BCC Minutes 07/07/2015 R BCC
REGULAR
MEETING
MINUTES
July 7, 2015
July 7, 2015
TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING
OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Naples, Florida July 7, 2015
LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Board of County
Commissioners, in and for the County of Collier, and also acting as the
Board of Zoning Appeals and as the governing board(s) of such special
districts as have been created according to law and having conducted
business herein, met on this date at 9:00 a.m., in REGULAR SESSION
in Building "F" of the Government Complex, East Naples, Florida,
with the following members present:
CHAIRMAN: Tim Nance
Donna Fiala
Tom Henning
Georgia Hiller
Penny Taylor
ALSO PRESENT:
Leo E. Ochs, Jr., County Manager
Nick Casalanguida, Deputy County Manager
Jeffrey Klatzkow, County Attorney
Crystal Kinzel, Office of the Clerk of Courts
Troy Miller, Communications & Customer Relations
Cherie' Nottingham, CPR, Court Reporter
Page 1
COLLIER COUNTY
Board of County Commissioners
Community Redevelopment Agency Board (CRAB)
Airport Authority
C" I
. 1010
r Atoms*v 1
AGENDA
Board of County Commission Chambers
Collier County Government Center
3299 Tamiami Trail East, 3rd Floor
Naples FL 34112
July 07, 2015
9:00 AM
Commissioner Tim Nance, District 5 —BCC Chair
Commissioner Donna Fiala, District 1 —BCC Vice-Chair; CRA Chair
Commissioner Georgia Hiller, District 2 — Community & Economic Dev. Chair
Commissioner Tom Henning, District 3 — PSCC Vice-Chair
Commissioner Penny Taylor, District 4— TDC Chair; CRA Vice-Chair
NOTICE: ALL PERSONS WISHING TO SPEAK ON AGENDA ITEMS MUST
REGISTER PRIOR TO PRESENTATION OF THE AGENDA ITEM TO BE
ADDRESSED. ALL REGISTERED SPEAKERS WILL RECEIVE UP TO THREE
(3) MINUTES UNLESS THE TIME IS ADJUSTED BY THE CHAIRMAN.
PUBLIC COMMENT ON GENERAL TOPICS NOT ON THE CURRENT OR
FUTURE AGENDA TO BE HEARD NO SOONER THAN 1:00 P.M., OR AT THE
CONCLUSION OF THE AGENDA; WHICHEVER OCCURS FIRST.
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."
Page 1
July 7,2015
PUBLIC PETITIONS ARE LIMITED TO THE PRESENTER, WITH A
MAXIMUM TIME OF TEN MINUTES.
ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THIS BOARD
WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDING PERTAINING THERETO,
AND THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD
OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE
TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED.
COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 2003-53 AS AMENDED BY
ORDINANCE 2004-05 AND 2007-24, REQUIRES THAT ALL LOBBYISTS
SHALL, BEFORE ENGAGING IN ANY LOBBYING ACTIVITIES (INCLUDING
BUT NOT LIMITED TO, ADDRESSING THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS), REGISTER WITH THE CLERK TO THE BOARD AT THE
BOARD MINUTES AND RECORDS DEPARTMENT.
IF YOU ARE A PERSON WITH A DISABILITY WHO NEEDS ANY
ACCOMMODATION IN ORDER TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS PROCEEDING,
YOU ARE ENTITLED, AT NO COST TO YOU, THE PROVISION OF CERTAIN
ASSISTANCE. PLEASE CONTACT THE COLLIER COUNTY FACILITIES
MANAGEMENT DIVISION LOCATED AT 3335 EAST TAMIAMI TRAIL,
SUITE 1, NAPLES, FLORIDA, 34112-5356, (239) 252-8380; ASSISTED
LISTENING DEVICES FOR THE HEARING IMPAIRED ARE AVAILABLE IN
THE FACILITIES MANAGEMENT DIVISION.
LUNCH RECESS SCHEDULED FOR 12:00 NOON TO 1:00 P.M
1. INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
A. Rabbi Ammos Chorny - Beth Tikvah Synagogue
2. AGENDA AND MINUTES
A. Approval of today's regular, consent and summary agenda as amended (Ex
Parte Disclosure provided by Commission members for consent agenda.)
B. June 9, 2015 - BCC/Regular Meeting Minutes
3. SERVICE AWARDS
Page 2
July 7,2015
A. RETIREES
1) Frank Millot, EMS-30 Years of Service
4. PROCLAMATIONS
A. Proclamation designating July 7, 2015 as Irving Berzon Day, retired Collier
County Engineer, for his contributions benefiting all citizens of Collier
County through his farsighted and dedicated efforts. To be accepted by
Irving Berzon.
B. Proclamation recognizing Yahl Mulching & Recycling, Inc. for their efforts
in recycling and reducing waste, as the recipient of Collier County
Hazardous and Solid Waste Department's Waste Reduction Awards Program
(WRAP) Award. To be accepted by John and Teresa Fillmore, owners of
Yahl Mulching & Recycling, Inc.
5. PRESENTATIONS
A. Presentation of the Collier County Business of the Month for July 2015 to
Stock Development. To be accepted by Brian Stock, CEO, Stock
Development; Keith Gelder, Director of Land Development, Stock
Development; and John Cox, President and CEO, The Greater Naples
Chamber of Commerce.
6. PUBLIC PETITIONS
A. Public Petition request from Mr. Peternal Francois requesting that the Board
of County Commissioners increase the penalties for taxi license violations.
Item #7 to be heard no sooner than 1:00 pm unless otherwise noted.
7. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS NOT ON THE CURRENT
OR FUTURE AGENDA
Item #8 and Item #9 to be heard no sooner than 1:30 pm unless otherwise noted.
8. BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
Page 3
July 7,2015
9. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. This item to be heard at 9:45 a.m. Recommendation to deny (not adopt)
the Livingston/Pine Ridge Commercial Infill Subdistrict small-scale
amendment to the Collier County Growth Management Plan, Ordinance 89-
05, as Amended, for transmittal to the Florida Department of Economic
Opportunity. (Adoption Hearing) (PL201400001282/CPSS-2014-2)
[Companion to Petition PUDZ-PL20140001326]
B. This item to be heard following Item #9A. This item requires that ex
parte disclosure be provided by Commission members. Should a
hearing be held on this item, all participants are required to be sworn
in. Recommendation to consider an Ordinance amending Ordinance No.
2004-41, as amended, the Collier County Land Development Code, which
established the comprehensive zoning regulations for the unincorporated
area of Collier County, Florida by amending the appropriate zoning atlas
map or maps by changing the zoning classification of the herein described
real property from the Agricultural (A) zoning district to a Commercial
Planned Unit Development (CPUD) zoning district for a 10.47± acre parcel
to be known as the Germain Honda CPUD to allow construction of an
automotive sales facility with associated repair services, up to 60,000 square
feet of gross floor area, on property located at the northwest corner of the
intersection of Pine Ridge Road and Livingston Road in Section 12,
Township 49 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida; providing for
repeal of Resolution No. 94-584, a conditional use for a retail nursery; and
providing an effective date. [Petition PUDZ-PL20140001326]
C. This item to be heard at 5:05 p.m. Recommendation to consider an
Ordinance Amending Ordinance Number 04-41, as amended, the Collier
County Land Development Code, which includes the comprehensive land
regulations for the unincorporated area of Collier County, Florida, by
providing for: Section One, Recitals; Section Two, Adoption of
Amendments to the Land Development Code, more specifically amending
Chapter 2 - Zoning Districts And Uses, including Section 2.03.09 Open
Space Zoning Districts, to add golf maintenance buildings as a new
accessory use within the golf course zoning district; Chapter 4 - Site Design
and Development Standards, including Section 4.02.03 Specific Standards
for Location of Accessory Buildings and Structures, to establish setback
requirements for golf clubhouse and maintenance buildings on waterfront
lots and golf course lots in zoning districts other than Rural Agricultural and
Page 4
July 7, 2015
Estates; Section Three, Conflict and Severability; Section Four, Inclusion in
the Collier County Land Development Code; and Section Five, Effective
Date.
D. This item to be heard at 5:05 p.m. Recommendation to consider an
Ordinance Amending Ordinance Number 04-41, as amended, the Collier
County Land Development Code, which includes the comprehensive land
regulations for the unincorporated area of Collier County, Florida, by
providing for: Section One, Recitals; Section Two, Adoption of
Amendments to the Land Development Code, more specifically amending
the following: Chapter One - General Provisions, including Section 1.08.02
Definitions; Chapter Five - Supplemental Standards, including Section
5.05.05 Automobile Service Stations, more specifically to establish site
design standards for facilities with fuel pumps; Section 5.05.08 Architectural
and Site Design Standards; Section 5.05.11 Carwashes Abutting Residential
Zoning Districts; Section Three, Conflict And Severability; Section Four,
Inclusion in the Collier County Land Development Code; and Section Five,
Effective Date.
E. Recommendation to consider (1) An Ordinance Amending Ordinance
Number 04-41, as amended, the Collier County Land Development Code,
which includes the comprehensive land regulations for the unincorporated
area of Collier County, Florida, by providing for: Section One, Recitals;
Section Two, Findings of Fact; Section Three, Adoption of Amendments to
the Land Development Code, more specifically amending the following:
Chapter Two - Zoning Districts and Uses, including Section 2.03.07 Overlay
Zoning Districts; Chapter Three - Resource Protection, including Section
3.05.02 Exemption From Requirements For Vegetation Protection And
Preservation, Section 3.05.07 Preservation Standards, Section 3.05.08
Requirement For Removal of Prohibited Exotic Vegetation; Chapter Four -
Site Design and Development Standards, including Section 4.02.04
Standards for Cluster Residential Design, Section 4.06.02 Buffer
Requirements, 4.06.05 General Landscape Requirements, 4.08.07 SRA
Designation; Chapter Five - Supplemental Standards Including Section
5.06.04 Development Standards for Signs in Nonresidential Districts;
Chapter Ten - Application, Review, and Decision-Making Procedures,
including Section 10.02.04 Requirements for Preliminary and Final
Subdivision Plats, Section 10.02.06 Requirements for Permits, Section
10.02.07 Requirements for Certificates of Public Facility Adequacy, Section
10.03.06 Public Notice and Required Hearings for Land Use Petitions;
Page 5
July 7,2015
Appendix A- Standard Performance Security Documents for Required
Improvements; Section Four, Conflict and Severability; Section Five,
Inclusion in the Collier County Land Development Code; and Section Six,
Effective Date; (2) Providing direction to staff to update the land use
procedures in the Administrative Code for Land Development; and (3) The
list of proposed 2015 Land Development Code Amendments - Cycle 2.
F. This item to be heard at 1:30 p.m. This item continued from the June
23, 2015 BCC Meeting. This item requires that ex parte disclosure be
provided by Commission members. Should a hearing be held on this
item, all participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to
approve for recording the final plat of Legacy Estates, (Application Number
20140001803) approval of the standard form Construction and Maintenance
Agreement and approval of the amount of the performance security.
[Companion to Item #11D.]
10. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
A. Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners direct the
County Attorney to advertise a hearing to rescind Ordinance 2013-70 to
remove the MSBU established to fund La Peninsula seawall repair as
requested by La Peninsula legal counsel. (Commissioner Henning)
B. Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners recognizes
Resolution 2007-138 providing for the expansion of an existing conditional
use for the Naples Bridge Club has conflicting provisions with PU-80-4C
(Resolution 80-128) and that the Board finds that the original Provisional
Use adopted in PU-80-4C, Attachment 1, Section 6, stating that any
expansion shall only require site plan approval is the prevailing language.
(Commissioner Henning)
C. This item to be heard following Item #11E. Recommendation for the
Board of County Commissioners to authorize the BCC Chairman to send a
letter to Governor Rick Scott requesting reinstatement of funding for the
Department of Economic Opportunity grant supporting the Collier County
Business Accelerator program. (Commissioner Nance)
D. Recommendation to amend the Interlocal Agreement between the Board of
County Commissioners and the Clerk of the Circuit Court to promote
Page 6
July 7,2015
accountability and transparency. (Commissioner Hiller)
11. COUNTY MANAGER'S REPORT
A. Recommendation to adopt a resolution establishing Proposed Millage Rates
as the Maximum Property Tax Rates to be levied in FY 2015/16 and
Reaffirm the Advertised Public Hearing dates in September 2015 for the
Budget approval process. (Mark Isackson, Corporate Financial and
Management Services Director)
B. Recommendation to award Bid Number 15-6457 "Naples Manor Water
Main Replacement - Phase No. 2 and MPS 306 Force Main - Phase III," to
Douglas N. Higgins, Inc., in the amount of$2,231,395 for Water and
Wastewater improvements under Project Numbers 70044 and 71010.
(George Yilmaz, Public Utilities Department Head)
C. Recommendation to award Bid Number 15-4561, "Master Pump Station 306
Force Main Phase II," to Bonness, Inc., for $1,107,858.57 under Force Main
Technical Support Project Number 70044. (George Yilmaz, Public Utilities
Department Head)
D. This item to be heard immediately following Item #9F. Recommendation
to approve a standard Donation Agreement that allows JD DEVELOPMENT
1 LLC, a foreign limited liability company, to donate a 1.14 acre parcel
along with a management endowment of$4,440.30 to the Conservation
Collier Land Acquisition Program under the offsite vegetation retention
provision of the Land Development Code LDC Sec 3.05.07H.1.f.iii. (b), at
no cost to the County, and authorize the Chairman to sign the Donation
Agreement and staff to take all necessary actions to close. (Alexandra
Sulecki, Principal Environmental Specialist) [Companion to Item #9F]
E. This item to be heard at 11:00 a.m. Recommendation to continue
operation of a modified Soft Landing Business Accelerator Project in view
of the eminent termination of the Grant Agreement with the State of Florida
Department of Economic Opportunity and veto of the Legislature's request
to extend funding for the Agreement into the State fiscal year 2016. (Bruce
Register, Office of Business and Economic Development)
12. COUNTY ATTORNEY'S REPORT
Page 7
July 7,2015
A. This item to be heard immediately following Item #9D. Recommendation
to rescind Resolution No. 14-155, as amended, relating to the "Zoning in
Progress" declaration which prohibited the issuance of Development Orders
for automobile service stations abutting residential property.
13. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
14. AIRPORT AUTHORITY AND/OR COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY
A. AIRPORT
B. COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
1) Request that the Board of County Commissioners, acting as the
Community Redevelopment Agency Board, decides: (1) whether any
fee or commission is appropriate should the sale of the CRA property
at the Gateway Triangle occur as anticipated on or before July 13,
2015, and (2) if any fee or commission is due, identify the proper
percentage or amount of that fee or commission.
15. STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS
A. Current BCC Workshop Schedule.
16. CONSENT AGENDA - All matters listed under this item are considered to be
routine and action will be taken by one motion without separate discussion of
each item. If discussion is desired by a member of the Board, that item(s) will
be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered separately.
A. GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
1) Recommendation to adopt a Resolution extending the Collier County
Architectural and Site Design Standards Ad Hoc Committee for 12
months.
2) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to sign a
funding assistance letter to the Congressional Delegation requesting
Page 8
July 7, 2015
the United States Army Corps of Engineers include funding for
Gordon River Pass dredging in its next budget.
3) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the water and sewer
utility facilities for Canwick Cove, PL20130000849, and to authorize
the County Manager, or his designee, to release the Final Obligation
Bond in the total amount of$4,000 to the Project Engineer or the
Developer's designated agent.
4) Recommendation to accept an Access Improvement Agreement with
Fifth Third Bank to fulfill a condition of approval pursuant to Hearing
Examiner Decision No. 2015-09, concerning a new access point on
Thomasson Lane in the Sabal Bay MPUD, Ordinance No. 05-59.
5) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the water and sewer
utility facilities for Piacere and Pavia, PL20130002059.
6) Recommendation to approve final acceptance and unconditional
conveyance of the water and sewer utility facilities for Artesia, Phase
1A, PL20140001712.
7) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the water and sewer
utility facilities for Artesia, Phase 1B, PL20140001714.
8) Recommendation to accept a Resolution Amending Exhibit "A" to
Resolution No. 2013-239, the list of speed limits on County
maintained roads; to bring various roadways into compliance with the
allowable maximum speed limits as identified in F.S. § 316.189 and
as required by Collier County Ordinance 91-25 (Collier County Speed
Limit Ordinance); for roadways located within the Lely Resort
Community.
9) Recommendation to authorize the Clerk of Courts to release a Cash
Bond in the amount of$25,000 which was posted as a guaranty for
Excavation Permit Number 60.095, (PL20130001140) for work
associated with Sandalwood Village.
10) Recommendation to authorize the Clerk of Courts to release a
Performance Bond in the amount of$493,500 which was posted as a
guaranty for Excavation Permit Number 59.912, (PL20 1 1 0002 1 90)
Page 9
July 7,2015
for work associated with Saturnia Falls Plat One (Riverstone).
11) Recommendation to accept an alternate security for that subdivision
known as Hatcher's Preserve, (Application Number AR-11440) enter
into a Construction and Maintenance Agreement with the new owner
and terminate the existing Construction, Maintenance and Escrow
Agreement.
12) Recommendation to grant final approval of the landscaping
improvements for the final plats of Reflection Lakes at Naples Phases
2C (AR-7523) Phase 2D (AR-7524), Phase 2E (AR-7525) and Phase
2F (AR-7526) and authorizing the release of the maintenance
securities.
13) Recommendation to award Bid #15-6383 for Golden Gate City
Various Sidewalk Improvements to Coastal Concrete Products, LLC
(Project #33363).
14) Recommendation to approve the release of a code enforcement lien
with an accrued value of$11,500 for payment of$450, in the code
enforcement action entitled Board of County Commissioners v. C.
Gary Wilcox and Sonja R. Wilcox, Code Enforcement Special
Magistrate Case No. CEPM20140003896, relating to property located
at 2118 44th Terrace SW, Collier County, Florida.
15) Recommendation to approve the release of a code enforcement lien
with an accrued value of$439,163.18 for payment of$5,000, in the
code enforcement action entitled Board of County Commissioners v.
Heriberto and Antonio Perez, Code Enforcement Board Case No.
CESD20080000222, relating to property located at 5384 Carolina
Avenue, Collier County, Florida.
16) Recommendation to approve the release of a code enforcement lien
with an accrued value of$148,112.29 for payment of$3,771.23, in the
code enforcement action entitled Board of County Commissioners v.
Peter V. Schryver, Code Enforcement Special Magistrate Case No.
CESD20090011040, relating to property located at 4851 Catalina
Drive, Collier County, Florida.
Page 10
July 7,2015
17) This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by
Commission members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all
participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to
approve for recording the final plat of Artesia Naples, Phase 5,
(Application Number PL20150000374) approval of the standard form
Construction and Maintenance Agreement and approval of the amount
of the performance security.
18) This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by
Commission members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all
participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to
approve for recording the final plat of Artesia Naples, Phase 4,
(Application Number PL20140002472) approval of the standard form
Construction and Maintenance Agreement and approval of the amount
of the performance security.
19) Recommendation to approve the selection committee rankings and
authorize staff to enter into contract negotiations with the number one
ranked firm Lago Consulting & Services, LLC, for RFP No. 15-6452
"Modeling Services for Surface Water and Groundwater
Management" for protected public water supply wellfields that utilize
the Surficial and Intermediate Aquifers.
20) Recommendation to approve the waiver of an optional local public
hearing on a petition to correct the legal description of the Fiddler's
Creek Community Development District 1 which was filed with the
Florida Land and Water Adjudicatory Commission since the CDD is
over 1000 acres.
21) Recommendation to accept a proposal from Atkins North America,
Inc. dated June 19, 2015 for the development of a Comprehensive
Watershed Improvement Project, approve a Work Order under
Contract No. 13-6164-SS for a not-to-exceed amount of$179,897,
authorize the County Manager or his designee to execute the Work
Order and authorize all necessary budget amendments. Project No.
51144.3.
22) Recommendation to approve a Stipulated Final Judgment in the total
amount of$17,500 for Parcel 138RDUE in the lawsuit styled Collier
County v. Grover C. Woody, III, et al., Case No. 15-CA-199.
Page 11
July 7,2015
(Golden Gate Boulevard from East of Wilson Boulevard to 20th Street
East, Project No. 60040.) Fiscal Impact: $17,500.
23) Recommendation to approve Change Order No. 1 to Work
Order/Purchase Order No. 4500157798 with Humiston & Moore
Engineers for Collier County Beaches and Inlets Annual Monitoring
for 2015 under Contract No. 13-6164-CZ, authorize the County
Manager or his designee to execute the Change Order for a time
extension of 138 days, and makes a finding that this item promotes
tourism.
B. COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
1) Recommendation for the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA)
to approve a Commercial Building Improvement Grant Agreement
between the CRA and Antone C. Mendes in the amount of$13,496
for property located at 2260 Tamiami Trail East and within the
Bayshore Gateway Triangle area.
C. PUBLIC UTILITIES DEPARTMENT
1) Recommendation to approve a Resolution and Satisfactions of Lien
for the 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995, and 1996 Solid Waste Collection and
Disposal Services Special Assessments where the county has received
payment in full satisfaction of the liens. Fiscal impact is $61 to record
the Satisfactions of Lien.
2) Recommendation to award ITB #15-6449, "Maintenance Repair and
Operations Parts and Equipment" to W. W. Grainger, Inc., as primary,
and Sunshine Ace Hardware, Inc., as secondary for commodity based
purchases that include maintenance repair and operations products of
industrial equipment, maintenance supplies, tools, inventory items and
work order repairs.
3) Recommendation to approve the Satisfaction for a certain Notice of
Promise to Pay and Agreement to Extend Payment of Water and/or
Sewer System Impact Fees. Fiscal impact is $18.50 to record the
Satisfaction of Lien.
Page 12
July 7, 2015
4) Recommendation to approve selection committee rankings and enter
into negotiations for a contract for Request for Proposal No. 15-6450,
"Naples Park Infrastructure Improvements," Project Numbers 60139,
70043, 70044 and 71010, with Q. Grady Minor & Associates.
5) Recommendation to approve a licensing agreement with the District
School Board of Collier County to allow the installation of a lightning
prediction and warning system on the Pump Station 309 building
located on the campus of East Naples Middle School.
6) Recommendation to approve Contract #14-6345, "Construction,
Engineering, and Inspection Services for the Wastewater Basin
Program," Project Numbers 71010, 70043, 70044, 70046, 70050, and
70051, with three firms: AECOM Technical Services, Inc., Stantec
Consulting Services, Inc., and Hole Montes, Inc.
7) Recommendation to authorize a budget amendment in the amount of
$93,000 transferring funds between cost centers and line items within
the Collier County Water-Sewer District Operating Fund (408) to
cover costs for unanticipated increases in bank fees and contractual
services.
D. PUBLIC SERVICES DEPARTMENT
1) Recommendation to approve a no cost Modification No. 13 to a
Disaster Recovery Initiative Grant Agreement for the Colorado
Avenue Storm Water Project with the Florida Department of
Economic Opportunity.
2) Recommendation to award Invitation to Bid No. 15-6463 to Construct
Company, Inc. in the amount of$225,800, for construction of the
"Tigertail Beach Observation Tower," approve the necessary budget
amendment, and make a finding that this expenditure promotes
tourism.
3) Recommendation to approve an after-the-fact Amendment and
Attestation Statement with Area Agency on Aging for Southwest
Florida, Inc. for the Older Americans Act Program Title III programs
and budget amendments to reflect an increase in grant funding (Net
Page 13
July 7, 2015
Fiscal Impact $16,309).
4) Recommendation to accept an extension of the expenditure deadline
on Fiscal Year 2012/2013 grant allocations from the Florida Housing
Finance Corporation to December 31, 2015 for the State Housing
Initiatives Partnership (SHIP) program.
5) Recommendation to approve the FY15 Program of Projects and
submittal of a grant application for the Federal Transit Administration,
49 USC § 5307 FY15 grant funds to support the Collier Area Transit
system in the amount of$2,888,127, through the Transportation
Electronic Award Management System.
6) Recommendation to approve an award for Invitation to Bid #15-6437
"Vanderbilt Beach MSTU FPL Utility Conversion at Vanderbilt
Beach Road, Installation and connection of new underground FPL
network" to MasTec North America, Inc. in the amount of
$574,606.25.
7) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to reinstate
and sign an extension agreement with the Department of Housing and
Urban Development (HUD) for the 2010 funded Shelter Plus Care
(S+C) grant to provide supportive services too hard to serve persons
with disabilities, approve the associated Subrecipient Agreement with
CASL, Inc., approve budget amendments to recognize funding
associated with this award, and authorize payment for outstanding
payment to Collier County Housing Authority.
8) Recommendation to approve continuation of the Library Electronic
Assistance Program through annual recurring funding by the Friends
of the Library, Inc. and the necessary budget amendment.
9) Recommendation to approve an agreement to accept U.S. Department
of Housing and Urban Development rural capacity building
technical assistance from the National Association for Latino
Community Asset Builders.
10) Recommendation to award Bid No. 15-6454, "Bus Shelters Repairs,"
to Florida Painters of Lee County, Inc. as the primary vendor and to
Page 14
July 7, 2015
Varian Construction as the secondary vendor.
11) Recommendation to approve and sign a Long Term Community
Market Agreement with Joseph and Neomi Rakow, Market Manager
of the Golden Gate Community Park Community Market with an
effective date of July 7, 2015 through February 1, 2016.
12) Recommendation to approve the submittal of a Five-Year Sovereignty
Submerged Land Lease Renewal with the Board of Trustees of the
Internal Improvement Trust Fund of the State of Florida at the
Cocohatchee River Park Marina, authorize payment of lease
processing fee of$630, and authorize the Chairman to sign the lease
renewal.
13) Recommendation to approve a Right of Entry to the Southwest
Florida Research and Education Center (SWFREC) University of
Florida, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences (UF/IFAS) to
install, maintain and monitor groundwater monitoring wells at the
Pepper Ranch Preserve as part of the Lake Trafford Watershed
Boundary Study.
14) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to execute
Landlord Payment Agreements, between 12 landlord/entities and the
Collier County Board of Commissioners allowing the County to
administer the Rapid Re-Housing and Homelessness Prevention
Program through Collier County's Emergency Solutions Grant
Program.
15) Recommendation to approve and execute a Standstill Agreement
between Collier County and the United States Department of
Agriculture (USDA) to allow the USDA to continue its operations at
the County's Agriculture Extension Office at the current terms and
conditions, until a new Lease Agreement can be submitted.
16) Recommendation to approve the recommendation to modify the
endowment related to the County's acceptance of properties donated
to Conservation Collier as offsite preservation under the Land
Development Code (LDC) Section 3.05.07, H.l.f. iii. a. and b.
Page 15
July 7,2015
E. ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DEPARTMENT
1) Recommendation to award a contract for Affordable Care Act Data
Reporting Services to Health E(fx) and authorize the Chairman to sign
the County Attorney approved agreement.
2) Recommendation to approve seven deletions to the 2015 Fiscal Year
Pay and Classification Plan made from April 1, 2015 through June 30,
2015.
3) Recommendation to recognize and appropriate revenues generated
through reimbursements to the EMS operating budget in the amount
of$79,052.
4) Recommendation to approve the Collier County Water-Sewer
District's completion of the remaining terms of the September 14,
2010 Agreement with 850 NWN, LLC, CG II, LLC and execution of
Mutual Releases.
5) Recommendation to approve a Lease Agreement with North Collier
Fire District for EMS Department use of Station 48 with no annual
rent and shared utility expenses.
6) Recommendation to approve the sale and disposal of surplus property
through an on-line auction in compliance with Florida Statutes and
Resolution 2013-095.
7) Recommendation to recognize and appropriate revenue for Special
Services to the Facilities Management Division Cost Center and
approve the necessary Fiscal Year 2014-2015 Budget Amendment.
8) Recommendation to affirm the staff's administrative award in October
2013 of Invitation to Bid #13-6141 Water Treatment Services to US
Water Service Corporation and award in accordance with the Board's
Procurement Ordinance 2015-37, Section 9 Formal Competitive
Threshold.
9) Recommendation to accept and ratify reports for staff-approved
change orders, changes to work orders, and surplus credit.
Page 16
July 7,2015
F. COUNTY MANAGER OPERATIONS
1) Recommendation to approve a Termination of Agreement for the
Timber Ridge PUD Unit 2 affordable rental housing project due to the
impact fees being paid in full in accordance with Resolution 95-62
and the Amended and Restated Agreement for 100% Deferral of
Collier County Impact Fees recorded in Official Records of Collier
County Book 2074 Page 0233.
2) Recommendation to approve Tourism Development Grant
Application Agreements for FY 16 Category B ($35,000) and
Category C-2 ($40,000) Grants, authorize the Chairman to sign, and
make a finding that this action promotes tourism.
3) Recommendation to adopt a resolution approving amendments
(appropriating grants, donations, contributions or insurance proceeds)
to the Fiscal Year 2014-15 Adopted Budget.
4) Recommendation to approve the First Amendment to the Agreement
between the Southwest Florida Economic Development Alliance, Inc.
and the Board of County Commissioners.
5) Recommendation to approve an agreement between Collier County
and RETIS designating Collier County exclusive rights to host the
RETIS FACE 9 Florida Executive Training Program in the fall of
2015, and providing funding in the amount of up to $12,000 for
financial support in facilitating the event.
6) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners adopts a
Resolution fixing the date, time and place for the Public Hearing for
approving the Special Assessment (Non-Ad Valorem Assessment) to
be levied against the properties within the Pelican Bay Municipal
Service Taxing and Benefit Unit for maintenance of the water
management system, beautification of recreational facilities and
median areas and maintenance of conservation or preserve areas, and
establishment of Capital Reserve Funds for ambient noise
management, maintenance of conservation or preserve areas,
including the restoration of the mangrove forest, U.S. 41 berm, street
signage replacements within the median areas, landscaping
improvements to U.S. 41 entrances and beach renourishment, all
Page 17
July 7,2015
within the Pelican Bay Municipal Service Taxing and Benefit Unit.
7) Recommendation that the Board authorize the Chairman, as a
member of the Southwest Florida Job Training Consortium, to
approve the Southwest Florida Workforce Development Board, Inc.,
proposed FY 2015/2016 budget.
8) Recommendation to approve Amendment #1 to Contract #15-6433
Production of the Tourism Guide to Miles Media Group, LLLP,
authorize the Chairman to execute the County Attorney approved
amendment, and make a finding that this expenditure promotes
tourism.
G. AIRPORT AUTHORITY
1) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners (BCC),
acting as the Airport Authority, approve the attached Fifth
Amendment to Assignment of Lease from Global Manufacturing
Technologies, Inc. to KPK Management, Inc.
2) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners (BCC),
acting as the Airport Authority, approves the attached First
Amendment to the Collier County Airport Authority Standard Form
Lease with the Florida Department of Military Affairs and Standard
Form Lease with Tellus Florida, LLC.
H. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
1) Request to advertise an ordinance amending Ordinance No. 2008-47,
as amended, relating to the Collier County Non-Consent Towing,
Private Property Towing, Immobilization and Storage of Vehicles
Ordinance, to be brought back at a subsequent meeting for adoption.
(Commissioner Fiala)
2) Recommendation to appoint one member to the Affordable Housing
Advisory Committee.
3) Recommendation to authorize the Collier County Black Affairs
Advisory Board to hold the annual "Diabetes Awareness Day."
Page 18
July 7,2015
4) Recommendation to appoint a citizen member to the Value
Adjustment Board.
I. MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
1) Miscellaneous Correspondence.
J. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
1) To provide to the Board of County Commissioners, the Clerk of the
Circuit Court's Internal Audit Report 2015-5 Fleet Management,
issued on July 1, 2015.
2) Board declarations of expenditures serving a valid public purpose and
approval of disbursements for the period of June 18 through June 24,
2015.
3) Board declaration of expenditures serving a valid public purpose and
approval of disbursements for the period of June 25 through June 30,
2015.
K. COUNTY ATTORNEY
1) Recommendation to approve an Assumption Agreement substituting
the law firm of Smolker, Bartlett, Loeb, Hinds & Sheppard P.A. for
the law firm of Smolker, Bartlett, Schlosser, Loeb & Hinds, P.A., in
the Retention Agreement dated April 24, 2007, as previously amended
and assumed.
2) Recommendation to approve a Stipulated Final Judgment in the total
amount of$11,000 for Parcel 153RDUE in the lawsuit styled Collier
County v. GG1 Naples, LLC, et al., Case No. 15-CA-329. (Golden
Gate Boulevard from East of Wilson Boulevard to 20th Street East,
Project No. 60040) Fiscal Impact: $11,170.
3) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners review
and approve the proposed 2-year extension to the Employment
Agreement for Mark Strain, Hearing Examiner.
Page 19
July 7,2015
4) Recommendation to approve a Resolution granting Marlene Messam,
as Project Manager, authority to make a binding commitment to the
construction plans for the US 41/951 Intersection Improvement
Project (Project No. 60116) for the purposes of trial and all pretrial
motions in the case styled Collier County v. RTG, LLC, et al., Case
No. 13-CA-259.
5) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners, Ex-
officio the Governing Board of the Collier County Water-Sewer
District, direct the County Attorney to enforce the terms of the May
18, 2015, mediation and pursue any and all actions required to hold
the required public hearing, together with the recovery of the
County's legal fees and costs.
17. SUMMARY AGENDA - This section is for advertised public hearings and
must meet the following criteria: 1) A recommendation for approval from
staff; 2) Unanimous recommendation for approval by the Collier County
Planning Commission or other authorizing agencies of all members present
and voting; 3) No written or oral objections to the item received by staff, the
Collier County Planning Commission, other authorizing agencies or the
Board, prior to the commencement of the BCC meeting on which the items
are scheduled to be heard; and 4) No individuals are registered to speak in
opposition to the item. For those items which are quasi-judicial in nature, all
participants must be sworn in.
A. Recommendation to adopt an Ordinance amending Ordinance No. 2005-54,
which re-established two Municipal Benefit Units, known as Service District
No. 1 and Service District No. 2, for the purpose of providing and regulating
solid waste collection, disposal and administration, to provide alignment
with the Franchise Agreements as amended, new procedures, clarifications,
and administrative changes.
B. Recommendation to consider amending Ordinance Number 2004-41, as
amended, the Collier County Land Development Code, which includes the
comprehensive zoning regulations for the unincorporated area of Collier
County, Florida by amending Ordinance No. 92-15, as amended, which re-
established Lely, A Resort Community Planned Unit Development (PUD),
by reducing the maximum number of dwelling units from 10,150 to 8,946;
Page 20
July 7,2015
by amending Section 2.06 entitled "Project Density" and Section 2.07
entitled "Permitted Variations of Dwelling Units"; by amending the market
absorption schedule; by amending Section 3.02 entitled "Maximum
Dwelling Units"; by amending Section V, C-2 Commercial/Professional to
provide that the square footage limitation does not apply to residential
dwelling units permitted as part of a mixed use project; and by amending
Section VI, C-3 Commercial/Neighborhood to allow C-3 uses and all types
of residential dwelling units as mixed use or stand alone for the C-3 parcel at
the corner of Rattlesnake-Hammock Road and Grand Lely Drive; by adding
Section XV, Deviations, from the Land Development Code to increase the
number of signs and the size of signs; amending Exhibit H, the PUD Master
Plan to move a C-3 parcel to the east of Lely Grand Drive and adjust
acreages to decrease residential uses and increase commercial uses by 6±
acres; and providing an effective date. The subject property consists of
2,892 acres located between U.S. 41 and Rattlesnake-Hammock Road west
of C.R. 951, in Sections 21, 22, 27, 28, 33 and 34, Township 50 South,
Range 26 East, and Section 3, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier
County, Florida. [PUDA-PL20140002040]
C. This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission
members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all participants are
required to be sworn in. Recommendation to approve an Ordinance of the
Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida amending
Ordinance Number 2008-02 which established the Lane Park Commercial
Planned Unit Development to remove the gross floor area square footage
limitations on permitted retail principal uses; to amend the minimum yards
and site lighting development standards; to amend the PUD Master Plan to
remove a portion of the existing 50-foot drainage easement along the eastern
PUD boundary, to show an additional PUD access point off of Market
Street, and to increase the required native vegetation retention acreage; and
to add new environmental developer commitments identifying the permitted
preserve uses, and providing flexibility to allow the on-site native vegetation
retention requirement to be satisfied off-site. The subject property is located
on the southwest quadrant of Market Ave. and Livingston Rd. in Section 36,
Township 49 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida, consisting of
5.27± acres; and by providing an effective date. [PUDA-PL20140000867]
D. Recommendation to adopt an Ordinance amending Ordinance No. 2001-55,
as amended (the Advisory Board Ordinance), to eliminate the three year
Page 21
July 7,2015
limitation on the duration of ad hoc committees.
E. This item has been continued from the June 23, 2015 BCC Meeting and
has been further continued indefinitely. Recommendation to execute the
proposed Mediated Settlement Agreement and Integration Agreement,
which integrates the Orange Tree Utility Company water and wastewater
systems into the Collier County Water-Sewer District, to provide water and
wastewater utilities to Orange Tree Utility customers pursuant to the May
28, 1991 Agreement, as amended, between Orange Tree Utility Company,
Orangetree Associates and the Board of County Commissioners of Collier
County; accept the Staff Report dated June 23, 2015 pursuant to Section
124.3401, Florida Statutes; approve existing Orange Tree Utility contracts
and agreements with vendors and suppliers as those of Collier County;
approve 9 Full Time Equivalent positions; approve a Resolution changing
the District boundaries; and approve inclusion of the proposed budget in the
FY16 Collier County Water-Sewer District budget.
18. ADJOURN
INQUIRIES CONCERNING CHANGES TO THE BOARD'S AGENDA SHOULD
BE MADE TO THE COUNTY MANAGER'S OFFICE AT 252-8383.
Page 22
July 7,2015
July 7, 2015
MR. OCHS: Chairman, you have a live mic.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Good morning, ladies and gentlemen.
Welcome to the Board of County Commission meeting for July 7 --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Good morning.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: -- 2015. It will be our last regularly
scheduled meeting until September 8th, so we have an especially busy
and long meeting today with a lot of deliberations to take place.
I'll ask you at this time to please silence all your devices, cell
phones, various devises that you might have to help us have an orderly
meeting.
This morning we are going to have an invocation delivered by
Rabbi Ammos Chorny from the Beth Tikvah Synagog, to be followed
by the Pledge of Allegiance.
Rabbi, please, sir.
Item #1A
INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
RABBI CHORNY: Good morning. As a nation, we were
convinced early that we could not endure half slave and half free. No
man can celebrate liberty as long as his brothers and sisters are in
chains or shackled by poverty or ignorance or a denial of basic rights
which enables them to contribute to the gross society.
Our most elusive dream has been the pursuit of happiness, for no
person can give happiness to another, a state which must find for
themselves.
This morning as we come together, we ask that you help us to
discover the secret that happiness comes not from selfish pursuits of
ingrown indulgence, but from sharing, not just what we have but also
who we are.
Page 2
July 7, 2015
Recreate in each of us the dreams of our founding fathers who by
your grace knew that where there is no dream, there can be no destiny.
Keep our dream and keep our destiny alive and safe. Amen.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Please join us in the pledge.
(Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Ladies and gentlemen, a sad note before
we move into our regular agenda. We'd like to note with sorrow the
passing of Mr. Jim Thomas who was a valued employee of our Parks
Department for over 30 years. A gentleman that was very well known
for his good nature and kindness. He ran the summer food program for
Collier County for many years and was committed to making sure
every child in our community had something to eat and was
lightheartedly often referred to as the mayor of the Parks Department
with so very many friends.
So at this time please join us in a moment of silence in
remembrance of Jim Thomas.
(Silence.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Thank you very much.
Mr. Ochs, would you like to carry us through the changes to
today's agenda, please, sir.
Item #2A
APPROVAL OF TODAY'S REGULAR, CONSENT AND
SUMMARY AGENDA AS AMENDED (EX PARTE DISCLOSURE
PROVIDED BY COMMISSION MEMBERS FOR CONSENT
AGENDA) — ADOPTED AND/OR APPROVED W/CHANGES;
MOTION TAKEN TO CONTINUE ITEM #16H1 UNTIL
SEPTEMBER — APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir, Mr. Chairman. Good morning,
Page 3
July 7, 2015
Commissioners.
Mr. Chairman, thank you for those kind remarks on behalf of Jim
Thomas.
These are your proposed agenda changes for the Board of County
Commissioners meeting of July 7th, 2015.
The first proposed change is to add Item 12.B to the County
Attorney's regular agenda. This is a recommendation to approve and
accept a proposed settlement agreement related to the BP oil spill and
the Deep Water Horizon case.
The next proposed change -- that is added at the County
Attorney's request, by the way.
Next proposed change is to move item 16.F.8 from the consent
agenda to become Item 11.F under the County Manager's agenda. This
is an item regarding the production of the annual tourism guide.
The next proposed change is to move Item 16.D.16 from the
consent agenda to become Item 11.G. And that is a recommendation
to consider some modifications to your Land Development Code as it
relates to off-site preservation requirements. That is moved at
Commissioner Henning's request.
The next proposed change is to move Item 16.F.4 from your
consent agenda to Item 11.H on the regular agenda. And this is a
consideration of a first amendment to an agreement between the Board
and the Southwest Florida Economic Development Alliance. That is
moved at Commissioner Henning's request.
The next proposed change is to add Item 16.H.5 to your Board of
County Commissioners consent agenda. It's a recommendation to
appoint a member to the Collier County Planning Commission.
Appointment from District 2. That is made at Commissioner Hiller's
request.
We have two agenda notes this morning, Commissioners.
Correction on Item 16.D.7, the Page 2 of the agreement is backup to
Page 4
July 7, 2015
the executive summary. Should read $6,414.
And on Item 16.F.2, the legal name of the C-2 grant organization
should read The Southwest Florida Holocaust Museum, Inc. And that
is -- both of those notes are made at the staffs request.
We have a number of time certain items throughout the day,
Commissioners. I'll go through these briefly.
Item 9.A is to be heard at 9:45 this morning. And that will be
immediately followed by its companion Item 9.B.
Item 11.E will be heard at 11:00 a.m.
Item 6.F will be heard at 1 :30 p.m., followed immediately
thereafter by Item 11.D, which is a companion item.
Item 9.0 will be heard at 5:05 p.m., followed by Item 9.D.
And finally, Item 12.A will be heard also immediately following
9.D after the 5:05 start of those hearings this afternoon.
Finally, we have court reporter breaks scheduled for 10:30 and
2:50 this afternoon. And those are all the changes that I have, Mr.
Chairman.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Thank you very much. Because we have
a very, very aggressive schedule today, having public hearings split
into three different times, I'm going to now go and ask the
commissioners for any additional changes, but I will ask them to give
their ex parte communication in its entirety. So anyone that seeks to
find the minutes on these items can easily find the ex parte.
So we'll begin this morning with Commissioner Taylor.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Okay, ex parte -- no changes to
the agenda. I do not have any disclosures on any of the items except
for discussions with staff on any of them. And even including -- yes,
it's all been discussions with staff.
Do I need to do this -- that's why I hesitated. Should I do it item
by item or --
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Whatever ex parte you have, ma'am, on
Page 5
July 7, 2015
any items, please --
MR. KLATZKOW: Commissioner?
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Yes.
MR. KLATZKOW: I do think it's best if you do your ex parte
just prior to the hearing.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: You want to do -- okay, let's do it like
that then, okay.
Thank you, Mr. Klatzkow.
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Hello, and good morning, everyone.
This morning I have no changes, no corrections on the agenda.
And on the summary agenda I have no ex parte -- oh, I'm sorry, the
consent agenda, though, that was the summary agenda.
The consent agenda I have on 16.A.18 which is the Artesia
Naples subject, I met with Greg Urbancic, David Coldwell and Paul
Eichart. That was back in 2009, but we have to disclose everything, so
-- it was back a while.
I've also had meetings and emails and staff-- I've spoken to staff
So thank you very much. That's all for consent and summary agenda.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Thank you, ma'am.
Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yes, thank you.
I would like to ask a couple of questions. On 16.J under other
constitutional officers, does 16.J.2 and 16.J.3 include any expenditures
that have not been pre-audited, Crystal? Or are all the expenditures on
here fully audited?
MS. KINZEL: Yes, Commissioner, those would have received
the pre-audit for disbursement.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. So 16.J.2 and 16.J.3.
MS. KINZEL: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's great, thank you.
Page 6
July 7, 2015
And with respect to the 16.J.1, were there any findings of any
illegal acts or improprieties with respect to the fleet management
audit?
MS. KINZEL: We've identified several audit issues that were
either corrected by staff or are noted for the Board's review.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: But was there any illegal activity,
any impropriety, any theft or anything like that?
MS. KINZEL: Not founded.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you. I appreciate that.
And how long did that audit take, County Manager?
MR. OCHS: I believe it began in the spring of 2013, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And ended when?
MR. OCHS: Just recently.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And recently being what?
MR. OCHS: I think we received the final report a month or so
ago.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So how long was it?
MR. OCHS: Well, as I said, it began in I believe May of 2013.
There may have been some time in between the two-year period where
it was suspended, but --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So basically two years.
MR. OCHS: -- essentially since the original commencement of
the audit to the completion, it was about two years time.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's an unreasonable amount of
time.
The other question that I have is, Commissioner Henning, on
16.F.4 to moving that to 11.H, we have a number of people in the
audience that have come strictly for purposes of this amendment. And
the amendment is a very simple one. It just -- I mean, it's basically
switching one line item to another, moving it from marketing to
salaries.
Page 7
July 7, 2015
Does this have to be on the regular agenda? Is this something that
we can address now under consent since they're here?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I have every right to pull it.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah, and I can vote against it. So
I'm going to make a motion that we approve the agenda except for
11.H which I think should remain as 16.F.4. Because I don't really see
what the discussion on that item would be.
MR. KLATZKOW: Any commissioner has the right to pull an
item.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Oh, do they? Then I apologize.
Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's what I said.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I know. I don't see why we're here
to discuss, you know, an issue that is so basic. And I know that we've
got all these people who came -- can we do something to --
CHAIRMAN NANCE: We'll take that up on the regular agenda,
ma'am.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Can we take it up as one of the first
items so that these people can leave?
CHAIRMAN NANCE: At the pleasure of the Board.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I mean, we've got the executive
director for the Regional Economic Alliance, we've got House
Representative Dudley Goodlette, we've got John Cox. I mean, these
people all have a great deal to do, and they thought this was going to
be on the consent agenda and they've made the time to come here,
which I think is great. And, you know, if we're going to pull it and
discuss it, could we maybe move it to the front of the agenda so that
they can leave?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Sure.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Let's take it right after the public
petitions are completed.
Page 8
July 7, 2015
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay, thank you very much. I
appreciate that.
And as far as my disclosure goes, let's see, which items would
you like disclosure on right now on consent?
CHAIRMAN NANCE: The consent and summary agendas.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. And so on consent I have
no disclosure. And on the summary agenda I've reviewed the staff
report.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Thank you.
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I have no ex parte
communication on today's summary or consent agenda.
Question within the change order list, Leo. I never received a
response from my request to -- do you want me to pull that or do you
want to deal with it later?
MR. OCHS: Your pleasure, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We could deal with it later.
MR. OCHS: Thank you. I do have some information available
for you.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you. That's all.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: All right. I have no disclosure on today's
consent agenda. On today's summary agenda I have read the staff
report on the Lane Park Commercial Planned Unit Development.
I would like to note that there are two I think really good and
important things on the consent agenda that have not been mentioned
and that is 16.A.21 is a development of a comprehensive watershed
improvement project which I think is very, very important for Collier
County.
And secondly, 16.D.13 establishes a relationship between the
University of Florida and Conservation Collier properties at the Pepper
Ranch to work on the documentation of the Lake Trafford watershed,
Page 9
July 7, 2015
which I think is very, very important.
Before we approve the agenda, it's my understanding, Mr. Miller,
we have two public speakers on consent?
MR. MILLER: Mr. Chairman, that number has now doubled to
four.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Okay.
MR. MILLER: The first two speakers are speaking on Item
16.H.1, which is an amendment to an ordinance regarding non-consent
towing. Your first speaker is Carlos Macias. He'll be followed by
Robert Dixon.
MR. MACIAS: Good morning. My name is Carlos Macias from
Carlos Towing. We've been doing business in this county since 1984.
Just a few things on this ordinance I find are unjust for people of
law enforcement. We're kind of put in the same classification as the
people doing private property towing, but the law enforcement is
totally different. Right here in -- let me see here. On Page 5 of the new
ordinance, it says the mileage charged for law enforcement directed
tows based upon the most direct distance from the scene to the towing
business location to the scene and back. There's a line crossed out "to
the scene and back."
We don't tow 10 cars a night like the private property do out of
apartment complexes while people are sleeping. We sit and wait like
an ambulance or fire truck. When the people call us we don't know
where we're going to go tow. We might get a two Monday, our next
tow might not be until Friday or maybe next week. We don't tow cars
multiple times a day like Lee County and Miami. So I'd like to see that
changed because that's taking money away from us where we don't do
that much work like other people do as far as the condo towing and
stuff like that.
And another thing is on Page 17 of the new ordinance, the
insurance requirements for the private towers for the private property,
Page 10
July 7, 2015
their insurance requirements are less than ours for law enforcement.
And my insurance just went up last year three percent, and I've never
had a claim. And their insurance requirements are less than ours. And
once again, they do 10 times the amount of work that we do. I have
three cars in impound, they have like 20 cars in impound. And two of
the three I'm going to end up with because they're not going to pick
them up. Because we get called out for red tags and everything. We
don't know what we're going to go tow. The other companies drive
around at night and they can pick and choose what cars they want to
tow. We don't have that, you know, option so --
And then Page 18 about the credit cards, we've been taking credit
cards. The only thing I'm asking for there is if you could help us out,
we don't have no control over the credit card companies charging us a
fee. So when I pay my property taxes every year and renew my tags,
the county charges us two and a half percent. We'd like some help
with that, you know, as far as charging a fee to process credit cards.
Because they're taking money away from us every time we swipe a
card. And in some instances we're on scene, we get charged even
higher because we have to key the numbers in.
So I thank you for your time.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Robert Dixon. He'll be
followed by Dr. Joseph Doyle speaking on Item 16.E.1, ACA Data
Reporting.
MR. DIXON: Good morning. My name is Robert Dixon. I've
been here before discussing these tow options that you have. The
biggest problem that I see you have with the change in the ordinance is
you keep putting in all this non-consent tows. You have non-consent
tows where you have the people going out there to the condos, taking
people's cars that are illegally parked. Has nothing to do with the
Sheriffs Department tows that are out there for people got arrested,
Page 11
July 7, 2015
people got in accidents, the roads are closed, they need the things to be
towed.
They're so separate it is unbelievable. But in the rules here you
keep trying to put it in here and putting the wording together so that it
is so open to interpretation that the Sheriffs Department and the county
cannot make a disclosure as far as what's right or what's wrong.
And they have their little meetings with certain people and listen
to what they say. If they'd have a meeting with every tower here, they
could get it all out, have it all set and dried and they wouldn't have
these problems. And that's what I would ask, that you have an open
meeting with the towers so that you would know exactly what's right
and what's wrong. If you have a meeting with one or two towers,
they're out for their own agenda and that's the way it's going to be.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Could I jump in on this, being that
this is my subject?
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Fiala, it's your item and
you're going to go first, and you're going to be followed by
Commissioner Hiller, then Commissioner Taylor.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You know, you make a good point
about meeting with all the towers. This is just for the fall. We're not
approving anything today, this is the start of the process.
So how about before we actually get to ratifying it we do meet
with the towers? And we'll say right in the beginning of September or
something. And I would be happy to do that and I'll get our County
Attorney with us to all sit around.
What I'm trying to do is solve some of the problems that we've
had. You know them as well as I do.
MR. DIXON: I know exactly the problems you're talking about.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And we're trying to save innocent
people here. And sometimes they're -- you know, when they lose their
car because they can't get out of the hospital and they can't pick it up
Page 12
July 7, 2015
themselves or when they didn't have the cash -- of course you're using
credit cards now and that's good. We solved that problem a few years
back to insist that towers would accept more than just cash, because
sometimes people just don't have the amount of money that's being
charged.
And especially if they're in the hospital for a few days. And they
have to pick it up themselves, by the way, they can't have their son
pick it up or anything else. And if they can't get out of the hospital to
pick it up, the charges go -- I had a gentleman call me, he was
distraught because he couldn't get out of the hospital and his son wasn't
allowed to pick it up.
So what we're trying to do is solve the overall problems. And I'd
be happy to meet with the towers before we put this on the final
agenda. I'm always willing to listen to anyone. And I want to hear
you. What I want to do is solve the problem not just for one tower, but
for the people in the community as well as the towers. And if we can
do that together, that's great. I know that that's a monumental task.
We might have to have it in here in this commission chamber. But I'm
happy to do that, okay?
If you will leave your name and address with the County Attorney
and same with the other gentleman as well, I forgot his name, Carlos,
and then I'll make sure to get ahold of you guys as well as hopefully
you will let the other towers know and we'll select a time and place for
the meeting, okay?
MR. DIXON: Yes, ma'am. The only thing that I'd like to
mention here though is you have 16 tow companies that work for law
enforcement doing those type of tows. North end and the south end.
The rest of the towers out there doing these private properties and
things like that, some of them don't even have business licenses out
there --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's true.
Page 13
July 7, 2015
MR. DIXON: -- so they don't care what you put in here.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: My friend right here down the row
here had her car towed out of her yard because it was a little bit over
the sidewalk.
And the egregious if you will, forgive me for using that word,
condo commandos called and had towing companies come out and
pull them out of their yard. She gets out in the morning to come to
work and there's no car there.
So, I mean, what we're trying to do is end some of that. Because
these things are -- they prey on innocent people. So keep that in mind
when we meet, okay?
MR. DIXON: No problem, thank you.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Hiller, then
Commissioner Taylor.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you.
Yeah, I had the opportunity -- I had the opportunity to be
involved in some of these discussions as well. And it was my
understanding that the Sheriffs Office is predominantly responsible for
the structuring of this ordinance. Jeff, is that correct?
MR. KLATZKOW: Yeah, we work extensively with the Sheriffs
Office.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So does the -- the issues that were
raised this morning, have they been contemplated by the Sheriff in his
review of this?
MR. KLATZKOW: I don't know. One of the issues is there is no
advisory board here, so sounds like there was an easy mechanism to
vet this. I think Commissioner Fiala's idea is a good one, we can sit
down with Sheriffs representatives, people in the industry and we can
tweak the ordinance.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: For about two years we've been
working on this.
Page 14
July 7, 2015
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And I've been -- because I've had
towers come in and talk to me as well on the issue.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: But we've worked closely with our
Attorney's Office and the Sheriffs Office, and they've attended just
almost every single meeting. And things that they didn't care for we
adjusted. We did everything we could to make sure that we included
as many people as we could.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So what we're going to do now is
have a meeting where you're going to send an email or letter to all
towers in the community and invite them to in effect a forum --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Right, in September. You know,
we're going on recess now, but -- and I guess other people are on
vacations and things as well. But when we return, we'll -- you know,
like in September. So we can get this started.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So are we going to continue this
item?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, this is just to put it on the
agenda. This is just to approve it at a later date. Let me see if I can't
pull that thing up real quickly.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: The towing ordinance?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right, but I mean, if this is subject
to change, maybe we should just continue this item and then have the
discussion and then bring back whatever the --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: All right, we can do that.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- adjustment should be.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: It's not like -- I mean, we've been
waiting two years. A couple more months doesn't make any
difference. I'm happy to do that.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Make a motion.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay, I make a motion that we put
Page 15
July 7, 2015
this in abeyance; I guess it would be, until after we meet with the
towers in September.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'll second that.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: We've got a second.
Commissioner Taylor?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I was going to second it. It's a
good discussion.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: We're on a good pathway.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Yep.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: We have a motion and a second. All
those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Okay, we're going to continue that item.
Further speakers, Mr. Miller?
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Dr. Joseph Doyle. He'll be
speaking on Item 16.E.1, ACA Data Reporting. And then Mr. Doyle
will be also registered to speak on Item 16.F.6, which is the Pelican
Bay tax hearing dates.
DR. DOYLE: Good morning, Commissioners, Dr. Joseph Doyle.
On the first item which is the Affordable Care Act, also known as
Obamacare, I'm here just to thank the County Commissioner for taking
the lead on this data reporting.
As you know, the IRS is utilizing this data to determine if the
Page 16
July 7, 2015
employer, which is you, the county, is in compliance with the -- to
determine if our employees are complying with the individual
mandate.
And the thing is, is that this is costing us $112,000 just for
reporting of compliance. This is one government cannibalizing another
government.
I mean, I can see where they might want to check on private
employers, but to go and check up on another government? It's costing
us the taxpayers $112,000. Thank goodness the County Manager is at
least coordinating this with all the different entities such as the Sheriff
and school board; otherwise it would probably cost us more.
What could that $112,000 be used for? Well, maybe the Health
Department could vaccinate children. Maybe neighborhood health
clinics could do mammograms or more working poor women who
can't even afford Obamacare even with the subsidies. Or maybe if
none of those things are needed we could give $112,000 back to the
taxpayers.
So I just want to point this out, that this is part of what Nancy
Pelosi said, we have to read what's in it before we -- we have to pass it
before we know what's in it, and this is what's in it. So thank you,
that's my comment on the first one.
MR. MILLER: All right. And now commenting on Item -- I've
lost it -- 16.F.6.
DR. DOYLE: Right.
Commissioners, I sent an email to all of you yesterday regarding
setting the hearing time for the Pelican Bay Services Division at the tax
hearing in September. And I'm requesting that -- what's written here I
believe is that -- is incomplete. I believe we need to have Pelican Bay
congruent with all of the other 20 MSTBUs and MSBUs and having
two hearings, one on September 10th and the other on September 24th,
two weeks later. You saw all of the minutes from last year where we
Page 17
July 7, 2015
had done that for the first time.
I came in January and had mentioned to the Board that I saw no
traction in changing our ordinance. I didn't realize that actually it's an
agenda item every year to set the time.
But I would request that we modify this recommendation to adopt
this resolution -- modify this resolution basically so that there are two
hearings for Pelican Bay. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Thank you.
MR. MILLER: That's your final speaker on the consent agenda,
sir.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Thank you. All right, at this time do we
have a motion to approve --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I think Commissioner Henning
wanted to speak.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Oh, I'm sorry, Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Which item was the first item
you were speaking on? 16.D?
MR. OCHS: 16.E.1.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Oh, Edward one.
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's why I couldn't find it.
Is there a -- I don't see a cost associated with that. Is there a cost
associated with that?
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Well, why don't we talk
about that.
MR. OCHS: Pleasure of the Board, sir. It's a required report.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Oh, it's a required report?
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir. If we don't provide this information and --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, let me just look over it and
I can always reconsider it.
Page 18
July 7, 2015
Okay, I'm good.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Hiller, then
Commissioner Taylor.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you.
Can you explain to me why we don't have two hearings on the
Pelican Bay MSTU budget? Is there a reason that we're at one? It may
be acceptable, I just don't remember. I remember we had some
discussion on it in the past. I just don't recall what prompted the single
hearing as opposed to two.
MR. OCHS: Commissioner, there's only one required by law.
There's only been one held historically. If the Board wants to hold the
second one, I don't know that there's anything that legally prohibits you
from doing that.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And are we holding two hearings
on all the other MSTUs?
MR. OCHS: Well, the other MSTUs are part of your budget just
like this is, and this first hearing coincides with your first two required
advertised public hearings to adopt your county budget.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So it wouldn't prohibit anyone
from making public comment at the second hearing on the Pelican Bay
MSTU if they so choose.
MR. OCHS: No, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So we can have one hearing, in
other words, one presentation, because we don't get presentations on
the other MSTUs.
MR. OCHS: No, you don't.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: All right. And so I guess in the
interest of efficiency to avoid the staff from presenting the same issue
twice, is that the reason we're limiting it to one but still allowing for
public comment on it? Because we're not really -- I mean, we're not --
if I understand correctly, it's being presented once, but it's being
Page 19
July 7, 2015
included at both hearings; is that a fair assessment?
MR. ISACKSON: Commissioners, for the record, Mark
Isackson.
Understand that you have an ad valorem tax on most of your
MSTUs that's governed by the TRIM process. That's why you have
two hearings. This is an assessment; it's not part of the TRIM process.
That's why you only have one hearing.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And so for the other MSTUs you
only need one hearing as well to the extent there's any hearing. We
just don't actually have a hearing -- we don't have anyone presenting
on those other MSTUs.
MR. ISACKSON: If you're levying an ad valorem tax, you're
governed under the TRIM statute which requires two hearings.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right, I understand. But I'm just
concerned about the MSTU, about the assessment hearings. We're
only required to have one.
And with respect to Pelican Bay, we actually have a presentation
on the one and we don't do any presentations on the other MSTUs.
MR. ISACKSON: Well, to the extent that I'm required to do
presentations under the TRIM statute, I do that for all the MSTUs.
And essentially what you're doing is reading the rolled-back rates --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right.
MR. ISACKSON: -- and all of that stuff.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So again, my -- I just want to
clarify. For purposes of the MSTU, we're treating the Pelican Bay
MSTU and the other MSTU the same with respect to your
presentation. We're adding another presentation for the Pelican Bay
MSTU by having staff present in addition above the basic requirement
that all MSTUs are required to comply with your presentation.
MR. ISACKSON: To the extent the lighting district levies a tax,
you have your two hearings. With respect to the assessment you have
Page 20
July 7, 2015
one presentation at the first hearing before you actually launch into
your MSTU hearings.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Got it.
Well, in that case, I think it makes sense to leave 16.F.6 the way it
is.
Thank you.
MR. ISACKSON: Thank you, Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Okay, any -- Commissioner Taylor?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: The explanation came forward.
I'm pleased and agree with Commissioner Hiller.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Thank you, ma'am.
Do we have a motion to approve today's regular consent and
summary agenda as amended?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'll second it.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Motion to approve and a second. Any
further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Hearing none, all those in favor, signify
by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Any opposed?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: It's approved 4-1 with Commissioner
Henning in dissent.
Page 21
Proposed Agenda Changes
Board of County Commissioners Meeting
July 7,2015
Add On Item 12B: Recommendation to approve and accept a proposed Settlement Agreement to
finally resolve all Collier County claims in the matter of In re:Oil Spill by the Oil Rig"Deepwater
Horizon"in the Gulf of Mexico on April 20,2010 now pending in the United States District Court for
the Eastern District of Louisiana,Case No.MDL 2179 Section J. (County Attorney's request)
Move Item 16F8 to Item 11F: Recommendation to approve Amendment#1 to contract 15-6433
Production of the Tourism Guide to Miles Media Group,LLLP,authorize the Chairman to execute the
County Attorney approved amendment,and make a finding that this expenditure promotes tourism.
(Commissioner Taylor's request)
Move Item 16D16 to Item 11G: Recommendation to approve the recommendation to modify the
endowment related to the County's acceptance of properties donated to Conservation Collier as
offsite preservation under the Land Development Code(LDC)Section 3.05.07,H.1.f.iii.a.and b.
(Commissioner Henning's request)
Move Item 16F4 to Item 11H: Recommendation to approve the First Amendment to the Agreement
between the Southwest Florida Economic Development Alliance,Inc.and the Board of County
Commissioners. (Commissioner Henning's request)
Add On Item 16H5: Recommendation to appoint a member to the Collier County Planning
Commission. (Commissioner Hiller's request)
Note:
Item 16D7— Page two of the agreement under the paragraph entitled"administrative costs",the
specified dollar amount should read: ' .• . . . • . - • . - • • • six-thousand four-
hundred fourteen($6,414). (Staffs request)
Item 16F2— Legal name of C-2 Grant Organization should read:
Florida Southwest Florida Holocaust Museum.Inc. (Staffs request)
Time Certain Items:
Item 9A to be heard at 9:45 a.m.,followed by Item 9B
Item 11E to be heard at 11:00 a.m.
Item 9F to be heard at 1:30 p.m.,followed by Item 11D
Item 9C to be heard at 5:05 p.m.,followed by Item 9D
Item 12A to be heard immediately following Item 9D
7/23/2015 2:15 PM
July 7, 2015
Item #2B
BCC REGULAR MEETING MINUTES FROM JUNE 9, 2015 —
APPROVED AS PRESENTED
CHAIRMAN NANCE: The regular meeting minutes of June 9.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Motion to approve June 9 regular
meeting minutes.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: I'll second that.
Any discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Hearing none, all those in favor, signify
by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: It's approved unanimously.
All right, would the Commissioners -- is Mr. Millot here today,
sir?
Item #3A
SERVICE AWARDS — RETIREES
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir, I have the opportunity to honor a recent
retiree with 30 years of distinguished service to our Emergency
Medical Services Department, and that is Frank Millot. Frank, if you'd
Page 22
July 7, 2015
step forward and be recognized.
(Applause.)
MR. MILLOT: That was a quick 30 years.
Item #4
PROCLAMATIONS (ONE MOTION TAKEN TO ADOPT
PROCLAMATIONS) — ADOPTED
Item #4A
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING JULY 7, 2015 AS IRVING
BERZON DAY, RETIRED COLLIER COUNTY ENGINEER, FOR
HIS CONTRIBUTIONS BENEFITING ALL CITIZENS OF
COLLIER COUNTY THROUGH HIS FARSIGHTED AND
DEDICATED EFFORTS. ACCEPTED BY IRVING BERZON —
ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, that takes us to Item 4 under your
agenda this morning, proclamations. Item 4.A is a proclamation
designating July 7, 2015 as Irving Berzon Day, retired Collier County
engineer for his contributions benefiting all citizens of Collier County
through his farsighted and dedicated efforts. To be accepted this
morning by Irving Berzon.
Mr. Berzon, if you'd step forward and receive your proclamation,
sir. Congratulations.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Mr. Berzon, I'm being asked to read this
proclamation, because everybody thinks so much of you, so if you
would indulge me, sir, and turn around and enjoy everybody's
appreciation.
Page 23
July 7, 2015
WHEREAS, Irving Berzon, a proud World War II veteran,
became the county engineering in 1973, he initiated Collier County
Utilities, building the first water and wastewater treatment plants,
which eventually became the South Regional Water Plant and the
North Regional Water Reclamation Plant; and
WHEREAS, as the county engineer he also built the first regional
sanitary landfill, which is still in use today, designing all roads leading
to the landfill and an elevation for a 100-year storm event. Notably
garbage collection service continued unabated during a number of
hurricanes and tropical storms, including Hurricane Wilma; and
WHEREAS, as county engineer, Irving Berzon successfully
initiated the first subdivision rules including sidewalks and stormwater
treatment systems, minimizing routine local flooding; and
WHEREAS, he also established the first safe local community
traffic flow, designing the appropriate width for lanes, medians,
sidewalks and room for slower motorcycles and bicycles on each
shoulder of the roadways; and
WHEREAS, Irving Berzon leaves a legacy of visionary public
water resource planning and management and critical infrastructure
designed for the future.
NOW THEREFORE, be it proclaimed by the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida recognizing his
contributions and vision that July 7th, 2015 be designated as Irving
Berzon Day.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Do you want to say anything?
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Yes, he's going to make a couple of
remarks. He's going to give us some guidance on how to keep Dr.
George straight over here.
MR. BERZON: As I said before, I -- I talk faster than I walk, so
just give me a moment.
Page 24
July 7, 2015
MR. OCHS: Do you want to come over here?
MR. BERZON: Oh, yeah.
I promise this won't be as long as the approval of the agenda.
Good morning, Mr. Chairman.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: The approval of the agenda.
MR. BERZON: Good morning, Mr. Chairman and
Commissioners. I wish to take this opportunity to thank you all for
recognizing the work I initiated and accomplished during my tenure as
county engineer and public works director. Although it's been many
years ago that I was involved with the county, I'm gratified to see that
most of the programs I initiated are still ongoing and further enhanced
to meet the county's needs of today.
I also wish to express my gratitude to Dr. George Yilmez, your
esteemed Public Utilities Administrator for initiating this process
which has led to your action today on my behalf. With my sincerest
gratitude to you all I say again, thank you.
(Applause.)
Item #4B
PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING YAHL MULCHING &
RECYCLING, INC. FOR THEIR EFFORTS IN RECYCLING AND
REDUCING WASTE, AS THE RECIPIENT OF COLLIER
COUNTY HAZARDOUS AND SOLID WASTE DEPARTMENT'S
WASTE REDUCTION AWARDS PROGRAM (WRAP) AWARD.
ACCEPTED BY JOHN AND TERESA FILLMORE, OWNERS OF
YAHL MULCHING & RECYCLING, INC ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: Item 4.B is a proclamation recognizing Yahl
Mulching and Recycling, Incorporated for their efforts in recycling and
reducing waste as the recipient of Collier County Hazardous and Solid
Page 25
July 7, 2015
Waste Department's Waste Reduction Awards Program award, to be
accepted by John and Teresa Fillmore, owners of Yahl Mulching and
Recycling, Incorporated.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Motion to approve.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: There's a motion, and I'll second that.
Motion to approve and second the proclamations.
Any discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Hearing none, all those in favor, signify
by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Thank you very much.
Item #5A
PRESENTATION OF THE COLLIER COUNTY BUSINESS OF
THE MONTH FOR JULY 2015 TO STOCK DEVELOPMENT.
ACCEPTED BY BRIAN STOCK, CEO, STOCK DEVELOPMENT;
KEITH GELDER, DIRECTOR OF LAND DEVELOPMENT,
STOCK DEVELOPMENT; AND JOHN COX, PRESIDENT AND
CEO, THE GREATER NAPLES CHAMBER OF COMMERCE —
PRESENTED
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, Item 5.A is a presentation of the
Page 26
July 7, 2015
Collier County Business of the Month for July, 2015 to Stock
Development. To be accepted by Brian Stock, CEO of Stock
Development, Keith Gelder, Director of Land Development, and John
Cox, President and CEO of the Greater Naples Chamber of
Commerce.
Gentlemen, if you'd please step forward.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Mr. Cox?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Did Christy Bartlett have her baby?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yes, she absolutely did. And it's
adorable. Or the baby's adorable.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Congratulations, Christy.
Item #6A
PUBLIC PETITION FROM MR. PETERNAL FRANCOIS
REQUESTING THAT THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS INCREASE THE PENALTIES FOR TAXI
LICENSE VIOLATIONS - MOTION FOR THE COUNTY
ATTORNEY TO BRING BACK INFORMATION TO THE
BOARD IN SEPTEMBER — APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Item 6.A is a public petition request from Mr.
Peternal Francois requesting that the Board of County Commissioners
increase the penalties for taxi license violations.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Chairman?
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: This is an ongoing code
enforcement case.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So under our rules the Board
Page 27
July 7, 2015
shall not have any discussion after the presentation.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Okay.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Sir.
MR. FRANCOIS: Good morning. Thank you.
I want to start by explaining the process -- well, not the process,
what Uber Technology and the new industry called Network
Transportation is.
Essentially Network Transportation Company generally enters
into the local market without seeking prior approval from regulators,
because Network Transportation companies wants to play by its own
rules. Avoiding fees and driver for hire that are required to pay like
property -- I mean proper licenses, decal, permits to conduct ground
transportation on the streets of Collier and the airport. Sometimes
price gouging customers by using search pricing.
Network Transportation companies are more than just an
application on your smart phone for arranging transportation service,
for compensation, using an on-line enabled base application such as a
smart phone app. to connect drivers and using their personal vehicle
for passengers.
It's a company using an app. to dispatch to independent
contractors. Essentially they are not performing the same function --
essentially they are performing the same function as a livery or
dispatch office does, and charge -- and does not change the underlying
nature of the transportation service being offered.
The app. is served as a taxi meter because it calculates the
distance in a fair which Uber takes a percentage of which is similar to a
taxi lease. As some of you may already know, Uber and Lyft drivers
are not using commercial insurance policies, they're using their
personal automobile insurance policy, meaning the passengers are not
covered in the event of an accident.
Because the drivers are -- because the driver was using their
Page 28
July 7, 2015
personal automobile policy for hire, the insurance company can and
will deny any claim in the event of an accident, leaving the passenger
or the public at risk, where they will face -- at risk with unpaid medical
bills and injuries. The driver's insurance policy will cancel.
And on the company's website it says it carries a $1 million
policy. The policy only covers the passenger for the duration of the
ride. When the drivers make side arrangement with passengers
without using the app., that will leave a coverage gap in insurance
where the rider will not be covered, because the app. will -- I mean the
insurance will cover you only when the app. is on. If the app. is not on
-- where most of the time you will find passengers that will make
personal arrangement with the driver, if they like the person, they'll be
like I want this person to pick me up again. But if the app. is not on
where the driver is going around Uber, then that passenger is not
covered.
We need to assure that the necessary steps and measures have
been taken to provide the most orderly, efficient and safe taxi and
livery service to all citizens and visitors who use these service within
the city streets, we need to protect the safety and well-being of the
resident and visitors of our city streets who use the service of vehicle
for hire to meet their transportation need.
The prevent-- the prevention of unfair, deceptive and predatory
practice we urge your support for stronger regulation on illegal taxi
operation here in the streets of Collier County. We need the County
Attorney Office to prepare a motion for injunction to be filed. They
must cease operation in Collier County until their drivers fall in line
with county taxi laws and transportation regulation. We need to make
illegal operation more expensive to operate so that the driver and the
company could be motivated to follow the regulation, strict penalty to
allow the city and the county staff to better serve as the code
enforcement department says, they are limited to what they can and
Page 29
July 7, 2015
cannot do as far as the regulations go. But if we do make it a
misdemeanor, that will deter the drivers from driving without the
proper licensing.
So what I'm asking today is for -- is that you consider making it a
misdemeanor so that drivers could think twice before they get behind
the wheel with the Uber app. on.
I have some headlines where a driver who had three previous DUI
got approved by Uber to drive passengers. And on the way to a
passenger he got pulled over where he got a fourth DUI. I'm sure
some of you have seen the news.
And on top of that, Broward County -- yesterday around 5:00
Uber announced that they would leave Broward County because
Broward County stand behind their ordinance, and they ask that Uber
Technology either follow it or pack up and go, which is exactly what
the headlines said.
And I've been in touch with a few other counties, and I talked to
code enforcement. Hillsborough County already have their cease and
desist petition already done, ready to file. And I have a copy of it right
here in case the Commissioners want to go over it.
Furthermore, I have a copy of the ordinance here which states:
Providing for Collier County vehicle for hire license requirement,
establishing penalty, providing for inclusion in the code of law and
ordinance.
So technically -- well, basically what we're asking as the cab
industry is for that ordinances be updated or somehow enhanced to fit
the -- for the same rules to apply to both Uber and Lyft, or any other
ride-sharing company that's functioning here in Collier County.
Because we have to have put the safety of our residents, because we
don't want these to start happening more often.
If you look at the news, all you got to do is type Uber, you will
find everything such as passenger getting raped -- this is the headline
Page 30
July 7, 2015
for Broward County where the Uber Technology announced they
would leave starting the 31st of this month.
I don't know if you have any questions.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Thank you, sir.
Commissioner Henning, then Commissioner Hiller.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That was from before, my light.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Oh, I'm sorry, sir.
Commissioner Hiller.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I just wanted to know who all the
gentlemen were sitting in the back of the room.
MR. FRANCOIS: We have some of the taxi drivers and owners
here today to support the request.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And the record should reflect how
many people are in the back that are taxi drivers.
MR. MILLER: Mr. Chairman, I did have one gentleman
registered to speaker. I explained to him that we do not accept
speakers on public petitions.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: We do not take speakers on public
petitions. I'm sorry.
As Commissioner Henning indicated, this is an active code
enforcement case, Commissioner; is that correct? So we're going to
limit comments.
Commissioner Taylor, any questions?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: How much -- we can't discuss
specifically the concept of Uber and where we stand as a county in
terms of regulation?
MR. KLATZKOW: You can talk about that if you'd like.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Okay, I'll keep my remarks
specifically to that area.
MR. OCHS: Sorry for the interruption, Commissioner.
I'm told by our Code Enforcement Director that we do not -- this
Page 31
July 7, 2015
is not an active code case at this time.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Oh, good.
So Mr. County Attorney, where do we stand with regulation
according -- regarding Uber? It's my understanding that the country of
France has just outlawed Uber. So where are we on this list?
MR. KLATZKOW: Well, we deregulated this industry a couple
of years ago. If you want to bring action against Uber, and Uber's
based well outside of Collier County, as you know. If you want to
bring action against them, you're going to have to amend your
ordinance to specifically provide that they fall within the ambient of
the ordinance. At that point in time we can take action against Uber
itself. Right now at this point in time really you're just left going after
the drivers.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Okay. I would support that. I
don't know about my colleagues.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: I'll make a motion that we just have the
County Attorney look into it and come back to the Board in September
with some recommendations as to our options.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's a good idea I'll --
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Second.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- second that.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Hearing none, all those in favor, signify
by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Any opposed?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
Page 32
July 7, 2015
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Approved 4-1 with Commissioner
Henning in dissent.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: And Mr. Francois; is that correct?
MR. FRANCOIS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Thank you for coming here today.
English is not your native language.
MR. FRANCOIS: No.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: You are to be commended for
taking the courage to come and speak to us on your presentation.
Thank you.
MR. FRANCOIS: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: All right, sir.
Mr. Ochs, I think that takes us, as the Board indicated, to Item
11.H?
Item #11H
FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE
SOUTHWEST FLORIDA ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
ALLIANCE, INC. AND THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS — APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir, that was previously Item 16.F.4, moved to
the regular agenda at Commissioner Henning's request. It's a
recommendation to approve the first amendment to the agreement
between the Southwest Florida Economic Development Alliance,
Incorporated and the Board of County Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, I don't know why the
Alliance can't bear the cost of this item instead of the county. It's their
request. Is there a reason? Alliance is what, the Chamber of
Page 33
July 7, 2015
Commerce?
MR. OCHS: No, sir, they're their own organization.
Bruce?
MR. REGISTER: Commissioner, Bruce Register, your Director
of Office of Business and Economic Development.
This was a request that came to us as part of the agreement that
we had with the Alliance as a result of offsetting their costs for
personnel, including salaries and benefits, as well as our marketing
expenditures.
Part of the compensation for their staff was to hire, and part of our
agreement with them was to provide professionally directed regional
economic development services.
Part of their recruitment process for filling that position involved
relocation expenses to achieve the kind of proficiency and content
expertise required for this kind of position.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I didn't get my question
answered.
MR. REGISTER: Could you repeat your question, sir?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Why can't the Alliance take it
out of their portion of the agreement? And who is the Alliance?
MR. REGISTER: The Alliance is the Southwest Florida
Regional Economic Development Alliance, comprising of the five
counties in Southwest Florida region.
It's -- we have an interlocal agreement among other counties to
support financially alongside private dollars that have been collected
and raised from the community to pursue a regional effort of aligning
our economic development interests and providing marketing services
collectively for the region.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, in the agreement it's
stating to amend it for benefits such as relocation health benefits.
However, we don't know what the titles are of people who are going to
Page 34
July 7, 2015
receive this. We don't know what the salaries are.
MR. REGISTER: Commissioner, the --
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, you have members of the Alliance
here that may be able to address some of those questions.
MR. BERGLUND: Thank you very much. My name is Eric
Berglund, I'm the Executive Director for the Southwest Florida
Economic Development Alliance, and we were formed in late 2013 as
a private 50106, and it is a public/private partnership. Collier County
took the lead on the public side back in January when you approved
the $100,000 worth of funding.
The current agreement that we operate under is an expense
reimbursement agreement. So the reason that this request came
forward was when it got to the finance department, there needed to be
further clarification as to what salary and benefits meant. So that's one
of the reasons that this came forward.
Currently with our reimbursement request the finance department
and Bruce received all our information as to who we are and what we
do and who's being paid what. And I'm happy to answer any of those
questions that you have as well.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Who are we paying $10,000 for
relocation?
MR. BERGLUND: I received the $10,000 relocation funds.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay, and your title is again
what?
MR. BERGLUND: I'm the Executive Director of the Alliance.
I'm the first full-time professional staff they hired.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And why can't those benefits be
taken out of the Alliance's share instead of Collier County's share?
MR. BERGLUND: They can be. The Alliance does have -- we
have two different funding streams, so we have the public dollars and
the private dollars.
Page 35
July 7, 2015
One of the things is because the agreement had indicated that it
was salaries and benefits. When the question came back as to what did
the commissioner -- Commission originally mean by benefits, that's
where I was recommended by the Clerk that we come forward for
clarification of what your original intent was and that's why this item
was here.
As far as the moving of dollar amounts, that was just to more
accurately reflect what we've got in place for other funding agreements
with other counties as well, to make sure that there's parity amongst
our government officials that -- or public entities that you're not being
unduly burdened on one side or the other, given the fact that we're here
representing five of the counties.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Hiller, then
Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you.
Yeah, the Regional Economic Alliance when it was first formed
predominantly had private sector members. And Collier County
became the first governmental entity that joined and set the trend for
other governments to join as well. And this is the second year of our
membership.
This year we made the additional commitment of contributing
$100,000, and Lee County has matched that.
And what was done was rather than give $100,000 grant without
a clear understanding of how that money was spent, it was requested
that a budget be attached to that grant and that everything be done on a
reimbursement basis, supported by documentary evidence to show that
the funds were being used for the purpose that the county intended it to
be used, which is for the advancement of the Regional Economic
Development initiative that we as a board are wholeheartedly
committed to.
Page 36
July 7, 2015
I make a motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Second.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Fiala, there's a motion
and second on the floor.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you very much.
Commissioner Hiller, did each county then donate $100,000 so
they have one big --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, because there are counties that
can't afford to, like Hendry County and Glades County and Charlotte
County. I mean, it would be a burden on them. So because we had the
wherewithal to do it, we volunteered and we as a board voted and Lee
County followed suit and did the same.
The private sector has donated a great deal, substantially more
than us. So it's basically in effect a contribution by the counties that
had the wherewithal to make the contribution.
And the hope is that these other counties eventually will have the
tax revenues to allow for a contribution. But at this point it's just the
two bigger counties that are voluntarily contributing.
And it's a voluntary donation. It's not required of us. And we're
doing it because as of right now we're the leaders in this regional
initiative, which is very positive. And we hope that they will benefit as
a result and generate those dollars to be able to be contributors down
the road.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Yes, I certainly can support this motion.
I think the Economic Development Alliance has got tremendous
regional potential. I think it's a new program that's coming from a
fresh perspective and I think having professional management is very,
very essential, so I'm going to support it.
Is there any further comment?
(No response.)
Page 37
July 7, 2015
CHAIRMAN NANCE: There's a motion by Commissioner
Hiller and second by Commissioner Fiala for approval. Excuse me,
Commissioner Taylor.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: It's approved unanimously. Thank you.
Item #9A
ORDINANCE 2015-42: THE LIVINGSTON/PINE RIDGE
COMMERCIAL INFILL SUBDISTRICT SMALL-SCALE
AMENDMENT TO THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH
MANAGEMENT PLAN, ORDINANCE 89-05, AS AMENDED,
FOR TRANSMITTAL TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY. (ADOPTION HEARING)
(PL201400001282/CPSS-2014-2) [COMPANION TO PETITION
PUDZ-PL20140001326] — ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, that takes us to your 9:45 time
certain hearing item this morning. That is Item 9.A. This is a
recommendation to deny the Livingston/Pine Ridge Commercial Infill
Subdistrict Small-Scale Amendment to the Collier County Growth
Management Plan.
That will be -- this item will be followed by Item 9.B, which is a
companion item, and that is a consideration of a change in the zoning
Page 38
July 7, 2015
classification from agricultural zoning district to commercial planned
unit development zoning district for the 10.47 plus or minus acre
parcel to be known as the Germain Honda CPUD to allow construction
of an automotive sales facility.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Yes, sir. And both of these items require
four votes in the affirmative for passage.
MR. OCHS: And the Item B, sir, also requires ex parte disclosure
and swearing in of participants.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Yes.
MR. OCHS: Mr. County Attorney, do you want to hear these
together and vote on each separately?
MR. KLATZKOW: Yeah, on this particular one I think we can
hear them both together.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: All right, if that's getting affirmative
nods by the Board we'll do that.
So at this time let's have ex parte disclosure and we'll kind of
open the hearing here.
Commissioner Taylor?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Yes, I've had two meetings with
the petitioner and his attorney. I've talked to staff about it. That's the
degree of the -- you know, and read the reports, of course. That's all I
have to declare.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, thank you. I've spoken with
Bruce Anderson. I've also spoken with the Germain representative.
I've had meetings and I've had emails. That's on both.
Oh, also -- no, no different one, excuse me. That's all.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I have had meetings, emails and
calls, and I've reviewed the staff report -- the staff reports, I should say.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Henning?
Page 39
July 7, 2015
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Spoke to staff on it.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Yes, thank you. I've read the staff report
-- supplemental staff report. I've had meetings with the petitioner's
representatives and with staff.
Would all those wishing to testify, please rise to be sworn in by
the court reporter.
(All speakers were duly sworn.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: I have two lights on. Commissioner
Fiala, you wish to hear Mr. Anderson present first?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, I guess so. But could I
suggest that after his presentation we start by voting on 9.A?
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Yes, we'll have two separate votes.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay, thanks.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Mr. Anderson?
MR. ANDERSON: Good morning, Mr. Chairman,
Commissioners. My name is Bruce Anderson from the law firm of
Cheffy Passidomo, and I'm here on behalf of the petitioner.
I'd like to introduce a couple people. First Mr. Flavio Galasso,
Vice President and Director of Operations for the Germain Motor
Company.
Dominic Amico, the Project Engineer from Agnoli, Barber and
Brundage. Jane Eichorn, the Permitting Coordinator, also from
Agnoli, Barber and Brundage. And Norman Trabilcock, the Project
Planner and Transportation Engineer.
As was noted, we have two applications pending: One to amend
the Comprehensive Plan and the other for a PUD rezoning. To the
greatest extent possible I will address both together.
This property is located at the intersection of two six-lane roads.
It's approximately a 10-acre quarter parcel at Livingston and Pine
Ridge Roads. Property is presently used for a retail nursery and a pool
Page 40
July 7, 2015
cleaning company.
This parcel is in an existing Livingston/Pine Ridge commercial
infill district which allows medical and general office uses. This
amendment of the Growth Management Plan would allow one
additional use only, that of a new and used car dealership.
As you'll note on the overhead projector, more than half of this
site is subject to a Florida Power & Light easement that's 225 feet in
width. This limits the utility, the property, for many uses, because of
the restrictions that FPL puts on what may occur within its easement
area.
Mr. Amico has had preliminary discussions with FPL regarding
this project, and although they have reserved final approval 'til they see
construction plans, they've indicated that they have no objections.
There are a -- the Zoning Department recommends approval, but
the Comprehensive Planning Department does not, seeking more
information about why this property was selected instead of others.
We did provide more information as requested and made two
separate submissions containing an evaluation and commercial
inventory analysis.
We reviewed at least nine other properties in Central Naples, East
Naples, South Naples and the Golden Gate planning districts.
Plain and simple fact of the matter is, this site was chosen because
it is at the intersection of two six-lane roads, it's already designated for
commercial use, it's the right size, and it abuts only other
nonresidential uses. Also this property is centrally located in
proximity to more than 50 percent of the satisfied client customer base
of Germain Honda and the American Honda Motor Company which
must approve any new location, limited the site to no farther north than
Pine Ridge Road, and they have approved this location.
There are a number of operational restrictions in the PUD
document, including the Dark Sky lighting limitations.
Page 41
July 7, 2015
One clarification that I made at the Planning Commission that I
want to make again on the record today is regarding operating hours.
If a customer needs to drop off or pick up their car outside of the
normal operating hours, of course my client is going to accommodate
the customer's needs.
There will be one entrance on Pine Ridge Road and one on
Livingston. And one of the very specific factors that the State Growth
Management Act lists for consideration for a Growth Management
Plan Amendment is, quote, the need for job creation, capital
investment and economic development that will strengthen and
diversify the community's economy. This act goes on to state that the
amount of land designated for future planned uses shall provide for a
balance of uses that foster economic development opportunities and
allow the operation of real estate markets to provide adequate choices.
These applications are for economic development to retain and
grow a successful local Honda dealership which faces increased
competition from Lee County which will now have two Honda
dealerships; the newest one is in Estero.
We all want to keep sales tax revenues for the sale of cars in
Collier County and not allow Lee County to poach on that by default.
It is projected that the annual sales tax revenues will increase
from their current estimated level of$1.8 million annually to $2.7
million annually in the first five years of operation at the new location.
This relocation and expansion of Collier County's only Honda
dealership represents a capital investment of$13 million to build a
state-of-the-art facility.
Over the next five years of expansion at the new dealership
location it's estimated that 29 new technical management sales and
support staff jobs will be added. The projected salary range for the
new jobs is from 38,000 to $120,000. Germain Honda workforce
currently provides employment for 63 people.
Page 42
July 7, 2015
In conclusion, the Planning Commission unanimously
recommended approval, and we respectfully request that you follow
their recommendations. And I and the other members of the project
team are available, should there be any questions.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Hiller, then
Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you.
This project is in my district, and I have looked at this site and the
site has presented a great deal of concern to me because of the power
lines. And to find a company that is willing to make a $13 million
investment as well as hire so many people at a high wage on that
parcel is very positive.
Our zoning department has studied this and has deemed it a
suitable use for the site. And it does seem that based on the evidence
that was presented at this hearing that this company within the
limitations of being a franchise has clearly explored a number of
alternatives. And I am personally very pleased that they have picked
this site, which might not be as well developed by a different user
because of the limitations of the power lines, which is the yellow area
you see over here.
This business is uniquely able to use this site because they can use
the back area where the power lines are for parking the vehicles.
Whereas, you know, another retail operation might not have the same
benefit. And it would be potentially detrimental for them to be next to
a power line grid like that.
So I've reviewed this very carefully. I think it really does make
sense to be situated at that intersection. And so with that, I would like
to make a motion to recommend that we do adopt the small-scale
amendment to the GMP for transmittal to the Florida Department of
Economic Opportunity.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'll second the motion.
Page 43
July 7, 2015
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Fiala seconds the motion
and Commissioner Fiala will speak next.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, you said everything about it
that I wanted to say but you said it eloquently, and it is your district so
I'm glad you were first up to bat.
I just wanted to say, this site isn't suitable for much of anything.
You're certainly not going to be building houses there or anything.
And there are definitely businesses that just couldn't fit in there. So I
was so pleased to see that they came up with this idea when they
visited me in my office. And I felt that I would totally support it. And I
find it interesting the color that they put the power lines on, it almost
looks like electric, doesn't it, with that color?
Anyway, so I wholeheartedly support this.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Thank you.
Commissioner Taylor?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Yes, I'd like to hear from Mr.
Weeks, please.
Mr. Weeks, you recommended denial because it doesn't -- there's
a conflict with the Comprehensive Plan. Specifically regarding the
marketing issues, could you please explain your position on that?
MR. WEEKS: Certainly. First of all, for the record, my name is
David Weeks of the Comprehensive Planning staff for the county.
Commissioner, the applicant provided an analysis of commercial
inventory that actually staff provided to the applicant. It was available
on line, we provided it to the applicant for easier use because we put it
in Excel document.
The inventory we provided was the existing commercial zoning
only. It did not include Comprehensive Plan designations that would
allow for commercial development of the specific use they're
proposing.
Page 44
July 7, 2015
They did do an analysis of the commercial zoning. What they did
not do was -- what they did do was evaluate properties comparable to
the size of the subject site; that is, approximately 10 acres.
What they did not do was look at smaller parcels that -- if there
were any, smaller parcels that were adjacent to one another that could
be aggregated. They also did not look at larger parcels that potentially
could be disaggregated, parceled off. That was the shortcoming that
staff identified.
They also did not look at all of the properties that were designated
in the Comprehensive Plan to allow commercial development but not
yet zoned for commercial development to accommodate the use they're
proposing.
So in staffs position, they did not complete the evaluation of
available properties within their defined market area. You may have
read that they do have limitations, as Mr. Anderson indicated, based on
a settlement agreement between Germain Honda and American Honda
Corporation, I believe it is. Staff recognized that, and we did not ask
them to look beyond those constrained boundaries.
So that's the short of it for how we found their analysis to not
fully be completed, therefore to demonstrate the need.
A second reason for the staff recommendation of denial is based
on the current level of use intensity that lies east of Livingston Road
versus west. The subject site is west of Livingston Road. East of
Livingston Road on both sides of Pine Ridge Road we have higher
intensity commercial development all the way to and beyond I-75. But
west of Livingston Road it's much lower; it's residential or
institutional. In staffs opinion it was an appropriate break at
Livingston Road. The subject site presently is allowed commercial
development but limited to office use only. And that's it.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Thank you.
Page 45
July 7, 2015
COMMISSIONER FIALA: In other words, this is actually a soft
denial. It's really an ideal place. And when they found something, you
know, even though they've looked in other places, this was an ideal
location because it's a site that not many others can use, right? So
that's a soft denial?
I got it.
MR. WEEKS: It's a denial. It's a denial. They may have been
able to demonstrate if they would have gone further, I just can't say.
I'm not going to speculate what they would have found. We just found
that they had not gone far enough.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Yes, I'd like to make a comment and
then go back to Commissioner Hiller.
I certainly support Commissioner Hiller's motion. I think -- I
originally did some consulting on this location, actually for the existing
nursery that's there now. I think it's a location that's got a great deal of
potential. I certainly want to respect Honda Motor Company and
Germain Honda's efforts to enhance their dealership and bring
economic development to Collier County. I do respect Mr. Weeks'
opinion, but I think Collier County wants to be inviting to people and
give people an opportunity to make the determination that they can
make.
I think -- I'm very impressed by their commitment to go to things
like Dark Skies lighting for their new dealership. I think we had a
wonderful response to that from Mr. Zellers family what he did on
Airport Road to really make a nice and very compatible dealership. So
I will support the motion.
Go back to Commissioner Hiller, then Commissioner Taylor
again.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I don't think that we as a Board can
use a market study to dictate to any petitioner that they need to
consider the purchase of properties through assemblages or
Page 46
July 7, 2015
disassemblage. We can't in any way suggest that separate property
owners are going to agree to sell individual parcels to put an
assemblage together, nor can we force a property owner to parcel off
say 10 acres out of 15 acres and sell a smaller piece to accommodate
what you're suggesting, Mr. Weeks.
I don't believe market studies were intended to do what you are
suggesting or how you are suggesting they ought to be used. And it
really gives me great concern because, you know, if we've got
someone, if we have a petitioner, not necessarily specifically this
petitioner, but any petitioner that finds a site that suits the particular
use, and our Planning Department has determined that this is an
appropriate use, it seems to me unreasonable to apply the market study
in this fashion.
I understand where market studies are applied; for example, to
look at how much commercial we have in totality, not by industry but
in total, or how much retail we have or how much residential we have.
And I do appreciate that.
But in this particular case, this very unique application of a
market study as a planning guide is not what I believe how market
studies were intended to be applied. And maybe what we need to do,
and this is a suggestion, and I think I would turn to you, Mr.
Casalanguida, I know that, you know, 163 was modified, when was it,
in 2012?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: 2011.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: 2011, pardon me. And I remember
at that time we basically said that staff should, you know, apply 163.
I think what would make sense, it really should not be part of this
discussion, but I'll introduce it at this point, is have staff come back in
the fall with clear guidelines of how market studies and other studies
will be applied in these kind of situations so that the petitioners are on
notice as to what is expected of them and why and that they produce
Page 47
July 7, 2015
that level of information.
You know, providing the market analysis, as was actually
provided to them, and them going to look at these sites is one thing.
To suggest that they should have gone beyond that and look at
assemblages and disassembling larger parcel I think is going beyond
what should be asked of them.
So, you know, I appreciate what Mr. Weeks has said, but it
doesn't seem to be the appropriate standard in this case. And again, my
concern is, I mean, the development of this site is very difficult. Very
difficult. And to actually have a business where our zoning
department deems it an appropriate use I think is what is clearly
persuasive in recommending approval in this instance.
And I do appreciate, you know, your professional involvement,
Mr. Weeks. But I do think we need to have clearly defined guidelines
for the future. And it would be prejudicial in this case to deny on that
basis with respect to the recommendation to send this to the
Department of Economic Opportunity.
MR. WEEKS: Commissioner, may I respond?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Sure.
MR. WEEKS: Not to the --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We're going to be here all day.
MR. WEEKS: -- suggested direction.
First of all, what they submitted is not a market study. A market
study would be far more detailed than what they provided. I won't go
into the detail about it other than to say that they did not provide it nor
did staff ask for it, because we did recognize the uniqueness of this
petition. Most applications for commercial amendment to the
Comprehensive Plan include a variety of commercial uses comparable
to our C-3 or C-4 zoning districts. And so the end use in most cases is
a shopping center. And so we get into the different types of, you know,
community shopping center, regional neighborhood, and there's
Page 48
July 7, 2015
specific details of what a market study should be in those instances.
But we recognize that this was a unique use. A single use.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you.
MR. WEEKS: It was not going to be a shopping center. So we
asked for less than we typically would. They provided less as well.
The other comment I would say --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Then let me correct my statement.
I was overly broad if I called it a market study. Whatever -- however
you'd like to professionally call it, I'm not sure what the appropriate
term is, but I understand your point.
MR. WEEKS: The other thing has to do with -- a couple more
points. One is ownership. In this particular case it's my understanding
that the applicant owns the property. And that sometimes is the case
for planned amendment petitions that come before you. I would say
it's more typical that the property is under a contract for purchase, so
they don't actually own the property.
My point there is that an applicant goes out and looks for property
to acquire, whether it's an assemblage or whether it's a disaggregation.
And that leads to the third comment. We do not ask the applicant
to actua-- what we ask the applicant to do is investigate whether there
was that inventory out there of smaller properties to aggregate. Or if
they would have come back and said we did look and there's not any or
we looked and the property owner would not sell us any, they didn't
want to, well, we would accept that. Because we're not trying to force
them to do something like I think you had suggested, that is that, well,
you must go buy that piece of property somewhere else.
I just wanted to clarify that. I don't want to be argumentative.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, I understand, I understand.
And I also think, you know, the fact that the Planning
Commission felt that approval was recommended -- I did speak to Mr.
Strain about the particular issue, and he was the one who actually gave
Page 49
July 7, 2015
me the guidance that allowed me to come to the conclusion that
recommendation was the appropriate motion on this for the reasons
that I stated.
But in fairness to all sides, I do think we need clarity. And I don't
think we should prejudice anyone, whether it's you, Mr. Weeks, or the
petitioner, for the lack of clarity of direction from the Board. And I
think we need to address that prospectively.
But, you know, Mr. Weeks, it shouldn't be held against Mr.
Weeks and it shouldn't be held against the petitioner under the
circumstances.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Thank you.
Commissioner Taylor?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Thank you very much.
And I've enjoyed this discussion, and I support the petition. Mr.
Weeks, I think you did a -- I think you did your job, and you're to be
commended for it.
I would like to talk further in the fall about what a market study
is. There's no way in the world, sir, that you are -- you would
understand the marketing of what the petitioner is bringing and vice
versa. So maybe we've put you in a box or Comprehensive Plan had
put you in a box that you will always be the bad guy, and you are
ethical and you did what you felt was right and I really commend you
for it. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: I agree.
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Jeff or staff, what is the reason
to -- not to have the ownership within our packet? We always had who
owned it --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I think that's very important.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, because, you know, there
would be a conflict -- there could be a conflict of interest --
Page 50
July 7, 2015
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Absolutely.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- to anyone --
MR. ANDERSON: One correction. He was incorrect.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Huh?
MR. ANDERSON: He was incorrect. The property is not owned
by my client yet.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. So let me finish what I
was saying.
One of us might be a consultant for the property owner or the
petitioner. We don't know that. We don't know if there's a conflict of
interest unless it is disclosed in our executive summary. And for some
reason it's been removed. Who, why, what and where? Who's going
to answer that? Who's going to take responsibility?
MR. WEEKS: We provided to you what was provided to us.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: But it's just a more general
question, not specific. I agree with Commissioner Henning. On this
particular project I'm not as concerned about, I do think that
Commissioner Henning's point is a valid one. And I've raised it myself
in the past.
MR. KLATZKOW: It should be disclosed, you're right. And we
will ensure that in the future it will be disclosed.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Who owns the property?
MR. ANDERSON: I don't have all the agenda backup with me
right now, but deeds were provided and full disclosure was made. It's
in the backup. It's never listed in the executive summary.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, it's in the backup material,
but it's not there.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: That's not you, sir. That's not you.
MR. ANDERSON: Yeah, I mean, we provided it.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Mr. Anderson, it's staffs
responsibility.
Page 51
July 7, 2015
MR. KLATZKOW: I'm just quickly looking at the backup.
There is a warranty deed.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: What packet page number?
MR. KLATZKOW: I am working off of the material that staff
gave me. My assumption that staff gave me the material. This was the
cover page to it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So it's not -- well, I looked for it
and I can't find it. So anyways.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Okay. Well, apparently it's an oversight.
In the future certainly we need this information.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: That's a good point.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: That's a good catch on Commissioner
Henning's part.
All right, any further comments?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: There is a motion to approve the
small-scale amendment and a second.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: All right, that is approved unanimously.
Item #9B
ORDINANCE 2015-43: AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 2004-41,
AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND
Page 52
July 7, 2015
DEVELOPMENT CODE, WHICH ESTABLISHED THE
COMPREHENSIVE ZONING REGULATIONS FOR THE
UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
BY AMENDING THE APPROPRIATE ZONING ATLAS MAP OR
MAPS BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF
THE HEREIN DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTY FROM THE
AGRICULTURAL (A) ZONING DISTRICT TO A COMMERCIAL
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (CPUD) ZONING DISTRICT
FOR A 10.47± ACRE PARCEL TO BE KNOWN AS THE
GERMAIN HONDA CPUD TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF
AN AUTOMOTIVE SALES FACILITY WITH ASSOCIATED
REPAIR SERVICES, UP TO 60,000 SQUARE FEET OF GROSS
FLOOR AREA, ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE
NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF PINE
RIDGE ROAD AND LIVINGSTON ROAD IN SECTION 12,
TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY,
FLORIDA; PROVIDING FOR REPEAL OF RESOLUTION NO.
94-584, A CONDITIONAL USE FOR A RETAIL NURSERY; AND
PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. [PETITION PUDZ-
PL20140001326] — ADOPTED
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Which takes us to Item 9.B.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'd like to make a motion to
approve 9.B.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Second.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: There is a motion to approve and a
second.
Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Hiller, would you like to
speak again, ma'am?
Page 53
July 7, 2015
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I don't think any more needs to be
said. I think, you know, the evidence is clear on the record. We've had
the discussion. The zoning staff approved this, the Planning
Commission approved it. I don't see any reason for denial.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Any public speakers, Mr. Miller? I see
no light.
MR. MILLER: (Shakes head negatively.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: No public speakers. All right, all those
in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Thank you, it passes unanimously.
MR. ANDERSON: Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Thank you, sir.
MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, would you like to take a 10-minute
break for your court reporter?
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Yes, we will, and we will return at
10:46.
MR. OCHS: Thank you, sir.
(Recess.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Please take your seats. Let's reconvene.
Item #10A
THE COUNTY ATTORNEY TO ADVERTISE A HEARING TO
Page 54
July 7, 2015
RESCIND ORDINANCE 2013-70 TO REMOVE THE MSBU
ESTABLISHED TO FUND LA PENINSULA SEAWALL REPAIR
AS REQUESTED BY LA PENINSULA LEGAL COUNSEL —
APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, that takes us to Item 10, Board of
County Commissioners.
Item 10.A is a recommendation that the Board direct the County
Attorney to advertise a hearing to rescind Ordinance 2013-70 to
remove the MSBU established to fund La Peninsula seawall repair. It
was requested by La Peninsula legal counsel. This item was brought
forward by Commissioner Henning.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Henning, please, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, the whole thing was, the
county's involvement is funding of this. Now, La Pen has its own
funding. And you can hear it today from consultant from Turrell &
Associates. They had received permits and are ready to open up bids
to construct the wall.
So I don't see any need to keep this on the books anymore. I
think we can, you know -- I'll make a motion to direct the County
Attorney to advertise it to rescind the ordinance.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: And I will second that.
Comments?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Seeing none, public speakers, Mr.
Miller?
MR. MILLER: Yes, Mr. Chairman, I have three speakers. Your
first speaker is Steve Adamczyk, hope I'm saying that correctly,
followed by Joshua Maxwell.
MR. ADAMCZYK: Mr. Chair, Commissioners, good morning.
My name is Steve Adamczyk. I'm the attorney for the Club at La
Page 55
July 7, 2015
Peninsula, the entity responsible for the ownership and the
maintenance repair/replacement of the seawall.
I'm going to defer any questions regarding the engineering
solutions to Josh Maxwell with Turrell, Hall & Associates, as that is
his area of expertise. I'm mainly here to talk to you about what The
Club has done since May of last year when we met to move this
project forward and get this done.
Mainly that comes into the form of financing. I represented at
that meeting that The Club had secured commitments from multiple
lenders for financing, and in October 28, 2014, the club closed on a $5
million line of credit. The maturity date is 2024. A copy of the
promissory note is available to the Commissioners.
To date they've only drawn 50,000 on the line of credit and that's
specifically because they're waiting for the contractors and the contract
to be signed to pull the rest of it.
Concerning repayment of that amount, even if they did draw the
full amount, which is more than enough, in February of this year,
2015, the board met at a special board meeting of The Club to levy a
special assessment. That special assessment was $19,000 per unit,
bringing the total budget, when you include the special assessment
revenues, the existing reserve amounts for the seawall and the future
seawall reserve replacements, to be more than the budget, which we
believe necessary, for roughly around $4 million.
So my point here is that at our last meeting in May, the motion
was essentially that we would come back to ask you to make a
decision to continue when there's evidence that they're moving forward
with the repair. So that's what I'm here to do today is let you know that
the board at The Club of La Peninsula has committed itself through
this line of credit and through engaging a very good contractor and
engineer -- I'm sorry, engineer, putting contracts before the board for
consideration with the permitting to get the job done. The seawall will
Page 56
July 7, 2015
be fixed and we support the motion to rescind the MSBU. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Thank you, sir.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Joshua Maxwell. He'll be
followed by Dr. Joseph Doyle.
MR. MAXWELL: Hello. Josh Maxwell from Tunell, Hall &
Associates, Project Manager for the seawall stabilization at La
Peninsula.
I just wanted to inform everybody that as of I believe April of last
year we were contracted to begin permitting and designing the repair
scenario for La Peninsula. Since that time we've had to break up the
permitting into two phases: The first phase being what has been
previously permitted in the past. That was a fairly easy permit to
acquire and that's what's allowing us to do some construction this
summer in the water.
The rest of the permitting, which includes the majority of the
waterway on Big Marco Pass, as well as Capris Pass, that's going to be
tied up with DEP and Army Corps 'til probably next spring, and
therefore we're kind of scheduling that construction for summer of
2016.
So we're hoping by the end of next year to be completely done
and hopefully not have to worry about any seawall issues for the next
30 years or more.
As Steve said, we do have the Phase I contracts that are due to our
office today at 4:00 p.m. And we'll probably start with construction at
the contractor's earliest availability.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Thank you. Questions, comments?
Commissioner Taylor?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Not of the speakers. This will be
after we hear public comment.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Yes, ma'am.
Mr. Miller.
Page 57
July 7, 2015
MR. MILLER: Your final registered speaker on this item is Dr.
Joseph Doyle.
DR. DOYLE: Good morning, Commissioners, Dr. Joseph Doyle,
Naples.
As you will recall, in January of 2014, I was here with several
other citizens group to oppose this ordinance in the first place. I
commend Commissioner Henning for putting this onto the agenda and
to rescinding this MSBU.
I would, however, from a taxpayer's standpoint like to point out
that there was -- there were expenses for advertising and county staff
and County Attorney time to set up this ordinance, and there is now
time and effort being used to rescind this ordinance. And I would like
to see the La Peninsula Condo Association reimburse us for those
expenses. It's just a principle of the matter. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Mr. Miller?
MR. MILLER: That is all the registered speakers we have on this
item, sir.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Thank you.
Commissioner Taylor?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Mr. Klatzkow, can you tell me
what -- I know this is a long-standing issue. This is a general question.
What liability or involvement do we have as county government on
whether or not a private entity repairs their seawall?
MR. KLATZKOW: It depends how we structure the transaction.
Properly structured you won't have any liability.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: But let's --just for the sake of this
argument there's an entity with a seawall that's crumbling. Do we need
to step in and get involved in that?
MR. KLATZKOW: If the Board finds that there's a significant
public purpose to it such as public health and safety is involved, then
the Board can do this, yes, if it's properly constructed.
Page 58
July 7, 2015
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Is it normal -- is that what the
Board's found in the past? I'm asking for those who have been on here.
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We have an existing ordinance,
it's an enforcement ordinance by code enforcement. So if the seawall
in this case is derelict, and there has been in the past.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Yeah, sure.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Derelict where the code
enforcement can go in there and take action.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And they have.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And then they lien the property for
the cost and the property owner has to pay for the cost of the repair.
They have to do it.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Henning, further
comments?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's it.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I was just going to explain the
MSBU and how we got involved.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: No, I've read that. I understand
what happened there; I understand the background. This was just a
general question.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Do we need to be treading in this
water, so to speak. Sorry for the pun.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, we didn't tread in there, they
kind of asked us at the time.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Okay.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: There is a motion and a second to
Page 59
July 7, 2015
remove the MSBU established to fund La Peninsula. Any further
discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Hearing and seeing none, all those in
favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Passes unanimously. Thank you.
Item #10B
RECOGNIZING RESOLUTION 2007-138 PROVIDING FOR THE
EXPANSION OF AN EXISTING CONDITIONAL USE FOR THE
NAPLES BRIDGE CLUB HAS CONFLICTING PROVISIONS
WITH PU-80-4C (RESOLUTION 80-128) AND THAT THE
BOARD FINDS THAT THE ORIGINAL PROVISIONAL USE
ADOPTED IN PU-80-4C, ATTACHMENT 1, SECTION 6,
STATING THAT ANY EXPANSION SHALL ONLY REQUIRE
SITE PLAN APPROVAL IS THE PREVAILING LANGUAGE —
APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Item 10.B is a recommendation that the Board
recognizes Resolution 2007-138 providing for the expansion of the
Naples Bridge Club and that the Board finds that the original
provisional use adopted stating that any expansion shall only require
site plan approval is prevailing language. And Commissioner Henning
Page 60
July 7, 2015
has brought this item forward.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you. Yeah, I moved from
East Naples to Golden Gate in the early Eighties. And this
organization has been there to the entrance of the community since that
time. And just like expanding roads or just like government services,
as a community grows there needs to be expansion.
This organization, in staffs opinion -- I was working with Nick
and others to recognize Section 6 of the Ordinance 2080 -- or 1980 to
allow them to come forward, submit their site plan for the expansion,
have staff work with them because they want to expand their footprint
which calls for a comprehensive amendment -- line of comprehensive
amendment.
Commissioner Fiala, you can verify this. In the past we have told
many a PUDs during the downturn of the economy of 2008 to where
PUDs out there -- it wasn't going to build it, it wasn't going to start it, it
wasn't going to pay any fees. And the Board has extended those PUDs
because it was due to sunset.
There is a provision in the land code to allow that. However,
there's not a case for conditional uses, and staff recommended this
process for the Board to approve.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I was very pleased to see that this
was on the agenda. I think it's so healthy to have places where
community can congregate and enjoy one another's fellowship and
friendship. And as noted in here, this serves a lot of people that are
retired now and it gives them something to do and something to
support one another with, and I wholeheartedly support it. So if you
make the motion, Commissioner Henning, I'll second it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Move to approve --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
Page 61
July 7, 2015
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- for the recommendations.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: We have a motion and a second.
Public speakers, Mr. Miller?
MR. MILLER: Mr. Chairman, we have four registered speakers.
Three have all ceded their time to your first speaker, Edward Kant, for
a total of 12 minutes.
MR. KANT: Two things. First of all, thank you so much for
recognizing Engineer Berzon earlier this morning. When I came here
36 years ago, he was one of my mentors. So I personally appreciated
that.
Second of all, I will take nowhere near 12 minutes.
Just first of all, thank you again, Commissioner Henning, for
bringing this to the Board. The Naples Bridge Center -- by the way, I
want to make a minor correction so the record is straight. It's not
Naples Bridge Club, it's the Naples Bridge Center, Incorporated. We
are a 50106 corp-- nonprofit member owned corporation. We have
currently north of 900 some members. And we've been out there -- it
was founded in 1976 and we had our original provisional use in 1980.
We expanded slightly in 1994. And so we've been out there now for
15 -- 16 years almost. And we find it's necessary, in order for us to
offer our members the types of services that they want, to expand.
I've got a lot of detail and everything down here, but the basics is
that we were approved in 2007 for this Conditional Use for the
expansion. As Commissioner Henning has pointed out, the economy
was such that it just simply wasn't going to work and we're now in a
position to go forward. So we would appreciate your positive response
to this request.
If you have any questions, I'll try to do my best to answer them.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Thank you, sir.
MR. MILLER: That is it, sir.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Very well. We have a motion and a
Page 62
July 7, 2015
second for approval. Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Hearing none, all those in favor, signify
by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Any opposed?
(No response.)
MR. KANT: Thank you, Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Passes unanimously.
Mr. Ochs, I think we're closing in within a few seconds of our
11 :00 time certain for some reason.
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir. Miraculously we're back on schedule here,
sir. It must be to your --
CHAIRMAN NANCE: It's time.
Item #1 1 E
CONTINUING OPERATION OF A MODIFIED SOFT LANDING
BUSINESS ACCELERATOR PROJECT IN VIEW OF THE
EMINENT TERMINATION OF THE GRANT AGREEMENT
WITH THE STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY AND VETO OF THE
LEGISLATURE'S REQUEST TO EXTEND FUNDING FOR THE
AGREEMENT INTO THE STATE FISCAL YEAR 2016 -
MOTION TO CONTINUE PROJECT OPERATIONS AND STAFF
TO COME BACK AT THE SEPTEMBER 8, 2015 BCC MEETING
WITH A STATUS REPORT — APPROVED
Page 63
July 7, 2015
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir.
11.E is your time certain hearing for 11 :00 a.m. this morning.
This is a recommendation to continue operation of a modified Soft
Landing Business Accelerator Project in view of the eminent
termination of the grant agreement with the State of Florida
Department of Economic Opportunity and the veto of the legislature's
request to extend funding for the agreement into the state fiscal year of
2016.
Mr. Bruce Register, your Director of Office of Business and
Economic Development, will present.
MR. REGISTER: Good morning. Bruce Register.
Commissioners, this is a recommendation to continue operation
of the Soft Landing Accelerator Project. I'd like to provide just a little
bit of background before we poise to answer your questions.
Since the summer of 19 -- excuse me, since the summer of 2013
this Board has directed staff to engage in policy work to exert greater
influence on our economic destiny to developing strategy and
planning. To that end the business plan was adopted in September of
2013; the strategic plan was adopted at the end of 2014. We're also
were seeking outside resources, including state and federal grants as a
directive from this Board. We also were directed to use judicious use
of our own county funding with results-oriented anticipation of our
objectives.
With the Board direction, the county initiated the accelerator
project with state, county and private funding to foster international
economic development and local entrepreneurial activity in May of
2014.
Over the past few months the viability and demonstrated success
of the accelerator have been evident with over 13 active participants
and continued expression of demand.
Unfortunately the support of the initial state funding has been
Page 64
July 7, 2015
discontinued.
Before you is an agenda item authorizing a revised,
reprogrammed accelerator project which defers the Immokalee
Kitchen Project, downsizes the existing Western Urban Accelerator in
some aspects. The adjustments to staffing, information technology
delivery and facility operations will have some impacts, but
functionality and acceptable levels of service can be maintained.
These challenges can be met with creative approaches including
expanding our volunteer professional counseling, privately donated IT
and marketing services, and the postponed Immokalee Kitchen until
additional resources can be identified.
Staff has begun discussions with private nonprofits and our
partners toward addressing the delayed Immokalee project.
Staff respectfully recommends continuing this project as defined
by this agenda item. We stand ready to address your questions, if
needed.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I like -- Commissioner Nance, I
like your item on the agenda asking the Governor to reinstate that. This
item I think is premature until we hear from the Governor, myself. Is
there a timely basis for this is modification?
MR. REGISTER: Yes, sir. There is -- we have what is defined
as a certified forward period from the state that will end September
15th. Until that time -- until such time we do have the opportunity to
continue minor operating expenditures with state funding.
We're also anticipating some moves that we could utilize, some
additional state funding, if we have this Board's authorization and
commitment to moving forward. If we don't have such commitment,
then I would respectfully suggest that a recommendation of
terminating the operation would probably be in order.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. So September 15th we're
Page 65
July 7, 2015
going to be back in session. We're going to have our meeting prior to
that.
MR. REGISTER: Commissioner, there is an opportunity to
garner an additional 3 or $400,000 of state funding if we act now.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Is that the reason?
MR. REGISTER: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Because the way this is written,
I would hate to send a message to the Governor that we don't need that
two and a half million. That's kind of what it looks like.
MR. OCHS: Well, no, sir, because that two and a half million
included two accelerator locations, both the urban and the rural. The
rural project is completely suspended at this point until we can work
towards a re-appropriation from the state legislature, and that's why
this is extremely scaled back from the original project.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Yes, Commissioner Henning, I agree
with you, I would hope that staff is going to jump in and take the time
that we have in recess to reevaluate exactly where we are on this.
Hopefully if we get the approval to send a letter to the Governor, we'll
get a response back from him and have them come back with some
options. Because the budget was very, very aggressive but I would
like to allow staff at least some time to retool on this.
Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, thank you.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: And the other two ladies.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So if your petition, after we approve
it, if it works and we do get some of that money back or all of the
money back, can you then change this program that you've -- I thought
you did a good job putting this together, but can you change it to then
be more inclusive if that happens?
MR. REGISTER: Commissioner, the anticipated moving
Page 66
July 7, 2015
forward, we are prepared to use some innovative approaches to
maintain continuity of the program while we can seek additional
funding. And if indeed state acts and provides us additional funding,
we can ramp back up to the original plan very easily.
The point would be we have made commitments and we have
activity occurring as we speak in our accelerator. If we do not provide
continuity for the momentum that we've gained so far, we well set this
program back.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, so in other words, yes, you
can react to it if you get extra money.
MR. REGISTER: Yes, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Yes, Mr. Register, I would like to make
a motion to continue operation with the proviso that the staff come
back at the September 8th Board meeting with a full report of
evaluating where you're at and give us options.
MR. REGISTER: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: There's a motion and a second.
Commissioner Hiller, then Commissioner Taylor.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: There is a cost to starting up a
project like this. That cost has already been incurred. If we were to
shut this project down and then start up again, we would be wasting
money. And so I think Commissioner Nance's motion is the
appropriate motion with respect to 11.E. I think we absolutely have to
support the ongoing operations of the accelerator that currently is up
and running.
How many companies do we have in that accelerator at this
point?
MR. REGISTER: 13.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And that is really impressive for
this short amount of time. I have been involved with some of those
Page 67
July 7, 2015
companies and they are accelerating. Without any question of a doubt,
the project is working and it's a great program.
So Commissioner Nance, thank you for your motion, and
Commissioner Henning for your second. And I will definitely support
what you're recommending.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Taylor, then public
speakers.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Yes, I listened to Commissioner
Henning's concerns and I think they're valid. So when we get to
discussing your letter, maybe we could modify it a little bit,
Commissioner Nance, to reflect that we are going to -- what we've
done to the east and what we're willing to support in the west, but to be
very clear, that we're not picking up the lack of funding from the state,
we are going -- we are kind of moving along as carefully and as
aggressively as we can. But I agree, we do not want to give that
message well, we really don't need that money. But I would support
your motion.
MR. MILLER: Mr. Chairman, two registered speakers. Your
first speaker is Catherine Haworth. She'll be followed by Steve
Wheeler.
MS. HAWORTH: Good morning. I'm Cathy Haworth and I'm
with the Small Business Development Center at the Florida Gulf Coast
University, and I just have a couple of comments.
I like the direction this is taking here. But I work in conjunction
and have been with the project ever since the inception. And we have
-- not volunteered our time because I get paid, but not from the project.
And I thought when they asked me to come up and speak today I
was going to go back and look at the number of clients that I actually
worked with. And I've worked with not just the clients that are in the
accelerator but I've worked with prospects as well. And I have, since I
started working with the accelerator, clocked 143 sessions with 250
Page 68
July 7, 2015
hours. So we're a collaborative partner in this; we're in this all the way.
My issues and my concerns are before I retired in 2007 I was 14
years the executive director of our economic development center in
Lake County, Ohio. My concerns are, if we let the ball drop on this
there's going to be everybody else out there just wanting to approach
these people that are here that we've nurtured, that we've worked with,
that we've got the synergies with it.
We also have the synergies within the organization. I mean, they
are -- all the people that are in the incubator and accelerator are
working with each other. And every time I go in the office one or two
times a week, it is just -- it's great. And I am -- being a former
economic development, they're out there ripe for picking if we don't let
this continue. So the momentum that we've created, we need to keep
going.
Commissioner Taylor, I don't know if you remember, but I kind
of attacked you the other night when you were at the HOA for
Brookside. And on your way out the door I'm like, this is really a great
project. Well, who knew then that this was going to happen now.
So anyway, Florida Gulf Coast University Small Business
Development Center, continued support for the project, we're happy to
be there. It's a great project.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you so much for all you've
done.
MS. HAWORTH: You're very welcome.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And what a great report.
MS. HAWORTH: Any questions for me?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Just stay with us.
MS. HAWORTH: I'm not going anywhere. Thanks.
MR. MILLER: Your final speaker on this item is Steve Wheeler.
MR. WHEELER: Good morning. I'm Steve Wheeler, I'm with
the Healthcare Network of Southwest Florida, and I love what I'm
Page 69
July 7, 2015
hearing here. I think that this is one of the most exciting projects that's
come to Naples in recent years. And I've been here -- I'm old and I've
been here almost 40 years now, and I'm delighted to hear your
conversation about supporting the project.
We at the Healthcare Network are very excited. We've developed
relationships with three of the companies that have come in through
the incubator that have break-through technology in medical areas.
We could be on the forefront of some diabetes research work here in
Collier County, through the Life Sciences Divisions with genomic
mapping and sequencing and some other areas that are going on here.
I agree, Commissioner Hiller, that we can't skip a beat with this.
We would be embarrassed and we would have wasted money if we
step away from it. So thank you, and I certainly hope that you do
support the motion that's in front of you. Thank you for what you do.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: All right, Commissioners, we have a
motion and a second on the floor. Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Hearing none, all those in favor, signify
by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Any opposed?
(No response.)
Item #10C
THE BCC CHAIRMAN TO SEND A LETTER TO GOVERNOR
RICK SCOTT REQUESTING REINSTATEMENT OF FUNDING
Page 70
July 7, 2015
FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY
GRANT SUPPORTING THE COLLIER COUNTY BUSINESS
ACCELERATOR PROGRAM - TO SEND LETTER AS WRITTEN
IN THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY — APPROVED
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And I'd like to make a motion to
Support 10.C, which is your letter as modified by the discussion that
we've had. To ensure that it doesn't improperly suggest that we have
the ability to --
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioners, my intention of the
letter was not to get into an extended justification of the program. I
think our application, you know, was very involved and includes that
justification.
My intention here was simply twofold: Number one, to provide
respectfully to the Governor and his staff and DEO some information
that I don't think they had. And that was the tremendous amount of
synergy and progress that we made in a very short time. So number
one was just to be informational.
And secondly was simply to try to get an audience with the
Governor's staff and DEO, in which case we can discuss the various
ramifications and concerns of the Commission.
So I would respectfully request that we be allowed to send this
letter in immediately and get this going and that we seek a meeting and
at that meeting we can have full engagement to explain or answer any
questions about this information.
But I just want it to be informational and I want to request an
audience.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Are you suggesting you feel
comfortable that it doesn't suggest that we're --
CHAIRMAN NANCE: No, ma'am, it is very clear.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: As long as -- then I'm fine. Then
Page 71
July 7, 2015
I'll modify my motion to send it as written.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: You know, I just want it to be
informational. Because the Governor -- honestly, the Governor and his
staff would have had no way to really understand the great amount of
progress and synergy that we had obtained because it was happening
on a day-to-day and week-to-week basis. So I'm hopeful that, you
know, this will do that and it will at least open the discussion for, you
know, early January sessions at the very minimum, so --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'll second the motion.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Point of order. Did we vote on --
CHAIRMAN NANCE: We voted on 11.A. We are now on --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: We're on 10.C.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: We voted on --
CHAIRMAN NANCE: We're on 10.C.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Okay, I'm sorry, I missed that
completely.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: I'm sorry, ma'am, yes, we just voted on
11.E.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: 11.E.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Yes, 11.E was the continued operation.
And we're now on the followup item, 10.C.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: We didn't give it a chance, like a
break between the two --
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Yeah, that's why I got --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- we went right into it.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Sorry, ma'am. Well, I hope you had a
chance to look at the letter.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Yes.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: And like I say, it's intended to be very
respectful and --
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Well, respectful but
Page 72
July 7, 2015
understanding that there was a commitment and what this does to the
program is --
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Stops it.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Stops it. And that, you know, just
Immokalee, and I know you mentioned Immokalee, but just say that
we will do our best but, you know, the program is based on this
money.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: We need a meeting, that's what we need.
We need a meeting.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Hopefully before January.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Oh, I know that. Well, I said, you know,
respectfully request a meeting with your staff. So we're going to send
it off. I want to send it off as soon as possible and get it underway and
get back and go to it.
So there's a motion and a second. Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Hearing none, all those in favor, signify
by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Thank you, it passes unanimously.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Good letter.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: We will get this sent out ASAP.
Mr. Flanigan, please prepare.
Item #1 OD
AMENDING THE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE
Page 73
July 7, 2015
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND THE CLERK OF
THE CIRCUIT COURT TO PROMOTE ACCOUNTABILITY AND
TRANSPARENCY — MOTION FOR COMMISSIONER NANCE
TO MEET WITH THE CLERK TO GO OVER THE CLERK'S
FY16 BUDGET EXPENDITURES - APPROVED; MOTION TO
CONTINUE ITEM #10D UNTIL THE CHAIRMAN HAS HAD AN
OPPORTUNITY TO MEET WITH THE CLERK AND BRING A
REPORT BACK TO THE BOARD — APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Thank you, Commissioners. That moves us back to
Item 10.D under Board of County Commissioners. This is a
recommendation to amend the interlocal agreement between the Board
and the Clerk of the Circuit Court to promote accountability and
transparency.
This item was brought forward by Commissioner Hiller.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you.
When I put together this executive summary, it gave me pause for
thought after I had uploaded it. And what I would like to suggest is
that we need to take one step ahead of my recommendation, which is
that the Chair and the County Manager work with the Clerk to develop
amendments to the interlocal agreement to promote accountability and
transparency. And that is that -- my suggestion would be that the first
thing that we need to do is really to direct the County Manager to go
out and hire an independent external auditor to audit that $6 million so
we really have an understanding of what we're negotiating and what,
you know, what amounts tie into the services that are enumerated in
the contract and how those amounts tie back to the budget.
And I spoke to the County Attorney, and the County Attorney did
explain to me that we as a Board do have the legal right to request an
audit of the $6 million and -- or I should say not request an audit but to
Page 74
July 7, 2015
audit to have that $6 million audited. And I also spoke to the external
auditors and they are not auditing that $6 million.
And so to that end I think the simple thing to do at this point is
really to wrap our arms around what this $6 million is going towards
and to ask the County Manager to go ahead and to hire an external
auditor to audit the $6 million and come back and give us the
information. Because at this point there is no pre-audit of the six
million, there's no post-audit of the six million, and we need to -- we
have a duty to know how these funds are being used. And I'm sure the
Clerk would agree with that.
So that would be what I would suggest. And I'll make a motion to
that effect after we have discussion, because I want to make a motion
that will, you know, incorporate whatever thoughts you all might bring
to the table on this issue.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Who was first? I'm sorry.
Commissioner Henning? Then Commissioner Taylor.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioner Hiller, you're
saying you don't want to approve anything in your executive summary.
You want to change it to reflect auditing of the $6 million?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, I think we need to have that
audit as the first step towards looking to discuss that amendment. I
think the Chair and staff and the Board as a whole need the
information and we don't have that right now.
So yes, the first step would be to direct the County Manager to go
out and to retain an external audit. If it's under 50,000, he doesn't need
to come back to us. If the fee turns out to be over 50,000, to bring that
agreement, you know, back to the Board for approval in September.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. You know, just like we
have more than one fee officer, we have more than one audit of the
constitutional officers, okay. It happens every year, it's provided to the
Board every year, it's on the agenda every year, and you approve it
Page 75
July 7, 2015
every year. Okay, every one of the constitutional officers are audited.
So I think you all know where it's going. Ifs just, you know, this
fight of the 2016 election for Clerk of the Court is what this is all
about. We're going to have these issues on the agenda every agenda
until the election is over with.
MR. BROCK: Mr. Chairman, may I comment?
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Yes.
MR. BROCK: Commissioner, the Clerk of the Circuit Court I
assure you, does not care about the stuff that we do being audited,
okay.
However, let me point out to you that you cannot go hire an
auditor to come in and audit the Clerk of the Circuit Court. You can,
however, request that the Clerk of the Circuit Court go hire an auditor
to come in and audit us and you pay for it. And I'm happy as a lark.
And I will read to you the language from the statute: The Board of
County Commissioners has the power to employ an independent
Certified Public Accountant, audit any funds, accounts or financial
records of the county and its agencies and governmental subdivisions.
Sentence two: Entities that are funded wholly or in part by the
county at the discretion of the county may be required by the county to
conduct a performance audit paid for by the county.
So you ask me to do an audit, I will go hire someone, you can pay
for it, and they will do an audit.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Mr. Brock?
MR. BROCK: Yes.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: In the backup material in my
conversations with you, you indicated in the past what you had done
was you had basically sent the county a bill for the various and sundry
services and administrative activities that you had in your office, and
that sort of discussion was the genesis of the interlocal agreement back
in time.
Page 76
July 7, 2015
MR. BROCK: That is absolutely correct.
Let's go a little bit further. We were actually in litigation over
you all not paying those bills, and this interlocal agreement was an
agreement that was created as a part of that process to avoid that.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Okay. And certainly I generally assume
that when you prepare your budget you realize exactly how you spend
this money and so on and so forth and we've recently approved your
budget. So in the interest of the commissioners here, would it be too
much trouble to ask you to just give us kind of a, you know,
restatement of how you, you know, spend the money so that the
commissioners can understand the nature of the interlocal agreement as
it stands today? I think we had some information that's kind of dated,
but would that be too much trouble? Rather than insist on an audit of
that --
MR. BROCK: I can do that.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: -- could you just tell us what your budget
consists of in some detail so the commissioners can come to grips with
it?
MR. BROCK: I can. My 2015 budget consists of 5,869--
(Cell phone ringing.)
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Sorry.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: I think Clint Eastwood just got involved
in the discussion.
MR. BROCK: I do too.
MR. KLATZKOW: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly.
MR. BROCK: The transfer from the Board consisted of
$5,869,500 which was for personnel services. Has nothing to do with
purchases, it's the payment of employees.
Then there was an amount of, let's see, how much was it, 828,600,
which was for operating expenses of which 400,000 of that almost was
for the books and the computers to operate the books, which the Board
Page 77
July 7, 2015
of County Commissioners is required by law to pay for, okay. Then
that leaves about $400,000. And I can actually break that down a little
bit further.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: I'm not asking you for it at this time. I
mean, can you --
MR. BROCK: Sure, I'll be more than happy to ask my finance
department to pull the numbers together and give --
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Just give us a summary of the various
services you provide and what your estimated cost is for those so that it
adds up and everybody can take a look at it and see.
MR. BROCK: And as you and I discussed in your office
yesterday, I don't have a problem sitting down with you at any point in
time and talking about this stuff.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Okay.
MR. BROCK: I will pull that together and sit down and have a
discussion with you with regard --
CHAIRMAN NANCE: I would suggest if we can just have that
discussion, I would like to see that before we go and engage an audit. I
mean, that's my personal -- you know, if we could start off with that,
Commissioner Hiller, I could certainly support your recommendation
for myself and the County Manager to meet with the Clerk and go over
the elements of the interlocal agreement.
But I would also like all the Commissioners to be able to
understand what the interlocal agreement consists of, what the values
are assigned, the duties and responsibilities of the Clerk, the duties and
responsibilities of the Board to the Clerk and vice versa, and then we
can have a reasonable discussion. I don't think honestly I'm prepared
to do that at this time because I don't have a full understanding of the
issue myself.
So before I engage in a conversation with Mr. Brock, which I
don't think is going to be a strained thing by any stretch of the
Page 78
July 7, 2015
imagination, I'd like to be able to understand what it is I'm talking to
him about. And I honestly can't tell you that I can do that, nor do I
expect -- you know, some of you may be more prepared on this than I
am. But I'd just like to get that information.
If Mr. Brock would be so kind as to provide that from (sic) the
Board, perhaps we can avoid spending any unnecessary money --
MR. BROCK: I don't have a problem, Commissioner.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: I have absolutely no problem with
Commissioner Hiller's recommendation to engage in the conversation.
I think it's appropriate and I will do so at the direction of the Board if
so requested.
Commissioner Taylor, then back to Commissioner Hiller.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Well, given that, I would like to
make a motion that we direct Commissioner Nance to sit down with
our County Clerk -- excuse me.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Clerk of Courts.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: -- Clerk of Courts, Mr. Brock, to
review the budget and his expenditures for 2015 or back as far as you
need to go, and that that information be made available to the
Commission.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll second that.
MR. BROCK: Commissioner, before we go any further, you
know, let me point out to you, you know, this is the audit of
CliftonLarsenAllen. Part of the required portion of
CliftonLarsenAllen's financial audit is to audit our statement of
revenues, expenses and changes and fund balance budget to actual. So
for Commissioner Hiller to say they don't audit that, if that's the case
they are not complying with their obligation under the contract.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Questions?
Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: To begin, I did speak to
Page 79
July 7, 2015
CliftonLarsenAllen, and the single audit act testing doesn't go to the
level of auditing that's required for us to have a full understanding of
how you are spending the $6 million that the Board is funding for the
services that you are providing us per the contract. And they were
clear about that. And it would have to be an agreed upon procedures
audit. A discussion doesn't validate it.
We as a Board have a duty, and the duty is we do need to have
these expenditures audited. If you were, you know, Acme Accounting
Company and if we had a contract with you, you would not agree if we
advanced $6 million to this accounting firm for accounting services, or
call it accounting and auditing services, without a preaudit, you know,
evidence of how the expenditures were being made. And you would
not agree to that vendor not being subject to a post audit.
And you're no different. You know, this section that you read
from the statute is correct. It makes it clear. And that goes to those
services that are beyond the statutory required services. Like for
example the preparation of the financial statements is something that
we have chosen to delegate to you. As you know, the ruling by the
Second DCA and the suit involving the county made it clear that the
Board has the right to decide who is going to prepare the financial
statements of the county, and we have decided to contract with you to
do that.
A discussion cannot substitute for the audit validation that is
necessary to ensure that that $6 million is being spent as we intend it to
be spent.
And so while I really do appreciate, Commissioner Nance, that
you are willing to work with the County Manager and speak to the
Clerk about amending the contract with respect to the provisions that I
highlighted, I do think that the first step is we do need to know. And I
don't think that the Clerk should be treated like other -- other than any
other vendor. You know, we can't have a separate standard for the
Page 80
July 7, 2015
Clerk to the Board with respect to the expenditure of Board funds.
The Clerk improperly has said that only he can choose who the
external auditor is. That's not true. We actually select who the
external auditor is. And the contract with the external auditor is
between the Board and the external auditor, not between the Clerk and
the external auditor.
And it would clearly be -- it would impair the independence of
that external auditor if he picks who would audit, you know, the
money that we are giving him. I think that's something that's reserved
to the Board.
So I think, you know, we have a duty, and not only do we have a
duty, we have liability if we fail that duty. There is a statutory
provision that says if for any reason we approve an illegal or I should
say an improper expense, we could be accused of malfeasance. And
that's why we rely on the pre-audit function and the audit function to
ensure the appropriateness, the properness, the correctness of these
expenditures as being legal and being expended for a valid public
purpose.
So I would like you to please think about that, and if you would
please reconsider the thought of-- and it is a problem, and the Clerk
has consistently resisted the audit of the expenditure we make to him.
And I will tell you, the external auditors did make it clear, they
don't audit it the way we need to have it audited. The way all our
expenditures -- the way all the payments, I should say, of expenditures
that this Board makes is pre-audited and then audited by the Clerk for
our benefit. So he can't do it to himself. And that's understandable.
But we've got to have someone do with respect to that six million the
same that he does to us with respect to all the other expenses.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Are you talking forensic audit; is
that what you're saying?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: It's not really a forensic audit. It's
Page 81
July 7, 2015
an agreed upon procedures audit to satisfy the objective. And the
objective is really to go in and to look at the underlying -- to do the
same thing that he does when he does his pre-audit testing and
basically look at the underlying documentation and ascertain that it's
being expended to satisfy the provisions in the contract and as per the
budget and in accordance with the law.
But someone has to do it for us. And a conversation won't satisfy
that requirement.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: If the Board will so allow me, I will meet
together with the County Manager and the Clerk, the three of us will
sit down, we will talk about these issues, we will gather information,
we'll supply that information to the Board members and I will bring it
back to an agenda item in September with some sort of a proposal for
your consideration and options.
Mr. Brock?
MR. BROCK: Mr. Chairman, couple things I cannot let pass.
One is she asked the external auditors if the single audit that they
performed encompassed that. I assure you the answer to that would be
no, because single audit applies to grants. This is not a grant. So I can
agree with her. If she asked that question, the answer would
definitively have been no.
And I can assure you at no point in time have I ever thought or
said that the external auditors are chosen by the Clerk. They are not.
There is a statutory scheme by which that is done whereby a
committee is formed, it has a statutory makeup, a recommendation is
made to this Board and this Board then makes that determination. And
I have never thought -- so I certainly can't imagine unless it was in a
total loss of mind that I would have ever made any such comment as
that because I know it's not true.
The bottom line here is, Commissioners, I don't care, I'll be more
than happy to sit and talk with Commissioner Nance. I will -- I don't
Page 82
July 7, 2015
care who looks at me. I'm not going to let you select who looks at me,
because I've already been through that one time and I know what goes
on there. But I'll be more than happy to select an auditor and in all
likelihood I would select CliftonLarsonAllen who is the county's
auditor to come in and look at it.
But as you suggested, Commissioner Nance, a logical approach
from my perspective, let's sit down and talk and see what the problem
is. If there's not a problem, we certainly don't need to be spending the
taxpayers money.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Don't you think we can arrive at
something that will meet the approval of the Board, sir? I do.
MR. BROCK: I do.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Henning, then
Commissioner Taylor.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, Commissioner Nance, I'm
glad you still meet with the Clerk, communicate with constitutional
officers to try to resolve issues. I think that's very important and I
think that's what the taxpayers want is for us to work together to
resolve issues instead of fighting each other through a third party such
as the courts.
But you know, I find it interesting. How much is your budget,
Mr. Brock? Is it six million?
MR. BROCK: 2014 it was 6 million, two-- or 2014-15 it was --
the transfer was $6,014,400.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: How much is the Sheriffs
budget? That's 150 million; is that right? 160 million?
MR. OCHS: 159 million.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, almost $160 million. We
haven't raised any questions about Sheriffs spending. You really got
to sit back and think, what is this issue really about.
MR. BROCK: Well, Commissioner, you know, the expenditure
Page 83
July 7, 2015
portion, other than personnel services is --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The transfer --
MR. BROCK: -- about a million dollars.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, but the transfer from the
Board --
MR. BROCK: That's it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- to the Clerk is six million.
MR. BROCK: Actually, it is 5,869-5, of which 4,849-7 is
personnel services. Of that there are operational expenses of 828,600,
of which the lion's share of that is the books of the county. That is
maintenance agreements on SAP and all of the computer programs that
deal with the books of the county and the computers to run it on, of
which -- let me point out, you know, I spent I think over $1 million of
trust fund money to help you all buy that. And then there's capital of
$191,000. And that's all. And the transfer.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, you know, the fee officers,
there's a transfer from our budget. It's budgeted in our budget to fund
their operation.
MR. BROCK: Every one of them.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And the Board really doesn't --
we don't approve their budget.
MR. BROCK: Nor do you approve mine.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And, you know, there's all the
constitutional officers out of there. And it just seems like it's pick on
Dwight Brock year, okay.
MR. BROCK: I mean, I'm more than willing to sit down with
Commissioner Nance and go over this stuff. And bring whoever he
wants to with him.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Yes, I would like to sit down with Clerk,
Mr. Brock, and the County Manager, discuss these issues, gather
information.
Page 84
July 7, 2015
And actually, I would suggest, Commissioner Hiller, that we
continue your item until after we gather some of this information and
provide it to the Board. And then if you wish to pursue some of these
details on the interlocal agreement, I think it would be appropriate at
that time. But I would request the Board allow me to gather
information and work together with these gentlemen to answer the
questions, inform the Board and let us go forward in an organized
fashion.
Commissioner Taylor, then Commissioner Fiala.
MR. BROCK: I will actually bring to those meetings probably
the person that has more knowledge than me with regard to those
financial affairs, and that's Crystal.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Taylor, then
Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I would like to defer to
Commissioner Fiala. I was going to call the question, but I'm
interested in her comments.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, not so much a comment. I
was just wondering, when you have the personnel that you're paying
for, does that include all of your auditors and the time and methods that
they have to use to do all of the auditing on us?
MR. BROCK: An allocation of the costs associated with those
auditors.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Is in that five million-eight?
MR. BROCK: Yes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. And what about the law--
MR. BROCK: It's in the four million-eight.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. And then the lawsuits where
you sue us --
MR. BROCK: It's not in the transfer, Commissioner.
Page 85
July 7, 2015
COMMISSIONER FIALA: It can't be from the money we give
you --
MR. BROCK: That is correct.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- because that's illegal, so where
does that money come from?
MR. BROCK: From my fees.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I see, okay.
MR. BROCK: From my other fees.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Which fees?
MR. BROCK: I think Crystal told you all that.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: She did, I just wanted to put it on
record.
MR. BROCK: You wanted to check me and see if I was going to
tell you the same thing?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, actually I knew you would say
the same thing, I just wanted it -- because it sounds --
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Maybe not. Maybe not.
MR. BROCK: I guess there's, you know, that possibility.
Anything's possible.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I just wanted to put it on the record
because --
MR. BROCK: Not a problem.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Okay, let's take motions one at a time.
There's a motion and a second on the floor, I believe, to allow me --
encourage me to meet together with the Clerk and the County Manager
to obtain information to come back to the Board with an agenda item
in September.
Is there any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Hearing none, all those in favor, signify
Page 86
July 7, 2015
by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Okay, Commissioner Hiller, would you
like to continue your item 'til after that time?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, is --
CHAIRMAN NANCE: I mean, this has got a predicate to your
item. I'm just asking to gather information so that we can --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Sure.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: -- thoughtfully consider it.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'll continue it.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: If you want to do that --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yep.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: If you would continue it and be so kind
as to bring it back after we have information, then we can --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yep.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: -- take it up.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Absolutely.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, I'm confused. Her item
says you want to include the -- well, it's one through six, payment of
services shall be reimbursed and not advanced. Wants the Clerk to
comply to our purchasing policy and so on and so forth.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Yes, sir, this item's been continued.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: But this is what she proposed
was to hire an auditor.
Page 87
July 7, 2015
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Uh-huh.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So if we continue this one, is it
one through six or is it -- or is it a new item which is hire an
independent auditor?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: What I'm going to do is do what
Commissioner Nance recommends, which is to continue the agenda
item that is --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So it is one through six.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- the original recommendation.
And then after he brings back information on -- you know, he and the
County Manager have spoken to Mr. Brock, I'll revisit the issue of the
audit and put that before the Board for a vote at a future time.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So it isn't the executive
summary, it's actually an audit.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, it's going to be a continuance
of an executive summary as recommended by Commissioner Nance.
And then if I deem it's appropriate based on the information that
Commissioner Nance and the County Manager bring back to the
Board, I will make a second executive summary that will recommend
for the appropriate type of audit of the monies that the Board provides
to the Clerk.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So it does include the audit.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Well, let's wait and see, sir. Let's do one
thing at a time. Let's try to see if we can keep it in between the lines a
little bit.
MR. BROCK: Thank you, Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Thank you, ladies and gentlemen.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: How about above the line so we
can all read it?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Commissioner Nance, do you want
to make the next motion on continuing the --
Page 88
July 7, 2015
CHAIRMAN NANCE: I'll let you make the motion if you want
to continue your item.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah, I'd like to -- I'll make a
motion to continue my item to bring it back after you do your
presentation on the information that you've gathered --
CHAIRMAN NANCE: I'll second that.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- from the County Manager.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: I'll second that.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: There's a motion and a second.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Any opposed?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: 4-1 with Commissioner Taylor in
dissent.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: And let me explain. The reason I
am opposing this is not to say that I don't recognize Commissioner
Hiller's right to do this or the properness of it. But I feel that it's too
convoluted, it's reaching for a lot of areas that I don't think have been
solidified. And until we hear from your results of what you do this
summer, and then I --
CHAIRMAN NANCE: You don't have to support it at that time,
ma'am, it will just be continued and we'll deal with it. I think that's fair
to everyone.
Mr. Ochs?
Page 89
July 7, 2015
Item #1 1 A
RESOLUTION 2015-147: ESTABLISHING PROPOSED MILLAGE
RATES AS THE MAXIMUM PROPERTY TAX RATES TO BE
LEVIED IN FY 2015/16 AND REAFFIRM THE ADVERTISED
PUBLIC HEARING DATES IN SEPTEMBER 2015 FOR THE
BUDGET APPROVAL PROCESS
MR. OCHS: Sir, that takes us now to Item 11.A. It's a
recommendation to adopt a resolution establishing proposed millage
rates as the maximum property tax rates to be levied in fiscal year
2016, and reaffirm the advertised public hearing dates in September,
2015 for the budget approval process.
And Mr. Isackson is here to present or answer questions from the
Board.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Move to approve.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Second.
There's a motion to approve and a second. Any comments,
discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Hearing none, all those in favor, signify
by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Any opposed?
(No response.)
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Good presentation, Mr. Isackson.
Page 90
July 7, 2015
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Passes unanimously.
Thank you, Mr. Isackson.
MR. ISACKSON: Thank you, Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Your best ever.
Item #11B
AWARD BID NUMBER 15-6457 "NAPLES MANOR WATER
MAIN REPLACEMENT - PHASE NO. 2 AND MPS 306 FORCE
MAIN - PHASE III," TO DOUGLAS N. HIGGINS, INC., IN THE
AMOUNT OF $2,231,395 FOR WATER AND WASTEWATER
IMPROVEMENTS UNDER PROJECT NUMBERS 70044 AND
71010 — APPROVED
MR. OCHS: 11.B is a recommendation to award bid number
15-6457. This is the Naples Manor Water Main Replacement Project
Phase 2, and the Master Pump Station 306 Force Main Phase 3 to the
responsive low bidder, Douglas N. Higgins in the amount of
$2,231,395. And Dr. Yilmez is available to present or respond to
questions.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Move to approve, but I do have
a comment.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: I will --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: There's a motion to approve and a
second.
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You know, if you take a look at
the bids, they are very, very close. So that tells me that they did take --
we got a good price, because they're trying to outbid each other, and it
was only a difference of less than $9,000 between one and two. So
Page 91
July 7, 2015
that was good to see.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Comments? Discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Hearing none, there's a motion and a
second. All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Thank you for your anonymous --
unanimous approval. Yikes, we're early in this thing here.
All right, Mr. Ochs?
Item #11C
AWARD BID NUMBER 15-4561 "MASTER PUMP STATION 306
FORCE MAIN PHASE II," TO BONNESS, INC., FOR
$1,107,858.57 UNDER FORCE MAIN TECHNICAL SUPPORT
PROJECT NUMBER 70044 - MOTION TO APPROVE AND
RECOGNIZING THE CONTRACT NUMBER REFERENCED IN
THE AGENDA SHOULD BE CONTRACT #15-6451 —APPROVED
MR. OCHS: 11.0 is a recommendation to award bid number
15-4561. This is the master pump station 306 Force Main Phase 2
project to the lowest responsive bidder, Bonness, Incorporated for
$1,107,858.57. And Dr. Yilmez again is available to present or
respond to questions --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll make a motion to approve.
Page 92
July 7, 2015
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And likewise, same way with
the other one, the bids were very, very close. Always good to see.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Nice to have many active bidders on an
activity. Very, very healthy.
Comments and discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Hearing none, all those in favor --
DR. YILMEZ: Mr. Chairman, if I might? Just one little
correction. The bid number should read 15-6451, for the record.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Okay.
MR. OCHS: I'm sorry, thank you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: We would probably notice that.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: With that correction, there's a motion
and a second.
No discussion, all those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Another unanimous approval. Thank
you, Dr. Yilmez.
MR. OCHS: Thank you, Commissioners.
Commissioners, that takes us to Item 11.B (sic), which was your
add-on item from the County Attorney's Office. And this is a
recommendation to approve and accept a proposed settlement
agreement to finally resolve all Collier County claims in the matter
regarding oil spill by the oil rig Deep Water Horizon in the Gulf of
Page 93
July 7, 2015
Mexico on April 20th, 2010, now pending in the United States District
Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: This is 12.B, sir?
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir.
MR. KLATZKOW: I'm happy to present now, but I think we're
on 11.F.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: 11.D is something different.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Yeah, 11.F.
MR. OCHS: You want to move to 11.F?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Yeah, let's go to 11.F.
Item #11F
AMENDMENT #1 TO CONTRACT #15-6433 PRODUCTION OF
THE TOURISM GUIDE TO MILES MEDIA GROUP, LLLP,
AUTHORIZE THE CHAIRMAN TO EXECUTE THE COUNTY
ATTORNEY APPROVED AMENDMENT, AND MAKE A
FINDING THAT THIS EXPENDITURE PROMOTES TOURISM -
MOTION TO APPROVE WITH MODIFICATIONS AS
PROPOSED — APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Excuse me, then. 11.F is a recommendation to
approve amendment number one to Contract #15-6433. This is the
production of the tourism guide to Miles Media Group. Authorize the
Chairman to execute the County Attorney approved amendment and
make a finding that this expenditure promotes tourism.
This item was brought forward to the regular agenda at
Commissioner Taylor's request.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: And with your indulgence,
Commission, it was brought forward because there were -- was a
mission of two areas that Mr. Wert has agreed to comply with. And I'm
Page 94
July 7, 2015
going to -- and these were the Clerk's concerns, and I'm going to allow
the Clerk to -- Crystal to explain them. And I'm sure Mr. Wert will
agree, and that's it. Mr. Wert has agreed to everything that was
brought up at the last meeting.
MS. KINZEL: Thank you, Commissioner Taylor.
Yes, we had a very productive meeting with Mr. Wert and you
and the Clerk's Office. And it appears on the revised amount that Jack
has included the revenue and the concern.
As we mentioned at the prior meetings, one of the concerns on the
agreement was the netting of revenue. So the other aspect I'm working
with Jack, we're going to be obtaining the backup and supporting
documentation to validate that revenue at the third-party vendor, and
we will work with that and be glad to report back to you successfully,
hopefully in the fall.
But to move forward, the guide, it satisfied us until we can look
further at the revenues from the prior years. But for the current year,
identifying the total cost was our request for the Board.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Mr. Wert, any comments?
MR. WERT: No, Mr. Chairman, I think we did -- as Crystal
mentioned, we did address all of the issues I believe that each of the
Board members had and that the Clerk's Office had in that, so the
revised executive summary actually put that up there just so I could
highlight that -- the added revenue that we included in the executive
summary for this item. So that is all now included and we think we're
-- hopefully we're good to go.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Good to go, thank you.
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: These publications, where are
they going to be distributed?
MR. WERT: In a number of different places, Commissioner. We
distribute them first of all to all the requests for information that we get
Page 95
July 7, 2015
through our website. We get telephone calls through our fulfillment
house. And so from that also trade shows, we go to many, many trade
shows over the year, they're distributed there as well. They're also
provided in the welcome bags to people who come here for group
meetings, to give them an idea of what all the destination has to offer.
So a number of different places.
Also in visitors centers throughout Collier County, and also at the
airports as well, including the Fort Myers International Airport. So the
guide has wide distribution throughout the U.S., and actually the UK
as well, because that becomes their guide as well and anyone else that
asks for a guide in English.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You know, my understanding
about putting together a magazine that has a lot of advertisement, or
even a newspaper, they put in advertising, they provide news, it pays
for itself. In fact, there's a profit.
MR. WERT: In some cases, yes. Not in all. Just look at the
number of magazines that are out of business today that were in
business five years ago. All of them are out of business because they
didn't generate enough revenue to stay in business. In the case of--
and if I might, Commissioner, and maybe this is a good opportunity to
explain to the Board, the advertising, it would be great if I could
charge enough for each of these ads to cover the cost. But in fact that
would not make our book at all competitive. We're in competition
with many other guides, not only in our destination but other places as
well. And our partners need to make a decision every year, do they
want to put an ad in our guide, how about Visit Florida's guide that has
an even bigger distribution obviously than we do.
So there are a number of different opportunities for our partners
to put their ad dollars, and most of them have pretty limited ad dollars.
So every year it's a struggle. We need to go out and make sure
that our ad rates are competitive. We kept them low during the
Page 96
July 7, 2015
recession, that was very important to do so. We've inched them up a
little bit in the last couple of years, but there is a limit where they just
push back and say no, I'm sorry, we're not going to advertise in that
book this year, so --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That goes back to your point is,
you know, some of the publications have gone out of the business
because they didn't charge enough. They didn't seek enough revenue
or they overpriced themselves. And --
MR. WERT: Sure, and I don't disagree.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So --
MR. WERT: I do think it's also important that we recognize that
we don't have to get advertising revenue, and there are some
destination that don't do that. Fort Myers right up the road does not
accept advertising in their guide. The Florida Keys do not. Now, the
individual Keys, they have their own guides, but for the destination of
the Keys, they don't do a visitor guide with ads in it. So there is that
possibility too.
We made this determination several years ago to save the county
money, to save us dollars that we could reinvest in additional
advertising and so forth. So the reason we got ads is to offset some of
the costs. We keep the number of ads in the guide at 40 percent or
less.
And much more than that, it becomes a coupon book and it really
is not attractive. Certainly not in keeping with our brand, so we've --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I would like to see the
contractor submit his invoice with time and material costs, how much
does it cost, okay.
MR. WERT: We will get that, absolutely. We've talked to them
and they're in agreement, and we've talked to Crystal about that. That's
the transparency that we've agreed to and they've agreed to.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Fiala?
Page 97
July 7, 2015
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Just a tiny little addition to what's
been said, no questions. But when I was in the tourism industry and
specifically the airline industry and I went to all the trade shows
around the country, and we had to have that piece in order to give out
to people. And the ads were the things that attracted them because it
was highlighting some of the major hotels or attractions. And that was
essential in trying to attract people to our area. And without that book,
you know, you become just commonplace like everybody else.
And so I applaud you for what you're doing, and I think that is so
important to bringing people here. And obviously it works, because
look at our tourism dollars that we bring in. That helps all of us save
so much money. We don't have to worry about a lot of the dredging
and everything else, and same with the beach parks, because it's taken
care of. And even the museums, it's taken care of through the TDC
funds. And so I welcome all that you have done, Jack, you've been a
wonderful asset to our community. Ever since we robbed you from
Tallahassee.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: All right, Commissioner Taylor, is there
a motion here somewhere?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Oh, I'm sorry, I thought there
was. Yes, I'd like to make that motion, that we accept the agreement or
what's before us with the modifications as stated by the clerk and also
by Mr. Wert.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And I'll second that motion.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: There's a motion and second. Any
further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Hearing none, all those in favor, signify
by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
Page 98
July 7, 2015
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Any opposed?
(No response.)
MR. WERT: Thank you, Commissioner.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: 5-0.
All right, would you all like to do one more item before we break
for lunch? We can do 11.G. Commissioner Henning, you pulled
16.D.16. Would you like to do that, Mr. Ochs?
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir, this is --
CHAIRMAN NANCE: You want to break for lunch, sir, or you
want to do one more?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Which one?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Yeah what?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The earlier.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: You'd like to break for lunch?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Okay, we're going to break for lunch for
one hour. We're going to come back at 12:59.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Could I come back at 1:00?
CHAIRMAN NANCE: 1:00.
(Recess.)
MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, you have a live mic.
Item #7
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS NOT ON THE
CURRENT OR FUTURE AGENDA
Page 99
July 7, 2015
CHAIRMAN NANCE: All right. Mr. Ochs, I think we're at
public comment at this moment.
MR. OCHS: That's correct.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Mr. Miller.
MR. MILLER: Mr. Chairman, we have three registered speakers
for public comment. Your first speaker is Deborah Greenfield, and
she'll be followed by Chris Hoganson.
MS. GREENFIELD: Commissioners, my name is Deborah
Greenfield. I'm president of Greenfield Advertising Group.
For six years I've been doing business with Collier County Solid
Waste, never had any issues. And about two months ago I was asked
to fill out an unusual form for direct deposit for paying our invoices,
which I did. I followed up 30 days later and told that my payments for
my vendors was scheduled for April 30th and June 10th. June 10th
came and went, no payments for direct deposit hit my account. And it
wasn't until last week when I found out about the lawsuits and
everything that was going on with Collier County government and the
Clerk of Courts, and I'm at a loss at what to do.
I was on the phone all last week with different departments, I --
legal pages of notes and all the people I spoke with. I have two
purchase orders that I need paid. They directly affect small people.
This is not government, these are small people. These are single
mothers with kids who are not going to get their commissions because
this has all been held up right here with everybody here.
I have a purchase order, purchase order number 4500158318 and
purchase order 4500158073. They amount to about $24,000, give or
take. Actually it's a little bit more than that. But right now I have
invoices that are in 90 days. And I didn't know until last week that
these were not going to be paid.
And I also got an email this morning bringing to my attention that
the Commission is going on hiatus for two months, which means that
Page 100
July 7, 2015
this could be tabled even longer.
So I am here, I've been here since 9:00 this morning, you've seen
me sitting in the back, waiting for an opportunity to address you.
Because I -- I'm not a government person, I'm a little business owner. I
don't know who to speak to to get these invoices paid. And I've been
strung along now for two months thinking that everything was fine,
right up until last week.
So I got an email this afternoon while I was sitting here from one
of my vendors asking for payment. He's going to lose his commission
if I don't get him paid. And I don't have the funds to forward to these
people. So I'll eventually get paid when this all straightens out. The
stations -- I buy television and radio on your behalf. They'll eventually
get paid. But it's the little people this trickles down to.
We're heading into the summer, electric bills go through the roof
We have -- like I mentioned, I mean, there are single mothers trying to
raise kids, they're not going to be able to pay their rent, they're not
going to be able to make their car payments, they're not going to be
able to pay their electric bills or buy food. This trickles down and it
affects everybody.
So I am pleading with you today to please figure out a way to get
my purchase orders paid. We took this business in good faith and after
six years of doing business with Collier County government and never
having an issue, all of a sudden this popped out of nowhere last week.
So I need your help.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Thank you.
Commissioner Henning, then Commissioner Hiller, then
Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Do you have a contract, ma'am?
Do you have a contract with the Board of Commissioners?
MS. GREENFIELD: I reply to RFPs. And it's my understanding
that anything under $3,000 there was not a formal RFP offered. And I
Page 101
July 7, 2015
have two con-- two I call it loosely a contract. We don't have formal
paperwork. I submit schedules for the stations and I get approval from
the department.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You know, why don't you
submit -- give me all the stuff that you have and I'll put it on the next
agenda for payment.
MS. GREENFIELD: And when would that be, sir?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It will be in September.
MS. GREENFIELD: Exactly. That's 60 days from now --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And you --
MS. GREENFIELD: -- and I have invoices in 90 days currently.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. And you just heard about
this issue --
MS. GREENFIELD: I just heard about this issue last week. And
I was on the phone just about every day. Crystal's aware of it. I started
with the Solid Waste Department and just started making phone calls
and asking questions and I got referral after referral after referral.
And again, you know, when I first initiated where the payments
were coming from, I was told that payments were scheduled to hit my
account on April 30th and June 10th. And when June -- April 30th
came and went and I didn't think a whole lot of it and then when June
10th came and went, then I got concerned.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, again, if you want to give
me those, I'll be happy to put that on the agenda.
MS. GREENFIELD: It's not going to help.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Hiller, then
Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Don't leave yet.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Wait, hang on. We're still
addressing your concern.
I'm very sorry to hear what's happening to you. And you are one
Page 102
July 7, 2015
of many victims of what the Clerk has done for the first time. He for
the past 15 years has been paying invoices such as yours in the manner
prescribed by our ordinance and then all of a sudden he has decided
that he will not pre-audit these invoices. And we approve them for
payment subject to his pre-audit.
So right now there are several issues. The first is the fact that you
submitted these invoices. There is a law that governs how he is
supposed to deal with them and he is choosing not to respect that law,
which is why you are falling victim as you are.
And I really feel for you, because it's not only you. I mean, there
are all these other businesses that are similarly situated that are
suffering because of what he is doing. And it's a really big problem.
He has sued our County Manager, he has sued our purchasing director.
And what the county decided to do at the last minute -- not at the last
minute but -- at the last meeting to help vendors like you is the county
is joining the lawsuit that is ongoing, and they are going to -- Jeff, can
you clarify for me your -- what you're asking for and where we are in
the process on that?
MR. KLATZKOW: We're in the process of trying to get closure
on this issue. Trying to get at least the court to order there be a status
quo until the full issue is heard. And by status quo I mean that
payment of invoices would continue as has been historically done.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And so basically -- and that is
going to happen. They're just waiting for a date to have the judge hear
this. And hopefully the judge will understand the severity of the
situation, will respect the current law, will direct the Clerk to do what
he has done which is to pre-audit and then move it forward for
payment. And that would happen ahead of that next board meeting
that Commissioner Henning was referring to.
So I really hope that the court does the right thing by you and all
the other vendors out there and provides you with the relief you
Page 103
July 7, 2015
deserve.
And there's no reason why he's doing what he's doing. I mean,
really, conceivably -- and, you know, Commissioner Henning brings
this up. It for all intents and purposes appears to be political on his
part. And that's a real problem, because you're a victim of this
situation.
But I do want you to know that the County Attorney's Office as
well as the attorneys representing the County Manager and the
attorneys representing the purchasing agent for the county are all doing
everything they can to resolve this situation and to help people like
you.
So if I may make a suggestion, stay in touch with the County
Manager and he'll keep you apprised of where they are in the process,
and as soon as there's resolution inform you of that.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I have a question, please.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And Jeff, is winning an RFP a form
of a contract?
MR. KLATZKOW: A purchase order is a form of a contract, so
yes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. And she won the RFP, right?
MS. GREENFIELD: Then yes I do, I have two current contracts
with the government.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So I would think that that's already a
contract. And if it is, then I don't see why we can't -- we've had a
couple other walk-on items today, why can't we approve a walk-on
audit?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Because he has to pre-audit it.
That's what the whole lawsuit is about.
MS. GREENFIELD: They've been audited.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, that's not true.
Page 104
July 7, 2015
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, he hasn't audited them. He has
not audited those.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Let's try and get this done. So let's
try and get this thing done. So --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, no, can I make a suggestion?
That that would be inappropriate in light of the litigation --
THE COURT REPORTER: Could you please get closer to the
mic.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I said it would be inappropriate for
you to take the action you're proposing in light of our law and in light
of the litigation.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm willing to --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Commissioner Fiala --
MS. GREENFIELD: Could I make a comment, please?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, everybody's trying to make a
comment at the same time.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Fiala, go ahead, you have
the floor.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Your comment is, ma'am?
MS. GREENFIELD: My comment is last week when all this
came under question, every single vendor invoice I had was sent to
Crystal's office. It was all audited. There were a couple of questions;
they were addressed. And I spoke with Robin in your office and she
said as long as the commissioners approved it she would pay it today.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, that's very -- hang on a
second. That's not what's going on.
Can you -- Leo, can you verify whether or not these have been
pre-audited? Because that's --
MR. OCHS: Commissioner, my understanding is that anything
that's pre-audited is brought forward on your disbursement report. I
Page 105
July 7, 2015
confirmed that this morning with regard to the disbursements reports
on today's agenda --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right.
MR. OCHS: -- and Ms. Kinzel confirmed that everything on
there was pre-audited by the Clerk. If they have pre-audited invoices
that are ready to come to the Board and are being withheld for some
reason, then I think the Board --
MS. KINZEL: Perhaps I can clarify. Mr. Chairman?
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Go ahead.
MS. KINZEL: For the record, Crystal Kinzel.
Part of our pre-audit function, as we have routinely repeated, is
that this Board has made an approval of the invoice or the expenditure.
Primarily the expenditure, which should occur before you even have an
invoice. But the timing. We have audited, as Debbie's just indicated,
everything except we do not have an approval by this Board.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And that's why --
MS. KINZEL: That is why it's not on the disbursement list. The
things that are on the disbursement list we were able to validate some
method of Board approval on the item in addition to our other pre-
audit or audit of invoices.
So the reason it's not appearing is because we cannot link it to an
approval by the Board. And that's been our consistent position and it's
been reported for the last three months that these items could come to
the Board and be approved by this Board and the Clerk will have an
ability to pay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So an RFP in this case is not a
contract.
MS. GREENFIELD: It is a contract.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, I know it is, that's what we just
heard. But Crystal is saying no.
MS. KINZEL: No, Commissioner, that's not what I'm saying at
Page 106
July 7, 2015
all. A request for proposal is actually a solicitation in which the
vendor responds. Then the county purchasing department should issue
purchase orders. There's ample opportunity between all of those before
they even acquire her services to bring those items to the Board of
County Commissioners for approval prior to the expenditure being
made.
The Board then makes a validation of those expenditures as valid,
they submit their invoice, we audit the invoice and we prepare it for
disbursement. That's how it should work.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And what you've just said is
incorrect. Because that's not the law nor is that how it has taken place.
And for you to suggest that we have to approve and then you're going
to audit the invoice? You just said you audited the invoices.
MS. KINZEL: No, Commissioner, we audited for everything
except we were unable to validate the Board having approved the
items. And this has been consistent. And I'm not going to argue the
law, that's obviously in the courts. But I don't want a misperception of
what is or isn't done. It's been consistent in our conversation.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: And so we have -- oh. And so we
have time. I think we will have time. We will have time to review
those expenditures.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: But she doesn't have time.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: We have the time -- well, we'll
see how we go today. But we are meeting at 5:00, so I dare say that
we will have time before this meeting tonight is adjourned.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You mean to take my idea up of
have a walk-on item?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So it's going to come on as a
pre-audited expenditure fully audited. Except for the -- I'm just telling
you, it has to be fully audited. We from --
Page 107
July 7, 2015
MS. KINZEL: No, Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- zero to $100 million will not
approve expenditures that have not been fully pre-audited. And after
they are pre-audited they come to us for a declaration that they serve a
valid public purpose and that we authorize payment. It doesn't get
approved by us and then go back to you for additional audit.
MS. KINZEL: Commissioner, I understand --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Commissioner?
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Hold on one second, let me ask one
question.
How -- Mr. Ochs, are you aware of how many items are enjoying
this same status?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Almost 300 the last meeting.
MR. OCHS: Sir, I don't know --
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Do you have an estimate of how many
invoices are in this same situation?
MR. OCHS: There's about $800,000 worth of-- I don't know
how many -- what the number is, but I think that's the dollar amount of
these expenditures that have not been presented. Only because of the
position that's been taken in the litigation. Which may be consistent
for the last 60 days, but hasn't been for the last 15 years, as I view it.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Okay, so what we're saying is a fix as
being suggested by the Clerk is we walk all these individual items on
our agenda? I don't think that's going to be possible.
MR. OCHS: Once you approve all of the purchase action in
addition to approving the expenditure.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: It's not possible. And then have
him audit it. It's not possible.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: That's not going to be possible.
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I make a motion we add this
Page 108
July 7, 2015
item on today's agenda for payment. But if you bring those to me, I'll
have a copy of it and we'll give it to the other Commissioners. That's
my motion.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Second.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: There's a motion and a second.
Any comment?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Let's hear from the -- from the
attorney or the County Manager or something, just to get their
comments on it?
MR. KLATZKOW: It's the pleasure of the Board.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: It's not the pleasure of the Board.
It's the law. We have a law that dictates how this is supposed to
happen and how it always has happened, and to sit here and say it's the
pleasure of the Board to violate its own ordinance is not an option.
MR. KLATZKOW: Ma'am, you approve some agreements,
some agreements are done administratively. If it's the pleasure of the
Board to hear this one and approve it because of your public speaker,
that's the Board's prerogative.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Any other comments?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: We have a motion and a second. All
those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: All those opposed.
Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I didn't vote, you're right. I'm trying
to figure out what the right thing to do is. I want to pay her. Because I
feel these should be paid. And I think we can do this today.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And what about the other 800,000?
Page 109
July 7, 2015
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well that's the problem. There's my
-- and that's why I asked for Leo's comments.
MR. OCHS: My comment is that if you're going to make an
exception for this one, then you may as well line up the hundred
vendors that are waiting. And that is --
CHAIRMAN NANCE: It's not going to solve it.
MR. OCHS: -- contrary to your policy and your ordinance. And
I don't know why you would go contrary to your ordinance.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: But isn't your argument
self-serving, sir, because you are in litigation with the Clerk? I don't
think you should be opining on it. And I'm not saying that
disrespectfully.
MR. OCHS: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I really am not saying it
disrespectfully.
MR. OCHS: I know that.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I asked for it.
MR. OCHS: It's not self-serving because it's your law and it's
your ordinance, it's not mine. I'm just asking you to follow your own
ordinance.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: It's the currently adopted policy of this
Board --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And if I set a precedent here then
we'll have a problem --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: It's not the law.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- and it will suffocate us. I
understand what you're saying.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: It is not the law.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: So you're voting nay?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Okay, the motion fails 2-3.
Page 110
July 7, 2015
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: It's not going to happen today.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And I want the Clerk to preaudit it
and bring it to the Board for a determination of valid public purpose
and approval of payment as prescribed by our ordinance.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: We are familiar of where we are in this
argument.
Let's go to the next public speaker, please, Mr. Miller.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Chris Hogenson. He'll be
followed by Anthony Fortino.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Terrible, terrible, terrible. Call in
a mediator.
MR. HOGENSON: Good afternoon. Welcome. Welcome me.
Nice to see you this afternoon. A couple --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: What is your name?
MR. HOGENSON: -- very similar arguments. I have a --
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Tell us your name again, please, sir?
MR. HOGENSON: Chris Hogenson. My company name is
Entertainment Source.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Thank you.
MR. HOGENSON: We've been doing business with the county
for over 15 years, a long, long time. Every payment that we've ever
had in the past has been through a purchase order. We've never had a
written contract. I was told long ago that the Collier County Board of
County Commissioners will not sign a contract, that POs are the only
way to go.
I have many, many invoices that have not been paid also, like the
last person. What we are doing is we're doing the summer camp
programs for the Collier County kids. We're giving them inflatable
games, disc jockey, karaoke, things of that matter.
I have 14 upcoming dates, five this week, that we're not being
paid on anything. And I don't know if I should be delivering these
Page 111
July 7, 2015
products and have to wait again until September until you guys are
able to pay or -- I need some direction on them where I should go. I
mean, it's really the children that are going to suffer for this whole
problem here. Does that matter? I'm wondering.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Sir, it does matter. It's the nature of the
argument that is currently in the court system. And I personally would
love to take action on your item, but if we begin to do that, we're
obligated to handle literally hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of
items in a way that's a policy that hasn't been adopted by the board.
The Clerk would like that. That is what -- the Clerk's aim is to
have us do this. And that is the nature of the litigation that's taking
place.
So at this time unfortunately I don't think we can do that. We're
just -- we're in the midst of a court procedure. You know, I personally
asked the Clerk to carry on business as he has the previous 15 years
until this can be resolved. And our County Attorney is seeking an
injunction to maintain that status quo until that -- this can be resolved.
And unfortunately you are caught in the middle. To my great chagrin,
actually.
MR. HOGENSON: Not just me. I mean, here we are with these
summer camps, all of the kids' parents have paid $66 a week for their
summer camps to have events going on. We have been contracted
with a purchase order to provide these and then we're not being paid
for them. And we don't know because of the conflict if we are going to
be paid on these.
So what I'm going to have to do is cancel every event that we
have scheduled. And the kids are really going to suffer.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: There is --
MR. HOGENSON: Also us. I mean, we're a small business, the
money that's owed to us right now makes a big difference.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Sir, I understand. But this Board cannot
Page 112
July 7, 2015
make the Clerk do his job. The Clerk has decided after 15 years he's
apparently had a sudden attack of conscience and he doesn't want to do
that and he wants to enga-- you know, he wants to use you as a
mechanism to try to force the Board to do something that's in litigation,
at his initiation. So --
MR. HOGENSON: He's elected, correct?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: He is.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: He's elected.
MR. HOGENSON: So I don't understand how this is helping him
with all the --
CHAIRMAN NANCE: I don't either, sir, but it's by his choice.
And I apologize to you. As Chair, you know, I just -- I don't have the
mechanism to fix it without causing this whole thing to blow up into a
nightmare over the summer.
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Sir, yeah, I apologize.
Commissioner Taylor and myself would like to see you get paid.
However, we don't have a majority; it's become a political argument in
the court. You know, some believe that staff has the ability to make
expenditures, some believe that only elected officials have that
obligation.
The problem is you're not going to get paid today --
MR. HOGENSON: All right, I had another point here. When I
read the complaint, or the argument, it was companies that were
invoicing overs $50,000 that he was worried about?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, under.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Under.
MR. HOGENSON: Oh, under. Okay, I misread that then. Okay.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Hiller?
MR. HOGENSON: That's definitely where we fall in, so --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Commissioner Nance, what you
Page 113
July 7, 2015
said was on point. And I echo how you feel and your conclusions.
The Clerk by his actions is hurting this community. He is hurting
the children, he is hurting the vendors, he is hurting the families that
rely on the vendors' earnings, and it's reprehensible. It's
unconscionable. And to what end, I don't know. But I will tell you, it
is completely against the law.
And the Clerk cannot tell the Board what to do. Just like we can't
tell him. However, he has a statutory duty to pre-audit. And with
whatever his conclusions are, he must advance that pre-audited invoice
to the Board. And with that the Board, based on our law and based on
statute, will make a determination if there is a valid public purpose
served. And we authorize payment. He does not authorize payment.
The spending authority, the discretion with respect to spending is
the Board's. And the Board has retained that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's what I said.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And the Board will only approve
payment after the full pre-audit is done. And then it comes to the
Board and we approve it. And he's not pre-auditing. He's withholding
your invoices.
MR. HOGENSON: With that said, the purchase orders that I
have received for the upcoming events, what would you think? I
mean, since we have that and that is a valid contract, should I still
deliver?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Here's what I --
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Excuse me, Commissioner Hiller, let me
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Sure, go ahead.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: -- interrupt you one time.
Sir, I'm the current Chairman of the Board. I have to sign on
behalf of the Board.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: You do.
Page 114
July 7, 2015
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Our staff is already authorized under our
policy -- my signature is already on your check.
MR. HOGENSON: Okay.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Okay? What is lacking is the attestment
(sic) and the approval of the Clerk. We've already made that approval.
Our policy has approved you for payment. My signature is on it.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: It is not.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Sure, it is. It's on it. We have agreed, our
policy says to pay this man. My signature is as good as on it. The
Clerk is not following through and doing his job to get you the
payment. If the Clerk approves your payment, you'll get it. We've
already -- our policy already calls for you to be paid. I agree with it.
MR. HOGENSON: So the percentage of chance of getting paid
on the upcoming events is?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Good.
MR. HOGENSON: Good?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: If I could have the floor.
MR. HOGENSON: Is there like a number good?
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We are going to go on break, but
the first meeting in September, if you get together with me prior to
that, I'll put it on the agenda.
MR. HOGENSON: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay?
Now, the misperception that, you know, staff members hold
checkbooks for the Chairman to sign is not true. The constitution,
Florida Constitution, Article 5, if anybody wants to read it, clearly
states the Clerk's obligations. And he holds all funds of the county
board. Not staff, not commissioner, it is the Clerk. It's the law. Some
people just don't want to abide by the law.
But I'll help you out. If you want to get together, I'll get it on the
Page 115
July 7, 2015
agenda and we'll see if the majority of the Board wants to pay you.
MR. HOGENSON: Hopefully we can wait that long. September,
my business may be out of business by then. You know, it's a lot of
money for us. It's our summer money. It's our summer funds. It's our
mortgage payments, my car payments. Every payment is being held
up by this fight for power. And it's not right for the vendors to have to
go through this.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I agree.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Fiala, then back to
Commissioner Hiller.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And you're right, you're absolutely
right. We set a policy years ago. We, the County Commissioners, set
a policy that anything between $3,000 and $50,000 we give the
authority to the County Manager to get the checks paid. That's how it's
been. In fact, that's how it is in all other 66 counties. We -- all 67
counties have been operating under that same premise for as long as I
can remember, and I've been here 15 years.
And then all of a sudden now the Clerk is saying no, each and
every one has to come back to the Board for approval. Even though
our approval is -- because we're gone for months in the summer or
around Christmastime there's a month, and we've asked the County
Manager to take over that responsibility and get those checks paid so
nobody has to go without. And all of a sudden now he's -- it's
interpretation is what it is. He's interpreting one way, we're still
interpreting the way every other county in the State of Florida is
interpreting and the way our policy had stated and he's abided by all
these years.
And I'm sorry you're getting caught in this. I so want to pay you,
I really do.
MR. HOGENSON: I'm just worried about the upcoming events,
because I think we'll just cancel them. I mean, all the kids that have
Page 116
July 7, 2015
paid for their summer camp money aren't going to be able to enjoy it.
And I think they're actually on the short side of this.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And -- can I say something?
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Hiller.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And what I would say is it's the
Clerk's fault bottom line. He has a duty by law to pre-audit and to
advance those pre-audited invoices to us. He has a duty to get it all
done so payment can be made within what is it, 45 days, is that's the
Prompt Payment Act? And he is failing to do that. We have a law that
has been the law for -- it has been a policy and is now law for a very
long time. He has unilaterally arbitrarily decided to make a change
that is directly hurting the children of our community, that is directly
hurting the vendors of our community, and we as a Board have taken
the stand that we will fight it and we will do what is right by you and
get it done.
And we have a County Attorney and we have the attorneys for the
County Manager and for the purchasing agent who are asking for a
hearing as quickly as possible in front of a judge, asking that the Clerk
be held to the standard that has been the county standard for the past 15
years. Just like you said, you've been doing business with the county
and this never happened before. This never happened before because
the law was what it was then and it is the same thing now.
And I'm very, very sorry that you're a victim. And we are doing
everything we can through the legal process to get you paid as quickly
as possible, but we have to follow the law.
Our County Manager and our purchasing agent are vested with
the administrative ability to make the purchase. The payment of that
purchase is reserved to us after the pre-audit. And that's when we
approve it for payment. But the Clerk must pre-audit it before we do
that.
MR. HOGENSON: So the upcoming purchase orders, yes, no? I
Page 117
July 7, 2015
should deliver --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I think you should go ahead and
deliver it. Because the issue is it's going to go before the judge and,
God willing, the judge is going to say this is the law. It is, we have a
purchasing ordinance that dictates this. We're not being arbitrary,
we're not changing how the process is handled for one vendor over
another. We are being consistent with the past, we are being consistent
with our law and we're praying for the court to help you to help our
community.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Until a final resolution.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And with the Court's blessing, the
status quo will be maintained and the Clerk will have to proceed as he
has always done which is you will submit your POs, you know, with
proof of what you've done to him for the pre-audit, they will come to
the Board, and the Board is the last approval. We say it serves a valid
public purpose, it's approved for payment, we did it this morning with
a whole slew of pre-audited invoices.
And whether it's zero to 50 or 50 to $100 million, the process at
the end of the day to approve for payment is the same.
MR. HOGENSON: Okay. Thank you for your time.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Taylor?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Why don't you stay there for a
second. You asked a question, I don't think it was answered.
If these invoices that you have are submitted to Commissioner
Henning, and if he puts it on the agenda in September and if it's
approved by the Commission -- you know, I'm going if okay -- how
long does it take for this gentleman to get paid?
MS. KINZEL: We run check runs every week and we can do
off-cycle check runs upon approval.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: A day or the next day, sir. So you
Page 118
July 7, 2015
asked a question, what should you do. You will be guaranteed,
assuming we have a majority to do this, to be paid the day of or the day
after the meeting, the first meeting in September.
MR. HOGENSON: Okay.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: So that gives you a framework
from which to make your decisions. And I'm in tears.
MR. HOGENSON: Thank you very much.
MR. MILLER: Mr. Chairman, your final speaker on public
comment is Anthony Fortino.
MR. FORTINO: Good afternoon, Commissioners. My name is
Anthony Fortino. As you are aware, my company, Fortino
Construction and Development has a contract to purchase 5.27 acres
with the county located in the Gateway Triangle property.
I'm here today to respectfully request an extension to be closed --
we have a closing coming up on Monday, the 13th. I'd like to request
an extension for any time between July up to July 28th of this month.
We've been in discussions and interacting and getting documents
back and forth with county staff. They don't seem to have a problem
with that. We do have the funds in place to close and so that's what I'm
here to appear before you today to respectfully request that.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Did you request this to get put on the
agenda, Mr. Fortino?
MR. FORTINO: No, I have not.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Why not?
CHAIRMAN NANCE: How can we deal -- we can't deal with
this under public comment.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: No.
MR. FORTINO: I was told that I can come and hopefully speak
and request to see if you would provide a vote on if we would extend it
because you're going on hiatus and we have a closing coming up.
So again, we would close on or before the 28th of the month.
Page 119
July 7, 2015
Because the closing is happening on the 13th. It's actually on a
Sunday, the 12th, but it gets moved to the 13th of July.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Mr. Klatzkow?
MR. KLATZKOW: I learned about this just moments before this
started. And I was able to get the contract. The contract provides that
the closing should have taken place six months after the purchase of
the signed agreement. That was 11/13/2014. It gave staff the ability to
extend for 60 days. That day is July 13th.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: So he legally has between now and July
13th?
MR. KLATZKOW: To close.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: And you can't do that?
MR. FORTINO: Again, I respectfully request to see if we can
extend it for a few more days or another two weeks, whatever is -- on
or before the 28th.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Hiller, I don't think we
can do this, but --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: We can't. I mean, it's -- we're not
in a position to do it. I mean, it was very clear by contract what the
period was for that extension. We don't have the contract in front of
us, this -- you know, we haven't had the opportunity to talk to staff as
to why you want an extension and review it and determine if there's
reasonableness. You say you have funding in place, then you should
be able to close on the 13th.
MR. FORTINO: Yes, you're right, Commissioner, and we do
have funding in place and it's basically all administrative on our side.
Because I'm doing -- I'm adhering completely with my contract with
you, I'm adhering to all those terms and obligations. I'm not going back
on anything except for all I can say is that I need -- it's administrative.
I've identified partners and, you know, we're looking at not only the
closing of the land purchase but it's also on the construction financing,
Page 120
July 7, 2015
we're looking beyond that. You know, we're looking at --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: You don't have your financing in
place.
MR. FORTINO: We don't have all the fin-- we have the
financing for the construct-- for the purchase of the property.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: But you don't have the financing
for the construction in place.
MR. FORTINO: We will have that in place. It's all administrative
right now. That's why I'm requesting that extension on or before the
28th.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Mr. Fortino, the process would have
been to go to staff and ask them to put an agenda item on here with the
backup for our consideration before -- when you come up here just to
make a comment and you ask us to make a decision, these board
members have no information by which to make a determination
whether they support your request or not. That's the dilemma we're in.
MR. FORTINO: We were interacting with county staff, you
know, providing all the documentation to get the project closed -- the
purchase closed, and they don't seem to have a problem with extending
it. Because, you know, title has been done, all of the due diligence
items has been completed. It's just a matter of, you know, a couple of
days or -- again, we're not looking to extend it more. We want to get
this thing closed so we can move forward and, you know, get our site
plans in with the County Manager and move forward.
I mean, I'm not looking to -- it's not a delay tactic in any way,
please don't take it that way. I've worked long and hard on this project.
And I'm not requesting three months here, I'm requesting a week or
two. That's all I'm requesting.
MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, I learned about this late yesterday
afternoon for the first time and I was unwilling to walk an item on like
this. And I imagine that's why Mr. Fortino's in front of you in this
Page 121
July 7, 2015
forum.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: So I'm sorry, County Manager
Ochs, you didn't suggest that he come before us under public
comment?
MR. OCHS: No, the question was, you know, could we walk an
item on or put an item on and I had said no, I'm not going to do that.
Follow-on question was well, is there any opportunity to address the
Board? And quite honestly the only one is the public comment section
of the agenda. Anybody can address the Board on any matter
technically under public comment. So that's --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: But it's not an agenda item that has
been noticed, we --
MR. OCHS: Commissioner, I agree with you. Look, I'm not
supporting this and didn't advocate for it.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Mr. Fortino, the Commissioners here
simply don't have any information provided by you to make a
determination. That's why we have to have an agenda item. We can't
just come up here and wing it. We have an agreement with you that,
you know, I presume we signed it, you signed it, everybody agreed to
it. So now you're coming here at the 11th and a half hour and asking
us to make a determination to do something else. So I hope you
understand, you need to do what you said you were going to do.
MR. FORTINO: Commissioner, I have every intention of doing
what I'm doing. And again, I will state for the record, I'm adhering to
our agreement, I simply am respectfully requesting a small extension.
It's not a delay tactic. The agreement does not change. And it's
interaction. My attorneys, talking with county staff, didn't see that it
was going to be an issue. However, I was instructed to come and say
hey, listen, since you're going on a long vacation, this was going to be
your last meeting until September, this was the time to, you know,
come in and address this.
Page 122
July 7, 2015
MR. KLATZKOW: Your leaving has nothing to do with this.
His closing date's less than a week from now.
MR. FORTINO: That's correct, yeah. And again, I'm adhering to
the contract, I'm not delaying anything. I mean, if I wanted to delay, I
wouldn't even be here. I would say look, I'm out of the contract and
that's it.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Now wait a second, you're telling me
you don't want to delay, but you're telling me you want to delay. So
what does that mean?
MR. FORTINO: Well, what I'm trying to explain to you,
everything is with the attorneys, and they needed a little bit of
additional time to get everything done. That's all I'm saying.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: They knew the terms of the
agreement.
MR. FORTINO: I understand. And again, I apologize for a little
bit of delay that I'm requesting.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Hold your attorneys responsible.
MR. FORTINO: Well, I'm looking to close the deal. I have a
vision that I fully intend to go through. And I'm not asking for, you
know, something that's, you know, outlandish either. I'm just asking
for a few more days just to get administrative --
CHAIRMAN NANCE: I'm just telling you, sir, that I can't ask
my Commissioners to vote on something that they have no knowledge
of. So what you need to do is you need to turn the lights on and get
your attorneys to go to work and get the thing closed by the date.
MR. FORTINO: Okay. I appreciate it. Thank you,
Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Thank you.
Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: You said it.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: All right.
Page 123
July 7, 2015
Mr. Miller?
MR. MILLER: Well, yes, sir, that is --
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Anything else exciting?
MR. MILLER: -- all your public comments.
I'm just waiting to see what's next.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Me too.
Mr. Ochs?
Item #9F
RECORDING THE FINAL PLAT OF LEGACY ESTATES,
(APPLICATION NUMBER 20140001803) APPROVAL OF THE
STANDARD FORM CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE
AGREEMENT AND APPROVAL OF THE AMOUNT OF THE
PERFORMANCE SECURITY. [COMPANION TO ITEM #11D.] —
APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir.
Commissioners, what's next is your 1 :30 p.m. time certain. It's
Item 9.F on your agenda. This item was continued from your June
23rd, BCC meeting. It requires ex parte disclosure to be provided and
participants to be sworn.
This is a recommendation to approve for recording the final plat
of Legacy Estates, an approval of the standard form construction and
maintenance agreement and approval of the amount of the
performance security. There also is as companion item, 11.D, that will
be heard immediately following this item.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Okay, we will open the public hearing at
this time and we will call for ex parte disclosure.
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Nothing additional.
Page 124
July 7, 2015
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: The only thing that I have from
previously is I spoke to staff again.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, under correspondence -- oh, on
9.F I do have disclosures. Under correspondence, I received a letter
and an email from Elizabeth Nelson and also I spoke with staff on this
item.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Taylor?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Discussions with staff. No
correspondence.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: I have received a letter from Dr. Nelson
and also had meetings with staff.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I want to correct mine. That's true,
we've had communication, because it was a letter to the BCC.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Yes.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: If that's the case, I didn't read it,
so I need to declare it too. Sorry.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Will all those planning on testifying,
please rise to be sworn in by the court reporter.
(All speakers were duly sworn.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: All right, who is going to present?
MR. URBANCIC: I will, Mr. Chairman. Greg Urbancic,
Coleman, Yovanovich and Koester for the petitioner this matter.
I'm pleased to report that we're in front of you today under
different circumstances than we were at the last meeting. We've had
the opportunity to have our developer representatives meet with the
neighbors in a series of meetings, and I'd like to commend your staff in
helping coordinate those and participate in those.
Mr. French, Mr. McClean, Mr. Holesworth, Mr. McCannon, I'm
sure I'm probably leaving some out, but we were successful through
Page 125
July 7, 2015
those meetings in reaching what we termed a cooperation agreement
with the immediate adjacent neighbors.
We're waiting on one signature to come through by email, but I'm
pleased to report that we've agreed on a set of terms which we think
are beneficial for the entire community and that particular area
involving landscape, some monuments and things like that.
So our proposal today is the same as it was, but this agreement
suggests that the neighbors will give us easements on their side and we
will file for an insubstantial change and straighten out the road and
then do some repaving when it's gone and I think betterment for the
entire area there.
So I'm happy to answer any questions, but I'd like to also thank
Dr. Nelson, Mr. and Mrs. Smith and Mr. and Mrs. Stressenreuter, who
are the immediate adjacent neighbors, for their participation and
assistance in this.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Wonderful. So I look forward to -- we're
going to hear from Commissioner Hiller, then we're going to go to the
public speakers. I'm delighted that people are working together.
Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I would agree.
Just to confirm, you will not be applying for the right-of-way
permit with respect to the public road, that the public road is going to
stay -- the public portion of the road is going to stay as is, and then you
are going to work with your neighbors on getting easements for the
private portion of the road. And that in exchange you're providing
these improvements so it works for the both of you.
MR. URBANCIC: That's correct. At the end of the day that road
will be straight, as it is today.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Wonderful.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's great. Well, I want to wait
Page 126
July 7, 2015
to hear the public speakers, but I will tentatively make a motion to
approve, subject to what they have to say.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'll second it.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Mr. Miller?
MR. MILLER: Mr. Chairman, two public speakers registered for
Item 9.F. Beth Nelson will be followed by Steve Stressenreuter.
MS. NELSON: Do I have to tap this to go?
MR. MILLER: No.
MS. NELSON: I just wanted to say thank you. We got off to a
rocky start but a lot of prayer went into this and our prayers were really
answered. I'm just -- and I want to thank you for your gift of time to
work this out. That's basically all I have to say.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Wonderful. Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Steve Stressenreuter.
MR. STRESSENREUTER: For the record, Steve Stressenreuter.
Yeah, Mrs. Hiller, I personally wanted to thank you just to take
the time. I really felt like you were diligent and understanding, you
know, the little guy who always feels like we're left out. And for the
Commissioners to take the time. I know it was a quick, it's a two-week
turnaround and we're kind of at that handshake arrangement now. But
again, I just wanted to thank you for that effort.
And I think, Mr. Dresher's just a great guy and I think we're going
to move forward.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Wow, thank you. And thank you
to the Board for -- remember, it's always us.
MR. STRESSENREUTER: I respect that. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Thank you, sir.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Good job, Commissioner Hiller.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: And what a change. Well done.
Page 127
July 7, 2015
MR. MILLER: That is all of our speakers, sir.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: That is all.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Do I have a second?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I seconded it.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: You made a motion for approval,
Commissioner Fiala seconded it.
Is there any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Wonderful. Hearing none, all those in
favor signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: All right, it's unanimously passed.
Item #11D
A STANDARD DONATION AGREEMENT THAT ALLOWS JD
DEVELOPMENT 1 LLC, A FOREIGN LIMITED LIABILITY
COMPANY, TO DONATE A 1.14 ACRE PARCEL ALONG WITH
A MANAGEMENT ENDOWMENT OF $4,440.30 TO THE
CONSERVATION COLLIER LAND ACQUISITION PROGRAM
UNDER THE OFFSITE VEGETATION RETENTION PROVISION
OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE LDC SEC
3.05.07H.1.F.III. (B), AT NO COST TO THE COUNTY, AND
AUTHORIZE THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN THE DONATION
AGREEMENT AND STAFF TO TAKE ALL NECESSARY
Page 128
July 7, 2015
ACTIONS TO CLOSE. [COMPANION TO ITEM #9F] —
APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, the companion item is 11.D on your
agenda. It's a recommendation to approve a standard donation
agreement that allows JD Development 1, LLC to donate a 1.14-acre
parcel along with a management endowment of$4,440.30 to the
Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Program under the off-site
vegetation retention provisions of the Land Development Code.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you.
My understanding, this is the first of its kind under the provisions
of the Land Development Code; is that true? One of the first?
MS. SULECKI: Good afternoon, Commissioners. For the
record, Alex Sulecki, Coordinator of your Conservation Collier
Program.
No, Commissioner, this is actually I think the sixth.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Fairly new then.
Now, the endowment, is that part of the Land Development
Code?
MS. SULECKI: Yes, sir, it is.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Now I make a motion to
approve.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Wait, wait. Can I --
CHAIRMAN NANCE: There's a motion, but Commissioner
Hiller, let's talk about this.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm allowed to make motions.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah, you can, but I want to share
something which I think is really important.
We all received an email from Marielle Kitchener who has
provided some really good insight, and her suggestion was that
Page 129
July 7, 2015
because one of the concerns that we have all had is the cost of
maintaining these donated lands. And what was suggested is that as
part of the donation, that whoever makes the donation remove the
exotics from the site. So if in this case it's the developer, so as part of
your motion, Commissioner Henning you would --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: It's in this already.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Oh, is it?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. So are we removing 100
percent? What percentage of the exotics are being removed?
MS. SULECKI: 100 percent is the goal. I mean, one or two may
remain, but that's the goal.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. And then --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And providing maintenance for two
years.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. So as long as we're
considering that, that's great. I just don't have it in front of me. But as
long as that's being considered, and I think it's really important that all
these exotics be removed by the developer before we take title to that
property. Because we want to get that maintenance cost as low as
possible. That was the only concern. I mean, if that's part of the
motion, I'm really good with it.
MS. SULECKI: Yes, ma'am. And I inspected this property
yesterday.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's good.
And are we setting that as a standard on all the future
acquisitions?
MS. SULECKI: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay, that's great. Good job.
MS. SULECKI: It's part of the LDC.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Good job.
Page 130
July 7, 2015
I didn't realize that.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Okay, there's a motion to approve and a
second.
Is there any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Hearing none, all those in favor, signify
by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Okay, it's approved unanimously.
Item #11G
MODIFYING THE ENDOWMENT RELATED TO THE
COUNTY'S ACCEPTANCE OF PROPERTIES DONATED TO
CONSERVATION COLLIER AS OFFSITE PRESERVATION
UNDER THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE (LDC) SECTION
3.05.07, H.1.F. III. A. AND B - MOTION DIRECTING STAFF TO
AMEND LDC SECTION 3.05.07, H.1.F. III. A. AND B FOR
TARGETED STORMWATER INFRASTRUCTURE, THE
COUNTY MANAGER TO WORK WITH MR. HANCOCK FOR
FUTURE ITEMS AND BRING BACK A LIST AT A FUTURE
MEETING FOR THE BOARD'S REVIEW - APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Alex, stay there.
Mr. Chairman, this leads us to the next related item.
Page 131
July 7, 2015
Commissioner Henning had brought this forward from the consent
agenda. It's Item 11.G.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Yes.
MR. OCHS: It was previously 16.D.16. And this was a staff
recommendation to modify the endowment related to the county's
acceptance of properties donated to Conservation Collier as off-site
preservation under the Land Development Code.
And as I mentioned, Commissioner Henning brought this
forward.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, thanks. Well, the person
who gets this question right will receive a Jim Flannagan cookie. The
question is, who made this famous comment: Government's view on
the economy could be summed up in a short phrase, if it moves, tax it,
if it keeps on moving, regulate it, if it stops moving, subsidize it. Who
said that?
MR. KLATZKOW: I think that's Reagan.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You got the cookie.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Who was it?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Who was it?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right, Jeff. Now let me just tell
you something. I'm the only one who --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I still have the floor.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- has any of the gluten free
cookies.
MR. KLATZKOW: So I get the cookie.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So that's how I view this item is
it's starting to move and we're going to regulate it now.
As we heard, that these off-site mitigation comes to the Board of
County Commissioners as a donation, okay. They clean it up with an
endowment they give us, okay. However, we have the fortitude to do
Page 132
July 7, 2015
these good deal purchases in the county. In fact, we had one in the
Red Maple Swamp.
MS. SULECKI: McElwaine Marsh.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, that's another one, right?
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Rookery Bay, Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay, you had the mangroves in
the McElwaine.
There's no mitigation, there's no cleanup. So it fits. President
Reagan's quote exactly. It's starting to move. Let's not --
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: There's a difference. Oh, you're
bringing him another cookie.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Let's play fair here. If you want
to do something --
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Hold on, Commissioner Henning has the
floor. Go ahead, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You want to do something, stop
these good purchases and allow the private sector to do off-site
mitigation for -- and if it needs to be an amendment, that would be my
motion on this item, for items strategically in our water management
plan, such as the Winchester, such as the Red Maple, and there's
another one I know -- pardon me?
MS. SULECKI: I was saying good idea to myself and to you.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, let's don't tax anybody
anymore money. Doesn't make sense.
MS. SULECKI: There is one difference in the good deals and the
donation. The donation came from citizens with really nothing to gain
from that, and the parcel didn't need cleanup. That was something that
we could have evaluated during the evaluation of whether to accept it
or not.
But in this case of the donations under the LDC, the developer is
getting something of value for them.
Page 133
July 7, 2015
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And that's what I was talking --
referring to is in the Land Development Code if somebody wants to
donate land to them, I didn't refer to that one at all. And we're dealing
with the Land Development Code amendment of exacting a little bit
more because it's moving.
So if it needs to be amended to -- if we accept these off-site
mitigations, let's target it in where we get the best bang for our buck.
And the best bang for our buck, it fits our water management plan.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: That's right.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And you know what? Those
parcels are starting to be less and less, the prices of those, so they're
going to be paying more if there's less property to -- if they want to do
the off-site donation or off-site mitigation and we target it in one area,
three areas, there's less property there, they're going to pay premium
for that property, more than it's worth, right. So that's the benefit.
I know you have some public speakers and I'll get off my high
horse --
CHAIRMAN NANCE: No, no.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- and go have a Jim Flannagan
cookie.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: I think, Commissioner Henning, that you
are exactly right. However, in my opinion we have to have a land
donation program in Collier County that is synchronous with what
other agencies are doing. And the reason I say that is right now South
Florida Water Management District and CREW and other state
agencies that have acquired and maintained public lands do not have a
clearly elucidated policy on what they require when they take
donations. Right now they're not taking any donations of land because
the maintenance cost of those lands greatly exceeds the cost of
purchasing them. Because it's in perpetuity.
So the reason that I have a concern is not that we've done
Page 134
July 7, 2015
horrendous damage with these little one-acre parcels. And certainly
our developers have to have a mechanism to do what is occurring here,
and I support this agenda item. However, Conservation Collier right
now is tasked with the responsibility of managing 4,600 acres or
something like that; is that right?
MS. SULECKI: 4,067.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: 4,067, something like that, okay.
Without blinding our Deputy County Manager, this area over
here, these sending lands up here, these consist of over 30,000 acres.
And there's been a suggestion that in this Growth Management Plan
when the final development rights are severed from that, that those
lands be conveyed to someone.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, you would be stupid to
accept it, but --
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Okay. Well, we've got this management
plan, and so with the knowledge that we'd be stupid to accept it
without some sort of provisions, at the same time the Southwest
Florida Water Management District is saying P.S., we're not going to
take it either.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So where in this amendment
does it address your concern about the other agencies?
CHAIRMAN NANCE: It does not.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It does not.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: It does not. But what I'm saying is that
down the road there's some suggestion within our LDC discussions,
which are going to come up later in the day, that we examine this
issue.
And what I'm suggesting to you is that it is very important for us
to talk to Mr. Gillory with the District, to Secretary Steverson with
FDEP, and that we start to understand how we can work with these
agencies on these lands that are adjacent to Picayune, which is a state
Page 135
July 7, 2015
program, to accomplish our goals in Collier County.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It's their goals. And that's --
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Well, it's our goals too. Because that --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioner, I was here when
the McElwaine Marsh was purchased and the people from the Rookery
Bay encouraged us to do that.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Right.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay?
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Well, what I'm telling you is --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: They don't want to do -- they
don't want to pony up for that benefit. But that's not the agenda item
here.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: No, it's not. It's not. I'm supporting it.
But what I'm saying, this is just a predicate to the next -- another item
that's on our agenda. I'm just suggesting to you, this is a great -- we
have a lot of exposure here, and it's in our best interest to contemplate
it. That's all I'm saying.
Do we have any additional public speakers, sir?
MR. MILLER: Yes, sir, Mr. Chairman. I have three speakers.
Marielle Kitchener will be followed by Marisa Carrozzo.
MS. SULECKI: Commissioners, I had a short presentation that
would give you some more information. Are you interested in --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I forwarded Marielle Kitchener's
email to Leo. And Leo, you can just put it on the record, and give a
copy to the court reporter and that way her comments are noted.
MR. MILLER: Marisa Carrozzo will be followed by Tim
Hancock.
MS. CARROZZO: Good afternoon, Commissioners. Marisa
Carrozzo on behalf of The Conservancy of Southwest Florida.
We're here today to support staff recommendation regarding the
off-site preservation, LDC provision for the properties that are donated
Page 136
July 7, 2015
to Conservation Collier. We believe that the three alternatives outlined
in the executive summary, The Conservancy agrees that option number
three is appropriate to pursue at this time.
Providing sufficient funds for management, as has been discussed
here already today, concurrent with property donations is definitely a
critical part of ensuring long-term sustainability of Conservation
Collier.
The current formula was developed and adopted with the best
information available at that time. So now there is the opportunity to
explore updating these donation endowments to reflect a longer term
management time frame, one that balances the needs of the program
with ensuring donations continue to be feasible. And we think that
option number three covers that.
This LDC provision is one of the few tools currently available to
help complete the important multi-parcel projects currently under way
in Red Maple Swamp and Winchester Head.
So as the Board considers direction on this item today, we also
believe that the Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Advisory
Committee should be an integral part of any process for developing an
updated endowment formula, and I believe that's recognized also in
staffs recommendation today.
So The Conservancy appreciates the Board's continued support of
Conservation Collier and again we support staffs recommendation
before you today and hope you will move it forward for further review
and recommendation by CCLAC, DSAC and staff. Thank you very
much.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Who's up for comments? Somebody
want to comment? Commissioner Fiala or Commissioner Taylor,
who's next?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Mine will be simple.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Fiala, then Commissioner
Page 137
July 7, 2015
Taylor.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I just thought at some point in time
and maybe while you're showing us your video or whatever you were
going to show us, we ought to tell our audience out there why
properties like this, you know, getting them all together, why they're so
important to our future, future water source, mainly, so that people
understand why we're trying to -- why we're accepting these and what
their value is.
MR. MILLER: Mr. Chairman, I did have an additional public
speaker.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Yes, sir.
MR. MILLER: Are you ready to hear him now?
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Yeah. Unless the Commissioner wants
to comment on the last one.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, I'll wait for Mr. Hancock.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Henning, you want to
wait for the next public speaker?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, I'll wait.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Mr. Hancock.
MR. HANCOCK: Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman,
Commissioners. Tim Hancock with Stantec.
I'm here today really on behalf of a couple of property owners
that are currently in the process; they have filed applications for the
donation and acceptance of land. One of them actually is in the
Winchester Head area.
And your action on Item 11.D has given me some comfort in that
my concern was folks in the pipeline may get held up pending the
outcome of potential LDC language.
So my first and foremost responsibility today to my clients is to
ask you to allow the existing applications to move forward and not to
be held up pending potential LDC modifications.
Page 138
July 7, 2015
That being said, I'm also here to offer our professional assistance,
along with the encouragement of other industry professionals out there
to work closely with Ms. Sulecki and Conservation Collier. There are
amazing opportunities out there to help fund Conservation Collier's
efforts, and you have already accomplished several of them without
maybe even knowing it.
And one of the ways that we can help fund is these properties that
are being donated have an appraised value. They also have an
ecological value. We can monetize the ecological value and turn that
money into long-term maintenance dollars. The county's already done
this in internal transfer. I had the pleasure of working as project
manager with the utilities department in solid waste on the resource
recovery business part. As we were going through the environment
permitting for that project Conservation Collier was going through its
permitting for the Caracara Preserve. The focus was to create panther
habitat units for sale, if you will.
What they realized was we could actually use those PHUs as an
internal transfer mechanism to other county projects. Those county
projects then paid into Conservation Collier and got the PHUs at a
slightly lesser rate than they would on the open market. We in essence
created revenue inside Conservation Collier through another county
department instead of going outside and spending those dollars. You
were a part of that, Alex was a part of that, your utilities department,
your solid waste.
So what I want to encourage you to do in looking at this LDC
amendment is to recognize that an acre is not an acre is not an acre.
Long-term maintenance costs for one piece of property that sits next to
a highly infested area are different than one that's fairly pristine and
isolated. We're going to have to average things out a little bit. And I
think with some industry help we can assist Conservation Collier in
getting there along with The Conservancy and others.
Page 139
July 7, 2015
So I want to offer that assistance. And secondly, thank you for
the opportunity to make this program work a little bit better. The more
easy and streamlined we make it we can actually generate revenue so
that Conservation Collier and this Board can go out and target lands
that have a higher ecological value than maybe just what you might get
through an open donation program.
So thank you for the opportunity and I look forward to working
with Alex and others to help make this happen.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Thank you.
Commissioner Taylor, then Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: And this was directed to
Commissioner Henning. Commissioner Henning what am I missing
here? Your idea is to target right now lands; is that it?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, target lands that are in our
stormwater management.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Rather than allowing the donor to
dictate what they give to; is that it?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, absolutely. Because
you're going to have a dual benefit. You're going to have a dual benefit
of those lands being in the county domain, won't be built on, it's in our
stormwater management plan. And you will learn in your tenure the
problem that we have with stormwater management to the east.
So I'm going to make a motion we direct staff to amend LDC
3.05.07 for those target purchases to benefit stormwater plan, and also
ask the County Manager to work with Mr. Hancock and the
professionals to bring back those good ideas of how we can gather
those extra dollars for long-term maintenance. That's the motion.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: I'll second it for discussion.
Mr. Ochs, do we have those lands identified in some way that we
would like to -- I mean, do we have a program to identify those lands
that we would favor?
Page 140
July 7, 2015
MR. OCHS: Sir, we have some identified. I wouldn't say it's
exhaustive. And we'll need to --
CHAIRMAN NANCE: So we don't have a full-blown program
on that?
MR. OCHS: Well, no, not right now. Your LDC targets specific
Conservation Collier lands but not necessarily all the lands that I
believe Commissioner Henning is referring to.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I think it does some of it,
doesn't it?
MR. OCHS: Alex, could you maybe just spend a minute and --
MS. SULECKI: Sure. In fact, I'll just put the language up there
for you, if that helps.
So it's hard to read, I'm sorry. I'll read it to you. So it says that:
Lands donated to satisfy the off-site vegetation retention requirement
must be located entirely within Collier County. Donations of land may
be made to a federal, state or local government, et cetera, et cetera.
Subject to the policies and procedures of the receiving entity, lands
donated in Collier County must include a cash payment of the land --
excuse me, I'm reading the wrong part.
MR. OCHS: Go to Item B.
MS. SULECKI: The applicant may acquire and subsequently
donate lands within the project boundaries of Winchester Head North,
North Golden Gate Estates Unit 53, another multi-parcel project or any
other land designated by Conservation Collier donation acceptance
procedures.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And all we have to do is put in
like the Red Maple and there's another one I can't think of, it's right
outside of Golden Gate Estates that --
MS. SULECKI: Winchester Head?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, that's within Golden Gate
Estates.
Page 141
July 7, 2015
But I know that Peter Gaddy and Mike Ramsey and the people
from stormwater were working on this. And it's part of our $1 million
study of Golden Gate Estates.
If we can just include that into the language, then it fits what
we're trying to do.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: I think it's a very innovative idea. But I
think we need to define what we're talking business somehow, you
know. I think Commissioner Henning's got a great idea, because those
lands actually are going to pay back to us in perpetuity, where some of
these other ones, although valuable environmental lands have value,
they wouldn't necessarily have the value that a critically needed
stormwater infrastructure area would have, both to the area itself and to
the western part of the county. So I think Commissioner Henning's
very perceptive.
But I will support his motion, but we need to come back with
another motion to, you know get --
MR. OCHS: Commissioner, part of the recommendation, we're
to present the amendment back to the Board for these LDC off-site
preservation options during your next LDC amendment cycle. Which
will be probably late fall, mid-October, November. So we have time
over the summer to refine this list.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Well, we just approved another item on
the consent agenda today that's part of that Watershed Management
Plan, is it not? Does that overlap this issue?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: To a certain extent, sir, because of the
Northern Golden Gate Florida Restoration Study.
MR. OCHS: We'll identify all those when we bring those back in
the second cycle for the Board's review.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Yes, ma'am, go ahead.
MS. SULECKI: Thank you very much.
I just wanted to say, I'm absolutely on board with what
Page 142
July 7, 2015
Commissioner Henning was saying. And that was kind of my thought
for if there was a referendum in 2016 that we should much better target
where we acquire lands. But currently we have these two multi-parcel
projects sitting out there with no funding to complete them. And at
present they are serving their environmental purpose, but they're not
serving their highest purpose in this program which is to manage them
so that people can come and look at them and see what they've
preserved.
So, I mean, this is an opportunity for us to get the funding. And
actually, I kind of had a better idea than one of the options.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You know, I've got an idea. I've
got a friend of mine to take these people out in the swamp, if they want
to do that, and show them all they want. And you know, you can
actually walk on the South Florida's Water Management's property
next to the black -- Red Maple.
MS. SULECKI: Yes, they have a 12-mile boardwalk and trail
there that's really nice.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. Doesn't cost anybody
anything.
MS. SULECKI: We'd like to coordinate with them in that area.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: All these concepts are good. My only
problem with this agenda item here and the reason that I've mentioned
this numerous times is it's great if somebody gives us an endowment
for seven or eight years. That's great, okay?
I just want somebody to tell me how we're going to pay for it
between the eighth year and the end of forever, okay. That's what I
want somebody to tell me. And nobody's telling me that --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Tim Hancock was telling you
how to --
MS. SULECKI: I have an idea too.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Hiller?
Page 143
July 7, 2015
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Tim Hancock did not give us the
long-term solution. There's a limited number of units that we have
through Caracara. Have we gotten all the units off of Pepper Ranch? I
know that when we originally made that purchase it was priced with
the expectation that we were going to get a certain volume of I believe
it was the panther mitigation as well as some other type of mitigation
units and that it turned out that we were not going to get them.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: It's all factored in that budget.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: But the issue is to your question,
what happens beyond year eight? We don't have, you know, an infinite
supply of these mitigation units that we can sell, nor are we going to
have so much internal demand to generate revenues for the long term,
which is the issue. And I think that question has to be asked and
answered, as Commissioner Nance has pointed out, before any
commitments are made.
And it's no different than when we build capital projects, there's
carrying costs associated with capital projects. And when we approve
capital projects, one of our current requirements is, you know, tell us
what that carrying cost is and show us how that's going to be funded
for the life of the asset. There's no difference. And I think the question
is fair, and I don't think that we can approve anything before we have
the solution to that issue.
MS. SULECKI: I would agree.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And that has been the ongoing
debate about this particular project.
MS. SULECKI: Okay. Well --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Just generally.
MS. SULECKI: -- after I put the options on your executive
summary, I had some discussions with some local consultants and
some folks in planning, and I came up with a fourth option that I think
might satisfy that. And that is that we revise the LDC to provide for
Page 144
July 7, 2015
donation of funds only.
And I think that would -- you can see here I've got the pros and
cons from each of the options, and just the listing of this has so much
more.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm going to include that in my
motion.
MS. SULECKI: I'm sorry?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The fourth option.
MS. SULECKI: The fourth option.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, bring it back and tell us
how it would look like.
MS. SULECKI: Yes, I'd like to go to DSAC and CCLAC and
bring something back for you.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Before I go to Commissioner Fiala and
Taylor, I would love for you to do that. And I would also like you to
compare how we're doing compared to the other option that these
developers have and that is to go out into the free market to mitigation
banks so that we can compare the deal that you're offering them to the
deal that's the option they have to go to on the outside. And we also
need to get together with the districts and talk about what they're
thinking so we're all together.
Commissioner Fiala and then Commissioner Taylor.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, it goes back to what I
mentioned in the beginning. We should tell them what the value of
this land -- or why it's valuable to preserve this land. Because like
Commissioner Nance said, he says yes, but we're going to have to
continue to maintain it. Even though the maintenance costs wouldn't be
that high because they're clear and pristine, but still and all there's got
to be a value. Why do you want to keep these lands? Why do you
want to get their donations?
And just like in CREW, we all know it's to preserve our future
Page 145
July 7, 2015
water sources. And if maybe that could be outlined when we do this,
you know, what is Red Maple for, what is Winchester Head for, I think
that that would help to clear it up for people as to why these are
essential for us to gather these land masses together.
MS. SULECKI: Thank you, Commissioner. And I put on your
last agenda the annual report for Conservation Collier for 2014, and I
attached to that a report that was done for us in early 2014 by James
Beever, the Southwest Florida Planning Council. And he actually did
put those dollar values onto those properties with a total value of 144
million in value that they're returning to this county each year.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Ma'am, I agree. But it's like if I give
Commissioner Henning a 60-foot Hatteras, I say, Commissioner
Henning, I'm going to give you a 60-foot Hatteras, but you've got to
ensure it, you've got to put the fuel in it, you've got to dock it, you
know what he's going to tell me? Thanks, Tim, I can't take the
Hatteras.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I can afford to dock it but I can't
afford the gas.
MS. SULECKI: I am totally with you, Commissioner --
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Taylor?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Ms. Sulecki, I'm glad this fourth
option. Because I know you kept saying I have a fourth option. I
would agree, I would agree with Commissioner Henning, I'd like to
call the question.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: All right, any further discussion? We've
beat a horse to death.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Aye.
Page 146
July 7, 2015
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Here we go. Please bring us back some
good guidance.
MS. SULECKI: Thank you, Commissioners.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Well done.
Item #12B
RESOLUTION 2015-148: A SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT TO
FINALLY RESOLVE ALL COLLIER COUNTY CLAIMS IN THE
MATTER OF IN RE: OIL SPILL BY THE OIL RIG
"DEEPWATER HORIZON" IN THE GULF OF MEXICO ON
APRIL 20, 2010 NOW PENDING IN THE UNITED STATES
DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF
LOUISIANA, CASE NO. MDL 2179 SECTION J — ADOPTED AS
STIPULATED
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, that moves us now to the add-on
item. This is Item 12.B. This is a recommendation to approve and
accept a proposed settlement agreement regarding the oil spill by the
oil rig Deep Water Horizon in the Gulf of Mexico. This action is now
pending in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of
Louisiana.
MR. KLATZKOW: My apologies for not doing this the normal
way, Commissioners. There was a confidentiality order that prohibited
my discussing this matter until the public hearing commenced.
First just a little bit of quick history. This item started actually
with an executive summary by Mr. Wert. He was looking to recover
Page 147
July 7, 2015
lost tourist tax revenue for approximately $450,000. The Board
subsequently authorized his office to get into a retainer agreement with
outside counsel who was specializing in this type of work, and we did.
A complaint was filed. The complaint's 100 pages. I sent it to
you under separate cover. The complaint -- 100 pages was a little
more expansive than the damages that the county suffered, including
lost sales taxes, ad valorem taxes, communication service taxes and
other revenues, and so we were above that $450,000 request.
There was a -- well, I got a call late last week. The magistrate in
the case called in BP attorneys, and said okay, this is what I think you
guys should settle for, and it's take it or leave it. And the offer to
Collier County was for an amount under $2.5 million. Okay.
Considerably more than the $450,000 that the Board had authorized
that we ask for.
The confidentiality order itself details what the overall BP
settlement was.
There are a bunch of different pots to this settlement. You will
note that in the first pot basically is the restore pot, Florida will be
getting $572 million. Collier County will have access to some of those
funds under the process.
There's a second pot of$8 billion of Florida getting $680 million.
And the pot that we're looking at is up to $1 billion paid to resolve
economic claims from the basic local government entities.
So this is separate and apart from the other monies we've been
talking about all these years. Frankly, I'm stunned at the offer that PB
has accepted. I was hoping we'd get a fraction of$450,000. But we're
okay.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Shh.
MR. KLATZKOW: No, BP's already agreed to this, so we're fine
on this one. And --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Move to approve.
Page 148
July 7, 2015
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Second.
MR. KLATZKOW: Before you move to approve, what you need
to approve is this: I need your approval to authorize the Chair to enter
into the settlement document. The settlement document agrees that we
will be dismissing all claims against BP and their related affiliates. The
related affiliates is a full page long, actually.
So we're releasing for an amount under two and a half million
dollars, all these various defendants. Outside counsel was very
aggressive apparently as to who they thought might be liable in this
case.
And so if I can get the Board --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Move to direct the Chairman to
enter into a settlement agreement with BP to release the parties as
noted at the meeting.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Mr. Klatzkow, I just have one question.
MR. KLATZKOW: Sir?
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Is this a take-it-or-leave-it offer or is this
-- we don't know?
MR. KLATZKOW: This is take it or leave it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
MR. KLATZKOW: Both for us and PB.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Got it.
Okay, there's a motion on the floor and a second by
Commissioner Taylor.
MR. KLATZKOW: I also need the Chair to be authorized to sign
the following resolution.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's in part of my motion.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Point of order. We have two
motions on the floor and one second.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: We have two motions?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We have two seconds, one
Page 149
July 7, 2015
motion.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Well, let's just say you made a
motion, I seconded it and then Mr. Klatzkow said wait a minute, and
then you changed the motion. So we have two motions on the floor.
MR. KLATZKOW: No, we added it to the original motion.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I amended it in the motion.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Amended it? Okay, so the
seconder agrees to the amendment then.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: And then we're requesting to make a
further amendment and add this resolution, sir?
MR. KLATZKOW: Yes, sir. And to authorize County Attorney
to take whatever further action by the Chair to close this settlement.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Is that acceptable to the second?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Yes, it is.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Hiller, any other further
discussion on the item? We have a motion and a second.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And that doesn't in any way bar us
from applying for funding for projects from the other --
MR. KLATZKOW: No, I've conferred that with outside counsel,
this is separate and apart.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I think that is what has to be made
very clear.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: This is pot one of four?
MR. KLATZKOW: Yes, this is the final pot of money.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, this is one of the multiple
pots. And this release that we're providing is related only as to this one
pot and we're not waiving our rights to the others.
MR. KLATZKOW: That's correct.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Further discussion?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Fiala.
Page 150
July 7, 2015
COMMISSIONER FIALA: How do these payments come in, do
you know? I mean, it isn't a lump sum. I think -- what did it say over
an 18-year period or something like that?
MR. KLATZKOW: No, my understanding is we'll be getting a
wire payment for this amount of money. Now, there's a 20 percent
contingency fee. There will be some expenses. So I think you're
looking to net about $1.9 million on this when all is said and done.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: And how we expend the funds, is
it restricted?
MR. KLATZKOW: No, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Not from this pot. The other pots
are project restric--
MR. KLATZKOW: These are economic damages to the county,
so if you -- you may -- we did put in a claim for $450,000 on lost TDC
money. You may want to consider part of that anyway going into that.
But everything else has nothing to do with TDC monies.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Okay, there's a motion on the floor and a
second. All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: It is approved unanimously.
MR. KLATZKOW: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Would we like to take a break for the
court reporter?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Sure.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Let's take it 'til 2:35. We'll stand in
Page 151
July 7, 2015
recess for that time.
(Recess.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: All right, ladies and gentlemen, welcome
back for the conclusion of this afternoon's session of today's meeting.
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir, we're moving now to your Community
Redevelopment Agency. You may -- I'm asking Mr. Klatzkow, is it
advisable for the Board to convene as the CRA board, Mr. County
Attorney?
MR. KLATZKOW: Sure.
MR. OCHS: Very good.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So we're going to close the BCC
meeting and open up the CRA meeting. Who's the chair of that?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Commissioner Fiala. Oh, and I
guess I'm vice-chair.
MR. OCHS: Vice-chair.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I am. So -- oh, here she comes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'm sorry.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: You were eating Flannagan's
cookies.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, I wasn't, I was back there
blabbering away.
Are we in a CRA meeting?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Yes.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: We need to open it up, Madam Chair.
Item #14B1
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY BOARD,
DECIDES: (1) WHETHER ANY FEE OR COMMISSION IS
APPROPRIATE SHOULD THE SALE OF THE CRA PROPERTY
AT THE GATEWAY TRIANGLE OCCUR AS ANTICIPATED ON
Page 152
July 7, 2015
OR BEFORE JULY 13, 2015, AND (2) IF ANY FEE OR
COMMISSION IS DUE, IDENTIFY THE PROPER PERCENTAGE
OR AMOUNT OF THAT FEE OR COMMISSION - MOTION TO
PAY A 1% FINDER'S FEE CONTINGENT ON THE CLOSING
OF THE PROPERTY AND TO PLACE 6% IN RESERVE IN CASE
OF LITIGATION - APPROVED 5/0; IF CLOSING FOR THIS
PROPERTY DOESN'T OCCUR ON JULY 13, THE COUNTY
MANAGER AND THE BAYSHORE/GATEWAY TRIANGLE
CRA MANAGER ARE TO TABLE THIS ITEM UNTIL
SEPTEMBER AND BRING BACK A LIST OF COMMERCIAL
BROKERS TO LIST THE PROPERTY — APPROVED
CRA CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: I'd like to open up the CRA
meeting this afternoon.
MR. OCHS: We have one item on your CRA agenda, Board
members, and that's the request to decide whether any fee or
commission is appropriate should the sale of CRA property at the
Gateway Triangle occur on July 13th, 2015. And if any fee or
commission is due, identify the proper percentage or amount of that
fee or commission.
Mr. Durham will present.
MR. DURHAM: Hi, Commissioners. Tim Durham, County
Manager's Office.
First thing I'd like to express, didn't know about that extension
business 'til after business hours yesterday so -- the extension of the
closing date by Mr. Fortino, so I do want to apologize for that, but that
caught me completely off guard, to be frank.
But the item here before you is dealing with the commission or
referral fee, if any is due. Should the closing still take place as
provided in the agreement, the closing date is supposed to be no later
than July 13th, and we know with the Board being away in recess,
Page 153
July 7, 2015
wanted to get this particular item resolved while you're away on recess.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: So at this point since we've been
advised by Mr. Fortino that we're not certain that this is going to close,
I think any action that this board decides on this item needs to be
contingent upon the fact that the closing is going to take place. Does
the board agree with that assessment?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Yes.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I mean, due to the genius of
Thomas Alva Edison we have the electric light, so I hope that Mr.
Fortino goes forth with his staff and advisers and consultants and
makes this happen.
MR. DURHAM: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: But I guess at this point we need to
discuss what if anything the board is going to do regarding
compensation or referral fees or finders fees or commissions or
whatever regarding this transaction.
Commissioner Taylor -- Oh, I'm sorry, ma'am.
CRA CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: That's all right, I'll just --
CHAIRMAN NANCE: I'm just taking the ball and running with
it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I don't mind interrupting.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Go ahead, it's your --
CRA CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Commissioner Taylor?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Thank you, Chairman Fiala.
Mr. Klatzkow, can you tell us what legally we're obligated to do
under the contract in terms of any fees, commissions, et cetera?
MR. KLATZKOW: I'll put the provision on for you.
Normally you would have a brokerage agreement that would
dictate what commissions or fees you would pay. To my knowledge
you don't have one here. Without that agreement then you're left
basically to say well, is it fair to pay anything at this point in time. It's
Page 154
July 7, 2015
really a fairness question.
At the end of the day the Premier Plus did bring in Mr. Fortino.
You could view this as sort of a finder's fee type of relationship. It's
clearly certainly less than a full-fledged brokerage commission that
would be due. I couldn't tell you what the customary finder's fee for
commercial property is in Collier County, I just don't know.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Would it be appropriate at this
time, given that we do not know whether this property is going to
close, based on what we heard today from Mr. Fortino, even though he
assured us, he asked for an extension, we didn't give it to him, he
assured us it would close, so there's a question mark. Would it be
appropriate to make this decision now?
MR. KLATZKOW: You can make this decision now, because
it's contingent upon the transaction closing anyway.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Okay, thank you.
CRA CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That was my question. Since the
transaction hasn't closed and may not close, it may be premature to
address this.
But what you're basically saying is we're not under any obligation
and that if we choose to, we may.
MR. KLATZKOW: Yeah. I mean, the claim would be basically
one for quantum meruit at this point in time saying that I brought you
the purchaser, therefore you owe me something. This is very unusual.
I've practiced law for a very long time, I've never seen a relationship
where you didn't get into a broker's agreement.
CRA CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Commissioner Nance? Looks
like your light is on.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: No.
CRA CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay. Any other comments
from any other commissioners?
Page 155
July 7, 2015
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I think we should wait and evaluate
this.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I know the --
CRA CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: You mentioned the finder's fee.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: -- that this gentleman questioned,
I think he wanted to speak and I advised him to fill out a form. I'm not
sure that was the correct advice, but --
CRA CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Sure, sure.
MR. DURHAM: And Commissioners, real quick, if I may. One
of the concerns was should the closing take place, if you felt that a fee
was appropriate under these circumstances and designate the amount,
it would come out of the proceeds from that sale. So that would not be
held up for the whole rest of the summer, because the intent is to apply
the remainder of the proceeds from the sale to the bank loan that's
owed by the CRA. And that was kind of the motivation for bringing
this unresolved issue forward.
MR. BURTON: Yeah, can I speak? John Burton with Premiere
Plus Realty, for the record.
We started this actual transaction by contract which is a part of
our contract. Within that contract to go through the CRA Advisory
Board there was a three and three percent commission, which totaled
to six percent. That was through the understanding that we were going
to get six percent commission for working, because there was a lot of
due diligence on our part, continued work all the way up from April to
today to actually see this transaction go through.
I did develop a time line to kind of show all the way to October,
which I still didn't get to finish, showing all the work necessary for us
to continue the underlined current to get to this point.
Mr. Fortino I believe is going to close on the 13th. I think he just
had some more administrative stuff that he had to complete. So to talk
about the commission now, yeah, we would like to talk about it.
Page 156
July 7, 2015
Because once you're in recess, there's really not much more we can do
then, unless it goes another route.
MR. KLATZKOW: I'm okay with it.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I have a question, ma'am.
CRA CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay. So I have two questions.
And Tim, did you have something to say about that or --
MR. BURTON: We did this on good faith.
CRA CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Pardon me?
MR. BURTON: We did this all in good faith. We were -- to the
understanding there was two other contracts, purchase agreements
made by the County Attorney that actually had a six percent
commission in there, so -- but that was under a different RFP.
MR. KLATZKOW: It was also for residential property, wasn't it?
MR. BURTON: Residential property, but we also have a listing,
that 17-acre site on Bayshore that has a six percent commission in
there as well.
And this was off market, by the way. This wasn't an active for us
to list, market and sell your property. However, this was a better
opportunity for Mr. Fortino to actually take a look at. And so that
RFP, you're right, didn't really matter.
MR. DURHAM: You had, Commissioners -- Tim Durham again.
You had two basically shelf agreement for real estate services for two
companies on retainer, CRE Consultants were for commercial
properties, and Premiere Plus for residential. But to activate those
listings required a separate listing agreement, and that did not occur
with the triangle property. So we're not aware of anything in writing
committing the Board of County Commissioners to any percentage or
commission amount in these particular circumstances. In fact, on the
17 acres which Premier plus is the residential realtor, a separate listing
agreement was engaged, so that's a completely different scenario. But
that was -- that did not occur with the property on the triangle.
Page 157
July 7, 2015
CRA CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay, I have a couple of
questions up here. Commissioner Nance, Commissioner Taylor,
Commissioner Hiller.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Mr. Durham, can anyone tell me if
anyone from Collier County staff or from CRA staff was engaged in
discussions with this gentleman regarding this purchase? I mean, were
they interacting with this guy in any way?
MR. DURHAM: He did -- the record shows he did go to
advisory board meetings, but I'd defer to Jean, who snuck up behind
me.
MS. JOURDAN: Hi. For the record, Jean Jourdan,
Bayshore/Gateway CRA Operations Manager.
We had ongoing discussions with Mr. Burton initially. It was for
our 17 acres. And then at one point he brought in Mr. -- he actually
brought in Mr. Fortino for the 17 acres, and then he actually went and
showed Mr. Fortino the Gateway Triangle properties because he knew
that we had those properties. And then they proceeded to bring in a
contract to the advisory board, and the advisory board recommended
bringing that contract to the Board of County Commissioners.
We brought the -- an executive summary and the contract and at
that time the Board of County Commissioners did not accept the offer.
Then we asked to advertise the property, which we did, and Fortino
was the sole respondent to that advertisement.
But there was ongoing conversations about the triangle and Mr.
Fortino and John Burton presented at the advisory board on several
different occasions.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: So county staff and CRA staff was
engaged in conversations with this gentleman regarding this
transaction?
MS. JOURDAN: Regarding the property itself in bringing it to
the Board. We have to -- any time someone offers to purchase CRA's
Page 158
July 7, 2015
property, we have to bring it to the CRA board because we have no
authority to enter into any agreements, which that was actually
reiterated numerous times.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Even a contract?
MS. JOURDAN: Excuse me?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Even a contract?
MS. JOURDAN: Any contracts we'd have to bring to the Board.
I mean, we have no authorization, signatory authorization whatsoever.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Over 50,000 is what Commissioner
Henning wants --
MS. JOURDAN: Oh, no, I'm talking about our real estate
contracts.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And I'm saying that he wants you
to say over 50,000.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I didn't want her to say that at
all.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's exactly why you want to say
MS. JOURDAN: What do you want me to say, Commissioner?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: You want to say all contracts over
50,000.
CRA CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Let me just get back onto the
subject, if you don't mind.
And were you engaged in any way in commission talks with
them?
MS. JOURDAN: No, actually, the only place the commission
was stipulated was in the FAR/BAR contract which was presented to
the Board of County Commissioners.
As far as what could be paid and what could not be paid, the six
percent, I did see that the six percent was in that FAR/BAR contract;
however, it was based on what the county had already agreed on
Page 159
July 7, 2015
paying anyone with those two contracts through the purchasing
department for each one of them since six percent/six percent for the
commercial contract and six percent for the residential contract.
Just one thing that I'd like to bring to your attention as far as the
commission goes. If a commission is agreed to be paid or a finder's fee,
we would need to take that out of the proceeds at the time of closing,
because any funds has to go towards the payment of the loan. And if it
was done at a different time, the CRA does not have funds to pay that
commission. It would have to come out of those funds.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I'm just trying to determine if this
gentleman was in sequential conversations about this transaction with
Mr. Fortino. I want to know the extent that he was involved in an
ongoing basis.
MS. JOURDAN: Oh, yes, this man, I have probably talked to
this man on the phone over 100 times. He has been in my office at
least 20, 30 times. He has done -- every time that I would talk with
Fortino, he has always been involved in the legwork, he has been
involved with finding Fortino's investors. I have spoken with him far
more than I have Fortino.
MR. BURTON: Can I say something too? It's just not me, it's an
actual staff. Premiere Plus Realty as well. And also Debra Sforza, who
is the other agent, has helped do a lot of this legwork. So, I mean,
when we talk about the commissions, there's a lot more that's being
spread around.
CRA CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Commissioner Taylor?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: We've established that you did
work for this sale, potential sale. What we haven't established, was
there any verbal discussion -- not written, we understand there's no
written -- any verbal discussion with the CRA board about a potential
of a commission?
MR. BURTON: Could I say something? Just not to interrupt.
Page 160
July 7, 2015
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I'd like Ms. Jordan to answer and
then I will open to you.
MS. JOURDAN: The CRA Advisory Board made a
recommendation to forward the contract to the Board of County
Commissioners with a recommendation for approval. They did not
specifically discuss the commission. But they did just make a
recommendation to forward it to the BCC or the CRA board.
But they were aware of the initial contract with the 17 acres; that's
the one that they actually had in place. And we actually have a signed
contract, a listing agreement with Mr. Burton on that property.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Okay. Mr. Burton?
MR. BURTON: Yeah. You know, obviously it was passed and
reviewed through the CRA board and also through the County
Commission to actually go to the bid process. As I remember, on,
what was it, on May 6th. So I mean, that structure was within that
contract. So it was in good faith that, you know, we were working
hard and doing our job, knowing that we were looking forward -- that's
the risk reward too. I mean, if this deal never closed the amount and
thousands of hours of work that we have done might not actually
happen. And that usually does happen. I mean, you could work on a
project like this for a year, which we might find out might not close.
And that's why we work for our commission.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Well, I think it's an honest
appraisal. I guess we go back to what our County Attorney said, this is
a discussion of whether -- in good faith, did you say, sir? How did you
put it?
MR. KLATZKOW: It boils down to what you think the right
thing to do is.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: There we are.
CRA CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: County Attorney, when this was
Page 161
July 7, 2015
put out to bid, when the bid was reviewed, when the bid proposal was
reviewed by your office, was there no consideration given to a
brokerage commission? Did it stipulate in the RFP that no
commissions would be paid by the county? I mean, you know, we're --
I can't believe that -- I mean, if this went out to RFP -- because all of
this previous stuff didn't work, the commercial property, the residential
property, none of these deals closed, it doesn't matter what those
contracts were. We have an RFP that went out and we had Mr. Fortino
who responded. Did the bid provide that no commissions would be
paid by the county?
MR. KLATZKOW: I don't think -- and Jean, correct me if I'm
wrong. I think what happened was that through this broker Mr.
Fortino came to the CRA to make an offer on this property.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Through the RFP.
MR. KLATZKOW: Under the statute you have to put that on
public notice. So you had Fortino in place --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: But it doesn't matter. If it had --
you can't sit there and say because he was in place and because it had
to go to anRFP --
MR. KLATZKOW: That's what the commission is based on, that
moment in time.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. When we put it out for an
RFP, did the RFP provide the county was going to pay a commission if
someone brought a bidder to the table?
MR. KLATZKOW: It's in your contract.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Which contract?
MR. KLATZKOW: It's in your contract that we would pay any
commission that might be due.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: We just didn't -- excuse me, I'm
sorry.
MR. DURHAM: I might be able to help a little bit.
Page 162
July 7, 2015
The -- Jeff is correct. In both those real estate services contract
there's provisions, if they list and the property sells, for a six percent
commission.
The issue really is for the Triangle property it was never formally
engaged. The real estate, these retainer for real estate services have to
be actively engaged by the county by entering into a formal listing
agreement. So for the Triangle property --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's my point. For that Triangle
property, and it doesn't matter what involvement there was on any of
the other properties, for the Triangle property there was no broker
engaged by the county to bring in a buyer.
MR. DURHAM: Correct.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And before we entered into this
contracts, we didn't recognize that any broker brought this buyer to the
table.
MR. DURHAM: Correct.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And we have no agreement. The
fact that -- I mean, I just -- I don't understand how this could not have
been addressed by the County Attorney's Office. I don't understand
how --
MR. KLATZKOW: Because he came to us unsolicited. That's
what this whole --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right. And that's my point. An
un--
MR. KLATZKOW: That's what you're paying for.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Unsolicited -- no, that's the
problem. And at that point in time that he came to us, we should have
made it clear. You can be a buyer's broker just as readily as a seller's
broker. He could have just as readily been paid by Mr. Fortino for
bringing Mr. Fortino to this project. And the fact that you're buying --
and the fact that you're bringing all this financing to Mr. Fortino, Mr.
Page 163
July 7, 2015
Fortino should be paying you for that.
MR. BURTON: No, no, actually as a matter of fact that would be
a conflict of interest for me. One is --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Why?
MR. BURTON: -- well, for me to introduce him to whoever
might have some money or interest, that's all it is is introduction.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Because you're not a mortgage
broker?
MR. BURTON: Yeah, I mean, you can't be. But this is a --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: But you're not.
MR. BURTON: Now I'm a trans-- no, I'm not. I'm just
answering questions.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: But here's the problem. With
being a transactional broker there are all these disclosures you have to
get from us, from them. There have to be sign-offs that recognize that
this relationship exists. I mean, we can't --
MR. BURTON: There is a paper trail, though.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Did you get like sign-offs on this
property with respect to that client?
MR. BURTON: No, the County Attorney's Office also put into
the May -- June 24th purchase agreement, you know, commissions,
like that there was supposed to be a commission paid. So --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Where?
MR. BURTON: -- so it was implied already.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: It's not implied. There's nothing
implied.
MR. BURTON: It was implied through the June 24th meeting.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: What June 24th meeting?
MR. DURHAM: Correct me if I'm wrong, and Jeff, maybe if you
remember, that was never formally agreed upon by the Board of
County Commissioners so it really doesn't matter if it's in an
Page 164
July 7, 2015
agreement until this Board executes --
MR. KLATZKOW: Right, the reason it's in the agreement,
because this issue came up whether or not they were entitled to a
commission. So then the issue came up with who would pay that
commission. So we agreed that if there was a commission deal, if, it
would be the county.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And then you did nothing to make
a determination that a commission was due? Because if a commission
was due, then there should have been all these disclosures -- you know,
there's a whole slew of documents that have to be signed that, you
know, create the relationship and provide for disclosures as to who his
client is and what his duties are. You know, is he a seller's broker, is
he a buyer's broker, is he a transactional broker? All of that has to be
disclosed. None of that was disclosed.
I mean, who is he the fiduciary to? Is he representing us? Is he
representing Fortino? I mean, there's no evidence of any of that on this
parcel. It doesn't matter what was done on the previous parcels. What
matters is, is that on this parcel, this went out to an RFP and this other
guy -- and Fortino bid on it, right?
MS. JOURDAN: It wasn't an RFP. It was actually advertised per
Florida Statute.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And then they --
MS. JOURDAN: And they responded.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- Mr. Fortino, not through the
broker.
MS. JOURDAN: Actually, I'm trying to go back. Was it through
the broker?
MR. BURTON: It was -- I got the original contract.
MS. JOURDAN: Yeah, it was a contract again. And then when
we did the purchase agreement we put in there the commission. And
when we brought it to the board, the board said there was no actual
Page 165
July 7, 2015
contract.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: On the 17th?
MS. JOURDAN: No, this was for the Gateway Triangle. When
they actually made the offer, the sealed bid, which they brought --
physically dropped off at our office, was a contract. But we brought
that contract to the board to be executed and the board did not accept it
at that time.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So it doesn't matter. We have to
go to the deal that's before us.
MS. JOURDAN: But they did submit a contract, it just wasn't
accepted by the board.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And then what did you do?
MS. JOURDAN: Then after that, what it was is that we had -- the
board approved the sale of the property but asked us to remove the fee
because they did not accept the contract to sign for the fee. But they
did allow us to sell to Fortino and said that we would discuss the fees
at a later date. So that's why we're bringing the fees back here now.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Why did we say -- that doesn't
sound right.
MR. DURHAM: During the October -- it was an October, 2014
meeting, this was all brought as one package before the BCC and it
was a fairly lengthy discussion. It was decided to segregate the
purchase sale agreement and the sale to Fortino from the commission
issue and to pull the commission issue out of that. So we came back
with an agreement that didn't have that commission percentage in
there, just simply had that the seller had --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Because it was deemed by the
board that no commission was owed. That's why it was pulled out.
MR. DURHAM: Right, there was a concern expressed by the
board that's included in the minutes that are part of the backup. There
was a concern about the commission and the commission amount; that
Page 166
July 7, 2015
is correct.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I mean, I don't see any of the -- any
of the markers of a brokerage relationship. I mean, you didn't get the
signatures from the board to represent the board, you didn't get the
sign-offs for all the disclosures.
MR. BURTON: The disclosures was on that October 28th
meeting. It was Fred Coyle's last meeting.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: You know, there are these formal
forms that have to be signed by, you know, if you're representing the
buyer or the seller and you have to get them to sign and you disclose
what your duties are and they must sign it.
MR. BURTON: That was the first purchase agreement.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Did you do that?
MR. BURTON: Yeah, that was the first --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Did you do this for this one?
MR. BURTON: We gave you a FAR/BAR contract that
stipulated the commission.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, I'm talking about the
brokerage --
MR. BURTON: Our certified contract --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, there are -- we're not talking
about the contract for the acquisition of the property, we're talking
about the disclosures as a broker. That you have to have your client
sign.
MR. BURTON: Yeah, and he has signed those.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Who signed them?
MR. BURTON: As a purchaser.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: He signed them?
MR. BURTON: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And you represented him as a
buyer's broker?
Page 167
July 7, 2015
MR. BURTON: As a transaction broker.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, did you get us to sign
anything? I mean, there are signatures for both sides.
MR. BURTON: From what I understood through the CRA is that
a FAR/BAR contract will not constitute a sale, okay. So with that
being said, it would have to go through a purchase agreement written
up by the County Attorney. And so I was working with the County
Attorney.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: But isn't Chapter 475 the chapter
that governs real estate brokerage relationships? And through 475
aren't there disclosure forms that a broker, whether he's representing
the buyer or the seller or is acting as a transactional broker, has to have
the parties sign and that basically is the first step in the fiduciary
relationship? Without that you don't have the evidence of the
relationship.
MR. BURTON: Well, the relationship was also with the 17
acres. Was implied as such. Actually that was signed by the county.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: But that wasn't what was sold.
MR. BURTON: It's understood.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So that's a totally different
transaction. It doesn't matter, because --
MR. BURTON: That's why this is an off-market transaction. We
were acting on the good faith of what we were doing, actually
consummating a deal --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: But you're a broker, right?
MR. BURTON: No, I'm a real estate agent.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, it's the same thing. You
have a broker --
MR. BURTON: It's two different things.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah, but your broker is the one
who is supposed to ensure that you do all the things that 475 requires.
Page 168
July 7, 2015
MR. BURTON: Actually, it's all documented, correct. It could
be documented.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah, but it's not documented with
us.
MR. BURTON: Yeah, it's because I was bringing you the buyer.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And you needed an agreement with
us in order to get compensation. I mean, just because you bring a buyer
without a listing agreement doesn't mean we owe you anything.
CRA CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: So Commissioner Hiller, while
we're on the same subject, is there -- we have Commissioner Henning
waiting to -- could we --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I just don't understand.
CRA CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: -- let him speak a little bit?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay, we had an agreement with
this gentleman as a broker for residential property. He brought a client
to a property that we own which is commercial, which we have
another agreement with another broker or person. There was no
engagement or no listing agreement. However, the gentleman did
bring the person to staff, to the CRA board, and worked with staff.
I don't see where we can pay a listing fee. However, Mr.
Klatzkow is right, I think it's appropriate to find -- to give a finder's
fee. Although the attorney didn't know what the finder's fee would be,
I Googled it. And for a licensed agent, the fee could be five percent up
to one and a half percent, or a flat fee of a few hundred dollars.
So I make a motion that we pay this gentleman a finder's fee of
one percent.
CRA CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Which is what, $50,000?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: One percent of the purchase.
CRA CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Oh, one percent of the purchase
price.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Purchase price of what? What's
Page 169
July 7, 2015
the purchase price?
MR. BURTON: Actually, I have a sampling of a fee schedule
right here for counties.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You have a what?
MR. BURTON: Sampling of a fee schedule. It's actually in your
executive summary.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: A fee schedule? A broker's fee.
MR. BURTON: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Of six percent.
MR. BURTON: But it's a fee. I mean, a fee could be --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay, I'm going to pull my
motion. We're going to go on with this.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I'm going to second Commissioner
Henning's motion for discussion, because I think Commissioner
Henning is suggesting that there's been some involvement.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: And fundamental fairness is the
issue. And, you know, it is clear to me, and I'm sorry, Commissioner
Fiala, I don't have the floor, let's let --
CRA CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: No, please do because --
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Okay. You know, I'm just saying
it's clear to me that there has been involvement with this gentleman
with the advisory board, with Ms. Jourdan, and I believe that in fact he
has brought value to the county. His services have been of value to the
county, if the county is able to close this sale.
So I will second Commissioner Henning's motion. I think it's the
purchase price which is -- what would the calculation be, Mr. Ochs?
MR. OCHS: Roughly $52,000, I believe.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: $52,000. So I'm going to second
that. I think that is -- you know, I don't think we're going to gain
anymore clarity by bashing this around. I don't think we're going to be
Page 170
July 7, 2015
able to determine it, because there was no agreement. But I think the
issue of fundamental fairness, as Mr. Klatzkow and Commissioner
Henning have rightfully brought up. So I will support that.
CRA CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay. I think that was a great
suggestion.
MR. KLATZKOW: May I make one suggestion?
CRA CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Any comments from board
members?
(No response.)
CRA CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay, Mr. Klatzkow?
MR. KLATZKOW: Just one suggestion. Reserve six percent of
the sales price in an escrow account just in case there's litigation.
Because as Jean said, you don't have the CRA funds to make that up
down the road. So in case there's a dispute, you'll have that buffer.
CRA CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: For what period of time?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: But the Board doesn't agree to
the six percent.
MR. KLATZKOW: No, you're not agreeing to the six percent.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So I'll make that a part of my
motion.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: And my second.
CRA CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay. Board members, all in
favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
CRA CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye.
CRA CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign.
(No response.)
CRA CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Very good, it passes 5-0.
Page 171
July 7, 2015
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Before we leave --
CRA CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: And let me -- are we still on the
CRA?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Yeah, we're still on the CRA,
because this is about the property that may or may not close.
In conversation with our County Attorney at our break, it was just
a suggestion and certainly wasn't a direction by him, but I think just to
have an abundance of caution and belt and suspenders and all those
things that attorneys suggest, that if indeed it does not close on July the
13th, that we immediately put it back on the market and that we direct
staff to do that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, I think that's an
appropriate direction that we should give.
And I want to clarify my motion. That finder's fee, if the property
closes.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Is contingent.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Contingent upon the property
closing.
CRA CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay, very good.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I thought that was understood.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I just want to make it perfectly
clear.
CRA CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: I understood that too, but I think
it's good that he cleared that up to make it perfectly clear.
So can we make sure that that is added to this motion?
MR. KLATZKOW: It was my understanding, but for clarity
sake, yes.
CRA CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay, very good.
MS. JOURDAN: May I ask a question? When you say put it on
the market, do you mean actually list it with a real estate agent?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Mr. Klatzkow?
Page 172
July 7, 2015
MR. KLATZKOW: I believe you're going to have to readvertise
it, right?
MS. JOURDAN: Yeah, but we don't have to list it with a real
estate agent --
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: No.
MS. JOURDAN: -- we can just advertise it ourselves.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: That's what I meant.
MS. JOURDAN: Advertise it ourselves?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Yes. If that's the Board's will,
that seems to be fine with me.
CRA CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Board members, any other
comments?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I mean, I think -- yeah, I think we
should list it with a reputable commercial agency and we should put it
out to bid and get commercial brokers to bid on this and give them a
listing and have them actively market the property. And try to get the
best possible price and have, you know, a formal listing agreement so
we don't have these kinds of issues and so we clearly have an
understanding what the agency relationship is and who is representing
whom. Because, I mean, the way this is being handled is just really
bad.
MS. JOURDAN: Well, I would agree, because we really don't --
I mean, we can get it out a lot better and to more people and it's
advertised and stuff if it actually goes with a real estate agent and we
have an existing commercial contract.
MR. OCHS: We have a broker for the CRA.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Who is the commercial broker?
MR. OCHS: What's the firm, please, Tim?
MR. DURHAM: CRE Consultants is the commercial firm on
retainer.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: It's my view we should bring it
Page 173
July 7, 2015
back at the September meeting if this doesn't close. I don't think
there's any reason to rush into this, because this has not been clean. It
has been the opposite of a clean arrangement. So --
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Well, but -- and I understand your
abundance of caution, but I guess the issue is, is that depending on
what happens on July 13th, if it doesn't close then there is a clear and
defined break with the former --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Everybody.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Yeah, and that we start fresh.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I think we should, ma'am. I don't
think that -- you know, we're going to have a month or six weeks in
there, I don't think that's going to make or break this property. I think
the property's probably going to be worth more later than it is now.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: That's right.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: So I suggest we de-- you know, I'm
making a motion that we don't do anything until our next meeting and
that if Mr. Fortino fails to close, that the County Manager and Ms.
Jourdan bring forth a proposal for disposition of the property if they
still feel like that's in order and bring something for the board to
approve. That would be my motion.
CRA CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Do I hear a second?
(No response.)
CRA CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: I'll second it for the sake of
conversation. And my conversation would be if it doesn't close, and I
think it will, but if it doesn't close do you have any renters left that can
help you get through these next couple of months? Because there's
payments involved. Or how would that affect you?
MS. JOURDAN: We actually have one renter left there, but he'll
be vacating within the next few months also, so then we'll have no
income coming in from those properties.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I think we do need to move this
Page 174
July 7, 2015
ahead. You know, if we have a real estate -- commercial real estate
firm that we have on retainer for the county, how do we lose? We
don't lose if we just go ahead and list it.
CRA CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Can we hear from the other two
commissioners? I've heard from --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Can I --
CRA CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Can you make it quicker,
though?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah, absolutely.
I looked at Chapter 475. You know, the other commissioners
have spoken a great deal and I think --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: (Laughing.)
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- this is a very important issue.
The Chapter 475 makes it very clear that there are disclosure
requirements for the brokers and it's required by statute like you must
make these disclosures to the seller and the buyer. And we never
received that. And it is the broker's duty. So I feel very strongly that
going forward I think we need to let's see what happens on the 13th, if
it doesn't happen, wait, keep it as it is, it's just a couple of months until
September. In September we should decide who the listing broker
should be for that commercial property, whether it's who we have on
retainer or we can go out and get another broker, I mean, there are
really great commercial brokers out there, and make sure that we have,
you know, the agreement as required with all the disclosures that are in
475.
Because it was the broker's duty to bring those disclosures to us
and have us sign them, and that didn't happen. And it's all right here.
I'm looking at it. And it's a big deal, because it goes to how they are
representing us and, you know, whose bringing forward the offers and
the duty of confidentiality and all that kind of stuff.
So we need to -- it's all right here. So I don't think there's much to
Page 175
July 7, 2015
talk about. I think, you know, waiting 'til September if the deal goes
through, then we've agreed to pay a one percent finder fee, you know,
based on the purchase price of the property. And if the -- and that's
assuming that it's, you know, paid for, you know, we're not involved in
any financing or anything like that.
And on the back side, if it doesn't go through, let's just wait 'til
September and decide, you know, what kind of relationship we want to
enter into, whether it's a single agency or a transactional brokerage
agency, whatever makes most sense to us at that time.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: That's been my motion and second.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And I support it is my point. I
agree with you.
CRA CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Commissioner Henning, any
comments before we go to vote?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, ma'am, we beat the heck out
of this.
CRA CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Pardon me?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I said we've beaten the heck out
of this.
CRA CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Yes, we have.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, I wish the County Attorney's
Office had handled it differently.
CRA CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: So we have a motion on the
floor and a second to not advertise this before September; is that
correct? For sale.
Okay, all in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye.
CRA CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign.
Page 176
July 7, 2015
(No response.)
CRA CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay, it passes 5-0. Thank you.
Now, anything else, board members?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thanks for your patience, Jean.
CRA CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: With that then, we will close the
CRA meeting.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: And open up the Board of County
Commission meeting for the second afternoon session.
Item #9E
ORDINANCE 2015-44: (1) AN ORDINANCE AMENDING
ORDINANCE NUMBER 04-41, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER
COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, WHICH INCLUDES
THE COMPREHENSIVE LAND REGULATIONS FOR THE
UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA,
BY PROVIDING FOR: SECTION ONE, RECITALS; SECTION
TWO, FINDINGS OF FACT; SECTION THREE, ADOPTION OF
AMENDMENTS TO THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, MORE
SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE FOLLOWING: CHAPTER
TWO - ZONING DISTRICTS AND USES, INCLUDING SECTION
2.03.07 OVERLAY ZONING DISTRICTS; CHAPTER THREE -
RESOURCE PROTECTION, INCLUDING SECTION 3.05.02
EXEMPTION FROM REQUIREMENTS FOR VEGETATION
PROTECTION AND PRESERVATION, SECTION 3.05.07
PRESERVATION STANDARDS, SECTION 3.05.08
REQUIREMENT FOR REMOVAL OF PROHIBITED EXOTIC
VEGETATION; CHAPTER FOUR - SITE DESIGN AND
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, INCLUDING SECTION 4.02.04
STANDARDS FOR CLUSTER RESIDENTIAL DESIGN,
SECTION 4.06.02 BUFFER REQUIREMENTS, 4.06.05 GENERAL
Page 177
July 7, 2015
LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS, 4.08.07 SRA DESIGNATION;
CHAPTER FIVE - SUPPLEMENTAL STANDARDS INCLUDING
SECTION 5.06.04 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR SIGNS
IN NONRESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS; CHAPTER TEN -
APPLICATION, REVIEW, AND DECISION-MAKING
PROCEDURES, INCLUDING SECTION 10.02.04
REQUIREMENTS FOR PRELIMINARY AND FINAL
SUBDIVISION PLATS, SECTION 10.02.06 REQUIREMENTS
FOR PERMITS, SECTION 10.02.07 REQUIREMENTS FOR
CERTIFICATES OF PUBLIC FACILITY ADEQUACY, SECTION
10.03.06 PUBLIC NOTICE AND REQUIRED HEARINGS FOR
LAND USE PETITIONS; APPENDIX A- STANDARD
PERFORMANCE SECURITY DOCUMENTS FOR REQUIRED
IMPROVEMENTS; SECTION FOUR, CONFLICT AND
SEVERABILITY; SECTION FIVE, INCLUSION IN THE
COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE; AND
SECTION SIX, EFFECTIVE DATE; (2) PROVIDING DIRECTION
TO STAFF TO UPDATE THE LAND USE PROCEDURES IN THE
ADMINISTRATIVE CODE FOR LAND DEVELOPMENT; AND
(3) THE LIST OF PROPOSED 2015 LAND DEVELOPMENT
CODE AMENDMENTS - CYCLE 2 — ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, you are now on Item 9.E on today's
agenda. It's a recommendation to consider a series of Land
Development Code amendments that were previously Board directed
or applied for privately, and also to provide direction to the staff to
update the land use procedures in your Administrative Code for land
development, and then finally, to consider authorizing the proposed list
of 2015 Cycle 2 Land Development Code Amendments.
Ms. Caroline Cilek will present.
MS. CILEK: Thank you. Yes, Caroline Cilek, Land
Page 178
July 7, 2015
Development Code Manager with our Growth Management
Department.
Just to add to what our County Manager has relayed, the
amendments for Cycle 1 have been publicly vetted and were
unanimously approved by the Development Services Advisory
Committee, as well as the Planning Commission.
Also in your new packet is the Cycle 2 prioritized list of
amendments for your consideration and direction to proceed working
on the Administrative Code for Land Development, which is a tool to
help applicants and public apply for land use applications.
I'm happy to answer any questions you may have.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Comments? Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The RLSA, is this a private
amendment incorporated?
MS. CILEK: Yes, Cycle 1 included privately initiated
amendments. This amendment went through the vetting process. And
the one before you today was approved by the Planning Commission
as presented. Previously there were other provision and those are no
longer in the document that is before you today.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I think that we need to go over
this in detail.
MS. CILEK: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: One of the things that I have
concerns about is packet Page 204. And that is resolution decision for
the stewardship receiving area, SRA, and amendment CRA, the
following advertised public hearing are required. One Planning
Commission meeting, one, BCC hearing.
Now, when we do a -- let's say the stewardship -- or the Big
Cypress stewardship, would this say that we're only doing one
hearing?
MS. CILEK: Okay. And we are looking at Amendment
Page 179
July 7, 2015
10.03.06, which identifies the public hearing procedures, correct? I
can put it up on the overhead just to make sure that we're all on the
same page. Because this is a companion item to the privately initiated
amendment.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes, we're on the same page.
MS. CILEK: Great. Yes, these would be the public hearing
requirements and notice procedures for the SRA areas.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So when the stewardship -- or
the Big Cypress comes forward, that's actually a DRI and it's a big
amendment. It's a Growth Management Plan Amendment? Is it just a
DRI? So it only requires one hearing anyways.
MS. CILEK: So these are specific to the SRA designations and
SRA amendments, which there are several types of amendments being
proposed. This is separate than any growth management changes.
MR. BOSI: Good afternoon, Commission, Mike Bosi,
Planning/Zoning Director.
The statutes have basically exempted SRAs from the DRI
process, so this is strictly a local ordinance that requires one hearing
before the Planning Commission, the EAC and then also the Board of
County Commissioners.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: What would we do with any big
development like Ave Maria or Big Cypress? Let's say it wasn't in the
RLSA. What would we do for any other development? Would it be
two hearings or one?
MR. BOSI: It would be one hearing.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. You answered that
question.
Let's go through the whole request by this private development so
I have a complete understanding.
MS. CILEK: Sure. That would be a different amendment. And I
will pull that up and put it on the overhead as we walk through it. So
Page 180
July 7, 2015
you're going to go to the 4.08.07 private amendment in your binder.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I don't have a binder.
MS. CILEK: Okay, I can --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: What page?
MS. CILEK: It is page -- looks like we're going to have to
coordinate.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: On the bottom of the page.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Do you want to look at it?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, I've got that binder in my office.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Go get it. Because there's going
to be more.
MS. CILEK: I think what would be helpful would be to look at
the proposed changes and those are highlighted in yellow for your
convenience, a reading. I can also pull up the amendment.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, pull it up.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Ifs F. It's section F.
MS. CILEK: If it would be helpful, can we walk through the
amendment page by page?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yep.
MS. CILEK: Okay. On the first page of actual LDC text there
are no changes.
Changes begin --
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: On Page 12.
MS. CILEK: -- on Page 12, correct.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Well, on Page 11, public notice
and required hearings.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right. And that's no different
than what we do now.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Yeah.
MS. CILEK: Correct, that is just a cross reference.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: One comment. You constantly
Page 181
July 7, 2015
have EAC. We don't have the EAC.
MS. CILEK: The EAC is incorporated into the Planning
Commission.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Correct. So why are we constantly
referring -- why not just strike that and just -- because it's the Planning
Commission. It's not the EAC, it's only the Planning Commission.
MS. CILEK: We can look at that at the future. It was my
understanding that the ordinance that allowed for the incorporation of
the EAC into the Planning Commission kind of covered that for the
direction. But we can look at that throughout the LDC as we move
forward and look at the sections.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, we're doing that right now.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: We're going to throw it all together.
MR. KLATZKOW: You have a number of ordinances that
require review by the EAC. We have the Planning Commission sitting
both as a Planning Commission and the EAC.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: That's why it's --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So why not just have one
ordinance that says all ordinances that address an EAC now shall
strictly refer to Planning Commission, and be done with it. And that
way -- you know, we just need some --
CHAIRMAN NANCE: We don't have that right now.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, we need that. Because we
need to clean it up. I mean, it's been longstanding that we no longer
have an EAC. It's easy.
MS. CILEK: I can look to discuss that with the County
Attorney's Office in the future.
Okay, the next page begins more of the substantive changes. Any
issues here?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No.
MS. CILEK: No, okay.
Page 182
July 7, 2015
This continues with the amendment process. As you can see, this
language is very familiar. It is from the PUD, planned unit
development, section of the --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It's the same thing we're doing
now for everybody else.
MS. CILEK: Correct. And this language is verbatim currently.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
MS. CILEK: No changes on Page 14.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And you have some deviations.
They can ask for deviations, and that's no different than anybody else.
Next one?
MS. CILEK: Page 15.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You're changing the --
MS. CILEK: This slide I believe shows the deviation request.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right.
MS. CILEK: Okay?
Page 16.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, we're also striking through
some things. Collier County RLSA overlay SRA characterization
chart is being struck through where it shows --
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Where are you?
MS. CILEK: So we're on Page 16.
I don't believe there's any struck through language, but I will note
that we've updated the SRA chart just to correct some minor errors. So
it's not included in this amendment. It's kind of a bulky amendment so
we have it as a separate one.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I want to comment on that when
it's appropriate.
MS. CILEK: Sure, that would be great.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Go ahead, let's finish this.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, go ahead, I want to listen to
Page 183
July 7, 2015
you.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Okay. Let's go to that
amendment.
MS. CILEK: So that is the -- for those who have a binder, it's the
one prior to this amendment, 4.08.07 SRA chart. And our goal here
was to allow this to be a little bit more user friendly in reading and to
just correct a couple of typos; one being that they were intended to be
uses that were underlined, just to show that they were allowed but not
required and that had not been included in the codified version. We
were here to correct that.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: And also, I believe adding
workforce or workforce was already in there?
MS. CILEK: We are making this consistent with the FLUE, I
believe, in the language that is being included.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Okay. What's happened here,
there's an incompatibility. Because with a town, the required uses with
a town is centralized or decentralized community treatment system.
But an interim use is interim well and septic. And if Pine Ridge and
the area behind the post office tells you anything, once you're on septic
it's very difficult to get you off.
So what you've got is you saying that we want workforce housing
which is higher density, and that comes in every one of the areas:
Town, village, hamlet, and rural. But what you're allowing is
individual well and septic systems in the rural, individual well and
septic systems in the hamlet. That's required. That's sprawl.
That's not an accusation to you, but it's incompatible when you're
trying to talk about higher densities. You can't put them on well and
septic. If you're talking about well and septic, then we've got whole
other problems that we're not -- that's not what the rural lands is
supposed to be about.
MS. CILEK: What I can do today is take note of this and share
Page 184
July 7, 2015
this with our comprehensive planning manager. This table now that is
corrected is verbatim of the GMP and the FLUE elements. So that
conversation will need to be had at that level. But I will relay that
information --
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: As we're going forward, you
know, what do we want out there?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Is this adoption hearing?
MS. CILEK: Yes, these amendments need to be heard once, and
today is the day.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Well, do we have to
adopt it today?
MS. CILEK: You don't have to, no. I'm here to present them for
adoption.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I think Commissioner Taylor
brings up a valid point. We were trying to take the density throughout
the agricultural area and create these villages; hamlets, villages and so
on and so forth, trying to condense it. And a well system, a septic
system is problematic.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Commissioner, that's already language
that's in there now. They just cleaned up the chart.
MS. CILEK: Right, we're here to just correct more or less a
scrivener's error. But I can certainly relay this to --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I guess it's kind of confusing,
because what happened is you struck out one chart and created a new
chart. However, the language -- some of the language was still in there,
or all the language is the same?
MS. CILEK: Correct. We only tried to clarify it when it was
inconsistent with small tweaks to the GMP language, and that's the
shaded language that you see there. But in general, the -- we're just
trying to correct a scrivener's error. But I take your comment to heart
and we can definitely share those with our staff members.
Page 185
July 7, 2015
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Absolutely.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: You all right?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Okay. Comment so noted.
MS. CILEK: Thank you.
All right, we're on Page 16.
Yes?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Can I clarify? Going back to the
issue of septic versus as sewer system, am I to understand that what's
being suggested, that there shall be no septic systems in that area, and
that there will be a sewer system?
And County Manager, do you have a factored in your budget?
Because to put a -- I mean, we're going to be -- the county is going to
have to put in the sewer system. I mean, the only thing the developer
has to do is, you know, tie in.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's not a true statement.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: But I want a clarification of what's
being proposed. Because if that isn't what's being proposed, then what's
here is okay.
MR. OCHS: Commissioner, there are --
MS. CILEK: I need to defer to --
MR. OCHS: There are private developers that put in their own
utility plants.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Did you put one in Ave Maria?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: That's right.
MR. OCHS: No, sir. Ave Maria for instance has their own water
and sewer utilities.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: But they are a special district.
They have a completely different funding mechanism. I mean, they
are like the county, they are a special taxing district. Big Cypress is
not part of-- for example, part of a special taxing --
Page 186
July 7, 2015
MR. BOSI: Big Cypress is a 189 district, a unique 189 district,
which is a financing district that was actually created by the legislature
at the same time of Ave Maria, so Big Cypress is a 189 that is able to
have bonding capacity for infrastructure provision.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Are they able to put in a sewer
system?
MR. BOSI: No, they were suggesting a town, and town requires
that they provide the utilities.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And does the town as it's -- as this
is currently written, does this provide for the sewer system in the
town?
MR. BOSI: It requires --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: It requires the sewer system.
MR. BOSI: -- your own to be provided.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: But I'm not sure I understand what
needs to change from this. I don't understand what the issue is.
MR. BOSI: There was nothing being suggested within this chart
related to the provision for a hamlet to be able to utilize septic. That's
an issue that needs to be taken up at a growth management plan stage
discussion. Because that's a provision that's allowed for by the current
policy for the Rural Land Stewardship Area.
And I've heard the Board express some concern over that aspect,
and that will be something I'll have to take to our comprehensive
planning staff and initiate the discussion in that process.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Is it proper to do that when we do the
GMP?
MR. BOSI: This is --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: It's appropriate to approve this
as-is at this time.
MR. BOSI: As is there's no substantive changes being suggested
to this chart.
Page 187
July 7, 2015
COMMISSIONER HILLER: We're okay.
MR. BOSI: The only thing that was added was underlying a
couple uses that were omitted from being underlined. There's no
modification, there's no substantive modifications to the chart -- to the
regulations within the RLSA except for the allowance for some of the
deviations that are being suggested by the private initiated LDC
amendment which have been reviewed and recommended for
approval.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: That's why this is bundled in a single
agenda item, Mr. Bosi.
MR. BOSI: Yes, correct.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That makes sense.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: So there are three different
considerations here.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: We've got the Cycle 1 amendment which
is composed of Board directed amendment, this privately initiated
amendment. And the amendments providing flexibility and the
clarification scrivener error amendments that are bundled together in
this.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right. And it does make sense to
approve them at this time without any adverse impact.
MS. CILEK: Correct. All of these have been vetted and
approved. We're not making any substantive changes to that chart.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I have another question.
MS. CILEK: Sure.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Who needs to approve this
amendment?
MS. CILEK: These amendments need a supermajority vote by
the Board of County Commissioners, all of them.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's why we're here today.
Page 188
July 7, 2015
MS. CILEK: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: All right. We have -- the
strike-through, the monitoring requirement to ensure the fiscal
neutrality, the development of the CRA shall submit to the county
fiscal impact analysis report every five years.
Now that's being crossed out.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Where are you? What page?
MR. YOVANOVICH: 29.
MS. CILEK: Let me put it on there for you.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That was statutorily eliminated,
wasn't it?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Board directed.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Page 28.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It was Board directed?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Sir, when we brought back the FIAM
analysis we were going to start doing developer contribution
agreements and eliminate the five-year review, because we found no
merit in it when we came back to the Board last time we presented the
FIAM review.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Can I ask a question regarding the
FIAM?
I thought it was statutorily eliminated also. Wasn't it? Or did
they have a different -- I can't remember now, but I thought there was
some provisions.
MR. BOSI: Mike Bosi again.
And no, Commissioner, the statutes have not addressed any
aspect of the determination for a fiscal neutrality, and that's still a
component that's still within our Growth Management Plan and within
our Land Development Code.
The last time we were here before the Board of County
Page 189
July 7, 2015
Commissioners, Mr. Casalanguida had said the Board of County
Commissioners had basically directed the staff to no longer utilize the
FIAM because the confidence within that model was no longer
maintained by the Board. And so we're approaching this from a public
facilities impact analysis as well as a developer contribution agreement
analysis that's going to be coupled together that's going to be part of
the review package that attempts to establish that fiscal neutrality.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I understand, and I remember that
whole discussion. And there was no question that the FIAM
absolutely does not work. It's impossible. It can't be relied on as to
proving neutrality or not.
But what is required in the statutes with respect to fiscal
neutrality? Is there any statutory provision that requires evidence of
that?
MR. BOSI: I will have to review the statute. The statutes were
based upon the original Collier program. But I haven't reviewed
specifically the Florida statutes related to the creation of an RLSA. I
can most certainly report back to --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: For some reason, and that's what --
and, you know, I am reaching back in my memory, but I thought that
was -- you know, the FIAM as a monitoring tool was eliminated as a
requirement. And I could be mistaken, but I had some recollection that
it was either modified or eliminated. If it was even in there.
MR. YOVANOVICH: It was never required.
MR. BOSI: Well, I know that --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Was it even in there or was it just a
local creature?
MR. BOSI: The Department of Community Affairs, the prior
DEO. Was committed to the FIAM and the Regional Planning
Council as well. They had -- but when the utilization of the FIAM was
happening throughout the state, there was issues, the same type of
Page 190
July 7, 2015
issues that were experienced by Collier.
The state pulled back, the region pulled back. The concept of
fiscal neutrality is still maintained but the utilization of the FIAM was
no longer being endorsed by the state or the region.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I had some recollection of that.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Let me provide a little bit of guidance to
the Board here on what we have before us. This is a very cumbersome
agenda item.
The Cycle 1 amendments that are outlined here through several
different sorts were unanimously approved by the Planning
Commission on two hearings: One on May 21st and the second on
June 4th. Okay? Those are being recommended by the Planning
Commission.
Number two: The upgrade to the Administrative Code for land
development includes procedures that are necessary based on the
proposed LDC amendments, and updates would be, as directed by the
Board to do so, will be brought forward to the Board consideration at a
future meeting. That's contingent upon the ones that have been
approved by the Planning Commission.
And the third element in this cumbersome agenda item are the
Cycle 2 list, which is a listing of things that have been brought forth at
different times for consideration going forward. So that's what the
Board needs to look at. You've kind of got three bites on this thing.
It's got three elements.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Are you done?
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Yes, Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Is there any other deviations
from the development standards besides the signs? I mean, the
changes to the development standards, I'm only seeing signs. So I'm
asking, is there any other development standards that was written in
the code that is being changed?
Page 191
July 7, 2015
MS. CILEK: So if we look at the list of amendments, if everyone
has that, there is one regarding the Immokalee interim deviations.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, no, no, that's not in the
RLSA.
MS. CILEK: Oh, I apologize. I'm sorry, I was speaking of the
entire cycle.
Looking at the SRA amendment, they are requesting deviations
and amendments.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, there's development
standard changes to the signs. Is there any other development changes
besides signs?
MR. YOVANOVICH: If I may, since -- for the record, Rich
Yovanovich on behalf of the private sector petitioner.
The answer is no. What we're simply doing is adding a process
where we can ask for deviations at any time.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: There's deviations in there, I see
that, that's great.
MR. YOVANOVICH: And then we're adding substantial and
insubstantial provisions, similar to PUDs, for process. And we're
actually increasing the amount of public input by requiring a
neighborhood information meeting process before any amendments.
We're not asking for any changes to any of the development
standards that currently exist through this amendment process.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay, I must have read that
wrong.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Yeah, that was not -- we never intended
to change any of the development standards that currently exist. We
just added the process by which we can ask for deviations.
Instead of having to ask for them at the very first development
order of the town we can ask for them later on in the process. So there
was no intent to change anything.
Page 192
July 7, 2015
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I looked at the wrong one. It is
Section 5 of the Land Development Code. That's not in the RLSA.
MR. YOVANOVICH: That's not the RLSA.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you.
Okay, I'm all set. No more questions.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Any further comments?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Is there a motion here from anyone?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And I'll give it a second.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Okay, what are we going to approve?
Are we going to take it in three step?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Motion to approve it all. Do we
have to break it up, or we can approve it until --
CHAIRMAN NANCE: I will second it.
Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Hearing none --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I already seconded it. But your
voice sounds better, so I'll just let you have that.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Okay. Well, we've got a double second,
so it's definitely seconded.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: All right.
Page 193
July 7, 2015
MS. CILEK: Thank you.
MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, that concludes your business items
on the agenda today, save for the three items that you'll hear at 5:05.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Okay, Mr. Ochs, would you like to talk
about -- is there any other thing you can handle at this time or would
you like to talk about the current workshop session? Since we're not
going to meet again until the 8th, is there additional business we can
conclude?
Item #15
STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS
MR. OCHS: If you want to go to communications for me,
anyhow, that would be great, sir.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Okay.
MR. OCHS: Those are -- per the Board's direction, at the last
meeting we adjusted the workshop schedules for October and
November to cover the items that you see on the visualizer.
Also, Commissioners, we did get information that due to the early
start of next year's legislative session, which will start in January, the
Collier Delegation meeting that typically is held the week of
Thanksgiving has been moved up to October 15th.
So I know that several commissioners had suggested that perhaps
if we could find a date that worked for the Board and also worked for
our delegation, if we could look to perhaps have some time with the
delegation in September after you get back, probably mid September.
We're trying to work on a -- what would be a, you know, an off-cycle
workshop date, if that's acceptable to the Board. If there's some
consensus that there's interest in that, prior to you adopting your state
legislative priorities for the next session.
Page 194
July 7, 2015
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioners in agreements on that,
letting Mr. Ochs come back with a proposed date?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah.
MR. OCHS: Okay, so we're going to work on that.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Okay. What about Commissioner
comments? Commissioners, do you have comments you'd like to
make at this point?
Going to distribute some caffeine here shortly.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, I have one.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Would you like to do that,
Commissioner?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, the Board just approved a
settlement agreement for the Orange Tree utility. It will be brought
into our system. That utility system does not fluorinate their water.
No?
MR. KLATZKOW: No, that's not what we did.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: What did we do?
MR. KLATZKOW: You authorized me to bring suit to compel --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
MR. KLATZKOW: -- the sale.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: All right. So what are we going
to do once we take it over? Are we going to force those people to
drink fluorinated water? It's going to be part of our -- it's going to be
interconnected within our system. So it's either no fluorination
throughout the whole district or fluorination throughout the whole
district.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Over 30 percent of Collier County
doesn't have fluoridated water because they're on well. And
predominantly where the families live doesn't have fluoridated water.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: But I'm not talking about outside
the service area for the district, I'm talking about the water and sewer
Page 195
July 7, 2015
district.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: I don't know, I think the system should
have consistent services to all, either all do one or all do the other
would be my suggestion.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm saying -- then I'll go back to
the original question, do we force them to drink fluoridated water at
Orange Tree?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Can I suggest maybe staff needs to
go back and look, there are updated studies, I think by the federal
government also about fluoridation and the impact on health. And, I
mean, you know, ingested fluoride as opposed to topical fluoride. But
I'm not sure what the status is at this point.
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, we'd be very happy to bring back a
staff report with the latest research and information, and whatever
input the -- Board direction you'd want to give at that time we would
certainly take.
But Commissioner Henning's correct. I mean, the intent if we do
take over that district is that it will be interconnected with all of your
other plants, and that's part of the beauty, if you will, of the system that
you can move flows around through a larger system.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Provides the same services for the same
cost.
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir. Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Other than that, have a great
summer. I'll be around if anybody wants their purchase orders.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah, it's my understanding -- I
read an article in the paper and I spoke to Leo about it to see if he had
the evidence that the paper was referring to on BQ Concrete.
Apparently the Clerk sent out two letters to BQ Concrete citing the
civil theft statute and where he basically told them that unless they
Page 196
July 7, 2015
reimbursed the county for what he claims they improperly received,
that he deems to be a theft, that he would proceed with litigation.
And I talked to the County Attorney. And regardless of the
Clerk's opinion of what his standing is, that the County Attorney -- and
I think it's fair to say, and I agree with him, that the Clerk does not
have standing to sue in the name of the Board. The Board is the only
one who can sue in the name of the county or be sued in the name of
the county.
So one thought I had to recover this money without litigation, to
the extent we know that there are funds -- and essentially what
happened was the Clerk failed to adequately pre-audit these invoices
and as a consequence they were improperly paid.
And so now to get this money back, one way to do it without
litigation is, in light of the invoices that haven't been paid, is to
establish an offset between what they have received in excess of what
they were entitled to and what they legitimately may still be owed.
And then the county can be, at least as to those two particular invoices,
be whole again.
And I don't know if that's something that the County Attorney
would do or the County Manager would do, but it certainly would be a
way to get that money back to the county now. And that way that
issue, at least with respect to those two invoices, would be addressed,
we would recover those funds.
Who would like to address that? County Attorney, County
Manager?
MR. KLATZKOW: If you know for certainty that you've
overpaid somebody and there are outstanding invoices due, you offset
it. You don't go to court to get your money back, you simply offset it
and that ends that. You know, that would be a function of the County
Manager working with the Clerk's Office.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Is that something that the Board
Page 197
July 7, 2015
would see as a reasonable thing to do? I mean, I don't see any reason
CHAIRMAN NANCE: First of all, you have to make a
determination what the facts actually are. Have we determined that
yet?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Have you got the letters that show
MR. OCHS: Ma'am, I'm sorry, I don't have them with me. I can
go downstairs and bring them later.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah, could someone bring them
up?
CHAIRMAN NANCE: I'm not sure we know what the facts of
the case are yet, are (sic) we? We're still researching --
MR. KLATZKOW: Well, if you know for certainty that you've
overpaid "X" number of dollars --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I mean, if they -- you know, if they
stipulate to those amounts as overpayments, then that issue is settled.
Now, and it can be taken care of without litigation, and we can
get the money back right now without spending a fortune in litigation
to get there.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I think it's common sense.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I think we should look at it, you
know.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Have an active investigation. I
don't see how you can do that.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Yeah, I think we need to wait until we --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I don't see --
CHAIRMAN NANCE: -- make some determination.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And to the same extent -- and that's
a good point. And to the same extent, since we have an active -- if
there's an active criminal investigation, then the Clerk can't be pursuing
Page 198
July 7, 2015
this civil action.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: He can't anyways.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: What?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: He cannot anyways.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: He can't anyways, but then he
shouldn't be. But didn't he send out some letters? Can you get me
those letters?
MR. OCHS: Yes, they're coming up.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's great.
So, I mean, if it can be resolved, then it should be resolved, you
know, expeditiously without litigation. If it can't be resolved, then the
Clerk shouldn't be doing what he's doing.
Crystal, is the Clerk continuing to investigate BQ?
MS. KINZEL: Commissioner Hiller, the BQ is under
investigation at this time.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: By FDLE. But is the Clerk's
Office investigating?
MS. KINZEL: We are not an investigative branch. However --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So you're not doing any audits.
MS. KINZEL: -- that is not the case.
No, I did not say that. We are continuing to gather the
information related to the active investigation. And that's all I would
really want to further say about it. The letters speak for themselves
regarding the Clerk's legal action, and the Clerk believes that action is
fully appropriate.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So the Clerk is continuing its
investigation of BQ. I just would like to know.
Can I see the letters?
This one looks like a duplicate of the same thing. There's only
two letters, right?
MR. OCHS: Yes, ma'am. I think one went to each of the
Page 199
July 7, 2015
principals of the firm.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Oh, I see. I understand.
Well, like I said, I don't -- I mean, I know -- County Attorney,
have you seen these letters?
MR. KLATZKOW: No.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Let me go ahead and give them to
you.
Nick, would you mind? I'll just give you everything that's here.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Why don't we let Mr. Klatzkow review
these letters and come back to us. We're going to have another session
here this evening, if you want to let him take a look at it.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah, that's a good idea.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: You want to do that? Let's do that. Let's
go to comments from Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, I don't have any comments,
except I'll miss everybody and I'll see you in the fall.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Taylor?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Well, I just have a couple of
comments. As you know, I'm on the Blue Zone Steering Committee
and I'm particularly assigned to a built environment part of the Blue
Zone where they look at how the county is and how the city is. And
I've gotten -- their survey, they brought in a planner and he reviewed it.
So I thought it would be very, very interesting for you to read his
evaluation of the county.
But also there is a document which is probably a sales document
because they would love you to get them to model your growth. But
it's about smart growth, and so for your summer reading --
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Would you be so kind as to forward that
to -- can you forward this to us?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Electronically.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: She's forwarding it right now.
Page 200
July 7, 2015
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Yeah. So I thought it would be
interesting for you to take a look at. And certainly not now.
And I just wish my colleagues a restful and wonderful summer,
and to the public too, and we'll see you in the fall.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Okay. I'd just like to bring one -- a
couple topics out there. One of them of particular concern that the
commissioners may not have been aware of. I've been aware of and
I've been forwarding information to staff regarding this.
But it seems that A. Duda and Son has made an application in
Hendry County for a new regional landfill. And it has been suggested
this landfill is going to be as high as 300 feet, and it has been discussed
to be a possible destination for various South Florida locations
including Broward and Dade County for disposal of goods in Hendry
County. And that application has been made.
Staff is aware of it. It has been suggested that the traffic through
the town of Immokalee could be as high as 400 trucks daily. And these
are very, very large trucks, these are not just little small trucks.
Limitations on the contents not clearly defined.
It has been requested from the Hendry County that we supply our
unified response from Collier County from Planning and Zoning by
July 20th, and I would like all of your support to enable staff and
authorize staff to spend whatever time necessary to come up with a
response to that.
I would hate to see this happen to Immokalee prior to this loop
road being constructed. You know, if you have a loop road that would
allow heavy traffic like that, that's one thing. But to have 400 huge
garbage trucks coming from Broward and Dade County every day
through a street that Secretary Hattaway has suggested might better be
designed as a complete street and traveling across a street that's
produced a very, very high incidence of injury to pedestrians and
bicyclists I think is unconscionable. A. Duda and Sons is the
Page 201
July 7, 2015
applicant. This application by A. Duda and Sons has created an
inter-agribusiness fight between landowners out there with -- large
adjacent landowners like King Ranch in very, very serious opposition
to this. But I don't know that it's within our ability, because it is taking
place on state roads, to really significantly impact its approval.
I am personally going to speak to Secretary Hattaway on this on
Thursday, but I'd just like the support of the commissioners to enable
the staff to do whatever they can to slow the approval of this down and
make sure that everybody receives our comments on this. I think it's a
tragedy in the making.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'd like to comment on it.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, I hope Secretary Hattaway is
still coming down. He canceled his appointment with me.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Oh, did he? Well, maybe he's done that
COMMISSIONER FIALA: He said something about he's getting
back from Bartow too late or something like that. But just maybe he'll
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Is he scheduled to see you on Thursday,
ma'am?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I think it was Thursday.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: All right, we'll check.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I just know he was scheduled to be
there and he had to cancel and didn't rebook.
And I totally agree, because you've got a walking community
there. You've got people who only have bikes or walking, and this
could be very dangerous to them.
Now, I don't know how long it takes, what, 10 years to approve a
landfill? But how far along are they in the process? If they're in the
ninth year --
Page 202
July 7, 2015
CHAIRMAN NANCE: I think it's a recent application for zoning
approval in Hendry County and I think you can get things approved in
Hendry County pretty quick.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, I see.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: But, you know, I mean, the critique of
this up in Hendry County with adjacent landowners has not been, as
you might expect, concerning Immokalee, it's concerning the
agribusiness interest. People don't want to see a 300-foot mountain
next to their property. They don't want to see the birds associated
oftentimes with landfills because all of their citrus out there is sprayed
by air. And the crop dusters are not happy about flying through big
flocks of birds, as you might imagine.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And probably they won't take care
of a landfill like we do. We have one of the cleanest landfills around.
And if you don't take care of it the way we do -- and it cost extra
money to do that, that's why our landfill is visited by so many, because
of the condition that it's in. And if it isn't, your landowners will even
have more of a problem.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: You have the odor, you have the
birds, you have so many issues. The traffic.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Yes, so --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Go ahead.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: So there's every reason to have a
response. And I'm just looking for nods, you know, to staff to let them
go ahead and do what they can do and advise us of what it is, what sort
of action we might need to take if any.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: As strong a response as we're
legally allowed to do. Immokalee has a Main Street and that Main
Street needs to be preserved and not as a truck thoroughfare.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I've heard from a number of
Page 203
July 7, 2015
community members, and there's a great deal of concern and
opposition, and I think we need to do exactly what Commissioner
Nance says and that is we need to prepare the appropriate response as
members of, you know, the overall region, that locating it there in that
fashion would create a problem for us as a neighbor. We would
directly be affected adversely.
So yeah, let's go ahead and we've got our nods.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Taylor, any further
comments?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Yeah, just it's almost -- this is
kind of a flag going up in the air. So we really have to be prepared
because I'm not suggesting there will be two land facilities in Hendry
County, but the space is running out on the east coast and they're
naturally going to look to the west. So I think we need to be very
strong in our response.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: All right. Mr. Ochs, if nothing further,
sir, I suppose, and commission members, that we are going to be in
recess until 5:05?
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Is that the correct --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: By the way, this Blue Zone
analysis is in --
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Let's call us in recess until 5:05.
(Recess.)
MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, you have a live mike.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to the
continuing meeting of July 7th. And this is the evening session of the
Board of County Commissioners.
I would ask you and remind you, for us to have an orderly
meeting, please turn off all cell phones, pager, audible alarms, or other
noise-making devices that might remain in your pockets after the 4th
Page 204
July 7, 2015
so we can have an organized meeting.
We are going to consider several items this evening. And I guess
we're going to begin with Item 9C; is that right, Mr. Ochs?
Item #9C
ORDINANCE 2015-45: AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 04-
41, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND
DEVELOPMENT CODE, WHICH INCLUDES THE
COMPREHENSIVE LAND REGULATIONS FOR THE
UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA,
BY PROVIDING FOR: SECTION ONE, RECITALS; SECTION
TWO, ADOPTION OF AMENDMENTS TO THE LAND
DEVELOPMENT CODE, MORE SPECIFICALLY AMENDING
CHAPTER 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS AND USES, INCLUDING
SECTION 2.03.09 OPEN SPACE ZONING DISTRICTS, TO ADD
GOLF MAINTENANCE BUILDINGS AS A NEW ACCESSORY
USE WITHIN THE GOLF COURSE ZONING DISTRICT;
CHAPTER 4 - SITE DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT
STANDARDS, INCLUDING SECTION 4.02.03 SPECIFIC
STANDARDS FOR LOCATION OF ACCESSORY BUILDINGS
AND STRUCTURES, TO ESTABLISH SETBACK
REQUIREMENTS FOR GOLF CLUBHOUSE AND
MAINTENANCE BUILDINGS ON WATERFRONT LOTS AND
GOLF COURSE LOTS IN ZONING DISTRICTS OTHER THAN
RURAL AGRICULTURAL AND ESTATES; SECTION THREE,
CONFLICT AND SEVERABILITY; SECTION FOUR,
INCLUSION IN COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT
CODE; AND SECTION FIVE, EFFECTIVE DATE — ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: That's correct, Mr. Chairman.
Page 205
July 7, 2015
And Item 9C is, in fact, the adoption of amendments to the Land
Development Code, more specifically amending Chapter 2, the zoning
districts and uses, including Section 2.03.09, open space zoning
districts, to add golf maintenance buildings as a necessary accessory
use within the golf course zoning district.
And Ms. Caroline Cilek will take you through the process.
MS. CILEK: Good evening, Commissioners. This is the second
reading of this LDC amendment, and it is, indeed, changing an
accessory use, which requires two hearings.
There have been no changes since you last reviewed it, and I'm
seeking your approval.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Second.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: There's a motion to approve by
Commissioner Henning and a second by Commissioner Fiala and
Commissioner Taylor.
Is there any discussion on this item? I think it's fairly
uncontroversial.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Hearing none, all those in favor, signify
by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: All right. It passes unanimously.
MS. CILEK: Thank you.
Page 206
July 7, 2015
Item #9D
ORDINANCE 2015-46: AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 04-
41, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND
DEVELOPMENT CODE, WHICH INCLUDES THE
COMPREHENSIVE LAND REGULATIONS FOR THE
UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA,
BY PROVIDING FOR: SECTION ONE, RECITALS; SECTION
TWO, ADOPTION OF AMENDMENTS TO THE LAND
DEVELOPMENT CODE, MORE SPECIFICALLY AMENDING
THE FOLLOWING: CHAPTER ONE - GENERAL PROVISIONS,
INCLUDING SECTION 1 .08.02 DEFINITIONS; CHAPTER FIVE -
SUPPLEMENTAL STANDARDS, INCLUDING SECTION 5.05.05
AUTOMOBILE SERVICE STATIONS, MORE SPECIFICALLY
TO ESTABLISH SITE DESIGN STANDARDS FOR FACILITIES
WITH FUEL PUMPS; SECTION 5.05.08 ARCHITECTURAL AND
SITE DESIGN STANDARDS; SECTION 5.05.11 CARWASHES
ABUTTING RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS; SECTION
THREE, CONFLICT AND SEVERABILITY; SECTION FOUR,
INCLUSION IN THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND
DEVELOPMENT CODE; AND SECTION FIVE, EFFECTIVE
DATE — ADOPTED WITH ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE
MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, that takes us to Item 9D on the
agenda this evening. This is also an amendment to the Land
Development Code amending Chapter 1, general provisions, including
Section 1.08.02, definitions; Chapter 5, supplemental standards,
including Section 5.05.05, automobile service stations, more
specifically, to establish site design standards for facilities with fuel
pumps, architectural and site design standards, car washes in adjacent
Page 207
July 7, 2015
residential zoning districts.
Ms. Cilek?
MS. CILEK: Thank you. Yes. I'm here today to present the
revisions to this LDC amendment in LDC Section 5.05.05. This will
be the second hearing, and I will also be seeking your
recommendations to move forward.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Ms. Cilek, let me make one comment for
everybody that's here. I trust that a number of you are here because of
the second hearing on this item. This item does take four votes in the
affirmative for passage, but I will also remind you that this item does
not pertain to the RaceTrac application on Palm Street and U.S. 41.
This is site design standards and supplemental standards that will be
for all applications going forward.
And so any comments that you have on the record should pertain
to this item and not to the specific application on U.S. 41 and Palm
Street.
Thank you.
MS. CILEK: Thank you. As directed at the last meeting, the
conditional-use provision has been removed, and enhanced site
standards such as requiring consistent architectural theme, canopy
standards, and lighting standards will be required for all gas stations.
These site standards will further be enhanced when the facilities are
located within 250 feet of residential property.
Staff recommends using this distance method in lieu of the terms
"abutting" or "adjacent" because it can be applied more consistently
throughout various development scenarios; however, to address
common situations, two exceptions have been included in this
amendment. These originate from the conditional-use process
reviewed at the last hearing.
It's important to note that these exceptions still will require the
site design standards for all gas stations, which are identified in LDC
Page 208
July 7, 2015
Section 5.05.05.C, but they will not be required to provide the
supplemental standards established in 5.05.05.D.
The first exception, which was generated at the Planning
Commission meeting with assistance from public speakers, applies
when a gas station is separated by at least a 100-foot preserve with 80
percent opacity and is at least 12 feet in height within one year.
The second exception would occur when a gas station is separated
from residential property by a four-lane arterial or collector
right-of-way. As noted on the slide, the supplemental standards will
not be required. But, again, the standards for all gas stations would be
required.
As with all cold (sic) language, there will be situations when
meeting all of the site standards at either level may not be possible.
For example, in a redevelopment scenario. In these situations, an
applicant may seek relief through a public hearing process. This could
be through a planned unit development, a planned unit development
amendment, applying for a variance if there's a land-use hardship, or if
it is, indeed, a redevelopment situation, then the site plans for
redevelopment -- or site plan with definitions for redevelopment. Each
of these requires a public hearing process which will evaluate the
requested relief and will require specific public notice to surrounding
neighbors.
Following the review and recommendations today, staff will be
preparing additional site design standards for facilities with fuel pumps
that have 16 or more fuel pumps that are within 250 feet of residential
property during the next Land Development Code amendment cycle
which will occur this fall. And it was included in the list of prioritized
amendments that you approved just a few hours ago.
That concludes my presentation, and I'm happy to answer any
questions that you may have.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Questions or comments from the Board?
Page 209
July 7, 2015
Commissioner Taylor?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Thank you very much for this.
And, indeed, I think you responded to the Commissions' and the
concerns that were expressed here; however, there doesn't seem to be a
caution for deliveries that would be adjacent to residential or at a
certain time, meaning they -- people -- trucks could come in and make
deliveries at all hours of the night whether it's on the back, with
residential side. And I'm going to pass this out to my colleagues here,
and I'm assuming you have a copy of this, right?
MS. CILEK: I do. I believe so.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: And this was -- I brought this to
our Hearing Examiner's attention, and he developed this language.
And we can see if this is something that we would agree to.
And basically it says that deliveries shall be prohibited between
the hours of 10 p.m. and 7 a.m. when located between the neighboring
residential property and the facility with fuel pumps.
So, basically, if the deliveries are on the front of the building, it's
24-hour delivery, whatever they want. But if it's on the back and it's
adjacent to neighboring or it's on the side that's adjacent to
neighboring, they would be prohibited in the nighttime hours.
MS. CILEK: And this is something that we did see in the
guidelines or guidebooks regarding gas stations, and we had discussed
it among staff in earlier conversations, so we're happy to move forward
with this language if it pleases the Board.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Okay. And that's it. Thank you.
That's all I have.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I think that's worthy of putting
in this amendment.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: All right, great.
MS. CILEK: And it's just the highlighted language that would be
added. The un-highlighted language already exists in the amendment
Page 210
July 7, 2015
as it is.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Do we need a motion to add it, or
do we hear from public comment and then make the motion later, or
how do we -- do we need a motion to add it?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Motion later.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Make a motion later.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Okay.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I think that that's an excellent
idea, because I've been worried about -- because the delivery trucks,
especially with these giant gas stations, they have breakfast in the
morning, so they have to deliver during the night, and that beep, beep,
beep, beep, beep will, you know -- people would have trouble sleeping.
But I think if it's in the front, there's enough to absorb some of that
sound that gives them a better -- a better possibility of having some
quietness.
And, too, with all of the new rules that are placed in this, there's
going to be some walls and things to protect them as well, and I think
that that's very important, too. Right now there isn't that provision, and
so I think those are good.
I would still love to see -- instead of 16 fuel pumps, I'd like to see
eight. That would be my preference. But other than that, I think that
it's a lot better than what it was; not as great as it should be. That's all.
MS. CILEK: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Comments?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Would you like to hear from the --
Commissioner Taylor?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Just -- I didn't know if there -- I'm
listening to you, Commissioner Fiala. I wonder if there's any shared
sentiment up here to maybe changing that number of pumps and
Page 211
July 7, 2015
reducing it? Maybe not to eight; maybe to 12.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's the majority of pumps. That
goes back to the issue of the map that, you know, the --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Talk into your microphone.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Sorry, sorry. That goes to the
majority of all pumps then. Then it wouldn't even make sense to have
two tiers because the majority of all the new stations are, like, the
higher number.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Sixteen.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So what we're protecting is against
the larger, because that's where the propensity is. I mean, we're not
going to have a lot of pump stations. We're not going to have a lot of
stations that have 12 or eight pumps, you know.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You mean everything's going to be
monster now?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That seems to be the trend, if you
look at it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, it's happening in my area.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right. That's why we want to
bolster the standards against the larger stations because the likelihood
of the smaller stations just --
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: So 16, you think, is small?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Oh, yeah, because most of the
stations -- I mean, they're inching, you know, up to 16, 18, 20.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, they're inching up to 24.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right. Well, 24 being the biggest.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. And that's what we've got, 20,
22, and 24 in my area.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And that's why we have the
enhanced supplemental standards.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: I think also, realistically, if somebody's
Page 212
July 7, 2015
going to put in a facility that's a large facility then they have the ability
to be required to have additional standards. You know, they've got the
economic strength to do that. If you're talking about somebody that's
got six pumps, I don't think they're going to be able to --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Financially.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: I don't think they'll be able to financially
qualify with even what we've outlined, because what we've outlined
here is really extensive. I mean, I don't -- I think this is going to be --
you know, this is going to be the most aggressive standard that I think
you'll find anywhere. I'll be surprised if you'll ever encounter anything
that's as extensive and complete as what staff has generated.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Okay. So the intention is 16
pumps and above we're going to look at --
CHAIRMAN NANCE: We're going to try to look and see if
there's other things that we can do to mitigate further.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Well, what happens if in the
summertime stations come in with 24 pumps? They're not -- they're not
going to be under that new regulation.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Probably not, ma'am. But, I mean, this is
-- in my view this is extensive. I don't know if the Commission shares
my view. I think this is about as -- you know, I'm anxious to see what
staff comes up with to enhance this, because this is really very, very
aggressive as far as buffers and requirements and lighting. I mean, I
think it's going to be -- I think it's going to meet everybody's approval.
If not, I'll be really surprised.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: And there's no way we can put
out some kind of caveat that if you're coming forward with a 24-pump
COMMISSIONER FIALA: They have to come before us, then,
if they're coming for 24-pump.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: They're -- staff is going to come back
Page 213
July 7, 2015
with -- you know, they're working on this right now to come back, and
I think they'll advise us.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: They're coming back with a
supplemental standard to make it -- to put in even more buffering and
more restrictive requirements over 16. But what we've done is we've
adopted already very strict standards for everything.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Going forward.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. You've made a good point.
Let me ask a question about that. I'll stop you right there. Because I
thought everything over 16 would then have to come in for approval.
That is not true?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: No, ma'am.
MS. CILEK: It would be administratively approved through the
standard Site Development Plan process. And they will abide by, if
adopted today, these standards, which are two levels. One that applies
to all gas stations and the other that applies to those that are very near
to residential property.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, what we have is we've
bolstered the standards for everything that's close to a residential
neighborhood regardless of the number of pumps. So we're -- we have
two standards. One for everybody that we've made stricter than it was,
and then the second standard is for anything that's close to a residential
neighborhood is even stricter regardless of the number of pumps.
And then what we're going to come back and do is, regardless of
where anything is, if you have 16 or more, we're going to even make it
stricter for the 16 and more. But we've already -- we've already --
we're already protecting --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So these only apply to 16 and
above?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No. This applies to everything,
Page 214
July 7, 2015
everything. But we have enhanced standards for everything that's next
to residential, like, in addition.
So we've got this -- we used to be here (indicating), now we're
here for everything, and then we're here for next to residential.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Next to residential.
MS. CILEK: Correct.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: What I'm thinking of is -- now, I
realize this doesn't work with Palm Avenue -- or Palm Street because
they're with the older rules yet, right, but now with -- like Manatee
Road, and the old rules still applied, but they were building a 20-pump
gas station there flat up against mobile home parks, 55-and-older
mobile home park. Well, there's no sleeping for those people from
there on in.
And I was complaining to Mark Strain about it because they
didn't even have to come before us. We couldn't ask them to do
anything because they didn't have to do a thing.
And I said, Mark, I need you to come with me and take a ride,
and he did. He didn't have to do that, but he did. And I told him what
it looked like. Well, when he got there, he said, oh, my gosh. It's right
in their backyard. I said, that's what I'm telling you. And I said, and
see all those trees there? They're all Melaleuca. They have to come
down. And they only have a requirement to build a 4-foot. Well, a
4-foot wall is going to do nothing to protect those people.
So Mark -- and I have to say this was a great thing. Mark said,
they're coming in to see some sign variations. Maybe I can work with
them.
And so then he -- we talked about what would be the most
important things to protect those people. And an 8-foot wall would
work as long as it had trees on both sides, and I assist -- excuse me.
So I insisted on trees on both sides as well to help buffer that.
And then Mark even threw in a buffer along the front end, and that was
Page 215
July 7, 2015
fine, too. So that was able to appease them, but at least we could talk
about it because they needed something.
I just want to make sure that, you know, because -- I think it's
because it was forced down our throats, it's tougher for me to --
because I want to make sure we're protecting the neighborhoods.
Everybody that lives in a home now doesn't want that to be in
their yard. And people -- Mark was saying something like, well,
everybody should check to see what zoning is by them. I don't know
of many people that do that. Maybe there's some people smart enough
to do that. I sure wasn't. I mean, I just bought a home.
And I'm trying to protect those people that don't know to check
their zoning first, because who would think that there would be a
monster station? They didn't think that 20 years ago, even 10.
MS. CILEK: Let me share two things with you. Staff has done a
lot of extensive research to make these standards very comprehensive
and so that -- so that they will provide the utmost compatibility with
regards to site standards and being near residential property.
So in the future, these being applied to that situation will greatly
enhance, you know, the gas station that would be proposed near a
mobile home park.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Can I just clarify, like, isn't, for
example, the wall next to residential for the situation that
Commissioner Fiala is describing 12 feet now?
MS. CILEK: If I may, it is on Page 7 under 5.05.05.D, and it is
actually eight feet in height but it's on a 3-foot berm.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So that's 11 feet.
MS. CILEK: That is 11 feet.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So they would have 11 feet.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, I know that now.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Fiala, a lot of the things
that you spoke to with the Planning Commission chairman have been
Page 216
July 7, 2015
incorporated into this for all.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, I understand that.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: So, I mean, this whole thing has been
raised to a whole 'nother level --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Right, and I think --
CHAIRMAN NANCE: -- and then those next to residential are,
you know --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I think that helped to open his eyes
as well when he saw the difference it made. Because we went back
then with Hitching Post and did the same thing.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Right. Well, this is a combined product
of all those efforts. So, I mean, I'm personally very delighted that
we're at this point because this is about -- I think this is about as good
as we can reasonably put together.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Until we find the next thing, but then
we can go back and change it again, and that's the only thing --
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Right.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Always.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- that gives me a little bit --
MS. CILEK: We'll be back.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- of comfort is that --
CHAIRMAN NANCE: They're going to look further.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Because as soon as it's done, you're
going to find something else.
MS. CILEK: We'll be back.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: But then we can bring it back.
MS. CILEK: And just to relate information to Commissioner
Taylor's comments about the number of pumps, we will bring the
research back that shows, on average, you know, what applications are
coming in, what number of fuel pumps for you as well.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: But my concern is between now
Page 217
July 7, 2015
and when you bring it back --
MS. CILEK: That is true.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: -- the stations -- that wonderful
direction that Commissioner Nance authored, Chairman Nance
authored at our last meeting is negligible, because once we pass this,
those 16 pumps and above, they're under stricter standards, but they're
not under what we envision going forward. And short of-- I don't
know how you remedy that.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Ma'am, I don't know -- frankly, I don't
know -- you know, I left this open for staff who are very thoughtful to
come up with additional standards. Unless you just want to make the
buffers thicker and wider, whatever, I don't know what you're going to
come up with, because this is about as comprehensive a program as
you could possibly require for every applicant.
In addition, I honestly don't know any applicants that we've had
coming forward that haven't made an effort to work with the
community, even within their requirements to meet special
circumstances. I mean, look at what has happened even on some of the
other applications. People have gone in and we said, hey, well, you
know, we've got this special circumstance, this particular layout of this
property; what can we do? And people have also come up and worked
with us to do that.
So I just think we've raised this so high. I believe if we get it too,
too high, you know, I believe we're going to be challenged as to
whether we're really realistic as what we're asking for and acceptable
in the community at all --
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: -- well.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: -- because, I don't -- you know, I hope
you've reviewed this. This is extensive. It really is.
MS. CILEK: And we'll use our time wisely to provide you
additional standards.
Page 218
July 7, 2015
Any other comments on the amendment?
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I think what needs to give us
comfort in the interim period is that no matter how many pumps,
anything close to a residential area we have really jacked up. I mean,
we have jacked up standards to really protect the residential
neighborhoods which to me is the greatest concern.
I'm -- yes, I am concerned about the impact of, you know, one of
these pump stations, you know, in a commercial zone, but I'm more
concerned about the impact of the station relative to a residential area
and, with respect to that, we have gotten very aggressive, and no
matter how many pumps. I mean, whether it's 8, 12, 16, 24, I don't
care. I mean, for residential it's very tough. You can go over them
again.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: I predict that it's basically going to
exclude the small stations altogether.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I think so.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Because I don't think they're going to be
able to afford it.
Commissioner Henning or Commissioner Taylor, additional
comments before we hear from the public speakers?
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Mr. Miller?
Mr. Chairman, we have six registered public speakers on this
item. The first speaker is Vern Hammett. He'll be followed by Bruce
Anderson.
MR. HAMMETT: Good evening. My name is Vern Hammett.
I'm a Collier citizen.
As you can imagine, I'm disappointed that the conditional-use
provision of the LDC amendment was removed during the previous
Page 219
July 7, 2015
BCC meeting. One argument for the removal of this language was the
concern from some on this commission that the conditional-use portion
was not legal.
My question is, then, why was the County Attorney not asked his
opinion? I assume that he reviewed this language and could make a
reasonable assessment as to its defensibility.
Also, it was articulated effectively during previous commissioner
dialogue that the conditional-use process would allow for a closer
examination of proposed mega-station development when located
close to residential property. I can think of specific examples where
this closer examination is incredibly important.
Older communities were never laid out by our former planners in
a manner to consider mega gas stations because this concept didn't
exist at the time. This is a new entity. And in circumstances of new
residential development, particularly PUDs, it certainly makes less
sense for conditional use because mega-station location could be
considered at conception.
Finally, I'm still of the opinion that the health and welfare issues
associated with living in close proximity to large service stations
should be closely examined, and I'm concerned that this commission
doesn't seem to share that sentiment.
In closing, I'd like to know why the County Attorney was not
queried when the legality of the previous draft was questioned, and I'm
asking you to reconsider the conditional-use process, keeping in mind
that it will provide the ability to take a closer look at mega-stations'
developments when located next to our older, well-established
residential areas.
And we're talking about 16 pumps. Maybe the 16 pumps -- until
we can get the new language for stricter criteria, maybe 16 or above
between now and then should be conditional use until we can get that
criteria in place.
Page 220
July 7, 2015
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Bruce Anderson. He'll be
followed by Robert Pritt.
MR. ANDERSON: I'm waiving.
MR. MILLER: Robert Pritt, and he will be followed by Rick
Baer.
MR. PRITT: Thank you. Mr. Chairman, members of the
Commission, my name is Robert Pritt. I'm an attorney with Roetzel &
Andress. I'm here on behalf of American Commercial Realty and
Naples South Plaza that's located at Tamiami Trail East and
Rattlesnake Hammock Road in District 1. I did speak at the first
hearing.
On behalf of my clients, we have a tremendous opportunity to
redevelop this constrained plaza by tearing down about 15,000 square
feet of tired and mostly empty commercial areas and replacing it with a
facility with fuel pumps, what I always thought was a service station,
and a convenience store of about 6,000 square feet plus the fuel
pumps.
Successful development of this plaza is largely contingent upon
being able to develop this service station facility. The problem that we
have and still remains is the measurement for the separation from
property -- being currently from property line to property line.
I did put up on the visualizer -- and, unfortunately, the red does
not show up very well. But I showed you what the plaza looks like.
And, essentially, the edge of the back, that yellow building there -- if
you look at yellow building and the orange building on your screens
there, the yellow building would be the back of the proposed
convenience store, and the orange building is the building that is the
closest residential property.
In fact, they kind of both go away from each other rather than
Page 221
July 7, 2015
toward each other. So this is not that type of a situation where they're
always up against each other or going to be that closely -- close to each
other.
The pumps -- I don't know if you can see that in the visualizer,
but I'll put my finger on it here. The pumps are way out here on
Tamiami Trail East about as far away from that orange building as you
possibly can get. The way that the ordinance is -- the draft is written, it
would seem that we miss it by just a few feet.
If we go -- if we went from the edge of the back of the store to the
edge of the property line, it's about 205 feet. The edge of the back of
the store to the closest edge of that multifamily structure is about 280
feet, the edge of the fuel pump canopy to the property line is about 300
feet, and the edge of the fuel pump canopy to the closest edge of the
multifamily structure is 375 feet.
So, in fact, they're quite a ways away. I was encouraged to hear
staff say that site plans with deviations are still a possibility, but we're
really -- this is one of those situations where the ordinance does not
quite take into consideration the factors here, and this is an example of
one of those situations where no matter how you visualize it, it's not
really up against anything, but it could be thrown in with -- not be able
to have the exception that's afforded.
I've learned that over the years if you're going to object or say that
there's a problem, you ought to come up with a solution, so here's my
solution.
My solution is to read up and down the paper. Oh, no. That's it
right there.
Essentially what this would be would be simply to add a No. 2 to
the exception in 5.05.05.D. You already have the exception -- the
yellow highlighting would be the change. You already have the
language that you see that is 5.05.D (sic), and then just add something
that would say "or to the fuel pump structures are separated from
Page 222
July 7, 2015
existing residential property by a minimum of 250 feet, and the store
structure is separated from existing residential property by a minimum
of 200 feet."
I thought about three or four different ways of accomplishing a
similar result, but that would -- to me to would be the best way to take
this problem that we would continue to have and take it away.
I'll be glad to try to answer any questions you have. Mr. Baer is
going to speak also.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. Take that language off. I
think I have another solution.
MR. PRITT: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Take that white paper off the
viewer.
It's a site design problem, okay. If you take your product and
move it towards or into the parking lot and replace the parking next to
the retail buildings or, you know, somewhere else where it can be
utilized, you solve the problem. You'll get the separation distance.
I mean, that's similar to asking the Board to move the residential
away from your commercial. Just move the commercial within the
project away from residential. It solves your problem.
MR. PRITT: I won't even argue with that. The only problem is,
is this is already -- this has already been built; the buildings are what
they are. We're tearing down a lot of the buildings to move it as far
away as we possibly can.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You're redeveloping, like you
said. So you're redoing the whole site out of it. So redo the parking
lot. Move your building in the parking lot away from the residential,
and we could keep the language the way it is. That's my solution.
MR. PRITT: I understand.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I like it.
Page 223
July 7, 2015
MR. PRITT: Anything else?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I think that would work. What do
you think, Bob?
MR. PRITT: Well, the whole thing -- I don't want to keep
throwing out problems, but the problem is, is that the whole plaza is
one -- is one unit. And try as we might, that plaza is going to be --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Site plan deviation.
MR. PRITT: -- there where it is. I'm sorry?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Site plan deviation.
MR. PRITT: Well, I was encouraged to hear that from the staff,
and I would be encouraged to hear that from the Board.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Not closer to the residents, you
know. Move your building into the parking lot.
MR. PRITT: I understand.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's your deviation.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And going along with what
Commissioner Henning just said, you're tearing down that building in
the front, too, that old dress shop that became a general -- or Dollar
General or something. You're tearing that down, and you're tearing
down half the shopping center, right?
MR. PRITT: Let me have Rick Baer tell you what they propose
to tear down. It is actually the wing that is on that -- on the east side,
the northeast side there, and that would be what would be used for that.
So when he gets to speak, he'll explain that to you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay, great.
MR. PRITT: I think. Okay.
MR. MILLER: Mr. Chairman, Mr. Baer is your next registered
speaker.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Sir.
MR. MILLER: And he will be followed by Tom Hardy.
MR. BAER: Mr. Chairman, ladies and gentlemen, my name is
Page 224
July 7, 2015
Rick Baer. Thank you for the opportunity to speak before you this
evening.
First, before I try to answer some of the very good questions, I
want to commend the Commission and the staff for the continuing
efforts which are constantly made in Naples and Collier County to
make it one of the best places in America to live.
And that's just what attracted my associates and I to acquire this
property some time ago, and it's why we have hung on with it through
some rather difficult economic times, particularly with this property.
When it was acquired, it was anchored by a Winn Dixie, and it
was predicated upon an entire redevelopment with a redevelopment
that was going to take place of the Winn Dixie store. Unfortunately,
they went bankrupt and shut the store shortly thereafter, and it's been a
collection of struggles and various things over time.
We proved the validity to the Wynn family of operating one of
their Sunshine Ace facilities on the East Trail, and then they relocated
into their own land. So once again, working towards redevelopment.
So looking -- oh, where's -- Bob, can you bring your drawing
back, put it there?
MR. OCHS: There you go.
MR. BAER: Oh, look; miraculously.
MR. OCHS: Do you want to work off this microphone?
MR. BAER: Testing, okay.
So the redevelopment which is contemplated right now only
involves this area here. This is the 15,000-square-foot building which
is close to 41 that goes back which has substantial vacancy. The other
buildings on the shopping center are not anticipated at the present time
for change, though we are hoping that this will be an impetus for
further redevelopment of all of the property.
We are currently under construction at the shopping center to
bring in a new Sears appliance facility to the property, and that ties in
Page 225
July 7, 2015
with the point relative to revision of the parking lot, because we do
have a number of regional and national merchants which are a part of
the main part of the shopping center which would remain, Sears,
Dollar General, and Anthony's in particular, all of which have legal
rights that go for another 20 to 30 years that constrain movement of the
driveways. So it would be rather difficult if not impossible to move
that building substantially.
So the one point that I would make, because I believe in the
separation between the fuel service areas and residential, is that the
principal concept of separating fuel service from residential should be
measured. If it's building to building, then you're going from the
nearest point of where, ultimately, the convenience store building goes
to the nearest residential building or, if it's from the fuel pump, that
you measure from the closest point of the area servicing the fuel
pumps to the property line and that additional buffers and such, per the
regulations that you've set out, can be provided, and that would be our
intent to provide them in the best possible way while still keeping the
property viable, because the majority of it does have to stay; otherwise,
it would be financial Armageddon.
So that would be my main point, and that's what I encourage you
to consider, and I thank you for the opportunity. I'll be pleased to
answer any questions that I can.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Yeah. I would like to make one
comment, then I'm going to go to Commissioner Fiala.
Sir, honestly I will tell you, it was very clearly the intent of this
entire board to establish an extraordinary standard. It was requested by
the community. And the only way I could find comfort and I think
others on this board could find comfort and not go into a
conditional-use process was to start out with a very, very aggressive
standard.
Furthermore, Commissioner Taylor has added a couple more this
Page 226
July 7, 2015
evening related to noise that I think are appropriate. So I'm just remiss,
and I think others are going to be remiss, to tell you that I'm going to
start making exceptions to this.
I apologize to you for that, but that's the only way that we're not
going to have a conditional-use process in Collier County is if we stick
to this. And I think this has been vetted in the community. It's been
the subject of many meetings. It's been the product of almost a year's
work by staff going over it and considering it.
And I thank you -- I thank you for your comments, but I believe
that these are the standards we need to adopt, and I believe that's what
the community requests from us. So thank you for your comments.
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. Yeah, I don't know how long
you've owned this place, but that shopping center is an embarrassment
to the community. It's so run-down looking.
Now, maybe you've only owned it a year or two and maybe -- you
keep talking about redevelopment. You plan on getting there, although
it sounds like you're going to do it piecemeal. How long have you
owned it, by the way?
MR. BAER: I've been involved in the ownership for quite a
while, but I was out of any active management until about six months
ago and put forth the plan that was bringing in Sears and now working
to do the convenience store, so --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Because that place really needs to be
mowed down and redeveloped entirely, to be perfectly honest with
you. And I'm sure that the new stores would love it.
MR. BAER: And one thing I should have mentioned is that we
have been in discussion with the residential community, which is on
the far edge we're pointing out on the plan, regarding redoing the
existing landscape barrier that's there and building it up in a very
attractive manner for all sides.
Page 227
July 7, 2015
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, I live right down the street,
and I'll be watching it. And now I know who to call.
MR. BAER: I'll give you my home and cell phone number.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, and you know what? I'm not
kidding.
MR. BAER: Nor am I; nor am I.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I think the Wawa will be the best
thing that could happen to that whole site. I would just like to see it
redeveloped totally rather than leave it like it is and try and do it
piecemeal by piecemeal. It's kind of like buying -- going to the dentist
and saying I need a pair of false teeth and, oh, by the way, I only want
one tooth at a time, you know.
MR. BAER: I understand your point but, unfortunately,
contractually, because of other leases which are in place, the only
alternative would be to hand it to bank and let the bank redevelop it in
20 years, and then it would really be bad.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, there's a lot of empty ones,
though, right? I mean --
MR. BAER: Well, there won't -- with what we are doing here,
there would only be one or two spaces empty, all of which would
likely be occupied, because we're actually not working on leasing those
now.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, it starts about Anthony's now,
and then it goes to the UPS, and then it goes --
MR. BAER: Yeah, all of that -- that's 100 percent occupied there,
so we would be moving some of the existing merchants from the
building which would be removed, and that's going to fill up most, if
not all, of what is at the complex.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Remaining ones. Thank you. I just
wanted to say I hope you --
MR. BAER: I appreciate your input.
Page 228
July 7, 2015
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- do a better job, because we're
trying to improve the appearance of our community.
MR. BAER: I agree completely. Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Tom Hardy. He'll be
followed by Rich Yovanovich.
MR. HARDY: I waive.
MR. MILLER: And Mr. Hardy waives. Mr. Yovanovich also
waives. That concludes your public speakers on this item, sir.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Thank you, Mr. Miller.
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Move to approve the
amendments with the addition -- additional language that
Commissioner Taylor submitted.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: I will second that for discussion.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: That's great.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Any further discussion from
Commissioners?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Comments? Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I just want to clarify the additional
wording where it says deliveries should be prohibited between the
hours of 10 p.m. and 7 p.m. (sic) when located between the
neighboring residential property and the facility with the fuel pumps.
In other words, deliveries in the space between the --
CHAIRMAN NANCE: The building.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- building and -- the facility and
the neighborhood.
MS. CILEK: Correct.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So they can have deliveries on the
other side.
MS. CILEK: Uh-huh.
Page 229
July 7, 2015
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. That's not as well written as
it should be. I understand what the intent is, but --
MS. CILEK: Well, we can take a look at it when we come back
for the --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I mean, it just -- something like --
why not deliveries made between the facility with the fuel pumps and
the neighboring residential property shall be prohibited between the
hours of 10 p.m. and 7 a.m.?
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Or when the delivery is adjacent to the
residential property.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah, because all you're trying to
do is describe where the delivery occurs, and you're prohibiting the
delivery in that particular space. Actually, let's ask one of our
reporters. That's their job.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Replace "when" with "in the area of'
COMMISSIONER HILLER: What?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: -- "in the area located," and you'll be
fine.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: We need wordsmithing. What?
MS. CILEK: "In the area located" is --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. Deliveries, you know -- or,
yeah, in the area located between; yeah, that works, too. So deliveries
shall be prohibited between the -- in the area between the neighboring
residential property and the facility with the fuel pumps.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll include that in my motion,
and then I'll call my motion.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's all I have to say.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Acceptable, Commissioner Taylor?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Yes.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
Page 230
July 7, 2015
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: All right. It passes unanimously.
MS. CILEK: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Thank you.
Item #12A
RESOLUTION 2015-149: RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. 14-
155, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE "ZONING IN
PROGRESS" DECLARATION WHICH PROHIBITED THE
ISSUANCE OF DEVELOPMENT ORDERS FOR AUTOMOBILE
SERVICE STATIONS ABUTTING RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY —
ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, that takes us to a companion item,
which is Item 12A under your County Attorney's report. This is a
recommendation to rescind Resolution No. 14-155, as amended,
relating to the zoning-in-progress declaration which prohibited the
issuance of development orders for automobile service stations.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: There's a motion to approve and a
second.
Any comment from the Board?
MR. OCHS: Mr. Klatzkow, you had two options in your
Page 231
July 7, 2015
executive summary. I presume we're taking the one that you
recommended per the Board's adoption.
MR. KLATZKOW: Yes. This will be the one where the
moratorium ends upon the effectiveness of this LDC change.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So there's no time table.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: If we -- if we stopped -- you know,
if we lift the moratorium tonight but the rules don't go into effect, it
will be simultaneous?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Simultaneous.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: There will be no time gap.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. All right. Thank you. I just
want to make sure.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Comments?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: If you said that before, I didn't hear
it; I'm sorry.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. I think it's a very important
point. There will be no time gap.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: All right. All those in favor, signify by
saying aye.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: All right. That passes unanimously as
well.
MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, I believe that concludes the Board's
business this evening.
Page 232
July 7, 2015
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioners? Commissioner
Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. I misspoke earlier
dealing with what we read in the Naples Daily News about the Clerk
suing the contractor BQ.
Statutorily, the Clerk has -- he's in charge -- he's the custodian of
the public's funds. And when it's reported that the public's funds were
stolen, he has every right to go get those funds.
And I understand there's a provision within the statutes that he
can go after triple damages; is that right? Yeah.
Crystal?
MS. KINZEL: Yes, Commissioner. For the record, Crystal
Kinzel, that's correct.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So I want to correct my mistake,
misspoken mistake.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Thank you.
Commissioners, any other business for the good of the county?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Motion to adjourn.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: If not, we will have our next regularly
scheduled meeting on September the 8th.
We are adjourned, Mr. Ochs.
**** Commissioner Fiala moved, seconded by Commissioner Hiller
and carried 4/1 (Commissioner Henning opposed) that the following
items under the Consent and Summary Agendas be approved and/or
adopted ****
Item #16A1
Page 233
July 7, 2015
RESOLUTION 2015-134: A RESOLUTION EXTENDING THE
COLLIER COUNTY ARCHITECTURAL AND SITE DESIGN
STANDARDS AD HOC COMMITTEE FOR 12 MONTHS
Item #16A2
THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN A FUNDING ASSISTANCE LETTER
TO THE CONGRESSIONAL DELEGATION REQUESTING THE
UNITED STATES ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS INCLUDE
FUNDING FOR GORDON RIVER PASS DREDGING IN ITS
NEXT BUDGET — SENT TO SENATORS MARCO RUBIO AND
BILL NELSON AND TO CONGRESSMEN MARIO DIAZ-
BALART AND CURT CLAWSON
Item #16A3
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE WATER AND SEWER UTILITY
FACILITIES FOR CANWICK COVE, PL20130000849, AND TO
AUTHORIZE THE COUNTY MANAGER, OR HIS DESIGNEE,
TO RELEASE THE FINAL OBLIGATION BOND IN THE TOTAL
AMOUNT OF $4,000 TO THE PROJECT ENGINEER OR THE
DEVELOPER'S DESIGNATED AGENT — FINAL INSPECTION
WAS CONDUCTED BY ENGINEERING AND RIGHT-OF-WAY
STAFF IN COORDINATION WITH PUBLIC UTILITIES ON
APRIL 24, 2015 AND FOUND TO BE SATISFACTORY AND
ACCEPTABLE
Item #16A4
AN ACCESS IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT WITH FIFTH
THIRD BANK TO FULFILL A CONDITION OF APPROVAL
Page 234
July 7, 2015
PURSUANT TO HEARING EXAMINER DECISION NO. 2015-09,
CONCERNING A NEW ACCESS POINT ON THOMASSON
LANE IN THE SABAL BAY MPUD, ORDINANCE NO. 05-59 —
THE BANK WILL PROVIDE A PERFORMANCE GUARANTEE
WITH EITHER A BOND OR LETTER OF CREDIT PER THE
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL #2 OF THE HEARING
EXAMINER'S DECISION NO. 2015-09
Item #16A5
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE WATER AND SEWER UTILITY
FACILITIES FOR PIACERE AND PAVIA, PL20130002059 —
FINAL INSPECTION WAS CONDUCTED BY ENGINEERING
AND RIGHT-OF-WAY STAFF IN COORDINATION WITH
PUBLIC UTILITIES ON SEPTEMBER 9, 2014 AND FOUND TO
BE SATISFACTORY AND ACCEPTABLE
Item #16A6
FINAL ACCEPTANCE AND UNCONDITIONAL CONVEYANCE
OF THE WATER AND SEWER UTILITY FACILITIES FOR
ARTESIA, PHASE 1A, PL20140001712 — FINAL INSPECTION
WAS CONDUCTED BY ENGINEERING AND RIGHT-OF-WAY
STAFF IN COORDINATION WITH PUBLIC UTILITIES ON
OCTOBER 23, 2014 AND FOUND TO BE SATISFACTORY AND
ACCEPTABLE
Item #16A7
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE WATER AND SEWER UTILITY
FACILITIES FOR ARTESIA, PHASE 1B, PL20140001714 —
Page 235
July 7, 2015
FINAL INSPECTION WAS CONDUCTED BY ENGINEERING
STAFF IN COORDINATION WITH PUBLIC UTILITIES ON
OCTOBER 23, 2014 AND FOUND TO BE SATISFACTORY AND
ACCEPTABLE
Item #16A8
RESOLUTION 2015-135: A RESOLUTION AMENDING
EXHIBIT "A" TO RESOLUTION NO. 2013-239, THE LIST OF
SPEED LIMITS ON COUNTY MAINTAINED ROADS; TO
BRING VARIOUS ROADWAYS INTO COMPLIANCE WITH
THE ALLOWABLE MAXIMUM SPEED LIMITS AS
IDENTIFIED IN F.S. § 316.189 AND AS REQUIRED BY
COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE 91-25 (COLLIER COUNTY
SPEED LIMIT ORDINANCE) FOR ROADWAYS LOCATED
WITHIN THE LELY RESORT COMMUNITY
Item #16A9
THE CLERK OF COURTS TO RELEASE A CASH BOND IN THE
AMOUNT OF $25,000 WHICH WAS POSTED AS A GUARANTY
FOR EXCAVATION PERMIT NUMBER 60.095
(PL20130001140), FOR WORK ASSOCIATED WITH
SANDALWOOD VILLAGE — THE AS-BUILT LAKE CROSS
SECTIONS HAVE BEEN RECEIVED AND THE LAKES HAVE
BEEN INSPECTED BY THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
DIVISION
Item #16A10
THE CLERK OF COURTS TO RELEASE A PERFORMANCE
Page 236
July 7, 2015
BOND IN THE AMOUNT OF $493,500 WHICH WAS POSTED
AS A GUARANTY FOR EXCAVATION PERMIT NUMBER
59.912 (PL20110002190), FOR WORK ASSOCIATED WITH
SATURNIA FALLS PLAT ONE (RIVERSTONE) — THE AS-
BUILT LAKE CROSS SECTIONS HAVE BEEN RECEIVED AND
THE LAKES HAVE BEEN INSPECTED BY THE
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION
Item #16A11
AN ALTERNATE SECURITY FOR THAT SUBDIVISION
KNOWN AS HATCHER'S PRESERVE, (APPLICATION
NUMBER AR-11440) ENTER INTO A CONSTRUCTION AND
MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT WITH THE NEW OWNER AND
TERMINATE THE EXISTING CONSTRUCTION,
MAINTENANCE AND ESCROW AGREEMENT — AND
REPLACING THE CURRENT PERFORMANCE SECURITY
WITH A CASH BOND AND ENTER INTO A NEW
CONSTRUCTION MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT
Item #16Al2
RESOLUTION 2015-136 (PHASE 2C — AR-7523);
RESOLUTION 2015-137 (PHASE 2D — AR-7524);
RESOLUTION 2015-138 (PHASE 2E — AR-7525);
AND RESOLUTION 2015-139 (PHASE 2F — AR-7526): FINAL
APPROVAL OF THE LANDSCAPING IMPROVEMENTS FOR
THE FINAL PLATS OF REFLECTION LAKES AT NAPLES
PHASES 2C (AR-7523) PHASE 2D (AR-7524), PHASE 2E (AR-
7525) AND PHASE 2F (AR-7526) AND AUTHORIZING THE
RELEASE OF THE MAINTENANCE SECURITIES
Page 237
July 7, 2015
Item #16A13
AWARD BID #15-6383 FOR GOLDEN GATE CITY VARIOUS
SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENTS TO COASTAL CONCRETE
PRODUCTS, LLC (PROJECT #33363)
Item #16A14
RELEASE OF A CODE ENFORCEMENT LIEN WITH AN
ACCRUED VALUE OF $11,500 FOR PAYMENT OF $450, IN
THE CODE ENFORCEMENT ACTION ENTITLED BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS V. C. GARY WILCOX AND
SONJA R. WILCOX, CODE ENFORCEMENT SPECIAL
MAGISTRATE CASE NO. CEPM20140003896, RELATING TO
PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2118 44TH TERRACE SW, COLLIER
COUNTY, FLORIDA — FOR A CODE VIOLATION THAT
CONSISTED OF BOARDED FRONT WINDOW WITHOUT A
COUNTY BOARDING CERTIFICATE THAT WAS BROUGHT
INTO COMPLIANCE ON FEBRUARY 9, 2015
Item #16A15
RELEASE OF A CODE ENFORCEMENT LIEN WITH AN
ACCRUED VALUE OF $439,163.18 FOR PAYMENT OF $5,000,
IN THE CODE ENFORCEMENT ACTION ENTITLED BOARD
OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS V. HERIBERTO AND
ANTONIO PEREZ, CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD CASE NO.
CESD20080000222, RELATING TO PROPERTY LOCATED AT
5384 CAROLINA AVENUE, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA —
FOR A CODE VIOLATION THAT CONSISTED OF
Page 238
July 7, 2015
IMPROVEMENTS MADE TO REAR OF STRUCTURE ON THE
PROPERTY WITH OUT COUNTY PERMITS THAT WAS
BROUGHT INTO COMPLIANCE ON SEPTEMBER 19, 2014
Item #16A16
RELEASE OF A CODE ENFORCEMENT LIEN WITH AN
ACCRUED VALUE OF $148,112.29 FOR PAYMENT OF
$3,771.23, IN THE CODE ENFORCEMENT ACTION ENTITLED
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS V. PETER V.
SCHRYVER, CODE ENFORCEMENT SPECIAL MAGISTRATE
CASE NO. CESD20090011040, RELATING TO PROPERTY
LOCATED AT 4851 CATALINA DRIVE, COLLIER COUNTY,
FLORIDA — FOR A CODE VIOLATION THAT CONSISTED OF
AN UNPERMITTED SHED THAT WAS BROUGHT INTO
COMPLIANCE ON DECEMBER 4, 2014
Item #16A17
RECORDING THE FINAL PLAT OF ARTESIA NAPLES, PHASE
5, (APPLICATION NUMBER PL201 50000374) APPROVAL OF
THE STANDARD FORM CONSTRUCTION AND
MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT AND APPROVAL OF THE
AMOUNT OF THE PERFORMANCE SECURITY — WITHHOLD
THE CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY UNTIL REQUIRED
IMPROVEMENT HAVE RECEIVED PRELIMINARY
ACCEPTANCE AND DELAY RECORDING THE PLAT UNTIL
THE SECURITY AND THE CONSTRUCTION MAINTENANCE
AGREEMENT IS APPROVED AND ACCEPTED BY THE
COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE
Page 239
July 7, 2015
Item #16A18
RECORDING THE FINAL PLAT OF ARTESIA NAPLES, PHASE
4, (APPLICATION NUMBER PL20140002472) APPROVAL OF
THE STANDARD FORM CONSTRUCTION AND
MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT AND APPROVAL OF THE
AMOUNT OF THE PERFORMANCE SECURITY — WITHHOLD
THE CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY UNTIL REQUIRED
IMPROVEMENT HAVE RECEIVED PRELIMINARY
ACCEPTANCE AND DELAY RECORDING THE PLAT UNTIL
THE SECURITY AND THE CONSTRUCTION MAINTENANCE
AGREEMENT IS APPROVED AND ACCEPTED BY THE
COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE
Item #16A19
SELECTION COMMITTEE RANKINGS AND AUTHORIZE
STAFF TO ENTER INTO CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONS WITH
THE NUMBER ONE RANKED FIRM LAGO CONSULTING &
SERVICES, LLC, FOR RFP NO. 15-6452 "MODELING
SERVICES FOR SURFACE WATER AND GROUNDWATER
MANAGEMENT" FOR PROTECTED PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY
WELLFIELDS THAT UTILIZE THE SURFICIAL AND
INTERMEDIATE AQUIFERS — AS DETAILED IN THE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item #16A20
WAIVER OF AN OPTIONAL LOCAL PUBLIC HEARING ON A
PETITION TO CORRECT THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE
FIDDLER'S CREEK COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
Page 240
July 7, 2015
1, FILED WITH THE FLORIDA LAND AND WATER
ADJUDICATORY COMMISSION SINCE THE CDD IS OVER
1000 ACRES — AS DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item #16A21
A PROPOSAL FROM ATKINS NORTH AMERICA, INC. DATED
JUNE 19, 2015 FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A
COMPREHENSIVE WATERSHED IMPROVEMENT PROJECT,
APPROVE A WORK ORDER UNDER CONTRACT NO. 13-6164-
SS FOR A NOT-TO-EXCEED AMOUNT OF $179,897.00
AUTHORIZE THE COUNTY MANAGER OR HIS DESIGNEE TO
EXECUTE THE WORK ORDER AND AUTHORIZE ALL
NECESSARY BUDGET AMENDMENTS (PROJECT NO.
51144.3) - THE PROPOSAL INCLUDES THE USE OF AN
EXCEPTIONAL TEAM OF SUB-CONSULTANTS TO SUPPORT
THIS PROJECT
Item #16A22
STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT IN THE TOTAL AMOUNT
OF $17,500 FOR PARCEL 138RDUE IN THE LAWSUIT STYLED
COLLIER COUNTY V. GROVER C. WOODY, III, ET AL., CASE
NO. 15-CA-199 (GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD FROM EAST OF
WILSON BOULEVARD TO 20TH STREET EAST (PROJECT NO.
60040) (FISCAL IMPACT: $17,500) — FOLIO #37221320008
Item #16A23
CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 TO WORK ORDER/PURCHASE
ORDER NO. 4500157798 WITH HUMISTON & MOORE
Page 241
July 7, 2015
ENGINEERS FOR COLLIER COUNTY BEACHES AND INLETS
ANNUAL MONITORING FOR 2015 UNDER CONTRACT NO.
13-6164-CZ, AUTHORIZE THE COUNTY MANAGER OR HIS
DESIGNEE TO EXECUTE THE CHANGE ORDER FOR A TIME
EXTENSION OF 138 DAYS, AND MAKES A FINDING THAT
THIS ITEM PROMOTES TOURISM — IN ORDER TO
COMPLETE SURVEYS FOR WIGGINS PASS, DOCTORS PASS
AND SOUTH MARCO BEACHES
Item #16B1
A COMMERCIAL BUILDING IMPROVEMENT GRANT
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CRA AND ANTONE C. MENDES
IN THE AMOUNT OF $13,496 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT
2260 TAMIAMI TRAIL EAST AND WITHIN THE BAYSHORE
GATEWAY TRIANGLE AREA - FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF
PARKING LOT IMPROVEMENTS
Item #16C1
RESOLUTION 2015-140: A RESOLUTION AND
SATISFACTIONS OF LIEN FOR THE 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995,
AND 1996 SOLID WASTE COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL
SERVICES SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS WHERE THE COUNTY
HAS RECEIVED PAYMENT IN FULL SATISFACTION OF THE
LIENS. FISCAL IMPACT IS $61 TO RECORD THE
SATISFACTIONS OF LIEN
Item #16C2
AWARD ITB #15-6449, "MAINTENANCE REPAIR AND
Page 242
July 7, 2015
OPERATIONS PARTS AND EQUIPMENT" TO W. W.
GRAINGER, INC., AS PRIMARY, AND SUNSHINE ACE
HARDWARE, INC., AS SECONDARY FOR COMMODITY
BASED PURCHASES THAT INCLUDE MAINTENANCE
REPAIR AND OPERATIONS PRODUCTS OF INDUSTRIAL
EQUIPMENT, MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES, TOOLS,
INVENTORY ITEMS AND WORK ORDER REPAIRS — THIS
AWARD IS PURCHASE ORDER DRIVEN AND PURCHASES
WILL BE MADE USING A PURCHASE ORDER OR
PROCUREMENT CARD
Item #16C3
SATISFACTION FOR A CERTAIN NOTICE OF PROMISE TO
PAY AND AGREEMENT TO EXTEND PAYMENT OF WATER
AND/OR SEWER SYSTEM IMPACT FEES. FISCAL IMPACT IS
$18.50 TO RECORD THE SATISFACTION OF LIEN — FOLIO
#81620560004
Item #16C4
SELECTION COMMITTEE RANKINGS AND ENTER INTO
NEGOTIATIONS FOR A CONTRACT FOR REQUEST FOR
PROPOSAL NO. 15-6450, "NAPLES PARK INFRASTRUCTURE
IMPROVEMENTS," PROJECT NUMBERS 60139, 70043, 70044
AND 71010, WITH Q. GRADY MINOR & ASSOCIATES — THE
OTHER FIRMS THAT BID INCLUDE JOHNSON
ENGINEERING, AGNOLI BARBER & BRUNDAGE, BARRACO
& ASSOCIATES AND WESTON & SAMPSON
Item #16C5
Page 243
July 7, 2015
A LICENSING AGREEMENT WITH THE DISTRICT SCHOOL
BOARD OF COLLIER COUNTY TO ALLOW THE
INSTALLATION OF A LIGHTNING PREDICTION AND
WARNING SYSTEM ON THE PUMP STATION 309 BUILDING
LOCATED ON THE CAMPUS OF EAST NAPLES MIDDLE
SCHOOL — THE SCHOOL'S CONTRACTOR WILL INSTALL
MAINTAIN AND REPAIR THE WARNING SYSTEM
Item #16C6
CONTRACT #14-6345, "CONSTRUCTION, ENGINEERING,
AND INSPECTION SERVICES FOR THE WASTEWATER
BASIN PROGRAM," PROJECT NUMBERS 71010, 70043, 70044,
70046, 70050, AND 70051, WITH THREE FIRMS: AECOM
TECHNICAL SERVICES, INC., STANTEC CONSULTING
SERVICES, INC., AND HOLE MONTES, INC. — ANY
PURCHASE ORDER FOR CEI RELATED SERVICES IN EXCESS
OF $200,000 WILL REQUIRE A FUTURE SEPARATE BOARD
APPROVAL
Item #16C7
A BUDGET AMENDMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $93,000
TRANSFERRING FUNDS BETWEEN COST CENTERS AND
LINE ITEMS WITHIN THE COLLIER COUNTY WATER-
SEWER DISTRICT OPERATING FUND (408) TO COVER
COSTS FOR UNANTICIPATED INCREASES IN BANK FEES
AND CONTRACTUAL SERVICES — FOR CREDIT CARD
PAYMENT PROCESSING AND CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
FOR HOSTING A PAYMENT CARD INDUSTRY, COMPLIANT
Page 244
July 7, 2015
INTERACTIVE VOICE RECOGNITION SYSTEM, WEB
PAYMENTS AND OUTBOUND CUSTOMER COURTESY
CALLS
Item #16D1
A NO COST MODIFICATION NO. 13 TO A DISASTER
RECOVERY INITIATIVE GRANT AGREEMENT FOR THE
COLORADO AVENUE STORM WATER PROJECT WITH THE
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY — TO
REVISE THE PROGRAM BUDGET TO REALLOCATE
ACTIVITY FUNDS WITHIN A SERVICE AREA
Item #16D2
AWARD INVITATION TO BID NO. 15-6463 TO CONSTRUCT
COMPANY, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $225,800, FOR
CONSTRUCTION OF THE "TIGERTAIL BEACH
OBSERVATION TOWER," APPROVE THE NECESSARY
BUDGET AMENDMENT, AND MAKE A FINDING THAT THIS
EXPENDITURE PROMOTES TOURISM — PROVIDING THE
PUBLIC WITH A HANDICAP ACCESSIBLE TOWER TO ENJOY
THE UNIQUE HABITAT
Item #16D3
AN AFTER-THE-FACT AMENDMENT AND ATTESTATION
STATEMENT WITH AREA AGENCY ON AGING FOR
SOUTHWEST FLORIDA, INC. FOR THE OLDER AMERICANS
ACT PROGRAM TITLE III PROGRAMS AND BUDGET
AMENDMENTS TO REFLECT AN INCREASE IN GRANT
Page 245
July 7, 2015
FUNDING (NET FISCAL IMPACT $16,309) — AN AFTER-THE-
FACT APPROVAL TO RECOGNIZE AN INCREASE AND A 10%
MATCH REQUIREMENT
Item #16D4
AN EXTENSION OF THE EXPENDITURE DEADLINE ON
FISCAL YEAR 2012/2013 GRANT ALLOCATIONS FROM THE
FLORIDA HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION TO
DECEMBER 31, 2015 FOR THE STATE HOUSING INITIATIVES
PARTNERSHIP (SHIP) PROGRAM — WITH THE REQUIRED
ANNUAL REPORT STILL DUE ON SEPTEMBER 15, 2015
Item #16D5
THE FY15 PROGRAM OF PROJECTS AND SUBMITTAL OF A
GRANT APPLICATION FOR THE FEDERAL TRANSIT
ADMINISTRATION, 49 USC § 5307 FY15 GRANT FUNDS TO
SUPPORT THE COLLIER AREA TRANSIT SYSTEM IN THE
AMOUNT OF $2,888,127, THROUGH THE TRANSPORTATION
ELECTRONIC AWARD MANAGEMENT SYSTEM — THE
APPROPRIATIONS INCLUDE TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT
THAT ARE AMENITIES SUCH AS BUS STOP
ENHANCEMENTS; SECURITY ENHANCEMENTS FOR CAT
FACILITY; PROVISION FOR AMERICANS WITH
DISABILITIES ACT PARATRANSIT SERVICES; BUS
OPERATIONS; REPLACEMENT OF ROLLING STOCK THAT
HAS EXCEEDED LIFE EXPECTANCY; SUPPORT VEHICLES;
PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE AND BUS WRAP
REPLACEMENT
Page 246
July 7, 2015
Item #16D6
AWARD INVITATION TO BID #15-6437 "VANDERBILT
BEACH MSTU FPL UTILITY CONVERSION AT VANDERBILT
BEACH ROAD, INSTALLATION AND CONNECTION OF NEW
UNDERGROUND FPL NETWORK" TO MASTEC NORTH
AMERICA, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $574,606.25
Item #16D7 — Clerical Changes (Per Agenda Change Sheet)
THE CHAIRMAN TO REINSTATE AND SIGN AN EXTENSION
AGREEMENT WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND
URBAN DEVELOPMENT (HUD) FOR THE 2010 FUNDED
SHELTER PLUS CARE (S+C) GRANT TO PROVIDE
SUPPORTIVE SERVICES TO HARD TO SERVE PERSONS
WITH DISABILITIES, APPROVE THE ASSOCIATED SUB
RECIPIENT AGREEMENT WITH CASL, INC., APPROVE
BUDGET AMENDMENTS TO RECOGNIZE FUNDING
ASSOCIATED WITH THIS AWARD, AND AUTHORIZE
PAYMENT FOR OUTSTANDING PAYMENT TO COLLIER
COUNTY HOUSING AUTHORITY — EFFECTIVE ON MAY 14,
2015 AND EXTENDING THE PROJECT TERM FROM
NOVEMBER 15, 2016 TO SEPTEMBER 25, 2017
Item #16D8
CONTINUATION OF THE LIBRARY ELECTRONIC
ASSISTANCE PROGRAM THROUGH ANNUAL RECURRING
FUNDING BY THE FRIENDS OF THE LIBRARY, INC. AND
THE NECESSARY BUDGET AMENDMENT — THE LEAP
PROGRAM PROVIDED FOR THE HIRING OF SEVEN HIGH
Page 247
July 7, 2015
SCHOOL STUDENTS TO PROVIDE TECHNOLOGY
ASSISTANCE TO LIBRARY PATRONS AND PERFORM
LIBRARY DUTIES
Item #16D9
AN AGREEMENT TO ACCEPT U.S. DEPARTMENT OF
HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT RURAL CAPACITY
BUILDING TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE FROM THE NATIONAL
ASSOCIATION FOR LATINO COMMUNITY ASSET BUILDERS
- THE TERM FOR THIS AGREEMENT IS FROM JULY 7, 2015
THROUGH MAY 14, 2016
Item #16D10
AWARD BID NO. 15-6454, "BUS SHELTERS REPAIRS," TO
FLORIDA PAINTERS OF LEE COUNTY, INC. AS THE
PRIMARY VENDOR AND TO VARIAN CONSTRUCTION AS
THE SECONDARY VENDOR — PER THE SOLICITATION
DOCUMENT, THE COUNTY SHALL ISSUE A PURCHASE
ORDER TO COMMENCE WORK
Item #16D11
A LONG TERM COMMUNITY MARKET AGREEMENT WITH
JOSEPH AND NEOMI RAKOW, MARKET MANAGER OF THE
GOLDEN GATE COMMUNITY PARK COMMUNITY MARKET
WITH AN EFFECTIVE DATE OF JULY 7, 2015 THROUGH
FEBRUARY 1, 2016 — WITH A MINIMUM OF 12 VENDORS
AND A MAXIMUM OF 22 VENDORS
Page 248
July 7, 2015
Item #16D12
THE SUBMITTAL OF A FIVE-YEAR SOVEREIGNTY
SUBMERGED LAND LEASE RENEWAL WITH THE BOARD
OF TRUSTEES OF THE INTERNAL IMPROVEMENT TRUST
FUND OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA AT THE COCOHATCHEE
RIVER PARK MARINA, AUTHORIZE PAYMENT OF LEASE
PROCESSING FEE OF $630, AND AUTHORIZE THE
CHAIRMAN TO SIGN THE LEASE RENEWAL — THE
RENEWAL TERM IS FROM JUNE 25, 2015 THROUGH JUNE 25,
2020, AND AUTHORIZES THE COUNTY'S USE AND
OPERATION OF THE 16 SLIP MARINA
Item #16D13
A RIGHT OF ENTRY TO THE SOUTHWEST FLORIDA
RESEARCH AND EDUCATION CENTER (SWFREC)
UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA, INSTITUTE OF FOOD AND
AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES (UF/IFAS) TO INSTALL,
MAINTAIN AND MONITOR GROUNDWATER MONITORING
WELLS AT THE PEPPER RANCH PRESERVE AS PART OF THE
LAKE TRAFFORD WATERSHED BOUNDARY STUDY — FOR
ACCESS, CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE OF UP TO 11
SHALLOW GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELLS
Item #16D14
THE CHAIRMAN TO EXECUTE LANDLORD PAYMENT
AGREEMENTS, BETWEEN 12 LANDLORD/ENTITIES AND
THE COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ALLOWING THE COUNTY TO ADMINISTER THE RAPID RE-
Page 249
July 7, 2015
HOUSING AND HOMELESSNESS PREVENTION PROGRAM
THROUGH COLLIER COUNTY'S EMERGENCY SOLUTIONS
GRANT PROGRAM — TO THE FOLLOWING: SUMMER LAKES
APARTMENTS II, LLC (LISTED TWICE IN THE EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY); COLLEGE PARK HOLDINGS, LTD; TUSCAN
ISLE COMMUNITY, LTD; NAPLES PLACE 1, LLC; GANG-
WOODRUF PROPERTIES OF FLORIDA LLC; PELICAN BAY
REALTY, INC; PHEASANT PROPERTIES, LLC; STEPHEN
COSGROVE (PRIVATE LANDLORD); BRITTANY BAY
PARTNERS II, LTD; BRITTANY BAY PARTNERS, LTD AND
SADDLEBROOK APARTMENT, LLC
Item #16D15
A STANDSTILL AGREEMENT BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY
AND THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF
AGRICULTURE (USDA) TO ALLOW THE USDA TO
CONTINUE ITS OPERATIONS AT THE COUNTY'S
AGRICULTURE EXTENSION OFFICE AT THE CURRENT
TERMS AND CONDITIONS, UNTIL A NEW LEASE
AGREEMENT CAN BE SUBMITTED — EXTENDING THE NEW
LEASE TERM THROUGH JULY 31, 2016
Item #16D16 — Moved to Item #11G (Per Agenda Change Sheet)
Item #16E1
AWARD A CONTRACT FOR AFFORDABLE CARE ACT DATA
REPORTING SERVICES TO HEALTH E(FX) AND AUTHORIZE
THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN THE COUNTY ATTORNEY
APPROVED AGREEMENT — REPORTING EMPLOYEE WAGE,
Page 250
July 7, 2015
LEAVE INFORMATION BY TYPE, HOURS WORKED, HEALTH
INSURANCE COVERAGE OFFERED, AND THE NAMES OF
DEPENDENTS TO THE IRS AS REQUIRED BY THE
AFFORDABLE CARE ACT
Item #16E2
SEVEN DELETIONS TO THE 2015 FISCAL YEAR PAY AND
CLASSIFICATION PLAN MADE FROM APRIL 1, 2015
THROUGH JUNE 30, 2015
Item #16E3
APPROPRIATE REVENUES GENERATED THROUGH
REIMBURSEMENTS TO THE EMS OPERATING BUDGET IN
THE AMOUNT OF $79,052 — FOR UNANTICIPATED
OVERTIME COSTS FOR THE PERIOD OF MAY 15 THROUGH
JUNE 4, 2015 BILLED IN ACCORDANCE WITH RESOLUTION
08-27
Item #16E4
THE COLLIER COUNTY WATER-SEWER DISTRICT'S
COMPLETION OF THE REMAINING TERMS OF THE
SEPTEMBER 14, 2010 AGREEMENT WITH 850 NWN, LLC, CG
II, LLC AND EXECUTION OF MUTUAL RELEASES — WHICH
RELEASES RESPONSIBILITY TO THE OWNERS AFTER
COMPLETING THE TERMS OF THE AGREEMENT DEFINED
AS FIELD CHANGES PERTAINING TO WELL NO. 2 — AS
DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Page 251
July 7, 2015
Item #16E5
A LEASE AGREEMENT WITH NORTH COLLIER FIRE
DISTRICT FOR EMS DEPARTMENT USE OF STATION 48
WITH NO ANNUAL RENT AND SHARED UTILITY EXPENSES
— THE COUNTY WILL PAY FOR 40% OF SEWER, WATER
AND ELECTRICITY
Item #16E6
THE SALE AND DISPOSAL OF SURPLUS PROPERTY
THROUGH AN ON-LINE AUCTION IN COMPLIANCE WITH
FLORIDA STATUTES AND RESOLUTION 2013-095
Item #16E7
APPROPRIATE REVENUE FOR SPECIAL SERVICES TO THE
FACILITIES MANAGEMENT DIVISION COST CENTER AND
APPROVE THE NECESSARY FISCAL YEAR 2014-2015
BUDGET AMENDMENT — FOR BUILDING MAINTENANCE
WHEN REQUESTED BY VARIOUS DEPARTMENTS OR
DIVISIONS
Item #16E8
STAFF'S ADMINISTRATIVE AWARD IN OCTOBER 2013 OF
INVITATION TO BID #13-6141 WATER TREATMENT
SERVICES TO US WATER SERVICE CORPORATION AND
AWARD IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE BOARD'S
PROCUREMENT ORDINANCE 2015-37, SECTION 9 FORMAL
COMPETITIVE THRESHOLD — FOR WATER TREATMENT
Page 252
July 7, 2015
SERVICES AT COUNTY FACILITIES THAT INCLUDE THE
NAPLES JAIL CENTER ON THE REVERSE OSMOSIS SYSTEM,
WATER SOFTENER SYSTEMS, WELL SYSTEMS,
ASSOCIATED PIPING, OTHER WATER TREATMENT
SYSTEMS AND SERVICES
Item #16E9
RATIFY REPORTS FOR STAFF-APPROVED CHANGE
ORDERS, CHANGES TO WORK ORDERS, AND SURPLUS
CREDIT - FOR THE PERIOD OF MAY 19, 2015 TO JUNE 15,
2015
Item #16F1
A TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT FOR THE TIMBER RIDGE
PUD UNIT 2 AFFORDABLE RENTAL HOUSING PROJECT DUE
TO THE IMPACT FEES BEING PAID IN FULL IN
ACCORDANCE WITH RESOLUTION 95-62 AND THE
AMENDED AND RESTATED AGREEMENT FOR 100%
DEFERRAL OF COLLIER COUNTY IMPACT FEES RECORDED
IN OFFICIAL RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY BOOK 2074
PAGE 0233 — THE IMPACT FEES WERE PAID IN FULL ON
APRIL 27, 2015
Item #16F2 — Legal name corrected (Per Agenda Change Sheet)
TOURISM DEVELOPMENT GRANT APPLICATION
AGREEMENTS FOR FY 16 CATEGORY B ($35,000) AND
CATEGORY C-2 ($40,000) GRANTS, AUTHORIZE THE
CHAIRMAN TO SIGN, AND MAKE A FINDING THAT THIS
Page 253
July 7, 2015
ACTION PROMOTES TOURISM — AS DETAILED IN THE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item #16F3
RESOLUTION 2015-141 : A RESOLUTION APPROVING
AMENDMENTS (APPROPRIATING GRANTS, DONATIONS,
CONTRIBUTIONS OR INSURANCE PROCEEDS) TO THE
FISCAL YEAR 2014-15 ADOPTED BUDGET
Item #16F4 — Moved to Item #11H (Per Agenda Change Sheet)
Item #16F5
AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY AND RETIS
DESIGNATING COLLIER COUNTY EXCLUSIVE RIGHTS TO
HOST THE RETIS FACE 9 FLORIDA EXECUTIVE TRAINING
PROGRAM IN THE FALL OF 2015, AND PROVIDING
FUNDING IN THE AMOUNT OF UP TO $12,000 FOR
FINANCIAL SUPPORT IN FACILITATING THE EVENT — TO
REIMBURSE TRAVEL AND LODGING COSTS ASSOCIATED
FOR UP TO TEN FRENCH INNOVATION COMPANIES AND
TWO RETIS EVENT OPERATION STAFF PERSONS THAT
WILL ATTEND
Item #16F6
RESOLUTION 2015-142: A RESOLUTION FIXING THE DATE,
TIME AND PLACE FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR
APPROVING THE SPECIAL ASSESSMENT (NON-AD
VALOREM ASSESSMENT) TO BE LEVIED AGAINST THE
Page 254
July 7, 2015
PROPERTIES WITHIN THE PELICAN BAY MUNICIPAL
SERVICE TAXING AND BENEFIT UNIT FOR MAINTENANCE
OF THE WATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM, BEAUTIFICATION
OF RECREATIONAL FACILITIES AND MEDIAN AREAS AND
MAINTENANCE OF CONSERVATION OR PRESERVE AREAS,
AND ESTABLISHMENT OF CAPITAL RESERVE FUNDS FOR
AMBIENT NOISE MANAGEMENT, MAINTENANCE OF
CONSERVATION OR PRESERVE AREAS, INCLUDING THE
RESTORATION OF THE MANGROVE FOREST, U.S. 41 BERM,
STREET SIGNAGE REPLACEMENTS WITHIN THE MEDIAN
AREAS, LANDSCAPING IMPROVEMENTS TO U.S. 41
ENTRANCES AND BEACH RENOURISHMENT, ALL WITHIN
THE PELICAN BAY MUNICIPAL SERVICE TAXING AND
BENEFIT UNIT
Item #16F7
THE CHAIRMAN, AS A MEMBER OF THE SOUTHWEST
FLORIDA JOB TRAINING CONSORTIUM, TO APPROVE THE
SOUTHWEST FLORIDA WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT
BOARD, INC., PROPOSED FY 2015/2016 BUDGET
Item #16F8 — Moved to Item #11F (Per Agenda Change Sheet)
Item 16G1
THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS (BCC), ACTING
AS THE AIRPORT AUTHORITY, APPROVE THE ATTACHED
FIFTH AMENDMENT TO ASSIGNMENT OF LEASE FROM
GLOBAL MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGIES, INC. TO KPK
MANAGEMENT, INC. — LOCATED AT THE IMMOKALEE
Page 255
July 7, 2015
REGIONAL AIRPORT
Item #16G2
THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS (BCC), ACTING
AS THE AIRPORT AUTHORITY, APPROVES THE ATTACHED
FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE COLLIER COUNTY AIRPORT
AUTHORITY STANDARD FORM LEASE WITH THE FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF MILITARY AFFAIRS AND STANDARD
FORM LEASE WITH TELLUS FLORIDA, LLC — LOCATED AT
THE IMMOKALEE REGIONAL AIRPORT
Item #16H1 — Continued until September 2015 — Approved during
Agenda Changes
REQUEST TO ADVERTISE AN ORDINANCE AMENDING
ORDINANCE NO. 2008-47, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE
COLLIER COUNTY NON-CONSENT TOWING, PRIVATE
PROPERTY TOWING, IMMOBILIZATION AND STORAGE OF
VEHICLES ORDINANCE, TO BE BROUGHT BACK AT A
SUBSEQUENT MEETING FOR ADOPTION (COMMISSIONER
FIALA)
Item #16H2
RESOLUTION 2015-143: APPOINT ONE MEMBER TO THE
AFFORDABLE HOUSING ADVISORY COMMITTEE —
APPOINTING KRISTI BARTLETT WITH TERM EXPIRING
OCTOBER 1, 2017
Item #16H3
Page 256
July 7, 2015
THE COLLIER COUNTY BLACK AFFAIRS ADVISORY
BOARD TO HOLD THE ANNUAL "DIABETES AWARENESS
DAY" — TAKING PLACE ON NOVEMBER 7, 2015 AT THE
GOLDEN GATE COMMUNITY CENTER
Item #16H4
RESOLUTION 2015-144: APPOINT A CITIZEN MEMBER TO
THE VALUE ADJUSTMENT BOARD — APPOINTING REBECCA
EARNEY
Item #16H5 — Added (Per Agenda Change Sheet)
RESOLUTION 2015-145: APPOINT A MEMBER TO THE
COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION— APPOINTING
ANDREW SOLIS TO FULFILL A REMAINING VACANT TERM
EXPIRING ON OCTOBER 1, 2016
Item #16I1
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
Item #16J1
THE CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT'S INTERNAL AUDIT
REPORT 2015-5 FLEET MANAGEMENT, ISSUED ON JULY 1,
2015
Item #16J2
Page 257
July 7, 2015
BOARD DECLARATIONS OF EXPENDITURES SERVING A
VALID PUBLIC PURPOSE AND APPROVAL OF
DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD OF JUNE 18 THROUGH
JUNE 24, 2015
Item #16J3
BOARD DECLARATION OF EXPENDITURES SERVING A
VALID PUBLIC PURPOSE AND APPROVAL OF
DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD OF JUNE 25 THROUGH
JUNE 30, 2015
Item #16K1
AN ASSUMPTION AGREEMENT SUBSTITUTING THE LAW
FIRM OF SMOLKER, BARTLETT, LOEB, HINDS & SHEPPARD
P.A. FOR THE LAW FIRM OF SMOLKER, BARTLETT,
SCHLOSSER, LOEB & HINDS, P.A., IN THE RETENTION
AGREEMENT DATED APRIL 24, 2007, AS PREVIOUSLY
AMENDED AND ASSUMED
Item #16K2
A STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT IN THE TOTAL AMOUNT
OF $11,000 FOR PARCEL 153RDUE IN THE LAWSUIT STYLED
COLLIER COUNTY V. GG1 NAPLES, LLC, ET AL., CASE NO.
15-CA-329 (GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD FROM EAST OF
WILSON BOULEVARD TO 20TH STREET EAST, PROJECT NO.
60040) FISCAL IMPACT: $11,170 — AN EMINENT DOMAIN
LAWSUIT TO ACQUIRE A PARCEL LOCATED IN SECTION 3,
TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST
Page 258
July 7, 2015
Item #16K3
THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS REVIEW AND
APPROVE THE PROPOSED 2-YEAR EXTENSION TO THE
EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT FOR MARK STRAIN, HEARING
EXAMINER — EXTENDING THE AGREEMENT TO
SEPTEMBER 30, 2017
Item #16K4
RESOLUTION 2015-146: A RESOLUTION GRANTING
MARLENE MESSAM, AS PROJECT MANAGER, AUTHORITY
TO MAKE A BINDING COMMITMENT TO THE
CONSTRUCTION PLANS FOR THE US 41/951 INTERSECTION
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (PROJECT NO. 60116) FOR THE
PURPOSES OF TRIAL AND ALL PRETRIAL MOTIONS IN THE
CASE STYLED COLLIER COUNTY V. RTG, LLC, ET AL., CASE
NO. 13-CA-259
Item #16K5
THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, EX-OFFICIO
THE GOVERNING BOARD OF THE COLLIER COUNTY
WATER-SEWER DISTRICT, DIRECT THE COUNTY
ATTORNEY TO ENFORCE THE TERMS OF THE MAY 18, 2015,
MEDIATION AND PURSUE ANY AND ALL ACTIONS
REQUIRED TO HOLD THE REQUIRED PUBLIC HEARING,
TOGETHER WITH THE RECOVERY OF THE COUNTY'S
LEGAL FEES AND COSTS
Page 259
July 7, 2015
Item #17A
ORDINANCE 2015-38: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING
ORDINANCE NO. 2005-54, WHICH RE-ESTABLISHED TWO
MUNICIPAL BENEFIT UNITS, KNOWN AS SERVICE
DISTRICT NO. 1 AND SERVICE DISTRICT NO. 2, FOR THE
PURPOSE OF PROVIDING AND REGULATING SOLID WASTE
COLLECTION, DISPOSAL AND ADMINISTRATION, TO
PROVIDE ALIGNMENT WITH THE FRANCHISE
AGREEMENTS AS AMENDED, NEW PROCEDURES,
CLARIFICATIONS, AND ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES
Item #17B
ORDINANCE 2015-39: AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER
2004-41, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND
DEVELOPMENT CODE, WHICH INCLUDES THE
COMPREHENSIVE ZONING REGULATIONS FOR THE
UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
BY AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 92-15, AS AMENDED,
WHICH RE-ESTABLISHED LELY, A RESORT COMMUNITY
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD), BY REDUCING THE
MAXIMUM NUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS FROM 10,150 TO
8,946; BY AMENDING SECTION 2.06 ENTITLED "PROJECT
DENSITY" AND SECTION 2.07 ENTITLED "PERMITTED
VARIATIONS OF DWELLING UNITS"; BY AMENDING THE
MARKET ABSORPTION SCHEDULE; BY AMENDING
SECTION 3.02 ENTITLED "MAXIMUM DWELLING UNITS";
BY AMENDING SECTION V, C-2 COMMERCIAL/
PROFESSIONAL TO PROVIDE THAT THE SQUARE FOOTAGE
LIMITATION DOES NOT APPLY TO RESIDENTIAL
Page 260
July 7, 2015
DWELLING UNITS PERMITTED AS PART OF A MIXED USE
PROJECT; AND BY AMENDING SECTION VI, C-3
COMMERCIAL/NEIGHBORHOOD TO ALLOW C-3 USES AND
ALL TYPES OF RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS AS MIXED
USE OR STAND ALONE FOR THE C-3 PARCEL AT THE
CORNER OF RATTLESNAKE-HAMMOCK ROAD AND GRAND
LELY DRIVE; BY ADDING SECTION XV, DEVIATIONS,
FROM THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE TO INCREASE THE
NUMBER OF SIGNS AND THE SIZE OF SIGNS; AMENDING
EXHIBIT H, THE PUD MASTER PLAN TO MOVE A C-3
PARCEL TO THE EAST OF LELY GRAND DRIVE AND
ADJUST ACREAGES TO DECREASE RESIDENTIAL USES
AND INCREASE COMMERCIAL USES BY 6+ ACRES; AND
PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. THE SUBJECT
PROPERTY CONSISTS OF 2,892 ACRES LOCATED BETWEEN
U.S. 41 AND RATTLESNAKE-HAMMOCK ROAD WEST OF
C.R. 951, IN SECTIONS 21, 22, 27, 28, 33 AND 34, TOWNSHIP
50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, AND SECTION 3, TOWNSHIP 51
SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
[PUDA-PL20140002040]
Item #17C
ORDINANCE 2015-40: AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 2008-02 WHICH
ESTABLISHED THE LANE PARK COMMERCIAL PLANNED
UNIT DEVELOPMENT TO REMOVE THE GROSS FLOOR
AREA SQUARE FOOTAGE LIMITATIONS ON PERMITTED
RETAIL PRINCIPAL USES; TO AMEND THE MINIMUM
YARDS AND SITE LIGHTING DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS;
Page 261
July 7, 2015
TO AMEND THE PUD MASTER PLAN TO REMOVE A
PORTION OF THE EXISTING 50-FOOT DRAINAGE
EASEMENT ALONG THE EASTERN PUD BOUNDARY, TO
SHOW AN ADDITIONAL PUD ACCESS POINT OFF OF
MARKET STREET, AND TO INCREASE THE REQUIRED
NATIVE VEGETATION RETENTION ACREAGE; AND TO ADD
NEW ENVIRONMENTAL DEVELOPER COMMITMENTS
IDENTIFYING THE PERMITTED PRESERVE USES, AND
PROVIDING FLEXIBILITY TO ALLOW THE ON-SITE NATIVE
VEGETATION RETENTION REQUIREMENT TO BE
SATISFIED OFF-SITE. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED
ON THE SOUTHWEST QUADRANT OF MARKET AVE. AND
LIVINGSTON RD. IN SECTION 36, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH,
RANGE 25 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, CONSISTING
OF 5.27± ACRES; AND BY PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
[PUDA-PL20140000867]
Item #17D
ORDINANCE 2015-41 : AN ORDINANCE AMENDING
ORDINANCE NO. 2001-55, AS AMENDED (THE ADVISORY
BOARD ORDINANCE), TO ELIMINATE THE THREE YEAR
LIMITATION ON THE DURATION OF AD HOC COMMITTEES
Item #17E
THIS ITEM HAS BEEN CONTINUED FROM THE JUNE 23,
2015 BCC MEETING AND HAS BEEN FURTHER CONTINUED
INDEFINITELY. RECOMMENDATION TO EXECUTE THE
PROPOSED MEDIATED SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND
INTEGRATION AGREEMENT, WHICH INTEGRATES THE
Page 262
July 7, 2015
ORANGE TREE UTILITY COMPANY WATER AND
WASTEWATER SYSTEMS INTO THE COLLIER COUNTY
WATER-SEWER DISTRICT, TO PROVIDE WATER AND
WASTEWATER UTILITIES TO ORANGE TREE UTILITY
CUSTOMERS PURSUANT TO THE MAY 28, 1991
AGREEMENT, AS AMENDED, BETWEEN ORANGE TREE
UTILITY COMPANY, ORANGETREE ASSOCIATES AND THE
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER
COUNTY; ACCEPT THE STAFF REPORT DATED JUNE 23,
2015 PURSUANT TO SECTION 124.3401, FLORIDA STATUTES;
APPROVE EXISTING ORANGE TREE UTILITY CONTRACTS
AND AGREEMENTS WITH VENDORS AND SUPPLIERS AS
THOSE OF COLLIER COUNTY; APPROVE 9 FULL TIME
EQUIVALENT POSITIONS; APPROVE A RESOLUTION
CHANGING THE DISTRICT BOUNDARIES; AND APPROVE
INCLUSION OF THE PROPOSED BUDGET IN THE FY16
COLLIER COUNTY WATER-SEWER DISTRICT BUDGET
Page 263
July 7, 2015
There being no further business for the good of the County, the
meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 5:50 p.m.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS/EX
OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF
SPECIAL DISTRICTS UNDER ITS CONTROL
TIM NANCE, CHAIRMAN
ATTEST:
DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK
ttest as to CUa►rmad s
signature oity,
These minutes appro -d by the Board on al ) 6 1 i S—; as
presented or as corrected
p
Page 264