tousling over today.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Oh, yeah.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And so if we avert that right now
by our planning so that we don't do that again, then mission
accomplished. So let's hear from our speakers. I'm sorry to have
taken up so much time.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: It's good to hear you, Donna.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Yeah. It's good to hear you.
MR. OLLIFF: It's unusual, but we have five registered speakers
under the staff communication item because I think that they were
aware that Norman was going to provide you with an update on the
item, and they've registered to speak. So I'm going to go ahead and
call them.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Yes, please do.
MR. OLLIFF: First speaker is Hal Ousley, followed by Ken
Drum. Mr. Drum waives. The next speaker would then be Vera Orr.
Page 209
July 31,2001
MR. OUSLEY: I'm Hal Ousley. I live in Lely Resort. The
homeowners are caught in the middle of poor planning by the county
and poor planning by Lely Development. And while you guys are
considering this, they're in a contest figuring out who the good guys
are and who the bad guys are and who's going to pay for it.
Well, it looks like to me that the homeowners are paying for it
because our property values and because of all the political going on,
nobody knows where we're going to come out on this. And what I'm
going to do is appeal to the Commission to have one commissioner
sit in on the talks, and Ken Drum, who represents the Lely Task
Force, sit in on the talks. And they'll have four people in there, and
maybe if they have two or three more meetings, they can work it out.
And that is only an appeal, and I hope that you gentlemen and ladies
will go along with it so we'll have four people at the meeting instead
of just two parties. Thank you very much.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That is a great suggestion to me
to move it forward. Mr. Feder, when is the dates that you have
outlined? I know you want to push this forward.
MR. FEDER: I think we do need to move. As pointed out,
you've some people that are being held hostage north of here as well
as the Lely folks. Again, the last correspondence we received after
waiting to meet with Lely and their counsel was the letter that you
received from Bob Mulhere saying that they agree with my concept;
that they'd like to build only four roads, but they don't necessarily
agree with what it is they were having to do toward any alternative.
I think that any meeting that they'd like to have to try to explore
that further to try to find an resolution, we'd be happy to. But I think
we do need to start bringing this toward a closure, either decide that
A and C is the alignment. They can still bring the issue forward for
an update of the DRI if they are going to reduce their density. And
that's fine to open up the whole thing to a thorough analysis.
Page 210
July 31, 2001
There's not really a provision in process for arbitration. We
haven't gone through the process. If they want to go through the
process of updating the DRI, that is a viable process. If they want to
meet some more and look at options before we go to that process, I'd
be very happy to do so. I just want to make sure that we start moving
on this, we get some clarify for everybody involved.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I'll volunteer my services
in--
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, great.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- and I'll be available -- if it
works out with everybody -- the 10th of August through the 15th and
the last week of August.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Is that acceptable to you,
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, it sure is.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I wonder if I could -- I'll admit a
bias. I just got from mediator training to be a certified mediator for
the State of Florida and have been very impressed with it. I've
learned about alternate dispute resolution, and I know that there's
leadership innovation center at FGCU, but it might be worth
contacting them to have some kind of a facilitator to help this
discussion because it's a complicated story. This is not something
that will be easily settled. I would suggest that we include some kind
of a facilitator.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You know, I think that the
public has voted us in to make some conflict resolutions with things
that happen within the county.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, maybe we ought to give it a go
with a commissioner and the staff and the Lely people. If it bogs
down, then I think it would be a good idea to inject an outside
Page 211
July 31,2001
mediator at that point to continue the process. But if you-all are
successful, great. If you're not we've got a backup.
MR. FEDER: Mr. Chairman, with all due respect-- and I'll
defer to the Lely representatives, the developer and their
representatives -- I think their difficulty and what they've expressed --
and in fairness to them, if you look at the DRI, the figures I just
mentioned, that DRI, the methodology -- first of all, they haven't built
out in the schedule, and the methodology is extremely suspect. That's
being very nice. The background traffic by itself has far, far, far
exceeded anything contemplated when the decision was made and the
DO provisions were written.
I would note to you that that probably means that's going to be
more difficult if they go back through the process. However, in their
mind they may feel that if they reduce density, it's to their advantage
and that they may want numbers, so while I do agree that I want to
move, I do agree that continuing discussions, if they are going toward
some end, are very important because a lot of people are looking for
an answer. I do want to at least recognize that there may be some
difficulty if they don't feel comfortable that they have the numbers to
be able to figure out issues from. So, with that, I would probably
defer over to Lely folks and see what they may want to say with that.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, I'll just add a little bit of
something right now. Obviously, you know where you stand on that,
Norm. I think it's good to have a fresh person in there and like Tom
Henning because he'll be able to sit in on these meetings, and if he
feels that a mediator is warranted, I'm sure that he'll get one in there
very quickly. But he can -- because he's a fresh pair of eyes, he'll be
able to take a look at this, and, I believe, he'll be able to carry it
forward. And I'd like to see that happen because right now all I see
are heels stuck in the sand.
Page 212
July 31, 2001
MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Chairman, I'll move on to the next speaker
then. The next speaker is Vera Orr, followed by Carey, I believe it's,
Realbuto.
MS. ORR: In view of what's transpired, I'll defer.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you.
MR. OLLIFF: Carey Realbuto. She's left. The next speakers
then are Bruce Anderson and Larry Keesey
MR. MANALICH: Mr. Chairman, as those gentlemen are
coming up, just one comment which is that if we do contemplate
having a commissioner involved in this process, I would recommend
coordination with my office in terms of any Sunshine Law
implications of that. There may be or may not be.
The question: If you have any delegation or authority to negotiate,
the Sunshine Law may be implicated in some ways. So we'll need to
work through that depending on what the exact arrangement and role
is going to be.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I appreciate that, Ramiro. It's not my
understanding it's a delegated authority; it is a mediation facilitation,
but ultimate decision lying with the Board of County Commissioners.
MR. MANALICH: Yeah. It may be, again, the details may not
apply. I'm just saying we'll need to take a look at that.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you. Mr. Anderson.
MR. ANDERSON: Mr. Chairman and Commissioners, for the
record, my name is Bruce Anderson on behalf of Lely Development
Corporation.
I would just like to amplify one of the comments Commissioner
Fiala made. This situation is different. Lely is not like some of the
other neighborhoods that you see coming before you even today that
are trying to close off public access. It's simply a matter of whether
it's going to be four lanes instead of six. And we are working -- my
client is working with the residents and also working with Mr. Feder,
Page 213
July 31,2001
and we will continue to do so to try to come to an agreement, and we
appreciate your consideration. Thank you.
MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Feder, do you want to give him -- that's the
end of the registered speakers.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay.
Item #14B
DISCUSSION RE WHIPPOORWILL DEVELOPERS
CONTRIBUTION AGREEMENT
MR. OLLIFF: There's no action required, but the next item was
just an update on our Whippoorwill Developer Contribution
Agreement.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you.
MR. FEDER: I'll be extremely brief here, I hope.
First of all, we are moving forward with a developer agreement
on this. We'll be bringing that back to you September 1 lth. Fairly
consistent with everything from before, which is right-of-way
donated by the PUDs in the area, impact fee credits for the design and
construction. We had mentioned forming a municipal benefit unit.
We are not going to do this at this time. We're going to allow the
others to proceed now that they've told us that we'll get time-certain
construction once that DCA is approved.
So with that in mind, we're going back to that process and trying
to get that to accomplish what has been an issue out there for some
time on Whippoorwill.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Are you okay with that, Mr.
Olliff?
MR. OLLIFF: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
Page 214
July 31,2001
CHAIRMAN CARTER: You're okay with it, Mr. Feder? I
guess you are. You've been telling me that.
MR. FEDER: We are. We're trying to get that issue
accomplished. We'd love to see east/west making it more viable, and
we'll continue on that in the future.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you.
Item # 14C
COMMISSIONER HENNING TO REPRESENT THE
COMMISSIONERS ON THE SOUTH FLORIDA
TRANSPORTATION INITIATIVE GROUP SUB-COMMITTEE
MR. OLLIFF: The next item was a letter received by the South
Florida Transportation Initiative, Swifti. And if the board will recall
in our joint meeting between Lee and Bonita, it was suggested that
there be some regular meetings between those three groups and
Swifti just to keep everybody on the same page. And Swifti has
stepped up and offered to host that meeting and is looking for the
Board of County Commissioners to designate a member who might
be the representative of the Board of County Commissioners to serve
on at least the initial meeting, and then, I guess, that group would
decide how often they needed to get together in order to keep the
different groups abreast of the issues that are moving in Southwest
Florida.
So really the item is fairly informal, but it is a request on the part
of Swifti for the board to nominate somebody or to appoint
somebody who could go and serve as our representative to the group.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I brought this up to Tom because I
currently serve on three subcommittees on the Southwest Regional
Planning Council plus going to the regular meeting. Commissioner
Page 215
July 31,2001
Coletta's also involved. We really need to spread some of this to the
other Commissioners for your input and participation. So that's why
I'm asking that -- Tom's giving me a nice smile down there. I think
he'd be a great guy to go serve on this subcommittee if he would be
available.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I just enjoy you talking.
Actually, Commissioner Coletta is on the Horizon Committee, our
transportation person.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Transportation doesn't quite fit
into my Horizon Committee. I'm willing to look any way we
possibly can. But I do have quite a few of those meetings I'm
attending in Fort Myers right now on behalf of the Commission. I
want to share the wealth.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Oh. Well, I don't mind
volunteering to work with Swifti. They're a great bunch of people.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, thank you,
Commissioner Henning. You'll be an excellent addition to them.
And we're all getting very well educated in the processes
MR. OLLIFF: The only other thing I've got is you may want to
look at Commissioner Henning's left hand. It may not look that way
the next time we have a meeting.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Oh, I didn't think we were going to get
through it without somebody --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Ahhhhh.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Ahhhhh.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I heard that.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Those wedding bells are breaking up
that old gang of mine.
Page 216
July 31,2001
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I'm going to say this if we're going
that far. The man is going to be investigating some waste alternatives
-- landfilling alternatives on his honeymoon.
MR. OLLIFF: That's dedication.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: That's dedication.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's not quite true. The
honeymoon is not next week. That's as far as we we'll go with my
schedule.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Yes, yes. Well, we wish you the best,
Commissioner Henning --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: The very best.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: -- and we're glad that you have joined
the institution.
MR. OLLIFF: Chairman, that's all the communication staff has.
Item #15A
DISCUSSION OF REIMBURSEMENT FOR CHARGES
RELATED TO THE PELICAN BAY MSTBU TOWN HALL
MEET1NG AND STRAW VOTE - TO BE BROUGHT BACK ON
A FUTURE AGENDA
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. I believe the last item is mine
under Commissioners is for future agendas. A discussion needs to be
held in regards to the charges related to the Pelican Bay and this TDU
town hall meeting.
There have been meetings with staff, and there have been
meetings with the associations out there, and everyone seems to be
amenable until bringing this to the board, which is really 50/50 split
on this. And I don't remember exactly, Tom, what the numbers are,
but perhaps you can refresh my mind, again, what is it 4000 --
Page 217
July 31,2001
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: The question is just whether or
not to put this on a future agenda?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Yes, I agree. It should be.
MR. OLLIFF: The total cost was somewhere around $8500, I
believe, and we were talking about splitting that between the property
owners association and the county because we were both sort of
involved in pushing that forward. So the total cost to the county
would be somewhere around $4,042. We'll bring that back if the
board so desires.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Please do.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. Thank you very much. That's
all I have.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Nothing.
Item #14D
DISCUSSION REGARDING INDIGENT HEALTH CARE IN THE
BUDGET
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I have one item. I was
requested by some folks to read this petition-- actually, the cover
letter and the petition will explain itself.
(As read): "Collier County Commissioners, you have not set a clear
plan for the indigent health care program except for putting a big
headache on the backs of the homeowners. It should be studied
further. The homeowner should not be the one to carry the tax. It
should be put to a vote. A sales tax would be a good way to pay for
the tax where no people would work, keep paying for health care tax.
(sic). It's hard to read. "Have you read the letters to the editor?"
Well, I think we all have. But, anyways, I want to leave this with the
Board of Commissioners, and--
Page 218
July 31, 2001
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Give it to the court reporter
now.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Give it to the court reporter, and I
appreciate you reading that into the record, and, I guess, one more
time, I would really like to clarify that we have not gotten a final
report -- not received the final report from the health-care committee.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: You mean there's not a plan
because the committee hasn't presented the plan yet?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: That's right. And if it requires major
commitments versus an expansion of some services we've discussed,
we all will, certainly -- and I think it's one of those issues that will go
to referendum. Even the chair of that committee says when you get
all done and put everything together, and this is what it's going to be
and how it's covered, etc., etc., and answered all the questions, their
recommendation in all probability will be to take it to referendum.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: You know, considering the
number of people who have objected to the idea before there was a
plan, you might think that they're going to oppose whatever plan
comes up.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, I think we are going to
have to let this thing run its course. I know -- when we get down to
the end there, I know we're going to make the right decision, if there's
a decision to be made on anything at that point in time.
Now, since I've got the floor, there's just one more thing.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: May I say one thing since all
this? I think the concerns of some of the public out there is the board
took action to dedicate some money before looking at the whole
thing. And that's what the concerns that I hear.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And I can address that, and I'd
like to go on from there.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Please.
Page 219
July 31, 2001
At the point in time we committed the money, it was to be able
to get such people as the school board and the hospitals to show that
we were sincere in our thoughts. We may get down to the final point,
and I might personally make a recommendation that we do away with
this tenth of a mil and use line items for what's left if they don't come
up with a plan. But we're not there yet.
But believe me, I think there's been an awful lot of assumptions
made that are not correct. The meetings have been opened. I have
invited TAG to come and they haven't.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Now, why would that surprise you?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm trying to drag everybody
into this process. My office is open. I've sent numerous invitations
out to people that had problems with the direction the committee's
been going. So far I've had one person take me up on it, about 40
different invitations. So at this point in time, I guess the public is still
waiting for the final outcome, and so am I.
And with that, I'd like to thank Tom Olliff for starting the move
to better our Internet connection, which has been quite a disaster.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: A challenge.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Better clarify that. We're very,
very dependent upon our Internet connection, our e-mail. We do a lot
of work late in the evening. I know because I receive e-mails from
commissioners that notify me of what actions are taken, "for your
information" type things. You see these times on there, and
sometimes they're in the early morning hours. It takes a lot to keep
up, and if you don't have a good Internet connection, you're at a loss.
You've got to try to get everything done in the short time you're in the
building, and believe me, you can't do it in eight hours.
MR. OLLIFF: And our apologies. We didn't know it was that
much of a problem until you took this break. And I think we realized
Page 220
July 31, 2001
it was consistently a problem for all of you, so, hopefully, we've got
that fixed as of tomorrow.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you. That's great. That's
wonderful.
Nothing further. I thank you, Commissioners. I'll look forward to
seeing you tomorrow morning at the workshop.
***** Commissioner Mac'Kie moved, seconded by Commissioner
Henning, and carried unanimously, that the following items under
the Consent and Summary Agendas be approved and/or adopted:
Item # 16A 1
ASSIGNMENT AGREEMENT FOR EASEMENT FOR
FIDDLER'S CREEK, PHASE 2-A, UNIT THREE
Item # 16A2
RESOLUTION 2001-269, AUTHORIZING FINAL ACCEPTANCE
OF THE ROADWAY, DRAINAGE, WATER AND SEWER
IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE FINAL PLAT OF "TIERRA LAGO"
Item # 16A3
RESOLUTION 2001-270, AUTHORIZING FINAL ACCEPTANCE
OF THE ROADWAY, DRAINAGE, WATER AND SEWER
IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE FINAL PLAT OF "WEDGEWOOD
SUBDIVISION"
Item # 16A4
Page 221
July 31, 2001
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF WATER UTILITY FACILITIES FOR
CAPRI COMMERCIAL CENTER
Item # 16A5
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF WATER FACILITIES FOR REGATTA
Item #16A6
BUDGET AMENDMENT TO APPROPRIATE RESERVES FROM
THE UNINCORPORATED GENERAL FUND TO REMOVE
DILAPIDATED MOBILE HOMES FROM THE IMMOKALEE
COMMUNITY
Item #16A7
ACCEPTANCE OF SEWER FACILITIES FOR GREY OAKS,
UNIT SIX, PHASE TWO
Item #16A8
RESOLUTION 2001-271, AUTHORIZING FINAL ACCEPTANCE
OF THE ROADWAY, DRAINAGE, WATER AND SEWER
IMPROVEMENTS IN "MAPLEWOOD UNIT THREE"
Item # 16A9
RESOLUTION 2001-272, AUTHORIZING FINAL ACCEPTANCE
OF THE ROADWAY, DRAINAGE, WATER AND SEWER
Page 222
July 31,2001
IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE FINAL PLAT OF "TAMIAMI
PROFESSIONAL CENTER"
Item # 16A 10
RESOLUTIONS 2001-273 THROUGH 2001-290, PROVIDING
FOR THE ASSESSMENT OF LIENS AGAINST CERTAIN
PARCELS FOR THE ABATEMENT OF PUBLIC NUISANCES
Item #16Al 1
AUTHORIZATION FOR STAFF TO HIRE A CONSULTANT TO
REVIEW AND CLARIFY/SIMPLIFY THE LAND
DEVELOPMENT CODE - IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED
$75,000
Item #16A12
AUTHORIZATION FOR A SPECIAL LAND DEVELOPMENT
CODE CYCLE
Item #16A13
MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT WITH WCI COMMUNITIES,
FOR PRIVACY WALL IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN GALLERIA
DRIVE (PELICAN MARSH UNIT TWENTY-TWO)
Item #16A14
FINAL PLAT OF "JUBILATION" AND SECTION 3.2.6.3.4 (2) OF
THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE WAIVED (POSTING OF
Page 223
July 31, 2001
SUBDIVISION PERFORMANCE SECURITY) UNTIL THE FIRST
CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY IS REQUESTED - WITH
STIPULATION
Item #16A15
FINAL PLAT OF "OLDE CYPRESS TRACT 12"
Item #16A16 - Moved to Item gl0P
REVISED VERSION OF DIVISION 3.5 (EXCAVATIONS) OF
THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE (ORD. 92-73 AS
AMENDED) TO SERVE AS AN INTERIM POLICY DURING
THE FORMAL REVIEW AND APPROVAL PROCESS
Item # 16A 17
FUNDING FOR AN ENGINEERING TECHNICIAN TO ASSIST
THE TRACKING AND PROCESSING OF DEVELOPMENT
PROJECTS AND UTILITY CONVEYANCES
Item #16A18
RESOLUTION 2001-291, ADOPTING AMENDED BYLAWS OF
THE BAYSHORE/GATEWAY TRIANGLE LOCAL
REDEVELOPMENT ADVISORY BOARD AND THE
IMMOKALEE LOCAL REDEVELOPMENT ADVISORY BOARD
Item #16A19
Page 224
July 31,2001
EXTENSION OF BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION FOR
MALIBU LAKES
Item # 16A20
RESOLUTION 2001-292, ADOPTING AN ADMINISTRATIVE
PROCEDURES MANUAL TO SERVE AS A GUIDE FOR
COLLIER COUNTY STAFF AND THE COMMUNITY
REGARDING IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CONSOLIDATED
IMPACT FEE ORDINANCE AND REPEALING AND
RESCINDING PRIOR UNOFFICIAL ADMINISTRATIVE
GUIDELINES OR PROCEDURES
Item # 16A21
LEASE AGREEMENT BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY AND
CPOC REALTY, L.L.C., FOR OFFICE SPACE TO BE UTILIZED
BY THE HOUSING AND URBAN IMPROVEMENT
DEPARTMENT - FOR THE ANNUAL AMOUNT OF $50,530
Item #16A22 - Added
FUNDING A SENIOR PLANNER TO ASSIST IMMOKALEE
HOUSING INITIATIVE WITH PROCESSING SITE
IMPROVEMENT PLANS
Item # 16B 1
AMENDMENT NO. 11 TO THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
AGREEMENT WITH HOLE, MONTES, INC. FOR LIVINGSTON
Page 225
July 31,2001
ROAD, PHASE IV, AND THE LIVINGSTON EAST-WEST
CONNECTOR- IN THE AMOUNT OF $82,800
Item # 16B2
BID #01-3246 FOR THE PURCHASE AND DELIVERY OF P1NE
STRAW MULCH - AWARDED TO CENTRAL FLORIDA
MULCHES IN THE AMOUNT OF $40,500
Item # 16B3
PROFESSIONAL CONSULTING SERVICES AGREEMENT
WITH WILSON MILLER FOR THE VANDERBILT AREA
CORRIDOR STUDY - IN THE AMOUNT OF $285,725
Item #16B4
PROFESSIONAL CONSULTING SERVICES AGREEMENT
WITH TBE GROUP, INC. FOR THE NORTH SOUTH PLANNING
CORRIDOR STUDY - IN THE AMOUNT OF $293,955
Item # 16B5
WORK ORDER NO. BRC-FT-01-08 WITH BETTER ROADS,
INC. FOR SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENTS ON DONNA STREET -
1N THE AMOUNT OF $104,673.45
Item # 16B6
RESOLUTION 2001-293, AUTHORIZING THE ACQUISITION
BY GIFT OR PURCHASE OF PERPETUAL, NON-EXCLUSIVE
Page 226
July 31, 2001
SIDEWALK EASEMENTS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A
SIDEWALK FROM GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD TO THE
GOLDEN GATE MAIN CANAL
Item #16B7 - Continued
DEVELOPER CONTRIBUTION AGREEMENT WITH FIRST
BAPTIST CHURCH FOR ROAD IMPACT FEE CREDITS FOR A
PORTION OF ORANGE BLOSSOM DRIVE - SUBJECT TO
CONDITIONS
Item # 16B8
RESOLUTION 2001-294, EXPANDING AUTHORIZATION TO
ALL DIVISION ADMINISTRATORS TO EXECUTE GRANT
APPLICATIONS, PERMIT APPLICATIONS AND OTHER
DOCUMENTS PERTAINING TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS
Item # 16B9
BID NO. 01-3248 FOR THE 2000-2001 PATHWAYS PROGRAM-
AWARDED TO BONNESS, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF
$308,723.45
Item # 16B 10
BID NO. 01-3244, "PURCHASE AND DELIVERY OF ONE ROAD
WIDENER ATTACHMENT"- AWARDED TO RINGHAVER
EQUIPMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $49,710
Page 227
July 31,2001
Item # 16B 11
ACCEPTANCE OF EASEMENT FROM THE BOARD OF
TRUSTEES OF THE INTERNAL IMPROVEMENT TRUST FUND
OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA TO BE USED FOR TOWER
ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY, AND UTILITY, DRAINAGE, AND
MAINTENANCE PURPOSES
Item # 16B 12
SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT NO. 3 TO THE
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH JOHNSON
ENGINEERING INC., FOR GOODLETTE-FRANK ROAD
IMPROVEMENTS BETWEEN PINE RIDGE ROAD AND
VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD - IN THE AMOUNT OF $200,000
Item # 16B 13
INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT AMONG COLLIER COUNTY,
THE CITY OF NAPLES AND THE CITY OF NAPLES AIRPORT
AUTHORITY FOR THE CONSTRUCTION AND
MAINTENANCE OF ENTERPRISE AVENUE EXTENSION (FKA
TRANSFER STATION ROAD)
Item # 16B 14
PROPOSAL FOR LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT
AMONG COLLIER COUNTY, THE CITY OF NAPLES AND THE
ESTUARY DEVELOPER
Item # 16B 15
Page 228
July 31, 2001
AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO THE CONTRACT FOR
PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING SERVICES BY HOLE
MONTES, INC. FOR IMMOKALEE ROAD SIX-LANING
DE'SIGN FROM U.S. 41 TO 1-75, PROJECT NO. 66042 - IN THE
AMOUNT OF $253,647
Item # 16B 16
CONTRACT AMENDMENT NO. 15 FOR PROFESSIONAL
ENGINEERING SERVICES BY HOLE MONTES, INC., FOR
IMMOKALEE ROAD CONSTRUCTION, PROJECT NO. 69101 -
IN THE AMOUNT OF $36,610.25
Item # 16B 17
RESOLUTION 2001-295, FIXING THE DATE, TIME AND
PLACE FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR APPROVING THE
SPECIAL ASSESSMENT (NON-AD VALOREM ASSESSMENT)
TO BE LEVIED AGAINST THE PROPERTIES WITHIN THE
PELICAN BAY MUNICIPAL SERVICE TAXING AND BENEFIT
UNIT
Item #16C 1
RESOLUTION 2001-296, APPROVING SATISFACTION OF
LIENS FOR SOLID WASTE ACCOUNTS THAT HAVE PAID IN
FULL THE 1996 SOLID WASTE COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL
SERVICES SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS
Item # 16C2
Page 229
July 31,2001
RESOLUTION 2001-297, APPROVING SATISFACTION OF
LIENS FOR SOLID WASTE ACCOUNTS THAT HAVE PAID IN
FULL THE 1995 SOLID WASTE COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL
SERVICES SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS
Item # 16C3
NEIGHBORHOOD CLEAN-UP EVENTS EXCEEDING $2,000 IN
TIPPING FEES TO BE APPROVED BY THE BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND NEIGHBORHOOD CLEAN-
UP EVENTS BE LIMITED TO ONE QUARTERLY EVENT PER
NEIGHBORHOOD - MOTION TO RECONSIDER AND THEN
POLICY AMENDED TO $4,000 TWICE A YEAR
MR. STASKO: Good morning, Mr. Chairperson and fellow
commissioners. My name is Tom Stasko. I live on Connecticut
Avenue. That's within the Freedom Triangle or Gateway Triangle, or
there's probably another half dozen other names for it.
As you may be aware or may not, recently the Triangle held a
cleanup day. It's been indicated for me (sic) after that that I've
heard nothing but praise and how well it went and how effective it
was. I have spoken to Teresa -- is it Risa (phonetic)?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Yes.
MR. STASKO: -- that did not sign this item but a different item
on the consent agenda. And during our conversation she also
commended the -- the efforts of the community. And I learned that
the cost of that was approximately $1,600. I spoke to her about the
increases of the residential homes which is -- will amount to
somewhere between 25 and 35 percent because of the trash collection
and the disposal with the landfill -- I don't want to say problems, but
Page 230
July 31, 2001
issues at hand that the county is facing. So there will be an increase
in the services or increase of charges, costs for those services.
Specifically, I'd like to, if I could, suggest that this item be
rephrased to read, "request that neighborhood cleanup events
exceeding $4,000 and waive tipping fees receive prior board
approval" and limit events to one event per fiscal year per
neighborhood. As it reads now, the county is liable for up to $8,000
a year because of four-
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Uh-huh.
MR. STASKO: -- different cleanups. Well, anybody that has to
have dumpsters out there four times a year, you know, it -- you have
to think about that. And if you take 1600 and multiply it by 1.25,
guess what the number is, $2,000. So a neighborhood like ours or
Immokalee, of course, with the ordinances of 99.51 which includes
litter now, specifically -- actually, if you throw an empty cigarette
pack or any litter on your property, you're in violation of the code.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Right.
MR. STASKO: And, as a result, your house can be taken away from
you. Well, I didn't know about that. My neighbors didn't know about
that until a month, six weeks ago. Those are different items, different
issues that will be contended with at another time. But I think that
for the next four or five years if it's changed to a limit
of $4,000 once a year, at least that's an out for a neighborhood to
say, okay, look it, let's take care of this; it's the best bang for the
buck.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Right.
MR. STASKO: Code enforcement can go out there and say,
"Hey, you guys schedule the cleanup for the last Sunday of next
month." Guess what's going to be around here two weeks after
that. I wish you'd reconsider that, if you would.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I -- I -- I think that makes a lot
Page 231
July 31,2001
of sense because four events per neighborhood is not very likely. So
I'd make a motion for reconsideration.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'll second that.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I have a motion and a second.
Discussion I would like to hear from Mr. Mudd since that really is his
area to-
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Can we vote on the reconsideration
motion while he's coming up?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, I'm not going to vote until I hear
what he has to say.
MR. MUDD: There are some neighborhoods that do it more
than once a year. The reason that it's on the agenda was to try to firm
up -- right now, based on -- on your delegation, I can -- I can
basically defer any payment to the landfill. And it got to be -- and I
think the intent of the board was for neighborhood cleanup, but we've
gotten into traders in Immokalee to the tune of about $20,000. And
it's a little -- I'm a little uneasy with that process.
And there was another item on your consent agenda in order to
take money out of the reserves in order to pay for that cleanup and
that process because it's in the tune of a hundred thousand dollars.
And that's a bit much to waive as far as what your intent was two
years ago. What we tried to do -- what we tried to do was lay out
that so that you would know that there is some delegation that's out
there for neighborhood cleanups.
I have no problem with the gentleman's process. I would ask you
to probably -- if it -- if we're just doing tit for tat and it's 2,000 four
times a year, then make it 4,000 twice a year just in case you get a
neighborhood that wants to do it and it's a more commercial
neighborhood than just the neighborhood that would like to clean up
and have that wait.
Page 232
July 31,2001
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. Would you go back to the
example about Immokalee again and one more time repeat what you
just said about how you would like to change it from where it is now?
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. What's happening right now is the
delegation is -- that the public utilities administrator can waive the
fees at the landfill for -- for cleanups in that process. There is a
move afoot and initiative in Immokalee to clean up the old trailers
that are basically condemned and to give the -- the trailer park
owners and -- and individuals that owned those particular facilities,
structures, a way to get those to the landfill and -- and get them out
without having a-- a financial hardship for them. It's been so
successful that we've had -- and when you start talking $112 a
trailer, we've had in tune of almost $20,000 worth of fees waived for
the trailer cleanup. There is another item on your agenda and consent
agenda that would take dollars out of reserves in the general fund in
order to pay those tipping fees which would be more appropriate, and
that's on that process.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: As long as the need is met.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Or else my suggestion would
be to take these trailers from Immokalee and move them into the
urban area so that everyone there can deal with them.
MR. MUDD: Sir, we're taking care of it. We're trying to make sure
that it's fair to every taxpayer and it's in there.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: We're more than willing to
share the trailers with everybody if they don't want us to dispose of
them.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: We've already voted in favor of
disposing of them and paying for it out of the general fund.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's a different subject, isn't it? I
mean, we're talking neighborhood cleanup here where people get out
Page 233
July 31, 2001
on a weekend and clean, whereas the trailers we have to move that's a
part of the -- of the rebeautification of Immokalee. I think they're
two different subjects that I don't think they're even under the same
topic.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I -- I appreciate that. There is
one more question. How would this affect the cleanup like the one
that took place over on Miller Boulevard where they collected, like,
120 tons of washing machines and discarded refrigerators and
everything else under the sun back about a couple months ago?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Basically, if the motion I intend
to make passes, then if there -- if they do that more than twice a year
or if the cost of the tipping fees is $4,000, they'd have to -- is more
than $4,000, they'd have to come to the County Commissioners for
approval.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA:
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
But they can come back to us?
Yes.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. That's fine.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: So do we really need to change it?
Can we just leave it to the discretion of Mr. Mudd to work with the
community so that we don't get into the situation that they can't do
that?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Well, the motion that we just passed
on consent, the limit that Mr. Mudd would have is $2,000. But our
speaker is pointing out to us that -- that we just did a cleanup in the
Gateway Freedom Triangle that would result in about $2,000 under
the new fee structure, maybe more. So it may be just a little bit too
low.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I -- I'd agree. And like with Jim's
Miller Boulevard, for instance, they did such an outstanding job.
And from what I read in the paper anyway, they were penalized for it.
I want to see them -- I think this is a good motion because that way it
Page 234
July 31,2001
will give us an expanded amount to work with, and you don't ever see
cleanups more than twice a year anyway.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: So, Mr. Mudd, you're comfortable with the
motion?
MR. MUDD: $4,000 twice a year, sir, I'd add twice instead of
once.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All right.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: That would be the motion I
would make if the motion to reconsider passes.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All right. All in favor of the
reconsideration signify by saying aye.
(Unanimous response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
Opposed by the same sign.
The motion carries 5-0.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I move that we amend the policy
under discussion to the maximum of $4,000 twice a year. In all other
respects, it should stay the same.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'll second that.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I have a first. I have a second. Any
discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All in favor signify by saying aye.
(Unanimous response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Opposed by the same sign. (No response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: The motion carries 5-0. Thank you
very much, sir. Again, my apologies for not catching that, but we
took care of business.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: He had another issue.
Page 235
July 31,2001
MR. STASKO: Yes. Again, Commissioners, thank you for
your time. Thank you for this opportunity.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And thanks for the information.
You saved us from making a mistake today. So thank you.
MR. STASKO: You're welcome.
Item # 16C4
STATE WASTE TIRE GRANT FUNDS TO BE USED FOR
PLAYGROUND SURFACING FOR YMCA, YOUTH HAVEN,
FARMWORKER'S VILLAGE, SALVATION ARMY AND
WALKING SURFACES AT 4-H CHILDREN'S GARDEN
Item # 16C5
SURPLUS SEALED BID #SO 1-3243 FOR ONE (1) BOAT,
MOTOR AND TRAILER - AWARDED TO CHRISTOPHER F.
SLABY- IN THE AMOUNT OF $200
Item # 16C6
PURCHASING POLICY FOR FORMAL COMPETITION
WAIVED; CONTRACT DOLLAR THRESHOLDS WAIVED;
WORK ORDER FOR CONSTRUCTION SERVICES RELATED
TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF A SUPPLEMENTAL WATER
SOURCE TO AUGMENT THE RECLAIMED WATER SUPPLY-
STAFF TO ENTER INTO A WORK ORDER WITH ONE OF THE
CONTRACTOR'S UNDER THE "UNDERGROUND UTILITY
CONTRACTING SERVICES"
Item # 16C7
Page 236
July 31,2001
AUTHORIZATION OF FUNDS FOR A FEASIBILITY STUDY
FOR POTABLE WATER SERVICE TO PRICE STREET AND
BAREFOOT WILLIAMS ROAD AREA THROUGH THE
FORMATION OF A MUNICIPAL SERVICE BENEFIT UNIT
Item #16C8
BILLING AGREEMENT WITH COCOBAY CONDOMINIUM,
INC., FOR UTILITY CUSTOMER BILLING
Item # 16C9
AGREEMENT WITH THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION FOR ELECTRONICS
RECYCLING
Item # 16C 10
RESOLUTIONS 2001-298 AND 2001-299, SETTING
SEPTEMBER 11,2001 AT 9:00 A.M. IN THE BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS BOARDROOM, THIRD FLOOR,
W. HARMON TURNER BUILDING, FOR THE PUBLIC
HEARING FOR APPROVING THE SPECIAL ASSESSMENT
(NON-AD VALOREM ASSESSMENT) TO BE LEVIED
AGAINST THE PROPERTIES WITHIN THE SOLID WASTE
DISTRICT I AND DISTRICT II MUNICIPAL SERVICES
BENEFIT UNIT FOR SOLID WASTE COLLECTION AND
DISPOSAL SERVICES
Item #16C 11
Page 237
July 31, 2001
AMENDMENT NO. 2 FOR CONTRACT GC526 WITH THE
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION (FDEP), EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2001, TO
CONTINUE TO PERFORM PETROLEUM STORAGE FACILITY
ASSESSMENTS AND INSPECT AND REINSPECT MINERAL
ACIDS TANKS WITHIN THE COUNTY - IN AN AMOUNT NOT
TO EXCEED $159,446
Item #16C12
RFP 00-3185, SOUTH COUNTY REGIONAL WATER
TREATMENT PLANT CONCRETE LEAK AND SPALL
REPAIRS - AWARDED TO CONSEL INC.
Item #16C13
SATISFACTION OF NOTICE OF CLAIM OF LIEN FOR
SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM IMPACT FEE RE RODNEY &
EMERSON DYKES C/O CLIMATE CONTROL
Item # 16C 14
PIGGYBACK BID NO. 00-103 FROM POLK COUNTY FOR THE
PURCHASE OF FIRE HYDRANTS FROM FERGUSON
UNDERGROUND, INC. FOR THE PELICAN BAY FIRE
HYDRANT CHANGE OVER PROJECT
Item # 16C 15
Page 238
July 31,2001
SATISFACTIONS OF NOTICE OF PROMISE TO PAY AND
AGREEMENT TO EXTEND PAYMENT OF WATER AND/OR
SEWER SYSTEM IMPACT FEES
Item # 16C 16
SATISFACTION OF LIENS RE ABATEMENT OF NUISANCES
Item # 16C 17
BID 01-3238, UPGRADE THE PELICAN BAY WELLFIELD,
BOOSTER STATION AND MASTER FLOW METER-
AWARDED TO MITCHELL & STARK CONSTRUCTION
COMPANY, INC., IN THE AMOUNT OF $734,950
Item # 16C 18
INITIAL READINESS FUNDING FOR HURRICANE DEBRIS
PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT IN THE 2001 HURRICANE
SEASON - STAFF TO MAKE NECESSARY TASK
ASSIGNMENTS TO COUNTY UTILITY ENGINEERING FIRMS
AND CONTRACTOR, PHILLIPS & JORDAN, INC.
Item #16C19
WORK ORDER WD-034 TO KYLE CONSTRUCTION IN THE
AMOUNT OF $274,400 AND WORK ORDER WD-035 TO
MITCHELL AND STARK IN THE AMOUNT OF $290,300 FOR
THE INSTALLATION OF FIRE HYDRANTS LOCATED WITHIN
THE PELICAN BAY SUBDIVISION
Page 239
July 31, 2001
Item #16D 1
HOME CARE FOR THE ELDERLY CONTINUATION GRANT
BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY AND THE AREA AGENCY ON
AGING FOR SOUTHWEST FLORIDA, INC., D/B/A SENIOR
SOLUTIONS OF SOUTHWEST FLORIDA
Item # 16D2
COLLIER AREA TRANSIT STAFF TO PROVIDE SERVICES
FOR THE SUMMER BARBEQUE AND BLUES EVENT TO BE
HELD AUGUST 5,2001 AT PELICAN BAY COMMUNITY
PARK
Item #16D3
RFP 01-3236, THREE YEAR CONTRACT FOR FITNESS
CENTER EQUIPMENT- AWARDED TO BARRY'S BARBELL
OF FT. MYERS
Item # 16D4
ALZHEIMER'S DISEASE INITIATIVE CONTINUATION
GRANT BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY AND AREA AGENCY
ON AGING FOR SOUTHWEST FLORIDA, 1NC., D/B/A SENIOR
SOLUTIONS OF SOUTHWEST FLORIDA
Item # 16D5
COMMUNITY CARE FOR THE ELDERLY CONTINUATION
GRANT BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY AND AREA AGENCY
Page 240
July 31,2001
ON AGING FOR SOUTHWEST FLORIDA, INC., D/B/A SENIOR
SOLUTIONS OF SOUTHWEST FLORIDA
Item #16D6
RFP 00-3168, CONCESSIONAIRE AT BAREFOOT BEACH -
AWARDED TO RECREATIONAL FACILITIES OF AMERICA,
INC.
Item #16D7 - Moved to Item #10N then continued to 9/11/01
REQUEST BY HENRY BREHM, REPRESENTING NET ASSETS,
TO CONSTRUCT A TOURNAMENT FACILITY AND USE
VINEYARDS COMMUNITY PARK TO HOST THE NUVEEN
CHAMPIONS TOURNAMENT
Item # 16E 1
RESOLUTION 2001-300, AUTHORIZING THE BORROWING OF
NOT EXCEEDING $5,000,000 FROM THE POOLED
COMMERCIAL PAPER LOAN PROGRAM AND AGREEMENT
FOR SALE AND PURCHASE TO ACQUIRE PROPERTY AND
BUILDING LOCATED AT 2373 HORSESHOE DRIVE SOUTH
Item # 16E2
BUDGET AMENDMENT TO RE-APPROPRIATE $50,000 FROM
THE GAC LAND TRUST TO PURCHASE FITNESS
EQUIPMENT FOR THE NEW COMMUNITY CENTER AT MAX
A. HASSE COMMUNITY PARK
Page 241
July 31,2001
Item # 16E3
LEASE AGREEMENT BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY AND
RICHARD B. LANSDALE FOR SPACE OCCUPIED BY THE
SHERIFF'S OFFICE LOCATED AT 3123 TERRACE AVENUE-
FIRST YEAR'S ANNUAL RENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $35,000
Item # 16E4
LEASE AGREEMENT BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY AND
ALAN AND PATRICIA BOOLE FOR SPACE TO EXPAND THE
SHERIFF'S OFFICE VEHICLE MAINTENANCE FACILITY
LOCATED AT 3573 ARNOLD AVENUE - ANNUAL RENT IN
THE AMOUNT OF $25,200
Item # 16E5
301 PROJECT FUNDS TO IMPROVE AND UPGRADE FIBER
OPTIC COMMUNICATION LINES AND EQUIPMENT ON THE
MAIN GOVERNMENT COMPLEX
Item # 16E6
AGREEMENT FOR THE CONVEYANCE OF GAC TRUST
RESERVED LANDS TO THE DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD OF
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, FOR THE FUTURE
CONSTRUCTION OF AN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL IN GOLDEN
GATE ESTATES
Item # 16E7
Page 242
July 31, 2001
HUMAN RESOURCE DEPARTMENT TO BRING BACK TO THE
BOARD PROPOSED ADDITIONS AND MODIFICATIONS TO
ORDINANCE 96-40, THE COLLIER COUNTY PERSONNEL
ORDINANCE
Item # 16E8
LETTER OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND COMMUNITY HEALTH
PARTNERS, INC., REDUCING THE PHYSICIAN FEE
SCHEDULE AND OUTPATIENT FEE SCHEDULE, AND
MODIFYING THE IN-HOSPITAL STOP LOSS AGREEMENT
UNDER THE EXISTING GROUP HEALTH INSURANCE FEE
AGREEMENT
Item #16E9 - Moved to Item # 100
Item # 16E 10
TWO MASTER PURCHASE AGREEMENTS WITH SPRINT:
ONE FOR REGULATED SERVICES AND ANOTHER FOR NON-
REGULATED SERVICES
Item #16E 11
RESOLUTION 2001-301, REVISING THE EMPLOYEE SERVICE
AWARD PROGRAM AND SUPERSEDING RESOLUTION 87-80,
EFFECTIVE OCTOBER 1, 2001
Item #16E12
Page 243
July 31,2001
FIVE YEAR CONTRACT WITH SPRINT, SUBJECT TO
APPROPRIATION, FOR EXISTING CIRCUIT SERVICES IN
EXCHANGE FOR SPRINT'S INSTALLATION OF A FIBER-
OPTIC SONNET RING AROUND THE MAIN GOVERNMENT
COMPLEX
Item #16E13 - Moved from Item #16Fl
AGREEMENT WITH THE GOLDEN GATE FIRE CONTROL
AND RESCUE DISTRICT PROVIDING FOR A MAXIMUM
EXPENDITURE OF $110,000 FROM THE GAC LAND TRUST
TO PURCHASE A WATER TANKER FIRE TRUCK
Item # 16F 1 - Moved to Item # 16E 13
Item #16G 1
RESOLUTION 2001-302, TERMINATING THE "OLD MARCO
VILLAGE WATER AND SEWER DISTRICT" FUND AS A LINE
ITEM OF THE BUDGET OF COLLIER COUNTY
Item # 16G2
FLORIDA ASSOCIATION OF COUNTIES STATE
LEGISLATIVE SURVEY
Item # 16G3
SUMMARY OF CONSENT AND EMERGENCY AGENDA
ITEMS APPROVED BY THE COUNTY MANAGER DURING
THE BOARD'S SCHEDULED RECESS
Page 244
July 31,2001
Item # 16G3(1)
BUDGET AMENDMENT REPORT - BA #01-365 AND 01-367
Item #16G3(2)
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO BETTER ROADS, 1NC. FOR
THE PROPOSED LIVINGSTON ROAD SIX LANING PHASE II,
FROM GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY TO THE COMMUNITY
SCHOOL ENTRANCE NORTH OF PINE RIDGE ROAD IN THE
AMOUNT OF $8,443.248.42
Item #16G3(3)
CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING INSPECTION SERVICES
CONTRACT TO KCCS, INC. FOR THE SIX LANING OF
LIVINGSTON ROAD PHASE II IN THE AMOUNT OF 728,349.00
Item # 16G3(4)
BUDGET AMENDMENT REPORT-BA #01-371, 01-372 & 01-373
Item #16G3(5)
BUDGET AMENDMENT TO TRANSFER FUNDS INTO THE
LIVINGSTON ROAD (GG PKWY TO PRR) TO COVER
INCREASED COSTS FOR ORDER OF TAKINGS AND
RELOCATING FPL POWER POLES
Item # 16G3 (6)
Page 245
July 31,2001
BUDGET AMENDMENT TRANSFERRING FUNDS WITHIN
THE SUPPORT SERVICES DIVISION FOR THE COMPLETION
OF ASSORTED DEPARTMENT MOVES ON THE
GOVERNMENT COMPLEX AND AWARD A WORK ORDER TO
VARIAN CONSTRUCTION FOR THE COMPLETION OF THE
MAIL ROOM
Item #16G3(7)
BUDGET AMENDMENT RECOGNIZING ADDITIONAL
REVENUE AND APPROPRIATE FUNDS AS AN OPERATING
EXPENSE TO COVER THE COST OF INSTALLING CABLE
FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INFORMATION
Item #16G3(8)
EMERGENCY PURCHASE ORDER TO FLORIDA
GOVERNMENTAL UTILITY AUTHORITY FOR THE
INSTALLATION OF WATER METERS AT THE NEW GOLDEN
GATE GOVERNMENT SERVICE CENTER
Item #16G3(9)
BUDGET AMENDMENT REPORT - BA #01-374
Item # 16G3(10)
BUDGET AMENDMENT REPORT - BA #01-402
Item # 16G3(11)
Page 246
July 31, 2001
BUDGET AMENDMENT TO INCREASE APPROPRIATIONS IN
CAPITAL RECOVERY FUND (522) TO REPLACE AN EMS
VEHICLE DESTROYED BY ACCIDENT, USING RESERVES
AND RECOGNIZED INSURANCE REVENUES
Item #16G3(12)
PURCHASING POLICY WAIVED TO PURCHASE GASOLINE
AND DIESEL FUEL FROM EVANS OIL COMPANY FOR
COUNTY VEHICLES WITHOUT FORMAL BIDDING
Item #16G3(13)
PURCHASE OF ONE MEDIUM DUTY ADVANCED LIFE
SUPPORT AMBULANCE FROM AMERICAN LAFRANCE
MEDIC MASTER CORPORATION USING THE FLORIDA
SHERIFF'S ASSOCIATION BID 00-08-0905 IN THE AMOUNT
OF $137,013
Item # 16G3(14)
CHANGE ORDER NO. 2 FOR TIGERTAIL PARK REDECKING
OF BOARDWALK WITH MODERN SERVICES FOR HOME
AND BUSINESS IN THE AMOUNT OF $6,442.00
Item # 16G3(15)
FUNDING IN THE AMOUNT OF $84,200 FOR THE
REPLACEMENT OF A BACKUP BATTERY SYSTEM FOR THE
TAX COLLECTOR AND PROPERTY APPRAISER'S BUILDING
Page 247
July 31,2001
Item # 16G3(16)
BUDGET AMENDMENT REPORT - BA #01-395 AND 01-391
Item #16J1
SATISFACTION OF LIENS FOR SERVICES OF THE PUBLIC
DEFENDER
Item # 16J2
MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS - 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 248
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
July 31, 2001
FOR BOARD ACTION:
Satisfaction of Lien: NEED MOTION authorizing the Chairman to sign Satisfaction of
Lien for Services of the Public Defender for Case Nos.' 98-2334-CFA, 98-2548-CFA,
99-1613-CFA, 94-408-CFA, 97-2696-CFA. RECOMMEND APPROVAL.
MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS TO FILE FOR RECORD WITH ACTION AS DIRECiED:
A. 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. June 6, 2001 through June 12, 2001.
June 13, 2001 through June 19, 2001.
June 20, 2001 through June 26, 2001.
June 27, 2001 through July 3, 2001.
June 27, 2001 through July 9, 2001.
Bo
6. July 04, 2001 through July 10, 2001.
.Districts:
Cow Slough Water District, Budget for 2001/2002, meeting dates f°r
2 O01/2002.
Collier Soil & Water Conservation District, Agenda for June 13, 2001,
Minutes of May 2, 2001, Profit and Loss Report May 2001.
Cedar Hammock Community Development District, Minutes of March
12, 2001, Agenda for March 12, 2001, Minutes of May 14, 2001, General
Purpose Financial Statement dated September 30, 2000, Proposed
Operating Budget for Fiscal Year 2002 and Unaudited Fianancial
Statements dated March 31,2001.
o
H:Data/Format
Collier Soil and Water Conservation District Financial Statements through
Sept. 30, 2000 and Local Government Financial Report 1999/2000.
Fiddler's Creek Community Development District Minutes of March 28,
2001 and Unaudited Financial Statelnents through February i8,
JUL 31 200t
Immokalee Fire Control District Annual Financial Report for Fiscal year
1999/2000, Financial Statement Audit through September 30, 2000,
Management Letter and Rebuttal.
Naples Heritage Community Development District Minutes of May 14,
2001, Financial Statement through
B ' September 30, 2000, Management
Letter, udget f~r 2002, Unaudited Financial Statement through March 31
2001. ,
Immokalee Water & Sewer District 2000 Public Facilities Report
Including District Map, Register of Officers and Agents, Schedule of
Regular Meeting.
Minutes:
o
Golden Gate Beautification Advisory Committee Agenda for June 12,
2001 and Minutes of May 8, 2001.
Rural Fringe Area Assessment Oversight Committee Special Meeting
Notice for June 13, 2001, Meeting Notice for May }/3, 2001 with Board of
County Commissioners, Meeting Notice for May 23,2001.
Collier County Housing Authority, Approved budget for fiscal year 2001
2001. -
Rural Lands Area Assessment Oversight Committee, meeting notice for
June 6, 2001.
H:Data/Format
July 31,2001
Item # 16L 1 - Withdrawn
BUDGET AMENDMENT NOT TO EXCEED $16,700 FOR
OUTSIDE COUNSEL AND PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
INCLUDING EXPERT WITNESS FEES FOR SERVICES
RENDERED IN CONCLUDING THE COUNTY'S LITIGATION
RELATING TO THE 1995-96 BEACH RESTORATION PROJECT
IN THE LAWSUIT STYLED BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY V. COASTAL
ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, INC., ET AL., CASE NO. 00-
1901-CA
Item # 16L2
COUNTY ATTORNEY TO DRAFT AN ORDINANCE TO
AMEND THE COLLIER COUNTY "FALSE ALARM
ORDINANCE" AND SCHEDULE A PUBLIC HEARING
Item #16L3
STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT RELATIVE TO THE
EASEMENT ACQUISITION OF PARCEL NO. 316 IN THE
LAWSUIT ENTITLED COLLIER COUNTY V. WILFREDO
MARIBONA, ET AL, (GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD, PROJECT
NO. 63041) - STAFF TO DEPOSIT $400 INTO THE REGISTRY
OF THE COURT
Item # 16L4
RESOLUTION 2001-303, APPROVING THE ISSUANCE BY THE
HOUSING FINANCE AUTHORITY OF LEE COUNTY OF ITS
Page 249
July 31, 2001
SINGLE FAMILY MORTGAGE REVENUE BONDS IN THE
AGGREGATE AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $99,000,000 TO
PROVIDE FUNDS TO FINANCE QUALIFYING SINGLE
FAMILY MORTGAGE LOANS IN VARIOUS COUNTIES
WITHIN THE STATE OF FLORIDA, INCLUDING COLLIER
COUNTY
Item #16L5
OFFICE OF THE COUNTY ATTORNEY AND THE RISK
MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT TO RETAIN COUNSEL TO
REPRESENT EMS EMPLOYEE, FREDERICK F. GONZALEZ, IN
A TRAFFIC TICKET CASE ARISING OUT OF AN ACCIDENT
MR. GONZALEZ HAD WHILE DRIVING A COUNTY
AMBULANCE
Item # 16L6
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY
AND THE STRAND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION FOR
DELINQUENT ROAD IMPACT FEES RELATING TO GOLF
COURSE DEVELOPMENT - DEVELOPER TO APPLY THE
$30,000 CASH BOND CURRENTLY HELD BY THE COUNTY
TO ANY CASH DUE FOR THIS DELINQUENT FEE
Item #16L7
CONTINUING RETENTION AGREEMENT FOR LEGAL
SERVICES ON AN "AS NEEDED" BASIS WITH THE LAW
FIRM OF FIXEL AND MAGUIRE FOR SPECIALIZED LEGAL
Page 250
July 31,2001
SERVICES PERTAINING TO EMINENT DOMAIN
PROCEEDINGS
Item # 16L8
SETTLEMENT IN WATER EQUIPMENT SERVICES, INC. V.
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, CASE NO. 97-4453-CA-01, NOW
PENDING IN THE TWENTIETH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND
FOR COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, PURSUANT TO WHICH
THE COUNTY WOULD PAY $6,500 AND ALL CLAIMS
AGAINST THE COUNTY WOULD BE DISMISSED
Item #16L9
STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT RELATIVE TO THE
EASEMENT ACQUISITION OF PARCELS 171 AND 771 IN THE
LAWSUIT ENTITLED COLLIER COUNTY V. DOMINIQUE C.
RIHS, AS TRUSTEE, ET AL., CASE NO. 01-0758-CA
(LIVINGSTON ROAD, PROJECT NO. 60071) - STAFF TO
DEPOSIT $8,562 INTO THE REGISTRY OF THE COURT
Item # 16L 10
STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT RELATIVE TO THE
EASEMENT ACQUISITION ON PARCEL NOS. 703A, 803A AND
803B IN THE LAWSUIT ENTITLED COLLIER COUNTY V.
NAPLES ITALIAN AMERICAN CLUB, INC., ET AL., CASE NO.
98-1672-CA-01 (AIRPORT ROAD SIX-LANING PROJECT FROM
PINE RIDGE ROAD TO VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD) - STAFF
TO DEPOSIT THE SUM OF $15,000 INTO THE REGISTRY OF
THE COURT
Page 251
July 31,2001
Item # 16L 11
STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT RELATIVE TO THE
EASEMENT ACQUISITION ON PARCEL NO. 989 IN THE
LAWSUIT ENTITLED COLLIER COUNTY V. RADIO ROAD
JOINT VENTURE, ET AL., CASE NO. 98-1396-CA
(LIVINGSTON ROAD EXTENSION-GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY
TO RADIO ROAD) - STAFF TO DEPOSIT THE SUM OF $1,000
INTO THE REGISTRY OF THE COURT
Item # 16L 12
AUTHORIZATION OF AN OFFER OF JUDGMENT TO
RESPONDENTS, MICHAEL H. AND LINDA M. BAUM, FOR
PARCEL 123 IN THE AMOUNT OF $2,100, CASE NO. 99-3687-
CA (GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD PROJECT 63041) - STAFF
TO DEPOSIT $1,000 INTO THE REGISTRY OF THE COURT
Item # 16L 13
AGREED ORDER AWARDING EXPERT FEES IN THE
AMOUNT OF $11,160.27, RELATIVE TO THE EASEMENT
ACQUISITION OF PARCEL 145 IN THE LAWSUIT ENTITLED
COLLIER COUNTY V. OWEN M. WARD, TRUSTEE, ET AL.,
CASE NO. 99-1291-CA, PROJECT NO. 65031 (RADIO ROAD,
SANTA BARBARA BOULEVARD TO DAVIS BOULEVARD)
Item # 16L 14
Page 252
July 31,2001
AGREED ORDER AWARDING EXPERT FEES AND
ATTORNEY'S FEES AND COSTS RELATING TO PARCEL NO.
131 IN THE LAWSUIT ENTITLED COLLIER COUNTY V.
R.A.K. DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, INC., ET AL., CASE NO.
92-2791-CA-01-HDH (WIDENING OF IMMOKALEE ROAD
66043) - STAFF TO DEPOSIT $11,963.20 INTO THE REGISTRY
OF THE COURT
Item #16L 15
STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT RELATIVE TO THE
EASEMENT ACQUISITION OF PARCEL 168 IN THE LAWSUIT
ENTITLED COLLIER COUNTY V. JAMES R. NASH, ET AL,
(LIVINGSTON ROAD, PROJECT NO. 60071) - STAFF TO
DEPOSIT THE SUM OF $67,341 INTO THE REGISTRY OF THE
COURT
Item # 16L 16 - Deleted
Item # 16L 17
AMENDMENT NUMBER 3 TO LEGAL SERVICES
AGREEMENT WITH THE LAW FIRM OF CARLTON, FIELDS,
WARD, EMMANUEL, SMITH AND CUTLER, P.A. TO PROVIDE
FOR ADDITIONAL ATTORNEYS TO BE UTILIZED ON THE
VARIOUS ISSUES THE FIRM ADVISES THE COUNTY
Item #17A - Continued to 9/11/01
PETITION SNR-2001-AR-997, COLLIER COUNTY
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL
Page 253
July 31,2001
SERVICES, REPRESENTING COLLIER COUNTY,
REQUESTING A STREET NAME CHANGE FOR A PORTION
OF ANTIGUA STREET TO SAMAR LANE, LOCATED IN ISLES
OF CAPRI NO. 3,
Item #17B
RESOLUTION 2001-304, RE PETITION AVPLAT2001-AR710,
VACATING THE 10' WIDE EASEMENT LOCATED ALONG
THE LOT LINE COMMON TO LOTS 5 AND 6, BLOCK 1,
ACCORDING TO THE PLAT OF "NAPLES MANOR LAKES"
Item #17C
RESOLUTION 2001-305, RE PETITION VAC-00-024, TO
VACATE A PORTION OF "GATOR GATE" AND A PORTION
OF "GATOR GATE UNIT 1"
Item # 17D
RESOLUTION 2001-306, DISSOLVING WATER
MANAGEMENT DISTRICT NUMBER SEVEN
Item # 17E
RESOLUTION 2001-307, RE PETITION VA-2001-AR-848,
SCOTT A. LINCOLN, P.E., FROM L.A. CIVIL ENGINEERING
GROUP, REPRESENTING MARATHON ASHLAND
PETROLEUM, LLC. REQUESTING A 3.25 FOOT SIDE YARD
VARIANCE FROM THE 40 FOOT REQUIRED SIDE YARD AND
A 7.6 FOOT FRONT YARD VARIANCE FROM THE 50 FOOT
Page 254
July 31, 2001
REQUIRED FRONT YARD FOR AUTOMOBILE SERVICE
STATIONS FOR THE RE-BUILDING OF AN EXISTING
AUTOMOBILE SERVICE STATION LOCATED ON THE EAST
SIDE OF TAMIAMI TRAIL EAST AND THOMASSON DRIVE
Item # 17F
RESOLUTION 2001-308, RE PETITION VA-2001-AR-814,
MCANLY ENGINEERING AND DESIGN, INC.,
REPRESENTING GULF COAST DEVELOPMENT GROUP, LLC,
REQUESTING A 10 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE 25 FOOT
REAR YARD REQUIREMENT FOR COMMERCIAL
PROPERTIES WHEN ABUTTING A RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY,
TO 15 FEET FOR A PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE
OF TAMIAMI TRAIL NORTH, APPROXIMATELY ONE HALF
MILE NORTH OF TAMIAMI TRAIL AND OLD U S-41
Item #17G - Continued to 9/11/01
PETITION SNR-2001-AR- 1017, COLLIER COUNTY
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL
SERVICES DIVISION, REQUESTING A STREET NAME
CHANGE FOR THE PROPOSED EXTENSION OF LIVINGSTON
ROAD FROM LIVINGSTON ROAD TO LIVINGSTON
PARKWAY
Item # 17H
ORDINANCE 2001-43, CREATING THE VANDERBILT BEACH
BEAUTIFICATION MUNICIPAL SERVICES TAXING UNIT
Page 255
Item # 17I
July 31,2001
ORDINANCE 2001-44, ESTABLISHING THE PINE AIR LAKES
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
Item # 17J
ORDINANCE 2001-45, AMENDING CHAPTER 38, CIVIL
EMERGENCIES, ARTICLE III, DECLARATION OF STATE OF
EMERGENCY, OF THE COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS
AND ORDINANCES, ALSO KNOWN AS ORDINANCE 84-37,
AS AMENDED
There being no further business for the good of the County, the
meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 5'10 p.m.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS/EX
OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF
SPECIAL DISTRICTS UNDER ITS
CONTROL
~.~.
JAMES D?CARTER-, ~.D., CHAIRMAN
Page 256
July 31, 2001
ATTE, ST:
DWIGHT El BROCK, CLERK
'" TheSe,: minutes approved by the Board on
presented / or as co~ected
.,as
TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF DONOVAN COURT
REPORTING, INC., BY BARBARA A. DONOVAN AND
PAMELA HOLDEN
Page 257