Loading...
Agenda 05/09/2017 Item # 2B05/09/2017 COLLIER COUNTY Board of County Commissioners Item Number: 2.B Item Summary: April 11, 2017 - BCC/Regular Meeting Minutes Meeting Date: 05/09/2017 Prepared by: Title: Executive Secretary to County Manager – County Manager's Office Name: MaryJo Brock 04/26/2017 10:10 AM Submitted by: Title: County Manager – County Manager's Office Name: Leo E. Ochs 04/26/2017 10:10 AM Approved By: Review: County Manager's Office MaryJo Brock County Manager Review Completed 04/26/2017 11:04 AM Board of County Commissioners MaryJo Brock Meeting Pending 05/09/2017 9:00 AM 2.B Packet Pg. 11 April 11, 2017 Page 1 TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Naples, Florida, April 11, 2017 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Board of County Commissioners, in and for the County of Collier, and also acting as the Board of Zoning Appeals and as the governing board(s) of such special districts as have been created according to law and having conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 a.m., in REGULAR SESSION in Building "F" of the Government Complex, East Naples, Florida, with the following members present: CHAIRMAN: Penny Taylor Andy Solis Donna Fiala William L. McDaniel, Jr. Burt L. Saunders ALSO PRESENT: Leo Ochs, County Manager Nick Casalanguida, Deputy County Manager Jeffrey A. Klatzkow, County Attorney Crystal Kinzel, Director of Clerk’s Finance and Accounting Troy Miller, Television Operations Manager April 11, 2017 Page 2 MR. OCHS: Madam Chairman, you have a live mike. Ladies and gentlemen, please come to order. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Good morning, good morning. It's wonderful to see the chamber so full. We have such a great day in front of us. But before we start, I would like to stand and have the invocation read by Pastor Michael Bannon of Crossroads Community Church of Naples, and then we'll have the Pledge of Allegiance. And, Commissioner Fiala, would you lead us on that? COMMISSIONER FIALA: Sure. Item #1A INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE PASTOR BANNON: Pray with me, please. Lord God, we thank you for your great goodness and grace toward us. Thank you for this beautiful community in which we live. We thank you for our commissioners; we thank you for their service. Lord God, I pray as they face a long day of meetings; that you would bless them with wisdom; that they might govern well; that they might make good decisions that would benefit us. Lord, we pray for them because you call us to do that, that it's good and pleasing in your sight. And, Father, I pray that you would help us as citizens of this county to be partners with them, our commissioners, in the betterment of our community. Lord, give us cooperative spirits, give us keen minds. Lord, I pray that you would bless us here with the spirit of unity. Father, I pray that you would work in such mighty ways that it would be obvious to all that you are God. And so, to that end, Lord God, we give this time and these people to you, that we might know you as you want to be known and follow you as you want to be April 11, 2017 Page 3 followed. Amen. COMMISSIONER FIALA: And put your hands over your hearts, please, and say with me... (The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.) CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you very much, Pastor Bannon, and my -- COMMISSIONER FIALA: Cohort. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: -- dear Commissioner Fiala to my right. Just a note, because I'm going to do it at the beginning of the meeting, not at the end, we have the artist of the month. This beautiful work behind us and in front of the Commission is by -- excuse me, it is not. It is Natalie Guess. And we all know Natalie for her batik work, but this is a new area that she's gone into, and it's quite beautiful, or at least it's new for me. So this is a batik, which is wax writing, and this is what she's doing. And she always represents Florida environment, and I think these are quite beautiful. So thank you very much, Natalie. All right. MR. OCHS: Good morning, Madam Chairman and Commissioners. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Good morning. Item #2A TODAY'S REGULAR, CONSENT AND SUMMARY AGENDA AS AMENDED (EX PARTE DISCLOSURE PROVIDED BY COMMISSION MEMBERS FOR CONSENT AND SUMMARY AGENDA.) - APPROVED AND/OR ADOPTED W/CHANGES MR. OCHS: These are the proposed agenda changes for the April 11, 2017 Page 4 Board of County Commissioners' meeting of April 11th, 2017. The first proposed change is to add an item to the agenda. It will become Item 10B. This was added at Commissioner Fiala's request, and it's a recommendation to accept a multi-way stop warrant study and improve the installation and operation of a four-way stop control at the intersection of St. Andrews Boulevard and Wildflower Way. The next proposed change is to move Item 16A8 from your growth management consent agenda to become Item 11B. This is a companion item to Agenda Item 9B, and this is the administrative code that implements the recommended Land Development Code changes that you'll hear under 9B this morning, and that request was made by Commissioner Solis. You have three time-certain items on your agenda today, Commissioners. The first will be heard at -- well, let me just go through the order. Item 13A, which is the presentation of your Comprehensive Annual Financial Report, will be heard at 10 a.m. Item 10A, which is a presentation by Dr. Savarese and your Coastal Advisory Council on coastal resiliency, is scheduled to be heard at 1 p.m. And then, finally, Item 12A will be heard immediately following the final presentation item this morning, which is Item 5B. And those are all the changes that I have today, Madam Chair. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you very much. So now let's go and -- MR. OCHS: County Attorney, ma'am. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: County Attorney, I always -- yes. MR. KLATZKOW: No changes, but I just do love these pictures that we're putting up every meeting. It just lightens everything up. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Good. Good. Thank you. That's our wonderful staff that's doing that. Crystal, no changes? MS. KINZEL: No, ma'am, thank you. April 11, 2017 Page 5 COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: No changes, no ex parte. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner Fiala? COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. No changes, no ex parte. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Oh, extraordinary. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I will echo that: No changes and no ex parte. Commissioner Solis. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: No changes, although I do -- I will be recusing myself on 16 -- 16 -- well, which one was it? There's an item relating to Lennar Homes. Yeah, 16A5, and I will be recusing myself on that one. But other than that, no changes and no ex parte. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Just a point of order. Do we pull 16A, County Attorney, or how do we handle that? MR. KLATZKOW: No. It's just -- you have your regular vote, and Commissioner Solis will not be voting on that item. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: But it's on the consent agenda, so... MR. KLATZKOW: Yes. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: So he'll just note as he's voting he approves the consent agenda excepting 16A; is that how we do that? MR. KLATZKOW: I think he's just done that. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: That's what I'm doing. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: That's enough. Okay. All right. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I have no changes and no ex parte. I do have an issue, pardon me, on Item 11A, the PACE program. I've done legal work for a PACE provider around the state, and so I think that that would constitute a conflict. I believe I can participate in the conversation if there's any questions, but -- and this is a question for the County Attorney. My assumption is that based on my representing a PACE provider, that I April 11, 2017 Page 6 would be in a conflict in voting on this. MR. KLATZKOW: You would in a conflict, and my recommendation is, although you can legally participate, I think the best course is not to participate. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Thank you. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: All right. All right. So no changes except as noted. Do we have an approval of today's regular, consent, and summary agenda as amended? COMMISSIONER FIALA: Motion to approve. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Second. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: All those in favor? COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Aye. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Aye. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Those opposed, like sign. (No response.) April 11, 2017 Page 7 Item #2B MARCH 14, 2017 - BCC/REGULAR MEETING MINUTES - APPROVED AS PRESENTED MR. OCHS: Item 2B is an approval of the meeting minutes from the Board of County Commissioners' meeting of March 14, 2017. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Motion to approve. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Second. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: No discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: All those in favor? COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Aye. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Aye. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Those opposed, like sign. (No response.) CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: It carries unanimously. Thank you. Item #4 PROCLAMATIONS – ONE MOTION TAKEN TO ADOPT ALL PROCLAMATIONS Item #4A PROCLAMATION HONORING THE WORK OF THE CANCER ALLIANCE OF NAPLES AND ITS FUNDRAISER YOGACAN. ACCEPTED BY JODI BISOGNO, DIRECTOR OF THE CANCER April 11, 2017 Page 8 ALLIANCE OF NAPLES – ADOPTED MR. OCHS: Madam Chair, that takes us to Item 4 on today's agenda; proclamations. Item 4A is a proclamation honoring the work of the Cancer Alliance of Naples and its fundraiser, YogaCAN, to be accepted by Jodi Bisogno, director of the Cancer Alliance of Naples. If you'd please step forward and receive your proclamation. (Applause.) MS. BISOGNO: By myself. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: By yourself. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Short ones get close to the middle. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: And you get to say something. MS. BISOGNO: Good morning. I just want to say real quick, I see lots of people in the room who actually know Cancer Alliance, and especially all the fire department back there. But we are just grateful to be here. We've been in this community for 14 years, and you either know us or you don't, and if you don't, we pay nonmedical bills for cancer patients who currently are in treatment; so rent, utilities, their mortgage, their car payment so that they can focus on their health after their diagnosis. And YogaCAN, through Dr. Joel Waltzer, who's a local dermatologist, and his wife Jane started this four years ago, and it has been incredibly supportive to the work that we do in the community, and through them and through all of you and a lot of people in this room, we could not keep doing what we do every day to support local cancer families. So thank you so much. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. (Applause.) April 11, 2017 Page 9 Item #4B PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING APRIL 9-15, 2017 AS NATIONAL PUBLIC SAFETY TELECOMMUNICATORS WEEK IN COLLIER COUNTY, IN RECOGNITION OF THE COLLIER COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE TEAM OF 56 DEDICATED PUBLIC SAFETY TELECOMMUNICATORS WHO PROVIDE A VITAL LINK BETWEEN THE PUBLIC AND FIRST RESPONDERS. ACCEPTED BY SHERIFF KEVIN RAMBOSK, CHIEF GREG SMITH, MANAGER NICK MCFADDEN, 911 DISPATCHERS AND STAFF – ADOPTED MR. OCHS: Item 4B is a proclamation designating April 9th through the 15th, 2017, as National Public Safety Telecommunicators Week in Collier County in recognition of the Collier County Sheriff's Office team of 56 dedicated public safety telecommunicators who provide a vital link between the public and first responders. The proclamation to be accepted by Sheriff Kevin Rambosk, Chief Greg Smith, and manager Nick McFadden and 911 dispatchers and staff. If you'd please come forward and receive your proclamation. (Applause.) MR. OCHS: Center yourselves, gang. Half of you on the other side. (Applause.) CHIEF SMITH: Good morning. For the record, Chief Greg Smith of the Collier County Sheriff's Office. Madam Chair and members of the board, I just want to take a moment to thank you for your recognition of the hard work and the dedication of the men and women who provide communications services for all the first responders in the county, save for the City of April 11, 2017 Page 10 Naples, but there are times when we do that as well, but we just want to also thank all the first responders who showed up this morning to support our proclamation. That's why you're here, right? (Applause.) CHIEF SMITH: Because our men and women are the vital link between them and the public who needs our assistance so desperately, and there's nothing more reassuring than a calming voice on the radio, whether you're that member of the public calling in or whether you're the first responder on the other end. I've served in both of those roles, and I can tell you that these men and women behind there are stellar in performing what they do each and every day. So on behalf of Sheriff Rambosk and all the men and women of the telecommunications center, I'd like to thank you for this award. Thank you. (Applause.) Item #4C PROCLAMATION HONORING THE RESPONDERS TO THE LEE WILLIAMS ROAD WILDFIRE FOR THEIR EXCELLENCE IN EXTINGUISHING THE FIRE WITH MINIMAL LOSS TO PROPERTY AND NO LOSS OF LIFE. ACCEPTED BY MEMBERS OF THE UNIFIED OPERATIONS CHARGED WITH FIGHTING THE LEE WILLIAMS ROAD WILDFIRE - ADOPTED MR. OCHS: Item 4C is a proclamation honoring the responders to the Lee Williams Road wildfire for their excellence in extinguishing the fire with minimal loss to property and no loss of life. To be accepted by members of the unified operations charged with fighting this particular wildfire, and I know, Madam Chair, you have a bit of April 11, 2017 Page 11 protocol you'd like to cover for this one. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: We're going to do this a little bit differently. We're going to ask all of you to come up for a photograph, and then when you finish that photograph, you're going to file single file, right to left, around, and you're going to come around again to accept your proclamation, but you're going to stop at the mike, please, and give us your name. So why don't we come on up and have a photograph to begin with. (Applause.) CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: We're going to get at least two or three rows here. The vertically challenged in the front. Maybe we'll make it four rows. Just keep coming in. Someone needs to put Lavah on their shoulders here. I guess we'll do five rows. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Charlotte, you need to get up front. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Lavah, you want a chair? Do you want to get a chair? Mary, you're in so much trouble right now. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, there you go, Lavah. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Oh, she knows what she is doing. MS. HETZEL: I may have to piece this together. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Someone lift Lavah up here. Oh, look. Troy's got it. That's the picture. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: We need a picture of that. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I know. MR. OCHS: All right. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. Ladies and gentlemen, single file. Start filing around the back of the room. CHIEF SMITH: For the record, Chief Greg Smith, Chief of Administration for the Collier County Sheriff's Office representing Sheriff Rambosk and all the men and women of the Collier County April 11, 2017 Page 12 Sheriff's Office. Thank you. MR. DEMON: Harris Demon (phonetic) with Traffic Operations in the Traffic Management Center. MR. McFADDEN: Nicholas McFadden with the Collier County Sheriff's Office, 911 Center. MR. HINTON: Alex Hinton with the Sheriff's Office, 911 Center. MS. SUGG: Megan Sugg, Sheriff's Office, 911 Center. MS. CONNOLLY: Kirsten Connolly, Sheriff's Office, 911 Center. MS. FLYNN: Brook Flynn, Sheriff's Office, Communications Center. MR. SEBASTUCCI: Murray Sebastucci (phonetic), 911 Communications Center, Collier County Sheriff's Office. MR. MESSNER: Steve Messner from the Water Department. I'd also like to, on behalf of Travis Gossard from Transportation, who wasn't able to be here today. MS. MORDONT: Danielle Mordont (phonetic), Community and Human Services. MS. McKINNEY: Andrea McKinney, Florida Department of Health in Collier County, Public Information. MS. FRIGUELLA: Deputy Chief Naomi Friguella (phonetic), Collier County EMS. MS. MONEDA: Sal Moneda (phonetic) from Fleet Management. MR. DELOLLA: Robert Delolla, Lehigh Acres, Fire Control and Rescue District. MR. DAIGLE: Joseph Daigle, Bonita Springs Fire Control and Rescue District. MR. MAZE: Nick Maze, BIE Eastern Region. CHIEF GREENBERG: Rita Greenberg, Deputy Chief, North Collier Fire Control and Rescue District, Florida Fire Chiefs Region 6. April 11, 2017 Page 13 MS. BUTCHER: Tabitha Butcher, Collier County EMS. MR. RUNT: Good morning. Michael Runt, Tice Fire District. MS. HANSON: Shawn Hanson, Greater Naples Fire Rescue District. MS. BISHOP: Tara Bishop, Greater Naples Fire Rescue District. CHIEF MESSINA: Deputy Tony Messina, Charlotte County Fire. MS. PRICE: Len Price, Collier County Emergency Management and Administrative Services. And I think it's just important to say that while this group is huge, this is truly just a small representation of the number of people who worked to take care of this fire situation. MR. McLAUGHLIN: Alan McLaughlin, Greater Naples Fire Rescue District. MS. JONES: Good morning. Ashley Jones, Director of social services for the Salvation Army Naples Regional coordinet (sic). MS. PROCTOR: Cally Proctor, Communications Manager with the Salvation Army. MR. GIDEONS: Mike Gideons with the Florida Highway Department on behalf of Colonel Gene Spalding. MS. MANNING: Samantha Manning, DBI Services. MR. SANCHEL: Brandon Sanchel, representing Communications and Customer Relations Division. MR. DeLEON: Omar DeLeon with the Collier Area Transit. MR. PETROLO: Good morning. Donald E. Petrolo, Fire Chief, Seminole Tribe of Florida. On behalf of Marsalas Osceola, Jr., thank you for this recognition. MS. MILLER: Good morning. Charlette Miller with Florida Power & Light. And on behalf of our company, I'd like to tell you how much it was a privilege to serve. Thank you. MR. HERNANDEZ: Carlos Hernandez, DBI Services, I-75. MR. CASHDOLLAR: Josh Cashdollar, Collier County Facilities April 11, 2017 Page 14 Management. MR. EIFORT: John Eifort (phonetic), Collier County Fleet Management. CHIEF HOWELL: Ed Howell, fire Chief, Lee County Port Authority. MR. VAN BRUNT: Glen Van Brunt, San Carlos Park, Fire Protection and Rescue Service District. MR. FRANKLIN: Dennis Franklin, Collier Area Transit. MR. GASTINEAU: Bruce Gastineau, Collier County EMS. MS. MAR: Good morning. Kathleen Mar, Department of Health, Collier County. MR. COLAJA: Tony Colaja (phonetic), Traffic Operations. MR. FULLER: Good morning. Patrick Fuller, Florida Division of Emergency Management. MR. PEREZ: Dave Perez, Greater Naples Fire Rescue. MR. PALERMO: Anthony Palermo, Greater Naples Fire District. MR. WALKER: Jeff Walker, Collier County Risk Management. MR. MILLER: Ron Miller, Collier County Risk Management. MR. NEEMAN: John Neeman, Logics Coordinator, Emergency Management. MR. FEGIS: Michael Fegis, Collier County Emergency Services. MR. NAPOLITY: Stephen Napolity, National Weather Service. MR. MORAVEC: Mitz Moravec, Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. MR. BULGER: Bob Bulger (phonetic), Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. MR. BEAUCHESNE: Scott Beauchesne, Collier County Risk Management. MR. NOTTINGHAM: Ben Nottingham, Florida Panther National Wildlife Refuge. April 11, 2017 Page 15 MR. HOLDEN: Doug Holden, Greater Naples Fire Rescue. MR. HART: Byron Hart, Big Cypress National Preserve. CHIEF CUNNINGHAM: Thomas Cunningham, Battalion Chief, Immokalee Fire Control District. MR. CHOTE: Good morning, everyone. Michael Chote, Immokalee Fire Control District. MR. LOUD: Mike Loud (phonetic), Greater Naples Fire Rescue District. MR. TEMPORELLI: Jesse Temporelli, Greater Naples Fire Rescue District. MR. ROLL: Jeff Roll, Greater Naples Fire District. CHIEF JAMES CUNNINGHAM: James Cunningham, North Collier Fire Chief. On behalf of the Board of Fire Commissioners of North Collier, we appreciate all the work of the men and women, and we were glad we were able to work together in a collaborative environment. Thank you for all your support. COMMISSIONER FIALA: You know, Commissioner, I don't know that everybody has realized we have all of these people working out there behind the scenes that we never see working to protect all of us. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: That's right. COMMISSIONER FIALA: This is a great show for all of those who are helping us. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I agree. CHIEF MARIA: Good morning. P.T. Maria (phonetic), Fire Chief, City of Naples. On behalf of the City of Naples, we want to thank you for this recognition. MR. TOPOLESKI: Robert Topoleski with the Cape Coral Fire Department. MR. LOWE: Rob Lowe, Greater Naples Fire Rescue. MR. NELSON: Corey Nelson, Greater Naples Fire Rescue. April 11, 2017 Page 16 MR. CROSS: Chris Cross, City of Marco Island Fire Rescue. MR. DRESCHER: Alan Drescher, Collier County EMS. MR. McELWAY: Good morning. Justin McElway, the American Red Cross. MR. MARTIN: Wayne Martin, Greater Naples Fire Rescue. MR. CORIANO: Good morning. Ray Coriano, Collier County Parks and Rec's, Golden Gate Community Center. MR. BELL: Jeff Bell, Collier County Parks and Rec. MR. WALLEN: Ricardo Wallen, Collier County Parks and Rec. MR. JELSEPH: Windel Jelseph, Collier County Parks and Recreation. MS. WILSON: Vicky Wilson, Collier County Parks and Rec, Golden Gate Community Center. MR. TIDAS: Scott Tidas, North Port Fire Rescue District on behalf of Fire Chief William Taft. MR. ESTES: Pat Estes, IT Department on behalf of my colleagues at the service desk. MR. BARRIOS: Mike Barrios, Information Technology Division. MR. WESTON: Michael Weston, Florida Forest Service, Caloosahatchee Forestry Center on behalf of all the rangers, senior rangers and the bulldozers, helicopters pilots and fixed-wing pilots. MR. PILATTO: Jeff Pilatto, Florida Forest Service, also the Florida Type 2 Interagency Red Team. MR. SAPP: Noland Sapp, Operations Chief for Greater Naples Fire Rescue. And on behalf of Fire Chief Kingman Schuldt, we'd like to thank you for this proclamation, and we'd like to thank all the other responders that assisted us in this endeavor. MR. SUMMERS: Commissioners, good morning. Now, three very quick comments. First of all, this is a result of team work and partnership. I dare not call out one agency, because April 11, 2017 Page 17 there were, as you could tell today, dozens involved in this operation, and it was the team work, the cooperation, the spirit, the coordination that made this successful, and it's part of what we do every day to put these plans, policies, and procedures together. So I want to thank them and just mention to you briefly that the cologne that we're all wearing this morning is Big Cypress, and it's going to be available at Macy's later as part of our rollout. But thank you very, very much to everyone engaged in this operation, and we're working really hard to keep our community safe and prepared. Thank you. (Applause.) MR. OCHS: I think we got them all, ma'am. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. Thank you very much. Item #4D PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING APRIL 22-29 AS PICKLEBALL WEEK IN COLLIER COUNTY, AS WE HOST THE SECOND MINTO US OPEN PICKLEBALL CHAMPIONSHIPS EVENT AT EAST NAPLES COMMUNITY PARK. ACCEPTED BY TERRI GRAHAM, CHRIS EVON, JIM LUDWIG AND CAROL CAEFER – ADOPTED MR. OCHS: Commissioners, that takes us now to Item 4D, which is a proclamation designating April 22nd through the 29th as pickleball week in Collier County, as we host the second Minto US Open Pickleball Championships event at East Naples Community Park. To be accepted this morning by Terri Graham, Chris Evon, Jim Ludwig, and Carol Caefer. If you'd all please step forward. (Applause.) COMMISSIONER FIALA: Would it be okay with you, Madam April 11, 2017 Page 18 Chair, if I read the proclamation? CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Oh, I'd love it. COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'm going to just read this proclamation so everybody can hear it, and that is: Whereas, the Minto US Open Pickleball Championship will be held in Collier County April 22nd to 29th -- mark that down -- for the second consecutive year; and, Whereas, the Minto US Open Pickleball Championships attracts 1,300 players this year and over 10,000 spectators from around the world, making Collier County the pickleball capital of the world; and, Whereas, the event will introduce pickleball to over 200 schoolchildren at the kickoff event. Kids Day, Media Day on Friday, April 22nd, and Kids Day on Thursday, April 28th, kids will be treated to a free lunch and a chance to watch and learn from the best; and, Whereas, there are an estimated 10,000 players in Collier County; and, Whereas, the economic impact to Collier County will exceed $3 million with 3,000 hotel room nights booked already; and, Whereas, the Minto -- yeah. Whereas, the US Open Minto -- sorry -- Minto US Open Pickleball Championship works closely with Pickleball for All, a not-for-profit organization that provides pickleball instruction and equipment to local PE teachers to build their pickleball programs; and, Whereas, the sport of pickleball promotes active, healthy lifestyles for our senior community, our youth, and everyone in between, providing a fun way to stay fit and active. And now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that April 22nd through April 30th be designated Pickleball Week in Collier County. Done and ordered this 11th day of April 2017, Penny Taylor, Chairman. (Applause.) April 11, 2017 Page 19 CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: They're ours; they're ours. COMMISSIONER FIALA: I wish you could see these -- I wish you could see these people at work. You know, we've been able to get a close-up look at them, and how they work, and it's fantastic to see how they put this thing together. And, boy, they never take their eye off that ball. They never get waylaid at all. I'm just so proud to call you friends. Thank you. (Applause.) MR. LUDWIG: We got four. Everybody else gets three. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: But who's counting? MR. OCHS: Madam Chair, if I could have a motion to approve today's proclamations, please. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Do I hear a motion to approve the proclamations? COMMISSIONER FIALA: Motion to approve. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Second. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: All those in favor, say aye. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Aye. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Aye. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Those opposed, like sign. (No response.) CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: It carries unanimously. Thank you. Item #5A PRESENTATION OF THE COLLIER COUNTY BUSINESS OF THE MONTH FOR APRIL 2017 TO PICKLEBALL FOR ALL. ACCEPTED BY JIM LUDWIG, EXECUTIVE April 11, 2017 Page 20 DIRECTOR/FOUNDER PICKLEBALL FOR ALL; CAROL CAEFER, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR/CO-FOUNDER, PICKLEBALL FOR ALL; SUSAN KUHAR, ACCOUNT EXECUTIVE, GREATER NAPLES CHAMBER OF COMMERCE; AND BETHANY SAWYER, MEMBERSHIP ENGAGEMENT SPECIALIST, GREATER NAPLES CHAMBER OF COMMERCE – PRESENTED MR. OCHS: Move to Item 5 on this morning's agenda; presentations. Item 5A is a presentation of the Collier County Business of the Month for April 2017 to Pickleball for All. To be accepted by Jim Ludwig, executive Director and Founder of Pickleball For All; Carol Caefer, assistant director and cofounder of Pickleball for All; and, Bethany Sawyer, Membership Engagement Specialist with the Greater Naples Chamber of Commerce. Please step forward. (Applause.) COMMISSIONER FIALA: Do you want us over more or here? CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Do you want to say something? (Applause.) COMMISSIONER FIALA: We'll see you at the games, huh? MR. OCHS: Congratulations. Thank you. Item #5B RECOGNIZING WILLIAM LANG, PLANNER, FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT, AS THE MARCH 2017 EMPLOYEE OF THE MONTH – RECOGNIZED MR. OCHS: Item 5B is a recommendation to recognize William Lang, Planner with our Floodplain Management Group, as the March April 11, 2017 Page 21 2017 Employee of the Month. Bill, will you please step forward. (Applause.) COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you for all you're doing for us. MR. OCHS: Stand right there in the middle, Bill. Back up a little bit against -- all right. Stay right there while I tell the audience a little bit about you, please. Commissioners, Bill Lang has been with the county for more than nine years working with our Growth Management Department. He was selected by the Employee of the Month Committee because of his dedication to the organization and its citizens that we serve. This became particularly evident when we assisted a homeowner with a costly flood insurance issue, his dedicated extra hours to research, study and analyze the homeowners' case and determine that the homeowner's flood insurance policy was rated incorrectly. As a result of Bill's outstanding customer service, the homeowner was able to save more than $1,400 in flood insurance premiums. Bill truly embodies what it means to be a role model for Collier County and our values and is very deserving of this Employee of the Month award. Commissioners, it's my honor to present Bill Lang as the March 2017 Employee of the Month. Congratulations, Bill. (Applause.) Item #12A RESOLUTION 2017-71: APPOINTING DANIEL SULLIVAN TO FILL THE VACANT SEAT FOR AN OWNER/OPERATOR TO THE TOURIST DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL – ADOPTED MR. OCHS: Madam Chair, that takes us to our first time-certain April 11, 2017 Page 22 item. That is Item 12A that was scheduled to be heard immediately after the proclamation -- excuse me -- the presentation item. This is a recommendation to appoint a member to the Tourist Development Council. The recommendation from the TDC was to appoint Mr. Ronald Albeit to the vacancy on the TDC. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you very much. I asked that this be pulled and voted on separately from the consent agenda because the first time the TDC voted on this, it was a tie. It was a three-way. There were nine members. There were three folks that applied. Only one, only one took the time to sit there and listen to the meeting. That was Dan Sullivan. And there were three votes for the other two; three, three, and three. Then -- I thought it failed, but it didn't, I guess, because it was voted again, and at that point the unanimous went to -- I don't have his name in front of me. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Ronald. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Ronald. But one of the -- one of the conversations from the dais, from the TDC meeting, Commissioner Fiala, was the importance of Marco Island, because this other gentleman, I guess, manages or is a GM of a hotel on Marco Island. And I was reminded of that because in our own staff report for a meeting between the Naples City Council and the County Commission, it appears that the majority of TDC revenue is not generated by Marco Island. It is generated by Collier County; whereas, the City of Marco has 25 percent, and the City of Naples has 25 percent. So as I was chairman of the TDC for a couple of years, the representation, I think, with your position now, because that's your district, has very -- what I consider very strong representation from Marco Island. And I think Collier County needs a voice, and I'm not April 11, 2017 Page 23 sure that a hotelier representing Collier County sits up there. I know we have Clark Hill on the board. I would say he's more -- excuse me. He's more of the City of Naples representation. So I'm asking you to reconsider what the TDC put forward. I think Mr. Sullivan is a very capable, experienced gentleman who has served on Marco Island, has worked on Marco Island, as well as every other part of Collier County, and I think as we're turning a new page for sports tourism, I think he will add an important voice to the deliberations of the TDC, so that's why I'm here. Do we have any speakers, Troy? MR. MILLER: Yes, ma'am. I have six speakers. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Now -- we can discuss now, or do you want to hear from the speakers? COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I'd like to hear from the speakers. I've certainly appreciated your comments. Obviously, you've got a lot of insight into this, and I agree with what you're saying, but I'd like to hear the speakers. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay, good. Thank you very much. MR. MILLER: Your first speaker is Dan Sullivan. He'll be followed by Jim Ludwig. MR. SULLIVAN: Good morning. I'm Dan Sullivan. I am the Director of Sales and Marketing for Green Links Golf Villas at Lely Resort. I've been in the county for 24 years. I've been past president and current board member for the Sports Council of Collier County. The Sports Council was started just about 20 years ago, and I was there during the inception. With the buildup of sports tourism, as a significant part of tourism in the county, we believe it's a good time to have a representative on the Tourist Development Council who represents the sports community. In my career I've been involved in negotiations with all level of April 11, 2017 Page 24 sports, professional, semiprofessional, amateur, as well as football, basketball, soccer, and pickleball. Been a coach. I had -- my toughest job of all was Little League baseball umpire. The Council is in talks to use TDT dollars to fund a sports complex for the first time, and this opportunity to put a person in an advisory position who deals with sports tourism daily makes sense. We currently have representatives on the council who shepherd the entrance of beach renourishment from both the City of Naples and the City of Marco Island. Also on the Council we have a representative who's a distinguished general manager. We also have a representative who is from Immokalee/Lake Trafford areas, as well as Everglades City, somebody from the arts, and then a general representative of hospitality. As a representative of the sports community, we think it makes sense to look at the future and put somebody on the Council who represents the sports community. I hope you would take my name and advisement to appoint me to the Tourist Development Council. Thank you. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Jim Ludwig. He'll be followed by Mary Silva. MR. LUDWIG: For the record, my name is Jim Ludwig, and I -- excuse me. I represent the pickleball community. Dan and I have been friends for about three years now. We've worked together on the Sports Council as well. Dan is very supportive of what we do in the pickleball world. He's there volunteering all the time. Dan is very much into the community, not only sports-wise, but his wife works in the school system as well. Last night we were out teaching at a school, and she came down to volunteer. So they are into this community. We need somebody that's into April 11, 2017 Page 25 sports where we're heading with the direction of the Collier County. This new complex we're talking about, we need somebody to have foresight. I believe Dan does. I'm there to support him in this every direction as well. So please consider Dan in your vote for TDC. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. Commissioner Fiala, do you have a question for him? COMMISSIONER FIALA: No. I'm waiting till they're done. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Mary Silva. She'll be followed by Mary Shee. MS. SILVA: Good morning. Hi. My name is Mary Silva. I come from the Lee County. I'm General Manager of the Hampton Inn & Suites in Estero. I've known Dan for over 10 years. We opened up our hotels at about the same time in Estero. We were friendly competitors for many years. And I traveled down mainly to -- in support of Dan to the appoint (sic) of the Tourist Development Council. He has been a diligent hotelier, a very active member in our hotel community, especially with the FGCU sports programs when we were competitors up in the Estero area. We all know his successes didn't start just 10 years ago, but a long time. He's just a very active member. He's a get-it-done type of person, and I think he would be a valuable asset to your community and council. Thank you. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Mary Shee. She'll be followed by Terri Graham. MS. SHEE: Good morning, everybody, and thanks for allowing us to speak today. Sports tourism in Collier County is a significant contributor to the local economy. I don't want to repeat what everyone else has said, but I do want to share with you that Dan was the past president of the April 11, 2017 Page 26 Sports Council. I'm the president of the Sports Council now, and he's always involved. He's always there for everybody. But what's, I think, important, if the sports complex is going to go forward, Dan has the experience of beach hotels, hotels on 41, and now East Naples hotels. So he has the personality down of which type of sports goes to which direction and which hotel, the rated pieces of sports tournaments versus the ones that can pay. He has an extremely valuable reputation, not only with sports directors, but his peers and his general managers. I've been fortunate enough to be friends with he and his wife for now seven years, and I just can't say enough about how much they do involve -- how much they're involved in the community and always with a smile on their face, and they'll do anything for anyone. And I 150 percent really, really want Dan Sullivan on the TDC. I think it makes sense for the direction we're going in Collier County. Thank you. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Terri Graham. She'll be followed by Liz Sanders. MS. GRAHAM: Good morning. So when we first came to -- when Chris and I first came to Collier County, to Naples, about the US Open Pickleball Championships to see where we were going to bring this, the CVB took us over to Green Links, and Dan Sullivan was there and greeted us with a hug and said, you have got to bring this event to Naples. He gave us a tour of the Green Links. He opened his doors, opened his arms and, from our standpoint at that time, he was not a friend of ours. We were looking at this as a business decision and what was best for our business of the US Open Pickleball Championships. He was a major influence of why we chose Naples, and since then, as we've had situations come up where we need answers, we need April 11, 2017 Page 27 advice, we need a lead, we've turned to Dan Sullivan. And he's one of the prime reasons that the event is successful, we feel, in Naples. And with all due respect to the other candidates that are running for this position, Collier County is in a prime position right now for sports tourism. And I've been up here before discussing how important it is to have designated sports-minded people on these boards, whether it's -- whether it's the TDC, whether it's the CVB, whatever it is, it's very, very important to focus on sports tourism. And your TDC committee already has a lot of other expertise in different areas, and I don't see a specific sports tourism person on the TDC. So I would strongly suggest that you look over again what you're looking at and make the best decision from a business standpoint; not emotion, not passion, but what's going to be best for the business of Collier County. Thank you. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. (Applause.) MR. MILLER: Your final speaker on this item is Liz Sanders. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. So one question or one comment, Ms. Sanders: Speak slowly. MS. SANDERS: No worries. Are you ready? I'm just here to say, not to reiterate what everybody else has said, but that Dan has the vast experience in town. He's been everywhere in every part of the hospitality industry. But the biggest thing is going forward in the future of sports in this town with its new deputy sports director, potential sports complex, he is a great liaison, and he understands the whole community in a whole. He is a man that is -- obviously has great history and a great experience, but he is our sound of reason on the Sports Council. As a board member, you know, we're a real dynamic group of people, and he is the person that makes sense over and over again. April 11, 2017 Page 28 And just understand that he sees the greater good of the entire community so he doesn't have a personal agenda or anything whatsoever, and he'd be a great asset to TDC. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. (Applause.) CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner Fiala? COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I've thought about this a lot before we even started to vote on the guys for the TDC. I was sitting there, so I was there for both. And the first time we were -- we were discussing it, I was a little disappointed that nobody else came to that meeting except Dan; Dan was there. And I was wishing that some of the other applicants would have been there, but they weren't. The second meeting where we were voting, then we had some, and -- but Dan was always there. And I'm going to go just backwards a little bit and tell you no matter where I go involving sports, Dan is always there. And I've gotten to know him just because he's every place. And, you know, that's what you really want. You want somebody to know the industry. You want somebody to be there. Yes, a Marco person left -- actually, two Marco people left, and we were trying to fill that Marco slot just to make sure that it was filled, but right now I think Dan could spread himself all over the place. It doesn't make any difference if it's Marco, it's North Naples, but it is sports. And we're getting into that heavily, and I think we -- I think we need somebody that is dedicated and has a passion for the sports. So I'll just make those comments. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner Saunders? COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Thank you, Madam Chair. I agree that Dan Sullivan is the right selection for this as we move forward in dealing with amateur sports. We have the amateur sports complex that we're going to be dealing with that involves Tourist April 11, 2017 Page 29 Development Council funds, and we also have the issue of enhancing the beach renourishment funds, and I think someone like Dan can give us some objective advice from the TDC. So I would make the motion, if you haven't already, to appoint him. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I'll second that motion. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner McDaniel, you going to talk us out of it? COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Why do you always accuse me of that? I just would like to say that I'm happy to have Dan come on board with us. He and I have been friends. Our daughters are the same age, have grown up together, we went to school together, horseback riding competitions, and I believe he'll make a wonderful addition to the committee. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner Solis, anything to say? COMMISSIONER SOLIS: And I would agree, I think with our emphasis on sports tourism, I think given the makeup of the TDC, that I think it's a great idea to have somebody that represents that area and that focus for the county. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: There's a motion on the floor and a second. All those in favor, say aye. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Aye. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Aye. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Those opposed, like sign. (No response.) CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: It carries unanimously. April 11, 2017 Page 30 Congratulations. (Applause.) Item #10B ACCEPTANCE OF A MULTI-WAY STOP WARRANT STUDY AND APPROVE THE INSTALLATION AND OPERATION OF A 4-WAY STOP CONTROL AT THE INTERSECTION OF ST. ANDREWS BOULEVARD AND WILDFLOWER WAY AT AN INSTALLATION COST OF APPROXIMATELY $300, WITH AN ANNUAL MAINTENANCE COST OF APPROXIMATELY $100 (COST CENTER #163630) – APPROVED MR. OCHS: Madam Chair, that takes us to Item 10B. This was the add-on from Commissioner Fiala. This is a recommendation to accept a multi-watch -- excuse me -- multi-way stop warrant study and approve the installation and operation of a four-way stop control at the intersection of St. Andrews Boulevard and Wildflower Way. And, Commissioner Fiala, I don't know if you wanted to make any comments on this one. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, I would love to make some comments. Ever since the county opened Santa Barbara to St. Andrews Boulevard, the traffic picked up. We've got all of the statistics. It picked up tremendously. They have a lot of people that cut through that neighborhood as well. Kids that are going to Lely High School take Wildflower, as well as the people that live in Lely Resort at the end of the resort use that as a cut-through. Meanwhile, there's Warren Street where, of course, they have the Little League games, and that's wonderful, on the weekends, but it also gives Naples Manor a way out of the Manor from the back roads rather April 11, 2017 Page 31 than having to travel a longer way around, and most of the jobs for those people are going up north so they all cut through as well. The sad thing is that everybody feels a need to hurry through there. Well, let me say speed through there. The people have been calling and calling. Ever since we opened the road, they've been calling and saying, can you slow this down? The Sheriff's Office has been there. They've put out patrol cars, and they've put out signs that tell you how fast you're going, but it doesn't seem that it's stopping much of anybody from speeding. Now, we've had plenty of accidents on there. They're all documented. And we've had a death on there. And the people are saying, we've got to do something. So they've asked for -- there are so many things that, really, they could use to slow that traffic down, but they want to start with this four-way stop. I suggest also that we work toward getting two roundabouts. I'm hoping that those two roundabouts would slow things down as well. Have they done that in the city, Penny -- Commissioner Taylor, have they slowed the traffic down on those roundabouts? CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: What happened -- the two -- well, the two -- the two roundabouts on the Central Avenue going across 41 has slowed traffic down. The traffic circles on 7th Avenue does slow traffic down considerably, and those are just traffic circles because of the dimensions of what they're in, and they've been in there for a long time, so they work. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. So thank you for that. That was unannounced. I didn't even know what she was going to say. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: We didn't talk about that ahead of time. COMMISSIONER FIALA: But I wanted to tell you that I think we have to work toward that, but right now this is a quick start to fixing the problem, and that is putting a four-way sign up there, and I April 11, 2017 Page 32 would ask you, Commissioners, that you would go along with that, and so I'm going to make a motion to approve. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Second. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner Saunders, did you want to speak to it? That's from before. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: No, no. Yes, that's from before. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Sorry. All right. Any speakers, Troy? MR. MILLER: No. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: So we have a motion on the floor and a second for the four-way stop. All those in favor, say aye. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Aye. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Aye. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Those opposed, like sign. (No response.) CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: It carries unanimously. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you, Commissioners. I appreciate that. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Any time. Item #9C ORDINANCE 2017-11: AN ORDINANCE THAT WOULD INSTITUTE TERM LIMITS ON COMMISSIONERS WHEREBY AN INDIVIDUAL SHALL NOT BE ELIGIBLE FOR ELECTION AS A COMMISSIONER FOR MORE THAN THREE CONSECUTIVE FOUR-YEAR TERMS – ADOPTED April 11, 2017 Page 33 MR. OCHS: Madam Chair, I'm going to move around here a little bit in anticipation of our 10 a.m. time-certain, if you don't mind. Perhaps we could take Item 9C. This was an item that was continued from your March 14th meeting, and it's a recommendation to adopt an ordinance that would institute term limits on commissioners whereby an individual shall not be eligible for election as a commissioner for more than three consecutive four-year terms. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: And, again, I have asked that to be moved to this agenda to hopefully persuade another voice here. I really believe that the people need to weigh in on this. I don't think it this should be instituted. I think that a commissioner that does a job that their constituents approve of will be elected and reelected and reelected. A commissioner who doesn't, will not be, and I think the history of the commissions shows that clearly. I'm not into institutionalizing one commissioner over another, but I can tell you the value of having an experienced commissioner up here, my colleague to my right, who will bring in issues when we're discussing a certain item, will reflect on certain things, that it's invaluable, and I would hate to lose this by what I consider an artificial 12 years. I mean, why don't we make it 16 years or why don't we make it eight years? It just doesn't make sense. So I would ask to see if I have any support. The last time we voted on this -- and we have to vote on it twice -- it was a 3-2, I believe. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: 4-1 first time we brought it up, and then you brought it out of consent agenda when Commissioner Solis was not here, and it split 2-2, which is why it's back today. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. Thank you for that. So you weren't here. Oh, so I should turn to you and talk to you. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: I was not here. April 11, 2017 Page 34 MR. OCHS: Madam Chair, just, again, for clarification, this is the second reading, so you're actually being asked to adopt the ordinance today. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Today. All right. Commissioner Fiala. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, I thought you called Commissioner Solis. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: No. Commissioner -- he didn't -- well, I guess. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: I think you're waiting to hear from me, right? CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I am waiting to hear from you, yes. COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, please. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Commissioner Fiala would like to say something. I'd like to hear what she's going to say first. COMMISSIONER FIALA: I have plenty of time. Go ahead. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: You might want me to hear what you're going to say first. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. Well, I've been here a long time, as probably a lot of people know, and much longer than I ever thought. I was going to serve one term, but what happened was, during the first term, four years, I was just beginning to figure out what I needed to do and how to do it. I had a mission in mind, and that was to rescue a community that desperately needed rescuing, and -- but, you know, you don't know how to do it, and you don't know the people that make things happen, and you don't know the community. Even though you think you know it well, you don't know it well. And so that first four years was a tremendous learning curve. So now I get into -- so I had to work -- I was just going to run one term. I was going to get in there, clean everything up, and leave. Well, it April 11, 2017 Page 35 didn't work that way. So I thought, well, now I'll run for the second term now that I know what to do. But the longer I was here the more I learned of the needs and then starting to figure out how. You have to learn a little bit about the state as well, and you have to learn about the departments and who does what and who can make things happen and who to stay away from, who you can trust and you cannot trust. Well, you know, another four years went by, but we began to see the wheels turning. Well, when you see the wheels beginning to turn, now the oil has been greasing the rusted wheels, you see them beginning to turn, but you have to go back because now you can't let somebody else try it and then falter and go back to the learning curve again, so you have to stay on another three -- four years. Okay, fine. Now I'm in my third term, but by this time I had a community that was so supportive and they all wanted to be a part of the process. I did not do anything by myself, I want to tell you. The community got together and supported seeing some of the changes taking place. Well, then when the fourth term was over, now we were seeing things. Now we were -- we actually got our first retail stores in two decades to open here. We actually started getting a couple restaurants here that we didn't have. Well, by that time, you don't want to turn it over, because if somebody else is running -- and this is what I had heard. People wanted to run for the seat because they wanted to use it as a steppingstone to Tallahassee or there's a matter of pride, I think, and maybe ego because now you're really important or something. And then there's even little things like, well, we don't want it in the county anymore, we want it in a city, maybe, and that isn't a reason to run for office. The reason to run for office is because you have a bunch of people there that need your help, and you're there for them, April 11, 2017 Page 36 not for -- not for praise and glory. So, anyway, so I threw my hat in for the fifth term, and that's why I'm here. But had I been limited to three terms, I don't think we would have ever come this far. So I really agree that, you know -- and I kind of said that before when we talked as well -- CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yes. COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- so thank you for letting me say it again. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: No. Thank you. Commissioner Solis? COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Well, first I want to make sure that my understanding of the application of this is correct in that this resolution will limit county commissioners to three full term -- three full terms moving forward. So this is -- this is not going to affect Commissioner Fiala in the sense that she's already been here more than three terms, correct? MR. KLATZKOW: That's correct. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Okay. COMMISSIONER FIALA: This wasn't a personal thing. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Well, right. And I want to make sure that it's clear that this is not, at least from my standpoint, any kind of comment on Commissioner Fiala and what she's done for the county, because I think that she's done some wonderful things for the county. It's great to have her understanding of how things work, and she's a great example of how to represent constituents in the district. I think that's clear. So it's not about that. My experience on different boards and different organizations, though, is that at some point organizations need new ideas, new energy, new faces. And I think that while this has not been an issue in Collier County, I think the County Attorney had looked to see if there April 11, 2017 Page 37 had been any other commissioners that had served more than three terms. I've been out and looked at the pictures as well and, I mean, I think there's maybe one or two, and they were many, many years ago. Of course, again, other than Commissioner Fiala. I think it would be a good policy. I think change in certain respects is inevitable, but it's also good, and it's healthy. So I'm going to support the resolution. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner Saunders? COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I think I would like to direct a question to Commissioner McDaniel. I think one of our goals -- I think everyone on this commission has the goal of helping each other achieve our personal goals as commissioners, and I certainly want to help Commissioner McDaniel achieve his goals. Obviously, this is an important issue for Commissioner McDaniel, and I'm going to support it, but I want to make sure that he still wants to move forward with it. He's heard a lot of discussion. And if he wants to move forward with it, I'm going to support the motion, not because I think that there's a problem, necessarily, but I think helping him achieve his goal is important, if this is important to him. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: My light's on. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner -- oh, yeah, it's your turn. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: My light's on. And it is important. It was -- I just -- we just came off a 12-month campaign for the last election. For any of you that saw any of the information that I put out, it was the number-one campaign platform, and it was brought to me by the electorate, the folks that, in fact, elected me, number one. And I have to say out loud, Commissioner Taylor, this is not an artificial setting for a change. This is -- and there is certainly exceptions to every rule. You know that. It has nothing to do with April 11, 2017 Page 38 you. COMMISSIONER FIALA: You don't have to worry about me. I'm here for a while. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay. Well, Commissioner Fiala brings up a really, really good point, and we're learning it, for those of us that are new to this board. I've served as your county commissioner for in excess of 130 days. I'm brought into the seat 30 days after the fiscal budget's been adopted by another board, and then within 120 days of that I'm asked to weigh in on another billion-dollar budget for the following year. I'm operating off of policies from prior boards that are being set, which was the rationale for me to propose a three-term term limit, three four-years to allow someone to become elected and give them that first term to learn the ropes, if you will, necessarily, and then two more terms after they get their pins up under them to be able to effectuate and do good for their community. I, last week, visited Tallahassee with several of ours commissioners that were up there, and I saw firsthand one of the necessities why it's good to have new ideas, why it's good to have a change of order, if you will. Oftentimes, politicians -- I'm not one -- get elected, and they're looking for a steppingstone as you said or a betterment for their personal career. And so, with that, this is something that I would like to propose. I would like to see it go through. And, again, I'm not picking on anybody up here. I actually set this -- the proposal establishes no term limits until the two commissioners that are up next year are up for reelection and the three of us that got elected last year, our terms would begin on that date. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: All right. Good. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And I'll move for approval. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Well, I was just going to add that I April 11, 2017 Page 39 think it's important also that in my district as well, I think the consensus is that, in general, that term limits are good, and it's -- we have to respect that from our constituents. So I would -- I'll make a motion to -- COMMISSIONER FIALA: He did. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Oh, you made a motion. I'll second it. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Second it, good. We've got a motion on the floor and a second. All those in favor, say aye. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Aye. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Those opposed, like sign. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Aye. It carries 3-2. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Love you. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, you know what, this doesn't hurt me at all, you know. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I know that. COMMISSIONER FIALA: I mean, I'm here, and I understand your reasoning, and it is good to have fresh new ideas. I don't deny that at all. Sometimes they get a little tired, you know, after -- the ideas get a little tired after you've been around and you have a certain path, and you need to have new pathways. You're not going to hurt my feelings. Thank you. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: I'm glad you're here, though. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: You know, and I think the fresh new -- the need for fresh new ideas should be decided by the people, not by an ordinance. April 11, 2017 Page 40 Item #13A PRESENTATION OF THE COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2016 AND AUTHORIZATION TO FILE THE RELATED STATE OF FLORIDA ANNUAL LOCAL GOVERNMENT FINANCIAL REPORT WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES - MOTION TO ACCEPT REPORT – APPROVED MR. OCHS: Madam Chair, that takes us to your 10 a.m. time-certain hearing this morning. This is Item 13A, and it is a presentation of the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2016, and an authorization to file the related State of Florida Annual Local Government Financial Report with the Department of Financial Services. Mr. Derek Johnssen from the Clerk of the Circuit Court's office will begin the presentation. MR. JOHNSSEN: Thank you, County Manager. Good morning, Commissioners. For the record, Derek Johnssen, Assistant Finance Director for the Clerk of Courts. Item 13A is the annual presentation of the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report, also known as the CAFR, for 2016. The preparation of the CAFR is a year-round process for the Finance Department. It includes the input of many people, departments, and agencies. We would particularly like to thank the County Manager, Deputy County Manager, County Attorney's Office, and the Office of Management and Budget for their support throughout the year. The information that they provide is instrumental in the preparation of the April 11, 2017 Page 41 CAFR document. In addition, we would like to show our appreciation for each of the constitutional officers for their efforts in preparing financial statements. The Sheriff, the Supervisor of Elections, the Property Appraiser, Tax Collector, and the Clerk all have individual audits included under separate tabs in the book before you. Those audits, as well as the consolidated audit of Collier County, are all performed by the firm Clifton, Larson, Allen. Finally, a personal word of thanks to my staff who worked many hours to prepare the document before you today; some are in the audience here. With that, an additional thanks to Clifton, Larson, Allen, I'm going to turn it over to Mr. Martin Redovan, the county's engagement principal, who has a brief, promise you, brief presentation on the results of FY'16 audit. Thank you. MR. REDOVAN: Well, thank you, Derek. Good morning, Marty Redovan with Clifton, Larson, Allen. We will go through the results of the last -- last year's audit, share the results, if I can get this thing moving. There we go. That's just kind of the presentation agenda. We'll go through the various reports, results, and have a quick conclusion. The financial statement audit does include several layers. There's an audit of the financial statements themselves, an audit of federal compliance, so compliance with federal grants, an audit with state compliance that includes state grants as well as certain items that are required to be audited in accordance with Florida Statutes and rules of the Auditor General. So we issue several reports, and I'll kind of go through these quickly. The Independent Auditor's Report, report on internal control; compliance that we mentioned, and I'll get into these a little bit more; the management letter, as required by the Auditor General; then we April 11, 2017 Page 42 have a compliance report on several items under statute; and then, finally, communications to you as governance. That's required under the accounting standards, or the auditing standards, excuse me. So here's where we really want to get -- since I was told to be brief -- the results of the audit. The Independent Auditor's Report, it's an unmodified report. That means it's clean, no qualifications, basically the highest level of assurance that we can render off your financial statements. The Independent Auditor's Report on internal control: No material weaknesses reported, which is very important for you to know, and then there were two comments last year that were at this level, but they were, you know, corrected during the current year, so there was no repeats and, again, no comments this year as far as material weaknesses. Single audit report: What that, again, refers to is grant auditing and compliance with all the requirements that exist in your grant agreements. We did issue an unmodified report on compliance; meaning for the grants we tested, the county complied with the compliance requirements. We did have two findings in internal control over compliance that were reported. We had one finding of the two that was actually a carryover from last year; last year meaning Fiscal '15 into Fiscal '16. Part of that was because of the timing of our finding from '15 getting into the '16 fiscal year. So there wasn't quite time to do the corrective action until we got into early Fiscal '16, so that's why I think that one lingered. Otherwise, I think they did immediately try to, you know, put a corrective action in play, and then there were no "question" costs, which is always important; that if a finding leads to question costs, you may have to turn dollars back. In this case there were no question costs. The management letter, as required by the Auditor General, we April 11, 2017 Page 43 had no comments or, you know, items of deficiency reported there. And then, finally, this Independent Accountant's Report is the one where there are several areas that the Auditor General has directed us to audit in compliance with statutes. It's listed as an unmodified opinion, but there was one little catch in there that had to do with E911. So technically it was an unmodified with one little exception in there. The E911 funding, there was about $14,000 that wasn't quite spent in accordance with the statute itself. So not terrible, but something that needs to be looked at and watched over. So items that I'm required to report to you as governance under the auditing standards, within your financial statements there are a number of significant estimates. So not every number in your financial statements is a very hard number that you say, yep, that's the number. It's an estimate, and those include self-insurance claims liabilities, those are estimates; the pension liability, which you might have known as -- or seen as a fairly large item now because of the way the reporting requirements have changed and the information that comes from Tallahassee for FRS; post-employment benefits other than pension, another estimate; the allowance for doubtful accounts; depreciation; and landfill post-closure. So there's several estimates and there's several -- they're significant to your financial statements, and you need to be aware of those. We did not have any difficulties encountered with management throughout the audit. There were no disagreements with management throughout the audit. And a couple of financial notes here: There are -- there's another statement coming up under -- or the Government Accounting Standards Board. As you recall, for those of you that were here a couple years ago when GASB 68 came on for the pension, that required the county to record its proportionate share of the pension April 11, 2017 Page 44 liability on its financial statement; increase liability significantly on your balance sheet, so to speak. The next one out that's coming up and really for your financials in '18 is for other post-employment benefits. So the liability that relates to other post-employment benefits, the measuring criteria is going to change, the reporting is going to change, and another substantial liability is probably going to make its way to your balance sheet in 2018. So I'm just trying to make sure you're aware of what's coming, try to avoid surprises, but those are the changes that our profession -- not our profession, but the folks that set what's known as general accepted accounting principles, they keep changing the rules, and more and more is getting loaded up on your balance sheet. So you need to be aware of that. And, you know, the question always comes up is, well, what ramifications does that have potentially with rating agencies and bonds? The rating agencies typically are ahead of the curve with these. They see them coming. They're part of the due deliberations on the pronouncements. They're not usually surprises to them. So even when the pension liability standard came out, they were well aware of it. I think they're already aware of these things and already kind of considering those as they're doing ratings on your bonds. So I don't think it will be a big surprise to them. I'm not going to say it won't have, you know, impact, but it shouldn't be, oh, geez, we didn't know this. They're well aware of these things. So, finally -- and that kind of goes back through the whole thing. It is going to be another liability that's going to gross up your balance sheet. And, finally, I do want to thank the County Manager's Office and the County Manager himself and all the team -- you know, the people that we deal with on the Board side, but then we also work, you know, April 11, 2017 Page 45 obviously, with the Clerk's -- the Clerk's and the Clerk's financial team and Clerk's finance, and we really do work, I think, very well with both groups, and both groups throughout the county work with us very well. We do -- in our grant testing, we hit a lot of board departments. They do cooperate. They help us out throughout the engagement, and I just want to thank everybody that's been involved with the audit that helped us out through the years. So thank you. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner McDaniel? COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I just had one question for Marty. Oftentimes when rule changes are put in effect, there is a static line drawn or some compensating rule change that is, in fact, put in place that wouldn't negatively impact our balance sheet or, as you said, increase up on the liability side. Is there any opportunity for us to have a way in on these rule changes, or is it just -- MR. REDOVAN: There's no counterbalancing on this particular standard. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: So we've been going along under these rules accounting for, as we do, for our retirement and so on and so forth, our -- and then they change the rules and it comes back around? MR. REDOVAN: Yes. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Hmm. MR. REDOVAN: Not the answer that any of us like, but that's -- yes, that's how it works, and it plays out, and there's -- as they roll out the new standards, they do have, you know, comment periods and, you know, people can weigh in and, you know, debate. I haven't seen where much has changed once they set this in motion, unfortunately. And, yes, at the end of the day, it's on your financial statements. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Thank you. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: No other questions. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: You doing good? April 11, 2017 Page 46 MR. REDOVAN: I'm fine. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: All right. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Madam Chair, do we need a motion to accept the -- CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I think we do need a motion to accept. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I'll make that motion. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I'll second that. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. Motion on the floor to accept the report as stated and as delivered to us, and a second. All those in favor, say aye. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Aye. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Aye. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Those opposed, like sign. (No response.) CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: It carries unanimously. Thank you very much. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you for a great job. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yes. Once again, highly professional. MR. REDOVAN: Thank you. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I can understand it. That's the most important thing, so... I think we keep these, right? MS. KINZEL: Yes. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: For your reading pleasure. MS. KINZEL: Chairman Taylor? CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yes. MS. KINZEL: Also, I might add, these do get distributed to libraries and other informational purposes, and the CAFR will be on April 11, 2017 Page 47 the Clerk's website. Prior years -- we put them on every year as soon as you've accepted them, so they'll be well open to the public. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Good. Thank you very much. You know what we might also do is leave a copy out here in our little waiting room out there. I think that would be very nice. MS. KINZEL: I can provide one. No problem. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. Thank you. All right. Item #9A RESOLUTION 2017-72: APPROVAL OF THE SINGLE PETITION WITHIN THE 2015 CYCLE 3 OF GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENTS FOR TRANSMITTAL TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY FOR REVIEW AND COMMENTS RESPONSE, FOR AN AMENDMENT SPECIFIC TO THE VANDERBILT BEACH/COLLIER BOULEVARD COMMERCIAL SUBDISTRICT ON THE NORTH SIDE OF VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD APPROXIMATELY ONE-QUARTER MILE WEST OF COLLIER BOULEVARD. (TRANSMITTAL HEARING) (CP-2015-2/PL20150002167) – ADOPTED MR. OCHS: Madam Chair, that takes us to Item 9A, advertised public hearings. This is a recommendation to approve the single petition within the 2015 Cycle Three Growth Management Plan amendments for transmittal to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity for review and comments/response for an amendment specific to the Vanderbilt Beach/Collier Boulevard Commercial Subdistrict on the north side of Vanderbilt Beach Road approximately one quarter mile west of Collier Boulevard. Staff will present. April 11, 2017 Page 48 Typically the applicant goes first, Madam Chair, if you'd like to proceed in that order. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yes. And I just need to declare that I do have a conflict here, and so that I have to recuse myself from the voting, and I understand that is an issue that needs four votes; is that correct? MR. KLATZKOW: Yes, it is. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. MR. KLATZKOW: Well, no. This is transmittal, right? So transmittal only needs three. Ultimately, it will need four. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. MR. OCHS: Go ahead, sir. If you'd state your name for the record, please. MR. HOOD: Sure. Frederick Hood with Davidson Engineering. I'm representing the applicant, Vanderbilt Commons, LLC, for the Growth Management Plan transmittal. I'll keep this pretty brief. I think you've all read the staff report and have heard about the project either from us or from being contacted by the neighbors. So the purpose of the Growth Management Plan amendment for this property -- and let me just give you a little background of where it is first so everybody can understand that. We're just west of the intersection of Collier Boulevard and Vanderbilt Beach Road. As you can see on the visualizer, we have a location map there. I'll put an aerial as well so you have a little bit better of an idea what it looks like. So we are discussing the Collier Boulevard/Vanderbilt Beach Road commercial subdistrict and, particularly, we're discussing the expansion area of that subdistrict. We create -- this subdistrict expansion area was created back in 2005, and it's about 15 acres. The actual acres is 14.992. April 11, 2017 Page 49 So what we're asking for to start is we have a scrivener's error on the original language in the subdistrict for the expansion area. The original square footage that attributed to this expansion area was 150,000 square feet. That was left out of adopted language. So what we're asking for initially is to correct that problem and put that 150,000 square feet back into the actual subdistrict language. The second thing that we're asking for is an additional 50,000 square feet that will bring the expansion area up to 200,000. What that does is, when we looked at a self-storage use in 2014, we were starting to look at what we would put on this property. We wanted to see what comparable uses would be good to add to what was already approved. Self-storage wasn't specifically outlined in the PUD or the subdistrict, so we asked staff to review the use and say whether it was comparable or comparable (sic) to the uses that were already approved. Staff agreed, we went through a Hearing Examiner application, and that was approved subsequent in October of 2014. Moving forward, the self-storage -- Midgard Self Storage is out of ground now and is constructed on Lot 4. It's in the northwest corner of this expansion area that we're discussing. That project took up about 95,000 square feet of our 150,000 allowable. What's important that we should talk about really quickly on that is that the self-storage facility sitting next to all of the other approved uses inside of this PUD in this expansion area of the subdistrict is far less intense than any of the retail or commercial uses that we've already looked at. This 50,000 additional square feet is sort of offsetting that self-storage facility. The combined 200,000 square feet that we have planned for with that self-storage facility and the rest of the uses not changing, we have actually less amount of trips transportation-wise to move forward with this project, so that's why we felt comfortable asking for the additional 50,000. April 11, 2017 Page 50 The third thing that we were asking for within this GMP revision, inside of the language there was also language about transportation, and it literally had to do with Vanderbilt Beach Road. We couldn't build a certain amount of square footage before Vanderbilt Beach Road was widened. It's since been widened. It no longer needs to be in the subdistrict language. We've pulled that out. Those are the three big things that we've asked for in this amendment that you should be aware of. I'm just making sure that I'm not missing anything for you. And the last thing, inside of the language that we've gone over with staff there's been some reordering of paragraphs, not text changes, but just reordering to make it a little bit more consistent and make sense. So what we did was at the end of the language we discuss how much actual square footage is in. So we fix the 150,000-square-foot issue, added the 50,000 to it, so we're at 200,000 for the expansion area. We also have just defined that we have 200,000 square feet for the Mission Hills PUD, which is just west -- or I'm sorry -- just east of this expansion area. And then at the end of that, we say that we have a total of 400,000. That wasn't discussed in the language previously. So now it's crystal clear how much square foot is available inside of the subdistrict and where it goes between the expansion area and the original area. And with that, I'll either open it up to questions, or staff can give you your staff report. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Madam Chair, could I get the presenter to explain that last issue. MR. HOOD: Absolutely. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I missed what you were saying there, the 400,000 square feet. MR. HOOD: Yes, sir. So we have a total of 400,000 square feet April 11, 2017 Page 51 in the overall Vanderbilt Beach Boulevard/Collier Boulevard subdistrict. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: The 150,000 over and above -- I'm sorry. You're going to 200,000, and you have a total of another -- you have a total of 400,000, so that extra 200,000, is that already built, or is that -- MR. HOOD: It's already accounted for. I'm not sure if it's actually built on Mission Hills, but Mission Hills has 200,000 available for them to build. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: And that's not your client's property? MR. HOOD: That is not our client's property. Mission Hills is here on the corner. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Okay. All right. MR. HOOD: That has 200,000 available to it, and then we're doing 200,000 available here. MR. OCHS: Madam Chair, we'd like to have a brief staff presentation, if we could. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yes, that's fine. MR. BOSI: Good morning, Commission. Mike Bosi, Planning and Zoning Director. Staff has reviewed the petition and provided a recommendation of approval in line with the Planning Commission's recommendation. The Planning Commission voted 4-1 to transmit -- or a recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners to transmit this to the Department of Economic Community. As noted earlier on, this is only a transmittal hearing. It will be coming back to the Board of County Commissioners after review from the state and then for a final adoption. At that period of time, the PUD amendment will be a companion item to the GMP amendment. Of note, when the Planning Commission did make their April 11, 2017 Page 52 recommendation, they let it be known to the applicant that their primary concern was going to be the specific uses and the specific restrictions upon uses of drive-through restaurants, fast-food restaurants that's currently in the language. That is going to be expected to be explicitly provided for within the PUD amendment how those restrictions are going to be applied related to the drive-through restaurants. That was primarily some of the concerns that were expressed at the Planning Commission hearing. Staff is in line with the Planning Commission's recommendation of supporting the petition with the focus upon the PUD when it does come back at the adoption stage. Staff would entertain any questions that the Board may have. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner Saunders? COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Just a couple. In terms of the 50,000 square foot, or rather the scrivener's error that should be 150,000, there's no question that that was a scrivener's error? There's no debate about that, I'm assuming? MR. BOSI: No, there is no debate about that. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: So the real issue for us, then, is whether or not to add the 50,000 square feet to -- MR. BOSI: That is the nature of the request; 50,000 additional square feet. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: And the rationale for that is that by building the storage facility, that reduced traffic impacts, and this would sort of bring it back up to what the initial traffic impacts were anticipated to be. MR. BOSI: That, and the intent of the subdistrict was to bring that convenient shopping in closer proximity to the residential units within the localized area, and we understood that the 95,000 square foot that's currently allotted to the self-storage consolidated a lot of those opportunities. So the 50,000 square feet is to provide for that April 11, 2017 Page 53 convenience shopping. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I met with the petitioner yesterday, and it seemed to be a fairly clear issue in terms of what they were asking for, and then I met with the surrounding property owners, and it became a little less clear. And I was concerned about a comment that was made on the record by the County Attorney that this whole development area, not just your project, but the whole area there, I think it was sort of described as a bit of a mess because of an agreement dealing with the traffic light and cost-sharing agreements and that sort of thing. MR. KLATZKOW: Yes. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: And I'm wondering -- and I'll just pose this as a question as to whether -- obviously, we've got to hear from the public and everything, but is this an issue that should be sent back to the property owners, the applicant, and the other owners there to try to figure out what is a fair solution to some of the issues that are being raised? MR. KLATZKOW: This is transmittal, so it's going to be coming back. After the State has their comments, it will come back to the Planning Commission. My expectation is that the Planning Commission should be addressing those issues at that point in time, and then it will come to the Board, and you can address those issues at that point in time. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: So from your perspective, it would be appropriate to send this on up for transmittal -- MR. KLATZKOW: Yes. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: -- but when it comes back, that's when these issues will have -- MR. KLATZKOW: I think those issues need to be hammered out. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Because I think I'd like to at April 11, 2017 Page 54 least send a message to the applicant that after having looked at the cost-share agreement and the developments around there, I've got a serious concern with how this is all playing out. And you've already got one commissioner that's conflicted out. You're going to need four votes when this comes back. And I want to see some fair resolution before I can vote to support any changes. Obviously, the scrivener's error and that sort of thing I can support, but the addition of the 50,000 square feet, that may be a problem for me unless we get some of these other issues worked out. MR. OCHS: Madam Chair, you have registered speakers, I believe. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Do we have speakers? MR. MILLER: Yes, ma'am. We've four registered speakers for this item. Your first speaker is Steve Bracci, followed by Terrie Abrams. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Good morning, Mr. Bracci. MR. BRACCI: Good morning, Commission. My name's Steve Bracci. I'm the Attorney on behalf of Black Bear Ridge Owners' Association who has several speakers here today. This item did come before the Planning Commission, as was mentioned earlier and, essentially, there are sort of three buckets of issues on this. And in terms of the actual item before you and the matter before you, which is the increase of intensity for an additional 50,000 square feet, Black Bear Owners' Association does not technically have an issue with that per se, but it notes that the history on this matter has been rather piecemeal over the years and, therefore, as Commissioner Strain pointed out and as Mr. Bosi just pointed out this morning, when this comes back as a companion item for adoption, ultimately, it will be alongside the PUD amendments for specific locational issues. And so there are some very important things that my clients will April 11, 2017 Page 55 point out today that they want with respect to locational issues of the uses, intensities of uses, types of uses, particularly the definition of what a fast food drive-through is, which is prohibited, and whether or not that includes a coffee drive-through on the corner, and they have some specific examples of why they're concerned about that. The issue -- back in 2014 this matter was brought before the Hearing Examiner, and there was a compatible-use determination, which is how this 95,000-square-foot storage facility got approved. But understand from the perspective of my clients who, by the way, are immediately -- immediately north of this property line, this property, under the cost-sharing agreement, which was just referenced by Mr. Saunders, it actually -- there was not just a PUD document that defined the uses. There was actually also a cost-sharing agreement, and it said that in the location where we now have a three-story miniwarehouse, that was supposed to be specialty retail. So we could argue about whether this miniwarehouse facility, you know, has a comparable use for a traffic perspective, but when you look at the contractual agreement that existed between this property owner, this applicant, and the predecessors of my property owners, they had actually discussed the fact that this would be specialty retail, and that was what was agreed to. So it is what it is. That can't be redone at this point. But keep that in mind, because my clients do have some concerns here going forward about what these uses should be. Additionally, Mr. Saunders' comment, it's encouraging to hear about looking at the proportionate share costs for the intersection improvements and the traffic signal improvements pursuant to that agreement. But, Mr. Saunders, I just want to point out one thing; that when Mr. Klatzkow addressed this issue, part of that proportionate share solution, we believe, is that the county may have to chip in as well. So I'm not sure that if we could just have these private parties get April 11, 2017 Page 56 together and figure this out when, in fact, this Pristine Drive loop road was designed as an alleviator so that the Vanderbilt Beach Road and Collier Boulevard intersection is not over-capacitated. And, really, the growth that's occurring out there and the use of this road and the necessity of this intersection, we argue, has more to do with the 400,000 homes still to be built out east along Immokalee Road than anything that these folks who live along Pristine Drive have done to cause that. So in terms of proportional use, we would argue that it's really a public use and that to put this on these homeowners along this segment at this point in time may be an inordinate burden that really should be shared by the public as a whole. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. MR. BRACCI: Thank you. MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Terrie Abrams. She'll be followed by Beverly Smith. MS. ABRAMS: Good morning. My name is Terrie Abrams, and I'm going to assume that you've read the letters and petition submitted by the residents of Black Bear Ridge. We are 100 homes directly behind the property that we are talking about today. The situation at hand has been created because the dots were not connected between the parcels of the land when ordinance revisions were permitted. Decisions have been done in a vacuum with department mental blinders on. Today's discussion is greater than just the density change, and by continuing this piecemeal planning approach, it only further adds to the can of worms. Mistakes have been made. Mistake No. 1 was the county allowed the owner to build a storage facility without consideration of the residents, as there were no residents at the time, yet there was a neighborhood meeting, but that would be really hard to get attendance April 11, 2017 Page 57 since the homes weren't built yet. It seems very odd and not at all compatible to have a storage facility in the midst of a plaza with restaurants, soft retail, and medical offices. There's no synergies. It was all strictly done on traffic intensity. Mistake No. 2 we've kind of covered, so I won't beat that one. It's about the CSA in regards to the roads. It's also about reducing removal of preserves, which we are all stewards of our wildlife and natural environments. We also have coming up limited housing density because it doesn't fit with the plan for the area. There is already a high density development in the immediate area, and the county in 2007 established a density that mirrors the CSA. Finally, dictates land usage, which we discussed, meaning the area was for moderately upscale housing and the businesses allowed were to enhance quality of life for those residents in the near proximity, walkable and safe, not fast food drive-throughs which are already in the area improperly separated from homes. The county needs to now look at traffic safety in the area prior to granting any future modifications. If not, the Genie's never going to go back in the bottle. Vanderbilt Commons could be 200,000 square feet of retail space sitting on 15 acres with no buffers to residential property while Mission Hills is 200,000 square feet of retail sitting on 33 acres; double, with the lake, preserve, and roads that buffer their retail environments from residential property. The county created the problem, needs to own and take corrective actions today before the situation escalates. How we got to this point that negatively impacts us isn't important. What is important is for the county to find a remedy for the residents of Naples who chose to live here having faith in the county to maintain the beauty and livability of Naples. If people want congestion, they'd be going to the other coast. April 11, 2017 Page 58 Letting this go through today without stipulations of land uses and further density changes sends a very bad message to the residents of Naples. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. Thank you very much. MS. ABRAMS: Thank you. MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Beverly Smith. She'll be followed by Marc Allen. MS. SMITH: Good morning. My name is Beverly Smith, and I'm a full-time resident at 7278 Acorn Way in the community of Black Bear Ridge, and we're located on the north property line of the Carolina Villages, also known now as Vanderbilt Commons. I'm here today to address the Commission regarding the application by the developer to increase the allowable square footage. My comments will focus on the application; however, there are circumstances in relation to this increase that need to be a part of the conversation. As we know, the reason for the application is due to the county approval of a 94,000-plus square foot warehouse unit that has been constructed on the property. This ultimately consumes 65-plus percent of the allowable 150- original square footage that was permitted by the county. The original concept of our vision of the county was that Carolina Villages, or Vanderbilt Commons, was to be a pedestrian-friendly office/retail business model to include 60 residential unit above the retail. This moderately upscale accommodate -- was to accommodate the growth of the residential communities, similar to a Mercado; however, with the approval and the construction of the storage facility, this vision has been completely overturned. Black Bear Ridge was in the beginning stages of development when the administration decision was made to allow the storage unit. There was no opportunity to voice April 11, 2017 Page 59 opinions. Logic was that the storage unit would not generate or impact traffic in relation to the -- relation to an office or retail of similar size. What was not taken into consideration was the impact on the balance of the development that would be the financial outcome. As previously addressed, the approach to alteration has been done in a piecemeal manner, and future surrounding influences should be included in the decision-making process. This does not appear to be the case now. What was to be a Mercato-like pedestrian-friendly business model has now resulted in nothing more than an indoor storage warehouse and a strip mall. The developer designed a strip mall consisting of two phases, a split mall with two buildings facing Vanderbilt Beach Road. These phases will total approximately 72,000 square feet. With the 95,000 already developed, we're looking at a shortage of 16,000. There are two lots on the northeast corner that are still slated as future development, an unknown at this point. If 50,000 is approved, that will leave 34- for the future development. Will we be here a year from now looking for additional square footage for those two lots? Let's remember the original application was for 100,000. It was submitted then and then withdrawn. Will the developer be looking to add another 50- to those back lots when the completion of the front lots are finished, getting his original 100,000 that he wanted? The storage unit is completed, and it is what it is, and we can -- we can no longer address that situation. But we just ask that if you agree to this 50,000 that there be a cap that no more additional square footage will be allowed on this property and that it will be capped at the 200,000 for that development or future development. Thank you. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. MR. MILLER: Your final speaker on this item is Marc Allen. April 11, 2017 Page 60 MR. ALLEN: Good morning. My name is Marc Allen; I'm a Florida resident. I reside in Black Bear Ridge. I'm speaking today because I'm concerned about how there has been a drift away from the original plan of the development for our neighborhood and about issues related to increases in traffic congestion, noise, pollution, negative impacts on quality of life, as well as property values. Another major -- MR. OCHS: Sir, just slow it down just a bit. MR. ALLEN: I wanted to make the three minutes. MR. OCHS: You will. MR. ALLEN: Okay. Another major factor is the impact of a cost-sharing agreement that impacts us which the County Attorney recently characterized as a train wreck. I'm not opposed to development, so my statements should not be construed in any way opposing development, but development at its best is planned and in keeping with the needs and desires of the community. It's your job to determine this. If you haven't read the minutes from the February 16th, 2017, Planning Commission, I hope you would with particular attention to Pages 16 and 17. Wolf Creek residential PUD was filed in 2001. It was to consist of three moderately upscale residential communities, and Black Bear Ridge is the smallest, consisting of 100 townhomes built out. Mission Hills CPUD followed in an ordinance where ordinances were passed in 2003. In 2004, two private cost-sharing agreements were entered into just before Carolina Commons MPUD was approved in 2005. Carolina Commons was to be a mixed residential light-retail development. It was, quote, intended to create a pedestrian-friendly atmosphere that encourages area residents to work and shop there and on-site workers to walk to other services, such as having lunch within April 11, 2017 Page 61 the project. It was to create a, quote, neighborhood focal point, high traffic-generating businesses such as gas stations. Conveniences stores, gas pumps, food -- fast food restaurants with drive-through lanes, and tire stores were strictly and specifically prohibited. As noted in the Planning Commission minutes, and I quote, this little shopping center in front of Black Bear, this was supposed to be just, like, personal uses for the residential use. Some restaurants, hair cutting place, that sort of thing. That's what was explained to us with the way this was going to develop. It was going to be a neighborhood little place. It was not quite developing like that, end quote. So what happened? It seems different agendas and a piecemeal approach ignoring the original plan produced a different result. First of all, the county became concerned about increased traffic on Immokalee being shunted down Collier and requiring a loop road connection from Wolfe Road to Pristine to act as a bypass. Quote, this is not an accident, this entire loop road, end road. In addition, the county required developers at Carolina Commons and Sonoma Oaks MPUDs to structure their site plans to include connector roads between the local inner and outer loop roads. The net effect of this requirement was a traffic configuration at Carolina Commons that can best be described as two strip malls with a racetrack running down the middle. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. Thank you very much, sir. Okay. MR. OCHS: That's all the public speakers? MR. MILLER: Yes, that's all of our public speakers. MR. OCHS: Madam Chair, just before the Board deliberates, a couple of housekeeping items. You have a -- you have, I'm told, 15 speakers registered for public comment. MR. MILLER: That is correct, sir. April 11, 2017 Page 62 MR. OCHS: Okay. And we need also a brief break at some point here fairly soon for your court reporter. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I was looking at the clock. I'm thinking this would be a perfect time to have a break. Commissioner McDaniel, will you -- COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I'm fine. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: -- hold your comments till we come back? COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I'll try to remember, yes, ma'am. MR. OCHS: Ten minutes, ma'am? CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yes, thank you. MR. OCHS: 10:57 we'll be back. (A brief recess was had.) MR. OCHS: Madam Chair, you have a live mike. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you very much. Okay. So we're here. We've heard from staff, we've heard from the petitioner, and now we're at Commissioners' discussion, which I cannot partake because I have a conflict. Commissioner McDaniel? COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes. I just wanted to make a point of clarification in that what we're actually voting on today is part of the process. The petitioner has to provide for specificities with regard to the use requests, square footage requests, and the like. We're not necessarily approving or disapproving the 50,000-square-foot increase. We are not necessarily approving or disapproving the uses as per the existing PUD. Those are all going to come back through the -- I see shift change at the microphone. Am I on track, Mr. Bosi? MR. BOSI: Commissioner McDaniel, yes, you are, sir. This is a transmittal hearing. April 11, 2017 Page 63 COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Correct. MR. BOSI: You're approving -- or not approving. You're recommending transmittal to the State for their review. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Correct. And just to offer a level of assurance to the residents, I, too, have received a lot of emails and concerns with regard to the use request, the cost-sharing agreement and so on. We hear those things, but it -- rather than -- and that's -- the only real way to remedy those is to deny this request to send it up, and I'm not looking -- I don't think that's a good idea at this stage. So I would like to offer up that we have heard we are listening, we will move through the process, but this is the beginning of that process, just -- I wanted to make that point of clarification. MR. KLATZKOW: By transmitting to the State, you are making no opinion -- COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Correct. MR. KLATZKOW: -- as to how you feel about this. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I can voice an opinion. MR. KLATZKOW: Yes, but for the residents' purposes, the Board is making no determination as to ultimately what it will be doing here. You're just sending it to the State for their comments to come back. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Right. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: All right. The County Attorney has opined that I can lead this discussion, which I have been doing, but I cannot vote on it, so if we don't have any more discussion, do I hear a motion? COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I'll make a motion for approval per the executive summary and the Planning Commission's stipulations. MR. HOOD: Madam Chair? I'm sorry. Before we move forward with the motions -- April 11, 2017 Page 64 CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Excuse me. We're in the middle of a motion. Do I hear a second to that motion? COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Madam Chair, I'm going to go ahead and second the motion for a couple reasons. One, I don't believe there's a particular problem with the extra square footage, but I do believe there's a problem with the piecemeal approach that's been going on in this community in terms of development and requests for additional square footage, requests for additional things, but also the cost-sharing agreement. So I don't want my second of this motion, if the motion passes, to be an indication that I am supportive of going forward with this overall project because at this point I'm not, because there seems to be some significant unfairness about what's going on there. So I'm supportive of moving this up to the next level, but I hope that that generates some dialogue amongst not just the community of the folks that spoke today but the surrounding properties that have some impacts or have some -- that are impacted by that cost-sharing agreement. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: All right. We have a motion on the floor a second. Mr. Hood? MR. HOOD: I just wanted to make some -- I was going to make some clarifying points, but at this point we're good. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: If I might, just as a point of discussion, Madam Chair, I beeped my light. And, Commissioner Saunders, you weren't here right when we came back from the break, and I did express similar concerns and delineated what we were, in fact, voting on, we weren't for or against. And I wanted to make sure that you knew I was in concert with what you were saying, so... COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Great. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. All right. There's a motion on April 11, 2017 Page 65 the floor to approve for transmittal and a second. All those in favor, say aye. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Aye. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Those opposed, like sign. (No response.) CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: And I abstain. Four-zip. Thank you. Item #7 PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS NOT ON THE CURRENT OR FUTURE AGENDA MR. OCHS: Madam Chair, if it pleases the Board, we could move to Item 7, which is public comments on general topics not on the current or future agenda. We have how many registered? MR. MILLER: I have received one more. We now have 16 speakers on public comment. Your first speaker is Judi Play -- Palay, excuse me. She has had additional time ceded to her from Richard Wilson. If Mr. Wilson is here and can raise his hand that he is ceding time. Thank you. She is also being ceded time by Henry Taylor. If Mr. Taylor could -- I see his hand. Thank you very much. Ms. Palay will be followed by Patrice -- Patricia Bonser. If I could have her waiting at the other podium. Ms. Palay, you'll have a total of nine minutes. MS. PALAY: Thank you. I won't take it all, I promise you. My name is Judi Palay. I am a resident in Glen Eden, North Naples, and have been a homeowner there since 2002. More than a year ago I came before you asking you to please April 11, 2017 Page 66 uphold the settlement agreement regarding the Cocohatchee Bay PUD, Kalea Bay, and the property on the east side of Vanderbilt Drive. Even though it is a less-than-perfect document, you agreed that it should not be re-opened. That agreement and the Site Development Plan allows five towers to go up on the west side of Vanderbilt Drive. Incidentally, the height of those, while listed at 200 feet each, is really 220 feet when the height of the two levels of garages are added. Aqua, next door, is 11 stories. Arbor Trace, on the other side, is 17 stories. The Dunes is 203 feet. Five of these massive towers? Does that maintain the integrity of our neighbors on Vanderbilt Drive? I think not. We will have a wall of cement instead of beautiful sunsets. This is not the first time that the developer has sought a different set of rules for his projects. Unfortunately, most times the community did not learn of these until it was too late. Minutes from some of the planning staff meetings back up our assertions. It was even suggested to him to skew the buildings to enable them to change the distances between. Other communities did not have the protection of the settlement agreement and PUD. Planning staff has severely altered those previously approved plans, changing the building widths 50 feet wider for each building and the distance between the parking structures down to less than 75 feet. And along the way, the placement of the buildings, lake, and some of the amenities have changed as well. Apparently, you, our commissioners, were unaware of these changes. You were circumvented. When we brought each of you a copy of the letter from our attorney sent to Count Attorney Jeff Klatzkow, each of you said you had not seen it. That letter was to let you know of some of the changes that were being requested for Buildings 2 to 5. Building 1 is already up. That one got moved 60 feet April 11, 2017 Page 67 closer to Aqua. The other changes are not what was approved in the SDPs and are not minor cosmetic changes. In addition, on March 30th, under the Florida Freedom of Information Act, we requested information from our County Attorney, County Manager, Hearing Examiner, Growth Management Department Head, Zoning Division Director, and the Development Review Division Director to learn where else exceptions had been made to building spacing by doing questionable skewing to get spacing reductions. We citizens wanted to present a fair and accurate report to you. A week later, no response except from Attorney Klatzkow who knew of no relevant legal suits. We are urging you on your next agenda to have discussion on Amendment SDPA-PL2016000242 and allow the many issues it raises to come into the daylight. Please do not allow approval before this open discussion can take place. In addition, we ask you to please review the LDC Subsection 10.02.13.D.5, which states that: In support of its recommendation, the CCPC shall make findings as to the PUD's master plan's compliance with the follow criteria, which is then shared. This is from the 12/18/2014 CCPC agenda. While part of this subsection talks about rezoning, shouldn't the same criteria be applied before making any substantial changes? The rezoning findings, LDC Subsection 10.02.08.F, states, quote, when pertaining to the rezoning of land, the report and recommendations to the Planning Commission, to the Board of County Commissioners, shall show that the Planning Commission has studied and considered proposed changes in relation to the following when applicable. I would like to emphasize No. 6, whether the proposed change will adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood; No. 9, whether the proposed change will seriously reduce light and air to the April 11, 2017 Page 68 adjacent areas; No. 10, whether the proposed change will adversely affect property values in the adjacent area; No. 12, whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to an individual owner as contrasting with the public welfare; and, finally, No. 18, such other factors, standards, or criteria that the Board of County Commissioners, the BCC, shall deem important in the protection of the public health, safety, and welfare. These are logical criteria that make sense to consider under any circumstance. I would offer to you a very rough look at proportional building spacing at 200 feet. That is the distance between Aqua and Kalea Bay. Do we have that chart, please? That is the distance between Aqua and Kalea Bay Building 1. Then, please note what it would look like, the entire black paper being the width of the building in Kalea Bay, and please note the width with 50 feet added. That's the red, which adds 20 percent on versus the height when the distance is 100 feet. And, again, please note that the parking structures would be less than 75 feet apart. So, once again, we ask you to please protect your constituents from overreach which continues to threaten our neighborhoods. Thank you. MR. KLATZKOW: Commissioners, I have to interject. We have a process. The process is, at this point, in the Site Development Plan stage. Mr. Bosi can speak on that. There have been no decisions. We are still in the Site Development Plan phase. What's going to happen is, ultimately, there will be a Site Development Plan, at which point in time, the residents, if they don't like it, have an administrative remedy of appealing it. I have been in litigation with this developer before, all right. Having this conversation now is not going to help with the later litigation, all right. We are too soon in the process to be lobbying the April 11, 2017 Page 69 Board for their position, okay. That comes through an administrative appeal where the developer has the ability to be here. And, quite frankly, I would suggest we take no further action on this, all right, that we have no further people on this, because they're asking you to do something you can't do, all right. It's simply not ripe yet for your determination. MS. PALAY: May I just respond to only one thing? For us to do an administrative appeal is over $2,000. We're not asking you to make a decision. We're asking you to please put it on an agenda so that we can then have an open discussion. We have a settlement agreement. That agreement, which the Board of County Commissioners is supposed to uphold unless they have a supermajority to break that, is not our responsibility. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Ms. Palay, unfortunately, we have a process, and that process has been outlined by our County Attorney. We have to follow the process that we have because, as our County Attorney has said, we have been in litigation with this developer before, and the law requires it. We can't hear anything until such time as the Site Development Plan has been submitted, and at which point you as the public have an opportunity to challenge that and at which point we will hear it. I do not believe at this point we should even comment on anything based on -- MR. KLATZKOW: You have nothing to comment on. Staff is still in the process of working with the developer. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Right. MR. KLATZKOW: And I've spoken with some of the residents, and I've suggested that they get with the developer and try to work everything out amongst themselves at this point in the proceedings. It is not in the developer's interest to have a challenge to their Site Development Plan. Now is the time for everybody to get together and April 11, 2017 Page 70 try to resolve it. Now, the developer can be difficult, all right, to put it mildly, all right. But having said that, this is the time for the residents to be talking with the developer. And if they can't get anywhere, they have their remedy to come to the Board after the Site Development Plan has been through the staff process. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. Commissioner McDaniel? COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: You can turn off my light, because you and the County Attorney said what I was about to say. I didn't hear the -- this item, these items, I don't know, are -- we're not allowed to vote on these things without them being publicly noticed and processes and so on and so forth. There is, in fact, a process. We have to go through the process. The citizens have a right; that's the reason we have public comment on general topics not on the current or future agenda, and citizens have the right to express those concerns. So I suggest as has been suggested, we follow the process. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner Fiala? COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, I was just going to say about the same thing. Citizens have a right to make public comment. And just because it might be discussed later or whatever doesn't mean that we can't listen to the citizens now. That's the way I feel. I mean, they have a right to comment on it and express their concerns and possibly, at some point in time, that will help either them or help them to get into negotiations or whatever, but I'm willing to listen. MR. KLATZKOW: They have the right to speak, ma'am. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. MR. KLATZKOW: But there's a timing issue. The question is, do you want to hear them now when the developer's not here and this is not the process, or do you want to hear them during the process? April 11, 2017 Page 71 COMMISSIONER FIALA: But we can't make a decision anyway. We're just listening. I mean, there's nothing we can do. MR. KLATZKOW: My counsel is at this point in time you move on to your next item. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I am acutely aware of the importance and yet the restriction of the law; I'm acutely aware of it, and it's frustrating. I can't tell you how many times I've wrung my hands talking to county and city attorneys about tell me why, present company excepted here, because I have two sitting next to me. And when you're -- as much as I want the public to hear and as much as I've listened to you in the office, I am concerned -- now, I'm one person up here. I am concerned that this will jeopardize any future action that you may have. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Yep. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I'm very concerned about that. So as much as it's difficult for me to say I don't want to hear you, I don't want to hear you because I want to hear you when the time -- when it's ripe, when the time is ripe. And I will bow to my colleagues here; Commissioner Solis and then Commissioner Saunders. MR. KLATZKOW: And there is no reason why the community can't speak to you individually during your office hours. It's just in this particular environment I don't think it's appropriate at this point in time. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. MS. BONSER: Can I just raise a question? CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: No. Just -- I'm sorry. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Very quickly. And I'm sensitive to the public being able to come and address the Commission, and I'm sensitive to the fact that there's a process, there will be public hearings, and there's an administrative appeal process as well. I understand all that. April 11, 2017 Page 72 And I've spent a lot of time speaking with the owners, but if we can speak to them in our office, why can't we just listen to what they have to say today? I mean, I don't know how we can tell them not to speak. MR. KLATZKOW: Commissioners, at the end of the day, they are publicly lobbying you, okay? COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Right. MR. KLATZKOW: And what is going to be alleged down the road is that there have been pressures on staff during the site development process to do things a certain way, all right. And that's the concern here, all right. This is a litigious developer we are dealing with, okay. We spent an awful lot of time and money the last go around to get that settlement agreement. And I do not believe that this is a good idea, and I see no good coming from this. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Okay. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner Saunders? COMMISSIONER SOLIS: The County Attorney -- COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Madam Chair, I've sat in that chair that Mr. Klatzkow is sitting in and have given advice to commissions and councils and had them not follow it, and that's very frustrating when you're a County Attorney trying to keep your client out of trouble. So I think the best course of business is to follow the advice of our counsel. I think every one of us wants to hear everyone in the public, and we've made no -- we had no hesitation in inviting the public to participate and encouraging it. But when the County Attorney says we need to stop, then we need to stop. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Fine. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: And please note that we -- that this commissioner -- and I'm not going to speak for my colleagues -- will April 11, 2017 Page 73 be more than happy to hear you in my office, and we will make sure that there's time enough to do that as a group. If you wanted to come in as a group, we do have a conference room here. MS. BONSER: I just have one question to ask, though. Maybe this isn't the right forum. I understand we're not being asked to speak now because of future SDP plans, but Tower 1 has already been built against -- one SDP has already been changed. That was the biggest issue, that we want to make sure it doesn't happen again. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I think what we could do is take your question to our County Attorney individually, and then when you meet with us, we'll be able to respond to your question on that. Thank you. MS. BONSER: Thank you. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Your question is duly noted. Thank you. MR. MILLER: Madam Chair, the only speakers I had on public comment were related to this same item, so that is all I have. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: All right. Thank you. MR. KLATZKOW: And the community will be notified throughout the entire process. This is not going to be a situation where they're going to be, in any way, not notified or not aware of what's going on. We will do extra diligent notice provisions on this. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. Item #11A RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE PROPERTY ASSESSMENT CLEAN ENERGY (PACE) PROGRAM WITHIN THE UNINCORPORATED AREAS OF COLLIER COUNTY FOR RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES AND APPROVE A STANDARD FORM MEMBERSHIP AGREEMENT WITH PACE PROVIDERS April 11, 2017 Page 74 - MOTION TO CONTINUE TO THE APRIL 25, 2017 BCC MEETING – APPROVED MR. OCHS: Madam Chair, that would move us to Item 11A this morning. This is a recommendation to approve a resolution adopting the Property Assessment Clean Energy, PACE, program, within the unincorporated areas of Collier County for residential and commercial properties. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: And, Madam Chair, this the item that I would be abstaining. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. Very good. And it requires three votes, not four, so just let it be duly noted. Thank you very much. MR. OCHS: Mr. French will make the presentation. MR. FRENCH: Good morning, Commissioners. For the record, my name is Jamie French. I'm the Deputy Department Head for the Growth Management Department. Commissioners, this item was originally brought to you in 2010 and failed -- the Board failed to take action on this item due to legal challenges that were happening in the State Supreme Court. It was then brought back on November 15th, 2016, once the Supreme Court had weighed in, and the Board at the time had asked staff to bring it back for consideration. Again, this is not a board-directed item. This was initiated by the PACE providers, and the Board had directed staff to work with the PACE providers and bring this item back. I'm happy to answer any further questions that you might have, and I do know that there are some PACE providers that are here to speak on this matter. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner Saunders, your light's on, but I'm assuming that's from before. April 11, 2017 Page 75 COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: That was from before. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay, good. No questions. So how many speakers do we have? MR. MILLER: I have four speakers; two of those speakers are ceding time to Jay Neal if he needs it. Jay Neal, and he's been ceded additional time from Jeff Jones. Mr. Jones could raise his hand if he's here. Oh, there he is. I'm sorry. And Bobbie Dusek. I saw her earlier. Mr. Jones, you have nine -- or Mr. Neal, rather, you have nine minutes. MR. NEAL: Yes. Thank you. My name is Jay Neal. I'm president of FAIR and the FAIR Foundation. I'm not a PACE provider. We are an organization that educates consumers and property owners about resiliency issues, mitigation, hardening wind -- homes and businesses against wind risk. Just to give you an example of some of the programs that we have, we issue the CERT badges that emergency providers use to get in -- to get into disaster areas post-CAT catastrophe. So we have a great interest in making sure that property owners in the state have the access to all the tools that they can muster to be able to harden homes and businesses against wind risk, and we hope to add flood risk and water reclamation to the existing statute in the future. Having said that, I think that what we have here is a program where we've worked with your staff for at least two years, if not a little bit more, and answered, in excruciating detail, every question that they had, and they are definitely good representatives for your commission because they left very little uncovered in their investigation and really put the PACE providers through a lot of thought process to make sure that this is a program that is good for residents of Collier County. Essentially, the program allows property owners to, through ad valorem tax assessment, do very narrow improvements to their property. They either -- they're in three categories: Renewable energy; sustainable energy; and wind mitigation, which is somewhere April 11, 2017 Page 76 between two thirds and 80 percent of all the PACE projects that have happened before in Florida. And so what I'd like to do very briefly is cover some of the economics. When a homeowner has, you know, old windows and maybe he's even canceled by their insurance company because they have a bad roof, this gives them the ability to make that replacement with a funding source that is fixed rate, that is no prepayment penalty, and that gives them a planning time where they can make equal payments that aren't going to change, and they can repay it at any time. In many cases, the microeconomics are such that between their electric savings on their energy bills and their state-mandated insurance discounts, they can often make that investment and pay it back within a period of three, four, you know, seven years, in a fairly short, attractive period. This is a program that individual property owners volunteer, decide that they're -- that they -- it's an additional arrow in the quiver that they can use to finance these improvements. From a societal standpoint, the Florida -- or FEMA, the National Emergency Management people, tell us that every dollar we spend on mitigation is 5 to $7 in social savings for emergency management insurance payouts and all those types of things. So it makes sense. It's also a huge job creator, because all these dollars that we spend on more insurance go offshore because they're in reinsurance. Half of the premium that we pay to our property insurance companies goes to Bermuda and Geneva and London, so it doesn't create any jobs here in Florida. By diverting those funds back into the Florida economy, we create a heck of a lot of jobs. The data is pretty strong: For every, I think, $10 million invested, it creates 6,000 jobs over 20 years. We're also taking money from electric savings, which is a low job creator, and putting that into other segments of the economy, which creates more jobs. So we believe this is a win-win-win all along. April 11, 2017 Page 77 There have been court challenges. It has been a successful program in many areas of the state. I think there's about close to 10,000 residential PACE projects that have been done. There have been no foreclosures. There have been no -- not anybody's behind. And why is that? Because property owners are investing. It's not a swimming pool. It's not a credit card spree. It's something to improve their property and their safety and the ability to come home to something after a CAT event. So that's all I have. I asked for extra time just in case you had questions, not so that I could go on and on. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: All right. Commissioner Solis? COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Are there any other speakers? MR. MILLER: Yes. I do have one other speaker, sir. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: You had no questions for this speaker? COMMISSIONER SOLIS: No, not for the speaker. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: All right, fine. Thank you. MR. MILLER: Your next speaker and final speaker registered on this item is Neville Williams. MR. WILLIAMS: Thank you. Good morning, Commissioners. I'm Neville Williams. I live in Lely Resort. I've been here seven years, 20 years total coming down here. We were very excited when we heard that Mr. French and his department were proposing this because this is a program that operates in 30 states, 16 counties in Florida, 15 cities, and it's -- nationwide it's funded about $3 billion in energy upgrades, weatherization, and things like that. It's also creating a great -- a lot of stable work for a lot of contractors. PACE has already created an estimated 33,000 new jobs since the first programs were launched in 2008; 17,000 jobs in California, Florida, and Missouri. Energy efficiency is one of them. You know, I know people who April 11, 2017 Page 78 have homes half the size of ours and pay three times the electric bill because their house is not, you know, energy efficient. And there's also the solar energy component. Energy efficient -- energy efficiency is the largest sector within the U.S. clean energy economy, but solar is there, and I know a number of solar installers in Fort Myers and in the eastern coast -- east coast who are -- a bulk of their customers now are PACE financing -- PACE financed projects. So they accelerate investments in solar energy and efficiency because it fills a gap in the market. Customers qualify for PACE based on the equity of their property, not their income. And it's -- I'm reading from Renewable Energy Report here. By expanding the base of financeable projects and making energy efficient -- energy savings possible for millions of homeowners and small businesses. PACE brings new private investment into communities that need it, creates jobs for local contractors, revitalizes neighborhoods by bringing new life to aging buildings, and it's part of transitioning America to a clean-energy economy; it's energy savings. That's just some notes here. I'm almost done. The main thing is, as the gentleman before pointed out, is while they can take -- loans for this can be attached to your taxes for 20 years, it's -- the interest rates are higher than if you went to a bank and got a home equity loan, but sometimes people can't qualify for the home equity loan, and that also can be a burden and an encumbrance. When this is an encumbrance, it does convey the loan, or the financing conveys with the title of the house, you can pay it off and -- early if you'd like. Already $230 million have been bonded in Florida already, South Florida, for this. And so as I said, it's 20 years, it conveys with the property, it really opens up a whole opportunity for businesses in the renewable and energy-efficiency business, and I think we need to do it in this county. The county can afford it, and it's not an encumbrance for the April 11, 2017 Page 79 county, I don't believe. Thank you. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. MR. MILLER: Madam Chair, I was just handed one more slip for this item; at your indulgence, Devesh Nermil. MR. NERMIL: Yes. Thank you, Commission, for allowing me to speak. I'm with one of the PACE providers in Florida, one of the four providers for new financial. You know, we are slowly starting to, in Southwest Florida, start to activate our program. And one thing that we notice is contractors tend to like a contiguous area to work in. And what I'd like to highlight is the benefits of this program in terms -- that go beyond, sort of, the idea of just having another option to finance. What PACE has been able to do for the market is transform how contractors actually deliver the products. We actually vet, train, qualify, and manage the contractor base to ensure that the public purpose of the Florida State Statute 163.08 is met in the sense that permits are pulled, products are prequalified, the payments are done from the providers directly to the contractors and the homeowners don't get involved with that. They have to clear and sign off, and there's dispute resolution; seniors get protections. So there's -- in terms of comparing financial vehicles to get your A/C prepared when it fails in the middle of the summer, to put in those windows that will give you insurance premium discounts, as Jay alluded to earlier, this mechanism gives a level of assurance that you don't get right now with a HELOC or a credit card or any other type of home improvement financing. I just want to make sure that folks are aware of that market transformation that PACE is bringing to the marketplace. It's only an April 11, 2017 Page 80 option; it's only voluntary. It's only if you think it's something that can work for you and if you qualify based on your ability to pay and equity. I would like to leave behind some of those consumer protection type of collateral that is involved. So we hardly even market our program. Really, it's done through the contractors whenever there's a need. I'm happy to take any questions. And I just wanted to remind everybody about the public purpose of what PACE is -- how this is created. Our CEO in California actually operated PACE at a time when they were burying utility lines underground, and he said, well, how could we apply the model to allow people to put solar on the roof when there's a public benefit that comes out of that, also a private benefit that accrues. So that district model is what this is all based off. And I just wanted to leave these behind, if you don't mind. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I do have a question. MR. NERMIL: Yes. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: You mentioned qualification. How do you qualify the buyers? MR. NERMIL: We qualify them based on equity and, you know, the -- we run a check to see if they've had any -- CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: So you have a widow in a home who is on Social Security, and she's owned it for umpty-ump years. The house is worth -- and I can think of one exactly right across from me -- enormous amount of money, but she has no income. MR. NERMIL: Correct. So we're going to be looking at ability to pay. And they will -- CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: What do you look at for -- MR. NERMIL: So seniors are going to get a special call out to see if they -- if they've agreed to it. They actually can agree to the payments that we're going to disclose to them, that they can actually April 11, 2017 Page 81 make that payment. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: So they actually sign on the dotted line; that's your prequalification? MR. NERMIL: No. They get a call to confirm that they are really able to commit to that financing. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: They get a call how? What information do you take from them? According to the Florida Bankers' Association, you don't -- you don't prequalify. MR. NERMIL: We don't use credit score in the same way a mortgage provider would. We're not trying to put people with a fixed income in a situation where they can't pay these assessments. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: How can I be -- MR. NERMIL: And there's no empirical data to prove that PACE liens have caused any defaults in the way that you're speaking of. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: That's why Senator Rubio is asking for a review of the whole program on a federal basis? MR. NERMIL: Yeah. I'm not going to speak on what Rubio's doing, but I'm just letting you know the facts from our programs; our default rates are below .03 or .01 percent in every one of the programs, and they're not PACE attributed. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: According to whose -- MR. NERMIL: According to our own data of our actual -- refinancings have gone through our program. So we monitor -- actually, Mike, you are in a better position to talk about the PACE transactions you guys monitor if -- CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: That's fine. I have some other questions. Commissioner McDaniel? COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Commissioner Solis was first. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. Commissioner Solis? April 11, 2017 Page 82 COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Late yesterday I was contacted by somebody that is involved in this process as well, and the concern -- while I think I would like to understand better the process myself, the concern was with the resolution I think, which characterizes this as a loan as opposed to a financing mechanism that's not a loan. And I just want to make sure that although, number one, the county doesn't have any responsibility for any of the financing that's done -- right? I'm correct? MR. FRENCH: Under the current agreement that has been provided to the Board for consideration, that is correct. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Okay. And, number two, that to the extent that the resolution -- I mean, does the resolution characterize this in the appropriate way, because my understanding is is that if it's a loan, then the collection issue is more in terms of, say, a mortgage as opposed to the Tax Collector's process that you would -- that the Tax Collector goes through to collect, you know, either delinquent ad valorem taxes or non-ad valorem special assessments. So I just want to make sure that the resolution as presented today -- and I got this yesterday. I'm concerned that if there's somebody else there that's concerned that maybe it needs to be worded a little differently that we word it differently and not create an issue. And so, I mean, my feeling is is that maybe we need to take one more look at this and make sure that we all understand as a whole what this actually means; that it's being done in the best way possible. And so I think I'd like to see this rolled over to the next meeting and give me an opportunity at least to understand it better. That's just my request. MR. OCHS: Madam Chair? CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yes. MR. OCHS: If I might also, you're joined this morning by our Tax Collector, Mr. Ray, who would like an opportunity to address the April 11, 2017 Page 83 Board on this item. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yeah. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I was actually going to call him up. That's on my notes here, so... CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Did you have anything? COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Oh, I do, yes, ma'am. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: But if you would like to hear from the Tax Collector first, I'm -- CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: No. Let's hear from you, and then we'll hear from him. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I was -- in my notes I had expressed concerns with regard to the agency process, and I -- in the liability that's put upon our Tax Collector with the collections that revolve around a PACE program. I certainly understand the worthiness of the program and the potential benefits, but I'm not satisfied with regard to the potential drawbacks as well. I mean, there's -- I've recently received information about the lack of subordination for these liens that supersede first mortgages and so on, that one-way communication that came out, and it had been expressed to me in prior conversations as well. So I would like to hear from our Tax Collector, though, with regard to his opinions. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: All right. Very good. All right. Mr. Ray, we'd be honored to hear from you, sir. MR. RAY: Thank you. For the record, Larry Ray, the Collier County Tax Collector. I'm not going to give you any opinions. I'm here today -- I wanted to come over here and talk to you. Number one, we already -- you make the decision, and we can collect the PACE collection. We can do that; that's what we do. It April 11, 2017 Page 84 would be a non-ad valorem assessment. We'd have to make some programming changes because this non-ad valorem assessment doesn't qualify for the discount for early payment. All of the stuff on our tax bill today does, but we can do that. It's a matter of a program change. It'd take us a little bit. I wanted to come over and maybe refresh your memory on the process in order for you to be able to make a more informed decision on how this would work if you collect PACE, which we would, under the Uniform Collection Method. It would become a non -- each -- the payment to the -- they take out a loan or whatever you want to call it. It's over 20 years. They would -- the PACE lender would give us an amount each year that would go on the tax notice. That amount goes on the tax notice, and away we go. People pay. We've got to separate from everything else because it doesn't get a discount. Time passes and become delinquent on 1 April. In June, I'm going to sell a certificate to an investor who's going to pay me those taxes and non-ad valorem assessments that are due on that tax notice. I'm then going to distribute the taxes to you guys, that non-ad valorem assessment to the lender and away we go. The homeowner now has a lien on his property superior to any lien to include the mortgage. Okay. They pay later. When they pay later, they pay me, I pay the investor back his money, because, remember, he paid all this. Two years go by without the payment being made, we are now in the process that is outlined in the Florida Statutes that is fairly rigid that leads to the house being -- the home being auctioned off by the Clerk of Courts for the taxes due, and that's the process. That process -- I see people -- the reason I came over, I have people in. When these things start, they're looking for relief; they're looking for relief for not paying their taxes. There is no relief. Once you get in the certificate process, short of paying that tax notice, it is going to run its course. April 11, 2017 Page 85 So you need to at least know that rigidity in order to make a good decision on how this works, I believe. So... COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Quick question. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yes, of course. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: And in that process, unlike with a traditional mortgage lender, that process doesn't have any ability to -- or allow for any ability to negotiate something down. MR. RAY: No negotiation; no negotiation. That's the point. We don't negotiate. We don't take a little now. We don't have a friend pay. And I don't mean it -- I'm not being -- I'm not cavalier about this. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: No. That's the way it works with mortgages. MR. RAY: The process is the process. And we deal with it all the time. Sometimes it's not comfortable. And all this means to me, to tell you the truth if you want one opinion is, maybe I'll have a few more uncomfortable situations. I don't know that, but that's an opinion. But what I outlined to you up to now is the way it will be. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: No other questions? Serious stuff, isn't it? COMMISSIONER SOLIS: It is. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Serious. So the reason -- the reason that the PACE provider has to come before us is because of the permission this commission has to give to be added to their tax bill; is that correct? MR. KLATZKOW: You're approving the program. That's what you're doing here. You're saying, yes, Collier County will participate. The PACE program is a state program, primarily. They're the ones who created it. What you're doing here is you're saying that, okay, Collier County will participate in the PACE program and then, essentially, you're out of it at that point. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: We wash our hands like Pontius Pilate? April 11, 2017 Page 86 MR. KLATZKOW: You're not washing your hands. But you're saying that this is a state-approved program, all right. State legislature created this. It gives you the opportunity to opt into the program, if you want to, after which your county manager will enter into agreements with approved PACE providers. Standard form agreement's in your package here. But this board will have no further activity with respect to it. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: So if we have an unscrupulous PACE provider -- and I don't mean to keep looking at the dark side, but I have to look at that side -- and they don't do what they say they're going to do and a home -- the certificate -- what -- the certificate -- the homeowner realizes they can't possibly pay this, and so the taxes go into arrears? MR. KLATZKOW: Well, you know, I wouldn't it unscrupulous because these PACE providers have been vetted. We're here not talking about fly-by-the-night people here. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Well, let's just say they don't -- MR. KLATZKOW: But what's to happen is this, okay. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. MR. KLATZKOW: Sooner or later somebody's not going to pay their taxes. We'll get into another recession. People will lose their jobs. Now mind you, this PACE add-on assessment is probably just a small fraction of everything, all right, that they're going to be owing on their taxes, whether it's the garbage pickup, taxes itself to you, to the Board of Education, whatever. There's just another add-on. But it will be part of the unpaid taxes. Whether it's the cause of the unpaid taxes, that I don't know. It's going to be relatively small or a portion of the entire thing. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Depends how long the house -- someone's owned the house and whether it's been homesteaded or not, the proportion, because the cost of this -- April 11, 2017 Page 87 MR. KLATZKOW: Well, that's why you have this program, because your traditional home improvement loan doesn't supersede the mortgage or anything else. This is sort of like a super home improvement loan that's secured by the assessment. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: In my deliberations to myself -- and, again, I'm looking at the dark side -- I keep thinking -- and I know some folks who have actually replaced the windows in their older homes, and the cost of those windows has been almost half of the cost of the value of the house in today's world. It's extraordinary. And I'm thinking, what a great way to keep the prices high. What a great way to keep -- to get government into this so that the market doesn't work, and people realize that costs better come down, or people aren't going to be able to improve it. And so they extend this kind of financing to folks that -- my concern -- and I guess it's more -- not everyone, but there are some very vulnerable folks, especially the elderly out there that I'm really worried that this is not going to be the right program for Collier County. I'm very concerned about it. But I'm -- I agree that I'd like to move it ahead to answer your questions. But I think Mr. Ray wants to speak? MR. RAY: No. You've -- there is one more agreement to sign. They send me a Uniform Collection Agreement, like I have with everybody I collect that is not a tax -- like a CDD, I have an agreement with; the City of Naples I have several agreements with; Marco Island. I would have an agreement with -- each of these providers, or lenders, would have to have an agreement where I would agree to collect the non-ad valorem assessment on the tax bill for a small percentage. Which, oh, by the way -- CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: It's 2 percent, right? MR. RAY: -- 2 percent is the maximum. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. And I would think the loans April 11, 2017 Page 88 were market rate; I would think that's correct? Right? (No response.) CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. All right. Yes, Commissioner Fiala. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. So let me just ask a couple questions. Did I understand you to say that the interest rates on these loans are higher than you would pay at a bank, right? MR. FRENCH: Ma'am, what we have found through our research is, yes, typically they are higher. And just for one point of clarification, within your agreement we took a very conservative approach. We primarily used the Miami-Dade model where there is a requirement within your agreement for PACE providers to come before you every time. So if there's a new provider that shows up in town, they must go into an agreement with the Tax Collector as well as the Property Appraiser before we vet them and bring them back to you for consideration. COMMISSIONER FIALA: You know, I interpret this as government supporting private for-profit businesses, and that makes me very uncomfortable, because I don't believe that that's been our practice ever. And why are we then stepping into that arena? I just have a real problem with that. Let me see if I have any other questions. Aren't there other ways for people to get loans that don't have to go and pay the extra interest and then, of course, have to pay the Tax Collector as well? Can't they just get loans and maybe even work through our -- if they're on a low income basis, maybe there are ways to work through our Housing Department where they provide incentive dollars for people of the lower income area to upgrade their home. I just feel -- I feel uncomfortable about this. I don't like supporting private for-profit businesses through the government. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner McDaniel? April 11, 2017 Page 89 COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes. I can see a benefit to this program. I mean, there are people that need assistance that can't get assistance with the private marketplace. But I am not comfortable in voting for this with -- for this today and to move it forward. I would like to make a motion to continue this item so that I have a little more opportunity to speak with our County Attorney, to speak further with our Tax Collector about the legal aspects of the lack of subordination for these liens. I have additional questions, and I would rather -- I think at this stage -- I mean, I see positives. I've met with -- I've met with a lot of folks with regard to this. I can see where there can be a benefit to the community. There is a segment of our community out there that does need assistance, can't just go to the bank and get a loan. They do need protection at the same time as you have expressed, Madam Chair, with regard to disclosure and there are items, I think, that are out there that people have concerns with regard to this. So I think -- and I also concur with Commissioner Fiala with regard to government not getting in the middle of the private sector's business. And maybe there's some other alternative program that we can establish that help those that are, in fact, in need to securitize -- to securitize a loan agreement to get these necessary improvements and the like. So I'd like to make a motion to continue it. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: There's a motion on the floor. Do I hear a second? COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Second. MR. OCHS: Madam Chair, point of discussion. Is there something that the staff is being directed to do with respect to this continuance? CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yes, in a minute. I think Commissioner Solis wants to speak. April 11, 2017 Page 90 COMMISSIONER SOLIS: I do. I think this is an alternative potentially for property owners. So I don't want to see us not present an alternative for property owners to make improvements to their property that maybe they couldn't otherwise do. This is -- and I have some experience with special districts and non-ad valorem special assessments. I mean, if you want a cure for insomnia, you can read my Larview (phonetic) article on that. It certainly is that. But this is a complicated issue. I think it's -- and it merits maybe a more detailed explanation to the Board as to how this works, because we're really talking about creating, essentially, a special district. So the county really isn't involved in this. The county's not pledging its borrowing power or guaranteeing anything. I mean, I would just like to see some more information, maybe a presentation on the whole program and really what it means. That's why I would like to see it continued, and I second the motion. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner McDaniel, you made the motion. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I did. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Are you -- is there anything else you'd like to see staff bring back? Are you satisfied with Commissioner Solis? COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I made it in the -- when I expressed earlier that I'd like to have further discussions about the concerns that have been raised with regard to the lack of subordination and clarification as to when, in fact, these loans that are -- take precedent over an already existent mortgage, because it's not my understanding that they do that as long as they're in a current position; it's only when they move into a loan status, and just get some additional questions regarding that. Is that clear enough, Mr Leo? CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Clear as mud? April 11, 2017 Page 91 MR. OCHS: Yes, sir. We'll make the presentation that we made back in November of 2016 before some of the new board members joined the Board. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: That's a wonderful idea. MR. OCHS: Yeah. And we'll include that in the backup, that item. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: All right. So we have a motion on the floor and a second to continue to our next meeting. Is that sufficient amount of time? MR. OCHS: Pleasure of the Board. We're ready to go. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I didn't specify a time frame, but you -- how's it fit? Do you need that to be specified in the motion? MR. OCHS: No -- MR. KLATZKOW: No. MR. OCHS: -- but we'll bring it back next meeting unless the Board wants to set it for a different time. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I think that's fine, as long as it doesn't put you in a tight -- MR. OCHS: No, sir. Thank you. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: All right. So there's a motion on the floor to continue until the next meeting and a second. All those in favor, say aye. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Aye. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Aye. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Those opposed, like sign. (No response.) CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: It carries unanimously, four votes, with Commissioner Saunders abstaining. April 11, 2017 Page 92 Item #14B1 THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA) BOARD TO REVIEW AND AUTHORIZE COUNTY STAFF TO MARKET THE SALE AND SOLICIT A DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT PLAN, THROUGH A REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL PROCESS, OF CRA-OWNED PROPERTY IDENTIFIED AS 4265 BAYSHORE DRIVE (FOLIO #61840960006, #61840960103, AND #61840840003) AND 4315 BAYSHORE DRIVE (FOLIO #53401680005) IN ACCORDANCE WITH FLORIDA STATUTE 163.380 AS OUTLINED IN THE COLLIER COUNTY COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT PLAN, AND BRING BACK ANY OFFERS TO THE BOARD – APPROVED MR. OCHS: Madam Chair, we have some members, I believe, in the audience that have an interest in Item 14B1. I think we can get through before your noon hour strikes if you want to take that item right now. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I think that's fine. MR. OCHS: Mr. County Attorney, shall the Board go into session as the CRA board now? MR. KLATZKOW: Yes. MR. OCHS: So, Madam Chair, if you could turn the gavel over to Commissioner Fiala to chair the CRA board meeting. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: It is officially turned over, sir. MR. OCHS: Thank you, ma'am. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Will the CRA portion of the meeting please proceed. MR. OCHS: Mr. Durham will make the presentation on 14B1, which is a recommendation for the CRA to review and authorize the staff to market and solicit a development concept plan through a April 11, 2017 Page 93 request for proposal process for CRA-owned property along the Bayshore Drive. Mr. Durham? MR. DURHAM: Hi, Commissioners. Tim Durham from the County Manager's Office. And I wanted to commend Commissioner McDaniel for hanging with me up in Tallahassee up and down those stairwells. We had quite a bit of running around, and he hung in there pretty well as we tried to find the various offices. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: For being an old guy, I did okay. MR. DURHAM: He did great. This is pretty much a good-news items, I believe, Commissioners. This is another terrific opportunity for the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle and that is selling and developing the 17.8-acre parcel located on eastern Bayshore Drive abutting Sugden Park and north of Thomasson. So the CRA originally purchased this property prerecession at a cost of 5.35 million. Its current appraised value is about 3.7 million. In 2012 the property was rezoned in what's called now the Cultural Arts Village of Bayshore, which is a mixed-use PUD, which I'll get into in a little more detail in a second. And like what we did on the Gateway Triangle property, the idea here is to devise a method whereby multiple proposers can give us their price and concepts on how they would develop the property using flexibility and creativity and doing it in a way that benefits the CRA, the community at large, and meets the satisfaction and expectations of this board. So this is what -- this is an aerial of the property. You can see there's a portion of it, and I'll -- can you see the cursor? Yeah. We do not own this particular parcel. This belongs to -- it's listed in the Property Appraiser's website as belonging to the Clyde O. Shadley Trust and has an assessed value of about $43,000. I understand from April 11, 2017 Page 94 my colleague he's asking 2.5 million for that particular parcel. But the bottom line is we own the area outlined in orange. That's the 17.89 acres. Permitted uses within the Bayshore mixed-use PUD includes the following elements: A maximum of up to 40 residential dwelling units; up to 48,575 square feet of commercial; up to 84,000 square feet of parking. And the thought there is a parking structure; 350-fixed-seat performance theater with a maximum height of four stories. That's what's allowable within the PUD. Based on the CRA Advisory Board, these are some of the expectations they've expressed, and I'm happy to talk about -- and I'm looking for your direction to see what you would like to see as we go forward and put this RFP out. But things mentioned -- yes, sir? Workforce housing, a variety of housing types including rentals, condos, townhouses, single-family units, if applicable, commercial uses, a cultural component, public access and, importantly, connectivity to Sugden Park. And this aerial shows the MSTU has already spent $40,000, $39,000, in designing a pathway connecting Bayshore to Sugden Park. We're making note of that in our proposal for the RFP, but we're also asking that if a proposer has a more creative idea or something that accomplishes the same access to Sugden, that they're free to recommend that. And kind of wrapping -- wrapping up, I'd like you to approve -- or give staff direction on the guiding criteria that should be in the RFP as outlined in your executive summary. I want you to know that the whole purpose of this, like with the Gateway Triangle property that we successfully accomplished this, we want to encourage proposers to think creatively outside the box, give us maybe ideas we've not thought of or considered. We will bring any credible responsive proposal back to the advisory board and back to you for your final approval, and that April 11, 2017 Page 95 wraps up my presentation. I'm happy to take any questions or guidance that you'd provide. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Commissioner Fiala? Oh, that was you. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: She's the chair. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, I'm the chair. I forgot. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I forgot, too. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Sorry about that. Commissioner McDaniel? COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes. Do we have any public speakers on this item? MR. MILLER: We do not, sir. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay. I'd like to make a motion to move this forward. I do -- I'd like to make a motion for approval. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I'll second that motion. I wanted to ask a few questions. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Me, too, for discussion. Okay. And thank you for the second. Well -- or you could have made the motion, and I would have seconded it as well. I would like to say out loud a couple of things. I would like for us as a board to have some discussion with our CRAs in actually buying real estate at all, ever. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: We don't do that anymore. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Good. If we're not doing that anymore, that pleases me. I think community redevelopment agencies ought to just, in fact, be that and assist with those that already own private property in enhancement of those things and offer guidance to our board with regard to zoning policies and the like to better facilitate community redevelopment along the line. Number two, we're moving into a seller's position here, and I'm April 11, 2017 Page 96 going to put my real estate broker's hat on for a second, Timothy, and that is the less stipulations, the less -- the less requisites that you put on a particular purchaser, the greater opportunity you have to receive a higher price. We already know we're in a deficit position in relationship to the purchase and the current appraised value. I believe that you should put this out for an RFP, offer it for sale at whatever the asking price is, and then make the determinations accordingly as those offers, in fact, come back with little to no stipulations as far as requisites of use, so on and so forth. If you find a congenial buyer that would like to entertain the connectivity between Bayshore and Sugden Park and that works, then you can make those economic decisions as you, in fact, go. MR. DURHAM: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Being that nobody else's light is on. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Well, I don't have a light. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, you may light up the dais right now. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Oh, there we go. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Talk to us. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: May I speak? CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yeah. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I would agree with Commissioner McDaniel on this. I'm wondering -- I know there's underlining (sic) zoning, but, you know, this underlining zoning was created at a time with a dream that basically tells you what they want there, and I don't think that's what we want to do. I think we've got a piece of land, I think it's worth -- we know what the -- we purchased it with. We know that the cultural community is very interested in this, but -- to restrict it to the PUD but, frankly, I'm not sure we can waive that PUD. April 11, 2017 Page 97 MR. KLATZKOW: You'd have to rezone it if somebody wanted a different use of it. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: It can be amended, just like -- COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: So can we -- can we, within this solicitation, say that rezoning -- I don't know how to word this, I mean, because it's a vote of -- MR. KLATZKOW: Well, no. You can sell it as-is or somebody can come back and say, listen, I want to do X, X, and Y on it and provided they ultimately get zoning I'd be willing to pay, you know, Z for it, that would be fine. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: It's just a regular real estate transaction. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. So someone experienced in this field would not look at the underlining zoning and say, you mean I've got put -- I can't build any more than 40 residential units, and I have to have 48,575 square feet of commercial space? MR. CASALANGUIDA: This would be the same as what we did with the pricing concept for the Gateway Triangle, which we told people, work with the zoning or come up with something creative, but stipulate that you would require the zoning, and we put a disclaimer in the purchase and sale contract that said -- COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Good. MR. CASALANGUIDA: -- the Board's not -- doesn't have to approve it, but bring it forward, and we'd develop the price. So this is wide open. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Good. MR. DURHAM: And that is in the materials, ma'am, the opportunity to rezone, make it fit the ideal price and concept. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: And I think it's important. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: And I think it's important also to note within the body of this RFP that -- of the features of it that qualify April 11, 2017 Page 98 it highly for a SAIL program, and some of that is access to public transportation, being able to walk to schools, being able to walk to the county for employment, be able to walk to a drugstore, to -- you know, and those are clearly specified in the document. So if -- if my colleagues agree, I'd like to see this put within the body of this. MR. DURHAM: The pedestrian orientation? COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Yes. MR. KLATZKOW: I would leave it as open as possible. MR. OCHS: Hold on. Hold on. MR. KLATZKOW: Leave it as open as possible. You never know what you're going to get. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: You just want -- COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Okay. Well -- no, but I did because of the underlining zoning. So I just kind of want to broaden it. But if I'm going the other way, I certainly will stand back and not do that. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: I mean, I think the idea is to have it as open as possible. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Okay. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: And in the understanding that there is underlying zoning, but there can be a rezone -- COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Okay. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: -- like most developments do. They'll end up with a rezone. MR. OCHS: Well, they can ask for one. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: They can ask for one, right. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: It is America. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: There's an underlying vision for what the county -- or the CRA originally wanted there, but, okay. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: What little I hear -- COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Isn't that the same thing that's April 11, 2017 Page 99 going on with the 5.2 acres at the point? COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Correct. MR. CASALANGUIDA: Exactly. MR. OCHS: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Okay. Well, the little I hear from the development community is the worst thing they can do is -- I'm sorry, is come before us and hope to get our votes. So I was just trying to broaden it. But I respect my experienced colleagues, so that's fine. Thank you. CHAIRMAN FIALA: When we started this whole project down at the CRA -- well, way even before there was a CRA, the effort was this was the worst -- worst, worst, worst area in all of Collier County. Normal people would not even drive down there, it was so full of crime. And slowly but surely, through a community effort, we tried to perk it up, pick it up. The CRA was created after the MSTU was created, and the area began to improve. One thing about the CRA is the CR, in my opinion, besides a community redevelopment, is creativity. You need to have creativity, and the reason that they wanted to dedicate part of this -- and we applied to the State for it -- to become an art district was because there were more benefits to becoming an art district, and there were some ways to apply for grants and so forth with the art district, and that was an important thing. We didn't want it to be -- you know, it was just full of -- well, you say don't buy any more property. Had we not bought the property, there were 27 flophouses located in this area. No human being should even live in them, and we bought them and not only closed them down, but we hauled them away because they would be -- you know, human people could never live in there, and yet people were doing just that. No running water, no electricity, et cetera. April 11, 2017 Page 100 By buying that up, we were able -- the crime dropped 33 percent in that area, but they had to have the ability to buy it when they saw the need to do that. They moved forward. The arts was utmost in their mind. And then we saw a group called the Cultural and Performing Arts Center, and I say that with a little pride in my voice because I was -- I was honored to be a little bit of a part of that. But anyway -- and that brought a new element to this. We needed to get away from all of the substandard housing and we needed to pick that up into a new level of housing so that we could start to blend the community, start to balance the community. Then along, of course, came the CRA -- the Bayshore Gateway/Triangle. Well, had we not bought that at the time, we would -- and the reason we brought those six pieces of property -- and we wanted to buy a couple more, but we were stopped then because of the recession. The reason was to control what went in there -- exactly what you were saying not to do -- because if you didn't have some limitations on it, you'd have the junkyard yet and you'd still have the collision repair area, and then you'd have lots of nice self-storage units and things like that, if you could ever get them to come in. This way you're going to have a consolidated effort which will then breathe new life into that whole area. But you can't put limitations on them by saying you can't buy any more property and you have to have lots and lots of density on these properties. Maybe that isn't what that particular property needed. So that's -- I just have strong feelings about that, and probably because I've been with it from the very start, and one of the things -- they have people that are specially trained in CRAs to do just exactly this. And I want to tell you that none of us are specially trained in the CRA field. And so I'd love to see some of the creativity that will come out of it. I know we're looking for an executive director with that background April 11, 2017 Page 101 and training, and that will hopefully lead us forward. But what I'd like to do now is -- I know you've made a motion to approve, but you put some, you know, criteria on that. Don't buy new properties and -- COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: No, no, no. We moved into discussion after I made the motion. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, okay. Good, good. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I made the motion for approval -- CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Just period. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: -- and then we moved into discussion. And I -- CHAIRMAN FIALA: All right. Then you -- then you've got my vote. But I don't want to -- I don't want to hamstring these people at all. Okay. Thank you. MR. DURHAM: Thank you, ma'am. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Sorry about all that long conversation. And, Commissioner Solis. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: I think I made my comments. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, good. Thank you so much. Now we have a motion on the floor and a second. Any further comments? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FIALA: Any questions? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FIALA: All those in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Aye. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Those opposed, like sign. April 11, 2017 Page 102 (No response.) CHAIRMAN FIALA: 5-0. Thank you. MR. DURHAM: Thank you. MR. OCHS: Thank you, Commissioners. You want to close the CRA meeting? CHAIRMAN FIALA: No, I don't really, but I guess I will. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: She likes having the gavel. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, you know, I have one more question before I close it. How much of that property is under water? Is it nine acres under water? MR. DURHAM: About 10 that are buildable and about eight that are water. CHAIRMAN FIALA: So, in other words, it's going to be -- are they allowed to fill in that water, or is that a natural water source that needs to be staying there? Because you have to consider that, too, when you think of how much to build on that property. MR. DURHAM: Yeah -- CHAIRMAN FIALA: What was the answer? MR. DURHAM: Apparently not. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Apparently not. You cannot fill it in, right? MR. DURHAM: (Shakes head.) CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. So you've got what, 10 buildable acres on this piece of property? (No verbal response.) CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Good. I just wanted to -- is that -- was I right, 10 buildable acres? MR. DURHAM: Yes, ma'am. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, fine. I just wanted to make sure I understood what we're dealing with here. Thank you very much. And the CRA meeting now closed. April 11, 2017 Page 103 CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: And I think what we should do is break for lunch and come back at one o'clock. MR. OCHS: Yes, ma'am. You have a one o'clock time-certain, roughly. So when do you want to be back from lunch, ma'am? COMMISSIONER FIALA: Roughly about 1:09. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: One o'clock. One o'clock. Thank you. MR. OCHS: Thank you. (A luncheon recess was had.) Item #10A A PRESENTATION BY DRS. MICHAEL SAVARESE, PROFESSOR OF MARINE SCIENCE, FLORIDA GULF COAST UNIVERSITY (FGCU), AND PETER SHENG, PROFESSOR OF COASTAL & ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING, UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA (UF) ON AN INTERACTIVE DECISION-SUPPORT TOOL FOR ADAPTATION OF COASTAL URBAN AND NATURAL ECOSYSTEMS IN SOUTHWEST FLORIDA, WHICH IS PENDING A GRANT AWARD BY THE NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION (NOAA) AND A COMPLEMENTARY PRESENTATION BY MR. JOHN SOREY, CHAIRMAN COLLIER COUNTY COASTAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE (CAC) ON THE EFFORTS TO BEGIN THE DEVELOPMENT OF A LONG RANGE BEACH/COASTAL RESILIENCY PLAN - PRESENTED AND DISCUSSED; TDC TO BRING BACK RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ALLOCATION OF THE 4 CENTS OF THE TOURIST DEVELOPMENT TAX CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Good afternoon. Glad we're back with you. And we have the honor today of meeting, up close and personal, April 11, 2017 Page 104 Dr. Michael Savarese and Dr. Peter Sheng, who will be Skyped in from the University of Florida. And today, this afternoon for this agenda item, we're going to talk about a couple of things, but it really -- the issue really is our beaches and sea level rise and the science that is going to be brought to the table. So, Dr. Savarese, I will turn this over to you. Thank you very much. DR. SAVARESE: Thank you, Commissioner Taylor. Is this microphone good for everybody? MR. OCHS: Yes, it is. DR. SAVARESE: Anyway, good afternoon. Thanks for putting us on the agenda. That's Peter Sheng there in the corner of that screen. Wave, Peter. He really does exist in Gainesville. He looks very comfortable. Peter and I are here today -- we're actually here to tell you about a pending project that will help Collier County. When this agenda item was scheduled over a month ago, we were under the impression, Peter and I, that we would have a signed contract and able to talk very specifically about the details associated with this project. We just were informed through our program manager at NOAA that the negotiations on the contract are taking longer than we thought. So, in essence, I'm not permitted to give you details about the project today simply because NOAA doesn't want that to happen, and we don't want to jeopardize the success of that funding. Peter and I have every expectation that this will be funded. The contract, we should have it finalized within the next few weeks, and we're still anticipating a June 2017 start date. So what I'd like to do today, or what Peter and I would like to do today, is just introduce you to what we intend to do very, very generally, try to set a stage, if you will, of how this science can help April 11, 2017 Page 105 endorse Collier County's planning for future change, and then answer any questions you might have about the process, again, without divulging any details about the project. I should tell you normally in this situation one would be suspicious and fear that the money was in jeopardy, but it's not. The monies that are funding this project -- this is a project through NOAA's NCCOS program which stands for the National Coastal Oceanic -- National Center for Coastal Ocean Science. The monies that are -- that we've been -- that we hope to be awarded once the contract is finalized is legislated money through the Restore Act, so it's not under the scrutiny of NOAA's budget. So the money's there. The money's secure. We just don't have the contract. And NOAA is -- is reluctant to have us make information -- the details public until that contract comes up. So let me talk a little bit about the project in general, okay. Again, this is a very different type of project. Most federal dollars that come to NOAA or to agencies like the National Science Foundation are specifically for doing science, okay. This is a very different kind of a flavor of a project. This is a project that takes science and provides tools for decision makers. And the decisions that this particular program is dedicated to do -- dedicated is to problems associated with the gulf coast. What kinds of problems does the gulf coast have to deal with it as we move on to the future and how can scientists -- Peter Sheng, myself, and our teammates, how can we provide that information as tools that the county and the municipalities in Collier County use? The project specifically focuses on the impacts of climate change and sea level rise and, obviously, is something we're all concerned with as Collier County citizens. So what this project will ultimately do is provide you, the county, and the cities with tools that you'll need to actually do planning in anticipation of sea level rise in the future. April 11, 2017 Page 106 So with that as sort of a broad introduction, I'd like to just take a few minutes and talk a little bit about conceptually what is going on. First of all, I want to thank the County Commission. The Collier board approved a resolution last year. The City of Naples as well -- I'd like to publicly thank them -- approved a resolution last year endorsing this NOAA proposal. And I got to tell you, the reviews that we received back through the proposal review process was very flattering about the support that we had in the local community. So the fact that the county and the City of Naples is paying close attention to this and is eagerly waiting for these tools to help with your planning in the future has done a lot to bring us success in bringing that funding forward. I also want to thank the Collier County League of Women's Voters. One of the things that I've noticed over the last couple of years is that attitudes have changed radically in response to climate change and sea level rise, and there seems to be sentiment and recognition that it's a problem and needs to be addressed, and the League has been instrumental, I think, in getting into the county and getting people to sit up and take notice. So it's been a process of educating the public and getting people to improve their awareness about the problem, and the League has been instrumental in helping that forward. I want to set a mindset for the county, and I'm -- there's a part of me that worries that this kind of work can just scare the hell out of everybody. Can I say "hell" in a commissioner meeting? COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: No. DR. SAVARESE: No, okay. I won't say it a third time. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Hell no. DR. SAVARESE: I mean, it's pretty daunting. When you look at the projections, the worst-case-scenario projections, it's downright scary. And the one thing I think communities need to avoid is a sense April 11, 2017 Page 107 of hopelessness. The truth is the projections for what sea level rise might bring to coastal communities is highly variable. There's not necessarily a high degree of confidence within those projections, and the reason for that is we still have future human history to change our patterns and change our behaviors. So it's possible the outlook might be grim, but I have to believe that given people's changes in behavior and smaller government organizations, like at the county municipal level, addressing this problem will change attitudes nationally and hopefully internationally and that those worst-case scenarios can be avoided, okay. So what I have here is that I think it's important to approach this optimistically. Not to worry about Armageddon, not to worry about the worst-case scenarios, but at least be aware of those worse-case scenarios in case those ultimately come our way. With that said, I'd like to make this statement: I think it's important for the county and the municipalities in our county to approach this with a vision of sustainability and economic health. Collier County, the cities in Collier County, have to remain economically viable and economically sustainable regardless of what sea level affects in the future. Between here and then we want to remain viable and sustainable. So I think the key here is to approach this whole sea level issue, the science, the planning, the implementation. It's important to approach this with the right vision. It's not just a matter of patchwork repairs. It's a matter of envisioning what the county's likely to look like in the future in a vibrant, healthy way so that we continue to host a wonderful place to live and visit as tourists. Any project, any concern like this really has to take three steps. The first is to have the best science available to generate the possible scenarios of what the landscape is likely to look like, okay. This NOAA project, if it's funded, when it's funded, will give you that best April 11, 2017 Page 108 science available. The science we're proposing, the science that Peter is really the intellectual leader of, provides the most sophisticated computer modeling imaginable; much, much more complicated in sophistication than the typical bathtub models. The sea level goes up a foot, you raise sea level a foot, and that's what the landscape is going to look like. That's not the way nature is going to act. So this will provide you the best science. Unfortunately, I can't -- we can't give you those details yet, but maybe in a future meeting when the Commission meets. Science -- for the sake of science is science wasted, right? The science has to be employed in some way, and that's why I would urge the Commission to think very seriously in supporting a planning effort. What we will provide is a list -- a collection of scenarios, and those scenarios should help drive a planning effort. The planning effort should have this vision for a sustainable and an economically healthy future in mind. It shouldn't just be about, you know, building walls and battling the incoming water. Those plans have to be viable, and they have to be adoptable because, again, there's a high degree of uncertainty as to what the ultimate scenario will look like. Okay. So planning is important. Science without planning is science wasted. And then, finally, a plan has to be engineered and, ultimately, that's the costly phase is actually putting bricks and mortar on pavement and actually implementing the plan. Just a couple of other parting thoughts. Again, the NOAA projects focuses on the first phase. We'll be able to provide you with the most sophisticated science available. I think it's fair to say -- can I tell them how much money is at stake here, Peter? Shake your head yes or no. April 11, 2017 Page 109 DR. SHENG: Well, you can say, but, you know, nothing is final until it's final. DR. SAVARESE: It's a million dollars' worth of science. I think the budget comes in at just under a million dollars. So that comes to the county and the cities cost free, and that -- those products will be delivered over a three-year period. I think it's okay to divulge that as well. The planning should follow or should operate in concert. The science shouldn't remain on a shelf. I think it's also important, and I think Peter would agree, that we as the scientists that are putting the tools together to help with decision making should work very closely with that planning team to at least advise them, to give them the information they need. So I think it's critical that whatever planning effort that the county decides to endorse that this NOAA project and our team is involved so that our science isn't happening in one arena and the planning is happening in another, and the left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing. That would be also science wasted. So I would encourage that as well. And, again, the plan that you ultimately endorse should be adaptable as time progresses because the actual effects, at least at this time, are uncertain. So I think the key is to plan for the short term, you know, 2030, 2060, and then to have adaptability to deal with problems further out into the future, like in 2100 and beyond. So with that as just a way of introducing this project, let me quickly introduce Peter. This is Dr. Peter Sheng. Again, Peter is the brains behind the brawn. Anything to add, Peter, or... DR. SHENG: No. DR. SAVARESE: Okay. Questions? COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, what a nice laugh he has. DR. SAVARESE: He's got a great laugh. That's why I like him April 11, 2017 Page 110 so much. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Would it be -- I have a question, because you've piqued my curiosity. And I just -- and, again, if you can't answer it, I understand. But you said that when sea level rise, it comes up a foot, so we build a foot higher. It's not like that. Can you -- can you expand that a little bit so that we understand what sea level rise would mean to landscape. DR. SAVARESE: Yeah. Peter, can I -- maybe I'll ask you to answer that question. Did you hear it? I made a point saying that it's not a simple bathtub coming up and that there are other influences that will affect the landscape. DR. SHENG: Okay. Mike mentioned bathtub model. A lot of the tools out there, they assume the landscape is like a bathtub. So if you inundate -- if you have a 1-foot sea level rise, the 1-foot sea level is going to go over the land just like in a bathtub, all right. Bathtub is not flat. It's kind of got a terrain, so they just flood the land like that. And if there is hole in there, they'll flood over. But, in reality, it doesn't work like that. Land has dissipation. Land will -- some you may have a mountain, you have some barrier, and the sea level rise is not going to act like a bathtub. And plus you have wind, you have storms. So what you want to be planning for is not just pure sea level rise with bathtub, but you need to consider hurricanes like Charley, Wilma. We have all kinds of storms that comes by. You know, whether we have climate change or not, we have storms. The storms are going to get more intense. And those, on top of the sea level rise, is what create all this flooding risk. And so we've done modeling using the bathtub model versus something called dynamic model which incorporates all the dynamics of the water flow and also dissipation by the land features. We have April 11, 2017 Page 111 incorporated all that stuff in three-dimensional models. So when we consider sea level rise with storms, without storms, we get very different results. If you use a bathtub model, what we found is some part of the flooding is going to be overestimated, some part will be underestimated because it doesn't consider the dynamics, interaction of the flow of water with the land. So that's basically -- I don't know if I answered your question exactly, but a lot of places are doing this bathtub modeling. You talk to Palm Beach County, they have a bathtub model on sea level rise. You talk to St. John's County in Jacksonville, they use bathtub model, and they know the shortcomings of that. So if you plan on that, you may end up, you know, overspending money in some places and underspending in some other places. DR. SAVARESE: Does that help you? CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yeah, no. That's wonderful. Does anyone have any questions here? Any? (No response.) CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. So I have another question. When you talk about the planning, can you expand a little bit? Because it's a discussion we're having up here. I mean, because, first of all, it's such a blessing and it's so extraordinary and, again, I think I'm correct that the NOAA grant is not for Collier/Lee, it's for Collier County; is that correct? DR. SAVARESE: That's correct. It's specifically for Collier County. And, again, I don't think this is something that can't be divulged, but when we had conversations about developing this project, we recognized that we could have -- we could have incorporated a larger geographic landscape and included all of Southwest Florida. But the larger the geographic scale the more computer modeling intense of the work would be, the more expensive April 11, 2017 Page 112 the work would be, or you'd have a very coarse granulation and you wouldn't really know at a small enough spatial scale what the effects are likely to be. So by focusing on Collier County, it's not that we don't wish the same kind of effort for Lee County and our sister counties to the north. It just makes sense to locate it in a geographically more restricted area. So this is designed specifically to help Collier County and its municipalities. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Is it only coastal area, or are we looking inland or it is -- can you speak to that? DR. SAVARESE: Yeah. I mean, Pete can you talk about the geographic extent of how far inland this goes? DR. SHENG: Well, in my definition, the entire state of Florida is coastal. The entire state of Florida is coastal. So it's -- you know, we don't -- I have some mass and some domains, but unfortunately that gets into too much detail. But the answer to that is we -- I think what we consider is more than just the conventional coastal, the beach area. No, we go quite far beyond. DR. SAVARESE: This covers a significant proportion of Collier's area, well into the interior. So not only would the work tell you how; the interface is going to behave, you know, there on the barrier islands and the beaches and along the bay fronts but also how the interior spaces are going to respond as well. So it's geographically comprehensive in that regard. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. All right. And then in our conversation, Dr. Savarese, you indicated that you and Dr. Sheng worked in a -- I don't know -- in an -- indirect with Harvard, or how did they interplay into this? DR. SAVARESE: Yeah. I know that the county's deciding on other -- or a variety of planning options for the future. When we -- April 11, 2017 Page 113 when Peter and I were developing this proposal, we worked very closely with the Harvard Graduate School of Design. And what we have already will integrate well with what they have planned, so -- and they are members of our anticipated team, so that we can make an easy transition of information from the science -- from the science to the actual planning. And we have a fairly complicated and comprehensive communication plan to keep everybody engaged and involved along the way, and that will be my principal role; I'm the person. While Peter is stuck in the lab cranking out computer code, I'll be here on the ground working with the local decision makers and stewards to make sure that communications are great. So when we designed this proposal, we worked very closely with the Harvard Graduate School of Design team so that there was a nice transition of information. That said, I don't want to influence your decision on, you know, what planning effort you as a board want to endorse. I would just encourage you to endorse some plan -- some planning effort and that the planning effort that you endorse, it would be essential that that planning effort work closely with us, because -- I can say this publicly over the television. I'm 58 years old. You know, it's not about the money anymore. It's about the effect. And I know Peter -- I'm not sure how old Peter is, but I think he probably feels the same way. We both want our science to do more than sit on a shelf, and to have our science not integrate with the planning effort would just be a travesty. So there needs to be that integration. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: How do you see that -- how do you see that unfolding, the timing of it, though? DR. SAVARESE: Well, I would argue that -- we've actually worked with the Harvard team to stagger our product. So, again, this isn't meant to influence your decision, but at least in our conversations April 11, 2017 Page 114 with the Harvard team, their start date and their deliverables are in step with our deliverables. So we've had conversations about the timing of our deliverables and the timing of their deliverables so that we would be working in concert and you wouldn't have to wait until our three years was over and then there would be another three years of planning so you have to wait six years. The hope here is that, you know, maybe our project gets funded for three years. Maybe after four years or five years you've got viable plans that can be considered so you're not waiting, you know, too many years into the future to start thinking about how to deal with the problem. So, again, I can tell you on behalf of the two of us -- I can tell you on behalf of NOAA, NOAA is funding, is going to fund, we hope is going to fund this project simply because they're enamored with the fact that this community is receptive, and to be receptive, it has to help the planning. So I guess to just preserve the integrity of the work, let's please make sure that, you know, we're in communication with whatever planning option you decide to endorse. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. Any questions for anyone? (No response.) CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Dr. Sheng, thank you. MR. MILLER: Madam Chair, I do have public speakers for this item. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Good. DR. SAVARESE: Can I ask a question of you? CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yes. DR. SAVARESE: How -- your schedule as a board, your board meetings, continue on into May? CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: June. DR. SAVARESE: To June? April 11, 2017 Page 115 MR. OCHS: July. DR. SAVARESE: Til July. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: July. We have one meeting in July. DR. SAVARESE: Want to go til August? Can we be invited back to give you what we had hoped to give at that later date -- CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yes. DR. SAVARESE: -- once we have a contract and we can share with you all the bells and whistles. I think you'll be very impressed. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: That would be wonderful. DR. SHENG: Can I just say a few words? DR. SAVARESE: Yeah, go ahead. DR. SHENG: Yeah. I just want to let you know why we picked Collier County and Southwest Florida as the focus area for this proposal. Number one is because I think Collier County, Naples, is a very important area in Florida. We have a really fast population growth, we have really nice homes down there, and also because relatively higher risk compared to places like Gainesville, right, for sea level rise. But, I mean, Southwest Florida and Naples area and Miami area, they have relatively higher risk under sea level rise and future storms and, therefore, in this, there hasn't been anything studied. But in addition, it has a lot of mangroves. You have a lot of natural habitat, and it's being underutilized for the purpose of flood protection. Last, but not least, I really like Collier County and Naples. I've been down there a few times. I really like it. I have some friends in Collier County in Naples, and they invited me to go back. So I wish I could be there today to shake your hands to thank you for your support. Although I apologize for not being able to reveal everything we have, I think you're going to like what we're going to April 11, 2017 Page 116 tell you when the project is finally approved. And, unfortunately, NOAA has got their rules, and we're told we just shouldn't do this until it's -- until it's finally public. The good news is we are in active phase of negotiation. We haven't heard anything negative. And one thing I want to assure you that this money comes from NOAA RESTORE Act Science program. So that money comes from BP, the bad guy who polluted Gulf of Mexico seven years ago; therefore, the money is in the bank. It's not going to be cut for whatever reason, like some of the other NOAA programs. So that's the good news. Again, I want to thank you. I want to echo what Mike said; we look forward to working with you. And next time I will come down in person. I'll shake your hands and give you a detailed presentation and take your questions. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Wonderful. Thank you so much, Professor. DR. SAVARESE: Thank you. DR. SHENG: Thank you. DR. SAVARESE: There were questions from the floor? CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: All right. So we have some speakers. MR. MILLER: Yes. Your first speaker's Judith Hushon. She'll be followed by Dennis Vasey. MR. OCHS: Madam Chair, do you want to hear the rest of the presentation before you take speakers or -- CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: If you want to speak specifically to the NOAA grant, speak now. If you want to speak to the -- MR. OCHS: Coastal resiliency. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: -- resiliency, then maybe you want to wait. You can speak to both if you want. DR. HUSHON: I wanted to congratulate them, but... CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: No, then please do. April 11, 2017 Page 117 DR. SAVARESE: We'll always take congratulations. DR. HUSHON: No. We've been working for the last six months with Mike and Peter as part of the Harvard Graduate School of Design project, and they have been great to work with, and I think we'll find that as a county as well. And the planning effort, we think, is really important, and we're glad that they agree with us, because that's -- then we go on and do the engineering and spend our money, but in the right way and in the best places. But to have this NOAA grant is just fantastic because we could do the -- as he says, the bathtub science. I'm a scientist. I like doing good science, and this will be good science. This will be better -- much better science than that, because what you'll find is that certain places are higher, certain places are lower, and inland we don't know -- you have to predict what's going to happen inland; that's a little harder to do. That's where Mike's expertise is going to come in. So I would just like to say, this is really an important activity, and we look forward to coming back; we'll be back with the Harvard project in another month or so, but we just are so happy for Mike and Peter. Thank you. DR. SAVARESE: Thank you. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. MR. MILLER: Dennis Vasey will be followed by Stan Chrzanowski. MR. VASEY: I'm Dennis Vasey, 4398 Longshore Way, North Naples, Florida. Sea level rise, climate change, global warming, are they interrelated acts or cycles of various conditions? Pleistocene was the most recent ice age around 12,000 years ago, and it affected land areas and America's sea, the Gulf of Mexico. April 11, 2017 Page 118 French, British, and Spanish seafarer charts after Columbus where their survey change show roughly that the coast is exactly where it was then. That was in the early 1,500s. There are those who claim we see changes from glacial rebound. Whatever we see or science we use, haste is imprudent. There is time for data gathering and informed decisions consistent with how high and when. Thank you. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. MR. MILLER: The final speaker I have on this item is Stan Chrzanowski. MR. CHRZANOSWKI: Good afternoon, Commissioners. I'm not a scientist. I'm a Land Engineer. I would like to put in a little plug for the bathtub model. The dynamic model is nice; it shows when things flood when there's a hurricane. The dynamic model shows that water comes in, it goes out, you rebuild. The thing about the bathtub model, water does lay level. It works its way up streams if the water downstream gets higher, and the bathtub model says you're going to flood twice a day at high tide, okay. You don't rebuild when you flood twice a day at high tide. You just go somewhere else because there's nothing you can do about it. The dynamic model is great; you know, you can rebuild after it's gone. I'm happy with everything I've heard today. I'm impressed. We do need to know rate of rise, because that's going to affect a lot of things. Whether the water comes up six feet in 200 years or six feet in 50 years makes a big difference. We have some areas, Rookery Bay, Collier Seminole, the National Wildlife Refuge, Ten Thousand Islands, the Everglades. Mr. Vasey and I have been canoeing these areas for the last few years. When the water comes up, you can go all the way through the April 11, 2017 Page 119 National Wildlife Refuge. You're traveling through a foot of water a lot of the times. We see a lot of mangroves working their way inland that didn't used to be there. I don't know what this means. But what I'm curious about is -- and Dr. Sheng, I think, brought something up about this. I'm curious at what elevation of sea level rise do we start losing Collier Seminole and the National Wildlife Refuge and the Everglades. At what elevation do they turn into something different? And I'm sure Dr. Savarese is going to give us that number as part of his study. So thank you. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. DR. SAVARESE: Are we allowed to respond to that? CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yes, of course. DR. SAVARESE: I guess -- I don't know, Peter, do you have any comments? I can address that. DR. SHENG: I'll let you comment first. DR. SAVARESE: Okay. I'll take the last comment first because it's the one that's stuck clearly in my head. What's to happen with these natural areas that are coastal now. Obviously, the effects on those natural areas, the public spaces that are mostly in the eastern part of Collier County have the most profound and obvious effects of sea level rise that's occurred in recent history. Part of the project -- and, again, I don't think I'm divulging too much information here. Part of the project that we have planned looks at both the natural side of things, that eastern part of Collier County, as well as the urban side, and those two come together, like Peter had mentioned, because natural landscapes serve as attenuation factors. Mangroves, marshes are good, dunes, they're all good at attenuating the influence of sea level rise. So one of the inherent products that we will generate is to look at exactly how mangrove systems are likely to respond, salt marsh April 11, 2017 Page 120 systems are likely to respond, and how they can actually be used as part of an adaptation strategy even for the urban side of Collier County to try to inhibit and slow down the effects of sea level rise. So Stan was right, our project will provide that kind of information. I wasn't sure about the intention of Dennis Vasey's comments. I don't know if he's questioning whether sea level rise is coming up or not. What I can say -- and, actually, this is my area of expertise. While Peter understands the physics and the modeling, I am a historian of sea level rise, if you will, and have been studying how the Southwest Florida coast, as well as other regions throughout the southeast and the Bahamas, have responded to recent sea level rise. There's a reason why, since Columbus time, there hasn't been much change on those maps, and that's simply because the rate at which sea level rise has been coming up through that time of colonialization and westernization of North America is a time when sea level was coming up at a very modest rate. And when sea level rise rate is offset by the rate at which sediment comes in -- the Mississippi River is delivering sediment as fast as sea level is going up. You can sit on the same beach for generations and generations, okay. If the sea level rise rate begins to exceed the rate at which sediment comes in, then all of a sudden you have a changing dynamic, and that's really what has happened since industrialization, okay. We've reached a tipping point where many regions of our coastal settings around the world, that balance has shifted. The rate of sea level rise has exceeded the rate of offset. Those rates can be offset by other things as well. You can have crust being pushed up. So there's a whole lot of complicating factors. So those are all considered within the science community when addressing the pending potential problems of sea level rise in the future. April 11, 2017 Page 121 So I think ignoring -- if Mr. Vasey's point was just to ask you to be cautious, yes, be cautious. That's why I think it's important to have a variety of scenarios and planning options. If his intention was to tell you to not worry about it because it hasn't been an issue in recent history, I would caution you against that, so... CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. And that would -- I think that's -- MR. MILLER: Yes. That's all the speakers we had, ma'am. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Dr. Sheng, do you have anything to say? We're -- I think we're finishing up this agenda item. DR. SHENG: Yeah. So when we were preparing the proposal, quite a few groups provided very useful input in terms of what kind of questions we would like to have answered. So we have a list of questions related to urban systems, questions coming from people in Collier County and Naples City, we have questions from managers' financial assistance, like Rookery Bay and other natural resource agencies in the area. So we will try to answer most of those questions that are in the proposal, and including some of the questions that were asked just now. And I'm sure that next time when we come down, have a meeting, presentation, we'll touch upon those, and we will come to the users and refresh their memory about those questions, how they like to be answered, and then we'll work on, you know, products and tools that aim to answer those questions. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you very much. Commissioner McDaniel. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: You know what, you can just re-hit my light there. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. Commissioner Saunders? April 11, 2017 Page 122 COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Thank you. We've been talking about enhancing our beach renourishment funds, raising some additional tourist taxes for different purposes, including that one. Will your report give us some guidance on what type of beach renourishment projects would be the most beneficial? You know, you can have storm prevention -- or storm protection projects versus just beach renourishment. But will we have some insight into what would be best for the county in terms of that particular aspect? DR. SAVARESE: The short answer is yes. I've spoken -- or at least I've had an email communication with Gary McAlpin to tell him a little bit about, very vaguely, the kind of work we're doing. The work definitely addresses coastal vulnerability. It looks at geomorphological change of the coast; in other words, where are the areas that are most likely to experience extensive erosion, overwash, and scarping, where are the problem areas likely to be for dune destruction and beach loss. So our efforts will help, I think, wonderfully in trying to anticipate what beach management, dune management needs are likely in the future. I'm very excited, personally, about that. A colleague of mine, Felix Jones is his name, he's one of our faculty members at FGCU. He's part of our team, and he's taken on that part of the project, so... COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Thank you. MR. OCHS: Madam Chair, that's probably a good segue into the second part of this presentation. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yes. MR. OCHS: Mr. John Sorey, the Chair of your Coastal Advisory Council, is here to speak to you about their initiative with regard to beach resiliency. DR. SAVARESE: How do we turn this off? Bye, Peter. Thank you. April 11, 2017 Page 123 Thank you, Peter. DR. SHENG: Thank you. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Mayor Sorey. MAYOR SOREY: I guess Peter can watch the rest. Good afternoon, Commissioners. My privilege to be here with you today. As you know, I'm the Chair of the Coastal Advisory Committee. And the project we want to talk about, the science has already validated it. All you have to do is look at what happened in the northeast with Hurricane Sandy. But on behalf of the Coastal Advisory Board, we're delighted and want to thank the County Commission for making beaches a top priority. We all know beaches are always rated as the top reason to come to Naples by our visitors, our residents and, therefore, as stewards of these resources, they have to be a priority. Let's talk a little bit about beach renourishment and the program that we need to do for the background of the beach resiliency and the sustainability. And it's a relatively simple project. It's volume of sand versus Mother Nature's wave energy. The complicated part, as in most situations in life, is how do we complement it? You all know the history of dredging and truck hauls. When we did the first truck haul, the Naples City Council made the decision to only renourish to the 100-foot and 85-foot standard. So on day one, we were going to be at or below standard. And there was a lot of discussion about truck haul and the implications of that and that sort of thing. Fortunately, the project turned out to be very successful; no accidents, and millions of dollars spent in our local community. Since then we've continued to renourish by truck, which has the advantages of small-scale, great-quality sand because we can control April 11, 2017 Page 124 the particle size, no shell fragments, and no organic matter, and it does have a very positive impact on the economic wherewithal of our community. The disadvantage is the truck impact on our communities, and not only our communities, but also all the way up into Lee County. So you know I'm on record, if the economics are acceptable, that dredging is the best alternative. The dredge challenges are numerous. One, it's a small project. While we think 25- to $30 million is a big deal, in the dredge community it's a small project. It's also very complicated. Our sand source that we've developed and spent several hundred thousand dollars on has shells in it, so we have to screen the sand, and that creates problems for the dredgers. Because of our shallow waters, we have to offload about 5,000 feet out and pump it onto the beaches, and then we have to move the pipes up and down the beaches. And I know you've heard comments about getting our own dredge, partnering with other communities. And Gary and I spent a lot of time on these issues, but the reality is, none of this has been feasible thus far. So what do we need to do? What is feasible and what is required to protect our beaches and coastal communities into the immediate future? And I think we can piggyback beach renourishment on the project we just talked about and also on a beach resiliency effort. So what are we talking about? And it's really not sea level rise per se, because we're there now. We don't need another inch or foot of sea level rise. If we have a major storm, we're going to be impacted today, and our upland structures could very well be impacted. So with our revenue structure and tax base, what do we need to do? We need to broaden our beaches and protect our beaches now. So how do we do this on an incremental, complementary, practical, and proven approach that addresses the needs of beach renourishment and April 11, 2017 Page 125 tourism? We can build higher and wider beaches providing more mass to resist erosion without affecting our offshore coral, generally referred to as hard bottom. This is a proven approach. We've done a lot of modeling, and we've also done a lot on the ground looking at what our renourishment has done in the past. With higher and wider beaches, we could have wider dunes and coastal plantings. We can use coarser sand which has a tendency to resist the wave energy more. We could have offshore breakwaters, feeder beaches, and integrate existing structures to create continuous and comprehensive levels of protection. Practically this means, among other things, adding an average 50 foot of dry beach, increasing the dune height from five feet to six feet, and widening the dunes and plantings. This will benefit tourism, the cities, the property owners, and the public. It will also complement the sea level rise studies that we've heard about today. But it will require a dedicated and committed source of funding. Wider and higher beaches will require approximately 1 million cubic yards of sand and could cost 25 to $30 million. The current tourist tax allocation will not provide the resources to even renourish the beaches to the current standards if we do not have FEMA support. And every time we have a FEMA renourishment they tell us we're not going to get any money in the future. Fortunately, we've been able to preclude that. This is a long-term program that builds on our very successful beach renourishment program. A sustained funding source for coastal resiliency is above basic beach renourishment needs. Storm surge is real and is driven by sea level rise. We're asking support from the BCC to obtain regulatory approval for a higher and wider beach, to begin a coastal program, and allocate adequate funding to develop and properly fund beaches and resiliency program. Logic April 11, 2017 Page 126 tells you that more sand equals sustainability. Thank you for your time, and I look forward to your support to make our beaches and coast more resilient. This is a proven, practical, and sustainable approach. I'd be glad to answer any questions. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Mayor Sorey, I think you mentioned that the -- at the very beginning you said that the City Council approved the extent of the beach at 100 feet. I think you meant the County Commission, didn't you? MAYOR SOREY: No. The City County -- the County Commission approved the entire project, but the recommendation that we gave the City Council was to renourish with what we call advanced renourishment, more than the standard. Because of the concern about the truck impact, City Council, in their wisdom, reduced the amount of sand that we put on the Naples beaches. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Oh. MAYOR SOREY: Collier County, the Vanderbilt Beach, they did the advanced renourishment. We put less sand than was recommended by the Coastal Advisory Committee. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Oh, okay. Thank you for that. Thank you for that clarification. Commissioner McDaniel? COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes. And I'm not sure if it's for you, Mr. Sorey. When I was reading the resiliency report, I found it interesting that there's been a shift in the granular sand size designation. I used to and have produced beach sand -- MAYOR SOREY: Right. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: -- that has been utilized on our beaches in my other life, and I recall that there was specificity in those specs requiring similar grain size to what currently existed in our April 11, 2017 Page 127 naturally occurring beaches, and I just -- I find it interesting that there was -- I would like to know about that shift, and what kind of science, in fact, was behind making those -- I mean, rationale says that larger grain size would be more resilient. MAYOR SOREY: Right. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: But I'd just like to know when that shift actually transpired. MAYOR SOREY: Okay. I'll answer the easy questions, and I'll let Mr. McAlpin answer the hard ones. Gary, you want to answer that question? MR. McALPIN: Thank you. For the record, Gary McAlpin. In 2005 when we were planning the beach renourishment program that puts almost 700 million cubic yards of sand on the beach, what we wanted to do was go with a coarser grain size. And so we went from an average grain size, which is about .23 on the beaches, to .33, because -- millimeters. And so what we -- because what we wanted to do is have that coarser grain size hold the slope better so it didn't bleed over into the coral, and so that's when we did it. It was approved by DEP, and it's worked out very, very well since then. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay. And then the other question I had two -- CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: No, no. Go ahead. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: The other is, are there going to be -- are there going to be continuing efforts with regard to where, in fact, we're relegated to get our sand from from an offshore basis? I mean, at this particular stage of the game, we're relegated federally to go to designated sand sources that are quite some distance away that force us into a particular type of methodology for our beach renourishment efforts, and then because of economics, because those are very expensive -- the hopper dredge, as you and I have talked about April 11, 2017 Page 128 at length, as -- because that's very expensive, we're relegated into basically only truck haul methodology for restoration. MR. McALPIN: All of our relatively inexpensive sand sources that are close in have been exhausted. They were exhausted in the 1997 beach renourishment program. So our closest source of quality beach sand in the .33 range is off of Captiva, about 40 miles from here. We have also -- and that's our closest source of offshore sand, and we require a federal lease to get that sand, and we have it. So what we wanted to try to do is add another tool to our toolbox, and that's when we added truck haul to that, because we can control it. So we have two sources of sand; one off of Captiva, and one for truck haul. If we could find another source of sand that is close in -- and these sand searches are not inexpensive. A typical sand search will cost about a million dollars with all the documentation and monitoring and survey that is required. The only other source we have is down off of Cape Romano, and that sand source is not as good, and we haven't developed that at this point in time. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And I'm just -- I don't mean to be leading, but I just -- you know, I wanted to have a further -- because a lot of folks just think that you can dump the dredge out there and pump the sand back up on. I do find it rather interesting that the shell content intermingled with the sand disbursement is reduced because, naturally, the shells come on -- come on shore all the time. They're out there and naturally occurring. And when we're doing a beach renourishment project, there's actual size limitations on the shells and the particulates that come in with that as well. MR. McALPIN: We screen, Commissioner, all of our sand offshore. So we take the shells out. We screen it to three-quarters of April 11, 2017 Page 129 an inch so that's how we get the shells off, and we don't have to deal with that. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Well -- and the other side is, you can pump them back on. There are entire businesses after every storm where people go pick them up and you -- MAYOR SOREY: And you, obviously, weren't here when we had the rocks in the sand, so that's the major reason -- COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes, I was here, Mr. Sorey. MR. SOREY: Okay, okay. Well -- COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And you want to be careful when you're leading me because I have been on the handle of a dredge before. MAYOR SOREY: I understand. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I know how to operate those and what to do to not pump things you don't want on the beach. MAYOR SOREY: Yeah. Well, at any rate, we made the mistake of pumping a number of rocks on the beach, and that's when we went to the screening which -- and I got complaints; they don't want the rocks, but we want the shells, you're exactly right. So -- but to screen out the rocks, we have to also screen out the shells. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Right. MR. OCHS: Commissioners, if I might just ask Gary to speak to the schedule for this type of change -- CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yes. MR. OCHS: -- and design with respect to the design and the permitting -- CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: That's wonderful. MR. OCHS: -- and time that it might take to get all of that finalized. MR. McALPIN: So we have in place the permit which would allow us to go an additional 50 foot dry beach. What we have to do at April 11, 2017 Page 130 this point in time is get the template changed -- the renourishment template changed with DEP to allow us to go further out. On all of our documentation -- we monitor the beaches every year, and all the documentation that we have recently has said that we could build a wider beach out to 50 foot, to get at a 50-foot dry beach, so that's in place. What we'll have to do is work with DEP to convince them that there's not going to be impact to the near-shore hard bottom, and then if they believe that there is impact then there will be issues of mitigation that they will probably try to assess on us. But that's the one issue. If we embark on this program right now, it's going to take us, to get that notice to proceed, probably about two years, okay, for when we look at this activity. And what we wanted to do first, before we start anything like that, we want to work with our agencies, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Florida Department of Environmental Protection, to go over our plans and make sure that we get a very positive and strong "yes" that they're going to permit this program if we provide them all the information that we want to. So we would do that first, and then we would -- assuming we get a positive response from that, and we bring it back to the Board and you guys approve it, then we would move out and go forward with the permitting program, and that -- to average about an additional 50 foot of beach. Now, that's not 50 foot everywhere. That's average. Some places are going to be wider, and some places are going to be narrower throughout the beaches. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I'm confused. I'm sorry, a hundred feet plus 50? MR. McALPIN: No, no. We have a -- we would add 50 foot of dry beach, Commissioner, okay. April 11, 2017 Page 131 CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: To what's existing right now? MR. McALPIN: To what is existing to the dry beach that is existing right now, okay. So our standard is 100 foot for Naples and Vanderbilt Beach and 85 foot for Parkshore. That is not all dry beach. That's a combination of dune vegetation and dry beach. So what we would do is add 50 foot additional dry beach to what we have out there right now, and that's what we would be working with the agencies to do. MR. OCHS: Go up another. MR. McALPIN: The other thing we would look to do with this is we would raise it up a foot so that we would have a higher dune. And with raising it up a foot and making it 50 foot wider, we would take 20, 25 feet of that 50 foot, and we would do dune plantings, because the dunes are really what the mass in the dunes -- the plantings, the roots are what really protect your inland structures and your coastal structures when you get storm surge. So this is not -- this complements everything that Mike Savarese talked about with coastal with the sea level rise, but it specifically deals with where is our biggest threat on the coast, and our biggest threat on the coast is from storm surge. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: It's interesting, because if we were able to secure a planning firm, and with the three years of the study for the NOAA grant and with the Savarese/Sheng partnership, all this is coming together at the right time. MR. McALPIN: Right. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: It's extraordinary. Things like this don't usually happen. MR. McALPIN: What we would try to do is that we could move -- we could move independently with the coastal resiliency, building wider and higher beaches, because that's already proven. Look at what April 11, 2017 Page 132 happened in Upstate New York with the beaches up there in New Jersey. The ones that survived were the ones that had strong, robust dunes and dune plantings up there. So our program, as we see it, would complement what Mike is doing. We would be able to put in the low-hanging fruit right now, the things that we need it to do. You know, the probability of DEP granting us any wider or higher beaches than what we've just laid out is probably very small because it would impact the hard bottom if we wanted to try to go wider than 50 foot or higher than six foot. That's not -- that's not reasonable. So we're kind of in that sweet spot right now, which is what we can do and what is permittable and doable, and that's how we look at it. But it would definitely complement everything that Dr. Savarese and Florida Gulf Coast are doing. MR. SOREY: And, Madam Chair, Dr. Savarese and I were just talking in the fact that I think as part of his science he could do some analysis of beach mass and impact on upland impact from a storm surge. So I think that's possibly something we could weave into this program. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: And we didn't mention Marco Island. We've got the City of Naples; we've got Parkshore. What about Marco Island? MR. McALPIN: Marco Island is very blessed. They have wide, wide, wide beaches at this point in time. Marco Island will be a different program completely than what we're looking at here. We would have to work with Marco Island. And if we had a coastal resiliency program, you know, we would -- Marco Island would be one piece of this. I mean, this is the first step that we would look at. Certainly we would do something at Marco, but we haven't studied that yet. That's not to preclude them from the program. It's just to come. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. April 11, 2017 Page 133 MR. McALPIN: They don't have the same problems we do because of the width of their beaches. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Good. DR. SAVARESE: Am I allowed to make a comment? CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Of course, on the mike. DR. SAVARESE: This -- I'm so pleased to hear that part of this resiliency plan involved increasing dune height and dune width along with elevating and widening the beaches. That makes good sense. I think anything that our work determines, it's going to be clear that dune height is going to be the most important influencing factor on how vulnerable a section of a beach is. So to invest money in beach renourishment where you're also fortifying the dunes, increasing the dune height, vegetating the dunes makes good, sound sense. So sounds like a great idea to me, so -- for what it's worth. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Before he goes away, I do -- CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yes, go ahead. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: -- I did hit my light there. Dr. Savarese, I just wanted to let you know that I really appreciated the time that you took with me several months ago. And the science that you shared with me didn't fall on deaf ears. And at our last MPO meeting, if it hasn't trickled through the weeds yet to you, I suggested to our DOT with regard to the potential of a PD&E study with regard to -- for the bridges out on the East Trail, because you had shared with me your grad student study work with regard to the loss of grass flats and the differentiation between the east and west side of the Fakahatchee Canal, that all sunk in. DR. SAVARESE: Excellent. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And while I was talking to staff or to the DOT, we're to have a look at the widening of those bridges, April 11, 2017 Page 134 which will help us from a pedestrian standpoint and, while we're doing that, widening them east and west will enhance the sheet flow out of the new restoration efforts up in the Picayune and Fakahatchee. DR. SAVARESE: Fantastic. Thank you. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes, sir. DR. SAVARESE: Appreciate it. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Madam Chairman, I have a group of citizens waiting in the back for me at 2 o'clock, so -- CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- I'm going to depart. I'm so sorry. But I'll be back there, you know. If you need me, I'll be -- CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: We know where to find you. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah. You can find me. If you still are continuing on after my meeting leaves, I'll be back. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: All right. Very good. So -- yes, Commissioner Saunders. (Commission Fiala left the boardroom for the remainder of the meeting.) COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I think this is a question for the County Manager. We have a lot of significant policy decisions to make dealing with the tourist tax. One of them is do we change the percentages that are currently allocated for different uses. And I think there's been some suggestion by board members that that may be something that the Board would consider doing. In addition, we have the fifth cent issue coming up with the amateur sports facility, and I think that -- and this is a question of process and timing. I think it would be better to make those policy decisions more quickly than it would be to delay those, because the more money we're able to collect and bankroll, the better off we're going to be both for the amateur sports facility as well as for building April 11, 2017 Page 135 up some funds for additional beach renourishment. So I guess it's a question for the Manager and question for the Commission in terms of timing. What are your thoughts on some of these difficult issues that we have to work through? MR. OCHS: Sure. It's a good question. Just to refresh the board's memory, the last time you spoke about the tourist tax and the allocation, you directed the staff to have the chair of the Board write a letter to the chair of the TDC asking the TDC to evaluate a reallocation, and they are in the throes of doing that, Commissioner. They're scheduled for a public workshop on that issue on the 18th of this month with the hopes of quickly concluding their analysis and their recommendations back to the Board. So, you know, I would expect you to have something back from the TDC in terms of a recommendation on reallocation probably by the middle of May at the latest, and we're back -- we're due to be back in front of you in early June with hopefully some refined numbers on the sports complex and more precise estimates of the cost of that project and the debt service financing and what allocations would be required out of a fifth penny for that. So it could come together here in the next 60 days if that's fast enough for the Board. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Certainly in terms of my thoughts, that's more than fast enough. I just wanted to make sure that we weren't sitting here six months from now still talking about allocations -- MR. OCHS: Sure. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: As long as the Tourist Development Council is moving that along, it's -- MR. OCHS: Having said all that, of course, whatever you do is going to require an amendment to your tourist development ordinance, and that requires two trips to the Board and a supermajority vote of the April 11, 2017 Page 136 Commission. So, you know, we have to advertise that in advance, and hopefully before you break in July, we can bring that back in front of you. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: We've got to do it before then. MR. OCHS: Pardon me? CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: We have to do it before then. MR. OCHS: Yes, ma'am. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I mean, we have to, because there's too much out there. We have -- Mr. Staros is here, and he's very concerned. I mean, he represents the two Ritz-Carltons and the Marco Beach Marriott, and he's very concerned about this. I think it's very important. These are very, very important. I keep using that word, but very, very important issues that we as a community have to decide. So I'm not suggesting we rush it, but we -- there's too much uncertainty right now. I want to make sure that in this discussion of the allocation or reallocation that we separate the subject of adding a penny to the reallocation. I think they have to be separated. I don't think we should presume that you're going to have a vote of a supermajority vote here to add another penny. So when we're talking about reallocation, let's deal with what we have right now and then discuss it and then maybe bring in the additional penny. MR. OCHS: If the Board wants me to provide that guidance to the Tourist Development Council, I can. An alternative may be to ask them for a reallocation recommendation on both the current 4 percent and a 5 percent scenario, so... CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: And I don't have a problem with that -- MR. OCHS: You know, the Board has indicated as recently as the last meeting that they were committed to a fifth penny, so I think we should get some recommendations on an allocation scheme that April 11, 2017 Page 137 includes all five pennies. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I think the comment that was made at each time that we've talked about the amateur sports facility is let's don't have staff continue to evaluate amateur sports unless we're committed to raising the fifth cent; I think we've all agreed to that. Then the next question was, do you need the entire $5 million, $5.2 million bonded, or can you bond, you know, $4 million -- MR. OCHS: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: -- which would leave a million dollars left over for other purposes. So I think they're intertwined, so I think we have to deal with both of them. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Madam Chair? CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yes, go ahead. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And, personally, I think we can do both, the direction to the TDC to have a discussion about the current prioritizations of the allocations of the taxes that exist and find out if there's any adjustment. And that wasn't clearing my throat for any other reason than clearing my throat. But the -- find out if there's an opportunity to make some adjustments in the priorities of those expenditures. I think we could ask that to begin in short order as staff's going through analysis with regard to the extra one cent, and both can be happening at the same time. I mean, you're correct; necessarily they're two separate issues, and I think personally, speaking for myself, we need to send a message to our residents that the beaches are a priority for us, for us as a community. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay, good. Because, I mean, we've all seen that pie chart which says the majority of the four cents is going to advertising, and I think we have to look clearly at ROI on that and discuss how we're going to reapportion the four pennies and then know where that lies in terms of the beaches to determine what else is needed April 11, 2017 Page 138 for beach resiliency planning and long term as well as the sports complex. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Well, if I might say, you know, again, it's a direction from this board to our TDC as far as prioritization with regard to the management of the TDT tax currently as it exists. Is there an opportunity for a portion of that to be relegated for a bonding instrument to allow for some of this widening and heightening of the existing beaches and such? And I'm not saying that's what we do, I'm just -- but I think we should give -- I would prefer that we give direction to them to give us an analysis of the priorities of how they're allocating those funds now. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Good. So which means what? MR. OCHS: So are we allocating four or five? CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Well, no. I think we need to look at the reallocations -- I think we need to examine the reallocation of the four pennies and then determine -- get an input from the TDC on that and then assess what that brings in on the annual basis and then to bring in -- and then to talk about the fifth penny. I think we owe it to the public. There's a lot of question out there. You know, when you talk about adding a penny, everyone says forget it, you think. Just put it -- forget about the museums, forget about this, forget about that. I think we owe it to them to do it, and it doesn't means it has to spend six months doing it, but I think we have to look at it in those two areas. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: If I -- Burt had his hand up, and then me. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I'm sorry. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: No, no. I'm just listening. I'll wait until you're finished. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I think we can do both. It would be my preference that we give direction to the TDC to give us -- April 11, 2017 Page 139 to have a look at and give us a set of priorities with regard to -- and alternatives as to how to use the current four cents. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yes. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And then the additional penny we seem to be in concert on, assuming the finances work together and we can mesh the sustainability of the utilization of those funds and such. I think we can -- you've got positive direction from this board to work on both at the same time. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: That's exactly what I was going to say, so perfect. And if it turns out that we have a project, an amateur sports facility that doesn't need an entire penny, then that's fine; there's other uses for it, including beach renourishment. MR. OCHS: Just remember, one of those four pennies can only be used for destination marketing and promotions. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: We're aware of that; well, I am anyway. MR. OCHS: So you're splitting three pennies, not four, on that reallocation. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Right. That's something that the TDC can come back to us on when we're going through the -- and, basically, we're just asking for an adjustment in the prioritization. Personally, I'd like to see that discussion opened up. MR. OCHS: Yeah. We will convey that clearly to the chair. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Good. MR. OCHS: Who is not in the room right now. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: She's off in another meeting. MR. OCHS: Yes. We'll let her watch the video. That will be easier. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: There you go. I think we do have a TDC member here, so... COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Madam Chair, on these items April 11, 2017 Page 140 that we just discussed, I don't know that you need a motion. I guess we just accept the report and -- is that correct? MR. OCHS: It appears as a presentation item, sir, yes. I don't think there's any specific action required. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: And you want us -- and you're clear on the direction of what we're asking? We don't need to make a motion? MR. OCHS: Yeah. I'm going to have Mr. McAlpin begin a preliminary study on what it would take to work with the permitting agencies to get some decisions on some of the elements that he just described that go along with this coastal resiliency concept. But we don't need any specific board direction or authority to do that at this point. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. Good. Do we have some speakers, Troy? MR. MILLER: No. We actually heard the speakers earlier. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. So no speakers. All right. Very good. Mr. Staros, would you like to speak? MR. STAROS: Sure. Give me a microphone, I love it. I'm Ed Staros. I represent the Ritz-Carltons here in Naples, Florida. And for those of you who don't know, Ritz-Carlton is owned by Marriott International, so we're one of the 30 brands at Marriott International. So the Marco Island Marriott is part of the family as well. I would like to let you know that the hospitality industry is 100 percent against the fifth penny; 100 percent. I've talked to Michael Watkins, third-generation hospitality family and so forth. I've talked to Rick Medwedeff, myself. I've had some informal talks with the fellow general managers. You have to look at it a little differently than a penny. Think of it as you're a meeting planner that's about to bring a group to Naples, April 11, 2017 Page 141 Florida, and the meeting planner gets a set amount of money that he or she may have. And the best example would be a typical group coming to Collier County of reasonable size would be about $200,000. One hundred thousand dollars of that would be the room tax, the bed -- paying for your room and accommodations, et cetera, and the other $100,000 would be for the airfare and delivery of getting people to and from the airport and the food and the beverage and the consumption of what they'll have during their -- during their stay. So let's just assume that's the normal just for the sake of this analogy. If you have $100,000, 4 percent of that is already gone. The meeting planner has $96,000 to spend on his or her program. A fifth penny means $95,000. There's an extra -- you know, all of a sudden there's money drying up for the purpose of what the whole meeting is, and that is to come to the area to learn from whatever the meeting is bringing. So we don't look at it as a penny. We look at it as an additional percent less money being spent in Collier County, less room accommodations, less food, less beverage, et cetera. We also agree with what I just heard, that we would love to chat about the allocation of the 4 pennies because, quite frankly, nobody in the hospitality industry -- well, the fourth -- nobody in the industry is happy with the present allocation, okay. So I think that's a wide-open subject that I'd love to get more of my colleagues involved with and the TDC because, quite frankly, it doesn't make a lot of sense. We in the hospitality industry look at the number one purpose of the bed tax is for beach renourishment, and then the number two reason is for the marketing of the area. And say, well, why marketing? There are so many more destinations now and so many new fun, wonderful places to go to, one has to market to be able to keep your -- to keep -- to keep growing. I shared this with Penny when we were chatting a couple of days April 11, 2017 Page 142 ago -- I had an appointment with her. I spent a lot of time -- I first -- I've been with Ritz-Carlton now for 34 years, and the first 16 I spent in Atlanta, Georgia, and I got to know many of the executives of Coca-Cola. And one of the senior executives that I had lunch with one day, we were chatting about advertising money, and he shared with me over lunch, he said, Ed, if we eliminated advertising -- this is many years ago, at least 25 years ago. If we eliminated advertising for 30 days, you never saw a sign, a billboard, an advertisement, you never saw a banner at a sports facility, et cetera, in those 30 days, we would lose between 20 and 25 percent of our customers, and that's a name pretty well known, Coca-Cola. And so they believe in the amount of advertising, always keeping it front of mind, front of mind, front of mind so you always think of a Coca-Cola when you go to the grocery store. That was just -- that was 25 years ago. I believe the same; if you don't continuously look at and remind your customers that have been here before and may not have been here for a while or want to bring a new guest to the area, you need to advertise. So those are the two main issues of the present formula; however, other than the beach renourishment, which should get the lion's share of the money -- you heard it from me. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: What is a lion's share, sir? MR. STAROS: Well, if I had it my way, if I could just, you know, eliminate all this and just write an edict, I would do 60 percent to beach renourishment, 40 percent to marketing, period, because I don't believe -- I believe the museums are a wonderful thing, but I don't think they should be funded by a bed tax. Operating expenses shouldn't be funded by a bed tax. That should be in another fund of some sort, in a general fund, et cetera. But those are the two areas that I would vote for, and I would be April 11, 2017 Page 143 very pleased that the 60 percent of whatever is being collected, let it be two, three, four, five cents, would go to beach renourishment, and 40 percent would go to future marketing. I'd love to chat with all of you on it in more depth, but I don't want to take up any more of your time today. But I'm very serious that -- and we're the ones that collect it, you know, and nobody that's collecting it wants one fraction of a penny to go to a sports facility even though we also all agree that a sports facility would be a nice thing for the community. Thank you. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Thank you. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. Item #9B ORDINANCE 2017-12: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 04-41, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, WHICH INCLUDES THE COMPREHENSIVE LAND REGULATIONS FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, BY PROVIDING FOR: SECTION ONE, RECITALS; SECTION TWO, FINDINGS OF FACT; SECTION THREE, ADOPTION OF AMENDMENTS TO THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, MORE SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE FOLLOWING: CHAPTER SIX - INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS AND ADEQUATE PUBLIC FACILITIES REQUIREMENTS, INCLUDING SECTION 6.05.01 WATER MANAGEMENT REQUIREMENTS, ADDING SECTION 6.05.03 STORMWATER PLANS FOR SINGLE- FAMILY DWELLING UNITS, TWO-FAMILY DWELLING UNITS, AND DUPLEXES; SECTION FOUR, CONFLICT AND SEVERABILITY; SECTION FIVE, INCLUSION IN THE April 11, 2017 Page 144 COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE; AND SECTION SIX, EFFECTIVE DATE – ADOPTED MR. OCHS: Madam Chair, that takes us to Item 9B on this afternoon's agenda. This is an item that was continued from the March 28th, 2017, board meeting. This is a proposed Land Development Code amendment dealing with stormwater management and water management requirements. Mr. Bosi will present. And I will also add, Commissioners, that there is a companion item related to this item that was moved off of the consent agenda at the request of Commissioner Solis this morning, and that is Item 16A8 that is now Item 11B. This is the administrative code that provides the implementation procedures for these Land Development Code amendments. So after we hear the Land Development Code amendment, we can go right to the admin code. Mike? MR. BOSI: Thank you, County Manager. Mike Bosi, Planning and Zoning Director. We're here again today on a continuation from an item that was presented to the Board of County Commissioners on the 28th of March provided an overview of the amendment in terms of how it affects the individual lots and how it would require, after a certain threshold, engineered stormwater plans for those lots. There was concern raised by the dais about vetting it with the stakeholders out in the Estates. On April 5th, Jeremy Frantz, myself, Matt McLean went out and spoke to the Golden Gate Civic Association Executive Committee, provided an overview of the -- of the amendment; about an hour long discussion at the end. They supported the amendment, but they wanted me to carry a message as well that a comprehensive approach to water management in the Estates is something that is direly needed and that they would, April 11, 2017 Page 145 you know, support this amendment but support that larger wholesale approach to water management and the need for agency-wide collaboration on that issue. With that, any questions the Board may have. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner McDaniel? COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I'll move for approval. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I'll second that. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And I want to -- for discussion purposes, if I may, I just want to compliment staff and thank staff for doing as I asked. You spread it out across the dais, but it was I who asked for you to -- that I pulled that the last time, and you did reach out. I had some folks that reacted poorly to the initial language, and you did take the time to reassure and let them know. I want to thank staff for going forward with that. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Good. There's a motion on the floor and a second. All those in favor, say aye. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Aye. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Aye. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Those opposed, like sign. (No response.) CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Let the record show that a supermajority approved it, four votes. Thank you. Item #11B RESOLUTION 2017-73: AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 2004-66, AS AMENDED, THAT CREATED AN ADMINISTRATIVE CODE FOR COLLIER COUNTY, TO AMEND EXHIBIT “B,” April 11, 2017 Page 146 ADMINISTRATIVE CODE FOR LAND DEVELOPMENT, BY AMENDING CHAPTER FOUR, ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES, MORE SPECIFICALLY TO ADD SECTION M, STORMWATER PLAN; AMENDING CHAPTER EIGHT, PUBLIC NOTICE, MORE SPECIFICALLY TO AMEND SECTION F, STAKEHOLDER OUTREACH MEETING FOR GOLF COURSE CONVERSION (SOM); AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE – ADOPTED MR. OCHS: Commissioners, Item 11B was the administrative code item that was moved off consent agenda at Commissioner Solis' request. This is the item that was implement the Land Development -- excuse me -- Land Development Code amendments that you just authorized as well as those related to the golf course conversion item that you approved at the last meeting. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner Solis? COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Yes. And I understand that we have already -- this is the second reading on this particular ordinance, but in going back through it, I just wanted to make sure that at least I was clear on some of the things that are contained in there, and one of them that I really was not sure I understood was this web-based -- what is it, web-based visual survey? MS. CILEK: Correct, yes. Caroline Cilek with Collier County's Growth Management Department, and I'd be happy to elaborate on one of the -- COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Please. MS. CILEK: -- stakeholder outreach methods, which is a web-based visual survey. MR. OCHS: This is related to which amendment? MS. CILEK: This is related to the golf course conversion process. And, as you know, obtaining public input from the April 11, 2017 Page 147 stakeholders is the foundation of this process. And we are going about that in two different ways, and the first is a stakeholder outreach meeting, and the second is the web-based visual survey. And the stakeholder outreach is a meeting; two meetings required; it's a publicly noticed requirement. And in the letter that would go out to the stakeholders would be a link, a user-friendly link to a survey. And the intent of the survey is to provide individuals who are not here in Collier County when that meeting is to take place an opportunity to look at what the applicant is proposing. It is visual in the sense that we wanted them to share information that would be shared at the stakeholder outreach meeting, visuals of the conceptual development plan. It is something that we have identified in the LDC that you all adopted in the last meeting as well as detailed in the administrative code which is before you today for final review. The web-based visual survey, a similar goal as a stakeholder outreach meeting, obtain input. One of the requirements is to allow for additional comments to be made, and the general goal is to be able to obtain input from people who can't be at the meeting, seasonal residents, perhaps, or individuals who have family or work obligations. I have an example of it -- of one, if you'd like me to put it on the overhead. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Please. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: While she's bringing it up, may I ask my question? CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yes. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And it's not in lieu of the processes of the NIM or notice. This is in addition to allow people to participate in the notification process. It's not in lieu of -- MS. CILEK: Correct. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: -- the requisites of the NIMs April 11, 2017 Page 148 and such. Good. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: And one of the reasons I'm curious about this is, as you were saying, this is an effort to address or give people that maybe aren't here or can't attend the neighborhood information meetings the ability to provide some input. We've had a lot of discussions that that's very important, especially in the context of the golf course conversion. So I'd just like to look through it. If you could just give us a quick run-through, I'd appreciate it. MS. CILEK: Sure. We prepared this for the Planning Commission to take a look at. We've had it available on our website and in the backup materials. And I'll scroll through here. So we have 10 different questions all with the same format, and we're looking, in this example, asking people their level of support. And this is just an example. We were, you know, looking -- COMMISSIONER SOLIS: You just made this up for -- MS. CILEK: We did. We created it in a couple hours. It was very easy to do. Survey Monkey. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Are we currently doing this already? MS. CILEK: No. This is a new idea, and we felt that it was something -- we wanted a robust process for the golf course conversion, and to do that we wanted to make sure that people had opportunities to provide input in different ways, and so we wanted to do a survey in addition to the stakeholder outreach meetings. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Good. MR. OCHS: Keep going. MS. CILEK: Sure. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And this is available online, is it, this example? MS. CILEK: Yep. This is our example. It's available on the Land Development Code website. This is one way it could be done. April 11, 2017 Page 149 There is flexibility built into how an applicant could do a survey. There's some general guidelines that are in the admin code. I'd be happy to put those up as well for you, but it's just another mechanism to obtain input and feedback. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: And who will be preparing the -- MS. CILEK: The applicant. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: The applicant? Okay. MS. CILEK: And some of those general guidelines would be reviewed by staff to make sure it meets those, and then they would be able to go forward, yep. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I like it. MS. CILEK: Thanks. MR. OCHS: So the specific recommendations with regard to the administrative code item that's on the agenda. MS. CILEK: So with -- the administrative code is before you today because we, at the last meeting, discussed adding a time -- like a month limitation of when they could have the stakeholder outreach meetings. So I can pull that up for you. And that was the only change that was discussed at the last meeting, so I believe today I was just to provide information about the web-based visual survey. MR. OCHS: I think the Board indicated that it would be from November 1st to April 1st, and the staff was recommending it go through the end of April. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: An extra 30 days. MS. CILEK: Yes. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Through the Easter holiday. MS. CILEK: I didn't want to misrepresent the dates. So, yes, it is November 1st through April 30th, and that is a six-month time period. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I like the idea that the applicant creates this survey a lot. I mean, that just takes it away from any kind of April 11, 2017 Page 150 tampering by staff or any kind of bias one way or the other if the applicant's doing it. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: I just wonder if there is going to be some direction from staff as to what needs to be in it just in case you don't get a survey one question. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I watched the faces of my colleagues to the left when I said there's no bias in it, and they both smiled like, oh, yeah, right. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: When it's being done by the applicant, there's some bias. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yeah. Well, the bias could be the other way. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Right. So there's -- okay. MS. CILEK: So at the bottom of that page are details. There are three bullet points about what we're looking to have in the web-based visual survey. And as long as they meet those three bullet points, they can release their survey. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: And staff will review to make sure that the survey has addressed each one of those. Okay. MS. CILEK: Yes. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Okay. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And it is an enhancement to the processes that are already in place. This is just an additional robust, I believe was the description, of an addition to the information process. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: All right. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: And my only -- my last comment would be the change in the time frame for the NIM specifically for golf course conversions. I mean, there's some concern out there that maybe this is headed in the direction of we're going to require all NIMs to be within a certain time frame, and I just want to make sure that what we're talking about today is specifically just for golf course April 11, 2017 Page 151 conversions. MS. CILEK: Correct. So for -- the time limitation would apply to stakeholder outreach meetings, which is a unique type of meeting only for golf course conversions, and they're -- the NIMs is a separate issue. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Right, right. But we're just talking about the stakeholder meetings. MS. CILEK: Today we are talking about the stakeholder outreach meetings for a golf course conversion. MR. OCHS: The larger NIM issue will be on your next agenda. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Not if I can help it. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Madam Chair, are you ready for a motion on this item? CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I am; I am very much. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Mr. Solis? COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Yes, I am. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I'll make a motion to approve Agenda Item 11B, the recommendation to approve a resolution amending Ordinance No. 2004-66. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: I'll second that. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Any discussion? Mr. McDaniel. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: No. My light's been on for a while. I leave it on in case I decide to say something. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. We have a motion on the floor and a second to approve this -- the item as presented by staff. All those in favor, say aye. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Aye. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Aye. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Those opposed, like sign. April 11, 2017 Page 152 (No response.) CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: It carries unanimously. Thank you very much, four votes. Item #15 STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS MR. OCHS: Commissioners, that brings us to Item 15, staff and commission general communications. I have nothing today, Commissioners. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. MR. KLATZKOW: Nothing. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: County Attorney? MR. MILLER: Nothing for me. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Ms. Kinzel, nothing? MS. KINZEL: No, nothing for me. MR. BROCK: I had to come over here and see if you-all were really meeting. Things have been so quiet and peaceful and wonderful. And everybody asks me, you know, what's going on? Nothing's happening. So I had to come over here and see if you-all were really meeting. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Do you have anything you'd like to comment on? MR. BROCK: No. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: You just had to make sure we're here, right? MR. BROCK: Just had to make sure you're here. You know, when nothing happens, you know, you begin to wonder after a while. But this is a good thing, folks. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I was just going to -- on the April 11, 2017 Page 153 contraire; there's a lot happening. MR. BROCK: Well, nothing that I am involved in. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: When Crystal is here, everything goes nice and smoothly. MR. BROCK: That's right. Okay. I gotcha. MS. KINZEL: Thank you. That's raise worthy, right. MR. BROCK: It is very nice to see a congenial board. I will tell you that just sitting here. It's like day and night. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: We're happy to be here, sir. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: We are. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner McDaniel, nothing? COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Oh, no, no. I have three. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Oh. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And I'll be brief. Number one, I would like to have a brief discussion with my colleagues. I have gotten approval with staff to bring forward an initiative to assist with Conversation Collier, an establishment of a not-for-profit organization called Friends of Conservation Collier when we had -- when we had the discussion several months ago, there was a nice gentleman that came to the podium, had the Green Bay -- if you'll recall the Green Bay Packers T-shirt on and talked about how they sold stock at $500 a share, and he actually volunteered to be our first shareholder. And if I could get somewhat of a head nod out of my colleagues, I would like to give direction to staff to construct a Timex, not a Rolex, not-for-profit organization. And it's a -- when I say Timex, I mean -- I don't want to overcomplicate the issue. These are nonvoting ownership shareholders who can voluntarily contribute to Friends of Conservation Collier, and the revenues generated will go to the Acquisitions Committee for future acquisitions. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Wouldn't that be through Community Foundation? I don't know if we can do that. April 11, 2017 Page 154 COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I think it's a good idea to have a not-for-profit created for that purpose. I'm not so sure we want the county to do it. There's all kinds of reporting issues and recordkeeping, and I'm just not sure. That would be something for the County Attorney to opine on, but -- COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I was talking to Crystal. Crystal's over here adding her two cents in, but she hasn't said anything. MS. KINZEL: No, sorry. The Board as a county can take and accept contributions for multiple purposes. We have had some concerns and issues when a separate non-profit that's really related to the governmental entity, and then whose books and who audits and who reporting (sic) and whether a component unit of government, depending on who decides the board (sic). It really makes it very complex. If anyone wants to contribute to Conservation Collier, I'm not aware of anything that keeps them from doing that just by presenting funds to the Board. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And I would like to maybe readdress the spirit behind what it is, in fact, that I'm looking to do and proposing here. And this is regarding -- and I have had conversations with our County Manager and our County Attorney, and this is legal, and we do have other Friends organizations within the county that is -- the process here is to incentivize the philanthropic community to voluntarily come out and participate in support of our conservation efforts through this organization called Friends of Conservation Collier. Oh, well, here we go. MR. OCHS: Commissioners, while the Clerk's coming up, just in terms of full disclosure, I think the distinction, as I understand, through April 11, 2017 Page 155 my discussions with Commissioner McDaniel, your normal Friends groups raise money in whatever denominations they raise. And then, as Crystal said, they turn them over to dedicated trust funds that are operated for the benefit of those departments. I think what the Commissioner has in mind, and correct me, sir, if I'm wrong, is issue a share at a fixed price to anyone who wants to buy, quote-unquote, a share for a fixed price. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: That's correct, and that was -- the gentleman that came to us to the podium said -- raised his hand, said he was going to be the first donor for $500 for Share 000001. MR. OCHS: The best analogy I can -- I'm sorry, Dwight. The best analogy I can recall for something similar was when we had a not-for-profit organization selling bricks for the Freedom Memorial. Crystal, you know, that was not a county group, but it was a not-for-profit. MS. KINZEL: Correct. There is, obviously, a construct that works but, as you know, we went down a path a little far on the bricks. So, absolutely, conversation is important, and we can come up with a legal mechanism. MR. BROCK: The only point I want to make -- CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Would you please identify yourself, sir. MR. BROCK: My name is Dwight Brock. I'm the Clerk of Courts. The point that I want to make is that, as we all know, governments are not private entities. The bureaucracy associated with governments far exceed those of private entities. And you run into the problems when you start basically co-mingling the function. If you're going to create a private entity, create the private entity and have it do whatever it's going to do. If it's going to be a part of government, then you need to create it as a part of government, and it will go through all of the bureaucracies of any other part of April 11, 2017 Page 156 government. And that's where we run into the problem is when you begin trying to commingle those two functions, and I come in and start looking. Okay. And -- COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: You're welcome -- MR. BROCK: -- the very simple solution to that is just keep them separate. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: You're welcome to come look. And if you'll recall at the beginning of my statement, I talked about a Timex, not a Rolex. This isn't a very complex process. This is just an initiative. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Why wouldn't you do a -- why wouldn't you just have people who are interested and do it privately and then use the Community Foundation as the holder of the money, or buying of the bricks or holder of the shares? Why wouldn't you do it like that? MR. BROCK: They charge a service fee. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yeah, but they also guarantee the money's spent for what it's supposed to be spent for. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: So are we. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Change -- you may not be here. That's why the Community Foundation is so important because what they do is they become the -- COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Intermediary. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: -- intermediary between people who want to give to organizations or government and to make sure the money's spent the way it's supposed to be spent. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: If everybody doesn't like the idea, then we don't -- it was just an idea that I had to look to support it. I don't want to make it more complicated. I don't want to make it with April 11, 2017 Page 157 bureaucracy. That's why I said a Timex, not a Rolex, and I specified, simple organization with the monies generated to go to the Acquisitions Committee that's already an advisory committee to this board for those acquisitions, so there's not a lot -- it's all transparent. There's not a lot of bureaucracy that travels along with that. I thought I was fairly clear, Commissioners. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: I mean, I -- how we get there is not, you know, an issue, but I think we're still in just the conceptual stage here. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Sure. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: I like the idea. And I like -- you know, they do cloud funding for all sorts of things, you know. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Right. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: So I don't know that that's -- COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: It's not brain surgery. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Yeah. I think there's some -- CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yeah, but for government. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Well, I mean -- right. Whether or not it's a department or a subdivision of the county, I'm not sure that that's -- because it does make it more complicated for whoever's doing this, but -- COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I have had lengthy conversations with our County Manager and our County Manager with regard to the legalities and such, and there -- and they asked me to bring it forward today to see if we could get a head nod for them to pursue this. Now, if there is not a head nod, we'll go do something different. What are those two doing? COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Madam Chair? I like the idea of some entity. I'm a little concerned about the government creating it, and part of the reason is -- you know, if we talk a little bit about the April 11, 2017 Page 158 recordkeeping and all that, but part of it is, you know, if you're a petitioner in front of the County Commission and you're a contributor to our philanthropic entity, does that put pressure on people to want to contribute? So I'm just a little concerned. I agree that we should -- it's nice to take a look at it, but I think there's some issues there that we just have to be careful of. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: How about if for now, then I will go back and consult with our staff and bring forward a little more specificity. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I think you can feel comfortable that there's a majority to go forward with it. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Just in how we get there from here? COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Just some cautions there. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And I'm not opposed to the Community Foundation being an intermediary. If it helps keep it out of government and keeps the bureaucracy to a lower order, I'm good with that. I really don't care how we get here -- how we get there from here. I just thought we -- the County Manager, County Attorney, and I had a consensus on that it was legal and it was okay and it was something that was accomplishable. So I do have two other things, but go ahead, Mr. Clerk -- forgive me, Madam Chair. MR. BROCK: I'm not suggesting that it needs to go to the Community Foundation. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: No. MR. BROCK: I'm just suggesting it's either a government function or it's a private function -- COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Got it. MR. BROCK: -- and not to try to do both of them in one entity. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Well, it is -- the Conservation April 11, 2017 Page 159 Collier is a government function, and this philanthropic effort can, in fact, be done through the government and support a government function as long as we designate how it's done, so... MR. BROCK: And they can contribute to the county when they want to give the county for something. At that point in time it becomes the county's funds. The Board of County Commissioners can then make the determination how to spend it. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: That's right. MR. BROCK: Very simple process. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Understood. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Yeah, because it gives -- people can give contribution -- cash contributions to Conservation Collier as it is now. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes, it is, and the rationale was, it's a piece of the pie. It's a voluntary -- it's a voluntary piece of the pie; voluntary contribution to designate/delineate that they are an owner in Conservation Collier, and that was the rationale. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: But what if -- and this is a what-if. But it just occurred to me -- COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Are you on the dark side again? CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Well, Conservation Collier, there's two -- there's purchasing and there's maintenance. So do they buy bricks that say, you're going to only use this for purchasing, I do not want to be part of maintenance. Or do they buy bricks to say maintenance, no purchasing? So you're going to commingle funds that are going to be at the discretion -- COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: No, no, no. Don't put words into my mouth, Madam Chair. I did not commingling funds. I specifically said a simple process of stock ownership, Friends of Conservation Collier with money going to the Acquisition Committee. April 11, 2017 Page 160 Didn't say anything about operations, didn't say anything about commingling. I said, going to the Acquisitions Committee. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I don't think it's simple, but that's it. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Take a look. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: We'll take a look at it, and I'll bring back a little more specificity. MR. OCHS: We're happy to work with the commissioner and certainly with the Clerk's Office -- CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I think that's good. MR. OCHS: -- and make sure he got exactly what he wants and it all will work internally. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: He doesn't always get what he wants. But, number two, if I may continue, I would like an update report on where we're at with Moraya Bay and efforts, County Manager -- oh, you have an answer? COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: No, No. I was going to tag onto that, because I had a conversation with the County Attorney on that topic. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay. If you're going to gather it there, we'll leave it alone. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I don't want to -- CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: You already did. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Oh, okay. I just wanted to let you know that there's some conversations that may tag along with what you're ready to say -- what you're saying there. Apparently, there's some other hotels that engage in some of the activities -- COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Right. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: -- and the County Attorney has suggested the possibility of some kind of an ordinance that requires the April 11, 2017 Page 161 beaches to be open -- COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Right. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: -- that can be enforceable. I don't know if you were going there or not. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I was kind of going there, just as topic. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I'm sorry. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: No, it was just a topic of discussion. I wanted an update as to what was going on with Moraya Bay and whether we needed to have a discussion with open beaches ordinance just to allow for a little more enforceability with our public traffic on the beaches. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I think we do. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I agree. So do you -- do we need to bring it back as a formal agenda item? Do you want to develop it, or do you want me to? COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Well, the part I don't -- can I -- do you mind if I jump in. I mean -- COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: We're in commissioner comments, so you can go. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Okay. And it's predominantly my district we're talking about. I mean, the law is that there is a public part of the beach. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Correct. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: It belongs to the public. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Correct. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: A resolution doesn't change that. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Correct. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: So I don't know -- I mean, the purpose of a resolution would be to restate what the law is already, right? April 11, 2017 Page 162 COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Well, I think that if you had an ordinance that outlined that, it becomes a little bit more enforceable, or a little more easily enforced. I don't know -- it looks like the County Attorney has something to comment on this. MR. KLATZKOW: Yeah. This isn't reinventing the wheel here. There's a different between ownership and public -- and access, all right. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Right. MR. KLATZKOW: And there's a constitutional right of the public to access to the beaches. And this would not be the first county ordinance of this type. In fact, I would just copy off of other county ordinances, which gives the public the right to access the beach. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: But access does not -- is not narrowed to land access. They can access the beach from the water. MR. KLATZKOW: No, no, no, no, no, no, no. Everybody keeps saying that. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Well, then Pelican Bay is in violation. MR. KLATZKOW: Okay. Then, the biggest issue with Pelican Bay, actually, is access, you know, parking and everything else. But if what you want to do is prevent the situation as we've had in the past with Moraya Bay, I can give you an ordinance that will do that. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Well, that's what I would like to see, and I think that's what Commissioner McDaniel was -- CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: So why -- COMMISSIONER SOLIS: So -- I'm sorry. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Go ahead, sorry. This is your district. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: So we have an ordinance that says that you cannot close off the public -- you cannot close off the part of the beach that the public has access to. MR. KLATZKOW: Has customarily used, yes. April 11, 2017 Page 163 COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Okay. And the enforcement mechanism for that would be what? MR. KLATZKOW: Code enforcement. MR. OCHS: The problem comes in that part of the customary use is on the private beach. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Right. MR. OCHS: That's where the rub is created. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And just as a -- you two have the legal aspects of this. This is a process where if it's left unattended, there's a potential for questions of private access being shut off -- public access. Excuse me, public access being shut off if the action is continually done without enforcement capacity other than the trespassee/trespasser issue. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I think the general law is that the beach seaward of the erosion control line is public. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Correct. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: And I think what's happening is that you have some hotel operations or other operations where they are putting cones up and things on the beach seaward of the erosion control line. Now, that still leaves beach access. That still leaves beach in front of that. And I think the ordinance would simply outline that so that there would be, perhaps, a little bit easier mechanism to enforce it. That's the only thought. If you don't need anything to enforce it -- MR. KLATZKOW: It's two readings. I'll bring you something, and if you don't like it, you don't have to move forward with it. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: But do we need it? Isn't that the law as it exist? Why isn't there code enforcement being applied? MR. KLATZKOW: Commissioners, what I'm talking about is more than just -- we'll call it wet sand, dry sand. I'm including dry sand on this with the ordinance. But let me -- let me bring you April 11, 2017 Page 164 something. You either like it or you won't like it or... COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Just, if you're going to bring something forward, I think part of the issue is where is the erosion control line. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Good question. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Right? I mean, maybe what we ought to be doing is requiring some demarcation where -- so for the people that -- the public that are traveling down the beach can know also that's the private beach, this is part of the beach that we can travel on because, I mean, if I'm walking out on the beach, I would have no idea. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: As much as anything else, as is often the case, the more we communicate with regard to how things, in fact, are and supposed to be, the greater opportunity we have for success and enforcement and reduction of conflict, because there are people who know where that line, in fact, is and don't and -- CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: But have these folks been talked to? MR. OCHS: Which folks, ma'am? CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: The ones that run the hotel. Has anyone gone down there and said -- COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes. MR. OCHS: Yeah, and they're telling you that their chairs are on their property, and they're right. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: And so has Code Enforcement been brought in? MR. OCHS: To do what, throw them off their own property? No, ma'am. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: We're only talking about the public part of the beach, seaward of the erosion control line. I don't see the harm in having the County Attorney come back with something for us to take a look at and some explanation as to why this would be of April 11, 2017 Page 165 some benefit. MR. OCHS: Commissioner, I don't disagree, but the issue with Moraya Bay, with respect, I don't think had anything to do with the coastal control line. It was -- people were used to using the portion of the dry sand that was actually on private property. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Right. MR. OCHS: And that's where all the conflicts come in. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: At this particular area. There are other conflicts -- MR. OCHS: Yeah. So that's, I think, what Jeff -- Jeff, I don't want to put words in your mouth. MR. KLATZKOW: That's what I'm saying. What I'm going to bring back is going to include dry sand landward of the erosion control line. We'll take a look at it and discuss it. And if it interests you, we can move it for a second reading. MR. OCHS: We'll bring GIS maps that show where all the lines are, you know, the coastal control line and the setback lines and the private property lines, and you'll get a better idea of the issues. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: And maybe give some thought to how do we require, whether it's Moraya Bay or a hotel or whatever, to correctly indicate where that line is? Because I think -- right? MR. KLATZKOW: Commissioner, I'm talking dry sand. You keep talking the erosion control line. I'm talking about landward of that spot. But let me bring you the ordinance for your review and... COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Okay. But then -- I'm sorry. Maybe I'm confused. The public has access to the area of the beach that's seaward of the erosion control line. We all agree on that? That's the law? COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Go with that. MR. KLATZKOW: Well, what I'm telling you is that they've also got customary access, all right. And if you've been using it for 20, April 11, 2017 Page 166 30, 40, 50 years, you can't fence it off. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Now, we've -- COMMISSIONER SOLIS: So there's more than the access issue that's seaward of the coastal construction line? MR. OCHS: Absolutely; yes, sir. MR. KLATZKOW: Yes. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Correct. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: I'd like -- yeah. I mean, I'd like -- bring something forward and some backup on the case law and on how that works. I'd like to understand that a little better. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yeah, that makes sense. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Okay? MR. KLATZKOW: Yes. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I remember that from back in the real estate days. There were -- you know, after a customary access point is being utilized, and a private property owner tries to cut it off, they no longer have the right to cut it off after it's been -- my recollection was seven years, but it might be longer than that now, so... COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Essentially an easement by adverse possession; is that what we're talking about? MR. KLATZKOW: This is a constitutional right. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Okay. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Right. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: I learn something every day. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I had three simple things -- CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: You have two now. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: -- and now -- and two down, one to go, and it has to do with the NIM process. And I would like for us to -- someone somewhere somewhere along the line decided that we needed to put a limitation on the timing for the neighborhood information meetings, and I -- I don't think we need to pursue that. April 11, 2017 Page 167 COMMISSIONER SOLIS: I agree. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: What do you mean? COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I would agree with that as well, other than on the golf courses. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Well, we already agreed on the golf courses. That was a specific issue. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: That's where I thought we were -- COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: When I brought it up at our last meeting, Mr. Casalanguida suggested that our staff was already working on a limitation of the neighborhood information meetings -- CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Oh, on all issues. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: -- and that wasn't what I was talking about. I was talking about the actual public hearings that are coming before us. And I would like to give direction to staff to cease and desist and leave the NIM process alone from a timing standpoint. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I would agree with that. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Might as well. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I don't remember. When I first was elected, I remember -- this might kind of open the Pandora's box. Mark Strain came to me as the new commissioner, and maybe because I was a new commissioner, and they had a NIM -- help me with this, Mike. They had a NIM process for the man cave. And -- COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: For the what? COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Man cave, yeah. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: The man cave. And they -- not too many people showed up for it. And so I was asked whether I would like another one, and I said yes. Is that an option for all the commissioners in the districts; if there is a NIM that is not well attended, they can request another one? MR. BOSI: It was -- in that particular case there was some sort of April 11, 2017 Page 168 anomaly with the notification process and, therefore, the question was -- I think was raised, would you like to have another NIM to satisfy that procedural question. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. MR. KLATZKOW: Commissioners, the Board always has the ability to take an applicant and say, listen, you know this was a seasonal community, you did your NIM when everybody was gone, okay, we want you to -- we're going to continue this item. Hold your NIM when everybody's there, and we'll hear it then. You always have that option. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Perfect. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I have one little point with regard to that. And since Mr. Bosi brought it up, it has to do with maybe we have a look with regard to the LDC's requisites for the notice parameter. I think right now there's a parameter of 300 feet or 500 feet, depending on where you are. And in certain areas such as Golden Gate Estates you get to notice three people. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: One person. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And maybe we ought to have -- if we're going to spend our time, let's have a look at how we can better provide a process of notification for people that are impacted by use changes that are forthcoming. MR. BOSI: We have had that discussion before with the Board. In the rural areas, it's 1,000 feet. East of 951 we require that notification process to be increased from 500 feet to 1,000 feet. We could look at the capture rate currently that that thousand feet would provide and give you some numbers as to what the capture rate number of properties that would be, if it was 2,000, if it was 3,000, if it was 4,000, something to that iteration to give the Board some additional considerations as to what type of magnitude of increase that -- COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Well, we want to be careful April 11, 2017 Page 169 about the -- you know, I don't want too much overreach, because then you start to put an excess burden on the development community that are coming forward with these use-change requests, but on the same token, we also want to provide for -- you know, if you have a neighborhood information meeting and you're only required to notice three people, let's -- you might get -- you know, you get your 30 percent show up, or 10 percent show up, and there you are. So I don't want it -- I don't want it to go off -- I would like to have a discussion, and we may be able to even do it together just to have a talk about a rational process to get to a point where we're providing for better public notice without an overreach process. MR. BOSI: And just to add to that point. I think that we focus only upon the mailing, and the mailing is only one-third of the notification. You've got signs posted on site as well as requirements for advertising in the Naples Daily News general newspaper circulation. So that's just one-third of the component of the notification. So a full description of everything that's required of the notification process is probably more appropriate to -- instead of trying to make a decision just on one component of it. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: I mean, my feeling is, I think the process is currently pretty good. I mean, there's signage requirements, there's the mailing, there's a lot of different aspects to it. And one, right, we don't want to overburden the property owner, but -- and, you know, neighbors need to pay attention as well. So I think -- you know, and one of the things about -- that occurred to me in talking about requiring the NIMs to be -- and, just in general, during the season, is, one, you're adding 50 percent of -- to an already very long period of time that someone needs to, you know, go through a process to rezone their property. There's that. I mean, there's also -- I think there's -- you know, if you're a resident of Collier County, you know, there's some -- you have some April 11, 2017 Page 170 obligation to pay attention to what's going on as well, and I don't think we can limit those NIMs. And, certainly, if there's an abuse of it -- and, clearly, you know, there's some strategy sometimes about when you have a NIM, then that comes before us, and I think it's up to -- it's incumbent upon us to say maybe this wasn't done as well -- COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: We can ask for another one as -- COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Ask for another one, send it back to the Planning Commission, whatever -- you know, we have some options there. So I don't know that there's really anything that we need to do, in my opinion, in this regard. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Well, in District 5, you know, Golden Gate Estates, as we discussed because of the -- even a thousand feet is five neighbors that might be impacted. And, yes, it's -- the onus could be, should be -- but I know very few people read the public notices, and you drive by those signs all the time and go, what the heck is that, so -- and few people actually stop and read the small print to find out what it was and so on. So it's just -- it's something -- if we were going to spend our time, maybe just have a more global perspective on it. And that was my three. I'm done. MR. OCHS: So we're not bringing back a change in the schedule for the NIMs. Do you want us to bring a discussion with regard to notification processes forward? COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Actually, why don't we -- I don't want to overburden the Board, but maybe -- MR. OCHS: Just work with you directly, sir? COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: -- if I can work with staff and have -- and find out if there's something we might be able to do, just geographically, for the eastern portion, because I think in the urbanized area west of 951, we pretty well -- what's in place works. April 11, 2017 Page 171 MR. OCHS: Very good. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: All right. Commissioner Solis? COMMISSIONER SOLIS: I think I've said enough. I was told once that a man of wise words is a man of few words, so I have nothing else to add to today's discussion. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Geez. I wish I'd learned that a long time ago. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I've got just one, just an update. I attended the Gulf Consortium Board of directors' meeting in Tallahassee on April 6th. There are some exciting things happening in terms of projects, and Collier County will be in line for funding. And I was there with county staff, and Gary McAlpin is the county staff person there. So I just wanted to let you know that that's moving along. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Good. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Excellent. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Just one thing, I mentioned it earlier today about the SAIL program, and the governor's office has contacted me starting last year about money, significant amount of money, that has been put aside. I think former Senator Saunders knows about the SAIL program. Last year it was 20 million. This year it's 40-. And the sense is that they would love to be able to have a SAIL project in Collier County. I know they've been down here looking around, and I'm trying to get at least one or two people at our next meeting to talk about it. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Madam Chair, would you share what SAIL stands for? CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Oh, my gosh. That I can't. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Does anybody know? COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I don't recall other. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: SAIL money. I just know it as SAIL April 11, 2017 Page 172 money. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: It's a fund coming out of the state. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yes, yeah, and federal, for workforce housing -- COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: There we go. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: -- up to 120 percent. MR. OCHS: Rental housing. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Rental. And so thinking, as I would, I saw that -- the county has land throughout the county; they own it. So I'm wondering if that might be something -- and I'm not asking for a decision right now, and we certainly don't have Commissioner Fiala here -- that we might look at county land in this effort; that they -- there would be a cost to the land. Maybe it would be a reduced cost, or there might be a long-term lease. SAIL projects 50 years minimum. There is -- there are very steep requirements. The management has to be on par with what is needed. No one, you think, comes in, develops, and he walks away. So if that's of interest, I'd like to see if our staff could bring some concepts back and ideas back. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And only -- the County Manager just had his hand up. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: He did. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: He wasn't waving at me. MR. OCHS: I'm just waving. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: You're just waving. How you doing? The -- and just as -- if I might add on maybe, you know, we can have a discussion with our Collier County Housing Authority. That's an organization that's here that is already effectively running both a government subsidized and independently owned rental complex. April 11, 2017 Page 173 That's an organization we could have discussions with as far -- because I wouldn't necessarily think about the county getting involved in the rental business per se, but there's an organization that's already out there that's in business that's got staff that we could maybe co-venture with. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yeah, and the people that -- COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Cooperate. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: The developers who have talked to me over the last year or so are folks who not only build it, but they run it. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Right. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: They manage it. So if it's of interest, then we could -- good, thank you. MR. OCHS: Commissioners, the only caveat or caution there is, as I understand the program requirements from the state, the land that is selected has to be zoned properly for that. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: That's correct. MR. OCHS: So I would venture to guess if you pick a piece of vacant land that you-all own, it's zoned "P" for public or "A" for ag. You might have to go through some kind of a rezone. And the reason I raise that is because the application deadline is September 1st to the state. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: That's right. So we'll chop, chop. MR. OCHS: And you-all are gone by the 14th of July, so... CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I bet creatively we could make this happen. MR. OCHS: We'll have a new NIM process for this, I presume. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: And, violating my own thing, I was just going to add that I think that is precisely one of the reasons, from what I heard from ULI and others, why we don't have any of these developers that are interested in this process. It's a very, very competitive process, and when you throw in a rezone -- April 11, 2017 Page 174 COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: They're out. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: -- they're out. It's just not going to work. MR. OCHS: Yeah. There's a lot of requirements for particular types of land that qualifies, and so far, as Commissioner said, we've had some experienced developers that have used this program before that have not been able to identify a qualifying site so far. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: But most of the time -- they haven't talked about the rezone, I guess, because the price has been so high of this land that they're looking at. Not our land, because I don't think we've identified it. So perhaps in -- with the background of the September deadline, maybe we could go through an exercise of identifying property at our next meeting and then talking about the rezone process. MR. OCHS: Bring your dinner. We'll be here. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: We're on. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Is that all right? COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I like it. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Oh, good. MR. OCHS: Is that direction? CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: He wants direction. MR. OCHS: Next meeting. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Next meeting. We've got September. September's our deadline. There's $40 million there. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Let me ask a question. If we had an identified piece of land owned by the county, how long would it take to go through a rezone process to get it to where it could be used for workforce housing? COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: We can't rezone our own land. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yeah, we can. MR. BOSI: A rezoning of property, anywhere between four to April 11, 2017 Page 175 five months on the very short end with very little application issues, to six to nine months. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: And how much time -- so we're talking about September 1 deadline. So what you're asking staff to do is impossible. MR. KLATZKOW: Well, what are you going to do if you rezone the land to this and then nobody wants it for the program? And then the County Manager wants to put a firehouse on it? COMMISSIONER SOLIS: We rezone it again. MR. OCHS: And, again, not to further complicate this, but most of the land that you own that's vacant is spoken for in your AUIR as park inventory or EMS inventory. So if you pluck that out and cause a deficiency in your level of service in your AUIR, you're going to have to address that in the fall. And I'm not trying to stop this, ma'am. I'm just making sure that -- there's unintended consequences sometimes to these decisions. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: But then we have our sports -- our sports center where we're adding fields that have not been figured into the AUIR. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I think what you're suggesting is that it's a good idea for us to take a look at this program and take a look at county property, potentially, but what you're asking staff to do is to come back and identify some properties for an application deadline that's due on September 1, and that's an impossible task. They can't -- they can't do it. I think they're stretched pretty thin in terms of a lot of stuff we're asking them to do. So my concern is -- CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Four months is August. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Well, I think he just said four to six months on the light side, fastest. MR. BOSI: Four to six -- four months would be the absolute minimum. If you had an application today ready to submit, with the April 11, 2017 Page 176 neighborhood information meeting requirements, the spacing for advertisement between your Planning Commission meeting and the Board of County Commissioners' meeting, four months would be an exceptional turnaround. I would say that -- COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: That fourth month we're not here. MR. BOSI: I would say that the Board of County Commissioners has directed the housing center to be brought back into the fall as part of the suggestions that you were asking for more information for. You were -- one of the suggestions was strategic sites for affordable housing. We could look into the SAIL program, try to provide more information and couch that within the overall presentation that we're going to have in the fall related to the affordable housing decision-making points that the Board has requested. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I didn't mean to interrupt. I just had a thought. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: That makes sense to me. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: In order to qualify for the SAIL program, the site, necessarily, would have to be zoned now, basically, is what I'm hearing out of staff. I mean, we can't ramp up -- I mean, it wouldn't be a bad idea for us to go through an inventory of the county-owned lands, to have a discussion of what we can do from the rezoning process and so on and so forth. But are there other alternatives with regard to those SAIL funds as far as workforce housing projects go for privately owned properties that -- CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: But the issue is the land. The land is expensive. They can't make the numbers work because the -- that's why they're not here, because the land is so expensive in Collier County. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: I think it's also the competitive April 11, 2017 Page 177 nature of the process. If anything requires -- the SAIL applications -- and correct me if I'm wrong. The SAIL application for the developer says, we have this land; it's zoned; this is what it's going to cost; this is what I'm going to do. It's going to be 50 -- it's a very strict template that you have to fit into. And if you're missing one of those things, you're just not competitive, and you don't even -- you're really not even considered. So it's -- we have, in a way, a chicken and an egg problem. It's also the value -- the cost of the land, but it's also not having an inventory of these properties that have developer -- privately held properties that a developer can come in and say, okay, this would be perfect for a SAIL program. I'm going to put the application together and put it in and have a chance of even qualifying. It's the rezoning, the time frame, and the uncertainty of that, as I understand it, that's one of the major factors that they just don't -- because it doesn't -- they can't compete that way in the program. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: We have a workforce housing problem that needs to be resolved. It's going to take us some time. And to try to squeeze this in between now and September 1 just isn't going to work. I think what staff has suggested in terms of coming back and giving us some ideas in a time frame that they can work into their schedule makes sense. But I would be opposed to directing staff to try to come up with a rezone -- piece of property rezone between now and September 1 for affordable housing. It's not going to work. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Yeah. And I don't think the SAIL program's going to go anywhere, I mean, if they're doubling the amount of money that's in there this year. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: We have the opportunity, assuming it gets funded next year -- COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Next year. I mean, I think if our efforts -- April 11, 2017 Page 178 COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: But if our efforts were in concert to carry this forward and to have a look at our inventory and have a look at what potentially could be rezoned, and if those funds were available, we wouldn't be having this discussion this time next year. We'd have a piece that's already zoned. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: I think we could be very proactive for next year. I don't know that it's -- COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And just to further the point, I mean, you know, there are organizations, and one that rings is -- I know -- I know that Habitat for Humanity has some fairly intensely zoned land that's contiguous on our Farm Worker's Village out on 29 there in Immokalee. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: They -- it's targeted -- the SAIL money is targeted for urban Collier County. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Oh, it is. Okay. Forgive me. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: And I would remind you that our governor will not be governor after 2018, and I'm not going to say any more. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: We're picking up on your -- CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: So it is incumbent upon this commission to act. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: I think we are. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: We are, as quickly as we can. I don't think -- I think Commissioner Saunders summed it up as, really, we don't have anything that we can wave a magic wand at and turn it into a densely zoned piece of property that could be facilitated for this year's application deadline. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I'm going to find out how stringent those -- I will make a call to find out how stringent the zoning question is. I mean, I know it's -- they don't want to take a risk, and I know they're up in competition, but I know that the -- it's been targeted for April 11, 2017 Page 179 urban, and Collier County is -- I was told this this week -- last week in Tallahassee, stopped in the hallway. Collier County is one of the areas they want to do this in. This -- the time is ripe, gentlemen. I don't want to miss the opportunity. So let me find out. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I understand what you're saying. We've already missed the opportunity; that's the point. And you're making it sound like we're refusing to take advantage of an opportunity that's right here on the table. If you can find out that the zoning is not important in terms of the application, then so be it. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: That's another can of worms. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: If you can make that -- I mean, we have another meeting in two weeks. Come back to us. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I will. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: But, again, to tell staff to do something that, on its surface is impossible, I think, is just wrong; that's where I come from. MR. OCHS: Commissioner, again, in fairness to the chair, I will also work with you to make sure that -- CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I know you will. MR. OCHS: My understanding of zoning being in place in the land was one of the requirements of the program. I think it is, but let's double-check. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I would say it is, probably. MR. KLATZKOW: And just as an aside, we have the statutory duty every three years to take our available land and figure out which parcels are for affordable housing purposes. That's something we've been doing. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Really? MR. KLATZKOW: Yes. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: When was the last time we did that? MR. KLATZKOW: It's a couple years ago. It must be coming April 11, 2017 Page 180 up. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Not under my watch, and I've been here three years. MR. KLATZKOW: It's every three years you've got to do it. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Oh, so we need to have a discussion. MR. OCHS: Well, that -- as Mike said, that's going to be incorporated into your Community Housing Plan Stakeholder Committee Report in the fall, okay. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay, good. That would be three years. All right, that's it. So nothing else. We thank you. Terri, you were hard at work. And this meeting is adjourned. **** Commissioner Fiala moved, seconded by Commissioner McDaniel and carried unanimously that the following items under the Consent and Summary Agendas be approved and/or adopted **** Item #16A1 THE CLERK OF COURTS TO RELEASE A PERFORMANCE BOND IN THE AMOUNT OF $78,620 WHICH WAS POSTED AS A GUARANTY FOR EXCAVATION PERMIT NUMBER 59.902- 27 PL20160000294 FOR WORK ASSOCIATED WITH COQUINA AT MAPLE RIDGE PHASES 2 AND 3 – SITE LOCATED ALONG CAMP KEAIS ROAD NEAR OIL WELL ROAD Item #16A2 THE CLERK OF COURTS TO RELEASE A PERFORMANCE BOND IN THE AMOUNT OF $49,040 WHICH WAS POSTED AS A GUARANTY FOR EXCAVATION PERMIT NUMBER 60.133 April 11, 2017 Page 181 PL20150002693 – LOCATED ALONG AIRPORT ROAD JUST SOUTH OF VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD Item #16A3 AN EASEMENT USE AGREEMENT (AGREEMENT) FOR LOT 7 NATURE POINTE, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF AS RECORDED AT PLAT BOOK 20, PAGES 20 THROUGH 22 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY – LOCATED AT THE END OF OUTRIGGER LANE WITHIN THE COCONUT RIVER ESTATES AREA Item #16A4 RECORDING THE FINAL PLAT OF OYSTER HARBOR AT FIDDLER’S CREEK PHASE 3, (APPLICATION NUMBER PL20160003066) APPROVAL OF THE STANDARD FORM CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT AND APPROVAL OF THE AMOUNT OF THE PERFORMANCE SECURITY – THE DEVELOPER MUST RECEIVE A CERTIFICATE OF ADEQUATE PUBLIC FACILITITES PRIOR TO THE CONSTRUCTION PLAN FINAL APPROVAL LETTER Item #16A5 – Commissioner Solis Abstained (During Agenda Changes) UTILITY FACILITIES QUIT-CLAIM DEED AND BILL OF SALE BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY, AS EX-OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD OF THE COLLIER COUNTY WATER-SEWER DISTRICT, AND LENNAR HOMES, LLC, IN ORDER TO RECONVEY TO LENNAR HOMES, LLC, ALL SEWER UTILITY April 11, 2017 Page 182 FACILITIES ASSOCIATED WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT PROJECT AT GIAVENO, PL20140001923, WHICH WERE PREVIOUSLY ERRONEOUSLY CONVEYED TO THE COUNTY Item #16A6 AWARD INVITATION TO BID NO. 16-7038R “AQUATIC VEGETATION CONTROL SERVICES” TO METTAUER ENVIRONMENTAL, INC. AS THE PRIMARY VENDOR, AND A+ ENVIRONMENTAL, LLC AS THE SECONDARY VENDOR – CONTROLLING EMERGENT, SUBMERGED AND FLOATING AQUATIC VEGETATION IN ROAD OR DRAINAGE RIGHT-OF- WAYS OR EASEMENTS Item #16A7 AMENDMENT #1 TO AGREEMENT NO. 16-6610 “ANNUAL CONTRACT FOR LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE” INCORPORATING LANGUAGE THAT INDIVIDUAL QUOTES EXCEEDING $250,000 SHALL BE APPROVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, AND RETROACTIVELY APPROVE ISSUED PURCHASE ORDERS, QUOTES, AND INVOICES EXCEEDING $50,000 – GROUND ZERO LANDSCAPING FOR P.O. #4500174682 ($129,324) AND HANNULA LANDSCAPING & IRRIGATION SERVICES FOR P.O. #4500175095 ($225,520) AND #4500175096 ($221,298) Item #16A8 – Moved to Item #11B (Per Agenda Change Sheet) Item #16B1 April 11, 2017 Page 183 (CRA) RESOLUTION 2017-67A & CRA RESOLUTION 2017-67B: AN AFTER-THE-FACT U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT (HUD) COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT APPLICATION SUBMITTAL TO FUND THE PHASE 2 FIRE SUPPRESSION SYSTEM UPGRADE AND THE SUGDEN REGIONAL PARK PATHWAY PROJECT WITHIN THE BAYSHORE GATEWAY TRIANGLE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AREA (BGTCRA) TOTALING $650,000 – UPGRADING THE WATER LINES AND ADDING 5 ADDITIONAL HYDRANTS ON COCO AVENUE, ARECA AVENUE, CANAL STREET, BASIN STREET AND CAPTAIN’S COVE Item #16C1 AWARD INVITATION TO BID #17-7042, “PUMP STATION MATERIAL REMOVAL AND DISPOSAL,” TO ENVIROWASTE SERVICES GROUP, INC – REPLACING THE CURRENT AGREEMENT FOR GREASE HAULING, BID #16-6543 Item #16C2 CORRECTING A SCRIVENER’S ERROR BY REMOVING THE INCLUSION OF THE ALLOWANCE AMOUNT WITHIN THE “SITE 1(A) BASE BID” REFERENCED IN THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ON THE AWARDED BID NUMBER 16-6688, “NORTHEAST RECYCLING DROP-OFF CENTER,” PROJECT NUMBER 59009, TO WRIGHT CONSTRUCTION GROUP, WITH NO CHANGE TO THE TOTAL AWARD AMOUNT Item #16C3 April 11, 2017 Page 184 AWARD BID NUMBER 17-7089, “BARRON COLLIER HIGH SCHOOL WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS - PHASE 2," TO KYLE CONSTRUCTION, INC., IN THE AMOUNT OF $828,009, PROJECT NUMBER 70125; AND AUTHORIZE THE NECESSARY BUDGET AMENDMENT – PHASE 2 CONSISTS OF REMOVING AND REPLACING APPROXIATELY 1,100 LINEAR FEET OF PVC AND 2,500 LINEAR FEET OF ABSESTOS CEMENT POTABLE WATER MAIN THAT WAS INSTALLED IN 1977 Item #16C4 AWARD BID NUMBER 17-7091 “COUNTYWIDE CHEMICALS,” FOR THE PURCHASE OF VARIOUS CHEMICALS REQUIRED FOR POTABLE WATER, WASTEWATER, AND IRRIGATION QUALITY WATER TREATMENT BY THE WATER AND WASTEWATER DIVISIONS AND AUTHORIZE THE CHAIR TO EXECUTE THE ATTACHED AGREEMENT Item #16D1 SECOND AMENDMENT TO STATE HOUSING INITIATIVES PARTNERSHIP (SHIP) PROGRAM SUBRECIPIENT AGREEMENT WITH COMMUNITY ASSISTED AND SUPPORTED LIVING, INC – INCREASING TOTAL AWARD BY $121,000 BY PROVIDING ADDITIONAL FUNDING, UPDATING ASSOCIATED EXPENDITURE TIME OF PERFORMANCE DATES AND REVISING LANGUAGE FOR REQUESTING TIME EXTENSION April 11, 2017 Page 185 Item #16D2 AWARD INVITATION TO BID NO. 17-7088 TO BONNESS, INC., FOR THE PAVEMENT AND DRAINAGE REPAIRS AT COCOHATCHEE PARK, IN THE AMOUNT OF $324,633.29 AND AUTHORIZE THE CHAIRMAN TO EXECUTE THE CONTRACT AND THE NECESSARY BUDGET AMENDMENT Item #16D3 INCREASING THE LAND ACQUISITION ADVISORY COMMITTEE (LAAC) MEMBERSHIP FROM SEVEN (7) MEMBERS BACK TO NINE (9) MEMBERS FOLLOWING THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ACTIVATION OF A LAND ACQUISITION PHASE FOR THE CONSERVATION COLLIER PROGRAM Item #16D4 A DONATION OF $45,038.20 TO THE CONSERVATION COLLIER PROGRAM AS OFFSITE PRESERVATION FOR EAST NAPLES SELF STORAGE (CU-PL20160001380) TO SATISFY THE NATIVE VEGETATION RETENTION REQUIREMENT Item #16D5 AMENDING THE BOARD'S STATE/FEDERAL SUBORDINATION LOAN POLICY TO EXPAND THE PARAMETERS FOR SUBORDINATION REQUESTS TO AID IN CONTINUED HOME AFFORDABILITY – EXPANSION OF THE April 11, 2017 Page 186 POLICY WILL ALLOW MORE HOMEOWNERS THE OPPORTUNITY TO REFINANCE THEIR EXISTING MORTGAGES Item #16D6 FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE SUBRECIPIENT AGREEMENT WITH CATHOLIC CHARITIES DIOCESE OF VENICE, INC. DBA CATHOLIC CHARITIES OF COLLIER COUNTY AND THE SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE SUBRECIPIENT AGREEMENT WITH NAPLES EQUESTRIAN CHALLENGE, INC. TO EXPAND U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT (HUD) FUNDING YEARS AND CLARIFY OUTCOME GOALS. THIS ITEM HAS NO NEW FISCAL IMPACT – AS DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Item #16D7 AN AGREEMENT TO PURCHASE VENDED MEALS FROM ANOTHER STATE-APPROVED PROGRAM SPONSOR WITH THE DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD OF COLLIER COUNTY (SCHOOL BOARD) TO SPONSOR AND OPERATE THE 2017 SUMMER FOOD SERVICE PROGRAM AT DESIGNATED RECREATION CAMPS WITH UNITIZED MEALS PROVIDED BY THE SCHOOL BOARD, AND AUTHORIZE ALL NECESSARY BUDGET AMENDMENTS. (TOTAL ANTICIPATED FISCAL IMPACT $134,878.02 WITH A FEDERAL SHARE OF $104,878.02 AND A LOCAL MATCH OF $29,150) April 11, 2017 Page 187 Item #16D8 AWARD RFP #17-7062 PARKS AND RECREATION DIVISION MASTER PLAN TO TINDALE OLIVER DESIGN GROUP, LLC, IN THE AMOUNT OF $74,830 AND AUTHORIZE THE CHAIR TO EXECUTE THE ATTACHED CONTRACT – FOR THE COMPLETION OF THE EAGLE LAKES COMMUNITY CENTER AND AQUATIC CENTER AND CONSTRUCTION OF THE BIG CORKSCREW ISLAND REGIONAL PARK Item #16E1 RESOLUTION 2017-68: AUTHORIZING THE CANCELLATION OF 2017 TAXES UPON A FEE-SIMPLE INTEREST IN LAND COLLIER COUNTY ACQUIRED BY WARRANTY DEED FOR CONSERVATION COLLIER AND WITHOUT MONETARY COMPENSATION (ON BEHALF OF PUBLIC SERVICES DEPARTMENT) – FOLIO #39493560005 Item #16E2 ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS PREPARED BY THE PROCUREMENT SERVICES DIVISION FOR CHANGE ORDERS AND OTHER ITEMS AS IDENTIFIED – TOTALING $19,292.66 Item #16E3 ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT PREPARED BY THE PROCUREMENT SERVICES DIVISION FOR DISPOSAL OF PROPERTY AND NOTIFICATION OF ITEMS AVAILABLE FOR April 11, 2017 Page 188 SURPLUS – FOR THE PERIOD OF MARCH 7 THROUGH MARCH 23, 2017 Item #16E4 SECOND AGREEMENT WITH FLORIDA GULF COAST UNIVERSITY (AS PROVIDED THROUGH ITS AFFILIATE, THE FLORIDA INSTITUTE OF GOVERNMENT) TO PROVIDE ON- SITE, INSTRUCTOR-LED TRAINING PROGRAMS TO COUNTY EMPLOYEES – FROM APRIL 2017 THROUGH SEPTEMBER 2017 Item 16F1 APPROVAL OF AGREEMENTS BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY AND FLORIDA SPECIALTIES LLC, PROVIDING FOR THE TERMINATION OF THE ADVANCE BROADBAND INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT PROGRAM AND JOB CREATION INVESTMENT PROGRAM AGREEMENTS, WHICH ARE BEING REQUESTED TO FACILITATE THE CLOSING OF THE SALE OF THE BUSINESS Item #16F2 AFTER-THE-FACT-APPROVAL FOR THE SUBMITTAL OF THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE LOCAL FOOD PROMOTION PROGRAM PLANNING GRANT APPLICATION IN THE AMOUNT OF A $100,000 FOR THE IMMOKALEE CULINARY ARTS & PRODUCTION CAMPUS. (TOTAL ANTICIPATED FISCAL IMPACT $125,087.52 WITH A April 11, 2017 Page 189 FEDERAL SHARE OF $100,000 AND LOCAL MATCH 25,087.52) – SUBMITTAL DATE WAS MARCH 27, 2017 Item #16F3 RESOLUTION 2017-69: AMENDMENTS (APPROPRIATING GRANTS, DONATIONS, CONTRIBUTIONS OR INSURANCE PROCEEDS) TO THE FISCAL YEAR 2016-17 ADOPTED BUDGET Item #16F4 REPORT COVERING BUDGET AMENDMENTS IMPACTING RESERVES AND MOVING FUNDS IN AN AMOUNT UP TO AND INCLUDING $25,000 AND $50,000, RESPECTIVELY – BUDGET AMENDMENT #17-330 FOR VETERINARIAN FEES NEUTERING – SPAYING Item #16H1 PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING APRIL 2017 AS NATIONAL FAIR HOUSING MONTH IN COLLIER COUNTY AND DECLARING THAT EVERY AMERICAN HAS A RIGHT TO LIVE WHERE THEY CHOOSE WITH DIGNITY AND WITHOUT FEAR OF DISCRIMINATION. THIS PROCLAMATION WILL BE SENT BY MAIL TO STEVE KIRK, PRESIDENT OF RURAL NEIGHBORHOODS AND DOROTHY COOK, MANAGER, NEIGHBORHOOD REVITALIZATION Item #16H2 April 11, 2017 Page 190 PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING APRIL 2017 AS AVIATION APPRECIATION MONTH IN COLLIER COUNTY, IN RECOGNITION OF THE MAJOR ROLE PLAYED BY COLLIER COUNTY'S GENERAL AVIATION AIRPORTS IN TOURISM, BUSINESS TRAVEL AND AGRICULTURE. THIS PROCLAMATION WILL BE DELIVERED TO COLLIER COUNTY AIRPORT MANAGER JUSTIN LOBB AND STAFF Item #16H3 PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING APRIL 21, 2017 AS TRY TRANSIT DAY IN COLLIER COUNTY, IN AN EFFORT TO PROMOTE PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION AS AN ALTERNATIVE MEANS OF TRANSPORTATION. THIS PROCLAMATION WILL BE DELIVERED TO PUBLIC TRANSIT AND NEIGHBORHOOD ENGAGEMENT DIVISION DIRECTOR MICHELLE ARNOLD AND STAFF Item #16H4 PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING APRIL 9-15 AS NATIONAL LIBRARY WEEK IN COLLIER COUNTY. THIS PROCLAMATION WILL BE DELIVERED TO COLLIER COUNTY LIBRARY DIRECTOR TANYA WILLIAMS AND STAFF Item #16J1 THE USE OF $5,000 FROM THE CONFISCATED TRUST FUNDS TO SUPPORT THE BOY SCOUT OF AMERICA, SOUTHWEST FLORIDA COUNCIL, INC April 11, 2017 Page 191 Item #16J2 CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT’S INTERNAL AUDIT REPORT 2017-4, 2016 FLEET MANAGEMENT DIVISION: 2016 FISCAL YEAR-END INVENTORY OBSERVATION – AVAILABLE ELECTRONICALLY ON THE CLERK OF COURTS WEBSITE Item #16J3 CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT’S INTERNAL AUDIT REPORT 2017-5 UNANNOUNCED CASH COUNTS, ISSUED ON MARCH 31, 2017 – AVAILABLE ELECTRONICALLY ON THE CLERK OF COURTS WEBSITE Item #16J4 BOARD’S PURCHASING ORDINANCE 2013-69, AS AMENDED, REQUEST THAT THE BOARD APPROVE AND DETERMINE VALID PUBLIC PURPOSE FOR INVOICES PAYABLE AND PURCHASING CARD TRANSACTIONS AS OF APRIL 5, 2017 Item #16J5 RECORDING IN THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, THE CHECK NUMBER (OR OTHER PAYMENT METHOD), AMOUNT, PAYEE, AND PURPOSE FOR WHICH THE REFERENCED DISBURSEMENTS WERE DRAWN FOR THE PERIODS BETWEEN MARCH 16 AND MARCH 29, April 11, 2017 Page 192 2017 PURSUANT TO FLORIDA STATUTE 136.06 Item #16J6 THE CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT AND COMPTROLLER, PURSUANT TO THE APPROVAL OF THE BCC AT THE JANUARY 10, 2017 BOARD MEETING NEGOTIATED WITH B.Q. CONCRETE, L.L.C. IN CARE OF JOSEPH D. ZAKS, ESQ. AND ROETZEL AND ANDRESS TRUST ACCOUNT, REGARDING OUTSTANDING PAYMENT REQUESTS. THE CLERK HAS NOW COMPLETED HIS AUDIT AND REACHED A SETTLEMENT OF CLAIMS WITH B.Q. CONCRETE, L.L.C. IN THE AMOUNT OF $140,694 Item #16K1 THE HIRING OF TARA MILLER DANE, ESQ., FOR MEDIATION SERVICES RELATING TO THE LASIP PROJECT NO. 51101, WING SOUTH PORTION, AND THE EMINENT DOMAIN CASE STYLED COLLIER COUNTY V. LORI R. LEAR, ET AL., CASE NO. 15-CA-1599, NOW PENDING IN THE TWENTIETH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT COURT FOR COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AND AUTHORIZE THE COUNTY ATTORNEY TO RETAIN MS. MILLER DANE FOR FUTURE MEDIATIONS IN EMINENT DOMAIN LITIGATION. (FISCAL IMPACT: $5,000) Item #16K2 RESOLUTION 2017-70: APPOINTING ELAINE L. REED TO THE HISTORIC/ARCHAEOLOGICAL PRESERVATION BOARD TO April 11, 2017 Page 193 A TERM EXPIRING ON OCTOBER 1, 2018 Item #16K3 A SETTLEMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $28,257 FOR THE TAKING OF PARCEL 241DAME REQUIRED FOR THE LELY AREA STORMWATER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, PROJECT NO. 51101, (CREWS ROAD, COPE LANE AND SANDY LANE/WING SOUTH INTERCONNECT), IN THE PENDING CASE STYLED COLLIER COUNTY V. DAN A. EBY, ET AL., CASE NO. 14-CA-2374. (FISCAL IMPACT: $18,527) ***** April 11, 2017 Page 194 There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 3:15 p.m. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS/EX OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF SPECIAL DISTRICTS UNDER ITS CONTROL ________________________________ PENNY TAYLOR, CHAIRMAN ATTEST DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK ____________________________ These minutes approved by the Board on _____________________, as presented ____________ or as corrected ____________.