BCC Minutes 04/09/2019 RApril 9, 2019
Page 1
TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Naples, Florida, April 9, 2019
LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Board of County
Commissioners, in and for the County of Collier, and also acting as
the Board of Zoning Appeals and as the governing board(s) of such
special districts as have been created according to law and having
conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 a.m., in
REGULAR SESSION in Building "F" of the Government Complex,
East Naples, Florida, with the following members present:
CHAIRMAN: William L. McDaniel, Jr.
Vice Chair: Burt L. Saunders,
Donna Fiala
Andy Solis
Penny Taylor
ALSO PRESENT:
Leo Ochs, County Manager
Nick Casalanguida, Deputy County Manager
Jeffrey A. Klatzkow, County Attorney
Derek Johnnsen, Clerk's Finance Director
Troy Miller, Communications & Customer Relations
Page 1
April 9, 2019
COLLIER COUNTY
Board of County Commissioners
Community Redevelopment Agency Board (CRAB)
Airport Authority
AGENDA
Board of County Commission Chambers
Collier County Government Center
3299 Tamiami Trail East, 3rd Floor
Naples, FL 34112
April 09, 2019
9:00 AM
Commissioner William L. McDaniel, Jr., Dist. 5-Chair; CRAB Co-Chair
Commissioner Burt Saunders, District 3 – Vice-Chair
Commissioner Donna Fiala, District 1; CRAB Co-Chair
Commissioner Andy Solis, District 2
Commissioner Penny Taylor, District 4
NOTICE: ALL PERSONS WISHING TO SPEAK ON AGENDA ITEMS MUST
REGISTER PRIOR TO PRESENTATION OF THE AGENDA ITEM TO BE
ADDRESSED. ALL REGISTERED SPEAKERS WILL RECEIVE UP TO THREE
(3) MINUTES UNLESS THE TIME IS ADJUSTED BY THE CHAIRMAN.
REQUESTS TO PETITION THE BOARD ON SUBJECTS WHICH ARE NOT ON
THIS AGENDA MUST BE SUBMITTED IN WRITING WITH EXPLANATION
TO THE COUNTY MANAGER AT LEAST 13 DAYS PRIOR TO THE DATE OF
THE MEETING AND WILL BE HEARD UNDER “PUBLIC PETITIONS.”
PUBLIC PETITIONS ARE LIMITED TO THE PRESENTER, WITH A
MAXIMUM TIME OF TEN MINUTES.
ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THIS BOARD
Page 2
April 9, 2019
WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDING PERTAINING THERETO,
AND THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD
OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE
TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED.
COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 2003-53 AS AMENDED BY
ORDINANCE 2004-05 AND 2007-24, REQUIRES THAT ALL LOBBYISTS
SHALL, BEFORE ENGAGING IN ANY LOBBYING ACTIVITIES (INCLUDING
BUT NOT LIMITED TO, ADDRESSING THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS), REGISTER WITH THE CLERK TO THE BOARD AT THE
BOARD MINUTES AND RECORDS DEPARTMENT.
IF YOU ARE A PERSON WITH A DISABILITY WHO NEEDS ANY
ACCOMMODATION IN ORDER TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS PROCEEDING,
YOU ARE ENTITLED, AT NO COST TO YOU, THE PROVISION OF CERTAIN
ASSISTANCE. PLEASE CONTACT THE COLLIER COUNTY FACILITIES
MANAGEMENT DIVISION LOCATED AT 3335 EAST TAMIAMI TRAIL,
SUITE 1, NAPLES, FLORIDA, 34112-5356, (239) 252-8380; ASSISTED
LISTENING DEVICES FOR THE HEARING IMPAIRED ARE AVAILABLE IN
THE FACILITIES MANAGEMENT DIVISION.
LUNCH RECESS SCHEDULED FOR 12:00 NOON TO 1:00 P.M
1. INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
A. Reverend Beverly Duncan of Naples United Church of Christ
2. AGENDA AND MINUTES
A. Approval of today's regular, consent and summary agenda as amended (ex
parte disclosure provided by commission members for consent agenda.)
B. March 5, 2019 BCC/Future Land Use Workshop Minutes
C. March 12, 2019 BCC Meeting Minutes
3. AWARDS AND RECOGNITIONS
A. EMPLOYEE
Page 3
April 9, 2019
B. ADVISORY BOARD MEMBERS
C. RETIREES
D. EMPLOYEE OF THE MONTH
4. PROCLAMATIONS
A. Proclamation designating April 9, 2019 as JC Jackson Day in Collier
County, in proud recognition of our homegrown football champion whose
extraordinary talent exhibited during his rookie season with the New
England Patriots contributed greatly to that team’s success and ultimate
advancement as Super Bowl champions. To be accepted by JC Jackson
alongside his parents, grandparents, other family members and friends.
B. Proclamation designating April 13, 2019 as Try Transit Day by offering free
rides in an effort to promote public transportation as an alternative means to
commute. To be accepted by Steve Carnell, Michelle Arnold, Omar Deleon
and other team members.
C. Proclamation designating April 14 - 20 as National Public Safety
Telecommunicators Week in Collier County, in grateful recognition of our
9-1-1 dispatchers. To be accepted by Sheriff Kevin Rambosk, Chief Greg
Smith, Director Bob Finney, Supervisor Sharon Gallo and several 9-1-1
dispatchers and support staff.
5. PRESENTATIONS
6. PUBLIC PETITIONS
7. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS NOT ON THE CURRENT
OR FUTURE AGENDA
8. BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
9. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. This item was continued from the March 26, 2019 BCC meeting.
Recommendation to adopt a Resolution approving an amendment to the
Page 4
April 9, 2019
Collier County Community Redevelopment Plan. (This item is a companion
to Item #14B1)
10. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
A. Recommendation to accept the year-end report of the Senior Advisory Ad
Hoc Committee (SAC), consider their recommendations, and allow the Ad
Hoc Committee to sunset on April 18, 2019. (Chairman Charles D.
Hartman)
11. COUNTY MANAGER'S REPORT
A. This item to be heard at 9:45 a.m. Recommendation to accept a report
regarding North Collier Fire District’s intent to sell Station 40 located at
1441 Pine Ridge Road. (EMS Chief Tabatha Butcher)
B. Recommendation to approve a resolution that conceptually approves the
issuance of a transfer of development rights (TDR) credit to private property
owners located within the primary/secondary flowway of Collier County
Comprehensive Watershed Improvement Project who will voluntarily
encumber their land with a flowway easement/agreement to allow the flow
of this re-hydration water across their property and to direct staff to include
changes to the Growth Management Plan with the Rural Fringe Mixed Use
restudy amendments to the Growth Management Plan. (Gary McAlpin, P.E.,
Coastal Zone Management, Capital Project Planning, Impact Fees and
Program Management Division)
C. Recommendation to approve an Agreement and award Request for Proposal
(RFP) #18-7382, Collier Area Transit (CAT) Fixed Route, Demand
Response Transit, and Transit Operations Management Services in the first
year amount of $8,009,821 plus cost adjustments noted in the incorporated
Cost Proposal Summary, to MV Transportation, Inc. and approve budget
amendments in the amount of $609,000 to fund the increase in contract cost
for the remainder of FY 2019. (Michelle Arnold, Division Director, Public
Transit & Neighborhood Enhancement Division)
D. Recommendation to accept the Whippoorwill Lane and Marbella Lakes
Drive Interconnection Study and direct staff to pursue the interconnection of
Whippoorwill Lane and Marbella Lakes Drive using the Concept Plan to
Page 5
April 9, 2019
initiate the design phase. (Project #60219) (Lorraine Lantz, Project Manager,
Capital Project Planning, Impact Fees and Program Management)
12. COUNTY ATTORNEY'S REPORT
13. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
14. AIRPORT AUTHORITY AND/OR COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY
A. AIRPORT
1) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners, acting as
the Collier County Airport Authority, approve and adopt the Airport
Layout Plan (ALP) and associated Narrative Update for the
Immokalee Regional Airport.
B. COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
1) This item was continued from the March 26, 2019 BCC meeting.
Recommendation that the Community Redevelopment Agency Board
(CRAB) adopt a Resolution recommending to the Board of County
Commissioners approval of an amendment to the Collier County
Community Redevelopment Area Plan. (This item is a companion to
Item #9A)
15. STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS
A. Proposed Future Workshop Schedule
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
16. CONSENT AGENDA - All matters listed under this item are considered to be
routine and action will be taken by one motion without separate discussion of
each item. If discussion is desired by a member of the Board, that item(s) will
be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered separately.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
Page 6
April 9, 2019
1) This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by
Commission members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all
participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to
approve for recording the minor final plat of Maple Ridge at Ave
Maria, Phase 5B Replat, Application Number PL20180003541.
2) This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by
Commission members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all
participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to
approve for recording the amended final plat of Esplanade Golf and
Country Club of Naples Phase 5, Parcels I, J, K1, K2, K3 and K4
(Application Number PL20180003694) approval of the standard form
Construction and Maintenance Agreement and approval of the amount
of the performance security.
3) Recommendation to approve final acceptance and unconditional
conveyance of the potable water and sewer utility facilities for Artesia
Naples Phase 5, PL20160002023 and to authorize the County
Manager, or his designee, to release the Final Obligation Bond in the
total amount of $4,000 to the Project Engineer or the Developer’s
designated agent.
4) Recommendation to approve the Amended and Restated Property
Transfer and Construction Agreement between the owner of
TwinEagles South, Naples Associates IV, LLLP (Owner) and Collier
County (County) to construct a lake to permanently accommodate the
stormwater run-off from Immokalee Road and provide the necessary
easements to the County for access.
5) Recommendation to authorize the Clerk of Courts to release a
Performance Bond in the amount of $68,477 which was posted as a
guaranty for Excavation Permit Number PL20170004286 for work
associated with White Lake Corporate Park Lot 1A.
6) Recommendation to approve the release of a code enforcement lien
with a value of $394,130.86 for payment of $2,080.86 in the code
enforcement actions entitled Board of County Commissioners v.
Edelmiro and Bernadita Robles, Code Enforcement Board Case No.
CESD20100009519 relating to property located at 4015 16th Ave SE,
Page 7
April 9, 2019
Collier County, Florida.
7) Recommendation to approve the release of two (2) code enforcement
liens with a value of $338,616.50 for payment of $3,000 in the code
enforcement actions entitled Board of County Commissioners v.
Richard L. Gossard, Jr and Evonne M. Estep, Code Enforcement
Special Magistrate Case No. CEPM2014024204 and Case No.
CEAU20160016271 relating to property located at 5310 Sholtz St,
Collier County, Florida.
8) Recommendation to hear Land Development Code Amendments at
two regularly scheduled daytime hearings and waive the nighttime
hearing requirement.
9) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to execute
Amendment No. 1 to Contract #19CO1 with the Florida Department
of Environmental Protection Bureau of Beaches and Coastal Systems
Beach Management Funding Assistance Program for Dredging of
Wiggins Pass, and make a finding that this item promotes tourism.
B. COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
C. PUBLIC UTILITIES DEPARTMENT
1) Recommendation to approve the document necessary to convey an
easement to Florida Power & Light Company over property owned by
the Collier County Water-Sewer District at 9622 Vanderbilt Drive,
Naples, FL 34108.
2) Recommendation to adopt a Resolution and to approve a Lease
Agreement with State Representative Ana Maria Rodriguez, District
105, for use of County-owned office space at the Golden Gate
Customer Service Center in Golden Gate City.
3) Recommendation to adopt a Resolution and approve a Lease
Agreement with United States Senator Rick Scott for use of County-
owned office space within the Administration Building at the Main
Government Center.
Page 8
April 9, 2019
D. PUBLIC SERVICES DEPARTMENT
1) Recommendation to approve an “after-the-fact” amendment and
attestation statement with the Area Agency on Aging for Southwest
Florida, Inc. (AAA), Home Care for the Elderly (HCE) grant program
for the Collier County Services for Seniors (CCSS). (No Fiscal
Impact)
2) Recommendation to approve “after-the-fact” amendment and
attestation statement with the Area Agency on Aging for Southwest
Florida, Inc., Older American Act grant program for the Collier
County Services for Seniors. (No Fiscal Impact)
3) Recommendation to authorize the Rotary Club of Naples-Collier, Inc.,
to use the Fred W. Coyle Freedom Park for its Honor Flag Fundraiser
for 2019. This project supports the various charities of the Rotary
Club.
4) Recommendation to approve an “after-the-fact” first amendment and
attestation statement with the Area Agency on Aging for Southwest
Florida, Inc. for the Emergency Home Energy Assistance grant for the
Collier County Services for Seniors and to authorize FY18-19 Budget
Amendment in the amount of $36,044. (Net Fiscal Impact $36,044)
5) Recommendation to authorize the necessary Budget Amendment to
recognize revenue for FY2019 received from the State Aid to
Libraries Grant in the amount of $195,181.
6) Recommendation to approve an Agreement for Invitation to Bid (ITB)
#19-7515 Vanderbilt Beach Irrigation to Stahlman-England Irrigation
Inc., in the amount of $94,773, and authorize the Chairman to execute
the attached agreement.
7) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to sign the
First Amendment to the State Mandated Agreement with David
Lawrence Mental Health Center, Inc.
8) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to sign the
Third Amendment to agreements with LeeCorp Homes Inc. and
Page 9
April 9, 2019
Prestige Home Centers, Inc. for the administration of the State
Housing Initiatives Partnership Demolition and/or Replacement of
Manufactured Housing Program.
9) Recommendation to approve a Bureau of Justice Assistance,
Medically Assisted Treatment Planning Initiative “after-the-fact”
grant application to facilitate the development of a substance abuse
medication assisted treatment model in the Collier County Jail and in
community treatment settings.
10) Recommendation to approve electronic submittal of an application
and accept year two of the Retired and Senior Volunteer Program
grant award in the amount of $54,522 for operation of the Retired and
Senior Volunteer Program from the Corporation for National and
Community Service and authorize necessary budget amendments.
11) Recommendation to recognize interest earned from the period October
2018 through December 2018 on advanced library funding received
from the Florida Department of State to support library services and
equipment for the use of Collier County residents in the amount of
$2,430.25.
E. ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DEPARTMENT
1) Recommendation to approve the Administrative Reports prepared by
the Procurement Services Division for change orders and other
contractual modifications requiring Board approval.
F. COUNTY MANAGER OPERATIONS
1) Recommendation to adopt a resolution approving amendments
(appropriating grants, donations, contributions or insurance proceeds)
to the Fiscal Year 2018-19 Adopted Budget.
2) Recommendation to approve a report covering budget amendments
impacting reserves and moving funds in an amount up to and
including $25,000 and $50,000, respectively.
G. AIRPORT AUTHORITY
Page 10
April 9, 2019
H. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
1) Proclamation designating April 2019 as Sarcoidosis Awareness
Month in Collier County. The proclamation will be forwarded to
Michael Patterson, a local advocate for improvements to the quality of
life of persons living with Sarcoidosis.
2) Proclamation designating April 13, 2019 as Pinwheels at the Pier Day,
in support of the efforts by the Children's Advocacy Center of Collier
County to prevent child abuse and promote public awareness. This
proclamation will be presented by Chairman McDaniel at the
Pinwheels at the Pier event on April 13th on the beach at the Naples
Pier.
I. MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
J. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
1) Recommendation to authorize execution of the budget amendment in
the amount of $150,000 for 9-1-1 Backup Facility.
2) Request that the Board approve and determine valid public purpose
for invoices payable and purchasing card transactions as of April 3,
2019.
3) To record in the minutes of the Board of County Commissioners, the
check number (or other payment method), amount, payee, and
purpose for which the referenced disbursements were drawn for the
periods between March 14, 2019 and March 27, 2019 pursuant to
Florida Statute 136.06.
K. COUNTY ATTORNEY
1) Recommendation to appoint one alternate citizen member to the
Value Adjustment Board.
2) Recommendation to reappoint two members to the Public Transit
Advisory Committee.
Page 11
April 9, 2019
3) Recommendation to appoint four members to the Immokalee Local
Redevelopment Advisory Board.
4) Recommendation to appoint two members to the Tourist Development
Council.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
17. SUMMARY AGENDA - This section is for advertised public hearings and
must meet the following criteria: 1) A recommendation for approval from
staff; 2) Unanimous recommendation for approval by the Collier County
Planning Commission or other authorizing agencies of all members present
and voting; 3) No written or oral objections to the item received by staff, the
Collier County Planning Commission, other authorizing agencies or the
Board, prior to the commencement of the BCC meeting on which the items
are scheduled to be heard; and 4) No individuals are registered to speak in
opposition to the item. For those items which are quasi-judicial in nature, all
participants must be sworn in.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission
members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all participants are
required to be sworn in. Recommendation to approve Petition VAC-
PL20180003286, to disclaim, renounce and vacate the County and the public
interest in a portion of the 30-foot County Utility Easement as recorded in
O.R. Book 1364, Page 1030 of the public records of Collier County, Florida,
located on the northwest corner of Bayshore Drive and Thomasson Drive, in
Section 14, Township 50 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida.
B. This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by the
Commission members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all
participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to approve An
Ordinance amending Ordinance No. 97- 3, which rezoned the subject
property to a Heavy Commercial (C-5) zoning district with conditions, in
order to add motor freight transportation and warehousing (SIC code 4225,
air-conditioned and mini-and self storage only) as a permitted use, and to
increase the maximum building height for that use only, from the presently
allowed maximum height of 28 feet to a zoned height of 35 feet and an
actual height of 38 feet. The subject property is located on the north side of
U.S. 41 East, approximately 1,000 feet east of Collier Boulevard, in Section
Page 12
April 9, 2019
3, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, consisting of
2.17± acres and by providing an effective date. [PL20180000125]
18. ADJOURN
INQUIRIES CONCERNING CHANGES TO THE BOARD’S AGENDA SHOULD
BE MADE TO THE COUNTY MANAGER’S OFFICE AT 252-8383.
April 9, 2019
Page 2
MR. OCHS: Ladies and gentlemen, please take your seats.
Please come to order.
Mr. Chairman, you do have a live mic this morning.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Good morning, everybody. Before
we get too far into our proceedings this morning, we're going to
endeavor to do the prayer and the pledge.
We have a special guest. Are you with me? We have a special
guest coming this morning. Our governor is coming to make a
presentation to Collier County, and he's asked us to, upon his arrival,
recess this meeting and troop up to the fifth floor and receive the
presentation.
So we're going to do our best to get through as many of the
formalities as we can and, upon his arrival, I'll call for a recession,
and we'll go upstairs. So with that --
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: A recess. Not a recession; a recess.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Not a recession. We've got
realtors here.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Sorry about that. Thank you for the
correction. We will recess upon his arrival. How's that? Recess.
Recess.
With that, I'm going to ask Reverend Beverly Duncan, if you
would, please, lead us in the invocation.
Item # 1A
INVOCATION GIVEN BY REVEREND BEVERLY DUNCAN OF
NAPLES UNITED CHURCH OF CHRIST
REVEREND DUNCAN: Good morning.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: If everyone would rise.
REVEREND DUNCAN: Let us pray. Oh, God of our rest time
April 9, 2019
Page 3
and our work time, God of sun and rain, wake us and move us
through this day urging us to listen, to learn, and to love even when
we'd rather not. Shine on our commissioners, lighting their way
forward along the path of service to the citizens of Collier County.
Breathe your justice and fairness into their process and their
decisions.
With thanksgiving for any and all who serve our community and
country, we ask a blessing on them. And when decisions do less than
satisfy, give all of us the patience and grace to move in faith.
So may we all go out each and every day, Creator God, to be the
guides and guardians of your creation and your people in all we do,
and bless these proceedings this day. Amen, Salom, and Shalom.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Commissioner Fiala, will you lead
us today.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I would. Please, folks, would you
put your hand over your heart and say with me...
(The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.)
Item #2A
APPROVAL OF TODAY'S REGULAR, CONSENT AND
SUMMARY AGENDA AS AMENDED (EX PARTE
DISCLOSURE PROVIDED BY COMMISSION MEMBERS FOR
CONSENT AGENDA.) APPROVED AND/OR ADOPTED
W/CHANGES (COMMISSIONER SOLIS ABSTAINED FROM
VOTING ON ITEM #16A3 AND #16D8); MOTION TO
RECONSIDER THE SHORT TERM RENTAL ITEM FROM THE
LAST MEETING – FAILED DUE TO LACK OF
SUPERMAJORITY (COMMISSIONER TAYLOR AND
COMMISSIONER FIALA OPPOSED); STAFF DIRECTION –
ENFORCEMENT SHOULD BE ON A COMPLAINT DRIVEN
April 9, 2019
Page 4
BASIS. CODE ENFORCEMENT TO ENFORCE FOR THAT
LIMITED SCOPE; RECONSIDERATION AGENDA ITEM WILL
BE PLACED ON THE 04/23/19 AGENDA AND IF APPROVED
THE ITEM WILL BE HEARD ON THE 05/14/19
MR. OCHS: Good morning, Commissioners. In the interest of
brevity, I'll try to blow through this change sheet as quickly as we
can. I won't read all the titles, but I'll just make a reference to the
agenda number.
We have several changes, most of which are continuances. So
the first proposed change is to continue Item 16A6 from your consent
agenda to your next meeting of April 23rd. That's made at staff's
request.
The next proposed change is to continue Item 16A7 to the next
meeting of April 23rd. That is also at a staff request.
The next proposed change is to move Item 16A8 from your
consent agenda. It will become Item 11E on the regular agenda.
That item is moved at Commissioner Taylor's request.
The next proposed change is to continue Item 16D7 from the
consent agenda, and that will be heard at your next board meeting of
April 23rd. That change is made at Commissioner McDaniel's
request.
The next proposed change is to move Item 17B from your
summary agenda. It will become Item 9B on your regular public
hearing agenda today. That move is made at both Commissioner
Fiala's and Commissioner Taylor's separate request.
We have two time-certain items on today's agenda,
Mr. Chairman. The first is Item 11A. It's to be heard at 9:45 a.m.
Now, I'll note that time-certain was assigned before we were advised
of the governor's visit, so that may push back a little depending on
how we do this morning. That item is the staff report on the
April 9, 2019
Page 5
proposed -- or the offer of sale of the North Collier Fire District
Station 40.
And your final time-certain item is Item 11D. This is the item
having to do with the proposed interconnection of Whippoorwill
Lane. That will be heard no sooner than 1 p.m.
Those are all the changes I have, sir.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: And I want to reiterate that is no
sooner than 1 o'clock. We had a miscue at our last meeting and folks
thought it was at 1.
MR. OCHS: No, sir.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: And that was not the case, so I just
want to --
MR. OCHS: Yes. It could be anytime after 1.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Anytime after 1 o'clock, not before.
So with that, Commissioner Solis.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Yes. In terms of the consent
agenda, I have no disclosures.
I would like to bring up at this moment, though, an issue that I think
we need to address immediately, and I'd like to bring forward a
motion to reconsider the direction that we gave to staff at the last
meeting related to short-term rentals. I think we've all probably --
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: We all know -- look, as a matter of
brevity, we all know why you're here so...
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: First, I think this is one of these
issues that maybe we're going to create some unintended
consequence that we're going to regret.
I think that it merits some more discussion as to what would be
an effective way of addressing the issues that there are out there.
And I'd like my colleagues' support in -- on a motion to reconsider.
One, the legislature's actively looking into this, and, two, I'm very
April 9, 2019
Page 6
concerned with the effect that -- just the way we've presented this.
Oh, the governor's here. Okay. So we will recess, and I will ramble
on some more later.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: So while you all are on the edge of
your seats, the governor has arrived, I've been given notice. We are
going to take a 30-minute recess, not recession, and endeavor to be
back here by 9:30 or so. With that...
I believe the public is welcome to join us if you would like to
traverse to the fifth floor.
(A recess was had.)
MR. OCHS: Ladies and gentlemen, if you'd please come to
order.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Good morning, everybody. If I'm
not mistaken, we're almost on time even contending with our great
governor.
So with that, County Manager, we were in the process of going
through our setting of the agenda, if I'm not mi staken, and,
Commissioner Solis --
MR. OCHS: That's correct.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: -- you were on stage.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Correct. Thank you.
Again, I'd like to bring a motion to reconsider the direction that
we gave staff at the last commission meeting relating to short-term
rentals.
I think it's -- our direction has created some uncertainty in our
real estate market, which I think is of great concern, should be of
great concern. Certainly, there's a large number of our residents that
are full-time residents now that came to Naples, learned what Naples
was about through a seasonal rental, and then ended up becoming
residents and taxpayers.
I'm very concerned that we need to reconsider how we deal
April 9, 2019
Page 7
with, effectively, you know, the bad apples out there that we heard
about at the last meeting without fundamentally affecting people's
property rights and affecting the market, the real estate market in
Collier County, which is the backbone, or one of the vertebra,
anyway, of our entire economy.
So with that said, I'd like to make a motion to reconsider our
action last time, and I'd like to hopefully just have this issue resolved
now. Because what I'm really ultimately asking for is that we just
direct staff to go back to the status quo where we were before and
give us some opportunity, one, to see what the legislature does,
because there are bills pending related to this issue that may or may
not answer clearly what we have the ability to do, and that we give
the real estate market some comfort that we're not going to up-end
what is a vital part of our community.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Is that a motion?
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: That's a motion.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: I'll second it.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: And as I said, please, as you know,
we have a very full agenda, and we all know why you're here. So, as
a matter of brevity, we're going to hold the applause until we get
through this. And, Commissioner Taylor, you were next.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: A point of order, we do not have
our -- we don't have a full commission right now, so I'm not sure we
can vote at this point.
MR. KLATZKOW: You can. You may want to wait for
Commissioner Fiala.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Well, the requirement -- and for
clarity purposes, the requirement for the reconsideration is a majority
vote.
April 9, 2019
Page 8
MR. KLATZKOW: On your normal process, it's a majority
vote. Your normal process would be a commissioner would notify
the County Manager that they wanted a motion to reconsider. The
County Manager would then bring that to the Board. The Board
would take a vote. If the motion passed, the item would be set for a
future agenda.
The second way to do it is to do it now, where, in essence,
you're suspending that rule. However, to do it this way requires four
votes. The end result would be the same. It would be coming back at
a future meeting.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: And we'd allow for public input and
the like at a future meeting, future stated communication?
MR. KLATZKOW: Yes. You need to have -- it's a two-step
process. First you vote -- first we see whether a majority of the
Board wishes to reconsider and then, secondly, you know, the item
gets put on a future agenda, and then it goes on the published agenda
and we have a public hearing.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Mr. Chairman?
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: I would just --
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: The motion maker wishes to go
first, and then we'll go.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Well, I was just going to --
just to clarify as we go through the discussion. I'm going to support
the motion, so we're going to have a majority vote support that,
whether Commissioner Fiala's here or not. I do have explanation at
some point, but I just want to -- just so you know going forward, that
motion will pass. I'm concerned about what the County Attorney has
just said, that you need a supermajority vote to hear that vote today.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Today.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: And that's an ordinance
requirement or is that a policy requirement?
April 9, 2019
Page 9
MR. KLATZKOW: That is your ordinance, your board
meeting --
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Can that requirement be
waived?
MR. KLATZKOW: Your ordinance requires that the process be
that a commissioner notify the County Manager in advance of a
meeting; however, under the Robert's Rules of Order, there is a
process where you can waive the standing rule. To waive a standing
rule is four votes.
(Commissioner Fiala is now present.)
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: So I think the question is, are you --
will you be satisfied with your motion if we -- in a majority vote to
reconsider the actions that were taken at our last meeting, or do you
want to try to settle this today?
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Well, again, I'd like to settle it
today but not by coming up with something new, because I think
there's a lot of discussion that still needs to be had. What I'm asking
is that we just return back to where we were prior to the last meeting
where we directed staff to take action. That's really -- so I'm not
suggesting that there be some revamping of our decision. It's just,
let's just start over.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Mr. Chairman, I might
suggest this is not even really a reconsideration. We had a vote to
take certain action at our last meeting. And we're going to consider
taking action at this meeting to rescind that action. It's not like we've
approved an agreement or approved an ordinance or approved a
rezone and we're reconsidering that. We gave staff some direction.
It was a rather informal discussion and direction, and now we're
talking about reversing that.
Now, I've got an explanation on that, so I question whether we
would need to have four votes.
April 9, 2019
Page 10
MR. KLATZKOW: Commissioner, if there are three votes,
ultimately, you will be hearing this matter. It just may be an
additional hoop that we go through on the consent agenda, but you
will be -- if there is majority support for this, you will be rehearing
this matter.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: And that's, I think, the question
today.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: The question is whether we
could reconsider -- rehear or redirect staff today.
MR. KLATZKOW: Yes. You can always make a direction to
staff.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Okay. Without a 4 --
MR. KLATZKOW: Yes.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: That clarifies --
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: As part of your motion for
reconsideration, and then reset --
MR. KLATZKOW: I would suggest you take separate motions
for that. What Commissioner Saunders is saying is that separately he
wants to consider directing staff to do or not to do something.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: That's correct.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Okay. So the first motion, without
putting words in your mouth, Commissioner, would be to reconsider
the previous motion at our last meeting?
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Correct --
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: And I've seconded it. Do we have
any other discussion?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Yes, because Commissioner
Fiala, I think, needs to be just briefed in terms of what requires four
votes and what requires three votes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you. I apologize for
walking in late. I was up in the Governor's office yet, and they had to
April 9, 2019
Page 11
finish some interviews, so excuse me. I didn't mean to be rude.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: We didn't take it as such.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: And just as a point of
clarification -- do you want to explain it to her or will I?
MR. KLATZKOW: It's your choice.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Well, as a point of -- as a point of
reference, Commissioner Solis has made a motion to reconsider the
motion that was made at our last meeting with regard to short-term
rentals and bring it up at a future meeting for reconsideration to allow
for participation of the public. That's the motion that we're on right
now.
Now, if we were to -- on the second motion to actually make a
decision today, that second motion would require a 4-1 vote. The
first vote requires super -- a regular majority. If we were to actually
change the decision that were made at the last meeting, that would
require a supermajority vote.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: And --
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: As clear as mud.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: And just for clarification, too, what
I'm intending is not that we come up with some new direction to
staff, but just to back up to where we were prior to the last meeting,
the status quo, so that we have this opportunity to look at this some
more and get more input from the community.
MR. KLATZKOW: Just for further clarity --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: May I ask the question: So, in
other words, we're going to pretend like we never voted on it in the
first place?
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Well, that's one way of describing
it, maybe, but I think what I'd like to suggest is maybe we just back
up and we relook at the whole issue, that's all, because of the
April 9, 2019
Page 12
uncertainty that it's created in the market and how, I think, dangerous
that is for our economy. I mean, we've come out of, you kn ow,
hurricanes, water-quality issues; all of that's taken its toll on our
markets, and I think we need to respect that.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: And there's been a motion and a
second to give reconsideration to the direction that was given in a
motion that was made at our last meeting.
Commissioner Saunders, you're first.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Yes. Just for some
clarification, at that last meeting where we had this conversation, my
motion was to direct staff to enforce our ordinance dealing with
short-term rentals or rentals less than six months but only to go after
the most egregious violators, and we talked about that, and we talked
about folks that were -- that had daily rentals that weren't controlling
the people that were renting those properties on a daily basis, people
that put signs in the yards for daily rentals. And the direction was,
we can't permit that type of interference in our residential
communities.
There was never any desire to go after legitimate rentals, longer
periods of time, a week on up to the six months. We were talking
about only the most egregious violators. And staff took that direction
to mean that if they got a complaint from a neighborhood about some
bad actors that were renting their properties on a daily basis, that they
would take some action. Again, never any interest in going after the
longer-term types of rentals.
Now, my view is, if the real estate market, the realtors that are in
this room, if you can at least be aware of those types of impacts on
neighborhoods for those types of rentals and deal with that as an
industry, I have no problem with that, but we cannot permit that kind
of disruption in our residential communities.
So that was the purpose of the conversation. It was never
April 9, 2019
Page 13
targeted for the longer-term rentals. It was only targeted at the most
egregious. And I even used that term, "egregious" violators. Staff
understood what that meant.
I'm going to support the motion to back up on that for two
reasons: One, so we can have more time to evaluate it but also give
the industry, all of you -- all of the realtors that are out here, give you
an opportunity to make sure that we're not engaged in that type of
activity that is so totally disruptive. None of us would want to live
next door to a single-family home in our community where every day
there were new people coming in and every day there were parties
going on. None of us would want that, and that's what I was trying to
get after.
So I have no problem stepping backing and saying, regulate this
yourselves, and let's see how things play out. So that's why I'm
supporting the motion.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Very good.
Commissioner Taylor.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Thank you, Commissioner
Saunders. I think your summation of what we did at our last meeting
is accurate, and I supported it. And I can't support the
reconsideration. I can support directing staff to continue in this very
limited fashion. And we're going to watch what happens in the state
legislature, because there's a couple of bills right now that could
change everything. They've -- if it was a different -- if we didn't have
the state pushing us and telling us how to run business in Collier
County, we could dial this back, and there wouldn't be so much
confusion out there.
But, unfortunately, we've been preempted by the state, and there
are a couple of bills. I believe the session's over in the middle of --
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: May 3rd.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: -- May 3rd, and we're going to
April 9, 2019
Page 14
have a lot clearer idea of what's going on. So, unfortunately, I can't
support your motion. What I can --
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Can or cannot support the motion?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I cannot.
What I can support is continuing in this very limited fashion
targeting especially daily rentals and, frankly, in some cases weekly
rentals. I've heard enough testimony from the public to understand
that property values work both ways, and the rights of folks work
both ways.
And I am certainly understanding of the value of keeping
property values high, but the folks that I have talked to, their property
values are high because they live in their houses and they don't have
daily or weekly rentals next to them; they didn't buy and invest their
money for that.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Thank you very much.
And as I said -- as I said, please hold your applause. We all know
why you're here.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: So I would like to see if we can
just -- we will definitely take this up again in May once we know
what -- well, probably a little bit before, but it will probably be the
first meeting in May to assess what the state is allowing us as Collier
County to do.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Correct.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. Thank you very much. I , too,
I've been thinking about this a lot. Anybody who lives in a
neighborhood, lives there, it's their house, they can live there.
They're not in business for themselves. They're in business to have a
neighborhood to live in, not to have a rental business going on.
April 9, 2019
Page 15
I have a real problem with that because it changes the neighborhood
and -- but I can see that -- I can see that there's an adjustment that
also could be made, and that would be to -- not for six months but
maybe for one month, no less than one month, because right away
you've got transient people coming and going.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Please, ladies and gentlemen.
Please allow us to say our piece, please. Continue.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So what I'd like to ask is -- because
I don't feel comfortable supporting this, and -- but I'd like to ask, is
there a way that at some point in time we can revisit and maybe put a
limit of one month on it rather than six months? And I think possibly
neighbors could lift --
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: No.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No?
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: We're preempted.
MR. KLATZKOW: You're preempted from changing the
duration of these vacation rentals.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay, fine. Well, then I'm sorry. I
can't support it.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: We are not preempted from
regulating the industry. We are not preempted from enacting swift,
severe punishment upon those who are abusive to the quiet
enjoyment rights of their neighbors. We are not permitted on a
certain level of legal fee structure to allow for incentivization for
proper behavior by a landlord. Those are things that we can, in fact,
make adjustments to.
The entire premise of this motion is to allow for everyone who
has consideration, both the neighbor who lives next to a less
appropriate or less caring neighbor who is doing things that are
disrupting their right to that quiet enjoyment, the entire premise, I
believe, of Commissioner -- well, the way I'm interpreting it is is this
April 9, 2019
Page 16
allows for an opportunity for everybody to weigh in and us to come
to a consensus as to how to best manage this circumstance.
This is no argument amongst any of us, it has not been managed
well. We are, as a municipality, delinquent in looking at this
circumstance. This has been transpiring for a long time and operating
off of a subjective interpretation of our code by our County Attorney,
by our staff along the way, and to wit, that has been exacerbated by
the preemption that transpired back in '14 when the state took away
our rights of local control.
So I'm in support of the motion personally just to allow for an
opportunity, and I think probably prudently a date of our first meeting
in May would be a good idea. We will have completed this session.
We all know there are bills that are going forward right now that may
even further preempt us, and we'll know what those are, what those
circumstances are, and I will set it for a time-certain so that
everybody knows when we're coming in for that discussion.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Just one last question, please.
Now, the realtors are concerned with the sales and it increases
their sales and so forth.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: It's okay. We like kids.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: What about the people who then
don't want to buy here anymore because they don't want to live in a
neighborhood where the people just keeping moving in and out and
they don't know who their neighbors are?
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: And if I may, if I may, the
discussion today is to reconsider that and allow for people, such as
what you've just mentioned, who have that as their opinion with
regard to short-term rentals to express that to us and us to be able to
express what we can and cannot do.
The discussion today is for us to give consideration for
reconsideration of an action that was taken at our last meeting. I
April 9, 2019
Page 17
mean, there's a lot of emotion. There's a lot of business. There's a lot
of things that are transpiring, and we know there are two sides to
every equation.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you very much for that
lesson.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: You've forgotten more about this
stuff than I know.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: And I would just like to --
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: You are next.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Just to point out that one of the
issues is, is that right now our enforcement methodology is a
complaint-based --
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Right.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: -- system.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Right.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: So if you have a neighbor that's
unhappy that you are -- that you have a seasonal rental, a four-month
seasonal rental which many people do prior to moving here and
purchasing a property in a very nice neighborhood, right, to
understand what Naples is about; that could be the subject of a
complaint, and that's not the scenario that we want to have involved
in the enforcement methodology, I don't think, because most of
those -- I'm going to go out on a limb. I won't say "most," but a large
number of those seasonal renters eventually become residents of
Collier County.
So, you know, the concern is is that just to say, okay, start
enforcing this, it creates the situation that's going to have an impact
on the people that we want to come here, you know, not the
daily/weekly renters with parties and all that. Nobody wants that.
But it's this other aspect of the rental market that I think is -- you
know, this could have a serious effect if there's a chilling effect on
April 9, 2019
Page 18
that part of the market.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Already is. Thank you, sir.
Commissioner Saunders.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Commissioner Fiala and Commissioner Taylor, we have thr ee
commissioners now that have said that we would like to go ahead and
reconsider this, and I gave an explanation as to why I think we should
reconsider it. Not backing down on the enforcement issue in terms of
those bad actors but asking the industry to help us with that.
Now, it's inevitable if you have three commissioners that we're
going to make that change. We've got 100 people sitting out here
right now. I'd rather -- and I'm asking you two to at least reconsider
your opposition to the motion so we can take care of this issue today,
because we're going to take care of it, but we keep everybody in
limbo for two more weeks or three more weeks, and there's no point
in that.
So as a matter of courtesy to the three of us I'm asking that you
support this motion so that we can move forward with it because
we're going to move forward with it in two weeks if we don't move
forward with it today, and why inconvenience everybody on that?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Then why do I need to support it,
again?
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: What I'm saying is you don't
have to support the end result.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: If we're going to move forward
with it anyway in two weeks, you said.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Yeah, because there's three of
us that said that we want to do this. So by not supporting the motion
today so we can reconsider this today, all you're doing is saying to
the audience and to the industry, come back in two weeks, and then
we'll do it, and there's no point in that. That's all I'm saying. We've
April 9, 2019
Page 19
got a bunch of people here. Let's just do it today. We can do this in
about two minutes and be done with it, so I'm just asking for that
consideration.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Commissioner Taylor.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I'd like to call the question.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: All right. Now, because we're off
agenda and voting on -- are we going to entertain public speakers at
this time?
MR. KLATZKOW: No.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: It's been moved and seconded that
we reconsider the motion that was made at our last meeting for a
future stated communication.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Just for clarification, if we
have four votes to do that, we can take care of it today. We only have
three.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: It's been recommended that we do
two motions: One for the reconsideration, and a second motion for
the rectification of what transpired at our last meeting. That will
require a 4-1. This is a regular majority to give folks --
MR. OCHS: No, no. Other way.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: If there's four votes to
reconsider, we can take care of this today. If there's only three votes
to reconsider --
MR. KLATZKOW: Then you'll have an item next meeting to
reconsider.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Yeah. And the point I was
making is, we're going to have those three votes in two weeks, so let's
take care of it today. That's all I'm suggesting.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Okay. That's not what I
understood.
MR. KLATZKOW: It's a very complicated issue.
April 9, 2019
Page 20
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Yes. So be that as it may...
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Well, let's be clear on this, though.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Do you want to speak?
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: The motion to reconsider --
MR. KLATZKOW: In this format, the motion to reconsider is
going to take your four votes; however, Commissioner, you already
requested the County Manager to bring this back so that if it doesn't
pass now and there are three votes here, I have no doubt your County
Manager will bring it back at your next meeting, and it will then
require three votes.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: That was my point.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: All right.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Let's just do it today.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: So we're going to --
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: We're going to hear it anyway.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: We're going to hear it one way or
the other. And if one of you were to come along, then we could hear
it for sure, so...
It's been moved and seconded that we give reconsideration to
the motion that was made at our last meeting. All in favor?
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Opposed?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Opposed.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: And the motion fails 3-2. So we
will give due notice as to when this item will, in fact, be on a regular
agenda, and I will set it as a time-certain so that everyone has an
opportunity to speak.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Mr. Chairman.
April 9, 2019
Page 21
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Yes.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: We're going to have a lot of
people leaving here in just a second, and I want to make a
clarification again. Just so that everybody knows, what we did a
couple weeks ago, what apparently we're going to continue doing for
another two weeks and that is --
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Or month.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: -- or month, whatever the
time period is, staff has the direction on a complaint-driven basis to
go after the most egregious violators. If the county gets a complaint
on, like, a daily rental and there's some serious abuse, then the
county's going to take action on that. We're not looking at any other
types of rentals. Just that --
MR. KLATZKOW: That's what we're doing.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: -- very limited scope.
And so in two weeks or three weeks, whenever, we'll have three
votes to change that to be more clear.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: You okay with that?
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir. But I want the audience to understand the
process under the ordinance. So at your next board meeting on
April 23rd, the Board will simply take a vote on whether or not a
majority of the Board would like to --
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Reconsider.
MR. OCHS: -- reconsider that item. If the majority votes in
favor --
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Then we'll set it --
MR. OCHS: -- I will then schedule that item for a full hearing
by the Board on your meeting of May 14th.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Very good.
MR. OCHS: So there won't be, I don't believe, a lot of need for
testimony, but that's up to the chair, at the next meeting. But it's a
April 9, 2019
Page 22
two-step process. So we first need the Board -- a majority of the
board to affirmatively decide that they want to --
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: We've done that.
MR. OCHS: No, you haven't. The motion failed, sir.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: You protected the motion by
sending the proper notice per our ordinance to the County Manager
that you wish to reconsider the item.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Right.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: That letter that you sent yesterday
or whenever that came actually triggered our next meeting for the
reconsideration that we will vote in a regular fashion and only
majority will require it to be set at a future stated communica tion
from that. So today we needed to have a supermajority in order to
move it up, so...
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: We're --
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: I know. I know.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: We're going to spend a month
waiting around to discuss something that we know the outcome of,
but that's just me.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Correct. And there again --
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: May I say that we have a -- may
I say that we have a month for --
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: I turned your light off.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Understanding that the --
certainly the will of the majority up here in terms of following what
Commissioner Saunders said and the concerns we have about the
short-term rentals, there's a month for the industry to show us that
they heard us.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Thank you.
With -- please. Ladies and gentlemen, please. The motion has
been -- we are going to reconsider this at our next stated
April 9, 2019
Page 23
communication. That vote will only require a regular majority at
that -- assuming that the three who voted in favor of this today
continue with their support, we will hear it again at our May 14th
hearing, and I will set it for a time-certain. In between then and now
educate yourselves as to the processes that are, in fact, transpiring
and be prepared for the May 14th meeting.
And with that, those who wish to exit may go, quietly.
(A brief recess was had.)
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Sir, you have a live mic. Oh, that's
your job. You're supposed to say that.
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: All right. Now, if you would,
please, if you would, please. Folks, if you can hold the chatter, ladies
and gentlemen, ladies and gentlemen, our meeting is still in session.
We cut mikcs off as a lot of folks were leaving, so now we have
actual business that we need to tend to.
And with that I'm going to call for any additional adjustments or
ex parte.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: We're still back there.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Yeah. We haven't even got to that
yet.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: I waylaid the disclosures. No
disclosures. I do -- I will not -- I will be abstaining from a couple of
items on the consent agenda: 16A and -- 16A3, 16D8. Our clients --
relate to clients of my firm, and so I will not be voting on those two
matters.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. Thank you very much. I have
no additions, no corrections to the agenda, and as far as ex parte goes,
on the consent agenda I have no disclosures. On the summary
agenda, on 9B -- well, it's been transferred to 9B so I don't need to
April 9, 2019
Page 24
say anything about that. That's it. No disclosures.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Commissioner Taylor.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: No disclosures; no changes to
the agenda.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Commissioner Saunders.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I have no disclosures and no
changes.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: And I, as well, have no disclosures
nor any changes.
So with that, I'll take a motion for setting our agenda for today.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: So move.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Until I decide to adjust it. All in
favor?
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Opposed same sign, same sound.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: So moved.
Proposed Agenda Changes
Board of County Commissioners Meeting
April 9, 2019
Continue Item 16A6 to the April 23, 2019 BCC Meeting: Recommendation to approve the
release of a code enforcement lien with a value of $394,130.86 for payment of $2,080.86 in the code
enforcement actions entitled Board of County Commissioners v. Edelmiro and Bernadita Robles,
Code Enforcement Board Case No. CESD20100009519 relating to property located at 4015 16TH
Ave SE, Collier County, Florida. (Staff’s request)
Continue Item 16A7 to the April 23, 2019 BCC Meeting: Recommendation to approve the
release of two (2) code enforcement liens with a value of $338,616.50 for payment of $3,000 in the
code enforcement actions entitled Board of County Commissioners v. Richard L. Gossard, Jr and
Evonne M. Estep, Code Enforcement Special Magistrate Case No. CEPM2014024204 and Case No.
CEAU20160016271 relating to property located at 5310 Sholtz St, Collier County, Florida. (Staff’s
request)
Move Item 16A8 to Item 11E: Recommendation to hear Land Development Code Amendments
at two regularly scheduled daytime hearings and waive the nighttime hearing requirement.
(Commissioner Taylor’s request)
Continue Item 16D7 to the April 23, 2019 BCC Meeting: Recommendation to approve
and authorize the Chairman to sign the First Amendment to the State Mandated Agreement
with David Lawrence Mental Health Center, Inc. (Commissioner McDaniel’s request)
Move Item 17B to Item 9B: This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by the
Commission members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all participants are required to be
sworn in. Recommendation to approve An Ordinance amending Ordinance No. 97- 3, which
rezoned the subject property to a Heavy Commercial (C-5) zoning district with conditions, in
order to add motor freight transportation and warehousing (SIC code 4225, air-conditioned and
mini-and self storage only) as a permitted use, and to increase the maximum building height for
that use only, from the presently allowed maximum height of 28 feet to a zoned height of 35 feet
and an actual height of 38 feet. The subject property is located on the north side of U.S. 41 East,
approximately 1,000 feet east of Collier Boulevard, in Section 3, Township 51 South, Range 26
East, Collier County, Florida, consisting of 2.17± acres; and by providing an effective date.
[PL20180000125] (Commissioner Fiala and Commissioner Taylor’s separate requests)
Time Certain Items:
Item 9A to be heard immediately following Item 14B1
Item 11A to be heard at 9:45 a.m.
Item 11D to be heard no sooner than 1:00 p.m.
4/24/2019 3:22 PM
April 9, 2019
Page 25
Item #2B and #2C
BCC FUTURE LAND USE WORKSHOP MINUTES FROM
MARCH 5, 2019, AND THE BCC REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES FROM MARCH 12, 2019– APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, Item 2B is approval of the March
5th, 2019, BCC future land-use workshop meeting minutes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Sir, I make a motion to approve
that and also to approve the March 12th BCC meeting minutes.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Second.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: It's been moved and seconded that
we approve both Items 2B and C. Any discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: All in favor?
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Opposed same sign, same sound.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: So moved.
MR. OCHS: Thank you, Commissioners.
That moves us to this morning's proclamations.
Item #4
PROCLAMATIONS – ONE MOTION TAKEN TO ADOPT ALL
PROCLAMATIONS – ADOPTED
April 9, 2019
Page 26
Item #4A
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING APRIL 9, 2019 AS JC
JACKSON DAY IN COLLIER COUNTY, IN PROUD
RECOGNITION OF OUR HOMEGROWN FOOTBALL
CHAMPION WHOSE EXTRAORDINARY TALENT EXHIBITED
DURING HIS ROOKIE SEASON WITH THE NEW ENGLAND
PATRIOTS CONTRIBUTED GREATLY TO THAT TEAM’S
SUCCESS AND ULTIMATE ADVANCEMENT AS SUPER
BOWL CHAMPIONS. ACCEPTED BY JC JACKSON
ALONGSIDE HIS PARENTS, GRANDPARENTS, OTHER
FAMILY MEMBERS AND FRIENDS – ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: Item 4A is a proclamation designating April 9th,
2019, as JC Jackson Day in Collier County. In proud recognition --
(Applause.)
MR. OCHS: This proclamation's made in proud recognition of
home-grown football champion whose extraordinary talent exhibited
during his rookie season with the New England Patriots contributed
greatly to that team's success and ultimate advancement as Super
Bowl champions.
JC, if you'd please step forward.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: And while he's shaking hands, I'd
like to invite his family, friends to please come on up. And you take
a position right there in the middle. And I'm going to read.
MR. OCHS: Come on up.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: And few know his real name, by
the way. Jerald Christopher Jackson is a home-grown football
champion born and raised in Collier County and a graduate of
Immokalee High School --
April 9, 2019
Page 27
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: -- where we played football and
was selected to play in the 2014 Under Armour All-American game.
JC began his college football years at the University of Florida before
transferring to the University of Maryland, starting 11 of 12 games as
a sophomore, making 40 tackles, an interception, and a team-high
five pass breakups.
Big Ten coaches voted JC an honorable mention All Conference
in '17 after he started all 12 games posting 40 stops, three
interceptions, and seven pass breakups.
During his impressive rookie year -- season in the NFL, JC was
a starting quarterback for the New England Patriots contributing
greatly to that team's success and ultimate advance as the Super Bowl
Champions.
All year JC gave up only 31 catches and had the lowest passer
rating allowed when targeted out of the quarterbacks in the NFL. JC
made three interceptions during the year and was named New
England Patriots' rookie of the year.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: In the Super Bowl on February 3rd,
2019, JC was part of the Patriot's defense that limited the Los
Angeles Rams to just 229 yards and no touchdowns and the New
England Patriots 13-to-3 victory.
Therefore, now, be it proclaimed by the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier that April 9th, 2019, be designated as JC
Jackson Day in Collier County.
(Applause.)
MR. OCHS: Photo time. Photo time everybody.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: We'll get him to give us a speech.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Thank you all for coming today.
April 9, 2019
Page 28
You don't have to -- unless you want to speak.
MR. JACKSON: I don't have anything to say. I just want to
thank you guys, man. I want you to continue making decisions for
us.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Yes, sir, yes, sir, yes, sir.
Appreciate it. One more round, please.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: I don't think I've ever seen Nick and
Mr. Bellone back there smile this much before.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: The annual Patriots invitational Super
Bowl is coming up again.
MR. OCHS: He said something about roll, Patriots.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Yeah, right. I knew that was
coming.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Well, how about that?
Item #4B
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING APRIL 13, 2019 AS TRY
TRANSIT DAY BY OFFERING FREE RIDES IN AN EFFORT TO
PROMOTE PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION AS AN
ALTERNATIVE MEANS TO COMMUTE. ACCEPTED BY
STEVE CARNELL, MICHELLE ARNOLD, OMAR DELEON
AND OTHER TEAM MEMBERS – ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, that takes us to Item 4B this
morning. This is a proclamation designating April 13, 2019, as Try
Transit Day by offering free rides in an effort to promote public
transportation as an alternative means to commute. To be accepted
this morning by Steve Carnell, Michelle Arnold, Omar Deleon, and
other members of our public transit team.
April 9, 2019
Page 29
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: She was coming one way and went
the other.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Makes you feel good to see
somebody from hometown win something like this, doesn't it? Wow.
Yeah.
(Applause.)
MS. ARNOLD: Thank you, Commissioners. I won't be -- I'll
be very brief. I know you guys have a long meeting today.
Thank you so much for having this Try Transit Day. We want to
provide an alternative mode for our residents within the community,
and we're encouraging everybody to come out on April 13th, which is
a Saturday, and use the transit. We've got -- we're partnering with
some other local businesses and activities.
Immokalee Pioneer Museum is having an event around that
time. The Conservancy's celebrating their Earth Day on the 13th, so
take Routes 13, 14, and 25 to that location. Botanical Gardens is al so
having a bloom and brew, so take Routes 13 and 14 as well. And
Route 23 in Immokalee will take you to that. And all those routes
connect at our transfer station.
So I encourage everybody to just jump on it. The drivers are
awesome. They will help you guide your way through the system, so
please use the transit. Thank you.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: I've done it, and it's awesome.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: It is, isn't it? And they're clean and
nice.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Since it's heating up out, a crisp 70
degrees inside.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: There you are.
April 9, 2019
Page 30
Item #4C
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING APRIL 14 - 20 AS
NATIONAL PUBLIC SAFETY TELECOMMUNICATORS WEEK
IN COLLIER COUNTY, IN GRATEFUL RECOGNITION OF OUR
9-1-1 DISPATCHERS. ACCEPTED BY SHERIFF KEVIN
RAMBOSK, CHIEF GREG SMITH, DIRECTOR BOB FINNEY,
SUPERVISOR SHARON GALLO AND SEVERAL 9-1-1
DISPATCHERS AND SUPPORT STAFF – ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: Item 4C is a proclamation designating April 14th
through 20th as National Public Safety Telecommunicators Week in
Collier County in grateful recognition of our 911 dispatchers to be
accepted by Sheriff Kevin Rambosk, Chief Greg Smith, Director Bob
Finney, Supervisor Sharon Gallo, and members of our 911 dispatch
staff.
(Applause.)
SHERIFF RAMBOSK: Good morning, everyone. Kevin
Rambosk, Collier County Sheriff. On behalf of the men and women
in the Collier County Sheriff's Office, I want to thank you for the
recognition.
I particularly want to thank all of our communications members
for the great job that they do. You know, I think everybody knows
that they are terrific with emergency communications, but they also
provide a lot of essential information to our residents, and they help
get information that prevents crime to our deputies in the street.
And to their credit and to the deputies in the street, they have created
the lowest crime rate in recorded history. Thank you very much.
(Applause.)
SHERIFF RAMBOSK: Thank you, all.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Can I say a little something?
April 9, 2019
Page 31
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Please.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I just want to tell you that -- you
know, I give these little tours every year, and one of the tours was
through 911 with our Emergency Operations Center. The other one
was through their Special Operations Center. I want to tell you, we're
not No. 1 like this and lowest in crime because it's haphazard. He
runs a good department, and that's your taxpayer dollars at work, and
they're working for you very well.
Thank you, Sheriff.
(Applause.)
SHERIFF RAMBOSK: Thank you.
MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, if I could have a motion to approve
today's proclamations, please.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So moved.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Second.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: It's been moved and seconded that
we approve today's proclamations. Any discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: All in favor?
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Opposed same sign, same sound.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: So moved.
MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, we had a scheduled 9:45 a.m.
time-certain hearing, if you'd like to go to that one now, sir.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: I would like to go to that one.
We're only 30 minutes-ish behind.
April 9, 2019
Page 32
Item #11A
A REPORT REGARDING NORTH COLLIER FIRE DISTRICT’S
INTENT TO SELL STATION 40 LOCATED AT 1441 PINE
RIDGE ROAD - MOTION TO DIRECT STAFF TO ACQUIRE
THIS PROPERTY – APPROVED
MR. OCHS: That is Item 11A. This is a recommendation to
accept a report regarding North Collier Fire District's intent and offer
to sell Station 40 located at 1441 Pine Ridge Road. Your EMS chief,
Tabatha Butcher, will present.
CHIEF BUTCHER: Good morning, Commissioners. For the
record, Tabatha Butcher, chief of EMS.
On January 22nd there was some discussion by the Board on a
proposal that North Collier had received to sell the current Station 40
located at 1441 Pine Ridge Road.
On February 13th, the North Collier Commission actually voted
to proceed with the sale of that station.
Since then EMS did an analysis of what the impacts of a relocation
would be. EMS currently leases space at the Station 40 location at
1941 (sic) Pine Ridge, so we take a look at response times and how
relocation or station builds will affect us overall.
The proposal is to actually relocate the station to a site at 1941
Pine Ridge Road or actually 8605 Kathleen Court. This property
does not have direct access or direct frontage to Pine Ridge; however,
it is located behind some businesses that can access Pine Ridge Road.
So what we did is we did an analysis of this relocation. And
currently we have a response time goal to meet eight minutes or less
90 percent of the time. The current Station 40 location, we actually
meet that response time goal 96 percent of the time. And the
April 9, 2019
Page 33
relocation of the new -- of the station would actually put the
ambulance off direct frontage from Pine Ridge Road, which would be
an access issue for us.
We suspect that would add about a one-minute time delay to get
from the new location out to Pine Ridge Road. The other thing that
we analyzed is where the actual call volume is in the current Zone 40,
and the current heavy call load is located along that Pine
Ridge/Goodlette corridor.
We also took a look at our dispatch systems. So curren tly we
are dispatched based on closest unit response. So we did an analysis
if we relocated the station to the new location what impacts that
would have not only on the existing Zone 40, but we have to look at
the zones that are adjacent to it and around it.
So what we found is that the relocation would actually decrease
the response area for Zone 40, would still allow us to maintain our
response times in that area, but it would actually expand the
geographical area to Zone 2, which is located further south in the
northern portion of the city. It would also expand the geographic
location in Zone 44, which is located at Pelican Bay.
We currently meet our response times in both Zone 2 and Zone
44 as we are supposed to; however, we're not sure if that expa nsion
of that geographical area would actually have an overall impact on
those other two zones. That's something that we cannot determine
until we actually see that data.
So with this analysis, we found that relocating the current
Station 40 to the new location is actually not optimal for our overall
system; however, it's going to be about a two-to-three-year process
for the station to actually be constructed. So in the meantime, we
actually recommended that we look for other options to stay within
that Pine Ridge/Goodlette area instead of relocating. We can look at
some other lease options, go into maybe some existing businesses
April 9, 2019
Page 34
that are actually there.
The other option is for us to -- if we cannot find another location
to relocate to, to actually look at if we need to add other ambulance
resources if we found that we were having response-time issues in the
other two zones.
Being that the actual station -- excuse me. One of the other
things we received is on April 2nd we received an actual letter from
North Collier to ask if the county would intend on purchasing that
existing station since we do have those concerns. That is not
something that we have currently in our station expansion plan. And
without knowing what that impact is going to be on Zone 2 or Zone
44, it's difficult for me to say that we should make such a capital
investment without knowing that we're going to have a direct
improvement at this time.
I'm happy to answer any questions.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: With that, Commissioner Fiala is
first.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: And just before you go, we do have
public speakers.
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Just to remind everyone along the
way, so before we move into a motion or anything.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'm not going to motion.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Sorry for interrupting you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, that's all right.
So I didn't know where this station was myself. I knew where
the station is located now, which is an ideal place. How many peop le
can get frontage right there on Pine Ridge Road? That is amazing,
and I was so surprised to hear that the Fire Department was selling it
when they've got the ideal location. And boy, that property probably
April 9, 2019
Page 35
is worthy a heck of a lot of money right now.
But I thought, well, let's see what it was. When Chief
Cunningham came up, it sounded like it was kind of winding back in
streets and everything. I just wanted to see it for myself. So I got
ahold of the County Manager's Office and I said, would you have
somebody take me on a little tour. I want to see what it looks like.
And so he arranged to have a tour actually yesterday. And so Len
Price took me there to see it for myself.
First of all, the station that's sitting there now, Station 40, looks
really nice, by the way. It's in very, very good condition, and it's
right there on Pine Ridge Road.
But you pass that and you go down a side street, and I said, are
we going in the right direction? Because you're going between two
buildings, two businesses, and you have to go down this small little --
it isn't even a road. It's just a pass-through, and into the back. Then
you have a piece of land here. But all of the trucks for the businesses
all in that area are all parked all over there, too. And I'm thinking,
how in the heck would they do this in an emergency?
And it just so happened that I went after the end of my day
yesterday. She picked me up about 3:30. So we just happened to
catch what all the traffic looks like at 3:30 in the afternoon as well.
So you could see what the ambulances would be facing if they -- if
they moved back there.
Anyway, so then you have to go around another place, just the
back of the buildings, and then you have to go between the buildings,
but you can't go always between because it depends on which way
you want to turn. I thought, oh, my goodness, I can't believe a fire
department would give up an ideal location like this to be back
behind buildings, and you have to dodge traffic and dodge all the
delivery trucks to the other businesses. That was -- it was amazing to
me.
April 9, 2019
Page 36
And I don't want our ambulances to be caught back there. You
know, this is a matter of life and death now when it comes to our
ambulances. And we just can't do that. So that's my input on this
right now.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Thank you.
Commissioner Taylor.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Please.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Chief Butcher, you mentioned
that -- and I know this is difficult, but what I understood from what
you said is that you -- one of the options we have is to look for
another location, and the only reason we're not thinking about this
fire station is because it hasn't been budgeted; is that correct?
CHIEF BUTCHER: Well, we feel that we can manage with the
resources that we have to maintain the response times, and we feel
confident that we can find a location within that Goodlette and Pine
Ridge area.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So you don't want to stay?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: No. I welcome your comment.
You don't want to stay -- because I'm a little confused by --
CHIEF BUTCHER: No, I'm not saying that we don't want to
stay at the current location. That would be the ideal option.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Okay, good.
CHIEF BUTCHER: However, if -- well, we know that North
Collier is going to sell, whether it be to developer or the county;
however, we don't feel that since -- typically, when we try to add
stations or resources, we want to see an impact actually on our
system, and by staying at that current location, we're not necessa rily
going to see a direct impact, so we're wanting to stay in that area, but
we don't feel that that capital investment at this time is going to show
you a direct impact now.
April 9, 2019
Page 37
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Right now, but after 350 units
are built behind the station, it very well might be.
CHIEF BUTCHER: Yeah. And that's something that we just
have to -- we have to look at and we have to continue to see if it's
going to have a direct impact on our response times.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Good.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Commissioner Saunders.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I agree with other comments from the Commission that EMS is
probably the second most important thing that we do. The first most
important thing, I think, is law enforcement, and maybe EMS is
either second or tied for first.
And I'm not particularly concerned about the capital cost.
Obviously, we have to be very leery about how we spend taxpayer
dollars, but when we're spending them on law enforcement and we're
spending them on the emergency medical service, I think we can be a
little bit liberal in terms of how we deal with that in order to protect
the public.
We have $6 million in the sales tax for EMS stations, and I
understand that's to fund three other stations, and this particular
station, if we purchased it, would cost about 1.2 million, I think, is
the -- is sort of the going number.
We can adjust expenses in that sales tax if we need to in those
different categories. We're not absolutely limited to only spending
$6 million for EMS stations if we determine that that was something
that we wanted to do down the road. Now, I realize that if you took
money from another program, that does have an impact.
Heck, Mr. Manager, we just got $40.9 million from FEMA, so we're
rolling in money. So let's start spending it.
April 9, 2019
Page 38
The point I want to make is that, using your term -- and I'm not
trying to put you on the spot, but you did say -- and I think this is
almost a quote -- the ideal option would be to stay at that station.
CHIEF BUTCHER: (Nods head.)
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I prefer going with the ideal
option because, again, we're talking about EMS and something that --
a service that is critically important.
So when we get down to the point of making some decisions, I'm
going to go with the ideal option as opposed to some other potentially
good option, even if it means spending 1.2 million dollars to get
there. We'll find the money somewhere for that.
So that's my view, Mr. Chairman, when we get to making some
decisions.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Thank you, sir.
Commissioner Solis.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: I just wanted to make sure I
understood something that you said. There was an analysis of what
the effect of relocating the station was on -- and I thought you said
one of the areas was -- included Pelican Bay.
CHIEF BUTCHER: Yes. So we take a look at what stations
would be affected if we relocate. So by moving the current Station
40 from where it is further east on Pine Ridge Road, it would actually
have an impact on Station 44 in Pelican Bay and Station 2 in the
northern end of the city, and reason being is because we're moving
the current station further to the east. So now some of that western
portion of Pine Ridge Road would actually be recommended for
either Pelican Bay station or the city station.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: So -- and just clarify for me, that
would be a negative impact or a positive impact?
CHIEF BUTCHER: It could potentially be negative or it
could -- it could stay the same. It just depends on how the calls fall,
April 9, 2019
Page 39
and we would have to monitor response times in both of those areas
to make sure it is not having a negative impact.
MR. OCHS: Commissioner, if I might, you know, because of
the closest-unit dispatch system, what the chief is saying is let's
assume for sake of argument that all these units and all these stations
are actually in the station when a call comes, so the dispatch system
automatically determines which unit is closest. So if you're moving
the current assets in Station 40 to the east, it may then call out some
of those units further to the west in the Pelican Bay station or the
North Naples station instead of the units that would typically have
been called out --
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Correct.
MR. OCHS: -- at the current location of Station 40. But, again,
closest-unit dispatch can be either an ambulance or a Fire Department
ALS engine. So we don't really know even what jurisdiction would
be called on each individual call. Is that right, Chief?
CHIEF BUTCHER: That's good.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Okay.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Fast question: We have some great
grant sleuths within our government system, and maybe there would
be some grants that could help us buy that station. Just a thought.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: I think we'll go to public comment
now. I have comments, but I'll reserve till the end.
MR. MILLER: Mr. Chairman, we have eight registered public
speakers for this item. Your first speaker is Diane Flagg. Diane has
been ceded additional time from Linda Roth. Can you raise your
hand to indicate you're here?
(Raises hand.)
MR. MILLER: Thank you. Lynne Secatore, I think I'm saying
that right.
April 9, 2019
Page 40
(Raises hand.)
MR. MILLER: Thank you. I hope.
And Jenine Povlsen?
(Raises hand.)
MR. MILLER: Thank you. She'll have a total of 12 minutes.
She'll be followed by Tyler Day.
MS. FLAGG: Good morning, Commissioners. For the record,
Diane Flagg, resident of Collier County for 39 years and former chief
of county EMS.
Very few decisions equal the importance of 911 emergency
response times to residents who are suffering a heart attack, a stroke,
or are unable to breathe. The decision you make today whether to
purchase Station 40 on Pine Ridge Road by Goodlette Road may
determine if a resident survives their medical emergency. Seconds
do matter in a medical crisis.
It is evident that the EMS chief went as far as possible to
describe the dire impact on residents if this station is not purchased
by county commissioners. The chief has confirmed that the county --
that if the County Commissioners do not purchase Station 40, 911
response times will suffer and I quote, "The primary concern with
relocating the current station to the proposed site is that the new
location does not have direct frontage and access to Pine Ridge Road
which would increase response times to the west."
What that means is -- this is north. This is the station right here,
Station 40. If this station is moved out here, then the discuss ion
about the increasing areas that the units would have to respond to is
that the unit down on 26th Ave. would have to respond up here, and
the unit on the far north end of Pelican Bay on Vanderbilt Road
would have to respond here because this unit has be en moved out
east.
This unit is directly on Pine Ridge Road, has immediate access
April 9, 2019
Page 41
to Goodlette Road, both north and south, also a short distance has
access north and south on Tamiami Trail. That's why this location, as
the chief described, is the ideal location for medical emergencies.
If you look at Exhibit B, this is where the station is moving. It
moves east on Pine Ridge Road, one of our most heavily congested
roads in Collier County which, Commissioner Fiala, I'm sure you saw
yesterday. This is where it's proposed to go. You would have to --
the vehicles would have to travel down this two-lane road, down this
two-lane road before they would ever get to an intersection and a
signal where then they would have to go west.
The chief also stated, and I quote, the relocation of Station 40
will increase the geographical area and call volume with the adjacent
zones, which I described to you here and here, and that the increased
geographical area and additional call volume, quote, will affect
response times with the zones adjacent to station -- to Zone 40, which
is Medic 2, which is all the way down on 26th Avenue North and 41,
and Medic 44, which is all the way up on Vanderbilt Road, and it is
west of Tamiami Trail. So it's all the way up here in the
northernmost boundary of Pelican Bay.
And I quote, "911 responses may be further delayed when a
concurrent call is received." What that means -- let's say that there's a
call at Artis Naples. The unit that's going to respond to that call if
everyone's in place is the unit all the way up on Vanderbilt Road. It's
going to come down and respond to Artis Naples.
And let's say that there's a second call for a heart attack that
comes in on the northern end of Pelican Bay. Well, if you're all the
way up here, your choices are the unit that's up by Royal Scoop on
Vanderbilt Drive or the unit on Livingston out by Mediterra, unless
there happens to be another station -- another unit somewhere
roaming leaving the hospital, because it is closest unit response.
But it's important to understand if everyone's in their station and
April 9, 2019
Page 42
if Medic 44 responds to Artis Naples and another call comes up on
the north end of Pelican Bay, your two closest stations are all the way
up on Royal Scoop by Vanderbilt Drive or all the way up on
Livingston Road by Mediterra.
To further quote, "It should be noted that average annual
response times in all three zones currently exceeds the Board's
established level-of-service standard." That's amazing. That means
that all those years of planning that you-all did, you planned correctly
in where those stations go, because they're all meeting your
level-of-service standard. This statement confirms that Station 40 is
exactly where Station 40 needs to be to meet the needs of our
community members in a medical crisis.
Why is there not a concern for delayed 911 response times by
North Collier Fire commissioners? Why did North Collier Fire
commissioners review the number of mutual-aid calls that they gave
to the City of Naples but never reviewed the 911 response time
impacts before they made the decision to sell?
This is why: If you look at where Station 40 is, the blue is the
North Collier Fire District. The blue is where they get their money
from. These are their taxpayers. The white is the City of Naples.
They don't get any revenue from the City of Naples.
So why did they look -- the only thing they looked at besides the
appraisal of the station was how many mutual-aid calls did they
provide to the City of Naples. That's what they looked at. They
never looked at the impact of 911 response times if they moved east.
And this map explains why because these -- they're right on the
boundary, through annexation over years, of the City of Naples.
That's why they're moving over here to the blue.
But EMS doesn't have that option. The Board of County
Commissioners provides emergency responses to all of Collier
County, to all city residents, to all of unincorporated Collier County.
April 9, 2019
Page 43
And that's why the chief tells you that this is the optimal solution,
Station 40 staying where it is.
Commissioners, as you are aware, the reason Collier County
EMS did not program the purchase of Station 40 into the Annual
Update Inventory Report, also known as AUIR, is because they had
no idea Station 40 was being sold.
You were not notified that Station 40 was being sold. The
County Manager was not notified that Station 40 was being sold.
They voted to sell the station before they ever informed the Board of
County Commissioners.
The recommendation to explore lease option surrounding
Station 40 makes zero business sense. A storefront does not have the
facilities of an emergency service station. Renovation costs to make
a storefront work as an emergency facility would be likely. The cost
of leasing and probable renovation costs will soon exceed the costs of
purchasing Station 40.
Leasing costs will continue to rise year after year, and one has to
consider, is there even a place available to lease? Because if you
look at where 40 is, this is retail storefront, this is retail storefront,
and this is all residential.
So what are -- you know you're going to incur costs just to
renovate to make it try and fit and work when you've got a station
right there.
Adding a second 12-hour ambulance as a result of not
purchasing Station 40 will also be at a substantial cost year after year
after year. Assuming this cost is $300,000, in just four years you
would have already paid for Station 40 with this cost alone.
The purchase of Station 40 is not premature. It is the County
Commissioners' last and only opportunity to assure that 911 response
times are not delayed to residents suffering a medical crisis. The cost
to purchase Station 40 is far less than the alternatives that have been
April 9, 2019
Page 44
discussed.
There are several funding options. One was brought up. The
$490 million Collier one-cent sales tax specifically included funding
for EMS stations. The enabling language in the sales tax does not
limit the amount of sales tax funds that can be used for EMS stations.
EMS impact fees is always an option. Because they lease, you could
consider using a portion of EMS impact fees. North Collier Fire
commissioners have voted to pay a base rent of 105,000 for the use of
Station 40 for two years with three six-month options to extend. Net
reduction of your $1.2 million cost would be 210,000 for the two
years or 367,500 if they extend for three-and-a-half years.
In addition, after the two-and-a-half to three-and-a-half years,
you may then approach the city when North Collier builds their
station out here and ask the city if they would consider also leasing
that station to serve these residents, because 40 is right on the city
boundary.
This is the only opportunity County Commissioners will have to
purchase a fully constructed emergency facility with direct access to
main roads and proven county EMS 911 response times that meet
your level-of-service standards.
There are few decisions made by Commissioners that equal the
critical importance of 911 response times. $1.27 million to purchase
Station 40 is available, is the most cost-effective option to the
alternatives presented, and is the right decision for residents, and we
would ask that you vote to purchase Station 40.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Thank you.
MS. FLAGG: Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Tyler Day. He will be
followed by Janet Vasey.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: I'm going to ask that we show
respect to all of the speakers.
April 9, 2019
Page 45
MR. DAY: Thank you for the opportunity to speak today. My
name is Tyler Day from the Villages of Monterey on Orange
Blossom. I'm here as the vice president of the Orange Blossom Pine
Ridge Community Alliance. This is an alliance of 11 communities
along the Orange Blossom or adjacent to the Orange Blossom
corridor.
We are served by Station 40 Fire and EMS, and that station, as
far as our group, represents thousands of families and close to 4,000
registered voters in our development area.
I've spoken numerous times in the past before. You and Burt
and I go back to discussions shortly after the French and Indian Wars,
was it? Well, maybe it was the Civil War. I can't remember. But
that shows you how long we've been around, since Donna was a
child.
But this is very important to Collier County and to our
communities. Our residents will be affected by any delay in EMS
responses.
With the move of the EMS Station 40 to Kathleen Court,
according to analysis, will increase the response time to three minutes
or more. Now, in three minutes, an accident victim or a choking
victim could die, a heart attack victim may well die.
I strongly and our communities strongly urge you to purchase
Station 40 and to keep EMS there and save the lives of our Collier
County residents.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Janet Vasey. She'll be
followed by Al Jones.
MS. VASEY: Good morning. Janet Vasey, for the record.
I've served on your county committees for a total of 20 years: The
Productivity Committee, the Emergency Medical Authority, and the
April 9, 2019
Page 46
Public Safety Authority.
I don't need to tell you that public safety and health is a primary
responsibility of county government. You all know that.
The Station 40 sale has the potential -- has the potential to seriously
degrade EMS response times and put lives in jeopardy, somet hing
that should be avoided at all costs.
First, it's clear that having Station 40 EMS ambulance move to
the new fire station location is not an option. The analysis performed
by EMS shows that response times to many locations would increase
be two, two-and-a-half minutes. Locations such as the Tamiami
Trail, Goodlette Road, Seagate Drive, the communities of Moorings
Park, Pine Ridge Estates, south Pelican Bay, Autumn Woods and, as
Tyler mentioned, along Orange Blossom Drive, they would all be
affected.
Also, we've heard EMS Stations 2 and 44 would be responding
to more calls under the closest-unit response, and that would be
degrading their response times, too.
Second, the current Station 40 is, as we've discussed, in the perfect
location. If you look at a map, you can see that that station is
surrounded reasonably by all the other stations, and we have
excellent response times as a group. The old saying is, if it ain't
broke, don't fix it, and this is not broken.
Third, money. The price is right, and you have the money to
buy it. Station 40 is available for a purchase at a reasonable, dare I
say, bargain price. You cannot build a new station including land and
construction for that cost even if you could find property in that area.
As we've discussed, sales tax revenue could be used, including
the six million for EMS stations, and impact fees.
The fire district would lease back Station 40 for $105,000 a year, and
this money could be used for any additional operating costs and
building maintenance until these costs are budgeted in the future.
April 9, 2019
Page 47
In conclusion, you have the perfect location, the opportunity, and the
money to solve this problem with no negative impacts on the health
and safety of county residents, especially those in District 2. You
should -- you don't need to play around with leasing space
somewhere, looking for locations in the immediate area, or running a
second 12-hour ambulance. You can fix this problem at minimum
cost with no disruption to EMS by buying Station 40 now.
Beep.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: She's practiced that before.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That was funny.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Al Jones. He'll be
followed by Caroline Martino.
MR. JONES: Good morning, Commissioners.
The sale of Engine (sic) 40 is only half of the situation here.
The other half is the relocation of Engine 40's quarters. Moving them
3,000 feet down the road, down a side street adds 3,000 feet of extra
traffic that they're going to have to go through before even getting to
the intersection of Goodlette-Frank and Pine Ridge Road, and
anybody who's been through that intersection knows. As a matter of
fact, coming down here today, I looked, there's about 10 cars backed
up there at that lanes -- all lanes are full backed up 10 cars. That will
potentially add three minutes of response times going west, and this
is at a time when seconds count, not minutes.
So when the road is full of four lanes of traffic or more, there is
nothing that's going to move those or make them cars vanish, believe
me. Take it from experience. I drove the rig in Boston. All the noise
in the world does not make those cars vanish. And some people
panic. They don't know what to do. They sit there. So that's what
you wind up with. There's that.
Now -- and I have a question as to why it is that the taxpayers
are being asked to buy something the taxpayers already own. You
April 9, 2019
Page 48
know, we're going to buy that and then replace -- and replace it. That
still leaves the problem of the engine. If you keep the EMS there on
Pine Ridge Road, the fire engine, which may, in some cases, be the
medical response, they're going to be down the side street and in, so
that doesn't -- you know, just staying there on Pine Ridge Road, a
good move for the EMS, but it doesn't resolve all the problems.
I'm understanding -- or there is talk that the property that's there
to be sold, if the county doesn't buy, it may be bought by the
developer of Pine Ridge Commons. I ask if anybody has explored
the possibility of a land swap. Putting a firehouse down there to exit
out onto Goodlette-Frank Road in exchange for that property,
because apparently they can't build larger quarters there on that land;
they don't have enough land. And, from my understanding, they can't
put a second story and just have the ground floor used for the
apparatus because insurance companies won't insure a firehouse with
a pole. I don't understand that, because there's -- they're all over
Boston and all other cities and probably here as well.
So I would say that there has to be some other consideration,
and looking at a land swap might be a good idea because it would
now enter out onto Goodlette-Frank Road, which is much less
congested than Pine Ridge Road, and they'd have time for the lights
to adjust before they got to that intersection whether they're going
south or west. Those are considerations to give.
I don't think that moving down -- definitely moving down Kathleen
Court is at all advisable.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Thank you, sir.
MR. MILLER: Your final speaker on this item is Caroline
Martino.
MS. MARTINO: Good morning, Commissioners. My name,
for the record, Caroline Martino. I'm a resident at 179 Ridge Drive in
Pine Ridge.
April 9, 2019
Page 49
I am also currently the president of the Pine Ridge Civic
Association, although we will be transitioning to a new president
shortly.
However, I've lived in Pine Ridge for 20 years, and you've heard
me speak before about the importance of Fire Station 40 staying
where it is. I want to thank Chief Tabatha Butcher for her
information. I want to thank the fire chiefs for their information. I
think we've all become much more informed about this issue.
It hasn't changed my mind, but we're more informed. It also has
given us the opportunity to inform our Pine Ridge residents, and so
far over 100 have actively sent in a support -- petition of support for
the Pine Ridge Civic Association opposing the relocation of Station
40 from its current location. Obviously, we'd like the Fire
Department to stay there, but that not being an option, we would very
much like EMS to stay there for all the obvious reasons, all the
surrounding areas. Seagate Elementary, Pine Ridge Middle, Village
School, with a high school team as well, Pelican Bay, Moorings Park,
Autumn Woods, the beach, Naples Grande, Naples Therapy Riding
Center which I ran for 10 years as a volunteer, and the tractor trail
thoroughbred rescue two horse barns on the corner of Center Street
and Goodlette-Frank Road.
And I would like to say that I am personally attached to Fire
Station 40 and the team for not only the reason that I brought before
you last time. My husband's grandmother lived in our guesthouse for
five years when we first moved in. She had heart issues, and we had
to ask the ambulance to come out several times for her. My
mother-in-law lived in our guesthouse 16 years. She has now moved
back up, believe it or not, to Upstate New York. But she had
bleeding on the brain at one point, and having Fire Station 40 and the
EMS team so close when we were in a medical emergency meant that
she did not suffer a stroke and she is able to still enjoy her almost
April 9, 2019
Page 50
90th birthday.
So -- and my husband and his heart attack back in 2008.
Seconds counted. They really, really matter. He would either not be
here if we added another three minutes, or per haps he would have
had a stroke. But at 54 years of age, he would have not been able to
continue his profession.
If you're stuck for cash, I have another solution for you. I invite
you to drive around Pine Ridge and look at the buildings, the new
homes that are being built there and the increase in property taxes
that the county is enjoying from these mega -homes going up in Pine
Ridge. Old 30-, 40-year-old homes like the one I live in to these
mega mega-mansions.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Thank you.
MS. MARTINO: There's your property tax; there's your money.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Yes, ma'am.
MR. MILLER: That was your final speaker on this item.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Thank you. All right. We'll close
the public hearing.
Commissioner Taylor.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Just for the record, as the
commissioner whose district encompasses the City of Naples, I have
had a conversation, more than one, with the chief of police -- chief of
fire, Chief DeMario, he explained -- it's interesting listening to
Ms. Flagg and Ms. Vasey's testimony that there is a balance that was
absolutely designed to keep coverage at its optimum, 44, 40, 2. And
in his words, moving Station 40 eastward upsets that balance.
Now, I don't know why we're doing this, why we're even saying
no. I mean, we need to buy this station. We need to move in this
station, and maybe North Naples will come to their senses, and
maybe they won't.
April 9, 2019
Page 51
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Commissioner Saunders.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I agree with Commissioner Taylor. I did spend some time with
the manager, and we talked about the different options. And the
manager, I think, was very concerned about the cost, which he should
be, and the fact that we are committed to three other stations and
funds are set aside for that, and he expressed concerns.
But I'm going to go back to -- and, again, I hate to put words in
our chief's mouth here, but she did say the ideal situation or solution
would be to buy that property. It's going to be hard for me to make
any other decision other than what she just said. So I don't know if
it's appropriate to make a motion, but I'll do that.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I'll second it.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Well, let me make the
motion.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: What was the motion, please?
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I was just at the point of
making one, because I could have -- since you already seconded it, I
could talk about short-term rentals here.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: But you wouldn't do that. I
know you too well.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Okay. The motion is direct
staff to take appropriate action to acquire that property. We will find
the money to make that happen, and so that's the motion.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: And I will second that.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: It's been moved -- well, you know
what, it's been moved and seconded that we direct staff to acquire this
station, and now I'm going to go to discussion and remind everyone
that I haven't discussed anything.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: That's all right.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: And I just want to make sure that
April 9, 2019
Page 52
the recommendations from our EMS staff -- there's several. And I
think Mr. Jones raised an interesting issue, which I think is within
some of the recommendations. I mean, the recommendations are to,
one, I guess, consider purchasing the property but also looking at
other options within that property that would make things even better.
I mean, because the facility is limited, right, in size?
CHIEF BUTCHER: Well, for EMS, no, it is not limited.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: It's not limited?
CHIEF BUTCHER: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Okay.
CHIEF BUTCHER: Fire has their own, which is not ours.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Fire has their own. For us it would
be fine.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Yes, for us it would be fine.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Well, I'm just wondering -- and I'd
be in favor of purchasing it as well, but there's other
recommendations that staff has made, and I'm just -- I want to make
sure that, you know, if there's an opportunity to somehow make the
level of service even better, that we're not going to foreclose any of
those, because that's all I'd want to bring up at this point.
CHIEF BUTCHER: Sure. The options of looking at other
space to lease in that area and staying in that western portion of Pine
Ridge, if we were able to find space that is actually further west on
Pine Ridge more close to 41, we could potentially improve response
times to that area by doing that.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: You're continually looking?
CHIEF BUTCHER: Yes.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I was going to address
something of the same thing, and that is it's pretty hard to improve
upon 96 percent anyway. That's almost a miracle. And I think you
April 9, 2019
Page 53
could try really hard, but I think that -- I think we found the perfect
location. The building is in nice shape, and it's close to everything. I
would absolutely support the motion.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: And I want to say this out loud. I
have a few questions, and I do, in premise, support the motion,
Commissioner Saunders, but I have questions.
Number one: Tabatha, when did North Collier buy the relocation site
for the new station that they're proposing they relocate to?
CHIEF BUTCHER: I don't know an exact date, but it's been
several years.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Fourteen.
CHIEF BUTCHER: They've owned that property for quite
some time.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Fourteen years, just so you know.
That was what was represented to me. It's been 14 years when
they fortuitously went out and made that acquisition knowing that
eventually, because of the consumption of the land and the
availability of the property that they had at the current station, they
weren't going to be able to fit in that particular site, so they've owned
that site for 14 years.
Number two -- where is she going? You're not allowed to talk
to her while I'm asking questions.
MR. OCHS: We're ready to answer.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: When an ambulance is called and
you hit the button on your blinking yellow light, how often -- how
many cars are passing past you before you can actually exit out into
traffic?
CHIEF BUTCHER: Well, that's variable. It's just going to
depend on how many are coming. But, there are times when there's a
couple that pass before they realize the ambulance is coming out.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Correct. Okay. And then often --
April 9, 2019
Page 54
now as far as controlling our lights goes -- and this is -- again, the
representation has been made about an increase on response times,
but I'm pretty sure I remember a conversation with Chief
Cunningham about having the capacity of controlling the lights to the
east on Pine Ridge Road from the new access point once the new
station is constructed to be able to control the traffic better than what
we currently have now; is that correct or no?
CHIEF BUTCHER: No. The actual -- the Opticom system,
which is the system that controls the lights from the units, will remain
intact. That will all remain the same.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: The answer is, no, he's not going to
be able to control the traffic that's coming from the east to be able to
access out on to Pine Ridge Road any better than what he can right
now?
CHIEF BUTCHER: No.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Okay. I understood. These are my
questions. These are the things that I wanted to -- that I wanted to
ask.
If we were to choose to not purchase the current Station 40,
would the call levels, even though they increase, still be within the
current Board-set level of service, estimated?
CHIEF BUTCHER: That we do not know, because we don't
know until it actually happens. That would be something that we
would continually have to monitor.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Okay. Last but not least, and this is
for you County Manager, and it's been brought up that we have the
capacity to manipulate sales tax revenue with regard to the purchase
of this station.
And I am, if I'm not mistaken, understanding that those sales tax
revenues were delineated for specific stations in other portions of our
county, or is it an aggregate of $6 million for an EMS station?
April 9, 2019
Page 55
MR. OCHS: Yeah. And I'll probably ask our county attorney to
weigh in as well.
My understanding of the way the ordinance was constructed is
you have four primary categories of expenditures in the infrastructure
sales tax basket, if you will, and that the ordinance provides the
Board some limited latitude to move funding within those four
categories but not between those categories.
So you've got six million in a line item for EMS stations. The
ordinance and the exhibit doesn't delineate which ones those are.
And I believe that the ordinance gives the Board latitude to move
dollars within that category of government facilities. And I'll see if
Jeff agrees with that or not.
MR. KLATZKOW: Yeah, I agree with that.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: The case that I'm wanting to make,
or the discussion that I'm wanting to have is, yes, there's no argument
that health, safety, and welfare should be the primary consideration of
local government, period, the end, but on the same token, I don't want
to make a motion where we're shorting other locales, other area s of
our community on the premise of relocation of a station that we
haven't budgeted for, we haven't planned for. You're regularly
looking for locations, sublease and so on and so forth, and I don't
want to jeopardize another segment of my community on a --
especially when we have staff recommending that we not pursue the
acquisition at this stage.
So that's one thing I want to -- I want to -- can you share with
me or give them any kind of level of certainty that we're not going to
delay the construction of another EMS station because of this
acquisition?
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir. I'll commit to you that won't happen.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Then fine.
Third, but not least, and I want my colleagues to be aware of this, it
April 9, 2019
Page 56
has not been mentioned, that there's more to this apple than just a
$1.2 million acquisition. Based upon the current owner's estimate of
the necessary repairs, it's basically a double of ongoing maintenance
and upkeep that's requisite for this building. So it's not just buy it for
1.2 million -- 1.26. There's another equivalent to that of necessary
repairs and maintenance, so I'm told.
MR. OCHS: Well, we don't know for so. But, you're right. I
mean, it's a 40-year-old building, as I understand it. So that would all
be part of the due diligence that we would go through as we normally
do before we would bring an item back to the Board for purchase and
sale.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: With that, thank you for answering
my questions.
It's been moved and seconded that we make the -- or direct staff
to make the acquisition to purchase this station. Any other
discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: All in favor?
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Opposed same sign, same sound.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: It unanimously passes.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: At which point we are going to take
a 10-minute break and be back at 11:20 to give Terri's fingers a rest.
(A brief recess was had.)
April 9, 2019
Page 57
Item #7
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS NOT ON THE
CURRENT OR FUTURE AGENDA
MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, you have a live mic.
Commissioner, we move to Item 7 on your agenda, public comments
on general topics not on the current or future agenda. I know we've
had multiple --
MR. MILLER: You've got about 28.
MR. OCHS: -- speakers. I think it would be constructive for
the Board to, by a show of hands, ask --
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: I'm going to look at my colleagues.
I'll help you with this, if you will. I take a look my colleague. We've
got a lot of people on both sides of this issue.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: What is the issue?
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: The issue is to speak with regard to
the short-term rental circumstances that are prevalent in our
community. The item that is before us right now is comment --
public comment on items not on today's agenda or a future agenda,
and if we allow for anyone to speak, we have to allow for everyone to
speak.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: It is on a future agenda.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: It is.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: We have the next meeting.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: At our next meeting.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: So it's a procedural question.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Well -- and, you know, I mean,
people made the commitment to be here today on both sides of the
issue.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Correct.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: And I guess theoretically but for me
April 9, 2019
Page 58
taking the motion to reconsider, they would have been able to speak
because it wasn't on an agenda either way.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: That's correct as well.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: If Andy's finished.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: What we could do -- I
assume -- how many people are here to speak?
MR. MILLER: Well, we have --
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Twenty-eight.
MR. MILLER: -- about 28 signed up for public comment.
Now, all but 6 of those have filled out that they are talking about the
realtor issue, the rental issue. I do have six that don't have a topic.
Of those six, I know one's not on that topic.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Well, I kind of agree with
Andy. They're here. What I would ask, though, is if we have 20
speakers that all are going to --
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: It's been represented -- I have an
idea that -- and, again, I don't want to -- I don't -- my thought is if we
allow for discussion on short-term rentals with folks that are
necessarily in adjustment or in favor of what we're doing or what has
been done in equivalent, a number of speakers with regard to
opposition of.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Yeah, I think that's
reasonable. If we can ask either side here to, you know, maybe take
five minutes or 10 minutes, have a spokesman instead of having 20
speakers.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: I think that's what -- Jesse had
shared with me that they would allow for -- he would go to two and
only utilize those twos, and then those that are in favor -- then we
April 9, 2019
Page 59
would -- I don't know how we're going to pick from the group of
private citizens that have --
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Just a point of order. It says --
I'm sorry, but we are discussing this --
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: In two weeks.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: -- in two weeks, and then we're
discussing it again. That's the -- that's the point of order here. So,
you know, I'm not trying to -- at all trying to muffle anyone, but --
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: I understand, yes, ma'am. That's
why we're having this discussion.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I don't understand, you know,
okay, well, we'll let -- we'll make the exception this time, because
you are correct. If we're going to -- if we're not going to just -- if
we're not going to follow --
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Write that down.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: If we're not going to follow our
rules of procedure here, then we can't make an exception for one and
not for another.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: We can waive the rules. We
can do a whole lot of things procedurally. And I think it sounds like
we want to hear from the public.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Well, we can also rob a bank,
but that's probably not appropriate to do that.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: No, we cannot rob a bank.
We cannot rob a bank. There's a statute that prohibits you from you
robbing a bank. There's no statute that prohibits us from adjusting
our rules whenever we want to adjust them. So let's don't make
absurd analogies, please.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: It's an issue of fairness. And I'm
not talking about fairness specifically today -- but it's important -- but
fairness going forward.
April 9, 2019
Page 60
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: You know what, we have a total --
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Mr. Chairman?
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: We have a point of order.
We -- the majority of this board can do what it wants to do
procedurally. We can waive the rules with a simple majority anytime
we want to. So let's hear the speakers, but let's ask for some courtesy
from them in terms of not being repetitive, because we have a lot to
do today. We've already gotten word from the realtors that they've
gone from seven to two, so that's progress.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: And it may be not as many as we
think because many may have left.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Number one. Number two, I think,
according to Troy, there are six that don't have anything on their slip.
So let's go. I'm suggesting that we go ahead and hear from the
speakers.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: They're going to say the same thing
they're going to say in two weeks?
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: And we're going to ask them to not
repeat themselves.
MR. MILLER: Mr. Chairman, do you just want me to call the
names then? Okay. We'll just call all the names. Cliff Dononfeld.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Now, hang on a second.
MR. OCHS: Hang on. Who got ceded time? And we don't
need to read 30 names.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Jesse and the lawyer. Are those the
two speakers for the realtors?
MR. PURDON: Us two. That's it.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Okay. And then anybody else other
than Jesse and the lawyer that are --
MR. MILLER: All right. I will go through and pull out Jesse's
April 9, 2019
Page 61
sheet and the people that have ceded time to Jesse. What's your
name, sir?
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: No one's ceding.
MR. URBANCIC: Greg Urbancic.
MR. MILLER: Greg Urbancic.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: There's no ceding time.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Excuse me. Three minutes apiece.
MR. MILLER: Okay. I have sheets for both those gentlemen.
So I don't know how to determine who else is here in the
opposition is what I'm saying.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Are you here -- is there anyone
registered to speak on this item that is in opposition?
MR. OCHS: Yes, there are.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Well --
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I think they left.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: And I believe they left.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Because they were told that it's
going to be on a future agenda.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Correct. Go.
MR. URBANCIC: Thank you, Commissioners, and I appreciate
the deference on this item.
My name is Greg Urbancic with Coleman, Yovanovich &
Koester Law Firm, and I'm here to speak on behalf of the Naple s
Area Board of Realtors and our 6,500 members.
I appreciate you rescheduling this for reconsideration. This is a
very important item to our association and to the real estate
community; however, I would note that the delay itself is also a
concern. I know we have put this off two weeks for the
reconsideration and then a little bit further beyond that.
I know we have a scheduling conflict on the 14th with our
leadership being in Washington lobbying for certain things that are
April 9, 2019
Page 62
for the betterment of our community as well, so we have to
potentially work on that date, and we've already mentioned that to the
chair.
But there is a lot of legitimate leasing and sales activity that's
going to occur over the next 30 days, over the next six months, or
whatever the case may be, but especially over the next several weeks,
and so we feel that it is important to our membership and to the real
estate licensees that they know the rules.
And the primary point that we wanted to get across, aside from
the reconsideration itself, is our belief that perhaps the reliance on the
destination resort hotel definition may not be the basis to prohibit all
the activities that are attempted to be prohibited. We think that,
perhaps, in the interim that it should be relooked at, the bases. We
don't think that all short-term rentals of single-family and multifamily
residences are prohibited under the code.
In fact, I think the definitions of the code work against that,
specifically the multifamily context. And I don't have the time today
to go into that but, certainly, I think that the argument is not clear in
your case and that the plain language does not prohibit short-term
rentals.
So I would encourage you to engage in discussions with our
leadership on this particular issue as you move forward and
especially as the state laws come about.
This item has an impact not only on our economy but on our
realtor members and their sales and also the real estate market. And
we think it's quite important.
We would like that certainty to know that there's no direct
prohibition on short-term rentals. I understand the activities that may
be the focus and the concern, but we're taking out a large segment of
our market of what legitimate realtors and real estate licensees do on
a daily/weekly basis in order to help our economy and for our
April 9, 2019
Page 63
thriving economy over the years, and to wipe that out with a, perhaps,
misinterpretation of the code would be a disastrous result.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker, then, is Jesse Purdon.
MR. PURDON: Thank you. Mr. Chair, Commissioners, and
my folks that took off time to come here today, I want you to know
that we appreciate you coming here in solidarity for private property
rights.
At the end of the day, there's no ordinance. That's the argument.
Last month was based on a false premise that was based on leaps and
interpretations that were then used as the law of the land. Nowhere
can an actual ordinance on rentals be pointed out simply because it
doesn't exist.
I wanted to briefly touch on the macroeconomic ramifications
this situation is having on Collier County, and this isn't to sound
alarmist and this isn't an overstatement. If we do not fix this
situation, we're effectively closing season for 2020.
Those 10- to 15,000 people who come down here on under a
six-month basis are going to walk, and they're going to take those
TDC dollars and those sales-tax dollars with them. When those
dollars go with them, our county revenue will go down, and then
we're going to be back in the same familiar situation we're always in:
How are we going to keep the lights on, and where are we going to
find the money?
And that's going to come right back to a tax issue. That's not a
place we need to go. We know where that leads and, realistically, we
have to understand that at our core we are an eco-based,
tourism-driven economy. The loss of these people will undoubtedly
ripple across our entire economy, and at some point we're going to
have to address this. We know -- we understand that some on this
April 9, 2019
Page 64
body are concerned about the bad actors, and I just want to take a
moment to ensure you that we are as equally concerned about the bad
actors. If there's anybody in this entire equation who's upset with the
bad actors, it's us. We will lead the charge on those folks. We're not
here fighting for party houses or party condos or anything else along
those lines. We're sitting here fighting fundamentally for our private
property rights.
And I'd like to leave you with this, and this is just a thought in
regards to governance in policy standpoint. The idea or the opinion
that absence of specific clarification on an allowed use in the LDC
means that a land use is prohibited within the LDC, that's under the
assumption that these rights come from the county.
Private property rights and every other right within our state and
federal constitution are empowered by our creator, not by a
commission or any other legislative body, meaning rights are
assumed unless by cause and process they're specifically legislated
and regulated away. The assumption that the rights don't exist is
fundamentally flawed.
So whatever you can do to provide clarity and calm to our
market would be much appreciated. Thank you for your time in
letting us talk today. Thanks.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Thank you. And I appreciate the --
and I would like to call upon anyone who is -- who would like to
speak in opposition of what we're talking about. If they're not here,
then we'll certainly hear them at our next meeting, so...
MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, if Mr. Miller could read the names
of those speaker slips that don't have a topic on just to make sure.
MR. MILLER: Well, I know Mr. Dononfeld does not have a
topic, but I know he's about this item. I don't know if you want to
hear from him. He's not in opposition.
MR. DONONFELD: I'm not in opposition, but I'm --
April 9, 2019
Page 65
MR. MILLER: You'll need to be on a microphone, sir.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: If you're going to speak on the item
that we've already addressed on this or a current agenda then --
MR. DONONFELD: Well, as understood -- yes, I'm a member
of NABOR, but I'm also the vice-chair of, as you know, the
Republican party and a lot -- and other boards, public transportation,
so I believe I have some points that are relevant that -- not from the
realtor perspective, but from the common-good perspective, if you
will.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Well, the common good with
regard to this subject matter, Cliff, is if this -- if you're going to speak
on an item on today's agenda or on a future agenda, please reserve
that comment for a future agenda.
MR. DONONFELD: You did let some people speak so -- and
my name was the first one called so I though, therefore, I should be
allowed to speak. I mean --
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: The rationale was to afford those
who were sitting here through the process to have that opportunity.
MR. DONONFELD: I've sat here through the process as well
all morning.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Yeah. So now we're down that
rabbit hole.
MR. DONONFELD: I thought -- I waited just because, as I
understood it, and as my name was the first called, was that you were
going to have some speakers on it, as you had a few, and I agree with
them.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Please proceed.
MR. DONONFELD: I just have some other points.
Okay. So while Collier County is approximately 65 percent
Republican -- I can't speak for the entire party or NABOR, only the
overwhelming majority who don't live next door to an uncomfortable
April 9, 2019
Page 66
daily situation. Far more probably live next to a barking dog, yet I'd
hope no consideration would ever be given to eliminating man's best
friend from everywhere outside the City of Naples.
I sympathize and empathize with people here and around the
country who have seen today's technology make life more difficult,
instead of easier, in many areas. Airbnb is just one of them and,
incidentally, most of those daily renters -- it's not realtors that are
bringing them in. It's Airbnb, and that's beyond us.
However -- and I'm not going to go into rental income is a
barometer of value; that's a realtor thing. But strip that away, and
you're taking a broad stroke in reducing all of our property values
unless, of course, you're in the City of Naples. This is so un --
incredibly unfair to so many residents of greater Naples.
As commissioners I commend you for being so responsive to
your constituents, although frequently those complaining are
minuscule minority. That small minority frequently uses hyperbole
to make sure our paradise seem like hell as rightfully pointed out by
our county manager just a few weeks ago. They say we don't want to
be Miami or New York City, but they never take reality into the
equation. It's about roads, traffic. We are paradise. For utopia, we'll
all have to wait for the afterlife.
Furthermore, while some enforcement may be in order in going
after the rare owners and unruly visitors who have overstepped with
daily rentals, six-month minimum penalizes everyone from seasonal,
employees, and employers ranging from restaurants, country clubs to
medical fields.
In addition, the aforementioned vacation renters for high-end
and moderate properties. There are many reasons for monthly and
shorter-term rentals, including people remodeling and building homes
and even temporary medical disabilities.
There is such a plethora of litigation issues that get opened for
April 9, 2019
Page 67
so many if we don't -- you know, if we don't honor what we've
already honored in the past, including the county, realtors, property
owners and, of course, it will drive the taxpaying, income-producing
property owners underground costing the county millions in lost
revenue. Others will flee to Lee County and other areas altogether.
So, again, as you already decided, I was just going to urge for a
more thoughtful process compared to Lee County, and if any
commissioners financial loyalties lie predominantly in the City of
Naples or Lee County, they should probably be recusing themselves
as well to avoid any perceived conflicts. Let's keep Collier County
great.
MR. MILLER: Mr. Chairman, I now have five slips remaining
that do not have a topic on them. Would you like me to call those
slips?
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Yes, I would, please.
MR. MILLER: Roy Mauer?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL:
MR. MILLER: Dorial Hess?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Janet Guftison?
(No response.)
MR. MILLER: And Rae Ann Burton.
(Raises hand.)
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: What are you going to talk to us
about?
MR. MILLER: Are you here to speak on realty? Come on up.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: She's waiving. She doesn't have
anything to say at this stage.
MS. BURTON: Oh, yes, I do.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Come on. You've got your three
April 9, 2019
Page 68
minutes. Let's go.
MS. BURTON: My name is Rae Ann Burton, 2530 31st
Avenue Northeast, Golden Gate Estates.
One: I'm here because the majority of Golden Gate Estates
homeowners are at work.
Two: To remind the Board why they're here, chosen by the
taxpayers to protect and provide our wishes and needs, not
developers whose only concern is money and care, not for the welfare
of the residents, environment, or wildlife.
Three: God gave the responsibility to man and woman to
protect, to maintain growth, to enhance environment and wildlife, not
eliminate the rural Florida area.
Four: That we, the taxpayers, give that responsibility to the
Board of Commissioners which is a privilege, not a right, nor to be
used for personal desires or gain.
Five: To maintain growth not allowing developers to fill their
coffers by building luxury congested gated developments or three- to
four-story luxury rental condos standing over nearby homes, even if
they are 40 feet. None are in the average wage earner's means.
Six: Growth only benefits all when it's managed and protects
homeowners and works with the environment, wildlife in rural area,
not against or limitation.
Seven: Many moved to the Estates for one reason, to get away
from heavy congested cities in the north and even from some in
Florida. Miami for one.
Eight: The cry from our growth is from developers and those
that winter or have summer vacation home s. They don't live here
24/7 or they moved to enjoy the rural area but now want it to be city.
Ninth: If growth is not controlled, it will be a mass of congested
high-priced homes, gated communities and roads four to six lanes
wide making the route home dangerous and time consuming trying to
April 9, 2019
Page 69
get out or into the driveways from the road.
Ten, some projects are great. Parks: We have parks. They're
called our back yards; trails or dead-end streets; environmental and
wildlife, some more than others; vegetation and trees determine the
amount of wildlife which builders eliminate during construction,
making the soil impervious.
Eleven, I stand before the Board to support as long as it makes
wise decisions that are beneficial to the existing homeowners and not
the winter/summer transients or those that want to make the Estates
another Miami.
Twelve, we do not want nor need massive overpriced shopping
centers when there are many on the way home from work. Too much
convenience means more wear on car, more pollution, more gas, and
more money spent on spur-of-moment wants.
Definitely, we do not want a bus barn, CAT bus maintenance
garage, or heavy equipment storage on Randall Curve. Put it in
Immokalee, as it benefits them more.
Fourteenth, and last, we do want something that's beneficial for
all such as an educational rescue center and wildlife preserve within a
park setting. Sanibel has Crow. Why not ours be Sly Wolf -- Shy
Wolf?
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: You've been practicing to stay
within your three minutes. Congratulations.
MS. BURTON: Hey.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Thank you very much.
MS. BURTON: Yup. Timer on the stove works fine.
MR. MILLER: And that concludes, sir.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: And I just -- I want to say this: For
future action going forward, when we decide to deviate from our
normal procedures and that which is -- and that which is how we
usually do things, we have to allow for exceptions along the way.
April 9, 2019
Page 70
Today certainly we are on uncharted ground.
So with that, my apologies to my colleagues. That wasn't what I
had necessarily intended, but be that as it may, we shall move
forward.
Item #10A
THE YEAR-END REPORT OF THE SENIOR ADVISORY AD
HOC COMMITTEE (SAC), CONSIDER THEIR
RECOMMENDATIONS, AND ALLOW THE AD HOC
COMMITTEE TO SUNSET ON APRIL 18, 2019 - MOTION TO
TERMINATE COMMITTEE AND COMMITMENT FROM
COUNTY MANAGER REGARDING A STAFF LIAISON FOR
ISSUES FACING SENIORS – APPROVED
MR. OCHS: That takes us to Board of County Commissioners
Item 10A. This is a recommendation to accept the yearend report of
the Senior Advisory Ad Hoc Committee, consider their
recommendations, and allow the ad hoc committee to sunset on
April 18th, 2019.
Your chairman, Mr. Hartman of the committee, will make a
brief yearend report.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: 11 -- excuse me, 9B.
MR. OCHS: 10A, sir.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Excuse me, 10A. Forgive me. We
said late morning.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Yep.
MR. HARTMAN: Pretty close.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: How we doing?
MR. HARTMAN: Thank you, Commissioners. One year ago
next week the commission created the ad hoc Senior Advisory
April 9, 2019
Page 71
Committee with a one-year life expectancy. The mission of that
committee was to look at all of the issues under the programs,
regulations, and what have you of the commission and look at it from
the point of view of how does it impact seniors in our community.
Now, the reason this is important is straightforward:
31.4 percent of our community, according to the U.S. Census Bureau,
is over 65. More than 50 percent of our registered citizens are over
50. We are a senior community. The majority of our residents are
seniors.
The purpose of the committee and its charter was to look across
all the departments of government and all of the activities under the
jurisdiction of the Commission to determine where and how items
might have been skipped, might be modified, or could be improved
for the benefit of the senior citizens.
Our function was not to get involved in taking action. Our
function was to identify problems. We have done that. In our final
report to you, which is in your packet, we have listed 13 specific
projects or 13 specific problems that we have identified across
healthcare, housing, transportation, public safety, and a whole array
of issues that you-all address.
To do this, we started out trying to figure what the direction
should be for this committee, and we looked at seven items that could
be addressed. The first was food, security, and hunger, but we
recognize there were other groups that were handling this in advisory
committees.
The second was information access and resource awareness, and
I'll come back to that, because we selected that as our number -one
priority.
The other areas are obvious: Affordable housing, access to
healthcare, transportation, public safety, social servic es and, strangely
enough, a specific item that came up many, many times, isolated
April 9, 2019
Page 72
seniors and how we might improve their situation.
The action item before you today is only one item: What to do
with the committee. It is at the end of its term. The committee has
made a specific recommendation, and I have to say that the report
from the staff does not make it clear. They changed our language just
a little bit, I think, because they thought it might clarify things.
What we're proposing is that there are three options at this point for
the Commission: One, terminate the ad hoc committee under the
terms under which it was created.
Secondly, convert it into a standing senior committee. And if
you did the first, which we believe for a number of reasons is the
optimal way to go, we would want to have some consideration for the
creation of a senior coordinator in the county. The problem we have
with senior issues is it cuts across all the departments. It cuts across
all of the issues handled, many by other advisory committees like
housing, transportation, healthcare, what have you. But they do not
bring to the table the issue of the senior point of view, and that is
what we would like to do.
So what we're proposing is Option 1: Terminate the ad hoc
committee under the terms as it was created, create a position, either
voluntary or paid, that's up to the Commission, that would become a
coordinator for senior issues across all departments and a single point
of contact for the community on all of the organizations, non-profit
and profit, and others that touch on all of these issues affecting
seniors.
This would allow us to more effectively bring to you not only
the indication of what the problems are that we've identified but a
recommended solution. The first thing I learned as an army officer
many, many years ago was never go to your boss with a problem
unless you have a solution in hand that you can recommend. He may
not use that solution, but you better have it, or you'll get run out of
April 9, 2019
Page 73
the house.
That's what we would like to do, but to do that we have to be
able to coordinate more with the private sector. So what our idea is is
terminate the ad hoc committee, we'll take it outside of Sunshine and
the restrictions that are there, create a citizens task force for senior
issues, and use that one point of contact, whether it's a voluntary or a
staff member, that could work for Mr. Ochs or others directly who
could be our coordinating body and contact point with the
government.
If that is not decided, then our recommendation is to create it as
a standing committee, and we will continue to identify the problems
that we see but we may not be able to give you what we think is our
considered thoughts on solutions.
Now, let me just point out a few of those 11 items that are in this
category of things that we came up with.
One is isolated seniors. We found -- and there was a great deal of
evidence to support this -- that there were a number of citizens who
failed to self-evacuate with Irma. The reasons either were physical or
medical or just didn't get the word.
When we looked around, we found that there was no central list
of isolated seniors in our community. The churches had some lists of
people that were in their parishes. The feeding organizations had
their list of people who they took food to. But at no point and no
place was there a central list.
What we recommended, what we do recommend in this
particular case, is let's use these new CERT teams -- that's the civilian
emergency response, I think it's response or recovery team -- that
have been created and have identified geographical areas of
responsibility during an emergency. Put them together with some
high school volunteers and Sheriff's Office or whatever, have a civic
day and go out and conduct a door-to-door registration of the isolated
April 9, 2019
Page 74
seniors in our community once a year in the late spring, perhaps, as
part of a civic day. Just one idea.
Other areas that we could look at. In housing, there is a program
in the United States that's been generated by the National Association
of Homebuilders, NHAV (sic), AARP, and several other
organizations. This is called universal design. It is an attempt to
redesign homes for seniors so that they can age in place.
The parameters of this are very simple: Go in a house before it's
constructed, widen the doors from 30 to 32 inches, which allows a
wheelchair to go through, widen the halls, make other adjustments so
that a senior that has limited mobility can stay in that home once their
mobility is limited.
What we're suggesting here is why not have the developers be
required to offer universal design option on each of the homes they
sell before it's actually constructed? And as we develop a base of
these universally designed homes, we think they would proba bly sell
at a premium over the regular homes because the seniors can move in
and stay there till the end of their life through their period of lack of
mobility.
There's several other areas in here. I don't want to bore the
Commission with going through them. You have them.
In the area of public safety, strangely enough a number of issues
came up having to do with pedestrian islands on our new broader
highways, and my specific case here is the intersection of U.S. 41 and
951. It's 12 lanes wide. There is a walkway to cross. I dare anyone
in this room to try. It is like standing at the Indianapolis 500 starting
line. The traffic moves at over 60 miles an hour both directions
through the intersection. You won't even find a bicycle trying to
cross there. There is no pedestrian island on two of the directions.
You can't go halfway and stop.
We're a little concerned that our seniors are being put in danger
April 9, 2019
Page 75
by our emphasis on being able to move more cars quickly through
our transportation grid as we speed up the traffic, but we're not
looking at walkability/bikeability for seniors. Now, this is just a few
examples of the ones that I have listed there.
I'll be glad to answer any questions from any of the
commissioners.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: And, for the record, by no means
are you boring us. We do have this report, and I cannot thank you
enough for your efforts in serving on this committee, chairing it up,
being succinct with your request, with your suggestions to us as the
policymakers of the community and what we as policy makers
should, in fact, be doing. So I thank you. That's the most I can say,
Douglas.
MR. HARTMAN: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Yes. Do my colleagues -- anybody
have any questions? Somebody want to make a motion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: I will. Or you can.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Go ahead. You can do it.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: I mean, I think it's time, as has been
recommended, that we terminate the committee. I would like to
establish it as a standing committee. I know the dysfunctionality that
comes along with the Sunshine Law and the opportunities for
communication along the way.
You're raising your hand while I'm talking, so go ahead.
MR. KLATZKOW: Yeah. I mean, if they want to have a
committee on their own, that's on their own. Once the Board
establishes a committee, you've got the Sunshine.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Okay. So if we just terminate --
MR. KLATZKOW: You terminate them. They can create
whatever committee they want to on their own.
April 9, 2019
Page 76
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Thank you for the clarification on
that. So we're not going to establish a standing committee. We will
terminate your existence.
I am resistant at this stage in going out and hiring a specific
person, but I would like to get commitment from my County
Manager that that there will be a liaison that will give due attention
and correspondence to this board with regard to policy adjustments
that are requisite for our senior community.
MR. OCHS: You have that commitment.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'll second your motion.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: With that, it's been moved and
seconded for now that we will terminate the committee's existence
and have a direct liaison from the County Manager's Office to us.
MR. HARTMAN: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Any other discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: All in favor?
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Opposed same sign, same sound.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: So moved.
With that, we will be back at 1 o'clock.
(A luncheon recess was had.)
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Commissioner, you have a live mike.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Well, there you go.
Good afternoon, everybody.
And while we're waiting for our colleagues to come forward,
April 9, 2019
Page 77
County Manager, I think we're going to -- I think, if I recall, we were
going to take care of what item turned up as 9B, which was on our
consent agenda, and then -- or excuse me -- on the summary agenda,
and we moved it to a line item above.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: What was it, No. 17B, right?
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Yes.
Item #9B
ORDINANCE 2019-05: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING
ORDINANCE NO. 97-3, WHICH REZONED THE SUBJECT
PROPERTY TO A HEAVY COMMERCIAL (C-5) ZONING
DISTRICT WITH CONDITIONS, IN ORDER TO ADD MOTOR
FREIGHT TRANSPORTATION AND WAREHOUSING (SIC
CODE 4225, AIR-CONDITIONED AND MINI-AND SELF
STORAGE ONLY) AS A PERMITTED USE, AND TO INCREASE
THE MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT FOR THAT USE ONLY,
FROM THE PRESENTLY ALLOWED MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF
28 FEET TO A ZONED HEIGHT OF 35 FEET AND AN ACTUAL
HEIGHT OF 38 FEET. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED
ON THE NORTH SIDE OF U.S. 41 EAST, APPROXIMATELY
1,000 FEET EAST OF COLLIER BOULEVARD, IN SECTION 3,
TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY,
FLORIDA, CONSISTING OF 2.17± ACRES AND BY
PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE – ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: This item is now appearing as Item 9B on your
advertised public hearing regular agenda. This item does require ex
parte disclosure be provided by commission members, and
participants are required to be sworn in.
This is a recommendation to approve an ordinance amending
April 9, 2019
Page 78
Ordinance No. 97-3 which rezoned the subject property to a heavy
commercial C5 zoning district with conditions in order to add motor
freight transportation and warehousing, specifically air-conditioned
and mini and self-storage only as a permitted use, and to increase the
maximum building height for that use only from the present allowed
maximum height of 28 feet to a zoned height of 35 feet and an actual
height of 38 feet.
The subject property is located on the north side of U.S. 41 East,
approximately 1,000 feet east of Collier Boulevard, and this item was
moved to the regular agenda at the separate request of both
Commissioner Fiala and Commissioner Taylor.
So, Mr. Chairman, it would be appropriate to take ex parte
disclosure at this time.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: And that we will do.
Commissioner Solis.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Yes. I received an email and
apparently had one brief conversation I don't even remember with
Mr. Mulhere.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: You can always claim innocence
but not lack of memory.
Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, thank you very much. I did
meet with Bob Mulhere and Felix Pardo, and I also spoke with some
residents of Falling Waters, and at the time I had no problems with it,
because it seemed just fine.
Once I got the agenda and read all the backup material, whoo, it hit
me differently. And so I felt I needed to talk about this, and so here
we are.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Commissioner Saunders.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: No disclosures.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Commissioner Taylor.
April 9, 2019
Page 79
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Yes. I received a telephone call.
We've had a conversation with Mr. Mulhere, and a telephone call,
and then also an email, and then conversations with staff, and I asked
it to be -- to discuss, because I have two questions. Very simple. Do
you want to start?
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: We'll get to those in a minute,
because I haven't done my ex parte.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Okay.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: And with that, I have also had
correspondence and emails as well.
Now, is it requisite that we have a full presentation, or do you
ladies have questions?
MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, I'm sorry. You will have to swear
in the participants, too, if you're going to go to a hearing on that.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Forgot about that. Anybody who
wishes to or may be testifying today --
MR. OCHS: Please rise and raise your hand.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Follow Terri's orders.
(The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.)
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Forgive me. I should have
stipulated for this particular item, not for anything coming forward.
So with that, now would you like to hear a presentation, or do
you have questions you specifically -- I'm going to leave it up to you
two since you're the ones that pulled it.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I'm going to defer to the
commissioner of the district.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay, fine.
Bob, I've heard your presentation, but the audience hasn't, the
TV audience. So why don't you give us a little.
MR. MULHERE: Thank you. And I promise to be brief, and I
appreciate the opportunity; you have another lengthy item on your
April 9, 2019
Page 80
agenda. And I'm glad to know that my meeting with Commissioner
Solis was so memorable. But anyway.
This item appeared before the Planning Commission. We
received a unanimous recommendation for approval. They did put a
lot of conditions on it. And Nick was kind enough to let me know
what your concerns are, so I'll focus on those as part of the
presentation.
Also here with me is Felix Pardo, who is an architecture, who is
representing the applicant as well. So you see the subject site on the
visualizer. The actual parcel is right here. This is the location of the
Tractor Supply store, immediately adjacent to us. This is all vacant.
So part of this overall property is C3, and a little portion is C5. It was
zoned C5 quite a long time ago in the '90s, and it had a number of
conditions placed on it when it was zoned C5. It allowed for
contractors' offices and subcontractors' offices and those kinds of
things in addition to all of the typical C5 uses: restaurants and all
those kinds of things.
This is an aerial. It shows you the subject site. It shows you the
Tractor Supply store. There's some development over here, and this
is vacant adjacent to us.
I don't need to talk about that.
This is a -- I just wanted to show you this is a conservation area,
so this will remain in conservation. This is the sub ject lot, so you can
see that the conservation area just touches a little bit of it. This is
Falling Waters Beach Resort right behind us.
We had a neighborhood information meeting. It was well
attended. There were lots of folks there. We subsequently met on
several occasions and spoke via email and over the phone with the
HOA president and with other, I guess, interested parties from the
community. I believe we've addressed all of their concerns. I believe
that's why no one is here.
April 9, 2019
Page 81
I want to -- and they did not speak in opposition at the Planning
Commission. The chairman of the HOA was actually there.
They had a few concerns, but at least the people we spoke to had
no issues when we agreed to certain conditions, so I do want to go
over those with you.
I want to show you, this is a stormwater management area that
the design locates that stormwater management area between the
proposed building and the Falling Waters. So our setback is
considerable. I'll go over the specifics of that with you in just a
second.
With respect to the perspective with the additional height,
7 feet -- 8 feet from 28 to -- 7 feet, the setback in the PUD is 60 feet
from the property line. So any of those existing uses; contractors'
offices, restaurants, warehouses, all of those uses can be placed
within 60 feet of the Falling Waters property line. That was a
concern that they expressed to us, because we were asking for a little
bit of additional height.
And what we did was design the site to move the building as far
as we could closer to Tamiami Trail, put all of the parking out in that
area so there would be no impacts on the neighbor. We actually
moved the building 137 feet away from that property line.
So I think that satisfied them with respect to what they will be able to
see, which will be very little, if anything. Maybe just the little
tippy-top of the roof.
I do know, Commissioner Taylor, that you mentioned that you
wanted to be sure that there was no light spillage and suggested full --
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Dark Sky.
MR. MULHERE: Yeah. There's a term, and --
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Full cutoff.
MR. MULHERE: Full cutoff, and we have no problem with
that. We were saying we would shield them, and that was a Planning
April 9, 2019
Page 82
Commission requirement. But full cutoff -- I looked it up, and I did
my research once I heard that; that actually ensures no upward
spillage whatsoever and focuses the light on the subject property. So
we don't have any problem with that.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Okay.
MR. MULHERE: So I think we've addressed those issues. I
know there was a question about traffic, so I'm going to get to that.
So these were the CCPC conditions, and it's a little bit hard to see, so
I just want to get to the ones that I think are most important.
The minimum setback from the northern property line shall be
135 feet. We're actually 137, but they put in a little bit of wiggle
room in case something happened during construction, the CCPC did.
Hours of operation are from 8 a.m. to 9 p.m., so there won't be -- you
know, this is very minimal impact, very low traffic, which I'm going
to get to in just a moment.
Security lighting shall be mounted to the building, shall not
exceed 10 feet in height, and we'll add to that "and shall be full cutoff
lighting."
All of the units are only accessed from the interior of the
building, so you're not going to have any roll-up doors. It's a really
nice design. I have a perspective that shows that.
There was a concern that if you had larger than 200-square-foot
maximum size units that somebody might use it for some sort of
heavy storage rather than self-storage, so we agreed to limit the size
to no bigger than 200 square feet for any particular single unit.
No parking on the rear or north side of the building, which would be
closer to Falling Waters.
No functional windows on the rear or north side. Those are faux
windows to meet the architectural standards, but there are no
windows facing the neighbors.
Let's see. Again, on that lighting fixtures one, we'll reference
April 9, 2019
Page 83
that it should be full cutoff fixtures.
We also agreed -- so the biggest -- there were a couple of
concerns. One was the view, which I believe we addressed. The
other one was condition of the existing wall. There is an 8-foot
masonry concrete wall, concrete block wall, and nothing to do with
my clients, but it has not necessarily been well maintained by the
owners, both north and south. Not particularly pointing out anybody.
We agreed to repair the wall, repaint the wall, along it's entire length,
which we really, I don't think, had to do that, but that was part of our
discussions with the neighbors, so we agreed to do that, so that's now
a condition.
We also agreed to put in all of the landscaping that's required
along the full length of that property. So I think that helped to
appease the neighbors' concerns with what it would look like from
their perspective. I have some pictures. This is a rendering of the
proposed building, another rendering. I do have -- this is a
perspective that shows you what they will see from their own
property line. There is a really nice buffer on the Falling Waters side,
and they've maintained that very well.
Now it's our job to maintain it on our side. Another thing we
agreed to do was to meet with the Falling Waters HOA -- and this is a
private agreement -- to meet with them once a year if they have any
issues; that way we can address them. We don't think there will be
any, but we'll agree to meet with their HOA once a year. That's
another discussion that we had with them.
Let's see. I know that you have a concern, Commissioner Fiala,
in general, and I think you were okay with this one because it was
further to the east, and you do have coming forward to you -- I won't
talk in detail because you haven't seen this yet, but there is a draft
LDC amendment winding its way through the system which would
require separation requirements. But that is from Collier Boulevard
April 9, 2019
Page 84
west to Airport Road, and we are east of that, so it does not affect this
property.
That's just an exhibit, an aerial exhibit that shows where that
separation requirement is proposed. It shows Falling Waters, and it
shows our site which is right here.
I did want to talk about the traffic, because I know you had a
concern about that. So there was a -- let me get the hand-held mic,
which is not here.
And let me put that on the visualizer. It's on. So there was a
conditional use approved in 2014 for this property that had 44,500
square feet of shopping center, and there was -- Norm Trebilcock,
who did not prepare our traffic analysis but prepared the traffic
analysis for the 44,500-square-foot shopping center --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That was what year, please, Bob?
MR. MULHERE: 2014 -- did a traffic analysis, and the existing
list of uses that you can see here that are permitted by the zoning,
which include restaurant -- sorry. Thank you, Leo. That's a little
easier, yeah -- restaurant, drive-in bank, medical, dental, fast-food
restaurant, the trip calculation was developed, and the total trips were
258 trips. For the proposed 44,500-square-foot shopping center, that
number actually increased by three trips from 258 to 261. That was
in 2014.
Now, we know that we're only one of the three lots that make up
that area that was going to be the shopping center, but taking out
14,000 square feet of retail from that 44,000, which is what we
looked at -- so it was 44,000. We didn't overestimate. We only took
14,000 out for the lot that we'll build the self-storage on, and that
would reduce the trips by 82. Then you add in the trips that we're
going to generate, which is 16. You have a net reduction of 66 trips.
So we will only generate -- the self-storage would only generate
16 p.m. peak-hour trips. It's a lot less than the 85 that we generated
April 9, 2019
Page 85
by the 14,000 square feet of retail that was approved for this lot.
So there will be a minimal impact on the intersection and,
typically, those are not -- there's not a high p.m. or a.m. peak-hour
trip generation associated with self -storage, because most people go
when they're out of work -- outside of work. Not out of work but
outside of work hours. So weekends -- primarily weekends. So it
doesn't really compete with the highest demand periods of 7 a.m. to
9 a.m. or 5 a.m., 4 a.m. -- 4 p.m. to 7 p.m.
So I went through a quick presentation. I really think this is an
appropriate use for that location. We've really worked hard to make
the neighbors happy with what we were proposing. We've agreed to
a lot of extra conditions to do so, and we would appreciate your
positive consideration, and I'll answer any other questions that you
have.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. Am I first?
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Yes, ma'am. You weren't lit up, but
I'll let you go first. How about that?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, but I light up all the time.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: True.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. Anyway, what I -- Bob,
thank you for that. The neighbors, when I spoke to them, they didn't
have a problem with it either, and I didn't have a problem, as I said,
until I read the agenda. And all of a sudden I was wondering why
you changed it from a C5 to a C5, being that it's a C5. That's okay,
because then you wanted to add something, right?
MR. MULHERE: Yes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You wanted to add, here's the
kicker, motor freight transportation and warehousing. So does that --
it sounded to me like --
MR. MULHERE: Yep.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- you were having a lot of big
April 9, 2019
Page 86
trucks stored in there and, as you heard earlier in the day, that area,
you know, you've got 12 roads (sic) coming in and ou t of there. The
congestion is high, and it's going to be higher because they're going
to be building an overpass there now. So you're even going to have
more congestion.
And with adding this a thousand feet from that, it sounds like
you're going to add way too much congestion. And later on people
are going to remember that I would vote for something that imposed
on them all of this extra traffic.
I just could not, in clear conscience, do that until I asked you
what are you going to do to safeguard thes e people.
MR. MULHERE: Yes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And I know it's storage units.
We've got 15 storage units coming into East Naples right now; 15
three-story storage units coming in. This is just one of them. And
you never -- the good thing about that -- I tried to find a positive with
15, because you can't shop in them and you can't eat in them, but I
thought, well, at least they don't generate any traffic. So that's a good
thing.
MR. MULHERE: Yes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: But all of a sudden we've got motor
transports coming in and out of there. And you know what, Bob, that
doesn't sit well with me.
MR. MULHERE: I got it. And that is a super question. And
this comes up nearly every time we discuss this, because it's very
confusing.
So county uses the SIC codes, the standard industrial code, and
the nomenclature, the way they word that SIC code is they call it
warehouse and motor freight. That's what they call it, and that's
8224, SIC code, but we are limiting it only to self-storage. There will
be no big trucks, no tractor trailers, nothing like that.
April 9, 2019
Page 87
So, yes, the name is SIC Code 8224, warehousing and
self-storage, but we are limiting it to only -- or warehousing and
motor freight. We are limiting it only to self-storage. It is very
confusing. It's very confusing to the neighbors --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: It doesn't say it, so how would I
know?
MR. MULHERE: I think it might say it somewhere in the
Planning Commission, the draft ordinance. I've got to see if I can
find it.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Was it in the backup information?
MR. MULHERE: It's in this draft ordinance.
MR. OCHS: It's actually in the title to the item as well. It
references the SIC code referencing air-conditioned and mini -- and
self-storage only.
MR. MULHERE: So in the -- as well, in the -- I'm putting on
the -- I'm sorry -- the podium computer. I want -- and I know that's a
little hard to see. But if you look at Item 1, let's see, 1F, which is
right here, that reads, "Motor freight transportation and warehousing,
4225, air-conditioned and mini-self-storage only."
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That doesn't tell me that you're not
going to have motor transports coming and going from there.
MR. MULHERE: Well, I mean, whatever I can do to -- we'll
put a condition. We'll put a condition on there that says -- because
we only want the self-storage, not the --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I just want the safety for the people
in that area.
MR. MULHERE: I understand.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's all I'm concerned with. I
think that the proposition is a -- the proposal is a good one.
MR. MULHERE: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I think that it -- you know, it won't
April 9, 2019
Page 88
be generating a heck of a lot of traffic unless it was generating motor
transport traffic coming and going and they're coming in and out to
store their vehicles there, then all of a sudden you've got a problem.
MR. MULHERE: No, no vehicle storage either.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Mr. Bosi?
MR. BOSI: Mike Bosi, Planning and Zoning director.
Commissioners, that is common with every one of our indoor
mini-storage facilities. The parent grouping is motor freight
warehousing. That's the parent grouping. But the use that it's
restricted to is only indoor mini-storage, so there can be no freight.
There could be no motor storage.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Would you say those words -- I
mean, indoor motor --
MR. BOSI: Indoor mini-storage.
MR. MULHERE: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah. Just so that it's clear to just
this person. Maybe everybody else understands it but, you know,
sometimes people take advantage of words and maybe do something
that you didn't expect, and they say, well, it says you can.
MR. BOSI: I can assure you that every indoor air-conditioned
self-storage facility that we've permitted in the last five years has had
this same identical description in terms of how they use -- the use
category and then with the restriction to the mini-storage
air-condition --
MR. KLATZKOW: Ma'am, if you want, we can amend the
language slightly and just call it air-conditioned indoor mini-storage
only.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you. That's what I'm
looking for.
MR. MULHERE: That would be great. Thank you, Jeff.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you, County Attorney. I
April 9, 2019
Page 89
appreciate that. And with that, I'll make a motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Second.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, I didn't wait for your
comments.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: No, I saw the site. Yes, I saw it,
and it was the lighting and the site for --
MR. MULHERE: Full cutoff lighting, so we have to add
that, Mr. Klatzkow, as well, so...
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: It's been moved and seconded that
we approve the staff's recommendation along with the amendments
proposed by the County Attorney. Any other discussion?
(No response.)
MR. MULHERE: Thank you, again. Appreciate --
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Wait till I call for the vote. All in
favor?
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Opposed same sign, same sound.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: So moved.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Don't jinx it.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: It's not over till it's over, Bob.
Item #11D
RECOMMENDATION TO ACCEPT THE WHIPPOORWILL
LANE AND MARBELLA LAKES DRIVE INTERCONNECTION
April 9, 2019
Page 90
STUDY AND DIRECT STAFF TO PURSUE THE
INTERCONNECTION OF WHIPPOORWILL LANE AND
MARBELLA LAKES DRIVE USING THE CONCEPT PLAN TO
INITIATE THE DESIGN PHASE - MOTION TO APPROVE
STAFF’S RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE
INTERCONNECTION – APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, that takes us to Item 11D. This is
a recommendation to accept the Whippoorwill Lane and Marbella
Lakes Drive interconnection study and direct staff to pursue the
interconnection of Whippoorwill Lane and Marbella Lakes Drive
using the concept plan to initiate the design phase.
Ms. Lorraine Lantz, your Project Manager with your Capital
Project Planning Department, will make the presentation.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: And I have a couple of things I'm
going to say first. We all know why you're here. I'm going to require
respect for all of the speakers that are here today. Understood? No
clapping. No booing. No nothing. We are going to show respect as
is deserved of you while you are here.
So with that, my staff is going to -- our staff is going to give us a
presentation, and then we'll call for the public speakers. Oh, yes, and,
by the way, if you do wish to speak, you'll be allotted your time
frame, but you have to fill out a form that is available outside and
turn it in over here to Troy to be listed as such.
Now, when we go to the public speakers, there are a lot of
people here for the same reason. If you hear someone say something
that you're about to say, as opposed to repeating it, state your name
for the record so that you are of record having spoken and say I agree
with so and so in regard to what they say, and that will help us move
things along.
MS. LANTZ: Thank you. Good afternoon. My name is
April 9, 2019
Page 91
Lorraine Lantz. I am the transportation planning project manager for
this project. I'm also your principal planner.
We are here today to present the conceptual design and the
recommendation for an interconnection on Whippoorwill Lane and
Marbella Lakes Drive. This project has a long history, and Jeff Perry
from Stantec Engineering will discuss some of the history, but I did
want to highlight a few important aspects.
These are two public roads. The county owns these roads and
the properties to adjoin them, and they have planned this for over 20
years. We have found documentation in which the connection was
discussed with the property owners and representatives from
Balmoral, which is now Aviano; Livingston Village, which is now
Marbella; Arlington Lakes, which is now Andalusia; Whippoorwill
Lakes, which is now The Reserves; and Whippoorwill Woods, which
is now Stratford. Those associations and their representatives at that
time reviewed the documentation and the plans, discussed them, and
actually wrote a letter saying that they would like the roads to
increase in size for Whippoorwill and the connection to Livingston.
So they were discussing whether it should go through and
whether it should be a two-lane or a four-lane. They wanted it to be a
two-lane, but they wanted to connect. All of them joined in one
letter.
Along with that history, there has been opposition, so I do
recognize that, but we have listened to that opposition to make sure
that when we come to you with the presentation that we have, with
the conceptual plans, that it recognizes and tries to mitigate those
concerns, but also I want you to -- when you're listening to Jeff and
when you're listening to the public, understand that a majority of the
residents on the corridor knew about this project, they expected it to
be built, and they were in favor of the project and the concepts.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: And I am going to ask you one
April 9, 2019
Page 92
more time -- we are not going to tolerate those kind of outbursts.
You will be afforded the same respect as those that are speaking now,
unless you act inappropriately, and then I will have you removed.
Understood?
Proceed, Ms. Lorraine.
MS. LANTZ: So in 2013 this project was deferred, and that
gave us the opportunity to balance some of the needs for safety and
for efficiency while preserving the corridor to create a sustainable
and beautiful public space, and that's what I think we will show you
with our concept plans and what Jeff Perry will demonstrate in our
presentation. Thank you. Jeff.
MR. PERRY: Thank you, Lorraine.
Good afternoon. Mr. Chairman, board members, my name is
Jeff Perry, a transportation planner With Stantec Consulting.
As Lorraine said, this project has a long history, and I want to
touch a little bit on that. But as we go through this, what we're going
to try to do is give you a very brief overview of the project. We 'll
talk a little bit about the design that has already been approved,
identify how we identified the issues, how we developed the concept
plan. I want to talk about our public engagement process, because we
believe it was as robust as we could possibly do within the time
frame we were given, and then we'll talk about our recommendations.
As Lorraine indicated, the county has the right-of-way for the
roadway. It was through developer contributions. The purpose of the
facility is actually to provide that interconnectivity between the two
roads and all of the developments that are served by those roads.
It provides a second means of access. If you're familiar with the
area, you realize that both Whippoorwill Lane and Marbella Lakes
Drive are both dead-end roads. There's only one way in and one way
out.
Interconnection provides an opportunity for rerouting or routing
April 9, 2019
Page 93
choice by first responders. The proposal calls for a traffic signal at
Livingston Road and Marbella Lakes Drive, which we believe will
improve the operation of that particular intersection, and we believe
that the project will reduce those delays and emissions that are
currently occurring at Pine Ridge Road and Whippoorwill Lane.
This is our study area. You see Pine Ridge Road along the top
edge, Whippoorwill Lane running basically down through the middle
north/south, Marbella Lakes Drive on the -- let's see if I can -- right
here is the Marbella Lakes Drive that dead ends at Hermosa Way,
which is the entrance to Marbella Lakes subdivision.
This hatched area is the area of the roadway we're talking about.
It's a quarter of a mile long here and just a little bit less than a quarter
of a mile long north/south.
This is an aerial view looking south from Pine Ridge Road.
This is the Nissan dealership. Whippoorwill Lane going down about
eight-tenths of a mile, the developments on both sides that are served
by Whippoorwill Lane; Marbella Lakes Drive is over here with the
entrance to Marbella Lakes subdivision there.
This is looking east from Livingston Road along Marbella Lakes
Drive to the entrance, Hermosa Way. This area here and here is the
area we're talking about for the roadway connection.
The aerial view, Hermosa Drive at Marbella Lakes Drive
there -- Hermosa Way, excuse me, at Marbella Lakes Drive. This is
the dead-end which is currently sort of a cul-de-sac of Whippoorwill
Lane just south of Stratford Place, and this is the area we're talking
about building the new connection.
The county has all the right-of-way either under easement or in
fee simple. This is Marbella Lakes; the Stratford Place development;
Aviano, which abuts both sections of the road but does not access the
road directly; Andalusia, which is to the north; and Mariposa, another
one of the other developments also to the north.
April 9, 2019
Page 94
As Lorraine already mentioned, we have developer
commitments for all of the right-of-way in this particular area. This
particular graphic shows the extension from Hermosa Way to the
bend or the corner and then north up to Stratford. And as Lorraine
also mentioned, there was notification provided. This happens to be
a brochure that was provided.
The County Commission in the adoption of this particular
development, Marbella Lakes subdivision, which was Livingston
Village, I think, at the time, actually required in the PUD document
that all sales or property be -- that owners be -- purchasers be advised
of the proposed right-of-way and the future roadway that would be
along this side here, these residents along here that would be
basically affected by the connection.
A little bit of the history: In 2012 a design was approved for the
road basically just connecting the two roads together with a new
paved roadway. In 2014, after a hearing much like this, the Board of
County Commissioners deferred action on that construction. The
road was reprogrammed last year in your budget cycle for
construction in the year 2020.
We were given the challenge of sort of developing a concept
that we could then take to the public, something that would be
different from the conventional design that would address as many of
the neighborhood concerns as possible and that it was vetted with
homeowners associations and stakeholders before we brought it back
to you.
So back in the fall, in August, September, and October, we met
with HOA leaderships to learn a little bit more about the specific
issues that they believe were of concern of their residents. At the end
of the year we developed a concept plan. We had HOA meetings in
January. We had seven meetings with HOA/stakeholders' groups.
One was a business owners' group. Developed our final concept plan
April 9, 2019
Page 95
in March, our final report, and we're here before you today.
During the public-involvement process, after we provided a
detailed presentation much like you're seeing today to all the
participants, we polled them with electronic devices so that they
could anonymously give us answers to a couple questions. We
wanted to know what their feeling was about the project as a whole,
whether they thought it was a good idea or not to connect the two
roads together regardless of how that connection took place.
We then asked them what they thought about the conventional
design, which I'll talk about in a moment, and the proposed concept
plan. And, lastly, we also talked a little bit about landscaping,
because as we'll show you, the proposed concept plan offers
opportunities for landscaping if the area would like to have it.
In 2012 the approved design was two 11-foot-wide travel lanes, much
like is out there today, three paved -- three-foot paved shoulders
along Marbella Lakes Drive. There were sidewalks. The design
speed was 40 miles an hour; posted speed, presumably, would be
30 miles per hour. The most important thing here is that during this
particular design there were no improvements along the existing
Whippoorwill Lane corridor. Everything started south of Stratford.
So it was just that small piece of area that I showed you previously.
Construction estimate cost at the time was about 1.5 million. It's
somewhere around 1.9, 95, 97 now. Debt cost does not include
having to modify the design, permitting, mitigation, and any other
landscaping or anything else that might go along with it.
When we met with the HOA leadership, we learned about traffic
issues, speeds, increases in volume, safety concerns, noise, lack of --
loss of green space, because that area I showed you is currently
heavily vegetated. We learned about all of these different types of
issues that were of concern the HOAs in the area.
We then went through and tried to develop a plan, had several
April 9, 2019
Page 96
different objectives: Improving the safety profile of the roadways
and intersections, something that would reduce speeds, reduce traffic
volumes, meaning cut-through traffic that might want to use this
roadway corridor as a way to get around the Livingston Road/Pine
Ridge Road intersection, and also to improve operations.
We developed a large list of issues of concerns. We then
identified every conceivable solution or countermeasure that we
could possibly come up with, sort of went through and ranked them
and decided what would work, what wouldn't work, what was just not
possible to do for a variety of reasons, and we came up with those
that we thought were the best at achieving the objectives: A new
traffic signal at Livingston Road and Marbella Lakes Drive that
would facilitate the additional traffic from Whippoorwill, the
residents in Whippoorwill that would use this interconnection to
travel south and then west over to Livingston Road and want to turn
left to go down south on Livingston Road. That would -- we've
already done the traffic warrants study. That additional volume
would warrant a traffic signal at that particular location in
conjunction with the Marbella Lakes traffic that's already using that
intersection.
We wanted to propose narrower travel lanes. We know for a
fact that narrow travel lanes will slow vehicles down. People drive at
a speed that they feel comfortable traveling at. That's why an
interstate highway has 12-foot travel lanes, most of your county roads
have 11-foot travel lanes. Many local streets may have 10-foot travel
lanes. The narrower the travel lanes, the slower the vehicles will
travel.
We also wanted to add raised medians. Along the Whippoorwill
section of roadway north of Stratford we have as much as 50 feet of
asphalt from curb to curb where you have north/south travel lanes
and all of the turn lanes at intersections, 50 feet of asphalt. In those
April 9, 2019
Page 97
areas where there is no turn lanes, there's actually a painted media n,
there's 30 feet of asphalt, and people travel at excessive speeds up
and down Whippoorwill Lane.
We have -- in our traffic data we recorded vehicles traveling
over 50 miles an hour up and down Whippoorwill Lane as well as on
Marbella Lakes Drive. Marbella Lakes Drive is 12-foot-wide travel
lanes today, so we have a quarter mile of 12-foot travel lanes that are
very easy for people to travel excessive speeds, especially over the
speed limit.
We use the raised medians in the corridor to actually narrow the
travel lanes. So if you have a travel lane that is currently 12 feet wide
with a painted median, we make the median wider, make it a raised
median, and now all of a sudden you have 11-foot travel lanes.
Splitter islands, because we're talking about some new road
segments that would basically be nothing but roadway, we would
include a splitter island, which is like a miniature median in the
middle -- and I'll show you that graphic, again, it gives some visual
and physical impedance in the roadway to help slow vehicles down
so that you don't have a long stretch of asphalt.
Roundabouts, the key to slowing traffic and calming traffic is
roundabouts. Everyone passing through the roundabout, including
the main line traffic on Marbella Lakes Drive or on Wh ippoorwill,
have to slow down to go through a roundabout. Today they don't.
They go 35, 45, 50 miles an hour past the entrances to these
developments. We've heard people complain that they can't make a
left out of their development to go up to Whippoorw ill Lane because
of the traffic that's moving through there so quickly. Roundabouts
force everyone passing through that intersection to slow down.
We would propose that a speed study be done, and we would
recognize a posted speed reduction would probably result from that,
and we could also suggest the truck limitations.
April 9, 2019
Page 98
All of these measures are intended to, number one, reduce
speeds, which reduces noise, and it also discourages cut-through
traffic, because when a roadway corridor like this is less efficient to
travel than Livingston Road and Pine Ridge Road, fewer people will
use this to cut through because they believe that they can get -- make
it in a shorter distance when, in fact, they can't.
The concept plan itself, as I mentioned, I'd like to show you
what we're proposing here. We have a traffic signal at Livingston
Road and Marbella Lakes Drive, a median diverter at the very
beginning of the corridor with the travel -- 11-foot -- 10-foot travel
lanes, excuse me -- 10-foot-wide median with 11-foot travel lanes on
both sides there. Speed reduction after an appropriate study would be
at the beginning of the corridor so everyone would know what the
speed limit is.
The distance between the medians we would propose
10-foot-wide travel lanes. So this particular section here would be
10-foot, there would be a raised median as you approach the
roundabout. This is a new roundabout at Hermosa Way. The
existing sidewalk along the south side of Marbella Lakes would
remain, would be undisturbed, but there would be a new sidewalk
connection across the roundabout medians through refuge areas to
allow connection to the existing multiuse pathway which is on the
north side of the canal that is on the north side of Marbella Lakes
Drive.
So for residents in Marbella Lakes, especially, that would like to
use the pathway, today they have to walk all the way back down to
Livingston Road, cross over, and then they're on the pathway. Here
they would be able to actually cross over one lane at a time through
the median refuge and get over to the pathway.
Further to the east, this is Hermosa Way, the roundabout we just
looked at. This is the new section of roadway, shifted to the north,
April 9, 2019
Page 99
10-foot travel lanes. This is the splitter island that we're talking about
here to sort of break up this quarter mile of roadway that would run
between the two roundabouts.
There would be no sidewalk on the south side. Because of the
multiuse pathway and the access across to it, we don't believe that it's
absolutely necessary to put one on the south side of the roadway.
Again, the raised medians, as you approach the roundabout,
roundabout here, we're now looking north to the right. We've
rounded the curve, rounded the corner at the roundabout. This is the
other section of brand-new roadway. There would be no sidewalk on
this side of the road. We would have, again, 10-foot-wide travel
lanes, the splitter island about halfway down the corridor, the raised
medians approaching the roundabout.
This would be a new sidewalk on the west side of the roadway
that would connect with the existing sidewalk here. The existing
crosswalk would actually connect these two existing sidewalks so
that people could travel along the west side of the road.
Further to the north, this is Stratford Lane. This is the area that
presently today is over 30 feet wide. It's a painted what we call a
gored median, yellow-striped median down through the middle,
30 feet of asphalt down through here. We would propose
11-foot-wide travel lanes with a raised median in the middle.
So you can see all of these raised median areas are suitable for
landscaping. They are wide enough, and they would be suitable for
landscaping.
Turn lanes, and this particular intersection would remain un --
would basically remain the same. As you travel further north, you
can see we have another raised median here with 11-foot-wide travel
lanes. There would be a new roundabout at Andalusia Way and
Night Hawk. This area through here is now 50 feet of asphalt from
curb to curb. So you have north and southbound through lanes plus
April 9, 2019
Page 100
right and left turn lanes that add up to be 50 feet wide.
This area over here, this is one of the only areas where we
actually probably need to modify the edges of the pavement, all along
this corridor here. We're not basically modifying anything in the
edges. All of the work is occurring in the middle. This particular
area, because of all the asphalt that's out here today, we don't need it
anymore. We would probably have to reconstruct this area through
here where you see all this green space is now actually turn lanes and
asphalt.
Moving further north up towards the Avow Hospice, this area
would remain the same. As you approach Avow Hospice turn lanes,
it would have a little median area through here.
Anyplace we have the medians we would have 11-foot travel
lanes as opposed to 10 feet at the request of your Traffic Operations
Department.
This area right here, if you can see, is the yellow striped gore
area. That's -- wherever you see these medians, that's the treatment
that's out there today. That's just simply what we call a gored or
painted median.
These existing lanes would be maintained, we'd have an
opportunity for a little median there, and then there would be speed
limit signs and so forth.
This area right here actually needs to be -- during our public
involvement we learned that it's actually striped incorrectly. It needs
to be modified, because you can now go north and west on Kraft
Road. Kraft Road is now extending all the way over to Livings ton
Road to the shopping center. So there's a left -turn movement here
that is permitted. Technically, according to the way the median is
striped, it doesn't look like you can make that left turn there.
During the course of our public involvement, we also talked a
little bit about landscaping, as I mentioned. The corridors that we're
April 9, 2019
Page 101
talking about afford the opportunity to put in some landscaping.
We recognize that beautifying the corridor can add value to the
surrounding property, helps to attenuate road noise because of the
features of the landscaping, bushes, and things like that. It adds some
visual and physical impedance. Anytime you have vertical objects,
whether it's curbs or whether it's trees and bushes adjacent to the
roadway, people have a tendency to drive just a little bit slower, just
like cars passing by.
As you approach cars, you're aware of how close you are to that
particular vehicle, so there's an option there to help to reduce speeds
by adding landscaping. And we asked that question, whether or not
they would be supportive of it. We recognize that while the county
may support the capital cost of landscaping in the initial project, they
do not maintain landscaping on local roads. So it would be -- if the
property owners, through an MSBU, decided that they were
supportive of landscaping, then that might be something we could
move forward with, because there is an opportunity for that.
Construction cost estimates, the planning estimates are about $3
million for the roadway improvement, final design, permitting,
mitigation. Landscaping would be excluded.
When we went through public engagement, as I mentioned, we
had seven HOA meetings and business owners. We had a total of
232 people that attended those meetings. We gave detailed
presentations, like the ones you've received, and we had this
interactive polling.
We asked four questions. We wanted to know what roadway
they access, because it's important to understand that there is a
difference of opinion largely based on which roadway you currently
live on or have -- access your business on. So we wanted to be able
to stratify the data, and we'll show that to you. We asked the $64,000
question, which -- you know, do you support the connection or not?
April 9, 2019
Page 102
Just plain and simple: Do you like it or don't you like it? Because
we wanted that opinion as well.
Then we asked about the preferred concept plan, because we
recognize that while some people may not want the connection, they
might like one versus the other. But we wanted to mak e sure that you
understood what the people's opinion was about the interconnection
to begin with; and if there was some concern or some support for the
concept plan, that would be a separately discussed item. We also
asked about the option for landscaping.
When you look at the data, the 232 residents represent about
6 percent of the households of this study area that we were talking
about.
On the right-hand side, the connection -- the question about
where you access. We had 230 of the respondents typed in their little
controller the support for the connection itself, whether or not you
support the idea of interconnection. About 50 percent of the entire
universe of people that attended these workshops said yes, and
50 percent said no or had no opinion. So out of the 230, 116 said yes,
they supported the idea.
When you look at it by roadway, the Whippoorwill Lane area --
again, we had 230 respondents. In the Whippoorwill Lane area,
89 percent of those respond -- excuse me -- 72 percent, 89
respondents, said they favored the interconnection; 81 percent of the
Marbella Lakes Drive residents in attendance indicated they did not
support it; 61 out of the 81 percent.
I will tell you that that's better than a year ago when we were
talking about the Pine Ridge corridor study. When we went to
Marbella Lakes, it was overwhelmingly, like, 99 percent against the
interconnection. So I think we may have made a few people realize
that there is, perhaps, some value there. At this time we had
81 percent of those people in attendance, I suspect, largely many of
April 9, 2019
Page 103
the same people that attended the first time; 81 percent indicated that
they did not like it, which meant there's about 19 percent said that
they thought it was a good idea and 7 had no opinion, as mentioned
earlier.
When we asked the question about the concept plan that I
showed you a few moments ago as compared to the original design,
out of the 229 -- I think we lost one in the process, 229 respondents,
181 people, 79 percent, said that they supported the concept over the
conventional design of two 11-foot-wide travel lanes and obviously
the improvements that would go along with Whippoorwill Lane.
When we asked about the interest in landscaping, it was pretty
balanced. There were about 123; a little bit over 50 percent indicated
they had some interest in the idea. There was no commitments being
made, but we did ask, you know, were you interested in it. We
explained that it would be somehow incorporated maybe in their
taxes or something like that, that they would be paying for it, so that
there was at least some indication that there was some support that
the county might want to pursue a little more research into that
particular area.
So our recommendation to you is basically to move forward
with the interconnection as you currently have budgeted, and we
believe that the concept plan tries to address as many of these issues
as possible and that it's a worthy pursuit to go forward with that
particular design concept.
And I think -- did you want to make any more --
MS. LANTZ: We do have some what we anticipate as some
rebuttals, so when -- after all the public come and makes their
comments, we would like to reserve the right to come back and do
some closing statements.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Before you go away, let's see. I
think Commissioner Taylor is the only one that has a question for
April 9, 2019
Page 104
now. I assume that is of staff.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Not a question, just a comment
to you, County Manager, of the extraordinary attention and diligence
and creativity and the willingness of staff to engage the public on
this -- on the shores of these two roads. I've never seen anything like
it. And I think Concept 2 is very exciting. I think it will increase
property values, and I look forward to hearing from the public.
Thank you. Congratulations to you.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: So with that, Mr. Troy, how many
do we have?
MR. MILLER: Mr. Chairman, we have 24 registered speakers
for this item today. I'm going to remind the speakers, I'll announce
two names. Please queue up at both podiums. Our first speaker is
Jaysen Roa. He will be followed by Pamela Jacobs.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: And as you're coming to the
podiums, there are -- there is a little light system that is on each one
of the podiums. Green means go, yellow means you've got 30
seconds, red means you're done. And there is a timer there that let's
you know how you're coming along with regard to your progress.
If you do hear someone say something that you have in your notes
that you wish to say, you are welcome to state your name for the
record and share that you share those comments either for or against.
MR. ROA: Thank you, Board Chair, Commissioners. For the
record, my name is Jaysen Roa. I'm the president and CEO of Avow
Hospice, formerly Hospice of Naples.
I think as many people here in the crowd know Avow was
founded in late '70s and subsequently licensed in 1983, and each year
we serve thousands of patients in and around Collier County.
My first comment is, certainly, anything that I'm going to state is
specific to our experience as a landowner off of Whippoorwill Lane.
By no means are my comments meant to lessen or in any way do we
April 9, 2019
Page 105
have an opinion about anyone else's opinion in the crowd. We
certainly have heard from other residents. We respect their opinion
both for and against this corridor expansion.
Having said that, Avow was one of the first projects on
Whippoorwill Lane and, obviously, through the years, everything
sprung up around us, and it looks completely different than it did
when our founders got that piece of land and decided to put our
Hospice there and our Hospice House where we care for and have
cared for thousands of Collier County residents.
Our patients and families really depend on us 365 days a year,
24/7. And what we've found is with that single point of access at
Pine Ridge Road and Whippoorwill Lane, it causes us some issues
sometimes with providing that care. And when we talk about it, it
truly is a life-and-death situation and so -- in two respects. The first
one is the majority of the patients that we see on a daily basis are out
and about in the community, and our staff, when they're leaving the
office, have to be able to get to them quickly and efficiently or, in
many cases, they don't get the necessary medications they ne ed or
treatment they need from any of our disciplinary team.
The other component of that is when patients are traveling to our
campus from area hospitals or even coming from their home because
they need intensive hospice care at our Hospice House, there h ave
been times when they haven't been able to make it because of
something that's happened at the intersection.
In addition to the failing intersection, we've also had instances
where something happens with the utilities on that corner right there,
and what that's done is, for one example, our connectivity for Internet
was cut multiple times in the past few years, and we rely on our
technology, again, for our patients and families to get the treatment
they need as well as the medications and equipment that they need.
And so our hope is with this project that there will be some
April 9, 2019
Page 106
redundancy, and we'll have multiple points of connection for
everything we rely on to take care of our patients.
And probably, just in summary, again, with respect to everybody
on both sides of the aisle, only because of our patients and families
and the fact that it's critical that we get to them in a timely manner,
any delay, even if it's just minutes, sometimes means the difference
between them having a good hospice death or a bad hospice death
and, for that reason, that's why Avow Hospice is in support of this
connection.
Thank you very much for your time and conversation.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Pamela Jacobs. She has
been cede three additional minutes from Amy Kessler. Ms. Kessler,
can you raise your hand to indicate you're present.
(Raises hand.)
MR. MILLER: Thank you.
Ms. Jacobs will have six minutes. She will be followed by Bud
Horenci. Go ahead.
MS. JACOBS: Can you put my --
MR. MILLER: Oh, I'm sorry. You have a PowerPoint.
MS. JACOBS: I do.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Oh, don't start her clock.
MR. MILLER: I've stopped her clock, sir.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: He turned on her green. He does
that all the time. He turned --
MS. JACOBS: I bet.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: He doesn't give you what you need.
MS. JACOBS: I could tell.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: He starts the clock.
MS. JACOBS: Can you hear me? Wrong one. I'm Pamela
Jacobs.
MR. HORENCI: That's the wrong one.
April 9, 2019
Page 107
MR. MILLER: You're the PDF. There you go.
MS. JACOBS: There you go. Thank you. Thank you very
much.
Commissioners and the county staff, ladies and gentlemen, good
afternoon. My name is Pamela Jacobs, and I am the vice president of
the Marbella Lakes owners association and have been very much
involved in this project, oh, for some time now; three terms.
I'm here today to represent Marbella Lakes and other communities
and their residents to voice our opposition, once again, to the
proposed Whippoorwill Lane and Marbella Lakes connection.
The next slide -- which I've got -- I have to learn to click and
talk. Anyway. Each of you had received a copy of our -- this
presentation last Thursday at your offices, and we wanted to make
sure that we gave you an opportunity to review them. If any one of
you doesn't have a copy, I brought some here, and we can provide
them. Does everyone have their copy? Thank you very much.
Okay.
We're here to speak our case. I'm presenting you with a petition.
That petition has only been circulating a pretty short peri od of time,
but I'm going to present the petition to our stenographer here. It
contains over 550 signatures.
MR. MILLER: Ma'am, you need to wait and speak while you're
on mic.
MS. JACOBS: Oh, okay. Beg forgiveness.
That petition contains over 550 original and electronic
signatures from all of the communities, and today we actually
received more signatures from Aviano. So I want to thank everybody
for that.
Anyway, the petition was created and signed to oppose the
destruction of 10 acres of preserve land costing millions of our tax
dollars, a project that truly the majority of our residents do not want.
April 9, 2019
Page 108
In addition to our "no road extension" that was a website -- and in
addition to those petition signatures, that website alone, in a very
short period of time, has well over 2,000 visitors reading all of the
background.
The home page, if any of you have taken the time to look at it, it
talks about more dangerous traffic, and there will be. You cannot add
2,000 cars a day and not have more traffic-safety issues. So that's
just regardless of whatever the results say. That was an MPO study.
There will be a cost to all of us for the upkeep of this proposal.
There's going to be more pollution and noise, but most of all there's
going to be more overdevelopment of land, and we're seeing a whole
lot of that here in Collier County.
It's going to be really a detriment to our neighborhood character.
Let's talk about the neighborhood character. This, Marbella alone, is
not the same as it was in 2006. Back then it was just vacant land
before the -- I think it was called the Livingston Lakes.
MR. HORENCI: Village.
MS. JACOBS: Livingston Lakes, yes. And then in 2009 that
developer went bankrupt, and a new developer, JL Homes came in,
and built what we now know as Marbella Lakes.
But, anyway, in 10 years communities have become mature.
They're established. Most of all, though, nature and natural habitat
overflow there with wildlife, rare and threatened bird species that
make it their home.
Anytime you remove trees, make way for what our
commissioner calls progress, you'll be destroying their nests.
And the strategic plan, you've recognized the expectations of these
communities. What we expect from all of you: We expect you to
preserve and enhance the neighborhood character, not to destroy it.
In terms of safety -- here we go. In terms of safety, the strategic
plan expects you -- and, by the way, this is the Collier County
April 9, 2019
Page 109
Strategic Plan. It expects you to promote safe and secure
neighborhoods. That's what we expect. By taking away bike paths
and secure walking areas, that does not promote safety to
neighborhoods. Adding an additional 2,000 cars a day can't possibly
increase safety. Even your own MPO study predicts that 2,000
additional cars, and that's going to use Marbella and Whippoorwill
Lane.
So allowing this project to go through and making it a major
thoroughfare cut-through cannot protect the safety of our school
children or the safety of our residents.
Conservation, I'm not going to say much about this because we
actually have another PowerPoint from a gentleman who is a wildlife
photographer who has lived in Marbella Lakes for years and has done
a wonderful pictorial that you will all see, but it is important to
voters. And the referendum question was put on the ballot asking
voters if they would be willing to tax themselves one-quarter million
for 10 years to buy the lands and green space. Sixty -two percent
voted that. They wanted yes. And again in 2006 voters were again
asked if they understood and approved funding the Conservation
Collier program for 10 years, and now 82 percent of those voters
approved.
Conservation is important to many of us. Many of us, including
myself, moved here because Naples, Florida, and Collier County was
really the benchmark of conservation.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: And your time is up.
MS. JACOBS: Whoop.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: That was six minutes. Thank you.
MR. MILLER: I paused while you walked over here and I
asked you to speak on mic as well, and we reset your time after your
thing was loaded.
MS. JACOBS: Okay. No, I'm not faulting you.
April 9, 2019
Page 110
MR. MILLER: Okay. Your next speaker is Bud Horenci. He'll
be followed by Les Appel. I hope I'm saying that right.
Mr. Horenci?
MR. HORENCI: County Commissioners, county staff, ladies
and gentlemen, my name is Bud Horenci. This Whippoorwill
extension project has been county explained to us a few times and yet
we've not heard a single good reason for this project. Not one.
We hear it's because of some original plan 15 years ago, we hear
it's for safety because there was once an accident on Pine Ridge that
blocked Whippoorwill, and we hear it's because staff worked really
hard in its design and justification.
How does facilitating cut-through traffic from major roadways
into residential neighborhoods have any benefit to the people who
live there? And that's what you're doing. If these reasons resonate
with the county, the county has too much money. Surely there are
more worthwhile projects needing funding.
We listened to multiple presentations pitching the Pine Ridge
improvement and, more importantly, this Whippoorwill extension
project. In earlier 2018, we heard about the Pine Ridge project with
an "oh, by the way" mention of this project. During the previous --
during that previous Pine Ridge presentation, you included a survey
for the Whippoorwill project.
According to your report, you visited eight nearby communities
and eight affected businesses. One of the questions was regarding the
elimination of the left turn onto Pine Ridge, which was
overwhelmingly rejected, and then you asked for attendees to vote
their preference for the Whippoorwill extension.
Now, these are your numbers in 2018, one year ago. Of the 313
participants, 195 voted no across all the communities. That's
62 percent. And I'll add that Marbella Lakes was, in fact, 95 no, six
yes. If your intent is to ignore these opinions of those that you ask,
April 9, 2019
Page 111
why are you asking them at all?
Now one year later you've added a few unusual traffic circ les
and presented again. There's a new smaller public participation
group but more government agencies giving opinions and a survey
designed to create predictable results.
We know how that works. Phrase a question differently, exclude an
answer option and many more. It's done all the time. Our opinions
haven't changed; the surveys did.
For all the environmental reasons, for all of the quality-of-life
reasons, and for all the natural resource reasons and to not waste tax
dollars, stop this project. Demonstrate to those of us who live here,
vote here, who pay taxes here and who believe in representative
government that you haven't forgotten that concept. Represent us and
please stop this project.
Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Les Appel. He'll be
followed by Linda Schwartz.
MR. APPEL: Presentation is a worthy goal. My name is Les
Appel, and I'm a resident of Marbella Lakes. Before retiring, I was a
developer -- podiatrist and developer of foot orthotics and could be
called a protector of the feet. When I moved to Florida, my amateur
photography hobby became focused on wildlife, and I also performed
volunteer work for five years at the Conversation Wildlife Animal
Hospital. I'm now involved with protecting the environment.
I have photographed the waterway and the banks along the
proposed path of the Whippoorwill extension for close to 10 years.
This unwittingly has become a viewable wildlife refuge made
possible by the walkway bordering the Aviano community, which we
thoroughly enjoy almost every day.
Bird mania. We are fortunate enough to have our very own
oasis in the middle of North Naples for resident wildlife, bikers,
April 9, 2019
Page 112
hikers, and walkers, when the required temperature, depth of water,
and season occur together.
Periodically, as pictured above, I have counted as many as 50 to
60 birds composed of herons and anhingas, egrets, cormorants and
threatened wood storks. What a breath-taking sight.
Squawking wood storks. Here are two wood storks on the walking
path seemingly squawking about the day's events like an old married
couple. Varies theories for this behavior, including wing drying,
cooling, or cleaning. Even now, when I view this photo, I marvel and
chuckle at the wood stork's performance.
Wood storks are us. Many of you from Marbella Lakes may
have seen a large amount of wood storks over the last couple years
standing for hours on the grass seemingly guarding the guardhouse.
These are threatened species.
Adorable otters; do not touch. The otters are frequent visitors in
the waterway in the banks. They look like miniature sea lions and are
very cute and adorable at a cautionary distance. On land they can
run, bound, and slide. Once I was putting my camera away, and a
group of six started right at me, and I couldn't take the picture but it
was amazing. If unthreatened, I've found that wildlife will actually
pose for you.
Flip fishing. The waterway is an amazing feeding ground. This
anhinga photographed in January this year actually pierced and
flipped a fish into his mouth. Seeing these amazing feats in our own
backyard threatened for questionable or undisclosed reason is sad and
infuriating.
This is not Photoshopped. This is my favorite photograph. It's a
black and white male and brown female hooded mergansers with a
great blue heron peering at them was also photographed this past
January. They are so beautiful and captivating and seemingly only
appear in January. They like forested areas with waters, which these
April 9, 2019
Page 113
protect -- this project threatens.
Definitely not Photoshopped. This is the rumored linchpin of
the project. I'm going to skip this because I'm going to go to my final
thing.
Progress equals preservation, not destruction. Please don't
destroy a little oasis with its preserves in North Naples by
succumbing to moneyed interest adding 2,000 vehicles to traffic
today, thereby endangering our schoolchildren.
Our new governor, Ron DeSantis, is implementing many
projects to revitalize and protect the environment which, in turn,
attracts tourists and healthy growth to Florida. Let's follow his lead
and end this project forever.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Linda Schwartz. She'll be
followed by Linda Scura.
MS. SCHWARTZ: You ready?
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: I'm ready.
MS. SCHWARTZ: I'm Linda Schwartz. I'm on the board for
Stratford Place, and I also live in Stratford Place. Good afternoon,
ladies and gentlemen.
I'd like to address the concerns of response times by emergency
vehicles and also the road closures during an emergency.
In the 13 years I've owned property in Stratford Place, Whippoorwill
Lane has been closed exactly one time, once in 13 years. That was a
dark October night. A man was driving home from work at the area
of Pine Ridge and Airport about two miles away. He turned on to
Whippoorwill at approximately 9:40 p.m.
At the same time a tractor-trailer truck was attempting to back
into a small driveway just south of Avow Hospice. The trailer was
blocking the entire southbound lane of Whippoorwill. There were no
lights on the trailer. His headlights were facing north, blinding the
April 9, 2019
Page 114
oncoming traffic. The man coming home from work couldn't see the
trailer until it was too late. He hit the trailer, the front of his car
going under the trailer. He came within one inch of being
decapitated. But the man was alert enough to call 911, and then he
called me, because that man was my husband.
I arrived at the accident scene within five minutes. After all, we
only live down the street. And when I arrived, I was amazed. The
emergency responders were already there with their spotlights set up
and working on getting my husband out of his vehicle. There was no
delay in their response.
The fire station is right around the corner on Pine Ridge, and
their response time was super fast, believe me. But it took almost an
hour to extract him from the vehicle so they could medivac him up to
the Trauma Center at Lee Memorial. Meanwhile, Whippoorwill was
closed down in both directions.
Now, I was parked on the south side of the accident and seemed
to be trapped. I wanted to get out and meet them at the hospital. The
police were able to direct me onto the shoulder of the road of
Whippoorwill. There was plenty of room. It was plenty wide. It was
easy to get around the whole accident scene and get out to Pine Ridge
Road and be on my way. So, you see, in an emergency there is
access and egress available if need be.
Now, we're told by DOT that the improvements to the Pine
Ridge Road corridor won't begin until at least 2025; that's six years
away. By diverting traffic from a major throughfare into a quiet
residential neighborhood is not a quick acceptable fix. This
interconnector project should not be considered until the problems on
Pine Ridge Road are fixed. Then we'll have plenty of time to decide
if this is really a necessary project. Thank you for your attention.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Lindy Scura. She'll be
followed by Donald Epstein.
April 9, 2019
Page 115
Ma'am, go ahead.
MS. SCURA: It's on? Okay.
Good afternoon. My name is Linda Scura, and I live in
Marbella Lakes. Here's what we believe is the series of events that
created this situation with the Whippoorwill extension project that
has residents disturbed.
In 2006 the county approved a rezone of the land beneat h the
power lines because they found a developer, Tousa Homes, that
would pay for part of the road extension. Why it was rezoned the
way it was was a huge mistake, but the county had found someone
that would pay for part of the interstate road, so now they're stuck
with this ridiculous zoning. In 2009, when Tousa Homes went out of
business, the county brought it upon themselves to pay the entire road
extension with taxpayer dollars. No one asked the citizens how we
felt about this, especially after the previous deal that had been struck
fell through.
Also in 2009 when the county decided to pay for the extension,
they created a stipulation that no development could occur. No CO
would be issued in the area under the power lines that was rezoned
until the interconnection was in place. This is the beginning of the
county's rush to push this project through.
In the meantime, another developer was found that would
develop homes beneath the power lines even though it should never
have been zoned that way, but this developer said that he will not pay
for the interconnect and, therefore, no CO to build, and that was why
the land is only under contract. This is also the reason why the
county is so anxious to push this project through to quickly sweep it
under the rug with a series of mistakes that were made in the cost.
In their haste to push the project through, the county came to bat
several times with proposals to the residents for that interconnect,
spending a great deal amount of funds to analyze it only t o have the
April 9, 2019
Page 116
analysts say the interconnect will offer no benefit in terms of the way
that they are trying to push it through as needed for the Pine Ridge
congestion issue.
Nevertheless, the county will -- with its back against the wall
and continuing down the path that started with this ill-advised and
senseless zoning on that land in 2006, kept on coming up to bat after
striking out every time until they got the audience that they wanted
and conveyed the messaging in a manner that would finally get them
the votes they wanted, and now they have -- they have just that. They
want to rush this project through.
The county has been relentlessly pushing for this project despite
striking out many times. Even based on the county's new executive
summary report, even this new plan/concept will be rejected once the
residents are made aware of the irresponsibility (sic) series of events
behind it. Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Donald K. Epstein. He
will be followed by Peter Whitely. Go ahead.
MR. EPSTEIN: Good afternoon. My name is Donald Epstein.
I live in Marbella Lakes. I thank the commissioners for allowing so
many of us to speak our peace today.
The proposed Whippoorwill extension is a project that benefits
very few to the considerable detriment of very many. And if I
remember my high school civics classes correctly, that's exactly the
opposite of the way a democratic government is supposed to work.
As the county has been considering effective ways to reduce
traffic at the intersection of Pine Ridge Road and Livingston Road,
we've been told by officials that opening Whippoorwill will not affect
traffic at that intersection in any way. So it's not a traffic
consideration that has put this destructive project on the front burner
once again.
The only rational conclusion that one can come to is that some
April 9, 2019
Page 117
officials believe that the well-being of developers supersedes the
quality of life of the very Naples families that they're supposed to
serve, and we're all very much aware that the project wi th all its
inherent traffic dangers and traffic noise will quickly, directly, and
permanently have a dramatic and detrimental effect on the quality of
life in several quiet Naples communities, not to mention the
plummeting of home values.
Quality of life is what puts Naples at the top of every list of the
best cities in the country in which to live. And an important and
necessary way to keep it that way is by allowing commercial
development only in areas where it will not adversely affect the lives
of thousands of families.
I urge you to think about your own community and how you,
your family, and your neighbors would be affected if a major
thoroughfare were suddenly plunged down in its midst, and I urge
you to remember why this same Whippoorwill project has been
rejected in the past, because officials value their constituents' lives
over any commercial considerations. I urgently hope that you'll
follow this wise and humane precedent. If I have any time left over,
I'd like to cede it to David Whitely.
MR. WHITELY: Peter Whitely.
MR. EPSTEIN: Oh, you're there already. I didn't see you.
MR. MILLER: Mr. Epstein had one minute left. I will add that
to Mr. Whitely's time. Mr. Whitely will be followed by Ken
Fullman -- Fullam, excuse me.
Mr. Whitely.
MR. WHITELY: I'd like to begin by thanking the County
Commissioners for giving me the opportunity to speak to this
proposal and also to county staff for the time and results that they
have devoted to their study.
Previous speakers have identified the many negative aspects of
April 9, 2019
Page 118
the proposed project, so I will not repeat them. Instead I will focus
on the why and the what.
Regrettably, the executive summary provided to you for this
meeting is selective as to the history of this issue and, consequently,
misleading on several important aspects. It is my understanding that
previous proposals over several years have each been rejected, yet
here we are again dealing with the project.
I remind you that just one year ago you received the executive
summary report in respect of the Pine Ridge corridor congestion
summary, and I'd specifically draw your attention to Page 21 of that
summary, and I quote from it. Determined that -- this is a direct
quotation from the report. "Determined that an interconnection of
Whippoorwill Lane and Marbella Lakes Drive would provide no
significant benefit in relieving future congestion within the Pine
Ridge corridor on its own. Improvements to all intersections within
the study are needed to resolve existing and future congestion
problems, regardless of whether an intersection is made," end of
quote.
Surely, the improvements to all interconnections within the
study area ought to be completed first and then the results assessed
before pursuing an interconnection of Whippoorwill Lane and
Marbella Lakes Drive.
Definitely, when a project of this significance is being
considered, the first and obvious step is to define a clear rationale for
it. In 2013, when this project was first under consideration, the
rationale was because it's in an original plan and it would ease traffic
flows on Pine Ridge and Livingston.
At that time the project was rejected. Subsequently a new
rationale was provided that could improve safety. What reasons are
now being put forward for the project? Apparently to improve safety,
reduce travel time, and reduce distance traveled. Pretty minor
April 9, 2019
Page 119
benefits, I suggest, would be derived from proceeding.
Please note when the recent consultation was held residents
were asked to express their preferences for various feat ures of the
proposed project. The questions put to the attendees were clearly
designed to elicit the responses that the proponents of the project
wanted. There was a glaring absence of any effort to explain the
potential negative aspects of the project, an extremely biased and
misleading exercise.
It's obvious that the reasons for the project are very poorly
defined and, therefore, keep changing. So in the absence of a clearly
expressed rationale for the project, it should be soundly rejected.
Please note that when the recent consultations were held,
residents were asked to express their preference for various features
of the proposed project. The questions put to the attendees were
clearly designed to elicit the responses the proponents wanted.
I ask you to step back and weigh the limited advantages of
proceeding with the project against the numerous negative outcomes.
I am confident that if you do so objectively, you must conclude that
the project does not have merit. I urge you to vote against the
recommendation to accept the interconnection study and to stop
throwing good taxpayer dollars after bad and put the project to bed
once and for all.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: That's enough, sir.
MR. WHITELY: It definitely belongs in the "not wanted" bin.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Sir.
MR. WHITELY: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Ken Fullam. He will be
followed by Tom Richards.
MR. FULLAM: Good afternoon. Thank you for your time.
My name is Ken Fullam. I'm a full-time resident of Marbella
April 9, 2019
Page 120
Lakes. As we all know, a representative government's primary
responsibility is safety and security. In fact, Collier County's own
strategic plan indicates, regarding quality of place, that, quote, "safety
should be at the forefront of the county's activities," end quote.
Specifically, the strategic goal is, quote, "to preserve and enhance the
safety, quality, value, character, and heritage of our neighborhoods,
communities, and region," end quote.
Community expectations in this strategic plan aim to preserve
and enhanced neighborhood character and promote safe and secure
neighborhoods. Listed under the heading of "Core Values and
Guiding Principles of Collier County," it states that you value and
embrace the opportunity and the responsibility to serve your
community and state that, quote, "customers come first," end quote.
The Marbella Lakes community was established almost 10 years
ago and has grown into a safe and quiet neighborhood. It is now an
established community that is secure, has increased its value, and has
developed the character of a quality community that is worth
preserving.
This project would result in a decline in the quality of life of the
residents of Marbella Lakes' 490 homes. A simple comparison of
area crime status and calls for service will tell you that.
The Whippoorwill extension will be a catalyst for increased
crime and traffic-related problems for our community. The result of
this project will be an increase in safety concerns as well as a decline
in value of its residential properties.
Building this road will only result in a negative outcome. The
safety and security of Marbella Lakes as well as the neighboring
communities can be maintained by avoiding construction of this
roadway.
As our elected leaders, you have the opportunity to follow your
strategic plan, to uphold your core values and your guiding
April 9, 2019
Page 121
principles, and you have the opportunity to achieve your strategic
goal by voting no on Whippoorwill extension.
We respectfully ask that you keep your commitment to your
community and the people you represent because it's the right thing
to do. Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Tom Richards. He'll be
followed by Meredith Doyle (sic).
MR. RICHARDS: Hi. My name is Tom Richards. I live at
Stratford Place. I've lived there since it opened up in 2005.
I've been on the board of Stratford Place since that same time all
the way up until now, and I'm a retired Collier County teacher.
I know a little bit about being on boards, and one of the main things
we do when we meet is to look for how you can serve the common
good of your community. And I know from following this board's
efforts that that's usually what they do. They've done a great job over
the years.
But with this project, I'm a little confused. Part of the
requirement for this project to go through is that a small piece of land
on the eastern side of Whippoorwill between Mariposia and Stratford
Place be developed for residential housing. That small narrow piece
of land is also occupied by high-voltage power lines. Anybody with
a computer or a smart phone can look up living under or around
high-voltage power lines, and you'll find tons of information
regarding the detriment this can have to people who reside there.
The minimum distance for anyone -- for a residential dwelling to
a high-voltage power line is 700 feet. There are sections of Stratford
and Mariposa right now that don't comply with that distance.
So in my mind, this project -- this project should have been stopped
dead just because of that. I know I heard Commissioner Fiala speak
before on the other item: Her main concern is for the safety of the
people who live in and around the project that is proposed. This
April 9, 2019
Page 122
makes it clear to me that there's no reason for this project at all if
we're going to put people in harm's way.
I would suggest if you want to go see that strip of land, go down
Whippoorwill -- to Whippoorwill, take a look at this line-of-sight
property, which houses high-voltage power lines.
MR. APPEL: Here it is.
MR. RICHARDS: Excuse me. I'm speaking.
All right. But I would suggest you go down there, and I would
suggest you go down there at 8 o'clock in the morning if you want to
see the connection already -- that already exists at Pine Ridge and
Whippoorwill. That will tell you we don't need any more traffic.
Also, when you're leaving that day, you make a turn west onto
Pine Ridge, you're approaching the intersection of Livingston and
Pine Ridge, look at the northeast corner. You'll see a line of pe ople
driving through the back of the Meridian shopping center because
they found out that it's a cut-through.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Okay, sir.
MR. RICHARDS: And ignore --
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Sir.
MR. RICHARDS: -- ignore --
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Red light's gone off. You're done.
MR. RICHARDS: You can ignore the signal.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Your point's made. Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Meredith Doyle. She'll be
followed by Lou Traina.
MS. DOUPE: Yes. I'm Meredith Nassif Doupe, and I live in
Mariposa, and I'm just going to speak to my experience as a mom and
working professional living off of Whippoorwill.
I have three daughters. There are many times that I have been in
situations where I have not been able to get out on Whippoorwill
because there has been accidents at Pine Ridge and Whippoorwill.
April 9, 2019
Page 123
There are many times, just because of the traffic on Whippoorwill
trying to take my daughters to school in the morning, that I'm backed
up past Avow Hospice or to Avow Hospice, and I can't get them out.
That poses especially a big concern for me, and I know that the
CEO of Avow expressed it as well. I have a daughter who has a heart
defect. And I know I'm not the only one that has concerns for their
children. I have other friends that live off that road. If I was giving
her CPR and waiting for an ambulance and it was at a high traffic
time of day, I don't know what would happen, okay. I don't know if
they would be able to get to her in a timely manner.
And I understand other people's concerns, but to me human live
should be the most important thing. And so I just wanted to express
that as a mom, as a professional who cares about her community very
much, who cares about the environment very much but most of all
cares about her children very much. Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Lou Traina. He will be
followed by Bill Korson.
MR. TRAINA: Thank you very much.
I just wanted to review the polling results that was presented a
little bit earlier just to put everything into pe rspective. We heard a lot
from Marbella, and I really congratulate the residents of Marbella for
showing up and speaking their voices and their beliefs.
Marbella represents 490 residents. You have another 1,482
residents that are out there. If you take a look at the polling survey,
which was really a good survey, has predictability, was done
professionally, if you just look at Marbella and Aviano, the
communities on Livingston Road, clearly you have scores of
81 percent for -- I'm sorry -- against the interconnection, and with
Aviano 55 percent against the interconnection.
But if you look at the other five communities, Mariposa you
have a very strong support of 61 percent in favor of the
April 9, 2019
Page 124
interconnection. Bella Vista you have 70 percent for the
interconnection. The Reserve, which for some reason wasn't
counted -- you've got 300 residents there -- I'm sure The Reserve is
all for this because the traffic is backed up to The Reserve at
8 o'clock in the morning. I can tell you that because I'm in it every
day.
Lucia, very strong support, 81 percent in favor of the
interconnection. Stratford we've heard from, but 64 percent of
Stratford are in favor of the interconnection and, of course, we heard
from Avow Hospice. I have photos here. I don't know if you -- worth
a thousand words. I mean, if you look at -- I'm happy to share these
with you, but if you just look at the backup, I don't know how you're
going to get an ambulance out of here when the road is backed up
right up to -- well, here we go. Give you this.
I mean, this is something you can only see when you're coming
out of Whippoorwill and leaving out in the morning. Could you
show the other one first. All right. This I took. Now, there are about
five cars behind me, and to my left is Avow Hospice. So I'm already
past The Reserve, So cars coming out of The Reserve. This is around
8 o'clock in the morning, actually five to 8. This is what you're
looking at.
As far as you could see is where the light would be, and you can
barely see the light. That's how far back -- it's well over an eighth of
a mile.
The second photograph is one that I took. This was the third
light that we hit. But you can see how the cars are -- they can't get
onto Pine Ridge because Pine Ridge is backed up. So you really do
have a traffic concern there that needs to be addressed. And if down
the road we are looking at putting -- doing something with Pine
Ridge, no left turn would be impossible. Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Bill Korson. He will be
April 9, 2019
Page 125
followed by Brian Ellenby.
MR. KORSON: Good afternoon, Mr. Chair and
Commissioners. My name is Bill Korson, and I'm the president of
the Aviano Master HOA. That's the old Balmoral PUD, which is
now closed.
Thank you for the opportunity to speak today and thank you
especially to Lorraine Lantz and her professional staff for their
presentation to our membership. They were able to schedule the
presentation on the day of our annual meeting, so the majority of
people had the opportunity at least to come.
The residents of Aviano will be greatly affected by this project,
as the road extension encompasses our entire eastern boundary and a
good portion of our southern boundary. We will experience,
obviously, increased traffic but also the noise and mess tha t
accompanies construction.
During Ms. Lantz's presentation, our residents were given the
opportunity to express themselves and actually vote. About half
objected to the project at that time, and I've given the Marbella
people their petition, which 25 of our residents have also signed.
But there's one thing that the residents of Aviano do agree on,
and that is that the concept plan with speed-reduction enhancements
was the only plan that was acceptable and that the less expensive
original plan should be totally rejected if reconsidered. We will not
support turning our eastern boundary into a dragstrip.
And if you talk to the Sheriff, they'll tell you that even
Livingston Road at times is used as a dragstrip by some of our
residents, which we just -- we just don't agree with that.
We know that -- I know that the thought of saving money --
because you represent the county. And getting a road and also
having money for other projects may be something that seems
appealing. But in this instance, without the speed-reduction
April 9, 2019
Page 126
enhancements, the Aviano residents absolutely reject the project.
As always, we look forward to working with the commissioners
and the professional staff on future projects. Thank you so much for
your time.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Brian Ellenby. He will be
followed by Christy Daggett.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: I don't see anybody moving, Troy.
MR. MILLER: All right. Christy Daggett will be followed by
Karen Allison.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Ms. Christy, is that you?
MS. DAGGETT: Christy.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Okie doke.
MR. MILLER: And she will be followed by Karen Allison.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Karen, if you'll come to this mike
over here, then we'll know everybody's here.
MS. DAGGETT: Hi. I'm here today to speak in favor of the
proposed expanded new plan.
I agree with you, Commissioner Taylor. I think for us on
Whippoorwill it will add value to our homes if we have the
roundabouts that slow down traffic, and it looks beautiful through
there, because right now Whippoorwill is a racetrack. I walk my dog
down that street every day, and 50 miles an hour is the normal.
Somebody passed me today at, like, 75. If I would've gotten my
phone out and time to video it, I would have loved to have shown you
that.
But not only do we have to worry about speed, but the dead -end
at Whippoorwill has become a trash dump. I can't tell you how many
times I have to call the county because people are dumping
dishwashers and garage doors and whatever they feel like doin g
down at the dead-end there, they're just dumping which, to me, looks
April 9, 2019
Page 127
horrible for us on Whippoorwill and brings down the county as a
whole.
My biggest concern is what will happen to our community if the
right-turn only off from Whippoorwill to Pine Ridge does happen. If
that happens to us, I feel like it will kill all of our property values.
It's going to be so hard to get in and out of there, and God forbid
there be an accident on Pine Ridge, because then we're blocked no
matter what way the accident happens on Pine Ridge Road between
75 and Whippoorwill. If there's an accident out there -- and we all
know there's accidents on Pine Ridge all the time in that specific
area -- we will not be able to go anywhere from Whippoorwill Lane
at that time.
So I just wanted to be here today to tell you all that I'm totally in
favor of this project, and I hope that it goes through.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Karen Allison. She will be
followed by Michael Kinghorn.
MS. ALLISON: Hi. My name is Karen Allison. I live in
Andalusia, which is off Whippoorwill, and I'm in complete support of
the extension.
Accidents on Whippoorwill have caused residents of all the
communities, including the visitors and employees of Avow, to be
trapped within or outside of their home for hours. During these times
it's impossible for fire, ambulance, police, or other welfare
responders to exit or enter to help anyone.
I believe the county is aware of the larger-than-average number
of severe accidents that occur at the Pine Ridge/Whippoorwill
intersection.
There is 1,210 units off Whippoorwill and only 490 in Marbella.
In the event of an evacuation, there is only one exit for all the
Whippoorwill communities, including the high-risk Avow patients.
April 9, 2019
Page 128
The numbers alone would support an additional exit for
Whippoorwill residents and Avow Hospice. When construction
begins on the long-term Pine Ridge project, our only exit will be
under contribution, further exacerbating the points above.
At the time of development of these communities, development
plans have always shown that Whippoorwill would be extended to
Livingston via the county-owned Marbella Drive. As a result, this
proposed extension should not come as a surprise to anyone.
While some owners in Marbella Lakes prefer to keep Marbella
Lakes Drive private and for the use of their residents only, it is, in
fact, public property and owned and maintained by all taxpayers, not
just Marbella residents.
The loud voices of a minority should not be able to drown out
the progress that supports the safety and well-being of so many other
communities and taxpayers. Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Michael Kinghorn. He
will be followed by Peter deMoore (sic).
MR. KINGHORN: Thank you to the Commission for allowing
us to have this input.
I hope you're weighing the fact that the general safety of the
public is affected in the way that I think all of us would rather exit on
Livingston than we would on Pine Ridge.
If you will consider the fact that -- oh, I appreciate the
Commission's study of this. I completely concur with Commissioner
Taylor who commended the planners for their comprehensive plan
and for their objectivity in this.
It's a little lonely in here today. I want to extend an invitati on to
any of my neighbors in Marbella to drive on Whippoorwill anytime
you wish, and I'll promise you that I won't ever do any idle Sunday
driving on Marbella Lakes, but -- Marbella -- thank you. Thank you
very much. And come drive Whippoorwill anytime y ou wish, and
April 9, 2019
Page 129
thank you for the opportunity.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Peter deMoore. He will be
followed by Casey Lucius.
MR. deMOOSE: My name is Peter deMoose. I live in Stratford
Place. I am a seasonal resident, and we live there seven months of
the year, which means I live there for more time than up north.
The study results that we keep hearing about, the most recent
study results, always seem to be held when seasonal residents are not
around, so we don't get to say anything.
Last year I was at the meeting at Hawthorne with the Planning
Department, and what I found very fascinating was that a
representative from the Planning Department of the county told me,
and I quote, we don't care what you think or want, we are going to
build the extension. I find that to be -- telling me everything I need to
know, that the county does not care about the residents, and what
they think -- they're going to build it because they wish to build it.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Thank you, sir.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Casey Lucius. She will be
followed by Carrie Filthaut.
MS. LUCIUS: Good afternoon. Thank you for listening to the
public comments.
Everything I've heard today sounds like personal preference.
We all have our personal preference of what we hope will happen,
and I suspect that the only objective report you're going to receive is
the report from the staff, because they spent months collecting
information, collecting data, surveying businesses, surveying the
community, the residents who live on those streets, and they came to
a conclusion that was based on data, not based on personal
preference.
And it would be my hope that as our representatives you would
April 9, 2019
Page 130
make a decision based on data. Please accept the staff
recommendation.
Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Mr. Chairman, your final speaker on this item is
Carrie Filthaut. She's been ceded additional time from Brian
Daugherty. Could you raise your hand to indicate you're here?
(Raises hand.)
MR. MILLER: Also Jerry Ferguson.
(Raises hand.)
MR. MILLER: And also Donald Hogan.
(Raises hand.)
MR. MILLER: Ms. Filthaut will have a total of 12 minutes.
MS. FILTHAUT: Good afternoon, Commissioners. Some of
you know me. I've been in this town for a long time. I have worked
in numerous law firms through town. I have been a resident of
Naples, Collier County for over 35 years. I grew up here.
At the time that I got here, we used to go out off of Power Line
Road, we would go three-wheeling. We went on swamp buggies.
We had all kinds of fun in this town, but things go, they change, we
get development.
And I stand here today and I listened to people who have come
after me, and they want to keep now their little piece of paradise and
stop the development because they're here; they're good now. I
wanted to do that 35 years ago. I wanted it to stay the way Naples
really was when it was a quaint little town.
I think that the changes that have come about in this town, although
sad in some ways, I think growth is important.
I bought in Andalusia after having worked in the law firm that
did the original zoning and platting for most of that area, so I'm very
well aware of the fact that when it was developed, that road was
intended to extend between Whippoorwill to Livingston. Marbella
April 9, 2019
Page 131
Lakes, when they were developed in 2006, got developer credits. I've
heard it's in excess of a million dollars. It would be interesting to see
where that money came from -- should you get to keep your own
little piece of paradise or our little conservation or preservation area,
it would be nice to know where my tax dollars are coming back.
I have been trapped inside my community -- there was one very
large wreck, but that's not the only time that I've been trapped on
Whippoorwill. I am trapped in the mornings when I go to work.
Pine Ridge is so difficult to get onto, you'll sit and you'll watch the
light turn green from a distance three times only to get to the very
beginning where your entering Pine Ridge to not be able to use the
green light because there's already traffic in front of you that ran the
light on Pine Ridge trying to make the light. You can't even get in
once you get a green.
We do not have access out of our community that's easy in the
mornings nor coming home at night. If you try to get in the right turn
lane into Whippoorwill, you're backed up into Pine Ridge traffic
sometimes. It is an issue.
The roundabout feature I think is the only feature. I agree with
the gentleman from Aviano. That street -- Whippoorwill is treated
like a complete raceway. I agree that roundabouts will calm people.
I think it will not have -- I do not foresee a lot of people using it as a
cut-through. If it's going to have roundabouts and slowing effects,
there's no reason anybody would want to go on that road.
It's intended to reach residential areas. There are no businesses
there. Avow Hospice is there, but every other business is on the
corner. It's directly off of Pine Ridge. So I don't think we're going to
have such an increase of traffic that it would be at issue.
When people in my community bought, while everybody in
Marbella Lakes was -- all 400-and-some owners were told that -- in
their purchase agreement it was stated that they -- this was going to
April 9, 2019
Page 132
happen. This extension was part of those plans. And I did work in
the law firms that handled the work. This was in the plans that
changed, that this was going to be in there, and it also stated that
noise mitigation would not be a factor.
So I believe, while most people would be arguing the noise
mitigation, you've come up with the preserve area and the sanctuary
items because it's not arguable with noise.
The logic isn't even clear. When this came around in 2013, my
owners were shocked and dismayed that the commission did not pass
it. They were shocked because they were aware. All of the thousand
and some owners that bought off of Whippoorwill were aware that
this is a county-owned road. We don't understand why a group of
people can keep it as their private playground. So all of us are sitting
here asking, why is it more important for them than us?
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Please -- hold a second, please.
MS. FILTHAUT: Sure.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: I'm going to ask this. She has sat
here quietly and afforded you the respect. I expect the same out of
you.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: We didn't attack her. She is
attacking us.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Please, sir, let her finish.
MS. FILTHAUT: As I stated, my owners were upset, and they
were surprised that this did not pass initially. You had an outpouring
of people that it seems the same argument over and over again in a
small -- it's a small group. It's a distant (sic) group. That's normal in
any HOA. I've been the president of my HOA since turnover. You
want a big crowd to show up, give them something the y're upset
about.
So our people, believing this was going to go through, did not
show up, did not cause a fuss. They assumed it was a done deal.
April 9, 2019
Page 133
I had a conversation this morning with the president of Mariposa who
today on the phone told me, after reviewing all of the materials that
she received, she wasn't worried; that there was no way that the
Board would disapprove this. She's basing it on the facts.
And as Casey Lucius said, we would like you to look at the data.
We would like to stick to the facts, and the facts are that there's an
agreement that county has on record that this road was going to
happen. I bought my house in Andalusia expecting this to happen, as
did all of the other owners in there.
I believe that if this does not go forward and there ever would be
a catastrophe such as a fire jumping a road or any way where we
couldn't get out, county wouldn't just be facing screaming people
about preservation areas; they would be dealing with heirs of people
that died in a fire or died in the catastrophe, and they would be
having to answer complaints against the county for not doing the
work that should have been done six years ago or more.
I would like to thank you very much for your consideration. I
hope that you will -- I sincerely hope that you will, for the benefit,
safety, health, and welfare of everybody that lives along that corridor,
to vote in favor of this project.
And I would like to add that I think county did a remarkable job
when they presented. I have never once told them anything was a
done deal. The only thing that's ever come close is when they're
looking at the one for Pine Ridge -- at Whippoorwill and Pine Ridge,
they just say there's not a plan we can figure out other than what
we've got right here. So thank you for your time.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Thank you very much.
MR. MILLER: Mr. Chairman, I do have one other slip, Ron
Resick, and that is your last speaker.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: You promise?
MR. MILLER: I hope so, sir.
April 9, 2019
Page 134
MR. RESICK: Good afternoon. Thank you all for serving our
county. I'm Ron Resick of Marbella Lakes.
Decades ago the boss and I stood in front of senior
congressional leaders to discuss an analysis. On that day, the great
Max said, honest analysts can disagree.
I've been a lifelong analyst at the senior level of government,
most recently at MIT. I do disagree with your analysis.
The traffic analysis in this report was based on one day's data
collection. It was then extrapolated to 365 days and beyond. It even
projects to future years. This glossy report with all of its charts and
diagrams stems from one data collection effort. Mathematically
weak, academically fluffy.
The narrow road with traffic circles to slow traffic will somehow
enable better speed from first responders. You just posted such an
article last week; thus, these become the smartest traffic circles in
history. They slow normal cars and trucks and will allow first
responders to go faster.
The latter better be right, because we're betting, as you are, our
very lives on it. So when we call, these great first responders will
haul. They should get to us faster than ever. We sure hope this is the
case.
The proposed added traffic light at Whippoorwill and Livingston
will stop traffic. That's what traffic lights do. For staff and others
who believe this will have no impact on Livingston Road, they need
to think again. This light will simply become the one you removed
up at Pine Ridge and Livingston. Tax money spent to remove and
now replace.
With no additional housing planned beyond the much-discussed
60 condos, how does car volume increase over a decade, as this study
suggests? If this isn't a cut-through, how do more cars appear?
The flawed one exit only from Whippoorwill onto Pine Ridge must
April 9, 2019
Page 135
look at three additional roads. Larson near Burger King and two
others complete with left-turn lanes from Pine Ridge into
Whippoorwill are west of Whippoorwill. I've driven the area. All
are used now on a daily basis and must be known to folks in the area.
So there are multiple exits.
If this project's approved, the money will be spent, the
environment will be uprooted and damaged, and the abundant
wildlife impacted; some likely destroyed. Narrow roads, lower
speeds, and added stoplight, questionable traffic circle use, and a
damaged environment make this suspect.
Our communities' lives depend on your commitment to fast first
responder support. Thank you all very much.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Thank you, sir.
MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, I think our court reporter's ready.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Do we want to deliberate and then
take a break or take a break and then come back and vote?
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: What I would prefer, if you're
asking the question is, let's finish this item.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: I'm thinking we should. Can you
hold on for a minute?
THE COURT REPORTER: Yes.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: She's looking good, though. She's
got the color back. She lost her color there for a minute, but now
she's back.
Commissioner Fiala, you're first.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay, fine. I've listened to
everybody, I've listened to the emotions, I've listened to the facts, I've
heard staff's presentation, and I tell you, I've watched this through the
years, and it's a good project. It's a good project, and I make a
motion to approve the project.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: And I'll second that motion.
April 9, 2019
Page 136
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Commission Saunders?
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I'm going to support the motion. These decisions are never easy, but
I'm looking at the map. It's Page 216 of our agenda packet. And
looking at the connection at Whippoorwill and looking at the
connection at Marbella Lakes and Livingston, and I really don't see
where we have any alternative.
You've got hundreds of units that have access only to Pine Ridge
on Whippoorwill and, obviously, hundreds of units that have access
only to Livingston off Marbella Lakes. I just don't see any
rationale -- and I was trying to find one. I don't see any rationale for
turning this down.
I think staff, with the improvements that you've talked about in
terms of slowing traffic, I think you've gone above and beyond to try
to protect the neighborhoods, and I think our completion of this
project will actually benefit. There are going to be some folks that
aren't going to like it, but I think the vast majority will benefit
tremendously from this, so I'm going to support the motion.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Commissioner Taylor?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Can we address the
environmental issue? Because there are drainage ditches there that
do attract birds. Now, we have those kind of birds in every drainage
ditch that I've gone through through Collier County.
Can we address what seems to be, I think -- let's just address the
environmental issue.
MS. LANTZ: So we would have to go out to revise the
environmental permit, but we would be leaving the ditch as it is, but
there would be an environmental permit that would have to be
acquired. But the ditch would stand. We would have to go -- make a
culvert to go over it for the road to -- or for one of the roundabouts to
go over it.
April 9, 2019
Page 137
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: And so the water that attracts
those birds and the otters would remain?
MS. LANTZ: Yes.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Thank you.
MS. LANTZ: And so would the shared-use path on that side as
well.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: And the shared-use path. Thank
you.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: There's been a motion and a second
we accept staff's recommendation for the interconnection. All in
favor?
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Opposed same sign, same sound.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: So moved.
Now we will take a 10-minute break and be back at -- 10
minutes from now.
(A brief recess was had.)
MR. OCHS: Mr. Chair, you have a live mic.
Item #2D - Added
ARTIST OF THE MONTH – HILDA CHAMPION
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Yes, I do. And "jeepers creepers"
April 9, 2019
Page 138
came out of me. Did you get that at the beginning?
Before we go any further, I was remiss this morning when we
had a full crowd. I want to announce the featured artist of the month
is our Collier County resident Hilda Champion, and just to -- because
I didn't have it at the beginning, I will say it again at our second
meeting this month.
Hilda was born and raised in Europe but sent much of her --
spent much of her adult life traveling around the globe. Those travels
provided her with opportunities to experience and appreciate the arts
found in many different cultures.
Hilda discovered photography late in her life and is primarily
self-taught. Her aspiration in photography is less about showing the
world as it is but rather to help people see the unseen. She describes
her images as based on true fantasy.
Hilda's work has been shown in national and international
exhibitions, and her images have won numerous awards and
accolades.
And if you have a moment, please, forgive me for not announcing it
sooner, but take a moment and view her art that's displayed in the
back of our chambers. So now we may proceed.
MR. OCHS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I'm kind of looking at registered public speakers on different items so
we can get people in and out of here.
Item #11B
RESOLUTION 2019-63: A RESOLUTION THAT
CONCEPTUALLY APPROVES THE ISSUANCE OF A
TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS (TDR) CREDIT TO
PRIVATE PROPERTY OWNERS LOCATED WITHIN THE
PRIMARY/SECONDARY FLOWWAY OF COLLIER COUNTY
April 9, 2019
Page 139
COMPREHENSIVE WATERSHED IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
WHO WILL VOLUNTARILY ENCUMBER THEIR LAND WITH
A FLOWWAY EASEMENT/AGREEMENT TO ALLOW THE
FLOW OF THIS RE-HYDRATION WATER ACROSS THEIR
PROPERTY AND TO DIRECT STAFF TO INCLUDE CHANGES
TO THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN WITH THE RURAL
FRINGE MIXED USE RESTUDY AMENDMENTS TO THE
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN – ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: I think the next one is Item 11B. This is a
recommendation to approve a resolution conceptually approving the
issuance of a transfer of development right credit to private property
owners located within a primary or secondary flowway related to the
Collier County Comprehensive Watershed Improvement Project, and
I'll ask Mr. McAlpin, your Coastal Zone Management director, to
present.
MR. McALPIN: Thank you, Leo.
For the record, Gary McAlpin, Coastal Zone Management.
So I want to start off by giving you a quick overview, a
refresher, if you would, on what we're trying to do with the
Comprehensive Watershed Improvement Program. We have a
number of major goals on this program and that have been looked at
and studied and agreed to over the last 15 years. The first is to reduce
freshwater flows into Naples Bay. The second is to rehydrate the
about 10,000 acres of Picayune Strand State Forest.
We want -- then we want to restore additional freshwater flows
into Rookery Bay and improve water quality throughout the system.
And we intend to do that, if you look at here -- if we start up here on
the visualizer, you see that we're up in the 305 area. We'll tap into
the Golden Gate Canal system, and we'll have a pump station there,
and we'll pump the water down onto 75, and it will cross 75 with the
April 9, 2019
Page 140
existing culverts that we have on 75, and we'll take it to a new pump
station which will be on the south side of 75, and we'll pump it down
through a spreader swale into the Picayune Strand State Forest.
This area right in through here is about 10,000 acres, and the
flowway will be to the southwest at this point in time. That's the
natural flowway of the area. This area right in through here is 6Ls.
We're going to stay away from 6Ls. This red line that you see right
in through here is the federal project, okay. So with the federal
project, we definitely want to stay away from the federal project,
because they're flowing water to the south at the same time.
We'll come in here through Winding Cypress in and around the
existing development in through there. We'll go through -- we'll go
under 41. We may have to have some -- when we go through and do
the study with 41, we may have to go through and do some of the
work on the study under 41 with the culverts, and we ultimately get
to this area right in through here, which is Rookery Bay.
So now that I messed up the map, okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Where was 6Ls again, Gary?
MR. McALPIN: 6Ls is right here.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
MR. McALPIN: This is the 6Ls development, and we want to
stay away from 6Ls.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: You better erase that.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Yeah, you better start --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: The map looks cute, though.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I want to move approval.
MR. McALPIN: Okay. So with this --
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I'd like to motion that we move
approval of this. This is probably some of the most exciting,
progressive, far-thinking into the future what we need to do with this
land.
April 9, 2019
Page 141
MR. McALPIN: We've made a -- we've made -- you've been
very fortunate -- we've been very fortunate with the County
Commissioners' support in this issue.
What we want to do at this point in time is talk about the TDRs,
and we can't really move -- Commissioner, if you'd like me to
continue or we can --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, I'd like to second her motion.
MR. OCHS: We do have a couple registered speakers, I believe,
Mr. Chairman, on this item.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Okay.
MR. MILLER: Yes, sir. We have two registered speakers.
Clarence Tears.
MR. McALPIN: Clarence had to leave us because he --
MR. MILLER: I did not think I saw him.
Bill Barton?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Had enough fun for the day; is that
what it is, Gary?
MR. McALPIN: He had to run for the day, but we do have Bill
here. And what we're trying to do -- Bill is president of the Florida
Land Preservation Trust, and we're trying to work with the
Preservation Land Trust on a public/private partnership to help us
with the area of the people that are in the middle of here and work
with them jointly with Bill and his group to help us secure the TDR
easements in this location.
MR. BARTON: Thank you, Gary.
Good afternoon, Chairman McDaniel, Commissioners. For the
record, my name is Bill Barton, long-time resident of Collier County,
and I'm here in my capacity today as president of Southwest Florida
Land Preservation Trust.
I learned a long time ago that when you think you've got the
majority vote on your side, quit talking. I'm going to risk it and talk a
April 9, 2019
Page 142
little bit. I don't want to change anybody's mind, though.
You all are fully aware that our Land Preservation Trust has
been a key player in the Gordon River Greenway from its inception,
from its concept plan, up to today when we are building the very last
segment of that greenway. Our trust raised the money for that. We're
currently under contract with Manhattan to do that.
As a consequence, our board is looking at something in which
we have been very involved for a long time, but we're seeing the end
of it and, as a consequence, our board has looked carefully at Collier
County and said, where else can we be helpful?
We think that we can be very helpful by supporting Collier
County, your staff, this commission, primarily in the coastal zone
water management issues with an emphasis on the restoration of
Naples Bay.
Gary has already mentioned to you that this project is one of the
key projects in helping us to restore Naples Bay by taking that
freshwater flow out of it during the July, August, September months
every year.
You've probably noticed just recently the City of Naples is
going to try to introduce some new oyster beds in the Naples Bay. I
sincerely hope that's successful but, candidly, I have my doubts.
Oysters survive in a very strict limit of saline up and down. And
when you get that flow in the Naples Bay every year and dramatically
lower the salinity of that bay, I think it's going to be very hard for
those oyster beds to be successful, or any other method of restoring
that bay.
So I'm very, very encouraged by -- and I hope you will support
your staff's recommendation today, because this is a little key point
of how to keep this project moving forward. Thank you for your
time.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Thank you, William.
April 9, 2019
Page 143
MR. MILLER: That was your final speaker, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: I don't have anybody else lit up, so
I'm going to speak. And I want you to come back to the podium, sir,
Gary, please.
I've got reservations about this process. I wanted to know how
many landowners -- homeowners in this area that's been designated
as a potential flowway. I want to know how you propose to assure
them -- because the way I'm reading this, this is a voluntary program
they have to apply for to then, in fact, receive the TDR for this right
for us to flow water over their lands; am I correct in that regard?
MR. McALPIN: That is correct.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Okay. And so -- and I want to say
this to my colleagues; I want to say this to the world: Everybody
knows that there's too much freshwater coming out of the main canal
system heading into the Naples Bay, period, the end.
But I don't see enough effort upstream in maintaining and
keeping the water out of the main canal system coming out of Easte rn
Collier County from other agencies that are out there, in fact, that
have capacities to assist with this without us putting a pump system
in and pumping water uphill to another canal system to be able to get
it in and then sheet-flow it down through here, number one.
Number two, I'm having issues with the District's necessities or
incapacities to run -- that's the Big Cypress Basin District's capacities
to run the east/west pumps that are out in the Picayune State Forest
because they don't have the southwest protection structure built
around 6Ls on the south end of this project. They can't run those
east/west pumps yet, and we're looking at flowing water right straight
down through there as well.
MR. McALPIN: Mr. Chair, if I may, so you're -- we have --
we're talking about the primary flowway and the secondary flowway.
The primary flowway is highlighted in green, and the secondary
April 9, 2019
Page 144
flowway -- we call it secondary because we think we may in some
areas impact that flowway in through there.
Most of that area is -- as you know, is publicly owned, but there
are about 100 private parcels in that flowway, and about 50 parcels
that we -- may be considered critical, okay, and that's a very
conservative position that we have relative to this issue.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: The definition of critical is?
MR. McALPIN: Well, that they would be -- we would have to
do something with them either to -- either through an engineer around
them or get an easement across their property.
We could -- it would be -- it would be more important for us to
deal with that. They could potentially make the project more difficult
for us if they didn't -- we wouldn't work -- they wouldn't work with
us on allowing us to flow water across their property.
And when we talk about flow water, we're really not talking
about sheet flow. We're really talking about increasing the hydration
just a little bit, okay, during -- typically, they would have wet
weather -- wet soil three months out of the year. We may increase
that by another three months out of the year, so we need to put that in
perspective.
So right now most of those properties are tied up into the TDR
program that we currently have.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: It's currently mostly designated as
sending area. I'm aware of that.
MR. McALPIN: Right. There are approximately 12 -- excuse
me. There are approximately 25 that are not in the TDR program at
all. What we want to do is entice them with this program that if they
allow us to flow water across their property, then we can give them a
TDR. That doesn't mean that they change ownership of their
property for that. It just means that for allowing us to flow water or
rehydrate their property, additional water coming onto their property,
April 9, 2019
Page 145
we get an additional TDR. That's what we're trying to accomplish
with here.
We've had so many engineering studies on this that have said
that, yes, we need to take water out of Naples Bay. We need to
rehydrate Rookery Bay, which is a co-sponsor of this and rehydrate
this area, that, you know, everybody agrees that this is the right thing
to do.
We've worked with the Water Management District, and we will
continue to permit and model that area up front to see what are the
right quantities of water that can be bypassed through here.
So we want to start the discussion with the property owners,
Mr. Chair, and we don't want there to be any surprises. We're going
to take this back. This is a conceptual approval if we want to bring it
back at some time in the fall as part of the RFMUD, the land
development program that is coming up to the Board.
So that's what we're trying to accomplish here. And I'll answer
any of your questions.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: All right. Then let's just say this.
I'm going to say this out loud: We haven't approved the TDR
program, the rural fringe update as it currently sits now where there's
an enormous amount of dysfunctionality within that land-use plan
overall, and you're asking me to conceptually approve creating more
TDRs in an area that we're designating as a flowway.
I understand, in concept, that this is a good idea to reduce the
amount of freshwater flow into the Naples Bay, but I'm not
satisfied -- I'm going to vote to approve this in concept today, but I
need to be assured that there's value for these TDRs that we're
offering to these folks for the taking of these rights.
I need to be able -- and that's only going to be accomplished by
the solidification and the vestiture that comes along with the existent
Rural Fringe Mixed Use District, and I also want to see upstream
April 9, 2019
Page 146
efforts from other agencies going on other than this to reduce the
amount of flow coming out of our canal systems in Eastern Collier
County.
There has been no move by the Basin or the District for any kind of
upstream retention/detention, foot storage, or anything in capacities
that are available upstream. I know it. So there you go.
MR. McALPIN: We have talked to them. We can work with
them, and we could -- when we bring this back at the time of
approval, we certainly can have that information for you.
But, Mike, do you want to talk about the TDR program and the
value of the TDRs right now?
MR. BOSI: Mike Bosi, Planning and Zoning director.
If you can remember back when -- the last time we spoke about some
of the issues that we've identified with the TDR program, it was --
and it was related to a credit imbalance, we looked at it, we said the
amount of credits that could be generated is basically about a third of
what we think we're going to need entitle the development within the
receiving area.
So we knew going into our amendment process for the Rural
Fringe Mixed Use District that we were going to have to create
additional TDRs to be able to balance the system to make the system
more functional.
This proposal would add, at the very most, a potential 500
additional TDRs, which is only about 5 percent of the overall total
that we project that we're going to need. And what it does as well is
it furthers the principles that are contained within the sending area.
This entire area we're talking about where this water easement would
be allotted for the TDRs is all within the sending area, and the
primary purpose of that sending area is to restore your environmental
qualities and, most certainly, the water flow and the water resources
is a huge part within that.
April 9, 2019
Page 147
So we think it hits two individual areas that we want to promote
within the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District, and as we go about
recalibrating the TDRs, this will be a portion of the TDRs that we're
going to propose as additions to help with the balancing of the effort.
So we really do see it as opportunities for a win from the Rural
Fringe Mixed Use District Program but also overall from an overall
water management standpoint. So we think we can -- when we bring
those amendments back to you late fall, early winter, we'll be able to
demonstrate to you how this fits soundly within the overall program.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: I understand that.
And I guess my last question -- thank you, Michael. You did
answer my questions. I did have a question on the existing TDR
program and how many TDRs are being offered up here.
Do the people that live out here know that there's been a flowway laid
over their land?
MR. McALPIN: This is what we wanted to have -- to start the
discussions for, Commissioner. We want to be able to -- we want
to -- after this conceptual approval, we want to have a public
workshop where we bring everybody together, all the property
owners, we discuss this, we show them what the program looks like,
and we start to talk about with them who's in, who's not in, how this
will be rolled out.
So we wanted to get your conceptual approval of an additional
TDR before we went out to the property owners and had that
discussion with the property owners, and this is why this is coming
before you now.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: So no, they don't know, necessarily,
that we've designated this area as a flowway?
MR. McALPIN: We've not had any public meetings to talk
about, with the private property owners, the 50 or so that are in the
primary flowway, at this point in time. We wanted to have Board
April 9, 2019
Page 148
approval before we did that.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: So there's been a motion and a
second to accept staff's recommendation. I don't need to be -- I don't
need to beat this anymore. I mean, I've already said that I'm going to
support it now in concept.
I have to say that it's a little bit backwards for me as far as the
property owners that are impacted by this overlay.
I, again, Mr. Barton, know well the necessity for the reduction
of the flow that we have coming out into Naples Bay. I'm all over
that. I have been voting for that premise and that reduction ever since
it started to come forward, and your efforts on that committee have
been amazing -- have done amazing for our community. I'm
concerned about this as a process just because of the process.
All in favor?
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Opposed same sign, same sound.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: So moved.
MR. McALPIN: Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Item #14A1
THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, ACTING AS
THE COLLIER COUNTY AIRPORT AUTHORITY, APPROVE
AND ADOPT THE AIRPORT LAYOUT PLAN (ALP) AND
ASSOCIATED NARRATIVE UPDATE FOR THE IMMOKALEE
REGIONAL AIRPORT - MOTION TO ACCEPT AND APPROVE
April 9, 2019
Page 149
THE IMPROVEMENT PLAN – APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, Mr. Chairman, if I can, I'd like to
move now to Item 14A1 under your Airport Authority. This is a
recommendation that the Board, acting as the Airport Authority,
approve and adopt the airport layout plan and associated narrative
update for the Immokalee Regional Airport.
Mr. Lobb will present.
MR. LOBB: Commissioners, good afternoon. For the record,
Justin Lobb, your airports manager with the Collier County Airport
Authority. Here before you this afternoon to discuss the findings and
recommendation of our airport layout plan narrative also known as
the airport's master plan for the Immokalee Regional Airport.
I'm here with Anna Merin (phonetic), our senior planner with
Atkins North America, the county's consultant for this project. She
has led this project from conception through the current nearly final
phase. She's going to walk you through what has occurred as a res ult
of this nearly two years long planning initiative that was
commissioned by this board in late 2016, and that was to refresh
plans that were last updated for the airport in 2009.
And as we know, much has changed since that time, particularly
out in Eastern Collier. Recognizing the airport is a vital economic
engine for the community, the future. Growth and development does
start with a solid planning framework, with input from community
and stakeholders, which is what we've done every step of the way and
what we're doing here today.
Now, before I turn it over to Anna, I just want to outline a few
brief highlights and accomplishments of the airport over the last few
years and some of these items that were outlined in the 2009 master
plan that were executed.
Several years back we completed a massive reconstruction of
April 9, 2019
Page 150
our primary east/west runway, 927, that was followed shortly
thereafter by the parallel taxiway bravo. Both areas were original
World War II pavement and, as you may know, the Board also
authorized acceptance of an FDOT grant to commence design for the
reconstruction of our secondary northwest -- excuse me, north/south
runway, also original pavement.
We've invested significant capital into facility and equipment
upgrades at the airport; that includes a new state-of-the-art weather
system, revenue generating equipment, replacement of aging
maintenance vehicles. We've welcomed new businesses at the
airport, and we're in discussions with several new entities that are
looking to call Immokalee Airport home.
We do continue to see, year over year, record fuel sales at the
airport, and that includes FY '18, which was up approximately
14 percent over the previous year, and we do expect to beat those
numbers again in FY '19.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Congratulations.
MR. LOBB: And, finally, something we're particularly proud
of. The airport itself, Immokalee Airport, in addition to the Airport
Authority organization as a whole, it is self-sufficient on an operating
basis, meaning we do no longer rely on a taxpayer contribution to
subsidize the ongoing operations now. We're not quite there in terms
of requiring county participation for capital projects and match
requirements, and some of those projects will be outlined here for
you shortly.
So with that, we're very excited to turn this over. And, Anna, I
will hand it off to you.
MS. MERIN: So for the record, my name is Anna Merin with
Atkins North America, as Justin stated.
So thank you, ladies and gentlemen of the Board and those of
the public that are here today, because I'm excited to present to you
April 9, 2019
Page 151
the findings for the final draft of the airport master plan at
Immokalee.
So, first of all, I'll throw this term around a lot in the
presentation, but what is an airport layout plan? It's a really
important guidance document for the airport, for the community, as
well as for the federal government and the DOT. And this plan really
graphically depicts the existing facilities at the airport; it also takes a
look at what are the future plans for the airport as well and overlays
those two elements.
Without an FAA and FDOT-approved airport layout plan, the
airport and the community does not have access to federal grant
funding, so it's definitely -- and state grant funding, so it's a major
priority for the airport to have one of these approved plans on file.
So the components of this and how the process typically goes when
developing this plan, first it started with an examination of the
existing assets, so a base-lining process, what the airport has and
what are its infrastructure deficiencies and assets.
The next process is now that we know where we are, we have to
do a forecast for the future, so we take a look at the future operational
footprint of the airport. And then after a careful comparison of those
two, we decide some development alternatives that will meet the
needs for the future.
Finally, we end up with a phased style interpretation of what the
proposed development will be. So when do things actually need to
happen. And then, finally, after all of that we come up with a capital
improvement for the airport. So we figure out how much these
infrastructure and development projects will cost and how could they
potentially be paid for. So we identify those funding streams that are
available to the airport.
So to get an idea of overall project schedule, where we stand
today, we have gone through each of those steps already. We are sort
April 9, 2019
Page 152
of in the final draft format of that master plan and aiming for
adoption very soon.
Throughout that process, we have gone through public outreach,
and I'll outline some of the ways we did that sort of later in the
presentation.
As for each of these elements, I'm going to run through quickly
and just tell you about the highlights of each of these; what were the
primary findings of each of these stages of the project, because they
have sort of -- each of those are critical to where we ended up at the
end.
So to start off, the base-lining process, this is where we take a
very critical look at the airport facilities themselves. We do site
visits, data reviews, things of that nature. We look at the runways,
their condition, the roadways, their condition, land-use airspace, all
of those elements and create a major baseline.
Major findings of this is that, you know, the airport has some
assets, you know, like, the primary runway, 927, that are in excellent
condition, and some that are much older and slated for, you know,
reaching the end of their useful life.
Another primary finding of this is that Immokalee Regional
Airport has a major asset in the developable land available. Many
communities, especially coastal communities, with airports the size
of Immokalee Regional are really closing out in their developable
space, so this does represent a land development opportunity.
So some additional base-lining information, I think that
historical footprint and the historical view of what's been happening
at the airport over the past 10 to 15 years is very important to take a
look at.
So on the left-hand side we have a graph here that is the based
aircraft for Immokalee Regional Airport, and this really gives an
interesting footprint. And, obviously, there is a big dip in there that --
April 9, 2019
Page 153
it kind of reflects some different timing, some economic downturns,
which really disproportionately affected general aviation as a whole.
Aircraft ownership especially went down quite a bit in that time.
And you'll see that sort of mirrored on the right with the fuel
sales graphic as well.
But Immokalee not being a towered airport, we don't have a
very specific count operationally of what's happening out there
day -to-day, so we have to look at more anecdotal evidence to
establish a baseline for operational performance out there.
So fuel sales is actually an excellent way to track the level of
operations that are happening at an airport. And as Justin had stated,
the airport has seen significant increases in their fuel sales in the past
five years at the airport.
And most notably what's interesting about this graphic on the
right is how much those fuel sales have increased in a jet sales
market. That's for aircraft that are high performance. They typically
have jet engines or turboprop engines, and so they're a bit larger than
the typical very small general aviation aircraft. We have seen a
marketable climb in fuel sales for those type of aircraft at the airport.
So all of this kind of gets wrapped together. We also bring in
information on other key performance indicators, things that could
affect aviation in the operational footprint of the airport.
Things -- elements -- or additional elements that we analyze:
We take a look at per capita income in the community, in the region
as a whole, population growth, and we come up with three separate
forecasts. One for the based aircraft at the airport. This is how many
aircraft are going to live at the airport. This is a critical forecast
element because it really tells us what kind of facilities we're going to
need and how big they need to be. This tells us how many hangars
we'll need, how many -- you know, apron space and how big those
hangers should be.
April 9, 2019
Page 154
Next we need some information on aircraft operations. This
helps us to ensure -- this number gives us an indication of what will
happen -- how many aircraft are going to take off, land, or do touch
and goes at the airport in a yearly fashion.
And then, finally, we have aircraft fleet mix. Fleet mix is
absolutely critical, because it tells us how big these aircraft are going
to be that are coming in and gives us an indication of that.
So for the forecast for this master plan, we did find that there
was an average annual growth rate of 1.35 percent, which is typical
of the region itself. So a lot of other airports in the region are seeing
an operational growth rate of that scale, with getting us up to around
48,400 operations per year by 2037. That is the forecast period. It's a
20-year period.
So this forecast of critical aircraft, that's what types of aircraft
we anticipate to be flying into Immokalee within that forecast perio d.
This has a really specific definition from a federal standpoint, and
so -- that we have to stick to and forecast to, and that is any aircraft
that makes substantial use of the facility, which means at least 500
operations a year. That means 500 takeoffs or landings per year.
And we take a look at those characteristics of those aircraft and
design the facilities to them. Now, this doesn't mean that the airport's
restricted for aircraft larger than this critical aircraft. It's just what it
is designed to. So it in no way limits from larger aircraft being able
to operate there. And this will determine the size of runways,
taxiways, and things like that.
So the existing critical aircraft is the one on the left there. That's
a King Air 200. It's a turboprop aircraft. We typically see it in
commuter and -- commuter and charter-style operations.
For the future, though, really tied to that jet aircraft sales and the
trends that we're seeing there, while the size of the overall aircraft we
don't anticipate to increase significantly, we do think the type is
April 9, 2019
Page 155
really going to make a change -over, which does have significant
performance differences in the future.
So after we have that baseline and we have the future, we have
to sort of overlay the two to see where the deficiencies lie for the
future. What are we going to have to do to meet the needs of the
future at the airport? And this graphic really shows kind of
combining those two elements.
What you see on the right is a graph of what's called annual
service volume or the capacity of the airport itself, the runways, the
taxiways, some of the most expensive infrastructure that's out there.
And there's -- so the baseline for this airport in the gray is actually --
this is how many aircraft or operations the airport can accommodate
over a one-year period without encountering significant delay.
We don't, obviously, want to hit that number ever. So for a
good planning metrics, we have actually use 60 percent of that
number and 80 percent of that number, and that helps us to decide
when these critical design elements need to happen. So the total
operations that you see there in red, that's the forecast for the 20-year
period.
This airport is well suited to accommodate what is forecast to
happen at the airport from a runways and taxiways and airfield
infrastructure component.
So the development projects that are mostly proposed in the
airport are those that are going to prioritize infrastructure that is
maybe aging out and timing out as well as some safety enhancements
and some small security enhancements.
So what was decided on in the preferred development after an
alternatives analysis was, first of all, a Runway 1836 rehabilitation.
I'll go into these all in detail in a moment; extension of Taxiway
Charlie, or Taxiway C, as you see there; additional hangar capacity
for revenue-generating purposes; and some security upgrades; as well
April 9, 2019
Page 156
as a perimeter access road in order to keep -- it's kind of a standard
for airports to be able to have this road to keep v ehicle traffic
separated from aircraft traffic. It's a much safer, more effective way
for operations and people to get around the airfield.
So as for the Runway 1836 rehabilitation, this is actually an
original runway to when the airport was constructed in 1942. It is
completely timed out. Actually, the last pavement assessment by the
DOT rated this at the lowest before total failure, and the pavement
condition is considered very poor. So at times they have to go out
there and actually trim the grass that pops up through this pavement.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: There's no grass that grows there.
MS. MERIN: So it's a priority from both a safety,
infrastructure, and a maintenance perspective. And this phase is
really under design right now where they will be soliciting design
very soon with shovels in the ground and construction expected to
commence probably in late 2019.
Second big priority that's out there -- and this is something that
actually is carried over from the previous master plan, because it is an
excellent development initiative. And you'll see -- let's see if I can do
some highlighting here. This -- sorry. I'm going to go back up.
There we go.
Adjacent to the north/south runway, Runway 1836 that's
proposed for rehabilitation, we are proposing that a taxiway extension
occur to correct that north and south portion of the airport. This is a
huge safety component for the airport.
Currently, aircraft that use the north/south runway up in this
region have to taxi down and cross this runway twic e before entering
the terminal environment. So to get to fuel, to get to the terminal
itself, they actually have to cross a runway twice. It's considered
very unsafe. So the less that we can keep that crossing operation
happening the better. This actually creates a really great asset for the
April 9, 2019
Page 157
airport in that it increases the amount of aeronautical development
property. So this allows us to have more airside access for
development parcels.
It also gives a 20 percent reduction time in taxi time coming
from that north/south primary runway for aircraft to reach the
terminal, and it will improve operational -- operational efficiency.
On the west side, Taxiway Alpha that is now a very heavily
utilized piece of pavement will likely, once Taxiway Charlie comes
into effect, fall out of use. They probably will likely never see
aircraft wheels very frequently, so it is proposed that that be a portion
of the new perimeter road. It will save a little bit to just reuse that
pavement for vehicle traffic.
One important note is that this future Taxiway Charlie extension
is going to impact the raceway leasehold that's out there. Anyone
that's gone out there recently may have noticed that there's -- I
believe it's an abandoned runway that they're actually working on, but
the leasehold encompasses that. It's a really great use of the property.
It's a long straight piece of pavement that they use for drag racing out
there.
The impact of the leasehold will be about 3.3 acres once this is
implemented, and the airport is in active talks with the tenant on how
to -- how to work this out; maybe a potential shift in the leasehold
and things like that. This project is anticipated to commence in 2020
for likely construction. There's an addition of some hangar
development in the area, and these are mainly revenue -generating
projects. Two 10-unit hangar complex -- or T hangar complexes, and
some box-style airport development that will handle multiple aircraft
or higher-end aircraft. And this is to generate private investment
interest.
We do have a new central development area. This is sort of a
major shift from the previous master planning process. Once the
April 9, 2019
Page 158
runways -- there were some safety enhancements for the runway;
thresholds up here were decoupled a few years ago that decreased or
removed the requirement for a significant safety area in the central
area. So there's a lot of the property that actually comes back to the
airport that no longer has to be vacant; that can be opened up and
studied for development.
As for the runway itself, with that airport jet traffic increasing,
we do believe that it will -- a future runway extension will be likely
and warranted within the forecast period once we begin to see those
jet numbers and if those fuel trends continue. So that be -- we're
calculating that shall be around 7,000 feet for the critical aircraft to
be able to operate comfortably and safely in Immokalee. The
ultimate runway length of 10,000 feet was studied, but it's not
considered warranted within the forecast. That area is reserved
however and still depicted so that it -- it is -- could be an option in the
ultimate configuration in the post 20-year period.
The land-use plan is accompanied in this master plan document,
and what this really depicts is the difference between
non-aeronautical, those areas that are for business, manufacturing,
areas that don't need airside access to conduct, and then aeronautical
parcels. These are places that would require access to runways and
taxiways in order to conduct business, with aeronautical typically
being the highest and best use for the airport on the airfield, so it's
important to delineate those ahead of time and have a master plan of
where those are.
So, finally, after all of this, it comes to what are the development
costs over this forecast period. So over the 20-year period, there was
about 47 million in development that was identified at the airport. I
realize that sounds like a very large number today, but that
development cost is, of course, the entire developmen t cost. That
does not necessarily reflect the exact local contribution there. A lot
April 9, 2019
Page 159
of support is available from the FAA and the FDOT depending on the
type of project as well as we've broken out some private investment
numbers that, you know, the local community would likely pursue for
actual facility development, hangar development, things like that.
So the public involvement process, there were project updates
on the Collier County Airport Authority website throughout the
process. Each working paper was posted, available, and did receive
public comment. There were media announcements for each of those
working papers that went out. Educational materials were available
on the website about the project in each phase. We did conduct one
public meeting at a CRA meeting in Immokalee. We did collect
surveys at that time, and comments collection throughout the process
was available.
So now that we've kind of gone through the whole process, we
looked at that timeline on the front end. Our next steps are really to
get this -- the document routed to the FAA, the Federal Aviation
Administration, as well as FDOT for their review and approval. And
the final documents at that point after their review and approval will
become the property of Collier County and th e Airport Authority.
So that is all I have. So thank you for your time today and happy to
answer any questions.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: It was a fine presentation.
MS. MERIN: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Commissioner Taylor.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: What kind of marketing are you
going to do about the T hangars? Because you could fill the entire
airport with T hangars, and those hangars would be filled. They
would be.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Tell her what we talked about
yesterday.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: There's such a demand.
April 9, 2019
Page 160
MR. LOBB: Yes, ma'am, great question, and you're absolutely
correct. I mean, right now all of our facilities are filled to capacity.
We do have a waiting list and, in general, in Southwest Florida, there
is a tremendous demand for hangars. There are none available.
So to that end what we have done is put out an RFP for private
hangar development at the airport. We are working with one party in
particular that is interested in building out that one facility that was
depicted on our plans. That would add to our total inventory of about
30 hangar units and our activity is very much a factor of hangars.
Aircraft owners want a place to house their aircraft.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Yeah.
MR. LOBB: So there's no question, hangars are one of the best
things we can do to spur activity at the airport, and that is something
we're very much actively pursuing.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: And depending on how the
activities go with the private investor, we talked yesterday about
seeing a cost-benefit analysis during the budgetary process about us
making an investment just to help incentivize that process.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: It's so important.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Yes. Of course, look at Leo. He's
going, "Really?"
I'm going to make a motion we approve and accept the master
plan with the note that I just want it to be said, you know, we're
coming forward -- our staff's coming forward with the Immokalee
Master Plan, and now the Immokalee Master Plan jives with our
master plan for our airport, which is phenomenal. I did make a
motion.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I'll second that motion.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: It's been moved and seconded that
we accept the plan. Any other discussion?
April 9, 2019
Page 161
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: All in favor?
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Opposed same sign, same sound.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: So moved.
Item #11C
AN AGREEMENT AND AWARD REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL
(RFP) #18-7382, COLLIER AREA TRANSIT (CAT) FIXED
ROUTE, DEMAND RESPONSE TRANSIT, AND TRANSIT
OPERATIONS MANAGEMENT SERVICES IN THE FIRST
YEAR AMOUNT OF $8,009,821 PLUS COST ADJUSTMENTS
NOTED IN THE INCORPORATED COST PROPOSAL
SUMMARY, TO MV TRANSPORTATION, INC. AND APPROVE
BUDGET AMENDMENTS IN THE AMOUNT OF $609,000 TO
FUND THE INCREASE IN CONTRACT COST FOR THE
REMAINDER OF FY 2019 – APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, that moves us to Item 11C. This
is a recommendation to approve an agreement and reward -- excuse
me -- and award a contract for Collier Area Transit Fixed Route,
Demand Response Transit, and Transit Operations Management
Services.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Mr. Chairman, unless there's
some questions, I'll make a motion to approve.
April 9, 2019
Page 162
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: And I'll second.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Is there any questions?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: That's another phenomenal report,
Michelle.
MS. ARNOLD: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: It's been moved and seconded that
we accept staff's recommendation. All in favor?
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Opposed same sign, same sound.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: So moved.
MS. ARNOLD: Thank you.
MR. OCHS: Thank you, Commissioners.
Item #11E
LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENTS AT TWO
REGULARLY SCHEDULED DAYTIME HEARINGS AND
WAIVE THE NIGHTTIME HEARING REQUIREMENT –
APPROVED
MR. OCHS: That moves us to Item 11E, which was previously
Item 16A8 on your Growth Management Plan consent agenda. This
is a recommendation to hear Land Development Code amendments at
two regularly scheduled daytime hearings and waive the nighttime
hearing requirement.
April 9, 2019
Page 163
Commissioner Taylor brought this forward.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: And I did speak with staff and
did a little followup, and I'd like to move approval as it's written,
please.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: I'll second that. Any other
discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: All in favor?
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Opposed same sign, same sound.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: So moved.
MR. OCHS: Thank you, Commissioners.
Item #14B1
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY BOARD (CRAB)
ADOPT A RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING TO THE BOARD
OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS APPROVAL OF AN
AMENDMENT TO THE COLLIER COUNTY COMMUNITY
REDEVELOPMENT AREA PLAN - THE COUNTY ATTORNEY
TO BRING BACK RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONTINUE
THIS ITEM TO THE NEXT BCC MEETING (04/23/19) –
APPROVED
Item #9A
April 9, 2019
Page 164
RECOMMENDATION TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION
APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE COLLIER COUNTY
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT PLAN - THE COUNTY
ATTORNEY TO BRING BACK RECOMMENDATIONS AND
CONTINUE THIS ITEM TO THE NEXT BCC MEETING
(04/23/19) – APPROVED
MR. OCHS: That moves us to our two remaining companion
items. The first is Item 14B1, which is a companion to Item 9A.
This was an item, both of them, continued from your March 26th,
2019, BCC meeting. It's a recommendation that that the Community
Redevelopment Agency adopt a resolution recommending to the
Board of County Commissioners approval of an amendment to the
Collier County Community Redevelopment Area plan.
Mr. Calahan can --
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Are you going to be as good as the
two before you?
MR. CALAHAN: I hope so. I hope we saved the best for last.
For the record, Sean Calahan, Executive Director of Corporate
Business Operations.
This item is the update of specifically the Bayshore section,
Section 5 of your community redevelopment plan.
So, just briefly, in the interest of time, I'll go through what we're
asking you to do today.
So as a reminder, we have one CRA that covers two areas,
Bayshore and Immokalee, that were established in 2000. So they
were established for a 30-year period, and they run -- so they would
run through 2030.
Section 4 of the redevelopment plan covers the Immokalee area.
Section 5, it covers Bayshore. This has gone through the Collier
County planning council. They found the plan to be consistent with
April 9, 2019
Page 165
the Growth Management Plan, which is what was in their purview to
do. And as I mentioned, they were established in 2000 for a period of
30 years.
So what we've done in the update of this redevelopment plan is
in Section 1 we've updated some of the language regarding
consistency with the Growth Management Plan. We've incorporated
a boundary expansion that was adopted in 2004 that was not reflected
in the maps. And also in Section 1 we've asked for an extension of
the CRA time frame for a 30-year period, which is the maximum
allowed under the Florida redevelopment statute, which is Florida
Statute 163, Section 3.
So we also updated -- we had to update the table of contents and
some of the figures and appendices to match up with the swap -out of
the Section 5, which covers Bayshore.
The Section 5 of the redevelopment plan is a complete swap and
replace, so we went through a very public process with our -- we
have our consultant here, Evan Johnson from Tindale Oliver, who's
here to answer any questions about that.
We went through a very public process with our CRA advisory
boards to construct this update. It's a 30-year update that provides a
number of different projects and visioning for the Bayshore section of
the CRA.
What are you being asked to do today? Approve the -- pending
your comments and any edits that you'd like us to incorporate before
transmittal, we'd ask you to approve the cleanup and consistency of
the edits, do the entire swap and replace of Section 5, and then extend
the sunset date of the CRA for an additional 30 years. So what does
that mean? So as far as TIF revenue and those considerations, which
have been discussed, and there were definitely a little bit of
deliberation at our workshop last year. So far you can see that the
Bayshore CRA has received about 22-and-a-half million dollars in
April 9, 2019
Page 166
TIF funding through 2019, which is today. The Immokalee, just
under 9 million.
The estimated TIF for the remaining 11 years, if you were not to
extend it, we estimate that to be around 36 million dollars for
Bayshore and around 10 for Immokalee. And then if you were to
actually extend, as we're asking today, for 30 years, that level of TIF
would be somewhere between 150 and 180 million dollars for
Bayshore and somewhere around 50 million for Immokalee over that
30-year period.
So that being said, while the plan is written -- Commissioner, did you
want to ask a question, sir?
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Please. Oh, yeah. His light was up.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Just a quick question.
Probably a question for the County Attorney. Can we extend the
duration of the Immokalee portion of the CRA for 30 y ears and not
extend the Bayshore portion for that 30-year period?
MR. KLATZKOW: I don't think you can. It's really just one
CRA.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Oh.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Well, that creates a problem
for me because I'd like to see the Immokalee area continue, because I
think they're going to need a lot of attention over a longer period of
time.
But just to give you an example on the Bayshore, the idea that
they could raise up to 180 million dollars in a CRA seems to me to be
way, way too much, number one; number two, I actually received a
phone call from someone who is a developer and businessperson in
the CRA, very supportive of the Bayshore CRA, and their comment
was, basically, we shouldn't extend the Bayshore CRA for 30 years,
because there's 11 years left and Bayshore is taking off.
So I have a problem in extending that one for 30 years. The
April 9, 2019
Page 167
numbers are just off the charts in terms of the amount of money. And
I think we would be doing a bit of a disservice to our entire budget if
we continue with that for a 30-year period.
MR. KLATZKOW: If you'd like, we can look into this,
Commissioner, and come back.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Would the Commission be
acceptable to this?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: No, I would agree, because I
agree with you.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Commissioner Taylor's light was lit
first, please.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: She is Commissioner Taylor.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: I'm sorry. Commissioner Fiala.
She hit her button.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Of course, I don't agree with that at
all, because the City of Naples already has extended theirs, and they
certainly get more, but I realize that's a different CRA. Then
Immokalee, we want to see them succeed, but we don't really want to
see Bayshore exceed (sic) any more than that. They've exceeded
(sic) as much as they want to -- or you want them to, but they still
have to put in all of their sidewalks. They still have to put in all of
their streetlights, because they haven't done that. They're working on
their water supplies. They're working on trying to catch up with all
of these things.
They just got -- they just began to grow when we went into a
terrible recession. We were stymied by that. Now we're pulling back
out again, and it's great to see, but there's so much work.
And, listen, I'm telling you folks -- and I probably should never
say this on the record, but I'm going to. There's so much crime in
there. They've got so much crime to overcome yet before they can
April 9, 2019
Page 168
get there, and Commissioner Taylor has seen it with her own eyes,
and so have I.
And we've got a lot more work to do. You say you're going to
get it done in 11 years, well, that would be nice. We've been working
at it now since the year 2000, and we haven't gotten it done yet. And
so why would we, then, take the money away from them -- and
they're the ones that are paying into it -- because then they've
succeeded enough. I just think that's wrong.
MR. KLATZKOW: I mean, there's no need to extend it 30
years right now. I mean, there's still a lot of years left on these
CRAs.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. But then, of course, the state
is trying to eliminate home rule, and then we lose if we don't have it
in place. We can always end it, but we can't extend once they say
home rule is -- now you lose your home rule.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: I have a thought in that regard, but
Commissioner Saunders is first.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: You know, I don't think we
should use what the City of Naples did as an example of what we
should do. I think the City of Naples -- most candidly, I think what
they did was wrong. You know, they extended a CRA for 30 years.
That's part of the problem that the state has with CRAs is what are
local governments doing with those funds and, you know, parking
garages on Fifth Avenue I don't think really are the types of projects
that CRAs were designed to make.
So I think that you could make an argument that what the City
of Naples did was not the right thing to do. That doesn't justify us
doing the same thing because, I think, again, that would be the wrong
thing to do to go out 30 years at this point.
The likelihood of the legislature -- and I've looked at all the bills
and I've talked to our lobbying folks. The likelihood of the state
April 9, 2019
Page 169
doing anything to restrict the creation of new CRAs or extending
CRAs is really minimal at best. They talk about it every year.
What's going to happen is there may be some more transparency in
terms of keeping track of what CRAs do, but they're not going to be
limiting the ability to create CRAs, and they're not going to sunset
CRAs. So I think that those are bogus arguments.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: How do you know that?
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: There's no way to know
anything like that definitively. I'm just telling you that the legislature
has been working on this. This issue has come up year after year
after year. Those bills are not moving again this year, just like they
haven't in past years. There's no real appetite to do that.
And what I'd like to do, and I'll make this as a motion, that we
continue this item so that the County Attorney can come back and tell
us whether or not we have some flexibility to extend a portion and
not extend a portion; otherwise, I have to vote against both of these,
and I don't want to do that because I think Immokalee is --
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: We're not all done yet.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Excuse me. I'm sorry.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: We're not all done yet.
Commissioner Solis.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: I'll second the motion for purposes
of discussion because, number one, we would have opportunities in
the future. If we wanted to extend, we could extend it in the future
prior to the 11 years running, right?
MR. CALAHAN: That's correct. And I'd also point out -- we
didn't quite get to this slide, and maybe Option 3 we need the County
Attorney to opine on.
But the Option 1, if you see that, you know, with the 11 years
left in the lifetime, we are planning to update Section 4 of the
redevelopment plan, which addresses the Immokalee area, next fiscal
April 9, 2019
Page 170
year. So at that point we're going to go through this same exact
process with the Immokalee plan update, and at that point because, as
the statute's written, you would have an opportunity to extend the life
of the CRA then.
So it doesn't necessarily -- for you to update the considerations
within this plan, you don't have to extend the CRA today. We could
wait at a future time. There's also a requirement to -- that's written
into this update to reevaluate the plan every five years. So that's
another point in time where, if there were changes made to the plan,
the way the statute's written, you could opt for an extension of the
time frame then.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: In five years?
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Or sooner. Commissioner Taylor.
Oh, I'm sorry.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Well, I was just going to finish by
saying, you know, I think -- I think having a time frame in which
something needs to happen is good, and I'm a little concerned with
just extending it another 30 years. We'll continue --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: For both or just one?
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: For -- I think they're different,
different areas. But with regard to the Bayshore CRA, I mean,
something -- we need to make some decisions on that, and I think just
extending it out another 30 years, we're just going to continue to do
the same thing.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Commissioner Taylor.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: That's my concern.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: I didn't mean to cut you off.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: That's it.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: So just -- this is really just for
some clarification. We've had a lot of things. Did you make a
motion?
April 9, 2019
Page 171
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: He did.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Yes --
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: I seconded.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: -- because I wanted to see if
we could extend one and not extend the other or just --
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Did I second that motion?
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Commissioner Solis seconded the
motion.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Oh, you seconded it. So what is
the motion?
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: To continue this item.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: To continue this item. It
doesn't have to come back, you know, immediately, but one of the
questions I'd like to have answered is can we extend one without
extending the other portion, and I'd like to have the County Attorney
at least send us a memo to that effect and just continue this item
generally until we know that answer, number one, but number two,
we've got plenty of time to extend this. It's not like we have to do
this today. We've got 11 years.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: So what if we don't continue it?
What if we vote on Option 1, which -- and then -- and so we can put
this kind of -- to some kind of finish here, and then when we start
looking at the redevelopment plan for Immokalee in 2020, then we
can -- then by that time I'm sure we'll have an answer.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: With the permission of the
second, I would modify my motion to that extent.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: No. I mean, I was in support of the
first motion. I am not in support of the second motion. I am in
support of continuing it. I do believe that there is concern and
deference needs to be given to extension of or not. Commissioner
Saunders, I concur with you with regard to that.
April 9, 2019
Page 172
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I'll keep the motion as -is
then.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: And my thought process, if I may --
and I would like for you to give due consideration to -- lean, so I can
see him.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I thought he was talking to me.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: No, I was talking to Commissioner
Saunders.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: You were looking at me.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Yeah. Well, you were in the way.
With love. I wasn't -- you were leaning forward, and I couldn't see
him.
The thought process here is we need to keep in mind a couple of
things, and I don't disagree with Commissioner Fiala that there is a
movement afoot for preemption on a regular basis to take away home
rule. Whether or not that comes to fruition or not is yet to be
determined and certainly isn't probably going to happen in this
session, one.
Two, Sean and I talked yesterday about segregation of these
CRAs in some different form or format so we can review them
individually similarly to what we did with the Golden Gate Master
Plan when it came back to us and I suggested the delineation of the
three different areas of Golden Gate, per se.
I've got issues with these updates. I have issues with the
language that allows for -- and this is why I'm concerned about
adopting the proposed plan as it's written now, because this is giving
staff permission to go forward with amendments to our GMP to have
discussion about acquisition of properties. There is discussion in
here where CRAs have the right for condemnation. I think it's
"abolish the displacement language" is one of the notes that I have
here.
April 9, 2019
Page 173
There are things within this that I've got issue with that I think
continuance is a nice way for us to go to have an opportunity for
further refinement.
I don't have a concern about the extension of the 30 years just in
preemption of the potential preemption, because we, I think -- County
Attorney, you shared with me we have the right to terminate
annually.
MR. KLATZKOW: Assuming you don't have any --
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Debt.
MR. KLATZKOW: -- debt.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Correct. So we know the Bayshore
CRA has debt right now, so we can't terminate their existence
without a move.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I'm okay with continuing it,
generally, here and then the County Attorney can give us an opinion
on this time period, but we don't want to send -- you know, if we
extended it today and the CRA knows that we can't unwind that in
less than 30 years unless they have debt, I think the first thing I
would do as a CRA member is go borrow some money.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: What's the -- and, you know, the
thought you had -- because I do concur with you with regard to the
extension and the reinvestment with the TIF. We have had
discussions about reestablishment of a base year at some point in
time. You are implementing an economic -- what's that called? It's
not an enterprise zone, but it's an economic incentive zone --
MR. OCHS: Innovation zone.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Economic innovation zone in
Golden Gate City proper which allows for local control with regard
to a similar process for reinvestment back into the community.
We may give, assuming -- and we are in assumption that that
will be successful. We may be able to apply that to other regional
April 9, 2019
Page 174
areas of our community as well, so -- and we can do that interimly as
we're going along with these CRAs.
So I think I'm okay with continuing -- with a continuance.
Commissioner Taylor.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Yeah. And I'll -- I certainly will
agree with the majority here and certainly vote for a continuance, but
in response to a couple of items that you spoke about, Chair, the state
statute says that CRAs can condemn. It's a state law.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: I understand. That doesn't mean I
agree with it.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: But -- I mean, I don't think --
unless you want to go to Tallahassee, there's no need to -- for us to
discuss it, because that's just the law. The state law says that CRAs
can condemn and acquire. It's just the way that it's written.
And as far as passing this, allowing the staff to run rampant
with, gee, Growth Management Plan amendments, this all has to
come back to us. This document in front of us is purely a 20,000-foot
view of where we -- the direction we'd like to see the CRA go. It
doesn't say that we're going to agree with every nip and tuck. That
will be something that the CRA board will go back and say, you
know, it will be nice to have this one and this one, and then it comes
back to us as a CRA to say we agree or don't agree with you, CRA,
and then it comes back to the Commission in the form of those
decisions.
So there's lots of stops on that process before it gets to us that
there will be tons of input and I think a lot of due diligence being
done. So I wouldn't -- I wouldn't worry about the plan somehow
giving everybody a green light to create things, because we are the
only ones that can create it.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Right. And with regard to that,
history has taught us that sometimes CRAs shouldn't be in the
April 9, 2019
Page 175
property acquisition mode, particularly the Bayshore property, the
Bayshore CRA.
And so it would be my suggestion, as we go forward, that
limitations are put upon those acquisitions, the decision-making
prowess of those that came before us, there was no malice in their
decisions of what they were doing, but those decisions have shown to
not be as fruitful, necessarily, as what they were intended at the time
of the acquisition.
And, yes, it is statute. They are allowed to do so, but it doesn't
mean that always good decisions are coming from it.
Now, we are, with the opportunity of time, allowing for a
potential positive outcome from those acquisitions.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: In response to that -- and I didn't
see it, but my colleague to my right, Commissioner Fiala, saw it.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Our right.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: And she's the Chair of the CRA.
To say that yes, yes, it was -- it was not ill-timed. It was a
situation where fate came in and dealt a blow that no one expected;
however, the value of buying those properties and getting rid of the
squalor and the blight can never be underestimated, can never be
underestimated, because that was the spark that started it.
And then private industry or private business is lifting this area
up. I mean, Bayshore -- the Collier County comes to Bayshore now.
It's amazing what's happened. And so whether it needs to extend
beyond 11 years, that's a topic for another day. But don't ever
underestimate the value of buying those properties, because it set the
groundwork for what we see now which I think is the Renaissance of
the area.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Everyone's certainly entitled to
their opinion, as I am.
Commissioner Fiala.
April 9, 2019
Page 176
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. And also, about to -- if all
goes well, about to change the Triangle totally to a whole different
area and bring that area up to a much, much better standard, if all
goes well. You never can tell till the fat lady sings, I guess.
But I wanted to ask the County Attorney, all we've heard
recently, through newspapers and through stories and through word
of mouth, is this legislature, before they finish their term right this --
what is it, in about five weeks or three weeks or something like that,
they do want to end home rule. If they do that, can -- what happens
then?
If we had put something in motion, would we have been able to
keep it, but if they decide that they are ending home rule, then we
cannot put anything in motion?
MR. KLATZKOW: If the legislature passes an act which
substantially amends the current CRA statute and somehow puts a
grandfather date that's not opportune for us, then there is that
potential, I suppose, that not extending it at this point in time would
have been a mistake, yes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you. I appreciate that
comment. We can always terminate it if we vote something in, but
we can always say, well, you know what, we don't need it but, you
know -- we don't need another 30 years. We only need five.
MR. KLATZKOW: You can always amend your plan.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: And we have another meeting
before the end of the session, this --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: On the 23rd.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: -- on the 23rd of April.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Yeah. And just so -- the way
these bills usually work, they have an effective date of July 1 or an
effective date of October 1, so we'll have plenty of meetings between
April 9, 2019
Page 177
now and --
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: True.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Except once they've made the
ruling then --
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: No.
MR. KLATZKOW: The legislation would have to be crafted in
a very certain way for it to affect the next two weeks, ma'am. I just --
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Kind of like they did in '14 when
they went back to '11.
MR. KLATZKOW: Sort of like that, yeah.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: It's been moved and seconded that
we continue this item. Is there any other discussion?
MR. OCHS: To the next meeting, sir?
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Do we want to pick a specific date,
the motion maker?
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I didn't pick a date. I mean,
we can have staff bring it back when they're ready.
MR. KLATZKOW: Next meeting would be fine. We'll beat the
legislative.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Our next meeting is fine. It's been
moved and seconded we continue the item to our next stated
communication.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I do need an answer to that
question.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: To what?
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: 23rd of April. I said our next stated
communication.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Those are big words. That's hard
for me to understand.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Oh, quit. All in favor?
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Aye.
April 9, 2019
Page 178
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Opposed same sign, same sound.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: So moved.
Item #15
STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, that moves us to Item 15, staff
and commission general communications.
We have two quick items for the Commission. You have a
June 4th workshop scheduled to ostensibly hear the report out and the
presentation from the Mental Health Stakeholders Committee who
are developing a strategic plan for the community mental health, and
in speaking recently with Commissioner Solis, he mentioned that he
didn't believe the work of that committee would have progressed to
the point where they might be ready to make that on June 4th; is that
correct, sir?
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: I think that's correct. I said at the
beginning that six months was probably a little ambitious for them on
such a big task, and I think I was very ambitious for them. So, yeah,
I don't think that there's going to be a strategic plan for us to look at.
MR. OCHS: In lieu of that, Mr. Chairman and Commissioners,
I would like to keep that spot open at 9 a.m., if I might, and substitute
out a county commission workshop with the staff to preview the
work that we've been doing over the last year on a facilities master
plan and an update. It gives us some direction. We've got some
April 9, 2019
Page 179
design work that we'd like to bring forward in the fall and late
summer predicated on your review of that draft.
So if we could workshop that on the fourth of June at 9 a.m.
instead of the mental-health workshop, we'd really appreciate that
opportunity.
So I'm seeing three nods at least there.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Yes.
MR. OCHS: The only other thing I have, Commissioners,
yesterday afternoon I emailed you the copy of a correspondence that
went out from me last Friday to Mr. Morrison who represents the
owners of the Golden Gate Golf Course.
We, as you know, at your direction, have been engaged in due
diligence regarding the potential purchase of tha t property. The
90-day inspection period expires at the end of -- actually on May 1st.
During our due diligence and, more specifically, the result of our
Phase 2 environmental assessment, we did find a couple of things on
the property that warrant further investigation by our engineering
team, particularly related to some laboratory testing on groundwater
samples.
So based on that and a couple of other loose ends that we've
been discussing with the agent for the owner, we've asked to
extend -- I've asked to extend that due diligence period another 60
days. I just wanted to get that on the record with the Board. As I
said, I've discussed this with you individually and had sent the copy
of the letter previously.
But if we can get that done sooner, we will. We haven't heard
yet back on the contents of my lettered, but I suspect they're going to
give us enough time to complete that environmental assessment.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: And this letter came to us, but I
didn't see the lead-up to it, so this million is for that carved-out piece
of land that I had shared with you --
April 9, 2019
Page 180
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: -- was imperative for us to have.
This is --
MR. OCHS: Yes, that corner.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: -- in addition to the 28 million that
he's asking for the balance-ish?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yes, sir. That piece is part of 167
acres, but he excluded it with us. So it's that corner parcel that's C3.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: It takes -- and gives us the entirety
except for the residential over on the westerly portion, so, okay.
And now the discrepancy in the pricing between the offer and what
the seller -- I thought this was the agent of the seller.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Our appraisal came in at about a
million, and they asked for a million-one, and they just said, meet
you in the middle on that, and I think that wasn't a big number.
MR. OCHS: So when we come back to you, it would be our
intention, barring anything to the contrary that we learn, that we
would recommend that 1,048,500 number.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Okay.
MR. OCHS: So that's all I have, Mr. Chairman. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: County Attorney?
MR. KLATZKOW: Nothing, sir.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: And, Clerk? I'm assuming Troy
doesn't have anything.
MR. MILLER: No, sir.
MR. JOHNSSEN: No, Chairman. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Nothing from me.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Nothing from me.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Commissioner Saunders.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I have nothing either.
April 9, 2019
Page 181
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Commissioner Taylor.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Of course.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Of course.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Of course.
Troy, if you could.
MR. OCHS: Sorry, Troy.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: We all know the cost of building
roads, and I just -- this is kind of a reminder of what we're looking at
here.
A two-lane road in Collier County is almost 10 million a mile.
It's kind of a nice round figure to remember, and that's to lay new
road. If we go to the next slide, new water infrastructure to install
water/wastewater per pipe is 400 or 450 per foot. That equates to
about 6, $7 million per mile.
So, in summary, the cost of laying new infrastructure,
transportation without water/sewer, is 9.6 million. Transportation
with water/sewer is about -- with water/sewer is about 16, $17
million a mile. And it doesn't -- that doesn't include other essential
service costs relative to growth.
And it has occurred to me that I think it would be very, very
important for us as a commission as we embark on the development
of the rural lands -- and we already have four towns slash villages in
the hopper that we're considering -- that we look at our Long Range
Transportation Plan, our 40-year plan, to look at where the roads are
planned and to encourage development to respect this plan but, more
importantly, to educate us -- oh, when this comes over and we look at
this, we understand what the costs will be.
And coincidentally, and really quite, quite coincidentally, right
now in -- it's on the Governor's desk is what I'm understanding, is a
Senate and House Bill 207 which has to do with impact fees. And
prior to this bill -- and it looks like it's going to be signed -- impact
April 9, 2019
Page 182
fees were paid at design for platting. It is no longer going to be the
law. Impact fees will be collected when development permits,
building permits are pulled, which means we have to front charges
to -- the taxpayers have to front these charges to development.
And for how long, we don't know. We know what happened
with Ave Maria. It wasn't the fault of Ave Maria. Again, it was, you
know, fate coming in. But I think it bears us well to carefully look
and to use the transportation network that is already in the LRTP as a
guide of where we would encourage development to occur to
minimize the cost to the taxpayers.
And so I'd like to see if we have a consensus here to bring this
forward as an agenda item for discussion.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Bring what? I don't know what
you're wanting to --
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: We're going to look at the Long
Range Transportation Plan in relation specifically to the rural lands
and have an explantation of where these roads are planned and what
extra costs will be in this area specifically for -- to use the
transportation plan as a very integral part of planning this whole area.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: I think we're already doing that
through the MPO process. We're about to engage -- our MPO's about
to engage our 2045 Long Range Transportation Plan update. I think
we should -- it would be prudent for us, number one, to wait for that
process to go through the system to be able to ascertain what the
long-range transportation needs are, then we can have a discussion as
to what we're going to do.
I, candidly, have concerns with these cost estimates that you've
put forward in regard to the construction as the basis of this -- as the
basis of this process, and I think we should -- I think we should allow
for the MPO to manage through that first.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: But the MPO isn't approving
April 9, 2019
Page 183
projects. We are.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: The MPO is approving Long Range
Transportation Plan.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Correct.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Based upon projects that are in the
pipeline.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Correct.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Correct. And, again, is the dog
wagging the tail, or is the tail wagging the dog?
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Woof.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Sounds like the tail is wagging
the dog.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: One might have that opinion or
another. I believe we should -- I wouldn't be interested in hearing
this right now, candidly. I don't know how you folks feel. I'm one. I
believe we have a Long Range Transportation Plan. We have two
land-use plans that are in Eastern Collier County, the Rural Fringe
Mixed Use District and the Rural Lands Stewardship Overlay, and I
think we should allow for those to ultimately come together for the
transfer to the State, and then it -- and those are all part and parcel to
the road network at the same time.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: But we've just gone through a
situation where a major developer in this community has pulled out,
pulled back from his plan, because it's my understanding from staff
they didn't anticipate that they were going to be required to pay for as
many roads as they thought they were going to be paying for.
And I think it's unfair to put staff in this position all the time. I
think it's very important that we send a message, a clear message to
the development community with interests in this area that it does
cost, according to AUIR, almost 10 million dollars a mile to lay road;
that it will be taxpayers' money now, because this bill is going to be
April 9, 2019
Page 184
passed, until building permits are issued.
And I think we are being very prudent with the money of the
taxpayers, and it is their money. So, you know, again, this is more
informational. This is more to bring this -- and clearly bring the
LRTP into the framework of the development of this area.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Commissioner Saunders.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I think I understand where
Commissioner Taylor is going with this, an d I don't necessarily
disagree with that; however, we do have a process, and the MPO is
going through that process. And the MPO doesn't make any final
decisions. Those ultimately come back to us. And so I think that we
can hear that at that time as opposed to kind of jumping ahead of that
process.
I think I know where you're going, and I don't -- I think you're
probably right, but I think this would be the wrong message to send
right now. I think we should go through -- continue going through
the MPO process. Have the MPO's recommendation, whatever that
will be, but ultimately it's going to be this commission that's going to
decide where we're going to build roads and how we're going to pay
for them, not the MPO and not any other entity.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: But I think, don't -- I mean,
again, I'm not a land-use attorney like my two colleagues on either
end of the dais, but isn't there -- to me there's an assumption only
because of the way we've always done business, that when I have a
development and it's my land, I can put this darn well where I want to
put it. I can understand that. But what if it could be shown by the
position of this commission that we want you to develop. I'm not
stopping -- I'm not trying to talk about putting, you know, fences up
and not developing.
But, you know what, it might be better to put it here rather than
there because, you know, it's not going to cost the taxpayers this
April 9, 2019
Page 185
much money, and I think that's the issue.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: That's what we're all saying.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: I mean, that's exactly what
happened with Rural Lands West.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: It did happen.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: I know. So I'm not sure what -- it
seems to me that the process did exactly what you're wanting to
happen.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: It did, but the bruises are there,
and I would like to build on the success of understanding that we are
not -- we're not closing the door to development, but we're saying we
want to use the transportation network as the framework by which we
go forward, because building a four-lane road in the middle of
nowhere 10 years or 20 years before it's needed is probably never
going to happen again, and we don't want it to happen again.
And to me it's very important, with the cost of this
infrastructure, of all the infrastructure, to keep that right in the
forefront of everything that we do and decide, and to have that
brought forward as a discussion item from staff makes it, I think,
more public to the development community, which is very important.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: I mean, I understand the concern,
and I think I understand what you're saying, but at this point we're
talking about legislation that hypothetically could be adopted.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: No. It's going to be adopted. It's
been passed by the House and by the Senate, and it's on his desk.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: It's on his desk. He may or may not
sign it. I mean, I think we're talking about reviewing a process that
we already have, and I don't know -- I'm just not comfortable -- and I
guess I don't understand what the issue is other than let's somehow
force development based upon the LRTP as it stands today -- I mean,
I don't know where we would go with this.
April 9, 2019
Page 186
There's a process that ties the development – future development
and the Long Range Transportation Plans together.
That's the process. Yes, it costs a lot to build roads now. That's
clearly factored into what a developer is going to have to provide in
terms of contribution to the roads. I think -- I'm not sure what we
would gain from doing this because it -- we're already doing it.
That's all I have to say about that.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: And I probably wasn't as subtle as
my colleagues, but I concur that there is a process in place and that
we should allow the process that we have in place to evolve
through -- what I think you're suggesting will come out while we're
reviewing the RLSA, while we are reviewing the Long Range
Transportation Plan. They're all intertwined and integrated together,
and a cost component is a portion of both of those. So, again, I don't
feel the necessity to view this or see this at a different point in time
than what the process that we already have in place is.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Oh, I'm not trying to change the
process. I'm just trying to make it more transparent to the public.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: And be that as it may, I don't see
three head nods.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Okay. So then let me try No. 2.
The final meeting of the rural lands growth committee that met
all year round, there has been a little concern because there was an
unadvertised -- an unadvertised presentation by the landowners at
that meeting, and I think everyone was open to hearing from them,
but I think the dismay is, this process was to bring consensus and,
unfortunately, it ended on discord.
And so I guess my request is to have one more meeting by
which those that may not agree with the landowners are allowed to
present and then have that on the record. That's it. That's all I would
like.
April 9, 2019
Page 187
Don't everybody speak at once.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: I have been in attendance in all but
one of the RLSA public hearings, and I don't see -- I have not seen --
I don't know about the advertised final public hearing. I thought it
was advertised that the folks that were speaking were, in fact,
speaking. I didn't see -- I have never heard anyone be stymied from
not being able to speak at those meetings.
The people that were at that last meeting -- yes, it was a very
contentious item -- were afforded an opportunity to speak. There was
a discourse amongst both sides of that, both property owners and
those that aren't the property owners, and what was reached as
consensus was moved to the consensus side. That was not -- is going
to come forward to us when we're working on the RLSA.
I don't think having another -- unless you -- I don't want to say
no, but I don't think it's necessary. We've had six or seven of those
meetings already, and I think it's time to come forward.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: And it's not the end of the
public process.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Yeah, it is.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: We're part of the public
process.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: By no means. No, no. It's got to
come to the Planning Commission for adoption, and then it's got to
come to us.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: It comes to us first, and then it
goes as a white paper, and then it goes to the Planning Commission,
I'm understanding, is it over the summer?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Over the summer. So I don't see
what one more meeting where at least the sides that may not -- may
agree somewhat but not agree with the landowners, I don't see the
April 9, 2019
Page 188
harm of giving them the soapbox the landowners had. That's all. It's
just being fair.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: And I don't -- I'm not the only one.
I don't agree with this. But how do the rest of you feel? I've already
said my peace. I think that everyone has had an ample opportunity to
express their opinion, and it was actually decided at that last public
meeting that I was at for the first hour, until I had to go, that there
was not going to be consensus reached, and those items were
delineated and put forth. So another public meeting, I don't see the
warrant, personally.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: And I agree. I think there
will be plenty of --
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: There's another one I don't see three
head nods on.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Okay. Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Last, but not least, Monday night
Mike Carr, prior chair of the Collier County Republican Committee,
made a motion to make a letter of recommendation from the CCREC
to support a change in the statute with regard to mentally ill and
intellectually disabled defendants and to add two words, three words,
"and the county" court into the statute, and I wanted to know if I was
getting positive head nods to send a letter from us in support of that
language change to enhance the Court's ability to assist those who are
suffering from mental illness that are in front of the judges who need
help and aren't getting it.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Yeah. Because right now
only in circuit court can they do that.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Correct. The current language says
"court," and we're adding "and county court," and that was at the
judge's request.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: And it's my understanding that he is
April 9, 2019
Page 189
working with Senator Passidomo and Judge Janeice Martin on all that
as well.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: He is, but I would like to send a
letter from us just to support that.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Yeah, I think it's -- I would
agree.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Sure.
CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Okay. I'll do it for and on our
behalf, or Leo will do it, and I'll sign it. And that's all I have.
With that, we are adjourned. I'll see you.
*****
**** Commissioner Taylor moved, seconded by Commissioner Fiala
and carried that the following items under the Consent and Summary
Agendas be approved and/or adopted (Commissioner Solis abstained
from voting on Items #16A3 and #16D8)****
Item #16A1
RECORD THE MINOR FINAL PLAT OF MAPLE RIDGE AT
AVE MARIA, PHASE 5B REPLAT (APPLICATION NUMBER
PL20180003541) – LOCATED IN SECTION 4, TOWNSHIP 48
SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST
Item #16A2
RECORD THE AMENDED FINAL PLAT OF ESPLANADE GOLF
AND COUNTRY CLUB OF NAPLES PHASE 5, PARCELS I, J,
K1, K2, K3 AND K4 (APPLICATION NUMBER PL20180003694)
APPROVAL OF THE STANDARD FORM CONSTRUCTION
April 9, 2019
Page 190
AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT AND APPROVAL OF THE
AMOUNT OF THE PERFORMANCE SECURITY –
W/STIPULATIONS
Item #16A3 – Commissioner Solis Abstained from Voting
(During Agenda Changes)
ACCEPTANCE AND UNCONDITIONAL CONVEYANCE OF
THE POTABLE WATER AND SEWER UTILITY FACILITIES
FOR ARTESIA NAPLES PHASE 5, PL20160002023 AND TO
AUTHORIZE THE COUNTY MANAGER, OR HIS DESIGNEE,
TO RELEASE THE FINAL OBLIGATION BOND IN THE TOTAL
AMOUNT OF $4,000 TO THE PROJECT ENGINEER OR THE
DEVELOPER’S DESIGNATED AGENT – FINAL INSPECTION
WAS CONDUCTED ON THE FACILITIES ON FEBRUARY 22,
2019 AND FOUND THEM TO BE SATISFACTORY AND
ACCEPTABLE
Item #16A4
AMENDED AND RESTATED PROPERTY TRANSFER AND
CONSTRUCTION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE OWNER OF
TWINEAGLES SOUTH, NAPLES ASSOCIATES IV, LLLP
(OWNER) AND COLLIER COUNTY (COUNTY) TO
CONSTRUCT A LAKE TO PERMANENTLY ACCOMMODATE
THE STORMWATER RUN-OFF FROM IMMOKALEE ROAD
AND PROVIDE THE NECESSARY EASEMENTS TO THE
COUNTY FOR ACCESS – AS DETALED IN THE EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
Item #16A5
April 9, 2019
Page 191
RELEASE A PERFORMANCE BOND IN THE AMOUNT OF
$68,477 WHICH WAS POSTED AS A GUARANTY FOR
EXCAVATION PERMIT NUMBER PL20170004286 FOR WORK
ASSOCIATED WITH WHITE LAKE CORPORATE PARK LOT
1A - THE AS-BUILT LAKE CROSS SECTIONS HAVE BEEN
RECEIVED AND THE LAKE WAS INSPECTED BY THE
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION
Item #16A6 – Continued to the April 23, 2019 BCC Meeting
(Per the Agenda Change Sheet)
RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE THE RELEASE OF A
CODE ENFORCEMENT LIEN WITH A VALUE OF $394,130.86
FOR PAYMENT OF $2,080.86 IN THE CODE ENFORCEMENT
ACTIONS ENTITLED BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
V. EDELMIRO AND BERNADITA ROBLES, CODE
ENFORCEMENT BOARD CASE NO. CESD20100009519
RELATING TO PROPERTY LOCATED AT 4015 16TH AVE SE,
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
Item #16A7 – Continued to the April 23, 2019 BCC Meeting
(Per the Agenda Change Sheet)
RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE THE RELEASE OF TWO
(2) CODE ENFORCEMENT LIENS WITH A VALUE OF
$338,616.50 FOR PAYMENT OF $3,000 IN THE CODE
ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS ENTITLED BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS V. RICHARD L. GOSSARD, JR AND
EVONNE M. ESTEP, CODE ENFORCEMENT SPECIAL
MAGISTRATE CASE NO. CEPM2014024204 AND CASE NO.
April 9, 2019
Page 192
CEAU20160016271 RELATING TO PROPERTY LOCATED AT
5310 SHOLTZ ST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
Item #16A8 – Moved to Item #11E (Per Agenda Change Sheet)
Item #16A9
AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO CONTRACT 19CO1 WITH THE
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION BUREAU OF BEACHES AND COASTAL
SYSTEMS BEACH MANAGEMENT FUNDING ASSISTANCE
PROGRAM FOR DREDGING OF WIGGINS PASS, AND MAKE
A FINDING THAT THIS ITEM PROMOTES TOURISM –
ALLOWING FOR 75% REIMBURSEMENT FOR THE INLET
MANAGEMENT AND MONITORING
Item #16C1
CONVEY AN EASEMENT TO FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT
COMPANY OVER PROPERTY OWNED BY THE COLLIER
COUNTY WATER-SEWER DISTRICT AT 9622 VANDERBILT
DRIVE, NAPLES, FL 34108 – FOLIO #62831200004
Item #16C2
RESOLUTION 2019-55: A RESOLUTION AND TO APPROVE A
LEASE AGREEMENT WITH STATE REPRESENTATIVE ANA
MARIA RODRIGUEZ, DISTRICT 105, FOR USE OF COUNTY-
OWNED OFFICE SPACE AT THE GOLDEN GATE CUSTOMER
SERVICE CENTER IN GOLDEN GATE CITY
April 9, 2019
Page 193
Item #16C3
RESOLUTION 2019-56: A RESOLUTION AND APPROVE A
LEASE AGREEMENT WITH UNITED STATES SENATOR RICK
SCOTT FOR USE OF COUNTY-OWNED OFFICE SPACE
WITHIN THE ADMINISTRATION BUILDING AT THE MAIN
GOVERNMENT CENTER
Item #16D1
AFTER-THE-FACT AMENDMENT AND ATTESTATION
STATEMENT WITH THE AREA AGENCY ON AGING FOR
SOUTHWEST FLORIDA, INC. (AAA), HOME CARE FOR THE
ELDERLY (HCE) GRANT PROGRAM FOR THE COLLIER
COUNTY SERVICES FOR SENIORS (CCSS) (NO FISCAL
IMPACT) – EFFECTIVE FROM JULY 1, 2018 THROUGH JUNE
30, 2019 WITH A THREE-YEAR RENEWAL OPTION
Item #16D2
AFTER-THE-FACT AMENDMENT AND ATTESTATION
STATEMENT WITH THE AREA AGENCY ON AGING FOR
SOUTHWEST FLORIDA, INC., OLDER AMERICAN ACT
GRANT PROGRAM FOR THE COLLIER COUNTY SERVICES
FOR SENIORS (NO FISCAL IMPACT) – THE REPORT WILL BE
DUE BY FEBRUARY 25 EACH YEAR AND WILL INCLUDE
THE ACTUAL COSTS FOR PERFORMING ALL SERVICES
DURING THE PRECEDING CALENDAR YEAR
Item #16D3
April 9, 2019
Page 194
ROTARY CLUB OF NAPLES-COLLIER, INC., TO USE THE
FRED W. COYLE FREEDOM PARK FOR ITS HONOR FLAG
FUNDRAISER FOR 2019. THIS PROJECT SUPPORTS THE
VARIOUS CHARITIES OF THE ROTARY CLUB
Item #16D4
AFTER-THE-FACT FIRST AMENDMENT AND ATTESTATION
STATEMENT WITH THE AREA AGENCY ON AGING FOR
SOUTHWEST FLORIDA, INC. FOR THE EMERGENCY HOME
ENERGY ASSISTANCE GRANT FOR THE COLLIER COUNTY
SERVICES FOR SENIORS AND TO AUTHORIZE FY18-19
BUDGET AMENDMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $36,044 (NET
FISCAL IMPACT $36,044) – PROVIDING UNINTERRUPTED
SUPPORT SERVICES FOR ELDERLY CLIENTS
Item #16D5
BUDGET AMENDMENT TO RECOGNIZE REVENUE FOR
FY2019 RECEIVED FROM THE STATE AID TO LIBRARIES
GRANT IN THE AMOUNT OF $195,181 – TO BE USED FOR
ANY PUBLIC LIBRARY NEEDS EXCEPT FOR
CONSTRUCTION
Item #16D6
AGREEMENT FOR INVITATION TO BID (ITB) #19-7515
VANDERBILT BEACH IRRIGATION TO STAHLMAN-
ENGLAND IRRIGATION INC., IN THE AMOUNT OF $94,773,
AND AUTHORIZE THE CHAIRMAN TO EXECUTE THE
ATTACHED AGREEMENT – FOR THE UPGRADE OF
April 9, 2019
Page 195
IRRIGATION CONTROLS AND REPLACEMENT OF THE MAIN
WATER SUPPLY LINE ON VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD,
WITHIN THE VANDERBILT BEACH MSTU BOUNDARIES
Item #16D7 – Continued to the April 23, 2019 BCC Meeting
(Per the Agenda Change Sheet)
RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE AND AUTHORIZE THE
CHAIRMAN TO SIGN THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE
STATE MANDATED AGREEMENT WITH DAVID LAWRENCE
MENTAL HEALTH CENTER, INC.
Item #16D8 – Commissioner Solis Abstained from Voting
(During Agenda Changes)
THIRD AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENTS WITH LEECORP
HOMES INC. AND PRESTIGE HOME CENTERS, INC. FOR THE
ADMINISTRATION OF THE STATE HOUSING INITIATIVES
PARTNERSHIP DEMOLITION AND/OR REPLACEMENT OF
MANUFACTURED HOUSING PROGRAM – AS DETAILED IN
THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item #16D9
A BUREAU OF JUSTICE ASSISTANCE, MEDICALLY
ASSISTED TREATMENT PLANNING INITIATIVE “AFTER-
THE-FACT” GRANT APPLICATION TO FACILITATE THE
DEVELOPMENT OF A SUBSTANCE ABUSE MEDICATION
ASSISTED TREATMENT MODEL IN THE COLLIER COUNTY
JAIL AND IN COMMUNITY TREATMENT SETTINGS – FOR
OPIOID USERS WITHIN COLLIER COUNTY
April 9, 2019
Page 196
Item #16D10
ELECTRONIC SUBMITTAL OF AN APPLICATION AND
ACCEPT YEAR TWO OF THE RETIRED AND SENIOR
VOLUNTEER PROGRAM GRANT AWARD IN THE AMOUNT
OF $54,522 FOR OPERATION OF THE RETIRED AND SENIOR
VOLUNTEER PROGRAM FROM THE CORPORATION FOR
NATIONAL AND COMMUNITY SERVICE AND AUTHORIZE
NECESSARY BUDGET AMENDMENTS
Item #16D11
INTEREST EARNED FROM THE PERIOD OCTOBER 2018
THROUGH DECEMBER 2018 ON ADVANCED LIBRARY
FUNDING RECEIVED FROM THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT
OF STATE TO SUPPORT LIBRARY SERVICES AND
EQUIPMENT FOR THE USE OF COLLIER COUNTY
RESIDENTS IN THE AMOUNT OF $2,430.25 – TO GO
TOWARDS EXPENDITURES IN SUPPORT OF LIBRARY
OPERATIONS AND CAPITAL IMROVEMENTS
Item #16E1
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS PREPARED BY THE
PROCUREMENT SERVICES DIVISION FOR CHANGE ORDERS
AND OTHER CONTRACTUAL MODIFICATIONS REQUIRING
BOARD APPROVAL – ONE CHANGE ORDER MODIFIES
CONTRACT BY $6,619.99 AND ADDS 24 CALENDAR DAYS
TO COMPLETION PERIODS, AND TWO (2) AFTER-THE-FACT
MEMOS WITH A FISCAL IMPACT OF $13,469.94
April 9, 2019
Page 197
Item #16F1
RESOLUTION 2019-57: A RESOLUTION APPROVING
AMENDMENTS (APPROPRIATING GRANTS, DONATIONS,
CONTRIBUTIONS OR INSURANCE PROCEEDS) TO THE
FISCAL YEAR 2018-19 ADOPTED BUDGET
Item #16F2
A REPORT COVERING BUDGET AMENDMENTS IMPACTING
RESERVES AND MOVING FUNDS IN AN AMOUNT UP TO
AND INCLUDING $25,000 AND $50,000, RESPECTIVELY –
FOR $13,000.00 IN MEDICAL EQUIPMENT NEEDED FOR THE
ANIMAL CONTROL NEUTER/SPAY PROGRAM AT DAS
Item #16H1
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING APRIL 2019 AS
SARCOIDOSIS AWARENESS MONTH IN COLLIER COUNTY.
THE PROCLAMATION WILL BE FORWARDED TO MICHAEL
PATTERSON, A LOCAL ADVOCATE FOR IMPROVEMENTS
TO THE QUALITY OF LIFE OF PERSONS LIVING WITH
SARCOIDOSIS
Item #16H2
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING APRIL 13, 2019 AS
PINWHEELS AT THE PIER DAY, IN SUPPORT OF THE
EFFORTS BY THE CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER OF
COLLIER COUNTY TO PREVENT CHILD ABUSE AND
April 9, 2019
Page 198
PROMOTE PUBLIC AWARENESS. THIS PROCLAMATION
WILL BE PRESENTED BY CHAIRMAN MCDANIEL AT THE
PINWHEELS AT THE PIER EVENT ON APRIL 13TH ON THE
BEACH AT THE NAPLES PIER
Item #16J1
EXECUTION OF THE BUDGET AMENDMENT IN THE
AMOUNT OF $150,000 FOR 9-1-1 BACKUP FACILITY – AT
THE ESTATES DUE TO THE GOLDEN GATE FACILITY BEING
TOO SMALL AND OUT OF DATE WITH CURRENT
TECHNOLOGY
Item #16J2
REQUEST THAT THE BOARD APPROVE AND DETERMINE
VALID PUBLIC PURPOSE FOR INVOICES PAYABLE AND
PURCHASING CARD TRANSACTIONS AS OF APRIL 3, 2019
Item #16J3
TO RECORD IN THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS, THE CHECK NUMBER (OR OTHER
PAYMENT METHOD), AMOUNT, PAYEE, AND PURPOSE FOR
WHICH THE REFERENCED DISBURSEMENTS WERE DRAWN
FOR THE PERIODS BETWEEN MARCH 14, 2019 AND MARCH
27, 2019 PURSUANT TO FLORIDA STATUTE 136.06
Item #16K1
April 9, 2019
Page 199
RESOLUTION 2019-58: APPOINT ONE ALTERNATE CITIZEN
MEMBER TO THE VALUE ADJUSTMENT BOARD –
APPOINTING JILL F. ROSENFELD
Item #16K2
RESOLUTION 2019-59: REAPPOINT TWO MEMBERS TO THE
PUBLIC TRANSIT ADVISORY COMMITTEE – REAPPOINTING
JOHN DIMARCO III AND ARTHUR DOBBERSTEIN; BOTH
WITH TERMS EXPIRING ON MARCH 22, 2022
Item #16K3
RESOLUTION 2019-60: APPOINT FOUR MEMBERS TO THE
IMMOKALEE LOCAL REDEVELOPMENT ADVISORY BOARD
– APPOINTING FRANCISCO LEON AND REAPPOINTING
FRANK NAPPO, ANDREA HALMAN AND MICHAEL
FACUNDO; ALL WITH TERMS EXPIRING ON APRIL 4, 2022
Item #16K4
RESOLUTION 2019-61: APPOINT TWO MEMBERS TO THE
TOURIST DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL – APPOINTING
KATHLEEN BROCK AS THE CITY OF EVERGLADES
REPRESENTATIVE AND REAPPOINTING CLARK HILL; BOTH
WITH TERMS EXPIRING ON APRIL 21, 2023
Item #17A
RESOLUTION 2019-62: PETITION VAC-PL20180003286, TO
DISCLAIM, RENOUNCE AND VACATE THE COUNTY AND
April 9, 2019
Page 200
THE PUBLIC INTEREST IN A PORTION OF THE 30-FOOT
COUNTY UTILITY EASEMENT AS RECORDED IN O.R. BOOK
1364, PAGE 1030 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER
COUNTY, FLORIDA, LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST
CORNER OF BAYSHORE DRIVE AND THOMASSON DRIVE,
IN SECTION 14, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST,
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
Item #17B – Moved to Item #9B (Per Agenda Change Sheet)
*****
April 9, 2019
There being no further business for the good of the County, the
meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 4:40 p.m.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS/EX
OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF
SPECIAL D ' TS UNDER ITS CONTROL
i ----N\
#e)' / , - ._ IF.40
WILLI A,14 L. McDANIEL, JR., CHAIRMAN
ATTEST
CRYSTA,L'K K- EL, CLERK
e
1;31:011411LLL' '
A e t as to Chairman's '�... i
signature only. �``'4 •t lti �
These minutes approved by the Board on Mai 1201°1
as presented ✓' or as corrected .
TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF U.S. LEGAL
SUPPORT, INC., BY TERRI LEWIS, COURT REPORTER AND
NOTARY PUBLIC.
Page 201
FORM 8B MEMORANDUM OF VOTING CONFLICT FOR
COUNTY, MUNICIPAL, AND OTHER LOCAL PUBLIC OFFICERS
LAST NAME—FIRST NAME—MIDDLE NAME NAME OF BOARD,COUNCIL,COMMISSION,AUTHORITY,OR COMMITTEE
Andrew I. Solis Collier County Board of County Commissioners
MAILING ADDRESS THE BOARD,COUNCIL,COMMISSION,AUTHORITY OR COMMITTEE ON
3299 East Tamiami Trail, 3rd Floor WHICH I SERVE ISA UNIT OF:
CITY COUNTY ❑CITY dCOUNTY U OTHER LOCAL AGENCY
Naples Collier NAME OF POLITICAL SUBDIVISION:
Collier County
DATE ON WHICH VOTE OCCURRED
April 9, 2019 MY POSITION IS: Cd ELECTIVE U APPOINTIVE
WHO MUST FILE FORM 8B
This form is for use by any person serving at the county, city, or other local level of government on an appointed or elected board, council,
commission, authority, or committee. It applies to members of advisory and non-advisory bodies who are presented with a voting conflict of
interest under Section 112.3143, Florida Statutes.
Your responsibilities under the law when faced with voting on a measure in which you have a conflict of interest will vary greatly depending
on whether you hold an elective or appointive position. For this reason, please pay close attention to the instructions on this form before
completing and filing the form.
INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 112.3143, FLORIDA STATUTES
A person holding elective or appointive county, municipal, or other local public office MUST ABSTAIN from voting on a measure which
would inure to his or her special private gain or loss. Each elected or appointed local officer also MUST ABSTAIN from knowingly voting on
a measure which would inure to the special gain or loss of a principal (other than a government agency) by whom he or she is retained
(including the parent, subsidiary, or sibling organization of a principal by which he or she is retained);to the special private gain or loss of a
relative; or to the special private gain or loss of a business associate. Commissioners of community redevelopment agencies(CRAB)under
Sec. 163.356 or 163.357, F.S., and officers of independent special tax districts elected on a one-acre, one-vote basis are not prohibited
from voting in that capacity.
For purposes of this law, a "relative" includes only the officer's father, mother, son, daughter, husband, wife, brother, sister, father-in-law,
mother-in-law, son-in-law, and daughter-in-law. A"business associate" means any person or entity engaged in or carrying on a business
enterprise with the officer as a partner,joint venturer, coowner of property, or corporate shareholder(where the shares of the corporation
are not listed on any national or regional stock exchange).
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
ELECTED OFFICERS:
In addition to abstaining from voting in the situations described above,you must disclose the conflict:
PRIOR TO THE VOTE BEING TAKEN by publicly stating to the assembly the nature of your interest in the measure on which you are
abstaining from voting; and
WITHIN 15 DAYS AFTER THE VOTE OCCURS by completing and filing this form with the person responsible for recording the
minutes of the meeting,who should incorporate the form in the minutes.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
APPOINTED OFFICERS:
Although you must abstain from voting in the situations described above, you are not prohibited by Section 112.3143 from otherwise
participating in these matters. However, you must disclose the nature of the conflict before making any attempt to influence the decision,
whether orally or in writing and whether made by you or at your direction.
IF YOU INTEND TO MAKE ANY ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION PRIOR TO THE MEETING AT WHICH THE VOTE WILL BE
TAKEN:
• You must complete and file this form (before making any attempt to influence the decision)with the person responsible for recording the
minutes of the meeting,who will incorporate the form in the minutes. (Continued on page 2)
CE FORM 8B-EFF.11/2013 PAGE 1
Adopted by reference in Rule 34-7.010(1)(f),F.A.C.
APPOINTED OFFICERS (continued)
• A copy of the form must be provided immediately to the other members of the agency.
• The form must be read publicly at the next meeting after the form is filed.
IF YOU MAKE NO ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION EXCEPT BY DISCUSSION AT THE MEETING:
• You must disclose orally the nature of your conflict in the measure before participating.
• You must complete the form and file it within 15 days after the vote occurs with the person responsible for recording the minutes of the
meeting,who must incorporate the form in the minutes.A copy of the form must be provided immediately to the other members of the
agency, and the form must be read publicly at the next meeting after the form is filed.
DISCLOSURE OF LOCAL OFFICER'S INTEREST
Andrew I. Solis , hereby disclose that on April 9, 20 19
(a)A measure came or will come before my agency which(check one or more)
inured to my special private gain or loss;
inured to the special gain or loss of my business associate, ;
inured to the special gain or loss of my relative, ;
inured to the special gain or loss of a client of my law firm by
whom I am retained;or
inured to the special gain or loss of , which
is the parent subsidiary,or sibling organization or subsidiary of a principal which has retained me.
(b)The measure before my agency and the nature of my conflicting interest in the measure is as follows:
On April 9, 2019, the Board of County Commissioners will consider Agenda Item 16-D-8, a recommendation to
approve the Third Amendment to agreements with LeeCorp Homes Inc., and Prestige Home Centers, Inc., for
the administration of the State Housing Initiatives Partnership Demolition and/or Replacement of Manufactured
Housing Program.
Prestige Home Centers, Inc., is a client of my law firm and in an abundance of caution, I will abstain from voting
pursuant to Section 286.012,Fla. Stat. to avoid any perceived prejudice or bias.
If disclosure of specific information would violate confidentiality or privilege pursuant to law or rules governing attorneys, a public officer,
who is also an attorney, may comply with the disclosure requirements of this section by disclosing the nature of the interest in such a way
as to provide the public with notice of the conflict.
1
April 9, 2019 rr
Date Filed Sign. ure
NOTICE: UNDER PROVISIONS OF FLORIDA STATUTES §112.317, A FAILURE TO MAKE ANY REQUIRED DISCLOSURE
CONSTITUTES GROUNDS FOR AND MAY BE PUNISHED BY ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING: IMPEACHMENT,
REMOVAL OR SUSPENSION FROM OFFICE OR EMPLOYMENT, DEMOTION, REDUCTION IN SALARY, REPRIMAND, OR A
CIVIL PENALTY NOT TO EXCEED$10,000.
CE FORM 8B-EFF.11/2013 PAGE 2
Adopted by reference in Rule 34-7.010(1)(f),F.A.C.
FORM 8B MEMORANDUM OF VOTING CONFLICT FOR
COUNTY, MUNICIPAL, AND OTHER LOCAL PUBLIC OFFICERS
LAST NAME—FIRST NAME—MIDDLE NAME NAME OF BOARD,COUNCIL,COMMISSION,AUTHORITY,OR COMMITTEE
Andrew I. Solis Collier County Board of County Commissioners
MAILING ADDRESS THE BOARD,COUNCIL,COMMISSION,AUTHORITY OR COMMITTEE ON
3299 East Tamiami Trail, 3rd Floor WHICH I SERVE ISA UNIT OF:
CITY COUNTY CICITY of COUNTY LIOTHER LOCAL AGENCY
Naples Collier NAME OF POLITICAL SUBDIVISION:
Collier County
DATE ON WHICH VOTE OCCURRED MY POSITION IS:
April 9, 2019 af ELECTIVE ❑ APPOINTIVE
WHO MUST FILE FORM 8B
This form is for use by any person serving at the county, city, or other local level of government on an appointed or elected board, council,
commission, authority, or committee. It applies to members of advisory and non-advisory bodies who are presented with a voting conflict of
interest under Section 112.3143, Florida Statutes.
Your responsibilities under the law when faced with voting on a measure in which you have a conflict of interest will vary greatly depending
on whether you hold an elective or appointive position. For this reason, please pay close attention to the instructions on this form before
completing and filing the form.
INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 112.3143, FLORIDA STATUTES
A person holding elective or appointive county, municipal, or other local public office MUST ABSTAIN from voting on a measure which
would inure to his or her special private gain or loss. Each elected or appointed local officer also MUST ABSTAIN from knowingly voting on
a measure which would inure to the special gain or loss of a principal (other than a government agency) by whom he or she is retained
(including the parent, subsidiary, or sibling organization of a principal by which he or she is retained);to the special private gain or loss of a
relative; or to the special private gain or loss of a business associate. Commissioners of community redevelopment agencies(CRAs) under
Sec. 163.356 or 163.357, F.S., and officers of independent special tax districts elected on a one-acre, one-vote basis are not prohibited
from voting in that capacity.
For purposes of this law, a "relative" includes only the officer's father, mother, son, daughter, husband, wife, brother, sister, father-in-law,
mother-in-law, son-in-law, and daughter-in-law. A"business associate" means any person or entity engaged in or carrying on a business
enterprise with the officer as a partner,joint venturer, coowner of property, or corporate shareholder(where the shares of the corporation
are not listed on any national or regional stock exchange).
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
ELECTED OFFICERS:
In addition to abstaining from voting in the situations described above,you must disclose the conflict:
PRIOR TO THE VOTE BEING TAKEN by publicly stating to the assembly the nature of your interest in the measure on which you are
abstaining from voting; and
WITHIN 15 DAYS AFTER THE VOTE OCCURS by completing and filing this form with the person responsible for recording the
minutes of the meeting,who should incorporate the form in the minutes.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
APPOINTED OFFICERS:
Although you must abstain from voting in the situations described above, you are not prohibited by Section 112.3143 from otherwise
participating in these matters. However, you must disclose the nature of the conflict before making any attempt to influence the decision,
whether orally or in writing and whether made by you or at your direction.
IF YOU INTEND TO MAKE ANY ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION PRIOR TO THE MEETING AT WHICH THE VOTE WILL BE
TAKEN:
• You must complete and file this form (before making any attempt to influence the decision)with the person responsible for recording the
minutes of the meeting,who will incorporate the form in the minutes. (Continued on page 2)
CE FORM 8B-EFF. 11/2013 PAGE 1
Adopted by reference in Rule 34-7.010(1)(f),F.A.C.
APPOINTED OFFICERS (continued)
• A copy of the form must be provided immediately to the other members of the agency.
• The form must be read publicly at the next meeting after the form is filed.
IF YOU MAKE NO ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION EXCEPT BY DISCUSSION AT THE MEETING:
• You must disclose orally the nature of your conflict in the measure before participating.
• You must complete the form and file it within 15 days after the vote occurs with the person responsible for recording the minutes of the
meeting,who must incorporate the form in the minutes.A copy of the form must be provided immediately to the other members of the
agency, and the form must be read publicly at the next meeting after the form is filed.
DISCLOSURE OF LOCAL OFFICER'S INTEREST
Andrew I. Solis , hereby disclose that on April 9, 20 19
(a)A measure came or will come before my agency which(check one or more)
inured to my special private gain or loss;
inured to the special gain or loss of my business associate,
inured to the special gain or loss of my relative, ;
inured to the special gain or loss of a client of my law firm by
whom I am retained;or
inured to the special gain or loss of ,which
is the parent subsidiary,or sibling organization or subsidiary of a principal which has retained me.
(b)The measure before my agency and the nature of my conflicting interest in the measure is as follows:
On April 9, 2019, the Board of County Commissioners will consider Agenda Item 16-A-3, a recommendation to
approve final acceptance and unconditional conveyance of the potable water and sewer utility facilities for Artesia
Naples Phase 5, and authorize the County Manager, or his designee, to release the Final Obligation Bond in the
total amount of$4,000.
The owner, WCI Communities, LLC, is a client of my law firm and in an abundance of caution, I will abstain from
voting pursuant to Section 286.012,FIa. Stat. to avoid any perceived prejudice or bias.
If disclosure of specific information would violate confidentiality or privilege pursuant to law or rules governing attorneys, a public officer,
who is also an attorney, may comply with the disclosure requirements of this section by disclosing the nature of the interest in such a way
as to provide the public with notice of the conflict.
April 9, 2019 jAk ►:
Date Filed Signa 1}! _
NOTICE: UNDER PROVISIONS OF FLORIDA STATUTES §112.317, A FAILURE TO MAKE ANY REQUIRED DISCLOSURE
CONSTITUTES GROUNDS FOR AND MAY BE PUNISHED BY ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING: IMPEACHMENT,
REMOVAL OR SUSPENSION FROM OFFICE OR EMPLOYMENT, DEMOTION, REDUCTION IN SALARY, REPRIMAND, OR A
CIVIL PENALTY NOT TO EXCEED$10,000.
CE FORM 88-EFF.11/2013 PAGE 2
Adopted by reference in Rule 34-7.010(1)(f),F.A.C.