Loading...
Agenda 03/22/2016 Item #11F 3/22/2016 11.F. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY t*"' Recommendation to codify the Board's previous approval for the use of industry best practices for lump sum, time and materials, and/or unit price methodologies on specific Board approved contracts. OBJECTIVE: To ensure critical repairs and services are delivered to citizens and that those contractors and consultants who provide such,are paid in a timely manner. CONSIDERATIONS: On January 12, 2016, BCC meeting agenda Item 11 D was unanimously approved by the Board to initiate a "contract modification" to be brought forward to the Board for signature to retroactively add language to incorporate lump sum, time and materials and unit pricing methodologies. Those contract modifications for Carter Fence Company and BUE, Inc., d/b/a/ Gatekeepers/Gateswork were unanimously approved at the February 9,2016 BCC meeting,under agenda Item 16 E6,and fully executed. The Clerk has continued to refuse payments to these two contractors. Immediately following and at the same meeting, the Board unanimously reaffirmed Agenda Item 11 E which provided for the continued use of industry best practices of obtaining prices using lump sum,time and materials and unit price methodologies on"...all master contracts." Subsequent to those Agenda Items being approved, the Clerk of Courts has continued to withhold payments to a number of contractors and consultants. In many cases, a contractor or consultant provided a lump sum quote or proposal, division staff issued a purchase order under a "master contract," and the work was evaluated by staff and determined that it complied with the County's specifications. During the pre-audit stage, the Clerk has on numerous occasions asked for back-up that includes: all documentation of costs, which includes items such as number of hours worked and billing rate by contractor and/or subcontractor position(s), material(s) or equipment invoices, and other reimbursable documentation for the project. This is clearly well beyond the requirement for the lump sum project completed by the contractor or consultant. To date,many of these invoices still have not been paid unless the contractor or consultant acquiesces and provides the documentation. Despite the Board's unanimous approval that lump sum, time and materials and unit pricing methodologies were to be adopted in"all master contracts,"the Clerk refuses to follow that direction and bring forth invoices for Board action. . Staff has identified the most critical master contracts to be amended to serve the best interest of the citizens. They include: • 12-5871 Well Drilling and Testing: 3 contractors effected; • 13-6013 Metropolitan Planning Organization General Planning Services: 3 contractors effected; • 13-6111 Maintenance and Minor Repairs: 3 contractors effected; • 13-6164:Professional Services:Architect and Engineering: 52 consultants effected; • 13-6166: Electrical Services: 3 contractors effected; • 13-6167R: Generator Maintenance,Repair and Installation: 1 contractor effected; • 14-6197 Hammerhead and Designated Driveways:4 contractors effected; • 14-6307: General Contractors: 5 contractors effected; • 14-6213:Underground Utilities: 6 contractors effected; • 14-6350: On Call Plumbing Services: 1 contractor effected; • 14-6295 Tourism Marketing: 1 contractor effected; • 14-6322: CAT Program/Architectural Services: 3 consultants effected; • 15-6382- 1: Grant Funded Engineering for Coastal Zone: 5 consultants effected; • 15-6382-2: Grant Funded Engineering for Airports: 2 consultants effected; Packet Page-325- 3/22/2016 11.F. • 15-6423 Real Estate Appraisal Services: 10 contractors effected;and, • To allow the County Manager or designee to amend and execute any other similar Collier County /'"\ master contract with this language after review and approval by the County Attorney's Office. On February 18, 2016, in Brock v. Ochs, Judge James R. Shenko concluded that: "The County Commission, pursuant to sections 125.01(1)(a) and 125.01(3)(a), Florida 14 Statutes, has the power and duty to adopt its own rules of procedures and has implied powers necessary or incident to carrying out such enumerated powers." Further,the Court declared"(A)That the County's Purchasing Ordinance is legal and not in conflict with any provisions of general or special law." Despite the above ruling,the Clerk continues to ignore the lawfully adopted policy directives of the Board of County Commissioners. The review of payment requests continues to subject our contractors, vendors, and consultants to protracted delays in payment and in some cases,non-payment. Staff is merely clarifying the original contract intent and historical practice between the County and its contractors and consultants as to lump sum payment projects. Staff asks that the Board again clarify that it was the vendors and their intent(i.e.,their meeting of the minds when they entered into the contracts), confirmed by the actual historical practice implemented over the years, to apply the industry's best practices of utilizing lump sum, time and materials, and unit prices through these amendments by authorizing the Chair to execute the amendments. Additionally, further clarifying that approval for payment on lump sum invoices are not subject to percentage mark-ups on labor or material. Staff is also recommending that the Board request that the Clerk pay all outstanding invoices that have met the performance specifications as authorized and accepted by staff for lump sum work pursuant to previously approved agenda items. As discussed prior and verified by the County Attorney, the Board has the ability to amend and clarify contracts with mutual consent from vendors. If the Clerk's position is that the Board cannot amend the performance for payment requirements in a contract after a solicitation was issued, then staff is respectfully recommending that the Board request that the Clerk place these invoices on the Special Interim Report (under Miscellaneous Communication) with a clearly articulated explanation for nonpayment for specific Board action. FISCAL IMPACT: Funds are budgeted and approved by the Board within operating divisions. The impact of this amendment should not increase costs. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This item has been reviewed by the County Attorney,is approved as to form and legality,and requires majority vote for approval. -JAK GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There is no impact to the Growth Management Plan related to this action. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners: 1) reaffirms their continued approval for the use of industry best practices lump sum,time and materials,and unit price methodologies on specific Board approved contracts with the understanding that lump sum invoicing is not subject to a limitation for percentage mark-ups on labor and material; 2) authorizes the County Manager or designee to execute the contract amendments codifying said approval; authorizes the County Manager or designee to amend and execute any other similar Collier County"master contracts"with this language after review and approval by the County Attorney's Office; 3)requires the Clerk to pay invoices pursuant to approved Board action;and 4)requests that the Clerk identifies unpaid disputed items on the Special Interim Report (under Miscellaneous Communication)for final Board review and authorization. Prepared By: Joanne Markiewicz,Director,Procurement Services Packet Page-326- 3/22/2016 11 .F. Attachments: 1. Contract Amendment Template for Contractors and Consultants 2. January 12,2016 Item I1D and 11E and Minutes 3. Contract Modification for Carter 4. Contract Modification for BUE 5. Judge Shenko's Order 6. Mitchell and Stark Invoice and Backup for Record 281979 Packet Page -327- 3/22/2016 11.F. COLLIER COUNTY Board of County Commissioners Item Number: 11.11.F. Item Summary: Recommendation to codify the Board's previous approval for the use of industry best practices for lump sum,time and materials, and/or unit price methodologies on specific Board approved contracts. (Joanne Markiewicz, Procurement Services Division Director) Meeting Date: 3/22/2016 Prepared By Name: MarkiewiczJoanne Title: Division Director-Procurement Services,Procurement Services 3/15/2016 1:08:17 PM Submitted by Title: Division Director-Procurement Services,Procurement Services Name: MarkiewiczJoanne 3/15/2016 1:08:18 PM Approved By Name: PriceLen Title: Department Head-Administrative Svc,Administrative Services Department Date: 3/15/2016 1:24:56 PM Name: KlatzkowJeff Title: County Attorney, Date: 3/15/2016 1:27:26 PM Name: KlatzkowJeff Title: County Attorney, Date: 3/15/2016 3:01:07 PM Name: WellsLaura Title: Management/Budget Analyst, Senior, Office of Management &Budget Packet Page -328- 3/22/2016 11 .F. Date: 3/15/2016 3:39:17 PM Name: OchsLeo Title: County Manager, County Managers Office Date: 3/16/2016 4:47:35 PM Packet Page -329- 3/22/2016 11 .F. EXHIBIT A-1 Contract Amendment# to Contract#13-6164 "Professional Services: Architect and Engineering" This amendment, dated , 20 to the referenced agreement shall be by and between the parties to the original Agreement, name of firm (to be referred to as "Consultant") and Collier County, Florida,(to be referred to as"Owner"). Statement of Understanding RE: Contract# 13-6164-"Professional Services:Architect and Engineering" In order to continue the services provided for in the original Agreement document referenced above, the Consultant agrees to amend Article 5 "Compensation" of the Agreement as provided below. This Amendment shall be retroactive to the original date the Board approved the Agreement. 5.1 Compensation and the manner of payment of such compensation by the OWNER for Services rendered hereunder by CONSULTANT shall be as prescribed in each Work Order. The Project Manager, or designee, reserves the right to request proposals from this contract utilizing any of the following Price Methodologies: Lump Sum (Fixed Price): a firm fixed total price offering for a project; the risks are transferred from the County to the contractor; and, as a business practice there are no hourly or material invoices presented, rather, the contractor must perform to the satisfaction of the County's project manager before payment for the fixed price contract is authorized. Time and Materials: the County agrees to pay the contractor for the amount of labor time spent by the contractor's employees and subcontractors to perform the work (number of hours times hourly rate), and for materials and equipment used in the project(cost of materials plus the contractor's mark up). This methodology is generally used in projects in which it is not possible to accurately estimate the size of the project, or when it is expected that the project requirements would most likely change. As a general business practice, these contracts include back-up documentation of costs; invoices would include number of hours worked and billing rate by position(and not company(or subcontractor)timekeeping or payroll records), material or equipment invoices,and other reimbursable documentation for the project. Unit Price: the County agrees to pay a firm total fixed price (inclusive of all costs, including labor, materials, equipment, overhead, etc.) for a repetitive product or service delivered (i.e. installation Note: Language deleted has been s#uelE-thr-ough. New language has been underlined. 1 Packet Page -330- 3/22/2016 11 .F. price per ton, delivery price per package or carton, etc.). The invoice must identify the unit price and the number of units received(no contractor inventory or cost verification. CONSULTANT agrees to furnish OWNER, after the end of each calendar month, or as specified in the Work Order,a statement of charges for the Services performed and rendered by CONSULTANT during that time period, and for any OWNER authorized reimbursable expenses as herein below defined, incurred and/or paid by CONSULTANT during that time period. The monthly statement shall be in such form and supported by such documentation as may be required by OWNER. All such statement shall be on CONSULTANT'S letterhead and shall indicate the Agreement Number, Work Order/Purchase Order Number and Project Site description(if any). 5.2 T-he-compensation _ _ .. _. . .-• . _ •. _. . , _ . . • . _ •. .. • • e• . _ - • • '_ ._ ._ _ . -_ •__ . The hourly rates as set forth and identified in Schedule B, which is attached hereto, shall apply only to projects procured under the Time and Materials pricing methodology specified in paragraph 5.1 above. Requests for consideration of a price adjustment must be made on the contract anniversary date, in writing, to the Purchasing Director. Price adjustments are dependent upon the lesser of the All Urban consumer price index(CPI)and the All Urban South consumer price index (CPI) for the immediate twelve(12)month period preceding the anniversary date of the Agreement,budget availability,and Purchasing approval. All other terms and conditions of the agreement shall remain in force. (Signature page to follow) Note: Language deleted has been struck New language has been underlined. 2 Packet Page -331- 3/22/2016 11 .F. IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the parties have each,respectively,by an authorized person or agent,have executed this Amendment on the date(s)indicated below. Accepted ,20_ Consultant's First Witness: OWNER: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS By: OF COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA Signature By: Print Name Joanne Markiewicz,Director Procurement Services Division Consultant's Second Witness: By: CONSULTANT: Signature name of company By: Signature Print Name Print Name and Title Approved as to Form and Legality: Deputy County Attorney Note: Language deleted has been strueleugh. New language has been underlined. 3 Packet Page -332- 3/22/2016 11 .F. EXHIBIT A-1 Contract Amendment# to Contract# 14-6322 "CAT Program Engineering/Architectural Services" This amendment, dated , 20 to the referenced agreement shall be by and between the parties to the original Agreement, name of firm (to be referred to as "Consultant") and Collier County, Florida,(to be referred to as"Owner"). Statement of Understanding RE: Contract# 14-6322 -"CAT Program Engineering/Architectural Services" In order to continue the services provided for in the original Agreement document referenced above, the Consultant agrees to amend Article 5 "Compensation" of the Agreement as provided below. This Amendment shall be retroactive to the original date the Board approved the Agreement. 5.1 Compensation and the manner of payment of such compensation by the OWNER for Services rendered hereunder by CONSULTANT shall be as prescribed in each Work Order. The Project Manager, or designee, reserves the right to request proposals from this contract utilizing any of the following Price Methodologies: Lump Sum (Fixed Price): a firm fixed total price offering for a project; the risks are transferred from the County to the contractor; and, as a business practice there are no hourly or material invoices presented, rather, the contractor must perform to the satisfaction of the County's project manager before payment for the fixed price contract is authorized. Time and Materials: the County agrees to pay the contractor for the amount of labor time spent by the contractor's employees and subcontractors to perform the work (number of hours times hourly rate), and for materials and equipment used in the project(cost of materials plus the contractor's mark up). This methodology is generally used in projects in which it is not possible to accurately estimate the size of the project, or when it is expected that the project requirements would most likely change. As a general business practice,these contracts include back-up documentation of costs; invoices would include number of hours worked and billing rate by position(and not company(or subcontractor)timekeeping or payroll records), material or equipment invoices,and other reimbursable documentation for the project. Unit Price: the County agrees to pay a firm total fixed price (inclusive of all costs, including labor, materials, equipment, overhead, etc.) for a repetitive product or service delivered (i.e. installation Note: Language deleted has been strut gh. New language has been underlined. 1 Cin Packet Page -333- 3/22/2016 11 .F. price per ton, delivery price per package or carton, etc.). The invoice must identify the unit price and the number of units received(no contractor inventory or cost verification. CONSULTANT agrees to furnish OWNER, after the end of each calendar month, or as specified in the Work Order, a statement of charges for the Services performed and rendered by CONSULTANT during that time period, and for any OWNER authorized reimbursable expenses as herein below defined, incurred and/or paid by CONSULTANT during that time period. The monthly statement shall be in such form and supported by such documentation as may be required by OWNER. All such statement shall be on CONSULTANT'S letterhead and shall indicate the Agreement Number, Work Order/Purchase Order Number and Project Site description(if any). 5.2 The-compensation - - .. _. . .. . _ •. _. . . . ••, _ . . . _ •. , .. - . • - ._ -_ •__ The hourly rates as set forth and identified in Schedule B, which is attached hereto, shall apply only to projects procured under the Time and Materials pricing methodology specified in paragraph 5.1 above. *** All other terms and conditions of the agreement shall remain in force. (Signature page to follow) Note: Language deleted has been struck gh. New language has been underlined. 2 CAn Packet Page -334- 3/22/2016 11 .F. IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the parties have each,respectively,by an authorized person or agent,have executed this Amendment on the date(s)indicated below. Accepted , 20_ Consultant's First Witness: OWNER: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS By: OF COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA Signature By: Print Name Joanne Markiewicz,Director Procurement Services Division Consultant's Second Witness: By: CONSULTANT: Signature name of company By: Signature Print Name Print Name and Title Approved as to Form and Legality: Deputy County Attorney Note: Language deleted has been st-ruck-thfeugh. New language has been underlined. 3 411114ash . Packet Page -335- 3/22/2016 11 .F. EXHIBIT A-1 Contract Amendment# to Contract# "Title of Contract" This amendment, dated , 20 to the referenced agreement shall be by and between the parties to the original Agreement, name of firm (to be referred to as "Consultant") and Collier County, Florida,(to be referred to as"Owner"). Statement of Understanding RE: Contract# -"Title of Contract" In order to continue the services provided for in the original Agreement document referenced above, the Consultant agrees to amend Article 5 "Compensation" of the Agreement as provided below. This Amendment shall be retroactive to the original date the Board approved the Agreement. *** 5.1 Compensation and the manner of payment of such compensation by the OWNER for Services rendered hereunder by CONSULTANT shall be as prescribed in each Work Order. The Project Manager, or designee, reserves the right to request proposals from this contract utilizing any of the following Price Methodologies: Lump Sum (Fixed Price): a firm fixed total price offering for a project; the risks are transferred from the County to the contractor; and, as a business practice there are no hourly or material invoices presented, rather, the contractor must perform to the satisfaction of the County's project manager before payment for the fixed price contract is authorized. Time and Materials: the County agrees to pay the contractor for the amount of labor time spent by the contractor's employees and subcontractors to perform the work (number of hours times hourly rate), and for materials and equipment used in the project(cost of materials plus the contractor's mark up). This methodology is generally used in projects in which it is not possible to accurately estimate the size of the project, or when it is expected that the project requirements would most likely change. As a general business practice,these contracts include back-up documentation of costs; invoices would include number of hours worked and billing rate by position(and not company(or subcontractor)timekeeping or payroll records), material or equipment invoices,and other reimbursable documentation for the project. Unit Price: the County agrees to pay a firm total fixed price (inclusive of all costs, including labor, materials, equipment, overhead, etc.) for a repetitive product or service delivered (i.e. installation Note: Language deleted has been struek-through. New language has been underlined. 1 C40 Packet Page -336- 3/22/2016 11 .F. price per ton, delivery price per package or carton, etc.). The invoice must identify the unit price and the number of units received(no contractor inventory or cost verification. CONSULTANT agrees to furnish OWNER, after the end of each calendar month, or as specified in the Work Order, a statement of charges for the Services performed and rendered by CONSULTANT during that time period, and for any OWNER authorized reimbursable expenses as herein below defined, incurred and/or paid by CONSULTANT during that time period. The monthly statement shall be in such form and supported by such documentation as may be required by OWNER. All such statement shall be on CONSULTANT'S letterhead and shall indicate the Agreement Number, Work Order/Purchase Order Number and Project Site description(if any). 5.2 The-compensation - - .- -- . ..• . •. _. •, _ . . . _ •. , .. . by£ONSULTAA:T'S personnel in performing the Se:ricer. The hourly rates as set forth and identified in Schedule B, which is attached hereto, shall apply only to projects procured under the Time and Materials pricing methodology specified in paragraph 5.1 above. The Rate Schedule may be updated by mutual agreement on an annual basis, in conjunction with the annual renewal of this Agreement provided for in paragraph 4.6 above, as directed by OWNER. *** All other terms and conditions of the agreement shall remain in force. (Signature page to follow) Note: Language deleted has been seugh. New language has been underlined. 2 Packet Page -337- 3/22/2016 11 .F. IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the parties have each,respectively,by an authorized person or agent,have executed this Amendment on the date(s)indicated below. Accepted , 20_ Contractor's First Witness: OWNER: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS By: OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA Signature By: Print Name Joanne Markiewicz,Director Procurement Services Division Contractor's Second Witness: By: CONSULTANT: Signature name of company By: Signature Print Name Print Name and Title Approved as to Form and Legality: Deputy County Attorney Note: Language deleted has been strnsk-through. New language has been underlined. 3 C40 Packet Page -338- 3/22/2016 11.F. BCC REGULAR MEETING MINUTES JANUARY 12, 2016 Packet Page -339- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Naples, Florida, January 12, 2016 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Board of County Commissioners, in and for the County of Collier, and also acting as the Board of Zoning Appeals and as the governing board(s) of such special districts as have been created according to law and having conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 a.m., in REGULAR SESSION in Building "F" of the Government Complex, East Naples, Florida, with the following members present: CHAIRMAN: Tim Nance/Donna Fiala Tom Henning Georgia Hiller Penny Taylor ALSO PRESENT: Leo E. Ochs, Jr., County Manager Nick Casalanguida, Deputy County Manager Jeffrey Klatzkow, County Attorney Crystal Kinzel, Office of the Clerk of Courts Troy Miller, Television Operations Manager Page 1 Packet Page -340- 3/22/2016 11.F. COLLIER COUNTY Board of County Commissioners Community Redevelopment Agency Board (CRAB) Airport Authority 01 I i. . 0 • r *zoo* AGENDA Board of County Commission Chambers Collier County Government Center 3299 Tamiami Trail East, 3rd Floor Naples FL 34112 January 12, 2016 9:00 AM Commissioner Tim Nance, District 5— BCC Chair Commissioner Donna Fiala, District 1 — BCC Vice-Chair; CRA Chair Commissioner Georgia Hiller, District 2 — Community & Economic Develop. Chair Commissioner Tom Henning, District 3 — PSCC Vice-Chair Commissioner Penny Taylor, District 4— TDC Chair; CRA Vice-Chair NOTICE: ALL PERSONS WISHING TO SPEAK ON AGENDA ITEMS MUST REGISTER PRIOR TO PRESENTATION OF THE AGENDA ITEM TO BE ADDRESSED. ALL REGISTERED SPEAKERS WILL RECEIVE UP TO THREE (3) MINUTES UNLESS THE TIME IS ADJUSTED BY THE CHAIRMAN. PUBLIC COMMENT ON GENERAL TOPICS NOT ON THE CURRENT OR FUTURE AGENDA TO BE HEARD NO SOONER THAN 1:00 P.M., OR AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE AGENDA; WHICHEVER OCCURS FIRST. REQUESTS TO ADDRESS THE BOARD ON SUBJECTS WHICH ARE NOT ON THIS AGENDA MUST BE SUBMITTED IN WRITING WITH EXPLANATION TO THE COUNTY MANAGER AT LEAST 13 DAYS PRIOR TO THE DATE OF THE MEETING AND WILL BE HEARD UNDER "PUBLIC PETITIONS." Page 1 January 12. 2(116 Packet Page -341- 3/22/2016 11 .F. PUBLIC PETITIONS ARE LIMITED TO THE PRESENTER, WITH A MAXIMUM TIME OF TEN MINUTES. ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THIS BOARD WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDING PERTAINING THERETO, AND THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED. COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 2003-53 AS AMENDED BY ORDINANCE 2004-05 AND 2007-24, REQUIRES THAT ALL LOBBYISTS SHALL, BEFORE ENGAGING IN ANY LOBBYING ACTIVITIES (INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, ADDRESSING THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS), REGISTER WITH THE CLERK TO THE BOARD AT THE BOARD MINUTES AND RECORDS DEPARTMENT. IF YOU ARE A PERSON WITH A DISABILITY WHO NEEDS ANY ACCOMMODATION IN ORDER TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS PROCEEDING, YOU ARE ENTITLED, AT NO COST TO YOU, THE PROVISION OF CERTAIN ASSISTANCE. PLEASE CONTACT THE COLLIER COUNTY FACILITIES MANAGEMENT DIVISION LOCATED AT 3335 EAST TAMIAMI TRAIL, SUITE 1, NAPLES, FLORIDA, 34112-5356, (239) 252-8380; ASSISTED LISTENING DEVICES FOR THE HEARING IMPAIRED ARE AVAILABLE IN THE FACILITIES MANAGEMENT DIVISION. LUNCH RECESS SCHEDULED FOR 12:00 NOON TO 1:00 P.M. 1. INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE A. Rabbi Ammos Chomy - Beth Tikvah of Naples 2. AGENDA AND MINUTES A. Approval of today's regular, consent and summary agenda as amended (Ex Parte Disclosure provided by Commission members for consent agenda.) B. December 8, 2015 - BCC/Regular Meeting Minutes C. SELECTION OF CHAIRMAN AND VICE-CHAIRMAN Page 2 January 12, 2016 Packet Page -342- 3/22/2016 11.F. D. That the Board appoint its members to offices of the Board of County Commissioners, the Community Redevelopment Agency, the Tourist Development Council, the Community and Economic Development Board, the Public Safety Coordinating Council, and the Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council, and to authorize the new Chairs for both the Board of County Commissioners and the Community Redevelopment Agency to execute all documents approved at both this meeting and those documents which were previously approved but are pending signature. 3. SERVICE AWARDS 4. PROCLAMATIONS A. Proclamation recognizing the 19th Annual Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Parade and Celebration on January 18, 2016. To be accepted by officers of the NAACP of Collier County - Harold Weeks, President; Barbara Melvin, 1st Vice President; Vincent Keeys, 2nd Vice President; Diann Keeys, Secretary; Irene Williams, Assistant Secretary; Akita Cannon, Treasurer. B. Proclamation recognizing Human Trafficking Awareness Month in Collier County. To be accepted by Collier County Sheriff Kevin Rambosk. C. Proclamation recognizing eight World War II veterans who were honored with the French National Order of the Legion of Honour. To be accepted by Harvey Limon, Gerald Cabot and Richard Heath. D. Proclamation designating January 14, 2016 as Kindness Awareness Day in Collier County. To be accepted by representatives of One Million Acts of Kindness: Bob Votruba (with his dog Bogart), Stacey Dooney and Susanna Tocco. E. Proclamation honoring the work of Collier County staff to improve the National Flood Insurance Program's Community Rating System for Collier County from a Class 6 to a Class 5. To be accepted by Howard Critchfield, William Lang, Caroline Cilek, Kathy Badger, Bethany Mitchell, Matt McLean, Robert Wiley, Rick Zyvoloski, Jamie French, Travis Gossard, Jonathan Walsh, Bob Garee, Mike Dumais, Laura Gibson, Gary McAlpin and the Collier County Floodplain Management Planning Committee. Page 3 January 12,2016 Packet Page -343- 3/22/2016 11 .F. 5. PRESENTATIONS A. Presentation of the Collier County Business of the Month for January 2016 to Premier Sotheby's International Realty. To be accepted by Judy Green, President/CEO, Premier Sotheby's International Realty; Kristi Bartlett, Vice President, Opportunity Naples, the Greater Naples Chamber of Commerce; and Andrea Sturzenegger, Vice President, Marketing & Membership, the Greater Naples Chamber of Commerce. 6. PUBLIC PETITIONS A. Public Petition request from Mr. Nader Amani requesting that the Board of County Commissioners remove condition #3 and amend condition #4 of Ordinance 2006-61 (Whippoorwill Lane rezone). Presenting on behalf of the petitioner is Mr. Biagio Bernardo of CRE Consultants. B. Public Petition request from Ms. Camden Smith requesting that the Board of County discontinuing of Collier County Commissioners consider discontinuiing fluoridation of ollie� County water. Item #7 to be heard no sooner than 1:00 pm unless otherwise noted. 7. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS NOT ON THE CURRENT OR FUTURE AGENDA Items #8 and #9 to be heard no sooner than 1:30 pm unless otherwise noted. 8. BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS 9. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS A. This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to approve an amendment to Ordinance Number 95-33, the Briarwood PUD, as amended, to add Private Clubs and Private Parking Garages, and associated required features, as a principal use in Tracts B & C: Community Commercial, to add minimum standards for the Private Clubs and Private Parking Garages principal use, to increase the maximum footprint of all structures for the Private Clubs and Private Parking Garages principal use in Tracts B & C: Community Page 4 January 12,2016 Packet Page -344- 3/22/2016 11.F. Commercial from 20% of the commercial land area to 27%, or 188,062 square feet, of the commercial land area, to limit the maximum square footage of all structures for the Private Clubs and Private Parking Garages principal use in Tracts B & C: Community Commercial to 40%, or 278,610 square feet, of the commercial land area which comprises 188,062 square feet of the building footprint on the ground level and an additional 90,548 square feet of mezzanine areas, to add a deviation allowing an alternative landscape buffer along Livingston Road and Radio Road, to add a deviation allowing the required 8-foot wall at the top of a berm instead of being located at ground level, to add a deviation to eliminate the requirement for terminal landscaped islands adjacent to parking areas within individual driveways, to add a new alternative landscaping exhibit for Livingston Road and Radio Road, and to add a new conceptual master plan for the Private Clubs and Private Parking Garages principal use, for the PUD property consisting of 209.17± acres located on the east side of Livingston Road, north of Radio Road, in Section 31, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida; and by providing an effective date [PUDA- PL20150000178]. B. This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to approve, with conditions, an Ordinance amending Ordinance Number 2003-11, the East Gateway Planned Unit Development, by adding 250 residential dwelling units to be developed in addition to the commercial development on the commercial development area or as an alternative to industrial and business park development on the industrial business park development area; by changing the name of the planned unit development to the East Gateway Mixed Use Planned Unit Development; by adding Permitted Uses for residential development; by adding Development Standards for residential development; by adding Deviations; by revising the Master Plan; by adding Exhibit B and Exhibit C, Road Right-of-Way Cross Sections; by revising Developer Commitments for the PUD located on the north side of Davis Boulevard and west of CR 951 in Section 34, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida consisting of 37.35± acres; and by providing an effective date [Petition PUDA-PL20140000548]. 10. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Ask A. Recommendation to approve a Resolution requesting the United States Page 5 January 12, 2016 Packet Page -345- 3/22/2016 11.F. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) budget full funding for Gordon River Pass Dredging in the upcoming Civil Works Operations and Maintenance Work Plan. (Commissioner Taylor) B. Recommendation to direct the Collier County Supervisor of Elections to place a straw ballot referendum on the March 15, 2016 Presidential Preference Primary ballot asking the voters of unincorporated Collier County if they support a single combined fire and emergency medical response independent special district in unincorporated Collier County that is governed by an independent elected body. (Commissioner Taylor) 11. COUNTY MANAGER'S REPORT A. Recommendation to accept and approve the proposed Parks and Recreation Division Fee Policy in order to establish guidance for future fees for services. (Barry Williams, Parks and Recreation Director) B. Recommendation to award Contract No. 15-6447, Chokoloskee Bridge Replacement, to Kelly Brothers, Inc., in the amount of$8,050,911.82, Project No. 66066. (Jay Ahmad, Transportation Engineering Director) C. Recommendation to approve a contract between Paradise Reef, LLC and Collier County for the production and distribution of a 56 minute documentary film, a three minute film, and two 30-second film spots; approve the necessary budget amendment in an amount not to exceed $527,614; and make a finding that this item promotes tourism. (Jack Wert, Tourism Division Director) 12. COUNTY ATTORNEY'S REPORT A. This Closed Session item to be heard at 12:00 noon. Recommendation for the Board of County Commissioners to provide direction to the County Attorney related to settlement negotiations and litigation expenditures in the pending case of North Collier Fire Control and Rescue District v. Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Case No. 15-CA-1871, now pending in the Circuit Court of the Twentieth Judicial Circuit, in and for Collier County, Florida. B. Return from Closed Session to be heard at 1:00 p.m. Recommendation for the Board of County Commissioners to provide direction to the County Page 6 January 12.2016 Packet Page -346- 3/22/2016 11 .F. Attorney regarding settlement negotiations and litigation expenditures in the pending case of North Collier Fire Control and Rescue District v. Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Case No. 15-CA-1871, now pending in the Circuit Court of the Twentieth Judicial Circuit, in and for Collier County, Florida. 13. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS A. To provide the Board of Collier County Commissioners information regarding a portion of an outstanding invoice received by Collier County Board of County Commissioners on or about September 11, 2015 from Gillig, LLC pursuant to the Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Contract #14-009 dated December 5, 2013; and inform the Board of other matters regarding this Contract. B. To bring to the Board's attention outstanding invoices related to the procurement of background checks and fingerprinting by the Florida Department of Law Enforcement and the Federal Bureau of Investigation due to new statutory requirements for a shared clearinghouse amongst agencies established by Florida Statute 943.053. C. To provide the Board information regarding outstanding invoices received after the expiration of Ferguson Enterprises, Inc. Contract #11-5715 on 9/12/15, and before the execution of Ferguson Enterprises, Inc. Contract #15-6475R on 12/8/15. 14. AIRPORT AUTHORITY AND/OR COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY A. AIRPORT B. COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY 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. Page 7 January 12. 2016 Packet Page -347- 3/22/2016 11.F. A. GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT 1) Recommendation to authorize the Clerk of Courts to release a Cash Bond in the amount of$3,280 which was posted as a development guaranty for an Early Work Authorization (EWA) (PL20150002294) for work associated with Saint Peter the Apostle Catholic Church. 2) Recommendation to authorize the Clerk of Courts to release an Irrevocable Standby Letter of Credit in the amount of$25,000 which was posted as a guaranty for Excavation Permit Number 60.110 (PL20130002033) for work associated with Sienna Reserve. 3) This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to approve for recording the final plat of Del Webb Naples Parcels 203- 204, (Application Number PL20150001882) approval of the standard form Construction and Maintenance Agreement and approval of the amount of the performance security. 4) This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to approve for recording the final plat of Esplanade at Hacienda Lakes Phase 2A, (Application Number PL20150002005) approval of the standard form Construction and Maintenance Agreement and approval of the amount of the performance security. 5) This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to approve for recording the final plat of Winding Cypress Phase 2, (Application Number PL20140002533) approval of the standard form Construction and Maintenance Agreement and approval of the amount of the performance security. 6) This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all Page 8 January 12, 2016 Packet Page -348- 3/22/2016 11 .F. participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to approve for recording the final plat of Fiddler's Creek Marsh Cove - Phase 2, (Application Number PL20150001903) approval of the standard form Construction and Maintenance Agreement and approval of the amount of the performance security. 7) This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to approve for recording the minor final plat of Lakoya Lot 341, Application Number PL20150002534. 8) This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to approve for recording the minor final plat of Mockingbird Crossing - Phase 2, Application Number PL20150002144. 9) This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to approve for recording the minor final plat of Golf Club of the Everglades Amenity Center, Application Number PL20150002440. 10) Recommendation to approve the release of a code enforcement lien with an accrued value of$252,750 for payment of$500, in the code enforcement action entitled Board of County Commissioners v. Ronnie G. and Beverly Bishop, Code Enforcement Board Case No. CESD20110017156, relating to property located at 1329 Saint Clair Shores Road, Collier County, Florida. 11) Recommendation to approve the release of a code enforcement lien with an accrued value of$3,363.33 for payment of$513.33, in the code enforcement action entitled Board of County Commissioners v. Kevin P. McCormick and Kathy McCormick, Code Enforcement Board Case No. CELU20140016371, relating to property located at 3575 3rd Avenue NW, Collier County, Florida. 12) Recommendation to approve the release of two (2) code enforcement liens with a combined accrued value of$196,707.09 for payment of Page 9 January 12.2016 Packet Page -349- 3/22/2016 11.F. $757.09, in the code enforcement actions entitled Board of County Commissioners v. Jeffrey M. Stone and Mardi S. Moorman, Code Enforcement Board Case No. CESD20120004892 and Code Enforcement Special Magistrate Case No. CENA20130011451, relating to property located at 5741 Painted Leaf Lane, Collier County, Florida. 13) Recommendation to approve the release of two (2) code enforcement liens with a combined accrued value of$29,273.91 for payment of $4,223.91, in the code enforcement actions entitled Board of County Commissioners v. Roger Dale Mooneyham and Roxie Mooneyham, Code Enforcement Special Magistrate Case Nos. CEPM20110004770 and CEROW20120000549, relating to property located at 4998 23rd Ct. SW, Collier County, Florida. 14) Recommendation to approve the release of three (3) code enforcement liens with a combined accrued value of$74,631.03 for payment of $2,831.03, in the code enforcement actions entitled Board of County Commissioners v. Chad A. and Crystal M. Shannon, Code Enforcement Special Magistrate Case Nos. CEPM20100002536, CEPM20110011548 and CEPM20140011736, relating to property located at 6654 Castlelawn PL, Collier County, Florida. 15) Recommendation to approve the release of a code enforcement lien with an accrued value of$48,250 for payment of$1,000, in the code enforcement action entitled Board of County Commissioners v. Kimberly M. Harrington and James W. Harrington, Code Enforcement Special Magistrate Case No. CEPM20140020881, relating to property located at 1103 Wisconsin Drive, Collier County, Florida. 16) Recommendation to approve final acceptance and unconditional conveyance of the water and sewer utility facilities for Esplanade Golf & Country Club of Naples, Phase B and R2, PL20140000380, and to authorize the County Manager, or his designee, to release the Final Obligation Bond in the total amount of$4,000 to the Project Engineer or the Developer's designated agent. 17) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the water utility facilities for North Naples Research and Technology Park Storage Page 10 January 12, 2016 Packet Page -350- 3/22/2016 11.F. Suites, PL20140000267, to accept unconditional conveyance of the off-site utilities, and to authorize the County Manager, or his designee, to release the Utilities Performance Security (UPS) and Final Obligation Bond in the total amount of$5,454.24 to the Project Engineer or the Developer's designated agent. 18) Recommendation to approve final acceptance and unconditional conveyance of the water and sewer utility facilities for Esplanade Golf & Country Club of Naples, Phases CI and C2, PL20140000985, and to authorize the County Manager, or his designee, to release the Final Obligation Bond in the total amount of$4,000 to the Project Engineer or the Developer's designated agent. 19) Recommendation to approve final acceptance and unconditional conveyance of the water and sewer utility facilities for Esplanade Golf & Country Club of Naples, Phase Al, PL201 40000060, and to authorize the County Manager, or his designee, to release the Final Obligation Bond in the total amount of$4,000 to the Project Engineer or the Developer's designated agent. 20) Recommendation to approve final acceptance and unconditional conveyance of the water and sewer utility facilities for Esplanade Golf & Country Club of Naples, SDP 41, PL20140000054, and to authorize the County Manager, or his designee, to release the Final Obligation Bond in the total amount of$4,000 to the Project Engineer or the Developer's designated agent. 21) Recommendation to approve an Adopt-a-Road Program Agreement for the roadway segment of Golden Gate Parkway from Airport- Pulling Road to Livingston Road, with two (2) recognition signs and two (2) Adopt-a-Road logo signs at a total cost of$200 with the volunteer group, Oracle America, Inc. 22) Recommendation to approve an Interlocal Agreement between Collier County and The City of Naples setting forth the future ownership and maintenance responsibilities for Sandpiper Street, south of Marlin Drive and Quit Claim Deed conveying the road to The City of Naples. Estimated fiscal impact $60,000 (Project #60131). 23) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to execute Page 11 January 12. 2016 Packet Page -351- 3/22/2016 11.F. Amendment No. 1 to Contract No. 14C01 with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Beaches and Coastal Systems Beach Management Funding Assistance Program for Collier County Beach Nourishment and make a finding that this item promotes tourism. 24) Recommendation to accept the fee-simple conveyance of the Oak Drive right-of-way to Collier County, authorize the recording of the Warranty Deed in the public records, and accept the maintenance responsibility for said right-of-way. 25) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to sign the Utility Facilities Quit-Claim Deed and Bill of Sale between Collier County and Wentworth Estates Community Development District (CDD) , in order to re-convey to the CDD all irrigation utility facilities associated with the development project at Treviso Bay Roadway, PL2004080032, which were previously erroneously conveyed to the County. 26) Recommendation to approve the name of a Collier County artificial reef site pursuant to the Memorandum of Understanding with the Community Foundation of Collier County and accept and appropriate a donation in the amount of$98,000 for Artificial Reef Donations Project No. 44038. 27) Recommendation to approve a short-list of professional engineering consultants pursuant to Request for Proposal (RFP) #15-6456, CEI Services for LAP Funded Projects and to authorize entering into negotiations between Collier County and Aim Engineering & Surveying, Inc. for "Construction Engineering and Inspection (CEI) Services for LAP Funded Projects." Growth Management Grant Fund 711. 28) Recommendation to approve an Interlocal Agreement between City of Everglades and Collier County for Utility work in the amount of $264,124.14 as an integral part of the Chokoloskee Bridge Replacement project. (County Project No. 66066) 29) This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all Page 12 January 12.2016 Packet Page -352- 3/22/2016 11.F. participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to approve a Resolution approving a Special Treatment development permit to allow construction of boat dock and dock access improvements on property owned by Standard Pacific of Florida with a zoning designation of RMF-6(3) and a Special Treatment overlay located in Sections 11 and 14, Township 50 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. (Companion to Item 17D) B. COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY 1) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners acting as the Community Redevelopment Agency Board execute a Bare License Agreement between the Community Redevelopment Agency and Naples Auto Donation Center, Inc. on property located at 1965 Tamiami Trail East for vehicle storage on a month-to-month basis. 2) Recommendation that the Collier County Community Redevelopment Agency approve an Exclusive Right of Sale Listing Agreement authorizing Commercial Real Estate Consultants, LLC to market and sell Community Redevelopment Agency property located at 4265 and 4315 Bayshore Drive consisting of 17.89 acres in accordance with Florida Statutes 163.380 as outlined in the Collier County Community Redevelopment Plan and bring back any and all offers to the Board. C. PUBLIC UTILITIES DEPARTMENT 1) Recommendation to award Contract #15-6365, "Disaster Debris Management, Removal and Disposal Services" to multiple firms. D. PUBLIC SERVICES DEPARTMENT 1) Recommendation to approve a Fourth Amendment to the Subrecipient Agreement with Habitat for Humanity of Collier County, Inc., to shift remaining project funds between line items in order to fully expend remaining awarded funds for Infrastructure Improvements. There is no net fiscal impact. 2) Recommendation to approve a donation of$23,263.40 as offsite preservation for St. Peter the Apostle Church (SDPA-PL- 20150000903) to satisfy the native vegetation retention requirement. Page 13 January 12, 2016 Packet Page -353- 3/22/2016 11.F. 3) Recommendation to approve Resolutions authorizing submittal of Federal Transit Administration Sections 5310, 5311 and 5339-Rural FY2015/2016 grant applications and applicable documents to the Florida Department of Transportation. (Total anticipated fiscal impact of$1,734,157.60 with a Federal share of$568,446.08, State share of $608,155.76 and local match of$557,555.76). 4) Recommendation to approve an after-the-fact Amendment to the Master Contract and Attestation Statement with Area Agency on Aging of Southwest Florida, Inc. for Federal-and State-funded Services for Seniors programs (No Fiscal Impact). 5) Recommendation to approve an after-the-fact Amendment and Attestation Statement with Area Agency on Aging for Southwest Florida, Inc. for Services for Seniors Older Americans Act Title III-E Grandparent program and budget amendment to ensure continuous funding for FY 2015 (Fiscal impact $7,000). 6) Recommendation to approve after-the-fact contract Amendment and Attestation Statement between the Area Agency on Aging for Southwest Florida, Inc. and Collier County for Services for Seniors to extend the grant period through February 29, 2016 for the Older Americans Act Programs and allow for additional in-home reimbursement rates (No Fiscal Impact). 7) Recommendation from Community and Human Services Division to approve a satisfaction of mortgage in the amount of$5,000 for an owner-occupied affordable housing unit that has satisfied the tei ins of assistance of Collier County State Housing Initiative Program. 8) This item continued from the December 8, 2015 BCC Meeting. Recommendation to approve FY15-16 contract with the State of Florida Department of Health for the operation of the Collier County Health Department in the amount of$1,378,200 and also to allocate additional funds in the amount of$249,220 to fill a funding gap due to state non-funding of the ACHA Medicaid match programs. 9) Recommendation to approve a Long-Term Community Market Agreement with The Florida Department of Health in Collier County Page 14 January 12. 2016 Packet Page -354- 3/22/2016 11.F. to provide a Community Market at the Collier County Government Center (no fiscal impact). E. ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DEPARTMENT 1) Recommendation to adopt a resolution authorizing the cancellation of 2015 taxes upon a fee-simple interest in land Collier County acquired by Warranty Deed for Conservation Collier and without monetary compensation (on behalf of Public Services Department). 2) Recommendation to approve a Termination of Facility Lease Agreement with the District School Board of Collier County for leased property in Immokalee on behalf of Transportation/GMD. 3) Recommendation to approve the sale and disposal of surplus property through an on-line auction(s) in compliance with Florida Statutes and Resolution 2013-095 and authorize the County Manager or designee to sign for the transfer of vehicle titles. 4) Recommendation to reaffirm the continued use of the industry's best practices of utilizing "lump sum," "time and materials," a combination of both price methodologies, and "unit price" for County purchase orders and projects. 5) Recommendation to retroactively authorize the use of Contract #14- 6280 Fencing Installation and Repair for "lump sum" quoted projects to Carter Fence Company and BUE, Inc. d/b/a/ Gatekeepers/Gateswork and inform the Board of termination notices received from both contractors. 6) Recommendation to approve the administrative reports prepared by the Procurement Services Division for modifications to work orders, change orders, surplus property and other items as identified. F. COUNTY MANAGER OPERATIONS 1) Recommendation to adopt a resolution approving amendments (appropriating grants, donations, contributions or insurance proceeds) to the Fiscal Year 2015-16 Adopted Budget. Page 15 January 12, 2016 Packet Page -355- 3/22/2016 11.F. 2) Recommendation to approve Ferris Marketing of Florida as a qualified applicant to the Collier County Basic Industry Growth Promotion Incentive Program and approve the attached agreement for Project "15-013." G. AIRPORT AUTHORITY H. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 1) Recommendation to appoint a member to the Bayshore Beautification Advisory Committee. 2) Recommendation to reappoint two members to the Golden Gate Community Center Advisory Board. 3) Recommendation to reappoint a member to the Isles of Capri Fire Control District Advisory Committee. 4) To provide information regarding North Collier Fire Control and Rescue District cancelling the Inter-Local Agreement between Collier County and Big Corkscrew Fire Control and Rescue District. (Commissioner Henning) MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE 1) Miscellaneous Correspondence J. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS 1) To record in the minutes of the Board of County Commissioners, the check number (or other payment method), amount, payee, and purpose for which the referenced disbursements were drawn for the periods between November 26 and December 30, 2015 pursuant to Florida Statute 136.06. K. COUNTY ATTORNEY 1) Recommendation to approve the Right of Entry Agreement with Lely Community Development District to ensure proper monitoring of groundwater well levels. Page 16 January 12,2016 Packet Page -356- 3/22/2016 11.F. 2) Recommendation to approve a Joint Motion and Final Judgment in the amount of$15,000 for Parcel No. 264RDUE in the lawsuit styled Collier County v. Ganash Rajaram, et al., Case No. 15-CA-379 for the Golden Gate Boulevard widening project. (Project No. 60040) (Fiscal Impact: $10,105.50) 3) Recommendation to approve a Retention Agreement for specialized legal services with the law firm of Kelley Stuffier PLLC on workers' compensation matters. 4) Recommendation to approve a Final Judgment as to Bank of America, N.A.'s interest in Parcels 113FEE and 113TCE as part of the US-41 / Collier Boulevard Intersection Improvement Project, Project No. 60116. (Fiscal Impact: $5,040) 5) Recommendation to approve a Budget Amendment to satisfy the Final Judgment in the matter styled Penny Phillippi v. Collier County (Second DCA Case No. 2D14-5805 and Circuit Court Case No. 14- 0416CA) and approve all necessary budget amendments. �. 6) Recommendation to approve a Final Judgment for Parcel 212RDUE in the case styled Collier County v. Eva Baldrich, et al., Case No. 14- CA-2701, now pending in the Twentieth Judicial Circuit, Collier County, required for the widening of Golden Gate Boulevard (Project No. 60040). (Fiscal Impact: $11,355.50) 7) Recommendation to approve a Final Judgment for Parcel 200RDUE in the case styled Collier County v. Baby Brothers Enterprises, Inc., et al., Case No. 15-CA-0298, now pending in the Twentieth Judicial Circuit, Collier County, required for the widening of Golden Gate Boulevard (Project No. 60040). (Fiscal Impact: $10,305.50) 17. SUMMARY AGENDA - This section is for advertised public hearings and must meet the following criteria: 1) A recommendation for approval from staff; 2) Unanimous recommendation for approval by the Collier County Planning Commission or other authorizing agencies of all members present and voting; 3) No written or oral objections to the item received by staff, the Collier County Planning Commission, other authorizing agencies or the Page 17 January 12, 2016 Packet Page -357- 3/22/2016 11.F. Board, prior to the commencement of the BCC meeting on which the items are scheduled to be heard; and 4) No individuals are registered to speak in opposition to the item. For those items which are quasi-judicial in nature, all participants must be sworn in. A. This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to approve Petition VAC- PL20150002259, to disclaim, renounce and vacate the County and the public interest in a portion of the 10-foot Utility Easement, recorded in Official Record Book 1137, Page 638 and the 50-foot Utility Easement recorded in Official Record Book 1401, Page 757 of the public records of Collier County, Florida, located in Section 9, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. B. This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to approve Petition VAC- PL20150001066, to disclaim, renounce and vacate the County and the public interest in a portion of the 12-foot drainage easement located along the rear border of Lot 15, Block "C" of Habitat Village, as recorded in Plat Book 37, Pages 48 through 51 of the public records of Collier County, Florida, located in Section 33, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. C. Recommendation to adopt an Ordinance amending "Schedule Four" of "Appendix A" of Chapter 74 of the Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances (The Collier County Consolidated Impact Fee Ordinance) by providing for an amendment to Ordinance No. 2015-17 to correct a scrivener's error in the Correctional Facilities Impact Fee Rate Schedule and to provide for the incorporation by reference of the corrected Correctional Facilities Impact Fee Update Study. D. This item requires that ex parte disclosure be_provided by Commission members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all participants are required to be sworn in. Kathleen Riley, et al. requests an appeal to the Board of County Commissioners of a final decision by the Collier County Planning Commission to approve Petition BDE-PL20150000487 for an 18- foot boat dock extension over the maximum 20-foot limit allowed by Section 5.03.06 of the Land Development Code for a total protrusion of 24 Page 18 January 12. 2016 Packet Page -358- 3/22/2016 11 .F. to 38 feet to accommodate a 26 slip multi-family docking facility for the benefit of a 15.61 ± acre project to be known as Haldeman Creek Docks in Sections 11 and 14, Township 50 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida [Petition ADA-PL20150001703] (Companion to item 16A29]. E. Recommendation to adopt a resolution approving amendments (appropriating carry forward, transfers and supplemental revenue) to the Fiscal Year 2015-16 Adopted Budget. 18. ADJOURN Inquiries concerning changes to the Board's Agenda should be made to the County Manager's Office at 252-8383. Page 19 January 12. 2616 Packet Page -359- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, you have a live mic. CHAIRMAN NANCE: Ladies and gentlemen, good morning and welcome to the Board of County Commission meeting of January 12th, 2016. Happy New Year. I will request, in order to help us have an orderly meeting, that each of you silence your devices. And if you have a phone call that you feel obligated to take, please step out into the foyer to conduct your business so that we can have an orderly meeting. At this time we will have invocation delivered by Rabbi Ammos Chorny from the Beth Tikvah of Naples. And please remain standing following his invocation for the Pledge of Allegiance. Item #1A INVOCATION BY RABBI AMMOS CHORNY FROM THE BETH TIKVAH OF NAPLES — INVOCATION GIVEN RABBI CHORNY: Good morning, everyone. Happy New Year. Our God and God of our fathers: As we stand here this morning we ask your blessings for our country, for our state, our county, for its government, for its leaders and advisers; for all who exercise just and rightful authority. We ask that you teach them insights of your law, that they be administered over affairs of state fairly. That peace and security, as well as happiness and prosperity, justice and freedom will forever abide in our midst. Creator of all flesh, bless all inhabitants of our country with your Spirit, that citizens of all races and creeds forge a common bond in true brotherhood to banish all hatred and bigotry and safeguard the ideals and free institutions which are our country's pride and glory. May this land under your providence be an influence for good throughout the world, uniting all man in peace and freedom in helping Page 2 Packet Page -360- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 them fulfill the vision of your profit. Nations shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war anymore. As we all say, Amen. (Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.) CHAIRMAN NANCE: At this time we are going to address today's regular consent and summary agenda. And at this time I will call for any additional changes from commissioners and for their ex parte disclosure. Commissioner Henning? MR. OCHS: Excuse me, Mr. Chairman. CHAIRMAN NANCE: Sir. MR. OCHS: I have a few items for the change sheet this morning. CHAIRMAN NANCE: Oh, I'm sorry, Mr. Ochs. Please lead us through those. Item #2A APPROVAL OF TODAY'S REGULAR, CONSENT AND SUMMARY AGENDA AS AMENDED (EX PARTE DISCLOSURE PROBIDED BY COMMISSION MEMBERS FOR CONSENT AGENDA) — APPROVED AND/OR ADOPTED W/CHANGES MR. OCHS: Thank you very much. Good morning, Mr. Chairman and Commissioners. These are the proposed agenda changes for the Board of County Commissioner's meeting of January 12th, 2016. The first proposed change is to move Item 16.H.4 from the consent agenda to become Item 10.0 on the regular agenda. That is an executive summary from Commissioner Henning regarding the North Collier Fire Control and Rescue District Interlocal Agreement. That item has been moved at Commissioner Hiller's request. Page 3 Packet Page -361- ..w,,.»«,,. , 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 The next proposed change is to move Item 16.E.5 to become Item 11.D on the regular agenda. That is an item related to the authorization of the use of a fencing repair contract. And that item was moved both at the separate request of Commissioner Henning, and your change sheet says Commissioner Taylor, but I believe it was Commissioner Fiala who also asked for that to be moved separately. I apologize for that. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: That's good. Because I didn't remember that. MR. OCHS: Yes, ma'am. Wrong name, I'm sorry. The next proposed change is to move Item 16.E.4 to become Item 11.E on the regular agenda. That is a recommendation to reaffirm the use of certain procurement methods by county staff for goods and services. That item is moved at Commissioner Taylor's request. There are three time certain items on the agenda today, Commissioners. The first is Item 11.C. That has to do with the award of a contract for a documentary film, and that will be heard at 10 a.m. Then at noon the Board will convene at a closed session to discuss a litigation matter. And at 1:00, we'll come back and open session and report out on the results of that 12:00 meeting. Reminders for court breaks are typically around 10:30 a.m. and 2:50 p.m. And those are all the changes that I have, Mr. Chairman. CHAIRMAN NANCE: Thank you, Mr. Ochs. My apologies for jumping your process there a little bit. At this time we will ask Commissioners for any additional changes that they may request and their ex parte communication. Commissioner Henning? COMMISSIONER HENNING: No further changes. I do have correspondence on 17.D as in David. Had meetings, Page 4 Packet Page -362- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 phone calls. Of course we heard this item at our last -- I believe our last meeting. Numerous correspondence, including emails. And they're all in my file. COMMISSIONER HILLER: No disclosures and no changes. CHAIRMAN NANCE: Yes, on my part I likewise had -- have numerous ex parte on item -- consent Item 16.A.29 and Item 17.D which is the Standard Pacific boat dock access improvement item. And of course those include the staff report. Meeting with counsel, Mr. Yovanovich; various letters from associations and citizens; meetings with staff; correspondence from the County Attorney; correspondence with counsel for the petitioner, and supplemental material also from Mr. Pires. No other ex parte communications on my part. Commissioner Fiala? COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you. On the consent agenda, Item number 16.A.3, which is the Del Webb Naples parcels, I've been invited to a few events. I've had emails from Judy Hushon and more about impact, not the project. And that's all I've had on that one. On 16.A.5, which is Winding Cypress, I've had meetings, correspondence, emails and met with staff. Some of those that I've met with is Rich Yovanovich, Kristi Hastings, Michael Hunnican. Email from residents -- and emails from residents of the surrounding communities. Moving on down to 16.A.7, I was actually -- this is Lakoya, and I was the speaker at a ribbon cutting way back in 2011. But just for the sake of telling everybody that's where I was and that's what I did. And 16.A.9, again we're still on consent agenda, Golf Club of the Everglades, I've only had meetings with staff. And I met with John Passidomo and Bill Barton in March of 2010, and I had a site visit years ago with Alex Sulecki, so I became familiar with the property. 16.A.29 -- I'm sorry I keep going on and on, but that's the way it is. I've had meetings, correspondence, emails, calls with staff. I've Page 5 Packet Page -363- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 met with staff on this and read the report. I met with Tony Pires, Kathy Riley, Maurice Gutierrez, Vicki Tracy, residents in the surrounding communities, meetings with the hearing examiner, CRA, MSTU meeting, boat tour with Bob Mesmer, Planning Commission meetings, and I've met with a couple of the planning commissioners, and emails from the County Attorney. Moving on to the summary agenda -- I'm sorry, moving on to the summary agenda. CHAIRMAN NANCE: Very busy, ma'am. Go ahead. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, my goodness. This one is pretty simple. Only on 17.D, which is the Haldeman Creek docks, again just the same as I mentioned on the last one, staff report and meeting with Tony Pires, Kathy Riley, Maurice Gutierrez, Vicki Tracy, surrounding residents in that area. I told you I took a boat tour, because that was really quite an eye opener. Meetings with the hearing examiner, the CRA and the MSTU group, and the Planning Commission Meeting and email from the County Attorney. Thank you. CHAIRMAN NANCE: Thank you. Commissioner Taylor? COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I'll start with 9.A, which is the Briarwood issue -- CHAIRMAN NANCE: Ma'am, we'll take the hearing -- COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: That's for later on, that's fine, good. Okay. And so then we go to -- and the Gateway is -- okay, so there's nothing except as almost ditto to Commissioner Fiala on 16.A.29. There were meetings with staff, meetings -- a town hall meeting that I attended last year. A neighborhood meeting, CRA meetings, site visit at Ms. Riley's house, conversations with residents, conversations with the MSBU folks. Also a lot of correspondence from the folks in the area of the Haldeman Creek area. Page 6 Packet Page -364- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 And 17.D would be exactly the same. Again, town hall meeting, neighborhood meeting, Haldeman Creek CRA, MSTBU meetings, many emails from residents, personal calls from residents, a site visit with Ms. Riley. I think that pretty much covers it. No boat tours, though. Saw it from the shore. CHAIRMAN NANCE: All right. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: And there's no changes to the agenda. CHAIRMAN NANCE: No changes. Is there a motion to approve the agenda as amended? COMMISSIONER HILLER: Motion to approve. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second. CHAIRMAN NANCE: There's a motion and a second. Any further discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN NANCE: Seeing none, all those in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye. CHAIRMAN NANCE: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye. CHAIRMAN NANCE: Any opposed, like sign. (No response.) CHAIRMAN NANCE: All right, the agenda is approved as amended. Page 7 Packet Page -365- 3/22/2016 11 .F. Proposed Agenda Changes Board of County Commissioners Meeting January 12,2016 Move Item 16H4 to Item 10C: To provide information regarding North Collier Fire Control and Rescue District cancelling the Inter-Local Agreement between Collier County and Big Corkscrew Fire Control and Rescue District. (Commissioner Hiller's request) Move Item 16E5 to Item 11D: Recommendation to retroactively authorize the use of contract 14-6280 Fencing Installation and Repair for"lump sum"quoted projects to Carter Fence Company and BUE,Inc.d/b/a/Gatekeepers/Gateswork and inform the Board of termination notices received from both contractors. (Commissioner Henning and Commissioner Taylor's separate requests) Move Item 16E4 to Item 11E: Recommendation to reaffirm the continued use of the industry's best practices of utilizing"lump sum,""time and materials,"a combination of both price methodologies,and"unit price"for County purchase orders and projects. (Commissioner Taylor's request) Time Certain Requests: Item 11C to he heard at 10:00 a.m. Item 12A to be heard in a Closed Session at 12:00 noon Item 12B to be heard in an Open Session at 1:00 p.m. Packet Page -366- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 Item #2B MINUTES FROM THE DECEMBER 8, 2015 BCC REGULAR MEETING — APPROVED AS PRESENTED CHAIRMAN NANCE: That takes us to Item 2.B, which is the approval of the Board of County Commission regular meeting minutes of December 8th. COMMISSIONER HENNING: So moved. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second. CHAIRMAN NANCE: There's a motion and a second to approve. Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN NANCE: Hearing none, all those in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye. CHAIRMAN NANCE: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye. CHAIRMAN NANCE: Any opposed, like sign. (No response.) CHAIRMAN NANCE: Those are approved. Item #2C SELECTION OF CHAIRMAN & VICE-CHAIRMAN — MOTION TO NOMINATE COMMISSIONER FIALA CHAIRWOMAN AND COMMISSIONER NANCE VICE-CHAIRMAN — APPROVED Page 8 Packet Page -367- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 All right, at this time it is time for the selection of a new Chairman and Vice-Chairman for this board. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Move to approve Donna Fiala as Chair and Penny Taylor as Vice-Chair. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I'd like to nominate Tim Nance as Vice-Chair. CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Taylor, you are declining Vice-Chair? COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Yeah. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay, then I'll amend my motion. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I'll second it. CHAIRMAN NANCE: All right, there's a motion and a second. Any discussion? COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah, I can't support that. The reason being is that Commissioner Henning is going to be off the Board. He's not running again. So I can't support that. CHAIRMAN NANCE: All right. Well, in full disclosure, since we're getting to that point, I was going to wait for this announcement a little later, but after serious deliberation it's fair for all of my colleagues on this board to understand that I made the decision not to run for an additional term as the District 5 Commissioner. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Wait a minute. Commissioner Hiller has applied for or is running for House of Representatives in 2016. So what's the difference if I'm not running for anything and her running for House of Representatives? Doesn't make sense to me. CHAIRMAN NANCE: Well, I mean, in full disclosure, if anybody wants to know, those are my intentions and I've given each of you a very short statement of my thought process. It's just a very personal decision to me. Each of us have time passages in our lives and I think this moment is an important one for me. So I've made that Page 9 Packet Page -368- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 decision. And, you know, we'll have additional discussion under Commissioner comment. I don't think it's appropriate to do it right now. But in all fairness and honesty to everyone on the Board and in the room I think it's fair that I just let you know that I've made that determination, so -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: And it's regrettable, because you've been a great Commissioner and you've brought a lot to this community and this Board. And, you know, I understand that this is what you want to do, but I wish you would take a little more time and maybe reconsider. CHAIRMAN NANCE: Thank you for your kind words. COMMISSIONER HILLER: And I won't stop asking you to reconsider until election day in August. CHAIRMAN NANCE: Thank you for your kind words, and everybody's support actually. You've been very kind. Commissioner Fiala? COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, with the motion and a second motion that I be Chair and you be Vice-Chair and Commissioner Taylor saying she would prefer it that way, then I think we should go to a vote. COMMISSIONER HILLER: But I think -- what was the -- did you want Commissioner Nance as Vice-Chair? COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, Commissioner Henning -- CHAIRMAN NANCE: The motion was -- COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- nominated Commissioner Taylor. CHAIRMAN NANCE: -- Commissioner Fiala as Chair and myself-- COMMISSIONER HILLER: Fiala as Chair and you as Vice- Chair? CHAIRMAN NANCE: -- and Commissioner Taylor as Vice- Page 10 Packet Page -369- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 Chair. Commissioner Taylor declined Vice-Chair and suggested that Commissioner Henning change his motion to be myself as Vice-Chair, which I believe he agreed to; is that correct, sir? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. CHAIRMAN NANCE: So the current motion is Commissioner Fiala as Chair and myself as Vice-Chair. Any further discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN NANCE: Hearing none, all those in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye. CHAIRMAN NANCE: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye. CHAIRMAN NANCE: Any opposed, like sign. (No response.) CHAIRMAN NANCE: Okay, that is a new Chair and Vice-Chair for 2016. (Applause.) Item #2D BOARD APPOINTMENT OF MEMBERS TO THE OFFICES OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, THE TOURIST DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL, COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT BOARD, THE PUBLIC SAFETY COORDINATING COUNCIL, AND THE SOUTHWEST FLORIDA REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL, AND AUTHORIZE THE NEW CHAIRS FOR BOTH THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND THE Page 11 Packet Page-370- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY TO EXECUTE ALL DOCUMENTS APPROVED AT BOTH THIS MEETING AND THOSE DOCUMENTS WHICH WERE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED BUT ARE PENDING SIGNATURE — MOTION APPOINTING COMMISSIONER NANCE CRA CHAIRMAN AND COMMISSIONER TAYLOR VICE-CHAIR; EDC — COMMISSIONER HILLER; PSCC — COMMISSIONER HENNING REPRESENTATIVE; TDC — COMMISSIONER TAYLOR CHAIRWOMAN; SWFRPC — COMMISSIONER NANCE AND COMMISSIONER TAYLOR REPRESENTATIVES — APPROVED CHAIRMAN NANCE: What I would like to do is I would like to consider at this time the offices and committee assignments or kind of leadership assignments for the Board of County Commissioners. Then we're going to take a short break, we're going to move around. I'm going to move 10 feet to my right, Commissioner Fiala is going to move 10 feet to her left and we'll continue the meeting at that time. But the current offices of the Board of County Commissioners include the Community Redevelopment Agency, Tourist Development Council, Community and Economic Development Board, Public Safety Coordinating Council and the Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council. So what I'm going to do in order to stimulate this discussion is I am going to take the lead and I'm going to make some suggestions and I`ll let everybody -- I'll let the melee proceed to see if we can come to terms. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: The elbows. CHAIRMAN NANCE: On the CRA, for the chairmanship of the CRA, I am going to propose that myself, Tim Nance, be Chair and Commissioner Taylor be Vice-Chair. For Community and Economic Development currently being Page 12 Packet Page -371- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 served by Commissioner Hiller, I'm going to recommend and nominate Commissioner Hiller to continue in that capacity; I think she's done an outstanding job. Commissioner Henning is the current Vice-Chair of the Public Safety Coordinating Council. I am going to nominate him to continue in that capacity. For the TDC chairmanship, which is currently being held by Commissioner Taylor, I'm going to nominate her to continue in that capacity. And for the Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council, I'm going to throw that up in the air because I've got my reservations on that. Currently Commissioner Taylor and myself serve in that capacity. I'm going to see what everybody else has to say. Commissioner Henning? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, the South Florida Regional Planning Council, what's the status on that? They're selling the building or is it -- COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: The building's been sold. They've moved. But now we're waiting to see what the legislature should do. Because you know by state statute, I believe that's correct, County Attorney -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: Why don't we keep it status quo until the legislators figure out what they're going to do. I know the Governor doesn't believe in regional planning. So that would be my suggestion on that one. CHAIRMAN NANCE: That we just continue, sir, as we are? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Correct, until the end of legislation. COMMISSIONER HILLER: I second your motion, Commissioner Nance. COMMISSIONER FIALA: I think that's a good idea. Page 13 Packet Page-372- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 CHAIRMAN NANCE: Okay. Commissioner Hiller, what do you think? COMMISSIONER HILLER: I think it's a good slate and I think we should call the question. I second you. CHAIRMAN NANCE: Okay, Commissioner Fiala? COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, that's your -- those are your choices. CHAIRMAN NANCE: No, those are my suggestions. Please -- COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, you know what -- CHAIRMAN NANCE: Please correct me if I'm in error. COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, no correction, no correction. I will go along with it. CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Taylor? COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Yeah, that's fine. CHAIRMAN NANCE: Okay. So just to review, for Board of County Commissioner, Commissioner Donna Fiala will be our Chair for 2016, Tim Nance will serve as Vice-Chair. On the Community Redevelopment Agency, Commissioner Nance will be the Chair and Commissioner Taylor Vice-Chair. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Could I be a co-chair with you on that? Because I'm so involved. CHAIRMAN NANCE: Ma'am, you are not restricted from any of your activities. I know you're super interested in that, so we'll be delighted -- COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you. CHAIRMAN NANCE: -- to continue to take the comments of the chairmanship of the Board. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I think so. CHAIRtiIAN NANCE: Community and Economic Development Liaison will be Commissioner Hiller will continue in that capacity. Commissioner Henning will continue to be Vice-Chair of the Public Page 14 Packet Page -373- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 Safety Coordinating Council. Commissioner Taylor will be appointed as 2016 Chair of the Tourist Development Council, and Commissioners Nance and Taylor will continue our representation with Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council until the legislature makes a determination on the future of that organization. Is there a -- COMMISSIONER FIALA: Motion to approve. CHAIRMAN NANCE: -- motion to approve? COMMISSIONER FIALA: Motion to approve. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Second. CHAIRMAN NANCE: There's a motion and a second to approve those positions and appointments. Any further discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN NANCE: Hearing none, all those in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye. CHAIRMAN NANCE: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye. CHAIRMAN NANCE: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN NANCE: That passes unanimously. Thank you very much. At this time we'll take a short -- COMMISSIONER FIALA: Just one second, if I might. CHAIRMAN NANCE: Yes, ma'am. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: I would like to acknowledge that sitting in our audience is a lady named Bridgette van den Hove-Smith, who is officially representing the Consul General de France in Miami Page 15 Packet Page -374- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 for the presentation of the Legion of Honor proclamation this morning. And I'm so proud to have Bridgette right here. Thank you very much for being here. (Applause.) CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: And I have another thing, as long as I have the microphone. This happened to wander into my desk here, and so -- CHAIRMAN NANCE: Has that been dunked in a bucket of water, ma'am? Does anyone know what this is? COMMISSIONER FIALA: We happen to know what this is. I'm going to just stand up and say you have done such an outstanding job as our chairman. You've been a joy to work with for all of us, I have to speak for everybody. And so on behalf of the County Commission and the county -- CHAIRMAN NANCE: Thank you very much. (Applause.) CHAIRMAN NANCE: Once again, my heartfelt thanks to everyone. Thank you so much for your courtesy and the various kindnesses that you've had for me during this time. I've done my best to try to work with everyone and I feel very good about the result from this last year. So thank you once again very much. You're very kind. COMMISSIONER HENNING: And Commissioner, you should, you have done an outstanding job of conducting these meetings and making sure everybody is heard. And I know Commissioner Fiala will continue that stride as we move on through 2016. CHAIRMAN NANCE: Thank you very much. At this time we'll take a short break for a little bit of reorganization and then we will proceed. Thank you very much. (Recess.) MR. OCHS: Ladies and gentlemen, please take your seats. Madam Chairman, you have a live mic. Page 16 Packet Page -375- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Although I don't look like Tim Nance, I'm -- COMMISSIONER NANCE: Thank goodness, ma'am. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: -- sitting in his seat. And I just want to thank all of the Commissioners for giving me this vote of confidence, and I hope that I am the chairman that you wish me to be. Thank you very much. Audience, it's so nice to see everyone here today. And before we get into too, too much, what I would like to ask the other Commissioners, I'm going to experiment a little bit, if this is okay with them. And what I'd like to do is when we hear issues -- now, this won't be on the proclamations or anything -- but when we hear issues, we have a presenter who presents what they're talking about and then usually staff comes up after that. And then after that we have people in the audience who would like to speak. And I would ask the Commissioners to bring just a paper and pen and when they want to make notes or ask questions, let's wait until after we've heard the presenters and after we've heard the speakers so everybody's had their opportunity to speak, and then we can deliberate amongst us. So that's just what I'm asking the other Commissioners to do, and I hope that meets with your approval. Okay, moving on to proclamations. Item #4 PROCLAMATIONS — ONE MOTION TAKEN TO ADOPT ALL PROCLAMATIONS Item #4A PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING THE 19TH ANNUAL Page 17 Packet Page -376- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 REVEREND DR. MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR. PARADE AND CELEBRATION ON JANUARY 18, 2016. ACCEPTED BY OFFICERS OF THE NAACP OF COLLIER COUNTY — HAROLD WEEKS, PRESIDENT; BARBARA MELVIN, 1ST VICE PRESIDENT; VINCENT KEEYS, 2ND VICE PRESIDENT; IRENE WILLIAMS, ASSISTANT SECRETARY; AKITA CANNON, TREASURER — ADOPTED MR. OCHS: Yes, ma'am. Item 4.A is a proclamation recognizing the 19th annual Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Parade and Celebration on January 18, 2016. To be accepted by officers of the NAACP of Collier County: Harold Weeks, President; Barbara Melvin, First Vice-President; Vincent Keeys, Second Vice- President; Irene Williams, Assistant Secretary; and Akita Cannon, Treasurer. If you'd please step forward. (Applause.) MR. WEEKS: TV, you got it? MR. KEEYS: Good morning, County Commissioners and distinguished guests to the community. I just would -- by default -- should I say my name is Vincent Keeys. I'm here on behalf of my lovely wife, Diann Keeys, who unfortunately could not make it. But we would like to invite all the County Commissioners and distinguished members of the community out to the 19th annual Dr. Martin Luther King Day parade. We would hope that everyone can attend. Thank you. COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll be there. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: When is it? (Applause.) CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Make sure to tell the audience. MR. KEEYS: Monday, January the 18th. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: That's next Monday. Page 18 Packet Page -377- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Where? CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Where do you meet? MR. KEEYS: It will be at Cambier Park. We will start off on Broad and 3rd and we will convene -- the celebration will take place at Cambier Park. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Thank you very much. 10:00 in the morning? MR. KEEYS: No, at 11:00. Not that early. 11:00. Thank you. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Thank you very much, sir. Item #4B PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING HUMAN TRAFFICKING AWARENESS MONTH IN COLLIER COUNTY. ACCEPTED BY COLLIER COUNTY SHERIFF KEVIN RAMBOSK — ADOPTED; READ INTO THE RECORD BY COMMISSIONER HILLER MR. OCHS: Item 4.B is a proclamation recognizing Human Trafficking Awareness Month in Collier County. To be accepted by Collier County Sheriff Kevin Rambosk. Sheriff Rambosk, if you'd please step forward. (Applause.) MR. OCHS: And also Linda Oberhaus, the Executive Director of the Shelter For Abused Women and Children is here this morning. COMMISSIONER HILLER: And also Angelina Spencer. MR. OCHS: And Julie Spencer, thank you. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Ladies and gentlemen, human trafficking is an egregious crime and we in Collier County stand firm against it. We have an incredible team led by our Sheriff that has done an outstanding job in stopping this crime. I would like to read the proclamation and then I would like the Page 19 Packet Page -378- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 Sheriff to make a very special announcement about what his team has accomplished most recently. WHEREAS, human trafficking is an egregious crime; and WHEREAS, Collier County government and the Collier County Sheriffs Office have launched a partnership, Collier County Against Modern Slavery, to bring awareness of the criminal act of human trafficking in our community and to end human trafficking in Collier County; and WHEREAS, the Collier County Board of County Commissioners adopted an ordinance introduced by Commissioner Georgia Hiller which went into effect January 1st to enforce the posting of public awareness signs at adult entertainment and massage bodywork establishments alerting employees and patrons to remedies and protections related to human trafficking, including contact information to report anyone forced to engage in an activity against their will; and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners went further, making human trafficking one of the county's legislative priorities for 2016. Commissioners will work with the Collier County Sheriffs Office to add measures to the 2012 Florida Human Trafficking Law that improved and strengthened the current legislation; and WHEREAS, Sheriff Kevin Rambosk, who has been a partner in this effort, has established a human trafficking unit in the Collier County Sheriffs Office, which focuses on stopping human trafficking and has had success doing so; and WHEREAS, these measures were taken to end human trafficking in Collier County and were endorsed by the Board of Collier County Commissioners; and WHEREAS, Collier County is committed to taking a firm stand against human trafficking and will remain focused on ensuring that all Collier County residents are safe and abusers are held accountable for their crimes. Page 20 Packet Page -379- V, ..1..110.11POM MavesartiMegMigarie.a.,q. ,114 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 NOW THEREFORE, be it proclaimed that the Collier County Board of County Commissioners hereby proclaims January, the entire month of January, as Human Trafficking Awareness Month. We really want to thank you all for all that you're doing. Sheriff, we present this to you. (Applause.) COMMISSIONER HILLER: Ladies and gentlemen, after the Sheriff makes his announcement, I would like to ask Linda Oberhaus to speak to what the Shelter is doing in partnership with the Sheriffs Office on human trafficking, and then Angelina Spencer also to describe her involvement with the efforts to save the victims. And then in conclusion, as I said in the proclamation, Collier County, in conjunction with the Sheriffs Office, has launched a public information campaign to fight this crime and promote awareness, and we will give you a very short video of what we -- not video, but slide show of what we are doing and explaining how in partnership we are launching this campaign. Sheriff? SHERIFF RAMBOSK: Good morning, Commissioners, Madam Chair. Thank you, Commissioner Hiller, for making this recognition possible. I will tell you that this is an ongoing investigative problem for not only Collier County but around the country and around the world. As you stated, we've made a commitment and appreciate you working together with us to bring the community's awareness up to the point that they can help us. Because without their help it becomes very difficult to make successful cases. This particular weekend I'd like to recognize our human trafficking unit that was just up here. They rescued four victims -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: Can they stand while you're Page 21 Packet Page -380- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 speaking? SHERIFF RAMBOSK: Yes, please stand up. They rescued four victims so far. (Applause.) SHERIFF RAMBOSK: They are looking at the attempt of another 12 victims, and they have arrested two subjects whose bail is just at $4 million. So we thank you very much and appreciate your support. (Applause.) COMMISSIONER HILLER: Linda? And Linda, when you present, before you start, could you announce who you are and who you represent? MS. OBERHAUS: Sure. Good morning. My name is Linda Oberhaus, I'm the Executive Director at the Shelter For Abused Women and Children. And last year we provided shelter, safety and support to 23 victims of human trafficking and their children. We were able to find -- actually what I want to say is that we've been very, very fortunate to work closely with the Sheriffs Office who has done a great job identifying victims of human trafficking in this community. It's my understanding that this is the only sheriffs office in the entire circuit that has a designated unit to address the issue of human trafficking. So the Shelter works very closely with the Sheriffs Office so they can identify the traffickers and so that they have a safe place where they can bring the trafficking victims 24 hours a day, seven days a week. And so we're just honored to be a part of this work and I commend the Sheriffs Office for their commitment and their dedication to really stopping human trafficking in our community. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Linda, we want to thank you and the Shelter for all you're doing for safeguarding these victims. Page 22 Packet Page -381- � era s �a.ate . �, ulint.veisioaatorarmaimisowo a .e 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 Because the bottom line is if we don't safeguard the victims, if we don't house them, we don't have a prosecution. And you are doing an outstanding job. You are the lead partner with the Sheriffs Office in sheltering the victims, and we hope you continue to expand your efforts. And I understand that you're going to continue to expand your efforts to house these victims into the future. So anything we can do to help -- you know, you're a part of the county's Victim Advocacy Coalition. If there's anything we can do to assist by way of grant funding or any cooperative assistance on any other level, please let me know, because you know that we are all as a Board and as staff committed to what you are doing and what the Sheriff is doing. MS. OBERHAUS: Thank you. And I appreciate your commitment on this issue as well. (Applause.) COMMISSIONER HILLER: Angelina? MS. SPENCER: Good morning and thank you. My name is Angelina Spencer and I'm a partner in a government relations firm in Washington D.C. called Empowerment Enterprises, Limited. We had the honor of working with Georgia Hiller and the County Commission and the Sheriffs Office. And I think it's important for everyone to know in this room, human trafficking is the third largest criminal enterprise in the U.S., following identity theft and the illicit drug trade. One trafficker can earn more than $100,000 annually abusing one victim. Today Collier County and its Sheriffs Office have committed to end modern day slavery. And this partnership will serve as a quintessential example across the county of commitment to this community saying when they see something they will say something. It's been an honor and a pleasure to work with Commissioner Hiller and the Sheriffs Office and all of the wonderful people here in this room that are in the trenches fighting against this horrific crime. Page 23 Packet Page -382- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 Thank you. And I will add that you have been much more efficient and pleasant and easier to work with than the federal government. COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's great. Thank you, Angelina. (Applause.) COMMISSIONER HILLER: While our technical staff brings up some of the slides on the public information campaign, I would like to give credit to the team that put together this outreach effort. Chief Stephanie Spell from the Sheriffs Office was by far the lead creative director. I mean, her ability to get the word out in a way that is tasteful and effective is beyond words. So I want to personally thank Chief Stephanie Spell. Linda Oberhaus, part of our team, and Angelina Spencer, part of our team, who really have done everything possible to put this campaign together and make it a success, starting this month. It is Human Trafficking Month. And please, as you're out there in the community, pay attention, be aware. And if you see any signs, call the Sheriffs Office, that guy standing right over there. How's the tech going? IT TECHNICIAN: I'll bring up the Facebook page in just a moment. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: I was just wondering, is Anna Rodriguez still involved with this, or no? SHERIFF RAMBOSK: She is not locally. I believe she's in the Tampa area now. I believe she's still involved in -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: And I want to share something that I think is really important. There was a -- the Sheriff had a press conference yesterday announcing the arrest of the two traffickers and sharing a little bit about the victims. And one reporter asked a very Page 24 Packet Page -383- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 interesting question that I think our audience probably would ask themselves and that is how many of the victims were foreign nationals, how many were immigrants. And the answer was none. All the women that were victimized were all local girls. So I want you to keep that in mind. This is a local crime. And the victim could be your next door neighbor's daughter, or son for that matter. So this is the logo, which you are going to see come out on hundreds of T-shirts in the near future. And you can see, it doesn't say stop human trafficking, it says Stop Modern Day Slavery. And it is slavery. It isn't just sex slavery, it's domestic slavery, it's other forms of labor slavery, and it's a crime that transcends both genders and all ages. It also says Collier County Partnership to End Human Trafficking. That partnership is between the Board of Collier County Commissioners and the Sheriffs Office. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Is this a film that we're -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, this is actually an information campaign and this is the logo for the campaign. This is the slogan. And what's going to happen is we're going to have T-shirts, we're having Twitter, Facebook, every type of social media. They are going to be -- this is the Facebook page. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Just in the interest of time I was wondering what we're doing so we can move forward. COMMISSIONER HILLER: And that's it. And this is an example of, you know, what you see -- can you lower it? This is the Facebook page. As you can see, we're starting to announce all the arrests, the nature of the crime, how you can call law enforcement, the 1-800 number and so forth. And that's basically it in a nutshell. So get the word out and let's get more arrests. Page 25 Packet Page -384- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Thank you very much for your involvement, Commissioner Hiller. We appreciate that. And thank you everyone for being here and letting us know what you're doing. Things that we never see normally. I appreciate that. Leo? Item #4C PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING EIGHT WORLD WAR II VETERANS WHO WERE HONORED WITH THE FRENCH NATIONAL ORDER OF THE LEGION OF HONOUR. ACCEPTED BY HARVEY LIMON, GERALD CABOT AND RICHARD HEATH — ADOPTED MR. OCHS: Yes, ma'am. Item 4.0 is a proclamation recognizing eight World War II veterans who were honored with the French National Order of the Legion of Honour. To be accepted by Harvey Limon and Gerald Cabot. If you gentlemen would step forward and receive your proclamation. (Applause.) COMMISSIONER HILLER: Congratulations. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Would you like to turn and face the camera. MR. LIMON: I would just like to thank the Collier County Commissioners for this honor. Thank you very much. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Thank you, sir. (Applause.) Item #4D PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING JANUARY 14, 2016 AS Page 26 Packet Page -385- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 KINDNESS AWARENESS DAY IN COLLIER COUNTY. ACCEPTED BY REPRESENTATIVES OF ONE MILLION ACTS OF KINDNESS: BOB VOTRUBA (WITH HIS DOG BOGART), STACEY DOONEY AND SUSANNA TOCCO — ADOPTED MR. OCHS: Item 4.D is a proclamation designating January 14, 2016 as Kindness Awareness Day in Collier County. To be accepted by representatives of One Million Acts of Kindness: Bob Votruba, with his dog Bogart; Stacey Dooney; and Suzanna Tocco. Please step forward. (Applause.) MR. VOTRUBA: Just a short speech I'd like to read. I'd really like to take this time to thank you guys so much, the Commissioners for making this annual event happen every year and giving it your support along the way. This proclamation lends a high degree of credibility because of your backing. This third annual Collier County Kindness Awareness Day is having a big impact, an impact that is both immediate and long term. The immediate being the kind acts that are being done by individuals, families and businesses/organizations on this day across Collier County. The long term is the desire of our youngest residents who choose to embrace kindness as a lifetime goal because of this event. With the blessing of the Collier County School Board, elementary schools throughout Collier County will take part in this one-day event. Some of the schools are even extending it out through the end of the year. Over 10,000 students in Collier County School System will be directly affected this year by this event. Not only the students but the educators and administrators as well. The students then take home and discuss this wonderful event with their parents and siblings. I can see this event ultimately touching the lives of 50,000 people throughout Collier County this year alone. Page 27 Packet Page -386- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 I'd like to take the opportunity to thank the people that helped me reach this goal. I must admit, I stacked the deck a little bit with five moms who have children in four different elementary schools throughout the district, so in a way success was tipped in our favor. Thank you to Stacy Dooney, Susanna Tocco, Beth Houswert, Laura Pacter, Lois Bhola, Lorraine Ryman and Melissa Cahn for their help these past few years. Kudos to them for making this happen. Thank you once again. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Thank you, sir. (Applause.) Item #4E PROCLAMATION HONORING THE WORK OF COLLIER COUNTY STAFF TO IMPROVE THE NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM'S COMMUNITY RATING SYSTEM FOR COLLIER COUNTY FROM A CLASS 6 TO A CLASS 5. ACCEPTED BY HOWARD CRITCHFIELD, WILLIAM LANG, CAROLINE CILEK, KATHY BADGER, BETHANY MITCHELL, MATT MCLEAN, ROBERT WILEY, RICK ZYVOLOSKI, JAMIE FRENCH, TRAVIS GOSSARD, JONATHAN WALSH, BOB GAREE, MIKE DUMAIS, LAURA GIBSON, GARY MCALPIN AND THE COLLIER COUNTY FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT PLANNING COMMITTEE — ADOPTED MR. OCHS: Item 4.E is a proclamation honoring the work of Collier County staff to improve the National Flood Insurance Program's Community Rating System for Collier County from a Class 6 to a Class 5 rating. To be accepted by Howard Critchfield, William Lang, Caroline Cilek, Kathy Badger, Bethany Mitchell, Matt McLean, Robert Wiley, Rick Zyvoloski, Jamie French, Travis Gossard, Page 28 Packet Page -387- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 Jonathan Walsh, Bob Garee, Mike Dumais, Laura Gibson and Gary McAlpin, and the Collier County Floodplain Management Planning Commission. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Leo? COMMISSIONER HILLER: Leo, can I -- CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Leo, would you -- as the people come walking up, would you tell them how much that saves them on their insurance bill, please. I think that's important. They don't realize what that five or six means. MR. OCHS: Yes, ma'am. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Come on up, folks. MR. OCHS: Please, everyone step forward. (Applause.) MR. CASALANGUIDA: For the audience's education, we started out as a Class 7 and worked our way down to Class 6 and ultimately to Class 5. Each one of those represents anywhere from a 1.5 to $2 million savings for Collier County insurance payers if they live in a flood zone. That's been about a four-year process and it's been with the hard work of the staff and the Floodplain Committee. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: These are the people working behind the scenes that make us look good, by the way, folks. MR. BROUGHAM: Good morning. I'm Phil Brougham and I serve or have served and am serving and will serve on the Floodplain Management Planning Committee since its formation in 2006. I have to give a lot of credit to our former County Manager, Mr. Mudd, who formed this committee under his direction, and the continued leadership of County Manager Ochs. And as Commissioner Fiala said, a lot of people in this county don't realize what a one point improvement in this community rating system means to them that have flood insurance policies. In the case of Page 29 Packet Page -388- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 Collier County, as Nick said, this one percent or one point saved the residents approximately a million and a half to $2 million in their annual flood insurance premiums. And that's due primarily not to the day-to-day work of the Floodplain Management Planning Committee, it's county staff. And we've been through a lot of ups and downs with this committee, but I can tell you that there have been hundreds, if not thousands of hours put in behind the scenes by county staff to make this improvement happen. And the work is not done; there's still more points out there. I would only ask you to be inquisitive with your county leadership as to what an additional one point improvement might make in these insurance premiums and what the associated staff costs to get there might be. We're getting into pretty rare air here, so there's more fruit there if you want to spend the money to get it. We're there to support you. Thank you very much. (Applause.) MR. OCHS: Commissioners, very briefly, on behalf of staff, we would really like to sincerely thank the volunteer members of your Floodplain Management Planning Committee, Mr. Brougham in particular, for his steadfast dedication and perseverance in this project. I think it's commendable, and we're very grateful for their service. So thank you. COMMISSIONER NANCE: Motion to approve today's proclamations. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Second. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: All in favor? Aye. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye. COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye. Page 30 Packet Page -389- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign. (No response.) CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Very good. Thank you. Item #5A PRESENTATION OF THE COLLIER COUNTY BUSINESS OF THE MONTH FOR JANUARY 2016 TO PREMIER SOTHEBY'S INTERNATIONAL REALTY. ACCEPTED BY JUDY GREEN, PRESIDENT/CEO, PREMIER SOTHEBY'S INTERNATIONAL REALTY; KRISTI BARTLETT, VICE-PRESIDENT, OPPORTUNITY NAPLES, THE GREATER NAPLES CHAMBER OF COMMERCE; AND ANDREA STURZENEGGER, VICE- PRESIDENT, MARKETING & MEMBERSHIP, THE GREATER NAPLES CHAMBER OF COMMERCE — PRESENTED M.R. OCHS: Madam Chair, that takes us to Item 5 on today's agenda, presentations. Item 5.A is a presentation of the Collier County Business of the Month for January, 2016, to Premiere Sotheby's International Realty. To be accepted by Judy Green, President/CEO of Premier Sotheby's International Realty; Kristi Bartlett, Vice-President, Opportunity Naples, the GOeater Naples Chamber of Commerce; and Andrea Sturzenegger, Vice-President of Marketing and Membership with the Greater Naples Chamber of Commerce. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Does somebody want to get up and say -- oh, you're going to do that? Okay. MS. GREEN: I just want to take a minute to thank each and every one of you. And, you know, it's -- as part of the Lutgert company and the Lutgert family, our company has always been focused on Collier County. So to receive this from you certainly just really is very special to all of us. And we continue to love this county Page 31 Packet Page -390- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 and want to make it better in many, many ways. But as a citizen I just have to take a minute to also say to the Floodplain that just went through and all, I personally live on the water. I personally have to buy flood insurance. And I just want to say to all of the work that each one of you do and as the county and the city works together in so many ways, I personally want to thank each and every one of you for the work that you do. Thank you very much. Thank you. (Applause.) CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Do we start on the 10:00 time certain? Item #11B RECOMMENDATION TO AWARD CONTRACT NO. 15-6447, CHOKOLOSKEE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT, TO KELLY BROTHERS, INC., IN THE AMOUNT OF $8,050,911.82, PROJECT . NO. 66066 — APPROVED MR. OCHS: Well, ma'am, we should wait technically 'til 10:00. We do have perhaps one item that we could take, if the Board would be so inclined, and that would be Item 11.B on today's agenda. It's a recommendation to award Contract Number 15-6447 for the Chokoloskee Bridge Replacement to Kelly Brothers, Incorporated, in the amount of$8,050,911.82. And Mr. Ahmad is available to make a presentation or answer questions from the Board. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Commissioner Henning? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Which bridge have we been working on over there for quite a while? Is that a -- I thought that was the Chokoloskee Bridge. MR. AHMAD: Good morning, Madam Chair, Commissioners. Jay Ahmad for the record. Page 32 Packet Page -391- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 Chokoloskee Bridge, we worked on this bridge about maybe three, four years ago where we did some repairs. Now we are actually replacing the whole bridge. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, you put in some kind of amenities for fishing then. That was a hard surface. Is that all going to go? Is that going to be removed? MR. AHMAD: Actually, the seawall that exists is going to remain, so the amenities that exist out there pretty much from the seawall inward toward the roadway will remain -- that will be replaced. But from the seawall outward will remain. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Let me ask another question. There's amenities for people who fish that were placed on that bridge. Are they remaining or are they being removed? MR. AHMAD: The bridge -- the answer to that question, sir, it's improved. We're not removing any amenities that existed. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. So, I mean, that repair was, if I recall, was quite extensive. MR. AHMAD: It was actually not too ex-- what we did in the past, we patched the deck, we did some side sloping to the -- for erosion to the sides of the bridge, but we just kept it -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, the pillars were scoring, and I remember it was -- MR. AHMAD: Oh, that is a different bridge, sir. COMMISSIONER HENNING: That is a different bridge? MR. AHMAD: You're talking about Route 92 near Goodland where we did some scour and the piers. We did some work there. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay, not on the Chokoloskee Bridge? MR. AHMAD: Not on Chokoloskee. COMMISSIONER HENNING: You didn't do any subsurface work on the -- Page 33 Packet Page -392- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 MR. AHMAD: Not that I recall. We just -- some of the deck, parts were falling, we patched those, and we patched some work on the piers, but nothing substantial and subaqueous. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Just half a million dollars worth. MR. AHMAD: Correct. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. Okay. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Commissioner Nance? COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes, thank you, Mr. Ahmad. I appreciate the work that everybody's done on this bridge. I know that have it's been -- since it came under discussion and the original designs were proposed there have been changes to elevate it to allow vessels to pass under it in better form, and also to allow the fire boat and other things. And Commissioner Henning, there was quite a bit of public impact regarding the aprons on the edge of the bridges, and staff did respond to keep that as a recreational amenity, I think is very important. People have utilized it, so -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: If it needs to be done, I don't have a problem. The problem I have is, you know,just a few years ago we spent money on repairing that. You know, a half a million dollars, that's quite extensive repairs. That's the only thing that concerned me. COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes, sir. I want to thank staff for working on the details of the bridge and I want to make a motion to approve. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Second. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Do I hear a second? COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Second. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Any other comments? (No response.) CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: We have no speakers. Page 34 Packet Page -393- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 All in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye. COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign. (No response.) CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Very good, this passes unanimously. Item #11C RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE A CONTRACT BETWEEN PARADISE REEF, LLC AND COLLIER COUNTY FOR THE PRODUCTION AND DISTRIBUTION OF A 5b MINUTE DOCUMENTARY FILM, A 3-MINUTE FILM, AND TWO 30- SECOND FILM SPOTS; APPROVE THE NECESSARY BUDGET AMENDMENT IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $527,614; AND MAKE A FINDING THAT THIS ITEM PROMOTES TOURISM — APPROVED MR. OCHS: Madam Chair, that takes us to our 10 a.m. time certain, which is Item 11 .0 on today's agenda. This is a recommendation to approve a contract between Paradise Reef, LLC and Collier County for the production and distribution of a 56-minute documentary film, a three-minute film and two 30-second film spots, and to approve the necessary budget amendment in an amount not to exceed $527,614, and make a finding that this item promotes tourism. And Mr. Wert is available to make a presentation. If the Board will recall and the public -- for the public's knowledge, the Board had previously approved this item and had Page 35 Packet Page -394- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 directed the staff and the County Attorney to work on a contract to bring back to the Board to formalize the agreement. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Mr. Wert? MR. WERT: Yes, thank you, Madam Chair. COMMISSIONER NANCE: I make a motion to approve. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Second. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: We have a motion and a second to approve. Commissioner Hiller, you have a light on. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah, I can't support this motion for the following reason: We are paying over a half a million dollars for a film that we will not be owning. And by we, I mean Collier County, the public. So you're using public funds to pay for the full value of an asset that we will have no ownership interest in. In fact, we are overpaying excessively since we're only getting a very limited use right. This would be the equivalent of, for example, if you wanted to lease a song on iTunes and they would charge you the full value of the production of the song rather than the value of listening to it, which is the equivalent of .99 versus, you know, let's say a million dollars. So, I mean, this is just an unbelievable proposal. You know, if we were paying for the value of the limited interest we were getting, I could accept it. But to pay for the full value of the film that the public is not going to own is really outrageous, so -- CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Commissioner Henning? COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- I can't vote for it. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, there's a lot of things that we pay for that we don't own. I know we spend a lot of money on economic development, expanding jobs and bringing in companies here in Collier County. This product will benefit a lot of our employees that are in the Page 36 Packet Page -395- _. , 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 hospitality industry. One thing that I heard two weeks ago from my neighbor who comes from Germany, actually a visitor here that owns property, a condo, that the Euro is being devalued to equal to what the dollar is. That's going to affect a lot of visitors from Europe. So we need to try to diverse our -- the people who visit here in Collier County. I think this is a positive step forward. So I support it. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: It's my button on before yours, if you don't mind. COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, go ahead. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: And that is for the people in the audience, you probably know we've been building a reef for -- actually the process started quite a while back. This reef is the largest reef in the northern hemisphere. Largest reef in the northern hemisphere. And what it's going to do is create a whole new business in our already vital tourism business. Ifs going to be creating the fishing and diving business. Fishing has waned because our fish stock has had no place to hide. And so by building this reef we've already seen it coming alive. And now the divers are going to go in. Now this reef is pretty far out, so it will be great for the divers. We've never been able to attract divers and the diving industry tourism industry before, but we will be able to now. And I believe that this film will be able to be used not only here locally but around the country. And I'm hoping when they go on some of these junkets that they'll be able to see it as they travel as far as the tourism department taking that with them. So I'm so pleased to see this going forward. And as you can hear, my vote is absolutely yes. Commissioner Hiller? COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you. Commissioner Henning, thank you for bringing up economic Page 37 Packet Page -396- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 development. When we invest in economic development, we have standards of return. And in fact we don't make payouts 'til we actually see the standards become a reality. For example, like job creation, we don't incentivize and merely give money to a company, because we require that they create jobs, we require that they prove that they have created those jobs and then we reimburse them for that contribution to our local economy. This is not happening here. There is no standard, there is no requirement that they create a certain number of jobs, there is no requirement that there be proof that those jobs be created. This is unacceptable. If we were paying for the value of the very short advertising slots that we are getting, if we were paying for the value of those short clips, that would be justified. But to pay for the full value of the film when we are not getting the full value of the film for the benefit of the public is unacceptable. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay, and so I've had a motion and a second. No other comment-- oh, I have two other people. Okay, I don't know which one was first. Commissioner Taylor? COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: One of the best things about this project, unlike a lot of the filming we're doing in the tourist development agency, is that it's employing local people. It's local people about a local story. And I wasn't up here at the time, but this Commission, they saw into the future. It's about sustainability. It's about taking 800 tons per reef, is that correct, of debris from the landfill and dropping it and creating a nursery for fish. 36 reefs. Do you know what that means to the landfill? This is probably -- you know, I've said it to people, I'll say it right now, it is such an exciting time to be part of Collier County. Because we've taken this one large step into the future. And this documentary Page 38 Packet Page -397- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 is not only going to tell the State of Florida about it, we're very optimistic it's going to tell the world. And no more will a tourist happen to meet our wonderful Assistant County Manager who is swimming in to ask him where the reefs are, because they're going to know where the reefs are. So I'm very excited and really looking forward to this. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Thank you. And Commissioner Henning? COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, I'm ready to vote. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay, fine. All those in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye. COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay, we have a 4-1 vote on that, it passes. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: And Madam Chair, if I could ask Mr. Julian to come up for one second to just clarify a couple of things. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Sure. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: You have a pretty aggressive time frame established. Can you tell me what your concerns are or how we go forward? Because it's your time schedule and your payments are dependent upon it. And we're going to hold your feet to the fire on this. MR. JULIAN: Absolutely. We -- in fact, we'll be done filming late this week. We have Andy Casagrande working with us. He's a famous underwater photographer who will do the underwater section for us, and we're all in. We'll be self-funding expenses until we can get Page 39 Packet Page -398- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 reimbursement from the county. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Could you state your name for the record? MR. JULIAN: Harry Julian. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: And so what kind of-- I know that the county has to approve every section of this. There's four sections and they have to approve it. What kind of turn-around do you need from our side? Understanding that everyone's busy, but I think it's important to put it on the record. MR. JULIAN: I do believe it is outlined in the contract. I believe it's a 30-day turnaround, which works for us. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: For each -- MR. JULIAN: Correct. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: -- time. Okay, so you deliver the film, the county gets it back in 30 days and then onward and upward, make sure everything is okay. MR. JULIAN: Correct. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Perfect. All right, thank you very much. And congratulations. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Leo? Item #6A PUBLIC PETITION REQUEST FROM MR. NADER A.MANI REQUESTING THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS REMOVE CONDITION #3 AND AMEND CONDITION #4 OF ORDINANCE 2006-61 (WHIPPOORWILL LANE REZONE). PRESENTING ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER IS MR. BIAGIO BERNARDO OF CRE CONSULTANTS — MOTION TO BRING ITEM BACK AT A FUTURE BCC MEETING — APPROVED , Page 40 Packet Page -399- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 MR. OCHS: Yes, ma'am, that takes us back to Item 6 on your agenda this morning, public petitions. Item 6.A is a public petition request from Mr. Nader Amani requesting that the Board of County Commissioners remove condition number three and amend condition number four of Ordinance 2006-61, the Whippoorwill Lane rezone. COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'd like to make a motion that we have staff bring it back -- CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Could we hear him finish? COMMISSIONER HILLER: Sure. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Thank you. MR. OCHS: And presenting on behalf of the petitioner would be Mr. Biagio Bernardo of CRE Consultants. CHAIRWOMiAN FIALA: Let's hear him first and then you're the first one to speak. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Do we have to hear him speak? CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: I think everybody in the audience deserves to hear what he's talking about, if that's all right. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Thank you. Yes, sir. MR. BERNARDO: Good morning, Commissioners. My name is Biagio Bernardo with CRE Consultants, a commercial real estate brokerage firm here in Naples. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Would you speak into the microphone, please. MR. BERNARDO: Sure. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Thank you. MR. BERNARDO: I also reside here in Naples. I'm here today on behalf of behalf of Nader Amani. He's the Page 41 Packet Page -400- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 owner of the subject property, 1450 Whippoorwill Lane. It's a 10-acre vacant lot located on the southeast side of Whippoorwill Lane. It was rezoned RMF-6 in 2006 when the property was rezoned. There were four conditions of approval, according to the Ordinance 06-61. And that's what we're here speaking about today, condition number three and four. Condition three states that certificate of occupancy shall not be issued until the roadway connection from Whippoorwill Lane to Livingston Road is fully operational. Condition number four speaks of the developer's contribution, their pro rata share for Whippoorwill Lane and Livingston Road extension and the Pine Ridge Road and Whippoorwill Lane signalization costs. It's come on our attention that on May 14th, 2013, the Board of Commissioners meeting proposed Whippoorwill Lane to Livingston Road extension was unanimously denied approval; thus the road was abandoned. So herein lies the problem: With the extension road abandoned, the conditions of Ordinance 06-61 makes the development of the property difficult and the certificate of occupancy, if it is developed, unattainable. We're respectfully asking the Board of Commissions to amend Ordinance 06-61 to remove condition number three and revised condition number four, eliminating the cost referencing Whippoorwill Lane/Livingston Road extension. Thank you. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Commissioner Hiller? COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah, I'd like to make a motion that we ask staff to bring this back. I think this should be discussed by the Board because, you know, clearly to the extent that we're going to continue to delay that, I don't see any reason why this developer should be held hostage by a Board vote. They should have the right to Page 42 Packet Page -401- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 develop. But I'd like to hear staffs perspective on this and so -- CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: First let me see if we can get a second on that, okay? COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah, go ahead. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: I'm sure we will. Do I hear a second? (No response.) CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: I'll second it. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: And then you wanted to hear from staff now or did you want to wait until it comes back before us? MR. OCHS: I believe the motion was to bring this back. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Just bring it back. I don't think we should discuss it now, I want to hear what staff has to say. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay. So we have a motion on the floor and a second -- oh, I'm sorry, Commissioner Henning. I didn't see that. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, this was a zoning action agreed upon by both parties, the property owner, petitioner and Board of Commissioners. The conditions were made based upon knowing the failure on Pine Ridge Road at the intersection of Livingston and Pine Ridge. The relief is what is being recreating (sic) in other areas is interconnectivity. That's the reason in there. It takes a supermajority to amend a PUD ordinance. I'm not going to support it. I think that interconnectivity is important for the residents here today. Not the future residents, but the residents that are impacted by the decisions that we make on a daily basis. Now, I know it's in your district, Commissioner Hiller, but it affects all the residents that travel through that intersection, and I just cannot support an amendment. I apologize. Page 43 Packet Page -402- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, it actually is not in my district. The -- it's -- well, and I'm not specifically talking about the project, I'm talking about the connectivity issue. That is in Commissioner Taylor's district. And there is no failure at that intersection as of right now. And that is why that interconnectivity was not expanded through, you know, those proposed road improvements. We don't do things just because. It has to be justified. And at this point in time there is no failure and there is no justification. So, you know, there's no -- if we're going to continue to delay, it may never be needed. And to that extent, you know, while I understand that this developer agreed to the condition in the past, circumstances have changed, and it doesn't look like it will be needed, or may not be needed. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: You mean the interconnectivity would not be needed; is that what you're saying? COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yes, because there's no failure right now. And that was clearly established. We had a public hearing on it. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: But we have to look at the future too, don't we? COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. Well, and the future is, you know, a different issue. But they -- I mean, they have the right to develop. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Well, let's see what the other Commissioners -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: And it's not going to adversely impact the traffic at the intersection, so there's no reason to deny it. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Commissioner Taylor, do you have a comment on this? COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Yeah, I would like -- I do not Page 44 Packet Page -403- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 agree to remove the restriction at the time. I think we have to look at the larger network. Frankly -- MR. KLATZKOW: If I may interrupt, the issue is whether or not you want to bring this back, not lose a good -- COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Okay, so I don't want to bring it back. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, if you bring it back we have to vote on it. It takes a supermajority, right? CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Right. MR. KLATZKOW: Staff will have an opinion as to do that. You have processes in your LDC where you can waive certain obligations. You'll have it fully vetted in your executive summary. But I'm just saying that -- COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: But it is a supermajority, sir? MR. KLATZKOW: What I'm saying is that the issue here is whether you want to bring this back for discussion. You are having this discussion now, but that's not what you should be doing, you should be having the discussion when the item has actually been noticed and heard. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Any amendment to a PUD takes a supermajority. MR. KLATZKOW: But this is not a PUD. COMMISSIONER HENNING: It's not a PUD? MR. KLATZKOW: No. MR. CASALANGUIDA: Straight zoning. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Pardon? MR. CASALANGUIDA: It's a straight zoning change, sir. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. So I think -- CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: If we brought it back we can just -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- any zoning takes a supermajority. Page 45 Packet Page -404- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 MR. CASALANGUIDA: Sir, in talking to staff, I think it's their opinion that in the process that it was approved would be -- the process would be adjusted. But I think we'll work with the County Attorney's Office, and if this is brought back by the Board, we'll bring you back options. COMMISSIONER HILLER: This is straight zoning? And we have a contract? I mean, is this contract zoning? MR. KLATZKOW: This is not contract zoning. The only issue -- ma'am, we're just going to expand this into areas nobody wants to talk about. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah, I understand that. MR. KLATZKOW: The only issue is do you want to hear this is the only issue. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, I think it's absolutely essential that we hear it. Because if it is straight zoning and it is not a PUD, then the fact that we have a contract that requires them not to build conditioned upon what this Board decides with respect to a future road improvement is a real problem. MR. KLATZKOW: Ma'am, that's why we bring it back on executive summary, so that all the facts and circumstances are before the Board as to what happened, where you are, what you can do. I'm -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: I think we should bring this back. MR. KLATZKOW: --just asking, rather than discussing this issue, the only issue before you, and it's your rules, the only issue before you on a public petition is do you want to bring this back. COMMISSIONER HILLER: I made a motion that we do and it was seconded by Commissioner Fiala. I think it's very important. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: This way then we'll have it in front of everybody, we all have our say in it and we can vote to decide what we want to do in the end. Page 46 Packet Page -405- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 So we have a motion on the floor. Commissioner Nance? COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yeah, I'm going to defer to the Commissioner of the district and recommend that Mr. Amani and his representative Mr. Bernardo meet before we go any farther with this, meet with the Commissioner of the district in which you're in and address her concerns. I'm going to defer to her because I believe she's going to know that situation better certainly than I do. If she has reservations then I believe that it's only fitting -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, it affects my district too . COMMISSIONER NANCE: -- that the petitioner -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: Are you actually physically in my district? COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: No. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Where is the project physically located in terms of the boundary? MR. BERNARDO: I couldn't speak to that. It's at the end of Whippoorwill Road where the high tension wires -- actually high tension walls bifurcate the lot. You know where the high tension -- right past Andalusia on the left-hand side. Down Whippoorwill Lane all the way to the end. On the east side of Whippoorwill. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: South of the -- MR. CASALANGUIDA: South of Pine Ridge. COMMISSIONER HILLER: It's on the south side of Pine Ridge? MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yes, ma'am. MR. KLATZKOW: Commissioners, you need to address this issue, because he can't move forward on a road that you don't want to build. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right. It's unacceptable. It's absolutely unacceptable. I think it's contract zoning and -- Page 47 Packet Page -406- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 MR. KLATZKOW: It's not contract zoning. COMMISSIONER HILLER: I think it is. MR. KLATZKOW: Before we get the lawsuit on claims of contract zoning we did this wrong we did that wrong, I'm begging you, if you want to hear this, and you should, because he can't develop -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right, I understand -- MR. KLATZKOW: -- because you don't want -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's why I made the motion -- MR. KLATZKOW: -- the road -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- that we bring it -- MR. KLATZKOW: --just bring it back without further discussion or don't bring it back, one or the other. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, I made -- CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: So we have a motion on the floor -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: To bring it back. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: -- to bring this back. A motion and a second. Everyone has made their comments. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I'll support it. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: And so all in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye. COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay, we have a 4-1 vote. We'll bring that back. MR. BERNARDO: Thank you. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay. Page 48 Packet Page -407- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 Item #6B PUBLIC PETITION REQUEST FROM MS. CAMDEN SMITH REQUESTING THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS CONSIDER DISCONTINUING FLUORIDATION OF COLLIER COUNTY WATER — MOTION FOR STAFF TO BRING BACK AN AGENDA ITEM FOR CONSIDERATION REGARDING REMOVAL OF FLUORIDE FROM WATER AT A FUTURE BCC MEETING — APPROVED MR. OCHS: Item 6.B is a public petition request from Ms. Camden Smith, requesting that the Board of County Commissioners consider discontinuing fluoridation of Collier County water. MS. SMITH: Good morning, Commissioners. My name is Camden Smith for the record, and I do handle strategy and operations for Commissioner Tom Henning. However I'm before you today as a resident of Collier County, longstanding, for 16 years. And a little bit about me, I am a Bachelor's degree holder of telecommunications/broadcast news, and most importantly, I have a Master's degree in public administration with a background in case study and public policy analysis. So I've got 10 minutes, I'm going to fly through it and I've got a video to show, so let's hope I don't go over, because you'll cut me off, I know. What is fluoride? The FDA has classified a drug as something that is used to diagnose, cure, mitigate treatment or prevent disease. Well, that really is what fluoride is used for in water fluoridation. So this is one time where a drug has been allowed to be added to the water since really the 40's but massively since the 60's. Water fluoridation began because there was a 1940's study in Grand Rapids, Michigan, did a little bit of an experiment, added Page 49 Packet Page -408- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 fluoride to the water, hey, tooth decay went down, we need to fluoridate water. Yeah, because you didn't have fluoridated toothpaste, mouth rinse or prescriptions available. And let's be honest, our dental and medical care has seriously changed over the years, so that's something very important to keep in mind as I discuss my request to end the water fluoridation program, and I'll talk to you about why. Touted by the dental industry as a solution to ending tooth decay, fluoride does not prevent tooth decay. This is a scientific fact. And I'll tell you why I have this background. My dad's been a dentist for 38 years, he's at the top one percent of the entire country of earnings for dentists, and he is proactive for dental prevention, issues of prevention. Fluoride does not prevent decay, it hardens the enamel. This is important to understand. And in fact Dr. Scott Frey of FreySmiles, a non-family member out of Allentown, Pennsylvania, says, and I quote: Topical application of fluoride from toothpastes and mouth rinses for example is more effective than systematic delivery. Now, I know that's quite a controversy so I'm going to talk to you a little bit about why. Cavities still occur in children and adults despite water fluoridation. So it's not preventing it. Like I told you, my dad is a dentist and so I got into the real science of this, because I am not a scientist and I'm not a dentist. Internal fluoride application -- that means taking it within your body; not just applying it to the teeth, drinking it -- benefits two sole audiences: That's children ages 10 and under and pregnant women like myself, I have a little bambino inside of me, and she needs to develop strong bones. It's not benefiting me, ifs benefiting her. Here's what fluoride doesn't do: Fluoride does not stop strep mutants. What are those? That's the bacteria that actually allows tooth decay to develop in our bodies. That is a scientific fact that even the Page 50 Packet Page -409- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 American Dental Association will say; fluoride's important in hardening enamel but it does not eliminate strep mutants. So if we remove fluoride from our water, what are we looking at here? If children need it internally because they are 10 and under, their bones are still developing -- I'm going to tell you why that works -- hydroxy appetite is a calcium ion. It's very weak, it's naturally occurring. That's what develops our bone and our enamel. But fluoride, therefore fluorapatite, replaces hydroxyapatite as we are developing. That's up to the age of 10. Then our bones are hardened. So you can create stronger bones and enamel. But after 10 only topical or external application of fluoride is what works and is most beneficial, specifically for people taking medications where the enamel can be affected or they have severe gum disease. We can get fluoride for topical and internal applications, if you look at the list that's on the screen. We have fluoride toothpaste, we also have fluoride free options for those of us who don't want it. We also have fluoride rinses. You even have pharmacies with prescription where you can get fluoride drops. And I'll talk a little bit about, you know, the fact that they do 50 milligrams per milliliter versus our very low dosage in water fluoridation to actually make a difference. And you have fluoride supplements. For pregnant women like me, we're already getting it in our foods and -- but believe it or not the foods can be pretty cheap because it's canned fruits and vegetables. So let's talk about this. If it benefits mostly 10 and under for internal application to replace the hydroxyapatite with fluorapatite, you're talking about less than 11 to 11 and a half percent of this population. That means 88 to 89 percent of us out there are drinking it and it's not making a difference on our enamel. We would need a topical application instead. So in my opinion, and actually in my father's, who is one of the Page 51 Packet Page -410- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 few dentists who agree with me, water fluoridation is a medical treatment for the super minority population here, and it's unnecessary. Because again, times have changed, we have fluoridated products available to us vastly on the market. The CDC released a report: Since water fluoridation has occurred, yes, it's one of the great accomplishments, but as care has changed and products on the market have changed, dental fluorosis is at a higher rate than ever in children 12 to 15. This is from the CDC, I didn't make this up. Look at the chart, it's 40.6 percent of them have dental fluorosis. What is that? Very quickly, normal healthy teeth, top left. Progressive fluoride over exposure moving down to the right where the person's enamel has been permanently damaged. Now, does this happen to everybody? No. Perhaps isn sensitive individuals, people with overexposure. But the point is we all react differently. Take you to the next slide. Harvard School of Public Health partnered with China in a study showing that fluoride overexposure actually reduced children's 1Q by seven points. Now, grant it, China has higher fluoride levels than we do, it's an important disclaimer, but Harvard thought this was important enough that we need to study low level, like water fluoridation, continual exposure and what it does. The adjunct professor said: Fluoride seems to fit in with lead, mercury and other poisons that cause chemical brain drain. Again, not on everyone, but we need to study this. The National Research Council scientists agreed and they created a video about the potential of why are we putting fluoride in our water. Even in Federal government, the U.S. National Toxicology Program, is reviewing hundreds, and I mean hundreds, I counted them; I couldn't even go up that high, to human, animal and cell studies to determine fluoride's true effect, specifically on the brain. And what we're talking Page 52 Packet Page -411- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 about is with the elderly and dementia, because they believe that may be one of the contributing factors. I want to exit out of my presentation very quickly because I need to show you a video that the National Research Council produced. And it's just real brief This is a snippet to explain why fluoride, why a drug is in the water. (At which time, a video was shown.) MS. SMITH: And that's the point. Each person is different. So I'm going to go back into my slides here. There is no such thing as one-size-fits-all. There just isn't. Every single body is unique and different and reacts and processes foods, chemicals, environmental issues and toxins differently. That's just human nature. So a benefit to one or some may not be actually beneficial to all. What I think we've done is finding other studies that have linked fluoride exposure to reducing white and red blood cell production, and the fact that it can cause diabetes and renal disease in rats. We've created a cumulative effect with water fluoridation at seven milligrams per liter in addition to having access to fluoridated cosmetic products like toothpaste, mouth rinses and naturally occurring fluoride in our soil and water. So to wrap up very quickly, because I am at time, I hear the beep, if we continue to add fluoride to the water, what we were doing is assuming that 89 percent of us who are over the age of 10, I certainly am and all of us in here are, need it, and we do not. Fluoride only changes the bone and enamel structure internal application-wise when it's under the age of 10. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Thank you so much. Commissioner Henning? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Camden, do you -- has there been any studies of areas that doesn't have fluoride versus the same area having fluoride or studies where fluoride has been removed from Page 53 Packet Page -412- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 an area, what the cause and effect is? MS. SMITH: I did find a study that showed countries, by the country. Not United States, because there are some areas, especially in the northeast that do not have fluoridated water and they don't have a higher tooth decay rate than we do. But I did find a study that shows -- Leo, can I put this on the -- MR. OCHS: Sure. MS. SMITH: You're the pro at that. I'm not good at that visualizer. That graph right there, if you're looking, the red is people with fluoridated water. And non-fluoridated water is the blue. So you can see tooth decay has declined over -- since the 1970's tooth decay has actually declined in all areas, whether a country has fluoridated water or not. Now, that doesn't mean that fluoride doesn't strengthen enamel, but in adults, again, you're still going to have tooth decay decline if they're brushing and flossing their teeth and eating a lower sugar diet. And let's face it, sugar's a little bit of a problem with the increase in obesity. But looking at that graph, yeah, Commissioner Henning, there is no difference. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Camden. COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm not done yet. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Take a look at this. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay. Well, right now the issue is do we want to bring it back for discussion or do you not? And let me ask the County Attorney, if we hear -- if the motion is to bring it back for discussion and they have -- and it's three votes you can bring it back, if it's only two votes we cannot, is that the way it goes? MR. KLATZKOW: Majority rules. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay, thank you. on. Page 54 Packet Page -413- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 So let's see, Commissioner Hiller? COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah, my daughter got fluorosis right here in Collier County and she had to go to the dentist because her teeth were turning yellow and pitting when she was a little girl and the dentist said stop drinking fluoridated water, don't use the tap water, and it went away. It is not a one-size-fits-all, and that's the problem. And to the extent children under a certain age, if they could benefit from it -- and I don't know whether they do or not; I grew up in a community that had no fluoridated water and I have fine teeth -- you can choose to get it. And if Collier County wants to support, you know, the distribution through its Health Department of fluoridating tablets or fluoride tablets to, you know, allow parents to choose to opt to give it to their kids, that's fine. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Do you want to make a motion? COMMISSIONER HILLER: But the majority of Collier County where children live does not get Collier County fluoridated water. So we're actually fluoridating water where the majority of people are more likely than not on their third set of teeth. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: What I'd like to do is -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: So I'd like to make a motion to bring this back for a public discussion. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Do I hear a second? AUDIENCE MEMBERS: Yes, yes. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Do I hear a second? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, I'll second it. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: And I hear a second. And Commissioner Henning, you were next. But I don't think that as long as the motion is on the floor to bring it back -- well, I'll take whatever leads you want, but I would think we could discuss most of this if we bring it back. If the motion goes away then, you know, Page 55 Packet Page -414- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 continue on if you'd like to. But Commissioner Henning? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, the motion would be for staff to bring it back for consideration of removing fluoride out of the water. And one of the issues that we're going to be faced with, and probably we need to address it now, we're going to take over the Orange Tree Utility system. The Orange Tree Utility system -- we're not, Jeff? MR. KLATZKOW: That's been a lengthy, lengthy road. But perhaps, yes. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Would you say that's going to be a while? MS. SMITH: Some day. MR. KLATZKOW: Some day. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Some day? MR. KLATZKOW: Some day. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Well, they do not fluoridate the water over there. So if they become the county system, it's going to be the same as the rest of the county water system, so it's going to affect a wide larger population, potentially, what our County Attorney says. MS. SMITH: We have a lot of people on wells who also don't have water fluoridation. COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's true. MS. SMITH: And we don't have higher decay rates out there. COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, we don't. And that's the key. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Commissioner Nance? COMMISSIONER NANCE: No comment. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: No comment, okay. Is that all that we have then? Page 56 Packet Page -415- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 (No response.) CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay, so we have a motion on the floor and a second to bring this back. All in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Opposed? COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Aye. Okay, so I've got the third vote to bring it back? COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Yes. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: All right fine. So we have a 3-2 vote. MS. SMITH: Thank you for the opportunity to speak. MR. MILLER: Madam Chair, if I might, we had several people who wanted to speak on the public petition, and I informed them all that we don't do that and told them that we would -- they could speak under public comment. However, now at your discretion as the Chairman, public comments for topics not on current or future agenda, so should those people wait to speak under public comment today or should they come back when this item is going to be heard? CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Come back when the item is to be heard, because the Commission has voted, right. MR. MILLER: So if you did want to speak on this, you would come back when the item is heard -- CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: That's right. MR. MILLER: -- at a future agenda. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: No need to hear it twice. MR. MILLER: Thank you, ma'am. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Thank you. Page 57 Packet Page -416- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 COMMISSIONER HILLER: Commissioner Fiala, I'd like to ask staff as part of the information that they bring back, to tell us the number of households that are on well water and where they're located, because clearly those are households that are not getting fluoridated water. And I want that number. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: But do you notice everybody up here has their own bottles of water. Nobody drinks the regular water, it seems. But anyway -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: There you go. So we could save money. MR. OCHS: Madam Chair? CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay, so right now we have a break for our stenographer. MR. OCHS: Yes, ma'am. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Or did you want to say something? MR. OCHS: No, I was just going to remind you it's court reporter break. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Oh, okay. Thank you very much. Thank you. MR. OCHS: 10 minutes, ma'am? COMMISSIONER FIALA: We'll be back in 10 minutes, which makes it 10:51. Thank you. (Recess.) MR. OCHS: Madam Chair, you have a live mic. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: You know what, everybody walked out the door and they didn't come back. Okay, Leo, on to the next one. Item #10A RESOLUTION 2016-14: A RESOLUTION REQUESTING THE Page 58 Packet Page -417- .... 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 UNITED STATES ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS (USACE) BUDGET FULL FUNDING FOR GORDON RIVER PASS DREDGING IN THE UPCOMING CIVIL WORKS OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE WORK PLAN — MOTION TO APPROVE INCLUDING A LETTER TO THE ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS AND COORDINATING WITH THE CITY OF NAPLES AND CONGRESSMAN CURT CLAWSON'S OFFICE — ADOPTED MR. OCHS: Yes, ma'am. That takes us to Item 10 on the agenda, Board of County Commissioners. Item 10.A is a recommendation to approve a resolution requesting the United States Army Corps of Engineers budget full funding for Gordon River Pass Dredging in the upcoming Civil Works Operations and Maintenance Work Plan. This item was brought forward by Commissioner Taylor, who -- there she is. Ma'am, we're on your Gordon Pass site. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I do apologize. Yes. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Is there anybody to present or are you the presenter? COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Well, I'm assuming I'm the presenter. But basically the issue is a grave one, because the navigation of the Gordon Pass is being severely impacted by the natural drift of sand. And it needs to be dredged. And I understand in the past the Army Corps of Engineers shoulder that responsibility and apparently they're taking their hands in their pockets and bringing them out and saying they have no money. So I think it's very, very important that we as a Commission and as Collier County send a letter to them, but also we will do it in conjunction with Naples City Council, who have also written a letter. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Very good. I have Commissioner Page 59 Packet Page -418- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 Henning. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, I'm going to support -- I'll make a motion to approve. However, where is the shoaling taking place? Is it in the Pass or -- COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: In the Pass. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay, so it's to the -- COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: My understanding. COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- north on the north side -- COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I understand -- MR. CASALANGUIDA: I'll have Gary come up and talk. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Okay, good. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Oh, okay. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Because there is a specific area. And according to those folks who navigate it said well the whole Pass doesn't want to be done but there's one hotspot. And I do not think it's marked at this point, which is extremely dangerous. MR. McALPIN: Commissioner, for the record Gary McAlpin. The shoaling is just outside the mouth of the Pass. So it's slightly offshore. And we will -- that's the area where they're having problems at this point in time. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Now, as you go out the Pass, it's marked? MR. McALPIN: The Pass is channeled and it's marked, yes, that is -- COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: On the north side? COMMISSIONER HENNING: So where is it in correlation with the marked channel outside the Pass? MR. McALPIN: Just right outside the Pass. There's an area that's about 1,000 feet where we have some shoaling just outside the Pass in the marked channel. COMMISSIONER HENNING: On the north side? Page 60 Packet Page -419- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 MR. McALP1N: It's more in the middle of the channel, but it tends to -- you know, in that whole area right in through there. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay, and you've made a motion to approve. And did I hear a second? COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I'll second it. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay. MR. OCHS: Madam Chair? Excuse me, the actual item talks about approving a resolution, but I heard a reference to a letter from the Chair. Is there a preference or -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: Can I speak? COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I think it needs to be -- I mean, it could be combined. You know, whatever is the most effective, and I'll bow to your experience in this. But I think we need to reach out and communicate to the Army Corps of Engineers the severity of the problem. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Got that? Okay, Commissioner Hiller? COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah, and you did mention a letter, Commissioner Taylor. It properly should be a letter. You know, resolutions are for policy issues. This is not a resolution, this is a request by us. And it does make sense to have the Chair write a letter on behalf of the Board and join the city to ask for funding. We're in -- we should be getting the money back. I mean we've got a whole community full of federal taxpayers and we have a waterway that's in need of dredging and we need those federal dollars back in this community doing what they're supposed to do. So, you know, it's very appropriate to ask by way of letter, and our new Chair should prepare that letter in conjunction with staff and get it out as quickly as possible and work with the city to make sure that the wording is coordinated in Page 61 Packet Page -420- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 a way that it's united. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: So I'm sure that the Manager will work with the City Manager to accomplish that -- MR. OCHS: Yes, ma'am. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: -- and probably Gary McAlpin will be a part of that as well. Commissioner Nance? COMMISSIONER NANCE: Mr. McAlpin, I have a question, sir, you might be able to help me. I share Commissioner Henning's concern about the shoaling and the location of that, and I don't have any direct experience with that, but I've read a number of articles and I've heard of instances where there have been boats run aground out there in this circumstance. v Due to the fact that we have so many part-time residents that obviously are having trouble with this, who is responsible for our navigational aids and markings of hazards out there, and would it be possible for us to get something done in the interim while we're having this discussion with the Corps to mediate people running aground out there when there's no need of it? MR. McALPIN: Commissioner, we have worked with the City of Naples to potentially identify and mark that shoaling out there. The city has elected not to do that because they believe that it's a situation where once you start it you have to continue it. But right now this is our only federal project and so the Corps has done this in the past. We have asked, in conjunction working with the city, that it be marked. They have said this is not something that they believe is their responsibility. And the county does not -- this is within the city's jurisdiction and so the county has elected not to move forward with this at this point in time. COMMISSIONER NANCE: Okay. So because the Pass itself is jurisdictional under the Corps of Engineers. Are they responsible for Page 62 Packet Page -421- ,- ,..aaMigi.akiEhaalakakt** 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 channel marking and whatnot, or is it the United States Coast Guard that's responsible? MR. McALPIN: Well, the Coast Guard would have to -- the markers themselves is a Coast Guard and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers both jointly. Marking the Pass for hazards would be -- we would have to get a permit that would go through the Coast Guard, which is relatively easy to do with a notice to mariners. COMMISSIONER NANCE: Well, Commissioners, is it appropriate to address that at the same time we're talking about the dredging? COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Absolutely. COMMISSIONER NANCE: I believe we should include that. Because the bottom line is we've got residents, citizens and visitors that are running aground out there and I think we need to do something. That's just me. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: That's the problem -- well, one of the emails, and I've gotten several, but from one gentleman in Royal Harbor whose a sailor basically said, just get it marked; help us. And, you know, there's going to be a wait. So I think we definitely need to mark it. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Do you want to call on somebody from the city over there to talk about markers? COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Oh, Mr. Jacobson. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: He kept raising his hand so I figured MR. JACOBSEN: I just have current information for you. Roger Jacobsen, Captain Roger Jacobsen. I'm the harbor master for the City of Naples, Code Enforcement Manager, I wash floors, I do whatever the city wants from me. Last week I got a call from Governor Clawson's office -- excuse me, not Governor Clawson, Congressman Clawson's office. They Page 63 Packet Page -422- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 wanted to know what kind of marker they should coordinate with the Army Corps of Engineers to put out there. I know that Pass like the back of my hand. Putting a marker in that Pass is extremely interesting. We've had to mark a couple of pilings here and there over the years and it's such a rough channel that the markers probably last a month or two and you have to replace it again and again. Not only that, once you mark it, let's say the city put the buoy out, and I had the same conversation with Gary. If we mark it are we now liable for it. So if the marker gets blown away that night and somebody runs aground the next day. So I passed all of this information on to Congressman Clawson because he is spearheading the charge against the Army Corps of Engineers. And between the Army and Clawson's office, they asked me what kind of buoys should go out there, what kind of chains. I've encouraged him to contact some of the local marine companies that would do the installation for them. I also got a call yesterday from Melissa, who is Curt Clawson's immediate secretary, wanting to know -- the Army classifies commercial vessels by their tonnage, where Mr. Clawson wants to change that. And if you're paying somebody to be on their boat, fishing boat, touring boat, that should be the definition of commercial. And the reason the Army Corps of Engineers right now is not pushing to get it dredged is because we don't have enough commercial traffic based on tonnage. So that's the newest information I have for you. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Thank you so much for bringing that to our attention. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: So do you think it would be advantageous to also send a letter to Representative Curt Clawson's office? Page 64 Packet Page -423- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 MR. JACOBSEN: Absolutely, because the city has already done that. Senator Rubio, Curt Clawson, Army Corps of Engineers, we've sent letters to just about everybody at this point. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay, good. Thank you. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Unless there's an objection -- I'm sorry. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: That's all right. Commissioner Hiller and Henning also have their lights on. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Well, unless there's a real objection, I think a resolution would be wonderful as well as a letter. I just think it shows intent much stronger than a letter. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: And we do have a motion on the floor and a second for that. Commissioner Hiller? COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah, first of all, I can't support marking that Pass without more information. And being presented with something that's not on the agenda and asking for a vote without getting input from the rest of the community on the issue I think is most inappropriate. Because I am sure there are arguments on both sides of this. And I think we need to understand what the position of our constituents are. So I can't support adding the markers at this time. If you want to bring it back, and again, this is not a policy decision, we're asking for funding to dredge the Pass to continue to keep it navigable. A resolution is not the appropriate action, the letter is. Secondly, you know, if we're discussing impassable waterways, Leo, I've received complaints about Wiggins Pass and that the markers, that between the second and third markers there's a problem again. So if you -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's not on the agenda. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Let me finish what I'm saying. Page 65 Packet Page -424- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 Since we're talking about navigability, I would like to ask that at the next meeting you please bring back a status report on what's going on and what's going to be done about that second and third marker. And that's all I wanted to say on that issue. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Commissioner Henning? COMMISSIONER HILLER: Just like, by the way, the -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: It takes three votes -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- buoys were not on the agenda either. COMMISSIONER HENNING: It takes three votes for direction, okay? You get direction from the majority of the Board of Commissioners. MR. OCHS: Correct. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay? COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, this is a request for information. COMMISSIONER HENNING: So anyway -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: And you know what, Leo? CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Boys and girls -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: Don't bother. Just bring it back to me and I'll put it on the agenda. But I want the information. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Commissioner Henning, the floor is yours. Captain Henning, Boat Captain Henning. COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm not a captain. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: You're a captain of your own boat. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Not yet. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I'm captain of my own boat. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Yeah. COMMISSIONER HENNING: The -- that's in the jurisdiction of the City of Naples. We don't -- as far as marking it, we don't want to Page 66 Packet Page -425- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 get involved in that, in my opinion. But that's not the motion. However, we want to coordinate with the city because of the safety of all the residents in the county. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: And so would you agree to amend the motion to -- CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: It's on the floor now. We have a motion and a second, right? And the motion was to coordinate our efforts with the City of Naples and our people will send a letter as well, but they'll first coordinate with them and we'll even work through Gary McAlpin to make sure all of the wording is proper and correct and get that done tout suite. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Okay. Not only to the Army Corps, but -- which is what I requested here, but also to Representative Clawson's office, et cetera, et cetera, coordinating. And would you agree that a resolution needs to be part of this? CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Yes, yes. Okay, is everybody clear on that? MR. OCHS: Yes. This only relates to the dredging of the Pass, not the marking -- CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Yes, sir. MR. OCHS: -- of the Pass. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Yes. Yes, sir. Okay, fine. All in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye. COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah, I can't support a resolution, I can support a letter. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay, so we have a 4-1 vote on that. Page 67 Packet Page -426- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 Thank you very much. Okay, let's move on. Item #10B (Tabled until after 12:00 pm Closed Session) RECOMMENDATION TO DIRECT THE COLLIER COUNTY SUPERVISOR OF ELECTIONS TO PLACE A STRAW BALLOT REFERENDUM ON THE MARCH 15, 2016 PRESIDENTIAL PREFERENCE PRIMARY BALLOT ASKING THE VOTERS OF UNINCORPORATED COLLIER COUNTY IF THEY SUPPORT A SINGLE COMBINED FIRE AND EMERGENCY MEDICAL RESPONSE INDEPENDENT SPECIAL DISTRICT IN UNINCORPORATED COLLIER COUNTY THAT IS GOVERNED BY AN INDEPENDENT ELECTED BODY — MOTION TO TABLE UNTIL AFTER CLOSED SESSION IS HELD — APPROVED MR. OCHS: Item 10.B is a recommendation to direct the Collier County Supervisor of Elections to place a straw ballot referendum on the March 15th, 2016 Presidential Preference Primary ballot, asking the voters of unincorporated Collier County if they support a single combined fire and emergency medical response independent special district in unincorporated Collier County that is governed by an independent elected body. And this item was brought forward by Commissioner Taylor. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay, do we have somebody presenting from staff or does Commissioner Taylor present? Okay, Commissioner Taylor? COMMISSIONER NANCE: Madam Chair, I'm going to make a motion that we continue the discussion of this item until after our shade session, because I think they're kind of related. And I believe it would be appropriate to wait and see what we discuss in that session Page 68 Packet Page-427- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 before we take action. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Is there a second to that motion? COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Can we discuss this in this particular -- MR. KLATZKOW: We will not be discussing it in the shade, but perhaps your discussions in the shade might impact your decision. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Okay. Well, I mean, there's not -- I don't mind, as long as it's heard today. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay, that's fine with me as well. Does everybody agree that we can just discuss it right after the shade session? COMMISSIONER HILLER: Sure. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Some nods? Okay, we'll do that then. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Okay. All right. So I'll second that motion to continue until after our shade session. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Do we need a motion for that? COMMISSIONER NANCE: I don't know, I just made a motion. MR. KLATZKOW: Technically yes, but okay. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Technically yes? Okay, all in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye. COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign. (No response.) CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay, very good, thank you. Done. Item #10C Page 69 Packet Page -428- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 TO PROVIDE INFORMATION REGARDING NORTH COLLIER FIRE CONTROL AND RESCUE DISTRICT CANCELLING THE INTER-LOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY AND BIG CORKSCREW FIRE CONTROL AND RESCUE DISTRICT — APPROVED MR. OCHS: Item 10.0 was previously Item 16.H.4, and that is to provide information regarding North Collier Fire Control and Rescue District canceling the Interlocal Agreement between Collier County and Big Corkscrew Fire Control and Rescue District. This item was moved to the regular agenda for discussion at Commissioner Hiller's request. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yes. Chief Stolts, could you step to the podium? Do you have the letter written by Fire Commissioner Lombardo with you? CHIEF STOLTS: Yes, I do. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Could you introduce it on the record and either you read it or I read it, whatever your preference is? CHIEF STOLTS: I'll have you read it, ma'am. COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's fine. Can I have it, please? COMMISSIONER HENNING: You mean the letter he signed? COMMISSIONER HILLER: So this is the Fire Commission's -- the North Collier Fire Commission's response to Commissioner Henning. Dear Commissioner Henning: It is with great interest that I read the executive summary for agenda Item 16.H.4 -- which, by the way, is the agenda we are now addressing, 10.C, since I requested that it be moved from consent to the general agenda. As there were numerous inaccuracies within it, I felt that a response was necessary so that these false statements regarding the Page 70 Packet Page -429- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 North Collier Fire Control and Rescue District -- which I will refer to further as the District -- would be corrected. Protecting citizens and visitors' lives. The path that the District and Collier County are currently on is a direct result of the Board of County Commissioners' decision to deny the District's renewal of its Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity, COPCN, and request to include its Big Corkscrew Island service delivery area within the approved service area. This denial occurred despite the recommendation for approval by Collier County's own staff and Public Safety Authority. The District did not ask the BOCC deny the District's request. When the vote occurred, the District was stunned and it was denied -- that it was denied. I believe that many others were also shocked since the BOCC's action resulted in almost a million dollar budget amendment soon after its new fiscal year began. Since the BOCC's granting of the District's first COPCN, the District and Collier County staff have worked harmoniously providing Advanced Life Support services, ALS. Gone were the accusations and ongoing conflict between our agencies. This all ended with when the BOCC voted on September the 8th, 2015. To state or imply that the District is not committed to protecting its citizens is inappropriate. If any government is to be accused that it is not taking steps to protect its citizens and visitors, it's Collier County. One district. As of January 1st, 2015 there is only the North Collier Fire Control and Rescue District. There is no North Naples Fire Control and Rescue District or Big Corkscrew Island Fire and Control Rescue District. The executive summary is full of references to entities that no longer exist. There are no Big Corkscrew Fire personnel and rather all personnel are employees of the North Collier Fire Control and Rescue District. Page 71 Packet Page -430- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 It's been over a year since the District's successful creation through merger which has saved over a million dollars already. Interlocal agreement. The District disputes that the Interlocal Agreement advanced life support partnership between Collier County and the District as successor to Big Corkscrew Island Fire Control and Rescue District, the Interlocal Agreement has been terminated. The Board of Fire Commissioners has not taken a vote to terminate, nor has required notice been provided to Collier County. In addition, the Collier County Emergency Medical Services paramedics continue to ride on the District's fire apparatus per that Interlocal Agreement. The District's paramedics or emergency medical technicians are still working with Collier County EMS paramedics by providing basic life support services while the Collier County EMS personnel provide ALS services. If the District had terminated that Interlocal Agreement, why are any of these things occurring? The District's personnel are assisting in helping Collier County EMS personnel. This has not changed. To allege otherwise is inappropriate as it's just false. Neither has the District violated Chapter 2015-191 Laws of Florida as the Interlocal Agreement is still in effect. The only thing that has changed is that it has been identified that the District's personnel will not be providing ALS services in conjunction with Collier County EMS personnel as there is no specific authority that prescribes such right to the District personnel. Unlike what occurs in the North Naples Service Delivery area, there is never a situation in which District personnel can begin ALS services prior to the arrival of Collier County EMS, as this agreement is only associated with one fire apparatus and that apparatus has a Collier County EMS paramedic. It also allows an emergency medical technician to staff the fire apparatus, even though such district personnel cannot provide ALS opou Page 72 Packet Page -431- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 services. In addition, as the District believes that the Interlocal Agreement is still in effect, it included within District Resolution 15-043 the following. Item 10, the District contends that in addition to that which has been pled or further pled in court proceedings the following are issues of conflict between Collier County and the District. Subsection C: The Interlocal Agreement advanced life support partnership between Collier County and the District as successor to the Big Corkscrew Island Fire Control and Rescue District. Closed quotes. The District will be discussing the Interlocal Agreement with Collier County staff during the conflict assessment meeting scheduled for next week. If there was no agreement it would be unnecessary to include it as an item in conflict to discuss. Attached for your convenience is District Resolution 15-043 which was adopted on December 10th, 2015. Department of health. As it relates to a letter sent to the Department of Health regarding issues related to the District's demobilization of its ALS program, I do not see why this is of concern to you. The District did not ask for a legal opinion regarding the legality of the Interlocal Agreement or Collier County's actions. It also did not ask a legal opinion regarding the legality of one medical director authorizing paramedics working under another medical director to practice outside their approved COPCN jurisdiction. Rather, the District is trying to determine how to shut its ALS program down as a direct result of the BOCC -- and by the way, BOCC is Board of County Commissioners -- decision to deny the District's COPCN renewal. The District needs to ensure that when the clock strikes midnight on January 29, 2016, that the actions that are taken by the District and its paramedics related to the demobilization of its lifesaving services Page 73 Packet Page -432- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 will not result in a violation of state law. In conclusion, the Board of County Commissioners made a political decision and is now having to face the consequences of its rash decision. All of the steps that the District has taken to date are to protect its residents. I hope that this letter corrects your misunderstanding on this issue; however, I am concerned that regardless of the truth there will be a continuation of the propagation of false information in an attempt to shift the responsibility of this travesty from the Board of County Commissioners to the District. Unfortunately the District did not deny the renewal of its COPCN. That was solely at the hands of the Board of County Commissioners. The District continues to be hopeful that we will be able to resolve this dispute. And this was a letter signed by Chris Lombardo, who is the chairman of the North Naples Fire District. It was sent to all the County Commissioners, to all the North Naples Fire District commissioners and to County Manager Ochs. Staff, can you please make sure that a copy of this letter as we've received it is included for the court reporter behind my statement? MR. OCHS: Yes, we will. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Chief Stolts? CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: It's in the backup material. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yes, I know. I want it behind my statement. COMMISSIONER HENNING: What's your question? COMMISSIONER HILLER: I can't support what you have brought forward for the reasons stated in that letter. And so, you know, I will make a motion to deny what you have presented since it's false. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay, there's a motion on the floor. Let's see, how did these -- whose buttons were on first? Page 74 Packet Page -433- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 COMMISSIONER NANCE: Commissioner Henning, then myself, then public speakers. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay, fine, yes. Commissioner Henning? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioners, if you want to follow me on packet Page 1935 in your packet, you will see a letter from the Chief to all personnel: The District supports the paramedics and recognizes the struggle it faces in light of the District's directive not to provide ALS service within the Big Corkscrew Island Service delivery area. And it goes on. And it's based upon the Board of Commissioners denying the COPCN. However, Big Corkscrew Island Service area, delivery area, has an ILA. And their paramedics, fire paramedics, will assist our paramedics. That's within the ILA. The directive was -- CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: What's an ILA? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Interlocal Agreement. However, what's interesting through the chairman, written by their attorney, from what I'm told, is they recognize they can do an ILA, Interlocal Agreement. And maybe they'll get one or the other, I don't know, we'll wait and see what the directive is after that. But over and over they have said they cannot. I just want to provide the Commissioners with -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's not a true statement. They have said that they have -- CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Excuse me, let's just -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- they can't provide ALS through the ILA because the COPCN was denied. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Commissioner Hiller, Commissioner Henning has the floor, please. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, I appreciate you trying to bring order to the meeting. Page 75 Packet Page -434- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 It's recognized by their Chief and back then in 2003 Chief Webb the utilization of fire districts paramedics providing ALS support patient care under the direction of the county certified paramedics assigned to EMS operations. So if you want to see that, that is right here. And it's backed up by the actual protocol by the District and the Medical Director's protocol. So, you know, ifs -- the bottom line is whether they canceled it, whether they amended it, they did so without even consulting with us. I mean, Chairman Nance signed it, they signed it, this agreement. Now they're amending it now without our approval or our consent. However, our staff, our EMS staff, is committed to still providing an enhanced service in that area. We've -- I think it was a quarter of a million dollars that we're spending out in that area because the chief at that time said it's needed, we needed more paramedics. So we have three paramedics to cover that area. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: You know, I went against everything I said in the beginning, I was going to ask speakers first to come to the podium and I already started calling on Commissioners, but I wanted to let you finish. And let me call on the speakers first and then we'll have -- let's see, Commissioner Nance is next and then Commissioner Hiller after the speakers. MR. MILLER: Madam Chair, you have two registered speakers for this item. First Orly Stolts, and he'll be followed by James Cunningham. CHIEF STOLTS: Good morning, Commissioners. Chief Stolts, North Collier Fire Control and Rescue District. Thank you for the opportunity to actually be here and addressing this today. Quite frankly, it was pulled off the agenda and I appreciate the opportunity to address this. First of all, Commissioner Henning, the Interlocal Agreement that Afttk Page 76 Packet Page -435- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 has been entered into between Big Corkscrew and Collier County is an Interlocal Agreement that is absolutely legal to do. It is not an Interlocal Agreement that gives the District powers to provide advanced life support. It is a simple Interlocal Agreement that allows your Collier medic to ride on our firetrucks. That's an Interlocal Agreement that is -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: Not true. CHIEF STOLTS: -- absolutely legal and we agree on that. COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's not true. CHIEF STOLTS: Okay, your opinion. Your memorandum -- or actually your executive summary -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: Let me ask you, why did you write the letter telling them to stop providing ALS? CHIEF STOLTS: I will explain that. In the Interlocal Agreement that Big Corkscrew signed into with Collier County EMS -- and quite frankly, the memorandum that you included in your executive summary today explains it very well. This is a memo sent to County Manager Ochs from Walter Kopka. My letter -- he refers to a number of things. In my letter that I sent to you all identified that unlike other Collier County interlocal agreements, the Big Corkscrew Island ALS agreement does not authorize the District's paramedic to practice under a Collier County EMS paramedic. That's what I said in the letter to you. Walter Kopka is answering that question for Leo Ochs. Walter Kopka, your Chief of EMS, says that is true. He agrees that our paramedics are not able to operate under the direction of a Collier County paramedic, sir. But he goes on to say that it's not like the other interlocal agreements within Collier County. And the other interlocal agreements in Collier County, the medics that are in the fire service are Page 77 Packet Page -436- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 certified under your County Medical Director, they train under your County Medical Director. This Interlocal Agreement is totally different. We did not do a swap program in the Big Corkscrew area back when this thing was negotiated. There was no SWAP program. The medics out in that area didn't have to do ride-alongs to the hospital. They weren't allowed to do advanced life support under that Interlocal Agreement. Also, my letter that I sent to you all back on December 9th, I stated that it also does not require the District's paramedics to certify by the County Medical Director, which is different than the others ALS interlocal agreements. Chief Kopka also agrees with that. Our paramedics in North Collier do not have to be certified by Dr. Robert Tober, the county's medical director. Therefore, we're not allowed to practice outside the boundaries of our COPCN, 70 square miles of the old North Naples Fire District. Now, back to the -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: Don't you agree that they can provide ALS support under the paramedics license? CHIEF STOLTS: I agree with that. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, that's what we -- that's part of the Interlocal Agreement. CHIEF STOLTS: In the Interlocal Agreement, and if I can, I know my buzzer's beeping here, but you asked me the question. Under the Interlocal Agreement, one of the whereas's says: Whereas this agreement provides an advanced life support ALS partnership between Big Corkscrew firefighter paramedics and firefighter emergency medical technicians to work and train under Collier County paramedics with and for -- with ALS or BLS duties. My paramedic, the North Collier paramedic that's out in the Big Corkscrew area today, will work right alongside of a Collier County paramedic who rode in on the same truck with us. We're going to Page 78 Packet Page -437- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 work alongside. When your medic says draw me up two cc's of a certain drug, my paramedic can draw up two cc's of that certain drug. We're going to hand that drug to your Collier County medic and that medic, your medic, will administer that drug. My medic will not. I'm working right alongside. He wants two cc's, here you go, here's your two cc's. In the other side of the imaginary line in North Naples we can pull up the two cc's, my paramedics, and my paramedics can administer the two cc's. Your medic can tell my medic: Hook up a 12-lead monitor, which is an ALS function. My medic in Big Corkscrew Island today will hook up the 12-lead monitor. We will not interpret what the monitor is saying; your medic will interpret. So we are working side-by-side, hand-in-hand with your Collier paramedic. We just can't do those ALS skills in that particular 110 square miles is the only place in Collier County that my 100 plus paramedics can't practice. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, that was a directive of you. CHIEF STOLTS: It was. And my medics are doing it today. Your medic is riding on my engine. We're going on calls. We're working side-by-side with your Collier medic. If he wants two cc's, here we go. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Orly, you're way past your time. I know that you've been communicating with Commissioner Henning, but we do have to get to the next speaker. CHIEF STOLTS: Thank you very much for your time, Commissioners. COMMISSIONER NANCE: I've got a question for the Chief. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay. COMMISSIONER NANCE: Chief Stolts, correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems to me there's been some correspondence from Page 79 Packet Page -438- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 North Collier Fire District and the county or perhaps Chief Kopka or somebody in EMS where you asserted that interlocal agreements are illegal in general. Is that true? CHIEF STOLTS: Some are and some aren't. COMMISSIONER NANCE: No, no, didn't you say that they are illegal? CHIEF STOLTS: An Interlocal Agreement -- COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yeah. CHIEF STOLTS: -- for you to give us the privileges to provide ALS -- COMMISSIONER NANCE: Interlocal Agreement for cooperative work together. COMMISSIONER HILLER: I don't think it's appropriate to ask the Chief for a legal opinion. COMMISSIONER NANCE: No, I'm asking him if-- COMMISSIONER HILLER: Are you a lawyer? COMMISSIONER NANCE: Ma'am, excuse me, I'm asking the questions right now, if you don't mind. I just want to know if there hasn't been correspondence between your District, sir, and the county or county staff in which you said or your attorney advised you to take the position that interlocal agreements were inappropriate and illegal for us to engage in together. Is that true? CHIEF STOLTS: Yes, it is. COMMISSIONER NANCE: Okay. So before we go -- CHIEF STOLTS: Some are and some aren't. COMMISSIONER NANCE: -- before we go into our shade session today to talk about our relationship, are there any other reasons or excuses that I'm unaware of on why you don't want to cooperate with the county? Just let me know now so when we get in the shade we can talk about it. Is there anything left? Page 80 Packet Page -439- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 CHIEF STOLTS: Sir, we are absolutely wanting to and willing to participate with the county. This is -- we should have never got to this position. We have participated, we have augmented your system tremendously over the last five years. COMMISSIONER NANCE: I do agree, I agree with that. Thank you very much. No further questions. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Next speaker? MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is James Cunningham. He's your final speaker on this item. MR. CUNNINGHAM: Thank you, Madam Chair and Commission. My name is James Cunningham. I'm currently the Operations Chief for North Collier Fire Control and Rescue District. Commissioner Henning, you indicate there's a termination letter. There is no actual termination letter. The only letter that was issued went out to our field paramedics to be very clear on what we have been consistent with all along and that is they cannot provide, meaning administer, medications or procedures that are considered advanced life support under the rules governed by the State of Florida to the patients. We have and always will work cooperatively with EMS, whether it's on scene or in the back of the ambulance. However, we cannot provide these services to the public unless we're under a licensed doctor to do that. In the Corkscrew area we do not have a medical director that oversees us; therefore, we cannot physically administer. But we absolutely are committed to working hand-in-hand with the medics that are out there. Just like in September we were surprised by the vote by the Commission, especially when staff had recommended approval as well as the PSA had recommended approval. We were again surprised to see this letter. The first time we saw it was in the executive summary in the packet. That was the first we learned that there was intention by Page 81 Packet Page -440- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 the County Commission to terminate the ALS agreement. I can assure you the Interlocal Agreement between Corkscrew and the fire district -- I'm sorry, fire district and the county, we didn't know of any such indication until then. And at no time has our commission taken a position to terminate the Interlocal Agreement with the county. It's vital from the operation side that we continue to have -- the only one resource for advanced life support out in that area is the EMS medic on a fire direct. The reason why it's different, Commissioner Nance, is the Interlocal Agreement between the District and the county, your EMS medic is the one providing the care. That is why that Interlocal Agreement is legally sufficient under the rules of the State of Florida. EMS can put medics on all of our vehicles. We don't need a license to do that. It's one of the many options provided to the Council and to the Commission as we're trying to work through the process. We're committed to continuing to work through the process as we're going forward with the conflict resolution sessions throughout the remainder of this week. I can assure you that the purpose of the letter that was sent to our staff was to make sure we're complying with State of Florida rules without having a medical director, and based upon the denial by this Commission, because our medics do not have a doctor to work under for that area, they cannot provide ALS services, whether it be medications or procedures, to patients. That is the reason why that letter was sent. Secondly -- we need to change the operational response -- CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Would you wind up, please? MR. CUNNINGHAM: I will wind up. The ALS, Advanced Life Support, medic from EMS had to go on the engine because what we had was the EMS medic on the firetruck Page 82 Packet Page -441- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 and the EMS ambulance in that area were both going to the same call, thus leaving no additional resource available for the remainder part of that district. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Thank you. Thank you very much. Sorry, but I gave Orly a lot of extra time, I just can't give anymore. Thank you -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'd like to -- CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: -- very much. So Georgia Hiller, you are the first -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you. Thank you so much. Stay up there, please. The -- Jeff, does the Interlocal Agreement have a provision in it that says that if any provision within this agreement is no longer valid the rest of the agreement remains in full force and effect and the specific provision that is deemed illegal essentially disappears? MR. KLATZKOW: Give me a second. COMMISSIONER HILLER: And while you're looking that up, you're absolutely correct, you cannot -- since the Board of County Commissioners did not expand the boundaries of the North Naples Fire District to include Big Corkscrew, North Naples paramedics cannot provide ALS in that area. The Collier County paramedics who have a COPCN that does include that area can provide ALS. But that geographical area is barred to your paramedics to provide advanced life support. Now, you can provide BLS, but you cannot provide ALS. And to do so would be completely illegal. MR. CUNNINGHAM: And I can give you an example of that, Commissioner. I would say Engine 42 on Immokalee Road and Oakes Boulevard, that engine is fully equipped with medics on it every day. Has all the tools and equipment. They can provide it across the street in Longshore Lakes from the Quarry. When they go east of Heritage Page 83 Packet Page -442- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 Bay, even though that truck is fully equipped with the paramedic and all the information and drugs on it, as soon as they cross that invisible line they must only do basic life support -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: And here's the problem. If-- you know, the county does not have sufficient trucks or personnel to service Big Corkscrew without your presence. And as a consequence, if our paramedics are not permitted to ride on your trucks, at that point in that Big Corkscrew area Big Corkscrew has zero ALS. MR. CUNNINGHAM: And that is why we're asking -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: We have a crisis for the citizens of Big Corkscrew. And again, I will tell you, my husband died of cardiac arrest and ALS is critical to saving lives. And I will not sit here and watch the citizens of Big Corkscrew's safety compromised because of the politics this board is engaging in which is downright offensive, because it's about life and death. The bottom line is that Interlocal Agreement does not allow for ALS if we as a Board do not expand north Naples COPCN to include what is now part of your district which is formerly known as Big Corkscrew. MR. CUNNINGHAM: And if we can stick germane to the item that we have right now, we would just ask that you not terminate the Interlocal Agreement that exists today between North Collier and Collier County, because at least we have one EMS paramedic that can practice out there, even though the North Collier paramedics cannot. COMMISSIONER HENNING: You see, that's -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: Can I finish what I was saying? It's still my time. I'm waiting for Jeff to respond. MR. KLATZKOW: I do not see that clause. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Is there any provision in there that addresses anything along those lines? Page 84 Packet Page -443- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 MR. KLATZKOW: Ma'am, it's a cooperative agreement. COMMISSIONER HILLER: It what? MR. KLATZKOW: It's a cooperative agreement. That's the point of these things. There's a clause in there that says if either party is not happy with each other, give 90 day's notice and it's done. But it's a cooperative type of agreement. COMMISSIONER HILLER: So essentially what Commissioner Henning is doing by way of his motion is looking to end this agreement to allow -- is that in effect what he's doing? I mean, to end this agreement is he essentially giving 90 days notice, is that the -- MR. KLATZKOW: Ma'am, ma'am, ma'am, what's the recommendation on the executive summary? COMMISSIONER HILLER: Can you read it? COMMISSIONER HENNING: She doesn't read her agenda. COMMISSIONER HILLER: I do. COMMISSIONER HENNING: She doesn't have it. COMMISSIONER HILLER: I do. COMMISSIONER HENNING: There's nothing here. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, because I do it electronically because I don't believe in killing trees, which is -- CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: To provide information regarding -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- what I actually started when I first got elected -- COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: The Chair has the floor. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: To provide information regarding North Collier Fire Control and Rescue District, canceling the Interlocal Agreement between Collier County and Big Corkscrew Fire Control and Rescue District. COMMISSIONER HILLER: But the essence of what Commissioner Henning wants, as I understand it, is to in effect make it so that even the county isn't providing ALS. Page 85 Packet Page -444- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 MR. KLATZKOW: No, ma'am. This is -- ` COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's what I understand that he really wants. MR. KLATZKOW: With all respect, you've done this in the past yourself, where you're providing information to the public. That's what this is. COMMISSIONER HILLER: I don't believe that is the intent. I believe his real intent is to leave Big Corkscrew out there with no ALS support at all. That is clearly where we are going. Because that is in essence what's happening. And we have 'til the end of this month. And otherwise my district, my district, District 2, which is serviced by North Naples, Collier, is also not going to have ALS. And I will not see my constituents of my District's public safety compromised by this Board. And that is exactly what's going on. This Board is trying to hold North Naples hostage by compromising Big Corkscrew's public safety. That is unbelievable. It's blackmail. And they are using the citizens of Big Corkscrew to blackmail the North Naples Fire Commission. I'm not going to let my constituents be compromised like this. That's what's really going on here. That is what's happening. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Thank you so much, Jim. Our next Commissioner up is Commissioner Henning, followed by Nance and then Taylor. Taylor then Nance? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. Boy, there's no truth to what she just said, or whatever his name's understanding is. It's just information. It's not canceling an agreement. You're still going to get advanced life support in North Naples, our paramedics are still going to be there, our ambulances are going to be there. No matter what this Board does there's still going to be advanced lives. So the drama here going on is just false. I mean, there's a lot of false information from North Naples. And it's unjust to the citizens. Page 86 Packet Page -445- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 Leo, what has changed in the Corkscrew area since the submission of Chief and Assistant Chiefs letters to the personnel? What has changed? What are they doing different? MR. OCHS: Sir, I'm going to ask Chief Kopka, if you don't mind, to come up. He's got more day-to-day operational knowledge of any substantive changes. COMMISSIONER HENNING: And I do have some other questions. MR. OCHS: Yes, sir. CHIEF KOPKA: Good morning, Madam Chair and Commissioners. I think it's first very important to let the public know that are watching this today services are being provided by all the personnel, whether it's Sheriffs Office, whether it's fire department, whether it's EMS. I want them to be assured that services are provided. If 911 needs to be called, we'll be there in whatever fashion or form we need to take care of patients in the field, first and foremost. Secondly, the memorandum we received from Chief Aguilera on November 13th states: Effective immediately under no circumstances will any North Collier Fire Control and Rescue District credentialed paramedic provide advanced life support within the Big Corkscrew Island Fire Service Delivery area. This includes when on scene and under the guidance of a Collier County paramedic. Therefore, to answer your question, sir, what has changed is when our paramedics are on scene, the direction they've been given is that paramedic that is working for Big Corkscrew or North Naples Service Delivery area are not allowed to perform advanced life support. COMMISSIONER HENNING: And prior to that they were able to. CHIEF KOPKA: Correct. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Prior to that memo. Page 87 Packet Page -446- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 CHIEF KOPKA: Correct. And again, for the general public's purpose, there are many calls that EMS are on day-to-day where we don't have other paramedics from the fire district on scene. And the paramedics of EMS do the job they need to to take care of patients with whatever care they need, whether it's basic life support or advanced life support. So that's the change that has happened since November 13th. COMMISSIONER HENNING: And this is part of the ILA that we signed and put more staffing out there for advanced life support. Part of that was that the fire paramedic was going to work under the county's certified paramedics to provide ALS. CHIEF KOPKA: Correct, yes. COMMISSIONER HENNING: See, that's the whole information that I want to provide, and I did, and has been changed by the staff of North Collier. CHIEF KOPKA: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Would you repeat that, sir? COMMISSIONER HENNING: That the staff from North Collier changed or amended the Interlocal Agreement with Collier County without notice so that their paramedics cannot -- will not work under the state certified paramedic of Collier County. That is the difference. Although they are providing BLS service, and I think they have to do it by statute. COMMISSIONER HILLER: And that is a false statement. COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm not finished. COMMISSIONER HILLER: On your part. COMMISSIONER HENNING: But there's a -- I gave you an email, Commissioner Fiala, that was recognized by Chief Webb of the utilization of the fire paramedics under the state certified paramedic. And back in March 15th of 2002, I just want to read this: Purpose and intent to provide specific direction on utilization of state certified Page 88 Packet Page -447- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 paramedics employed by the local fire districts on scene in providing advanced life support care. Assigned responsibility: All departments under Collier County certified paramedics assigned to EMS operations, you are responsible and commend of all respect of patient's care being provided (sic). The fire paramedic in question has the -- identified and participated in the current ALS engine program with Collier County and is known to you as having complete course curriculum in the current participation and training required by Collier County EMS MOU coordinator. Prior to any ALS procedures being performed, the fire paramedics must obtain your consent and approval. Prior to the administration of any medication, the Collier County certified paramedic must verbally confirm the approach, dose and route. Confirmation of ET tube placement is also required on the intubation. Only Collier County paramedics may initiate the ALS patient during transport to the medical facility. So it's been an ongoing practice in Collier County that the fire paramedic will work with Collier County paramedics; certification to administer drugs if needed and patient care. And this information is in the files of now North Collier Fire District. They can. Now it has been changed by the staff of North Collier that the fire paramedics cannot provide that type of medical care. That's all. That's all I was providing is information. And hopefully maybe the fire commissioners of North Collier will send us 90-days of an intent to change the Interlocal Agreement that we both agreed upon. We'll see. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay, Commissioner Nance, I think you were next, and then Commissioner Taylor. COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes, I -- you know, I think that the fire districts are very essential and very, very good partners in providing emergency medical response. I don't think we could do the Page 89 Packet Page -448- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 job without them. However, that being said, for us to go forward in Collier County and really achieve a gold standard level of service that others in our nation rarely have achieved, we are going to have to unify our emergency response. And in order to do that we're going to have to have much, much better cooperation than we're currently getting. I am completely underwhelmed by people that want to make legal and personal decisions to restrict service or find reasons not to cooperate based on individual interests, and I'm going to continue to vote based on people that want to get together instead of people that want to fragment a system that is so vital to our people. Because we are right on the cusp of being able to have a unified emergency response, and it's one of my highest priorities. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Commissioner Taylor? COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: One of the things you do on your Christmas vacation is that I received an email from Mr. Myers, Ron Myers, who's on the public safety committee. And he sent each Commissioner a letter, the same letter that's saying, you know, we always hear about King County out in Seattle, Washington and we always try to compare it. Well, here's their annual report. Read it. Well, I did. And guess what? And this was recommended to read. They have one medical director. It's unified. There are subdirectors, it's much larger than Collier County, but there's one medical director. And I really want to thank Mr. Myers for this, because to me it's confirmation that we are heading in the right direction. Is it easy? No, it's not. But certainly after this discussion and the allegations and the drama and, you know, people dying, which of course is not happening, it is again underlined to me that this is ripe, this issue is ripe for settling. And we will do it. And so thank you very much. And please, any kind of more information, please send it to us. I read it. Thank you. Page 90 Packet Page -449- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 CHAIRWOMAI\T FIALA: Commissioner Hiller? COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you. Yeah, when is the Board going to send a 90-day letter to North Naples saying that they have amended this Memorandum of Understanding since they have declined to expand the North Naples Fire District to include the Big Corkscrew area and as a result North Naples -- the new North Naples Fire District cannot provide ALS services to that part of the district. The county is the one who has amended the understanding. Jeff, in your opinion, is that -- you know, and it's interesting, you made a comment when I asked if there was a provision in that contract that addressed, you know, if there's any provision of this agreement that is no longer valid that the rest of the agreement remains in effect, and you said no, no, there isn't because this isn't a contract, it's merely a Memorandum of Understanding. Are you taking the position that that's not a contract? MR. KLATZKOW: I did not say that, ma'am. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Then I misheard. What did you say? MR. KLATZKOW: What I said was that no, that provision is not there. COMMISSIONER HILLER: But you said that -- MR. KLATZKOW: I'm not surprised it's not there because it's a cooperative agreement. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Oh, it's a cooperative agreement. So -- MR. KLATZKOW: The intent of the agreement is that Collier County and the fire district sit down and figure out what's in the best interest of the residents of Corkscrew and work together. COMMISSIONER HILLER: But you agree that the North Naples Fire District cannot perform any services if it would be illegal Page 91 Packet Page -450- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 to do so under the current circumstances? MR. KLATZKOW: If it was illegal? COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yes. MR. KLATZKOW: If anything's illegal you can't do it, ma'am -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you. MR. KLATZKOW: -- I would agree with that. COMMISSIONER HILLER: And it is illegal for North Naples to provide ALS where it doesn't have a COPCN to allow it to do so. MR. KLATZKOW: Well, that's your opinion, ma'am, but they did it for years and years. COMMISSIONER HILLER: And I think for years and years what has been done by this county is illegal, as has been proven over and over again, that the county has done things illegally. MR. KLATZKOW: You keep saying that, ma'am, but I -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yes, I'm saying it. And we're in the middle of a lawsuit that we have been challenged on that in the same words. MR. KLATZKOW: Not for nothing, if that lawsuit takes two years to resolve itself, those residents aren't getting the services they want. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Then we -- MR. KLATZKOW: You just say I don't want to do something because the agreement is unlawful, that's the easiest thing in the world to say. COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, it is required by law. If you -- MR. KLATZKOW: Then they should have done it. In all those years when they did it under the Interlocal, they were wrong. The same -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: And guess what? All the -- MR. KLATZKOW: The same people who thought it was right now think it's wrong. Page 92 Packet Page -451- ... ,.•+.a ua, usc.. 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- other districts -- CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Folks, our stenographer cannot take -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: And the districts -- CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Commissioner, listen, please. -- when both of you are talking at the same time. One or the other. Now, you were answering a question. MR. KLATZKOW: I am answering the question. I mean, we're being attacked here by ourselves, we eat our own here, that our agreements are unlawful. They are not unlawful. I've got somebody wants a certificate, they didn't get their certificate so now they say well, the Interlocal Agreement, you have to give us a certificate. Really? You did business under the Interlocal for years and years and years and it was fine. But as soon as you get the certificate all of a sudden well, we can't do it under the Interlocal because that's unlawful. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right. That's why they went for the certificate and why every other independent fire district should have its own COPCN, so they can deal lawfully with us. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Ma'am, that's the past. COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, it isn't. It's the future. But here's what I'd like to know. In addition -- Chief Kopka, I thank you for presenting today. And I would like to ask, what were you doing up in Tallahassee and who were you representing when you were most recently up there lobbying, and what were you lobbying about? CHIEF KOPKA: Home rule issue on COPCN legislation. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Specifically. What position did you take on what issues and who authorized you to lobby on behalf of the county on the position you took? CHIEF KOPKA: Well part of the Collier County Board approved legislative packet is home rule and that's what I was Page 93 Packet Page -452- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 supporting, local home rule. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Specifically what? CHIEF KOPKA: Senate Bill 742. COMMISSIONER HILLER: And what does that bill say? What was your position with respect to that bill? COMMISSIONER HENNING: That has nothing to do -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: It does have everything to do with this. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioner Fiala? CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Yes. COMMISSIONER HENNING: You know, this is totally ridiculous. It has nothing do with that item. She is interrogating staff. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Yes, that's -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: I have the right to ask the question. COMMISSIONER HENNING: And it has nothing to do with this item. COMMISSIONER HILLER: I believe it does. That's what I'm trying to find out. COMMISSIONER HENNING: We need procedures here. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Right. I'm sorry. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Commissioner Fiala. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Let's go -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: I have the right to get information to see how it relates. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Yes, but we don't -- this is not part of the subject. COMMISSIONER HILLER: How do I know? I'm trying to find out. Unless I get an answer, I can't make that determination. I have reason to believe that it is but I need to confirm that. And I have the right to request information. COMMISSIONER HENNING: She knows it's not. Aloft Page 94 Packet Page -453- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 COMMISSIONER HILLER: Oh, I think it is. COMMISSIONER HENNING: She's just pontificating. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, you know what then? If we're going to continue to argue, we're going to go to the shade session right now and when we come back we'll discuss it again. COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm going to make a motion to approve this item. COMMISSIONER NANCE: And I will second it. COMMISSIONER HENNING: I call the motion because we've already had discussion. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: A motion on the floor and a second. Any -- I won't say any further comments, because -- all in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye. COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Chief, I want to apologize on behalf of the Board of Commissioners on the conduct of some interrogation of you in the day-to-day job that you have to do. This item is done and you don't have to respond. COMMISSIONER HILLER: You do. I have the right to receive the information. Leo, I would like to know exactly what Chief Kopka was doing in Tallahassee, who he met with, what position he took, and I would also like to know who authorized him to do so. MR. OCHS: I'd be happy to provide that information. And just for the record, I authorized him to be there. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you. I want all the specifics Page 95 Packet Page -454- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 of the position he took and who he spoke with. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: And with that we are going -- yes, sir? Item #12A RECOMMENDATION FOR THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS TO PROVIDE DIRECTION TO THE COUNTY ATTORNEY RELATED TO SETTLEMENT NEGOTIATIONS AND LITIGATION EXPENDITURES IN THE PENDING CASE OF NORTH COLLIER FIRE CONTROL AND RESCUE DISTRICT V. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, CASE NO. 15-CA-1871, NOW PENDING IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE TWENTIETH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA — CLOSED SESSION MR. KLATZKOW: If we're going to shade session, ma'am,just e. a quick announcement to the public that we will be meeting in the shade session. Estimated time is no more than one hour. We'll be coming out at 1:00. And that the persons attending the shade session will be the five Commissioners, the County Manager and myself. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Wait a second. And that it will be transcribed by the court reporter who will be attending that shade session with us and that once the litigation is concluded the full transcript of our discussion will be made public and available to anyone who wants to read it. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Thank you very much. And with that, folks we will not adjourn but we'll research for now. (Luncheon recess.) MR. OCHS: Please take your seat. Madam Chairman, you have a live mic. Page 96 Packet Page -455- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: But I don't know if we can conduct it yet. MR. OCHS: You don't have a quorum right now, ma'am. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: We're missing a couple people. MR. OCHS: We'll bring this session to order. (Luncheon recess.) CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Good afternoon, everybody. We have returned. And Leo, would you like to start us off here, please. Item #12B THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS TO PROVIDE DIRECTION TO THE COUNTY ATTORNEY REGARDING SETTLEMENT NEGOTIATIONS AND LITIGATION EXPENDITURES IN THE PENDING CASE OF NORTH COLLIER FIRE CONTROL AND RESCUE DISTRICT V. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, CASE NO. 15-CA-1871, NOW PENDING IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE TWENTIETH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA — NO DIRECTION GIVEN MR. OCHS: Yes, ma'am, that takes us to Item 12.B. And that is the item for the County Attorney, Mr. Klatzkow, reporting out after the closed session. MR. KLATZKOW: Yeah, that's just the closed session is now terminated. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: What did you mumble? COMMISSIONER NANCE: He said the closed session is now terminated. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: The closed session is now Page 97 Packet Page -456- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 ygr.M:n. terminated. Six words. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Thank you. Item #7 PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS NOT ON THE CURRENT OR FUTURE AGENDA MR. OCHS: Madam Chair, that would now take us to Item 7 on today's agenda, public comments on general topics not on the current or future agenda. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay. MR. MILLER: I have one registered speaker, Michael George Hagan. MR. HAGAN: Thank you. I have two items I'd like to discuss, if possible. The first one is I'm Michael George Hagan; I'm a social worker. I've been here in Collier County 12 years. I'm from New York and Chicago, spent 10 years in Palm Beach County attempting to do this and I didn't leave -- the guy told me I was interfering with their investigations. But I did leave and came to Collier County because my mother insisted I do. And she was here, because I insisted she come here and live here and not Palm Beach County over there, because that's a little too difficult. So my first item is my brother did this in Chicago. He was on the board or in charge of or it's under his name where he made Chicago and Gallway where our family's from sister cities. So my first proposal is I'd like to do something if possible and make Collier County and Cook County, Illinois sister counties. And I know it's a new theory, but there's so many people here from the Midwest. And that's really the Midwest. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: You might have a problem with Page 98 Packet Page -457- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 Ohio. MR. HAGAN: We went to Notre Dame, but, you know, it's just a thought. So I'd like to -- you know, if possible to consider that. I'm willing to work with the Commissioners and/or your staff to research this and look into it, and maybe we can do something -- if it can be done maybe we can get it done by next month. If not, that's fine. But I think it's a good idea. And my second thought is I'm here to advocate for the needy, as a voice of the needy. I don't want to say the word homeless because that draws a lot of attention here in Collier County, but that's basically who I'm speaking about. And my second request or question is, is there any way possible that the Collier County Commissioners in Collier County could come up with a way -- and I have some ideas, and again I'd like to speak to you directly and speak to your staff and whoever works on this as far as a free bus pass is concerned for homeless people. Because I am homeless and I've been homeless on and off for 22 years of my life in Florida. By my choice. And I've seen everything. Everything. And most of it's unspeakable. That I need to see. I'm not going to hell and I'm not going to prison, which is pretty much the same thing, but those people are here. And what happened last week pushed me to come here. And what's happening over there and on Bayshore and Tomlinson and Naples Manor and in Immokalee is unspeakable. And I've seen it all. And I'm asking for your assistance, whether you grant it to me or not, you know, something has to be done. Because if you lose this county, like Palm Beach lost their county, like Broward, Miami-Dade and like you lost -- or Collier County lost Hertz Corporation and Lee County and what -- you know, I'm just asking for your help. Thank you. Page 99 Packet Page -458- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 MR. MILLER: That is the only registered speaker we have for public comment. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Thank you. Item #10B (Continued from earlier in the meeting) RESOLUTION 2016-15: DIRECTING THE SUPERVISOR OF ELECTIONS TO PLACE A STRAW BALLOT REFERENDUM ON THE MARCH 15, 2016 PRESIDENTIAL PREFERENCE PRIMARY BALLOT TO ASK VOTERS THE QUESTION, AS AMENDED, OF WHETHER THEY WOULD BE IN FAVOR OF A "UNIFIED EMERGENCY RESPONSE" IN THE COUNTY — ADOPTED MR. OCHS: Madam Chair, that would bring us back to Item 10.B, which the Board said they wanted to hear after the noon session. And 10.B is a recommendation to direct the Collier County Supervisor of Elections to place a straw ballot referendum on the March 15th, 2016 Presidential Preference Primary Ballot, asking the voters of unincorporated Collier County if they support a single combined fire and emergency medical response independent special district in unincorporated Collier County that is governed by an independent elected body. And Commissioner Taylor brought this item forward. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Thank you, County Manager Ochs. At this time because I did bring it forward but I was not the genesis of it, I'd like to ask Commissioner Burke and Commissioner Page to stand up, because they're the initiators of this -- well, I guess -- CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: While they're coming up, could I mention that a straw ballot -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: I think we're still on public Page 100 Packet Page -459- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 comment. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: They said that was the only public comment. Troy just said. COMMISSIONER HILLER: How many more public speakers are there? MR. MILLER: I'm sorry? COMMISSIONER HILLER: How many more public speakers are there under public comment? MR. MILLER: I was just explaining to this gentleman who just handed me this right after we announced 9.A, I have one other speaker for public comment. COMMISSIONER HILLER: I thought there were two. Isn't there another one, too? I thought a lady walked up as well. MR. MILLER: No, she handed something in for a different item. That was for 9.A. COMMISSIONER HILLER: I think we should let the public -- CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Let us finish this one because we've already started this and we didn't hear anything from anybody who was MR. MILLER: I explained to the gentleman I would speak to you on the break. Because we had the item, we heard the item and we moved to the next item. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay. MR. MILLER: Okay, so you want to address it after this item? CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Yes, please. Because we've already started this. And I was starting to make a comment. You said a straw ballot, but on the presidential preference, aren't only republicans allowed to vote on it? You can't get independents and you can't get democrats to vote because it's the republican presidential primary, so you're leaving out about two-thirds of the county on a straw ballot. Page 101 Packet Page -460- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 COMMISSIONER HENNING: You're going to have democrat candidates for president that's going to be on the presidential preference. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: The same day as this one or -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Oh, really? Okay, I had not heard that. COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm sure you don't pay attention to what that side is doing, but -- CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Well, how about independents, are they allowed to vote on -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: I mean, just like any other race, whether it be the primary -- I mean, the general election you have ballot questions -- you can put a ballot question on any of the -- CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: I realize that. I just wanted to make sure we got the most voters. Because I know if it was only on the one presidential primary, you'd have a whole lot of people that were pretty angry. If it was just on two, then you'd still have a whole bunch of people that are registered as something else feeling like they were eliminated from the opportunity to vote. I'm just throwing this out as a question. COMMISSIONER HENNING: I know, but any time you hold a voter's registration, you have a right under certain parameters. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Right, certain parameters, you're exactly right. That's what I checked on yesterday. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay, so you're well aware of it. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Yes. And that's why I brought this up, because I just want to make sure that everybody that wants to vote can vote, you know, that hold a voter's registration. But anyway, so now we can talk about it. Okay, and you have a speaker? Page 102 Packet Page -461- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 MR. MILLER: Yes, I have two. Commissioner Page. And Commissioner Burke, if you want to go to the other podium, sir? COMMISSIONER PAGE: Good afternoon, Commissioners. For the record, Jeff Page. I'm with the Greater Naples Fire District, I'm the Chairman there. I also am here representing the Collier Citizen Council. I believe they also sent the Board a letter in support of this straw ballot vote. Basically what we're asking, we do not as a district have the ability to put out a referendum question like that countywide. So we're actually coming to the Board similar to what happened in 2010, asking the Board's support with that. Commissioner Burke and I both serve on the Emergency Services Task Force which has had -- been continuing to meet over the last say two years. So with that I'm going to defer to Jim. COMMISSIONER BURKE: Yeah, Commissioners, you all know that I'm a commissioner of the North Collier Fire District. But I want to make it clear, I'm not speaking for that commission today. I'm speaking as an individual who's also active with other organizations. But the first thing I want to do is commend you for once again taking the lead on this critical issue of moving forward with consolidation. I also want to commend the citizens -- the Greater Naples Fire Board for making the request and the CCC for a letter of support. But as a reminder, in November, 2010, the BCC took the initiative on a consolidation straw ballot that was overwhelmingly supported by the public, and which I think served as the foundation piece for what took place in November of 2014 with fire districts consolidating. I think the time is right to try to continue that momentum and keep this moving forward. I can tell you, it's no secret, I've been a big proponent of Page 103 Packet Page-462- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 emergency services consolidation, but I've come to see it not as an end in itself but as a critical part of the quality improvement process. I don't think we can reach the alternate level of performance unless we come together as one. So I think this is a big step you're taking and I appreciate it. Thank you. MR. MILLER: Madam Chair, I do have additional public speakers. As it turns out, Mr. Chao just came up -- not public comment. He wants to speak on this item. Ramon Chao. And he'll be followed by Chris Spencer. COMMISSIONER CHAO: Yes, I am also a commissioner of North Collier, but I am not here for that reason. If this is going to be put on the ballot, one of the most important things, at the ending you must ask the question: Even if it raises taxes. I think that would be the true statement. COMMISSIONER HILLER: What about and potentially reduces the level of service? COMMISSIONER CHAO: Yeah. Well, that goes without saying. COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, it has to be stated. COMMISSIONER CHAO: Yeah, I agree. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Even if it raises taxes and reduces the level of service. COMMISSIONER CHAO: I agree with you. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: All depends on the wording, doesn't it? COMMISSIONER CHAO: I just wanted to -- that was my one comment I wanted to make here, but I came here specifically, I was up in Tallahassee yesterday and we met with probably seven, eight different senators and representatives, and it just -- we were speaking with people and they were yes, yes, yes to our faces and then Page 104 Packet Page -463- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 completely against it when it went to the vote. And it just really shocked me. And I would hate to see -- it's the politics of it. We need people in our local government who care about the people, that there's no agenda, there's no job waiting on the other side of a vote, that there's nothing going on here where the people are going to suffer. Because I'm speaking as a taxpayer. I'm paying taxes on both ends for services. And we the people need people who are here for the people. And if you're not, just get out. That's just simply where I'm at. It really breaks my heart to see all the political garbage going on, you know, and -- I'm not trying to jump into any other subjects, and I won't, I'll respectfully respect the Board. And I've said it over and over, people are dying, and it's criminal. Thank you. MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Chris Spitzer. He'll be followed by Paul Anderson. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Boy, isn't that a political statement? MR. SPITZER: Good afternoon, Commissioners. Happy New Year to each of you. It's good to see you again. My name is Christopher Spencer and I'd like to speak about the consolidation. Number one, I want everyone to know that I'm for consolidation, anything to get away from the county. However, most of these districts have already done that because they felt that the job the county has done has been horrible at best so they incorporated into independent districts; thus they've moved forward and some of them have merged. But the language on this proposed bill is missing -- or this vote is missing some pretty important facts that I don't know how you're going to word this into a question. Number one, the cities will not be allowed to vote on this, but they're still going to be utilizing the services of the EMS aspect, which Page 105 Packet Page -464- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 you keep saying is a golden carrot but it's really not a carrot. It's a big money pit. And the whole issue that we're talking about with consolidation and ALS service, which is a little outside the scope, I'm bringing it back, is we just want to do the service and we'll adjunct with you. You can transport, you can do anything, but the cost of EMS will cripple every single independent fire district, merged together totally or not, and the increase of the people's taxes will go up dramatically. Furthermore, would it not be fragmenting the system if the city doesn't get to vote taxation without representation? And they're going to be utilizing the services of who, the new independent district? This idea is put forth by a group of people who have all combined and made different groups and associations, the CDC, the LMNOP, all these different groups. But it's the same people over and over again. It's not the contingency of the people. The vote was had a while ago, and it was like five years ago, I think it was like 2010, November 2nd, if I'm correct. And they voted for consolidation. Consolidation has happened. But to move forward without the clear direction of there is a huge cost to this would be disheartening and problematic for the people of the cities, of Marco Island and the City of Naples, and I would just like you to before you opine on this to sit back and think about this a little bit longer, because the idea of doing the same vote over and over and over again, you're going to get the same result if you keep asking the same question, will it save taxes and be more efficient. This will not. Thank you. MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Paul Anderson. He'll be followed by Bob Naegele. MR. ANDERSON: Hi. I 'm Paul Anderson, Fire Chief and District Manager with the Immokalee Fire Control District. I'm speaking on behalf and at the request of the Board of Fire Commissioners of Immokalee Fire District. Several of them gave me Page 106 Packet Page -465- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 some thoughts they want me to share with the Board of County Commissioners. I'm going to try to get through the list. I might speak a little quickly, but I got a couple of calls on the way here this morning to add some thoughts. First of all, my board feels that special districts were created by the people and for the people for specific local services. The intent of a special district was for local people to vote to tax themselves for services that they wanted in their community. The other intent was to provide the people in the local community local control over their local resources. Local residents who live in the area are elected to govern the special districts. They do not believe the legislature intended for special districts to cover an entire county other than those specified by law such as the school district, stuff like that. One of the concerns is currently there's inequality in resources currently provided to Immokalee on a countywide basis. All you need to do is drive through Immokalee. Older smaller CAT buses. Sidewalks not equal to sidewalks in other areas of the county. We have asphalt sidewalks instead of poured concrete. Streets not up to par with other areas of the county. County parks. We have a county park that has two porta-potties for a bathroom. There's nowhere else in the county who has porta-potties as the only bathroom. They have field houses with bathrooms and concession stands. Why would residents of Immokalee want to give up local control to a county commission who doesn't currently provide equality in any services, let alone fire protection? Immokalee Fire Control District Commission considered the option of consolidation and voted unanimously that they were not interested in consolidation because they felt it was not in the best interest of Immokalee Fire District's residents and business owners. If the Board of County Commissioners votes yes for the straw ballot to be county-wide, they will be circumventing another local Page 107 Packet Page -466- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 elected body's decision. Who does the County Commission think they are to circumvent another elected body's decision that was made with the best interest of that body's constituents in mine? Who does the Greater Naples Fire Board think they are to dictate a straw ballot that shoves down the throat and applies to other independent fire districts when those districts feel it is not in the best interest of their district. They're also circumventing the decisions of another elected body. The language in the question is misleading. The questions should ask: Would you support a single combined fire and emergency medical response independent special district in unincorporated Collier County that is governed by countywide independent elective body with you no longer having local control of your own fire department? Immokalee Fire District Board of Commissioners requests that the Board of County Commissioners vote no on the straw ballot question because it's misleading. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Thank you. MR. MILLER: Your final speaker on Item 10.B is Bob Naegele. MR. NAEGELE: Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission, thank you very much. In 2010 you did what I think was historical. You put the item to the people to say should we proceed with a straw ballot. And it was an overwhelming vote. I believe it was 70 percent. And I think that at this stage we've had pretty good success. And in 2016 we ought to put this on the straw ballot again to see if we should make another move forward. I'm here today as president of the Pelican Bay Property Owner's Association. I live at 7993 Via Vecchia. Thank you. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay, Commissioner Henning? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, it's interesting, they say that EMS is a money pit. But North Collier's budget is greater than our EMS and we service the whole county, and you only have that much of Page 108 Packet Page -467- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 the county. We service the whole county for less. So I don't see where it's a money pit. Actually, I think our employees do a wonderful job. We don't do it, ask the question in the cities, Marco Island or Naples, because they self-govern under the Florida statutes. However, they have the right to ask the same question of their residents. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: How do you feel about the straw ballot, sir? COMMISSIONER HENNING: I mean, I'm in support of it. Here it is. The thing is, there's nothing binding. It's just asking citizens, how do you feel about this? That's all it is. It's not -- how do you feel about it. There's no binding for the independent fire districts or the county or any other elected official. And like Mr. Naegele said, you know, because of the 2010 question after that, we had two districts merge into -- well, four districts merge into two. That's not a bad thing. So I'm very supportive of the item of asking taxpayers a question. There's nothing wrong with that. So I'm going to make a motion to approve. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Second. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Commissioner Hiller? COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah, the principle of smaller government is fundamental. It's very clear that big government is ineffective and inefficient. In fact, that's the fight between the republicans and the democrats that republicans want less taxes and smaller government and the efficiencies that come with it. We all know what it's like to deal with the federal government. Bigger is not better. Bigger is most certainly not cheaper. To put this question on the ballot -- and by the way, I'm not saying that this is a republican versus democrat question. What I'm saying is that point that the chief from Immokalee made, that we in America value smaller government by way of special districts, by way Page 109 Packet Page -468- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 of municipalities. That's what the whole political system has been founded on, on local rule being as close to the people as possible. Not having a big umbrella government. Asking this question about whether consolidation is something the people would want without telling them that the taxes could be raised and the level of service could be lowered or that the level of service will be higher and the taxes will be lowered, or that nothing will change whether you consolidate or not makes this an absolutely empty question. That's like saying, you know, do you or do you not -- or do you like ice cream, without telling you what flavor you're going to get at what price. I mean, is it Publix ice cream or is it Haagen dazs? Is it chocolate, is it vanilla? I mean, it's absolutely the most ridiculous thing I have ever seen. I mean, if you're going to ask a question say would you accept consolidation if your new taxes are going to be raised by 10 percent and your level of service is going to be decreased because now you're going to have a larger government and it's going to be more inefficient in delivering the service? And of course that's parenthetical. But the bottom line is putting this question, as empty as it is, on the ballot is useless for informational purposes. I can't support it as it's written. If you tell me consolidation will lower taxes by X percent and will increase level of service because delivery times will increase, you know, by X minutes, I could support that. But this is ludicrous. And to the point that Commissioner Henning made that, you know, whether or not EMS is a money pit, oh, EMS is absolutely losing money. And the reason we have relationships with fire throughout Collier County is because we cannot deliver the level of service necessary to save lives unless we would raise taxes exponentially. So we are actually using the taxes paid to those special districts to subsidize the system that we cannot support on our own unless we turn around and raise your taxes exponentially. I can't Page 110 Packet Page -469- . 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 support this. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Commissioner Nance? COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes, I would like to make a couple of comments. I have absolutely no problem asking the public for their opinion. But I think the way this is worded is a little difficult because I think it's got two separate and distinct elements. I think that there are things to like about it and things not to like about it. I wholeheartedly support a straw ballot that asks the public a new question. We've asked them several times if they support fire district consolidation, and they did. And the fire districts to their credit have done a marvelous job working that direction. We need to give credit where credit is due. I think they've worked at it steadily, I think there's great progress, and I think the public likes it. I think there's everything to like about it. However, we've never, and I think this is what this is touching, we've never talked about a unified emergency response, a response system that includes fire and rescue and emergency medical services. We've never asked them that question. So from that perspective, if it was worded properly I think we'd really get some good information. If we asked them: Do you support a system in the county that contemplates a unified emergency response. You can even include the Sheriff in it. The Sheriff is involved as a first responder and, you know, it makes every bit of sense to discuss those sorts of things. However, when you add: That's governed by an independent elected body, that throws a whole other element in it now. That contemplates the administration of a completely different organization. And nobody's ever done that, nobody's said, look, throw out the independent districts you have, put a new one in there, substitute this elected body for that elected body. I don't know that that's going to Page 111 Packet Page -470- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 produce meaningful results that you can -- I don't know that you're going to be able to take these results and you're going to derive anything from it. So I certainly would support asking the question if they support a unified emergency response, because I think it's new information. It's not just a repeat of fire district consolidation. And really, you know, that's been introduced in many forums, it's been introduced by many citizens, it's been introduced by the media, it's been introduced by a lot of people. So I think it's a good question. I think that the two-parted question is problematic but, you know, if the rest of the Board wants to stick with it, I would support it. But I think it could be improved if you just remove the portion about the independent elected body and just ask them about a unified emergency response. I think you would get good and meaningful information from that question. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Commissioner Henning? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, Commissioner Nance, the problem with the change is the fear from a lot of the independent fire districts. By taking that out would be oh, they want to take over fire. COMMISSIONER NANCE: Right, I think that's why we're getting the response that we're getting. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right. And if you remove that, because it is an independent special district, like the independent fire districts are created under Florida statute, which is a special district. But if we would add: Would you support a single combined fire and EMS medical response independent special district in unincorporated Collier County that is governed by the independent elected body that unifies emergency response or provides a unified -- COMMISSIONER NANCE: Commissioner Henning, here's my concern. My concern is we're asking the question of the citizens, and I hate to tell you this, a whole bunch of them don't even know that the Page 112 Packet Page -471- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 fir e districts are independently elected body. They don't even know that. They don't know that. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Do they not vote? They voted those commissioners in. How could they not know? COMMISSIONER NANCE: I know, ma'am. If you went out and you did a poll on the street and say hey -- all they want to know is when they call the fire department that they come, when I call EMS that they come. They're not concerned with the administrative arrangement of it. We are as professionals because we're tasked with that responsibility. The average citizen is not pulling his hair out over the administrative arrangement of any of these emergency responders. They're not. They're not worried about how the Sheriffs organized, they're not worried about how EMS is organized. They could care less. All they want to know is they get great service. That's all they care about. COMMISSIONER HENNING: So Jeff, can we add: To provide a unified -- MR. KLATZKOW: You can change the language, sure. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. I'm going to amend my motion. COMMISSIONER NANCE: I think the question -- MR. KLATZKOW: The easiest way if we can get the question on the overhead so that we could just do cross-outs, we'll know exactly what we're talking about. COMMISSIONER NANCE: If we're talking about unified emergency response, I think that's a new question and valuable information. COMMISSIONER HENNING: To provide a unified -- COMMISSIONER NANCE: Emergency response. COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- emergency response. COMMISSIONER NANCE: And that covers a lot of territory. Page 113 Packet Page -472- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 That covers everyone. And I think that's the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow; is it not? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, I'm going to amend my motion to reflect that. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Yeah, I would agree. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay? Commissioner Henning? COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's it. COMMISSIONER NANCE: You want to put it up there and craft it? Commissioner Henning, you're the motion maker. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: I just wanted to -- COMMISSIONER NANCE: Excuse me, Madam Chair. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: That's all right. While they're putting that together I would just like to say it all depends on how it's worded as to what decision is actually made from it. When they were mentioning before about the straw ballot and the way it was worded at that time, it directed you to, you know, do you want to live or die. You know, it wasn't really like that, but it's kind of like that of course, naturally they knew what answer they wanted to come up with. So then East Naples Fire Department put out one that was just the opposite and it got just the opposite answer. You can lead people to say whatever. What you want to do is be clear. You want to be clear. And you want to -- the way Donna Fiala likes it, anyway, be fair. Just be fair. COMMISSIONER HILLER: So let's add at what cost and what level of service. What's the response time county-wide and at what cost to the taxpayers. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Well, let me finish what I was going to say. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Let's be fair. Page 114 Packet Page -473- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: And then also, I think another thing is if you direct it to a primary, you're going to get very low voter turnout. That happens every time, we all know that. If you direct it to a general election, and this is going to be a big one, you're going to get a lot of voters. I think you would get a much better cross-section if you wait until the general election. COMMISSIONER NANCE: I believe that we are limited in a Presidential election year to putting these sorts of ballots on given elections. We need to check with the Supervisor of Elections, Jennifer Edwards. I believe actually we're restricted from putting additional things on the Presidential ballot date. I might be wrong, but I think we're restricted from that at this time. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Yeah, I don't know that either. COMMISSIONER NANCE: We have to inquire. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: We could check. But I also want to check with the Elections Office to find out who all can vote. Because if it comes down to you can only have republicans voting then you cross out like two-thirds of the community. That's not good. If you have two parties but no other people can vote, that's not good either. But I think we need to get a little bit more information. If a lot of people can vote in the Presidential primary and that's what you folks feel should be done, well, you know, I'll just go along with that. I just want to make sure that everybody has a say. Okay, let's see, who was -- Commissioner Taylor? COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I think Commissioner Henning was before me. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Oh, I'm sorry. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, to say on there, at an added cost, is saying that these (sic) merging has failed. When these people from North Collier are saying we saved a million dollars, okay? And greater Naples, they saved money. Page 115 Packet Page -474- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 So to put a question on at an increased cost is just the opposite of what has been done. So it's -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: State what the point is. COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- those fear mongers in there that want to try to get government efficiencies not to happen. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: All in the wording, isn't it? You can lead them to vote however you want them to vote. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Just state what the cost is. I'm not saying -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm not done. COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- it should be more or less, just state it. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Madam Chair, I'm not done. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay, go ahead. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Now, as far as the general election Presidential preference, anybody -- when you've got a question on the ballot, anybody can vote, that's number one. Who's going to go to the ballot would be the democrats and republicans, because that's the Presidential preference. And they are contested in both of the races, on the democrat and republican side. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Can the independents vote then? COMMISSIONER HENNING: They can vote on the ballot question. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: So they can't vote for the other, so that probably won't draw them out, right? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I don't -- CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: But they could vote if they made their way to the elections office. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, obviously another reason that you want it in the Presidential preference, you got a result back from the citizens. Let's say it's positive. Then the civic organizations Page 116 Packet Page -475- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 and the media have the ability to ask the candidates: So what do you think about this? CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: That's true. COMMISSIONER HENNING: And that's including county commissioner candidates because it includes EMS. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: That's true. COMMISSIONER HENNING: So again, the citizens can base their decision on what candidate based upon how they feel about the straw ballot. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay, I voiced my concerns. Commissioner Taylor? COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I just needed to understand, are we changing the wording on this or are we leaving it the same and then COMMISSIONER HENNING: You would add: To provide the unified response. COMMISSIONER NANCE: Unified emergency response. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Emergency response. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: And leave in governed by an independent elected body? Leave that in? Okay. Now, this was not my issue, this was greater Naples, I'd like to hear from Commissioner Page to see if-- COMMISSIONER PAGE: That's fine. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: And Commissioner Burke who spoke? Okay, and let the record show they waved it's okay. COMMISSIONER BURKE: Commissioner Chao would like to interject -- CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: You can't talk from the audience, sir, I'm so sorry. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Stand up to the mic. Stand up to Page 117 Packet Page -476- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 the m1.d, please. COMMISSIONER HENNING: That has to be -- you're not the Chair, okay? COMMISSIONER HILLER: But no, you're calling up all the other fire commissioners and you have another fire commissioner here. COMMISSIONER CHAO: I apologize -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: And she still wants to guide the meeting. COMMISSIONER CHAO: I apologize if there's been any confusion. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay, would you then sit down? But thank you very much. COMMISSIONER CHAO: Yes, ma'am. God bless. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Thank you very much. Okay. Now we have a motion on the floor and a second. Whoever made that motion, please tell me what the motion was. COMMISSIONER HENNING: The motion was to forward to the Supervisor of Elections the language in the amended language to put on the Presidential preference ballot. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Good. Everybody in agreement with that? Then all in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye. COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay, that's a 4-1 vote. Thank you very much. COMMISSIONER HENNING: You know, the audience is here Page 118 Packet Page -477- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 to assist us, not participate up here when we're in deliberation. We had public comment, that is over with. A commissioner has the right -- any individual commissioner has the right to ask the public a question. But the Chairman needs to recognize the -- if somebody wants to come up and speak that hasn't signed up prior to the item being spoke. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: And I'm sorry that I just -- but we were all done and I didn't mean to offend you in any way, but thank you very much for understanding. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Madam Chair, may I say one thing? CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Commissioner Hiller has -- COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Oh, I beg your pardon. COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, I really have a problem with the way this last issue, the last point of addressing Commissioners Page and -- which other commissioner was here, Burke -- Commissioner Burke, and not addressing Commissioner Chao. You do understand that's a fire commissioner. The gentleman who -- CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: I don't understand what you're talking about. COMMISSIONER HILLER: When Commissioner -- I'm losing track of all my names here. Commissioner Taylor -- I've got so many commissioner names in my head. Commissioner Taylor turned around and says, you know, do you commissioners have any other comments, they waive, and Commissioner Chao is ignored and then you tell him he can't speak. I mean, I just -- CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: He spoke already. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah, but at the end she asked again as a follow-up -- CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Nobody spoke then at the end. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, they chose not to, but they were asked. Page 119 Packet Page -478- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 COMMISSIONER HEl NING: What's the next item? CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: We're done with that item. COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, no, I think as a courtesy, they're our commissioners and it's on a topic that involves their district. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: The subject is now voted, please. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah, but I think as a courtesy -- CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: As a courtesy to me, if you would stop talking, please. We'll move on to the next subject. COMMISSIONER HILLER: As a courtesy to my constituents I will say whatever I feel is necessary to represent them, and he is my constituent. MR. OCHS: Madam Chair, your next item would be your advertised public hearings. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Do you dare? Item #9A str RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE AN AMENDMENT TO ORDINANCE NUMBER 95-33, THE BRIARWOOD PUD, AS AMENDED, TO ADD PRIVATE CLUBS AND PRIVATE PARKING GARAGES, AND ASSOCIATED REQUIRED FEATURES, AS A PRINCIPAL USE IN TRACTS B & C: COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL, TO ADD MINIMUM STANDARDS FOR THE PRIVATE CLUBS AND PRIVATE PARKING GARAGES PRINCIPAL USE, TO INCREASE THE MAXIMUM FOOTPRINT OF ALL STRUCTURES FOR THE PRIVATE CLUBS AND PRIVATE PARKING GARAGES PRINCIPAL USE IN TRACTS B & C: COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL FROM 20% OF THE COMMERCIAL LAND AREA TO 27%, OR 188,062 SQUARE FEET, OF THE COMMERCIAL LAND AREA, TO LIMIT THE MAXIMUM Page 120 Packet Page -479- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 SQUARE FOOTAGE OF ALL STRUCTURES FOR THE PRIVATE CLUBS AND PRIVATE PARKING GARAGES PRINCIPAL USE IN TRACTS B & C: COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL TO 40%, OR 278,610 SQUARE FEET, OF THE COMMERCIAL LAND AREA WHICH COMPRISES 188,062 SQUARE FEET OF THE BUILDING FOOTPRINT ON THE GROUND LEVEL AND AN ADDITIONAL 90,548 SQUARE FEET OF MEZZANINE AREAS, TO ADD A DEVIATION ALLOWING AN ALTERNATIVE LANDSCAPE BUFFER ALONG LIVINGSTON ROAD AND RADIO ROAD, TO ADD A DEVIATION ALLOWING THE REQUIRED 8-FOOT WALL AT THE TOP OF A BERM INSTEAD OF BEING LOCATED AT GROUND LEVEL, TO ADD A DEVIATION TO ELIMINATE THE REQUIREMENT FOR TERMINAL LANDSCAPED ISLANDS ADJACENT TO PARKING AREAS WITHIN INDIVIDUAL DRIVEWAYS, TO ADD A NEW ALTERNATIVE LANDSCAPING EXHIBIT FOR LIVINGSTON ROAD AND RADIO ROAD, AND TO ADD A NEW CONCEPTUAL MASTER PLAN FOR THE PRIVATE CLUBS AND PRIVATE PARKING GARAGES PRINCIPAL USE, FOR THE PUD PROPERTY CONSISTING OF 209.17± ACRES LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF LIVINGSTON ROAD, NORTH OF RADIO ROAD, IN SECTION 31, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; AND BY PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. [PUDA- PL20150000178] — MOTION TO DENY — APPROVED; COUNTY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE RESOLUTION OF DENIAL 2016-16 MR. OCHS: Item 9.A requires ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission members, and all participants are required to be sworn in. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: I thought this would be a nicer day. MR. OCHS: This is a recommendation to approve an amendment Page 121 Packet Page -480- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 to Ordinance No. 95-33, the Briarwood PT D, as amended, to add private clubs and private parking garages and associated required features as principal uses in tracts B and C. (All speakers were duly sworn.) MR. OCHS: Madam Chair, it would be appropriate at this time to take ex parte disclosure from Commission members. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Thank you. And we will start with Commissioner Taylor. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Yes, I have had numerous conversations with residents; I attended a neighborhood meeting; I have had meetings with staff; meetings with the principals that are developing this property; I actually had a meeting with staff with Mr. Strain before I was even sworn in about this issue because it had to do with procedure in a neighborhood informational meeting. I have received literature promoting this and asking for my ability to buy it. Yes, a postcard. And that's all, thank you. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Commissioner Nance? COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes, I've had meetings and discussions with staff on this item. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Commissioner Henning? COMMISSIONER HENNING: I had meetings with staff about this and received correspondence from staff about this. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Commissioner Hiller? COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah, I spoke to the County Manager on this issue. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay, and I myself have had meetings, correspondence, emails and calls, messages from Fred Hood and a staff report. And sir, what we're going to do is hear from you, then we'll hear from staff, then we'll hear from our guest speakers here, and then we'll hear from Commissioners. Page 122 Packet Page -481- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 MR. HOOD: Good afternoon, Madam Chair, Commissioners. For the record, Frederick Hood with Davidson Engineering. I want to start with the video of the project that we prepared for the Planning Commission, if you would permit me. (Video was played.) CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Fred, how long is this. MR. HOOD: Another 30 seconds. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: That's not really showing us much of anything. COMMISSIONER HILLER: But I like the music. Very soothing. MR. HOOD: Okay. Sorry for that. Just wanted to give you an idea of what it was going to look like. With me this afternoon is one of our project engineers, Crystal Weems, with Davidson Engineering. Don Stevenson, our project architect with Don Stevenson Design, and Lotus Architecture. Christian Andrea is our project landscape architect with Architectural Land Design. And Mike Werchek, our applicant and developer is also here with me. The applicant, Premier Auto Suites of Naples, is seeking a PUD amendment to the Briarwood PUD to add private clubs and private parking garages and associated required features as a principal use in tracts B and C of the community commercial district of Briarwood PUD. We're also looking to add minimum standards for the private clubs and parking garages as principal use, to increase and define the maximum footprint of all structures for the proposed private clubs and private parking garages principal use to 27 percent of the commercial land area, to limit the maximum square footage of all structures in the principal use private clubs and private parking garages to a maximum of 40 percent, to add a deviation allowing an alternative landscape Page 123 Packet Page -482- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 buffer along Livingston and Radio Roads, to add a deviation allowing an eight-foot required wall at the top of the berm instead of being located at ground level, to add a deviation to eliminate the requirement for terminal islands adjacent to parking areas within individual driveways, to add an alternative landscaping exhibit for Livingston and Radio Roads, and to add a new master plan for the private clubs and private parking garage's principal use. The 15.99-acre subject property is located at the northeast corner of the intersection of Livingston and Radio Roads within the Briarwood PUD. The property has been set aside for nonresidential uses and has the designation of community commercial. The subject property is bordered on the northern and eastern boundaries by a small portion of the Briarwood's platted native preserve, Dover Park residential community condominiums and water management tracts of the Briarwood PUD. "`-4n. The proposed site plan identifies 16 separate buildings on-site, 15 which will provide a maximum of 148 private garages within the private club development. The 16th building and associated clubhouse that you saw in the video will accompany the other 15 buildings as an amenity for the private garage and private club land uses, owners and guests near the Radio Road entrance. This amenity area and all common areas within the project will be for the sole use of owners and their guests and will not be open to the public. The maximum floor area as defined in the PUD is currently 20 percent of the commercial land area. That 20 percent equates to 139,305 square feet permitted floor area for the property. The total footprint floor area square footage sought at full use build-out is 188,062 square feet. The increase in footprint floor area over the Page 124 Packet Page -483- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 current maximum allowed is 48,757 square feet, which amounts to an increase of seven percent over the 20 percent that's allowed right now. When the proposed mezzanine floor areas, which each individual garage are required to have, are added to that maximum floor footprint, an additional 90,548 square feet is being requested to provide a total of 278,610 square feet of developable floor area, or 40 percent of the commercial land area. As noted previously, in addition to the land use and floor area increase request, we have also proposed a deviation for the required Type D landscape buffer along Livingston and Radio Roads. To increase buffer screening and enhanced views from the roadway, the developer will provide additional trees that will collectively double the minimum number of trees required by the LDC on those right-of-way corridors. Where the additional trees are planted in clusters of three trees or more, there shall be a maximum of a 60-foot gap between each cluster. Where a hedge is planted along Radio and Livingston Roads, the placement of these shrubs will be planted at three feet on center and maximum 60-foot lengths with a maximum of-- minimum, sorry, minimum of 60-foot length with a maximum of 30-foot breaks in continuity. When adjacent to residential uses, we are providing a Type B 15-foot landscape buffer as required, with an eight-foot high masonry wall, meeting the standards of the LDC. A deviation for the construction of the wall is also being requested to require the eight-foot wall be placed on the top of the berm instead of being placed at the ground level, in accordance with the Planning Commission's recommendation. A final deviation to eliminate the requirement for terminal landscape islands adjacent to parking areas within individual driveways is being sought to maximize the parking areas that will be Page 125 Packet Page -484- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 located in front of every unit. This intent of the LDC requirement is to provide a landscaped terminus at the end of delineated parking spaces and parking lots of commercial developments as a separation to buildings, drive isles, sidewalks, et cetera. In this case we are parking vehicles in individual driveways, like we would for residential development, which departs from the intent of the LDC requirement for commercial development. The clubhouse, or building number 13 as identified per Exhibit B, shall provide off-street parking at a ratio one per 200 square feet. Through Section 63-70 of the PUD document as proposed, we have defined the parking regulations for this land use as two parking spaces per unit. One of the two spaces must be provided in the individual unit's driveway. The additional required space may be provided within the individual unit. As accepted by the Planning Commission, parking spaces located in driveways shall be provided in an area at least 23 feet from the edge of pavement for 90 degree parking. Where parallel parking is proposed, a 15-foot setback was being asked to be required from the edge of pavement to the principal structure. As a condition of this Board's approval, we would like to request that that 15-foot setback from the edge of pavement to the building be reduced to a 10-foot setback to the edge of pavement. And I'll discuss why I'm asking for that in a little bit, but it's part of the presentation. Within this minimum 10-foot setback we would still be able to provide the minimum one parking space per unit in a parallel format in some of the tighter areas of the development. The development, as represented in the site plan, would not be altered by this request. If the 15-foot setback is implemented, the site plan would need to be re-worked to allow for additional space to be added between building facades and edge of pavement. Unintended potential consequences will range from driveway Page 126 Packet Page -485- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 alignment along Radio Road being shifted and water management areas being redefined. In a few other examples of this land use across the country, namely in Naperville, Illinois, Minneapolis, Minnesota and Chandler, Arizona, the private garage use has not been seen to provide an additional parking standard for the garage use itself, meaning the garages themselves are the parking areas. And in this case, Premier Auto LLC's product, we are attempting to provide additional parking and driveways, and for the clubhouse located on site. Those other developments have been seen to operate successfully without the additional parking standard we've implemented for this project without the minimum setback for the building to the edge of pavement. These other developments have also been seen to have a limited visiary (phonetic) component in place when accompanied by an owner much like this development will. In practice, these other developments have a drive-in directly from the isle field, whereas the Premier Auto Suites product is attempting to make this private garage and private club use less utilitarian and more upscale with separate driveways and landscaping. The lessening of the internal 15-foot setback to 10 feet will not have an adverse impact on how the development is perceived from the adjacent right-of-ways and will still implement and promote the intent of the additional parking standards we have proposed for Premier Auto Suites. Per discussions with members of the Briarwood Master Association, we would like to further limit the number of membership in the private club and private garage's land use. With this Board's agreement, Section 6.37.0 will be revised to reflect a maximum membership of no more than two individuals per unit with an overall maximum of 296 members, instead of the original 10 individuals per unit with a maximum of 1,480 members. Page 127 Packet Page -486- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 And that concludes my presentation. I will answer any questions that you have at this time. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Well, I've asked everyone to make notes and then we'll ask after we've heard you, after we've heard staff and after we've heard speakers. Thank you very much. Staff members? MR. JOHNSON: Good afternoon. Eric Johnson, Principal Planner, Zoning Section. For the record, staff reviewed the subject petition in accordance with the Growth Management Plan, the Land Development Code and the PUD regulations. Staff is recommending approval of the project, subject to conditions. The project went before the CCPC, the Collier County Planning Commission. They also had conditions of approval, and those conditions have been incorporated in the proposed ordinance before you today. That really concludes my presentation. I'll be happy to answer any questions, if you have them. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Thank you. Speakers, please? MR. MILLER: Your first public speaker is Kim Bennett. She'll be followed by John Alcott. MS. BENNETT: Hi. Thanks for hearing me today. I'm Kim Bennett. I live at 642 Briarwood Boulevard. And I've been involved with this project since its very beginning as Chair of the Architectural Committee of Briarwood. This whole process has been a little frustrating for me and all of the homeowners in Briarwood, feeling that regardless of how much participation is put out there, how many people show up, how many people sign petitions, it's kind of ignored and moved forward, pushed forward, without really hearing what we're trying to say. ioft Page 128 Packet Page -487- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 From the very beginning the way they affected this zoning as a private and a parking garage as being a conditional use of the PUD was so irresponsible and so out of the realm of what the private parking garage was really intended to be as a conditional use. Private parking garage for conditional use under that PUD was meant to be the parking structure that's at, say, Mercado, where they park and then shop, or downtown where they park in a garage structure that's available to the public to get to the shops on the land. It's not intended to be a storage facility for cars and dub them garage. That's not what it was intended. To call it a private club, does that mean it can be a car club, a gun range, any other kind of club? Who all can buy in this? Can it be a corporation? Can it be then two corporations, since it's limited to two owners? And how many members of that corporation will be able to use this facility? The bottom line is the PUD was never zoned for that and the zoning that they're trying to use doesn't even fit the reality. It's a made up fictitious use that they're trying to force us to believe is a garage or a private club. It doesn't take into consideration the residents or the impact on the residents having that kind of facility there and the kind of use that it's going to be. It's an experimental use and it's in our neighborhood next to our homes. So it's very emotional for us that you're taking an experiment that doesn't actually have a zoning and trying to pigeon it into a zoning that's not real reality and experiment with our homes and our investment and our lifetime investment of our future. That's all I have to say. Thank you. COMMISSIONER NANCE: I have one question, ma'am. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER NANCE: Excuse me, I have one question, ma'am, you might be able to help me for my understanding. Page 129 Packet Page -488- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 How is it -- how do you think you're negatively impacted? Explain to me how -- I just want to understand your perspective. MS. BENNETT: Well, from the very beginning when the PUD was originally set up, that was always set forth to be something of community use, whether it be shopping stores, a medical plaza, restaurant, something that the whole community could use. There's actually access into our community directly from it. And during a hurricane those gates will have to be left open, which means Briarwood residents will have the expense of securing and policing those gates that are open directly into our community. COMMISSIONER NANCE: So you're telling me it's a cost issue? MS. BENNETT: There's a cost issue, there's a noise issue, there's an appearance issue. Their beautiful video was just lovely with their glass doors that are not realistic. We know they're going to be steel commercial warehouse doors. And their landscaping that they featured, if they plant that much landscaping, was 10 to 15 years mature. That's not what I'm going to be looking at for the first 10 to 15 years, assuming what they plant survives that long to grow that size. So the eyesore of a giant warehouse structure, the noise from muscle cars, motorcycles, motor homes, boats, you name it, having their engines there and having no control of what they do inside the units. Yeah, we can call and file a complaint, but the police are going to be limited to what they can do or what they can see. To have it open 24 hours a day, I mean, there's not many places open 24 hours a day except for the AA Club on Pine Ridge Road. You know, if it was a storage warehouse it would close at a decent hour and you wouldn't have semis dropping off muscle cars in the middle of the night. The way it's structured now, they can come at any time of day or night and do whatever they want to in there. They can make as much Page 130 Packet Page -489- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 noise as they want. They can even live there. Because by the time someone comes to check, they can leave and turn around and come back or they can say I was just leaving, I wasn't spending the night. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay, thank you very much. MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is John Alcott. He'll be followed by Sharon Johnson. MR. ALCOTT: Good afternoon, Commissioners. My name's John Alcott. I live in Briarwood and my address is 379 Dover Place, unit 601. I am a member of Dover Park, which is a condominium community there. And I have been asked by -- I had served on their board for 18 years, just stepped down this year. I've been asked by their board and I was also asked by the president of the board of Dover Place, which is our neighbor community, condo community, to come and speak this morning. Both Dover Park and Dover Place see this addition as quite okay with us. And the -- one of the reasons for this is we obviously don't know what the future will bring so we don't know what's coming in in the future. We have looked at this project and found it to be acceptable to us. And it is literally in our backyard. We sit on the property that is directly adjacent to it. We have looked at it, we have seen it from the beginning. We were very much more skeptical at the beginning, but have been very happy with the changes that the ownership has made, the reduction of the amount of members, et cetera. Naturally you can't see into the future to see exactly that would number one be there. But we feel we have taken a good look at this, and we feel that it is okay with us. Other than that, I don't think there's much more to say. As I said, it's directly in our backyard, we've taken a look at the landscaping, et cetera, and we're happy with it and we're the ones most affected by it and we quite honestly don't think that -- there may be a problem with noise, but I think that can be effectively handled. Page 131 Packet Page -490- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Thank you. COMMISSIONER NANCE: So sir, you're the community most adjacent to the project? MR. ALCOTT: That is correct. Dover Park is and Dover Place is right next to us, which is -- they have a couple of buildings that are not on the property line but adjacent. Dover Park and Dover Place, if you will go around a lake, Dover Place is primarily on Briarwood Boulevard. It curves around so that it then faces Radio Road and then curves towards Skelly Road, which is in our development and then it meets our homes, which are directly behind along the property line that you see where it butts up -- abuts us -- COMMISSIONER NANCE: Thank you, sir. MR. ALCOTT: -- as far as our community is concerned. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Next speaker? MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Sharon Johnson. She'll be followed by, and my apologies, I think this is Jarvis -- Janice? Okay, you'll be our last speaker. MS. JOHNSON: Hi. I think Kim's pretty much covered a lot of the things that I wanted to discuss. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Who covered? MS. JOHNSON: One of my concerns and my neighbors is security. I didn't hear a lot about security being mentioned as far as we have an emergency exit on the property. What will keep these people from walking into our neighborhood? We're concerned with theft, we're concerned with just in general having these people walking through our community. So I don't know what kind of security. These are questions that I'm bringing forth because my neighbors have asked me to. The other question was in the Naples News there was something about one person purchasing five units. At that time the owners were 10 per unit. Obviously there was a concern with that because what's Page 132 Packet Page -491- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 the story on subletting? Are they allowed to sublet, these two people? Can they form an LLC and have people under them? We're not sure about that. Do you all happen to know what the situation is with subletting? COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: It's not on the record. MS. JOHNSON: Does anybody know? COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: No. MS. JOHNSON: Do we know about the security? I mean, it's easy to say that we can call the police or we can do whatever we have to do, but that's a long-term situation, you know, for us. The other thing that we saw going through the website, we noticed that a lot of these clubs would have huge car shows. Now, I came from an area that was known for car shows. And believe me, the residents were so grateful at the end of the week when all the cars were gone. And now we're going to be living with this next door. It's not that we think the idea is bad, we just think the location is not proper. I don't think anybody would really care to hope that that isn't going to happen in this neighborhood. I know in Marco Island there was a problem with people supposedly setting up a gun range in one of these warehouses. Now, it came to pass that it was okay because they claimed it was for personal use. I personally don't want a gun range in my backyard. I believe the other one was the fact that they were manufacturing motorcycles in one of these units. Well, come to pass, the motorcycle company did have other places where they lacquered and they put the parts to it, but they were basically selling motorcycles out of this unit. And no one can prove that, but that's what they were doing. So there's a lot of questions and concerns. I don't know that I necessarily would want to live right next to it. But security is major, subletting is major, and there's no management and there's no control over this. Page 133 Packet Page -492- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Thank you. MS. JOHNSON: I don't see a management company in place, I don't see anything like that happening. Thank you. MR. MILLER: Your fmal speaker on this item is Janice Kiernan. Thank you. MS. KIERNAN: Good afternoon, Commissioners. I just have a few things. I think it's a good project. I think it's in the wrong place. It's right next to a development; there's no road separating it. There's I believe right now 148 garage units. They can have RVs, boats, at least eight cars can be in there, it used to be 10, and have a partying atmosphere 24/7. There's a lot of gas in those. That's going to be quite the same as a gas station as far as the amount of gas in there, from what I can figure out. They also at one point had these car condo garages as a warehouse, but because it went through the previous PUD thing, they now want to call it a private club. The thing is I looked up, and I would like to give you the documents on the Collier County and what the private club really should mean. And as far as what it should mean is it should be for the neighborhood which would promote public health, safety, welfare, morals, order, comfort, convenience, appearance or general welfare. And I don't think any of those do that. So I would like to at least leave a few things with you, if you don't mind. I also looked up -- in fact, they mentioned Iron Gate, I think. Well, Iron Gate is in the middle of an industrial park with nothing around it. So I printed out some pictures of Iron Gate, and I also printed out an article from the Chicago Tribune about what they entailed. And one of the things was the Commissioner Chairman, Patti Gusten, said she believes the garages are far enough away from homes. Page 134 Packet Page -493- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 This is going to be like what, 15 feet from homes? That's not so good. So I'd like to leave this, what they specified as far as the Iron Gate. They also specified something about Garagetown. In fact, they said Chandler. This is also an industrial park and there's nothing else around it, but I printed out when they bought it what they bought in an industrial park. I also have pictures, but I didn't want to do too much. Okay. Also I have maps of the area here and it is considered commercial ind-- neighborhood commercial and shouldn't be anything with industrial matters to it. And I also printed out up in North Naples they have one called My Other Place, and here's what it looks like today two years later. It's a dust bowl. I also printed out the FLUE, and also -- CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Thank you. MS. KIERNAN: -- sorry about that, the Florida, if they do make it public, the accesses they have to do for a private club. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Ma'am, you can just give those to the County Attorney. Ma'am, ma'am? COMMISSIONER HILLER: I would like to see them. Can I see them? CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Yes, you can -- Commissioner Hiller would like to see them. So would you give them to the County Attorney and he can pass them down to all of us. Okay, now, Commissioner Taylor, you were the first one that had your button on, do you know which one was first after that? COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Thank you. I'd like to preface my comments by saying I've been troubled by this, because this is a use that is not -- contrary to what is in our documents, this use has been controversial from the beginning. We've had the developer say that it is a private club and a private garage. But yet at the Collier County Page 135 Packet Page -494- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 Planning Commission meeting one of the future owners, or one of the owners of this development said I'm not going to be there, I'm going to store my cars there, this is for storage. But yet we still have it as a private club and a parking garage. And under this commercial zoning storage is not allowed, storage is supposed to be in industrial, and there's a reason for that. So I'm really struggling with this, because it's been a moving target. It's almost what do you want us to be today so we can get approved, we'll be there. So I think the first question I have is for Mike Bosi. I would like to know why there wasn't a zoning verification of this property developed. MR. BOSI: Mike Bosi, Director of Zoning Division. When you have a PUD amendment, as this petition started as a conditional use request, that use is analyzed and examined for the proposal based upon the use characteristics: Its intensity, its impacts. Based upon that, that's a much higher level of analysis and review, because it's not only reviewed at a staff level, at an administrative level, but also from the public hearing bodies. So therefore a zoning letter which is done from just strictly a staff analysis on a limited basis would not provide the in-depth and type of review that this petition had to go through as first as a conditional use and now as a PUD amendment. So a zoning letter is actually a lower level of review than the type of review that it's been forced to go through. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Okay. Why are we allowing additional density to this? Just because they asked for it? MR. BOSI: There's no densities, no living associated -- there's no living quarters, there's no dwelling units associated with this use. If this use was associated, it would be a dwelling unit for vehicles. That is not density in the sense of residential use. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Intensity. Page 136 Packet Page -495- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: I'm sorry, would you say that part again? COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: So I was corrected by -- MR. BOSI: The last part was there was a question as to whether this was an increase within density. This is not an increase in density because there's no residential use being proposed. I think the question was intensity. And the intensity question would be based upon what is the highest use that's allowed for within this PUD document. And this PUD document would allow for -- and actually an SDP was approved for a Lowe's Hardware Store. The trip intensity, the intensity of impact for that type of a C-4 use was based upon the use characteristics, the intensity analysis provided against what's the highest use provided within that PUD in that commercial area against this proposed used. This proposed use had less of an intensification compared to the highest use allowed within the PUD and therefore that use was one of-- that comparison was one of the main components which we utilized to rest upon our recommendation of approval. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: So -- and I know this was late in the -- late in the process, because they were already before the Planning Commission. But when there was testimony given that this was going to be used for storage, that didn't cause you pause to think about -- MR. BOSI: It most certainly did. And one of the overriding questions that we had, even when it was a conditional use and as we moved through the PUD amendment process, was what components, what requirements, what conditions would we and could we put on this to make sure that that recreational component would be utilized within this facility. Your office had asked me to provide for an analysis of this use compared to a Vault. The Vault was a storage facility that's going on Page 137 Packet Page -496- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 in the City of Naples near the airport. And that characteristic of that facility is you have a car, you give it to a valet or custodian, they take it to an individual area within the garage, they store it, you request that car again, they do maintenance services on it, that car comes out to you again, you never interact with that facility. This facility is much different. This facility as it's provided or as it's proposed and as it's required by some of the conditions within the PUD amendment says that these units have to have some assembly, some living space component. The units are owned by the individual owners that they interact with. The characteristics of these are different than a straight storage. And one of the things that we've had the most difficulty with this is because the range of uses within the commercial component of this PUD do range from neighborhood commercial but to ones that we have as a C-4 in a regional zoning district. So -- and this use being a use that we've never really had before, we've never had a request to have a condominium so to speak for automobiles. And with a recreational component incorporated. So the entire time we have had a struggle but we think based upon the intensity analysis and some of the restrictions and the conditions that not only staff but the Planning Commission has incorporated with into the document, that we feel that we could arrive upon that recommendation of approval. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: So you're -- initially it was introduced to me as a Premiere Auto Suites. And then it morphed into motorcycles and boats. And boaters up here -- when you have a boat, you have to flush that boat. And according to what I have here in the notes is that boats cannot be flushed between the hours of 8:00 p.m. at night to 6:00 a.m. in the morning but after that they can be flushed. And what I understand, when boats are flushed, there's noise Page 138 Packet Page -497- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 involved. MR. BOSI: I'm sure there is. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: And lots of running water. AUDIENCE MEMBERS: And exhaust. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: So now we're morphed into maintenance outside, because they're not going to do it inside, right? MR. BOSI: Yes. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Then I had a hard time with a question that was posed to me, what is going to prevent two people from having a motorcycle club and revving their motors up? How are we going to, as a -- how are we going to, there's a word for it, monitor what goes on in the inside of these so-called auto suites that now are motorcycles and boats and who knows what? MR. BOSI: I don't think that there's any intention for us to monitor what's going on. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: How are we going to enforce the rules? MR. BOSI: If there's noise spillage, if there is an impact in a negative way to the adjoining residents, there's a code enforcement process. And there's also one of the things that I think was maybe understated but there's an association, and I'll let the applicant speak because I'm not as familiar with their product. But I know there is an association within the membership requirement, and I'm sure there's governing bodies of regulations. And the intent of this association, I would think, to make sure that there was some monitoring going on therefore as to ensure that they are compatible with the adjoining units and the characteristics that they are proposing are the characteristics that they exhibit through the actual use of their day-to-day owners of these individual units. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Okay. And then finally, I believe Page 139 Packet Page -498- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 that the Collier County Planning Commission did put a condition on this that there would be no shows involved, no public shows. So the idea of having a car show there doesn't -- it will not happen. MR. BOSI: That was most certainly one of the identification (sic), that this could be one of the inactivities that they did not want to see because of the potential negative impact that some of the speakers spoke about. So that is a restriction. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: And then the other thing -- I'm sorry, there's one other thing. I understand they started off with one square footage computation per unit and then they expanded it; is that correct? In the process over all these months. MR. BOSI: There's been a number of different iterations based upon the original SDP that was submitted. Some of the issues that were raised by the Planning Commission, by staff. Based upon those concerns they've modified their square footage, they've modified the requirement for how much of that square footage had to be a ratio between storage and the garage unit and the actual recreational unit and the assembly unit. So there's been a number of different changes throughout the process. And I think what the Planning Commission had recommended, which was within your packet, is a much different product than what was originally proposed. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: And I believe that 15 feet has been maintained in their recommendations; is that not? Isn't that correct? MR. BOSI: Yes, I believe so. I believe the applicant is asking you to make a recommendation against what the Planning Commission COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: And I believe the suggestion by the Planning Commission is that they make the square footage space of each individual less to accommodate the 15 feet that staff wants them Page 140 Packet Page -499- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 to maintain; isn't that correct? That was a suggestion, right? MR. BOSI: It could be. Maybe I'll defer to Mr. Johnson, but I don't remember that specific -- COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Yeah, it was. MR. BOSI: -- statement from the Planning Commission. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: All right, thank you. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay, I don't know which one was next, Hiller or Henning. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioner Hiller. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Me. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Me? CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Yes. COMMISSIONER HILLER: I don't understand how this ever could have been approved as a community commercial project. I don't see how these units could be approved as private clubs. Based on my reading of those definitions, neither the structure of this community is being proposed and more specifically the garages and the living areas within those garages fall within these parameters. To ask for essentially a 50 percent increase in intensity, you know, literally without any justification for that, I just can't support. I can't support this project. I have to say that I agree with one of the speakers that said this project might work in a different part of town. It seems to be more of an industrial warehouse project. I'm concerned about the quote, private clubs within the warehouse component, because, you know -- I'm not familiar -- you know, I've heard of mixed use, but I haven't heard of residential industrial. It's not a combination that I think works in the public's interest or in the public's welfare. So I can't support this project based on the evidence I've seen. And I'm going to wait until the hearing closes, and I have not Page 141 Packet Page -500- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 heard any evidence to rebut the conclusions that I've come to. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Thank you. Commissioner Henning? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, part of the ordinance of the original ordinance is missing. Because I wanted to understand what is allowed today on this piece of property, so I had Nick forward it to me. Mike Bosi, maybe you can help me understand what I'm seeing here. A permitted use, uses, you've got restaurants with no drive in. Cocktail lounge, retail package sales of liquor and other beverages. No drive in. Subject to provisions of the Land Development Code. Retail shops, shopping centers, stores -- retail shops, shopping centers, stores, may include incidental processing and repair activities provided they are an accessory or subordinate to the retail sales use provided within all storage processing repair, merchandise occurred within the principal building except such use as garden shops may be outside but within the total fenced in area of the connecting principal building (sic). Financial institution, of course we know. Golf driving range was there. Professional business, financial, utility offices, in-service, medical office, clinics for humans, barber shop, beauty shop, shoe repair, laundry, dry cleaning pickup establishment and self-service laundry, retail bakery, tailoring, milling, garment alteration repair and museum. What would you say that is? Would you say that would be -- MR. BOSI: Those are uses -- the majority of those uses are uses within the C-2 and C-3 category. The one aspect, because of the age of-- those uses, those uses have square footage limitations within those zoning categories. This PUD does not have square foot limitations, and because of that the only limitation that they have is total square footage of the Page 142 Packet Page -501- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 commercial allowed. So the total commercial allowed could be the type of a use attending for meaning 120,000, 136,000 retail establishment. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Retail. MR. BOSI: Yes. COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's what I see it as retail. How does this use compare to retail? MR. BOSI: In terms of intensification comparison, it's a much lower impact than retail. Because the trip generations of the retail are much higher than -- and one of the things from the analysis, they've requested more square footage so you would think that they would have a higher impact. But because of the characteristics and utilization of how that square footage is only interacted with by one individual or one owner and not available to the community, so it's different. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right. So you're talking about traffic impacts. MR. BOSI: Traffic impacts. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Traffic trips, so on and so forth. What I looked at is what kind of impact of the use it has and how does that compare with other land uses. Now, this is a storage facility of the boys toys, there's no question about it. There is not an impact. However, how the boys toys are being utilized, worked on, engines flushing, which you must do to a boat whether it's an inboard or outboard, there's an allowability for lifts in there. So you know there's going to be repair in there. There's going to be impact guns, there's going to be compressors running those impact guns. MR. BOSI: There was -- there had been restrictions placed on no repair allowed within the facility. Now -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Well, their own brochure said lifts. Now, I don't know what kind of boy would want a lift if he couldn't fix his toy, work on his toy. I have no idea. So to me it -- like Page 143 Packet Page -502- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 Commissioner said, it's more of an industrial use than a retail use. And I'm looking at a compatibility issue of the surrounding areas. Under our Growth Management Plan that's one of the things we need to take a look at is the compatibility of uses. And this one doesn't have the smell test for compatibility for a residential. I don't care if it's multi-family residential, single-family residential, ALF residential. I can't see the comparable, that's my problem with this. And nobody has convinced me otherwise. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay, I'll just weigh in on this a little bit myself. And see, I was listening to all the -- I guess it was -- they were hoping for a Home Depot there originally, right? COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, a Lowe's. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: A Lowe's? Okay, fine. And I was thinking, my goodness, that is intense, with deliveries all night long and people picking up their construction projects and things in the morning. And I thought that would be difficult for any family to live with. This one sounded far less intrusive, far less intense, so I thought it was pretty good. And I think guys need a place to go, you know, where guys can, you know, man cave type of a thing. And so I was thinking of that -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: Where man is never wrong. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: That's right. We women stay away from it. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Rule three is refer to rule one. COMMISSIONER NANCE: I'm afraid that's a parallel dimension that's not in our Land Development Code. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: And what I thought was if this doesn't go through, then maybe they will get that shopping center that this lady talked about and they can have car shows there then, which is something they don't like to see, and they could have bars, and that's a Page 144 Packet Page -503- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 lot of noise all into the night. And I'm thinking, you know, I would try and think of the lesser of the two intense projects myself. But that's just where I was going. You're the Commissioner for the district. Go ahead. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Well, one of the things that -- you know, one of the questions early on I posed is look, this is not -- this is storage. It's not permitted in this zoning. Contrary to what staffs report is it's storage. It's storage. So it can go into an industrial. But this is a new beast in our -- coming to us. You know, it's a new use. Because it does have a recreational component. It is going to be used -- it does have lifts, there's storage and working on things, and it's much wider than just autos. And I think we need to really develop some standard and some industrial -- or some standards outside the industrial area if this is something that we want to entertain that's coming before us, because it's a brand new world. This is a new coming to us. But I can tell you how troubled I am, because it was auto and then I learned it was boats and then it was motorcycles and they can flush their boats and it's like a moving target. Ifs almost like what do you want me to be today, I'll be it so I can get through. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Maybe you can work that through with them so that the most intensive things would not be a part of this PUD. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Well, and again it's how is it going to be monitored? Who's going to -- and maybe it would incumbent upon the ownership. I think there's a lot of concern about whether things can be supervised. And unlike a shopping center, there's I don't remember how many units there are. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Are they expensive units? I remembered something like a couple hundred thousand dollars. And of course that doesn't limit one with how much -- you know, what they Page 145 Packet Page -504- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 want to put in, something of that price range. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I think it can be constructed with LLCs. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Do you know? MR. HOOD: Yeah, there's 148 total units individual right now, and they're going for about 230 to start. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: $230,000? I thought -- you're not going to be putting your old ramshackle something in there and store it. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: But when you think about the concept, just the visual concept of it, it's 138, did you say? MR. HOOD: 148. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: 148 closed doors. It's units where things are going on in those units. And I heard it again and again in the neighborhood meetings. They're nervous about it. What is going on there? Who's monitoring? What's happening? What if, what if, what if. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: So -- and it's fun to talk like this because you can actually talk and ask people questions. I like that. So what they are permitted to put there are the intensive units of a shopping center and things. I mean, they're already -- by right somebody can just go in and install a shopping center, right? I mean, that's what it's zoned for. So they would have no say about that, right? Okay, do you think that would be better for them? COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Some of the neighbors in these meetings said yes. You know, wouldn't it be great if I had a coffee shop or, they didn't want to say, a bar to go to. Wouldn't it be nice to have some facility so I don't have to get in my car and drive, it's right there. And there is some question whether the Lowe's was even allowed in the original zoning. It went through but there's a question whether Page 146 Packet Page-505- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 it's allowed. So I think we're kind of at an interesting place, but it is not a project I can support right now. I can't. I just can't. I think it's not -- as I say, I'm so uneasy about it, because it's been a moving target. They didn't come and say this is what I'm going to do and have us modify it. And the idea that they want to reduce that setback by five feet but not reduce the square footage in their units which they enlarged during this process, all this stuff is going on and I do not feel comfortable about it. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Commissioners, what do you want to do? COMMISSIONER HILLER: Close the hearing and have a vote. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Oh, I forgot to close the hearing. Thank you. MR. HOOD: Excuse me, sorry. Madam Chair, would you mind if I answered a couple of questions -- CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Please do. MR. HOOD: -- before we get to that point? I just wanted to start to look at Commissioner Taylor's concerns with the noise with boats. The use itself and the storage lifts were questions that we had that was discussed. Let me just start with the noise from the boats. That is something we looked at all of the uses that, you know, the boys toys that you could have that you would want to put into a garage. The major one is automobiles. We would like to be able to park automobiles in these garages. Boats was a secondary idea that got put into the PUD document. It's something that we could live without. Our developer has looked at it and there's not that many people that want to be storing boats in these types of units. They want to store their vehicles. It's -- so that's an issue we can take off the table right now and we don't have to talk about flushing motors, we don't have to talk about, you know, Page 147 Packet Page -506- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 pulling them in with tractor-trailers, whatever that happens to be. Another issue that came up was hours of operation for the flushing of the motors, for the delivery of vehicles, would these be open for 24 hours a day. There was a comment about storage facilities not being open 24 hours a day, storage facilities or rental facilities. These are condominium units that will be owned. To preclude someone from getting to their property for 24 hours is not something that we considered, but it is something that we could consider if that was a large issue that would help this move forward. Security gates. This project from the very beginning -- from the very beginning we looked at putting -- it was buildings one and two on the north and east side and on the west and south side that was all one building. We were trying to use those two buildings as our security so that you would not be able to move between buildings and go off property. What we've done instead of that, per the Planning Commission and the coordination with staff, is we've put several security gates at the entrances where the emergency access road is behind these buildings, we've put more security gates between these buildings now. There was an issue about the lifts. We're not looking at doing maintenance lifts where you put your car up on a hydraulic lift and you are draining your oil, you're dropping your motor, you're doing anything like that. These are storage lifts. You put them on a storage lift, they stay there. We're not looking at doing -- the people that are going to own these that are going to pay $230,000 for a unit, they're not looking to work on their cars. They have other people to work on their cars. I know that sounds kind of callous, but that's not what these units are for. They are for the parking of their high-end vehicles. That's it. So if we can put something into the document that says no maintenance lifts, we can do that as well. But these are just for Page 148 Packet Page -507- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 storage. That is the point of this whole project, parking cars that you don't have space to park in your three or four-car garage, but you have somewhere else to come here and put them on a storage lift. And if you want to put eight cars in your unit, you can. The number of units being bought by one or more people, we've come down from 10. We didn't even really want to say that we were going to have more than one person owning a unit. We put in 10 because at one of the neighborhood information meetings there was a question about well, how many people can own these and how many people are going to be able to have access to this? So we said, okay, we'll run the traffic impact statement at 10 members per unit to see what that does from an LOS standpoint or a traffic standpoint, to see what that would do to the right-of-way and to -- to the adjacent right-of-ways and what that would do to utilities. It still didn't rise to the level of 163 or 170,000 square foot shopping center. We were well below it. So for us to come down from the arbitrary 10 that we were requested to look at down to two I think was a major step from our developer. And if we had to go down to one person per unit, I think we could live with that. The subletting and management issues. That goes to our condominium documents. We will have condominium documents for this project. This will run basically like a commercial condominium with residential standards. You can't do certain things. There -- you can't do certain things after certain hours. You can't -- you know, you can't store more than eight cars in your unit. There will be a list of items into these documents that are being created right now that will control some of these issues that have been brought up. I hate to make the comparison between this being a hybrid commercial auto residential sort of community, but that's kind of what it is. We are looking at this to have a place to store your cars but that Page 149 Packet Page -508- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 also has rules that are set up like a residential community. We are trying to be good neighbors, we've, you know, looked at putting the wall being higher, we've looked at additional landscaping so that these buildings won't be seen as much from the right-of-way. We've looked at again the clubhouse component of it, it being a private garage, it being limited to the owners and their visitors only. We have tried very hard for the last two years to try and make this a perfect product. There's no other product like this in the country right now. We have done something that is well above what The Vault is doing right now, what Iron Gate is doing in Naperville, what the Autoplex Garage has done in Minneapolis. This is a far better project in my opinion and our developer's opinion. And I would just like to work with you all to come to a satisfactory conclusion on this project that we've been working very hard to bring a new use to Collier County. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Commissioner Nance? COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes, I -- you know, the urban coastal zone is going to build out. It's going -- if it builds out in traditional ways, you pretty much know what you can expect on that piece of property. And I think some of the uses are pretty intense. Now when you start talking about big box store, which as our population increases those are going to be more and more likely. You know, there's deliveries there with semi-trucks, there's recycling, there's dumpsters, there's forklifts, there's all kinds of stuff. That we understand and know about. This product, although I appreciate Commissioner Taylor's concerns about it, I can clearly see that it's developed. But, you know, from my third-party look at it, I mean, there's nothing like that in my district and I think in my lifetime it's very unlikely that there will be. But I think that, you know, this sort of a project has the opportunity to be very high end good neighbors. I don't think that this is likely to Page 150 Packet Page -509- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 attract an industrial sort of a clientele. I think this is a completely different concierge sort of an offering that does have -- I mean, this is my perspective, this is my gut level feeling on it. I believe that some of the people that testified that they like the project are forward thinking in that they honestly feel like this is going to be a better neighbor to them than one of the traditional C-3, C-4 sorts of intensity and use. So I certainly defer to the Commissioner of the district but I think there's a lot of things to like here under the right circumstances. And, you know, the fact that it's new to the area makes it problematic but that's okay, that's a good thing. I'm happy to see that somebody's thinking about other additional amenities here that are just --just add to the attractiveness of our area. So that's just my comment. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: I was also impressed that you were willing to work with the people. Like you said, so no boats then and you could have certain limitations for hours. I thought that was very good. And it certainly makes it a less intense project than what they might have to deal with. And afterwards they can't ever say oh, I wish we would have, because it's too late. So I too like the project, but I know -- because I think it's something that we don't have before us and how nice that you're bringing something of this quality. In a $230,000 parking area you're certainly not going to be sitting there working on junk. And so that -- and the caliber of people that you're going to get in there are going to be a different caliber of people too. MR. HOOD: Yes, ma'am. We're not looking at this to be a maintenance parking garage. That's not what we're looking at doing here. And just additionally, when the conversation came up about, you know, having a shopping center here, sure, that could have been here. That has not been proposed here for several decades now. We've got Page 151 Packet Page -510- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 two shopping centers that are at Santa Barbara and Radio right now. One of them is not doing as well as the other. But to put another one here that close, I don't know if that would work out. I don't have a crystal ball but sure, that could be here, but it hasn't been here yet. And we're looking at a new use that would operate as a great neighbor to an existing and well established residential community. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Well, I'll make a motion to approve, just to get the motion started. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Did you close the hearing? CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Oh, no, thank you. Good girl. You get a star for that one. I'd like to close the public meeting, please. And with that, I'll make a motion to approve. Okay, then do I hear another motion from anybody? COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: One of the things I had asked staff is if we could continue this and then staff develop criteria for what this really is. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Can I comment? COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Yes, I would be happy to do it. COMMISSIONER HILLER: This is an industrial use and it's incorporating -- CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Speak into the -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: It's really an industrial use and it's incorporating -- I mean, it's a bastardized definition of club and confusing residential in the mix. I just don't think -- it doesn't rise to the level of warranting a vote as a conditional use for this location. I mean, this might work in a different location, but it doesn't work in this location. I mean, I can't support this in this location on any level based on, you know, community commercial, what the definition of a private club is, you know, what currently is there. They're asking for an Page 152 Packet Page -511- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 increase of 50 percent in intensity. I mean -- CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: No, 50 percent less. COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, more. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: More. COMMISSIONER HILLER: More. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: And, you know, let's call an apple an apple and orange an orange. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right, exactly. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: It's not compatible because it doesn't fit in the zoning. COMMISSIONER HILLER: It doesn't. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: But it is a hybrid of a new use that's coming in and my thought was can we not make it compatible with this -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: No. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: -- and by doing that put in zoning or criteria. COMMISSIONER HILLER: We can't, because it's zoned. We have the standards. It's in the LDC. If we want to do something down the road and change our definitions, we can do that. But we don't have this for this. MR. KLATZKOW: I think the applicant's entitled to a yes or no at this point. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay, I can't support it. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Commissioner Henning? COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I make a motion to deny. COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'll second it. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Commissioner Henning? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay, what I was going to say is if you wanted to continue this to try to work with the applicant, put the onus on the petitioner instead of staff to make it compatible, that's one Page 153 Packet Page -512- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 thing. I think that's very noble. If you're going to deny it, deny it based upon it's not a compatible use -- COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Use. COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- to the neighboring properties or within the PUD. COMMISSIONER NANCE: Commissioner Henning, could you support it under some circumstances? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, here's the thing: The idea that it's a $200,000 unit, boys are boys, they still want to tinker, okay? I don't care how much money they got. If they got a toy, they're going to want to tinker with it. They're going to want to take off the exhaust and put on a baffled muffler on there so it makes it more throaty or whatever. COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's what I want to do with my car. And I'm not a boy. COMMISSIONER NANCE: Well, if the guy is working on his Bentley, is that really a bad thing? COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm losing my concentration here. So if you're going to have -- if you're going to allow it, it has to be restrictions that is within the PUD, not into the governance document, in making the management company responsible for enforcing the ordinance. MR. HOOD: Sir, we have that. It's in the ordinance that no major maintenance will be there. I can add the language that will say the management company will be responsible for it, but that base language is there. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, well, what's the definition of major? MR. HOOD: Engine overhaul, pulling your exhaust off and replacing it with another. Minor to me is changing oil. Page 154 Packet Page -513- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 COMMISSIONER HENNING: Minor, okay -- MR. HOOD: That's as far as I would see these people taking their car and, you know, pulling it into the driveway and putting it up on ramps and changing the oil. But I don't really see somebody who's going to go and buy a $350,000 Ferrari changing their own oil. It's a service that Ferrari's going to do for them so they're going to drive it to the dealership and they're going to drop it off and it's going to come back and it's going to sit in that garage. These are not the people that you're thinking of that are going to spend $250,000 who are going to have a, you know, '69 Chevelle that want to come in there and rehab their engine. They're not going to spend that kind of money to have a facility to do something like that. That's not our clientele that we're looking to have here. COMMISSIONER HENNING: In our -- CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Hang on. In our Land Development Code you have allowed in C-4 district minor repairs of automobiles. C-5 you have major repairs of automobiles. C-4 you can have a muffler shop. MR. HOOD: You can. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay? Now, if a guy wants to go there and polish it, all right, or change his oil, I don't see where that's going to be invasive to the neighborhood. But when you've got air tools, when you allow compressors, when you allow lifts to work on the vehicles and have compressors, you're going to have noise that is going to impact the neighbors. The problem is your petition hasn't addressed the compatibility issue for me. MR. HOOD: Compatibility insofar as being next to neighbors and potentially having compressors or compatibility insofar as the land use itself versus the residential land use that's -- Page 155 Packet Page -514- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 COMMISSIONER HILLER: I thought we closed the hearing. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right, this is land use compatible with the neighbors, and we're just having a dialogue of what that land use really is. MR. HOOD: Right. MR. WERCHEK: Could I address -- it's funny that you bring up the -- I'm sorry, Mike Werchek, I'm the developer of-- hopefully, maybe the developer of the project. But it's funny that the gentleman that was buying the five units, we started just kind of playing with how it might look inside. And I had suggested, I said, where are you going to put a lift somewhere? And he said, you know, I really don't want a lift. And I said, but a lift is like a tool box in a garage. Even if you never use it, it's cool. And it's something that just -- it's like an accessory. And our guys have no intentions of working. If there is a lift, it would be -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: It doesn't say anything in the Q' PUD document. MR. WERCHEK: But it does. It says that we cannot work on our vehicles at all. COMMISSIONER HENNING: You have -- no, you have -- you said major -- MR. WERCHEK: Going through it with the Planning Commission, it was left to where -- the way we stated it, it was more of what could be done in your garage at home or what you might do in your garage is what could be done here. COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm going to overhaul my engine in my garage. My tool box is -- MR. WERCHEK: You can't buy a unit from us. I'm sorry, Mr. Henning. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I'm not -- for $200,000 you know what I'm going to say? I'm going to do it out of my garage. Page 156 Packet Page -515- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 MR. WERCHEK: But, you know, you also look at the need for this in this community. COMMISSIONER HENNING: I don't disagree with it. I just think it's a compatibility issue. MR. WERCHEK: We build in the downtown district and we cannot get enough garages for the gentlemen. A lot of our communities have restrictions on their garages where they can't park outside overnight in a golf course community or a lot of communities. And what we looked to do here was to make it so many steps above what anyone else is doing in the country because we are in Naples. And I thought that we could have the finest facility ever built of this type, and this would be the place we could do it. I can't do this in other communities. I can't charge $231,000 for a base unit as a starting price and do that anywhere else but Naples. And that's why we took the time to lay the project out. Every 25 feet we jag in our out. And nobody does that with a commercial building because it costs too much money. We are again trying to have the flagship of all these garage facilities that are popping up across America, we wanted to have the one in Naples that everybody looked up to and said, that hands down is the best one that was ever built. And this is a community where we can do it, and this is an opportunity to do that. And also again to take care of our residents with something that is very, very much needed, which is storage for their vehicles. But the intent of working on them, I mean, our guys are -- they're not mechanics. And a lot of these cars, have you ever tried to work on a car, one of the new cars today? I can't even hardly find the oil filter or the dip stick. I mean, this isn't something that you work on a car today. They're so complicated. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, that's true. But these guys have muscle cars, okay. Your clientele is going to be in the Fifties and Page 157 Packet Page -516- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 Sixties. They're going to have muscle cars. And, you know, guys are guys. I had an automotive repair shop. I know your clientele. I used to fix their cars because they would work on them. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Folks, we've got a motion on the floor and a second. And it's been very interesting, but I think it's time to vote on that now. So the motion is on the floor and a second. Commissioner Taylor? COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: No, that's fine. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: All right. All those in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye. COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Opposed, aye. Motion is denied. COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, the petition is denied. The motion passes to deny the petition. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Thank you. Okay. MR. OCHS: Madam Chair, I think it's appropriate for a court reporter break at this time. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay. MR. OCHS: 15 minutes. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: 15 minutes sounds good. MR. OCHS: Thank you. (Recess.) Item #9B Page 158 Packet Page -517- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 ORDINANCE 2016-02: AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 2003-11 WITH CONDITIONS, THE EAST GATEWAY PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, BY ADDING 250 RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS TO BE DEVELOPED IN ADDITION TO THE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT ON THE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT AREA OR AS AN ALTERNATIVE TO INDUSTRIAL AND BUSINESS PARK DEVELOPMENT ON THE INDUSTRIAL BUSINESS PARK DEVELOPMENT AREA; BY CHANGING THE NAME OF THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT TO THE EAST GATEWAY MIXED USE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT; BY ADDING PERMITTED USES FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT; BY ADDING DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT; BY ADDING DEVIATIONS; BY REVISING THE MASTER PLAN; BY ADDING EXHIBIT B AND EXHIBIT C, ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY CROSS SECTIONS; BY REVISING DEVELOPER COMMITMENTS FOR THE PUD LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF DAVIS BOULEVARD AND WEST OF CR 951 IN SECTION 34, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA CONSISTING OF 37.35± ACRES; AND BY PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. PETITION PUDA- PL20140000548 — ADOPTED W/CHANGES MR. OCHS: Madam Chairman, you have a live mic. Ladies and gentlemen, please take your seats. Commissioners, we move now to Item 9.B. This item also requires ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission members, and all participants are required to be sworn in. This item is a recommendation to approve with conditions an ordinance amending Ordinance No. 2003-11, the East Gateway Planned Unit Development, by adding 250 residential dwelling units to Page 159 Packet Page -518- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 be developed in addition to the commercial development on the commercial development area or as an alternative to the industrial and business park development on the industrial business park development area. (All speakers were duly sworn.) CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Thank you. And ex parte from County Commissioners. We'll start with Commissioner Henning. COMMISSIONER HENNING: I spoke to Blake Gable and staff. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay, Commissioner Hiller? COMMISSIONER HILLER: I reviewed the backup material and I spoke to staff. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Very good. Commissioner Nance? COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes, I've read the staff report, I've had phone calls and discussions with Mr. Yovanovich, who's counsel for the petitioner, and I've had meetings and discussions with staff CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Commissioner Taylor? COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Yeah, I've had discussions with Mr. Yovanovich, a short discussion with Mr. Gable, and lengthy discussions with staff And with -- and The Conservancy, Nicole Johnson. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay, very good. And I've spoken with Rich Yovanovich and David Genson and also with Blake Gable, with Nicole Johnson, with April Olson with The Conservancy. I've spoken with a couple of the planning board members, and I read the staff report. Okay. MR. ARNOLD: Good afternoon, Commissioners. I'm Wayne Arnold, representing the applicant today. With me is Rich Yovanovich, counsel for the project; David Genson from the Barron Collier Companies, and Tim Hall with Turrell Page 160 Packet Page -519- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 Hall, our environmental consultant for the project. I'll put up an aerial for you. By way of orientation, this is about a 33.4-acre project located in your activity center number nine, which is located at Davis Boulevard between I-75 and Collier Boulevard. We're adjacent to partially developed industrial to the east and we have two residential multi-family projects located immediately west of us. The project that we're proposing is to add, as the title mentioned, 250 dwelling units to the previously approved commercial and industrial and business park PUD. And we've put in place some standards that have development standards appropriate for the residential and required buffering for the combination of uses. The CCPC had a lengthy discussion on our project and we had discussion that principally centered on two deviations, the recommended approval, subject to not agreeing with two of the deviations we requested. And one of those deviations has to do with on-site native vegetation preservation, and we are requesting a deviation to allow us to go off-site for a substantial portion of our on-site native vegetation requirement. The Planning Commission disagreed with our request and they were suggesting that we go in a direction that would preserve more on-site vegetation and go off-site with less vegetation. And we apologize for the late notice, but we have been working toward a new plan that would sort of go in the direction of the Planning Commission, and we have come up with a new master concept plan that would have a preservation requirement of our 7.7 acres. 6.37 acres would be on-site and then we would go off-site with about 1.35 acres. And let me just reorient you to the master plans so I can maybe talk about this deviation. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Wayne, can I ask for clarification, how are you revising this proposal? Page 161 Packet Page -520- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 MR. ARNOLD: We're revising our deviation request to preserve more vegetation on-site and to go off-site with -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: An acre and a half. MR. ARNOLD: 1.35 acres. COMMISSIONER HILLER: So less than one and a half acres. MR. ARNOLD: Right. COMMISSIONER HILLER: And still develop the same number of units notwithstanding. MR. ARNOLD: That's correct. Well, we've asked for a maximum of 250 units. In reality if they pursue a higher density single-family, that seems to be the market right now, they probably will net fewer units than proposed but the unit count is still suggested to be 250. COMMISSIONER HILLER: So the unit count remains the same? MR. ARNOLD: Correct. COMMISSIONER HILLER: And you're simply reducing the number of acres that you would transfer off-site. MR. ARNOLD: That's correct. COMMISSIONER HILLER: So you would keep like six acres on-site, transfer 1 .3 off-site? MR. ARNOLD: A little over six acres would be retained on-site. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. MR. ARNOLD: So before you is the master plan that depicts in the hatched shading area the preserve which goes up our western boundary and then along I-75. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Wayne, you're asking for an increase of units. MR. ARNOLD: Yes, we've asked for 250 total dwelling units. None are approved today. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, Commissioner Hiller just Page 162 Packet Page -521- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 asked you, you're asking for the same number of units and you said yes. MR. ARNOLD: Yes. Maybe I misunderstood. I thought it was in the context of if we're increasing the amount of on-site preserve are we decreasing the number of units in our request. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah, that's what the question was. The request for additional units is consistent with your original application. The 250 that you're asking for is the original number. What I wanted to find out was, was there going to be a change in that number of units because you're decreasing the number of acres that you're moving off-site. MR. ARNOLD: And the answer is we're keeping the 250 unit request. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. So that is consistent with the original application. MR. ARNOLD: This before you shows a preservation area along I-75 only and it was an area that would have allowed us to recreate 2.3 acres of vegetation on-site, get no credit for it and then mitigate off-site all 7.7 acres. Staff didn't like that suggestion, the Conservancy didn't like that suggestion. The Planning Commission seemed to be willing to allow us to take credit for the area we were recreating on-site. Staff was not supportive of that. So we've come up with our third option which is what I just described, and this would retain 6.37 acres on-site and then we would go off-site for 1.35 acres. So we are deviating from the code that would require us to preserve 7.7 acres on site. One of the things I think's important is the area we've identified for the off-site mitigation. The area that's lightly shaded with a labeling pointing to it actually is land that's owned by Barron Collier Companies, and we would use this to mitigate for a portion of this property and you're going to see a similar request for Creekside Page 163 Packet Page -522- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 Commerce Park coming forward. COMMISSIONER HILLER: You're offsetting it with 26 acres? MR. ARNOLD: Well, we would propose to do this at a one-to-one, because we do have another project that's in the pipeline where we would like to utilize a portion of this for that mitigation as well. COMMISSIONER HILLER: So you're going to take 1.3 acres out of this 26.3-acre site? MR. ARNOLD: Yes. And the area that's shaded in yellow is part of your Pepper Preserve out in Immokalee, Pepper Ranch. And the area that's shaded in purple is part of the South Florida Water Management District's conservation land holdings. So this actually connects to conservation area -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: And what is this 26 acres? MR. ARNOLD: It's right now zoned agriculture I believe with a mobile home overlay. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Continue, please. MR. ARNOLD: And just to wrap that up, it's my understanding that Nicole Johnson representing The Conservancy is here to withdraw their objection to our off-site mitigation request and would -- I wouldn't say support the project, but they would not object to the off-site mitigation of 1.35 acres of our preservation requirement. COMMISSIONER HILLER: So then the only issue is the additional units. MR. ARNOLD: Well, I don't think the additional units have been an issue for staff or Planning Commission. The only other deviation that was not supported by your Planning Commission was a request, we had two new road cross sections shown for the project, one for our commercial where we're deviating from the standard 60 feet to go down to a 54-foot wide right-of-way. Staff was supportive of that Page 164 Packet Page -523- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 request. We also asked for a deviation for the residential to allow sidewalk on one side only of the street. And the Planning Commission, I think it was in the -- we had been in the pipeline for quite some time when they had a discussion on sidewalks, and I know the Board has had some discussion on sidewalks. We believe that on these highly urban projects, and really, 250 units may sound like a lot, but it's of a smaller scale, that having a sidewalk on one side of that street is sufficient. We don't believe that it's necessary to have dual sidewalks on all of these communities. I mean, we've run the gamut of projects from 30 units to what is the maximum number of units where we need these, and we believe that having dual sidewalks is excessive for a project of this magnitude. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Thank you. Is that the end of your presentation? MR. ARNOLD: It certainly can be. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay, do we have the staff member here that wants to present? MR. ARNOLD: I did have a couple of other things I needed to add -- CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Oh, I'm sorry. MR. ARNOLD: -- if I could. Your staff had communicated with us just in the last day or so, asking us to add a condition with regard to transportation and interconnectivity. And Mr. Yovanovich has had that discussion I think with Mr. Casalanguida and Trinity Scott from your transportation planning group. And if I could read some language into the record? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Do you have a copy to put in the overhead. MR. ARNOLD: You know, I do, actually. Now I can't read it. Okay, this is a condition that generally replaces an existing Page 165 Packet Page -524- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 condition in the PUD. And it says: The portion of the joint access/frontage road/interconnection shown on the PUD master plan from the I-75 Alligator Alley CPUD located within the MPUD which conducts Bedzel Circle to the intersection of State Road 84/Davis Boulevard and Market Street shall be constructed to the property line prior to the issuance of the first certificate of occupancy for a residential unit or end commercial user. Temporary construction trailers, models and sales facilities shall be permitted prior to the completion of the frontage road. And that language is acceptable to us. It replaces some older generic language for interconnections that was in the original PUD. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Thank you. Okay, staff? MR. REISCHL: Thank you, Madam Chair. Fred Reischl with zoning division. We got the revised master plan on Friday and we didn't get a PUD, so we're basically looking at this the same time you are. We did have time to do a color rendering that shows that with the adjacent preserves, that will show you how the -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: There's a lot of preserve there. MR. REISCHL: That will show you how the proposed preserve here will connect to the adjacent preserve to the west and to the east. A couple of conditions that we saw over the last few days which I think I should bring to your attention. With this they would need an additional deviation to allow non-contiguous preserves, because that little area in the southwest -- COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Is noncontiguous. MR. REISCHL: And there are also changes due to Section 2.11, because that describes how the native vegetation is going to be preserved. So if you do decide to go with this altered master plan, those are some additional changes. Page 166 Packet Page -525- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay, thank you. MR. REISCHL: Thanks. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: How many speakers do we have, Troy? MR. MILLER: We have two registered speakers. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay, would you call them? MR. MILLER: Your first speaker is Jane Cheffy. She'll be followed by Nicole Johnson. MS. CHEFFY: Hi. Good afternoon, Commissioners. I'm really not quite sure where we stand with the deviation on the sidewalks, because I understand now that the petition is going to be amended or has been amended. So I'm going to just make a statement based on the assumption, and I could be wrong, that they're still asking for a deviation regarding sidewalks on both sides of a residential street that has housing on both sides of the residential street. And basically I just want to say that Naples Pathways Coalition is who I'm here on behalf of and that we do support having more and better and safer pathways and infrastructure that is conducive to people getting out and walking and exercising and being more active. We think that when you have a brand new community that's being planned, it's not the time to be eliminating elements of your infrastructure that is conducive. This is a new age. We people now realize that we're all obese and people don't get enough exercise, and we look at our infrastructure and it's just not conducive to getting out in the beautiful outdoors that we have here and exercising. And so why sidewalks on both sides of the street? Well, I believe, and PC believes, that it's more conducive to come outside the door of your home and get onto the sidewalk, whether you're walking, whether you're wheeling in a wheelchair, whether you're wobbling in a walker, to be able to get going and get the exercise, the outdoor air and just health in general. I think it's more conducive. I think that a person Page 167 Packet Page -526- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 in a wheelchair with a walker or a child being required to cross the street to get to a sidewalk, that's just an impediment that we don't really have to approve at this point. This is a brand new development. And any time you have to retrofit and put in sidewalks, that's extremely, extremely expensive. I personally have driven around and looked at communities that have sidewalks on one side of the street, and I notice that the driveways on the other side of the street don't match up. So it isn't as if you wheel your wheelchair down your driveway and go straight across to the next sidewalk. It's usually then you have to go down the road a ways until you find the ramp, basically, the driveway, to get up to get to the sidewalk. So that is my statement on behalf of Naples Pathways Coalition. Thank you. MR. MILLER: Your final speaker on this item is Nicole Johnson. "' MS. JOHNSON: Good afternoon. For the record, Nicole Johnson, here on behalf of The Conservancy of Southwest Florida. And from an environmental perspective, this project really highlights the issue of on-site preserves. Specifically do urban preserves have value. And we appreciate the fact that staff included our very lengthy comment letter in your backup materials. And while the letter is lengthy, I think that everything can really be summed up by saying the mosaic of preserves within the urban area of Collier County is extremely important from both an environmental and a quality of life perspective. And it makes Collier County the unique and beautiful place that it is today. And some of the maps that we included I think really show you the picture. These are all of the preserves that we have in the urbanized area west of 951. And there's a lot of green on that map. Page 168 Packet Page -527- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 Therefore, we were concerned by the applicant's unwillingness during the Planning Commission hearing and their consent agenda meeting to not even acknowledge that on-site preserves were important for their project. The Planning Commission, in an attempt to find a compromise, did recommend allowing the proposed 2.5 acres of scrape-down water management area to count towards the native vegetation requirements. And that was certainly a generous compromise. The Conservancy wasn't opposed to looking at that, but we were pleased that albeit at the 11th hour the applicant has come forward with a revised master plan that includes over six acres retained on site of the native vegetation. It would require a deviation of about 1.35 acres off-site and -- but this is actually more on-site native vegetation preserve than the Planning Commission recommendation, because those 2.5 acres that would have been scraped down are going to be retained as is. So because this exceeds what the Planning Commission recommended, The Conservancy is not objecting to this revised master plan and we do appreciate the fact that the applicant has finally come around on this. And I want to end with the project really illustrates I think two important points: First of all, we do appreciate that the applicant has proposed a revised master plan, making the changes just several days before the BCC hearing. But really, this is not the process that we want to be following in Collier County. These sorts of things really needed to be discussed with staff prior to the Planning Commission or at least at the Planning Commission so that what comes to you has been thoroughly vetted and isn't sort of the messy process that you have today. And I think the second point is that projects can still be economically viable and marketable while preserving native vegetation on site. A lot of the feedback we got during the Planning Commission Page 169 Packet Page -528- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 hearing was they couldn't preserve anything on-site and be marketable. And I think that this revised master plan shows that you can have both your preserve and your development. So we appreciate their revisions and appreciate the opportunity to comment. Thank you. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Are you going to close the public hearing? CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: No, I'm not, as a matter of fact. Do you have anything else to add? MR. ARNOLD: Well, I think I would add only with respect to the sidewalks. Part of our discussion over time has been that -- our view is that you also create potential conflicts of people backing on driveways onto the sidewalk on both sides of the street and that's not necessarily the best scenario either. Our streets are 20 feet wide. It seems like it's an opportunity to cross the street to get to the sidewalk for certain sized communities. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Can I comment? CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: No, actually -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: I want to talk about the sidewalk issue. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: We'll just -- we've got three other people's lights on. But you're one of them. You're the third one. Commissioner Taylor? COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Yes. It kind of works on Tenth Street. Sidewalks on both sides of the street, narrow streets, lots of driveways. They don't have a problem. It's been there for -- probably it's the oldest working class neighborhood in the City of Naples. I don't agree. I know we tried to do this before, I think Mr. Yovanovich was the attorney at the time, with another development. We need sidewalks. I can't not support this if we do not get rid of the sidewalk deviation. Page 170 Packet Page -529- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 And also, the LDC says an acre maximum off-site. We have an LDC, that's what we need to follow. And I can't support it unless it conforms to the LDC in that area. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Thank you. Commissioner Henning? COMMISSIONER HENNING: The proposed land to do the off-site mitigation, is it being used for any other kind of mitigation? MR. ARNOLD: No, sir. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Is it being proposed for use of any other mitigation? MR. ARNOLD: Not that I'm aware of. And I'm sure we can get confirmation. The client is saying absolutely not. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. The proposed language added by staff, are you proposing that that's a deviation of road width and sidewalk also? MR. ARNOLD: Well, we are asking for two road crossings. The county code requires a minimum of 60 feet for local streets. And that's what both these roadways, whether it's the residential or commercial, would be. We're asking for 54 feet in width for the commercial and down to -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: Even for this? MR. ARNOLD: Yes. And 40 feet for the residential component. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, see, I just don't know how that works, because I know that interconnection is going to serve a larger area, more traffic. And I don't know if that six feet really makes a difference as far as right-of-way. MR. CASALANGUIDA: Do you have a copy of the cross-section of the street? We can put it on the viewer. It's got at least 12-foot lanes and it's in probably pretty good shape. It's got 12-foot lanes. Page 171 Packet Page -530- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 MR. ARNOLD: Yeah, it does have 12-foot travel lane and it has dual sidewalks through the commercial component. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay, there will be dual sidewalks on this portion of it but not dual sidewalks on what now? MR. ARNOLD: We've specified that the commercial portions would have the dual sidewalks. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right. MR. ARNOLD: And then on the residential only there would be a sidewalk on one side of the street only. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Is that eight-foot sidewalk? MR. ARNOLD: No. COMMISSIONER HENNING: What is that? MR. ARNOLD: The sidewalk shown on each side of that cross-section are five feet wide. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Five foot. MR. ARNOLD: Uh-huh. COMMISSIONER HENNING: And that's the standard? MR. ARNOLD: Yes, sir. MR. CASALANGUIDA: For local, yes. COMMISSIONER HENNING: For -- okay. So if you propose a sidewalk on one side for residential, what is the width going to be for that? MR. ARNOLD: It's proposed at five feet as well. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, I'm not sure five feet will work for both sides of the street. I mean, I can understand the deviation if you're going to have wider sidewalks. I mean, five foot is basically -- that's hard for one person to passing -- let's say an old man pushing a stroller and -- MR. CASALANGUIDA: Who would that be? COMMISSIONER HENNING: I don't know. And his neighbor coming the other way. Page 172 Packet Page -531- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 MR. ARNOLD: Would it be helpful -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: I don't think it is. MR. ARNOLD: -- if we increased the residential sidewalk on one side to six feet wide, would that be better? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I'm not sure if that's appropriate or not. I know five foot wouldn't be appropriate. But a six-foot -- or should it be eight foot? COMMISSIONER HILLER: It's no longer a sidewalk at eight feet. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Six-foot -- MR. ARNOLD: Yeah, five and six feet are your pretty good common sidewalk widths. COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's correct. I mean, eight feet is CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Commissioner Hiller, I think you're next. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, wait a minute. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: I'm sorry. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I'll wait for anybody else, what do they think about -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: So I sit on the statewide advisory board to the Department of Transportation for Pathways and Bicycle Safety and I work very closely with Billy Hattaway who has defined what complete streets are. And he came to speak to us and we had a workshop on it. And it's very clear that the Pathways Coalition, notwithstanding that they were present when he presented, didn't hear what he said. And he was very clear that two sidewalks in a development are not a requirement to have a complete street. In fact, to Commissioner Taylor's point, I walk out of my door in one of the oldest residential neighbors in the county and it's Pine Ridge Page 173 Packet Page -532- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 Estates, and we have no sidewalks. And I will tell you there are no sidewalks needed at all. At all. In our neighborhood everybody walks off their driveway, walks on the road, runs on the road, cycles on the road. There's no conflicts, no issues, no problems. The point being is that it turns on the volume of traffic, the pedestrian traffic, the car traffic. It does make sense to have two sidewalks in the commercial area where you have more traffic and you have more pedestrians. But in the residential areas where you have very light traffic and very few pedestrians, it doesn't make sense to have sidewalks on both sides. That doesn't increase walkability. It doesn't encourage more people to exercise. I will agree with Commissioner Henning, you know, increasing it to six feet does make more sense. I mean, I'm very familiar with the comfort level because I've looked at it from the perspective of my involvement with him and working on this whole issue. Eight feet is no longer a sidewalk. You know, now you're moving into like a multiuse pathway, which is not what the intent is via residential area. That's completely different. That's more along the lines of, you know, when we're trying to build a large corridor for multiuse activity in front of a bunch of high-rises. It's a very different pathways concept. But Commissioner Henning is correct, I mean, moving from five to six feet would make sense. Having a sidewalk on one side and not on the other actually promotes better usability because then on the other side you can have people actually like cycling and you would actually have like one side where people are cycling, one side where people are actually walking on the sidewalk and then the cars going in between. Otherwise your road just becomes very cramped and it doesn't work well. I have to say that first of all I'm happy you made the adjustment on the preserve, but secondly I don't see this issue about the sidewalks as an issue which would justify denial. This is not a deviation. The Page 174 Packet Page -533- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 way our code is currently written is overly restrictive and doesn't contemplate what the Department of Transportation is considering by way of its complete roads concept. And we have agreed to adopt that, we did that in our workshop, we talked about it here at the Board level and that's what we have to respect. I mean, it makes perfect sense. You have to look at every situation and tailor your sidewalks and your pathways and your bike lanes based on the traffic of both pedestrians, cyclists and cars within that unit. So yeah, I just wanted to get that on the record. Because there's absolutely nothing wrong and nothing that takes away from promoting healthy living by having a sidewalk on one side. MR. ARNOLD: Commissioner Hiller, I agree with you on many of those points and I would just reaffirm that the typical cross-section that we have in our Land Development Code is for a local public street. These are not typically public streets we're asking for the deviation from. This likely will be a gated community, it doesn't connect anywhere else, so there is no connectivity of the residential to something else. They have to come through the commercial to get out of the project to an adjacent industrial project. So when we talk about these deviations for sidewalks, a lot of it becomes buyer profile. We ask for these for builders because half of the buyers would like a sidewalk on one side of the street, half the people seem to not want a sidewalk. COMMISSIONER HILLER: They don't. And I know that for a fact because I'm an example of someone who doesn't like the sidewalk on my side of the street because I don't want to have, you know, a parade of traffic walking in front of me. If there's a choice, one side or the other, I would go for the non-sidewalk side. And that's true. I mean, it's good to give people choices. And I really have to say, in light of the configuration of this development Page 175 Packet Page -534- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 having two sidewalks on the commercial side and one sidewalk, you know, expanded to six feet on the residential side makes sense. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Thank you. Would you like to go next? I was going to go next but you can certainly go first. COMMISSIONER NANCE: Well, I just want to chime in on the dual side -- you know, if two sidewalks are indicated because the volume is there and the need's there, I certainly support it. But I don't think it should be required just out of pocket. Because you remember, when you have a small development like this, if you put in more impervious surface and sidewalk that you really don't need, what's taken up is green space. It's taken up with plantings or room for a tree to develop properly or so on and so forth. So there is every reason to make a calculated determination on the need for two sidewalks. Two sidewalks per se are not necessarily better than one. It depends on the need and what you're exchanging for that paved surface. COMMISSIONER HILLER: I really like what you just said about the fact that -- COMMISSIONER NANCE: Well, think about it, it's not going to be some other pavement. You're going to lose grass or shrubbery or tree space or -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: You are taking away from green space. And that's important. I mean, we need as much open space as possible for, you know, water. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay, now it would be my turn and thank you for that. First of all, when I talked to the developer originally and they didn't want to leave much of the preserve I was kind of shocked, because they back right up next to I-75 and all that truck traffic noise all night long. And when you eliminate the preserve you don't have any buffer from all that. And I said, are you sure you're building Page 176 Packet Page -535- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 homes back there? It sounded like it would be commercial. No, we're building homes. I said, you know, that just wouldn't work. In my estimation, I would never want to buy a home backed up next to I-75. And they said you know what, you're probably right. So we came to talking about that a little bit. And I felt much better about that when they increased that preserve a great deal, back to just about what it should have been. I would have liked to have them just leave one acre -- take one acre off-site according to the Land Development Code and stick right with the LDC. The second thing is, and I'm just as passionate as the others are about sidewalks. We have in our LDC sidewalks on both sides of the street. You're finding more and more people all the time, every time I come home from work they're walking their dogs, they're walking up and down the street, people are getting their exercise even if it's just in their own neighborhood. Which is a great thing. I have -- this one couple, they ride on one scooter, it's for a disabled scooter, and the woman rides alongside of him holding on. She's sitting on part of the seat and they walk down together. But I mean at least they're doing that. But on our street, when my community was built in '74, they didn't put any sidewalks in. And finally they put sidewalks in a few years later but only on one side. So everybody that is on my side has to go over across the street. Now you've got an open roadway where people could be hit by cars because they have to keep crossing over to the other sidewalk. And everybody's -- they're kind of crowded on those little sidewalks because you've got so many people walking. I believe that we should stick to what our Land Development Code says. And once we deviate just once, and I'm going to say that again, once we deviate once everyone that's going to come in is going to say nope, we only want it on one side. And I just don't think that's Page 177 Packet Page -536- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 the way to go. If we want to talk about it at some kind of a workshop if you want to change that, fine, but right now Land Development Code says sidewalk on two sides. I don't mind that it's a five-foot sidewalk, at least people can ride on both sides or walk on both sides or whatever. But I'm sticking with that. And so I would say, I'd like to make a motion to approve this -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: You have to close the hearing. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Oh, yes, there we go. I keep forgetting to close the hearing. Thank you for you and your poking of the stick. I'll get it, though. Okay. So with that, I will close the public hearing. Okay. Do I need to pound a gavel or anything? MR. ARNOLD: Could I just add one thing, Commissioner Fiala? CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Yeah. MR. ARNOLD: With regard to the one acre of off-site preserve, that's part of the reason we're asking for the deviation to go with the 1.35. And that's not a new number. Apparently that's been a number that's been supported by this Board previously and by staff. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: It's a different day, sir. Not this Board. Not me. COMMISSIONER HILLER: But legally we can't support similarly situated petitions differently. We can't say okay, we're going to do it for A but not do it for B and it's exactly the same set of facts. MR. YOVANOVICH: What I would ask you to consider -- Rich Yovanovich for the record -- is what Nicole said, which was we're actually giving you more on-site native preserve by not using the water management area for preserve, as your Planning Commission originally recommended to you. So we're doing more than the Planning Commission recommended with this second proposal. Also, and I think we shared this with Commissioner Fiala, the Page 178 Packet Page -537- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 unit price change by bringing this preserve on-site, we had an average selling price of 281 before, we're now at 307 in the after because we went to what we proposed. We'll probably lose another unit or two which would further bump up the purchase price of these units by losing that sliver and being able to count it. The reason we're counting it -- and if you look at where that sliver is and what it's adjacent to off-site, that's where there's some lower income housing, so we strategically put that in that location to further enhance this project. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: I think you have a better chance of getting a better price now that you've got preserves buffering them from the main highway. MR. YOVANOVICH: So what we're asking is, is -- the 1.35 is in line with what has been approved before. And what we're proposing is greater than what your Planning Commission asked us to keep on site. So we understand the sidewalks. You know, if we've got to trade one for the other, you know, we'll go to sidewalks on both sides, but it's really important for the off-site preserve to keep these units in -- and again, I told you what the difference of the price points are. And we're asking you to, if you'll go with that tradeoff, one sidewalk on both sides with the 1.35 acres off-site. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: I could make a motion to approve that, as a matter of fact. Do I have a second? COMMISSIONER NANCE: I'll second it. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay. So I have a motion and a second to keep the preserves as they have proposed, the latest proposal, let me say that, and the sidewalks on both sides. COMMISSIONER HENNING: I have questions. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Yes. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Wayne, where has this been done before? Page 179 Packet Page-538- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 MR. ARNOLD: I'm not certain. It was mentioned to us by your staff. MR. CASALANGUIDA: Collier 36 on the east side of Collier Boulevard, just north of Vanderbilt, around that area. It was 1.36 as part of a deviation. MR. OCHS: One time? MR. CASALANGUIDA: One time. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Would you prefer to change the motion, Commissioner Henning? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, yeah, I do. The motion is the deviation for the sidewalk on one side? CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: No, no. COMMISSIONER HILLER: You're going to do sidewalks on both sides? CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Yes. COMMISSIONER HENNING: The --just added the off-site -- CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: I'm sorry, I can't hear Commissioner Henning. COMMISSIONER HENNING: That the off-site mitigation property will not be used for any other mitigation purposes? MR. ARNOLD: Yes. COMMISSIONER HENNING: In other words, no double dipping. MR. YOVANOVICH: We understand the no double dip comment. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: I got that same impression when he was first making his presentation. I know where you're going, because when he said we'll use that elsewhere, right? MR. YOVANOVICH: When we say elsewhere, we have a couple of other projects. We're not looking to use it for Water Management District mitigation or Corps mitigation, but there are Page 180 Packet Page -539- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 other projects where we're forming kind of our own mitigation bank, if you will, for other projects. So that 20-acre piece that we just identified, we'll be using more of it but we won't be using it for other agencies. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. And the added language for the cross-section that was put out there? MR. CASALANGUIDA: The interconnection. COMMISSIONER HENNING: For the interconnection. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Yes, that has to be -- I thought that was already a part of it. I'm sorry, if it wasn't I do want to add that. The interconnect is a strong part of our thrust forward. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay, so now let me see if I can restate that, and thank you for your guidance there. My motion is to approve it with the preserves as recently proposed, taking 1.35 off-site -- not that I'm crazy about that, but I'm willing to go with that -- and sidewalks on both sides of the street, and the interconnect in place. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Madam Chair, may I speak to the 1.35? CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Sure. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: We were talking about how infill is happening within the urban area. And if we keep allowing the camel to get into the tent inch by inch by inch, at some point it just keeps growing. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: So what you're saying is? COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Hold to the LDC. If we want to change the LDC, let's change the LDC. We have a guide, let's just do it. Because it's open space, it's urban. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Would you like to make the motion? COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: If you would just modify your Page 181 Packet Page -540- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 motion that -- CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Just for one acre on-site and period -- rather one acre off-site of preserve? MR. YOVANOVICH: If I'm allowed to respond? CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: You can. MR. YOVANOVICH: Thank you. Well, then you may as well just eliminate the deviation process from the Land Development Code in the first place. Because all we're asking for is a deviation to a stated Land Development Code provision. You have a process to ask for deviations, because you recognize that one size doesn't always fit. So that's why we have a deviation process. We're talking about a very specific piece of property here in a very specific location. I would say why would you change your entire code when you see very few requests for deviations from the native preservation requirements through this process. And sometimes they make sense and sometimes they don't. We think it does on this particular piece of property in this specific location. And how often do you see The Conservancy not opposing a request for an off-site deviation like you see right now? And they are an environmental advocacy group and they're not saying don't do this. And I believe the Planning Commission said on the record had we made this as part of our original approach they would have been fine with 1.35 acres off-site. So I would ask you -- you have a deviation process in place so you can look at specific situations. What I think Commissioner Taylor is saying is don't allow deviations at all. Well, then you may as well take that out of the Land Development Code. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: No, sir, what I'm saying is this is 2016, not 2009. And development is back with a roar. And if we don't hold the line with open space -- MR. YOVANOVICH: You'll have open space. We're not Page 182 Packet Page -541- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 changing the open space. 60 percent of open space will be met. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: That's right, but we do have a framework by which we can judge how much open space our community would require or request in a guiding document called the Land Development Code. That's what I'm saying. MR. YOVANOVICH: It is guiding, and we're asking for a .35 acre deviation. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Commissioner Henning, this is your district. Do you have any comments on that? COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, I understand what Commissioner Taylor is saying. But each incident is different. And if you take a look at -- this is not green space, this is preserve. And it's adjacent to I-75. All it is is buffering I-75. Preserves are -- I don't know what native species would want to be near I-75 except for a homeless person. That's it. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Except for what? COMMISSIONER HENNING: A homeless person. I mean, that's -- you're not going to find a panther, you're not going to find a black bear. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: But you'll find birds and things. COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, you know, I go down -- I live right on -- right by there. There's no birds in the woods. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay, well, anyway -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: Would you want to be next to I-75? CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: No, that's why I wanted the preserves there. COMMISSIONER HILLER: And interestingly enough, there are so many residential communities that abut 75. You know, I believe there are a number of Divosta communities, like Village Walk which is right on 75 and doesn't have a buffer and the people who live in those Page 183 Packet Page -542- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 homes are quality people and are fine with the location they live in. You know, this notion that you can't abut a major road or highway is flawed. It exists all throughout. I mean, we've got even retirement homes that abut these kinds of roads. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Commissioner Nance? COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yeah, I just want to make one little comment. I think there's a very important distinction that we need to make going forward in our communities regarding open space and green space and preserves. When I look at that map and I see that little .4 acre down there that's titled preserve, I want to tell you, ladies and gentlemen, as a preserve that has absolutely zero value. .4 acre is a wet spot that's going to breed mosquitoes and it's not going to support anything. It could be classified as green space, it could be classified as a buffer. But as a preserve, if we're creating preserves like that we are fooling ourselves and leaving ourselves to error. I would much rather see that .4 acres added to our holdings out in the east where there is a critical mass of area that is actually a valuable environment and ecological entity. That .4 acres there is wasted. If we have 100 of those in our inventory and we think we have 40 acres of preserve, I'm sorry, but we're just fooling ourselves. So, you know, I don't mind making thoughtful adjustments. You know, the preserve up there next to 75, I agree with Commissioner Henning, I don't think it's going to have a lot of value, but at least it's got six acres of contiguous area and it does have certainly more value than a whole bunch of little bitty what I just call wet -- they're just wet spots, they're drainage ditches as far as I'm concerned. They're not really anything of any value. They're nothing to be proud of in Collier County relative to the other 78 percent, 1.4 million acres that we have that's quality, quality preservation and protection from development. Page 184 Packet Page -543- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 So I'm just saying, we need to think seriously about what we're doing, and encourage -- if developers wants to add to our holdings in the east, we need to seriously listen to their offers, because those are going to be significant preserves for our community in perpetuity and they're not going to be little wet spots. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: And I agree, but you know what? As we're building out we need to have green space here in the rural area. COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes, ma'am, we need green space but we don't need wet holes that nobody can do anything with. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Well, that one's pretty small, I agree. So the motion is on the floor. MR. OCHS: Madam Chair? MR. REISCHL: Madam Chair, if I could just reiterate the other changes that are required if this motion goes through? CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay. MR. REISCHL: Would be a deviation for noncontiguous preserves, if that's how you decide to go. And there are several changes to Section 2.11 of the PUD in addition to the interconnection language that was discussed previously. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay, so let me see if I understood what you actually just said, okay? Because I'm a little slow when it comes to that. Okay, so what he said was yes, the motion was okay, to keep those preserves as we've said and yet give them 1.35 off-site. Not that I'm nuts about that, by the way. I would have said none, but I'm being Donna nice guy here. The second thing is we have sidewalks on both sides of the streets, and the third thing is we have interconnectivity. That's what my motion says. And I make a motion to approve that. COMMISSIONER NANCE: And noncontiguous preserve, right? Yes. Page 185 Packet Page -544- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 MR. OCHS: This small preserve, it is not contiguous to other preserves, so it just needs deviation language to allow -- MR. REISCHL: Right. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: So I need to put that in my motion too? MR. OCHS: Yes. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay, fine. That little piece of wet spot is also -- okay, do I have a sec-- I had a second in Penny Taylor. Do I still have that second? COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: You do. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay, fine, I have the second. COMMISSIONER HENNING: And deviations from Section 2.13 of the ordinance. What else? COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: They stand as written. COMMISSIONER HENNING: They stand as written? COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Right? MR. OCHS: No. COMMISSIONER HENNING: No. MR. ARNOLD: I think what -- I'm sorry, for the record, Wayne Arnold. I think what Mr. Reischl was referring to, there's some cleanup language that we need to put in the preserve section of the PUD document to reflect the off-site preserve of 1.35 acres. It's some language cleanup to make it consistent with your motion. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Okay. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Very good. If there's any melaleuca or anything, you have to take that out of the preserve, right? MR. ARNOLD: Correct. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: I mean, I know that that's standard, but I thought I'd just mention it anyway. Page 186 Packet Page -545- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 Okay, very good. So the motion is on the floor, the second is agreeing. All those in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye. COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: So that's a 5-0. Thank you very much. MR. ARNOLD: Thank you very much. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Commissioner Fiala, I just want to make a comment. I'm really concerned. You know, the point of having the right to petition the Board for deviations is essential. We will never be able to write a code that in every instance is going to apply fairly to every landowner that comes before us. It is absolutely essential that we be practical and pragmatic in how we look at the code and look at each individual petitioner. I mean, it's not a one size fits all. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: No, but the rest of the deviations we approved. COMMISSIONER HILLER: But the double sidewalk is not what is intended by complete streets. And to say that it's in the code and therefore we must do it and unless we change the code that's how we should apply it doesn't make sense. I've been studying this -- CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Yes, but you live in a very exclusive neighborhood and things are different in your neighborhood. COMMISSIONER HILLER: My neighborhood was the working class neighborhood of unincorporated Collier County. That is where Collier's workers lived. Page 187 Packet Page -546- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Please. COMMISSIONER HILLER: The value of the properties today is not reflective, but that's not the issue. The issue is, is that we have to be flexible on complete streets. We can't sit there and require every development, notwithstanding the traffic -- CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: We need to get going because it's 4:08. COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- to have two sidewalks. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay, now on to the next one. I'm sorry, but -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: It's a waste. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: -- we could beat this horse to death even more, but that's silly. So on to 11.A? Item #11A THE PROPOSED PARKS AND RECREATION DIVISION FEE POLICY IN ORDER TO ESTABLISH GUIDANCE FOR FUTURE FEES FOR SERVICES — APPROVED MR. OCHS: Yes, ma'am. That is a recommendation to accept and approve the proposed Parks and Recreation Division fee policy in order to establish guidance for future fees for services. Mr. Williams, your Parks and Recreation Division Director, will present. MR. WILLIAMS: Madam Chairman, Commissioners, Barry Williams, Parks and Recreation Director. Just wanted to start by saying that what we have in front of you is not a request to raise or lower fees. What we're looking for, and we've worked with a consultant, Public Resources Management Group, and I Page 188 Packet Page -547- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 have Thierry Boveri here with us who has a presentation that he can go through. But what we're looking for today is a recommendation to you to adopt a philosophy of how we bring fees forward in the future. And part of the discussion that we've had over the years, we bring the fee policy to you from time to time. On average our cost recovery or the amount of money of our operating budget that's captured by user fees is roughly 37 percent. So we will bring you recommendations from time to time, we'll look at the cost of the service and we'll also make recommendations on what we think the cost recovery should be. But we don't really have a framework to operate from. And so what we've done in this consultant's work is looked around the country at Parks and Rec divisions and how they've approached this. And I hope what you see in your backup documentation is information that's consistent with how your current fee policy has been devised. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: You're way ahead of Lee County in cost recovery, way ahead of Palm Beach County. I don't know about the City of Naples or Marco Island, but you've done pretty well there. But yeah, it's good that you I think -- I think, anyway -- that you take a good look at it and then share with us what your conclusions are. MR. WILLIAMS: Yes, ma'am. And the importance of that has been the recession. And the recession, if you have a cost recovery that's low, you're vulnerable to a reduction in service. So you're able to ride kind of the waves of the business cycles that our community goes through when you have a fairly healthy robust fee policy. But again, what we wanted to do today was to introduce you to Thierry Boveri. He does have a presentation we wanted him to walk through with you, if that would be okay. Page 189 Packet Page -548- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Sure. MR. WILLIAMS: Okay, let me turn it over to Thierry. MR. BOVERI: Good afternoon, members of the Commission. My name is Thierry Boveri. I'm with Public Resource Management Group and I have a very brief presentation to discuss the cost recovery policy. A little bit -- I think under a year ago we were here to discuss the findings of a rate study that we were commissioned to perform for the Parks and Recreation Department which identified some of what was discussed with respect to the cost recovery of all the existing fees. What we find is, is that the majority of parks and recreational departments across the country typically under-recover with respect to the fees that they charge relative to the services that they provide. This is common. That's because a lot of the services that may be offered, there may not be an exchange-based transaction to which you can recover a particular fee, and therefore for the existing fees that we do charge, we try to evaluate and develop a methodology for assigning and developing a fee. A lot of times this can be an arbitrary process trying to assign and particular fee at a particular level of cost recovery. What we seek to try to do today with the proposal of a cost recovery policy is to develop a methodology that brings forward a formula to identify how you would go about setting a particular fee and recover a certain level of cost. As a result of the 2014 fee study that was developed last year and then presented was a recommendation to develop this cost recovery policy, which we're here today, and also include an index provision for existing fees to keep pace with inflation as the cost of services goes up annually. The policy goals associated -- that kind of guided how it was developed included that it should be practical to where staff can Page 190 Packet Page -549- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 calculate the individual fees, it needs to be transparent, and the end result needs to be reasonable. And ultimately needs to reflect the county's values and strategic initiatives. So in development of the policy, we tried to incorporate certain elements of that, which I'll discuss when I explain how this fee formula works on the cost recovery percentage. So as you see here on this breakout of the formula, the first element of the policy would seek, in terms of the methodology, would seek to identify the particular cost of service, which includes the fixed cost and indirect cost. It doesn't include any of the capital costs as an outcome of the last year's study, strictly the operating costs that we're looking at. Once the direct costs have been identified, we try to compare that service relative to a series of five different criteria that range from how much the service might benefit the community, so in other words if a particular service affected a greater number of the population within the community, that that service would receive a more preferential reduction in the cost recovery in design of the fee than another fee that would be very individualistic. So, for example, if you had a swim class that's being offered to the population at all the different various pools versus a very specialized highly advanced training class in karate, for example, you're going to provide a greater reduction to the required cost recovery for the swim class than you would for the karate class. And that allows you a methodology for assigning how you want to divvy up the monies that aren't being generated from the user fees relative to the monies that you receive from the general fund in order to provide all the services that you provide now. Other elements within the criteria for the cost recovery policy: In addition to the community benefit relate to -- excuse me. Relate to youth and senior benefits, how it provides benefits to the youth or Page 191 Packet Page -550- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 senior. If there's a benefit to the disabled or the disadvantaged and whether it provides a safety or educational benefit. And all those are laid out in detail within the policy. So once we identify the cost service then we apply this cost recovery factor, based on the type of service. We divide it by the number of identified billing units to come up with a rate for the associated service that we may be offering. And then there is consideration that's listed here as a market factor. What that is, is if a particular service that you're providing has high participation but staff identifies that the cost recovery is very low and it meets all these other criteria and maybe the fee is reasonable up until the point where we consider a market factor, we might decide at that point utilizing this market factor to raise the fee, because we can. And the reason why we would want to do that is because we have high participation, we can increase the revenue to the system. That means that we can either have a lower pull from the general fund or we can increase the services, and that would be at the discretion of the Board and the division. So the policy tries to seek to make consideration for market factors which can sometimes be complicated. And that's essentially how the methodology for the fee policy holds. There are some other principal provisions to the policy that I think we need to mention. The fee methodology that you would run through, that formula that you would run through, the way it would work is it would be applied only to new fees that we would be calculating and bringing forward, not any existing fees. Or if we wanted to change the existing fees in the formal process that I think the Parks and Recreation Department goes through the budget process, as I understand bringing forward fees with that upcoming budget cycle would be the typical time where fees would be changed or presented. Page 192 Packet Page -551- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 And so you wouldn't -- this methodology wouldn't provide a tax on your staff right now to go back and look at every single fee and have to recalculate every fee, because we have over 300 fees. So what this proposal would do is that as you change fees, you would then look at each fee as you were to change them or as you were to initiate a new fee. The other element of the provision that I need to mention is that there's a maximum limitation to the fees that can be implemented associated with the policy at 10 percent. And the existing fee -- the next provision, the existing fees may be indexed to inflation on an annual basis. And finally, under very unique circumstances, in the case of an absence of the Board, and there might be a need for a fee to be established, because let's say you have a traveling speaker coming in to the county and you need to initiate a fee, there would be a policy to provide for an interim fee established that would then be brought forward at the next board meeting. But the fee would be established on an interim basis by the division director. So that was a very brief overview of the policy. And for your consideration we'd recommend the adoption of the cost recovery policy and also recommend that there would be a periodic review to the policy, recognizing it is a new policy, and that as you live with it there's going to obviously be things that you may want to change or improve upon over time. And so for that reason we also recommend looking at it periodically. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: We have the poorest of poor and the wealthiest of wealthy in this community. And does that affect your methodology in that? Because some parks are -- you know, will have to have the fees changed according to who can pay. Or, you know, they would probably go unused if kids can't pay to get in there. So will that all be part of your methodology? Page 193 Packet Page -552- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 MR. BOVERI: Yes, ma'am, it would be. I think that the policy as laid out has a few different provisions to deal with those circumstances. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Good. MR. BOVERI: One of the ones I mentioned before, the market adjustment factor, can help with that, as well as the criteria mechanisms, the five different criteria with which you determine the cost recovery for a particular service. If it's a benefit of a disadvantaged community, they would receive the benefit in reduced fee under the -- CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: We're doing pretty good with these cost recoveries. I mean, to figure that we recovered already 37 percent, compared to other places, that's wonderful. MR. WILLIAMS: Yes, ma'am. And just to answer, or to reiterate, there is a provision that takes into consideration -- and again, if you think of this, there's the cost of service and then the population ` . served and there are some of these vulnerable populations, there's a mechanism to reduce the expectation for cost recovery. That becomes a guidance that we use to bring fee recommendations forward to you. But you also have in the fee policy itself, existing one, a provision that helps deal with people with low income. There is a provision for scholarships, in granting scholarships so that that's taken care of. So again, it's just meant to give us guidance as we bring recommendations forward to you in terms of how we characterize a fee recommendation. So it's a fairly straightforward process. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Let's see, I have three people. I don't know who was first. COMMISSIONER NANCE: Commissioner Henning was first. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay, Commissioner Henning. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay, yeah, it really needs to be analysis on cost of service or cost efficiencies, or how can you be ofsk Page 194 Packet Page -553- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 efficient, cost containment, before you pass it on to the user. I mean, I know that it's a choice to have staff maintain the grounds over there instead of using outside contractors. That's a costly endeavor. That's a policy decision by the Board of Commissioners. And I'm not sure -- I don't think it's appropriate to pass that on there. I would imagine other parks farm that out. MR. WILLIAMS: Commissioner, it's a very good point. A couple of points come to mind when you say that. You know, for the most part we outsource quite a bit within the parks division. A lot our recreational services are outsourced, our concessionaires are outsourced, you know, so we do attempt to outsource as much as we can. What we've found in parks, maintaining athletics fields, it's a different thing for mow and go kind of outsource arrangements. We do have some outsource mow and go arrangements that we have taken advantage of, but maintaining athletics fields, working with the recreation staff, working with sports tourism in particular, you just need that interconnection that's difficult. A lot of the parks divisions, those are the kind of things that they maintain but they do outsource some of those mow and go operations. Now, it is a good point. COMMISSIONER HENNING: What about the maintenance of painting, things like that? Is that outside? MR. WILLIAMS: Well, painting is dealt with through facilities management so I'm not really, you know, able to talk to that one. But -- and I do believe a lot of the painting is outsourced sir. MR. OCHS: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, you missed a spot in the Vineyards. MR. OCHS: I'm writing that. COMMISSIONER HENNING: I sent that to both of you. I Page 195 Packet Page -554- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 haven't heard anything. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Commissioner Taylor -- or Commissioner Nance, I'm sorry. COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes, I think having these methodologies as a means to develop your fees and change them is going to take Parks and Rec to a very good professional level. It won't be arbitrary, you won't get in constant fights and you'll have a means to discuss the fees rationally and make the changes as the Board provides you with guidance. So that having been said, I congratulate you on doing this and I'd like to make a motion to approve. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: And I'll second it. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: I have a motion and a second. Any discussion on that? (No response.) CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: I've got two people that wanted to speak, but if everybody wants to just vote, we can move on. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Yeah, let's -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: I want to talk about one thing. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay, you don't want to -- COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Yeah, I was just -- as an aside, I was pleased to note that there is a process for less disadvantaged -- or more disadvantaged children and families to be able to use our park system. Because indeed, those are the folks that need this, you know. So I'm delighted to hear that. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Commissioner Hiller? COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah, the only change really that I see from what's going on now is the market factor. Otherwise essentially it's exactly the same. Because otherwise the formula is no -- like I said, there's no difference. And the market factor is going to be determined by staff? MR. WILLIAMS: Well, staff would bring recommendations to Page 196 Packet Page-555- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 the Board. Ultimately it would be the Board's decision in terms of our characterization of marker factors and how our fees are set. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, I just think you're going to have to be really, really careful. Because we have disadvantaged children throughout the entire county, and while there may be concentrations in one neighborhood over another, I think if you start saying that one park is going to have a factor to consider disadvantaged and then in another park -- like I assure you that in North Collier there are children from low income families who are visiting the water park. Now, we may be located in North Collier. So are you going to say that you're going to have higher rates in North Collier and that, you know, if you come from a lower income family that you go to a park somewhere else? MR. WILLIAMS: No, ma'am, the fee -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: How are you going to do it? MR. WILLIAMS: The fee schedule applies to all constituents in Collier County the same way -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: I would hope so. MR. WILLIAMS: -- so there's not a differentiation. If you had a service -- and the water park is a good example, I guess. If you had a service -- and currently, for example, use sports. If you were to apply this methodology there would be considerable discounts because you're serving youth, perhaps disadvantaged youth. So you'd have considerable -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: And how would you define disadvantaged youth? MR. WILLIAMS: Disadvantaged youth -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: I mean, you made the point that everybody has to be charged the same and now you're saying we're going to have a program that targets -- MR. WILLIAMS: Let me change that a little bit, I guess. I think Page 197 Packet Page -556- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 what we're trying to do is to keep youth out of trouble and so let me not use the term disadvantaged youth. I think all youth have advantages. We're trying to involve them in activities that will keep them from doing things we'd rather them not. So -- but your fee policy, my point is that it applies throughout the county the same. So what you would want to do is to give a -- not capture totally the expense of that service for youth sports. You would want to provide a bigger discount for that. This policy would give us the guidance to bring forth those requests to you to make that recommendation. COMMISSIONER HILLER: So charge more for adult sports and less for youth sports. MR. WILLIAMS: Perhaps. COMMISSIONER HILLER: But not to suggest oh, we're charging less for someone from -- CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Right, that -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: That needs to be clarified, because that's not the way it's being presented. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: They said that in the backup material. COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, but that's not how it was presented here for the public to hear. What's being presented before us today to vote on is not that. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: And I want to tell you, you guys are doing so great with this pickle ball stuff. It is amazing how you've just reacted to the need. I mean, quickly. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Can I finish what I was saying? CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Well, I'll finish mine then. And I think it's just amazing. And as you all know, CBS Sports is coming on down to see it happen. They're going to be filming that whole tournament. And I just want to say, our staff has been quick to respond to that Page 198 Packet Page -557- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 going on. So I'm just giving kudos. Go ahead. COMMISSIONER HILLER: But here's the reality. The reality is that the cost and the proper management of the cost is the real issue. Because that's what you're looking to recover. And if you would manage the cost more effectively and efficiently then you wouldn't have to worry so much about what to discount because that issue wouldn't be there in the first place because the cost wouldn't be as high that you're looking to pass on and we wouldn't have these absorption issues that we're facing. So I think what needs to be done is, you know, if you have a consultant, go back and look at how you are managing the costs in Parks and Recs. Just like Commissioner Henning said. Because I've had the same issues. In fact, one of the issues I was going to bring to the County Manager's attention is the fact that we're staffed, as I understand, to provide early learning services. Why are we doing that? Why aren't we outsourcing? I mean, there are agencies that, you know, are -- you know, that are efficiently and effectively managing I'm sure at a lower cost than we are personnel that can teach, you know, very, very young children. Why do we have that kind of staff? I mean, I'm going to the issue of outsourcing. We outsource the management of our boat docks and that has proven to be better than when we had our own staff doing that. I think you have to begin by looking at the cost and then go to a policy to adjust the cost relative to the issues that you raise here. But, you know, cost management is the first issue. MR. WILLIAMS: Commissioner, I don't disagree. And that's something that we do every day as we look at all the services that we provide and try to determine if somebody else can do them. The early learning services that you mentioned are subsidized from the State of Page 199 Packet Page -558- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Yeah, I guess he has. That's what, number 13.A, I believe, right? So could we address 13.A first, please, Leo? Item #13A TO PROVIDE THE BOARD OF COLLIER COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INFORMATION REGARDING A PORTION OF AN OUTSTANDING INVOICE RECEIVED BY COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ON OR ABOUT SEPTEMBER 11, 2015 FROM GILLIG, LLC PURSUANT TO THE INDEFINITE DELIVERY INDEFINITE QUANTITY (IDIQ) CONTRACT #14-009 DATED DECEMBER 5, 2013; AND INFORM THE BOARD OF OTHER MATTERS REGARDING THIS CONTRACT — DISCUSSED MR. OCHS: Certainly. 13.A is your other constitutional officers. An item to provide the Board information regarding a portion of an outstanding invoice received by the Board on or about September 11th, 2015 from Gillig, LLC pursuant to the Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity Contract dated December 5th, 2013. The Clerk's finance department put this on the agenda, ma'am. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay. So would you like to talk, Crystal? MS. KINZEL: Thank you, Commissioner Fiala. For the record, Crystal Kinzel with the Clerk's Office. We have some outstanding invoices in relationship to the Gillig contract, which was the purchase of a 428,000 plus dollar bus. We have made a partial payment towards the purchase of that bus based on the items that we were able to validate according to the original contract. Page 201 Packet Page -559- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 There were about seven items that were either substitution items or additional items amended to the agreement by staff that we've been unable to validate the cost. We had requested from the vendor documentation on some of those substitutions. We do not have that. So we just wanted to bring to the Board's attention, based on Mr. Sibley's letter to the Board and copied to the Clerk's Office, that those items are outstanding. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Leo, do you want our staff or can we hear from the gentleman that's here? COMMISSIONER HILLER: I would like to hear what Mr. Ochs has to say. MR. OCHS: Well, Commissioners, again, as I have provided some supplemental information, there was a reference in the summary about authorization to enter into this. And I had a discussion with Ms. Kinzel a little earlier in the afternoon, it's the staffs opinion and supported by legal opinion by the County Attorney's Office that the procurement services director had the authority to make those substitutions pursuant both to the contract and to your procurement ordinance. So with regard to the authority to make those modifications, I was simply providing that information to the staff. And I think what Ms. Kinzel has just presented is something maybe a little bit different than the authority question. Has to do more with I'm hearing some documentation concerns. And maybe this gentleman could speak to that more directly. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Would you like to? MR. SIBLEY: I sure would. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Thank you. MR. SIBLEY: Thank you very much. Butch Sibley with Gillig, LLC. No, there really is no difference from what this gentleman's Page 202 Packet Page -560- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 speaking and this lady is speaking about. I'm caught in the middle. This is a catch-22 for me. I did nothing wrong here. All's I want is my money. What it comes down to is the Board entered into a contract with Gillig. The Board's staff issued a purchase order to me. We accepted the purchase order, built the bus in good faith, expecting to be paid for it. We built the bus exactly like the staff wanted it. Exactly. Delivered it on time. The bus is in revenue service out there making money right now for Collier County. The question became whether or not the BCC's staff had the authority to make certain changes or purchase certain options within the scope of this contract that was approved by the Board to build this bus. Each bus is custom built. The BCC staff and the Manager believes that the staff has the right to do that. The Clerk believes that they had to come back to the Board. So for these insignificant little changes that added up to $22,000, you know, they weren't big changes on the bus, there was no cardinal changes on the bus, it's not like they changed the engine or something, they just added little features and things that made it a little different, you know. So the BCC said no, it's within our ordinance -- I guess you guys have some kind of ordinance here that allows Board staff to make specific changes. And the Clerk's Office says oh, no, no, no, any changes has to go back to the Board for approval. Look, I don't care whether she's right or whether he's right. I'm stuck in the middle. I provided -- on November 25th I provided the information that the Board's staff asked me to in relationship to the cost justification on these seven components. Gave it to them. The Clerk may have asked for additional information. The Board's staff said no, no, no, no, no you don't need anything more and we're not taking this to the Board. The Clerk says, oh, they've got to Page 203 Packet Page -561- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 take that to the Board. I'm saying wait a minute, you two guys can't fight nice in the sandbox is not my problem. Ails I want is my money, $22,002. I'm asking this board to please help me get paid for my bus. Thank you. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Leo? MR. OCHS: Yes, ma'am. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: What -- can you explain anything about this or -- you had told me about it in my office so I think it would be a great explanation if-- the necessary changes which had to be made? MR. OCHS: Yes, ma'am. We changed or modified seven specifications, most to promote additional safety for the passengers on the bus and the motoring public that motor in and around the buses. The result of the changes is actually a reduction in the overall price of the bus as originally quoted. Examples like tires that were spec from a manufacturer who didn't make that size tire anymore, we substituted a different manufacturer that made that size tire. An information rack, we modified the dimension of that by two or three inches so it would accommodate the materials that we had produced to put in there. Some safety lights that were originally spec'd to be triangular in shape, we asked for a round shape with a beveled cover because it was more visible by the motoring public. So we think we made minor changes. We went to the County Attorney's Office and asked them to look at your ordinance to confirm that in our opinion that those minor changes could be made by your procurement services director, were indeed authorized by your ordinance, and they came back and affirmed that for us, in their opinion, anyhow. So we didn't really feel that we were compelled to come again to the Board for authorization based on that analysis. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Unless we do, then this gentleman Page 204 Packet Page -562- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 doesn't get paid; is that right? What can we do about getting him paid? It's not his fault and he's been held hostage. MR. OCHS: I'm not sure what additional payment information. I would leave that to Ms. Kinzel. MS. KINZEL: And Commissioner Fiala, I can comment on that. It was not necessarily the fact that the staff had approved the changes. That is an element. But if it was just based on Board approval we could have brought it to the Board for just Board approval. What we're looking for is the differential between the cost elements of what was originally on the price line item. And when Leo speaks to the tires, we had asked for -- the price of the tires was about $707 each; there's six of them. The difference between the Michelins and the other Firestone tires, we wanted a cost estimate from Gillig to indicate the difference between those tires so we could verify that there in fact was a cost difference. Another example is $30,000. The Board had approved a budgetary placeholder of$30,000 for an Avail system. When we received the invoice, it was $12,272 for a prewiring for a system. We have no way to substantiate the cost differential between what you had budgeted if the description on those items isn't the same. So what we had asked of the vendor and of the department was to get to us the cost difference between the items that they did change so that we could validate those costs to what we were paying. Okay? I believe Mr. Sibley was willing to do that but county staff indicated to him not to provide that to the Clerk. MS. ARNOLD: That's not true. MS. KINZEL: Okay, that's what he indicate do me, Michele, so I -- you know, you and I worked very well I thought on this. We had expected that staff was bringing this to the Board on December 8th so the gentleman could be paid. It did not occur. So we put it on the Page 205 Packet Page -563- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 agenda in hopes to get him paid. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Well, I hope we end here today so he does get paid. So tell me, is there -- I know I have two commissioners waiting, but I have to hear the rest of the story. Go ahead, Michele. MS. ARNOLD: Well, what occurred was -- for the record, Michele Arnold, Public Transit and Neighborhood Enhancement Director. What occurred was the request to have us put an item on the Board agenda to explain that we had made some ministerial changes to the contract. And Mr. Ochs had pointed out several of the changes. I wanted to point out that the one particular item with regard to our ITS, our Avail system, as Crystal pointed out, it is a budgeted item. There are 20 some odd other jurisdictions that are a party to this contract. There is no way that Gillig can, as a part of their proposal, can identify what that cost is, because everybody else has a different ITS system. When we asked for the bus, when we ordered the bus, we specified what our specific ITS system was. It's with Avail. Gillig meets with that particular vendor who provides us our system and they get a quote, and that is provided as part of the purchase order estimate. And that's what we've asked for. So we didn't ask for $30,000, which is the limit that the contract requires, or specifies, we asked for our $12,000 system and that's what we got. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Did you tell the gentleman not to give the information? MS. ARNOLD: Absolutely not. What happened was there was some discussion about him coming down to meet with the Clerk's staff to provide further verification because it's proprietary information. I forwarded him our opinion from the County Attorney's Office and he Page 206 Packet Page -564- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 sent a response back saying I don't need to provide any further information. This is the opinion from your County Attorney and they are saying that what staff has done is within their right, so you all need to pay me. Why should I drive down there to -- CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: You know, we're never going to have any vendors left if we don't find a way to solve these things. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Move to approve. And the Board finds that the -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: Absolutely not. COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- $22,200 of invoices serves a valid public purpose. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Second. MS. ARNOLD: Can I just make one other point? That we have two other vehicles that are on order that have been moved out of the schedule because of this whole issue that I'm not sure just approving this item will resolve. Because I'm not really understanding, I thought the reason why this was put on the agenda was because of the question of whether or not we had the authority to make those ministerial changes. And just approving it I'm not sure is going to clarify. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: You have your button on first. Georgia is first, then Commissioner Taylor, then Commissioner Henning. COMMISSIONER HILLER: This is a very significant issue. It goes to exactly what you said and that is the right of staff to engage in the execution of ministerial tasks. This is a ministerial series of actions. You were within the budget. In fact, the overall cost of that bus purchase was reduced. This is not 22,000 over budget. The budget for that bus cost went down. You executed administrative tasks. You did not make discretionary decisions. There is no Board action required. And there is no approval by this Board to authorize payment when what the Clerk is saying is Page 207 Packet Page -565- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 that he needs additional documentation and it doesn't go to Board approval. So the issue of what documentation the Clerk is alleging is still necessary to be paid is the issue, and that is not a vote by this Board. If the Clerk feels that there is underlying evidence that needs to be presented, that's an issue separate from authorization of the Board and whether or not you engaged in an administrative act. And that's the issue. So what is the documentation that the Clerk needs? Because the motion here is not relevant to the issue, according to what Ms. Kinzel just said and what was just discussed before us. Because clearly there was no Board approval required to make the 22,000 and change that this man is owed. What did the Clerk want? MR. SIBLEY: Here's the justification. COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, no, that's not my question. What did the Clerk want from you? Can you get to the podium, please. Let me just ask: What documents did the Clerk ask of you? And actually, don't answer that, let me just ask -- let me say, I would like the Clerk's Office to tell me, what documents have you asked of this vendor that he has not provided? MS. KINZEL: Okay, Commissioner Hiller, thank you very much, because you've hit right on exactly. It is the documentation to validate the charges that have been received against the contracted items. That is exactly the point of why we brought it forward. So I appreciate that. We have asked about -- there are about seven items, they've been articulated several times, including in the County Attorney's response, on what changes can be made or not made. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Commissioner Taylor's mic is right in front of you, I can't see you. Sony. Page 208 Packet Page -566- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 MS. KINZEL: We have several items that were changed. Some are very small, I agree, including on the magazine rack, those prices and the basis of those prices. The major items are -- well, and let me do all of them, because it's all important, regardless of the dollar value. We have a passenger information station. We wanted to see the quote. That was only $414. We had the profile antenna that was changed and that's $125. COMMISSIONER HILLER: What specific documentation do you want for these items? MS. KINZEL: The cost estimates from Mr. Sibley. In other words, what's his cost relationship, the differential between that was substituted versus what was on your list, we would like to see substantial documentation. Because when -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: The documenta-- MS. KINZEL: Can I finish? I want to see what he paid. But you didn't provide a receipt, an invoice or what -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: You -- MS. KINZEL: -- what detailed information. For example, on the Avail system, okay, everyone's assuming it's a savings because the budgetary placeholder was 30,000 and he only charged you 12,272. Now, for example, on that one, again I say, it was a system versus the invoice description that came to us was prewiring. That's totally different than a system. Additionally, we started to review this a little more when it did not come before the Board and found that Fleet I think in fact has charged about $1,800 to finish the wiring of the Avail system on the bus because that is not what was received. So these are the types of issues that we were trying to resolve with some documentation from Gillig. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, on all the other items in the construction of this bus, did you get their underlying invoices of what Page 209 Packet Page -567- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 they paid for -- MR. SIBLEY: No. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Please, hang on a second. They put sheet metal on the bus. Let's say it's a steel bus. Do you get the underlying invoice from them on how much they paid for the steel for that particular bus? MS. KINZEL: I will tell you, we did not on that case because the remainder of the items matched the price listing that the Board had originally approved. COMMISSIONER HILLER: So because they charged less than what was budgeted within the purchase order, you want backup? MS. KINZEL: It's not necessarily less. It is a substitution or a deviation -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: So you think -- MS. KINZEL: -- from what was solicited as the item that you accepted and approved. COMMISSIONER HILLER: So was staff-- MS. KINZEL: What came in was different than what you ordered. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. So staff was able to satisfy the same requirement with a lesser product and therefore you need validation that its okay -- MS. KINZEL: Well, Commissioners, really -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- from that? MS. KINZEL: -- only the Board can determine that the substitutions -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah, but -- MS. KINZEL: -- are equal to what you got. But we're trying to validate the pricing differential from what was originally solicited with the Gillig product. And I had one other question, Mr. Sibley, because you mentioned Page 210 Packet Page -568- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 the contract was with the Board of County Commissioners, but I understood that you were working through the LYNX Consortium and that in fact we paid a fee to LYNX for you to work with them as the contractor. MR. SIBLEY: So what's your question? MS. KINZEL: Is your contract in your mind with the Board of County Commissioners or is it with the LYNX Consortium? COMMISSIONER HILLER: Or maybe it's with the Board of Commissioners and the Clerk of Courts who refuses to pay -- MR. SIBLEY: Maybe it's -- yeah, it's certainly not with the Clerk, I know that. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, believe it or not, it is. MR. SIBLEY: However, we have a contract with the LYNX Florida Consortium, and Collier County is named on that contract as an authorized purchaser. At some point I believe it was. I can tell you the dates. COMMISSIONER HILLER: We're third-party beneficiaries? MR. SIBLEY: No. COMMISSIONER HILLER: What are we? MR. SIBLEY: Michele brought that -- here it is right here. Michele brought before this Board an agenda item to purchase buses off of that LYNX contract, which was approved by this Board. I don't know if these are the exact people, but by this Board. MS. KKI:NNZEL: It was, but the price listing that was presented to this Board is not in accordance with what you then build. And that was the deviation that we were trying to validate, what is the deviation in what the Board had approved to be purchased versus what you provided as the materials on those items that was different from the original contract. MR. SIBLEY: Not necessarily. Not necessarily, because each bus is custom built. So the contract has a base bus, but then there are Page 211 Packet Page -569- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 14 different pages of optional equipment that can be used in place of the base. For example, you brought up the Avail system. Each property has a different type of ITS system ranging from Miami to $56,000 to maybe Lake County with $5,000 or so. Some people do full-blown systems, some people do prewiring, you know. We don't know what the specific components of that build are until we get to the preproduction meeting. So what we did is we put a $30,000 placeholder in there which allows the transit agency to take some amount of money to their Board for approval. Knowing that the average system is about 20 to 25,000, we put a $30,000 placeholder, they can take it to their Board and get approval so that they don't have to come back to their Board to get more money later. Once we understand what the cost is, after we understand what their specifications is, the price is adjusted. If I charged you $30,000 for that Avail ITS system, you would have never questioned it. COMMISSIONER HILLER: And which is unbelievable. MR. SIBLEY: Yeah. COMMISSIONER HILLER: And you know the most amazing thing about it? That would have been fraud. MR. SIBLEY: Yeah, unbelievable. Blows me away. MS. KINZEL: That is incorrect. COMMISSIONER HILLER: It is absolutely correct. MR. SIBLEY: I just want my $22,002. You guys can fight this out later. Just tell me what to do. COMMISSIONER HILLER: So essentially the way the contract is structured is the budget allows -- like an individual line item allows for a configuration of the product up to that budgetary amount, and then staff does the -- makes the ministerial decision-making of what suits that particular bus. And as an example, where you have a Page 212 Packet Page -570- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 dow $30,000 budget, we use 12,000 of it because we only needed the prewiring component and that's all we wanted to purchase for that particular bus. MR. SIBLEY: And ma'am, I explained all that in this November 25th letter that I spent time myself drafting about all the seven issues. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, here's the bottom line -- CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: What happened with that letter? MR. SIBLEY: I gave it to Michelle's staff who I believe gave it to Crystal. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Did you get that letter, Crystal? MS. KINZEL: Yes, I did. It does not have the backup and supporting information. What it says -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: So -- MS. KJNZEL: Can I finish my answer? Thanks. What it says is exactly what Mr. Sibley has indicated. It is a generic answer which says each property has different requirements. Oftentimes the specific requirements are not known or change orders placed. Gillig use this as a placeholder. Once the preproduction meeting is held, the ITS systems are defined. Now, here's the other thing that -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: So -- MS. KINZEL: -- is ironic here, if I can finish the answer. They bring to the Board the estimate of those cooperatives or consortium agreements. The Board is actually approving obviously more money than may even be necessary. Once the purchase order is determined and a definitive amount of the expectation of county staff is available, all they needed to do was bring that information back to the Board, either on consent or another manner that they -- what you were actually approving. MR. SIBLEY: So see, I don't need any more documentation. All she wanted was them to come back to the Board. Page 213 Packet Page -571- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 COMMISSIONER HILLER: And it's completely unnecessary because it's -- MR. SIBLEY: Why am I even here? COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- immaterial because -- CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: I'm going to just quiet it down for just a minute. We've got three other -- and I would love to hear you go on COMMISSIONER HILLER: I didn't finish my statement. COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, Madam Chair -- CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: I've got three other people here. COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- I have a motion. I'm calling the motion. COMMISSIONER HILLER: We can't support it. COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm calling the motion -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: It cannot be supported. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Talk to the motion and let's move on. This jibber jabber -- CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: I understand that, but I'm trying -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: I pulled my motion -- CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: -- to give a couple other people an opportunity to talk. Commissioner Taylor? COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: My talk was to second that motion. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay, Commissioner Nance? COMMISSIONER HILLER: We can't support this. MR. OCHS: Commissioners, this goes to the lawsuit. COMMISSIONER HILLER: 100 percent. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: This goes to the what, please? COMMISSIONER NANCE: I want to tell you something -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: 100 percent to the lawsuit. And Page 214 Packet Page -572- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 here's the reason -- CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: But this gentleman has to get paid. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right. And he needs to -- MR. OCHS: The Clerk can pay him. The Clerk can pay him. COMMISSIONER HILLER: The Clerk can pay him. This is an issue about the Clerk's failure to accept what this man says. And this man is right. In fact, the irony of this situation is the point you made. If they purchase 100,000 in steel and that's the budget and in fact you only pay 60,000 for the steel, we're paying 100,000, she's not validating the underlining information related to that budgetary item because there's a match. But there's a difference that's like what, $18,000 less, and because we didn't use the full budgetary amount she wants to validate the lesser amount and doesn't validate every line item in that budget? I've never heard anything so stupid in my life. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Crystal? MS. KINZEL: Thank you, Commissioner Fiala. The information that Commissioner Hiller's just put forward on the record is incorrect. COMMISSIONER HILLER: It's absolutely correct. MS. KINZEL: The Clerk's Office -- excuse me, could I please answer the questions or at least put on the statement, since it's my turn? We verify things that match, we verify things that don't match -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: You don't validate anything. MS. KINZEL: -- we ask for information to substantiate costs. And a big reason that we do that, if you've all forgotten, the BQ Concrete where we had exactly the problem with the backup and differentiation -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: You didn't validate it. Oh, wow. MS. KINZEL: Oh, you're right, excuse me. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Oh, wow. ook Page 215 Packet Page -573- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 MS. KINZEL: So we have gotten better at what we are doing -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, you're not. MS. KINZEL: -- and we continue to try to get supporting documentation so that -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: You don't know what you're doing. MS. KINZEL: -- we can make payment, okay? COMMISSIONER HILLER: You don't know how to do your job, that's the problem. MS. KINZEL: Okay, and you know -- I'm not even going to comment. COMMISSIONER HILLER: And here's the problem -- CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Commissioner Henning just said he has a motion on the floor and a second. He said he wanted to call the question. COMMISSIONER HILLER: I can't support it. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: You don't have to support it, he just wanted to put his motion on the floor. So would you repeat your motion again? COMMISSIONER NANCE: I have something to say. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Oh, okay, fine. Go ahead. COMMISSIONER NANCE: When I got elected to office I had people over and over and over tell me that if I tried to do anything as a county commissioner I needed to go into Collier County and I needed to make it so that it was a business friendly environment. The biggest problem was Collier County was a joke. Nobody wanted to do business with the county. It was so damn difficult, the process and administration was awful. Staff wouldn't cooperate with anybody, the Clerk wouldn't cooperate with anybody, it was a giant quagmire, everybody was sick of dealing with Collier County. COMMISSIONER HILLER: They still are. MR. SIBLEY: Gillig won't -- Page 216 Packet Page -574- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 COMMISSIONER NANCE: Commissioner Hiller, just let me speak a moment, please, ma'am. This pettiness coming from the Clerk has no public benefit. This has been going on now, this is going into my fourth year. I've yet to see any material fiscal benefit come out of all this bickering from the Clerk. The Clerk continues to be petty, he wants to bring things like this up that simply demonstrate that somebody on staff didn't cross an I or dot a T. And what it amounts to is when you have a bus that's approaching a half a million dollars that has thousands of features on it, it does require some management. It requires staff to make decisions. This man's got pages and pages and pages of options that people have to make decisions on. If the Clerk of Courts in Collier County believes that he has to return to the Board of County Commissioners because a tire manufacturer was discontinued and somebody had to make a damn executive decision to choose another tire, then we are completely out of our freaking minds, okay? There's no public benefit to this. This is costing this county a fortune, not only monetarily in staff time, it is causing so much ill will nobody wants to do business with the county. And I want to tell you something, the biggest cost in sourcing stuff for the county is the fact that nobody wants to be a vendor for Collier County because the professionals in here are so damn petty. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Here here. COMMISSIONER NANCE: And my patience for this is wearing very thin. It's now before the court. The circuit court's going to decide if somebody's got the authority on it. These BS agenda items need to come to an end, we need to pay this man and thank him for coming down here and doing business with us. COMMISSIONER HILLER: But we can't -- Page 217 Packet Page -575- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 COMMISSIONER NANCE: That's what we need to do. We need to stop thinking of some reason not to pay people and start thinking of some reason to get our act together and make it happen and make it easy for them to work. COMMISSIONER HILLER: We can't -- COMMISSIONER NANCE: We're torturing each other and we're torturing our vendors. And it's got to stop. The Clerk is being petty, it's got no public benefit. If he can come in and show me where in the hell he saved Collier County a nickel, I'll eat the nickel, all right? He's spending hundred dollar bills chasing nickels. It's ridiculous. I'm sick of it. I'm sorry, I've got to get something to drink. MR. OCHS: Madam Chairman? CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Yes, sir. MR. OCHS: Just very quickly, when we started this discussion I said I thought this was about authorization, and Ms. Kinzel said this was about documentation, backing up certain substitutions on pricing. And I believe her, now that she said that. So there is no need that I can see for the Board to have to take any action to approve an expenditure that the County Attorney has said the staff is already authorized under your existing ordinance to make. If she needs -- I don't know what -- whatever she needs from this gentleman beyond what she's already gotten, the Board doesn't need to get involved in that. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Not at all. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: So Crystal, then will you pay him? MS. KINZEL: Commissioner Fiala, exactly. We had tried to work this out at the staff level and get the documentation. I agree with the County Manager, if we get the documentation to support the items, that's what we will have to review to the remainder of the payment. MR. OCHS: And all I have to say, that is a completely new Page 218 Packet Page -576- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 standard, a recent standard, let's put it that way, that the heretofore vendors like this gentleman have not been subject to. And their own published price list, I'm not sure that level of backup documentation and scrutiny has been required currently or in the past. So we can all dance around this, but I think we know what it is. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: So in other words, we do not need to vote on this, this can just be handled and this guy can get his -- MR. KLATZKOW: It's not going to get paid. She won't pay him unless you say pretty please. COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, no, no -- MR. KLATZKOW: That's what's going on here. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Until he gives her what she wants, which is completely unjustified and unnecessary. MR. KLATZKOW: She's wants -- she's asking you -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: To do the Clerk's job? MR. KLATZKOW: She's asking you to approve this item so he can get paid. COMMISSIONER HILLER: No -- MR. SIBLEY: So approve it so I can get my money. MR. KLATZKOW: He's saying that it doesn't have to get done that way. MR. SIBLEY: Just approve it. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Our approval -- MR. SIBLEY: All she got to do is say approved. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Our approval doesn't eliminate the underlying document-- MR. SIBLEY: But she'll still pay for it. COMMISSIONER HILLER: We can't waive the Clerk's documentary evidentiary standard. That's not our jurisdiction. We are not the Clerk of Courts. If he wants those documents, it's his liability, he needs to get it. And if that means he has to sue you to get it in order Page 219 Packet Page -577- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 to pay you, that's what he has to do. The fight is with the Clerk. The Board doesn't have the legal authority to waive a documentary requirement that the Clerk has -- MR. SIBLEY: But my contract, my purchase order, came from this Board. MR. OCHS: Yes, sir, we -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: He is a party to that contract. MR. OCHS: Yeah, we approved the purchase -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: He's the Clerk to the Board -- CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Georgia. MR. OCHS: We approved the purchase, the Clerk does the preaudit and then the Board approves the ultimate expenditure of the funds. MR. SIBLEY: That's fine. MS. KINZEL: Commissioner Fiala? MR. SIBLEY: So where are we at? MS. KINZEL: Could I make it real easy? CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: I'd like to hear that. MS. KINZEL: If we can agree to get the documentation, we'll work with Mr. Sibley to finish up the documentation and ask the Board to approve the 22. We've covered both ends of the approval. COMMISSIONER HILLER: We don't need to approve anything. You get the documentation, get your satisfaction with your preaudit and send it to us for our general approval before prepayment like we do on every single expenditure. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Why do you need an approval? If he produces all of this stuff you've asked, he's produced all the other things already, and it's less than what we originally planned? MS. KINZEL: Commissioner Fiala, I was trying to make a mutual agreement. Your County Attorney says the approval would cover the bases. I was just trying to make it happen on both ends. Page 220 Packet Page -578- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 The Board needs to take your action and then the Clerk's Office will take theirs. And thank you. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Let's hear the -- MR. KLATZKOW: The executive summary says that one of the problems here is that there's no BC approval of the funding authority. So -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: What? MR. KLATZKOW: That's what it says. I mean -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: But here's the way -- MR. KLATZKOW: So it's really two things: It's documentation and it's approval. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Here's the way it works. She finishes her preaudit and she puts it on the dispersal approvement (sic) list, just like every other expenditure. We're not giving any separate authorization to a ministerial act engaged in by staff legally. We will approve for disbursement subsequent to preaudit as required by our ordinance in every instance. This is not going to be an exception to the rule. It is not any different than any other payment. The dispute is over the documentation between the two of them and they need to resolve it independent of us. This is the Clerk's preaudit underlined documentary requirement. The fact that they don't know how to properly do a preaudit and don't understand what they should be looking at -- MR. KLATZKOW: That's not what the -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- versus not looking at is not our issue. MR. KLATZKOW: -- executive summary -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: I don't care what his summary says. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: I can't get her to quiet down. I'm sorry, I've tried. Page 221 Packet Page -579- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 So we approved 30,000 for this, it's less money than what we approved for. So we've already approved that. She needs documentation to prove that it's less money and then she can pay it. We -- MR. SIBLEY: I don't think that's correct, ma'am. I don't think that's correct coming from her. I don't think so. I think that after any subsequent documentation that I give her, she's still going to require Board approval to pay it. Aren't you? COMMISSIONER HILLER: Mr. Gillig, or Mr. whatever -- CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Are you, Crystal? MS. KINZEL: Commissioner Fiala, we need to see the information that he has as a base of the contract. That's where we started our request for -- MR. SIBLEY: Doesn't end there. MS. KINZEL: -- the supporting documentation. Let me explain exactly what happened, okay? MR. KLATZKOW: You know, that's -- MS. KINZEL: When -- MR. KLATZKOW: Crystal. MS. KINZEL: -- the item -- MR. KLATZKOW: Crystal, that's not what your recommendation says. MS. ARNOLD: Crystal, I have a question, what -- MS. KINZEL: You know what? Take action whatever you think appropriate. MS. ARNOLD: Will you approve his payment if he gives you that additional documentation? MS. KINZEL: I haven't seen the documentation yet -- CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: But would you -- MS. KINZEL: -- I don't know. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: -- approve it, Crystal, is her question. Page 222 Packet Page -580- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 MS. KINZEL: If-- we have to be able to validate the documentation. I can't say we will approve it based on documentation until I've seen and audited the documentation, Commissioners. COMMISSIONER HILLER: And that's the -- MS. KINZEL: And let me explain -- can I please finish a sentence? Commissioner Fiala, part of the issue with this agreement was once we discovered that there were differences we have then found other items that we have mentioned at the bottom of this executive summary, concerns, and we have mentioned that perhaps you want to look at some of the solicitation and bidding issues with the LYNX contract. That was discovered after the preliminary request for the information and the supporting documentation, okay. That was included in executive summary. And let me explain the difference between this and the 273 report for Board approval. We had agreed to bring on this 273 report items that had passed the Clerk's preaudit other than Board of County Commissioner approval and determination of a valid public purpose. This item did not pass the Clerk's preaudit. That's why we had asked staff to get us additional information -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: This is the lawsuit. This is all the lawsuit. MS. KINZEL: No, it -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: This is a total game. In is a game to no end. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Please, stop interrupting. COMMISSIONER HILLER: You don't know how to read the law. We have an ordinance and you need to read -- CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Please stop interrupting. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yes, ma'am. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Excuse me, I'm sorry. Go ahead. Page 223 Packet Page -581- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 MS. KINZEL: Thank you. That's the difference between this item and an item that merely requires Board approval. We had discrepancies in our audit function. We returned these items to the department, rejecting them for a lack of that documentation. That's what started the item that -- we asked the department to please bring forward that information, okay? That was issue number one. Once that documentation was not forthcoming and based on legal opinions and other information that we've gotten regarding this contract and the procurement, including the items that were attached where the difference between single source, sole source and the procurement nuances from the entire LYNX contract, we added a clause to this that the Board of County Commissioners may want to have someone review those compliance issues, okay. That's why at this point in time, not having seen the documentation, I cannot make a blanket statement that yes, the Clerk will approve this. He -- MR. KLATZKOW: Then your recommendation is wrong. MS. KINZEL: -- needs to have -- MR. KLATZKOW: Read your recommendation to the Board on your executive summary. MS. KINZEL: My recommendation, Jeff, is just to review it. MR. KLATZKOW: If it determines appropriate, authorize the expenditure of funds. MS. KINZEL: Correct. MR. KLATZKOW: It's an action item. Now you're changing it. Now you're saying even if they approve it you may not pay it. You've changed this. MS. KINZEL: Okay. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Oh, my God. I mean -- MS. KINZEL: Jeff, are there other lines to that recommendation that also say they should look at the additional items for compliance Page 224 Packet Page -582- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 based on the documentation. MR. KLATZKOW: It says you'll pay it if they approve it and now you're saying you won't. MS. KINZEL: Jeff, I'm saying I need the documentation to validate. I've asked for both the documentation and the amount. MR. SIBLEY: That's not what it says in this. It says if you approve it -- CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: People are never going to want to do business with us anymore. MR. SIBLEY: -- she'll pay it. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: I don't blame them. MR. SIBLEY: It says if you approve it, she would pay it. That's what her executive summary says. MS. KINZEL: No, I don't believe -- MR. SIBLEY: And I've already given her the documentation. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay, Commissioner Henning, you wanted to say something, and then Commissioner Nance again. MR. SIBLEY: See, I'm put in the middle. I'm a vendor. And I hope all the other vendors in this county and everywhere are watching this, because I am a vendor fighting for my money. On one side is the Board and on the other side is the Clerk. And guess who's in the middle? The vendor. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Innocent. MR. SIBLEY: And -- yes, and I'm innocent. I did nothing wrong. COMMISSIONER HILLER: You didn't. And the problem is the Clerk will not complete his preaudit. We legally can't pay until he finishes his preaudit. Once he finishes his preaudit after getting whatever he feels he needs to satisfy his requirements, he gives it to us and we approve it for payment. She won't approve the document you gave. And let me read some of the examples, just for the public's Page 225 Packet Page -583- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 information, on what's in dispute and what she is disputing. Question: Low pro-- this is Crystal's -- or the Clerk's question to the vendor. Low Profile 800 megahertz antenna ASP-931. Page 8 of Gillig price sheet said ASP 930-T. Why the difference? Answer: The ASP-931 and ASP 930-T are identical except for the cable connector. One uses a male and one uses a female. The type radio used determines which one we use. Both are the same price. She finds that unacceptable. MR. SIBLEY: They're the same price. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Now she's not verifying $100,000 in steel, but she's debating when one's a male and one's a female connector and wants the underlying evidence for that. I mean, if we have fraud and procurement it's because they're looking at this shit instead of the other stuff. So yeah, the point you made that they're not auditing like if you had sold us a system for 30,000 and because the budget was 30 and they're not auditing the underlining invoice for that but they're looking at it as suddenly there's a change and it's 12,000 instead of 30,000 is the most idiotic thing I've ever heard. MR. SIBLEY: But Michele and her staff all do this audit. They're the ones that -- you know, I don't make this stuff up just say hey, you need to buy this. They require this stuff from us, and I work with them to get them what they want. And she audits all this stuff. She just doesn't -- you know, she doesn't pass this paper. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Crystal is -- MR. SIBLEY: I'm talking about Michele. She's already done all this. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Crystal has to audit. MR. SIBLEY: Well sure, she can audit it too. And I gave her that documentation. COMMISSIONER HILLER: She has to. Page 226 Packet Page -584- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 And, you know, here's another example where -- MR. SIBLEY: I mean, how wrong is what I gave her? COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- at no difference in cost, but she wants to see the underlying invoice when the exact same tires were switched out because one vendor couldn't supply the size so they went to the other vendor that had the same size. But suddenly you need an invoice for that, but you don't need the invoice for $100,000 in steel. MR. SIBLEY: Right. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Commissioner Nance? COMMISSIONER NANCE: Michele and Ms. Markiewicz, you've been involved in the specifications, the purchase of these buses. This vendor has kindly worked with us and supplied us with units previously, I believe. In fact, aren't they one of our sole source suppliers that we have to conduct business with and so on and so forth? MS. ARNOLD: Yes. COMMISSIONER NANCE: Are you two satisfied that we have received a product that meets the specifications for what we requested and what we bid on and that we have received, the item for which we have bartered? MS. ARNOLD: Absolutely. MS. MARKIEWICZ: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER NANCE: So as far, Mr. Ochs, as county staff is concerned, county staff has received what we have bid on, we have bid through our process, we have made corrections and adjustments to the situation as dictated by the situation? MR. OCHS: Yes, sir, we have received what we've specified. COMMISSIONER NANCE: And we have submitted the bill to the Clerk to pay because we are signing off on it and we say it's good to go. MR. OCHS: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER NANCE: So what does the Board need to do Page 227 Packet Page -585- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 now? MR. OCHS: I don't think you need to do anything, unfortunately. And I feel horrible for this gentleman. But look it, you've got a job, I've got a job, the Clerk's got a job. I think we performed ours under your ordinance and the County Attorney's opinion the Board is -- COMMISSIONER NANCE: Sir, we're satisfied that we have received it and we have indicated that the Clerk should pay it. COMMISSIONER HILLER: We can't. MR. SIBLEY: Yeah, but she hasn't paid it. So I come to you because you issued the purchase order. This Board, through the procurement director, issued this purchase order to me. So my recourse is with you. I have the contract with you. I have the purchase order with you. I don't have it with her. COMMISSIONER HILLER: But you do, because they are part of us. He is Clerk to the Board. And here's the problem: We cannot authorize disbursement until the Clerk has concluded his preaudit. He has refused to conclude his preaudit because even though he didn't look at the under-- this was a $500,000 bus and he didn't look at the underlying documentation for 480,000, but now for the balance of 22,000 he wants underlying documentation and will not make approval to us that he has preaudited. He has the first line of lability. We rely on his preaudit to limit our liability. We don't assume liability 'til he does his preaudit and he gets it done, then he gives it to us and we approve for disbursement. MR. SIBLEY: I understand. COMMISSIONER HILLER: And he refuses to do it. That's the problem. Our problem is we are not the Clerk of Courts. They are coming up with this underlying document requirement. And like I said, they did not look at 480,000 in invoices but they are looking at like these 22. And they won't pay this 22 -- Page 228 Packet Page -586- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 MR. SIBLEY: But the executive summary that Crystal preCented today -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: Is wrong. MR. SIBLEY: -- at the bottom says if you approve it -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's not -- MR. SIBLEY: -- she would pay it. That's what it said. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah, but we are not going to do that because we are not going to assume full liability. It is her responsibility to get it done. MR. SIBLEY: So I'm back in the middle again. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right, she has stat-- MR. SIBLEY: Still. COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- statutory liability -- CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Commissioner Nance? COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- we have a separate level of liability. MR. SIBLEY: I just hope -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: We rely on her -- MR. SIBLEY: -- all vendors are watching this. COMMISSIONER HILLER: We need to conclude it. MR. SIBLEY: I just really hope all vendors are watching this, because if this is what doing business in Collier County's like, then it certainly sends a message to other vendors. Myself included. Because I have a purchase order right now for two more buses on hold because of this. I had to stop production of those buses and kind of put them aside because it was wait a minute, am I going to be right back here arguing this same thing again? So I -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: It's 100 percent the Clerk's fault. 100 percent. It's his legal duty and he's failing to do, or choosing not to do or feeling he can't do, whatever the reason is doesn't matter. It's -- MR. SIBLEY: Should I send that purchase order back? Page 229 Packet Page -587- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 MS. KINZEL: Commissioner Fiala? MR. SIBLEY: Am I -- should I send that purchase order back? CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Let me ask the Clerk's Office. MR. SIBLEY: I don't know what to do. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: What did you say, Crystal? MS. KINZEL: Commissioner Fiala, I just want to put on the record that, you know, Commissioner Hiller continues at each and every item that we try to bring back to the Board for resolution to make accusations, to make statements that are not validated, and I don't want to continue the argument or the engagement. I think we are to the point -- CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: But we do have a problem, Crystal. MS. KINZEL: Well, I believe that Commissioner Henning called the question. And I will tell you, if the Board does what the Board chooses to do and the Clerk's Office will do our preaudit function as we see -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's impossible. MS. KINZEL: -- appropriate. Okay? COMMISSIONER HILLER: Absolutely legally impossible. It cannot be done from an audit -- CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Excuse me, do you want to -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- perspective -- CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: -- say something, Commissioner Nance? You're done? MR. SIBLEY: So what do I do? CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: I am so sorry -- MR. SIBLEY: Am I going to get my money? CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: There is nothing we can do. MR. SIBLEY: Nobody's paying my money. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Like Crystal said, if we don't do -- MR. SIBLEY: So I don't get paid my money for the bus that's Page 230 Packet Page -588- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 operating in revenue service right now in Collier County? That I built in good faith based on the purchase order that I received from Board staff. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: I have a funny feeling we're not getting any more buses, by the way. COMMISSIONER HILLER: And the recourse is for you to sue the Clerk. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Mr. County Attorney, I would like to hear from our legal adviser. MR. KLATZKOW: Hey, you've got -- you had an item here where I'm being told by Crystal that the recommendation isn't really the recommendation. So I don't know what to make of this executive summary. I don't know why this wasn't paid. I don't, okay. But I also don't know why this executive summary has been brought to the Board, because it's not an action item. Because even if you took action, she wasn't going to pay anyway. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Correct. She can't. And we can't take action -- MR. KLATZKOW: I am absolutely flummoxed on this executive summary. COMMISSIONER HILLER: We can't take action unless she completes the preaudit. COMMISSIONER NANCE: Is that the case from the perspective of the Clerk at this moment? CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Crystal? COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: If we took action on this item can we get -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: We can't. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Excuse me, Commissioner Hiller, we have been listening to you for 45 minutes. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Good. Maybe -- Page 231 Packet Page -589- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: You have said everything that you need to say. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Not necessarily. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Please allow other people up here and give them the courtesy of being able to speak without being interrupted. Madam -- Crystal, Assistant Clerk, can you please tell us if we took action on this, would that mean this gentleman would get paid? MS. KINZEL: Commissioner Taylor, I have to have the underlining documentation to validate all -- COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Okay, assuming -- MR. KLATZKOW: Then why did we bring the item? COMMISSIONER HILLER: Impossible. MS. KINZEL: Because, Jeff, I wanted to move it off of the dime when I wasn't getting a reaction from county staff even regarding getting the documentation. MR. KLATZKOW: Honest to God -- MS. KINZEL: I brought it forward -- MR. KLATZKOW: This is wrong. MS. KINZEL: -- to try to get resolution of the documentation and the process and procedures. This had nothing to do with actually the approval. It had to do with getting the documentation to support an expenditure that was presented to the Board. MR. KLATZKOW: Then you need to -- MS. KINZEL: I did not -- MR. KLATZKOW: -- rewrite the executive summary. MS. KINZEL: Wait a minute. I did not need to even bring this forward. We rejected this to the department and the department can resubmit it, and when it's complete and when it can be validated we will address it and pay it. And that's the bottom line. I was trying to facilitate getting him paid. I actually called. Page 232 Packet Page -590- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 This could have been brought forward when they did the purchase order and changed the items. And yes, we do validate all the items. We actually went out with Michele's staff and validated the bus and the receiving of the items of the bus because of the -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: Look at the underlying -- MS. KINZEL: -- magnitude of this purchase. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Did you look at the underlying invoices for the other 400 -- MS. KINZEL: Commissioner Hiller, our audit process we differentiate, depending on the circumstances that we see when we review the expenditure, okay? COMMISSIONER HILLER: Oh, so it's audited by exception. MS. KINZEL: No, it is not. And I've said that again -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: What a joke. MS. KINZEL: -- and, you know, I'm just not going to argue anymore. COMMISSIONER HILLER: The public is at risk. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Maybe it's time we took a break. Our court stenographer is going to pass out. MR. SIBLEY: What am I supposed to do with this existing purchase order? I know there's $22,000 that I'll probably never see from Collier County, but what am I supposed to do with this existing purchase order? Should I send it back to you? MR. OCHS: Sir, if you have some whatever documentation the Clerk's Office is asking for, I would ask you respectfully to get it to them. MR. SIBLEY: Okay. Well, that may or may not get me paid on this $22,000. I'm not really sure. Because there's still going to be a question of whether Crystal is going to require additional Board approval even after I give her this documentation. And then you're not Page 233 Packet Page -591- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 gong to approve it MS. KINZEL: Let me explain. If every other element of our audit process is validated it will go on the 273 report pursuant to our agreement and the Board will bless it at that time. That is not a problem. So to continue to argue amongst ourselves with the vendor and the Board and the Clerk I think is nonproductive. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: That's another month or month and a half. MR. SIBLEY: Yeah. Oh yeah, at least. At least. So -- MS. KINZEL: Commissioner Fiala, I'm not the one that delayed requesting this stuff for two months. We had begged for this to be on the Board agenda December 8th and the matter might be resolved by today. MR. OCHS: What did you want on the agenda? MR. SIBLEY: I gave you the November 25th document. MR. OCHS: Authorization to approve the expenditure? We were not -- MS. KINZEL: No, direction to staff to procure the backup documentation that we were requiring to approve the expenditure. MR. OCHS: That's not what this -- MR. SIBLEY: So -- but I do have one final question that is still out there. There's another two buses that we have a purchase order for that have these exact specifications, so they have these exact issues. COMMISSIONER HILLER: It's going to be the same. MR. SIBLEY: Am I going to be here again next year? I mean, I like this Board and all and, you know, it was a very entertaining day sitting here for seven hours, but I don't need this. COMMISSIONER NANCE: Sir, let me give you a little perspective, okay? The Clerk won't pay the Florida Department of Law Enforcement and the FBI either. Page 234 Packet Page -592- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 COMMISSIONER HILLER: I mean, it's like unbelievable. COMMISSIONER NANCE: So if that -- MR. SIBLEY: So why should I expect to get paid? COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yeah. I don't know what the heck you're thinking. MR. SIBLEY: I don't know. COMMISSIONER NANCE: The FBI can't get paid, okay, because -- MR. SIBLEY: I'm here today, aren't I? COMMISSIONER HILLER: You know, it's like we can't even get fingerprints done. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Commissioner Fiala? CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: We're going to -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: It's such a joke. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: -- take a break for 10 minutes. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Oh, my gosh. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: I know I don't have an answer for you. I just don't know what to do. I don't know what to tell you. Get the information to Crystal and I guess just be prepared to wait for a while until -- because she has to validate it, then if she finds anything that she needs to question and so forth, then it has to come back to us, has to wait until it goes through the County Manager's Office. MR. SIBLEY: He's not going to bring it back to you. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: What? MR. SIBLEY: He just told me he's not bringing it back to you. COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, no, that's not what he said. We automatically get everything for approval prior to disbursement, after they conclude their preaudit. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: So it's just going to be a while but -- MR. SIBLEY: -- but it has nothing to do with approving the Page 235 Packet Page -593- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 changes. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: -- it can be done if you get whatever backup documentation she's been talking about. Prove that it costs less than what we had approved it for, I guess. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Mike, what is he supposed to do, go to his supplier and say I have to have an invoice in order so I can get paid? Oh, my God. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Let's take a 10-minute break right now. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Not for the -- CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: I'm so sorry, Cherie'. (Recess.) (Commissioner Henning is not present.) MR. OCHS: Ladies and gentlemen, please take your seat. Madam Chairman, you have a live mic. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: But I don't know if we can conduct the meeting yet. MR. OCHS: You don't have a quorum. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: We're missing a couple of people. MR. OCHS: You have a quorum now, ma'am. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Thank you very much. With the reporter -- the reporter that's just going to sit down? Ma'am, I have something to show you later on about that same subject, so I hope you will talk to me. All right, thank you. Okay, very good, we're back in session. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Do you want to -- this is part of the record, you know, the last item. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: We'll pass it over, don't worry about it now. Okay, Leo, I know we didn't get that resolved, so we should go back to what, 11.D? Page 236 Packet Page -594- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 Item #11D RETROACTIVELY AUTHORIZING THE USE OF CONTRACT #14-6280, FENCING INSTALLATION AND REPAIR FOR "LUMP SUM" QUOTED PROJECTS TO CARTER FENCE COMPANY AND BUE, INC. D/B/A/ GATEKEEPERS/GATESWORK AND INFORM THE BOARD OF TERMINATION NOTICES RECEIVED FROM BOTH CONTRACTORS — MOTION TO RETROACTIVELY APPROVE MODIFICATIONS TO ALL CONTRACTS AND USE THE BOARD DIRECTION PROVIDED GOING FORWARD — APPROVED MR. OCHS: Yes, ma'am. 11.D was previously 16.E.5, and that was a recommendation to retroactively authorize the use of Contract 14-6280, fencing installation and repair for lump sum quote projects to Carter Fence Company and BUE, Incorporated, doing business as Gatekeepers Gate Work, and inform the Board of termination notices received from both contractors. That item was moved off consent agenda by both Commissioner Henning and Commissioner Fiala. So Commissioner Fiala, Commissioner Henning's not present on the dais right now, so we're happy to present or -- CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay. Yes, why don't you start that. MR. OCHS: Okay. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Which one is it, Leo? MR. OCHS: 1 1.D was previously 16.E.5. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: 16.E.5? MR. OCHS: Yes, ma'am. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: I have to have all these big books. I'm Page 237 Packet Page -595- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 one of these archaic people who marks up her books and puts little tabs in and everything. Thank you. Go ahead, Joanne. MS. MARKIEWICZ: Joanne Markiewicz, Director of Procurement Services for the County. I'm not quite sure why Commissioner Henning pulled this item. We had a contract for fencing and there's some ambiguous language between lump sum and time and material pricing. The old contract was held by Carter Fencing, and clearly in that contract it reflected both lump sum pricing and time and material pricing. Carter and Gatesworth both were awarded 14-6280, fencing installation repair, and for the first several months there were quotes issued under lump sum quoting. The Board staff approved those quotes and purchase orders, and then subsequently a number of those invoices, those lump sum invoices, were paid. And then sometime four, five, six months later those lump sum invoices stopped being paid. We took a look at the contract, we inquired with the Clerk of Courts, and I'm here to say this contract is very ambiguous. Our recommendation to you is that -- well, actually the contractors tendered a termination notice. It was too difficult for them to use as a time and materials contract. They were being asked for backup invoices per the contract. And so I think it's in the county's best interest to go ahead, we'll terminate this contract. You're going to hear a second item in a few minutes about time and material and lump sum. And what we'd like to do is put that language in our contracts going forward. MR. OCHS: One more item I believe, Commissioners, and Joanne, correct me if I'm wrong, the request to apply this lump sum payment methodology retroactively is because there's still some pending invoices for lump sum projects that apparently won't get paid Page 238 Packet Page -596- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 unless that's done. MS. MARKIEWICZ: That's correct. So we're asking you to retroactively allow us to use this contract as a lump sum contract. And there's about, between the two vendors, about $20,000 involved. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay. COMMISSIONER HILLER: May I speak? CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Yes, you can. COMMISSIONER HILLER: So in effect what we're looking at is a contract modification, County Attorney? MR. KLATZKOW: Yes. COMMISSIONER HILLER: So the action required by the Board and the vendor obviously is in agreement and that is that we are going to modify the terms of this agreement to change time and materials to VV modify sum, and -- MS. MARKIEWICZ: We want to retroactively change the terms, but both of the vendors would prefer to terminate the contract. COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, we are going to terminate the contract. We're going to -- by mutual agreement the -- first the contract is going to be modified to allow for retroactive payment so that the term lump sum is used as of a specific date. And then the second is by mutual agreement we will terminate this agreement as it exists and then just rebid the project. MS. MARKIEWICZ: Yes, ma'am. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right? Is that okay, County Attorney? MR. KLATZKOW: Yes, ma'am. COMMISSIONER HILLER: So it's a contract modification. So I'll make a motion to modify the contract. Do you want to -- is there any specific -- CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: That's all you need, Joanne? MS. MARKIEWICZ: Yes. Page 239 Packet Page -597- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 COMMISSIONER HILLER: Is there any specific wording you need for the contract modification? MR. KLATZKOW: No. COMMISSIONER HILLER: May I make a motion that we modify the contract -- COMMISSIONER NANCE: I will second that. I want to see this go ahead. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, I mean, there's no problem doing that. COMMISSIONER NANCE: Okay. COMMISSIONER HILLER: If the term of the agreement is changing, you know, in terms of how it's being paid. And clearly the Clerk didn't have a problem with the lump sum. He had paid a whole bunch so he was satisfied with it. Nor did staff. So it seems both parties are satisfied and this will solve that issue. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Now are these the two contractors that said they didn't want to do business with us anymore? MR. OCHS: Yes, ma'am. COMMISSIONER HILLER: So actually we're up to three contractors who don't want to do business with us because -- COMMISSIONER NANCE: There's more. COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- of the Clerk. I know we're going to get to more, but at least within the last hour we've got Gillig and these two. And I understand. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Well, we've got this one solved. Good. Thank you very much. So I have a motion on the floor and a second, right? COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Any further comments? (No response.) CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: All those in favor, signify by saying Page 240 Packet Page -598- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 aye. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye. COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye. And so just to -- the next steps will be the contract modification will be brought to the Board for signature. And then once it's signed by the Board then the vendors will -- you'll advance the lump sum invoices to the Clerk for payment, the Clerk will validate those lump sum invoices however he does his audit. Once he concludes his preaudit on those invoices that will come to us for approval for disbursement and we will approve it. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: What are we going to do for fencing by the way? Do we have other vendors we can use or do they charge a higher price now or what? MR. OCHS: Well, we'll get individual quotes each time we need some fence repair done until we can get a new agreement in place pursuant and in accordance with your procurement ordinance. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay, okay. Item #11E REAFFIRMING THE CONTINUED USE OF THE INDUSTRY'S BEST PRACTICES OF UTILIZING "LUMP SUM," "TIME AND MATERIALS," A COMBINATION OF BOTH PRICE METHODOLOGIES, AND "UNIT PRICE" FOR COUNTY PURCHASE ORDERS AND PROJECTS — MOTION TO APPROVE AND APPLY RETROACTIVELY TO ALL CONTRACTS — APPROVED MR. OCHS: Commissioners, that takes us -- thank you, Page 241 Packet Page -599- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 Commissioners. That takes us to 11.E, which was previously 16.E.4. And that is a recommendation to reaffirm the continued use of the industry's best practices of utilizing lump sum, time and materials, a combination of both price methodologies and unit price for county purchase orders and projects. And Commissioner Taylor moved this to the regular agenda, and Mr. Casalanguida has done some work on this item that he'd like to speak to the Board about after we take whatever questions Commissioner Taylor may have. Or if you'd like to go first, ma'am? COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: No, I'd like to hear from Mr. Casalanguida. MR. OCHS: Thank you. MR. CASALANGUIDA: Thank you, Mr. County Manager. Good evening, Board Members. At the request of the County Manager, as we've been going through this suit with the Clerk, he's purposely asked me to stay out of that and work as the operating officer with both the Clerk's Office and the procurement staff and just deal with any issues I see in terms of contracts. So I've worked with Joanne, County Attorney's Office. And these items actually were flipped. And in essence this one was first. So I'll basically take you through the different procurement options that you have and contracts and make sure that you understand them and how they're applied and in any contracts where there's ambiguity we'd like to have this included in those contracts where needed. So the first one and the easiest one, I'll start from the bottom up, is unit price. It's where the county agrees to pay for a total price for a unit. So if we go out and we solicit quotes to replace light poles in the county and four vendors put in and we pick the lowest vendor, and Page 242 Packet Page -600- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 .....:........... then that vendor says for $10 a pole I will replace that one light, every time that light's replaced, the Clerk would pay them $10. And that's inclusive of everything, their labor, their materials all included. There is no post-audit other than the work was done. And that's very important. Your second most effective one is lump sum where people come in, we get multiple quotes. They say they're going to replace the ceiling, four vendors come in, they don't break down the individual cost; they say based on the specifications we've given you three quotes, we take the lowest quotes, lump sum. When the county staff says based on the specifications the work was done, the Clerk would say the work was done, we pay the bill. The hardest part is time and materials. Obviously you'd be between county staff and the Clerk, when you do the post-audit, to verify who was there, what materials were used to go into a ceiling to verify that. There are times where time and materials make sense. So we have all of these definitions in the contract. In terms of the procurement order, the purchase order issuing the work would identify which one we would be using during each time. So if we said rip into the ceiling, maybe repair the air duct, go in there and look and the contractor has a fixed rate of$20 per hour or whatever that number is, plus materials, and then the work's done, supervised. He gives you a breakout of the hours used and the materials used and the markup that's allowed, and that's how you would audit to the invoice. So hopefully our goal is by having these clarified for both the Clerk's purposes and our purposes included in each contract and then the purchase order would identify what we use and ob-- COMMIS STONER HILLER: You're talking about master contracts. Page 243 Packet Page -601- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 MR. CASALANGUIDA: Master contracts, yes, ma'am. COMMISSIONER HILLER: You're talking about all contracts? Any and all contracts? MR. CASALANGUIDA: Master contracts, ma'am. So in other words, when we use a vendor repeatedly over and over again. So plumbing supply house, repair company, general -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: Like the conflict we have right now with the general contractor who's not being paid and why the special ops ceiling won't get repaired, because we can't get any GC to bid on it because the Clerk won't pay. MR. CASALANGUIDA: That's exactly where it would come into play, ma'am. So you would have a general contract with a purchase order to repair the ceiling, it would say lump sum. You would get three quotes from three different contractors and we would take the lowest price, and when the work was done to the specifications we would submit that to the Clerk's Office. So what we're asking you to do is approve these terms and us to include them in these contracts that we have so that hopefully Crystal will have less of an issue and it will give her some comfort level as well too. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Okay, so I asked for it to be pulled and I appreciate your clarification of the three areas. It's just that it just seems to me, and I may be wrong about this, that a vendor that comes in can change midway and said wait a minute, I'm not going to do time and materials, this is lump sum because of the way the contract was written before. COMMISSIONER HILLER: No. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I appreciate your going back and clarifying it and not mixing it up. But I'm just saying, the contract seems to be, you know, which gun do you want me to shoot, which way do you want me to bid on this. And I need some clarification on Page 244 Packet Page -602- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 that. Because that's what it appears to me from what I've read here. MR. CASALANGUIDA: No, if-- the general contractor's contract is a great example. If the specifications are clean and we get three bids, it's lump sum. If the specifications are to repair that ceiling and go into that ceiling and we say to them we want to do this time and materials, they have an hourly rate that they can apply, plus a markup. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: So the county makes that decision. MR. CASALANGUIDA: The county would make that decision during the issuance of the purchase order. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Okay. MR. CASALANGUIDA: And then upfront the Clerk knows what it is. It's either time and materials or lump sum. And more importantly, the vendor knows what it is. So they know what they have to do the work too. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Okay. But it says that -- here it says that on the contract it was sometimes on a lump sum contract you had an area that talked about time and materials. So there could be some confusion. So the contracts, the original contracts themselves were not clear. MR. CASALANGUIDA: That's exactly as your purchasing director pointed out. As part of the audit process that Crystal conducts it talks about providing backup to what they had done. Now, there's obviously a challenge to that when they're doing these lump sum because -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right. MR. CASALANGUIDA: -- did they use some nails out of a different job that's in their pouch as -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right. MR. CASALANGUIDA: -- they're nailing it in? Was some flashing left over? When was the flashing from? It's all these little Page 245 Packet Page -603- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 nuances that a contractor looks at us and goes you really want me to track where I bought my nails from for this job? And when we ask for time and materials, they'll know up front because the P.O. that we have and the notice to proceed will say time and materials, provide all the backup with it. Or it will say this is a lump sum job, all you have to do is perform to the specifications. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: And there won't be any section for time and materials on that; is that correct? MR. CASALANGUIDA: No, it's -- sometimes time and materials make sense. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: No, no, no, if it's a lump sum contract there's not going to be any time and materials -- MR. CASALANGUIDA: Correct. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: -- requirement on it. MR. CASALANGUIDA: That purchase order will be -- COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Okay. So I would like to use this as an example to the public watching, the public that may watch and the public who have left us, that this is an example of a cooperation between the County Manager's Office and the Clerk's Office to get some clarity in what could have been a little bit muddy. And it is very an adult way of doing it and thank you very much. And I move approval. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Commissioner Nance? COMMISSIONER NANCE: And I will second it. Nick? Excuse me, Mr. Casalanguida, when I saw this item on the consent agenda, I was absolutely delighted. It's absolutely the way to go. It's going to clear all this up. Time and materials is often the most costly way you can do something, because you don't know how long the item's going to take and you don't know what's necessary. Well, let's suppose you got a leak in the wall and you go to a contractor and you go hey, you know, Page 246 Packet Page -604- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 I've got a problem in this wall, what do you bid to fix it? He's going to go, I don't know, I've got to break a hole in the wall, maybe there's a gold-plated pipe in there, I'm not going to tell you, but this is how much I charge per hour and this is how much I charge for a gold-plated pipe and we'll use what we need to do and we'll get together on it. And then typically if you have a time and materials contract and it exceeds a certain amount of money, everybody circles back together and goes, now wait a minute, we've got to get approval for this. Because the guy may come in and go hey, you know, you thought you were going to spend $5,000 and it's going to cost you 100. That's when everybody needs to come back together. So yyo►►n your time and materials, you can specify what happens if there's mexpected COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Yeah, like a limit. COMMISSIONER NANCE: Like a stop loss or a limit or something. MR. CASALANGUIDA: No questions. Like a mechanic opens up your car and -- COMMISSIONER NANCE: Perfect. MR. CASALANGUIDA: -- says I opened it up and I found all this extra work that I need to do, do I have authorization to do so. COMMISSIONER NANCE: As the way to go. I believe the Clerk will be more than satisfied with that. It will solve a lot of problems. Thank you, I'm ready to approve that. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: So the motion is on the floor and a second. All in -- MR. OCHS: Madam Chairman, I think you have some speakers. MR. MILLER: Thank you, Leo, I was getting there. We have three registered public speakers for this item. Your first speaker is Henry Fernandez, and he'll be followed by Terry Kelly. Page 247 Packet Page -605- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: And they all get gold stars for staying with us for so long. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Oh, they've been sitting here all day too? COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: All day. MR. FERNANDEZ: I was going to say good morning, but it's good afternoon. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: It's good evening. MR. CASALANGUIDA: Good evening. MR. FERNANDEZ: For the record, my name is Henry Fernandez, I'm a project manager for Brandanna, Incorporated. We're a general contractor that provides general contracting services for the county. We have been providing services for the county for approximately over the last 20 years. And what was just discussed in definition and clarification, let me say, for the wording in these contracts for lump sum versus time and material is something that we were hoping that would be approved. We've had recently certain invoices that were being requested after the fact, then when we submitted them as a lump sum needing some backup information. So we just wanted it to be clarified if that was going to be the norm on all of our lump sum estimates or proposals that we were issued work orders or purchase orders for, and now that the verbiage that's been proposed to be changed is something that we agree to and would like to see happen. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Good. Thank you. COMMISSIONER HILLER: May I address the speaker? I understand what your concern is, because now what's happened is if the master contract says, you know, that staff has the option and then you enter into an agreement through the purchase order with staff on whatever methodology is used, that still doesn't stop the Clerk in Page 248 Packet Page -606- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 terms of what kind of documentation they feel they need to satisfy themselves on that preaudit requirement. So just because it says lump sum doesn't mean that the Clerk somehow isn't going to come back and say I want to look at something. Now what that is, I don't know. I don't know how the Clerk is going to decide to preaudit lump sum contracts. But what I'm suggesting to you is that if you think the word lump sum is in there and that somehow the Clerk as a result is not going to conduct a preaudit to the extent they feel necessary, I don't think that's going to be the case. I don't think that this is an effort at cooperation, because I don't know what they do. I mean, I don't understand what they do. Their methodology of auditing is unique and different. So I'm just telling you -- COMMISSIONER NANCE: We can be hopeful, ma'am. COMMISSIONER HILLER: But what I'm telling you is we need clarification on that now. Because if we're going into this -- and quite frankly, this is an issue for the County Attorney, this is not about cooperation between the staff and Clerk, this is about the County Attorney ensuring that our contracts, our master contracts with vendors where master contracts are the way we deal, has to be clear to avoid issues that create ambiguity where the Clerk can create controversy, as he has. So my question to the Clerk's Office is how are you going to preaudit a lump sum contract? MS. KINZEL: Commissioner Hiller -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: These vendors should have the right to know. They should know what their -- CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: You asked the question, let her answer it, okay? COMMISSIONER HILLER: Go ahead, what documents will you need? MS. KINZEL: First of all, your indication that we create the Page 249 Packet Page -607- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 confusion, the Clerk's Office does not write your contracts, nor does the Clerk's Office determine the type of contract that is let. We merely audit to what the contract says. If you let a contract that is time and materials and it says that the vendor is constrained to a 25 percent markup, how would I audit if I do not know what in fact they pay? COMMISSIONER HILLER: I didn't ask that question. MS. KINZEL: No, wait, excuse me -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: Just go to lump sum. MS. KINZEL: Wait. No, you don't understand. You just said on the record that you have no idea what we do, and I find that accurate for today, okay, you have no idea. COMMISSIONER HILLER: I have no idea because you audited MS. KINZEL: But this issue in a -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- 22,000 but not 480. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Would you please stop talking at the same time? She cannot type fast enough to get both of you. Go ahead. COMMISSIONER HILLER: I just wanted to know how you audit a lump sum. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: You don't ever stop. MS. KINZEL: Commissioner Fiala, I'm not going to answer the question because of what's transpired here. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: I understand. COMMISSIONER HILLER: I want to know. I have a -- and this vendor has a right to know. MR. FERNANDEZ: I just have one question. COMMISSIONER HILLER: The public has a right to know. MR. FERNANDEZ: On the -- I guess can the. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Because you can't answer it. MR. FERNANDEZ: The contract -- well, I'm reading the executive summary that was presented under this agenda item. There's Page 250 Packet Page -608- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 one verbiage that I thought was unique on the unit price that possibly could be added to the lump sum, and that's just my opinion, but it says -- and it says -- I'm just going to paraphrase the last sentence in the unit price: This invoice must identify the unit price and the number of units received. No contract or inventory or cost verification required. So can we have that clause added to the lump sum as no contract or inventory or cost verification required? COMMISSIONER HILLER: I like what you're saying. And here's what needs to be in the contract, County Attorney. If we have this in there that staff will decide what methodology is being used, it should also provide in the contract that the vendor knows what the documentary requirements are for preaudit. So if it's time and materials, that the vendor knows he has to produce time cards and, you know, underlying invoices from suppliers for the materials that he applied to the job. If it's a lump sum, I don't know what Crystal wants to do for a lump sum. You know, if it's a unit price, it's pretty straightforward. But I think the underlying documentation that is expected of the vendor that he understands what his documentary audit requirements are should be in the contract so there is no ambiguity on anybody's part as to what he has to produce. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: So maybe what we can do is we can ask the Clerk's Office what they will be looking for in -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: And put it in the contract. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: -- and that our people can put it in the contract. But at least we know what the Clerk's Office will look for so our people can match whatever they're looking for and the vendor will know what materials they need to give and we won't go through all of this stuff. COMMISSIONER HILLER: And normally -- MR. FERNANDEZ: The industry standard in our business for a Page 251 Packet Page -609- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 lump sum contract is to provide you a price, we agree to that price -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right, and you're done. MR. FERNANDEZ: -- and we're done. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right. MR. FERNANDEZ: And you pay the bill. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yep. Yeah, but who knows what the Clerk will want. MR. FERNANDEZ: Well, I'm just saying, we'd like to follow industry standard, if we can. And it's very simple. I mean, time and materials is very clear. I think that's what the documentation is for and that's what you need. COMMISSIONER HILLER: And unit price is very clear. MR. FERNANDEZ: Unit price is very clear, but lump sum just needs to be one price. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Lump sum, right. MR. CASALANGUIDA: And Commissioners, Joanne will read into the record, it's in there in the sentence. Joanne, if you want to read it in there? MS. MARKIEWICZ: Yes, under lump sum it says: No hourly or material invoices presented. Rather there's an agreement in price and then what we do is validate that the work is according to the specification. COMMISSIONER HILLER: And the Clerk agrees with that, right? You said this was a matter of cooperation and agreement and everybody has kumbaya together and the Clerk says that's fine, right? I want that on the record. Right? CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Well, let -- Crystal will tell you. MS. KINZEL: Commissioner Fiala, on this agenda item the Clerk's Office was not consulted. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Oh, so members of the public, there is no Kumbaya. Page 252 Packet Page -610- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 MS. KINZEL: But this is a -- I appreciate what Nick has outlined. And I want to repeat, the Clerk's Office does not create your contracts, the Clerk's Office does not create your methodology for purchasing. That is a county staff event. We audit to what you have approved based on the specifications in the contract agreement. If we can audit to your contract as you've articulated in your contract, that's how we perform your audit on any item. We don't create the contract, we don't create how you go about procuring, we audit to what you have defined. And in many of these contracts the problem has been you issue a contract that says time and materials with a markup and an hourly and then everybody balks at providing the backup documentation. I didn't create the rule or the request, that was part of your contractual construct. And -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: So we're talking about subcontracts CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: So if we're talking about -- would you let me please talk? COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: So if we have a lump sum contract with these people and they perform their duties and our people who go out and inspect and make sure that it's done and they meet those things, do you need anything more than that? MS. KINZEL: We would audit to the construct of your contract. COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's not an answer. MS. KINZEL: Yes, it is. I haven't seen a contract yet, so I can't say oh, we don't need anything for this agreement until I see what you prepare. MS. MARKIEWICZ: Commissioners, what we're asking you to do is retroactively insert this in all of the lump sum and time and material contracts. Page 253 Packet Page -611- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah, except -- MS. MARKIEWICZ: So for the general contractors we're asking you to retroactiv-- COMMISSIONER HILLER: Which is fine except we still haven't gotten an answer from the Clerk's Office as to whether or not that's going to have some kind of, you know, evidentiary requirement for purposes of their audit. And the Clerk refuses to answer that. MS. KINZEL: I have not re-- COMMISSIONER HILLER: So these vendors are in as much of a -- these vendors are at as much risk today with this change. In fact, you know, Commissioner Taylor said oh, we all -- this is cooperation and everyone's like getting along, and Crystal says I didn't even see this; we didn't even approve it. MR. CASALANGUIDA: Commissioners, when we meet -- for clarification, we met with the contractors in a room, and one of the biggest issues was the issue of lump sum and time and materials. And the Clerk was in that meeting; the Clerk's Office was represented in that meeting. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, Crystal, you did know about it. MR. CASALANGUIDA: Not the agenda item. She knew about the issue between time and materials -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: Did she sit in on your meeting -- CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay, Georgia, let people talk. COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- ahead of the production? MR. CASALANGUIDA: She does, ma'am. If these are inserted in the contract, then it's part of the contract that she audits to. And when staff issues the purchase order to Surety or one of these vendors, it will say: This purchase order is lump sum. Which a purchase order is a contract. So if our meeting holds up to the discussion, then what she would Page 254 Packet Page -612- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 audit to is that it's a lump sum payment -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: What documentation would she need for that audit? CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Would you let him finish? MR. CASALANGUIDA: It's exactly the way it reads, ma'am. The documentation would be a certification by staff that the work was done according to the specifications. And then if she wanted to audit, the audit would be she could go look at the wall and see that the wall was done. So no different than a fixed -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: And that's it. MR. CASALANGUIDA: And that's it, ma'am. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Is that correct, Crystal? Is that how you would audit a lump sum? I mean, these vendors need to know. And they have the right to know. MS. KINZEL: Commissioner Hiller, I'm not going to continue to argue with you at this meeting. COMMISSIONER HILLER: You're not answering the public's question. MS. KINZEL: That is not true. We've answered every question. I've indicated exactly what our audit process is, that is we audit to the document that you prepare and that you agree on or you solicit or you construct. COMMISSIONER HILLER: So then construct is -- CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: No, no, no, no. COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- not requiring underlying documentation for anything. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Commissioner Hiller, enough. COMMISSIONER NANCE: Mr. Klatzkow, if we put a catchall in the contract which says if the vendor provides the documentary requirements as delineated and satisfies the terms of the description of the work and it is validated by staff that it is sufficient basis for Page 255 Packet Page -613- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 payment from the Board of County Commissioners, is that going to be of any help in this at all, or not necessarily? MR. KLATZKOW: I have no idea. COMMISSIONER HILLER: We have no idea. COMMISSIONER NANCE: That's an honest answer. Okay. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: So Commissioner Taylor? COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: No, that's fine. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay, fine. Any other speakers? MR. MILLER: Yes, ma'am. Terry Kelly will be followed by Bart -- is it Zino? MR. ZINO: Yes. MR. KELLY: Good evening, everybody. Thank you very much. Terry Kelly, Surety Construction Company. To the point of looking at this executive summary, I mean, I think this clears up all the issues I've had. And since Joanne has mentioned it would be retroactive, that's important to our company as well as these other guys sitting out here. I've got three projects right now that are completed and my payments are held up on a lump sum contract because the Clerk is asking for backup, which I feel like there's absolutely no sense in having to do. Please let me finish. I've been working here at the county doing county work for 24 years. The procurement department asks for a price. We give them a price, we're the low bidder, they give us a contract -- we already have a contract. They give us a P.O. They give us notice to proceed. We go to work, we finish the job. The people that are in charge, be it CSO or facilities or whatever, they come in, inspect the work, tell everybody they're done, I send an invoice in and I get a check in the mail. It's worked that way for 24 -- 22 and a half years, let's say, because in the last while all of a sudden we've been scrutinized on lump sum dollar Page 256 Packet Page -614- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 amounts. We understand time and material backup is mandatory. No question about it, Crystal. We don't have that argument. It's part of the deal in this building or anywhere we work. But when we work out in the other sector and it's lump sum, do the work, send the bill, get a check. Simple as that. Now, the point is I've got three projects being held up, I've got three more I'm getting ready to bill by the end of the month, and I've got a $140,000 job that we have on hold because I don't know if I'm getting paid how I'm getting paid. And these are all lump sum projects. So the importance of this document -- and Joanne I think has done an excellent job at delineating what's necessary for lump sum billing, time and material billing and unit pricing. I applaud her efforts. And the only condition is this needs to be retroactive. We've got Brandanna represented here, we've got PBS, we've got myself. There's two other vendors that are on this contract who are out of Lee County, and they apparently don't do enough work to be concerned about it. They're not here that I know of, okay. So my question has got to be to Crystal is that if this executive summary saying lump sum says no invoice is required, no backup required, are you going to have a problem with that? MS. KINZEL: Let me -- you know we've had this discussion about the issue of the procurement and the conflict in the current agreement that you have. And that's what mandated that we require the backup. It wasn't a general lump sum agreement. That agreement specifies time and materials and other items. Then the departments were going out and saying we're just lump summing this. We had to validate to the contract agreement. Now, this executive summary seems to say they're going Page 257 Packet Page -615- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 retroactive. I was also going to ask is it limited to only the five general contractor vendors that you're speaking about doing an amendment to their contract. Because this was solicited one way and issued another way. And -- MS. MARKIEWICZ: Excuse me, Commissioners, that's not correct. In fact, I have the general contract sitting here right in front of me. In each summary of the work the owner reserves the right to specify the completion and whether time and materials or lump sum. There's another section, same thing, time and material or lump sum. There's a rate schedule included in the contract that is to be applied only for time and material. It was applied for time and material for a good number of months. Recently it's been applied to lump sum projects. MR. OCHS: In other words, lump sum P.O.'s were being paid under this contract for some time in the past and then it stopped. MR. KELLY: Absolutely. COMMISSIONER HILLER: So, I mean, your question has no answer. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Go ahead, Commissioner Nance. COMMISSIONER NANCE: Mr. Kelly, I'd like to ask you a question, sir. You said that you had several projects and several invoices that had been held up. Would you please confirm with me, sir, is this a problem with purchasing on the county staff side or is this a problem with the Clerk's approval? MR. KELLY: Problem with the Clerk's. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: And they're all lump sum? COMMISSIONER NANCE: All of them are that way, sir? MR. KELLY: Yes. COMMISSIONER NANCE: How long has this been going on? MR. KELLY: I'm going to say since back in September there's Page 258 Packet Page -616- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 been questions. COMMISSIONER NANCE: All right, sir. MR. KELLY: Perhaps October. COMMISSIONER NANCE: Okay. Thank you very much. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: So why -- Crystal, can you tell me why you're not paying on a lump sum? MS. KINZEL: Well, Commissioner, because quite frankly this hasn't been brought up to us by this contractor or other contractors. We sat in a meeting -- and Nick is right, we talked about the backup and the documentation. There is a requirement in the contract that says you refer to the rate schedule. So there are conflicting clauses in the agreements that refer back to the time and materials clauses. That's why they're bringing forward a clarification and trying to go retroactive to that. We talked about how the procurements had changed over time, did we not, that said that the ability -- because we have not had this problem with our vendors previously in paying under whatever you provide the backup -- MR. KELLY: I think what Joanne just read said lump sum or time and material. And I would have to refer back to the P.O., the specific P.O. But there's a box for them to check, lump sum, time and material, unit price. And I'm guessing that the jobs that I'm talking about, Joanne, do not have time and material checked. They are lump sum. Because that's how they were asked to be procured and that's how my response would have been. Because I could tell you, if it was lump sum, I'm all in. When it's time and material, I'm not interested. It's too much BS. I mean, the bottom line. I'm not interested in time and material. MS. KINZEL: And Nick, what we had discussed is that regarding the lump sum, if was no competition to the lump sum, there should be some validation of that. For example, you issue the Page 259 Packet Page -617- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 specifications out, then multiple vendors were required to put forward a bid or a quote on that lump sum so that you would have validation across the contract. COMMISSIONER HILLER: That has nothing to do -- CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: They're our master group that we've already approved, right? So -- MR. KELLY: Commissioner, we have a contract that when they write the P.O., that actually is the dollar amount. The meat and potatoes is in here, and then the P.O. says go do the Sheriffs Office for $27,000 over on Horseshoe Drive. And that's what the P.O. says. And then we get a notice to proceed which says go. And that purchase order is the one that delineates lump sum, time and material, unit price. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Exactly. MR. KELLY: And I don't believe I have any time and materials signed up. The only one we did is when we did the fire station out there in Golden Gate with the termites. That was a T&M -- I take that back. That was a lump sum and then the extra work was done on a T&M basis, the additional work. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: So in other words, all of your contracts are lump sum. And Crystal, if they're all lump sum, you would just pay them, right? MS. KINZEL: He only has one contract. And the problem and the confusion has come in because the contract says lump sum and/or time and materials. Now, as we talked about with Nick, if you're looking for a lump sum procurement, you would routinely have the specifications go out to the multiple contractors. Those contractors would bid a lump sum and county staff would theoretically take the lowest bid for it to be economical. If in fact you're only going to that same vendor and you're just saying give me a lump sum, you have no control whatsoever on the Page 260 Packet Page -618- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 pricing. So routinely -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: That has nothing to do with it at all. MS. KINZEL: -- if you're using a vendor you would have either a unit pricing or a time and materials in using an overall vendor. And that was kind of the differentiation we had talked about in my office. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: So he doesn't get paid -- let me just make sure I understand what you just said. He doesn't get paid because his contract first says time and material or lump sum, he chose lump sum, but you're saying that we didn't, we the county, didn't go out and get other people's prices so you're not paying him? MS. KINZEL: No. Commissioner Fiala, I have no idea what is pending for Surety Construction at this time. This was not brought up to us that there were items that he was missing. You have my phone number, give me a call. We'll go look at it. MR. KELLY: The bottom line is you're asking for backup, backup, backup, and we feel no backup required on lump sum. MR. CASALANGUIDA: This is easy to clarify. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay, good. Listen to it. MR. CASALANGUIDA: Because if you say today, and Crystal's here, Surety's here, if the invoice comes in and says lump sum and we've retroactively said the purchase order governs and we've identified these terms in the contract, then Crystal should audit to lump sum. COMMISSIONER HILLER: What is that? MR. CASALANGUIDA: Which is -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: Define what audit to lump sum is. MR. CASALANGUIDA: Performance based, ma'am. In other words, what the product -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: There's no documentation from this gentleman. Page 261 Packet Page -619- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 MR. CASALANGUIDA: No documentation -- MR. KELLY: An invoice. MR. CASALANGUIDA: Right. COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's it. MR. CASALANGUIDA: And specification is delivered per the specs that we've quoted. That's it. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Crystal, the documentation from the vendor, as Nick describes it and as this vendor is willing to provide an invoice that says lump sum, here it is, are you going to pay on that? COMMISSIONER NANCE: Ma'am, stop asking that question, because I don't think we're going to get an answer to it. Sorry to interrupt you -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: But then -- COMMISSIONER NANCE: Sorry to interrupt you. MR. KELLY: I've asked that question, Commissioner Nance. COMMISSIONER NANCE: Sir? MR. KELLY: I asked that question. If I've got a lump sum contract and I send in a separate invoice for that same dollar amount, somebody in the county staff obviously has to validate it, be it Claude or one of your project managers has to validate it. And then it goes to you, it's validated by Claude or Robert Fuentes, whomever, then you should pay it. And the question is, is that the case? Are you going to pay it when they sign off on my invoice after completion? MS. KINZEL: The Clerk has an independent responsibility to audit the invoices to the contract. I can't predetermine that we will approve every one of your requests based on county staff saying yes, okay? That's where I'm avoiding the predetermination. But what we have talked about in clarifying these contracts will certainly go a long way in a lack of confusion on what supporting documentation will be required. Page 262 Packet Page -620- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 So I agree with clarifying the agreements. I was a bit ambiguous as to how far this retroactive on all contracts. Now I understand it's limited simply to these five general contractors that are on the existing agreement -- MS. MARKIEWICZ: No, no, no. MS. KINZEL: -- is that correct? MR. KELLY: No, ma'am. MS. KINZEL: No? Okay. So it's to all contracts for all things that have been let previously -- MR. CASALANGUIDA: All contracts that have been let previously where there's ambiguity in the section where there's an hourly rate that you're auditing to. So if the P.O. says lump sum, then you audit to lump sum. MS. KINZEL: Will I be getting a list of the contracts that you are having the Board approve -- that's not included in the agenda item, correct? So which vendors are we now changing -- MR. KLATZKOW: All contracts. MS. KINZEL: -- their contracts? MR. CASALANGUIDA: It's all contracts. MR. KLATZKOW: It's all contracts. You don't need a list. It's every single contract. Every single contract that you think there's an ambiguity, poof, no more ambiguity. You'll be auditing to lump sum. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: How many are you holding up? COMMISSIONER NANCE: All of them. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Yeah, but how many? Are we talking five? COMMISSIONER NANCE: All of them. You just heard her say all of them. MS. KINZEL: No, that's not true, Commissioner Nance. We're paying 90 percent of the invoices. So, you know -- COMMISSIONER NANCE: Thank you, Mr. Kelly. I appreciate Page 263 Packet Page -621- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 you persevering today. MR. KELLY: All right, thank you. COMMISSIONER NANCE: Thank you sincerely. MR. KELLY: Thank you. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Thank you, Mr. Kelly. We appreciate you bringing it. And I hope you'll stay working with us. We don't want to lose you; you're a good, good company. MR. KELLY: I would like to, but obviously this has got to get cleared up. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Yes, I understand that. And I'm hoping that we'll get to that point. MR. MILLER: Last public speaker, ma'am, is Bart Zino. MR. ZINO: Good evening. I'm Bart Zino with PBS Contractors. I'm the president there and I've been there 17 years working for the county -- I'm not sure if my contract is 12 or 15 years in duration, but it's been a pretty successful relationship. I'm obviously in favor of the language change. I'm most interested in the lump sum part of the language change. There isn't anything that could induce me to work for Collier County under a time and material or a unit price. There's absolutely nothing. Too open to interpretation. I've got two invoices in with the county now that I had to provide a full audit documentation of how I arrived at my price after I did the work; I've got two work orders right now that I refuse to start until this gets straightened out; and the one invoice I got paid under this contract I had to provide full documentation according to the time and materials schedule, even though it's a lump sum contract. There's no ambiguity as to whether or not -- I was pre-audited on a time and material basis with full documentation providing every vendor invoice and showing the Clerk that I only made five percent on that project. I'm afraid that if I accidentally make more than five percent on a Page 264 Packet Page -622- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 project I'm going to be required to refund the county money on a lump sum deal. Because why ask the question if it's not open to an answer. I don't get it. I'm so afraid to provide any information, not knowing where it's going to go. If the county wants to be my partner and wants to guarantee me five whole percent on everything I do, then make sure on the jobs that I lose my behind on you guarantee me five percent. And then I'll take the five percent beating on a job that I might make six percent on. Can't have it both ways. It's one way or the other. I've had a long relationship with the county. Watching the guy with the bus go through what he went through today is exactly why everything I've got is on hold. I really don't want to work for the county very much anymore until this gets straightened out. And it's really a shame because it's been a great relationship. I've got two more issues. I've got a little bit of time. COMMISSIONER NANCE: Excuse me, I'm going to interrupt you one second. Do we have a limitation that these people can only make five percent on a job? MR. CASALANGUIDA: No, sir. COMMISSIONER NANCE: Where is that coming from? MR. ZINO: Your contract. MR. CASALANGUIDA: Time and materials section, sir. MR. ZINO: But not when it's cross-referenced to lump sum. And that's the issue. If it's an either/or, the Clerk always interprets to the strictest stringent (sic) interpretation that's possible. COMMISSIONER NANCE: Now wait a minute -- MR. ZINO: Because if the Clerk wanted to interpret either/or as or, we would be audited to the "or", wouldn't we? We wouldn't be audited to the "and". COMMISSIONER NANCE: Now you mean to tell me if we Page 265 Packet Page -623- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 have a time and materials -- MR. CASALANGUIDA: Charges an hourly rate, sir. COMMISSIONER NANCE: That we have a five percent limit on the job? MR. CASALANGUIDA: You -- MR. ZINO: It goes even further. It tells us what our subs are allowed to make on the job. COMMISSIONER NANCE: Why are we doing that? MR. ZINO: Well, we don't want to -- CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: That's your contract. MR. ZINO: I can't answer that. MR. CASALANGUIDA: That goes to the question of when you don't know what the job is. And it's very rarely used. Most of your quotes are going to be lump sum. COMMISSIONER NANCE: No, no, I know that. MR. ZINO: It's being applied now. COMMISSIONER NANCE: I'm just trying to figure out what the thinking is on -- that doesn't even encourage anybody to come work on a difficult time and materials job. Wait one second. What is done -- MR. ZINO: Let me give you a -- COMMISSIONER NANCE: Sir, in the private sector tell me what your private sector customers do when you have a time and materials warranted situation. And I'm sure you've done dozens of jobs. How do you work with them. MR. ZINO: Let me tell you how this is all began. There was a period of time when the county -- the Board felt that change orders were out of control on general contracting services. And so in order to limit the exposure to the county and in order to limit apparently our greed for change orders, our general contractor greed for change Page 266 Packet Page -624- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 orders, they started changing the contract to limit our markup on change orders. And I get that. I get it in -- I didn't like the terms, but I get it. Because in the private sector very often change order terms are negotiated as part of the initial contract so there's no fights later. COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes, sir. MR. ZINO: Treated as cost plus. That interpretation was integrated into the newest contract and implied and written in such a way that there is interpretation to the audit of the contract that says we have to provide that information as part of getting paid for our preaudit on lump sum. It's an evolution is how it began, with a good intent and it really went down the road. And so as I said, in either/or we're being audited even on lump sums. For markup, for costs, for the rate schedule, for backup invoices. I mean, I've had to provide the documentation. I'm not making it up. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: You understand it's all going to change now. COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, it's not. MR. ZINO: I would like to see it change. I've got two other concerns that are related to all of this. I'm still not sure, because the Clerk and I have written to the Clerk and gotten a no response -- I'm sorry, I got a response that was useless for Mr. Perez. Does my contract, our general contract for ongoing services which allows for work under $50,000, do these $50,000 deals need to be approved before the Board of County Commissioners or is that approval implicit in the contract that we've agreed to? So if you give me a work order for $12,000 and it doesn't go before the Board because it's under this contract, is that approval implicit or do I need to go back before the Board before a purchase order is issued and their office will pay? Page 267 Packet Page -625- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 COMMISSIONER NANCE: That is what is in dispute currently, sir, with the Clerk of Courts. MR. ZINO: But I have a contract that says I can do work under $50,000. Is that the approval? See, if that's the case, I'm not doing your work under $50,000. Period. I'm not putting the money at risk. COMMISSIONER NANCE: That's where we're at. MR. ZINO: And I'm afraid that after we resolve this hurdle, that will be the next hurdle. And you know what? I work too hard for my five percent, my whole five percent. MR. CASALANGUIDA: Commissioners, that is not part of the dispute right now. MR. ZINO: I'm sorry. MR. CASALANGUIDA: I'm just -- Bart, just so you know, right now if there's a valid Board contract and it's a procurement under $50,000, right now that's not a dispute between the county staff and the Clerk's Office. It is established in a contract under $50,000. So -- MR. ZINO: I just want to get it on the record so that I've got something to go back to later when I'm here in a couple more months. MR. CASALANGUIDA: Got it. MR. ZINO: Okay, the other issue is I heard a reference to three bids. When the county can't get three bids on a lump sum purchase, did I hear that then that lump sum -- did I misinterpret it that that lump sum is now subject to a preaudit verification? Did I hear that right or did I just like zone out for a minute? MR. CASALANGUIDA: I'm glad you brought that up. For clarification it says, we will endeavor to get quotes. And if we put out five and we get two and we go with the lowest bidder, that is still the lowest quote and we intend to honor that. MR. ZINO: As a lump sum. MR. CASALANGUIDA: As a lump sum. Page 268 Packet Page -626- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 MR. ZINO: You're not my partner. MR. CASALANGUIDA: If the purchase order says lump sum, which is what we intend to issue. COMMISSIONER HILLER: But the issue is not you. The issue is whether the Clerk will accept that. Because the Clerk will say you didn't try hard enough to get five. And therefore it's invalid and they won't pay. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: We don't know that. MR. CASALANGUIDA: I haven't heard that one yet, but -- CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: We don't know that. MR. ZINO: But I heard a reference earlier and I just want to make sure I didn't hear it wrong. MS. KINZEL: Bart, what I was explaining was Nick and my discussion previously regarding other contracts, okay? And what I'm hearing from you goes back to again the construct of your contract. The Clerk audits to the contract you've been issued. The five percent you keep bringing up, I'm not aware of any limitation the Clerk is placing on any five percent. So -- MR. ZINO: Oh, then your staff needs to be retrained. MS. KINZEL: No, the markup -- of a limit to a markup on a time and material we certainly -- MR. CASALANGUIDA: Subcontract is five percent. MS. KINZEL: Correct. MR. BARTON: I disagree vehemently. MS. KINZEL: Well, the subcontractor rule is in your contract. And if your contract says you can't use more than 50 percent of-- COMMISSIONER HILLER: How much are -- MS. KINZEL: -- subcontractors, we -- MR. ZINO: When you asked for a boat dock -- MS. KINZEL: I didn't write the contract, Bart. MR. ZINO: -- do you think I have on my payroll? otsiyo Page 269 Packet Page -627- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 MS. KINZEL: I didn't write the contract. I'm only auditing to what -- MR. ZINO: Call me when you've got a way to get paid. MS. KINZEL: -- Board's staff has written. COMMISSIONER NANCE: Mr. Zino, sir, thank you for persevering. MR. ZINO: It's been a long day. I'm sorry. COMMISSIONER NANCE: Sir, no, I -- sir, you saw me misbehave. You've been a gentleman of the highest order. I thank you for your perseverance. And I want to let you know, you and Mr. Kelly are being very helpful -- CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: And you guys too. COMMISSIONER NANCE: -- in helping us do that. Thank you. Good night. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Somebody was talking. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Mr. Kelly, can you come back up? Because I do want to talk to you. And because I heard what Mr. Zino said. And Mr. Zino, can you stand at the other podium? Because I want to just -- and let me share with you why. Because you are both making my point. And the point that I have repeatedly been asking for clarification on the record is what underlying documentation is the Clerk going to go ask for when you enter into a lump sum contract with the county and they refuse to provide that response. So you have no idea what documentation will be asked of you. And to the point that you just made, Bart, when you said that even though you -- and it's not about clarifying the wording in the contract, because you both have contracts that provide lump sum or time and materials. And the county opted to go with lump sum. And notwithstanding, you just said on the record that the Clerk is auditing your lump sum using the time and material standards, Page 270 Packet Page -628- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 meaning we're not looking at a lump sum, and what you said -- MR. KELLY: That's our argument, right. COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- Mr. Kelly, was that if it's time and materials, it's obviously a requirement to produce the time and the materials -- MR. KELLY: No argument. COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- by way of documentary evidence. And if it's a lump sum you get an invoice that to the county MR. KELLY: Then we're done. COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- that says you agreed to 12,000 for the fence, we provided the fence, it's been verified independently the fence is there and you pay me 12,000 and no other documentary presence is required other that the invoice that conforms to the lump sum agreement. MR. KELLY: And clearly that's what we're asking for. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: The original contract is written that says either/or -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, it doesn't matter. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: No, I'm asking that question. And are we going to change that contract now to just read -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: It doesn't -- CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Just read -- okay. So that's what we're talking about. COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, that doesn't solve -- THE COURT REPORTER: Please. MR. ZINO: My issue with it all -- CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: I know, I'm sorry. MR. ZINO: I'm sorry. Is you say you fulfill the contract or you read the contract. I interpret the contract differently than it's currently being interpreted Amw Page 271 Packet Page -629- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 and enforced on me. When I signed it I thought I signed A. Apparently I signed B. And that's what I'm trying to avoid -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: But that's not -- MR. ZINO: -- when I get to C. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Let him talk. COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's not -- let me -- but here's the issue, Bart. The issue is that the interpretation of the contract is the Board of County Commissioners because we're the other side to the party. The meeting of the minds is between you and us, not the Clerk's interpretation of what we're thinking or what you're thinking. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: But that is the fact here. MR. ZINO: Except it's our money. COMMISSIONER HILLER: I understand. But it's the public's money that we're looking to pay you for the services you've rendered, and the Clerk is -- CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay. COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- applying his own independent interpretation of what we think -- MR. ZINO: I can't comment on -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- and that's the problem. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: So there's a motion on the floor -- MR. ZINO: -- what your relationship is with the Clerk. COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- we have nothing. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: -- to accept this new way of writing up -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: But it doesn't -- CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Excuse me. We have a motion on the floor to accept the new way of writing this contract so it's clearly stated either one or the other but not both; is that correct? MR. KELLY: This is going to be retroactive? COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes. Page 272 Packet Page -630- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 MR. OCHS: Yes. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: And to be retroactive. And anybody else? COMMISSIONER HILLER: I have a comment, and that if that contract provides that the only documentation required by the contractor in a lump sum agreement is the underlying invoice with staff independently confirming that the job is done, that the Clerk will accept that. I mean, he can go and independently physically verify, but from a payment standpoint there is nothing further the Clerk has to validate other than the invoice that matches the purchase order for the lump sum. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: That's what we stated before, so -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, no, but the Clerk has to agree to that. COMMISSIONER NANCE: Let's vote. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Call the question. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: We can't make the Clerk -- we're asking the Clerk to do this, we're passing this -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: They're all -- CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: -- and we're -- excuse me, you can't talk at the same time. Geez, you have diarrhea of the mouth today. COMMISSIONER HILLER: There are big issues here. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: So we have a motion on the floor and a second. Everybody in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye. COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: And I just would like -- , . Page 273 Packet Page -631- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: There's no opposition, so that's a 4-0 vote. Then at least they have their marching orders. Our guys are -- you know, you guys are wonderful. I'm sorry that there's so many problems. It's embarrassing to us up here. We really wish it was better. And maybe this will make it better. I'm sorry you've had to go through all that. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Thank you so much your patience. MR. OCHS: Thank you, gentlemen. Apologize. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: You know, we believe that you are one of the most important parts of Collier County government and we value what you do for us. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Thanks for sitting here all day through all of this. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Absolutely. MR. KELLY: Leo, you said late morning? It's late night. MR. OCHS: Yeah, well I miscalculated. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: You need a time certain. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay, we move on now to -- what is it, 13.B? Item #13B TO BRING TO THE BOARD'S ATTENTION OUTSTANDING INVOICES RELATED TO PROCUREMENT OF BACKGROUND CHECKS AND FINGERPRINTING BY THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF LAW ENFORCEMENT AND THE FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION DUE TO NEW STATUTORY Page 274 Packet Page -632- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 REQUIREMENTS FOR A SHARED CLEARINGHOUSE AMONGST AGENCIES ESTABLISHED BY FLORIDA STATUTE 943.053 — MOTION DIRECTING THE CLERK TO PAY OUTSTANDING INVOICES — APPROVED MR. OCHS: 13.B. Yes, ma'am. And this is an item from the Clerk's Office to bring to the Board's attention outstanding invoices related to the procurement of background checks and fingerprinting by the Florida Department of Law Enforcement and the Federal Bureau of Investigation, due to new statutory requirements for a shared clearinghouse amongst agencies established by Florida statute. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Leo, can you explain it? MR. OCHS: Well, again, Commissioners, we have a statutory responsibility to do certain fingerprinting and background checks through these two agencies. Their rate schedules are statutorily defined. The Board approved these agreements a couple years ago. As part of the executive summary staff indicated in the summary that the prices would change over time. They have changed slightly. I consulted with Mr. Klatzkow's Office who opined that there's no need for Board approval of those changes, given the fact that the Board has no discretion, they're defined and determined by statute. So I signed the form to pay the rates and the payments have been withheld to the service providers. COMMISSIONER HILLER: So the FDLE and the FBI can sue the Clerk for payment. MR. OCHS: And again,just like the bus contract, I think it's important that the Board does not take an action to approve a payment that the County Attorney says the Board needs to take no action on. MR. KLATZKOW: You can't say no. 'That's why I tell the County Manager's Office don't bring it to the Board, because they can't say no. The statute requires you do fingerprints. The statute requires Page 275 Packet Page -633- 3/22/2016 11 .F. January 12, 2016 that you do the FDLE and then the prices are set. There is no discretion. You can't say no. It's the very definition of ministerial. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: How can the Clerk say no? MR. KLATZKOW: Well, he does. COMMISSIONER HILLER: The Clerk is the Clerk. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay, Commissioner Nance? COMMISSIONER NANCE: Okay, I'm going to demonstrate in this executive summary how easy this is, okay. Executive summary, it's a nice executive summary, it goes down, and the second paragraph under considerations it says this: On April 12th, 2011 the Board of County Commissioners approved item 16.E.2 at the specific rate of $43.25 per person. Okay? So that specific rate was approved on the consent agenda. The last line on the item under consideration it says: If, quote, statutory rates rather than a flat rate that is subject to change order approved by the Board, this agreement and related change rates can be audited by the Clerk for payment. So here's how difficult it was to fix this item. If the Clerk would have just had the courtesy to come to Mr. Ochs and say Mr. Ochs, look, you just need to put on the consent agenda change the language there to statutory rates and just fly it through on the next agenda we won't have any problem, we'll just keep this thing going, no sweat. It would have been done, nobody would have even noticed it and it would have been fixed. But no, what did we do? We stopped paying the Florida Department of Law Enforcement and the FBI. That's what action the Clerk took. MS. KINZEL: No, Commissioner -- COMMISSIONER NANCE: No, that's what happened, ma'am. You stopped paying them, and now they say they're not going to work for us. It's just that simple. And it's less money than we talked about to Page 276 Packet Page -634- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 begin with. MS. KINZEL: Commissioner Nance. COMMISSIONER NANCE: So nobody made a good faith effort to fix the problem because we had to make it an issue to whine about. MS. KINZEL: No, we did -- COMMISSIONER NANCE: That's what's happening. MS. KINZEL: -- take it to your staff and they refused to put it on the consent agenda. That is the exact solution that the Clerk's Office proposed over a month ago. COMMISSIONER NANCE: So why didn't you put it on the consent agenda? MS. KINZEL: Your staff-- at this point we just put it under where we are with the Clerk's agency. COMMISSIONER NANCE: You're in the executive summary writing business, just send it on through. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Wait a minute, wait a minute, wait a minute. MS. KINZEL: That's what -- COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Wait a minute. Apparently there was a delay in the response of the County Manager. And I'm being very generous in my remarks. So let's get this done and go forward. MR. OCHS: Ma'am? CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Leo, go ahead. MR. OCHS: There was no delay on my part. I did not respond because there was no need to come to the Board to get authorization to make the payment to the service provider, given the fact that these are statutorily set rates. There is no discretion as -- MR. KLATZKOW: There's no discretion. MR. OCHS: -- Mr. Klatzkow just said. MR. KLATZKOW: You have to do the fingerprints. MR. OCHS: Plus when you approved this action two years ago Page 277 Packet Page -635- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 the executive summary said right in it that the rates will change over time -- COMMISSIONER NANCE: Well, then there's no issue at all. MR. OCHS: -- and the Board approved that with that stipulation. COMMISSIONER HILLER: There is no -- COMMISSIONER NANCE: Well, then I stand correct, Mr. Ochs. Thank you for correcting me on that. MR. OCHS: That's why I didn't bring it forward. COMMISSIONER NANCE: Okay, all right. I apologize, I stand corrected. MR. CASALANGUIDA: Commissioners, in the item you approved in 2011 in 68-2, the last sentence in consideration says: These prices for the services will fluctuate from year to year. So you approved that knowing that statutorily they're set and they fluctuate year to year. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah, I mean, the legislature is setting the price. MR. OCHS: Right. MR. KLATZKOW: You don't approve paying recording fees. Why? Because they're statutory. I mean, it's -- you've got no discretion. We don't take stuff to you that you have no discretion on because you could do the wrong thing and say no. I mean, you know. COMMISSIONER HILLER: But the issue is not us. The issue is the Clerk, Jeff. You don't need to tell us what we know. We know we don't have do anything. The Clerk is insisting we do something that we are not required to do. The Clerk doesn't understand that this is a ministerial issue. The Clerk doesn't understand that it's statutorily required. The Clerk doesn't understand that it's a statutorily set rate. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: So what can we do about straightening this out? COMMISSIONER NANCE: I think if we don't pay -- somehow Page 278 Packet Page -636- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 if the Clerk doesn't pay them, they're going to quit providing service. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. And then we're in violation. COMMISSIONER NANCE: Isn't that what they've indicated? MR. OCHS: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER NANCE: They sent us correspondence and indicating that's the case? They've indicated that's the case, they're going to stop doing business because we won't pay them? MR. OCHS: Yes. COMMISSIONER NANCE: All right. COMMISSIONER HILLER: What's the penalty to us under the statute for not fingerprinting? Jeff? MR. KLATZKOW: Oh, I have no idea. You're required to -- for certain positions you are required to do it. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right. So my question is what is the punishment where we are in breach of statute? MR. OCHS: I mean, we can't hire the people if we can't get the background check. We'll have to shut the programs down. COMMISSIONER HILLER: So what do we have to do, sue the Clerk to compel him to pay because, I mean, it will put our hiring practices at a standstill? MR. OCHS: Perhaps. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Crystal, would you just pay this? Being that we have no control over this. MR. KLATZKOW: You can make a motion that the Clerk pays the bills, okay? CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Pardon me? MR. KLATZKOW: Make a motion that the Clerk pays these bills. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay. COMMISSIONER NANCE: I'll make the motion. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Second. Page 279 Packet Page -637- 3/22/2016 11.F. January 12, 2016 COMMISSIONER NANCE: Any disco-- COMMISSIONER HILLER: But wait a minute. How can we make a motion to direct him to do something he refuses to do because CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: That's all right. MR. KLATZKOW: He's asking you to take action. That's the recommendation. He's asking you to take action. So I would suggest your action is to direct the Clerk to pay the bills. COMMISSIONER NANCE: Ask him to pay the bills. COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, or direct him -- CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: There's a motion -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: Or direct him to recognize -- COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Call the question. COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'd like to make the motion. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: No, there's a motion -- COMMISSIONER NANCE: I already made it. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: All in favor -- COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: We're calling the question. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: -- signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye. COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Opposed? COMMISSIONER NANCE: Okay. COMMISSIONER HILLER: So to direct the Clerk to pay the bill. CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Yes. MR. KLATZKOW: Easy peasy. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Not to authorize it but to direct him to get it done. Page 280 Packet Page -638- 3/22/2016 11 .F. EXHIBIT A-1 Contract Amendment#14-6280 "Fencing Installation and Repair" This Amendment, dated 1 f '2 , 2016 to the referenced Agreement shall be by and between the parties to the original Agnleement, BUE, Inc., d/b/a Gatekeepers/Gateswork, (to be referred to as "Contractor")and Collier County, Florida, a political subdivision of the State of Florida(to be referred to as"County"). Statement of Understanding RE: Contract#14-6280"Fencing Installation and Repair" In order to continue the services provided for in the original Agreement document referenced above, the Contractor agrees to amend the Agreement as stated below. This Amendment shall be retroactive to the original date the Board approved the Agreement. Note: Words underlined are added; Words Lek t rouugh are deleted. Change# 1: Agreement,Paragraph 3 is hereby amended as follows: *** 3. THE CONTRACT SUM: The County shall pay the Contractor for time and materials the Work performed pursuant to the prices offered by the Contractor in his response to 't' ITB # 14-6280 - Fencing Installation and Repair per Exhibit B Price Schedule, attached herein and incorporated by reference or subsequent quotes.The County shall pay the Contractor for lump sum or unit price Work as defined in Exhibit B Price Schedule. Any County Agency may utilize the services offered under this contract,provided sufficient funds are included in the budget(s). This contract will be purchase order driven. Change#2: Exhibit B"Price Schedule"is hereby amended as follows: Exhibit B Price Schedule The above hourly rates and markups are only applicable to Time and Materials projects. *** Lump Sum (Fixed Price): a firm fixed total price offering for a project; the risks are transferred from the County to the contractor; and, as a business practice there are no hourly or material invoices presented, rather, the contractor must serform to the satisfaction of the Coun 's •ro'ect mana_er before •a ment for the fixed price contract is authorized. Page 1 of 3 Packet Page -639- 3/22/2016 11 .F. Time and Materials: the County agrees to pay the contractor for the amount of labor time spent by the contractor's employees and subcontractors to perform the work(number of hours times hourly rate), and for materials and equipment used in the project (cost of materials plus the contractor's mark up). This methodology is generally used in projects in which it is not possible to accurately estimate the size of the project, or when it is expected that the project requirements would most likely change. As a general business practice,these contracts include back-up documentation of costs; invoices would include number of hours worked and billing rate by position(and not company(or subcontractor)timekeeping or payroll records),material or equipment invoices,and other reimbursable documentation for the project. Unit Price: the County agrees to pay a firm total fixed price (inclusive of all costs, including labor. materials, equipment, overhead, etc.) for a repetitive product or service delivered (i.e. installation price per ton, delivery price per package or carton, etc.). The invoice must identify the unit price and the number of units received(no contractor inventory or cost verification required). (Signature page to follow) Page 2 of 3 Packet Page -640- 3/22/2016 11 .F. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Contractor and the County have each, respectively, by an authorized person or agent,hereunder set their hands and seals on the date(s)indicated below. Accepted: ,2016 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS CO!.1.1FR COUNTY,FLORIDA By: 16‘41 ,4) i. ie Markie icz -- or of Proc ent S cc ion BUE,Inc.,d/bla Gatekeepers I Gateswork Con IV or 'i By: First Witness Si 1 fy ,,,, J Type/Print Witness Name Typed Signature — — — Second Witness Title Type/Print Witness Name .. TERRI S EVANS MY COMMISSION#EE 878816 Approved as tei Fprn-e and Legality: op„o EXPIRES July 18,2018 .,n (407)398-0153 FloridallotaryService cam I ounty Attorney VNA-aif Page 3 of 3 41— Packet Page -641- Accepted: ,2016 3/22/2016 11 .F. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA By: Joanne Markiewicz Director of Procurement Services Division BITE,be.,d/b/a Gatekeepers/Gatenverk Conwt, By: First Witness Si Ie-r24elf S Jj Type/Print Witness Name Typed Signature Co /v1,1,1,47, S,raid Witness Title Type/Print Witness Name fre ',4 TERRI S EVANS (*; ;*1 MY COMIASSION#EE 878616 - Approved as to Form and Legality: EXPIRES July 18, 2018 1407171415-3 RommotaryService.com Prw t 0 tiS k' Assistant County Attorney Page 3 of 3 Packet Page -642- 3/22/2016 11 .F. EXHIBIT A-1 Contract Amendment#14-6280 "Fencing Installation and Repair" This Amendment, dated 127 , 2016 to the referenced Agreement shall be by and between the parties to the original Agreement, Carter Fence Company, Inc. (to be referred to as "Contractor") and Collier County,Florida, a political subdivision of the State of Florida(to be referred to as"County"). Statement of Understanding RE: Contract#14-6280"Fencing Installation and Repair" In order to continue the services provided for in the original Agreement document referenced above, the Contractor agrees to amend the Agreement as stated below. This Amendment shall be retroactive to the original date the Board approved the Agreement. Note: Words underlined are added; Words struck threugh are deleted. Change#1: Agreement,Paragraph 3 is hereby amended as follows: 3. TIM CONTRACT SUM: The County shall pay the Contractor for time and materials the performance-of this-Work performed pursuant to the prices offered by the Contractor in his response to ITB # 14-6280 - Fencing Installation and Repair per Exhibit B Price Schedule, attached herein and incorporated by reference or subsequent quotes. The County shall pay the Contractor for lump sum or unit price Work as defined in Exhibit B Price Schedule. Any County Agency may utilize the services offered under this contract, provided sufficient funds are included in the budget(s). This contract will be purchase order driven. *** Change#2: Exhibit B "Price Schedule" is hereby amended as follows: Exhibit B Price Schedule *** The above hourly rates and markup are only applicable to Time and Materials projects. *** Lump Sum(Fixed Price): a firm fixed total price offering for a project;the risks are transferred from the County to the contractor: and, as a business practice there are no hourly or material invoices presented, rather,the contractor must perform to the satisfaction of the County's project manager before payment for the fixed price contract is authorized. Page 1 of 3 Packet Page -643- 3/22/2016 11 .F. Time and Materials: the County agrees to pay the contractor for the amount of labor time spent by the contractor's employees and subcontractors to perform the work (number of hours times hourly rate), and for materials and equipment used in the project (cost of materials plus the contractor's mark up). This methodology is generally used in projects in which it is not possible to accurately estimate the size of the proiect, or when it is expected that the project requirements would most likely change. As a general business practice,these contracts include back-up documentation of costs; invoices would include number of hours worked and billing rate by position(and not company(or subcontractor)timekeeping or payroll records),material or equipment invoices,and other reimbursable documentation for the project. Unit Price: the County agrees to pay a firm total fixed price (inclusive of all costs, including labor, materials, equipment, overhead, etc.) for a repetitive product or service delivered (i.e. installation price per ton, delivery price per package or carton, etc.). The invoice must identify the unit price and the number of units received(no contractor inventory or cost verification required). (Signature page to follow) Page 2 of 3 Packet Page -644- ' 3/22/2016 11 .F. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Contractor and the County have each, respectively, by an authorized person or agent,hereunder set their hands and seals on the date(s)indicated below. Accepted: s,..)_ctrak‘a.r-j ,2016 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA By: e Markiewicz daft. Director of Procurement Se • I on Carter Fence Company,Inc. Covir tOr 1 1 B) / First ess Signature Lfax'*1 4-eC Type/Print Witness?. rie Typed Signature .46 Second With .s Title Type/Print Witness Name (Approd as ba Form and Leeaho,. i.--- --- --.4ssistart*Lounty Attorney -24->pigAt Page 3 of 3 Packet Page -645- 3/22/2016 11 .F. IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE TWENTIETH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA CIVIL ACTION DWIGHT E. BROCK,as Clerk of the Circuit CASE NO.: 15-00595 CA 01 Court of Collier County,Florida, Plaintiff, vs. LEO E. OCHS,JR.,as Manager/Administrator Of Collier County,Florida,and JOANNE MARKIEWICZ,as Purchasing& General Services Director of Collier County,Florida, Defendants, And COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA, Intervenor. FINAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT THIS CAUSE having become before this Court upon the motion for final summary judgment filed by Defendant, Leo E. Ochs, Jr.(the"County Manager"),the motion for summary judgment filed by Collier County, Florida(the"County"),and a joinder in these motions by Joanne Markiewiez(the"Purchasing Director")(collectively, the"Defendants"),as well as the motion for partial summary judgment filed by Dwight E. Brock(the "Clerk"), and the Court having reviewed said motions and the exhibits thereto, having heard the argument of counsel and being otherwise fully advised in the premises, the Court makes the following determinations. 1. This action stems from a dispute raised by Plaintiff, Dwight E. Brock, Clerk of the Circuit Court of Collier County(hereinafter"Clerk")against Defendants, Leo E. Ochs,Jr., as Manager/Administrator of Collier County(hereinafter"the County Manages"), and Joanne Markiewicz, as Purchasing and General Services Division Director of Collier County(hereinafter Packet Page -646- 3/22/2016 11 .F. "County Purchasing Director"). The County later intervened in the action brought by Plaintiff, and filed a Counterclaim. 2. Collier County is a non-chartered political subdivision of the State of Florida and is governed by a Board of County Commissioners. 3. Leo E. Ochs,Jr.,has served as the County Manager for Collier County since September 2009. His responsibilities including serving as the chief executive officer, carrying out the policy directive of the Board of County Commissioners and running the County's day-to- day operations. 4. Joanne Markiewicz serves as Collier County's Director of Procurement Services and Purchasing Director. As the senior employee within Collier County's procurement department, Ms. Markiewicz reports to the department head in administrative services, who reports to the County Manager. 5, Dwight E. Brock has served as the Clerk of Courts for Collier County since being first elected to the position in 1993. 6. The underlying facts of this case are that On or about July 2, 2014, Swain Hall,a Procurement Strategist in the County purchasing section, issued Invitation to Bid, Solicitation: 14-6265 Online Safety Training Program("TB 14-6265"). On or about July 22, 2014, Skillsoft Corporation("Skillsoft") submitted its bid in response to 1'iB 14-6265, the"Skillsoft Bid". On or about December 2, 2014, (with a contract date of November 2,201 4)Agreement 14-6265 for Online Safety Training Program (the"Skillsoft Contract")was executed by Mark Murray on behalf of Skillsoft Corporation d/b/a Skillsoft Direct and the Defendant MARKIEWICZ in the name of COLLIER COUNTY on behalf of the BOARD. 7. Counts I and II of the Clerk's complaint as well as Count I of the County's Counterclaim and Count I of the County Manager's counterclaim all seek declaratory and injunctive relief related to whether a County Commission in a non-charter county may lawfully delegate to its county administrator the authority to make purchases and enter into associated fi 2 Packet Page -647- 3/22/2016 11 .F. contracts below a legislatively-determined threshold amount. Under the Florida Constitution, a non-charter county may take any action that is not expressly prohibited by general or special law. State v. Orange County,281 So.2d 310, 312(Fla. 1973). 8. On December 31, 2015, Intervenor,the County,and Defendant,the County Manager,both filed Motions for Summary Judgment with this Court. Defendant,County Purchasing Director, filed a Motion to join in both Motions for Summary Judgment. That same day, Plaintiff filed his Motion for Partial Summary Judgment. 9. The first issue in this case involves a challenge by the Clerk to the Collier County Board of County Commissioners' (the"County")authority to delegate to the County Manager (and his designees, including the Purchasing Director),the ability to make small purchases(and enter into associated contracts)below a legislatively-determined threshold amount of$50,000 and in accordance with policies and procedures established by Collier County ordinances and resolutions. The main question presented is whether the County Commission possesses authority, pursuant to the County Administration Law of 1974, §§ 125.70-74, Fla. Stat. (1974)(the "Administration Law"), to delegate these powers and duties. 10. The second issue in this case is the Clerk's challenge of the process by which The County approves all expenditures. Specifically, the Clerk states in his amended wherefore clause to Count I that he seeks a declaration that"before making payment,the Clerk's office may require documentation of each expenditure in sufficient detail to establish that the Board of County Commissioners' approval of the contract,agreement or purchase,decision of the authorized public purpose served,and how that particular expenditure serves to further the identified public purpose." The third and final issue is the County and County Managers' claims seeking injunctive relief requesting the Court compel the Clerk's performance of his duties. II. Summary judgment is proper when there are no genuine issues of material fact and that the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law. See Fla. R.Civ. P. 1.510 3 Packet Page -648- 3/22/2016 11 .F. (c); Vohisia Cnty. P. Aberdeen at Ormond Beach, L.P., 760 So.2d 126, 130 (Fla.2000). The interpretation of a statute central to a summary judgment is a matter of law, See Eng g Contractors Assn of S. Fla, Inc. vs. Broward Cnty., 789 So. 2d 445,449-50 (Fla.4`h DCA 2001). 12. Ordinances of the County are presumed valid and legal until proven otherwise. Miami-Dade County v. Malibu Lodging, 64 So, 3d 716(Fla. 3d DCA 2011). 13. COLLIER COUNTY is a non-charter county under Article VIII, Section 1(f), Florida Constitution, which provides in pertinent part: "Counties not operating under county charters shall have such power of self- government as is provided by general or special law. The Board of county commissioners of a county not operating under a charter may enact, in a manner prescribed by general law, county ordinances not inconsistent with general or special law,..." (emphasis added) 14. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 129.09, F.S., if the CLERK acting as county auditor, signs any warrant to pay any illegal charge against COLLIER COUNTY or to pay any claim agains COLLIER COUNTY not authorized by law or COLLIER COUNTY ordinance,the CLERK shall be personally liable for such amount, and if the CLERK signs the warrant willfully and knowingly the CLERK is guilty of a second degree misdemeanor. 15. The BOARD of County Commissioners is the elected governing body of COLLIER COUNTY. Section 125.01, F.S. outlines various powers and duties of the BOARD as the governing body of COLLIER COUNTY, a non-charter county. The BOARD can only take action in public at noticed public meetings. Section 125.01(3)(a), F.S. provides, as to the powers of the BOARD, that: "(3)(a) The enumeration of powers herein shall not be deemed exclusive or restrictive, but shall be deemed to incorporate all implied powers necessary or incident to carrying out such powers enumerated, including specifically, authority to employ personnel,expend funds, enter into contractual obligations, and purchase or lease and sell or exchange real or personal property." (emphasis added) 4 Packet Page -649- 3/22/2016 11 .F. 16. In 1974, the Florida Legislature enacted the Administration Law that outlines the powers and duties of the"County Administration". The Legislature specifically codified the purpose of the Administration Law at section 125.71 stating: It is the legislative intent that it is necessary to authorize a form of county administration that best assures an adequate and efficient provision of services to the citizens in this state, that provides for coordinated administration of county departments to better protect the health, welfare,safety, and quality of life of the residents in each of the more urbanized counties, and that places in the hands of a county administrator the multitude of details which must necessarily arise from the operation of a county as a unit of local government and,thus,enables the board of county commissioners to perform freely,without unnecessary interruption, its fundamental intended purpose of making policies within the framework of law applicable to county government in this state. It is the further legislative intent to provide a formula and structure for the economic and efficient conduct of county affairs by making the county administrator established by this act responsible for handling of all things necessary to accomplish and bring to fruition the policies established by the board of county commissioners. §125.71, Fla. Stat. (emphasis added). Section 125.74 defines the County Manager's powers and duties. It states, in relevant part: 1. The administrator may be responsible for the administration of all departments responsible to the board of county commissioners and for the proper administration of all affairs under the jurisdiction of the board. To that end,the administrator may, by way of enumeration and not by way of limitation, have the following specific powers and duties to: 5 Packet Page -650- 3/22/2016 11 .F. (a) Administer and carry out the directives and policies of the board of county commissioners and enforce all orders, resolutions, ordinances,and regulations of the board to assure that they are faithfully executed. (g) Supervise the care and custody of all county property. (i) Develop, install, and maintain centralized budgeting,personnel, legal and purchasing procedures. (k) Select,employ,and supervise all personnel and fill all vacancies, positions,or employment under the jurisdiction of the board. However,the employment of all department heads shall require confirmation by the board of county commissioners. (►n) Negotiate leases, contracts, and other agreements, including consultant services, for the county,subject to approval of the board, and make recommendations concerning the nature and location of county improvements. (q) Perform such other duties as may be required by the board of county commissioners, (2) [i]t is the intent of the Legislature to grant to the county administrator only those powers and duties which are administrative or ministerial in nature and not to delegate any government power imbued in the board of county commissioners as the governing body of the county pursuant to s. 1(e), Art.VIII of the State Constitution. To that end, the above specifically enumerated powers are to be construed as administrative in nature,and in any exercise of governmental power the administrator shall only be performing the duty of advising the board of county commissioners in its role as the policy-setting governing body of the county. § 125.74, Fla. Stat. (emphasis added). 17. In 1978, Collier County expressly adopted section 125.74 of the Administration ' Law. See Collier Cnty. Ord.No. 78-18. 18. For decades, the Collier County Commission,through a series of resolutions 6 Packet Page -651- 3/22/2016 11 .F. and ordinances, specifically delegated to the County Manager and his designees the power and duty to make purchases and enter into associated contracts below a legislatively-determined dollar threshold amount. Collier County first established the procedure for adopting a purchasing policy with the passage of Collier County Ordinance No. 1987-25. Pursuant to that procedure, the County further adopted a complete Purchasing Policy. On June 27,2000,the County amended its Purchasing Policy to authorize the Purchasing/General Services Director, or designee,to approve all bilateral contracts for commodities and services under a formal competitive threshold authorized by the County Commission. The most current Purchasing Policy was adopted by Resolution 2009-30. Resolution 2009-30 authorized the Purchasing Director, under the direction of the County Manager, to approve of purchase orders, purchasing card charges, or formal agreements,without first having to go before the County Commission, so long as the amount does not exceed $50,000. The County Commission retained jurisdiction of all contracts for commodities and services in excess of the$50,000 threshold amount. Thereafter, in 2013, the County adopted a Purchasing Ordinance which repealed and replaced Ordinance No. 87-25 and codified and formalized the County's Purchasing Policy. Although the Purchasing Ordinance made the Purchasing Department of the County responsible for preparing and recommending for adoption the administrative procedures known as the Purchasing Manual for the implementation of this Purchasing Ordinance,the County Commission elected, for purchases under$50,000, to continue to utilize the Purchasing Policy adopted by Ordinance No.2009-30 until a Purchasing Manual could be approved. Ordinance No.2013-69 was subsequently amended by Ordinance No. 2015-37. Ordinance No.2015-37 contained "a formal legislative finding"by the County Commission that the "power to make purchases and enter into agreements and contracts under$50,000.00" is "administrative and ministerial and promote(s)the efficient administration of County 7 Packet Page -652- 3/22/2016 11.F. government, and that having the County Manager and Procurement Services Director make purchases and enter into contracts under$50,000 is in the best interest of the County and secures the maximum efficiency for the benefit of the public." Ordinance 2015-27 also specifically "delegates the County Manager and Procurement Services Director or designees, the authority to make purchases and enter into contracts for purchases or awards in an amount not to exceed $50,000.00." Specifically,the Purchasing Ordinance,as amended, sets forth detailed procedures for: (1) very small purchases(less than$3,000); (2) informal competition for small purchases (exceeding$3,000 but not greater than $50,000);(3)and formal competition and County Commission approval for large purchases(in excess of$50,000). All purchases greater than $50,000 are awarded by the County Commission; however,purchases of$50,000 and under are awarded by the Purchasing Director,subject to the procedures set forth in the Purchasing Ordinance. Very small purchase(those less than $3,000), may be approved by the Purchasing Director without formal or informal competition, by means of a purchase order, purchasing card, or formal agreement, in conformity with the provisions of Section 27 of the Purchasing Ordinance, regulating the County's purchasing card program. For small purchases(exceeding$3,000, but not greater than$50,000), and where a Board approved contract is not applicable, purchases may be solicited by obtaining at least three competitive quotes. Awards"shall be made to the lowest, qualified and responsive quote in accordance with the standards set forth in this Purchasing Ordinance." The Purchasing Ordinance directs the manner in which the Purchasing Director is to solicit quotes and orders her to keep records of all quotes submitted for public inspection. Finally, all purchases and contracts under$50,000 are subject to the Clerk's pre-audit and must be ultimately approved by the County Commission as serving a valid public purpose prior to any disbursement of funds. The County Commission may always refuse to approve a purchase made by the County Manager or his designees. 19. The process for the payment of expenditures in Collier County begins with a 8 Packet Page -653- 3/22/2016 11 .F. purchase pursuant to a Board-approved contract or either(1)a contract under$50,000 approved by the County Manager or his staff,(2)a purchase order for an item less than$50,000 by the County Manager or his staff,or(3)a P-Card purchase for less than$3,000. 20. When the County Manager or his staff make purchases and enter into contracts under $50,000, they first refer to their overall budgets and then make a determination as to whether the good or services needed would serve the public. 21. Next, invoices for goods or services received are reviewed by the procurement staff and then loaded into the Count's financial accounting system. The accounting system contains a field that requires the County Manager's staff to insert language explaining the purpose of any particular purchase. 22. Once staff completes this process, all of the foregoing information, including staff's Preliminary determination of a public purpose, is submitted to the Clerk for pre-audit. 23. The"pre-audit"or"prepayment audit" is the audit performed by the Clerk before an expenditure is actually paid with a final check. In performing his pre-audit function,the Clerk must determine the legality of all county expenditures before payment is made. 24. Following pre-audit, the expenditures are presented to the County Commission in a disbursement report for them to expressly approve those expenditures and make the final determination of valid public purpose prior to the payment being disbursed by the clerk. This disbursement report, which is prepared by the Clerk's office, includes a list of expenditures, with a column for information indicating the purpose of each expenditure. 25. It is undisputed that the County itself has the authority to enter into contracts and make purchases for public purposes. See§ 125.01(3)(a), Fla. Stat. ("The enumeration of powers herein may not be deemed exclusive or restrictive, but is deemed to incorporate all implied powers necessary or incident to carrying out such powers enumerated, including,specifically, authority to employ personnel,expend funds,enter into contractual obligations,and purchase or 9 Packet Page -654- 3/22/2016 11 .F. lease and sell or exchange real or personal property."). Therefore,the issue is solely whether this authority may be delegated to the County Manager,or other designees employed by the County. 26. The Clerk relies upon a Florida Attorney General opinion that the Board of County Commissioners cannot delegate contracting authority to the County Manager. 88-61 ("AGO 88- 61"). In that case in 1988, the Monroe County Clerk sought the Attorney General's opinion concerning whether the clerk could"accept and pay claims for payment due on contracts or leases executed by the county administrator"and his designees"with delegated authority from the board of county commissioners[.]" AGO 88-61 at 1. The Attorney General concluded"that the authority to execute contracts which obligate the county involves the exercise of independent discretion and judgment which may not be delegated absent statutory authority,"and that it had not found "any statutory authority which would allow a county administrator to be delegated discretionary powers held by the board of county commissioners." Id. AGO 88-61 is distinguishable because it concerned the delegation of the power to enter into all contracts, without limitation. It does not consider whether the authority to make small purchase and contracts under a legislatively-determined threshold dollar amount could be delegated. The Court does not find AGO 88-61 persuasive authority. 27. The Clerk argues that the County Commission may not delegate limited purchasing and contracting authority to the County Manager because the non-exclusive list of powers in section 125.74(1)contains provision"(m)"granting county administrators the power to "negotiate leases, contracts, and other agreements, including consultant services, for the county, subject to approval of the board,and make recommendations concerning the nature and location of county improvements employees added." In interpreting subsection 125.74(1)(m), "however, we cannot read [it] in isolations,but must read it within the context of the entire section in order to ascertain legislative intent for the provision." Florida Dep't of Envt'1 Protection r'. ContractPoint Fla. Parks, LLC,986 So.2d 1260, 1265 (Fla.2008). Further,"a statute should be interpreted to give effect to every clause in it, and to accord meaning and 10 Packet Page -655- 3/22/2016 11 .F. harmony to all of its parts' and is not to be read in isolation,but in the context of the entire section." Id. (quoting Jones v. ETS of New Orleans, Inc., 793 So.2d 912,914-15 (Fla.2001). Reading this subsection as a limitation on the County Commission's ability to delegate limited purchasing and contracting authority to the County Manager(a) ignores the statutes' clear admonition that the listed powers are"by way of enumeration,and not by way of limitation,"(b)ignores the interaction between subsections 125.74(1)(q)and 125.74(2), which permit the County Commission to delegate additional administrative and ministerial powers,and ignores the distinction between"administrative"and "ministerial"powers and duties. Under the plain language of the Administration Law,the County Commission is authorized to grant the County Manager the power to "[p}erform such other duties as may be required by the board of county commissioners." § 125.74(1)(q), Fla. Stat. Pursuant to this provision, the County Commission can grant the County Manager any powers and duties that further the legislative intent stated in section 125.71, limited only to the extent that those powers and duties must be"administrative or ministerial in nature and not to delegate any government power imbues in the board of county commissioners as the governing body of the county pursuant to s. 1(e), Art. ViII of the State Constitution." § 125.74(2), Fla. Stat. 28. "Ministerial"powers and duties are those"imposed expressly by law,not by contract or arising necessarily as an incident to the office, involving no discretion in its exercise, but mandatory and imperative." City of Tarpon Springs v. Planes, 30 So. 3d 693, 695 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010). 29. Florida courts have not articulated a similarly concise definition of"administrative" powers and duties. Generally, however,the Florida Supreme Court has explained that"[w]hile `the powers of government,' that are divided and limited by the constitution cannot legally be delegated or exercised except as authorized by the constitution,yet valid and appropriate statutes may, within organic limitations,confer upon officers or commissions or boards,administrative or 11 Packet Page -656- 3/22/2016 11 .F. ministerial authorities and duties,which may require the exercise of administrative discretion and judgment." Williams v. Kelly, 182 So. 881 (Fla. 1938)(emphasis added). An official exercises"administrative" discretion when his acts are guided by standards for making decisions and are subject to meaningful oversight. See Thomas v. City of West Palm Beach, 299 So. 2d 11, 14 (Fla. 1974)(holding that a city ordinance which delegated to city officials discretion to determine if dwellings were unfit or unsafe for human habitation if they met certain criteria were valid and a lawful delegation of discretion to the officials). Thus,a municipal official acts lawfully pursuant to an ordinance providing "more than sufficiently definite guidelines"to restrain delegated discretionary authority. United Sanitation Servs. Of Hillsborough, Inv. I. City of Tampa, 302 So. 2d 435,438 (Fla. al DCA 1974);see also Mistretta v, United States, 488 U,S, 361,372-73 (1989)(holding that executive officials may exercise governmental power so long as Congress lays down an "intelligible principle"that "clearly delineate[es] the general policy"an agency is to achieve and specifies the"boundaries of [the] delegated authority"). In these situations,the"fact that some authority,discretion or judgment is necessarily required to be exercised in carrying out a purely administrative or ministerial duty imposed by statute does not invalidate the statute." Conner v. Joe Hatton, Inc., 216 So. 2d 209,211 (Fla. 1968). Rather,"the true distinction is between the delegation of power to make the law, which necessarily involves a discretion as to what the law shall be,and the conferring of authority or discretion in executing the law pursuant to and within the confines of the law itself." Id. 30. "[G]overnment power imbued in the board of county commissioners as the governing body of the county"are those essential governmental powers reserved to the governing body as policymaker(such as the powers to pass laws,adopt a budget,or create a zoning code),which interpretation is consistent with the stated purpose of the Administration Law to enable the County Commission to place"in the hands of a county administrator the multitude of details which must necessarily arise from the operation of a county as a unit of local government"and 12 Packet Page -657- 3/22/2016 11.F. thereby enable"the board of county commissioners to perform freely,without unnecessary interruption, its fundamental intended purpose of making policies within the framework of law applicable to county government in this state." § 125.71, Fla. Stat. 31. The Court finds as to the first issue,that the Purchasing Ordinance adopted by the County Commission constitutes a lawful delegation of administrative authority. The standards and layers of review established by the County Commission appropriately limit the County Manager's discretion and assure that he only exercises"administrative"powers and duties that do not intrude on the County Commission's role as the"policy-setting governing body of the county." 32. The second issue is a challenge by the Clerk to the" process"by which the County approves all expenditures. Specifically,the Clerk states in his amended wherefore clause to Count I that he seeks a declaration that"before making payment,the Clerk's office may require documentation of each expenditure in sufficient detail to establish that the Board of County Commissioners' approval of the contract,agreement or purchase,decision of the authorized public purpose served,and how that particular expenditure serves to further the identified public purpose." At no other point in the operative complaint are there any allegations as to the process of County approval, nor are there any allegations that the County, County Manager,or Purchasing Director are acting in violation of any statute, ordinance,or other source of law. The Clerk has asserted that the issues to be resolved as to his process claim are: (1) who is responsible for inputting the purpose of each expenditure in the report submitted to the Board prior to approval of payment of each expenditure;(2)whether the Board's finding of valid public purpose needs to come before or after the Clerk's writes(but has not yet issued)each check; and(3)what information should be included in the expenditure report submitted to the Board prior to approval of payment of each expenditure. Not one of these three issues is a legal issue. 13 Packet Page -658- 3/22/2016 11 .F. Prevailing law holds that"[a] party seeking declaratory relief must show that... [the] relief sought is not merely giving of legal advice by the courts..." Santa Rosa County v. Administration Cor,Un'rr, Div. of Admin. Hrngs., 661 So.2d 1190, 1193 (Fla. 1995)(quoting Martinez v. Scanlan, 582 So. 2d 1167, 1170 (Fla.1991); see generally Mchttosh v. Harbour Club Villas Condo. Ass'n,468 So.2d 1075, 1081 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985)(declaratory judgment is not proper to advise as to the correct procedure to follow). Further,the mere"[d]isagreement with a constitutional or statutory duty,or the means by which it is to be carried out, does not create a justiciable controversy or provide an occasion to give an advisory judicial opinion." Department of Revenue of State of Fla. V. Markham, 396 So. 2d 1120, 1121 (1981)(superseded on other grounds). Accordingly, the Clerk's disagreement with the County's current payment approval process is not appropriate for this Court to issue a declaration. See,e.g.,Askew v. City of Ocala, 348 So. 2d 308,310(Fla. 1977)("the courts have no power to entertain a declaratory judgment action which involves no present controversy as to the violation of the statute"). Therefore,the Clerk's"process"claim fails as a matter of law. 33. The third and final issue is the County's and County Manager's claims for relief seeking mandatory injunctive(or possibly mandamus)relief. The injunctive relief sought by both the County and County Manager cannot he ordered by the Court because neither the County nor County Manager pled a cause of action for injunctive relief. Each purported to seek only declaratory relief. "[Clourts are not authorized to award relief not requested in the pleadings. To grant unrequested relief is an abuse of discretion and reversible error." Worthington v. Worthington, 123 So. 3d 1189, 1190(Fla 2d DCA 2013). 34. The rulings herein are not based upon any comparison of other county ordinances nor any opinion testimony of Dr. Robert E. Lee. CONCLUSION The County Commission, pursuant to sections 125.01(1)(a)and 125.01(3)(a), Florida 14 Packet Page -659- 3/22/2016 11 .F. Statutes, has the power and duty to adopt its own rules of procedures and has implied powers necessary or incident to carrying out such enumerated powers. The County Manager and his designees have been lawfully granted authority from the County Commission through the Purchasing Ordinance to make purchases and enter into associated contracts below$50,000. The Administration Law authorizes this delegation of administrative powers and duties. Accordingly, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that: I. The County Manager's Motion for Final Summary Judgment is GRANTED. 2. The County's Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED. 3. The Clerk's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment is DENIED. 4. Final Judgment as to Counts I and II of the Clerk's Complaint is entered in favor of the County Manager,the Purchasing Director and the County,and against the Clerk. The Clerk shall take nothing by this action and the Defendants shall go hence without day. 5. Final Judgment as to Count I of the County Manager's Counterclaim for declarative relief and Count I of the County's Counterclaim for declarative relief is entered in favor of the County Manager and the County and against the Clerk. 6. The Court declares: (A)That the County's Purchasing Ordinance is legal and not in conflict with any provisions of general or special law; (B) That the County Manager and his designees have the lawful authority to make purchases,and enter into contracts for purchases, under$50,000(including the Skillsoft Contract) pursuant to the Purchasing Ordinance and that such authority was properly delegated by the County Commission to the County Manager and his designees as an exercise of`administrative or ministerial' powers and duties; 15 Packet Page -660- 3/22/2016 11 .F. 7. The Court reserves jurisdiction to consider any supplementary proceedings and post-judgment rulings, if any, including costs. DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers in Collier County, Florida this day of February,2016. THE HONORABLE JAMES R. SHENKO Circuit Court Judge Copies to: All counsel of record 16 Packet Page -661- 3/22/2016 11 .F. , . . . Mitchell & Stark Const, Co., inc. invoice 6001 Shirley Street Phone Number Naples. Florida 34109 (239) 597-2165 SOLD TO: invoice Number: 16128 Collier County Board of Commissioners Invoice Date: 12/16/2015 Attn: Finance Department Our Order#: Your order#: 4500163939 Terms: Upon Receipt !SHIPPED TO: Project Manager: Joshua Peterson INCANRF [buanity Unit Description Unit Price Amount 1 LS Fill Ox Ditches and Clarifiers w/reuse $ 2.045.34 $ 2,045.34 $ 'FINAL INVOICE $ I - I - S $ • I $ <7.• Ct' TOt,,•?rd ,Z; pt?.y thIs kariouW„ 2 045 2)4 payable. Mitchell E.: Stark Const ftr 6001 Shirley St. YOU FOR YOUR l3L1 SIN ESS: 3/22/2016 11 .F. Send all Invoices to: Collier County Board of County Commissioners Ot-Ltn Collier County Board of County Commissioners Procurement Services Division G ? Attn:Accounts Payable Phone:239-252-8407 • • 3299 Tamiami Trl E Ste 700 Fax: 239-732-0844 O •••.• Naples FL 34112-5749 Al**, Tax Exempt:85-8015966531C-1 Co ' OR email to:bccapclerk @collierclerk.com Purchase Order number must appear on all related correspondence,shipping papers and invoices: Vendor# 102052 Purchase order PO Number 4500163939 Date 11/06/2015 MITCHELL&STARK CONSTRUCTION CO INC 6001 SHIRLEY ST Contact Person Wastewater Lab NAPLES FL 34109 Please deliver to: NCWRF Delivery Date: 10500 GOODLETTE RD NAPLES FL 34109 Terms of Payment Net 30 Days Item Material Description Order Qty Unit Price Per Unit Net Value 00010 Fill Ox Ditches and Clarifiers w/reuse 2,045.34 EA 1.00 2,045.34 u* Item completely delivered *"* Total net value excl.tax USD 2,045.34 VENDOR Terms and Conditions The VENDOR agrees to comply with all Purchase Order Terms and Conditions as outlined on the Collier County Procurement Services Division site: http://purchasing.colliergov.net/Purchasing%20Policy/Forms/Allltems.aspx,including delivery and payment terms.Further the VENDOR agrees to: 1. Provide goods and services outlined in this Purchase Order with the prices,terms,delivery method and specifications listed above. 2. Notify department Immediately if order fulfillment cannot occur as specified. 3. Send all invoices to: Collier County Board of County Commissioners Attn:Accounts Payable 3299 Tamiami Trl E Ste 700 Naples FL 34112-5749 OR email to:bccapclerk @collierclerk.com The Purchase Order is authorized under direction of Collier County Board of County Commissioners by: Joanne Markiewicz,Director,Procurement Services Division Printed 03/08/2016©09:10:44 408-233312-634999 Page 1 of 1 Packet Page -663- 3/22/2016 11 .F. Mitchell & Stark Construction Company, Inc. 9009 High Cotton Lane Fort Myers, Florida 33905 October 30, 2015 Collier County Public Utilities Division NCWRF 10500 Goodlette-Frank Road Extension Naples, FL 34109 Attn: Mr. Peter Schalt, PMP Re: M&S Quotation—Fill clarifiers & oxidation ditches at NCWRF Dear Mr. Schalt, We propose to perform the requested filling of four (4) clarifiers and two (2) oxidation ditches at the NCWRF with potable water for the negotiated lump sum cost of$2,045.34. Please allow 45 days on the work order. The water is to be be furnished by the county. Two fire hydrants will be utilized,with no flowmeters. An air gap will be provided in lieu of a backflow preventer. M&S will provide the necessary hoses and labor to complete the filling. The TASK 1 scope of the proposed work is: • Provide two (2) 300' lengths of 2-1/2" discharge hose to connect to the fire hydrants • Install the hoses with appropriate air gap • Assist the county in monitoring filling progress and in moving hoses Please let me know if you would like for us to proceed with the work. If you have any questions or comments please give me a call. Sincerely, Mitchell &-Sta . Const. Co., Inc. *iv Joshua S. Peterson, E.I. "Contractors and Engineers since 1955" An Equal Opportunity Employer Packet Page -664- 3/22/2016 11 .F. • WORK ORDER/PURCHASE ORDER Contract 14-6213"Underground Utilities Contractor' Contract Expiration Date: July 7. 2016 This Work Order is for professional contracting services for work known as: Project Name: NCWRF Fill Ox Ditches and Clarifiers with Test Water Project No:408-233312-655200 The work is specified in the proposal dated October 30, 2015 which is attached hereto and made a part of this Work Order. In accordance with Terms and Conditions of the Agreement referenced above,this Work Order/Purchase Order is assigned to:Mitchell & Stark Construction Company Scone of Work: As detailed in the attached proposal and the following: + Task I Labor and materials to fill six tanks with potable water for testing purposes. Schedule of Work: Complete work within 45 days from the date of the Notice to Proceed which is accompanying this Work Order. The Consultant agrees that any Work Order that extends beyond the expiration date of Agreement # 14-6213 will survive and remain subject to the terms and conditions of that Agreement until the completion or termination of this Work Order. Compensation: In accordance with the Agreement referenced above,the County will compensate the Firm in accordance with following method(s): ®Negotiated Lump Sum (NLS) [Lump Sum Pius Reimbursable Costs(LS+RC)[Time& Material(T&M)(established hourly rate Schedule A) [ Cost Plus Fixed Fee(CPFF), (define which method will be used for which tasks) as provided in the attached proposal. Task I S2045.34 TOTAL FEE $2045.34 PREPARED BY: ]f, . etcr Schalt, PMf Senior Project Manager Date Date, APPROVED BY: �Gti t. _ Zrr / Vv-r4 Robert VonHolle, Plant Manager Date APPROVED BY: N/A ---___-----_._--_-�_-- type name, Department Head Date By the signature below, the Firm (including employees, officers and/or agents) certifies, and hereby discloses,that, to the hest of their knowledge and belief,all relevant facts concerning past,present,or currently planned interest or activity financial, contractual, organizational, or otherwise) which Page 1 of 2 Packet Page -665- 3/22/2016 11 .F. relates to the proposed work: and heir on whether the Firm has a poientiai conflict have been fully disclosed. Additionally, the Firm agree_, to notify the Procurement Director, in writing within 48 hours of learning of any actual or potential conflict of interest that arises during the Work Order and/or project duration, ACCEPTED BY: Mitchell&: t ruction Company if),''`4< - !o_ ua S. Peterson,Project Manager Date Page 2 of 2 Packet Page -666- e coa-1) 3/22/2016 11 .F. Mitchell & Stark Const. Co., Inc. Invoice 6001 Shirley Street Phone Number Naples, Florida 34109 (239) 597-2165 SOLD TO: Invoice Number: 16128 Collier County Board of Commissioners Invoice Date: 12/16/2015 Attn: Finance Department Our Order#: Your order#: 4500163939 Terms: Upon Receipt SHIPPED TO: Project Manager: Joshua Peterson NCWRF Quanity Unit Description Unit Price Amount $ 1 LS Fill Ox Ditches and Clarifiers w/reuse $ 2,045.34 $ 2,045.34 $ FINAL INVOICE - $ $ $ $ $ $ 1 is $ $ Please pay this amount Total $ 2,045.34 Questions concerning this invoice? Make all checks payable to: Please call.(239) 597-2165 Mitchell & Stark Const., Inc 6001 Shirley St. Naples, Florida 34109 THANK YOU FOR YOUR BUSINESS Packet Page -667- 3/22/2016 11 .F. Lump Sum 12/18/2010 08 : 05: 06 EST ARNOLDKL (Kelly Arnold) Material document 5001006665 posted 12/29/2015 08 : 31 : 02 EST COURTADEDC (Diane Courtade) CONTRACT 14-6213, UNDERGROUND UTILITIES CONTRACTING, 14-6213; BCC APPR 07/08/14; ITEM #16C10. CONTRACT EXPIRATION 7/7/16. THIS IS A NEGOTIATED LUMP SUM CONTRACT. AMOUNT DUE IS VERIFIED PER THE QUOTE SCHEDULE AND THE WORK ORDER WHICH ARE ATTACHED TO THE PO. NTP 11/10/15, FINAL COMPLETION 12/25/15 . REVIEW COMPLETE. 01/21/2016 10 : 19: 58 EST MCCANNAC (Cynthia McCanna) Please provide backup documentation for this record. 02/09/2016 12 : 56:21 EST MCCANNAC (Cynthia McCanna) Proposal + Work Order is attached to Req 1022195 Labor and materials to fill six tanks with potable water for testing Negotiated Lump Sum $2045. 34 02/09/2016 14 : 28 : 24 EST COURTADEDC (Diane Courtade) On 10-6-14 there was an Amendment done to contract, Exhibit Al-A that was FCC approved and there are contracted rates that I need to be able to use as a guide when auditing the invoice. Please attach all backup to support the record. Thank you 02/11/2016 15 : 32 : 34 EST MCCANNAC (Cynthia McCanna) The work order for this project was issued as a negotiated lump sum. It was not time & material . Thanks, Mille Michael P. Westhafer, P. E. , V. P . CGC058926 CFC057673 Mitchell & Stark Construction Company, Inc. 9009 High Cotton Lane, Fort Myers, Florida 33905 office (239) 332-1632 x224 fax (239) 332-281.9 cell (239) 450-2885 02/12/2016 13: 43 : 15 EST COURTADEDC (Diane Courtade) Packet Page -668- 3/22/2016 11 .F. 4. H 2i b '0 r0 rd r a) a) a) a) a) a) H 4 1# 44 •H -H -H - •H 4-4 4-4 ro ( 4-1 N 44 4-1 CO 4-1 -H H 41 174 -H '0 'd -H a) -H -H a) -H 'd 0 0 0 'd 0 0 '0 4:) 'd 'd 10 '0 0 -H -H-H 0 a) a) 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 1) 1J 1-) E; (~ Z 5 F Zi E m 4 << - ca m a) m CO a) m ro 0 (a a) U U cd a) ro a) ro a) (d a) 3 (.9\ • \ 3 0 U U 3 ca 3 0 3 to 3 0 'd H r0 0 c W'd --'0 0 '0 -----'0 0 a) ro X H'd H H 0 (a '0 a) RS a) (IS '0 O ro a) al TS tr 1-i It a) b rd 01 i bl b 0)4-.) H b11) 0)4.-) H 0)1-3 Oro 'd > i-I > Ord 0 0 00 (tt a) Ora 0 0(a a) 0ra 0 ra La a) 0-H 0 0 (d A Ur -H -H rd A ,0 (a A C7 ra A .0 MI A C7 U Z o,Cra,a U H 0 OU 1 OU H U "U H s" 'd 1 Q,a) R4 R1 'd I rd a)r0 N '0 1 21 I 'd a)U '0 O U 1 'd a) 0 •J 2s a)a k 4 4 -u'd a)EH 0 a a)a U rd a)a -)Ti a)H a)-H aJ'd 0 W Ti a)E 1 a)•H -r{ 0 0+�, 'd 0 a)14 f-4-u 1 4) r 0 a)1J 4 0 a)u w 0 a)1J 4 0 a)1J w 1J > 1J 'd a) d iJ k H k a)'d'd 0 0 1J 1J E1 4J H a) 0 4) a) 0.0 1-) (v a) 0 1-) a) O iJ 44 a) C, a) bl-H E~ O ro 0 0 1J a) 0 5 bl-H 5-H w•H 4 bl-H 5 E bl•H E•H p bl•H E g b)-H E-H r4 -H. > •H E 04-1 >4-1 4-1 at > > •H O E E 0-H E 0 0•H O Er 0•H E~ O •H E.O E; a-i •H m k O r-i o o b1 m,Q 4-1 4 0 A 0 bl m,0 �i b1 m,La •i.g d bl m rq S-1 M0,4 k,0 0 U C14-r1 m 4-1 L i 1J 1J R1 N k•H m 0 4-I 0,P 0-W•H'CD 4-1-H m 04-1 1-1•H CO 4-1•H m 0 44 0 H CO U CO a m 00,0, 0 U R,M,m cam m cn m ro m m (a m (n ( m o m m as ca CO I awro4 � 4waaw 44 �awa44C Ca (n4u)i vwgg44aaP4w4a44P4c444P4 < 44ap4g a) rd rd ni rd H roro rorororo rorororororo ro PPfl co o bbb'd0 Efl2flbbbbE gHfl -d'b'd'8f ci (d'd'd x (d r a (a r d r d ro (d (drard (d0rora0bdrt-ro a cal ca (a rtro (d 0pUUUUHH .0 -4iJ4JUU UUUU-J4J4J UUUUUUI-li-i 4-lOU 0000000 0- k �t �-11.1004-J4J00001-1H -Ii-i000000k -t ?-1 Sa00 a)£XZ 0 0 0 >,?,0 0 d 0Z (d rOXXXX 0 d 0 0X XXXX 0 0 0 Z P4 � M Hr--10000 HH 0000 0000 ro (d (dN Ff,'UU Hr-•1UU CD)U (d (d-H•Hrororo (dUUUU (drorord (d (dUUUU (drd O-H-H-H-H H H 4) a) a) - -H-H X Z-H•H•H•H •H•H-H-H•H-H -H-H H.0-,0,4.G >,>, k x x a) a) a) a)-0,0 .0-0 4,0 a) a) a) a)4 [4 0 4 A a) a) a) a).0-0 4-1 H 10.0 a--).0 H H co as a) 0- 00 0 1-)1J >y 4J 1)44,J 0 0- 0 4,N 1)1J 4JJ 1-)1i - 0 0 4i-1J 1--) rA W T >,' a)N f t f�o (mod it-H-H-H-H >>r'>,(IS ro J-, >,,>4•H•H-H-H ?,> >,y+>-H-H-H•H x 1-1 U00(-) aaaAAAAUU ZUUUUAAAAUUUUUUAAAAUU rn O O H O 00 o,+00 d+H rN O r-1 CD wo 01 CD n1c)ri CD riO ri CD wO r14 CD HCDHOrCD V'Ow 0 H U1 O N Ul VD O l0 l0 l0 l0 rH I.()ON N N(-N r Ln O(.1 VD V)O N N N CD Ill O N 10 t.()O N N N O 4-) Ul N lD LO Lfl N N N Ul N Ul N Cl Ul N U) N N ;id: 1- (/). 'dr N N lD r VD r H Ul Ul 01 d!O O 01 rV 01 O CO 01 01 rn N r''1 Ul in r co co 01 O O l0 r r r H N O H 01 C+7,d+d,dr ro M N N N UI UI H H r-1 HO r4 P1 co co pi W clr cl nl 01 01 N N d,W dr dr NN 01 rl r+l rl 31 Nul(n Ill U1,-IriCINNrl rl ri ri r-1 H C)CD r(ri r r r r co co op N dr N N N N rr1 M M ri ri rl H -0 N Ul 117 Ul 411 Ul U). U1 U1 CD C)0101 01 elcv N U1 U1 U1(I UI un N N N N N N en en el n•1,r V,dr c}+HH N O O cif 1.0 l0 l0 l0 10 Ul U1 In Ul Ul r r O7 CO CO CO O O rl ri N Cl N N dr Vr W d!r r Ul U1 Ul Ul el 01 r")co H ri O O O EV H H H c-1 H H H H H H CD CD O O O O H r-H H H H H H H H H H H H H.H ri H H H H H H.H O H 0 In U1 In In un In Ul In In In un N Ul un N ul ID ID VD lD IO IO ID lD lD lD ID ID ID ID ID ID b l0 l0 lD ID LC)to ID •• •• •• HHHr-IHHHH riHHH'Hr-IHHHr1.HHHH riHH riHHHHHHHHHH.HH.HH. 0 0 CD CD O CD CD CD CD CD CD O O`0 0 0 0 0 O0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a) N.N.N CV N CV N NN N NN N N N N.N-CV N CVNN N N N NN N N N N N N N N N N CV CV CV 'd 0 \\\\\\\---\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ 0 0 (d to r,r r r co co r co co 0101010\0)0)H H:01 01 01 01 01:c)01010101 O 0 H H Hr-I.N N N N ID ID U a) a): HHHrjHHHN.N NNNNNNNNN 00000:00000HrHH riH riHHHHH ri >-0 'a N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N H H N N N N N N CV CV N N N N N N N N N N N N N N 'd 0 a),--1 Q' HriHriHriHH H ri HHHHHH O O O 0000000000 O 0000000000 1i rd E rd oa00 0 5 0 0 U 0 0 ° 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a) 0 0-H S d 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O 0 O U A w w 00 0 0 0000 0 0 0 0 0 Packet Page -669-0 0 0 0