Agenda 09/15/2009 Item #10A
Agenda Item No. 10A
September 15, 2009
Page 1 of 22
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Request approval that the Board of County Commissioners consider including the changes
to the Growth Management Plan RLSA Overlay of the Future Land Use Element with the
Evaluation and Appraisal Report Growth Management Plan Amendment process
beginning in 2012 or in the alternative holding a special Growth Management Plan
Amendment Cycle in 2011 to address priority amendments as identified by the "Five-Year
Review of the Rural Lands Stewardship Program" report pursuant to the Special Meeting
of the Board of County Commissioners held on April 21, 2009
.-.
OBJECTIVE:
To request approval of the Board of County Commissioners (Board) to process the changes to
the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay as part of the Evaluation and Appraisal Report
Growth Management Amendment process beginning in 2012, or authorize a special Growth
Management Plan Amendment Cycle (special GMP A Cycle) to amend the Rural Lands
Stewardship Area Overlay (RLSA Overlay) and related Transportation Element policy(s) of the
Growth Management Plan as recommended by the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Review
Committee (Committee) in its "Five-Year Review of the Rural Lands Stewardship Program"
report. This report was presented and accepted in its entirety as a planning document by the
Board on April 21, 2009, including recommendations of the Environmental Advisory Council,
the Collier County Planning Commission and the Board. The Committee was appointed by the
Board on October 24,2007 by Resolution 2007-305A.
CONSIDERATIONS:
Policy 1.22 of the RLSA Overlay mandates the five year review of the RLSA program by both
Collier County and the Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA). This review was
completed through the Committee-prepared "Phase I-Technical Report" which the Board
accepted and transmitted to the DCA in late May, 2008. Policy 1.22 does not explicitly require
any further data from Collier County nor does it require amendments to the RLSA Overlay.
The March, 2009 "Five-Year Review of the Rural Lands Stewardship Program" report was
prepared by the Committee with staff facilitation and limited assistance and includes
recommended amendments to the Growth Management Plan RLSA Overlay and a related
amendment to the Transportation Element. The Committee presented the Report to the
Environmental Advisory Council (EAC) and Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC)
separately in public hearings beginning on January 28, 2009 and ending on March 10, 2009.
Both the EAC and CCPC submitted individual recommendations to the Board relative to the
Committee-recommended amendments to the RLSA Overlay and the Transportation Element of
the GMP. Based upon EAC and CCPC recommendations, in March, 2009, the Committee made
several modifications to its January, 2009 report to incorporate most of the EAC and CCPC
recommendations.
The Committee-proposed amendments to the RLSA Overlay, as presented to the Board on April
,'-" 21,2009, include most of the comments and recommendations advanced to the Board by the
1
Agenda Item No.1 OA
September 15, 2009
Page 2 of 22
,-
EAC and CCpc. Following a full day of public testimony regarding the "Five-Year Review of
the Rural Lands Stewardship Report" the following Board action was taken:
. By a vote of 3-2 the Board accepted the "Five-Year Review of the Rural Lands Stewardship
Report" in its entirety as a planning document and authorized that it move forward as
proposed GMP amendments in a "first in and first out" order in relation to previously filed
GMP amendment applications; incorporate the 404,000 credit cap and Stewardship
Receiving Area (SRA) 45,000 acre cap, provided backup data is developed to determine the
actual credit and acreage cap values; and provided there be placed in a new RLSA GMP
policy a statement to the effect that Credits do not provide vested rights to land owners and
no excess credits are created.
. By a vote of 4-1, the Board authorized proceeding into a special GMP Amendment Cycle
(GMPA) at the expense of the private sector in the order of: 2007/2008 GMP Amendment
Cycle...15t, Tmmokalee Area Master Plan (TAMP).. .2nd, and RLSA.. ..3rd (see Exhibit 1)
. Although no vote was taken, the consensus of the Board was that the Committee has
completed its mission and should be dissolved while keeping all "stakeholders" informed
throughout the special GMP A Cycle, if authorized by the Board, following one final meeting
of the COlmnittee to review an Executive Summary from Staff to the Board which would
outline (this meeting was held on June 5, 2009):
a. Timing for the RLSA GMP amendments;
b. Total costs for the special GMP A Cycle and funding sources; and
c. Committee recommendations regarding RLSA Review Committee dissolution.
Following the meeting, a number of discussions were held by staff with representatives of
Eastern County Property Owners (ECPO) to address the Board's directive that the amendments
proceed under private sector funding. ECPO' s position, as expressed to the Board during the
April 2151 meeting, is that the RLSA overlay amendments are intended to benefit the County and
came from a County-appointed Committee and, therefore, the costs of such amendments should
be borne entirely by the County. Considering the current position of the ECPO, if directed to
proceed with Options 1 and 2 below the Board would acknowledge that the Rural Lands
Stewardship Program is deemed to benefit the entire County and the region and in doing so
direct that the amendment process be accomplished at County expense. The options are as
follows:
. Postpone the RLSA overlay amendments to make the amendments a part of the 2012 EAR GMP
Amendment process (assuming the EAR is found to be in compliance by the Department of
Community Affairs);
. Proceed in 2011 as a Special Growth Management Plan Amendment cycle; or
. Direct staff to indefinitely delay any future amendments until such time that the needed funding
is identified.
Option 1: Consider the amendments as part of the larger Growth Management Plan
amendment cycle that will follow the 2011 Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) due to
the DCA on January 1, 2011.
-
2
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
September 15, 2009
Page 3 of 22
a. Typical with the Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) process are follow-up EAR-based GMP
amendments drafted and prepared to implement EAR recommendations. The Collier County
EAR must be completed and transmitted to the DCA by January 1,2011. Staff will subsequently
receive the Sufficiency finding, make the needed revisions and staff the revised EAR through the
requisite adoption hearings. Adding in the adoption period window and the applicable appeals
period, the corresponding EAR-based GMP Amendments will not begin until early to mid-year
2012. Based upon the current forecasted schedule, the 2012 EAR-based GMP Amendment
hearings would not take place until late 2012 or early 2013.
b. Delaying the amendments to 2012 would essentially shelve the work performed by the RLSA
review committee and the respective reviews performed by the EAC and CCPC for at least 2 to 3
years, and with that most of the work would have to be updated to prepare the proposed RLSA
amendments for EAR-based GMP cycle. In addition, staff recognizes that the inclusion of the
RLSA Overlay amendments in the EAR-based GMP amendment cycle could adversely impact
the schedule for the EAR, and, as noted, the provision for developing the supporting data and
analysis is not budgeted.
,,,,"-"
c. As noted, if the Board so directs that the proposed amendments be considered as part of the 2012
EAR-based amendment cycle, with the understanding that the ECPG are not willing to fund the
process, the Board would be doing so with the understanding that the amendments to the RLSA
serve a greater public purpose. This greater public purpose would include RLSA growth
management coordination with the East ofCR951 Horizon Study, with the proposed amendments
to the Immokalee Area Master Plan, and coordination with the development of the Collier County
Interactive Growth Model which projects timely land use and capital infrastructure needs m
conjunction with population growth in these specific areas east of CR95 I.
Option 2: Schedule a special cycle for this series of amendments. The cycle would follow the
lAMP GMP Amendment cycle.
a. If directed by the Board to initiate a special GMP A Cycle, due to lack of funding and current
staffing to supp011 what would be three simultaneous GMP amendment cycles as well as the
EAR, the timing and scheduling of the special cycle could jeopardize the timing of the EAR and
possibly the completion of the lAMP cycle. If the EAR is delayed or not found sufficient, the
statutory penalty, without exception, is the inability of a local government to propose
amendments to the GMP until such time that the EAR is found sufficient by the DCA.
~
b. The approved dates for the 07/08 GMP amendment cycle (See GMP Impact below) are tracking
on time. Likewise, the dates for the lAMP amendments are based on a finding of sufficiency and
completeness without the need for additional substantive data and analysis. lfthe Board approves
a special GMP A Cycle for the proposed RLSA amendments and the amendments are found to be
sufficient and complete prior to the proposed amendments ahead of the of the lAMP, it would be
practical to move these proposed amendments ahead of the lAMP amendment process. Again,
that would only be prudent if the lAMP is delayed while awaiting the submittal of any supporting
data and analysis.
3
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
September 15. 2009
Page 4 of 22
Option 3: Indefinite delay of any future amendments.
a. If the Board directs an indefinite delay of any future amendments at this time, staff anticipates
that the Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA) will likely comment in the EAR
Sufficiency finding that the County must address the RLSA Overlay recommendations presented
to the Board on April 21st. Policy 1.22 of the RLSA Overlay mandated the five year review of the
RLSA program by both Collier County and the DCA. The creation of the RLSA Review
Committee was by a Board policy directive. The Board accepted the "Phase I-Technical Report"
which was then transmitted to the DCA in late May, 2008. The DCA did not issue any fonnal
response to the transmitted "Phase I -Technical Report." The plain reading of Policy ] .22 would
indicate that no further data and analysis is required from Collier County nor does it require
amendments to the RLSA Overlay. The DCA has verbally disputed the plain reading of Policy
] .22 and contends that at the time of the 5-year Report stage that amendments to the RLSA are
warranted if the intent of the Goals, Objectives and Policies set forth in the RLSA program are
not being addressed per DCA's assessment.
In addition, any future RLSA proposed GMP Amendments must also be reviewed in conjunction
with SB 360 which became law when recently executed by Governor Crist. More specifically,
the provisions related to establislunent of an unknown trip mobility fee methodology and
corresponding legislation is of primary concern. At this time it is impossible to ascertain the
exact impacts of a trip mobility fee in lieu of transportation impact fees and transportation
concurrency as it exists in Collier County today. Likewise, any amendments related to eastern
.__~ Collier County will need to be intebrrated with the Board approved initiative, the Master Mobility
Study being undertaken by the Transportation Division.
In summary, the department is not adequately funded to take on an additional role of compiling
and finalizing the needed data and analysis to support the RLSA Special GMP A Cycle regardless
of the impacts and delays in processing the RLSA amendments. If funding is provided for a
Special GMP A Cycle, staff would outsource the project to a qualified finn. Additionally, the
Board would need to be available to meet to review these amendments during its traditional
summer recess in order to meet deadlines and avoid interference with the EAR process. If these
conditions are not acceptable to the Board, staff recommends Option 1, the EAR-Based Cycle
amendments, as the preferred option.
LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS:
The County Attorney's Office will assist staff with the implementation of the Board's direction.
This item is not quasi-judicial and as such, ex-parte disclosures are not required. A majority vote
is necessary for Board action. - HF AC
FISCAL IMPACT:
There are currently no funds budgeted in the proposed FY2010 County Budget for this special
GMP Amendment Cycle. However, should the Board direct staff to outsource the preparation of
the submittal and applicable reviews, the cost is estimated to range from $100,000 to $150,000.
Funding would come from Fund 111 Reserves in FY 2010.
0'-
4
Agenda Item No. 10A
September 15, 2009
Page 5 of 22
GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT:
The following schedules for the 07/08 GMP Amendments and the lmmokalee Area Master Plan
GMP Amendments have been approved by the Board:
2007-2008 Growth Mana2ement Plan Amendment Cycle Schedule
EAC Transmittal Hearing September 2, 2009
CCPC Transmittal Hearing #1 October 19,2009
CCPC Transmittal Hearing #2 October 20, 2009
CCPC Consent December 3, 2009
BCC Transmittal Hearing #1 January 19,2010
BCC Transmittal Hearing #2 February 2,2010
DCA ORC Report April 16, 2010
EAC Adoption Hearing June 2, 2010
CCPC Adoption Hearing #1 July 20,2010
CCPC Adoption Hearing #2 July 23,2010
CCPC Consent August 19, 20 I 0
BCC Adoption Hearing #1 September 21,2010
BCC Adoption Hearing #2 September 23,2010
Immokalee Area Master Plan Growth Mana2ement Plan Amendment Cvcle Schedule
EAC Transmittal Hearing December 15, 2009
CCPC Transmittal Hearing #1 January 29,2010
,,- CCPC Transmittal Hearing #2 February 16,2010
CCPC Consent Aprill, 2010
BCC Transmittal Hearing #1 May 4,2010
BCC Transmittal Hearing #2 May 18, 2010
DCA ORC Report July 30, 201 0
EAC Adoption Hearing September 22, 2010
CCPC Adoption Hearing #1 October 28,2010
CCPC Adoption Hearing #2 October 29, 2010
CCPC Consent December 2,2010
BCC Adoption Hearing #1 January 27 +/-, 2011
BCC Adoption Hearing #2 January 28 +/-, 2011
*Note: Standard hearing start times are as follows: EAC and BCC at 9:00a.m.; CCPC at
8:30a.m.
RURAL LANDS STEWARDSHIP AREA REVIEW COMMITTEE:
On October 24, 2007, the Board adopted Resolution 2007-305A, creating the Committee as an
ad hoc advisory committee to assist in the five-year review of the Rural Lands Stewardship Area
Overlay (RLSAO) of the Future Land Use Element of the GMP, as provided for in Policy 1.22 of
the RLSAO and the Section 4.08.04 G of the Land Development Code. Resolution 2007-305A
provided for a one year "sunset" for the Committee (i.e. October 24, 2008).
,,,,--....
On June 10,2008, the Board approved Resolution No. 2008-163 which extended the term of the
Committee members six (6) months to April 24, 2009, based upon the Committee's belief that it
5
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
September 15, 2009
Page 6 of 22
would not complete its assigmnents provided for in Resolution 2007 -305A prior to October 24,
2008.
On January 6,2009, the Committee voted unanimously to recommend to the Board that the term
of the Committee be extended an additional twelve (12) months to allow the Committee to
advise and make recommendations to the Board during a special GMP amendment cycle
requested by the Committee through its letter dated November 24, 2008, which was distributed
to the Board. On February 10,2009, the Board extended the tenn ofthe Committee to April 24,
2010 by approval of Resolution 2009-28.
Staff analysis of Resolution 2007 -305A indicates that the Committee has successfully completed
its functions, powers, and duties as provided for in Section Four of Resolution 2007 -305A which
is recited directly below.
1. Review data concerning the participation and effectiveness in the Overlay meeting the
Goal, Objective, and Policies in the Future Land Use Element of the Growth
Management Plan. ("Phase I Report" to the Board on ~Ma.v 26,2008)
2. Review the RLSA Overlay and make recommendations to increase the effectiveness of
the Overlay. ("Phase II Report " to the Board on April 21, 2(09)
3. Assist in determining the most effective venues and dates to hold public presentations.
4. Assist in promoting public interest in the review process.
.^""_....~,
The Committee last met on June 5, 2009, and directed that the Exhibit 2 letter be submitted to
the Board. There is no indication from the Committee of an interest to meet in the future. As
such, the Board may choose to dissolve the Committee with the understanding that the
Committee members and all other "Five-Year Review of the Rural Lands Stewardship Report"
participants would be given every opportunity to be kept infonned and encouraged to actively
participate in this GMP special GMPA Cycle for 2011 or 2012 EAR-based RLSA Overlay
amendments. Accordingly, a companion Resolution dissolving the Committee has been prepared
for separate action by the Board.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Board take one of the following actions:
1. Direct that the amendments to the RLSA Overlay, as identified in the Committee's
report, be incorporated into and considered as part of the EAR-based GMP Amendment
process; or
2. Direct staff to hire a consultant to prepare and process a 2011 Special Cycle RLSA GMP
Amendment. Work would begin in FY 2010 with funding appropriated from Fund 111
reserves; or
3. Direct staff to indefinitely delay any future amendments until such time that the needed
funding is identified.
4. Dissolve the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Review Committee
Prepared bv: Thomas Greenwood, AICP, Principal Planner, Comprehensive Planning
Department
,....-..
6
Item Number:
Item Summary:
Meeting Date:
.J. ~e""" J. ............-
Agenda Item No. 10A
September 15, 2009
Page 7 of 22
COLLIER COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
10A
Request approval that the Board of County Commissioners consider including the changes to
the Growth Management Plan RLSA Overlay of the Future Land Use Element with the
Evaluation and Appraisal Report Growth Management Plan Amendment process beginning
in 2012 or in the alternative holding a special Growth Management Plan Amendment Cycle in
2011 to address priority amendments as identified by the Five-Year Review of the Rural
Lands Stewardship Program report pursuant to the Special Meeting of the Board of County
Commissioners held on April 21, 2009. (Thomas Greenwood, Principal Planner,
Comprehensive Planning, COES)
9/15/2009 9:00:00 AM
Prepared By
Thomas Greenwood
Community Development &
Environmental Services
Principal Planner
Date
Comprehensive Planning
5/23/20099:42:51 AM
Approved By
Randall J. Cohen
Community Development &
Environmental Services
Comprehensive Planning Department
Director
Date
Comprehensive Planning
7/20/20092:18 PM
Approved By
Judy Puig
Community Development &
Environmental Services
Operations Analyst
Community Development &
Environmental Services Admin.
Date
Approved By
7/22/20099:48 AM
Mike Bosi, AICP
Community Development &
Environmental Services
Principal Planner
Date
Approved By
Zoning & Land Development Review
7/29/20098:02 AM
David Weeks, AICP
Community Development &
Environmental Services
Chief Planner
Date
Approved By
Comprehensive Planning
7/29/20099:25 AM
Joseph K. Schmitt
Community Development &
Environmental Services
Community Development &
Environmental Services Adminstrator
Date
Community Development &
Environmental Services Admin.
8/3/20098:32 AM
Approved By
Heidi F. Ashton
Assistant County Attorney
Date
..c:l_.JII't~\ A __._..J_4.__.t-\______~......\1..,A 0___....._.__L__~ 1~ ",""r\f\n\1f\ I'\r'\Tr'h.Trr'T....rA,,..T"~r:'n nrnr'\T\'T"\1r\
{\ In {"""'AC\
~ -0- - - ~ -
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
September 15, 2009
Page 8 of 22
County Attorney
County Attorney Office
8/1/20092:15 PM
Approved By
Jeff Klatzkow
County Attorney
Date
County Attorney
County Attorney Office
8/17/2009 1: 38 PM
Approved By
OMB Coordinator
OMS Coordinator
Date
County Manager's Office
Office of Management & Budget
8/20/2009 11 :50 AM
Approved By
Mark Isackson
Budget Analyst
Date
County Manager's Office
Office of Management & Budget
8/25/2009 9:27 AM
Approved By
Leo E. Ochs, Jr.
Board of County
Commissioners
Deputy County Manager
Date
County Manager's Office
918/20094:15 PM
.J:."".l_.!fr"'.\ It. ____..l_~__....\__~___~..J,..\1...,A CI___""__u1-___ 1C ""f"\f\1'\\1^ 0r\TT"lo.,T""""""'\Tl."-A'lrt..TA01:n T'lT'"""'T\r'\T)'T"'\1^
"If) ,,,,^r.A
Agenda Item No. 10A
September 15, 2009
Page 9 of 22
Exhibit 1
Note: These are partial BCC Minutes of April 21, 2009 meeting...pages 175
through 187.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'm just trying to contain
myself so I don't start talking again.
The motion is that we accept the committee's report and that
we move -- that I move to move it forward through the GMP
process incorporating the compromised changes associated with
caps on acreage and a cap on the credits. Did I leave anything
out?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: What's that banging noise up here?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'm sorry? 404,000 for the
cap, recognizing that you have to develop justifying backup data
to submit it to the process and that we make it very clear in the
process, in the notice document, that this does not bestow any
vested rights on any landowner, okay, and that there will be no
excess credits created; is that right?
And now you agree with me about the vested rights issue?
You agree that this plan does not create vested rights for credits?
MR. KLATZKOW: I think we can put in our Compo Plan
that exact statement.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay, okay.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And that -- and that is also your
second, Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I don't think we varied
from our original motion.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: No, no. I just wanted to make sure
everybody understands what we're doing.
And Joe, does that meet your needs?
MR. SCHMITT: Bullet number one, yes, ma'am.
1 I Page
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
September 15. 2009
Page 10 of 22
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, very good. So now we have
the motion as restated on the floor and the second.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And I'm opposed because I
am very emphatic about the credits of315,000 until such time as
we empty the granary.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Thank you for telling me
why you are opposed. Would you like to --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Everything else I agree.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: -- state yours as well?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I already did.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, very good.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I know it was a long time
ago.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: That's all right. I have a short
memory, too. It's written down someplace.
Okay. So now you're going to take this back--
MR. SCHMITT: Yes, ma'am. Based on that, we've
accepted the report. So the second piece, is it the board's desire
for staff to come back to you? We'll have to schedule a special
cycle for these -- this to be treated as a -- during a special GMP
cycle, and we'll come back to you in a formal executive summary
with dates proposed for that.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And let me just clarify. Special
GMP cycle does not mean that it goes before anything else? It
2 I ~.. OJ 9
Agenda Item No. 10A
September 15, 2009
Page 11 of 22
still goes to the bottom of the barrel? It's just a special--like an
individual cycle?
MR. SCHMITT: I'll make this simple. We're going to try
and do the '07 transmittal, followed by the Immokalee transmittal,
followed by these GMP amendments transmittal, and then we
start the train again with adoption. So it will be sequential.
I'm going to try and fit that in. We're going to look at the
dates, look at availability, look at your calendar, and all the other
things will be placed on your shoulders. So -- and I could -- LDC
hearings, you still have the sign LDC. You have lots of other
things. We just need to look at all that. And we'll come back to
you with a date.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Right. I just wanted to make sure
this -- so that everybody is clear that a special cycle does not
mean it's a special one that goes before anything else. It still is in
line with everything else. It's just an individual cycle.
MR. SCHMITT: Unless you so direct it bumps one of the
two that's scheduled.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: No, no, no. We would never do
that, or let me say I would never do that, okay.
Okay. So let's see. Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Are we bumping anybody
out from their submitting of their monies and documents for a
GMP amendment?
MR. SCHMITT: No, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. So this is -- this is
-- this is not going to slow down that process whatsoever?
MR. SCHMITT: No, sir. The dates are shown right there
on the executive summary.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: But the -- we're going to
put Immokalee into the RLS (sic) amendments?
3 I Page
Aqenda Item NO.1 OA
September 15, 2009
Page 12 of 22
MR. SCHMITT: No, sir. It will be a separate cycle. We'll
deal with the '07/'08 cycle, Immokalee will be separate because
that's -- you're going to have your hands full with that, and then
we will -- we will special -- schedule another cycle to deal strictly
with the RLSA amendments.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And the -- who's going to pay
for the cost of these amendments?
MR. SCHMITT: That's a good question. That's -- that was
one of the questions raised by Mr. Cohen as well that they -- in
your executive summary, I -- the five-year review was required
when you adopted the plan. There was no requirement to do a
follow-on amendment cycle so that that's -- that's for you to
direct.
I'll identify it in the budget as part of our budget preparation
if, in fact, you direct that it be absorbed -- we absorb the cost as
part of the -- in the county.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, when other people
come forward with a GMP amendment, they have to put money
up front to get that accomplished, and I don't see why we should
treat this any different than where a group of landowners want to
go forward with these GMP amendments. And I feel that in order
to address this, I think they need to come forward with the n10nies
that it's going to take to pay for staffs time.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: So did you have a motion on that or
something?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'll make a motion that we pay
-- that the outside people, the people involved in this Rural Land
Stewardship group, the landowners, step up to the plate and pay
their fair share to go through with the amendments.
4 I :: G S
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
September 15, 2009
Page 13 of 22
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll second that as long as
you say that Bill McDaniels will pay for it if they don't.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I have a motion on the floor by
Commissioner Halas and a second by Commissioner Henning.
Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Did I understand the phrase
their fair share in there somewhere?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I didn't hear that.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, he said pay their fair
share. What is their fair share?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: They're going to pay just the
-- they're going to pay whatever's required that we ask other
people to come forward when they request a GMP amendment.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Is that a fee, Joe?
MR. SCHMITT: Well, yes. There's a fee for a basic
amendment if you're going to come in as a private submittal. And
that fee, Randy, is what, 16,000? 16,500, that -- and then your
executive summary, we probably -- we estimate this will probably
run somewhere between -- and I turn the page here, 90,000.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Ninety-eight thousand or something
like that.
MR. SCHMITT: About $91,000 based on staff time and
everything involved.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Total? Or is that 90,000 in to
the fee that you charge?
MR. SCHMITT: No, that's ninety thousand total, not
counting the fee.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
MR. SCHMITT: I'm talking everything from legal
advertising, court reporter, cost of minutes, cost of printing,
everything involved.
5 I J?age
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
September 15, 2009
Page 14 of 22
Go ahead, Randy.
MR. COHEN: Just one other thing, and I think it's probably
a necessary item as well, too. If we're going to properly analyze
the credits in relationship as to how they entitle acreage, we're
probably going to have to have an outside economic consultant
take a look at it, just as we did with the rural fringe, and that cost
will probably have to be added to it as well.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And, quite frankly, I'm with
Commissioner Halas on this all the way, because our budget is so
bad as it is, we can't -- you know, we -- we let staff go, and we
can't even build roads and things now, and we can't -- we can't
afford to do something like this.
And I think we would jeopardize the whole county by us
forwarding this. So unless we find a funding source for this, I
could not vote on moving that forward.
MR. COHEN: And the one other thing is, I think we'll
probably need to put a caveat on that that would be with my staff
remaining the same as well, too.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's not in the motion.
MR. SCHMITT: Nick wanted --
MR. COHEN: I just wanted to let you know.
MR. SCHMITT: Nick wanted to add the transportation
study involved as well, and Nick, this is only your staff time
involved?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yeah. Nick Casalanguida with
transportation. We put in an estimate in there just for staff time,
not to go through and run the analysis of that transportation study
done by WilsonMiller.
Weare doing some analysis right now with our general, you
know, funding that we get annually. But to do a specific study of
what you're proposing, I'll have to put something together for Joe
6 I ~)~.c,'~
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
September 15, 2009
Page 15 of 22
to bring back to you and tell you what we would -- you know,
what it would take for us to do that.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, I think the costs have
got to --
MR. SCHMITT: I would recommend that we, as staff,
come back to you during one of the upcoming BCC meetings,
identify the dates for the special cycle, which then you can vote
on, and we'll also identify costs.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Good.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: So would you like to repeat your
motion, Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: The motion is that the special
cycle for this RLSA program be paid for by the landowners that
are involved in this process.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And just to reiterating, it's
not taking anybody out of the hopper right now.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That's true, and this is frrst in,
frrst out, right.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No cutsies.
MR. VARNADOE: Commissioner Fiala, could I make just
one comment. I just want to set the record straight. The
landowners did not ask for a Growth Management Plan
amendment.
You appointed a committee, you asked them to make some
recommendations to you, they did. They're the ones that are
recommending the Growth Management Plan amendment, not the
landowners. So when you say that, it's not our amendment,
Commissioner Halas. And I know that you don't want this to go
7 I Page
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
September 15. 2009
Page 16 of 22
forward, but let's be fair about it.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: No, no.
MR. VARNADOE: Wedidnot--
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I want it to go forward,
George, but there's -- we don't have the money, okay.
MR. V ARt~ADOE: We've taken --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: So if you want this to go
forward, George, somebody's going to have to step up to the
plate, and the taxpayers aren't going to step up to the plate on this.
We just don't have the money.
MR. VARNADOE: So why did we not think about this two
years ago when we appointed this committee?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, I don't know, because
things could change.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: We didn't have the problem two
years ago.
MR. VARNADOE: Well, the landowners are willing to
talk to your staff about participating, but this is not our
amendment, and I want that clearly on the record. That was your
committee that made this recommendation.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Well, we don't even have to go
forward then as long as that's the case.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Oh, no, no, no.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, let's vote on this with
the idea that this thing has still got to come back with Joe to be
able to give us a total in-depth story of what the cost is going to
be.
At that point in time, we can hear from everybody and his
brother, and if we have to, modify our decision if there's any
reason to do so.
8 I F '~.::
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
September 15. 2009
Page 17 of 22
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Go ahead.
MR. SCHMITT: If I could clarify. Ifwe don't do it now,
we end up doing it as part of the -- probably as part of our
EAR-based amendments, and that's going to delay it probably,
Randy, 2012, 2013 when -- by the time we do an EAR and then
do our EAR-based amendments, because essentially what you did
here was an evaluation and appraisal report of your GMP but only
for the Rural Land Stewardship Program.
Certainly those kinds of things are absorbed by the taxpayer
as part of your every-seven-year amendment cycle. And if we
don't do it as part of the special cycle, it would most likely fall
into the EAR process.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Any other comments from
commissioners?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Just one quick one. That's
also something else that can be weighed out by the landowners at
that point in time, you know, whether that cost is justified against
waiting in the -- for a time off in the distant future.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. We have a motion on the
floor and a second.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: 'Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. We have a 4-1 vote on that.
Okay.
MR. SCHMITT: And the third one you've already
discussed, so we're not bumping any other cycles.
9 I Page
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
September 15. 2009
Page 18 of 22
Go ahead, Randy.
MR. COHEN: Commissioners, there's one other thing that I
think we need clarified. This committee has done Phase I and it's
done Phase II. Obviously we have other things that are still going
to be in the hopper for them to review or participate in.
The question really is is, is it your intent for this committee
to continue to meet at various times and stay in existence, or is it
-- are we at a point in time now that we're -- the report's moving
forward and it's going to be moved into a GMP amendment cycle,
do you want the committee to redissolve? And that's a
fundamental question as to how you view this committee and how
you want their involvelnent.
Obviously with amendments moving forward and the like,
you may want them to continue to be in existence and be an
active group as stakeholders, and that's your call.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We asked them to provide
a report on any changes, and they have done that. They've done a
very good job on it. That is going to be a cost to continue that,
just like the east of lands study committee. That's going to
continue. There's a cost on to that.
At a certain point, even our president says, you know, he's
going to cut some of these out. We need to do the same thing.
We need to thank the committee formally through a letter by the
chair, and move on.
MR. SCHMITT: Yeah. Ifwe continue with these
meetings, minutes, televising them, sometimes televising these
meetings. We could certainly sunset this committee but still have
stakeholders involved as it evolves through the -- through the
amendment process, and certainly there will be involvement from
the landowners, and most likely because of the authors of this --
10 I .~ 3. 9 e
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
September 15, 2009
Page 19 of 22
WilsonMiller when they developed the original plan, will
certainly be involved in this as well.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. I understand where
Commissioner Henning's suggestion's coming from, and I'd like
to save money whenever possible; however, this committee has
been quite a resource that we have come to depend upon, and we
wouldn't be as far as we have been as far as bringing this plan
forward if it wasn't for them.
I would suggest that we have them meet one more time
when Mr. Schmitt gets the proposal together so that they can
critique it and offer us their final advice, and at that point in time
sunset them, because we're far from completed here. We have --
we have some stuff still in flux.
MR. SCHMITT: That's fair. When we come back with the
GMP amendment, we'll identify what -- the desires of the
committee in regards to whether they would like to continue or
sunset, and we'll bring that back as well.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. All in agreement? Do I see
some nods from my commissioners? Yeah.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Boy, that was turned
around. Geez.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Go ahead, comment.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioner Coletta said
about the executive summary, bringing it back on the next agenda
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, I didn't say that and
get the committee's recommendations. What you said is get the
GMP amendments together and then --
MR. SCHMITT: No, sir. I'm coming back to you with an
executive summary to identify the dates for the special cycle --
11 IF;:) <) e
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
September 15. 2009
Page 20 of 22
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right.
MR. SCHMITT: -- along with the costs. What I heard
Commissioner Coletta say was also for the committee to meet one
more time to discuss what their future is.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: When you have the
information together --
MR. SCHMITT: The information on the --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- and you can come back
with your staff recolnmendations so that they can dovetail
everything that they learned into that to be able to bring us to a
final conclusion.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: When do you anticipate that
happen, to bring that back?
MR. SCHMITT: It would be --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: The final conclusion.
MR. SCHMITT: I'm thinking of the dates, the May 12th
meeting. It may be the second meeting in May, the BCC meeting.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: All right. And then we can
sunset it after that.
MR. SCHMITT: Whatever your direction is. I heard
Commissioner Henning say --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm going to make a
motion that we sunset the RLS (sic) Committee and direct the
chairman to write a letter of appreciation for their time.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: You mean sunset them today, or
what do you mean?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, I think we have to
do that formally on an agenda.
MR. SCHMITT: I would have to look at the ordinance. I
don't recall -- I can't recall if there was an official sunsetting date.
I'm looking at Jeff. I have to look at --
12 I F '3 9 e
Agenda Item No.1 OA
September 15, 2009
Page 21 of 22
MR. KLATZKOW: How about when Joe comes with his
executive summary we can take care of the issue at that point in
time --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right.
MR. KLA TZKOW: -- one way or the other.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. So in other words,
leave it open. I just, that last bit of information, I'd love the
feedback from that committee. I see what you're saying. Give us
a choice that we can work with, then I have no problem with that.
And I assume that they probably want to get on with the rest of
their lives, but don't relax too long. We're going to recycle you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Now, you've made the
motion. Is that a second?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, no. I didn't second.
Well, the motion that Commissioner Henning made didn't quite
represent what I'm looking for. His was just to sunset it now.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Would you like to restate your
motion, Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You said you're going to
bring it back -- we're going to bring it back up on the agenda?
MR. KLATZKOW: Mr. Schmitt's bringing it back on the
executive summary on this entire matter. This could be one of the
issues he brings up as well.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's fine.
MR. SCHMITT: We extended this committee --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I remove my motion.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
MR. SCHMITT: -- once, and I'm not aware of the dates, so
we'll bring it back.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, very good. So now
everybody's set? May I have a motion to --
13 I ;::> a 9 .2
Agenda Item NO.1 OA
September 15, 2009
Page 22 of 22
Exhibit 2
June 10, 2009
The Honorable Donna Fiala, Chairman
and Members of the Collier County Board of County Commissioners
3301 East Tamiami Trail
Naples, Florida, 34112
Dear Chairman Fiala and Commissioners:
The Rural Lands Stewardship Area Review Committee ("the Committee") on June 5, 2009, asked me, as
its Chairman, to submit a letter to the Board of County Commissioners (Board) advising that the
Committee has completed its functions, powers and duties as provided for in Section 4 of Board
Resolution 2oo7-305A which was adopted on October 24, 2007. These functions, powers, and duties
included the research and preparation of both the Phase 1 Report (review of the Rural Lands Stewardship
Program activities during the first 5 years) and the Phase II Report (review and recommendations
regarding the Rural Lands Stewardship Overlay).
The Committee wishes to thank the Board for its support to proceed with a special Growth Management
Plan Amendment Cycle for considering the Committee recommendations to improve the Rural Lands
Stewardship Area Overlay of the Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan. These
recommendations are contained within the Phase II Report which was heard during the public hearing
held before the Board on April 21, 2009. The Committee feels strongly that the process it followed
allowed for maximum public participation in the Committee's meetings and assisted the Committee in
making its findings and recommendations.
As Chairman, my job was made easier through the very dedicated members who actively served on the
Committee including Neno Spagna, Vice-Chairman, Brad Cornell, Zach Floyd Crews, Gary Eidson,
David Farmer, Jim Howard, Tom Jones, Bill McDaniel, Timothy Nance, Tammie Nemecek, Fred N.
Thomas, Jr., and Dave Wolfley.
On behalf of the Committee, it has been a pleasure to serve the Board and Collier
County while completing this project in a timely manner as originally set forth in the Project Management
Plan. Please plan to keep me and the members of the Committee informed of the progress of our
recommendations as they are addressed in the Growth Management Plan Amendment Cycle.
Very sincerely yours,
K/C $~
.:3Jl.
Ron Hamel, Chairman
Rural Lands Stewardship Area Review Committee
CC: County Manager James V. Mudd