BCC Minutes 05/28/2002 RMay 28, 2002
REGULAR MEETING
OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
May 28, 2002
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:
VICE-CHAIRMAN:
Jim Coletta
Tom Henning
Donna Fiala
Fred Coyle
James D. Carter, Ph.D.
ALSO PRESENT:
Tom Olliff, County Manager
Jim Mudd, Assistant County Manager
David C. Weigel, County Attorney
Bleu Wallace, Director Community
Development Operations
Page 1
COLLIER COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
AGENDA
May 28, 2002
9:00 a.m.
NOTICE: ALL PERSONS WISHING TO SPEAK ON ANY AGENDA ITEM
MUST REGISTER PRIOR TO SPEAKING. SPEAKERS MUST REGISTER
WITH THE COUNTY MANAGER PRIOR TO THE PRESENTATION OF THE
AGENDA ITEM TO BE ADDRESSED.
COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 99-22 REQUIRES THAT ALL
LOBBYISTS SHALL, BEFORE ENGAGING IN ANY LOBBYING ACTIVITIES
(INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, ADDRESSING THE BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS), REGISTER WITH THE CLERK TO THE
BOARD AT THE BOARD MINUTES AND RECORDS DEPARTMENT.
REQUESTS TO ADDRESS THE BOARD ON SUBJECTS WHICH ARE NOT ON
THIS AGENDA MUST BE SUBMITTED IN WRITING WITH EXPLANATION
TO THE COUNTY MANAGER AT LEAST 13 DAYS PRIOR TO THE DATE OF
THE MEETING AND WILL BE HEARD UNDER "PUBLIC PETITIONS".
ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THIS BOARD
WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS PERTAINING THERETO,
AND THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD
OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE
TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED.
ALL REGISTERED PUBLIC SPEAKERS WILL BE LIMITED TO FIVE (5)
MINUTES UNLESS PERMISSION FOR ADDITIONAL TIME IS GRANTED BY
THE CHAIRMAN.
IF YOU ARE A PERSON WITH A DISABILITY WHO NEEDS ANY
ACCOMMODATION IN ORDER TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS PROCEEDING,
1
May 28, 2002
YOU ARE ENTITLED, AT NO COST TO YOU, TO THE PROVISION OF
CERTAIN ASSISTANCE. PLEASE CONTACT THE COLLIER COUNTY
FACILITIES MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT LOCATED AT 3301 EAST
TAMIAMI TRAIL, NAPLES, FLORIDA, 34112, (941) 774-8380; ASSISTED
LISTENING DEVICES FOR THE HEARING IMPAIRED ARE AVAILABLE IN
THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' OFFICE.
0
3e
LUNCH RECESS SCHEDULED FOR 12:00 NOON TO 1:00 P.M.
INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
A. Associate Pastor Roy Fisher, First Baptist Church of Naples
AGENDA AND MINUTES
Ae
Be
Ce
De
me
Fe
Ge
Approval of today's regular, consent and summary agenda as amended. (Ex
Parte Disclosure provided by Commission members for summary agenda.)
March 30, 2002 - Emergency Meeting
April 23, 2002 - Regular Meeting
April 24, 2002 - Workshop
April 30, 2002 - CRA Meeting
May 3, 2002 - Workshop
May 13, 2002 - Workshop
PROCLAMATIONS
Ae
Proclamation recognizing Ted Tawney for his Heroic efforts on January 25,
2002. To be accepted by Ted Tawney.
Be
Proclamation recognizing the Collier County Wastewater Operations
Challenge Team. To be accepted by Jon Pratt, Coach of the Operator's
Challenge Team and the entire team.
2
May 28,2002
e
C. Proclamation recognizing Commissioner James D. Carter and Mr. Clarence
Tears, Jr., for their efforts and hard work on the Water Symposium. To be
accepted by Commissioner James D. Carter and Mr. Clarence Tears.
D. Proclamation proclaiming June 3-7, 2002 as Code Enforcement Investigators
Appreciation Week. To be accepted by Ms. Michelle Arnold, Director,
Code Enforcement
SERVICE AWARDS
Five-Year Attendees:
1) Jo-Anne Varcoe-Leamer, Administrative Services
2) Emma Gifford, Road and Bridge
3) Jeffrey Letourneau, Code Enforcement
Ten-Year Attendees:
4) Glen Miles, Facilities Management
5) Jacqueline Loy, Emergency Medical Services
6) Paul Baumgardner, Emergency Medical Services
Fifteen-Year Attendees:
7) Steve Ritter, Transportation Engineering
Thirty-Year Attendees:
8) Cecilia Martin, Planning Service
PRESENTATIONS
A. Recommendation to recognize Julie Allen, Program Leader, Parks and
Recreation as Employee of the Month for May 2002.
3
May 28, 2002
6. PUBLIC PETITIONS AND COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS
A. Public Comments on General Topics
Public Petition request by Wilma Britton to discuss Permits and
Encroachment Problems in Henderson Creek.
Ce
Public Petition request by Bob Krasowski to discuss Solid Waste system
design issues.
7. BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
8. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS
Recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners to approve an
Ordinance establishing a Mandatory Non-Residential Recycling Program
within the Unincorporated Areas of Collier County.
Bo
Conduct a Public Hearing for the purpose of receiving input from
subscribers regarding the performance of Comcast Cablevision.
Ce
Petition RZ-01-AR-1143, James G. O'Gara, representing Golden Gate
Capital, Ltd., requesting a rezone from "RSF-3" Residential Single Family
to the "RSF-5" Residential Single Family Zoning District to allow for a
maximum of 16 single-family dwelling units for property located at the
Northeast comer of
50th Terrace SW and 22nd Avenue SW in Section 21,
Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida.
This item has been continued indefinitely. PUDZ-2001-AR-1842, Dwight
Nad,au, of RWA, Inc., representing Thomas G. Eckerty, Trustee for 1-75
Exit 15 Land Trust, requesting a rezone from A, RSF-4, RMF-6, RMF- 12
and C-4 to "PUD" Planned Unit Development to be known as the East
Gateway PUD allowing commercial retail uses on a 20 acre parcel and
industrial/office park uses on a 17 acre parcel, for property located in the
southwest quadrant of the 1-75, Exit 15 Interchange, with frontage on Davis
Boulevard (SR 84), in Section 34, Township 49 South, Range 26 East,
Collier County, Florida, consisting of 37.39+ acres.
An Ordinance creating the Pelican Bay Municipal Service Taxing and
Benefit Unit; setting forth the boundaries of the unit; designating the
4
May 28, 2002
governing body of the unit; providing for purpose and powers; providing for
annual estimates of expenses, taxation and assessment rate; providing for tax
and assessment imposition and collection; providing for the creation of the
Pelican Bay Municipal Service Taxing and Benefit Unit Advisory
Committee; providing for composition, nomination and appointment;
providing for terms of office; providing for removal from office, failure to
attend meetings; providing for officers, quorum, rules of procedure;
providing for reimbursement of expenses; providing for functions, powers
and duties of the committee; providing for the duties of the County
Manager; providing for a review process; providing for opportunity to
comment prior to initial implementation of use of taxing or assessing
authority; providing for supercession, repeal and consolidation of prior
ordinances, including repeal of Ordinance No. 90-111, as amended, the
original 1990 Ordinance creating the Pelican Bay Municipal Service Taxing
and Benefit Unit, Ordinance Nos. 91-22, 98-113, 99-98, 2000-22, 2000-82,
and 2001-19 and providing for supercession, repeal and consolidation of
Ordinance Nos. 78-67, 80-53, 82-122, 85-9, 86-29 and 88-35 relating to
street lighting; providing for conflict and severability; providing for
construction; providing for inclusion in the Code of Laws and Ordinances;
and providing an effective date.
9. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
A. Appointment of member to the Contractors' Licensing Board.
Appointment of members to the Forest Lakes Roadway & Drainage
Advisory Committee.
C. Appointment of member to the Citizens Advisory Task Force.
D. Appointment of members to the Collier County Code Enforcement Board.
E. Appointment of member to the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board.
Fe
Discussion regarding LDC changes as requested by the Workforce Housing
Advisory Committee. (Commissioner Fiala)
10. COUNTY MANAGER'S REPORT
5
May 28, 2002
Ae
F$
Go
Consideration of Fiscal Year 2003 Tourist Development Category "C"
(Museums) Grant Application from Marco Island Historical Society in the
amount of $25,000; Tourist Development Council recommends denial.
(Joseph K. Schmitt, Administrator, Community Development)
Consideration of Fiscal Year 2003 Tourist Development Category "C"
(Museums) Grant Application from Naples Botanical Garden in the amount
of $500,000; Tourist Development Council recommends approval. (Joseph
K. Schmitt, Administrator, Community Development)
Consideration of Fiscal Year 2003 Tourist Development Special Event Grant
Application from Parks and Recreation Department for the Fifth Annual
Country Jam in the amount of $120,000; Tourist Development Council
recommends denial. (Joseph K. Schmitt, Administrator, Community
Development)
Consideration of Fiscal Year 2003 Tourist Development Special Event Grant
Application from Parks and Recreation Department for the Viva Naples-
Latin Music and Food Festival in the amount of $75,000; Tourist
Development Council recommends denial. (Joseph K. Schmitt,
Administrator, Community Development)
Consideration of Fiscal Year 2003 Tourist Development Special Event Grant
Application for the City of Naples Fourth of July Celebration in the amount
of $50,000; Tourist Development Council recommends approval. (Joseph
K. Schmitt, Administrator, Community Development)
Consideration of Fiscal Year 2002 and 2003 Tourist Development Special
Event Grant Applications from the Marco Island Film Festival in the amount
of $160,000 for each fiscal year; Tourist Development Council recommends
approval of $96,000 for Public Relations, Advertising, and Web-Site for
Fiscal Year 2002 only. (Joseph K. Schmitt, Administrator, Community
Development)
This item was continued from the May 14, 2002 BCC Meeting. Approve
Staff, Coastal Advisory Committee and Tourist Development Council
recommendations to disapprove a TDC Category "A" Grant Application for
the Goodland Canals Dredging Design and Permitting in the amount of
$150,000. (Tom Wides, Interim Administrator, Public Utilities)
6
May 28, 2002
He
Je
This item was continued from the May 14, 2002 BCC Meeting. Approve
Staff, Coastal Advisory Committee and Tourist Development Council
recommendations to disapprove a TDC Category "A" Grant Application for
the Barefoot Beach Club Dune Restoration in the amount of $81,500. (Tom
Wides, Interim Administrator, Public Utilities)
A meeting to be held in Executive Session exempt from Section 286.011,
Florida Statutes, in accordance with Section 447.605, Florida Statutes,
between the Collier County Board of Commissioners and the County
negotiating committee relative to collective bargaining, and the Southwest
Florida Professional Firefighters and Paramedics, Local 1826, IAFF, Inc.
(Jo-Anne Leamer, Administrator, Administrative Services)
This item has been deleted.
Ke
te
Adoption of Resolution of the Board acting as Ex-Officio Board of the
Collier County Water and Sewer District authorizing the execution of a loan
agreement with the Florida Local Government Finance Commission in an
amount not to exceed $70,000,000 pursuant to the terms of the Loan
Agreement in order to finance the acquisition and construction of certain
improvements to the utility system, and authorize the execution of a Letter
of Credit Commitment with First Union National Bank. (Tom Wides,
Interim Administrator, Public Utilities)
This item has been deleted.
11.
Me
Approve that Collier County will accept appointment as a Court Appointed
Receiver over Lee Cypress Water and Sewer Cooperative, approve
designation of Bleu Wallace as Administrator of the Receivership, authorize
funding not to exceed $30,000 for receivership expenses, all to assist the
Florida Department of Environmental Protection to effect an Interconnection
of the Lee Cypress Cooperative's Sewer System with the City of Everglades
Sewer System. (Joseph K. Schmitt, Administrator, Community
Development)
Ne
Develop a transition plan to provide for the orderly transition to a new
County Manager. (Thomas W. Olliff, County Manager)
AIRPORT AUTHORITY
7
May 28, 2002
12. COUNTY ATTORNEY'S REPORT
13. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
14. FUTURE AGENDAS
15. STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS
16.
CONSENT AGENDA - All matters listed under this item are considered to be
routine and action will be taken by one motion without separate discussion of
each item. If discussion is desired by a member of the Board, that item(s) will
be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered separately.
A. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
1)
Executive release of Code Enforcement lien established in Collier
County v. William H. Tost, II and Betty Tost.
2)
Approve a Resolution to extend the term of the Workforce Housing
Advisory Committee.
3) Code Enforcement lien resolution approvals.
4) Code Enforcement lien resolution approvals.
5)
This item is being continued to the July 30, 2002 BCC Meeting.
Proposal to impose a temporary moratorium on projects in the
Whippoorwill Area (Bounded on the North by Pine Ridge Road, on
the South by the Wyndemere Subdivision, on the East by 1-75, and on
the West by proposed Livingston Road) until such time as a Master
Plan showing proposed infrastructure improvements, including at a
minimum, potable water distribution, sanitary sewage collection,
stormwater management, and roads, has been accepted by the Collier
County Community Development and Environmental Services
Division. (Joseph K. Schmitt, Administrator, Community
Development)
8
May 28, 2002
B. TRANSPORTATION SERVICES
1)
Approve Budget Amendment No. 2 in the amount of $44,629.25 to
Woods Hole Group for the Haldeman Creek Basin Restoration (AKA
Dredging) Project, Contract No. 01-3216, Project No. 31011.
2)
To have the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) approve a
Budget Amendment, transferring funds from Capital Improvements
General of the Immokalee Beautification Fund 156 in the amount of
$150,000.00 to the Immokalee North Triangle Beautification Project
#66071.
3)
To have the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) approve a
Budget Amendment, transferring funds from Capital Improvements
General of the Immokalee Beautification Fund 156 in the amount of
$87,370.00 to the Immokalee Main Street Beautification (SR 29)
Project #66073.
4)
Approve a Budget Amendment and Change Order Number 2 for the
13tnStreet SW Bridge Design-Build Construction Contract No. 01-
3223, Project No. 60012, Purchase Order No. 204298, for $15,856.00.
5)
Approve Amendment No. 3 in the amount of $535,432.45 to the
Contract for Professional Services Agreement by Agnoli, Barber and
Brundage Inc., for the design of Livingston Road from Golden Gate
Parkway to Pine Ridge Road, County Project No. 60071, and for the
design of Livingston Road from Pine Ridge Road to Immokalee Road,
County Project No. 62071.
6)
Accept a Warranty Deed for Road Right-of-Way in accordance with
the Terrafina PUD Development Commitment and Quitclaim to the
owners any interest the County may have in a 60 foot strip of land
along the South Boundary of the West half of the Terrafina PUD.
7)
Approval of two (2) road impact fee refund requests totaling
$144,090.00.
8)
Resolution to establish a "No Parking" zone along Crescent Lake
Drive as platted in Crescent Lake Subdivision, Plat Book 13, Page 65-
67 from its intersection with Airport road to its intersection with
9
May 28, 2002
Campbell Circle. Approximately eight signs will be needed at a cost
of $100 each for a total of $800.
C. PUBLIC UTILITIES
1)
2)
3)
Approve the purchase of Sole Source Cartridge Filters from George S.
Edwards Co., Inc., in the amount of $51,488.50. This is a reliability
upgrade (spare parts) at the North Water Plant.
Award RFP 02-3339 for construction and demolition waste artificial
reef recycling to committee's shortlist selection of firms, McCulley
Marine Services Inc., for an estimated annual amount of $250,000.
Adopt a Resolution approving the Satisfaction of Lien for Solid Waste
Residential Account wherein the County has received payment and
said lien is Satisfied in Full for the 1991 Solid Waste Collection and
Disposal Services Special Assessment. Fiscal Impact is $16.50 to
record lien.
4)
Adopt a Resolution approving the Satisfaction of Liens for Solid
Waste Residential Accounts wherein the County has received
payment and said liens are Satisfied in Full for the 1992 Solid Waste
Collection and Disposal Services Special Assessments. Fiscal Impact
is $18.00 to record the liens.
5)
Adopt a Resolution approving the Satisfaction of Liens for Solid
Waste Residential Accounts wherein the County has received
payment and said liens are Satisfied in Full for the 1993 Solid Waste
Collection and Disposal Services Special Assessments. Fiscal Impact
is $18.00 to record the liens.
6)
Adopt a Resolution approving the Satisfaction of Liens for Solid
Waste Residential Accounts wherein the County has received
payment and said liens are Satisfied in Full for the 1994 Solid Waste
Collection and Disposal Services Special Assessments. Fiscal Impact
is $30.00 to record the liens.
7)
Adopt a Resolution approving the Satisfaction of Liens for Solid
Waste Residential Accounts wherein the County has received
payment and said liens are Satisfied in Full for the 1995 Solid Waste
l0
May 28, 2002
Collection and Disposal Services Special Assessments. Fiscal Impact
is $46.50 to record the liens.
8)
Adopt a Resolution approving the Satisfaction of Liens for Solid
Waste Residential Accounts wherein the County has received
payment and said liens are Satisfied in Full for the 1996 Solid Waste
Collection and Disposal Services Special Assessments. Fiscal Impact
is $52.50 to record the liens.
9)
Approve the Satisfaction of Lien documents filed against Real
Property for Abatement of Nuisance and direct the Clerk of Courts to
record same in the Public Records of Collier County, Florida. Fiscal
Impact is $72.00 to record the liens.
Award a Contract to Douglas N. Higgins, Inc., for Port-Au-Prince
Utility Replacement, Project 70060 and 70074, Bid 02-3367, in the
amount of $985,620.
11)
Authorize County Manager to negotiate and execute the First
Memorandum of Understanding pursuant to the Landfill Operations
Agreement.
12)
Authorize and approve early payoff amount of $113,541.31 of the
Goodland Water District $468,500 Water Revenue Bond, Series B.
Board approval to Award Bid #02-3375 to Thermo Elemental in the
amount of $124,776, for the purchase of a Quadrupole Inductively
Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometer (ICP-MS).
14)
Convey a Utility Easement from Collier County, a political
subdivision of the State of Florida, to the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, as ex-officio the governing
board of the Collier County Water-Sewer District for construction and
maintenance of Utility Facilities at a cost not to exceed $100.00,
PUED Project 70054.
15)
Approve feasibility assessment and preliminary presentation of
landfill gas to energy project.
11
May 28, 2002
D. PUBLIC SERVICES
1)
Adopt a Resolution and approve a Real Estate Exchange and Purchase
Agreement between the Board of County Commissioners and the
District School Board of Collier County that will net $92,067 in
Revenue.
2)
Approve Budget Amendment recognizing $2,000 revenue from a
donation for a memorial bench at Vanderbilt Beach Access.
3)
Approve the renewal of Contract #97-2646 Tigertail Beach Food and
Beverage Concession with Cool Concessions, Inc.
4)
That the Board of County Commissioners approve award of Bid #02-
3335 in the amount of $98,500 for clean up and monitoring at
Caxambas Park to Envirotac Ltd.
5)
Approve a Limited Use License Agreement in the amount of $25,000
between the Board of County Commissioners and the Naples Junior
Chamber of Commerce, Inc., approving the use of specified county-
owned property for conducting a July 4th Fireworks Festival.
6)
Authorization to enter into a Grant Agreement in the amount of
$20,000 between the University Extension Office/Collier Board of
County Commissioners and the Empowerment Alliance of Southwest
Florida for the purpose of providing Homeowner Educational
Programming in Immokalee.
7)
Approve a Work Order for Aaron Lutz Neighborhood Park for Labor
and Material for installation of existing shelters, installing new
concrete sidewalks, installing new bahia sod and tennis courts
reconditioning in the amount of $67,375.00 for Professional Building
Systems Inc.
8)
Award of Bid #02-3384 to G.A. Foods in the amount of $200,000.00
to prepare the food for the Summer Food Service Grant Program
while summer school is not in session.
9)
Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners authorize
funds not to exceed $10,000 to appraise property to be potentially
12
May 28, 2002
utilized for Stormwater/Park purposes off of Bayshore Drive within
the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Area.
E. ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
1)
Authorize the purchase of 26 Panasonic Toughbook Wireless Laptop
Computers from Comark Government and Education Sales Company
utilizing the U.S. Communities Government Purchasing Alliance
Master Agreement in the amount of $119,288.
2)
Award RFP 02-3342 Analytical Laboratory Services for Collier
County to US Biosystems and Severn Trent Services for an estimated
annual amount of $80,000.
3)
Approve a Budget Amendment totaling $179,700 for the Emergency
Replacement of a 250-ton chiller at the County Jail.
4)
Approval of a Budget Amendment for emergency repairs and
unanticipated building maintenance expenditures totaling $287,000.
5)
Approval of a Budget Amendment to Fund 516, Property and
Casualty Insurance to fund claims, reinsurance and professional
services for the remainder of FY02.
6)
Approval to secure a Lease Agreement in the annual amount of
$301,469 with Abbas Ahrabi Asli for office space to be utilized by the
Property Appraiser and approve a Budget Amendment in the amount
of $1,367,400 for leasehold improvements.
7)
Approval of an award of RFP #02-3353 to MGT of America for the
revision of Human Resources Practices and Procedures.
8)
Approve changes to the County Purchasing Policy to enhance contract
administration and management.
9)
Approval to secure a Lease Agreement with Gerald T. and Catherine
L. Berry for office space located at Court Plaza III at an annual cost of
$44,804.
13
May 28, 2002
10)
Award Annual Contract for underground utility construction services
pursuant to RFP #02-3345, in the estimated amount of $6,000,000.
11) Award Annual Contract for Telemetry Services pursuant to RFP #02-
3359, in the estimated amount of $700,000.
12) Award contract for architectural services for programming and design
of the Grey Oaks Public Safety Facility, RFP #02-3326, in the amount
of $74,188.33.
F. EMERGENCY SERVICES
G. COUNTY MANAGER
1)
Approval of Budget Amendment Report - Budget Amendment #02~
335 (1981 Water Management CIP (Fund 325) Stormwater
Management).
2) Presentation of the Environmental Advisory Council's Annual Report.
H. AIRPORT AUTHORITY
1)
Immokalee Regional Airport Extension of Temporary Use Permit for
Immokalee Regional Raceway.
I. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
1)
Commissioners' request for approval for reimbursement of payment
to attend the Water Symposium Celebration Awards Banquet.
J. MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
1) Miscellaneous items to file for record with action as directed.
K. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
1)
Recommendations to approve a Resolution between the Board of
County Commissioners and Sprint Telephone Company of Florida to
partially fund the cost of maintaining the enhanced 911 Emergency
Telephone System.
14
May 28,2002
17.
2)
That the Board of County Commissioners make a determination of
whether the purchases of goods and services documented in the
detailed report of open purchase orders serve a valid public purpose
and authorize the expenditure of County funds to satisfy said
purchases.
L. COUNTY ATTORNEY
1)
Approve the Agreed Order awarding expert fees as to Parcel 101B in
the Lawsuit entitled Collier County v. Jose L. Rey, et al, Case No. 99-
3683-CA (Golden Gate Boulevard, Project No. 63041).
2)
Request by the Housing Finance Authority of Collier County for
approval of a resolution authorizing the Authority to re-issue an
existing issue of multi-family housing revenue bonds to be used to
finance the River Reach Apartments project.
3)
Approve the Stipulated Final Judgment relative to the Easement
Acquisition of Parcel 361 in the Lawsuit entitled Collier County v.
Tony Guarino, III, et al, (Golden Gate Boulevard Project, Project No.
63041).
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. SHOULD ANY OF THE FOLLOWING
ITEMS BE MOVED TO THE REGULAR AGENDA ALL PARTICIPANTS
MUST BE SWORN IN.
Ae
Petition SNR-2002 AR-2138, Robert B. Lemeur, representing Brian
Seligman, requesting a street name change from Put-In-Bay Court to
Tropical Bay Court, located in Waterways of Naples, Unit 7, in Section 14,
May 28, 2002
Township 48 South, Range 27 East.
Be
Petition RZ-01-AR-1353, Mr. Terrance Kepple of Kepple Engineering, Inc.,
requesting a rezone from "A" Rural Agricultural to "C-5" Heavy
Commercial District allowing commercial and retail uses for property
located on the East Side of Collier Boulevard (CR 951), and approximately
one-quarter mile North of Rattlesnake-Hammock Road (CR 864) in Section
14, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, consisting
of 4.71 acres more or less.
Ce
Petition AVPLAT2002-AR1969 to disclaim, renounce, and vacate the
county's and the public's interest in the drainage and maintenance access
easement located on all of Tract V, according to the plat of"Sweetwater Bay
II - Unit 1", as recorded in Plat Book 26, Pages 96 through 98, Public
Records of Collier County, Florida, located in Sections 9 and 10, Township
48 South, Range 25 East.
De
Petition AVPLAT2001-AR1587 to disclaim, renounce and vacate the
county's and the public's interest in the 10 foot wide lake maintenance
easement and the 10 foot wide utility easement located along the rear of Lots
12 and 13, according to the plat of"Terranova of Pelican Marsh Unit One"
as recorded in Plat Book 34, Pages 61 through 62, Public Records of Collier
County, Florida, located in Section 35, Township 48 South, Range 25 East.
18. ADJOURN
INQUIRIES CONCERNING CHANGES TO THE BOARD'S AGENDA SHOULD
BE MADE TO THE COUNTY MANAGER'S OFFICE AT 774-8383.
16
May 28, 2002
May 28, 2002
Item #2A
REGULAR, SUMMARY, AND CONSENT AGENDA-
APPROVED AND/OR ADOPTED WITH CHANGES
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Let me start off with any changes.
Mr. Olliff?.
MR. OLLIFF: Good morning, Mr. Chairman. Good
morning, Commissioners. You do have a fairly lengthy change list.
And I figure I better read it off before it grows any further.
The first item on your list is actually a continuance from your
proclamations and presentations portion. Item 3-A will be continued
to your June 11 th meeting. That was a proclamation to recognize
Ted Tawney, one of your CAT bus drivers, and we will do that
recognition on June 11 th.
Next item is a move from your consent agenda, it is -16B, as in
boy, 5 will become-10-O on the regular agenda, supports an
amendment to a professional services agreement contract with
Agndi, Barber & Brundage. That item will be -10-O on your regular
agenda.
Next item is actually a deletion off of your consent agenda, Item
16-C2. At the staff's request, this item, which was an award of an
RFP for construction and demolition of waste artificial reef recycling,
is being deleted primarily because there was a bid protest. And once
the bid protest has been resolved, we'll bring this item back for your
consideration.
Removing item -16C15 to item-10-P on your regular agenda is
the approval of a feasibility assessment, a preliminary presentation of
the landfill gas to energy project. That change is being made at
Commissioner Coyle's request.
Page 2
May 28, 2002
Item-16-E, E as in Edward, Number 8 is moving to 10. That
will be 10- Q on your agenda. That is approvings (sic) and changes to
the County's Purchasing Policy to enhance contract administration
and management, -16E8 to -10Q; again at Commissioner Coyle's
request.
Item -16E-10, as in Edward, to will become -1 OR on your
agenda. That is an award of an annual contract for some
underground utility construction services, - 16E 10 to - 1 OR, at
Commissioner Coyle's request.
And the last item that the Commissioner has requested to be
moved will be -16E 11, again as in Edward, will become -1 OS, as in
Sam, on your regular agenda. That is awarding an annual contract for
our telemetry services in your Utilities Division.
The last agenda change that I have, Mr. Chairman, is the
deletion of-16H1 off of your consent agenda. It was an Immokalee
Regional Airport extension of a temporary use permit. We are
resolving some issues about a better and, perhaps, a longer term way
of handling that as opposed to a temporary use permit. And we'll
bring that back when we have those details resolved.
Last two items, there are notes on your agenda. The first is a
note that when the Board approves the April 30th, 2002, Community
Redevelopment Agency minutes, that you will be approving those as
the Board of County Commissioners acting as the Community
Redevelopment Agency.
So you actually sit in a separate capacity when you are sitting as
the CRA or the Community Redevelopment Agency Board. And so
we've made a note on your agenda that those minutes will be
approved actually by the CRA Board, the Board of County
Commissioners sitting as the CRA Board.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Do we do that separately?
Page 3
May 28, 2002
MR. OLLIFF: No, ma'am, I don't think that's necessary
unless Mr. Weigel believes it.
MR. WEIGEL: I would appreciate it if you would note that
separately, that way we have no issue from anyone. Thank you.
MR. OLLIFF: Last item, Mr. Chairman, is just a note that Item
10-I, which is the item that has the Board excusing themselves into
executive session to discuss union bargaining agreements for fiscal
year '03, that item has a time cert for 12:00 noon.
And then we will ask that the Board excuse itself at 12:00 noon
and probably schedule its lunch, depending on how the agenda, goes
and then the Chair wants to handle that. But it was assumed that the
Board would just proceed to lunch after those negotiations in your
conference room.
Mr. Chairman, that's all the changes I have for this morning.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Mr. Weigel, you got any comments
before we proceed?
MR. WEIGEL: No changes. And the only comment is with the
item -10I at the commencement of that item, Staff, County Manager
and I will assist in putting on the record before we adjourn to private
meeting the name of the - the names -- name or names of the
committee on behalf of the County outside of Commissioners, the
Bargaining Committee will put that on record at that time.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you, Mr. Weigel. We're going
to start with Commissioner Henning for changes on the Consent
Agenda, Summary Agenda or any Ex Parte Disclosures on the
Summary Agenda starting with you, Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No changes, Commissioner
Coletta. But I do have a disclosure on -17B. I did talk to staff on that
item.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Is that it, Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes, sir.
Page 4
May 28, 2002
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Coyle, it seems
like you already got to the County Manager a little earlier--
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: -- and took care of that business. Is
there anything else?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, a lot of business. But
I've got one other. Are we at the point of Ex Parte now?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, we're there, sir, or changes to
the consent or summary agenda.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. All right. As far as
changes to the -- or Ex Parte, I would like to declare that I have
talked to petitioner on Item 8-C representing Golden Gate Capital
Limited to out a project there. And I would like to pull for discussion
one additional item, Item - 16E6. And at the proper time, I would like
to make a comment about Item -16D8.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Thank you. Myself-- you
took the one item I was going to ask to be pulled, but that's quite all
right. I'm glad you got there before I did. And I have no other
disclosures to make. Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I had a couple questions on
three different items on the consent. And I didn't know whether to
pull them or whether you could answer the questions right here and
now. The first thing is on -16G2; it says this is about the EAC report.
And it says we were supposed to hear the EAC report rather than just
read it in the consent. And I wanted to check to -- I read it all, but I
wanted to know if, indeed, that needs to be on the record.
MR. OLLIFF: It was originally scheduled as a regular agenda
item when we were putting the agenda together. Given the length of
the agenda, we went back and looked to see if there was a
requirement that the item be presented verbally. There was no
requirement for it to be presented in an oral format. So we called the
Page 5
May 28, 2002
Chair of the EAC and Mikey Coe, who is also going to participate in
the presentation, neither of them objected to having us place this on
the consent agenda.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Good. I was going to call them
myself this weekend, but I thought I wouldn't disturb their holiday.
Thank you very much.
The second thing is -16D8. This is the same one that
Commissioner Coyle mentioned. And I wanted to know who -- this
is where we're providing two hundred thousand dollars worth of food
for summer programs in the school system.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: $461,900.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And I wanted to know, are we
providing food for the school system, or what is this food for?
MR. OLLIFF: It is a long, long standing program that the
County has provided through a federal program, a grant program. All
of the monies for this program, completely federal grant-funded. We
provide food using the school facilities through your Parks and Rec
staff.
We contract with the school's kitchen staff who provide both
breakfast and lunches for areas of the community, primarily those in
Immokalee, East Naples and in some of the other areas of the
community. And we provide literally thousands of breakfast and
lunches, usually during the summer period when school is not in
session.
It is the program designed to allow children to get a -- some
location where they can get a well-balanced nutritional meal
somewhere during breakfast or lunch when they might otherwise
have gotten that meal through the school system and through the free
lunch program.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Coyle, do you have a
question? We'll come back to you.
Page 6
May 28, 2002
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Just additional questioning.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: My question concerning that
particular item, and maybe it's more of a comment than anything else,
but we're spending almost a half million dollars to provide chocolate
donuts, cinnamon buns and pop tarts. Now, you know, if that's a
nutritionally balanced meal, you know, I've been reading the wrong
books. And I'm also informed by staff that, you know, we'll be
receiving an award for the best summer program in the State of
Florida. I think we need to take a look at the criteria here and decide
whether or not we can do something better.
MR. OLLIFF: That may be part of the program, but you will
also provide cereal. You will also provide sandwiches for lunchtime,
and you'll provide hot meals at lunch. And most of the time it's
prepackaged sandwich products during the summer program.
They may have highlighted some of the frilly items that they
give, but it is a nutritionally balanced lunch and breakfast program.
We can, by all means, provide a copy of the menu if you'd like to see.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, these were the things that
were listed in the executive summary. So, you know, I had no
understanding of what else was provided. But it's certainly
reassuring that we're offering something other than chocolate donuts
and cinnamon buns.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you, Commissioner Coyle.
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. And the last question about
that same item, is this just for anybody in the neighborhood who
needs a meal, or is this for children in a summer program?
MR. OLLIFF: It's actually, as I recall the program's criteria, it's
for any of the kids in the neighborhoods. And there are certain
criteria for the neighborhoods that these programs are provided in.
Page 7
May 28, 2002
And I think it's based on the number of students during the school
year that participate in the free lunch program. So those -- anybody
who shows up is eligible to be able to get breakfast and/or the lunch
at any of the community parks or schools where the program's
provided.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. And the last one I wanted to
address is -16B7, and that's just to make a statement. On this one,
and I'm going to turn to that one, we were talking about issuing a
check for impact -- instead of impact fee credits and I -- let's see.
This is a builder who mistakenly paid his road impact fees by
check rather than applying them to use the assigned impact fee
credits. And I understand in checking that this is the second time he's
done that. And I would like to state on the record this is the last time
he does that. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Before we go, Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I don't want to go out of turn.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We want to exhaust --
COMMISSIONER CARTER: I'm still intrigued with your
balanced diet. I thought chocolate cake and donuts were good. They
got milk in it. They got eggs in it. They got all that stuff in it.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, we used to be a police officer?
I take that back.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: My question is not about that
particular item. So if you'd like to continue and come back to me.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. May we?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. Sure.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's all right. Let
Commissioner Coyle finish his laundry list.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. -16B6, we're talking about
the vacation of certain property and other property being transferred
Page 8
May 28, 2002
to us for a road. The map I have is pretty much just a black blob, so
it's impossible for me to determine where these things are located.
But the important question is, does this mean that we can have a
wider road than we had originally anticipated? And I believe this is
Logan Boulevard Extension that we're talking about.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, it doesn't- the 80 foot doesn't
necessarily mean that it's going to be a wider road, but it's going to be
an enhanced road by having that extra 20 feet in there. And what we
tried to do is the petitioner -- the developer wanted the bottom land
piece that we had an easement on, which we really didn't have a need
for. And we had a need for the north/south easement so that we could
put a road in there. And we thought it was a pretty good trade. Okay.
And that's why it's on the agenda. But it doesn't give us a wider road.
It gives us an enhanced road.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. So we only -- still only be
able to put in a two-lane road. MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: We couldn't do a --
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. And I talked--
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- wider road?
MR. MUDD: -- to Ed Cant prior to this about that particular
item.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Thank you. I'm finished,
Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you. We'll go to
Commissioner Carter, who we're all waiting to hear from.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: I have no disclosures on the
consent or summary agenda. I'm only pulling -16E, as in Edward, 6
for discussion. Don't have a stroke over there. I am not against
what we have to do. But I do have some comments and suggestions
to the Board to deal with this ongoing challenge that we face.
Page 9
May 28, 2002
MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Chairman, that item would become -10T.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I had it marked.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: We're running out of the
alphabet here.
MR. OLLIFF: T, as in Tom, on your regular agenda. - 16E6
will become - 10T.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: That's all I have, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you, Commissioner Carter.
Okay. With that, does someone want to make a motion for --
COMMISSIONER CARTER: I move for approval of the
agenda and the minutes for today's regular Consent and Summary
Agenda as amended.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And I'll second it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And we have a motion by
Commissioner Carter, a second by Commissioner Fiala. All those in
favor indicate by saying
COMMISSIONER
COMMISSIONER
COMMISSIONER
aye. Aye.
CARTER: Aye.
FIALA: Aye.
COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: The ayes have it 5 to 0.
Page 10
AGENDA CHANGES
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMTSSZONERS' MEET:[NG
May 28, 2002
Continue :[rem 3 (A) tO 3une 11, 2002 BCC Meetinq: Proclamation recognizing
Ted Tawney for his heroic efforts on 3anuary 25, 2002. (Staff's Request.)
Move Ttem 16(B)5 to 10(0): Approve Amendment No. 3 in the amount of
$535,432.45 to the Contract for Professional Services Agreement by Agnoli,
Barber and Brundage, THC., for the design of Livingston Road from Golden
Gate Parkway to Pine Ridge Road, County Project No. 60071, and for the
design of Livingston Road from Pine Ridge Road to Tmmokalee Road, County
Project No. 62071. (Commissioner Coyle request.)
Delete Ttem 16(C)2: Award RFP 02-3339 for construction and demolition
waste artificial reef recycling to committee's shortlist selection of firms,
McCulley Marine Services :[nc., for an estimated annual amount of $250,000.
(Staff's Request.)
Move :[tem 16(C)15 tO 10(P): Approve feasibility assessment and preliminary
presentation of landfill gas to energy project. (Commissioner Coyle request.)
Move :[rem 16(E)8 to 10(O_): Approve changes to the County Purchasing
Policy to enhance contract administration and management. (Commissioner
Coyle request.)
Move Ttem 16¢E}10 to 10(R): Award annual contract for underground utility
construction services pursuant to RFP #02-3345 in the estimated amount of
$6,000,000. (Commissioner Coyle request.)
Move :[tem 16(E}11 to 10(S~: Award annual contract for Telemetry Services
pursuant to RFP #02-3359, in the estimated amount of $700,000.
(Commissioner Coyle request.)
Delete :[tem 16(H)1: /mmokalee Regional Airport Extension of Temporary
Use Permit for Tmmokalee Regional Raceway. (Staff's Request.)
**Note: The approval of the April 30, 2002 Community Redevelopment
Agency Minutes will be approved as the Board of County Commissioners
acting as the Community Redevelopment Agency.
**Note: :[rem 10(:[) has a time certain for 12:00 noon.
May 28, 2002
Item #2E
MINUTES OF THE APRIL 30, 2002 CRA MEETING-
APPROVED AS PRESENTED
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'd like to move for approval as the
CRA Board for the April 30th Community Redevelopment Agency
minutes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We have a motion by Commissioner
Fiala, a second by Commissioner Henning. All those in favor
indicate by saying aye. Aye.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
Items #2B, C, D, F and G
MINUTES OF THE MARCH 30, 2002 EMERGENCY MEETING,
APRIL 23, 2002, REGULAR, APRIL 24, 2002 WORKSHOP, MAY
3, 2002 WORKSHOP AND MAY 13, 2002 WORKSHOP-
APPROVED AS PRESENTED
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. I'd like to move for
approval of the March 30th,, emergency meeting; April 23rd regular
meeting; April 24th workshop; May 3rd workshop and May
13th workshop.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Second.
Page 11
May 28, 2002
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We have a motion by Commissioner
Henning and a second by Commissioner Carter. All those in favor
indicate by saying aye. Aye.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: The ayes have it 5 to 0. Now, we go
on to the proclamations. And, Commissioner Carter, you're up first.
Item #3B
PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING THE COLLIER COUNTY
WASTEWATER OPERATIONS CHALLENGE TEAM-
ADOPTED
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Okay. This morning I would
like to invite John Pratt, who is the coach of the Operator's Challenge
Team, and the entire team to step forward if they would this morning.
Come right up here in front of the cameras. Thank you.
Whereas, the Collier County Wastewater Operation's Challenge
Team completed- competed in the Florida Water Resources
Conference in Orlando, Florida on March 26th, 2002. And whereas
the team competed with teams from across the State of Florida and
finished in second place by a very slim margin.
And whereas the top teams in the Florida Compete Competition
are invited to attend a national competition to be held in Chicago,
Illinois in September at the Water Environment Federation National
Conference.
And whereas the Collier County team will compete with over
teams from across North America and whereas this is the third year
Page 12
May 28, 2002
that the Collier County team has competed in this competition and
the second year they have been invited to participate on a national
level and whereas last year's team finished in the Nationals held in
Atlanta, Georgia.
And it's their goal to move up in the overall standings this year
and whereas this event promotes teamwork and training in all areas
of wastewater treatment and collections. The County's four-member
team competed in events that test their skills and safety, wastewater
connections, laboratory, wastewater troubleshooting and pump
maintenance.
And whereas congratulations are extended to the County team
members for finishing runner-up in the City of Fort Lauderdale and
whereas the members of the County team are Joseph Deanski,
Bill Combs, Dave Fitts, Dave Wallers and Coach John Pratt.
Now, therefore be proclaimed by the Board of County
Commissioners that the members of the Collier County Team
competing in the event be recognized for this outstanding
achievement the 28th day of May, done and ordered this 28th
day of May, 2002. The Board of Commissioners, Collier County
Florida, James Coletta Chairman. I move for approval.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. We have a motion by
Commissioner Carter, a second by Commissioner Fiala. All those in
favor indicate by saying aye. Aye.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Ayes have it. Face the camera,
please. Thank you. If someone would like to say a couple words.
Page 13
May 28, 2002
MR. PRATT: John Pratt, coach of the Operator's Challenge.
Thank you very much for honoring us like this. The real honor goes
to everybody else within our department who has allowed us the
time, given an extra effort to -- so we were able to go to this
competition. If it wasn't for them, we'd have a hard time practicing
and actually putting our best foot forward for the County. So to
everyone in our department, thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you. Commissioner Henning?
Item #3C
PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING COMMISSIONER JAMES D.
CARTER AND MR. CLARENCE TEARS, JR., FOR THEIR
EFFORTS AND HARD WORK ON THE WATER SYMPOSIUM-
ADOPTED
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you. Commissioner
Carter, you could sit where you're at or you could stand up from.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, let's put them up front,
Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Front and center, please.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: This is appropriate.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Is Clarence Tears here?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Clarence Tears couldn't make it
this morning, so we're going to save this proclamation --
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- his section of it. Go ahead
and get started. Whereas the Collier County Water Symposium of
was created to form a comprehensive understanding of a complex and
vital, important water resource. And whereas the symposium brought
together scientists, engineers, decision makers all facets of State
Page 14
May 28, 2002
coders to promote and an understanding of water issues facing Collier
County today and in the future.
And whereas this sharing, understanding will help further
cooperation of matters relating to preservation and protection of
Collier County and Florida's water supply.
And whereas Commissioner James D. Carter and Mr. Clarence
Tears organized the importance - or recognizing the importance of a
critical need of-- for education and awareness through community
work tirelessly to organize and promote this symposium and for the
benefit and welfare of all the citizens in Collier County.
And whereas Commissioner Carter and Mr. Tears have helped
to provide coordinated decision-making framework to enhance the
cooperation among jurisdictions, agencies and state coders.
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed that the Board of
Commissioners of Collier County Florida, that Commissioner James
D. Carter and Mr. Clarence Tears be recognized for their
extraordinary efforts in the creation of the water symposium as well
as their efforts to preserve and enhance our water supply, protecting
the quality of life for all residents who reside in Collier County.
Done on this day, the 28th of May, and signed by our Chairman. Mr.
Chairman, I move that we approve this proclamation.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Motion by Commissioner Henning,
second by Commissioner Coyle. All those in favor indicate by
saying aye. Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: The ayes have it. Would you please
face the cameras.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: I forgot.
Page 15
May 28, 2002
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: A couple of words, Commissioner
Carter, would be very appropriate.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Thank you. Different place for
me. First of all, I do want to thank my Co-chairman, Clarence Tears,
for an outstanding effort to make this such a successful event. It was
hard work by the total community. I can't think of one section of this
community, from education to conservationists to water management
people to businesses and industry, that didn't participate in this event.
It was a total effort.
And to my knowledge, that's the only way you get things like
this to work. The water, a finite a resource, is what we have to
protect and continue to focus on how we're going to do it better and
better. And it's just not a local effort.
In the State of Florida, this will be the number one issue in the
Legislature next year, the Council of one hundred, their number one
issue this year. So you will find there's a great focus in this State on
this finite resource, water.
And so I congratulate this community, the one hundred families
who are out there demonstrating how we can save water. And they
are so proud to be a part of this, from wearing their T-shirts to
requesting the Committee. They put a sign in their yard that says, "I
am one of the one hundred out preserving and conserving water."
So there's community pride in what we're doing here. And I
think this is just atypical of what you can expect from the real people
in Collier County. These are the folks that get up everyday, go to
work, do their jobs and know that this is one of the greatest places in
the world to live. So I thank you, Commissioners. I thank Clarence
Tears and the Water Management District for all this effort to make
sure that this is just the beginning.
And tomorrow morning in a news conference, I will have the
pleasure to make another announcement about the success of this
Page 16
May 28, 2002
Water Symposium and how we are going to be involved at a State
level because we are considered at this point on the leading edge in
one of the leading counties in this effort in the State of Florida. Thank
you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you, Commissioner Carter.
Commissioner Coyle?
Item #3D
PROCLAMATION PROCLAIMING JUNE 3-7, 2002, AS CODE
ENFORCEMENT INVESTIGATORS APPRECIATION WEEK-
ADOPTED
COMMISSIONER COYLE: This next proclamation is going to
be accepted by Michelle Arnold, Director of the County's Code
Enforcement Department and, I guess, some other people. I'm not
going to read the names of these people. They're going to stand back
there?
MS. ARNOLD: No, I want them to come up front.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Up front, please. Okay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So when you see these people
knocking on your door, you might recognize them.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Please, line right up along the front
here. Face the audience.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I didn't know we had so many
code enforcement officers. Whereas the code enforcement officers
provide for the security, health and welfare of the citizens in the
community through the enforcement of buildings, zoning, housing,
animal control, fire safety, environmental and other codes and
ordinances.
Page 17
May 28, 2002
And whereas code enforcement officers deserve recognition for
the jobs that they do in protecting lives and improving neighborhoods
as are emergency personnel such as police, fire and emergency
medical services.
And whereas everyday, assisted by support and program staff,
they attempt to provide quality customer service to the public for the
betterment of the community. And whereas too many times their
efforts go unnoticed, even after code compliance has been
accomplished due to their efforts and expertise. And whereas code
enforcement officers are dedicated, well-trained and highly
responsible individuals who take their job seriously and are proud of
their department and the Local Government in which they serve.
And whereas the Florida Association of Code Enforcement has
declared the first week of June to be set aside by local government to
honor and recognize their code enforcement officers. Now,
therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of County Commissioners
of Collier County Florida that the week of June 3rd through 7th be
designated as Code Enforcement Officer's Appreciation Week, done
and ordered this 28th day of May,, Board of County Commissioners,
Jim Coletta, Chairman.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Move to approve.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We have a motion to approve by
Commissioner Fiala, a second by Commission Carter. All those in
favor indicate by saying aye. Aye.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye's have it 5 to 0. Move right over,
please.
Page 18
May 28, 2002
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Boy, you guys have a tough job, I'll
tell you that.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yeah. I'll tell you that. These
people get more criticism than the Commissioners.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Why isn't Michelle in the
picture?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Michelle, in the front, please.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: There's somebody hiding back
here.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Front and center. And, little lady, if
you can move up to the front, please.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Just raise your hand then.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Just raise your hand so we know
you're there. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And, Michelle?
MS. ARNOLD: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You've got to take this with you.
Thank you.
MS. ARNOLD: Thank you, Commissioners, for recognizing
my staff. I just want to say that although the proclamation says Code
Enforcement Officer Recognition, I want to recognize my support
staff as well. And some of those members of that staff is here. They
do an excellent job. And as the proclamation states, they're quite
often not recognized for the efforts that they do for our community.
I also want to take this opportunity to thank them publicly for
the efforts that they did and they participated in with the recent water
emergency. The staff came in, you know, at short notice and spent
many hours going out and informing the public, both knocking on
their doors and calling different golf course communities and those
types of things. And it's a perfect example of when my staff
participates in an effort that we have success. Thank you.
Page 19
May 28, 2002
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you, all.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Back to work. I tell you, Michelle
certainly does a wonderful job. And her staff behind her, I can
understand how we've been so successful. Commissioner Fiala, now
it's your mm. You're going to be the main presenter for the service
awards.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
Item #4
EMPLOYEE SERVICE AWARDS- PRESENTED
MR. OLLIFF: Chairman, as the Board's making their way down
to the floor, I'd take the opportunity to call up your first three
awardees, which were all five-year attendees. This morning we're
recognizing Jo-Anne Varcoe-Leamer of Administrative Services,
Emma Gifford from Road and Bridge and Jeffrey Letourneau from
Code Enforcement.
Mr. Chairman, this morning we also have the privilege of
recognizing two ten-year awardees and Glen Miles with your
Facilities Management Department and Jacqueline Loy of your
Emergency Medical Services Department.
Mr. Chairman, we're also recognizing this morning a 15-year
awardee and Steve Ritter with your Transportation Engineering
Department. Mr. Chairman, last and then we have a rare
opportunity this morning to recognize a 30-year awardee, Cecilia
Martin our CC with your Planning Department. Mr. Chairman, that's
all your awardees this morning. As if you can tell, CC started when
she was about eight.
Mr. Chairman, as you're making your way back to the podium.
I'll also tell you why he's no longer in the room. I'm sure he's still out
Page 20
May 28, 2002
in the hallway. Today is Skip Camp's birthday. So you have all the
free reign to get at him a little bit during the day.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Today is it?
MR. OLLIFF: It is, Mr. Camp's birthday today.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Well, why is he hiding out in the
hall?
MR. OLLIFF: Because it's his birthday, Mr. Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Come in here and we'll all sing
Happy Birthday.
Item #5A- Continued to June 11, 2002
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. It's my turn now. Julie Allen,
are you in the audience, please? Julie? Well, regardless if she's here
or not, we're still going to make the presentation or is she just a little
bashful?
MR. OLLIFF: No, I don't think Julie's here. She was supposed
to be here, Mr. Chairman, and we'll just continue this one until your
June 11 th meeting.
Item #6A
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: That's fine. That sounds fine to me.
Okay. Now we're going on to the public petitions and comments.
How many signees do we have?
MS. FILSON: We have five.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Five, six?
MS. FILSON: We have six.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We have six. Why don't we --
Page 21
May 28, 2002
COMMISSIONER CARTER: This is on public comments; is
that correct?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And would you call the first one,
please.
MS. FILSON: Yes, sir. The first speaker is Mr. Kenneth
Thompson, and he will be followed by Bill Odah. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Mr. Thompson?
MS. FILSON: Mr. Bill Odah. And he will be followed by
Lowell Johnson.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: The first gentleman whose name you
called, put him at the bottom of the pile .just in case he does show
back up in the room so we give him every opportunity.
MR. ODAH: Commissioners, my name is Bill Odah. And I'm
here on behalf of the Property Rights Action Committee. Arising out
of the meeting that was at the Civic Association a week or two ago,
there was a question of exactly how much money they were willing
to pay for land in the ROMA District.
And so in order to clear up that question, we went to the ROMA
documents and we discovered-- I think if you have a copy of this
up there on sheet two, we discovered that for each project from 1
through 11, starting off with 456 acres at a total budget of 1,368,000
that would mean it would be three thousand an acre for the first two
projects, then going up to 3,500 an acre, and then going up to 4,000,
and so on and so forth. And after checking into this, these numbers
didn't seem to ring true with what was going on in the area.
So we went ahead and we did a research on the MLS sales for
the last quarter, which appears on page One, Exhibit B and Sales
Pending Under Contract, which have not closed yet, and then on
Page 22
May 28, 2002
the next page then the MLS listings properties for sale. And after
averaging the results of these three things, we came up with $9,623
per acre as a starting point for the average value of land today in the
ROMA area.
So based on that, we rounded it down to 9,000, if you look at
Exhibit C. And the bottom line is, we come up with a total projected
cost, according to ROMA, to acquire land of $33,013,000 when it
actually -- the actual market value is $99,039 -- or 99,000,000, I'm
sorry, $39,000.
So there seems to be quite a great discrepancy here. And we felt
that it was necessary to bring this to your attention before this
property gets taken off the tax role, because it is potentially valuable
property and it's increasing in value all the time. And that concludes
my statement.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yeah. Just one comment. If this is
the case, they shouldn't be able to buy zero acres of property, because
who would want to sell their property for less than it's worth? MR. ODAH: Exactly.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yeah. I'm kind of at a loss at this
why they're even proceeding if this is all true to fact going down the
line, right?
MR. ODAH: Right.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I would assume that if it would be
market value or above, you would have to have a willing seller. And
I can't picture anyone out there that would sell for a third of its value
or half its value.
MR. ODAH: Well, I certainly wouldn't,
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yeah. Unless somebody's going to
do that, I imagine they'd make it a donation -- MR. ODAH: Right.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: -- and write it off their taxes, right?
Page 23
May 28, 2002
MR. ODAH: Right. Okay. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you very much for bringing
this to our attention.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: This was an excellent -- presented
to us.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: It is. Very good.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you. Next?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I'm sorry, Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioner Coletta, I think
the concern here is what happened similar in the South Blocks of'
Golden Gate Estates where a lot of people, somebody would say that
they were raped of their land of devaluing their property. And is this
the same thing that is projected from the Soil and Water if that's how
they're going to get the land is devalue it and then purchase it?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, I appreciate those comments.
And, of course, neither you nor I can represent the interest of Soil and
Water. But they have made a firm promise that if this was to go
forward, they would make it part of their document where it was
never in the document that went forward for the Picayune State
Forest in the South Block. They'd make a part of it that would be a
willing seller. That's why I'm kind of at a loss why they're
proceeding with the idea that they're going to buy land at a third of its
value. I don't see that happening. But it's a good comment to make.
One of the nice things we got going for us, when it comes to
the South Block now in the Everglades and the restoration, we're
going to have two people there representing our interest in the form
of Tom Olliff and Pam McKie, who I'm sure they're going to make
sure that the people that are remaining get true value for their lands
that are still in the South Block that remain to be sold. I had to get
that in real early, Tom.
Page 24
May 28, 2002
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Just put a big target on his
chest. You better get out of Dodge, Tom.
MS. FILSON: Next speaker is Lowell Johnson, and he will be
followed by Linda Hettinger.
MR. JOHNSON: Good morning. I've been asked to come
forward. I'm a-- first of all, I'm a realtor. I've been in the real estate
profession since. I specialize in land out in Golden Gate Estates, and
I have acquired a reasonable amount of knowledge on the subject
matter in sales and purchases.
Over the last year and a half, I have denoted a measurable
amount of increase in value of land in Golden Gate Estates. It has
gone through the roof. Lots that were the smallest parcel that we
have out there is one and a quarter acres, and those one and quarter
acres a year and a half ago were going for in and around -- those that
are buildable.
Now, I want to make clarification on that. I'm not talking about
lots that are inundated with melaleuca trees and cypress trees and so
forth and low lots that have been on the market for sometime and no
one's going to buy them. I'm talking about buildable lots. And I
work with a variety of the builders on 951 -- or Collier Boulevard
now.
And I have been noticing a major amount of increase in the last
year and a half of values that have gone -- lots that were one and a
quarter acre, lots to $7,000 a year and a half ago are going for twice
that amount are going for to $15,000.
I am selling lots to builders for inventory purposes because of
the wetlands issue that has come about in the last year and a half, two
years, that has made it extremely difficult to finalize on lots for
people who are -- this is the blue-collar area, primarily. I deal with
blue-collar workers. And out in Golden Gate Estates -- I just want to
throw in a comment that anything that is a negative to these people
Page 25
May 28, 2002
who are so hard-working people -- I live in Golden Gate City, and I
consider myself a blue-collar worker. And anything that is presented
by any committee that is a negative to people being able to buy land
out in Golden Gate Estates is a shame. I've been asked to give from
the Right's Action Committee my knowledge on the subject matter to
verify what Mr. Odah said in regards to $9,000. Well, those lots that
are buildable that are of value from Everglades Boulevard to DeSoto
in the ROMA area are easily on an average to $15,000 value. Thank
you.
MS. FILSON: Linda Hettinger. She will be followed by Ty
Agusta.
MS. HETTINGER: Good morning, gentlemen. My name is
Linda Hettinger, and I'm Vice President of Property Right's Action
Committee. And first of all, I want to concur with what Mr. Odah
and Mr. Johnson said. And I am here to speak also on the ROMA on
a little different area.
Number one, what Mr. Henning said is correct. And one of the
problems with designating this, if it is designated a ROMA area, is
that our property right's values could go down due to this. The
people will be afraid to purchase land in here due to the restrictions.
And this could cause a value of our land to go down. And this is one
of the reasons we had this report made up so that we can refer to it,
later on improve, if this happens, prove that our values have gone
down due to this designation.
Another thing I'd like you to think about, I realize that you
people have nothing to do with designating this as ROMA, but I think
you should be aware of some of the problems and the ideas that we're
focussing on. ROMA, we don't understand why the ROMA is being
put into an area that is developed with many family homes and is
continuing to develop. It seems to me that this is the wrong place to
have a ROMA. And also, it is one of the highest areas in elevation in
Page 26
May 28, 2002
Collier County. Collier County goes from 0 to 18 feet. And the
ROMA area is 11 to 14 feet. So it's one of the highest elevated areas
of sea level in the County, which is to my way of thinking, is the
wrong place to try and restore the historic water flow and restore
wetlands.
Another thing is that I think that if you look on the map, that a
good place for the ROMA would be directly east of Golden Gate
Estates. There are few homes there, if any. And that has been
historically a much lower area. And this would be a good place to
have a ROMA area. The only place that would be over there that
would be affected would be the Ford Motor track, but I think they
could be accommodated with some diversionary waterways. These
are answers and solutions and problems which we, as the staff
members, are looking at. And we are going to present them to the
Soil and Water Conservation people. Thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Ty Agusta and he will be
followed by Bob Krasowski.
MR. AGUSTA: Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. I'm the
President of Tax March of Collier County. I'm also on the Board of
Property Right's Action Committee.
Yesterday our friends at the Naples Daily News, Bill the straw
man -- I'm sure you're all familiar with what a straw man is. It's a
diversion or a misdirection. They're directing the attention of the
hundreds of people actively protesting the establishment of a ROMA
and established this poor guy, Lester, as a single, evil developer. I
was invited to two meetings by a Morales family. They live off
DeSoto, I think th Avenue. There were several hundred people there.
A lot of them talk funny like me. But the fact of the matter is, none
of you attended. The second meeting they had two television
cameras and the Naples Daily News did not attend. You know, to be
perfectly honest with you, the structure, as the gentleman presented,
Page 27
May 28, 2002
is very similar to the way the Southern Blocks were acquired, flow
the low price, flush out the number of absentee owners.
You know, I lived in New York City for a hundred years.
Everybody's talking about those fast-talking New Yorkers. Jesus
Christ, those guys walked on water compared to what happens in
this County of well-to-do, highly educated people. How could we
allow?
Now, you point fingers to the Soil and Water Conservation
Group. That gentleman is talking about, "Oh, no, we are only dealing
with willing sellers." We don't have the power for Imminent
Domain. You know, this is a rather aggravating answer. Any lawyer
can tell you that other than the Federal and the State Governments,
nobody has Imminent Domain problems other than what gets
delegated to them by the Governor. And you can acquire that a good
example of it is what happened in Southern Golden Gate Estates
where the Environmental Protection Agency gained the power for
Imminent Domain.
And today they're doing exactly what they promised they'll
never do, similar to what they're being promising today that they will
never do. They will only deal with willing sellers. This is not true.
They are -- today, right next door in the courthouse, there were
Imminent Domain proceedings against people owning property in
Southern Golden Gate Estates.
Ladies and gentlemen, shouldn't we have a little conscience?
You are essentially, to quote you, Mr. Carter, "screwing people."
Whether you got up this morning or not to do so, the fact of the
matter remains that you're taking advantage of these people, many of
whom do not speak the language. They are Cuban or Mexican or
whoever. But, you know, I fought a revolution when I was a very
young -- a youngster. And nobody came to help. When I came to
this country and I was getting a little older, I swore that any time I see
Page 28
May 28, 2002
someone who needs help, I will get up and help. I wish you would
do the same thing. Thank you very much.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Bob Krasowski, and he will
be followed by Kenneth Thompson.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Good morning, Commissioners. Good
morning, Staff. I raise in this section here of the Agenda 6-A to ask -
- my name is Bob Krasowski, for the record. To ask a question-- I'll
be in front of you at 6-C in a few minutes, but this isn't included
in my presentation. So I would just like to know, I have in front of
me a document that is an Executive Summary of some action that you
voted on and passed a little while back. But there's -- I don't quite
understand what's in here and how it relates to how we're a Solid
Waste Master Plan. I was told that our Solid Waste Master Plan
would go out for bid and it's -- I checked the video on that meeting
last night and it was, in fact, said that it would go out for bid. So I
would like to ask the Solid Waste Director, whomever, I notice he's
here, Mr. Yilmaz. Is the -- under the Task Five, Additional Services
of this Executive Summary, has the Solid Waste Master Plan
Assignment Contract been given to our consultants for other
Solid Waste issues, Malcolm Pirnie, or not or is the Solid Waste
Master Plan still yet to be assigned or RP'd, requested proposal?
COMMISSIONER HENN1NG: Mr. Chairman?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: If I may, if we already -- if it's
on the Consent Agenda and it's staying on there, these people are here
for other reasons. So maybe you can get together with Mr. Yilmaz.
MR. KRASOWSKI: This isn't on the Consent Agenda.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. It's on the regular agenda?
MR. KRASOWSKI: It's not on any agenda and that's why I'm
up here on this. If it was on the agenda, I'd get up during the item on
the agenda. And this is the question as to whether or not -- okay.
Page 29
May 28, 2002
This is public comment on something that's not on the agenda. Has
the Solid Waste Master Plan been assigned to anyone? Or as our
understanding, as expressed to us at another meeting, is it still an item
that is up for request proposal?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Mr. Yilmaz, would you come up to
the podium and see if you can answer this question.
MR. YILMAZ: For the record, George Yilmaz. Our
Conceptional Plaster Plan has been assigned to Malcolm Pirnie in the
form of work order.
MR. KRASOWSKI: When may I ask, Mr. Yilmaz?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I'll allow you the privilege -
MR. KRASOWSKI: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: --of asking, of course, the remainder
of your time.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Mr. Yilmaz, when was that done?
MR. YILMAZ: I don't remember a specific date, but that
was done as a follow-up to our Solid Waste Workshop at Top of the
Hill. And we had a chance to present the Board with two items, and
that as part of that General Solid Waste Conceptional Master
Planning, along with Financial Master Planning, was authorized by
the Board for staff to use one of the utility engineering firms and
Malcolm Pirnie as being one.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Chairman.
MR. KRASOWSKI: I'll pursue with Mr. Yilmaz as you had
suggested, Mr. Henning. But I'll make this comment now that we
were told, even promised, that the Solid Waste Master Plan
contract would not be given unless there was an RFP involved. We
have that on videotape.
You Commissioners are new Commissioners and mentioned
often that this is a new day in Collier County and you're looking to
establish yourself with public trust. We follow what you tell us. And
Page 30
May 28, 2002
if other things happen behind the scenes, it doesn't sit well with us. I
just discovered this as a result of some interaction between some
people and--
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Well, right now, Mr. Krasowski,
I think you're accusing us of something. I would have to review
those tapes. I would review it with staff, and it may be your
perception.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Right.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Or it may be a reality.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Um-hum.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: But at this point, I would prefer
you didn't accuse this Board of County Commissioners of doing
something that we're not doing.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Well, I'm suggesting that there is a
difference between what we were promised and what we were told
and what's on the tapes and what has occurred. So, yeah, I'd want to
call it accuse and get to that level. But I certainly do want to identify
our concern about what we perceive to be some incongruous activity,
you know. Okay. So, thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: No, thank you. One thing we always
do is allow you the opportunity to be able to speak from that podium
and ask the hard questions that you want to ask.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Yeah. And you go beyond what, you
know, the basic requirement is in letting me pursue questioning. And
thank you, George, for your clarification.
MR. YILMAZ: Commissioner, one point of clarification. The
only thing that comes to my mind that I recall, we talked Waste
Stream Analysts and characteriztion study potentially being looked
into, awarded in the form of PFP or looking at some other
contractors.
Page 31
May 28, 2002
As far as Conceptual Master Planning goes, our consultant,
Malcolm Pirnie, Inc., has done great deal of work and we have
invested great deal of money for them to process from where we
were from the top of the landfill where we are today. And therefore
it only makes sense. And it's prudent to not repeat those investments
with other consultants. There is a lot of working knowledge that
Malcolm Pirnie brings on table all the way from Lee County.
As you recall, Malcolm Pirnie started with looking into Lee
County incineration potential option. And they came back and said,
"That's not a good option for County." They also came back before
this Board and recommended, "No mass burner and incineration
option." So having said that, I don't know where Mr. Krasowski is
coming from. But the point here is there are efficiencies, cost
effectiveness and continuation of one primary contractor to Solid
Waste Program. And again, we find that to be essential. However,
we do work with other consultants. We engage in CDM. We brought
Dr. Monica Azaris on board as our Composting and Biocycle
Consultant. So it's not just Malcolm Pirnie. We're working on
everyone who can provide us the best information that we can share
with you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you, Mr. Yilmaz.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Mr. Commissioner, I don't have the
time to go into where I'm coming from with Mr. Yilmaz, although
I've spent over a year interacting with him on the very specific issues
here. I just wanted clarification on where we stand with this Solid
Waste Master Plan. And I will say that part of Malcolm Pirnie's
direction has been as a result of a diverse input from people in this
community including the premiere recycling advocates in Collier
County, Zero Waste Collier County.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you, Mr. Krasowski.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Thank you.
Page 32
May 28, 2002
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Mr. Olliff?.
MR. OLLIFF: Just quickly. Mr. Krasowski's raised a specific
issue. We'll get with Mr. Krasowski on that particular issue.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you.
MR. OLLIFF: And we'll also provide you a response in writing.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you very much.
MS. FILSON: Your final speaker is Mr. Kenneth Johnson.
MR. JOHNSON: My name is Kenneth Johnson. I live at
Becca Avenue. You know, Mr. Carter, I knowed Mr. Olliff was
quitting. And I wish you wouldn't accuse him of raising the taxes,
the sales taxes. You did that. You know, you're an awful good
person. I really appreciate you being a County Commissioner. Tom
Olliff did not raise no sales tax. He's in Collier County, knows -- just
as soon as he gives resignation, you come up here and you told in the
newspaper that Tom Olliff raised the taxes.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: I stand to be corrected, sir. I
never said Tom Olliff raised anything.
MR. JOHNSON: All right. Forget it. I'm an easygoing person.
I'll let you get away with it. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Just for the record, sir.
MR. JOHNSON: But I want you to do another thing for me,
please, sir. I live at Becca Avenue. And Ersila E. Thompson does
not call Code Enforcement on anybody. She's the co-owner of that
property. I wish you would have Code Enforcement to leave my wife
alone. What I do is something else. It's my -- I'm going to clean it up.
I don't care what you do. I don't care what Don Hunter does. Until
you straighten him out, I've got here -- I've been to every sheriff's
department you can -- he turned these cops against me. He gets on
the door-- he gets on nationwide TV and he tells everybody that he
didn't get the in people all stirred up, that he's going to send them
Page 33
May 28, 2002
back to where they come from. Well, he's right on TV. Then he gets
over here on these steps and lies about it. I don't know.
Somebody has turned these Latin people against me. I can't go
anywhere but a hospital bed anymore. And I've got much more to cut
on, because it's all --
(Video sound went out.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Would you, please, continue. And I
apologize for the interruption. We do have our audio back. We
corrected the technical difficulty.
MR. JOHNSON: No, don't never apologize for nothing that will
catch up with you. But anyway, this Don Hunter, I have been to
Captain Lanier. We had a conference with Lieutenant Riley -- I
mean Lieutenant -- I wish he was back, Lieutenant Scott Anderson,
which has got the worst mouth of any hog pen I believe I've ever seen
about me. I known him when he went on this force at 17 years old.
And I'm not all the things he says I am. And I'm going to tell you
until somebody does something about Don Hunter and his entourage
of pickpockets -- and I don't like saying this about nobody. And now
for ten years -- it will take me ten years to apologize and get over
this. But I'm going to tell you, I went -- there's Captain Bloom. There
is Captain Weeks. You go to talk to these people, and then there's
Lieutenant Craine. He told me he'd take - take the people and put
them over there in this area and stop this high rate speed on Becca
Avenue.
Well, he drove up, turn around and left. Now, that's really
doing a good job. And if you want to find them, I got myself in bad
trouble with PBR. I was told by some of the people that if I didn't
turn these deputies in of what they were doing and this, that and the
other, that I never would get nowhere. I got two -roll gate fences, a
roll gate. I have to -- when I call them sometimes, I've had to stand
back from these fences to keep these guys from punching me in my
Page 34
May 28, 2002
face and beating me with flashlights. This is the truth, so help me
God. And I hope nobody holds- I called them this morning. And
right across the street from me on the 17th day of this month they
held a drug charge, a drug raid. I called this morning to find out if
this man was still in the jail. And he has a $565,000 bond. And this
is the kind of people I have to live in front of. I don't like slum lands
lord. And I don't think people in the county-
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I'll have to ask you to wrap it up.
MR. JOHNSON: -- like people what I do. I ask for ten minutes,
sir? If you'll just give me another --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: No, ten minutes we can't allow. It's
five minutes maximum on this. But if you'd like to make closing
comments, you're more than welcome.
MR. JOHNSON: I just want you to, please, if you don't do
nothing else in your life is to stop Code Enforcement against my
wife. She owns the property. I don't own nothing. I own a lot of
property, yeah, a lot of it. I got the deeds. I don't owe you nothing.
I don't owe nobody nothing. I pay you my taxes. But until -- I just
reside there. That's all I do and try to keep the property in nice-
looking shape. But what I want you to do, if it's not her that calls that
number in, please don't bother my wife anymore. She's a nervous
wreck. She's over here in the nursing home doing people's hair. She
will follow her customers to the day they die. I'll tell you that.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We thank you for that, very much,
sir.
But, please, leave my wife alone. Just pick on me, will ya?
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Okay.
MR. JOHNSON: I would appreciate that.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you.
MR. JOHNSON: And, Mr. Carter, I didn't mean any harm.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: It's all right.
Page 35
May 28, 2002
MR. JOHNSON: Okay.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: You have a nice day.
MR. JOHNSON: And there's one dead tree, Ms. Fiala. If you
would get it moved off the front of my property -- or her property, I
would appreciate it. You seem to be the only lady to get things done
for me.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you. Next speaker.
MS. FILSON: That's your final speaker, Mr. Chairman.
Item #6B
PUBLIC PETITION BY WILMA BRITTON TO DISCUSS
PERMITS AND ENCROACHMENT PROBLEMS IN
HENDERSON CREEK
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Then we'll go on to the public
petition. And the first one is William Britton.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Wilma.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Wilma.
MS. BRITTON: Good morning. My name is Wilma Britton. I
live at 9-A Duncan Lane, Holiday Manor. First, I would like to thank
you for giving me the opportunity to be here to explain my problem.
On February the 12th, 2002, I received a citation from Code
Enforcement to remove trees and bushes or get a permit in the Collier
County right-of-way alongside Henderson Creek Drive. I checked
into getting the permit and was told that they had to be at least five
feet beyond the right-of-way and it would be pretty costly. So I
decided to take them out and restore alongside the road.
Then on April the 4th, 2002, I received two more citations, one
to remove my new storage shed I had received a permit for and it
was already CO'd on November 29th, 2001. This storage shed was a
Page 36
May 28, 2002
replacement and it was installed in the same place where the old shed
was. I was not aware at this time that it was a County right-of-way.
I have lived at this location since March of '93 to the present
time. I purchased a share in the coopt from Robert and Leo Kavin
when the park became a coopt. At no time was the residents
informed about a right-of-way. At the time I purchased, we were told
what we seen was what we got. That was a mistake. The second
citation stated that I was to move my trailer and part of my carport.
My trailer has been on that location for over 27 years. My carport
was permitted on May 5th, 2000, and CO'd on May 15, 2000. As of
this date, I have moved my storage shed and removed the bridge
walkway across the ditch. If I have to move my trailer that's been
there for 27years, I will lose my home, since there is no way it can be
removed without destroying the whole place.
I have always tried to abide by the codes and hire a builder to
get the codes and the permits. My question is, why after all these
years that we find out about right-of-ways and have surveys that are
not checked out before trailers or anything are placed on them?
I am not the only one who's had plants and trees on the right-of-
ways. We have one person who has a driveway across the right-of-
way and several who have screen rooms and plants on both sides of
Henderson Creek Drive but was not asked to remove those. There
are two RV's on the right-of-way on Henderson Creek ditch.
I'm here to ask you as a Committee, would you, please, allow
me a variance on my trailer and my attached carport? At this time I
thank you for your indulgence.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Mr. Chairman, Mr. Olliff, can
we address this? It seems like it's an older community where this is
not the only issue. AndI think we need to work with this person to
help her through this issue. But I think that we're going to find that
Page 37
May 28, 2002
there are more issues in there. And I think we just need to find a way
to deal with it in total to help people who've been living in a place for
27 years. I think it's kind of-- well, to me, it's not very logical for me
to come back and tell you you got to move it after you've been there
for 27 years. Now, if you sold it, then that's different, because it's a --
MS. BRITTON: I haven't personally lived at that location. I've
lived there for ten years. But I purchased it and it was sitting there
then.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Right.
MS. BRITTON: And it's been in that park since.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Carter, this is the
same one we've been working on for some time. And it's not an easy
situation as where do you make the exceptiOns? I believe on one
point, we were looking at something in the way of a variance that was
going to be able to encompass all the minor infractions that existed
out there.
Would you care to comment on that, please, Mrs. Arnold?
MS. ARNOLD: For the record, Michelle Arnold. Yes, we are
working with the Association's President, John Juliano, to look at
the entire park and whether it's a variance for certain structures or
nonconforming use alteration. Whatever that appropriate permit
would be for to recognize all these properties, we're going to look
into it.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: But one question, if I may: What
happens in the meantime with the violations that are placed against?
MS. ARNOLD: Well, Ms. Britton's is a little bit more unique
than the rest of the park because we're dealing with a right-of-way.
And we didn't discover that encroachment problem until there was
some surveying work done for the County along Henderson Creek
Drive.
Page 38
May 28, 2002
So the way that she can resolve that is with her own variance, or
we can look into whether or not we can incorporate her encroachment
with the rest --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And a variance cost $2,000.
MS. ARNOLD: Right.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And I don't think it would be fair for
someone that's been living at a continuous address for as long as she
had to have to bear that if we could possibly consider putting it in.
Joe? MR. SCHMITT: For the record, Joe Schmitt, Administrator,
Community Development Environmental Services. What we really
have here is somewhat of an encroachment, and I understand Ms.
Britton's concern. Actually, her original trailer, which is -- this is the
configuration, the outline which kind of shows how her trailer has
expanded.
I've gone back through the records. We're currently still looking
at the records. But what was once permitted as a screened-in porch
was later enclosed, insulated and electrical wire installed, which later
became part of the trailer. And then there was a second permit
issued, which again was for screen enclosure on the other side. And
basically, what was once the original trailer has grown into almost a
double-wide type of structure. And what exists out there - this is a
copy that shows the stake right here. This was the shed that was
installed.
And, Commissioner Coletta, if you recall, this issue was raised
to you and my understanding this is a coopt. So there's really no
platted individual pieces of property. It's basically a coopt where
they maintain their ten-foot easements between what is defined as
their property line, but it's not a platted property line. So it's pretty
much that the Homeowners Association has to implement the rules
and regulations. So when we went out there after several complaints
back and forth, specifically in this part of the trailer park or that area
Page 39
May 28, 2002
and we went back, that's when we discovered actually that what had
happened is on this site here, in the greened-in portion were all the
areas, that basically through enlarging of the original manufactured
home or trailer, has become- it was enlarged, encroached into the
County's right-of-way, and that's when we cited Ms. Britton. Of
course, she can come in and apply for a variance. But there are
certain structures I know that have been removed. And we're
currently going back to look at the records so we can at least
understand what was permitted and the aspects of how it was
permitted and CO'd.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Don't go away. Commissioner
Henning first, then Commissioner Coyle.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Michelle Arnold answered my
questions. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: My question really is a procedural
question: Isn't this really a petition to place this variance request on a
future agenda?
MR. SCHMITT: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: This is a far more complex issue
than has been presented in this particular complaint. And I would
suggest we just try to make a determination as to whether we place
this on a future agenda for discussion and then try to get the details at
that point in time.
MR. OLLIFF: My suggestion to you would be, rather than
doing that, because this is, as Mr. Schmitt has outlined, one unit
within a much larger coopt so that if all the coopt owners are
together, then there is really a single property here that we're dealing
with.
My suggestion to the Board would be that you direct us to go
back and look and see and work with the park ownership or
association, if you will, and see if there is any possibility of us
Page 40
May 28, 2002
trying to develop a single variance petition since it is a single
property, in essence, to see
encroachment-type issues.
issues for individual units.
if we can't deal with any and all of these
And there may be some variance-type
There might be some right-of-way
permit-type issues that we can all roll up into the same single
application. And if then there are certain individual cases that
can't be covered by this single application or permit, that's when I
would suggest that we might have to bring something back for you to
consider.
But until we look at that, that would be my suggestion to you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Mr. Olliff, I've seen four nods up
here so far--
MR. OLLIFF: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: -- directing you to do so.
MR. SCHMITT: We need to involve the neighbors as well,
because there's an ongoing dispute back there; as you well know --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Right.
MR. SCHMITT: -- that has involved other neighbors.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And I would very much like to be
aware of the public meetings that will be taking place and be able to
be a part of it.
MR. SCHMITT: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Next speaker.
MS. FILSON: There are no speakers for this item.
Item #6C
PUBLIC PETITION REQUEST BY BOB KRASOWSKI TO
DISCUSS SOLID WASTE SYSTEM DESIGN ISSUES
Page 41
May 28, 2002
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, no. I think we're still on
public petitions. We were the two public --
COMMISSIONER CARTER: We got Mr. Krasowski, I think.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Bob Krasowski.
MR. OLLIFF: He left.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: No, he's here.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: We're on item 6-C, Bob.
MR. KRASOWSKI: I never learn how to use this thing. They
always make these things too big to zoom out. Good morning,
Commissioners. Good morning, Staff. For the record, my name is
Bob Krasowski.
Before I even start, I want to thank the Solid Waste
Department, Public Utilities, Department of County Managers
Department for all the positive interactions they've provided for us.
And I'm representing Zero Waste Collier County. Zero Waste
Collier County is a group of civic-minded people who have taken an
interest in the County's Solid Waste Program. Some of us have been
involved in this struggle since the early '80's. And I say "struggle,"
because on many points there are two distinct sides to the issue, the
Zero Waste approach on the one hand and the incineration pyrolysis
as a poor technology approach on the other.
We, Collier County, that's you and me, all of us, have recently
been spending a lot of time and effort and money evaluating the
pyrolysis option. And no doubt we have the right consultant for that
part of the project, Malcolm Pirnie.
Malcolm Pirnie is nationally known for the million
incinerators and landfills they have helped site. The incinerator most
familiar to us is the one in Lee County. Malcolm Pirnie was at the
genesis of that project. And anyone can correct me if I'm wrong, I do
believe they still have a role as a consultant in Lee and are involved
with evaluating the expansion of that incinerator.
Page 42
May 28, 2002
Well, with the analysis of the large centralized machine, the
pyrolysis option, drawing to a close, your technical team is
evaluating the three responses to your request for proposals on
gasification. And you will soon receive a report from them.
We, on the Zero Waste side of the equation, seek your
endorsement, even your financial support, for our project to bring
methods, technics and design strategies of the Zero Waste
Program to Collier County. Our desire is to conduct a Zero Waste
Symposium much like the Water Symposium shepherded by
Commissioner Carter on our behalf as you well remember just this
morning. Commissioner Carter was acknowledged for the great job
that was done in that regard.
It is essential to the success of a symposium that is of such a
symposium, that is to be conducted, as -- that it is to be conducted as
an independent effort and to the degree possible concurrent with your
present activities.
As Zero Waste advocates, we join many others around the
country in support of a Zero Waste Management strategy that
features, and I've listed them here, most of you are familiar with
them, waste minimization. Now, in Collier County, I'll go into what
is happening now and what will be happening in the future, possibly
under Zero Waste. As -- let's see. Okay. Waste minimization --
many successes of waste minimization are presented in the folder.
The Zero Waste Issue Brief that I distributed amongst you the week
before last, I came to visit all of you and we had brief conversations
on this issue. And I'd refer you to that to see successes in that regard.
Reuse, we can improve our reuse of discards. It is a sin how
much of what is useful is thrown away. Third, recycling. I wonder if
we could find one person who doesn't know about recycling.
And right now in the County, our residential recycling operation
has one small container for recyclables, one large container for
Page 43
May 28,2002
garbage. It should be the other way around. Or we could get the
smaller than the big gallon containers that are tipped, full of garbage.
There's a smaller version that's available to people. We could give
people one of each, one for recyclables and one for garbage. Our
commercial recycling effort is on the verge of attention. If-- you'll
be looking at it today. The discussion will come up in a little while
today. It's on the agenda. And we know that percent of the materials
going into the landfill are coming from the commercial waste stream.
It's important that we attack aggressively what's available as far as
recycling in that waste stream. Number four, composting. We have
a great opportunity here to manage our organic waste materials by
composting, not MSW composting, that's the general waste stream,
but clean composting of food and horticultural debris and sludge
materials.
And then fifth, there's examples of processing leftovers before
they are put into a stabilized landfill. I won't go into that now. I have
limited time, but this reduces odors and leachate problems at the
landfill. And you're going to have a landfill no matter what, a
process you go with. At least for the -- not, you know, in the distant
future.
I'm here today to appeal to you to take action to direct the situation so
the Zero Waste Collier County can assemble a team of
knowledgeable and talented people to analyze our situation and apply
Zero Waste models and techniques to the development of a Waste
Management Program that can be used for our County, for our
County Staff, for a comparison to the present effort. We want this to
be done entirely under the purview of the Solid Waste Department of
Mr. Yilmaz and the others involved there. What we do request is that
it not be done as part of the Malcolm Pirnie work. No disrespect to
them, but we perceive them as having one perspective on the whole
issue. And we'd like to see the Zero Waste perspective presented and
Page 44
May 28, 2002
developed and analyzed under the Zero Waste perspective by Zero
Waste people.
So Commissioners, will you, please, one of you, all of you, put
this item on your next agenda. And of course that allows for more
discussion and allows us to see -- well, it gives us feedback on what
you're thinking about it and the public feedback. And it also allows
us to see, you know, who would be willing to go along with this.
Only other thing I'd add is the symposium concept, I think there
is a report coming on the wastewater-- excuse me, on the Water
Symposium Concept. This Zero Waste -- or symposium would not
just get a bunch of recommendations and a publication that you
should do this or that, but it would be tied exactly to the dynamics of
our waste situation and it would describe how we could apply these
different things to our specific situation. I think it's a big-win
situation for the County, and I'd appreciate your consideration for
those requests. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Natural Foods.
MS. FILSON: There are no speakers.
Item #8A
ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING A MANDATORY NON-
RESIDENTIAL RECYCLING PROGRAM WITHIN THE
UNINCORPORATED AREAS OF COLLIER COUNTY-
DENIED; COMMISSIONER CARTER TO COME BACK WITH
INTERIM REPORT IN SIX MONTHS AND STAFF DIRECTED
TO HOLD WORKSHOPS OVER THE NEXT 18 MONTHS TO
REFINE PROPOSED ORDINANCE
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. We move onto Item 7 -- or
no, excuse me, 8-A under the Advertised Public Hearings.
Page 45
May 28, 2002
MR. YILMAZ: Good morning, Commissioners. For the record,
Solid Waste Director, George Yilmaz. Commissioners, as you know,
we have initiated a number of programs to increase our recycling in
different waste streams.
Unlike some of those we have accomplished the last one, one
and a half year time frame under your general direction and vision
you have set for us. One, a biocycle program for the Art started in
August, resulted in reuse of over percent of these waste streams.
Two, an Artificial Recycling Program Initiative that we have started,
which will take a significant portion of construction demolition
waste to build artificial reefs to enhance coastal ecosystems. This
program will improve our fisheries significantly as well as diving and
tourism-related activities. And it is a true reuse ecosystem
enhancement solid waste program. Three, a construction demolition
waste diversion program which will allow us diverting close to 80 to
90 percent of construction demolition waste. Currently an end pass,
most of it being landfill for recycling reuse and off-site disposal of~
diversion of this waste is crucial. As a result, all other causing
gypsum board contaminated CND will be diverted from the landfill.
Four, landfill gas reuse program which is being designed to
accomplish two things: One, decrease air emissions; two, utilize the
currently flared gas to power one of our water plants, which is going
to be energy intensive,energy demanding reverse osmosis type unit.
And lastly, five, with your general direction and approval of the
contract amendments on this specific section of the contract we used
to have, enhanced residential curbside recycling program. It started
in August of year 2001, again with your vision and general direction
this program resulted in reduction of waste and associated cost.
Therefore, I'm pleased to announce today on an approval level a
proposed budget for upcoming year will not include giving up any
increase in our solid waste services to single-home residents due to
Page 46
May 28, 2002
the fact that, even in such a short time, they were able to reduce their
waste to overcome automated increases, such as CBI based on
contract. Having said that, I'd like to continue and just to share with
you today as requested by the Board, we are here to present
nonresidential recycling ordinance to improve commercial recycling.
Commercial waste stream has been one of those waste streams that
we're doing diligently our best to address as we have done some of
the waste stream, as I mentioned about just minutes ago.
I would like to share with you three highlights of this ordinance,
because it's important for us to start with those three highlights of this
ordinances and a big picture I brought; if you wish. One, this
ordinance does not target businesses already recycling. However,
this ordinance does target businesses who recycles nothing, even one
item, as this ordinance would require. Two, this ordinance provides a
one-year grace period for the businesses to engage in recycling and
be in compliance with ordinance requirements within that year
without any enforcement threat. Three, this ordinance is expected to
minimize our waste stream and reduce our total waste, solid waste
management cost to our small businesses as well as businesses as our
pilot project and kind of like assessment based on pilot project as
shown.
Having said that, I'd like to enlighten, with your permission, our
Special Legal Counsel, David Dee, and as a follow-up, Steve Swartz,
Malcolm Pirnie, who's the Vice President of Malcolm Pimie, and
they have done the cost benefit analysis for us. Our special legal
counsel will basically brief you on the legalities and the structure and
how dependable this ordinance is. And, of course, our technical
consultant will share with you their findings on the cost benefit
analysis.
And again, this cost benefit analysis net benefit to businesses,
not necessarily impact. Having said that-
Page 47
May 28, 2002
MR. DEE: Good morning, commissioners, as you heard, my
name is David Dee. I'm an attorney with the law firm of Landers and
Parson in Tallahassee. I work for local governments throughout the
State of Florida on solid waste issues and have done so for the last 23
years. I've been working for this County for several years on various
solid waste issues, including the development of this ordinance.
Approximately one year ago, this Board expressed its interest in
having a mandatory recycling ordinance that would apply to
nonresidential property.
During the Board's meeting last March, the Board expressed
interest in looking at a great number of different types of materials;
everything from paper and plastic and glass to aluminum foil. We
have tried to consider the Board's goals and desires in developing the
ordinance. We've also tried to get input from Zero Waste and from
the Chamber of Commerce so that we would understand both the
costs, the benefits and the impacts on those people who would have
to deal with this ordinance.
Under the ordinance, we've created some definitions for
shorthand purposes. Under the ordinance, a generator is the business
or another entity that creates solid waste and in mm has recyclable
materials that can be extracted from the solid waste. An owner is a
person that owns nonresidential property, which in mm is defined to
mean everything that's not residential. So we're talking about
property used for the commercial purposes, for businesses. We're also
talking about property used for institutional purposes or not for profit
organizations. That would include your hospitals, your churches and
your schools. A contractor is a business that collects recyclable
materials for profit, typically that would be a waste management DFI
or similar business. The ordinance creates responsibilities for waste
generators. It requires waste generators to recycle one material.
Over the next months, they need to identify the material that they
Page 48
May 28, 2002
wish to recycle and begin to remove it from their waste stream. So if
you're an office, like in my office, we simply identify paper, for
example, and you put it in a container that's provided to you by the
owner. The owner is responsible for arranging for the containers that
will be used.
The owner is responsible for arranging to have those containers
removed from your property. That is consistent with your existing
mandatory collection ordinance, which requires property owners to
arrange for solid waste disposal services.
The County, for its part, needs to help businesses understand the
requirements of the ordinance. They need to reach out and educate
the public about the requirements of the ordinance. And they need to
review and revise this ordinance on a regular basis as necessary.
Accordingly, no later than June 1st of next year, your staff and
the County Manager are obligated to come back before you, present a
report concerning the status of the County's recycling programs, the
costs, the benefits, the impacts and ways where we can improve the
implementation of this ordinance. They also are obligated to come
back before you at least once every two years thereafter, again to try
and review and refine this program.
Now, under this ordinance, owners and generators can comply
in several different ways. For example, an owner can hire a
contractor to come collect the recyclable materials and to provide the
recyclable containers. In the alternative, an owner can provide the
containers themselves and self-haul the material to a recycling
facility. And in that manner, they can save some money at their cost.
Under this ordinance, the contractor would be required to come
before the County, obtain a certificate of operation and to provide
periodic reports to the County. Similarly, if somebody is self-
hauling, they're obligated to provide periodic reports. The reason we
have the reporting requirements is simply so that the County can keep
Page 49
May 28, 2002
track of who's collecting the material, confirm that businesses are
indeed engaging in recycling. We've tried to make the reporting
requirements as simple as possible. We don't want this to be
erroneous. We don't want this to be burdensome.
But we do need to have some basic method of tracking the
implementation of the program. The way this would work, simply, a
typical office is going to choose to recycle paper, in all likelihood.
But they have the choice. They can recycle aluminum cans or glass
or whatever it is they produce. But most offices would want to
recycle paper. That's simple. It's easy. There's a market for that
material. Retail stores, shops are probably going to recycle cardboard.
But again, it's their choice. They can choose paper, plastic, whatever
it is that's easy and cost-effective for them.
Restaurants typically would have the ability to recycle glass,
aluminum cans, metal cans or organic waste.
Now, for a smart business like McDonald's, a Wal-Mart, Publix,
they're already recycling. Their recycling program will not change
with the implementation of this ordinance. What we're trying to go
after are the people that aren't recycling anything. We're trying to
give them some encouragement to recycle at least one thing with the
idea being that if we can increase the participation in the commercial
community, we can increase recycling as a whole. We can bring the
commercial community in to do its fair share to help with recycling
in Collier County.
Now, the ordinance does contain exemptions and variances so
that there are relief mechanisms in place. We recognize that small
businesses don't generate a lot of waste, and this may not be cost-
effective for them. For that reason, any business that's using a 96
gallon container for their waste disposal needs is exempt from the
ordinance.
Page 50
May 28, 2002
Similarly, we recognize that some people may have site-specific
conditions that restrict their ability to recycle. Anyone can come to
the County Administrator and obtain an administrative variance if
they can demonstrate that they're suffering from some substantial
hardship as a result of this ordinance. We also know that the Land
Development Code has requirements that may create a problem with
the implementation of this recycling ordinance. For example, under
the land development code, people may have limited parking spaces
or they may have difficulty screening their recycling containers.
Under those certain circumstances again, somebody can come to the
County Administrator and seek relief or they can seek a variance
under the Land Development Code. And finally, we want to give
everybody a fair opportunity to come into compliance. We want to
have the businesses educated and have the time to get up to speed on
this program.
So again, there's no enforcement of this ordinance for months.
And that date by the way could be extended by the Board if there
were some problem with implementation. In developing this
ordinance, we've tried to be reasonable. We've tried to be flexible.
We want to provide flexibility to generators to select the type of
waste that they want to recycle. We try to provide flexibilities,
flexibilities so that owners can either haul their own material or make
arrangements with a private company to collect the material for them.
And we've tried to establish reasonable goals. We've worked with
both Zero Waste and the Chamber as I mentioned. On one hand,
Zero Waste would like the County to implement a very aggressive
and comprehensive program to do it as expeditiously as possible
Although Zero Waste has some very commendable concepts, I am
concerned, and I believe the County staff and consultants share the
concern, that what Zero Waste is advocating may not be feasible
Page 51
May 28, 2002
initially. And it may create problems with implementation that we
would like to avoid.
We would like this to be a smooth transition into this program.
And for that reason, we have not adopted all of the recommendations
made by Zero Waste for a more aggressive program. And indeed,
when we were prepared to be more aggressive and to require the
collection of free materials, we realized we did not have the technical
data to support that approach. The analysis is done by Malcolm
Pirnie, as you will hear in a minute, support the collection of one
material as a cost-effective program. But we don't have the data
today to say, that, yes, it would be cost-effective to require all the
businesses to recycle two or three or more materials. For that reason,
we did not wish to go forward with the approach advocated by Zero
Waste. On the other extreme, the Naples area Chamber of
Commerce has continued to advocate for a voluntary program. They
believe that no mandatory program should be imposed on the
business community. With all due respect, we disagree with that as
well.
The State adopted a comprehensive solid waste management act
in 1988. Fourteen years have gone by and we still don't have
compliance with the minimum goals set by the State of Florida. We
still don't have the business community recycling to the extent that it
should. And the burden of recycling has generally been placed on the
residential segment of the population. For that reason again, we have
not agreed with the Chamber.
We tried to go forward with the mandatory program that was
recommended by the Board more than a year ago. The fundamental
component, though, of trying to reach balance between these two
extremes is to have a regular review of this program based on the
experience that the County gains as it moves forward. On that, both
the Chamber and Zero Waste agree. They want regular and routine
Page 52
May 28, 2002
reviews of this program. Zero Waste hopes that in the future you will
agree to expand the program in light of the success that the County
has enjoyed. The Chamber, on the other hand, hopes that you will
fine-tune the program, perhaps broaden the exemptions, perhaps
provide relief in other ways so that if the program's not working quite
perfectly, you can adjust in midcourse to make it work better.
So that's why I believe that's essential that we have these regular
and routine reviews. Bottom line is we're trying to promote and
encourage recycling in this County. We believe that the program
that's being proposed to you will reduce the cost incurred by many of
the community's businesses for waste disposal.
And most importantly, we believe that it will conserve the
capacity of your landfill, thus benefitting all of the residents and all
of the businesses here in the County. With that, I'd like to turn it over
to Steve Swartz from Malcolm Pirnie, talk about some of the
technical issues.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay.
MR. DEE: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Before you go, Commissioner
Henning's got a question.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Dee.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And then Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER HENNING:
MR. DEE: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING:
You have the ordinance?
On page nine, top paragraph,
paragraph B, that's if I'm reading that right that a -- and actually it
goes down further that a, "Not for profit organization can transport
with no certificate," correct? They get a variance on that?
MR. DEE: Yeah, not for profits are not being regulated under
this ordinance.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. But everybody else is?
Page 53
May 28, 2002
MR. DEE: If they want to haul, we're not regulating.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right.
MR. DEE: If they --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm just talking about hauling.
MR. DEE: Yes, sir. Yeah, they're not regulated. Private
companies are being regulated under the ordinance when they haul,
yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. What about senior
citizens that want to supplement their income?
MR. DEE: If they're trying to engage in a business for profit,
we're trying to regulate them in terms of-- that might be an
appropriate opportunity for a variance. I mean-
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The only reason I'm bringing
that up is because I know of two senior citizens - MR. DEE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- that one picks up scrap
metal to supplement his Social Security, and the other one picks up
aluminum cans to supplement his Social Security.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Well, this might expand his
business, Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, if it doesn't, what
happens when he has to have liability insurance of a million dollars?
I agree, he can pick up business. I'm not at retirement age, but I hope
I get to slow down. But when we have more Government regulations
on insurances and other things, I'm just concerned about that.
MR. DEE: I would hope the County Manager in his reasonable
discretion would grant a variance for the requirements.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Once we sign this, it's law.
MR. DEE: Yes, sir, that's correct.
MR. OLLIFF: Beyond that, let me ask a follow-up question.
This is based on property ownership. And in those two cases that you
Page 54
May 28, 2002
brought forward talking about people who are in a residential zoning
category and wouldn't be affected, I don't believe.
MR. DEE: Well, let me ask you, Commissioner, are you talking
about somebody that's going along the roadside and picking up cans
along the side the road?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm talking -- no, I'm not. I'm
talking about a retired person coming to a business asking for their
scrap metal and/or aluminum cans. And it happens out there in the
real world, because I see it every day. Two people in Golden Gate,
retired people, going to businesses to pick up metals.
MR. DEE: I understand your scenario. I guess, again, it would
be an opportunity for them to come to the County Commissioner and
see the County Manager and seek a variance from the ordinance
which I assume would be granted without-
COMMISSIONER HENNING: This is an ordinance. This is a
contract with the Community and the Board of Commissioners.
MR. DEE: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So the County Manager giving
a variance, he would be acting as a County Commissioner, not as a
County Manager.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, any appeals from any
decisions by the County Manager are directed to the Board of County
Commissioners under this ordinance. So if the individual came in
and sought a variance and didn't get it, they could come to you and
seek relief from you.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: There's no provisions for
variance in the ordinance for a business or an individual that is
picking up recyclable items.
MR. DEE: Yes, sir, there is. In section 16 on page 12,
paragraph A, the County Manager shall grant an administrative
variance from the requirements in this ordinance when an owner,
Page 55
May 28, 2002
generator or other person demonstrates that the application of the
ordinance would create a substantial hardship.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Which section is that?
What page?
MR. DEE: It's 16, page 12, paragraph A.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. I'll review that. Thank
yOU.
MR. DEE: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And I --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- had a couple of questions as
well.
MR. DEE: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: My two real simple -
MR. DEE: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- just housekeeping. On page 8-
A5 it says, "Section 5 definitions -- excuse me. I'm so sorry. And it
says, "The word shall is always mandatory and not merely
discretionary." And I thought, why wouldn't you just say must rather
than shall? That was just a comment that you might want to take into
consideration. And the second thing it was talking about landfill air
space, and I don't know what landfill air space is. Would you tell
me?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It's the part that smells.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Not quite.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Is that what it is? And they want to
fill that up? Is that it?
MR. DEE: It's sometimes referred to as the design capacity of
the landfill. It's the area above the landfill that is to be filled.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, I see. Oh, how high it can go.
MR. DEE: Yes.
Page 56
May 28, 2002
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. And my last question, and
this one pertains to incentives, you gave an example of BT Boomers
and how much they saved as far as money goes or would have saved
and then also, how much less goes to the landfill. And yet this
business is only renting -- or leasing their property, so the savings
actually goes to the owner of the property. What incentives do you
have for the generator? Doesn't he save any money?
MR. DEE: I was going to say, the economic analysis was done
by Malcolm Pirnie, not by me.
MR. YILMAZ: Commissioner, you have two parts. One -- for
the record, George Yilmaz -- incentives to businesses in twofold. If
the generator responsible for recycling services, meaning the business
owner himself or herself, they would recognize the net savings as
financial benefit. If the owner recognizes such benefit, it would go to
owner. However, business would still have, under this ordinance, if
they go above and beyond minimum requirements, ordinance has at
least two sections for them to be promoted as environmental,
responsible businesses who are doing more than the minimum
required by this ordinance.
And we're planning to partner with Chamber and other agencies
for us to come up with. We're an aggressive business recognition
program for the businesses getting top five ranking for every given
year to be recognized through this Board as the business who are
environmental friendly and environmental conscious. So having said
that, intangible benefits built in this ordinance in addition to financial.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I realize that they would probably
get an award and maybe once a year. And I was hoping that would
be enough to encourage them, because this is a great plan. We need
to do this. You know how strongly I feel about recycling anyway. I
just want to encourage businesses like BT Boomers to, you know, to
be doing this even though they don't see a lot of recognition all year-
Page 57
May 28, 2002
round. I was hoping that, you know, if there's anything that we could
ever think of or dream of to do that would urge them to do that, that
would be great. Anyway, that was all.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Mr. Chairman, I have one
question -
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Go ahead, Commissioner Carter.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: -- on the ordinance itself. It's on
page 10. Remember recycling is a commodity's market. All those
materials, prices rise and fall depending on demand. In this section
8-B, it says, "Notwithstanding any provision, anybody as a generator
shall not be required to recycle a waste material if there is no market
or cost-effective system available recycling such material." I have a
little trouble with that, because I could probably, as a business owner,
pursue that and demonstrate to you there isn't a cost-effective way to
do it or there may not be a market, because the market could change.
So how are we going to deal with that?
MR. DEE: Commissioner, that language was intended to mirror
the provisions of the Florida Statutes that authorize County
Commissions to adopt ordinances of this sort. The statute says that
local governments can require businesses to recycle certain materials
that County designates, the local government designates, provided
that the material will indeed be recycled and provided that there is a
market for those materials.
Trying to comply with the ordinance, I have created in this
document an exemption to say that you don't have to recycle anything
for which there is no market for where it's not cost-effective. Now, in
this particular case, it's a moot issue for most businesses, because
they decide what they're going to recycle. If it's not cost-effective,
they're probably not going to recycle it. But for most any business,
they can recycle paper. A lot of them, as I mentioned before, can
recycle cardboard, the retail shops. And virtually all of them can
Page 58
May 28, 2002
recycle aluminum cans or glass bottles that they may produce in their
operation or from their -- just personal consumption. By way of
example, in our offiCe in Tallahassee, although I would not identify
us as avid recyclers, we've got our trash cans where we can put our
paper. And in the past, where we might have put our food scraps at
lunch or cans or bottles in there, we now just take them in the
kitchen. There's a container for food scraps. There's a container for
aluminum cans. There's a container under the sink for glass bottles.
That's how we recycle three different things. It's painless. It's cost-
effective. It's easy.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: I understand all that.
MR. DEE: yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: -- it's a commodity's market.
And my concern is is that if the market goes up and down and if there
comes a day that paper is not worthwhile to recycle, who's going to
recycle it?
MR. DEE: Well, Commissioner, my assumption is that this
Board would not require anybody to recycle anything if there was no
market or if it wasn't cost-effective. And part of this program is to
encourage people to do something that benefits the community and
makes sense. If it doesn't make sense, then I agree, we shouldn't be
doing it.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Fiala and
Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, I just wanted to make a
comment. I was talking to George the other day, and I was trying to
figure out what a beauty shop or barber shop would recycle. Those
would be one of those that fall under the category of nothing to
recycle.
But again-
Page 59
May 28, 2002
MR. DEE: They may be exempt anyway. They may not
produce enough waste-
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's what I mean.
MR. DEE: -- to fit under this ordinance anyway. I mean,
realistically, we ought to be focusing on the largest businesses that
are producing the most waste and work our way down from there.
That's where you're going to get your most benefit from this program.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes, Mr. Dee, I thank you for
pointing that out.
MR. DEE: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And I am very happy with that.
But it raises a concern that I have, an additional concern, and that is
the variance process. You're saying in this ordinance that the County
Manager, the portion in the Land Development Code 2.7.5 is -- it
precludes that it's making -- it's having a County Manager or its
designee as a person that can waive this variance process of the Land
Development Code correct?
MR. DEE: That is correct, but that's a separate ordinance. So
that talks about variances within the Land Development Code can't
be granted administratively. This is a stand-alone ordinance. And
the rules of this ordinance apply to this ordinance and this program. I
would suggest to you, you probably don't want to be in the business
of hearing and granting all of the variances for this particular
program because my guess is there's going to be a number of them.
And those are probably better handled at your Solid Waste
Department level with an appeal process here to the Board if for
some reason somebody strongly believes they should have been
granted a variance and staff doesn't grant them one.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And I think what it says here,
it's saying, "Zoning code and ordinances under the variance process
Page 60
May 28, 2002
under the Land Development Code." So, you know, whether it be a
Code Enforcement problem, the County Manager's designee can't
waive that. It has to come before the Board of Commissioners or the
Board of Zoning Appeals or the Code Enforcement. That's what this
variance process says. And I guess it raises the concern, ladies and
gentlemen, of that's what happened in the past when staff has given
variances that has got us in trouble. And I'm still waiting to see those
variances, in-house variances come before the Board, so we can take
action on those.
MR. DEE: Commissioner, if I can respond to that. There is an
administrative variance from the requirements of this recycling
ordinance. It would be directed to the County Manager. A variance
from the Land Development Code will be handled just as it always is
under the Land Development Code. And the two examples that were
brought to our attention repeatedly by the Chamber were the
questions about the number of parking spaces and the ability to
screen the recycling containers. With that, we've got two
separate procedures, depending upon the type of issue. The other
point I'd like to make is, we debated about putting something in this
document saying that the Board would provide guidance to the staff
about the kinds of situations that would warrant a variance. We
ultimately decided not to put that in there, but obviously the Board
has that authority to give direction to the staff about the kinds of
situations where they want variances to be granted or where they
don't want a variance to be granted.. And then the fault was, let's go
forward with the ordinance. Let's get some real world experience.
Let's see what kind of fact patterns develop like the ones you
mentioned with the two elderly individuals. And then we'll have a
better idea so that before June 1st of next year, before we start
taking any enforcement action, the issue comes back to the Board, the
Board can direct staff how they wish to proceed. They can postpone
Page 61
May 28, 2002
the enforcement date of this ordinance. They can revise the
ordinance as the Board sees fit.
And before we go out and create a problem for anybody or for
any business, we've got an opportunity to correct, to try and make
things more workable.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. I'm going to ask a question:
My former business, which was equipment rental, which I no longer
own, at that point in time I was recycling used oil from the engines
when we saved the one side, and when we got a full drum we moved
it out. And we also recycled cardboard, because we bought
equipment on regular business. We would take it and transport it
down to the Community Center where they had a cardboard container
and put it in there. It was just a sensible thing to do. Would that
have qualified my business as being a recycler? Would I have met
the qualifications?
MR. DEE: You would have complied with this ordinance,
yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And on the same note,
Commissioner Henning's business, which was engineer repairs and
everything, I know that he also recycled oil and possibly other things,
too. But would the oil in itself have qualified him to meet the criteria
of this ordinance?
MR. DEE: I believe it would, yes, sir. Again, the goal is to
get people that aren't doing anything.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I understand. And I'll be honest
with you, I think this is a wonderful crafted ordinance. It's about as
benign as you can get to get the community, the commercial
community, involved to some extent so they're totally aware of what's
happening. And as we move forward in the year to come and the
years to come, we'll be able to amend it to be able to meet the needs
of that community.
Page 62
May 28, 2002
MS. FILSON:
MR. OLLIFF:
with the first speaker.
And we're hoping that this will set a precedence that they'll
follow in future years. Is that the way that you're putting this
together? And I mean basically by itself, it really doesn't have --
there's so many ways that you could get out of this.
What it is is it's a way to be able to say to the community, we're
asking for you to go one step above voluntary compliance. You may
already be there, but we want to make you aware of it. Is that the
message that we're trying to send?
MR. DEE: Absolutely. It's one step beyond the honor system.
We're just trying to encourage people to participate.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, with the permission of my
fellow Commissioners, I'd like to hear the speakers, and then we'll
continue our discussion after that. Public speakers?
The first speaker is Bob Krasowski.
Mr. Chairman, I don't know that we're done
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Oh, and I apologize for that.
Please continue. Then we'll go to the speakers.
MR. SWARTZ: Commissioner, good morning. For the
record, I'm Steve Swartz from Malcolm Pirnie. A number of my
points have already been covered in the questions. So I'll go through
this very briefly. We assisted in the development of this ordinance in
analyzing the economic impact. Questions were raised about how
much of a burden this would be on the businesses of the County. So
what we did is we devised the pilot program with four businesses
ranging from small to large in terms of waste generated. And those
four businesses are shown in this chart. There's a counseling
company. There's a moving company. There's a Kentucky Fried
Chicken and there's a restaurant. And the restaurant generates the
most waste.
Page 63
May 28, 2002
What this chart shows, interestingly, is with the exception of
the smallest business, every business that we studied actually saved
money by going to this recycling ordinance. And the reason for that
is by recycling, which has cost, they have to spend more for the
collection of the recyclables, they therefore generate less solid waste.
And the smaller quantity of solid waste means that they can pay less
for regular collection. And it turns out, except for the smallest one,
that those costs, of course, saved more than offset the recycling
course.
Now, the smallest business here would be exempt anyway
from this ordinance so that we would hope that they would comply
voluntarily, but they don't have to. So of the businesses that are
covered by this ordinance, every one of them would actually save
money.
This is a fairly limited pilot study, only four businesses. But
what we would hope to do, if this Board sees fit to implement this
ordinance, is that in the first year of operation, when we have many
participates, we can do a much more detailed study, refine this and,
you know, point the direction to the future.
Interestingly, most of these businesses didn't realize that there
was money to be saved. I mean, it didn't occur to them that they
could reduce their fees for regular hauling. And certainly the hauling
companies don't rush to tell them.
So that could be some part of the reason for resistance to this
program; not seeing that there's a savings. And we'll come to that at
the end. We believe that public information and education is going to
be an important element of this program. All right.
There's another kind of savings, less waste going to landfills.
We have -- you have a landfill that has approximately 15 years left.
It's a very cost-effective landfill. When it's gone, the next best
alternative will be that it will be very much more expensive.
Page 64
May 28, 2002
So anything that preserves landfill capacity is valuable. And
we think this program- this is just the one material now that we
expect to rap up in the future. But just the one material allowing for
increased participation over time will generate about five percent
landfill savings, we think, ultimately.
And that's five percent savings going to landfills, also saves
money, because, of course, we pay, the County pays a fee to Waste
Management to operate the landfill. That's going to ramp up over
time too as participation rates increase, we hope. And we estimate
that in full participation it's about $250,000 a year. That's in addition
to the savings that the individual businesses see.
So, in summary, we think this is a very strong program, cost-
effective for businesses, cost-effective for the County, protective of
the landfill, protective of the environment.
In addition to the ordinance, there are three important elements.
One is the Public Information Program to show people that they can
save money this way and to show them how to do it. Second, of
course, is the Enforcement Program. And third, equally important, is
data management.
We need to be collecting data on the recycling efforts, success
and failures, refining the program and your staff will be reporting
back to you at the end of one year and then every two years after that.
And hopefully the program will get better and better. Thank you
very much.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you very much, sir.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Mr. Swartz, what that tells me
is that what we need, without question, is a marketing program,
because Solid Waste Department is going to have a product to sell
and they need to sell it to the businesses. So they need to put together
a marketing plan to get to the businesses or their customers to show
them what's in it for them to be a part of this program.
Page 65
May 28, 2002
And I would hope that this Board is a part of passing this
ordinance if this is the direction we go, ask that we have in this next
year a well thought-out, produced marketing plan that involves the
Chamber, that involves other business groups in the County so that
when it comes time to make this a reality, we have achieved a buy-in
versus having to go to the stick treatment to get people to participate.
MR. SWARTZ: That is correct, sir. Yes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Very good. Thank you very
much for your report. And now we'll move on to public speakers.
MS. FILSON: First one will be Bob Krasowski and he will
be followed by Mark Ginquitti.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Hello again, Commissioners, Bob
Krasowski. Boy, I wish the other Commissioners were here. Can
they hear in the back, if that's where they are?
COMMISSIONER CARTER: If they got the speakers on.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Yeah. I'm with Zero Waste Collier
County. We've been involved over a period of many months
discussing this ordinance with Mr. Yilmaz, with the Chamber on
occasion, and we're very disappointed. Just last week when we met
with Solid Waste Department, Mr. Yilmaz when what was the fourth
draft of this ordinance, which did include the recyclable of up to three
items by those businesses that generated up to three items was
reduced and regressed back to what's in front of you today is one
item.
So requiring businesses to do one item as opposed to three
allows for those other items to go to the landfill where this reduced
cost to business, as identified in this study here. And maybe Mr.
Swartz would like to comment on this to make sure I'm not
misunderstanding, but several -- a couple of the businesses that
Page 66
May 28, 2002
realized a savings by doing the one, also realized a savings by doing
all general recycling. It wasn't as much, but it was still less than what
they were paying prior.
So that leads me to understand that if we were to require those
businesses that fit into this category to recycle everything, it wouldn't
cost them anything. They'd save a little bit of money, but the
community in general would be saving, because that material
wouldn't be going to our landfill. The landfill is used by residences
as well as businesses. And I notice, Commissioner Carter, in your
suggestion that we all work together later, you left out Citizen
Interest Group. It was all business, business, business.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Because they are the market,
my friend.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Well, they're using our landfill, my
Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Well, everybody uses the
landfill, sir.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Right. And we have to -- not that we have
to, but the system that is set up for residences to recycle includes
-something items. We have a capacity to put other things out there.
Of course, businesses could do the same. But like Mr. Swartz said,
and as is discussed in the documentation from Zero Waste in
California, that most businesses don't identify their garbage as an
issue as long as it stays constant because they're focused on their
main interest. Our suggestion at Zero Waste is you do more analysis
of this situation. That's why a symposium would be a darn good idea
around here, because then we'd have more than four little businesses
and the limited analysis of what this ordinance suggests we do.
Now, I've identified that by keeping only one item as a
requirement that the cost to the community is increased, because their
Page 67
May 28, 2002
recyclables that should be included in large volume and diverted from
the landfill is not being done.
The savings that can be realized as a diversion from the
landfill on some of these items that might look profitable -- we have
to factor in that conversion component to see if there's a value there.
Organics, the organics in the waste stream, and some businesses
produce more, like in the food stores that throw away spoiled or other
foods, we have an RFP out now for organics processing that
identifies a commitment of five thousand tons a year of the organic
food out of the commercial waste stream, thousand tons of sludge,
and or thousand, I can't remember exactly what, and then another or
thousand horticultural as a baseline offering to invite people and
propose on it.
If we don't have organics as a required element in this, I'm not
so sure that we'll be able to get people to recycle the organics. They
might go for cardboard or some glass or something else instead. So
that's a problem there. How are you going to stay with your
commitment not to the RFP you put out on organics, but the flow
control. This ordinance is mostly fluff. Okay.
You're accommodating the business community without
having the knowledge to understand how it is impacting or whole
solid waste stream as a whole. We were a bit concerned that the
interest, small interest group -- not small, it's a business interest
group, but the small representation of that business interest group in
the Chamber contained our people that we assigned the task to
operate our landfill waste management was involved as a member of
the Chamber in this.
And it's good to have their input, but they're also the people who
are benefiting from more materials going to the landfills.
So if I may go on, I have other things. I think this is a big
issue. And as Zero Waste Collier County in the efforts, I represent a
Page 68
May 28, 2002
number of people on this, I'd like to finish up my statement.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I just ask, how many speakers do
we have, please.9
MS. FILSON: We have three.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Three more speakers.
Bob, would you hold it down to one more minute, please?
MR. KRASOWSKI: I'll certainly make an effort.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
MR. KRASOWSKI: And I appreciate this.
Okay? Okay. Whose interest is this designed to serve?
You've got me on that. Many businesses are already doing one
recyclable. Why can't we encourage those to do more?
Where it shows that the small businesses can save money, the
fact is it's because they can't downsize from the smallest container.
Accommodations should be made to allow those people to downsize
and recycle as well.
Land development, Land Development Code, the needs to
address these issues, we suggested a more accelerated, but a rollout
timetable. And as Mr. Dee said, their primary concern, most of
all, was to conserve space in a landfill.
Well, by requiring people to do one recyclable when even
some businesses can do three and not have them cost them money,
that's not conserving space at the landfill to the extent we could do.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Your one minute is up, Bob.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Okay. Well, that's too bad. That's
really too bad because I have a lot of comments to make. We went
over the ordinance with the Solid Waste Department. There's other
things I might suggest that they might agree to. I don't know what
the big hurry is. You know, I mean we put more -- this is -- you
know, we put more into this. You got three guys over -- you have
Malcolm Pirnie, you have the Solid Waste Department, you have
Page 69
May 28, 2002
David Dee speaking, you have one citizen that's put in just as much
time as they have and I'm limited and can't get everything out.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Is anybody else here from your
organization that could-
MR. KRASOWSKI: No. Most of the people work, and they
don't work in the task that these people are assigned to. So you
know, maybe at an appropriate time, if we decide to put the
symposium issue on the agenda next time, I can rally the people to
come and they can speak. But why should they come here and spend
a day when this kind of stuff goes on?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: See, we have a limited --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I'm sorry you're disappointed.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Yeah, very.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We try to give you total access to the
whole system from beginning to end. I know I've met with you
numerous times.
MR. KRASOWSKI: I'm entitled to that.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: It's not a shut-out process. We know
exactly where you're coming from.
MR. KRASOWSKI: But we're not getting anywhere.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Where do we draw the line between
persons that are more qualified or better equipped to be able to
answer the questions than others?
MR. KRASOWSKI: You do it all the time. You have
developers come up here, and they go on and on. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: That's--
MR. KRASOWSKI: You have the building people up here, and
they go on and on.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Bob. Bob, I disagree with you one
hundred percent. We have afforded you every opportunity several
times in the course of a day to present your case.
Page 70
May 28, 2002
MR. KRASOWSKI: Well, then I'd like to conclude any
comments.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And kept-- I'm going to allow you
another minute for your comments. But I just want to make sure that
you understand you have not been cut out of the process. You have
had more time at this podium than anyone.
MR. KRASOWSKI: I know. And I'd like to -- and I'd like to --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And to reflect to the point that we
haven't done that is totally crazy. Please continue with your closing
comments.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Don't start saying it's crazy. I've specified
that other people get more time up here. I'm requesting more time.
This is not totally crazy. Nothing's totally anything.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Bob, one minute, wind it up.
MR. KRASOWSKI: I appreciate the minute. Okay. I
appreciate it.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And we appreciate your comments.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thirty seconds is up already.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Henning, you can
wait a minute. Now we got to start over.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Okay. So he's got me figured out. The
comments -- okay. We have the voluntary three percent participation
in recycling. If we were to increase the recycling, which we're going
to, then as efficiencies of greater mass and greater business are
realized, which we know nothing about, then more people -- the cost-
effectiveness of recycling will drop.
We have to do more studies. Also, I think that this whole issue
should go in front of the Planning Counsel and in front of the
Environmental Advisory Review Board, because you got all sorts of
issues here and this stuff going behind the scenes as part of what is
related to this is not getting adequately reviewed in regards to its
Page 71
May 28, 2002
impact on the community. Okay. Well, I appreciate it and, you
know, I could go on and on, but you've given me time. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you, sir.
MS. FILSON: Next speaker is Mark Ginquitti, and he will be
followed by Vince Cautero.
MR. GINQUITTI: Good morning, Commissioners. My name is
Mark Ginquitti. I'm Vice President of Member Services for the
Naples area Chamber of Commerce. Do those that own or manage a
business in Collier County believe recycling is a good thing? Yes,
they do. Does a business community believe we should collaborately
pursue avenues that extend the life of the County's landfill?
Absolutely. Does the Naples area Chamber of Commerce advocate
the necessity of an all-encompassing public contribution in creating
an effective recycling program? Yes. If individuals or groups register
questions or concerns on this ordinance, should one translate this as
an opposition to recycling? Absolutely not. The Naples area
Chamber of Commerce comes before you today as a proponent, not
an opponent; an ally, not an advisory, in our efforts to do what is
right.
However, the best of unions occasionally encounter debates,
lively discussions and disagreements. The pursuit of the objective
should not cast a shroud over inquiries or excuse a presentation of a
question-laden ordinance purely to meet a scheduled deadline.
Over the past months, the Naples area Chamber of Commerce
sought, through verbal and nonverbal medias, information from Solid
Waste to questions such as: The County's cost to administer this
program. Variances to conflict with the LDC code. Who will
administer the grants or grant the variances? Landlord and tenant,
who shoulders the responsibility? Economic hardship definition and
enforcement. Many of these requests still remain unanswered. We
continuously witness the success of a residential, voluntary recycling
Page 72
May28,2002
program. The effort by the County to promote and create awareness
amongst the community is commendable. Families routinely place
recyclables in their blue bins, reducing the amount of solid waste
setting up permanent residence at the County landfill. What makes
us think that the business community, many that practice residential
voluntary recycling will not assimilate recycling into their daily
business routine?
Based on the pilot program, a sample group of four businesses
throughout the County, three indicated they would continue to
recycle. Is it logical or not that their peers would also follow suit?
Participation figures, nine years to reach percent compliance.
Enforcement and review that is contained in this ordinance basically
creates a mandatory voluntary program for Collier County. The
Naples area Chamber of Commerce believes we should drop the "M"
or mandatory off of this program and partner with the County to
vigorously promote the cost-effectiveness and benefit of a voluntary
program. We believe that establishing awareness will not only
produce success, but also produce victory, victory in extending the
life of our landfill, preserving the environment and avoiding
exorbitant exuberant cost of hauling solid waste to a distant landfill.
Finally, we should reconvene in 12 months to review the voluntary
recycling accomplishments and to determine whether to maintain the
current course of voluntary recycling or change direction.
In closing, I want to thank County staff and their consultants for
their professionalism and access to inquiries that the Chamber and
our members have posed to them over the many months. Thank you
very much.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Your next speaker is Vince
Cautero, and your final speaker is Terry Douglas.
Page 73
May 28, 2002
MR. CAUTERO: Good morning, Commissioners. Vince
Cautero for the record. I'll be brief. I'm representing the Issues
Advisory Council of the Naples area Chamber of Commerce. And
I've been authorized by David West and the chairman to speak on
behalf of that committee. Two items, and I'd like to focus on Section
16 which is on page 15 of your packet. Mr. Dee entered into a
dialogue a moment ago with Commissioner Henning about the issues
that I just wanted to bring to your attention. At some point in the
next 12 months while the ordinance is unfolding, we would like to
work with your staff a little bit in more detail regarding the criteria
for administrator variances that may be granted in conjunction with
the ordinance. Part and parcel with that, 16-B on page 15 talks about
the variance process that someone would go through if they couldn't
qualify for the substantial hardship. The last sentence of that states
that in the alternative they may apply for administrative variance. If
I'm correct, someone may have their-- may have an opportunity to
choose between an administrative variance or applying for a variance
with the Land Development Code. If I'm not correct, perhaps I can
be corrected by a member of the County staff or their consultants.
But in any event, it still talks about the administrative variance
section. And all we're asking is that we can work over the next year
and deal with the criteria for that if for no other reason the definition
of substantial hardship still leaves some open-ended issues there. It
talks about any other hardship at the end of it.
But we are appreciative of the fact that your legal counsel and
staff have included a definition of substantial hardship in there. So
those are the only issues that I wanted to raise again. Again,
Commissioner Henning had questioned Mr. Dee on those. And we're
acutely aware that there are definitions dealing with these issues and
that the process is here. But we'd like to just have the opportunity to
Page 74
May28,2002
work a little bit more, put the staff on that administrative variance
process.
And as Mr. Ginquitti said, we'd like to thank your staff and
consultants for working with us and working very hard and coming
to, I think, no less than four or five meetings that we've asked them to
come to. And they have given up a lot of their time for that. Thank
you for your attention.
MS. FILSON: Your final speaker is Terry Douglas.
MS. DOUGLAS: Good morning, Commissioners. My name is
Terry Douglas, and I represent Waste Management. Organic waste is
also known as protrusible waste, defined in our franchise agreement
as solid waste as well. Waste Management has discussed this
language issue with the staff, and they have agreed with these
definitions. Recent discussions in Tallahassee, the DEP
recommended that organic waste and protrusibles not be listed as a
recyclable item. This attempt to delete was supported. So organic
waste is not listed as a recyclable item. Waste Management is
requesting that organic waste be removed as a primary recyclable and
stick to the items that mirror our mandatory residential recycling
program.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Ms. Douglas, I have a question:
If organic waste was the secondary recyclable in the businesses, is
that acceptable under this Florida Statute, I think you're referring to?
Don't know?
MS. DOUGLAS: I think it's listed. I mean, I think we need to
realize that organic waste, protrusible waste is defined as solid waste.
And you, in fact, have a franchise agreement. And that language is
pretty concrete.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So what you're saying is, no
organic waste is acceptable for recycling according to Waste
Management and the contract that we have with Waste Management.
Page 75
May 28, 2002
MS. DOUGLAS: I think what I'm trying to say is that the State
itself has been able to deem that organic waste is not a recycling item.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. You know where I
could -
MS. DOUGLAS: I think it would be at this point a really good
idea that we try to follow that, maybe mirror the program that we
have in place that we're all very happy about. And then in a year
when you revisit all this, maybe things will have changed. But as of
today, for your larger businesses who are going to be targeted and
encouraged to recycle, protrusible waste is a tough one. And I think
maybe we need to just hold back and reconsider that one item for
now.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You know where we could find
that in the action that legislatures --
MS. DOUGLAS: I'm not sure that it was an action. I don't
know that that happened at committee level, but I do know that it is
not in the ordinance at the State level. And maybe Mr. Dees could
help us with that. If not, I know I can in due time.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
MS. DOUGLAS: I can help you with that. And I'll be glad to
fax that to you. Yes.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I do have a question on organic
waste. What would you recycle that for, I mean, for animal food or
I'm kind of lost. What would it be used for?
MS. DOUGLAS: Commissioner, I'm not qualified to really
answer that. But I can tell you that we have customers who are very
sensitive to the time our trucks come by their business or their
residence. And we're very sensitive to that. And I would imagine
that the collection of organic waste would also be of a sensitive
matter in the future as well.
Page 76
May 28, 2002
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, Jim Mudd, Deputy County
Manager, for the record. And I want to address an issue that Ms.
Douglas has presented to you. The commercial recycling ordinance,
the commercial side of the house is basically done on contract, okay?
And each one of the businesses contract with the hauler to pick up
their trash. If that business wants to recycle organics, say it's a Publix
and they have -- and their vegetables only stay on the shelf for a
certain period of time and then they come off the shelf and then it
becomes a waste product, a recyclable, I mean, they want to recycle
that and you can find a commercial hauler to take that, to take it to a
recycling place where they do composting. They shouldn't be
precluded from doing that. This is very different than our residential
collection, which is specific, which we have a contract with Waste
Management for a large part of the unincorporated area.
Each one of the businesses come into their own contract with a
waste hauler. Okay. And it could be -- and I don't want get into the
different -- to the different folks, but there's several CND waste
collectors. There's all kinds of different collectors in this process.
And there's nothing that you have in this commercial recycling
ordinance that precludes you from calling one thing or the other as a
recyclable nor does it preclude that business from going out and
contracting with anybody in order to pick up that particular
recyclable material.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you. Thank you, Terry.
One of my big concerns is we've come a long way on this landfill.
We're keeping it in one place instead of buying another. We're trying
to conserve the space in it. I think we've done a good job. We've
gotten rid of the smell. And that was the big thing. And we worked
very hard to get rid of that smell. And we've invested a lot of money.
What I'm concerned with is -- excuse me -- if we collected organics
Page 77
May 28, 2002
or food waste and put it in some kind of a compost, wasn't that
against our odors and how about the neighbors around that place
where they would be composting it? Do you have an answer for
that?
MS. DOUGLAS: Commissioner Fiala, obviously there are
issues that need to be considered.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah. I'm concerned about that. I
figure we need to take this one step at a time.
MS. DOUGLAS: I do want to say that recycling paper,
recycling cans, recycling cardboard, these are all items that make
sense. We're doing them at home. So it's not going to be difficult.
The cost is something that each business member will have to
evaluate for their own situation. The request today is that you just
remove the organic language as a primary. That's my only request
today. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Fine. One question, if I may. The
organic would also include grease collection? No?
MR. OLLIFF: Not as far as I know. I'll get George to --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We better qualify that, because I'd
hate to find out that we just cut the -- okay.
MR. OLLIFF: Where it says my answer is right, no, it's not
included as an organic waste.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. But would grease collection
in itself satisfy this ordinance? That's another question.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: It doesn't say in there.
MR. YILMAZ: Commissioners, for the record, George Yilmaz.
Grease trap is a waste stream for our wastewater facilities. And it's
regulated under pretreatment ordinance for the wastewater facilities.
So it actually doesn't even come to our landfill.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: That answers it for me.
Page 78
May 28, 2002
MR. YILMAZ: And one other pOint, I want to follow-up with
what Kerry mentioned, that we did have conversations and dialogue
with Waste Management and Don Groseclose has been our contact.
And before we drafted this ordinance, we did have long
discussions including Malcolm Pirnie being there and Connell
Carney there. And to our understanding, they did not object to it,
commercial side of organic waste being processed in a processing
facility as drafted.
Further, we have taken the language out for the residential side.
And also, I'd like to briefly mention the time line. When you look at
the organic processing RFP, even when we have an organic
processing RFP being awarded today, it would take us three, four, if
not five years to materialize that processing facility ready to get those
organic wastes. At that time, Waste Management's collections
contract's up for bids or RFP's anyway. So we're not talking about
doing it now. We're simply gearing up for future.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: So the research can continue?
MR. KRASOWSKI: Yes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Are we doing anything to instead
of recycling more than one product at different places?
MR. KRASOWSKI: Yes, ma'am. And I think Commissioner
Carter's point is well taken. An aggressive marketing plan putting the
information out will be financial incentives for businesses to recycle
more than one item where they become more cost-effective. So the
answer is yes.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I think the idea of putting a plaque in
businesses that exceed the compliance requirements is very well
thought out. I know as a customer I would tend to gravitate to those
type of businesses.
Page 79
May 28, 2002
MR. KRASOWSKI: Frankly, one of our first candidates could
be Commissioner Henning, due to the fact that he's already doing
above and beyond or used to do above and beyond what would be
required by this ordinance.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The check will be substantial.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA:
MS. FILSON: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA:
And that concludes the speakers?
Okay. And with that, I'm going to
close the public portion of this agenda item. And Commissioner
Coyle, I believe you have a statement.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. Commissioner, I don't
think anybody here disagrees that we should be recycling materials to
the greatest extent possible. But what I've heard is I've heard
disagreement expressed by the Commissioners, by the Chamber of
Commerce and by Waste Management and by Zero Waste, who
terms the ordinance is all fluff.
I don't want to be critical of the ordinance. I think you've done a
good job with it. It is an extremely difficult issue to deal with when
you don't know exactly what's going to be recycled, how much is
going to recycle, who's going to be doing it. I think the ordinance
needs some fine-tuning.
But I would like to raise the question: Why do we single out
businesses for a mandatory recycling program, but let residences
continue on a voluntary program? It seems to me that we should be
consistent in this process. And I would not, for a minute, suggest we
begin a mandatory residential program. What I would suggest is to
give the Chamber of Commerce an opportunity. We could set some
goals with respect to percentages of recycle. And then, rather than
the County taking on the entire burden of trying to implement an
educational program, we could work through the Chamber of
Page 80
May 28, 2002
Commerce and others who have really very direct relationships with
businesses in the community.
And if they met those targets, then this ordinance could be held
in abeyance. And if they failed to meet the targets, we could
reconsider this issue. I believe the free enterprise system has worked
very well for this country for a long, long time.
And I sort of hate to take some kind of socialist approach to this.
And I would like to give them an opportunity to demonstrate they
really can do this job properly. And if we don't achieve the proper
goals, then we have to take some other action.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I think we've taken deep cuts
as it is in what we originally thought we were going to impose as far
as mandatory goes. It's just like opening a new restaurant; you need a
little while to get comfortable and see where the goods and the bads
are and straighten them out.
I think that tweaking should take place, true. But I think it
should take place after a mandatory -- I think this was an excellent
compromise between all phases of people interested in Waste
Management. And I feel that we should go forward with it.
And those businesses who want to even recycle more, who see the
benefit either financially or just if they're concerned citizens, because
many won't see that benefit, I don't think, I don't think if they don't
realize financially anything because they don't own the land, they're
not going to be encouraged to do this. I think working with the
Chamber to put together a good marketing plan is an excellent
idea. But I would like to go forward with the ordinance as it is.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Carter?
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Mr. Chairman, I'll direct this
question to Commissioner Coyle: What if this was not to go in effect
for 18 months; a marketing plan put in place; goals established,
Page 81
May 28, 2002
agreed to goals? Those goals are met through a voluntary basis, fine.
You don't need a mandatory ordinance. However, if the goals are not
met, then the ordinance would go. into place in 18 months to
accomplish the objective.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I think that's an excellent
approach. One of the advantages of doing it that way is that it gives
us an opportunity to get some experience with the process and to see
how it's working and thereby work out some of the kinks in the
ordinance itself.
But it will be an educational process for all of us and I'm sure
that we can come up with a more complete and accurate ordinance at
that point in time. And I think the possibility of having the
mandatory program at the end of that period would provide
substantial incentive to get a voluntary program kick-started. So I
would very much agree with that program.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I can't really agree with what we're
saying here. I'll tell you the reason why. I was a small business
owner for 16 years in Collier County. And I mentioned the fact that I
recycled two products in my conversation. One of them was waste
oil. But I didn't mention the fact that this was a mandatory
requirement and that this waste oil was required to be recycled and
also too, you had the pollution control here in Collier County that
would check up on people to make sure that they adhered to this
regulation.
Now, most likely I would have done it regardless of the
regulation. But I'm sure there's many other people that would
conveniently do as they had in the past and dispose of it on the
ground or in the waterways. The other part was the cardboard that I
mentioned that we recycled.
Now, did I do that because it was a tremendous incentive to do
it? Yes, it was, because if I put it all in the dumpster, the dumpster
Page 82
May 28, 2002
was filled and there was no place to put anything in there. So the
incentive for those two products was already, one, required by the
ordinance and the other one required out of necessity to leave some
space in the dumpster for the rest of the refuge that we generated in
the business. I do think that this ordinance that's put together lacks
anything in the way of substantial teeth that's going to hurt anyone.
I think that probably percent of all people are already recycling
one item and could comply. I do think it's a starting point and this
could be torqued as time went along. Every year we get to revisit it.
And if the business community feels that we've imposed
something on them unjustly, they have all sorts of remedy to be able
to bow out of this, including the fact they can ask for an exception to
the whole rule. They can claim a hardship. They can be a small
business that's only used in a small amount. It's just a beginning
point.
And for that, I'm going to make a motion for approval of this
ordinance.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And I'll second it.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Now discussion. Commissioner
Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Several things. I guess my
concern about the ordinance is, who is the County Manager that's
going to make the designee to enforce the ordinance or have the
variances? And what is the criteria for the variances? I don't want to
get into a situation that we're allowing employees of the County to
grant variances that -- they should have some kind of criteria in the
ordinance.
I do believe that there is a residential ordinance mandating
recycling, Commissioner. And the problem I had with that is each
year we have a third of our residents change over, either moving out
or just moving in. And there's not a lot of education there. And I'm
Page 83
May 28, 2002
seeing that from experience of many houses that don't have recycling
bins out on the day of recycling.
And I think that we can do much better through an educational
process, just like we should be doing on the business side of it. It
should be an educational process to get them to recycle. And then in
another year from now or 18 months, just come back from our
experience and then we can consider an ordinance, something that
would really fit the community and the different businesses. And I'm
talking about, you know, different variance's criteria. And we also
need to identify who the haulers are going to be of the different
recyclable materials out there. And like Bob Krasowski says, and if I
may quote, "We don't know the full impact of this ordinance." And
that's very true.
If we do have an educational process where we implement it to
educate the businesses to recycle and also have a hauler for these
different kind of recyclable items and like Bob says, "I don't know
what the big hurry is on this." And I agree with that. I think that we
can have that educational process. And then once we work out all the
kinks, bring it back for consideration at that time.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Commissioner, would you be
supportive of the idea of the marketing plan to the businesses with
measurable goals that gives us an indication of what takes place?
And at 18 months, that they're not doing it, then I say come back and
put the ordinance in as mandatory.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Correct.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, I wanted to make a comment.
We read right here in our summary -- or in our agenda packet that the
four businesses that were targeted, the one business who was the
major recycler, that by the way, had the most tonnage, said that being
that they're not an owner and they wouldn't realize any financial gain
Page 84
May 28, 2002
from recycling when their experiment was over, he was going back to
not recycling, because it was too much of a trouble.
So, in other words, our landfill continues to fill up. So I feel it's
necessary right now to do whatever we can to preserve what space we
have left in our landfill, especially for those businesses who don't
own their -- the property that they sit on and have no encouragement
to -- what? No encouragement. I think that we need to place a
mandatory status on this.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: If I understand the target recycling
levels as proposed in this particular ordinance, the 18-month or two-
year voluntary period would have little or no impact upon the amount
of recycling. Because even if the ordinance were passed right now,
there is a voluntary period for getting people to use it. So and the
question really becomes: What if they achieve the efforts
voluntarily? Why do we ram this down their throat? And from a
practical standpoint, I don't really see that we gain much by going
ahead with an ordinance that everyone, at least all the public speakers
have said it's flawed in some respect and we need to have some
additional work on it.
So I don't see anything that we lose to try to refine that, learn a
little bit about the process as we go through a voluntary recycling
program, and then if we don't meet our targets, it becomes
mandatory. And I don't think it's --
COMMISSIONER FIALA:
18 months after that to try this --
COMMISSIONER COYLE:
COMMISSIONER FIALA:
volunteer again --
COMMISSIONER COYLE:
So then do we have to wait another
Oh, no. No.
-- mandatory one thing while they
No.
Page 85
May 28, 2002
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- to learn how to do it? I mean, I
think we've got to put a -- we've got to save this landfill. And I think
we need to start now.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And if I could bring up another
point, too. Recycling isn't new, it's been a long time now. And it's
very easy for the consumer out there, the regular homeowner, to
recycle because they're working with the item one item at a time. For
businesses to recycle, there has to be an incentive and some direction
to help them along with it. It feels good; that helps in some cases.
But for the most part, it gets down to dollars and cents. If I own a
certain establishment and I have ten competitors and I'm going to be
the only one to recycle, I now place myself at a disadvantage.
In order for this to be fair, you have to have a level playing field.
And believe me, they will not recycle of any substantial means on a
voluntary program. We've offered it voluntary for how many years
now? And it's been in the public domain, recycle, recycle, recycle.
You see it on a continuous basis.
Businesses are profit-orientated. I know. I've been in one for
long enough. You do what you have to do to survive. And this is a
guideline to be able to help them get to that point. If we find it's too
restrictive after one year, let's trash it and go back to the old way.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Coletta?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yes, Mr. Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: If you don't mind, with all due
respect, I disagree with you. The business community is part of the
community. And they're a part of solutions. So we need to
encourage them to be a part of the solution.
And I can tell you -- I can't tell you how many customers that I
took through my business and said, these are the items that I recycle.
It was a proud moment to gain that customer's confidence that I am a
Page 86
May 28, 2002
part of this community. And I know so many business people out
there that do the same.
And we need to encourage through education. And I'm sorry,
but I just don't see the business people as just trying to be out there to
just try to save a buck.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I understand. And I'm going to go to
Commissioner Fiala. And then if anyone else has any comments, I'm
going to call for the motion.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you. Last year we started
this conversation about commercial recycling. And at that time the
Chamber came before us and said, "Give us a year. We need a year
to inform our membership and so forth." Now it's a year later and
they're saying, "Give us another year or 18 months," and we still
haven't advanced. We still only have three percent recycling out of
the business community, even though they've had a year to encourage
them to recycle. And they're still responsible for 60 percent of the
recycling material put into the landfill. I do not think it's the way to
go.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. With that, I'll call for the
motion. All those in favor of the motion indicate by saying aye.
Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: All those opposed.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. The motion failed by two to
three with Commissioner Fiala, Commissioner Coletta voting for it.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: I would like to introduce another
motion that we adopt the provisions of the nonresidential recycling
ordinance after 18 months along with a marketing plan with
Page 87
May 28, 2002
established goals that businesses through the Chamber and other
resources can meet to demonstrate how well we do. At the end of
that period, if they don't meet the goals, then it would become a
mandatory ordinance.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll second the motion for
discussion purposes.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: So we have a motion from
Commissioner Carter and a second from Commissioner Henning.
Discussion, Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: My -- I'm more in favor of it.
And this might be part of your motion is for the County to spend
some money on educational purposes for recycling from the business
sector.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Well, that's part of a marketing
plan where we go out to our customers and say, "This is what you
need to do." But I would like to make the business community a
partner in -- what are the goals we want to achieve? How much can
we accomplish in this period of time? And that plan can be brought
back to the Board for review again if you like. It also, secondarily,
gives us an opportunity to work through the administrative
procedures which seem to have a lot of concerns so that we have
thought this through -- so at the end of that period, if you met the
goals, you don't need the ordinance. But if you haven't met the goals,
then that's the end. You have to do it. Then you are mandating to a
business, "This is what you have to do." I happen to have enough
faith in the business community that I believe if given the goals,
understanding what they have to do to get it done, that this is an
opportunity for them to do it. But we haven't really had a marketing
plan. There hasn't been a sales effort.
And businesses respond to, show me the bottom line, show me
how this is cost-effective for me. And when they see that, every
Page 88
May 28, 2002
smart business owner will do it. Now, are there some that will take
exception to that? But the vast majority won't. So I think we could
accomplish that through the ordinance.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Fiala and then
Commissioner Coyle.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. Rather than the County
putting too much money for advertising, I'd like to see the Chamber.
They wanted to put this off for 18 months. Let them put up the
money to market to their people. We haven't seen that done this past
year. So I'd like to see them put their money where their mouth is,
number one. Number two, do we have any safeguards so that in six
months if we see recycling has not improved from the business
community, we might be able to go back and rethink this, because
we're now banking on them doing what they haven't done this past
year when they were going to do it. And again, the landfill just keeps
filling up every day.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Well, I think also, Mr. Chairman,
don't lose sight of it, there's other pieces coming forward that are
going to be dealing with the landfill issues. And when you get to
those pieces, you may see additional savings on that landfill. So this
is not an isolation. This is just a part of the total program.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Carter, as part of your
motion, would you include an interim report in six months?
COMMISSIONER CARTER: I don't have a problem with that.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Second?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I had a question.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yes, go ahead.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. The one thing I want to
make sure of is that nobody gets the impression that we're doing
something that is going to have a major negative impact on the
landfill, because that's not what this does.
Page 89
May 28, 2002
The current projection, if this were a mandatory program, the
current projection is that there would be five percent recycling by the
end of this year, 2002. And by the end of 2003, there would be 30
percent recycling. I see no reason we can't set those as our goals, and
it will have no impact whatsoever on the landfill. It will achieve
exactly the same goals, and it will give us an opportunity to work out
the problems and the ordinance.
I would like to ask one question. I think it's a legal question.
What I wouldn't like to do is to give this grace period and then say,
"Whoops. We need a mandatory ordinance. Now, let's spend six
months or more getting a mandatory ordinance." Is it possible to
proceed with refining a mandatory ordinance that would be placed, in
effect, if we didn't meet our goals so that we don't waste more time
debating that issue?
MR. WEIGEL: Commissioner, yes. I think the answer is
unquestionably yes. The ordinance-- with a draft ordinance as it is
today can continue to be worked over and brought back. And I had a
question for clarification on the motion for my own clarification. The
motion was actually clearly stated by Commissioner Carter. But he
had talked in terms of adopting after 18 months. And so I wanted to
make sure that staff, as well as myself, was clear that we would be
talking about if the motion, as amended on the floor were to be
adopted, that this ordinance would be adopted in 18 months or it's
adopted now lying in place to be effective in 18 months?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That was my question.
MR. WEIGEL: It can be done that way. And in essence, if you
adopt it as it is now and the marketing plan is separate from the
ordinance and it doesn't -- I do not see that it requires that the
ordinance be changed or modified to talk about a marketing plan.
What I understand that to be is Board direction to staff to do that.
And Commissioner Fiala has talked about the Chamber doing a
Page 90
May 28, 2002
marketing plan. These details can be worked out and reported back
to the staff-- or to the Board periodically as far as that goes, how it's
going. Whether it's at a six-month specific time frame or just more
informally as time goes by and meetings are held.
But you can adopt this ordinance today with an effective date,
18 months from today, whatever time period you say, unless one of
our other able attorneys stands up, that's kind of standard practice as
an availability to you. And you can always change that ordinance,
even though its effective date has not come into being yet, it's
adopted but not effective at some point later. And you can change it
prior to months if you determine to.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I guess my question didn't intend
that we adopt the ordinance today. MR. WEIGEL: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So much as to say, can we refine
the ordinance over the next several months, work out some of the
concerns that some of the Commissioners have and some of the
members of the public have? Bring it back to us, we could then
consider it for adoption at that point in time. And that way we would
have an ordinance in place that could be implemented if we don't
meet our deadlines. Would that be acceptable, Commissioner Carter?
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Well, let me get a legal response
to that.
MR. WEIGEL: The answer is yes. And it may well be that the
forum you'd like to have to discuss refinements would be a
workshop. So it's not a formal hearing. But, you know, up or down
votes yes or no on an ordinance. Although you always can make
changes on the floor within certain parameters.
If we get too far afield from what's advertised, then we start to
run into potential legal problems. But it may be that you'll want to do
a workshop, taking the ordinances that's before you today as a model
Page 91
May 28, 2002
and some variations on that theme, two or three or four, maybe
several different elements to be workshopped at some point or
various times during the next 18 months.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: I think that answers my question.
It gives you the framework. It gives you everything that you need.
You don't start from scratch. All you're doing is improving what you
have. And in the interim then your suggestion is right on, let's take
the goals that are there.
Who pays for it, I think is an excellent point by Commissioner
Fiala that the Chamber needs to belly-up on this and be the ones that
provide the funding. But I think we can together, we can take the
resources and develop the marketing plan and how you're going to
communicate and get people to sign up and participate.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: What do we got?
MR. MUDD: We got a motion and a second, I believe, right?
COMMISSIONER CARTER: And we have a comment from
our County Commissioner.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Mr. Olliff?.
MR. OLLIFF: Just two points. One, if-- I would suggest that
in follow-up to this motion that if this is the direction the Board's
going to take that we would do two things: One, I think we're going
to need to bring back an item upon your agenda at some point to talk
about how we measure this, because without this ordinance in place, I
don't know how we measure the business community's compliance.
And through this ordinance, there was a process where each and
every business then would be part of the registry and we would
know. So I think, formally, we're going to have to bring back
something that's going to be the mechanism for that.
Secondly, I would think the workshop idea is probably a good
idea if that's again the route that you want to go, because I think
there's a number of issues that we heard here today that we would
Page 92
May 28, 2002
want to try and work out with you in addition to not only the
measurement standard, but I think some of the issues about the
variance process obviously the Board wants to see some criteria for.
And those are the two recommendations that I'd rhake in addition --
or strapped onto your motion.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: I don't have any problem with
that, Mr. Olliff. And I really agree, we need to find out how we sign
people up. We have to have the system in place. That's what I'm
looking for is a well-defined system that covers all these points. And
I candidly don't think we have that this morning. But we still have
the framework to move forward.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You know, I know there's a
way to measure the results without this ordinance. I'll be happy to
talk to staff over it with the item.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I think I'd like to hear a definition of
exactly what we got. I heard a lot of counters back and forth. And it
seems to be a little bit clouded.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And there was an addition to the
motion by the way, but not an addition to the second also.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Now, you got me confused.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: I don't know what your issues
are.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, could you restate the motion as
you see it, Commissioner Carter?
COMMISSIONER CARTER: We adopt the provisions of the
nonresidential recycling ordinance as a framework that will be
revisited 18 months from now. And in the interim, a marketing plan
put together by the Chamber of Commerce and our Solid Waste
Department to go out and solicit and get businesses to be a part of the
program along with a system that will not only have the goals as
Page 93
May 28, 2002
established that are in our program this morning, but a system to
determine who signs up and how they participate along those lines.
And I think that's generally what I've heard here. If I've missed
something, Commissioner Coyle, help me out.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: So we're looking for a report back
from staff from the workshop?
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Yes. That would be part of
staff's direction to get to a workshop to work out some of these
details. And also Commissioner Fiala had requested that we have
interim, and I would see no problem with all of that. I think every six
months would certainly be an excellent idea.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Is that fine with your second?
MR. KRASOWSKI: Can I ask a question?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: No, you can't, Mr. Krasowski.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We already had you in the course.
Thank you, sir. Okay. With that, is there any other discussion? All
those in favor indicate by saying aye. Aye.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. One oppose and that's
Commissioner Fiala. And with that, we're going to break for our 12
o'clock certain which is-
Item # 1 OK
EXECUTIVE SESSION BETWEEN THE COLLIER COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS AND THE COUNTY
Page 94
May 28, 2002
NEGOTIATING COMMITTEE RELATIVE TO COLLECTIVE
BARGAINING, AND THE SOUTHWEST FLORIDA
PROFESSIONAL FIREFIGHTERS AND PARAMEDICS, LOCAL
1826, IAFF, INC.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: At 12:10.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: -- at 12:10. And we're going to --
MR. WEIGEL: We're going to make a notice on the record
right now of the County's Labor Negotiation Committee, Negotiating
Committee, which will be Mr. Leo Oaks, Attorney Mike Pettit,
Attorney Mark Levett, Mr. Jeff Walker and Mr. Jeff Paige.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And we'll reconvene, I estimate
probably 1:15 or 1:30. What would you recommend?
COMMISSIONER CARTER: 1:30.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: 1:30 it is.
MR. WEIGEL: Okay. 1:30.
Thereupon, (A recess was had.)
Item #8B
PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE PURPOSE OF RECEIVING INPUT
FROM SUBSCRIBERS REGARDING THE PERFORMANCE OF
COMCAST CABLEVISION- NO ACTION
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Let's go on to Item 8-B. Mr.
Wallace?
MR. WALLACE: For the record, Lou Wallace, Director of
Community Development Operations. Mr. Chairman, this is a public
hearing for the Board to consider customer service provided by
Comcast. Comcast holds a franchise issued by this Board as does
Time Warner.
Page 95
May28,2002
Staff is conducting compliance reviews on both those major
cable systems. And next month, staff will be bringing you a request
for transfer of the Comcast franchise to AT&T broadband. Staff
thought it fitting that you should hear from the Comcast subscribers
on the customer service issues prior to next month. Last week we
extended the comment period for written comments to be submitted
by two weeks. I gathered those last week and submitted them to the
Board on Thursday. There's some written comments by Comcast
subscribers. And with that, there's no action required by the Board
except to consider these comments. And I understand there's just a
few speakers.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: All right. Then we'll go on to the
speakers.
MS. FILSON: Yes, Mr. Chairman. We have two speakers,
Joseph Norris, and he will be followed by William Gaston.
MR. NORRIS: Good afternoon, Commissioners. I think I'm
going to be a little nervous here, but I'll do my best. I have before
you a -exhibit mail fraud complaint against my homeowners
association and Comcast.
In, my homeowners association entered into an exclusive
contract with Continental Cable, which is now owned by Comcast.
That contract states that they have the right to all services, television
services, pay-per-view services in our homeowners association.
Comcast also demanded -- or Continental Cable demanded that
it would be a common expense for everyone, which means that you
will lose your home to foreclosure under a Comcast exclusive
contract if you choose a competing telecommunications provider.
Now, I asked my children, before the contract was signed, if they
preferred to have a satellite system or to go with a cable television
program.
Page 96
May 28, 2002
I, myself, prefer to use the satellite system, because I was bom
with the disease called toxoplasmosis, which left me 90 percent blind
in my right eye. And I suffer from double vision and some severe
learning disabilities.
So I decided to go with the satellite dish. But I let my children
pick. And they looked at the programming, and they decided that
they would rather have a satellite dish than go with the local
programming.
So under the Telecommunication Act, I felt that I had the right
to install an outside antenna, receive my local television
programming for free, my Florida Public Television for free.
Comcast states in their contract that they have the right to charge me
for Florida Public Television that I am receiving for free in direct
violation of the Telecommunication Act. Comcast is in direct
violation of the Cable Television and Consumer Protection Act. They
cannot force exclusive contracts onto neighborhoods that cause unfair
competition to the satellite industry. The '96 Telecommunication Act
opened up a marketplace for free enterprise. Anyone under the
Telecom Act can compete.
But I had written my homeowners association and asked for
reasonable accommodations under the law, how they'd advise me to
do this. My homeowners association sent me a bill for $600 for
reading my application, with no response. I was harassed for five
years. I had three different liens put on my property. I lost my credit.
I asked for a loan on the equity of my house to help put my three
kids through college, and the bank said, "You owe a $4,000 lien.
You would have to pay the lien off first." Well, my wife and I didn't
have the money to do that, so we used our credit cards at the time to
supplement our children to college for their food and tuition. So I
come here to you to ask you to suspend the license of Comcast Cable
for a number of reasons, for their violations against the four members
Page 97
May28,2002
that are protected under the Fair Housing Act: The handicap, the
religious people of natural origin and family. I have a friend who
lives in Imperial Golf Estates. She's a very devout Christian woman
who does not have cable television. She only allows her children to
watch Christian television programming on cassettes and family
value programming.
Imperial Golf Estates entered into a contract, exclusive contract,
with Comcast that forced every homeowner to pay for cable
television. She fought with the Board saying that she had a 1 st
Amendment right not to associate with Comcast. It cost her over
$800 to remove the liens on her property. She still pays the bill under
protest. And she feels like her 1st Amendment right has been
violated.
While undergoing my mail fraud complaint, all the information
to file a mail fraud complaint, it bothered me when I discovered when
I petitioned for some of the contracts from some of these people to
ask their boards for the cable television contracts, I found out huge
differences in pricing. And I also found out that Comcast redlines. It
will go down 951. It will go into all the country clubs, charge them
$20 for cable television, go right across the street and charge
minorities over $40 for the same service.
This is illegal, because what is happening is these contracts are
sold sometimes so far below the operating of Comcast infrastructure
that minorities are now forced to pick up or supplement the cost of
cable television for rich white families. Can I have another minute
here.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Sir, I'm going to have to ask you to
wind it up.
MR. NORRIS: Okay. I feel as if the 14.5 percent
telecommunication tax that the State of Florida has placed is
segregating neighborhoods. White families are only paying $3 a
Page 98
May 28, 2002
month in franchise taxes, while minority families are paying $6 a
month for the same service.
I think you have a moral obligation to look into this, stop
Comcast from offering deep ball contracts that undercut the cost of
their infrastructure. And I believe it's your responsibility to see that
everybody pays the same fair price for telecommunication service in
Collier County. Thank yOu.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you, sir.
MS. FILSON: Your final speaker is Mr. William Gaston.
MR. GASTON: For the record, William R. Gaston, President of
Marco Island Cable. I'm also a Comcast customer at N-305 Anglers
Cove.
I would like to request to the Collier County Commission that
the transfer of Comcast to the new entity not be allowed until the
following conditions are met: Number one, that Comcast be forced
to stop frozen contracts that are in violation of Florida State Statute
718.1232, which assures a condominium apartment owner or tenant
the ability to choose any licensed or franchised multichanneled video
service provider. In essence, this part of the statute assures access to
any cable or satellite provider.
Number two, that it renounces null and void the provision and
all existing contracts that require exclusivity. And three, that it
accept the following statement in its transfer of franchise; "The
franchisee shall not enter into or enforce an exclusive contract for the
provision of cable service or other multichannel video programming
provider with any person, entity or location or demand exclusive
right to serve a person, entity or location as a condition of extending
service or providing service. Violation of this provision shall result in
an immediate review and revocation of this franchise." The City of
Marco has adopted a similar provision.
Page 99
May 28, 2002
Number four, that it provide uniform pricing throughout the
franchise area and all of Collier County. Marco Island Cable was
issued its current franchise by Collier County in. The same is true as
Comcast. The City of Marco has never issued a franchise. The
Communications Act of mandates that pricing may not be predatory
in nature and within the franchise area. And Florida law does not
allow predatory pricing or dumping.
Marco Island Cable knows for a fact that this year Comcast is
offering customers on Marco an initial rate of $14.95 per unit for
expanded basic. Nine years ago, when Marco Island Cable started in
business, Comcast's bulk rate was $18. On Marco, bulk rates have
come down since 1993, while comparable single-family rates have
doubled. To my knowledge, this bulk rate is not offered in Naples
and unincorporated areas of Collier County. In fact, I have in my
possession a proposed service agreement for a large condominium
complex in Collier County, in your Naples, that offers an initial rate
of $27.50 for a five-year agreement. The same agreement from
Comcast would only be $14.95 on Marco. Obviously the rate is
higher where Marco Island Cable system is not available.
Well, Marco Island Cable serves almost 7,000 customers on
Marco and now is in front or has the ability to serve 11,000
customers. Its continued expansion in Collier County is in doubt.
Most all of the new developments on 951 have exclusive agreements
for cable service. On Marco, with full expanded basic from Comcast
offered at only 14.95, its expansion is in doubt.
Marco Island Cable is being dealt a one-, two-punch exclusivity
that forces condominium boards to violate a Florida Statute to receive
service. And secondly, if you're on Marco, the unbelievable rate,
again, 14.95. In reality, there are only two significant times that a
local franchising authority may exercise any regulatory pressure on a
cable company, at franchise renewal and a transfer of control.
Page 100
May 28, 2002
Currently you are transfer of control. You have that opportunity now,
and please don't let it pass you up.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Chairman, just a question.
Mr. Gaston, are you saying that we should, out of the contract
provisions between the County and Comcast or the new companies,
remove the bulk rate?
MR. GASTON: No, sir, not at all.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: What does then provide
uniform pricing throughout the franchise?
MR. GASTON: Okay. If Marco Island Cable is serving certain
sections of Marco and wishing to expand in areas of Collier County,
we have our rate that has been uniformed for eight years, basically
posted for five years. Comcast is going against us on Marco at a very
low rate. But that rate is not being offered to your other constituents
in Naples and Collier County-
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I see.
MR. GASTON: -- to my knowledge.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Are you allowed to go into
their franchise area to offer your cable?
MR. GASTON: Correct. Comcast does not have an exclusive
franchise and neither do I.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: That's Marco Island?
MR. GASTON: That's correct.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Or is that all of Collier County?
MR. GASTON: Well, we received a franchise from Collier
County. Comcast received a franchise from Collier County. This
portion of that franchise that is in Marco Island was assigned to the
City of Marco by Collier County.
Page 101
May 28, 2002
COMMISSIONER HENNING: But you can go outside of the
municipality, down 951 and where Comcast is serving and offer your
service to their customers?
MR. GASTON: Correct. I can with the modification -- of a
very relatively easy modification of the franchise, go up 1. That is
my intention sometime in the future. I am currently -- under the
provisions of franchise issued by Collier County, we are in
compliance with build-out requirements. In fact, we're ahead of the
build-out requirements on Marco. And at some time we do hope to
extend. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Are there any other questions for the
public speaker? With that, I'm going to close the public speaker part
of this agenda item. And this requires no action on our part, but you
want to make some comments, Mr. Wallace?
MR. WALLACE: That's correct, Mr. Chairman. I might add,
just for clarification, Mr. Gaston's franchise, Marco Island Cable, he
has a franchise to provide cable service to the Island of Marco Island.
That's what his current franchise covers.
In 1998, with the incorporation of City of Marco Island, within
the city limits that was transferred to the City of Marco Island
Council. The only thing that's in his current franchise, the
unincorporated areas, the area Goodland, just outside the corporate
limits of City of Marco Island. So he would have to come in and
query either a new franchise in the unincorporated area of the County
off the Island or amend his current franchise in order to serve off the
Island. I appreciate his comments. And staff will look into those
comments that were brought up. And you will be seeing the
application for transfer the last meeting in June.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: This will allow us some wiggle
room here? I mean, we've had a lot of comments from citizens that
are concerned. And will this give you some negotiation hour?
Page 102
May 28, 2002
MR. WALLACE: I would expect that Comcast will make a
presentation at that time where they may address the comments of the
subscribers that I provided you last week. They do have copies of all
of those.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: This requires no other action on the
part of the Commission?
MR. OLLIFF: No, sir.
Item #8C
PETITION RZ-01-AR-1143, JAMES G. O'GARA,
REPRESENTING GOLDEN GATE CAPITAL, LTD.,
REQUESTING A REZONE FROM "RSF-3" RESIDENTIAL
SINGLE FAMILY TO THE "RSF-5" RESIDENTIAL SINGLE
FAMILY ZONING DISTRICT, LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST
CORNER OF 50TM TERRACE SW AND 22Nr) AVENUE SW-
CONTINUED TO LATER IN THE MEETING
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Thank you, Mr. Wallace.
We'll move on to the next item, which is going to require those
people wishing to participate, Dan, to be sworn in.
And do we need to get disclosures on part of the Commission on
this? We'll start with Commissioner Carter.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: No disclosures.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: This is on the Golden Gate thing?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Right.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, I have not met with anybody.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I received a couple of e-mails along
the way. I met with the petitioner a long time ago on this issue.
It seems like it was about three months ago.
Page 103
May 28, 2002
Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: The same is true for me. It was
quite some time ago.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, I think I did -- somebody
came into my office in Golden Gate from--
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. That's correct.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: It might have been this one person.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I went to the public hearing
months ago and contacted the Civic Association and neighbors
around this petition who live around there.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you. Mr. Bellows?
MR. BELLOWS: Good afternoon, Commissioners. For the
record, Ray Bellows, presenting petition RZ-01-AR1143. The
petitioners are requesting to rezone this subject 3.7 acre site from
RSF-3 to RSF-5. This will allow for single-family dwelling units.
As you can see on the location map, the site's located north of 22nd
Avenue and south of 20th Place. The site is currently vacant and was
previously cleared and plotted as Block 168, Unit 5 in Golden Gate.
The petitioner has indicated that the subdivision of this property
would only yield 11 single family lots based on the density of three
units per acre. This would result in less lots than is currently
developed in the adjacent property, because the RSF-5 Zoning
District allows for a maximum of 18 lots on the subject 3.7 acre site.
The petitioners agreed to limit the rezone to 16 lots.
The other reason for rezoning the subject property is that as you
can see on the conceptuals plan here, the shape of the tract is
generally curvilinear, creating pie-shaped lots. Therefore, the
resulting lot sizes would not completely conform to the RSF-3 lot
widths of 80 feet. The rezones to RSF-5 will allow them to have
ability to configure the subdivision to obtain the proposed 16-lot
Page 104
May 28, 2002
subdivision without receiving -- or going less than the minimum lot
frontage on many of the public roads.
The traffic impact set indicates that the traffic generated by the
project would not significantly impact any project and would be
approximately 160 trips on a day, on a daily basis.
The subject site is located within the activity center or an
intensity band within the future landings map. As you can see on the
future landings map, the subject site's just outside the activity center
and within the density band which is one mile from the activity
center.
The density band allows for additional three units per acre over
the base density of four units. So the site is eligible for a density of
seven units per acre. However, they're only asking for the RSF-5
zoning with the limitation to 16 lots. So therefore, it is consistent with
the future landings element. And staff has no problems with limiting
the site to 16, which would be similar to the number of units on the
adjacent properties to the north's south. This petition went to the
Collier County Planning Commission on April 18th. And by a vote
of eight to zero, they recommended approval subject to some
conditions that have been incorporated to the ordinance.
But first is that the development of Block 160-AP limited to 16
residential lots at all residential units will have a minimum floor area
similar to the RSF-3 Zoning District. The project shall connect to
water and sewer, utilities that are available in the area. And lastly,
the project shall be consistent with all applicable development
standards in the RSF-3 Zoning District.
What the petition is basically proposing is a subdivision that will
result in the same number of lots as adjacent property. As you can
see on this location map, there are a number of lots on the west side
of the site because of its curvilinear nature is resulting in pie-shape
box. To the north side, we'll also have the same amount of lots close
Page 105
May 28, 2002
to the property zone than on the east side. Based on this, staff has
recommended approval. The Collier County Planning Commission
has recommended approval. During the Planning Commission
Meeting, there was some evidence presented that the subject site is
subject to a deed restriction. This deed restriction was between Gulf
American Corporation, which limited this particular tract to civic
uses such as a park.
Through discussions with our County Attorney's Office, deed
restrictions are not enforceable by Collier County. And that's a civil
issue between the residents and the property owner.
Staff has discussed this with me, the person who raised the
issue. And I'm not sure if they're here to discuss it further. But this is
a civil issue. And I'd be happy to answer any other questions you
might have.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Why was the recommendation
to hook up to water and sewer?
MR. BELLOWS: Well, I think most of that came about because
there is water and sewer that's coming to the area. And they didn't
want these things to create a further problem with too many units of
well and septic too close to each other.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: My understanding from the
utility company, they're only extending water and sewer if somebody
requests it. So who's requesting it in the area?
MR. BELLOWS: Well, the petitioner has agreed to extend
utilities to serve these lots.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. So you're saying that
the petitioner is asking for water and sewer? MR. BELLOWS: Correct.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So why would it be a
recommendation by the County Commission?
Page 106
May 28, 2002
MR. BELLOWS: Well, they created it during the Planning
Commission Meeting when the issue was arisen whether they would
have water and sewer or not.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It's my understanding that the
sewer plant sought the wastewater treatment plant because of a lot of
activity there and of hookups that it's creating an odor problem. So I
just, I don't know if we're going to get that discussion with some of
the concerns of residents in the area or not.
MR. BELLOWS: This project would not exacerbate,
significantly, any problems with the processing of water or sewer to
this.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Will that help it?
MR. BELLOWS: No, it will not help it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
MR. BELLOWS: There is a concern among some of the
residents that called me and also showed up for the Planning
Commission that too many wells and septic in that confined area
could cause some problems also. So the petitioner agreed to extend
utilities.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you.
MR. BELLOWS: Do we have a question?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: A whole other infrastructure is in
place here? No problems with the roads or streets, water service?
MR. BELLOWS: No problem with levels of service of the
roadways or anything like that.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: How many speakers do we have?
MS. FILSON: We have two, but I think the petitioner wants to
speak.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay.
Page 107
May 28, 2002
MR. O'GARA: Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, members of the
Commission. My name is Jim O'Gara.
I think Ray did a good job describing the project. There's a
couple of things, one it is -- there are some folks that allege that there
is a deed restriction on this property. We were well aware of that
when we purchased the property.
And our attorneys, and especially the title company, worked
very closely with the Avitars counsel. And we are confident that
there is no restriction against this property. Again, to reiterate what
Ray said, that's a civil issue. But we're confident that that restriction
no longer applies.
As Ray described, this property is currently zoned RSF-3. We
are requesting a change to RSF-5, which is reflective of the density in
the area. The typical lots in Golden Gate City is approximately ten
thousand feet, 80 by 125. This particular property consists of 3.7
acres, 160,000 square feet. And we are going to equally create ten
thousand square foot lots that mirror the same configuration and size
as the properties butting the property. The reason we're asking for
RSF-5 is with a ten thousand square foot lot, ten thousand square foot
lots into 43,560 is 4.356 something. That requires us to go to the
next digit, RSF-5. While RSF-5 could theoretically allow you to do
smaller lots, different setbacks and whatnot, we are committing to the
maximum of 16 lots, no lot less than ten thousand square feet.
And we are using the RSF-3 Building Standards for
construction, the -- which go into detail about the side yard setbacks,
rear yard, minimum floor area size and that kind of thing.
We've made a number of promises to members in the
neighborhood. And while I realize this is a zoning hearing, I wanted
to make sure that those promises were read into the public record so
that there's no possibility of a bait-and-switch by the developer.
These are commitments, as I said, no lot less than ten thousand
Page 108
May 28, 2002
square feet, maximum of 16 lots. The construction will all be done
pursuant to the RSF-3 standards with the exception of the lot width.
And that's the reason, because of the pie-shaped nature, we had to
have some flexibility in the frontage of these properties. We also
agreed to extend sewer and water to the property at our expense.
Further, at the request of the Golden Gate Civic Association, the
RSF-3 standard has a minimum of a thousand square foot floor plate.
We agreed to make the minimum floor plate 1,200 square feet. Our
smallest unit was in excess of that, and it made sense.
About the only other thing I could think of, typically the pricing
of the housing, these houses will sell for approximately $140,000,
some a little more, some a little less, just kind of vary as to the
market. But this is consistent with my understanding of the Board's
desire to increase the housing stock in this price range. I'd be happy
to answer any questions.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: In that Planning Commission's
recommended a thousand square feet and what your per household
residence and you're saying you're going to commit to 1,200 square
feet?
MR. O'GARA: That is correct, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Is that excluding the garage?
MR. O'GARA: That is excluding the garage; yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And then there will be garages
on each--
MR. O'GARA: It will be garages on each one as well.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Commissioner Coyle
pointed out to me as an example to try to measure the loss that is
similar to neighboring areas.
MR. O'GARA: Yes, sir.
Page 109
May 28, 2002
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. And what he explained
to me is very true is the section just to the -- well, underneath of it is
not a good example because, you know, the rings get tighter as you
go down; would you agree to that?
MR. O'GARA: Yes, sir, that is correct.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So I can't use that as an
example, but I want to the -- the one to your left to measure. No.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: This one.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: This one. That block. So I
measured it and I came out with six on one side and eight on the
other side, a full lot.
MR. O'GARA: There are nine lots on this side and seven on
this side.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Full lots, not --
MR. O'GARA: Full lots, yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- half lots or --
MR. O'GARA: Full lots.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That isn't how I seen it. I used
the example right next to it.
MR. O'GARA: I have the plat that I can be happy to show you.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm going by this example here.
That's part of the plat map for Golden Gate. It's in our example. On
the back side of your warranty deed it says, "Plat Book, Block 8."
MR. O'GARA: There are seven, ten thousand square foot lots
here and nine, ten thousand square foot lots here. The frontage on
these lots, with the exception of the comer, are .-
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. O'Gara?
MR. O'GARA: -- Yes, sir. Maybe I'm not getting it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. If we take that Block
178 and move it to the left, right there -
MR. O'GARA: Yes, sir.
Page 110
May 28, 2002
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- what I measure on one side is
six lots on the shorter side and eight lots on the other side, right?
MR. O'GARA: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And I'll remeasure it. But that's
-- if you want to be similar to what's around there.
MR. O'GARA: That block is not as long as this one is. Perhaps
this might help.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Remeasure it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll remeasure it. I'll use a
different ruler.
MR. O'GARA: This is the proposed subdivision of ten thousand
square foot lots. We actually have -- well, I realize this is a zoning
hearing and this is an example. This is the subdivision that we
proposed coming back with. Everyone of those lots are ten thousand
square feet.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
MR. O'GARA: There's a total of 1,000 square feet here. Ten
thousand feet.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Well, if you turn that
around, I'll step up there in just a minute and look at your example so
I can--
MR. O'GARA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's a real fine example
there.
MR. O'GARA: Yeah. We have a copy of the survey that shows
the 3.7 acres, which is 160,000 feet divided by ten thousand lots is 16
lots. If you-- there are 4.356 ten thousands in 43,560. All the other
ten thousand square foot lots that abut this property, the density is 4.
something. And that's the reason for the RSF-5 requests.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: These are all going to be owner-
occupied homes?
Page 111
May 28, 2002
MR. O'GARA: Yes, ma'am. These are all single family, owner-
occupied homes. Part of the problem was that Golden Gate platted
before there was an RSF-3 Zoning. And the zoning that was Put on
what actually was out there didn't necessarily reflect what was platted
in that area. Typically the platting was done now with gross acres.
What we're left with these remnant pieces are net acres. And so the
lot sizes will be identical to all the abutting property owners. And the
building standards will be the same as the abutting property owners.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: One of the things that I notice that we
have such a shortage of homes that are of an affordable price for
owner occupancy. And so I was glad to see something like this,
unless you have something --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Are they going to be occupied
or are they going to be rented out?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well --
MR. O'GARA: They're for sale, single-family homes to be
built.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I just asked that. Unless -- that's
what I asked, are -- will they be owner-occupied and he said, yes,
they will be for sale. But that doesn't mean that somebody can't come
in and buy them all and then rent them.
MR. O'GARA: I suppose that we're just building housing and
selling houses.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That could happen anytime, I
think.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Um-hum.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Questions? Commissioner Henning,
did you want to take advantage of the petitioner being there now to
take a look at the map.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yack at him?
Page 112
May 28, 2002
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, go up there to the map there
and see what he is with his layout that he has.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Now, while we have this
interruption, Mr. Chairman, I want to correct for the record, I did
meet with Mr. O'Gara on this project. It has been a long time ago.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: You'll be noted.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: And he went through this entire
presentation with me as he's doing it now. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Speaker?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm ready for speakers, Mr.
Chairman.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay.
MS. FILSON: The first speaker is Cheryl Newman. You're
last. Cheryl's last. The first speaker is Tracy Ingram. He will be
followed by Cheryl Newman.
MR. INGRAM: Yes. Thank you, Commissioners. My name is
Tracy Ingram. I'm a resident of Golden Gate Unit 5 for about 15
years, Alumni of Porter Gulf University, lived in the area, College of
Business.
This isn't about, you know, whether or not he can use this
property or develop it. I mean, we know, you know. I'm a business
person myself. I agree, if he owns the property, he should be able to
develop it, use the property. The question is is it equitable and fair to
the residents of Golden Gate?
Unfortunately I was given some information probably about five
minutes ago that changed the gross acreage of that area property from
2.98 acres to 3.7 acres, which changes things a lot. Because with 2.98
acres, it's very hard to do ten thousand square feet lots and do 16 of
them. My calculations came up with 12 lots for 12 units at ten
thousand square feet.
Page 113
May 28, 2002
And I had just some preliminary base -- zoom out here a little
bit, you know, just some base calculations with the 2.98 acres, which
RSF-5 would allot them with 21 units. But now with, you know,
having 3.7 acres, you know, you could easily do 16 units there with
ten thousand acres -- ten thousand square feet. I am the gentleman
and related to the lady who were at the Planning Commission
Hearing and -- or had the complaints about this previously being
zoned as park site, which it was, and you saw that. It was zoned or
deed-restricted as a park site. Collier County, some of your
predecessors decided that you don't need to enforce deed restrictions.
Deed restrictions kind of come apart on a property, you know,
based on one thing or another. And there's no need to enforce them.
That's not my call. That's not your call. I'm not going to argue that
issue right now.
My question is is the integrity, you know, when we get to this
point, we're right now saying that we're going to give them RSF-5
Zoning, and he's going to be required to meet these standards that's
he's supposedly said under oath, which I never seen him swear in or
say in a public hearing, okay, that he's going to do these things with
the property. I don't see anything that's going to restrict him or keep
him to that. I mean, I have deed restrictions saying it's supposed to
be used for a park site. And you're not upholding that. But you're
going to uphold the fact that he has to have 16 units and has to have
square feet of interior floor space?
You know, how can I be reassured as a citizen, you know, and
as a community member for a long time that that's going to be
upheld? I don't see anything that's going to hold him onto his word
on that. I understand. I mean, he seems like a very honorable man,
and he gives a very eloquent speech. He comes up here, he talks, you
know, and we've heard a lot of good things. But hearing things and
seeing things is different.
Page 114
May 28, 2002
One other thing I'd like to show you here, these, if you can see,
these are the signs he placed up. They meet County standards, sort
of, handwritten. Of course he only contracted with a sign company to
do it. It wasn't directly his fault. If you see that a little bit more, you
know, completely handwritten, doesn't have a turkey on there but we
all fault him for that one. But, you know, he did put a sign up. And it
did briefly meet County standards. But it isn't the quality of
workmanship that we're looking for. I mean, I agree with your point.
We definitely need, you know, single family, livable housing that's
going to be good quality.
But are you going to have housing that's going to be good
quality and not going to burn down, you know, not going to be blown
away next hurricane that comes by? You know, what's it going to be
made out of?. What's the quality of standards? He makes a $140,000
house. Does he put $20,000 worth of materials into it? These are
things I don't know.
But all I have from experience is seeing the quality of work he's
already done as the resident who lives across the street. And that
doesn't give me an easy feeling of saying, "Oh yeah, we'll give him
RSF-5, and he's going to do wonderful things. And he's going to
build palaces over there and people are going to move in. And
everything's going to be happy and hunky-dory," when I've lived
across the street for 15 years and was told that this was supposed to
be a park site. I don't expect you to enforce that. I just want you to
look very carefully at what we're doing here, because we're giving
him RSF-5 zoning. And I would just really like some reassurance
that he's going to be maintained to the quality and expectations that
he's being held to, because I've seen from experience what he puts up.
And I don't have exact dimensions and stuff like that of how
many units and square acreage. I mean, according to everything else
from what we discussed, we discussed during the break, you know, it
Page 115
May 28, 2002
would be ten thousand square feet. It would meet everything of RSF-
3 zoning except for the lot frontage which he agreed to, which would
need RSF-5 zoning just so that he can go around the comers, cut
comers, you know, because if you cut the comers you could make a
little bit more property in there and make a little bit more profit.
And I don't know if I necessarily want somebody -- you know,
my mom is a real estate appraiser. She's appraised real estate here in
the County for ten years. And, you know, we're not looking to have
the property value in the area decrease. Mr. Commissioner, can I
have a minute more?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I'm just going to ask you to wrap it
up, sir.
MR. INGRAM: Absolutely. The only other thing I will
mention is that the, you know, you have the middle school and the
elementary school in the area. And they're both still with portables;
over capacity. You have water and sewer, like they've already
mentioned, that is, you know, over capacity.
I'm very happy with well water. I have a very deep well. I have
really good water. And when all of a sudden these water alerts say
you have to boil your water, everything else is coming through, I'm
not under those same restrictions because I have a nice deep well.
Not everybody in the neighborhood has a well.
And I understand that they will need to have water and sewer
here to make this deal float, you know, based on some regulations,
you know, some laws that were put into effect a long time ago. But if
at the time this becomes County maintained water and sewer, we will
be assessed to move over to water and sewer. And that's not
necessarily the assessment I would like to have at this time. Thank
you very much for your time.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you.
MR. INGRAM: If there's any questions?
Page 116
May 28, 2002
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Ingram, before you go, can
you put that picture of the sign back up there and the one that you can
see. And if I'm correct, isn't that supposed to state what is being
rezoned, too?
MR. BELLOWS: Yeah. For the record, Ray Bellows. The
petitioner placed a sign on site in coordination with the County. He
made a good point that the ordinance that requires this sign has not
stated it has to be professionally block lettered on the ordinance.
Staff has made that change and will be reading that back as an
LDC Amendment that requires the signs to be professionally block
lettered. Because the ordinance wasn't as specific as the lettering
quantity type, he was allowed to proceed. The wording and the
information contained on the sign is consistent with the requirements
of the advertising for the sign and was allowed to proceed on to the
Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So you're saying that it did not
have to be -- state what it's to be rezoned to? If I remember, by
looking at the small signs, of course, he's done a great job of trying to
inform the neighbors by a four by eight sign. But if I remember the
old ordinance, it said it was the present zoning and being asked to
rezone to a different rezoning. Like if it's agricultural to PUD, you
needed to state that in the public notice.
MR. BELLOWS: Yeah. It should have stated the zoning
action.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So it wasn't advertised
correctly? Posted correctly?
MR. BELLOWS: It doesn't appear to be. The other thing is the
Land Development Code Amendment has not proceeded yet with that
change to require block lettering, but we're in the process of that.
Page 117
May 28, 2002
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Correct. And I'm going by the
old ordinance of saying those small signs, if I remember, when you
got out of your vehicle and looked at them- MR. BELLOWS: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- it said, "From to."
MR. BELLOWS: Well, this is consistent with the requirement
as adopted requiring a larger four by eight sign. And I can't tell you
offhand whether it's -- that ordinance says you have to have the actual
zoning of that he should stated something.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, we're going by the old
ordinance.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Where is the area code 991 that
people are supposed to call in case, you know?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's 941.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, is that 941 ? Okay.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Any other questions?
COMMISSIONER CARTER: I'm sure Mr. O'Gara would put
on the public record that the Block 168 will be limited to 16
residential homes. All residents will have a minimum floor area of
one thousand square feet. The projects will have etc., etc. It will all
become part of public record. It becomes part of law. Therefore, I
think the speaker's concerns about that issue will be put to rest.
Secondly, we have building codes in Collier County which address
the other issues. And you can't put up a tar paper shack and call it a
house. So I think that if you sit with Mr. Ed Perico, he could
certainly tell you what would have to be done here if you were
concerned about the quality home that Mr. O'Gara is talking about
constructing.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Our next speaker is -- well, we'll
come back to you, sir.
MS. FILSON: Our next speaker is Cheryl Newman.
Page 118
May 28, 2002
MS. NEWMAN: Good afternoon, Commissioners. For the
record, Cheryl Newman. I'm here on behalf of the Golden Gate Area
Civic Association. In the absence of our President, I'm the Vice
President and I've been asked to come before you this morning. It's
afternoon now.
The petitioner has been working with the residents and the
Golden Gate Civic Association to come to a reasonable agreement on
development of this property. He has on record, as he stated to,
agreed to build by the RSF-3 standards, 1,200 square foot minimum
with a garage not being included and no more than 16 units with
sewer and water. And one of the concerns that the residents have, and
I'm sure Mr. Ingram tried to bring that across to you, is once it's been
put on record here, what is to keep Mr. O'Gara from selling this piece
of property once it's rezoned and the new developer go over and
apply for a permit and he gets permits for RSF-5 and not abide by the
RSF-3 standards? And that's the biggest concern; what happens after
this?
And we would just like to make sure that the residents will be
given what they have been promised. Mr. O'Gara has been very
honest in committing to these standards that we agreed upon. And I
think that's all I have to say this morning. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Cheryl, I think your concerns
can be addressed if he records it on the deeds for that block of certain
size of the house and certain size of the lot, if that's what your
concern is.
MR. OLLIFF: Actually, I think it's probably a little easier than
that. David, I'll ask you to correct me if I'm wrong, but the rezoning,
if it includes stipulations by the Board that the rezoning is approved
subject to certain stipulations, those are the stipulations that go along
with the zoning. The zoning runs with the land so that even if the
Page 119
May 28, 2002
property is sold three, four or five times, subsequently the same
stipulations that the Board agrees to here today would run with the
land and be restrictions on that property until some other subsequent
zoning action were to occur.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Tom, I just want to make sure, in
the future, if those stipulations are included, the approvals, it'will still
have RSF-5 Zoning?
MR. OLLIFF: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: If someone wishes to build a
smaller home there, do they have to come to the County to get
approval?
MR. OLLIFF: Yes, sir. I would-- those stipulations, as long as
you're willing to put a 1,200 square foot minimum building size on
this zoning approval, any developer is going to have to build to that
standard.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: With a garage.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Without a garage.
MR. OLLIFF: Without a garage.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, plus a garage that they were
going to add.
MR. OLLIFF: Right. And if the builder wanted to change that
stipulation, they would have to come in front of this Board and get
that stipulation waived or revised.
MR. BELLOWS: And I'd just like to point out, the zoning maps
are marked specially to denote that these additional stipulations have
been added. So it adds another layer for the staff to check on. It will
insure that these stipulations are adhered to.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Are there any questions of the
petitioner or--
MS. NEWMAN: Can I just say one more thing?
Page 120
May 28, 2002
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Please go ahead.
MS. NEWMAN: A little bit of confidence was lost when there
was a duplex built on a single-family home. So this is what we're a
little afraid of. We don't want this to happen again.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I'm just -- is there any other
questions of the petitioner or of anyone else before I close the public
hearing? Go ahead.
MR. O'GARA: Commissioner Chairman, three points. The
information on the sign is put on precisely duplicating what the
County furnished as the text to put on there. We did it exactly,
because I thought it should say something about housing or
something. But we did it precisely. In fact, we received two
communications from the County reinforcing that this is the correct
text. So we did that.
Secondly, we did put up the signs and I personally checked that
they were up. A little bit before the Planning Commission date I
came over there and two of them were down. But there were tire
tracks all around it. I speculated that it met with foul play. We had
to put it back up immediately. And to my knowledge, they have been
up ever since.
And that kind of raises the issue of quality. One of the things
we're all grappling with here in the development community is
keeping the costs down. How do we come up with a product that's
affordable? And when you -- that's $800 for those signs. And by the
way, they were in there pretty darn good. But to put them up with it
all printed and the turkey, that's $2800. Divide that into 16 lots, that's
just one more rock that we got to pass on to the consumer, which is a
tough thing to do.
And I'll grant you, it's perfectly readable, but it doesn't look as
professional as we all would like to have. But we're trying to keep
Page 121
May 28, 2002
the cost down so we can deliver the most affordable product. And
that's the reason for that.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I'd like to commend you for working
with the Civic Association.
meeting when I was there.
regular basis.
I know I've seen you there before at a
Obviously you've been attending on a
MR. O'GARA: They're good friends.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, I kind of hope that when we
get this particular issue settled that you still remain a loyal and true
friend of the Civic Association.
MR. O'GARA: I intend to.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Would you like to make a motion?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm not going to do that,
because my concerns is the advertising of the rezone is not according
to the Land Development Code, either the new or the old, and it's
supposed to state what property is supposed to be rezoned, what it is
and when it's supposed to be, too. Under a technicality, it could be
challenged in the court, and I'm not going to make a motion to --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: That's fine Mr. Henning. How about
Mr. Weigel, could you comment on that please, so we know where
we're going with this.
MR. WEIGEL: Okay. I know a lot of law, but I can't comment
specifically the exact requirement here. And so if Ray or anyone else
on Development Services staff can state or refer to the Land
Development Code and respond to that question, it would be fine.
Otherwise, my suggestion would be if we cannot answer that
question directly here now, would be to continue this item to the next
meeting. It would not require further advertisement, so that we
would know if, in fact, there was a defect, if at all. And if there is a
Page 122
May 28, 2002
defect of such a kind that it's a fatal defect to the process, because the
signage is required. And the intent is to adequately inform the public
of proposals that change in land use.
MR. BELLOWS: Just for the record--
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Mr. Olliff?.
MR. BELLOWS: -- Ray Bellows. Section 2.7.2.3.2 is the
Notice of Public Hearing where proposed amendment would change
the zoning classification of land and for conditional use and
variances. And under this section, it says, "A sign shall be placed at
least 15 days prior to the date of the public hearing by the Planning
Commission. The sign shall be posted and contain the following
language:" And it says, "Public hearing to rezone this property, from,
to, to permit," in this case it would be single-family zoning, "and give
the date and time of the public hearing meetings."
They're also to require information as to the contact person and
staff and evidentially they did not get the information as to what the
zoning action was on the sign.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Chairman?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: If I may. I don't want to delay
this item. I know Mr. O'Gara's been working with the Civic
Association for a long time. Mr. Ingram living in the area, I really
don't know what his concerns are. So possibly if we can satisfy those
concerns, we can move forward with this and not have to -- for Mr.
O'Gara to have to go through the process again.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, what are you suggesting,
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, that if we get Mr. Ingram
up here to find out what his concerns are, what, you know, what he
would like to see as far as this property, because he did state that he
recognizes Mr. O'Gara has the right to use his property.
Page 123
May28,2002
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Would you mind coming back up,
sir? I do appreciate your patience with this process.
MR. INGRAM: Thank you. I appreciate you taking the time to
-- for the record, Tracy Ingram -- to work through this. And I mean,
obviously, you know, we see a little bit of blunder here. You know, I
can't, you know, honorably sit here and say I represent all the, you
know, citizens of Unit 5. I can't say I represent all their interests. I
know when we had a Town Hall meeting, we had 70, 80 people in
the room. They were all there up in arms about this development.
We had a lot of people there. And I know when we had the Planning
Commission meeting -- we had two, here, we got three. So, I mean,
that does lean to the fact that people didn't really understand what
was going on or know what was happening. I mean, I understand
that, you know -- I want to be fair and equitable here, but we have to
be fair to all the parties considered, you know, not just me and not
just, you know, the developer.
We have to, you know, if there's -- you know, honestly,
personally, I can't see anything that he's trying to do wrong. He's
been working with us. He has been, you know, I mean, he honestly
has been trying to be fair and trying to bring this up. But you put
yourself in a legal bind, you know. I can't sit here and say that I can
represent everybody, you know, in Unit 5 and say that this is okay.
You know, I understand that I am the only person here who showed
up to defend this, but I, you know, was a little bit more involved than
some other people. I did come down to the Property Appraisers and I
did, you know, ask a lot more questions. And I did go to the
courthouse and I did pull the deed and I did pull the mortgage on the
property and I did, you know, look up records and find out what was
going on. Your average citizen isn't that informed.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: No.
Page 124
May 28, 2002
MR. INGRAM: And they depend on you to be their, you know,
their eyes and ears.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I'm hearing you. And the only thing
is, you can't absolve this from anything that might have been
overlooked in the process.
MR. INGRAM: Um-hum.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I'm not too sure exactly why we
called you back up, but I'm glad to hear your opinion and the fact that
you're trying to balance it all out. I for one am for continuing this
until we can try to work our way around this legal issue. I'm glad that
Commissioner Henning did bring this up. I'd hate to get to the point
where we approve this, then find out that we caused the petitioner
even more trouble by doing so. Possibly there's a way around this that
we haven't realized yet. I'm not too sure what it is. I'd like to see this
thing resOlve without having to cause the petitioner a tremendous
amount of additional expense. Like he says, he's trying to build
houses at an affordable rate.
But I for one am getting very nervous about putting my stamp of
approval on something that may have a flaw in it.
MR. INGRAM: Right. And he's gone to the extent of putting a
letter in every one of our mailboxes to make sure that we knew.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: That's required also. But there's still
a process that's missing here. MR. INGRAM: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And I'm hearing from my County
Attorney saying that it might be a good idea to continue it. And I
know that makes you very nervous, and I can understand why. But
that legal issue, I just don't feel comfortable at this point in time. Go
ahead, we haven't closed the public hearing.
MR. O'GARA: As I understand it, what we're talking about is
the zoning today. It's our intention, assuming where we go with the
Page 125
May 28, 2002
zoning, I still have yet to come back with a subdivision plat that you
have to approve. The subdivision plat will stipulate -- there it is. It's
16 lots. That's how you're going to know it's 16 lots. And you get to
approve that. I'm not going to -- I mean, until I do that, you've got
another bite at the apple.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: No, and I understand that. And
you're an honorable person. But until my County Attorney tells me
that I can proceed, I have reservations to go to the next step.
MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Chairman, to a contractual agreement?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No. They're talking about the sign,
it didn't say from RSF-3 to RSF-5.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: No.
it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA:
figure legally-
No. We have no problem with
Being that it didn't say that, they
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: A couple words. And the problem is
is that even though we might not care to make an issue of it, someone
along the way could make a major issue. Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: There were a number of people at
this meeting you said who were up in arms. At the end of that
meeting, do you believe that the people who were present understood
what was going to happen there?
MR. INGRAM: Excuse me?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: At the end of the meeting, do you
feel reasonably certain that most of the people understood what was
going to happen on that property?
MR. INGRAM: I think a lot of people really stormed out of
there, were rather upset about the whole situation. There were some
people who -- he got in there -- I say, you know, unfortunately he was
a little bit of a tack. You know, citizens sometimes, you know, are
not necessarily the nicest when it comes to this situation.
Page 126
May 28, 2002
I'm trying to just be, you know, businesslike, professional about
this. But there were a lot of people who were very upset about this.
And he did make some -- I originally believe this was supposed to be
RSF-7 -- 6-
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Three.
MR. INGRAM: -- when the petition was actually written.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Um-hum.
MR. INGRAM: Okay. So there's been a change there. And the
public hearing was on RSF-6 even though in the public hearing it was
changed to RSF-5 and from to. And he's been giving. I understand
that. But does everybody know that? Does everybody know the
situation where the property's at right now? And if, you know, if
some people may still think it's RSF-6, I mean, because the sign's
never said RSF-4, 5, 6, you know.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yeah. And I agree with you.
Probably the people that were reading the sign wouldn't have seen the
difference anyway.
MR. INGRAM: Right.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: But the problem is that the letter of
the law--
MR. INGRAM: Well, and then also you have the residents of
Unit 5 have been told they have a civil action against the property to
enforce the deed restriction of a park site.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: That's a private issue.
MR. 1NGRAM: That would be a private issue. That would not
be your issue.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: It's not a land use decision here.
MR. INGRAM: Yeah, at any rate.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: You got the County Attorney for
those decisions.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Actually --
Page 127
May 28, 2002
MR. BELLOWS' It's a single family residential unit. I don't
know why it's unclear.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Actually, I would like to see us go
forward with it as long as he's met the Golden Gate Estates -- or the
Golden Gate Civic Association's criteria. He seems to have worked
with all the neighbors. He seems to be -- he's made the house -- he's
promised only 16 units and he's promised 1,200 square feet plus a
garage on each one. So I wouldn't mind going forward.
But this is Commissioner Henning's District, and I wouldn't
want to step in there. And so, Commissioner Henning, I would need
your nod of approval before I'd make a motion that way.
MR. BELLOWS' As you can see on the visualizer, the sign did
say: "16 single family residences." The language provided by our
staff to Mr. O'Gara also stated it should have said RSF-3 to RSF-5.
But there is clearly an intent to do the 16 single family lots, if that
makes any difference in the advertisement.
MR. O'GARA: I also did personally walk the neighborhood and
put a letter in each mailbox describing everything in detail precisely.
I don't know how to be much more --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: You did a wonderful job, how you
came and you brought it from one part where the community was
totally opposed to that where the resistance has been almost totally
removed. And that's what we wanted to see. And that's the direction
that we put out a long time ago, that we wanted this Commission to
be able to sit with staff for petitioners such as yourself to do. And
you did everything right.
I just want to make sure that I'm not leaving myself open
knowing that I know that the wording wasn't exactly the way it
should be. My County Attorney might be able to comment a little bit
further. If he can say that he doesn't see a problem with it, I won't
Page 128
May 28, 2002
have a problem with it. I have no problem with your project, only
with the sign.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: I think County Attorney's trying
to get an answer for you, Mr. Chairman. You may want to move to
another item and then come back to this while he gets that answer.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Next item--
MR. INGRAM: That's another piece if you would honor me.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Please do, sir. We're trying to work
our way through it. And we appreciate you being a part of this.
MR. INGRAM: Thank you. On the sign right there, if you can
see, it says each lot size must be a minimum of twelve thousand
square feet. It says on the sign.
MR. O'GARA: It says ten thousand.
MR. INGRAM: No, I believe that's a twelve.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: It looks like ten.
MR. O'GARA: Oh, it's a comma.
MR. INGRAM: Is it a ten?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Oh, it's a comma, yeah.
MR. INGRAM: Is that a comma?
MR. O'GARA: Yeah.
MR. INGRAM: Okay. Sorry then.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Mr. Weigel?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: We going to have a sidebar here?
MR. WEIGEL: Dave Weigel, County Attorney. Both my land
use attorneys are indisposed today. I've got one on the phone right
now who's ill. But I'm going to check very quickly the code provision
that Ray read, just taking a moment to look at it. And then I'm going
to have an opinion for you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you. Then what we'll do is
move on to another item and come back to this.
Page 129
May 28, 2002
Item #8E
ORDINANCE 2002-27, CREATING THE PELICAN BAY
MUNICIPAL SERVICE TAXING AND BENEFIT UNIT-
ADOPTED WITH STIPULATIONS
The next item on our agenda, and this will be continued shortly,
would 8-E.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: It's a Pelican Bay ordinance.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Um-hum.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Mr. Chairman, may I ask if, Ms.
Filson, we have any speakers on this? And then I'm going to move
for approval, because the Board has heard this. And this is just a
continuation of the process to bring it to us. And I think it also has to
be heard by the Board again. There's no opposition in the
community. Everybody's on board with this. And we've been
through everything. And I think it's just time to, as a matter of
procedure, to move forward.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Any speakers?
MS. FILSON: No, sir, we have no speakers.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I just had one question. I haven't
heard anything at all. Everybody seems to be very happy with this,
and you're happy to see the whole community.
I was just wondering why the County pays for the elections. Do
they do that in other MSTBU's or MSTU's or whatever?
COMMISSIONER CARTER: I really don't have the answer to
that. But Mr. Dwight Brock was here and gave you that answer by
saying that was something that he was going to pay for.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, okay. If he wants to pay for it
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: That's fine.
Page 130
May 28, 2002
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- fine with me. Great. That's all I
needed. COMMISSIONER CARTER: Then I would recommend to
the Board that we approve the attached ordinance creating the Pelican
Bay MSTBU and superseding, reputing and consolidating prior
related ordinances, further that the Board authorize a chairman to
sign said ordinance.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We have a motion from
Commissioner Carter and a second from Commissioner Fiala. Any
discussion?
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Can we put in the motion that
the Clerk of Courts would -- it would come out of his budget for the
fee?
COMMISSIONER CARTER: If we go back in public record,
and if he's listing, which he may not be, but one of his associates is,
he can probably call us and correct me if I'm wrong, but if I
remember his last statements in front of this Commission, he said he
would take care of it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: It says in here, "The cost of the
nominating and balloting process shall be born by the Board of
County Commissioners." It would be better if it said, "By the Clerk's
Office," if that's what he wanted us to do. I was just concerned, and
I'm sorry to bring up-
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Comes out of the same pocket.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- a stickling point here but-
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, it comes out of that interest.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Well, since it's not in your
district, I'm amazed that you're over here dealing with it again.
Mr. Weigel?
Page 131
May 28, 2002
MR. WEIGEL: Thanks. If I can help a little bit. The fact is is
whether it's the clerk or the Board of County Commissioners, the
balloting -- the nominating and balloting process is one where this
ordinance provides that it's a County Attorney Clerk function.
And so we're going to be working together on that, in any event.
And the County will be paying for it, you know. Through the County
Attorney's Office and the staff that we provide, there will be some
mailings and things of that nature. But we'll be coordinating with
Dwight. The ordinance is written as it's written. And we've talked
with Dwight about it. And that's the way it's to be written. But the
fact is is this is a rather unique situation. We may never have another
MSTBU with some of the, I think, hybrid and special qualities and
desires for Government participation that this one has. And so from
the County Attorney's standpoint, I think it's a very good process.
And I wanted to also mention another thought that
Commissioner Carter had mentioned to me in our review process and
I'd like to have it reflected here on the record today. And
Commissioner Carter had noted that in regard to beautification,
maintenance, conservation areas, and it talks with streets and lighting
and other things, that another concern that this district may have may
be concerning ambient or street noise.
And so I would ask that the motion and the second include that I
will add a couple words including anything necessary for consultant
studies and to take care of noise or ambient noise. And that would
probably, I'm not the consultant, but it would probably be in terms of
landscaping and berming and things of that nature.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: And I would give them the
authority if they so choose. It's not a mandate on our part.
MR. WEIGEL: That's right. This ordinance provides for an
ever closer relationship with the County Manager, working with the
Board of the MSTBU. It's a nine plus two, eleven member Board.
Page 132
May 28, 2002
Eleven members is what they have right now. Two of those members
are the commercial business interest. They do not have to reside in
the district. They do have to reside in the County.
And that's fair play, in essence. Because if you have
representatives from the Ritz or the Registry or any other businesses
that are within the Pelican Bay MSTBU, they can certainly be very
vital and interested members, but not necessarily be residents within
the district within which their business is operating.
Again, it's a process that provides for nomination, sort of like the
people's choice, rises and bubbles to the top and comes to the Board
of County Commissioners. The Board of County Commissioners
ultimately appoints all members, and as with all committees serve at
the pleasure of the Board of County Commissioners. And Mr. Brock
took great pains to see to it that the transition is gradual. No one is
thrown out of a job at the present time who's a member of committee.
Things will start to happen toward December of 2002, in a rather
gradual way. And we look forward to the process as far as our end
goes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I just have to apologize to you if I
'offended you. I served on an MSTU, and they were always docked.
And it became a big contentious issue with this one and I just didn't --
I was just asking the question to ask a question. I certainly didn't
mean to offend you.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: I understand, Commissioner. I
just -- I'm going to leave it alone.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. So we have a motion by
Commissioner Carter?
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I second it.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And we have the second from-
Page 133
May 28, 2002
MR. WEIGEL: If you had my language also to concern -- to
include the studies-
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: They agreed to that.
MR. WEIGEL: -- and consideration regarding noise. And I'll
add those words to it.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: All right. I include it.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Any other discussion? All those in
favor, indicate by saying aye. Aye.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: The ayes have it 5 to 0.
We're going to take a five-minute break so they can switch the
tapes out in the production room. Thereupon,
(A recess was had and the hearing continued as follows:)
Item #8C Continued from earlier in the meeting
PETITION RZ-01-AR-1143, JAMES G. O'GARA,
REPRESENTING GOLDEN GATE CAPITAL, LTD.-
REMANDED TO THE COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING
COMMISSION
CHAIRMAN COLETTA:
the Golden Gate.
MR. WEIGEL: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA:
Had to go back on the one there on
Okay. You are prepared?
MR. WEIGEL: I'm prepared. We're ready.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We'll return to the one there on the
Golden Gate Zoning change.
Page 134
May 28, 2002
MR. WEIGEL: Okay. David Weigel, County Attorney to
address 8-C, which is petition RZ01AR1143 requesting a rezone
from RSF-3, single family, to the RSF-5 residential single family
zoning district.
Mr. Henning is correct that the Land Development Code,
specifically Section 2.7.2.3.2, Sub 1, specifically states, "The sign
shall be posted at least days prior to the date of the public hearing by
the Planning Commission. The sign to be posted shall contain
substantially the following language and the sign's copy shall utilize
the total area of the sign."
And I probably should put this on the visualizer. It's a little hard
to pull it out of the code book. But it shows the format of the sign
and the top would say, "Public hearing to rezone this property." And
as a subset it says, "From blank to blank to permit," and then, which
is the next line down, and there's a blank space and you'd put in the
change in zoning and the date and time. Now, there's nothing wrong
with putting additional or other information. But I do have a concern
that it doesn't say from some zoning, current zoning, which is RSF-3
to RSF-5. I have a problem with the fact that it's not there,
notwithstanding the fact that notices were put out in mailboxes, it has
a contact number on there which is a County employee contact
number, Development Services and things of that nature.
So there is, in fact, the ability for people to know that
something's going on. There are hearing dates shown on the sign
with the Planning Commission, the Board of County Commissioners;
that's all good. But I still have a problem that it didn't say from and
to, because what it does say is, "Residential lots," on the sign. And it
already was residential.
So the County sometimes gets sued in these things, not because
we have a stake, we don't. But we end up having a stake in defending
them. My strongest -- first advice would be to go through the process
Page 135
May 28, 2002
again and do the sign out there. My second advice would be to see if
we can get an indemnification from the owner who believes he's done
everything correctly. So if the lawsuit's filed and the County is
inevitably made a Codefendant, that we have someone who will stand
up and put some wherewithal forward on a defense because they
didn't want to go forward and put us through a no risk policy by
putting up the signs again. I expect this project's been a long time
coming. The prevention is probably an important thing to do. I'd say
if the petitioner doesn't want to take the prevention and this Board
finds that from a zoning standpoint, not from a construction
standpoint -- this is a question of use, not buildings -- that if you find
that what he's requested is compatible and you feel assured and he
will provide us some indemnification, I'll sit back.
But I think it's pretty clear, notwithstanding that it says that the
sign to be posted shall contain substantially with the following
language, I think it's an important element that should have been
there.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Will you step up to the podium, Mr.
O'Gara.
MR. O'GARA: We are prepared to give you that
indemnification, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And that is part of the public record.
And will that suffice as far as releasing the County from liability?
MR. WEIGEL: Well, it doesn't release us. But what it says is if
we are signed-- if we are sued that he will provide us legal
representation in this defense.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay.
MR. WEIGEL: May or not be adequate, but we'll at least have
that on the record.
Commissioner Coyle?
Page 136
May 28, 2002
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Legal representation of our own
choosing? We get to select the person who represents us and he has
to pay, or does he select the person?
MR. WEIGEL: No. We don't have the detail there,
Commissioner. His indemnification would be that-- what
indemnification means is that if we lose, he pays us for the cost that
we have in losing.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Um-hum.
MR. WEIGEL: And time and material in defending.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And we -- I believe we had a motion
on the floor for approval or no? A little time has gone by.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I don't think we did.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We never did do the motion phase,
did we? Would somebody like to make a motion to that effect?
Another effect? Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: May I just say something? If
we have somebody that challenges this, it's going to come from a
citizen. Knowing what we know, that it wasn't done right, what the
perception is going to be is that we're going to rezone this and damn
the public.
So I would be more in favor of continuing this and do it right,
because if the sign was noticed, then Mr. Ingram had a great point, is,
you know, the room was packed, which I was there during the
neighborhood meeting. A lot of people walked out of there very
angry. And at the Planning Commission there was only citizens
there. Now, is that because of the posting of the property? Don't
know. Or the improper posting of the property? We don't know.
So taking it through the process of the public hearing is going to
hold a better participation, hopefully, and showing the community
Page 137
May 28, 2002
that we want to do the right thing. So I would hope that we could
continue this and do the process correctly.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Did you want to make a motion to
that effect?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So moved.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We have a motion for continuance.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We have a second from
Commissioner Fiala. And the motion was made by Commissioner
Henning. Is there any other discussion?
I hope that we'll be able to move this forward in the quickest
possible time period that we can with the least amount of cost to the
petitioner so that we can come up with something in the way of a
balance of justice here.
With that, I'll call for the--
MR. WEIGEL: Mr. Chairman, once again, if Ray is close. The
fact is if you go a continuance with a general continuing generally,
he'll have to start through the process again, which I don't know if
that's an intention.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I don't think that's the intention here.
Is that correct, Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That it has to go through the
Planning Commission with-
MR. WEIGEL: You see, the idea is that the notice provides
adequate notice of people attending the hearings and both the
Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners. But
if you continue generally then it will just go off the docket, so to
speak.
And, Ray, correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that he has a
six-month process that he has to stay up before he comes in again
Page 138
May 28, 2002
which may not be the intended desire here. What -- I'm trying to look
for another way we conceivably, this could be --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: What about table in?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Could this be deferred back to the
Planning Commission?
MR. WEIGEL: Well, it could be deferred back to the Planning
Commission, but the idea is that they need a sign up, an appropriate
sign up, 15 days before the Planning Commission so that it could go
through. And-
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Well, can't we state it that way,
sending it back to the Planning Commission with the criteria for
posting the sign prior to that meeting?
MR. WEIGEL: You know, that's truly creative. And I think
that, yes, that you could do a remand that it come back. We've never
done this before, but it would be a remand as opposed to making him
start in square one, because he has been through significant process, a
remand that if he posted appropriately and rescheduled before the
Planning Commission and then posted and scheduled, advertised for
hearing before the Board of County Commissioners so that he doesn't
go back to square one.
The only other alternative would be for him to withdraw right
now and reapply and go through again. So I think that for purposes
of due process and public notice, if you do a remand, I could accept
that.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Henning, you have a
motion on the floor?
COMMISSIONER HENNING:
is?
Can we explain what remand
MR. WEIGEL: Yeah. Well, typically that's kind of court
jargon. And what it is is it's sent down to the lower tribunal to come
back in a form that is appropriate that the upper tribunal has
Page 139
May 28, 2002
determined, so kind of in a corollary here, this needs to come back to
you. But to get to you, it has to go back to the Planning Commission,
not to denigrate them, but they are certainly a different tribunal, a
different opportunity for due process.
So again, this will take some hybrid advertisement. The petition
would be the same petition number, because we're keeping this
process in motion. And it's another couple of hurdles to jump over.
But at the same time, it provides both the applicant and the petitioner
as well as the Board of County Commissioners assurance that the
process stands up to any rigorous review.
COMMISSIONER HENN1NG: Okay. That was the part of my
motion.
MR. WEIGEL: And I'd like to have the applicant agree on the
record if he does agree with that.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And then we'll close the public
hearing. Then we'll let you restate your motion.
MR. O'GARA: I'm a little unclear about timing. I mean, is this
-- I'm not sure what -- if you can walk me through it one more time,
please.
MR. WEIGEL: All right. It appears that you're about to get
nothing today, if nothing changes. So you need to -- one would
suggest that you put up your sign again following the Land
Development Code, that specific section that we looked at very
precisely; the County Attorney Office will assist you with that. You
can hand do it, although I think you can do a little neater job than
what you did, but I'm not a good printer, so I can't help you with that.
But we want to make sure that it follows substantially, and I mean
significantly substantially the from and the to and everything that's in
the Land Development Code Provision.
It will have to go up 15 days before an advertised hearing before
the Planning Commission. You'd need to work with staff to find out
Page 140
May 28, 2002
the earliest possible Planning Commission Agenda to get on and
work with staff to get the advertisement in the newspaper, because
it's advertised, not just signed with a sign on the lot. And the
Planning Commission has seen all this before, so I expect that things
won't be unduly difficult. And this Board has certainly had significant
progress today with you too. But this is to make you have the
assurance that if the Board does rule favorably on a zoning change,
that both you and the Board will not be sued and suffer delay and
expense and pain and gnashing of teeth. So I would ask that the
Board, with your-- well, the question is to you. Do you agree with
the Board to remand this so it can follow the process I just stated?
MR. O'GARA: I suppose that's my only real alternative.
There's quite a cost to this kind of thing, and we did put up the
language precisely as we were given by the County. In fairness,
shouldn't the County perhaps pay for some of these out-of-pocket
costs?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I don't think you're going to have any
agreement there. If I were you, I wouldn't draw this out any longer
than we already have.
MR. O'GARA: That's the truth. Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: So we have your agreement?
MR. O'GARA: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you very much. And with
that, I'm going to close the public hearing. Thank you very much.
Commissioner Henning, your motion.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Make a motion to remand this
petition to the Planning Commission.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And -- I'm sorry. I didn't mean to
interrupt.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: To the Planning Commission.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And I second that.
Page 141
May 28, 2002
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. So we have a motion from
Commissioner Henning and a second from Commissioner Fiala. Any
other discussion? All those in favor, indicate by saying aye. Aye.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed? The ayes have it 5 to 0.
Item #9A
RESOLUTION 2002-251, RE-APPOINTING LES DICKSON TO
THE CONTRACTORS' LICENSING BOARD- ADOPTED
Thank you. We're moving onto 9-A, reappointment to the
Contractor Licensing Board.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: This is a reappointment to the
Contractor's Licensing Board, because we had two applicants and one
of them reside in Lee County.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Oh, okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So he wasn't eligible.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: So I'd move for approval of Les
Dickson.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We have a motion from
Commissioner Carter.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And Mr. Chairman -- I'm sorry.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Well, I know. And I have to
incorporate the fact that the terms of office for Board members shall
be limited to two consecutive terms of service on any one Board. And
under D of this section etc., etc., the Commission lifts that limitation.
Page 142
May 28, 2002
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Very good with the etc., etc.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And so we have a motion from
Commissioner Carter, a second from Commissioner Fiala. Any
comments or discussion? All those in favor indicate by saying aye.
Aye.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: The ayes have it 5 to 0.
Item #9B
RESOLUTION 2002-252, APPOINTING ROBERT H. JONES AND
VIRGINIA M. DONOVAN TO THE FOREST LAKES ROADWAY
& DRAINAGE ADVISORY COMMITTEE- ADOPTED
The next one, item 9-B reappoint -- or no, appoint two members
to serve four-year terms for the Forest Lakes Roadway and Drainage
Advisory Committee.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Move for approval.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Move for approval by Commissioner
Carter, second from Commissioner Henning. Any discussion? All
those in favor indicate by saying aye. Aye.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
Page 143
May 28, 2002
Item #9C
RESOLUTION 2002-253, APPOINTING RUSSELL TUFF TO THE
CITIZENS ADVISORY TASK FORCE - ADOPTED
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Move on to 9-C, to the Citizens
Advisory Task Force.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Motion on for Russell Tuff.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second that.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. We have a motion by
Commissioner Henning and a second by Commissioner Coyle.
Discussion on my part is that I have serious concerns that there's no
representation for District 5. And this is one of the bigger things for
District 5 is the block grants that always come into play in
Immokalee when we have a local representative in Immokalee, Essie
Serrata, who is going to be taking Fred Thomas' place who has also
submitted her name.
And I am going to have to vote no against Russle Tuff, even
though he is a close, personal friend. And hopefully it'll come back
around for consideration for Essie Serrata as we have no
representatives from District 5 on this particular Board. But there is a
representative from District 3.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Discussion?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Please. Go ahead, Commissioner
Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I would think that we are going
to still continue trying to bring Immokalee up to your standards or the
Commissioner's standards. I don't see where Russell Tuff is going to
make a difference on that Board.
Page 144
May 28, 2002
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Why, I think that the difference
would be a matter of representation. In all fairness, every other
district is represented, but District 5 is not represented. And we're
talking about a very capable individual that could balance this out for
District 5. Any other comments?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm not going to get into a
contest with you so --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: But we have a motion on the floor by
Commissioner Henning and a second by Commissioner Coyle. I'll
call the question. All those in favor, indicate by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And opposed? Aye. So on the
opposition vote, Commissioner Coletta. Okay. Next item is?
Item #9D
RESOLUTION 2002-254, APPOINTING CATHLEEN
CURATOLO TO THE COLLIER COUNTY CODE
ENFORCEMENT BOARD; GERALD J. LEFEBVRE AND G.
CHRISTOPHER RAMSEY TO SERVE AS ALTERNATE
MEMBERS - ADOPTED
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Members of Collier County
Code Enforcement Board.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Collier County Code Enforcement
Board, 9-D.
Page 145
May 28, 2002
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Chairman, I would move that we
appoint Cathleen Curatolo to the full position and the other two
members become alternates.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Any discussion? All those in favor,
indicate by saying aye. Aye.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And that motion was by
Commissioner Carter and seconded by Commissioner Coyle.
Item #9E
RESOLUTION 2002-255, APPOINTING FRANK DONOHUE TO
THE PARKS AND RECREATION ADVISORY BOARD-
ADOPTED
Moving on to the next one, appointment of members to the Park
and Recreational Advisory Board.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Move for approval.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We have a motion by Commissioner
Carter for approval and a second by Commissioner Henning. Any
discussion?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Just one little bit of one item.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yes, please.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I was just wondering if there's --
because there is nobody from District 1, and apparently there hasn't
Page 146
May 28, 2002
been. There are three from District 3 and there are three from District
4, one from 5, one from 2, but nothing in District 1 at all.
And I was wondering if there was some way, I'm not going to
stop this from going through, but if maybe next time we could try and
get somebody from District 1. I've advertised in the newsletter and
I've gotten people that said, yes, they would like to do this. But it
was after the fact.
So I was wondering if maybe next time we could allow
somebody from District 1 or even advertise somebody to --
MS. FILSON: Well, I don't know if I can legally advertise for
someone from District 1 since it doesn't state that in the ordinance.
However, I do have an application that I'm going to hold in advance
that I have received from District 1, and he will be considered next
go-around.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And so we have a motion. And we
have a second. Any discussion? All those in favor indicate by saying
aye. Aye.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: The ayes have it 5 to 0. Discussion
regarding LDC changes, Item 9-F.
Item #9F
DISCUSSION REGARDING LDC CHANGES AS REQUESTED
BY THE WORKFORCE HOUSING ADVISORY COMMITTEE-
STAFF TO PREPARE LANGUAGE CHANGES TO THE LDC AS
PRESENTED
Page 147
May 28, 2002
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, that's me. First of all, I'll
make this nice and quick. I'm going to announce before and then I'm
going to announce after again that the Naples Area Housing Fair is
June 1st. Just for all those who are interested, this is -- it's going to
be at the Golden Gate Community Center. It's free, and it tells the
entire community what kind of housing is available, where they're
located, the housing rentals. They even have the bankers there. It's
going to be a great effort put on for the community to talk about
affordable housing and all facets of it. And I wanted to get into the
Work Force Housing Advisory Committee -- or it's actually Work
Force Housing Task Force. This group has proposed four LDC
changes. And I brought them up to you at the last meeting, and you
asked me to put it on this meeting. And that's what I'm doing. Our
report from our committee, you know that annual report that we're
supposed to give, will be given at the next board meeting, the June
11 th board meeting. But for this, I'd like you to vote on this. And it's
in your packets to amend the LDC to include fast-track provisions for
affordable housing projects, which will also include a project
manager to coordinate the process.
Number two, change requirements and standards to allow guest
houses or accessory units in the urban area. Number three, reevaluate
qualifying criteria for density bonus provisions. And number four,
change the LDC to encourage mixed use zoning to provide incentives
for work force housing. These are all -- there's nothing really
confrontational about them at all, nor is there anything contentious.
But this will help us to move forward to the next step. If you all
approve this, the wording will be brought back to us, right, Cormac,
wording will be brought to us for the LDC meeting at the LDC
meeting? MR. GIBLIN: That's right. Cormac Giblin for the record,
Housing Urban Improvement Department. These are just broad ideas
Page 148
May 28, 2002
that the committee is working on right now. And we hope to craft
those into LDC amendments sometime in the future.
COMMISSIONER HENN1NG: Mr. Chairman?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Two things. Number one, just
to remind you, Henderson Creek was somewhat of a fast-track,
because they were trying to meet a deadline.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Good reminder.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So do you still want to keep
that in there?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, for the other ones. I know I
shouldn't want to, but yes. Unless, can you tell me, I mean, that left a
bitter taste in my mouth.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I know.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And it still does. And yet
apparently some of the other ones are being delayed because we don't
have them on fast-track that are good projects. That particular one, it
was on fast-track. But we didn't have -- apparently from the vote, we
didn't have the laws in place, even though we knew it was going to
impact the streets. There wasn't anything yet in place. The LDC is
going to be changed to accommodate all of that extra density on the
street that is that bad, but they weren't in place yet. And, I'm sorry --
MR. GIBLIN: If I may, the fast-tracking incentive that we do
offer is pretty much one of the only incentives we offer for affordable
housing. It is a terribly valued asset to those developers.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And yes. And I just thought
that everybody should be known that Henderson Creek was part of
that fast-tracking. And the next -- I have a concern about Number 2.
But it's a good suggestion. My only concern is renting out guest
houses. You got some real entrepreneurs out there that would like to
buy a main house and a guest house and rent them both out. So
Page 149
May 28, 2002
actually what you do have is a duplex. So if we can tie it somehow to
the -
MR. GIBLIN: Owner-occupied main house.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, owner-occupied or tax
exempt, or homestead exemption. Thank you. If we could tie it to
that, then I think it would be a great product, because, I mean, you
see that all over, even in St. Pete, where you have some rental
apartments attached to the main house and it works out great.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Boy, am I glad --
MR. SCHMITT: Just to make a statement. For the record
again, Joe Schmitt, Community Development Environmental
Services Administrator. Just be advised that if we talk about guest
houses and renting, we're talking about an amendment to the Growth
Management Plan and we're talking about density, increasing density.
And by doing that, we're opening up Pandora's box from a standpoint
if we allow guest housing on a permanent rental basis, we're in effect
increasing density within the urban area, which certainly is going to
allow other things to happen as well, once we do that. So that's one of
the cautions with that, because you can build a guest house now, but
certainly it's for a limited use and not as a rental. I think,
Commissioner, if I'm not mistaken, you're looking for a way of rental
activity.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. And yet I'm concerned with
what type, like for instance in Naples Manor, they're renting out Ted
Sheds to people.
MR. SCHMITT: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And, I mean, we can't have that.
We have to --
MR. SCHMITT: Right. Those are illegal. I mean, those are
illegal. And when we find those out, Code Enforcement goes out and
takes care of those.
Page 150
May 28, 2002
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. Yes. So we do have to have
the teeth in this, the criteria to make sure that this is not something
that is going to hurt a neighborhood. And that's why it's important to
craft the words properly and wisely.
MR. OLLIFF:' I think if the Board directs us to do this, we'll
bring this back and I think you'll have some language to actually
discuss. And it will be a full-fledged community discussion, I'm sure,
when you get to this issue.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, yeah.
MR. OLLIFF: But today it's really just Board direction, yes or
no? Do you want to see us bring back some language that talks about
the allowance of guest houses, recognizing that there are pros and
cons on a lot of these issues?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It depends on what you come up
with.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And the same with the fast-
tracking. I'm glad Commissioner Henning said something because
that is something we do need to also address. This is -- these are my
Committee's suggestions. They were the ones that presented this.
But Commissioner Henning brought up a real good point.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. If it's in East Naples,
let's put it on the slow track.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. Could you put that wording
in.
MR. SCHMITT: I mean, just so you understand, fast-tracking
means there's a concurrent review. It goes through Building Review
Department at the same time it's going through the Site Development
Plan or type of review or the plotted subdivision review. So it's
concurrent. That's what makes it fast track. Normally we don't do
the building review process until the first phase is done. And fast-
Page 151
May 28, 2002
tracking is available right now as part of a bona fide low income
housing program.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And by voting on this today, all
we're doing is asking you to put together the wording and bring it
back.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: We're not going to provide any
exemptions from the existence of infrastructure of any kind, are we?
That isn't your intent? We're going to have to take into consideration
road capacity, water, sewer, all those kinds of things.
MR. SCHMITT: Oh, absolutely. Concurrency will -- as we
implement 3.15 of the LDC, certainly. There will be no waivers.
And, of course, unless you want to move in that direction, but there
are no waivers. I didn't think so. There would be no waivers
involved. It would have to go through that process.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And I presume under Number 3,
you're going to reevaluate whether we permit affordable housing if
high density is to occur in areas like 41 and 951. MR. SCHMITT: High density areas.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. And/or other high traffic
areas. I'd presume you'll put limitations on the density.
MR. SCHMITT: And that will all be dealt with as well as part
of the concurrency updating of the LDC.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Chairman, we need a motion on this just so
that we can get some more direction. The only question I had before
you get to a motion was the attached included information regarding
linkage fees and inclusionary zoning, although the first list of four
items doesn't refer to those items.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's just for your reading
pleasure.
Page 152
May 28, 2002
MR. OLLIFF: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Take it home, because that's what
our Committee is now working on. And per this Board's suggestion,
I think it was Commissioner Henning's suggestion, we're now
meeting twice a month. And we have somebody coming down from
Tallahassee to give us a presentation on Inclusionary Zone on July
15th, thanks to Cormac Giblin. And we're going to be inviting
anybody who would like to come in to listen to that presentation.
And we're going to be moving full force ahead on that particular
subject.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Fine. And are you making this in the
form of a motion?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, can I make a motion on it?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: You sure can.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'd like to make a motion that we
accept these LDC suggestion changes to be considered to be worded
and brought back to us for-- for--
COMMISSIONER HENN1NG: Adoption.
COMMISSIONER
COMMISSIONER
COMMISSIONER
FIALA: Pardon me?
HENNING: Adoption.
FIALA: Adoption. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: I'll second the motion.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: So we have a motion from
Commissioner Fiala and a second from Commissioner Carter. Any
discussion? Although-
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Just one little discussion. Naples
Area Housing Fair, June 1st -- see, I promised I'd do it twice -- 11:00
a.m. to 2:00 p.m., Golden Gate Community Center and it's free.
Thank you. That's my discussion.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you. All those in favor
indicate by saying aye. Aye.
Page 153
May 28, 2002
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: The ayes have it 5 to 0. Now, we're
to the County Manager's Report of our agenda.
Item # 10A
CONSIDERATION OF FISCAL YEAR 2003 TOURIST
DEVELOPMENT CATEGORY "C" (MUSEUMS) GRANT
APPLICATION FROM MARCO ISLAND HISTORICAL
SOCIETY 1N THE AMOUNT OF $25,000 - APPROVED
MR. WALLACE: Mr. Chairman, for the record, Bleu Wallace,
Director of Community Development Operations. Right now I am
overseeing the tourist tax and providing staff support to the Board
and the TDC.
On April 15th, the Tourist Development Council met and
reviewed all of the Special Grant Applications that had been
submitted. And today we're providing you the results of those
considerations. The first one is the Marco Island Historical Society
asking for a special grant out of tourism -- I'm sorry, museum
category of $25,000. The Tourist Development Council
recommended denial. And Mr. Bill Tyson is here, he can address the
Board. Before I call on him, I wanted to go over the allocations that
are established by ordinance on the viewer here. Some 66 and two
thirds percent of the tourist development dollars that are collected go
toward beach renourishment; 23 percent goes toward advertising
promotion and special grants; 19 percent goes to Category C, which
is the museums or County owned and operated museums; and then
Page 154
May 28, 2002
7.7 percent goes to C-2, which is non County owned museums. This
is based on the Budget Department's projection for TDC dollars in
the next year. It's some $500,000 less than the current fiscal year that
was projected at the beginning of this year.
And the Board should be applauded for taking corrective action
back in November and adjusting the museum and some of the
museum grants downward in anticipation of that revenue shortfall.
There is going to be a shortfall this year. Part of it's going to be
absorbed by reserves and part of it absorbed by the actions that you
took in reducing the museum and the Naples Botanical Garden
grants. But this is the best picture that our Budget Department can
give us going forward. On a going-forward basis, we look at
collecting $9,184,000 in tourist development taxes for next year.
Based on the allocations established by ordinance, each of those
categories are on the far right side. Category A, again, is beach
renourishment; B is advertising promotion and special grants; and
Category C is your County owned and non County owned museums.
And with that, I would ask Mr. Tyson to come forward.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: You certainly may.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Bless you.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Bless you.
MS. PERDICHIZZI: My name is Elizabeth Perdichizzi of
Marco Island Historical Society. Two months ago, on Tuesday,
March 26th,, the Collier County Board of Commissioners approved a
bare licensed agreement between the County and the Marco Island
Historical Society, which reserves County land by the Marco Public
Library for five years for the building of a museum on Marco. We're
hoping we don't need five years. We think we can do it in two,
possibly three. The Marco Island Historical Society has pledged to
raise $4,000,000 to build a first-class museum on the property that
you designated, which will become the fourth branch of the Collier
Page 155
May 28, 2002
County Museum. You have before you the application for 25,000 for
an architectural rendering, foot plan and model that help people
visualize the building that we're wanting to put on this site.
We have a pledge already of 5,000 toward the purchase, because
it costs 30,000 to do. So we're only asking for 25,000. Even before
you designated the property last March, we have been busy. We have
raised 35,000, and we have plans for it. Now, unfortunately, the
TDC, we were not able to make clear exactly last month what it was
that we were planning to do with this money. So my colleagues and I
would like to help set that record straight.
We have met with a major professional fundraiser and are in the
process of meeting with others to do a feasibility and planning study
timetable and a comprehensive plan to get us started. The company
that we met with has raised 7,000,000 for Hospice. And they were
the ones that said that we need to start with a model. That's what
we're asking you for. We have already raised $35,000, and we have
committed an additional 5,000. That makes $40,000 that we are
committing to the museum project. But we have scraped the bottom
of the barrel, to do this. We realize that this sum will not put heads in
beds this summer, but perhaps future summers that it will. In fact,
summer is the time that most people need to get out of the heat, the
sun and the rain.
Now, the travel industry, there's a bar graph in the package that
shows you that museum travel is the third reason to travel. We want
to provide the hoteliers and the business community on Marco a good
reason to come to Marco. The hoteliers are behind us. The letters are
coming in, and some of my colleagues will read some of those letters.
Collier County also has a unique history in that -- we need to
develop as a marketing tool. All of Southwest Florida is developing
marketing strategies about Florida history and prehistory. Lee County
has Mound Key and Pine Island and Randall Research Center. And
Page 156
May 28, 2002
their County Commissioners bought the property for the Randall
Research headquarters. In Miami, Florida spent $27,000,000 to buy
the Miami Circle. History in Southwest Florida is becoming very
important, and we're missing the boat if we don't make plans for it.
And we think that a museum on Marco Island will pay for it in this
direction.
Also, Collier County schools will benefit. The Marco Island
Museum and History Center's Educational Programs will be designed
to provide educators and their students with a curriculum base,
hands-on, multisensory learning experience outside a classroom
setting. The second and fourth grade Social Studies curriculums
include units on community history, prehistory of Florida, Native
American groups, including the Caloosa and pioneer families.
Someone else will be talking about this.
We're also asking for matching grants for the value of the
property that you designated. We think that will be a big boost. We
have solicited and received letters from the Smithsonian. We have a
long experience with the Smithsonian Institution, dating back to
1896, when they sent down a man to development -- do the
Pepper/Hurst Expedition. And then again in '95 and in the year 2000,
we were able to bring their treasured artifacts. May I just close,
please?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA:
remarks.
Yes. Go ahead with your closing
MS. PERDICHIZZI: Okay. I did want to tell you that we are --
we want to raise the money and build a museum for you.
Historically, this is the way Collier County has acquired all the other
three branches. We are offering the County our talents, our energy,
our money we have raised in the past, our money we hope to raise in
the future without promise of reward for ourselves. We love our
home. We love our history. We know we have something unique to
Page 15 7
May 28, 2002
offer our summer visitors, and we'd like your help to do this. Thank
yOU.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is William Tyson, and he will
be followed by Delishia Kraft.
MR. TYSON: Good afternoon. My name is Bill Tyson. I'm the
immediate/past president of the Historical Society. And I'd just like
to speak to the backing of businesses in our community. In the past,
we've never demonstrated to you that we've had backing or support
from our businesses, our business community. You should have
received, late Friday, some letters from the general managers of the
hotels on Marco Island. Whether you've had a chance to read them or
not, two of them are very similar. But I would like to read to you
from two of them. They're very short.
And the hoteliers, the general managers themselves, not
knowing when they'd have the opportunity to speak to you today on
the agenda, chose instead to submit letters of their interest. One of
the hotels on the Island, the Marco Island -- or Marco Inn Suites, the
owner Mr. Pat Prugden is out of the state right now. But I just want to
demonstrate his interest in history on Marco Island. He's so
interested that he has allowed us to establish our second mini
museum on his property. So I think that says a lot as far as his
support. The letters that I wanted to read, this one states that: "We're
writing in support of the Marco Island Historical Society's effort to
build a museum on Marco Island. We believe that the construction of
this new facility will enhance the ambiance and cultural selections
offered to our guests, providing them an additional choice of
activities to do during their stay. In addition, this new facility will
provide residents and children living on the Island and in the
Marco/Naples area an opportunity to learn about our very interesting
historical background.
Page 158
May 28, 2002
Provision of educational and cultural facilities will also
encourage families to seek homes in this area, providing the resorts
and other businesses with the work force needed to run our
operations. We urge you to approve the request for assistance and
recognize their worthwhile efforts on behalf of the citizens of Marco
Island and Collier County. Sincerely, Marsha Dmochowski, General
Manager of Radisson Resort."
Second I would like to read from is: "Dear Chairman Coletta
and copies to Commissioners. I'm writing in support of the Marco
Island Historical Society's request for TDC funds for the
development of a museum on Marco Island. As a general manager of
the largest hotel in Collier County and the greatest contributor of
County Occupancy Tax, I hope that my opinion is regarded
accordingly. It's time that Marco Island be appropriately recognized
for their share of the Category C TDC funds. Our historical society
has established an ambitious plan to develop a museum, which will
preserve Marco Island's heritage by proudly displaying our unique
history to the public. I urge the County Commissioners to fairly
appropriate the request of $25,000 to the Marco Island Historical
Society and continue to support this project in subsequent years.
Thank you for your consideration, Robert J. Dictor, General Manager
of Marco Island Marriott Resort."
Basically, that's the point that I want to get across to you folks is
the fact that we do, indeed, have support from our major hoteliers on
the Island. And with that, I'll step back.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Question, sir, if I may? Mr. Tyson,
your agreement you have with the County for the land that's to be
utilized, what is the window that that sets in? That's what, how many
years out? Five years? MR. TYSON: Five years, yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And so you're actually moving
against the gun at this point in time. You have to be as proactive as
Page 159
May 28, 2002
possible to make this all happen. And I commend you for the thirty-
some thousand dollars that you raised. And I was the one person on
the TDC who voted in favor of it. Of course, I was the only one.
And I'm at a little bit of a loss that we're talking some seed
money, and there was some question about the seed money being
used. In other words, they -- some people thought that possibly the
seed money was inappropriate, but meanwhile we turned around and
we spent twenty times that for the Botanical Garden seed money.
And this is the reason that I was supportive of the Marco Island
venture. Marco Island is a high tourist destination, without a
question. This is something that would be totally utilized by the
public there. And I'd like you to know you have my support, and I
would like to make a motion that we approve this fund.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'll second that.
MR. TYSON: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Any other public speakers?
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Before-
MS. FILSON: Yes, sir. The next one would be Delishia Kraft
and she will be followed by Kris Helland.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: While she's coming up, maybe I
can ask Mr. Wallace a question. As you rework the numbers, am I
correct in that you could fund this -- we could fund this 25,000 and
not deter from any of the other County museum projects?
MR. WALLACE: Commissioner Carter, during the -- not this
item before the TDC, but the Naples Botanical Garden item, the
Naples Botanical Garden has a grant application in for $500,000. As
the percentage calculated out, it was somewhat short of that, some
$25,000 short. The budget director addressed the TDC, and it's on the
record before you in the Naples Botanical Garden portion that he had
identified some $240,000 of nonspecific museum category funds that
were collected prior to the current percentage -- allocation
Page 160
May 28, 2002
percentages going into effect that Could be utilized for either.
Therefore, to answer your question, yes, this $25,000 could be
utilized for out of those funds and it wouldn't affect the percentage of
allocation or the effectiveness of the other grants.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Also, you were mentioning
nonCounty owned museums. But this is -- being that it's on County
property and they're going to give to the County, would this still be
considered a nonCounty owned museum, even though --
MR. WALLACE: I would have to defer to the County Attorney
on that one.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, okay. Well, it's not even
important now. That's -- you've got the answer, the right answer.
That's all I need.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Well, I have my questions
answered. So I would be supportive of this 25,000. How many votes
does it take to make this happen up here?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Three.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Three. I count three. If people
keep coming up here and keep talking, they're going to talk me out of
it. So if they don't want to talk anymore, I will support this motion.
MS. PERDICHIZZI: Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Mr. Carter, you have a way with
words. Next speaker?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: The next speaker is Kris Helland.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Is anybody opposed?
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Is anybody opposed to the
motion? We're going to give you the money.
MS. FILSON: JoAnn Foote.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Just wave.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Just wave like that.
MS. FILSON: Eleanor Burnham.
Page 161
May 28, 2002
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Just wave.
MS. BURNHAM: I would just like to speak for one minute.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Oh know, just lost $25,000.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: It could cost you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I think it's a thousand dollars a
minute, isn't it?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yep, I think that's it.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Where's my Great Uncle Jeb?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yep, that's me, all right.
MS. BURNHAM: I just wanted to tell you that we've been
working hard, even though we weren't sure about this wonderful
thing that happened today. We have a new, little mini museum open
at Old Marco Inn through the help and courtesy of Pat Crookten, the
part owner and general manager of Old Marco Inn. He made this
possible by giving us an old boutique, or it was once a motel room.
We've turned it into a museum. But he is charging us a dollar a year,
and so that made it really possible.
I'm excited to tell you the museum opened on April 5th. It
contains the full-size diagram that I've given you a picture. That's a
wonderful thing to see. I hope you'll all make a trip down. I'm
excited about it because that was totally paid for by Memorial Donor
Funds when my husband died in June of 2000.
Now, the amazing statistic that I'm up here to tell you, that
museum opened on the 5th of April. And as of last Friday, I counted
signatures on three -- over 300 lines and I didn't count double-
signatures on the -- on the lines. And I think that's pretty impressive
in seven weeks with a little mini museum. So I think we have a lot of
people really interested in the history of Marco Island. Thank you
very much.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you. Any other speakers?
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Catherine Kirk.
Page 162
May 28, 2002
COMMISSIONER FIALA: While Cathy is coming up --
MS. FILSON: Followed by Don Craig.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: While Cathy's coming up, I just
wanted to say, I --
COMMISSIONER CARTER: It will get expensive here, folks.
COMMISSIONER FIALA:
thousand dollars a speaker.
COMMISSIONER COYLE:
COMMISSIONER FIALA:
I--
Yeah. He's docking you a
It's down to 20,000.
20,000 now. I just want to tell you,
MS. KIRK: I just uttered my last word.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: You may speak, ma'am. We've
got a good sense of humor.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We'd love to hear from you.
MS. KIRK: Thank you. For the record, my name is Catherine
Kirk and I live at Goodland. And one of the people over here from
Marco said, "On Marco Island? I said, "No. I'm Goodland." We are
not a part of Marco Island.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I know.
MS. KIRK: But we are a part of Collier County. Actually,
when I was born in 1923 at Caxambas, the south end of Island, I was
born in Lee County. Figure that one out.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It never was incorporated.
MS. KIRK: Collier County had not been established at that
time, it was in 1923 or 4, I think. Anyway, I lived my entire life at
Caxambas, except when I came to Goodland in 1949 and I've lived
there since. I'm very, very interested on what goes on the Island,
because it is a part of my history and a part of most of the people
there. My family came from Georgia. They landed in Caxambas in
1901, and we have worked for our County and for our people all this
Page 163
May 28, 2002
time. The Island where I live, Goodland, is made up of-- made from
the Caloosa Indian. It was made by the Indian sitting there opening
an oyster, eating the oyster and tossing the shell out at their door one
by one. It was at one time 16 feet tall, all made of clam shells -- not
clam. Excuse me, oyster shells. I'm sorry. And where I live now in
Goodland, I have walked around and picked up about three or four
bushels of artifacts.
And I'm going to use those artifacts. I'm going to make little
displays of them and sell them to the people who come down from
other places as we pick up little boxes of stones. And I think that you
can make a good bit of money out of it. And I'm going to give it to
the Historical Society. So we need to put our foot prints down on this
Island. And I hope you'll vote.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. Just --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes, Mrs. Kirk, before you go,
please --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Fiala first.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's all right. He can ask her.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, I didn't want her to leave.
That's all.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. I just wanted to say-
MS. KIRK: I have for a longtime.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- I can almost feel now this chain-
of-life museum system where they started Roberts Ranch, the hotels
especially. They're always looking for things for their people to do
for their spouse groups. I worked for a hotel for a while on Marco, as
a matter of fact. And we were always looking for things for the
people to do.
Now, they could board them up on a bus or one of the trollies
and they can go right from the Robert's Ranch all the way catching
Page 164
May 28, 2002
every museum along the way right out to Marco Island. It'll just be
great. I can feel it.
MS. KIRK: My husband came from Rochester, New York
when he was a young man. We were married in 1941. But before
that, we spent all of our free time looking for Indian mounds. And I
put -- I don't know how many we put in. But I was walking this close
behind his back breathing down his neck, because I didn't know
where I was most of the time. One time we were over at the Edison,
the old Edison place and we got interested in it and it became dark.
So we were coming on this swampy area and I heard this weird
sound. "What is that?" He says, "That's the Sasquatch." I said,
"What?" Well, the same thing, it got louder and louder. Everywhere I
went, I could hear this. And finally it sounded as if it was all around
me when -- this noise was so terrible. I was scared crazy. But
anyway, I got all kinds of tales about it when we get our museum.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: It sounds great. I think the
Skunk Ape would really love to be here to hear part of this
conversation.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: The last speaker is Don Craig.
MS. KIRK: In all my enthusiasm, I forgot to tell you, my name
is Eleanor Burnham. And I--
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Let the records note that, Eleanor
Brown.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Burnham.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Burnham.
MR. CRAIG: Good afternoon. My name is Don Craig and I'm
a 25-year resident of Collier County and a licensed electrical
contractor. And years ago I came from a little town called Boston.
And when I first came down here, I didn't see much in the way of
history. And I'm delighted to see all the support for history and
encouragement. And I want to thank on behalf of the Board and I
Page 165
May 28, 2002
serve on the friends of the museum on the Board. I want to thank
you, all you Commissioners, for your support of our museum.
I have to refer to a couple of notes. I had them written down
earlier this morning, and now I'm going to go back to them.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: I don't think I've failed to
communicate here someplace.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You can withdraw your motion.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well -- no, go ahead.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: There are minutes. There are
minutes, when I think about that.
MR. CRAIG: Every year some of us come before this Board to
plead for museum funding. The other day I was up at your beautiful
new North Naples Library. And it's encouraging to see the state of
the art and what they have done with everything up there. We have
high hopes that we may see that ourselves some day down here in our
museum. There was an issue regarding Botanical Garden money
coming up, and we were a little concerned over the distribution of it
and the funds that never seem to happen for Roberts Ranch. And
also, if funds are committed for the Botanical Garden, which is a
private enterprise, will -- and if that happens, will that affect our
Collier County budget in any way? And I'd like to thank you all for
your attention. Again, thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you, sir. And that concludes
the speakers?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Do we have our motion on the floor
and a second? Any other discussion? Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: First of all, I want to recognize
Mrs. Kirk. It's an honor for you to be here today, in my eyes. A lot
of history there as far as Marco Island. It's my understanding that the
petitioner -- it was a misunderstanding with a Tourist Development
Page 166
May 28, 2002
Council of why you need this architectural renderance for your
fundraising. You already have $30,000 for your fundraising as part
of it. What I would like to see is a resubmittal of application to go
before the TDC Board for their consideration knowing --
reconsideration knowing all of the information, because, you know, I
hold the Advisory Board's recommendations very highly. And I think
just with a clarification, it could be straightened out. And I believe
we do have time to bring it back before the TDC Board; am I correct?
MR. WALLACE: For the record, Bleu Wallace. Since
Commissioner Coletta's been heading up the TDC since January,
we've been meeting on a monthly basis. There's no problem in taking
anything back to the TDC.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I hear you, Commissioner Henning,
but I also believe that the action that we're trying to move towards at
this point in time will meet all the needs. You mean providing it to
them for your information of what we based our decision on or were
you meaning sending it back to them for their consideration to be sent
back to us again?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, even -- no. What I mean
is even the application is stating that the matching is $5,000. But
when you put the whole -- if you put the whole picture together of
25,000 or 30,000 that you're going to put into it, this is the
advertising promotion and then take that back to the Tourist
Development Council. Does that clear it up?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Ma'am? Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, let me just comment on that.
The people from the Marco Island History Museum effort came to
my office. And they were telling me that they had been shot down by
the TDC and they went on. We talked for about 20 minutes before it
came to light that they had this other money sitting there, but it was
already dedicated to fundraising for putting the architectural reviews
Page 167
May 28, 2002
and all of these things together. They just needed the additional
money in order to get this show on the road.
And I said, "Well, why didn't you say that?" Well, they didn't
want to let them know that they had that money because they thought
maybe then they wouldn't get the money. I said "No. No. That's
what's it's for is to show that you've raised all this money for a
match." So that's how all that came to be. And so that's why you're
hearing the full story today. And in fact, I noticed as they were
telling us of their stories, they've got this part dedicated. I'll lay a
dollar to donuts that this new part that they have is a memorial in the
museum, which I don't know how much the person paid to do it. I
bet that's not considered in their funds that they have allocated as
well. It's amazing, you know, when a little group is together just
earnestly trying to put it together, they don't know how to work the
figures like a major group.
MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Chairman, I just need to remind you, you're
on item B. You've got S to go, just the County Manager portion of
the agenda.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, we got 'til midnight.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: We have a motion.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Well, like Commissioner Coyle
said, "Get a life."
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I do and I love it.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Before you take a vote, I really
have to say something. I'm going to vote in support of this money.
But I need to tell you that about three and a half years ago I voted to
allocate two and a half million dollars to the Collier County
Historical Society to help them do something and I got left holding
the bag. Now, historical societies are generally not particularly good
at raising money, at least in my experience. And I can't tell you how
important it is for you to raise money as quickly as you possibly can.
Page 168
May 28, 2002
I would say that as long as there is progress toward raising money,
and I mean really good progress because you have a lot of good
money to raise.
And quite frankly, I am apprehensive about whether or not
you're going to raise it. It's a lot of money. But I encourage you to
do so, and I'll vote for this grant.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Well, I think we already
voted, but we're going to do it again. Is there any other discussion?
Okay, hearing none, I'm going to go with the motion. All those in
favor indicate by saying aye. Aye.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER COYLE:
Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And the descending vote is
Commissioner Henning. Thank you very much. Next item?
Item #1 OB
FISCAL YEAR 2003 TOURIST DEVELOPMENT CATEGORY
"C" (MUSEUMS) GRANT APPLICATION FROM NAPLES
BOTANICAL GARDEN IN THE AMOUNT OF $500,000-
APPROVED
MR. WALLACE: For the record, Bleu Wallace. Next item, Mr.
Chairman, is the Tourist Development Category C Grant Application
from Naples Botanical Garden in the amount of $500,000. The
Tourist Development Council recommends approval. And I will turn
the podium over to Naples Botanical Gardens.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Motion to approve?
Page 169
May 28, 2002
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, we had a motion to approve
from Commissioner Henning and a second from Commissioner
Coyle and Commissioner Carter. Any discussion?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We still need to go to public
speakers.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We do.
COMMISSIONER FIALA:
Sondra Quinn and Pam Brown.
COMMISSIONER COYLE:
We have two public speakers,
I withdraw my approval.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, me, too.
MS. QUINN: Sondra Quinn, President, CEO of Naples
Botanical Garden. As you know, the Naples Botanical Garden is
developing and building a world-class 21 st-century botanical garden
focused on the theme on the relationship between people and plants
and the tropical and the subtropical zones of the 26th latitude.
The garden has just completed the concept master plan, which
you see before you. And it is a plan for the next 10 to 20 years. We
are now in the necessary -- or the process of securing the necessary
environmental and developmental permits. Some of the key things I
think are just that we have been able to acquire 160-acre site with
private money.
We are preserving and restoring one third, which is this area
right here, which is all green space. It is the pine flatwoods. It is the
oak scrub and wetlands. And we are also creating Florida Gardens,
Gardens of the 26th latitude, Asia, Africa, the Carribean and the
Amazon Rain Forest. We have completed our five-year plan. And
the garden is requesting $500,000 from the TDC's Special Museum
Category Grant Program-
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Ms. Quinn?
Page 170
May 28, 2002
MS. QUINN: -- which is under construction. Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We have a motion and a second
COMMISSIONER CARTER: To approve this.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- to approve it.
MS. QUINN: Oh, okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Do you still want to continue?
MS. QUINN: If you're going to vote for it, yes. I mean, I've
reviewed this with all of you.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Correct.
MS. QUINN: So if you feel you have the proper information, I
don't need to go any further.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Thank you.
MS. QUINN: And I thank you for the review.
MR. OLLIFF: I hate jumping in front of a train, but there's one
issue I think the Board does need to resolve. I think the TDC funding
request was for 475 based on the funding that was available. I
believe the Botanical Garden's request is actually for the 500. If
they're looking for the difference, I believe the $25,000 out of, again,
what was $240,000 of unbudgeted carry-forward funding, that's the
same money that you just tapped and provided the funding for the
Marco Museum Group. They're looking for the difference, the
$25,000 out of that same source as well.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Mr. Wallace, you got something to
add?
MR. WALLACE: Yes. The TDC did recommend using those
funds to augment the 475 that was allocated through the percentages.
In this way the percentages do not have to be changed by ordinance
and the allocations remain the same.
MS. FILSON: And, Mr. Chairman, you have one additional
speaker.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Please.
Page 171
May 28, 2002
COMMISSIONER CARTER:
talking 500 or 475.9
COMMISSIONER HENNING: 5.
MR. WALLACE: 500, sir.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: No, 500.
summary is.
MS. FILSON:
MS. BROWN:
So the answer to that is we're
That's what the executive
Your final speaker is Pam Brown.
Good afternoon. I'm Pam Brown, for the record.
I am the Vice President of the friends of Collier County Museum. I
guess what I really want to address here, 'it looks like there's
$240,900 in reserve, and our budget hasn't been discussed yet. Is this
going to hurt our budget when it comes up?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: From what I understand, Pam, the
budget that's being submitted is remaining intact.
MS. BROWN: Okay. But we also had it last year. If you
remember, we came before the Board that 300,300 was cut from the
Visitor's Center over in Immokalee, and we haven't readdressed that
yet.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: The Visitor's Center?
MS. BROWN: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: You're right. We haven't. I don't
know if this would be the forum that we would address it or if it
would be the budget hearings themselves.
MR. DUNNING: For the record, John Dunning, Public Services
Administrator. Yes, we plan on addressing those issues during the
budget workshop coming up in a few weeks. What I will say on the
record though, for Ms. Brown's benefit, is of that 240,000, roughly,
the Board is going to be allocating potentially 50,000 of that today.
We are getting on the agenda for the TDC for the next meeting in
June to actually request the balance of that money for the $190,000 to
be utilized to supplement some of the programs that were cut in last
Page 172
May 28, 2002
year's budget for museums, the County-owned museums. And, you
know, complimenting with the budget we're putting together and
even some revisions that we're doing at the County Manager's
request, I think we're going to have a pretty good budget for you.
MS. BROWN: Okay. Well, I'd appreciate y'all look this over
because I saw there's like, I think, close to $2,000,000 additional of
staff recommendations that have not been addressed at all. And, you
know, we're giving away money to other museums that's not a part of
our system.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We can only work with the budgets
that are presented to us when they're presented. One of the things I'd
like to know, because you're on top of it in Immokalee, roberts Ranch
fell behind quite a bit in the past, and I understood we got caught up.
Are we in danger of falling behind and losing grant money?
MS. BROWN: Well, I don't know about losing the grant
money, to be honest with you. But as far as, like I said, the Visitor's
Center was supposed to have been for this year's budget, that was out.
So we are relatively, yes, sir, I would say about a year or two, just off
the top of my head and I may be wrong. I could come back at the
next meeting and address that for you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And bring Aunt Mill with you.
MS. BROWN: We can try to do that. Okay. Thank you very
much.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you. Can we -- where were
we now?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: We have a motion and two
seconds.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: We got a motion.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Did we have a motion? We had a
second?
Page 173
May 28, 2002
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I made the motion. And the
issue is since we give the Marco Island museum $25,000, that leaves
$475,000, correct?
MR. OLLIFF: You have -- these budgets are being based on the
expected revenue in next year's budget. In order to stay within the
budget office's projections for the Botanical Gardens Society, the
only amount of money that would have been available, based on our
expectation for revenue, and that category is 5. In order to make their
request whole, they're asking that you supplement that with $25,000
of what was carried forward in this budget area to bring it up to the
full $500,000.
I just wanted to make sure that the Board was fully aware that in
order to reach that $500,000 recommendation from the TDC, that
you're going to use all of next year's allocation in this category, plus
you're going to dip into, what is in essence, reserves for $25,000 to
meet the 500.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And what happens if we get into
next year and we don't have the funds? We don't have enough funds
to meet all of our commitments?
MR. WALLACE: Staff would bring to the Board a similar
resolution as we did last year where you went and cut a new contract,
adjustment contract with those holding grants reducing that and also
reducing the County Museum's budget, just like it was done last year.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Commissioner Coyle, I think
that's just a lot like what FDOT did to us; they came in here and
presented us a check with 3.7-some million dollars and turned around
and took it away because they didn't have the funds. Don't spend it
until you have it.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yep.
Page 174
May 28, 2002
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. So do we have any other
discussion? All those in favor, indicate by saying aye. Aye.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed? The ayes have it 5 to 0.
Item # 10C
FISCAL YEAR 2003 TOURIST DEVELOPMENT SPECIAL
EVENT GRANT APPLICATION FROM PARKS AND
RECREATION DEPARTMENT FOR THE FIFTH ANNUAL
COUNTRY JAM IN THE AMOUNT OF $120,000 - DEFERRED
MR. WALLACE: Mr. Chairman, the next item is from Parks
and Recreation for the Fifth Annual Country Jam in the amount of
$120,000. The Tourist Development Council recommended denial. I
will turn this over to Ms. Ramsey.
MS. RAMSEY: Good afternoon. For the record, Marla
Ramsey, Collier County Parks and Recreation Director. Earlier this
afternoon we presented to you a Country Jam Showcase brochure that
listed some of the happenings that we had at this last event. And a
couple of things I think that are noteworthy is that this was the fourth
annual event. And each and every year it's been bigger and better. In
the past, Board direction has been for us to run about four large
events, a lot of them having to do with music related to them.
And staff is recommending this year that we cut that back to two
events; one of which you're seeing right now in front of you is
Country Jam. This year's Country Jam had over 7,000 people in
attendance to it. We had $30,000 of in-kind advertisement along
Page 175
May 28, 2002
with the free advertisement that you see in this particular item that
you have before you.
We also had 34 vendors at this particular event, a wings cookoff
and a bronco-bucking contest; so to speak. The event itself, given
general fund dollars and TDC funding that we received last year,
actually did $18,000 better than projected that we would versus
revenue. And our request to TDC was based upon the fact that we
wanted to expand this event from a two-day event to a three-day
event. In order to get an event that will put heads in beds, it needs to
be expanded, similar to what you would see of Sunfest on the other
Coast, which is four or five days in a row. This year we documented
bed-nights off of the event. We also had it rain out; of course that
didn't help our numbers a lot. But we found that everybody that has
attended the event has been very, very positive of it.
We've had a lot of good coverage as you can see that we were
requesting that if you don't -- if you see that you don't want this event
to go to a three-day event, in order to make this repeat event a two-
day event, we would need another $90,000 TDC request in order to
bring back the same event that we held last year. And I guess that's
kind of the highlights that I have. And I'll answer any questions that
you might have.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Questions? I might comment that I
was the descending vote on this particular item when it was
disapproved. The reason being is I thought that if under the right
circumstances that this would be a positive thing for tourism. And I
still feel that way under the right circumstances. Although, I'll be
honest with you, that if we -- rain or no rain, if we had another event
such as this last time, we probably are going to have to weigh our
options. I kind of thought this last time we got involved we were
going to be coming out with either a break-even or a profit. And I
realize what it is when you're dealing with mother nature; it doesn't
Page 176
May 28, 2002
always come together just the way you plan. I've been through
enough of these festivals to know that rain can be a very big deciding
factor. I'm still in favor of it.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Well, last year you took in
$78,000 in revenue?
MS. RAMSEY: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Perhaps we can look at some
way to do this and what, craft a proposal? I'm willing to craft a
proposal that somewhere around the $78,000 number based on
income, because that's a known entity, you can draw that. I don't have
a problem with perhaps doing something around 75,000 that would
keep this Country Jam in place. And maybe next year you'll get the
weather on your side and be able to meet your revenue.
MS. RAMSEY: A comment on that, and I appreciate that.
What we find is that events of this sort, a lot of times, have a ticket
price of 35 to $40 for event. And we did have two main headliners.
And we feel that we want to keep the price reasonable. And, yes, we
probably could raise even more funds off this event if we were
willing to raise the ticket prices.
We're trying to keep the ticket prices around the $10 mark, 15
at the gate. We feel that that's probably as high as it can go. And we
agree that the 75 to $80,000 mark is probably what we're going to be
able to raise off of those gate receipts. MS. FILSON: I have speakers.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'm not sure whether I have a
question or not. But let me ask one question. You know, I don't like
to pay for these out of the General Fund Revenues. Is there any
reason that some private group can't do this sort of thing rather than
the Government taking it on? MS. RAMSEY: Well, there's two
schools of thought, I think, on that. And, yes, you can have a
Page 177
May 28, 2002
promoter come in and do an event like this. And I will refer to the
Fish Concert that you had out in the -
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Everglades.
MS. RAMSEY: -- Everglades area. One of the problems with
that is you don't have a control over what the event will become.
And in this particular case, we do not provide alcohol. We are very
stringent in the drugs.
And if you had gone out to the Fish Concert, you would
probably been amazed at what you had seen, and you would not
really want to put that type of event on in one of our County parks.
And so I have a caution on that side. A lot of government agencies
do continue to host events in order to bring in a very good family-
oriented event, one without the alcohol, without having to worry
about what your children are going to be exposed to.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Thankyou.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I have a question now. This
last event you raised $78,000?
MS. RAMSEY: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: How much General Funds
moneys did we spend for this event? MS. RAMSEY: About 125.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So we spent 125 out of
General?
MS. RAMSEY: Yeah. I think the total cost of the event, with
the TDC, was about 223,000, something in that area.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So we spent 220,000 to gain
$78,0007
MS. RAMSEY: Yeah. And one of the things that we look at
when we talk about the TDC is that we spent in -- about $65,000 in
cash and in-kind advertisement that went into this particular event,
and all of that is advertising Collier County.
Page 178
May 28, 2002
And whether we're advertising an event or beaches or a specific
hotel, we do feel that those dollars are bringing people to this event.
Not only to the event, but to the County in general. And we feel that
those are dollars that are being spent for the benefit of all of Collier
County, not only for this event, but also for the economy.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So you advertised the events,
nothing else? We didn't advertise the beaches or Pelican Bay or
anything else?
MS. RAMSEY: We advertised the event as the festival that it is
along with we had some packaging by a number of hoteliers in
Collier County to bring in the package deal. I believe that the hotel
nights were somewhere around the 40 to $50 per night range to draw
people in.
We had a busload of people that came in from Tampa that came
for the event. So we are drawing from outside of the immediate area,
although we probably get a large number of our people local, and
that's who our biggest target is, yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: What -- the previous year, what
was the numbers the previous year? What did we spend? What do
we have?
MS. RAMSEY: I'm going to have to ask Annie to give you that
specific, because I did not bring that with me. She probably has a
little more detail on that for you.
MS. PAPPALARDO: You talking budget or attendance?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No. I'm talking, what did we
spend, tourist tax money, ad valorem money and then what was our
net?
MS. PAPPALARDO: Okay. Last -- the Third Annual Country
Jam, our budget was at about 116,000. We had no TDC funding.
That was the first time last year that we received TDC funding, the
Fourth Annual. And so basically it was a two-day event with more
Page 179
May 28, 2002
local talent. This year the big increase you see there was we had two
of the top country music entertainers in the country. So the event did
jump quite a bit.
Basically the attendance, I think the Friday night rain killed us.
We had six inches of rain out there. But budget-wise, we spent
116,000 back in '01, and this year we spent about 223, that was
including TDC funding, which is the first time we received that.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Commissioner, the question --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Do you know how much
money we put in --
COMMISSIONER CARTER:
'017
-- is, what was the revenue in
MS. PAPPALARDO: '01, the revenue was at about -- $52,000.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
MS. PAPPALARDO: This is the most an event for us has ever
brought in 78,000.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We're really gaining.
MS. PAPPALARDO: Just a little bit of history and if you saw
our TDC report, this event has really grown in the last four years.
Basically, you know, it takes three to five years for events to make it
or break it. And that's what shows you. You will see that with the
Marco Film Festival, they have been here a longer time. You've seen
how the event has grown. This is a critical year for us, this fifth year.
I really think this event has the potential to bring in the bed
nights. The bed nights that we record are true. You can call any of
the hotels that we work with. They will say, "Yes, we had this
reported." Our survey shows a lot more bed nights in that we don't
record that, because we did not have at the time a hotel writing me a
letter saying, "Annie, I had 25 bed nights and this." But it shows that
we did bring in many more bed nights.
Page 180
May 28, 2002
Our web site that we have right now, the amount of e-mail that
we get there from outside the area is incredible. I know that families
are visiting here from Wisconsin, New York and coming down to the
event for this. And I also want to stress the importance that as a
special events team, me and Peg, we work really hard and our
department works really hard. Our vendors are now coming here, not
only for Country Jam, but they will come in and spend three, four,
five weeks here in the area doing the Everglades Seafood Festival,
Tomato Seafood Festival, Cape Coral Parks and Rec. We all work
together to try to bring vendors in, keep them here from where they're
coming. They're staying here.
We have vendors that are staying at the World Tennis Center for
three weeks, because they have booked three or four events and
they're staying here, spending their money, spending their gas, eating
in town and staying here for hotel night. We're not even able at this
time to, you know, to record that.
After the TDC meeting, I was recommended to go to the Tax
Collector's Office and get a listing of all the hotels so I can work with
them next year. I have done that. And they will all be receiving a
letter from this year's events hoping that they will help us track every
single little room that comes into the area. So you're only -- we're
only tracking for you here the people that are coming in right now to
visit. We're not tracking the entertainers. We're not tracking the
vendors. We're not tracking many, many areas that we still -- we
don't have the money to hire a marketing firm. We do everything in-
house. And so it's a big job.
And I also want to stress to you, as far as private promoters, I've
been here for many years. I've worked for Lee and Collier County,
Special Events Supervisor. And I can tell you, I also did think my
years for Immokalee as a volunteer and President of the Board, when
I've asked private promoters to come in and help us with a
Page 181
May 28, 2002
scholarship for a child in a high school here in Collier County, the
answer is, "No," many times. So when you do it in-house, when you
have County Government doing this, and that's not all we do, we do
everything, you know, from marketing for our department,
everything from the red guide to the ice cream social you'll see this
summer, you know, that's a big savings to this County, because we
truly are -- our passion is there, to really come in and promote the
County, not just promote. As a private promoter comes into town,
they charge $25 per ticket and they leave town and that's it. So you're
getting something out of that. Everything that comes back in, where
does it go? Back into the General Fund.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: You have a great passion for the
subject. But the difficulty is, and it gets to many areas which I think
we're going to get to when we hire a marketing coordinator to work
this funding process, we really don't know what the revenue streams
are. We can only guess. We can only suppose or infer. And I think
it's a very difficult decision for a Commissioner to say "Well, how
can I best use General Fund dollars for tourist dollars in this arena?"
It seems to me that ! know what you want to do, but there's not a
good revenue traffic system to tell me what you're getting for the
dollar spent. And I'm going to go with it this year, Commissioners.
But I don't think that I can spend what we did last year. And even
though it was a rain out, there is, you know, just the quick numbers
telling me we're losing ground here. And I don't know whether the
Philharmonic or somebody like this would joint-venture. You've got
to find a venture partner here who will and can work with us in
something like this if you're really going to start spending these
enormous amount of dollars. Or maybe you got to keep it more to a
local level for the next year until we get a marketing director
coordinator for the TDC that says, "Okay. How does this all fit
together?" Because we don't have a plan. We go from situation to
Page 182
May 28, 2002
situation, and that's all we've done since I've been here as a
Commissioner. And we're trying to get better at it, but we've got a
long way to go.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'm not a tourism expert, as I've
said to this Board on numerous occasions. And my only alternative
really is to take the recommendations of the TDC. They are the
people who really determine whether or not these activities are
putting beds and heads, and obviously they didn't seem to think they
were. And so I would endorse a TDC's recommendation for denial.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: You have anything to say?
MR. DUNNING: I'm just going to make one quick observation.
For the record, John Dunning, Public Services Administrator. The
one point I wanted to make out more than this, and this is the policy
level discussion not appropriate for today, but one of the issues with
TDC money is, does it have to put heads in beds? And while that has
been the Board's past practice in identifying where those monies go,
you know, it's my interpretation of the ordinance in the statute that,
no, in fact, you do not have to show that direct correlation for events.
There's lots of different ways of promoting Collier County. A local
event such as this is one.
My second observation I would make, I know I said I would
only make one, but the second one would be, it's very difficult to
make this presentation without you seeing the full picture of what the
general fund implications are going to be. And you'll see that in a
couple weeks at the June workshop. And if I was going to make one
recommendation to say this item at least for today, it would be to
continue it at least until we've had that budget workshop discussion
where we can provide you a menu of options. One of the things that
we're seeing from a Board policy level is the idea of they would like
to see a revenue break-even. Typically in the past, we have
Page 183
May 28, 2002
supplemented and subsidized some of these events to keep it cost-
effective for the families out in Collier County. If the Board would
like to see us take a look at raising our revenues, which you will be
seeing across the Board and other parks and Rec activities at the next
Board meeting, but if you'd like to see it for these type of events as
well, we can certainly bring you a menu of options for your budget
workshop discussion. Then you could follow it up with a
recommendation in June at the second Board meeting.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: John, you brought up a good point. I
like the idea of being able to reconsider it. And one of the things I'd
like to look at as an option is the partnership with the Collier County
Fair Board to hold it out there so that we could have an area that's
going to be accessible from all parts of the County. And possibly we
could utilize some of their volunteer forces, which are pretty
numerous now, to help get the word out. MR. DUNNING: I wouldn't
have an issue with that.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: John, a couple of things that you
said triggered this in my mind. One, you're right. We have to look at
policy in a different -- from a different viewpoint, because we're
struggling with limiting funding across all expenditures in this
County. So, you know, that's a given.
The second, you mentioned not only promoting Collier County.
Now, you're getting to an issue that says, "Are we funding it from the
right area or does the industry believe so strongly in this that they
would say some of the dollars that we allocate there should be with
the Country Jam because we think that there's a total benefit to the
County in tourism?" And I don't know the answers to that. But I'm
willing to defer this to try get a better handle on this and some
response from the industry. So I could support that, Chairman
Coletta, if that's the wishes of the Board.
Page 184
May 28, 2002
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Help me on this. Is there motions on
the floor already on this?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: No.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Then I'll make a motion to
defer.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: We can't. We got a bunch of
speakers.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second speaker.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I'm sorry. We have-
MS. FILSON: Yes, sir, we have three speakers, Mr. Mark
Phillips. Mr. Mark Phillips? James Graham. Yes, sir you're up to
speak. Would you like to speak?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: You have to come up front, sir.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: He said he's already spoke.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Oh, on another subject. Forgive me.
MS. FILSON: It says Tinsley. I'll change that for you. Okay.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Right. He's under canals.
MS. FILSON: Okay. Bob Krasowski.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Hello again, Commissioners. I might as
well get my money's worth, being that I'm here today.
MS. FILSON: He signed up after the item started.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: That's fine.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Is that okay?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: That's fine.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Thank you. You're very generous.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We're glad you're here, Bob.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Thank you. I'm glad to be here. I hear all
these numbers about money coming out of the General Fund, a
couple hundred thousand dollars. Now, as you know I've been trying
Page 185
May 28, 2002
to appeal to the Board for 20 or 30,000 at most to do a Zero Waste
Symposium, which would--
COMMISSIONER FIALA: This isn't General Fund.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Wasn't that mentioned that we spent
$125,000 of the General Fund?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We're talking--
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's spent. Not now.
MR. KRASOWSKI: No. This is exclusively Tourist
Development?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yes. Right. But there might have
been some General Fund money that's been used in the past. But
right now we're discussing the Tourist Development Funds.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Okay. Well, maybe we could bring the
Zero Waste Symposium together and bring the Beach Boys in with
them and then lose less money, you know, some creative thinking
here, you know, 30 grand. I see there's hundreds of thousands on
every item on the list on the agenda, you know, I mean, 30 or less.
But I just wanted to get up here and be humorous about the whole
deal. Okay.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: You're always welcome, Bob. We're
glad to see you.
MR. KRASOWSKI: See you later.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Next?
MS. FILSON: He was the final speaker.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Fine. So we have a motion to defer
made by myself and seconded by --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Me.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: -- Commissioner Fiala. Any other
discussion? All those in favor of deferring, indicate by saying aye.
Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
Page 186
May 28, 2002
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed? The ayes have it, three.
And two Commissioners are absent, that would be Commissioner
Carter and Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: The Court Reporter is not going to
like it.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: No, she won't. It has to do with the
videotape. I think we can go to about 5:00 on that.
Item # 1 OD
FISCAL YEAR 2003 TOURIST DEVELOPMENT SPECIAL
EVENT GRANT APPLICATION FOR PARKS AND
RECREATION DEPARTMENT FOR THE VIVA NAPLES -
LATIN MUSIC AND FOOD FESTIVAL IN THE AMOUNT OF
$75,000 - DENIED; TO BE BROUGHT BACK FOR
RECONSIDERATION AFTER THE NEXT BCC MEETING
Okay. Next item, D.
MR. WALLACE: Mr. Chairman, the next item has to do with
Viva Naples, a grant application in the amount of $75,000. The
Tourist Development Council recommended denial.
MS. RAMSEY: Hello. For the record, Marla Ramsey, Director
of Parks and Recreation. I have a couple of quick items, observations
on this one I think that are very, very positive. Viva Naples was our
first event this year. We held it at the Fair Grounds. And
unfortunately, it was three weeks after September 11 th, which
everybody was very afraid to come out. But even still, we had over
2,000 people in attendance.
The one thing that I think is very interesting on this particular
one is that we had over $97,000 in in-kind advertisement from the
Page 187
May 28, 2002
local community in both the Telemondo Spanish station, the WINK
TV, the Naples Daily News, the Salsa, WINK 96.9, and La Energia,
which is a 1440 am. Both TV stations produced a 60-second
commercial. So we had a large contingency of local support for
bringing in a Latin festival to Collier County. This, like I said, was
our first year. We did have a sponsor of last year of $50,000 in TDC
grant.
Again, this year we had asked for some additional funding in
order to take this to a two-day event, because there was a one-day
event. If you wanted to duplicate the same event that we had this past
year, we would need to have about $45,000 in order to make that
happen. I guess at this point in time I'll take any questions that you
might have on this particular event.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I'd like to make a statement more
than a question. I originally voted against this because the numbers
just weren't there. It just seemed to be too much of an empty
promise. And even though I think it's a wonderful venture, I still
question the financial aspects of it, whether it -- at what point it's
going to break-even. I mean, the numbers were so far removed this
first time. And do we really want to invest four years to bring it up to
that point in time? That's a question I leave my fellow
Commissioners with.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, I agree.
MS. RAMSEY: I guess one of the questions that I would have
of the Board is what is your direction on special events? Are the
Parks and Recreation events to break-even? Is that the goal of the
events that we put on or are the events to be reasonable for the
community such as they can afford it? And I think that's the direction
we need to know in order to know how to move forward.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I think I can answer that. I think
you're going to have two parts to it. The part that has to do with
Page 188
May 28, 2002
tourism dollar has to show an excess to the tourism fund that it's
coming from. As far as funds coming from General Funds to
underwrite some of these events, no, definitely wouldn't have to
break-even because it has a public benefit that far outweighs the cost.
But it's got to be a reasonable cost that we're putting out for it. That's
my own personal feelings.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: We're not dealing with General
Fund revenue here.
MS. RAMSEY: No, I understand that. And I think the point
that I had made only was that we had gotten a grant for -- a TDC
grant of $50,000. We did receive back in in-kind advertisement for
$97,000, which is almost double two to one the dollar amount that we
received from TDC. In addition to that, we spent $30,000 on
additional advertisement which would give you, you know, a total of
$127,000 in advertisement of Collier County.
And, I guess, if the direction is that TDC funding needs to put
heads in beds, if that's the only criteria, maybe we need to look at
what is the advertising dollar doing for Collier County in general?
And if we're able to take that 50,000 and duplicate it two to one, is
that not a good return on a TDC dollar?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Some people would feel
advertising Collier County is the wrong thing to do. And I think
looking at the Tourist Council's recommendation is because of what
kind of dollars did it bring into the industry? Advertising, you know,
advertising is great. But what kind of results do you get?
MS. RAMSEY: I lot of the advertising was done in the Tampa
area; Miami area; Sarasota, Sun Sentinel; Palm Beach and various
other locations which weren't necessarily local. So we had a number
of our dollars in that advertising from outside the driving area.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Should we go to public
speakers?
Page 189
May 28, 2002
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Public speaker?
MS. FILSON: We have one speaker, David Coria.
MR. CORIA: Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, members of the
Commission. I'm David Coria, Chairman of the Hispanic Affairs
Advisory Board. I'm here speaking for myself as a private citizen
though.
It appears that the Tourist Development Board has taken upon
itself to ask for the denial of funds to the Viva Naples Festival. It
seems the communities of Immokalee, Golden Gate and East Naples
are in competition with Port Royal, the Moorings and Park Shore for
funding of cultural events. I'm always intrigued when an Advisory
Board, without any knowledge of the community, can issue decisions
which affect those same communities. My first question to the
Tourist Development Board, are there any Hispanics on your Board?
Are there any familiar with the cultural activities that take place at
that Hispanic festival? Are they cognizant of the number of visitors
from Tampa, Orlando and Miami which visited last year? And that
was four weeks after the tragedy of September 1 lth. This year we
expect the numbers to be much higher. The number of visitors
should be much greater to the Collier community from those same
areas.
The disposal income of the residents of Immokalee, Golden
Gate -- the Hispanic residents, I should say, of Immokalee, Golden
Gate and East Naples does not allow for the luxury of the
Philharmonic, the Sugdon Theater or the Naples Dinner Theater. For
them, the few events that the County does provide is what they look
forward to. The Hispanic community does not have the benefit of
elegant speakers, fundraisers or lobbyists who ask for them. Their
meager entertainment is all they can afford. Please consider the
cultural activities of the Hispanic festival as an asset to the Collier
County open to all residents to come and enjoy the festivals of Collier
Page 190
May 28, 2002
County. I ask you to reconsider the decision of the Tourist
Development Board and to fund the Viva Naples Festival.
yOU.
Thank
start with
'statewide
This year
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you. Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, just a question, because this is
very confusing to me. I know that other cities like Fort Lauderdale,
for instance, has the Zydeco Festival and it's become so popular. It's
put on by the, I think, by the Parks and Recs Department even. And a
lot of the cities around Florida are doing that in order to -- when you
go over there, you have to stay and it's a three-day festival. But they
had to get it started some way or another.
I can relate closely to what the TDC had to say in their
recommendation for denial, because they're looking for-- they're
looking for a reason to spend the dollars that they've taken in on
something that will benefit the tourism industry and bring tourists
here. Conversely, after the event has really become successful, it
will. How do you get from point A to point B? Are there grant
dollars available that you could request that could get us from point A
where it's a successful event and the TDC would be just dying to
support it?
MS. PAPPALARDO: Basically what happens is many events
TDC funding. And once they are respected throughout the
or national level, sponsorship money comes in a lot easier.
I have sent out probably about a hundred sponsorship
proposals nationwide, everything from beef jerky to anything you can
think of. And its hard right now. It's a rough year to begin with.
And Viva Naples did have -- we had $2500 sponsoring cash, plus a
few $500 business booths, the same for Country Jam. But it takes a
long time to get that money.
And some of the companies that are willing to give that money
are not the venue that we're trying to bring, for example, alcohol and
Page 191
May 28, 2002
tobacco. We turned down $15,000 from an alcohol company this
year because we, you know, basically cannot have alcohol in our
parks. So, yeah, if I'm given the direction to say, "Go, Annie, you
know. Go get a beer sponsor." I'm sure Coors Light would love to
sponsor, you know, whatever company, bottling company, would
love to sponsor something like that. But as a County, we have had
that sensitivity that we have kept our events alcohol-free in order to
provide that family-type entertainment. So we don't advertise our
events to that venue. We're very specific in advertising our events in
a very family-oriented atmosphere.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: If I may ask a question? Is there
some way that -- you know, I'm not saying the event is wrong. I'm
just saying Tourist Tax Development money, I have a hard time
justifying using it. Possibly if it was more than a couple of years and
it was making the money, it might be different. But to be able to
spend it at this point in time, it's difficult. Is there any way that we
could do this out of Park and Recs funds and then build back the
amount of money that tourism benefited from that? In other words, if
you had an event that was totally successful and we could show that
we have generated X number of beds and that this is the value of it
and that's the percentage that tourism should pay for?
MS. PAPPALARDO: I have spoken to hotels about the
possibility, as we generate so many bed nights at a hotel getting a
kickback for every bed night--
CHAIRMAN COLETTA' Well, I-
MS. PAPPALARDO: -- we actually generate to the hotel. That
is something that is done a lot with athletic events. Yes, it can be
done like that with the hotel directly. Basically, sponsorship money,
to answer your question, is what with time we will have national
sponsors in order to, you know, break-even the event. If TDC
funding is only available for so much time, it's seed money --
Page 192
May 28, 2002
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Right.
MS. PAPPALARDO: -- after that. We're on our own. We're
supposed to get these events to the purpose where now it might be
the, you know, the Dodge, you know, Viva Naples or whatever. I'm
just, you know, saying companies I write to all the time. But
basically, that's what happens. This is seed money in order to get the
event to that level. And it takes time and it's not just something that
happens overnight.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Is this an item maybe we want to
reconsider, too? I'm not too sure. Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Make a motion that we accept
the Tourist Development Council's recommendations on Item 10-D.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Motion from Commissioner Henning
and second from Commissioner Coyle. Discussion?
COMMISSIONER CARTER: The problem is we do everything
piecemeal. We do it one year at a time. There's no commitment.
There's no plan. We don't sit here and say, "I'm going to do this for
five years. You're going to get X number of dollars for five year?"
Because the system doesn't work that way. So maybe the system's
broke. Maybe there's a lot of things we have to do differently. We
don't want alcohol or such things, but you have Swamp Buggy Days
and they make a lot of money off of selling beer.
So somewhere along the way we got to figure out what we're
doing here. And I don't think we can do it today. And it's going to
take some time. But we really have our work cut out for us, because
it's a false expectation. The Hispanic community is going to feel let
down on this. They're going to say, "Nobody cares." It's not a
question of we don't care. You know, we just really don't know how
to do it. We don't know how to continue this over a period of time to
Page 193
May 28, 2002
get you where you need to be because we never had a good plan to
start with.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I totally agree with what
Commissioner Carter just said. I feel I too have to honor what the
TDC has advised, yet at the same time I would love to see a network
of events taking place in Collier County, not only for the tourism
industry, but as well for our own local people so they'd have
something to go to. I think that would be wonderful. How to go there
though, I don't know. Like you said, we need a plan. We need to put
something together.
MR. OLLIFF: I'm going to jump in here and at least just
reiterate one thing that Mr. Dunning pointed out before and that is
this community is unlike any that I've come across when it comes to
dealing with TDC monies. You have no requirement under your
TDC Special Events Category Funding to put heads in beds. That is
something that you have had ingrained in you by the TDC. And I'm
saying that it's wrong, but I'm telling you that there is no requirement
for that. There's no requirement for that under state statute. There's
no requirement for that under Collier County ordinance. So if you're
looking for seed money to be able to grow local events, this is the
funding source that most communities use for these special type
events.
And just -- it concerns me when I hear the Board heading
towards, well maybe we ought to use General Fund money as
opposed to TDC money. If you're going to use a funding source for a
special event, this ought to be the funding source that you look to to
do that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You won't see me going to the
General Fund.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Me either.
Page 194
May 28, 2002
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Well, you know, Mr. Olliff, I
don't disagree with you at all on that. And just right back again, I
wish we had a way to continue this for the next year and stay out of
the General Fund, you know. I don't mind continuing any of this
until -- if you can come back and show that there are some moneys
that can be seed money of this and to continue them and we don't
really -- you know, I'm not looking to make money be off of this,
because it's never going to make any money. What it's going to do is
augment something that mirror's Collier County and the population
that is here.
My other fear is though, if you don't do this right and everyone's
going to come in here and say, "Italian-American, Polish-American,
Irish-American, you know, fund this. Let's, you know -- hey, I grew
up in an ethnic neighborhood. They never funded anything. They
just went and had a party and charged everybody what it took to do it,
you know. I don't know how they did it. We all had fun. But there's
got to be a better way.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Carter, may I ask a
question?
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Sure.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: If the motion failed, would you ask
to bring this back on a continuance to be addressed differently?
COMMISSIONER CARTER: I would.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Any other discussion?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, just an observation.
Commissioner Carter's assessment is absolutely correct. But in order
to get to some comprehensive plan about how we do this for the long
term, we have to decide which ones we're going to do. And you can't
do it one at a time. So if you're going to bring this one back, you
really need to bring them all back. And we need to sit down and say,
"Which one of these festivals do we want to sponsor?"
Page 195
May 28, 2002
And we have to understand that in times when we don't get
enough money, we're not going to be able to do that. And we have to
fall back on three criteria: Health, safety and welfare. I don't see
entertainment mentioned there anywhere. Okay. Now, I know how
much you like these things, but when push comes to shove and I've
got to build roads, I'm less concerned about entertaining people and
I'm more concerned about laying asphalt. And that's where my
priorities are right now.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Absolutely.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And although I think it's
wonderful for us to have these things, I think for us to have one for
every neighborhood and every cause and every segment of the
community is lunacy. We can't do that. We'll never be able to do
that. So if we're going to do something, let's decide upon a festival,
something big, something nice, something that's inclusive of
everybody in this County.
And let's put our energy into doing it and doing it correctly
rather than trying to do it on a hit and miss basis, because you're
right, we could fund one of these things this year and then next year
pull the rug right out from under you because we don't have the
funds. And that's a tremendous waste of manpower, and it leads the
community to have false expectations about what's going to be going
on. But if we could pull together a single festival of some kind, and
lots of other communities seem to do that, then we can do a better job
of planning and funding over the long term.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: So you would like to withdraw your
second and go for a continuance?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No. I feel as strongly about this
one as I did about some of the others. Whenever the committee who
is charged with determining how money should be spent in the
Tourist Development Funds advises how they think they should be
Page 196
May 28, 2002
spent, in order to overrule them, I have to have more and better
information than they do and I don't. I really don't have more and
better information. But if we're going to bring any of these back, I
think we have to bring all these festivals back, considering them at
one time, maybe a workshop and say, "How are we going to put
together something that benefits the entire community?" Let's do it
one time. Let's put our energy into doing that. Let's try to find the
funding to do it.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: It's possible on what you're
saying, Commissioner, is you could take a three-day event, you could
have a Latin day --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: -- you could have this day. I
mean, you could have --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Don't leave out Irish.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Polish.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: The Italians.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: There you go.
MR. DENNING: I'm going to interrupt you for a second.
Based upon previous Board direction, I believe you've had this
discussion. And actually we are working on what I would consider
an ad hoc advisory board to bring back to the Commission to do just
what you're talking about, put together a well-rounded community to
look at these issues and see where we can do a community event that
benefits everybody, all of the industries that are involved and not just
a hotel segment, restaurant segment and so forth.
I anticipate you're going to see that actually at the next Board
meeting. I plan on bringing that back to you-all. So we are working
on it from that comprehensive standpoint. I think what you're
looking at today are some of the events that, you know, we've looked
to find a niche in the Parks and Rec Department. We've tried Jazz
Page 197
May 28, 2002
festival previously, and we couldn't compete against the City of the
Naples and some of their events.
And we found one like in the Country Jam that seemed to work
where we were starting to get some decent attendance, and it was one
of our biggest events, probably next to Snow Fest was our biggest
event. We thought there was a market out there for this festival and
that we were going to give it a shot. Last year, the timing was poor.
We thought that, you know, bringing back a second event and giving
it another shot while we work on this master event may be something
worthwhile, but recognizing that we are looking at the bigger picture.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: All right. So that leaves us with the
motion for denial. And any other discussion on that? All those in
favor of the motion of denial indicate by saying aye. Aye.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And opposed? The ayes have it 5 to
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Do you want me to entertain a
motion to bring this back for reconsideration?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: You're more than welcome to do
what you like.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: I will make a motion to the
Board we bring this back after we hear from John Dunning's next
Board Meeting to see if there's a way to integrate what he's talking
about and still be able to do something with this. And I if could-
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second that motion.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: -- make that recommendation to
the Board.
Page 198
May 28, 2002
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I have a motion from Commissioner
Carter, second from Commissioner Henning. Any discussion? All
those in favor indicate by saying aye. Aye.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
Item # 10E
FISCAL YEAR 2003 TOURIST DEVELOPMENT SPECIAL
EVENT GRANT APPLICATION FOR THE CITY OF NAPLES
FOURTH OF JULY CELEBRATION IN THE AMOUNT OF
$50,000 - APPROVED
MR. WALLACE: Mr. Chairman, the next item is the Naples --
City of Naples 4th of July Celebration, a grant application for
$50,000. Tourist Development Council recommends approval.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I'd like to make a motion for
approval.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. We have a motion -- okay.
How many speakers do we have?
MS. FILSON: We have none.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We have none. Okay. Any
discussion? All those in favor indicate by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed? The ayes have it 4 to 0.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Who's out?
MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Chairman--
Page 199
May 28, 2002
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Coyle is--
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Before I vote, I want to hear
from --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I'm sorry. I thought you did.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: No. From--
MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Chairman, I am just going to, at least, put the
Board on fair notice that this is the first that I can recall where the
County for a 4th of July fireworks program has provided TDC
funding. And I just want to make the Board aware that not only does
the City of Naples provide your County program where the Jaycee's
put together a competing -- not competing, but complimentary, I
guess I would call it, fireworks program at Sugden Park. City of
Marco provides their own fireworks program as does the City of
Everglades. And just fair notice that we've never been in this
business with TDC funding. But if you're going to make an approval
of this one, chances are you're probably going to see a number of
other requests following suit.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: This is just for the parade, if
I'm correct. And it's just for promotion of it, Herb.
MR. LUTZ: Thank you. For the record, Herb Lutz. This has
nothing to do with fireworks except that the Seminole tribe is going
to provide a firework show in Immokalee. We are going to have a
concert at the Immokalee High School, and those are both on the
night of the 4th. This is primarily to support the concert, which is in
the County the night of the 3rd and the entire parade activities and all
the stuff associated with it and jump and everything else on the 4th.
We're not doing any fireworks other than what the Seminole tribe is
going to do. We were out in Immokalee this morning.
MR. OLLIFF: As long as it's restricted to where it's not
providing funding for the fireworks, and I think you're probably safe.
Page 200
May 28, 2002
COMMISSIONER CARTER: If that's what I understand, then
I will support the motion. If it is for fireworks, then I won't vote for
it.
MR. LUTZ: The Seminole tribe is going to pick up the tab for
the fireworks.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I just -- can I just add something on
the side?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: You sure may.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Maybe if we can contribute to this
again instead ofjust calling it the City of Naples, we might have
something to say about the County.
MR. LUTZ: It's in the process of taking place. This is the first
year, and Commissioner Coyle knows this, that the City of Naples
bowed out of all of these activities completely, turned them over to
my committee and myself. They have nothing whatever to do with
the parade or any of the other activities. They are doing their own
fireworks off the pier. All of us will be in Immokalee.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: But it's called the City of Naples
4th of July Celebration. That's just what I'm asking.
MR. LUTZ: I understand. And next year maybe we can call it
something else.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Collier County.
MR. LUTZ: But-
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Will we have a parade in Naples
or do they-
MR. LUTZ: Yes, the parade is in Naples, Commissioner. And
so is the jump, the concert and the new activities in Immokalee for
the first time, which we're already trying to get squared away for next
year are in the. County. Any other questions? I know you approved it
and I'm thankful for that. Can I say something, because I overlooked
-- I heard a discussion.
Page 201
May 28, 2002
Tom, you remember that many years ago we did the first
cultural festival and parade in this County. And, Bleu, you remember
it because you were here I think at that time. We did a one-day event
which involved everything, including people from Immokalee
bringing food and vegetables and everything else and putting them
down in Cambier Park. I think that's a great idea to put one major
festival together. The key is to involve Everglades City and
Immokalee and everybody else in it.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Um-hum.
MR. LUTZ: And if we can help in any way, shape or form,
we'll be happy to serve on the committee that you put together.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Can I ask you, I think this is such a
wonderful event, and we all love it. Why did the City of Naples pull
out?
MR. LUTZ: I'd rather not discuss it up here at the podium
today.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
MR. LUTZ: But I'd be more than happy to speak to you in
private about that.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
MR. OLLIFF: Is there anything that would restrict the name
from being changed in this current year?
MR. LUTZ: No. We haven't -- we'd have to probably get
approval from the City of Naples to do that, because the interlocal
agreement is between Collier County Government and the City of
Naples. Quite frankly, I have enough of a battle right now just trying
to make this year be taken care of all right. I don't think I'd like to
stir anything else up. But we can address that next year if I'm still
involved in it. I know what you mean, Tom.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Um-hum.
Page 202
May 28, 2002
MR. OLLIFF: Well, it just seems for anything that doesn't
require City approval, it could certainly be called Collier County.
MR. LUTZ: The problem -- I didn't want to get into this, but the
problem is we have --
MR. OLLIFF: I did.
MR. LUTZ: I know. We have to use the downtown --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: He's leaving.
MR. LUTZ: We have to use -- that's all right. He wanted to
leave a long time ago, and I kept him. You remember that.
We have to use the streets downtown. We have to use the parks
downtown. We have to use police and fire and barricades and all the
other stuff that the City pays for, because none of the TDC money
goes for that. All that the money goes for is bringing the military
down here.
And I have to tell you that if everything falls into place, because
it hasn't yet for this year, it will eclipse last year, up to and including
a call I got from Immokalee this morning from the Navy. How many
years have I been trying to get the Navy to participate? The USS
Philippine Sea was en route back from the Middle East. And they
have approved bringing a color guard and marching unit right from
that boat in Jacksonville and coming down here. It's going to be
pretty incredible. And our Honorary Grand Marshal just came back
from Afghanistan, spent four months blowing the tops off of
mountains, happens to be Lee and Mary Ellen Master's son, Jeffrey,
who helps us get our jet fighters. So, I mean, we're all right. Thanks
for your help and approval. And we look forward to making it
bigger. But if I can help with anything, let me know.
MR. OLLIFF: I'm not letting this one go. That was a great
answer, Herb, but is there any reason that prevents us from calling
this the City of Naples and the Collier County 4th of July
celebration?
Page 203
May28,2002
MR. LUTZ: If the interlocal can be handled that way. Blue?
MR. OLLIFF: I thought the interlocal already referred it.
MR. LUTZ: Well, he's shaking his head affirmatively. I can go
-- I can go back to the City of Naples and tell them that we want to
change this name. Now, if-
MR. OLLIFF: As long as it's a jointly funded program, I'd think
it ought to be done.
MR. LUTZ: They've agreed to do that with the 1 event.
MR. OLLIFF: Absolutely. And I don't see any reason why we
shouldn't attempt to do it this time. And as a matter of fact, I think I
would like to have Commissioner Coyle go with me to do that.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'll be happy to.
MR. LUTZ: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I really--
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Because the Grand Potent will
tell you that negativism is gone.
MR. LUTZ: Why, you know, the entire Araba Temple will be
down here for this, all 19 units and 150 folks this year.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Good.
MR. OLLIFF: The only reason I'm making --
MR. LUTZ: Yes, Tom.
MR. OLLIFF: -- it an issue, Mr. Chairman, is when you got
events in Immokalee called the City of Naples 4th of July festival, it
just doesn't make a lot of sense.
MR. LUTZ: Well, that gets us rent-free into the auditorium at
the high school and some other things along with that.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, we'll have a good showing, I
know that.
MR. LUTZ: Yes. I'll call you, Commissioner Coyle, about that.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Fine, just let me know,
Herb, and we'll go down and pound on doors.
Page 204
May 28, 2002
MR. LUTZ: We'll make an appointment with Kevin.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
MR. LUTZ: And you can go with me to hold me up. All right.
Thanks folks.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Maybe we should start with the
Mayor.
MR. LUTZ: I'll set up a joint meeting with the two of them like
I did for 911.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That would be good. But I have a
question: Can we arrange transportation for people from Naples out
to Immokalee and from Immokalee to Naples so that everybody can
enjoy these things?
MR. LUTZ: I can arrange it if you can fund it.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, why don't we just use the
busses we've got? Just run-
MR. LUTZ: You can't. You can't. We tried using that for even
some of the other things in town and the way it's set up, they can't put
riders on--
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Why not?
MR. LUTZ: -- unless they pay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, they can pay 25 cents. I
mean, what's wrong --
MR. LUTZ: I don't have a problem with it.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- my only concern is getting the
buses in a route to go back and forth so people don't have to drive
their cars. And that way, if you had events in Immokalee or Naples,
people from both ends can enjoy these things.
MR. LUTZ: We can probably also get the Sheriff's Office to
participate in helping get us out there without any difficulties, if that's
necessary.
Page 205
May 28, 2002
COMMISSIONER COYLE: With an armed escort; is that what
you say?
MR. LUTZ: Whatever it takes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
MR. LUTZ: Anything else? It's been a long day, too.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: What does it take, Mr. Olliff or
Mr. Wallace, to use those buses if it is a fair box issue? You might
even get a sponsor that would pay it. You may even get, you know,
for a penny a ride, if that covers the ordinance.
MR. OLLIFF: We'll have to get back with you. I know that
there were some restrictions based on the Federal Grant Funds that
fund the program. But I believe if it is an existing route, which I
believe the Naples/Immokalee route is, that we may have the ability
to make this work. But I'll provide a written response back to Mr.
Lutz at the end of the Board.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Okay.
MR. LUTZ: He would need to also make some type of public
purpose finding to support that if we're going to pick up the cost in
any way, directly or indirectly.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It could solve a lot of parking
problems, first of all, and- MR. LUTZ: Where?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Either end, Immokalee or-
MR. LUTZ: We're not going to have any parking problems in
Immokalee, because we can only handle 900 people in the
auditorium. And they're going to come from all over Immokalee and
part of the Estates and some down from Labelle, if that's necessary.
The fireworks, I don't know how many people they're going to have
with that. They're running that. All we're doing is bringing the
military to support it, but they're not going to participate.
MR. OLLIFF: We'll get you an answer.
Page 206
May 28, 2002
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Good. Thanks.
MR. LUTZ: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Thanks, Council.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Fine. We have already taken a vote
on that. Do we want to make a notation on that that you voted in
favor of that, Commissioner Carter?
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Yes.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And were you here, Commissioner
Coyle, when we took the vote?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I voted in favor of it.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. So we have Commissioner
Coyle's vote.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: He was out of the room.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You heard me say yes.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Right.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, it was --
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Back there and the light came
on.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Let's move on to the next item. We still got
a long ways to go.
Item # 1 OF
FISCAL YEAR 2002 AND 2003 TOURIST DEVELOPMENT
SPECIAL EVEN GRANT APPLICATIONS FROM THE MARCO
ISLAND FILM FESTIVAL IN THE AMOUNT OF $160,000 FOR
EACH FISCAL YEAR; TOURIST DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL
RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF $96,000 FOR PUBLIC
RELATIONS, ADVERTISING AND WEB-SITE FOR FISCAL
YEAR 2002 ONLY - APPROVED
Page 207
May 28, 2002
MR. WALLACE: Mr. Chairman, the next item is an application
from Marco Island Film Festival in the amount of $160,000 for both
fiscal year 2002 and fiscal year 2003. The Tourist Development
Council recommends approval only of the 2002 grant for $96,000,
limiting that to public relations, advertising and web site
maintenance. And they did not take up the 2003 application at all.
And Mr. Campo is here.
MR. CAMPO: For the record, my name is Nick Campo. I
represent the Marco Island Film festival. Chairman, Commissioners,
thank you for seeing us today. If I can just take one moment, we
would be extremely interested in finding out if we could utilize the
CAT system for the festival, because transportation is a nightmare for
us, especially bringing people from Marco to Downtown Naples,
Naples up to the Pavilion Shopping Center where we're going to have
our Naples event this year. We would love to be able to utilize that if
it's possible. We'd be in on that conversation if we can.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: How about Immokalee and
Everglades City?
MR. CAMPO: And Immokalee and Everglades City.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay.
MR. CAMPO: I mean, we're looking to move people all around
the County at this point. So I didn't know exactly what that would
entail. But we would love to sit in on that conversation, if something
could be done, and be a part of that.
That being put aside, let's move right into what we're here for
and that is the approval of our TDC recommended $96,000 grant.
And we're going to be real short here, which I'm sure you'll
appreciate. But I just want to go over a few numbers with you. Last
year, the 5th year, we generated approximately 1.4 million dollars in
National Public PR for the festival -- excuse me, for Collier County
Page 208
May 28, 2002
and, of course, for Marco Island during the festival. That's
advertising -- excuse me -- articles and TV shows and different things
that were promoted that mentioned the festival and mention the area.
There's just one simple little thing that's out there right now and
this is the May 12th Variety. And I just wanted to read this to you
very quickly, just one line. And this is an article about a program to
develop sponsors for festivals, and they used our festival as an
example. And there's one line here I think is beautiful, and it's,
"Tucked off the Southwest Florida Coast and blessed with white sand
beaches and plenty of golf, Marco Island is a natural for the circuit."
They were referring to the Marco Island Film Festival. This is in
Variety right now, which is the trade publication. And that's just one
article of a number that we're getting.
We've grown from a $260,000 festival to a budgeted festival this
year of a little over 700,000. We are incorporating Naples into it at a
much larger scale this year. We are having our opening in Naples for
four days, and then we're moving the festival to Marco for four days,
reason being is the logistics of moving everything back and forth,
we're talking 95 films, moving 20 to 30 films a day back and forth
between the theaters in Naples and the theaters in Marco. Moving
the star -- the invited guests and all of our equipment just became too
much of a nightmare. So we decided to actually do four days in
Naples, four days in Marco, hence, we have the $100,000 addition.
We also will be doing probably a Best of the Fest in the Bonita
area afterwards like we did last year. And, of course, we're looking
to incorporate Immokalee somehow. I don't know if we're going to
be able to pay to go out there this year, but we definitely want to
bring -- we want to get involved in the school system and bring them
to the festival this year. Hopefully we can possibly use the public
transportation.
Page 209
May 28, 2002
Really, that's about it. The only thing that we're asking, the
TDC was very, very generous in their recommendation. And they
gave us three line items, the public relations for 53,500, the paid
advertising for 40,000, that's all out-of-county, national advertising
and our internet web site development for 2,500, which is a huge part
of the festival at this point. We probably get 30 to 50 e-mails a day
that are directly related to the Film Festival. We are asking though,
we're very concerned with our celebrity promotion, because that is
one of the biggest parts of the festival. And this year we're looking to
bring in an alias star. It's our fifth year. It's time for us to bring in --
excuse me -- a real name. And they're very expensive. They're all
round trip, first class tickets for a star, for their significant others, for
their publicists, for their bodyguard, you don't even know what these
people ask for, and there's nowhere in here, because they cut that part
of the budget out for us.
And so we're simply asking that we change the public relations
name from public relations to celebrity promotion, so that we can, if
we come up short, utilize some of that 53,000 to bring the stars in.
Other than that, we're just looking for approval of the recommended
amount of money. And if you have any questions, I'd be happy to
answer them.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I don't think that that was mentioned
to the TDC about using that 53,000.
MR. CAMPO: Well, at the time we didn't realize what they
were going to be cutting. They cut out that whole portion. So now
I'm kind of asking for that now.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: To reference back to the TDC, they
originally were very much opposed to the funding until they found
out the scope of the expansion -- MR. CAMPO: Um-hum.
Page 210
May 28, 2002
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: -- and they agreed to come aboard
for the cost of the advertising, because of the fact that it was
expanding to the point they could see a direct benefit. But generally,
for the most part, if it remained the same, the scope of your operation
compared to last year, I doubt seriously that TDC would have come
through. They more or less drew a line in the sand last year, and they
stepped over it this year because of the way you were stepping up to
the plate-
MR. CAMPO: Right.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: -- to expand the whole operation. I,
myself, can still back the TDC's recommendation. In fact, I'll make a
motion that we approve the TDC recommendation as it came down.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll second it.
MR. CAMPO: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Discussion now? The TDC also
recommended here -- or it didn't recommend. During their
discussion, they were very excited about the advances you've made in
this Film Festival. And Mrs. Saunders as well as Mr. Galleberg both
said that it was important to bring famous people down as you're
rising to a new level.
And I would like to be able to see at least a small portion of that
money used to help you bring those people down. I'm not asking for
any more money, but I think they should be able to. You know, with
TDC themselves, part of them felt it was a good idea.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, they seem to be unanimous
with Mr. Vaccaro's suggestion to limit those funds to that particular
direction. I'm not saying that it wouldn't be a good idea to consider
something different. And I'm willing to listen to anything that the
Commission has.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Mr. Chairman, I will not support
using public relations' dollars to transport a star. Find a sponsor.
Page 211
May 28, 2002
Find somebody else to pay for their lifestyle. I'm not going to pay for
it. The other, I see a very direct benefit to Collier County. And I
could support that because it fits, to me, with an overall plan of where
we're trying to go. You know I did not support this in the past,
because I did not see where you were going.
I hope you have a five-year plan in place that you can
demonstrate in the future where you're taking all of this and what
you're going to ask the TDC to augment in the future. Because as
you go forward and we get our marketing person internally, I think
those questions will be in front of you and we'll have a better basis
for making decisions.
MR. CAMPO: I fully appreciate that, Commissioner, and I
understand exactly what you're saying. It's just a request. However, I
would like to state that I believe that this is one of the strongest
marketing tools that Collier County has going right now, 1,670 room
nights that are documented room nights that was four weeks after
911. We're really becoming a tool for the County,.I believe, as a
marketing. And I honestly would like to see some of the programs
that the TDC is putting forward to market Collier County that are
doing as well, that are performing, that are tracked as well as we're
being tracked. So I completely appreciate what you're saying. It's
just a simple request. Believe me, we were very happy with the
money that the Tourist Development Council has given us, and we
will work around it. It was just a request.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA:
MS. FILSON: No, sir.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA:
Any speakers?
Any other discussion? We have a
motion. We have a second. All those in favor indicate by saying
aye. Aye.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
Page 212
May 28, 2002
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed? The ayes have it 5 to 0.
Thank you very much.
MR. CAMPO: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: You know, I think at this time we're
going to take a five-minute break, which usually goes to ten minutes.
(A recess was had and the hearing continued as follows:)
Item # 10G
STAFF, COASTAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND TOURIST
DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL RECOMMENDATIONS TO
DISAPPROVE A TDC CATEGORY "A" GRANT APPLICATION
FOR THE GOODLAND CANALS DREDGING DESIGN AND
PERMITTING - RECOMMENDATION APPROVED
MR. HOVELL: Good evening, Commissioners, Ron Hovell
with Public Utilities Engineering. Does it sound like I'm on?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yes, you are.
MR. HOVELL: There we go. This item is a grant application
from the Goodland Civic Association for the design and permitting of
the dredging of the Goodland canals. I've put a view up of the five
year areas that are the primary concern down there in Goodland.
Real briefly, the County Attorney and I made a trip down and
visited, I think, all those areas that are shown by boat. And attached
to your executive summary, we have a written opinion from the
County Attorney that indicates that this project is not eligible for
TDC funds, specifically because it's not related to beach
maintenance. There's no beach in the vicinity of Goodland and the
material to be dredged. Although we haven't tested it, it's probably
Page 213
May 28, 2002
not beach-compatible sand. It probably could not be put on a beach.
So for those reasons, the staff, the Coastal Advisory Committee and
the Tourist Development Council have all recommended against
approving this grant application. And I know there are a number of
public speakers here as well as the County Attorney that wrote the
legal opinion if you have any questions for him.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, I do have one. I understand
what you've just told me. And of course, we've spoken and spoken to
the County Attorney. Being that this is such a great tourist
destination and one of the ways tourists get there is by boat and being
that their passes are getting closed up, is there ever a way partially
funding just those passes, you know, not the places where they're
eroding?
And you were talking about they're eroding because there's no
bullnosing at the end of the -- or no sea walls at the end of their
Bullnose Islands. But if there was a way at some passes to at least
enable not only tourist boaters but also fisherman who provide the
fish and the seafood for the tourists to be able to get in and out of
there at least one or two passageways?
MR. HOVELL: Not to my knowledge, Commissioner. I put up
on the view screen the Florida Statute. And there is a difference
between the Florida Statute and the Collier County Ordinance to the
tune of about three words. Those three words in the Collier County
Ordinance say, "Pass and inlet maintenance." Although I wasn't here
when the ordinance was developed, I assumed that those words were
added to clarify that you can maintain some passes as long as you are
also maintaining the adjacent beach. For instance, when we just
dredged Wiggins Pass, we dredged up beach-compatible sand and
placed it on the beach. And I would believe that that's why the
County Ordinance says that. The Florida Statute does not make that
Page 214
May 28, 2002
specific allowance for passes and inlets. It only relates to
maintaining beaches.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, what --
MR. HOVELL: Again, with no adjacent beaches to Goodland
nor it being beach-compatible sand, we see no way to make it eligible
under the Florida Statute.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Does it say that the pass must
contain beach-compatible sand or that they must remove the sand
from the pass in order to put it on to an adjacent beach?
MR. HOVELL: No, ma'am. My point was that I believe the
way the Collier County Ordinance included those words was with the
assumption that when you're maintaining a pass, you are in essence
maintaining a beach. In Goodland, that is not the case. It's not a
pass-through to adjacent sections of beach. You're not doing sand
bypassing, moving sand from one side to the other. You're not
placing sand on the beach.
Florida Statute strictly speaks to beach maintenance and beach
renourishment. It's only in the County that we've added those few
extra words. And as I say, I believe it's because -- perhaps you can
say it's an assumption that any pass we would be maintaining would
be, by definition, maintaining a beach. But that's not the case in
Goodland. So--
COMMISSIONER FIALA: But it is maintaining a pass that's
used by people from the tourist industry as well as serving the tourist
industry.
MR. OLLIFF: Ma'am, as much as we'd like to, it's our opinion
that it's not legal.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, that cuts that conversation
short.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Headed off at the pass one more
time.
Page 215
May 28, 2002
MR. OLLIFF: Suffice, there are a number of different ways.
But it's our interpretation of Statute that we're not allowed to do that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And I'd like to support it
because one of those areas that they want to dredge is an area when I
first got stuck in my boat.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: See.
MR. OLLIFF: I've been there, too.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Is there a way at some future -- I
mean, not in the very near future, I mean, like shortly, we can address
something like this and see if we can't adjust?
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Why not let them address it to an
MSTU? Let them do their own thing, every property owner down
there.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, there's only about 400
properties and it's over a million dollars.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Well, they got the work. They
know what they need to do. I think it's up to them to make that
determination.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Question, if I may? Where would it
be that the boat ramps are going to go over here in Goodland?
MR. HOVELL: You're talking about the property that the
County acquired?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yes. That's down over here at the
far corner? Was there anything there that needed to be done as far as
dredging?
MR. HOVELL: No. That's the one area that would not seem.to
need any dredging, or at least it wasn't specifically pointed out as one
of the higher priorities. And again, even if it was, I'm not sure how
we would classify that under the State Statute to somehow be eligible
for TDC funds because it wouldn't be a beach park or beach park
facility.
Page 216
May 28, 2002
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, the boating is an industry that
brings tourists down there, I would imagine, I mean, for that one
particular item. But then again, if that's not a problem area, then that
won't work.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Well, Commissioner, we already
invested 4.75 million in that piece of sand.
to spend any more money there.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Um-hum.
So I don't think I'm going
Well, I mean, if it was a
question whether the boats could get in and out, then, of course, at
that point in time, to make it economically viable for the County to
get involved with it, we'd have to. But that's a moot point, because
you already got access in and out.
MR. CAMPO: Mr Chairman, as I see it from the County
Attorney perspective, when I read the ordinance and the statute, it
talks about the qualifying logical -- or factual nexus you need is as
these uses relate to the physical preservation of the beach shoreline or
inland lake or river you're going to have to show that nexus. In the
absence of that, I don't see where you can use the monies.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Any other questions of staff?.
Speakers?
MS. FILSON: Yes, sir. We have three speakers, the first one
being Mike Borbush. He will be followed by Connie Steigel-
Fullmer.
MR. BORBUSH: Good afternoon, Commissioners. Well, I feel
like I'm swimming against the tide here, but here we go. For the
record, my name is Mike Borbush and I'm the President of the
Goodland Civic Association and a 23-year resident of the County.
I'm here to request approval of the TDC item involving $150,000 for
dredging in Goodland. This request is for an engineering study to
determine the cost of dredging five inlets to the canals. This is not a
request for interior canal dredging. First, let me thank Ron Hovell
Page 217
May 28, 2002
and his staff for all the time that they have put in with us. He came
down and toured the affected areas by land and sea.
Tourism is a vital part of Goodland's economy, restaurants,
charter captains, fish houses. Fisherman, crabbers and marinas are all
affected by the shoaling that has impacted their business at low tide.
There are five areas around Goodland that need dredging.
First is the Buzzards Bay area where Staffs Idle Hour
Restaurant, the Little Bar Restaurant, the Old Marco Lodge, Charter
Captain's Ted Naftal and Russ Gover, and commercial fishing
interests like Kirk's Fish House and Captain Gary Weeks reside.
These restaurants are all accessible by water. And the fishing interest
to supply tourists and locals with fish and crabs have a difficult time
navigating the bay at low tide. The second area is the entrance to the
Mar-Good Campground and the Drop Anchor Trailer Park. Eighty
percent of the restaurant -- eighty percent of the residents of Drop
Anchor are seasonable -- seasonal, and Mar-Good serves tourists
year-round with travel trailers and campsites. This entrance is very
narrow.
A third is the large shoal in front of the Marker Seven Marina
and Pink House Motel as a tourist interest directly impacted by the
shoaling that restricts the boat traffic in and out of the motel. The
fourth is the entrance to the Coconut Avenue Canal, which has a
commercial fishing interest in the canal and a possible marina under
consideration at the entrance.
Fifth is the entrance to the canal at the Calusa Marina and Palm
Avenue Canal. This is a very heavy traffic boating area where a
planned PUD is set to break ground this summer directly served by
this canal. Goodland is heavily dependent upon tourism. And
boating is a large part of the recreational activities for tourists. We
encourage you to approve the dredging study of the affected area for
boaters visiting Goodland. Goodland's unique charm and character
Page 218
May 28, 2002
draws not only tourists, but County residents by boat to Goodland for
events such as the Mullet Festival, which is attended by thousands
each year. The boat parade in February to benefit Hospice also is a
tourist favorite. Off-season events such as the Little Bar Spamajama
are also very popular with tourists. On any given Sunday, Staffs Idle
Hour plays host to hundreds of tourists and locals enjoying the
unique atmosphere of Goodland, and they come by boat and car.
In conclusion, the Goodland Civic Association asks your
support for the approval of the dredging study as it impacts the tourist
and interest in Goodland and has a direct affect on our local
economy. Thank you for your consideration.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Connie Steigel Fullmer, and
she will be followed by your final speaker who is James Graham.
MS. FULLMER: Good evening Commissioners, Connie Steigel
Fullmer, for the record. Mike pretty much summarized a lot of the
things that I was going to say. Commissioners, Commissioner
Carter, you mentioned about the $4 million that was wonderfully set
aside to acquire the property that we're in hopes of becoming a park
and boat -- possibly a boat ramp in Goodland.
Something having to do with that land that may be in
conjunction with what we're talking about, about the dredging, is that
Marla Ramsey has indicated that in comments to her about that
property, it's the proposed development that was going to go in there.
They excavated down and took dirt out to take it down to four foot
above sea level.
During heavy rains, we have water standing on that Old Palm
Point property; a lot of mosquitoes so it needs to be filled. Her
concern is about being able to move dirt in from other areas of the
County to fill that land. Some of that fill that can come out of those
bays and canals can be used as the fill that's needed to fill in on that
land as a possibility. But also, looking at this request for the money,
Page 219
May 28, 2002
for an engineering study, somehow we got pigeonholed into the
category for the beach category. Perhaps there's a possibility to look
at funding money to pay for this engineering study from a different
piece of that TDC pie. We have all of these events that go on
throughout the year in Goodland that draw tourists from all over the
country, in other parts of the world, as a matter of fact.
The Mullet Festival is in its 21 st year. The Mardi Gras Boat
Parade is in its seventh year. We've funded all those events, our
annual birthday celebration, the annual Christmas Bazaar, the
Spamaramajama. Those are things that the business people in the
local community have worked on for years and have funded them all
these years. We bring in a lot of tourist dollars in that community.
People that come from the hotels, the concierges give guidance
to the people that are staying on Marco at the hotel to go down to
Goodland. These are places that you can enjoy great meals, great
entertainment, lots of fun and lots of events. They come by boat.
They come by motorcycle. They come by car. And we have a lot of
people coming down that way. Goodland generates an awful lot of
tourism dollars. So maybe another piece of that TDC piece can be
looked at, maybe the special events piece of pie, although it's pretty
well divvied up, as we've learned today. But museum money, we
have our own museum in Goodland at Mar-Good. But the entire
community of Goodland is actually a museum. Our oldest building
down there dates back to 1870. It's one of oldest concentrations of
historic buildings and homes anywhere else in Southwest Florida. So
we've been pigeonholed into this part of the budget for beach
renourishment or beach access or things to do with beach, but we
actually could fit in any of those pieces of pie or category. And we
thank you for your consideration. Maybe give it another swift look if
you could. Thank you very much.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thankyou.
Page 220
May 28, 2002
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Your final speaker, James Graham.
MR. GRAHAM: James Graham, resident of Goodland. And
I'm on the Board and have been for a while. And we voted to fill up
the application and send in for this, because we believe that we're
entitled to this tourism funding to help us. We had established as a
tourism to the staff. What more can I say. I had to follow the two
speakers in front of me. I'd see in the future, if we don't get some help
with this dredging business because a lot of the boats today can't get
in on certain tides to enjoy what -- they're sent down actually and
told, "Where are you going to go?" Goodland, all the hotels, "Where
would you go?" Goodland is a destination for tourism. It has been
for years, and you-all know this. And not only did -- by the way, to
get off the point here, I've watched you guys on TV. I think you
might be good this year. I really, really do.
But anyways, but I like to think that when it comes to Goodland,
we're a jewel or a diamond or maybe a diamond in the rough. I don't
know. But I believe you can take your hats and turn them around and
become true stewards of a jewel of Southwest Florida, which is
Goodland. It has been, you know, like I said, it's really up to you
guys. I don't know how to do this. I don't know how to get this kind
of help. But obviously, the residents of Goodland would never
approve of, you know, trying to get this dredging done, because they
don't have the money, really, I guess. But there's some that would
like to see the whole thing fold up and we would lose this, you know.
There's people who go out of their way to put spokes in a wheel to
stop it from rolling and destroy something that is wonderful to me.
Anyways, that's my opinion, and it's something to think about. This
is a jewel. Save it. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Mr. Chairman, I think your Vice
Chairman is trying to get your attention.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Hi.
Page 221
May 28, 2002
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Hello, Commissioner Henning. How
can I help you?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I think this might not be out of
line to -- for a Federal appropriations on that. And we have some
candidates that are vying for Congress and maybe you could bring
that up as far as a first win for Collier County. With that, I'll make a
motion that we accept the Tourist Development Council's
recommendation. But I will mention that to some candidates to see if
we can do something on a federal level.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We have a motion from
Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second from me.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And a second from Commissioner
Coyle. Any other discussion?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Just one more if it looks like it's not
going to pass. And is there a way that we could maybe get some
people from our County to work with some people from Goodland
and figure out some ways to help, at least get some of these passes
open and maybe use the sand in the parks so we'll accomplish
something from Marla? That was a great suggestion and at least to
keep the passes open so that the fishermen can get out and supply the
restaurants as well as the tourists can get in?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. And, Mr. Hovell?
MR. HOVELL: Hovell.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Hovell. Thank you. If I get a
picture of this and bring it to the attention of the powers to be in
Washington, D.C., maybe we want to consider getting a consultant to
find out how much it would take to dredge those, if we get a
favorable nod from Washington, D.C.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Anything I can do to help and I'm
sure the Goodlanders would help, also.
Page 222
May 28, 2002
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We have a motion to disapprove.
Any other discussion? All those in favor of that motion indicate by
saying aye. Aye.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Opposed.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And Commissioner Fiala is the
person that's opposing it. Thank you.
MR. GRAHAM: Thank you very much.
Item #1 OH
STAFF, COASTAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND TOURIST
DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL RECOMMENDATIONS TO
DISAPPROVE A TDC CATEGORY "A" GRANT APPLICATION
FOR THE BAREFOOT BEACH CLUB DUNE RESTORATION IN
THE AMOUNT OF $81,500- RECOMMENDATION APPROVED
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. We're moving on to Item H,
right, -H?
MR. HOVELL: Yes, Commissioner, the -1 OH is another grant
application for TDC Category A funds. This one is from the
Barefoot Beach Club. It's for approximately -- let's see $81,500
basically to restore some sand dunes - MS. FILSON: Sorry.
MR. HOVELL: -- sand dunes that were damaged during
Tropical Storm Gabriel. Again, I know we have some public
speakers for this, but we did get a County Attorney's opinion. Since
that area has never previously been maintained with public funds,
Page 223
May 28, 2002
there has not been an erosion control line established. The public
property, if you will, the State property begins at the mean high
water. This project was strictly to repair the sand dunes on the high
end of the beach and is totally on private property. And I believe it's
based on those facts that the County Attorney wrote her opinion
indicating that it's not eligible for TDC funds. I note Jacqueline
Robinson Tears, she wrote the opinion if you have any questions for
her. If not, I know there's two speakers on this subject.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: One for all the speakers?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Your first speaker is Rick
Bohanscurt and he will be followed by Michael Poff.
MR. BOHANSCURT: Good afternoon, Commissioners. I'd
thank you for the honor and privilege to be able to address you here
today. For the record, my name is Rick Bohanscurt. Everybody
mispronounces it. I'm the Manager of Barefoot Beach
condominiums. We have twelve, seven-story mid-rise buildings on
approximately 2,800 feet of shoreline with 348 owners there. First of
all, I'd like to emphasize that Barefoot Beach is not a private beach.
It's a beach access, both from the north and from the south by County
parking lots. The beach is highly utilized throughout the year by both
County residents and tourists, like I said, throughout the entire year.
Our project benefits the Countywide beach program by reducing
future maintenance costs.
Furthermore, we have restored the critical sea turtle nesting
habitat that was restored from Tropical Storm Gabriel. And to quote
Commissioner Fiala from her later today on another subject,
"Barefoot Beach owners have put their money where their mouth is."
The owners paid $198,360 up-front out of their own pockets without
having any inkling prior to having the slightest hope of any monetary
participation from the County. As far as participation goes, I would
like to point out that any of the owners from Barefoot Beach Club
Page 224
May 28, 2002
make their donations, large donations, to the friends at Barefoot
Beach. Also, they volunteered their time as docents and tour
volunteers at the park, at the south end, thus eliminating the need for
the County to have to pay for County employees to staff these
positions.
In closing, I'm going to keep this short, our long-term goal is to
be part of the County program. And with your positive approval
today, we'll be furthering the cooperative relationship between the
County and Barefoot Beach. Thank you once again for allowing me
to speak today.
MS. FILSON: Your final speaker is Michael Poff. Did I get
that wrong, too?
MR. POFF: That's okay. For the record, Michael Poff, Coastal
Engineering Consultants, representing Barefoot Beach
Condominiums. Thank you for the opportunity to present some
supplemental information. Billy Barefoot Beach has historically
been a stable beach requiring very little maintenance. The County
performed the Sea Grass Removal Project several years ago,
including Barefoot Beach. Other than that, this beach has been low
maintenance. They're asking today that you do not make it no
maintenance. The Barefoot Beach condominiums have applied for
TDC funding to restore their dune in the aftermath of Tropical Storm
Gabrielle. County staff have been very helpful in discussing the
future inclusion of Barefoot Beach in the Countywide Beach
Management Program.
However, due to timing and the need to complete the project
prior to nesting season, the condos took it upon themselves to apply
for and acquire the necessary permits and implement their project.
The project included trucking in over 2,700 cubic yards of beach-
compatible upland sand. The sand was placed on the beach and dune
seven feet in dune crest width, then sloped out and onto the beach 12
Page 225
May 28, 2002
to 15 feet wide. The dune crest was planted with thousands of sea
oats. An irrigation system was installed to water the plants. The cost
for this primary dune and beach restoration work is $81,500, which is
the basis of the TDC application.
For your information, the condos are also restoring their
secondary dune, the dune that is off the beach. Sand overwashed
landward, completing covering existing vegetation. They are
spending an additional $120,000 out of their own money on planting
and irrigation of a secondary dune. They are not seeking
reimbursement for these costs. The beach committee and TDC
recommended denial on some of those issues that were raised that we
would like to discuss with you briefly. First, one member stated that
Lely Barefoot Beach has many County code violations. Please note
that the condos are only one development within Barefoot Beach.
Barefoot Beach condos have no code violations.
We have received a letter. We forwarded it to staff and to
yourselves stating that the condos do not have any code violations. I
have extra copies here if you do not have them or would like copies.
Second, one member questioned if we had permits for the work. The
answer is, yes. We provided those permits to staff, and we have extra
copies if you need them. Further, both County and DEP staff has
observed the work and deem the project complete having met all
permit requirements. Third, the issue of the litigation of the gatehouse
was raised. As you're aware, this issue has been ongoing for many
years. The bottom line with respect to beach access on Barefoot
Beach is the public may proceed past the gatehouse and directly enter
the north or the south County lots and access the beach, which leads
to our next issue, public access. The County has set a precedence of
maintaining the beaches Countywide even if public access is not
immediately adjacent to the work. And through prior correspondence
to you and staff, we provided two examples.
Page 226
May 28, 2002
But, please note, there are many others of similar projects that
the County has used TDC funds on and the relationship to public
access. Comparing our project to the others, the two public accesses
on Barefoot Beach, both of which include significant parking, are
within the historical limits of other County projects.
The last issue is work on private property. By nature of the
work, dune restoration is done on private property. Beachfront
owners generally own to the mean high water line. Or in the case of
a beach project, such as Vanderbilt, Park Shore, Naples an erosion
control line. Ninety-nine percent of the dunes built on Vanderbilt,
Park Shore and Naples were built on private property, as this work
took place landward of the mean high water line or the erosion
control line. The dunes are vital in terms of storm protection serving
as a reservoir of sand during erosion events and providing habitat for
sea turtle nesting and gopher tortoise burrows. An erosion control
line was not required as part of the permits to restore the dunes for
the damage from the storm.
All of Lely Barefoot Beach is publicly accessible and vital to the
tourism industry of Collier County. Spring break and Easter weeks
the beach is packed. We had to shut down construction as there were
so many people on the beach. All the condos are asking for is to be
treated equally with the rest of the County.
I am confident that if Barefoot Beach were in the Countywide
program today, this project would have been paid for by TDC funds.
Please do not discriminate against them for independently proceeding
with their project. Rather, reward them for independently achieving
success. Thank you. And I'm happy to answer any questions you
may have.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: But I'd like to make a motion that we
go along with the Tourist Development Board and the County staff
and Coastal Advisory Committee and deny this particular application
Page 227
May 28, 2002
based upon the fact that we have -- the County Attorney's office has
written a legal opinion indicating that the project was not eligible.
And to go against that, would be contrary to what we should be
doing.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second the motion.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Questions? Are we going to take
questions?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yes, I am. Question?
COMMISSIONER CARTER: I don't agree for three reasons.
One, there was a precedence set, which you have pointed out from
Park Shore Resident's Beach Renourishment 1997, 125,000; South
Naples Beach tee groins, 1999 to 2000 for $700,000, which if we're
applying the same criteria, those would not have been paid for out of
beach renourishment funds. Secondly, we have always supported a
public, private partnership in trying to get things done in this
community. The private sector has stepped up here, spent $200,000.
You say, "Well it benefits them." Well, yes, it does, but it benefits
everyone. If turtle nesting is a high priority and we care about it, then
I would suspect if they didn't do anything that would have caused us
difficulties. What they're asking for us to do is support 815 and
plantings to hold the sand and an irrigation system in order to make
sure that it grows.
It seems to me that it's tourist tax dollars supporting one of our
greatest assets and that is the beach. And everyone uses this beach. I
don't know how Counsel ended up with this opinion. That's what we
have legal counsel for. But in this case I'm challenging that because I
think that this is a legitimate request.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Any other comments, questions?
Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: In order to be consistent with my
position all day today on these issues, I would have to vote against
Page 228
May 28, 2002
this particular petition. However, I'm concerned about the same
problems that Commissioner Carter is concerned about. I know of
these other projects that have been conducted, and they have been
paid for with TDC funds and in all fairness, I think we should be
consistent in the way we go about doing these things. That doesn't
necessarily mean that I would go against the TDC's recommendations
today. But I certainly think we need to sort out the consistency issue
and provide every one the same access to TDC funds rather than
providing it to some and not giving it to others. I think consistency is
very important when we get down to the issue of making decisions
about a valid public purpose.
It can't be a valid public purpose when it's done in South Naples
and not be a valid public purpose when it's done at Lely Barefoot
Beach. I don't understand the distinction. I think the public access is
just as restricted in South Naples as it is in Barefoot Beach, if not
more so. But I would like to have that question addressed. I'd like to
understand where we can go with this, if anywhere.
MR. HOVELL: I can try and adjust it to some extent. The
projects that Coastal Engineering Consultants sent us as examples
and in discussing with the County Attorney's Office, the difference
seems to be almost all the projects we've ever done have in some
way, shape or form gone typically from the back end of the beach all
the way out to the waterline, if not further, by filling in submerged
lands.
And so it becomes a little harder to say it's either strictly on
private property or that there's no public benefit, because typically
you are, in fact, doing something with the public lands as well as
private lands. In this particular case, it is strictly work on private
property. It is not across the width of the beach. And I would
concede that it's not across the width of the beach because it didn't
need to be across the width of the beach. But the County Attorney's
Page 229
May 28, 2002
opinion was based on the fact that it's strictly on private property with
no work on public property.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So you're saying that there is no
work from the mean high waterline seaward? It's -- it's all -
MR. HOVELL: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It's all-
MR. HOVELL: In this particular case it was strictly restoring
the dunes and not both beach renourishment and restoring the dunes,
which is what we -- way back when when we did the major
renourishment on Naples Beach, we filled in submerged lands, built
up a beach. And then, yes, on the back we built up sand dunes on
private property. But we did so through a very public process and
obtained easements from the property owners and have built a beach
that's both valuable to the public and to the private interest.
In this particular case, I think it's a lot more challenging to tie
the argument to the public benefit and it's certainly, I would think,
not possible to tie it to doing work on public land.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Is this policy fairly well
documented about mean high water and --
MR. HOVELL: Any beach renourishment projects we do we
have to determine whether or not -- if the County executes it,
anyway, we have to determine on whose property we're doing it. And
typically it's not on County property. It's either on State property,
because of a previously established property line called the erosion
control line, or the mean high waterline, and then it becomes below
that at State submerged lands. So, yes, we're always very sensitive to
whose property we're doing the work on.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Let me make sure I
understand this. If you restore a beach from the mean high waterline
seaward, that is very clearly an appropriate use of TDC funds?
Page 230
May 28, 2002
MR. OLLIFF: Depending on a number of other criteria,
including public access, beach parking proximities and in some of
those things, because there are some other cases out there where we
will probably be bringing back some items for your discussion, where
previous Boards, frankly, have made a decision that there is a public
benefit that I'm not sure your staff today can find. And we're
uncomfortable and we want to bring those back for your review.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Would those include some
of the ones that are listed here. You think?
MR. OLLIFF: No, sir, not any of those two. But these are
projects that we have yet to expend funds on.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I guess I need to know where we
establish the dividing line. If we are making sand dune restorations
on private property in order to hold sand in State property, would that
entire project be considered for funding for TDC funds?
MR. HOVELL: I'd have to look to the attorneys on that one.
I'm not sure.
MS. ROBINSON: Good'afternoon, Commissioners. The
primary basis for the opinion in this case is that there appeared to be
no public benefits that could be pointed out by our staff.
Additionally, all of the work that was actually done for which they're
requesting reimbursement for was done on private property. And
although in the Florida Constitution it clearly says that the public
owns all of the shoreline under the water, unless it's been given to
private parties by the State, this particular project doesn't extend that
far.
And there's no connection that we can find between the work
that was done by the homeowners and the benefit to the public. That
being the case, there was no justification for using public money for
this private project.
Page 231
May 28, 2002
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. But we apparently have
perhaps done that in the past and we need to solve those problems,
right?
MR. OLLIFF: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. All right. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Any other comments?
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Well, I guess you have the
misfortune of the sand coming from the public area onto the private
area and you had to clean it up and restore dunes, because I often
wonder what would have happened if there were no buildings there
and it all washed out and then where would we be? Then I guess we
would be back to more of a public purpose. I'm going to lose this
one.
MR. HOVELL: Well, it seems if they had brought in more sand
and covered the beach out to the waterline and spent more money that
wasn't needed, you would then be voting to approve this today. As I
said, the work was done specifically to restore the damage from the
storm. Albeit on private property. But as I said, 99 percent of all the
dunes built on those three beaches are on private property. They are
all landward of the erosion control line or the mean high waterline.
That's the nature of the work and it is a valid TDC expenditure. I will
disagree, all due respect to the County Attorney's opinion, working
on projects up and down the State of the Florida. This is definitely a
project that would garner TDC funds. The Park Shore project was all
above mean high water. There was no work seaward of mean high
water and there is no erosion for the line in place on that particular
project.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. With that, if there's no more
discussion, I'm going to call for the question. All those in favor of
the motion to go along with the TDC recommendation, indicate by
saying aye. Aye.
Page 232
May 28, 2002
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed?
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And Commissioner Carter is the
descending vote. Thank you. Okay. From there we go to K, right,
Item #1 OK
RESOLUTION 2002-256, AUTHORIZING A LOAN
AGREEMENT WITH THE FLORIDA LOCAL GOVERNMENT
FINANCE COMMISSION IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED
$70,000,000 TO FINANCE THE ACQUISITION AND
CONSTRUCTION OF CERTAIN IMPROVEMENTS TO THE
UTILITY SYSTEM;
10-K? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Motion to approve.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We have a motion to approve from
Commissioner Henning. COMMISSIONER CARTER: Second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And a second from Commissioner
Carter. Any discussion or questions? COMMISSIONER COYLE:
Yeah.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Are you all pretty well versed in it?
Go ahead, Commissioner Coyle.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I've got $70 million worth of
questions.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: One at a time.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Tell me about that. There's
something I don't apparently understand here. Have you spent some
of this money already? Do you have authorization to spend it or is
Page 233
May 28, 2002
this money that's going to be spent in the future? And what is $70
million going to be spent for?
MR. WIDES: Commissioner, the short answer is, yes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
MR. WIDES: But first off, for the record, Tom Wides, Interim
Public Utilities Administrator. This is a request for a master
resolution being put in front of you for a $70 million loan agreement
with the Florida Local Government Finance Commission. In
essence, we know when we brought the master plan for water and
wastewater in front of the Board. Last November time frame, we, in
fact, had a master plan, approximately $427 million worth of
expenditures out into the first five years of the plan broken up among
water and wastewater projects.
And the projects that -- and the way we expect to use these
funds, these $70 million -- and I would speak of this as a line of
credit as opposed to being a commitment today that we would be
taking draws upon, this is a line of credit for $70 million to, in fact,
enable us to -- for projects that were either in the master plan or have
already been approved by the Board to, in fact, use those funds for
the -- what I'll call the relatively short-term financing for these
projects during their permitting and their construction stages.
Once construction is complete, which you would expect to be a
three to five-year time frame, depending on the project, we would roll
these funds over into a permanent form of financing through a bond
issue. Okay. And again, these funds are for projects that were either
part of our master plan or already approved by the Board. And, in
fact, before we went out for any individual actual loan agreements
under these, under this $70 million line of credit, each and every one
of those projects and a separate resolution would be brought before
the Board for final approval. So that's the other piece to link this in
together.
Page 234
May 28, 2002
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
MR. WIDES: But again, in the source of funds and the use of
funds, this is for water and sewer projects only, it has -- the funds
cannot be used for any other use outside of the water and sewer
funds, our projects.
And number two, these basically will all be short-term,
relatively short-term loans. Okay. And no ad valorem taxes will be
used in any way, shape or form to pay back any of these projects. It
will be all water and sewer user funds or impact fees that will be
paying these loans back.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. So we'll get to see each of
these projects when they come forward?
MR. WIDES: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
MR. WIDES: And this is a representative, if I may, this is a
representative listing of the projects. This is only approximately, you
know, 76 or so million dollars of that 426 million. And we'll try to
roll these lines of credit over as new projects come on board for us as
we need the funds. The last thing we wish to do right now is go out
and borrow funds in advance when we don't need it now. We want
the line of credit in place.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Any other questions?
COMMISSIONER CARTER: I just see this as the financing
arm for the 15-year plan that this Board has approved.
MR. WIDES: This is, in fact, one of the financing arms. We
also have the State Revolving Fund Loans that have a very low
interest source too for the longer term funding.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: If there's no other questions, I'll call
for the question. All those in favor indicate by saying aye. Aye.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER. FIALA: Aye.
Page 235
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed?
May 28, 2002
The ayes have it 5 to 0.
Item # 1 OM
COLLIER COUNTY ACCEPTANCE OF APPOINTMENT AS A
COURT APPOINTED RECEIVER OVER LEE CYPRESS WATER
AND SEWER COOPERATIVE; BLEU WALLACE TO SERVE AS
ADMINISTRATOR OF THE RECEIVERSHIP; FUNDING NOT
TO EXCEED $30,000 FOR RECEIVERSHIP EXPENSES, ALL TO
ASSIST THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION TO EFFECT AN INTERCONNECTION OF THE
LEE CYPRESS COOPERATIVE'S SEWER SYSTEM WITH THE
CITY OF EVERGLADES SEWER SYSTEM- APPROVED
Thank you. MR. WIDES: Thank you. Moving on now to Item -
10M.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Motion to approve.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Wait. Wait. Slow down. Slow
down. We have a speaker. There some things to consider, and I'm
looking for your input on this.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Nice fence. Is that the input
you want?
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Is that your fence?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: No, this is Copeland. We could use
a little bit of help.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I went down there after I --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you so much, Commissioner
Fiala.
Page 236
May 28, 2002
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah. My husband and I rode
around there for a while.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Did you buy any property yet?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: It's a wonderful place. Mr. Wallace?
MR. WALLACE: Mr. Chairman, for the record, Bleu Wallace.
Excuse me, I'm losing my voice. Lee Cypress Cooperative Utility
serves some to customers down in Lee Cypress, which is very near
Copeland in that area.
There is a package sewer plant on-site that the Florida
Department of Environmental Protection has been having a lot of
problems with over the last ten years or so. They have asked the
County to assist them in stepping in and accepting court-appointed
receivership. We would be the agent for the Board as receiver in
order to allow the City of Everglades engineers to construct an
interconnect and get on the property.
The coopt folks have not been very cooperative in letting them
on the property to effect the interconnect. This is a $1.9 million
project that's being funded by grants that were secured by Anchor
Engineering, who is the Everglades City's engineering consultant. It's
also being funded partially by the City of Naples in lieu of a DEP fine
to assist in that construction. Our role would be to oversee, oversee
the interconnect. We may not even spend a dollar. But I thought if
we needed to spend some administrative dollars, I needed to ask for it
now, because I would not have time to run back to the Board. We're
prepared to assist the DEP in this effort to get this plant off-line. I do
have a couple more pictures I'll show you. This is the sewer plant
that serves the 50 to 60 customers. This is the affluent bond. And
I'm sorry, the little cheap camera I had didn't pick it up.
But that pond is where the treated wastewater goes. And it has a
green slime across the top of it. Thank goodness it's fenced. I
Page 237
May 28, 2002
understand that Community Development Block Grant Money built
the fence a couple of years ago, because it's located right next to a
small church and a park. And there were -- I had some complaints
that kids were down there swimming in it in 1998. That's the first
time I had gone there to look at it. We think that everybody will be
better off if this plant is taken off-line. FDEP has already scheduled a
hearing before the Circuit Court here in Naples for June the 1 lth, and
it will be -- of course, the County Attorney's Office may want to
address that hearing that's already been scheduled. And during that
proceeding, we anticipate that Collier County, if this Board will
accept it, will be Naples named as receiver. Yes, sir?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: There are 50 people or 50 homes?
MR. WALLACE: 50 connections.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: 50 connections.
MR. WALLACE: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And I presume it's because this
thing isn't working right?
MR. WALLACE: That's correct, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And we're going to spend over a
million dollars to do that? That's $20,000 per home. We could
install septic tanks and drill a well for that price.
MR. WALLACE: Sir, we're not spending anything. This is part
of the agricultural grant that Everglades City has gotten to install this
interconnect and connect it to their sewer system. Collier County is
not spending any money at all, unless staff needs to spend some
money for administration.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. So the $1,052,400 is not
our money? It's somebody else's money?
MR. OLLIFF: It is grant money being granted to the City of the
Everglades who runs their own utility.
Page 238
May 28, 2002
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. But answer the question for
me, though, why are we spending so much money to deal with
homes? Is there an obligation that we put them on a sewage
treatment facility?
MR. WALLACE: The problem, sir, is this is turning into a
health, safety and welfare issue. The untreated -- or ill-treated
wastewater that's going into that pond down there I'm sure has
already contaminated some of the ground and eventually will hurt the
groundwater.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: But can you install septic tanks
and wells? Then you don't have a sewage treatment facility at all to
have to worry about. Is that an option? MR.
WALLACE: Well, you do have the infrastructure for a central
sewer system that's already in place. And DEP and the one that came
to us and asked us for our assistance, sir, and heading up the
receivership.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
MR. OLLIFF: Generally given an option, if there is centralized
sewer somewhere within a fairly reasonable, reachable point, DEP's
going to require you to try and hook up a central sewer, especially if
you're down in this part of the County where you're in what is
considered, frankly, some environmentally sensitive land. And
they're probably not going to promote septic tanks in the area.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's really a State policy,
Commissioner Coletta, that the more they can eliminate septics in the
State, they're making every concerted effort to do that whenever it's
feasible to do so. So I think that we would not be taking a wise
direction to look at that as an alternative.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: May I suggest that we call up -- well,
I'm sorry. You still got your presentation to finish and then.
MR. WALLACE: Sir, I'm done.
Page 239
May 28, 2002
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: What I'd like to do is call up Jane
Bee, who heads up the Lee Cypress Sewer Water District. And she'll
give you a little bit more of an overview from the residents down
there and the problems that they're encountering. And I need your
input to try to make this thing work.
MS. BEE: I'm Jane Bee and I'm President of the Lee Cypress
Water and Sewer Coopt, which is an owner/user coopt. Every
family, every household in town has one share in the coopt. And we
have a package water plant, and we have this little package sewer
plant.
In the early '90's, there was a grant that the County administered
through Mr. Greg Mahalik and it was supposed to put in new
recovery lines, new distribution lines. They put in the new package
plant for the water, and the money for the sewer plant was deleted. It
took two years from the time the money was approved until the
construction started. Inflation ate up the money. The DEP had
ordered us to either come online, get our sewer plant operational or
hook up with Everglades City. The agreement that was first
discussed between Everglades City and Copeland, Lee Cypress, in
front of the DEP was going to be one hook-up at the lift station,
going from there to Mayor Hamilton's Subway Shop and from there
on down to the sewer plant in Everglades City. That would be one
$500 hook up, one $15 a month fee, plus 320 for a thousand gallons
of sewage processed. Everglades City changed that to $15 per 50
houses in town, $500 per 50 houses in town, even though there's only
one hook-up.
We don't forbid them from getting on our property. We just are
trying to get a contract that the community can live with. We are one
of the poorest communities in the state, let alone in Collier County.
Immokalee looks like a resort community compared to Copeland;
Page 240
May 28, 2002
granted we only have 72 families, 250 people. But most of them
have paid their dues.
They're retirees living on $320 a month supplemental Social
Security because they never had funds to pay into it to get a return on
their money. The younger people are maids or waitresses in the
hotel's seasonal work. The men are crabbers and fishermen, seasonal
work. We have never asked for charity. We've asked for our fair
share. We ask for a working contract with Everglades City. It would
cost less than $30,000 to totally upgrade the existing sewer plant.
We've done two thirds of it already. We've redone the wiring. We've
redone three of the tanks. Two more tanks have developed leaks but
their affluent treated water is what goes into the pond anyhow. But
they need to be pumped out and resealed.
We've replaced blowers. We've replaced the electrical. There is
so much that we have done. The -- what was installed under the
previous grant was below Collier code where we're supposed to have
six-inch pipe, we've got four-inch pipes. Where we're supposed to
have four-inch pipes, we have two-inch pipes.
The fire hydrants weren't even set in concrete. They were just
hooked up to the waterlines. And the first time we had a major fire
down there, the fire hydrants blew off the pipes. And the community
has done these repairs. We have set the fire hydrants in concrete.
Every time the pumps started up at the water plant, the pipes were
hooked up Paddy-Wonkus (phonetic) and the pipes blew up. We had
to pay $1,000 for a plumber to come in and redo the pipes right there
at the water plant. You know, we have tried, and we've tried to work
with Everglades City. Every time we've made a counteroffer to their
contract offer, they have laughed and thrown it in our faces.
I have signed a contract and submitted it to the DEP agreeing to
pay for one hook up, which is all they're going to give us at the lift
station. Why should we pay 500 for 50 families when they're doing
Page 241
May 28, 2002
one hook up? Why should we pay $15 a month for 50 families when
there's only one hook up? It should be $15 a month plus 320 for
1,000 gallons of treated sewage.
They are trying to get rich off one of the poorest communities in
the State. We can't do it. If we are forced to go to that contract that
they keep offering us, within six months there will be nobody living
in Copeland.
Now, that may be what Collier County wants. I don't know. But
it's a fact. If they can't pay their water and sewer bill, which they're
not going to be able to, it's going to increase from a combined
water/sewer bill of $36 a month --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Keep going, Jane.
MS. BEE: -- an extra 15 per household to pay the sewer, to pay
for the extra sewage to Everglades City. Within six months we'll be
so far behind that they will put a lien against everybody's home and
we will cease to exist. And we have fought this good fight since
1989 when we formed the coopt, every home in town has one share
and we're going to die.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And if I may point out, too, that
there is an effort taking place with quite a few people, including the
School board, EDC, to try to help Copeland pull itself up by the
bootstraps. And without the sewer, we can't come up with a working
arrangement with the City of Everglades or come up with some way
to make this work. This is going to be economic disaster for the
residents there. There's no way they can cope with this kind of cost.
Now, I'm opening it up for you for discussion. I'm looking to
you for some answers. We'll start with Commissioner Henning and
then go to Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We have 50 residents, 50 hook
ups that, ma'am, what that would entail, if you have to invest
$30,000, that would be $600 per resident or per hook up to improve
Page 242
May 28, 2002
your antiquated system, which we don't know if DEP is going to
accept it. And it sounds like somehow we need to work the City of
Everglades, you know, to look at the moneys that they're getting for
the grant and make sure we can get the best deal for the residents in
Copeland. They're getting 1.5 million?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: At one time I even asked for some
money from our mitigated fines that we got from the Environmental
Protection Agency for a sewer plant overrun. But that money went to
Port of the Isles -- or not Port of the Isles.
MR. OLLIFF: Port au Prince.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Port au Prince.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Right, Port au Prince. There's
answers out there. But I can tell you right now, if we put this burden
on Copeland just the way it is and expect them to come up with
$30,000, it just won't happen. I think you can say that for yourself. I
know right now what your bills are. Trying to collect them are
difficult enough.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Um-hum.
MS. BEE: We have to have a licensed operator. We have to
have the chlorine. We have to have the electricity, the maintenance,
the routine maintenance, the meter readers. It's, you know, it's a
shoestring operation. But it's worked, and it's kept the water -- the
bills down where the people can afford to pay.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah. Thank you. I'm still back at
square one. So let me do some catching up. If there's a grant for 1.5
million to connect it to Everglades City, wouldn't that provide hook
ups as well?
MR. OLLIFF: I don't think the grant covered the connection
fees. Just to cut to the quick here a little bit, if you're looking for a
recommendation, I think you need to move ahead with the
Page 243
May 28, 2002
receivership, simply because it's a health, safety, welfare issue and
DEP is going to court. And the way I understand Florida Statute,
Counties are, by statute, in the position of having to be the receiver,
should it go that far. But I would also ask that the Board direct the
staff to go back and meet with not only Ms. Bee and some of the
other residents that may be knowledgeable enough from the
community of Copeland but to also broker a meeting with the City of
Everglades City. And given the current track that we're on, heading
down towards a DEP condemnation case on this system, I think, one,
investing money in that existing package plan probably isn't
something that makes long-term, good sense.
Two, knowing that the DEP is probably going to push us
towards having centralized sewer, we need to find a way to make it
financially work for the people of Copeland, because you've got to
recognize that Collier County certainly has no utilities anywhere near
that area. So we're not in a position to actually be able to provide any
centralized sewer outside of an agreement somehow with Everglades
City.
And three, just to direct us to go look at what funding options
we do have, because it seems like the major hurdle is this $500 per
connection charge. That is not an insermountable issue. That is a 28
to $30,000 item. And if push comes to shove through your own
utility department, we can make some health, safety and welfare
decisions if it comes to that. But my original suggestion would be to
look at CDBG funding or some other grant applications that we
might be able to look at to cover their connection cost. Now, if the
residents down there are already paying somewhere between 35 and
$40 a month for their water and sewer, then you've got to assume that
the sewer portion of that bill is going to fall off and be replaced then
with a $13 a month fee from Everglades City plus the $3, whatever it
is, per thousand usage charge.
Page 244
May 28, 2002
So hopefully, in terms of the monthly cost, it's going to be a
fairly small, if not, you know, unnoticeable increase for the residents
of Copeland. And we just need to figure out a way to be able to take
care of this connection charge somehow. It's a health, safety and
welfare issue, and I think we need to step in and do something to try
and broker the best deal that we can for everybody.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Recommend approval. Or do you
have -
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. We already have a
motion and a second. I think that's great direction.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: That's what I wanted you to
understand, what we're up against. I think we're giving direction to
staff on this too what to do.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes. Most definitely.
MR. CHAIRMAN: First thing I'd like to see, I might be able to
sit on these meetings if I know all the players. MR. OLLIFF: Absolutely.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Jane, is there anything else you want
to add before I take the vote?
MS. BEE: Well, if we can get a contract that we can live with
with Everglades City, we would be more than glad to give up our
sewer plant, believe me. My husband's been the maintenance man
for ten years, and he really would like to retire.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And I want to mention the fact that
Jane is so devoted to her community that she went to work last night
at 11:00 o'clock and didn't get offuntil when? MS. BEE: 7:00.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: 7:00. She came straight here, and
she's been here all day long.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you for that.
MS. BEE: Thank you for letting me speak.
Page 245
May 28, 2002
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And with that I'm going to call --
MR. WEIGEL: Mr. Chairman, I don't believe Ms. Filson and I
heard a second.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It was Commissioner Coyle.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: It was Commissioner Coyle.
MR. WEIGEL: Okay, great.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: All those in favor indicate by saying
aye. Aye.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: The ayes have it 5 to 0. Thank you.
MS. BEE: Thank you.
Item # 10T
LEASE AGREEMENT IN THE ANNUAL AMOUNT OF $301,469
WITH ABBAS AHRABI ASLI FOR OFFICE SPACE TO BE
UTILIZED BY THE PROPERTY APPRAISER- APPROVED
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Mr. Chairman, with your
indulgence.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Right, if we could. We're going to go
to the next Item which would be 10-T, which is originally 16-E6.
MR. CAMP: Good afternoon, Commissioners. For the record,
Skip Camp, Facilities Management Director. This item is to relocate
the property appraiser to property adjoining the County Courthouse
Complex. There were some questions?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I had a question primarily. And
it's my understanding that I was given some incorrect figures --
Page 246
May 28, 2002
MR. CAMP: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- with respect to appraised value
of the buildings.
MR. CAMP: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I was concerned that we were
paying in rent far beyond the value of the building. And I now have
additional correct data which indicates that is not the case. MR. CAMP: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'm only concerned about a couple
of things. I don't want to -- I know you have a space problem, and I
don't want to complicate it or delay the solution. I'd just like to have
reassurance that this is the best possible deal we can get. It's the only
alternative that presently exists to solve our space problems, and it is
in the -- our best interest to proceed with it.
MR. CAMP: I think that observation is absolutely correct.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
MR. OLLIFF: I'll also tell you that we sent the property
appraiser in first to do some groundwork for us and then to negotiate
with the property owner. And goodness gracious, if your property
appraiser can't cut a good deal with somebody, then we came in
afterwards and beat the property owner up some more after that and
got some additional concessions out of them. And I will tell you that
I am not a proponent.
And if you'll look at the track record of our budget over the last
two years, we have made a concerted effort to get out of Lee space
and to try and build space that the County owns. In this kind of
market, it's going to be the last thing I do to recommend leasing
additional office space. But in this particular case, we have beat the
bush for the better part of a year and a half trying to come up with a
solution. And this is the most cost-effective solution that we have
been able to find.
Page 247
May 28, 2002
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Thank you. You've
answered my question.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Skip, I pulled that, not because I
disagree with what you have to do, but some thoughts to share with
the Board because this is an ongoing challenge -- MR. CAMP: Absolutely.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: -- that all of us have. And as
long as I've been on this Board, and frankly it's been kind of a
piecemeal, let's do what we can do every year to try to get through
the situation. And it is not really long term going to answer the
questions for staff, in my judgement.
So I'm going to take the Board back to a model that was done by
the Board of Commissioners in about where they established an
Economic Development Advisory Committee. This was a citizen-
driven committee that began to take a look at that issue for economic
development of Collier County. And at the end of that, they came
back with proposals that today, that's why you have a public, private
partnership with the EDC. What I believe we need to do, in my
judgement, is for staff, through directions if the Board desires to do
this, is look at what I call a penny for Collier County. And that
penny, and I don't know what would be involved in that penny, but
you got a road infrastructure out there. You got storm water
management. You got County facilities. And there may be other
issues that have to be addressed by this community.
And in the past we've tried to drive it from government to the
community. We've tried referendums and that's failed. I think at this
point I would suggest that we use the same model we did with the
EDC, get a citizen's group today appointed by the Board of County
Commissioners representing all the various interest groups in the
County, give them a challenge for a year, 16 months; whatever the
Board desires, and come back and ask, what do we need? How much
Page 248
May 28, 2002
will it cost? Where can we cap this with the estimates so that we can
sunset whatever we do?
Jacksonville did this very successfully for two reasons:
Everybody had an input on what they wanted. It was capped and
they knew what it was going to cost with all the escalators built in. I
am suggesting long range to this Board that we begin to look at this
for the future. And if we don't, we're going to keep finding out,
trying to cut a deal here and there for a lease space or build
something here or there. And it's not that we don't have the plans.
You have a 20-year plan that was laid out. Nothing wrong with the
plan. The problem is implementation.
We have a 20-year program for roads, not a problem with the
plan. The problem is implementation. So we're scrambling all the
time. And the more I thought about this, if Pinellas County could do
a penny for Pinellas, why couldn't Collier County do a penny for
Collier under the guidance and direction of such a Board established
where they interviewed all groups in the community?
They get all the data. Staff can provide information. And once
they go through this process, through a series of public meetings, and
that's a long process, because I served on that EAC, at the end of the
day there was a solution. And that solution was a buy-in by the
community and the Board because everyone had an input. So I
suggest that to the Board as the long-range consideration.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Would you like to make a motion?
COMMISSIONER CARTER: I'll make a motion for approval of
Item 16-E6.
MR. CAMP: Would you also include in your motion giving
staff the ability to get three quotes in lieu of a formal bid in order to
save both time and money on this particular project?
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Yes, I would.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'll second.
Page 249
May 28, 2002
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We have a motion from
Commissioner Carter and a second from Commissioner Fiala. Any
other discussion? All those in favor indicate by saying aye. Aye.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: What do we got here?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Wait a minute, Happy Birthday.
MR. OLLIFF: Chairman, I need to point out, we found some
historic records that if you'll look closely, I think it will indicate that
Mr. Camp was actually here at the founding of Collier County.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: That's correct.
MR. OLLIFF: Happy Birthday, Mr. Camp.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: He hasn't aged a bit.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You are going to frame that,
correct?
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Mr. Chairman, do you think
there's any interest on the Board looking at this for the possibility --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Can I think about that?
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Hum.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Can I think about that?
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Yes, please do. I just don't want
to lose the thought.
MR. OLLIFF: I think what we need to do is I'm going to put
that on our list. I think it makes a great budget discussion item. And
when the Board is presented with a number of its capital funding
options, the Board can at least look at that as something and decide
whether or not it wants to proceed further with that idea.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Fine.
Page 250
May 28, 2002
Item #1 ON
DEVELOP A TRANSITION PLAN TO PROVIDE FOR THE
ORDERIJY TRANSITION TO A NEW COUNTY MANAGER-
DEPUTY COUNTY MANAGER MUDD CONFIRMED AS
INTERIM COUNTY MANAGER
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Moving on to 10-N,
Transition Plan. You are going to tell us you changed your mind,
right?
MR. OLLIFF: I could but my wife wouldn't believe it ifI told
you that after all that we've made her do so far over the last couple of
weeks.
Mr. Chairman, I've put together an executive summary that's
included in your package that talks about a transition plan. And a
couple of just key decisions, sometimes I think communities and
Boards can make this a whole lot more difficult -- complicated than it
is.
This is a selection process pretty much like it is for any other
position. There are a couple of key decisions that, I think if you can
make those today, it will set us up for the type of process that we
need to go through. In essence, I think there are four decisions that
we need to cover today. And the first one is whether to use your
internal Human Resources Department or to look outside at an
external selection firm. I will tell you that the Board used an external
selection firm the last time, a firm called Mercer & Associates. And
they did a very quick job for the County in terms of generating
outside candidates short-listing those for the Board to consider. They
actually did some interviews themselves, and then presented a very
Page 251
May 28, 2002
qualified short-list for the Board to consider in their final interviews.
The pluses and minuses are going either way.
I will tell you that your Human Resources Department is
capable, but I will tell you they probably have not gone through an
executive search like this before. The downside of using your
Internal HR Department is that it's expected that the quality of the
applicants that you would get probably wouldn't be as great as if you
used an outside selection firm simply because your Human Resources
Department is going to go through straight and standard advertising
and does not have a stable, if you will, or connections of-- with
people that they can tap on the shoulder and let them know that there
are positions that are available.
A lot of the best candidates for positions like this are already
working. They are in jobs. And selecting firms have the ability to be
able to go out and find those people and bring them to you and
generate some interest.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: On that issue, right now
Regional Planning Consult is going through the same thing. They
tried to do it on an advertising kind of basis. They flushed out really
stuff that just wasn't there. And so they have now gone to a search
firm with a window that says, "Ninety days all applicants," compared
with the internal applicant short lists in front of the Regional
Planning Council.
So I don't like to see a firm get out there and spend months and
months and months on this, but you can shorten it up, because you're
absolutely right. They know where the people are that you want to
consider and they're already working.
MR. OLLIFF: The second decision that the Board needs to
make is, and my recommendation in that case if it wasn't clear, that I
think it is -- I think this County would be better served using an
external selection firm. I don't believe it has to be a very expensive
Page 252
May 28, 2002
process. I don't think it needs to be anything that's going to cost you
even what we've estimated as the high-end in your executive
summary, which is, I believe, is $25,000. If I recall, in fact, I was
checking with Regional Planning Council staff, I believe their
contract for their total search was somewhere in the 15 to $17,000
range. So I think if you look at what I estimated our internal cost
would be, the delta difference between your internal cost to go
through a selection process and hiring an outside firm is just not that
large. If the Board chooses to go the external route, there are two
typical processes that would be followed.
The first is what I would call your typical consultant selection
process, and that would be we have to go through a period where we
would actually go through the selection of the selection firm itself.
And I would think the quickest that we could possibly get you back a
contract with a selection firm would be your meeting of June 25th,
which is the last meeting in the month of June.
The typical process for a selection firm is then to go out and post
ads in national magazines, International City and County Manager's
Association, for example, is a publication that a lot of managers of
local governments read and they have job postings. The problem
with those is, if you'll look there, the lead time for ICMA, for
example, is 60 days. So in order to get an advertisement in a
magazine like that or a monthly newsletter like that is about 60 days.
Once the national publication advertising is done, then you've got an
applicant review process by the consultant themself. And I'm
estimating that somewhere towards the end of October you've got
your consultant going through his own set of interviews and short-
listing, getting a short-list to the Board of County Commissioners
somewhere in early to mid November, towards the end of November,
then having the Board go through its own interviewing selection and
negotiating a contract after that so that under the typical scenario my
Page 253
May 28, 2002
best guess for you is that you probably would not be able to get a
manager in here working until the end of this calendar year or the
beginning of 2003, depending on whether he was external and how
far away they need to relocate. What I'd suggest to you is I think this
County and this Board has too much on its plate to frankly wait that
long. I think that kind of a process just is fine if you don't have issues
like your rural fringe that's on your plate, your rural land's item that's
getting ready to come to you, a commitment on the part of this Board
and the staff to go through the Land Development Code and the
Growth Management Plan in earnest over the balance of this year.
I also think you're getting ready to establish a moratorias on
three roadways around this County. And those kind of issues are
weighty issues and ones that are difficult to deal with if your staff is
in transition and you don't have your manager's position filled. So I
would suggest to you that that process is probably one that I wouldn't
recommend, even though it's typical only because it would take too
long.
The option that I would recommend instead then would be an
accelerated process where you will continue to go through your
consultant selection process. You don't have a choice about that.
You simply got to go out and select the best selection firm that you
can. That would still be in front of the Board on June 25th. But my
suggestion to you then would be that we simply give that consultant
some direction that says, "Within a period of 60 days bring back a
short-list and bring back a short-list using either e-mail sources, using
your own contacts, your own communications outside of some of
those national publications and forego the national publication
process." I think you might cast a larger net. But in terms of the
trade-off of the 60 days that it adds to your process, I'm not sure that
it's worth that.
Page 254
May 28, 2002
My suggestion would be then that you could probably, with an
accelerated process like this, actually at your meeting in August, have
interviews and a selection process. And what I'm suggesting as a
target is to have somebody on Board by the start of your fiscal year.
And so I'm suggesting that by the time you get done with your
summer break and you get your budget to hold still using an
accelerated process like this, you could actually have a new County
Manager on Board to start your fiscal year with. And I think that's a
reasonable and good target to try and set for the County. The other
thing I'd mention to you is that if there is an opportunity for the
Board to have an acting manager appointed and to have any
opportunity to actually be able to see an internal candidate, there's a
third decision then that needs to be made. Some Boards for some
reason want to put a restriction that the person who is appointed as
the acting manager is not allowed to apply for the full-time position.
I'm not a particular proponent of that restriction.
My recommendation is that if you have some qualified or a
qualified internal applicant that you are going to appoint as an acting
manager, frankly, anytime that you can see somebody in a position,
that's a luxury. If you've got the opportunity to actually be able to see
somebody perform with the staff that they're going to perform with,
doing the job that you're going to ask them to do, I would always take
advantage of that kind of an opportunity.
So as part of this, my third recommendation would be that you
not put that restriction on yourselves and that you allow anyone that's
appointed as your acting manager to also be considered as your
interim manager. If the Board ends up selecting that person, it is also
a much easier transition. But I'm not going to stand here and tell you
that there's any bias towards anybody, either internal or external,
because I know of a lot of good external candidates that I think would
be interested in the position if the Board cast the net out there.
Page 255
May 28, 2002
And I think you're going to have a difficult selection process in
front of you. And I don't think anybody is a shoe-in for the job. But
I do think that if there's an opportunity to look at somebody
internally, that's something you ought not to pass up.
The fourth thing, and, frankly, this kind of ties in with that one,
if you'll notice on these timelines I'm suggesting to you that if you're
going to look at an acting manager or you're going to put somebody
in place because of the Board's summer vacation schedule and for a
number of other reasons, I would suggest to you that appointing
someone somewhere in the middle of July makes some sense to me.
And it only makes sense because you have one Board meeting July
30th and then you don't have another Board meeting again until the
month of August. And I think if the Board is going to have an
opportunity to be able to have the acting manager go through an
actual Board meeting, putting together an agenda, walking the Board
through it, working with the staff that has that Board meeting put
together, the July 30th meeting is one, if not your only good
opportunity to have that happen.
I would be disingenuous if I didn't tell you that selfishly as well
I would like to be able to amend my agreement to allow me to
transition out of here in 60 days as opposed to what is currently in my
agreement. And I think that if you're going to appoint an acting
manager, you probably don't want me around. You don't want the
old manager hanging around lurking in the hallways while your
acting manager gets appointed. And you want him to be able to run it
without having to look over his shoulder.
So I've got a four-step recommendation in front of you. One is
that you use an external selection firm; secondly, that you use that
modified process that I suggested to you that would allow you to
interview within 60 days; and thirdly, that you not put the restriction
on yourself in terms of internal appointments being allowed to apply
Page 256
May 28, 2002
for the full-time position; and lastly, that you consider appointing an
acting manager in the middle of July and also amending the current
agreement that I have with you to transition me out of here at the
same time frame.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: How much are you willing to pay
to get your term reduced from 90 to 60 days? You don't have to
answer that right now.
MR. OLLIFF: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Just think about it for a while. Do
we have to competitively procure the consultant to do this?
MR. OLLIFF: You do. But part of the recommendation that I'd
make is that you do that through some competitive selection process
that we would pare down. And I will work with the Purchasing
Department and I think that we can, through a modified selection
process, get you there by the end of June.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Do we have an RFP that we have
used in the past for this purpose?
MR. OLLIFF: We have, and I think it's one where we would
just have a very short time period when that RFP was out on the
street. We probably faxed it to most of the firms. Because there are,
frankly, a handful of firms that do this work, especially those that
focus on local government.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. So you could get it out
within -- easily within 30 days?
MR. OLLIFF: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Mr. Chairman, I would like to
recommend to the Board Mr. Olliffs plan that he's outlined for us.
I'm not going to reiterate the reasons. It all makes a lot of sense to
me so that by October 1 we would have a new County Manager in
Page 257
May 28, 2002
place. Particularly, I want to emphasize what Tom said that your
interim needs to have the opportunity to apply. I think that's
absolutely critical.
Thirdly, the search for him, you're right. You got Sabin; you got
Mercer. There may be a couple of others that specialize in this. And
believe me, they know where the good people are working. And I
think we owe it to ourselves and to the community to do this
modified search so that at the end of the day, when we make these
decisions, no one will say, "Well, you didn't really do this or that."
We'll do it all, and then make that decision as a Board of County
Commissioners. And who knows, whatever you do, no matter how
it's structured, you may flush out some other people along the way
that could possibly fill other positions in the County.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: And that's a motion.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's a motion? I will second that
motion, by the way. And I'm really glad that -- I hope that we
appoint a deputy manager right now to be the manager, the interim
manager, because he's going to have to carry us through the budget
seat. And it's going to have to be somebody that's very familiar with
our budget. And then we'll see how he works that budget. But we
have a motion on the floor and I've seconded it. I just thought I'd put
my two cents forth.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: You often wonder why the windows
do not open out. But I like your direction, Commissioners. I think
it's clear and concise. Any other comments? Commissioner
Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm sorry. Go ahead.
MR. CHAIRMAN: No, I'm through. I'm giving you the cue.
Page 258
May 28, 2002
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We got some public speakers,
and I'm dying to hear what their thoughts are. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Go ahead.
MS. FILSON: The first speaker is Phil Jackson and he will be
followed by Jack Pointer.
MR. JACKSON: Good evening and thank you for the
opportunity to address the Board. And my name is Phil Jackson and I
represent the DHR International, which is an executive search firm. I
want to just spend a minute. Certainly I support the motion that was
made so far. I do have something to add in the way of information
that would help further speed the process along.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Just before the gentleman starts,
may I ask the County Attorney, I believe this may not be appropriate
because of the motion and what we're doing?
MR. WEIGEL: I don't know what the gentleman is going to
say. Obviously, he has a right to public comment. Now, whether
that would prejudice his ability to participate in the process, it would
be an issue depending on his comments.
MR. OLLIFF: My recommendation would be that if the
gentleman is interested in the actual contract or the selection that he
meet with your purchasing director and not make a presentation to
the Board.
MR. JACKSON: Okay. Certainly I'll take -- if that's the
guidance given, then I'll follow that guidance. I did meet with the
procurement organization, and I am a registered supplier as of today.
I left some information packets with your secretary. So that
information, either you need to return to me if it's not appropriate for
you to have it and I'll resubmit through -- although I did leave a full
copy with the procurement organization.
MR. WEIGEL: And I think for the integrity of the process, I
mean, I know this is a well-intentioned speaker. But I think for
Page 259
May 28, 2002
purposes of not only actual but perceived integrity of the process, I
think it's important that these comments be reconsidered by the
speakers to not be made at this time. There will be a forum where he
will have that opportunity.
MR. OLLIFF: Absolutely.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And we thank you very much for
coming.
MR. JACKSON: Okay. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Next speaker is Jack Pointer, and
he will be followed by Bob Krasowski.
MR. POINTER: Good evening, Commissioners. My name is
Jack Pointer. I live in North Naples. The single most important job
of a manager is to provide for the continuity of management.
Manager Tom Olliff, supported by this Board, has provided to this
County the single greatest number of potential managers in recent
memory. People who are skilled in things like roads, transportation,
drinking water, wastewater, solid waste, public safety, personnel,
special services; all of those are leaders that we have available to us
to continue or to keep the continuity of management going in this
particular County. There is no reason at all to spend a nickle outside
the cost of running this County to find a replacement for the fine
manager that we have at the present time. In Collier County's 75
years of history, the people of Collier County not once went outside
the County to provide the Commissioners that are seated where we're
seated here and are seated here. The people were able to find its
commissioners, its leaders, raised them within the County or they
migrated into the County and took up positions of leadership, finally
seating themselves here.
This particular manager, this particular Commission has
provided itself with the finest people that you could possibly ask for
in the leadership positions. By promoting from within, you inspire
Page 260
May 28, 2002
the people that you have working for you saying, "Hey, we are
considered managers and the top people." And it goes all the way
down. You move one person up from within to the manager and
you're going to move the last person down at the bottom in a
promotion. I urge you to find within.
We've already got the finest people leading this County. It's
difficult to follow Tom Olliff, but it's got to be done and there are
people here. Please find them. You've already got them. You have
been found by us, the people. We the people expect you to find our
manager. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Thank you, Jack. That was
good.
MS. FILSON: The final speaker is Bob Krasowski.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Well, how do you follow that?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You can't, Bob.
MR. KRASOWSKI: You can't. No, I can't.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: But give it a try.
MR. KRASOWSKI: But I'll give my own personal opinion
here. I've been here for 23 years. I've seen a lot of managers come
and go. And there's been good and bad in all, but I certainly
appreciated my experience in relation to Mr. Olliff.
You know, he made a comment earlier about firms that are
specifically looking into these government positions, filling
government positions. But I don't know if that's where we want to
concentrate our efforts, because, you know, we're always talking
about thinking outside of the box. Well, let's start looking outside of
the box for solutions, you know. So I have a suggestion. I do believe
there's a lot of talent here, and there are people that could move up.
But I support what Mr. Olliff was saying about -- and Commissioner
Carter about looking, taking all options, all avenues just for the
purpose of getting as much input as you can.
Page 261
May 28, 2002
I would suggest one place we might look is the top management
at Disney Land. I don't see Collier County as being very different
from Disney Land. We have -- where is my -- oh, we have Frontier
Land in Golden Gate. We have Tomorrow Land in North Naples,
and Fantasy Land in Port Royal. Among other things, we do have
what approaches the Epcot Center out in the further reaches where
we have people from Haiti, Cuba, Mexico, Central and South
America.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I don't think this is really
necessary. Do you, Bob?
MR. KRASOWSKI: I do, yeah.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Let him. Go ahead.
MR. KR~SOWSKI: And if I could go on without interruption
outside of what you would consider as appropriate statements here,
whatever I say is appropriate for me.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You mean inappropriate
statements.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Or inappropriate.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Appropriate or not. Okay. So what I'm
pointing at here, and if we can lift the conceptualization a bit,
brainstorm a little bit, not to be stuck in the mud with our thinking,
just imagine a monorail that connected the hotels here with the
beaches and the upper class shopping districts, a monorail that would
go down and up Goodland that would be above and independent of
traffic lights and the traffic.
Then other connecting monorails that would go east, west; a
transportation system that somebody at Disney World would be very
familiar with. In the early '90's, I visited Disney World with then
Commissioner Tim Constantine. And what we investigated while we
were there was the Solid Waste Management -- surprised I'd be aware
Page 262
May 28, 2002
of this, right-- System there. And because Disney World can control
what comes in, they can keep bad stuff out. And they have an
excellent, Commissioner Henning, excellent composting operation
there. They compost their horticulture waste and their food waste.
And Tim and I stood there, along with a few other people, and the
odor was not offensive. It was very earthy, but it wasn't like a landfill
odor. And that's because of their anaerobic processing.
So I'm trying to be a little -- apply a little levity to the situation.
I'm dead serious in suggesting this because the county manager sets
the agenda. He can schedule when people appear and when they
don't which has an effect on the outcomes of many situations. It's
very important that we look around and make sure that we do
consider all things and hear from all people, because we are moving
into the future and we have to, you know, try to avail whatever
opportunities are out there to be progressive. Okay.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you for that neat approach.
Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Before we go too far astray here, I
just would like to say to Jack Pointer, thank you very much. There's
not many people here in this community who really take the time to
understand just what a good staff we have here and to understand
what a good job they're doing. And I'm afraid that many of them
have a quite different perception. But I sure wish that what you said
here today could be broadcast and written in every newspaper in
Collier and Lee County, because I think it very correctly sums up my
position on this staff here. I would have no problem whatsoever
asking Mr. James Mudd if he would be willing to become the County
Commissioner-- I mean, the -- maybe a Commissioner, too.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: You know what --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I love that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll pay this at my --
Page 263
May 28, 2002
COMMISSIONER COYLE: But County Manager. So I would
have no problem doing that whatsoever. I feel far more comfortable
hiring someone that I have observed in the job than in getting
someone from the outside that I don't really know. I've seen too
many people come before me with exceptional credentials who
turned out to be absolute duds. And I just don't want to get put in that
position with the problems we've got facing us today. So I know I
don't have enough support, I suspect, on the Board to proceed. But I
really would like to promote from within and proceed as you've
suggested, Jack, and thank you.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Well, I've never been an
advocate of promoting from within. But I've been here long enough
and received enough criticism that if I don't do what I propose, then I
really don't do justice by a person that we would promote internally.
And Tom knows what we went through before, because this is the
third County Manager that I'm working with. And I just think it's a
good insurance policy.
And there's some other benefits that spill out from that. But the
other comment that you made, you know, we could clip out what
Jack Pointer just said and show this on Channel 1 1 as a separate part.
And we need to do more of that where we capsulize some of our
discussions and put them out there so you get the news, if you please.
You don't have to watch 12 hours of Commission meeting.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'd support a motion to put it on
our channel, run it hours a day for the next two weeks.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And let me just jump in here and
say Jack would know because he sits at all of these meetings. He has
an agenda. He's not trying to impress anybody, and he's not trying to
get anybody in office. He just says it because he's here all the time
and he reads everything.
Page 264
May 28, 2002
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And I consider Jack Pointer to be a
tremendous asset. I take him with me quite often to different
meetings I have, and he contributes quite a bit. Although I do have
some reservations about taking a clip and running it, it might be self-
serving, I think, in the contents of the meeting or in the agenda issue
that it fits in.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Well, we could take Tom's clips
how he led us into this and we then can take the quotes from the
audience. I mean, you can consolidate what we do on one agenda
item just like they do in the newsroom in other news stations. And
you can get it down where people get the message but they don't have
to listen to all the rhetoric.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Wouldn't it be neat if we could
control the news?
COMMISSIONER CARTER: We can. It's our own channel.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'd like to comment on
Commissioner Coyle's comments. I too feel very strongly about Jim.
I just feel that he can lead us. I think he's done a great job. Yet, I
don't want to in any way take away from all he can be by just shutting
the door, because then he might get criticized. I don't think that that's
fair. I think that he needs to win out over everybody, because as far as
I'm concerned and obviously Commissioner Coyle, he does win out
over everybody. But this way the press --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: It gives you a comparison.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. The press can't say, "We had
a closed mind."
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And regardless of what you come up
with, whatever process, judging what I've seen in the past, we're still
going to get criticized.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, yeah.
Page 265
May 28, 2002
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: But that can be accepted as part of
the job description that we have.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: But I never thought that was part of
the job description when I ran.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: They fooled you, didn't they? Let's
go to-
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Do we need to incorporate in the
motion then as a part of that that the Board would like to offer the
Interim County Administrator position to Jim Mudd who would take
over approximately July 15th if we meet Tom Olliff's schedule?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'll second that.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Is that correct, on the 15th?
MR. OLLIFF: Yes, sir. In fact, if you're looking to go through
those points, I think that you're directing us to go through an
accelerated consultant -- selection consultant process. The second
thing is that you are, based on your most recent discussion,
appointing the Deputy County Manager, James Mudd, to become
your acting or Interim County Administrator or County Manager
effective July 15th. Lastly, I think, and I would thank you, this is part
of that, that you're authorizing the Chairman to sign a contract
amendment of mine that would allow the notice period to go from 90
days to the 60 days to the July 15th date. And lastly, I think you'd
probably want to include in that motion some direction, because Mr.
Mudd, once he becomes your acting or interim manager, is no longer
your deputy.
And even though it may be a period of time, for his own
protection, I would recommend that he have an agreement, an
employment agreement with you, even for that brief period of time,
that just simply assures him that once the selection process is over
with, he's still got a position to be able to go back to even if it's
somebody else that's selected.
Page 266
May 28, 2002
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Good point.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Excellent point, Tom. I would
want to hold his position when we went through this so he's got that
option.
MR. OLLIFF: Yep.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Would you incorporate that in your
second?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Absolutely.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Is there any other discussion?
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I can't support the motion.
And the reason I can't support it is an interim manager that is
applying for the position has an unfair advantage over other
candidates. We don't know what other internal personnel that might
be interested in applying for this job. So it's not fair to the rest of the
employees or other candidates.
I'm a little bit concerned about the short period of time that we're
going to be in the selection process. We have great staff to get us
through a difficult-- any difficult situation with Tom Olliff not being
here, because he's done a great job of staffing this County with
intelligent people. So that's my comments on the motion.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Any other comments?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Just a question: So if you have a
search firm out there and they're e-mailing candidates, they would
also let the candidates know we have an interim manager that's
available for this job, right?
MR. OLLIFF: Absolutely. And anybody worth their salt who's
actually making the application, would have known that on their own.
They would have searched that out and found out that the deputy was
appointed as an interim and has applied.
Page 267
May 28, 2002
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Any other comments or questions?
For that I'm going to call for the question. All those in favor of the
motion as so stated indicate by saying aye. Aye.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. We have one descending vote
and that's Commissioner Henning. Thank you. MR. OLLIFF:
CHAIRMAN, thank you. And just in closing, I'll pass the
thanks to Bob, because there are a lot of segways between a County
Manager, collection and garbage. And I was just waiting to see
where he was going with his, and he took the high road on it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: May I just say that Jim Coletta
whispered under his breath, "How are we going to replace him?" So
you are truly going to be missed.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: He isn't gone yet. We still get to
pick on him for a couple more weeks.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Right. We've got 90 days.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'm already mourning.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We just gave up.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Did we just give it up?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We sure did.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I shouldn't have voted for it.
MR. OLLIFF: I appreciate it. While I am looking forward to
the new challenge, I cannot tell you how much I'll miss this place.
It's part of my life and after even 19 years I was very serious in the e-
mail that I sent out to the staff that most of the people that I've
worked with are not only good friends, but most of them are as close
Page 268
May 28, 2002
as extended family.
is easy for me either.
COMMISSIONER HENNING:
strip.
MR. OLLIFF: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA:
television, Tom.
And so it's going to be hard. So don't think this
It's only an hour and a half
You can always watch us on
No, on second thought, you don't want to do that.
Item # 10-0
AMENDMENT NO. 3 IN THE AMOUNT OF $535,432.45 TO THE
CONTRACT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
BY AGNOLI, BARBER AND BRUNDAGE, INC., FOR THE
DESIGN OF LIVINGSTON ROAD FROM GOLDEN GATE
PARKWAY TO PINE RIDGE ROAD; AND THE DESIGN OF
LIVINGSTON ROAD FROM PINE RIDGE ROAD TO
IMMOKALEE ROAD - APPROVED
Okay. Now we're on Item 10-O, which was originally 16-C15;
is that correct?
MR. WEIGEL: It was 16-B5 Commissioner.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: 16-B5. Okay. Stand corrected.
MR. CAMP: Edward Camp, Transportation Operations
Director. This will be fairly quick. I believe Commissioner Coyle
requested that this be pulled for a brief explanation of what was --
what the substance of the item is. I put on the visualizer a very -- just
a strip map showing Livingston Road. It's being zoomed in now to
Phase 4, which is the northerly portion.
I'd like to move this up a little bit. Phase 3, which is -- that
northerly portion, that is being from Immokalee Road north to the
County line. Phase 3 being from just north of Pine Ridge Road to
Page 269
May 28, 2002
Immokalee Road. Phase two, from Pine Ridge down to Golden Gate.
And, of course, Phase 1, the phase which is open and seeing an
almost daily increase in use down to Radio Road. This particular
agenda item covers Phases 2 and 3. Just as I stated in the agenda
item, the divisional contract was signed in 1999. Amendment
Number 1, which was in 2000, was an emergency declaration by the
Board to extend the limits of the project so we could get it all the way
up to Immokalee Road. Amendment Number 2 in 2001 went to give
all of Livingston Road a six-lane cross section. And this particular
amendment is one, which is in essence, an after-the-fact amendment
in that, if you'll remember back about two years ago we had a
significant sum of money that FDOT was going to allocate toward
the project. At that time all our permits were in place. Our design
was underway.
And in order to preserve both permitting and the money at the
time, this was prior to FDOT's recent determination that we weren't
going to get some of that funding, the consultant was authorized by
staff to move forward and protect those permits. There was quite a
bit of work that was done. I can run down through here. The list
starts with everything from additional sound barrier walls to revised
additional permitting services. A lot of work was spent in the right-
of-way taking process with depositions and hearings. There was an
addition for some portion of Orange Blossom Drive so that it would
be fully connected up all the way from Goodlette Road through to
Livingston Road. There were additional accesses and utilities in
North Collier Regional Park. At the point at which we had a 90
percent plan submission it was determined that we had to revise nine
intersections because of six-laning. And I could go on and on. But
this is for work that was done over about a year and half to two-year
period.
Page 270
May 28, 2002
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Ed, so that we don't take up too
much time, let me just ask you the questions I have concerning this.
MR. CAMP: Certainly.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA:
associated with this?
MR. CAMP:
pin down what all
almost impossible
are going to be up
time were, and it's
These were unanticipated costs
Yes, sir. At the time it was almost impossible to
of the Imminent Domain. And this is typical. It's
to determine what your Imminent Domain costs
front, coupled with the fact that the plans at the
leased for Phase 2, almost substantially complete
up to about the 90 percent phase. And then when we went back and
determined that we were going to use -- go to the six-lane and change
the median out so that we get a full 22-foot median; that required a
lot of changes in the access management plan. So this was one of
these things where we were moving along and all of a sudden there
were in-process changes.
The good news is that had this been a negotiated change up
front, the cost probably would have been higher, because we've been
working on estimates. In this case, we were able to go back and
require the consultant to prove the time out. And I can say that I'm
aware of a number of times when the staff was able to negotiate this
fee much more favorably.
So this is an unusual situation. I think if we hadn't had the twin
prongs of the permitting issues and the money that was hanging out
there from FDOT, we may have approached it somewhat differently.
But there was a great reluctance, if my memory serves me correctly
at the time, to stop the project or to do anything that would hold it up
because of that FDOT funding. Unfortunately, as you're aware, that
changed rather rapidly right at the end of the job or almost at the end
of the job. But by this time we'd already made the commitment.
Page 271
May 28, 2002
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: One of the items that's listed here is a
survey of FP&L transmission line locations. That can't be
unanticipated, I mean, they've been there a long long time, right?
Those are the kinds of things that are bothering me a little bit about
this and particularly when we're talking about over a half million
dollar of change orders. It caused me some concern.
MR. CAMP: I'm going to have to defer that. I asked Dan
Brundage, who is our consultant on this project, to stick around since
I was not directly involved with the contract negotiations. But I'd like
Dan to explain that particular item.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, things like archeological
investigation and protected species surveys. I mean, you would have
had to do that for a two-lane road. Why are you charging again for a
four-lane road? And I don't understand those kinds of things.
MR. BRUNDAGE: As far as the FP&L survey-
COMMISSIONER CARTER: For the record.
MR. BRUNDAGE: Oh, I'm sorry. For the record, my name is
Dan Brundage. I'm the principal in charge with Agndi, Barber &
Brundage for the project. The FP&L costs were associated with
when they did their line relocation, they did not take into
consideration the drainage system on the project. And we found that
at some of the intersections there were conflicts between their
locations and the close proximity to some drainage lines.
So what we did was go out and survey the exact location of the
poles. And then we had to do some modifications while the project
was under construction to redesign the drainage system to basically
rectify that conflict. With regards to the specie survey and the
archaeological studies, those are things you cannot anticipate when
you're doing the proposal process.
Our subconsultant that put together a proposal for that portion of
the work felt like this was an area that was fairly nonimpacted with
Page 272
May 28, 2002
pristine wetlands and that type of thing. Plus, they really did not
anticipate any type of archaeological sites along the way which
would consist of, you know, Indian artifacts and that type of thing.
That proved to be the case. But we had to do a study anyway to
satisfy some of the permitting agencies that report to the Corps of
Engineer. They still insisted on performing those studies. So that's
basically where those-
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It seems to me that we do that on
just about every construction project we proceed with. And it's not
really unexpected.
MR. BRUNDAGE: Well, you'll do it where you know you're
going to have a problem. But on this project, given this close
proximity to some of the FP&L lines and previously cleared rights of
way and that type of thing, it was really unanticipated.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: One last thing, just for
clarification, Watermark Communities was going to build a golf cart
underpass.
MR. BRUNDAGE: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It was my understanding that they
were going to assume the responsibility for the cost of doing that.
MR. BRUNDAGE: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And but yet there's a charge in
here for coordinating with them and developing revised cross-section
sheets, appropriate details and minimize the meeting with etc., etc. If
Watermark was going to pay the cost for doing that, why are we
having to do all this kind of work?
MR. BRUNDAGE: I can't-- well, unfortunately,
Commissioner, I don't have any history on that personally. I can only
suggest that this is probably very similar to the situation we ran
across when Pelican Marsh built the bridge that is -- Goodlette Road
Page 273
May 28, 2002
crosses Pelican Marsh Boulevard. They bought and paid for that.
That was all their costs.
However, there were coordination costs for the County at that
time, because we were designing the roadway. Again, I would only
suggest that it is a very similar situation, but I have nothing factual at
this point to back me up on that, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
MR. BRUNDAGE: Any other questions from the Board?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I just get very worried about a half
million dollars in change orders for contracts.
MR. BRUNDAGE: I might point out that even with this, the
cost of this particular roadway design and the construction costs were
significantly less than what we typically find if for no other reason
but to thank heaven we weren't working under traffic. You can't
imagine how much that increases the cost of construction.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: If there's no further questions,
I'll entertain a motion.
COMMISSIONER
COMMISSIONER
COMMISSIONER
COMMISSIONER
COMMISSIONER
COMMISSIONER
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING:
The motion is 5 to 0.
FIALA: Motion to approve.
CARTER: Second.
HENNING: All in favor? Aye.
CARTER: Aye.
FIALA: Aye.
COYLE: Aye.
Any opposed? Any opposed?
MR. BRUNDAGE: Thank you, Commissioners.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Commissioner Coyle, I do share
your concerns on these. I have for a long time. I don't know what
the answer is. But I do hope in the future we can find a better way if
Page 274
May 28, 2002
Project Management could tighten this up and deal with these and not
have a number like that in front of us.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. That's very worrisome.
Item #10P
FEASIBILITY ASSESSMENT AND PRELIMINARY
PRESENTATION OF LANDFILL GAS TO ENERGY PROJECT-
APPROVED
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Let's move onto the next Item, 16-
C15, correct?
MR. WEIGEL: Sir, it's 10-P.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA:
COMMISSIONER FIALA: 10-P.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: P. P.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: P. P.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Got it.
Now 10-B.
P.
P as in Paul.
MR. YILMAZ: Good afternoon, Commissioners. For the
record, George Yilmaz, your Solid Waste Director. Commissioners,
landfill gas to energy project will have three primary objectives this
year: One, decrease our air emissions significantly by applying H2S
scrubbers and catalytic converters to utilize landfill gas to power one
of our water plants; three, provide long-term revenue stream for
landfill gas management and control. Having said that, before I take
more of your time, we have a brief presentation that we can make.
However-- yes, Commissioner?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I asked for this to be pulled. Why
don't you just let me ask my question?
MR. YILMAZ: Yes, sir.
Page 275
May 28, 2002
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And then you can get on with this.
Okay. I've got two Items, 16-C 11, which is a Memorandum of
Agreement, Memorandum of Understanding with Waste
Management; and an Item 16-C 11 that appears to address pretty
much the same project.
MR. YILMAZ: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Now, what I find-- what I don't
understand is, why are these two separate, and what is the purpose of
these two executive summaries?
MR. YILMAZ: The executive summary for landfill gas to
energy initiatives for us to receive Board authorization to act the way
our landfill operation's contract landfill gas to energy project section.
The memorandum of understanding is to establish mutual
understanding between parties, in this case, Waste Management in
Collier County, to, in writing, acknowledge what their
responsibilities are so that with that activation each party, not
verbally but in writing, understand what that means.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. On one of them you're asking us
to give you authority to bring back a negotiated proposal from Waste
Management?
MR. YILMAZ: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: On the other one you're asking us
to authorize you to develop a memorandum of understanding with
Waste Management?
MR. YILMAZ: Yes.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Now, what does a memorandum of
understanding do that negotiated agreement wouldn't do?
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, the memorandum of
understanding was something that we did in October, I think it was,
George. September or October, we sat down with Waste
Management to make sure that we weren't stepping all over their
Page 276
May 28, 2002
present contract for the landfill, okay, and dedicated waste streams,
okay, that it has some stipulations in there about what stuffs theirs
from the franchise that actually collects it. So it was more
encompassing to talk about all different kinds of avenues that we
could take, may it be recycling, commercial recycling. I mean, we
heard Ms. Douglas talk about that a little bit today. We talked about,
"What would we do with the gas? Who owns the gas off the
landfill?" We talked about, "What happens if we had a compost
operation? Who has the -- who owns the yard waste? Who gets the
sludge? What stuff could we take in order to do that process? If the
County went to some kind of a gasification technology, how would
that work in that process?"
Because you're talking about dedicated waste streams and how
you work through that process. That's what the MOU is all about.
We didn't want to have people sit there and start speculating and get
into a big, nasty fight about garbage and about the County's future
plans.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So the MOU is primarily to lay the
groundwork for the negotiated proposal itself?.
MR. MUDD: And not only this negotiated proposal, but
additional RFP's that we have out on the street right now.
COMMISSIONERCOYLE: Okay. Thank you. That answered
my question. Thanks.
MS. FILSON: Mr. CHAIRMAN, we have two registered
speakers.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Please call them.
MS. FILSON: Jack Pointer, and he will be followed by Bob
Krasowski.
MR. POINTER: Good afternoon, Commissioners. My name is
Jack Pointer. I live in North Naples. This item to approve the
feasibility assessment and preliminary presentation of landfill gas to
Page 277
May 28, 2002
electric energy project is one that I would be concerned with and
would like you to be concerned with. I am not saying that it works or
it doesn't work, but I would like you to consider these things, that if,
in fact, you decide to provide yourselves with gas from the landfill
and try to convert that into energy, you have got to make some
investment.
The probability is that the gas available to you would not exceed
the capacity of providing maybe about 40 megawatts of electric-
generating capacity. If, in fact, that is the number, then it would cost
you approximately $60 million, about a million and a half dollars per
megawatt, to install the machinery. Then you've got to put yourself
together with the people and a utility to run that. And you set it up
probably for a 30-year period. An amount of money is going to be
required to run that system and to make it produce electricity for you.
It is going to cost you something. Look at how much investment
you've got to make versus how can you buy the same power or the
same requirements from the present Florida Power & Light that have
got their system in operation at the present time. You probably have
to look at a 30-year period. The probability is that it's going to be
very closely balanced. But when the time comes to get into this a
little bit deeper, if this is the way that the County wants to go and the
Commission wants to go, fine and dandy. But just be sure that you
recognize that invested cost on the part of the County has to be
weighed with operating costs on the part of buying power. Thank
you, very much.
MS. FILSON: Your final speaker, Bob Krasowski.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Thank you, Commissioners, Bob
Krasowski again, this time with Zero Waste Collier County. I have --
I'm very interested in what Mr. Pointer was saying as well as maybe
hearing from Mr. Swartz, from Malcolm Pimie who was about to
speak. And I'd love to have the answers to the questions that Mr.
Page 278
May 28, 2002
Mudd had brought up as far as his discussion with Waste
Management. As I understand it, Waste Management manages the
landfill for us, and I don't quite understand how that brings about a
situation where they own the gas. You know, I thought we'd own the
gas. I know there's a flare out there already and that I believe by
putting the energy generator on top of that, we get to some benefit
from what's being flared up. I have no idea if Mr. Pointer's numbers
were accurate or correct. I saw Mr. Swartz making faces when he
mentioned 60 million bucks for the 40 megawatts. So I'd like to
know more about it.
And then I'd also like, because for years we've been talking
about this, A1 Perkins used to come down here and say, "Use the gas.
Use the gas." And we're finally getting around to doing it. But he
had some very large numbers as far as the value of the gas and how
much gas was in there. And yet other people spoke about, "Well, if
you tried to manage the gas, it could cause odor problems, you
know." So they're all interesting things. But I'd sure like to know and
I think this is going to come back before you. Is that true? Is that
correct, before any final arrangement is made? Because maybe at
that time all these questions will be answered because it's our landfill.
It's our gas. And if it is -- if it does have a high value, money value,
we should be well on the deal, not just get -- give it up or let it slip
away or whatever. So I think we should all 'keep an eye on this. I
guess that's it for now. Okay. Unless I can get somebody to explain
more about the deal from the consultants. We pay them a lot. Let's
get them up here.
COMMISSIONER COYLE' When it comes back.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Why don't we do that another
time?
MR. KRASOWSKI: Later on when this comes back?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Sure.
Page 279
May 28, 2002
MR. KRASOWSKI: Okay. Sure. If that's appropriate.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. We have a motion?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Move to approve.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Motion to approve from
Commissioner Henning, second by Commissioner Carter. Any
discussion? All those in favor indicate by saying aye. Aye.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
Item # 10Q
RESOLUTION 2002-257, CHANGES TO THE COUNTY
PURCHASING POLICY TO ENHANCE CONTRACT
ADMINISTRATION AND MANAGEMENT- ADOPTED
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Moving back on, 16-E8,
which is now what?
MR. OLLIFF: 10-Q.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: 10-Q.
MR. CARNELL: Good evening, Mr. CHAIRMAN, Steve
Carnell, Purchasing General Services Director. We have a four-and-
a-half-hour presentation for you ready to go.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Let me just ask you three
questions.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: I'll nod off for a while.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: We needed that little laugh.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. I understand what you've
done with reducing it from a standard ten percent to the greater of
Page 280
May 28, 2002
$10,000 or ten percent. That makes it more restrictive, right? But
under work orders, you provided, "As long as it does not exceed
$100,000 or if it does exceed $100,000 it doesn't exceed ten percent."
So if I've got a $5 million contract, I'm talking about giving you the
permission to make a $500,000 change order approval. And on the
one hand, you're making things more restrictive. On the other hand,
we're leaving them fairly open-ended. Is there a reason for that?
MR. CARNELL: Yes, sir. This is actually in concert with our
existing policy with regard to change orders. The Board has
amended our policy in February to permit us to authorize change
orders at the staff level up to ten percent of existing contract
authority. And as you say, for a larger contract, that would mean
larger dollars of discretion available. For a smaller contract,
obviously, it would be less.
What we're attempting to do now is make that consistent for
work orders that come from contracts. And then if I can take a
moment just briefly to distinguish the difference, a change order is an
instrument to an existing contract where we want to modify scope,
schedule time, activity, dollars expended, because we want to modify
in some way the activities under a contract that is typically project
specific. We have a very specific agenda and schedule of work that
we're attempting to accomplish. And we want to come back and
amend that for one reason or another, increase it or decrease it.
A work order is different. A work order is an actual directive to
do work under an umbrella or a term agreement that already exists
that we have procured competitively but is entered into in a more
general way where we don't have a specific list of tasks when we
begin. For example, our annual contract for engineers, annual
contract for architects, in general, where we have them available to
perform services.
Page 281
May 28, 2002
And then when we're ready to use them. We issue a work order
that tells them to go to do specific tasks and we set forth a schedule
and a fee and so forth. And what this is doing, Commissioner, is
simply attempting to make clear, and we've never had this
clarification in our policy before, that work orders, in effect, have the
same limits that change orders do, that there is a ten percent
authorization to work within there then which staff can approve work
orders. And when I say staff, I don't mean the secretary or the janitor.
I'm talking about division administrators would be authorizing these
actions. And there are other inherent restrictions as well. For
example, budget restrictions, we're not permitted to exceed our
budget authority in approving a work order or a change order. And
that -- the change order portion is already existing policy in practice.
This is just carrying that over to the work order side.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I disagree with you that that's what
this does. Okay. I think they're substantially different. The change
order -- the contract changes say that you can approve amounts not
more than the greater of ten percent or $10,000. Under the work
orders, you're saying the higher of $100,000 or ten percent.
MR. CARNELL: Well, it's intended to be the greater of in each
instance, in both instances. The reason we have that language is that
work orders vary in size. We could have a work order for $10,000.
We could have a work order for a million dollars. And the reason
that we set that forth, we have had -- what we wanted to do was to
not create a situation where a $10,000 work order was limited to ten
percent. We could only have a $1,000 worth of authorization to
adjust it, should the need arise. So what we did, we've written the
language in such a way that the smaller work orders, in effect, get an
absolute boundary of $10,000 and that the larger work orders then
operate under the ten percent provision, that right now is our current
practice with change orders.
Page 282
May 28, 2002
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. It's getting clear to me. I
understand what you've said. I just questioned whether or not ten
percent is an appropriate figure if we're talking about multi-million
dollar contracts. I don't know. What is your normal practice? MR. OLLIFF: Ten percent.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It's always been ten percent?
MR. OLLIFF: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: If you had it less than ten percent,
you wouldn't have to go through all this stuff with me every time?
MR. CARNELL: No, we'd be seeing you more frequently if it
were less than ten percent.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, I know. But at least it
wouldn't be a surprise.
MR. OLLIFF: Okay. It's still worth it.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Is it still worth it?
MR. OLLIFF: Yes, sir. And it's worth it in order to make these
projects keep moving. And that's one of the changes that we made
when we originally came to the Board with an Accelerated
Transportation Construction Plan was some expanded change order
authority.
MR. CARNELL: Commissioner Coyle, or any other member of
the Board, I'd be happy to, if you'd like any further explanation in
terms of what we're doing at the administrative level with the
procedures, I'd be happy to give you some additional information
subsequent to the meeting as well. I'd offer that to you if there's
anything further I can clarify for you.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Really, my only concern is I see
lots and lots and lots of change orders coming through and they're
huge amounts of money. And I think there's several of us here who
are a little worried about the volume of change orders, particularly
Page 283
May 28, 2002
the dollar volume. And somehow we need to get a better handle on
those things, either in project management or in approval review.
MR. CARNELL: Well, let me address that in that the
administrative procedures, we focused in on these thresholds. But
there's really much more to this that's happening. This administrative
procedure is our first comprehensive attempt as an agency to create a
common administrative baseline to how we administer things like
change orders and work orders.
And when I say administer, I don't just -- that would include the
basics such as who approves and what sequence and how we
formulate, put them together. But it also includes some baseline for
how we analyze and review change orders, the need for them, and
trying to provide the staff some common guidance as to when the
change order arises or work order adjustment.
When the issue question comes up about the need to potentially
adjust the scope to have a standard that we can refer to as a starting
point for all of our project managers and all of our staff County-wide
so that we can begin to raise, if you will, the professionalism further
and increase our contract in attracting management ability and
hopefully do a better job of some things that you may be concerned
about in terms of making sure that we properly audited and reviewed
a change order before we approve it and also taking proactive steps to
avoid them.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: I think we need a motion here.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: That's what I was waiting to see if
Commissioner Coyle had any more questions.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No, I'm sorry. I'm all finished.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I make a motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Second.
Page 284
May 28, 2002
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Any other discussion? All those in
favor indicate by saying aye. Aye.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Opposed? The ayes have it 5 to 0.
Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thanks for keeping it short, not
three hours.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Hey.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: But you had to discard the four-
hour message.
MR. CARNELL: That will be next time.
Item # 1 OR
RFP #02-3345, ANNUAL CONTRACT FOR UNDERGROUND
UTILITY CONSTRUCTION SERVICES IN THE ESTIMATED
AMOUNT OF $6,000,000- APPROVED AS CONTAINED IN
THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Now, it's 10-R, which is formerly
16-El0.
MR. OLLIFF: I think if we can go straight to Mr. Coyle.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. This is another $6 million
amount. I just want to make sure that --
MR. OLLIFF: This is actually the same as your annual
contracts --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
Page 285
May 28, 2002
MR. OLLIFF: -- where we have then a series of firms that we
can use at guaranteed rates and prices. If for instance we have
waterline breaks that, like the project at U.S. 41 and Immokalee Road
in the middle of the night, we've got a contract already on-hand that
we can pick up the phone, we know what the rates are going to be.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: This is not authorization to spend
$6 million?
MR. OLLIFF: No, sir.
COMMISSIONERCOYLE: Okay. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Vote for approval.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Any discussion?
COMMISSIONER HENNING:
CHAIRMAN COLETTA:
Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING:
Yes.
All right, Commissioner
If I could just say with the new
GIS System, hopefully we can not budget this kind of money on that
and cut that down, because everything's going to be laid out.
MR. OLLIFF: That's our hope, too.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Good point.
MR. OLLIFF: Item 1 OS, Mr. CHAIRMAN, was -EH on your--
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We didn't get a chance to vote yet.
We're moving too quick. All those in favor indicate by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER
COMMISSIONER
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed?
FIALA: Aye.
COYLE: Aye.
The ayes have it 5 to 0.
Item #1 OS
Page 286
May 28, 2002
RFP #02-3359, ANNUAL CONTRACT FOR TELEMETRY
SERVICES IN THE ESTIMATED AMOUNT OF $700,000-
APPROVED AS CONTAINED IN THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Okay. Last item -- well, 10-S, which was originally 16-E 11.
MR. CARNELL: I might as well take that as my four-and-a-
half hour presentation. This was a recommendation -- this is similar
to your utility -- underground utility contract in that we're asking to --
you to award annual contracts for telemetry services. This is simply
to get these agreements in place competitively through the
competitive process so that we have the ability to obtain these
services on a timely and prompt basis from these various firms that
we've selected. We have a selection committee that's done the review
on the competitive process and recommends award of these contracts.
I'll be happy to answer any questions.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Any questions?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: The expenditures will come back
to us for approval on this one?
MR. CARNELL: The contract calls for work orders of, I
believe, it's $200,000 or more will come back to the Board for
approval. Work orders below that will be approved at the staff level
provided that there is sufficient funding and sufficient budget in the
project.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Vote for approval.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Second. We have a motion from
Commissioner Fiala, a second from Commissioner Coletta. With
approval, any discussion? All those in favor indicate by saying aye.
Aye.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
Page 287
May 28, 2002
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: The ayes have it 5 to 0. Let's go on
to the County Attorney's report.
MR. YILMAZ: No, sir. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Mr.--
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Good move.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Are you sure?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Good move.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Mr. Olliff?
MR. OLLIFF: Think of it, sir, at 7:25, good County Managers
keep their mouths shut.
Item #15
STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Let's start with Commissioner
Henning and see if there's any closing comments.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes, I think it's public
comment and public petitions. Today I looked at it, we spent an hour
and a half by the time we gave out the awards and everything else.
And what I have been noticing over the last few meetings is, we'll
have some people come in and punch and jab and then leave and kind
of setting the stage for the meeting. And I don't know how the rest of
you would feel about taking that item and moving it after the County
Manager's report.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, I kind of like that idea.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Oh, I like it, Commissioner
Henning. You know, we moved that to accommodate the public,
Page 288
May 28, 2002
because a lot of people waited around to make some comments and I
think often meaningful comments.
Today I'm finding it's becoming an opportunity to, you know,
whatever you did -- you had for breakfast didn't agree and you're
going to come in here and you're going to do whatever you're going
to do. I'd rather move it down on the agenda. Let's get some of the
other business taken care of. It does not preclude them from having
the opportunity to come and speak to us. But frankly, I think it's
getting abused.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And if you take look at it,
there's more people waiting for their item to come up. We had one of
our advisory Board members sitting here for all morning long, then
had to go to work. I mean, he just -- you know, there was enough of
it that he just had to go to work. And I really felt bad about that. So
maybe we can do a time certain for that. But you see, those are the
kind of things that we need to try to avoid to accommodate the masse.
So thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: You want to make that in the form of
a motion?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Can we do that now or do we
need to bring it back or just give you guidance to rearrange the
agenda?
MR. OLLIFF: That's all it would take.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Good.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: All in favor. Just nod your heads, I
guess.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I think it's a good idea. I just have
one question: Do you think there's any benefit to trying to make it a
time certain either right before or after lunch?
Page 289
May 28, 2002
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I think the easy thing about it is
you can just tune in the TV and see how far we are in the agenda and
know when you have to come down.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right. It has the agenda --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: They don't even have to wait then.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And not only that, but we still allow
people to speak on every single item that comes before us. Okay. I
think you have sufficient direction from that.
MR. OLLIFF: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA:
anything else?
Commissioner Henning, do you have
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It's a pleasure to be here with
yOU.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: It's been a pleasure to be here with
you, too, sir. Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And I've really enjoyed it, too.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I have never had so much fun in my
whole life. Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You guys are punchy already.
Good night, everyone.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: I think this Board is sick. I just
want to thank this Board for the proclamation today. And the water
symposium is very generous. I dearly appreciate that. And,
Corrunissioner Henning, excellent letter to the editor on this subject.
I can't thank you enough for the recognition. It's been my pleasure as
always to serve.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And I just have to add, I heard that
you were there all the time at that symposium, you and your wife --
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Yes, ma'am.
Page 290
May 28, 2002
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- guiding that thing through. And,
I mean, that's speaking -- speaking of dedication, we are really proud
that you were there on the forefront for us.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Well, by attending, I learned a
lot. I think I got my money's worth.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Not only that, he gets free water
for a year.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: No. I have to compete for that.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioner Carter, you
deserve everything that you got on the organization of that
symposium and sticking with it and for the betterment of the
community. So thank you.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Thank you. And tomorrow
morning at 10:00, that will be part of an announcement I make.
We're going to move further with that through a State effort.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Fine. With that, we're adjourned.
Thereupon, (Requested transcription of tapes completed.)
**** Commissioner Carter moved, seconded by Commissioner
Fiala, and carried unanimously, that the following items under
the Consent and Summary Agendas be approved and/or
adopted: * * ***
Item #16Al
EXECUTIVE RELEASE OF CODE ENFORCEMENT LIEN
ESTABLISHED IN COLLIER COUNTY V. WILLIAM H.
TOST, II AND BETTY TOST-IN THE AMOUNT OF $3,300
Item # 16A2
Page 291
May 28, 2002
RESOLUTION 2002-228 EXTENDING THE TERM OF THE
WORKFORCE HOUSING ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Item # 16A3
RESOLUTIONS 2002-229 & 2002-230, PROVIDING FOR
THE ASSESSMENT OF LIENS FOR THE COST OF THE
ABATEMENT OF PUBLIC NUISANCES
Item #16A4
RESOLUTIONS 2002-231 THROUGH 2002-237,
PROVIDING FOR THE ASSESSMENT OF LIENS FOR THE
COST OF THE ABATEMENT OF PUBLIC NUISANCES
Item # 16A5 -Continued to July 30, 2002
PROPOSAL TO IMPOSE A TEMPORARY MORATORIUM
ON PROJECTS IN THE WHIPPOORWILL AREA
(BOUNDED ON THE NORTH BY PINE RIDGE ROAD, ON
THE SOUTH BY THE WYNDEMERE SUBDIVISION, ON
THE EAST BY 1-75, AND ON THE WEST BY PROPOSED
LIVINGSTON ROAD) UNTIL SUCH TIME AS A MASTER
PLAN SHOWING PROPOSED INFRASTRUCTURE
IMPROVEMENTS, INCLUDING AT A MINIMUM,
POTABLE WATER DISTRIBUTION, SANITARY SEWAGE
COLLECTION, STORMWATER MANAGEMENT, AND
ROADS, HAS BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE COLLIER
COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION. (JOSEPH K.
SCHMITT, ADMINISTRATOR, COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT)
Item # 16B 1
Page 292
May 28, 2002
BUDGET AMENDMENT NO. 2 IN THE AMOUNT OF
$44,629.25 TO WOODS HOLE GROUP FOR THE
HALDEMAN CREEK BASIN RESTORATION (AKA
DREDGING) PROJECT, CONTRACT NO. 01-3216,
PROJECT NO. 31011
Item gl 6B2
BUDGET AMENDMENT, TRANSFERRING FUNDS FROM
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS GENERAL OF THE
IMMOKALEE BEAUTIFICATION FUND 156 IN THE
AMOUNT OF $150,000.00 TO THE IMMOKALEE NORTH
TRIANGLE BEAUTIFICATION PROJECT #66071
Item #16B3
BUDGET AMENDMENT, TRANSFERRING FUNDS FROM
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS GENERAL OF THE
IMMOKALEE BEAUTIFICATION FUND 156 IN THE
AMOUNT OF $87,370.00 TO THE IMMOKALEE MAIN
STREET BEAUTIFICATION (SR 29) PROJECT #66073
Item #16B4
BUDGET AMENDMENT AND CHANGE ORDER
NUMBER 2 FOR THE 13TM STREET SW BRIDGE DESIGN-
BUILD CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT NO. 01-3223,
PROJECT NO. 60012, PURCHASE ORDER NO. 204298,
FOR $15,856.00
Item #16B5 - Moved to Item #100
Item # 16B6
Page 293
May 28, 2002
WARRANTY DEED FOR ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY IN
ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERRAFINA PUD
DEVELOPMENT COMMITMENT AND QUITCLAIM TO
THE OWNERS ANY INTEREST THE COUNTY MAY
HAVE IN A 60 FOOT STRIP OF LAND ALONG THE
SOUTH BOUNDARY OF THE WEST HALF OF THE
TERRAFINA PUD
Item #16B7
TWO (2) ROAD IMPACT FEE REFUND REQUESTS
TOTALING $144,090.00
Item #16B8
RESOLUTION 2002-238 ESTABLISHING A "NO
PARKING" ZONE ALONG CRESCENT LAKE DRIVE AS
PLATTED IN CRESCENT LAKE SUBDIVISION, PLAT
BOOK 13, PAGE 65-67 FROM ITS INTERSECTION WITH
AIRPORT ROAD TO ITS INTERSECTION WITH
CAMPBELL CIRCLE. APPROXIMATELY EIGHT SIGNS
WILL BE NEEDED AT A COST OF $100 EACH FOR A
TOTAL OF $800
Item # 16C 1
THE PURCHASE OF SOLE SOURCE CARTRIDGE
FILTERS FROM GEORGE S. EDWARDS CO., INC., IN THE
AMOUNT OF $51,488.50. THIS IS A RELIABILITY
UPGRADE (SPARE PARTS) AT THE NORTH WATER
PLANT
Item #16C2 - Deleted
Page 294
May 28, 2002
RFP 02-3339 FOR CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION
WASTE ARTIFICIAL REEF RECYCLING
Item #16C3
RESOLUTION 2002-239 APPROVING THE
SATISFACTION OF LIENS FOR CERTAIN ACCOUNTS
THAT HAVE BEEN PAID IN FULL FOR THE 1991 SOLID
WASTE COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL SERVICES
SPECIAL ASSESSMENT
Item #16C4
RESOLUTION 2002-240 APPROVING THE
SATISFACTION OF LIENS FOR CERTAIN ACCOUNTS
THAT HAVE BEEN PAID IN FULL FOR THE 1992 SOLID
WASTE COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL SERVICES
SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS
Item # 16C5
RESOLUTION 2002-241 APPROVING THE
SATISFACTION OF LIENS FOR CERTAIN ACCOUNTS
THAT HAVE BEEN PAID IN FULL FOR THE 1993 SOLID
WASTE COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL SERVICES
SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS
Item # 16C6
RESOLUTION 2002-242 APPROVING THE
SATISFACTION OF LIENS FOR CERTAIN ACCOUNTS
THAT HAVE BEEN PAID IN FULL FOR THE 1994 SOLID
WASTE COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL SERVICES
SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS
Page 295
May 28, 2002
Item #16C7
RESOLUTION 2002-243 APPROVING THE
SATISFACTION OF LIENS FOR CERTAIN ACCOUNTS
THAT HAVE BEEN PAID IN FULL FOR THE 1995 SOLID
WASTE COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL SERVICES
SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS
Item # 16C8
RESOLUTION 2002-244 APPROVING THE
SATISFACTION OF LIENS FOR CERTAIN ACCOUNTS
THAT HAVE BEEN PAID IN FULL FOR THE 1996 SOLID
WASTE COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL SERVICES
SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS
Item #16C9
SATISFACTION OF LIEN DOCUMENTS FOR THE
ABATEMENT OF NUISANCES
Item # 16C 10
AWARD A CONTRACT TO DOUGLAS N. HIGGINS, INC.,
FOR PORT-AU-PRINCE UTILITY REPLACEMENT,
PROJECT 70060 AND 70074, BID 02-3367, IN THE
AMOUNT OF $985,620
Item # 16C 11
AUTHORIZE COUNTY MANAGER TO NEGOTIATE AND
EXECUTE THE FIRST MEMORANDUM OF
UNDERSTANDING WITH WASTE MANAGEMENT INC.
OF FLORIDA, PURSUANT TO THE LANDFILL
Page 296
OPERATIONS AGREEMENT
May 28, 2002
Item #16C12
AUTHORIZE EARLY PAYOFF AMOUNT OF $113,541.31
OF THE GOODLAND WATER DISTRICT $468,500 WATER
REVENUE BOND, SERIES B
Item #16C 13
AWARD BID #02-3375 TO THERMO ELEMENTAL IN THE
AMOUNT OF $124,776, FOR THE PURCHASE OF A
QUADRUPOLE INDUCTIVELY COUPLED PLASMA
MASS SPECTROMETER (ICP-MS)
Item # 16C 14
CONVEY A UTILITY EASEMENT FROM COLLIER
COUNTY, A POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THE STATE
OF FLORIDA, TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AS
EX-OFFICIO THE GOVERNING BOARD OF THE
COLLIER COUNTY WATER-SEWER DISTRICT FOR
CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE OF UTILITY
FACILITIES AT A COST NOT TO EXCEED $100.00, PUED
PROJECT 70054
Item # 16C15 - Moved to Item #10P
Item # 16D 1
RESOLUTION 2002-245 APPROVING A REAL ESTATE
EXCHANGE AND PURCHASE AGREEMENT BETWEEN
THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND THE
Page 297
May 28, 2002
DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD OF COLLIER COUNTY
THAT WILL NET $92,067 IN REVENUE
Item # 16D2
BUDGET AMENDMENT RECOGNIZING $2,000
REVENUE FROM A DONATION FOR A MEMORIAL
BENCH AT VANDERBILT BEACH ACCESS
Item #16D3
THE RENEWAL OF CONTRACT #97-2646 TIGERTAIL
BEACH FOOD AND BEVERAGE CONCESSION WITH
COOL CONCESSIONS, INC
Item # 16D4
AWARD OF BID #02-3335 IN THE AMOUNT OF $98,500
FOR CLEAN UP AND MONITORING AT CAXAMBAS
PARK TO ENVIROTAC LTD
Item #16D5
A LIMITED USE LICENSE AGREEMENT IN THE
AMOUNT OF $25,000 BETWEEN THE BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND THE NAPLES JUNIOR
CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, INC., APPROVING THE USE
OF SPECIFIED COUNTY-OWNED PROPERTY FOR
CONDUCTING A JULY 4TM FIREWORKS FESTIVAL-TO
BE HELD AT SUGDEN REGIONAL PARK
Item # 16D6
A GRANT AGREEMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $20,000
BETWEEN THE UNIVERSITY EXTENSION
Page 298
May 28, 2002
OFFICE/COLLIER BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS AND THE EMPOWERMENT
ALLIANCE OF SOUTHWEST FLORIDA FOR THE
PURPOSE OF PROVIDING HOMEOWNER
EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMMING IN IMMOKALEE
Item #16D7
WORK ORDER #PBS-02-06 FOR AARON LUTZ
NEIGHBORHOOD PARK FOR LABOR AND MATERIAL
FOR INSTALLATION OF EXISTING SHELTERS,
INSTALLING NEW CONCRETE SIDEWALKS,
INSTALLING NEW BAHIA SOD AND TENNIS COURTS
RECONDITIONING IN THE AMOUNT OF $67,375.00 FOR
PROFESSIONAL BUILDING SYSTEMS INC
Item # 16D8
AWARD OF BID #02-3384 TO G.A. FOODS IN THE
AMOUNT OF $200,000.00 TO PREPARE THE FOOD FOR
THE SUMMER FOOD SERVICE GRANT PROGRAM
WHILE SUMMER SCHOOL IS NOT IN SESSION
Item # 16D9
AUTHORIZE FUNDS NOT TO EXCEED $10,000 TO
APPRAISE PROPERTY TO BE POTENTIALLY UTILIZED
FOR STORMWATER/PARK PURPOSES OFF OF
BAYSHORE DRIVE WITHIN THE BAYSHORE/GATEWAY
TRIANGLE REDEVELOPMENT AREA
Item # 16E 1
Page 299
May 28, 2002
THE PURCHASE OF 26 PANASONIC TOUGHBOOK
WIRELESS LAPTOP COMPUTERS FROM COMARK
GOVERNMENT AND EDUCATION SALES COMPANY
UTILIZING THE U.S. COMMUNITIES GOVERNMENT
PURCHASING ALLIANCE MASTER AGREEMENT IN
THE AMOUNT OF $119,288
Item #16E2
AWARD RFP 02-3342 ANALYTICAL LABORATORY
SERVICES FOR COLLIER COUNTY TO US BIOSYSTEMS
AND SEVERN TRENT SERVICES FOR AN ESTIMATED
ANNUAL AMOUNT OF $80,000
Item #16E3
BUDGET AMENDMENT TOTALING $179,700 FOR THE
EMERGENCY REPLACEMENT OF A 250-TON CHILLER
AT THE COUNTY JAIL
Item # 16E4
BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR EMERGENCY REPAIRS
AND UNANTICIPATED BUILDING MAINTENANCE
EXPENDITURES TOTALING $287,000
Item #16E5
BUDGET AMENDMENT TO FUND 516, PROPERTY AND
CASUALTY INSURANCE TO FUND CLAIMS,
REINSURANCE AND PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FOR
THE REMAINDER OF FY02
Item # 16E6 - Moved to Item gl 0T
Page 300
May 28, 2002
Item #16E7
AWARD OF RFP #02-3353 TO MGT OF AMERICA FOR
THE REVISION OF HUMAN RESOURCES PRACTICES
AND PROCEDURES
Item #16E8 - Moved to Item #10Q
Item #16E9
LEASE AGREEMENT WITH GERALD T. AND
CATHERINE L. BERRY FOR OFFICE SPACE LOCATED
AT COURT PLAZA III AT AN ANNUAL COST OF $44,804
Item # 16E 10 - Moved to Item #1 OR
Item #16E 11 - Moved to Item #1 OS
Item #16E12
CONTRACT FOR ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES FOR
PROGRAMMING AND DESIGN OF THE GREY OAKS
PUBLIC SAFETY FACILITY, RFP #02-3326, IN THE
AMOUNT OF $74,188.33-TO BARANY, SCHMITT,
SUMMERS, WEAVER AND PARTNERS, INC.
Item # 16G 1
BUDGET AMENDMENT REPORT- BUDGET
AMENDMENT #02-335 (1981 WATER MANAGEMENT CIP
(FUND 325) STORMWATER MANAGEMENT)
Item # 16G2
PRESENTATION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY
COUNCIL'S ANNUAL REPORT
Page 301
May 28, 2002
Item #16H 1 - Deleted
IMMOKALEE REGIONAL AIRPORT EXTENSION OF
TEMPORARY USE PERMIT FOR IMMOKALEE
REGIONAL RACEWAY
Item # 1611
COMMISSIONER JIM COLETTA'S REQUEST FOR
APPROVAL FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF PAYMENT TO
ATTEND THE WATER SYMPOSIUM CELEBRATION
AWARDS BANQUET-IN THE AMOUNT OF $50.00
Item # 16J 1
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE- FILED AND/OR
REFERRED
The following miscellaneous correspondence, as presented
by the Board of County Commissioners, has been directed to the
various departments as indicated:
Page 302
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
May 28, 2002
FOR BOARD ACTION:
1. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS TO FILE FOR RECORD WITH ACTION AS DIRECTED:
mo
Bo
Clerk of Courts: Submitted for public record, pursuant to Florida Statutes,
Chapter 136.06(1), the disbursements for the Board of County Commissioners for
the period:
1. Disbursements for April 27, 2002 through May 3, 2002.
2. Disbursements for May 4, 2002 through May 10, 2002.
Districts: Flow Way Community Development District - Ordinance 02-09;
District Map; Ordinance 190.
Minutes:
1. Collier County Planning Commission - Agenda for September 19, 2001.
Ochopee Fire Control District Advisory Board - Meeting Minutes for
October 1st, 2001.
AG£~DA ITEM -
NO .._~
I A¥ 2 tl 20O2
H:Data/Format
May 28, 2002
Item #16K1
RESOLUTION 2002-246 AUTHORIZING SPRINT
TELEPHONE COMPANY OF FLORIDA TO PARTIALLY
FUND THE COST OF MAINTAINING THE ENHANCED
911 EMERGENCY TELEPHONE SYSTEM
Item # 16K2
A DETERMINATION OF WHETHER THE PURCHASES OF
GOODS AND SERVICES DOCUMENTED IN THE
DETAILED REPORT OF OPEN PURCHASE ORDERS
SERVE A VALID PUBLIC PURPOSE AND AUTHORIZE
THE EXPENDITURE OF COUNTY FUNDS TO SATISFY
SAID PURCHASES
Item # 16L 1
THE AGREED ORDER AWARDING EXPERT FEES AS TO
PARCEL 10 lB IN THE LAWSUIT ENTITLED COLLIER
COUNTY V. dOSE L. REY, ETAL, CASE NO. 99-3683-CA
(GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD, PROJECT NO. 63041)-
STAFF TO DEPOSIT $5,200 INTO THE REGISTRY OF THE
COURT
Item #16L2
RESOLUTION 2002-247 AUTHORIZING THE HOUSING
FINANCE AUTHORITY TO RE-ISSUE AN EXISTING
ISSUE OF MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING REVENUE BONDS
TO BE USED TO FINANCE THE RIVER REACH
APARTMENTS PROJECT
Item # 16L3
Page 303
May 28, 2002
STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT RELATIVE TO THE
EASEMENT ACQUISITION OF PARCEL 361 IN THE
LAWSUIT ENTITLED COLLIER COUNTY V. TONY
GUARINO, IIL ET AL, (GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD
PROJECT, PROJECT NO. 63041)-STAFF TO DEPOSIT
$4,000 INTO THE REGISTRY OF COURT
Item # 17A
RESOLUTION 2002-248 RE: PETITION SNR-2002 AR-2138,
ROBERT B. LEMEUR, REPRESENTING BRIAN
SELIGMAN, REQUESTING A STREET NAME CHANGE
FROM PUT-IN-BAY COURT TO TROPICAL BAY COURT,
LOCATED IN WATERWAYS OF NAPLES, UNIT 7, IN
SECTION 14, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST
Item # 17B
ORDINANCE 2002-26 RE: PETITION RZ-01-AR-1353, MR.
TERRANCE KEPPLE OF KEPPLE ENGINEERING, INC.,
REQUESTING A REZONE FROM "A" RURAL
AGRICULTURAL TO "C-5" HEAVY COMMERCIAL
DISTRICT ALLOWING COMMERCIAL AND RETAIL
USES FOR PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF
COLLIER BOULEVARD (CR 951), AND
APPROXIMATELY ONE-QUARTER MILE NORTH OF
RATTLESNAKE-HAMMOCK ROAD (CR 864) IN SECTION
14, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER
COUNTY, FLORIDA, CONSISTING OF 4.71 ACRES MORE
OR LESS
Item # 17C
Page 304
May 28, 2002
RESOLUTION 2002-249 RE: PETITION AVPLAT2002-
AR1969 TO DISCLAIM, RENOUNCE, AND VACATE THE
COUNTY'S AND THE PUBLIC'S INTEREST IN THE
DRAINAGE AND MAINTENANCE ACCESS EASEMENT
LOCATED ON ALL OF TRACT V, ACCORDING TO THE
PLAT OF "SWEETWATER BAY II- UNIT 1", AS
RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 26, PAGES 96 THROUGH 98,
PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA,
LOCATED IN SECTIONS 9 AND 10, TOWNSHIP 48
SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST
Item # 17D
RESOLUTION 2002-250 RE: PETITION AVPLAT2001-
AR1587 TO DISCLAIM, RENOUNCE AND VACATE THE
COUNTY'S AND THE PUBLIC'S INTEREST IN THE 10
FOOT WIDE LAKE MAINTENANCE EASEMENT AND
THE 10 FOOT WIDE UTILITY EASEMENT LOCATED
ALONG THE REAR OF LOTS 12 AND 13, ACCORDING
TO THE PLAT OF "TERRANOVA OF PELICAN MARSH
UNIT ONE" AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 34, PAGES 61
THROUGH 62, PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY,
FLORIDA, LOCATED IN SECTION 35, TOWNSHIP 48
SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST
There being no further business for the good of the County, the
meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair- Time 7:00 p.m.
Page 305
May 28, 2002
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS/EX
OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF
SPECIAL DISTRICTS UNDER ITS CONTROL
JAME~ COLETTA, ~HAIRMAN
ATTEST:
DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK
STATE OF FLORIDA )
COUNTY OF COLLIER
I, Brenda Grimes, Court Reporter, do hereby certify that the
foregoing proceedings were taken by audiotape at the date and place
as stated in the caption.
Page 306