BCC Minutes 10/09/2001 ROctober 9, 2001
REGULAR MEETING
OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OCTOBER 9, 2001
LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Board of County
Commissioners in and for the County of Collier, and also acting as
the Board of Zoning Appeals and as the governing board(s) of such
special districts as have been created according to law and having
conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:10 a.m. In
REGULAR SESSION in Building "F" of the Government Complex,
East Naples, Florida, with the following members present:
CHAIRMAN:
James D. Carter, Ph.D.
VICE-CHAIRMAN:
Pamela S. Mac'kie
Jim Coletta
Donna Fiala
Tom Henning
ALSO PRESENT:
Tom Olliff, County Manager
David C. Weigel, County Attorney
Page 1
COLLIER COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
AGENDA
October 9, 2001
NOTICE: ALL PERSONS WISHING TO SPEAK ON ANY AGENDA ITEM
MUST REGISTER PRIOR TO SPEAKING. SPEAKERS MUST REGISTER
WITH THE COUNTY MANAGER PRIOR TO THE PRESENTATION OF THE
AGENDA ITEM TO BE ADDRESSED.
COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 99-22 REQUIRES THAT ALL
LOBBYISTS SHALL, BEFORE ENGAGING IN ANY LOBBYING ACTIVITIES
(INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, ADDRESSING THE BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS), REGISTER WITH THE CLERK TO THE
BOARD AT THE BOARD MINUTES AND RECORDS DEPARTMENT.
REQUESTS TO ADDRESS THE BOARD ON SUBJECTS WHICH ARE NOT ON
THIS AGENDA MUST BE SUBMITTED IN WRITING WITH EXPLANATION
TO THE COUNTY MANAGER AT LEAST 13 DAYS PRIOR TO THE DATE OF
THE MEETING AND WILL BE HEARD UNDER "PUBLIC PETITIONS".
ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THIS BOARD
WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS PERTAINING THERETO,
AND THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD
OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE
TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED.
ALL REGISTERED PUBLIC SPEAKERS WILL BE LIMITED TO FIVE (5)
MINUTES UNLESS PERMISSION FOR ADDITIONAL TIME IS GRANTED BY
THE CHAIRMAN.
IF YOU ARE A PERSON WITH A DISABILITY WHO NEEDS ANY
ACCOMMODATION IN ORDER TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS PROCEEDING,
1
October 9, 2001
YOU ARE ENTITLED, AT NO COST TO YOU, TO THE PROVISION OF
CERTAIN ASSISTANCE. PLEASE CONTACT THE COLLIER COUNTY
FACILITIES MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT LOCATED AT 3301 EAST
TAMIAMI TRAIL, NAPLES, FLORIDA, 34112, (941) 774-8380; ASSISTED
LISTENING DEVICES FOR THE HEARING IMPAIRED ARE AVAILABLE IN
THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' OFFICE.
LUNCH RECESS SCHEDULED FOR 12:00 NOON TO 1:00 P.M.
1. INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
A. Reverend Harold Brown, Lely Presbyterian Church
®
AGENDA AND MINUTES
Ae
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
H.
Approval of today's regular, consent and summary agenda as amended
September 6, 2001 BCC Budget Public Hearing
September 6, 2001 Health Care Workshop
September 11, 2001 Regular BCC Meeting
September 12, 2001 Pelican Bay Budget Public Hearing
September 14, 2001 Emergency Meeting
September 18,2001 Code Enforcement Workshop
September 19, 2001 BCC Budget Public Hearing
3e
4e
PROCLAMATIONS
Ae
Proclamation to recognize the week of October 7-13,2001 as "National 4-H
Week". To be accepted by Ms. Shirene Provenza.
Be
Proclamation to designate the Month of October 2001 as Mental Illness
Awareness Month. To be accepted by Ms. Kathryn Leib Hunter, Executive
Director of NAMI, the National Alliance for the Mentally Ill.
Proclamation to recognize and encourage the Ecumenical Coalition. To be
accepted by Rayburn Cadwallader.
SERVICE AWARDS
Five-Year Attendees:
2
October 9, 2001
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
8)
9)
lO)
Anthony Gracia, Wastewater
Carla Fogle, Utility Billing
Tony Barry, Transportation
Ralph McKellar, Solid Waste
Diana Watson, EMS
Carole Esposito, Water Department
Kellie West, EMS
Tishya Arthurs, Building Review
Keith Maycroft, Road and Bridge
Mario Garcia, Wastewater Collections
Ten-Year Attendees:
11)
12)
Carl Gibson, Pollution Control
Edward Kant, Transportation
Fifteen-Year Attendee:
13) Roger Baase, Parks and Recreation
5. PRESENTATIONS
A. Presentation of the EMS Phoenix Awards.
6. PUBLIC PETITIONS AND COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS
A. Public Comments on General Topics
7. BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
Ae
THIS ITEM WAS CONTINUED FROM THE SEPTEMBER 25, 2001
BCC MEETING. This item requires that all participants be sworn in and
ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission members. VA-2001-AR-
979, Terrance Kepple, of Kepple Engineering, representing Shader-
Lombardo Properties, LLC, requesting a 12.1 foot variance from the
Vanderbilt Villas PUD required distance between structure setback of 20
feet to 7.9 feet for property located at 515 Roma Court, further described as
Lot 22, Vanderbilt Villas, in Section 21, Township 48 South, Range 25 East,
Collier County, Florida.
3
October 9, 2001
8. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS
This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte
disclosure be provided by Commission members. Petition RZ-2001-AR-
45 l, Walter H. Rascher, Jr. and Lisa J. Rascher representing Ester and
Francis Rascher, requesting a rezone from its current zoning classification of
"A" Rural Agricultural to "RSF-3" residential single family district, the
subject property is located on the North side of Polly Avenue approximately
one half a mile North of Rattlesnake Hammock Road in Section 16,
Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. This site
consists of 4.55 acres.
Be
THIS ITEM WAS CONTINUED FROM THE SEPTEMBER 11, 2001
BCC MEETING AND IS FURTHER CONTINUED TO THE
OCTOBER 23, 2001 BCC MEETING. This item requires that all
participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission
members. Petition PUDA-2001-AR-500, R. Bruce Anderson, Esq., of
Young, Vanassenderp, Varnadoe and Anderson, P.A., representing the
Skinner and Broadbent Development Company, Inc., contract purchaser,
requesting to repeal the current Falling Waters Beach Resort PUD and to
adopt a new PUD for the purpose o£ adding self-storage (SIC #4225) to the
list of permitted uses and removing some of the permitted uses including
restaurants, fast food restaurants, food markets and automobile service
stations from Collier Boulevard (CR 951) approximately 400 feet North of
Tamiami Trail and Collier Boulevard intersection in Section 3, Township 51
South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, the Falling Waters PUD
consists of 74.37 acres, the Community Commercial Tracts consist of 4+
acres.
THIS ITEM CONTINUED FROM THE SEPTEMBER 25, 2001 BCC
MEETING. This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte
disclosure be provided by Commission members. PUDA-2001-AR-702,
Margaret Perry, AICP, o£Wilson Miller Inc., representing Eagle Creek
Properties Inc. requesting an amendment to the Eagle Creek PUD having the
effect of amending the PUD documents to allow self storage facilities and
related accessory structures for the exclusive use of Eagle Creek residents as
a permitted use, for property located at 401 Tower Road, in Section 3,
Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, consisting of
298+ acres.
4
October 9, 2001
9e
De
This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte
disclosure be provided by Commission members. PUD-92-08(1), RWA,
Inc., representing William T. Higgs, requesting a rezone from PUD to PUD
known as White Lake Industrial Park PUD having the effect of changing the
name to White Lake Corporate Park PUD, increasing the industrial land use
from 67.4 acres to 77.3 acres, changing the zoning of 7.8 acres from
industrial to commercial, reducing the area of the lakes from 44.1 acres to
36.6 acres and the area of the conservation/open space from 22.1 acres to 9.3
acres, and changing the property ownership, for property located Northeast
of and adjacent to the intersection 1-75 and Collier Boulevard (C.R. 951), in
Section 35, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
A. Appointment of member to the Black Affairs Advisory Board.
Be
Appointment of members to the Lely Golf Estates Beautification Advisory
Committee.
C. THIS ITEM WAS CONTINUED FROM THE SEPTEMBER 25~ 2001
10.
De
Ee
BCC MEETING. Finalize the Annual Performance Appraisal Process for
the County Attorney.
Board of County Commissioners approval of Operation Weed and Seed
Program Memorandum of Agreement. (Commissioner Coletta)
Discussion by Board of County Commissioners to assist Mosquito Control
with the petition process to survey Golden Gate Estates residents for
spraying by Mosquito Control. (Commissioner Henning)
COUNTY MANAGER'S REPORT
ge
Recommendation to conceptually approve and authorize the staff to develop
a Citizen's Oversight Committee for the Referendum of Roads. (Thomas W.
Olliff, County Manager)
Be
Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners confirm James
V. Mudd as the Collier County Deputy County Manager and Leo E. Ochs,
Jr., as the Assistant County Manager. (Thomas W. Olliff, County Manager)
5
October 9, 2001
C. THIS ITEM WAS CONTINUED FROM THE SEPTEMBER 11~ 2001
De'
te
BCC MEETING. Adoption of an Ordinance amending Chapter 74 of the
County's Code of Laws and Ordinances, as previously amended by
Ordinance No. 2001-13 (The Collier County Consolidated Impact Fee
Ordinance). (Phil Tindall, Impact Fee Coordinator)
Construct South County Water Reclamation Facility Expansion, Project
73949. (James V. Mudd, Public Utilities Administrator)
Approve Funding for Tropical Storm Gabrielle Beach Recovery. (James V.
Mudd, Public Utilities Administrator)
11. AIRPORT AUTHORITY
12. COUNTY ATTORNEY'S REPORT
13. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
14.
15.
FUTURE AGENDAS
STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS
16.
CONSENT AGENDA - All matters listed under this item are considered to be
routine and action will be taken by one motion without separate discussion of
each item. If discussion is desired by a member of the Board, that item(s) will
be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered separately.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
1)
Authorization to utilize staff as a resource to assist the Weed and Seed
Program in Immokalee.
2)
Request to approve for recording the final plat of "Ibis Cove Phase
One-A".
3)
Request to approve for recording the final plat of "Berkshire
Commons Parcel 1, 2 and 3".
6
October 9, 2001
Be
4)
Approve an agreement to accept an artificial reef grant from the
Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission.
5) Adopt Resolutions enforcing liens on properties for Code Violations.
6)
60-Day Extension of the 2001 Tourism Agreement between Collier
County and the Tourism Alliance of Collier County.
TRANSPORTATION SERVICES
1)
Resolution authorizing the application and execution of the FY 2001
Section 5307 Grant Application with the Federal Transit
Administration (FTA).
2)
Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners award two
Annual Bids, #01-3251 (Concrete and Metal Culvert Pipe) and #01-
3256 (Asphalt and Related Items) for Fiscal Year 2001/2002.
3)
Approve the Facilities Relocation Agreement with Florida Power and
Light Company to relocate and reconfigure power poles on Goodlette-
Frank Road between Pine Ridge Road and Vanderbilt Beach Road to
facilitate the road-widening project, Project No. 60134.
4)
Adopt a Resolution approving, as serving a valid public purpose, the
expenditure of county funds for expenditures incurred at the August
30, 2001 ribbon cutting and groundbreaking ceremony of Livingston
Road, Phase I.
5)
Request Board approve a Landscape Maintenance Agreement among
The Estuary at Grey Oaks and the Estuary Property Owners'
Association, the City of Naples and Collier County.
6)
Award Bid #01-3281, "Bayshore-Avalon Beautification Municipal
Services Taxing Unit (MSTU) Roadway Grounds Maintenance".
7)
Award of RFP 01-3234 "Bus Stop Shelters" for Immokalee Circulator
and Collier Area Transit (CAT).
8)
Approve the placement of two "Welcome to Golden Gate Estates"
signs for the Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association within
7
October 9, 2001
County roadway rights-of-way.
Ce
De
Ee
PUBLIC UTILITIES
1) Approve Professional Engineering Services Agreement with Water
Resource Solutions, Inc., for the North County Water Reclamation
Facility Deep Injection Well, RFP 00-3122, Project 73948.
2) Approve Committee Selection of firms for Contract #01-3271
"Professional Engineering Services for Coastal Zone Management
Projects".
3) This item has been deleted.
4) Adopt a Resolution to support implementation of aquifer storage and
recovery technologies to protect the environment and public water
supplies.
5) This item has been deleted.
6) To obtain Board approval for an Interlocal Agreement between the
Property Appraiser and the Board of County Commissioners for use
of the Geographical Information System (GIS) Digital Data and
Topography acquired by the Property Appraiser in FY-2000.
PUBLIC SERVICES
1) Presentation of the Annual 2001 Report of the Collier County Film
Commission.
2) Award Bid #01-3250, Portable Toilet Rentals to J. W. Draft, Inc. and
Waste Management of Collier County, Inc., on a primary/secondary
basis.
3) Recommendation to award bid #01-3252 for the purchase of turf used
by Collier County.
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
8
October 9, 2001
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
8)
9)
Approve a Budget Amendment to appropriate the maintenance service
revenues for reimbursement of operating expenses.
Convey a Conservation Easement to South Florida Water
Management District required for the construction of the Collier
County Animal Shelter.
Authorize staff to reject bids received for 01-3268, Charter Bus
Service and re-bid.
Approve an additional thirty (30) day extension of Contract #97-2671,
Office Supplies.
Recommendation to declare the Neopost Mail Equipment as surplus
and authorize the sale of equipment to Mail Barcoding Services of
SWFL, Inc.
To award Bid #01-3259, Irrigation Parts and Related Items.
Award Bid No. 01-3260, Herbicides/Pesticides/Fungicides to a variety
of bidders.
Approve the Award of Bid No. 01-3273 to Truegreen Landcare, Inc.,
for grounds maintenance for Main Government Complex.
Approve the Award of Bid No. 01-3274 to Commercial Land
Maintenance Inc., for grounds maintenance for Main Satellite
Facilities.
Fe
EMERGENCY SERVICES
1)
Approve an Emergency Medical Services (EMS) County Grant
Application and County Grant Distribution Form, adopt a Resolution
certifying that the Grant monies will not be used to supplant the
existing Emergency Medical Services Budget and approve a Budget
Amendment to recognize and appropriate revenue.
G. COUNTY MANAGER
9
October 9, 2001
1)
2)
3)
Board authorization for Payment of Invoices for services pertaining to
election requirements and Town Hall Meeting for the Pelican Bay
Services District, Ordinance No. 2000-82.
To adopt a Resolution approving amendments to the Fiscal Year
2000-01 Adopted Budget.
Approval of Budget Amendment Report - Budget Amendment #01-
524.
He
Je
AIRPORT AUTHORITY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
1)
Satisfaction of Lien: NEED MOTION authorizing the Chairman to
sign Satisfaction of Lien for Services of the Public Defender for Case
Nos.: 90-2783-MMA, 86-675-CFA, 84-2979-TM, 84-3430-TM, 95-
2179-CFA, 88-1781-MM, 88-2004-TMC, 89-2211-MM, 89-2905-
TMC, 87-3796-TMC, 96-6987-MMA, 91-292-MM, 90-5008-MM,
89-6788-TM, 90-2945-TM, 89-1390 CFA, 89-3285-MMA, 97-1485-
CFA, 91-887-CFB, 90-4733- TM, 84-1046-TM and 94-1099-CJA;
RECOMMEND APPROVAL.
2)
MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS TO FILE FOR RECORD WITH
ACTION AS DIRECTED.
Ke
3)
4)
5)
Districts: Minutes and Agendas.
Minutes: Advisory Committees.
Letter from Guy L. Carlton, Collier County Tax Collector - 2001-
2002 Budget Amendment.
OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
1)
Authorize a borrowing from the Pooled Commercial Paper Loan
Program in an amount not to exceed $2,300,000 for the acquisition
and implementation of a fully integrated financial management
l0
October 9, 2001
17.
system.
L. COUNTY ATTORNEY
1)
Execute Satisfaction of Code Enforcement Lien established in Collier
County v. Todd A. Mastro and Lisa A. Mastro.
2)
That the Board of County Commissioners accept an Offer of
Judgment and approve the Stipulated Final Judgment to be created
based on the same terms and conditions as the Offer of Judgment for
Parcel 163 in the Case entitled Collier County v. Russell Baisley, et al,
(Livingston Road, Project No. 60071).
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.
Ae
This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte
disclosure be provided by Commission members. Petition CCSL-2001-3,
AJ Smith of Recreational Facilities of America Inc., requesting a coastal
construction setback line variance to allow construction of a dune walkover,
chickee hut, designated storage area for a beach concession and a pathway
landward of the beach, located at the Collier County Barefoot Beach Park,
Sections 7, 8, 17 and 18, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier
County, FL.
B. This item has been deleted.
This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte
disclosure be provided by Commission members. Petition CCSL-2001-2,
Don Cahill representing William G. Reckmeyer, requesting a Coastal
October 9, 200~1
Construction Setback Line Variance to allow for construction of a single
family residence, located at Lot 9, Block C, Unit 1, Lely Barefoot Beach,
Section 6, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida.
18. ADJOURN
INQUIRIES CONCERNING CHANGES TO THE BOARD'S AGENDA SHOULD
BE MADE TO THE COUNTY MANAGER'S OFFICE AT 774-8383.
12
October 9, 2001
October 9, 2001
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. Good morning, ladies and
gentlemen. Welcome to the Board of County Commissioners
meeting this date of October 9th. It is now 9:10. If you would join
me for the invocation and pledge of allegiance. Invocation led by the
Reverend Harold Brown of Lely Presbyterian Church.
REV. BROWN: Let us pray. Our Father, we thank you for
another beautiful day in a very lovely city. Our hearts are so heavy
about other cities, though, that have been touched by disaster, and we
cannot begin this day without thanks for health and life and daily
bread as we are concerned for all that you represent to us of comfort,
solace, hope, and encouragement and confidence in the presence of
what might escalate into a very difficult long-term battle in the world
to preserve democracy.
We thank you for our wonderful country. We thank you for
each other, and we pray that we might somehow or another make
those who are making extra efforts getting on planes to go into
foreign locations, hitting the line to rescue folks, how grateful we are
for all of these persons who are putting their lives on the line in order
that we might enjoy beautiful Naples and the democracy of this
wonderful country.
So bring us together, oh, Lord, around higher motives authored
by your love however we see that love expressed in your superior
power, but most of all in your superior love. Wherever you are,
whatever you mean to each of us, we unite in praising those things
that touch us deeper than ourselves and the material to provide
serious spiritual sustenance, strength and encouragement and hope.
Help us to share that, and we thank you. Amen.
(The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Good morning, again. Good morning,
Commissioners.
Page 2
October 9, 2001
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Good morning.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Good morning, James.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I see two of the commissioners have
been to their hairdressers since we last met.
They look good.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Me?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I think it's you, Tom.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: No. It's him.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Good morning, Mr. Olliff.
Item #2A
CONSENT, SUMMARY AND REGULAR AGENDA-APPROVED
AND/OR ADOPTED WITH CHANGES
MR. OLLIFF: Good morning, Mr. Chairman. Board members,
I'll be smart enough to stay away from hairstyles this morning, and
I'll just walk you straight through your change list.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: That's why you're the smart one.
MR. OLLIFF: First item on your change list is a withdrawal.
It's Item 7-A on your agenda. You will recall this was an item that
was continued from the September 25th meeting. It was a variance
request, VA-2001-AR-979. It is being requested by the petitioner to
be withdrawn at this point.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Mr. Olliff, they are aware that if they
withdraw and they continue as they're doing that they will certainly
be subject to violations and code enforcement?
MR. OLLIFF: Yes, sir. As the Board will recall, this was an
after-the-fact variance. The violation of the setbacks were in place
and constructed, and that violation would stand, and we would
proceed with code enforcement prosecution of that.
Page 3
October 9, 2001
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All right. Thank you.
MR. OLLIFF: Item 8-A has also been requested to be
withdrawn by the petitioner. It was a rezoning request. It was
Petition RZ-2001-AR-451. Again, that's Item 8-A that's been
requested to be withdrawn by the petitioner.
Next item is Item 8-D, as in "David," on your agenda, and it's
been requested by Commissioner Henning that that item be continued
for a period o£ two weeks. It doesn't show that on your index, but
we're requesting a two-week continuance or until the first meeting --
actually, the second meeting in October, October 23. That was
PUD-92-08(1).
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Just a question. Since that
wasn't on the change list, hadn't anticipated that one, is there delay in
the project? Is there staff support for that continuance? Is there a
problem if we continue two weeks?
MR. OLLIFF: I don't believe so. I've notified the petitioner,
and the petitioner has I believe, notified the owner o£ the property.
And I believe everybody's in agreement in terms of that two-week
continuance.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I'm sorry. I must be on the
wrong one. Which -- which item did you say?
MR. OLLIFF: 8-D, as in "David."
CHAIRMAN CARTER: B as in "boy."
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I'm sorry. I was on D as in
"dog," and I was wondering about our South Treatment Plant.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, D as in "David."
CHAIRMAN CARTER: That's all right. I know these
short-termers have a little problem here.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Oh, hush yourself.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: It's White Lake; right?
MR. OLLIFF: The item that is being continued is the White
Page 4
October 9, 2001
Lake Industrial Park PUD, 8-D as in "David."
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Thank you. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I got it right.
MR. OLLIFF: Okay. The next item is a request in timing, Mr.
Chairman. It's Item 10-B, as in "boy." That is a staff item asking for
confirmation o£both the deputy and assistant county manager, and
I'm requesting for some scheduling reasons that we hear that directly
after Item 6 on your agenda so that it would be the first regular staff
item heard this morning.
The last change on the list is a move from 10-C to 8-F. The item
was an advertised public hearing. It's an adoption of an ordinance,
and it was inadvertently put on your agenda index under the county
manager's portion of the agenda, and it needs to be shown under the
advertised public hearings portion of the agenda. It is amendments to
an ordinance, and it needs to show up on that particular location.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Which item is that?
MR. OLLIFF: That was Item 10-C.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Tom, and it's going to 8-F, did you
say?
MR. OLLIFF: If it's going to be heard on this agenda, it would
need to be heard under 8-F.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: What's 8-E?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Which is now 8-E because we --
MR. OLLIFF: I'm sorry, 8-E.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
MR. OLLIFF: 8-E. Mr. Chairman, that's all the changes that
I'm recommending this morning.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All right. Mr. Weigel.
MR. WEIGEL: No. No further changes from county attorney.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. I'd like to have on the
Page 5
October 9, 2001
consent agenda 16-B-8 pulled. Discussion. 16-B-8.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Can you tell us just what that is?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. It's the Golden Gates
Estates Civic Association welcome sign and $125 permit fee waiver.
MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Chairman, that would become Item 10-F on
your agenda under the county manager's report.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Anything else, Mr. -- Commissioner
Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No. That would -- that would
be it for now. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No. Nothing. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Commissioner Mac'Kie.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: One item under
communications, please.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Item 10-C which became 8-E,
Collier County Consolidated Impact Fee Ordinance, I understand
there is a need to move the airport's item through because of timing,
but the other language I would like to check with a couple not-for-
profit organizations and see how that fits their needs. Also there are
some language in there that would take quite lengthy discussion. I
don't think it's proper. So I would ask that to continue to next month.
And the other one, I would like to pull 16-A-3, Berkshire
Commons plats.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Final plat of Berkshire Commons,
that's A-3 -- 16-A-3, and that would go where?
MR. OLLIFF: That would become Item 10-G, again, under the
county manager's portion of the regular agenda.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Isn't that 10-G Golden Gate
Estates Civic Association--
Page 6
October 9, 2001
COMMISSIONER FIALA:
COMMISSIONER HENNING:
CHAIRMAN CARTER: 10-F.
COMMISSIONER HENNING:
COMMISSIONER COLETTA:
That's 10-F.
10-F?
Okay.
Excuse me, Commissioner
Henning, you wanted to move the ordinance forward two weeks, is
that what you wanted to do?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No. Part of the ordinance I
would like to continue to next month. They're talking to our county
manager. There is a need to move part of the ordinance which would
be the Airport Authority.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And I would like to move that
today -- hear that today.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And you would like to have the
rest of it deferred until you can do a little more research into it?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: For next month.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I have no problem with that.
I've been spending quite a bit of time on the wording for the other
part. I would more than welcome your input, and that I don't think is
-- well, on second thought possibly it is.
Friendship House is running up against the --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We've got till the end of this
year.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: What's -- what's -- I'm not too
sure on the timing of that.
MR. OLLIFF: I don't either. Sitting here today I couldn't tell
you what the exact timing on that particular project is.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Would two weeks -- for you?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, the -- those type of
impact fee waivers -- we're still going to have plenty of time by the
Page 7
October 9, 2001
end of the Year which, you know, is December 31 st.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: But they have to pay them when
they get their building permits, so -- so it will stop a project.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And they still have to pay them
-- pay during their building permits; it's just whether it comes back to
us and whether we accept a reduction of those impact fees.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: If I -- if I may, I have no
problem with delaying it to the next meeting, but I really don't want
to see a delay any longer than that. It's -- there's many agencies out
there that would benefit from this if it happened in a timely manner.
They've been planning their whole building program around it.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Is it possible -- I know Mr.
Weigel's in the middle of a conversation probably about this topic,
but is it possible to consider part of this ordinance and not all of it?
MR. WEIGEL: Yes, Commissioner, it is. What we do would
carve out, make the record very clear what elements of the ordinance
are to be discussed and then would be discussed today and/or
approved after consideration, and we would probably need to
readvertise and bring back the other elements of the ordinance as an
-- either an ordinance amendment or stand-alone ordinance a month
from now or whenever the board decides.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: IfI could just understand, then,
the part where you're -- you're suggesting that we do talk today about
the not-for-profit section of the impact fee ordinance?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Not correct.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Not correct. What they want to do is
not talk about not-for-profit today. Everything else could be
discussed and voted on by the board, and that element would come
back, you pick the period, 30 days, two weeks or whatever.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Two weeks.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And the reason for that?
Page 8
October 9, 2001
I just don't get that. One more time. I need to understand that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, if you read the language
in the ordinance, there's a lot of federal codes that deals with it, and I
know you being a lawyer you probably understand that. Being
myself I don't, and some of those things that we need to -- I need to
feel comfortable with. And, besides, there's a couple of not-for-profit
organizations, and I don't know -- I would like to have their input
in--
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: You just weren't able to get that
by today.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I wasn't able to get that, and I
have a heavy speaking schedule for the rest of this month.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: If-- if I may make a
suggestion. Why don't we bring it up for discussion today and then
move it forward so that you have a better direction of what you're
looking for and what's been done at this point in time, and we can
have legal counsel tell you where we are with it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. So we can go ahead and
have the discussion and then continue that portion onto next month.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: If you deem it's necessary and
everyone else does, I have no problem with that.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: How's that?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I think maybe we can -- we get a sense
of what's -- areas you want to do and work with, and then you can
work with legal. But that section could be continued; the other part
could be voted upon today.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And yet maybe somewhere during
a break you could call Friendship House -- because that's your main
concern -- and see if they could handle one month or if they needed it
for two weeks.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, why don't we -- why don't we
Page 9
October 9, 2001
get to that point, have the discussion, and let everybody do what they
need to do.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Okay.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Any other changes, Commissioner
Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENN1NG: No, sir.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Commissioner Mac'Kie.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: You already did mine.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I did yours. You're okay. I have
none.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Permission to approve the
regular, consent, and summary agenda with the changes noted.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Prior to voting on this, I must disclose
on summary agenda CCSL-2001-2, Mr. Don Cahill representing the
petitioner is a member of my Rotary club. He has not discussed this
item with me, but I am disclosing so that everyone will be
comfortable based on the recent publicity. Thank you.
We have a motion. We have a second. Do we have public
speakers, Mr. Olliff?
MR. OLLIFF: No, sir.
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
(Unanimous response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
All in favor signify by saying aye.
Opposed by the same sign.
Motion carries. Thank you.
Page 10
AGENDA CHANGES
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' MEETING
October 9, 2001
WITHDRAW: Item 7A THIS ITEM WAS CONTINUED FROM THE
SEPTEMBER 25, 2001 BCC MEETING. This item requires that all
participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be provided by
Commission members. VA-2001-AR-979, Terrance Kepple, of Kepple
Engineering, representing Shader-Lombardo Properties, LLC, requesting a
12.1 foot variance from the Vanderbilt Villas PUD required distance
between structure setback of 20 feet to 7.9 feet for property located at 515
Roma Court, further described as Lot 22, Vanderbilt Villas, in Section 21,
Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. (Petitioner
request.)
WITHDRAW: Item 8A Petition RZ-2001-AR-451, Walter H. Rascher, Jr. and
Lisa J. Rascher representing Ester and Francis Rascher, requesting a
rezone from its current zoning classification of "A" Rural Agricultural to
"RSF-3" residential single family district, the subject property is located on
the North side of Polly Avenue approximately one half a mile North of
Rattlesnake Hammock Road in Section 16, Township 50 South, Range 26
East, Collier County, Florida. This site consists of 4.55 acres. (Petitioner
request.)
CONTINUE: Item 8D: PUD-92-08(1), RWA, Inc., representing William T.
Higgs, requesting a rezone from PUD to PUD known as White Lake
Industrial Park PUD having the effect of changing the name to White Lake
Corporate Park PUD, increasing the industrial land use from 67.4 acres to
77.3 acres, changing the zoning of 7.8 acres from industrial to commercial,
reducing the area of the lakes from 44.1 acres to 36.6 acres and the area of
the conservation/open space from 22.1 acres to 9.3 acres, and changing
the property ownership, for property located Northeast of and adjacent to
the intersection 1-75 and Collier Boulevard (C.R. 951), in Section 35,
Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. (Commissioner
Henning request.)
ITEM 10B TO BE HEARD IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING ITEM 6A - Confirm
James V. Mudd as the Collier County Deputy County Manager and Leo
Ochs, Jr., as the Assistant County Manager. (Staff request.)
MOVE: Item 10C to 8,F THIS ITEM WAS CONTINUED FROM THE
SEPTEMBER 11, 2001 BCC MEETING. Adoption of an Ordinance amending
Chapter 74 of the County's Code of Laws and Ordinances, as previously
amended by Ordinance No. 2001-13 (The Collier County Consolidated
Impact Fee Ordinance). (Staff request.)
October 9, 2001
Item #2B, 2C, 2D, 2E, 2F, 2G and 2H
MINUTES OF THE SEPTEMBER 6, 2001 BUDGET PUBLIC
HEARING, SEPTEMBER 6, 2001 HEALTH CARE WORKSHOP,
SEPTEMBER 11,2001 REGULAR MEETING, SEPTEMBER 12,
2001 PELICAN BAY BUDGET PUBLIC HEARING, SEPTEMBER
14, 2001 EMERGENCY MEETING, SEPTEMBER 18,2001 CODE
ENFORCEMENT WORKSHOP AND SEPTEMBER 19, 2001
BUDGET PUBLIC HEARING- APPROVED AS PRESENTED
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Motion to approve the minutes
of September 6th -- Budget Public Hearing September 6 Health Care
Workshop September l lth, 12th, 14th, 18th and 19th. We didn't
have enough meetings in September.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I have a motion by Commissioner
Mac'Kie. I have a second by Commissioner Henning. All in favor
signify by saying aye.
(Unanimous response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Opposed by the same sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Motion carries. Takes us to
proclamations, 3-A, Commissioner Fiala.
Item #3A
PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING THE WEEK OF OCTOBER 7-
13, 2001 AS "NATIONAL 4-H WEEK"- ADOPTED
COMMISSIONER FIALA:
for coming up. Proclamation;
Yes.
This is for 4-H. Thank you
Page 11
October 9, 2001
Whereas, the goal of 4-H is to provide educational opportunities
for the youth and adult volunteers in Collier County in the areas of
leadership, citizenship, personal development and practical skills;
and,
Whereas, these activities have resulted in learning experiences
and accomplishments that have received state and national
recognition; and
Whereas, the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County
feels this 4-H program contributes to the overall development of our
youth and strengthens our communities; and,
Whereas, the 4-H members receive inspiration and guidance
from interested parents, cooperative extension service workers, and
staff volunteer adult and teen leaders and support from many
community organizations and businesses; and,
Whereas, 4-H forms partnerships and collaborates with other
youth-serving organizations and agencies to reach a wide and diverse
audience.
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that the week of October
7th through the 13th, 2001 be designated as National 4-H Week, and
all citizens of Collier County are urged to join the board in giving
appropriate recognition to the achievements of the 4-H Clubs of
Collier County.
Done and ordered this 9th day of October.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Whoa, whoa, whoa. Formality, we
need a motion for approval.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So moved.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Second.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I have motion for approval. I have a
second. All in favor signify by saying aye.
Page 12
October 9, 2001
(Unanimous response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
applaud.
(Applause.)
Opposed by the same sign.
Motion carries. Now you can
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Linda, come on up and just say hi.
MS. PROVENZA: Good morning. I'm Shirene Provenza
representing the 4-H County Council and a member of the
Discoverers 4-H Club. I've been a member of 4-H for four years. On
behalf of the 4-H club members, I thank the commission, county
administrators, and personnel, our extension agents, civic clubs,
businesses, schools, and 4-H volunteers for your time, support, and
commitment to youth development through 4-H.
Throughout the past years approximately 3,000 boys and girls
ages 5 through 18 from backgrounds in their families throughout the
county participated in traditional 4-H clubs, school enrichment, and
through collaborating youth-serving agencies. Over 200 adult
volunteers volunteered their time to make these opportunities
possible. 4-H emphasizes practical skills, public speaking,
recordkeeping, and knowledge in a wide variety of project areas
including animal science, citizenship and leadership, health and
safety, individual and family resources and environmental sciences.
As a 4-H'er I was privileged to participate in the 4-H
ambassador program where students are trained in subjects such as
etiquette and public speaking. The students go on to earn recognition
as a state 4-H ambassador representing all of Florida 4-H in our own
area. I was pleased to receive the first-place trophy and medal in the
statewide competition for this program.
For the past three years, I have been one of 20 Collier teens who
received statewide recognition in competition at 4-H Congress held at
Page 13
October 9, 2001
the University of Florida where state elections are also held. This
year a Collier teen was elected state 4-H council secretary. Three
Collier teens also were awarded trips to National 4-H Congress. One
teen will also be competing in national engineering events in
automotives held in Indiana, and two teens competed in regional
horse events in Memphis. Collier County youth also won three out of
six top awards presented at 4-H Legislature in Tallahassee.
4-H helps us learn to work together as a group, making decisions
and following through on our responsibilities, and we have a lot of
fun. This is the centennial year for 4-H, and we'll be participating in
a national conversation on youth development with other counties
throughout the country. 4-H clubs are reorganizing this fall, and 4-H
projects are also being conducted in classrooms and other youth-
serving agencies. We invite the citizens of Collier County to join us
in helping make a positive difference. Again, thank you for your
support.
Item #3B
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING THE MONTH OF OCTOBER
2001 AS MENTAL ILLNESS AWARENESS MONTH-
ADOPTED
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you. Okay. Proclamation B on
mental health and mental aware -- health awareness month.
Commissioner Mac'Kie.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
come up to accept this proclamation.
If Kathryn Leib Hunter would
While you're coming up, I'm
going to start reading it. It's a long one, but it's got a lot of important
information in it.
Whereas, the strongest weapon in the fight against mental illness
Page 14
October 9, 2001
is science, during the past decade, a wide array of effective new
medications for severe mental illness have been developed. Genetic
discoveries and progressive brain research continue moving us one
step closer to sound medical answers for living with and perhaps one
day even curing or preventing severe mental illnesses; and,
Whereas, a new perception of mental illness is emerging, one
that focuses on early intervention, effective treatment, rehabilitation
and recovery, no area of health care is changing more than mental
health. Advances are prompted by better science and more research,
the information revolution, the important role consumers play in
advocating for themselves, and family members who speak out for
their loved ones; and,
Whereas, barriers to mental illness recovery are falling one by
one, more than 30 states have adopted measures to ensure health
insurance parity. In addition, PACT, which stands for Program for
Assertive Community Treatment, a 24-hour-a-day, 7-day-a-week
mobile service program for persons with the most severe mental
illnesses is being replicated in communities throughout the country;
and,
Whereas, treatment works if a person with mental illness can get
it, science has greatly expanded our understanding and treatments of
severe mental illnesses. Once forgotten in the back wards of mental
institutions, individuals with these disorders have a real chance for
reclaiming full and productive lives, but only if they have access to
the treatments, services, and programs so vital to recovery; and,
Whereas, the nation's mental health care system is in crisis
despite the tremendous strides in the fight against mental illness, far
too many still struggle to get access to treatments and services that
we know are critical to recovery. The system denies access to the
latest medications and limits funding for essential programs. The
results have been disastrous. Persons with mental illness are dying in
Page 15
October 9, 2001
restraints on hospital wards. They are committing suicide. They are
being shot or warehoused in prison. They are discriminated against
in the workplace, or they are living wasted, isolated lives unnoticed
by anyone when they could again become part of their communities;
and,
Whereas, research on mental illness is significantly underfunded
in relation to its economic and public health impact. Depression,
bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, and obsessive-compulsive disorder
account for an estimated 20 percent of the world's total disability
resulting from all diseases and injuries, yet for every U.S. Taxpayer
dollar spent on medical research, less than one cent is allocated to
schizophrenia, one of the most disabling mental illnesses; and,
Whereas, stigma continues to be the single most significant
barrier to people getting the help they need. As underscored by the
U.S. Surgeon General David Satcher in his 1999 landmark report on
mental health, stigma towards mental illness remains a pervasive and
potentially lethal barrier to mental illness recovery.
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that the month of October
2001 be designated as Mental Illness Awareness Month. Done and
ordered this 9th day of October 2001, Board of County
Commissioners, Collier County, Florida, James Carter, Chairman.
I move acceptance of this proclamation.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I have a move for acceptance.
I have a second. All in favor signify by saying aye.
(Unanimous response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
Opposed by the same sign.
Motion carries.
(Applause.)
Page 16
October 9, 2001
MS. HUNTER: One of the highlights of the proclamation each
year is that I get to see Linda Denning one time every year at 4-H --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: The same time.
MS. HUNTER: I get to see some of you at the same time.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: That's right.
MS. HUNTER: But seriously, on behalf of the board of
directors ofNAMI, I appreciate this proclamation. And if statistics
serve me right, there's five commissioners so at least one of you is
personally affected by severe and persistent mental illnesses.
NAMI continues to serve the one in four families free of charge
in Collier County. We provide educational programs. We help
families access services, and we've had a rash recently of children
who unfortunately have been presented with some real barriers to
care.
On October 27th I'd like to ask you to -- invite you to join Judge
Baker and Judge Carlton Anne Goodnight, myself, Senator Saunders
for Partners in Crisis, Children in Crisis Awareness Day. And at the
panel we will talk about the severe barriers that children face. Only
15 percent of our children are receiving services that need them.
Then we will take the families there and help teach them how to be
real good advocates and how to communicate effectively with their
legislatures. So I will be sending you a pamphlet on that and, again,
thank you. Have a good day.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you, Kathy, for all you do.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you.
(Applause.)
Item #3C
PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING THE ECUMENICAL
COALITION- ADOPTED
Page 17
October 9, 2001
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All right. Next proclamation will be
by Commissioner Henning. That will be the Ecumenical Coalition.
Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes. And I call up Rayburn
Cadwallader. While you're coming up, I'll go ahead and start the
proclamation.
Whereas, on September 11 th, 2001, a devastating blow was
struck upon social, moral, and economic fiber of the United States of
America by means of terrorists capturing airplanes and flying and
using them as instruments of murdering thousands of innocent people
from many countries of the world; and,
Whereas, all societies of the world are now in a state of turmoil
wondering what will hence occur in their respective parts of the
world; and,
Whereas, our American society of the world has been thrown
into a state of fear for it's ongoing existence; and,
Whereas, the cities and countries of-- counties of Southwest
Florida have been dramatically and sadly impacted by the death of
relatives and loved ones; and,
Whereas, the communities of Naples and Collier County mourn
those impacts-- impacted; and,
Whereas, there is a very uneasy environment as to what next to
do in our communities to show our patriotism and our love for fellow
people; and,
Whereas, the Ecumenical Community through the Ecumenical
Coalition desires to bring about a new future for our citizens who will
fight to preserve our way of life both here and abroad.
Now, therefore, the Board of County Commissioners of Collier
County, Florida, recognizes and encourages the Ecumenical Coalition
for its efforts to rebuild the love of our citizens and fellow people.
Done and ordered 9th day of October 2001, and signed by the
Page 18
October 9, 2001
Chairman James D. Carter.
Motion to approve this proclamation.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Second.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I have a motion for approval.
I have a second. All in favor signify by saying aye. (Unanimous response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Opposed by the same sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Motion carries.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I listened to -- you were at City
Council recently. Are you going to give a little talk here too? MR. CADWALLADER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Good. I just thought that was
very informative.
MR. CADWALLADER: So that Reverend Brown doesn't
become concerned, I am a recent transplant to Collier County, and we
will be approaching the ministerial association on this matter. Their
president, a young lady by the name of Lisa Litco, is going to set it
up.
I think we all have been so affected by this recent debacle.
Interesting to note, having been in politics for about 40 years and
then having moved here, I'm at an extreme disadvantage. I don't
know anybody. So I just took this on. I did get a telephone call from
one of my young friends who is now in the United States Congress,
and we got onto the discussion because he and I knew seven people
that were killed in the event, and one of those seven was from
Terrace Park where I'm from in Ohio. And I notice his name is the
same name as a person here who was killed; very coincidental. The
name was Cherry. No relation. Excuse me.
Our conversation went on and he said, "Ray, you wouldn't
Page 19
October 9, 2001
believe in the cloakrooms of our United States Congress there are
discussions like you can't believe about the same subject that I'm here
talking to you this morning and we, frankly, don't know what to do."
And I said, "Well, I don't think it is a legislated -- legislative matter.
I think it is, in fact, a people on people matter." And with that in
mind and with the thought in mind that a history of working with
Habitat for Humanity, I'm going to approach them because I think
their prototype is an excellent one to start here and that is volunteer,
ecumenical, local, citizens one-on-one.
I think that Collier County and Naples are excellent examples of
where something can start like this from ground up without having a
bureaucracy set up to do it or help from Washington. With that I
thank you very much. And whereas the past two proclamations were
recognition of the past, I hope someday in the near future you will
recognize this as being an event that you happened to participate in.
Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you.
(Applause.)
Item #4
EMPLOYEE SERVICE AWARDS - PRESENTED
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All right. We move to the service
awards. Commissioner Coletta.
MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Chairman, as the board's making their way
down to the floor, I'd like to take the opportunity to go ahead and ask
our five-year attendees as I call their name to make their way up to
the front. We have a number of five-year recognitions this morning,
and the first would be Carla Fogle with Utilities Billing. The next
would be Tony Barry with Transportation. Next would be Diana
Page 20
October 9, 2001
Watson with EMS, Carole Esposito with the Water Department,
followed by Kellie West of EMS, followed by Tishya Arthurs from
Building Review, Keith Maycroft with Road and Bridge, and our last
five-year awardee would be Mario Garcia with Wastewater
Collections Department. If I could get a round of applause for these
employees. They've been-- (Applause.)
MR. OLLIFF: We have the good fortune of recognizing two
ten-year attendees this morning, Carl Gibson with Pollution Control
and Ed Kant with the transportation department. (Applause.)
MR. OLLIFF: Finally, Mr. Chairman, we've got one 15-year
attendee this morning, and Roger Baase from your Parks and
Recreation Department. (Applause.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: It's a photo op.
MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Chairman, that's all our awardees this
morning. Thank you very much.
Item #5A
PRESENTATION OF THE EMS PHOENIX AWARDS-
PRESENTED
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All right. The next item is a very
special morning for us as far as our presentations. I will turn that
over to Mr. Tom Storrar for the Phoenix awards.
MR. STORRAR: Good morning, Commissioners. Tom Storrar,
your Emergency Services Administrator. It's great -- with great
pleasure and pride that I can present to you the recipients of the
Phoenix Awards handed out by our EMS Department.
Page 21
October 9, 2001
The Collier County Emergency Medical Services Department
has adopted the Phoenix Award to recognize those paramedics and
firefighters through their skills and knowledge have successfully
brought back to life individuals who have died. The Phoenix was a
mythological bird who died and rose renewed from its own ashes.
During the month of August, the emergency medical service
paramedics and North Naples Firefighters using their skills,
knowledge, and expertise brought back to life three members of our
community.
We are proud to recognize the following medics. If they would
come down front, please. Lieutenant Erin Percival and Paramedic
Craig Samples. If you would come down front, please. (Applause.)
MR. STORRAR: At this time we would also like to recognize
and present the Phoenix Award for their immense help in saving the
lives to the following North Naples firefighters; Captain Paul
Morriarty, Firefighter John Stanfill, Firefighter John Vosburg, and
Firefighter Michael Swanson. (Applause.)
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: In case you didn't notice there is
a black ribbon on the firefighters' badges in memory of the
firefighters in New York City and elsewhere.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You know, until you mentioned
that, I didn't notice. I'm glad you pointed that out for the audience as
well.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you very much for the service
that these fine men and women do in our community. Too often we
just take this for granted. We see them out there, and we just have an
expectation if we're in trouble they'll be there. They go through
rigorous training. They are on top of what they have to do every day,
and they're there to serve us. And it's just wonderful to have an
Page 22
October 9, 2001
opportunity to spend a few minutes and recognize them for a job
really well done. So the next time you see one of them out there, you
know, say hello and thank him for taking care of us.
All right. That moves us to public petitions and comments.
MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Chairman, I have no one registered this
morning.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: No registered speakers under that this
morning. All right. Then we will move to --
(Unidentified inaudible speaker from audience.)
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Oh.
MR. OLLIFF: Under public comments and general topics?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Well, we'll find them then.
MR. OLLIFF: For the Parker Beach? Okay. I assumed you
wanted to speak under the beach renourishment item.
UNIDENTIFIED MAN: That's fine.
MR. OLLIFF: Okay.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: It probably makes more sense.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All right. We'll hear from you under
beach renourishment.
Item # 1 OB
CONFIRMING JAMES V. MUDD AS THE COLLIER COUNTY
DEPUTY COUNTY MANAGER AND LEO E. OCHS, JR., AS
THE ASSISTANT COUNTY MANAGER- APPROVED
All right. That would move us to 7 -- I'm sorry. 10-B, approval
of Mr. Mudd and Mr. Ochs for positions that you have recommended
to the Board of County Commissioners.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Before there's a rush to get to
Page 23
October 9, 2001
make the motion to approve that, I'm just going to jump in 'cause I
want to get to -- to thank Tom for that outstanding choices, thank the
two of you for your willingness to do even more and harder work and
recommend approval -- move approval.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second to that.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: That certainly took care of your
presentation, Mr. Olliff. I have a motion to approve. I have a
second. All in favor signify by saying aye. (Unanimous response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Opposed by the same sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Motion carries.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: You look like you have
something to say.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Please go ahead, Tom.
MR. OLLIFF: The only thing I would say on top of that is
thank you very, very much. I think these two gentlemen will serve
Collier County extremely well in those positions, and I think you
won't regret that decision.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: No doubt about it.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All right. A round of applause for
these gentlemen.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: For many in our listening audience,
you may not really -- maybe you're just tuning in or maybe just
coming back, or you don't follow us on a regular basis, but this is an
ongoing effort on Mr. Olliffs part to build a management team. And
he has been very, very successful in the people he has brought into
the organization and the ones that he's grooming and growing in the
organization, and this is not the end. Within probably 30 to 45 days
there will be more announcements of people who will be joining or
Page 24
October 9, 2001
moving forward in Collier County Government. I said it privately,
I've said it publicly, we will build the best management team, and I
will pit that team against any team anywhere at any time. This is a
first-class organization, and they're really doing their job. So you can
stand tall, and you can be proud of what you're doing. I know I'm
proud as a commissioner and the privilege to chair this commission
of being a part of this growth in Collier County. So thank you, Tom,
for an excellent job.
MR. OLLIFF: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: We will move to Item 7-A, Board of
Zoning Appeals. This -- A has been withdrawn.
Item #8C
PUDA-2001-AR-702, MARGARET PERRY, AICP, OF WILSON
MILLER, INC., REPRESENTING EAGLE CREEK PROPERTIES,
INC., REQUESTING AN AMENDMENT TO THE EAGLE
CREEK PUD TO ALLOW SELF STORAGE FACILITIES AND
RELATED STRUCTURES FOR THE EXCLUSIVE USE OF
EAGLE CREEK RESIDENTS, LOCATED AT 401 TOWER ROAD
- DENIED
MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Chairman, I think your next item is all the
way down to 8-C.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: 8-C. So 7 we eliminate. We're all the
way down to 8-C. Moving right along in this agenda. 8-C is
continued from September 25th. This is PUDA-2001-AR-702.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I have disclosure if now's the
appropriate time on this, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All right. Commissioner Mac'Kie,
disclosures.
Page 25
October 9, 2001
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I met with representatives of the
neighborhood, the Eagle Creek area.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Mr. Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I have received some e-mails
and talked to some of the residents and representatives of the Eagle
Creek residences, and there is a file somewhere around here of my
contacts.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: That's always the case too.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: That's always the case too. We all got
a file somewhere. Okay. Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I also met with the residents
and the petitioner. I have my file right here.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And, likewise, I have met with the
residents, actually, a couple times and the petitioner, and here's my
file.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Boy, the organization skills are
improving rapidly here. I, likewise, have met with the homeowners
of the -- of the association. I've had e-mails. I've had letters. I have
had phone calls. Anyone participating in this needs to stand and be
sworn.
(The oath was administered.)
THE WITNESS: Good morning, Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Good morning.
MR. REISCHL: Fred Reischl, planning services. This is a
request for rezone for the Eagle Creek PUD. Petitioner proposes to
eliminate the use of water and wastewater facilities and to replace
that with self-storage facility. And on the visualizer you can see the
location of Eagle Creek southwest comer of U.S. 41 and Collier
Boulevard, and I've highlighted the area that's proposed for the self-
storage facility if this is approved on the Tower Road side of Eagle
Creek.
Page 26
October 9, 2001
I've also passed out an amended property owner list. The -- it
was brought to staff's attention that the property owner is not Eagle
Creek Properties but Eagle Creek Utilities II, and you have the
amended property owner list in front of you. They are generally the
same people with the deletion of one person; that is properties and
not utilities.
This petition is consistent with the Growth Management Plan
because the storage facility would be for the exclusive use of Eagle
Creek residents; therefore, it's considered an accessory to a
residential use and not a commercial use. The parcel's isolated from
the rest of the Eagle Creek PUD by the golf course, and its access is
from Tower Road.
Self storage is a low traffic generator. Transportation services
department did not have a problem with people leaving Eagle Creek
and accessing the site from Tower Road.
The Planning Commission heard this petition, and at the hearing
they heard several Eagle Creek residents who were in opposition.
Their concerns included the fact that it would become -- it would
become a commercial operation, that it would generate excess traffic,
and the facility was not needed by the residents. The Planning
Commission-- there was a motion to approve, and that failed and the
people who were opposed to that motion stated that there was a lack
of internal access to the parcel.
Based on the buffering that's required by code and the fact that it
is consistent with the Growth Management Plan for Eagle Creek
residents only, staff recommends approval.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I have some questions.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Questions by commissioners.
Commissioner Mac'Kie.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Having learned a really difficult
lesson in Foxfire where we got statements from people who
Page 27
October 9, 2001
purported to represent their communities and later found that maybe
while they technically legally did, they didn't in actuality or maybe
they even legally didn't -- and I'm not going there, but I'm concerned
about what -- what level of investigation the staff does now when
somebody comes in and says, for example, this petition is supported
by -- there's something in the file that says this is supported by the
residents of the area and that there was -- pardon me just one second.
Maybe I can stop doing that -- that there is a petition and that this is
supported by the neighbors, et cetera. What do we do to confirm or
to get more information about that petition, because I've now had it
pointed out to me that this was an old petition, that it wasn't current;
that, in fact, there were very few responses. That there is a more
current inquiry, et cetera.
And absent that I -- I would have pre-Foxfire assumed that if a
petition says the community supports it. We did a survey. I would
have presumed that to be true, and I don't necessarily anymore, and I
wonder if there are provisions for the staff to confirm whether or not
such a representation is true. Long question. Sorry to be so verbose.
MR. REISCHL: And it's probably going to be a short answer.
No, we don't, but that's because we don't rely on that information for
our analysis.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: But can you imagine -- I mean, I
know that you can, Tom, that for a county -- county commissioner it
is very important. I relied on it significantly to my detriment in the
Foxfire matter as I stated previously and your commissioners -- I will
suggest to you that I'm not alone in that, that you care a lot about
what the community's opinion is. So there needs to be some way. I
don't know what it is, but I just punt that to you as the county
manager. That's all I've got.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Two questions. This is a PUD
Page 28
October 9, 2001
amendment, so for my own information does staff look at the whole
PUD and see how it is consistent with our LDC and our comp plan?
MR. REISCHL: We do. In fact, on your underlined copy, you
saw a lot of other changes besides this one, and those were all
initiated by the county attorney's office, so there is a look to bring it
up to today's code but not -- especially for Eagle Creek because it's
significantly built down.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. The second and final
question is, how would the residents of Eagle Creek -- since this is
for their use only, what is their access to it?
MR. REISCHL: As I said, that was brought up at the Planning
Commission, and there is no internal access to it. It is from Tower
Road. So a resident of Eagle Creek would have to exit Eagle Creek
onto either Collier Boulevard or 41, go around the back way or go
around to Tower Road to get to the -- to the site.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: There is no way for
interconnectivity?
MR. REISCHL: Not keeping the golf course in its current
configuration.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And we've got to keep our golf
courses intact.
MR. REISCHL: Well, again, this is a lower traffic generator.
The ITE manual showed it as 31 trips per day, which I think is
probably high for a storage facility anyway, but the ITE shows there's
only 31 trips per day.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. That 31 trips per day interests
me as well. The -- the developer has stated that he polled the
community, yet some of the responses or some of the letters that I got
e-mails and letters that I got said they hadn't been polled. Number
one, that concerned me. Number two, most of them that I had heard
Page 29
October 9, 2001
from, in fact, every resident that I heard of-- heard from said they
would not be using the facility and what they were concerned with
being that there would be no use by the Eagle Creek Community, and
they would have to come out onto the roadway to -- so they didn't
really feel that it was really meant for them anyway. They were
concerned that it would be turned commercial.
In your summary you, of course, have said it won't be
commercial unless, of course, the developer comes back and asks for
approval. If they get approval, then it is a commercial. That 31 trips,
number one, will change, obviously, because now it would be rented
to outsiders. Second of all, this would -- this would be the concern of
the residents living in Eagle Creek that it would be a commercial
facility, and I'm concerned about that as well.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: But, Commissioner, that can never
happen unless the Board of County Commissioners approved that.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So then what happens to that
property when he has 110 storage units if we don't approve it? What
does it do? Just sit there and erode?
MR. REISCHL: Yes. It would be -- if he doesn't have a
business to support the facility, then it could not open to the public
unless the board approved the Growth Management Plan amendment,
and then if that amendment was approved, they came back to amend
the Eagle Creek PUD once again.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So now these people -- the
developer is saying he is -- he is building these in response to the
community's request. The community doesn't seem to want it at all.
The developer is pushing and the community is fighting it, so -- but
continually insists that it's for the community, but they don't want it.
I'm having a problem with that. Anyway, I'll just state that for the
record.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Commissioner Coletta.
Page 30
October 9, 2001
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: If I may, one of the -- one of
things I can mention -- to the developer's credit, he was up front with
the questions I asked him, and I expressed a concern over the fact that
he would be issuing the IDs -- issuing the IDs to be able to gain
entrance to this. And my concern was that at some point in time if
this thing didn't prove to be profitable, what's to say that the next
owner would feel obligated to hold to these criterias.
And also, too, from what I can see, the survey that was put out
wasn't a true survey. It was questions asking people if they would
like to rent different units, what size units, and when they came back
they never asked the question yes or no would you like it. So the
survey was self-serving, which is true of most surveys, and I don't
want to discredit the developer for that, but I do have concerns.
And that when I asked the developer how many units would be
going in there, he didn't know. He didn't know what the break-even
point was. So that was telling me that he has no idea as far as the
business plan goes if this is going to work, and so my -- my
suspicions are that there's an ulterior motive to this whole thing, and I
would like to have answers to that today.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, I would have to too,
Commissioner Coletta. You went to the core of the motive. What is
the motive, because if there's no cost benefit analysis -- and as a
businessman this is a turkey.
MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Chairman, that might be an appropriate
segue to have the petitioner come forward and make a presentation.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I think so.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Lots of questions.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I'll withhold my comments as to
turkey. Maybe it's a golden goose, and I don't know it.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And, Tom, while they're setting
up, will you give some thought, please, to that issue about how to flag
Page 31
October 9, 2001
these.
MR. OLLIFF: I will. I'm concerned about the position it puts
the planning staff in of trying to go out and verify a survey or to
resurvey. If there is an association in place, it makes it a little easier.
There is at least an association board which is easy to check with. So
when there is a formalized association of any kind, we can certainly
do that, and it will bring back some recommendations for that,
because I do think you have a very valid point, especially from the
commissioner's perspective.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: At -- at least to flag it for county
commissioners.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I don't know, Tom. I don't know
where in the criteria process but, you know, there's organizations like
Molhke & Associates. I mean, we need to find an objective third
party if that's going to be a basis for a commissioner decision making
that somewhere in the process. Maybe that has to be built in that
says, "If you're going to have homeowners association's input, then it
has to be one that is done by an objective valid third party, or we
can't consider the criteria."
MR. OLLIFF: And a lot of this will be addressed at least in part
by your public participation plan that you will review as part of the
LDC.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Good morning.
MS. PERRY: Good morning, Commissioners. I'm Margaret
Perry from WilsonMiller. With me today are David Amico, president
of Eagle Creek Properties, Jeff Perry, transportation planner from
WilsonMiller, and Jim Siesky from the law firm of Siesky, Pilon, and
Wood. I'm going to give a brief overview of what our request is, why
we're requesting it and, if it meets with your favor, have follow-up
speakers Mr. Amico, Mr. Perry, and Mr. Siesky.
The Eagle Creek PUD is generally bounded on the north by
Page 32
October 9, 2001
Tamiami Trail East, the south by Tower Road, east Collier
Boulevard, 951, and west Barefoot Williams Road. The subject site
is approximately 1.4 acres located northeast of the existing two-story
golf course maintenance facility.
From 1985 until late 1999, this site was used as a sewage
treatment facility for the Eagle Creek Development. When county
sewer service became available, Eagle Creek became a customer of
the county, and the sewage treatment plant was no longer needed.
Directly north and west of the sewage treatment plant -- the former
sewage treatment plant is the Eagle Creek Golf Course and the
maintenance facility. To the east is the Comcast TV tower and to the
south across Tower Road is a single-family residence located quite a
distance from that road.
The request before you today is to amend Section 4 of the PUD
document for Eagle Creek which section outlines the uses and
standards for development within the golf course indicated tract
shown on the master plan. We request that essential services,
including on-site water and wastewater treatment facilities, be deleted
and self-storage facilities for the exclusive use of the residents of
Eagle Creek be added.
Currently the PUD states that this site could be used for a
clubhouse, pro shop, gift shop, restaurant, cocktail lounge for use of
the patrons of the golf course; however, given the location near the
golf course maintenance facility and the TV tower to the east, we do
not believe that the uses are feasible. It is the intent of the developer
to provide a use that is much less offensive than the former sewage
treatment plant and also provide a potential benefit to the residents of
Eagle Creek.
The Planning Commission considered this request on July 19th.
A motion was made and seconded for a approval, but failed by a vote
of 3 to 4. The basic premise for the motion made was the right of the
Page 33
October 9, 2001
property owner to use his land in a way that was compatible with and
not offensive to adjacent land uses. We believe that a self-storage
facility is such a use. Your staff has recommended the compatibility
of the proposed use and has recommended approval of this request.
Other issues that were raised at the Planning Commission, as
Fred said, were additional traffic generation, lack of internal access,
belief that the facility would become a commercial establishment,
and the lack of interest by the residents. Jeff will address the traffic
issues, and Mr. Amico and Mr. Siesky will address the other issues.
I thank you very much for your consideration, and now Mr.
Amico would like to state a few things. Thank you.
MR. AMICO: Good morning, Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Good morning.
MR. AMICO: I am David Amico, president of Eagle Creek
Properties. I have been with Eagle Creek Properties since its
inception some 15-plus years. As Margaret had mentioned, in 1986
the sewage treatment plant began operation for the residents and area
of Eagle Creek and was a Florida Public Service Commission
regulated utility.
The intent of the developer was to operate a sewage treatment
plant there indefinitely. The piece of land is a landlocked piece of
property, doesn't really have much value for PUD-related uses, as
Margaret had mentioned, for either housing or for golf course related
pro shop or something to that effect, but the land did serve well for a
sewage treatment plant. The -- once the service was turned over to
the county, which was in late 1999, we had a -- for lack of better
word -- survey. An interest letter went out to the homeowners that
were present at that time. That was in February of 2000. It -- it
basically was a result of requests that we had received in our sales
office from time to time, and I don't have that as a documented list of
people, but as 951 or Collier Boulevard had developed with RV parks
Page 34
October 9, 2001
-- for example, there's Pelican Lakes and Silver Lakes right across
from us -- we've had people from those areas stop into Eagle Creek
and say, "Do you have a place where I might be able to keep my RV
if I were to purchase here?" That's their lifestyle. That was the
request.
Homeowners within Eagle Creek, we did get some homeowners
that purchased at Eagle Creek from these developments. We felt
there could have been others. Some people at Eagle Creek have boats
that they store off site, and from time to time we get a request for
that. That was the genesis of the interest letter going out originally.
The sewage treatment plant itself was sold or disassembled in
early 2001. From the period of late '99, 2001 we were looking for
someone to -- to take this package plant. There's not too many
buyers for something like this, and in mid 2001 it was disassembled
-- disassembled very recently in the June, July period is really when it
was completely removed. The request was filed with the county in
April. Once we knew we had a buyer for it and we knew -- we felt
we had interest from both outside -- and by "outside" I mean the use
would be solely for the residents, but we feel there would be more
residents or potential customers that would have purchased here and
still may that -- that do own over at these other RV resorts that I had
mentioned.
We then, once we knew we were moving the property, had it
cleared and ready to use. Then we went through with a further
expenditure of having WilsonMiller engineering firm request the
land-use change to storage units. The piece of property, as I had
mentioned, is a landlocked piece of property. We had intended to use
it for a sewer plant all along. The property as it stands today has very
little use with the current PUD uses to the owner, and we felt that this
would be the best nonintrusive use by the owner. If there were
another use that we felt would be less intrusive and would be more
Page 35
October 9, 2001
beneficial, we would do so.
You had asked about the analysis that had been done. At the
time that this was done, we had looked at the cost of building these.
We had looked at the neighborhood, the rental rates, and it seemed to
make sense because owning the property -- and it's sitting there today
just as a piece of property that is not being used for anything -- it
could be phased, and we would obviously only be renting to those
that do have an interest. There may be a great deal of people that
may not have an interest, but we feel that there still is an adequate
number that we may phase it one building at a time and fill those
buildings up.
But it certainly would have more of a beneficial use to us in
doing that than it would be just sitting there today and/or finding
another use and/or coming back to you at a later date and trying to
pull it out of the PUD and sell it to someone else altogether. But
right now it's just a piece of property we can't use very well.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Just a fast question, Dave. I'm sorry
to interrupt you, but I understood from the residents that they had
wanted to buy this property and convert it to something that is -- that
is friendly to the golf course, and -- and I was wondering have you
been working with them along that line? Have you come up with a
sale price? I know that they've been trying to get one from you.
MR. AMICO: We have -- we have attempted a couple times to
negotiate with the homeowners and -- I should say with the golf
course community and have not been successful. We requested a
meeting as recently as yesterday and met with them, and they felt that
they wanted to wait to see the results of this -- of this meeting before
they would sit down again with us.
We have asked for a price. They have not given us what they
feel it would be worth. We do -- you know, I think if that were to go
forward -- our intent in filing this was not to try to drive that price
Page 36
October 9, 2001
one way or another, I mean, and I don't want that insinuation to be
here. The intent is to build storage units. It's the best -- we feel the
best use of the property today, and that's the intent.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: What do you think the value of the
property is today?
MR. AMICO: Well, we had an appraisal done by Appraisal
Research, and it came in in excess of $100,000.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: For the one acre of landlocked --
MR. AMICO: 1.6 acres, yes.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: What would it cost you to build the
storage sheds? What would your -- see, I'm looking at a cost-benefit
analysis. I'm still puzzled why you would invest in something where
you don't know what the return is.
MR. AMICO: Well, it's a greater use of the property than it is
today. There is -- right now it is just sitting there as a -- as a piece of
property not being used for any -- we do feel that there is a benefit
and there is enough interest to -- you know, to warrant.
COMMISSINOER MAC'KIE: Mr. Chairman?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Maybe I'm really sensitive to
this issue since I'm about to get into the land acquisitions business for
the public sector, but certainly we have valid inquiry about whether
or not this is a viable use before we approve a rezoning change. But I
think we have to be careful about getting into the valuation question
when we know there's this ongoing debate between, you know, a
private-- two private interests.
And -- and, personally, I think we have to focus on whether or
not this is an appropriate land use for this piece of property. And a
factor for me in that decision is whether or not there is a market for it,
and that's what you're investigating and inquiring about it, and I
respect that. Part of, you know, what we're hearing from the people
Page 37
October 9, 2001
who live currently in your community is that either your data was old
or inadequate, but we are hearing from them that there's just not a
market. And the last thing that I want to do is support a rezone for a
construction project that becomes a dead piece of dark land there
attracting, you know, potential crime problems and that -- that is a
really valid community issue for us to be concerned with.
I don't understand and I'm not going to get into your business
about why you would want to rezone something for which there does
not appear to be a market. That's a private question, and it's your
business, but it's our business from the perspective of whether or not
it's going to sit dark if we were to approve it and became, you know,
a drain on the community in addition to whether or not it's just
appropriately sited from a land-use perspective.
This appears to me, based on what I've heard so far-- and we're
just starting this public hearing -- that, you know, there's really not a
market for this and that you're potentially creating -- if we were to
approve this -- would be potentially creating a safety and crime and
just a community blight issue is what it starts to look like to me.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, I appreciate your comments, and
you're going where I wanted to go. It becomes a bigger picture, but
questions by other commissioners.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, this question is directed
to our county attorney, Mr. Weigel. Would you advise us on this.
I'm the one that brought up the issue of the value of the property, and
if I didn't act appropriately I want to know now so I don't do it again
in the future.
MR. WEIGEL: I think that you can -- it's not inappropriate in
the general context of discussion and information gathering to ask
that kind of question. Ultimately, as Commissioner Mac'Kie
indicated, the formal questions before you are the appropriateness of
a land-use change request within an area that already has a specific
Page 38
October 9, 2001
zoning, and this is PUD-to-PUD rezoning and -- but I think that -- the
kind of questions and value can be part of the general information
gathering that you have, but not the -- not the mainstay of the
decision-making process, because this is a land-use code related,
Growth Management Plan related hearing in general. I hope I
answered your question.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you, Mr. Weigel.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Other questions for Mr. Amico.
Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Amico, I'm sure we're
going to hear from the residents that you say it's for their use and
their use only, and I'm sure they're going to say, "Well, how are we
going to be assured of that that is going to be only for their use?" My
question is, who do you think should enforce the use "residents
only"?
MR. AMICO: I would say the most likely group would be the
property management company. Seems that that would be a
company regardless of who they are today or in the future. There's
always going to be someone managing that area. As far as the
assurance goes, I think the assurance is that the petition says that.
We're saying that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
MR. AMICO: Unless the whole process here really has -- has a
fault and that -- that we can't believe what we're saying and we can't
believe what we're voting upon and we're worried about what may
happen that -- that a bad decision is going to be made by another
group in the future. We're -- we're here to say that the intent is for the
homeowners only, that the -- we're happy to control that. We're
happy to control that with cards, gate -- gate this area in and have
cards strictly issued to homeowners. We're happy to keep those
records completely open to homeowners or representatives, the Board
Page 39
October 9, 2001
of County Commission, or anyone else that you feel would be
appropriate.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You said the property manager
will be responsible for that?
MR. AMICO: Well, you said-- you asked me who would be
the most likely person; that seems to me that that's going to be the
group that will be there on an ongoing basis, as opposed to saying the
developer would do it or the club president or, you know --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The property manager --
MR. AMICO: I'm saying the records could be completely open,
you know. It could be done through the club if they choose to assist
in if they felt that that was a control issue and wanted to participate in
that. We have no problem with that either.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: How many public speakers do we
have, Mr. Olliff?.
MR. OLLIFF: You have three.
MR. AMICO: I have -- I'm sorry to interrupt, but Jeff Perry
wanted to just address the traffic issue if he could.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Commissioners, have any questions on
traffic?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Thirty-one trips; that's not really
the issue.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I don't think that's an issue for the
board, Mr. Amico, but we would allow him an opportunity to come
back and speak to that issue if it becomes one.
MR. AMICO: And I believe Jim Siesky had some comments as
well. Thank you.
MR. SIESKY: Thank you, Commissioners. Just a few brief
comments.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: For the record, sir. For the record, sir.
MR. SIESKY: Jim Siesky, for the record. I want to let you
Page 40
October 9, 2001
know that we did try to meet with the homeowners, and we did try to
meet with them yesterday. Our purpose in the meeting was to try to
address their concerns with regard to this use of the property.
Unfortunately, it -- they weren't willing to consider the use of the
property for the storage facilities, so we really didn't get anywhere in
addressing their concerns.
It seems more apparent that they're most intent on purchasing
the property, and we would have been happy to discuss with them
purchasing the property. We recognize that they didn't have a lot of
time to discuss that with the owner and suggested perhaps a
continuance. They weren't willing to do that, so that's why we're here
today.
Some of the concerns that we have heard that you've discussed
today is the need. I suggest to you that that's a business decision this
board usually doesn't get involved with. If someone wants to build a
residential community or some other development, this board is
usually not addressing whether it's going to be viable. I can think of
quite a few that have failed, and the board really wasn't concerned at
that time whether they would succeed.
The -- also with regard to the actual use of this property for
whether there's a demand, I did some quick rug research yesterday
and found one indicator. It was a survey that was done in Oregon,
and the per-person basis it's -- range from 4.5 square feet per person
to about 17.5 square feet per person; that is storage demand. There
are approximately 1,000 people that reside in Eagle Creek. That
would net, based on the middle point, say, ten square feet per person,
about, I think, 10,000 square feet demand. That's four buildings
based on the proposal of 2,500 square feet per building. So it should
be adequate demand over the years that this facility would be used.
One of the other concerns has been security. We have said
repeatedly that this is only for the use of the people here that are
Page 41
October 9, 2001
residents of Eagle Creek, and these people -- the people of Eagle
Creek should thereby be more secure, both in the fact that they will
be the only people using the facility, but only their neighbors will be
using the facility. They won't be using a facility with strangers as
they would in the general public.
I know that they're concerned about how do we assure that only
people in Eagle Creek can use this facility. And I asked Mr. Pires
yesterday, "What would you like to see?" He didn't have an answer.
He wanted us to suggest something. I talked with Mr. Amico and we
talked. We provided the rent roll. I don't think that really does a
whole lot of good. We can provide the rent roll, but there still needs
to be some enforcement mechanism and in thinking -- I haven't really
discussed it with Mr. Amico, but I think we could probably do a
covenant that runs with the land that would be enforceable by the
homeowners association or wherever is necessary. That should be
sufficient. Provide for attorneys' fees if we don't use it or the purposes
that we said we would, and I don't see any real problem with that.
There's adequate provisions, I'm sure, in the existing PUD that would
permit us to negotiate and -- and put in place a covenant like that and
I would be willing to say that it would be satisfactory to the residents
before being finally approved by this board.
Read my notes. One of the other concerns, I guess, is the
maintenance facility would lose a direct access. There is an access
that is used now in this area (indicating). Okay. Thank you. Okay.
The access that is used right now is this area, whereas the actual
access is over in this area (indicating). I would suggest to you that
this access -- there's no right to use it at this point, but we would do --
make in a planning process endeavor to make that available for use
by the golf course if possible.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Let -- let me just understand what
you said. Instead of driving out onto 951, they could use that access?
Page 42
October 9, 2001
MR. SIESKY: No, ma'am. I'm sorry. This maintenance facility
has maintenance vehicles that would like to make a direct access to
this area of the golf course. Instead they have to come around this
way or would have to come around this way if the access were
blocked off. It's strictly golf course maintenance facility vehicles.
There's also been some discussion about it possibly being an
eyesore. It's screened now but, as you know, it's -- there's pepper
hedge that is screening part of the area. That will have to be
removed, will have to be removed anyway. The owners of the golf
course maintenance facility would have to screen that. The club is
willing to -- I mean, the owner is willing to participate equally with
the club owners to share the cost of that screening, the replanting.
The only other concept that I really heard that was a concern
was the absence -- absence of internal access, and thats really can't--
can't be remedied. You can't go across that golf course and destroy
the beauty there.
We suggest to you that the proposed use with the safeguards is
imminently reasonable. It's a business decision that we people in the
capital society are entitled to make, and if it fails with that stipulation
in the covenant that runs with the land, it would just be the problem
for the developer. Thank you. Any questions?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you, sir. Public speakers,
please.
MR. OLLIFF: Yes, sir. The first public speaker is Tony Pires
followed by Paul Alvarez.
MR. PIRES: Mr. Chairman, members of the board, my name is
Tony Pires with the law firm of Woodward, Pires and Lombardo, and
I'm here today representing the Eagle Creek Golf and Country Club.
And we have tenants today, Mr. Paul Alvarez, who will be a speaker,
and Will Kriz. And these individuals are property owners within and
residents of Eagle Creek, and Mr. Alvarez is the president of the
Page 43
October 9, 2001
Eagle Creek Golf and Country Club, and Will Kriz is the treasurer of
the condominium association and past president of the condominium
association. Also in attendance but not registered to speak in
deference to the desire of this board not to have reiterations and
redundancies but fully back the positions that I am espousing and that
Mr. Alvarez will be promoting as well as Mr. Kriz are 40 members of
the Eagle Creek Golf and Country Club in the audience.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Would you raise your hands, please.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Oh, my.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you.
MR. PIRES: I can affirmatively tell you they do not want these
facilities. There is no need. There is no demand, and contrary to the
representations -- I differ with staff in one respect that there was no
indication that this application basically revolved upon or evolved
upon the need for or a demand. Yet -- and I would make part of the
record just in case it's not in the board's packages, the application
cover letter that was submitted by Ms. Perry with this particular
application at the time, and I'll just read to you an excerpt from it.
Dated April 12, 2001, quote (as read): "After receiving requests from
its residents, Eagle Creek Properties surveyed its residents in
February 2000 regarding the interest in an on-site storage facility.
Results of the survey indicated the residents strong desire for such a
storage facility." No number is given. "The developer of the project
is attempting to satisfy the needs of its residents by requesting an
amendment to the PUD to allow for self-storage units at this
location."
In the staff report to the Planning Commission at page 2, in one
of the questionnaires a summary finding as to whether the change or
changing conditions make -- strike that. Excuse me. Page 4, whether
there are substantial reasons why the property cannot be used in
accordance with existing zoning. Last sentence in that rationale is
Page 44
October 9, 2001
provided by your staff to a planning commission, quote, Eagle Creek
residents now desire a storage facility in place of the wastewater
plant.
And, additionally, with regards to that questionnaire are the staff
report, the staff in another location indicated at paragraph 5 a pro
aspect with regards whether the change or changing conditions make
the passage of the proposed amendment necessary, quote, the
developer surveyed residents and determined that on-site storage for
residents would be a desirable replacement for the plant. That is
incorrect. There were no numbers attendant to this survey that were
submitted with the application.
The planning commissioners queried the applicant's
representative at the July 19th, 2001, Planning Commission hearing,
and I have the transcript to make part of the record, and in that query
it was determined that 325 parties were surveyed on this particular
issue and of that 227 responses were provided, 180 showed no
interest, 15 were opposed, 32 were interested. This is in February of
2000.
The plant-- the residents, the Eagle Creek Golf and Country
Club -- by the way, everybody who buys in Eagle Creek has to
purchase a membership in the Eagle Creek Golf and Country Club.
That is not developer controlled. There are other associations that are
developer controlled. The condominium association is not developer
controlled, nor is the golf and country club. So I would submit to you
that the best indicator of what the community desires, what is viable,
what is consistent and compatible with the uses in the community,
compatible with the land uses in the community, is the voice and
sentiment of the Eagle Creek Golf and Country Club.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I'm going to pause you just for a
second, because I think that's a useful piece of information for Tom
as he's deciding how he could give good advice to the county
Page 45
October 9, 2001
commissioners that if we get a representation -- not suggesting in this
case it's relevant -- if we get a representation that the Joe Smith
Condominium Association supports this fully, it would be nice to
know if that's a homeowner controlled or developer controlled
association.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Good point.
MR. PIRES: Thank you, Commissioner Mac'Kie.
That is an excellent point. In this particular process, the property
owners, the residents had no clue that this application was winding its
way through the system until they got a friendly letter from planning
services saying, "Hear ye! Hear ye! There's a planning commission
hearing coming up on July 19th, folks. You-all might want to be
there."
They quickly did their survey -- the condominium association
did -- of 190 condo units, who are probably the most likely to want to
have storage units if at all, not estate homes which are single-family
or the other single family homes or villas or coach homes. If I may,
I'll try to be -- wrap it up briefly.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Better than 40 individual
speakers, Mr. Chairman.
MR. PIRES: I'm trying to talk slow so the court reporter does
not throw rubber bands at me. All right. Out of 190 condominium
unit owners that were questioned, there were 126 responses; 124
opposed, 2 were interested. Now, there might be some correct
number of 138 and 3 were interested, so regardless, overwhelmingly
no desire, which we would submit to you pulls out the underpinning,
the lynchpin of this application is articulated in the request is it
articulated in the staff report to the Planning Commission.
What else don't we know or did not know even until the
Planning Commission? What number of units were they talking
about? What is the square footage? That was not even in the
Page 46
October 9, 2001
application, was not articulated until we went to the Planning
Commission.
The developer's indicated a final site plan and total size of the
facility has not been finalized. Before this exercise is done, this is an
e-mail of August 22nd from Margaret Perry to Fred Reischl, August
22nd, 2001. Before this exercise is done petitioner wanted to obtain
BCC approval of the site, of the use itself.
We anticipate -- you know, I call these exercise -- anticipate
construction of four to five self-storage buildings each being
approximately 2,500 to 3,000 square feet. Two, again a final design
has not been finalized; however, we anticipate approximately 110
storage units of varying sizes and an outdoor storage area of
approximately 2,500 square feet. I think what's interesting is, number
one, it's not in the application. Number two, it's not anticipating and
range of numbers. One hundred and ten units, there are 470
maximum units that could be built, so that would be one out of every
four owners in Eagle Creek would have to have a demand produced
in these units. As you can see, it's not there. The demand is not
there.
The who, what, and why of this application is, who's asking for
it? It's a developer; however, what's also interesting is the application
is not as it's couched, and the PUD amendment as couched does not
solely apply to the 1.3 acres. The amendment would be to Section 4,
which is all the golf course including the clubhouse and the golf
course. Those tracts total 149 acres, and the language change isn't
just to the 1.3 acres. The language change would also be to the 147
plus or minus acres owned by the country -- the golf and country
club.
They don't want this use for themselves or for the community.
It's not needed, not wanted. We would ask this board to deny this
application and recognize the lack of viability, the incompatibility of
Page 47
October 9, 2001
this use in this particular community. Thank you. CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay.
MR. PIRES: And I will submit these to the court reporter as
part of the record.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
MR. WEIGEL: This is Paul Alvarez to be followed by Will
Kriz, your final speaker.
MR. ALVAREZ: Good morning, Commissioners. My name is
Paul Alvarez, A-l-v-a-r-e-z. I'm the president of the Eagle Creek
Golf and Country Club which is, as Tony pointed out, the only
member-owned entity of Eagle Creek, so we are the people who
come together to voice our concern about this. I charter all residents
of Eagle Creek must be members of the country club, either a golf
member or a social member. About 10 percent of our members are
nonresidents to Eagle Creek. The vast majority of them come from
Marco Island.
I wish to make a couple of very short points, and the first one is
that the first time we did hear about this storage unit going on
adjacent to the golf course was in early July when we did receive the
official notification. Prior to that there was no meeting held to
inform the residents or the club members of the plan, and there was
no meeting to ask for input. Secondly, in the months that followed the
Planning Commission's rejection, there was no meeting. There was
no request on the developer's part to seek input by us.
Further, I have to agree with Commissioner Fiala that there
seems to be no support whatsoever. We have repeatedly asked to be
given a price to purchase the property. I requested that on July 19th,
and so I find it kind of strange when people say that they have
negotiated with us. Two weeks ago I received a letter from the
developer demanding in four days to offer them a price. Yesterday
we had a meeting with them where they talked about whether or not
Page 48
October 9, 2001
we might perhaps want to buy a partial piece of this land one day
before this meeting. It is absolutely not -- it's not a normal way to
conduct business.
I will tell you based on my interaction with members, there is no
evidence of a demand or a need by our members for this facility.
Indeed, not a single person has telephoned me or spoken to me in
person and said, "Paul, I want storage sheds." This obvious lack of
interest, by the way, is from a membership that doesn't hesitate to
contact me when the Sunday brunch runs out of French fries. So I
can conclude that there is not a lot of interest here. There is no need.
There is no desire. There is no logic for this requested change in
zoning, and we respectfully ask you to reject it. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you, sir. Next speaker, please.
(Applause.)
MR. KRIZ: Good morning, Commissioners. For the record, my
name is Will Kriz; that's K-r-i-z. I'm frasier (phonetic) and past
president of the condominium association of Eagle Creek, which is
the only homeowner association thus far turned over to the residents
by the developer. Condominiums make up nearly half of all the
homes in Eagle Creek.
Residents received official notice during the first week of July of
the July 19th hearing before the County Planning Commission on the
proposed PUD amendment. Because there was little more than two
weeks between receipt of the notice and the hearing, the
condominium association immediately undertook a mail survey of
condo owners to gauge their feelings on the proposal. Approximately
three fourths of the condo owners responded. The result was that
there was virtually no support for the proposed amendment. The tally
at the time of the commission hearing was 124 to 2. A final tally was
3 in favor and 138 against, and I have copies here of the inquiry and
the responses for the record if you-all want it.
Page 49
October 9, 2001
Had we had an indication of the proposed amendment from the
developer prior to the official notice of the July 19th hearing, we
might have done a more scientific survey. But it's evident that there's
little interest in self-storage units on the part of condominium owners.
This lack of interest raises the probability that the developer could be
forced to rent the units to nonresidents in order to make a profit.
In the event he succeeded in renting to nonresidents, it is our
fear that security of the community would be compromised. To gain
access to the self-storage units, one must pass through an electrically
operated security gate at the Tower Road. Once inside that gate
anyone would have access to the buildings that house maintenance
equipment, not only for the golf course, but common grounds and
have access to the whole Eagle Creek community.
For these reasons we urge that the Board of County
Commissioners reject the proposed PUD amendment. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
Thank you, sir.
Members of the Board, any further
questions of anyone you want to ask, or I'll close the public hearing.
MR. SIESKY: May I have a brief rebuttal?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I think we've heard all we need to
hear. Any questions by the part of the board? Any other comments,
Mr. Reischl?
MR. REISCHL: No.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I move we close the public hearing.
Discussion by the board.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, being that there's no
discussion, I would like to make a motion. Even though I understand
the developer's interest in it, I would like to make a motion to deny.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I have a motion to deny by
Page 50
October 9, 2001
Commissioner Fiala. I have a second by Commissioner Coletta. Any
discussion? Any questions? All in favor signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: The attorney's trying to get your
attention.
MR. WEIGEL: I just want to make sure that we have a finding
that is specific. Ms. Fiala indicated lack of--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Incompatibility.
MR. WEIGEL: Okay. We want the record to reflect that
standard.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Is that what you're saying?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Motion says lack of incompatibility
(sic).
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Second agrees with that. Hearing--
hearing no questions, call the motion. All in favor signify by saying
aye.
(Unanimous response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Opposed by the same sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Motion carries 5-0.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you, Mr. Reischl. We will take
a 15-minute recess, give our magic fingers a rest. We'll be back in
session about five to.
(Brief recess taken.)
Item #8E
ORDINANCE 2001-54 AMENDING CHAPTER 74 OF THE
COUNTY'S CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES (COLLIER
Page 51
October 9, 2001
COUNTY CONSOLIDATED IMPACT FEE ORDINANCE)-
ADOPTED
CHAIRMAN CARTER: We're ready. We're on.
Welcome back to Board of County Commissioners meeting. We are
now going to move to the item -- next will be the Impact Fee
Ordinance. Who is -- there he is. Mr. Phil Tindall, you will lead us
in that discussion, and I -- as we in our earlier discussion, there's
probably one section we'll carve out for more discussion, but I guess
we need to go what I call the 90 percent, and walk us through the
process.
MR. TINDALL: Based upon the discussion I was listening to --
to Mr. Ochs -- by the way, Phil Tindall, Impact Fee Coordinator. Mr.
Chairman, when you were working on the agenda, it seemed like the
bulk of the questions were -- had to do with the Section A of the
ordinance amendment which has to do with waiver for charitable
organizations. It sounds like you perhaps in discussion should focus
on that; is that a correct statement?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No. There is several other
questions.
MR. TINDALL: Okay.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: There are, I guess, a number of
questions, so I think you -- my suggestion with the pleasure of the
board is that we walk through the areas that are affected, and then
you've got the not-for-profits which I think is going to have a
considerable amount of discussion. But if we could take the other
items first and answer those questions by the board, then we'll deal
with the other.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: We are on 10-C; right?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: We're doing the Impact Fee
Ordinance.
Page 52
October 9, 2001
MR. TINDALL: Those items are spelled out in the numbered
paragraphs in the executive summary, and I can -- I can give you the
short version of what each of those revisions are accomplishing.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I am so sorry. I'm just floating
around here. What is the number on our agenda?
MR. MUDD: Ma'am, it's 10-C.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: It is 10-C.
MR. MUDD: It was moved. It's 10-C on your --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Find that under the county manager's
report.
MR. TINDALL: It was 10-C on the original agenda. It was
moved to Item 8-E, but originally 10-C. So that's where you're going
to find it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you. Got it.
MR. TINDALL: First of all, we're incorporating level of service
standards applicable to water facilities by reference in the ordinance
to include the standards set forth in the water and wastewater master
plan. That was previously not included in the -- when the
consolidated impact fee ordinance was adopted in March. So that
was just adding of that language. Basically, it's going to be the
standards set forth in the comprehensive land use plan or the water
and wastewater master plan, whichever service is most strict.
Also, there's provisions authorizing to spend water and sewer
impact fees to grant developer contribution credits to the extent it's
authorized by the master plan and provided the project is not then in
conflict with the master plan. Just adding the -- or the ability to apply
impact fee credits for those specific instances. Any questions on that
part?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: You're clear there.
MR. TINDALL: Okay. We -- on a limited basis, we're instating
an exemption of road impact fees for government entities but only on
Page 53
October 9, 2001
a specific very limited scale, and this has to do with tenants of the
county's airports that enter into a lease agreement. Specifically what
we did in this case was to cover -- we took out those exemptions to
the adoption of the consolidated impact fee ordinance in March
unaware at the time that there was actually a lease agreement in the
pipeline with the company called C.M. Marble with the Immokalee
Airport, and the intent was just to make sure the county could honor
its original commitments in that particular lease agreement.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Tindall, so this is not
waiving impact fees for other government agencies such as school,
fire --
MR. TINDALL: No, sir. This is very narrowly defined, and it
only applies to tenants of the airports for which the lease agreement
was executed before March the 13th of 2001 which was the date the
consolidated impact fee ordinance was adopted. Anything
subsequent to that date, that exemption goes away. Really the only
beneficiary is the company that we had made the prior commitment
to, and it was on file.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: If I may, when the impact fees
are waived on this particular thing, who in the end owns the
buildings?
MR. TINDALL: The county owns the buildings.
They are leased to the company. At the end of the lease term, the
county has the option of actually taking title to the structure or
requiring the company to return the land to its original state.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So we've been asking these
people to pay an impact fee on something that we're going to own in
the end?
MR. TINDALL: Yes, sir. That's correct.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, that's -- I think it was
clarified there that we have the ability to once the property's
Page 54
October 9, 2001
improved to include the improvement, and I think that would be
something that we should be doing in the future when those facilities
come on-line; no?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I don't. The way the ordinance
is presently written I have no problem with it myself.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Mr. Tindall, is it true
that transportation or the county through transportation gave $250 --
$250,000 for this road paving improvement to the Immokalee
Airport?
MR. TINDALL: I would have to refer that question to the
transportation department. I'm -- I'm not sure.
MR. OLLIFF: I believe the amount was $200,000, ifI recall.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
MR. TINDALL: With regard to the waivers for charitable
organizations, we wrote Chapter 4 in the executive summary in such
a way that made it easier to follow than the language in the
ordinance. Commissioner Henning is absolutely correct. The way
we have it spelled out in the ordinance is pretty difficult to follow in
making reference to all the different sections of-- to portions of
Section 501 of the IRS Code.
Just to put it in a nutshell for you, all charitable organizations
that are tax exempt under Section 501 of the IRS Code that provides
services of substantial benefit to residents of the county at no charge
or at reasonable or reduced rates and no part of those earnings go to
the benefit of any private shareholder or individual would be eligible
for this waiver. In the middle of the paragraph, we've listed -- we've
listed specific things that are excluded, and everything else would be
included within the eligibility criteria.
Those things that are excluded under 501 (c)3 include entities
that are operated for religious, scientific, literary or educational
purposes or to foster sports competition facilities or equipment, or for
Page 55
October 9, 2001
testing for public safety, or for prevention of cruelty to animals.
Under Section 501 (c)4 local associations of employees, which are
basically this would be inclusive of-- labor unions would be
excluded. Anything else that's tax exempt under Section 501 of the
IRS Code would be included.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And then it's still at the
discretion of the sitting commission whether that item is going to be
accepted for any one of those things that are eligible.
MR. TINDALL: Full discretion in terms of-- you have full
discretion in terms of the applicability and-- and the prioritization of
applications.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And did you want to comment
on the purpose for all this?
MR. TINDALL: Well, the purpose was to provide support for
charitable organizations within the community. There are quite a few
of them. When the impact fee consolidated ordinance was adopted in
March, there were previously some very limited exemptions for
charitable organizations, but they were so narrow in scope we felt
that there was potentially an equal protection challenge possibility, so
we decided to wipe the slate clean and give the board an opportunity
to enact policies that were more inclusive and more properly defined
in terms of the present sitting board's priorities regarding policy.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: In other words, these are such
organizations as the Red Cross, Hospice, Friendship House in
Immokalee that serve a governmental purpose to some extent.
MR. TINDALL: All those entities would be included within
the --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Right. And this only takes off
the county's part of the impact fees that have to do with roads. It
doesn't take off the fire department. It doesn't take off the hospital. It
doesn't remove any of them, and it would be up to $7,500. And if I
Page 56
October 9, 2001
seem to know a lot about it, that's what I did this summer.
MR. TINDALL: I would like to add one little comment about
the Immokalee Friendship House just so we -- you know because we
haven't had a chance to brief you on it yet because the recent progress
has been made on that. We've been actually working with the
representatives of the Friendship House to provide us with sufficient
documentation so that we can calculate a credit on the impact fees
based on the prior use of that existing building that's being renovated
for the purpose of the -- of the thrift shop. What we -- they have now
provided us with that documentation, and we are now able to
calculate a credit for the prior use that would effectively wipe out the
present impact fee. So that is really not something that needs to be
addressed by this ordinance. It's actually being addressed within the
scope of the ordinance.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I do appreciate that. The
impact fee that was on there was about double what the cost of the
original building was to build.
MR. TINDALL: Right. But, of course, we needed to have
something to put in our files to document.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I understand, and we have the
director here today from Friendship House who will be speaking to
us later.
MR. TINDALL: That is effectively a done deal right now.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I thank you for all the time you
put into this.
MR. TINDALL: Sure.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Mr. Tindall, if I could ask a question.
I may go to legal on this. Let's suppose an organization has a sizable
road impact fee that exceeds $7,500. Does that have to be paid all in
one given year, or can they spread that over a period of time in order
to pay for that.9 Let's say that it is $50,000.
Page 57
October 9, 2001
MR. TINDALL: The -- we have no provision in our ordinance
allowing for the deferral of impact fees except for multi-family
construction that comes under the affordable housing provisions. As
far as this type of construction which would normally be generally
lumped into a commercial type category, we don't have any
provisions for payments over time or deferrals over time, that sort of
thing.
COMMISSIONER HENNING:
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay.
Mr. Weigel?
MR. WEIGEL: No. I don't think so, but part of the reason for
that policy that's been in place -- and Mr. Feder may want to respond
further -- is the fact that when the approvals go forward for site
development building permit, when the collection is typically
obtained of the various impact fees, there is an impact that's coming
onto the roads potentially very shortly thereafter. And transportation
as well as the areas, other fiscal areas that are impacted, the services
that need to be provided, need as much lead time as they can to, in
fact, build and develop into their infrastructure requirements that
infrastructure that's going to be additionally required.
So there's been, I think, a businesslike and fiscally sound reason
for that. And as a side note, a question you raised at the last board
meeting had to do with the fiscal viability of projects and when they
go through the approval process. And, clearly, the ability for an
entity, a potential developer petitioner, to pay the various assorted
impact fees is part of that fiscal viability makeup that may be under
further review by us based on your suggestion, but as part of the
complex that is certainly on the plate for the developer right now.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. Mr. Henning. Commissioner
Henning, you have a question for Leo.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes. David, if you could
I have a question for legal also.
Does that open a can of worms,
Page 58
October 9, 2001
follow me on the ordinance on page 2 of the ordinance.
MR. WEIGEL: Okay. I'll move there. Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Page or line 7 through 10. It
appears to me that the Board of Commissioners is authorizing the
county manager to grant exemptions, the impact fees.
MR. WEIGEL: Well, there is -- obviously, there is language
addressing that. It's in the whereas part which is not the operative
part of the ordinance, Phil and Tom, and so ultimately that will fall
away in the codification, the whereases, so I think you may want to
point the commissioners to the operative part of the ordinance where
that aspect may or may not to whatever degree be implemented.
MR. TINDALL: Okay. I'm sorry. I printed out my copy on 8
1/2 by 11. So can you point me to which whereas we're talking
about?
MR. WEIGEL: Yeah. He's -- he's talking on page 2 of the
ordinance itself, page 5 of the agenda item, and it's the second
whereas -- full whereas appearing toward the top of the page. And
it's talking about where the board desiring to authorize county
manager to grant exemptions from road impact fees with regard to
future applications. There is that phraseology there that he's
questioning.
MR. TINDALL: Okay. Is this the one where it says, "Board of
County Commissioners desires to establish a limited program to
authorize __,,9
MR. OLLIFF: No. This is the sixth whereas.
MR. TINDALL: Thank you. One, two -- okay. Yes. Right.
Good. Okay. This is the one that only applies to the leases with the
Airport Authority. That is -- in the body -- it's the thing that I
discussed earlier when we were talking about Siena Marble and the
leases with the Airport Authority. The body of the ordinance limits it
to companies that have a lease agreement that was executed prior to
Page 59
October 9, 2001
March 13th, 2001. So anything past that date, even if there's a new
lease agreement it does -- the provisions do not apply.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. So it's a limited exercise
of giving the county manager authority to exempt impact fees.
MR. TINDALL: But the intent was really just so that the county
could meet its commitments that were previously made to Siena
Marble before the consolidated impact fee ordinance was adopted.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So the -- my colleagues can
understand that.
MR. OLLIFF: It is limited to that one application, and basically
by this action you would be authorizing me to grant -- to sign the
documents that would waive -- waive the impact fees for that one
particular applicant.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Next question for legal is
Commissioner Coletta's wife works for the Hospice. Is there any
conflict of commissioners working for not-for-profits that would
receive this benefit?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Mind you, this hasn't come
before us yet. It would be a question I would be asking you, too, at
that time.
MR. WEIGEL: There may be at that time. Under the state law
and the county ethics laws, we really come in terms the question of a
vote of a commissioner or a conflict of a -- potential of a conflict of a
commissioner that may have a positive or negative remunerative
effect, fiscal effect for him or herself or their relatives. A wife falls
within that relative definition by statute.
I don't want to dodge the question, but it would be difficult to
say in the ordinary context of things that she has potentially -- a paid
employee would elevate this to a conflict, but I would really have to
look at this further. Usually it's the quick responses that get me into
trouble, and I would like to have a little more facts and a little more
Page 60
October 9, 2001
opportunity to review it in the context of probably a later vote as
opposed to this one.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So for that reason should we
continue this part of this ordinance?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm sorry. I don't follow.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: No. No. No. The question just
would come up when Commissioner Coletta is faced with the choice
of whether or not to vote, he'll have to seek advice from whomever
he seeks it to decide whether or not he could vote, but there's no
question about whether or not he can vote on legislation. He just
might or might not be able to vote on the application of the
legislation if somebody should suggest it would benefit his wife,
which I think would be a very long stretch, but --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: It would be quite a stretch, to
be honest with you, but at that point in time whatever legal decides
I'll be -- and if there's a question, I will be more than happy to abstain
from voting.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Being in the atmosphere that
we're in, Commissioner Coletta and Commissioner Carter had to go
through this, and the interpretation that he got was that he was
incorrect of what he is doing in his -- his family's life and
employment, and it's just the atmosphere here in Collier County.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And respectfully, I'm just going
to say this, you know, I guess I can be more blunt than I have been
able to be in the past, but I'm just going to say that's an individual
commissioner's decision about whether or not he votes on an item
and, you know, we don't need to create a controvery where one
doesn't exist by talking about up here on the dais as if there might be
one.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I think it's a healthy discussion,
but we could draw a parallel with that with your business property
Page 61
October 9, 2001
and your -- your opposing the business property down the street, the
one that put in the U-Haul and to be able to fence it off because it
might affect the value of your property. I mean, that would be
something that would be a stretch of the imagination also.
COMMISSIONER HENNING:
U-Hauls, or I don't do any towing.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
Well, I don't -- I don't rent any
Come on, guys.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Hey, hey, time out. Time out. Time
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: We're going the wrong
direction.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Time out, Commissioners. The
question would be when a singular item comes in front of the board,
at that time the individual commissioner because of the affiliation of
a family member in said petitioner's role in front of the board would
go to legal counsel and seek opinion. It can go through a process of
which I'm very familiar with, and at that time you can make said
decision, but in body politics decision to have an ordinance that is
broad based, I don't see how that can affect anything because we're
not talking about a particular organization at this point. Am I correct,
Counsel?
MR. WEIGEL: Point well taken, Mr. Chairman, and the fact is
we're really talking about future potentialities and not necessarily
givens concerning additional impact fee ramifications for any
particular business. The legislation sets the standard, and then the
individual parcels, developers, entities, configurations, they come
forward and then would be subject or not subject to any of the
provisions of the ordinance as ultimately adopted, and it's not adopted
even right now.
I will state for the record, though, that in regard to
commissioners and their votes -- requirements for voting, there is a
Page 62
October 9, 2001
statutory requirement for elected officials to vote the job to which
they are elected. There also is a statutory requirement for them not to
vote where there is a conflict. If there is no conflict, but there is a
potential perception of conflict under separate statutory authority
286.012, Florida Statutes as part of the Sunshine law does say that
under-- under a perceived perception -- that sounds redundant -- of
conflict an elected official -- in this case a commissioner-- may elect
-- may determine not to vote on a particular matter. So there are --
from time to time have been items of either direct conflict or
perceived potential conflict where the county attorney has advised the
commissioners of the law, and then the commissioners themselves
make the determination as to what their conduct will be on the
particular item.
The -- the advise from the county attorney is given in the context
of the commissioners fulfilling their statutory obligations to vote and
do not have to do with the private personal interests of the
commissioners. That's been the point of reference that we've always
applied and have worked with the commission on ethics, and we
continue to operate in that mode.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I want to apologize, but those
are some of the questions that I wanted to ask not sitting up here and
not having the time to do that. It's -- it's no way an attack on
Commissioner Coletta's, but I know -- and I think everybody can
agree -- that there is a need for gaining the confidence of the people
here in Collier County. Forgive me.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And, frankly, this is not the way
to do it, and it's going to work exactly to the opposite of that end
and -
COMMISSIONER HENNING:
COMMISSIONER COLETTA:
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
And that's why I wanted to --
Can I bring an end to this?
We get this agenda. You know,
Page 63
October 9, 2001
some of us do our homework ahead of time.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: If I may, I would like to bring
closure to this and just accept Commissioner Henning's apology and
move on.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Duly noted and recognized. May we
move on with the discussion. Thank you.
MR. TINDALL: The next set of areas that are being addressed
by this ordinance amendment have to do with making some
improvements to some of the definitions and actually adding one
definition. These mainly have to do with adult-only communities.
We've been over the past several months struggling through research
and review of past permits and such determining the proper way to
assess various impacts fees on different types of adult-only
communities.
It's a problem area not only in this county, but I've surveyed other
counties, and they're having the same types of issues.
For one thing we were operating previously under the false
belief that the terms "adult congregate living facility" and "assisted
living facility" were synonymous terms. Based upon our research as
we're trying to address this issue, we have determined that they are
quite different. Basically an adult congregate living facility is pretty
much an independent transitional type living facility where people
live pretty much like the elderly people who live there live pretty
much like any of the rest of us in terms of being able to move about
and being self reliant, et cetera.
With an assisted living facility, those are specially licensed
businesses by the State of Florida, and they provide a greater deal of
medical and other types of care and services for the residents, and a
larger majority of the residents are not able to fully take care of
themselves and also not able to do things like operate vehicles and
such. So they provide services that act such as buses and that sort of
Page 64
October 9, 2001
thing that has an affect on the road system in that it decreases the
amount of traffic. So we felt a need particularly having to do with
roads to separate those two definitions and provide the more accurate
terminologies.
We also made a minor change to the definition of square
footage. There was one phrase in there that really only should apply
to road impact fees, and we just made sure it said that, and that's all
for definitions.
Having to do with water and sewer impact fees when multi-
family and mobile homes and other types of residential developments
are -- are started. Impact fees are initially calculated on a meter size
basis, and then later on as a development is built out there's another
methodology called the permit space calculation methodology. If
later on it's determined that the actual impact on our water and sewer
system is less than the fair share amount derived by the meter size
calculation methodology, the utilites just wanted a means of
providing an impact fee credit so that they can make up the difference
as the development is built out towards completion.
And, finally, we did -- there were just a number of scrivener's
errors, things like typos and misspellings and that sort of thing that
we collected -- that we've corrected generally throughout the
ordinance, but that's that. In summary, that's -- that's what this
ordinance amendment does for you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Questions by commissioners?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Do we have any public
speakers?
MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Chairman, you have two public speakers,
and if you're ready for those, I'll go ahead and call them.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: If there's no further questions by
commissioners at that point, yes.
MR. OLLIFF: First is Ed Laudise followed by John Lawson.
Page 65
October 9, 2001
MR. LAUDISE: Good morning. My name is Ed Laudise.
COURT REPORTER: Would you spell that?
MR. LAUDISE: I don't know if I can. It's been a long day
already. L-a-u-d-i-s-e. I'm with the Immokalee Friendship House.
With all due respect to the commissioners and the community, I
would like to take a few minutes and indulge you and tell you a little
bit of history and tell you where the Immokalee Friendship House is
and why I'm talking with you folks today. I promise I will not go
over my allotted time.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you, sir.
MR. LAUDISE: -- however, I will be available if you folks
have any questions.
Back in August of 2000, the Immokalee Friendship House was
given some money through a request, and that money was used to
purchase the property next door, a dilapidated building next door. It
was in code violation. We had talked with county about purchasing it
and also about making it a safe structure that would also be
something on Main Street in Immokalee, Florida, that would be
something we could all be proud of.
We came up for permits and were advised we would be required
to pay $10,000 in impact fee on this existing structure. We
questioned this and were informed that we would have to pay no
impact fees because it was an existing structure. We were called
back, and we were told that we owed $8,000. So we were very
confused about this.
Eventually, we came to Board of County Commission meeting.
My issue was I wanted to make sure that I had a safe structure,
bottom line, and the building was out of code. I was concerned about
people going up to the building getting cut or hurt or something. So
we solicited the Board of County Commission a couple months ago
about getting a permit, at least conditional, to work on the building,
Page 66
October 9, 2001
get it safe, and then that we would work with you folks on what
impact fee might be determined, and that would be when we
determine the CO.
We had a target date of October to finish the project. The
project is -- is 99 percent finished and 99 percent up to code. Of
course, it's ovcrbudgct and all those kinds of things, but I'm not going
to trouble you with those things. I want to explain to you what we're
trying to do in our community, and as you folks know, the economic
picture of Immokalee is substantially different than it is in Naples.
This property is located right in the middle of this economically
challenged area. Our goal is to set up a thrift store that will support
the Immokalee Friendship House, that will also provide a job training
location and also a place to improve the living conditions of the
people in our community by selling housewares. Okay. That is our
goal, and I would imagine that the county would endorse that.
We also are hoping to generate some much needed funding for
the Immokalee Friendship House. For those of you who don't know,
we are challenged every year to come up with our entire budget. The
average donation right now is about $10 from a person, so financially
the organization is challenged routinely. So we've embraced the
entrepreneurial spirit that is so wonderful in this country and decided
to set up a thrift store. This will be the first thrift store of its kind
supporting a local charity in Immokalee.
Okay. I've got to keep up with what -- I wrote it down really
quick, so you guys got to bear with me. So that's sort of the history.
And let me tell you a little bit about the Friendship House now that
I've explained about what our -- what our function is with the thrift
store. Last year, I just -- we just completed our fiscal year, as you
folks did. Last year we served 29,000 meals to the hungry in
Immokalee. Last year we sheltered 950 people. Last year over 150
of those were children, children in Collier County. We are the only
Page 67
October 9, 2001
charitable organization that is open 24 hours a day, 365 days a year
within 40-plus mile radius.
Immokalee Friendship House is in profound need of financial
support. In the absence of that, as I said, we've embraced the
entrepreneurial spirit and is working to establish this thrift store. I
hope the county commission today can decisively act and help us so
we can get our CO, and I understand respectively what Mr. Tisdale
(sic) said, but I also want to -- I also want to make sure we're laying
the groundwork. You -- you -- in this county you have a lot of
charities that are working very hard to knit together a safety net for
the community. And we can't do that unless we have a very strong
partnership with county. I'm not asking you for money. I'm asking
for the support. I'm not, Mr. Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
COMMISSINER COLETTA: Question.
MR. LAUDISE: I want to make sure that our activities can go
on.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you, sir. Commissioner
Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Ed, I'm not suggesting the
county give you a gift of money, but tell me in other communities
does the local government take an active part with operations such as
yours?
MR. LAUDISE: I mean, absolutely. Of all the counties, we're
one of less than a handful that are not supported by a homeless
shelter that's not receiving some sort of financial support. We have
other support, and I don't want to disparage the county or county
government because they do a lot of things on our behalf to make
sure we get through the day.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: What we do is we offer you
assistance to make it. We don't actually step in there and offer you a
Page 68
October 9, 2001
pot full of money or financial assistance. We give you some
guidance. That's what we mainly do; right? MR. LAUDISE: Exactly. Exactly.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And what about this impact
fee? Will this money in any way help your operation?
MR. LAUDISE: I'll put it to you bluntly; it's a show stopper. I
can't afford to do it unless I get -- I resolve this issue. And I cannot
right now in light of the economic times and the other things that are
going on in this country I cannot go after donors and ask for them for
money to pay an impact fee. I need to ask our donors to support us
so we can feed the people.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Please indulge me one more
question.
MR. LAUDISE: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Since September 1 l th what has
happened to your donation stream?
MR. LAUDISE: It's -- it's nonexistent almost. Our agency is --
is honestly struggling to make sure we have enough food for our
people, make sure we have enough money for payroll.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: And what would happen if your
services suddenly ceased?
MR. LAUDISE: There would be 29,000 hungry people, and
there'd be 950 people on the streets in Collier County.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Need I say more.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: If somebody --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Excuse me. Commissioner Fiala next
and then Commissioner Mac'Kie.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you. The question I had was
I don't -- I didn't understand why there was an impact fee in the first
place. I went out to see the building and -- and I saw what condition
it was in, which was pretty putrid, but the impact fee had already
Page 69
October 9, 2001
been paid on it previously being that it was an existing building.
What they're doing is bringing this thing up to code so it enhances the
community. They're not adding a building or anything, so I didn't
understand what the reason for the impact fee was in the first place.
MR. TINDALL: I can answer that. That's correct. The impact
fee was paid or really vested because it was actually built before there
were impact fees, but the original use was that of a storage facility. If
you look at our rate schedule, you'll see that the rate for a storage
facility is considerably less for the various impact fees than that of a
retail establishment which is a land use this most closely resembles.
What we have charged or-- I'm sorry, calculated on the impact fee
we initially and subsequently presented to the Immokalee Friendship
House was the difference between the two rates. It wasn't the full
cost of the impact fees for a new retail establishment.
Now, what we have been working very hard with the
representatives of the Friendship House so they could provide us with
documentation that there were other land uses besides that of a
storage facility that were properly permitted, etc. And it took a lot of
work, but as of last Friday they were able to provide us with
sufficient documentation that the structure was previously used for
retail purposes. Because of that, now that we have that
documentation we can calculate a credit that entirely wipes out the
new impact fee. So we're not going to be charging them any impact
fees now.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Period. So that -- so we don't have
to worry about that. Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: But he was speaking on behalf
of those that are still going to be charged impact fees.
MR. LAUDISE: Absolutely. One of the points I want to make
-- and I appreciate that. Honestly, I do. We went through great
lengths to make sure we had that documentation, and our county
Page 70
October 9, 2001
manager has done a terrific job in assisting us through that process.
But I also want to make sure -- I want to bring a message forth to the
county about the other charities that are in our community that are
providing a baseline of social support network that are doing things
in our community that -- it's not the government's obligation or
responsibility to do, but we are partners in that process, and I want to
make sure we start laying the groundwork so it's sensible and
responsible but that other people can come in and do things that help
knit the fabric of this wonderful community together. That's what I'm
asking.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'd just like to underscore what he's
saying. I served -- represented Collier County on a Boca Grant
Review Board which is money that the state gives us, and it's for
victims of violent crimes and agencies that help these victims. And it
was interesting to note I was on a regional board with, I think, it's
seven other counties represented on that same board. We were the
only county in the seven, the wealthiest, of course, of all of those
counties, but the only county that did nothing to support their social
service agencies. Interestingly enough to go one step further, we
were one of only a couple in the entire State of Florida that didn't do
anything for -- so just exactly what Ed is saying.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Other comments from board
members? The only thing I was going to say was give you a chance
to make a plug if somebody wanted to help you with this shortfall in
food and -- and funding, what number should they call?
MR. LAUDISE: Thank you very much.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: You're welcome.
MR. LAUDISE: 941-657-4090. And the Friendship House, the
address is 602 West Main Street, Immokalee, Florida 34142. Thank
you very much, and I thank the commission and all the county staff
that have worked very hard on this process.
Page 71
October 9, 2001
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you, sir.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you, Ed.
MR. OLLIFF: Next speaker is John Lawson.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Don't worry, you'll get plug
time, too, John.
MR. LAWSON: Thank you, Pam. I'm John Lawson, the
executive director for community outreach with the Guadalupe
Center in Immokalee, and I work with Ed in that community to serve
the poor. And we are in the process now of doubling the size of our
family education program through private resources, and I thought I
should speak to encourage you today to act in favor of-- of allowing
not-for-profit organizations a more viable way of navigating through
the impact fee system which has been very difficult, as Ed has
mentioned and also to endorse, as you do on many occasions, the
invaluable community service of not-for-profits in helping to make
our community a wonderful place to live and to work.
I have lived here for 32 years in this county and raised my kids
here, and it is a truly wonderful place, and it is made more so because
of community service organizations and a wonderful government.
And when we can work together to that regard, then we can all win,
so, thank you very much.
And as Pam mentioned, Guadalupe Center is -- has also been in
this situation since September 1 lth of having a disengagement of our
-- of our donors as they have focused in on the world events, and we
encourage them to come back, and we will have a Thanksgiving
celebration in Immokalee as we do every year, and we encourage that
participation. So thank you very much.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I just have to say I recommend
that to the county commissioners if you haven't ever spent
Thanksgiving in Immokalee slicing turkey and serving cranberries
out to the farm workers. I really recommend it to you. It is a real
Page 72
October 9, 2001
Thanksgiving when you go out there and do that.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: If I may, Chair-- Chairperson
Carter, make a motion to approve this ordinance?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Second.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I have a motion by Commissioner
Coletta. I have a second by Commissioner Mac'Kie.
MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Chairman, you probably want to close out
the public hearing first.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Be a good idea. First I'll close the
public hearing. I forgot we're still under public hearing. Close the
public hearing. I entertain your motion, Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And my second, please.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Second by Commissioner Mac'Kie.
Any discussion by board members? Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you. I must say that I
know that some of our staff is not in support of this, but I must
commend them on the way that -- where the money is coming from,
but it is still a donation to charitable items. And I must say that I do
that on my own will, not through fees given to government to put in
infrastructure. And also we are out there telling the public why to
vote for a half-cent referendum, and we're telling them that impact
fees are at its highest level, and then we're giving it away part -- part
of it. I think it's not conducive of what we want to tell the people out
there going to the polls in November.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA:
COMMISSIONER HENNING:
fine.
Commissioner Henning.
If I may, Tom.
You can disagree and that's
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: May I make a comment?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: If I may comment on that,
I see the direction you're looking at, but
Page 73
October 9, 2001
you're looking totally in the wrong direction, and we're making an
investment in services that are there for our citizens at a bargain rate,
and this is what this all spells out to. It's nothing more than fees that
are being paid by the government for government use. We're just
offsetting them to encourage these places to grow to be able to take
care of the needs that are out there on a private scale rather than on a
government end.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It's -- it's a charitable
organization, again, and they're doing a great job through the private
sector, and that's where I feel it should be, private sector donations.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: If I read the ordinance correctly -- and
I may be incorrect here -- it says they may be waived. It doesn't say
automatically waived.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: That's what it says.
MR. OLLIFF: They may be, and it's going to be at the
discretion of the Board of County Commissioners on each and every
one of those applications. And just for the record to be very clear the
-- and to reiterate what Commissioner Henning had indicated earlier,
the funding source for this is actually interest earned on impact fees
paid. So at least there is some argument to be made that development
as it occurs is helping to offset any impact fees for these charitable
organizations if the board should try -- decide to waive any of them.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And there is a limit on how much
the agency applying for it can get as well as how much we can give
out a year.
MR. OLLIFF: There is a total maximum waiver of 7,500 and a
total maximum of annual allotment of $100,000 for this program.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: And how much do we collect in
impact fees in a given year, roughly?
MR. OLLIFF: I don't know the total collection, but I will tell
Page 74
October 9, 2001
you just the interest alone is in excess of several million dollars.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Here, Phil's here to --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, that tells me interest is more
than several million -- several million a year, and we're talking about
$100,000 max to help organizations of public-private corporation, if
you please -- if I can use that term -- to meet the needs of the
community. I guess I'm a little puzzled by the question.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I think it's a shameful
mischaracterization of what's really going on here when what we're
doing is affording the county commission the opportunity to decide
whether or not to allow interest on impact fees to be used to pay an
impact fee if they find that there is such a great public purpose being
served that it is a worthy use of the interest on impact fee money.
Nobody's waiving anything today. Nobody's giving anybody a
donation today, and that is a disservice to the community to get that
misinformation out there.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I don't think it's
misinformation. I think it's correct if you read the ordinance.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: It is. It gives this board the
opportunity to make a decision. It doesn't give away a nickel.
MR. T1NDALL: If you net out the school and fire impact fees
which are not included in the waiver, we will -- in fiscal year 2001
we collected at my best estimate approximately $42 million.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you, sir.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Can we call the question?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Yes. I'm going to -- well, I will call
the question. Any further discussion? All in favor signify by saying
aye.
(Unanimous response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
(No response.)
Opposed by the same sign.
Page 75
October 9, 2001
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Motion carries 5-0. Thank you. I like
spirited discussions on the floor. All right.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioner Carter.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I guess I ought to explain
myself after all that discussion. It's going to give me an opportunity
to bring this back up in the future.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: You can bring up anything you want
at any time under the request to bring something back for
reconsideration.
All right. We're going to move on. County manager's -- I got
that right. Did I jump something? Wait a minute. I've got to -- I'm
still-- whoa, whoa, whoa.
Item # 1 OF
THE PLACEMENT OF TWO "WELCOME TO GOLDEN GATE
ESTATES" SIGNS FOR THE GOLDEN GATE ESTATES AREA
CIVIC ASSOCIATION WITHIN COUNTY ROADWAY RIGHTS-
OF-WAY- APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Mr. Chairman, you're still on public hearing.
You're on 8-F, which is 16-B-8 brought forward at the request of
Commissioner Coletta.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Yes. Yes. I thought there was another
animal in here I'd missed. Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: One more time, John.
MR. MUDD: It's 16-B-8 that's being brought forward to 8-F.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: It's the one you pulled,
Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Right.
Page 76
October 9, 2001
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Has to do with that sign.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Signs in Golden Gate, sir.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: It may seem a little strange
why I would be pulling something from the Golden Gate Estates
Area Civic Association.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, it does.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Yes. We're all baffled by that, but go
right ahead.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No. Seriously, I kind of
questioned whether we're setting a precedent, and I want to make
sure we're not, $125 impact fee. If this is something that hasn't been
done as a matter of course over a period of time, I'm really opposed
to it, and I'll find the donations out there to cover this cost. Can you
tell me, Mr. Kant?
MR. KANT: Edward Kant, transportation operations director.
That is the permit fee, not an impact fee, sir.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Permit fee.
MR. KANT: That's for the right-of-way permit. The request
from the association was to waive the fee. Our -- to be consistent with
our recent actions, we've not been waiving fees. There have been
several of those that have appeared before this board in the last six
months or so, so that's why we put it on the agenda the way it was.
Even though it was requested, we cannot support that.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: One question, the sign that's on
951 that's been put up recently advertised in Golden Gate City, is that
-- they paid the fee for that; correct?
MR. KANT: That was done through the Golden Gate
Beautification MSTU Advisory Board. That was an existing prior
sign that was replaced. I don't believe that that was the same thing as
these new signs.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: They were not forgiven the fee
Page 77
October 9, 2001
because there was no fee to forgive.
MR. KANT: That's correct. There was -- those have been out
there for probably 15 years. These were replacement signs. I cannot
give you a straight answer, 'cause I just don't know if there was any
fee discussion on those signs.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I appreciate that. I recommend
that we deny it and pass the hat down the county here to get the $125.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: My already --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Just talking about the hat.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I would second that, Commissioner
Coletta, because recently Willoughby Acres had the same kind of
thing on their agenda, and they paid for it out of their homeowners'
association. It was a buck and a quarter.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: My already high opinion of you,
Commissioner Coletta, goes up again because you stand by your
principles and not your political boundaries. I respect that you stand
by your principles. I support that. Thank you for bringing it up.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Great catch, and we didn't mean to
tease you so much.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, we did.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Oh, okay. See, we do have a little fun
up here, folks. Lighten up. You know, we could get hungry
watching the movement of this agenda. Okay. I have a motion. I
have a second.
MR. KANT: Excuse me, Commissioners. I'd like a
clarification, if I may. My understanding of the motion is to permit
the installation of the signs but not to waive the fee.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Correct, sir.
MR. KANT: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I have a motion. I have a second. All
in favor signify by saying aye.
Page 78
October 9, 2001
(Unanimous response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Opposed by the same sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Motion carries 5-0. Thank you.
MR. KANT: Thank you, Commissioners.
MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Chairman, I need to clarify. That item was
actually 10-F, I believe, on your agenda, and we need to back up now
to Item 9-A and just start working your way back down the agenda as
it's printed.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you.
Item #9A
RESOLUTION 2001-395 APPOINTING CAROLYN SPATTA TO
THE BLACK AFFAIRS ADVISORY BOARD - ADOPTED
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: One applicant for that Black
Affairs Advisory Board position. I'd like to move for his approval.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I have a motion for. Do I hear a
second?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I have a second by Commissioner
Henning. All in favor signify by saying aye.
(Unanimous response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
COMMISSIONER FIALA:
3 for 10-G?
MR. OLLIFF: No, ma'am.
out of order.
Opposed by the same sign.
Motion carried.
Are we supposed to be doing 16-A-
We took that -- we took Item 10-F
We were incorrect in telling you that that was Item 8-F.
Page 79
October 9, 2001
It was actually 10-F, so we're back up to Item 9-A and 9-B is where
we're at now.
Item #9B
RESOLUTION 2001-396 RE-APPOINTING WILLIAM
ERICKSON, ROBERT COLE AND GEORGE PEARSON TO THE
LELY GOLF ESTATES BEAUTIFICATION ADVISORY
COMMITTEE - ADOPTED
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. All right. We're on -- we're on
B, under appointment of members to Lely Golf Estates Beautification
Advisory Committee.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Three applicants for three
positions. Do we have to waive the -- MS. FILSON: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: So I'll move their approval with
the necessary waiver.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I have a motion by Commissioner
Mac'Kie, second by Commissioner Fiala. All in favor signify by
saying aye.
(Unanimous response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
Opposed by the same sign.
Motion carries.
Item #9C
FINALIZING THE ANNUAL PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL
PROCESS FOR THE COUNTY ATTORNEY- APPROVED IN
THE AMOUNT OF $145,614; WITH LIFE INSURANCE, $400
Page 80
October 9, 2001
CAR AND PHONE ALLOWANCE AND CONTRACT
EXTENDED TO 2003
That takes us to C. This item has been continued from the
September 25th meeting, and it is the bi-annual performance
appraisal process for the county manager which has been done, and
this is now for the county attorney. Board discussion.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I'll just jump in there and say as
I -- as I said to David privately, I really commend him for some
serious improvements, some giant steps he's made in organization
and delivery of services. I hear just glowing reports from
constitutional officers who interact with his office, and I -- as you can
tell by my numbers -- gave him a very high evaluation and just want
to get the chance to commend him publicly for that positive change
over previous -- previous times where I've had a different opinion.
I'm very, very pleased and impressed with their work.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Pam has the most background of
any of us here, so she can compare one to the other. This is my first
year working with David, but I've found him to be actually a very
good -- a very rewarding experience. David keeps his staff involved
with all of us as well, and I appreciate that. He takes the specialist
from whatever question we have and makes sure they are there and
they respond immediately. ! don't have to wait. By the end of the
day, I have my answer, and I -- and I just really appreciate that,
David. You don't leave us hanging out there to dry.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: If I may add my two cents. I
wasn't too sure how the whole process worked when we first started
last November, and at one point I came to a disagreement with David
over the Sunshine and ethic laws. I thought he had something wrong,
so I signed up for a seminar on this subject in Orlando, and David
Page 81
October 9, 2001
was kind enough to accompany me there. And you want to know
something, he was absolutely correct right down the line, every single
way, and I've never questioned him since.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: That's all right to question him, but he
really knows the Sunshine Law.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: He sure does and ethic laws.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And you know one other thing
that I really --just because of my leaving and having been here a long
time, I want to say that I have learned that David does an especially
good job which is a really tenuous difficult position to be in to try to
tell us when we're about to mess up without making some admission
on the record that if we do mess up ends up getting used against us in
court. I mean, he has to tread that line so carefully, and -- and
sometimes I have been critical in the past that I want him to stand up
and yell at us and give us more direct advice. But what I have
learned over the years is that when -- if he should do that, he could
really be hurting us in the long run, and he is very prudent about that.
I think that's probably one of the biggest challenges of the job that he
really handles very well.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I might also add you've done an
excellent job of pulling the staff together that can meet all our needs.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, I only have one question. I will
-- because David knows, I gave him the toughest evaluation last year
of any commissioner -- seated commissioner, and I was tough on
David. I had a lot of questions, and we sat down, and we have
worked this year. And like Commissioner Mac'Kie I have seen
substantial improvement, terrific improvement as a matter of fact,
David. You may still think my evaluations are conservative, but he
has -- he has -- he has met or exceeded all my expectations, and that's
a tough job for anybody that reports to this board, and I congratulate
you on the progress that you have made, David. And you have -- to
Page 82
October 9, 2001
me personally you've restored my faith in what you do in your office,
and I feel very, very comfortable with the legal advice and direction
that you give us.
You're continuing to be a team player with all our operating
departments, which is a big move that we didn't have in the past, and
I think ifs through the two gentlemen sitting to my right, our
administrator, Mr. Olliff, and Mr. Weigel, that we're getting better in
terms of coordinating and working legal with all our operating
departments. And we're not there yet. We got a lot more work to do,
but you will see us get much better doing that internally and
externally. Both have done a tremendous job of working with the
other constitutional officers.
So this is a very positive thing that I see that's happening, and I
commend you, David, for a year that you have worked diligently to
get better and that you have -- doing some things in the future.
Again, he evaluated himself, and he said, "Here's some things we still
need to do. I need an outside source to evaluate our departments," so
he's going to have the State's Attorney association team do a review
of his operations for efficiency and organizational effectiveness and
ways it could be better. And, hey, you know, I didn't have to tell
him. He went and did it himself. That's the kind of thing that I
respect and the way I evaluated you.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Mr. Chairman, I know there are
a couple of things. There was that life insurance whole versus term
that was a technical correction we made in our county manager's
contract and also the desire to extend the contract and then an auto
phone allowance issue. I don't know, I certainly support those. I
wonder if there were other issues for our decision making today. I
guess we're on the merit pay discussion as well. What exactly is --
besides evaluation, what else is on the table for our decisions?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: What's on the table is some
Page 83
October 9, 2001
Contractual things that -- that I'll let David Weigel present to us, and
then there is the adjustment of how much you pay a county attorney.
He has laid out for you the cost of living, which I believe is in his
contract, and the pay plan adjustment which would bring him up to --
to be, A, competitive of other county attorneys around the state for
the size county and operations and put him in a position where his --
his pay is now more relevant to the assistant county manager in this
whole scenario that's been taking place and that's there, plus there is a
merit factor to be calculated, too, if that's the desire of the board. So
you've got contractual things to discuss. You've got the pay plan
adjustment to discuss and whether or not you feel there is a merit
increase. So, Mr. Weigel, you want to talk about the contract?
MR. WEIGEL: Yes. Thank you. Thank you, Commissioner,
and thank all of you commissioners for your comments, not just now
but during the course of the year and, of course, most recently during
this evaluation review process. Because in having an opportunity to
speak with you individually and have followup it's continued to assist
me and certainly provide me with pointers as to how we can better
accommodate this board as a collective unit but also you individual
commissioners with the very important work questions you have that
our office is a part of in getting you to the Board of County
Commissioner meetings every two weeks and -- and the bigger
considerations you have, too, planning considerations.
The county attorney contract I have is -- is a 1998 contract, my
second with this board. And Tom had brought forward to you a
couple weeks ago that his contacts with the insurance representative
for the county had stated that whole life insurance could be provided
as opposed to term life, has a few extra positive aspects to it for the
insured, me.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: But there's no cost differential.
MR. WEIGEL: Apparently no additional cost there, so my
Page 84
October 9, 2001
thought would be if that does, in fact, appear to be the case as we've
been told, I'd have that same consideration in my contract as Tom
asked for and received two weeks ago. Additionally, as I mentioned
to the commissioners, I don't have an auto phone allowance. I
negotiated with Commissioner Barry four years ago, and she said,
"Let's bring it up another time, but not right now." This appears to be
an opportunity to bring that up.
I am certainly on the circuit more than ever before and expect to
be on the circuit far more even in this year and years -- hopefully in
years to come often driving my car or, in fact, coming in to utilize the
office as a transmittal point for commissioners and other work that
we have. So I'd appreciate some consideration for a monthly auto
phone allowance as part of your consideration today.
The third item on the contract would be in terms of the contract
by its own term would come to an end in October a year ago from
this week, next year, and I know Commissioner Mac'Kie had
mentioned a couple years ago -- two or three years ago -- not on my
contract but on the county manager contract, not this county manager,
that there might be a board consideration to not have contracts of
your two contractual employees coming up in election years. From a
personal standpoint, if you do have the confidence in me and also the
desire and stand with the thought that we can continue not only to
deliver as we have but deliver in a better way, in a coordinated way,
with constitutional officers and county manager, that this would be an
opportunity to extend my contract right now as opposed to getting
into a negotiation process next fall. It could be extended, obviously,
for any period that you would choose.
I note that one year would take it to 2003, two years would be
2004 which may be an election year. That's not such a problem for
me, but it's something that, obviously, has been an issue discussed
before. Three years would put it to 2005 as far as that goes.
Page 85
October 9, 2001
So that's really the discussion in regard to potential contract
elements that might be considered for revision today. Mr. --
Commissioner Carter mentioned that the wage adjustment and you-
all have seen or at least had reference to the fact that the Arthur
Andersen study three, three and a half years ago which was
commissioned after seven years with no wage adjustment, I did
indicate a significant differential with county attorneys and assistant
county attorneys vis-a-vie the public sector.
It didn't even compare the private sector to which we lose our
attorneys and came up with a 26 percent -- at that time, 26 percent
differential, and in the two-year implementation that occurred all
county employees had an additional 5 percent, I think, added in
which for the county attorney's office was a 31 percent differential
over two years. Last year this board graciously extended to me that
15 1/2 percent wage adjustment consistent with what all the other
attorneys in my office had received, and that's another issue for you
this year too.
My contract mentions that I should receive wage adjustments
that the other county employees -- general wage adjustments that
other county employees receive. The Arthur Andersen breakout was,
obviously, specific to different job classifications and areas which
made it more valuable, and I would respectfully request that that be
implemented too.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All right. You have heard the items
presented by our legal counselor, Mr. Weigel, our county attorney.
Discussion by the board.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I certainly support the three
contract revision items, the whole life insurance. I think the car
phone allowance is a reasonable one, especially considering that
we've told him to get out there on the road more. I support the
extension of the contract but think that considering that I'm a short
Page 86
October 9, 2001
timer I'm not going to say how much time and I'm not going to -- I'll
support what the majority of the board thinks is right on the amount
of time and on what the merit pay increase should be, but I do think
there should be one.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I agree with you, Commissioner
Mac'Kie, on the first two. I would support moving that to 2003; that
way it takes it out of a nonelection (sic) year and gives the
opportunity that, you know, it really gets down to almost less than
two years to work through that -- that contract, and then you have the
wage adjustment and the other. So I would like to hear from the
other commissioners on it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I agree with the 2003 that you've
just mentioned. Obviously we -- we have no expense involved with
the insurance. I think we should give him that. As far as car and
phone allowance, I'm sorry he didn't have it before. He certainly
does deserve that. We need to bring his wages up to the rest of the
state. I'm surprised that we haven't done that before, so I support all
of-- all of those.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: So you would support the wage
adjustments, is what I hear?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, absolutely.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: We've brought everybody else's
wages up throughout the entire county. We can't leave him out.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Commissioner Coletta, any comments.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I just appreciate everything
Dave has done and am supportive of this. Wage adjustment's
important because I think under present circumstances the way we're
adjusting other wages in his office pretty soon he'll be the lowest paid
person. I mean, that would be over a period of time.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: No. You'll always be the lowest paid
Page 87
October 9, 2001
person, Commissioner. You have a part-time job, but your salary is
set by the State of Florida.
Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No. Nothing.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: No comments?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No comments.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. All right. I entertain a motion
from the commissioner to put this all on the table.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I was just saying to one of the
commissioners I'm very poor at making motions, but I'm going to try
this one. I'd like to make a motion that we -- that we change David's
life insurance to whole life, that we give him car and phone
allowance, that we extend his contract to the year 2003, and that we
adjust his wage appropriately so that he meets the standards that have
been set forth in this state.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I have a motion.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I can second it, but don't we
have to be specific about the wage adjustment?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I think you do need a clarification on
that. If you're saying that the pay plan adjustment, I think that
clarifies it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, okay. Pay plan adjustment.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And that -- that is indicated -- so
you're -- so you're suggesting that we do approve the pay plan
adjustment. Is there any interest on the board to look at the merit
pay?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, yes. Should that be part of this
same motion?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: It needs to be a part of the motion.
Luckily, I told you I'm very poor at making motions, but I'm here
learning because Pam has always been my guiding force.
Page 88
October 9, 2001
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Two, three, or four percent is
what's sort of out there for decision making, and it's -- you know --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: What did we give Tom?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: We gave Tom four, didn't we?
No, we gave you--
MR. OLLIFF: 2.9.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: 2.9?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Wouldn't it be appropriate to
do the same for Mr. Weigel?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I would think so and especially
being that Commissioners Carter and Mac'Kie have said what a great
improvement, I think he deserves that merit raise, so okay, let me
include in that motion a 2.9 percent merit adjustment increase.
MR. WEIGEL: The auto allowance, I didn't hear a dollar
number for auto allowance, just so the clerk would know.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: What are you propose -- I don't know
how much--
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: He's proposed $400 a month.
MR. WEIGEL: Auto phone allowance.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Is that what the motion
intended?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's what the motion intended.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second to it also.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Go for the best package you can get.
Ms. Filson is very good at finding those out there. I don't know, what
do we get? What's the standard -- what's our standard package for the
state -- covers the whole state, Ms. Filson?
MS. FILSON: Two of the commissioners have a package that's
99.99 a month and -- I'm sorry, three of you and two of you have one
that's 149.99 a month with AT&T.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I'm not going to suggest in the motion
Page 89
October 9, 2001
that you might want to look at something a little less than 400 a
month then. I don't know. Our bills don't run more than maybe max
200 a month by any commissioner.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: But he's talking about car and
phone, total of $400 a month.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Four hundred would be a cap;
doesn't mean he has to achieve that number.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All right. I'm okay with that. Up to --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. Up to 400. That's -- that's
good. You should have made this motion.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: No, ma'am. No, ma'am. I believe all
commissioners have an equal opportunity to wade into water and
make motions.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I'm going to take a risk here and
just be sure -- and I apologize, David, but you know we all have --
our salaries are all public knowledge, so I'm just going to be sure I
understand what I'm voting on here. That your current -- your salary
would go from 118,951 to 145,614 or thereabouts because that's a 3
percent merit pay on top of COLA.
MR. WEIGEL: I think that's correct, and I will say, though, in
regard to that auto allowance, if it's in terms of submitting bills for
auto, that's a little different than just having an allowance that I pay
income tax on. Whatever figure you may choose as far as that goes
which is, quite frankly, easier to do than breaking out this part of
transportation and that part of that gas bill and accumulating them.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And I would just suggest
however it works with Tom. Does Tom have an allowance, or do
you have this receipt reimbursement?
MR. OLLIFF: No. I have -- I have an allowance, and we
structured it specifically that way because it's probably more
paperwork than it's worth going the other way.
Page 90
October 9, 2001
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Amen. So I'd avoid --
personally I'd avoid -- we'll spend more than $400 monitoring it if we
do this whole receipt reimbursement thing. It's just you give him an
allowance. If 400 is too much, make it 300. Do whatever you think
it ought to be. That's my suggestion anyway. CHAIRMAN CARTER: Questions?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. Yes. When you say an
allowance, in other words, whether he spends it or not he would get
it?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And he pays income tax on it. I
mean, it becomes -- it's basically salary.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I don't -- I really don't -- is that
what you have, Tom?
MR. OLLIFF: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Then I don't have a problem.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: See, he spends less he gets taxed less.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No. He gets the 400, period.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: No, he gets the money.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Period. He doesn't get taxed any
less.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Oh, yes he does. It's up to; it's
income.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: He gets the right to expense the
bills off.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Right. He can write expenses against
it.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: No.
MR. WEIGEL: No.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: What he's proposing and what
we do with Tom is we give him -- you can call it salary, you can call
Page 91
October 9, 2001
it whatever you want to. In his check he's going to get his paycheck,
and then he's -- may get a separate check, yes, for his phone car
allowance. We will be giving him money. It's not reimbursement for
expenses, and we will be giving it to him whether he spends it on
candy wrappers or car phones, but we will be acknowledging that we
believe he has an expense of around $400 a month for automobile
and car phone debts related to county public purpose. And we will be
giving him $400 a month in addition to the 145 -- the 145,000 this --
and we're just getting off on the small issue here, but that's -- we need
to be clear. We're not talking about a reimbursement. We're talking
about giving money for a car allowance and a car phone allowance,
and he will get a check for $400 a month.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. Any other discussion? Any
other questions by any commissioner?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I -- I needed to be sure that I
understand. We are talking about 145,000 in round numbers plus
4,800 a month -- I mean, a year after you get that 400, so we're really
talking about a package that's about $150,000 of cash separate from
benefits. Is my math good?
MR. OLLIFF: Your math is pretty good.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, we should at least be up to
what the rest of the state pays all of their attorneys; right?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And you see here what the -- we
have a -- we have a deal here that tells us in Sarasota he's making
146, but he's got a review coming up. Pinellas makes 147.
Hillborough makes 151. Orange makes 162. Broward makes 160.
Palm Beach makes 120 but is expecting a March review. Lee makes
121, but is expected --
MR. WEIGEL: Your values are actually on the right side, some
of them anyway, because --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I was doing currents --
Page 92
October 9, 2001
MR. WEIGEL: Okay, fine.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: -- and is expecting -- Lee
County is expecting to come up to 130. So, like, for example, when I
said Hillsborough is 151, he's expecting 162 this year. I mean, this --
it sounds like a lot o£ money 150, but it's not out of the ballpark.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: The thing I always keep thinking
about is it' he were in the private sector, he could make what a regular
attorney makes in the private sector, and you have to keep good
people and pay them.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: What does a regular attorney
make?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I don't know, but they all drive
around in Mercedes --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I used to.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- and live in great places.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: You can look it up, because the
first year I was on the board I was still a regular attorney, and you can
see I was making a lot more -- I was making more than 150. Let's go
with that. Oh, the good old days.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Yes. Okay. Well, you're going to go
back to good 'ole days, so any further discussion? Any other
questions by commissioners? I'm going to call the question.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: We didn't have a second, did we?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, we did.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Commissioner Coletta seconded your
motion.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: With all the necessary
corrections.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: With all the necessary corrections. All
in favor signify by saying aye.
Page 93
October 9, 2001
(Unanimous response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Opposed by the same sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Motion carries 5-0.
MR. WEIGEL: I thank you. I look forward to work very, very
hard with you-all. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All right. That takes us to --
MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Chairman, at your indulgence, I know this
has been a confusing agenda, but could I ask you to consider Item 10-
A in order for me to be able to make the engagements that I have to
make this afternoon, and I would love to be able to cover that
personally.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: You're supposed to be on an
airplane right now, aren't you?
MR. OLLIFF: I'm supposed to be leaving for an airplane right
now.
Item #10A
STAFF TO DEVELOP A CITIZEN'S OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE
FOR THE REFERENDUM OF ROADS- APPROVED
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. Can we go to 10-A?
MR. OLLIFF: Chairman, ifI can, I just in -- in light of the
upcoming referenda, we have a proposal for you to consider this
morning, and it is one that I know that some other communities have
used throughout the State of Florida. I think it's one that is very, very
appropriate for our community. And what we are proposing is a
Citizens Oversight Committee specifically designed to review any
revenue and expenses related to monies received should the referenda
Page 94
October 9, 2001
for roads pass in its referendum election of the first week of
November.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: A motion by Commissioner Mac'Kie.
I have a second by Commissioner Fiala. Any discussion?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: You want to talk more about it?
I mean, I just don't want to cut you off.
MR. OLLIFF: No. I just want to make sure that the public
understands clearly that there are a number of protections in this
particular referenda issue. One is that there is an ordinance that
simply cannot be amended by future boards in terms of the uses of
these monies and that the monies are restricted specifically for road-
related expenses only. In other words, the county commission cannot
use those monies to build parks, libraries, do indigent health care, or
anything else. It can orily be used for road-related expenses.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And as insurance for that we
would be creating a citizens over-sight committee to watch and report
should there be anything questionable to prevent anything
questionable from happening.
MR. OLLIFF: And just, secondly, while I had the public
opportunity I wanted to point out-- because it's come up in questions
before, well, is there an opportunity to supplant, if you will, taking
this money as it was always alleged that the state did with a lot of
monies and move this money. I will tell you the only other monies
that we use for road construction in this county are gas taxes and
impact fees, and both of those are also restricted funding sources that
can only be used for road-related improvements, as well, so there is
no opportunity for this commission to be able to do anything with all
three of those funding sources other than road-related improvements.
But on top of all of that we thought it would be an icing, if you
Page 95
October 9, 2001
will, on the cake of protection to provide a citizen over-sight
committee; that's why it's recommended to you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: The over-sight committee does not
change what roads are to be built or -- it does not take or usurp the
accountability and responsibilities of the Department of
Transportation. It says, "Here's the plan, here's the roads, and we'll
make sure the money is spent on those activities." MR. OLLIFF: Exactly.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All right. We have a motion. We have
a second. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all in favor signify
by saying aye.
(Unanimous response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Opposed by the same sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Motion carries 5-0. Thank you, Mr.
Olliff. Have a safe trip. Mr. Mudd, you will be taking over, I
understand. That would move us back to -
Item #9D
OPERATION WEED AND SEED PROGRAM MEMORANDUM
OF AGREEMENT- MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT
APPROVED
MR. MUDD: To 9-D, sir, Board of County Commissioners
approval of the Operation Weed and Seed Program.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: That says Commissioner
Coletta. Is that weed and seed something, 'cause there's not backup, I
don't think, in the packet, was there?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm sorry for the lack of
backup. I'll tell you what I would like to do. Rather than give you
Page 96
October 9, 2001
my view on it, I'd like to invite John Lawston (sic) up here to give
you an overview of where we are with it. It's a program that involves
the population of Immokalee in a very big way. It involves the FBI --
well, I'm taking John's speech away from him. Come on up, John,
and please give us an overview of this whole program.
MR. LAWSON: Yes. For the record, John Lawson, executive
director for Guadalupe Center Community Outreach. Approximately
six months ago we were approached by the Immokalee Civic
Association and the Immokalee Alliance to help bring forward the
Weed and Seed Program. And as part of that effort we've had a
series of community forums, and we've actually gone out into the
community to seek the advice of the community knocking door to
door. There was also a proclamation that was offered by the county
commissioners to support this initiative during the summer.
Where we are right-- we're in the process of making application
for recognition as a site. At this point we have formed a series of
committees -- and steering committees, and our request to you today
is to formally direct staff to participate in that to assist in the Weed
and Seed Program on the steering committees.
The steering committees will then help guide the program and
help in the implementation of the strategies that have been developed
by the community organizations and the residents of the community.
It is a program that is a part of the U.S. Justice Department and has
been endorsed strongly by Attorney General John Ashcroft. It was
started by the Bush administration, and it continues to be supported
financially through the Bush administration.
It is a cooperative community based program that is co-
sponsored by the sheriff's office. Residents and a whole series of not-
for-profit organizations and our involvement with you is to make sure
that the coordination of this program moves forward smoothly so
we've requested participation from parks and recreation, the library,
Page 97
October 9, 2001
code enforcement, and other community organizations.
Jim Coletta has been actively involved in the meetings in
helping through the executive committee up to this point. Leo Ochs
has also participated in some of the meetings, and we can only praise
your county staff for seeing that the importance of this as a vision for
the Immokalee community.
We -- it would have no particular growth management impact on
the county, nor would it have a direct fiscal impact because the
salaries of the staff or this is part of their job to do these types of
things anyway. And we would recommend that the board authorize
your staff to participate in the coordination of the Weed and Seed
Program and continue to advise us as we move forward.
Once we receive recognition, which would happen in perhaps as
early as February of this year, then we would be asked to apply for
funds through the Justice Department to implement the strategies that
have been developed, and then that would move forward with the
guidance of your staff and their role of assisting us in the weeding
and seeding components as to -- as to their involvement. I would be
happy to answer questions.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I just have -- I know everybody
thinks I play solitaire on this thing up here, but I actually have the
Weed and Seed web page up, and I just wanted to --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: That's her story.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: -- show it to you. I wanted to
read something to you from it about the strategies -- I just think this is
neat about the weed and seed (as read): "The strategy involves a
two-pronged approach. Law enforcement agencies and prosecutors
cooperate in weeding out criminals who participate in violent crime
and drug abuse, attempting to prevent their return to the targeted area,
and seeding brings human services to the areas encompassing
prevention, intervention, treatment, and neighborhood revitalization."
Page 98
October 9, 2001
I just thought that was a very nice little synopsis of what the Weed
and Seed Program is, and I move for approval.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I have a motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I have a second by Commissioner
Fiala.
MR. MANALICH: Good morning, Mr. Chairman, if I may
interrupt, I'm sorry. Ramiro Manalich, assistant county attorney. As
part of your motion, there was distributed to you a memorandum of
agreement. That's what -- I would ask for you to approve that
agreement to implement what Mr. Lawson has been talking about.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Would the commissioner include that,
please.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: So moved.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Second--
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second also.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Also included. And further
discussion? All in favor signify by saying aye.
(Unanimous response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
you,
Opposed by the same sign.
Motion carries 5-0. Thank you. Thank
Commissioner Coletta, for bringing that to us.
Item #9E
ASSISTING MOSQUITO CONTROL WITH THE PETITION
PROCESS TO SURVEY GOLDEN GATE ESTATES RESIDENTS
FOR SPRAYiNG BY MOSQUITO CONTROL- DISCUSSED
We're now at Item E, discussion of the Board of County
Page 99
October 9, 2001
Commissioners to assess mosquito control with the petition process
to survey Golden Gate. Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you. I know
Commissioner Coletta is working on some initiatives with that, but
because of the Sunshine Law, you know, if we're going to vote on it,
we can't talk about it on a one-on-one basis. What I am proposing,
Commissioner Coletta -- and if this is not in parallel with what you
are working on right now, is there is a true desire in Golden Gate
Estates to have mosquito spraying service, especially with the scares
of encephalitis and others. Golden Gate Estates is unique that
sometimes your neighbor is more than a stone's throw away, so I
would think that if we can assist the residents out there by doing a
mail-in survey for the service and then come back to the Board of
Commissioners for approval for creating a MSTU. Is that fitting to --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I can't thank you enough for
bringing up this subject. I've been working on it now for, like, about
four months, numerous meetings.
As you recall, the first move out there from one mile past 951 where
the district used to end, when I was president of the civic association,
I leaned unmercifully on mosquito control to have the district
expanded in two jumps, so now it's past Orangetree.
And now that I'm a commissioner, I really can't take quite the
active role and take on mosquito control as a commissioner, so I
recruited a bunch of troops, got a number of new people involved.
They're out with a petition drive right now, and they'll be presenting
it to mosquito control in the near future, and I'd like to invite
everybody to participate in a meeting. And I didn't put
Commissioner Henning up to this, by the way, but I do thank you for
bringing it up. There's a meeting on the 17th, a week from this
Wednesday, over at the Golden Gate Community Center at seven
o'clock in the evening where we'll have all the entities that have to do
Page 100
October 9, 2001
with mosquito control that are in favor of it, that are opposed to it.
We're going to have mosquito control there. They're also going
to have the civic association representatives, the people out in the
estates that have been doing the petition drive. Nancy Payton said
she'll be there. Dr. Joan Crawford's going to be there from public
health. A number of people are going to be able to give a total
overview of this so that the people there can make up their minds and
be able to move this forward.
The petition will be presented to mosquito control, and we're
going to have them bear the expense like we did the last time for the
survey. And if my memory serves me correctly, they'll probably do
the survey during the middle of the winter when there's no mosquitos
and see if the intent is pure. The last time it was overwhelmingly
pure. People didn't forget what it was like and the danger out there is
ever present.
And also, too, as a further note on that, I worked very closely
with public health to make sure that mosquito spraying would go to
Immokalee for a one-time shot to remove that ever present danger
because of the Nile virus in the surrounding counties, and they
believe it may be present in the Immokalee area. And with the
number of people that work in the fields there it's an absolute
necessity. And the last time around I believe we -- well, no, that
came from our budget already that's in place.
But you can look forward to about another year to hear about
Immokalee also wanting to form a mosquito control district.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Interesting.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I've got three years left. I've got
to get a lot done. You probably can tell I've been very busy with all
these projects, and they're all starting to bear fruit.
But remember the ! 7th, a week from tomorrow, the Golden Gate
Community Center. Please come. Give them your input -- seven
Page 101
October 9, 2001
o'clock-- to expand the mosquito control district from Orangetree to
Desoto. If you live near that boundary now, you may want to see it
expanded even if you are in the covered area because if you're near
the edge of it, undoubtedly you're going to get the wash back from
the mosquitos that are still out there with the changing of the breezes
and the winds.
And with that I thank you, Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, it sounds like you have it
covered, so I'll just withdraw my request. Sounds like you're doing
your surveying.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: But you're right. We can't
communicate and we don't.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, that's fine. Healthy discussion.
Everybody's on board going the same direction. Thank you,
gentlemen. We will now move to county manager's report.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Are we to beaches now?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: We're just about down to Item 10, I
have D. I think it's still 10-D.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, D might be a little bit long based
on some conversations I've had with other commissioners as I've
done office visits with them.
The beach issue has got some public speakers to it. If we could try to
go to 10-G, there's one public speaker on that one, and that was an
item that Commissioner Henning wanted to pull forward out of the
consent agenda which was 16-A-3 which is a request to approve the
recording and the final plat of Berkshire Commons Parcels 1, 2 and 3.
Item # 10G
RECORDING THE PLAT OF "BERKSHIRE COMMONS
PARCEL 1, 2 AND 3 -CONTINUED TO 10/23/01
Page 102
October 9, 2001
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All right. Let's move to 10-G,
permission of the board. Let's deal with that item and come back and
talk about Tropical Storm Gabrielle, and then we'll take D.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioners, the reason I
pulled this I'm not clear on circulation for the final plat of Berkshire
Commons 1, 2 and 3.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: The traffic circulation?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes. Egress and ingress.
MR. KUCK: Commissioners, Tom Kuck, engineering director,
for the record. I'm not really sure what you want to discuss on it.
The petitioner has requested -- and they've talked to me a little bit
earlier -- they would like to continue this for two weeks to address
any questions you have, but I'm not sure the particular questions that
you have on the plat.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Does that meet with your approval,
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's fine. It's just looking
through the Land Development Code, and you can correct me if I'm
wrong, 3.2.9 there are certain criteria for a final plat, and I just didn't
find what was needed in there.
MR. KUCK: I think that what they intend to do and I can -- let
me put this drawing up on the board.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Well, we're going to continue
this for two weeks.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's fine.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I'll make a motion to continue
for two weeks.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I have a motion by Commissioner
Mac'Kie. I have a second by Commissioner Henning to continue for
Page 103
October 9, 2001
two weeks. All in favor signify by saying aye.
MR. MUDD: Sir, you had --
(Unanimous response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
MR. KUCK: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
Opposed by the same sign.
Motion carries 5-0. Thank you.
That will take us to Item E, and that's
approve funding for Tropical Storm Gabrielle beach recovery. Mr.
Mudd.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Forgive me for just trying to
figure things, Mr. Chairman, but that -- is that the last item on our
agenda besides communication and-- CHAIRMAN CARTER: Yes.
MR. MUDD: No, ma'am. No, ma'am. You have the South
County Water Plant that we need to bring that to you, and that was in
front of the damage from --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Gabrielle.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: We need to do Gabrielle, then we're
going to do the water plant, and then we will go to board
communications.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I see. Thank you, sir.
Item # 10E
FUNDING FOR TROPICAL STORM GABRIELLE BEACH
RECOVERY- STAFF RECOMMENDATION AS AMENDED
APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, before you today on the regular
agenda is a -- is a series of proposals that we need board action on to
Page 104
October 9, 2001
talk about the damages that were done from Tropical Storm Gabrielle
on September 14th, 2001.
The majority of the beaches in the county were under water. We
had a number of dunes that were overtopped, in particular Clam Pass
and Lowdermilk Park. And our estimate on county engineered
maintained beaches is 40,000 (sic) cubic yards of sand washed away.
Now, we have -- based on Commissioner Carter's direction last night
at the Tourist Development Council, we have gone back and asked
FEMA if all the beaches in Collier County, even though they're not
engineered and maintained, could be recipients of federal aid, and the
answer we got back was yes.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Good.
MR. MUDD: The -- the constraint on engineered and
maintained beaches that we got was from the state agencies and the
way funding comes when you get a declared emergency, you get 75
percent from FEMA, you get 12.5 percent from the state, and then the
county would pay 12.5 percent to give you that 100 percent process.
But because there's the likelihood of receiving state funds -- with
some of the cuts that the governor is making, their state agencies are
basically saying that we probably won't receive anything as far as that
12.5 percent is concerned from the state side of the house. So their
more stringent requirement to have maintained and engineered
beaches kind of goes out the window with that process, because
they're no longer a partner. We are going to do everything we can to
get an estimate on all the beaches in Collier County to bring that to
the -- to the federal eyes and apply for that as far as a claim against
Hurricane Gabrielle.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I really appreciate that,
Mr. Mudd, in that short period from our TDC meeting last night to
this afternoon. You've taken that action because, I'm with you, the
state is going to be a nonplayer which I will address under board
Page 105
October 9, 2001
comments in many, many areas, but the federal government can still
be a player, and if they really want to help us keep the country
moving again, we're going to give them that grand opportunity.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. So what you have in your packet is
talking about the 400,000 cubic yards of sand washed away from
maintained beaches and engineered beaches that we have in Collier
County. I just want to make that distinction because we haven't got
the estimate yet against the other parcels.
For instance, Park Shore, we just finished the renourishment in
April 2001, and I provided all the commissioners at that time a before
and after shot in this process. And if you look at the picture below,
you see three to four feet of sand loss because of that hurricane on
sand that we just got finished renourishing. So it was a bad storm.
Even though it didn't knock down trees and whatnot, it came in at
high tide and really did some damage to our beaches.
Here's a picture of Clam Pass Park. You can see the truck on the
top part. That's four-- to five-foot scarp from the July storm that we
had, and we estimated the July storm was about 150,000 cubic yards
worth of damage. And at the bottom slide you see that the dunes
were wiped out, and the sand was pushed inland because it
overtopped those dunes, and it pushed a lot of sand forward as well as
eroding it back out into the surf.
Here's Vanderbilt Beach. You can -- you can kind of see where
the stairs used to go out from the place where he's got all the lounge
chairs out there. He's missing about four foot of sand in that
particular case and -- and all that area was covered by sand. So it
really did -- really did some severe damage to the landward side of
our beaches as far as the cross-section is concerned.
It's another picture of Lowdermilk Park, and you can see the
escarpment that was formed as it went into the dune area.
This is a picture down on the Naples Beach and you can see by
Page 106
October 9, 2001
the -- by the line, the bleach line, the sun line on the lumber there. It
used to have -- it's about three foot of sand lost there where you have
the first two stairs that you see there were basically covered by sand,
and it was touching the third one. Stairs are normally 10 to 12 inches
in height, so it gives you an idea.
Here are some of the rocks that showed back up after the beach
event, and we've been out there policing those up as fast as we can.
Beach Recovery, September 18th, Florida coastal emergency was
declared; the 21st FEMAs unofficially declares it an emergency.
We discussed 85.5 percent of replacement, 75 federal and the 12
1/2 state and the other 12 1/2 coming from county. They, basically,
agreed to the cost of 234,200 cubic yards of that 400,000 that we
estimated as lost. October 3rd we were added with two other
counties to the presidential disaster, so we have a presidential disaster
that's been declared, and our mission now -- once you have the
declaration from the time of the incident, the hurricane, you have to
have your bills in to have reimbursement from FEMA, and you've got
an 18-month window in order to do that.
And if you think about the three T's, turtles, tourists and tarpons,
and you have to avoid all three of those when you put sand on the
beach, you only get about 100 days a year you can actually go out
there without disturbing one of those three and having some serious
impacts on the environment and on the economy of-- of this
community. So you've got some limited times that you have to react
in order to do this, to do 400,000 cubic yards of sand. And I want to
specify here, because you have to have some permits and
Commissioner Carter so eloquently told us yesterday, we need to try
to shorten that permit process to get every bit of beach that we need
to have fixed in and approved so we can get after it. But right now
we only have permits, standing permits to do upland sand
renourishment, and we have one permit that I know of to do Clam
Page 107
October 9, 2001
Pass and to take sand out in a dredge manner in order to put it up on
the Clam Pass Beach. And there is a separate item for $167,000 in
the budget that you approved in order to do that process, and the
Tourist Development Council reapproved that project to specific
application last night.
So to truck 400,000 cubic yards of sand on the beach, our
estimated costs about 800 -- excuse me, about $8,500,000. We have
a million dollars in the project for beach restoration renovation this
year. That $8.5 million estimate we'd have to pull $7.5 million out of
reserves. If you pull that $7.5 million out of reserves, you're left with
$700 in reserves. So we need to do some things to shore up the
reserve in case all the economic predictions that everybody tells us,
our tourist season's going to hurt a little bit in that kind of process.
In order to shore up those reserves, there are four projects that
are -- that are on schedule that we've -- that we've obligated or
encumbered dollars for this year. We're -- we're not going to be able
to go to construction, so the majority of the cost of those projects
we're tying those dollars up, and we won't get to the construction site.
And then I'll have a breakdown of those projects on my next slide.
And I'll show you what we need to keep in for -- for the engineering
piece and what part we can differ and do it with an educated decision
process and -- and then shore up the reserves so we're not just stuck
with $700, and we could get ourselves in a problem as the year
progresses because the budget was based on revenues coming in.
FEMA reimburses 75 percent, as I said before. That will bring in
to the coffers about $3.5 million. We'll also need to inform the board
that FEMA -- I wish they paid bills as fast as I did. They -- they
could take up to three years to pay it back. Okay. The state 12.5,
that's highly unlikely at this time with the budgetary cuts that the
state is -- is -- is basically espousing right now.
Here are these four projects that I talked about. It's -- we
Page 108
October 9, 2001
recommend a $4.5 million project deferral so we can beef up those
reserves. This year the total amount remaining for Vanderbilt Beach
parking garage was 3.8 that was encumbered. They're only going to
be able to get the engineering piece done this year with the permit
process. We're -- we're asking the board to consider that we keep
$500,000 in the budget this year for Vanderbilt Beach to do those
kind of issues with engineering and permitting in order to keep the
project moving, but it would never go to construction this year. So
we're asking to slip the project to next year to the tune of $3.3
million.
Clam Pass dredging, Marco Island breakwater, and Hideaway
Beach access, all in the same category. They're in the budget;
however, the only thing we would do this year would get the
engineering piece done. If-- if we were really fast, we'd be able to
once the permits were obtained basically get the contracts for
construction awarded, and then the bills would come in next year. So
we're asking that we defer the amounts on the right-hand column,
Caxambas Pass dredging to keep $35,000 in this year's budget and
defer the actual dredging for 300,000 until next year. Marco Island
breakwater modifications, that we keep $75,100 in this year's budget,
and then we slip the actual modifications to the breakwater to the
tune of $630,000 to '03. And Hideaway Beach, that we keep $81,000
in the budget this year and move the actual construction part or the
sand replenishing part -- and that hasn't been decided yet if they were
going to do a walkway or do a beach renovation, and that was part of
the engineering part that we were going to look at this year, and we
slipped 320,000 till next year.
Construction plans, the existing permits we're going to use. Not
all beaches are covered, so we're going to go out there and see if we
can get those permits as fast as we can from the Florida Department
of Environmental Protection and from the Corps of Engineers.
Page 109
October 9, 2001
Pelican Bay south of-- of Clam Pass Park, Villa
Mar Lane and the Naples south of 18th Avenue are all areas where
we're going to need to get additional permits. Before we can go out
there as part of the consent order that -- that was signed, we have to
make sure that the project rocks don't exist before we put sand on the
beach. So there's $400,000 delegated in this proposal to go out there
and get rid of the project rocks before we bring any ounce of sand
onto the beach.
And then you have to go out there and get sand companies.
Right now we've got John, and we've got Big Island that put in
request -- answered our request for proposals and gave us samples,
and I think you've all had the opportunity to take a look at those
samples to actually get into contract negotiations with them in order
to produce the sand.
In order to do 400,000 cubic yards of sand, you've got about
20,000 truckloads, 20-ton trucks. This is what the sand and the
truckloads going to the different beaches would be based on our
preliminary plan that we have right now. Vanderbilt would get 6,000
truckloads; Park Shore, 2,000; Naples Beach would get 10,000; and
Marco Island would get 2,000. We'd have to work several beach
access points simultaneously, and we're going to have to do some PR
with the local communities to make sure that the access roads and the
egress and that process is lined up and we've got it scheduled and
we've got everybody knowing what it is and understanding what
we're trying to do, and we still have to do that yet.
We plan to start work -- get the engineering piece done this
month -- November 1st through January 12th. We'll try to get the
initial shot out, and then we would start up with anything we weren't
able to finish after Easter which is the 31st of March. So we'd start 1
April to the end of April, and hopefully we'd be able to get that
400,000 cubic yards laid out on that beach.
Page 110
October 9, 2001
What I need from the Board of County Commissioners today is
to, one, approve the $7.5 million budget amendment; to waive the
formal competition requirements. What we're going to do is go out
and get several bids from truck firms and from other sand companies
to make sure we get the best price in this thing and that nobody takes
a beating at us in that process, because there's two parts to this.
There's making the sand, and then there's actually trucking it and then
-- and then grading it on the beach.
The third bullet, authorize the chairman to execute the contracts.
I would like to defer that, and what we'll do once we get the contracts
in place, we will come to the Board of County Commissioners and
get your approval to execute those contracts. We can do that. We
have several workshops that are scheduled, and if we have the
contracts in place, we will make sure that we get the public notice out
42 hours in advance, and we'll add that to the workshop. We'll close
the workshop, and then we'll go for a special meeting, if-- if need be.
I think we could have it all done in -- I think the next board meeting
we will get to it. We'll get to it.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Whatever it takes, Mr. Mudd, we will
do it.
MR. MUDD: So I would say that third bullet, I'd like to take
that off the executive summary, and we will come to the board to
execute those contracts. And we've talked to the Clerk of Courts.
He's more comfortable with that process in light of the recent
Attorney General's decision as far as delegation of authority.
We'd like to authorize that the public utilities division
administrator, the acting administrator is Tom Wides, we do name
changes quite quickly in the front. But I'll make sure Tom is -- is up
to speed. We'd like to see the public utilities administrator be able to
execute the FEMA agreement and to be the signatory for
reimbursements when they come in so we can get them back into the
Page 111
October 9, 2001
county coffers and start collecting interest on those dollars.
And, then, we'd like to defer those four TDC projects that are on
Slide 10 that I briefed you on.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I'll make a motion to approve
the recommendation as it was just outlined.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I have a motion to approve. I have a
second.
MR. MUDD: You have -- I think you have three speakers,
David.
MR. WEIGEL: That's right. There are three speakers. There
are three.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: There are three public speakers.
Question, Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Jim, may I just ask you a question
before a speaker gets up there, and that is you had said you were
going to send 2,000 truckloads of sand to Marco Island. Is that what
was lost from-- from Gabrielle was --
MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am. Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: We didn't lose anymore than that?
MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am. We went in there, and we did a
rough estimate on all of that. One of the things that we're going to do
with the AE contracts that we have, we're going to basically go in
there, and we're going to have them go in and do a good cross-
section, do the more specific estimates to make sure that we've got
exactly the amount that was missing, okay. It was a rough estimate
for FEMA. Now we need to get into a very finalized estimate for
FEMA so that we get all the -- when we sign that FEMA agreement,
that's all in -- that's all -- that's all in the process along with the
additional damage that we saw in our beaches in order to get that so
they -- that they see it to see if we can increase this claim.
Page 112
October 9, 2001
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: No further -- oh, we have public
comment. I'm sorry.
MR. WEIGEL: We have three speakers. The first one's David
Shealy to be followed by Wally Hilliard.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: If you're going to speak next, be on
the on deck circle, please.
MR. SHEALY: My name is David Shealy, and I have basically
had the same idea that I thought some of the projects that were in line
to be done should have been deferred, and that was the idea I brought
to the commission today. And as you-all know reading in the
newspapers, magazines, and TV weather conditions around the world
have been quite turbulent over the past ten years and probably are
going to continue to be, and I don't see where anybody should have
any high hopes that next year's going to be any better than this year
and so forth, and I think that those projects that are being deferred
probably really need to be totally reviewed and looked at again and
see if you're going to even be able to afford it next year, because I
don't see where there's going to be any difference.
Other than that, it's obvious that there's been damage done at the
beaches. I think it needs to be repaired immediately. I think the idea
of trucking sand in is fast, it's available, and it's a good quick fix;
however, in the future I think that stronger beaches that can hold up
to this kind of weather possibly need to be designed in some way
because, obviously, what's going on right now is not working.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. Thank you very much, sir.
MR. WEIGEL: Thank you. Next speaker.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Next speaker, please.
MR. WEIGEL: Wally Hilliard followed by Colin Kelly, the
last --
MR. HILLIARD: Good afternoon. I have three quick items for
Page 113
October 9, 2001
you. Number one, we took some pictures by helicopter that I would
like to pass out to you but only ask that at the end of the day you give
them back.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: No. I don't think we can.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I don't think we can do that, sir. You
could put them on the visualizer, I believe.
MR. HILLIARD: Okay. If I put them up there, you won't really
get a look at them. You guys got to look at them because in support
of Mr. Mudd I think you'll really enjoy them.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: We have-- we have TV screens
right here.
MR. HILLIARD: All right. Picture No. 1 is taken before the
storm at high tide. Picture No. 2 is after the storm at low tide, and
you can notice the dune coverage. Right there. That's low tide after
the storm, and if you compare one and two, your dunes got wiped
out. The vegetation on the dunes got irradicated. See the green and
right there and then you look at the next one, all the vegetation is
wiped out. Your dunes are gone.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Yup.
MR. HILLIARD: And Picture No. 3 is the same thing, just that
it was from the north looking south instead, and if you had time to -- I
spent hours looking at these stupid pictures, and they're really
revealing. They tell you a great deal. If there was any way for you-
all to look at them and my very quick time allowed, but I'd like to
mention some of your beach -- significant part of your beach I'm
advised is lying offshore, and mother nature given time will bring a
part of that beach back, probably as much as half. I get that from Dr.
Staiger and Bob Crawford.
Okay. Now, for a 9th grade geometry course, if you'll bear with
me and if you've got a piece of scratch paper. Your current beach is
20 to 30 foot of high tide. The -- at low tide you have 60 to 80 feet of
Page 114
October 9, 2001
beach at low tide. Now, if you wanted to put 2 vertical foot of sand
on 70 foot of current beach at low tide, that would amount to 140
cubic foot of sand, and you can force me to go back through it, I'll be
glad to. Then you're going to -- if you put 2 foot of sand on your
beach, you're going to push your beach out another 40 feet. So that
takes another 80 cubic foot of sand.
And, finally, God won't allow you to build a beach like this.
You've got to put a toll on it toward the beach. That's going to take
another 60 cubic feet. Adds up to 280 cubic foot of sand divided by
27, 10-plus cubic yards of sand per lineal foot; that's the 400,000
yards you're talking about is 10 cubic yards.
Now, that's great for me if I'm walking your beach. I'm really
delighted you put 2 foot of sand on your beach. But you understand
you didn't put any storm protection there, and that's why we got
wiped out so bad, because there was no storm protection. In order to
provide any serious storm protection, you need a minimum of 4
vertical foot of sand at the high tide mark. When you go from 2 foot
to 4 foot, you don't double. You have to go 2 1/2 times, so now you
need 25 cubic yards of sand per lineal foot. That will push your
beach up and out and provide some real storm protection, and it'll
also help in aiding the restoration of the dunes.
So if you want to ask me questions about that arithmetic, I'll be
glad to do it, but my time's up. I may be rushed a little bit, I intended
to--
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I don't think we have any questions,
sir. Thank you very much. Next speaker, please.
MR. KELLY: May I speak with this to show a couple things?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: You can -- if you want to put it on the
visualizer, sir, you may speak-- you may speak from that side.
MR. KELLY: My name is Colin Kelly with Parker Beach
Restoration, and I'd like to say that this county commission earns its
Page 115
October 9, 2001
money. This is tough work that you do, and I was at the TDC
meeting yesterday -- last night, and Commissioner Carter's comments
at yesterday's tourist development committee meeting were very
appropriate.
To paraphrase -- if you don't mind me, Commissioner Carter --
he says that we need to deal with the DEP on issues of expediting
emergency permitting with an iron fist covered with a velvet glove.
And I think that was well said, because Collier County needs to get
their beaches back in shape. This attitude follows legislative action
that has already been made law.
And with that I'd like to show you a letter that was written by
Senator Charlie Clary, which is the chairperson of the Appropriations
Committee for the Senate and Paula -- Representative Paula Dockery,
which is the chairperson for the Appropriations Committee for the
House of Representatives passed legislation this year just as it was
signed by -- off by Governor Jeb Bush. You have a copy of this
letter. But, essentially, this letter says that they sit a line item
separate on the budget for new and innovative technology for beach
restoration, and to meet this definition it has to be post or pre-
pumping and dredging. Well, Collier County certainly meets post
pumping and dredging, as we all know.
The fact that in this letter, which is very pointed to David Struhs,
which is secretary of the DEP, directed them to spend this money for
beach erosion. Now, Collier County certainly qualifies for this.
Never -- very seldom -- thanks to Mr. Mudd we're able to get some
FEMA dollars, one of the first times, but we seldom ever get any
state money. Now, here's an opportunity that -- that the City of
Destin had an opportunity to see the sand web system at work. And
as you can see this is the sand web system essentially, although it was
done by a competitor of ours, showing a six foot five plus --
distension, and one month later this is me standing at that same spot.
Page 116
October 9, 2001
We've seen pictures of these before. Bill Parker's shown this to us in
Collier County. Now -- now they understand it. They also happened
to witness where they had a seawall with no beach at all at high tide,
and this is after one month. They had a nice wide natural beach. So
Destin with that understanding has helped take the battle up and has
applied for the sand web system using this special appropriated
money.
Now, it says the -- Senator Clary supported Parker
representatives who said state money would be available from the
state, although Department of Environmental Protection officials had
told city officials that budget legislation barred funding for unproven
technologies. Senator Clary said part of our legislative intent was to
look at the net system or potentially any others that came along, said
Clary a co-author of the budget.
Essentially what we've got here is the DEP that the legislators,
the people that make the law, said, "We're not going to be directed
and told how we -- our intent of the law." So if there has to be a
legislative clarification, they're certainly willing to go back to the
DEP and say, "This is the money that we intended for this to
happen."
I encourage Collier County, if you're going to deplete your TDC
fund money, that you can apply for a million dollars of this funding
simply because -- and you've already got the permitting in process
that we're doing the experiment in November. You can extend that
permitting process. You can have your staff apply for this funding.
The worst thing could happen is you hear no.
And I don't think anyone on this council is afraid of hearing no.
But we believe and Senator Clary believes and Paula --
Representative Paula Dockery believes that this funding will be
handed down for such situations in Collier County. That would put
up to a million dollars back in the coffers of the Tourist Development
Page 117
October 9, 2001
Committee's money and give you some -- some alternatives rather
than depleting it down to $700. I would encourage the county --
Collier County to apply -- to apply for an extension of the permitting
that's already taken place on the sand web system and apply for $1
million of this funding. Thank you very much for your time.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. Thank you, sir. Any other
speakers?
MR. MUDD: Commissioners, just so you know, in case you've
-- if you've forgotten, just to give you -- bring you up to speed, there
is a Parker Sand Web System that we're doing in this year's TDC
budget to the tune of $1.1 million, and I think that's what Mr. Kelly
was alluding to.
First of all, we have permits for that process and as soon as we
get out of here -- and he brought up some good points, and last night
he gave us some insight onto -- into the state coffers where there
might be some dollars that we can get ahold of. We're going to take
and ask FDEP to fund that project that we've got the permits for that
we're in process of implementing here within the next month or so. It
starts on November 2, and that's in the areas below what we don't
have permits for the maintained beach in Naples, the south side of the
pier.
So we'll try to get $1.1 million, and we'll try to get as much
money from them as we can out of this special fund and -- and use
Mr. Kelly's Parker Web System as much as we can in the future. I
think it has great potential and basically control structures to try to
keep the sand where it's supposed to be instead of having it migrate
down the beach and out into the sea.
One of the other things the first gentleman alluded to is we got
to start thinking about some training structures for hurricanes, and
we've talked before and I've talked to several members of the board
before about artificial reefs, and there was an artificial reef project in
Page 118
October 9, 2001
the consent agenda today. That's a great way to get at some of mother
nature before it brings it's wrath to the beach in a storm event. The
barrier islands down there in Marco Island, we're going to get
engineering done this year, and we've -- and hopefully you'll approve
to slip the construction, which wouldn't start this year, to next year is
a way to take some of that peak off of mother nature's wrath during a
storm and to preserve that beach. And we're going to look at more
and more of those type training structures to see if we can't help our
beaches out in the future.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I appreciate all your comments, Mr.
Mudd, and I know you're going to do everything you can. Under the
current fiscal challenges of the State of Florida, we'll go after it, but I
wouldn't hold my breath because of the shortfalls. And -- but that
may be a way to go after them, and maybe there can be help coming
down from the federal level that will work into this. And since
Representative Dockerty, who controls appropriations, and the
senator on the other side of the legislative body, when those people
support something, at least we have a fighting chance. So I think it's
well worth the effort to go after it, but I'm not overly optimistic
because of the financial situation in the State of Florida.
Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Just a fast question with the Parker
nets. Been reading about them for years and years and so forth. I
noticed in your pictures they were all along the beach. When you use
the Parker Net System to recover sand, do you just leave them up
forever or--
MR. MUDD: No, ma'am. They can go in for -- they go in for a
period of time. You still have the same limitations with Parker Web
down here for turtle season as we do for any other sand
renourishment project, so they'll start in November, stay up through
part of the high tourist season, and then-- and then we'll take a look
Page 119
October 9, 2001
and see how well they did. Part of that project that's going in in
Naples is a pilot test program too.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Where is it? I'd like to go see it.
MR. WEIGEL: 18th Avenue South. Four blocks, just south of
the pier, about four blocks.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I'm sure there's plenty of people who'll
give you a tour, including Bill Bigas.
MR. MUDD: And what we're going to do, ma'am, when you --
when you look at the plan to do the renourishment, we're not going to
lay any truck renourished sand south of the Naples Pier because of
Sand Web project, and the city council voted to do that Sand Web, so
there'll be a buffer between where we -- where we actually bring
upland sand and deposit it and the sand web system that's now.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: By the way, citizen Bill Bigas spoke
in favor of all of this last night in front of TV city.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I heard him.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: He was very much supportive of this
and, you know, that he has -- and some serious questions about what
we've done in the past, but last night he was there supporting us 100
percent in this effort. So I commend him again publicly for helping
US.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I also would like to commend
him, but I just got one request. If only he could send his e-mail
instead of using all capital letters, it would be a lot easier to read.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, I'm sure he'll accommodate.
Any questions? Can we entertain a motion?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I had -- I think I made one
already.
COMMISSIONER HENNING:
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
right. Any further discussion?
There's a motion and second.
We have a motion and second. You're
Hearing none, all in favor signify by
Page 120
October 9, 2001
saying aye.
(Unanimous response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
Mudd, for your due diligence.
COMMISSIONER FIALA:
Opposed by the same sign.
Motion carries. Thank you, Mr.
Good presentation.
Item # 1 OD
SOUTH COUNTY WATER RECLAMATION FACILITY
EXPANSION, PROJECT 73949 - APPROVED
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Now that would bring us to the item
that everybody's been holding their breath on waiting to discuss, so
let's go to that item and that is construction of South Water
Reclamation facility expansion project 73-949, Item D under county
manager's report. That's D as in "David."
MR. MUDD: Commissioners, I'm Jim Mudd, Deputy County
Manager and old public utilities administrator. The -- we'll talk about
the south county water reclamation facility expansion that you have
on the regular agenda today. The reason we're here is we've got --
we've had a serious increase over --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Mr. Mudd, before you continue, I've
had a request from our recorder that she might just rest her magic
fingers for five minutes, so could we do that? I'm sorry. I didn't
catch your signal, ma'am. If we may, let's take a quick break. That's
about five or six minutes, and then we'll come right back and do this
item. Thank you.
(Short break taken.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Commissioners, we are a quorum and,
Page 121
October 9, 2001
Mr. Mudd, will you proceed. MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Do we have a quorum2
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Commissioner Mac'Kie, if you would
join us up here. Here comes along with Commissioner Coletta
getting his energy food.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Remind me to bring the candy in.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Got to quit chewing that Red Man, but
any how you'll be all right.
MR. MUDD: Talk about the south county water reclamation
facility expansion. We had a -- this is on the regular agenda, and the
purpose -- and the purpose is -- is the objective that the Board of
County Commissioners meet growing sewer service demand in the
south sewer service area by amending contracts for engineering,
inspection, construction services to construct an expansion to the
south county water reclamation facility to increase capacity to 16
million gallons per day, which is the maximum month average day
flow.
What we'll try to do in this -- in this -- in this slide show is to
show you our budget. Our 2002 budget is for $25 million. We base
that budget on a series of plans that were at the 60 percent level, and
some things have changed since the time that we put the budget
together, and there's a $21 million difference, and I'm going to go
through that difference with you so you can see where that came
from. The 2002 budget was $25.4 million for this project. Pre-bid
adjustments to that fee came in at 10.4 million, post-bid adjustments
came in at 10.7 million for a total estimate of 46.5 million. The pre-
bid adjustments -- to break down that 10.4 million, to increase factors
of safety on the plant which was at 3.8 million.
Operational enhancements we found that the plant that exists
right now needs to have some substantial modifications to it to
Page 122
October 9, 2001
enhance its capability to -- to meet the demand that we have from our
present sewer customers. We have some good neighbor
improvements. You've heard from the Lely-- the Royal Palms Golf
and Lely Homeowners Association; they live around the plant
project. I'm not too sure they disapprove of the project, but they
certainly don't want to have to smell the project, and -- and they don't
need to have an unsightly facility in their neighborhoods, and it's --
it's a pretty nice neighborhood. I've been there lots of times.
And then we need to upgrade the power supply because what
we've got right now doesn't -- doesn't stand present codes and needs
to be upgraded. So pre-bid adjustments are 10.5 -- and I'm going to
break down each one of those categories for you so that you can
understand where those numbers come from. The factor of safety is
$3.8 million.
We get some high strength waste capacity down there. We're
going to add to aeration basins. We're going to upsize our blowers,
and we're going -- and we're going to put deeper clarifiers in there in
order to handle it. And I was -- I was disturbed that -- that we were
always getting about 25 percent more solids out of the south than we
were in the north, and we were getting this, you know, compatible
flows, and I've had my folks look and is that infiltration that's
happened to our sewer systems up north. And then we had a
conversation with our billing folks, and what's happening, there are a
number of high-rises on the north end and -- and all of those high-
rises have air conditioners, and all of those air conditioners in order
to work they take the water out of the air, the humidity out of the air,
and it-- and it becomes water, and the water goes down into the
sewer system. So what I'm getting is I'm getting a lot more water
coming into the sewer systems because of the high-rises. And so
down south where we don't have high-rises we're just getting what
people are sending out of their homes to us, single family and condos
Page 123
October 9, 2001
and that issue, so I'm getting a lot more solids. So I'm getting a lot
more concentrated organic load down south over the last five to ten
years. We need to be able to handle that process and be able to treat
it when we get it so that we don't have what happened in April to us
when the plant got close to capacity, we had -- we had a couple of
times when odors were released because the plant was right on the
boundary of good operation, and we were worried that we were going
to have an overflow, which we didn't have in the south side. But
those deeper clarifiers, the aeration basins all help us in that process.
It adds stability and reliability for the neighborhood compatibility.
Operational enhancements, flow equalization tank No. 2, when
we bring in this -- we're building flow equalization tank right now for
this high season. As we put in that 8 million, it's going to need
another 1.25 million gallon equalization tank so when you get the
high flows it can go there so the plant's not handling peak and then as
the peaks go down during the evening hours you can start drawing
down your equalization tanks, and then you can keep the plant on an
even keel.
Modifying existing piping, modifying existing electrical, and
we're going to put an Allen Feed which is the chemical coagulant
system, and automated Allen Feed System into that plant. During the
high season this last time, we had to come in temporary with different
trucks, and it was -- it wasn't very scientific, I'll tell you that, but it
did the purpose. But in order to have a bigger plant and work that
process, and Allen makes the sludge settle faster so you can handle
more of it when you get it during the peak season, and that's where
that 3.1 million comes from.
Good neighbors. Odor control, we're covering our aeration
basins because that's where a significant part of the odors come from.
There is a dedicated scrubber at the preliminary treatment side.
That's at the head works. The head works reek. Okay? Flat out.
Page 124
October 9, 2001
You get to the head works, it's the nastiest part of the plant. It's the
one where you have a tough time holding whatever you ate four
hours ago.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: The thing about Mr. Mudd is he
just -- he doesn't tell you exactly the truth.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: He always holds back a little bit.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: "It reeks." Oh, okay. That's
clear.
MR. MUDD: So you need a dedicated scrubber at the head
works, and we don't have a dedicated scrubber at the head works on
the south plant like we do on the north plant, and this is -- and this to
help so we don't have any burps from the plant in that process.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Actually, that's a situation where birds
going south in migration turnaround and go north if they fly over
that.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. Upgrade to scrubber on the sludge
holding tanks, that's -- that's the appropriate thing, and that's what
some of Dudley Chisolm and Mr. Matson had -- had talked about
prior in order to make that go over. We're going to move the
entrance road, so we're going to take it out on Wildflower. We're
going to cut it a little bit farther in so we're not near those homes that
sit right there. We're going to close the -- the Warner Road entrance.
We're going to put trees there, increase the parking spaces so more
people can use the ballfield across the street, and they don't have to
park, and that can be kind of a nice little neighborhood park in that
process. And we're going to make sure this is the last expansion to
the south plant.
Power supply, we need to upsize the main power feed cables.
We need to improve the reliability of twin generators instead of one
larger generator. We need some redundancy, and we need to upsize
the building for the two generator fix.
Page 125
October 9, 2001
Post bid negotiations, initial came in at $39.6 million. We were
-- we were able to through negotiations move some things, change
them, not do some items. We were doing a little -- we'd win on one
and lose on the other, but the delta there was about $700,000 to our
favor, and while we were doing that we were able to grab six months
on the construction schedule, so it would come in at 25 months which
would be in keeping with the consent order that we had from the
Florida Department of Environmental Protection.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: That's a good thing.
MR. MUDD: Post-bid adjustments, owner contingencies.
There's 10 percent in this contract for contingencies. Okay. It's not
money. It set there. It sits there based on the negotiations we've done
with the contractor, with Montgomery Watson, his -- their subs.
There shouldn't be any overruns in this one. I think we've got them
all covered in this bid, but the $4.2 million is a contingency that sits
out there in the fund, and if it's not used on the project, it goes back
into the reserves.
Higher subcontractor bids because of the risks attributed to
uncertain site conditions, critical schedule lost, or local construction
market conditions, we came in $3.9 million higher than we thought
with the subs. We had two subs drop out because of all the work that
they had in the local areas, so youtre running out of people to do the
jobs.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Any questions?
MR. MUDD: Owner site rep. We've got a representative from
Montgomery Watson -- excuse me. Hole -- Hole Montes --
Montgomery Watson -- Hole Montes in for Malcolm Pernie, and I
can bring it back, but it was $1.8 million. The Montgomery -- excuse
me -- the Malcolm Pernie piece of that is a little over $1 million.
They are also in that $1 million going to do some value engineering
for us. They are also going to take a look at the final design to make
Page 126
October 9, 2001
sure it's correct for us in that process.
I wanted -- I wanted another set of eyes on the design. I want
another set of eyes representing us on -- on the site to make sure that
this project goes according to schedule and on budget and we don't
have any overruns as far as dollars are concerned and time is
concerned. And that's -- and we don't have a construction inspection
section in public utilities engineering.
And, Commissioner Henning, last -- but we could have two
positions -- three positions total in our budget this year to establish
that section. We -- we haven't started the hiring process yet, but
we're getting all the job directions ready.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you. Malcolm Pernie,
how did that -- we come to the decision that they're going to be the
overseer of the project?
MR. MUDD: Sir, we have six utility contracts that are standing
right now. Standing -- I call them indefinite delivery, indefinite
quantity contracts. We -- we use those engineering firms that the
limit on those contracts are $3 million each, and they're multi-year
contracts. We try to level the work between those six contractors.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
MR. MUDD: One of the reasons -- one of the reasons we went
to Montgomery Watson in this particular -- Malcolm Pernie in this
particular case is the fact that they don't have a private interest. They
only work on the -- on the public sector side of the house. They don't
-- they don't -- their AE firm isn't used by -- by private contractors
and that process in order to design a project for them where you'd get
into a conflict of interest.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you, Mr. Mudd. I know
months and months ago when you and I attended Lely Homeowners
Page 127
October 9, 2001
Association meeting and the room was packed, you gave them your
presentation, and there was a lot of objections in the room. But I see
no one here today, so does that mean that you've been meeting with
them, you've met their objections --
MR. MUDD: Ma'am, we're -- we're doing everything we can in
that process. What I -- they asked for a couple of things at the -- at
the sludge holding in the final -- in the final pressing of the sludge to
cover that facility. We're doing some adjustments to the facility
mechanically-wise and chemical-wise. I'd like to make sure that
works before I have to go in there and completely surround that
facility and then work scrubbers on the top. And we're going to work
with them in that process. That's -- that's about the only difference
we had between what Mr. Matson and
Mr. Dudley Chisolm had presented.
The other issue that they brought up was stormwater, and it was
a separate project. We've got John Boldt working with them in that
project to make that happen, but that's just bigger than this facility. It
has the whole neighborhood, and if that storm event we had just two
weeks ago where we got that eight inches of rain, I spent a lot of time
looking at the drainage district, the stormwater collection out there. It
does definitely need to have a project.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, it sure does. Well, I'm glad
you've been meeting with the people because this could have been a
very contentious meeting, and instead it's just factual. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Any other questions by
commissioners?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Comment. I -- I don't see any
way that we can get out of this obligation. I'm glad that we are going
to be good neighbors to the community by some added things to help
with their quality of life. I would hope that -- well, my wishes was
that we had more options. In this case we don't. We are under a
Page 128
October 9, 2001
consent order, so if there's no more discussion, I'm ready to make a
motion.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, I want to just go to that point. I
briefed every one of the commissioners on draft wastewater master
plan already and will present that officially to the board and to the
public on the 27th of November with the water and with reclaimed
water, so it will be a complete package so that we won't piecemeal it,
and you'll get a picture of the whole process along with rates, impacts
fees, and everything else that pertains to that process. But in that
wastewater master plan there are an additional three sites that we
need to go out there and get as far as site development is concerned,
land procurement permits and to start building.
And the first that we've started already with an appraisal is out
there on Orangetree, because that plant's in a little bit of trouble. It's
been -- it's been right on the verge of failure several times, and we're
still trucking -- they're still trucking their sewage to our north plant,
and they started that up again about a month ago. So they're basically
on the edge. We're going to need to do something.
One of the things that Commissioner Henning is trying to get at
is to make sure when we do those plant sitings that we do it with
some vegetative screening around it and try to get it away from the
neighborhoods. Okay? And if the neighborhoods develop after it
that they know that that plant is there, and then we can -- we'll work
the good-neighbor piece, but everybody knows the situation that
they're in.
On vegetative screening is to get some trees to buffer you from
the neighbors so that you can start working on some of the odors, the
sound and the visual processes that you have with the plant of that
size.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Any other questions or comments?
Ready to entertain a motion.
Page 129
October 9, 2001
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Move to approve staff's
recommendations.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I have a motion by Commissioner
Henning.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I have a second by Commissioner
Fiala. Any discussion? All in favor signify by saying aye.
(Unanimous response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Opposed by the same sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Motion carries 5-0. Thank you, Mr.
Mudd.
MR. MUDD: Thank you, sir.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thanks for killing the bug here.
We've got animal life up here today. I don't know it is.
Item #15
STAFF COMMUNICATIONS
All right. That's going to take us to other -- to right down to
staff and commission general communications. Any staff
communications?
MR MUDD: No, sir.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: None. Now we go to commissioners.
MR. WEIGEL: Commissioner, just for the record, on 8-C when
the board was hearing the matter about the proposed storage facility
and the reason it was placed on the record, Commissioner Henning
mentioned "incompatibility," and you said, "lack of." And I want to
make sure my note is correct and the reporter's note is correct. Lack
of compatibility or incompatibility. I thought I heard the word "in,"
Page 130
October 9, 2001
and I wanted to make sure that we have either lack of compatibility
or incompatibility as the restated -- he was restating essentially what
Commissioner Henning had indicated for the board to endorse.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, it's not compatible -- compatible
so it would be lack of compatibility.
MR. WEIGEL: I wanted to make sure the note was correct for
her so when the transcript comes out ultimately we'll have that clear.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I'm sure all the English experts will --
I will be getting e-mails.
MR. WEIGEL: And, secondly, I again express my appreciation
in regard to your review and discussion of our office today. And, of
course, I'm not an island. I have very fine staff, and I know that they
receive and respect the compliment you provided them, too, and will
continue to work that way.
From a housekeeping matter, I would presume that your motion
and approval includes the appropriate budget amendments so we can
process it now as opposed to a shortfall that would occur later on in
the year -- at the end of the year. So if-- if you say nothing separate,
I will just process that as part of the --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. Mr. Mudd, do you have
anything from your office?
MR. MUDD: You directed us as part of the Item 8-C, the Eagle
Creek PUD south storage facility, to come back to the board to have
the staff take a look at a way to survey residents in the local
community to show support for a particular rezoning or reuse of a
particular piece of land. We talked about a number of things from the
dais here. A third-party agent which is a survey company,
homeowners' associations, and we differentiate between is it really
homeowner or is it developer sponsored and another is public
participation in the Land Development Code cycle. And that's an
item for discussion that you'll take on at a future time, but we're
Page 131
October 9, 2001
going to go back and look at -- look at other alternatives and come
back to you with a recommendation on that particular --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Mudd, don't we have that
discussion in the LDC cycle coming up Wednesday, that discussion
about notification.9
MR. MUDD: In the public participation, yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. And we could deal with
that at that time.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir, but there's -- there's several issues.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: This may or may not be in the cycle,
but any time we review PUDs and we find out that there are exotics
on the property, I would like to see those removed and dealt with,
because it's an approved PUD. And as I understand, any PUD that's
been approved has to remove all exotics as part of that process, so I
want to make sure we stay on top of that whether it's homeowners'
groups or whether it's the developer, whoever is responsible, got to
keep them out of there, the exotics. Okay.
Before we go to the rest of the comments by -- by
the commissioners, I would like to take this opportunity to publicly
congratulate Commissioner Mac'Kie for appointment by the governor
to the position where she will be involved in acquiring lands for
South Florida Water Management District, I believe. If that's correct
and --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: That's not a gubernatorial
appointment but--
CHAIRMAN CARTER: It's a gubernatorial appointment.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: It's not.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: And she has, you know, labored hard
in the Vineyards here for seven years, and I certainly appreciate the
opportunity I've had to work with her and I think our listening
audience should know what a fine contributor she has been to the
Page 132
October 9, 2001
Board of County Commissioners and to this county. And while I will
miss you a great deal, I couldn't be happier for your personal success.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Thank you so much, and I don't
think this is going to be my last meeting, so I'm not prepared to say
my goodbyes.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: No. No. You'll have another time or
two to do that, but before we have the big crying up here at the actual
departure event, I just wanted to make that point. Commissioner
Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. I do have a comment. I'd
like to take this time to bring up the subject of the ongoing
investigation by the State Attorney's Office and the past indiscretions
of some former commissioners and staff. I believe that we need to
inform the public that we are not passive observers as the legal
process unfolds and the findings are made public knowledge. The
county government has been cooperative with the ongoing
investigation by supplying office space, office equipment, and
phones. Records are being made available from current files and
archive files as expediently as possible.
I would hope that the Collier County Board of Commission
would solidify the present comments by directing our chair, Dr.
Carter, to draft and send a letter to the Florida Department of Law
Enforcement irreversibly expressing our full support of the ongoing
investigation and that we will act accordingly in a fair an expedient --
the fair and expedient discipline of all and any county employees
who admit guilt or are found guilty by Florida State Statute and that
all personnel that are indicted be suspended until charges are brought
to a final decision.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I certainly support you in that. I
think that's already been the posture of this board, and putting, it in
writing is a good thing. I -- I want to be careful that we don't get into
Page 133
October 9, 2001
the personnel issues because we can go to jail if we tell the county
manager what to do with his staff, and so I know you don't want to
tread there either, but that's the only caution I would have is that we
can only direct the county manager. He makes personnel decisions,
but in every other aspect it's already been the posture of this board,
and I couldn't agree more with putting it in writing.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I think your idea is excellent,
Commissioner Coletta, and I would encourage that to be drafted and
worked with Mr. Weigel on that issue, and if the board supports that,
I have no problem with that.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And if I may go out of order
because that's just a perfect segue to my communication item. May I
-- may I go next, Mr. Chairman?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Do you have anything else?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Yes, you may, Commissioner
Mac'Kie.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: On the issue of credibility of
Collier County government and the convicted felons -- felon who
previously served on this board now has a radio show. I know that it
is tempting for us in our desire to get public information out.
Particularly with regard to the half-penny referendum, it may be
tempting to use that forum of that particular radio show, but I wanted
to bring it up for the board to consider giving direction to the county
manager that he direct his staff not to appear on the radio show with a
convicted felon, convicted for activities that took place while he was
serving as a county commissioner.
I don't think it serves us well as we try to rehabilitate our
reputation with the public to be sitting with a man having a
conversation as if all things are normal as if he we're not appalled by
the actions that he's admittedly taken and has now been convicted of.
Page 134
October 9, 2001
I think that's going to contribute to -- I think if we participate on that
radio show, that particular show, certainly not the channel. There are
wonderful qualified esteemed people who work for that radio show,
that radio station.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I don't think this has anything
to do --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: If you don't mind, I'll finish my
comments, and then I'm sure the Chairman will call on the rest of the
board to get to respond. But my request was that the board ask the
county manager to tell his staff that we do not feel it is appropriate
for county staff members to participate on that radio show. That's my
request. I'm sorry.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Comments from commissioners.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, first of all, during certain
commissioners comments, I feel that some of the commissioners
don't mind jumping in on other commissioners comments, but I think
that directing staff to, you know, doing -- we need to get out the
message on the appropriate radio station or television station that the
people listen to, it's a informational, and I think that would be up to
our staff to use whatever venue they can. It has nothing to do with a
conviction of a former county commissioner.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Just so I can be clear, what my
reason --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I heard what you said.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: If you don't mind, I'm going to
say it again is that I think that as -- as county staff people sit and chat
in a comfortable forum with a convicted felon, with a person who
used his office to defraud the people he purported to represent, if
there were a way to appear on that show and have some big
disclaimer that, "We don't like you. We don't approve of what you
did. We are not comfortable sitting here with you, nevertheless we're
Page 135
October 9, 2001
trying to use this forum." That'd be one thing, but it's inappropriate
when we're trying to rehabilitate the reputation of county commission
-- of county government for us to be sitting and chatting with a felon.
That's my -- and then I won't say it again. And I am going to say one
more thing. I think this is -- this is a question that has come up from
the ranks where people are concerned and are looking for direction
from this county commission.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I have to agree with
Commissioner Mac'Kie. You know, she made a very clear case. It's
kind of hard to argue against that. I appeared on former
Commissioner Constantine's show before he was indicted, and I think
there's every reason in the world for myself not to appear there again,
and I'll do so.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Before he was convicted.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'd like to see if it's legally done
if we can direct staff not to be there too.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I think it's very important the
distinction you're making, Commissioner Coletta. Prior to his
decision and the decision of the State's Attorney and the judicial
process, several of us and I for one hosted the show this summer as a
request, and I said I would continue to do public participation on
regular shows as a part of my job. Now that this change of events,
just want to make sure everybody understands that prior to none of us
were discriminatory, if you please, in-- in appearing on anyone's
show, but the changing conditions, what I hear Commissioner
Mac'Kie says, she's recommending we no longer participate on that
show as long as it's hosted by the gentleman in question and until that
station makes a decision otherwise and/or they change their format.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: We could -- we could be on
every other show. It's the fact that he is convicted for a felony
Page 136
October 9, 2001
associated with his work in county government and that -- if we just
sit and chat with him like everything's normal, that's not going to do
much to develop public confidence.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You're right, Commissioner
Mac'Kie. That's the reason for my comments today was to draw that
line in the sand--
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Exactly.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- that there is a difference now
that this has taken place in the last couple of years, and personally I'd
like to thank you for leading the charge early on.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: It was not a fun thing. Well, that
sounds like three.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I'm looking for, is there -- do I have
three nods? Okay. We have three to pursue that. Mr. Mudd, you
and Mr. Weigel might want to draft that and bring it back to the
board for review. Maybe it doesn't have to be -- I don't know how
you want to do that, Mr. Mudd.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: They might not even have to
bring it back.
MR. WEIGEL: I don't think we have to bring that back.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Uncomfortable discussion. I just
felt like it had to be.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. I understand and everybody
might want to take a look at it before you send it out. Whatever you
choose to do. All right. Anything else you would like to discuss?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: That's all I had.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All right, Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I don't have anything to discuss,
except I have a new grandbaby and she's beautiful.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, congratulations.
Congratulations. I'm sure we'll get pictures. At least I saw that was
Page 137
October 9, 2001
the one that was giggling on the internet.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, you will. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes. And I can see where my
colleagues are, and there's not a problem with that. I just think we
should not lose any opportunity to tell the board's side of the story on
this referendum coming up in November. Now, if Tim Constantine
doesn't have any listeners, he's not going to have a radio show.
But I just feel that it's -- it's a way to reach out to the voters in Collier
County.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I don't disagree with that, and I am on
Frank Kinsman's show each Monday morning from 7:30 to 9. I'm
also on Rich King's show usually from 4:30 to 6 on Mondays also,
and I made myself available to both of those hosts to discuss any and
all things that affects county's business. Rich goes a little beyond
that, but that's fine. And as long as they invite me to be on the show,
I always speak as a commissioner. I do not speak for the Board of
County Commissioners, but I do -- have been given an opportunity
when road referendum comes up to present our side of the story and
to try to help people and make available to them materials that will
assist them in making that decision.
I mean, after all, we got some good things, and we're finding
that once people understand the issue, an educated voter makes --
makes good decisions.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I recommend the web site to
people too. There's a lot of good information there. If you go to the
colliergov.net, it'll lead you to information about the -- that you may
be needing to weigh on your decision about how to vote on a half
penny and some very, very clear very well laid-out information.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, going along with that when --
when Tom and Jim and I were running for office, one of the biggest
Page 138
October 9, 2001
questions we were faced with no matter where we went to speak was,
"What are you going to do about the roads?" And people were
writing letters and so forth. So now we're going to take that giant
step, and we've been-- we've been-- we've taken two other steps, and
now this is the final step to make sure that we've answered what we
said we were going to do all through the election.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Exactly.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All right. I have several items,
Commissioners. I'll go through these quickly. The first is there is a
program that's going to be offered called Building Consensus
Solution for Florida's Public Programs. This is Florida Conflict
Resolution Consortium. I will circulate it. I have indicated that I will
attend November 15th on mediation and facilitating, but there is ones
on negotiating, resolving public dispute, facilitation. There's
planning and managing public decision-making processes, and I
would encourage anyone who would like to participate in that to do
SO.
God bless you, Commissioner, and before you continue to have
an attack. I will speed this up. I will send this down the dais and you
can --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Well -- and it just -- copies were
just provided to us by Mr. Mudd.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: How much is this?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Can I just endorse this? I've
done the mediation certification class with-- and can't endorse
enough how you really learn some practical skills from the conflict
resolution consortium. It's a great thing to bring to -- I may be there
but in a different capacity.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Is it expensive?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I don't believe so.
Page 139
October 9, 2001
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: You have a budget for it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, we do have a budget for this?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Chat with Ms. Filson, and she'll guide
you and direct you on how to spend your money.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, okay. Because I'm running out
of my own money. We had an allocated amount my husband and I
has set aside, and I'm getting --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, I though you were running out
of this year's budget, and I would say it is October 9 and you're done
already? You're in trouble, lady.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No. This is our calendar year.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. All right.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I think it's $400.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Something like that. Okay. Next item
I have is this is in regards to architectural and engineering, and I've
had this conversation with Mr. Mudd. Estimators live and die in the
construction industry by how well estimators come in on target.
A&E does not seem to pay the same attention to that, and what I'm --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Architectural and engineering, is
that the A&E?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Architectural and engineering firms,
and so he is going to really work on these people that when you give
us an estimate you better be close to where it needs to be, because we
don't want to see it's here and it's 100 percent more when we get
down the line.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Sort of like today?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Yeah. Sort of like today is an
example. So we're going to be much tougher in the future on that,
but I think it's good for all of us to be aware there's a big difference
between how construction firms operate and A&E firms operate. So
he's going to go after that. At least I would suggest --
Page 140
October 9, 2001
MR. MUDD: Sir, we're going to draft -- we're going to draft an
amendment clause in every one of the contracts that basically tells
them that if their estimate exceeds 115 percent of their estimate, you
know, if it's 15 percent over their estimate, then they're going to pay a
fine. They got to get closer. They're not paying any attention to the
building conditions, the economic conditions that we're going
through right now with Collier County with the growth, and I got to
-- I got to be honest with you, the estimates have been real sloppy
that we've been getting lately. And I'm not the only one. Norm
Feder's suffering through this too.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Very good.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: This is what we expect out of top
management is they catch these things and really go for it, and I'm
very appreciative of that effort.
Also want to announce that Clarence Tears, the gentleman who
is in charge of the Big Cypress Basin, is now in Saudi Arabia. He is
a reservist, and he's been called up, so he is there. I know that just
adds another opportunity for us and challenge in the county, but we
certainly God speed to him and bless him and God may keep him in
His safety while he is over there serving our country. So we don't
want to forget him, and if you want to e-mail him, I'm sure there's a
way to reach him in the desert.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I just received an e-mail the
other day.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Would you share that with the
rest of us. I'd very much like to send him a note.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: He's eating very well, lobster
and steak.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Yeah. That'll last until the Army food
catches up to him, and then he'll be back to a more interesting menu.
Page 141
October 9, 2001
The last thing I have and perhaps the most important that we
will have to be considering is I spent Wednesday, Thursday, and
Friday in Orlando with Florida Association of Counties Board and
other commissioners discussing the financial crisis that faces the
State of Florida. We know right now conservatively the state will --
probably is looking at a 1.4 billion shortfall, and that is in this fiscal
year for the state that started July 1 through June 30. They haven't
even seen -- started next year's legislative process, and we don't know
what they're going to do. However, you have to keep in mind they're
on different budget cycles than we are.
Second thing we concluded is state legislatures do not
understand the county budgetary process. They don't understand it.
Only a few who are former commissioners that are there may
understand it. The rest of them, frankly, don't get it. So we are going
to the bargaining table with the legislative groups not in an
adversarial role but one, as I said earlier, with an iron fist with a
velvet glove. We will participate, and we will discuss, but we are not
going to become victims of cost shifting which go downward to the
counties in which we don't have the funds to pay for it; state's off the
hook while we're holding the bag. And you know that we have very
limited income streams, and that always gets down to things like ad
valorem taxes.
We have prepared-- that group has prepared the untouchables
list of which I have given to Mike Smykowski and the executive
staff. We will be reviewing all of these to find out which of these
areas would affect Collier County and how we would be affected.
We are going to send to them and tell the FAC, "Here are the areas of
our greatest concern. Here are examples on how it would negatively
affect us, and these are the actions that we support FAC's board in
negotiating with the legislatures."
Anything that's been there that was approved early -- and an
Page 142
October 9, 2001
example was, transportation, we had a $3 million grant that was
supposed to get that has been pulled back. They have withdrawn
that. So any monies that were there that you think you might get may
well not be there. Second message coming out of these agencies is
before you spend you better figure out whether it's there, because if
we have to spend and then get reimbursement, we need to double-
check every time we do something. So it is not a pretty picture, but it
is one that we have to deal with and as best and ably as we can.
Now, is there any hope in all of this? Well, there's always hope
because we do have two funds in the state. We have-a rainy day fund
of about $5 million, but that has to be paid back within five years.
You can borrow from it, essentially, but you can't keep it. You've got
to return it. There is another $500 million -- I'm sorry. There's
another $200 million fund that could be used in this process, but it's a
one-time shot, so it's my conclusion coming out of that meeting with
other commissioners that we really got a challenge in front of us. We
got to do everything that we can to work with the legislators to make
sure we don't become victims of cost shifting.
Number two, the thing that went on the table and I think is the
most positive and we mentioned a couple times this morning is that
we're going to encourage the legislature to review the operating
agencies and look at all the rules and regs that we have to operate
under in the permitting process. And there are some horror stories
out there where projects can be delayed 18 months, 2 years because
some bureaucrat from some agency under Ordinance No. 29,
paragraph 3, dot ! says you didn't do a study on this. And some of it
is just absolutely ridiculous. So we're going say to the legislators,
"You get the state government to clean up their act, fast track
streamline some of these agencies in terms of permitting, that's an
enormous savings to counties."
So we are coming not with ain't it awful, but we're coming with
Page 143
October 9, 2001
solutions to the problem. So it was a very productive meeting.
Norman Feder and myself and Dawn Wolfe will be back in Orlando
this Friday talking to go TOPS which is the group that has the money
that was originally going to be spent on high-speed rail. Last year Lee
County got a good chunk of money out of that. I don't know how
much is there, but we're going to go in there with our staff, our
elected official, and myself, and plus others to really make the pitch
to that group. And showing up in numbers and saying this is what
you want is far more effective than anything else you can do.
So it's a continuing effort on commissioners, and I know
Commissioner Coletta has been involved with me working at the
regional and state level to get done what needs to be done to protect
this county. So it may not be all good news, folks, but we sure got
the challenges out there, and we will work due diligence to get the
job done. Thank you for your patience.
That's the update. Remember, we have the association state
meeting in November, and if you haven't made reservations, you
haven't made the opportunity to be there, that's the second time you
will have an opportunity to work as body politic at the state level to
encourage FAC and the final agenda that will go to legislators.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Motion to adjourn.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I have a motion to adjourn. Is there a
second?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: That's up to you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. All set. All approved. We're
all set. We're out of here. Thank you very much. God bless
America.
***** Commissioner Mac'Kie moved, seconded by Commissioner
Henning and carried unanimously, that the following items under the
Page 144
October 9, 2001
Consent Agenda and/or Summary Agenda be approved and/or
adopted: *****
Item #16Al
STAFF TO BE UTILIZED AS A RESOURCE TO ASSIST THE
WEED AND SEED PROGRAM IN IMMOKALEE
Item # 16A2
RECORDING OF THE FINAL PLAT OF "IBIS COVE, PHASE
ONE-A"
Item #16A3 - Moved to Item # 10G
Item #16A4
AGREEMENT TO ACCEPT AN ARTIFICIAL REEF GRANT
FROM THE FLORIDA FISH AND WILDLIFE CONSERVATION
COMMISSION
Item #16A5
RESOLUTIONS 2001-379 THROUGH 2001-386 ENFORCING
LIENS ON PROPERTIES FOR CODE VIOLATIONS AS
OUTLINED IN THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item # 16A6
Page 145
October 9, 2001
60-DAY EXTENSION OF THE 2001 TOURISM AGREEMENT
BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY AND THE TOURISM
ALLIANCE OF COLLIER COUNTY
Item # 16B 1
RESOLUTION 2001-387 AUTHORIZING THE APPLICATION
AND EXECUTION OF THE FY 2001 SECTION 5307 GRANT
APPLICATION WITH THE FEDERAL TRANSIT
ADMINISTRATION (FTA)
Item #16B2
TWO ANNUAL BIDS, #01-3251 (CONCRETE AND METAL
CULVERT PIPE) AND #01-3256 (ASPHALT AND RELATED
ITEMS) FOR FISCAL YEAR 2001/2002 - AWARDED AS
CONTAINED IN TIlE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item #16B3
FACILITIES RELOCATION AGREEMENT WITH FLORIDA
POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY TO RELOCATE AND
RECONFIGURE POWER POLES ON GOODLETTE-FRANK
ROAD BETWEEN PINE RIDGE ROAD AND VANDERBILT
BEACH ROAD TO FACILITATE THE ROAD-WIDENING
PROJECT, PROJECT NO. 60134 - IN THE AMOUNT OF $961,152
Item # 16B4
RESOLUTION 2001-388 APPROVING, AS SERVING A VALID
PUBLIC PURPOSE, THE EXPENDITURE OF COUNTY FUNDS
Page 146
October 9, 2001
FOR EXPENDITURES INCURRED AT THE AUGUST 30, 2001
RIBBON CUTTING AND GROUNDBREAKING CEREMONY OF
LIVINGSTON ROAD, PHASE I
Item #16B5
LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT AMONG THE
ESTUARY AT GREY OAKS AND THE ESTUARY PROPERTY
OWNERS' ASSOCIATION, THE CITY OF NAPLES AND
COLLIER COUNTY
Item #16B6
BID #01-3281, "BAYSHORE-AVALON BEAUTIFICATION
MUNICIPAL SERVICES TAXING UNIT (MSTU) ROADWAY
GROUNDS MAINTENANCE"- AWARDED TO COMMERCIAL
LAND MAINTENANCE, INC.
Item #16B7
RFP 01-3234 "BUS STOP SHELTERS" FOR IMMOKALEE
CIRCULATOR AND COLLIER AREA TRANSIT (CAT) -
AWARDED TO BRASCO INTERNATIONAL
Item #16B8 - Moved to Item #1 OF
Item # 16C 1
PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING SERVICES AGREEMENT
WITH WATER RESOURCE SOLUTIONS, INC., FOR THE
Page 147
October 9, 2001
NORTH COUNTY WATER RECLAMATION FACILITY DEEP
INJECTION WELL, RFP 00-3122, PROJECT 73948
Item # 16C2
COMMITTEE SELECTION OF FIRMS FOR CONTRACT #01-
3271 "PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR
COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT PROJECTS"- AWARDED TO
COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, BOCA RATON, FL.;
HUMISTON & MOORE ENGINEERS, NAPLES, FL.; AND
TAYLOR ENGINEERING, JACKSONVILLE, FL.
Item #16C3 - Deleted
Item # 16C4
RESOLUTION 2001-389 SUPPORTING IMPLEMENTATION OF
AQUIFER STORAGE AND RECOVERY TECHNOLOGIES TO
PROTECT THE ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WATER
SUPPLIES
Item #16C5 - Deleted
Item # 16C6
INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE PROPERTY
APPRAISER AND THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS FOR USE OF THE GEOGRAPHICAL
INFORMATION SYSTEM (GIS) DIGITAL DATA AND
TOPOGRAPHY ACQUIRED BY THE PROPERTY APPRAISER
Page 148
October 9, 2001
IN FY-2000
Item # 16D 1
PRESENTATION OF THE ANNUAL 2001 REPORT OF THE
COLLIER COUNTY FILM COMMISSION
Item #16D2
BID #01-3250, PORTABLE TOILET RENTALS - AWARDED TO
J. W. CRAFT, INC. AND WASTE MANAGEMENT OF COLLIER
COUNTY, INC., ON A PRIMARY/SECONDARY BASIS
Item #16D3
BID #01-3252 FOR THE PURCHASE OF TURF USED BY
COLLIER COUNTY- AWARDED TO LEO'S SOD; HOME
DEPOT; AND GOLDEN GATE NURSERY AND SOD
Item #16E 1
APPROVE A BUDGET AMENDMENT TO APPROPRIATE THE
MAINTENANCE SERVICE REVENUES FOR
REIMBURSEMENT OF OPERATING EXPENSES
Item # 16E2
RESOLUTION 2001-390 CONVEYING A CONSERVATION
EASEMENT TO SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT
DISTRICT REQUIRED FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE
COLLIER COUNTY ANIMAL SHELTER
Page 149
October 9, 2001
Item # 16E3
STAFF AUTHORIZED TO REJECT BIDS FOR 01-3268,
CHARTER BUS SERVICE AND RE-BID
Item #16E4
ADDITIONAL THIRTY (30) DAY EXTENSION OF CONTRACT
#97-2671, OFFICE SUPPLIES - WITH MARCO OFFICE SUPPLY
Item # 16E5
NEOPOST MAIL EQUIPMENT DECLARED AS SURPLUS AND
THE SALE OF EQUIPMENT AUTHORIZED TO MAIL
BARCOD1NG SERVICES OF SWFL, INC. - IN THE AMOUNT
OF $9,000
Item #16E6
BID #01-3259, IRRIGATION PARTS AND RELATED ITEMS -
AWARDED TO BOYNTON PUMP AND IRRIGATION,
FERGUSON UNDERGROUND, MELROSE SUPPLY, AND
CENTURY RAIN AID ACCORDING TO THE EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
Item # 16E7
BID NO. 01-3260, HERBICIDES/PESTICIDES/FUNGICIDES TO
A VARIETY OF BIDDERS- AWARDED AS CONTAINED IN
Page 150
October 9, 2001
THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item #16E8
BID NO. 01-3273 - AWARDED TO TRUEGREEN LANDCARE,
INC., FOR GROUNDS MAINTENANCE FOR MAIN
GOVERNMENT COMPLEX
Item #16E9
BID NO. 01-3274- AWARDED TO COMMERCIAL LAND
MAINTENANCE INC., FOR GROUNDS MAINTENANCE FOR
SATELLITE FACILITIES
Item # 16F 1
RESOLUTION 2001-391 APPROVING AN EMERGENCY
MEDICAL SERVICES (EMS) COUNTY GRANT APPLICATION
AND COUNTY GRANT DISTRIBUTION FORM AND
CERTIFYING THAT THE GRANT MONIES WILL NOT BE
USED TO SUPPLANT THE EXISTING EMERGENCY MEDICAL
SERVICES BUDGET
Item # 16G 1
PAYMENT OF INVOICES FOR SERVICES PERTAINING TO
ELECTION REQUIREMENTS AND TOWN HALL MEETING
FOR THE PELICAN BAY SERVICES DISTRICT, ORDINANCE
NO. 2000-82 - AUTHORIZED IN THE AMOUNT OF $8,515.40
Item # 16G2
Page 151
October 9, 2001
BUDGET AMENDMENT RESOLUTION 2001-03 APPROVING
AMENDMENTS TO THE FISCAL YEAR 2000-01 ADOPTED
BUDGET
Item #16G3
APPROVAL OF BUDGET AMENDMENT REPORT- BUDGET
AMENDMENT #01-524
Item # 16J 1
SATISFACTION OF LIENS FOR SERVICES OF THE PUBLIC
DEFENDER
Item #16J2
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE- FILED AND/OR
REFERRED
The following miscellaneous correspondence has been filed
and/or referred to the various departments as indicated:
Page 152
FOR BOARD ACTION:
1.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
October 9, 2001
Satisfaction of Lien: NEED MOTION authorizing the Chairman to sign Satisfaction of
Lien for Services of the Public Defender for Case Nos.: 90-2783-MMA, 86-675-CFA,
84-2979-TM, 84-3430-TM, 95-2179-CFA, 88-1781-MM, 88-2004-TMC, 89-2211-MM,
89-2905-TMC, 87-3796-TMC, 96-6987-MMA, 91-292-MM, 90-5008-MM, 89-6788-
TM, 90-2945-TM, 89-1390 CFA, 89-3285-MMA, 97-1485-CFA, 91-887-CFB, 90-4733-
TM, 84-1046-TM and 94-1099-CJA; RECOMMEND APPROVAL.
MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS TO FILE FOR RECORD WITH ACTION AS DIRECTED:
Clerk of Courts: Submitted for public record, pursuant to Florida Statutes,
Chapter 136.06(1), the disbursements for the Board of County Commissioners for
the period:
1. September 5, 2001- through September 11, 2001.
2. September 12, 2001- through September 18, 2001.
Districts:
A. North Naples Fire Control & Rescue District - Proposed budget for FY
2001/2002, districts maps, Districts Facilities' reports, registered agent form,
schedule of regular board meetings.
Bo
Pelican Marsh Community Development District -Notice of Public Meetings
Scheduled for Fiscal year 2001-2002, District Map.
C. Heritage Greens Community Development District - Notice of Public Meetings
~ scheduled for FY 2001-2002, District Map.
Do
Big Corkscrew Island Fire Control and Rescue District - 5 year plan, Audited
Financial Statements through September 30,2000.
Mediterra South Community Development District - Public meeting schedule and
District Map.
Fo
H:Data/Format
Naples Heritage Community Development District - Meeting dates for FY 2002,
District Maps, Notice of Meetings scheduled for Naples Heritage Community.
Development District.
P~'1isc. C°rres:
Item#
Copies To:
AGENDA ITEM
No.
0 C T u 9
p~. /
4. Minutes:
Ao
Bo
Golden Gate Beautification Advisory Committee - Agenda for September 11,
2001, and Minutes of August 14, 2001.
Co
Collier County Airport Authority - Agenda for Sept 10, 2001, and Minutes of
August 13, 2001.
Do
Pelican Bay MSTBU Advisory Committee -Agenda of September 5, 2001,
Minutes of August 1,2001, Budget-In-Brief FY 2001, Pelican Bay Services
Division FY 2002.
Eo
Rural Fringe Assessment Area Oversight Committee - Meeting Notice of August
29, 2001, Agenda for August 29, 2001, Minutes of August 8, 2001.
Fo
Collier County Library Advisory Board - Agenda of August 29, 2001, Minutes
of June 27, 2001, Director's Report of August 23, 2001.
Environmental Advisory Council - Agenda for September 5, 2001, Minutes of
August 7, 2001.
G. Rural Lands Assessment Area Oversight Committee - Minutes for June 18, 2001.
H. Hispanic Affairs Advisory Board - Minutes of June 14, 2001.
Emergency Medical Services Advisory Council - Agenda for August 29, 2001,
Minutes of July 25, 2001.
J. Collier County Planning Commission - Agenda for August 16, 2001.
5. Other:
A°
Letter from Guy L. Carlton, Collier County Tax Collector - 2001-2002 Budget
Amendment.
H:Data/Format
AGENDA ITEM
No.
OCT U9 2001
Pg.
October 9, 2001
Item # 16J3
MINUTES AND AGENDAS FOR DISTRICTS
Item # 16J4
M1NUTES FOR ADVISORY COMMITTEES
Item #16J5
LETTER FROM GUY L. CARLTON, COLLIER COUNTY TAX
COLLECTOR- 2001-2002 BUDGET AMENDMENT
Item # 16K1
RESOLUTION 2001-392 AUTHORIZING A BORROWING FROM
THE POOLED COMMERCIAL PAPER LOAN PROGRAM IN AN
AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $2,300,000 FOR THE
ACQUISITION AND IMPLEMENTATION OF A FULLY
INTEGRATED FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
Item # 16L 1
EXECUTION OF SATISFACTION OF CODE ENFORCEMENT
LIEN ESTABLISHED IN COLLIER COUNTY V. TODD A.
MASTRO AND LISA A. MASTRO
Item # 16L2
OFFER OF JUDGMENT ACCEPTED AND APPROVAL OF THE
STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT TO BE CREATED BASED
ON THE SAME TERMS AND CONDITIONS AS THE OFFER OF
Page 153
October 9, 2001
JUDGMENT FOR PARCEL 163 IN THE CASE ENTITLED
COLLIER COUNTY V. RUSSELL BAISLEK ETAL, (LIVINGSTON
ROAD, PROJECT NO. 60071) -STAFF TO DEPOSIT $9,560 INTO
THE REGISTRY OF THE COURT
Item # 17A
RESOLUTION 2001-393 RE PETITION CCSL-2001-3, AJ SMITH
OF RECREATIONAL FACILITIES OF AMERICA INC.,
REQUESTING A COASTAL CONSTRUCTION SETBACK LINE
VARIANCE TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A DUNE
WALKOVER, CHICKEE HUT, DESIGNATED STORAGE AREA
FOR A BEACH CONCESSION AND A PATHWAY LANDWARD
OF THE BEACH, LOCATED AT THE COLLIER COUNTY
BAREFOOT BEACH PARK, SECTIONS 7, 8, 17 AND 18,
TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY
Item #17B - Deleted
Item # 17C
RESOLUTION 2001-394 RE PETITION CCSL-2001-2, DON
CAHILL REPRESENTING WILLIAM G. RECKMEYER,
REQUESTING A COASTAL CONSTRUCTION SETBACK LINE
VARIANCE TO ALLOW FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A SINGLE
FAMILY RESIDENCE, LOCATED AT LOT 9, BLOCK C, UNIT 1,
LELY BAREFOOT BEACH, SECTION 6, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH,
RANGE 25 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
Page 154
October 9, 2001
There being no further business for the good of the County, the
meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 1:48 p.m.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS/EX
OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF
SPECIAL DISTRICTS UNDER ITS
CONTROL
JAME -~. ~D.,
CHAIRMAN
":-DW.I.~T E. BROCK, CLERK
Attest ~.s to Chatrm~n'$
These minutes approved by the Board on
as presented
or as corrected
TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF DONOVAN COURT
REPORTING, INC., BY CAROLYN J. FORD, NOTARY PUBLIC
Page 155