BCC Minutes 03/25/2003 RMarch 25, 2003
TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Naples, Florida, March 25, 2003
LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Board of County
Commissioners, in and for the County of Collier, and also acting as
the Board of Zoning Appeals and as the governing board(s) of such
special district as has been created according to law and having
conducted business herein, met on this date at 8:00 a.m., in
REGULAR SESSION in Building "F" of the Government Complex,
East Naples, Florida, with the following members present:
CHAIRMAN:
VICE-CHAIRMAN:
Tom Henning
Donna Fiala
Frank Halas (via
speakerphone)
Fred W. Coyle
Jim Coletta (via
speakerphone)
ALSO PRESENT: Jim Mudd, County Manager; David Weigel,
County Attorney; Ramiro Manalich, County Attorney; Jim Mitchell,
Clerk's Office; and Dwight Brock, Clerk of Courts.
Page 1
COLLIER COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
AGENDA
March 25, 2003
8:00 a.m.*
NOTICE: ALL PERSONS WISHING TO SPEAK ON ANY AGENDA ITEM
MUST REGISTER PRIOR TO SPEAKING. SPEAKERS MUST REGISTER
WITH THE COUNTY MANAGER PRIOR TO THE PRESENTATION OF THE
AGENDA ITEM TO BE ADDRESSED.
COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 99-22 REQUIRES THAT ALL
LOBBYISTS SHALL, BEFORE ENGAGING IN ANY LOBBYING ACTIVITIES
(INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, ADDRESSING THE BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS), REGISTER WITH THE CLERK TO THE
BOARD AT THE BOARD MINUTES AND RECORDS DEPARTMENT.
REQUESTS TO ADDRESS THE BOARD ON SUBJECTS WHICH ARE NOT ON
THIS AGENDA MUST BE SUBMITTED IN WRITING WITH EXPLANATION
TO THE COUNTY MANAGER AT LEAST 13 DAYS PRIOR TO THE DATE OF
THE MEETING AND WILL BE HEARD UNDER "PUBLIC PETITIONS".
ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THIS BOARD
WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS PERTAINING THERETO,
AND THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD
OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE
TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED.
ALL REGISTERED PUBLIC SPEAKERS WILL BE LIMITED TO FIVE (5)
MINUTES UNLESS THE TIME IS ADJUSTED BY THE CHAIRMAN.
IF YOU ARE A PERSON WITH A DISABILITY WHO NEEDS ANY
ACCOMMODATION IN ORDER TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS PROCEEDING,
YOU ARE ENTITLED, AT NO COST TO YOU, TO THE PROVISION OF
CERTAIN ASSISTANCE. PLEASE CONTACT THE COLLIER COUNTY
1
March 25, 2003
FACILITIES MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT LOCATED AT 3301 EAST
TAMIAMI TRAIL, NAPLES, FLORIDA, 34112, (239) 774-8380; ASSISTED
LISTENING DEVICES FOR THE HEARING IMPAIRED ARE AVAILABLE IN
THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' OFFICE.
THERE WILL BE NO LUNCH RECESS.
MEETING IS ANTICIPATED TO END AT 1:00 P.M.
1. INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
A. Pastor Roy Shuck, Faith Community Church
AGENDA AND MINUTES
J
A. Approval of today's regular, consent and summary agenda as amended. (Ex
Parte Disclosure provided by Commission members for summary agenda.)
B. February 25, 2003 - Regular meeting
C. February 28, 2003 - Workshop
SERVICE AWARDS
4. PROCLAMATIONS
Ae
Proclamation to observe April as Sexual Assault Awareness Month. To be
accepted by Jamie Wills, Victim/Advocate Counselor and Elizabeth Knake,
Executive Director.
Proclamation to designate the month of April as Conservancy Volunteer
Month. To be accepted by Kathy Prosser, President and CEO of the
Conservancy of SW Florida.
Ce
Proclamation to proclaim April 5, 2003 as Great American Cleanup Day.
To be accepted by Denise Kirk, Water Reduction & Recycling Manager and
Barbara Lee from the Solid Waste Management Department and Adopt a
Road Program.
PRESENTATIONS
2
March 25, 2003
Al*
Recommendation to recognize Kim Hadley, Environmental Specialist,
Environmental Services Department, as Employee of the Month for March
2003.
e
Be
Presentation by Keith Arnold, Florida Lobby Associates, to present update
on the current legislative issues affecting Collier County.
PUBLIC PETITIONS
e
Ae
Public Petition request by Mr. Christopher Fowler regarding Special Land
Use Permit to operate remote control car races.
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
8. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS
e
10.
Ae
Request the Board adopt an Ordinance amending Collier County Ordinance
No. 2001-76, as amended, which created the Livingston Road Phase II
Beautification Municipal Service Taxing Unit; providing for amendment to
Section Six to increase the number of members who serve on the Advisory
Committee fi.om five to nine; providing for amendment to Section Six to
limit membership on the Advisory Committee to three members from each
subdivision or community; providing for amendment to Exhibit A to delete
Grey Oaks Development from the boundaries of the district, providing for
inclusion in the Code of Laws and Ordinances; providing for conflict and
severability; and providing for an effective date.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
A. Appointment of members to the Pelican Bay MSTBU Advisory Committee.
Be
Reconsideration of discussion regarding rush hour dump-track traffic on Oil
Well and Immokalee Roads. (Commissioner Halas.)
Ce
Discussion regarding Hideaway Beach December, 2002 Renourishment
Project. (Commissioner Fiala.)
COUNTY MANAGER'S REPORT
3
March 25, 2003
This item to be heard at 11:00 a.m. Review the written and oral reports of
the Advisory Boards and Committees scheduled for review in 2003 in
accordance with Ordinance No. 2001-55, including the Golden Gate
Community Center Advisory Committee, the Immokalee Enterprise Zone
Development Agency, the Library Advisory Board, the Pelican Bay MSTBU
Advisory Committee, and the Tourist Development Council. (Winona
Stone, Assistant to the County Manager)
Be
Adopt a Resolution to correct a Scrivener's Error in the Order of taking
entered by the Court on April 5, 2000 in the Case of Collier County v.
Northside Construction, et al, for the Condemnation of Parcel 110 for the
Pine Ridge Road Project (Project No. 60111). (Heidi Ashton, Assistant
County Attorney, County Attorney's Office)
Ce
Approve an Amendment to the Original April 10, 2001, and previous July
30, 2002 Amendment to the Florida Department of Environmental
Protection Consent Order related to various Wastewater Projects, 73077,
73158, 73164, 73949, and 73950, at no additional cost. (Jim DeLony,
Administrator, Public Utilities)
Recommendation that the Board approve $192,000 in legal support to be
performed by Carlton Fields under the existing Continuing Services Contract
for Contingent Growth Management Services in support of the Checkbook
Concurrency LDC and GMP Amendments, Traffic Impact Vesting Process
and Defense of Challenges to the Notice of Intent by DCA to find the Rural
Fringe Amendments in compliance, and to apprise the Board of the Work
Program for Development of LDC to implement the Final Order
Amendments to the GMP. (Joseph K. Schmitt, Administrator, Community
Development)
Ee
Adopt a Resolution opposing any proposed changes to Florida Statutes that
will diminish any authority of any Local Government to regulate any
Telecommunications Facility except to the extent necessary to facilitate the
E911 Program at the specific site of the E911 Telecommunications Facility.
(Bleu Wallace, Director, Community Development Environmental Services
Operations)
Approve the borrowing an additional $4.5 million to bring the total to $8.0
million to complete the building expansion of the Community Development
and Environmental Services Division's Offices and Construction of the
4
March 25, 2003
11.
associated parking garage and the borrowing of $2.3 million to fund the
replacement of the Division's Business System. (Joseph K. Schmitt,
Administrator, Community Development)
Ge
That the Board of County Commissioners adopt policies to be used in
developing the Collier County Government budget for fiscal year 2004.
(Michael Smykowski, Director, Office of Management and Budget)
Approval of a request by the Public Vehicle Advisory Committee that the
Board adopt a Resolution authorizing a temporary fuel cost surcharge to
allow taxicab drivers to recover some costs of the recent increases in motor
vehicle fuels. (Michelle Amold, Staff Liaison, Community Development)
Request by David Reinersten, representing Southern Extreme Water Ski
Team, to waive fees in the estimated amount of $2525 for a Regional Water
Ski Tournament to be held at Sugden Regional Park, June 20 to 22. (John
Dunnuck, Administrator, Public Services)
Je
Accept a Grant Agreement from the South Florida Water Management
District in the amount of $54,000 and authorize a Code Enforcement
position for enforcement of the Boards' Irrigation Ordinance. (Jim DeLony,
Administrator, Public Utilities)
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS
12. COUNTY ATTORNEY'S REPORT
13.
Ae
Proposed Resolution opposing Senate Bill 1462, which exempts certain
construction and demolition debris from Solid Waste Regulations.
OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
Ae
For the Board of County Commissioners to provide funding for a mid-level
accountant in the office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court and to direct staff to
provide to the Clerk's Office copies of draft executive summaries and
supporting documentation at the time they are submitted to the Budget
Office for review.
14. AIRPORT AUTHORITY
5
March 25, 2003
15. STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS
16. CONSENT AGENDA - All matters listed under this item are considered to be
routine and action will be taken by one motion without separate discussion of
each item. If discussion is desired by a member of the Board, that item(s) will
be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered separately.
............................................................................................................
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
1)
Award of Contract #03-3456 for Professional Engineering Services
for Engineering Analysis and Rate Testimony for Orangetree Utilities
pursuant to Ordinance No. 96-6, as amended, in the amount of
$77,194.
2)
3)
Approval of the Satisfaction of Lien for Code Enforcement Board
Case No. 1995-406 styled Board of County Commissioners Collier
County, Florida, vs. Nancy Mills regarding violation of Ordinances
No. 99-51 of the Collier County Land Development Code.
Review Tourist Development related advertising and promotion
invoices, determine expenditures serve a Public Purpose, approve
appropriate invoices for payment directly to vendors in the amount of
$14,067.97 from Fund 194 Reserves, and deny payment of invoice in
the amount of $3,857 as recommended by the Tourist Development
Council.
4)
5)
6)
Approval of the Satisfaction of Lien for Code Enforcement Board
Case No. 1992-23 styled Board of County Commissioners Collier
County, Florida vs. Nancy Mills regarding violation of Ordinances
No. 99-51 of the Collier County Land Development Code.
Approval of the Satisfaction of Lien for Code Enforcement Board
Case No. 1996-520 styled Board of County Commissioners Collier
County, Florida vs. Nancy Mills regarding violation of Ordinances
No. 99-51 of the Collier County Land Development Code.
Approval of the Satisfaction of Lien for Code Enforcement Board
Case No. 1996-169 styled Board of County Commissioners Collier
6
March 25, 2003
7)
8)
9)
County, Florida vs. Nancy Mills regarding violation of Ordinances
No. 99-51 of the Collier County Land Development Code.
Approval of the Satisfaction of Lien for Code Enforcement Board
Case No. 2002-195 styled Board of County Commissioners Collier
County, Florida vs. Nancy Mills regarding violation of Ordinances
No. 99-51 of the Collier County Land Development Code.
Approval of the Satisfaction of Lien for Code Enforcement Board
Case No. 2002-21 styled Board of County Commissioners Collier
County, Florida vs. Donald Saporito regarding violation of
Ordinances No. 99-51 of the Collier County Land Development Code.
Request to grant final acceptance of the roadway, drainage, water and
sewer improvements for the Final Plat of "Pelican Marsh Unit
Twelve".
10)
12)
13)
Request to grant final acceptance of the roadway, drainage, water and
sewer improvements for the Final Plat of"Kathleen Court".
Code Enforcement Lien Resolution approvals.
Recommendation to approve a contract with the Bureau of Surveying
and Mapping of the Florida Department of Environmental Protection
(FDEP) as a single source vendor for Second Order Vertical Control
established through Golden Gate Estates, in the amount of $55,049.
Approval of Allocation of Funds from the respective Impact Fee Trust
Funds in the amount of $4,721.59 for litigation related expenses, as
authorized by the Collier County Consolidated Impact Fee Ordinance,
2001-13.
14)
Award of Bid//03-3479 in the not to exceed amount of $50,000 for
construction of an artificial reef.
16)
Approval of one (1) impact fee reimbursement of $525.00 due to
Building Permit cancellation.
Approve an increase of $473,000 to the Community Development and
Environmental Services Division Capital Budget for additional
7
March 25, 2003
Be
expenses incurred to the Division's Garage and Office Building.
17)
Approval of a Resolution requesting an increase to the maximum
home sales price ($150,000) in Collier County for all Florida Housing
Finance Corporation (FHFC) Programs.
18)
Approve Budget Amendment transferring remaining $491,225 from
"Remittance to Private Organizations" line item to "Other Contractual
Services" line item in the Tourist Development Tax Fund 194
(Advertising/Promotion) to establish operating budget for the newly
formed Tourism Department.
19)
Approval of two (2) Impact Fee reimbursements totaling $13,833.64
due to building permit cancellations.
TRANSPORTATION SERVICES
1)
That the Board of County Commissioners approve a Work Order
under Contract #01-3290 to Wilson Miller in the amount of $106,000
and a Budget Amendment for the Forest Lakes MSTU for the purpose
of producing a Drainage and Roadway Improvements Master Plan
within the Forest Lakes District.
2)
3)
That the Board of County Commissioners approve the Budget
Amendment for the Radio Road Beautification MSTU for the purpose
of reapportioning the adopted budgeted funds to maintain Devonshire
Boulevard Landscaped Improvements in the amount of $45,000.
Approve a Resolution authorizing execution of a Florida Department
of Transportation Local Agency Program Agreement for the
Beautification Enhancements to the Haldeman Creek Bridge on
Bayshore Drive.
4)
5)
Approval of the design for bus stop shelters and the proposed
locations on the Purple Route of the Collier Area Transit (CAT).
Approve Work Orders to McGee and Associates, in the amount of
$23,490, Contract #00-3131 for Landscape Architectural Services of
1-75/Golden Gate Interchange Project.
8
March 25, 2003
Ce
6)
Approve a Property Transfer and Construction Agreement with the
Estates at Twin Eagles, Ltd., for conveyance right-of-way and other
easements and construction of a wildlife crossing. (Fiscal Impact: A
savings of not less than $59,400)
7)
Approve Memorandum of Agreement between the State of Florida
Department of Transportation (FDOT) and Collier County to
authorize the transfer of responsibilities for review and approval of
drainage permits on State roadways from FDOT to Collier County.
8)
Approve County Incentive Grant Program (CIGP) Amendment
Extension for Livingston Road from Pine Ridge Road to Immokalee
Road (FM #410003 1 54 01) Project #62071.
PUBLIC UTILITIES
1)
Approve withdrawal of the Permit Application for Hideaway Beach
Access Improvements (Tigertail to Hideaway Connection), Project
90511.
2)
3)
4)
Approve Work Order HM-FT-03-01 to Hole Montes, Inc., for
Professional Engineering Services related to Raw Water Booster
Pumping Station Performance Testing and Operation and
Maintenance Manual in the amount of $24,740, Project 70057.
Approve a Change Order for an additional $7,631 in consulting fees to
Public Resources Management Group (PRMG) for the Collier County
Water-Sewer District User Rate Study.
Approve a Work Order for a video through Survey of Vanderbilt and
Naples Beaches as required by the Rock Removal Plan, Project
90507, in the amount of $27,925 (Contract Number 01-3271 -Fixed
Term Professional Engineering Services for Coastal Management
Projects).
6)
Approve a Budget Amendment for Hideaway Beach Renourishment
Engineering Services, Project 90502, in the amount of $165,500.
Award RFP #02-3356 - Special Assessments System Programming,
approve contract negotiations and authorize Chairman to sign a
9
March 25, 2003
7)
contract with DUA Computer Resources Inc., in an amount not to
exceed $143,500 and approve a budget amendment.
Approval to terminate the January 2, 2001 rental of two (2) Pitney-
Bowes Documatch Integrated Mail Systems and approval to rent two
(2) new Pitney-Bowes Documatch Integrated Mail Systems to
commence October 1, 2003.
8)
Approve Work Order #UC-020 with Kyle Construction Inc., in the
amount of $187,600 for work associated with the Price Street Water
Main Assessment Project.
9)
Approve Work Order WM-FT-03-03 to Wilson Miller, Inc., for
Professional Engineering Services related to North County Regional
Water Treatment Plant Reliability Assessment and Maintenance
Agreement System in the amount of $48,000, Project 70094.
PUBLIC SERVICES
1)
Approve the Summer Food Service Program Grant in the amount of
$461,600.
E. ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
Fe
1)
Approve Change Order No. 1, Phase 2, Amendment No. 1 for
Architectural Services for the design of the Courthouse Annex,
Contract 00-3173 in the amount of $69,716.
COUNTY MANAGER
1)
2)
3)
Approve Ochopee Fire Control District's Application for a Matching
(50/50) Grant offered by the Florida Division of Forestry in the
amount of $4,230 and approve the necessary budget amendments.
Recognize and appropriate Isles of Capri Fire Control District
Protective Inspection Fee Revenue in the amount of $26,000 by
approving the necessary Budget Amendment.
Approval of Budget Amendment Report-Budget Amendment #03-221
for $41 to balance the Vanderbilt Area Study project in the SAP
lO
March 25, 2003
System.
G. AIRPORT AUTHORITY
H. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
I. MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
1) Miscellaneous items to file for record with action as directed.
J. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
1)
Recommend that the Board of County Commissioners approve a
document for Seventh Year State Criminal Alien Assistance Program
(SCAAP) Grant Funds.
2)
Recommend that the Board of County Commissioners designate the
Sheriff's Office as the "Official Applicant" of the United States
Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Assistance, Bulletproof Vest
Parmership Grant Program, to accept Grants when awarded and
approve applicable budget amendments.
3)
That the Board of County Commissioners make a determination of
whether the purchases of goods and services documented in the
Detailed Report of Open Purchase Orders serve a valid public purpose
and authorize the expenditure of County funds to satisfy said
purchases. Detailed Report of Open Purchase Orders is on display in
the County Manager's Office, 2n~Floor, W. Harmon Turner Building.
COUNTY ATTORNEY
1)
Approve the Stipulated Final Judgment relative to the Fee Simple
Acquisition of Parcel 178 in the Lawsuit styled Collier County v. Big
Corkscrew Island Fire District, et al, Immokalee Road, Project No.
60018.
2)
Approve the Offer of Judgment relative to the Fee Simple Acquisition
of Parcel 181 in the Lawsuit styled Collier County v. Big Corkscrew
Fire District, et al, Case No. 02-2218-CA (Immokalee Road Project
11
March 25, 2003
17.
#60018).
3)
Approve the Offer of Judgment relative to the Fee Simple Acquisition
of Parcel 186 in the Lawsuit styled Collier County v. Manuel Alvarez,
et al, Case No. 02-2182-CA (Immokalee Road Project #60018).
4)
Approve the Offer of Judgment relative to the Fee Simple Acquisition
of Parcel 174 in the Lawsuit styled Collier County v. Michael S.
Combs, et al, Case No. 02-2315-CA (Immokalee Road Project
#60018).
s)
Approve the Offer of Judgment relative to the Fee Simple Acquisition
of Parcel 185 in the Lawsuit styled Collier County v. Manuel Alvarez,
et al, Case No. 02-2182-CA (Immokalee Road Project #60018).
SUMMARY AGENDA - THIS SECTION IS FOR ADVERTISED PUBLIC
HEARINGS AND MUST MEET THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA: 1) A
RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL FROM STAFF; 2) UNANIMOUS
RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL BY THE COLLIER COUNTY
PLANNING COMMISSION OR OTHER AUTHORIZING AGENCIES OF
ALL MEMBERS PRESENT AND VOTING; 3) NO WRITTEN OR ORAL
OBJECTIONS TO THE ITEM RECEIVED BY STAFF, THE COLLIER
COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION, OTHER AUTHORIZING
AGENCIES OR THE BOARD, PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF
THE BCC MEETING ON WHICH THE ITEMS ARE SCHEDULED TO BE
HEARD; AND 4) NO INDIVIDUALS ARE REGISTERED TO SPEAK IN
OPPOSITION TO THE ITEM. FOR THOSE ITEMS, WHICH ARE
QUASI JUDICIAL IN NATURE, ALL PARTICIPANTS MUST BE SWORN
IN.
18.
Ae
TO BE CONTINUED INDEFINITELY. An Ordinance amending
Ordinance Number 02-43, the Balmoral PUD, to correct a Scrivener's Error
in Section 1.2, Legal Description; Section 2.3, Description of Project Plan
and Proposed Land Uses; Section 3.6, Landscaping and Buffering
Requirements, Section 5.7.K, Transportation Development Commitments,
and by providing for an effective date.
ADJOURN
12
March 25, 2003
INQUIRIES CONCERNING CHANGES TO THE BOARD'S AGENDA SHOULD BE
MADE TO THE COUNTY MANAGER'S OFFICE AT 774-8383.
*NOTE: MEETING TO BEGIN AT 8:00 A.M.
13
March 25, 2003
March 25, 2003
Item #2A
REGULAR, CONSENT, AND SUMMARY AGENDA-
APPROVED AND/OR ADOPTED WITH CHANGES
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Everybody takes his or her seat. I
call the Board of Commissioners meeting to order.
We will have invocation by Roy -- Pastor Roy Shuck from Faith
Community Church, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance led by
Beth Walsh.
Would you all rise, please.
PASTOR SHUCK: As we pray today, our chairman has asked
that we pray for our troops in the Gulf War in Iraq, he's also asked
that we pray for the people that have been taken prisoners and for the
families of the military people.
Father, as we come to you today in prayer, we certainly share
Commissioner Henning's concern for our military personnel. We
thank you for their dedication, for their willingness to stand between
that and uS which would destroy us.
We thank you, Lord that there is those who are willing even to
lay down their life for the freedoms that we enjoy today.
We do pray that you would protect them, that you would keep
them safe, that those that do suffer physical harm and those that do
suffer death, that there would be a special measure of grace for them
and a special measure of love for their families and for those who
love them deeply.
We do pray especially for the spouses and the children today of
these people that have -- are there in the theater of war. We ask,
Lord, that these would be loved by all of us who are here, that we
would give them special care and special concern and work to meet
their needs.
Page 2
March 25, 2003
We pray, Lord, that you will help the churches of this nation to
step forward and to give the compassionate help that is so needed on
their behalf.
We do ask now for your kindest blessing upon this meet, give us
wisdom, and may, Lord, we build a great community where there is
justice and righteousness, and help up, Lord, to lay aside our selfish
ambitions for the betterment of this great community. In the name our Lord, we pray, amen.
(The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thanks, Beth, wherever you are.
County manager (sic), David Weigel, do you have any
additions, corrections or deletions or editorials on the consent
agenda?
MR. WEIGEL: Only to note that the notice for the meeting is
from eight o'clock until one, and it's typically (sic) that we will
attempt to provide a meeting time, both front and rear end, but the
meeting should not be constrained to have to run till one o'clock if
the business should be concluded prior to that, nor should the
meeting be constrained to end at one if, in fact the meeting business
would seem to run past the one o'clock time. So one o'clock does not
mean that the meeting must automatically shut down pursuant to
sunshine law.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: County manager, Jim Mudd, would
you walk us through the change sheet, please.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. Good morning, Mr. Chairman,
Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Good morning.
MR. MUDD: The change -- the change list for March 25, 2003,
item 4(C), the title needs to be changed to read, it's a proclamation to
proclaim April 5th, 2003, as the Great American Cleanup Day to be
accepted by Denise Kirk, water reduction and recycling manager,
Page 3
March 25, 2003
and Barbara Lee, Adopt-a-Road coordinator for the road maintenance
department of the Transportation Services Division.
The next item is to continue item 10(D) to April 8, 2003,
recommendation that the board approve $192,000 in legal support to
be performed by Carlton Fields under the existing continuing
services contract for contingent growth management services in
support of checkbook concurrency LDC and GMP amendments.
There was some -- there was some confusion about what pots of
money that 19 -- that $192,000 was going to be taken or added to in
order to get it. So instead of going through that confusion today,
we'll get it straight and have it at the next meeting.
The next item is an add item for 10(M), and this came in last
evening, and that's a resolution to support the continued state funding
for primary care facilities through local -- through a local, state, and
federal matching fund program, and that was added because there's
been some discussion in Tallahassee about stopping some certain
avenues in order to get those revenues, so that's why the resolution is
there today.
Next item is to move 16(A)16 to 10(L) to be heard in
conjunction with item number 10(F), and that's to approve an
increase of $473,000 to the Community Development and
Environmental Services Division capital budget for any additional
expenses incurred in the division's garage and office building project.
And 10(F) is the bonding issue -- or bonding or loan --
commercial paper issue for that same facility. So having both heard
together would be appropriate.
The next item is item 16(B)8, and the title is to read, approve
county incentive grant program, CIGP, amendment, extension for
Livingston Road from Pine Ridge Road to Immokalee Road, and
then we have FM #410014 1 54 01, project 62071. And the title
submitted read the wrong FM number, so that's just a clarification.
Page 4
March 25, 2003
Next item is to move item 16(C)5 to 10(K) to be heard at 12
noon. Reason for that is Commissioner Halas will be here at certain
times today during breaks in his training that he's having in Virginia
with the Federal Emergency Management Agency, and that's to
approve a budget amendment for Hideaway Beach renourishment
engineering services project 90502 in the amount of $165,500. And
again, that's Commissioner Halas and Commissioner Coletta's
request.
And we have two time certains, and, again, these have to do
with Commissioner Halas's breaks during his training and he'll link
up with us.
The first item at 9:30, and that's item 9(B), and that's
reconsideration of discussion regarding rush hour dump truck traffic
on Oil Well and Immokalee Roads. Again, Commissioner Halas's
request.
And time certain item at 10:45 a.m., and that's item 10(G), that
the Board of County Commissioners adopt policies to be used in
developing the Collier County government budget for fiscal year
2004. Again, Commissioner Halas's request. That's all I have, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And Sue, we have some
commissioners with us viva (sic) cell phone, correct?
MS. FILSON: Yes, sir, and I've already hooked a telephone up.
In fact, I heard a slight noise. I'm wondering if one of them's
connected in now.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. We just don't know. Who
may -- which commissioner may we have viva (sic) cell phone?
MS. FILSON: I think they're both going to call in.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta?
Commissioner Halas?
We have neither commissioner with us.
Page 5
March 25, 2003
Commissioner Coyle, do you have anything -- changes or
corrections on today's agenda?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Nothing.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Do you have any ex parte
communication on the summary agenda?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I do not.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I have no ex parte, and I have
nothing to add or change.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: From the Clerk of Court's office, Jim
Mitchell, do you have anything? MR. MITCHELL: No.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I have no changes. I just need a
clarification on one item on the consent agenda, and I have no ex
parte communication.
Item 16(B)4, I need a clarification on that, and that is with the
transit system -- CAT system and bus shelters. Do we -- are we
amending it so one of the shelters could be at the intersection of
Santa Barbara and -- I forget the -- what is it, Recreation Lane?
MS. FLAGG: Yes. Diane Flagg, for the record. And we are
going to amend the location of one of the shelter locations to place it
on Santa Barbara in front of the Golden Gate Community Park.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, that's a good idea.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
MS. FLAGG: You're welcome.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: With those changes, additions, I'll
entertain a motion to --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Commissioner Henning?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Oh, yes. Great, we do have a
commissioner with us. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Commissioner Coletta here. I
Page 6
March 25, 2003
just want -- I just came on. They had a hard time hooking me up.
Was 16(C) 1 pulled for the -- no, I take it back. Not 16(C) 1.
Was 16(C) 1 pulled?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: We have 16(C)5, which is approving
the amendment, Hideaway Beach Renourishment engineering
services.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That one's been pulled?
CHAIRMAN HENN1NG: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you. That's all I needed
to know.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Is there anything else, Commissioner
Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No. Thank you for asking,
Commissioner Henning.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Do you have any ex parte
communication on the summary agenda today?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Hold on just one second,
please.
MR. WEIGEL: Mr. Chairman, I believe summary agenda is
being continued indefinitely if you--
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So I would have none.
MR. WEIGEL: If you adopt the agenda as it's provided here.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Do we have Commissioner
Halas with us today, this morning? (No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. We have four commissioners.
I'll entertain a motion for today's agenda.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So move.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: There's a motion by Commissioner
Coyle to accept the agenda as -- and -- the consent and summary as
Page 7
March 25, 2003
amended, second by Commissioner Fiala.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries, 4-0.
Page 8
AGENDA CHANGES
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' MEETING
March 25, 2003
Item 4C title to read: Proclamation to proclaim April 5, 2003 as Great American
Cleanup Day. Te be accepted by Denise Kirk, Water Reduction and Recycling
Manager and Barbara Lee, Adopt-a-Road Coordinator from the Road Maintenance
Department of the Transportation Services Division. (Staff request.)
Continue Item 10D to April 8, 2003 BCC Meeting: Recommendation that the Board
approve $192,000 in legal support to be performed by Carlton Fields under the
existing continuing services contract for contingent growth management services
in support of the checkbook concurrency LDC and GMP amendments, traffic
impact vesting process and defense of challenges to the notice of intent by DCA
to find the Rural Fringe Amendments in compliance, and to apprise the Board of
the work program for development of LDC to implement the final order
amendments to the GMP. (Staff request.)
Add Item 10M: Resolution to support the continued State funding for primary care
facilities through a local, State and Federal matching program. (Staff request.)
Move 16(A)16 to 10L to be heard in conjunction with 10F: Approve an increase of
$473,000 to the Community Development and Environmental Services Division
Capital Budget for additional expenses incurred to the Division's garage and
office building. (Commissioner Coyle request.)
Item16(B) 8 title to read: Approve County Incentive Grant Program (ClGP)
Amendment extension for Livingston Road from Pine Ridge Road to Immokalee
Road (FM ~410014 1 54 01) Project 62071. (Title submitted reads FM #410003 1 54
01)
Move Item 16C5 to 10K to be heard at 12:00 noon: Approve a Budget Amendment
for Hideaway Beach Renourishment Engineering Services, Project 90502, in the
amount of $165,500. (Commissioner Halas, Commissioner Coletta request.)
Time Certain Items:
9:30 a.m. Item 9B: Reconsideration of discussion regarding rush hour dump-
truck traffic on Oil Well and Immokalee Roads. (Commissioner Halas request)
10:45 a.m. Item 10G: That the Board of County Commissioners adopt policies to
be used in developing the Collier County Government budget for fiscal year 2004.
(Commissioner Halas request)
March 25, 2003
Item #2B
MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF FEBRUARY 25, 2003 -
APPROVED AS PRESENTED
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Motion to accept the regular
meeting minutes for February 25th.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Fiala,
second by Commissioner Coyle on the February 25th, '03, regular
meeting.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. I'm sorry.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- carries, 4-0.
Item #2C
MINUTES OF WORKSHOP MEETING OF FEBRUARY 28, 2003
- APPROVED AS PRESENTED
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And motion to approve the minutes
from the February 28th workshop.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Fiala,
Page 9
March 25, 2003
second by Commissioner Coyle to accept the minutes of the
workshop of February 28th, '03.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries, 4-0.
Item #4A
PROCLAMATION OBSERVING APRIL AS SEXUAL ASSAULT
AWARENESS MONTH- ADOPTED
We'll go to proclamation today. We -- our first one will be
delivered by Commissioner Fiala, and this proclamation -- to observe
April as Sexual Assault Awareness Month
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. Will the -- are you the
representative?
MS. WILLS: I am.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you. I hope when Coletta
said did we pull it, he didn't think we pulled it off completely, he
knows it's on the regular agenda.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. I didn't explain that.
Would you come up here in front of the dais, please.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you very much.
MS. WILLS: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: It's my pleasure to read this.
Proclamation: Whereas, sexual assault continues to be a major
social crisis in our society; where one out of every four women has
been a victim; and,
Page 10
March 25, 2003
Whereas, every female faces the potential threat of becoming a
victim; and,
Whereas, sexual assault affects every child and adult from ages
nine -- four to 94 years of age in Collier County as a victim/survivor
or as a family member, significant other, neighbor, or co-worker of a
victim or survivor; and,
Whereas, volunteers and service providers in our community are
working to provide a continuum of care to sexual assault survivors
through 24-hour hotlines, counseling, support groups, advocacy,
medical care and education; and,
Whereas, Project HELP Crisis Center seeks to improve services
for victims and survivors of sexual assault and prevent future sexual
assault through public awareness, training, education, and free
service for victims; and,
Whereas, this community recognizes the vital importance of
designating a time devoted to increase the general public's awareness
and support of agencies providing free services to rape victims; and,
Whereas, Project HELP Crisis Center holds forth a vision of a
community free from sexual violence.
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that Collier County will
observe April as Sexual Assault Awareness Month, and to include
April 2nd, 2003, as Sexual Assault Awareness Day and urge all
citizens to take part in activities and observances designed to increase
awareness and understanding of the epidemic that affects us not just
on a social level, but on a national level. Decide to end sexual
violence.
Done and ordered this 25th day of March, 2003.
Motion to approve.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And I'll second that motion. Motion
made by Commissioner Fiala, second by myself.
Page 11
March 25, 2003
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHA~IRMAN HENNING: Motion carries, 4-0.
Thank you.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: We want a picture first. Thank you.
MS. WILLS: Hi. My name is Jamie Wills, and I am the rape
counselor at Project HELP Crisis Center. And as Collier County's
only rape crisis center, I'd like to thank you all and invite you all to
come down to Lowdermilk Park on Wednesday, April 2nd. It is an
opportunity for social service providers to gather and share
information about where our survivors can go to get help, legal
recourse, self-defense techniques, and I'd like to thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
(Applause.)
Item #4B
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING THE MONTH OF APRIL AS
CONSERVANCY VOI,I INTEER MONTH - ADOPTED
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Next proclamation will be delivered
by Commissioner Coyle. This proclamation is to dedicate the month
of April as Conservancy Volunteer Month.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Would Sally McKiergan please
Page 12
March 25, 2003
come forward.
MS. McKIERGAN: I'd like to invite --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You invite as many people as
you'd like. Bring them all down and just line up in front here.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Come on down.
MS. McKIERGAN: Good morning.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Hi. How are you today? Getting
prepared for the fish fry?
MS. McKIERGAN: Yes, I bought some --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, okay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You're all set? Okay.
Whereas, The Conservancy of Southwest Florida is the region's
leading non-profit environmental organization; and,
Whereas, The Conservancy has helped protect nearly 300,000
acres of environmentally sensitive land since 1964, including
Fakahatchee Strand, Belle Meade, South Golden Gate Estates,
Rookery Bay, and Big Cypress Preserve; and,
Whereas, The Conservancy actively assists with state and
federal land acquisitions and restoration programs in the Greater
Everglades Ecosystem and more than 5,500 members support The
Conservancy of Southwest Florida, and more than 700 volunteers
generously donate their time and expertise to the Conservancy of
Southwest Florida; and,
Whereas, The Conservancy helps shape environmental policy in
South Florida by participating in and monitoring more than 125
Southwest Florida environmental issues annually; and,
Whereas, in addition to playing a key role in environmental
advocacy and protection, The Conservancy operates in support of its
mission the Naples Nature Center, the Briggs Nature Center, the
Wildlife Rehabilitation Center, and the Sea Turtle Monitoring and
Protection Project; and,
Page 13
March 25, 2003
Whereas, The Conservancy provides environmental education
programs reaching thousands of adults and students every year; and,
Whereas, over 700 volunteers assist in the daily functioning of
The Conservancy as museum docents, information desk volunteers,
store sales personnel, wildlife caregivers, special events volunteers,
dock masters, boat captains, mailers, volunteer coordinators, office
helpers, couriers, carpenters, horticultural assistants; and,
Whereas, local business professionals, including veterinarians,
medical staff, and business leaders also donate their time and service;
and,
Whereas, in fiscal year 2000 (sic), volunteers donated more than
55,000 hours to The Conservancy of Southwest Florida.
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that the month of April
2003 be designated as Conservancy Volunteer Month.
Done and ordered this 25th day of March 2003, Board of
County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, Tom Henning,
Chairman.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Motion to approve, please.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And I'll second that motion.
Motion by Commissioner Fiala, second by Commissioner
Henning.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries, 4-0.
Thank you.
Page 14
March 25, 2003
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes, you may but we want to get a
picture first.
MS. McKIERGAN: Oh, all right.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Sally, let me shake your hand.
MS. McKIERGAN: Thank you very much for that kind
proclamation, Mr. Chair, and members of the board.
It's my -- it's our pleasure to be here today to accept this
proclamation, and I want to let you know that Kathy Prosser sends
her regrets. She, herself, is in her own board meeting this morning at
eight o'clock, so she could -- she was unable to come.
But you were right in that proclamation, over 5,000 school
children came to Collier County to the -- and visited The
Conservancy this past fiscal year, and they did a fantastic job. The
volunteers greeted them, hosted these 5,000 school kids, and helped
them watch Robert Ballard and his staff of scientists as they
conducted experiments and tests off the Channel Islands in the State
of California.
So they do a great job and they very much deserve your
attention. And I would like to invite you-all and members of the
community to the 14th Annual Fish Fry, which is going to be held on
April 11 th, that's Friday, April 1 lth, and also to Earth Day
celebration on April 26th. Thank you so much.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
MS. McKIERGAN: Bye-bye now.
(Applause.)
Item #4C
PROCLAMATION PROCLAIMING APRIL 5, 2003 AS GREAT
Page 15
March 25, 2003
AMERICAN CIJEANIIP DAY- ADOPTED
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Next proclamation I will deliver, and
if I may ask Denise Kirk from water reduction and recycling
management and Barbara Lee from Adopt-a-Road coordination.
This proclamation, ladies, please, is to recognize Greater
American Cleanup Day. Thank you.
Whereas, the mission of Keep Collier Beautiful, Incorporated, is
to protect environment and improve the quality of life for all of the
municipalities and unincorporated areas -- portion of Collier County
by providing public education using mass communications and
grass-roots activities in -- which will result in understanding and
action by individual -- individuals, businesses, civic and
environmental -- and government organizations to protect the air,
water, and natural resources of Collier County; and,
Whereas, Keep Collier Beautiful, Incorporated, organizes a
cooperative volunteer network of citizens, organizations, businesses,
and government entities for the annual Great American Cleanup/Bay
Days activities as (sic) part of the national Keep America Beautiful
Great America Cleanup; and,
Whereas Keep Collier Beautiful, Incorporated, is (sic)
partnership with Adopt-a-Road programs volunteers along with all of
the Collier County's community and civic organizations along with
Collier County's franchise hauler, along with Collier County Solid
Waste Management Department involved more than 700 volunteers
countywide last year in the Great American Cleanup; and,
Whereas, the Collier County Board of Commissioners, county
commissioners, support this endeavor as an important program of
litter prevention and community improvement.
Now, therefore be it proclaimed, Saturday, April 5th, 2003, be
known as Great American Cleanup Day through (sic) Collier County
Page 16
March 25, 2003
and business organizations and citizens are encouraged to participate
in the conserve -- conservation and beautification efforts.
· Done in this order, 25th day of March, 2003. Signed by the
chairman, Tom Henning.
I would make a motion to approve of this proclamation.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Henning,
second by Commissioner Coyle.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries, 4-0.
Thank you.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you for all your hard work.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Barbara, good to see you. Thanks,
Denise. If you want to say a few words after we get a picture.
MS. LEE: Mr. Chairman, members of the board, Keep Collier
Beautiful, its partners, and its affiliates thank you for this
proclamation.
The American -- Great American Cleanup is now in its 1 lth
year in Florida. It is an innovation of Keep America Beautiful. It
focusses attention on litter and litter prevention. Litter is a fact of
life that we can change, a problem we can solve if we all pitch in to
help.
This proclamation making April 5 the Great American Cleanup
Page 17
March 25, 2003
Day offers everyone the opportunity to do just that.
One of Collier County's big events during the Great American
Cleanup is the popular Bay Days, which attracts hundreds of
volunteers. They will be very visible April 5 cleaning up our
waterways. An armada of boats, pontoons, rubber dinghies, will
push off into the waterways armed with fishing nets and grabbers.
They will not be seeking fish, but rather the unsightly litter that
pollutes our waters.
Parents and children will gather on the beaches to pick up litter
and the hundreds of cigarette butts carelessly discarded.
Simultaneously, Adopt-a-Road volunteers will be cleaning up
our roads and encouraging neighborhood cleanups. Everyone is
invited to join in and volunteer his or her time to help make Collier
County the pristine paradise it can be.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
(Applause.)
MS. LEE: Thank you, Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
Item #5A
KlM BRADLEY, ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALIST,
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT, RECOGNIZED
AS EMPLOYEE OF THE MONTH FOR MARCH, 2003 -
APPROVED
Now one of the -- one of the fun things the Board of
Commissioners needs -- gets to do is recognizing our employees, and
this morning we have an Employee of the Month, and I would like to
call up Kim Hadley. Kim Hadley is an environmental specialist,
Environmental Service Department, and we're going to recognize her
Page 18
March 25, 2003
an Employee of the Month, so let me explain some of the great things
she has done.
Just -- we're going to embarrass you here for a minute, if you'd
just turn around, please. Thank you.
Kim Hadley has contributed a multitude of tasks which have
been a valuable asset to customer service, current planning,
engineering inspections, and the environmental sector of the
community development division.
As one of the images (sic) this scope, the membership can
present numerous challenges to any endeavor. Kim has choose -- has
chosen to see this as an opportunity for problem-solving within the
division and has been tireless in her efforts, with admirable success.
With the asset -- assistance of the Land Development Code
amendments, computer data improvements, plan review, code
enforcement, and various other field inspections, Kim has performed
under difficult conditions. She has gained the respect of everyone
who she works for and is known to be patient, timely, and invariably
effective.
Incredibly, in her spare time, Kim -- upbeat attitude and
personal energy has given all county employees and their families an
opportunity to participate in recreational activities and fun events
which has enhanced the public relations, internal communications,
potential and morals (sic), striking a balance in her professional
performance.
Commissioners, I would like to, this morning, present Kim with
a plaque this morning, designating her as Employee of the Month,
March 2003, and I ask for a motion to -- for us to recognize Kim for
Employee of the Month for 2003, March.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So move.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So move.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
Page 19
March 25, 2003
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And also I want to give Kim a check
for $150 for her tireless efforts of being a great employee of Collier
County and just a little note that I wrote you. We have a motion and
second on the floor. All in favor of the motion, signify by saying
aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries, 5-0 -- 4-0.
Thank you.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, thanks. Thanks for being here.
Let me give you this plaque, and just hold it up, and we're going to
get a picture.
Item #5B
PRESENTATION BY KEITH ARNOLD, FLORIDA LOBBY
ASSOCIATES, REGARDING THE FOLLOWING CURRENT
LEGISLATIVE ISSUES AFFECTING COLLIER COUNTY:
HEALTH CARE COSTS; TRAUMA CENTER; IMPACT FEES;
COMMUNICATIONS TOWER PLACEMENT; LOCAL OPTION
GAS TAX FUNDING; EXTENSION OF SR29 INTO STATE
INTERMODAL SYSTEM; UPL PROGRAM; ANIMAL CONTROL
ISSUES; WATER/SEWER ACT; SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL;
AND MONIES REQUESTED FOR PROJECTS FOR BAREFOOT
FIF. ACH AND GOODIJAND FLOATING PARK
Page 20
March 25, 2003
Well, now we're going to get to the other fun stuff that we do
here at Board of Commissioners.
This is a presentation by Keith Arnold, Florida lobbyist
association (sic) -- and present an update on the current legislation
issues affecting Collier County.
Mr. Arnold, thank you for being here this morning.
MR. ARNOLD: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the
board. If I may, I'll hand out -- here's a couple for you.
Thank you, again, Mr. Chairman, members of the board. For
the record, my name is Keith Arnold with Florida Lobby Associates
in Fort Myers and Tallahassee, and it's my pleasure to be here before
you today to give you an update as to where we are at this almost
midpoint in the legislative session this year.
First, just generally, the legislature has been meeting for four
weeks. This is the fourth week of the legislative session.
There's been approximately 2,500 bills filed in this year's
legislative session and thousands of various amendments relating to
those bills.
I think generally the session is moving along at a fairly slow
pace compared to others, and it's largely attributable to issues that are
overshadowing the legislative process.
If you take a look at the big three or what we might call the big
three, the fiscal issues are dominating the legislative session because
of voter-approved mandates on the legislative pro -- on the legislative
process.
Most specifically the Article V of the constitutional
requirements, the high-speed rail issue and the Class Size Reduction
Act. These three issues taken together with a softening of the
economy have certainly created a difficult economic situation in
Tallahassee with, depending upon whose estimates you believe,
several billion dollars of state revenue shortfalls in this year's
Page 21
March 25, 2003
legislative session.
That compiled with a state that's growing, demands that are
occurring, the expansion of the school system most particularly, and
the expansion of health care services for the poor, predominately
Medicaid funds, has created an economic problem that is certainly --
bogged down would probably be the wrong word, but certainly is
overshadowing the legislative process.
As we speak, the House and the Senate are deliberating on the
budget acts right now. I'll be in Tallahassee later on today to deal
with those issues. But most recently on that, another $321 million
came out of the revenue estimating conferences in anticipated
shortfall for this year's budget.
Specifically, as it relates to local government, I think it's a fair
statement to say that, generally, the mood in Tallahassee is to push
down to local governments more fiscal responsibilities. I know that's
not what you want to hear. And unfortunately, it does seem to be the
trend in Tallahassee right now with respect to the Article V issue,
which is obviously a hotly debated issue, which has been delayed in
its implementation.
The nature of the discussions in Tallahassee seem to be that the
legislature is moving along the direction to go ahead, of course, and
comply with the constitutional requirements of paying for the Article
V constitutional requirements, but they would probably
simultaneously reduce local government revenue sharing. That could
impact this county significantly.
The House and Senate are moving along in that direction as we
speak. The thought being almost punitive in nature that local
governments push the Article V issues on the state, and the state is
seemingly moving in a direction to reduce local government revenue
sharing for its financial implementation.
Secondly, the Medicaid issues have attracted an awful lot of
Page 22
March 25, 2003
attention right now in Tallahassee. And, again, the mood seems to be
that, as the state has decided, they don't want to pick up a bigger and
bigger share of the Medicaid costs, that they would ask you, local
governments, to do that. That would be really in the form of greater
participation in nursing home and long-term care issues for the
Medicaid population of this county, as well as an acute care.
Those issues obviously are financially extremely difficult for
local governments to handle. But clearly even those people who are
involved in the budget process for health care seem to be moving in a
direction where they would ask counties to shoulder a greater burden,
a disproportionate burden, if you will, of the health care
expenditures.
As you already know, generally state government, the two
biggest expenditures for state government are education and health
care. There are 30 something departments in Tallahassee. Two
aspects of government consume 70, 75 percent of state general
revenue dollars, of that being education and health care.
And on both of these issues, the state seems to be moving in a
direction of asking local governments to shoulder a bigger portion of
those expenditures.
Obviously, education doesn't impact you as much directly as
county commissioners, but it clearly impacts your constituents in that
if the Florida legislature pushes for a greater ad valorem increases for
the educational needs of this state, Collier County will continue to be
a donor community for those needs. And I would submit to you the
same would be true in health care related expenditures.
Just to give you an idea, again, of, I think, what we're dealing
with in Tallahassee. The legislature -- I don't want to generalize too
much, but there is -- in fairness to the state legislature, they are
facing significant financial problems. And if they are unable to deal
with those financial problems, they do tend to want to ask local
Page 23
March 25, 2003
governments to assume a greater and greater portion of that. And not
only are they doing that, they're also debating preemptive legislative
issues which would take away from county's -- the county's rights to
regulate certain industries.
For example, this county, most particularly in the area of
transportation, has taken an extremely aggressive stand in the area of
impact fees. There's legislation pending in Tallahassee right now
which would repeal all impact fees in the State of Florida, would
impose a statewide impact fee, and then, theoretically, resubmit some
dollars back to you for the losses which you have incurred.
Now you, as a county commission, have taken a pretty bold and
aggressive stand in transportation funding through the imposition of
impact fees, and there is legislation to repeal your actions pending in
Tallahassee right now.
To give you another indication of some of the preemptive
issues, which I know you're concerned with here in Collier County,
there is legislation pending in Tallahassee right now which would
preempt your right as a county commission to regulate cell phone
tower placement. The state wants to assume control of that, and so
you would not, by local ordinance, be able to regulate the height or
the placement of tower placement throughout Collier County.
That, of course, is being proposed by the telephone or
telecommunications industry as a way to make the same ordinances
or same law apply statewide and preempt your authority.
We saw this issue in a slightly different form last year when the
state did, in fact, try to preempt your authority to regulate sign
placement.
And here, again, in Collier County, you had taken a pretty
aggressive stand in dealing with how you perceive signs ought to be
placed, where they ought to be placed, how they could be removed if
there was road construction or school construction or for whatever
Page 24
March 25, 2003
public policy purposes, and the state did attempt to preempt your
authority in that area. And so, in many ways it's much, much the
same.
Specifically to your legislative agenda, if you look at the first
page of your specific issues, transportation, again, continues to be
one of the highest priorities of this particular community, this county
of your efforts.
And Representative Davis and Senator Saunders have filed the
Local Option Gas Tax Indexing request. This was one filed rather
late in the presession process, so it hasn't been heard yet in any
legislative committee. But Senator Saunders and Representative
Davis are committed to passing that on your behalf.
And likewise, you've asked that State Road 29 be included on
the State Intermodal Transportation Network. It already is. North of
LaBelle, State Road 29 north of LaBelle up to U.S. 27, and so this
would be an extension.
For whatever reasons, FDOT is resisting that effort, and, again,
Representative Davis is trying to amend that on a local bill so that
State Road 29 south of Immokalee would be on the State Intermodal
system.
As it relates to three specific funding requests, you've asked for
a total of not quite $5 million for a variety of issues, including the
Barefoot Beach acquisition.
As you'll recall, you as a commission purchased a piece of
property on Barefoot a couple of years ago, and you've asked for
participation by the State of Florida to reimburse you on that. We got
a pretty good rating from that particular project; 133 out of a possible
180 points.
The Florida Communities Trust is a subcomponent of
Preservation 2000, which is now Florida Forever, and so the funding
is potentially there for that.
Page 25
March 25, 2003
When we look at some of the revenue cuts that are occurring in
Tallahassee right now, it's very difficult to go inside these programs
and eliminate these programs, although the state is trying to go after
all unencumbered trust funds. And most specifically, probably what
you've heard the most about, is the state's desire to go into the
transportation trust fund, take those unencumbered dollars out of
there and fund school construction or Medicaid expenditures, et
cetera.
You also asked for 2.3 million for the Goodland Boating Park.
Again, a pretty reasonable score. And what will happen on these two
issues out of the Florida Communities Trust is it will greatly depend
on how much the legislature appropriates to that program, and then
once we determine what the legislative appropriations is, the ranking
becomes somewhat more important.
A FRDAP grant of 200,000. It has been recommended by the
Bureau of Design and Recreation Services. This particular program
looks like it may actually be cut significantly by the legislature.
You can see right now the two budgets that are being debated in
the respective chambers are very different. Six million dollars for
this program in the House, 12 million in the Senate, and so obviously
the Senate position is more advantageous. To the extent the Senate
position prevails, we'd be more likely able to fund this particular
request.
In addition to that, you have on your agenda today a resolution
which I was just handed which deals apparently with a joint program
between the Collier Commission, I believe, NCH, and Collier Health
Services, Inc., where you're apparently going to be asking for
164,000 -- or excuse me -- 472,000 of federal and state funds in
what's called the UPL program, that's the Upper Payment Limit
Program. That's a sub component of Medicaid.
I believe what you're deliberating on and what you're asking us
Page 26
March 25, 2003
to put on our agenda and to understand and to advocated for is a
primary care program where it looks to me like your social service
department, your county health unit, the local hospital, and Collier
Health Services, Inc., is pursuing a primary care program for greater
access to health care here in Collier County.
That program is being debated presently in Collier County. So
if you decide to add that to our list, we, obviously -- I would hope
that you're able to do that today to let us know, because these issues
are being appropriated as we -- as we speak.
You had two or three issues on your -- on your list this year that
you had submitted to us as your primary objectives. One's a local
bill which Representative Goodlette has filed, and that's simply a
codification of your water and sewer acts which relates to not only
Collier County, but most of the -- I think all the municipalities in
Collier County, Everglades City, the City of Naples, Marco Island,
and even some of the unincorporated areas such as Immokalee and
other areas in the county. That is supposed to be scheduled this
week, and I don't anticipate any objection to that.
You are in opposition to cross-reporting of family violence.
Actually we look pretty -- pretty good with respect to that bill. Just
to refresh your memory, you were concerned about animal control
officers having a higher standard applied to them where they would
have to cross-report their view of family violence.
Now, there's already some of those requirements placed upon
them, and so this seemed to be in your-- in your estimation, overly
duplicative of existing law, and I think that your view will prevail on
that.
The next issue is a little bit more tenuous. You had asked that
with respect to annual control, that animal control officers be allowed
to utilize federally approved substance two and substance three drugs
for euthanasia of animals, and there's currently no bill in the
Page 27
March 25, 2003
legislature on that, so we're looking for a vehicle to amend.
There are other counties that expressed a similar interest, and
we're working with the Florida Association of Counties on this.
I've spoken already a little bit to the Medicaid mandate. You
made that clear during your initial discussions with us before the
legislative session that you were opposed to -- understandably
opposed to being required to shoulder a greater portion of the
Medicaid expenditures in the state. This is a huge issue to not only
this community but all counties throughout the State of Florida.
I clearly see the legislature trying to move down a road where
they ask you to be more involved in Medicaid expenditures.
Obviously that is a -- that is the -- depending upon what year, either
the largest or the second largest expenditure of the State of Florida
rivaling education.
So I think your opposition to this is, obviously, warranted. I
don't think you would be remotely able to fund the requirements of
the Medicaid program. And I think it's really important for us to
work with not only you but with the Florida Association of Counties
and make sure that when you're in Tallahassee, as Commissioner
Coletta, I believe, is right now, that we really work and focus on that
particular issue. It has massive long-term financial implications to
communities such as yours.
Finally, you asked us to be supportive of a couple infrastructure
funding issues, enterprise zones. These -- there's a couple bills, and
these were general requirements that you had. Again, the problem I
see with infrastructure funding is the preemptive nature of
Tallahassee.
There's several pieces of legislation filed, which does, in fact,
take away from your ability to fund some of these things, such as the
impact fee legislation, which I mentioned earlier. I am very
concerned and I see ourselves in pretty much a defensive posture on
Page 28
March 25, 2003
these particular issues.
And so we'll continue to monitor many of those pieces of
legislation, but expansion of existing funding opportunities for the
county seems to be unlikely in this political climate. Protecting your
ability to fund your infrastructure needs is really where most of us
who are working with counties are focused right now, almost in a
defensive posture.
Finally -- I won't go through the rest of these bills individually,
but you have a list of about 60 or 70 bills that we've put on a list to
monitor. As I said, there's about 2,500 bills. All of them impact local
governments in some way.
I think the good news is, only about 2- or 300 of them normally
pass in the legislative session. As some of these bills become more
serious or become a focus of the legislators in Tallahassee, we'll --
they'll bubble up to the top of our list, and then we'll -- depending
upon what type of bill it is, we'll provide the needed attention to
those.
But these are ones we're watching which we believe have a --
either a fiscal or public policy impact to counties. We obviously,
because of the nature of the legislative process, we have to narrow it
down to what we're focused on.
But again, these are -- these are 60 or 70 bills which do, in fact,
impact you greatly from a public policy standpoint.
Concluding, just generally, the budget is being debated this
week. It's not a particularly attractive budget for either the state
government or for local governments, for that matter.
I -- the legislature seems to be moving along at a slower pace
than normal, and I think that it is because of these overriding,
overshadowing issues. They really have not decided what they're
going to do at this point to any degree of finality with Medicaid.
Class size reduction is very much up in the air with a huge
Page 29
March 25, 2003
dispute between the governor, the Senate, and the House as to how to
find that -- how to fund that, excuse me. Impact fee legislation is
being discussed for the first time at a state level. A variety of other
issues are being discussed.
There's great disagreement, in fact, in the numbers involved in
what it takes to fund that legislation.
You couple that with the high speed rail issue and the governor's
desire to put both of these issues back on the ballot where he would
lead an effort to hopefully have the citizens reject these issues after
they've already passed them. The legislature seems not likely to go
along with that.
So, again, great consternation between the executive branch and
the legislative branch as to how to fiscally deal with these issues.
Until those overriding large financial issues are dealt with, all
the other issues are really held at bay, and that's the process I think
we find ourselves at.
So Mr. Chairman, members, I'd be happy to answer any of your
questions at this point.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commission Fiala has a question.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. Regarding the impact fees. If
the state does take over the impact fees and we collect them no more,
will we then become a donor county as we are to most other issues?
MR. ARNOLD: It would be hard for me to imagine that you
would not be. The -- the problem for Collier in -- as it relates
particularly to ad valorem -- and I'm somewhat familiar with this
because the education budget is so much ad valorem based, there are
a few communities in the state which become donor communities
because of the high ad valorem assessment or -- excuse me, the high
property values, notwithstanding ad valorem assessment would be a
better way of stating it.
And so the reality is, is every year as your property values
Page 30
March 25, 2003
increase disproportionate to other communities, what happens is is
that you shoulder a bigger and bigger responsibility of those state
programs, and that's specifically what happens to Collier County
particularly in education funding.
Now, if-- on impact fees, it's a static number. It's not based on
value. But you do, in fact, have the -- I think the highest, if not
certainly one of the highest impact fee rates in the State of Florida.
You've taken a very bold and aggressive stand there. And for the
legislature to come back and say, hey, we're now in the impact fee
business, you're now out of it, and we'll figure out a way to keep you
whole, trust us, it puts you in a very vulnerable situation. And my
guess is is that's not going to work in the long run for you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta, do you have
any questions?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. Could you give me some
more detail, Keith, on 29 going south from Immokalee? I thought it
was removed from the intermodal system. Now it's added back on
again?
MR. ARNOLD: Commissioner Coletta, the state never had it
on there, and DOT -- Florida Department of Transportation has
resisted putting State Road 29 on the State Intermodal System.
Despite that, Representative Davis is attempting to amend a
couple bills, and also attempting, I might add, to work with FDOT to
have State Road 29 below Immokalee down to Everglades City
added to the State Intermodal System.
And, you know, those discussions are ongoing. Don't know if
we'll get there this year or not. Clearly we're working with
Representative Davis, and he, in turn, is working with the Florida
Department of Transportation. But I don't believe there was ever a
commitment by the state DOT to add it.
And you only have one road on, you know, the State Intermodal
Page 31
March 25, 2003
System, which is 1-75. And so it seems obvious that this would be
added, and I believe Commissioner Halas has also expressed an
interest in that as well. So we're working and trying to achieve that
objective.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. I just wanted to mention
that today I'll be meeting with Mike Davis at 3:30 along with the
representatives from the Department of Environmental Protection.
They have a meeting going on regarding the Collier County land
purchases at 3:30, and I'll be taking part in that and make a report
back when I finish that. And also at 1:30 I'll have a meeting on
Article V that I'll be attending.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta, I have a
question for you. At 3:30, you're meeting with Representative Mike
Davis and Natural Resources. Which item are you talking about
purchasing --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I have no idea. I just got -- I
just got a message from Davis that he invited me to his meeting.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I would assume that when they
say land purchases, they're talking about either the remaining block--
the remaining private homesteads in the south block and possibly the
roads.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: This is a meeting that Mike
Davis had called at his own -- I believe he called it. Maybe they
asked him for the meeting. But in any case, I've been invited to it.
CHAIRMAN HENN1NG: I think the board might talk about
that later on today also.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's why I'm here.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas, are you with
us today?
Page 32
March 25, 2003
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I have a number of questions. But
first I think it's important to make an observation about the impact
fee issue.
The danger is not only that we won't get money returned to us
from the state. The danger is that we have one of the highest impact
fees in the state because our property values are higher, and Collier
County doesn't have a standard road grid, so we have to buy more
property to create the necessary roads to handle traffic.
We can be assured that whatever the state establishes statewide
for any impact fee will be substantially lower than what we have
here, so we're going to get hit twice. First of all, the total amount of
money being raised is going to be substantially lower statewide
probably and our share of that will be lower. So it will be
devastating to Collier County, and we need to do whatever we can to
stop that effort.
I am surprised that the state would want to take it under -- under
their jurisdiction, because it really is a local issue, and it has to be --
it has to be patterned to the needs of the local community, and I'm
surprised they would even consider that.
MR. ARNOLD: Your observations are warranted and
understood. I mean, I believe that it would be difficult for Collier
County not only to remain whole but, over a long-term, be able to
generate the funds necessary to support the transportation
infrastructure of this community.
The effort is interesting because I think traditionally industries,
particularly the home building industry and the Florida Association
of Realtors, have resisted the statewide imposition of impact fees.
But what we see going on now, Commissioner Coyle, is that
these industries have 67 different counties with 67 different standards
Page 3 3
March 25, 2003
for impact fees, and 400 municipalities that have their own standards,
and add to that now the 67 different school districts.
What we're seeing is the industry fight with preemptive
legislation which would control impact fees at the state level, number
one. So they're rather supportive of this, and that's not -- not all
industries are totally supportive of this, but generally speaking, the
building and construction industry seems to be somewhat supportive
of doing this so that there would be uniformity in the structure of
impact fees around the State of Florida, and I think it's also fair to say
that it's their political objective that they would have a better way of
controlling that process at a state level.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, I understand, and that's
probably -- probably the motivation for doing that, but I don't think
they've thought it out very clearly, because what happens is, if we are
unable to get the money to build the roads, our alternative is to
declare a moratorium.
MR. ARNOLD: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So I don't know that they've
thought this process out very clearly, and I think it's going to be in
their -- it's not going to be in their best interest to proceed with this
particular effort because I think there are a lot of roads here in Collier
County that could very well go into a moratorium if we do not get the
impact fees to improve them.
So -- but that aside, I need to ask you some questions about
some of the specific legislation. Number one is the state bill 332.
The summary states that this bill expands the uses of the proceeds
from local option fuel taxes. It doesn't just say that they're going to
be indexed. It says it expands the uses of those fees, and I guess I
need to understand what that really means.
MR. ARNOLD: This bill, both the Saunders bill as well as the
Davis bill, were developed in conjunction with working with your
Page 34
March 25, 2003
local transportation department. And the principal impact of the bill
was, in fact, to allow for the indexing. Remember, the state allows
that for their sales tax usage and did that many, many years ago, and
they indexed the pr-- the gasoline tax to the ~PI, the Consumer Price
Index, and the effect of this bill would allow you, as local
governments -- or require you, in fact, as local governments to do the
same.
I would really prefer to defer to Norman if he has a greater
explanation of that as to what the other objectives of Collier County
would be with respect to the expanded usage of that locally.
MR. FEDER: For the record, Norman Feder, transportation
administrator.
With all respect, Commissioner, I have your same concern. We
asked for indexing. We paralleled the state's concept of indexing.
I honestly, I must admit, I have no idea what this other use is
that's entered into the discussion.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It could be that it's just improperly
summarized. That might be the case. But we need to take a look at
that bill so that we clearly understand what its impact is. MR. ARNOLD: So noted.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And then with respect to health
care issues. As these things are being forced down to the local level,
do we have any latitude with respect to the level of services or the
types of services that would be covered? Can we prioritize these
things to be reasonably consistent with our ability to pay?
MR. ARNOLD: That's the fear is that you might not be able to
do that. I mean, obviously the fear is twofold. Number one, it's a
new mandate on local governments. And the legislature routinely
waives the mandates under the constitutional provisions which
allows them to do that for the health, safety, and welfare of the
citizens of the State of Florida.
Page 35
March 25, 2003
So, theoretically, they would pass this by the required vote
which would allow them to waive those mandate requirements. In
other words, they would not have to provide the local funding
mechanisms for you.
And secondly, they, in fact, through legislation could prioritize
them for you, and notwithstanding your inability, or perhaps in some
communities, unwillingness to participate in these programs. So the
fear is, is just that, that it won't be based on local financial
capabilities. It will be a mandate from the state irrespective of those
local financial capabilities.
And of course, particularly here in Southwest Florida, what I
hear the most of legislators in Tallahassee is, well, you know, your--
you know, your local communities are only at four and a half, five,
five and a half mills, except for the interior counties, which are all
bumping up to 10 mills if they're not up there now, and so they --
again, it's somewhat punitive in nature.
But so I'm fearful that both points are issues that we're going to
have to deal with, that they, in fact, will prioritize them for you.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, I would encourage them to
look at the taxes per capita rather than the mill rate, because the taxes
are really an indication of-- are derived from the mill rate and the
property values, and our property values are quite high.
One -- a couple of other questions, Mr. Chairman, if you don't
mind.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Please.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: There are some programs where
we contribute money, the money goes to Tallahassee, and then
Tallahassee divides it up. Which of those are voluntary as far as our
participation is concerned?
MR. ARNOLD: That's a -- I don't even know where to start on
that one. That's a big question.
Page 36
March 25, 2003
There are -- I mean, there are thousands and thousands of state
programs, and some are voluntary and some are not, so that would be
a massive undertaking just to even begin to answer that question, but
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, it appears to me that if we're
going to be faced with these mandates, we need to start taking a look
at those -- those programs where we participate and we lose money
by participating. And I think that's probably true of just about every
program we participate in, that there is something skimmed off-- not
skimmed off but it's --
MR. ARNOLD: They're contributing counties.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- it's allocated to other people,
and we are donors under those circumstances.
If we have an option to not participate in those programs, we,
perhaps, could use the savings to do some other things that are very
critical here in Collier County. And although I suspect there are
rules about how we could use that money, it would be good for me to
know which ones we have the flexibility to opt out of.
Can the staff provide that for us at some future point in time,
perhaps during our budget negotiations?
MR. MUDD: Sir, we'll start looking at it.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
MR. MUDD: Okay. I'm not -- and there's thousands of
programs, so we'll start peeling this back to figure out where we have
options and try to get --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
MR. MUDD: -- the best information we can.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It could be millions of dollars if
we can --
MR. MUDD: You're talking about SHIP and other things like
that?
Page 37
March 25, 2003
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, yeah, yeah.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir, we'll take a look.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And along with that, I would like
to understand what our flexibility is with respect to being able to use
that -- that money. It might be very restrictive and it might not
achieve our purposes to do so, but I'd like -- at least like to
understand that.
Two other quick things. One is the legislation concerning the
location and control of the cell phone towers, and the other is the
legislation concerning the solid waste disposal that we're debating.
I appreciate your assessment on where we stand with winning
either of those two battles.
MR. ARNOLD: The -- I'm not as familiar with the latter, and
so I need to spend some time, perhaps, with your counsel. I know
that that's an issue that has been hotly contested here in Collier, and I
haven't been immersed in that issue, so I apologize for not really
knowing the answer to that.
But as it relates to the first issue, the cell towers, the Florida
Association of Counties is attempting to work with the
telecommunications industry on a compromise. I would submit to
you that, unfortunately, the compromise means that there's a
statewide standard, whatever that compromise might be, and that
may not fit -- you know, it may not be exactly what you want.
And so whether it's today or two or three years from now, you
may choose to regulate these towers a little bit more intensely than
the state does. And unfortunately, the way the legislation is moving,
and sponsored by Senator Bennett principally in the Senate, it looks
like the telecommunication industry at least has the political
capabilities right now to force a compromise on the Florida
Association of Counties.
And while that compromise is elusive -- they haven't figured out
Page 38
March 25, 2003
exactly what it is yet -- it is still going to be preemptive, and you,
generally speaking, in Collier County, have taken, again, more
aggressive stands on these issues. And so I'm concerned that the
compromise will not be satisfactory to you as commissioners.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Can you advise us on any course
we could take to get a more acceptable solution?
MR. ARNOLD: Absolutely. And I think right now, the most
important thing is to work the local delegation. And when I say
local, I mean not only Collier but Southwest Florida, you know,
western Dade, Lee, Charlotte County, to work the local delegations
and make, you know, them understand.
Generally speaking, the public, your constituents, you know,
seemingly, you know, want some sort of reasonableness to all of this.
And so if they don't have the ability to talk to you, the problem
becomes is they think you've approved these towers in your
neighborhoods, and, in fact, you haven't if the state is -- preempts
your ability to do that.
And so it puts you in a real difficult situation politically. And I
-- I think we start there, we continue to work that, you know, work
with the Florida Association of Counties. I think we should resist a
compromise if possible. But some communities, some county
commissions don't want to deal with this issue, and so they like the
state taking over, and that's the difficulty you face as well.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Just let them take it all over. It
would make it a lot easier for us.
The final comment is that the solid waste disposal bill has very,
very serious implications, and it's something I think we have to
aggressively oppose.
We're taking all the actions we can to make sure that our landfill
will last for the next 20, 40, maybe 50 years. This particular bill
could substantially undermine our ability to do that. So I would like
Page 39
March 25, 2003
to make sure that we are very aggressive in opposing that process.
So whatever needs to be done with respect to coordination with legal
counsel, I'd like to urge that we do it.
MR. WEIGEL: If I may, Mr. Arnold, Commissioners, by virtue
of the fact that this is an item for your consideration and action
today, today is the day and henceforth where with Mr. Arnold, or
whomever in that regard, up at Tallahassee to make our point known
based on your action coming up a little bit later today.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Thank you.
Thank, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
Mr. Arnold, what -- do you know the bill number for the impact
fee issue the state is considering?
MR. MUDD: On page -- it's on page eight of your handout.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: That's all I need to know.
MR. MUDD: And it's SB 1022.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: The -- Mr. Arnold, can you tell me,
your firm represents who besides Collier County and Lee County?
MR. ARNOLD: We represent a number of other entities. Here
in Collier we represent International College, we represent some
health care entities. Specifically in Lee, Lee Memorial Hospital. We
represent cities, the City of Fort Myers. We represent-- there's about
10 or 12. I can provide you a list of that. It's rather cumbersome
doing it by memory, but I'll provide you that list.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Senator Saunders had a bill
dealing with the Trauma Center in Lee County. Is that -- is that still
on the table?
MR. ARNOLD: Senator Saunders introduced a bill dealing
with HCRA, the Health Care Responsibility Act, which is the
transfer of funds from neighboring counties to trauma -- not to
trauma institutions, but to public hospitals which receive
Page 40
March 25, 2003
out-of-county patients. That's an existing law.
Your staff has asked that -- let me back up. Senator Saunders
tried to take care of the interlocal agreement that you presently have
or at least have talked about and moved forward on with Lee
Memorial Hospital, so he has attempted to remove the impact of this
bill away from Collier County because you've already entered into an
interlocal agreement or have considered entering into an local (sic)
agreement with Lee Memorial.
And so that interlocal agreement would be preemptive. It would
preempt the impact of his bill as it relates to Collier County. And so
your interlocal agreement, the one that you've envisioned engaging
in, would be controlling, in effect.
He's also raised the HCRA requirements though from four
dollars per person to six dollars per person, and he's done that at his
own initiative. In meeting with your staff, we've asked him to reduce
that back to current law, which is four dollars per person so there
would be no greater exposure to any county in the State of Florida, as
well as to this county.
But more importantly, I think, is the fact that his attempt to draft
that bill, he was hoping to limit the impact to Collier County by
making your interlocal agreement controlling.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: It's my understanding that -- well,
we don't have an interlocal agreement. All we have done is set aside
funds.
MR. ARNOLD: Right.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And the Trauma Center hasn't -- or
Lee Memorial hasn't asked for those funds. MR. ARNOLD: Right.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: But since you are a lobbyist for Lee
Memorial and you're a lobbyist for Collier County, I wasn't sure what
position you're going to take with that initiative, or should I read that
Page 41
March 25, 2003
in the Fort Myers News Press?
MR. ARNOLD: The -- Commissioner Henning, the HCRA bill
was sponsored by Senator Saunders at his own initiative in talking
with officials at Lee Memorial. I mean, obviously, when we take a
look at the trauma debate and your participation in that and
neighboring communities' participation in that debate as well as Lee
County's own inability to come to a conclusion as to how they would
like to participate, he decided that he wanted to write legislation
which strengthened the HCRA laws.
We have asked him to not expand the scope of that law as it
relates to Collier County because Collier County, on its own
initiative, really through his leadership, stepped to the plate first and
attempted to deal with this issue in a very proactive way.
He very much wants to limit the exposure of that bill to
whatever you have agreed to or would agree to with Lee Memorial to
whatever that interlocal agreement ultimately would say. And so that
legislation allows you to move forward in that process, and your
exposure would not be beyond anything that you agree to in that
contractual relatiOnship.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, again, we don't have a
contractual agreement, so we're going to have to work on that, I
guess, ourselves. I'm a little bit concerned about serving two
masters, one in Lee County and one in Collier County.
MR. ARNOLD: That's understood, Commissioner. It's a point
well taken. And I think, again, what I would emphasize to you is that
even Lee Memorial has asked -- this bill is not going to pass if, in
fact -- I mean, I shouldn't state that in a broad sense. But my sense is
the opposition to that bill will be overwhelming if, in fact, the HCRA
requirements are not reduced to its current levels.
The Florida Association of Counties has come out against the
bill because it increases the financial obligations on each county in
Page 42
March 25, 2003
the State of Florida.
And so we've advised him to keep this consistent with the
current law. We've talked to him about that. He has not yet agreed
to do that, but I think that he is going to be -- we're hopeful he'll be
favorably inclined to do so.
If that's done, then hopefully it will minimize any impact on that
county and it will be consistent with what you already have
embarked upon.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Does your firm represent any
utilities companies?
MR. ARNOLD: No, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Just a brief statement and then a
question concerning the issue of the Trauma Center.
Our agreement several months ago to provide some support was
contingent upon --
MR. ARNOLD: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- Collier County -- I mean Lee
County providing their fair share of support, and they opted not to do
that. So there really is no commitment of funds with respect to
Collier County; however, we did discuss a willingness to pay our fair
share.
And my concern always is that the fair share should be based
upon the actual medical costs of treating residents from Collier
County rather than just some arbitrary figure that we are allotted.
And so I still would like to see a program which would permit
us to pay for our residents who are treated at the Trauma Center in
very much the same way that an insurance company would pay for
their insured. That's the only way we can have control over how
much the money really is. If people just divide up a loss in some
Page 43
March 25, 2003
arbitrary manner, we could very easily be paying far more than our
share of the costs.
So can you tell us if there's any way we might be able to move
in that direction?
MR. ARNOLD: I really think that -- I mean, first of all, just
knowing that -- the Lee Memorial officials, I think they're going to
be willing to work with you in any way that's acceptable to you. I
mean, I think they very much appreciate the overture you have made
to them. And so I don't think they're going to be resistant to any of
those discussions consistent, you know, with what you've stated
there.
But just backing up a second, I think when Senator Saunders
presented this proposal to you last summer, in his discussions with
staff and -- I think what he was attempting to do, and I think more
importantly what your staff was attempting to do is limit the upside
exposure.
So how that number of $700,000 was ultimately arrived at may
have been a somewhat arbitrary decision based upon, you know, the
level of service or the medical issues that Collier County residents
incurred at a local trauma center. But at the same time, I think what
staff wanted to do at your request was limit the upside exposure, so --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: If I may.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you, Commissioner
Henning.
The agreement was that it would be $700,000 cap, and that was
only to be put into effect if Lee County stepped up with their share.
We -- I believe at that time we figured out our part was 10 percent of
the total, Lee County's would be 90 percent because of the high
usage they have.
The -- it was supposed to be on a voucher system from what I
Page 44
March 25, 2003
remember, and that would have kept Collier County's exposure just
down to where it needed to be. Of course, Lee County never
activated their part of the agreement, so we've never gone forward to
that point, and we've never been consulted by them or asked to
participate in any of the ongoing talks.
So we're sitting by the sidelines with no directions at all.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And it sounds like, Commissioner
Coletta, that the board is really going to have to take an active role in
this issue with the Lee Trauma Center. Of course, we-- I think we
all agree that we don't want to see the Trauma Center close, but we
don't want to be raped by action that legislation takes without any
representation from Collier County.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Exactly. I agree with you,
Commissioner Henning. The four dollars that was on there before,
that would have caused Collier County to have to pay a million
dollars without any consideration to what it was going for. The
voucher system gave us that protection we needed. To go to six of
dollars is not something as a competent commissioner sitting on the
board that I would be in favor of. But I'll be seeking direction from
this commission today to be able to go to Burt Saunders and tell him
exactly how we feel about it.
MR. ARNOLD: If I might add, Mr. Chairman, we've provided
a letter to that effect to Senator Saunders, and we'll be happy to
provide you a copy of that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Mr. Arnold, questions (sic). This
year, what have you done to assist the commissioners and staff to
determine the needs of specific appropriations of bills that have been
filed in legislation?
MR. ARNOLD: Perhaps you can be more specific in what
you're looking for there, Commissioner Henning.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, you know, we've -- like this
Page 45
March 25, 2003
discussion today about Lee Trauma Center. This is the first time that
we had discussion about that, and I didn't know -- I mean, have you
been in contact with staff about this bill?
MR. ARNOLD: Yes, yes. We've had conversations with the
deputy county administrator on this, and they expressed their
concern, again, about the six dollars, the -- which would be an
increase requirement, roughly a half a million dollars to Collier
County. And so staff, understandably, was concerned about the
financial impact of that bill as it related to you.
Again, Lee Memorial in their request in their dealings with
Senator Saunders did not request that the fee be increased, and so we
talked it over and decided the best course of action was to see if
Senator Saunders would agree to go back to current law which would
limit your exposure to existing law.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Have you held regular meetings with
our staff?.
MR. ARNOLD: We do. More than likely this time of the year
they're phone interviews, phone meetings, dealing with a variety of
issues, depending upon, you know, what the issues of the day are.
My direct report is your deputy county administrator, and that's who
we interact with mostly.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. And during the delegation,
you were present at the delegation?
MR. ARNOLD: (Nods head.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
Commissioner Coletta, do you have anything else?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No. I think we got the
direction of the commission pretty well defined. And if you like, I'll
carry that message on to Burt Saunders either today or tomorrow.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And will you be checking with him
Page 46
March 25, 2003
about the impact fees as well and making sure that our -- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I certainly will. That's a new
one me.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, us too.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And I will report back to you
on what I find.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: It would have been nice if we would
have knowledge of this before you went up there so you could
prepare yourself on the item.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, I'm here now and I'm
sure there's not a better place or source of information than
Tallahassee itself.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Correct.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And I'll diligently work on
these items for you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
Any other questions, comments for our legislation
representative, lobbyist. Mr. Mudd?
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, as your -- as we look at this, I've
only been here for going on -- it's coming on three years. This is the
first time we've had a report to the board, and you asked for it, Mr.
Chairman, to have in front -- and I would say that this is a good
thing. We should continue it in the process. And I -- you have some
valuable information in this packet. That bill by Senator Saunders is
on page six, and it's the last item on that page of your handout. That
is -- that is item SB 0696.
This has been-- this has been-- this has been the first, and I
would say this is probably a good -- a good exchange of information
for our lobbyist for a commissioner that's sitting in Tallahassee right
now in order to help us along the way to get Collier County items
brought to the forefront of what's going on.
Page 47
March 25, 2003
So I commend the chairman for asking for this particular item,
and we'll make sure, based on your direction, that this is part of--
part of our yearly program, so someplace down the middle we'll have
our lobbyist come back to the board and let us know what's going on
in Tallahassee and how it affects us.
CHAIRMAN HENN1NG: Thanks for being with us, Mr.
Arnold, today. Thank you.
MR. ARNOLD: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I would echo
the comments of your county manager. You know, generally
speaking, you know, some commissions like to handle this
differently.
I generally do report to Mr. Ochs. But to the extent you and I
can interact directly, it certainly helps keep me more informed of
your individual wishes and desires, and I would, you know, welcome
that, and I'll take it upon myself to reach out individually to you
more.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And answer emails?
MR. ARNOLD: Absolutely.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you. Thanks for being with
us today.
I would hope that the board, after legislation, or the -- is
finalized in Tallahassee, that we can develop a plan, be prepared for
next session, next year, of what we need to ask for. And I'm not sure
that we have done it -- done it right in the last two years.
I think that we have some opportunities to take a look at if we
get our money -- our bang out of the money that we send for
representation to Tallahassee on certain issues.
We might want to take a look at, especially to the lobbyists, for
specialty things that are going on in Tallahassee, whether it being an
unfunded mandate, which FAC takes care of a lot of those issues, but
specifically to Collier County, unfunded mandates, or any bills that
Page 48
March 25, 2003
we are seeking funds for. I just think that we need to work a little bit
more proactive with -- before legislation to set up a game -- plan.
Commissioner Coletta, or Carter, or Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, I don't have anything
really to add other than I'll be awaiting your instructions during this
meeting what else you'd like me to do.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, you got -- you're working with
FAC --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's correct.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- correct? Yeah. They have a --
COMMISSIONS COLETTA: I'll be having numerous meetings
with many of the representatives that Mr. Arnold referred to.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Great. And they have a great
lobbying team up there, and I'm sure they'll give you some
instructions on how to lobby your local delegation on some of these
bills that are coming through.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, there's no problem with
the instructions -- I've been here three years going -- on how to do it.
It's just that their agenda is not the same as Collier County. It's
fairly concised (sic), and that's fine. But I'm looking for directions
for our Collier County initiatives that we want to move forward.
I got a pretty good idea, and of course I'm not taking action of
any kind. I'm just gathering information and bringing it back except
for those specific issues that you've already identified that you
wanted me to speak on your behalf to the local representatives.
Other than that, it's -- it's an information-gathering venture, and
I'll bring back the information for you to disseminate and decide
what action to take --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- by your action today.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
Page 49
March 25, 2003
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Commissioner Coletta, I'd like to
ask you a question --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Sure.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- In reference to the land
purchase issue. I was informed that the meeting between a
representative of Collier County with the governor and his cabinet
concerning this had been postponed. Do you know if that's true, or
are you clear on what meeting is going to be held with respect to that
land acquisition issue?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, the meeting with the
governor's -- as far as I know, is still taking place on April the 8th.
The meeting that's taking place today -- other than an email that I
received through my secretary from Mike Davis, I know nothing
about it. In fact, my conversations with him last evening, he never
even mentioned the meeting, but I have an email to that effect today.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala, do you have
anything else?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas, are you with
us?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
No more discussion. The next item is?
We're done with this item.
Item #9B
RECONSIDERATION OF RUSH HOUR DUMP-TRUCK
TRAFFIC ON OIL WELL AND IMMOKALEE ROAD- TO BE
lalROI IGHT FIACK TO APRIIJ 22_ gCC MF, ETING
Page 50
March 25, 2003
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Time certain, 8 -- 9(B).
CHAIRMAN HENN1NG: Is 9(B).
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. That's a Commissioner Halas item.
Commissioner Halas, are you on -- are you on the
communication?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Hello? Hello?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas, welcome to
today's meeting.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: It's good to be back there.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Great. We have an -- your item on
9(B), reconsideration discussion regarding rush hour dump truck
traffic on Oil Well Road and Immokalee Roads (sic).
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That's correct.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: It's -- you want to go ahead and lead
us off on what we need to do, what you're asking?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. I'd like to bring that back
for reconsideration due to the fact the, upon further investigating of
that, it's non-enforcing because -- that most trucks that are equipped
with the exhaust systems, if they have the proper muffler equipment,
we can't mandate no use for Jake brakes. It's a safety mandated item
on trucks.
The only way that we can do anything about that, of course, is
the truck is not properly equipped with mufflers and running through
a straight pipe. So instead of spending the extra $2,500 for signs that
we can't -- and since we can't enforce that, I feel that we need to
bring that back for a vote.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. And you understand the only
action that we're going to take today is for reconsidering to put it on a
future agenda?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: A future agenda, that's correct.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Commissioner Coletta, do
Page 51
March 25, 2003
you have anything on this item?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. There's really nothing
new. At the last meeting we had, that subject came up, and I also
repeated it again in several emails I sent out to the commissioners.
If they -- if we feel there's a need to bring it back up for
rediscussion, I have absolutely no problem. We can never talk
something -- about something too much.
I do want to remind you that this was supposed to be an item to
be able to -- we're trying a voluntarily type of program at this point in
time, handing handouts at the pits, telling the drivers what they need
to do to be able to make it more tolerable for the residents that live in
the area, and various things.
This thing here is a reminder of the fact that, to be able -- to
drive in this particular area, to -- your Jake brakes couldn't be
disturbing the local residents.
And Commissioner Coyle (sic) is absolutely right when he says
that it's the ones with the inadequate mufflers that are causing the
biggest of problems. So when you come through an area, if you have
a Jake brake on and you have a muffler that's working totally, it's
very unlikely you'd even hear it.
But the offenders that are out there, I'm pretty sure they know
who they are. The reasons they're doing it is beyond me. But I'm
more than willing to rediscuss it if our Commissioner Coyle -- excuse
me -- if the commissioner would like to -- Frank Halas would like to
bring it back. I have no problem with that.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah. I think that -- also that if
the trucks are ill equipped, with the improper muffler system and
running straight pipes, I think this would be an issue that the sheriff
could mandate through making some little meter measurements of
the vehicle, a certain distance from the vehicle itself. But that's
something that -- that's not for the commissioners to decide. That
Page 52
March 25, 2003
would be for the sheriffs department to decide.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, we could-- it doesn't
hurt to bring attention to this problem one more time.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Exactly.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm supportive of bringing it
back. Possibly we can have representatives from the sheriffs
department telling us about their efforts and what they could do to try
to alleviate this ongoing problem that's been going on for many years
now, and it's been escalating at an unbelievable pace.
So I'll go ahead and second your motion to bring it back.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: We do have two public speakers. Is
the board ready to go to public speakers at this time? MS. FILSON: Is that a yes?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes, that is a yes.
MS. FILSON: Mr. Chairman, we do have two public speakers.
Pat Humphries.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Followed by?
MS. FILSON: She will be followed by Virgil Cotton--
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Gim.
MS. FILSON: Cottongim.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
MS. HUMPHRIES: Good morning.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Good morning, Ms. Humphries.
MS. HUMPHRIES: I'm Pat Humphries from the Golden Gate
Estates Area Civic Association.
Now is a perfect time to address this issue. With four trucks
every three minutes on Wilson, 72 trucks every 20 minutes on Oil
Well Road, and 20 trucks every five minutes on Immokalee Road, it's
obvious there is a tremendous impact on the residents in and around
Golden Gate Estates.
Page 53
March 25, 2003
These figures will double or triple in the future when the rural
fringe and rural ag. areas start to develop, so Jake brake signs and a
blinking light in a school zone is just the beginning of adjustments on
the part of the county and the industry to solve this problem in a sane
and compatible manner.
I question whether Jake brakes would even have to be used if
the speed limit was being obeyed. I know it's not being obeyed on
Wilson Boulevard. I have observed these trucks going in excess of
60 miles per hour. Safety is the priority here. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
Next speaker?
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Virgil Cottongim.
MR. COTTONGIM: I guess a lot of what I was going to say
has been addressed by Mr. Coletta and Mr. Halas, because they are --
they're taking the right steps to look at the problem as it should be,
not just go off on a knee-jerk reaction and make regulations on that
we don't need.
And I wasn't going to say a lot. But to address the lady's
concerns there, there's -- all the pits are out there on Immokalee Road
and Oil Well Road. And as long as Naples is growing like Naples is
growing, there's going to be dump trucks out there.
And whether or not they're safe or not is a matter of opinion.
One person can look at a dump truck and see a monster, and another
one look at a dump truck and see a working man making a living. It's
just a matter of-- the degree how you look at it, whether or not you
get excited and want to regulate them.
I would just hope that the county commission didn't go to the
point of putting in certain regulations we don't really need, like
making you stay in the right lane and stuff that had been discussed
before. But we'll leave that to another day. I'm glad they're looking
Page 54
March 25, 2003
at it the right way now.
And the Jake brake sign on Oil Well Road by the school is not
legal. I don't know who put that sign up there, but it's not -- it
shouldn't be there.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. We're going to discuss that
issue. If the board by unanimous -- not un -- by majority, the second
meeting in April; is that correct?
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir, two meetings from now.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
MR. COTTONGIM: I didn't know this was even -- we didn't
even know this was up today and nobody knew what it was about
anyway. But I'm glad they're taking the right steps on it. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank any.
Any more further discussion on the motion?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: If I may.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Oh, please.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Commissioner Henning?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Please.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I was wondering if
Commissioner Halas would consider adding to his motion that we
direct staff to come with -- to work with the sheriff's department and
come back with any options that might be out there that we can do to
alleviate this problem.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes, please add that to the motion.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'll add it to my second.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Any further discussion?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'll just say that --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- that I've checked with somebody
Page 55
March 25, 2003
who manages a fleet of trucks, but I'll go into it when we come back
in April.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion for
reconsideration, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries 5-0.
Thank you, gentlemen.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. We'll call you back later.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, thanks for being with us.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: There's one more item that--
I'm not too sure where it is on the agenda, but I kind of hoped to have
Commissioner Halas here so I could get direction. We lost him. He's
gone. Okay. So we'll try again later. Thank you.
MR. MUDD: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner-- Commissioner
Halas is coming -- Jim Mudd, for the record. Commissioner Halas is
coming to us at his break times. It's 9:30, 10:45, and again at noon in
order to do the process, so I'll just kind of let you know when he's
going to be getting back on the board. He's doing the best he can
with what he has.
Item #6A
Page 56
March 25, 2003
REQUEST BY MR. CHRISTOPHER FOWLER REGARDING A
SPECIAL LAND USE PERMIT TO OPERATE REMOTE
CONTROL CAR RACES - TO BE BROUGHT TO A FUTURE
MEETING FOR CONSIDERATION
CHAIRMAN HENNING: The next item is 6(A), public
petition, request from Christopher Fowler regarding special land use
permitting operation, remote control race cars.
Commissioner Coletta, do you have anything?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, I didn't mean to interrupt
you, but I just -- I thought it might help if we explain where
Commissioner Halas is at this time so somebody doesn't think he's
sitting on the beach enjoying himself, talking on his cell phone. He's
not. He's up in Elysburg, Pennsylvania, taking a FEMA course so
that, in the event of natural disaster such as a hurricane, he'll be able
to react in a positive way.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And the rest of us that didn't have
that will act in a negative way.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, far from it. But I'm sure
you'll take directions from Commissioner Halas when the time
comes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
Mr. Fowler, we're taking up your time today. Thank you for
being with us. And I can just tell you that I -- MR. FOWLER: It's serious business.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Sir, before you start, that I've
checked with the community, and there is a lot of support for your
endeavor here today, so --
MR. FOWLER: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- I'm not sure what kind of
Page 57
March 25, 2003
presentation that -- this is, ask for special land use permit to operate
remote car races at Berkshire.
MR. FOWLER: Right. Currently we race in the parking lot at
the Berkshire Commons, and the Publix parking lot, and we have
been there for approximately seven years. We realize that the
community is growing ever closer to where we race out there. And
in certain instances, we have gone on later than county code allows
for noise ordinance.
What we've tried to do to alleviate that problem is to move our
starting times up. We can't move them too far because then we
become a hindrance to the community use of the parking lot for
shopping and whatnot.
We tried to get there and set up so our racing doesn't start until
five, and we're now trying to press to be done by 10 o'clock when the
noise ordinance takes effect.
What we're asking -- we've had a couple of complaints by the
local community about noise and have met with code enforcement,
and they have asked that we now secure a permit each time that we
want to race.
Up until that point, these permits have been free. We are a
nonprofit organization registered with the State of Florida, and these
have been free to us; however, I understand that the number of free
ones are limited.
And what we're asking of the commission is that they allow us
to continue racing there either on a blanket permit for one calendar
year or to forego the permitting process altogether.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, two comments. First of all, I
don't have any problem with the blanket permit. I think this is a
healthy sport for families to get together. I'm sure that you have a
lot of youth there, and I think that that's important. And I would
Page 58
March 25, 2003
certainly move forward to a blanket permit.
I wanted to tell you something else as a side note. I've been
working with another group, the remote control airplane people, and
they're going to be -- they've been at the same location for 23 years,
but they're going to be losing their location.
So I've spoken with the people from parks and rec. and with
these remote controlled airplane people, and I've suggested that
maybe we have a new type of a park in Collier County, a remote
control park, where one section can be for remote control planes,
another for the boats and another for the cars, each one to handle and
maintain their own portion of the park.
Right now we have a group going out to look for the land.
Actually, they've identified some land. And they're going in to
negotiate a deal. And if this can be worked out, it would be very
innovative for our county, I guess for the state, actually, and I think it
would answer those needs, but that's probably a couple years down
the road.
I just wanted you to know that I'm working hard on that, and
that's looming up in front of us.
MR. FOWLER: Right. In an effort to look for somewhere else
to race, I've gone out and spoken with a number of people that are
currently out at the Florida Sports Park, but I understand that those --
those are leased pieces of property. And if we were to race out there,
it would be at a cost equal to the amount of time that we use on their
lease.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta, do you have
anything on today's agenda, the topic --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: On this item here, well, I do
have some concerns, you know, as to where we're going to draw the
line in the sand on this. A number of times now I have required (sic)
youth organizations, they even belong to -- came before us to file for
Page 59
March 25, 2003
the permits and pay the fees. I can understand this situation as being
something slightly different, but still, I have concerns on the
direction we're going with this.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Do you have any?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: (Shakes head.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: County manager, Jim Mudd, I think
you're going to get at least three nods up here. Is there anything
concerning-- about the general permit?
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, your-- the three nods are to bring
this back on the regular agenda --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Correct.
MR. MUDD: -- for discussion? And I think basically you're
asking me -- you'd like to get some more information on this in order
to do that, so I don't have a problem with this coming back.
I will say that there is a -- there is a remote control piece at the
Golden Gate Park that we have across the way, and it might not
necessarily fit with his particular models that are out there, but we
have already gone into that a little bit, Commissioner Fiala, as far as
our park system is concerned, and I know the remote control airplane
folks have even been talking to us about our landfill, about doing
that, and I will tell you that -- that, at the landfill, would also help us
in bird control.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Seagulls.
MR. MUDD: All right? So, you know, we can get some of
those Collier County turkeys someplace else.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Stray (sic) for the turkeys.
MR. FOWLER: I have spoken with Marla Ramsey from parks
and rec. myself, and she let me know there was a -- there was a
county park that was in the design stage but it's out towards the
Manatee Elementary School or Manatee Middle School out on 41;
however, as time permits, I think that this is more important for us to
Page 60
March 25, 2003
at least get this set now. And once we're there, then we can start
talking about where we can go afterwards. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Right.
MR. FOWLER: Because obviously our community isn't going
to get any smaller.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Obviously.
Thank you Mr. Fowler.
MR. FOWLER: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENN1NG: Next item on advertised public
hearing is --
MR. MUDD: Commissioner?
CHAIRMAN HENN1NG: Yes.
MR. MUDD: Are you going to give us a vote here on 6(A) to
bring this back?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. I thought you just needed a
nod. Yeah.
I'll entertain a motion to bring this item back.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So move.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And I'll second the motion.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Too late, I already seconded.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, you seconded. I'm sorry.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Coyle,
second by myself.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENN1NG: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle -- or
Commissioner Coletta, are you with us?
Page 61
March 25, 2003
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I have no problem with
bringing it back. I'm in the ayes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries 4-0.
We're going to take a break at 10 o'clock, which is another 15
minutes, for our court reporter to rest her fingers.
Item #8A
ORDINANCE 2003-12 AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 2001-76,
WHICH CREATED THE LIVINGSTON ROAD PHASE II
BEAUTIFICATION MUNICIPAL SERVICE TAXING UNIT; BY
CHANGING THE MEMBERSHIP OF THE ADVISORY
COMMITTEE AND DELETING GREY OAKS DEVELOPMENT
FROM THE BOUNDARIES OF THE DISTRICT - ADOPTED
WITH CHANGF, S
Commissioner -- or county manager, Jim Mudd, the next item is
8(A)?
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir, and that's to request the board adopt an
ordinance amending Collier County Ordinance No. 2001-76, as
amended, which created the Livingston Road Phase II Beautification
Municipal Service Taxing Unit; providing for amendment to section
six to increase the number of members who serve on the Advisory
Committee from five to nine, and that was board directed; providing
for amendment to section six to limit membership to the Advisory
Committee to three members for each subdivision or community;
providing for amendments to Exhibit A to delete Grey Oaks
Development from the boundaries of the district; providing for
Page 62
March 25, 2003
inclusion in the code of laws and ordinances; providing for conflict
and severability; and providing for an effective date.
Commissioner, the reason that this is on the regular agenda
instead of the summary agenda is the fact that we've got some
conflicting guidance. We've got guidance to go from five to nine, and
that's because some -- or some people from Kensington, Grey Oaks
and Wyndemere all talked about not having the same representation
on the board, and the board decided to fix that with three -- with
three each.
Subsequent to that direction, the board, based on the payment of
Grey Oaks' share of the promissory note for the decorative street
lighting, et cetera, to the tune of about $150,000 in escrow -- and I
think the bill came out to be 134, 138, something around the 140, and
once you're done and delete them, we will give them the final bill
and take it out of escrow -- you basically said to take Grey Oaks out
of that MSTU.
Sue Filson has an issue with, how am I going to put this out for
advertisement for the members since Grey Oaks is leaving, how do
you want the membership of that MSTU board to be there, and then
there's another issue, if you take three members out for Grey Oaks,
then you've got an equal spread of 3-3. You try to have an odd
number so that you can -- you can -- if-- there's somebody to break a
tie.
But I will tell you that there is somebody that has payments into
this MSTU, and that's the owners of the properties to the northeast of
Wyndemere, that section on Livingston Phase II that's undeveloped
at this particular time, but it looks like it's clearing. And that might
be a source of a representative, even though their share, taxable share
is rather small compared to the other two members.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. We have one speaker today.
Is it the wish of the board to -- questions, directions, or go right to the
Page 63
March 25, 2003
public speaker?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Right to the public speaker.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Public speaker.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Would you call up the
speaker, please?
MS. FILSON: Yes, Mr. Chairman. Tor Kolflat.
MR. KOLFLAT: Good morning, Commissioners. My name is
Tor Kolflat, and I am president of the Grey Oaks' Estates
Homeowners' Association.
Some time ago the county manager advised me to, and I quote,
never pass up an opportunity to say nothing, closed quote; however, I
would be remiss to pass up this opportunity.
For the past seven months, I and others from Grey Oaks have
appeared at your board meetings, met with you individually, and met
with the county manager and members of his staff, all regarding the
Livingston Road MSTU issue.
During that time, we have always been treated with
consideration, fairness, and courtesy. For this we would like to
express our sincere appreciation and thanks. Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Mr. Mudd, I just need to clarify
what you're asking us to do. There's one element of this executive
summary that I'm willing to support immediately, and that is the
withdrawal of Grey Oaks from this MSTU.
I'm undecided as to how we set up the membership for the
remaining organization. And what I would need is some guidance
from you as to what organizations are currently represented and
whether or not they're represented sufficiently.
And would a change in membership result in a selection process
Page 64
March 25, 2003
for additional members, or do we just cut out three people and we're
in fine shape?
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, what I was -- what I was trying to
get at is, there is some miscellaneous taxable value out there -- and I
don't like to put people in the miscellaneous category -- of about $8
million, which serves about one percent of that particular MSTU, as
you can see by this chart.
And what I would say is to at least get an odd member to -- what
I was -- what I would recommend is we get three from Wyndemere,
three from Kensington, and we get at least one or two from the
representatives of that miscellaneous, and maybe one would be the
appropriate number.
And those -- then that miscellaneous is represented by
Landscape Florida, which is a company that's in that particular area,
and it's also the Brynwood Preserves is the other-- is the entity.
And we would -- and Sue Filson would go out and advertise for
one member from those two to bring the board on that MSTU to be a
total seven people.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So you're suggesting three from
Kensington, three from Wyndemere, and one from the --
MR. MUDD: Either Florida -- Landscape Florida or Brynwood
Preserves and whatever the board--
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And then we would select that
process during the application?
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. So that gives a total of seven.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Mr. Chairman, I would like to
make a motion that we accept the staffs recommendation of
excluding Grey Oaks from this MSTU and establishing the remaining
board to consist of six -- or seven members, three from Kensington,
three from Wyndemere, and one from the additional area.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'll second that.
Page 65
March 25, 2003
CHAIRMAN HENNING: There's a motion by Commissioner
Coyle, second by Commissioner Fiala.
Commissioner Coletta, do you have anything?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, no, I don't.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas, are you with
us?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I think that's a great direction, what
we need to do on this issue, and I appreciate your motion.
I'll call the motion. All in favor of the motion, signify by saying
aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING:
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING:
Thank you.
Any opposed?
Motion carries, 4-0.
I think we can knock out a few other things here.
Commissioner Fiala, I think your item 9(C) is going to take a
while?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Probably.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: You have some speakers?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
Item #9A
RESOLUTION 2003-127 APPOINTING THEODORE J. RAIA, JR.,
JOHN IAIZZO, AND DAVID C. NORDHOFF TO A 4-YEAR
Page 66
March 25, 2003
TERM TO THE PELICAN BAY MSTBU ADVISORY
COMMITTEE - ADOPTED
9(A) is an appointment of members to the Pelican Bay MSTBU
Advisory Committee, and our Clerk of Courts, Dwight Brock, has
been working with that community for, I think, two or three years,
Mr. Brock?
MR. BROCK: It seems like a lifetime, Commissioner.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, we appreciate your efforts.
MR. BROCK: Great group of people.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'd like to make a mo -- oh, I'm
sorry. Go ahead.
MR. BROCK: The community voted. David and I held a
public -- a meeting in which they could have come and watched us
count the votes, and I think we have reported the report -- reported
the people to you.
There is one thing that I would like to say, because there was an
issue last time there was a vote held as to whether or not The
Registry was a residential communit -- a residential party or a
nonresidential party, and according to the records from the Property
Appraiser's Office, it is listed as a residential parcel. But I will tell
you that The Registry did not vote one ballot even though they were
a residential party.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Interesting.
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That was very interesting. And
they're going to try and change that designation, aren't they, from
residential to commercial?
MR. BROCK: We told them that we would do what we could
to try to deal with that issue. I'm not sure how we're going to deal
Page 67
March 25, 2003
with it. You know, in discussions with The Registry, they told me
that they did not want to vote in the residential category and they
would not be casting any ballots. And we checked, and they did not.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. So I'd like to make a motion
then to accept the recommendations, or rather the ballots -- the final
tally of the ballots for John Iaizzo -- I'm sorry if I mutilate these
names -- David Nordhoff, and Theodore Raia, the top three
vote-getters.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'll second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: There's a motion by Commissioner
Fiala, second by Commissioner Coyle.
Any more discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Seeing none, all in favor of the
motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries, 4-0.
Thank you. Let's take a 1 O-minute break. The time is five
minutes to 10 o'clock. We'll be back at five after. Thank you.
(A recess was taken.)
Item #9C
STAFF DIRECTED TO PROCEED AND COMPLETE
HIDEAWAY BEACH DECEMBER, 2002 RENOURISHMENT
Page 68
March 25, 2003
PROJF. CT BY MAY 1,2003 - FAIl.ED
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. The next item on the agenda
is 9(C), and that is a discussion regarding Hideaway Beach
December 2002 Renourishment project.
Commissioner Fiala's asked to bring this to the board.
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, thank you very much.
I asked to have this item put on the agenda because I've really
been concerned with the serious erosion that's taking place along
Hideaway Beach shoreline, and I've taken a look at it myself, and it's
become a very, very serious problem.
I've spoken with Mr. Genirs and I've asked him to please come
up to the podium and present the issue on behalf of the Hideaway
Beach people because he can-- he can state it a lot better than I can.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. We have six public speakers.
MS. FILSON: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Sue?
Sir, are you representing the community?
MR. GENIRS: I'm rep -- I'm the president. For the record, Mr.
Chairman, my name is Robert E. Genirs. I'm the president of the
Royal Marco Point II Association, which represents two of the
buildings on Hideaway Beach, building 4000 and 5000.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And are you registered as a lobbyist
today?
MR. GENIRS: I am, yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. If you don't mind, folks, from
the Hideaway Beach, if we can-- if you can take five minutes,
present what you need to present, and the speakers have three
minutes. Commissioner Halas is going to be back at 10:45 at a time
certain.
Page 69
March 25, 2003
Continue, sir.
MR. GENIRS: While I'm speaking, Mr. Chairman, I do have a
handout, which I'd like to put in front of you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Give that to Sue.
MR. GENIRS: This is pictures.
I also inquired, Mr. Chairman, if a copy could have been sent to
Commissioner Coletta, but I understand that that was impractical to
do so. As a courtesy, I wanted to include him.
In the package that you have in front of you is a chronological
sequence of events which took place in connection with the
December 2002 renourishment.
Also attached to that chronological sequence is a copy of an
office of the county attorney's opinion about Erosion Control Lines,
and also there is a copy of a letter from the City of Marco Island
Councilman Arceri supporting us in our efforts here.
I'll briefly try to go through. If you would follow the sequence,
I'll try to do it within five minutes.
September 17th, the Marco Island Beach Advisory Committee
unanimously approved the motion requesting County Coastal
Advisory Committee --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Sir?
MR. GENIRS: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Just a minute.
Sue informed me, our registered lobbyist list, you get on that list
if you are a paid representation (sic) of communities or if you're -- if
you're a paid lobbyist, if you're paid in any capacity.
MR. GENIRS: No, I'm not paid in any capacity.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Thank you. I'm sorry to
interrupt you.
MR. GENIRS: That's okay.
On November 21, after being retained to do so, Humiston and
Page 70
March 25, 2003
Moore completed engineering drawings for the project, and the
drawing clearly showed debris and fallen trees on the beach where
sand was to be placed in front of the 4000 and 5000 buildings. There
was no request to be -- made of us to remove any of these fallen
trees.
On December 6th, the DEP permit was issued, and that permit is
good until May of 2004.
On December 1 lth, there was an on-site construction meeting,
and there were no problems noted to the best our knowledge, at least
me, as president, was not informed of any problems.
On December 12th, the drawings were presented to the CAC,
discussion was accepted, there was no motion required since this is
part of TDC Category A funds approved for a million dollars, truck
haul to any beach.
On December 17th and 18th, when the job began, the contractor,
after moving northward from the entryway to the beach all the way
up and just past the 3000 building, which is just south of the 4000
and 5000 building -- and by the way, removing certain impediments
on the way, since a permit had been -- allowed them to do so, he
stopped at marker H11, which is just south of the 4000 building, and
he said he could not go any further due to fallen trees and other
debris on the beach in front of 4000 and 5000, and he quoted us a
price of $33,000 to remove these fallen trees and proceed with the
job.
After discussion as to this necessity and who's responsible to
pay, the discussion took a new mm so that the new reason given to
halt the job is that there was no Erosion Control Line established.
Humiston and Moore, who was present, said that an ECL was not
required.
On December 23rd, after many discussions that I had had with
government officials to clear the way for the job to be completed
Page 71
March 25, 2003
while the contractor was still on the premises -- and based on the fact
that a permit had been issued for the removal of fallen trees, et
cetera, moreover, that the contractor had been willing to remove
these fallen trees for an additional of $33,000, the RMP II
Association took it upon itself to judiciously remove most of the
same at a cost, by the way, of $3,000.
On December 24th, which was a Monday morning, the
contractor returned to the job. He was please that he could now
proceed, but government officials in charge of coastal projects ruled
that they could not allow it due to no Erosion Control Line.
That report was made to the CAC on January 9th that the job
was stopped due to no Erosion Control Line. The CAC requested
county attorney's opinion as to whether an ECL was required, and
that is what I have attached to your recap.
On February 12th, the county attorney issued his opinion. He
said that no Erosion Control Line was required.
I've also given you up at the podium a copy of the Humiston and
Moore report. In that report they -- they discussed the reason that no
ECL was required. And in view of the time limit, I won't read what
it says on February 15th, but that's the sum of it.
On February 19th, our beach chairman, Mr. Jim Snediker,
requested completion of the project. The interpretation was
apparently made that this was a new project. Mr. Snediker said, no,
it's just correcting a misinterpretation of the already approved
project.
May I go on?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Please, one more minute.
MR. GENIRS: The vote was taken that it was a new project, the
version carried, and RMP II president, Jim Snediker, appealed to the
County Commissioner Fiala, requested that the item be placed on the
agenda for March 25th.
Page 72
March 25, 2003
In summary, one, the county should have thoroughly reviewed
the site with the contractor before starting the project. If half-fallen
trees or other debris needed to be removed by the property owner, the
attorney should have informed them. The county should have not
stopped at H11 due to no ECL since there obviously was some
question and difference of opinion around that issue. The county
should have gotten clarification before stopping the job.
And we believe the county has no reason that it should not now
complete the project. The funding is approved. The fixed contracts
for the contractor are in place. The permit is still in force. The
staging area and beach access road is still there, and mobilization is
easily facilitated, and there's virtually no beach in front of both 4000
and 5000 buildings. And with high tide, the water comes all the way
up to the conservation area, and we have been quoted many times by
Mrs. Nancy Richie, that the protection of the conservation area
vegetation is essential for our property.
I appreciate the fact that there's an agenda on the item (sic) at 12
o'clock that discusses a more long-range fix for Hideaway Beach, but
we desperately need a Band-Aide here or, for us, there will be no
long-range plan. We need a short-range fix, and I'd ask the board to
consider it, please.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
Next speaker?
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is David Somers, and he will
be followed by Hal Hansen.
MR. SOMERS: My name is David Somers. I'm the general
manager at Hideaway Beach. And I'm -- certainly just to go over --
the county commission approved the inlet management plan back in
1997, and these T-Groins were implement-- part of that
implementation of that plan.
The T-Groins were permitted by the state, in 1997, and part of
Page 73
March 25, 2003
their requirement is supplemental renourishment that needs to occur
during the course of the temporary permit that is currently in place.
The engineers, Humiston and Moore, designed a template in
order to accomplish that renourishment that needed to be in place.
And unfortunately, the template was not completed, to the reasons
that Mr. Genirs just brought to the commission.
Had that templet been completed, I think that the -- certainly the
area in question would have been much more stable than it's going to
be in the future. And again, the fact that no Erosion Control Line
was required because of the state permit and the fact that these were
a -- renourishment requirements based on the permit that already
existed with the T-Groins.
As I say you, you do have a letter from Councilman Arceri
supporting the issue. And certainly if the council has any questions,
I'll be happy to answer.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: At this time, Mr. Somers, you work
for the Hideaway Beach Association, correct? MR. SOMERS: The master association.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: The master association. And you
need to be a registered lobbyist when you come to the Board of
Commissioners under your capacity. MR. SOMERS: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: So you need to go to the Clerk of
Courts. I think it's the fourth floor recording. Is that right, Mr.
Brock?
MR. BROCK: Sorry?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: To register as a lobbyist, you need to
go where?
MR. BROCK: Yes, you can go to the Clerk of Court's Office.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
MR. BROCK: I'm-- you know, I'll let David address the issue.
Page 74
March 25, 2003
I'm not sure I necessarily agree with the interpretation that you're
giving.
MR. SOMERS: That I'm a lobbyist?
MR. BROCK: Yes.
MR. SOMERS: I mean, I've spoken before and haven't been
required to be a lobbyist.
MR. BROCK: If you get paid to be a lobbyist, I think -- David,
you address it.
MR. SOMERS: I'm paid to be a general manager. I'm not paid
to be a lobbyist.
MR. WEIGEL: Okay. If his role with the corporation includes
this kind of function as opposed to a separate function to come before
the board on behalf of the organization, then he is not a lobbyist. It
could be included within his role. It sounds a little complicated, but
that's the distinction that we've -- that we have reached in the
community here.
So what I suggest is, Mr. Somers, that you check with me, and
we'll make sure that you're appropriately registered, if that needs to
be.
MR. SOMERS: And I apologize to the commission for not
knowing that.
CHAIRMAN HENN1NG: Not at all. And I think that we need
-- just need to have a general discussion again to clarify this.
MR. SOMERS: If there's any questions--
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Questions?
MR. SOMERS: Yeah. I'll be happy to answer any questions.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I see none. Thank you.
MS. FILSON: You next speaker, Mr. Chairman, is Hal Hansen.
He will be followed by Robert Knowles.
MR. HANSEN: Thank you very much. Good morning,
Commissioners, and thank you for hearing us. My name is Hal
Page 75
March 25, 2003
Hansen. I'm a resident of the 5000 building in Hideaway Beach in
Marco Island. I'm retired and not paid by anybody.
My -- very briefly, I just want to address what I perceive to be
any misconceptions about Hideaway Beach and who we are. I see it
in the press. I hear some comments from certain officials and from
certain vocal citizens regarding Hideaway Beach as being sort of a
hotsy-totsy place and maybe, perhaps, not worthy of receiving this --
TDC funds and so forth.
I just want to briefly state that the majority of the people in
Hideaway Beach made it on their own, no silver spoons. Most us
started life either poor, as I did, or from families of modest means,
and we worked hard, our families sacrificed and saved, and by the
grace of God we realized the so-called American dream, but we all
remember and respect our humble roots.
There's a great sense of community in Hideaway Beach and the
Riviera condominium complex. We also pay a whole lot of taxes.
Overall, Hideaway owners pay millions of dollars of taxes into the
Collier County coffers. The Riviera owners alone, about ! 12 of us,
pay around one and a half million dollars a year.
What do we do -- what do we demand for this? Well, I would
say very little. We're all mostly retired, we have no kids in the public
school systems, but we gladly support the education of the county's
children and want to do that.
We maintain our own streets and lights. In the 10 years that I've
lived there, I don't think I've seen the county sheriff's officers on -- in
our area more than a handful of times, so we're not drawing much
there. Yet we willingly support all of these things that are -- benefit
the rest of the citizens of Collier County, and particularly the
children and the underprivileged.
Our hearts are open and our wallets are open. We're a very
compassionate and generous people. Much of our time, effort, and
Page 76
March 25, 2003
money are given to help the underprivileged of Collier County,
particularly the children.
For example, our Hideaway Beach Club tonight is hosting a
Hideaway Friends of the Guadalupe Center of Immokalee where we
bring in high school students who tutor elementary kids at Pinecrest
Elementary School. Our group will raise about $150,000 to help pay
for this effort, which is about 10 percent of the Guadalupe Center
budget.
That means what?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: You need to wrap up, sir.
MR. HANSEN: I'll wrap up.
The other perception that I want to address is the perception of
-- that I see in the press again so often, private beach versus public
beach. No one in Hideaway Beach, or certainly the Riviera Condo
Association, thinks or believes that our beaches along our shores are
private. We all recognize and respect that this is public domain.
Early on we had a beach. We had several people who would
wander and walk up from Tigertail and from the Crescent Beach
area. We have often had people beach their boats and picnic and surf
fish from our beach. We don't mind that. That's fine. We welcome
that. But the beaches are deteriorating to such a point that that is
hardly possible in many areas today; therefore, we feel that it's time
and fair to go on with the projects that have been planned. Time is of
the essence. At the rate the beach is deteriorating, at least in front of
our buildings, we will soon be fishing off our lanais. Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Robert Knowles, and he will
be followed by James Bolanda.
MR. KNOWLES: Hi. I'm Bob Knowles, and I just wanted to
say that I would like to carry on Hal's speaking of how -- that the
Page 77
March 25, 2003
impression is that we're all pretty money down there. Well, I just
would like to say that, you know, my mother couldn't afford me
when I was a little boy, and I ended up on the state, and I had to go
out and -- thank God my grandmother come along and took me. And
I ended up going to a trade school.
But I ended up coming to Marco in the '70's buying a $40,000
place. I financed my home up in the north. And since then I have
bought eight places, condos, a couple of lots, and a beach house.
Well, I haven't sold them at a loss, but I -- but I don't consider
myself a very, very wealthy man. I consider myself quite poor, as a
matter of fact. I still work. I don't go to the job every day, but I do
work. Have a couple of plants around the country, and I was very
fortunate that I came from the other side to get up this side, and I
don't think that I'm any better than anybody. As a matter of fact, I
don't play golf because I don't have the time. I don't play tennis. I
don't go boating. The only thing I do is work, and I hope to be able
to work for a long time. Thank you.
And I hope you fix our beach.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
MS. FILSON: James Bolanda. He will be followed by Jim
Snediker.
MR. BOLANDA: Mr. Chairman and fellow commissioners, we
thank you for hearing our plea today and we especially thank you for
your public service on behalf of the residents of Collier County.
I am a permanent year-long resident of Collier County, been so
since 1996, a resident of the 4000 building, which is one of the
buildings included in this association that we're now speaking of.
It's interesting to note that some of the issues that we're talking
about today remind me of a book that I read back in 1996 and
supported some of the conundrums that we find in some of the issues
that are represented in this situation.
Page 78
March 25, 2003
The death of that book, incidentally -- maybe you've read it --
was the death of common sense. It had to do with the fact that many
times unintended consequences occur of decisions being made by not
only public agencies, but also private agencies as well.
I would highlight also the fact that the experience that we've
recognized -- and I've been a part of the studies over the years, over
the last decade -- the beach erosion in front of the buildings that are
represented and part of Hideaway Beach has been receding at 10 feet
per year. Ten feet a year of the beach has been disappearing.
As a result of that, we are now begging that these moneys,
which have been authorized, moneys that are developed from tourist
funds, money that comes to us from visitors to our island, as we have
been and many of our friends who come to visit have been, and
ultimately, as myself, purchase property on Marco Island and in this
beach-front community -- these moneys have been appropriated.
We're here to talk about the fact that we need to clear up an
unintended error that came as a result of the operations, but from an
unintended error against what was an approved project.
I would like to also recognize that these are, in fact, substantial
properties. These properties have appreciated over the years. There
is nothing that we would deny about that. But who purchases these
properties? It's people who have come to Marco Island to enjoy the
beach and to enjoy the properties that are there.
As a result of that, as with myself and many others, properties
have been purchased and repurchased. And what does this do? This
increases the value of the properties as we go along. And we know
that county tax revenues grow as a result of these things.
It's been highlighted that current revenues are -- on these two
buildings alone would likely be $1.5 million.
Now, what does this revenue support? It supports the functions
that protect our environment, it supports the fact that turtles have
Page 79
March 25, 2003
been designated as a very important segment of our environmental
community. It goes for the functions that preserve the protected
mangroves which our state has proven -- has decided to do.
These funds, along with many of the volunteer efforts that you
have appropriately recognized this morning -- if I can just finish --
recognize that it's a combination of funds that come from
governmental institutions derived from revenue from the tax base
along with volunteers.
So to the point, we're asking that a wrongful interpretation of the
facets that have been applied to this situation would be rectified this
morning. We ask also that we would not fail to continue with this
project and to see the bigger picture, because the bigger picture
ignored, I believe, would be to endorse this idea of dying common
sense in our society, which I know that none of us would endorse.
So, again, we thank you for recognizing and hearing our plea,
and we look forward to instituting an approved program. Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
MS. FILSON: Mr. Chairman, your final speaker is Jim
Snediker.
MR. SNEDIKER: Good morning. My name is Jim Snediker.
I'm a member of the Collier County -- Collier County Coastal
Advisory Committee. I'm also chairman of the City of Marco Island
Beach Advisory Committee. And going back, I was a member of the
former Collier County, Naples, what, Beach Maintenance
Renourishment Committee on-- years and back.
One thing I'd like to start off by saying is that our coastal
operations now -- our county coastal operations has improved greatly
in the last several years.
When Jim Mudd came a few years ago, then Ron Hovell, and
Jim DeLony, we're doing much better, we as a county, in doing our
Page 80
March 25, 2003
coastal -- coastal projects than we were before.
This is one particular case where it came up last fall to the
Coastal Advisory Committee. The -- Ron had the engineers design
the particular renourishment program here that we're talking about.
Most of it got through, or part of it got through, then they ran into the
trees. Mainly these trees -- the tree situation should have been
addressed beforehand. I mean, the trees were always there. It's
shown very clearly on the drawing.
But also when the contractor got out there, he said, oop, I've got
to stop because the trees are here. I can't go any further.
There was a meeting out there, and then the question came up
about the Erosion Control Line. Should there be an Erosion Control
Line there or not?
The county then stopped the project because they really didn't
know. Went to the county attorney's office, the county attorney said
no. In this particular case the Erosion Control Line is not needed.
So we, as a county coastal projects operation, in my opinion,
made two errors; one, we should have sort of addressed this tree
situation beforehand; number two, when we found out that the
Erosion Control Line was not needed, we should have then
proceeded. We should have finished the project.
We had to build a little sand -- the beach itself that come up to
this point was not wide enough to put a truck on, so we had to put
some sand on there to put -- we call that a sand road, a beach road to
put the trucks on. The road is still there. We can still do it. We just
have to go back to it and just finish up the project.
It is not a new project as -- some people on our Coastal
Advisory Committee had talked about it being a new project. It's just
a continuation. It's the same -- I realize you cannot see this, but the
drawings themselves, we went up to here, we stopped. Didn't go the
rest of the way. Now we can go the rest of the way. We've got the
Page 81
March 25, 2003
contracts in place, we've got the permit, we've got the staging area.
We have to bring in three trucks, which is mobilization, which is not
a big deal. It's just a case of finishing the project that we all
approved and wanted to have done before.
I'd be glad to take any questions if you have --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala, I believe, has a
question or a comment.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, just a couple.
On your picture there, the part that has not been done that you
just pointed out to us, that was approved by the CAC and the TDC?
MR. SNEDIKER: Well, okay. This particular type of project,
this being within the million dollar truck haul, quotation mark, or --
any beach, okay? This is the way it goes through, and the million
dollar overall budget for -- for many projects was approved by CAC,
TDC, and Board of County Commissioners.
Then at that time it went to staff, county staff, and the county
staff determined where it should be -- may I proceed? CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes, please.
MR. SNEDIKER: Okay. And then the county staff determined
where it should go. County staff, and Ron Hovell is the one who
communicated to the Coastal Advisory Committee, then presented
this to -- at our December meeting, said okay, this is where the
county staff would like to have it done. It was not -- did not require a
vote by the CAC. It was a staff decision, and the CAC -- it was
presented to CAC, we accepted it, I guess is the word, or, you know,
talked about it, did not have requirement (sic) vote, so we did not
vote on it, and the project proceeded.
Now, when it came up at the meeting, month, month and a half
ago, we were told that all of a sudden, now the Board of County
Commissioners has to determine where every foot of sand goes on
the beach. I don't know if you people really want to get into that
Page 82
March 25, 2003
kind of micro management. You've got a lot bigger things to do, I
think, than that. But this was a project, at that time, was approved all
the way through by the appropriate staff.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's what I wanted to know. I
can see why, because if you can't even fit a truck on there -- MR. SNEDIKER: Right.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- there's nothing left. And, of
course, many of the -- many things are involved in this, not only --
not only the beach erosion, which we're trying to prevent or trying to
restore, but also we have the -- just for -- for environmental purposes,
the turtle season. The turtles have no place to nest if there's no beach
there anyway. So that's another point to be thinking of.
MR. SNEDIKER: I'll be glad to show you these drawings if
you want to see them where the sand was supposed to go, and
obviously the sand was supposed to go underneath the trees. I don't
know if you want to get into that details (sic), but the drawings are
here.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, I've seen it myself. Anybody
else?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle has seen it, and
-- okay. Well, thank you for offering.
Mr. Jim Mudd, where are we at with this issue?
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, from what I understand-- and I'll
be honest with you, I -- when Jim DeLony came onboard, I basically
told him to make sure, on the beach issues, that he gets to the CAC
and the TDC on these particular issues whenever they arise, okay,
and if there's a discretion between staff and whatever, to go back to
the committees and get their guidance, because as you can tell, things
are contentious. And everybody's vying for limited dollars and so --
so he's done that.
Page 83
March 25, 2003
And I'd let him give you some things, maybe to fill out some of
those dates that were presented earlier, but I will tell you, whatever
the board decides, if you decide to go -- normally on -- if you de --
this would not be a good item to bring back because you run into the
1 May turtle nesting season, okay, and if you do that, mobilization
and things go out -- go out the window. So if we're going to decide
on this particular issue and overrule one of your committees, then I
would suggest that you do it today so that we could get this
accomplished before we run into nesting season.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: What did you mean, overrule one
of our committees?
MR. MUDD: Mr. DeLony?
MR. DeLONY: For the record, Jim DeLony, public utilities
administrator.
Let me get to the chase here, if I might, and just set a couple
things here -- and I really do appreciate the record that's been
presented here earlier, and I don't have anything to -- in terms of--
you know, say what was presented was not wrong (sic), I just want to
clarify a couple things, so I got the con -- so hopefully we got the
context as I understand it and hopefully it's the way everyone
understands as well.
The work was originally funded out of a bulk fund, for lack of a
better term, for placement of sand on any of Vanderbilt, Park Shore,
Naples or Marco Island beaches. That's the genesis of the
empowerment to do this project. And as mentioned, we take that
empowerment, and then we begin to scope it as needed throughout
the year and put the sand where needed on beaches.
And we work with the Coastal Advisory Committee to help us
make that kind of decision and get those kinds of priorities, just as
Mr. Mudd has directed me to do, and that's basically what's
transpired up to this time.
Page 84
March 25, 2003
We -- this project was stopped because at the time that we
stopped it we did not have, in my view, the right -- or enough policy
to proceed. The county attorney's office legal opinion, which was
referenced earlier that was dated 12 February, stated, a legal opinion
was revised to indicate that the BCC may use TDC funds even where
there is no Erosion Control Line, provided the board makes a finding
of public purpose and a finding that renourishment of these beaches
promotes tourism.
So I looked at that and said, well, that's public sand going on a
private beach, and do we have enough policy from the board to do
that? So I thought about it and said, okay, let's take this as directed
to the CAC and talk about it.
MR. MUDD: Can I interrupt?
MR. DeLONY: Sure.
MR. MUDD: Can you please give the board the definition of an
Erosion Control Line?
MR. DeLONY: Yeah. An Erosion Control Line is a line of
demarcation that generally delineates where public property stops
and public -- private property begins.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, while you've given that
definition --
MR. DeLONY: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So being that there's no room for a
truck on this beach now, if we put sand on it, then we would have an
ECL, right? I mean--
MR. DeLONY: Potentially, yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- we first need to put some sand on
there in order to have that?
MR. DeLONY: Well, again, the state would make that
determination. And as we've discussed at the CAC and others, the
lack of an Erosion Control Line is not necessarily a disabilitor (sic) in
Page 85
March 25, 2003
this case, it's just that policy provides that we've got to make sure, if
we're going to use this fund source, that we have the board's approval
to do it in light of the intent of those funds. And I was concerned
about that.
I wanted to make sure that we had it clear -- the Coastal
Advisory Committee is your advisory committee for, I believe, these
types of issues, and we took it appropriately to them as soon as we
could. And we said, okay, wait a minute. We may have gotten off to
a bad start here and some things look a little fuzzy here, let's get
some clarity before we proceed further and expend these funds, and
that was the intent of taking it back to the CAC and getting some
CAC guidance, to make sure we were in consent-- you know, we
were truly following board direction.
And clearly, I needed to make sure that with -- these TDC funds
were being expended appropriately. So we took it to the CAC. A lot
of discussion. CAC's worked very, very hard over the last several
months with this and many other issues associated with the -- with
this project and many others for-- for our county.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: If I may.
MR. DeLONY: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. Mr. DeLony, could you
tell me, how does this compare with what we did over on Barefoot
Beach when we denied funding there?
MR. DeLONY: Well, Bare --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Lely Barefoot Beach? No, it is
Barefoot Beach.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: By the Lee County line.
MR. HOVELL: For the record, Ron Hovell, coastal projects
manager in the public utilities engineering department.
My recollection of the request from Barefoot was to only place
the sand up -- up on the back part on the dunes, clearly on private
Page 86
March 25, 2003
property, and not in a section of beach that the public would tend to
walk on at all.
There is no Erosion Control Line there either, and I don't recall
the county attorney's opinion, if any, on that subject.
Does that answer your question, Commissioner?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, in a way, it does. But I
believe at the time our discussion went to the fact that since the
tourists couldn't benefit from it that that fund was not appropriate to
be spent in that direction. It's been a little while since that item did
come up, but I do remember that part of the conversation.
MR. DeLONY: If I may, sir, I'd like to continue here with some
of the discussions on this matter, unless there's anything else from
you, sir.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Sorry to interrupt you.
MR. DeLONY: No, no. Sir, the bottom line for me was, I just
wanted to go back, confirm that -- it has been checked. You know,
with TC (sic) funds, concerns about ECL, lack of ECL. There's no
question we have an erosion problem at the beach. That's not -- that's
not the matter here. It's just, you know, what do we do to fix the
problem appropriately? What fund source is appropriate.
We took it to the TD -- the CAC, as mentioned, worked very
hard with the TAC (sic) to try to come up with this answer with
regard to policy and how these TDC funds should be placed and
where and so on.
And at the end there was a motion made to complete work as
originally planned at the CAC level, and that was -- it did not pass
with a vote of three -- five against, three for, and one abstention. So
that kind of put me, where to from here?
You know, I mean-- you know, we've got some concerns
whether or not we've got policy. I went to the policy board that
advises yourselves and gives me some guidance with regard to
Page 87
March 25, 2003
policy, and that's where it is today, and that's where -- the reason I'm
sure it's appropriately brought to you today by the folks at Hideaway
Beach and the concerns they have about the continuance of this
project.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you very much.
Some of-- some of my questions are, if the project was
approved, the money was appropriated and the process had begun,
and then because trees seemed to prevent them to go any further, and
then there was some other realizations about the ECL, but you can't
have an ECL unless you have a beach there, and you can't have the
beach there unless you -- unless you put the sand there because it's so
badly eroded, why did it then have to go back to the CAC being that
the process was already completed?
MR. DeLONY: Ma'am -- and I appreciate the question. You
know, anytime during a project that we've got a concern that we
somehow or another do not have the proper authorities or policy to
proceed with that project, it's incumbent upon staff to go and get that
guidance and either that confirmation or get additional information to
ensure that we are in full compliance with the rules and the intent of
the board.
And I was concerned about that. I just -- it's not a question of
being for or against anything. It certainly is -- it was an unscoped
project. It was a very general empowerment that we were working
under, anywhere in Collier County, Vanderbilt, Park Shore, Naples,
or Marco, you know. I was very uncomfortable that we didn't have
the right nexus with regard to this specific project for it to proceed
further.
Fairly comfortable that we continue to put the -- place the
material behind the permitted Groins. You heard that. And you can
see -- and I believe you have some pictures in front of you that show
Page 88
March 25, 2003
-- Ron, would you put those up, please, on the teleprompter?
We went ahead and completed the project, you know, down to
where this is the last T Groins. You know, pretty -- you know, we've
got that, the county built those Groins. We have an obligation under
the permit to maintain those -- felt pretty comfortable that we were
there, even though there is a lack of an Erosion Control Line along
some of that reach of beach.
But to go further without getting some good policy or direction
or confirmation of that, I was very uncomfortable to do that, and so I
went to the CAC to say, hey, here we are. What -- you know, should
we continue or should we not. A lot of discussion.
In fact, the Coastal Advisory Committee, you know, after they
-- after this was kind of gone through them -- and I hate to speak for
them, but I can relate this -- has put together a subcommittee to look
at this, this -- policy matters in the future.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: But now, I've spoken to Ron
Hovell, and unless I misunderstood him -- and please correct me if I
did -- what you said was, there was a very serious erosion problem
here, and it needed to be renourished. You didn't give me a time
frame, but you said that it definitely had to be done. So I don't
understand, if we've got the money appropriated and we've got -- and
we have the trucks there and -- why we can't just proceed being that
we had approval.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And I think the whole discussion is,
is it appropriate to use TDC funds for renourishment. I don't think
the question is that there has to be sand on the beach. There's no
question there needs to be sand on the beach. But I understand the
CAC is looking at some criteria on limited access or no access to the
beaches and that's --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I was able to walk on them. You
know, it was a long walk from Tigertail, but I was able -- and I had to
Page 89
March 25, 2003
walk in some water, obviously, but I could get there, and nobody
stopped me. I mean, I was able to just walk there, and -- which is
great. I realize that it's a trek and it's good exercise, but it says for
public purpose in here.
CHAIRMAN HENN1NG: And it -- maybe we get the
Hideaway folks to open up an access for the general public and the
tourists, just like The Registry does. They truck people in from a
motorized vehicle down to the beach, and maybe that is one of the
alternatives for the rational nexus on this item.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: It would certainly give
justification to use TDC funds if there was an access like that. I
mean, it's not realistic to expect the average person to walk that great
distance from Tigertail Beach all the way around the edge of the
island.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas, are you with
us today?
MR. MUDD:
CHAIRMAN
MR. MUDD:
CHAIRMAN
He comes on at 10:45, sir.
HENNING: Okay.
Which is about two minutes from now.
HENNING: All right.
Mr. DeLony, is there anything else to add today?
MR. DeLONY: No, sir. We're basically following, you know,
the CAC's direction with regard to proceeding with this project.
With the fact CAC voted to not support continuous project, we did
put it on hold, and we're at hold now.
Mr. Mudd was correct that we have -- if it is board desire to
proceed or direction to proceed, we're going to be scrambling, but --
to make sure we get the -- we meet the turtle window closure for
beach renourishment for 1 May, so --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: So what's the pleasure of the board?
That's what-- the final line.
Page 90
March 25, 2003
MR. DeLONY: Well, essentially I've asked that-- I've asked
that question with regard to this -- answering this question, do we
proceed or do we stay where we're at.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Correct.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, just one other fact that I think you
don't have yet, is, could you-- Mr. DeLony or Mr. Hovell, could you
please tell me what the estimate for beach sand was for this project
and how much was actually delivered?
MR. DeLONY: The conservative estimate that we began with
in December was 25,000 tons of sand and when we -- we have so far
to date placed about 30,000 tons of sand. And this is against, you
know, an allocation that we had placed in this grant application of a
total 67,500 tons of sand, so about half of that allocation went to
Hideaway, Marco, and is currently there now.
The estimate that we have for the subsequent work is -- how
much is that? Somewhere between eight to 10,000 tons to complete
the work to the extent -- to the limits that we have here -- noted here.
We stopped here with the blue line, and it's about another eight to
10,000 yards, give or take.
Yeah, thank you, Jim. You have the cut sheets. But the bottom
line is about that, about eight to 10,000 cubic yard -- tons, excuse me.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I have a question. Is there anything
prohibiting the residents from putting sand on the beach, to pay for it
themselves?
MR. DeLONY: They'd have to have a permit. They could
probably do that under our permit. We'd have to make some
arrangements for it to be under our permit. We'd have to work very
closely with them. But in that regard, we would -- we would
certainly try to do that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
MR. DeLONY: And any -- any work by the residents
Page 91
March 25, 2003
themselves, we'd work very closely with them to make sure that it
would -- it would be in full compliance with any permit requirements
that we have and they'd have to do that for us to allow that to happen.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: So what's the pleasure of the board at
this point?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. I'll just -- I'll have one more
comment, if I may.
MR. DeLONY: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Have we had to use much sand on
the rest of Marco Island? I mean, I realize that nearly a third of our
TDC dollars come in to renourish beaches, and I was just wondering
if the rest of Marco has had to use it or if this would be -- if this -- I
think it would be a -- I think the people from Marco Island feel that
their tax -- their tourist tax dollars need to go to this project, and I
really have to stand in favor of that.
And I would like to make a motion that we complete this job
and -- on Hideaway Beach by the 1st of May.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. There's a motion on the floor.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Hello, there's -- this is
Commissioner Halas on the line again.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, glad to have you here with us
today.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. What -- where are we at on
the agenda at present time?
CHAIRMAN HENN1NG: We're on item 9(C). That's
Commissioner Fiala's --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And I have just made a motion to
complete this job on Hideaway Beach by the 1st of May.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Is there a second on the
motion?
Page 92
March 25, 2003
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Seeing none, it failed, but I know
Commissioner Coyle has some questions.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'll second the motion--
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Second the motion --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- for discussion purposes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- for discussion purposes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: But I do have some question, if--
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Please.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- if you wouldn't mind.
This is a very complex process. It's divided into lots of
components. I've got to make sure that I understand how the
components are broken up,
What is the relationship between this particular issue and item
16(C)(5), which has now been moved to 10(K)?
MR. DeLONY: Thank you, sir. The item that you had
reference to, the subsequent item, deals with the major large
renourishment of that reach of beach that is going -- that's going --
we plan to do this next year. This item we're speaking to today deals
with a small fix of this reach of beach.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: For essentially an existing
project?
MR. DeLONY: Yes, sir, yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Now--
MR. DeLONY: Now -- well, let me be clear on that. Yes, sir,
existing project in a sense that we have an authorization to place
annual beach renourishment on Vanderbilt, Park Shore, Naples and
Marco as an allocation with TDC funds.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
MR. DeLONY: So it's in that context that these funds were
being expended.
Page 93
March 25, 2003
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Now, there is another
segment on the north end of Hideaway Beach that is another project,
is that true, that has or has not been undertaken or started?
MR. HOVELL: If I might, Ron Hovell, for the record again.
There's three projects at Hideaway Beach; the one we're speaking of
that -- to place the sand at the north end of Hideaway Beach,
otherwise known as Royal Marco Point; there's the major
renourishment, which is currently estimated around four and a half
million dollars that we're in the design phase for, and that's what the
budget amendment, item 10(K) is about; and then there's a separate
project called Hideaway Beach access improvements, which was to
place some sand and --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
MR. HOVELL: -- boardwalk between Tigertail and Hideaway.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Now I've got it. I just
wanted to make sure I had those straight.
I think I need a clarification as to the legality of providing the
funds, and there are two important phrases; one, serves the public
interest and, secondly, supports tourism.
What I'd like to understand is how these projects address those
requirements.
MS. ASHTON: The requirement is a paramount public purpose
and also that it promotes tourism, you're correct.
I don't know that you've been given the information, because
there are some issues -- number of projects for Hideaway Beach.
And as the board knows, in the past -- and I'm not a technical person,
I don't really have the history, but I'll do my best -- T-Groins were
placed along Hideaway Beach.
Now, the question is whether or not -- how does this relate to
the maintenance of the beach and the erosion of the other Marco
beach, because everything is all interrelated, and you have to rely on
Page 94
March 25, 2003
your technical people for that.
Also, if this does affect the T-Groins that we already put in
there, how does that affect the permit that we have or the money
we've already spent for those things. I don't know that that's been
provided to you, but that's information that you would need to know
in order to make a finding of paramount public purpose, because the
public purpose cannot be, we're placing sand on a private beach and
the benefit is to those private owners solely. There has to be a
benefit to the public at large through the interworkings of the beach
potentially, you know, the renourishment of the beach, maintenance,
and so forth.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And for the record, that was Heidi
Ashton from the county attorney's office. MS. ASHTON: Oh, sorry.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I guess one of my real concerns is
that whatever we do with putting sand on the beach under current
circumstances, it's not going to stay. And I'd like to understand what
permanent or semi permanent actions might be taken to solve the
problem.
I know we have temporary Groins there. Is there a project to
replace those temporary Groins with permanent Groins?
MR. DeLONY: Well, yes, sir, in the sense that it would be part
of that major renourishment piece that we'll look very carefully at
that.
When you talk to a permanent solution for beaches, all beaches
at some stage of the game, you're going to gain or lose sand over
time.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah.
MR. DeLONY: You can make some structural adjustments to
that. That requires some -- even that will require some maintenance
in terms of, usually renourishment activities similar to what we're
Page 95
March 25, 2003
talking about today.
So I'm a little confused as to what a permanent solution would
be. We will continue to have requirements on this beach and in the
majority of our beaches in Collier County for some type of annual,
quar -- every four year, three year renourishment cycle to ensure they
provide, you know, that access or provide that public purpose that
Heidi spoke to before.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: What -- this is Commissioner
Halas here.
What kind of bothers me is, when we say beach renourishment
and we say the word public, that -- I take that as being that this is
open to everybody in regards to getting to that beach.
When you talk about Hideaway Beach, basically it's only for a
select few because that's in a gated area, and so that raises a flag for
me in regards to the amount of beach renourishment that we're going
to get involved in here.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, that's one of the issues I
need to get to when we were talking about, serves a public purpose
and promotes tourism.
I need to understand whether a public purpose is served by
providing this beach renourishment for the residents. I don't think
the ordinance says that you can't put sand on a private beach. The
question is whether or not doing so serves the public purpose and
promotes tourism.
An argument could be made that if you let these beaches
deteriorate, it's going to become unsightly, maybe some buildings
will begin to be impacted, and will that in itself have a negative
impact upon tourism? I don't know. I don't know the question --
answer to that question. But I believe the issue goes beyond whether
it is a private beach.
Page 96
March 25, 2003
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yep.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It goes bey -- it goes to the point
of whether or not there is a public purpose and if it impact --
positively impacts tourism. And I can make an argument that says,
yeah, you need to maintain these beaches, you don't want them to be
eroded away because they are attractive and tourists enjoy that sort of
scenery. But I don't know how far we can go in that respect.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, may I say also that what we
do is -- the areas that tourists and the general public are allowed to,
that we prioritize those beaches and then we have a priority less so --
that somewheres along the line where there is -- where it relates to
private beaches, they're farther down the list on the priority of
exactly when we're going to be able to maintain those beaches, that,
number one, since these are tourist tax dollars, that we take care of
the areas where it's related to tourist areas, and then those would be
the -- of the highest priority. Maybe that's a good way of setting
precedence here of exactly how we're going to take care of these
beaches.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. If I may interject here. I
think the purpose of the intent is the general public.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Uh-huh.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I can tell you that that beach serves a
public, but it's -- in my opinion, it's not the general public. I mean, I
used to walk that back in 1970 around that comer. You can't get
there now from Tigertail. Sorry, Commissioner Fiala. What is there
now is a bunch of mangroves and --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Right.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- high water, so -- and probably at
mean low water, or there's some skinny water that you can walk
across, but that's going to be a little dicey at that point.
Now, the -- there is a motion and a second on the floor right
Page 97
March 25, 2003
now to continue -- for the county to continue to put sand on that
beach.
Now, the other alternative is for the community to work with
our staff and the permit is there today to put sand -- for the
community to put sand on there, so --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Can I ask you a question, please?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Sure.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: How-- I understand that you're
concerned with public access. And there's the bigger job looming up
ahead of us and we're in the planning stages for that, and maybe that
would be the appropriate time to discuss public access.
Right now we have a beach that's in danger, and we had a job
that we needed to complete. How about if we finish that, and then as
they get into the discussions about the major project on Hideaway,
they can then discuss public access?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And that's a very good point.
Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. I just wanted to draw a
distinction between those in very much the same way.
I think it's premature for us to make a decision on supporting all
of this beach renourishment business. But if this, in fact, is a project
that was already approved and it just was not completed, I feel more
comfortable letting that project proceed. But I wouldn't want to
indicate that I'm willing to dump a lot of sand for renourishment in
the future.
MR. DeLONY: Yes, sir. And ifI may. And I don't mean to
interrupt you. Jim DeLony, for the record.
Sir, I have to be very careful here to tell you that the project
that's been approved was not scoped to the specifics of this project.
The project that was approved by yourselves in the May 2002 agenda
item 16(C)4, stated that it was an annual beach renourishment which
Page 98
March 25, 2003
provided a million dollars for the placement of approximately 67,500
tons of sand on any of Vanderbilt, Park Shore, Naples, or Marco
Island beaches.
So that was a very general, you know, use your discretion kind
of a -- not necessarily a blank check, but a very large area for us to
go out and do the right thing.
Our approach and deployment on taking that empowerment
from you is to take it, look at -- assess the beaches, work with the
CAC, scope out the needs of this annual renourishment, and working
with the CAC, prioritize them and move out and expend these funds
as required on this -- as outlined by the Board of County
Commissioners.
It was not a specific reach of beach, so many tons, you know,
this is what we're going to do type project.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So it's your position that you've
actually met that commitment? You've actually produced or placed
enough sand on that beach to meet the requirement as approved by
the county commission at that time?
MR. DeLONY: Well, it's my position that we've ran -- we have
run out of policy, that the sand that you've got on the beach now is
consistent to the policy as I understand at this stage of the game. To
go forward with any more beach sand, needed or not, ma'am -- I
mean, I agree with you, this is some of the most eroded beaches in
Collier County. Something needs to be done. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
MR. DeLONY: The question I've got is, do we use TDC funds
to do it?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah.
MR. DeLONY: And I've run out of policy to do that in my
assessment. That's the reason I took it back to the CAC and asked
them, what do you think. And we -- the work needs to be done, this
Page 99
March 25, 2003
is the fund source we're using, here's the reach of beach we thought
we would do, we're at this point here, no ECL, no nexus to the
Groins, what do you think? And there was a lot of discussion, a lot
of-- lot of good input by folks on that CAC, and at end they made a
vote, and they voted 5-3-1 against proceeding with the project. And
that's where I am today.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And that's about where I stand. I
feel that we shouldn't be putting TDC funds in a private beach area.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. I might add to that, too,
this has nothing to do with the fact that it's Marco Island.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That's exactly right. It could be
anyplace.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: It's all Collier County's coast,
and that we have to get more proactive in trying to secure beach
accesses wherever we can.
The only place that's doing it right at this point in time is the
City of Naples, and God bless them for it. But why should they get
the whole load put on them because the rest of the county's going to
fall behind.'?
I think we need to look at this overall, what we can try to do to
improve it, not to make the lives of the people who live at Hideaway
Beach less attractive than it already is. We want to definitely keep
their standard of living where it is.
But I think Commissioner Henning was going in the right
direction when he said something that would be nonintrusive, a small
beach access where people would be brought to it by possibly a
trolley, we would have a bathroom facility on there. I mean, right
now it makes absolutely no sense, somebody coming all the way
around from Tigertail Beach to use that beach, then when nature
calls, they're supposed to trek all the way back again to Tigertail
Beach to use the rest room.
Page 100
March 25, 2003
So I'm sure if we all work together on this, that we could come
up with something that would be the best for everyone in Collier
County.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle, did you want
to--
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, I'd just like to make one
summary statement. If I were convinced this was an existing project
that we had not completed, I would vote in support of proceeding. It
appears to me, based upon the evidence presented by staff that there
was no commitment as to linear distance. There was a commitment
as to money and tons of sand, and that was the guidance provided by
the commissioners at that time, I presume. MR. DeLONY: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And if that is a true statement, I
am very reluctant to make a decision without going back through the
advisory committees, because that's a bad precedent to establish.
MR. DeLONY: Sir, let me just be -- let me see if I can help you
a little bit. And what we have from you is a dollar amount and a
quantity.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
MR. DeLONY: And no specific locations other than the
beaches of Collier County, essentially.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And you've satisfied that
requirement?
MR. DeLONY: In my view, when we sat down, we took that
empowerment from you, we looked at the needs of the community,
and working with the CAC, we try to address them.
In this case, we looked at the beach at Hideaway and looked at
the length of beach there that needed work -- needs some sand, to
include the part where we stopped. I mean, that was the original
scope of what we set out to do.
Page 101
March 25, 2003
As been mentioned, we stopped. We ran across this vegetation
that we did not have an original contract, we were going to -- have to
figure out what we're going to do about that. But at the same time
that we -- and concurrently with the stop of the work was, what about
this ECL, you know, where is the ECL, and where do we stop with
regard to ECL, and do we have the empowerment to move forward
putting essentially public sand on private property with no ECL
designation?
That's where this came up, and that's the reason I asked for the
county attorney's opinion on this -- on the 12th of February.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: But that's been answered, that you
don't need an ECL.
MR. DeLONY: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So I need to separate these two
issues.
MR. DeLONY: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You did or did not meet the
requirements that were provided to you by the county commission
when it made a decision on replenishing this thing in terms of money
and tons of sand?
MR. DeLONY: The decision that you gave me was mo -- was
gross quantity, gross location, and a fixed budget of one million
dollars.
COMMISSIONER COYLE:
MR. DeLONY: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE:
requirement?
MR. DeLONY: Yes, sir, I have.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
anything more, you need our guidance?
MR. DeLONY:
And we put that there?
So you've satisfied that
So in order for you to do
Well, let's put it this way --
Page 102
March 25, 2003
MR. MUDD: Let me help a little bit, Commissioner. There
was a fact that was wrong in that statement.
There's a million -- Jim Mudd, for the record, by the way,
county manager.
There's a million dollars laid out. And they call it 67 tons. I call
it 50,000 cubic yards, okay? That's what I remember.
That is a very generic templet. It's a menu. That menu goes in
front of the Coastal Advisory Committee, and they, based on staff
surveys and whatnot, decide where and if that money needs to be
spent to get at troubled areas or areas that are severely eroded in
Collier County, and they do that, and they lay that stuff out on an
annual basis.
This project had an estimate of 25,000 tons. They put 30,000
tons there, okay, to the tune of $590,000 of that one million.
Mr. DeLony and Ron Hovell had issues with the ECL, because
you can get yourself in a fix, especially if you start putting it on
private land when you're trying to figure out public purpose and
things like that, and they -- and they asked a very legitimate question
of the attorney's office.
The attorney's office said, you don't need an ECL if you can
satisfy two requirements, and that has to be the good of the general
public and it also has to promote tourism, okay? And the board can
make that decision and say, fine, we don't need the ECL, and this --
and this particular project does that.
This was discussed. Mr. DeLony came back to the Coastal
Advisory Committee and asked them, do we continue on this project
with everything-- with the information that you're being provided
now that I'm telling you, and they went through a long discussion.
Your Coastal Advisory Committee voted not to continue this project.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Exactly.
MR. MUDD: Staff does not come forward to the board then
Page 103
March 25, 2003
with a requirement to continue the project after your advisory
committee -- and the CAC is your expert committee, okay? It's not
the TDC, which is your funding committee, okay, and tells you how
they're going to break down that fund. The CAC is your experts as
far as where the stuff is placed on the beach, and that's what you
asked them to do as far as the charter is concerned.
So at this juncture, Mr. DeLony is done with that project unless
the board tells them -- him to go forward and put more sand on that
beach and continue this project.
So he has -- he has fulfilled his requirement based on the funds
that have been allocated by the board and that have been directed to
be done by the Coastal Advisory Committee as your expert advisors.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: We're starting to get repetitive here.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, yeah.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: So without further new discussion,
I'd like to call a motion.
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, I made a motion that we --
that we --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Right.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- replenish this beach, finish the
job we started and do it before the 1st of May.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Is there -- is there anything else?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: That's it? Okay.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that motion was already given
and it was seconded --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Correct.
MR. MUDD: -- by Commissioner Coyle.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I understand that. I just didn't want
to start talking about the same thing over and over again.
Page 104
March 25, 2003
So we've got a motion and a second. All in favor of the motion,
signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
Opposed?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: The motion fails, 3-2.
Okay. So that's where we're at with that issue.
Mr. Mudd, we have, in my opinion, a dilemma. We have a
10:45 -- and right now it's 11:10 -- time certain on the agenda, 10:45,
and now we also have an 11 o'clock agenda. The 11 o'clock is
Citizen's Advisory Board reporting to the board, so can you give us
some direction to -- which one do we need to take first?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Hopefully you'll go to the one at
10(G), if you can. I've got to go back to class here. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
MR. MUDD: If anything, at least get Commissioner Halas's
comments as far as 10(G) is concerned so that we can continue that at
a different time so that you have an idea of what his -- what his ideas
are.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And I think that's appropriate
because we have citizens that are volunteering their service, and to
put them through some more -- subject them to some more of this
abuse, I think, would be inappropriate.
So Commissioner Halas, on the -- the item 10(G), if we could
get your comments.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I think we ought to go forward
and adopt the policies that have been prescribed in that for budget
development for the fiscal year of'04.
Page 105
March 25, 2003
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'm in favor of that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Officially take a vote on that,
we really need to have that item and vote on it as a board. MR. WEIGEL: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Is there going to be any -- there
really needs to be discussion on it at -- and explanation, so I would
rather move to the 11 o'clock, which is --
MR. MUDD: And when Commissioner-- and when
Commissioner Halas comes back at 12 o'clock, we can -- we can go
to the vote on 10(G), if that --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay, let's do that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. I'll see -- I'll get back to
you guys again with the phone patch at 12 noon.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, thanks for being with us.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. And thank you very much.
Item #10A
GOLDEN GATE COMMUNITY CENTER ADVISORY
COMMITTEE, IMMOKALEE ENTERPRISE ZONE
DEVELOPMENT AGENCY, LIBRARY ADVISORY BOARD,
PELICAN BAY MSTBU ADVISORY COMMITTEE, AND
TOURIST DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL-FOUND TO BE IN
ACCORDANCE WITH ORDINANCE AND TO BE RETAINED
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Next item is 10(A). This is review the
written and oral reports of the advisory boards and committees
scheduled for review in 2003 in accordance to ordinance 2001-55.
Wynona Stone is here to proceed with this item.
Page 106
March 25, 2003
MS. STONE: Good morning, Commissioners. Wynona Stone,
assistant to the county manager.
As you're aware, every fourth year you review your advisory
boards and committees to ensure that they are taking the actions that
-- as to the ordinances that created them. Also you will be
determining if there are any changes needed to those governing
ordinances for them to operate more efficiently and effectively.
This year you have 10 boards scheduled for review. On your
March 1 lth meeting, you reviewed five and approved their reports.
Today you will be reviewing the last five, the remaining five of
those. That includes the Golden Gate Community Center Advisory
Committee, the Immokalee Enterprise Zone Development Agency,
the Library Advisory Board, the Pelican Bay MSTBU Advisory
Committee, and the Tourist Development Council.
If you don't have any questions of me at this time, I'll introduce
your presenters.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
MS. STONE: Okay. The first presenter is Ms. Cheryle
Newman with the Golden Gate Community Advisory Committee.
Ms. Newman?
MS. NEWMAN: Good morning. For the record, Cheryle
Newman, vice-chair of the Golden Gate Community Center Advisory
Committee.
Mr. Chairman, fellow commissioners, and staff, I'm representing
the advisory board this morning in place of Vicky Clavelo, who is
our chairperson, and was unable to be here this morning.
I believe in your agenda packet, you should have a copy of our
annual report, and I'd just like to bring to your attention item number
five on that annual report.
After reviewing some of the policies and bylaws and guidelines
in place, it was realized that we are currently operating at an '86
Page 107
March 25, 2003
guideline. Even though we are meeting monthly and we are doing --
following all the bylaws and guidelines that were established back
then, we felt it was time to review those.
And each of the members were provided a copy of those
guidelines at our last meeting in March. And for our meeting in April
we are going to sit down and review those guidelines and see if there
are any items that should be addressed at that time.
Just to bring everyone up to date on the Golden Gate
Community Center Advisory Board, it is another unique advisory
board appointed by the BCC with administrative responsibilities of
the supervisor to the Parks and Recreation Department.
The ordinance was originally created in '75, established the
MSTU for the Golden Gate community to build the center. I've only
been in Collier County, Golden Gate since '93, and I've only been on
the advisory board since the late '90's, so I'm just going on some
documentation that I've been able to acquire in talking to some of the
other members that have sat on the board prior to me.
It's our understanding that we are the watchdog for the dollars
brought in by the MSTU, which is an additional tax over and above
what Collier County residents pay in their ad valorem tax for parks
and recreation.
Keith Larson, our current supervisor, is here today, as well as
Steve Whittier, his immediate supervisor with parks and recreation,
so any technical questions I believe they would be able to answer for
you.
But I think all I really need to clarify to you is that we are
following all the guidelines, even though they are outdated. We feel,
and I personally feel, since the inception
Parks and Recreation Department, we've
relationship between the community and
Department. Things have created a very
of the partnership with the
had a good working
the Parks and Recreation
-- we have a first class
Page 108
March 25, 2003
operation out there. We've had wonderful supervisors, starting from
John Dunnuck, through Keith Larson.
The center is in the midst of a great expansion for our
community. We want to continue that good working relationship.
And there's just a few things that we, as a committee, feel need
to be narrowed down and defined as far as who answers to who,
whose money gets spent where so that we have a -- continue this
good work relationship that we currently have.
If you have any questions for me, I've got -- I've got some things
here that I can go over with you, or if there's anything technical that
you'd like to speak with Keith, he's here, as well as Steve Whittier.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta, do you have
any questions?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, none. Thank you for
asking.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'd just like to say that I look upon
the Golden Gate Community Center as one of the success stories of
Golden Gate and of the whole county. I've watched it mature, just as
you have, and we're just so proud of what you're doing and where
you're taking this thing. I couldn't -- I couldn't add anything more
than how proud we are of you.
MS. NEWMAN: Thank you. We've very proud too.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I make a motion that we find that the
Golden Gate Community Center Advisory Board is -- accordance to
the ordinance.
MR. MUDD: And you -- and you retain them in their
existence?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And we'll retain them for a while in
Page 109
March 25, 2003
their existence.
MS. NEWMAN: We appreciate that.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: There's a motion and a second on the
floor.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING:
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING:
Any opposed?
Ms. Stone, please continue.
MS. STONE: Your next presenter is Mr. Raymond Holland.
He's with -- the chairman of Immokalee Enterprise Zone
Development Agency. Mr. Holland?
MR. HOLLAND: Good morning, I'm Raymond Holland,
chairman of the Immokalee Enterprise Zone Development Agency.
The primary purpose of the enterprise zone is to encourage and
stimulate economic activity in distressed areas by offering tax
benefits to local business that relocate or expand in an enterprise
zone. Benefits are also available to homeowners in the area.
Currently there are 51 zones in Florida. Immokalee was
designated an enterprise zone in 1997. Since 1997, there have been
27 different businesses, some of which are housing development,
packing houses, day care centers, and the like, that have taken
advantage of the program. And to date, they have received over
$600,000 in tax credits and refunds.
In the past 12 months, there have been 11 Immokalee businesses
that have received almost $125,000 in tax credits and
reimbursements, 49,000 in sales tax refunds, and 75,000 in sales and
Page 110
March 25, 2003
corporate tax credits.
The zone boundary for the enterprise zone was expanded in
1999 to include all areas within the Immokalee census tracts rather
than just the urban boundary.
The enterprise zone committee is composed of 13 members who
meet every other month. The enterprise zone has workshops during
the year, usually two a year, and we have other means of advertising
the availability of these funds, to inform local residents and business
owners about the benefits available through the program, and we also
have occasional press releases and other ways to get the word out.
The governor's office requires quarterly and annual reports from
each EZDA coordinator regarding zone activities, and our
coordinator is Helene Caseltine. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion for approval.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And there's a motion by
Commissioner Coletta that, finding of fact the enterprise zone is in
accordance with the ordinance and to continue the enterprise zone,
second by Commissioner Fiala.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING:
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING:
Any opposed?
Motion carries, 4-0.
MS STONE: Commissioners, your next presenter is Ms.
Jaculyn Dering, she's the chair of the Library Advisory Board.
Page 111
March 25, 2003
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Very important function to Collier
County.
MS. DERING: Thank you. Hello, my name is Jackie Dering,
and I'm the chair of the Library Advisory Board, and I would like to
stand here and very glibly tell you that the library speaks for itself,
but I won't be so short.
We work closely with the director and the staff on a lot of the --
just about everything that goes on in the library. We work with them
from buildings to policies. The policies are updated regUlarly and
amended as needed, as situations present themselves that we, in our
all-encompassing wisdom, did not foresee.
We make recommendations to the Board of County
Commissioners. I like to think of us as your representative and your
conscience with regard to library matters.
We work with -- on fund-raising issues, any kind of special
projects, and we're the last line with relations with the patrons where
things remain unresolved.
And you received our report, and that's pretty much all I have to
say.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Any questions?
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Just a comment. And Jackie, you
guys are doing a great job. It's just -- I'm just admonishing my own
District 1 a little bit. They should have a member on there. I know
that it has been advertised and nobody has responded. So those of
you out there that live in District 1, apply for the library board. We
need you.
Thank you.
MS. DERING: Thank you very much for your time.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I'll make a motion, a finding of fact
that the Library Advisory Board is according to the ordinance and
Page 112
March 25, 2003
they serve a valid public service and they continue with the efforts
for another two years; is that correct?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And a second by Commissioner
Coyle.
All those in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING:
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING:
Any opposed?
Motion carries, 4-0.
MS. DERING: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Ms. Stone?
Thank you.
MS. STONE: The next presenter is Mr. Lou Vlasho, chairman
of the Pelican Bay MSTBU Advisory Committee.
MR. VLASHO: Thank you, and good morning,
Commissioners. My name is Lou Vlasho. I'm-- I guess as of an
hour ago I was the chairman of the Pelican Bay Services Division
Advisory Board.
You have our report, and I'd like to make a few general
comments, since we only get this opportunity once every four years.
I'd like to start by letting you know what the vision of Pelican
Bay is. Pelican Bay is Florida's premier, mixed-use beach-front
community. It promotes the enjoyment, health, safety and general
welfare of its property owners, residents, guests, employers and
employees through cooperative governance of the community and
cooperative management of its common elements.
The cooperative governance is in addition to the county -- the
Page 113
March 25, 2003
Collier County Commission, the members of the MSTBU, and the
board of the Pelican Bay Foundation. Their principal contact with
the county leadership is the MSTBU, of course.
A brief history. We started Pelican Bay in 1974 when the Clam
Bay Improvement District was established, an independent district,
as a framework for development of the area.
In 1978 another independent group, the Pelican Bay
Improvement District, was established.
In 1991, your predecessors established a Pelican Bay Services
Division, the MSTBU, which reported to the county commissioners.
And in 2002 a new ordinance was established which gave the
MSTBU broader control of services, streamlined the structure, and
defined the responsibilities. And Mr. Brock's help in that effort was
greatly appreciated.
We also have a mission statement for the MSTBU. Very simply
it is preserve and enhance landowner -- landowner value and resident
quality of life by promptly and efficiently providing the services
which answer the needs of the community within Pelican Bay.
We serve 11,000 permanent and seasonal residents, and our
annual budget exceeds $4 million. For 2003 it will be four and a
quarter million dollars.
Community beautification. Our mission here is to provide the
high quality maintenance of the right-of-way berms, parks within the
Pelican Bay community to ensure an efficient and consistent system.
The major items under this are the landscaping maintenance of
nearly three million square feet of right-of-way and community park.
Included in our work is street sweepings, street trash pickup,
beach cleaning, sign maintenance, which includes all the signs,
traffic and entrance signs.
The major programs for the last year was improvement of our
landscaping and irrigation system along Pelican Bay. The reason for
Page 114
March 25, 2003
that was the age, plus also the consistent -- to establish a consistent
landscape pallet, improved traffic visibility, and install a new
irrigation system with computerized controls, which also helps with
the reduction of water.
We also are finishing right now the renovation of the berm
along 41 on the west side, and we have removed the exotic materials,
installed new landscaping and a new irrigation system.
In the prior year, we replaced all the signs within Pelican Bay,
the entrance and the traffic signs, the streetlights, including the poles
and the fixtures.
The second area we work on is water management, and here our
efforts are to provide the efficient and timely delivery of water
maintenance services to the Pelican Bay community by providing for
the necessary maintenance for the community storm water system to
assure its efficient operation in the transporting and treatment of
storm water.
In addition, the division tries to maintain the highest aesthetic
appearance while maintaining the delicate balance of the ecosystem.
We manage 175 acres of lakes, nine acres of swales, four acres of
aquatic plants.
Our major effort has been the Clam Bay restoration. And here
our mission is to provide funding for the restoration and maintenance
of the Clam Bay estuary system.
The ongoing monitoring program allows us to comply with the
permit requirements and to help ensure the health of this unique
ecosystem. This has been a seven-year program to reverse 50 years
of damage which started long before Pelican Bay existed.
Our major efforts currently are Clam Bay maintenance
dredging. Twenty-two thousand linear feet of internal channels have
been cut to improve flushing and draining -- drainage, 18 mangrove
starter islands are in place, including some alternate planting plots.
Page 115
March 25, 2003
We continue the ongoing maintenance. We have a
subcommittee that evaluates all aspects of the Clam Bay program.
WCI Communities has been our partner to the tune of $1 million, and
they have paid that to us. And we have, to date, spent $2.3 million
on the mangrove area.
The results are summarized as we've had good success with all
aspects of the program. Clam Pass has been open for three years
before it required additional dredging. We have stopped -- we, that's
a pretty broad term. Let's just say the die-off has stopped, and
thousands of mangrove seedlings have naturally been deposited in
the die-off area.
Our next area is security operations, and there we have a
contract with Sheriff Don Hunter who provides us one full-time
deputy 24 hours a day, seven days a week.
In our uninsured assets restoration reserve, we currently have
$1.1 million to provide for the restoration of Pelican Bay landscaping
into its original premier state in the event of a natural disaster.
My final comments are to recognize the people that I had the
opportunity to work with, and I want to read their names, for the
record. Joe Bedoniac (phonetic), Tom Brown, Jim Burke, Jim
Carroll, who has served as vice chairman, John Domaney (phonetic),
Glen Harold, Dave Rolak, Ed Storrows, Chris Subkin (phonetic),
George Warner. Mr. Bedoniac, Mr. Brown's service concludes today,
along with mine.
In addition, I'd like to recognize the people that have worked
with me on boards prior to this year. Cornelia Craig, Allan Varley,
Ed Griffith, Herb Hasset. And I would like to also recognize and
mention Jim Carter's effort. We appreciate the work he's done and
we look forward to working with Mr. Halas.
And second to last, I'd like to say a word about our manager,
Jim Ward, who's done an outstanding job over the years. And I
Page 116
March 25, 2003
know personally because I have been your chairman on the MSTBU
for three and a quarter years, the longest serving chairman. I took -- I
assumed the chairmanship in 2002. And Jim Ward has been a
professional, an excellent man to work with, and it was a pleasure to
work with him.
If you have any questions, I'd like to try to answer them.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any questions?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. Did I understand you to
say that your term of service was ending today?
MR. VLASHO: Yes. When you appointed the three -- so I'm
giving an unofficial report right now, which means I can say
whatever I want. The best part of it is, I can now talk to Jim Carroll
about anything in Pelican Bay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, I have a question about
coordination with the residents of Seagate concern some of their
needs in Clam Bay, and I need to gather some information so I can
discuss their concerns with them. But if you wouldn't mind
providing me some information after this meeting, maybe we can talk
about it outside this meeting, and--
MR. VLASHO: Let me know.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
MR. VLASHO: Dave Rolak has been our chairman of that
subcommittee, and he --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
MR. VLASHO: -- or Jim Ward would have firsthand
information for you.
COMMISSIONERCOYLE: Okay. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I make a motion that Pelican
Municipal Service Taxing and Benefit Unit Advisory Board meets
and serves the purpose under which it was created.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
Page 117
March 25, 2003
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. I sign on for it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion, signify by
saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries, 4-0.
Thank you.
MR. MUDD: A point of clarification, Mr. Chairman. The
library board is for four years, and they'll come back and give you a
presentation four years from now.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And I'll amend that motion and the
second.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And the second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Mr. Bleu Wallace.
MR. WALLACE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. For the record,
Bleu Wallace, director of community development operations.
I've had the privilege since December 2001 of providing the
staff support and helping out in working with the Tourist
Development Council.
This report was taken to them in January, and they approved it,
and it's been forwarded on to you. The Tourist Development Council
is required by statute so long as we collect a tourist development tax.
And over the past year we've worked very closely with the board,
TDC, the clerk, county manager, to transition into where -- where the
tourist effort is going.
In the past year we've hired a new tourism director. He's
Page 118
March 25, 2003
present, Mr. Jack Wert. And also we've been meeting more
frequently, and this board is very aware of everything that we've
been doing because everything has to come to this board for
approval.
Over the past year we have spent some $9 million in beach
renourishment projects and over $3 million in funding of advertising
and market plans, museums, special museum grants and special event
grants.
And unless there's any questions, I'll leave it at that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any questions by the members?
Commissioner Coletta, any questions?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, none. Thank you very
much.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No.
CHAIRMAN HENN1NG: I make a motion that Tourist
Development Council fits the purpose in which it serves. Is there a second?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I second that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion, signify by
saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries, 4-0.
I have to ask our court reporter if she -- is she okay? You need
Page 119
March 25, 2003
a break? Okay.
Item #1 OB
RESOLUTION 2003-128 CORRECTING A SCRIVENER'S
ERROR IN THE ORDER OF TAKING ENTERED BY THE
COURT ON APRIL 5, 2000 IN THE CASE OF COLLIER
COUNTY V. NORTHSIDE CONSTRUCTION, ET AL, FOR THE
CONDEMNATION OF PARCEL 110 FOR THE PINE RIDGE
ROAD PROJECT (PROJECT NO.60111)- ADOPTED
We continue on to item 10(B), adopt a resolution correcting a
scrivener's error in the order of taking entering (sic) by the court on
April 5th, 2000, in the case of Collier County versus Northside
Construction for the combination of parcels 110 for the Pine Ridge
Road project, project No. 60111.
MR. MUDD: Commissioners, this is a pretty straightforward--
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Entertain a motion.
MR. MUDD: When you make that motion, just basically in the
motion say that the commissioners have read this particular item as
presented in the executive summary, and then go for a vote, and I
think we're okay unless you have any questions. It's basically -- the
legal description of the parcel was a little messed up and we're trying
to correct that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I always read my agenda.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I'm sure you do, Commissioner
Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Me, too.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta, do you?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Of course I do, word for word.
Page 120
March 25, 2003
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala, you want to
make a motion?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I certainly do. I make a motion --
after I have read the executive and all of the backup material, I make
a motion to approve the attached resolution to correct the scrivener's
error on Exhibit A.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And I'll second it, all four
scrivener's errors, which I have read.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. There's a motion by
Commissioner Fiala, second by Commissioner Coyle.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries, 4-0.
Thank you, Heidi. That was a great presentation.
Item #10C
AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION CONSENT ORDER
RELATED TO VARIOUS WASTEWATER PROJECTS, 73077,
731587 731647 73950~ AT NO ADDITIONAIJ COST- APPROVF. D
MR. MUDD: The next item is 10(C), and that's to approve an
amendment to the original April 10th, 2001, and previous July 30th,
2002, amendment to the Florida Department of Environmental
Page 121
March 25, 2003
Protection consent order related to various wastewater projects,
which is 73,077, 73,158, 73,164, 73,949, and 73,950 at no additional
cost. And this item will be presented by Mr. Jim DeLony.
MR. DeLONY: For the record, Jim DeLony, public utilities
administrator.
What you have before you today is the results of some
negotiations that we did with the F -- for the Florida Department of
Protection, FDEP, starting somewhere around October, and we
concluded these negotiations in February of 200 -- October of 2002,
and we will (sic) conclude this in 2003, February.
The main goal for this amendment to the consent order, from
my view, is to get the FDEP's release and approval to use all four of
the north Collier water reclamation facility aeration basins for
sewage treatment capacity.
Currently the FDEP consent order requires us to reserve up to
three of the four aeration basins for flow equalization. This limits
our ability to manage peak sewage demands because it effectively
reduces treatment capacity by up to 3.75 million gallons per day.
The bases for the time extension for the flow equalization tanks
is to allow adequate time for debugging the new system and allow for
proper bum in of the facilities once we place these in service.
Operational problems or bugs always manifests themselves
usually during the first several months of operation. Therefore, if the
contractor completes the consent order -- by the consent order
contract date of 31 October, 2003, and if we have problems or bugs,
as I outlined before, it would leave virtually no time for us to debug
the system before we potentially could incur fines in the amount of
$10,000 per day.
FDEP agreed to the time extension in March -- to March to
ensure that our facilities were ready prior to the summer and seasonal
high-flow demand.
Page 122
March 25, 2003
The time extension will also ensure that the contractor is
available for debugging during the peak demand season, should any
problems develop.
Furthermore, within the package you see that we want to
mitigate the time that was lost to the stoppage of payments to the
prime contract that began in February, 2003. The contractor's
painting and electrical subcontractors demobilized and had to
remobilize once we cleared up our issues associated with their
payment this past -- this past -- in this month, March.
Actual impacts to our project, which may be up to three weeks
or more, are still being quantified by the prime contractor.
And that basically covers the details associated with the
equalization of flow tanks.
Beyond that, the FDEP consent order amendment that you have
in front of you provides that the Palm Drive/Davis Boulevard force
main project in the inflow and infiltration program were added at the
demand of the FDEP to address inflow and infiltration problems in
pumping station sewage overflows in our south sewage system.
The time extensions that you see before you for the expansion to
24.1 million gallons per day and the expansion to 30.6 million
gallons per day are based on the most updated information of actual
flow and demand projections from operating data and the 2002
wastewater master plan.
The extended dates will ensure completion of these expansion
projects in time to meet our sewage demands. This allows for the
most sufficient expenditure of the public's dollars, it ensures that we
don't build facilities before they're actually necessary.
Additionally, the time extension reflects that we have a
nine-month delay in FDEP's project permitting process. The time
extension for the South Collier Water Reclamation expansion project,
which is another item you have, is to accommodate extra time or
Page 123
March 25, 2003
delays that we have encountered in obtaining FDEP environmental
res -- permits for that project.
These time extension negotiations or renegotiations are a result
of what I would call a great record of compliance and due diligence
since the original consent order was executed back in -- back several
years ago.
From the very beginning when the county received the consent
order, it's been staffs goal to ensure full and responsive compliance
with all terms and conditions of the consent order.
When we found opportunity to approach FDEP with a proposal
for legitimate extension, we did it to preclude fines that could be as
much as $10,000 per day, which I mentioned earlier.
Staff will continue to manage the situation to ensure that we're
in 100 percent compliance with all regulatory and statutory permit
and consent order conditions while we continue to provide efficient,
effective, and appropriate demands -- or meet that demand of our
sewer district customers and ensure those resources are correctly
applied as well.
We recommend that the board approve the amended consent
order as written in the executive summary before you. In my recent
conversation with Mr. Rick Cantrell, FDEP's district manager, he
confirmed FDEP's continued commitment to work with the county in
partnership and to actively monitor our progress of these consent
order projects.
As conditions warrant in the future, he assured me that FDEP
will work with the county to evaluate any new data, any operational
progresses that could support a reduction in length of time specified
in this current consent order amendment that, in particular, amending
the water's time period, hopefully to -- not hopefully -- but for sure
something less than the year 2016.
The FDEP's greatest concern remains that the sewer district's
Page 124
March 25, 2003
growth does not get ahead of system capacity and the district's ability
to sustain permit compliance.
We know that this is also a paramount concern of yours and, of
course, your staff, and you clearly demonstrated that in your
approval in February of our 2002 Wastewater Master Plan.
With that I'm open to your questions or any directions that you
may have for me.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any questions, Commissioner
Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No. I thought it was very well
presented.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I need some clarification. I
thought the consent order was a result of a failure of our plant to
handle the required capacity two years ago or so. MR. DeLONY: That's correct, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Well, why are we now
including things in the consent order that reflect our plans for the
future? Why are we being placed under the potential penalties of the
consent order for things that are not scheduled for completion until
2016 or, perhaps, later?
MR. DeLONY: Those were in the original consent order as
tasked to be done by the county to ensure that we stayed in
compliance and met demand in the future context as well as the
current context.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So that means we're going to stay
under the consent order provisions forever because they're going to
manage our future?
MR. DeLONY: I don't -- I don't think so, sir. That is certainly
not our intent to get to that point. As I mentioned earlier in speaking
with Mr. Cantrell yesterday and the work that I've done and the work
Page 125
March 25, 2003
that was done before I came here about this specific matter over the
last 18 months or two years, that I don't believe they want to manage
our utility. I believe they want us to manage this utility. I believe
that what was done here and what continues to be done is to
negotiate out of them doing just what you suggest that you don't want
them to do.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, but we're actually saying
that the expansion of the north facility to 30.6 million gallons per day
will be completed, maybe January the 1 st, 2016, and for the next 13
years, we're going to be under a consent order by the state to do that,
and then if we want to change that date, based upon actual needs,
we're going to have to sit down with the state and negotiate that.
MR. DeLONY: That's correct, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Which is -- which essentially
means the state is managing our plans for expansion, not us. And I
don't understand why -- if we have met the requirements of the
original consent order, why are we now being placed under a consent
order for the next 13 years?
MR. DeLONY: Sir, those expansions that you've referenced
were in the original consent order. This is not something new.
Those expansion requirements were placed in the original consent
order in terms of--
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And were those expected dates,
did they exist at that time?
MR. DeLONY: Yes, sir, they did, and we negotiated
differences in dates with regard to providing them data and different
information, as I indicated with regard to operational progress on our
existing plant as well as new plant additions as they come onboard.
And that's what -- that's what we're going to continue to do is that --
two goals is that we want to get out from underneath the consent
order, absolutely. But to do that we're going to have to demonstrate
Page 126
March 25, 2003
to FDEP that we've got full charge of current and future demand on
those systems, and I believe that we -- with that master plan that you
approved, the progress that we have made, sustained to date, and the
progress we will sustain certainly in the future to stay in compliance
and meet demand, I believe FDEP will pull the consent order at some
time to be determined.
Right now 2016 is the date that they've got. Are they hard on
that? No. I can go back to them and work it and continue to get a
better deal, if that's the way you want to approach this. But in my
mind, this is consistent with the -- with what we're -- what we're
doing in terms of our master plan. And it really imposes nothing on
the utility unless we slip off the hook, don't keep our promises, or we
fail to go back to FDEP when we have an operational change or
considerable progress.
What I don't want FDEP to do is to require us to bring facilities
onboard earlier than we need them. And I believe we can negotiate
that position.
Mr. Mudd?
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, just a little bit of history on this
one, on that particular item.
That expansion to 30.6 million gallons per day was originally --
we called that a 10 million gallon expansion, and that was going to
be the next one that was going to come onboard at that plant. It was
going to be due based on the original consent order of 1 January,
2005.
There's another requirement in the consent order that basically
said that we would provide them a master plan. Because they're --
the one we had they weren't using, and it was -- it was two years out
of date, and we provided that master plan, which you got to see
twice, but you got an update just here in February.
That master plan, the first one, showed them that that -- that
Page 127
March 25, 2003
particular increase to 10 million gallons was an overkill. It was an
estimate at the time, but it was overkill when you looked at the
population demands that were coming from the north side of the
county.
And so that master plan basically said you could -- we could
lessen our capital outlay if we broke that 10 million gallons down
into -- to two increments of five each.
The first one needed to be in place on 1 January, 2005. And we
could take -- instead of doing 10 all at once, we could take that
second increment of five and we could move it and it wouldn't be
needed till 2010.
When that happened I asked Mr. Cantrell, you know, 2010 is a
long time after we're done with this thing, and I had the same feelings
that you did. We put the county at risk for a four-and-a-half year to
five-year period of time when we didn't have to, because you have
this threat of this fine that's coming down because of a consent order
that you mutually agreed to.
Well, the second update to the master plan shows that this
second increment of five isn't needed until 2016 now instead of 2010.
It's getting to the point of almost being ridiculous because now
you're not -- you're not subjecting the county to four and a half years
of unneeded consent order to try to get away from the capital
expenditure, now you've increased that another five years on top,
almost 10 to 11 years of consent order when you don't need to.
And with that-- with that consent order, there's all kinds of
penalties for anything that goes wrong in the different paragraphs.
Even though it didn't have anything to do with the north plant, you
subject the entire system to that process.
And so that gives you a little background to how the 10 came
and how it got extended out. And now we're into the 2016 side of the
house.
Page 128
March 25, 2003
My opinion and your opinion aren't too far -- 2016 puts the
county through a rather long time of sitting under the microscope of
the Florida Department of Environmental Protection.
MR. DeLONY: Sir, if I might. If I thought this was the last
time that we would come back to you with an amendment, then I
would -- you know, I'd tell you that. But I'm not telling you that.
Our intent is to take what we can get now, work very closely
with the FDEP staff, which -- we have good relations with those
guys. It's not the Hatfields and McCoys. I mean, we are working
together for the right reasons, you know, staying in compliance, meet
demand, protect the environment.
I believe that working with them, we can come back to this
board with a subsequent amendment that will get that date, 2016,
much closer to today. Now, I don't know when that will be and I
don't know what that date would be. I would think that Mr. Cantrell
and his staff need to see this first increment of five coming online in
2005, 2006, see if the county has worked out its operational
problems, and if we've got this system under the control that we
didn't have two years ago and we've sustained that over the period of
time since, and then I'd probably take another look -- I'd take another
look at pulling that date back.
And that's essentially the position that I understand of the staff
at FDEP, and it's the position and the cultivation of relationship that
I've asked my staff as well as myself to sustain with regard to dealing
with the FDEP.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala, you had
something?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: He just answered my question. I
was going to ask if you could renegotiate with FDEP -- MR. DeLONY: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- FDEP again on this amendment,
Page 129
March 25, 2003
but you've just answer my question. Thank you.
MR. DeLONY: Yes, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Entertain a motion? I make a motion
that we approve the amendment. This is a -- make a motion that the
Board of Commissioners ex official (sic) governing board of the
Collier County Wastewater Sewer District approve an authorized
chairman to sign this amendment to the FDEP's 2010 -- 2001 and
2002 amendment to the consent order.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: For the water sewer district, I'll
second that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING:
Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING:
motion, signify by saying aye.
us?
have
after
And there's a second.
Seeing none, all in favor of the
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta, are you with
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm with you on that motion.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. That was a 4-0 vote.
We are going to take a five-minute break because we're going to
two items that Commissioner Halas is going to be with us right
this. Thank you. Five minutes.
Page 130
March 25, 2003
(A recess was had.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Would everybody take your seat,
please.
Commissioner Halas? No? You're going to dial him in?
Okay. County manager, Jim Mudd, the next item?
Item # 10E
RESOLUTION 2003-129 OPPOSING PROPOSED CHANGES TO
FLORIDA STATUES THAT WILL DIMINISH ANY AUTHORITY
OF ANY LOCAL GOVERNMENT TO REGULATE ANY
TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITY EXCEPT TO THE
EXTENT NECESSARY TO FACILITATE THE E911 PROGRAM
AT THE SPECIFIC SITE OF THE E911
TF.I.F. COMMI INICATIONS FACII.ITY- ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that would be -- we have a couple
minutes before 12 o'clock, and that's 10(E), which is adopt a
resolution opposing any proposed changes to the Florida statutes that
will diminish any authority of any local government to regulate any
telecommunications facility except to the extent necessary to
facilitate the E911 Program at the spec -- at the specific site of the
E911 Telecommunications facility.
And basically your lobbyist, Mr. Arnold, talked about that today
based -- that legislation that's out there, takes a lot of-- the being a
good neighbor policy out of-- in public hearings that we have in our
Land Development Code and basically does away with an awful lot
of that as far as where they want to put their antennas. It's basically
saying they can put them in our county and state lands and federal
lands, and they -- they can submit a permit to the county, and if the
county doesn't sign up to it within 30 days or tell them one way or
Page 131
March 25, 2003
the other within 30 days, that your noncommunication becomes an
approval for them and they can -- they can put that in there.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I'd entertain a motion.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: The motion by Commission Coyle,
second by Commissioner Fiala.
And just a point of order. Who's with us -- any other
commissioners with us today?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Could you -- could you repeat
the motion back, please?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: It's a motion--
COMMISSIONER FIALA: It's to oppose, right?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It's a motion to oppose the
proposed amendment in Florida statutes which would essentially
exempt certain telecommunication facilities from government, or
county government approval.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you, Commissioner
Coyle.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas, are you there?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. All in favor of the motion,
signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries, 4-0.
Page 132
March 25, 2003
Next item?
Item # 10L- Moved from Item #16Al 6
1NCREASE OF $473,000 TO THE COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
DIVISION CAPITAL BUDGET FOR ADDITIONAL EXPENSES
INCURRED TO THE DIVISION'S GARAGE AND OFFICE
FII IIIJD1NG - APPROVFD
MR. MUDD: We had a-- we wanted to do 10(L) and 10(F)
together, and they basically have to do with needs of community
development as far as their building, the new building and the
parking garage. One item was asked to come forward at 10(L) by
Commissioner --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Fred Coyle.
COMMISSION COYLE: Yep.
MR. MUDD: -- Commissioner Coyle to be heard on. I think
we're raring to go on that one.
Joe? If you could do 10(L) first, please, which is 16(A) 16.
MR. SCHMITT: Yes. It's -- I'm going to have to -- well, yes,
that one will have to be first.
Good afternoon. For the record, Joe Schmitt, administrator of
community development and environmental services.
What this is is a request for an additional half million dollars to
be added to the construction account, and it concerns issues to meet
the requirements to fund the ongoing construction for the building,
Community Development Environmental Services building.
And as noted in the executive summary, what it covers are the
road impact fees that were not part of the original assessment when
this was first planned three years ago. And there were $300,000
Page 133
March 25, 2003
spent on some remodeling about two years ago in the community
development building and another $38,000 that was needed to
construct a temporary parking lot to the rear of the construction site
that currently exists, and that construction included a lighted
walkway for safety for the employees who use the community
development building.
So that's frankly what we're asking, so this is an approval of a
$473,000 increase in the capital budget for the construction project.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle pulled this off
the consent, so let's go to Commissioner Coyle.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes.
Mr. Chairman, the reason I did so is that it is related to another
item on the agenda concerning the bonding that would be 10(F), and
I merely wanted both of these items to be considered in its -- in their
entirety so we'd understand the total scope of the bonding
requirement.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
MR. SCHMITT: Okay. So 10(F) before you today is a
proposal to approve a request to fund an $8 million requirement for
the Community Development and Environmental Services office
expansion and parking garage expansion. Well, it's an additional
parking garage. And what we're asking is to transfer that to
borrowed funds.
In addition, to approve a request to borrow funds for the
purchasing of the installation of the division's business system, and
that project is estimated to cost $2.3 million.
For background. On April 1 lth, 2000, the Board of County
Commissioners approved a $9.5 million construction project, that
was a 40,000 square foot expansion of the community development
office building.
The amount was entirely funded by Fund 113, which is our
Page 134
March 25, 2003
development services and permitting, and it was to come out of the
cash carry forward balances or our reserves.
The original plan included a two-level office building. In FY-02
that was changed to one floor and a reduction from 40,000 square
feet down to 22,000 square foot expansion.
In regards to the business management system, the Community
Development and Environmental Service Division had been using --
we'd been using our CD plus system for seven years. That system is
basically -- it's founded and fundamentally an outdated system and
an outdated language and, frankly, the vender no longer even
supports the software.
We've been in the process for almost six months in putting
together a request for proposal that will go out for bid. It's ready to
hit the streets here shortly, and we're projecting $2.3 million to
replace that system. That system is used not only in the community
development division, but also in transportation and utilities, and a
shared software system to help in our management -- in our project
management process.
Basically what's happened is the economic situation has
changed significantly, and I was before you two weeks ago to talk
about an increase in fees. And what we're looking at is to stem the
tide of the use of our reserves.
Our year-end reserve balance is projected to be at $1 million,
assuming, of course, that the valuation tables bring in the projected
revenue, the increase in the valuation tables and the increase in the
fees, bring in the money that we project.
This balance is unacceptably low, and what we're trying to do is
stem that tide a bit, stretch out the use of the reserves, and we're
looking to try and maintain about a $2.3 million balance.
And if I can explain that. The balance, what it really is, it's a
balance to pay for committed services, and that's for -- it's also
Page 135
March 25, 2003
prepayment of inspection fees, and that's to pay for -- for the staff
that I have to do the building review and inspections.
The borrowing will raise the project -- the borrowing will raise
our projected physical year-end balances to approximately about $6
million, and that represents four months of operating expense.
We're looking at all payments for this debt -- the two debt
transactions to come out of Fund 113, and our recommendation is
that the board approve the borrowing of $8 million required to fund
the building expansion project and the $2.3 million required to
purchase and install the new system.
Now, I just want to reiterate again, these projects both have
already been approved. What we're doing is just asking the board for
approval to not use moneys in reserves. What we're doing is to use
commercial paper to fund this and -- and not take the money out of
reserves.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Question by the board members?
Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Just one quick question. Please
give me an assessment upon -- assessment concerning the potential
impact of the challenge to the use of 113 funds for this purpose. The
development community apparently is -- has raised some concerns
about whether or not this money should be used for that purpose. Tell
me how that will impact our ability to complete this bonding process.
MR. SCHMITT: Well, Commissioner, the question-- I
understand your question and appreciate you raising that issue.
Yes, in fact, that is the question. I think the question really is
more in regards to -- the building itself, the 22,000 square feet, about
40 percent of the building will be community development activities,
the other 60 percent are other organizations within the division.
They pay fair market value and a rent.
Oh, I'm sorry. It was the other way around? Oh, I got it -- I got
Page 136
March 25, 2003
it backwards. It's 60/40.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's even better.
MR. SCHMITT: Sixty percent community development. Oh, I
said it right the first time then.
My staff has corrected me. Forty percent is community
development staff, and 60 is nonpermit fee type of activities, code
enforcement and some of the other activities. Right now I have most
of those -- a lot of activities in leased space.
This project was approved three years ago, and three years ago
it was approved to use 113 money, the building permit fees, the
funds, the reserves, for this project.
The question was, of course, the legitimacy of using that. I'm
just moving on the premise that that decision was already made.
We're just trying to move forward with the project.
Of course, the project is already being built and the funding's
already been approved. If we want to go back and change that, then
it's something I would have to go back and look at using general fund
dollars and work this out with -- with the county manager, and then
use Fund 113 to pay rent.
Now, our current building was built with -- entirely with Fund
113. So that current building was -- and those entities that are not in
the permit related type of activities pay fair market value or pay rent
back to the county out of the general fund to reimburse the Fund 113
account for the capital expense of that building.
I don't know if that answered your question, but I -- it's --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Partially.
MR. BROCK: Commissioner?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: The Clerk of Court, Dwight Brock.
Thank you.
MR. BROCK: The commercial paper program is secured by all
unsecured non-GO revenue, okay? So this funding source is sources
Page 137
March 25, 2003
of revenue to the county in general, if that helps answer the question.
It's not fund -- it's not specifically directed to Fund 1 13 moneys for
the pledge for the commercial paper.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: It's like the water sewer district?
MR. BROCK: Well, I mean, it's a general pledge of all
unsecured revenues, ad valorem revenues.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: If I understand -- and I don't want
to belabor this too much, but I need to understand where the money's
going to come from if we have that challenge. So if I understand
what you're saying, Mr. Brock, we -- we very well might have to
make up the difference from general fund revenue if, in fact, we don't
get the necessary 1 13 revenue to pay off these bonds; is that --
MR. BROCK: I think that would be a fair statement.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So it sort of opens up the potential
of having to use those general revenue funds for that purpose. That
causes me some concern.
I guess I need an assessment to give me a little more comfort,
maybe from the county attorney, as to what kind of risk exists here
with respect to this particular challenge.
MR. MANALICH: This is something that we have been
notified in correspondence from the clerk that is an issue. Now,
we're going to have to take a close look at -- we have not yet made a
risk assessment at this point. We are going to have to evaluate it
very closely. Obviously there's a history here, but there's also certain
legal principles and restrictions on the use of Fund 1 13.
So at this point I don't think I can give you a very good risk
assessment; however, I think tying in to what Mr. Brock indicated,
even if that risk, we determine, is relatively high, I believe we would
have other funds to be able to use further commercial paper program.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And that was --
MR. MANALICH: Commissioner--
Page 13 8
March 25, 2003
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Excuse me. That was Ramiro
Manalich, for the record, county attorney's office.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, Jim Mudd, county manager, for
the record.
Dwight has a good point. Depending on the outcome of this
investigation that he's going to do, and to tell us one way or the other,
in order to finish that building, what Mr. Schmitt has just told you is
based on last board meeting's presentation on fee increases and the
briefings that he's given you about shortages and drawing down that
reserve to a level that -- that would not be prudent for his
organization, we would have to go out and get commercial paper for
this particular facility anyway.
And if Mr. Brock determines that, whatever it turns out, if it
needs to come out of the general fund, we'll pay the building off
based on general funds, interest and principal on commercial paper,
and we'll charge community development rent for this particular
space.
But what Joe's telling you is, he doesn't mix apples and oranges.
He basically -- if there's general funds positions in a building, the
present building he's in, which was funded by 1 13, if they're there,
they're paying fair market rent for those spaces that they're in so that
he doesn't mix 1 13 with general fund, and he tries to keep them very
separate from each other and keep -- and make sure that we don't
commingle those particular funds based on the activities of the staff.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I just want to make sure that if we
ultimately have to commit general fund revenues for this purpose,
that all we're doing is essentially fronting the cash and we will be
paid back from 113 funds, that is, service fees and/or other fees that
you get.
MR. SCHMITT: That's correct. Or if, in fact, I don't have the
workload, naturally I'm going to take action to reduce --
Page 139
March 25, 2003
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Your costs.
MR. SCHMITT: -- the force structure or the work force
basically so I -- because -- that's what the reserves are there for. The
reserves are there for prepaid fees. They're part of the inspection
program. And if the reserves aren't there, I have to go into the
general fund to meet payroll.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: But I just want to make sure that
we've got a mechanism to get the general fund reimbursed.
MR. SCHMITT: Yes. Well, actually what would happen is, if
there was a downturn in the level of permits, I would reduce -- I
would basically have a reduction in force or basically reduction in
the staff and --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Then you would run out of spaces
to---
MR. SCHMITT: Then I'd be looking to skip camp and say,
we've got property available, and basically then the general fund
would probably have to pay some kind of-- remit the Fund 113 for
the renting of the space. So yes, it's just a matter of the -- as my boss
mentioned, I'm trying not to mix the funds, which has certainly been
a mission of mine since I've gotten here. I've been trying to clean
this -- clean this part of the business up.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Mr. Brock?
MR. BROCK: Commissioner, you're obviously going to have
113 money -- Fund 113 money available for papers -- for purposes of
paying for the housing of the functions of 113. I don't think anyone
has even suggested to me that that would be inappropriate.
You're also -- in the way that I think it is structured by your
staff, the way they have it schemed out is, they're going to be paying
for those other functions that are going to be housed in that building
by paying rent, theoretically fair market value rent. And that money
would also be available for purposes of paying back the commercial
Page 140
March 25, 2003
paper.
So I think in answer to your question that there would be a
funding mechanism there to pay off the commercial paper, the
answer to that is in the affirmative, that there is.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Commissioner Halas is back
online here.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Do you have any questions,
comments?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: No. I just -- I've been listening in
the background here intently and determining where we're at in the
agenda, and I've pretty much figured it out.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All right. We're on 10(F).
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Does that answer your concerns?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Great.
Entertain a motion.
MR. MUDD: If you could do them separately, sir --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Two motions.
MR. MUDD: -- and 10(L) first, which is the old 16(A)16, and
that's to add that $500,000, and then a motion for 10(F), which is the
ability to go out and do commercial paper for those particular items.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Entertain a motion.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Motion to approve the grant
approval of four hundred seventy three dollars (sic) capital budget
increase, increasing our total capital budget to 7.5 -- from 7.5 million
to $8 million to complete CDES's garage and office building
Page 141
March 25, 2003
expansion.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I think that's two items.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, that's the 16(A) 16.
MR. MUDD: That's 10(L), sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. So we have a motion on the
floor. Do we have--
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- a second? Second by
Commissioner Coyle.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENN1NG: Motion carries, 5-0.
Item #1 OF
$4.5 MILLION TO BE BORROWED TO BRING THE TOTAL TO
$8.0 MILLION TO COMPLETE THE BUILDING EXPANSION
OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION'S OFFICES AND
CONSTRUCTION OF THE ASSOCIATED PARKING GARAGE
AND AN ADDITIONAL $ 2.3 MILLION TO FUND THE
REPLACEMENT OF THE DIVISION'S BUSINESS SYSTEM -
APPROVED
Next, entertain a motion, 10(F), to approve the -- for staff to
Page 142
March 25, 2003
proceed, arrange borrowing of $2.3 million required to replace,
install the CDES business systems and to approve the borrowing --
arrange the borrowing for $8 million required to expand the present
CDS (sic) office facilities--
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So move.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- for construction.
Motion made by Commissioner Fiala, second by Commissioner
Coyle.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries, 5-0.
Item #1 OK- Moved from Item #16C5
BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR HIDEAWAY BEACH
RENOURISHMENT ENGINEERING SERVICES, PROJECT
90502; IN THE AMOIINT OF $1657500- APPROVED
We've got our time certain at -- which one do we want to take
for-- take first? The 10(G), budget?
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, you have a number of people here
for item 16(C)(5), which is now 10(K), to be heard at 12 noon, and I
would --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
Page 143
March 25, 2003
MR. MUDD: I would recommend we do that one first and we
can get whatever people have --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Who's on deck from staff to present
this?
MR. DeLONY: I am. For the record, Jim DeLony, public
utilities administrator.
Before you you have a budget amendment for Hideaway Beach
renourishment engineering services in the amount of $165,000.
These are the necessary funds we need to complete the
engineering, permitting, design, offshore sand search, final plans and
specifications, to provide the information we need for decisions
associated with what we talked to earlier, Mr. Coyle's question about
the major renourishment project. This is that project. It's going to be
-- you know, it's going to be the fix that you were looking at earlier
for lack of a better term. And this is a budget amendment to write
the budget, correct the budget to the need.
This originally goes back to TDC recommendation for a project
budget of $335,500 in April of 2001. And since that time, we've
updated that budget, looked carefully at what we need to do.
We understand there's a lot to be done with regard to sand
search in particular. And the bottom line of it is, we brought this to
the CAC on the 21st of February and TDC on the 24th of February,
and both those committees have unanimously recommended the
approval of these additional funds to go ahead and complete this
large major renourishment effort in terms of its designed permitting
and all the other necessary things so we can come back and decide
how we're going to -- or if we're going to build it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Any questions by the
members of the board? We do have public speakers on this item?
MS. FILSON: Yes, Mr. Chairman. We have five speakers. Dr.
Jack Solverson.
Page 144
March 25, 2003
upi
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Dr. Jack; is Dr. Jack here. Come on
Next person, you want to stand up, next -- behind Dr. Jack?
MS. FILSON: The next one is Bruce Anderson.
Are they -- will the speakers be given five minutes or three
minutes?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Three minutes.
Sir, thank you for being here.
DR. SOLVERSON: Good afternoon. My name is Dr. Jack
Solverson, and I am the current president of the Hideaway Beach
Association. I represent the 625 members of this homeowners'
association.
Many of them are here today. And if you would stand, please.
Thank you.
I would like to state that Hideaway gives complete support to
the Marco Island city manager, Bill Moss, and the city council, who
have stated that all beaches on Marco Island, including the beach
adjacent to Hideaway, have legally been declared to be public
beaches.
The topic of public access to the beach adjacent to Hideaway
was settled and concluded 23 years ago. In September of 1979 an
agreement was reached with the Collier County commissioners, the
Marco Island developer, and Hideaway Beach.
Simply stated, that agreement concluded, since the beach
adjacent to Hideaway was immediately next to the large public beach
at Tigertail and that in lieu of another public access to the beach
through Hideaway, Hideaway Beach Association would pay for the
development of a boat ramp, public parking, and landscaping at
Caxambas Pass.
The Hideaway Beach Association did fulfill its part of that
obligation. That boat ramp is still under the control of Collier
Page 145
March 25, 2003
County and substantial revenues are generated annually for Collier
County.
The Hideaway Beach Association respectfully requests that the
Collier County Board of Commissioners fulfill its part of their
obligation to support the position of the City of Marco Island and the
Hideaway Beach Association in continuing pursuit of the
renourishment of the beach adjacent to Hideaway.
Thank you for your time and consideration, and I would like to
now hear -- have you hear from Hideaway's consulting attorney, Mr.
Bruce Anderson.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I thank you.
Mr. Anderson followed by?
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Bruce Anderson. He will be
followed by David Somers.
MR. ANDERSON: Good afternoon, Commissioners. For the
record, my name is Bruce Anderson on behalf of the Hideaway
Beach Association, whom I've represented for a number of years on
many issues dealing with Collier County.
Marco Island, including Hideaway Beach, was the first area of
Collier County to have its beaches renourished after the Board of
County Commissioners created in 1988 a special taxing district of
Marco beachfront properties for the purposes of beach renourishment
and erosion control.
Pursuant to state statute, as a part of that renourishment, a new
public/private property line was established and platted in the public
records for the mean high water line that existed prior to
renourishment. This new property line is known as the Erosion
Control Line.
In 1992 voters approved levy of a two percent tourist tax. In
1995 that tax was increased to three percent, and the county sought
and received court approval to pay off the remaining Marco Island
Page 146
March 25, 2003
beach renourishment bonded debt with the tourist tax. This payoff
and refinancing saved the county about $200,000 at the time which
then became available and was plowed into county-wide beach
renourishment.
The specific legal description of Marco beachfront properties at
issue, including Hideaway Beach, was a part of that court
proceeding. This case was appealed all the way to the Florida
Supreme Court, which unanimously found that the use of tourist tax
money to fund beach renourishment and erosion control on Marco's
beaches met the requirements of the state tourist development tax
statute.
And that statute, which the court quoted in the opinion, requires
that there be public access where such taxes are used for beach
renourishment. In other words, the statutory definition of public
access was met and it was a proper public purpose to renourish
Marco's beaches with the only two public access points being more
than two and a half miles apart. Those two points being at the Cape
Marco development at the southern end, and at the northern end,
Tigertail Beach Park, which abuts the southwest boundary of
Hideaway Beach development.
In 1997 the county commission approved the Capri and Big
Marco inlet management study. Much of Hideaway Beach,
especially the highly eroded areas, abuts the south side of Big Marco
Pass. This study recommended that T-Groins and beach fill be placed
at certain critical locations along Hideaway Beach and that Big
Marco Pass be dredged to address the shoaling problems, and that the
dredged sand be placed on the abutting Hideaway Beach.
This 1997 study also called for data to be gathered to design a
more long-term solution for the stretch of Hideaway that abuts Big
Marco Pass.
Now we're ready to implement that study.
Page 147
March 25, 2003
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I have to ask you to wrap it up, sir.
MR. ANDERSON: The bottom line here is that Collier County
made an agreement with the property owners of Hideaway Beach 23
years ago, that providing public access to beaches and water by boat
from the Caxambas boat ramp was equivalent to or more important
than providing another public access point right next door to Tigertail
Beach.
The county cannot now renege on that agreement by trying to
penalize Hideaway property owners because the county is having
buyer's remorse more than 20 years later.
Plus, the county would still keep the public benefits that it got at
the Caxambas boat ramp. What kind of a message would that send to
other property owners that the county currently tries to negotiate
agreements with?
The public has had and will continue to have public access to
the beaches adjacent to Hideaway, whether by walking from Tigertail
or coming by boat to Caxambas boat pass.
I would ask you to honor the integrity of the agreements that the
county has made in the past and to protect the integrity of all of
Marco Island's beaches, including Hideaway, Tigertail, and the areas
further south.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Mr. Anderson, I have a question for
yOU.
MR. ANDERSON: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Is -- this agreement is part of the
PUD approval?
MR. ANDERSON: Yes, sir, it was.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay, thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is David Somers, and he will
be followed by Jim Snediker.
MR. SOMERS: I did check with the county attorney, and I
Page 148
March 25, 2003
don't have to register as a lobbyist.
MR. MANALICH: That's correct, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you. I'll get my facts straight.
MR. SOMERS: That's okay. My name is David Somers. I'm
the general manager at Hideaway Beach.
Obviously this last piece of the puzzle to come up with the full
renourishment engineering study that's needed for the future
renourishment of Hideaway, the hundred and sixty-five, five needs to
be approved, as was mentioned by Mr. DeLony. The Coastal
Advisory Committee and the TDC unanimously approved these
recommendations recently.
There is estimates out there of how much the full renourishment
will cost. And I think until the engineering study has been
completed, that's really the only way that this council is going to
have the ability to determine whether or not the full renourishment
needs to proceed.
Back in 2001, there was a finding by the county commission
that there was a public purpose at Hideaway Beach, and that was in
connection with the T-Groins and the public access.
The photo that you have in front of you is a photo that's taken
from 1969 which shows that there was plenty of sand around
Tigertail, by Little Clam Pass -- down here is Little Clam Pass. It
comes out here. Tigertail Beach would be approximately here -- and
that there was plenty of sand to walk all the way around that area.
And that obviously has changed over the years with the amount of
erosion that has occurred in that particular area.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I remember that.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, me too.
MR. SOMERS: At the time in January of 2001, there was a
unanimous vote by the county commission to continue and try to find
ways to improve the access that was there, and also to go and install
Page 149
March 25, 2003
the additional two T-Groins that have been installed, which you
talked about earlier this morning with the additional renourishment.
As Dr. Solverson said and as Bruce Anderson said -- that, you
know in the '79 PUD, there was a discussion at the board level, and
in ordinance 79-68, the county commission approved 4-0 with one
commissioner being absent.
The fact that in lieu of a 200-foot access for public access at
Hideaway, go ahead and make the improvements down at Caxambas
Park. That's not any different than what the county agreed to with
MICA. And in lieu of walkways every thousand feet, that MICA
gave the county Tigertail Park, which you still have.
So Marco Island has, in essence, satisfied all of your
requirements for public access, albeit it's a lot different in this time
and age. But I don't see how you can then turn around and say that
that doesn't count and that it's past history. We've satisfied our
requirements, and .certainly the county attorney has given you
opinions that we have met the requirements for the tac -- TDC
moneys to be used, and we certainly hope that you would support
this issue today.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
Next speaker?
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Jim Snediker, and he will be
followed by your final speaker, Councilman John Arceri.
MR. SNEDIKER: Good morning, or good afternoon. Jim
Snediker, for the record.
I'm a member of the county Coastal Advisory Committee and
also chairman of the City of Marco Island Beach Advisory
Committee.
This project originally came up about two years ago in the
former Collier County, Naples Beach Maintenance and
Renourishment Committee, which I was also a member of. And we
Page 150
March 25, 2003
voted for the -- for the engineering for this project.
Obviously, as engineering has progressed -- primarily I think it's
because of the sand search. The sand search has become a little bit
more expensive, the detailed sand search, that is, in which the -- is in
process now.
The initial engineering drawings have already been completed
for this project and are being reviewed by CAC and your staff, and
the sand -- detailed sand search is now underway. All that's needed
now is just a little bit more additional funds to complete the
engineering study and then get into the pro -- the construction project
itself.
From a total CAC point of view in our 1 O-year budget as of
about three weeks ago, we were in very good shape for doing this
project as far as the construction and -- obviously the engineering
and the construction.
And that includes even after putting over $11 million into the
budget for the City of Naples, Park Shore, Vanderbilt Beach
renourishment project. So there is sufficient funds within our
1 O-year budget and within our current budget, if you will, for next
year to accomplish all of these items.
So we would like, from CAC's point of view and from the City
of Marco Island's Beach Advisory Committee's point of view, we
would like, obviously, the engineering to proceed so that we can then
get into the major discussion of the construction itself. Thank you.
MS. FILSON: Your final speaker is Councilman John Arceri.
COUNCILMAN ARCERI: Good afternoon, Commissioners.
For the record, my name is John Arceri. I am a member of the Marco
Island City Council, and also a member of your Coastal Advisory
Committee, recently appointed.
Before I begin with that, I'd like to take this opportunity to thank
the commission for their support in the recent Florida water efforts.
Page 151
March 25, 2003
There's no doubt in my mind, as being one of the leaders in this
whole effort in the past six months, that if the county didn't provide
the lobbying and legal effort, we would not have won this victory,
and we would be in bad shape. So I wanted to thank you personally
for the efforts you put into this thing.
As I mentioned, I recently joined the Coastal Advisory
Committee. When I got on, I was told that this issue of Hideaway
being eligible for funds or not was resolved and all we would be
doing is looking at all the projects for the county and trying to push
through the Hideaway Beach project, which was the major one for
Marco Island.
I've been concerned that the first two meetings have occupied
itself with this issue of eligibility, as well as some recent comments.
And I'd like to just briefly go through very quickly some of the
comments I made before the Coastal Advisory Committee on this
issue of eligibility. You've heard about the agreements of the past.
I'm not going to talk about those at all.
But since that 1976 agreement on the Tigertail
Beach/Caxambas, which would satisfy our needs, there's been 15
years of development along the beach in which the county held to
that agreement, never asked for any further access in any of their
permitting or any of the PUDs so that there was no request by the
county for those accesses, right up until the last one in 1997 where
there were no requests for them.
The referendums that were mentioned, the people of Marco
Island supported those referendums for the tax funds set up based on
the thinking that these funds would be fairly used for all of the
beaches on Marco Island.
You've heard about some of the court rulings and your recent
attorney's interpretation that Hideaway Beach is, in fact, eligible for
those public funds. But I also look at this as an issue of fairness that
Page 152
March 25, 2003
Hideaway is, by fact, uncontestable, the most eroding beach in
Southwest Florida.
In the 1990s, when Marco Island had a major beach
renourishment, the people of Hideaway Island were assessed 25
percent but only received about seven and a half percent of the sand,
as the county at that time thought that the Coconut Island would
preserve the sand on Hideaway, which it did not. And it still remains
our worst eroded beach in the county. And that has been allowed to
continue over the last several years, including some of the loss of
access between Tigertail and Hideaway Beach.
All that Marco Island really has to attract tourists are the
beaches of Marco Island. We don't have the museums and the piers
that are eligible for others funds. The only funds we really need for
-- for our tourist part is the beaches.
We have the majority of the hotels on the island and contribute
about 30 percent to the TDC funds. And Marco's beaches, if you
look at the five and 10 year plans that you'll see shortly from the
CAC, we don't really have any major projects on Marco beaches
other than this Hideaway Beach renourishment project. And if that's
found to be ineligible, Marco Island would receive about eight
percent share of the major project funding over the next several
years, which would be well under.
In conclusion, it's a critical project for us. I would ask that you
proceed with the engineering part, as has been stated previously, at
least for us to get a feeling for what the total cost of this project is.
This project has received CAC unanimous support and TDC.
We will, in parallel with this effort, continue to seek ways of
improving access to Hideaway Beach. The CAC had looked at the
boardwalk project, threw it out. Next month you will receive a
proposal for an environmental study for a 30-foot beach between
Hideaway and Tigertail. We will do what we can to try to improve
Page 153
March 25, 2003
access to Hideaway Beach.
And I would, just in conclusion, ask that you proceed with this
as was planned, without a change in policy based on certain
perceptions of certain things that were said or certain newspaper
articles. You had a policy in effect. It was a good one, it was a fair
one.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you, sir.
COUNCILMAN ARCERI: Thanks very much.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion of the board?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I do feel we need to proceed with
this -- with this study. I think that's imperative to -- for the next step
to take place, and we must make the study. I think that all of our
staff agrees with that as well.
So I'd like to make a motion that we approve the $165,000 for --
to move forward with the -- and is it an engineering study --
engineering study.
MR. MUDD: Preliminary engineering and design, ma'am, is the
MR. DeLONY: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And I'll second that motion, but I can
tell in that second after hearing from what the PUD -- getting a
glimpse of what the PUD says, public access in that area is in danger
in my opinion. So I'm very concerned, but I think we do -- are
setting up a mechanism for possibly other sources.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: May I chime in when you get a
chance?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle, then
Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I think in order to be consistent,
we have to pay attention to the experts in this process. And both the
Page 154
March 25, 2003
Coastal Advisory Committee and the Tourist Development
Committee have recommended approval for this engineering study.
I voted against the last renourishment issue that came before the
board just a few minutes ago because the advisory committee had
recommended against it.
In this case the advisory committees have recommended in
favor of it, so I would -- I would tend to favor accepting their
recommendation.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. I'm not in favor of it, and
I'll tell you why. We've still got the issue of beach access that's not
going away. I'm more than willing to change my vote the day that I
see a plan on the books that will give beach access. At that point in
time I'll throw my full support behind it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas, do have you
anything?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. I feel the same way as
Commissioner Coletta does that, I feel what we need to do is look at
the possibility of that PUD allowing us to have access at that -- on
that beach if they're requiring that we renourish those funds.
I would look at the idea that anybody that lets us get involved in
having beach access readily available for the citizenry of Collier
County along with the tourists, then I would definitely back a plan
whereby we would put them higher on the priority list.
This is not saying that we would not allow any access or allow
any renourishment of that beach, but I would also look at the -- a
priority list prioritizing where the public and where the tourists are
able to get access to those beaches, readily have access to them,
where there's provisions put in place whereby there's rest rooms or
whatever other facilities on those beaches.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Is there any other discussion on the
Page 155
March 25, 2003
item on the agenda today?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I did hear a pledge from
somebody that came up to speak that they would be -- they would be
looking at the access issue, and I think that that's going to be an
important component of this engineering study. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. I'm going to call the motion.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: The motion carries, 3-2.
Commissioner Fiala, Henning and Coyle in favor. Halas and Coletta
against.
Item # 10G
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT BUDGET POLICIES FOR
FISCAL YEAR 2004- APPROVED AS AMENDED-
SEPTEMBER 4 & 18 ESTABLISHED AS BUDGET PUBLIC
HEARING DATES
Next item is 10(G).
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Folks, if you can just keep it down
on your way out, we would appreciate it. Thank you very much.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, on -- that 10(G) is that the Board
of County Commissioners adopt policies to be used in developing the
Collier County Government budget for fiscal year 2004.
Page 156
March 25, 2003
And before -- and before we start that one particular thing, part
of the county manager's ordinance is the fact that we provide the
board and the taxpayers an annual report for 2002.
You have -- should have received copies of this. It's blue,
red-lined, white stars. I will tell you the staff did a -- did a super job
with this particular document, and it gets to the issues.
The next -- the next piece that we needed to talk about as we go
through that particular -- how we did in 2002 -- and 2003 is still in
the works -- but in order to make 2004 a better year as far as the
budget, budget guidance takes on a particular importance in years
past with budget guidance.
People left the budget guidance process pretty much not
knowing what the heck they were going to bring forward as far as the
budget is concerned, and it was more of, well, when we see it we'll
know it, and we'll go along with it.
We chose this year to not do that because what-- seeing it--
knowing it when I see it, that kind of logic makes people do an awful
lot of work, okay, and most of it is wasted, and makes them go
through all kinds of contortions in order to do it.
I've also heard some things about zero based budgeting. It's
very difficult to do when you -- when you have some 18- to 1,900
employees in the county manager's particular section along with the
sheriff's.with another 1,200 and the clerk with 300 plus. And if you
take a look at that, it becomes very difficult.
But what I've chose (sic) to do in this particular budget policy as
far as the county manager is concerned is to contain the expanded
growth of head count to try to force efficiencies within the
organization and cap those so that the particular department directors
and administrators can come up with efficiencies within their own
organization, and that's why you see page two in the first paragraph
where it says less than. And less than is a new -- is a new person
Page 157
March 25, 2003
we've just employed in Collier County, at least in our lexicon. We're
using less than and not more than.
It's less than 25 as far as a head count is concerned, and I plan to
try to hold that down to less than a handful.
We've also said -- and I'll tell you how sincere and square we
are on that particular case. I've told the department directors to take
this very seriously, and the administrators, in the fact that, you know,
they're going to come forward in a very constrained environment.
You heard from the lobbyist this morning about a reduced cost
share as far as Article V is concerned that's on the books. I'll also tell
you part of that legislation, there were an awful lot of voluntary items
that are going to be up to the county to fund that used to be funded
by our court system in the way it presently is with the revenues and
things that Mr. Brock brings into the county that we're going to have
to deal with.
There's also some things about Medicare (sic), and you heard
that this morning, and how some of those costs are going to come to
bear on Collier County, along with numerous other issues that are out
there, including one of the things we heard about getting rid of
impact fees and to come down with some kind of a revenue share that
we get from the state based on increased doc. stamps, rates, and
things like that.
The next item was to hold the budget to the CPI, which is 2.8
percent or less, for the particular budgets. There are some things that
are mandated that we have to do in those budgets, and Mr.
Smykowski will talk about that a little bit.
I've also chose to come forward with a -- with a pay plan where
we put those items down, and we got very specific with them. And
we're asking for a 4.55 percent share as far as payroll is concerned so
that we can adjust those salaries so we can stay up with inflation and
let those dollars be leverage for the individual employee so that they
Page 158
March 25, 2003
basically stay current and the dollar doesn't decrease, and that's 2.8
percent for CPI.
There's a -- there's a percentage for an awards program of 1.5,
and a .25 pay scale maintenance process.
One of the things we plan to do and bring before the board is to
shrink the lower end minimum to get that closer to the market value
for those employees that are -- that are farther away from market.
Right now 72 percent of the employees in the county manager's
office are below market value in their particular areas.
I would -- I would -- I would say to you, in my opinion, that that
is -- that that is a percentage that's too lopsided. It should be
something of the 60/40, 50/50 range on either side, but I'm more
prone to the 60/40, 60 below, 40 above. But if it's in 60/40, 50/50
range, I feel that we're on the right track. But to have it 72/28, I think
it's a little bit too lopsided, so part of that .25 percent on pay scale
maintenance will go to shrink the minimums and move them closer
to the market for those employees in that 72 percent range.
I will also say that last year 1.9 percent of the personnel
percentage, which was 4.0, went to the awards program. We need to
set that. The awards program is all over the board in the past years of
the county, and we need to set a particular percentage and say, this is
what we're going to have. And I tried to do that with that 1.5 percent
figure so that we set it. So as far as awards program and
maintenance, we are. 15 percent below what was asked for last year.
The next item that I've asked the -- Mike Smykowski to do in
his budget guidance is to reduce the number of funds that we have in
Collier County. I know it drives the folks in Tallahassee crazy, and I
have to sign all the trim notices, which are a stack that are this deep.
And there's 134 funds right now.
I will tell you those funds have a tendency to make budgeting
and figuring out exactly the expenditures are very difficult. Not only
Page 159
March 25, 2003
for the county staff, but also for the clerk and anybody else that tries
to do a budget and tries to stay within that budget.
It also causes us to do double duty, to overstate the budget
because you're keeping track of it in different places, and it -- and it
-- and it also has a tendency to diminish the flexibility that
department directors and administrators have in using personnel
between fund sites. Because if I have to use a person that's basically
funded, let's says, in TDC dollars but he's only given 85 percent of
his time and he has to do 15 percent of time for general fund or
whatever, you've got to do all kinds of transactions and cost shifts in
that process.
To try to help us, to give us some more flexibility, to help us as
far as budgeting, to give more visibility on the budget and what
things are being done for the -- for the board, I chose to put a 10
percent reduction on those funds. I plan to also have that same 10
percent in the next year's budget guidance so that we can get this
down to a-- to a usable level.
I will also tell you that Mike works with the clerk on these
particular funds to make sure that we legitimately can do that and to
try to diminish those numbers.
The next piece that we tried to do in the budget guidance was to
let you know and to let the employees know that we -- we are
proceeding in our movement of costs for the medical system.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Can I interrupt for just a second?
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'd like to place -- cast my vote in
favor of this agenda. I've got to run. They're going to shut the chow
line down here in about 15 minutes.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Why don't you make a motion?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: What's more important?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And I'm glad somebody gets to eat.
Page 160
March 25, 2003
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Why don't you make that in the
form of a motion, Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. I make a motion that we
adopt the plans for the upcoming budget policy for '04 and to go
forward on the reduction of 10 percent of the different items that are
-- that was stated by county manager here.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: If I may, I'm going to give a
second, but before I do, there's one thing I'd iike us to take a good
look at, and that's on page six.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Is this on -- okay, I'm sorry. Go
ahead.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Page six, okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I didn't mean to interrupt,
Commissioner Henning.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I just want to make sure we stay on
the item today.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I am staying on the item.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: This is on page six, the fee
waiver policy.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'd like to see us -- I mean we
-- time and time again we keep coming across when people are going
through the motions of spending the taxpayers' dollars to file with us
-- the staff to file, asking for fee waivers for all sorts of things, and a
number of times we refused it, and a couple times we even made
donations to those causes to get it through.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: With our arms twisted.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I would like to see that
removed right from the budget so we don't have this continuously
keep coming up.
Page 161
March 25, 2003
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Was that part of your motion,
Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes, it is.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And I'll second it.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: May I?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Please. Thanks for being here today.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Before you -- before you go off to
eat, I want to make sure that you understand that your motion will
approve a budget that will result in an increase in ad valorem taxes in
year '05 and '06 of a fairly substantial increase of approximately
eight to nine percent. I certainly cannot support a budget that
proposes that sort of an increase over the next three years.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, then I guess we'll have to
get ahold of the sheriff and see if he can cut his budget -- part of his
budget out.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, I think we need to work on
that. But one of my problems here is the statement that the current
budget is based upon the services being performed or being currently
funded in FY-04 through FY-06.
Now, I fundamentally disagree with that statement and that
process. There have to be lots of items that are being funded in
FY-04 through FY-06 that are not essential. And if we're running
into some very difficult budgeting problems, while we can't maybe
take the step of going all the way to zero based budgeting concept,
we sure as heck can go through the projects we've got here and start
weeding out those that aren't such high priority, particularly if that
philosophy is going to result in an increase in ad valorem property
taxes.
I think before we ever start increasing ad valorem property
taxes, we need to take a look at the projects we're spending money on
Page 162
March 25, 2003
right now and see if we can't trim it out of there.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, then you've also got the
mandates that are going to be directed down to us from state also.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Exactly. That makes it even more
important that we start looking at what we're doing now with a view
toward -- toward prioritizing and cutting out the things that really
aren't top priority.
I think we're going to get into real trouble if we don't do that.
And I understand the county manager's concern with going directly
to a zero based budgeting. I think that would be impossible to do in
one -- one complete -- or in one budgeting cycle. But there's nothing
to stop us from looking at where we're spending our money right now
and finding a way to start cutting out projects that are not --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, I don't think this is the time
or -- I don't think this is the time right now to start looking at the
budget and figuring out what we're going to cut out of it.
I think this is something that we need to address later on --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well--
COMMISSIONER HALAS: -- as we approach the budget here.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- all I'm suggesting to you is this
is part of the budget guidance that are you suggesting we approve.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: If I may.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Please, Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm sorry. I can't tell whose
hand's up, and I feel like I'm jumping in in front of everyone, and I
apologize if I am.
But one of the things -- and let's stick with Jim Mudd one more
time. It's my understanding that we still don't know a lot of the
factors that are going to be coming in. What's the assessed valuation
going to be at that point in time, too?
Jim Mudd, isn't this something that we can deal with the next
Page 163
March 25, 2003
time the budget comes back for us as far as how we're going to
handle the upcoming years --
MR. MUDD: Commissioner--
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- if it will be necessary maybe
to make an adjustment early on?
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, what -- what you're approving
right now for the thing is a millage neutral level 3.8 -- MR. SMYKOWSKI: 772.
MR. MUDD: -- 772 millage rate, and you're telling -- and
you're telling me to stay within that millage rate and bring forward a
budget based on those particulars that I discussed earlier.
We provide you a three-year model the best we can, the best we
can -- you know, our crystal ball is as good as anybody else's -- to
kind of let you know where we are.
Now, if you looked at the guidance from last year, you will
notice there were millage increases in those years in the guidelines
that you got from Mr. Olliff. I will also say that those -- those
millage increases weren't as much as what's on this particular sheet.
As we get more firm certainty as far as those out years are concerned,
we kind of-- we can kind of free that up.
I will also say, there are still some uncertainties out there that
we've got. We don't know what the turnback's going to be from the
clerk, okay? We've gotten his estimate. I can't tell you if it's going
to be more or less. The same thing with the other constitutional
officers.
We also made an assumption that we'd have a 12 percent
assessed value increase. I will tell you that that is probably on the
low end. It's between 15 and 12, but I -- let's -- you know, I don't
want to say it's 14 and base it, and then all of a sudden it comes in at
12 and then we're saying, well, boy, now we really need to cut the
heck out of it. So I went to the -- I went to the low side on that
Page 164
March 25, 2003
estimate.
But again, we put $3 million into -- into this budget policy for
unfinanced mandates that we're going to get from the state. Could
the state give us more than $3 million and reduce our revenue
sharing? And we heard some of that thing today -- some of those
thoughts today. They could--
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Mr. Mudd, I'm going to move this
item.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Mr. Halas, if you would amend your
motion to approve the adopted amended policies to a detail in the
attachments to the executive summary for '03, '04, it would take care
of my concerns --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I amend those -- I amend that
motion to put -- to include just '03 and '04 to maintain the same -- the
same level of ad valorem tax millage.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And the second?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'll second.
MR. SMYKOWSKI: Mr. Chairman, before you take a vote on
the motion, if that would include the public hearing dates of
September 4th and September 18th, which are Thursday evenings,
those have been cleared. The board room is reserved. But just so
you're aware, we are second in priority. The school board has to set
their date first--
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Say yes, Commissioner Halas.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Pardon?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Say yes.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle -- Coletta, say
yes.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes.
Page 165
March 25, 2003
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All right.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: One dissenting vote. Okay.
MR. MANALICH: Mr. Chairman, just for a point of
clarification. There was some discussion about the fee waiver policy.
Was that in some way -- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That was included in my
second and in Commissioner Halas's original motion.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That's correct.
MR. MANALICH: Okay. So it was amended, and that was
part of the original motion?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That's correct.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
Item # 1 OH
RESOLUTION 2003-130 AUTHORIZING A TEMPORARY FUEL
COST SURCHARGE TO ALLOW TAXICAB DRIVERS TO
RECOVER SOME COSTS OF THE RECENT INCREASES IN
MOTOR VEHICIJE FIIEIJS- ADOPTED
Next item is 10(H), adopt a temporary fuel cost surcharge to
allow taxicab drivers to recover some of the costs of the recent
increase of cost for motor fuel -- motor vehicle fuel.
And I'll make a motion to approve.
Page 166
March 25, 2003
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second that motion.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Henning,
second by Commissioner Fiala. And we have public speakers.
Call the public speakers, please.
MS. FILSON: We have one public speaker, Jim Kramer.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Mr. Kramer?
MR. KRAMER: I waive.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'd just like to make one
observation. On page two of this item, the resolution itself, I believe
there is -- is something wrong with the paragraph number three. The
last line in paragraph number three, it says, I think, 155.9 cents per
gallon. Would you like to make that dollars? I mean, I guess it's all
the same thing.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: It's $1.55.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. It's all the same thing, but
wouldn't you rather make it -- put it in common terms?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
MR. MANALICH: I think that would be -- I think that would
be an improvement.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, yeah, because it can be a
little -- little cumbersome.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And I recognize that scrivener's error
in my motion.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion, signify by
saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
Page 167
March 25, 2003
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm opposed to it for the simple
reason I think we're overstepping our bounds, even interfering in this
particular industry.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. And we do have an ordinance
on that -- the public vehicle --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I know we do.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- advisory board. And the motion
carries, 3-1, Commissioner Coletta dissenting.
Item # 10I
DAVID REINERSTEN, REPRESENTING SOUTHERN
EXTREME WATER SKI TEAM, REQUESTING WAIVER OF
FEES IN THE ESTIMATED AMOUNT OF $2525 FOR A
REGIONAL WATER SKI TOURNAMENT TO BE HELD AT
SI IGDF. N REGIONAI~ PARK~ Jl JNF. 20 TO 22- FAII.F.D
The next item is 10(I), request by David Reinertsen,
representing South (sic) Extreme Water Ski Team to waive fees in
established (sic) amount of $2,525.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Commissioner Henning, before we
go any further on this, my son skis with this water ski group. And
although, you know, he doesn't benefit by it nor does he get
promotions by it--
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So you're going to pay for the fee,
right?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Because -- I checked with our
county attorney and with our county manager and also with outside
legal counsel, and although I don't technically have a conflict of
interest, I felt that possibly to cast any shadow -- to stop any thoughts
of conflict of interest, I don't know how to say that properly. I wish I
Page 168
March 25, 2003
were --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: It's the perception of conflict?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Perception, thank you. That's the
word.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: You're welcome.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Rather than even create a
perception of conflict of interest, I'm going to step down.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: We don't have a quorum to vote
on it.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, we do. I'm still here.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Oh, I was hoping you'd gone by
now.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, that was Commissioner
Halas.
MR. MANALICH:
audience. You can stay.
You don't -- you don't need to sit in the
You're just not a participator or voting.
You can remain on the dais.
We do have a physical quorum here, even though I guess there's
a conflict, but we have another member that can vote. But we still
have the physical quorum for the meeting as a whole here, so I think
we can go ahead and vote this.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Mr. John Dunnuck is at the dais,
would like to give us a little information on this item.
MR. DUNNUCK: Good afternoon, Commissioners. For the
record, my name is John Dunnuck, public services administrator.
I believe the executive summary's pretty self-explanatory from
the standpoint of, we received a request earlier this spring to host --
to see what it would be -- what it would cost to lease our facility at
Sugden Park for an event.
When we provided the Collier County board adopted fee policy,
Page 169
March 25, 2003
the person who was looking, Mr. Reinertsen, said that that was
beyond their scope because it's a -- they don't charge fees and so
forth to be able to cover those type of large scale fees, which is $800
a day to rent Sugden Regional Park.
Recognizing that he has, I think, an April 11 th cutoff point,
either deciding whether to have it Sugden Park or try to find
somewhere else, we wanted to put it on the board agenda instead of
typically going through the public petition process. We did it out of
courtesy.
From parks and recs. standpoint, we absolutely support the
event. We think it would be great for the community. Anything that
raises exposure to our park site is certainly welcome. But we do have
fee policies to cover our park rangers, our maintenance standpoint of
bringing in a large scale event. Recognizing staff has no ability to
waive fees, we wanted to bring it to the board's attention and provide
the board the opportunity in that regard.
And we have Mr. Reinertsen here who could speak to the issue.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you. And I just have one
question. Is it -- can the organization provide security, pay for
security at the -- at the site for this event?
MR. REINERTSEN: Yes, sir. My name is Dave Reinertsen.
I'm president of Southern Extreme Water Ski Team, and I'm here to
represent my team and the southern region of' National Show Ski
Association.
We have in place -- you know, we can get security guards.
That's part of the cost that we have to incur to have this kind of
event, and that's why -- we had -- this came about, if I can explain a
little bit how this came about.
We had gotten a bid -- we put in a bid to host this tournament
which is held every summer, and our site became -- they pushed up
some construction at Miromar Outlets where we have our ski site,
Page 170
March 25, 2003
and it wasn't viable with the amount of teams that are coming to have
the tournament there.
And we also lost some sponsors that were going to back us. So
Sugden Park being the beautiful place that it is for a ski tournament,
we contacted the county and talked to them about it. And our budget
is very limited. We can supply insurance. You know, every year
when we have this event, there's a million dollar liability policy in
place. All of the team members and boats are all insured that are at
this event, and I'm sure we can work with the county and assure that
there's proper security insurance and all these things needed.
However, the moneys are just -- this is a non-for-profit group,
and we're very new. And like I say, the sponsors we had at the time
were for the site that we are at, and they are, you know, from the Fort
Myers area.
So I hate to do this. You know, it's like an emergency thing.
And I'm aware that the parks and rec. will have to be involved, you
know, some -- a minimal amount, I would think, to have this
tournament. But I'd appreciate you considering waiving these fees
for us so we can bring the participants here.
We're going to have about seven teams, which is probably 5- or
600 people. We have 60 hotel rooms blocked off already for these
people coming in. It's in June, which is a very slow time for tourists
in this area.
I think it would be a very good way to bring in people from
outside, see Collier County, spend their money here for the weekend,
and hopefully make this an annual event, since this facility is
probably one of the best in the country for show skiing.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any questions?
Commissioner Coletta, any questions?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, more of a statement. For
some time now we've been arbitrarily refusing these fees to a number
Page 171
March 25, 2003
of different ones, including the Collier County fairgrounds, who've
had them for a number of years, Immokalee Rotary came to us asking
for a fee waiver on the carnival, Golden Gate Civic Association,
which was looking for a permit -- permit fee waiver to be able to put
up right-of-way signs, and even your Golden Gate city civic, which I
can't remember what the issue was, but I know we refused them.
If the issue of the fees that we're charging at the park are out of
line, they should be adjusted so that they apply to all equally. That's
my own stance on this particular one.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. I'm going to go ahead. I'm
going to make a motion to approve based on, this event will bring
people into Collier County spending sales tax dollars. I'm sorry that
we did not sponsor it through TDC money, but it's really late for --
MR. REINERTSEN: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- for that, and hopefully this event
can continue in Collier County in the future. Is there a second to my motion?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'll second it for discussion
purposes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I do have a question. Didn't we
just have a motion a few minutes ago concerning budgeting policy
that told us that we were not going to have any BCC fee waivers?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's correct.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: For '03/'04 budget.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: '03/'04, okay. All right. Just
wanted to make sure.
CHAIRMAN HENNING:
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING:
saying aye.
Any further discussion?
All in favor of the motion, signify by
Page 172
March 25, 2003
Opposed?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: The motion carries (sic).
MR. MUDD: Motion fails.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I'm sorry. Motion fails.
MR. REINERTSEN: Commissioner Henning?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And there's not going to be a -- we're
not going to resolve this with another motion, so this item is not
going to be continued. It's just -- it just lies there.
MR. DUNNUCK: The only other option you may have from a
commission standpoint, too, is direct staff to actually co-sponsor this
event. You know, from the aspect of, will it bring people into the
park site? Of course. Is it in line with parks and rec. activities? Yes,
it is. You know, that could be an option from our standpoint. What
we would have to do in this case is work within our existing budget
to try to make the event happen. But that is a potential option if the
board so choosed (sic) to go that route.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So you're saying that you
would use your parks and rec. funds to finance this? Is that what
you're suggesting?
MR. DUNNUCK: We would probably have some limited
co-sponsor basis on it.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I just can't. It's still going
against everything we're trying to establish here to make this a level
playing field. If you allow -- this one went through, I'd be back to
you for a whole bunch of them out there. A lot of them are
nonprofits that I've been involved with, they're always looking for an
opportunity also, and I have no problem if it's equal right across the
board, the playing field is level for everyone.
Page 173
March 25, 2003
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. But your staff can choose
which -- how they spend their budget because it is a budgeted item,
so that's up to the staff members and the event organizers.
MR. MUDD: Mr. Chairman, I think this item just died on the
dais.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yep.
MR. MUDD: I think that's where it's going to stay. If you'd
like to -- and I would also --
MR. REINERTSEN: Mr. Chairman, so you're saying, would it
be okay if I spoke with parks and rec. about maybe co-sponsoring the
event, or is that out of the question if I go that route?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: The Board of Commissioners budget
a certain amount for parks and rec. You can go to the administration
and see if they would like to co-sponsor. That's strictly up to them,
and the county manager. But the Board of Commissioners is not
going to waive the fees.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: The only thing I would say is
that when they start to co-sponsor events, that they're doing it
arbitrarily across the board, and at that point in time I would be
agreeable.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Anything else?
MR. REINERTSEN: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
Item # 1 OM - Added
RESOLUTION 2003-131 SUPPORTING THE CONTINUED
STATE FUNDING FOR PRIMARY CARE FACILITIES
THROUGH A LOCAL, STATE AND FEDERAL MATCHING
PROGRAM- ADOPTED WITH CHANGES
Page 174
March 25, 2003
The next item is 10(M), a state funding for primary care
facilities through the state and federal matching grants. Mr. Dunnuck, you have this item.
MR. DUNNUCK: Yes. Good afternoon, Commissioners.
We received word Monday, as a matter of fact, with respect to
some information that's going on up at the state level in regards to the
continued funding of primary care and the governor's initiative to
support our primary care clinic, which we recently passed with the
commission. Apparently the Senate has recommended at this point
in time -- and it's still in committee level -- to remove those fundings.
From our standpoint, we have a resolution before you to -- to
suggest to our local delegation and to the Senate that they continue
those fundings to leverage additional federal funds for the program of
creating this primary care facility.
We honestly believe that when all is said and done in the final
budget, the funds are going to be in there. There are a lot of vested
interests across the state, and we think this is, as much as anything, a
political maneuvering. But nevertheless, we wanted to cover our
bases and ask the board's support, to continue supporting the primary
care initiative.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I'll make a motion to approve this
resolution.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any discussion, Commissioner
Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, by all means.
Is there some way you might want to consider adding to this
motion or maybe it has to be a separate motion that this is one of our
things, one of our legislative agendas that we want to pursue; in other
words, to protect our funding on this?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Sure. You got it. I think it will be
Page 175
March 25, 2003
once
Burt
we pass this resolution, but, yeah, I'll add that, and you got a --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- headshake from the seconder.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Uh-huh.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. Because I'll be seeing
Saunders in the next day or so.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Great.
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. No further discussion.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries, 4-0.
Item # 10J
GRANT AGREEMENT FROM THE SOUTH FLORIDA WATER
MANAGEMENT DISTRICT IN THE AMOUNT OF $54,000 AND
AUTHORIZATION FOR A CODE ENFORCEMENT POSITION
FOR ENFORCEMENT OF THE BOARDS' IRRIGATION
ORDINANCE- APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, you skipped over 10(J).
CHAIRMAN HENNING: 10(J).
MR. MUDD: It's accept a grant agreement from the South
Florida Water Management District in the amount of $54,000 and
Page 176
March 25, 2003
authorize a code enforcement position for enforcement of the board's
irrigation ordinance.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Entertain a motion.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So move.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Second.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion made by Commissioner
Coletta (sic), second by Commissioner--
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Coyle.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- Coyle, second by Commissioner
Henning.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING:
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING:
there?
Opposed?
Commissioner Coletta, are you
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Oh, I'm for the motion.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. So the motion carries, 4-0.
All right. The next-- are we all done with 107
Item #1 lA
PUBLIC COMMENTS- JIM KRAMER REGARDING
COMMI INICATIONS EFFORTS
MR. MUDD: We're done with 10, sir. Which brings us to 12 --
which brings us public comment on general topics.
Page 177
March 25, 2003
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Do we have any public speakers?
MS. FILSON: Yes, Mr. Chairman, we have one, Mr. Jim
Kramer.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Mr. Kramer. Thank you for being
here today.
MS. FILSON: Are we still doing three?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Pardon me?
MS. FILSON: Are we doing three or five?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Three or-- what?
MS. FILSON: Minutes.
MR. MUDD: Minutes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Oh, three or five minutes.
Take you three minutes, Mr. Kramer, right?
MR. KRAMER: About that, yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you. We'll -- three minutes.
MR. KRAMER: My name is Jim Kramer.
According to the newspaper this morning -- and these words by
Commissioner Henning, quote, I think the whole point of the public
petition is to ask the commissioners to take action. I am concerned
that the staff's time is being wasted.
Wow, a piece of legislation with my name on it being
considered by the Collier County Board of Commission. I'm so
flattered.
Of course for now you're calling it the resolution to limit unduly
repetitious public petitions. Better we not let the people know that
the not true purpose of this is to cut off public debate that might
prove embarrassing to a commissioner or two in front of the cameras.
Let's see if I can shed some light on it. In February of 2002, I
brought before you a problem with the violation of ordinance 99-38,
the towing of vehicles in Collier County.
You, Mr. Chairman, stated that you had researched the problem
Page 178
March 25, 2003
and came to the same decision I had, that I'd been overcharged. You
sent me to city council for resolution. They sent me back to you the
next month saying the ordinance was a county responsibility.
Tom Olliff told you-all in April, and I quote, Mr. Chairman, I'll
take care of this one personally. He did not.
And I was next sent to the sheriffs office for an investigation.
They passed it on to the state's attorney, who concluded the
ordinance was not enforceable as written, but your own attorney's
office disagreed.
So in August, I appeared before the commission once again.
Mr. Chairman, you said to me, and I quote, Mr. Kramer, I suggest
that you pay the bill and move on, unquote. What you didn't know at
the time, I guess, was that the bill had been paid on January 14th.
I bought the videotapes of the commission meetings. In
September I stood ready to pay those -- play those back for you. But
at the last minute, the county manager's office refused to let me show
them, so I read you the transcripts.
Next, the county attorneys took several months to review the
ordinance, and finally in January 2003, I received a call from deputy
county Attorney Ramiro Manalich saying that the case had been
referred to the code enforcement office of Janet Powers, operations
supervisor.
Ramiro said, and I quote, she will call you Monday, unquote. I
have yet to hear from her.
Mr. Chairman, it's now been over 400 days since I brought this
problem before you. You know as well as I do that the solution to
this is not limiting unduly repetitious public petitions. It's getting this
government to work for the people. That, I submit, is your job.
One thing.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: You'll have to wrap it up, Mr.
Kramer.
Page 179
March 25, 2003
MR. KRAMER: A quotation. Our lives begin to end the day
we become silent about things that matter, Dr. Martin Luther King,
Jr.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
Any more public speakers?
MS. FILSON: No, sir.
Item #12A
RESOLUTION 2003-132 OPPOS1NG SENATE BILL 1462,
WHICH EXEMPTS CERTAIN CONSTRUCTION AND
DEMOLITION DEBRIS FROM SOLID WASTE REGULATIONS
- ADOPTFJD
CHAIRMAN HENNING: The next item is 12 -- 12(A),
proposed resolution opposing Senate bill 1462, which exempts
certain construction and demolition debris from solid waste
regulations.
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. After the lesson we've
learned with the C&D that was in our landfill and the stink that arose
from it, we certainly want to oppose this bill, so I make a motion to
oppose the bill.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And I second it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And there's a second on the floor.
We do have public speakers on this item.
MS. FILSON: Yes, Mr. Chairman, we have one public speaker,
Bob Krasowski.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Good afternoon, Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Good afternoon, sir.
MR. KRASOWSKI: For the record, Bob Krasowski. I'm with
Page 180
March 25, 2003
Zero Waste Collier County Group.
I have with me a week-old version of this Senate bill. I'm sure
there's been changes made to it. I've reviewed in a brief period what
has been generated by your staff.
The whole concept of Zero Waste is to take discarded materials
and channel them through the economic system that makes reuse of
them or sends them back into production or to the environment in
terms of composting.
C&D identified as garbage, with the control of garbage on it,
has limited applications in this regard. What Zero Waste would like
to see for C&D to become -- the various elements of C&D to become
products for reincorporation into the marketplace. And part of this
effort seems to do that.
On the other hand, just like we all like to be free to do what we
like, none of us object to stop signs and red lights, there have to be
some controls on the behavior of the marketplace. So by taking
wallboard and piling it up for a year and waiting for a market to
develop while it blows into the air, the dust blows into the air, that's
not a very acceptable concept either. And I think there is
consideration for doing just that in this bill.
As part of the legislation that I see here, it says that there should
be -- it should not be thought that this legislation -- nothing in this
section prohibits a local government from enacting an ordinance
designed to protect the public's health, safety, and welfare, so we
could accept this and still be able to pursue the health, safety, and
welfare, but I'm not here suggesting that you change what's set up to
go by-- to go forward today.
But I do want to mention that there -- we need to come up with a
different process, something other than what we're doing now, yet we
have to maintain some type of control so it doesn't turn into a big
polluting mess.
Page 181
March 25, 2003
So I hope, beyond just objecting to this Senate bill, that
somehow we get involved in designing some type of legislation that
would allow for the C&D to go into the marketplace, but then doesn't
pose a risk of environmental -- developing an offensive
environmental program. That's it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: One of the items, Bob, the concerns
that we have is the -- in the C&D, you have the concrete. We use
that concrete today to create artificial reefs in the Gulf, and this bill
would-- would jeopardize that, and-- so, that's kind of where we're
at today.
Commissioner Coletta, do you have anything?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, no, you're heading in the
right direction. I like the way this is going. Just don't give me too
many more directives because I do want to come back home some
day.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any more direction for
Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'm sure we could come up with
some.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I've got to find out where Halas
is and join him for lunch.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Commissioner Henning, if I may.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Sure.
MR. KRASOWSKI: You know, I understand that there's a lot
of variables and issues involved in this whole thing right here, and
we'll touch upon it Thursday and Friday. But I really don't feel
comfortable in thinking that our orientation to controlling solid waste
is totally dependent on our-- you know, in general, statewide, on our
small individual programs or the economy of waste that is presently
set up in Collier County.
Page 182
March 25, 2003
You know, I'll just leave it at that. But I understand, you know,
the reef building project depends on big pieces of concrete, which is
construction waste, yeah.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Part of it, yeah.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And I will be with you this
Thursday.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Good. I appreciate that. We're looking
forward to it. We're going to have a good time.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion, signify by
saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries, 4-0.
Item #13A
FUNDING FOR A MID-LEVEL ACCOUNTANT IN THE OFFICE
OF THE CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT AND STAFF TO
PROVIDE TO THE CLERKS OFFICE COPIES OF DRAFT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARIES AND SUPPORTING
DOCUMENTATION AT THE TIME THEY ARE SUBMITTED TO
THF. BI IDGF. T OFFICFJ FOR RFJVIF. W - APPROVFD
The next item we come to is constitutional officers, 13(A), for
the Board of Commissioners to approve (sic) funding of mid-level
accounting office for the clerk of the Circuit Court, direct him to
Page 183
March 25, 2003
provide the clerk's office a copy of the draft executive summary in--
supporting of the document.
If I could just -- I think I can straighten this out if I could just
ask the Clerk of Courts something. I know the clerk goes over the
agenda, the biweekly -- or biweekly agenda, and that's correct? And
any concerns that the clerk has, he'll let one of the commissioners
know or staff, and any concerns of-- the Board of Commissioners
has on the agenda, they could either ask staff or the clerk for any
kind of clarifications?
MR. BROCK: That is correct. Not only do we go -- I mean,
and we have been devoting a lot of resources out of my office in
going over them, including the participation in the executive
summary review with the county manager's office on Wednesday,
which my finance director, or the clerk's finance director, attends and
participates in that process.
In addition to that, we go through the agenda items in our staff
to try to identify issues that we may come up with one day during the
week at this point in time. We're devoting a tremendous amount of
resources to the front end of this process.
You know, I've had discussions with Mr. Mudd about, if things
come up that he needs issues addressed with us about, that he's going
to get ahold of us and try to deal with those issues, and if we're
needed, he's going to try to have us here to do that.
I'm sitting here, and -- you know, I know this is a very important
part of government, and I know the decisions that you-all make here
are important. But, I mean, most of the issues that you-all deal with
here, from my perspective, are sort of like watching paint dry,
because they don't have anything to do with me.
Land use issues, things of that nature, we're not involved in. I
mean, those aren't involving the expenditure money. We monitor
this program, or monitor the meetings from the TV.
Page 184
March 25, 2003
Am I answering your question?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah. So, you know, any concern
that you have on the items on the agenda or any concerns the Board
of Commissioners has on the agenda, that's going to be shared
information. So I'm not sure what we're being asked to do, if it's
really needed--
MR. BROCK: Well, I mean--
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- as long as we have that
communication.
MR. BROCK: What has transpired is, we are devoting a lot of
resources to the process involving the county manager, meeting the
county manager, working with his staff and going through the agenda
process.
What, do you have it on Wednesday, Jim?
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
MR. BROCK: Jim meets over there with them on Wednesday.
We meet with Commissioner Fiala one day a week, we meet with --
one day every biweekly session, we meet with the chairman, Mr.
Henning, you, once every -- biweekly. Plus three of my staff people,
myself and three of my other staff people, are meeting once a week,
or once a meeting week-- it's a biweekly period -- to go through all
of this.
In addition to that, we're devoting a tremendous amount of
resources to the process of major contracts review in an attempt to try
to stay ahead of the curve, so to speak. And all of that is beginning
to tax our resources to the point that we've got to have some relief.
One of the suggestions that was made to me was, well, you
know, you no longer have former Commissioner Carter on staff that
you had paid for. Well, I mean, that is a correct statement. And there
was $50,000 there that has been freed up. But the realty is, as a
consequence of a request of the county administrator's office to come
Page 185
March 25, 2003
up with 300 additional thousand dollars for purposes of paying
insurance for the board employees that work, or the employees that
work on the board's side of my operation, I no longer have those
moneys to be used. So I've got to have resources in which to deal
with the needs that are being demanded of the office.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. I fully understand now.
Commissioner Coyle, you have your hand raised?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, there are some other issues
here on the executive summary that I think -- think that we should
address. Excuse me. One is the request that copies of the executive
summaries be provided to the clerk no later than the time they're
provided to the office management budget. Are you doing that?
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, we give it to them-- we give it to
them now on Thursday, the day after, because we get the copies back
from the printer.
One of the things, if this is approved, we will -- we will make --
when those exec. summaries come in, we will make a duplicate copy
and get them over to the clerk on that day.
There's another thing we're in the process of doing, and we're
going to do that -- I chose not to do it this year because of the SAP
business that we're doing right now, and we're trying to get the
financial thing squared away, and that's caused some turmoil,
because you basically changed the way we do business in Collier
County of-- from an 11-year-old system that everybody was
acquainted to, to a new one, and we're trying to get the wrinkles out.
What I want to do -- and with the board's approval -- and we'll
bring that up during budget, is to go into a paper list document that
you see in front of you where you'll have laptops sitting right there,
and we'll do -- we'll do it from the dais vis-a-vis electronics, and we'll
get that out. And so that we will cut down on the paper that gets
moved around this county, which there's a lot of money that goes into
Page 186
March 25, 2003
it to do that.
There's several -- there's several counties in Florida that have
done it already with great success. Hillsborough is one of them.
And when that happens, as the document's being made, the
Clerk of Court will instantaneously be there along with everybody
else. It will cut down on the amount of staff time and the dollars that
go into it as far as reproduction is concerned and whatnot, but that's
an effort in the future that comes about next January, is what we're
thinking about. But in the interim, yes, we'll make an additional
copy of those executive summaries and get those to the clerk in the
interim, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. So there should be no
problem meeting that requirement? MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Now, there is one other
thing that we brought up during our discussions several weeks ago,
and that relates to the front-end examination of some of these billings
from the contractors.
And what I requested at that time was that we write into our
contracts a requirement that the contractors produce all of the backup
information necessary to permit an audit of that bill to determine that
we're actually being cha -- that they actually have performed the
work that they're charging us for.
MR. MUDD: We're working on that, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. So we're going to be doing
that?
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. All right.
MR. BROCK: We have already had discussions with Mr. Mudd
along these lines in getting this stuff together. You know, we're
working with the county administrator's office to put a lot of the
Page 187
March 25, 2003
things that we have talked about in place.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, now that brings us to the
issue of the additional individual. I'm very reluctant to get involved
in approving individual job positions for you or for the county
manager for that matter. You don't come to us for approval of
addition of a clerk, do you?
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, if it's --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Or do you want us to start doing
that?
MR. MUDD: No, hang on now.
Commissioner, we do come to you-- if there's an addition of a
staff person that's outside of the budget that we put as far as our
expanded positions, we come to the board and ask for your
permission in order to expand that particular position.
And let me give you two for instances, okay? One of-- one of
which was Mr. Schmitt when he needed to get the staff person for the
green space administration. We came to you and asked for that
position. Today on your budget, Mr. DeLony, on an item for
$54,000 on that grant position to do irrigation and to make sure that
we have a person that's enforcing the irrigation ordinance, came to
you for a new position.
Now, there was some -- there was some rather-- I call them
strenuous things there that I made Mr. DeLony say. If that position
is not going to fund itself vis-a-vis fees, okay, that they -- that they
get after this first year, that he would delete that position and that
person would be moved to a vacancy that we have within the county.
And he knows that, because I said, hey, I don't like
grand-funded positions for one year, and then all of a sudden I'm
stuck with that person with no fees coming in, and it becomes a
water/sewer expense, that's not correct either.
So if they're going to give out tickets for watering at the wrong
Page 188
March 25, 2003
time of whatever, then those fees should cover that person's position
until we get people that are abiding by the irrigation ordinance, and
at which time we can delete that because we've changed the habits of
folks and we can fill a vacancy that we have in Collier County.
But we do come to the board if we have a position that's new
that wasn't identified in the expanded positions for the budget in that
particular year.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala?
MR. BROCK: Commissioner, I'm not asking you to approve a
budget position, because I establish the employees. What I'm asking
you for is to provide the funding for it.
The board is statutorily required to fund those functions of my
office that relate to operations of the accountant, auditor and
custodian of county court functions. And that's what I'm asking you
for is to provide me with the funding to enable me to do the things
that we're doing.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. I just wanted to tie up, if
you don't mind.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Sure, please.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Could I do that?
And I'm not going to quibble over the dollars involved. The
only thing I would hope is that by examining some of these things in
advance, that it will be less expensive and troublesome for you than
trying to find them -- the problems after they've occurred. So I
would hope that if we were to fund this person that you would, at
some point, recognize some savings hopefully in the auditing
process, so -- that would be my hope.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thanks.
Well, you pretty well stole my thunder. That's what I was going
to say. I had a long conversation with Jim Mitchell yesterday and --
Page 189
March 25, 2003
to discuss this, and it all boiled down to, we're asking you to do a lot
more up-front so that we don't get into a problem down the road, and
we want to pay for that service, is the way I understand it.
And I think, really, we're going to save money hand over fist
because we're going to catch things in advance instead of having to
monkey around with it later on. So that's the way I understood it,
and this is about the price of doing business, right, the cost of doing
business?
MR. BROCK: You know, Jim can tell you this, but there are a
tremendous number of things that are happening between his people
and the clerk's staff in trying to make this process work much better.
We're participating in a process of trying to deal with these
issues beforehand. We're trying to address the issues before they
arise and deal with the concerns that the clerk's office has before it
creates problems for everyone. And, you know, Jim and I are
working very well in that vein.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, just one thing just to help.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Real quick.
MR. MUDD: Real quick. What you have on the -- what you
have on the visualizer is that $300,000 that Dwight talked about.
I've gone to all the constitutionals and all our administrators,
there's a three -- $3 million shortfall as far as our health insurance is
concerned because we'd had some rather large claims. And in order
to make up that shortfall by edict of Tallahassee, where we have to
come up with the $3 million by the 1 st of July, I've gone back out to
everybody, based on the number of folks that they have that are in
our medical insurance program, and I've basically asked them to
come up with their fair share of that $3 million.
So if Dwight had any savings from a position that was vacant,
for instance, Mr. Carter's, that he's basically sucking it up and trying
to come up with that $326,000 that I've levied on him so that we can
Page 190
March 25, 2003
-- we can pay that health insurance bill.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta, do have you
anything?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, I do. I think we're
heading in the right direction. Once more, we're -- the objective
we're trying to create here is to be proactive rather than reactive.
And I've enjoyed today's meeting, especially where we referred
to Dwight on several different issues, and he was there to be able to
give us his opinion on it. That's all a positive. And I'm looking
forward to retaining this same type of-- what do you want to call it --
relationship in the coming future.
I really do think there's a positive aspect of having to -- the
Clerk of Court's or his designee up on the dais with us, because these
issues can change from the time that the agenda goes out and we start
to modify our thinking or modify in the original agenda, and it would
be great.
Any issues that the clerk would have a part of, that he would be
there for it. Maybe the agenda could be so adjusted that his time
wouldn't have to be spent the whole meeting, just more important --
critical parts that could get us into trouble in the future.
MR. BROCK: Mr. Mudd and I have had discussions along
those identical same lines, and we agree.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Getting back on the item
today is to entertain a motion. We do have it -- have to take it out of
the general funds, correct?
MR. MUDD: (Nods head.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: To award the Clerk of Court $30,000
at this point for additional staff to assist the Board of Commissioners
at the meetings.
Is there a motion?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'll make that motion. And also for
Page 191
March 25, 2003
the preliminary work that they do on any of the invoices and so forth,
all of the background work that they're doing. I don't want to just
state that it's for this portion. I want to state that it's for all of the
work that they do to help us do business properly.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I make that motion.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: A motion on the floor. Is there a
second?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion, signify by
saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: The motion carries, 4-0.
Thank you. We need to give the court reporter -- I know we're
in staff discussion, but I can see her fingers cramping up, so if we
could just give, I mean, like three minutes. Okay. Three-minute
break.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Would it be possible not to mm
off the sound system so I don't have to reconnect, it's only going to
be three minutes?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: It's only going to be three minutes?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah. But we want you to take a
three-minute break though.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. I'll go out and join
Halas for lunch.
MR. BROCK: Don't go eat.
Page 192
March 25, 2003
(A recess was taken.)
Item #15A
COUNTY MANAGER, COUNTY ATTORNEY AND SELECTED
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS TO ATTEND MEETING IN
TALLAHASSEE WITH GOVERNMENT CABINET ON APRIL 8,
2003 REGARDING THE SOUTH GOLDEN GATE ESTATES,
F, VF. RGI.ADF, S RESTORATION PROJF. CT.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Ramiro, do we have any staff
communication from the county attorney's office? MR. MANALICH: No, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Then we'll go over to the county
manager for --
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. This has to do with the South Golden
Gate Estates, Everglades restoration project discussion, and it was
supposed to be heard today but has been postponed to the 8th of
April.
I provided each one of the commissioners a draft response to
every one of those questions. The best that I can -- that we can come
up with as far as background are investigation of the particular
issues, and we've done that.
I'd like to, at this juncture, find out how the board wants -- how
the board wants the manager and staff to respond to this particular
invitation, because we haven't done that because they postponed the
meeting, so we haven't basically said, this is who's going to be there
and whatnot. It basically got over -- our actions that you directed
were overcome by events based in Tallahassee.
I've also -- I've also heard that, you know, that this is a moving
train and they're changing their questions, too. So while we have
Page 193
March 25, 2003
some answers to questions that we know about, it would probably
behoove us to get them the answers. I would like the board to tell
me, are we going to go up -- somebody from the board, or do you
want county manager to go up and appear next -- on the 8th of April?
Do we want to respond to the questions based on this draft that you
have in front of you? What's the next step?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I can just -- one thing that -- I have
contacted DEP, and we're trying to set up a meeting prior to this so
that hopefully we can respond to their concerns so it can be taken off
the consent -- or the cabinet's agenda. Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. I -- with respect to the
meeting, I mean, if someone were to go to the meeting, I think it's
essential that we have at least the county attorney or assistant
attorney and the county manager, and, perhaps, a representative from
the board, but we can't go because there's likely to be a sunshine law
violation as a group.
But I would very much encourage that the people who have the
information be present there rather than trying to have a
commissioner relay information and, perhaps, not have all of the
backup detail that's necessary.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: If I may?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you very much. Well
today, possibly I'll be coming up with more information. I wish that
the message that was given by Mike Davis's aide there was a little
more detailed what the meeting's going to be today. But they may be
volunteering more information, which I'd be more than happy to pass
on. I agree that the county attorney should be there, and I think a
representative from the county manager's office should also be there.
In reality, I'd love to see the whole commission be there, but
Page 194
March 25, 2003
that wouldn't be practical. And I think as far as the legal part of it
goes, if it was announced that it was a meeting taking place in
Tallahassee and it was a legal meeting and notified, we'd be able to
do it as a group. But I don't know if that would be practical for all of
us to try get up here on the issue.
I personally would like to attend being that these issues are
primarily taking place in District 5, and I do have some familiarity
with them, and I'd be very careful about speaking my own mind. I'd
be speaking the mind -- combined mind of the commission with the
guidance of the county manager and the county attorney.
I also like the idea of sending up something in advance and
maybe we won't have to go. That's even a better alternative.
Tallahassee's a nice place, but I'd just as soon be home. I'll come if I
have to, but--
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- at this point in time, I'm not
too sure what to tell you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner, I'm trying to arrange
that we meet with DEP and address all those issues. I think that is
the best venue, being today that it was supposed to be discussed. And
having to be in two places, I definitely didn't want to delegate my
duties as chairman and spokesman of the board.
Since the date has changed, I'm more than willing to address
these issues at (sic) April 8th when they do come up, if we can't settle
them beforehand.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, if it's all right with you, I
would like to accompany you and also announce that it's a -- that
we're going to both be there. And I think that if we check with the
county attorney, there's a way it can be done through legal notice.
MR. MANALICH: We'll have to look very closely at that.
There's a couple of issues that are involved, one is, in regard to the
Page 195
March 25, 2003
whole board, there is -- attorney general's opinion out there
indicating you cannot have a board meeting normally in other
locations other than the county seat. Now, that can be, perhaps,
worked around. We have in the past done it once before.
The other issue would be, if we only have -- if we have two
going, it would not be a county commission meeting. Perhaps, if you
did not direct comments to each other, then that would be all right.
But we'll have to look closely at that, and obviously the state will be
on the other side so -- and they're the ones that interpret that law, so
we'll talk with them about it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. And the other issue, April 8th
is the Board of Commissioners meeting. And hopefully
Commissioner Halas and the other commissioners will be available
to be here at the meeting.
I appreciate Mr. Coyle's -- Commissioner Coyle's changing his
schedule, and I appreciate Commissioner Coletta being up there to
lobby the lawmakers in Tallahassee today. So what's the pleasure of the board?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I would like to reemphasize
Commissioner Coyle's suggestion of sending the attorney that was
most intimately involved with this process from our staff to go up
there. I feel that they would be a great representative and give the
backup to Commissioner Coletta, as long as it's his area that's going
to be mostly affected. I think the rest of us have to stay in place
because it's a regular scheduled board meeting.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: How about Marty Chumbler? Is
she at all relevant to this particular issue?
MR. MANALICH: Yes. Ms. Marjorie Student in our office has
mentioned that we might be able to use those resources there.
They're under retention agreement and are familiar with, perhaps,
Page 196
March 25, 2003
many of these issues.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay, good.
MR. MANALICH: It's certainly a good option.
MS. STUDENT: Just for the record, Marjorie Student, assistant
county attorney.
The firm of Carlton Field, Ms. Chumbler and Ms. Linnan, in
particular, are very familiar with administration commission and
government -- our governing cabinet procedures. So I had made that
suggestion to Mr. Manalich.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay, good.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. So the direction is -- let me
clarify it -- if-- we'll try to settle these issues before the next
governor's meeting on April 8th, and if we can't, we would like the
county manager's representative and somebody from the county
attorney's office and possibly our legal -- outside legal staff of
Carlton and Fields, is it--
MR. MANALICH: Correct.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- to be there representing the Board
of Commissioners, or are we sending Commissioner Coletta in that
case?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Would you rather go?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'd be more than willing to go,
but one of the things we're going to have to keep in mind because of
the fact we're going to draw it out, it's going to require a -- I don't
think we'll ever get a plane at the last minute. Believe me, these rates
for these planes are just unbelievable, especially if you schedule one
at the last minute. So I think it will necessitate the three of us riding
up together in a car and also riding back again, because --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And we'll work out those details of it
after we get board direction on the item. So, again, is the chairman
going to represent the Board of Commissioners or is Commission
Page 197
March 25, 2003
Coletta? What's the wishes of the board?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I think the proper person is the
chairman, if you could go.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And I think this is an important issue
to -- that the commission is represented, but, again, we need to try to
settle this issue before it gets to the governor's cabinet.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Correct.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I think we should settle it, too.
Do you feel comfortable going up? Are you real -- I wouldn't
feel comfortable going up to defend this position because I don't
think I'm as well versed. But if you feel comfortable, you are the
chairman.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And I feel fine with it.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: The only problem I'm having
right now that I don't quite understand is, why when the meeting was
originally scheduled for today -- and that's why I'm up here now is
because I couldn't get the flights changed again -- it was just fine the
other week. And now all of a sudden this week it's not a good idea
for Commissioner Coletta to represent his own district on matters
that pertain mainly to his district?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, I'm not sure if that's true,
Commissioner. What it is is we had commissioners -- you were
going to be up there anyways. Commissioner Coyle was going to be
up there also. His schedule has changed. And Commissioner Halas
was still going to be gone, which he is now. So we wouldn't have
had even a simple majority for today's meeting.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, in all honestly --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I mean, next week is --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- I have no problems with you
going up, but I would also like to be there.
Page 198
March 25, 2003
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, I guess that's your prerogative
whether you want to be at the next meeting or be at -- in Tallahassee.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, I was kind of hoping that
the motion would also include me in it if it's going to include you.
We haven't even explored the possibility of rearranging the
meeting date so maybe some other commissioners could go if they
want to see what the process is all about, possibly doing the meeting
the following Tuesday and have a meeting the following Tuesday
after that. That's another possibility.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Well, the governor meets on
the same time that the board meets.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's correct.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And rearranging the calendar, I'm
not sure if that's a proper thing.
What I'm hearing is -- and I'm more than willing to represent the
Board of Commissioners at the governor's cabinet April 8th if need
be, and we're going to try to settle this issue beforehand. So that's a consensus on the board.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm sorry. Consensus? I
haven't heard anybody say anything.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. I just think it's a matter of
form that an issue that's going to be taken up by the governor and his
cabinet concerning Collier County should -- should -- that we should
have the chairman of the commissioners representing us at that point
in time.
I do not believe that it is reasonable for us to risk the sunshine
law violation potential for having more than one commissioner being
there. There is no way that you can avoid talking about things that
we are likely to be voting on.
So I don't know -- even if you advertised it as a meeting, it's so
Page 199
March 25, 2003
inconvenient for the public in Collier County. They couldn't
possibly attend the meeting. So in that way, I think it would violate
the sunshine law.
So the point really is, I believe, that -- to be on the safe side, we
should have one person there. And when it comes time to represent
the Collier County Commission, I can't think of a better person than
the chairman, and I would have to believe that Governor Bush would
be sitting there thinking the same thing. Did we not think it's --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I want to make a point, some of
the reasons why the governor is bringing these issues up is because
of some of the intervention measures that I had taken on the Picayune
State Forest and other parts of it, and I would assume he would want
the person that was directly involved in working with the public on
this issue.
But, you know, I'm here to serve the best interest, you know, of
the -- of Collier County. I know before it was just fine for me to
come up here, now it isn't. I think there's some sort of undercurrent
where somebody's afraid I'm not going to read a script.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, now don't take this
personally. I mean, that's not the point here.
As I understand it, we asked you to represent us while you were
there because you were going to be there anyway. And that was the
reason that was done. I would hate to see you take this personally
because --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, I'll survive whatever the
decision is, and I'll survive it very well. It's just that -- I mean, I
stated my opinion. I guess the big thing is is I wish Commissioner
Halas was still here so we could get a true reading of the commission
right across the board. I'd still like to be the one to represent the
commission. Obviously you and Henning feel the other way. If
Commissioner Fiala feels that way too, then that will end this
Page 200
March 25, 2003
discussion.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, as far as the sunshine law
goes that you've pointed out, Commissioner Coyle, when the
governor invited all of us there, apparently he didn't have a problem
with the sunshine law. I guess he expected us to act like sunshine
law abiders.
And I agree that Commissioner Henning, being our chairman,
should go up there. But I would hate to stop Commissioner Coletta.
He's been so -- so deeply involved in this whole thing. He knows all
the players and he's gone to all the meetings. I would think that it's a
slap in the face for him if we say he can't go.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And I don't think anybody has stated
that, Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, but I -- I'm just saying that I --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yep.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: He should go too.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: That's up to him whether he wants to
go. So that's where we're at on this.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, I will say to you that you have a
number of super majority items for the next board agenda that are
coming from community development. And if you're going to make
a decision that's going to require that commissioners can go and more
than -- to be a super majority, you've got to have four votes.
And if we're going to do that, then I would suggest that we
postpone the next board meeting to an alternate date, different week
or Wednesday instead of Tuesday or whatever, because there are
significant community development items on the next agenda that are
coming before the board, or basically that agenda's going to be pretty
much --
Page 201
March 25, 2003
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I would be for that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: If you're going to postpone it,
you're going to have one more absence. That is, if you postpone it
anytime during that week or early next week, so that won't solve the
problem.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. We'll have to work out those
details before the next meeting. So there is a consensus on the board.
County manager, do you have any other staff communication?
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, this has to do with right-in,
right-out going onto Palm Drive, but I'm going to wait till the next
time we meet.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Closing comments, no. It's
been very interesting doing the meeting over the phone, far removed
from where I'd like to be, but so be it. You know, originally I was
scheduled, just for people that are wondering why I'm over the
phone, is the original meeting with the governor was supposed to
take place today, so I changed my flight plan to include being here
for the governor's meeting. Then the governor moved the meeting to
the 8th, and that's where we are with this at this point in time.
But, meanwhile, I'm going to put this -- the rest of this day to
the very best of use, and I'll be reporting back to you on what I find.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Nothing from me.
Item #15B
BCC ENCOURAGING EVERYONE TO SHOW SUPPORT OF
Page 202
March 25, 2003
Ol IR MII,IT ARY.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. Just a little something. I
might look a little overstated with all of red, white, and blue, but I
just wanted to say, I've wrapped myself in the flag today, and I'm
going to continue to do it. And I encourage all of our citizens out
there, wear something to let our people know here that we support
our military over there. And God bless them all, God protect them
all, and God bless America.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, said, thank you.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Way to go, Donna. Good.
Item #15C
DISCIISSION REGARDING SIGN ORDINANCE
CHAIRMAN HENNING: One item that I want to bring up, and
that is an old item, signs.
Commissioners, the board approved the new sign ordinance
keeping with the character of the community, but I can tell you that
in my opinion, it's going to bring a lot of problems for the mom and
pop businesses out in Collier County because of an old ordinance
that hasn't been enforced, so staff is going to do some amendment --
amendments for the Land Development Code for the Board of
Commissioners' consideration.
And so you'll be seeing those coming up in the spring.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: May I ask, will that include barber
poles?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Isn't there something about barber
poles in that? No, there isn't?
Page 203
March 25, 2003
MR. MUDD: Commissioners, as long-- we've gone through
this. Barber pole is pretty much okay, as long as it's not moving.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
MR. MUDD: Put the barber pole up there and unplug it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Don't put it in your pickup truck.
MR. MUDD: And I think -- and I think we've addressed that
pretty well. And what we're basic -- and what the commissioner is
basically talking about, and the staff is, there are several instances in
the county where you've got a mom and pop that's out there that don't
-- where they don't have the 150 foot in order to put a sign, and yet
they might be behind some other company that's in front, and nobody
even knows that they're there, and the only thing they can use is a
directional sign on the entrance to say, go to -- go to mom and pop's,
and you don't even know what mom and pop's is, so the sign
ordinance is -- could hurt them.
And what we're basically talking about is a -- a commercial
establishment that might be less than 150 but more than 100, and
they might be able to put a sign out there that is smaller than the 150
or above sign, but it at least gives them some identity and people --
and let's them know, and it also won't clutter the particular landscape
and cause a sign eyesore either, so we're looking at that and coming
back with a -- with an alternative there. Just something for you to
look at.
We're going to try to get it implied into this Land Development
Code process to kind of let you know what those are so that you can
see an -- you can see an alternative, and it would have to come to the
board -- what the staff is recommending would have to come to the
board as a variance, and you'd have to hear it to see if it -- if it was
applicable or not.
And the City of Naples uses that same kind, it has to come in
front of their council as a variance, and that variance would have a
Page 204
March 25, 2003
standard that you could fall back on, and that's what we're trying to
come back to the board as a well-thought-out plan in that particular
instance.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commission Coyle wanted to say
something on the topic.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes, I'd like to make a brief
comment concerning that.
You know, it's important that we get that done pretty quickly,
you know. We are causing a lot of people a lot of consternation.
They don't know what is permitted and what isn't permitted, and
some of them are contacting us about the code enforcement people
forcing them to remove signs.
It was sort of my understanding that what we were going to do
is to hold back on forcing people to remove these things till we
clarified some of these issues.
And so we're going from day-to-day catching a lot of flack from
people who are being forced to do certain things that, perhaps, we
don't really intend.
And at some point in time we've got to tell people, and we've
got to be very public about what the changes are that we're going to
make. And we've been -- we've been -- we've gone now from, what,
1st of February to 1st of April now almost, and we don't yet have
anything that we can publish that will tell people what signs are
permitted and what we're really going to do. I'm talking about the
things we're going to change now, not the things that have already
been included in the ordinance, but the things we're planning on
changing.
And if I were sitting out there in a business and I didn't -- I
didn't know whether I was going to have to remove this thing or keep
it, I would be pretty upset, too, and I think we need to let people
know something soon.
Page 205
March 25, 2003
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner, I think the changes
we're going to see come forward, none of the signs are going to be
permitted. It's something that's going to fit the character of the
community and also there has to be a variance process, so --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, I thought we were -- we had
given staff direction to come back to us with some recommendations
about the kinds of lighted signs you could have in a window that
would not be -- would not be neon.
MR. MUDD: We're still coming, Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And so -- but, you see, people are
sitting out there not knowing what's going to come, and they don't
know what to do. We make them turn off the neon signs, but we
haven't given them an alternative. And we just need to -- need to let
people know what we're doing here, okay?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I guess that's -- we'll have to figure
out how we're going to do that, when we're not sure if the board's
going to approve any kind of amendment of the Land Development
Code.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. Well, I just think that if the
people know that there are certain things that we're going to be
considering, if they understand that these are things that we're
thinking about changing, they'll feel more comfortable about the fact
that we're really doing something. But so far, there's no indication
that we are.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, I'll get you a list before the next
board meeting of those things that we're taking a look at so that you
can -- we can get that out to the public to let them know. Now, it
won't be a vote by the board --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's right.
MR. MUDD: -- but it will give them an idea of what the
consideration is so that you have it, and I'll make sure that it's an item
Page 206
March 25, 2003
on your next agenda so that you've got an idea of what we believe --
what you told us to do and what has come up in that process since.
I will tell you the code enforcement is going out there, and they
are looking and fixing the big violators. If you have a sign that is
rather large for your -- for your gas station and it doesn't fit, i.e., the
Racetrac sign, okay, that's sitting on 41, they're giving them a notice
of violation and telling them to take it down. That isn't even
something that the board's even contemplating, okay, as far as the
change is concerned. They're basically saying, hey, you don't fit at
all. Fix it. And that's what we're going out and we're trying to get at.
And I will tell you, once all of that's done, you will have acted
before we ever get down to the point in time of an open/close sign as
far as a notice of violation, because we've got so many other big
items to get at before we even get down to the nitty-gritty ones.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Will you include -- thank you.
Will you include a timeline so that -- because we're all writing people
MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER FIALA:
on the horizon--
MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER FIALA:
further to go on.
I'm so glad you brought it up.
Thank you.
I've already written it down --
-- and telling them this is looming
-- and yet, we've had nothing
CHAIRMAN HENNING: We're adjourned.
Thank you.
*****Commissioner Coyle moved, seconded by Commissioner Fiala
and carried 4/0 (Commissioner Halas absent), that the following
items under the Consent and Summary Agendas be approved and/or
Page 207
March 25, 2003
adopted: *****
Item gl 6Al
CONTRACT #03-3456 FOR PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING
SERVICES FOR ENGINEERING ANALYSIS AND RATE
TESTIMONY FOR ORANGETREE UTILITIES PURSUANT TO
ORDINANCE NO. 96-6, AS AMENDED, IN THE AMOUNT OF
$77,194- AWARDED TO HARTMAN AND ASSOCIATES: INC.
Item #16A2
SATISFACTION OF LIEN FOR CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD
CASE NO. 1995-406 STYLED BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, VS. NANCY
MILLS REGARDING VIOLATION OF ORDINANCES NO. 99-51
OF THE COIJlJlF, R COl JNTY IJAND DEVEI,OPMF, NT CODE
Item #16A3
REVIEW TOURIST DEVELOPMENT RELATED ADVERTISING
AND PROMOTION INVOICES, DETERMINE EXPENDITURES
SERVE A PUBLIC PURPOSE, APPROVE APPROPRIATE
INVOICES FOR PAYMENT DIRECTLY TO VENDORS IN THE
AMOUNT OF $14,067.97 FROM FUND 194 RESERVES, AND
DENY PAYMENT OF INVOICE IN THE AMOUNT OF $3,857 AS
RECOMMENDED BY THE TOURIST DEVELOPMENT
COl INCII~- DENY KEI.I.F.Y SWOFFORD ROY INVOICF.
Item #16A4
Page 208
March 25, 2003
SATISFACTION OF LIEN FOR CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD
CASE NO. 1992-23 STYLED BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA VS. NANCY
MILLS REGARDING VIOLATION OF ORDINANCES NO. 99-51
OF THE COI,IJER COl INTY I,AND DEVEI,OPMENT CODE
Item #16A5
SATISFACTION OF LIEN FOR CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD
CASE NO. 1996-520 STYLED BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA VS. NANCY
MILLS REGARDING VIOLATION OF ORDINANCES NO. 99-51
OF THE COIJ,IER COl JNTY I,AND DEVEIJOPMENT CODE
Item # 16A6
SATISFACTION OF LIEN FOR CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD
CASE NO. 1996-169 STYLED BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA VS. NANCY
MILLS REGARDING VIOLATION OF ORDINANCES NO. 99-51
OF THE COIJJlER COl JNTY I.AND DEVEI~OPMENT CODE
Item #16A7
SATISFACTION OF LIEN FOR CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD
CASE NO. 2002-195 STYLED BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA VS. NANCY
MILLS REGARDING VIOLATION OF ORDINANCES NO. 99-51
OF THE COIJJER COl JNTY I,AND DEVEIJOPMENT CODE
Item #16A8
Page 209
March 25, 2003
SATISFACTION OF LIEN FOR CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD
CASE NO. 2002-21 STYLED BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA VS.
DONALD SAPORITO REGARDING VIOLATION OF
ORDINANCES NO. 99-51 OF THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND
DEVEIJOPMENT CODE
Item #16A9
RESOLUTION 2003-121 RE: FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE
ROADWAY, DRAINAGE, WATER AND SEWER
IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE FINAL PLAT OF "PELICAN
MARSH l INIT TWEIJVE"
Item #16Al0
RESOLUTION 2003-122 RE: FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE
ROADWAY, DRAINAGE, WATER AND SEWER
IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE FINAL PLAT OF "KATHLEEN
COl ~RT"
Item #16Al 1
RESOLUTION 2003-123 THROUGH RESOLUTION 2003-124 RE:
CODE ENFORCEMENT TJIEN RESOIJI ITION APPROVAI,S
Item #16A12
CONTRACT WITH THE BUREAU OF SURVEYING AND
MAPPING OF THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
Page 210
March 25, 2003
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION (FDEP) AS A SINGLE
SOURCE VENDOR FOR SECOND ORDER VERTICAL
CONTROL ESTABLISHED THROUGH GOLDEN GATE
ESTATES; 1N THF, AMOI JNT OF $55;049
Item #16A13
ALLOCATION OF FUNDS FROM THE RESPECTIVE IMPACT
FEE TRUST FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $4,721.59 FOR
LITIGATION RELATED EXPENSES, AS AUTHORIZED BY
THE COLLIER COUNTY CONSOLIDATED IMPACT FEE
ORDINANCE, 2001-13 - AS DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE
SIIMMARY
Item #16A14
BID #03-3479 IN THE NOT TO EXCEED AMOUNT OF $50,000
FOR CONSTRUCTION OF AN ARTIFICIAL REEF - AWARDED
TO MCCI II J~FJY M AR INF,; INC.
Item #16A15
ONE (1) IMPACT FEE REIMBURSEMENT OF $525.00 DUE TO
BUILDING PERMIT CANCELLATION- TO BE PAID TO
RANDAI,IJ C. MF, RRFJJ~; JR.
Item # 16Al 6- Moved to Item # 10L
Item #16Al 7
RESOLUTION 2003-125 RE: INCREASE TO THE MAXIMUM
Page 211
March 25, 2003
HOME SALES PRICE ($150,000) IN COLLIER COUNTY FOR
ALL FLORIDA HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION (FHFC)
PROGRAMS
Item #16A18
BUDGET AMENDMENT TRANSFERRING REMAINING
$491,225 FROM "REMITTANCE TO PRIVATE
ORGANIZATIONS" LINE ITEM TO "OTHER CONTRACTUAL
SERVICES" LINE ITEM IN THE TOURIST DEVELOPMENT
TAX FUND 194 (ADVERTISING/PROMOTION) TO ESTABLISH
OPERATING BUDGET FOR THE NEWLY FORMED TOURISM
DFiPARTMENT
Item #16A19
TWO (2) IMPACT FEE REIMBURSEMENTS TOTAL1NG
$13,833.64 DUE TO BUILDING PERMIT CANCELLATIONS-
TO BE PAID TO MS. CYNTHIA SKAHILL ($5,491.82) AND
KAYE HOMES ($8~341.82)
Item # 16B 1
WORK ORDER UNDER CONTRACT #01-3290 TO WILSON
MILLER IN THE AMOUNT OF $106,000 AND A BUDGET
AMENDMENT FOR THE FOREST LAKES MSTU FOR THE
PURPOSE OF PRODUCING A DRAINAGE AND ROADWAY
IMPROVEMENTS MASTER PLAN WITHIN THE FOREST
I,AKES DISTRICT
Item #16B2
Page 212
March 25, 2003
BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR THE RADIO ROAD
BEAUTIFICATION MSTU FOR THE PURPOSE OF
REAPPORTIONING THE ADOPTED BUDGETED FUNDS TO
MAINTAIN DEVONSHIRE BOULEVARD LANDSCAPED
IMPROVF, MF, NTS IN THF, AMOI JNT OF $45~000
Item #16B3
RESOLUTION 2003-126 RE: EXECUTION OF A FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION LOCAL AGENCY
PROGRAM AGREEMENT FOR THE BEAUTIFICATION
ENHANCEMENTS TO THE HALDEMAN CREEK BRIDGE ON
BAYSHORE DRIVE
Item #16B4
DESIGN APPROVED FOR BUS STOP SHELTERS AND THE
PROPOSED LOCATIONS ON THE PURPLE ROUTE OF THE
COLLIER AREA TRANSIT (CAT) - FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT
OF $40,000.00 ARE BUDGETED IN THE TRA 5307 GRANT
AND ADDITIONAL FUNDING RECEIVED FROM THE
GOI~DF, N GATE MSTIJ
Item #16B5
WORK ORDERS TO MCGEE AND ASSOCIATES, IN THE
AMOUNT OF $23,490, CONTRACT #00-3131 FOR LANDSCAPE
ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES OF 1-75/GOLDEN GATE
INTERCHANGE PROJECT
Page 213
March 25, 2003
Item # 16B6
PROPERTY TRANSFER AND CONSTRUCTION AGREEMENT
WITH THE ESTATES AT TWIN EAGLES, LTD., FOR
CONVEYANCE RIGHT-OF-WAY AND OTHER EASEMENTS
AND CONSTRUCTION OF A WILDLIFE CROSSING. (FISCAL
IMPACT: A SAVINGS OF NOT IJF, SS THAN $59;400)
Item # 16B7
MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE STATE OF
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (FDOT) AND
COLLIER COUNTY TO AUTHORIZE THE TRANSFER OF
RESPONSIBILITIES FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF
DRAINAGE PERMITS ON STATE ROADWAYS FROM FDOT
TO COI,I,IF, R COl JNTY
Item #16B8
COUNTY INCENTIVE GRANT PROGRAM (CIGP)
AMENDMENT EXTENSION FOR LIVINGSTON ROAD FROM
P1NE RIDGE ROAD TO IMMOKALEE ROAD (FM #410014 1 54
01) PROJF, CT #62071
Item # 16C 1
WITHDRAWAL OF THE PERMIT APPLICATION FOR
HIDEAWAY BEACH ACCESS IMPROVEMENTS (TIGERTAIL
TO HIDF, AWAY CONNF, CTION): PROJFJCT 90511
Item #16C2
Page 214
March 25, 2003
WORK ORDER HM-FT-03-01 TO HOLE MONTES, INC., FOR
PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING SERVICES RELATED TO
RAW WATER BOOSTER PUMPING STATION PERFORMANCE
TESTING AND OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE MANUAL
1N THE AMOIJNT OF $24~740~ PROJECT 70057
Item # 16C3
CHANGE ORDER FOR AN ADDITIONAL $7,631 IN
CONSULTING FEES TO PUBLIC RESOURCES MANAGEMENT
GROUP (PRMG) FOR THE COLLIER COUNTY WATER-SEWER
DISTRICT IISER RATE STIIDY
Item # 16C4
WORK ORDER FOR A VIDEO THROUGH SURVEY OF
VANDERBILT AND NAPLES BEACHES AS REQUIRED BY
THE ROCK REMOVAL PLAN, PROJECT 90507, IN THE
AMOUNT OF $27,925 (CONTRACT NUMBER 01-3271-FIXED
TERM PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR
COASTAL MANAGEMENT PROJECTS) - WITH COASTAL
PI,ANNING & ENG1NEF, RING
Item #16C5 - Moved to Item #10K
Item # 16C6
AWARD RFP #02-3356- SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS SYSTEM
PROGRAMMING, APPROVE CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONS
AND AUTHORIZE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN A CONTRACT WITH
Page 215
March 25, 2003
DUA COMPUTER RESOURCES INC., IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO
EXCEED $143,500 AND APPROVE A BUDGET AMENDMENT-
WITH D! JA COMPI JTER RESOI IRCES~ INC.
Item # 16C7
TERMINATE THE JANUARY 2, 2001 RENTAL OF TWO (2)
PITNEY-BOWES DOCUMATCH INTEGRATED MAIL
SYSTEMS AND APPROVAL TO RENT TWO (2) NEW PITNEY-
BOWES DOCUMATCH INTEGRATED MAIL SYSTEMS TO
COMMENCE OCTOBER 1, 2003 - FOR A PERIOD OF THREE
(3'} YEARS
Item # 16C8
WORK ORDER #UC-020 WITH KYLE CONSTRUCTION INC.,
IN THE AMOUNT OF $187,600 FOR WORK ASSOCIATED
WITH THE PRICE STREET WATER MAIN ASSESSMENT
PROJECT
Item #16C9
WORK ORDER WM-FT-03-03 TO WILSON MILLER, INC., FOR
PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING SERVICES RELATED TO
NORTH COUNTY REGIONAL WATER TREATMENT PLANT
RELIABILITY ASSESSMENT AND MAINTENANCE
AGREEMENT SYSTEM IN THE AMOUNT OF $48,000,
PROJF, CT 70094
Item # 16D 1
Page 216
March 25, 2003
SUMMER FOOD SERVICE PROGRAM GRANT IN THE
AMOUNT OF $461,600 - FUNDED BY THE UNITED STATES
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE FOOD AND NUTRITION
SERVICE AND ADMINISTERED BY THE FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF EDI ICATION
Item # 16E 1
CHANGE ORDER NO. 1, PHASE 2, AMENDMENT NO. 1 FOR
ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES FOR THE DESIGN OF THE
COURTHOUSE ANNEX, CONTRACT 00-3173 IN THE
AMOIJNT OF $69~716- WlTH SPlI.l.lS CANDEI.A: DMJM
Item # 16F 1
OCHOPEE FIRE CONTROL DISTRICT'S APPLICATION FOR A
MATCHING (50/50) GRANT OFFERED BY THE FLORIDA
DIVISION OF FORESTRY IN THE AMOUNT OF $4,230 AND
APPROVES THE NECESSARY l:II IDGET AMENDMENTS
Item #16F2
APPROPRIATE ISLES OF CAPRI FIRE CONTROL DISTRICT
PROTECTIVE INSPECTION FEE REVENUE IN THE AMOUNT
OF $26,000 BY APPROVING THE NECESSARY BUDGET
AMENDMENT
Item #16F3
BUDGET AMENDMENT REPORT-BUDGET AMENDMENT
#03-221 FOR $41 TO BALANCE THE VANDERBILT AREA
Page 217
March 25, 2003
ST[ IDY PROJECT IN THE SAP SYSTEM
Item #1611
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE-FILED AND/OR
REFERRED
The following miscellaneous correspondence, as presented by
the Board of County Commissioners, has been directed to the various
departments as indicated:
Page 218
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
March 25, 2003
FOR BOARD ACTION:
1. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS TO FILE FOR RECORD WITH ACTION AS DIRECTED:
Co
DJ
Clerk of Courts: Submitted for public record, pursuant to Florida Statutes,
Chapter 136.06(1), the disbursements for the Board of County Commissioners for
the period:
Districts:
The Ochopee Fire Control District Advisory Board - Minutes for January
13, 2003.
Minutes:
Pelican Bay Services Advisory Board - Agenda for March 5, 2003,
Minutes of February 5, 2003.
Collier County Planning Commission CORRECTED Agenda - March 6,
2003.
3. Collier County Library Advisory Board - Agenda for February 26, 2003.
4. Development Services Advisory Committee - Agenda for March 5, 2003.
5. Collier County Citizens Corps Advisory Committee - February 20, 2003.
Other:
1) Collier Park Commerce Owner's Association -Notice of Annual Meeting of
Members April 1, 2003, Minutes of December 13, 2002
H:Data/Format
March 25, 2003
Item # 16J 1
DOCUMENT FOR SEVENTH YEAR STATE CRIMINAL ALIEN
ASSISTANCE PROGRAM (SCAAP) GRANT FI INDS
Item # 16J2
DESIGNATATION OF THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE AS THE
"OFFICIAL APPLICANT" OF THE UNITED STATES
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, BUREAU OF JUSTICE
ASSISTANCE, BULLETPROOF VEST PARTNERSHIP GRANT
PROGRAM, TO ACCEPT GRANTS WHEN AWARDED AND
APPROVE APPIJCAFtlJE BI ~DGET AMENDMENTS
Item # 16J3
DETERMINATION OF WHETHER THE PURCHASES OF
GOODS AND SERVICES DOCUMENTED IN THE DETAILED
REPORT OF OPEN PURCHASE ORDERS SERVE A VALID
PUBLIC PURPOSE AND AUTHORIZE THE EXPENDITURE OF
COUNTY FUNDS TO SATISFY SAID PURCHASES. DETAILED
REPORT OF OPEN PURCHASE ORDERS IS ON DISPLAY IN
THE COUNTY MANAGER'S OFFICE, 2ND FLOOR, W.
HARMON TI JRNER BI III,DING
Item # 16K1
STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT RELATIVE TO THE FEE
SIMPLE ACQUISITION OF PARCEL 178 IN THE LAWSUIT
STYLED COLLIER COUNTY V. BIG CORKSCREW ISLAND FIRE
DISTRICT, ET AL, IMMOKALEE ROAD, PROJECT NO. 60018 -
Page 219
March 25, 2003
STAFF TO DEPOSIT THE SUM OF $2400.00 INTO THE COURT
REGISTRY
Item # 16K2
OFFER OF JUDGMENT RELATIVE TO THE FEE SIMPLE
ACQUISITION OF PARCEL 181 IN THE LAWSUIT STYLED
COLLIER COUNTY ~ BIG CORKSCREW FIRE DISTRICT, ET AL,
CASE NO. 02-2218-CA (IMMOKALEE ROAD PROJECT #60018)
- STAFF TO DEPOSIT $3,000 INTO THE REGISTRY OF THE
COI~RT
Item # 16K3
OFFER OF JUDGMENT RELATIVE TO THE FEE SIMPLE
ACQUISITION OF PARCEL 186 IN THE LAWSUIT STYLED
COLLIER COUNTY V. MANUEL ALVAREZ, ETAL, CASE NO. 02-
2182-CA (IMMOKALEE ROAD PROJECT #60018)- $3,000 TO
BF, PAID INTO THE REGISTRY OF THF. COl IRT
Item #16K4
OFFER OF JUDGMENT RELATIVE TO THE FEE SIMPLE
ACQUISITION OF PARCEL 174 IN THE LAWSUIT STYLED
COLLIER COUNTY V. MICHAEL S. COMBS, ET AL, CASE NO.
02-2315-CA (IMMOKALEE ROAD PROJECT #60018)- $3,730
TO BE PAID INTO THE REGISTRY OF THE COIIRT
Item # 16K5
OFFER OF JUDGMENT RELATIVE TO THE FEE SIMPLE
Page 220
March 25, 2003
ACQUISITION OF PARCEL 185 IN THE LAWSUIT STYLED
COLLIER COUNTY V. MANUEL AL VAREZ, ETAL, CASE NO. 02-
2182-CA (IMMOKALEE ROAD PROJECT #60018)- $5,553.90 TO
BE PAID INTO THE REGISTRY OF THE COl JRT
Item #17A
TO FIE CONTINIIED 1NDEFINITEI~Y. AN ORDINANCE
AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 02-43, THE BALMORAL
PUD, TO CORRECT A SCRIVENER'S ERROR IN SECTION 1.2,
LEGAL DESCRIPTION; SECTION 2.3, DESCRIPTION OF
PROJECT PLAN AND PROPOSED LAND USES; SECTION 3.6,
LANDSCAPING AND BUFFERING REQUIREMENTS, SECTION
5.7.K, TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT COMMITMENTS,
AND FlY PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE
There're being no further business for the good of the County,
the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 2:10 p.m.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS/EX
OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF
SPECIAL DISTRICTS UNDER ITS
ATTEST:
Page 221
March 25, 2003
DWIGHT:E: BROCK, CLERK
s 4 9nat~e '~ ~
These minutes approved by the Board on
as presented ~ or as co~ected
TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF GREGORY COURT
REPORTING SERVICE, INC. BY TERRI LEWIS
Page 222