BCC Minutes 03/03/1981 R
,
.
.............~-
. .
Naples, Florida, March 3, 1901
LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Board of County Commissioners in
and for the County of Collier, and ~lso acting as the Governing
Doard(s) of such speci~l districts as have been created According to
law and having conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 A.M.
in Regular Session in Ruilding "F" of the Courthouse Complex with the
following members present:
CHI\IRMI\N:
John 7\. pistor
VICE C 111\ HIM 7\N :
Clifford Wenzel (Absent)
C.R. "Russ Wimer
Mary Frances Kruse
David C. Brown
ALSO PRESENT: william J. Reagan, Clerk; Harold L. Hall, Chief
Deputy Clerk/Fiscal Officer; Elinor M. Skinner and Edna Brenneman (5:00
P.M.), Deputy Clerks; C. William Norman, County Manager; Irving Berzon,
Utilities Manager; Clifford Barksdale, Public Works Administrator/
Engineer; Donald 7\. Pickworth, County Attorney; Kerry McQuinn and Tony
Pires, Assistant County Attorneys; Richard lIenderlong amd Lee Layne,
Planners; Thomas Hafner, Public Safety I\dministrator; Terry Virta,
Community Development Administrator; Deputy Chief Raymond Barnett,
Sheriff's Department.
~~ 059 PAc~ 840
page 1
.oox
NOTE: ITALICS RErRESF.NTS ITEMS R~QUEr.TED TO BE ADDED TO
AGf:NDA AS FOLLOWS: 'CONTINl1~D FRO~' NIIOR IIEETI/fG
"EMERGENCY ITEM '.'REQUr.ST'FOR
BOARD OF COUNTY COmllSSIONERS ADVERTISING FOR
. PUBLIC REARING
059 'PAC~ 6~r
AGENDA
March 3, 1981
NOTICE: ALL PERSONS SPEAKING ON ANY AGENDA ITEM MUST REGISTER
PRIOR TO TilE ITEM UElllG IIEARD.
REQUESTS TO ADDRESS TilE BOARD ON SUBJECTS WHICH ARE NOT
ON TillS AGENDA MlIST OE SUOI.IITTED IN WRITING WITH EXPLA-
NATION TO TilE COUNTY I~AN~.GER AT LEAST 13 DAYS PRIOR TO
THE DATE OF THE MEETING AND WILL BE IIEARD UNDER "PUSL1C
PETITIONS" AT 11:00 A.M.
ANY PEASO" WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL ^ DECISIOM OF TillS
BOARD HILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS PERTAINING
TIIERETO, AND TIIEREFOnE 14AY NEED TO EllSURE TIIAT A VER8ATIM
RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES
TilE TESTll',ONY ArlO EVIDENCE uroll WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO
BE BASED.
1. INVOCATION
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: February 10, 1981
5. PROCLAMATION AIlD PRESENTATION OF AWARDS
A. Proclamation declaring the month of March as Youth A~t
flonth.
B. Proclamation declaring that March 14, 1981, be designated
as Scout - Goodwill Goodturn Day.
6. SOCIAL SERVICES CASES
7. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. CP-BO-19C, Neno Spagna representing Angelo & Grace
Montemurro: Requesting Comprehensive Plan use element
from residential low to medium density (0-4 units per
gross acre) to residential medium to high density (6.22-30
units per gross acre) on lot 43, block "A", replat Unit 1,
Conner's Vanderbilt Beach Estates Subdivision. This land
is located off of Vanderbilt Beach Road to the west and
northwest of Seabreeze Avenue. (Planning) (NOTE: Per
attached letter, Dr. Spagna is requesting that this
Petition be withdrawn and postponed indefinitely.)
n. Petition CP-80-15C, Wafaa Assaad representing Craig Meffert:
Requesting a Comprehensive Plan Land use element amendment
from commercial to residential medium to high density (6.22-
30 units per gross acre) on Lot 23, block "A", Myrtle COY,
Acres Subdivision located off of Hyrtle Coye Lane Ind
300 feet southwest of US 41. (Planning)
~
..
Agenda
Page 2
March 3, 19B1
.
C. Petition CP-Bo-f6C, Wafaa Asaad representing Lely Estates, Inc.:
Requesting Comprehensive Plan Land use clement amendment
from residential low to medium density (0-4 units per gross
acre) to residential medium to hiqh density (6.22-30 units
per gross acre) for a portion of block 17, unit 1, Le1y
Tropical Estates Subdivision located at the northeast
corner intersection of Hawaii Boulevard and Rattlesnake
Hammock Road. (Planning)
,
O. Petition CP-BO-18C. Waf.. Asaad. representing Kimbrel, Burns
and Callander: Reque~ting Comprehensioe Plan Land Use element
amendment from residential low to medium density (0-4 units
per gross acre) to medium to high density (6.22-30 units per
gross acre) for land located north of State Road 84 about
I~ miles west of State Road 951. (Planning)
E. Ordinance pertaining to puh1ic beaches an~ beach access
areas of the County prohibiting the taking of glass
containers on the heaches and beach access areas. (County
Attorney)
F. Puh1ic hearing to consider rate increase request by Waste
Management, Inc. (Yahl Brothers \oIaste Disposal) (Public 1.lorks)
B. OLD BUSINESS
A. ~Furt}ler consideration of recommendation fo~ chango in position
oLassification/pay for Ascistant County Mannge~ position.
9. COUNTY MANAGER'S REPORT
A. COUNTY MANAGER
(1) Recommendation to adopt and execute a franchise agreement
with Sandia Cableoision, Inc. for provision of cable
te1eoision se,'vices to the T~moka1ee area. (NOT~:
County Manager recommends this itam be mov.a to Ma~ch 10
agenda)
(2) ""Recommendation and report' o~": cZaasification of Emtlttgcnc!f
Medical Services Director.
B. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
(1) Petition PU-78-20C, James Calderwood: Requesting
extension of PU (5) of the "E" estates zoning
district f"r a home for the elderly on the south
side of Rattlesnake P.m~ock Road, southeast of
Wing South Airport in Section 22, TSOS, R26E.
(2) Resolution to recooer funds expended by the County
to ahate public nuisances on lots pursuant to
Ordinance 76-14.
a) Lot 3, Block 3, Naples Manor Addition
b) East 100 feet of Lot 14, Unit 1, Myrtle Cove Acres,
Block A
c) Lot 3, Block G, Flamingo Estates
C. PUBLIC SAFETY
!OOK 059 PACE 642
(1) Recommendation for approval of contract between State
Medical Examiner Commission and Collier County.
(1)"Statue report and racommdndation Oft neY ao"n!r c.b"lano.
eer~l"a.
.
(
Agenda
Page 3
March 3, 1981
aoDX 059 mE 643
D. PUBLIC WORKS
',( 1) Recommenda t i on for a pprova 1 /execut ion/recordat ion
of a right-of-way map and approval/execution of an
inter-local agreement for improvements to a portIon
of Corkscrew Road (County Road 850)
(2) Recommendation for preliminary acceptance for one
year maintenance of Livingston Road, located in
sections 24 & 25, TWP. 49 South, Range 25 East.
E. MUSElIM
(1) Recommendation to accept grant from Florida endow-
ment for the humanities to fund an archaeological
conference sponsored by the Collier County Museum.
F. SOCIAL SERVICES
(l)"Reeommendation to approve contract ~ith State
Department o[ li.R.S. to [und t~o additionaZ
homemakers [or' Homemakers' Ser>vicas Soction;
with local match o[ $996.00.
10. DATA PROCESSING MANAGER'S REPORT
11. UTILITIES MANAGER'S REPORT
A~' 'COUNTY WAnn.SEWER DISTRICT
()) Sewer area A - ay.tem development chargee, authori.at(~
[or public hearing.
12. COUNTY ATTORNEY'S REPORT
A. Recommendation to approve and adopt a resolution to
exercise Collier County's power of eminent domain for
rights-of-way'required to construct Pine Ridge Road
extension.
B. Recommendation to adopt resolution authorizing exchange
of a parcel of land owned by Collier County in return
for a ~arcel of land necessary for Goodlette Road
construction program.
13. CLERK TO THE BOARD'S REPORT
A. Payment of bills
B. Budget amendments
C. Other
14. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
A. Recommendation for appointment to the Board of Building
Adjustments and Appeals. .
. .
Agenda
Page 4
Harch 3, 1981
15. MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
16. NEW BUSINESS
17. PUBLIC PETITIONS
18. ADJOURN
&OOX 059,m'644
&OOK 059 PACE 645
March 3, 1981
.'
MEMORIAL SERVICE FOR FORMER CLERK MARGhRET T. SCOTT; RESOLUTION 81-51
IN RECOGNITION OF HER LONG, DEDICI\TED SERVICE TO COLLIER COUNTY -
APPROVED
7\fter a brief eulogy by Honorable Judge Harold Smith, Chairman
pistor read a resolution in recognition of former Clerk Margaret T.
Scott's long dedicated service to collier County. Commissioner Wimer
moved, seconded by Commissioner Brown and carried 4/0, with Commis-
sioncr wenzel absent, that Resolution 81-51 be approved. Chairman
pistor presented said resolution to Mrs. Martha 7\nderson, Mrs. Scott's
sister, and expresscd the sympathy of the Board.
Page 2
..
MOX 059 PAcE647
March.3, 1981
..
AGENDA - APPROVED WITH THE ADDITIONS/DELETIONS
commissioner Wimer moved, seconded by Commissioner Kruse and
carried 4/0, with Commissioner Wenzel absent, that the agenda be
approved with the following additions and deletions:
A. proclamation re Marco Island Volunteer Fire
Department Recruitment Week.
B. Remarks from Commissioner Brown to Engineering
Department re Immokalee Sewer construction - Added
(9D) .
C. Recommennation and report on classification of
Emergency Medical Services Director - Continued
until 3/10/81 by request of County Manager. (9A-l)
D. Discussion re franchise agreement with Sandia
Cablevision, Inc. - Continued until 3/10/81 at
request of County Manager. (9A-2)
E. Approval of minutes of ?/10/81 - Deleted.
PROCL7\MATION DESIGNATING MARCH 19RI AS " YOUTH 7\RT MONTH" - APPROVED
Chairman pistor read the proclamation that designates March 1981
as "Youth Art Month". Commissioner Wimer moved, seconded by Commls-
sioner Brown and carried 4/0, with Commissioner Wenzel absent, that the
proclamation be approved, and Chairman pistor presented same to Ms.
Gloria Topczynski, who accepted it with thanks, on behalf of all
Collier County art teachers and students.
paqe 3
BOOK 059 PACE 649
March 3, 1981
.'
pnOCL^~^TION DESIGNATING MARCH 14, 1981 1\5 "SCOUT - GOODWILL GOODTURN
DI\Y" - APPflOVED
Chairman pistor read the proclamation designating March 14, 1981
as "Scout - Goodwill Goodturn Day'", in recognition of thQ Goodwill
Industries' and the Boy Scouts' of I\merica years of beneficial service
to Collier County, which is sponsored by ~cDonald's Restaurants.
Conmissioner v/imer moved, seconded by Commissioner Brown and carried
A/n, with Commissioner Wenzel absent, that said proclamation be
~pprovcd. Ch~irm~n ristor presented same to Ms. Delores Monaco, who
accepted IVith thanks on behalf of Goodwill Industries, with several
representatives of the Boy Scouts and McDonald's Restaurants also
thanking the Board.
paqe .
'.
BOOK 059 PACE 65f
March 3, 1981
:
PROCLAMI\TION DESICN^TING MARCH 1 THROUGH M^RCH 7, 1981 AS "M^RCO ISL^NO
VOLUNTf.ER FIRE DEPI\RTMENT RECRUITMENT Wf.EK" - APPROVED
Chairman pistor read the proclamation designating the week of
March 1 through March 7, 1981 as "Marco Island Volunteer Firo
Department Recruitment Week".
Commissioner wimer moved, seconded by Commissioner Brown and
carried 4/0, with Commissioner Wenzel absent, that said proclamation be
approved. Chairman Pistor presented same to Marco Island Fire
Department Lt. Bob Pistor, who accepted with thanks to the Board.
Page 5
March 3, 1981
BOOK 059 PACE 653
"
PFTITION Cp-RO-19C, NENO SPAGNA FOR ANGELO & "RACE MONTEMURRO RE
CmlPREIIENSTVE PLAN LI\ND Uf,E CIlANGE FROM RESIDENTIAL LOW TO MEDIUM
DENSITY TO RES IDENTIAL ~'EDI UM TO IlIGII DENS ITY ON LOT 43, BLOCK "^w.
REPLAT UNIT 1, CONNER'S VANDERBILT BEI\CH FS1'I\TES SURDIVISION - DENtED
Legal notice having been published in the Naplcs Daily News on
January ~O, I~Rn as evidenced by Affidavit of puhlication filed with
the Clcrk, public hearing was opened to consider petition CP-RO-19C,
filed by Dr. Ncno SpagnA for Angclo ~ Grace Montemurro requcsting a
comprchensive plan land use change from residential low to medium
density (n-~ units pcr acre) to residential medium to high density
(<;.22-30 units pcr acre), on Lot 43, Block "7\", replat Unit 1, Conner's
V~nderbilt ~each F.states Subdivision.
Chair~an pistor noted he had rcceived a letter dated 2/11/81 from
Dr. Spa~na requesting an indefinite postponement for Petition
CP-80-19C. Co~munity Dcvelopment Director Terry Virta Asked the Board
to postpone said petition to a specific date; withdraw it or preferably
hear petition CP-RO-19C at this time.
Commissioner Wi~cr moved, second cd by Commissioner Kruse and
carried ~/r, with Commissioner Wenzel absent, that the public hearing
bc closed. Commissioner Wi~er moved, seconded by Commissioner Kruse,
that petition CP-SO-19C be denied. Although the following persons were
registered to speak thcy declined the opportunity:
Mr. Carl Gilzow
Ms. Evp.lyne LawmAster
G. Tucker
Chairman pistor called for the question which carried "/0, with
Commissioner Wcnzel absent.
Page II
March 3, 1981
ORDIN^NCE NO. 81-0 RE PETITION CP-OO-15C, W^FAA ^SSA7\D FOR CRATG
MEFFERT; RF: A COMPRF:I1F:NSIVF: PLAN LAND USE ELEMENT AMENDMF.NT FROM
COMMERCI^L TO RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM TO HIGII DEN~ITY (~.22-30 UNTTS PEn
ACRE) O~ LOT 23, BLOCK "A", MYRTLE COVF: ACRES SUBDIVISION - ^OOPTE~
Legal notice having been published in the Naples Daily News on
January 30, 1901 as evincnced by Aff!navit of publication filed with
the Clerk, public hearing was opened to consider petition CP-RO-15C,
filed by Mr. WafaB ^ssaad for Mr. Craig Meffert requesting a
comprehensive plan land use element amendment from commercial to
residcntial medium to high density (~.22-30 units per acre) on Lot ",
Block ^, Myrtle Covc ^cres Suhdivision located off Myrtle Cove Lane and
300 feet southwcst of u.S. ~l.
Planner Richard lIendcrlong located the property on a map on an
overhead board; noted that the parcel of land is approximately '.~
acres and, referring to the Executive Summary, dated '/19/Pl, he
described the zoning on the adjacent land. ~p explained that on
January '9, 1901, the CCP^ held a puhlic heAring for petition CP-OO-15C
and,
that basen upon thc staff report, the Agency made a recommendation for
approval of said petition by a unanimous vote of 5/0.
It was noted that Mr. Wafaa Assaad of Wilson, Miller, Barton, Soli
and Peek, representing the r-etitioner, was present to respond to any
questions that the Bo~rd might have.
Upon hearing that there were no registered speakers from the
public, Commissioner Wimer moved, seconded by Commissioner Brown and
carried 4/0, with Commissioner Wenzel absent, that the public hearing
be closed.
Page 7
aoQX' 059 PACE654
BOOK 059 PACE 655
March 3, 1901
..
Commissioner Wimer moved, seconded by Commissioner Brown and
c~rricd 4/0, with Commissioner Wenzel absent, that Ordinance No. 81-8
re pctition CP-~O-15C, as numbered and entitled below, be adopted and
entered into Ordinance Book No. I?
ORDINANCE NO. 81-~
AN OR!)INANCE I\MENDING ORDINANCE 79-37, THE COM-
PREIlENSIVE PLI\N FOR COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA BY
AMENDING TilE LI\ND USE ELEMENT WORK STUDY AREA MAP
11 FROM COMMERCIAL TO RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM TO HIGq
~r.NSITY (n./.7-30 UNITS PER GROSS ACRE) ON THE
FOLLOWING ~ESCnIrED PROPERTY: LOT 73, BLOCK A,
MYRTLE COVE I\CRES SUBDIVISION; I\ND BY PROVIDING AN
F:FFECTIVE DI\TE.
Page 8
"
~
March 3, 1981
ORDINANCE NO. BI-9 RE PETITION CP-RO-Jr.C, WAFAA ASSAAD, FOR LELY
ESTATES, INC., REQUESTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE ELEMENT AMENDMENT
FROM 0-4 UNITS PER ACRE TO (,.22-30 UNITS PER ACRE FOR A PORTION OF
BLOCK 17, UNIT 1, LELY TROPICAL ESTATES SUBDIVISION - ADOPTED ACCORDTNG
TO STAFF RECOMMENDATION, WITH TilE STIPULATION TH!\T PETITIONER I.IRITE A
LETTER AGRr.f.It-.:G NC1T TO Rf.t-IOVf., BUT I\CTIVELY SUPPORT, TI1f. pF.TITrON RE
.PUD" FOR 12 UNITS rf.n ACnE, \oJflICH I~; cunRf.NTLY IN THE COMMUNITY
DEVELOPt-IF.NT Df.PAnTMr.NT
Legal noticc having becn publishcd in the Naples Daily News on
January 30, 1981 as evinenccd hy Affidavit of publication filed with
the Clerk, puhlic hcaring was held to consider petition CP-RO-lr,C,
filed by WafaB Assaad for Lely F.st~tes, Inc., requesting a
comprehensive plan lann use element amendment from resinential low to
medium density (0-4 units per acre) to residential medium to high
density (G.22-30 units per acre) for a portion of Block 17, Unit I,
Lely ~ropical Estates Subdivision located at the Northeast corner
intersection of Hawaii Boulevard and Rattlesnake Hammock Road.
Planner Richard I!enderlong located the property on a map on an
overhe~d board and explained the parcel of land is comprised of
approximately 5.42 acres. He referred to the Executive Summary, d~ted
2/19/81, and described the zoning of the adjacent land. lie stated that
on January 29, 19RI, t~e CCPA held a public hearing and hased upon the
staff recommendati0~, the Agency made the recommendation to forward
petition cp-nO-Ir.c to the Board with the recommend~tion of approval ~nd
the stipulation that the zoning would not exceed 12 units per acre.
Mr. Henderlong explained th~t the staff recommends approval of
this petition because the proposed land use change would be compatible
and complimcntAry to the surrounding area, since the land to the south,
page 9
aOOK 059 PACE 656
BOOK 059 PACE 657
March 3, 19A1
to the southeast as well as to the west, of the property in question,
is zoncd residential medium to high dcnsity and the land directly to
thc southwest is intensive commercial use. lie noted another reason for
Approval recommendation is because the staff believes there are
existing community services and fa~ilities for accommodating this land
use change.
Mr. Henderlong said that the staff recommends that the petitioner
rcscrve space for thc future widening of Rattlesnake Hammock arterial
roan, as required in the Traffic Circulation Element.
Mr. Bill Barton, of Wilson, Miller, Barton, Soli and peek,
representing the petitioner, explained he would address the general
nature of the project as it relates to utilities, traffic and density
ann than ask Mr. ~ssaad to conclude the presentation.
Mr. Barton said the property fronts on Rattlesnake Hammock Road,
and the petitioner believes that the current single family zoning for
the property is inappropriate in its present position and location.
Utilities: Mr. Barton noted that the property is well served by
water, electric and tclephone facilities. He said the area has had a
great deal of confusion ahout the sanitary system; noted his firm has
spoken at several public hearings rcgarding that subject; and as a
result of thc concer;) shown Io/ith regard to the sanitary system in the
area, his clie~t has made the decision to totally separate the sanitary
systcm that will be used to operate this project by furnishing a
completcly separate and distinct collection system, separate pump
station and separate force main, that will "travel" the sewage back to
the sewagc treatment plant. He noted that the treatment plant has
Page 10
March 3, 19!11
never becn an issue in the problem, but thc difficulty has been
associated with the pumping station, which is located near the
residential propcrty to the north. Hc said his client will be happy to
make a stipulation to the requcstcd land use changc that he will Makc a
totally separate and distinct sewage system which will not impact or
affect the existing system in the area.
Traffic: Mr. Barton explained that the study regarding traffic
aspects for thc projcct, manc by County Traffic Planner Robert ~univ~n,
closely p~rallels his firm's finnings, which he said resulted in the
traffic incrcase of approximately 90 vehicle trips per day.
In addition to the traffic aspects, Mr. Barton explained that
simultaneously with pctition CP-RO-l~C, his client has a petition for a
"PUD" that does set forth a 12 units per acre development. lie noten
that there was some concern that if the land use request amcndment from
o-~ units per acre to ~.22-30 units per acre is granted, there would be
no control over property use, should the petitioner withdraw the
aforementioncd "PUD". He briefly explained that if petition CP-PO-l~C
is approved there would be a comprehensive land use plan which said
"6-30" but a zoning that would be residential single family, and that
would mean the property would be placed in thc position of being
useless, since no ~uilding permit could be issued for any kind of
building under thosc circumstances.
Density: Mr. Barton indicated the property shown in green on a
map on an overhead board and explained his firm has made a study on the
surrounding arca, bounded by yellow, which gave the following results:
1. Virtually all the surrounding property is zoned and in
Page 11
aoox 059 PACE 658
BOOK 059 PACE659
~'arch 3, 1981
use with constructed buildings.
? Changes in density will be few in numbers, since the
property is uscd.
3. Under currcnt zoning, the naximum "build-out" d&nsity 1s
3337 dwelling units, or 2.39 dwelling units per acre
gross rlensity. This nunber is signifiCAntly lower than
the maximum ~.o dwelling unIts per acre, which is tho
County's dcsiren growth density.
4. If the land use envisioned with Petition CP-80-lr,C
occurs, ann the I? units per acre are built, the maximum
number of rlwclling units, Above the single family zoned
usage of the lann in question, will be 3371 or an
increase of 2.41 dwelling units per acre.
ChairMan ristor asked ~r. Parton to elRborate on the proposed
separate sewcr systcm, since he said he has received calls regarding
the problem with the existing sewer system in the area. Mr. Barton
explaincrl that his clicnt plans to construct a separate and distinct
gravity system; a brand new punping station, which does not have any
force and effect on the existing pumping station. ~r. Barton said the
developcr plans to tie into an existing force main, not in use since a
larger pipc was rcquired and this pipe was put out of use years ago:
the sewage will be carricd across Rattlesnake lIammock Road, south into
the residential arca below and ultimately into the sewage treatment
plant.
Mr. Wafaa Assaan, of ~ilson, Miller, Barton, SolI and peek,
rcprcsenting the pc~~tioner, re-emphasizcd the surrounding area land
use and zoning as ~n existing church to the east of the Petition
CP-RO-lr,C site; multifamily and commercial to the south; and to the
northwest the lIamlet Condominium which is zoned "R"'-2". He pointed out
that this piece of propcrty is the only vacant land in the area because
page 12
March 3, 1981
the Comprehensive plan land use designation is not compatible, prac-
tical, or usable, he said.
Mr. Assaad explained the companion "PUD" which his client has
filcd to develop thc property in question, should the Board approve
pctition CP-p'o-I(,C, as follows:
I. One 2-story apartment building on the corner of Hawaii
Blvd. and Rattlesn~ke Hammock Road and a 3-story
apartment building closest to the church.
2. 2-story townhouse, planned for placement at the north
end of the site, hacking to the existing villas. The
height of the buildin0s for the site will gr~dually
decrease to the single family dwellings which abut the
property in question.
Mr. lIssaad explaincd the property abuts on rlattlesnake Hammock
Road, a designated arterial road by the Comprehensive plan, and Hawaii
Blvd., which, he said, is intended to be connected to Kings Lake,
Bridlepath and Briarwood and is intended to be used as a major
collector road.
Mr. ^ss~ad briefly described the Board's denial of a "RM-2"
rezoning petition for this site, approximately 2 years ago because of
the high density normally associated with "RM-2" classification. He
said at that time the staff was directed to look into a new zoning
classification that would limit height to three-story buildings and the
density to 12 units per acre, and :Ie reminded the Board that the
Commissioners adopted the zoning designation "RM-IB" as a result of the
staff study and recommendation. He explained his client's "PUD" was
tailored very closely to the "RM-1B" classification and gave these
reasons for filing said "PUD" as a companion to petition CP-80-1r.C:
1. This would give the County better control and a chance
P8ge 11
&OOK 059 PACE660
MOK 059 fAtE66I
March 3, 1901
to review the site plan.
2. Any specific stipulations which the Board felt
~pplic~ble could be recommended.
Mr. Assaad stated when his firm Applien the County rating system
to his client's planned site, 37 rating system points were achieved,
the Zoning Code requires 11, and he noted that the heachfront Condo-
niniuns in P~rk Shore area, by comparison, achieved 3~ points in an
area zoned "RM-2". Mr. Assaad concluded hy stating that for the
foregoing reasons, the zoning designation "RM-2", for ~ to 30 units per
acre, is the only current classification available to his client under
the existing Comprehensive Plan. He stated his client's Comprehensive
eLand Use amendment ~rplication and the "PUD" application ask for no
more than 12 units per acre, and he explained that in both applications
his ~lient has committed to the donation of the additional right-of-way
on Hawaii Blvd., which will he needed one dAY to expand the existing
road facilities.
Responding to Chairman Pistor, ~1r. I\ssaad said that there are two
points of entrance to the development - one off Rattlesnake Hammock
Road and one off Hawaii Blvd. Chairman Pistor further asked what types
of safeguards the developer has planned for Rattlesnake Hammock Road in
the event that the planned en~.ance from said road is allowed, and Mr.
Assaad explained that the ~asic design criteria is to set the Rattle-
snake Hammock entrance ~t enough distance from Hawaii Blvd. so that
should the County neen a right lane into the development when the
Rattlesnake lIammock Road is upgraded, his client will have the entrance
set hack far enough from the intersection.
Page 14
March 3, 1981
When Chairman pistor asked if the developer planned for a right
turn lane, Mr. Assaad said his firm did not feel thc size of the
devclopment warranted a right turn lane, but he indicated his client
would be glad to provine for one if the Board felt it was necessary.
Chairman pistor nsked if the County eventually ~-lanes Rattlesnake
Hammock and places a median in this area, whether the developer is
anticipating a cut-through in said medi~n for the entrance to the site,
and Mr. Assaad explained that the present right-of-WAY is 100' and the
subdivision regulations require a 135' right-of-way. lie st~ted that
his client is proposing to donate to the County one-half the difference
between those two amounts of right-of-way, which is 17 And l/? feet
anytimc the County nceds the land.
Pur'ic Work Administrator/county Engineer Clifford Barksdale said
that although the Comprehensive Plan land use amendment application did
not include the rezone petition, the traffic planner did review the
rezone petition, and his recommcndation is that the entrance to the
development be off Hawaii Blvd for some of the reasons which Chairman
pistor questioncd.
Responding to Commissioner Kruse's question rcgarding price range
of the proposed un~~s, Mr. Assaad said he estimated that the units
would be above 10w income and compatible with the ncighborhood units
which, he believed range in price from $50,000 to $70,000 per unit.
Commissioner Wimer said that the discussion should center on th~
Comprehensive Plan amcndment, because the issue becomes confusing when
rezone factors are prcsented. He said the rezone discussion should he
held at another time and place.
IOOi 059 PAtE 662
Page ) ~
BOOK 059 PAGE 663
March 3, 19111
The following persons spoke in opposition to Petition CP-80-1r,C:
Mr. ,lM1CS n. Polis
Mr. William S. Pettit
Mrs. ~. Ford KAnnedy
*Mr. Jerry r.. nosenthal
~'s. I"'ori'l E. Palmer
Mr. Kcnneth Finlay
"'S. P,lrhiHa Keim
Mr. ^lfred T"leProspore
Mr. J~ck Stanley, registered but declined to comnent.
· I'r. nosenthal g,we eight (8) photographs, as exhibits, for Board
considcration regarding sewer system overflow in front of his home.
^ll the opponents of petition CP-PO-lr.C stood up at the request of
~'s. Palmer. No count was taken.
Noting th"t the State law for comprehensive pl~nning is a separ~te
issue from zoning, Commissioner Wimer requested that Community
~evelopnent Director Terry Virta explain the nifferences between land
use amendments and zoning issues and the constraints which apply to
same. Mr. Virti'l stated that petition CP-PO-Ir.C is not a rezone, or a
variance, but is a petition to amend the Comprehensive plan for Collier
County, which Was prepared and adopted hy the ROArd of County
Commissioners in May of 1979, pursuant to a State mandate that local
units of government prep~re and MJopt such a plan. lie said those plans
~re review~~ periodically and hy initiation of either staff, Board,
planning "'Jcncy or by pctition from indivic1ui'll property owners, the
plan is re-evaluated and examined in specific areas, to determine if
Lhe land usc designations are appropriate, as currently shown on the
pli'ln. Mr. Virta explained that in petition CP-OO-lr.C, the property
owners requested such an examination which the staff has done from all
Page 16
March 3, 19111
aspects, i.e. surrounding land usc, traffic, utility systcm, and staff
has m~de the rccommendation that a land usc dcsignation of ~.'2 to ~n
units pcr acre is more appropriate than the prescnt designation of 0 to
4 units per acre. lie s~id in that ~ecommendation, however, thc staff
and a rcviscd Comprehcnsive Plan would indicate that somewhere in the
range bctween ~.2? and ]0 is thc appropriate figure, that numbcr to hc
reachcd whcn zoning questions are addressed.
Commissioner Wimer askcd ~r. Virta to explAin thc types of ques-
tions which are appropriate to address during a Comprehcnsive Land Use
Plan changc, as compared to the types of issues addrcssed during a
rezoning change. ~r. Virta said that during a land use request changc
the evaluation is not at the same depth as the examination of a piece
of property which occurs when a rezoning pctition is before the Foard.
In a rezonc petition, he explained, the discussion is comprise~ of
specific numbers of units, definite amounts of traffic and population
generation, and specified amounts of wAtcr needs and effluent. In a
Comprehensive Land Use amendment petition, Mr. Virta said, the
relationship of a piece of land to the land surrounding that property
is discussed. He re-emphasized that in petition Cp-eo-l~C a piece of
pro~~rty was examined with regard to the following factors: the land
haG single family and multi-family zoning, plus a provisional use for a
church abutting that land; multi-family zoning is across the road:
commercial zoning is in closc proximity, ~nd the propcrty is on a major
arterial. Those factors, he said, were considere~ and led the staff to
their rccommendation. When Commissioner Wimer asked if the Board
granted this petition and the r.omprehensive Plan was amended could
&OOK 059 PACE 664
Page 17
BOOK 059 PACE 665
March 3, 1981
"somebody go out and build on that", Mr. Virta answered negatively. He
stated th~ property is currently zoned "nS-3", single familYf and a
(,.22 to 30 units per acre land use designation would not allow building
at the "RS-3" density. Mr. Virta s~id in petition CP-DO-l~C, if the
petitioner who ~sked for the land US0 change fails to follow through
with his rezone petition, he puts his property in "limbo", since he
cannot build on the site because of the ~forernentioned conflict, and
the property c~nnot be used until it is rezoned or the Comprehensive
Plan changed back to the original designation for this property.
Commissioner ~imer stated that he understands the confusion of the
public and he is concerned because ~.22 to 30 units per acre is a wide
range. He asked why the County docs not have a category for medium
density which would more clearly be understood and the density amount
could be "locked in" so that everyone is on the "s~me firm ground" for
clarification. Mr. Virta explained that this is the year when the
staff is obligated to come back to the Poard with an update for the
Comprehensive Plan and this question is the primary problem which is
recognized ~nd will be addressed.
Pro Rill ~c^nly, representing Lely Estates, described in detail
some of the acknowledged problems with the sewer system in current use,
~nd how th~sc difficulties have been h~ndled. He explained that until
L~C DER notified Lely Estates, the company was not ~ware that a
developer in the area had tied into their sewer lines without
permission or Lely Estates' knowledge. He referred to Mr. Rosenthal's
comments regarding sewer overflow and said at that particular time the
large amount of rainf~ll was a contributing factor. He stated that he
Pago 18
March 3, 1981
felt from conversations with the DER and the County lIealth Department,
that Lcly Estates has done everything possible to remedy the sewer
system. Mr. Pettit took issue with Mr. McAnly's statement by referring
to a letter he received from the DER, in answer to his complaint to
them. He quoted the letter d~ted February 25, I~Rl which stated, "The
sewage backups expcrienced by residents of LAnai Circle were due to
grcase blocking the collection lines. This caused an odor as the
sewage became septic, when it was not allowcd to flow to the treatment
plant." ~r. Pettit contended if the plant had been properly maintained
the situation might not have occurred.
Mr. Barton re-emphasized his plea for Board consideration of
Petition CP-80-l~C as it pertains to traffic generation and the traffic
load which lIawaii Blvd. is designed to carry; the projected new sewer
system and he refuted the claim that property values would he
destroyed. When Commissioner Winer asked Mr. Barton if he understood
that, even if the Roard adopted thc staff recommendation, there would
be no guarantee of a zoning change on the property. Mr. Barton agreed
with Commissioner Wimer's statement that the burden of proof would be
on the developer to try and solve some of the area problems when the
re~one petition is brought hefore the Board.
Commissioncr Kruse asked the County Attorney if she was correct in
her interpretation that the basic question today is whether or ~ot the
four Commissioners believe that n to 4 units per acre is the
appropriate zoning designation for the property in question. Mr.
Pickworth answered affirmatively, and said that, basically, if the
Board feels that 0 to 4 units per acre is the correct zoning, the Board
800K 059 fACE 666
Page 19
BOOK 059 PACE 667
March 3, 19A1
has no legal obligation to change the designation to something else.
Mr. nosenth~l asked to have two points clarified, for the record:
1. Since Mr. Rarton stated the DER had graded the sewage system
as able to handle approximately son,nno gallons per day, and
he acknowledge during the sudden rainfall that under 1(,0,000
~allons per day were handled, which would be below capacity,
why was there sewer back-up?
? How could Mr. Barton's proposed project achieve a 37 rating
from a possible .0, when the Fnvironment~l Advisor whom Mr.
Rosenthal consulted said he had not been consulted regarding
the project and that department represents 5 points on the
rAting scale?
Mr. Mc^nly explained he hAd a letter from the DER which states the
pumping station is approved for 1/? mgd. He explained that the added
silt and slud~e from the sudden heavy rainfall contributed to the
particular problem which Mr. Rosenthal described.
**********rommissioner Brown left the room at IO:50 A.M.
RF,Cr:SS:
10:53 ^.M.
RF:CONVf.NF,D:
II:OO A.M...........
Hearing there were no further persons registered to speak
regarding petition CP-P.O-lr,C, Commissioner Kruse moved, seconded by
Commissioner Brown and carried 4/n, with Commissioner Wenzel absent,
that the public hearing be closed. Commissioner Kruse moved, seconded
by Commisisoner Brown and carried 4/n, with Commissioner Wenzel absent,
that the Goard accept the staff recommendation and approve CP-AO-l~C
requesting the Comprehensive LAnd Use element amendment from
rpsidential low to medium density, 0 to 4 units per gross acre, to
residential medium to high, (,.22 to ~o units per acre, with the
stipulation that the petitioner write a letter agreeing not to remove,
but actively support, the petition re "PUD" for 12 units per acre
currently in the Community Development Department, and that the
Page 20
March 3, 1981
ordinance numbered and titled bclow be adopted and entered into
Ordinance Book n12..
The following letters in opposition to CP-RO-l(,C were received:
foIr. Eric Larson
!'Irs. R. \,anless
"'s. Laura V. Harrop
"'r. and Mrs. William Douglas
Mr. Alfred E. Stevcns
Dr. Paul and Dorothy Gross
Mrs. Raymond R. Riersach
Ms. Olga M. Rose
Mr. Richard T. Kirchner
Mr. .10scph H. Yemp
Jerry f.. and f.lizabeth Rosenthal
Ch;\rles ~,. and l'mily D. Jaffer
Mr. John Connell
Mr. W. Ford Kenncdy
Carson R. and Letha Hoover
Mrs. Mary Straw
Conley and Bc;\ Poole
Mr. and Mrs. ~,:. G. Quarles, Jr.
K. ~I. Johnson
..,r. and Mrs. H. Fields
ORDINANCE NO. RI-9
7\N ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCF. 79-32, THF. COM-
PRf.IIENSIVE PLAN FOR COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA BY
AMENDING TilE LAND USE ELF.M~NT WORK STUDY AREA M^P
13 FROM RESIDENTIAL LOW TO MEDIUM DENSITY (0-4
UNITS PER GROSS IICRE) TO RESIDENTIAL fo'EDIlfM TO HIGH
DENSITY (~.22-30 UNITS PER GROSS ACRE) ON TilE
FOLLOI,ING DESCRIBED PROPERTY: 1\ PORTION OF BLOCK
17, UNIT 1, LELY TROPICAL ESTATES SUBDIVISION, AS
RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 8, PAGE 50 OF TilE PUBLIC
RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; AND PROVIDING
AN EFFECTIVf. DATE.
aDDI 059 PAtE 668
Page 21
MQK 059 PACE 669
March 3, 1901
BCC WORK~1I0P RE ENFORCEMENT OF FIRE CODES IN BUILDINGS IN COLLIER
COUNTY - "CIIEDULED FOR 3fIO/?,I, AFTERNOON.
Ch~irman pistor noted that he had received a report from the
County M~na~er, which includes a report from thc Community Development
Dcpartmcnt on the change or enforcement of fire codes in Collier
County. Noting th~t he hAS read the rcport and he feels this subject
is complex enough to warrant a workshop to be held on this subject, he
~csi~nate~ the afternoon cf March In,10Pl for such ~ workshop.
Chairman Pistor asked that the press give adequate coverage so that
intcrcstc~ r~rs0ns will he aWure of this fact.
OROI~^NCE NO. 8]-lr RE PETITION CP-PO-18C, RE KIMBREL, BURNS, AN~
CM,LM'DEf1 Rf.0UESTING cn~'PRE!lENSIVE PLAN L"ND USE ELEMENT AMENDMENT
Ff10M r-~ U~IT" PER GROSS ACRE TO ~.77-3n UNITS - ADOPTED WITII TilE
STIPULATIm' TIII'.T ^ COMP^NION Rf.ZO~F: PETITION SET THE MAXIr-<UM OF 12
UNITS PF.f1 "eRr:
Lc~al noticc having been published in the Naples Daily News on
January 30, 1981 as evidenced by Affidavit of publication filed
with the Clerk, puhlic he~ring was opene~ to consider Petition
CP-PO-1PC, filed by Wafaa Assaad, representing Kimbrel, Burns, and
Callander requesting ~ Conprehensive Plan land use element
ancnunent fron residential low to nediun density (O-~ units per
acre) to ncdium to high clensity (15.27-30 units per acre) for land
loc~ted north of state Road 8~, about I and 1/2 miles west of State
Ro"d n51.
planner nicl1ard lIenderlong referred to the Executive Summary
dated 2/19/8] to describe the property to which petition CP-AO-18C
refers, and he inuic~ted the location on an overhead map as the
site in question relates to State Road 84 (Davis Blvd.), Radio Road
Page 22
. .
March 3, 1981
and State Road 951. Mr. Henderlong described the zoning on the
adjacent land as follows: to the north, low to medium residential
(0-4 units per acre); to the e~st-northeast, residential low to
medium density (r,.27-30); and property to the south is agricul-
tural, zoned low to ~edium (0-4). He explained the parcel of land
is approximately r,o i1cres of land. He noted that when the Compre-
hensive plan WAS adopted in 1979, the plan did not provide
sufficient ~edium to high residential density areas for future
development.
Mr. Henderlong referred to the Executive Sum~ary which
explains the reasons for staff recommendation for approval with
regard to the need for multi-fa~ily residential rental units which
would not i~pact an established or existing residential single
family development, and he noted that the proposed use would be an
efficient and economical extension of community support services
and facilities. On January 29, 19RI, he said the CCPA held a
public meeting and by a vote of 5/0 recommended approval of
CP-BO-IBC, based upon the maximum of 17 units per acre by companion
rezone and the need to provide for more rental housing in Collier
County.
Mr. Wafaa Assaad of Wilson, Miller, Barton, SolI and Peek,
representin~ the petitioner, explained that petition CP-BO-lBC
addresses a definite need in Collier County, and he said the site
was specifically selected because of the following reasons:
1. The site is highly accessible.
2. The site is not surrounded by existing developments.
t'a<jc 23
aoox 059 PACE 570
~OOK 059 PACE 671
March 3, 1981
3. There is a complete range of community services and
f~cilities available to the property.
Mr. Assaad explained the developer has a companion "PUD"
rezone petition filed and in process in the Planning Department.
He indicated three representatives of the dcveloper Are present if
the Board has any questions.
Commissioner wimer commented th~t hc hoped the project would
be successful. He~ring thilt no one was registered to spcak from
the public, Commissioner Rrown moved, seconded by Commissioner
Kruse and c~rrie~ ~/n, with Commissioner Wenzel absent, to close
the public he~ring. Commissioncr Wimer moved, seconded by
Commissioner Brown ~nd carried ~/n, with Commissioner Wenzel
absent, th~t petition cp-nn-IRC be ~pproved as recommended by staff
with thL stipul~tion that a companion rezone petition set the
m~ximum of 12 units per acre and that the ordinance as numbered and
titled below be adopted and entered into Ordinance Book No. 12.
ORDINANCE NO. PI-lO
AN ORDINANCE AMF.NDING ORDINANCF. 79-32, THE COM-
PRF.llENSIVE PLAN FOR COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, BY
AMF.NDING THF. LAND USE ELEMENT \~OR'< STUDY AREA MAP
!3 FROM RESIDENTIAL MF.DIUM DENSITY (n-~.22 UNITS
peR GROSS ACRE) TO RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM TO HIGH
DENSITY (G.22-30 UNITS PER GROSS ACRE) ON THE
FOLLOWING DF.SCRJRED PROPERTY: THE F.AST 1/2 OF THE
EAST 1/2 OF TilE SOUTH~JEST ] /~ ANI' THE v!EST l/? OF
TilT' NORTH EAST 1 / ~ OF TilE SOUTl1\'lEST 1/4, SECTION 4,
TOWNSllIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 2G EAST, COLLIER COUNTY,
FLORIDA, LESS ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY: AND PROVIDING AN
EFFECTIve D,A,TE.
page 24
March 3, 1981
.....Commissioner wimer left the room: 11:12 A.M.;
Returned: 11:15 A.M......
ORDIN^NCE NO. HI-II RE PROHIBITION OF GLASS CONTAINERS ON rUBLIC
BEACHES ^ND BE^CII ^CCESS AREAS OF COLLIER COUNTY - ADOPTED
Legal notice havin~ been published in the Naples Daily News on
Febru~ry 11, 19RI as evidenced by Affid~vit of publication filed with
the Clerk, public hearing was opened to consider the proposed ordinance
regarding prohibition of glass containers on public beaches and beach
access areas of Collier County.
County Manager C. Willian Norman briefly explained the proposed
ordinance which prohihits glass containers from being brought to the
public beaches and beach access areAS of Collier County. North Naples
Civic Association representative Mike Zewalk heartily encouraged the
Commiss:oners to pass said ordinance and said such an ordinance to
protect the beaches anc users from broken glass is an utmost need to
the people of Collier County. Commissioner Prown thanked Mr. Zewalk
and asked that his comments be recorded.
Hearing that there was no one else registered to speak from the
public, Commissi~ner wimer moved, seconded by Commissioner Brown and
carried ~/O, with Commissioner Wenzel ~bsent, that the public he~rinq
be closed. commissioner Wimer moved, seconded by Commissioner Brown
and carried 4/0, with Commissioner Wenzel absent, that the Ordinance as
numbered and entitled below be adopted and entered into Ordinance Book
No. 12.
&001\ 059 PACE 672
page '5
March 3, 1981
BOOK 059 PAGE 673
ORDINANCE NO. 81-11
AN ORDINANCE PERTAINING TO Till': PUBLIC BI':ACHES AND
BEACH /lCCESS ARI':AS OF TilE COUNTY; PROHIBITING THE
T/lKING OF GLI\SS CONTAINI::r.S ON THE BEACIIES /lND BEACH
ACCESS ARE/lS; AND PROVIDING /IN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Page 26
March 3, 1981
RATE INCREASE WASTE MANAGEMENT (YAHL BROS.) - APPROVED; REVISED
ADDENDUM TO RATE STRUCTURES AND I\UTIIORIZATION TO BILL IN ADVANCE FOR
COMMERCIAL CUSTOt-1ERS TO BE PREPARED AND BROUGIIT BACK TO BOARD FOR
ADOPTION - APPROVED. PROPOSED REVENUE OF S794,OSI (27% RATE OF RETURN
BEFORE TAXES - AT TIIIS TIME) - APPROVED
Legal notice having been puhlished in the Naples Daily News on
February 1, 1981 as evidenced by Affidavit of publication filed with
the Clerk, public henring was opened to consider a rate increase
requested by Waste Management, Inc. (Ynhl Brothers Waste Disposal).
Public ~orks Administra~or/Engineer Clifford Barksdale said the
County's consultants, Associated Utilities Services, Inc., h~ve
submitted their study and recommendation, copies of which are in the
Executive Summary dated 2/20/81. Mr. Barksdale explained that with
this rate request, the staff is recommending the consideration of the
elimination of the once-a-week back yard service, because of the
difficulty of administering the increased costs associated with said
service. Mr. Barksdale stated that the County consultant witnesses,
Mr. Joseph F. Brennan and Mr. Stuart McDaniel, are present to explain
their recommendations and answer any questions.
Attorney Jack Stanley, from Vega, Brown, Nichols, Stanley and
Martin, representing Yahl Brothers Disposal, pointed out to the Board
that the franchise agreement calls for the hearing rate to be ~ quasi-
judicial hearing; Yahl Bros. has a court reporter present; and the
company intends to present sworn testimony for the Commissioners'
consideration. He introduced Co-Counsel Attorney Ira Abrams, from
Miami, and explained that Mr. 7\brams would do most of the cross
examinations of the witnesses. Mr. Stanley stated that Yahl Bros.
General Manager Ron Markham and District Controller Edward C. Bacom
aoox 059 PACE 674
page :17
alWll 059 PACE 675
March 3, 19B1
would also testify.
Mr. Stanley stated that Waste Management of Florida took over Yahl
Brothers' operation on July 1, 1979, and, he said, since that time the
services and financial records have been upgraded and expanded with
over 1/2 million dollars spent on equipment. He pointed out that the
franchise ageement provides that Yahl Bros. or Waste Management, Inc.
is deserving of a fair return which includes a reasonable profit. Mr.
Stanley said the cour~~ 'q consultant has said that the rate base, rate
return approach is the proper approach, and he noted his firm agrees
with this statement.
Mr. Stanley said that on I\pril I, 1980, based upon County
Consultant Brennan's recommendation, the Board approved a 27% rate of
return for Yahl Bros. and contended that testimony would prove that
Waste management "came no where near" that dollar figure, but actually
the firm lost dollars on the Collier County operation. According to
the consultants' report, Mr. Stanley noted that Mr. Brennan is, this
year, recommending a reduction of 25% for rate of return, which he
deemed unfair. Mr. Stanley referred to Associated Utility Services'
Inc., projection last year, which stated that based upon their
recommendations for rate increases, Yahl Bros. would take in an
additional approximate $19~,OOO. He said that in I\US's report this
year, the Company stated they suspected that the money would not be
produced, and Mr. Stanley contended that AUS now admits their
Page 28
March J, 1981
suspicions were confirmed. He said that more people switched to twice
a week curbside service than was anticipated, which resulted in lower
revenues to Yahl Bros.
Mr. Stanley stated that since Yahl Bros.'s budget was prepared
last summer cost factors have escalated. He refuted Mr. Brennan's
assumption that the prine rate for the year would avera~e l~' ann that
the 14% was about equal to the prime rate in 1980. Mr. Stanley re-
minded th~ ~0~rd that any rate increase approved at this hearing would
be collected effective ^pril I, 1981; since a full year of 1981 figures
were used for revenue generation by Yahl Bros. and Mr. Brennan, but
~onies collected will only he for 9 months, Mr. Stanley contended the
projected revenue generation would not be accurate.
Mr. Stanley said that ^US's customer count of 2100 is an
artificial figure, since ^US based the multi-units (condominiums)
customer count on January, February, and March figures. He stated
those three months are peak usage months hut that June, July and ^ugust
customer count is much lower. His firm averaged the year and used the
customer count figure of 1350. He stated since the report w~s
prepa~ed, fuel costs h~ve "sky-rocketed".
Mr. Stanley listed the following concerns to substantiate his
argument for Yahl Bros.' rate increase request:
I. Fuel costs have escalated since the budget was prepared; he
referred to a recent newspaper article which stated Collier
County is the most expensive place to buy fuel in the State
of Florida.
2.
The Sfi,OOO figure allocated for bad debts
feel a more realistic figure is S24,000.
the reasons for this contention.
is low; Yahl Pros.
He elaborated on
"ell 059 ~676
Page 29
&~ 059 WE 6TI
March 3, 1981
3. If the County consultant's recommendation for 25% rate of
return was approved, and that figure was used, and if the
extra projected expenses that Yahl Dros. contends the company
deserves were added, an additional ~~ cents, per month, per
customer increase would result; if the 27\ rate of return was
approved, another 16 cents would be available to Yahl Bros.
or a total of (,5 cents.
~. Yahl Bros. is in the husiness to make money and attract
investment capital; the County's consultant has failed to
consider the nost current data available, which would allow
Yahl Rros. to make the reasonable profit which the Company's
franchise agreement provides.
Chairman pistor asked if yahl Bros., in their present contemplated
rates, was tryin~ to achieve their profit in nine months for a full
year, and he asked If such were the case, what happens next year? Mr.
Stanley stated that the company has asked by letter for next year's
rate hearing to he scheduled, before the Board, so that a full year
will be covered. nesponding to Chairman Plstor, Mr. Stanley stated the
conpsny ~culd like to achieve a position with the Board, whereby a fair
rate of return has been obtained and any rate increase request could
then he "tied Into the cost of living index".
Yahl Bros. Manager Ron Markham was sworn in and he explained that
the first six months' ownership was spent upgrading the equipment,
which had been allowed to deteriorate, hefore service improvement could
be achieved.
He referred to the April, 1980 rate increase granted the
conpsny by the Board, hut said that in May, ]980 Yahl Eros. was still
dissatisfied with the quality of service which was rendered and a
nans~ement chan~e was instituted which resulted in replacement and
upgrading of office staff; the billing system was converted to
conputerization; safety and driver training programs were instituted, II
complaint reporting system was initiated for better service and public
PlIg. ..30
March 3, 19111
.
relations; work orders and preventive maintenance were instituted; over
300 cOMmercial containers have been repaired; and the company is still
in the process of upgrading commercial service. He acknowledged some
problems remain but contended there h~s been a "lOO~ turn-around" in
service, which Yahl Bros. provides now. He concluded that Yahl Bros.
Is asking the Commissioners to allow the company to collect the
revenues, which will allow the rate of return previously granted by the
Commission.
Co-Counsel Ira Abrams called District Controller Edward C. Racom,
who was sworn in and gave his background, experience, and educational
qualifications; and indicated he has had approximately fi and 1/2 years
g25
experience in the waste industry, since he had audited Waste
Management, Inc. while he was employed with the auditing firm of Arthur
Anderson and Company; he has been employed by Waste Management, Inc.
for 3 and 1/2 years. A long cross examination followed during which
Mr. Bacom testified to the following items:
I. On behalf of Waste ~anagement, Inc., Yahl Bros. Disposal, on
approKimately June ]5, 1979, he entered into a franchise
agreement and addendum with Collier County; he identified the
franchise agreement and ~ddendum No.1, shown to him by Mr.
Abrams; stated to the best of his knowledge, though the
copies were not executed, that said documents were the same
agreement and addendum; and Mr. Abrams offered said documents
into evidence.
2. lie stated that he understood that according to said franchise
and addendum, the documents were to provide a basis for the
Commission to give Y~hl Bros. a rate of return; he filed an
application of rate increase; appeared before the Board
approximately April 1, 19RO; and the Board approved a '7~
rate of return on investment.
3. For calendar year ending December 31, 19BO, the Company
PAge 31
MOX 059 rACE 678
M(lX 059 PACE 679
March 3, 1981
sustained a pre-tax, pre-interest loss of $55,500, which is a
negative 4.8% return on investment.
4. lie reviewed ^ssociated Utility Services', Inc. current
report, suhmitted for consideration in conjunction with the
currcnt petition for a rate increase; he does agree with the
findings of the County's consultant with respect to rate
base, which is the company's investment reflected in the
deprcciated value of the company's fixed assests plus a
component to provide the company with working capital to
operate their business.
5. ITe acknowlcdged ~'r. Stuart McDaniel prepared the operating
expcnse segment of the AUS report, to which Mr. Bacom
rli sag rccd . Ile cx pI a 1 ned the ph llosophy wi th wh ich \o.'aste
Management prepares their budgets in approximately July of
each year with a final approved budget in the mid-fourth
~uarter of the year, after iL is approved by corporate.
I
G. Consideration of extraordinary expenses were given for the
year in question; some expense projection increases now fall
short of what thc company feels might happen since deregu-
lation of fuel, and the manpower and equipment change which
the company did as a result of managemcnt change.
7. Last year's hudget reflected maintenance area problems; this
ycar's recent review of equipment measurements show the items
are virtually on budget.
8. ruel conjcctured price rise by the end of l~PI resulted in an
increase of fuel expense projection of $1",000 above what is
alrearly in the burlget; Mr. McDaniel included SIR,SOO to be
added to fuel budget expenses; the datA developed by Mr.
Brennan and ~r. McDaniel for their projections took place
bcfore deregulation on J~nuary 20, 1081; the original rate
increase petition as of 9/30/RO was filed on 12/3/BO. Tire
projections should be increased, since Mr. Bacom contended
their cost will be effected hy the petroleum industry deregu-
lation.
n F.laboration on the !Jrocedure userl to upgrade Vahl Bros.
deteriorated truck equipment was presented.
10. Thc barl debt situation was discussed; with a year-end addi-
tional projection of SlP,OOO the company feels will occur in
19P1, which nccds to be covered in this rate increase
request.
11. Customer count conflict was explained, since the Comp~ny
answered Mr. ~'cDanicls' interrogatory with a condo count as
of January 1, of 2100 customers; this was the number upon
Page 32
March 3, 1981
which Mr. McDaniel baseo his computations; 2100 is the
se~sonal high customer count; yearly average count woulo he
1600 or 1700.
12. Mr. Brennan used an income tax rate for the Company of ~5~1
published rate for 1979 was ~5.8~; projected rate will he
approximately 4(,% for 1980 ~nd 1981.
13. Debt equity ratio was discussed; ~r. Brennan used information
as of (,/30/00; published information of 0/30/80 was availahle
before the ^US report of February?, 19RI; Mr. Bacom
contenoed the correct oebt equity ratio as of 9/10/no was
approximately ?(,~ debt, 74~ equity, which changes the
relationship that Mr. Brennan oeveloped of 22.2~ debt ano
72.0% equity. Mr. Brcnnan used the same (,/30/PO oate to
calculate capitalization of I-.'astc ~1ana<Jement, Inc.; publisher1
material was available after that oate.
Mr. Bacon concluded that v'aste Managcment, Inc. is ask,ing thp.
Board to leave the rate of return established by prcvious agreement at
27% and to give some consideration to the extraordinary expcnses ,which
the Comnany expects to experience. Responding to Chairman pistor, ~r.
Bacorn stated the Company buys their gasoline through bulk tanks.
********RECESS:
12:00 Noon
RECONVENED:
1:45 P.M.***....
At the beginning of the afternoon scssion, Fiscal Officer/Chief
Deputy Clerk Harold Hall explained he would administcr the oath to
those witnesses 'who appeared before thc Board, and he oid so as each
witness appeared.
Mr. Abrams requested permission to continue covering areas of
concern with questions to Mr. Bacom. Mr. Bacom clarified that the
revenues which he was seeking on bchalf of Waste Managenent, Inc. WAS
3/4's of a year because, the first quarter revenue is forever lost.
Mr. Abrams askeo that the rate application and the budget be marked and
offcred as evidence and asked that these items be covered later in the
~ 059 I\\tf 680
page 3J
BOOK 059 PACE 681
March 3, 1981
discussion. ^ discussion followed during which decisions were reached
re~nrding the order of appe~rance of witnesses for Waste ~anagement and
the County.
During ~r. Ahrams' questioning of Mr. Bacorn, Mr. Bacom explained
that ~aste Manngement, Inc. would ask the Board to consider an
ndditional S7~,nOn for expenses due to cost escal~tion and the higher
income tax rate of ~5.?~. Mr. Bacom explained the 7.7\ rate of return
which is requeste~ is pre-tax, pre-interest. Chairman pistor
questioned the importance of the 6/30,/80, date as it relates to the
figures used hy Mr. Brennnn, and Mr. Abrams stated that the testimony
would show that the data available after r,/3n/AO was absolutely
essential for a fair return to be computed. l1e stated that the
statement of Waste Management, Inc. is a consolidated statement; he
clarified Mr. Bacon's earlier testimony regarding debt ratio and said
Waste ~anagement believes Yahl Bros. should stand on its own. Another
discussion covered the way in which the witnesses would be allowed to
testify for hoth ~aste Management and the County, with the decision
made that Mr. Silverman would he recognized as nn expert witness for
Waste Man~gement, Inc. and that no new information would be introduced
by Waste Management, Inc. that is not included in their report.
risc~l Officer lIall administered the oath to Mr. Stuart ~cDaniel
and Mr. Joseph r. Brennan, of ^ssociated Utility Services, Inc., County
Consultants. Mr. Brennan took issue with Waste Management's estimation
that gasoline will cost $7..0,5 per gallon by the end of 1~8l. Mr.
McDaniel referred to the l/B/Bl, Interrogatory ~7 and quoted: "~xplain
any unhudgeted expenses items." Mr. McDaniel noted that the answer to
Page 34
March 3, 19A1
this item was a question mark; he contended that Waste Management, Inc.
had ample opportunity to include amounts for unbudgeted expenses.
Responding to Mr. McDaniel, Mr. Bacom clarified how the condominium
customer count discrepancy occurred. ^fter continued discussion, Mr.
McDaniel asked what rates Waste Management, Inc. w~s now requesting,
and ~r. Racom stated the company was asking for the opportunity to earn
27% return on income which would generate revenue residentially of
$8fi8,100; total revenue of ~1,7~7,(,95. ~r. McDaniel said it was his
undarston~i~g that the Po~rrl Wng to approve rates the Company will
charge; ~r. Ahrams took issue with this statement and said under the
franchise that the only issue to be decided was a rate of return and
that individual pick-up charges were not to be dccided at this time.
Mr. Brennan contended once a revenue requirement is established
that specific rates are established, that the way to develop rates is
to establish what the expenses and investments are; he added that rate
base, rate of return methodology is the technique employed to "get the
rates". Commissioner Kruse noted that the agenda item and public
notice stated the hearing was to set the rates and to approve a rate
increase and that nothing was said about a percentage of return for the
Company. County Attorney Pickworth agreed.
During Mr. Brennan's testimony he refuted Waste ~anagement's
contention that gas costs would be as high as the Company is esti-
mating; he related how he achieved the figurc of $1.41 per gallon of
gasoline in his computations; and how he computed his recommendation of
25\ rate of return before interest. A lengthy discussion resulted in
Mr. Brennan explaining why he used Value Line Beta data, explanation of
~O~~~
Page 35
&OOK 059 rm683
March 3, 1981
what Beta data is and why his figures differ with the data used by
Waste Management, Inc. lie explained his recommendation of 25\ hefore
income tax overall rate of return; said he used Waste Management, Inc.
as the parent of Yahl Bros., as a whole proxy, which is a technique
employed by many regulatory juris~ictions, when hoth the debt an~
equity are r~iserl hy the parent. He noted that in late 1900 Waste
Management, Inc. sold $25 million tax free bonds that paid 7 and l/Z\,
and that he reflected that 7 and 1/2% in his computations. He
explained why his report reflects a ~5% income tax rate; and his method
of computing the capital structures ratio, debt and equity.
Mr. McDaniel explained his assi1nment to review expenses and
investment data filed by Yahl Bros. December 3, 1980 in support of
their rate application, said data based on the financial results of
opc~ations by Yahl Bros. for the six month historical actual period
ending September 30, 1980. He explained after that review, a field
investigation and subsequent financial revenue reports for the months
of October, November, December as well as January 19RI, nus used Yahl
Bros. 1981 bud'Jet ilnd the actual 19f1O data and concluded this
information was an appropriate basis for setting rates for this
proceeding. lie elaborilted on the difficulty which resulted in
obtaining an accurate customer count, and explained that though Yahl
P.ros. indicated they were serving 8,3S1 customers, nu~ concluded that
was understated, because the revenues being received at that time were
greater than the multiplication of the number of customers times the
rates. lie stated that for the purpose of setting rates, nus charged
Yahl Bros. with 9,511. He explained why AUS recommended an increase of
PlIge 36
March 3, 1981
$144,967, which is a 23.1% overall increase in the present rates.
Tires: He refuted the Company's increased expcnse rcquest for
tircs, because the records which were kept last year do not accurately
project what the tire expenses will be for this year, since $65,000 was
budgeted for this year, but only $30,000 w~s actually reflected as
being uscd for tires.
Bad Dcbts: lie explained that the Company included $1;,000 for this
g 38
item but now claims it will be higher and he svb~itted that ~ large
part of the bad debts resulted from the problems the Company inherite~
with the old billing system and that the S24,000 the COMpany claims for
bad debts is not reflective of the on-going Company.
Multi-Unit Concomlniums: Mr. McDaniel expl~ined that about 32
multi-unit condominium owners are billed on a bulk basis with the
owners reporting the number of users at any given Month, and that the
Company affords a discount from the published rates. He explained the
2117 multi-unit number furnished by the Company on 1?/17/RO, and he
noted that the rate applied was the average rate, a lower rate than the
actual rate as of 1?/17/80. He said based on AUS' study, the
determined annualized revenues at present rates from residential
customers was $(,27,000 a year, and he added if the month of January
figures are used and annualized, that amount is some $20,000 higher
than the former figure, which suggests that AUS' estimate is a
reasonable one.
Chairman pistor asked if there was an amendment to data he ha~
seen and revised schedules were given to the Commissioners with the
aoOK 059 PACES84
page 37
BOOX 059 PACE 685
March 3, 1981
explanation that those schedules were presented the previous evening,
at the meeting held between staff, consultants, and representatives
from Waste Managcment, Inc. and Y~hl Bros. Mr. McDaniel explained two
changcs which resulted in the revised schedule correcting a computation
of the franchise tax and rcflecting an increase in the fuel budget of
$1?, 500. He sa id those two items resul ten in a sl ight change in two of
the ratcs required in order to achieve the computed revenue deficiency,
$1~~,9r,7. Mr. McDaniel noted the suggestion to drop once a week back
door servicc; cxplalned how excluding the present 28R customers of that
service and changing them to twice a week, hack door service would
indicate a rate change, the figure $7.97 would become $7.40 to produce
the samc amount of revcnues.
*****Commiss;0ner ~imer left the room at 7:50 P.M.;
Rcturned: 7:55 P.M.*****
A lengthy discussion between Mr. Abrams and Mr. Brennan occurred
which covered the reasons why Mr. Brennan used Value Line Beta data
instead of Merrill Lynch Beta data, used by Waste Management, Inc. with
each gentleman prcsenting arguments to support their reasoning.
****Commissioncr 8rown left the room at ~:50 P.M.;
Returncd At J:S3 P.M.****
Other topics covercd in the discussion were computations involved
in dctermining the risk factor for Yahl Bros.; the prime rate as it
applies to the calculations, weightcd averages, and increased gasoline
cost estimates.
Commissioner Kruse asked if the statement that Yahl Brou.
'.......
..--...
money refers to straight operational income and outgo or if it reflects
Page 38
March 3, 1981
the purchase of capital assets, trucks, etc., which the Company owns.
Mr. Brennan responded that the Company lost money on straight
operations, and Mr. McDaniel explained to arrive at the net loss of
$55,000, there was $115,000 non cash depreci~tion, a valid operation
expense but not a cash opcrating expense.
Attorney Warren Z. Silverman, rcpresenting Waste Mana~ement, Inc.
as an expert witness, was sworn in by Mr. HHll; acknowledged he had
read the franchise Hgreemcnt and the exhibits; which staff had
forMulated as addendUM ^l; conten0en the Agreement states the County
will establish a fair ratc of return and the revenues required for the
company to have an opportunity to approach that rate of return. He
explaincd after the rate is established, it is his view that the
COMpany setS the tariffs and comes back to the Board for approval or
disapproval. In a lengthy question and ~nswer session between himself
and Mr. Abrams, Mr. Silverman presented his opinions to substantiate
earlier testimony given that Waste Management, Inc. needed a 27% pre
tax r~te of return; his opinion of the Beta factor; compared Charlotte
Sanitation, a Waste Management, Inc. division in Charlotte County,
where he represents the County, with Yahl Bros. operation; and he
explained that Charlottc Sanitation's rates ~re guaranteed since they
are in the form of an asscssment.
......Commissioner Rrown left the room:
3:28 P.~1.
Returned: 3:30 P.M.......
Continued testimony by Mr. SilverMan occurrcd.
....Rr.Cr.SS: 3:35 P.M. RECONVf.Nf.D: 3:55 P.M.....
Commissioner Kruse noted that the last proposed rates which she
MOK 059 PACE 686
page 3~
m~ 059 ~CE687
March 3, 1981
had were those rates published in the newspaper as existing, Naste
~ana~ement, Inc. requested and Consultant proposed rates. She asked if
the proposed column reflects the 25% return on investment and Mr.
Silverm~n answered affirmatively. When she asked if the Waste
M~nagement, Inc. column reflected the 27% rAte of return or higher, ~r.
Silverman anfiwered, ,"l1igher"; Commissioner Kruse asked how much higher
the rate would need to be. ^t this tine, Assistant Attorney pires
relayed Mr. Pickworth's request that thc heAring not proceed for a few
ninutcs until hp (;nllld rptllrn t.n thp room..
Mr. Pickworth cxpl~ined that Mr. Brennan would have a short
rebuttal period. Mr. Brenn~n elaborated on the prime rate; the
procedure wherehy the Feder~l Reservc Po~rd changed the re-discount
rate downward in Ma~ch 19rn, the narket continued on that trend until
October 198n when the Fedcr~l Reserve Board reversed themselves and
increased the re-discount rate and how this trend related to his
computations. Ile suggested that the Merrill Lynch Company has a Beta
cssentially the sar:le as a year ago for h'aste ~'anagement, whereas Value
Line had a Bet~ tod~y that is significantly less th~n a year ago.
Mr. J~ck Stanley returned and made a closing statement for Waste
Mana~ement, Inc. coverin~ the COr:lpany's stated loss of $55,000, his
contention that Collicr County has a very high cost of living, and he
presented his arguments for his opinion that Yahl Bros. c~n provide the
needed service at a much less cost than the customers can provide for
theMselves.
Mr. Barksdale stAted a fair rate of return in a franchise is
subject to change each year, upward or downward. He stated he felt
pag e 40
March 3, 1981
thcre had been sufficient testimony to determine a fair rate of return
for this coming year; he noted that the rate of return is indicative of
the risk, and the more factors which are included in the budget which
take out risk, such as cost indcxing for gasolinc pricing, that in turn
the rate of rcturn could be 10~ler. He indicated the following points
of disagrecment between the Consultants, the County staff and ~~r at
last evening's meeting and r~lated the disagreement in terms of
dollars:
1. Custoner count - ~i.5,r00.
2. 8~d Debts - $18,000
1 Fuel Cost - Slr-,OOO
4. Tire Cost - $15,000 - total doll~rs disagreement $74,000.
Mr. Bark~ridle explained how the staff would compromise on these
four items of disH9reement as follows:
1. Customer count could he adjusted to 1~,080 to 17,000 or
dollar amount of SI2,~On.
? Best debt issue should not be increased because A lot of the
debt was commercial and related to the fact that the Company
bills after-the-fact instead of in adv~nce as is done for
residential customers. He said the County offered to inclu~e
in the instructions for the rate increase this year thAt the
Company have authority to bill in Hdv~nce for commercial
accounts.
3. Fuel cost would be a compromise from Sl.43, County figure
cost per ~allon, and 51.59, WMI's figure, to $].59 per gallon
of gasoline or SB,Cno additional.
4. Tire cost would be split 50-50 to be $7,500.
Mr. Barksdale stated instead of $772,004 proposed revenue on the
revised statement which the Commissioners now have, $2~,OOO would be
~dded to that figure if his figures above were accepted, which would he
page III
aOOK 059 PACE 688
&oox 059 rACE 689
March 3, 1901
added to WMI's operating cost, so that the rate of return would remain
at 25\. lie said if the Board grants just an additional $'8,000 in
revenue without costing that amount to the operational side, a '-7.5\
rate of return would be given versus the 7.5% which is currently
indicated in the chart.
Mr. Bacom disputed ~r. Barksdale's figures and said that the
following approximate rates would answer an earlier question of what
the rates would he if WMI were granted their requested increase:
nnce/~eek Rack Door
Tllice/\^leek Curb
Twice/Week Back roor
~, u I t i- Un i t
~r,.95
S".7.5
SI'.90
$r,.00
Commissioner Brown asked what the Board promised the Company last
year and ~r. Bacom answered on April 1, 1980, when the existing rates
were grar~ed, the Board stated the Company would be allowed to return
to ask for a rate increase; he contended the Company was not allowed to
return as soon as they should have heen, hut he agreed with Attorney
Pickworth that the Board did not promise or guarantee a rate of 27\.
Responding to Chairman pistor's question, Mr. Bacom stated the ~bove
rates would generate the following projected revenue: SP"P,IOO,
residential revenue and ~ total of Sl,7"7,"95. Responding to
Commissioner Wimer, ~r. Bacom said that if the Commission approved
\'/t-'I's request, the Company would come bilck with definitive rates, but
he said he would defer to his Company's rate consultant for exact
fi'Jures.
Commissioner Kruse noted that she was not aware the Board was to
set a given rate of return for WMI's investment at this hearing, since
Pllge 42
March 3, 1901
as the situation was presented to her the Board was to establish rates,
which were based upon a return for the COMpany's investment. She
stated she had to know what the cost to the custOMer would be. She
said that although WMI said the Board is not gUAranteeing a 25% or 27\
return that by the same token, that essentially the Board would be
guaranteeing that perccntage if thc Board adjusted those rates to give
the company that 25% or 27%. The end question, she stated is how much
does it the affect person paying thcir garbage bill, and she contended
that the consultant rate apparently was based on 25% and had an X
dollar amount to the customer, whilc the WMI requested rate was
probably much more, i.e. 35~ or ~O% return on investment. Now, she
said ,',.,1 was asking for 27% and she did not likc plain percentagc
rates. Mr. Cdcom stated WMI would accept the "rough" rates he
prcviously quoted. Commissioner Kruse asked if the County Consultants
were in ~greement with those ratcs, to which the response was negative.
County ~'anager vJilliar1 Norman pointed out that those rates woulc1 give
WMI the percentage rate of return they requested; the full increased
gasoline cost requested; the had debt increase cost; and the incre~sec1
costs for tires with which the staff disagrees.
The following registered speakers spoke in opposition to the rate
increasc:
Mr. Bruce Holly
pAr. Lou Mason
Mr. Donald Hodges
Mr. Leo Teplow, representing Lely villas II, CondominimuM ~ssn.
During Mr. Teplow's discourse, Commissioner wimer clarified that
~I)OI 059 nCE 69D
Page II:!
MOll 059 WE 691
March 3, 1981
the former owners of Yahl Bros. are now in the business of hauling fill
and those were the trucks Mr. Teplow had seen recently on the street,
which have nothing to do with Yahl Bros. business currently under
discussion. Co~missioner Brown moved, seconded by Commissioner Wimer
and CArried din, with Commissioner Wenzel ~bsent, that the public
he~rin'J be closed.
Co~nissioner Wimer asked for clarification regarding the
multi-unit discount to which Mr. Teplow referred and Mr. Markham
explained this practice was in process when he beca~e manager; there
was no provision for the discount in the franchise; and he explained
how such discount is handled. Co~missioner wimer sug'Jested that at
another time this part of the franchise should be addressed with regard
to multi-unit ~iscounts. Commissioner ~imer asked what the 27~ relates
to after taxes and ~fter a short discussion, Mr. McDaniel referred to
Schedule tr of Mr. Brennan's testimony, and stated that the overall
r~te of return after taxes is It,.8d~, which includes a l7~ return on a
72.r~ common equity ratio.
^ discussion followed regarding proposed rates. Mr. B~rksdale
addressed the problem of how the rates would be affected if once a week
hack door service was eliminated. Commissioner Yruse noted that
subject waS not covered in the published notice of this hearing.
Commissioner wimer stated he was personally unwilling at this time to
change the method of pickup but would be happy to discuss that item at
a separate time. Mr. Silverman explAined that he had an opportunity to
compute the rates at 27~ before tax rate of return; referred the
Commissioners to revised schedule ~5 and noted the rates as followsl
Pllge 44
March 3, 1981
Once/Week Back Door
Twice/Week Curb
Twice/Week Back Door
Multi-Unit
$6.40
$5.50
SO.15
$5.30
He stated that as these rates equate to $772,004 shown as proposed
revenue, S22,047 would be added to thAt nUMher, which would generate
S794,051 as proposed revenue. lie said there may he a 550 or $60
difference lower, when the rates are extended. Mr. Silverman SAid he
used Mr. McDaniel's customer count on revised schedule ~5 for that
computation. Commissioner Kruse noted that with those rates used, if
there is a twice a week roadside pickup, 2 cans both times, that
essentially breaks down to 34 cents a can and she said she could live
with that. Commissioner Wimer moved, seconded by Commissioner Brown
and carried d/O, Commissioner Wenzel absent, that the Roard authorize
the adoption of the rates of Sh.40; $5.50; SO.15; and S5.30.
****Commissioner Kruse left the room, 5:15 P.M.;
Returned at 5:20 P.M.****
After a short discussion, Commissioner Wimer moved, seconded by
Commissioner Brown and carried 3/0, Commissioners Kruse and ~enzel
absent, that the revised rate structure addenda, which would inc:ude
the authorization to bill in advance for commercial customers, would be
brought hack to the Board for adoption.
After further discussion and at the request of Mr. Abrams the
Board considered the rate of return percentage. Mr. Barksdale noted
that the rate increase was granted without justification according to
the County's consultants, and he said he felt the 25\ rate of return
should be held. After further discussion Commissioner Brown moved,
pag e ., S
&oOK 059 PACE 692
BOOK 059 PACE 693
seconded by Commissioner Wimer and carried 4/0, Commissioner Wenzel
absent, that the Board approve a proposed revenue of $794,051 or '-7'
March 3, 1901
rate of return before taxes at this time.
***At this time Deputy Clerk Skinner was replaced by Deputy Clerk
Brenneman.**.**
POARD APrROVp.s rAY CRADE ?P (MINIMUM LEVP.L S27,9h5) FOR ASSISTANT
COU~TY M~NACCR POSITION
County Manager Norman ~rlvised the Board that the rccommendation
being Mane is hu.sic311y the Ofl~ made the prc'w'!cus we,=,k1 with regard to
the position of Assistant County Manager, with the exception that a
change in the title is no longer being recommended. The reason for up-
grading the position, said Mr. Norman, is set forth in the Executive
Sum~~ry revised March 7, 1981, noting that a job description is at-
tached to the Summary. The recommendation, concluded Mr. Norman, is
for the Eoard to approve the position and title of Assistant County
Manager to be classifierl within pay grade 28, the minimum level of
which is ,77,9(,5.
Commissioner ~imer moved, seconded hy Commissioner Kruse and
carried ~/r with Commissioner Wenzel not in attendance, that the staff
recommendation for reclassification of the Assistant County Manager to
an increased level of responsibility and accountability be approved.
RP.SOLUTION Pl-57 PE PP.TITION PU-7R-2nC, JAMES CALnERWOOD, EXTENDING
PROVISIONAL USP. (5) OF "E" DISTRICT TO AUGUST 20, 19A1, FOR PROPERTY
LnCATFn TN S~7, T50S, R2('F - ADOPTFD
Pursuant to recommendation contained in the Executive Summary
dated February 17, 1901, Commissioner Wimer moved, seconded by Com-
Page "6
March 3, 1901
missioner Brown and carricd 4/0 with Commissioner Wcnzel not present,
that Resolution eO-52 with regard to petition PU-7n-20C, filed by James
Calderwood, extending Provisional Use (5) of the "E" District to ^ugust
20, 1981, for property located In Section 72, Township 50 South, nDnqe
26 East, be adopted.
rage 47
~~~~
.
March 3, 1981
RESOLUTION OI-53 TO RECOVER FUNDS EXPENDED BY COUNTY TO ABATE PUBLIC
NUISANCE ON LOT 3, BLOCK 3, NAPLES MANOR ADDITION - ADOPTED
Commissioner Wimer moved, seconded by Commissioner Brown and car-
ried 3/1 with Commissioncr Kruse voting in opposition and Commissioner
Wenzel not present, that Resolution eO-53 to recover functs expended by
the County to abatc a public nuisAncc on Lot 3, Block 3, Naples Manor
Addition, property owned by W. Dale Cain, be adopted.
800~ 059 PAr.r 696
rag e 1lI1
March 3, 1991
RESOLUTION HI-54 TO RECOVER FUNDS EXPENDED BY COUNTY TO AB^TE PUBLIC
NUISANCE ON EAST IOO' OF LOT 14, UNIT 1, MYRTLE COVE ACRES, BLOCK ^ -
ADOPTF.D
Commissioner Wimer moved, seconded by Commissioner Brown and car-
ried 3/1 with Commissioner Kruse voting in opposition and Commissionor
~Ienzel not present, that I'lesolution eO-54, to recover funds cxpendc<'l by
the County to abatc ~ public nuisance on the East IOO' of Lot
1 A
~ ., I
Unit I, ~yrtle Cove Acres, Rlock A, property owned by Ernn~ Jo Atkisson,
be adopted.
Mal 059 rACE 698
PlUlC II!!
March 3, 1981
RESOLUTION fll-55 TO RECOVER FUNDS F:XPENDm BY COUNTY TO ABATE PtlRLIC
NUISANCE ON LOT 3, BLOCK G, FLAMINGO F:STATES - ADOPTED
Commissioner Wimer moved, seconded by Commissioner Brown and cnr-
ried 3/1 with Commissioner Kruse voting in opposition and Com~issioncr
Wenzel not present, that Resolution nO-55, to recover funds expended by
the County to abate a public nuisunce on Lot 3, Block G, Flamingo
Estates, property owned by Kimball, be adopted.
800K 059 PAGf 700
PllCjO 50
March 3, 19111
CIIAIRMAN AUTIIORIZED TO SIGN CONTR"CT BE'JWEEN THE ST"TE MEDIC"L
EXAMINER~' CO~~ISSInN AND COLLIER COUNTY
Pursuant to recommendation contained in the Executive Summary
dated February 7.3, 1981, as prepared by the Public Safety "d~inis-
trator, Commissioner wimer moved, seconded by Commissioner Brown and
carden ~/o \~ith Com",ission"r Wenzel not present, th~t the Chidrman be
~uthorizen to sign the Contract between the State of Florida IIR9
~edjcal Examiners' Com",ission and Collier County to provide State
supplcmcnt~l fu~dz for County Mp~ic~l Exnminer services.
~Ol 059 m.E 702
Pa90 51
MDK 059 PACE 707
March 3, 1981
STATUS REPORT OF ACTIONS ASSOCIATP.D WITH COUNTY ASSUMING AMBUL^NCE
SERVICE RY rURLIC SAFETY ADMINISTRATOR; RP.COMMENDATIONS FOR SUIT^BLE
M'RllLM,CP. STATION LOCATIONS IN F.AST NAPLF.S AND NORTH NAPLES TO BE
pnp.SENTED TO POARD 3/1n/nl; PROPOSED DF.SIGN FOR COUNTY LOGO TO BE
AFFIXED TO A~nULANCE VEHICLES - APPROVED
Public Safcty Administrator Thomas Hafncr reported to the Board
thc actions which have takcn placc for the County to assume rcspon-
sibility of the ambulance service, as detailed in the Executive Sum-
mary diltccJ rebruilry 7.7, 19"1. }I,mong the actions, s~id Mr. Hafner, is
the sclection of an EMS DepDrtment Dircctor who will be in place per-
manently during the weck of March 9, lQ81, arrangements for an office
to house thc Director and act ilS a storage area for medical supplies,
and the location and arrangement for the North Naples ambulance. Mr.
llilfn"r eXfOlilined that the ~lorth Nilples Fire T'epartment Chief has in-
dicilted that it is fcasible to park the North Naples ambulance at their
Station '7, ano that the ambulance crews will be welcome to use their
lounge and kitchen facilities.
It is proposed, continued Mr. Hafner,
that a small trailer be purchased and placed directly behind the hose
dryin~ rack to provide sleeping quarters for the crew.
fir. Pafncr said that it is further proposed that the Naples
ambulance will be located and ambulance crew housed at the F.ast Naples
Fire Department, Station fll, on Airport Road, ilS coordinated and
approved by the East Naples Fire Chief. Also, it is further recom-
mended that letters be scnt to the Marco Island Fire Commissioners,
Golden Gate rire Association, and Immokalee Fire Chief requesting
permission to use the present facilities for ambulance stations.
The proposed arrangcmcnts wcre discussed covering such aspects as
the rental for the office fAcilities, the cost for thc proposed trailer
PlIqe 52
March 3, 1981
and necessary renovations, the lack of other suitable facilities, and
the like. Commissioner ~imer expressing concern thnt the location of a
trailer, where suggested, would be objectionable to the residents of
the North Naples are~ and also stating his prefercnce for not splitting
up the operations in each of the two areas. The Commissioner voiced
his appreciation regarding the offcrs made by the respective Fire ne-
partments, but reiterated his desire for adequate facilities.
Mr. Hafner pointed out that the proposcd arr~ngemcnts would he
temporary, noting that he has been working with the consultants on the
design for the ncw building program. It was suggested hy the County
^ttorney that perhaps a month-to-month lease for a ~orth Naples loca-
tion could be negoti~ten.
Commissioner wimer snid that he agreed with the efforts being put
forth to save money but that he did not think that the suggested
arrangements provided ar.eguate facilities and requested that efforts be
made to locate complcte facilities both in the North Naples and East
Naples areas. The Chair directed that Commissioner Wimcr's suggestion
be implemented and that a report be forthcoming at the next Board
meeting.
Pursuant to an additionnl recommendation contained in the suhject
Executive Summary, Commissioner Wimer moved, seconded by Chairman
pistor and carried ~/n with Commissioner Wenzel not present, that thc
proposed design for the County logo to be affixed to the cab doors of
each vehicle be approved.
Page 5:\
~OOK 059 rACE 708
BOOK 059 PACE 709
March ), 1981
RIGIIT-OF-W,W M^P FOR IMPROVF:MF:NTS TO PORTION OF C('HlKSCRF:W ROAD (CR 850)
^ppnOVED FOR CH^InM^N'S SIGNJ\TURE, J\ND FOR RECORDATION; INTER-LOCAL
^GREF~FNT BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY ^ND LEE COUNTY RE S^ME - APPROVED FOR
CHAInM^N'S SIGN^TURE
Public Works J\dministrator/Engineer Eilrksdale cxplained thllt tho
Roard is hein9 requestcd to approve, for execution by the ChairMan and
recording, a right-of-way map; also the approval and execution of an
inter-local agreement between Lee County and Collier County, for the
purpose of improving a one-And-one-half mile section of Corkscrew Road.
lie refcrred to the Executive Summary dilted February 19, 1981 for the
reasons such rccommendations are being made.
Commissioncr Brown moved, seconded hy Commissioner Wimer and
carried 4/0 with Commissioner Wenzel not present, that the staff
recommendations he ilpproved; i.e. that the right-of-way map be
approved, that the Chairman be authorized to executc subject map, and
the nap recorded as evidence that the specific portion of Corkscrew
Road is a public right-of-w~y; and, thAt the Inter-Local Agreement
between Lee County and Collier County for the purpose of sharing the
cost of specific surfacing improvements, be approved, and the Chairman
authorized to execute said J\greement.
Page 54
March 3, 19BI
PRELIMINARY ACCF.PTANCE OF LIVINGSTON ROAD (ENTRANCE ROAD TO WYNDF.MERF.
SUBDIVISION) rOR ONE-YF.AR ~AINTENANCF. - APPROVF.O
For the reasons set forth in the F.xecutive Summary prepared by the
Public \oforks Administriltor/Engineer, Commissioner Brown moved, secon(led
by Commissioner Kruse and carried 1/0 with Commissioner Wenzel not
present, that the Hc~rrl iluthorize preliminary acceptilnce for one-year
maintenance of LivinCJston Road, entri'lnce roar] to v!yndemere Subdivision,
as recoT'1mended.
ROAD CONDITIONS CONNF.CTEO ~ITH CONSTnUCTION or IMMOKI\LEE SEWEn SYSTP~
TO BF: H!SPF:CT!'D 'JnE rRF:GU!'NTLY, M; RF.0lJfSTfr' BY CO~l1.1ISSInNr.R P.ROl''N
Commissioner Prawn expli'linecl that it has been brought to his
attention thi'lt there is a need for closer supervision of the
restoration of the roadways pursuant to the construction of the
Im,;.)kalee Sevier System. fie sa id that. there is a rlarked improvement for
a short t.ime aft.er Public V'orks 1\c1ministriltor/
F.nCJineer Barksdale has visited the site, but "dies down" following his
departure. Mr. Barksdale said that he will make an attempt to inspect
the project more often in the future.
GRANT rRm,' rLOnID^ ENDO'..Ir-'ENT rOR TilE fllJMANITIF:S FOR SOUTfll-!Ef,T FLORIf"~
M{CII^EOLOGTCM. SGCICTY - ACCEP7EO; rROPfR ARRMIGfMENTS TO OF: r>'!\DE FOr;
rROCF:SS !'Ill. CR,\NT rIINO:.; CIIA I R~1M' JlUTlIOR I Z PO TO 5 IGN DOClJ~1r.NTS FOR GP""IT
ACCEPTJI,NCF:
Pursuant to staff recommendation, as contained in the Executive
Summary dated Pebruary 7.0, 1981, Commissioner Wimer moved, seconded by
Commissioner Brown and carried J/n with Commissioner Kruse temporarily
absent and Commissioner Wenzel not present, that the FEll Grant for the
Southwest Florida Archaeological Society be accepted; that the Fiscal
Page S~
&OOK 059 fACE 712
MDK 059 rACE 713
March 3, 19R1
Officer be directed to make arrangements to process the Grant fundsl
~nd, th~t the Chairman be authorized to sign the necessary documents
for the acceptance of the Grant.
CONTf1ACT \'iITH IIRS rOR FUNDS TO FIRE TWO MlrlITIONAL lIN'E,.,AKEI1S FOR FOUR
MONTHS - A r rROVr.D FOR ClIA I R~\AN' S SIGNATURE; BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR APPRO-
PRIATION or rllNns TO Br. PRr.PARED
Social Services Director Martha Skinner informed the Board that
approximately el0,OOO is heing offered by the Florida Department of
lIealth and Rehabilit~tive Services of the State of Florida for the
purpose of hiring two additional ho~emakers for the 1I0memakers Service
of Collier County in order to provide homemakers service to more of
Collier County's functionally impaired senior citizens. She pointed
out that ~ County match of $99~ will be needed. Responding to Chair-
~~n Pistor, ~s. Skinner said that sufficient funds are not available in
the budget but that she recommends the expenditure, noting that there
is a waiting list of approximately seventy individuals who have re-
quested the service. When asked to comment, Fiscal Officer Hall said
that he could "find" the appropriate matching funds.
Commissioner Prown moved, seconded hy Commissioner Wimer and
carried ~/O with Commissioner Kruse temporarily absent and Commissioner
~enzel not present, that the Board take the necessary action to accept
the suhject funds from !IRS hy authorizing the Chairman to sign the per-
tincnt contr~ct, and that a budget amendment appropriating the funds be
approved.
Page 56
BOOK 059 PAGE 72.7
March 3, 1901
PUB LTC Ilr.lln ING TO CONS I Dr.R REVIS IONS TO TIlr. SYSTr.~' l'lEVELOPMr.NT CHARGES
Fan CONNECTIONS TO COUNTY'S sr.wr.n FIICILTTIr.S WITHIN SERVICE AREA "A"
r."TIIPr.rSIIED FOR MIIRCIl 31, 19RI
Utilities Director Irving Berzon reported that the date of
~~rch 31, 1981 h~s been suggested for the purpose of holding a public
hearing to consider revisions to the ordinance pertaining to system
development charges.
He said that it is being proposed that rates be
increased approximately 9%, based on the consultant's estim~te for
providing sewage treatment and transmission facilities in the North
Nnplcs <1reC1.
Commissioner ~imer moved, scconded by Commissioner Kruse and
carried t/0 with Commissioncr ~enzel not present, that the Board
ilpprovc the d,ltc of March 31, 19P1 for holr1ing a public hearing to hear
commcnts regarding the prcposed revisions of County Ordinance 78-17, as
recommcnded hy staff.
nr.SOLUTION Pl-Sr. TO r:xr.f1CISr. COUNTY'S POv'Ef1 OF F.MH'H'T DOt'AIN FOR
nIGI:TS-OF-\':IIY RF:':1Ulrf.r:: TO CO"J"TRUCT PHI!': f1IDGE ROllE' F.XTEI\'SION - ADOPTEJ:I
County IIttorncy Pickworth cxplained that there are 20 parcels re-
mJining to be acquircd for the purpose of constructing pine Ridge Road
F.xtension. IIttorncy Pickworth said that ten of the parcels have been
negotiatcd but that the other ten have to be condemned, pointing out
that negotiations for the subject parcels will continue up to the final
court hearing, but that "it is necessary to get the thing underway".
Commissioncr Wimer moved, scconded by Commissioner Brown and
carricd ~/0 with Commissioncr Wcnzel not present, that Resolution 80-56
pertaining to the excrcise of thc County's power of eminent domain for
PIge 57
March 3, 1981
the rights-of-way required to construct pine Ridge Road Extension, be
adopted.
&OOK 059 I'm 728
paqe Sf!
March 3, 1981
RESOLUTION 01-57 AUTHORIZING EXCII^NGE OF PARCEL OF COUNTY LAND IN
RETURN FOR P^RCF.L RF.QUIRF.D FOR GOODLF.TTF. RO^D CO~STRUCTION PROGRA~
ADOPTED; CH^IRM^N AUTIIORIZF.D TO SIGN ST^TUTORY OEF.D HE SAME
Pursuant to brief explanation by County Attorney pickworth,
Commissioner wimer moved, seconded by Commissioner Brown and carried
~/n with Commissioner Wenzel not present, that Resolution pn-57,
authorizing the exchange of a parcel of County land for A parcel
required in conjunction with the Goo~lette Road Construction Program,
he adopted and that the Chairman be authorized to sign the Stntutory
Deed relating thereto.
MOK 059 PACE 732
rll<jC 0;9
aaox 059 PACE 735
~larch 3, 19B1
COUNTY ATTORNP.Y AUTIIORIZCD TO RP.(\Ul\ST RESUMES FROM CERTAIN INDIVIDUII.LS
ron POSSIRLl\ APPOINn'p.NT TO COUNTY IIl\ALTH FACILITIES AUTIIORITY
County Attorney pickworth advised the Board that three names have
been suhmitted to him for possible appointment to the Collier County
lIealth Facilities Authority - lIarmen Turner, M. Collins, anc1 Richard
Smith. With Board approval, said Attorney pickworth, he woul~ write to
the individuals informing them thAt they are heing considere~ and
asking that resumes be forwarded to the Board's Administrative Ai~e.
There were no ohjections voiced, whereupon Chairman pistor directed
that the suggestion he implemented.
ROUTINF BILLS - APPROVFn FOR PAY~ENT
Commissioner Prown moved, seconded by Commissioner Winer and
carried 4/0 with Commissioner Wenzel not present, that the bills,
having heen processed following established procedure with funds
available, he approved for payment as witnessed by the following checks
issuc~ fron February 75, 19~1 ttlrough ~~arch 3, 19P1:
ACCOUNT CHECK NOS.
County Checks 54n9 - 57A9
8UDGET ANENDMP.NT CI-Jr TRANSFERRING FUNDS TO PROVIDE FOR EMERGENCY
PUIICIIM;E or TELP.~~ETRY CQUIPMENT (AMBULANCE SERVICE) - ADOPTED IN THE
^~OUNT OF SIR,nGl
Commissioner Prown moved, seconded hy Commissioner Wimer and
carrie,1 4/r with Comnissioner \':cnzel not presl'nt, that Budget Amend-
mcnt 8l-l0 to transfer funds to provide for the emergency purchase of
telemetry equipment for Ambulance Service be ac10pted in the amount of
Sln,o(,l,
paqe fiO
BOOX 059 PACE 737
March 3, 1901
IlUDGET Mo'END~\F:NT 81-31 TR^NSFERRING FUNDS TO E:STM\LISH OPP.RI\TINC1
BUDGET FOR C0UNTY'S CONSTRUCTION PROGR^~ M^~^Gf'Mf'NT AGENT (OTIIER
Gf'Nf'R^L ^m'lNISTR^TIVF:) - ^DOPTED 1"1 TilE At'OUNT OF $154,(,70
Commissioner WiMer moved, seconded by COMmissioner Brown and
cilrricd 4/r Io.'ith Commissioner I'!enzel not present, that l'udget ^mend-
ment Rl-31 to transfcr funds to esta~lish an operating budget for the
County's Construction Program ~anageMcnt ^gent be adopted in the amount
or ,,154,1;70.
Page 61
MOX 059 PAGE 739
Milrch 3, 19A1
BUDGET AMEND~ENT el-12 TRANSFERRING FUNns TO REVERSE BUDGET AMEND-
m:NT RI-7.1 - A[)OPTED IN TilE M~OtJNT OF $~ ,~7n
Conmissioner Wimer moved, seconded by Commissioner Brown and
carried ~/n with Commissioner \'!enzel not present, that Budget Amend-
ment 81-37 to transfer funns to reV2rsc nudget Amendment 01-21, be
adopted in the ~mount of $5,470.
Page 62
hOOK 059 PACE 741
March 3, 1981
BUDGET AMENDMENT nl-~3 TRANSFERRING FUNDS TO APPROPRIATE nRS GRANT
~'ONrE" ($9, 9(,?) AND PROVIDE FOR MATCIIING FUNDS ($C)~)(;j (SOCIAL Sr.RV-
rep.,,) - ADOrTp.D
Commissioncr Wimer movcd, seconde~ by Commissioncr Krusc and
c,'rried ~/['I with Commissioncr Wcnzel not present, that Oudgct Amend-
n0nt nl-33, transferring funds to appropriate "RS Grant monies in tho
amount of S0,~(,?, an~ to provirle for matching funds in the amount of
s~~r" r~ Sociol Services, be anopted.
page 63
800K 059 PACE 743
March 3, 19A1
UNEMPLOYMENT COMPF.NS^TION COST CONTROL AND ADVISORY SERVICE ~GRF.EMF.NT
\qTfI IJC^C, INC. - ^PPROVF.D FOR CI1^IR~1^N' S SIGN^TURE
Pursu~nt to the recommendation of staff, as set forth in the
Execlltive Summ~ry with re'Jard to the subject, and as explained by
I'isc,11 Officer Haroln Hall, Commis"ioner I<ruse moved, seconded by
Commissioner Wimer ~nd carried 4/0 with Commissioner Wenzel not
present, that the Boarn approve the execution of a one-year Unem-
ployment Compensation Cost Control and Advisory Service Agreement
effective March 1~, 19R1; and, that the Fiscal Officer be directed to
revie" the PrograM in nine Months to determine if its cost effective-
ness justifies a renewal of the ^greement with lJC^C, Inc.
Page fill
March 3, 1981
BCC APPOINTS MARK P. STRAIN TO BOARD OF BUILDING IIDJUSTMENTS AND
APPEALS TO COMPLETE TERM OF WAYNE SCAMEHORN; ADVISORY BOARn VACAN-
CIES TO BE ANNOUNCED DURING REGULAR BOIIRD SESSIONS TO INSURE NOTIFI-
C^TIO~ TO punLIC
Pursuant to staff recommennntlon, as contained in thc F.xecutive
Summary dated February 18, 1981, Commissioner Kruse moved, scconded by
Commissioncr Wimer and c~rrled niP with Commlssioncr ~enze1 not
present, that Mark P. Strain be appointed as a RegulAr Member on the
Board of Buil~ing ^njustments Ann ^ppeals to serve the remainder of thc
term of ~ilyne Scamehorn which expires Decemher 'I, 1nr~.
There w~s 0 hrief ~iscussion concerning the methon of Dnnouncing
vacancies on the various ~rlvisory hoarrls, with Commissioner Wimer ob-
serving that there appeared to be more press covcrage when vacancies
were announced nuring Regular Foard ~leetings at \-,hich time members of
the menla were in attendance. It was the consensus of the Board that
such procedurc bc followed in the future.
CHMRMIIN IIUTI10RTZED TO SIGN CERTIFICIITES FOR COnneCTION TO TII,X ROLLS
Commissioner t~imer moved, seconded by Commissioner Prown and
carried 4/0 with Commissioner ~enzel not present, thnt the Chairman be
authorized to sign the following Certificates for rorrectlon to the
1980 Tangible Personnl Property Tax Roll:
NOS.
DATED
19RO-h9 to
?/?4/81 to
?/;>7 /81
1980-72
BOARD APPOINTS MESSRS. PELOW AND LEJEWSKI (EAC ~E~BERS) TO GOLnF.N
GIITE ESTATES STUDY COMMITTEE
liS recommended by Environmental Consultant J~y Har~lc in his
Pllge I;!'t
~OOK 059 fACE 74.6
BOOX 059 PAGE 747
March 3, 1981
~e~ornndum to the Board dated February 23, 1981, Commissioner Kruse
movecl, seconded by Com~issioner wimer and carried ./0 with Commis-
sloner Wenzel not present, that Messrs. Ted Below and Eugene Lejewski,
Fnvlron~cntal Advisory Council members, be appointed to the Golden Gate
Estates Study Committee.
It was noted that both individuals have
Indicated their willingness to serve on the Committee.
UTILITY E^SEMP.NT RE f1M1CO SE~,P.R PII^SE I IMPROVE~'ENTS PROJECT - ACCEPTED
P0R TilE m:CnRT"l POLLOh'H'C; RECORDATION
Pursuant to action taken by the Board on April 3, 1979, wherein
the Goard approved the acceptance and expenditure of funds for the
recording of ~11 Utility [asements related to the Marco Sewer phase I
Improvements project, Utilities Director Irving Eerzon submitted the
following Cascr:\Cnt (I"r. and f'rs. IIjerke Kuperus), same having been
recorded In the Official Records.
Page 6~
BOOK
059 PACE 74.9
March 3, 19B1
Le^VE Of M1SF.NCf. for; ENGINEf.I1I1JG DEPM1T"'CNT f.MPLOYE:E f.LLY VAN BLlIRICUM-
^PPrlOVf.D
Co~missioncr Wimer moved, seconded by Commissioner Brown and
carried ~/D with Commissioner Wenzel not present, thftt the lenve of
Absence requested by Engineering Department employee El1y Van Rlaricum,
beginning Approxim.tely ...nrch 9, 19R1 and ending June 10, 1901, be
~!)r)rovc(l, ~s reco~nenrlcrl hy stnff.
r:T;,CUSS1J'lN DF HF.0UEST BY ST^TE CIVIL DF.FF.f\'Sr. F0P. ',','ORYSIlOP SF:f,f;ION nF.
I~TEnI~ NUCLEArI CIVIL PrlOTCCT10N PLAN FOri ~OU~TY O~ M^RCH 17, 19Q1
County ~ana~er Norrnan inforncd the Poarrl that a request hns bern
recciverl from the Stnte Civil Defense Department for a one-hour
~orkshop Session for the purpose of discussing the Inplications of the
Interim ~'uc]e<H ~ivil Protection Plen for Collier County and suggesting
th€ rlatc of ~arch 17, lQCl.
There wos a hrief discussion regarding the
rccJucst wherein it was clccirlerl by consensUS of the Ro~rd that no action
he t~kcn ~t this time on the request.
~IS~ELLAMC0U~ cnRREsPoNDENCE - FILED AMD/Orl nEFErlRED
There being no objection. the Chair directed thftt the fol-
lowin~ corre5ron~encc be filerl and/or referred to the various
rlepDrtmcnts ~s inrlicQterl:
1. Letter dated fehruc1ry 2:l, l<"lPl froJ'l1 L. Edward Stone,
Executive vice-President, Marco Island Chamher of
Conncrcc, su~~estin1 v0rious options for the m~in-
ton.ncp. of the neoian strip on Collier Blvd., Marco
Islend - xc Public ~orks Adninictrator, and County
"",i,nager; filed.
7. Monthly Activities Report for the Library facility
(~onsolidated) for J.nuary, 19A1 - Filed.
3. Circulftr Letter PI-OS oated January 23, 1981 from
Everett fl. rlothschild, IIUD, re Clarification of
Page 67
March J, 19R1
Site and Neighborhood Standards for new ~sslsted
llousinCJ projects in llrel'lS of Minority Concentrll-
tlon (COR,,) - xc planning, and Fiscal officer;
fil ell.
~. Letter daterl f~. ruary 19, 10Pl from chnrlcs n.
nusscll, Director, Florida Dep.:3rtmcnt of Labor nnn
Employment Security, tr~ns~ittin0 ~onitorinq Report
for FY 19A1 Comprehensive employment and Training
~ct - Referred to CeT~ Dept. 2/25/Pl; !'Iled.
5. Building Department ~onthly ^ctivlty Report for
J~nIJary, 10Pl - Filed.
(,. Project Stotus ncrort re Collier County r,overnment
Center Exp"nsion Com",.. No. 8D"r, (Poll zzl/lIeery) -
Filed.
7. Letter ciatccl Februc1ry 19, lC1Pl from Fronk 1\. petten-
gill, North ~aples rire Control ristrict, requesting
the Bee to authorize no huil~ing to exceed the heiCJht
of 100' from ground level - xc Planning ~nd Building ne-
pc1rtncnts, County ~anaCJer; filed.
8. Memorandum dated Fchru~ry 23, 19B1 from Court
^dministrator transmitting monthly record of
Juveniles Incarcerated in Collier County ~ail for
Montll of January, 1981 - Filed.
9. Letter dated FEbru~ry ~, 19R1 from Florida SecretAry
of State Firestone re State ^id to Libraries - xc
County ~anager, and Library Director; filed.
10. Letter dated February 5, 19"1 fron JoSeptl Perrino
expressing support for the rezoning of niggs Roan
for residential development (hearing on 3/1n/~11 -
xc Conmunity Deve1op~cnt ^nministrator; filed.
11. Letter dated February 17, 19"1 from Robert f1.
\'/ilkerson, Division Director, Departr:lent of COr:l-
munity ^ffidrs rc Cuban/Hcdtian F.ntrants Security
and Safety ProgrRm - xc F~scal Officer, public
Safety ^dMinistrator, and Sheriff; filed.
12. Memoranoum dated February 27, 1981 frorn Comrnlssioner
Wimer statinq letter was sent to Tallahassee verifying
that Boat Registration funds will be used for matching
grant for Bayview Park (copy of letter attached - due to
the urgency of the matter, signed by him In the absence
of the Chairman) - Filed.
page 1i0
MO~ 059 PAGE 750
JlECOBD,D'8 DIlO "T~
'" wrI"i'~"i2'l "., "
~......... ",' ',>c,..., ;,..:'...\."r.,",~.' "
-,...,..-~.. '
"heIl NCel4, ,.,t.t_~~~. ~;.;':' :'__ lc.
,;J:,l"1"'.f.\ __,""
BOO~ 059 P~GE 751
March 3, 19R1
13. Copy of publication by U.S. Depart~ent of Commerce,
Economic revelopmcnt ^nministration, entitlen
Econo~ic Research Studies of the Economic Develop-
ment ^nministration - ^n ~nnotated Pibliography 197~-
197n - Filen.
1~. Letter nnten Fehrunrt ln, 19P1 from Debora L. Baker,
Marketing Representative, ISI, re status of contract
with Boarn, CDPG, etc. - Filed.
15. Copy of Memorandum nated February 24, 19R1 from
Social Services Cirector to County ~anuger rc
increase in cost to transport patients to ^. G.
Ilolley Stilte 11()Spit"l and requesting approval -
Filed.
lC,. Letter dated February 12" 10Pl from John VanDerPloeg,
V , C Disposal Company re purchase of franchise (Bud
V,irk) for solid waste removal service in the ~arco
Island areA, with attach~ents, and copy of response
daten February 2r" 19R1 from County Solin Waste
ri rector _ xc County f.'anager, publ ic \'iorks ^d~inis-
trator, and ~sst. County ~ttorney pires - and filed.
*
*
*
*
*
.
.
There being no further business for the good of the County,
the meeting was anjourned by order of the Chair - Time: 5:~O P.M.
Po^nr OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS/F.X
OFFICIO GOVERNING BO^RD(S) OF
SPECI^L DISTRICTS UNDER ITS CONTROL
I ) ,
I ( ,--I
; cO l \/)"-./, J : u l{vl,
JOHN ^. PISTOn, CH^IRM^N
(
_0
,-
--
'r:'i1i\',
,. .'V<'"