Loading...
Agenda 12/15/2009 Item #16K 4 Agenda Item No. 16K4 December 15, 2009 Page 1 of 35 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Recommendation to authorize the County Attorney to advertise and bring back for Board consideration an Ordinance establishing the Habitat Conservation Plan Advisory Committee to assist the Board of County Commissioners in determining the feasibility of developing and implementing a Habitat Conservation Plan to protect red-cockaded woodpeckers in the North Belle Meade Overlay area. OBJECTIVE: To obtain the Board of County Commissioners' (Board) authorization to advertise and bring back for consideration an Ordinance which will establish the Habitat Conservation Plan Advisory Committee to assist the Board in detennining the feasibility and desirability of developing a Habitat Conservation Plan to protect red-cockaded woodpeckers in the North Belle Meade Overlay area. - CONSIDERATIONS: The Board initially established the Habitat Conservation Plan Committee as an ad hoc committee by approval of Resolution No. 2005-174, and this ad hoc committee's tenn eventually sunsetted on September 12, 2009. At its September 29, 2009 meeting (Item 10-A), the Board received and discussed the Committee's Habitat Conservation Plan Application for red-cockaded woodpeckers. To aceommodate the Committee's request to continue its work on the Habitat Conservation Plan, the Board authorized re-establishment of this ad hoc committee as an advisory committee. The proposed Ordinance will establish the Habitat Conservation Plan Advisory Committee If approved, our Office will advertise and bring back the attached Ordinance for Board consideration. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: The proposed Ordinance was drafted by the Office of the County Attorney and is legally sufficient for Board action. - STW FISCAL IMP ACT: The cost of advertising the Ordinance is estimated at $300, GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMP ACT: None. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board authorizes the County Attorney's Office to advertise and bring back for the Board's consideration the attached Ordinance establishing the Habitat Conservation Plan Advisory Committee to assist the Board in detennining the feasibility and desirability of developing a Habitat Conservation Plan to protect red-cockaded woodpeckers in the North Belle Meade Overlay area. Prepared By: Steven T Williams, Assistant County Attorney .--. Item Number: Item Summary: Meeting Date: Agenda Item No, 16K4 December 15, 2009 Page 2 of 35 COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 16K4 Recommendation to authorize the County Attorney to advertise and bring back for Board consideration an Ordinance establishing the Habitat Conservation Plan Advisory Committee to assist the Board of County Commissioners in determining the feasibility of developing and implementing a Habitat Conservation Plan to protect red-cockaded woodpeckers in the North Belle Meade Overlay area. 12/15/20099:00:00 AM Approved By Steven Williams County Attorney Assistant County Attorney Date County Attorney 11/24/200910:31 AM Approved By William D. Lorenz, Jr., P.E. Community Development & Environmental Services Director - COES Engineering Services Date Engineering & Environmental Services 11/30/200911:07 AM Approved By Jeff Klatzkow County Attorney Date Approved By 12/1/20094:02 PM OMS Coordinator County Manager's Office Date Office of Management & Budget 1217120093:41 PM Approved By John A. Yonkosky Office of Management & Budget Director - Management and Budget Date Office of Management & Budget 1217/20093:58 PM Aaenda item t~o. 16K4 "December 15, 2009 Page 3 of 35 ORDINANCE NO. 2009- AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, TO ESTABLISH THE HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN COMMITTEE AS AN ADVISORY COMMITTEE; PROVIDING FOR CREATION AND PURPOSE; PROVIDING FOR TERMS, MEMBERSHIP AND ATTENDANCE; PROVIDING FOR OFFICERS, QUORUM AND COMPENSATION; PROVIDING FOR FUNCTIONS POWERS AND DUTIES; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICT AND SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR INCLUSION IN THE CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners has expressed a desire to create a Habitat Conservation Plan Advisory Committee as an advisory committee to assess the feasibility of developing and implementing a Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) for red-coekaded woodpeckers (RCWs) in the North Belle Meade Overlay area and to provide a recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners as to the desirability of the County to pursue the development of said HCP, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that: SECTION ONE: CREATION AND PURPOSE Pursuant to the provisions of Collier County Ordinance No. 2001-55, the Board of County Commissioners hereby establishes the Habitat Conservation Plan Advisory Committee (the "Committee") as an advisory committee to assist the Board of County Commissioners in determining the feasibility and desirability of developing and implementing a Habitat Conservation Plan to provide for the protection of red-cockaded woodpeckers (RCWs) in the North Belle Meade Overlay area. SECTION TWO: TERMS, MEMBERSHIP AND ATTENDANCE The Committee is hereby created as an Advisory Committee. Membership of the Agenda Item No. 16K4 December 15, 2009 Page 4 of 35 Committee shall be sought and appointed in accordance with Collier County Ordinance No. 2001-55 or its successor ordinance. The Committee shall be comprised of five (5) members. To the maximum extent possible, the Committee membership should have representation from various stakeholder groups including, but not limited to, potentially affected property owners, the development community, and environmental interests. A resident of the North Belle Meade Overlay District is desired for the Committee, but not required. The members shaH serve at the pleasure of the Board of County Commissioners. The County Manager shaH select a staff liaison to attend the Committee meetings as needed and assist the Committee. If any member of the Committee is absent from two (2) or more consecutive meetings or one-half of the meetings in a given year without a satisfactory excuse, such member's position may be declared vacant by the Board of County Commissioners as prescribed by CoHier County Ordinance No. 2001-55, as amended, or its successor ordinance. SECTION THREE: OFFICERS, QUORUM AND COMPENSATION At the Committee's first meeting, the membership shaH elect a Chair and Vice-Chair. Thereafter, Chair members shall be elected annually. The presence of a majority of the voting members shall constitute a quorum, The Committee shall adopt rules and procedures for the transaction of business and shaH keep records of meetings, findings and determinations. The members of the Committee shall serve without compensation, but may be reimbursed for travel, mileage and/or per diem expenses. SECTION FOUR: FUNCTIONS, POWERS AND DUTIES The functions, powers and duties of the Committee shaH be: A. To prepare a Habitat Conservation Planning Assistance grant application pursuant to Section 6 of the Endangered Species Act to assist with the preparation of this Habitat Conservation Plan. The application will include concepts for incentivizing the plan to achieve property owner cooperation and adequate compensation for participation. These ideas or alternatives will be fuHy developed once the grant is received and implemented and before the HCP is approved by the Board of County Commissioners or the United States Fish and Wildlife Service. The application will be brought to the Board of County 2 Agenda Item No. 16K4 December 15, 2009 Page 5 of 35 Commissioners for Board approval before the grant application is submitted to the USFWS in August of20l0. B. To coordinate preparation of a Habitat Conservation Plan for the North Belle Meade Overlay including coordination with the United States Fish and Wildlife Service in preparation for approval by the Board of County Commissioners. C. To serve as a forum for community review and input to the Committee in its drafting of the application and developing concepts for incentivizing the plan to achieve property owner cooperation and adequate compensation for participation. All meetings shall be open to the public and shall be governed by the Florida' Government in the Sunshine Law. All meetings shall be held after reasonable public notice is provided as to the location, time and subject matter of the meetings. SECTION FIVE: CONFLICT AND SEVERABILITY. In the event this Ordinance conflicts with any other ordinance of Collier County or other applicable law, the more restrictive shall apply. If any phrase or portion of the Ordinance is held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion. SECTION SIX: INCLUSION IN THE CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES. The provisions of this Ordinance shall become and be made a part of the Code of Laws and Ordinances of Collier County, Florida. The sections of the Ordinances may be renumbered or relettered to accomplish such, and the word "ordinance" may be changed to "section," "article," or any other appropriate word. SECTION SEVEN: EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall be effective upon filing with the Department of State, o o Agenda Item No. 16K4 December 15, 2009 Page 6 of 35 PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, this _day of ,2009, ATTEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA By: , Deputy Clerk By: DONNA FIALA, CHAIRMAN Approved as to form and Legal sufficiency: Steven T. Williams Assistant County Attorney 4 Agenda Item No. 16K4 December 15, 2009 Page 7 of 35 September 29,2009 Item # lOA RECOMMENDATION TO CONSIDER THE HABIT A T CONSERVATION PLAN ADVISORY COMMITTEES HABITAT CONSERV A TION PLAN APPLICATION FOR RED-COCKADED WOODPECKERS - MOTION TO RESURRECT COMMITTEE, ACCEPT REPORT AND APPLY FOR SECTION 6 GRANT- APPROVED MR. OCHS: Ma'am, I believe you wanted to go to lOA next because we have several members of the public that are still waiting on that one. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes. MR. OCHS: lOA is a recommendation to consider the Habitat Conservation Plan Advisory Committee's habitat conservation plan application for Red-cockaded Woodpeckers. Laura Roy -- excuse me. Laura Roys Gibson, environmental specialist from CDES, will present. MS. GIBSON: Good evening, Commissioners. We're here today for your committee, the Habitat Conservation Plan Advisory Committee, to present their recommendations to you based on your direction last October through resolution 2008-307 which directed the HCP Advisory Committee to develop a habitat conservation plan for the Red-cockaded Woodpecker. The resolution also included that the committee would sunset on September 12th of this year. Here to present their recommendations is the former chair of your committee, Judith Hushon. And I would also include that we do have Fish and Wildlife Service staff from Vero Beach here to answer any questions that you may have. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Sorry you've had to wait here so long, Page 280 Agenda Item No. 16K4 December 15, 2009 Page 8 of 35 September 29, 2009 folks, whoever is here for this item. MS. HUSHON: There are a number of people still here. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Sure has been. MS. HUSHON: Hello, Commissioners. I'm Judy Hushon and, you know, I'm going to go through this fast. Does that sound good? CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, good. MS. HUSHON: Yeah, yeah. I talk fast, so you got to listen-- you got to listen fast. CHAIRMAN FIALA: We'll listen. MS. HUSHON: Okay. We've had a little less than a year -- we started on this. We did what you asked. We've come up with a draft of an HCP for Red-cockaded Woodpeckers. And we finished this draft. It's certainly not final by any means. And even if it -- if it -- it goes on then through negotiations, and through changes that would be suggested. Let me just talk a little bit about, what are RCWs. These are little birds. They live in clusters or groups of eight to ten birds in 55- to 75-year-old slash pines, and they require very little in the mid-story, which is why you kind of have to clean it out. They have a life span of about 20 years, raise about two young a year, and it takes them five to seven years to make one of their cavities. That's part of the reason these poor guys, when people cut down their trees, have such a hard time. They need these old trees, and it takes a long time. Here you can see one of the -- one of the birds. They're actually about this big, and one of their trees. Okay. Our first task was to gather data on where they were in Collier County. Two of the clusters that we -- clustered populations that we know about. One is in Big Cypress National Preserve, is doing fine. Picayune is picking up. They started with three clusters. They're now up to nine. They moved some of the City Gate birds. You guys remember the City Gate stuffwhen they were moving the birds. Page 281 Agenda Item No. 16K4 December 15, 2009 Page 9 of 35 September 29, 2009 Well, some of those -- they're now up to nine clusters, which means they're doing much better down there. Ten is considered good for recovery. Thirty clusters is considered, they can get along on their own and they don't need our help. . A previous exercise had used photo interpretation to try to figure out where the areas were that these birds had -- where we have the trees that could support these birds, and then where the foraging habitat, that means where they eat, are. And you can see the dark green sections in there are where the old trees, old growth pines are located. And the lighter kind of beigey-colored green is where the foraging habitat could be. Okay. Primary needs. We need to maintain those habitats if we're going to maintain the birds. That's really the crux ofthe whole thing. We need to provide corridors between clusters. It turns out that the females move. They leave their birth cluster and will go to another one, and so this keeps the gene pool. This is why -- what happens. But they need to have these corridors on which they can get to another cluster, so that's very important. And we wanted to manage the population across the whole North Belle Meade overlay. That's, again, BMO. The HCP is -- a take is defined by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service as to harm, harass, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, collect any wildlife within the United States, and each of those terms has another full definition on it. If you do anything to disturb their nesting and cavity trees or in that immediate vicinity, that would be considered a take. What would happen under an HCP, habitat conservation plan, is that the county could be given a take permit. They would enter into an MOU, a memorandum of understanding, with the Fish and Wildlife Service. Then the county would get the take permit. And when you came in as a landowner to get a clearly permit of some sort, whether it was to put your house up, put up a garage, driveway, or whether it was Page 282 Agenda Item No. 16K4 December 15, 2009 Page 10 of 35 September 29, 2009 to do agricultural clearing, you would have to go to the county, and then they would do what the Fish and Wildlife Service now normally does, which is specify what -- that this is a take and, therefore, your mitigation is going to be X. Okay. That's -- because you're destroying this much of the land that the Red-cockaded Woodpeckers could have used. That would be -- if an HCP goes into effect, that would be how it would work. So it's -- the county would acquire the take permit, and we'd have to modify some of our growth management plan, LDC, and administrative code to handle these little changes that would occur. All right. We have identified the sections that would have :..- require changing. Any property owner who doesn't want to go along with this, who wants to opt out, can still go back to the service and get their own incidental take permit, or ITP. On July 26th we had a stakeholders meeting at the firehouse in Golden Gate, 20 -- and about 20 residents attended, and it was a good give and take. We gave a little presentation, and then some of our people -- Amber over there -- gave one, and then we had question and answer for about two hours, maybe it was two-and-a-halfhours. It was a good one. And their inputs are reflected in this latest draft. The goals of an HCP. To protect the RCW population to allow responsible development with the protection of these birds. You can have responsible development and these birds. It isn't A or B. It can be A and B. And to speed up the awarding of take permits, what nit's actually not take permits. It would be clearing permits -- what would happen with the county holding the take permit, it would take no more time for that permit than it would take for your permit, your clearing permit to pass through the county's various offices that would go through it now. But now it can take a year to two years to get an ITP from Fish Page 283 Agenda Item No. 16K4 December 15, 2009 Page 11 of 35 September 29, 2009 and Wildlife Service. And the county usually is faster than that, and time is money. Major provisions of the HCP. For NBMO properties, we have to determine the property location of east versus west -- east versus west. And this is just another little map. On this map we have located -- these are where the clusters are that we think about. And we've divided -- this is the east side, this is the west side. We have clusters in the west. The east we don't have clusters. But as a result, they have less stringent requirements for mitigation, given the charts that we came up with. And this is basically the same map as that one. And we have -- arranged the clusters, one of the things you want to do is draw a circle that's about a half a mile in radius, because that is the area that that -- those birds in that cluster need for their foraging and for their clusters to maintain themselves, and so that is a very critical area for them. This is a proposed mitigation table. It's certainly not carved in stone at this point, but there are people who think it's too strict, there are other people who think it's not strict enough, and so that sometimes means you're getting toward the right position. We -- there may be some problems still airing out in this, but it's coming along. Mitigation. There are basically a couple of kinds of mitigation. There's offsite mitigation where you might -- you would donate money, and the money might be -- would be to buy property and manage that property for Red-cockaded Woodpeckers. We've talked with Alex Sulecki about possibly Collier-- Conservation Collier taking on that role. It would mean some changes in how they do their business; however, it's a possibility. They already own one piece of property that has -- that they -- now has RCWs on it, the Nancy Payton Preserve in the northwest comer of North Belle Meade. They've moved some birds onto that location now, so we're -- so off site is one possibility. Page 284 Agenda Item No. 16K4 December 15, 2009 Page 12 of 35 September 29, 2009 Another possibility is on-site mitigation, and we saw that more as landowners who were willing to maintain their property for Red-cockaded Woodpeckers, that means clearing out that mid-story that -- which is also good for fire, because this reduces the fire hazard to those houses. If they would clear out that mid-story -- and most -- a lot of that's Sabal Palms, and we have Melaleuca and things like that in that mid-story. Then -- and maintain it for the RCWs and agree to clear it every so often and keep it clear, then they could reduce by one-half their mitigation requirements. And, again, just keep in mind that the mitigation requirements are only for that portion of their land that are disturbed. If they have a five-acre lot and they disturb a half an acre, which would be the 10 percent, which they could do in North Belle Meade overlay, they would only be talking about mitigation on a half acre, in this case a quarter acre. So we're not talking huge numbers here. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. MS. HUSHON: Translocation is another possibility for these birds, and that's what got the birds back down into Picayune -- yeah, into Picayune, was some of the birds from City Gate went down there, . and plus Roy DeLotelle is here. He's going to talk a little later. He brought the birds down. He also got some birds from, I believe, South Carolina or North Carolina, to mix up the gene pool down there so we'd have breeding success. Translocations. Yes, there are costs associated with translocation, and we want to monitor the success of the trans locations. But they are a way -- when a cluster has to be -- or a cavity tree has to be taken out, it is a way of not losing the birds. Any clearing permit would be affected, residential clearing or agricultural Right to Farm Act. And you say, well, it turns out we have problems with that. It turns out that the county would now have the rights of the federal government. They would be assuming the Page 285 !'Igenda Item No. 16K4 December 15. 2009 Page 13 of 35 September 29, 2009 rights of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service through the memorandum of understanding. And when you assume that, then your rights as a federal agency would trump the state rights on the Right to Farm Act, so you could __ you could enforce the mitigation on a right-to-farm clearing. That's kind of in a nutshell. Use of mitigation funds, purchase RCW habitat, RCW education, trans locating, monitoring. These are all potential uses of funds that would be collected as mitigation moneys. What are the benefits and obstacles? Benefits are that we would keep our RCWs in Collier County. I think that's a big benefit. The county's liability would actually be reduced to challenges that it's not enforcing the ESA, which actually can happen right now on a right to farm, if somebody goes in and just clears. The county actually has some liability that maybe they haven't enforced the Endangered Species Act or informed the owners and the owners have said -- or maybe they sent them a letter but the owners threw it away. Who knows? And it provides stronger protection for the RCWs and has the potential for restoration, and that's really where we'd like to go is restoration. And it promotes ecotourism. People will come from all over to see these little birds. And in fact, somebody who has them on their property has the potential to guide tours to their -- to take people to see them. People would pay good money for that. Obstacles. Many property owners right now have not granted access to their property. You would have to do a survey at the time you wanted to do some of your property clearing, and at that time you would have to grant access to the county to come verify the results of your survey. That's for RCWs. The public has been getting away with not protecting RCWs and doesn't apply for incidental take permits. And you can ask USFWS Page 286 Agenda Item No, 16K4 December 15, 2009 Page 14 of 35 September 29,2009 about how many have been applied for, et cetera. You know, these things -- the clearing just happens. And completing the HCP will require staff time, some staff time and funding, and the county's not completely protected against lawsuits; however, on a Bert Harris claim, you would be protected. Somebody could bring a lawsuit, but you might be able to get it dismissed on summary judgment. And I just -- on that note, I wanted to read what Jeff Wright had written to us, which our committee operated under. You asked questions in 2006, and I was just going to read this. These are the conclusions. There are serious concerns that private development options might be limited as a result of implementation of the proposed RCW plan by actively working with federal contacts and obtaining formal delegation of federal ESA authority and thereby removing itself from the definition ofa government entity, the county would have a very good shield in the event of a Bert Harris claim arising from enforcement of the proposed RCW plan. There are also serious concerns that the failure to make changes in light of county knowledge of our RCWs and their habitat could be construed as knowingly allowing take of endangered RCWs and could result in county liability under the ESA. Many of these concerns would be alleviated if the county were to have measures in place to ensure against development on areas known to contain endangered species or their habitats. Although there are many ways to do this, the proposed RCW plan is one way to put such measures at rest. Future activities. This is kind of where we could go with this. The HCPAC could continue as an advisory committee. We could apply for a U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Section 6 Grant, and that would give us money to actually write the final HCP. We could hire -- use that money to hire professionals to help us put it together and do a better job than we did. I mean, we did this as a committee. Page 287 Agenda Item No. 16K4 December 15, 2009 Page 15 of 35 September 29, 2009 The applications go in in August for the next FY. So, you know, like if we could get an app- -- get this all together, get an application together, get the application submitted in -- by August for Fish and Wildlife Service money. During this time we would also like to engage the Fish and Wildlife Service in dialogue to identify information required to complete the HCP and support the required effort to modify. And we would support any effort -- this would be the future -- to modify the Growth Management Plan and the Land Development Code. We -- what I did was to identify the general sections that would need modification were we to be proceeding in this way. The negotiations, once you have a fairly well completed HCP, may take a year or two with the Fish and Wildlife Service to complete. So there you have it, very quickly. CHAIRMAN FIALA: You did a good job. MS. HUSHON: Very quickly. But the committee has done a great job. I mean, I've had a really good committee, and they've been working and they've been writing, and this is all the committee's work. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. MS. HUSHON: So-- CHAIRMAN FIALA: Now, we have -- well, we had anyway -- I don't know if we still have -- eight speakers. MS. FILSON: Nine. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Nine speakers. MS. FILSON: Now. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Would you-- COMMISSIONER COYLE: Everybody waive. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Would you like to call the speakers. And I have to let everybody know that we ordered some pizza, being that we've been here for about 11 hours. And we'll share it with you even, but we better get some food in. A few -- a few need to have some food or they're going to pass out. Page 288 Agenda Item No, 16K4 December 15, 2009 Page 16 of 35 September 29,2009 So I wanted to just tell you, when it comes, we're going to pay for it and just be so rude as to eat right in front of you, or share it with. Okay. And Sue, would you call the speakers, please. MS. FILSON: Roger Williams. He'll be followed by Gary Beardsley. MR. WILLIAMS: Madam Commissioner, fellow Commissioners, thank you very much for the opportunity to speak. I've never been to one of your meetings before, so there is -- I am really glad that I came to this one. It's been both informative and entertaining. , COMMISSIONER HALAS: We make a lot of sausage. MR. WILLIAMS: Okay. For the record, my name Roger Williams. I am a retired DOD employee. I own a small -- very small parcel up in the northeast comer of North Belle Meade. I didn't go to their meeting because I had another function I had to go to that particular night, but I did look at the stuff on the website, and there are a lot of inconsistencies and contradictions in it. She's addressed a couple of them in her presentation, but the one that really jumped out and grabbed me was the reference material they used indicates -- in fact, it clearly states that only 80-plus year-old longleaf and loblolly pines are suitable for RCW cavities. The HCP developed assumes that the small slash pines in Florida are also suitable. They (sic) may be a few cases where this would work, but in most cases the birds require big, huge, 80-year-old trees, not 6-inch slash pines like the HCP refers to. Let's review a couple of the facts. There are 22 types of woodpeckers in North America. Now, RCW is just one. It is endangered, there's no doubt about that. There's only 1 percent of the total population that we once had left. Almost all of the RCWs are on protected lands today. More than half of them are in the national forests. Overall, a very, very small percent -- is that one minute? I better wrap it up. Better hurry. Page 289 Agenda Item No. 16K4 December 15, 2009 Page ',7 of 35 September 29,2009 A very small percentage exists on private land, and the amount that's in Collier County is even less. Per the National U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the RCW is well on its way to recovery due to a program they refer to as Safe Harbor. It's particularly used and well liked in the Carolinas, and the landowners there are telling local government, which is in their face about, you can't do this like it is here, their message they're taking back is, if you take local government control away and just give us the opportunity to do with our lands, we will give you the habitat and the birds, and the Fish and Wildlife Service acknowledges this has worked and is working very well. The only HCPs in Collier County is the small batch that's out here in North Belle Meade. If you look at the slides from the beginning to end on the -- the committee's presentation there, you will see the numbers going up. It starts with a cluster of six in one up here, then the next one is eight, and it goes up and up and up. Well, you're not seeing these birds, and I'd like to know why they did. In contrast -- CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thanks, Mr. Williams. MR. WILLIAMS: May I have an -- couple of extra -- may I have two extra minutes? I've waited here since nine o'clock this morning to have my say, and if you would afford me that opportunity, I would greatly appreciate it. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. MR. WILLIAMS: I will hurry it up. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Please. MR. WILLIAMS: Apalachicola National Forest in contrast to Collier County has 650 groups compared to the six to ten that are here. Lee County just last week declared the RCW's to be completely gone from Gateway. There were a few up there. Obviously you're aware of the clearing that took place for the community up there. The RCP requires submission of an RCW survey prior to Page 290 Agenda Item No. 16K4 December 15, 2009 Page 18 of 35 September 29,2009 clearing. This survey must be performed, and I quote, by a trained environmental professional familiar with RCW survey protocols and signed, and also -- and it refers to paragraph -- or Appendix A, which is a four-page description of what we're going to do to go out and look for woodpeckers. It assumes that all cavity -- all cavity trees are active unless there have been no activity for five years. If a cavity tree is found active or inactive, it requires the property to be changed in designation, it requires the inspection process to include the -- whether at the time -- the bottom line is that it requires extensive inspection of most trees by highly trained personnel without any definition of what their -- CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Two minutes. SPEAKER: -- license and requirements are. I'll wrap this up. CHAIRMAN FIALA: You have wrapped it up, Mr. Williams. MR. WILLIAMS: I have wrapped it up. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Mr. Williams, thank you. MR. WILLIAMS: I request that you throw this out. This is not a smart thing to do. Do not go forward with this. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, is that what you were trying to say? Okay. MR. WILLIAMS: It is, it is. Thank you very much. MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Gary Beardsley. He'll be followed by Roy DeLotelle. MR. BEARDSLEY: Good evening, Madam Chairman, and also the other commissioners. I don't want to get too much into the history. My name is Gary Beardsley. I live in Golden Gate Estates. In fact, right there's my house, plus I own land in the Belle Meade. It's very bothersome for me -- there's three things I found in life that are most difficult. One is to climb a barbed wire fence that's leaning towards you, and the other is to kiss a girl that's leaning away from you. The third, I've finally figured out after 20 years, is to get the comprehensive land plan in place and operational. Page 291 Agenda Item No. 16K4 December 15. 2009 Page 19 of 35 September 29, 2009 I was the chairman of the Coastal and Conservation Element. We won a state award as the best in the state, and then Neil Dorrill told the commissioners they had to do it, and they said, you mean we've got to meet these deadlines? The problem is, agencies -- Army Corps, state DEP, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife, they're lax and then they're tough, they're lax and then they're tough. Right now the Fish and Wildlife is not doing their job. At the meeting -- public meeting we had, I even asked them. I said, why aren't you doing your job? And they said, well, we don't have the staff and we don't have the resources, money. And -- so if this plan was put in place today, I would be against it; however, I think that it needs to move forward and be massaged. It needs to have input from more citizens from the various environmental organizations and the landowners, of which I'm one, and I think that this may have a chance because, I'll tell you, the agencies are not doing their job. And if you think they are -- I turned in 200 wetland violations to the Army Corps and DEP, and they didn't do one thing about it. I'm an environmental consultant. Thank you very much for your time. I hope you do move this forward. MS. FILSON: Ray DeLotelle. He'll be followed by Bruce Anderson. MR. DeLOTELLE: I'm French, not Italian. It's Roy DeLotelle, but I'm sort of used to the language. I don't necessarily have a horse in this game, so to speak. I'm from Gainesville, Florida. I've been working with Red-cockaded Woodpeckers for 29 years. I've been working with Red-cockadeds here in Collier County for about the last ten years. So Ijust wanted to provide a few "factlets," if you will, that I think might be important. This is part of the south central recovery unit as defined by the Page 292 Agenda Item No. 16K4 December 15, 2009 Page 20 of 35 September 29,2009 Fish and Wildlife Service. And as such, there's 23 small populations of Red-cockadeds in this unit. Over the last ten years, using a lot of the techniques that Judy's suggesting, these populations have increased by over 58 percent. I see I can't compete with that pizza. CHAIRMAN FIALA: You know what, we can hear you better now, now that we're not thinking about-- MR. DeLOTELLE: Right. But in particular, I've worked with Red-cockadeds on Picayune, and although the pines are smaller down there, as the gentleman previously stated, we still can find cavities suitable to do inserts with, and that's the little nest box that you drill out -- you drill out of the pine tree and slap the box in, put some putty in, shim it up, and you've got a ready home for the Red-cockaded Woodpecker. Then you can do your translocation activities by bringing in some young birds and potentially establishing a new young population. Using these techniques, we have grown the population from actually no breeding groups in '99 to eight breeding groups now over the last eight or nine years. The other thing -- one other thing that was mentioned about going to Payton Preserve, there's already Red-cockadeds there, so it probably wouldn't be a good site for translocating birds too. I doubt the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service would permit it, but that's their question. So that's about all I had, unless you-all had some questions for me. Like I said, I have worked with Red-cockadeds for 20-some years, all in Florida for the most part. CHAIRMAN FIALA: There might be questions. I have a couple of commissioners who are on deck, but we wait until after all the speakers. MR. DeLOTELLE: All right, thank you. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. Page 293 Agenda Item No. 16K4 December 15, 2009 Page 21 of 35 September 29, 2009 MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Bruce Anderson. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Nope. MS. FILSON: Michael Ramsey. He'll be followed by Amber Crooks. MR. RAMSEY: What, no Bruce? Oh, man. Good evening, Commissioners. Been an interesting day. I am Mike Ramsey. I'm the president of Ramsey Inc., Environmental Consulting and Ecological Consulting. I'm also a board member on the Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association, of which many of our members are in the North Belle Meade. I'm a certified wildlife biologist and I deal also with these issues of Red-cockadeds and their habitats in this area, and I've been doing it for the last 25 years. The issues that are covered here today, the Golden Gate Area Civic Association holds the position that we do support the implementation ofthis plan. Everything that we've talked about today is already covered by existing state and federal agencies and at no cost to the Collier County residents. It appears, after attending the meetings and looking at the information, that we would be reinventing the wheel at the local level at ten times the cost to the county residents in perpetuity. The solutions that you just heard discussed can be implemented as a private sector solution by the existing consulting staff and the private sector working with landowners applying for permits to the other agencies. So everything we're talking about can be done now at no cost to the residents because it's already handled by other agencies. We feel at the Estates association, the Golden Gate Area Civic Association, that it is unfair that this program would economically ride crippling hard on the backs of the existing property owners in the North Belle Meade. Those property owners already have and are being subjected to many other land use restrictions. Page 294 Agenda Item No. 16K4 December 15, 2009 Page 22 of 35 September 29,2009 We also feel, after talking and after working out there and looking at some of the things that are going to happen in the North Belle Meade, implementation of this plan would create an even further cost to the residents of the county due to the aggressive legal land use scenario it would create. It would create a legal -- a very aggressive land-use-taking scenario the way it's set up. And last, no other county in Florida is considering implementing this plan. It apparently is going to be costly and increases the county's liability not so much in the area of permitting with U.S. Fish and Wildlife, but the issue of land use taking opens up many lawsuits when you're taking away the right of a person to use his land. Thank you for your time. MS. FILSON: Next speaker is Amber Crooks. She'Il be followed by Brad Cornell. Is Brad here? MS. CROOKS: Thanks. Good evening. I'm Amber Crooks from the Conservancy of Southwest Florida. And it's a sight to look from here and see you all chomping on pizza, but I'm so glad you continued this item because we do have a lot of people here with interests, including the Conservancy. And we've participated in the habitat conservation plan process and reaIly had high hopes for this plan. Unfortunately, this HCP does not go far enough to protect the RCW. The HCP had a potential to close a loophole by which many property owners have not been consulting with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for possible impacts to RCWs or their habitat, which is an existing obligation under the Endangered Species Act. While habitat conservation plans have pleasant sounding names, they result in an incidental take permit which will allow for destruction of endangered species habitat. HCPs are intended to be long-term plans, and this HCP would be in effect for 30 years without much of an opportunity to change it should it ultimately result in RCWs being extricated from Collier County. Page 295 Agenda Item No. 16K4 December 15, 2009 Page 23 of 35 September 29, 2009 Because of these reasons, it is imperative that if we pass this plan, that it be a quality plan and provide a proven benefit to the woodpecker, but unfortunately there are many elements of this HCP as drafted that are incomplete or inadequate. Many elements of this plan are concerning and have resulted in an ineffective HCP, primarily the exemption ofprojects in the receiving area which do have substantial priority RCW habitat. There's also been some question if this HCP could regulate agricultural clearing projects. While the rural fringe program may limit local regulation of natural resources and the Right to Farm Act may seek to limit the county's latitude on agricultural clearing, through the HCP, federal authority being delegated to the county, we feel that endangered -- because the Endangered Species Act would surpass state or local regulations, these projects should be included in the plan. Agricultural clearing and receiving land impacts clearly should be subject to the terms of the HCP. Also, the grievance policy language allows renegotiation of any element in the HCP, including mitigation rates. The grievance policy adds an unknown to the plan, which makes it impossible to ensure that a no net loss is produced, which is one of the Fish and Wildlife Service criteria. And finally, the plan does not adequately address impacts to other upland species which utilize the same habitat, such as the panther or Indigo snake. The plan is salvageable but only with these changes. Without rectifying the bad parts of the plan, the Conservancy believes that the plan should not move forward. And HCP is not the only potential solution to the problems of RCW management. Due to its insufficiencies, we believe that no plan is better than a bad plan; therefore, we respectfully request the board direct these changes be made to the plan. If the board does not favor Page 296 Agenda Item No. 16K4 December 15. 2009 Page 24 of 35 September 29, 2009 the aforementioned improvements for the RCW, we ask that you vote no on the HCP and seek alternative methods to better protect Collier County's RCWs. Thanks. MS. FILSON: The next -- the next speaker is Brad Cornell. He'll be followed by Joe Bonness. Is Joe here? COMMISSIONER HALAS: He's out riding his bicycle. MS. FILSON: Then he'll be followed by George Dennis. MR. CORNELL: Good evening, Commissioners, Madam Commissioner and Commissioners. I'm Brad Cornell, and I'm here on behalf of Collier County Audubon Society. And it's been a long day, and I appreciate the opportunity to address you on this important topic that we have been discussing for several years at different inter -- at different junctures in the decision-making process. Collier County Audubon Society supports creating a habitat conservation plan in North Belle Meade with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. I want to note that the county landowners, developers, including single-family home developers, are all liable under the Endangered Species Act and must abide by that and enforce it. And back in 2005, Collier County Audubon and Florida Wildlife Federation asked our attorney, Tom Reese, to render a legal opinion about this issue and also about liability that the county may have under the Bert Harris Act. And as you may know, we are interveners alongside the county helping to defend the North Belle Meade overlay and other policies. But as part of that, I note from Tom's legal opinion, the federal ESA makes it unlawful for any person, including federal, state, and local governments, to take or harass any endangered species. In addition, not long after that, in December of2006, the County Attorney's Office issued another opinion regarding an earlier version of a Red-cockaded Woodpecker Protection Plan in which it states, regardless of whether or not the proposed Red-cockaded Woodpecker Page 297 Agenda Item No. 16K4 December 15, 2009 Page 25 of 35 September 29, 2009 Plan is adopted, if the county ignores the data that it has and issues permits that allow activity in violation of the Endangered Species Act, the county and its employees could be liable under the stiff civil and potentially criminal penalty provisions of the Endangered Species Act. I bring that up because it's important to realize that -- and it's not always obvious -- that we do have obligations at a local level to enforce federal laws that are protecting endangered species. The status quo is unacceptable. It will result in Red-cockaded Woodpecker losses, birds and habitat and other species impacts. The county is obligated to proactively address this requirement and enforce the federal laws and protect itself and its citizens from legal liability and also to save development costs for Collier County citizens where it's necessary. An HCP is the type oftool which can accomplish this. The HCP draft before you today is a reasonable first attempt to write such a tool. It has some serious flaws, however, which we believe can be fixed. Collier County Audubon Society recommends accepting this draft as a point of departure for negotiations with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to draft a final HCP for North Belle Meade. While this will require investment, effort, and time on the county's part, it is the right course of action for the citizens of North Belle Meade, for endangered species, and for yourselves. Thank you very much. MS. FILSON: Your final speaker is George Dennis, and I believe he wants to waive. MR. DENNIS: I'm just here for answering questions. MS. HUSHON: He's here to answer questions from Fish and Wildlife. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, from Fish and Wildlife? MS. HUSHON: He's from Fish and Wildlife Service. MR. DENNIS: Be happy to answer any questions. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. Okay. We have three Page 298 Agenda Item No. 16K4 December 15, 2009 Page 26 of 35 September 29,2009 commissioners. Let me see who -- Commissioner Halas was the first. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Since you're from Fish and Wildlife, my first question will be directed at you, sir. Please come to the mike and identify yourself. MR. DENNIS: Well, I thought I'd get away with the eating pizza. George-- CHAIRMAN FIALA: No. Now that he's eaten, he's feeling energized. MR. DENNIS: George Dennis. I'm the trust resource supervisor at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife office in Vero Beach that covers this area. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. There was a statement by one of the other speakers saying that Fish and Wildlife does not adhere to the laws or that they don't have the time to address issues that have been brought before them; is that correct? Is that a correct statement? MR. DENNIS: What I would like to say to that question, is that, you know, we do the best job we can. We need to work with our partners, including local NGOs and the county and the state to get the job done. It's a very big job. There's 67 endangered species in Southwest Florida, and our office covers 20 counties. So there's quite a bit of work. And so we'd like to partner with you to try to address those issues. COMMISSIONER HALAS: So when you say you want to partner, that means that you want us to take on the responsibility of what you should be doing? MR. DENNIS: Well, what I would say to that is that I believe that through working through a comprehensive plan like that habitat conservation plan, that we could, by directing the authority down to the county, allow these actions to occur in a more quick manner where it wouldn't take as long, and that would be a benefit to the citizens that were developing in that area. Page 299 Agenda Item No. 16K4 December 15, 2009 Page 27 of 35 September 29, 2009 And we believe that by working with you that we could come to some resolution on the cost in that that would make it as -- at a minimum cost. We know there's going to be costs in dealing with these endangered species. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. You might as well just stand there because I'm sure other commissioners have some concerns or items they'd like to address with you. MR. DENNIS: Thank you. COMMISSIONER HALAS: My next question is to the County Attorney. County Attorney, it was brought out that we, as the county, could act as the agent for U.S. Fish and Wildlife. Ifwe get into a concern, is Fish and Wildlife going to back us up -- MR. KLATZKOW: Well-- COMMISSIONER HALAS: -- for liability? MR. KLATZKOW: -- the state's never done that before, I mean. They came in here, they asked for the roads to be vacated, and now I've got lawsuits there they won't step in on. They asked for the overlay, and now I've got an $80-million Hussey case where, well, they really don't want to step in on. So they're very good at telling us what to do, but they're not very good at helping us out and defending it. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. I'm not sure if that's a state issue or U.S. Fish and Wildlife, but in any case -- MR. KLATZKOW: You're not going to get any help from-- COMMISSIONER HALAS: Get it on the record. MR. KLATZKOW: You're not going to get any help from the feds or the state, and I'd be curious to know how many other counties in Florida have taken on this responsibility and what their experience has been. COMMISSIONER HALAS: The other question I have is in regards to the Right to Farm Act. Page 300 Agenda Item No. 16K4 December 15, 2009 Page 28 of 35 September 29,2009 It seems to me that if we get involved in this and take on that responsibility, are we liable for being -- going into litigation? MR. KLATZKOW: I think if you take this on, you are opening -- we're opening ourselves up to claims that we are only issuing the permit, and we're opening ourselves up to claims that we wrongfully denied a permit. I mean, the onus becomes on us. I mean, I'd just as soon the onus is on them. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. Thank you very much. I'm done. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coletta? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes, thank you. Sir, I heard the question but I didn't hear the answer. What other communities out there have taken advantage of something like this, and how successful have they been? MR. DENNIS: I would say in Florida we have no counties that have taken on a countywide plan like this, but we do have three counties in for county planning for countywide; Sarasota, Charlotte, and Highlands County. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. MR. DENNIS: This year for the grant money that was spoken about earlier, there's also been applications by Lake, Polk, Indian River, and St. Lucy County. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Question, if! may, on the grant money. See, my big hang-up with this whole thing is just -- just compensation for the landowners themselves. To me, they're the most important thing in the world. If you own the land, you have a certain amount of expectation to be able to develop the land within certain limits and to be able to enjoy it within those limits also. And so, when we start to put these layers on top of them, we're taking away their rights. Now, what I'm saying to you is, this county has been very, very receptive to doing all sorts of programs. We've been recognized Page 301 Agenda Item No. 16K4 December 15. 2009 Page 29 of 35 September 29, 2009 because of our rural fringe, rural lands, we reached out past our boundaries with our Conservation Collier; but every one of these programs was so put together and so structured that it made the landowner whole, and in all cases it was a voluntary program where they would enter it, see the benefits of it, and would take part of it. So while I can be receptive to a lot of things, I'm not going to be able to be receptive to something that is going to be mandatory and is going to be imposed upon the people that I represent without compensation. But I do appreciate the fact that you brought this forward. There's no bad ideas. Sometimes they're before their time and maybe there isn't enough put to it at this time. MR. DENNIS: And I'd just like to say to that, Commissioners, that I appreciate your effort in the county to work with us on endangered species. These are very difficult issues down here, and we just would appreciate continuing to work with you on all these issues. COMMISSIONER HENNING: And once again, if! may go back. We have one in the works right now. When I say we, I'm talking about the landowners, are putting together, one, it's a panther protection program that not only encompasses Collier County, the northern part of it, but it picks up parts of Lee and Hendry, and this program's going to grow, but it has all sorts of some compensation-type thing built into it for voluntary people to be able to come aboard. Beautiful program, totally endorse it. It's for the best interests of the landowners. But I won't support a program that we just, from this point, mandate out there, and I can't see the benefit to the county. I mean, it's just -- the benefits are nebulous to say the least. Is that a word? CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes, it is. Commissioner Henning? Oops. He'll be back. Commissioner Coyle? Page 302 Agenda Item No. 16K4 December 15, 2009 Page 30 of 35 September 29, 2009 COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'm still eating. Y ou're going to have to wait a while. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, here comes Commissioner Henning. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Oh, I don't know what's -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll second the motion. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. I don't know what we're doing. We created this committee for the purpose of developing this plan, and now they've developed a plan and now we're saying we don't want to get involved in it. I'm sort of confused. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. COMMISSIONER COYLE: So what's going on, Judy? MS. HUSHON: Well, we developed a straw band. That's all this plan is right now. It needs a lot more development. You can kill it right here, or we can continue on, which is what we're proposing to do to make it a good plan. We've come up with some other ideas recently, I talked to Mr. Coletta about one of them, which was, if people want to manage their property for Red-cockaded Woodpeckers, maybe we'd reduce their property tax ad valorem rate, you know. That's -- that would give them a little payback for this. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, that's always a possibility; once again, it has to do with compensation. MS. HUSHON: But I'm just saying -- but these are things that take a lot of evaluation -- a lot oftime to talk out, a lot of evaluation. We didn't have a lot of time and evaluation. We did all this in nine months. And we had a baby. The baby's a little imperfect, as Amber kind of said, that we have an imperfect baby. We have a chance to improve this baby, unlike some of them, to teach it new tricks and to improve it. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. So would it be fair to say that you're not really looking for a total endorsement of this plan at the Page 303 Agenda Item No. 16K4 December 15, 2009 Page 31 of 35 September 29,2009 present time? MS. HUSHON: That's correct. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Then maybe I can help you. I like the concept. I don't like the liability, and I don't like the penalties that are placed on landowners. If you can -- if you can develop some incentives for landowners that make it attractive for landowners to create or protect habitat, I think that would be an excellent improvement to the plan. I would like to have some working relationship with the Fish and Wildlife Service so that we could create plans like this, they could use them ifthey wish for their decision-making processes, and we wouldn't have to pick up any liabilities associated with their decisions, but maybe that's not possible. Maybe it's not even desirable. But I would ask that you take a look at ways you can make it better, and you have some suggestions you've shared with us tonight. The only other one is that the plan apparently applies to receiving areas that have been previously designated; is that a -- is that fair? MS. HUSHON: There was some habitat, a small amount of habitat that happens to occur in a receiving area. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, right there. MS. HUSHON: Right there. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. MS. HUSHON: It just so happens that that's really good habitat. I think we could work with that landowner. They're going to have to set aside some preserve area anyway when they develop that piece of property, which they want to. And I think we could work with them to set aside that as that -- that good property -- good land as preserve. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, well -- MS. HUSHON: And maintain it for RCWs as a preserve. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. MS. HUSHON: And so I think we can work with that landowner even though it is receiving. You know, I think that one -- because of Page 304 Agenda Item No. 16K4 December 15, 2009 Page 32 of 35 September 29, 2009 the size of that piece of property and the fact that they are going to have to set some land aside as preserve, I think that's one of those things one can negotiate. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, good. Well, I think those are the kinds of approaches we want to take, cooperative approaches, and providing incentives rather than try to ram it down somebody's throat. So I would be happy to make a motion that we approve the plan and encourage you to continue improving it, taking a look at some of the things that you've suggested, such as providing incentives to landowners and negotiating with others to create preserves for habitat, and come back to us at a later date, and hopefully it will be a plan that everybody can endorse and we can move forward. MS. HUSHON: Could we apply for a Section 6 Grant? COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, yeah. MS. HUSHON: That would be a good thing. COMMISSIONER COYLE: You could even apply for a Section 8 if you want to. MS. HUSHON: I think we want a Section 6., COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay, all right. MS. HUSHON: But no, we would like that opportunity to apply to try to get some funds that we could then use to the benefit of the county . COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. MS. HUSHON: Because right now, we could even hire an HCP coordinator to take over some of the functions that our county staff is having to do right now. Our county staff -- our environmental staff, our environmental staff, as you know, is covered by permit fees and things, and they're so -- stretched so thin they really don't have time to take this on. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, I would support your application -- MS. HUSHON: And we tried to do as much as of this as we Page 305 Agenda Item No. 16K4 December 15, 2009 Page 33 of 35 September 29,2009 could not put it on their burden -- that burden on their backs. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Oh, maybe I shouldn't support the application. MR. KLA TZKOW: No, you can support it. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. I would support your application for grants, but the County Attorney wants to tell me the risks. MR. KLATZKOW: Well, no, not a risk. My recollection is that the committee's sun-setted. MS. HUSHON: We are. We have to be resurrected. MR. KLATZKOW: So there is no they right now. COMMISSIONER COYLE: I hereby resurrect the -- MS. HUSHON: We died on the 12th. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, look, look, you're a volunteer committee, you're doing good work, it's something we need to do. As long as we don't have to implement it in its current form, what downside is there if we resurrect you and let you continue working? MR. KLA TZKOW: There is no downside, sir. You just need to resurrect. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. I make a motion that we resurrect, and adding that to my other motion that we accept the report and encourage you to improve upon it, and that you apply for a Section IV grant. And anything else you need? MS. HUSHON: That's what we need right now is-- COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. MS. HUSHON: And we may need to advertise for some new committee members. I don't know. You know, they'll have to re- -- if we resurrect, Sue -- MS. FILSON: I didn't know you were sun-setted. We normally do that by resolution. MS. HUSHON: Oh, okay. MR. KLA TZKOW: Ifmemory serves me right, the committee Page 306 Agenda Item No. 16K4 December 15, 2009 Page 34 of 35 September 29, 2009 was -- the committee had started out by resolution rather than by ordinance, but this was supposed to be an ad hoc committee with a one-year life. If the board wants, I'll come back with an ordinance that makes it a regular board committee, and then we could advertise for members, and they could apply for grants subject to board approval. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'll second that motion. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. We have a motion on the floor and a second. Commissioner Henning? COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, I'm ready to move on to the next item. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Coletta? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. Forgive me, but could we identifY the scope of action we're talking about? In other words, a -- whatever takes place, that's going to be something that's voluntary for the landowners to be able to join in and not be mandatory? COMMISSIONER COYLE: WeJl, that's what we just told them. COMMISSIONER HALAS: That's what we made in the motion. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. Just wanted to make sure. I had to say that out loud one more time. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Well, that's good. That's good to repeat that, because you always are protective over the landowners. COMMISSIONER COYLE: But in your district, these are red cockatoo woodpeckers. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Watch your language, Commissioner. We call them RCWs where I come from. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. We have a motion on the floor and a second. Do we have any further discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FIALA: I want to thank you-all for indulging us. Page 307 Agenda Item No. 16K4 December 15, 2009 Page 35 of 35 September 29, 2009 By the way, as can you see, our personalities got a little bit better as we fed the faces a little bit. All those in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. CHAIRMAN FIALA: There's one opposed. 4- 1, thank you. THE COURT REPORTER: Can I have five minutes? I need to do a disk change. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Certainly. We will take five minutes for the stenographer. (A brief recess was had.) CHAIRMAN FIALA: Hello, everyone. MR. OCHS: Madam Chair? CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes. MR. OCHS: Ready to move on? CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes, sir. Item #8B and Item #10K (Discussed together) Item #8B RESOLUTION 2009-233: A RESOLUTION APPROVING AMENDMENTS (APPROPRIATING CARRY FORWARD, TRANSFERS AND SUPPLEMENTAL REVENUE) TO THE FISCAL YEAR 2009- I 0 ADOPTED BUDGET - ADOPTED; Item #lOK Page 308