BCC Minutes 01/28/2003 R
January 28,2003
TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Naples, Florida, January 28, 2003
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 district as has been created according to law and having
conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 a.m., in
REGULAR SESSION in Building "F" of the Government Complex,
East Naples, Florida, with the following members present:
CHAIRMAN: Tom Henning
Frank Halas
Donna Fiala
Fred W. Coyle
Jim Coletta
ALSO PRESENT:
Jim Mudd, County Manager
David Weigel, County Attorney
Page 1
COLLIER COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
~
AGENDA
January 28, 2003
9:00 a.m.
NOTICE: ALL PERSONS WISHING TO SPEAK ON ANY AGENDA ITEM
MUST REGISTER PRIOR TO SPEAKING. SPEAKERS MUST REGISTER
WITH THE COUNTY MANAGER PRIOR TO THE PRESENTATION OF THE
AGENDA ITEM TO BE ADDRESSED.
COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 99-22 REQUIRES THAT ALL
LOBBYISTS SHALL, BEFORE ENGAGING IN ANY LOBBYING ACTIVITIES
(INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, ADDRESSING THE BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS), REGISTER WITH THE CLERK TO THE
BOARD AT THE BOARD MINUTES AND RECORDS DEPARTMENT.
REQUESTS TO ADDRESS THE BOARD ON SUBJECTS WHICH ARE NOT ON
THIS AGENDA MUST BE SUBMITTED IN WRITING WITH EXPLANATION
TO THE COUNTY MANAGER AT LEAST 13 DAYS PRIOR TO THE DATE OF
THE MEETING AND WILL BE HEARD UNDER "PUBLIC PETITIONS".
ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THIS BOARD
WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS PERTAINING THERETO,
AND THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD
OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE
TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED.
ALL REGISTERED PUBLIC SPEAKERS WILL BE LIMITED TO FIVE (5)
MINUTES UNLESS THE TIME IS ADJUSTED BY THE CHAIRMAN.
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, TO THE PROVISION OF
1
January 28, 2003
CERTAIN ASSISTANCE. PLEASE CONTACT THE COLLIER COUNTY
FACILITIES MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT LOCATED AT 3301 EAST
TAMIAMI TRAIL, NAPLES, FLORIDA, 34112, (239) 774-8380; ASSISTED
LISTENING DEVICES FOR THE HEARING IMP AIRED ARE A V AILABLE IN
THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' OFFICE.
LUNCH RECESS SCHEDULED FOR 12:00 NOON TO 1:00 P.M.
1. INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
A. Father Tim Navin, S1. Peter the Apostle Catholic Church
2. AGENDA AND MINUTES
A. Approval of to day's regular, consent and summary agenda as amended. (Ex
Parte Disclosure provided by Commission members for summary agenda.)
B. January 7,2003 - Joint BCC/City of Naples Workshop
C. January 8,2003 - BCC/Land Development Code Amendments
3. SERVICE AWARDS
A. Twenty-Year Attendees:
1) Gregorio Flores, Utilities Finance
2) Gary Hamm, Road Maintenance
B. Twenty-Five Year Attendee:
1) Jodi Walters, Domestic Animal Services
4. PROCLAMATIONS
A. Proclamation for Love My Library Month. To be accepted by John Jones,
Director of Library and Helen Eckhardt, President of Friends of the Library.
B. Proclamation to designate the week of January 26 through February 1 as
Catholic Schools Week. To be accepted by students from 4t\ 5th and 6th
2
January 28, 2003
grades, their respective teachers and Rachel Baier, Dean of Studies.
5. PRESENTATIONS
A. Presentation to the Board of County Commissioners for their support of the
Healthy Kids Program. Plaque to be presented by Dr. Joan Colfer, Director
of Collier County Health Department, and Maryann McCarty, Nursing
Program Specialist.
B. Presentation to the Transportation Division to award Sponsor of the Year
Awards for the Adopt-A-Road Program administered by the Road and
Bridge Section of the Transportation Operations Department.
C. Presentation to recognize Glenn Price as this year's outstanding Aquatic
Plant Manager of the Year, awarded by the Florida Aquatic Plant
Management Society.
6. PUBLIC PETITIONS
A. Public Petition request by Mr. Ken Drum to discuss overall plan for the
Santa Barbara Extension.
B. Public Petition request by Mr. Jim Kramer to discuss Selective Non-
Enforcement of the Collier County Sign Ordinance.
7. BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
A. This item reQuires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte
disclosure be provided bv Commission members. PUDA-2002-AR-2803,
Karen Bishop ofPMS Inc. of Naples, representing Walnut Lakes LLC,
requesting an amendment to the Walnut Lakes PUD having the effect of
modifying development standards in Table 1 to provide for a revision to
yard requirements, specifically to reduce the 1 0- foot side yard setback for
single- family detached dwelling units to 6 feet for one-story homes and 6
feet for two story homes; and to revise the master plan to eliminate the golf
course and the site specific nature of a potential assisted living facility, for
property located on the North side ofUS-41 and approximately 2.5 miles
East of Collier Boulevard (CR-951) in Section 12, Township 51 South,
3
January 28, 2003
Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida.
8. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS
9. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
A. Request Board to set the balloting date for the recommendation of members
to the Pelican Bay MSTBU Advisory Committee by record title owners of
property within Pelican Bay.
B. Appointment of members to the Golden Gate Community Center Advisory
Committee.
C. Appointment of members to the County Government Productivity
Committee.
D. Appointment of member to the Lely Golf Estates Beautification Advisory
Committee.
E. Discussion regarding addition to Goodland Overlay. (Commissioner Fiala)
10. COUNTY MANAGER'S REPORT
A. Presentation to the Board of County Commissioners by the Greater Naples
Area Chamber of Commerce and the Solid Waste Management Department
of a Six Month Progress Report regarding the suspended Ordinance
establishing a mandatory non-residential recycling program within the
Unincorporated Areas of Collier County. (Jim DeLony, Administrator,
Public Utilities)
11. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS
12. COUNTY ATTORNEY'S REPORT
A. Request for Board approval, in accordance with Collier County Resolution
No. 95-632, for outside counsel to represent individual defendants in the
Florida Water Services Corporation vs. Collier County, et aI, Lawsuit, and
for the related purchasing policy waiver due to exigent litigation
circumstances.
4
January 28, 2003
B. Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approve and
ratify a Memorandum of Understanding with the Southwest Florida
Professional Firefighters, Local 1826, International Association of
Firefighters, Inc. (EMS Bargaining Unit) for, among other things, a third
year wage adjustment of2.9% retroactive to November 1,2001 for all
bargaining unit employees and a merit increase of 1.6% retroactive to
October 1, 2002 for eligible full time bargaining unit employees.
13. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
14. AIRPORT AUTHORITY
15. STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
16. CONSENT AGENDA - All matters listed under this item are considered to be
routine and action will be taken by one motion without separate discussion of
each item. If discussion is desired by a member of the Board, that item(s) will
be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered separately.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
1) This item continued from the Januarv 14, 2003 BCC Meetinf!.
Approval of one (I) impact fee refund request totaling $3,327.00 as a
rebuild from a house fire.
2) Approval of one impact fee refund request totaling $3,713.82, non-
buildable lot.
3) Request to grant final acceptance of the roadway, drainage, water and
sewer improvements for the final plat of "Pelican Marsh Unit Nine".
4) Request to approve for recording the final plat of "Forest Park Phase
III", and approval of the Standard Form Construction and
Maintenance Agreement and approval of the amount of the
Performance Security.
5) Request to approve for recording the final plat of "Tuscany Reserve"
and approval of the Standard Form Construction and Maintenance
5
January 28, 2003
Agreement and approval of the amount of the Performance Security.
6) Request to approve for recording the final plat of "Venezia Grande
Estates" and approval of the Standard Form Construction and
Maintenance Agreement and approval of the amount of the
Performance Security.
7) Request to approve for recording the final plat of "Jasmine Lake-A",
and approval of the Standard Form Construction and Maintenance
Agreement and approval of the amount of the Performance Security.
8) Request to approve for recording the final plat of "Masters Reserve-
Phase II", and approval of the Standard Form Construction and
Maintenance Agreement and approval of the amount of the
Performance Security.
9) Approve Collier County to enter into a three-year agreement with the
Collier County Hunger and Homeless Coalition to become the Lead
Agency for the Annual HUD Continuum of Care Grant Application.
10) Approve a Resolution supporting proposed legislation for
consideration by the 2003 Florida Legislature, to 1) extend the
deadline allowing rural enterprise zones to expand their jurisdictional
boundaries, and 2) reduce the required minimum purchase price from
$5,000 to $500 for eligibility under the Enterprise Zone Business
Equipment Sales Tax Refund Program.
11) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners amend the
hire date from April 2003 to February 2003 for the two new Planner
positions in the Comprehensive Planning Section of Planning
Services.
12) A Resolution supporting March Performance as a Qualified Applicant
pursuant to ~288.1 06, Florida Statutes; and providing an appropriation
of $32,000 as local participation in the Qualified Target Industry Tax
Refund Program for Fiscal Y ear( s) 2004 through 2007, and providing
for an effective date.
B. TRANSPORTATION SERVICES
6
January 28, 2003
1) That the Board authorize the Transportation Administrator or his
designee to execute the attached Federal Transit Administration
Section 5310 Grant Application and applicable documents.
2) That the Board authorize the Transportation Administrator or his
designee to execute the attached Federal Transit Administration
Section 5311 Grant Application and applicable documents.
3) A Resolution of the Collier County Board of County Commissioners
authorizing the execution of a Joint Participation Agreement (JP A)
with the Florida Department of Transportation for State Block Grant
Funds.
4) Recommendation to approve the purchase of one (I) 15 CY Dump
Truck, Diesel, in accordance with Bid #03-3457.
5) Recommendation to award Bid #03-3458R-Annual Contract for the
purchase of limerock and fill material for the approximate annual
amount of $500,000 to five companies.
6) Approve Change order No.1 for $71,155 for the Construction
Engineering and Inspections Services by PBS&J, Inc. for Goodlette-
Frank Road (Pine Ridge Road to Vanderbilt Beach Road) Four and
Six Lane Improvements, Project No. 60134.
7) Approve a Budget Amendment to recognize additional revenue for the
Collier County Transportation Pathways Program Project #69081 in
the amount of $94,928.
C. PUBLIC UTILITIES
1) Approve Underground Conduit Installation Agreement with Florida
Power and Light Company for the South County Water Reclamation
Facility Expansion, Project 73949.
2) Approve a Developer Contribution Agreement with DiVosta and
Company, Inc., and IslandWalk Development Company, Inc. in the
amount of$36,902 for Wastewater Facilities provided in accordance
with the PUD documents for the IslandWalk Development, Project
7
January 28, 2003
Number 73190.
3) Approval of an Interlocal Agreement with the City of Naples to bill
specific Wastewater Accounts. Fiscal Impact is $36,000 per year.
4) Approve a Work Order for a sand search for the re-nourishment of
Hideaway Beach, Project 90502, in the amount of $21 0,448.
5) Approve a Work Order for a Hard-Bottom Investigation as part of
County-Wide Sand Search, Project 90527, in the amount of$55,992.
6) Re-appropriate the balance of unspent funds in Fiscal Year 2002
related to North Wellfield Improvements in the amount of $98,200,
Project 70075.
D. PUBLIC SERVICES
1) Approve and execute documents necessary for the conveyance to
Florida Governmental Utility Authority of Water Utility Facilities
located at the Golden Gate Community Center Annex, at a cost not to
exceed $95.00.
2) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners convey
easements to Florida Power and Light Company and Sprint-Florida,
Inc., the total cost of which will not exceed $30.00.
3) Approval of a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity for the
Collier County Emergency Medical Services Department.
E. ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
1) Approve a Resolution authorizing the Chairman of the Board of
County Commissioners to execute Limited Use Bare License
Agreements for the 2003 Calendar Year.
2) Award Bid #03-3449 for preparation and delivery of title
commitments and real estate closing services for right-of-way and
other land acquisitions.
8
January 28, 2003
F. COUNTY MANAGER
1) Approval of Florida Association of Counties (FAC) $7,927 Special
Assessment for Lobbying Services related to the Implementation of
(Article V /Revision 7) State Court Funding.
2) Adoption of Resolution of the Board of County Commissioners
regarding reimbursement of certain costs relating to the Acquisition
and Construction of various Transportation related Capital
Improvement Projects.
G. AIRPORT AUTHORITY
H. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
1) Commissioner Halas's request for Approval for Payment to attend
function(s) serving a Valid Public Purpose for the Economic
Development Council Installation of Officers and Outstanding
Volunteer Award Dinner.
2) Commissioner Halas's request for Approval for Payment to attend
function(s) serving a Valid Public Purpose for Lake Trafford's Bright
Future Event.
I. MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
1) Miscellaneous Items to File for Record with Action as Directed.
J. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
K. COUNTY ATTORNEY
1) Approve the Stipulated Final Judgment relative to the Fee Simple
Acquisition of Parcel 128 in the Lawsuit styled Collier County v.
North Naples United Methodist Church, Inc., et aI, Case No. 02-1742-
CA (Goodlette-Frank Road Project (Pine Ridge to Vanderbilt Beach
Road), Project #60134).
2) Approve the Stipulated Final Judgment relative to the Acquisition of a
road easement designated as Parcel 128 in the Lawsuit styled Collier
9
January 28, 2003
County v. Gerald A. McHale, Jr., Successor Trustee Under
Unrecorded Land Trust Agreement Dated 12/10/92, et ai, Case No.
00-0487 -CA (Pine Ridge Road between CR 31 and Logan Boulevard)
(Project No. 60111).
3) Approve three Agreed Orders with Respondent Sprint-Florida,
Incorporated f/k/a United Telephone Company of Florida ("SPRINT")
with respect to (1) Parcel No. l78B in the Lawsuit styled Collier
County v. Roberto Bollt, et ai, Case No. 02-2217-CA; and (2) Parcel
No. 182 in the Lawsuit styled Collier County v. Lazaro Herrera, et ai,
Case No. 02-2211-CA; and (3) Parcel No. 188 in the Lawsuit styled
Collier County v. GJR of Naples Inc., et ai, Case No. 02-2212-CA
(All Three Agreed Orders concern Immokalee Road Project #60018).
4) Recommendation to approve a Budget Amendment in the amount of
$35,000 for outside counsel and professional services in support of
Resolution 2002-428 expressing concerns regarding the Acquisition
of the Marco Island/Marco Shores Utility System by the Florida
Water Services Authority.
5) That the Board of County Commissioners, as the Governing Body of
Collier County and as Ex-Officio Governing Board of the Isles of
Capri Municipal Rescue and Fire Services Taxing District and the
Ochopee Fire District enter into Interlocal Agreements with
Independent Fire Districts for the purpose of implementing the duties
and obligations of the various dependent and independent Fire
Districts with respect to Fire Plan Review and Fire Code Inspections
for new construction, construction projects and existing structures
within the various districts.
6) Approve the Stipulated Order of Taking and Final Judgment relative
to the Fee Simple Acquisition of Parcel 129 in the Lawsuit styled
Collier County v. North Naples Fire Control and Rescue District, et
ai, Case No. 02-1702-CA (Goodlette-Frank Road Project #60134).
7) Authorize the making of an Offer of Judgment to Respondent Temple
Grove Partnership, John A. Pulling, Trustee, A/K! A Temple Citrus
Grove, A Partnership, for business damages to Parcel No.1 04 in the
amount of $3000 in the Lawsuit styled Collier County v. John A.
Pulling, Jr., Trustee ofa Land Trust dated January 2, 1992, et ai,
10
January 28, 2003
Case No. 02-1908-CA (Livingston Road Project; Pine Ridge Road to
Immokalee Road).
17. SUMMARY AGENDA - THIS SECTION IS FOR ADVERTISED PUBLIC
HEARINGS AND MUST MEET THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA: 1) A
RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL FROM STAFF; 2) UNANIMOUS
RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL BY THE COLLIER COUNTY
PLANNING COMMISSION OR OTHER AUTHORIZING AGENCIES OF
ALL MEMBERS PRESENT AND VOTING; 3) NO WRITTEN OR ORAL
OBJECTIONS TO THE ITEM RECEIVED BY STAFF, THE COLLIER
COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION, OTHER AUTHORIZING
AGENCIES OR THE BOARD, PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF
THE BCC MEETING ON WHICH THE ITEMS ARE SCHEDULED TO BE
HEARD; AND 4) NO INDIVIDUALS ARE REGISTERED TO SPEAK IN
OPPOSITION TO THE ITEM. SHOULD ANY OF THE FOLLOWING
ITEMS BE MOVED TO THE REGULAR AGENDA ALL P ARTICIP ANTS
MUST BE SWORN IN.
A. V A-2002-AR-2848, Richard D. Y ovanovich, of Goodlette, Coleman and
Johnson, P.A., representing M.L.S. of Naples, Inc., requesting a 6.1 foot
variance from the required 10 feet to 3.9 feet for an existing sign, and a 2.2
foot variance from the required 5 feet to 2.8 feet for an existing flagpole, for
property located at 1455 Pine Ridge Road, located in Section 10, Township
49 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida.
B. Petition A VPLAT2002-AR3474 to disclaim, renounce and vacate the
County's and the Public's interest in a portion of the 20 foot wide
Maintenance Easement located along the rear of Lot 86, according to the plat
of "Moon Lake Unit 5" as recorded in Plat Book 23, Pages 79 through 80,
Public Records of Collier County, Florida, located in Section 6, Township
50 South, Range 26 East.
C. This item has been continued from the January 14.2003 BCC Meeting.
Petition A VPLA T2002-AR2704 to disclaim, renounce and vacate the
County's and the Public's interest in all of the Platted Conservation
Easement located on Lot 73, according to the Plat of "Southport on the Bay
Unit One" as recorded in Plat Book 15, Pages 51 through 53, Public Records
of Collier County, Florida, and to accept a Relocation Conservation
Easement over a portion of said Lot 73, located in Section 6, Township 48
11
January 28, 2003
South, Range 25 East.
D. Petition A VPLA T2002-AR2593 to disclaim, renounce and vacate the
County's and the Public's interest in a portion of the 7.5 foot wide utility
easement located along the East line of Lot 52, Block 72, according to the
Plat of "Naples Park Unit No.5" as recorded in Plat Book 3, Page 14, Public
Records of Collier County, Florida, located in Section 28, Township 48
South, Range 25 East.
E. Board to review and approve staff recommendations relative to the attached
list of "PUD Sunsetting Projects", which have not commenced construction,
as defined in Section 2.7.3.4 of the Collier County Land Development Code
(LDC), and have not submitted an amendment application pursuant to the
Resolutions adopted by the Board of County Commissioners on June 25,
2002.
18. ADJOURN
INQUIRIES CONCERNING CHANGES TO THE BOARD'S AGENDA SHOULD
BE MADE TO THE COUNTY MANAGER'S OFFICE AT 774-8383.
12
January 28, 2003
January 28, 2003
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Would you all rise for the invocation
given by Father Tim Navin from St. Peter the Apostle Catholic
Church, and following that we'll do the Pledge of Allegiance.
Father?
MR. NAVIN: Good morning. Let us pray. Throughout life,
Lord, we have all been taught to look out for ourselves. Sometimes
we forget that you have been looking out for each one of us all along.
We ask you now to hear the prayers of this community, but also
to hear our words of praise and thanksgiving for your blessings.
Thank you for the many people who work so hard for the good of our
community. Many different people make up our neighborhoods.
Thank you for creating each of us for a special purpose.
Thank you too, Lord, for the positive influence of others in our
lives. Let us continue to gather as a community to work towards
solutions to the problems we face and to come together in your name
offering our praise and gratitude, amen.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala, would you
lead us in the pledge, please.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
(The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
Item #2A
REGULAR, CONSENT AND SUMMARY AGENDAS -
Mr. Weigel, do we have any changes on the agenda today?
MR. WEIGEL: Nothing additional, but I would like to make a
statement in regard to item I2(A) that's being continued. And I just
want to communicate to the commission that this was a lawsuit filed
by the Florida Water Services Corporation against Collier County,
Page 2
January 28, 2003
also against the Water Waste Water Authority, also against the
members of the Water Waste Water Authority, also against the
members of the Board of County Commissioners.
Our office was in contact with the plaintiff law firm that had
filed this complaint. We expressed our extreme displeasure of the
manner and tenor of the complaint in -- particularly including
individual members of the respective boards, and spoke in terms of
counterclaiming to them in regard to a frivolous lawsuit.
They have agreed to remove the individual members of both the
waste -- W ater Waste Water Authority and Board of County
Commissioners from the complaint. Weare continuing it to the next
meeting because we want to see that, in fact, an amended complaint
is ultimately filed and served upon us.
If that should occur, however, obviously the savings from not
having to go to outside counsel will be significant even though we
thought we would prevail immediately with the pleadings that we'd
be filing in court in response to the initial complaints. We just
wanted to pass on, the kind of good news with the continuance is that
we believe we've saved considerable money for the taxpayers.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
County Manager Jim Mudd, walk us through the change sheet.
MR. MUDD: Good morning, Mr. Chairman.
The change list for today, we're going to continue item 6(B) to
February 11, 2003, and that's the public petition request by Jim
Kramer to discuss selective nonenforcement of the county sign
ordinance, and that's at the petitioner's request.
Mr. Weigel talked about the continuance of item 12(A) to
February 11 th, and that's basically the outside counsel for the Florida
Water Services Corporation versus Collier County lawsuit.
The third item is to move item 16(H) 1 to 9(F). That's
Commissioner Halas's request for approval of payment to attend a
function for valid public purpose for the Economic Development
Page 3
January 28, 2003
Council installation, and that was at Commission Coletta's request.
Commissioner Coletta mentioned to me earlier this morning
that he now does not plan -- his original intent was to say he was
going and he would also like to be named as far as that particular
exec. summary. But since this morning, Commissioner Coletta's
agenda has changed and he will not be able to attend that event, so --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And I am very appreciative of
the fact that Commissioner Halas will be there to represent us.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So do you want to still pull it
then?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, I have no reason to pull it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Does anybody -- excuse me, Mr.
Mudd.
Anybody else want to attend these functions under the valid
public purpose?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Seeing none, go ahead.
MR. MUDD: 16(H) 1 stays on the consent agenda.
The fourth item is withdraw item 16(H)2, and that's at
Commissioner Halas's request to -- for approval of payment to attend
functions serving a valid public purpose at Lake Trafford's big future
event. They're basically doing a rather large dredge event out in that
-- as far as the Corps of Engineers and South Florida Water
Management District, and that withdrawal was at the request of
Commissioner Halas.
The next event (sic) is to move item 16(K)5 to 12(C), and that
item is that the Board of County Commissioners, as the governing
board of Collier County and ex -officio governing board of the Isles
of Capri Municipal Rescue and Fire Servicing Taxing District and
the Ochopee Fire District enter into an interlocal agreement with
independent fire districts for the purpose of implementing the duties
and obligations of the various dependent and independent fire
Page 4
January 28, 2003
districts. And that's going to be heard at 12(C), and that move was at
Commissioner Henning's request.
Then we have two notes, Commissioner. Item 12(B), we're
asking that has a time certain of 12:30 (sic), and that's basically a
recommendation of -- the Board of County Commissioners approve
and ratify a memorandum of understanding with the South Florida
Professional Firefighters, Local 1826.
And the last note is just a clarification item. It's item -- excuse
me -- we have two more behind. Leo snuck a couple in there.
The other note is 16(C)4. It's a clarification. This project is
one element of -- and there were several questions by the
commissioners as we talked this -- as we talked the agenda over the
last couple of days, and this one is for clarification.
This proj ect is one element of the engineering and design of the
Hideaway Beach renourishment proj ect that was approved by the
Coastal Advisory Committee, the Tourist Development Council, and
the Board of County Commissioners as part of the FY-'02 budget,
and we're finishing the work up in FY-2003.
The sand search shall be used for renourishment purposes of
this particular beach or for other beaches in Collier County if the
Board of County Commissioners so designates. The reason for that,
the final construction of this project, we haven't got the final
estimates, but we've heard -- we've heard figures of five million, six
million dollars. And the board has not made a decision upon that.
We want to make sure this isn't wasted effort that can't be used
someplace else if the board decides to do something different with
their Tourist Development Council money.
Next item, the following two items are from the January 14th,
2003, BCC agenda.
Item 16(B) 1, which was a change order number three for
Bonness to work on the bridge at Lake Avenue, and item 16(B)2,
which was for the construction, engineering and inspection by HDR
Page 5
January 28, 2003
for that same lake that -- Lake Avenue -- avenue bridge. Both items
we're going to continue indefinitely . We have some -- we have some
issues as far as making sure we have the right contracting procedures.
So instead of trying to postpone it to a date, time certain, we're just
going to continue it indefinitely.
Y .?
es, SIr.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I have a question, Mr. Mudd. On
the first one, item 12(B), did you say 12:30, or was that 10:30?
MR. MUDD: 10:30, sir.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: 10:30?
MR. MUDD: 10:30.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. Because you did say --
MR. MUDD: By 12:30, Commissioner, based on this agenda,
we should be long gone.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: But you said 12:30.
MR. MUDD: I'm sorry.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That's why I just --
MR. MUDD: 10:30, sir.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you for clarifying that.
MR. MUDD: That's all I have, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. We'll go down the line.
Sue Filson, do you have any changes to the agenda?
MS. FILSON: No, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I don't have any changes to the
agenda at this time.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Do you have any disclosures on the
summary?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I just have one -- not on the
summary, no.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes, thank you.
Commissioner Fiala?
Page 6
January 28, 2003
COMMISSIONER FIALA: The only disclosure I have is that
it's Fred Reischl's birthday, and he's turning 50 years old today.
Stand up, Fred.
But having disclosed that, I just received one email with regard
to 17(C).
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Thank you.
Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I have no disclosures, nothing
to change, thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Nothing to change.
Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I have no changes and no
disclosure for the summary agenda.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I think we all have disclosures on
one of the consent agenda items.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: 17(C).
CHAIRMAN HENNING: 17(C).
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That's the summary agenda.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Summary agenda. Nope, I'm
mistaken. Looking, I don't have any changes or disclosures on the
summary agenda.
But I do -- today's proceedings, we're not going to use the dippy
buttons or the lights. I will recognize the commissioners if they want
to speak on a certain item.
So I'll entertain a motion to approve the agenda and the
minutes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So move.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Motion to approve --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion to -- from Commissioner
Coyle to approve the minutes and the agenda, second by
Commissioner Fiala.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
Page 7
January 28, 2003
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries, 5-0.
Page 8
AGENDA CHANGES
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' MEETING
Januarv 28. 2003
CONTINUE ITEM 6B to February 11. 2003 BCC meetina: Public Petition request by
Mr. Jim Kramer to discuss selective non-enforcement of the Collier County Sign
Ordinance. (Petitioner request.)
CONTINUE ITEM 1 2(A) to F ebruarv 11. 2003 B CC m eetina: Request for Board
approval, in accordance with Collier County Resolution No. 95-632, for 0 utside
counsel to represent individual defendants in the Florida Water Services
Corporation vs. Collier County, et ai, lawsuit, and for the related purchasing
policy waiver due to exigent litigation circumstances. (Staff request.)
MOVE ITEM 16(H)1 to 9F: Commissioner Halas's request for approval for payment
to attend function(s) service a Valid Public Purpose for the Economic
Development Council Installation of Officers and Outstanding Volunteer Award
Dinner. (Commissioner Coletta request.)
WITHDRAW ITEM 16(H)2: Commissioner Halas's request for Approval for
Payment to attend function(s) serving a Valid Public Purpose for lake Trafford's
Bright Future Event. (Commissioner Halas request.)
MOVE ITEM 16(K)5 to 12(C): That the Board of County Commissioners, as the
Governing Body of Collier County and as Ex-Officio Governing Board of the Isles
of Capri Municipal Rescue and Fire Services Taxing District and the Ochopee Fire
District enter into Interlocal Agreements with Independent fire Districts for the
purpose of implementing the duties and obligations of the various dependent and
independent Fire Districts with respect to Fire Plan Review and Fire Code
Inspections for new construction, construction projects and existing structures
within the various districts. (Commissioner Henning request.)
NOTES:
ITEM 12(B) to be heard at 10:30 a.m. Recommendation that the Board of County
Commissioners approve and ratify a Memorandum of Understanding with the
Southwest Florida Professional Firefighters, local 1826, International Association
of Firefighters, Inc. (EMS bargaining Unit) for, among other things, a third year
wage adjustment of 2.9% retroactive to November 1, 2001 for all bargaining unit
employees and a merit increase of 1.6% retroactive to October 1, 2002 for eligible
full time bargaining employees.
Item 16C4 - For clarification, this project is one element of the engineering and
design of Hideaway Beach renourishment project which was approved by the
CAC, TDC and BCC for FY 2003. This project was originally approved as part of
the FY-02 budget. This sand search shall be used for renourishment purposes of
this particular beach or for other beaches in the County if the BCC so designates.
The following two items are from the January 14. 2003 BCC Aaenda:
ITEM 16(B)1 (from the January 14. 2003 BCC Aaenda) was continued to the
January 28. 2003 BCC meetina and is further continued indefinitelv: Approve
Change Order No.3 with Bonness, Inc., in the amount of $1,390,146.36 for
additional construction services to build a bridge at lakeland Avenue over the
Cocohatchee Canal, Project No. 65041. (Staff request.)
ITEM 16(B)12 (from the January 14. 2003 BCC Aaenda) was continued to January
28. 2003 BCC Meetina and is further continued indefinitelv: Approve
supplemental agreement No.1 for $142,337 for the construction engineering and
inspections services by HDR Construction Control Corporation to add inspection
services for the construction of the lakeland Avenue Bridge, Project No. 65041.
(Staff request.)
January 28, 2003
Item #2B
MINUTES OF THE JANUARY 7, 2003 JOINT BCC/CITY OF
Entertain a motion for the January 7th, 2003, joint BCC/City of
Naples workshop.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: We have a motion from
Commissioner Coyle, second by Commissioner Fiala.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries, 5-0.
Item #2C
MINUTES OF THE JANUARY 8, 2003 SPECIAL MEETING -
AEER OVEn AS ffi.E.SENIED
Entertain a motion for approval of January 8, 2003, BCC/Land
Development Code amendments.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I second it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Coyle,
seconded by Commissioner Halas to approve the minutes.
Page 9
January 28, 2003
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries, 5-0.
Items #3A & #3B
N ow we go to service awards. If you all would join me in front
of the dais, we'll present these awards to the fine employees that we
have here in Collier County.
MR. MUDD: Mr. Chairman, the first service award attendee is
Gregorio Flores for Utilities Finance, and these are 20-year awards
for time in Collier County.
(Applause. )
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Wow. Congratulations.
MR. MUDD: Now, Gregorio, if you could just -- Gregorio,
come on back over, get in the front, right in the middle. You have to
smile now.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Pain's almost over.
(Applause.)
MR. MUDD: Thank you very much.
The next 20-year awardee is Gary Hamm from road
maintenance.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Hi, Gary. Thank you.
Page 10
January 28, 2003
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Congratulations, and thank you
from us.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Turn, face the camera, please.
(Applause. )
MR. MUDD: Mr. Chairman, the next awardee is a 25-year
awardee, and that goes to Jodi Walters from Domestic Animal
Services.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's called hanging in there.
Thank you for all your service.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Twenty-five years; you must
have started when you were 10.
(Applause.)
MR. MUDD: Mr. Chairman, that completes the awardees for
today.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: The next item is --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You have to take the leadership
role.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I thought those were my glasses.
Okay. We're ready.
Commissioner Coy Ie, your dippy light is on. Do you want to
say something?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No. I want you to turn my dippy
light off.
Item #4A
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING FEBRUARY AS LOVE MY
Page 11
January 28, 2003
CHAIRMAN HENNING: The next item is proclamations, item
4(A), and Commissioner Donna Fiala will be giving out this
proclamation. Commissioner?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And -- thank you. And will the
representatives from the library please come up? All of you. Good
mornIng.
And by the way, I hope that everybody in the audience and
everybody who's going to come and visit us today will notice on the
table outside of this room that there are some things to pick up for
Love Your Library Month, and I hope each and every one of you do
that, by the way.
Proclamation: Whereas, beginning on Saturday, February 1st,
and continuing throughout the month of February, Collier County
Public Library will commence a month-long Love My Library
campaign to celebrate the vital role of books as windows to the past
and doorways to a bright and exciting future for all Collier County
residents; and,
Whereas, this month-long celebration reflects the library's
year-round commitment to providing the highest levels of service
possible to county residents; and,
Whereas, Love My Library Month activities will showcase the
important role books play in our daily lives and the absolute joy that
reading can be; and,
Whereas, through books, the reader can travel the world and
beyond, visit the past and imagine the future; and,
Whereas, the friends of the library of Collier County,
Incorporated, in partnership with Collier County Public Library, has
been committed to supporting quality library programs and services
and has taken the lead in underwriting the many special programs
offered at all Collier County Public Libraries, including the Love My
Library Campaign.
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of County
Page 12
January 28, 2003
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that the month of
February be proclaimed as Love My Library Month.
Done and ordered this 28th day of January, 2002 (sic), Board of
County Commissioners, Tom Henning, Chairman.
Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I second it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: There's a motion by Commissioner
Fiala to move this proclamation, followed by a second of
Commissioner Halas.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries, 5-0.
Thank you.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Congratulations. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Thank you. John, good seeing
you agaIn.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you for everything.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Will you step up to the podium
and --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Let's get a picture first, please.
John?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, great.
(Applause.)
MS. ECKHARDT: My name is Helen Eckhardt. I'm the
president of the Friends of the Library of Collier County.
Page 13
January 28,2003
The Friends of Collier County is a nonprofit organization
dedicated to providing financial assistance to the Collier County
Public Library system, and we are pleased to join with the other
sponsors in supporting Love My Library Month.
Our goal for this program is 500 books.
John, will you -- John, on behalf of the Friends of the Library, I
would like to present you a check representing funds in the amount
of $106,700 to cover costs for adult and children's programs, staff
training, equipment and materials, and the many special items that
make the Collier County Public Library System exceptional.
(Applause. )
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, God bless you. Thank you for
that gift.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Wow.
Item #4B
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING THE WEEK OF JANUARY
26TH THROUGH FEBRUARY 1ST AS CATHOLIC SCHOOLS
:wEEK - A D.OEIED
CHAIRMAN HENNING: The next proclamation will be
presented by Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you. Would Rachel
and Scott Baier, Pat Moore, Vicki Fernandez (sic), Lindsay Poloto
(phonetic), and the Royal Palm Academy students please come
forward and line up in front of the dais.
Please. Right up here, please.
As a former student of Catholic education myself, I can tell
you, there is a light at the end of the rainbow, and you have a lot to
thank your parents for, and your teachers. And I'm very honored to
read this proclamation.
Page 14
January 28, 2003
Whereas, Catholic schools throughout the United States of
America will celebrate Catholic School Week on the last week of
January; and,
Whereas, Collier County is experiencing growing demand for
Catholic education with existing Catholic schools expanding the
program and new schools opening; and,
Whereas, approximately 1,200 students in Collier County are
currently enrolled in Catholic schools which include St. Elizabeth, St.
Ann's, St. John Newman's and the Royal Palm Academy; and,
Whereas, Catholic education in Collier County now also
includes post-secondary studies with the new arrival of Ave Maria
University; and,
Whereas, the National Catholic Education Association has
announced this year's theme to be making a world of difference; and,
Whereas, students enrolled in area Catholic schools devote
numerous hours of service towards the improvement of our
community; and,
Whereas, the goals of Catholic education is to educate the
mind, the heart and the character of every child.
And, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that the week of January
26th through February 1 st be designated as Catholic School Week in
Collier County, Florida, and urge all citizens to remember the impact
that Catholic education has had in our area and encourage you to join
in the week-long celebration sponsored by each school.
Done and ordered this 28th day of January, 2003, Tom
Henning, Chairman, Collier County Board of Commissioners. And I
make a motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Coletta to
approve this proclamation, followed by Commissioner Fiala.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
Page 15
January 28, 2003
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries, 5-0. Thank you.
(Applause. )
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Great.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Do you have a spokesperson?
Please take the podium.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Would you like to give the
proclamation?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Oh, yes, by all means. There
you go.
MS. BAIER: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And I have an extra copy of it
I'm going to send to Tom Monahan from Ave Maria University.
Thank you.
MS. BAIER: Good morning. And thank you, first of all, for
having us here. My name is Rachel Baier, and I'm representing
Royal Palm Academy. As you can see, we have several of our
students here with us.
We thank you for celebrating Catholic Schools Week with us.
And I wanted to tell you just briefly a little bit about our school. We
are a private Catholic school here in Naples. Weare affiliated with
over 150 schools worldwide. And the main theme of our education is
what we give to our children, not only high academics, but also we
form their characters, we form them spiritually, and also
epistolically.
As you read in the proclamation, it says that Catholic schools
Page 16
January 28, 2003
serve the community, service the county by going out and offering
service to the elderly, food drives, things like that. So those are some
of the things that we are doing in the community.
So I wanted to thank you again for recognizing our school and
all the other Catholic schools in the county. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you.
(Applause. )
Item #5A
PRESENTATION TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS FOR THEIR SUPPORT OF THE HEALTHY
KIDS PROGRAM - PLAQUE PRESENTED BY MARYANN
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Now we move on to 6(A) (sic),
proclamation -- or presentation.
The first presentation will be from Dr. Joan Colfer from the
director of Collier County Health Department, and this is a
presentation for the support of the Healthy Kids Program.
MS. CRAIG: Good morning. I'm Susan Craig from the Health
Department, and I am representing Dr. Colfer who, unfortunately,
had some family illness and needed to leave town.
Weare here to present the board with an award that was
submitted by one of our employees, Maryann McCarty, who is in
charge of our Healthy Kids Program, and that's the program that
provides for health insurance for children, families who are below
200 percent to poverty.
And due to funding that the county provided us to expand an
outreach proj ect that was really quite innovative, hadn't been done
anywhere else before, we've been able to significantly increase the
Page 1 7
January 28,2003
number of children who now have access to health insurance in
Collier County.
And we thank you for your foresight to work with us on this
project.
Maryann?
MS. McCARTY: I'll just read the little blurb to you that I
submitted on your behalf. We were allowed to nominate a
community partner in an innovative project that we had done, and
you won for the State of Florida.
And in the summer of 2001, the Collier County Health
Department received a stipend of money from the Collier County
Board of Commissioners to proceed with the project to identify and
target outreach efforts to pockets of underserved, underinsured
populations who had not been identified or served through previous
Florida kid care outreach.
For this project, we identified four elementary and one Pre-K
learning center in the rural community of Immokalee, in which 90
percent of the population qualified for free and reduced lunch, and
three other schools in a section of Collier County that was a
catchment area for low-income groups and minority populations.
A tear-off in three languages was developed and attached to the
reduced and free lunch application requesting parents to provide their
name, address and phone number if they were interested in further
information regarding health insurance for their children.
Daily pickups at the central school administration building
provided thousands of names of families interested. Every family
was initially sent a kid care application.
Home/school liaisons were then hired as OPS outreach workers
to provide one-on-one home visits on weekends and evenings to
assist families in the application process.
Since they were already members of the community and were
bilingual, they were accorded access to a community that
Page 18
January 28, 2003
traditionally feared divulging family information.
Enrollment in the town of Immokalee has increased by more
than 25 percent, with a 30 percent increase noted in the catchment
area selected.
Over 2,000 applications and home visits have been recorded
since the start of the project. This program has proved so successful
that a second year of funding has been granted by the Board of
Commissioners. I thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
MS. CRAIG: Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you for all your hard work.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Thank you very much for all your
hard work.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And your time. That was very nice
of you.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Ifwe'djust turn around and get a
picture now.
(Applause.)
Item #5B
SPONSOR OF THE YEAR AWARDS FOR THE ADOPT-A-ROAD
PROGRAM ADMINISTERED BY THE ROAD AND BRIDGE
SECTION OF THE TRANSPORTATION OPERATIONS
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Next presentation will be by our
transportation department recognizing the fine businesses and
organizations that have taken a lot of time to clean our roadways.
MR. ETELAMAKI: Good morning. My name is Mike
Page 19
January 28,2003
Etelamaki, road maintenance director. I'm here to give you a little
history on the Adopt-A-Road Program.
The Adopt-A-Road Program was initiated in Collier County in
1991. It has steadily grown in the interim years to encompass 207
miles of county roadways, 578 miles of lane miles, and 84 sponsors.
These volunteer participants donate a combined total of almost
12,000 hours annually picking up approximately 50 tons of litter per
month, producing savings to the taxpayers of a quarter million dollars
per year. This allows road maintenance workers to be used more
productively in road repair and drainage problems.
We appreciate the support the Board of County Commissioners
has shown for the Collier County Adopt-A-Road Program throughout
the year.
Barbara Lee, the Adopt-A-Road coordinator for road
maintenance, who by the way does an outstanding job for us, will
introduce the recipients of the sponsor of the year awards for the year
2002. Barbara?
MS. LEE: Commissioners, Mr. Mudd. We have six awards to
present today, five -- five runners-up, and our top sponsor of the
year, so we'll start with the runners-up.
Bentley Village is very proud of their efforts to keep their
segment of Vanderbilt Drive free of litter. The group calls
themselves the Bentley Rangers, and Ed Clark is their Adopt-A-Road
coordinator. He informs me that their average age is 80 plus, and
they have one gentleman of 92.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Isn't that amazing.
MS. LEE: They pick up litter on a three-week basis instead of
a month. The award will be accepted by Ed Clark.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you. Turn around and we'll
get a picture. Are we going to count backwards?
MR. CLARK: Our 92-year-old assistant is sitting back there
Page 20
January 28,2003
with us.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Sir, you can go to the podium,
please, if you'd like to say something.
MR. CLARK: I'm very pleased to tell you that one of our
workers is 92 years old, Dr. Ben Krantz. Ben, please stand.
(Applause.)
MR. CLARK: In addition to his work for us, he also is still
practicing medicine and goes down to the Friendship House every
week.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Good for him.
MR. CLARK: An ideal citizen.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes, we do thank you.
(Applause.)
MS. LEE: The experts state that clean streets, free from litter,
reduce the crime in the area. The Collier County Sheriffs
Department in Immokalee obviously supports this supposition,
because not only do they sponsor two roads in Immokalee, but they
also assist Immokalee residents, outlying areas like Copeland in their
encompassing cleanup efforts. This award will be accepted by
Lieutenant Mark Baker and Nancy Reed.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, congratulations.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you so much for all your
work.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Do you have enough volunteers?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: They've seen a lot of those
cleanups, haven't they?
MR. MUDD: Before you leave, can I get you to just get a
picture?
(Applause.)
MS. LEE: The increasing amount of traffic on --
MR. BAKER: Ms. Lee, just one second.
Page 21
January 28,2003
I'd like to thank the commissioners and the board as well as the
-- on behalf of Sheriff Hunter thanking the Department of
Transportation Services for recognizing the Immokalee substation as
well as the sheriff's office in their committed effort to improving the
quality of life, especially to the residents of Immokalee.
As Commissioner Coletta knows, the community has been
partnering with businesses. Government businessmen have gotten
together along with the government and the community as far as
trying to improve the quality of life for the residents, and I thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And your name for the record?
MR. BAKER: It's Mark Baker.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
MR. BAKER: Thank you.
(Applause.)
MS. LEE: The increasing amount of traffic on Immokalee
Road has resulted in a big increase in the amount of litter; however,
the portion of Immokalee Road one mile east and one mile west of
highway 951 is visibly cleaner than most of Immokalee Road. This
portion of roadway passes in front of Ray's Lawn and Garden who
have sponsored the road since 1993 and takes pride in reducing the
litter.
Ray Pelletier is here to accept the award.
(Applause. )
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Since 1993, that's perseverance.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thanks, Ray. Good to see you
agaIn.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Just turn around for a picture.
Thank you.
(Applause.)
MS. LEE: One of the principal reasons for the existence of
Naples Nights (sic) Lions Club is service. They provide service in
Page 22
January 28,2003
many areas, but they've faithfully picked up litter along Santa
Barbara Boulevard from Radio Road to Davis since 1994. We
recognize their dedication. The award is being accepted by William
Arthur, their Adopt-A-Road chair.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I dropped a five-dollar bill out there
somewhere on the road.
MR. ARTHUR: What?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: On the road, I dropped a five dollar
bill out there.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Can I get a cheeseburger,
please?
(Applause.)
MS. LEE: Since the inception of the Adopt-A-Road Program
in Collier County in 1991, Global Title Company has been the
sponsor of Goodlette- Frank Road from Golden Gate Parkway to
Creech Road. The appearance of this particular section of the
roadway speaks to their dedicated efforts.
The award was going to be accepted by one of their volunteers,
Jennifer Pell, but unfortunately she has sent a message at the last
minute. She's having car trouble and can't get here. Instead, the
award will be accepted by Tessie Sillery on behalf of Global Title
Company.
(Applause. )
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Great service, thank you.
(Applause.)
MS. LEE: Now, the top sponsor of the year is Singenta
(phonetic) Seeds. Since 1994, they have kept Greenway Road off of
u.S. 41 in East Naples comparatively free of litter. The company has
changed its name a couple of times in past years but has not changed
its dedication to the Adopt-A-Road Program. The award is being
accepted by Dan Howard, office manager.
Page 23
January 28,2003
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So it's you we owe all this thanks
to, huh?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Congratulations.
(Applause.)
MS. LEE: That concludes the presentations.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, thank you. That's a real
pleasure to do these fun things.
Item #5C
GLENN PRICE RECOGNIZED BY THE FLORIDA AQUATIC
PLANT MANAGEMENT SOCIETY AS THIS YEAR'S
OUTSTANDING AQUATIC PLANT MANAGER OF THE YEAR
=..EJ ,A Q UE...ERES.ENIE.
The next fun thing that we have will be presented by
Commissioner Fiala. I'm sorry, Commissioner Coyle. This is a
presentation to one of our employees, and he will explain what it's all
about.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And I'm pleased to present this
plaque to Mr. Glenn Price. Would Glenn come up, please.
Glenn is the Aquatic Plant manager for the road maintenance
department of our transportation department. Glenn has been
recognized -- if you'd turn around and face everybody while I tell
them about you.
Glenn has been recognized with the Aquatic Plant Manager of
the Year Award for 2002 by the Florida Aquatic Plant Management
Society.
Glenn has been a Collier County employee for 19 years and has
previously received a national award for his modification to a
computerized spray system. The Florida Aquatic Plant Management
Page 24
January 28, 2003
Society is dedicated to preserving Florida's Aquatic heritage as well
as providing information and training to aquatic plant managers
around Florida.
The society provides an opportunity for government agencies to
work with private sector aquatic plant managers in providing safe
and effective aquatic plant control.
Glenn, congratulations on this award and for a job well done.
Thank you very much.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you so much for all you do.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: We just want to get a picture, if you
don't mind.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Great.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: The transportation guys are
standing. That's nice.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: That concludes the presentations.
Item #6A
PUBLIC PETITION REQUEST BY MR. KEN DRUM TO
DISCUSS OVERALL PLAN FOR THE SANTA BARBARA
The next I
tem is item 6, public petitions. The first one is a petition by Mr.
Ken Drum to discuss the overall extension of Santa Barbara.
MR. DRUM: Good morning.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Good morning.
MR. DRUM: My -- for the record, my name is Ken Drum. I'm
representing the Lely Resort Task Force, which is a combination of
Page 25
January 28,2003
two communities, Lely Resort and Parker's Hammock.
The purpose of my petition today is to ask you to set aside
some time in a future meeting to discuss a policy for the entire Santa
Barbara roadway.
Santa Barbara Boulevard and also Logan Boulevard, as it's
called up north, is a different type of road compared to u.s. 41 or
951 or Airport, even Goodlette, in the fact that Santa Barbara cuts
through residential communities. And in several places you have
homeowners trying to back out of their driveways into traffic. You
have on the south end a possible condemnation of homes in Parker's
Hammock if Route C is used, and in Lely Resort you have a
possibility of a six-lane highway where presently we have a 30 to 35
mile an hour speed limit with homes that are built quite close to the
existing roadway.
So what has happened in the past in our view is that the whole
matter of what happens on Santa Barbara has been sort of a
piecemeal approach. And as a result, every time there's a change,
there's a running battle with the neighborhoods along Santa Barbara.
So what we'd like to see is an overall approach to Santa Barbara
with the recognition that it's a highway or roadway that goes through
neighborhoods. Also some of the commercial districts, the property's
quite close also to the roadway.
There are two reasons for this, in summing up, and that is,
obviously there's a safety issue, and no one in our community
believes that you're going to construct a six -lane road and keep the
speed limit at 25 miles an hour. You know, people just don't believe
that.
The other thing is, it's really hurting our property values. I
know from a personal standpoint, in our community our houses have
not increased the average percentage in the county, and one of the
reasons for that is that buyers look at a road proj ection for the year
2020 or something like that that's put out by the transportation
Page 26
January 28, 2003
department, and what they see is a road coming right through the
middle of the community, and that scares away buyers.
So the time, I think, to do it is now, to have an overall policy so
every community understands what's going to happen along Santa
Barbara so that the property values are not depressed, and so that in
the future people can buy with confidence knowing what's going to
happen.
And like I said, I would hope you would set some time at a
future meeting to discuss this and, perhaps, come out with a policy
for not only Santa Barbara but, perhaps, some other roads that go
through the middle of neighborhoods.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I'm so glad you brought this
to the forefront. This is something we've been -- we've been tossing
back and forth now for a few years, and I know that the people in
Parker's Hammock, for instance, have not known what to do with
their homesites, whether they can sell them, whether they can't. The
same with people in Lely Resort, and, of course, it's been hitting, in
the last year, Logan Boulevard, same thing.
And I think it's -- it's about time we do step forward and put
together a policy for that particular roadway. Is it going to be a
roadway or is it going to be a highway? And is it going to be four
lanes? Is it going to be six lanes? And I don't know how we go about
doing that, but it is time we do this so that we can give these people
-- as Norm Feder said one time at one of these meetings he's been
kind enough to attend with me, he said, we need to put closure to this
thing. And that's exactly what Ken is asking for is closure.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I think it would benefit everyone,
the staff and taxpayers included, to decide upon a final route for
everything we're going to do along that roadway and remove the
Page 27
January 28, 2003
uncertainty. It certainly would make the staffs planning process a lot
simpler if we were to indicate the route that we would approve.
And while it might irritate some residents who don't want --
like that particular decision, it certainly will confine the debate to
something that is known rather than a group of alternatives.
So I don't know -- could I ask Mr. Mudd, if we can do that
sometime soon, puts the staff in a position --
MR. MUDD: Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, I recommend
that we do that at a workshop, because they can be lengthy, and this
way it gets the opportunity for everybody to speak in that process.
We can make it a full-day workshop if you want to. And I would
suggest that we probably take another road segment and we talk
about Livingston south at the same time, because right now it's
drawing lots of controversy and you're getting emails, I'm getting
emails, and we've had citizens study that with the citizen task group
and we lay both of those roads out, and we finally layout an
alignment, recommendations, and then get some board direction, and
then we can bring it back to a future board meeting to set that policy.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. I agree with the direction
we're going on this thing. Leaving everybody in suspense as to
what's going to happen next is not the answer. This keeps coming
back to us in bits and pieces, and I don't like it. I don't like this
continuous battle that takes place, because you're always going to
have opposing sides at every issue. Let's get this up in front, let's
come to an agreement.
But let's also remember that if we do come to an agreement that
we're going to move forward with six -laning and we are going to
impact people's properties, that we come up with an equitable way to
reimburse them for their serious losses. I mean, we've got to keep
that in our mind at all times as we move forward through this
process.
Page 28
January 28,2003
CHAIRMAN HENNING: So are you saying you're in favor of
having a workshop to look at the Santa Barbara alignment and also
the Livingston south alignment?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's what I said in the first
sentence, yeah.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay, great.
Are you in favor of it, Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'm also in favor, but I also feel
that Lely Resort has got some obligations on this also.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay, great. Well, it sounds like we
have some direction, County Manager.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And if you would schedule to have
a workshop on these two items, we would appreciate it.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
Item #7 A
ORDINANCE 2003-06, RE PETITION PUDA-2002-AR-2803,
KAREN BISHOP OF PMS INC. OF NAPLES, REPRESENTING
WALNUT LAKES LLC, REQUESTING AMENDMENT TO THE
WALNUT LAKES PUD, LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF
US-41 AND APPROXIMATELY 2.5 MILES EAST OF COLLIER
Next item is 7(A), board of zoning appeals. First item is
petition 2002-AR-2803. Karen Bishop ofPMS, Incorporated, of
Naples, representing Walden (sic) Lakes, 1.1.c.
Commissioners, I will ask a -- disclosures, this item, ex parte
communications.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I have no dis -- anything to
Page 29
January 28, 2003
disclose at this point.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Nothing.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Other than talking to traffic, I
have no disclosures.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No disclosures.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I have talked to staff on this item.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So it's all over.
MS. BISHOP: Am I done?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes, you're finished.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Ifwe could have --
MR. MUDD: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to -- I'd like to change the
way we do business when we do seven and eight. And it's okay,
Karen, you're going to sit there for just -- you're going to be there for
at bit.
We normally start with staff, and it leads -- and I think it gives
a false impression to the public that our staff is a proponent for the
particular petition, and that's not the case. The petitioner sits right
there.
And I would like to start with the petitioner who's petitioning
the board. And then if you ask staff, does it follow the Land
Development Code or the Growth Management Plan or those
particular things, they're standing ready in order to answer those
questions for you.
But I'd like to set the record straight. The staff is not the
proponent for these particular items. There's a petitioner that comes
in and asks for a particular item.
And, Mr. Chairman, with your -- with your consent, I'd like to
start with the petitioner petitioning the board, and then having the
staff there as backup for our Land Development Code and the
Growth Management Plan.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, this is the commissioner's
Page 30
January 28, 2003
meeting, so I'm going to poll my colleagues.
Commissioner Halas, are you in favor?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'm in favor of it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Absolutely, much needed.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Let it roll.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Sure.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Ms. Bishop, you're up.
MS. BISHOP: I love being the guinea pig. Thanks so much.
Good morning, Karen Bishop, agent for the petitioner.
This is an existing PUD, 612 units. It was platted probably 20,
25 years ago as a mobile home subdivision at one point. My clients
took it over, we turned it into a PUD, we were going to build a golf
course community. Changes in marketing and changes in the -- you
know, I think 9/11 has had a lot to do with what people are buying
these days.
So we have a new marketing strategy. We're getting rid of our
golf course and we are requesting -- so we're requesting to remove
our golf course and requesting to lessen our setbacks to the kind of
product that seems to be selling more here in Collier County, the
Pebblebrooke product, the Indigo Lake's products, you know, those
kinds where you have a little lesser setbacks.
Five foot is what we have in Pebblebrooke, which has worked
out very nicely. We're pretty much sold out there now. I think
there's only a couple homes that aren't completed. The same with
Indigo Lakes, and those projects like that. So these are the things
that we're looking for on this particular change to this PUD.
That really is it. There isn't any other thing. We just --
dropping the golf course and lessening our setbacks to create the
product that we're looking to sell at Indigo and Pebblebrooke.
And I have a cold, so -- if I sound weird.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: We promise we won't get close to
Page 3 1
January 28, 2003
you, but --
MS. BISHOP: Good idea. I feel horrible.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- Commissioner Fiala has a
question for you.
MS. BISHOP: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I've never seen Indigo Lakes or
Pebblebrooke, so I know you're referencing them, but I can't compare
them because I don't know what we're talking about. Is there a way
for you to -- I mean, I can't see if you're eliminating the golf course
why you would need these setbacks, but --
MS. BISHOP: It's the bang for your buck. I mean, when I
bought my lot in Pebblebrooke, as well as anyone else, you're paying
top dollar for the land. There's no such thing as cheap land anymore.
And so you look to put -- I wanted as much house as I could get on
that lot, because -- you know, I chose Pebblebrooke because of its
location to schools and the type of people that were going to live
there, families themselves, and I wanted more house than I did yard
in the big scheme of things, so --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So what you're -- what you're
saying is, the reason you're asking for these setbacks is so that you
can build a larger house?
MS. BISHOP: Well, I guess in terms -- the larger house for
your -- on that lot would be an appropriate way to look at it. But
when we say larger house, I'm not talking about like what's been--
you know, taking an existing subdivision, like let's use the example
of Downtown Naples where you have an existing subdivision with
existing criteria and then people are tearing down those little houses
and building these mega houses. That isn't the case.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No. I just wondered -- because
somewhere in this stuff that we received, it said something about
minimum square footage, 1,000 feet, and I thought, that's pretty tiny.
MS. BISHOP: Well -- and I can tell you that the chances of
Page 32
January 28, 2003
anyone building those are probably pretty minimal, but that's a
standard minimal size of square footage in a PUD in general. That's
the minimum.
Sometimes I see 1200, but most of these subdivisions, they're --
they start around 1500 and go up to about 25. My house, I think, is
right at 2900 square feet, so -- I think some of the ones in
Pebblebrooke actually get up to 3200 square foot. Indigo the same.
Some of them are two stories. Mine's one story.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So--
MS. BISHOP: So it's a mix of a -- it's kind of like your
subdivision, just with a -- newer type of designs. You know in
Lakewood how you have the subdivisions right next to each other, or
houses right next to each other? This is more of a -- I want to say
more of a clustering type of mentality like you'd see in Pelican Bay
or Windstar or, you know, some of these other upscale
neighborhoods where they have a little less side yard setbacks, and
you still have sidewalks, your front yards, you still have back yards,
you still -- we have big recreational facilities for the kids. As a
matter of fact, we have sidewalks on both sides.
So we still have all those normal things that you would find,
you know, that brings you the intimacy of a neighborhood there. We
just have the houses a little bit closer together.
Y .?
es, SIr.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. I have couple -- a question.
We've got some documentation here, and it's kind of confusing. I
look at attachment D and I look at attachment D-1. I'm trying to
decide what your plan is here. Is it -- and it's page 13 and 14.
MS. BISHOP: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And I'm trying to find out what
you're really proposing here.
MS. BISHOP: D-1 is the existing that we're getting rid of,
Page 33
January 28, 2003
which had a golf course layout on it.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. And what's attachment D,
which is page 13?
MS. BISHOP: D would be the new subdivision layout.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
MS. BISHOP: And now there's an existing lake. I know I have
__ hold on a second. I have a drawing for you -- right there.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. You're looking at--
you've got 204 acres here, and I think your game plan here is to have
612 residents; is that correct?
MS. BISHOP: That's what it's zoned for, existing zoning.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. And then we've got also
some assisted living homes that are going to be here also.
MS. BISHOP: Well, they may not. I mean, it's --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well--
MS. BISHOP: -- up to our -- whoever develops this, if they
choose to, then we have a ratio. If you build this kind of product,
here's what it is. But from what I'm understanding at this point, the
current marketing doesn't show that as something that they're going
to build.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: But you -- in the documentation
there was something stated that you're going to use a floor area ratio
of .45 or .54.
MS. BISHOP: That's -- it's .45, and that's the county
regulations.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. So what are we talking as
far as density goes per acre if you use a floor area ratio of .45?
MS. BISHOP: Well, I know that I've personally been confused
by these floor area ratios for a long time.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Mr. Nino's here. Maybe he can
explain it to us.
COMMISSION HALAS: Yeah. I--
Page 34
January 28, 2003
MS. BISHOP: Well-- and, you know, when he explained to
me, I wasn't any more clear with it. But I can tell you that what I
think it equates to -- assisted living facility, if you look at the
Marriott as an example, which is on Airport Road, that's .45
coverage, I think that when they were finished they probably had
close to, you know, 18 units to the acre in that little bit of area.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And is this going to be in
conjunction with the 612 units?
MS. BISHOP: No, sir. What we have to do is, for each acre of
ACLF we use, we have to remove three units from the subdivision to
apply to utilize that.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That's correct. But if you use the
floor area ratio, then you're looking at bringing up the density per
acre. It could be as high as maybe 27 units per acre.
MR. SAUNDRY: Karen?
MS. BISHOP: Excuse me.
MR. SAUNDRY: May I speak, please?
MS. BISHOP: You need to come up here, Ken, and do this.
Excuse me. This is Ken Saundry. He's the owner.
MR. SAUNDRY: Pardon me, Mr. Halas. I'm Ken Saundry.
We're the owners of record of the property.
I don't want to make your meeting go longer. I want to make
your meeting go shorter. And there might be something that could
clear this up right now. The contract purchaser for this property
doesn't want to have ACLF on the site at all. So it would be
agreeable to us to drop it from your petition. That's why I didn't
want you to go along discussing a long time on something that's not
necessary for our use.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Can we have that taken out --
MR. SAUNDRY: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: -- so that we eliminate the density
out there?
Page 35
January 28, 2003
MR. SAUNDRY: Well, we take the ACLF off. We don't want
to drop the density of the whole PUD.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, the density would be --
hold it, because --
THE COURT REPORTER: Excuse me.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner, let me clarify this.
MR. SAUNDRY: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: When this came before the board, I
think, in 2001, it was determined that ALF, that we -- that's not part
of the equation in the density, because they have some kind of
sovereign immunity from that. Am I correct on that, Mr. Weigel?
MR. WEIGEL: I don't think I'd use that term. But the ACLF,
in the context of this discussion, is, if it were to be utilized, it brings
some density benefits or bonuses to the developer to increase density,
and if the ACLF is not utilized, then the property does not receive
additional density capabilities. Is that not correct?
MR. SAUNDRY: That's agreeable to us, because we don't
need that bonus because we don't need the ACLF component. We no
longer need it. It was in the original PUD, that is correct. But to
serve this contract purchaser in the development scheme he wants,
we don't need it. So what I don't want to do is belabor your
discussion and go into all the ratios and the conversion factors. We
could drop it -- we could drop it from the PUD right now and save us
a lot of discussions and ratios and things like that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Right.
MR. SAUNDRY: That's what I want you to understand. I
want this job to be simpler for you, not harder.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, thank you. I'm glad
somebody feels that way.
MR. SAUNDRY: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas, you can
continue, please.
Page 36
January 28,2003
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. So then, therefore, we're
going to drop that portion of the PUD of the ALFs, okay.
I've got some other questions here. I've got a ton of questions,
in fact.
In the -- on page 29, you say detailed description of the
proposed changes and the reason for the changes. On--
MS. BISHOP: I don't have page 29.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah. This is what was given us
in the documentation.
MS. BISHOP: Right. But your staff -- what your package is
and what I get from staff are not the same thing.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
MS. BISHOP: So you'll have to bear with me, because my
pages are numbered different.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, it deals with detailed -- the
top of the page says, detailed descriptions of proposed changes and
reason for changes. And--
MS. BISHOP: I don't have it here.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: In number 5 it says, revision to
maximum building height for ALF and multi-family. And I know
we're going to drop the ALF, but I'm looking at multi-family. To
acknowledge the ability to do three-story buildings, which is
achievable under the current regulations but which regulations affect
our marketing indicators that call for nine and 10-foot-story heights.
MS. BISHOP: Right.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: The current regulation is 35 foot.
Is the 10 -- nine to 10-foot-story heights, is that measured inside the
building or outside the building? Is this the actual ceiling heights
then or --
MS. BISHOP: Right. So what we're saying is, it used to be
everyone used to build floor -- you know, your ceiling heights were
like six feet to seven foot. Now everybody's doing 10. I have
Page 37
January 28, 2003
12- foot in my house.
So what we're saying is, now that -- for the marketing, because
of the changes in design, and people want higher ceilings now, our
three-story building can't fit in 35 feet. It has to be 50 to allow for
the heights. It's still three stories, but we need the higher -- so that
we can be marketable with the other projects around us.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: So you're saying now these
homes are going to be at least 50 feet high?
MS. BISHOP: The multi-family itself, not the -- not the
single-family, just the multi-family.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Now, is the multi-family going to
have elevators in it also?
MS. BISHOP: If it's three stories, it has to by code.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. So then we have elevator
shafts protruding up through that then?
MS. BISHOP: Well, they'd be a part of the building. I mean,
I've not seen the designs. Some people make them internal, some
people make them external, but they're still a part of the design.
They wouldn't be any taller than the -- actually the -- obviously the
shaft is not any taller than the roof of the building.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, what would you say the
overall height is going to be? What I'm --
MS. BISHOP: Fifty.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: The overall height --
MS. BISHOP: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: -- from the ground --
MS. BISHOP: The ground.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: -- level to the very top --
MS. BISHOP: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: -- is going to be 50 feet?
MS. BISHOP: Fifty feet.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: The reason I'm asking --
Page 38
January 28, 2003
THE COURT REPORTER: You need to let him finish.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Oh, I'm sorry, I'm sorry.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: You need to talk slow like Mr.
Henning.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. The reason I'm asking you
these questions is because that is a very -- kind of a low profile area
at the present time, and we're trying to eliminate high-profile
buildings out in that area --
MS. BISHOP: Right.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: -- okay, to conform with the rest
of the area there, so that's why I'm asking you these questions that --
what the height of this is going to be.
And since we've already made a determination that the ALF
portion of this is going to be eliminated -- because I was very
concerned about where we were going with the heights out there,
okay.
Now, in the -- with the advent of removing all of this area out
there where the lakes are, that's why you're proposing that we
eliminate the side yard setbacks from 10 feet, I believe, to six feet; is
that correct?
MS. BISHOP: Well, it's not so much because of the lakes. It's
because of the -- you know, you're -- what you're looking for. I
mean, keep in mind, density is a combination of the different types of
products that you put in. So if you want more single-family, then
you will have -- you have to make up the difference -- since
single- family takes up more land, you'll have to use multi-family --
you know, more multi-family if you use more single-family. Less
single-family, less multi-family. That's how that kind of works.
So in the case -- it's the product that is running our request. The
product that the client wants to sell is the specific product that has
been successful in Collier County all over the county and has almost
become kind of the standard of what people are looking for.
Page 39
January 28, 2003
Earlier the other -- the first application we submitted we had a
higher end product available. Unfortunately the market is not going
in that direction, so the people that want to build here are building
what sells, which is what's selling in Pebblebrooke, what's selling
Indigo, what's selling in Laurel Lakes, what's selling in Saturnia,
which is these closer setbacks to allow, you know, the regular person
to have more bang for their buck in their yard, which is what I did. I
wanted -- I could only afford so much lot. I wanted to utilize every
bit that I had, so that's what that's about.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. Then what is the rear yard
setback? In here -- I read in here where it's going to start off at 50 if
you're there first, but then if you increase your development, then the
50-foot setback in the back yard doesn't --
MS. BISHOP: First of all, I'm lost at where you see 50-foot
setback, but I'm going to tell you that -- keep in mind that your
perimeter buffers are outside of any of these setbacks. So we have
perimeter buffers first, so anyone that has a yard on the outside of the
perimeter buffer, you've got that buffer, then -- and then you have
your setback from your property line.
So even if your setback from your property line was 20 feet, if
you've got -- and actually most of ours are going to be a little more
than that. But if you're -- excuse me.
We have 20- foot for single-family detached. So if you have
20- foot, then you've got a 50-foot buffer that goes completely around
the proj ect that has trees and hedges, so the internal setbacks is where
you're looking at -- if you've got a -- back to back lots, each house
would have 20-foot back to back, there'd be 40-foot in between
buildings, essentially, is what you would see there.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas, I see you're
trying to search for --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah.
Page 40
January 28, 2003
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- what you marked. Why don't we
go to Commissioner Coyle, and we'll come back to you later.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yep.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
Commissioner?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Thank you.
I would like to direct my questions to the staff just to get some
clarifications on a few things.
Number one, will the floor area ratio apply to multi-story
single-family -- or multi-story residential units?
MR. SCHNEIDER: Don Schneider with planning services,
Commissioner.
Can you please state that question again?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: The floor area ratio of .45 is
specifically stated to apply for a assisted living facilities. My
question is, will it also apply to multi-family or multi-residential
units?
MR. SCHNEIDER: No.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No, it will not, okay.
MR. SCHNEIDER: In my judgment, it just applies to assisted
living facilities.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And so we'll use our density
rating per acre for the multi-family residences, okay.
MR. SCHNEIDER: That's correct, yes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Now, with respect to the building
height maximum of 50 feet, what setbacks will be appropriate for
those 50-foot tall buildings?
MR. SCHNEIDER: We have setbacks in the table one here for
the -- those particular dwellings. Maximum height of 50 feet, but our
setbacks, side yard, is point -- or half the building height but not less
than 15 feet. This is for multi-family dwelling. Rear yard is the
building height and not less than 20 feet.
Page 41
January 28, 2003
So minimums there would be 15 feet and 20 feet for side yard
and rear yard.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Are those -- are those standard
code requirements or have we varied from those?
MR. SCHNEIDER: I don't believe we've varied from those,
no, sir. I think those are standard, and -- I can --
MS. BISHOP: They are.
MR. SCHNEIDER: I can check that to be certain, but I --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
MR. SCHNEIDER: I believe they are LDC standards.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. So we're not likely to have
a three-story building with a setback of six feet?
MS. BISHOP: No.
MR. SCHNEIDER: No. No, no, that won't be the case.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
MS. BISHOP: And if I may, zoning codes are one measure of
regulation. Building codes is the second. So regardless of what my
zoning allows, the building department, if my building construction
meets a certain criteria, then I get to have these setbacks. If it does
not, I may have to have larger setbacks just based on fire codes.
So I don't know if you guys are aware of that, but this is just
one level of criteria. There's a whole different level when you get
into actually building your building and submitting it for permit. The
fire department can say, sorry, we want your buildings farther apart
unless you do A, B, or C, sprinkle, less windows.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Ms. Bishop?
MS. BISHOP: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle has another
question.
MS. BISHOP: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. Let me follow up on the
other question with respect to outside boundary setbacks.
Page 42
January 28, 2003
Explain to me what the outside boundary setbacks are for this
particular development.
MR. SCHNEIDER: Well, the outside boundary setbacks would
be the normal perimeter buffers that adjoin the property lines. And
in this case, it depends on what's next door. In other words --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Let's suppose we've got a
multi-family building there.
MR. SCHNEIDER: A multi-family building, I think you
would probably see our A buffer, if I'm not mistaken. And perhaps
Ray can help me with this too. But that would be our maximum
distance buffering between, say, the neighbors and the multi-family
structure, which would be --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. But -- okay. Can you give
me a figure?
MR. SCHNEIDER: I believe it's 15 feet, and I would have to
go to my LDC code.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Fifteen feet plus --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- the setback that would be
allowed for that particular structure?
MR. SCHNEIDER: Yes. The buffer comes first, 15 feet, and
then there's --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Then there's a setback for the --
MR. SCHNEIDER: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So that's what we're talking
about, right?
MR. SCHNEIDER: I believe that's correct. Am I right, Ray?
MR. BELLOWS: No. The setbacks are measured from the
property line. The buffer is within that. So you don't measure the
setbacks from the buffer. You measure them from the property line.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: From the property line.
MR. BELLOWS: Yeah.
Page 43
January 28,2003
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So we could have a building built
six feet from a property line if we approve these variances -- or these
changes?
MR. BELLOWS: No, because you can't build within the
buffer. The buffer is --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. The buffer prevails. It's
going to be 50 feet no matter what we do?
MR. BELLOWS: Whatever it says in the PUD for a buffer.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Now--
MR. BELLOWS: And they do vary by the adjacent land uses.
The Land Development Code has a matrix. And depending what the
adjacent land use is, the buffer may vary.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, you -- see, here's my
problem. Suppose the current adjacent land use is agricultural.
MR. BELLOWS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And we know it's not going to
stay agricultural.
MR. BELLOWS: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And it's rezoned to residential.
Have we created a situation where the buildings are -- the
developments are built too close together?
MR. BELLOWS: No. The county -- the way the matrix was
anticipated is that the first one in sets the standard for that proj ect.
Then as subsequent rezones come in, they have to comply with the
increased setback requirements for being adjacent to an existing
residential development. So the newer proj ects as they come on
through the rezone process, they're the ones that have to provide the
bigger buffer.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Now, one final question,
then I'll be finished, and I guess it's a question to both the petitioner
and to the staff.
The requirement that there be 60 percent green space in the
Page 44
January 28, 2003
development -- what we've been trying to do with PUDs is to get a
little more specificity with respect to the PUDs rather than less.
Does it, in any way, concern you with respect to your ability to
assure that the 60 percent green space is provided, that you won't
have a plan prior to the issuance of the first, what is it, 300 dwelling
units?
MR. BELLOWS: Yes. I think I understand your question, and
it's typical for all PUDs that have -- or any zoning district for that
matter -- where there is a specified open space requirement. The
language says that they have to comply with that in the PUD. And
the reason we don't go into more detail in showing it on the master
plan per se is because in 90 percent of the cases or more there's no
actual development plan to -- for staff to review to determine where
the best areas for open space are to be done. So the petitioner
subsequently, when they file their site development plans, or
preliminary subdivision plats, our staff looks at the open space
requirements there.
And this particular PUD has gone a step further than most
PUDs. They have a little more detailed information that they
guarantee that they will meet the 60 percent open space, that they
demonstrate that -- that they meet that intent at the time of site
development plan.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Did you get your question answered
on the side yard setbacks, and I think it was the rear yard setbacks?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Either, the boundaries.
MR. BELLOWS: Yeah, the boundaries --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: The boundaries are the ones I was
concerned about, and yes, I did -- I did get my question answered.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: But I think it props a future
concern about whether or not we want to change the process. But,
Page 45
January 28, 2003
nevertheless, I understand how it works.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. I found -- it's in the
wording. And this is in section 4, paragraph 4.3, and it's under B. It
says, buildings shall be -- shall be set back a minimum of 50 feet
from any abutting single-family lot line or multi-family development
tract abutting any existing external residential district. Is there
anything wrong if we take out the existing -- remove just the word
existing and have it abutting any external residential district?
MS. BISHOP: Well, keeping in mind that this is my club
facilities, and this is my internal club stuff. That section 4 is under
the common area plan. So what we're talking about here is my
clubhouse and any maintenance facilities.
So I'm going to suggest to you that if it -- we were talking
external, I could understand, but we're talking internal, and the
clubhouse needs to be in close proximity and is not a negative to the
project. It is a positive. Fifty feet from the existing residential would
be -- I'm guessing would be totally surrounded by existing
residential, but --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: But it doesn't specify specifically
the clubhouse. It just says, development regulations.
MS. BISHOP: Well, it says for the common area, and what
that has to do is -- your -- you know, and actually, I guess, it does say
clubhouse meeting rooms, shuffleboard courts, small docks and piers.
I mean, I don't want my shuffleboard court 50 feet away from my
residence. Then we're having -- we're not utilizing our land well
when I can have -- anything I call a rec. facility then has to be 50 feet
away. I don't know how that's going to be.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: But the problem is, you could
interpret this to say -- we ought to specify the clubhouse then,
because the way this is written, if somebody has a home built, then
Page 46
January 28, 2003
you could build another home and not have the 50-foot setback.
MS. BISHOP: No. But if you're looking at a little -- a little
obelisk, a building that you put in between shuffleboard courts and
tennis courts, now that has to be 50 feet away from a residential
building.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I need some help in --
MR. BELLOWS: I think we can say the principal structure,
that they have a 50-foot setback, and any accessory structures --
MS. BISHOP: Can be less.
MR. BELLOWS: Yes.
MS. BISHOP: That would be fine. I don't think that the
clubhouse -- that would be fine.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Can we put that in there, and--
okay.
And I have one other. In the engineering portion, in -- I believe
under engineering it says, prior to development you have, platting of
the property will be required. Could we put in there, consistent with
the master plan, add that to the wording?
MR. BELLOWS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: It's not in there.
MR. BELLOWS: They would have to do that anyways.
MS. BISHOP: Right. That's kind of without being said. You
have to do that. If I make a substantial change to my design and it
does not match my master plan, I have to trot back up here to you
guys, say, I've changed my plan, and show you.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. But it's not written in
there. That's why I was asking.
MS. BISHOP: That's fine. I don't care. That's fine.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you. Two questions,
please. First, is this property for sale right now?
MS. BISHOP: No, actually -- well, the term for sale. We have
Page 47
January 28, 2003
builders who are interested in this, and the builder is Engle Homes,
which, you know, like in Pebblebrooke, there's five builders in there,
and in Indigo there's four, I think, in there. This one's Engle.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. And the second question is,
does this reduced setback encourage a higher-end product? Let me --
let me tell you why I'm asking that question. This area is in
desperate need of a higher-end product to begin to balance out the
housing ratio in that area. And so I was just wondering if this will
encourage that.
MS. BISHOP: It is -- what we're looking to do is -- what seems
to be selling all over the county is this kind of product. It's the -- that
corridor, if you go along that Immokalee corridor, you see about four
or five projects all with the same kind of product.
The term higher-end -- ultimately you have a choice. In
Pebblebrooke, I think the houses there start in the low 100's and go
all the way up to, you know, just under 400,000. So you have this
range of what would be considered work-force affordable in the low
lOOts to, you know, the upper 3's to low 4's. So you're getting a
diverse market there with these setbacks that gives the ability to
spend more money on the land -- build a better house, you know,
because now I can put a bigger house there. And it's based on your
square footage. So if you're spending a hundred dollars a square
foot, the more land you've got to put it on, the more money you're
spending.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'll try not to belabor this.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. You know, I, too, am
concerned about the setbacks. I mean, six feet between buildings is a
really, really small area. And I have observed that the market is
demanding more separation, more green space, quite frankly. But
I'm not going to try to second guess the economics of your project.
You know it better than I do.
Page 48
January 28, 2003
But can you explain to me why, with the elimination of a golf
course, that you need to reduce the setbacks between buildings when
you're apparently dealing with the entire property? You're not going
to build any more units. You're limited to 612 units.
MS. BISHOP: Right.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So there's no increase in density.
You're going to have -- have multi-family units. It appears to me that
you're really not utilizing all of your property. So if you're not
utilizing all of your property, why is there a need to jam it all up
together?
MS BISHOP: Well, let me see if I can try and unders -- explain
this. First of all, there's --
MR. SAUNDRY: Wait.
MS. BISHOP: Excuse me. Ken will, I guess, do this.
MR. SAUNDRY: Commissioner Coyle, I'm the one that's
dealing with the contract purchaser, so I --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Your record for the name -- your
name for the record?
MR. SAUNDRY: My name is Ken Saundry, once again.
When we changed our product from a golf course with
multi-family buildings and we're going more low rise, you're
spreading out the density that you've got across the land. You're not
going up as much. You're spreading it across more, okay? That's
why you've got more on the ground floor now, so you've got more
density down there. That's why you have to have a -- certain size lots
to get the number of units that you're zoned for.
So that's -- but yet, we still have 60 percent open space
requirement. If you're going to put 600 units on a 200-acre piece of
property and 60 percent has to be open, you're going to put your units
in the area that you're left to develop. So to get those units in there
and have a certain number of lots, to get enough home on that lot,
you have to look at what the setbacks are so that you look at what the
Page 49
January 28,2003
rectangle is that will allow the homes.
So that -- does that answer your question?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I think.
MR. SAUNDRY: Well, you've got 60 percent open space out
of 200 acres.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: But part of the open space is
really -- you're going to be using yards and setbacks for that; are you
not?
MS. BISHOP: Yes. What I was going to try to explain was
that what we're talking about here is the difference between a proj ect
that would have been considered maybe Quail Creek where we had a
golf course and a lot more space. It was going to be a lot more
upscale when we first were heading down this path. That isn't
selling. That isn't going to work in this -- and not suggesting that
maybe sometime in the future it wouldn't work, but it's just not
working, and the economics for us to be able to move forward with
our proj ect demands that we provide a product that will sell.
What is selling -- and even though I hear what you're saying
about the six foot setbacks, I just got to tell you, I live in a project
like that. Now, I'm probably the only one in the whole subdivision
who doesn't have a five-foot setback. I had more room. I was able to
move mine. But every other one in there does, and I don't see that
it's a negative. It's fine.
There's like five kids per minimum household. It's a kid
neighborhood. The projects all around us are literally the same
criteria, and they are selling through the roof.
I appreciate that if this was a public roadway and you were
driving down it and you had all these things, that that might be
something that might not be a positive for you, but this is a private
subdivision that you have to come in a gate to, totally surrounded by
buffers, that the only ones who are going to be affected by this
setback are the people who choose to spend their money there.
Page 50
January 28, 2003
If they want more setbacks, they'll go out to the estates and buy
a big two-and-a-half acre piece of property and stick their house
there. But they're choosing to come here because this is what's
selling. And Engle Homes provides a top-of-the-line product that
allows you to have the best bang for your buck, and so the setbacks
are not diminishing the quality of this project. It's the people in there
that make the proj ect.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, I understand that. Is it the
staffs opinion that this is a common and accepted practice for other
developments we have approved?
MR. SCHNEIDER: Yes, sir, to date we have approved other
developments.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And I would agree with you, that
if you make a mistake, you're going to get punished financially
because it won't sell.
MS. BISHOP: Right.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So I'm not going to try to double
guess or second guess your finances on this project.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Before we continue any further, as
Commissioner Halas -- one thing I neglected to do is have everybody
sworn in by the court reporter that's going to give and has given
public testimony today. So if we can do that now, I would appreciate
it.
(The witnesses were sworn.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And if I ask, Ms. Filson, do we have
any public speakers on this item?
MS. FILSON: No, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'm concerned about -- a little bit,
still concerned, and I believe you when you say financially this is the
thing that's selling. But if you -- I look at your diagram in attachment
D, and if you eliminated some of the lake area, in other words,
Page 51
January 28, 2003
maybe the width or whatever, then you could end up giving the
people the side yard setback of 10 feet. Is this possible? It's still --
MS. BISHOP: Well, I mean, with all due respect, designing
this subdivision --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Seven feet? Let's say instead of
seven feet?
MS. BISHOP: Well, eliminating the lake eliminates the
product. In other words amenity --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, not eliminate the lake
totally. I mean, you've got all this lake area from what I can see.
MS. BISHOP: Right. But look right here. Part of it's already
dug, just so you know. So filling in holes is not a cheap way to go.
So we're utilizing a lot of the existing lake and making some changes
to it.
But amenitizing your product is what brings you that top dollar
that Donna's looking for for her district. And eliminating lakes so
that I can give more -- a little more setback does nothing to the
bottom line of the project and does not help the person who's buying
that lot.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. So--
MS. BISHOP: They're still going to want, as even -- you know,
they're still going to want as much as they possibly can get on there.
We've identified what our market is, we've identified what our
product is. And the amenitized version of this means that the
majority of these people will have an amenity. Instead of the
back-to-back lots like -- I lived in Golden Gate City for a long time,
and you have a lot -- back-to-back lots there, less amenitized. And to
keep that from happening, they've gone with this plan.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. So what I'm looking at
here on this Attachment D does not have any representation
whatsoever to what the development's going to look like.
MS. BISHOP: No, no. That is --
Page 52
January 28,2003
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Because if that's the case, you've
got lake already dug there.
MS. BISHOP: Right. That existing lake will have to be
changed somewhat, as you can see. It's similar but a little bit
different in the ground and that -- but this does represent what the
site is going to look like, absolutely, or I'd be back here again with
my plat. If it's not -- if there's a substantial change to this, I have to
make a change to my master plan.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. I have one other thing, and
then that's -- that will be it.
On page -- well, this is on type of development, tract S, because
you said that the page numbers don't follow with what you have.
MS. BISHOP: Tract S?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: It's in regards to a whole
complete paragraph that was added to this plan. And in here -- let's
see if I can find it so it doesn't take up a lot of time.
The current planning manager shall have the discretion to
determine the increment of a hundred unit dwellings as added to
equivalent amount of open space so as to be a disproportionate share
of the open space requirement does not fall on the remaining
developed tract.
Instead of leaving this up to the staffs discretion, can we just
put in there, you tell us what you want to do in that area?
MS. BISHOP: Could you find that? Could you tell me where
that is, first of all? I'm so sorry. I'm feeling a little ill today.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. It's under section two.
MS. BISHOP: Section two. I'm there, okay.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. And it's under --
MS. BISHOP: Oh, pursuant --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: -- 2.3 and it's tract S, type of
development. It's the whole paragraph, I believe, that you added to
this.
Page 53
January 28, 2003
MS. BISHOP: Yes. It's pursuant to the --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. To leave this up to the
current planning people, and why not just -- or leave it up to staff
discretion, and why not just eliminate staff discretion and basically
put the responsibility onto you and you tell us what your plan is?
MS. BISHOP: We added this based on staffs request.
So tell me what you want, Don. I'll be glad to change it.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Oh, is that right, Don?
MR. SCHNEIDER: That's correct, Commissioner Halas.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. I stand to be corrected.
MR. SCHNEIDER: This whole thing was added to help add
clarity to this 60 percent.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay, okay. Thank you very
much. I stand to be corrected.
MS. BISHOP: That's okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Anything else, Commissioner?
Anybody else?
So Ms. Bishop, November of 200 1 you came before the board.
So a little bit over a year we're coming to amend it, and you see all
the abuse you're getting, so maybe we won't --
MS. BISHOP: I won't be back, I swear. They're building it.
You will never see me again in -- for Walnut Lakes, I swear.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Mr. Schneider, do you want to -- do
you have anything to add or you want to go through a presentation?
MR. SCHNEIDER: Well, I would like to add that we've made
a few minor corrections to the PUD document in addition to what
was discussed here today, and these are mostly errors that we found,
typo errors. And particularly in the transportation section there was
one word that was left out that we'd like to insert, so we will make
some changes like that to the final document.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Scrivener notes, errors are
going to be corrected?
Page 54
January 28, 2003
MR. SCHNEIDER: That's correct.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And nothing substantial?
MR. SCHNEIDER: Nothing substantial.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Nothing that you want to get on the
record?
MR. SCHNEIDER: Nope, not really.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Any further questions before
we close the public hearing for deliberations?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Just one brief question to clarify
something.
The petitioner has suggested we take out ALF. That's a change
that you'll make, I presume?
MR. SCHNEIDER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And also the conversion factor
for the ALFs would be removed, since there's not going to be any
ALFs so--
,
MR. SCHNEIDER: That's correct.
MS. BISHOP: It's gone.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Is that what we're saying?
MS. BISHOP: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. I just wanted clarification
on that. Thank you.
MS. BISHOP: And Commissioner Coyle, I want you to
definitely look at that site plan and notice that there be no place -- I
mean, we've got buffers all the way around -- preserve across that
north half, existing beside us on the south, and that this is preserve
land that's state (sic) on stat., so you're not going to see what you
were worried about earlier, that somebody comes in, it's ago now, and
comes in. We have totally buffered it, so whatever happens around
us, they will not be impacted by our site.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Good. Thank you.
MR. SCHNEIDER: Yes. Commissioner, rest assured that any
Page 55
January 28, 2003
reference to an ALF will be taken from the PUD document.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Just one other que -- one last
question. And there was a traffic impact study that was turned in on
this?
MS. BISHOP: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And the density is not changing.
MS. BISHOP: There's no changing in the density so there
would be no changes in the traffic from the original.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Correct.
MS. BISHOP: Yes. Actually, you know, transportation did
change saying that the county -- that the neighbors have to pay for
the light. That was the only change. If there's a light warranted, we
all have to chip in, instead of the county writing a check, which I
thought was probably a good thing.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala has a question.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No question. I just wanted to say
that the EAC recommended approval and the CCPC recommended
approval, so I would like to --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Before we do that, we'll close the
public hearing.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: You were about to make a motion;
is that correct, Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. I'm closing the public
hearing.
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I'm sorry, Karen.
MS. BISHOP: We didn't have to go to the EAC because there
Page 56
January 28, 2003
was no changes in any of the environmental. Originally it was
approved, yes, by the EAC.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, I see, okay, on August 7th,
200l.
MS. BISHOP: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So I'd like to make a motion to
approve.
MR. WEIGEL: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: As amended.
MR. WEIGEL: Well--
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Mr. Weigel?
MR. WEIGEL: I would like -- although staff has indicated that
the ALFs and all that supporting language comes out, as well as
petitioner, the motion should include the language about ALFs being
removed, that your motion to approve is on the condition or with the
conditions of the ALF -- all ALF language and provisions being
removed and any further considerations that you have so that you
have specificity in what the board actually approves, and not just
referring to the record generally.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Very good. Okay, fine. I'm sorry.
I stand to be corrected. And I'd like to amend my motion to include
the elimination of the ALF from the document -- from the PUD, and
all of the provisions that go with it.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And I second that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. There's a motion on the floor
to approve with the amendments by Commissioner Fiala, seconded
by Commissioner Halas.
Any other discussion?
Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: (No verbal response.)
Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No.
Page 57
January 28,2003
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: (No verbal response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: (No verbal response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: We're okay.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries, 5-0.
Thank you very much. Come back again when you want a
little bit more abuse.
MS. BISHOP: You know, I hate being the first up and the only
one up because you guys have had two weeks just to look at my
application. I don't like that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
Item #12B
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING WITH THE
SOUTHWEST FLORIDA PROFESSIONAL FIREFIGHTERS,
LOCAL 1826, INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF
FIREFIGHTERS, INC. (EMS BARGAINING UNIT) FOR A
THIRD YEAR WAGE ADJUSTMENT OF 2.9% RETROACTIVE
TO NOVEMBER 1, 2001 FOR ALL BARGAINING UNIT
EMPLOYEES AND A MERIT INCREASE OF 1.60/0
RETROACTIVE TO OCTOBER 1,2002 FOR ELIGIBLE FULL
Page 58
January 28,2003
MR. MUDD: Mr. Chairman, that brings us to a time certain of
10:30.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes.
MR. MUDD: And that's item 12(B).
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Correct.
MR. MUDD: Recommendation that the Board of County
Commissioners approve and ratify a Memorandum of Understanding
with the Southwest Florida Professional Firefighters, Local 1826,
International Association of Firefighters, Inc.
MR. PETTIT: Good morning, Commissioners. For the record,
Mike Pettit, assistant county attorney.
I was the spokesperson for the Labor Negotiating Committee
that was involved in negotiating this Memorandum of Understanding,
and I'm here to answer any questions you have.
We endorse it as written and as attached. If you do choose to
approve and ratify it today, we simply need to get original signatures
from the union representative, and I'll have to sign it for legal
sufficiency, and I do believe it's legally sufficient. And we'll submit
it to the chairman.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Questions to staff?
(N 0 response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: No questions.
Ms. Filson, do we have any public speakers?
MS. FILSON: Yes, sir. We have one public speaker, Jim
Brantley.
MR. BRANTLEY: Commissioners, good morning. My name
is Jim Brantley. I'm president of the Southwest Florida Professional
Firefighters and Paramedics. I thank you for allowing me the
opportunity to address you.
Number one, it's good to be back in Collier County where
homes of 100 to $400,000 are still referred to as affordable
Page 59
January 28,2003
work-force housing. That's such a comfortable status to be headed
into negotiations.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: For your information, they're not
affordable. We all know that.
MR. SCHNEIDER: No. In the previous hearing, they were
referred to as work-force affordable.
I want to obviously urge ratification of the MOU. A lot of
work went into this. We'd like to thank Mr. Pettit in particular for
helping to kind of work through the mess we've gotten ourselves into
in the last 18 months. We now have a clean slate essentially to work
from as we move towards an entire collective bargaining agreement
to be worked on.
With that said, I approached this with cautious optimism in that
if the negative air that has existed for the last 18 months is not
corrected, I'm afraid we're going to end up in the same mess again.
Nonetheless, as we stand here today with this ratification, this wipes
a whole lot of issues off the table and allows us to move forward into
this next year working on a collective bargaining agreement to
replace the existing one, so we urge your ratification of this, and I
thank you for your time.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank for being here. It's very
important. And thanks for all your time that you've been working on
this agreement. I know the Board of Commissioners individually,
I'm sure, I know myself, has always checked in to see where we're at
with that, and I want to thank the county manager's office for keeping
this up to date.
Any more discussion?
Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion for approval.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion to approve --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- by Commissioner Coletta, and
Page 60
January 28, 2003
seconded by Commissioner Coyle.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(N 0 response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries, 5,0.
MR. PETTIT: Thank you, Commissioners.
Item #9A
RESOLUTION 2003-61, CONFIRMING BALLOTING DATE OF
MARCH 7,2003 FOR THE RECOMMENDATION OF MEMBERS
TO THE PELICAN BAY MSTBU ADIVSORY COMMITTEE BY
RECORD TITLE OWNERS OF PROPERTY WITHIN PELICAN
BAY - ADOEIED
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Let's go back to our regular
agenda, which would be the county commissioner's section of it, and
the first item is --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I think I'm next, aren't I, 9(A)? Or
-- I'm sorry.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: We're getting -- we're right at 9.
We're just starting.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, I'm sorry.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: That's all right. Glad to have you
back.
The first item is to request the board to set a balloting date of
recommendation of the members of the Pelican Bay MSTU (sic)
Page 61
January 28,2003
Advisory Committee by recording title owners of property within
Pelican Bay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'd like to make a motion that we
set the balloting date as March 7, 2003, and direct the county
attorney to prepare a resolution confirming the balloting date.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'll second that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: There's a motion on the floor to set
the balloting date by Commissioner Fiala, seconded by
Commissioner Halas.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(N 0 response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries, 5,0.
Item #9B
RESOLUTION 2003-62, REAPPOINTING WILLIAM E.
ARTHUR, CHERYLE NEWMAN AND JAMES J. HENNICK TO
THE GOLDEN GATE COMMUNITY CENTER ADVISORY
COMMITTEE - A Dill.IED
Appointment of members to the Golden Gate Community
Center Advisory Committee.
MS. FILSON: Mr. Chairman, I'm sorry. On this one, if you'll
please waive section B of the ordinance. Mrs. Newman has served
two terms.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: How do you know that we're going
Page 62
January 28, 2003
to appoint her to it?
MS. FILSON: If she's appointed. I'm sorry.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
MS. FILSON: I stand corrected.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I'll make a motion to approve the
applicants and waive the section that Ms. Filson has just stated.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'll second that.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And seconded by Commissioner
Coyle.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries, 5,0.
Item #9C
RESOLUTION 2003-63, RE-APPOINTING JOSEPH MUMAW
AND APPOINTING ALBIN A. KOZEL, JR., STEPHEN L. PRICE,
JAMES C. RAY, JR. AND RICHARD SCHMIDT TO THE
COUNTY GOVERNMENT PRODUCTIVITY COMMITTEE -
ADOEIED
Appointment of members to the county -- Collier County
Productivity Committee.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion to approve the five
that the committee recommended.
Page 63
January 28, 2003
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: There's a motion to approve the
productivity's recommendation to the BCC by Commissioner Coletta,
second by Commissioner Fiala.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries, 5,0.
Item #9D
RESOLUTION 2003-64 APPOINTING TONY BRANCO TO THE
LEL Y GOLF ESTATES BEAUTIFICATION ADVISORY
COMMITIEF, - ADillIED
Appointment of members to the Lely Golf Estates
Beautification Advisory Committee. It's the next item.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I'll make a motion to approve
Tony Branco -- Branco, I think his name is pronounced -- as
recommended by that committee.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: There's a motion by Commissioner
Fiala to appoint Tony Branco to the Golden -- or Lely Golf Estates
Beautification --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Second by Commissioner Coyle.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
Page 64
January 28, 2003
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(N 0 response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries.
Item #9E
DISCUSSION REGARDING ADDITION TO GOODLAND
OVERLAY - SIGN ORDINANCE OVERLAY AND
COMMERCIAL VEHICLE OVERLAY TO BE CONSIDERED
DURING LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENTS
(CONSENS-l IS)
The next item, I think, is Commissioner Fiala's.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, it is, thank you.
Yes, there's no backup work, because I didn't give any to the
county manager. And I've asked to bring this forward to you because
it seems that there has been maybe some kind of a misunderstanding,
or whatever.
Many, many months ago, I was attending the Goodland Civic
Association with the Goodlanders as they were -- as they were
discussing creating a -- an overlay for Goodland. And, of course,
their efforts were because they wanted to preserve Goodland as it's
been as a tiny little fishing village instead of being carried into a
different era, if you will.
And as we were discussing, we discussed many things with
regard to the signage there as well as to the way the vehicles are
parked along the swales. This is -- their lots in Goodland, along with
Page 65
January 28,2003
this overlay, have been preserved at, some of them, 25 feet wide.
Well, at a 25- foot-wide lot, you really don't have anyplace to park
your vehicle other than in the front of it.
And somehow, as they were discussing this, some of these
things didn't seem to actually appear in the -- in the overlay, and we
didn't really realize that until recently, and so they -- I'm ask -- I've
asked them to come forward, and I have Mike Barbush, who is the
president of Goodland Civic Association, to come and present his
concerns, and hopefully we can just modify this.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala, you're asking
to amend the existing overlay?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, I am. And I'm asking Mike
to come up and talk to you to tell you the Goodland -- to give you the
Goodland --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Perspective.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you. I needed that word,
fellows.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: That's all right. We'll get it out of
you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: There you go. Just wind that key
up.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: So we'll go to public speakers, and I
believe Commissioner Fiala would like Mr. Barbush to speak first.
MS. FILSON : Yes. In fact, he's registered to speak first, Mr.
Barbrush ( sic), Mike Barbrush. He will be followed by Connie
Fullmer.
MR. BARBUSH: Good morning, Commissioners. For the
record, my name is Mike Barbush, and I'm the president of the
Goodland Civic Association.
Thank you for your consideration of this item. We are
interested in adding two additional item or amendments to the
existing Goodland overlay. The first item is to allow commercial
Page 66
January 28, 2003
vehicles to park under homes and in swales.
During the first meetings of the Goodland -- of the overlay, the
Goodland Civic Association membership unanimously voted for this
item. Somewhere between the final document submittal and the
adoption of the overlay by commissioners, the commercial vehicle
amendment was deleted.
Well, we were unaware of this until a code enforcement action
revealed the oversight. This case involves a long-time Goodland
resident who has a tow truck parked under his large stilt home.
Weare a working village, whether it be in construction, the
service industry, or at sea. We have already laid the groundwork
with the original overlay and request the assistance in adding the
commercial vehicle amendment to the existing P -- existing overlay.
Secondly, the Goodland Civic Association, in conjunction with
the Goodland businesses is requesting a sign ordinance amendment
to the overlay. The new sign ordinance is set to take effect February
1st.
Back in February of 2002, we had the first of two meetings
with Michelle Arnold, code enforcement officer, and Michelle
Crowley, the code enforcement investigator. During these meetings
with staff and business owners, it was agreed upon with the full
support from the Goodland Civics Association, that all signs in
Goodland would be grandfathered in.
We understand the needs for the new sign code ordinance in
shopping centers, strip malls, and the like in other parts of the
county, but many signs in Goodland have been there for more than
20 years, and one for 40 years in the case of the Goodland fishhouse,
Kirk's Fishhouse.
There's also agreed that any kind of sign replaced or repaired,
other than just painting the sign, would have to fall within the
existing code. So at some point in time all the signs in Goodland will
eventually become -- under the new existing -- or the new sign code
Page 67
January 28,2003
enforcement.
We would like to comply with the sign ordinance in this way.
The look of the signs in Goodland is what we like because of the -- it
adds to the character and with the community, and we ask your
support in adding these two items to the Goodland overlay.
I would like to thank Michelle Arnold and Michelle Crowley
for their guidance in this matter, and I'd also like to thank Ray
Bellows and his staff for all the hard work they did to get the overlay
started.
It took us about six or eight months of seven or eight meetings
with our townfolk to get the overlay started. Where the commercial
vehicle ordinance went during all this process, like I say, is a mystery
to us. We had talked about having anything up to a semi tractor
trailer to be able to park in your swale or at your house or anything
like that.
Again, these are all things that were voted unanimously by the
civic association. We had two votes on this. And as recently as our
past January meeting, I asked our membership again if they were still
in favor of the sign ordinance overlay change and of the commercial
vehicle overlay change, and unanimously all of our people in
Goodland want to see the signs stay the same, and they want the
commercial ordinance or the commercial vehicle parking put back in
the overlay where it was at the beginning.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Jim Mudd, do you think we should
__ the appropriate place to discuss the amendments or the overlay
would be in tomorrow's workshop as far as the signs?
MR. MUDD: We can discuss it with the signs, and I -- and I --
and the reason I got up and asked the question about what's in the
overlay and what's not in the overlay, there was a survey that was
done of all the residents when this overlay was done, okay, and we
put in that overlay what the majority of the residents asked us to put
into the overlay.
Page 68
January 28, 2003
Now, if things have changed and the attitude of the residents
have changed, then that's one thing. But let's make sure we
understand something off the bat, because -- that's the question I
asked because there was a statement that was made -- and I'm not
saying Mike was wrong or not, but it caught my ear -- that basically
said, well, the staff made a mistake. The staff didn't make a mistake
with the current overlay, did not make a mistake in the current
overlay.
The major -- we went with the majority of the homeowners that
were polled and asked, and they specifically asked about commercial
vehicles and where they were parked. It was a close vote, okay? It
was 69 versus 68, and there were nine that were -- nine percent that
were -- didn't care.
And so we went with the no commercial in the swale, and the
same thing with the signs. And Ray Bellows has those statistics and
the results of the poll in his hand.
So if the board directs a Land Development Code change based
on the change of attitude of the residents, then that is a Land
Development Code change that they want.
There's also a thing that needs to be addressed, and it's called
funding of that Land Development Code change, and it's not a 113
expenditure at this particular juncture. So it's either going to be
funded by the petitioner's request, and that's the Goodland Civic
Association, or it's going to have to come out of the general fund.
But I will say for the record, again, that the current overlay was
a result of the survey of the residents at the time and was not a staff
mistake, that it was overlooked as far as vehicle parking nor signs.
So, sir, we can discuss this at tomorrow's workshop if you like.
But if you so direct staff to do a Land Development Code, code
change at the request of the Goodland Civic Association, then I'd also
ask you to direct staff to figure out where we're going to get the
money in order to do that, either the general fund or we ask the
Page 69
January 28, 2003
petitioner to come up with those funds for the Land Development
Code change.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: What would be the cost of -- for a
change in the Land Development Code in case the people in
Goodland would like to do this? The reason -- this is a real unique
community, and I'd like -- I'd like to see it preserved as it is.
Now, if these people are willing to come up with the expense of
that specific Land Development Code change that pertains to their
area -- Ray, can you give us --
MR. MUDD: Twelve hundred -- it's twelve hundred dollars for
the fee, Commissioner, and that Land Development Code change will
go through a series of hearings. You'll go through the planning
commission, and then you'll also go in front of the Board of County
Commissioners for that, so you'll have plenty of opportunity to get
the input from everyone as far as those particular items are
concerned.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. A question of David
Weigel, if I may.
MR. WEIGEL: Sure.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Mr. Weigel, is it appropriate to
be discussing items in a workshop without notifying the public ahead
of time so we can get their input? I mean, 24 hours doesn't seem like
a lot of notification.
MR. WEIGEL: Well, the workshop is -- it generally gives
some consensus of direction to staff to bring something back and/or
provide the opportunity for public hearings in the future.
I don't foresee that there's any legal question in regard to having
an item discussed at the workshop at all. Anything from that
workshop thereafter would probably follow in the processes of
notification and legal advertisement and also potentially public
Page 70
January 28,2003
petition or application process that might come from that.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. Just a fast question, Ray.
I've been working on the Bayshore overlay with the people on
Bayshore, and they've had to modify it and they're increasing it and
changing the lines. How come they didn't have to -- as they amended
their overlay, they didn't have to come back and pay the dollars and
change the Land Development Code, but how come Goodland has
to?
MR. BELLOWS: They're a little bit -- differences between the
two. The Bayshore is part of a comprehensive plan that was created
for the community. It's in the Growth Management Plan.
This is just a zoning document that has an overlay section
dealing with Goodland. It has no comprehensive plan equivalent.
In that time the board directed staff to do the zoning overlay at
no cost to the residents of Goodland. We've had a survey that was
sent out, mailed out to the residents of Goodland. The responses of
those surveys -- 152 were sent back to staff. And of those, where
there was a clear majority of support, those changes were
incorporated into the overlay.
Now if there's a change in feeling among the community -- it's
not clear to me that the Goodland Civic Association speaks for
everybody in Goodland -- and, therefore, if they want the change,
they should pay for it and go through the process as an association if
__ unless the board directs us otherwise, we will be happy to process
it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas, you have a
question?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes, I have a question. What's the
chances of -- in this overlay, just to call it a historical community?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, if we look in the Land
Page 71
January 28, 2003
Development Code, it's identified as a fishing village.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: It is? Okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes.
MR. BELLOWS: The Land Development Code -- I have a
map here that depicts it.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Just leave it as such, as a
historical village.
MR. BELLOWS: There are many zoning districts within
Goodland. There's village residential, there's RSF-4, C-4, C-5, so
there's no one set zoning district, and that's why the purpose of the
overlay is to create a district that supersedes the specific
requirements of each of those individual zoning districts, and,
therefore, development would comply not only with, say, the C-5,
but anything else in the overlay.
Now, the issue with signs, I don't think staff has a problem with
dealing with that as part of the workshop because the signs will be an
issue there. The issue of commercial vehicles, that really wasn't
addressed in any other venue except for the original overlay where
we held about 15 meetings down in Goodland and -- along with
mailing out the survey. So I'm not sure how that should be
addressed. Maybe that should be workshopped also.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Can I just ask this --
MR. BARBUSH: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: -- Mike a question.
When you're saying you want to park a semi truck in a swale or
something, is this only to pertain on Sunday events that take place
down there --
MR. BARBUSH: No, sir. Just to give you a little background
about how -- what we're trying to do with the overlay, and I can
appreciate what Ray says. And I don't have an argument with -- if
he's got the documentation to prove that the vote went against the
commercial ve -- I can understand that.
Page 72
January 28, 2003
But the reason that we did the overlay was because, number
one, most of our -- almost all of our lots in Goodland were
nonconforming. Had we had a hurricane come through or any
natural disaster, we would have had to come back up and get
variances or whatever to rebuild exactly what we had in Goodland.
Our lots -- our lots are too small, the setbacks are wrong.
And through the years of gerrymandering Goodland for one
reason or the other, we finally came up with a comprehensive plan to
take care of some of these -- some of these items.
Also, we're a fishing village -- not being able to store crab traps
in the side of your yard and things like that don't have anything to do
with the rest of the county here.
What we tried to do is tailor this to the residents of Goodland
through the course of all these meetings. And God bless Ray for all
the things that he went on with down there for all that time. But if
every time we want to amend the overlay because of what you-all
change the county to be that doesn't have anything to do with us,
we've got to come up with another $1,200 for every amendment that
comes through with this?
I can appreciate what Commissioner Fiala is saying, and I can
appreciate what Ray is saying about the Bayshore situation being
different.
The purpose of the overlay as far as we understand it is to
amend and to preserve the quality of life in Goodland as opposed to
what else is happening in other parts of the county that have nothing
to do with us.
So I can appreciate the fact that there is a procedure involved
here and there's a dollar figure involved and all the rest of that sort of
thing. But I think we're missing the point here of why we even
started this overlay, and that was to keep pace with what -- with the
changing nature of the county and to keep our village as close to the
same as we can.
Page 73
January 28,2003
We have two or three developments that are online. They're
going to change Goodland to some extent to this or that. But our
means of communication with you-all and of changing these things,
or trying to keep things the same, is this overlay. And if every time
__ you know, God knows what will happen down the line with this
overlay. If every time we have one amendment to this overlay we're
having to put out $1,200 -- and I can appreciate staff time and the
money and all the rest of that that goes into this -- we -- I don't think
we signed on for this when we did the overlay.
Now, whether we can put this in the comprehensive situation
like Ray says or whatever, I think there needs to be some adjustment
here.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Let's continue on with the public
speakers.
MR. BARBUSH: Thank you. Appreciate your time.
MS. FILSON: Your final public speaker, Mr. Chairman, is
Connie Fullmer.
MS. FULLMER: Good morning, Commissioners. Connie
Stegall-Fullmer, secretary/treasurer of the Goodland Civic
Association. Mike Barbush has pretty well represented our issues.
I would like to suggest though that the overlay process took
about two years for us to complete. It began in June of 1999, and it
was directed by commissioners for us to go forward with the overlay
process.
The first meetings were around January of 2000, and the survey
went out -- that we're referring to -- went out in May of 2000. We
had, from May of 2000 through May of 2001, meetings when we had
the opportunity to further discuss the responses to the survey, so that
the initial survey that went out was mid course.
We discussed commercial parking, we discussed the crab traps,
we discussed the setbacks, we discussed many, many things during
that long process. And Mr. Bellows was very good in helping us
Page 74
January 28, 2003
through all of that. And the final summary that was presented for
you as the Board of County Commissioners, though not any of you
sitting today were part of that decision, but the final summary listed
seven main items that were to be changed that were part of -- from
the existing code and the overlay.
One of the -- two of those items addressed parking, and it was
our understanding, our determination, that our commercial parking
was included in one of those two items that was in the final product,
so we were not aware that commercial parking was not taken care of
in the overlay.
Those two items were, number one -- the fina11anguage in the
overlay, one of the items was to allow parking of recreational
vehicles and equipment in the front yards of properties within the VR
and RSF -4 zoning districts, and the second item having to do with
parking said that the overlay would allow parking of property
owner's vehicle in front drainage swa1e fronting the property owner's
lots within the VR and RSF -4 zoning district.
It's that second item where we believed that our commercial
parking fell. We thought we had taken care of that issue. Because
through all of the subsequent discussions after the survey results
came in, even though it was close, as Mr. Mudd said, 68 to 69, and
15 un -- 15 respondents undecided, it was mid term that that survey
came in. Subsequently the discussions that took place within that
next year had to do with the concerns of commercial parking.
As Mr. Barbush has said, this is a working community. We
have trucks, we have vans, we have a tow truck sitting underneath a
resident's house that's been there for 10 years. Those are issues that
we needed to be able to protect and activities we needed to be able to
protect.
It was our understanding that this was part of the final product.
It wasn't until the code enforcement issue came up a couple of
months ago that we learned that we really were not protected.
Page 75
January 28, 2003
So we would like this amendment to be made, or the language
to be changed. We're not saying that staff made an error. We're just
saying that we understood it to be one way. They understood it to be
something different.
Now that we understand that code enforcement and planning
interprets it one way, we're asking that the language be changed to
reflect what the intent of the community really was, that intent was to
be able to park our commercial vehicles in our yards and in our
swales.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
MS. FULLMER: Thank you.
And in addition, we currently, in Goodland, generate about
$1,204,000 in annual property taxes from those residents that live
there, and we would hope that the $1,200 that we're estimating it will
cost to change the language be paid for out of the general fund.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Before we go any further,
Land Development Code takes four commissioners to approve it, and
before we determine who spends the $1,200, I think what we need to
do is poll the commissioners to see if they're willing to consider these
amendments. I think that's appropriate.
I think there's a misunderstanding on the vehicle -- commercial
vehicle parking. Presently you can park a commercial vehicle on
somebody's property and -- depending on the size of it, as long as it's
screened. The question here is, can you park that commercial vehicle
in the easement, or in this case what they're saying is the swa1e.
From my part, I cannot see where a semi tractor trailer has
anything to do with a fishing village. So right up front I can tell you
that I have a real problem with that. We did allow the crab traps to
be stored in the yards in Goodland.
Now, as far as the signs go, I think we can take a look at it, but
I can tell you that if we grant this, we could be opening up Pandora's
Page 76
January 28,2003
box.
So Commissioner Coletta, are you in favor of hearing these
amendments at a future Land Development Code?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm always willing to listen to
what the people of an area want. It's sometimes a little difficult to
get the public sentiments. And I am concerned about bringing this
back on a continuous basis. I can understand fine tuning it. Twelve
hundred dollars is quite a bit of money.
But I'd like to find -- get more direction from the community of
Good1and, what they actually want. I hear some differences of
opinion, and I'm not too sure -- I'd like to hear more about it. I think
we're here to serve the people to give them the product they want in
the end.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. So are you suggesting -- you
want to hear more from the public in Goodland. Are you suggesting
a -- some sort of survey?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I think a survey would be an
excellent choice.
What is the residents -- the number of residents you have in
Good1and?
Commissioner Fiala, do you know that number?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I don't know whether that matters in
this discussion.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm just curious what the depth
of the problem is, if a survey's necessary or community meetings to
take place in Good1and. I'd be willing to attend it and listen to
everyone.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: To answer your question, they just
had a meeting, I think, a week ago today, as a matter of fact, for the
Good1and Civic Association. And right now they're very well
attended because of this time of year. Their residents are back. And
they voted unanimously to support this effort. I don't believe there
Page 77
January 28,2003
was one vote against it.
MR. BARBUSH: No, there wasn't.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'm willing to reconsider, or
consider.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Consider their application to the
amendments?
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, absolutely.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, good to hear that.
Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes, I am. I feel that we need to
address the issues of those people in Good1and, because I think that's
a very unique community and I think we should try to preserve that
as a historical area, and I think we need to listen to the input of the
community. And obviously, they've probably made some changes
since the overlay and have really given it some more serious thought,
and I think we ought to -- we ought to at least listen to what they
have to say. That's why we're here.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Now the issue about paying for the
application. I can tell you, any amendments that the Board of
Commissioners does to the Land Development Code, we do it under
public hearing. All the public is invited to attend that for their input.
That's what we're here for.
We do advertise the meetings, and there's a first reading and
then a final and a second reading. At that time, because of public
input, there, in this case, could have been some deletions from this
particular overlay. So public did have time for their input.
Gentlemen, ladies, who's going to pay for this amendment to
the Land Development Code? Are we going to ask the civic
association or -- leave it up to the civic association if they would like
to pay for the amendment, or do we take it out of the general fund?
Page 78
January 28, 2003
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I would oppose taking it out of
the general fund. I think that sets a precedent that we don't want to
get involved in.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yep.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I hear on two sides of me.
Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm open for discussion on it. I
can see both sides, possibly even a split on the whole thing.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. We're having discussion
now. So what would you like to do?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'd like to see a split, in other
words, we come forward with half the money and they come up with
the other half.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, I'm hearing -- Commissioner
Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I think that the community, since
they're the ones that are interested in this, I think the community
ought to put up -- put the money up.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And that's where I'm at too. So
that's three.
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I would really like to see a split
myself. In fact, I'd like to see -- because I feel there was a
misunderstanding, I'd like to see it eliminated and not taken out of
anything. But if the majority of my commissioners say that they
want to do it this way, we can invite you all to maybe a pancake
breakfast where we can raise the money for that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you. Okay. So what we've
got here is a direction to -- not direction to the civic association, but
the feelings on the Board of Commissioners, and -- so if you receive
an application for the amendments of the overlay, you know where
it's coming from.
Page 79
January 28, 2003
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you, Commissioner
Henning.
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: When you have that pancake
breakfast, give me a call and I'll come and cook.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Great.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And I won't be there.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You can pay and stay home.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Ladies and gentlemen, I hope that
we can stay with the topics that we're dealing with today, because we
do have some other people that want to talk about other issues.
But we're going to take -- give our court reporter about a
10-minute break. And the time is 11 :05, so we're going to reconvene
at 11: 15.
(A recess was taken.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Would you all take your seats,
please. Okay. We're ready to reconvene. We have a live mike.
Item #10A
PRESENTATION BY THE GREATER NAPLES AREA
CHAMBER OF COMMERCE AND THE SOLID WASTE
MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT OF A SIX MONTH PROGRESS
REPORT REGARDING THE SUSPENDED ORDINANCE
ESTABLISHING A MANDATORY NON-RESIDENTIAL
RECYCLING PROGRAM WITHIN THE UNINCORPORATED
Page 80
January 28, 2003
The next item is the update on the commercial recycling.
Mr. DeLony.
MR. DeLONY: Good morning, Commissioners. My name is
Jim DeLony, for the record. I'm the public utilities administrator.
On 27 March, 2001, the solid waste management department
was directed to develop a mandatory nonresidential recycling
ordinance. The ordinance was presented to the board for adoption on
the 28th of May, 2002, and at that time the board voted to postpone
the adoption of the ordinance and evaluate nonresidential recycling
on a voluntary basis for the next 18 months.
We're on item 10(A), sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No, I know which item. I was
looking at the cookies down at the other end.
MR. DeLONY: Oh, cookies, okay. I thought maybe I --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I know --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That always diverts me.
MR. DeLONY: Mrs. Fiala told me I was speaking too fast on
my previous occasion, so I'm taking a little time here this morning.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you for listening.
MR. DeLONY: The board direct -- yes, ma'am.
The board directed -- voted to postpone the adoption of this
ordinance and reevaluate nonresidential recycling on a voluntary
basis for the next 18 months.
The board also directed the solid waste department to work
closely with the Greater Naples Chamber of Commerce in their
efforts to increase voluntary recycling by nonresidential of the
business community.
As part of that direction, the board requested interim progress
reports on a six-month's interval throughout the next -- that 18-month
period.
I'd like to introduce David Weston, immediate past chairman of
the Greater Naples Chamber of Commerce. Mr. Weston is the chair
Page 81
January 28, 2003
of the chamber's efforts with regard to voluntary recycling. He will
present the first six-month interim report. George Yi1maz is here
also from our solid waste department. He and I will be available to
answer any questions that you have following the presentation by
Mr. Weston.
With that, David.
MR. WESTON: Thank you, Mr. DeLony. Again, Dave
Weston, for the record. I'm here on behalf of the Greater Naples
Chamber of Commerce. Chairman, Commissioners, thank you for
having me.
Last spring, an ordinance was presented to try and encourage,
in fact, mandate of business recycling. And the Chamber of
Commerce worked very hard with staff to try and work on that
ordinance, but we continued to have the idea that maybe a carrot
versus a stick, less government versus more might be a worthwhile
attempt. So with that and with the vision of the commission, we
were ordered to try and go off and embark on that.
It's a compex -- complex, excuse me, very collaborative effort.
We had a bunch of independent folks, very technical. I know more
about solid waste than I ever thought I would know. And we've had
to kind of reach out to experts, to Collier County Solid Waste staff,
and to our own business members to try and learn what's all
involved.
Always -- getting started, it's like a term paper. Getting
started's the toughest part. Once you get started, it really gets easier
as we go along.
What has happened though is we have formed into a pretty
good solid unit. And really, my appreciation goes out to the solid
waste staff, Mr. DeLony, Dr. Yi1maz, Ms. Kirk, and I just met Ms.
Hapke, who's a public relations type of person, public information,
which is a key element of the plan.
I would be remiss if I didn't make note of her contributions,
Page 82
January 28, 2003
even though she admonished me not to. Ellie Krier has done a
Herculean effort in bringing all these diverse groups and trying to get
us all together and keeping us on the same page. And it's through her
efforts that we're as successful as I believe we have been.
Up until this point in this first six months, we've reached out to
community organizations, both business and green. We've gone --
obviously our natural thing is to go to the Greater Naples Chamber
membership, Collier Building Industry, I've spoken to their executive
committee and they've gone to their board and membership, I've
spoken to the EDC leadership and their membership, we've also
gotten input from the -- what we would term the green organizations.
The Audubon Society has interacted with us greatly, given us a lot of
good, positive suggestions, Keep Collier Beautiful has participated,
given us a lot of information, the Conservancy. The City of Naples
has been kicking in information and suggestions in telling us what
they do in their solid waste group.
In addition to that, we have technically oriented groups like
Zero Waste who have some innovative ideas that they're offering and
going to help us get in touch with some experts from far-reaching
places around the planet.
The chamber organized a group of individuals as well to try and
get aho1d of the different business sectors. We've got representatives
from NCH Health Care. I mean, it's amazing what they're doing over
there with bugs and high voltage and things like that to deal with
their solid waste. Vin Depasquale from Dock 5, because we wanted
restaurant and bar input.
Clark Hill from Naples Hilton Towers, because we needed to
know the hotel and motel business. Everybody has a different
perspective, different challenges.
In addition to that, we got Dolly Roberts from DBR Marketing,
Trout Scanlon from Creative Arm. They are the creative element, I
will say, that has -- going to merge with the county's consultant who
Page 83
January 28, 2003
__ on marketing this and promoting this and educating us.
Bob Sandy from the Naples Daily News. There's a big -- I
guess I hear about 40 to 50 percent of our landfill space is paper. So
my general approach is, look for the big deal and try to get your
biggest bang for your buck up front, so we're going to try to focus
some of the things that create the biggest impact earliest.
Tuff Publications with Russell Tuff, other newspapers, and the
CBIA has offered us Trevor Tibstra. He's with Commercial Cleanup,
so he's a waste hauler, plus he's on the board of the CBIA, so they're
connecting with the builders and developers.
In summary, that's a broad spectrum of people. The first thing
you need to do is get the folks together.
Then we said, okay, for this initiative to work, we need to
know, where are we, where do we want to go and how are we going
to get there, and when will we know when we get there.
So where we are is we have a really well-run landfill. It's really
well run, and there's been a lot of improvements, as we know, and
we've heard over the last 12 to 18 months, but it has a finite capacity.
And last I checked coming in here, people were still wanting to
move to Collier County. We just heard about rezones and zoning
and like that. So the demand on that landfill is going to continue.
When we met with the county manager and his staff, we
collectively came up with a mutually-shared goal to try and boil it
down to a simple mission, and that is to extend the life of the landfill
by 30 to 50 years. You've got to shoot for the best so we can try and
accomplish our goal, and then hopefully, as the county manager said,
is hopefully technology will have progressed in 50 years so that
maybe we'll zap our garbage or transport it through Captain Kirk's
transporter.
Where do we want to go? The 50 years, how do we know we're
going to -- how do we get there? First we set the goal, then we
educate, promote, facilitate and innovate.
Page 84
January 28, 2003
By educating, we have groups like Keep Collier Beautiful and
Zero Waste and a lot of other organizations, Keep America Beautiful,
and the county's own staff and their consultant to provide
information, waste audits. A lot of times people don't even know
what we have, what we're creating in our own businesses.
Education -- promotion, public service agreements,
announcements. We're asking both the printed press, the glossy
magazines, the newspapers, the radio, TV, to help us out. Those are
businesses that would help get out the word if we start reminding
people daily that it's not a second thought, it's your first thought.
What are you going to do with your garbage? Boom, you put it --
you separate it into recycling.
Shows, both CBIA, neighbor, Collier Building Industry, the
chamber, greater chamber, all do big trade shows. So have booths
there that show people how to do things different ways and
innovative ways to deal with it.
Seminars. We've got offers by Zero Waste and Keep Collier
Beautiful and others to actually conduct seminars to educate our
members.
Facilitate. My office is about 300 yards from the transfer
station on Enterprise. We have 37 people in the office. So I went
around and asked them, said, does everybody know where the
recycling area is here if you want to drop it off. A very low
percentage of the people knew that we could have probably thrown a
baseball to it. We need to try and get the word out that it's there. And
when I visited it, it's incredible. I had no idea of the number of
things that are accepted there, from equipment -- office equipment,
fluorescent lights, paint, all the hazardous waste, but just tremendous
things. So we need to get the word out, and that takes money,
promotion, and those type of things.
Innovation, or actually on facilitation, we have -- we probably
need more venues. They have the things called roll-offs. We've
Page 85
January 28, 2003
worked with staff, that they have them located in some places in the
county. We need to put them more places. We need to ask area
businesses if they would put them there. Because if it's difficult to
get to, people don't do it. We have to make it easier to comply.
Also a better variety of containers. One size doesn't fit all.
That was our -- one of our problems with the ordinance is you have
big businesses that have tremendous things, like I mentioned in the
hospital. But we need to have a variety of containers to fit the
variety of different types of businesses and facilities.
The innovatives. Through technical organizations, the county's
staff and their consultant, Malcolm Pirnie. And to get them to give
us more ideas and information that -- to make this a success.
The good news is we do a great job already in Collier County
of recycling. A lot of counties would like to have the percentage we
have. We're not going to be satisfied with that, obviously.
A significant -- we did a little polling and research. A
significant number of our businesses already participate in recycling
in the top large -- largest business as 100, are almost predominantly
recycling. And some of them are aggressive and have amazing
things going on. Recycling administers, high-tech solutions.
Our poll of our chamber also -- membership also showed a
tremendous support. Everybody -- I haven't met a soul who says, I'm
not for that. Everybody wants to do it. Now we're trying to get
everybody together on how to best implement this. But when you
have positive support and all the groups together, I think we'll be
successful.
There are resources available from other successful
communities, like Ann Arbor, Michigan, Seattle, Washington, who
have voluntary business recycling efforts that are very successful.
That's kind of bringing us, all six months, getting everybody
together, getting these groups, finding out what's going on.
N ow is our next phase, education, promotion, and innovation.
Page 86
January 28, 2003
We anticipate about a 90 to 120 day roll out for the marketing and
promotional program that we're going to have to work closely with
the county staff and their consultant to make sure that we haven't left
anything out. And we're going to need continued support,
philosophically and financially from the county commission through
their designated staff and consultants to make this so.
But I've got to tell you, I don't come in front of you very often
with such a positive feeling about where we started to where we are
right now and the direction that we're headed in. I mean, there is --
before I came up here, we were out in the hallway like school kids
saying, man, we're going to do this and we're going to do that, and
we can do that. And so given the opportunity, we're finding people
will do the right thing and that's where we are today.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Question by commissioners to Mr.
Weston?
Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Are you going to establish some
type of a matrix for measuring the amount of waste material that's
being recycled?
MR. WESTON: Excellent question. Yes. And that's -- the
county has actually shown us and we've worked together and come
up with three systems of measurement that were in your packets, I
hope, in the summary. And those are tough. It's a moving target.
We're going to have to do a lot of work to achieve those, but, yes,
absolutely. How do you know when you get there? You've got to
have those measurements, which we've agreed to.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. And how often are you
going to report back?
MR. WESTON: I think we have two more times or -- in six
months, but I think we're going to -- we had a year to try and get this
thing together. And we're at the -- it's half time.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta?
Page 87
January 28, 2003
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. Thank you very much.
I do appreciate the chamber's commitment for this and putting
up some of their own money and time and effort. It's greatly
appreciated.
At this moment in time though, the first six months I realize
you're getting your feet underneath you. Meanwhile, we had a
slippage of about a percent. We didn't really see any gains at this
point in time, which gives us more of a goal to have to work for in
the future.
A couple of questions I have. One, is there some program out
there that now exists within the country that you're using as a model
that has got some measurable results to it that we compare so we
know how we're doing in comparison to that?
MR. WESTON: We don't have a single community. I
mentioned Ann Arbor and Seattle, which, each one -- obviously one's
a large metropolitan area and they're not -- we're unique here, and we
keep saying that Naples is special and different, but we're trying to
get the best of all the ideas we get out there.
There's also the Zero Waste organization that's come up with
some innovative, I'll call them, scientists people, educators, other
restaurant people, to contribute some ideas. But we don't have one --
we're not going to say we're going to model ourselves after Ann
Arbor. But we are going to try to take a lot of the good ideas from
them.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, going back to
Commissioner Halas's question, how do you measure your results?
How do we know as we're moving through this? I know six months
isn't enough time to come up with a definitive answer that you've got
the answer to everything. What do we have that we can compare it
with other than our percentage, which I'll be honest with you, I'm not
impressed with 15, 16 percent. I mean, you got -- at least you got a
number that's so low. I mean, you're bound to be able to increase the
Page 88
January 28, 2003
product with a little bit of effort. But is there anything out there at all
that we can measure against?
MR. WESTON: Well, as Mr. DeLony and I have talked about
and the staff as well, the ultimate measure is, how are we reducing
the volume that's going into the landfill. That's the proverb -- I'm an
accountant. Bottom line is what's going in there. The complication
with that is if I say, it's X number of tons today, and tomorrow it's not
lower than that because we have growth and other contributing
factors.
We're developing an algorithm that we think will show that
present -- that we're making inroads on it, but it's not a finite stagnant
number that you can just say it's at five and it better be at four,
because that -- we'd have to raise the gates and not let anybody in,
don't promote any more businesses and those type of things.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. No, I thank you for
that. I really didn't quite get the answer, but I understand that we're
probably in the forefront of this technology.
MR. WESTON: We still have to develop -- those measurement
standards, those three that are in the end are going to have to be
detailed. The devil's into details.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Can you comment on another
part of this report where it said, the Collier County Public Schools
isn't participating and they find it cost prohibitive. That's very
discouraging.
MR. WESTON: Yeah, yeah. It's the largest employer in the
county, I believe. And we have received very positive response from
the board when they -- when we contacted them about it, so they're
going to be jumping onboard. But at one time -- and I've done some
research, like I said, more than I wanted to about solid waste.
But there is -- even though it's a good thing, we all agree
recycling's great. It costs money to get the trucks out there, got to get
people to haul it around, even if it's separated, and there's a cost in
Page 89
January 28,2003
there. And so what is the ultimate cost benefit becomes difficult to
ascertain.
The public school system apparently did an analysis and
decided, no, it's going to cost us more to separate it than not to,
okay? That was -- and I don't know the date of that or the age of
that, and I can't speak for them.
There was an article about Mayor Bloomberg in New York. He
__ they collect it, they separate it and then heave it in the pile because
it costs less to just chuck it in the pile than it does to deal with it, to
burn it, the fuel and all that. So there's some challenges on the far end
of the stream. You can promote and get everybody to separate it and
do well. Got to do something with it. It's got to be efficient.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And I realize--
MR. WESTON: It's a complex issue.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And I realize that the
commercial, or as you like to refer to it as nonresidential, is not doing
any better than the general population out there, that we're actually
starting to slip on that particular effort too. Am I correct, or are we
holding our own as far as our recycling rate? I would like to know
the answer to that, if you don't mind, Mr. Yi1maz.
MR. YILMAZ: For the record, George Yilmaz. Are we talking
about single-home residential recycling, sir?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm talking about residential
overall, including single-family, including multi-family.
MR. YILMAZ: Our residential curbside has increased from 26
to 28 percent and our projections is that you will do much better
there as we go further the next two years. So we do see increase in
our residential recycling.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So in other words, the 26
versus 13 . We're about -- residential users are doing twice as good as
the commercial users are at this point in time?
MR. YILMAZ: Yes, sir.
Page 90
January 28, 2003
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you.
MR. WESTON: And the third measurement does an analysis
vis-a-vis residential contribution so that we can measure the relative
ratio. That's one of the three measurements in there.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Mr. Weston?
MR. WESTON: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Has any outside vendors been
recognized outside of Collier County to pick up recyclables?
MR. WESTON: I know that -- I spoke with a woman and--
Neala Hoch, who's also with Keep America Beautiful organization
and also works for the recycling organi -- hauler from Lee County,
and I understand there's about seven or more that do it. And that's --
we talk about the invisible recycling that goes on, the people in the
office that take the cans to the scouts, the people who take it down to
the transfer stations and don't have it checked off so it's not in that 13
percent.
We're trying to get those people onboard. We already, through
the county staff, have cooperation. They're going to check and see if
it's a commercial drop-off versus a residential, which hasn't been
monitored up to this time. And we're trying to get more people just
to sign up for you at the main haulers and have them report it, either
Waste Management, who happens to be the main hauler for Collier
County, and have them report, and they do report if you have a
commercial deal, but the outside, the independent haulers mayor
may not.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Right. And I would suspect that
you're not getting any reporting but through communication of
contacting those outside vendors and encourage them into Collier
County to do business here and ask them to send -- report to the
chamber or our staff to measure, you know, what's being picked up.
But --
Page 91
January 28,2003
MR. WESTON: See, a lot of that stuff, when you have outside
haulers like that, and particularly financial institutions, they want to
destroy it, they have confidentiality issues, and so they're not making
a big fanfare out of it, it's mulched up and goes out in an unmarked
truck, you know, goes down -- and that's what's happening with
them, and they're mostly out of Lee County, those operations.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. And I think they just want to
-- not to identify their clients?
MR. WESTON : Well, they just -- I mean, there's just -- they're
handling sensitive financial documents, and so they don't make a big
publicity thing out of it. But we could ask them to report on their
tonnage. They're a private industry, so we could try to ask them.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Sure. And then I think if we could
work with the tax collector on the occupationa11icense, when those
go out, can we use that as a tool for education of identifying the
recyclab1es and where they can be -- who can you call to step up
some service?
MR. WESTON: That's part of that education. A lot of people
don't know.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Sure. And I think education is the
way that we make things happen on a lot of things, you know, big
manatee or whatever.
MR. WESTON: This morning we had the road cleanup people
and the kids. I mean, I sat here. I was real impressed what people
will do because it's the right thing to do.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Right.
MR. WESTON: If they know what to do and how to do it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Right, thank you.
Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah. I just want to make sure
that we are getting the message out there to the commercial people,
because 60 percent of the trash is generated by commercial industry,
Page 92
January 28,2003
and it's very important that we get the message out to them and that
we start seeing this recyclable rate starting to go up there in the
landfill. That's the most important thing.
MR. WESTON: I appreciate your point. I also think it's
important for the record to point out that a significant percentage of
the amount that is being recycled right now, construction and
demolition and horticultural, huge. The two largest elements that are
being recycled are commercial activities. They are head and
shoulders above anything else. So leading the charge is commercial.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you, Mr. Weston, for being
here. If you would give me a call, I've got some ideas that might
assist you, but I don't want to hold the process up, so if we go back to
the public speakers.
Oh, Mr. DeLony.
MR. DeLONY: I really don't have anything to add, other than
to just ask if there's any further questions for me or for my staff or
any other direction you could provide us.
I would just like to give a summary, if I could, from an overall
perspective. First of all, this is a win-win at this stage of the game,
okay, in my assessment, sir. We are working closely together to
make sure we get that education and that awareness at the level
where voluntary recycling can work or would work. We'll just have
to evaluate how well it works and then weigh some board decision, if
that's the direction we continue to go on with regard -- the end game.
The end game is, of course, preserving our landfill capacity and the
earth space in that landfill for 50 years or more.
We'll be back to you the first week in March and laying out that
long-term strategy. This folds into that strategy in some -- to some
degree. In terms of recycling, absolutely. It's one of our key
components of diverting from that landfill constituents that either can
be reused or recycled or put to other better use somewhere else. So
this is a critical part of it.
Page 93
January 28, 2003
Of course, the decision by the board back last year was that
we're going to work the voluntary piece before we make it
mandatory. So in that sense, it does fold very carefully into our
long-term strategy, which, of course, again, I'll be back in the first
week of March with some greater detail with regard to where we
stand on the different long-term, short-term, and immediate-term
solutions that we could propose to you for your decisions.
But this currently is a win-win. We've got the measurab1es.
We thing the measurab1es will give us the right indicator now.
We've got to move out against those measurables and those standards
and get some performance as indicated by you, sir, and that's where
we're going.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. Okay. One question.
Do we have any goals as far as percentages? Because that's the only
measurable performance that we have in this agenda package that we
have. It says 13 percent now. Do we have something for the end of
one year, maybe 25 percent or some other number?
MR. DeLONY: Sir, that's a great question. I guess what we're
looking for right now is positive -- positive movement upward above
our current situation. We have not necessarily sat down and
benchmarked a specific goal for the next six-month period, but we
will take that and bring it back to you as to what the benchmark is
and how well we did against that --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I would strongly recommend
that you come up with a --
MR. DeLONY: Yes, sir, benchmark for performance.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- benchmark to achieve.
MR. DeLONY: All right, sir. As mentioned earlier, we have
three measurab1es that we're looking at. W e'lllook carefully at
crafting benchmarks for measuring excellence or subexcellence with
regard to execution.
Page 94
January 28,2003
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I think that's where you were
trying to go, right, Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That's exactly, when I said that
we want a working matrix to know what the percentage is, and that's
where I was -- when I directed that question to you, that's exactly
where I was coming from.
MR. DeLONY: I believe we could work that out.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: We want a matrix on that to find
out -- so we actually tell what's happening.
MR. WESTON: Yeah. We have talked about it conceptually,
but we don't have that number, because it's a -- there's a lot of inputs,
things are coming in from every angle. We need to get a good
formula. A bad number's not worth telling you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Great. Thank you.
Ms. Filson, do we have any public speakers?
MS. FILSON: Yes, sir. You have one public speaker, Bob
Krasowski.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Good morning, Commissioners. For the
record, my name is Bob Krasowski. I'm with Zero Waste Collier
County.
I'd just like to mention that I think this is just wonderful what
you have in front of you today. I know earlier we had an interest in
__ the Zero Waste Collier County did -- in the mandatory recycling
ordinance. But with the talent available through the chamber, the
talent available in the solid waste department, we think that much can
be done in terms of succeeding with recycling and other programs in
the current environment.
We look forward to working with -- further working with the
chamber and the solid waste department on implementing strategies
that will increase the waste diversion.
As it's been mentioned, the -- 60 percent of the waste now
going to the landfill is contributed to the commercial sector, and
Page 95
January 28, 2003
there's incredible opportunity to change that. I'm sure you're aware
of that. So we're very hopeful.
It's a good idea to set targets, but then again, I think you should
give some time before we -- so we can determine exactly what those
targets might be.
Of course, our organization is interested in zero waste. I mean,
shooting for the maximum goal, but I think working in increments
towards that is a good idea so you don't get frustrated when you only
get it up to 50, 60 percent.
Much of what's been done already by the solid waste
department in diverting materials from the landfill of -- now you'll
see probably in March charts which will show you that 50 percent of
the material that used to go to the landfill is now being diverted. And
the 60 percent number for commercial is 60 percent of what
continues to go there. But a lot has been accomplished.
Of course, Zero Waste not -- wants not only the material to be
diverted, but they want it to be diverted to a useful purpose, okay, not
just send it to another landfill, but to get it back into the economy and
into the structure.
I'm very, very encouraged by the enthusiasm and openness of
the chamber and of the solid waste department to discuss various
options.
On March 27th and 28th now -- we've moved the date several
times -- but now we're shooting for those dates to hold a zero waste
workshop, design charette, partially sponsored and funded by the
State Department of Environmental Protection, being helped along
with the solid waste department with the help of Mr. Yilmaz and Mr.
Mudd and Mr. DeLony, and also being co-sponsored by the chamber,
that we're going to bring people in here to discuss what they've done
in other places, California, the State of Washington.
Ms. -- I've shared the resume of Gary Liss (phonetic) with you
folks in the past, but we're moving -- continuing to move on that.
Page 96
January 28, 2003
But Dr. Jeff Morris is a Ph.D. in economics and an expert in zero
waste -- worked on the programs in Washington that were referred to
as very successful ventures. He's now located on the east coast, and
he's going to be coming down for our workshop.
So I hope you can all participate in that. I hope that this can
help in our effort to -- and I hope the commissioners are there and
pay attention to what's offered. And the chamber, I know they'll be
there also.
There were questions about the school board. Recently --
they're very receptive to discussion on this issue. Recently I've
spoken in front of the school board and asked them about their
participation in our workshop and in our analysis of what the school
system does now. A couple of years ago they brought some people
in, talked about the issues and was determined to do a county-wide
school program. Maybe it wouldn't be so cost effective, but then
they left it up to each individual school to do what they want, which
for now is not a bad idea, bad situation.
My -- I'm aware of one school in northern Collier County, and
because of its location it's available to be included in a program that
comes out of Lee and Bonita. There's a company there that will
collect mixed paper and provide the totes free of charge. Other
companies charge the schools for the totes. But -- and this school
will probably move forward on it.
They'll be taking their paper and putting it in these totes, and
this company hauls them away and makes their money by doing that,
but as no charge to the school. So they can actually possibly
experience a savings by the reduction of their waste, the stuff they
throw in the garbage to pay to have hauled away.
This company, in competition with other companies, also
provides cardboard recycling out of a rate lower than some other
companIes.
So I think as, Commissioner Henning, I've heard you mention a
Page 97
January 28, 2003
couple times -- and I don't mean to put words in your mouth. I hope
I don't misrepresent your position -- but you are encouraging and
looking for a diversity of companies to provide the services for
recycling, and that's real important. We've got to let the free market
work here, because it will -- the community will benefit.
So I appreciate the opportunity to -- I appreciate your attention
to my comments.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thanks, Bob, and that's exactly
where I stand. Open markets tend to drive prices down. It's better
for the consumer. So -- well, great.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Excellent.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
Item #12C
INTERLOCAL AGREEMENTS WITH INDEPENDENT FIRE
DISTRICTS FOR IMPLEMENTING THE DUTIES AND
OBLIGATIONS OF THE VARIOUS DEPENDENT AND
INDEPENDENT FIRE DISTRICTS WITH RESPECT TO FIRE
PLAN REVIEW AND FIRE CODE INSPECTIONS FOR NEW
CONSTRUCTION, CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS AND
EXISTING STRUCTURES WITHIN THE VARIOUS DISTRICTS
=-..AEEROVED WITH-CHANGES
Next item is a county -- no, public comments on general topics.
MR. MUDD: No, sir. It's 12(C). It was an item 16(K)5 that
was n10ved forward, and that has to do with the administrative items
for independent fire district, dependent fire districts.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. What do you want to do
about iten1 II?
MR. MUDD: Oh, excuse me, sir. I'm sorry.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Public comments on general topics.
Page 98
January 28, 2003
Sue Filson, do we have anybody signed up?
MS. FILSON: I have no one.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: County manager, what is the next
item again?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: 16(K)5.
MR. MUDD: It's 12(C), which is 16(K)5, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And Mr. Zachary is going to --
MR. ZACHARY: I'm going to tell you a little about it. Good
morning, Commissioners. Robert Zachary, county attorney's office.
This item is to gain your approval for these various interlocal
agreements that the county has as the governing body of the county
and the governing body of the Ochopee and Isles of Capri fire
districts with the other independent districts to govern the -- reflect
the duties and performance that needs to be done to -- for fire plan
reviews and fire code inspections done by the individual districts.
The agreements are essentially the same as prior agreements,
but this one was needed to reflect the fact that the East Naples Fire
Department is taking over the duties as the administrative district
from North Naples.
There has been one change from the agreement that you have in
your package to reflect the concerns that I had with a creation of a
contingency fund by the East Naples Fire District, so that language
has been removed from the agreements that you have in your
package that had to get in there because we didn't have them all
signed yet. And it's on page 3 of the agreements between the
individual fire districts and the East Naples district, and it's in section
5 that talks about the distribution of funds, and section 5(B), the
language that talks about the contingency fund, and distributing the
excess back to the fire districts has been eliminated.
I've been assured that there is -- if there's any problem with this,
we can reopen the discussions with the fire districts and come back to
you, but -- either an amendment or another agreement.
Page 99
January 28, 2003
CHAIRMAN HENNING: There's a bunch of agreements in
there.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, but I don't see a section
5(B).
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yep, I don't either.
MR. ZACHARY: Well, this is the interlocal agreement
between the East Naples Fire District --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: There it is.
MR. ZACHARY: -- and it would be Ochopee --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Page 15.
MR. ZACHARY: -- Isle of Capri and the county.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It's on page 15.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, sir.
MR. ZACHARY: It's on page 3 of my agreement.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: We have another interlocal
agreement in here on page -- on page 2.
MR. ZACHARY: There needs to be two separate ones. One is
with the county and all the signatures of all the fire districts --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
MR. ZACHARY: -- to reflect the duties that the -- of the fire
official's office. And then the individual districts also have an
agreement with the East Naples reflecting that that's the -- East
Naples is the administrative district for the funds.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. I just have one other
concern. I have talked to a lot of the elected officials on the fire side
about my concern. It states in here that East Naples will administrate
it and they will be compensated one percent of the total collection of
the fees through the permitting fees.
And the concern I have is, what if it costs East Naples Fire
Department more than one percent of what they collect? We have a
drop in inspections or permits? It's not fair to East Naples to take up
the burden of what it costs them to administrate -- administer this
Page 100
January 28, 2003
program. Or would it be fair to the other districts if East Naples
would have a huge windfall in that?
So I would like to change it just to state that East Naples Fire
and Rescue Control District will be compensated for the
administration of, and take out the one percent.
MR. ZACHARY: I think that, perhaps, some of the
representatives of the fire districts are here and wanted to speak to
that -- that issue.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Correct. And I -- I understand we
have some public speakers.
MS. FILSON: Yes, sir. I have four public speakers. The first
speaker is Joyceanna Rautio. She will be followed by Rob --
MR. POTTENGER: Pottenger.
MS. FILSON: -- Pottenger, thank you. I can't read it.
MS. RAUTIO: Good morning. My name is Joyceanna "JA"
Rautio. I'm a North Naples Fire District commissioner. I'm here
today to represent my district to let you know that we wholeheartedly
supported the idea of taking the administrative district duties and
transferring them over to East Naples.
It's my understanding that every fire district has so far met and
approved the change-over, because we've been working on this for
the last couple of months.
As Mr. Zachary said, the agreements are pretty much the same.
You have three of them that you have to sign, the main agreement
and then the agreement with the Isle of Capri and with Ochopee,
because the independent districts and dependent districts must have
an agreement with the administrative district, which, hopefully, after
today, will be East Naples.
The issue of the one percent is something that we feel that
could go either way. As far as North Naples is concerned, it was for
seven years, the one percent of the inspection fees came to us as the
administrative cost to cover running the business of the fire code
Page 101
January 28,2003
official's office and transferring of the checks, taking care of all of
their day-to-day operations and payments, telephone bills, et cetera.
So I don't have a problem with the one percent, but I will admit,
with the chaos that we've had in North Naples, we never analyzed
whether it was more or less. So I think that Commissioner Tom
Cannon from East Naples could let you know what he thinks about
this. I think it could stay the same and, perhaps, we could adjust,
say, when we get around to adjusting the excess funds issue, we
could go ahead and look at those two issues at the same time at
another meeting.
But we're here today, or I'm here today on behalf of my district
to let you all know that we are more than eager to give up this
particular set of administrative duties, and it's just -- it would be a
seamless transition.
On the issue of the contingency funds, I will tell you that North
Naples never did reach a point where we had to set up a contingency
fund in our chart of accounts. We have never reached the point of
two years excess amount of funds coming in for any of the plan
review and inspections. So it's really almost a non-issue, that's why
it was so easy for the fire districts to go ahead and take this out so it
is not an issue for us today.
If you have any questions, I'll answer them, and if not, I'll let
the next one talk.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
Next speaker?
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Rod Pottenger, and he will
be followed by Chuck McMahon.
MR. POTTENGER: Rob Pottenger, East Naples Fire
Department. All those fingerprints you see on those papers are from
me passing it around trying to get the signatures, and I'd just like to
say thank you for at least, Mr. Henning, for putting it back on. A lot
of hard work has gone into this with our committee.
Page 102
January 28, 2003
One of the drawbacks to the one percent, in our aspect, it's
much easier bookkeeping-wise. For us to single out how long it takes
us to do -- for instance, payroll. Our payroll will be done with our
regular payroll.
Every time I, myself, or the fire chief or commissioners meet
with the fire code official, that -- we'd have to document time-wise
and then billable. Personally, I would much rather see the one
percent. And if we'd like to address it at a later time, that's fine. But
I know to administer it for our end, it would be much easier for the
one percent. Thank you.
Oh, do you have any questions?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: We want to thank East Naples and
North Naples for resolving this issue. And I just see better
government, a willingness to take some -- an existing organization
and do something different. Great opportunities.
MR. POTTENGER: Well, we've always tried to go in the spirit
of cooperation, so we thank you.
MS. FILSON: Your next speaker is Chuck McMahon, and he
will be followed by your final speaker, David Ellis.
MR. McMAHON: Hello. My name's Chuck McMahon,
Golden Gate Fire Commissioner, chair.
With this whole issue and regarding everything, we've put
painstaking hours into getting this all set and put forth, and you
know, putting everything in order and going over all the documents,
making sure any changes were where they needed to be.
The one percent that we're talking about right now, again, was
something that was never brought up. We never talked about it.
With where we're at right now, we have -- the commissioners for all
the districts have signed a document as it was with the one percent in
that there. I think to change that today without the approval of all the
commissioners would probably put us at a standstill and could cause
a little bit of headaches.
Page 103
January 28, 2003
My recommendation is that we follow forward with this and
make the change if we need to maybe down the road after we can see
how it works and what it looks like, along with the other changes that
we're talking about with the overhead.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: May I ask a question,
Commissioner Henning?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you.
Commissioner McMahon, could you tell me, this money that
we're talking about, the one percent, do you know what it equates out
to in dollars?
MR. McMAHON: At this time, no, I don't, and that's why I'm
saying that maybe we need to look at this a little bit harder and
reissue it later on, revisit it, and if we need to adjust it, adjust it. At
this point in time, North Naples has nothing to show of what they've
done over the years with it, so there's really no record to be able to
say what's right.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: May I suggest possibly we
might be able to approach it several different ways, one, any kind of
overage you had on this should be able to reduce our millage as far as
what we have to pay as taxpayers to the fire district; number two, if
we were to allow you to go forward and an accurate accounting to be
done, is there a possibility that you might consider any large
windfalls that come forward to be able to reimburse the county
government, as the county procedure proceeds so you can start to get
a grip on what's taking place?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner, this is permitting
fees. If somebody wants to put a building up, they have to put a
sprinkler system in.
MR. McMAHON: Yeah, that has nothing to do with the
millage rate or any of that. This is strictly, when you -- when you
put a building in and you -- through the impact fees and such, you
Page 104
January 28,2003
would be paying your fire code official's office for their duties.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I understand.
MR. McMAHON: And this is that money. I also -- yes, revisit
that once we get moving. We'll never exceed that number, to the best
of my knowledge. That is just a safety feature that was put in there
so that we didn't end up with all this excess money that we couldn't
use, that it would have gone back to the districts and would have
been split up, you know, evenly to the districts to do as -- I agree a
hundred percent that we need to revisit that and look at that as -- we
could lessen the fees in the future instead of divvying that out
through the districts, so.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you.
MR. McMAHON: All right? Thank you.
MS. FILSON: Your final speaker is David Ellis.
MR. ELLIS: Good morning, Commissioners, David Ellis with
the Collier Building Industry Association. I'm running the risk of
keeping you-all past noon, so I'm going to be very, very brief.
The building industry, we've been working very closely with
the fire districts over the last several years working with the issues in
relation to their code inspections and their plan reviews, and it's an
evolving process. It's an improving process, and a lot of good things
have happened.
As far as this move, the north to east as the administrative
districts, it seems like an appropriate move at this time.
I very much appreciate your attention to the money in these
matters. It's important, and they are the fees that are being paid by
those users in the system. I'm looking at the contingency fund. I
think that's probably wise in terms of the two years, and in terms of
the one percent fee.
Ms. Rautio and I were just looking in the records to try to see
how much money more or less that might be. That has not been
accounted for well, and it's something that we will account for well,
Page 105
January 28, 2003
and even going to East Naples and starting over with a clean state is
something that I think will be very positive in that regard.
To further that, the industry, we're going to keep a close eye on
it. We'll start looking at some of these enterprise type funds and
where the money is being used and how it's being used, and if it's not
being used appropriately, it would be an opportunity to reduce a fee.
And frankly, if there's more money necessary, justification to
increase a fee.
Right now, you know, we're looking at the 113 fund, a fund that
had $11 million in reserves, and is now proj ected two years later to
have $2 million lost. And today we even talked about whether or not
we should use those type of designated funds for a very specific
planning exercise and whether or not it's appropriate in the use of
those funds.
And I know that's a different topic, but we will, as an industry,
be watching very closely and working with the fire district to
improve that service, and at the same time to -- also to make sure the
funds are available and ready so that things can get done where we
build safe buildings.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala has a question
for you.
MR. ELLIS: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, not a question. I just -- it just
warms my heart to see such a cooperative effort taking place between
all of the fire districts and your district -- your industry, who is
paying for this particular portion, and I just -- I'm glad that this came
-- I'm glad you pulled it because this way we got to hear the effort
that's taking place. I don't think people in our community even knew
how we were moving forward with this.
And actually I'd like to make a motion that, as the governing
body of Collier County, and as the ex officio governing body of the
Isle of Capri Rescue and Fire Services and Ochopee Fire District, we
Page 106
January 28,2003
enter into the interlocal agreement with the independent fire districts.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I second that.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. There's a motion and second
on the floor.
Any further discussion for the commissioners?
I do have some questions, maybe Mr. Cannon, Fire
Commissioner Cannon from East Naples can help me out.
I'm a little concerned is -- we're making an agreement with
stipulations like the one percent when we don't even know how much
we're collecting each year. So I think it's something that could be
administered.
Tom Cannon in his second duties, something that he makes a
living at, is a CPA. And the question, Tom, is can there be two
companies separated out in the bookkeeping, one East Naples Fire
District and one the permits that are received?
MR. CANNON: Yes, Tom Cannon, chairman of the East
Naples Fire Control District.
The way we have set up the bookkeeping for whenever it gets
into our hands is a separate entity with a separate set of books.
Presently that one percent we're talking about equals somewhere
between 6,500 and 7,000 per year.
Through my primary occupation as an accountant, I guarantee
we'll be looking at it, from the East Naples end, we don't want to lose
money, nor do we want to make money. We want to break even on
this venture and control the costs. We'll be looking at the costs quite
extensively.
And as far as the one percent, we could live with either. We
would prefer the one percent while we get a handle on the expenses.
And if we see that we're underfunding or overfunding, we would go
back to the individual districts in Collier County to seek an
improvement on that one percent.
Page 107
January 28, 2003
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thanks -- thanks, Tom, that's
important, because I see that Chief Schank, yourself as a fire
commissioner and your bookkeeper, is going to be spending time on
it, and I think it's very important for the district to log that time and
justify it, because it is an added responsibility to East Naples.
And I want to thank you for all your time that you've put in it
so far. And one of the best things that are going to happen through
this interlocal agreement is the fire steering committee's oversight
input in the operation.
Thank you. I'm going to remove my concerns __
MR. CANNON: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- and ask Commissioner Fiala if
she wants to amend it to include Mr. Zachary's comments on section
5 of removing that.
MR. ZACHARY: Okay. You're approving the document -- not
the one that you have in your package but the one that was -- that I
have that has that language removed regarding the contingency fee?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Before I do anything about
adjusting my motion, I'd like to hear if that's the way the cooperative
effort between the fire districts had understood it to be written.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: They said that, yeah.
MR. ZACHARY: Okay. I had verbal assurance from -- that
the commissioners -- the chairman of all the committees is in
agreement to removing that language.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. So -- and I see a nod from
Chuck McMahon out there. Tom Cannon? Everybody's in
agreement with that? JA?
MS. RAUTIO: I must have missed the wording that you
actually removed, because we had talked, I guess, yesterday, and I
wanted to know where you started with the paragraph, which is on
page 3, actually your 5(B), fire code official's office, what sentences
you were removing, just for the record.
Page 108
January 28, 2003
MR. ZACHARY: Okay. For the record, in section 5, under
distribution of funds, under 5(B), I've removed the sentence -- the
paragraph starting with, the East Naples Fire District shall create a
fire code official's contingency account. Everything after that
sentence has been removed. That's all the language that deals with
the contingency -- contingency fund.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And that goes all the way down to __
three lines to official officer's (sic) current budget -- year's budget.
That's that whole sentence where you're talking about?
MR. ZACHARY: Right. The whole rest of the paragraph
after.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: The whole rest of the paragraph.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: The rest of the paragraph, okay.
MR. ZACHARY: The rest of the paragraph.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Now, is that what you --
MR. CANNON: My only question on that would be, we're
talking about a two-year contingency fund, a reserve account, but the
language that you're taking out talks about a contingency fund in
excess of the current budget. We're still looking at creating a reserve
account for at least two years' worth of expenses. Is that left in?
MR. ZACHARY: No, that's all taken out. And I assumed that
we would deal with that and get the language for the contingency
fund, which I don't have a problem with, and then get a mechanism __
put a mechanism in place. And if there is excess funds, that we could
look at the fee schedule and adjust the fee schedule to get the
contingency fund in equilibrium with that two-year contingency fee
fund that you --
MR. CANNON: Yeah. We're talking about anything after the
reserve account for two years worth of funds would be the excess
contingency fund that we're talking about, or are you talking about
any contingency fund prior to the current year budget?
MR. ZACHARY: I'm talking about any contingency fund, just
Page 109
January 28, 2003
eliminating that language right now and then developing language
that we can implement that contingency fund at a later date.
MR. CANNON: Yes. As long as we can come back and revisit
that contingency policy.
MR. ZACHARY: That's fine.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Mr. Zachary, they can't do that.
They need a contingency fund to pay the bills. Because the language
-- there's nothing in this language to say -- as far as the budgeting, the
approval of the budgeting for the following year.
And let's say for -- one case is they need to hire extra inspectors
or plan reviewers or, you know, the permitting process takes a dump
where we're going to have, you know, 50 percent reduction in the
permitting fees, so they need to pay -- continue to pay these people,
planned review and the inspectors. So I have a concern about that.
Commissioner Halas, what's your concerns?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'm just wondering if the parties
could get together and come up with the language, or whether they're
going to need more time and then come back later on today. Is that a
possibility?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Come later today?
MS. RAUTIO: That's a possibility. I just wanted to put on the
record that right now the reserve fund that we have is in a CD of
$700,000. So we have a reserve fund and the contingency fund is
separate, because if you ever reach the point of two years' money,
that would be the current budget for the fire code, the official's
office, then we would need that contingency fund.
So when I chatted yesterday with Mr. Zachary, I thought we
were going to go down a little bit further and remove that portion
starting at funds deposited in the contingency fund in excess of, and
then remove the rest of the paragraph.
So does that create a problem for you, Mr. Zachary?
MR. ZACHARY: Well, it was my understanding that -- you
Page 110
January 28, 2003
did have that -- that you already have a mechanism where if you have
to hire extra people, you've got a reserve fund, and I just wasn't
comfortable with this contingency fund language as it was, so I
thought it best just to eliminate any mention of the contingency fund,
and then we can deal with that at a later time, since they already __
you already have, what I understand is, an amount in excess of what
the budget is that is there to use for what you need it to -- if you have
a -- hire an extra -- more inspectors or have more inspections than
you were planning on, that that money's already there, available.
MS. RAUTIO: Right, and roughly right now, that's a CD of
$700,000, is what we consider the reserve.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: A CD?
MS. RAUTIO: Yes, it's a CD.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: So it's not really that readily
available, or what am I hearing is -- we want to make interest off of
this, we don't plan on using it?
MS. RAUTIO: Right now you don't use it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Right.
MS. RAUTIO: And there -- at some point in time we could go
to a long tortuous explanation of a former employee in the financial
department of North Naples Fire District how that occurred, but right
now I don't think that's relevant to the contract and their local
agreements we have in front of us.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: The reserve is, from what I
understand to be, the day-to-day operation, if need be. It's kind of
like an emergency fund. So the contingency fund, from what I'm
hearing is, it's not really needed at this time.
And it's suitable to remove this language, Tom?
MR. CANNON: Yeah, as long as we can come back and
address this at a later date to give us the correct language on what we
would do. Once we've maximized or achieved that two years' worth
of reserves, which I don't know if we'll ever do, that we can either
Page 111
January 28, 2003
come back and look at lowering the fees or -- or disbursing it. As
long as we can come back and review this language on the
contingency fund, we'd have no problem.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And in the agreement, I thinks it
needs to be recognized, the reserve fund too.
MR. CANNON: Right.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Commissioner Halas, do you
have anything else?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: No. I just want to make sure that
all parties are -- understand what's happening here.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's what I was going to ask too.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: On my motion I just wanted to see
nods from everybody here that -- representing the fire districts, that
this change is acceptable to them.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: To all parties.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Are you in agreement with the __
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Tom? JA? Chuck?
MR. McMAHON: If I may.
MS. RAUTIO: I will agree to it, although I thought we were
going to allow them to set up a contingency fund, if necessary, and
we would drop further paragr -- further sentences down. But I would
agree to what I believe I've understood now on the record where he
starts in the paragraph at, the East Naples Fire District, and continues
and wipes outs the rest of that paragraph.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And I understand that we're going to
address it later on.
MR. CANNON: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Kind of clean it out. So that's what
it is.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. All right. Is there -- Dave,
do you have to say something?
Page 112
January 28, 2003
MR. WEIGEL: I'd just mention that Ms. Fiala has a motion on
the floor, so you'll, I think, want to go back to your motion to make
sure that it includes -- it was to approve the interlocal agreement on
behalf of the Collier County and the -- as ex -- or as governing board
of the independent fire districts. And so you may wish to amend
your motion to include the removal of the language that Mr. Zachary
stated on page 15 of the agenda paragraph -- was it 5(B)?
MR. ZACHARY: 5(B).
MR. WEIGEL: In 5(B), starting on the line -- on the fourth line
with the words, East Naples Fire District, and removing all of the
language thereafter.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. That's exactly why I was
asking for approval from everybody before I amended anything.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: We understand that, Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Are you willing to amend it?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I am willing to amend it.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And I'll second it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
MR. McMAHON: And if I may?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner, thank you.
MR. McMAHON: I have, at the 11th hour when all this came
up yesterday, we knew we were trying to get in here today, I had
called every chair of all the districts, and I have talked to them about
this and told them that we were making some changes and this is
what it would be. And everybody was all right with that, and I
verbally talked to them, and they said okay, and then I relayed back
to Mr. Zachary that the wishes were all right, that everybody was
okay with everything.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
MR. McMAHON: So that is your verbal.
MR. WEIGEL: Thanks for getting that on the record.
Page 113
January 28, 2003
MR. McMAHON: Thank you
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Great, thank you.
No more -- or any more discussion?
Seeing none, all in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries.
Item #15A
ASSISTANT COUNTY ATTORNEY CHADWELL RE 1-75 &
Now we have staff communication, correct?
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Mr. Weigel, do you have anything
under communications?
MR. WEIGEL: Yes, sir, on brief communication. Assistant
County Attorney Ellen Chadwell will address the board.
MS. CHADWELL: Good afternoon, Commissioners.
I just wanted to communicate to the commission some recent
developments on the 1-75 at Golden Gate Parkway interchange. I
thought that you might want to be kept abreast of that proj ect. FDOT
has initiated formal condemnation actions to acquire the property that
they need for that interchange.
Collier County, because obviously we own a roadway easement
there in the Parkway and have some separate sidewalk easements,
Page 114
January 28, 2003
has been named as a defendant in those suits.
Weare currently working and preparing a subordination
agreement with FDOT that would subordinate our interest to them
and would provide for the return of the Parkway property to the
county for future maintenance and control once the project is
completed. Excuse me.
We will be stipulating to that effect for purposes of the order of
taking hearing, and that's really all that I wanted to explain.
We will be coming back to the board with the subordination
agreement, obviously, for your final approval and execution and may
ultimately be back asking the board for some direction regarding
compensation issues.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Anything else, Mr. Weigel?
MR. WEIGEL: No, that's it, thank you.
Item #15B
COUNTY MANAGER MUDD RE ADDING SOUTH GOLDEN
GATE ESTATES PROJECT ON THE JANUARY 29,2003
WORK.SHQP AGENDA
CHAIRMAN HENNING: County Manager Jim Mudd, do you
have anything for us today?
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, outside of we're going to see you
at the workshop tomorrow for signs, one addition to that agenda,
okay, that came out rather late -- and I had a meeting with the South
Florida Water Management District that had to deal with the south
Golden Gate Estates project. That project is on fast track, and I
wanted to make sure that the board members understood what that
meant.
So I have put the PM (sic) for the south Golden Gate Estates
restoration project, it's part of the Everglades restoration program, on
Page 115
January 28, 2003
the agenda for about 11: 15 tomorrow so you can get an update during
that workshop time.
That was the first time that I could get that person here in order
to have that happen, so I think it's important that we understand
where that project is. They finally have come up with a course of
action that does not impact, adversely, the properties to the north of
1-75, and I think we need to have the -- the board members need to
get that information so that they understand it as it proceeds forward.
From what I understand, the governor of the state is doing
eminent domain actions right now in Tallahassee for that particular
project, so I thought it -- I thought we needed to be brought up to
speed. They gave me some information that was new last week, and
so we've added it to that agenda item.
That's all I have, Commissioner.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Great.
Commissioner Halas, do you have anything?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I have nothing.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Nothing.
Item #15C
COMMISSIONER COLETTA RE ACCESS RIGHTS FOR
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, I do, as a matter of fact.
You'll find an email on that very subject Jim Mudd was talking
about. I don't have any problem with informational items coming up
for discussion.
Before any kind of decision is reached, I really do want to see
the public brought in. We're talking about access rights and the
Page 116
January 28, 2003
elimination of them for Golden Gate Estates, the Picayune State
Forest. People have been lobbying and fighting for it for some time.
But in any case, for your information a one-way
communication was sent out, a copy of the newsletter and a question
from one gentleman that wrote me a letter and my answer to him, and
then you were copied on it.
So I am looking forward to the update. I do hope that we keep
an open mind as to what our objectives are in Collier County.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
Item #15D
COMMISSIONER COYLE REGARDING STAFF LOOKING
INTO FPL TRANSMISSION LINES AND THE ECONOMIC
Commissioner Coyle, do you have anything?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes, I do, as a matter of fact. I
have a couple of things.
I would like to bring to the board's attention that Florida Power
and Light is in the process of studying a route for the installation of a
new transmission line from Lee County to the Collier County
substation, which is on Golden Gate Parkway just east of Airport
Road.
Now, as you know, a new transmission line involves a lot of
right-of-way. And I think that in view of the projects that we have
ongoing in that portion of the county, it would be extremely
important and cost-effective if we coordinated our construction
efforts and right-of-way efforts with Florida Power and Light,
otherwise we're going to find ourselves building something then
having to tear it down or vice versa. So it's extremely important that
we coordinate our efforts.
Page 11 7
January 28, 2003
We might even be able to piggyback onto some of their
right-of-way and reduce our right-of-way costs for some of the things
that we want to do. But that doesn't address the potential disruption
to many neighborhoods in that area. That area is very developed,
and bringing another major transmission line through that area could
be very damaging to a neighborhood, and we might even want to
enter into talks about undergrounding some of that power line or
transmission line.
So FP&L has asked us to give some information -- our
preferences on a route, but I think we need to study this route so that
we understand how it will impact any of our plans.
And what I would ask is that the Board of County
Commissioners give the staff direction to return to us with a
proposed route that we then could endorse as a Board of County
Commissioners to Florida Power and Light, and I think that would
have more weight than just individual preferences.
So that's my first item. And I would appreciate an indication of
consensus of the board.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Correct. And if the -- if we endorse
it, mind you that we might get some people upset. So if you want to
hear a report from the county manager in that time, direct whether
you want to let our support --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Oh, absolutely. Yeah, my intent
was to ask the staff to go back and study the appropriate routes, give
us a report on the implications of that, and then we could make a
decision as to what we wanted to endorse.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I'm in favor of that.
Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I have no problem--
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'm in favor.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala?
Page 118
January 28, 2003
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And this is from the Lee County
line to Golden Gate Parkway?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes, yes. It's going through a--
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- a lot of Collier territory.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Right. And we may be able to tie
it in, like you said earlier, Commissioner Coyle, with a -- possibly
with a road going --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: With a road, yeah.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Exactly.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That would be wonderful.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Right-of-way that way with
another road.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Now, on a different but perhaps
related issue, one of the items on our agenda today observed that we
do not have in Collier County a -- an economic development plan in
our Growth Management Plan. I think it would be appropriate that
we have an economic development plan for Collier County.
Certainly the economy is important to the future of our county.
And I would ask that we also ask the staff to develop for us
some approaches as to how we might be able to do this, whether we
have one developed in coordination with the EDC and then we could
review what they have developed and then, perhaps, incorporate it
into our Growth Management Plan.
But we are constantly trying to address industry and encourage
people to come here and create higher paying jobs. It seems to me
that if we're really serious about that, we should have a plan to do it.
And it might very well be something EDC has already developed that
we might want to adopt.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I think they're working on
something right -- like that now at the present time. But I think it
ought to be in conjunction with the county so that we make sure that
Page 119
January 28, 2003
it fits well with the Growth Management Plan.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: My question is how many other
counties have put this into the Growth Management Plan, and then
estimate a cost to amend the Growth Management Plan to put it in it.
Where it the money going to come from?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: The -- well, first of all, I can't
answer that question, but there is no necessity that it be put into the
Growth Management Plan. All I'm suggesting is that we have a plan,
and then we can make a decision whether or not we want to make it
part of the Growth Management Plan.
My problem is, I'm not aware of an economic development plan
that has ever been approved by this board, and I think that it would
be a good thing to do, even if it isn't placed in the Growth
Management Plan. But if you find that it is an appropriate thing to
do based upon the staffs recommendation, we could take that action,
otherwise we just have it as a separate plan.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Would it be more
appropriate to ask the EDC to develop some language for us since we
give them a half a million dollars a year?
MR. MUDD: Plus, Commissioner, you have a representative
on the horizon committee for the economic -- how we doing,
Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That's right.
MR. MUDD: And we have a representative that works on that
particular task force. So I think the staff talking to EDC, and at the
same time Commissioner Halas talking to that group that he
participates with, is trying to bring new businesses in, would be a
good approach, and we can figure out how far we have to go in order
to get that plan developed, and maybe it does exist.
But I -- as a plan per se, I haven't seen it since I've been here,
okay? I mean, it's been some goals for the EDC, what they -- and
industries that they want to bring in. Maybe it's a -- it's the chance to
Page 120
January 28, 2003
put it in a box and put a bow on it and call it an official plan, but
we'll take a look at that and we'll come back to the board and give
you an idea of how much more work we have to do in order to make
it happen.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Because there's a lot of good
businesses out there that I think -- that don't even look at what we
have to offer, and we need to basically have a shopping list for the
people that would be interested in getting involved with Collier
County and bringing their business down here so they know what we
have to offer them as far as agreements or whatever else, to entice
them to come down here.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And I think that needs to be -- we
need to address that, yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Anything else, Commissioner
Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No, nothing more, no.
Item #15E
COMMISSIONER HENNING RE POLICY CONSIDERING
CHANGE ORDERS AND REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATION
EROCRSS (RQP)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
I have a few things. A while ago at one of our workshops
Commissioner Coyle brought up the topic about change orders to
capital improvements in Collier County and directed our staff to put
some criteria around change orders, and I think it was a percentage of
10 percent, what he was asking for.
I would like to see the board take action in a regular meeting
directing staff to bring back, whether it be through an ordinance or an
Page 121
January 28, 2003
employee, insert it in an employee -- the handout, wherever the
proper venue is -- is to implement that. Any change orders giving
staff the ability to -- up to 10 percent of the original contract, correct?
Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. It was broken down by
level of staff responsibility.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: But just so the people understand
the importance of your suggestion, it also included some other things
with respect to how a change order was reviewed and approved and
the statements that must be made and certified by the staff members
before it gets approval, as well as one final element, which was very,
very important, and that was the requirement that these procedures be
placed in the contract so the contractors themselves know if these
procedures are not followed for a change order, they don't get paid.
And I think that's been done.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Is it -- is it in the --
MR. MUDD: I guess what Commissioner Henning is wanting,
from what I can understand, is he wants the policy to come back for
our blessing.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Approval, okay.
MR. MUDD: We're already implementing, but we'll bring that
back.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Sure.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And also I think it's important for us
to take a look at the RFQ process, request for qualification, and staff
then ranks those one to five or whatever -- how many people
participate in the qualification, and then from there, they negotiate
with the top qualifier of whatever, you know, capital improvement
we make on negotiating a contract. And I think that we need specific
guidelines for our staff to -- under that criteria of negotiating with a
Page 122
January 28, 2003
contractor.
We are doing a lot of capital improvements in Collier County.
Don't want to tie the hands of the county manager, but we do want to
-- I think that we need to get a little bit better handle on the process
ofRFQs and RFPs. You see where I'm coming from?
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Everybody agree? Yeah?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I had a comment on your first one
about the 10 percent change order and staff just making that
recommendation. And one of the thing that concerns me is 10
percent of $40 million is four million bucks, and so as we go back
and talk about it, I'd like to address that concern, please.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. You're correct. That's a lot of
money.
Commissioner Halas, do you have anything to add to --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, I just want to make sure
that we don't ask for something that we can't produce here, because
we want to make sure that we don't tie staffs hands, but yet we want
to make sure that the accountability is there. So I guess what we've
got to do is we've got to find that happy medium so we don't tie up
the process and waylay some projects that are in the pipeline. So I
guess what I'm saying here is that --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: We got what you said.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. Let's make sure --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Did you get that, Mr. Mudd? What
Commissioner Halas is saying is that we don't want to tie the hands
on you, but we want to be --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Accountability.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- responsible, accountable to the
process.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: So we've got to find a happy
Page 123
--~-"""'-'"'~---'~--'--'~' ....,.......",...---.-.... ----
January 28, 2003
medium here.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. No further business, I'm
going to adjourn this meeting.
We're adjourned.
* * * * * Commissioner Coy Ie moved, seconded by Commissioner
Fiala and carried unanimously, that the following items under the
Consent and Summary Agendas be approved and/or adopted: *****
Item #16Al
APPLE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION REQUESTING AN
IMPACT FEE REFUND IN THE AMOUNT OF $3,327 FOR A
H.OME1.0CATED AT ~7~1 COffiLAN.F
Item #16A2
JOEL E. METTS, GENERAL CONTRACTOR REQUESTING AN
IMPACT FEE REFUND IN THE AMOUNT OF $3,713.82 FOR A
E.R.OEERIYJ.OCATED AT 26R~ - 60TH A V~
Item #16A3
RESOLUTION 2003-39, AUTHORIZING FINAL ACCEPTANCE
OF THE ROADWAY, DRAINAGE, WATER AND SEWER
IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE FINAL PLAT OF "PELICAN
MAR.SH.l..IN..I"
Item #16A4
FINAL PLAT OF "FOREST PARK PHASE III" - SUBJECT TO
CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT,
Page 124
January 28, 2003
Item #16A5
FINAL PLAT OF "TUSCANY RESERVE" - SUBJECT TO
CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT,
Item # 16A6
FINAL PLAT OF "VENEZIA GRANDE ESTATES" - SUBJECT
TO CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT,
Item#16A7
FINAL PLAT OF "JASMINE LAKE - A" - SUBJECT TO
CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT,
Item #16A8
FINAL PLAT OF "MASTERS RESERVE, PHASE II" - SUBJECT
TO CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT,
Item #16A9
THREE YEAR AGREEMENT WITH THE COLLIER COUNTY
HUNGER AND HOMELESS COALITION TO BECOME THE
LEAD AGENCY FOR THE ANNUAL HUD CONTINUUM OF
Page 125
January 28, 2003
Item #16A10
RESOLUTION 2003-40, SUPPORTING PROPOSED
LEGISLATION FOR CONSIDERATION BY THE 2003 FLORIDA
LEGISLATURE TO EXTEND THE DEADLINE ALLOWING
RURAL ENTERPRISE ZONES TO EXPAND THEIR
JURISDICTIONAL BOUNDARIES AND REDUCING THE
REQUIRED MINIMUM PURCHASE PRICE FROM $5,000 TO
$500 FOR ELIGIBILITY UNDER THE ENTERPRISE ZONE
Item #16A11
HIRE DATE AMENDED FROM APRIL, 2003 TO FEBRUARY,
2003 FOR TWO NEW PLANNER POSITIONS IN THE
COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING SECTION OF PLANNING
SERYlCFS
Item #16A12
RESOLUTION 2003-41, SUPPORTING MARCH
PERFORMANCE, INC., AS A QUALIFIED APPLICANT
PURSUANT TO S.288.106, FLORIDA STATUTES; AND
PROVIDING AN APPROPRIATION OF $32,000 AS LOCAL
PARTICIPATION IN THE QUALIFIED TARGET INDUSTRY
(QTI) TAX REFUND PROGRAM FOR FISCAL YEARS 2004
IHROlIGH.2007
Item #16B1
RESOLUTION 2003-42, AUTHORIZING SIGNING AND
Page 126
January 28, 2003
SUBMISSION OF A FEDERAL TRANSIT AGENCY 49 U.S.C.
Item #16B2
RESOLUTION 2003-43, AUTHORIZING SIGNING AND
SUBMISSION OF A FEDERAL TRANSIT AGENCY 49 U.S.C.
Item #16B3
RESOLUTION 2003-44, AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A
JOINT PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT (JPA) WITH THE
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FOR STATE
ill ,OCKDRANI...EllNDS
Item #16B4
BID #03-3457 FOR THE PURCHASE OF ONE (1) 15 CY DUMP
TRUCK, DIESEL - AWARDED TO WALLACE
INTERNATIONAL TRUCKS, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF
$77,222 00
Item #16B5
BID #03-3458R, ANNUAL CONTRACT FOR THE PURCHASE
OF LIMEROCK AND FILL MATERIAL - AWARDED TO
AGGRISOURCE, FLORIDA ROCK, BIG ISLAND, SOUTHERN
SAND AND STONE AND HARMON BROTHERS IN THE
Page 127
January 28, 2003
Item #16B6
CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 IN THE AMOUNT OF $71,155 FOR
THE CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING AND INSPECTIONS
SERVICES BY PBS&J, INC. FOR GOODLETE-FRANK ROAD
(PINE RIDGE ROAD TO V ANDERBIL T BEACH ROAD) FOUR
Item #16B7
BUDGET AMENDMENT RECOGNIZING ADDITIONAL
REVENUE FOR THE COLLIER COUNTY TRANSPORTATION
Item #16Cl
UNDERGROUND CONDUIT INSTALLATION AGREEMENT
WITH FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT CaMP ANY FOR THE
SOUTH COUNTY WATER RECLAMATION FACILITY
Item #16C2
DEVELOPER CONTRIBUTION AGREEMENT WITH DIVOSTA
AND COMPANY, INC., AND ISLANDW ALK DEVELOPMENT
Item #16C3
INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF NAPLES TO
Page 128
January 28,2003
Item #16C4
WORK ORDER WITH COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING
FOR A SAND SEARCH FOR THE RE-NOURISHMENT OF
Item #16C5
WORK ORDER WITH COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING
FOR A HARD-BOTTOM INVESTIGATION AS PART OF THE
Item #16C6
RE-APPROPRIATE THE BALANCE OF UNSPENT FUNDS
RELATED TO NORTH WELLFIELD IMPROVEMENTS IN THE
Item #16D1
CONVEYANCE OF DOCUMENTS TO FLORIDA
GOVERNMENT AL UTILITY AUTHORITY OF WATER
UTILITY FACILITIES LOCATED AT THE GOLDEN GATE
COMMUNITY CENTER ANNEX, - COST OF RECORDING
Item #16D2
CONVEYANCE OF EASEMENTS TO FLORIDA POWER &
LIGHT COMPANY AND SPRINT-FLORIDA, INC. - COST OF
Page 129
January 28, 2003
Item #16D3
CERTIFICATE OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY
FOR THE COLLIER COUNTY EMERGENCY MEDICAL
Item #16E1
RESOLUTION 2003-45, AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF
LIMITED USE BARE LICENSE AGREEMENTS FOR THE 2003
CALENDAR.YEAR
Item #16E2
BID #03-3449 FOR PREPARATION AND DELIVERY OF TITLE
COMMITMENTS AND REAL ESTATE CLOSING SERVICES-
AWARDED TO THE SEVEN FIRMS AS LISTED IN THE
Item #16F1
PAYMENT OF THE VOLUNTARY SPECIAL ASSESSMENT
FOR LOBBYING SERVICES RELATED TO THE
IMPLEMENTATION OF (ARTICLE V/REVISION 7) STATE
COURT FUNDING TO THE FLORIDA ASSOCIATION OF
Item #16F2
RESOLUTION 2003-46, REGARDING REIMBURSEMENT OF
COSTS RELATING TO THE ACQUISITION AND
Page 130
January 28, 2003
CONSTRUCTION OF VARIOUS COUNTY TRANSPORTATION
Item #16Hl
PAYMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $85 FOR COMMISSIONER
HALAS TO ATTEND THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
COUNCIL INSTALLATION OF OFFICERS AND
OUTSTANDING VOLUNTEER AWARD DINNER TO BE HELD
Item #16H2 - Withdrawn
PAYMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $25 FOR COMMISSIONER
HALAS TO ATTEND LAKE TRAFFORD'S BRIGHT FUTURE
EVENT ON JANUARY 24,2003 AT PEPPER RANCH AND
ERESERYF.
Item #1611
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE - FILED AND/OR
REEERRED
The following miscellaneous correspondence, as presented by
the Board of County Commissioners, has been directed to the
various departments as indicated:
Page 131
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
January 28, 2003
FOR BOARD ACTION:
1. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS TO FILE FOR RECORD WITH ACTION AS DIRECTED:
A. Clerk of Courts: Submitted for public record, pursuant to Florida Statutes,
Chapter 136.06(1), the disbursements for the Board of County Commissioners for
the period:
1. Disbursements for December 14, 2002 through December 20, 2002.
2. Disbursements for December 30, 2002 through January 3, 2003
B. Districts:
1. Cedar Hammock Community Development Agency - Minutes of August
12,2002; Final Operations Budget FY 2003; Unaudited Financial Report
Dated July 31,2002 and Schedule of Regular Meetings FY 2003.
2. Port of the Islands Community Development District - Minutes of
November 15, 2002; Minutes of October 18, 2002; and Unaudited
Financial Report Dated October 18,2002.
3. Key Marco Community Development District - Minutes of November 7,
2002.
C. Minutes:
1. Productivity Committee Advisory Board - Minutes of November 20,
2002.
2. Collier County Planning Commission - Agenda for December 19, 2002,
Minutes of November 21,2002; Agenda for January 2, 2003, Minutes of
December 5, 2002, Agenda for December 5, 2002; Minutes of November
7,2002.
3. Citizens Advisory Task Force - Advisory Recommendations; Agenda
for December 12,2002; Minutes of of December 12,2002; Agenda for
September 12, 2002, Minutes of September 12, 2002. CC CDBO Citizens
Advisory Task Force - Agenda for May 9, 2002, Minutes of May 9,
2002.
4. Parks and Recreation Advisory Board - Agenda for December 18, 2002,
Minutes of November 20, 2002.
H:DatalFormat
5. Affordiable Housing Commission Advisory Committee - Minutes for
January 17,2001, January 18,2002, Agenda for Feb. 6,2001, Feb. 15,
2001, March 15,2001, Minutes for March 15,2001, Agenda for AprilS,
2001, April 19, 2001, May 9, 2001, October 18,2001, Minutes of October
18,2001, Agenda for November 15,2001, Minutes of November 15,
2001, Minutes of Dec. 13,2001, December 20,2001, Agenda for January
17, 2002, Minutes of Jan. 17, 2002; Agenda for February 21, 2002,
Minutes of Feb. 15,2002; Minutes of March 21,2002, April18, 2002,
Agenda for May 9, 2002, Agenda for September 19,2002, Minutes of
September 19, 2002; Agenda for October 17, 2002, Minutes of October
17,2002.
6. Collier County Airport Authority - Minutes of November 18,2002;
Agenda for December 9, 2002; Minutes of October 14, 2002.
7. Citizens Corps Advisory Committee - Agenda for November 21, 2002.
8. Community Character Smart Growth Advisory Committee - Agenda for
November 14,200; Minutes of November 14,2002; Agena and Minutes
of October 15, 2002.
9. Historical & Archaeological Preservation Board - Agenda for December
18, 2002; Minutes of November 20, 2002.
10. Immokalee Enterprise Zone Development Agency Board - Minutes of
September 26, 2002.
11. Development Services Advisory Committee - Agenda for January 8,
2003; Minutes of December 4,2002.
12. Health and Human Services Advisory Committee - Agenda for October
17, 2002; Minutes of October 17, 2002.
13. Isles of Capri Fire/Rescue Advisory Board - Minutes of December 5,
2002.
14. Collier County Library Advisory Board - Agenda for December 18, 2002;
Minutes of October 23, 2002.
15. Lake Trafford Restoration Task Force Meeting - Minutes of November
22,2002 and January 8, 2003.
16. Workforce Housing Advisory Committee - Minutes of Octoher 28. 2002~
Minutes of November 4,2002
17. Lely Golf Estates Beautification Advisory Committee - Agenda for
November 21,2002; Minutes of October 17,2002.
H:Data/Format
18. Parks and Recreation Advisory Board - Agenda for November 20, 2002;
Minutes of October 9, 2002.
19. Collier County Hispanic Affairs Advisory Board - Notice of Meeting
Agenda - November 20, 2002.
20. Pelican Bay Advisory Board - Agenda for December 4, 2002.
21. Immokalee Beautification M.S.T.U. Advisory Committee - Agenda for
January 15,2003; Minutes of November 20,2002.
22. Forest Lakes Roadway & Drainage M.S.T.U. - Advisory Committee-
Minutes of November 22, 2002; Minutes of December 13, 2002.
23. Radio Road Beautification M.S.T.U. - Advisory Committee - Minutes of
November 19,2002; Agenda for December 17,2002.
24. Bayshore Gateway Triangle Local Redevelopment Advisory Board -
Agenda for December 11, 2002.
25. Productivity Committee Meeting Minutes of October 16,2002.
26. Golden Gate Beautification Advisory Committee - Agenda December 10,
2002; Minutes of November 12, 2002.
27. Environmental Advisory Council- Agenda for December 4, 2002;
Minutes of October 16,2002, January 8, 2003, Minutes of December 4,
2002.
28. Hearing Examiner Committee - Minutes of April 17, April 24, 2002, May
15, 2002, June 26, 2002; August 26, 2002.
29. Minutes from a workshop on April 12, 2001.
30. Bayshore Beautification M.S.T.U. - Agenda for January 8, 2003;
Minutes of December 11,2002.
31. Vanderbilt Beach M.S.T.U. - Agenda for January 9, 2003; Minutes of
December 5, 2002
D. Other:
1) Friends of the Library Group Annual Reports submitted by John Dunnuck,
Public Services Administrator.
H:Data/Format
January 28,2003
Item #16Kl
STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT RELATIVE TO THE FEE
SIMPLE ACQUISITION OF PARCEL 128 IN THE LAWSUIT
STYLED COLLIER COUNTY V. NORTH NAPLES UNITED
METHODIST CHURCH, INC., ET AL., CASE NO. 02-1742-CA
(GOODLETTE FRANK ROAD PROJECT - PINE RIDGE TO
VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD PROJECT #60134) - STAFF TO
Item #16K2
STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT RELATIVE TO THE
ACQUISITION OF A ROAD EASEMENT DESIGNATED AS
PARCEL 128 IN THE LAWSUIT STYLED COLLIER COUNTY
V. GERALD A. MC HALE, JR., SUCCESSOR TRUSTEE UNDER
UNRECORDED LAND TRUST AGREEMENT DATED 12/10/92
(PINE RIDGE ROAD BETWEEN CR 31 AND LOGAN
BOULEVARD, PROJECT NO. 60111) - STAFF TO DEPOSIT
Item #16K3
THREE AGREED ORDERS WITH RESPONDENT SPRINT-
FLORIDA, INC., F/K/A UNITED TELEPHONE COMPANY OF
FLORIDA ("SPRINT")WITH RESPECT TO (1) PARCEL 178b IN
THE LAWSUIT STYLED COLLIER COUNTY V. ROBERTO
BOLLT, ET AL., CASE NO. 02-2217-CA; AND (2) PARCEL NO.
182 IN THE LAWSUIT STYLED COLLIER COUNTY V.
LAZARO HERRERA, ET AL., CASE NO. 02-2211-CA; AND (3)
PARCEL NO. 188 IN THE LAWSUIT STYLED COLLIER
COUNTY V. GJR OF NAPLES, INC., ET AL., CASE NO. 02-2212-
Page 132
January 28,2003
CA (ALL THREE AGREED ORDERS CONCERN IMMOKALEE
R 0 A Il.ER.OlE.CT #6001 R)
Item #16K4
BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR OUTSIDE COUNSEL AND
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES IN SUPPORT OF RESOLUTION
2002-428 EXPRESSING CONCERNS REGARDING THE
ACQUISITION OF THE MARCO ISLAND/MARCO SHORES
UTILITY SYSTEM BY THE FLORIDA WATER SERVICES
AI.IIHORITy
Item #16K5 - Moved to Item #12C
Item #16K6
STIPULATED ORDER OF TAKING AND FINAL JUDGMENT
RELATIVE TO THE FEE SIMPLE ACQUISITION OF PARCEL
129 IN THE LAWSUIT STYLED COLLIER COUNTY V. NORTH
NAPLES FIRE CONTROL AND RESCUE DISTRICT, ET AL,
CASE NO. 02-1702-CA (GOODLETTE-FRANK ROAD PROJECT
#60134) - STAFF TO DEPOSIT $9,739 INTO THE REGISTRY OF
IHF COUlIT
Item #16K7
OFFER OF JUDGMENT TO RESPONDENT TEMPLE GROVE
PARTNERSHIP, JOHN A. PULLING, TRUSTEE, AlK/A TEMPLE
CITRUS GROVE FOR BUSINESS DAMAGES TO PARCEL NO.
104 IN THE AMOUNT OF $3,000 IN THE LAWSUIT STYLED
COLLIER COUNTY V. JOHN A. PULLING, JR., TRUSTEE OF A
LAND TRUST DATED JANUARY 2,1992, ET AL., CASE NO.
Page 133
January 28, 2003
02-1908-CA (LIVINGSTON ROAD PROJECT; PINE RIDGE
ROAD TO IMMOKALEE ROAD) - STAFF TO DEPOSIT $3,000
Item # 1 7 A
RESOLUTION 2003-47, RE PETITION V A-2002-AR-2848,
RICHARD D. yaV ANOVICH, OF GOODLETTE, COLEMAN &
JOHNSON, P.A., REPRESENTING M.L.S. OF NAPLES, INC.,
REQUESTING A 6.1 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE REQUIRED
10 FEET TO 3.9 FEET FOR AN EXISTING SIGN AND A 2.2
FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE REQUIRED 5 FEET TO 2.8 FEET
FOR AN EXISTING FLAGPOLE, FOR PROPERTY LOCATED
Item #17B
RESOLUTION 2003-48, RE PETITION A VPLAT2002-AR3474 TO
DISCLAIM, RENOUNCE AND VACATE THE COUNTY'S AND
THE PUBLIC'S INTEREST IN A PORTION OF THE 20 FOOT
WIDE MAINTENANCE EASEMENT LOCATED ALONG THE
REAR OF LOT 86, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT OF "MOON
L.AKEJ.lNlT ~"
Item #17C
RESOLUTION 2003-49, RE PETITION A VPLAT2002-AR2704 TO
DISCLAIM, RENOUNCE AND VACATE THE COUNTY'S AND
THE PUBLIC'S INTEREST IN ALL OF THE PLATTED
CONSERVATION EASEMENT LOCATED ON LOT 73,
ACCORDING TO THE PLAT OF "SOUTHPORT ON THE BAY
UNIT ONE" AND TO ACCEPT A RELOCATION
Page 134
January 28,2003
CONSERVATION EASEMENT OVER A PORTION OF SAID
LOT 7?,
Item #17D
RESOLUTION 2003-50, RE PETITION A VPLA T2002-AR2593 TO
DISCLAIM, RENOUNCE AND VACATE THE COUNTY'S AND
THE PUBLIC'S INTEREST IN A PORTION OF THE 7.5 FOOT
WIDE UTILITY EASEMENT LOCATED ALONG THE EAST
LINE OF LOT 52, BLOCK 72, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT OF
" "
Item #17E
RESOLUTIONS 2003-51 THROUGH 2003-60 RELATIVE TO
TEN "PUD" SUNSETTING PROJECTS", CRESTWOOD PUD,
PARKWAY PLACE PUD, WATERFORD ESTATES PUD, VFW
PUD, MYRTLE WOODS PUD, ORANGE BLOSSOM GARDENS
PUD, SUNSHINE VILLAGE PUD, MICELI PUD, GARDEN
WALK VILLAGE PUD, P ARKW A Y CENTER PUD
(RESPECTIVEL Y) WHICH HAVE NOT COMMENCED
CONSTRUCTION, AS DEFINED IN SECTION 2.7.3.4 OF THE
COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE (LDC) AND
HAVE NOT SUBMITTED AN AMENDMENT APPLICATION
PURSUANT TO THE RESOLUTIONS ADOPTED BY THE
*****
There being no further business for the good of the County, the
meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 12:30 p.m.
Page 135
'__~" _ ,~_~.~_".___.....u_..,.
January 28, 2003
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS/EX
OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF
SPECIAL DISTRICTS UNDER ITS
CONTR~ .
~rJL--~
TOM HENNING, Chairm
ATTesr~'~~:'~'\,\\,
D~~~t~~fi~~K,CLERK
.: r".C>... J~>::'~7't.~;\...'Q- I" Attest as to Cha1rUA'S
, l?:.o!\ ";""';';',,:-:~ "'~', s1gnatur ~1
; 1..~ E ~'~!'.,.~:~~.,5... <:,j'~~..~ ::~ ~ t vn J.
:. 1 ,:. ;:. ,:~,;;1;;1: ~ .
l)~~~~~~9~ ~C
II ...-:)... .... ...~~.. ,"'
I j " .!),' . .... . .. . (':J~:;.
TiK:s'~ffiiil1ifes approved by the Board on aj as 103
as presented ~ or as corrected
TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF GREGORY COURT
REPORTING SERVICE, INC. BY TERRI LEWIS, RPR
Page 136