BCC Minutes 10/28/2014 R BCC
REGULAR
MEETING
MINUTES
October 28, 2014
October 28, 2014
TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Naples, Florida, October 28, 2014
LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Board of County
Commissioners, in and for the County of Collier, and also acting as the
Board of Zoning Appeals and as the governing board(s) of such special
districts as have been created according to law and having conducted
business herein, met on this date at 9:00 a.m., in REGULAR SESSION
in Building "F" of the Government Complex, East Naples, Florida,
with the following members present:
CHAIRMAN: Tom Henning
Fred Coyle
Donna Fiala
Georgia Hiller
Tim Nance
ALSO PRESENT:
Leo Ochs, County Manager
Jeffrey A. Klatzkow, County Attorney
Crystal Kinzel, Office of the Clerk of Courts
Tim Durham, Executive Manager of Business Operations
Troy Miller, Communications & Customer Relations
Page 1
COLLIER COUNTY
Board of County Commissioners
Community Redevelopment Agency Board (CRAB)
Airport Authority
0t.I I,
A>
r 41020.
(41
AGENDA
Board of County Commission Chambers
Collier County Government Center
3299 Tamiami Trail East, 3rd Floor
Naples FL 34112
October 28, 2014
9:00 AM
Commissioner Tom Henning, District 3 - BCC Chair
Commissioner Tim Nance, District 5 - BCC Vice-Chair; TDC Chair
Commissioner Donna Fiala, District 1 - CRAB Chair
Commissioner Georgia Hiller, District 2 - Community & Economic Dev. Chair
Commissioner Fred W. Coyle, District 4 - CRAB Vice-Chair
NOTICE: ALL PERSONS WISHING TO SPEAK ON AGENDA ITEMS MUST
REGISTER PRIOR TO SPEAKING. SPEAKERS MUST REGISTER WITH THE
EXECUTIVE MANAGER TO THE BCC PRIOR TO PRESENTATION OF THE
AGENDA ITEM TO BE ADDRESSED. ALL REGISTERED SPEAKERS WILL
RECEIVE UP TO THREE (3) MINUTES UNLESS THE TIME IS ADJUSTED BY
THE CHAIRMAN.
COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 2003-53 AS AMENDED BY
ORDINANCE 2004-05 AND 2007-24, REQUIRES THAT ALL LOBBYISTS
SHALL, BEFORE ENGAGING IN ANY LOBBYING ACTIVITIES (INCLUDING
BUT NOT LIMITED TO, ADDRESSING THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS), REGISTER WITH THE CLERK TO THE BOARD AT THE
BOARD MINUTES AND RECORDS DEPARTMENT.
Page 1
October 28,2014
REQUESTS TO ADDRESS THE BOARD ON SUBJECTS WHICH ARE NOT ON
THIS AGENDA MUST BE SUBMITTED IN WRITING WITH EXPLANATION
TO THE COUNTY MANAGER AT LEAST 13 DAYS PRIOR TO THE DATE OF
THE MEETING AND WILL BE HEARD UNDER "PUBLIC PETITIONS."
PUBLIC PETITIONS ARE LIMITED TO THE PRESENTER, WITH A
MAXIMUM TIME OF TEN MINUTES.
ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THIS BOARD
WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDING PERTAINING THERETO,
AND THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD
OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE
TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED.
IF YOU ARE A PERSON WITH A DISABILITY WHO NEEDS ANY
ACCOMMODATION IN ORDER TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS PROCEEDING,
YOU ARE ENTITLED, AT NO COST TO YOU, THE PROVISION OF CERTAIN
ASSISTANCE. PLEASE CONTACT THE COLLIER COUNTY FACILITIES
MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT LOCATED AT 3335 EAST TAMIAMI TRAIL,
SUITE 1, NAPLES, FLORIDA, 34112-5356, (239) 252-8380; ASSISTED
LISTENING DEVICES FOR THE HEARING IMPAIRED ARE AVAILABLE IN
THE FACILITIES MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT.
LUNCH RECESS SCHEDULED FOR 12:00 NOON TO 1:00 P.M
1. INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
A. Pastor Jim Thomas - East Naples United Methodist Church
2. AGENDA AND MINUTES
A. Approval of today's regular, consent and summary agenda as amended (Ex
Parte Disclosure provided by Commission members for consent agenda.)
B. September 23, 2014 - BCC/Regular Meeting
C. October 7, 2014 - BCC/Bicycle Safety Workshop
3. SERVICE AWARDS
Page 2
October 28, 2014
4. PROCLAMATIONS
A. Proclamation recognizing the Red Sox Foundation and the Home Base
Program and its mission to heal the invisible wounds of war for post service
members, 9/11 veterans, and their families. To be accepted by General (Ret)
Frederick M. Franks, Jr. Sponsored by Commissioner Hiller.
B. Proclamation declaring November 15, 2014 as Florida Panther Festival Day.
To be accepted by Tom Trotta, Friends of the Florida Panther Refuge and
Brad Cornell, Audubon Society. Sponsored by Commissioner Nance.
C. Proclamation designating November 9-15, 2014 as Perioperative Nurse
Week. To be accepted by Linda L Savage, Florida Council of Perioperative
Registered Nurses (FCORN) and President of Shellcoast Association of
Perioperative Registered Nurses; Harriet Garman, member of Board of
Directors and Education Chair of FCORN. Sponsored by Commissioner
Henning.
D. Proclamation designating November 15-23, 2014 as Hunger and
Homelessness Awareness Week. To be accepted by Angela Fisher,
Executive Director, Collier County Hunger and Homeless Coalition.
Sponsored by the Board of County Commissioners.
E. Proclamation designating October 2014 as the 40th Anniversary of the Big
Cypress National Preserve. To be accepted by Pedro Ramos, Big Cypress
National Preserve Superintendent. Sponsored by Commissioner Nance.
5. PRESENTATIONS
A. Recommendation to recognize Becky Erickson, Accounting Technician,
Facilities Management, as the Employee of the Month for September 2014.
B. Presentation to the Board regarding Collier County's readiness position
regarding the Ebola threat. Presented by Dan Summers, Bureau of
Emergency Services.
6. PUBLIC PETITIONS
Item #7 to be heard no sooner than 1:00 pm unless otherwise noted.
Page 3
October 28, 2014
7. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS NOT ON THE CURRENT
OR FUTURE AGENDA
Item #8 and Item #9 to be heard no sooner than 1:30 pm unless otherwise noted.
8. BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
9. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Recommendation to consider an ordinance amending Ordinance number 04-
41, as amended, the Collier County Land Development Code, which
includes the comprehensive land regulations for the unincorporated area of
Collier County, Florida, by providing for: Section One, Recitals; Section
Two, Findings of Fact; Section Three, Adoption of Amendments to the Land
Development Code, more specifically amending the following: Chapter 1 -
General Provisions, including Section 1.08.02 Definitions; Chapter Two -
Zoning Districts and Uses, including Section 2.03.01 Agricultural Districts,
more specifically (1) to amend the permitted uses in the Agricultural and
Estate districts to allow hogs to be kept for show by children enrolled in a 4-
H development program, and (2)to amend the accessory uses in the Estate
District to allow off-site retail sale of fruits, vegetables, and nursery plants
grown on site; Chapter Four - Site Design and Development Standards,
including Section 4.02.07 Standards for Keeping Animals; Chapter Five -
Supplemental Standards, including Section 5.04.05 Temporary Events,
Section 5.05.05 Automobile Service Stations, more specifically, to allow
automobile service stations with more than 8 fuel pumps within 300 feet of
residential property to seek approval as part of a planned unit development
or conditional use; Section Four, Conflict and Severability; Section Five,
Inclusion in the Collier County Land Development Code; and Section Six,
Effective Date.
B. This item to be heard at 1:30 p.m. This item requires that ex parte
disclosure be provided by Commission members. Should a hearing be
held on this item, all participants are required to be sworn in. Standard
Pacific of Florida GP, Inc. requests an appeal to the Board of County
Commissioners of a final decision by the Collier County Planning
Commission to deny Petition BDE-PL20130001765 for a 32-foot boat dock
extension over the maximum 20-foot limit allowed by Section 5.03.06 of the
Land Development Code for a total protrusion of 52 feet to accommodate a
42 slip multi-family docking facility for the benefit of a 19.06 ± acre project
Page 4
October 28, 2014
to be known as Haldeman's Landing in Sections 11 and 14, Township 50
South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida [Petition ADA-
PL20140001454] (Companion to Petition ST-PL0000896 Haldeman's
Landing Special Treatment Permit).
C. Recommendation to deny the single petition within the 2013 Cycle 3 Growth
Management Plan Amendment for transmittal to the Florida Department of
Economic Opportunity for review and comments response of the Vincentian
Mixed Use Subdistrict, Transmittal Hearing.
10. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
A. Recommendation to accept information on the record contrary to
information presented under Agenda Item #10B to present factual
information available by public record regarding the Clerk of Courts
contract for banking services with First Florida Integrity Bank as adopted
under Agenda Item 13.A. at the September 23, 2014 Board meeting.
(Commissioner Henning)
B. Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners direct staff to
prepare an extension to the bank services agreement with 5/3 Bank to allow
the county to re-solicit the county's bank services contract under the Board
of County Commissioners, and to recognize that the bank services contract
with First Florida Integrity is void since it was procured illegally. 5/3 Bank
notified the County Manager ahead of the 9/23/14 Board meeting that it
agreed to a month-month extension which information was placed on the
record by Commissioner Hiller at the 9/23/14 Board meeting. Contrary to
the County Attorney's statement, no extenuating circumstances existed to
justify waiving the County's Purchasing ordinance and procurement
irregularities committed by the Clerk of Courts in his solicitation of the
banking services contract. Further, that the public record reflects that the
Clerk of Courts allowed First Florida Integrity Bank to modify its
solicitation response after all bank responses were a matter of public record
and the candidate banks had been interviewed, so as to make First Florida
Integrity Bank the lowest net cost bank, a fact known to and ignored by the
County Attorney. No other bank was allowed to modify its' response. That
additionally, First Florida Integrity Bank provided a non-conforming
response in that it did not have a trust company, a requirement to custody the
county's securities; and instead, First Florida Integrity Bank intended to
custody the county securities with a broker-dealer; that no custody
Page 5
October 28,2014
agreement with the third party custodial provider was submitted as required
by the solicitation; that the County Attorney had not even considered this
material deficiency in his review of the First Florida Integrity Bank contract
presented by the Clerk and approved by the Board on 9/23/14. That all these
facts were known by Commissioners Henning, Nance and Fiala before their
vote in favor of First Florida Integrity Bank on 9/23/14 since the evidence
was in the back up material provided by the Clerk, as attachments to his
agenda items. For these and other reasons already noted on the public
record, 5/3 Bank, Wells Fargo and Sun Trust, which competed against First
Florida Integrity Bank, have been irreparably harmed by the sham
procurement of banking services by the Board of County Commissioners
and the Clerk of Courts. (Commissioner Hiller)
11. COUNTY MANAGER'S REPORT
A. Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to execute
Contract No. 14-6343 -Tropical Storm (TS) Debbie Naples Beach
Renourishment (Sand Supply and Delivery) to supply and deliver
approximately 78,678 tons of beach quality sand as authorized by the
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) PW 0679-Naples Beach
Renourishment project to Phillips and Jordan, Inc. for $1,823,635.56
(Project 195-90038), authorize staff to withhold Notice-to-Proceed issuance
until the FEMA PW revision has been issued, authorize all required budget
amendments, and make a finding that this item promotes tourism. (Gary
McAlpin, Growth Management Division Coastal Zone Manager)
B. Recommendation to award Invitation to Bid (ITB) 14-6352 - Naples Beach
Renourishment (Sand Placement) to Earth Tech Enterprises, Inc., in the
amount of$748,861.20 to place, grade and transport approximately 78,678
tons of beach quality sand as authorized by the Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA) PW 0679-Naples Beach Renourishment to
repair damages as a result of Tropical Storm Debby (Project 195-90038),
authorize staff to withhold Notice-to-Proceed (NTP) issuance until the
FEMA PW revision has been issued, authorize all required budget
amendments, authorize the Chairman to execute the Agreement, and make a
finding that this item promotes tourism. (Gary McAlpin, Growth
Management Division Coastal Zone Manager)
C. Recommendation to review and approve the proposed Collier County 2015
State Legislative Priorities. (Debbie Wight, Legislative Affairs
Page 6
October 28, 2014
Coordinator)
D. Recommendation to award Bid Number 14-6316, "Modifications to Clarifier
1 and Bleach Piping System at the South County Water Reclamation
Facility," to Cardinal Contractors, Inc., in the amount of$1,961,000 for
Project Number 73969. (George Yilmaz, Public Utilities Administrator)
E. Recommendation to award Bid Number 14-6330, "Master Pump Station 109
Improvements," to Douglas N. Higgins, Inc., in the amount of$1,596,937
under Master Pump Station Technical Support Project Number 70050.
(George Yilmaz, Public Utilities Administrator)
F. Recommendation to approve an award for Invitation to Bid #14-6320
"Vanderbilt Beach MSTU Utility Underground Conversion Phase II and III,
Excavation/Boring, Conduit Installation, and Concrete Pad Placement" to
Danella Utility Company in the amount of$2,637,081. (Harry Sells, Public
Transit and Neighborhood Enhancement Department Project Manager)
G. This item to be heard immediately following Item #9B. This item
requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission members.
Should a hearing be held on this item, all participants are required to be
sworn in. Recommendation to approve a Resolution approving a Special
Treatment Development Permit to allow construction of a 42-slip docking
facility on submerged lands adjacent to property owned by Standard Pacific
of Florida with a zoning designation of RMF-6(3) and a Special Treatment
Overlay located in Sections 11 and 14, Township 50 South, Range 25 East,
Collier County, Florida [Petition ST-PL20140000896] (Companion to
Petition ADA-PL20140001454; ST-PL20140000896 shall be heard after
ADA-PL20140001454 and shall not be heard if the companion item is
denied). (Summer Araque, Principal Environmental Specialist)
12. COUNTY ATTORNEY'S REPORT
13. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
14. AIRPORT AUTHORITY AND/OR COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY
A. AIRPORT
Page 7
October 28, 2014
B. COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
1) Recommendation that the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA)
review and accept an offer to purchase CRA owned property in the
Gateway mini-triangle by Fortino Construction & Development, LLC
and Assignee for construction of a mixed-use development project
comprising residential, hotel and rooftop restaurant and retail uses;
authorize the CRA Chairman to execute all documents necessary to
facilitate the sale and authorize staff to deposit the funds received
from the sale into the appropriate account.
15. STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS
A. Current BCC Workshop Schedule.
16. CONSENT AGENDA - ALL MATTERS LISTED UNDER THIS ITEM ARE
CONSIDERED TO BE ROUTINE AND ACTION WILL BE TAKEN BY
ONE MOTION WITHOUT SEPARATE DISCUSSION OF EACH ITEM. IF
DISCUSSION IS DESIRED BY A MEMBER OF THE BOARD, THAT
ITEM(S) WILL BE REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND
CONSIDERED SEPARATELY.
A. GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION
1) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the water and sewer
utility facilities for Fairgrove at Talis Park PL20120001256 and to
authorize the County Manager, or his designee, to release the Final
Obligation Bond in the amount of$4,000 to the Project Engineer or
the Developer's designated agent.
2) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the water and sewer
utility facilities for Brightling at Talis Park, PL20120002875, and to
authorize the County Manager, or his designee, to release the Final
Obligation Bond in the amount of$4,000 to the Project Engineer or
the Developer's designated agent.
3) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the privately owned
utility facility for Naples/Marco Island KOA Kampground,
Page 8
October 28, 2014
PL#20130000303, and authorize the County Manager, or his
designee, to release a Utility Performance Security (UPS) and Final
Obligation Bond in the total amount of$9,125.80 to the Project
Engineer or the Developer's designated agent.
4) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the sewer utility
facility for Naples/Marco Island KOA Kampground PL20120000060
and to authorize the County Manager, or his designee, to release the
Utilities Performance Security (UPS) and Final Obligation Bond in
the total amount of$4,600 to the Project Engineer or the Developer's
designated agent.
5) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the water and sewer
utility facilities for Italia, PL#20130002058.
6) Recommendation to authorize the Clerk of Courts to release
Irrevocable Standby Letter of Credit No. 5195512157667 in the
amount of$25,000 which was posted as a guaranty for Excavation
Permit Number 60.043, (PL20110002185) for work associated with
The Conservancy of Southwest Florida.
7) Recommendation to authorize the Clerk of Courts to release a
Performance Bond in the amount of$63,420 which was posted as a
development guaranty for work associated with Maple Ridge at Ave
Maria Phase 2, Early Work Authorization (EWA) PL20130002336.
8) This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by
Commission members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all
participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to
approve for recording the final plat of Cambria, (Application Number
PL20120000792) approval of the standard form Construction and
Maintenance Agreement and approval of the amount of the
performance security.
9) Recommendation to approve one (1) Adopt-A-Road Program
Agreement name change for the road segment of Capri Boulevard,
from the Capri Water Tower to the end of Capri Boulevard, for the
volunteer group Capri Realty and cancel the existing agreement with
Christopher Realty for the same road segment with two (2)
Page 9
October 28, 2014
recognition signs at a total cost of$60.
10) Recommendation to cancel the Adopt-a-Road Agreement with
sponsor T. G. I. Friday's and to allow the roadway segment of Golden
Gate Parkway from Airport Road to Livingston Road to become
available for adoption as part of the Adopt-a-Road Program.
11) Recommendation to approve an easement agreement for the purchase
of a road right-of-way, drainage and utility easement (Parcel
268RDUE) required for the expansion of Golden Gate Boulevard
from east of Wilson Boulevard to 20th Street East. (Project No.
60040.) Estimated Fiscal Impact: $12,987.
12) Recommendation to approve an easement agreement for the purchase
of a Road Right-of-Way, Drainage and Utility Easement (Parcel
255RDUE) required for the expansion of Golden Gate Boulevard
from east of Wilson Boulevard to 20th Street East. Project No. 60040
(Fiscal Impact: $3,100).
13) Recommendation to approve an easement agreement for the purchase
of two Road Right-of-Way, Drainage and Utility Easements (Parcels
197RDUE and 226RDUE) required for the expansion of Golden Gate
Boulevard from east of Wilson Boulevard to 20th Street East. Project
No. 60040 (Fiscal Impact: Approximately $9,125).
14) Recommendation to approve an easement agreement for the purchase
of a Road Right-of-Way, Drainage and Utility Easement (Parcel
173RDUE) required for the expansion of Golden Gate Boulevard
from east of Wilson Boulevard to 20th Street East. Project No. 60040
(Fiscal Impact: Approximately $2,600).
15) Recommendation to approve an easement agreement for the purchase
of a Road Right-of-Way, Drainage and Utility Easement (Parcel
257RDUE) required for the expansion of Golden Gate Boulevard
from east of Wilson Boulevard to 20th Street East. Project No. 60040
(Fiscal Impact: $3,600).
16) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to sign an
Interlocal Agreement between the City of Naples and Collier County
for Utility work in the estimated amount of$176,255.77, and reserve
Page 10
October 28, 2014
$44,475.71 as a utility allowance, for a total of$220,731.48; as an
integral part of the Collier Boulevard Roadway (Green Boulevard to
Golden Gate Boulevard) improvements, Project No. 68056.
17) Recommendation to award Bid #14-6299 to Stage Door II, Inc. for the
"Immokalee Sidewalk Improvements" project for construction of
sidewalk improvements on Second Avenue North, North Second
Street, and Escambia Street in the amount of$306,920.25 (Project
#33329) and recognize and approve a Local Agency Program (LAP)
Agreement schedule change.
18) Recommendation to approve a $546,837 Work Order under Request
For Quotation #14-6213-7 to Douglas N. Higgins, Inc., to construct
the stormwater improvements in Golden Gate City (20th Ct. SW, 46th
Terr. SW & 48th St. SW), Project No. 51029.
19) Recommendation to approve South Florida Water Management
District (SFWMD) Agreement No. 4600003145 and to authorize any
necessary budget amendments to recognize grant funding in the
amount of$1,250,000 and to recognize a grant match in the amount of
$3,750,000 for the construction of the Lely Area Stormwater
Improvement Project (LASIP)/County Barn Road Project 33384.
20) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to sign a
revised Local Area Program (LAP) Agreement with the Florida
Department of Transportation (FDOT) to amend the project's
description and responsibilities of the Agreement; and to execute a
new Resolution memorializing the Board's action; for the Design, CEI
and Construction services to add new Bridges in Golden Gate Estates
at 8th Street NE, 16th Street NE and 47th Avenue NE. Project 33340.
There is no change to the previously approved FDOT grant funding
for this project.
21) Recommendation to approve the release of a code enforcement lien
with an accrued value of$20,180.86, for payment of$9,180.86, in the
code enforcement action entitled Board of County Commissioners v.
Park East Dev. Ltd., Code Enforcement Board Case No.
CESD20120006530, relating to property located at 5100 27th Place
SW, Collier County, Florida.
Page 11
October 28,2014
22) Recommendation to approve the release of a code enforcement lien
with an accrued value of$44,236.80, for payment of$1,036.80, in the
code enforcement action entitled Board of County Commissioners v.
Amerada Hess, Corp., Code Enforcement Board Case No. 2005-38,
relating to property located at 6300 Davis Blvd., Collier County,
Florida.
23) Recommendation to approve the release of a code enforcement lien
with an accrued value of$71,229.36, for payment of$679.36, in the
code enforcement action entitled Board of County Commissioners v.
Jennifer Kennedy, Code Enforcement Special Magistrate Case No.
CEPM20140005517, relating to property located at 3156 55th Terrace
SW, Collier County, Florida.
24) Recommendation to approve an Adopt-A-Road Program Agreement
for the segment of Immokalee Road from Wilson Boulevard to Rock
Road, with two (2) recognition signs at a total cost of$60 with the
volunteer group, Golden Gate Traffic School.
25) Recommendation to further streamline the building permit process by
offering the customer the added convenience of electronically
forwarding the Notice of Commencement (NOC) to the Clerk of
Courts for recording. A $5 NOC convenience fee for this optional
service is recommended to offset processing costs, pursuant to Section
2-11 of the Collier County Administrative Code.
26) Recommendation to adopt a Resolution for the approval of a Locally
Funded Agreement between the Florida Department of
Transportation (hereinafter FDOT) and Collier County for the
painting of traffic signal structures on FDOT's Project FPID #429120-
1-52-01 and to authorize the Chairman to sign a Resolution and the
Locally Funded Agreement. (Fiscal Impact ($45,778)
B. COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
C. PUBLIC UTILITIES DIVISION
1) Recommendation to award Invitation to Bid Number 14-6340, "Small
Meters Change Out," to Vanguard Utility Service, Inc., in the amount
of$363,648.22 for Project Number 70010, "Meter Renewal and
Page 12
October 28,2014
Replacement Project."
2) Recommendation to approve a $363,559 work order under Request
for Quotation #14-6213-6 to Douglas N. Higgins, Inc., to install a new
wastewater force main from Victoria Park to Goodlette Frank Road
under North County Water Reclamation Facility Technical Support
Project Number 73968.
D. PUBLIC SERVICES DIVISION
1) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to sign three
Memorandums of Agreement with the Florida Fish and Wildlife
Conservation Commission to allow youth hunts for Collier County
residents at Pepper Ranch Preserve in November 2014, January 2015,
and February 2015.
2) Recommendation to approve and authorize payment to Florida Power
& Light Company in the amount of$7,782 for a non-refundable
Engineering Deposit required for design plans for Phase IV of the
Vanderbilt Beach Municipal Service Taxing Unit Aerial to
Underground Conversion Project.
3) Recommendation to approve First Amendment to the Agreement for
Child Advocacy Supervised Visitation with Collier County Child
Advocacy Council, Inc. d/b/a Children's Advocacy Center funded by
the Department of Justice Office of Violence Against Women.
4) Recommendation to approve two substantial amendments to the U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Community
Development Block Grant FY2011-2012 HUD Annual Action Plan.
5) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to sign a
release of lien for Countywide impact fee deferral.
6) Recommendation to grant an exception to the suspension of the Short
Sale Policy for a satisfaction of mortgage for State Housing Initiatives
Partnership Program loan, accepting $1,500 to satisfy the $15,000
value of the initial mortgage.
Page 13
October 28, 2014
7) Recommendation to award the Invitation To Bid No. 14-6248
"Pharmacy Services" to Woolley's Pharmacy, Inc. and Collier Health
Services, Inc.
8) Recommendation to approve the MakerLab Club Application with 3D
Systems Inc. in order for the Collier County Public Library to receive
four 3D printers for public programming use with a value of$4,000.
9) Recommendation to award RFP #14-6332 for Exotic Vegetation
Removal to six firms (in no particular order): Collier Environmental
Services; EarthBalance; Earth Tech Environmental, LLC;
Environmental Restoration Consultants, Inc.; Kevin Erwin Consulting
Ecologist, Inc.; and Sandhill Environmental Services, LLC and
authorize the Chairman to execute a standard County contract.
10) Recommendation to appropriate $36,000 from Museum Reserves to
purchase and improve Vacant Lot #8374156004 in Everglades City,
accept donation of$30,000 from the Friends of the Museum of the
Everglades towards acquisition of the property, approve all
transaction documents, and approve the attached budget amendments.
11) Recommendation to approve the FY 14-15 contract with the State of
Florida Department of Health for the operation of the Collier County
Health Department in the amount of$1,289,500.
E. ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DIVISION
1) Recommendation to approve the sale of and disposal of surplus assets
per Resolution 2013-095.
2) This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by
Commission members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all
participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to
renew the North Naples Fire Control and Rescue District's Certificate
of Public Convenience and Necessity for Advanced Life Support non-
transport services for one year and authorize the Chairman to execute
the Permit and Certificate.
F. COUNTY MANAGER OPERATIONS
Page 14
October 28, 2014
1) Recommendation to adopt a resolution approving amendments
(appropriating grants, donations, contributions or insurance proceeds)
to the Fiscal Year 2014-15 Adopted Budget.
G. AIRPORT AUTHORITY
1) Recommendation to approve and execute an Amendment to Collier
County Airport Authority Standard Form Lease for Salazar Machine
& Steel, Inc. revising the liability insurance requirements.
2) Recommendation to approve and execute an Amendment to Collier
County Airport Authority Standard Form Lease for Fletcher Flying
Services, Inc. revising the liability insurance requirements related to
the mobile office structure.
H. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
1) Recommendation to reappoint member to the Immokalee
Beautification MSTU Advisory Committee.
2) Recommendation to reappoint one member to the Collier County
Citizens Corps.
3) Recommendation to appoint two members to the Affordable Housing
Advisory Committee.
I. MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
J. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
1) Board declaration of expenditures serving a valid public purpose and
approval of disbursements for the period of October 9, 2014 through
October 15, 2014.
2) Board declaration of expenditures serving a valid public purpose and
approval of disbursements for the period of October 16, 2014 through
October 22, 2014.
3) Recommendation to endorse the United States Department of Justice
and United States Department of Treasury combined Equitable
Page 15
October 28, 2014
Sharing Agreement and Certification through September 2015.
K. COUNTY ATTORNEY
1) Recommendation to authorize an increase to the purchase order for
Nabors, Giblin & Nickerson, P.A. ("Nabors Giblin") relating to legal
services in the case of Collier County v. Orange Tree Utility Co., et al,
Case No. 2014-CA-001434.
2) Recommendation to approve an Amendment to Agreement for Legal
Services for the Retention Agreement with Baker, Donelson,
Bearman, Caldwell & Berkowitz, P.C. by changing the date of the
Agreement to be September 1, 2014 to September 1, 2016 and by
amending Exhibit "A."
3) Recommendation to approve a Mediated Settlement Agreement in the
amount of$140,000 along with statutory attorney's fees for the
acquisition of Parcel 116RDUE in the lawsuit styled Collier County v.
Kaye Homes, Inc., et al, Case No. 10-CA-2680, for the Collier
Boulevard expansion (Project No. 68056) (Fiscal Impact $80,683.75).
4) Recommendation to approve a Mediated Settlement Agreement in the
amount of$20,000 along with statutory attorney's fees for the
acquisition of Parcel 117RDUE in the lawsuit styled Collier County v.
Timothy Maloney, et al, Case No. 10-CA-2690, for the Collier
Boulevard expansion (Project No. 68056) (Fiscal Impact $14,783).
5) Recommendation to approve a Stipulated Final Judgment as to RTG,
LLC, for Attorney's Fees and Expert Fees and Costs related to the
Taking of Parcels 119FEE and 119TCE in the case styled Collier
County v. RTG, LLC, et al., Case No. 13-CA-259, relating to the
intersection improvements at SR 951 (Collier Blvd.) and US 41
(Project No. 60116) (Fiscal Impact $16,000).
6) Recommendation to authorize the County Attorney's Office to make
an Offer of Judgment to Party Defendant, Pinegate 135, LLC, in the
amount of$40,001 to settle any and all apportionment claims related
to the taking of Parcels 150FEE, 150SE and 150TCE in the lawsuit
styled Collier County v. LDJ Associates, Ltd., et al., Case No. 13-CA-
1238 (Collier Boulevard Expansion Project No. 68056 from Green
Page 16
October 28, 2014
Boulevard to Golden Gate Boulevard). Fiscal Impact: $40,001 plus
attorney fees as may be awarded by the court in accordance with
Section 73.092(2).
7) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to sign and
record two (2) Satisfaction of Final Judgment forms in the case of
Orange Tree Utility Co. ("OTU") v. Collier County, Case No. 2007-
CA-002333, for the payment of Trial Level and Appellate Level
Attorneys' Fees and Costs by OTU to Collier County in the total
amount, including accrued interest, of$302,938.25.
17. SUMMARY AGENDA - THIS SECTION IS FOR ADVERTISED PUBLIC
HEARINGS AND MUST MEET THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA: 1) A
RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL FROM STAFF; 2) UNANIMOUS
RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL BY THE COLLIER COUNTY
PLANNING COMMISSION OR OTHER AUTHORIZING AGENCIES OF
ALL MEMBERS PRESENT AND VOTING; 3) NO WRITTEN OR ORAL
OBJECTIONS TO THE ITEM RECEIVED BY STAFF, THE COLLIER
COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION, OTHER AUTHORIZING
AGENCIES OR THE BOARD, PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF
THE BCC MEETING ON WHICH THE ITEMS ARE SCHEDULED TO BE
HEARD; AND 4) NO INDIVIDUALS ARE REGISTERED TO SPEAK IN
OPPOSITION TO THE ITEM. FOR THOSE ITEMS WHICH ARE QUASI-
JUDICIAL IN NATURE, ALL PARTICIPANTS MUST BE SWORN IN.
A. This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission
members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all participants are
required to be sworn in. Recommendation to approve a resolution
amending Development Order 84-1, as amended, for the Toll Gate
Commercial Center Development of Regional Impact by providing for:
Section One, Amendments to Development Order by extending the
expiration date and the buildout date to August 1, 2021; Section Two,
Findings of Fact; Section Three, Conclusions of Law; and Section Four,
Effect of Previously Issued Development Orders, Transmittal to Department
of Economic Opportunity and Effective Date. The subject property is
located at the intersection of Collier Boulevard and Beck Boulevard in
Section 35, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, and Section 2, Township 50
South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida [Petition DOA-
Page 17
October 28, 2014
PL20140000561].
B. This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission
members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all participants are
required to be sworn in. Recommendation to approve an Ordinance
amending Ordinance Number 2004-41, as amended, the Collier County
Land Development Code, which established the comprehensive zoning
regulations for the unincorporated area of Collier County, Florida, by
amending the appropriate zoning atlas map or maps by changing the zoning
classification of the herein described real property from a Commercial
Professional and General Office zoning district within the Gateway Triangle
Mixed Use Overlay - Mixed Use subdistrict (C-1-GTMUD-MXD) and a
Residential Multi-Family-6 zoning district within the Gateway Triangle
Mixed Use Overlay - Residential subdistrict (RMF-6-GTMUD-R) to a
Residential Multi-Family-6 zoning district within the Gateway Triangle
Mixed Use Overlay - Residential subdistrict (RMF-6-GTMUD-R) for the
project known as Breeze of Calusa, located on three parcels just south of
Calusa Avenue and west of Airport Pulling Road in Section 11, Township
50 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida, consisting of 4.69+/- acres
subject to conditions; and by providing an effective date [RZ-
PL20130001752].
C. Recommendation to adopt a resolution approving amendments
(appropriating carry forward, transfers and supplemental revenue) to the
Fiscal Year 2014-15 Adopted Budget.
18. ADJOURN
INQUIRIES CONCERNING CHANGES TO THE BOARD'S AGENDA SHOULD
BE MADE TO THE COUNTY MANAGER'S OFFICE AT 252-8383.
Page 18
October 28, 2014
October 28, 2014
MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, you have a live mike.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Good morning, everyone. Welcome to
the Board of Commissioners' October 28, 2014, regular meeting. If
you would either silence or turn off your cell phones, it would help us
-- assist us to conduct a meaningful meeting.
Today's invocation will be by Pastor Jim Thomas from the East
Naples United Methodist Church. Would you all rise.
Item #1A
INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
PASTOR THOMAS: May we pray. Dear Lord, we come here
this morning asking for the help of the spirit as we offer this prayer in
your name.
Father, we come here today wanting to put the unity in
community. May, Lord, we overcome any personal disagreements in
the individual agendas that are here today, dear Lord, so the good of
the community will be what is served.
We have been put here to serve, dear Lord, not to be served. And
may we open up our minds and open up our hearts to hear what each
other has to say and, most importantly, dear Lord, to hear what it is
you would have us to do.
And we come humbly offering this prayer in your name. Amen.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Now the Pledge of Allegiance.
(The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: That was a meaningful prayer. Thank
you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Great one, if we all adhere to it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: County Manager, would you walk us
through today's change sheet?
Page 2
October 28, 2014
Item #2A
TODAY'S REGULAR, CONSENT AND SUMMARY AGENDA
AS AMENDED. (EX PARTE DISCLOSURE PROVIDED BY
COMMISSION MEMBERS FOR CONSENT/SUMMARY
AGENDA) - APPROVED AND/OR ADOPTED W/CHANGES AS
DETAILED
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir, Mr. Chairman. Good morning.
Commissioners, these are the proposed agenda changes for the
Board of County Commissioners' meeting of October 8 (sic), 2014.
Commissioners, I'm pleased to tell you I have no specific changes
to the order of the agenda. I just have a few time-certain items I would
like to confirm or not -- or not with the board.
The first of those is Item 11C on your agenda. That's the item
having to do with the presentation of your state legislative priorities,
and that item has been asked to be heard at 11 a.m.
The next item for time-certain hearing is Item 9B. It's an
advertised public hearing having to do with the boat dock extension
request. That item was scheduled -- is scheduled for 1 :30 p.m.
time-certain. To be heard immediately following would be Item 11G.
That is a companion item.
Now, I know that the commission received a one-way
communication yesterday from the chairman regarding those two
items, and I'll let him address that.
And then, finally, Commissioners, Item 14B1 under your CRA is
scheduled to be heard at 2 p.m. this afternoon.
We have court reporter breaks scheduled for 10:30 and 2:50. And
just a reminder, no public hearing items are heard sooner than 1 :30
p.m.
Page 3
October 28, 2014
And those are all the changes I have, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
County Attorney?
MR. KLATZKOW: No changes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Ex parte communication.
Commissioner Coyle, do you have any further changes or ex parte
communication?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No further changes to the agenda. I
have ex parte disclosure for two items on the summary agenda, and
that's 17A and 17B, and I have just reviewed the staff reports dated
9/18/14 in both cases, and that concludes my ex parte disclosure.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you very much. As far as
disclosures go, on the consent agenda, I have no disclosures. On the
summary agenda I have two. On 17A, I've received correspondence,
and also a staff report, and on 17B I've had meetings and
correspondence, I've spoken with staff, updates with Mark Strain, and
a staff report.
And also, Commissioner, I respectfully would ask -- I saw your
note, and I think that's great. I think it's great that you had gone out
there. That's wonderful. I think some surprising things are going to be
coming up today, and I would ask that we do hear that at 1 :30 as we
had planned, if you would consider that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah. It's whatever the majority
wants to do.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I just -- I know that some of this is an
emotional issue, and I think that we can -- you know, if we're going to
hear it and then continue it later on, we're going to be wasting the
public's time twice.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: We might.
Page 4
October 28, 2014
CHAIRMAN HENNING: However, you know, I respect your
opinion and --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- and again, Commissioner Fiala did
-- let me do my ex parte communication first.
17E2, I received the application that was sent to me by the
County Manager's Office. 17A was staffs report on the Tollgate
Plaza. 17B, staffs report on that item.
And I do want to make a separate motion to continue Items 9B
and 11G, and that's the boat dock extension on our agenda. I did go
down there with the county attorney by boat, and Mark Strain, we
looked at that, that whole -- not only that shoreline, but the wraparound
of that property.
And I feel there's at least two options that should be vetted out so
that when the public comes back, they will have a full understanding
what is being presented.
So I'm going to make a motion that we reprimand --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Remand.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Remand. Reprimand? Remand, thank
you -- these items, or 9B and continue 11C to the hearing officer for a
nonbinding recommendation to the Board of Commissioners. That's
my motion.
Is there a second?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I will second that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Discussion, Commissioner
Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. I can't accept what you're
proposing, because the law with respect to what the hearing officer is
supposed to do and can and can't do is very clear and doesn't allow for
what you're asking of him.
The Planning Commission had the opportunity to review this.
Page 5
October 28, 2014
They gave their opinion, and now what you're suggesting is that the
hearing officer who couldn't hear this in the first place because of the
amount of public opposition facing this petition, is being, in effect,
asked to step in the shoes of the Planning Commission and provide an
advisory opinion to the board. That's unacceptable.
And I have to agree with Commissioner Fiala. You know, unless
there is some other compelling reason to continue this, this matter
should be heard today. Everyone in the community knows that it's
going to happen at a time-certain. They want to come and be heard.
The petitioner, again, unless they provide a compelling reason to
support a continuance, would want this petition heard as well.
So I absolutely cannot support it. It's not supported by law, and
it's unfair to the community.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Jeff, is there anything unlawful of my
motion?
MR. KLATZKOW: No.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah, okay. And I did speak to the
county manager about my recommendation prior to even sending the
memo.
Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Just remember that my remarks that
are about -- I'm about to make, the devil made me do this. Where are
her horns? You're not wearing them, are you?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Let me put them on just for you.
Hang on.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I want to make sure that you can
properly assert a defense as you go forward with what you're about to
say.
So go ahead, speak into the mike. And the camera is on me, so if
you have to say the devil made you do it, you can, and everyone will
Page 6
October 28, 2014
know it's true.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Well, it's true.
But there are things that have been known to the residents for a
long time. And they did make comments on the record concerning
these things at the time that it went through the Planning Commission,
but none of that has been included in the executive summary which the
Board of County Commissioners has received today.
It has never been officially placed on the record, and that is the
proof of what the residents know has never been presented for the
official record.
So I find it hard to oppose a motion to gather additional
information, because there are things that we all need to know and take
into consideration. I'm disappointed that these things were not
included in the original record and were not given to us before this
time, but it's my belief that they did, indeed, brief some of the
commissioners about this over the past several months.
But I think there's merit to at least getting more information and
having a complete executive summary in our packet that is part of the
official record, because we have to make the decision based upon the
official record. And so I think there's merit in doing that. In fact, I
think it is beneficial to the residents who are concerned about this
development because they will have the time necessary to come in and
present this information and provide official documentation of their
positions.
So I believe it's a good idea. The only improvement I could make
on the chairman's motion would be to send it to the Planning
Commission and let the Planning Commission review it.
I'm concerned that there were only four members of the Planning
Commission who voted on this. One recused himself because of a
conflict of interest. I don't know what that conflict is. I'd like to know.
The chairman was not even present for the meeting, so I'm
Page 7
October 28, 2014
concerned about that process. And I think that it's -- it would serve our
interests to have it reviewed additionally.
And I would suggest that it be sent through the Planning
Commission once again, but if that is not deemed appropriate, then I
would support having the hearing examiner take a look at it and give
us a nonbinding recommendation.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: County Attorney, Commissioner
Coyle is recommending that it go back to the Planning Commission,
and I think he's indicated the chairman be there and Commissioner
Rosen state his reasons for abstaining, I believe, not participating.
MR. KLATZKOW: He recused himself.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Recused himself.
MR. KLATZKOW: Mr. Strain cannot hear this as a member of
the Planning Commission, because the Planning Commission role in a
boat dock extension is one not for recommendation but to actually give
a decision. That decision's being appealed here.
And under the -- to keep him away from the dual-officer issue
that we have in the Florida constitution, when we created the hearing
examiner, we separated those roles. So he can't do both. Normally he
can sit on the Planning Commission because it's just a body that
recommends.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: He cannot do both, but can we,
through the motion, have the hearing officer hear it, make
recommendations to the Board of Commissioners through the Planning
Commission?
MR. KLATZKOW: No, I wouldn't -- I think it's either/or. Either
send it back to the Planning Commission and ask them to get a better
record for you, as Commissioner Coyle suggests, or send it to Mr.
Strain for a recommendation.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, that was, in fact, my motion,
Page 8
October 28, 2014
or my suggestion.
I wasn't suggesting that we send it through the hearing examiner
before we send it to the Planning Commission. The hearing examiner
hasn't officially heard this and hasn't issued an opinion on it.
MR. KLATZKOW: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So there would be no conflict if we
sent it to the Planning Commission, right?
MR. KLATZKOW: There's no conflict, but Mr. Strain cannot sit
on the Planning Commission in this role.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Explain to me why not.
MR. KLATZKOW: Because under your LDC, the board
delegated the duty of issuing boat dock permits to the Planning
Commission. It's a final order. That final order is being appealed here,
and Mr. Strain cannot give final orders as a hearing examiner and final
orders as a Planning Commissioner without violating the dual-officer
problem.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Even though he never -- never
offered an opinion --
MR. KLATZKOW: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- while he was acting as the
planning --
MR. KLATZKOW: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- or the hearing officer?
MR. KLATZKOW: We're trying to keep his hat separate.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Might I also suggest one other
thing? We have no way of contacting all these people that are coming
this afternoon. They're going to be showing up because they, in good
faith, have been told that their agenda item is at 1 :30, and I don't think
it's fair to these people either.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, I understand your concern. It's
Page 9
October 28, 2014
not the first time that we've done this. And I was going to ask my aide
to email all of the --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, but who would they email?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Email the people who emailed us.
That's what I would ask my aide to do; however, let me get to
Commissioner Hiller -- she was first -- and then come back to you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's what I wanted to say.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, you'll be the final say.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. We're creating a process
that is not approved by our ordinances. We're -- by introducing the
hearing officer as someone who can give a nonbinding opinion on a
final vote by the Planning Commission, we're creating an
administrative process that has not existed before and is not provided
for by law. So I don't see how we can do that. It's just not fair to the
parties.
I -- if what Commissioner Coyle says is true, that there is
evidence that was not introduced on the record by our staff that should
have been included that works to the benefit of the side that considers
itself-- itself aggrieved, which I think you're referring to the public --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Correct.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- that is in opposition.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Then it would make sense to allow
the Planning Commission to rehear this. And, yes, Commissioner
Rosen should disclose why he is recusing himself. That should be on
the record to make sure that it's a recusal with merit. But I can't
support continuing this in order to allow the hearing officer to hear this
matter.
Now, Commissioner Fiala, you said that there was information
Page 10
October 28, 2014
that you had that was going to come to light this afternoon that was
important to this matter and had to -- and why it should be heard
today?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Is that something you can talk
about now to help us make the decision as to whether to continue or --
and remand it to the Planning Commission or hear it today?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, there are a few things; I don't
know if I can talk about it today. You know, we're probably taking as
much time as it would have been to present the whole item this
afternoon --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, it goes to the issue of the
decision, though.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. One of the things was the
developer had already been approved to build 51 boat slips in a basin,
in a boat basin right there.
Now, why they diverted from that to building these slips in a
narrow channel, I do not know, but that hasn't been brought forward up
till this point, although these people already have an approval to do
that.
And the second thing is that I don't believe it's been mentioned
that the developer wants to dredge the channel, and that's fine; we
know that on the record. But who does -- who pays for that? Right
now, the channel -- and Commissioner Henning a few years back,
when the people said their canal keeps silting in, he says, well, you
know, we're not going to pay for that. If you want it, you pay for it, if
you remember.
And so we established the Haldeman Creek MSTU so that the
people would pay for it themselves.
Windstar is not a part of that MSTU. It took them a few years,
but they finally had enough money together to dredge it? And they
Page 11
October 28, 2014
keep it dredged and keep it looking nice.
When these new docks would be built -- they want to put them in.
They said they had to dredge in order to be able to do that, but once
they dredge, as it silts back in, then who's going to continue to dredge
it. And who's going to pay for it? And they said, well -- you know,
well, we weren't planning on doing that, but then it came to be at a
meeting, they said, well, they would, but they would -- they would
base the MSTU on the dock price rather than the homestead or their
property value whereas --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So their contribution would be
significantly less.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- everybody else in the MSTU has
to base it on their property value. So these people would be paying for
that, yet they've already got a boat basin that's clear and ready to go.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, they would be paying
disproportionately less than the other property owners.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, absolutely. Those are two
things.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Mr. Chairman, could I just clarify
something?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It's my impression -- and I could be
wrong, but it's my impression that the reason that the developer is
changing the location of the boat docks is they could not get a state
permit from the DEP to do the dredging that they previously had
wanted to do so they -- they, in essence, don't have an option in their
minds. And if I'm incorrect about that, County Manager, please tell
me.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: He doesn't know.
MR. OCHS: No. I'll have to verify that with staff
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala, you want the last
Page 12
October 28, 2014
word?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I feel that we should at least be
here to listen to the people and -- after they've all prepared all of their
documents, prepared their presentation. They're a nice group of
people, and I hate to close the door on them.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Can --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Nope.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries 3-2, Commissioner
Fiala and Commissioner Hiller dissenting.
Now we're going to -- further go onto ex parte communication by
Commissioner Hiller and any other changes to today's agenda.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: As far as ex parte goes, I have, on
11G, correspondence, emails, and calls, and I reviewed the staff report;
no disclosures on 16A8, 16E2; and on the summary agenda, on 17A, I
reviewed the staff report for -- and also for 17B.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
Commissioner Nance?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes. I would like to pull, for a
brief discussion, Item 16A26, which refers to traffic signal structures.
As far as ex parte disclosure on today's regular agenda, I will go
ahead and disclose on -- even though we've remanded it -- 9A and
11G, I've read the staff report. I've had meetings with the petitioner,
meetings with staff, received numerous letters and emails which I've
included in my ex parte.
Page 13
October 28, 2014
On today's summary agenda, on Items 17A and 17B, I have read
the staff report and regard -- following up on that, I would like to make
a motion that we approve today's regular, consent, and the summary
agenda as amended.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: There's a motion on the floor. Is there
a second to the motion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I'll second it for discussion.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I would like to make one little
discussion on today's consent agenda.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Well, let's identify what
16A26 is going to be. That's going to be 11 --
MR. OCHS: 11H, Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- H. Okay.
Go ahead, Commissioner Nance.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: There's a very, very good-news
item in today's consent agenda, and that is Item 16D10, which is the
acquisition by the museum of the Everglades of an adjacent parcel.
And it's very correct of us to acknowledge the great and generous
donation of the Friends of the Museum of the Everglades, who I see
representatives in attendance with us today, who have donated $30,000
to the effort to acquire an adjacent piece of property that will greatly
benefit the Museum of the Everglades.
So I think we should acknowledge the generosity of the Friends
of the Museum and the great opportunity we have to make that facility
much better down in Everglades City. So I think that's very
appropriate.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Discussion on the motion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Seeing none, all in favor of the
motion, signify by saying aye.
Page 14
October 28, 2014
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries 4-1, Commissioner
Hiller dissenting.
Page 15
Proposed Agenda Changes
Board of County Commissioners Meeting
October 28,2014
Time Certain Requests:
Item 11C to be heard at 11:00 a.m.
Item 9B to be heard at 1:30 p.m.
Item 11G to be heard immediately following Item 9B-unless companion item (9B)is denied
Item 14B1 to be heard at 2:00 p.m.
1 1/3/2(114 I I:26 AM
October 28, 2014
Item #2B and #2C
BCC REGULAR MEETING MINUTES FROM SEPTEMBER 23,
2014 AND BCC WORKSHOP MEETING MINUTES ON
OCTOBER 7, 2014 — APPROVED AS PRESENTED
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Now I entertain a motion to
approve the September 23, 2014, regular BCC meeting and October 7,
2014, BCC Bicycle Safety Workshop.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So moved.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Coyle.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Second by Commissioner Nance.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries unanimously.
Now let's go to proclamations, County Manager.
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir; yes, sir.
Item #4
PROCLAMATIONS — ONE MOTION TAKEN TO ADOPT ALL
PROCLAMATIONS — ADOPTED
Page 16
October 28, 2014
Item #4A
PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING THE RED SOX
FOUNDATION AND THE HOME BASE PROGRAM AND ITS
MISSION TO HEAL THE INVISIBLE WOUNDS OF WAR FOR
POST SERVICE MEMBERS, 9/11 VETERANS, AND THEIR
FAMILIES. ACCEPTED BY GENERAL (RET) FREDERICK M.
FRANKS, JR. — ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: Proclamation 4A is a proclamation recognizing the
Red Sox Foundation and the Home Base Program in its mission to heal
the invisible wounds of war for post-service members, 9/11 veterans,
and their families.
To be accepted by General Frederick M. Franks, Junior, Retired,
and this item is sponsored by Commissioner Hiller.
General, if you'd please step forward and receive your
proclamation.
(Applause.)
GENERAL FRANKS: Tom, can you all come up here, please.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Would you like to bring the other
members who are here with you up for the photograph.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Are you assisting me today in doing
my proceedings?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I am. I'm your charming assistant
today and every day.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah. We're going to count on
Commissioner Nance since he's the vice-chair, but thank you for your
offers.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Anytime. It's my pleasure.
GENERAL FRANKS: Commissioner Hiller and County
Page 17
October 28, 2014
Commissioners, I'm truly honored to accept this on behalf of the Home
Base Program, Boston Red Sox, Massachusetts General Hospital
Program in Boston with an extension now here to Southwest Florida.
Here now two weeks before Veterans Day when we here in Collier
County and Florida and across America recognize the service of our
veterans in all our conflicts.
The Home Base Program is proud to join the -- really, the family
of programs here in Collier County and in Southwest Florida reaching
out to our veterans who have post-traumatic stress and traumatic brain
injury. And I'm joined today on the picture and here by Alfredo
Vasquez, who is the director of the Collier County Veterans Council.
Fred, welcome here this morning; by Greg Centron (phonetic) -- Fred
is a retired army veteran -- by Greg Centron, also an army veteran,,
both of this war. Greg is a counselor here at Naples Vet Center just up
the road here on Horseshoe Drive; also by Gary Vincent, who --
veterans service office here in Collier County, all of whom have been
indispensable to welcoming Home Base to join this team that reaches
out to veterans and their families here in Collier County and Southwest
Florida, veterans who have earned all of these services by their courage
and by their selfless service to us all.
And I'm also joined by Mr. Tom O'Brien from Kensington Golf
and Country Club, actually a neighbor of mine who's a member of our
14-member volunteer committee, members of Kensington and others
who have joined together to raise funds for a local program here as an
extension of Home Base.
Home Base was founded in 2009 by the Boston Red Sox after
their win that year in the World Series to reach out to veterans and
families with post-traumatic stress and traumatic brain injury through
community education and through clinical healing of post-traumatic
stress and traumatic brain injury.
Just this past year we wanted to reach out to veterans and their
Page 18
October 28, 2014
families also here in Collier County and in Southwest Florida because
we have -- in what we're calling Southwest Florida, Glades, Hendry,
Charlotte, Lee, and Collier Counties, we have close to 4,000 veterans.
And if the national statistics are correct of approximately 30 percent of
those in some way, shape, or form are affected by post-traumatic stress
or traumatic brain injury then, of course, we have that need here at
home, here with our veterans.
And so, in coordination with our team members here, we started a
warrior health and fitness program this past June with our first
iteration, a second one just this past month in September here at
Florida Gulf Coast University for 27 of our veterans who are
participating in a warrior health and fitness challenge to assist them
with the exercise, sleep, and nutrition dimension of their lifestyle.
Actually, the director of that program, Armando Hernandez,
who's a Marine veteran of this war, could not be here this morning
because at 7:07 this morning his wife gave birth to their first child,
Liliana. So I want to recognize Armando in absentia.
Thanks again to the commissioners for this extraordinary
recognition of Home Base Program but specifically to our veterans
here at home who have earned this by their courage and by their
selfless service for us all. Thank you very much.
(Applause.)
MR. MILLER: Mr. Chairman, I know it's not customary
procedure, but I had a gentleman who said he was encouraged to fill
out a speaker slip for this item, Ted Raia.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah. Commissioner Hiller wants to
speak on it, too.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Go ahead. Let Ted speak.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: So are you -- are you not going to
speak on this?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I will after Ted speaks.
Page 19
October 28, 2014
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, go ahead. Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'm going to let -- I said I would let
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, no. I'm the chairman. I'm
going to conduct the meeting.
Ted, just a minute. Commissioner Hiller wants to make some
statements.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you so much, Mr.
Chairman.
Thank you so much, General, for being here and for all of you
who are participating in supporting this program. It is a very important
program. We need programs that help post 9/11 veterans and, in
particular, ones that have issues that are hidden wounds of war.
So I would like to commend you for everything you're doing both
in the northeast and here in Southwest Florida. In Collier County, we,
as Collier County Government, are dedicated to support you. We've
acknowledged what you're doing. We've said we'd be your partners.
You're part of our Victim Advocacy Coalition. And I personally will
volunteer both money and time to back you. So thank you.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Mr. Raia?
MR. RAIA: Good morning. Ted Raia from Pelican Bay.
Commissioner Henning, County Commissioners, I want to thank
you for your service to the county and, General Franks, for service to
our country.
I am an Army veteran retired with 26 years of active duty as an
Army physician. I did my residency at Walter Reed during the
Vietnam War, and I completed my service as chairman, Department of
Radiology at Walter Reed.
So I had an opportunity to see many of these soldiers going
through their treatment. And it is very moving, and it is so good for
Page 20
October 28, 2014
people like the general and our commissioner to promote recognition
of these wounded veterans.
I also commanded a combat support hospital in the first Gulf
War, and I came close to meeting General Franks there. He was the
assistant commander of the First Calvary division. And when our
plane landed and we descended, the First Calv Band was playing there.
And we all marched down. And suddenly they stopped playing when
they recognized we weren't the First Calv plane, so -- but that's all
right, General.
But people must realize that the soldiers over there, it's a 24/7 job.
It isn't a nine-to-five job. They sleep on the ground, eat out of cans,
and when they come home with a lost limb or post-traumatic stress
syndrome or other abnormalities like this, the war is still going on for
them. And it is a war, and it continues to be 24/7. So we should try to
do everything we can.
Now, I got involved in this because when I received a check from
Commissioner Hiller returning my donation, I said -- and I heard about
this organization started. I said, wouldn't it be nice if all those people
who donated to your campaign and received a check back, to turn that
check over to this organization, and that's why I'm here.
Thank you, Commissioner Hiller, and thank you again, General
Franks.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you. Next proclamation?
Item #4B
PROCLAMATION DECLARING NOVEMBER 15, 2014 AS
FLORIDA PANTHER FESTIVAL DAY. ACCEPTED BY TOM
TROTTA, FRIENDS OF THE FLORIDA PANTHER REFUGE
AND BRAD CORNELL, AUDUBON SOCIETY — ADOPTED
Page 21
October 28, 2014
MR. OCHS: Proclamation 4B is a proclamation declaring
November 15, 2014, as Florida Panther Festival Day. To be accepted
by Tom Trotta, Friends of the Florida Panther Refuge; Brad Cornell,
Audubon Society; and Amber Crooks, Conservancy of Southwest
Florida. And this item is sponsored by Commissioner Nance.
If you'd please step forward and receive your proclamation.
(Applause.)
MR. TROTTA: I want to thank Commissioner Nance for
sponsoring this proclamation and the entire Collier County
Commission for declaring November 15th as Florida Panther Festival
Day in Collier County.
The Florida Panther Festival is an educational and fun event for
the whole family. Admission is free, and there will be lots to see and
do. It includes live music, children's activities, nature walks, and
presentations by panther experts and involved citizens.
The Florida panther is a symbol of wilderness that exists in
Southwest Florida today. The uniqueness and beautiful area is
world-renowned. Visitors come to see our remarkable ecosystem that,
due to the efforts of many, is still intact in some places.
Activities such as fishing in the Ten Thousand Islands, exploring
the vast watershed of Big Cypress Swamp, strolling through an ancient
cypress swamp at Corkscrew can only happen here in Collier County.
Along with these wonderful opportunities comes responsibilities.
The festival will emphasize living with wildlife through exhibits,
special presentations, and interaction to educate the public.
New this year will be a financial and technical assistance meeting
for our rural residents. This meeting will have staff and experts on
hand to offer financial and technical assistance for building livestock
and pet safety pens, electric fencing, securing trash and gardens, and
removing other wildlife attractants.
Page 22
October 28, 2014
And come and join us for a great day at North Collier County
Regional Park.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you. Can you state your name
for the record.
MR. TROTTA: Tom Trotta.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
(Applause.)
Item #4C
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING NOVEMBER 9-15, 2014 AS
PERIOPERATIVE NURSE WEEK. ACCEPTED BY LINDA L
SAVAGE, FLORIDA COUNCIL OF PERIOPERATIVE
REGISTERED NURSES (FCORN) AND PRESIDENT OF
SHELLCOAST ASSOCIATION OF PERIOPERATIVE
REGISTERED NURSES; HARRIET GARMAN, MEMBER OF
BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND EDUCATION CHAIR OF FCORN
— ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: Item 4C is a proclamation designating November
9th through the 15th, 2014, as Perioperative Nurse Week. To be
accepted by Linda L. Savage, Florida Council of Perioperative
Registered Nurses and president of Shellcoast Association of
Perioperative Registered Nurses; Harriet Garman, member of the
board of directors and education chair of FCORN, and this item is
sponsored by Commissioner Henning.
If you'd please step forward and receive your proclamation.
MS. SAVAGE: Thank you.
(Applause.)
MS. SAVAGE: Thank you, Chairman Henning and all the
County Commissioners. My name is Linda Savage. I have been a
Page 23
October 28, 2014
perioperative nurse for 42 years-plus, along with my colleague, who is
exactly the same.
This is a very wonderful recognition of all the operating room
nurses and those that believe in our missions and statements here in the
county. We are doing this not only here but nationwide. We are
getting proclamations to recognize those nurses who very seldom get
recognized by their patients because they are asleep. They don't know
their names, and they don't know that we exist, but we are also their
advocates, and we are their voices for safety, for infection control, and
for anything that can happen behind those double doors.
Again, this is a very nice recognition for all of those here in
Collier County, and I want to thank you very much.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Next proclamation.
Item #4D
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING NOVEMBER 15-23, 2014 AS
HUNGER AND HOMELESSNESS AWARENESS WEEK.
ACCEPTED BY ANGELA FISHER, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR,
COLLIER COUNTY HUNGER AND HOMELESS COALITION —
ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: Item 4D is a proclamation designating November
15th through the 23rd, 2014, as Hunger and Homeless Awareness
Week. To be accepted by Angela Fisher, executive director of Collier
County Hunger and Homeless Coalition.
This item is sponsored by the entire Board of County
Commissioners. Please step forward.
(Applause.)
MS. FISHER: Good morning. I'm Angela Fisher, the Executive
Page 24
October 28, 2014
Director of the Hunger and Homeless Coalition, and I would like to
thank you, the County Commissioners, for this recognition of Hunger
and Homeless Awareness Week, as well as the recognition of how all
of-- how hard all of our hunger and homeless service providers work.
I share this proclamation in recognition with all of our partner
agencies. Homelessness is both a statistical and a personal reality for
many families here, veterans, and a growing number of school-aged
children.
In 2014, Collier County reported 361 homeless adults; 849 school
students as homeless. One of the fastest growing segment of the
homeless population is families with children. In Collier County, we
are also seeing an increase in the number of unaccompanied youth.
I am honored to be an integral part of raising awareness of
homeless issues and solutions here in Collier County, not only during
awareness week, but all year long. There are many activities being
held to raise awareness, one of which is a candlelight vigil being
hosted by the Faith Communities to End Homelessness on November
16th at Unitarian Universalist's Congregation at six.
And if you're interested in more information about homelessness
in Collier County or would like to volunteer and become involved,
please visit our website at collierhomelesscoalition.org.
Again, thank you so much for this proclamation and all that you
do to end homelessness in Southwest Florida. Thank you.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And our last proclamation.
Item #4E
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING OCTOBER 2014 AS THE
40TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE BIG CYPRESS NATIONAL
PRESERVE. ACCEPTED BY PEDRO RAMOS, BIG CYPRESS
Page 25
October 28, 2014
NATIONAL PRESERVE SUPERINTENDENT — ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: Item 4E is a proclamation designating October 2014
as the 40th anniversary of the Big Cypress National Preserve. To be
accepted by Pedro Ramos, Big Cypress National Preserve
Superintendent. This item is sponsored by Commissioner Nance.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make a
few introductory remarks on this proclamation.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay, great.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Ladies and gentlemen, it is -- it's
not often that a community can claim to be a part of greatness on a
national level. The formation of the Big Cypress National Preserve
has helped define Collier County. If our national park system is one of
America's best ideas -- and I think it's pretty much acknowledged that
that's the case -- the beginning of the formation of national preserves is
certainly its sibling.
The National Preserve in Eastern Collier County occupies
729,000 acres. It's well over half the county. And it has quietly
defined Collier County as far as the natural world is concerned, not
only for everybody that lives here and has experienced it, but also the
nation and the environmental movement, the sportsmen's movement.
I think we're very fortunate to have this, and it has too quietly
flown under the radar. So this opportunity to celebrate its 40th
anniversary is a very, very good opportunity for us to showcase this as
the part that we've played in this.
The time that I spent in the land that became Big Cypress
National Preserve changed the way I looked at the world as a young
boy, and it changed my life, and it has changed many other's lives also.
Like every other great thing, great achievement takes a great deal
of work and requires the leadership and greatness of men and women.
It's certainly the case with Big Cypress Preserve.
Page 26
October 28, 2014
And I would like to take the opportunity, with the permission of
the chair and the board, to read this proclamation and also invite
people today who are in attendance who, as individuals and as people
who have worked with advocacy groups, work so hard to make this
happen, come up and join Superintendent Ramos for a photograph.
But I'd like -- at this time I'd like to read the proclamation.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: You know, while Commissioner
Nance is reading the proclamation, you may come up to the dais for
the photograph. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Whereas, 40 years ago, on October
11, 1974, President Gerald Ford signed the bill establishing the Big
Cypress National Preserve as one of the first national preserves in the
National Park System; and,
Whereas, the Big Cypress National Preserve encompasses the
most biologically diverse region of the terrestrial Everglades and
comprises 729,000 acres of freshwater swamp supporting the rich
marine estuaries along Florida's southwest coast and includes cypress
forests, mangroves, prairies, and a mixture of tropical and temperate
plant communities and a diversity of wildlife; and,
Whereas, the creation of the Big Cypress National Preserve, a
new concept, was possible only through the cooperative efforts of
many individuals, organizations, agencies, and advocacy groups to
ensure that the Big Cypress Swamp would be protected and enjoyed
for generations to come; and,
Whereas, in establishing the Big Cypress National Preserve,
Congress defined the preserve's purpose as to, quote, assure the
preservation, conservation, and protection of the natural scenic,
hydrologic, floral and faunal, and recreational values of the Big
Cypress watershed in the State of Florida and to provide for the
enhancement and public safety thereof; and,
Whereas, the preserve has a dual mission, to preserve and protect
Page 27
October 28, 2014
this resource and to provide for the continuation of sustainable
traditional uses by the public, including the Miccosukee, Seminole,
and traditional peoples, hunters, anglers, off-road vehicle users, and
private property owners; and,
Whereas, with over one million visitors to the Big Cypress
National Preserve annually, South Florida's National Park areas
improve the quality of life for everyone by protecting the environment,
building the economy, and providing opportunities for visitors and
residents to experience, learn about, and appreciate the Greater Big
Cypress and Everglades ecosystems, and for people and families to get
outdoors and enjoy nature; and,
Whereas, the celebration of the Big Cypress National Preserve
will inspire all people to experience and connect with this national
treasure and to appreciate the innovative thought, the leadership, and
the cooperation that resulted in the conscious preservation of the land
and its flora/fauna cultures and recreation for all mankind in
perpetuity.
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that October 2014 be
designated as the 40th anniversary of the Big Cypress National
Preserve.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER NANCE: We are also very fortunate to have
as our superintendent and leader Superintendent Pedro Ramos who I
will tell you, because I'm so interested in the park service, is a
superstar in the National Park Service System and the Department of
the Interior. This gentleman, together with all the organizations and
people that work so hard to do this, are causing the national preserve to
thrive and reach its great potential, and we're very honored and
privileged to have him here today with us.
(Applause.)
Page 28
October 28, 2014
MR. RAMOS: This is pretty awesome.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Sir, your name?
MR. RAMOS: If I may, these are some of the best words I've
heard in a long, long time. Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Tim Nance,
who cares deeply about the preserves and the Everglades in general,
commissioners, good morning. Thank you for giving me the
opportunity to be here with you to accept this very extraordinary
proclamation. It is a real treat. It is a real pleasure for me to be here
with you-all today.
As you know, the National Park Service preserves and protects
some of the most important stories and places that we have as a
country. The collection of all these places really do tell the story of
who we are as a people and what we're made of as a nation. And we
do have a very special place right here in our backyard in Collier
County.
So being here today, as I reflected on it, to me, is special for a
number of reasons. Two main reasons that I'd like to share with
everybody; commissioners and the public alike.
One of them is the fact that it was 40 years ago that the Congress
of the United States and the people of Florida struck a unique
compromise that had never been struck before. It was a new way of
doing conservation here in our country. And it was a new experiment,
if you will, that many doubted whether it would work or not.
It was a mandate that we received from Congress, not only to
protect the natural values that we all know about that are right here in
our backyard that are so special and important to our life here in
Collier County and in South Florida, but it was also a mandate to make
sure that we balanced those responsibilities with a mission to ensure
that important traditional uses that are very much part of the fabric of
who we are down here in South Florida were also preserved and had a
Page 29
October 28, 2014
place in perpetuity at Big Cypress National Preserve. It was a tall
order from Congress, and it hasn't been easy at all.
Usually when I go to events like this, I'm facing some very, very
hard issues that we have dealt with over many, many decades. This is
not one of them. This is a good day, and it's a good day because we
can remember how Big Cypress came about. It came about because a
coalition of people that oftentimes did not even see eye to eye with
each other came together and put their differences aside to make sure
that this place would be protected in perpetuity, not just for the people
of Collier County, but for the people of our country, for the people of
our nation.
And that very same coalition of people that existed 40 years ago,
I'm pleased to say that still exists to this date, and it's what keeps us
going.
And at this point I'd like to ask everybody that is here for this
proclamation to stand up and be recognized, because we could not be
doing what we do without their support, Commissioners.
Please.
(Applause.)
MR. RAMOS: I was not going to take the risk of naming
everybody by name because I know where that goes and what happens
when you try to do that. But, very sincerely, thank you for the support
that you give us day in and day out with the hard work that we have
down here at Big Cypress.
The other reason -- and I'll be brief-- is that there is nothing more
important to me as the superintendent for Big Cypress National
Preserve than to make sure that this community has a place in the
preserve, that there is unity in community. I loved the convocation
language this morning and how that was said, because that is what it's
all about for us.
And we will continue fighting to make sure that people have
Page 30
October 28, 2014
access to Big Cypress, that Big Cypress is very much part of a way of
life here in Collier County. It has flown under the radar even though
we are the majority of the land here in Collier County, and we're going
to change that. And this proclamation is proof of the fact that people of
Collier County really do care about Big Cypress and having it in its
backyard.
And one of the ways that we do that is by celebrating, by having a
party. And this year we're going to have a big party. It's going to take
place on December 6th. It's free for everybody to attend. It's going to
happen right behind our welcome center there about two miles east of
the intersection of 29 and 41 . It's not too far. It's a nice 40-minute
drive, same kind of drive that you would take to drive out to
Everglades City. And it's going to be a lot of fun. It's going to be a lot
of food, music, and tent with people celebrating 40 years of history not
only for Collier County but also for our country and all of the effort
that has been made down here in the name of conservation of the
wonderful, incredible natural values that we have right here in our
backyard.
Thank you, Commissioners, and thanks everybody for your
support.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And your name for the record? We
need your name for the record.
MR. RAMOS: Pedro Ramos. I'm the superintendent at Big
Cypress National Preserve.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
MR. RAMOS: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I'll entertain a motion to approve
today's proclamations --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Motion to approve.
Page 31
October 28, 2014
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- as read. Motion by Commissioner
Hiller. Seconded by who?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Me.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Me.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Now we get to recognize our valuable
employees.
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir, Mr. Chairman.
Item #5A
RECOGNIZING BECKY ERICKSON, ACCOUNTING
TECHNICIAN, FACILITIES MANAGEMENT, AS THE
EMPLOYEE OF THE MONTH FOR SEPTEMBER 2014 —
PRESENTED
MR. OCHS: That takes us to Item 5A, and that is a
recommendation to recognize Becky Erickson, the County Technician,
Facilities Management, as Employee of the Month for September
2014.
Becky, if you'd please step forward.
(Applause.)
MR. OCHS: Get your photo, Becky, and I'll tell the board a little
bit more about you.
Commissioners, Becky has been employed with Collier County
Page 32
October 28, 2014
for 15 years. She works in our construction and capital projects
section in our facilities management department working with all the
financial aspects of new buildings and renovation projects.
And when an employee in the maintenance section recently left to
take a position in another department, Becky volunteered to take on
most of the responsibilities for that position.
With her knowledge and experience and skills, she's ensured that
that transition has been completely transparent, has accepted the
additional work and responsibilities in the face of a very hectic
end-of-fiscal-year process.
Thank you, Becky.
Her commitment and dedication to the department, to her
coworkers is admirable and certainly greatly appreciated and is among
many of the reasons that she was chosen by her counterparts as
Employee of the Month.
And, Commissioners, it's my privilege to present Becky Erickson,
your Employee of the Month for September 2014.
Congratulations, Becky.
(Applause.)
MS. ERICKSON: Thank you.
MR. OCHS: Thanks so much. Congratulations.
MS. ERICKSON: Thank you very much.
(Applause.)
Item #5B
PRESENTATION TO THE BOARD REGARDING COLLIER
COUNTY'S READINESS POSITION REGARDING THE EBOLA
THREAT. PRESENTED BY DAN SUMMERS, BUREAU OF
EMERGENCY SERVICES — PRESENTED
Page 33
October 28, 2014
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, Item 5B is a presentation to the
board regarding Collier County's readiness position regarding the
Ebola threat. This item will be kicked off by your Bureau of
Emergency Services Director, Dan Summers.
Mr. Summers?
MR. SUMMERS: Commissioners, Chairman. Good morning,
Dan Summers, Director of the Bureau of Emergency Services and
Emergency Management. And at the last board meeting, the board
kindly asked that the staff give you an update on our emergency
management readiness and Ebola concerns.
And I will -- we will kick this off real quickly here but -- and,
again, I will do introductions. But I think the hospital and
public-safety representatives that are here today to answer your
questions is a testament -- and I'm going to use the word "unity" as
well -- to our unified emergency planning and the communication the
coordination, and the cooperation that we have from all the agencies.
The agenda today, I'm going to make a few opening remarks.
The administrator of our Collier County Florida Department of Health,
Stephanie Vick, Stephanie's going to discuss a little bit with you about
the disease overview.
I want to give an opportunity, Commissioners, to ask the
questions of some of the hospital representatives and public safety that
are here. And I, too, worry about missing someone -- but to tell you
who is here, and we'll make them available to you for questions and
answers.
Scott Campbell is here, our CEO from Physicians Regional
campuses; Chief Nursing Officer Judy Paull; Marcia Catania is here
from their infection prevention.
From our NCH hospitals' community, Dr. Weiss is here; Michelle
Thoman is here from nursing; and Georgine Kruedelbach is here also
from infection control.
Page 34
October 28, 2014
Dr. Tober's been heavily engaged with us in our public safety and
Emergency Medical Services fire rescue planning; of course, Chief
Kopka; Chris Byrne representing our district response team and Marco
Fire, and Chris runs our operations committee that stays on top of these
issues for our inner agency coordination.
I believe April is here today, April Donahue from the Medical
Society. We included the Medical Society as part of our discussions.
And Sheriffs Office Lieutenant Jones and Lieutenant Lee are both here
involved in our engagement, and Chief-- pardon me. Chief Mclnerny
is here from the Collier County Fire Chiefs Association. Chief has
been leading the way with the fire chiefs also on some protocol issues
that the response agencies want to have.
From the Department of Health, Stephanie's team is here. Dr.
Allison Nist; Muhammad Abbasi is here; Kathleen Man, Emergency
Preparedness. Kathleen, as you well know, has also embedded part of
our emergency management office. So we solve most of our problems
at the water cooler; don't we, Kathleen? So she's part of our
operations; and Deb Milsap is their public information officer.
My coordinators are here today also; Michael Morelan. Michael
works on our shelter operations; Greg, in our human services; Rick
Zyvoloski is, as you know, all things planning; and Mike Shaw does
our homeland security and operations.
Just a couple of opening remarks. As you know, there are no
cases or threat in Collier County. I will tell you we have not updated
this PowerPoint from last evening. As you know, CDA announced a
couple of screening resources and techniques, triage techniques. We're
going to review those later today, and we'll take a look at that.
One of the things I think is important to tell you is that Collier
County has a great baseline planning team, a great baseline planning
framework, and we are syncing up in real time every hour or two
whatever the latest guidance is in some of those discussions.
Page 35
October 28, 2014
So we have been -- to put some comfort to the community and
comfort to the board, we've been engaged in this discussion and have
worked together in the past on many events, whether it's hurricane
drills or exercises, H1N1 . So unlike some of the communities that
were a stranger to working with each other in one of these unique
public health crises, that's certainly not the case here, and we'll
continue to sync up plans.
We have an adopted comprehensive emergency management plan
that pulls all of these agencies together. That document is not a
stranger -- is not strange to any of our response partners, and we seek
their input continuously. And, as I mentioned under the health
department's leadership, our engagement with all the agencies on
H1N1 in previous years was highly successful.
We do know this has a wide-reaching affect in Collier County
should we have a case, and we have looked at those potentials,
everything from temporary housing, protective clothing for our
responders, and even towards a disposal of medical waste.
So I think Florida overall has led forward in this. I had
conversations with the surgeon general last week in a presentation in
Tallahassee. I'm not -- I have no hesitancy about anyone being
reserved in terms of engagement preparedness or readiness.
We'll continue to refine plans. And we get input from all the
parties, as we normally do. And our drills and exercises have kept us
quite sharp in the past. We'll get a pat on the back for no hurricanes
here recently, but it does not diminish our readiness posture or the
ongoing preparedness efforts that we have had in the past.
One very important thing, the emergency operations center is a
location where all this, should we have a case or a situation, we will
not hesitate to activate that. There's no cost to activate that emergency
operation center on its own. All of its capabilities are vast and well
oiled.
Page 36
October 28, 2014
I will tell you that in the communities we've spoken with, this is
as much of a media-management challenge versus a clinical challenge.
The clinical challenge is pretty well known. The media hype is
something that we will have to work to manage, and the emergency
operations center will be the media-management location should that
become an issue. And, again, it may just be the demands that may
drive that.
Our responder coordination is very good, and ifs a continuing
process to refresh and review, as I mentioned, and it really is excellent.
And I reserve "excellent" to make sure that -- leave that category for if
we have a case, but I'm very, very confident that will go well. We'll
continue to do some rehearsals both on paper, conference call
discussions, and some practical exercises.
EMS, fire, and law enforcement and our dispatch center, their
infectious disease managers, medical directors are fully engaged in
this, and I know some of the risk managers are going to have another
meeting later this week.
We've been lock step with public help in the rollout, and great
coordination with 911 center, as we always do.
Let me turn the podium over now to Stephanie Vick. Stephanie's
going to give you a little quick overview from the health department's
perspective on the disease and her readiness.
Stephanie?
MS. VICK: Good morning, Mr. Chairman and members of the
board.
To understand the planning that we've been doing with Ebola, it
probably helps a little bit to understand the disease itself.
Ebola was first discovered in Africa near the Ebola River in 1976.
It's been discovered and been around for a while and hence the name
Ebola. There have been 16 identified outbreaks in Africa since 1976,
although none in the United States.
Page 37
October 28, 2014
This 2014 Ebola outbreak is the first one to occur in West Africa,
and it is the largest known Ebola epidemic.
Ebola's caused by an infection from a virus, just like the flu is a
virus and a cold is a virus. The virus can cause disease in humans and
nonhuman primates like monkeys and chimpanzees. It enters the body
through contact with mucous membranes, and that's when a person
who has the disease has progressed along, and they have copious
amounts of body fluid.
So it enters through the mucous membranes or perhaps an open
cut. It can only be spread to other people after symptoms begin. So
that may help a little bit in your understanding about the 21-day
requirements and taking your temperature every day.
Okay. The symptoms of the disease are -- some of them are
fever, headache, joint and muscle weakness, fatigue, and then it moves
into the diarrhea and vomiting. The symptoms can appear anywhere
from two to 21 days after exposure. The norm is somewhere around
eight to 10 days. But the early symptoms mimic the flu, and so it's
very important to differentiate what you're dealing with, whether it's
flu or Ebola.
This is my plug for flu vaccines. It's very important to get your
flu vaccine. Do you know that only half the people -- less than half the
people in the country that need the vaccine can get it, do get it. And
we don't have a vaccine for Ebola yet. But here we can protect ourself
for flu, and we can help differentiate from the Ebola virus if we're
protected from the flu.
So it's important to ask the questions about travel and contacts.
As I said, there's no FDA-approved vaccine. The treatment generally
is minimal. It's providing IV fluids and electrolytes. It's watching over
that person, maintaining their oxygen status and their blood pressure.
It's treating other infections, if they happen to coexist. And then if they
progress and they come into organ failure, then you're dealing with
Page 38
October 28, 2014
those sort of things, like kidney failure. We always want to maintain
strict isolation and we want to protect our healthcare workers, not only
in hospitals, but our first responders.
So when we've been considering what we need to consider during
planning, the things that we've been looking at is our healthcare system
preparedness. Are our hospitals ready for someone to just walk in the
door and maybe have Ebola? And how will they handle that? We've
been looking at outpatient facilities, because not everybody goes to the
hospital. They may walk into their favorite doctor at a clinic, or they
may go to their primary care provider. Some children may go into the
school clinics. So we need to look at all of the places in the system
where people may come in contact.
As I said, we look at responder safety, and we try to look at how
we're going to share information with our partners and other
organizations.
Travel is a big issue these days. I mean, we are a global
economy. People fly back and forth. We help each other, so we have
Doctors Without Borders going to Africa to help. So we have to
consider what those implications are with travel.
We need to decide how to communicate with the public. We
need to not instill fear. We want the public to be prepared and
knowledgeable. And we want to continue continually monitor and
investigate disease, and that's the crux of public health, and it is the key
to prevention and containment of this disease.
So our Ebola response in Florida has been led by our governor,
and it's been done through the Florida Surgeon General, the
Department of Health, and then other state partners. And I've listed
some of them here; Department of Environmental Protection,
Department of Transportation, that comes -- would not think
Department of Transportation until you start thinking about
transporting waste, okay.
Page 39
October 28, 2014
Florida Department of Law Enforcement. What if we have to
quarantine people; who's going to help enforce that?
And then, because we are an integrated department of health,
there are 67 community health departments that are involved in the
statewide response, we being one of them. That, then, translates down
into the county itself, and we work with our community partners, as
Dan was saying.
So we're talking about hospitals, we're talking with urgent care
centers, we're working with emergency management, with law
enforcement, fire, the schools, the medical examiner, utilities.
The way that we've been communicating with them is we --
anytime that we get an update or guidance information, we've been
sending that information out by blast fax, by email. We have weekly
planning meetings with all those interested parties every week, and we
actually started them way before the first person was diagnosed with
Ebola in the United States.
We have task-group meetings where we consider special issues
such as social isolation and humanitarian support should we have to
quarantine someone. We participate -- our health department
participates with the state on twice-daily calls, and then, in turn, we
report back to the state every day, even on weekends; all of this
happens every day of the week. So there's a continual circle of
communication between our state guidance and at the local level.
The last thing we do is try to make information easily available to
the public, and we do this in concert with the joint information center
at the state level so that everybody is speaking the same?
So we've made a link available on our website at
www.collierhealthdepartment.org. If you click on the Ebola update,
you can go directly to the CDC or, if you look to the side, you can go
to the DOH website.
Thank you.
Page 40
October 28, 2014
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you. Questions by the board,
starting with Commissioner Fiala then Commissioner Hiller.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. Stephanie -- do you mind if I
just call you Stephanie?
MS. VICK: Oh, no problem.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I don't -- is it Dr. Vick? I don't
know.
MS. VICK: No, no. Call me Stephanie, please.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you. I was wondering if they
are doing anything at the airports to -- I don't know -- if they have
some kind of mechanism whereby somebody breathes into something,
or have they not gotten into the airports?
I know that they -- newspapers were suggesting that possibly they
were thinking of doing that. I just didn't know if we were here in
Florida.
MS. VICK: Yes. And for that question, I'm going to have our
epidemiologist respond to that a little bit. So, Mohammad, would you
come on up.
MR. OCHS: State your name.
MR. ABBASI: Muhammad Abbasi with the Florida Department
of Health in Collier County.
Can you please repeat the question?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I was just wondering if they
were doing anything at the airports to check people that are coming
into the area, other areas.
MR. ABBASI: As of yesterday, CDC is requiring all the
travelers from those three countries which are Ebola affected, which is
Guinea, Sierra Leon, Liberia. They're required to come at five airports,
which is New York JFK, New York Liberty, Washington Dulles,
Chicago O'Hare, or Atlanta. They cannot come to any other
international airports.
Page 41
October 28, 2014
And when they come to those airports, CDC's doing initial
screening, they'll ask questions, whether they're treating patients in
those countries or they have any family members, just accessories (sic)
factors, and they will pass the information of all the travelers to the
state health departments where they actually live, and the state health
department then gives the information to local health departments.
And, actually on Saturday, Governor Scott signed an executive
order which gives us authority to do -- for 21 days twice-daily
monitoring for all the travelers in our jurisdiction in person.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yes. I'd like to say thank you very
much for your presentation today. What's very clear is how effectively
you're managing a two-way communication system with the state and
federal government, and I think it's very reassuring, and I think the
public should feel comforted by the fact that you don't even just talk
once a day; you're talking twice a day with some of these agencies and
every single day of the week. That's very impressive because that's a
certain way to contain any potential epidemic from exploding and
becoming a real problem with that type of communication and
cooperation. So I want to thank you for what you're doing. It's very
commendable.
I would like to have -- I'd like to ask Dr. Weiss a question, and I'd
like to ask Mr. Scott Campbell from -- I want to say Physicians
Regional, but I know that's inappropriate -- after I ask Dr. Weiss a
question.
Dr. Weiss, would you mind stepping up.
I think there's a general misconception about how bad the Ebola
situation is among the public. Can you describe what's actually going
on as of today and what you forecast could potentially happen as
Page 42
October 28, 2014
compared to other public health threats that we currently face?
DR. WEISS: Thank you very much. Alan Weiss, NCH,
president and CEO. There's been one patient in this country who's
died of Ebola. There are have about seven, probably more now, who
have gotten Ebola and survived.
As Mrs. Vick appropriately said, about 100 people a day will be
dying of the flu this year; 44 percent of Americans get the flu shot. So
we've had one person die of Ebola. We have 100 people dying a day.
Now, it's seasonal, but on average year-round, 100 die of the flu. So
the chance of any of the 5,500 hospitals in this country getting a patient
with an Ebola -- getting a patient with Ebola is close to zero, but not
zero, and that's why we're all prepared. So we are prepared to identify,
isolate, and then inform if we do get a patient.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And how -- when we talk about
contamination and contagion, how contagious is this as compared to
other public health threats? I mean, it makes it sound -- I mean, people
-- the media has made it sound like it's as bad as the Bubonic Plague,
and we're all going to be wiped out on the face of this earth. You
know, can you put it in perspective for us so we understand what we're
really facing from a health perspective.
DR. WEISS: As we do that, can I ask my colleague, who's the
head of our infectious disease department and actually is an expert on
this, to help share in that answer.
MS. KRUEDELBACH: Hi, Georgine Kruedelbach, Infection
Prevention at NCH.
I think that when we think about how contagious it is and what
we've learned in our country is that a patient really has to have
symptoms. And long before we have to worry about that, we should
identify them when they're coming into our healthcare systems. So
we've learned a lot of valuable lessons from Texas. Learn to identify
those patients, capture them in triage, capture them at any point of
Page 43
October 28, 2014
entry into our facility, and then begin assessing them and evaluating
them for risk and putting them in immediate isolation.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So the ability to potentially contain
this disease from becoming an epidemic is high?
MS. KRUEDELBACH: Yes, agreed.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's very positive; that's very
good news. Thank you.
DR. WEISS: And if I could add to that, this is a -- I picked this
editorial up written by a professor of pediatrics infectious disease. And
this first sentence is, when the history of American medicine in the
21st Century is written, the chapter on the great Ebola epidemic of
2014 will surely be one of the most comical and embarrassing
chapters. The cruise ship temporarily marooned, people exposed, and
preening politicians ever-ready for cameras, harassing one of the
world's most expert public health professionals in a theatrical
performance billed as a congressional hearing.
What brought on this nonsense? Four American citizens who
acquired Ebola overseas were brought home and successfully treated;
one foreign national came to our country while incubating the disease,
was not recognized early, and succumbed despite therapy. Two health
workers -- and this is written a little bit --
So, basically, we talk about being in the -- if you think about
Stephen Covey of the Seven Habits, there's the urgent, unimportant
quadrant, and then there's the important non-urgent quadrant. We want
to stay in the important, non-urgent quadrant and not get between
having hubris. We're not -- we don't hubris about this disease -- but
not being in the panic stage and getting -- putting in too many
resources.
This whole thing is going to cost this country probably billions of
dollars. And when you look at the cost of healthcare already, you look
at things that are common; tuberculosis, flu. We need to stay focused
Page 44
October 28, 2014
and alert but not over-responding.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you.
Scott, I know you've brought several members of your staff that
are here today because they have a few words to share. Would you
like to present them and allow them to speak on --
MR. CAMPBELL: I have Judy Paull, our Chief Nursing
Executive for Physicians Regional; and I'm Scott Campbell, CEO of
Physicians Regional; Marcia Catania, who's our Infectious Control
Prevention Officer.
And just real quickly I'll tell you, the assignment that we have, as
NCH and all hospitals, is the safety of our patients, employees,
families, physicians, and our visitors. We have a collaborative work
relationship with Dan, Stephanie, the fire, sheriff, the health
department, EMS Emergency Department, NCH. So we're working,
as they've pointed out, very, very collectively. It's not a one-person
arena. It obviously will take a collective group.
We have ongoing training. We stay current, as was mentioned.
The CDC continues to make changes. Our training has included,
obviously, a tremendous amount of work in the emergency
department, all of our staff, our physicians; it's going to the executive
committee by medical staff, our board of trustees; full collaboration
there to be sure the training is current and meets CDC guidelines.
We have all the necessary personal protective equipment, as
suggested by CDC, as most hospitals by now should have in place.
We follow all the screening protocols. And as they continue to
change, we will update those to be sure we invest order.
And we have an isolation area in our emergency department in
the event a patient, as unpredictable as it may be, as Dr. Weiss pointed
out eloquently, may not be likely. The flu symptoms are very likely,
especially in season. But we have an isolation area. In the event that
the screening projects that this could be a potential case, then that
Page 45
October 28, 2014
patient will be isolated to protect, as I mentioned earlier.
And we want to assure Collier County and Southwest Florida of
our preparedness in general. We've put a lot of effort into it, and we
recognize our assignment is to be sure that we have everything in
proper order.
And I have Judy Paull, and if Marcia wants to say anything as
well, they can follow.
MS. PAULL: I don't think I have anything significant to add
other than to say that our job in the hospital is the same every day
whether it's Ebola or flu or whatever. Our mission is to keep patients,
visitors, our staff safe, and we feel confident that we are prepared to do
that.
We -- our job is to operationalize science, and that's what we do
every day. We use evidence to guide us, and we will continue to do
that.
MR. OCHS: Could we have your name for the record.
MS. PAULL: My name is Judy Paull. Thank you.
MS. CATANIA: Good morning, everyone. I'm Marcia Catania,
and my job is to make sure that our staff and our patients are safe in the
hospital with any possibility of a threat of Ebola, and we do that
in-servicing with available personal protective equipment. We follow
the CDC guidelines. And if there are any updates, we quickly
improvise, and we continue with our daily in-service and education.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
MS. CATANIA: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Are there any more speakers on this
issue?
MR. SUMMERS: No, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. So that's it.
I just have a few general observations and maybe some specific
Page 46
October 28, 2014
questions that some of you could respond to. It's been my experience
in public life that perception becomes reality. And it is just natural, in
my opinion, that extremely qualified and intelligent people, physicians
included, tend to be very confident in their knowledge about what they
should be doing, and I have no doubt that our community is very
knowledgeable about that, and you're prepared.
But there are so many reasons for a loss of public confidence in
government today that even the slightest mistake we make will be
magnified in its effect and perception in the public.
So we have to be overly cautious about what we do here. And
while I feel confident in the quality and capability of our medical
facilities in Collier County, I have absolutely no confidence
whatsoever in the ability to identify potential carriers of this disease.
There are so many easy ways for people to bypass the controls
that have now been put in place. There are many people who travel
throughout the world who have dual state citizenship, and they have
multiple travel documents and passports.
We have already seen, among them, some of-- some medical
workers, the arrogance of people who have been in the areas where
they could have contracted Ebola and complaining about the fact that
they're being quarantined and watched over with no real concern for
the opinions of other people.
That erodes confidence in our medical system to respond to this
when people intentionally take action that they should know they
should not be taking, and some of those people are qualified nurses
and, perhaps, doctors.
So my concern, really, is how do we know that -- the people who
have been working in the areas where Ebola is prevalent, how do we
know that they're going to the designated airports? How do we know
that they don't go out of Africa and connect at another airport
somewhere else and fly into Miami? How do you track them? You
Page 47
October 28, 2014
can't.
We have to rely upon someone else to do that, and, generally,
those people are people who have failed us multiple times in the past in
areas related to terrorism, which is far more deadly than Ebola. And I
have concerns that it's not being done very well now.
So I don't know that you can -- you can reply to any of those
because those are things beyond your control, but that's the weak link
in the chain, as I see it. We can't assume that people are going to do
exactly what we want them to do and go to the right airports. They're
going to be finding ways to get around that, because if they have
Ebola, if they suspect they have Ebola, they want to get into the United
States so they can be treated because they think they can best survive
under those circumstances and they, quite frankly, don't care about
who else is on that airplane or on the bus when they're traveling.
So that's the danger, in my opinion, and it's not going to take
many more mistakes where people lose more confidence in the process
and the problem and the hysteria gets worse and worse.
So, now, that brings me to the one question that I think you might
be able to answer for us. Is there any indication that this virus can
mutate and, perhaps, become an airborne contagion? Are we
absolutely certain that nothing is going to happen with respect to that?
Because these things are very, very smart, and they want to survive
just as much as we want to survive, and they find ways to survive.
MR. SUMMERS: Commissioner, let me ask Dr. Nist to come
forward. She has some expertise in that area. And we hear you loud
and clear on the effort of others in that screening process, and we will
be very aggressive in that discussion with the state and federal
partners. Thank you.
DR. NIST: Dr. Allison Nist, Physician at the Health Department.
The CDC has been evaluating your question extremely rigidly
and very thoroughly. Ever since the beginning epidemics in the '70s,
Page 48
October 28, 2014
they have been very clear to us that there is absolutely no respiratory
transmission right now and that they have -- if they had a sense that
this was developing as a threat through mutations, we would be
hearing about that, because they certainly would know that that would
require an entire different set of precautions.
So while they have not actually said anything explicitly to the
way you have worded your question, that there is no indication of any
threat of mutations, they have repeatedly let us know that they do not
feel that that is a transmission threat.
Ebola is a very, very interesting organism in that it creates
tremendously high concentrations in many, many different body fluids.
To the extent that it creates transmissibility in some substances that, in
many other diseases such as HIV and hepatitis, we see no threat of
transmission through sweat or saliva, but Ebola, indeed, in the acute
stage, in those 21 days when people are most symptomatic, it can
develop concentrations -- it's all related to concentration --
concentrations that can make transmissibility possible if someone
touches one of those secretions and then touches a mucosal membrane.
So it's a very -- it's a different virus than many of the things we've
seen before in terms of both SARS, tuberculosis, hepatitis, malaria,
and HIV.
The thing that Ebola does is that it is so highly concentrated, it
creates a hemorrhagic shock syndrome that, essentially, creates total
body failure, organ failure through dehydration and through lack of
circulation to essential organs, which is why its mortality rate is 50 to
70 or higher in other countries.
We have been able to really change that mortality rate because we
have such good intensive care situations here where we can contain
that -- we can arrest that process and hydrate the patients, sustain them
through the shock syndrome.
The other thing that is very interesting about Ebola is that -- and
Page 49
October 28, 2014
they are -- the CDC is very clear on this, too, that they feel very
comfortable in stating this, that after the person has recovered, there
are a few fluids that remain infectious for a few weeks after -- weeks or
months after.
It is known to be concentrated in semen and potentially could be
sexually transmitted up to three months after recovery from the
disease; however, it does not continue to multiply; therefore, people do
not walk around as potentially infectious carriers after recovery. And,
likewise, there is not adequate concentration before the person who
becomes ill in that 21-day prodrome period from the time of contact
and acquiring the infection to the time of becoming truly symptomatic
and ill. It does not -- they have absolutely been very clear that there is
no transmission risk; therefore, the risk of someone sitting in a plane
with someone who is asymptomatic and coming from one of our three
West African countries, they're really stating that that is not a risk.
So what we're talking about here is a very unique disease. It's a
disease that is so highly transmissible through these direct contact
means that we have had to -- essentially, what we've been doing the
last three or -- well, three months or so, we've had to really develop a
network of acquisition of the total body biohazard level for CDC gear
that we've never needed in the past.
And what we've discovered is that many of the things that we
thought would protect us adequately had a little gap around the
forehead or a gap somewhere on the arms or legs that made it actually
not usable in a true Ebola -- so we're all actually going out ordering the
fully protective gear, which is quite expensive.
And because we want to be cost-effective, we want to both
protect our health workers and citizens but, likewise, we obviously
don't want to overspend public resources.
We've developed an excellent network for triaging the number of
outfits we have, identifying where those are stored, and having a
Page 50
October 28, 2014
communications network so that we can use them adequately as
needed.
I truly have to commend Stephanie Vick and all she has done, and
all of the people who are here today who are part of that network of
people who meet on conference call on Monday, every Monday to talk
about their problems, because I think we've really developed a very
effective way of dealing with this epidemic -- potential epidemic if it
should ever happen here.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Thank you.
MS. CATANIA: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Nance, and then we're
going to take a 10-minute break.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes. I would like to commend
everyone for your work on this issue, and thank you for coming here
today, and thank Mr. Summers for putting this brief presentation
together.
I think under every situation that we get, there's obviously a
couple opportunities that provide -- are provided. One of them is, I
think, an understanding on what we need to do to communicate in our
community. I think, both in the public health sector and in the private
health institutions here, this should be an opportunity for us to refine
what we have to do and those -- and all of you professionals realize
that public perception is always kind of a strange animal.
We find, you know, just in the industry I worked in, the public
perception of risk is a very odd creature, but we -- you know, in the
public sector, we need to be able to assist our citizens in making good
decisions and trying to guide their actions in a way that best benefits
them and protects them.
I think, clearly, one of the side benefits that we're going to get out
of this is people are going to start re-examining international
movement of not just people, but all sorts of things. I mean, the free
Page 51
October 28, 2014
international movement and uncontrolled movement of food, fiber,
natural products and whatnot has created epidemics of animal and
plant diseases that are -- currently fly under the radar, but cost our
nation billions of dollars annually and infections in our forests, in our
food animals, and all sorts of ways that aren't generally recognized.
And surely this example that we hope is not going to become
something that we don't expect is an example where we need to get a
grip on the movement of things across the world. The world is a
much, much smaller place, and we're really at risk in a lot of ways. If
not physical risk of death, certainly economic ruin in a lot of cases.
And, you know, our citrus industry in Florida is a classic example of
what's happened to us with the, you know, invasion of devastating
diseases.
So thank you -- thank you all for your work.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. And we're going to be back;
we're going to take an 11-minute break and be back at 10:40 -- oh,
10:50, I'm sorry.
(A brief recess was had.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: County Manager, please take your
seat.
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir.
Item #10A
ACCEPTING INFORMATION ON THE RECORD CONTRARY
TO INFORMATION PRESENTED UNDER AGENDA ITEM #10B
TO PRESENT FACTUAL INFORMATION AVAILABLE BY
PUBLIC RECORD REGARDING THE CLERK OF COURTS
CONTRACT FOR BANKING SERVICES WITH FIRST FLORIDA
INTEGRITY BANK AS ADOPTED UNDER AGENDA ITEM
13.A. AT THE SEPTEMBER 23, 2014 BOARD MEETING -
Page 52
October 28, 2014
PRESENTED FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY
Item #1 OB
DIRECTING STAFF TO PREPARE AN EXTENSION TO THE
BANK SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH 5/3 BANK TO ALLOW
THE COUNTY TO RE-SOLICIT THE COUNTY'S BANK
SERVICES CONTRACT UNDER THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS, AND TO RECOGNIZE THAT THE BANK
SERVICES CONTRACT WITH FIRST FLORIDA INTEGRITY IS
VOID SINCE IT WAS PROCURED ILLEGALLY. 5/3 BANK
NOTIFIED THE COUNTY MANAGER AHEAD OF THE 9/23/14
BOARD MEETING THAT IT AGREED TO A MONTH-MONTH
EXTENSION WHICH INFORMATION WAS PLACED ON THE
RECORD BY COMMISSIONER HILLER AT THE 9/23/14
BOARD MEETING. CONTRARY TO THE COUNTY
ATTORNEY'S STATEMENT, NO EXTENUATING
CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTED TO JUSTIFY WAIVING THE
COUNTY'S PURCHASING ORDINANCE AND PROCUREMENT
IRREGULARITIES COMMITTED BY THE CLERK OF COURTS
IN HIS SOLICITATION OF THE BANKING SERVICES
CONTRACT. FURTHER, THAT THE PUBLIC RECORD
REFLECTS THAT THE CLERK OF COURTS ALLOWED FIRST
FLORIDA INTEGRITY BANK TO MODIFY ITS SOLICITATION
RESPONSE AFTER ALL BANK RESPONSES WERE A MATTER
OF PUBLIC RECORD AND THE CANDIDATE BANKS HAD
BEEN INTERVIEWED, SO AS TO MAKE FIRST FLORIDA
INTEGRITY BANK THE LOWEST NET COST BANK, A FACT
KNOWN TO AND IGNORED BY THE COUNTY ATTORNEY.
NO OTHER BANK WAS ALLOWED TO MODIFY ITS'
RESPONSE. THAT ADDITIONALLY, FIRST FLORIDA
Page 53
October 28, 2014
INTEGRITY BANK PROVIDED A NON-CONFORMING
RESPONSE IN THAT IT DID NOT HAVE A TRUST COMPANY,
A REQUIREMENT TO CUSTODY THE COUNTY'S
SECURITIES; AND INSTEAD, FIRST FLORIDA INTEGRITY
BANK INTENDED TO CUSTODY THE COUNTY SECURITIES
WITH A BROKER-DEALER; THAT NO CUSTODY
AGREEMENT WITH THE THIRD PARTY CUSTODIAL
PROVIDER WAS SUBMITTED AS REQUIRED BY THE
SOLICITATION; THAT THE COUNTY ATTORNEY HAD NOT
EVEN CONSIDERED THIS MATERIAL DEFICIENCY IN HIS
REVIEW OF THE FIRST FLORIDA INTEGRITY BANK
CONTRACT PRESENTED BY THE CLERK AND APPROVED
BY THE BOARD ON 9/23/14. THAT ALL THESE FACTS WERE
KNOWN BY COMMISSIONERS HENNING, NANCE AND
FIALA BEFORE THEIR VOTE IN FAVOR OF FIRST FLORIDA
INTEGRITY BANK ON 9/23/14 SINCE THE EVIDENCE WAS IN
THE BACK UP MATERIAL PROVIDED BY THE CLERK, AS
ATTACHMENTS TO HIS AGENDA ITEMS. FOR THESE AND
OTHER REASONS ALREADY NOTED ON THE PUBLIC
RECORD, 5/3 BANK, WELLS FARGO AND SUN TRUST,
WHICH COMPETED AGAINST FIRST FLORIDA INTEGRITY
BANK, HAVE BEEN IRREPARABLY HARMED BY THE SHAM
PROCUREMENT OF BANKING SERVICES BY THE BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND THE CLERK OF COURTS -
DISCUSSED WITH NO FURTHER ACTION TAKEN
CHAIRMAN HENNING: The next item, it's suggested by the
county attorney that we hear them both, and that's 10A and 10B, and
that has to do with the banking contract.
Here's what I'd like to do is I would like for Commissioner Hiller
to have time to present her item and, actually, myself present the item.
Page 54
October 28, 2014
I want to come down to the podium to present my item and use the
visualizer.
I also don't want to get interrupted in my presentation; however,
I'm willing to answer any questions pertaining to my item on the
agenda and hopefully not get interrogated.
Does anybody have any problem with that or the procedure, how
we do this? And can we allow the vice-chairman to referee this issue?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Does he have a big bat? You better
pass the gavel down to him.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah. Well, you have somebody over
here that can help you if you need, the Sheriffs Department.
Commissioner Hiller, do you want to go first?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. Sure, I'd love to. And I like
your idea about being at the podium, so I'll go ahead and follow your
lead on that.
Good morning, members of the board and the viewing audience.
The recommendation that I have before all of you today is to ask
that you allow the county manager to put out an RFP for the
solicitation of banking services for the Board of County
Commissioners.
I'm not concerned about the banking services for the Clerk. I'm
not concerned about the banking services for the Supervisor of
Elections, because how they choose to procure their services is up to
them. They're independent constitutional officers.
The Board of County Commissioners, on the other hand, is bound
by its own purchasing ordinance. And as a result, it should have the
ability to procure its banking services -- which is an expense of the
Board of County Commissioners, not an expense of the Clerk of
Courts, not an expense of the Supervisor of Elections -- to be procured,
as I said, by the county manager through his purchasing agent in the
Sunshine, legally and ethically.
Page 55
October 28, 2014
To begin, as you all know, the Clerk of Courts went ahead and he
put out an RFP, and that RFP said the Clerk was the sole decider with
respect to the Board of County Commissioners' banking services. I
objected. I objected to this at the beginning of the summer. I
communicated with our county attorney, who communicated with
outside counsel, Nabors and Giblin, who concurred that the Clerk
could not and should not be the sole decider and the sole signer on a
contract involving the expenditure of funds under the responsibility of
the Board of County Commissioners where the Board of County
Commissioners would have to approve that expenditure and determine
that it served a valid public purpose.
The Clerk, as a consequence, finally agreed to ask the Board of
County Commissioners for a ratification, and that ratification ended up
being predicated on the county attorney's incorrect opinion and
improper interpretation of a case, the Frankenmuth case, which had
been brought forward in -- as an attachment to an opinion by the Clerk,
and that opinion was an attachment to a letter that he was proposing be
sent to the attorney general, Pam Bondi, requesting a formal opinion,
because the Clerk believes that our county manager is wrongfully
expending public funds without board approval.
And as part of that letter and as part of that opinion relying on the
Frankenmuth case, the Clerk said that the board does have the ability
to ratify and approve a contract that was initially an unauthorized
agreement provided that the three-prong test outlined in Frankenmuth
Mutual Insurance Company versus Magaha -- if I say that properly.
I'm not sure -- has been satisfied.
Well, the county attorney did not do that. The county attorney did
not rely on satisfying the three-prong test in that case. In order to
allow the Board of County Commissioners to wrongly waive its
purchasing ordinance and wrongly waive irregularities, which, I will
emphasize, are material with respect to how the Clerk procured this
Page 56
October 28, 2014
agreement.
I'll refer specifically to two important sections in that case, one
where it refers to -- that the Board of County Commissioners must
ratify an agreement in the same manner in which the agreement would
have been initially approved. In this case, this agreement would have
been approved pursuant to the county's procurement ordinance law.
What the county attorney did in that regard is he ignored a
material fact. He ignored the fact, which I put on the record before the
vote, and that fact was that we didn't have exigent circumstances that
would, in any way, allow this board to waive our procurement
ordinance.
What the county attorney said is that essential services were going
to be interrupted and that as a consequence of that interruption we had
to ratify the contract recommended by the Clerk with First Integrity.
Nothing could be further from the truth, as stated. That was placed on
the record before the vote, and the county attorney, notwithstanding,
ignored the facts and gave the board incorrect advice.
Specifically, the county manager had informed me, and I
informed the board, that Fifth/Third was willing to extend their
contract to a month-to-month basis to allow the county manager to go
out and solicit on behalf of the board under the board's procurement
ordinance.
Why the county attorney chose to ignore this fact is beyond me.
As a consequence, the county ordinance could not be waived;
notwithstanding that he said it could be, notwithstanding the motion
made by Commissioner Henning, and notwithstanding the incorrect
vote by the board.
The other point made in the Frankenmuth case is that a Board of
County Commissioners must have full knowledge of the material facts
relative to the agreement. The board did not. The board clearly was
not informed as to all the material facts relative to this agreement. The
Page 57
October 28, 2014
board pretended not to be informed about the fact that Fifth/Third
agreed to extend their contract on a month-to-month basis to allow for
a re-solicitation of this agreement.
As a consequence, this board wrongly voted to approve this
agreement outside of the county's ordinance. And as I said in the
beginning, a Board of County Commissioners must ratify an
agreement in the same manner in which the agreement would have
been initially approved, which means it would have been approved
under the county's procurement ordinance.
And let's consider a defect. The big protest that Fifth Third
presented to the Clerk where the Clerk acted as judge, jury, and
executioner and made the determination that he was right about
himself with respect to what he calls a subjective decision is
completely invalid.
And Fifth Third and any other party that had engaged in
competing for this award should have had the right to present before
the Board of County Commissioners and should have had the right to
be heard by our purchasing agent, by the county manager, and as a
final appeal to the Board of County Commissioners as provided by our
purchasing ordinance. They were deprived their due process rights.
The Clerk went ahead with his solicitation, notwithstanding that I
objected that he could not do so, notwithstanding that I had the support
of the county attorney that he could not do so. He held two meetings
outside of the Sunshine with a selection committee that I sat as a part
of representing the Board of County Commissioners.
When it was uncovered that he failed to properly notice these
meetings, in violation of the Sunshine Law, he reconstituted the
selection committee with absolutely no representation from the Board
of County Commissioners and no representation from the Supervisor
of Elections.
That committee had several meetings. Those meetings were
Page 58
October 28, 2014
noticed, but they were held in a closed conference room inhospitable to
public access, chilling the public's right to view and hear what was
going on and their right to participate in this process, a violation of
Sunshine.
With respect to how that committee selected (sic) is equally
disturbing. I asked, as a matter of public records -- I should say --
forgive me. I asked through public records to get all the tabulation
sheets for the members of this committee. I was not provided with all
of them.
And in the Clerk's backup to the board, the board was not
provided with all those tabulation sheets. In fact, I only received 11
out of what should have been 16.
In the evaluation process, there are certain material irregularities
which are of serious concern. The first is that the Clerk, in his
solicitation, required that the securities of the county be held in a
custodial account with a trust department and that the custodial
agreement be made a part of the overall agreement that would be
entered into by the board, the Clerk, and the Supervisor of Elections.
First Integrity Bank does not have a trust department. It does not
have, I should say, a trust bank affiliated with it, and as a consequence,
what First Integrity did is it selected an out-of-state broker-dealer to be
the custodial agent. That was not what was in the RFP.
All the other banks had trust companies which are independent of
the custodial -- of the depository division of the bank, and all of them
were willing to provide agreements as to how those securities would be
held for the county's benefit. Right out of the box, First Integrity was
nonconforming as a bidder.
And best practices does recommend that the depository institution
and the custodial institution be two different institutions. And, in fact,
the three banks that were competing with First Integrity had exactly
that. They had a trust company independent of the depository bank
Page 59
October 28, 2014
that would hold those securities for the benefit of the county.
In fact, our investment advisor, who is assisting us with our
investment policy, specifically told me that Wells Fargo and SunTrust
were two of the top custodial agents for governmental securities within
their trust companies in the state; notwithstanding, the Clerk continued
to consider First Integrity as a candidate in this bidding process.
And then, after all the banks were interviewed, First Integrity
wrote a letter that said that they were going to eliminate their
compensating balance requirement which obviously affected the cost
of services and made them more competitive as against the other three
banks that they were bidding.
Now, that's a problem, because Crystal, during the process, even
went on to say that we don't allow bidders to change their bid once the
bids have been made public and the selection process is underway.
And our county manager assured me that nor does our purchasing
allow for -- our purchasing agent allow for such practice,
notwithstanding what the county attorney suggested was otherwise.
And, actually, I have an email to that effect that I'm going to
introduce on the record and I will read in part at the end, because it's
very revealing.
In short, what happened was there were procurement practices
that were allowed by the Clerk that never would have been allowed by
the county, that never would have been allowed pursuant to our
purchasing ordinance, and, in fact, if our county manager ever would
have done what the Clerk did in his selection process, the Clerk would
be down here at that podium and he would be yelling at you
commissioners asking for Leo's head on a platter or, at a minimum,
have him marched off in handcuffs.
The Clerk arbitrarily allowed what otherwise would not be
allowed. These are material irregularities.
First Integrity Bank already has a liquidity concentration-risk
Page 60
October 28, 2014
concern. First Integrity Bank is a new bank. Senator Richter says it's
about five years old. It does not have the history of serving
governmental accounts like our account as compared to the other
banks.
It has a 3.5 Bauer rating as compared to a 5 Bauer rating by the
other banks. It has grown, in large part, by acquisition. I don't know
what their current negative -- their current retained earnings is, but
their financial statements, as submitted to us, shows negative retained
earnings.
And the Clerk's reliance that the fact they're a qualified public
depository means that everything is okay is very far from the truth. In
fact, the reason that the sheriff is no longer with TIB is because they
lost their qualified public depository status, and we all know why.
The county attorney said in our meeting of September 23rd that
the process by which the Clerk procured this contract was not legally
sufficient. Nothing has changed. Nothing has changed. All the facts
remain as they are and, yet, he changes his opinion, again, ignoring the
Fifth Bank (sic) offer to extend its contract in order to avoid the law
which governs us and to allow for the approval of the waiver of
material irregularities.
He recommended the approval of a contract that goes against
public policy. It has a provision in there that does not allow us to
terminate this agreement without approval of the Clerk of Courts, a
point well made by Commissioner Coyle.
We cannot allow our decision-making to be contingent upon or
bound by another elected official.
And then we have a contract which names us as a party, that
names the Clerk as a party, executed by us, executed by the Clerk and,
supposedly, to benefit the Supervisor of Elections, but the Supervisor
of Elections is not a named party. The Supervisor of Elections didn't
even execute this contract, and yet we're providing services to the
Page 61
October 28, 2014
Supervisor of Elections through this contract that they're not even a
part of.
I could go on and on and on, but I think that there is sufficient
evidence on the record -- let me refer back again to the Frankenmuth
case. There is sufficient evidence on the record where the County
Commissioners do have full knowledge of material facts relative to
this agreement to the degree that they cannot approve it. And so my
reason for being here today is to ask the Board of County
Commissioners to recognize what Fifth Third has, on multiple
occasions, told us and that it is willing to extend its contract on a
month-to-month basis so that there is no interruption of essential
services, essential banking services to the county, so that the checks
can be paid and payroll can be met, as was Commissioner Henning's
concern, to allow the county manager to go forward and to put the
banking services solicitation back out to market so that it can be
procured under the board's procurement ordinance in a transparent and
ethical and fair manner to all.
We are the fiduciaries of the public's tax dollars. It is our duty to
be as conservative and as prudent as we possibly can in the public's
interest.
And with that, members of this board, I would like to make a
motion to ask you to recognize First Integrity's contract as void;
second, to allow for an extension on a month-to-month basis of the
existing agreement with Fifth Third; and, third, to allow the county
manager to solicit this agreement as it relates to the Board of County
Commissioners' banking services, not as it relates to the Clerk's
banking services, and not as it relates to the Supervisor of Elections'
banking services, to allow that county manager to put this back out to
bid and to create a selection committee and to allow that selection
committee to evaluate the evidence and make a recommendation to the
board to allow the board to select its bank services provider pursuant to
Page 62
October 28, 2014
law, ethically and transparently, all in the public's interest.
I thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Vice-chair, may I present?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Let me just do one thing. I'd like
to -- just want -- I just want to introduce this email chain, which I think
says it all. It describes how our county manager solicits and selects,
and he would not do what the Clerk has done, and so I'm going to
introduce it in the record.
County Manager, you have a copy of this, correct?
MR. OCHS: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: All right, thank you. And I'll go
ahead and introduce it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And it has to be voted on by the
board.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Please, go ahead and vote on it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: May I present?
VICE-CHAIR NANCE: Yes, sir, go ahead.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, first of all, let me say -- actually
-- yes, first of all, let me say -- I wasn't going to read the executive
summary; however, I do want to point out in the executive summary --
and the commissioner is always pointing out that this is illegal; illegal,
illegal, illegal.
So the steps of the Sunshine Law -- there was a committee which
Commissioner Hiller was a part of. She volunteered her service on
behalf of the board. The Clerk of Court discovered that a meeting by
the selection committee was not advertised so, therefore, he closed the
meeting, he disbanded the selection committee, and reconstituted a
new committee. There's no Sunshine Law violation because there was
no act that was taking place.
Second, let me just say, if anybody here or in the audience or
listening feels that this contract with First Integrity of Florida, FFIB, is
Page 63
October 28, 2014
unlawful, go over to the Sheriffs Department and file a complaint,
okay, throw everybody under the jail for that. But I can tell you, it isn't
illegal.
One of the allegations by Commissioner Hiller is FFIB required a
balance of $25 million on deposit. And I want you to refer to Packet
Page 272 through 279.
Commissioner Hiller, can you tell me where there's a requirement
for a $25 million balance on deposit? It's not there, okay.
Now, if you look at Packet Page 280 -- and you'll see there was a
request, not a requirement, a request by FFIB for a 25 million balance;
not a requirement, again.
And I want to remind you, this is a request for proposal. It's not a
sealed bid. I think somebody's confused about the difference between
a sealed bid and a proposal. A proposal is just that. It's a negotiated
item, okay. And we do that on a regular basis; our staff does it on a
regular basis.
Derek Johnssen is a clerk staff person, the liaison between the
bidders and the Clerk, okay. He wasn't a part of the evaluation team,
okay. And I may refer to him later on, if you don't mind.
And you can see on 280, those transcript correspondence, so the
statement of this is a requirement from First Federal is not true, simply
not true.
Also, it's alleged FFIB provided a nonresponse, they did not have
a trust company required by the county's securities and, instead, First
Florida Integrity intended to -- custody of the county's securities with a
broker deal, and no custody agreement within (sic) the third-party
agreement provider was submitted by the solicitation.
Okay. I want to show something to you. First of all, I want to
show you the proposal by First National Bank, which is -- First
Integrity Bank, Garrett Richter's bank. And I want to point out and
show you, there's the custodial security, Infinex. There was an
Page 64
October 28, 2014
attachment emailed to all the commissioners, including Commissioner
Hiller, that Infinex was selected.
I also want to point out to you -- look at packet Page 299. Are
you with me? This is a Government Finances Officers Association,
and their recommendations -- and I'll quote you one paragraph. One of
the most important protections of the controls against fraud is the
separation of safekeeping and custody function of the investment
third-party safekeeping -- I'm sorry -- let me start over.
One of the most important protections and controls against fraud
is the separation of safekeeping and custody functions from the
investment, third-party safekeeping, custody or securities by arranging
to have securities held by a checks-and-balance third party. The
government can effectively minimize its safekeeping and custodial risk
at the investment transaction. That is exactly, exactly what FFIB has
provided, okay. Not all of them have that true separation. There is an
affiliation with some of the other ones.
Another allegation is contrary to the county attorney's statement,
which was read into the record. There's no extenuating circumstances
that exist to justify waiving the purchasing policy ordinance
procurement irregularities committed by the Clerk of Courts in its
solicitation of banking service contract.
Isn't it quite interesting the Board of Commissioners, on a regular
basis, over and over, waives its purchasing policy. And, in fact, there
was an item on today's agenda that was continued to waive the board's
purchasing policy, and it will come back. I don't know if that's the
issue or not, but, you know, staff either recommends sole source or
piggyback, piggyback on a state contract, okay, or there was one on
another county's contract.
I also want to state what the county manager said on September
23rd, that he could not advertise an RFP for banking services, and time
-- when this contract, this present contract expires. So, therefore, there
Page 65
October 28, 2014
was an urgency.
Can you imagine, come December, we don't have a bank to pay
our employees? How ridiculous is that? We must provide that service.
Now, I'm talking about, in the last two decades I asked the Clerk's
Office has -- they have prepared the RFP banking with the county
staff. In fact, I was a participant on this last contract with Fifth Third,
on the selection there.
And now the clerk comes over to us with a banking contract
cheaper than Fifth Third's bank, presented the contract, and this is how
he's treated?
Now, it's my understanding from the people who elected me, they
demand that we work together. They demand that we work together for
their best interest.
Now, we've got a recommendation to the Board of
Commissioners, direct staff to prepare an extension, banking service
agreement with Fifth Third. How can anybody -- how could anybody
extend a contract that's not theirs? It is not our contract. We are not a
party to that contract. Nobody signed that contract. And, again, over
the last two decades, the Clerk of Court has provided this service, the
request for proposal, and chose a bank, and it's done legally.
Furthermore, this temporary contract that's being suggested or
requested, we have a -- we will lose approximately $10,000 a month,
the difference between First Integrity's contract and the present Clerk
of Court's contract with Fifth Third; 10,000 a month.
So, you know, I also want to say, FFIB, Gary Tice, Garrett
Richter's bank is a local company. Fifth Third's bank is a company out
of Ohio. Now, isn't it in the best interest of the citizens to do business
with a local company that pays over or around $90,000 per employee?
That's a direct benefit to the citizens of our great county.
Now, I want you to look at Packet Page 281, okay. Everybody
with me? And I'm going to read parens -- paragraph -- the second
Page 66
October 28, 2014
paragraph, Parens 2, a motion to reconsider made by a member who
voted in the majority, if such motion is made at a regular meeting, the
following meeting at which the matter was voted upon, but only in
accordance with the following: Where a member voted in the majority
wishing that -- the board to reconsider the matter after adjourn (sic) of
the meeting in which it was voted on, the members shall deliver --
shall deliver to the county manager a written memo stating that the
member intends to introduce a motion to reconsider.
The memo shall state the date of the regular meeting in which the
member intended to introduce the motion, and it shall be delivered to
the county manager no less than six days prior to such meeting.
Paragraph B, no motion for reconsider shall be made any later
than a second regular board meeting following the board's vote on the
matter sought. That's today, okay. Where's the memo? Where is the
memo from the commissioner that voted in the majority on our
agenda? It's not there. You can't act upon this issue according to our
rules.
Now, I want you to take a look at Commissioner Hiller's item on
the agenda, the executive summary. Do you see the legal
considerations? That wasn't written by our county attorney. That is a
direct conflict of our ordinance, somebody providing a legal opinion
that is not the county attorney.
So I will stand -- there is no reason for a motion on my part
because my part is just to provide information. And I'll answer any
questions. Thank you.
(No response.)
VICE-CHAIR NANCE: All right. Currently, we have -- we've
received some information. We are currently under contract that was
voted by the Board of County Commissioners with First Integrity
Bank. And, of course, right now we have a motion on the floor to
declare that contract void.
Page 67
October 28, 2014
I think the Board of County Commissioners has already acted on
this, but at this time I would like to entertain any comments by board
members on this issue.
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Just a very quick one. You've got
four speakers who have --
MR. MILLER: Five.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- five speakers --
MR. MILLER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- who have signed up to speak on
this.
VICE-CHAIR NANCE: Would you like to hear the public
speakers? Let's go ahead and hear the public speakers on this issue.
Since we seem to be in a general purpose melee, we might as well go
ahead and continue.
MR. MILLER: Your first public speaker is Jim Ray, who's been
ceded three additional minutes from Jim Mitchell. He will be followed
by Garrett Richter.
MR. RAY: Chairman, Commissioners, I appreciate the
opportunity. My name is Jim Ray. I'm representing Fifth Third Bank.
Just a brief comment for the record. I just wanted to reiterate to
the commissioners that Fifth Third, after consult with its counsel,
communicated to the county attorney that we were willing to enter into
a month-to-month contract prior to your last vote to provide banking
services to the county to continue those while you went through an
RFP process.
We also communicated that to you via letter last week that all of
you should have received along with the county manager and the
county attorney, and I'm here today just to -- as you guys debate this
matter, whatever you guys decide is up to you, and that -- to the extent
you need to enter into a month-to-month contract with Fifth Third
Page 68
October 28, 2014
Bank for the continuation of your banking services agreement, we
stand ready, willing, and able to provide that to the county. Thank
you.
MR. KLATZKOW: We never had any communications, sir.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I think you meant the county
manager.
MR. RAY: We emailed that letter to each of the commissioners
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, no.
MR. RAY: -- the county manager, and the county attorney.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: When you -- no, no. He's
correcting you with respect to the first statement you made. You made
the statement that when the county asked you to extend your services,
that you communicated with the county attorney. You communicated
MR. RAY: Oh, I apologize. It was. It was the county manager.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- with the county manager, not the
county attorney. That's why he's correcting you.
VICE-CHAIR NANCE: Yes, sir. I have one question for you,
sir, if you don't mind. Is it the contention of Fifth Third Bank right
now that the process that the county has engaged in to procure banking
service is illegal?
MR. RAY: That is not an -- a matter for us to opine on. That's a
matter for you to opine on, so we have no position.
VICE-CHAIR NANCE: Okay. Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Garrett Richter. He'll be
followed by Michael Dunzelman.
MR. DUNZELMAN: He'll be ceding. They're going to cede.
MR. MILLER: Oh -- and Nancy Oltegg will both be ceding their
time to Garrett Richter.
SENATOR RICHTER: If necessary.
Page 69
October 28, 2014
Good afternoon, Commissioners, and thank you very much for
this opportunity to speak before you on what should have been a
simple process, in my opinion.
For the record, my name is Garrett Richter. I'm your elected State
Senator, and I'm the president of First Florida Integrity Bank. I'm here
on behalf of First Florida Integrity Bank. First National Bank was
easier for all of us to say, but nonetheless.
There have been -- everybody's entitled to their own opinion, but
the facts are the facts. And as Chairman Henning pointed out, when we
received the RFP and responded to that RFP, we did state in there a
request for a $25 million balance, since that's become an issue for
discussion.
It was clearly stated that that was a request. And in the process
that was put forth, the selection committee met with each of the
vendors. By the way, all four of the vendors -- there were four finalists.
There were ourselves, there was Fifth Third, there was SunTrust, and
there was Wells Fargo. All four of the vendors are very capable of
providing the banking services.
When each vendor was invited back to the selection committee to
clarify any comments or statements within their response to the RFP,
and a request for clarification came about the 25 million, and at that
point I addressed that clarification personally and said that that is
strictly a request and not a requirement. That was early on prior to the
selection committee making any recommendation to the Clerk.
I might suggest -- oh, there's also been some conversation about
the third-party arrangement. As has already been stipulated by the
Florida official's best practices document, it is best for the county to
have a separation there. The arrangement that we've put through is an
arrangement through infinite -- Infinex with purchasing and Bank of
New York, Mellon Bank of-- New York Mellon, which is probably
one of the foremost and largest in the country, not necessarily the state.
Page 70
October 28, 2014
So there's certainly no risk to the county there.
I'd like to also address some comments that Commissioner Hiller
made regarding our bank relative to our safety and soundness. I
overheard her radio comments and indicating that she felt maybe the
banking regulators needed to be approached. We went to the banking
regulators. They have repeated and sent us a certificate of good
standing. Anybody that has a business background knows that there
are expenses in start-up phases, especially when regulators delayed our
start-up for 10 months.
If many of you remember, for 10 months, back when we were
trying to open the bank, we carried expenses for 10 months without
one cent of earnings, 100 percent expenses with an employment base
of 50 employees for that 10 months while the FDIC dragged their feet
on approving our charter. So that is really a huge cost for negative
returned earnings.
I can tell you we have core operating earnings right now that are
positive, that are ahead of our plans, and that our shareholders are very,
very happy with. A further review of our public disclosed financial
statements will indicate we're not only operating on a profitable basis,
but we maintain an extremely sound balance sheet.
As a point of reference, we have much lower than the average
peer banks in nonperforming loans, delinquent loans, et cetera. So any
financial analyst could look at our balance sheet, look at the public
statements, the public call reports and see that we are extremely,
extremely sound and safe. And it would further -- you would further
find that the regulators designate your capital standpoint, and we are
designated as, quote, a well-capitalized bank.
So the challenge to our safety and soundness is inappropriate and
especially dangerous when you go on public record suggesting that.
So there are -- when the RFP came out, the responses, there were
significant similarities between our response and the responses of the
Page 71
October 28, 2014
three competitors. There were also significant differences. We were
proud to be selected as the bank for Collier County.
I would suggest to you that the Clerk did not bring a contract here
for ratification, which is what was stated by Commissioner Hiller. He
brought a contract here for execution. It was not the ratification of a
contract that the Clerk and our bank entered into. It was a contract to
enter into a three-party contract with the county, the Clerk, and our
bank.
And, Commissioner Coyle, you made the point in the debate on
that, that why didn't the Clerk just enter in directly? At that point, if
something like that were to happen, possibly it could have come up for
ratification.
So we have an existing contract. The differences in our responses
that are significant to the taxpayers, I can draw to two significant
differences. Number 1, is our cost, as has already been alluded to. I'll
expand on that in a bit. And the reason our cost was lower than the
other three providers is because we take tremendous pride in being a
local, locally headquartered bank here in Collier County. That is the
other significant difference.
What does locally headquartered mean to the citizens and the
taxpayers of Collier County and to the Board of Commissioners? It
means that our chairman and CEO, Gary Tice, our entire -- executive
management team, myself, as president, our chief lending officer, our
chief risk officer, our chief compliance officer, all of our backroom
personnel, all of our marketing personnel, all of our compliance
personnel, live and work and play in Collier County.
This is where we live, Collier County. We are a proud corporate
citizen of Collier County. We were aggressive in our pricing because
we are proud of Collier County.
Not only did we submit a proposal that was significantly less on a
monthly basis on cost, but we also went ahead and waived all those
Page 72
October 28, 2014
costs in the proposal for the first 12 months of the contract. There's a
significant cost differential between ourselves and any of the others
bidders.
The fact that we're local means we set up the lockbox local. I
happen to know from conversations that we've had in the Clerk -- one
of the comments that citizens make of the county is why am I sending
my utility payments to Cincinnati or to Miami or wherever they go?
With this solution, with this good solution that the Clerk and that
the county have entered into on a contract, those utility payments will
be mailed to Naples, Florida, and they will be processed by employees
that live in Collier County. We believe that we've presented the best
solution.
If this were to go to another bid -- I find it interesting that Fifth
Third's anxious and wants to do a bid again. I'm going to guess that
they now know what our pricing is. That's just taking a guess that they
know how we've priced it, which is dramatically different than the way
they priced it.
I believe firmly that the county made the best decision on behalf
of the citizens and the taxpayers of Collier County, and I would
encourage you to not revisit the process. We are well along the line of
implementing the contract which will go into effect on November 1st,
which is the expiration date. That's three days, I guess. We are ready.
And I might also note, based on the contract that was executed, on
the lockbox, the reason we have the ability to deliver, in the year 2000
(sic), we were selected to be the county's bank. This -- we also do the
Collier County Sheriffs Office and the Immokalee Fire and Sewer, so
we do have experience with public -- public depositories. There's a lot
of dialogue relative to the security of the qualified public depository.
It's backed by the state. Fifth Third, Wells Fargo, SunTrust, they will
all -- they will all support our -- all public deposits throughout the
state. And, finally, in order to set up and establish the lockbox
Page 73
October 28, 2014
services, we've hired two people since then. We've already hired two
people, and we've made a capital investment, capital investment of
hundreds of thousands of dollars on state-of-the-art equipment so that
we can provide first-rate, high-quality services to the county, to the
Clerk, and to the other officials, the other constitutional officials.
So I thank you for your support, and I'd be happy to answer any
questions.
MR. MILLER: That is all the registered speakers on this item.
VICE-CHAIR NANCE: Yes. Questions from board members?
Commissioner Hiller.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yes, thank you.
Senator Richter, thank you so much for being here. I'd like to ask
you some questions, if I may.
You mentioned that you currently have as your clients the sheriff,
and I believe you said the Immokalee Sewer and Water District; is that
correct?
(No response.)
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And you also -- I believe, also have
the property appraiser as your client; is that correct?
(No response.)
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So let's eliminate the Immokalee
Sewer and Water District. If you look at adding up the Property
Appraiser, the Sheriffs Office, the Clerk of Courts, the Supervisor of
Elections, and the Board of County Commissioners, there appears to
be a concentration of government accounts that will make up a very
large percentage of your total deposit base at this point where the
source of funds is the Board of County Commissioners.
I don't have the information in front of me, but if memory serves
me correctly, one of the footnotes in your financial statements was that
you were already facing liquidity concentration risk and that two
existing depositors of yours made up something like 15 percent of your
Page 74
October 28, 2014
deposit base, and that's before adding us, and I'm not sure if that
considered the sheriff and property appraiser.
Is there not a concern on your part that your liquidity
concentration risk is going to be elevated as a consequence of seeing
so much of the public's funds making up your deposit base? And
what's your current deposit base now, like 800,000 -- eight hundred
million?
SENATOR RICHTER: Are you finished with --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, just -- I'm just --
SENATOR RICHTER: I'll respond to all your questions.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. I -- just -- you know,
because -- and if you look at the total of the dollars that are coming
from the county as a percentage of your total, I think you're going to be
north of about 20 percent, but I'm just wondering what your feel is on
that. And then I have a couple of other questions.
SENATOR RICHTER: Okay. No, I have absolutely zero
liquidity concern whatsoever with the deposit relationships that we've
earned throughout Collier County, specifically the deposit
relationships that you've identified.
We are -- we have just under $900 million in total assets.
Liquidity -- I believe it was in your comments, Commissioner Hiller,
that you -- when you brought up qualified public depositories, and you
said that that didn't make any difference, and you referred to we all
know that we're no longer with TIB because they were no longer a
qualified public depository.
Within the contract, if we no longer become a qualified public
depository, you will no longer be with us either. So that -- there's a
self-intended resolution to any situations there.
Let me expand a bit on what a qualified public depository is. It is
not a process that just any financial institution in the State of Florida
can qualify for. There are -- we are a highly regulated industry. We
Page 75
October 28, 2014
have regulators that come in on a frequent basis. They review all of
our operations. They review our financial statements, they review our
liquidity, they review our capital, they review our asset quality, they
review our management team, they review our compliance with
regulatory issues. We are tremendously regulated. And at the end of
that review, if there are any concerns, they are addressed at that point
in time.
A qualified public depository, based on the deposits that we have
that are public deposits that are not the Collier County's alone, they are
other public deposits also, we pledge, as well as Fifth Third and other
banks that are approved by the Chief Financial Office of the State of
Florida -- all those financial institutions pledge securities into a pot, if
you will. That pot of securities -- stands behind the deposit.
So whether the county had their money in Wells Fargo, Bank of
America, Fifth Third, First Florida Integrity or any other financial
institution that is a qualified QPD, all those deposits have the exact
same level of backing.
So I have no liquidity issues whatsoever. We have a growth
strategy that we are repeating in Collier County. In fact, in Collier
County today, there are 36 financial institutions serving Collier
County. We rank as the number six bank in Collier County for deposit
market share.
We have a diversified balance sheet, we have a location in
Tampa, we have six locations in Collier County, and liquidity does not
cause me -- does not keep me awake.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, thank you very much. I'm
glad you touched on the qualified public depository issue because, you
know, obviously that is a very important one, and it's important in that,
you know, being a qualified public depository does mean that you're
part of the pool and those assets are -- or those securities are pooled as
collateral, if you will.
Page 76
October 28, 2014
But, you know, going to the issue of TIB, TIB lost its status and,
as a result, the sheriff had to leave. And we are, I do not believe,
prudent in our decision-making if we look at a bank and have any
concern that that bank could potentially lose its qualified public
depository status.
And so, as a result, liquidity concentration risk, obviously, you
know, plays into that equation, as do your financials with respect to
other issues.
If being a qualified public depository was a given and -- towards
eliminating any sort of concern with respect to the financial soundness
of any bank we would deposit our monies with, we would not be
asking for financial statements and wondering about the ratings of a
bank when we would engage in evaluating a bank to be our provider.
I'm curious how you ended up getting 50 percent as your pledge
requirement. It seems awfully low for a brand new fledgling bank.
And I do know that the CFO is the one who awards that requirement.
So I commend you. I don't know how you did it, that you ended
up with a 50 percent pledge requirement that matches Wells Fargo's
and SunTrust and, up till last month, Fifth Third, but that's a discussion
for another day.
SENATOR RICHTER: Well, that would -- may I respond?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah, of course.
SENATOR RICHTER: That would be a response by the CFO
based on the criteria. The objective criteria in the matrix of criteria
that they evaluate to determine and approve a qualified public
depository.
I would say that that would, then, support the statements I've
made relative to the safety and the soundness of our financial
institution. That would confirm it. If you're suggesting anything else
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No. I'm just -- I'm just -- it was
Page 77
October 28, 2014
very odd, because when I saw it, I certainly would not have thought a
bank that is turning five years of age would have a pledge requirement
that was at 50 percent. I thought it might be hard, but I don't know. I
mean, I'm just asking.
SENATOR RICHTER: May I --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. And you're right, it is a
determination made by the CFO, and that is a question for him, which
is why I don't want to address it with you.
SENATOR RICHTER: On all startup banks, I believe it's the
first two years --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I think it's three years.
SENATOR RICHTER: -- three years, you have a higher
pledging requirement. I believe it's 125 percent.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah, it's over half.
SENATOR RICHTER: After the first three years, then, almost as
a matter of practice, those pledging requirements are reduced to 50
unless there are issues.
So we did have a higher pledging requirement during our de novo
status of the first three years. We are -- we are now -- I say five years,
but we're actually eight years, because when we opened the bank, we
opened it with an acquisition of a bank that had been opened three
years. So the charter we acquired is three years longer. So the
financial institution that's in place is over eight years in duration.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I appreciate your answer.
The other -- I wanted to clarify to -- actually three points. The
first is the issue with respect to ratification. This board did ratify the
Clerk's process when it approved the contract with your bank, so there
absolutely was a ratification involved, and the ratification was
supported by the waiver of the county's purchasing ordinance and was
supported by the waiver of the irregularities engaged in the
procurement process by the Clerk, so I wanted to clarify that.
Page 78
October 28, 2014
The other thing that I wanted to clarify is that if you look to Fifth
Third's bid protest, while the Clerk stated that you were the lowest cost
provider -- and this was a discussion that the selection committee had
as well -- is that you can't look at cost on a net -- on a gross basis. You
obviously have to look at it on a net basis, and Fifth Third correctly
highlighted that on a net basis they were the net low-cost provider and
that, as I pointed out, when you consider the compensating balance
requirement, you know, it becomes unequivocal.
The last thing I want to clarify is the statement you made with
respect to my characterization of your bank and the bank regulators.
What happened on the radio is I was asked, you know, who else could
you possibly talk to with respect to this issue if you have any concerns,
and one of the comments I made, well, potentially, you could go to a
bank regulator, not that the bank regulators ought to investigate your
bank for any reasons raised by me.
So that's just to clarify those points for the record.
I stand by what I said before the board and before the public.
You and I had a conversation on Thursday before this went before
the board for a vote on September 23rd. And during that conversation,
I told you all about the irregularities engaged in -- with respect to the
procurement process by the Clerk of Courts, and I suggested to you
that the best thing to do would be to allow this to go back out to bid so
that the process would not be tainted by what he did wrong and that if,
in fact, you're the best bank, you know, you would be selected fairly
and legally and transparently, not in the manner in which the Clerk did
it, and you objected. You said absolutely not.
And I said, I really don't recommend that you participate in this
process because of all the irregularities. I said, there's no question that,
as a consequence, one of the bidders is going to file a bid protest.
And your response was, yes, Fifth Third already has.
And I said, I make my point.
Page 79
October 28, 2014
You insisted that you could not wait and withstand the number of
months it would take to put this back out to bid. I still don't understand
why. But I will say to you what I have asked the county manager to
communicate to you, what I've asked Fred Pezaschkan to communicate
to you, and that is I believe that if you were to do the right thing as a
professional banker, recognizing how the Clerk proceeded improperly
through this solicitation, that you would allow the board to go back out
to market and to rebid the board's portion.
Again, what you do with the Supervisor of Elections or the Clerk
of Courts or the sheriff or the property appraiser is between you and
them.
But as it relates to the Board of County Commissioners, if you
would allow this board to go back out to solicit pursuant to our
purchasing ordinance, to do it fairly and transparently and not in the
corrupt fashion in which the Clerk has proceeded, you would, I
believe, show to the entire banking community and to the citizens of
Collier County that, you know, you valued the integrity of the process
and don't want to participate in a process that is anything other than
above board.
SENATOR RICHTER: I'm happy to respond to that. Your
recollection of that phone conversation is almost entirely accurate.
You did leave some comments that you made to me out, which I will
not necessarily make public.
I will tell you that, in my opinion, the Clerk resolved any issues
regarding the legality or the illegality. People can be entitled to
opinions but not fact.
I believe you just stated that in Fifth Third's protest they stated --
and you said it was clear that on a net cost they were better. That is
absolutely not clear. That's not an accurate statement.
The cost to the account for the activities, there's a significant
difference. If there's any difference on a net basis, it would be on any
Page 80
October 28, 2014
interest that is earned on balances.
Our balances and their proposals are very, very similar. In fact, I
believe right now -- and I would have to say I believe, based on -- I'm
not sure what LIBOR is. Fifth Third's here. Do you know what
LIBOR is today?
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Not today.
SENATOR RICHTER: Okay. LIBOR today, plus, what, five
points?
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Probably, like, .28 right now.
SENATOR RICHTER: Yeah. Is very, very similar to the 25
basis points that we bid as a minimum -- minimum threshold.
So if you were to snapshot it today -- and the inference being over
historic times LIBOR may be higher than Federal Reserve, we're in --
we are in historic times now with the Federal Reserve policy. And if
anybody wants to pick up the newspaper and read it this morning,
they'll know that the Federal Reserve, that rates -- we're heading into a
rising rate environment where the Federal Reserve discount rate will,
in fact, go up.
So the distance between their cost to the taxpayers and our cost to
the taxpayers, your statement that their net cost is less is not accurate,
in my opinion, and I don't think the facts would bear it to be accurate.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: It appears that they are correct.
And when you add the opportunity cost of the compensating balance, it
makes it more so. But I don't -- there's no point to discuss it any
further.
SENATOR RICHTER: The compen -- first off, as a clarification,
the compensating balance was a request, not a requirement. It was not
a zero interest. It was going to continue to earn the same amount
anyway. So whether that balance was requested, required, there or not
there, has zero impact on the bottom line.
VICE-CHAIR NANCE: Thank you.
Page 81
October 28, 2014
Commissioner Henning?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, there she goes again.
First of all, she said the integrity of the bid was a reason to
reconsider this; the contract is not valid. I proved to you that she was
wrong. I proved to you that it wasn't a requirement for a $25 million
deposit. It was a request. I provided the backup material.
And then she goes on to say that First Integrity's bid did not
include the security, and I proved to you it is in there, it is in the
document, and I proved to you that is the best practice of the industry.
There is no law anywhere that I could find that requires to have an
in-house security. You want that separation.
And now she's saying -- and now she's saying it's a ratification.
Well, let me read to you -- I have the September 23rd
recommendation. Commissioner Fiala made the motion to approve.
The board approved the attached newly proposed three-party contract
for banking services and acknowledged the variation of the board's
purchasing policy and solicitation that was made under the Clerk's
policy, which is two separate policies.
However, I'm glad that Mr. Ray got it right, at least somebody got
it right, and he provided those comments to you through an email.
In the header/subject is request for reconsidering of banking
services for the Board of Commissioners. And, again, she has failed to
show any memo to the county manager that there is a reconsideration
to be put on this agenda, which is not on our agenda.
So my question to you, County Attorney, is there any voting on
either one of these items? Mine is for information only. Do we need to
vote on --
MR. KLATZKOW: Commissioner Hiller has an action item you
need to vote on.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Well, she had a motion. It
wasn't seconded. So I'm going to make a motion --
Page 82
October 28, 2014
VICE-CHAIR NANCE: Excuse me one moment. Let's do a
couple things here. I think it is clear that we have members of the
Board of County Commissioners that are going to be in disagreement
about a number of things, and there's been a lot of independent
suggestions that procedures are not appropriate, that criteria are not
appropriate, and I think those are issues that rightfully might be
considered as independent items for decision.
For decision purposes today, we have been asked to discuss an
item or to act on a motion on an item that this board has previously
acted on.
Before we get to that point, because of suggestions of legality that
have been discussed, over not just this meeting but other meetings
where material was presented and opinions were voiced, County
Attorney, in your opinion as county attorney, is there anything within
this process or the contract that the Board of County Commissioners
has voted to approve that is, in any way, illegal or causes any of our
actions to be illegal?
MR. KLATZKOW: No.
VICE-CHAIR NANCE: All right. Is there any discussion on the
board on that topic?
(No response.)
VICE-CHAIR NANCE: Hearing none, it is my determination
under the Rules of Robert that this board cannot rightfully entertain a
motion to consider an item that we previously voted on outside of the
reconsideration process.
So I'm going to say that we do not have a motion that we can act
on as a board. But to allow full discussion of this issue, I would like to
have any other board members discuss this item and any concerns that
they might have regarding the testimony of either Commissioner Hiller
or Commissioner Henning.
I know that there have been issues on the responsibilities and
Page 83
October 28, 2014
duties of the Clerk and the board in conflict on these things, and they --
it seems that they are not resolved at this time, but I think those are
completely independent of the issue that's before us at this instant.
Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Commissioner Hiller had her light
on first.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, go ahead. Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. I do have some comments
concerning this. You're asking for general comments.
And just to clarify, it has nothing to do with the qualifications of
the bank. I have full confidence that your bank will provide us the
services we expect and our funds will be properly secured. I do not
have any concerns with that.
I do have concerns with the way the Clerk conducts some of his
business. I find it to be too casual and too dictatorial, and it is
something that has grown in importance over the past few years, and
there is growing concern within the county among businesses and
individuals about the way the Clerk does certain things.
And, in this case, I think there is ample evidence that the Clerk
treated this process much too casually, and he should have adhered
more closely to the procurement policies of the county.
I think we should have used the procurement policies of the
county. So I think, in that respect, Commissioner Hiller has made
some correct observations. But I don't know of any way that we can
legally void a contract that the majority of the board has already
ratified.
The allegation has been made that it was illegally done. That's
something I'm afraid we would have to prove in a court of law, which
might extend this whole process a long, long time and cost more
money than any of us want to spend on it.
But to say that there were steps that the Clerk should have taken
Page 84
October 28, 2014
to do a better job of justifying the decision process, I think, is a valid
concern.
And so I -- I don't know how to instruct the county manager to
proceed with a procurement when we have a valid contract in hand that
was approved by the majority of the board. The majority of the board,
essentially, endorsed the Clerk's actions, and I have to accept the ruling
of the majority of the board.
I -- we certainly can't -- I think, we can't get enough votes to
overrule the three people who voted before, and in order to do that,
we'd have to have the votes to do it.
I think the board made a mistake in not taking the opportunity to
resolve this issue with an extension of the older contract. I think we
should have taken that opportunity, but we didn't, and the Board of
County Commissioners voted in the -- in a majority to proceed with it.
And so, in my opinion, it's done, but I would urge those of you
who are still on this board -- excuse me -- when there is an opportunity
for renewal, that it be done under the county's procurement policies
and that it be done by the Board of County Commissioners.
I feel very uncomfortable with one constitutional officer making
these kinds of procurement decisions on his own and without having
an appropriate review.
So, basically, that's all I have to say about it. I think
Commissioner Hiller has some valid concerns here, and I don't know
how you solve it. It's -- we have a contract with Senator Richter's bank
and I, certainly, don't have any motivation to proceed.
SENATOR RICHTER: For the record, I'm an employee.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay, all right. For the bank that
employs Senator Richter.
VICE-CHAIR NANCE: Senator Richter is all our employee.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: But that's really all I have to say
about this.
Page 85
October 28, 2014
VICE-CHAIR NANCE: Okay. Thank you. Commissioner
Hiller, then Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Does Commissioner Henning want
to go first or not?
VICE-CHAIR NANCE: I think you're next, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay, thank you. The board
cannot ratify what the Clerk did improperly. The board cannot ratify
procurement irregularities. The board had no legal basis to waive its
own purchasing ordinance.
As a consequence, the motion made by the board can't stand.
You can't reconsider something that's not proper in the first place; it
doesn't exist. You can't rescind a contract that is void from its
inception; it doesn't exist. And, therefore, the suggestion that this
matter cannot be voted on and that my motion should not be
considered by this board is incorrect, and that's supported by all the
evidence that's on the record.
Commissioner Coyle is correct, the board voted in the majority.
And Jeff Klatzkow repeatedly -- our county attorney has repeatedly
said that the actions of the board are deemed valid until overturned by
a court of law, which I find the weakest excuse ever to engage in
improper conduct as a board or to provide advice as an attorney.
With that being said, it's very clear what your intent is,
Commissioner Nance. Your intent is to block a vote on my motion
and improperly use the rescission ordinance that does not apply relying
on Commissioner Henning's presentation. And, of course, you can do
that, and your actions are on the record, as are mine.
I stand beside -- you know, behind what I have said. And I,
again, go to the process which is completely improper and against the
public's interest.
VICE-CHAIR NANCE: Commissioner Henning?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
Page 86
October 28, 2014
Commissioner Coyle, question. You said that our purchasing
policy shouldn't be waived in the future, and it especially shouldn't be
waived in this incidence. And is that a true statement?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No. I didn't say anything about
waiving them in the future. I think you pointed out there are some
fairly routine processes for waiving procurement policies when it
seems appropriate.
I believe that there are a number of subjective issues that arose
during this evaluation that were not necessarily clearly outlined in the
request for proposal, and I believe that Commissioner Hiller has
pointed out the fact that some of the scorecards of the evaluation
committee have not been reviewed in their entirety.
There are still questions about all those kinds of things. That kind
of stuff should not be waived, but certainly some routine
administrative waivers are necessary in the orderly conduct of business
on a daily basis.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Such as sole source and --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- state contracts and so on and so
forth.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: But this particular contract should
have been through the -- our purchasing policy. That's your -- the gist
of your comment?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I think so, yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. So -- and you feel that we
should continue a contract, not -- with Fifth Third that was not
procured through our purchasing policy; therefore, we would have to
waive it; wouldn't that be true, since it's not our contract?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: There are adequate provisions
under our existing ordinances which state that under exigent
Page 87
October 28, 2014
circumstances we can take certain action that's in the best interest of
the people of Collier County. So, yes, we could have extended that
contract in this particular case.
We shouldn't ever let ourselves get backed into a corner by a
constitutional officer into trying to make a decision under the threat
that a contract is expiring, so you've got to approve it anyway. There
are always opportunities for us to take proper action.
And so I do not consider that an extension with our prior -- well,
our existing bank provider would not have been an improper action to
give us more time to straighten out the irregularities of the Clerk's
solicitation process, not the qualifications of the bank that was chosen.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, thanks for the clarification. I
just want to put on the record the RFP has been in the process for
months and months.
Commissioner Hiller, prior to our break -- I know you wasn't here
-- was self-appointed to this committee with no objection by the board.
This contract with Fifth Third is not our contract. You can't extend a
contract that you're not a cosigner on so, therefore, it would be a new
contract, and we would have to waive our purchasing policy because it
did not -- it never did -- go under our purchasing policy. And we are
not a cosigner like we are in this contract with First Integrity.
You know, there's a lot of allegations here. They're opinions,
okay? We have a legal opinion by a contract employee who we have
paid for years and years to give us legal advice. Now that we have a
lawyer on the board, we are to accept somebody else's opinion? I don't
think so. I can't do that. I can consider her opinion as a county
commissioner, but I have to depend on the person who we've hired to
give us that opinion.
So I'm done. I'm ready to celebrate.
VICE-CHAIR NANCE: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I just want to say, after all is
Page 88
October 28, 2014
said and done, we already have a contract that's signed. It begins in
four days. No matter how we toss this back and forth, we have the
majority that have voted for this contract. Let's move forward and
finish this subject.
VICE-CHAIR NANCE: Okay. I'm going to -- because I've been
appointed as chair of this item by the chair, I'm going to have the final
word, and that is, I do believe that there are a lot of points worthy of
consideration by this board, and certainly the process is not as tightly
organized as it could and rationally should be.
And I think this has caused a lot of grief I think past history of
conflict with the Clerk has entered into that. I think that's unfortunate,
because this is something -- this is an essential service that we have to
have on a day-to-day basis.
And, first and foremost, our process, whatever it is and whatever's
ratified by this board, has got to be in the best public interest. And I
believe that the majority of the board feels, flaws and all, warts and all,
that the decision that was made is the one that's in the best public
interest at this time.
So with that said, I'm going to close this item, and I'm going to
say we're going to return after a celebration with Commissioner
Coyle's lunch at 1 : 17.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: They're making me buy.
VICE-CHAIR NANCE: Thank you to anyone --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Are we celebrating you leaving; is
that it?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Celebrating the service.
VICE-CHAIR NANCE: We're celebrating Commissioner
Coyle's service to us all over an extended period of time, for which he
should be congratulated and thanked by all of us.
(Applause.)
Page 89
October 28, 2014
CHAIRMAN HENNING: County Manager?
SENATOR RICHTER: I'm sorry. Very, very quickly. I'd like to
extend my appreciation on behalf of Gary Tice and all of our bankers
in Collier County to the entire Board of Commissioners, all five of
you, for the in-depth dialogue that we've had. We realize that we got
maybe caught in the middle of some politics, and that was
tremendously unfortunate.
As a good sign of-- as a sign of our good faith, we will be
designing a special banking product for all the employees of Collier
County that will come with it some special perks that we'll do that we
did not input in the RFP but have alluded to.
So thank you very much for your consideration, and thank you for
your support.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Leo, do you have something?
MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, will you be taking up your 11 a.m.
time-certain right after lunch, the Item 11C? Just so the public knows
what's next.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah. The other time-certain we
disposed of.
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: It was at 2 o'clock. I think we should
do that, our time-certain.
MR. OCHS: We'll hear the legislative priority items first item
back.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Sure.
MR. OCHS: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So that -- what time are -- what
time are we scheduled to come back? Because I believe there's a
representative --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Three o'clock.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- from the Sheriffs Office here to
Page 90
October 28, 2014
speak to that item.
MR. OCHS: 11 : 17 (sic), I believe.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: 1 :17.
MR. OCHS: Oh, I'm sorry. 1 :17, thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: As the vice-chair stated, let's go.
(A luncheon recess was had.)
MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, you have a live mike.
Ladies and gentlemen, please take your seats.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Welcome back to the board's meeting
coming back from lunch recess.
Is anybody here to hear or participate in the Haldeman dock boat
-- Haldeman Creek boat dock extension? Raise your hand.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. That item has been continued.
It's going to the hearing officer. That will be publicly advertised. And
the hearing officer is to give a nonbinding recommendation to the
Board of Commissioners, all right? So we're not hearing that today.
We are going to which item, 11 what?
Item #11C
COLLIER COUNTY 2015 STATE LEGISLATIVE PRIORITIES —
APPROVED
MR. OCHS: 11C, sir. That is a recommendation to review and
approve the proposed Collier County 2015 State Legislative Priorities,
and Debbie Wight, your Legislative Affairs Coordinator, will make the
presentation.
MS. WIGHT: Good afternoon, Commissioners. I'm Debbie
Wight, Legislative Affairs Coordinator for Collier County.
And you have an executive summary and also Appendix A that
Page 91
October 28, 2014
lists the priorities. And this year we did what you instructed last year
and put what you deemed, in meetings with commissioners, the most
important. We put those four.
The second section, water quality resource funding, is a new
category, and we have five projects that we're putting forward to the
legislature with hopes of getting three funded. It's a very competitive
process, and we think we have a good package of projects that
represent the community needs.
And then the third project is issues to monitor that still have
relevancy.
I can answer your questions, if first I can introduce -- Brett Bacot
is here in place of Keith Arnold, who sends his regrets, but he had
another commitment, and they're with Buchanan Ingersol and Rooney;
and we have Burt Saunders, and he's with GrayRobinson; we have
Sergeant Wade Williams, who's with the Collier County Sheriffs
Office, and he's here on invitation to talk if you have questions about
the trafficking issue.
Anyway, I'm here to answer questions or respond.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Human trafficking, you're saying,
right?
MS. WIGHT: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. Debbie, would you mind
putting the priorities on the overhead so the public can see what we
have deemed to be important. I mean, we all have it, but it would be
nice if they could see it.
And I just wanted to comment that on the priorities that you see
up here is the oil drilling and fracking, pedestrian and bike safety, the
-- maintaining IFAS, and issues regarding human trafficking.
And as a board, we all agreed that asking our legislative
delegation to strengthen state rules and regulations governing oil well
Page 92
October 28, 2014
drilling was very important in light of what happened with the
Collier/Hogan well.
Pedestrian and bike safety, we had an exceptional workshop that
highlighted all the issues that we need to address with the state
regarding legislation and standards in order for vulnerable users of our
roads to be able to do so safely.
And then I know IFAS is an issue very near and dear to
Commissioner Nance's heart which, you know, we all support and
continue to endorse.
And then human trafficking, I heard you said that Wayne --
Sergeant Wade Williams was here. I -- Commissioner Henning, if he
could be allowed to speak, I would like to hear what he has to say,
because human trafficking is something that our Victim Advocacy
Coalition is taking up this year as its main initiative, because it has
become an explosive issue and does need legislative attention.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Nance?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes. I just wanted to make just a
comment to the board and the public community which might be
watching and in attendance today.
As far as Priority No. 3 there, I think the University of Florida
Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, with our new center
director, Doctor Calvin Arnold, we've strengthened our relationship
greatly with the University of Florida in very short order, and the
activities that we're supporting are not just centered on agricultural
production vis-a-vis the tremendous project that they are facing with
citrus greening disease, but also the staff there related to surface water
management and water quality has become engaged with the county
and with the Big Cypress Basin in a very, very productive way as well
as exploring opportunities with economic development regarding the
accelerator project in Immokalee, regarding food that we can also tap
in with the Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences.
Page 93
October 28, 2014
So I think that's a very, very -- very, very good and active issue
for us. And, of course, we're supporting continuing funding with a
goal to get the funding for the center back within the University of
Florida extension budget itself rather than having to go to the
legislature repeatedly and ask for funding.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. We have public speakers.
MR. MILLER: I have one registered speaker, and that is Wade
Williams.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
SERGEANT WILLIAMS: Good afternoon, Commissioners.
Good afternoon, members of the public. Thank you for this
opportunity. Do I have a time limit or --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah.
SERGEANT WILLIAMS: Okay. Fantastic. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: We have somebody here to take care
of you if you don't -- if you go over that.
SERGEANT WILLIAMS: On behalf of the Collier County
Sheriff, Kevin Rambosk, I'd like to thank you. He couldn't be here
today. I know he provided a letter. I think all of you may have this
letter in support. The sheriff supports the fight against human
trafficking and rescuing victims of modern-day slavery, which is what
this is.
I would like to take a minute to recognize and laud our current
partners, and I don't want in any way to give the impression today that
I'm somehow diminishing their roles or responsibility or our
partnership with them.
Our local law enforcement, the Florida Department of Law
Enforcement, the Attorney General's Office, FBI, and A-USA, we
work with all of them and have a very strong partnership with them.
Also, our local nongovernmental organizations, which take care of
services for our victims, our NGOs.
Page 94
October 28, 2014
I think it's relevant in this case to briefly describe what trafficking
is so that we understand. It is modern-day slavery. It does not involve
the transportation of a person anywhere. A person can be trafficked
without being moved at all.
It can occur in both international and domestic victims. In fact, a
high number of our cases are domestic victims. In fact, all of our cases
so far this year in Collier County have been domestic U.S. citizens.
And it occurs in various different forms, generally labor and sex
trafficking. The majority of cases are sex trafficking cases. This is
forced prostitution.
Florida Statute 787.06 specifically addresses trafficking. It's a
law which was supported by Attorney General Pam Bondi in 2012,
which was a comprehensive kind of restructuring of some other laws
and created a very powerful law for law enforcement to address the
issue.
There are some areas -- trafficking is a pervasive problem, and
there are some areas where we can improve, and that is in three
different areas, and if I could just quickly go over those. The first is
relating to comprehensive victim's services. What I would recommend
is that we have the state potentially have an advisory panel and that the
advisory panel determine which services are most effective addressing
the needs of trafficking victims, keeping them from going back into
"the life," as it's referred to.
This panel could potentially -- or this legislation could potentially
also fund a group of providers as designated like trafficking service
providers, according to those conditions and those necessary services
that are needed. It's so essential that we have those quality services or
we're not going to be effective.
Stabilization of the victim is the number one issue why we will
not win a trafficking prosecution case. We also need -- what would
help our ability would be a statewide task force and, with law
Page 95
October 28, 2014
enforcement, we currently have a task force, but somebody we can call
in other jurisdictions, regional commanders that could help coordinate
and facilitate training and coordination of investigative efforts.
Also, the potential of special courts to address those issues. And I
can comment on that further. I see my time's up, so thank you very
much for hearing this important issue.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Your time isn't up yet. Your time
will -- oh, it is up.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah. This is a part of our priority.
It's already on our priority list.
Any other questions, comments?
Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'd like to make a motion that we
approve our priority list so that we can go ahead and present these to
our legislative delegation.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'll second the motion.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Hiller,
second by Commissioner Fiala to approve our priorities.
Discussion on the motion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Seeing none, all in favor?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING. Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: (No verbal response.)
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries unanimously.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And I'd like to, if I may,
Commissioner Henning, make one final comment with respect to the
Page 96
October 28, 2014
human trafficking.
I really applaud Sergeant Williams for his efforts in leading the
human trafficking initiative in Collier County, and I'm honored to be a
part of your task force and help you any way I can.
SERGEANT WILLIAMS: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I think that our Victim Advocacy
Coalition can do a great deal working collaboratively with you to assist
these victims. What's going on is absolutely horrific, and our
legislature -- our legislative delegation and our elected leaders in
Tallahassee have to make this as much of a priority as drug
enforcement, as drunk driving, and all of the other, you know, horrible
crimes, you know, against the victims of our community.
So I'm so glad that this whole board recognizes the importance of
the sheriffs initiative and your involvement --
SERGEANT WILLIAMS: Thank you so much.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- so thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries unanimously.
Is there anybody here that just came in to either hear or participate
in the Haldeman Creek boat dock extension? Raise your hand.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
MS. WIGHT: Thank you, Commissioners. And if I can just
remind you that the Collier County Legislative Delegation meeting is
December 4th beginning at nine in Immokalee and at 2 o'clock at
Naples City Hall. Okay. Thank you.
MR. OCHS: Yes. At some point, sir, we'll need either yourself
or someone you designate from the commission to present your
priorities at that meeting.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'll be there anyway, if you want --
to assist anybody.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Can --
Page 97
October 28, 2014
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, it doesn't make any difference.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I would love to do it with you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, you can do it, if you'd like, or
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Can we do it together?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Let the chairman decide what he
wants to do.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah. No, if I can't be there, I'll have
Camden contact you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, I'll be there anyway.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'll be there, too.
MR. OCHS: Thank you, Commissioners.
Item #7
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS NOT ON THE
CURRENT OR FUTURE AGENDA
MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, that takes us to Item 7, public
comments on general topics, or would you like to --
MR. MILLER: At this time I have no registered speakers for
public comment on general topics.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: We're done with No. 7.
Item #9A
AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 04-41, AS AMENDED,
THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE,
WHICH INCLUDES THE COMPREHENSIVE LAND
REGULATIONS FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF
Page 98
October 28, 2014
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, BY PROVIDING FOR:
SECTION ONE, RECITALS; SECTION TWO, FINDINGS OF
FACT; SECTION THREE, ADOPTION OF AMENDMENTS TO
THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, MORE SPECIFICALLY
AMENDING THE FOLLOWING: CHAPTER 1 - GENERAL
PROVISIONS, INCLUDING SECTION 1 .08.02 DEFINITIONS;
CHAPTER TWO - ZONING DISTRICTS AND USES,
INCLUDING SECTION 2.03.01 AGRICULTURAL DISTRICTS,
MORE SPECIFICALLY (1) TO AMEND THE PERMITTED USES
IN THE AGRICULTURAL AND ESTATE DISTRICTS TO
ALLOW HOGS TO BE KEPT FOR SHOW BY CHILDREN
ENROLLED IN A 4-H DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM, AND (2) TO
AMEND THE ACCESSORY USES IN THE ESTATE DISTRICT
TO ALLOW OFF-SITE RETAIL SALE OF FRUITS,
VEGETABLES, AND NURSERY PLANTS GROWN ON SITE;
CHAPTER FOUR - SITE DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT
STANDARDS, INCLUDING SECTION 4.02.07 STANDARDS
FOR KEEPING ANIMALS; CHAPTER FIVE - SUPPLEMENTAL
STANDARDS, INCLUDING SECTION 5.04.05 TEMPORARY
EVENTS, SECTION 5.05.05 AUTOMOBILE SERVICE
STATIONS, MORE SPECIFICALLY, TO ALLOW AUTOMOBILE
SERVICE STATIONS WITH MORE THAN 8 FUEL PUMPS
WITHIN 300 FEET OF RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY TO SEEK
APPROVAL AS PART OF A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
OR CONDITIONAL USE; SECTION FOUR, CONFLICT AND
SEVERABILITY; SECTION FIVE, INCLUSION IN THE
COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE; AND
SECTION SIX, EFFECTIVE DATE - REMAND THE SERVICE
STATION'S AMENDMENT TO THE CCPC FOR FURTHER
VETTING AND FORWARD THE TWO OTHER AMENDMENTS
TO THE NOVEMBER 18, 2014 BCC MEETING FOR THEIR
Page 99
October 28, 2014
SECOND HEARING — APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Very good. That takes us to your advertised public
hearings.
The first advertised public hearing is Item 9A. It's a
recommendation to consider an ordinance amending Ordinance No.
04-41, as amended, the Collier County Land Development Code, for
three specific Land Development Code amendments that were
previously directed by this commission, and Ms. Caroline Cilek will
take you through those items, Commissioners.
MS. CILEK: Thank you. Yes, good afternoon, Commissioners,
Caroline Cilek, Land Development Code Manager with the Growth
Management Division. And I am here to present three board-directed
out-of-cycle LDC amendments for your consideration.
This is the first hearing for these amendments. Because we are
proposing changes to the permitted conditional and prohibited uses of
several zoning categories, the Land Development Code requires that
the amendments are considered at two board hearings. To fulfill this
requirement, the amendments are on the agenda for the November 18th
meeting.
Each of these amendments was thoroughly vetted by the public
and by Collier County advisory boards. Several public information
meetings were held, and all comments collected are provided in the
attachments of your agenda packets.
If I may, I'll proceed into the amendments. The first amendment
was board directed on January 14th and seeks to amend the Estates
zoning district accessory use section to allow for residents to grow
fruits, vegetables, and nursery plants for both personal consumption
and off-site retail sale.
Those pursuing to sell produce and nursery plants off site,
pursuing to sell produce and nursery plants off site would be subject to
Page 100
October 28, 2014
LDC Section 5.02.00, home occupation, as well as several additional
site design standards.
This amendment was approved by the Planning Commission on
October 16 with a unanimous 6-0 vote.
The second amendment was directed by the board on the same
date, January 14th, and seeks to streamline the process for raising hogs
in the Estates and agricultural zoning districts as part of the county's
4-H youth development program.
This amendment was approved by the Planning Commission on
October 16th with a 6-0 unanimous vote of approval.
The third amendment follows board direction on July 8th and
proposes to limit automobile service stations to eight fuel pumps when
located within 300 feet of residential property. A greater number of
fuel pumps may be sought through the conditional use process or as
part of a planned unit development.
This amendment was approved by the Planning Commission on
October 16th with a unanimous 6-0 vote.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
MS. CILEK: Are there any questions regarding these
amendments?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Questions? Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, thank you. I'd like to address
No. 3.
MS. CILEK: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And we are talking specifically
about the automobile service stations. We had no idea that interstate
humungous gas stations were going to come in and decide to plant
themselves at the entrance to people's neighborhoods. We're trying to
take care of that now, but I think we -- we might need to go just a little
bit further, and I don't know if we can do it on this agenda or not.
But also when they're directly across the street from a community
Page 101
October 28, 2014
park where the kids are running back and forth across the main
thoroughfare, 55-mile-an-hour thoroughfare, it can be a very
dangerous situation. And we have that going on in one section of the
county now on U.S. 41 .
Also, when they plant themselves in the front of a neighborhood
that already has cute little two-story stilt homes, and now these people
will never have a moment's peace and quiet.
We need to have -- first of all, this is what this is for but,
secondly, on those that are in the future, we need to make sure that
there is some kind of protection for the neighborhoods behind them.
For instance, on Manatee Road, there's a 55-and-older mobile
home park there, and you can see all the mobile home park vehicles
sitting there, but there's no protection, no walls, no nothing to protect
them from what's going on in front of them.
And so we need to address that, and I don't know if you can add
that in here. I don't know if the other commissioners would agree. But
it's just coming right now in my district, but it's going to be coming
into others, and I want to make sure that we have this so that nobody
else has to deal with the stuff we're dealing with right now.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala, have you talked
to staff members about this particular --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes. Who did you speak to on that?
Maybe they can address it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Nick.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: My understanding, fuel stations, gas
stations, must have a separation with a wall.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, I would think so. I couldn't
believe on Manatee Road --
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Commissioners, for the record, Nick
Casalanguida.
Page 102
October 28, 2014
We discussed it yesterday. And, you know, going forward I think
we can look at that, but it would be hard to make that change right in
the middle of a hearing today, so --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: It is a requirement under the service
station provisions that there has to be that separation with a wall.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: She's talking about the type of buffer,
sir, the height of the wall. She's also talking about pedestrian
accessibility, things that -- because it's a conditional use above eight
pumps, you can look at a lot of different things. Both the Planning
Commission and the board has a lot of leeway for the conditional use
process to address compatibility.
So, you know, discussing with staff, I think you've got that
flexibility in a conditional use. The way this is written now, under
eight pumps, you don't have a conditional use process. It's just the
Land Development Code.
So if you change the threshold, then it becomes more of a
conditional use hearing in front of the Planning Commission and both
the board. So that's the challenge. If you go lower in pumps, you'll see
more of these things.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Let's call them mega-stations.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Right, above eight pumps.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Pardon me?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: You're saying above eight pumps is a
mega-station.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Mega.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Right. But the way the
commissioner's describing it, if it's below eight pumps right now, it's
administrative. You would not go through a conditional use process if
it meets the zoning criteria. If you're asking to see all gas stations that
abut residential come in front of the board for conditional use review
and the Planning Commission, that's not our prior direction, but it can
Page 103
October 28, 2014
certainly be done.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Any further questions?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, I have a question. Let's make
sure we clarify. I have a feeling that some of the people in the
audience today are concerned about the gasoline station that is
considered for U.S. 41 very near to this building.
As I understand it, this change will not, in itself, prohibit that
particular project from proceeding; is that correct? This will address
only those projects that are brought before the Board of County
Commissioners after this ordinance is approved by the Board of
County Commissioners. Do I have that right?
MS. CILEK: (Nods head.)
MR. OCHS: Say yes.
MS. CILEK: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. So this is not a solution that
can be applied retroactively to any project that is currently under
consideration?
MS. CILEK: No.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. I wanted to make sure I got
that right.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And this is the first of two --
MS. CILEK: Correct.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- hearings on these three items.
MS. CILEK: Correct.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. And I don't think there's any
objections to approving these by the Board of Commissioners since it
was directed by the board.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I just wanted to make sure --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: You don't have to convince us that we
need to approve this, because I think you'll find us unanimously
agreeing with you. So if you want to waive your time, you may do so.
Page 104
October 28, 2014
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Let me just say, as I mentioned, is
there something that we can do with this also to make sure that there's
some kind of separation, wall or something, to protect people from
behind where they have eight pumps or whatever? I just want to make
sure that -- and same with the safety factor for the parks. As we're
working this up, I want to make sure that we address that, too.
MS. CILEK: Sure. I want to point out one of the provisions in
the proposed amendment language, which is C 1 -- or excuse me,
C2(b), and that is regarding proximity and mitigation of impact to
ensure compatibility with residential property. That standard is
designed, through the conditional use process, to address your
concerns.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, good. Okay, very good. Thank
you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. And I think it's very
important that two things be made clear, and the first, that this is the
most restrictive we can be in order to limit this type of development.
Is that correct, legally, that we can't be any more restrictive than we're
being by providing this code provision?
MS. CILEK: I think when it comes to legally restrictive --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Let -- I don't want you to answer
that.
MS. CILEK: Fine.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's for the county -- I know I
looked at you, but --
MS. CILEK: Perfect.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- I really meant to be looking at
the county attorney.
MS. CILEK: That's great.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I mean, I want to be sure that we
Page 105
October 28, 2014
are doing the most the law allows because of-- it's a matter of such
great public concern, but without, in any way, compromising property
rights --
MR. KLATZKOW: We're trying to balance --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- of the owner.
MR. KLATZKOW: If you're asking the question, we're trying to
balance the two as best we can.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Is -- but, again, is this the most
restrictive we can be, or do we have the ability to be --
MR. KLATZKOW: The most restrictive you can be is to go
through your whole county and start X'ing out areas where you can
have a gas station, but then you're running a risk of people claiming
that their rights have been diminished. So this is a -- this is better than
what you have. This is a lot better than what you have.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Now, does this provision -- and I
want this to be clear on the record. It allows the property owners to
seek approval as part of a PUD or as a conditional use, but it does not
guarantee the owners of the property that they will be given the right
and that it remains the board's discretion, based on the evidence
presented, to deny such a request coming to us under a PUD or as a
conditional use.
MR. KLATZKOW: As long as the board takes the criteria and
fairly implements the criteria, yes, the board can say no.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Does that satisfy you,
Commissioner Fiala? Because I know how concerned you are.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, that's moving in the right
direction.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Is it enough?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, I don't -- I don't know. I was
just going to ask another question and see if it is. But that's definitely
-- I don't know if you guys have any suggestions. I would have never
Page 106
October 28, 2014
thought to put something like this on the agenda two years ago,
because it was unheard of to have a mega-station in a neighborhood.
Now, I understand many more are coming.
Like, for instance, the one that's being built on Manatee Road,
right next door by the Wal-Mart they're going to build a mega-station,
a Wal-Mart mega-station, then Wawa is coming in and building
mega-stations.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Oh, I love those.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: We could build one in your
neighborhood.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I wish you would.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Anyway, so these things are all
coming. And I think just as long as we make sure that both people
have property rights --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Exactly.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- not only the people coming in, but
those people who are already here, and it will affect their property
values and property rights. And so we have to take in both sides of
that issue.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Nance?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes. I agree -- I agree with this
recommendation. I'm in full support of all three items on here, but just
as a cautionary reminder to everyone, that a lot of the properties that
people apply to use under all sorts of commercial conditions, Cl, 2, 3,
and 4, have a lot of activities that are included in the Land
Development Code that might be a lot less desirable than a gas station.
And people need to understand that our current Land Development
Code provides protections for buffers between commercial properties
and residential properties.
So everybody needs to understand that there's a full gamut of
things that can happen on properties that currently exist in our Land
Page 107
October 28, 2014
Development Code pretty much by right and that it's not a conditional
use.
So everybody needs to be aware of what those are and the fact
that there are many alternatives that, you know, we're going to have to
come to grips with and this board does all the time.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Well, let's go to public
speakers. And, again, I don't think you're going to find anybody
opposing moving this forward to the second hearing. Thank you.
MS. CILEK: Thank you.
MR. MILLER: I have two registered public speakers on this
item. Eric Donihoo, Donihor (sic), and he'll be followed by Vern
Hammett.
MR. DONIHOO: Thank you.
First, I would like to say it's definitely a step in the right direction
that you're looking at. To answer your -- part of what your statement
was, is there more that can be done? In my opinion, absolutely yes.
If you look at some of the information that was very thoroughly
done by the current staff in trying to give you information, they
pointed out that there are other communities within our own state, such
as Davie, Florida, that does not allow a gas station within 250 feet -- of
any size gas station -- to residential use.
Okay. We've used the language in here that a gas station of eight
pumps or less may come in, without expectation or approval by
you-all, within 300 feet. So they could basically put their pumps 20
feet from your property line if they so desired.
If you go on to read the information that we provided from the
county, on Page 2, it talks about the EPA providing an Air Quality and
Land Use Handbook that basically comes out and says they
recommend locating sensitive land uses such as residential 300 feet
from a large gas station based on benzene emissions. That is their
minimum of 300-foot, not within 300 feet. So I would ask our board
Page 108
October 28, 2014
to take a hard look at not using the language of allowing someone eight
pumps or less within. I would say 300 feet should be our minimal.
It also goes on to state, if you look at some further information in
there that's available that had some experts that have put out some
letters on it, one of which is Patrick Breysse, who's a professor of
Johns Hopkins' Bloomberg School of Public Health. When asked
about mega-stations, in particularly -- he was referring to a particular
brand that -- I don't need to come out and give their name or anything,
but it's a mega-station similar to what we're looking at within our
county.
He comes out to state that they looked at this in the minimum that
came out from the California Air Resource Board, who did an
extensive study on this, was 300 feet should be the minimum of
residential to any gas station facilities referring to the measurement of
the pump. They used a gallonage of a facility doing 3.6 million
gallons a year as their threshold.
In the meeting that we held with the mega-stations looking for a
location within our county, they stated openly in this meeting, as a
matter of public record, that their average in their portfolio, including
all stores within their portfolio, was a minimum of 85,000 gallons per
week, which simple math tells you that it's well in excess of 3.6
million. Their portfolio also includes much, much smaller stations that
are not mega-stations.
If you go on to continue to read his information, he tells you that,
quite frankly, as a result, setback distance of 100 meters, even, is not
likely to provide adequate protections from cancer risk.
So what I would ask the board is to continue down the path you
have, take a hard look at saying within 300 feet requires nothing.
Maybe 300 feet should be the minimal. And then for a mega-station,
maybe it should be as much as 1,000 feet, which is the measurements
that were used, if you look at Page 2 of the county's assessment in
Page 109
October 28, 2014
school site guidelines.
And then anything over that measurement would require your
approval, and that would answer your needs there.
Thank you for your time. I appreciate it.
MR. MILLER: Your final public speaker on this item is Vern
Hammett.
MR. HAMMETT: I waive my time.
MR. MILLER: And he's waiving his time, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Caroline, did the Planning
Commissioner or DSAC hear an enhanced setback for these mega gas
stations?
MS. CILEK: Both of those advisory boards reviewed the
proposed language. DSAC's recommendations are in the amendment
text and on the summary sheet. And then there was one change by the
Planning Commission regarding, actually, that provision I just read a
little bit earlier, but we --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And that's what's being adopted by the
-- that's what's being recommended by the staff?
MS. CILEK: Right.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Let me --
MS. CILEK: Planning Commission recommended to move
forward with the language as written, which was prepared by staff.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Yeah, DSAC, it says -- let me
get the packet page. Packet Page 39. That doesn't make sense.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: It's on Page 17, recommendations.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah. The recommendations by
DSAC, No. 3, measurement distance of 300 feet from the pump to the
face or the edge of the residential building.
MS. CILEK: That is actually less restrictive than we have it now.
Right now it's written so that it's from the fuel pump to the lot line of
the residential property, which allows for the lot -- basically your
Page 110
October 28, 2014
backyard and your side yards to be used without -- or not be impacted.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And what's the separation distance?
MS. CILEK: 300.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well -- okay. So we do have a 300 --
MS. CILEK: Uh-huh.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- within there? Okay. My
misunderstanding. From the speaker it sounded like it was a lot less.
MS. CILEK: The first sentence of the proposed language reads,
automobile service stations shall be limited to eight fuel pumps when
located within 300 feet of residential property.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Within.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So they allow pumps, as long as
it's under a total of eight, to be within 300 feet.
MS. CILEK: Correct.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Within.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Within.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: The word is "within."
MS. CILEK: So within that 300 feet distance, you can have up to
eight pumps. Once you hit 300 feet, you would have to go through a
conditional use or through a planned unit development process to
allow for a greater number.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I don't like that language. I think it has
to define the separation no matter how many pumps you have. You
can have, according to this, 10 feet, as long as you don't exceed eight
pumps.
MS. CILEK: Well, the setbacks would apply for a gas station,
automobile service station in the LDC. So those setbacks would still
apply.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, what are the setbacks?
MS. CILEK: I don't have that table up, but I can identify that
before the next board meeting, if that would be helpful.
Page 111
October 28, 2014
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I think that we need to address it
today.
MS. CILEK: Okay. We can --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: So I don't know what the other board
members feel. I would like to continue this discussion till later on this
afternoon and give that. You want me to get my LDC book?
MS. CILEK: I can -- I'll access someone's computer.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. What do you think?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I think that's a good idea, because I
wanted to address the thousand feet anyway. That would be great.
MS. CILEK: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'm confused about the confusion.
When you say within 300 feet of a residential area, you're essentially
saying from the lot line of the gasoline station to the lot line of the
residential area is 300 feet?
MS. CILEK: It's actually from the fuel pump of the automobile
service station to the lot line of a residential property.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's not good.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. So --
MS. CILEK: And within that are only eight fuel pumps.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So the distance between those eight
fuel pumps and the next residence will be 100 yards, 300 feet?
MS. CILEK: It will be subject to the LDC setback standards, and
any other walls and buffers that we have outlined in this section, which
I can highlight for you. I don't have them off the top of my head, I'm
sorry.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. What I'm having trouble
with is the statement by the speaker that the fuel pumps could be
within 20 feet of the residential area, and that makes no sense to me.
And I think that's what has confused some of the members of the
board.
Page 112
October 28, 2014
If you're saying that the separation, the minimum separation for
fuel pumps, eight or less, is 300 feet; is that what you're saying? That's
not what you're saying? Okay. Tell me what you are saying.
MS. CILEK: I'm going to read the language so that --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
MS. CILEK: -- it's very clear what the proposed amendment
relayed.
So C 1, automobile service stations shall be limited to eight fuel
pumps when located within 300 feet of residential property.
For the purposes of this section, residential property shall be any
lot which is developed or intended for residential use. The
measurement shall be the shortest distance between the fuel pump to
the residential property.
A greater number of fuel pumps may be approved as part of a
PUD or conditional use subject to the following section, and it goes on
to discuss existing fuel pumps.
I would like to note real quick about automobile service stations.
This is language in the section. Shall -- sites shall be separated from
adjacent residentially zoned or residentially developed properties by an
architecturally designed 6-foot-high masonry wall or fence utilizing
materials of a similar color.
So I just wanted to point out at least one provision that addresses
compatibility between residential and automobile service stations.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, you see, this can be
interpreted to mean that if it's located anywhere within 300 feet of the
residential property, the fuel pumps --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: You can only have eight.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You can only have eight, but they
can be located anywhere.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Right.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Subject to the LDC.
Page 113
October 28, 2014
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Right. So they could be located
within 5 feet of the lot line of the residential unit.
MS. CILEK: Subject to LDC setbacks.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, subject to the setbacks,
which are not going to be really great. What do you have, a 20-foot
setback or --
MR. CASALANGUIDA: It depends on the area.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. So --
MS. CILEK: Right. And it would depend on the PUD.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So now it's -- now I'm beginning to
understand the concern of the speaker.
I think if your intent is that the fuel pumps should be located 300
feet from the nearest residence, that sounds pretty good, but that's not,
apparently, what you're saying.
MS. CILEK: Right. And this was -- we followed this following
your direction. So perhaps we can revise the language to reflect your
current interest.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, my current interest would be
to make sure that the fuel pumps are located the maximum distance
you can get them from residential property; like 10,000 feet would be
good.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle, on this one, let's
get a consensus from the board -- from the board, on just this issue
about the separation.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: May I ask one more question before
we get the consensus?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Sure.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: If that fuel station with eight pumps
or less then has a 40-foot-high convenience store behind it, that's all
part of that 300 feet, isn't it; the fuel pumps in front, the convenience
Page 114
October 28, 2014
store, it could then be 20 feet from their residence, right?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: It could be in the back.
MS. CILEK: I mean, it would depend on the layout of the land.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Right. So I think it's important to --
for us to decide what we mean by -- where we take the measurements
from.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, actually what we need to do,
and I'm sure it's done -- it has been done, is what is the -- the typical
commercial lot out there and, you know, debate that.
Like Commissioner Coyle said -- and I support a distance of the
fuel pumps no less than 300 feet, and try to get them as far removed
from residential area, right?
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, but then you have the lights
and the traffic, or the lights and the deliveries that are going behind this
convenience store, which will still be also a detriment to the people
that are living smack behind that property.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, you would have the same thing
with a Wal-Mart or CVS, deliveries in the back. You have that right
by Shadowlawn.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, but they wouldn't -- I don't
think you'd have a Wal-Mart backed right up --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I mean, I'm sorry, a Walgreen's -- I'm
sorry, a Walgreen's or a CVS or any type of service area, most of them
have unloading --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: But we have an ability to -- we have
an ability now to carve something into our Land Development Code
that will protect our neighbors -- our neighborhoods for the future.
We're not going to be here, but we can at least set something up so that
we protect the neighborhoods of the future.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Well, Jeff, Commissioner
Page 115
October 28, 2014
Fiala's concerns about more changes to the proposed LDC, can we -- I
know in the past that would be a future amendment. It hasn't been
heard by the other committees. How do we do that?
MR. KLATZKOW: Why don't you -- you've got three
amendments here. I understand you've only got one amendment here
that you're concerned about. So we can move the other two
amendments forward in the process. Why don't you kick this one back
to the Planning Commission, who can then publicly air these concerns
and maybe come up with something else.
As I'm seeing this chart, I'm looking at, like, 40-foot setbacks
between the pumps and residential as we currently are. So if we want
to move to 300 feet, I don't know if, from a practical standpoint, that
you can even do that. But that's something that the Planning
Commission could just really get their teeth into.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. That's not a bad idea.
But let me get the consensus of a 300-foot separation or greater.
Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yes. I think that no gas station
should be allowed within 300 feet from the commercial lot setback line
that abuts the residential community --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Commissioner Nance?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- at a minimum, and that -- it
doesn't matter the number of pumps.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I would be in favor moving the
other two items forward, but I believe if we have issues with fuel --
and that's what people are talking about, pollution with fuel -- that we
need to address that.
If we are talking about the distance between commercial activities
and residential, I think that that is a huge issue. I think it's rightfully --
the county attorney has made a great suggestion. I believe we should
remand this one to the Plan (sic) Commission and talk specifically
Page 116
October 28, 2014
about fuel-related issues, if that's the issue. If we're talking about the
distance of a store or other commercial activities, I think that's a much
greater issue. And we're going to -- we're on a slippery slope here,
because we're talking about major, major overhauls to what we've
done.
So I know that these -- that these facilities have a convenience
store element, and they have a fuel element. But I would -- I would
make the motion to remand that to the Planning Commission and let
them take this under advisement and make a recommendation back to
us.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'll second that motion.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Not only do we have a
consensus, now we have a motion and a second. Motion by
Commissioner Nance, second to approve the remainder of the LDC
proposed amendments, reprimand (sic) the automobile --
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Remand.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah, remand.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: We've done enough reprimanding,
Commissioner Henning.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I said that twice today -- the service
stations back to the Planning Commission for a full vetting.
MS. CILEK: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Any further discussion on this
item?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any discussion on the motion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion, signify by
saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
Page 117
October 28, 2014
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries unanimously.
I hope that's satisfactory. Good.
Next item?
Item #14B1
AN OFFER TO PURCHASE CRA OWNED PROPERTY IN THE
GATEWAY MINI-TRIANGLE BY FORTINO CONSTRUCTION
& DEVELOPMENT, LLC AND ASSIGNEE FOR
CONSTRUCTION OF A MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT
PROJECT COMPRISING RESIDENTIAL, HOTEL AND
ROOFTOP RESTAURANT AND RETAIL USES; AUTHORIZE
THE CRA CHAIRMAN TO EXECUTE ALL DOCUMENTS
NECESSARY TO FACILITATE THE SALE AND AUTHORIZE
STAFF TO DEPOSIT THE FUNDS RECEIVED FROM THE SALE
INTO THE APPROPRIATE ACCOUNT - MOTION TO APPROVE
THE PURCHASE CONTRACT IN ITS CURRENT FORM
INCLUDING THE CHANGES THAT WERE READ INTO THE
RECORD DURING THE MEETING WITH THE REALTOR'S
COMMISSION TO BE HEARD AT A LATER DATE — MOTION
FAILED (COMMISSIONER HENNING, COMMISSIONER
HILLER AND COMMISSIONER NANCE OPPOSED); MOTION
TO BRING BACK THE CONTRACT TO THE NOVEMBER 18,
2014 BCC MEETING — APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, that takes us to the two o'clock
Page 118
October 28, 2014
time-certain hearing this afternoon. It's Item 14B1 on the agenda
under your Community Redevelopment Agency.
It's a recommendation that the Community Redevelopment
Agency review and accept an offer to purchase CRA-owned property
in the Gateway mini-triangle by Fortino Construction and
Development, LLC, an assignee, for construction of a mixed use
development project comprising residential, hotel, and rooftop
restaurant and retail uses; authorize the CRA chairman to execute all
documents necessary to facilitate the sale; and authorize staff to
deposit funds received from the sale into the appropriate account.
And your CRA Operations Manager, Ms. Jean Jourdan, will
present.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And we're acting as the CRA, and the
CRA chairman is still Commissioner Fiala. So Commissioner Fiala's
going to conduct this item.
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Thank you very much. I call the CRA
meeting to order.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Motion to adjourn.
MS. JOURDAN: Good afternoon. For the record, Jean Jourdan
with the Bayshore/Gateway CRA.
I'm here today to obtain a recommendation of approval by the
Community Redevelopment Agency to sell CRA-owned property
within the Gateway mini-triangle for the development of a mixed use
project.
I just want to give a little bit of history. The Gateway
mini-triangle is identified in the CRA redevelopment plan as a
redevelopment of a catalyst project. It is also identified in the
Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay in the Future
Land Use Element as a catalyst project site.
The CRA's objective in assembling these properties were
specifically for the redevelopment of the site with a mixed use project
Page 119
October 28, 2014
that would spur redevelopment of this entryway into the community.
The development of the site meets the goals and objectives of the
CRA redevelopment plan and the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle
Development Overlay and the Future Land Use Element. Proposed
developments meets the vision of the CRA and the community that
was established in 1999 and adopted in the redevelopment plan of June
of 2000.
The developer is proposing a multi-story hotel with up to 193
units, meeting space, a rooftop restaurant, ground floor retail, personal
services, as well as professional offices and up to 89 multifamily
residential dwelling units.
Before I move forward, there were some insubstantial changes to
the purchase agreement that I'd like to read into the record, if that's
okay, if I may.
In your purchase agreement, in 4.05, the paragraph says
conceptual site plans set forth in Exhibit C hereto and the conceptual
site plan as set forth in Exhibit D. We're striking through "and the
conceptual site plan set forth in Exhibit D."
The next item is --
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Can you tell me why you're striking
that?
MS. JOURDAN: Because there is no Exhibit D. It got switched
in the executive summary and the agreement, the conceptual.
Additionally, the seller reserves the right to unilaterally deny the
sale, conveyance, and assignment or transfer to a third party, and we're
adding the language "except as provided in Section 4.0.16."
In Section 9.02, we would add "whereupon," the word one, o-n-e,
and percent, one percent, and also real estate brokers.
In 11 .01, it reads "the seller." That should be "the purchaser."
In 12.01, we're adding brokerage commissions; the language
would be, "shall be paid by the seller."
Page 120
October 28, 2014
In 15.02, we're also striking "set forth in Exhibit D hereto." It's
no longer within the packet. Also changing the interim director to
CRA operations manager. Then at the end of the paragraph we would
add "such recommendation is not binding on the county."
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Are those all the changes?
MS. JOURDAN: Yes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Was this vetted through -- I
mean, this is a contract. Was this vetted through the County Attorney's
Office, these changes?
MS. JOURDAN: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Jeff? That should have been --
sounds like it's on the fly instead of the comprehension of this contract.
MR. KLATZKOW: Well, normally we try to get these things a
little bit better. This agreement was flying back and forth. You don't
meet again until the third Tuesday of November.
The seller was saying that they had difficulties meeting that time
frame because they have other parcels that they wanted to purchase.
So, yes, this was done on the fly, but we are comfortable with it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Why are we paying commission
of$312,000? Why do we have a broker when we have real property
management?
MS. JOURDAN: Well, real property management doesn't go out
and bring us this -- bring us the buyer.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: What is the --
MS. JOURDAN: What happened in this instance, there is no
binding contract between the CRA board and the real estate broker.
Initially, the CRA had listed their 17-point (sic) acres on
Bayshore Drive with this real estate broker. While they were trying to
bring us a buyer for the 17 acres, they were also looking at the
mini-triangle. They're the one who initially brought us the buyer, Mr.
Page 121
October 28, 2014
Fortino. We had brought -- they had submitted a contract to us back at
one of the other meetings, which the board had looked at and
considered, and at that time we had asked if we could put the property
notice -- legally notice the property. And so we did legally notice the
property.
The person who responded to the notice was Fortino again so,
therefore, the broker is asking to be paid a commission for initially
bringing us the buyer.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. I think you said the CRA
advisory board on our previous parcel entered in the contract with this
broker?
MS. JOURDAN: No. There was a contract with Collier County.
This brokerage firm has a contract with Collier County, which was put
out to RFP, and they were the winner of the property. So when the
CRA listed our 17 acres, we utilized that contract that the county had.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Now I'm getting a little
bit more information I'm looking for. It's a little bit more comfortable.
So we have a contract with a real estate broker?
MR. KLATZKOW: We have an issue, which is why I changed
the language that the seller will be responsible for brokerage fees. You
have a contract with this person for residential property, a listing
agreement, not for commercial.
So between now and the time this thing finalizes, the purchaser
has 150 days inspection period, okay, we're going to have to figure that
out.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, wait a minute. It's being
changed so we pay these fees, the seller.
MR. KLATZKOW: That's right. The seller typically pays the
brokerage fee.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, we don't -- in our contract,
we don't authorize -- I mean, that's for residential. That's what you just
Page 122
October 28, 2014
said, right?
MR. KLATZKOW: Commissioner, I'm agreeing with your
concern. I share the same concern, which is why the contract now
reads "seller shall pay any brokerage fees."
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Well, that's outside the
contract, the authority of it. Are we going to waive our purchasing
policy since this is not a part of the contract?
MS. JOURDAN: Maybe Joanne could address that?
MR. OCHS: No.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. I don't know how this
person got involved in this parcel when whoever controlled or is
supposed to manage this contract should have had full knowledge of
what this broker can and cannot do. The broker should have known
signing the contract that he cannot represent commercial property.
MS. MARKIEWICZ: Joanne Markiewicz, Procurement Director.
Commissioner, all I can tell you is we have a commercial contract
with a broker, and we have a residential contract with a broker. This
contract is with the residential contractor, is my understanding. The
fee is the same. It's 6 percent in both cases, in all cases.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. We have a contract with
this broker to list commercial property; is that what you're saying? No.
MS. JOURDAN: No. My understanding is that they were
actually chosen through the RFP process for the residential property,
and there's another brokerage firm that was -- actually represents the
commercial property. That's my understanding.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: This is -- this is not right. This
-- I mean, you know, we have a contract with somebody else, another
broker, for a -- we're listing on a commercial?
MS. JOURDAN: Yeah. We -- and as I said, we did not -- we do
not have a listing with this broker for this specific site.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Who's this broker for this?
Page 123
October 28, 2014
MS. JOURDAN: John Burton. He's here if you'd like to speak
with him. John Burton, Premiere Plus Realty.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Is this the one getting the
300,000?
MS. JOURDAN: Yes.
MR. KLATZKOW: We took that out. Nobody's getting
anything yet. I separated the issue. The issue before you is the
purchase and sale agreement, okay. We'll pay any brokerage fees, but
that means any brokerage fees. That means any and all.
Now, I don't know that 6 percent is customary for commercial at
this level, 5.5 percent (sic), that's -- 5.5 million, that's something we
can look into. But there's an open issue here --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
MR. KLATZKOW: -- the board will have to address down the
road.
I'm -- yeah.
MS. JOURDAN: Yeah. Commissioner, it's in the executive
summary, but, however, the attorney's office took it out of the purchase
agreement.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So you -- I thought you said on
Section 12.01 that the seller will pay the brokerage fees in your
on-the-cuff changes to the agreement.
MS. JOURDAN: Jeff, do you want to address that where it said
sellers?
MR. KLATZKOW: It would be -- the seller would pay any
brokerage fee, not the buyer. So it's our responsibility. We have to
figure out how much and who we're paying, if anybody, down the
road.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, if we don't approve this
contract, do we have to pay anybody?
MR. KLATZKOW: You don't have to pay anybody anything if
Page 124
October 28, 2014
you don't approve this contract, no.
MR. BURTON: Let me speak.
MS. JOURDAN: Is it okay if we turn the microphone --
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Yes, go ahead.
MR. BURTON: Yeah. It was -- John Burdon with Premiere Plus
Realty.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Your name?
MR. BURTON: John Burton. Yeah, we got the contract to list
the old cappa (phonetic) site, the 17.8 acres. That's on Bayshore. And
in doing so in this process we understood what was in the CRA
overlay, and it was the mini-triangle.
There were two properties that are in the front which was the
vision of Collier County CRA, Bayshore/Gateway Development, to
purchase those properties in order to make that whole thing
contiguous.
So we were tasked, with Anthony Fortino, to actually go out and
put those two properties together, what you see as seven and eight,
okay. And in doing so, talking with the CRA and the advisory
committee for the CRA, that's how we entered into a contract with the
CRA and the county, so there was an exhibit -- is there an exhibit to
that contract -- that actually got this whole thing out for public bid in
the first place.
So we actually had a contract in place before any of this went out
to public bid, and it had a 6 percent commission in there.
MR. KLATZKOW: You have, to my knowledge -- and if you
have a contract, I'd be happy to see it.
MS. JOURDAN: It wasn't signed.
MR. KLATZKOW: You have no commercial contract with this
board.
MR. BURTON: Yeah, in due process of that, that's how we came
to this conclusion right here. So for this entire process to continue to
Page 125
October 28, 2014
happen, there really was -- for the seven and eight parcel that you see
on the screen there, to actually make this happen for the 5.6 acres that
the county owns.
So, you know, we -- you know, we were under the impression
that we were going to get the 6 percent commission.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: For what?
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: But the seven and eight are
commercial, right, and they were under contract for those?
MR. KLATZKOW: My understanding is that he brought a buyer
to a commercial property when he had a residential listing with us. We
have another commercial listing agent. So he brought us the buyer, but
he's the wrong broker.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Can I ask a question?
MR. BURTON: But that was list or sell the property, which this
is off market.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: May I speak?
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Yes, go ahead.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you.
Jeff, when we decided to put this out for bid, did we state in the
bid that we were going to compensate any brokers that brought
buyers?
MR. KLATZKOW: You'd have to ask Jean. I --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Did we have --
MS. JOURDAN: No, that wasn't in the bid.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So we didn't agree to compensate
any broker, and we did not enter into any sort of listing agreement
separate and apart from putting this property out to bid with a broker,
with this broker or any other broker. Did we enter into a listing
agreement?
MR. KLATZKOW: You do not have a listing agreement for this
property.
Page 126
October 28, 2014
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. That's what -- I'm asking
only about this property.
MR. KLATZKOW: Right, which is why I pulled that language.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right. So I'm just -- I'm just going
over the facts to make sure. Because what this gentleman just said
makes no sense, so I want to just clarify in my head what we actually
did or didn't do.
So when we put this property out to bid, we did not provide in the
bid that -- in the bid documents that in any way we were going to
compensate any broker, and we did not agree to any sort of
commission agreement with this broker or any other broker with
respect to the sale of that property?
MR. KLATZKOW: That is my understanding, correct.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So, I'm sorry, but I don't
understand how you can make a claim for a commission when we
never represented we would pay a commission and we didn't engage
your services to bring a buyer. And it seems to me you had a
preexisting relationship with this gentleman. You said something
about bringing these two properties together. What do you mean by
that?
MR. BURTON: It was bringing -- well, it was actually the CRA,
17.8 acres that we have on Bayshore that our office has listed, signed
by you commissioners.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Does he have a listing that includes
these parcels?
MR. BURTON: It doesn't include these parcels, but it's the CRA.
MR. KLATZKOW: He's a broker for us for different parcels.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I understand. We have a --
MR. KLATZKOW: Not this one. My understanding is he did
bring us the buyer, but he doesn't have a listing agreement for this.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right.
Page 127
October 28, 2014
MR. BURTON: Yeah, but it was entered into -- our sales
contract that got this all started was with our brokerage commission --
MR. KLATZKOW: Right, but there's a difference between
selling $100,000 properties where you get 6 percent and
five-and-a-half million dollar properties where the commissions are
generally much lower.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: You have a contract, as I
understand from the county attorney, with the county to sell the
residential parcels within the CRA. And, yes, you have been retained
by the CRA to be the broker who will receive a commission on the sale
of residential lots, but that agreement did not include those two lots. If
you can show me where it included those two lots, I would be very
interested to see that.
MR. BURTON: Which two lots?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: The seven and eight.
MS. JOURDAN: Ours is one through six, Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It doesn't include that.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, what are we -- well, that --
MS. JOURDAN: One through six.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: One through six. Are those --
forgive me for saying that. So one through six are the commercial lots,
and seven and eight are?
MS. JOURDAN: Those are the commercial lots that are owned
by another individual which Fortino has under contract.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. So you have a separate
contract on seven and eight independent of us?
MR. FORTINO: (Nods head.)
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And our sale is of 1 through 6, all
of which is commercial?
MS. JOURDAN: Correct.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So, I mean, any commission that
Page 128
October 28, 2014
may be --
MR. BURTON: So the commercial contract --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- owed to you is with Mr. Fortino?
MR. BURTON: -- I have in place with the CRA is what?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: You don't have a contract.
MR. KLATZKOW: For selling of commercial --
MR. BURTON: I have a commercial listing with you guys. Yes,
I do.
MR. KLATZKOW: Well, again, I think the issue of who owes
what to whom is for a different board.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Do you have a commercial
agreement?
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Can we -- let me just interject here.
May I ask the county attorney, is this something that we can split in
two?
MR. KLATZKOW: Absolutely. You could make it --
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay. So we can vote on the
purchase of the property by Fortino, right?
MR. KLATZKOW: Yes.
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: And that's without any compensation
or anything whatsoever as far as commission goes, and then we can
take that as a separate item?
MR. KLATZKOW: Down the road when we have all the
documents in front of us.
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Down the road.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Let's do that.
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: I would like to do that. Would you
like to make a motion?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I would like to do two things. One,
I want to find out what you think and what Commissioner Coyle
thinks. And we have a commissioner-elect in the audience, and I don't
Page 129
October 28, 2014
know if she wants to speak as a public speaker because this is her
district, and I think her opportunity --
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: It's his district.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, it will be her district. I
mean, it's his district until the -- until November 2nd, then it becomes
her district. So since we're making a decision now and she's here -- if
she wants to weigh in, I think we should give, you know --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Actually, it's the 18th of November.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. I stand corrected.
You are -- let me just make sure, Commissioner Elect, that you --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That means I get a paycheck
another two weeks.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- completely understand that you
are not allowed to say or do anything till the 18th, so go back to the
beach, okay? FYI.
So, but in case she would like, since she's obviously here and has
an interest in this item, if she wants to speak, I think we should afford
her the opportunity to weigh in, and then I would be happy to make a
motion, after I hear from you and from Commissioner Coyle and from
her.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I want to make sure I consider
everything you want.
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: In which order?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: In whatever order you decide.
You're the boss.
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Well, good, good. So I will listen to
you first, Commissioner Coyle. This is your district.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Thank you very much.
If there's disagreement about this sales contract, then I think we
should divide it rather than delaying the sale itself, and I would vote in
Page 130
October 28, 2014
favor of the sale --
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Is that a motion?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- under the terms and conditions
that are laid out in the executive summary.
And, yes, that is a motion, and -- but with respect to the
compensation to the realtor, you know, we -- we had a good-faith
working relationship with the man. He went out and did the work and
brought us what we needed to do in order to accomplish the sale. I
don't see how you can possibly ignore that.
But if we're paying a 6 percent commission to a realtor who has a
commercial listing for us, why wouldn't we pay a 6 percent
commission to a realtor who has brought us a commercial sale?
So I don't know the purpose of badgering the realtor about this.
In my opinion, if he was not going to get paid a commission or if he
was going to get paid a separate commission, it was incumbent upon
the county staff or the CRA staff to make sure that was straightened
out. It is not the realtor's fault here. He was working from a
good-faith standpoint, and in most cases that's just as good as a
contract.
So I -- but let's --
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Let's separate it if you wish, and
let's move forward, but if--
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: So your motion is to separate these
and approve the sale of the land?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Approve the contract, yeah, yeah.
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: And I'll second that motion, and I
would -- I much prefer to address each one separately.
We want to get this moving forward so he can purchase the other
two pieces of property as well. Okay. That's -- yes, ma'am?
MS. JOURDAN: May asked add one thing? I just wanted to say
Page 131
October 28, 2014
I -- you know, for the record, I don't know if it makes any difference,
but I understand why he felt that he has a contract with the county, not
with the advisory board or CRA staff, because in the overlay, this is
Gateway Triangle mixed use district, which is not really commercial.
It's a mixture of residence and stuff. So it does have that zoning that's
applicable in the overlay, and that's the same zoning --
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: But we'll address that --
MS. JOURDAN: -- that's on the 17 acres.
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: But, Jean, we'll address that in --
MS. JOURDAN: I understand. I just wanted to --
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: -- as we discuss that one next.
Let's see. Commissioner Hiller, you're next?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yes. I'd like to hear from
Commissioner-Elect Taylor if she's interested in weighing in.
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Commissioner Taylor? Nothing?
MS. TAYLOR: I'm going to bow to the decision. I'm here to
learn. I haven't read as much as you have, but thank you very much.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay.
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Then if there are no public
speakers, I'd say call the question and --
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Well, I wanted to check with
Commissioner Nance. He has a button on also.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes. I -- you know, I have spent
time talking with Mr. Fortino. I think he's got a very creative proposal
for the board, which I'm going to support.
You know, my concerns all along were that I had hoped that
through our process and procedures that we were going to get in a little
bit of competition for Mr. Fortino from others that were as creative,
because I just think that having, you know, one respondent to a request
for proposal or for an offering of a sale of any public property is not in
Page 132
October 28, 2014
our best interest.
But I will support the proposal because I feel like that's what
you-all want, and I'm willing to defer to you on this issue.
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Very good. And we have seven
speakers, but Burt Saunders is standing -- are you signed up, Burt?
MR. MILLER: Yes, he is.
MR. SAUNDERS: Yes, I am, and I can speak for --
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay. I guess you're going to be the
first one.
MR. SAUNDERS: I can speak for four of them.
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay.
MR. SAUNDERS: And I won't take that much time. For your
record, Burt Saunders with the GrayRobinson Law Firm, and I have
the privilege of representing Tony Fortino and Fortino Construction
and Development, LLC, the purchaser.
We have one change to make the agreements consistent. We had
a conversation with Nick Casalanguida and the county attorney dealing
with what happens in the unlikely event that the property doesn't get
developed and it's going to be resold.
We have a provision where we share in the profits with the
county on a resale. I just wanted to get that on the record. We've
made that provision consistent in the document. That was pursuant to
our conversation with the County Attorney's Office and with Nick
Casalanguida last week.
We've signed the agreement. We have a --
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Let me just see if I understood what
you just said. What you just said is if they decide not to build, that
then, if they sell the property, we share with them in the profits; is that
MR. SAUNDERS: There can be no sale --
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Does it revert back to us if they --
Page 133
October 28, 2014
MR. SAUNDERS: There can be no sale of the property without
the consent of the county. It's just a provision that if something
happens that's unforeseen and the property is sold, then there's a
mechanism for dealing with that.
The county is fully protected on this. The only project that can be
developed is consistent with what's in the site -- or the site plan that
was presented. It has to be consistent with the Triangle Development
Plan.
It is highly unlikely that 15 months from now, 18 months from
now, when this closes, that there would be a resale of the property.
That is highly unlikely. That's not anyone's intent, and you're fully
protected if there is. But if there is, then there's a mechanism for that.
That's all that provision does.
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Well, I think you just turned it all off,
Burt. May I hear from the other speakers?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I think what he's saying is
we'll sit on the property until the values go up, and then we'll help you
enjoy in the profits.
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Yeah. I'm afraid that didn't sound
good at all.
MR. MILLER: Are you ready for your next speaker?
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Yes. We'll hear our next speaker.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Tony Fortino. He'll be
followed by Bob Mulhere.
MS. JOURDAN: Bob said he's waiving.
MR. FORTINO: Good afternoon, Commissioners. Anthony
Fortino, Fortino Construction and Development.
Listening to everything that's going back and forth, I'm going to
go on the record and say that my vision still remains the same, haven't
changed my mind. No one in my group has changed their mind. We
think it's an exciting opportunity. We appreciate the opportunity to get
Page 134
October 28, 2014
in there and do this redevelopment with the county.
Our vision is such that it's going to stay with the C4 use,
permitted uses. We have restrictions on what we can and can't do
there, and we -- you know, we want to stay within those restrictions.
We want to, basically, capitalize on the redevelopment that's there with
the CRA and Collier County.
We'd like to build a hotel permitted use, rooftop restaurant, retail,
some type of event space and office use, along with residential. That's
all allowable uses.
We feel that right now the property is a blighted piece of
property, and we want to turn it around. And we know that this will be
a catalyst project for that part of Naples.
I am a full-time resident; plan on staying here for a long time.
Little help of God I'll be in front of you with other projects in the
future, and that's what I plan to do with my residency here.
So I hope that you look favorably upon our request here today
and you act in favor of this application so we can all move forward and
enjoy a better Naples in that area.
Thank you for your time.
MR. MILLER: Your next pubic speaker is John Baum (sic).
MR. BURTON: No, I'm giving that over to -- we're done.
MR. MILLER: Charles Gunther?
MR. GUNTHER: Charles Gunther. I'm a CRA Board --
Advisory Board Member.
This is a project we've been looking for, for a long time. I've been
on this board now for about 13 years, little too long, maybe.
When we first started, this was a piece of property that everybody
said was blighted. The hardest part is making the pieces of property
contiguous where everybody can -- one person can do something.
That's hard to find in a piece of property like this.
This is a gentleman that came through with a -- not only a good
Page 135
October 28, 2014
bid, but a bid where he's paying cash for something that we're losing
money on. But when you're being paid cash, that's catching up on a lot
of our bills. So we're going to be able to pay off the loan a lot quicker.
This is something -- these people came to us --
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Excuse me. There's two
conversations going on at the same time. Let's just listen to you,
Chuck. Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Take it out in the hall.
MR. GUNTHER: This gentleman came to us with a background
that's just -- it's fabulous. I mean, there's nothing I can see bad with it.
I -- as far as his question about --just last year we talked about -- I
don't see this man walking away from this trying to sell it to make
money. He's a developer. He wants to develop something.
There's -- a lot of things that can be done with that property, but
we only had one bidder, and I don't think you'll have any more one
bidders. You're going to see people that are going to say, no, that's too
many pieces of property; it's too hard to assemble it. This gentleman
came through and said, we want to assemble it, and that's a big, big
thing to happen.
On the advisory board, I'm the only one that actually represents
the triangle. And this is something that will not only help that area; it
will help the whole CRA. That's what we've been looking for. We
need that catalyst, and I can't see anybody voting this down.
And I think this last condition, I would work with you. I think
Mr. Fortino is very -- very honest. He's not going to play games with
you.
That's all I have to say. Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Mike Carr. He'll be
followed by Peter Dvorak.
MR. CARR: Commissioners, I'm a commercial realtor here in
Collier County, and moved here permanently in 1978, been a broker
Page 136
October 28, 2014
since '82.
Wasn't planning on speaking here, but I have an interest in the
triangle. I've sold multiple properties there. I happen to have two
under contract now, and I found out that this meeting was this
afternoon. I said, I'm going to go say something good about it, because
I think it is a very, very good thing for the community and for the
property owners in that area. It will enhance it tremendously.
And I think we're fortunate to have a developer of this quality,
and I think the county should take the money and run.
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your final registered public speaker is Peter
Dvorak.
MR. DVORAK: Good afternoon. For the record, Peter Dvorak.
I sit on the CRA Advisory Board; I have for some time. I've seen a lot
of projects over the last few years, although not as many as we might
like. But if we, as a board, had envisioned a redevelopment for this
property, it would look exactly like the one Mr. Fortino has come up
with.
And I think there's been a fair amount of investment along
Bayshore. There's a lot more -- there's a lot more room for us to grow,
but the development and redevelopment of the Gateway area has been
slower in pace, and this would be a tremendous catalyst, especially
with the acquisition of the other two parcels. And, really, it will be a
gateway both to -- into and out of the city.
I've spoken with Mr. Fortino. I think his intentions are pure to
develop this sooner rather than later. The market is obviously moving
in the right direction for that, and -- but for the process that it takes to
go through all the steps in the planning and approval process, he'd
probably like to build, you know, next six months, not in a
year-and-a-half or two years from now.
And I take the last amendment that Mr. Saunders mentioned to
Page 137
October 28, 2014
you more as a sweetener and a failsafe, not -- for the county, not
because that's what his intent is by any means. I think he wants to get
in there and get moving as quickly as possible.
I also would like to point out that we did receive the full
appraised value for this parcel. And given that Mr. Fortino was the
only bidder, I would ask you not to consider something other than
moving forward with him, because I don't think it will have the desired
result.
And as Mr. -- as Chuck said, as Mr. Gunther said, we're going to
be able to pay down our existing loan tremendously with the proceeds
from this and hopefully get back in a position where we are financially
healthy enough as an organization to start giving out grants, residential
and commercial grants as we originally intended to do after our debt
service has been paid off. And this helps us get one step closer to that.
Thank you.
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Thank you.
Jeff, did you want to say something?
MR. KLATZKOW: Yeah. I mean -- and, again, my preference
would have been to let this be cleaner in November, but there were
some time frames.
If you go to your Packet Page 898, your declaration of restrictive
covenants, Paragraph 4. Paragraph 4 is the fail-safe process that we
built into this so that if Fortino Construction does not do what they say
they're going to do, you'll have the option to buy back this property for
5.2 million; in other words, the sale price, all right.
The wrinkle on this -- and Mr. Isackson can explain this better
than I do -- is that my recollection is that upon the sale of this property,
that monies will be going to Fifth Third to pay down your debt on the
CRA. So when you need to exercise this in a couple of years, you're
going to have to think of a funding source then, but I don't know a way
around that.
Page 138
October 28, 2014
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I don't think this contract is ripe
for consideration today with all the changes and all the comments.
That is something to consider, if nothing's done, we have to buy it back
or we have the opportunity?
MR. KLATZKOW: It's the option. It gives you the clawback if
the redevelopment doesn't go as planned.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So we don't have to do that?
MR. KLATZKOW: No.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. But it's different than
what Senator -- Burt Saunders has stated?
MR. KLATZKOW: No. He's got a different process where -- if
they decide to flip this property --
MR. SAUNDERS: That is correct.
MR. KLATZKOW: -- all right, at that point in time, there will be
some sharing of the proceeds if we agreed to let him flip the property.
MR. SAUNDERS: That is absolutely correct.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: But that's not a part of our
packet and neither is a lot of these on-the-fly changes, and I don't --
again, I don't think it's ripe for consideration today. We need a
presentation, not only of the project -- even though it's somewhat in
our backup material, but it's very dark.
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Can you try and talk us out of this,
Burt? You got us here.
MR. SAUNDERS: Yeah, let me -- let's kind of back up a little
bit. In a normal real estate contract, you sell a piece of property, you
don't have an opportunity to automatically buy it back if you don't like
what's happening. In this contract, you have the right to buy it back for
the same price that is being paid for it, so you are fully protected. That
provision is in there to protect you. That doesn't protect Fortino. It
protects the county. So that's an added benefit.
If there's -- something happens and the county permits the
Page 139
October 28, 2014
property to be resold because of some circumstances, then there's a
provision in there to protect you for that. There's nothing in this
agreement that is different than what you would normally expect in a
real estate transaction other than the seller has -- guarantees that this
project will be built the way you want it to be built. If you don't like
the plan, you don't approve the plan.
And, in addition, if something goes wrong, you can buy the
property back for the original purchase price. That's not what normally
happens in a real estate transaction. We're ready to -- we've signed the
agreement. We have the deposit. I have the check for the deposit.
There are two other parcels, Parcels 6 -- I'm sorry -- Parcel 7 and
Parcel 8. Fortino Construction has contracts on those. If we get this
approved today, those contracts will be exercised, those parcels will be
purchased, and Mr. Fortino will have 150 days to do all of his due
diligence, get this closed, get his financing in place, get his plans
working to begin this project.
So you are fully protected. You're more protected in this real
estate transaction than what normally happens, and that's the purpose
of those provisions.
So I would hope that you would not consider those changes to be
changes that are inconsistent with the interest of the county, because
they're there to protect you.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Can I finish what I was saying?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Not only we should have a full
presentation on what's being proposed, again, our backup material is
not clean, but also we should have a presentation on the finer points of
the contract, so -- and that, I don't know if that can be done at a future
meeting, like the meeting in November, or not, but that would be my
preference.
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Did you want to say something, Jean?
Page 140
October 28, 2014
MS. JOURDAN: Yeah. May I just add -- and I'd like to direct
this to the County Attorney's Office. The changes that we've
implemented -- that are being implemented here now, it's my
understanding, were all pro-county, are safeguards for us. Is that true,
Jeff, to -- I mean, they weren't for the developer's benefit. They were
things for our benefit.
MR. KLATZKOW: Well, no. I mean, it's back -- it's been back
and forth. I mean, usually we like to have everything done, okay,
signed, sealed, delivered, a complete package ready for the board. This
is not how this deal was going --
MS. JOURDAN: I understand.
MR. KLATZKOW: -- but I understand that the buyer's problem
is that he loses the sale on 7, and 8, at least he says he does, unless this
thing closes now.
MS. JOURDAN: Today.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's not our problem.
MR. KLATZKOW: No, no, I'm not -- I'm just --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: He needs to negotiate with --
MR. KLATZKOW: That's why this is before you now. Not in
the --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- them. We can't compromise the
public's interest because he has some alternative deadline.
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Well, we don't know if this is the
public interest. According to what we're hearing, we're not going to
lose any money on this. And, yes, it doesn't sound like it's a very clean
project with all the things we've heard.
At the same time, this is essential that this move -- this moves
forward. We've got a lot of the people from the CRA advisory board
here who have heard it every step of the way. And although it's
become very convoluted today, it is essential that we move forward in
order to get this thing moving.
Page 141
October 28, 2014
We've had so many problems if this area. Commissioner Nance
keeps saying we should get more money for it. Well, you can't get
more money for a sow's ear and -- unless somebody has a real good
imagination, and I think Mr. Fortino does.
We've had so many problems in that area. You just go over and
ask the Opera Naples people, and they'll let you know about all of
them, and there are more.
And if he's going to begin to raise that -- that property value, if
he's going to begin to bring this to an area that we can proudly look at
and say this is the entrance to East Naples, then I, for one, am going to
give him the chance.
I think it's a -- I know this has been -- this has been pretty sloppy.
We've removed the one part of this subject anyway. According to Jean
and Burt now, the reason they brought these things up was because it
was supposed to be benefiting the county. It didn't sound like that at
the time that Burt was saying it, but actually this is what they're saying.
I see people in the audience who have been listening to this all
along who are also -- who have been a part of all of this process, and
they are all agreeing.
So I would like to hear -- let's see. Commissioner Coyle, I'm
going to put you last because this is your district. I'm going to go with
Commissioner Nance.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I have a little bit of anxiety based
on the fact that we're starting to talk about what is going to occur in
this gentleman decides to sell the property, because I don't see that we
have a clear way of buying it back from him even if that was to occur.
If we take this money that we receive and it justifiably belonged to the
lender, we give it to the lender, Mr. Fortino decides to sell the
property, how are we to pay Mr. Fortino back?
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: We don't have to. That's just --just
what the county attorney said.
Page 142
October 28, 2014
MR. KLATZKOW: You don't -- you've got the right to say no to
an assignment, okay. If he wants to flip the property, you can say no,
all right. The quirk is that if he's going to -- if you say yes, then you're
going to share the proceeds of any profit. That was the change.
MS. JOURDAN: One more thing. Additionally, if it does sell,
the person who buys it still has to develop what Fortino said he was
going to develop, so you're still getting the same development because
the development is within the agreement.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yeah, I think you're getting way --
MS. JOURDAN: The specific uses.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I think you're getting way out on a
limb in requiring that of a future buyer that we don't even know what
the circumstance is. I mean, there's provisions in there for a recision,
there's a provision in there what happens if he doesn't do this within 36
months. I don't know.
I'm looking for Commissioner Coyle to supply a little bit of
comfort here that he's comfortable with this. I've got a certain
measured amount of anxiety at this point.
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: We need you here, Commissioner
Coyle. Move on.
MR. FORTINO: Commissioners, I just want to add one other
thing. And let's understand one another here. I stand here before you
with my vision today. And what normally happens is that, you know,
Fortino Construction and Development and assignees takes this
contract. It normally gets assigned to a development team. I'm part of
that development team, whether I'm a managing member of that or I
have a carried interest in that entity.
So I'm here today, I'm going to be here tomorrow and two years
from now when it's developed, or five years from now. And when it's
-- you know, I'll see to its full completion. That's what my intentions
are.
Page 143
October 28, 2014
My intentions are not to do a flip and make some money. Again,
I have my name, my integrity. I stand before you today. I'd love to
stand before you on other projects in the future. My name is my bond.
My word's my bond. That's how I do business.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Put it in the contract that you're not
going to sell it.
MR. FORTINO: Well, you have provisions in that contract says
if I do sell it, I have to come before you to get your permission. My
intentions are not to sell it and flip it. I want to be part of this. I think
that this is going to be an iconic project here in the City of Naples, and
I want to be part of that process. To me, it's very important.
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Does that mean you can't even sell it
unless we give you permission to sell it?
MR. FORTINO: Within the provisions -- you have that language
in the provisions, exactly what you just said, Commissioner.
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay.
MR. FORTINO: And my -- again, my intent --
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: That answers Commissioner Nance's
question.
MR. FORTINO: -- it to take this, put it inside a development,
LLC, because, unfortunately, I can't write a check for $60 million
today, but my -- I will assure you that my investors can. And the main
goal is to get this project redeveloped, as all of the residents here are
applauding my vision.
So, again, I stand here before you. My intent is not to flip it, sell
it. My intent is to create something of value, a catalyst project that will
change that area that's blighted currently. I hope that we understand
each other, because that is my intent.
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You know, we've taken something
that was really on a fast track for approval, and you have screwed it all
Page 144
October 28, 2014
up; you really have. It's going to be difficult to dig out of this hole, and
I'm very, very disappointed.
But let me tell you where I think the opportunities and risks really
are. Mr. Fortino or anybody else cannot build what we want to build
there unless we get Parcels 7 and 8, okay. End of story. If you don't
get 7 and 8, what anybody builds on the parcels we sell to them will
not be acceptable to the people who have been working on this for so
long.
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: That's true.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So if you lose 7 or 8, you really
don't have much going for you.
Now, Mr. Fortino can get 7 and 8, but he's not going to get it --
make the commitment unless we sell him our parcels, okay.
So what is the risk? We sell him our parcel, he gets 7 and 8, and
he has an opportunity to build what he says he's going to build. If he
doesn't do it within 60 months, that's completion, then he's not in
compliance. Then we can buy back what we sold him for $5.2 million,
and the chances are that the property will be worth more than that five
years from now. So there won't be really a risk to us to do that. And,
hey, if it's worth significantly more five years from now, it's not going
to be very difficult to get financing for that, particularly if the tax base
of the CRA has increased during that period.
So I don't see a downside here, but I am really disappointed at
these last-minute changes that just confuse things. And what I -- what
I have before me in this packet, in my opinion, is acceptable. Any
discussions about selling it to somebody else and splitting whatever
profits, I think, are just extraneous and have confused the thing to the
point where it's really, really frustrating, not to mention the fact that I
don't like people coming in and, at the last minute, start fiddling with
the contract, because it leaves me with the uneasy impression that
they're trying to get away with something, okay.
Page 145
October 28, 2014
So what I've got here before me says that if you don't begin
construction within 36 months and if you don't complete within 60
months, we can find you in noncompliance, and we can buy that
property back for exactly what you paid for it. And we'll get to enjoy
any increase in price, and we can work with somebody else to get this
done. The only thing that would be better would be if you threw in
Parcel 7 and 8 for that $5.2 million.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I think that's what we ought to do,
Commissioner Coyle. I believe -- no, really. Let's talk about having a
little faith here, if Mr. Fortino wants to talk about faith. Let him go out
and buy Parcels 7 and 8 while we're finishing up this contract, and then
we'll know if he's for real or not, now, don't we?
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: No, he can't buy them until he's got
this.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Oh, yeah, he can.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, I'd love to do that, but I -- my
conscience won't let me do that because I --
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Okay. I just wanted to see what
your demeanor was in your last meeting, see how mean you were
really going to be.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'm trying to be fair and --
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I know.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- I want to treat the realtor fairly,
too.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I'm just teasing you.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, I understand.
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Let me ask you one question. You
made a motion before to split this, right, and I seconded it. Did we
ever vote on that?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You didn't.
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Go ahead.
Page 146
October 28, 2014
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So, once again, I would say split it
from the realtor's fee, if there's any heartburn concerning the realtor's
fee. But I -- you know, this is my last day in office, last day at a board
meeting, and I'm not going to be voting on anything after this, but I'd
really encourage you to be fair to the realtor.
When you enter into a business arrangement and people do what
they said they're going to do, then you ought to do what you said you
were going to do, end of story and -- whether you've got a signed
contract or not.
But the -- I make a motion that we approve the contract in its
current form, not as it was changed or attempted to be changed, but
with the changes -- the minor wording changes that were previously
announced here, and that we resolve the issue with the sales
commission at a later date.
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay. So you're -- that's split -- that's
still your first --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's the split.
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay. And I seconded that before.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
MR. OCHS: Madam Chairman?
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Yes, sir.
MR. OCHS: May I? Again, I want the board to understand that
this provision that is giving many of the members concern about
splitting some potential profits on a future sale if the board were to
allow the property to be sold did not come from Mr. Fortino. It came
from the staff in an attempt to try to protect the board from some
flipping action if the board even approved a future sale. And if the
board is uncomfortable with that, I would suggest you just direct us to
strike that altogether. You still have the provision to buy it back at
$5.2 million, that's what you paid for, and we can move on.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, in my copy I don't have that.
Page 147
October 28, 2014
MR. OCHS: It's not there, yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So it's this last-minute change that
bothers me.
MR. OCHS: Well, we can strike it.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And, furthermore, if they can't flip
it without our approval, we don't need that provision because we can
withhold our approval till we get a participation in the profits.
MR. OCHS: Absolutely. And, moreover, even if you were -- as
Jean said, even if you agreed to sell it at a future date, the requirements
to develop to the specifications in this document run with the property,
not with the owner, so there's still a requirement even for a future
developer, if it's not Mr. Fortino; if the board permitted that, they still
have to build to these standards.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I understand, but that is not
realistic.
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Gentlemen, could we first vote on the
first thing and then back to that?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Call the question.
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I have a question.
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: All in favor of splitting this.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, it's not splitting it; it's
approving it.
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: No, you had said first to split, right?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, you're approving --
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: That's what I was trying to --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- the purchase contract.
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Oh, okay. I'm sorry. I'm sorry, I
didn't -- and approving the purchase. Okay, then I'm sorry that I
interrupted you.
MR. OCHS: Well, except the document in your packet,
Page 148
October 28, 2014
Commissioners, I believe, still has the provision on the commission.
Let's check that, Jennifer, please.
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: No. And we can add to that. I spoke
with Crystal Kinzel. And Crystal said, in order to do that, we could
say, in addition, the BCC agrees to pay the 6 percent commission to
Premiere Properties for the marketing and services rendered on the
triangle properties, and that would make it legal to pay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Who's opining on that?
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Crystal.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Crystal is opining a legal
opinion?
MR. KLATZKOW: I have.
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: I think Dwight did.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: He's not our attorney.
Is that right, Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Hey, he's your boyfriend. That's
between you and him.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, he's my fishing buddy.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, he's your boyfriend.
MS. KINZEL: Just to clarify, Commissioner, obviously,
anything is -- it is all contingent upon your determination of policy.
There are some contract issues that the county attorney brought up, and
we had worked with them that if everything was okay and you agreed
to the commission, to get around the contract irregularities and issues,
you would have to make a separate motion in order to make it able to
be paid.
But nothing happens at the Clerk's Office until you make a
decision on what to pay forward. We were just trying to work with the
CRA and the County Attorney's Office so that we could make a
payment if that is the board's decision to do, okay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That is about worth as much as we
Page 149
October 28, 2014
just paid for it, okay. You want to call the question?
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Yes, Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I have a question on the
contract. Last page of the -- it was Packet Page 894. Provision 15.02.
It's saying that the Exhibit C is conceptual and -- the conceptual site
plan in Exhibit D. And the final development plan must be submitted
to CRA executive director -- we don't have an executive director --
prior to submittal of the building permit.
So this proposed person, is it going to be the final say of
approving the site plan?
Mr. Fortino, can you tell me if that's your understanding is that at
that point it would be strictly administrative?
MR. SAUNDERS: Commissioner, what we were trying to do --
this was a request of the staff-- was to make sure that the CRA board
or executive director, or whatever that person is called, or the board,
would have an opportunity to take a look at the Site Development Plan
and make comments to your staff.
Site Development Plans are administratively approved by your
staff. They're very technical documents. But we wanted to make sure
that the CRA had an opportunity to take a look at it to make comments
on it. So there's no veto power on the part of the CRA.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, that needs to be changed
then. That language needs to be changed. First of all --
MS. JOURDAN: It should be CRA board.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Hang on. We don't have an
executive director, okay, so I don't know why that's in there. It's
saying the executive director shall review the final Site Development
Plan for compliance. I -- that isn't what I heard.
MR. KLATZKOW: Jean, would you put the change on. You
read a change into the record earlier on this.
MS. JOURDAN: Yeah, I read that in there to be operations
Page 150
October 28, 2014
manager.
MR. KLATZKOW: That's fine. Could you put it on the
overhead.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Is that all of it right there?
MR. KLATZKOW: And who is the CRA operations manager?
MS. JOURDAN: That is myself. I would prefer it to be the
board, the CRA board.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: How are we doing this here at this
time? I think we should either continue this or deny it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, the final site plan, we have
staff to review site plans. And, quite frankly, one of them is a fire plan
reviewer. They review some of these site plans. I don't know why
that's in there. It doesn't even need to be; 15 doesn't even need to be in
there. Again, this is not ripe.
MR. SAUNDERS: Commissioner, again, we put that in there at
the request of the county. We have no problem striking that language
at all, none whatsoever. So if you just strike that, that's fine. It's --
that's something to give you -- the CRA the extra assurance that they
could take a look at what's going on, that's all that was, and it was at
the request of the county.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm done. I'm ready to vote.
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: I'll tell you, this is so important to that
whole area, and I'd hate to see, because of all these things that have
gone on, that it doesn't pass. It would -- it would be a very difficult
thing for this whole area to have to lose that project; I will say that.
Is there any other comment coming from anybody?
(No response.)
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay. All in favor of the motion,
vote aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Aye.
Page 151
October 28, 2014
And it goes down 3-2.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I didn't vote.
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay. All those against?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: (No verbal response.)
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: That's 3-2. And I'm so sorry, because
that whole area loses.
MR. SAUNDERS: Just for the record, could we have a roll call
so we know who voted or how --
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Certainly. Roll call votes, and we'll
start at this end.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coyle, aye.
Donna Fiala, aye.
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No.
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No.
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: And, Commissioner Nance?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: No.
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Do you want reasons for each one of
those?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I want to make a motion to bring it
back at the next meeting under a better contract.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll second that motion.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I think the contract just needs some
work. I feel just so uneasy about all the changes that are going on, and
I'm not sure staff or anybody else is prepared to understand the
ramifications of what we're even talking about or have they thoroughly
considered the ramifications. That's why I'm making a motion to bring
Page 152
October 28, 2014
it back at the next meeting.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And I second that motion.
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: We have a motion and a second. Can
you bring that back at the next meeting?
MR. FORTINO: Well, Commissioners, we have certain
challenges. And, you know, my investors have been patiently waiting.
And, you know, it's been from, you know, being here full-time, boots
on the ground, you know, full-time resident that I've been assuring
them that this project -- you know, that it would move forward. You
know, we waited a long time and, you know, we're here today with
these other two pieces of property that were challenging in itself to try
and tie up.
And, again, business terms and contractual terms, I think those
are things that we tried to put forward to make the staff and everyone
in the county as comfortable as possible to get this project going.
But, again, money doesn't sit around forever. For those investors,
if they're not -- you know, if they feel that they're uncomfortable in
waiting, then there goes my investors.
So, again, you know, another month goes by, and then we're
looking at Christmas and everything else, so --
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Well, I would suggest then if-- the
only way you're going to get this vote -- it looks like there's three here
that say absolutely nothing now, and -- but when you come back
November 18th, have a real clean thing. Go talk to them beforehand,
make sure that everybody's concerns are met so that when you bring it
back -- because we know that you've got support from your -- your
Community Redevelopment Agency's board of advisors; that's good.
Everybody wants to see this move forward. I hate to see it languish
any longer, but you've got three people that say absolutely not, and --
MR. FORTINO: Let me just say this one last comment. My
vision, our vision is not going to change whether it was when we
Page 153
October 28, 2014
started this hearing today, right now, or it's going to be next month.
The vision's going to remain the same. And I think everybody's
objective is to get this project to become successful for everyone.
So, again, in the spirit of getting a contract and having everyone
comfortable with the terms and conditions of that contract, can we at
least move forward to get these terms ironed out? Because, to me, I
think that we all share the same vision. We all want the same thing. I
think it's a matter of just the contractual terms, ironing them out. And
because we wanted to make people happy, I think we put things in
there that were a little convoluted for the commissioners.
And, again, my intent was not to have that done. We wanted to
get a clean-slate contract, move forward, get everybody done. But the
vision remains there. My vision, your vision, everyone's vision here is
the same; that's not going to change. The only thing is, it's another 30
days.
So, again, I would ask if you would reconsider what I'm saying,
and we can iron this out within the next week, but let's move forward
with an agreement because, in concept, I think we all agree. So it's just
the terms that we can make each other feel comfortable with.
I'm trying to make this as easy as possible. Maybe it wasn't the
way to go. So I think if we just work a little bit more on the language
to make the commissioners feel more comfortable, I think that that's --
and, again, I don't blame you, but I would reconsider and say, please,
let's look at this and maybe we can work it out with the terms, because
that seems to be the way to go.
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Mr. Fortino, a couple people here
wanted to speak. Commissioner Henning was the first one.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. I think we're on the same
page; however, don't even try to meet with me and, say, give me
promises not in a public meeting. I want to have that dialogue in the
public meeting so it's on the record. And I would hope that the county
Page 154
October 28, 2014
manager would provide a little bit more assistance with this issue. You
have some great staff I think you could put on it and straighten it out
and give us the final points when it comes back.
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Commissioner Nance?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I agree with Commissioner
Henning. I'm prepared to support it. I wanted to have every reason to
support it, I'm just so uncomfortable with some of the confusion and
some of the things that I don't think have been provided for here, so I
just -- I just would like to see staff take another bite at it and move
forward as fast as we can. I apologize to you for that but, listen, you're
dealing with the government, and it's at the speed of dark. So this
won't be the last time we have a little glitch.
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Just so you know, that there's
nothing we can do at this point in time to approve a contract with you,
but it won't be another month. It will, 18 -- well, 20 days. So you need
to work this thing out, and please try to discourage our staff from
wanting to change a bunch of stuff. We should never do this at the last
minute. There should never be these kinds of discussions at the last
minute. You just can't get things approved that way.
But if you will do what you can do to retain the option that you
have and bring this back on the 18th of November -- is that the right
date? --
MR. OCHS: (Nods head.)
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- then I think you would probably
get unanimous approval. But with all the confusion, you're lucky to
have gotten two votes today, unfortunately, and I know it's not your
fault. But in any event, good luck to you. This will be the last time we
talk.
MR. FORTINO: Well, I wish you all the best that life has to
offer you, Commissioner. And, again, Commissioners, thank you for
Page 155
October 28, 2014
your support. I appreciate your time today.
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Thank you very much. And with that,
the CRA meeting is adjourned.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, we need to take a vote on
the motion. There wasn't a vote on this motion, was there?
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: There was?
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Voice vote and --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, there wasn't a vote, was
there?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: A vote on my motion and your
second.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right.
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Oh, I'm sorry. I --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: What was the motion?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: The motion was to bring it back at
the next meeting for review and recommendation and revote.
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: I'm sorry. You're right. Then the
meeting is still in session. And all those in favor, signify by saying
aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: (No verbal response.)
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay. And that's a 5-0.
And now the meeting is closed. I have never conducted such a
sham of a meeting in my life. Wow. I'm sorry.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: With that said, I think we're due for a
Page 156
October 28, 2014
break. Right, Terri? We're going to take a 10-minute break and be
back at 3:20.
(A brief recess was had.)
MR. OCHS: Well, Mr. Chairman, you have a live mike, sir.
Item #9C
RESOLUTION 2014-231 : THE SINGLE PETITION WITHIN THE
2013 CYCLE 3 GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT
FOR TRANSMITTAL TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY FOR REVIEW AND COMMENTS
RESPONSE OF THE VINCENTIAN MIXED USE SUBDISTRICT,
TRANSMITTAL HEARING - MOTION TO APPROVE THE GMP
AMENDMENT — ADOPTED
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. I think we're still on public
land use items.
MR. OCHS: That's correct, Mr. Chairman.
We're on Item 9C, and that's a recommendation to deny the single
petition within the 2013 Cycle 3 Growth Management Plan
amendment for transmittal to the Florida Department of Economic
Opportunity for reviewing comments response of the Vincentian
Mixed Use Subdistrict. This is a transmittal hearing.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Who's going to present this?
MR. YOVANOVICH: Do I go first?
MR. OCHS: Yes, the petitioner goes first.
MR. KLATZKOW: We do the swearing in and everything else.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Are you going to -- it's legislative, but I
wasn't sure if you were going to swear us or not.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: This is legislative. This is not
quasijudicial.
Page 157
October 28, 2014
MR. KLATZKOW: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: It's growth management.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Are we ready?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Hiller's not here to
keep you straight.
MR. KLATZKOW: Or straighten me out.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Yeah, I'm ready.
MR. YOVANOVICH: All right, good.
Good afternoon. For the record, Rich Yovanovich on behalf of
the petitioner. And with me is Christopher Shucart, the property
owner; Bob Mulhere, with Hole Montes & Associates; and Paul
Michael from Hole Montes & Associates.
What you have before you is a request to create the Vincentian
Mixed Use Subdistrict within your Comprehensive Plan.
I've placed on the aerial -- on the visualizer an aerial that
identifies the property. That's the Vincentian parcel right here. It's
approximately 31 acres in size. It's currently designated urban coastal
fringe subdistrict within your Comprehensive Plan.
Under the current zoning for the property, the roughly 8.5 acres
that fronts U.S. 41 can be developed as 115,000 square feet of
commercial, and the remainder of the property, according to your
staffs interpretation of the current PUD, can be developed with 39
residential units on the rear portion of the property.
As you can see from the property -- I have a zoning map. The
property is surrounded zoning-wise -- on 41 you have a series of
commercial properties that have been developed essentially as strip
retail development, and then around us we have some single-family,
we have some multifamily, we have some mobile home park. So
going back to the aerial, you can see the type of development that
surrounds us.
Our request is to allow for a commercial or a subdistrict on the
Page 158
October 28, 2014
property that would allow up to 250,000 square feet on the 30 acres, up
to 224 units on the approximately 30 acres, or a combination of the
two. As we take acreage towards commercial, we would reduce the
amount of residential.
We got there through a series of meetings with the surrounding
neighbors, as well as the East Naples Civic Association. We initially
had submitted a request for 100 percent commercial. We were then
questioned, why can't we do residential on that property. And we
could do residential on that property if we were to increase the density.
So we submitted a request for up to 360 units per acre.
There was a lot of concern about that level of intensity. We had
reduced the density to the Planning Commission to 10 units per acre.
Again, there was still some concern about the amount of density;
however, the Planning Commission did recommend approval of 10
units per acre.
We continued to have meetings after that with both the East
Naples Civic Association and also with Commissioner Fiala. And I
know Commissioner Fiala reached out to her friends in the area to
make sure what we were doing was consistent with what people
envisioned for that area.
I believe that the 224 units that we have in front of you, which is
7.3 units per acre, is consistent with the community's vision for the
property.
As the property is currently designated under your
Comprehensive Plan, it's very limited in what we could do. We could
continue with the retail strip development that's along 41, and I think
most people said they prefer not to see more of the same. They would
like to have an opportunity to -- if we did go commercial, to do
something better, if you will, because with the full 30 acres, we could
be more creative and probably attract better retail businesses. So that's
why we have the option for entire commercial development.
Page 159
October 28, 2014
Another option was if we went residential with only 90 units
allowed under the current Comprehensive Plan, because we're in the
coastal fringe subdistrict, we felt pretty confident that we could not
develop a higher-end project with just 90 units on the full 30 acres.
So we arrived at a density on the property that would be enough
to be able to do a well-amenitized higher end, mixed use -- I'm sorry --
multifamily project.
We had originally submitted for luxury rental apartments, but the
neighborhoods said to us, why are you limiting yourself just to rental?
Why not do multifamily for sale product, so we introduced that project
to Comprehensive Plan, again, in response to concerns we heard from
the neighbors.
Your staff has reviewed this project from an infrastructure
standpoint, and you'd have to go back to the Planning Commission
report to see where staff basically said there's ample utilities, there's
ample transportation, schools. All of the infrastructure is there and
able to support our request.
Your staff is recommending denial of our increase in density and
our increase in commercial. My understanding is, from the residential
standpoint, they're recommending denial because we're in the urban
coastal fringe and, basically, the state statute says you can increase
density in an urban coastal fringe provided you mitigate for that
increase in density; which Dan Summers, who's in charge of your
emergency -- related to hurricanes and the like, has reviewed our
petition and is comfortable with what we're requesting.
He has asked for a portal generator to mitigate for the impacts of
this project. He's not concerned with the density, and he knows what --
the level of construction that we'll put on this site. Evacuation will
really not be an issue related to this project, but he wanted us to
mitigation for providing a generator that can be taken to the different
school sites. So we've agreed to provide for that mitigation.
Page 160
October 28, 2014
So we think increasing density is okay in this area. Plus, if you
look across the street on U.S. 41, you can see we're on the edge of the
urban coastal fringe. Right across the street is your -- I'll call it your
normal urban area. So we think that this makes sense to increase
density.
And, ironically, if we were an affordable housing project, we
could ask for an increase in density on this property to go to 11 units
per acre. I don't think we'd get approved, but -- because we know that
there's plenty of affordable housing in this area. But from a pure
density standpoint, your Comprehensive Plan would already allow for
11 units per acre in the urban coastal fringe. So we don't think we're
out of line by asking for what we're asking for density-wise.
So -- and then they also raised the issue of, well, there's plenty of
residential units that could come on the market in this area; why do we
need more? And we think that one of the factors they're not
considering as far as data and analysis is really what the community
wants, and the community doesn't want more of the same in this area.
They would like to see a higher quality multifamily project or a better
quality commercial.
So from a pure number standpoint, your staff will say there's
plenty of residential and there's plenty of retail. We would say, from
the good-planning standpoint, following through with our request, as
supported by both the Planning Commission and the East Naples Civic
Association, makes sense for a good quality development on this
property, and we think that you need to look at parcel by parcel at
times to come up with appropriate standards.
I can go on in great detail regarding this if I need to, but I think
that is an overview of kind of where we are, and we would ask that you
follow the Planning Commission's recommendation as modified and
reduced in density and transmit this to the state for their review.
When we come back -- we've already got our PUD that's going
Page 161
October 28, 2014
through the process. When that comes back, you'll see additional
development standards in the PUD that will assure that we end up with
a quality multifamily project. We'll be required to have a gated
entrance, we'll be required to have a clubhouse on site. We'll be
required to have management on site. We'll be -- you know, we have a
whole lot of safeguards that you'll see in the PUD that will assure a
high-quality multifamily project on this property. We could talk about
that if you need to, but just know that there are assurances that will
result in what the community has asked us to provide on this site.
That's an overview. If you have any questions, we're happy to
answer any questions you may have.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah. There's one speaker. Could
we hear from the one speaker first, and then I can speak?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: No, I have a question.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And then we still have to hear from
our staff.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, okay, fine. Well, then, I'll just
wait until everybody has presented so that I can speak on behalf of this,
unless you'd like me to speak now, and I'd be happy to do that, too.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Whatever your preference is. It's your
light.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, it is my light. I just have to
say to those in the area, one of the things we've all been concerned
with is that we have a quality project here, and I just could not see
four-story units in there. It's just -- it would overshadow everything. It
doesn't fit into that community.
So we talked and talked. I have to tell you, we did a lot of
talking. We moved -- we eliminated 140 of the units. We're down to
224, two-story buildings rather than four-story. I've inquired about the
Page 162
October 28, 2014
amenities and the walls and the landscaping so that this will be a
quality project that will then enhance the neighborhood which people
will be proud of.
Now, I realize this developer is only developing the property, and
then he'll be selling it, but we'll have all these provisions in place so
that when he does sell it, somebody can't come in that's -- we've
eliminated the storage units, we've eliminated the automobile leasing,
we've eliminated general warehousing.
Some of those things that just did not fit in the neighborhood,
we've eliminated them. And so even if somebody buys that property,
they can't build those things anymore.
We've discouraged any commercial because the East Naples
Civic Association has said we already have so much commercial. We
prefer not to. We haven't eliminated it, but we've discouraged it.
We've said that -- you know, use some of the things that are there that
don't even have any impact fees on them.
So right now I feel that the product is much better to go in front of
all of you. I feel far more comfortable with it. The East Naples Civic
Association has also said they feel comfortable with it.
I think we've gone through this with a fine-tooth comb, and I
think that's all I have to say right now. Seven and a half-- 7.3 units per
acre.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Per acre.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Thank you.
Has anybody recommended changing the boundary of the coastal
high hazard?
MR. YOVANOVICH: I'll have to let staff answer that one.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: It's such a precedent, I think, that
we're setting.
MR. BOSI: Mike Bosi, Director of Planning and Zoning.
Page 163
October 28, 2014
The Coastal High Hazard Area was just recently updated with the
new maps that the Regional Planning Council had provided, so there
has been a very recent adjustment within the past 18 months of the
Coastal High Hazard Area, and it's actually increased the boundary in a
lot of areas, has had some significant differences, but it has been
adjusted, and it's been adjusted based upon the surge map that was
provided for by the Regional Planning Commission.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Mike, Holiday Manor Park, behind
the commercial, do you know the density of that? Is it beyond the
coastal high hazard requirements?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: It's over off 951 there right by
Wal-Mart.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: No, no, it's right there.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, the Holiday Manor, you said.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Did I say Holiday Manor? Hitching
Post.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Far greater than four.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: It's been too long.
MR. BOSI: The --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I mean, I can see if that is above the
requirements for the high hazard that the line can be -- or should be
adjusted -- or could be adjusted, I should say. But, again, it's such a
precedent of saying, you know, we can't have development -- greater
development in this area for the safety of the public. That's my
opinion.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Commissioner, of course we're going to
have to build at the minimum elevations for the structures, so we'll
clearly meet all of the construction requirements for the minimum
elevation for residential.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I understand that.
MR. YOVANOVICH: And, again, you've already determined
Page 164
October 28, 2014
that it is okay to increase the intensity above three units per acre for
affordable housing. So it doesn't make any sense to us to be allowed to
do an 11-unit-per-acre affordable housing project, from a health,
safety, and welfare of number of people versus a for-sale, market-rate
project with less density than we could achieve through affordable
housing based upon the urban coastal fringe.
And the urban coastal fringe, the map is really not truly the map.
And I'm not saying we're not in the urban coastal fringe, but it's an
elevation. You have to look property by property to determine
whether or not you're really in the urban coastal fringe. This map is
kind of a guide because it jumps over 41 in certain areas based upon
the map. It doesn't mean it's necessarily urban coastal fringe.
So that -- we think that we're consistent from a density standpoint
with what could happen if it were affordable housing.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And you proposed it to be affordable
housing in your submittal application.
MR. YOVANOVICH: No, sir, no, sir. We never did, and that
was a very, very big concern of the residents. And if you -- when you
read the district (sic), you'll say we specifically cannot have affordable
housing on this site. And we cite to the provision in your own
Comprehensive Plan, like it says, you can't basically congregate
affordable housing in one area to make it enforceable, that we can't do
affordable -- and that was because when we were at 360 units, a lot of
people were afraid we would result in an affordable housing project
with that high a density even though we said we weren't going to be,
because we weren't using a bonus.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: We're boring somebody.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Sony.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: It's not that. I have a question.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Oh, you do.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I do.
Page 165
October 28, 2014
CHAIRMAN HENNING: What is your question?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: My question is for staff I have to
agree with Mr. Yovano -- can you hear me? I'm sorry. I wasn't
speaking in the mike.
I have to agree with Mr. Yovanovich. It does seem we have a
double standard. How can we allow higher density because it's
affordable housing but not allow it using the -- you know, the coastal
argument? I just don't understand how -- I mean, it just doesn't make
sense.
MR. BOSI: I think the requirement, the allowance for affordable
housing within the Coastal High Hazard Area, has everything to do
with relationship between service needs for the household and the
businesses within the Coastal High Hazard Area --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's insane.
MR. BOSI: -- and the cost and evaluation of where the location
for those individuals at that lower pay scale could find a close -- a
residence in close proximity to those work locations. So allowing for
affordable housing that's committed to affordable housing to provide
for individuals who live and can work within close proximity to the
households and to the businesses within the --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Hang on. I understand.
MR. BOSI: -- Coastal High Hazard Area is the justification for
why the affordable housing bonus provision is allowed for in the
Coastal High Hazard Area.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That doesn't make any sense at all.
The whole purpose of a Coastal High Hazard Zone is a public-safety
issue. So now we're saying it's okay to put people who would benefit
from affordable housing at physical risk so that they can commute to
work more readily. That is absolutely non-sensical to me. I can't
understand that. That just doesn't make any sense.
I mean, the Coastal High Hazard Zone is established because we
Page 166
October 28, 2014
believe that there is a public-safety concern that we need to address
and that we limit density because of evacuation and other needs in the
coastal areas in the event of a major storm.
So I don't see how you can turn around and make an exception for
affordable housing. I mean, that just doesn't make any sense at all.
So I think we have to revisit that, and that isn't the subject of this
discussion, but I agree with Mr. Yovanovich that it doesn't make sense.
MR. BOSI: And just for clarification, the policy is not my policy.
This is the policy that's adopted by our Growth Management Plan
within our density rating system for how we treat properties within the
Coastal High Hazard Area.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I understand, and I completely
respect that, and I'm not finding fault with you, and I want to make that
clear on the record. I'm saying that as a matter of logic, you know, it
seems to make very little sense to me.
And I'd be happy to sit down with staff and, you know, figure out
some solution to our Growth Management Plan so that that is properly
addressed to reconcile the needs of affordable housing and the
public-safety considerations that we have to contemplate in the Coastal
High Hazard Zones.
MR. BOSI: And public safety is one of the concerns. The other
concern from the state perspective is property loss.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah.
MR. BOSI: Insurability within the State of Florida is a long-term
concern, and I think that's one of the things that the legislature has
recognized and, because of that, that's one of the components where
they really want to limit the intensity and that exposure of property.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well -- and you make an even
better point why it's illogical to have these density bonuses related to
affordable housing, because insurance is extremely expensive in
Coastal High Hazard Zones. So, you know, giving density bonuses for
Page 167
October 28, 2014
affordable housing that's actually in an area where the cost, because of
insurance, is going to be -- and the type of construction you need is
going to be much higher makes very little sense.
But I think what we need to do is look at, you know, a different
reason other than that for addressing this issue here. I mean,
Commissioner Fiala seemed -- and, you know, this is your district, isn't
it?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I mean, she feels that this -- you
know, somehow changing the use of this parcel and changing the
densities on this parcel would be beneficial to this community. Was
there a lot of objection by surrounding neighbors?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: To 360?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: To what's being proposed here
today for transmittal.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Not today, no, but there was
objection to 360 units and four stories.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: But that was changed.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, that's been changed.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So what we have here today, has
that been objected to by the community?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I haven't had any objections given to
me, so -- and we discussed that also with our East Naples Civic
Association. And so everybody seems to be comfortable with that.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So if we have -- I mean, tell me
again why what Commissioner Fiala wants and the community seems
to be supportive of is not a good thing.
MR. BOSI: We have a policy within the Growth Management
Plan that says we're going to limit density within the coastal high
hazard --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay.
Page 168
October 28, 2014
MR. BOSI: -- to three units per acre. There's one provision that
allows you to get beyond that, and that's affordable housing. And I
think we just had a short discussion about maybe that's not appropriate
to put that type of density within the Coastal High Hazard Area, which
only reinforces that policy that the board has related to limiting the
density within the Coastal High Hazard Area at three. That's our
current policy.
If the board feels that maybe that -- that level is too limiting and
we need to engage in a conversation and discussion, whether it be at a
workshop or through further, you know, public hearings, the staff
would understand and respond to that.
But as of today, the policy that's provided by the Growth
Management Plan is we limit it to three units per acre, and that's the
perspective the staff is adhering to, that three units per acre, and that's
the policy that's been established.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So, really, the issue is, is whether
the three units per acre in the Coastal High Hazard Zone is really the
reasonable threshold for development given consideration to public
safety.
MR. BOSI: That's a much larger question but very applicable to
this petition.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Do you don't think that there is a
public-safety concern with increasing the density on this site?
MR. BOSI: I spoke with Dan Summers, who requested a
portable generator from the applicant related to that very issue, and his
perspective was -- and I don't want to get too far into Dan's overall
thinking related to evacuation. But the way that the storm tracking is,
the way that they would give advance notices, the way that the
population responds, he felt that requesting the generator would
provide enough additional square footage within the already identified
shelters to be able to expand those shelters to be -- those generators
Page 169
October 28, 2014
would expand the opportunity within there to be able to cover the
additional density that's -- because there's density already associated
with this petition. They're asking for some additional density -- that he
could cover it with that.
So from an evacuation standpoint, the Coastal High Hazard Area
is not as high of a concern in terms of being able to evacuate the
people within the --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: For this particular parcel.
MR. BOSI: -- time period for this particular parcel.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: What's the density of the
surrounding pieces? Like, you've got a number of projects -- like,
there's one that seems to be very high density. I don't know what
direction that is. That's Hitching Post?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: What's the density of Hitching
Post? How many units per acre for that?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Those are mobile homes.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Those are all mobile home? Oh, I
didn't know that.
THE AUDIENCE: Three hundred sixty-eight lots on 44 acres.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Do the math.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And then they also --
MR. YOVANOVICH: It's over eight.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- in this particular -- if I may throw
this in, because it wasn't mentioned, but they're also going to have a
hurricane hardened community center so -- right on the premises.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: They're building that right now. It
would be nice to know what the densities of the surrounding properties
are.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Hitching Post is 8.36.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And yours is, what you want?
Page 170
October 28, 2014
MR. YOVANOVICH: We would be 7.3, what we're asking. So
we would be less than our neighbor, which is to the east.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right.
MR. YOVANOVICH: I think what's zoned behind us --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: The Trail Acres?
MR. YOVANOVICH: It's RSF-4, so that would be four units per
acre, all those smaller single-family lots.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Is that Trail Acres?
MR. YOVANOVICH: Yeah. Those are single-family -- smaller
single-family lots, Trail Acres.
And Whistler's Cove -- well, Whistler's Cove across the street, I
hate to mention, but that's over 10, and that's an affordable housing
project.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's Section 8 housing.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Yep, Section 8, which people pretty much
said, please make sure you don't do that, and that's why we've -- and in
our -- when you see the PU --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: We have density over 10 in a
Coastal High Hazard Zone?
MR. YOVANOVICH: We have -- no, we have 8.3, Hitching
Post, in the Coastal High Hazard Area. You would be allowed, for
affordable housing, to go to 11.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. And in Whistler's Cove we
have 10?
MR. YOVANOVICH: Which is across the street.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And that's 10?
MR. YOVANOVICH: It's over -- that's 10.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And then that -- what is the urban
residential subdistrict? Is that part of the park? What is that?
MR. YOVANOVICH: That -- everything on the north -- is that
north -- north side of 41 is regular urban, okay, which would allow a
Page 171
October 28, 2014
base density of four units per acre.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. And what about --
MR. YOVANOVICH: When you go across the street, you're
only allowed three.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And what about Treetops?
MR. YOVANOVICH: Treetops?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: You've got --
MR. YOVANOVICH: That's further to the west. I don't know,
Commissioner, what that density is. It's a multifamily project, but I
don't know the density.
MR. MULHERE: Six.
MR. YOVANOVICH: It's zoned RMF6, so you would think that
would be six units per acre.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Was there any bump-up on that
Treetops project?
MR. YOVANOVICH: I don't know. I'd have to -- I can -- we
can get that information at adoption.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Is there any -- what did you say?
MR. YOVANOVICH: Bump-up in density, increase.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: A bump-up in density on Treetops.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Do you know, Commissioner Fiala? I
don't know if there was or wasn't for that one.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Low-income rental is all I can tell
you.
MR. YOVANOVICH: For Treetops?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah.
MR. YOVANOVICH: It's low-income rental?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So it probably has an affordable
housing bump also.
MR. YOVANOVICH: It may have gotten a density bonus there.
Who knows? I can't --
Page 172
October 28, 2014
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So it really -- so it really looks like
what's happening is to get the increased density in the Coastal High
Hazard Area, what all these developers are doing is using that
affordable housing bump to get around the public-safety limitation. It
would seem, based on, you know, what you're -- like Treetops and
Whistler's Cove, as an example.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, that was in the last few years
that we've changed the language of the coastal high hazard. It wasn't
since Trail Acres or Treetops. That's been there years, and the
Hitching Post has been one of the first established --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: They predate.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Oh, sure.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah, mobile homes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And may I just go back to when we
first started, Commissioner Henning; I questioned the same thing, why
would you put so much in the Coastal High Hazard Area of people
who couldn't defend for themselves? Because they had no money.
Why would you increase the density there? And I've been pushing that
a while, so I understand what you're saying. But, luckily, that doesn't
affect this one right now.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Nance?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes. Rich, are there any -- because
of the overlay, the coastal overlay that everybody's talking about, are
there increased elevation requirements for your construction regardless
of what you do?
MR. YOVANOVICH: There will be minimum elevations that
we'll have to establish, regardless. If we did regular single-family at
three units per acre, we're going to have additional standards that we're
going to have.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: You're going to have a substantial
amount of it that's included, I heard Commissioner Fiala mention, that
Page 173
October 28, 2014
are two-story.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
MR. YOVANOVICH: What we originally had asked for was
four stories and 360 units. We've reduced that to two stories and 224
units. Simply said, we need enough critical mass density for the
property not to --
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Well, 112 units are going to be
second-story units?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's a very good point.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Correct.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's a very good point.
MR. YOVANOVICH: That's a very good point. I hadn't even
thought of that.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: They'll probably be the only people
out of the water when the great flood comes.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So let -- so, you know, that is -- I
mean, you've got two issues. One, the evacuation issue but then --
MR. YOVANOVICH: That's been mitigated.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. So the evacuation is
mitigated. So what is the density if you look at it from the standpoint
of the ground-floor units?
MR. YOVANOVICH: Well, 112 would be the density of ground
floor -- assuming everything's a two-story building, and it will be, there
will be 112 on the ground floor would be --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So then -- so what is that -- so what
is it per acre?
MR. YOVANOVICH: A hundred twelve is going to be less than
four. Can you do that in your -- 112 divided by 31 .
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's what you get paid the big
bucks for.
MR. YOVANOVICH: That's 3. -- in my head? I can do lawyer
Page 174
October 28, 2014
math, which will not be lawyer accurate.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Divide by two, Rich, and that's the
number.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. What is the total?
MR. YOVANOVICH: Can you please just help me? 3.65. This
is an open book -- .65.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So 3.65, so you're under 4?
MR. YOVANOVICH: Correct.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And four is the limit in the coastal?
MR. YOVANOVICH: Three. Three is the limit in the coastal.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. So you're .65 over that
limit. I thought it was four. I thought it was four.
MR. YOVANOVICH: It's four, but you lose one for being in the
Coastal High Hazard Area. That brings you down to a base of three.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. I thought it was four in the
Coastal High Hazard Area.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Mike, do you have to do a
presentation? I think the board understands the issue. If not, we'll go
to public speakers.
MR. BOSI: No, no formal presentation. I've already articulated
what staffs position is and why the recommendation of denial is
coming from --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And the denial is because this is
not consistent with the Growth Management Plan?
MR. BOSI: Correct.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Let's hear from our public speakers.
MR. MILLER: We have one registered speaker. Marcia (sic)
Seamples.
MS. SEAMPLES: Hi, Marci Seamples. I'm with the East Naples
Civic Association.
We have voted and written a letter in support of this project. I'm
Page 175
October 28, 2014
just going to read it to you today.
The East Naples Civic Association Board of Directors supports
the proposed amendment to the Collier County Growth Management
Plan establishing the Vincentian mixed use subdistrict as approved by
Collier County Planning Commission on September 4, 2014.
The East U.S. 41 corridor is ripe for development and
redevelopment. Right now, Collier County has the rare opportunity to
encourage growth that will best benefit the community. We believe
this project is an excellent example of what well-planned development
can bring to East Naples.
Whether the parcel is ultimately developed as residential mixed
use or commercial, as outlined in the amendment, will bring a needed
improvement to the U.S. 41 east corridor.
A residential project would provide much-needed market rate
multifamily units. A commercial project would offer increased
property values and better services. We believe that the planned unit
development permitting of the next phase of Collier -- excuse me -- of
county review will allow us better opportunities to define any other
outstanding issues that are left unanswered in the Growth Management
Plan amendment process.
We will continue to monitor this as it goes through the PUD
process and provide comments and input. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Can I ask the county attorney a
question, please?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Sure.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Jeff, this is a difficult issue,
because you have a commissioner of the district and you have a
community that would like to change, and we have a Growth
Management Plan that provides that this can't happen. And I think the
board would be happy -- I mean, I don't want to speak for the rest of
the board, but it seems like the board would be happy to support the
Page 176
October 28, 2014
commissioner of the district.
So, I mean, what is the solution? Do we have to amend the
Growth Management Plan? Is there some sort of, you know, variance
mechanism? I'm not sure --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: This is an amendment to the Growth
Management Plan, Commissioner Hiller.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: This is not a PUD. It is to do exactly
what you said, and it's lawful --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: But that's not -- that's not what
staff is saying. I mean, staff is not -- and maybe I'm misunderstanding,
but staff is saying we should deny because it's not consistent with the
Growth Management Plan --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, if we approve it --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- so this amendment for this parcel
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- it will be consistent.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, no. Let me ask Jeff. Jeff, I
mean, help me out.
MR. KLATZKOW: It's a policy decision. Once upon a time this
board made the policy to move growth out of this area elsewhere, all
right.
You can change that policy. You can decide that you'll just have
pockets of growth. It's a board policy.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Can we -- if we approve this, even
though it's not consistent with the Growth Management Plan, will we
-- I mean, we're approving it for transmittal. And if the state accepts
and it comes back to us for final adoption, will we have a problem
approving this change because it's not consistent with the Growth
Management Plan?
MR. KLATZKOW: You amend your GMP all the time.
Page 177
October 28, 2014
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So that wouldn't be an issue in this
case?
MR. KLATZKOW: That's not an issue, no.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So Mike seems to want to address
that point.
MR. BOSI: No, just to agree with the county attorney. This is an
amend -- this is an amendment to specifically exempt this property
from the larger coastal high hazard density limitation.
So if transmitted to the state and brought back for adoption, at
adoption it would create the regulations that would allow for this
particular parcel, and it's --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: But then denial with -- for being
inconsistent with the Growth Management Plan is not a valid basis for
denial.
MR. KLATZKOW: Sure, it is.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Why?
MR. KLATZKOW: Because you made the policy determination
once upon a time to shift density out of this area elsewhere. This is
what you'd be saying is, we don't want to change that policy.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right. Well, then the
recommendation is that you can amend this, but you are, in effect,
changing the policy. It's not denial because it's not consistent. I mean,
it's --
MR. KLATZKOW: The question is going to be, the next time
Rich Yovanovich comes down here with another application in this
area, what are you going to do?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, we can do it on a
case-by-case basis, can't we?
MR. KLATZKOW: Right. And what will happen is, unless you
change your policy on the coastal high hazard, years from now all the
exceptions will swallow up the rule.
Page 178
October 28, 2014
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Will swallow up what?
MR. KLATZKOW: The rule. So if your rule is no development
shifted out here but you continuously grant exceptions, you will
swallow it up.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So in other words, we're, in effect,
changing our policy with respect to development in the Coastal High
Hazard Area.
MR. KLATZKOW: Sure.
MR. YOVANOVICH: I think -- can I just briefly respond to the,
okay, because you allow one exception, you've opened up the entirety
of the program? This is one specific, unique parcel that we're asking
for a change on. Each application will stand on its own merits. And it
may not make sense on a different piece of property to do that, and this
one we believe it does.
And, by the way, the fact that I'm asking you for a Growth
Management Plan amendment, by definition, I'm inconsistent with
your Comprehensive Plan because I wouldn't be here.
So we're asking for the ability to have a separate subdistrict so
when I bring a rezone in I could be consistent with your
comprehensive plan.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And I'd like to make a motion to
approve.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Nance?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes. I understand Commissioner
Hiller's concern. At the same time, I believe that this is a classic
example where the communities next door, civic association, and the
applicant has done everything that they can to craft a project that
comes as close as possible to being safe of yet meets the community
needs.
And I think that's very hard to do. From the comments that
Commissioner Fiala's made, I think everybody's worked very hard to
Page 179
October 28, 2014
make this work. And I think this is exactly the sort of a result that I'm
looking for and hoping for when we make an exception to it.
And I think -- in the end, I think this will probably be the safest
housing within the scope of that aerial view, for sure. And if
everything around it was that safe, I think we'd be happy. I think it's
going to be much safer, for example, than the high-density mobile
home community that's adjacent to it.
So I think there's every reason to support this. I think it meets -- I
think it passes muster.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala made a motion to
transmit to the state. Is there a second to the motion?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Second by Commissioner Coyle.
Discussion on the motion now. Commissioner Hiller, do you
have anything on the motion?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. On the motion -- has --
staff, I'm sure, looked into the impact on the surrounding
infrastructure. I mean, is there -- what's the -- like, the impact on the
road?
MR. BOSI: The Public Facilities Impact Assessment that was
provided by staff has come back satisfactory. There will be no adverse
effects in terms of any of the available capacities for any one of those
systems.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: That's in our backup.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. But I just wanted that on the
record. I think it's very important that that be on the record so
everyone understands that even though we're increasing density, there
won't be any adverse impact on the existing infrastructure.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any other discussion on the motion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Seeing none, all in favor, signify by
Page 180
October 28, 2014
saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed?
Aye.
Motion carries 4-1, Commissioner Henning dissenting.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: We go to -- do we have any other
time-certains? I don't think so.
MR. OCHS: No, sir.
Item #11A
CONTRACT NO. 14-6343 -TROPICAL STORM (TS) DEBBY
NAPLES BEACH RENOURISHMENT (SAND SUPPLY AND
DELIVERY) TO SUPPLY AND DELIVER APPROXIMATELY
78,678 TONS OF BEACH QUALITY SAND AS AUTHORIZED
BY THE FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY
(FEMA) PW 0679-NAPLES BEACH RENOURISHMENT
PROJECT TO PHILLIPS AND JORDAN, INC. FOR $1,823,635.56
(PROJECT #195-90038), STAFF TO WITHHOLD NOTICE-TO-
PROCEED ISSUANCE UNTIL THE FEMA PW REVISION HAS
BEEN ISSUED, ALL REQUIRED BUDGET AMENDMENTS,
AND MAKE A FINDING THAT THIS ITEM PROMOTES
TOURISM — APPROVED
CHAIRMAN HENNING: 11A.
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir. 11A is recommendation to approve and
authorize the chairman to execute a beach renourishment contract to
Page 181
October 28, 2014
supply and deliver sand to the Naples Beach, and Mr. McAlpin will
present.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Could you tell us what -- the
recommendation of the TDC and coastal advisory?
MR. McALPIN: Yes. The coastal advisory -- for the record,
Gary McAlpin, Coastal Zone Management.
The Coastal Advisory Committee voted unanimously to approve
this item; that was 8-0. And the TDC yesterday approved unanimously
to approve this -- voted unanimously to approve this item, and that was
9-0.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Questions by the board?
Commissioner Hiller.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I think what's important is that we
have evidence on the record to ensure that there is no question that this
sand that is being placed is related to storm erosion, and that as of right
now the beach is short 78,000 tons of where it would be to reach that
hundred-foot mark, which is our design plan so that there isn't any
perception that this is viewed as an advance renourishment beyond that
design plan line.
MR. McALPIN: Commissioner, the -- when Tropical Storm
Debby hit the coast in 2012, since we do a renourishment every --
since we do a survey every year, we had a pre-storm benchmark. We
-- FEMA came down here with Florida Department of Emergency
Management. They reviewed it, and we did a survey after the fact, and
they had determined that 52,000 cubic yards, or 78,000 tons of sand,
were displaced as a result of Tropical Storm Debby.
Now, that sand that was displaced by the survey is not only on the
dry beach, but it's also on the wet beach, the beach that goes down to
the depth of closure, which is about a thousand feet out.
That is exactly what we would be placing on the beach at this
point in time. That PW has been approved by FEMA. We have asked
Page 182
October 28, 2014
for some modifications to that. They have -- to change the means and
methods to go from -- to go to a truck-haul project. They have
approved that. And so we have -- we're going to execute exactly as per
what FEMA has authorized, which is replacing certain areas of the
Naples Beach, not continuously, but the 52,000 cubic yards of sand on
the Naples Beach.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And that's fine. But, again, what
we're doing is building up the deficiency up to the hundred foot line.
We're not going beyond that.
MR. McALPIN: We're -- we are building up -- we are replacing
the sand that was -- that was eroded away. We are building the --
putting the sand on the beach in the areas that were damaged where our
dry-beach benchmark is 100 feet. We're still staying with that
dry-beach benchmark with 100 feet. In some locations, that width of
beach, because the sand that was lost is in the wet portion of the beach
and we have to replace that. It will be temporarily larger, but then the
beach will equilibrate, and that's what we will be doing.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Believe it or not, I've already -- my
mind has gone onto many other things. I'm so sorry. But what I
wanted to mention here -- it came back to me quickly enough -- is
being that FEMA was the one that's proposed that they -- that we get
this sand, and they're -- they're willing to pay, I think it's 75 percent of
the funds, right, and then another 12-and-a-half percent from state, all
we have to pay is 12-and-a-half percent to get this stuff done, I think
we should move forward with it, so I'd like to make a motion to
approve.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Fiala,
second by Commissioner Coyle.
Discussion on the motion?
Page 183
October 28, 2014
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Seeing none, all in favor of the
motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: (No verbal response.)
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries unanimously.
Item #11B
AWARD INVITATION TO BID (ITB) #14-6352 - NAPLES
BEACH RENOURISHMENT (SAND PLACEMENT) TO EARTH
TECH ENTERPRISES, INC., IN THE AMOUNT OF $748,861 .20
TO PLACE, GRADE AND TRANSPORT APPROXIMATELY
78,678 TONS OF BEACH QUALITY SAND AS AUTHORIZED
BY THE FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY
(FEMA) PW 0679-NAPLES BEACH RENOURISHMENT TO
REPAIR DAMAGES AS A RESULT OF TROPICAL STORM
DEBBY (PROJECT 195-90038), AUTHORIZE STAFF TO
WITHHOLD NOTICE-TO-PROCEED (NTP) ISSUANCE UNTIL
THE FEMA PW REVISION HAS BEEN ISSUED, AUTHORIZE
ALL REQUIRED BUDGET AMENDMENTS, AUTHORIZE THE
CHAIRMAN TO EXECUTE THE AGREEMENT, AND MAKE A
FINDING THAT THIS ITEM PROMOTES TOURISM —
APPROVED
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioners, Item 11B is a
Page 184
October 28, 2014
companion item to 11A, and this is the contract for the placement and
grading and transport of the delivered sand along the beach.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Move approval.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Nance,
motion second by Commissioner Fiala.
Discussion on the motion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: No discussion. All in favor of the
motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: (No verbal response.)
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries unanimously.
MR. McALPIN: Thank you.
MR. OCHS: Thank you, Commissioners. I wanted to recognize
my friend and colleague, Bill Moss, from the City of Naples, has been
here all day to make sure this item went well, and I want to recognize
Bill. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: You didn't want to leave him with
all his sand in a pile, sir.
Item #11D
AWARD BID NUMBER #14-6316, "MODIFICATIONS TO
CLARIFIER 1 AND BLEACH PIPING SYSTEM AT THE SOUTH
COUNTY WATER RECLAMATION FACILITY," TO CARDINAL
Page 185
October 28, 2014
CONTRACTORS, INC., IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,961,000 FOR
PROJECT NUMBER 73969 — APPROVED
MR. OCHS: That's true.
Commissioner, that takes us to Item 11D, which is a
recommendation to award a bid for modifications to Clarifier 1 and the
bleach piping system at the South County Water Reclamation Facility.
Dr. Yilmaz is ready to present or answer questions that the board may
have.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Questions by the board members?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Motion to approve.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Coyle.
Second by Commissioner --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Fiala.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- Fiala.
Discussion on the motion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: No discussion. All in favor of the
motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: (No verbal response.)
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries unanimously.
MR. OCHS: Thank you, Commissioners.
Item #11E
Page 186
October 28, 2014
AWARD BID NUMBER #14-6330, "MASTER PUMP STATION
109 IMPROVEMENTS," TO DOUGLAS N. HIGGINS, INC., IN
THE AMOUNT OF $1,596,937 UNDER MASTER PUMP
STATION TECHNICAL SUPPORT PROJECT NUMBER 70050 —
APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Item 11E is a competitive bid award
recommendation for improvements to Master Pump Station 109 and,
again, Dr. Yilmaz is prepared to present or respond to questions from
the board.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Coyle to
approve, second by Commissioner Fiala.
Higgins, again, huh?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I think they won that one by 80
bucks.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah. Discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: None? All in favor of the motion,
signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: (No verbal response.)
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries 5-0 unanimously.
MR. OCHS: Thank you, Commissioners.
Page 187
October 28, 2014
Item #11F
AWARD FOR INVITATION TO BID #14-6320 "VANDERBILT
BEACH MSTU UTILITY UNDERGROUND CONVERSION
PHASE II AND III, EXCAVATION/BORING, CONDUIT
INSTALLATION, AND CONCRETE PAD PLACEMENT" TO
DANELLA UTILITY COMPANY IN THE AMOUNT OF
$2,637,081 — APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Item 11F is a recommendation to approve an award
of bid for the Vanderbilt Beach MSTU utility underground conversion
Phase II and III, excavation/boring, conduit installation and concrete
pad placement. And Harry Sells, your Public Transit and
Neighborhood Enhancement Project Manager, is prepared to present or
respond to questions from the board.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Why don't you present?
MR. SELLS: You ready to present?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Are you?
MR. SELLS: I am.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Good.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Motion to approve.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Coyle.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Second by Commissioner Fiala.
Discussion on the motion?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Good presentation, Harry.
MR. SELLS: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
Page 188
October 28, 2014
COMMISSIONER HILLER: (No verbal response.)
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries 5-0.
MR. OCHS: Thank you, Commissioners.
Item #11H
RECOMMENDATION TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION FOR THE
APPROVAL OF A LOCALLY FUNDED AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION (HEREINAFTER FDOT) AND COLLIER
COUNTY FOR THE PAINTING OF TRAFFIC SIGNAL
STRUCTURES ON FDOT'S PROJECT FPID #429120-1-52-01
AND TO AUTHORIZE THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN A
RESOLUTION AND LOCALLY FUNDED AGREEMENT -
MOTION TO DENY THE RECOMMENDATION AND THE
COUNTY MANAGER TO BRING BACK A POLICY OF BEST
VALUE OPTIONS — APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Item 11G was previously 16A26 on your growth
management consent agenda. This is a recommendation to adopt a
resolution approving a LAP agreement with the State Department of
Transportation for painting and ongoing maintenance of certain traffic
signals along Davis Boulevard.
Mr. Casalanguida is prepared to present or respond to questions.
This item was moved at Commissioner Nance's request.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Nance?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes. I just wanted to bring this
issue back to everybody's attention. And I'm not sure that there is
Page 189
October 28, 2014
support for changing the current board's policy, but I just wanted to
point out the magnitude of the commitment that we've made for
painting some of our traffic signal structures for reasons that are
unclear to me.
And the opportunity that board members and staff has to ride
around the county and take a look at what our different structures and
infrastructure looks like in the county at these different intersections, as
you approach the intersection, you'll commonly see that we have
streetlights that are erected out of-- that are typically constructed out
of brushed aluminum. They're gray in color. We have weathered
wooden poles from FP&L; they're typically gray in color. We have
concrete poles that are weathered concrete in color. And then we
somehow got to the point where we decided that these traffic signal
structures, which are originally supplied to us as a gray structure,
which is galvanized and is designed to be a lifetime low-maintenance
structure, and somehow we began deciding that it was in our best
interest to paint them green.
And so, at present we are spending and committing millions of
dollars going forward to painting these items green. And if you will
take a look at how they look in our community around the county, you
will see that half of them are very pretty. They're green -- I don't know
why they're green compared to gray, but that are -- and a good
percentage of them look absolutely terrible because they weather very
badly. And the reason that they weather badly is that galvanized medal
is not designed to be painted, and it holds up very poorly.
So, at present, if you'll go down to some of our most popular
intersections, like Golden Gate Parkway and U.S. 41, you will see that
these supposedly green signal structures look absolutely terrible.
They're chalky. The paint is -- gets to a point where it starts peeling.
Similar light poles that are erected in our medians in Immokalee
that were chosen to be blue are peeling. They look terrible.
Page 190
October 28, 2014
The colored light poles that were chosen to be put out on
Livingston Road that are similarly dark green in color are looking very
weathered and chalky. Those are going to have to be repainted.
So what we are is we're in a situation where we're painting these
structures that are really inconsistent with most of the other poles that
we put up because we think they look good. And my question to you
is, are you satisfied with the way these look in your community, and do
we really -- should we really continue to support painting these over
and over and over again, an amount of money that -- you know, if you
add it up, you might be astounded as to how much money we're really
dedicating to doing this when it's not consistent with any other color
that we have. We continue to put up brushed aluminum gray poles,
then we turn around and put up other green poles.
So I'm just wondering if we really want to spend this amount of
money doing this when it seems to be a money pit to me.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, you make a valid point,
considering we allow a bunch of clowns to jump up and down with
signs in the right-of-way.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Let's paint them green.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: What's the difference?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I'm talking about maintenance and
paint, Commissioner Henning. I understand you don't like this sign
waving, but I'm talking about what we're doing to our physical
infrastructure to paint it and maintain it and the costs.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And what are you proposing?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I'm proposing that we cease
painting these galvanized structures and go with galvanized structures
as provided by the vendor, because they're a lifetime low-cost,
low-maintenance item that I don't think looks any worse and quite
possibly better than what we're doing, because we're getting mixed
Page 191
October 28, 2014
results.
Certainly, when we repaint them, they look great for a few years,
and then they look in various states of disrepair from fair to poor to
awful. And, you know, I'm not sure that we have a consistent look that
we think justifies this expense.
So, you know, it's up to the commission to go around and look in
their community and see if they like the way they look. I think it's not
achieving the desire and maybe what we had hoped for by this
expenditure, is all I'm saying.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I'd support that if it doesn't distract the
motoring public from driving down the road.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: What? Start again.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I think this was a Bonnie McKenzie,
former Mayor Bonnie McKenzie issue, wasn't it?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I think so. There was a belief that
if you painted them green, our northern visitors would think they were
trees.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Oh, yeah. Well, you know, some of
them do have some vegetation on them. They're carried over by maybe
some listed species, like eagles and --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: We could put some artificial limbs
on them, and they'd be really, really --
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Make them into trees.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- nice. We wouldn't have to water
them the way we do the trees we put in the medians now.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah, that's true.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Mr. Casalanguida, I think I asked
you how many intersects -- and this agenda item says that, basically, in
order for us to do this it costs us $15,000 at each intersection to paint
them initially, and then over a period of seven years, every seven years
or so it's going to cost us $25,000 to sandblast them and paint them
Page 192
October 28, 2014
again. And what they look like in between, I think, is anybody's guess.
But how many intersections are we currently attempting to
beautify using this technique?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: For the record, sir, Nick Casalanguida.
One hundred forty-eight intersections that are painted green.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: One hundred forty-eight?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yes, sir. And about 15,000, as we
noted, to paint them originally, and about $25,000 to redo them. They
last about seven years.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: So in seven years we've got -- 15-
plus 25- is 40-.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: All in.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: All in. So you've got $40,000
every seven years.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Well -- and 25- after that. So your
all-in your first seven years is 40-, and it's 25- after that, sir, and you
have about 148.
I've got a picture of one that's galvanized, if you want to take a
look at it and get a feel for what it's like, if that's what you want.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Zoom in a little bit. That's a galvanized
intersection, sir.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: And I think everybody can see that
the light poles are also gray because they are aluminum.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: And I've got one that's green and --
that one is hard to tell with the color of the monitor. And that's one
that's about ready to be repainted.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Can I ask a question?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, after Commissioner Nance is
done.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. Sure, absolutely. Are you
Page 193
October 28, 2014
done?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: What is your question?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Nick, it was my understanding that
this all started as a problem because when -- and I could be mistaken.
But I thought that what happened was when these poles were first
painted, that the wrong kind of paint was used, and it wasn't paint that
would withstand the sun over, you know, what would have been
deemed a reasonable period of time, and that's why we're having these
problems now --
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Ma'am --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- and that, you know, when they
get repainted with the proper grade of paint, that the life of the paint
would be much longer than maybe what we're talking about. But I
don't know. I mean, that -- I remember that there was an issue. And
this was before me, but I remember there was a great deal of talk in the
community about the wrong paint having been used or specked, I don't
know what, but this is an error going back years.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: There were three intersections done by
DOT on 41. They used the wrong paint; it faded quickly. So DOT
came back and repainted them. But, typically, they last about seven
years with the proper paint and prep.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So all of DOT --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Say that again, proper painting
prepping.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Proper painting prep.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Proper paint prep.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Say that five times fast.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So DOT paints all of their light
posts?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: No, ma'am. They -- this is a DOT
Page 194
October 28, 2014
project. We're going to pay them to do this. After they've done it,
we're going to reimburse them 45,000.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: But what you were talking about,
you said before DOT painted --
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Several intersections on U.S. 41 where
they faded quickly, right along the city line, we had some complaints.
Billy Hattaway stood behind it -- well, actually, it was Stan Kant at the
time. They came back and repainted those mast arms green.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So the state actually does paint
their --
MR. CASALANGUIDA: At the request in the past, they've done
so. Now their policy is, if you want that upgrade, you pay for it, and
then you maintain it afterwards.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Is there any problem with
aluminum being exposed over time and not being painted? How does
it ultimately look?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: It's as that picture shows. It's
galvanized metal. Typically 25 to 30 years is what you might get out
of a signal pole, mast arm.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, the material lasts that long,
but the look over time -- because, I mean, if you look at, you know,
metal roofs over time, they don't look so good.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: They don't -- the look actually holds
up better than the structure actually does. They become structurally
deficient from the wind and periods of time.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, we're only talking about the
look, because we're talking about the --
MR. CASALANGUIDA: The look will hold up --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- aesthetics of paint versus no
paint.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Galvanized will typically hold up the
Page 195
October 28, 2014
life of the project.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, that's not my question. My
question is, what does it look like -- what does unpainted galvanized
look like over time? Have you seen a seven-year-old unpainted
aluminum light post?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: It is the same as a galvanized fence. It
starts to get a little pantine on it, like a white film to it, occasionally
may rust around the bolts where the galvanization is compressed
because of the pressure of the bolts being tightened down. But it holds
up, and it starts to get that white film to it, a little dirt on it.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Does it look unattractive?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: That's in the eyes of the beholder,
ma'am. It's not as attractive as a green constantly painted one, but it
comes with less cost, so --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. That's interesting, because the
paint actually then preserves the look for a long -- even though you
have to pay some money, it holds the look up longer rather than -- it's
going to still look -- what do I want to --
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Chalky after five years.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, chalky, no matter which way
you have it, right?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: But they won't look as chalky if they
have the paint on them as they will with galvanized?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Right, because you're going to treat it
again in seven years.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I see.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: So once it gets to the point the paint
flakes, you scrape it down, you sandblast it, and you repaint it again.
So you're refreshing it every seven years; as opposed to galvanize,
Page 196
October 28, 2014
you're going to get 20 to 25 years, and as you get to the useful life of
the mast arm, it will just -- it starts to get a little pitted. It starts to rust
in certain spots. But structurally it's still sound.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Even though it's rusted.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Even though it's starting to rust --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: But the paint would help it not to
rust.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yes, ma'am. And you might get a
little bit longer life. But if I was to -- you were to ask me honestly, the
cost versus the length of that, no, you're going to be spending more
time painting it than you are going to get a useful life out of it. It looks
better.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And my last question is, if we do not
approve this, as Commissioner Nance suggests, can we use that money
to put landscaping in? Because we're getting a lot of requests for that.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: That would be a board policy decision,
ma'am, where that money goes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Is there a motion on this item?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I've got one more comment, Mr.
Chairman.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Are you going to make a
motion?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes. I'm going to make a motion
that we deny Item 6A26 (sic) and go to galvanized. And I would invite
the commissioners to take a look at it.
I will tell you several things about galvanized metal. Galvanized
metal is not designed to be painted. One of the problems we're having
is it doesn't accept paint because it is a sacrificial finish. It's designed
to weather away over a very long period of time and to prevent rust.
The classic example of how people feel about it is if you'll go to
the Florida Keys, you'll see that all their infrastructure is galvanized,
Page 197
October 28, 2014
and that's in a saltwater environment. Why do they choose that?
Because it's very resist to weathering. It's absolutely no maintenance.
They don't have to do anything with it.
Some of the reason that this paint fails is it doesn't stick well
because the galvanize underneath it is trying to sacrifice itself and it's
letting the paint loose. That's what galvanizing is supposed to do.
I will tell you that I don't know anybody that recog -- that
recommends you paint a galvanized structure. If you wish to have a
painted structure, you need to start out with one that's not galvanized
because it will accept the paint better.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That doesn't make sense.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: That is -- ma'am, it does.
Galvanizing is meant to be finished coat. It's not meant to be an
undercoat.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, the only reason I asked that,
Commissioner Nance, is because you have all these aluminum roofs
that are all painted that last for an exceptionally --
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Those are Galvalume, ma'am.
They're not hot-dipped galvanized like these pipes. That's a
completely different product.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Those are powder coated.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: It's a different product. Oh, my
bad. I didn't understand that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: There's a -- hang on. There's a motion
to not approve this and make a policy decision not to repaint --
COMMISSIONER NANCE: No.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- the others in the county? Is that
what your motion is?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: No, I would re-galvanize them.
Instead of painting them, I would galvanize them as a final finish and
walk away for 35, 40 years and not have to do anything to them.
Page 198
October 28, 2014
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Do you want to know the cost of that
before we give that policy decision?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Well, we know it costs $25,000 to
refinish them with paint, so you can refinish them with galvanized.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: It's a lot more than that, sir. These are
hot dipped --
COMMISSIONER NANCE: These are hot dipped, right.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: So I think you're going to just have a
policy going forward.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Well, maybe -- okay.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yeah. Once you've got an intersection
that the paint's come off, I'd have to see from the manufacturer if I strip
them, because you don't want them to flake off, ultimately, rather than
repaint them, if that will do anything to the galvanization. But any
new ones installed, if that's a policy going forward, then I would
certainly not paint them if that's the board's will.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: If it suits the board, before we need
to make that policy, I would encourage the board to go around and
look at what the mast arms look like in South Florida, both the local
ones we have and ones you see other -- in other areas, and decide how
you feel about it. I just think, you know --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I have, and I'll support your motion,
but as a policy decision, we need to give some kind of guidance to the
board or to the staff so they know what to do.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Let me change my motion.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Do you want these sandblasted, or do
you want these pressure cleaned until the green comes off or --
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I will make a motion to deny this --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Right.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: -- recommendation --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Right.
Page 199
October 28, 2014
COMMISSIONER NANCE: -- and for staff to go out and
evaluate what the relative costs are of continuing to maintain them
green or return them to galvanized, but going forward, until the board
decides otherwise, to have all new ones be the low-maintenance
galvanized finish.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: How about the guidance would be to
ask the county manager to bring back a reasonable policy on
maintenance, understanding that the board wants the best value? And
I'll second that motion.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Absolutely.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Who's next? Hiller?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I am.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. And so, as we're -- as this
motion is presented, say, for instance, as we're replacing some of the
string lights to the mast arms, and maybe part of the street already has
painted mast arms, it wouldn't look very good if you then switched to
galvanized so then you don't even have a corresponding look. Are we
going to be taking that into consideration as well just to make sure that
-- you know, if you haven't started any on a street, I can see that, but --
you know, replacing the poles. But if you're halfway through the job,
and from this day forward you don't want to do them, I think that
would give a very poor look.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: You're going to -- if you're going to do
it this way, you're going to have some roads that will be, as we replace
these or go from span wire to mast arm, if the policy is to be
galvanized, you are going to have green, some galvanized, some not
until we get to the point that we either replace them or sandblast them
till they're all clear pantine or just the galvanized look to them.
Because I've got some that are fairly new, Livingston and Golden
Gate Parkway. It's a mono tube intersection. It's all green. And when
Page 200
October 28, 2014
the time came up, I would either sandblast it or maintain the green,
depending on what was more efficient after we do our review.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Well, one of my considerations is
for everybody to understand what maintaining green actually looks
like. Go out and see what they look like to you in your community
right now, and you're going to find out that it's not maybe what you
think.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well -- and maybe they haven't been
maintained for a while -- and I'm not sure of this. I'm just taking a stab
at it -- that because our income was so little, we've been using the
money mainly to bolster up our public utilities and maintenance in that
area, that's the most necessary, that's the most urgent, and some of the
things we've let go by the wayside, including the landscaping, until we
could get caught up with some of these things.
But I would guess if we have a regular maintenance schedule, just
as we do with other facilities, that they would all look nice. Am I
wrong there?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: No, they're being repainted, ma'am,
every five to seven years. As Commissioner Nance is pointing out,
when you get to the fourth, fifth, and sixth year, you're going to start to
see what I showed you in that picture, which is some flaking. The
paint's going to start to come off, and then we schedule it.
These are not break/fix in terms of public health/safety. So we
wait till these things get to the point that they're flaking, and they need
to be painted. If I can get eight years, I will. I don't just put them on
an automatic seven. I wait till they get to that point that they need to
be repainted.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: How much does it cost to sandblast
them?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: The total package is about 25,000
round trip to be blasted and repainted after they're up.
Page 201
October 28, 2014
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No. I mean, not repainted, but
bringing it down to galvanized, as Commissioner Nance is saying.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: I don't know if I could. I don't know if
the sandblasting to remove the paint would affect any of the
galvanization. I'm going to have to find that out, which is the
direction.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: That might not be an option.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Right.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: It might not be a reasonable option.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So you're going to bring it -- your
vote is to bring it back, right? Your motion is to bring it back?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: The motion is very clear.
MR. OCHS: That's part of the motion.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: What is the motion?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: The motion is to deny this item and
have the county manager bring back a policy on best value of what to
do with these.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Maintenance.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: You know, you've got cold
galvanized. You go to Sunshine Hardware and pick up a case of cold
galvanized paint, and try that.
Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. I'm just looking here on the
Internet to see what the warranty lives are, and I found one here for
thermostat powder paint finish, and they say it's supposed to last, you
know, 15 years.
So I think one of the things, I mean -- and I don't know if that
works on that type of light pole. I'm looking at, you know, painting
light -- outside, outdoor light poles. And I don't know. So what -- one
of the things I would suggest is that when you come back to us with,
Page 202
October 28, 2014
you know, the best-value option is to consider looking at the various
types of paint finishes that can be used and what those life cycle
warranties are because, you know, if what we maybe need to do is
change to a different type of product that might extend the life and
keep those poles painted -- I mean, one of the things we don't want to
do is cheapen the character of this community.
While it's very important to save money, we don't want to do it at
the expense of compromising the standard that we have established
that we're recognized for.
So maybe looking into alternative paint products or methods that
address, you know, longer life cycles might achieve savings and would
be worth considering maybe as a compromise.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Based on -- I understand the board
direction. We'll come back and we'll give you a full analysis on
everything we have. Your Golden Gate Parkway bridge is steel and it's
painted green. You wouldn't want that exposed. That's different. We
can buy mast arms, hot dip galvanized, and they can be left alone
pretty much for the life of the product with some minor maintenance at
the flanges and the stress points.
And I'll let you know what the options are in paint, and I'll let you
know --
COMMISSIONER NANCE: That's the way the streetlights are.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Right.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: You have to paint most of your
streetlights now. In some cases we have decided to put more
ornamental streetlights in there, but you're going to have to paint them.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: That's right.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: People need to realize -- they need
to go out there and look at them and see what they look like, because
they're not bright and shiny anymore. They're looking pretty rough.
So, like I say, I agree with Commissioner Hiller, I want it to look
Page 203
October 28, 2014
good, but I don't want to go from this bright shiny to awful, bright
shiny to awful result when we're paying dearly for that, you know. I
just want to make sure that we're getting what we hoped for.
I would rather have something that's very consistently nice and
doesn't need maintenance and is gray than something that's green and
goes from bright, shiny green to awful, chalky, nasty, and that's what
we've got.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And peeling.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah. What Commissioner Hiller is
talking about is a powder coating, electrical charge powder coating,
and it has to be done in a certain environment --
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Environment.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- to do that, an enclosed environment.
But that could be accomplished by just taking it down and having Tim
Durham stand up with red and green.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: He does a good job with that, sir.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Well, you can do that if you acid
dip steel and you powder coat it right then. You'll have a finish that's
much better than we have here, but it won't be galvanized.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I see a future as a painting
contractor for you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You're going to acid dip --
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I've done a lot of it.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Commercial painting contractor. I
see it in the stars. And I think -- Tim, I think if you're going to stand at
an intersection, I recommend the uniforms like they have in Bermuda,
because I think we could actually fund that with TDC dollars, because
I think it would promote tourism. Because that's what Leo said over
lunch; as long as it promotes tourism, we can do anything.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I will even volunteer to make
Commissioner Henning happy. I will stand next to a mast arm with a
Page 204
October 28, 2014
sign that says, how's my paint look, and give him some feedback.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well., better that than your hair.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Make sure you put my phone number
down.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion, signify by
saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries unanimously.
Now we go to --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Now you see what you're going to
be missing, Commissioner Coyle. I mean, these are the kind of
discussions you will no longer be having. I mean --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: CC workshop schedule?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- this is a -- something to
reminisce over.
Item #15
STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS
CHAIRMAN HENNING: 15A.
MR. OCHS: Yes. We're onto the workshop schedule and staff
communications, Mr. Chairman.
Again, the community -- the workshop schedule's been laid out
Page 205
October 28, 2014
for December 2nd with the City of Marco, February 3rd on your
library system, and March 3rd with your affordable housing team, so
those are all the upcoming workshops that I have at this point.
I have no other communication except to remind the board of the
unveiling of the new sign commemorating the Fred W. Coyle Freedom
Park tomorrow at 10:30. Hope you can all join us.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And the public is invited.
MR. OCHS: Yes. The public is invited, indeed, yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Maybe the Naples Daily News
would put that in the newspaper, that it would show up tomorrow
morning to let, you know, the community know that Commissioner
Coyle is retiring and that we are having the sign unveiling and that we
welcome everyone to attend.
MR. OCHS: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That it's not just a board or county
event.
MR. OCHS: Right. And, again, Commissioner, on behalf of the
staff, it's been an honor and a privilege working with you, sir. We've
enjoyed it over all these years, and we're grateful for all the many
contributions that you've made to our community and our organization.
We wish you and Cheryle Godspeed and great fortune in your future
endeavors.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Thank you.
(Applause.)
MR. OCHS: That's all I have, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
County Attorney?
MR. KLATZKOW: Nothing, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Nance?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes. I would just -- I would like to
echo County Manager Ochs' comments about Commissioner Coyle.
Page 206
October 28, 2014
I'm going to miss him. I'm going to miss his support fighting through
these paint items going forward. And I know it's tearing his heart out
to have to go to Oregon and miss that discussion, but I have told him
repeatedly that we all will miss his counsel and thank him for his
dedicated service during his lifetime. It's something that's actually
very rare, and he's done a tremendous job in dedicating his life to us
all.
And I've got -- in commissioners' comments, I've got several
items of note that are dates of interesting things.
One of them is on Wednesday, November the 5th, at 6:30 is a
very interesting display regarding the French Early Colonial Efforts in
Florida where they tried to settle in Florida in 1563. That's going to be
at the Collier County Museum starting at 6:30, and it's going to feature
some of the very, very earliest engravings that illustrate what the native
peoples and the settlement efforts looked like during that 1563 event.
It's sponsored by the Collier County Museum. It's a charge of$35
for Friends of the Museum, and tickets for nonmembers are $50.
Some of the reason for that is the executive director of the University
of Florida Digital Worlds Institute is showcasing a lot of lithographs
and art that shows this. There's going to be entertainment, and there's
going to be a presentation from John de Bry, who is a direct
descendent of Theodore de Bry, who made these lithographs, so that's
going to be very, very -- very, very good.
And two items that were suggested by Superintendent Ramos, a
reminder that Friday, February the 3rd at the Collier County Museum,
right over here, is going to be the Big Cypress National Preserve
birthday bash from 7 to 10 p.m., and then on Saturday is the Fourth
Annual Swamp Heritage at the Big Cypress Welcome Center from
10:30 in the morning on Saturday until 4 p.m.
So I think those are all great things coming up that people can
enjoy and participate in.
Page 207
October 28, 2014
Nothing other than that, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I can't believe I'm crying, but I am.
Leo, those words were wonderful.
Commissioner Coyle, I'm sitting here with tears in my eyes. I'm
going to miss you. And I can't believe I'm saying this after these four
years, but I am.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I can't believe you're saying it
either.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I am so going to miss you. I just
have one question I have to ask myself. When Brent Batten retires, am
I going to be crying the same way? I'm just curious.
But I will say it's been an honor to work with you. You have
brought so much to this board. You've brought a great deal of intellect,
wisdom, and integrity, and I want to thank you for your very serious
commitment to this community over all these years. It's really been a
pleasure and honor working with you.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I hope you enjoy your retirement
and --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I will.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- please still stay involved,
because we need your contribution. We need people who care to stay
committed.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yes, yes.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Stay committed or be committed.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'll be committed.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I would also like to say I'm really
pleased that the board unanimously approved our legislative priorities.
I think our commitment to advancing legislation in the public's interest
Page 208
October 28, 2014
with respect to oil drilling is extremely important. We kept our word
to our constituency that we did that, and we were unanimously
supporting that initiative. I know we're all going to work collectively
really hard to see change at the state level for the local community's
benefit.
The fact that we're going to be working on legislation to protect
pedestrians and bikers so that they can safely use the pathways and
bike paths that we're providing for them is another wonderful initiative.
The fact that we are, you know, committed to fighting human
trafficking and working to bolster laws and funding for the nonprofits
and for law enforcement to stop these crimes is a -- is a very, very
good thing.
I mean, overall, I'm very excited and, Commissioner Fiala, I
really look forward to being at that meeting with you and hopefully,
jointly, we can speak to these issues and persuade our legislative
delegation to fight for the causes that we, not only as a community but
also as a state, believe are very, very important.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: They are. I couldn't be more pleased
with our selections.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. And I think we really did
the right thing that we narrowed the focus to a few big issues that we
can really make a difference on. So I think the board did very well
today in that regard. I think that was a very positive unanimous vote.
And, by the way, remember to vote 11 -- you know, November
4th is around the corner, and everybody needs to go out and do their
civic duty and vote for your representatives, because they are the ones
who are going to make the difference in your quality of life.
I'm going to keep crying. This is terrible. Oh, boy. My makeup.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Is that all you have?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Is there -- would you like more? I
mean, I will give as much as you want. Just tell me. I'll keep it
Page 209
October 28, 2014
coming.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: We still have some daylight.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Oh, why not go into the night
together.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, again, being the spokesperson
for the board, if I'm not available, we will communicate that to you so
you can attend the --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, we'll support you regardless.
I mean, if you come and speak, we'll speak as members of the public or
members of the board for the public.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Support system.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Just -- hey, listen, we're your
angels, you know. Commissioner Fiala on one side; me on the other.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I knew she wasn't done.
You know, there's -- there are some great attributes that
Commissioner Coyle has brought to the board. One that I recall is
spearheading the concurrency, the change to our Growth Management
Plan so we don't fall behind infrastructure. And that was a long, long
fight, and I know Commissioner Coyle and one particular state senator
was communicating on a regular basis. But we have the infrastructure,
and it is because we are dealing with concurrency.
The other one is spearheading the Freedom Memorial with
interested citizens that wants to recognize the police, the firefighters,
and all emergency responders and citizens that participated in that
devastating experience of 9/11. And I understand you personally have
given close to $60,000 for that effort. That's just what I'm told.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: How much?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Sixty thousand.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Oh, my God. That's awesome.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I didn't know it was that much.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah, well, maybe Cheryl did it and
Page 210
October 28, 2014
didn't tell you. I don't know.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Cheryl doesn't tell me where all the
money goes.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Smart woman.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And I know there's a lot that you have
done that you can stand tall on and say, I've accomplished this, okay.
And that is very important. My belief that public service is a great
educational tool and a great experience, and that's one thing that you
can say if somebody disagrees with your accomplishments.
So thank you for your service.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I have four items. I'll make
them quick, though.
First of all, I'd like to thank Mike Sheffield and Troy Miller and
their whole team, because right now Collier Television is now
available on Summit Broadband to all of the customers on Marco
Island, condominiums and single-family homes, neighborhoods in the
Vineyards, St. Tropez, Barefoot Beach Club, Mariposa, Countryside,
and Parkshore Landings. Thanks to all of you guys' efforts.
They haven't been able to see our meetings before this, and so
Collier Television -- today they could be watching -- is on 97 or 98
depending on where they live in the Summit Broadband network.
The second thing I'd like to mention is -- this is Leo. Maybe after
today -- and we had this CRA business going on, and it -- and, you
know, I guess I've noticed before that our CRA interim manager really
isn't an executive director, and maybe it's time that we thought about
putting her into that position, being that she's acting like one and doing
all the work as one.
So that's just a suggestion just from Donna Fiala. I don't know
how that -- how that will fly, but it's something maybe to consider.
Page 211
October 28, 2014
The third thing -- and I'm really delighted to tell you about this.
Saturday night I went to the Honor Flight, if anybody's been there.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I saw you on the Naples Daily News.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You did?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah, it was there.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No kidding.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I was there at the previous one.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh. I want to tell you folks, if
you've never been to an Honor Flight, you need to go. It's a thrilling
experience. I went at night. I got there at about 10:30, quarter to
11 :00. They took a bus of us over.
And I was thinking about you because you've been such a strong
advocate for all the veterans in our community. And it was so
magnificent. They had these guys playing the bagpipes. There must
have been 20 of them. I didn't even realize there were that many
bagpipes in the area. And they had bands, and they had one JROTC
member, cadet rather, from each high school there, and they had one of
these sword bridges -- what would you call that -- sword salutes as
they were -- these 50 veterans deplaned and came up to the upper level
of the airport.
The bands were playing, the sword bridge was there, and people
were cheering, cheering, cheering, and they took each veteran by
themselves; a lot of them were in wheelchairs. And I want to tell you,
it was a thrilling experience, especially for them. Tears in their eyes,
goose pimply, the whole shot. It was one of the most magnificent
things. And it was all done by volunteers. What magnificent
coordination of efforts.
And getting back to veterans, I think of you, Fred. You've been a
veteran on our board, and you've been eloquent in many of the things
that you've taught us. The way you approach things, it's never from an
emotional standpoint. It's always been from fact. And the way you
Page 212
October 28, 2014
present it, you just open the whole thing up to new thoughts, and I'm
going to miss you like crazy.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'm not leaving. I really do
appreciate all the nice things you've said about me. And I'd like to
remind the public about something I've said to you over lunch today.
Whatever you think that I might have done that is good in Collier
County over the 13 years on the commission and the two years before
that on the Naples City Council I didn't do by myself. It takes at least
three people on this commission to get anything done. So whatever I
might have done was with the help of the other commissioners here.
And -- but Commissioner Henning has caused me to remember
some of the days when the state was threatening to take away a lot of
our home rule powers, and that was very threatening, and it required a
lot of work, some of it unpleasant, in Tallahassee to stop that, but the
amazing thing is that we did stop their efforts to eliminate our ability to
assess impact fees. We did stop them from eliminating our
concurrency system. And we were one of the few states in the county
that -- or the few counties in the state that really had an effective
concurrency system. And we won that battle, and we won it by
working together, and I'm very proud that we stood together in getting
that done.
But for the public, this is my last meeting. My wife and I are
going to go back to retirement, and I can only say that I have been
proud and honored to serve the people of Collier County for this period
of time, and I'll always look back on this time as a time of great
learning and appreciation for the support that I've received, so thank
you very much.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Is there a motion to adjourn?
Page 213
October 28, 2014
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Motion to adjourn.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Is there any objections?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: We are adjourned.
**** Commissioner Nance moved, seconded by Commissioner
Henning and carried 4/1 (Commissioner Hiller opposed) that the
following items under the Consent and Summary Agendas be
approved and/or adopted
Item #16A1
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE WATER AND SEWER UTILITY
FACILITIES FOR FAIRGROVE AT TALIS PARK
PL20120001256 AND TO AUTHORIZE THE COUNTY
MANAGER, OR HIS DESIGNEE, TO RELEASE THE FINAL
OBLIGATION BOND IN THE AMOUNT OF $4,000 TO THE
PROJECT ENGINEER OR THE DEVELOPER'S DESIGNATED
AGENT — A FINAL INSPECTION WAS CONDUCTED BY
STAFF ON JULY 24, 2014 AND THE FACILITY HAS BEEN
FOUND SATISFACTORY AND ACCEPTABLE
Item #16A2
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE WATER AND SEWER UTILITY
FACILITIES FOR BRIGHTLING AT TALIS PARK,
PL20120002875, AND TO AUTHORIZE THE COUNTY
MANAGER, OR HIS DESIGNEE, TO RELEASE THE FINAL
OBLIGATION BOND IN THE AMOUNT OF $4,000 TO THE
PROJECT ENGINEER OR THE DEVELOPER'S DESIGNATED
AGENT — A FINAL INSPECTION WAS CONDUCTED BY
Page 214
October 28, 2014
STAFF ON JULY 29, 2014 AND THE FACILITY HAS BEEN
FOUND SATISFACTORY AND ACCEPTABLE
Item #16A3
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE PRIVATELY OWNED UTILITY
FACILITY FOR NAPLES/MARCO ISLAND KOA
KAMPGROUND, PL#20130000303, AND AUTHORIZE THE
COUNTY MANAGER, OR HIS DESIGNEE, TO RELEASE A
UTILITY PERFORMANCE SECURITY (UPS) AND FINAL
OBLIGATION BOND IN THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF $9,125.80
TO THE PROJECT ENGINEER OR THE DEVELOPER'S
DESIGNATED AGENT - A FINAL INSPECTION WAS
CONDUCTED BY STAFF ON JULY 25, 2014 AND THE UTILITY
FACILITY IS OWNED AND MAINTAINED BY THE
DEVELOPER ON PRIVATE PROPERTY
Item #16A4
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE SEWER UTILITY FACILITY
FOR NAPLES/MARCO ISLAND KOA KAMPGROUND
PL20120000060 AND TO AUTHORIZE THE COUNTY
MANAGER, OR HIS DESIGNEE, TO RELEASE THE UTILITIES
PERFORMANCE SECURITY (UPS) AND FINAL OBLIGATION
BOND IN THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF $4,600 TO THE PROJECT
ENGINEER OR THE DEVELOPER'S DESIGNATED AGENT — A
FINAL INSPECTION WAS CONDUCTED BY STAFF ON JULY
23, 2014 AND THE FACILITY HAS BEEN FOUND
SATISFACTORY AND ACCEPTABLE
Item #16A5
Page 215
October 28, 2014
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE WATER AND SEWER UTILITY
FACILITIES FOR ITALIA, PL#20130002058 — A FINAL
INSPECTION WAS CONDUCTED BY STAFF ON AUGUST 21,
2014 AND THE FACILITY HAS BEEN FOUND SATISFACTORY
AND ACCEPTABLE
Item #16A6
THE CLERK OF COURTS TO RELEASE IRREVOCABLE
STANDBY LETTER OF CREDIT NO. 5195512157667 IN THE
AMOUNT OF $25,000 WHICH WAS POSTED AS A GUARANTY
FOR EXCAVATION PERMIT NUMBER 60.043,
(PL20110002185) FOR WORK ASSOCIATED WITH THE
CONSERVANCY OF SOUTHWEST FLORIDA — THE AS-BUILT
LAKE CROSS SECTIONS HAVE BEEN RECEIVED AND
ENGINEERING SERVICES HAS INSPECTED THE LAKES
Item #16A7
THE CLERK OF COURTS TO RELEASE A PERFORMANCE
BOND IN THE AMOUNT OF $63,420 WHICH WAS POSTED AS
A DEVELOPMENT GUARANTY FOR WORK ASSOCIATED
WITH MAPLE RIDGE AT AVE MARIA PHASE 2, EARLY
WORK AUTHORIZATION (EWA) PL20130002336 — THE
BOARD APPROVED THE FINAL PLAT AND CONSTRUCTION
PLANS FOR THIS PROJECT ON SEPTEMBER 10, 2013
Item #16A8
Page 216
October 28, 2014
RECORD THE FINAL PLAT OF CAMBRIA, (APPLICATION
NUMBER PL20120000792) APPROVAL OF THE STANDARD
FORM CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT
AND APPROVAL OF THE AMOUNT OF THE PERFORMANCE
SECURITY — W/THE STIPULATION THAT THE COUNTY IS
TO WITHHOLD THE CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY UNTIL
THE PRELIMINARY ACCEPTANCE FOR THE REQUIRED
IMPROVEMENTS HAVE BEEN RECEIVED
Item #16A9
ONE (1) ADOPT-A-ROAD PROGRAM AGREEMENT NAME
CHANGE FOR THE ROAD SEGMENT OF CAPRI
BOULEVARD, FROM THE CAPRI WATER TOWER TO THE
END OF CAPRI BOULEVARD, FOR THE VOLUNTEER GROUP
CAPRI REALTY AND CANCEL THE EXISTING AGREEMENT
WITH CHRISTOPHER REALTY FOR THE SAME ROAD
SEGMENT WITH TWO (2) RECOGNITION SIGNS AT A TOTAL
COST OF $60
Item #16A10
CANCEL THE ADOPT-A-ROAD AGREEMENT WITH
SPONSOR T. G. I. FRIDAY'S AND TO ALLOW THE ROADWAY
SEGMENT OF GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY FROM AIRPORT
ROAD TO LIVINGSTON ROAD TO BECOME AVAILABLE FOR
ADOPTION AS PART OF THE ADOPT-A-ROAD PROGRAM —
STAFF CONTACTED THE SPONSOR ON SEPTEMBER 22, 2014
AND WERE INFORMED THAT THEY NO LONGER WISH TO
CONTINUE SPONSORSHIP PARTICIPATION
Page 217
October 28, 2014
Item #16A1 1
AN EASEMENT AGREEMENT FOR THE PURCHASE OF A
ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY, DRAINAGE AND UTILITY
EASEMENT (PARCEL 268RDUE) REQUIRED FOR THE
EXPANSION OF GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD FROM EAST
OF WILSON BOULEVARD TO 20TH STREET EAST. (PROJECT
NO. 60040.) ESTIMATED FISCAL IMPACT: $12,987
Item #16Al2
AN EASEMENT AGREEMENT FOR THE PURCHASE OF A
ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY, DRAINAGE AND UTILITY
EASEMENT (PARCEL 255RDUE) REQUIRED FOR THE
EXPANSION OF GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD FROM EAST
OF WILSON BOULEVARD TO 20TH STREET EAST. PROJECT
NO. 60040 (FISCAL IMPACT: $3,100) — FOLIO #39323840002
Item #16A13
AN EASEMENT AGREEMENT FOR THE PURCHASE OF TWO
ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY, DRAINAGE AND UTILITY
EASEMENTS (PARCELS 197RDUE AND 226RDUE) REQUIRED
FOR THE EXPANSION OF GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD
FROM EAST OF WILSON BOULEVARD TO 20TH STREET
EAST. PROJECT NO. 60040 (FISCAL IMPACT:
APPROXIMATELY $9,125) — FOLIO #39261800007 AND FOLIO
#39207000007
Item #16A14
Page 218
October 28, 2014
AN EASEMENT AGREEMENT FOR THE PURCHASE OF A
ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY, DRAINAGE AND UTILITY
EASEMENT (PARCEL 173RDUE) REQUIRED FOR THE
EXPANSION OF GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD FROM EAST
OF WILSON BOULEVARD TO 20TH STREET EAST. PROJECT
NO. 60040 (FISCAL IMPACT: APPROXIMATELY $2,600) —
FOLIO #37288040004
Item #16A15
AN EASEMENT AGREEMENT FOR THE PURCHASE OF A
ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY, DRAINAGE AND UTILITY
EASEMENT (PARCEL 257RDUE) REQUIRED FOR THE
EXPANSION OF GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD FROM EAST
OF WILSON BOULEVARD TO 20TH STREET EAST. PROJECT
NO. 60040 (FISCAL IMPACT: $3,600) — FOLIO #39323880004
Item #16A16
THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE CITY OF NAPLES AND COLLIER COUNTY
FOR UTILITY WORK IN THE ESTIMATED AMOUNT OF
$176,255.77, AND RESERVE $44,475.71 AS A UTILITY
ALLOWANCE, FOR A TOTAL OF $220,731 .48; AS AN
INTEGRAL PART OF THE COLLIER BOULEVARD
ROADWAY (GREEN BOULEVARD TO GOLDEN GATE
BOULEVARD) IMPROVEMENTS, PROJECT NO. 68056 — AS
DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item #16A17
Page 219
October 28, 2014
AWARD BID #14-6299 TO STAGE DOOR II, INC. FOR THE
"IMMOKALEE SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENTS" PROJECT FOR
CONSTRUCTION OF SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENTS ON
SECOND AVENUE NORTH, NORTH SECOND STREET, AND
ESCAMBIA STREET IN THE AMOUNT OF $306,920.25
(PROJECT #33329) AND RECOGNIZE AND APPROVE A
LOCAL AGENCY PROGRAM (LAP) AGREEMENT SCHEDULE
CHANGE
Item #16A18
A $546,837 WORK ORDER UNDER REQUEST FOR
QUOTATION #14-6213-7 TO DOUGLAS N. HIGGINS, INC., TO
CONSTRUCT THE STORMWATER IMPROVEMENTS IN
GOLDEN GATE CITY (20TH CT. SW, 46TH TERR. SW & 48TH
ST. SW), PROJECT NO. 51029 — REPLACING A SYSTEM THAT
IS PASSED ITS USEFUL LIFESPAN AND IS FUNCTIONALLY
OBSOLETE
Item #16A19
SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT
(SFWMD) AGREEMENT NO. 4600003145 AND TO AUTHORIZE
ANY NECESSARY BUDGET AMENDMENTS TO RECOGNIZE
GRANT FUNDING IN THE AMOUNT OF $1 ,250,000 AND TO
RECOGNIZE A GRANT MATCH IN THE AMOUNT OF
$3,750,000 FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE LELY AREA
STORMWATER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (LASIP)/COUNTY
BARN ROAD PROJECT #33384 — CONNECTING THE LAST
SEGMENT WITHIN THE LELY CANAL BASIN
Page 220
October 28, 2014
Item #16A20
RESOLUTION 2014-223: THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN A
REVISED LOCAL AREA PROGRAM (LAP) AGREEMENT
WITH THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
(FDOT) TO AMEND THE PROJECT'S DESCRIPTION AND
RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE AGREEMENT; AND TO EXECUTE
A NEW RESOLUTION MEMORIALIZING THE BOARD'S
ACTION; FOR THE DESIGN, CEI AND CONSTRUCTION
SERVICES TO ADD NEW BRIDGES IN GOLDEN GATE
ESTATES AT 8TH STREET NE, 16TH STREET NE AND 47TH
AVENUE NE. PROJECT #33340. THERE IS NO CHANGE TO
THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED FDOT GRANT FUNDING FOR
THIS PROJECT
Item #16A21
RELEASE OF A CODE ENFORCEMENT LIEN WITH AN
ACCRUED VALUE OF $20,180.86, FOR PAYMENT OF
$9,180.86, IN THE CODE ENFORCEMENT ACTION ENTITLED
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS V. PARK EAST DEV.
LTD., CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD CASE NO.
CESD20120006530, RELATING TO PROPERTY LOCATED AT
5100 27TH PLACE SW, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA — THE
PROPERTY WAS BROUGHT INTO COMPLIANCE BY THE
NEW OWNER ON APRIL 11, 2013
Item #16A22
RELEASE OF A CODE ENFORCEMENT LIEN WITH AN
ACCRUED VALUE OF $44,236.80, FOR PAYMENT OF
Page 221
October 28, 2014
$1,036.80, IN THE CODE ENFORCEMENT ACTION ENTITLED
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS V. AMERADA HESS,
CORP., CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD CASE NO. 2005-38,
RELATING TO PROPERTY LOCATED AT 6300 DAVIS BLVD.,
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA — THE PROPERTY WAS
BROUGHT INTO COMPLIANCE ON OCTOBER 6, 2006
Item #16A23
RELEASE OF A CODE ENFORCEMENT LIEN WITH AN
ACCRUED VALUE OF $71,229.36, FOR PAYMENT OF $679.36,
IN THE CODE ENFORCEMENT ACTION ENTITLED BOARD
OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS V. JENNIFER KENNEDY,
CODE ENFORCEMENT SPECIAL MAGISTRATE CASE NO.
CEPM20140005517, RELATING TO PROPERTY LOCATED AT
3156 55TH TERRACE SW, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA —
THE PROPERTY WAS BROUGHT INTO COMPLIANCE ON
SEPTEMBER 24, 2014
Item #16A24
AN ADOPT-A-ROAD PROGRAM AGREEMENT FOR THE
SEGMENT OF IMMOKALEE ROAD FROM WILSON
BOULEVARD TO ROCK ROAD, WITH TWO (2) RECOGNITION
SIGNS AT A TOTAL COST OF $60 WITH THE VOLUNTEER
GROUP, GOLDEN GATE TRAFFIC SCHOOL
Item #16A25
RESOLUTION 2014-224: FURTHER STREAMLINING THE
BUILDING PERMIT PROCESS BY OFFERING THE
Page 222
October 28, 2014
CUSTOMER THE ADDED CONVENIENCE OF
ELECTRONICALLY FORWARDING THE NOTICE OF
COMMENCEMENT (NOC) TO THE CLERK OF COURTS FOR
RECORDING. A $5 NOC CONVENIENCE FEE FOR THIS
OPTIONAL SERVICE IS RECOMMENDED TO OFFSET
PROCESSING COSTS, PURSUANT TO SECTION 2-11 OF THE
COLLIER COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE CODE
Item #16A26 — Moved to Item #11H (During Agenda Changes)
Item #16C1
AWARD INVITATION TO BID NUMBER 14-6340, "SMALL
METERS CHANGE OUT," TO VANGUARD UTILITY SERVICE,
INC., IN THE AMOUNT OF $363,648.22 FOR PROJECT
NUMBER 70010, "METER RENEWAL AND REPLACEMENT
PROJECT." — REPLACING 10,000 POTABLE WATER METERS
TO ENSURE ACCURATE AND COMPLETE BILLING
Item #16C2
A $363,559 WORK ORDER UNDER REQUEST FOR
QUOTATION #14-6213-6 TO DOUGLAS N. HIGGINS, INC., TO
INSTALL A NEW WASTEWATER FORCE MAIN FROM
VICTORIA PARK TO GOODLETTE FRANK ROAD UNDER
NORTH COUNTY WATER RECLAMATION FACILITY
TECHNICAL SUPPORT PROJECT NUMBER 73968 —
PROVIDING A NEW PATH FOR WASTEWATER FROM
VICTORIA PARK TO THE NCWRF
Item #16D1
Page 223
October 28, 2014
CHAIRMAN TO SIGN THREE MEMORANDUMS OF
AGREEMENT WITH THE FLORIDA FISH AND WILDLIFE
CONSERVATION COMMISSION TO ALLOW YOUTH HUNTS
FOR COLLIER COUNTY RESIDENTS AT PEPPER RANCH
PRESERVE IN NOVEMBER 2014, JANUARY 2015, AND
FEBRUARY 2015 — THE FOLLOWING HUNTS WILL TAKE
PLACE ON THESE SPECIFIC DATES: NOVEMBER 14 - 16, 2014
WILL BE A DEER HUNT; JANUARY 16 - 18, 2015 WILL BE A
HOG HUNT AND FEBRUARY 27 & 28 AND MARCH 1, 2015
WILL BE A TURKEY HUNT
Item #16D2
AUTHORIZE PAYMENT TO FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT
COMPANY IN THE AMOUNT OF $7,782 FOR A NON-
REFUNDABLE ENGINEERING DEPOSIT REQUIRED FOR
DESIGN PLANS FOR PHASE IV OF THE VANDERBILT
BEACH MUNICIPAL SERVICE TAXING UNIT AERIAL TO
UNDERGROUND CONVERSION PROJECT — TO COMPLETE
HURRICANE HARDENING WITHIN THE VANDERBILT
BEACH MSTU
Item #16D3
FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT FOR CHILD
ADVOCACY SUPERVISED VISITATION WITH COLLIER
COUNTY CHILD ADVOCACY COUNCIL, INC. D/B/A
CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER FUNDED BY THE
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE OFFICE OF VIOLENCE AGAINST
WOMEN — PROVIDING A SAVE PLACE FOR VISITATION
Page 224
October 28, 2014
AND SUPERVISED VISITATION BETWEEN PARENTS IN
SITUATION INVOLVING DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, CHILD
ABUSE, SEXUAL ASSAULT AND STALKING
Item #16D4
TWO SUBSTANTIAL AMENDMENTS TO THE U.S.
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
(HUD) COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT
FY2011-2012 HUD ANNUAL ACTION PLAN — AS DETAILED
IN THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item #16D5
CHAIRMAN TO SIGN A RELEASE OF LIEN FOR
COUNTYWIDE IMPACT FEE DEFERRAL — LOCATED AT 4420
BOTANICAL PLACE, UNIT 104, NAPLES
Item #16D6
GRANT AN EXCEPTION TO THE SUSPENSION OF THE
SHORT SALE POLICY FOR A SATISFACTION OF MORTGAGE
FOR STATE HOUSING INITIATIVES PARTNERSHIP
PROGRAM LOAN, ACCEPTING $1,500 TO SATISFY THE
$15,000 VALUE OF THE INITIAL MORTGAGE — LOCATED AT
620 6TH AVE CIRCLE, IMMOKALEE
Item #16D7
AWARD THE INVITATION TO BID NO. 14-6248 "PHARMACY
SERVICES" TO WOOLLEY'S PHARMACY, INC. AND COLLIER
Page 225
October 28, 2014
HEALTH SERVICES, INC. — WOOLLEY'S PHARMACY WILL
PROVIDE SERVICES IN NAPLES AND COLLIER HEALTH
SERVICES PROVIDING SERVICES IN IMMOKALEE
Item #16D8
THE MAKERLAB CLUB APPLICATION WITH 3D SYSTEMS
INC. IN ORDER FOR THE COLLIER COUNTY PUBLIC
LIBRARY TO RECEIVE FOUR 3D PRINTERS FOR PUBLIC
PROGRAMMING USE WITH A VALUE OF $4,000 — THE
PRINTERS WILL BE DONATED BY MAKERLAB CLUB AND
THE FRIENDS OF THE LIBRARY WILL PROVIDE
REPLACEMENT SUPPLIES AS NEEDED
Item #16D9
AWARD RFP #14-6332 FOR EXOTIC VEGETATION REMOVAL
TO SIX FIRMS (IN NO PARTICULAR ORDER): COLLIER
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES; EARTHBALANCE; EARTH
TECH ENVIRONMENTAL, LLC; ENVIRONMENTAL
RESTORATION CONSULTANTS, INC.; KEVIN ERWIN
CONSULTING ECOLOGIST, INC.; AND SANDHILL
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, LLC AND AUTHORIZE THE
CHAIRMAN TO EXECUTE A STANDARD COUNTY
CONTRACT
Item #16D10
APPROPRIATE $36,000 FROM MUSEUM RESERVES TO
PURCHASE AND IMPROVE VACANT LOT #83741560004 IN
EVERGLADES CITY, ACCEPT DONATION OF $30,000 FROM
Page 226
October 28, 2014
THE FRIENDS OF THE MUSEUM OF THE EVERGLADES
TOWARDS ACQUISITION OF THE PROPERTY, APPROVE ALL
TRANSACTION DOCUMENTS, AND APPROVE THE
ATTACHED BUDGET AMENDMENTS — ADDING AN
ADDITIONAL 28 PARKING SPACES AND THE PARKING
AREA WILL ALLOW FOR AFTER-HOURS EVENTS SUCH AS
BICYCLE SAFETY CLASS HELD BY THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE
ANNUALLY
Item #16D11
THE FY 14-15 CONTRACT WITH THE STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH FOR THE OPERATION OF THE
COLLIER COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT IN THE AMOUNT
OF $1,289,500 — THE CONTRACT IS EFFECTIVE UNTIL
SEPTEMBER 30, 2015
Item #16E1
SALE OF AND DISPOSAL OF SURPLUS ASSETS PER
RESOLUTION 2013-095 — FOR VEHICLES AND EQUIPMENT
THAT HAVE BECOME OBSOLETE AND UNECONOMICAL
Item #16E2
RENEW THE NORTH NAPLES FIRE CONTROL AND RESCUE
DISTRICT'S CERTIFICATE OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND
NECESSITY FOR ADVANCED LIFE SUPPORT NON-
TRANSPORT SERVICES FOR ONE YEAR AND AUTHORIZE
THE CHAIRMAN TO EXECUTE THE PERMIT AND
Page 227
October 28, 2014
CERTIFICATE — THE PERMIT WILL COMMENCE ON
JANUARY 1, 2015 AND EXPIRE ON DECEMBER 31, 2015
Item #16F1
RESOLUTION 2014-225: ADOPT A RESOLUTION APPROVING
AMENDMENTS (APPROPRIATING GRANTS, DONATIONS,
CONTRIBUTIONS OR INSURANCE PROCEEDS) TO THE
FISCAL YEAR 2014-15 ADOPTED BUDGET
Item #16G1
AN AMENDMENT TO COLLIER COUNTY AIRPORT
AUTHORITY STANDARD FORM LEASE FOR SALAZAR
MACHINE & STEEL, INC. REVISING THE LIABILITY
INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS — THE AMENDMENT IS
REQUIRED IN ORDER TO REDUCE THE INSURANCE
REQUIREMENTS IN THE ORIGINAL LEASE
Item #16G2
AN AMENDMENT TO COLLIER COUNTY AIRPORT
AUTHORITY STANDARD FORM LEASE FOR FLETCHER
FLYING SERVICES, INC. REVISING THE LIABILITY
INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS RELATED TO THE MOBILE
OFFICE STRUCTURE — THE AMENDMENT IS REQUIRED IN
ORDER TO REDUCE THE INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS IN
THE ORIGINAL LEASE
Item #16H1
Page 228
October 28, 2014
RESOLUTION 2014-226: REAPPOINT A MEMBER TO THE
IMMOKALEE BEAUTIFICATION MSTU ADVISORY
COMMITTEE — REAPPOINTING ANDREA HALMAN WITH
TERM EXPIRING ON SEPTEMBER 23, 2018
Item #16H2
RESOLUTION 2014-227: REAPPOINT ONE MEMBER TO THE
COLLIER COUNTY CITIZENS CORPS — REAPPOINTING LEE
HENDERSON WITH TERM EXPIRING ON NOVEMBER 5, 2018
Item #16H3
RESOLUTION 2014-228: APPOINT TWO MEMBERS TO THE
AFFORDABLE HOUSING ADVISORY COMMITTEE —
APPOINTING IRMA MILLER REPRESENTING THE
ESSENTIAL SERVICES PERSONNEL WITH TERM EXPIRING
ON OCTOBER 1, 2017 AND APPOINTING SHAUN MCMANUS
REPRESENTING RESIDENT IN JURISDICTION WITH TERM
EXPIRING ON OCTOBER 1, 2015
Item #16J1
BOARD DECLARATION OF EXPENDITURES SERVING A
VALID PUBLIC PURPOSE AND APPROVAL OF
DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD OF OCTOBER 9, 2014
THROUGH OCTOBER 15, 2014
Item #16J2
Page 229
October 28, 2014
BOARD DECLARATION OF EXPENDITURES SERVING A
VALID PUBLIC PURPOSE AND APPROVAL OF
DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD OF OCTOBER 16, 2014
THROUGH OCTOBER 22, 2014
Item #16J3
ENDORSE THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
AND UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TREASURY
COMBINED EQUITABLE SHARING AGREEMENT AND
CERTIFICATION THROUGH SEPTEMBER 2015
Item #16K1
AN INCREASE TO THE PURCHASE ORDER FOR NABORS,
GIBLIN & NICKERSON, P.A. ("NABORS GIBLIN") RELATING
TO LEGAL SERVICES IN THE CASE OF COLLIER COUNTY V.
ORANGE TREE UTILITY CO., ET AL, CASE NO. 2014-CA-
001434
Item #16K2
AN AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT FOR LEGAL SERVICES
FOR THE RETENTION AGREEMENT WITH BAKER,
DONELSON, BEARMAN, CALDWELL & BERKOWITZ, P.C. BY
CHANGING THE DATE OF THE AGREEMENT TO BE
SEPTEMBER 1, 2014 TO SEPTEMBER 1, 2016 AND BY
AMENDING EXHIBIT "A" — FOR THE COUNTY'S APPEAL OF
THE FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY'S
DEOBLIGATION OF BEACH RESTORATION FUNDS
Page 230
October 28, 2014
Item #16K3
A MEDIATED SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT IN THE AMOUNT
OF $140,000 ALONG WITH STATUTORY ATTORNEY'S FEES
FOR THE ACQUISITION OF PARCEL 116RDUE IN THE
LAWSUIT STYLED COLLIER COUNTY V. KAYE HOMES,
INC., ET AL, CASE NO. 10-CA-2680, FOR THE COLLIER
BOULEVARD EXPANSION (PROJECT NO. 68056) (FISCAL
IMPACT $80,683.75)
Item #16K4
A MEDIATED SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT IN THE AMOUNT
OF $20,000 ALONG WITH STATUTORY ATTORNEYS FEES
FOR THE ACQUISITION OF PARCEL 117RDUE IN THE
LAWSUIT STYLED COLLIER COUNTY V. TIMOTHY
MALONEY, ET AL, CASE NO. 10-CA-2690, FOR THE COLLIER
BOULEVARD EXPANSION (PROJECT NO. 68056) (FISCAL
IMPACT $14,783)
Item #16K5
A STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT AS TO RTG, LLC, FOR
ATTORNEY'S FEES AND EXPERT FEES AND COSTS
RELATED TO THE TAKING OF PARCELS 119FEE AND
119TCE IN THE CASE STYLED COLLIER COUNTY V. RTG,
LLC, ET AL., CASE NO. 13-CA-259, RELATING TO THE
INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS AT SR 951 (COLLIER
BLVD.) AND US 41 (PROJECT NO. 60116) (FISCAL IMPACT
$16,000)
Page 231
October 28, 2014
Item #16K6
THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE TO MAKE AN OFFER OF
JUDGMENT TO PARTY DEFENDANT, PINEGATE 135, LLC, IN
THE AMOUNT OF $40,001 TO SETTLE ANY AND ALL
APPORTIONMENT CLAIMS RELATED TO THE TAKING OF
PARCELS 150FEE, 150SE AND 150TCE IN THE LAWSUIT
STYLED COLLIER COUNTY V. LDJ ASSOCIATES, LTD., ET
AL., CASE NO. 13-CA-1238 (COLLIER BOULEVARD
EXPANSION PROJECT NO. 68056 FROM GREEN BOULEVARD
TO GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD). FISCAL IMPACT: $40,001
PLUS ATTORNEY FEES AS MAY BE AWARDED BY THE
COURT IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 73.092(2)
Item #16K7
THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN AND RECORD TWO (2)
SATISFACTION OF FINAL JUDGMENT FORMS IN THE CASE
OF ORANGE TREE UTILITY CO. ("OTU") V. COLLIER
COUNTY, CASE NO. 2007-CA-002333, FOR THE PAYMENT OF
TRIAL LEVEL AND APPELLATE LEVEL ATTORNEYS' FEES
AND COSTS BY OTU TO COLLIER COUNTY IN THE TOTAL
AMOUNT, INCLUDING ACCRUED INTEREST, OF $302,938.25
Item #17A
RESOLUTION 2014-229/DEVELOPMENT ORDER 2014-02: A
RESOLUTION AMENDING DEVELOPMENT ORDER 84-1, AS
AMENDED, FOR THE TOLL GATE COMMERCIAL CENTER
DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT BY PROVIDING
FOR: SECTION ONE, AMENDMENTS TO DEVELOPMENT
Page 232
October 28, 2014
ORDER BY EXTENDING THE EXPIRATION DATE AND THE
BUILDOUT DATE TO AUGUST 1, 2021 ; SECTION TWO,
FINDINGS OF FACT; SECTION THREE, CONCLUSIONS OF
LAW; AND SECTION FOUR, EFFECT OF PREVIOUSLY
ISSUED DEVELOPMENT ORDERS, TRANSMITTAL TO
DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY AND
EFFECTIVE DATE. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED
AT THE INTERSECTION OF COLLIER BOULEVARD AND
BECK BOULEVARD IN SECTION 35, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH,
RANGE 26 EAST, AND SECTION 2, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH,
RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA [PETITION
DOA-PL201400005611
Item #17B
ORDINANCE 2014-38: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING
ORDINANCE NUMBER 2004-41, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER
COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, WHICH
ESTABLISHED THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING
REGULATIONS FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, BY AMENDING THE
APPROPRIATE ZONING ATLAS MAP OR MAPS BY
CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF THE HEREIN
DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTY FROM A COMMERCIAL
PROFESSIONAL AND GENERAL OFFICE ZONING DISTRICT
WITHIN THE GATEWAY TRIANGLE MIXED USE OVERLAY -
MIXED USE SUBDISTRICT (C-1-GTMUD-MXD) AND A
RESIDENTIAL MULTI-FAMILY-6 ZONING DISTRICT WITHIN
THE GATEWAY TRIANGLE MIXED USE OVERLAY -
RESIDENTIAL SUBDISTRICT (RMF-6-GTMUD-R) TO A
RESIDENTIAL MULTI-FAMILY-6 ZONING DISTRICT WITHIN
Page 233
October 28, 2014
THE GATEWAY TRIANGLE MIXED USE OVERLAY -
RESIDENTIAL SUBDISTRICT (RMF-6-GTMUD-R) FOR THE
PROJECT KNOWN AS BREEZE OF CALUSA, LOCATED ON
THREE PARCELS JUST SOUTH OF CALUSA AVENUE AND
WEST OF AIRPORT PULLING ROAD IN SECTION 11,
TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY,
FLORIDA, CONSISTING OF 4.69+/- ACRES SUBJECT TO
CONDITIONS; AND BY PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE
[RZ-PL20130001752]
Item #17C
RESOLUTION 2014-230: A RESOLUTION APPROVING
AMENDMENTS (APPROPRIATING CARRY FORWARD,
TRANSFERS AND SUPPLEMENTAL REVENUE) TO THE
FISCAL YEAR 2014-15 ADOPTED BUDGET
Page 234
October 28, 2014
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS/EX
OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF
SPECIAL DISTRICTS UNDER ITS CONTROL
TOM HE IN , I, AIRMAN
ATTEST
DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK
=RAttes1 Chairman's
s'riaitira`otly.
These minutes approved by the Board on t t /1e)/ itt , as presented
or as corrected
TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF GREGORY COURT
REPORTING SERVICE, INC., BY TERRI LEWIS, COURT
REPORTER AND NOTARY PUBLIC.
Page 235