BCC Minutes 09/28/2021 RSeptember 28, 2021
Page 1
TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Naples, Florida
September 28, 2021
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: Penny Taylor
William L. McDaniel, Jr.
Rick LoCastro
Burt L. Saunders
Andy Solis
ALSO PRESENT:
Sean Callahan, Interim County Manager
Amy Patterson, Deputy County Manager
Jeffrey A. Klatzkow, County Attorney
Derek Johnssen, Clerk's Office
Troy Miller, Communications & Customer Relations
Page 1
September 28, 2021
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
September 28, 2021
9:00 AM
Commissioner Penny Taylor, District 4 - Chair - CRAB Co-Chair
Commissioner William L. McDaniel, Jr., District 5; - Vice Chair - CRAB Co-Chair
Commissioner Rick LoCastro, District 1
Commissioner Andy Solis, District 2
Commissioner Burt Saunders, District 3
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
September 28, 2021
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. Invocation by Reverend Edward Gleason of Trinity By The Cove Episcopal
Church
Invocation given
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.)
Approved and/or Adopted w/changes – 4/0 (Commissioner McDaniel
absent)
B. September 9, 2021 - BCC Budget Hearing Meeting Minutes
Approved as Presented – 4/0 (Commissioner McDaniel absent)
3. AWARDS AND RECOGNITIONS
Page 3
September 28, 2021
A. EMPLOYEE
B. ADVISORY BOARD MEMBERS
C. RETIREES
D. EMPLOYEE OF THE MONTH
1) Item #16F1 - Jared Del Re, Employee of the Month – August 2021
Read into the record
4. PROCLAMATIONS
A. Proclamation designating October 1, 2021, as Naples Better Government
Day in Collier County. The proclamation will be mailed to Sally Tiffany,
President, Naples Better Government.
Presented (No vote taken to adopt)
5. PRESENTATIONS
6. PUBLIC PETITIONS
7. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS NOT ON THE CURRENT
OR FUTURE AGENDA
A. Dan Cook – Mandatory vaccine policies
B. Jackie Keay – Affordable Housing & Homelessness
C. Nancy Lewis – Essential Services Personnel (ESP) Affordable Housing
D. Richard Schroeder – Vaccine Mandates
E. Lisa Hunsberger – David Lawrence Center Policies
F. Meagan Maddux – David Lawrence Center Policies
G. Chad Taylor – COVID/Vaccines Mandates
H. Steven Bracci – Commissioner Newsletter w/NCH Update stating that
the unvaccinated are the predominate driver of cases.
8. BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
9. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. This Item has been continued from the September 14, 2021 BCC
Page 4
September 28, 2021
Meeting Agenda. 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 an
Ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County,
Florida amending Ordinance Number 2004-41, as amended, the Collier
County Land Development Code, which established the comprehensive
zoning regulations for the unincorporated area of Collier County, Florida, by
amending the appropriate zoning atlas map or maps by changing the zoning
classification of the herein described real property from an Agricultural (A)
zoning district to a Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) zoning
district for the project to be known as Blue Coral Apartments RPUD, to
allow development of up to 234 multi-family rental units, of which 70 will
be rent restricted as affordable. The subject property is located on the south
side of Immokalee Road, approximately 1000 feet west of Juliet Boulevard,
in Section 30, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida,
consisting of 9.35± acres and by providing an effective date.
(PL20190001600) (This is a companion to Item PL20190001620 Agenda
Item #9B) (District 2)
Ordinance 2021-31 Adopted – 5/0
B. This Item has been continued from the September 14, 2021 BCC
Meeting Agenda. An Ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of
Collier County, Florida amending Ordinance No. 89-05, as amended, the
Collier County Growth Management Plan for the unincorporated area of
Collier County, Florida, specifically amending the Future Land Use Element
and Map Series by adding the Immokalee Road Interchange Residential
Infill subdistrict to the Urban, Mixed Use district to allow development of up
to 234 multi-family rental units, of which 70 will be rent restricted as
affordable. The subject property is located on the south side of Immokalee
Road, approximately 1000 feet west of Juliet Boulevard, in Section 30,
Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, consisting of
9.35± acres and furthermore, directing transmittal of the adopted amendment
to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity; providing for
severability and providing for an effective date. [PL20190001620/CPSS-
2020-2] (This is a companion to Item PL20190001600, Agenda Item #9A)
(District 2)
Ordinance 2021-32 Adopted – 5/0
Moved from Item #17B (Per Agenda Change Sheet)
C. This item requires ex parte disclosure be provided by the Commission
Page 5
September 28, 2021
members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all participants are
required to be sworn in. Recommendation to approve Ordinance Number
2004-41, as amended, the Collier County Land Development Code, which
established the comprehensive zoning regulations for the unincorporated
area of Collier County, Florida, by amending the appropriate zoning atlas
map or maps by changing the zoning classification of the herein described
real property from a Rural Agricultural (A) Zoning District to a Residential
Planned Unit Development (RPUD) Zoning District for the project to be
known as Soluna RPUD, to allow construction of up to 108 dwelling units
on property located southwest of the intersection of Tree Farm Road and
Massey Street, in Section 35, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, consisting
of 18.5± acres; and by providing an effective date. [PL20210000093]
(District 5)
Ordinance 2021-33 Adopted – 5/0
10. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
11. COUNTY MANAGER'S REPORT
A. Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chair to sign an Eighth
Amendment to Contract No. 04-3673 with Carollo Engineers, Inc.,
pertaining to the design of the Northeast County Water Reclamation Facility,
in the amount of $4,819,950. (Tom Chmelik, Public Utilities Engineering
and Project Management Division Director) (All Districts)
Approved – 5/0
B. Recommendation to award Invitation to Bid (“ITB”) #21-7899, “Hamilton
Avenue Improvements,” in the amount of $3,246,304.75 to Haskins, Inc.,
authorize the Chair to sign the attached Agreement, and approve the
necessary budget amendments. (Ayoub Al-Bahou, Principal Project
Manager, Facilities Management Division) (District 4)
Approved – 5/0
C. Recommendation to accept an update on the American Rescue Plan (ARP)
Act Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Fund (Kristi Sonntag,
Director, Community & Human Services). (All Districts)
Approved – 5/0
Moved from Item #16B1 (Per Agenda Change Sheet)
D. Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners, acting as the
Page 6
September 28, 2021
Community Redevelopment Agency Board (CRA), approve a resolution
renaming the Bayshore Gateway Triangle Site Improvement Grant Program
to Single Family Improvement Grant Program and updating eligible
activities and process; and placing the remaining residential grant programs
in the Bayshore Gateway Triangle Community Redevelopment Area on hold
until further notice. (District 4)
Motion to continue to a later date as a regular agenda item and keep
applicants on hold – Approved – 5/0
12. COUNTY ATTORNEY'S REPORT
A. The Annual Performance Appraisal for the County Attorney (All Districts)
Approved – 5/0
13. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
14. AIRPORT AUTHORITY AND/OR COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY
A. AIRPORT
1) Recommendation to approve the award of Invitation to Bid (“ITB”)
No. 21-7897, “Everglades Airpark-Runway 15-33 Rehabilitation-
Grant Funded,” in the amount of $1,748,853.75 to Quality Enterprises
USA, Inc., and authorize the Chair to sign the attached Agreement
(Andrew Bennett, Executive Airport Manager). (District 5)
Approved – 5/0
B. COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
15. STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS
A. Commissioner Solis – TDC Update; Congratulations to Jack Wert for
18 years of service.
B. Commissioner Taylor – Bring the Mosquito Control issue to a future
meeting; Resiliency studies for all airports; Create a Proclamation for
the Zuchi Foundation and send it to them – Consensus; Infill effects on
the community such as dumpsters, lighting, buffers, and amplified
sounds; Disposal of County Property and giving (501c3) non-profits the
chance to benefit; Staff to evaluate Imagine Solutions that is looking for
Page 7
September 28, 2021
County Support
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Approved and/or Adopted w/changes – 4/0 (Commissioner McDaniel absent)
A. GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
1) Recommendation to approve the release of a code enforcement lien,
with an accrued value of $42,059.28 for payment of $5,000 in the
code enforcement action titled, Board of County Commissioners v.
Tam Thanh Nguyen and Tammy Nguyen, relating to property located
at 5175 Green Blvd, Collier County, Florida. (District 3)
Brought into compliance on May 18, 2021
2) Recommendation to approve final acceptance and accept the
conveyance of the potable water and sewer utility facilities for Ranch
at Orange Blossom Phase 3B, PL20200000486 and 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. (District 5)
3) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the potable water and
sewer utility facilities and accept the conveyance of a portion of the
potable water utility facilities for Founders Square Storage,
PL20210001390. (District 5)
4) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the potable water and
sewer utility facilities and accept the conveyance of a portion of the
potable water utility facilities for Founders Square Medical Office
Building, PL20210001144. (District 5)
5) Recommendation to accept the conveyance of a sidewalk easement
(Parcels 108SWE1, 108SWE2, 108SWE3) to facilitate Collier
County’s maintenance of the public sidewalk along the south side of
Mainsail Drive. (District 1)
Page 8
September 28, 2021
6) Recommendation to accept the conveyance of a sidewalk easement
(Parcels 105SWE1, 105SWE2) to facilitate Collier County’s
maintenance of the public sidewalk along the south side of Mainsail
Drive. (District 1)
7) Recommendation to approve an Adopt-a-Road Program Agreement
for the roadway segment of Golden Gate Parkway from Santa Barbara
Blvd to CR 951, with two (2) recognition signs and two (2) Adopt-a-
Road logo signs for a total cost of $200 with the volunteer group,
Sellstars Affinity Realty (District 3)
8) Recommendation to approve an Adopt-a-Road Program Agreement
for the roadway segment of Goodlette Frank Road from Golden Gate
Parkway to Creech Road, with two (2) recognition signs and two (2)
Adopt-a-Road logo signs for a total cost of $200 with the volunteer
group, Naples High School. (District 4)
9) 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 final plat of Valencia Trails Naples – Plat
Three (Application Number PL20210000755) approval of the
standard form Construction and Maintenance Agreement and approval
of the amount of the performance security. (District 5)
10) Recommendation to amend Exhibit “A” to Resolution No. 2013-238,
as amended, the list of Speed Limits on County Maintained Roads, to
reflect speed limit changes at three separate locations. (All Districts)
Resolution 2021-192
11) Recommendation to approve a Resolution amending the Collier
County Growth Management Department Development Services Fee
Schedule, with an effective date of October 1, 2021, to comply with
recent Florida State Legislative changes. (All Districts)
Resolution 2021-193
12) Recommendation to approve the selection committee’s ranking for
Request for Professional Services (“RPS”) #21-7877, “Construction
Engineering and Inspection (CEI) Services for TIGER Grant,” and
authorize staff to begin contract negotiations with the top ranked firm,
Page 9
September 28, 2021
Kisinger Campo & Associates Corp., so that staff can bring a
proposed agreement back for the Board’s consideration at a
subsequent meeting. (District 5)
13) Recommendation to approve the Tourist Development Council Grant
application requests from the City of Naples, the City of Marco Island
and Collier County for FY2021-2022 in the amount of $8,362,600;
budget these expenditures; authorize the Chairman to execute an
Agreement with the City of Naples; and make a finding that these
expenditures promote tourism. (All Districts)
14) Recommendation to approve the electronic submittal of the 2020/2021
Federal Highway Administration Flexible Funds Grant Award
(Section 5307) in the amount of $500,000 in the Transit Award
Management System for the purchase of a 40 ft. fixed-route bus and
authorize the necessary Budget Amendment. (All Districts)
15) Recommendation to approve budget amendments reducing budgeted
grant revenues in the amount of $499,402.50 and reallocating funds to
fund current contracts due to the termination of Federal Emergency
Management Agency Hazard Mitigation Grant Program Sub-
Recipient Agreements H0309 (Solana Rd), H0379 (Gordon River
AMIL Gate), H0393 (Goodlette Rd), H0452 (Freedom Park Pump
Station), H0459 (Upper Gordon River Improvements) and H0501
(Big Cypress Golf and Country Club) with the Florida Division of
Emergency Management. (All Districts)
16) Recommendation to approve and execute a Local Agency Program
Agreement with the Florida Department of Transportation in which
Collier County would be reimbursed up to $703,613 for construction
of Corkscrew Road curve at Wildcat Dr., and to authorize the
necessary budget amendments (Project #60233) (FPN 446323-1-58-
01) (District 5)
Resolution 2021-194
17) Recommendation to approve Change Order No. 2 to Contract Number
21-7834 with Thomas Marine Construction Inc., “Freedom Park
Bypass Ditch Improvements,” to extend the length of the construction
contract by 60 days. (Project Number #60102) (District 4)
Page 10
September 28, 2021
B. COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
Moved to Item #11D (Per Agenda Change Sheet)
1) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners, acting as
the Community Redevelopment Agency Board (CRA), approve a
resolution renaming the Bayshore Gateway Triangle Site
Improvement Grant Program to Single Family Improvement Grant
Program and updating eligible activities and process; and placing the
remaining residential grant programs in the Bayshore Gateway
Triangle Community Redevelopment Area on hold until further
notice. (District 4)
C. PUBLIC UTILITIES DEPARTMENT
1) Recommendation to approve and execute documents necessary for the
conveyance of a Utility Facility Warranty Deed and Bill of Sale for
potable water infrastructure on County owned property located at the
Collier County Sports Complex and Events Center, 3920 City Gate
Blvd N, to the Collier County Water-Sewer District, at no cost to the
County. (District 5)
2) Recommendation to approve the documents necessary to terminate a
portion of an existing Collier County Utility Easement to JDA
Courthouse Shadows, LLC, a South Carolina limited liability
company, associated with the development at Courthouse Shadows.
(District 1)
3) Recommendation to approve and adopt the FY22 fee schedules
established in the 2021 Solid Waste Rate Study and Financial Forecast
Report approved on July 13, 2021 and escalation of contracted
Franchisee fees. (All Districts)
Resolution 2021-195
4) Recommendation to approve a purchase order under Agreement No.
19-7527 to Technical Management Associates, Inc., for the “Tamiami
Wells 9-16 MCC Replacement,” in the amount of $453,000 and the
necessary budget amendment. (Project Number 70085) (District 5)
D. PUBLIC SERVICES DEPARTMENT
Page 11
September 28, 2021
1) Recommendation to approve and authorize the removal of
uncollectible receivables of $5,556.98 from the financial records of
the Parks and Recreation Division under Resolution No. 2006-252 and
authorize the Chair to execute the attached Resolution. (All Districts)
Resolution 2021-196
2) Recommendation to authorize a Budget Amendment recognizing Park
and Recreation Insurance Claim #50-03262111294 proceeds, in the
amount of $8,503.22. (All Districts)
3) Recommendation to adopt a Resolution authorizing non-ad valorem
special assessment on hospital-owned properties or properties used as
a hospital as authorized by the Local Provider Participation Fund for
the Directed Payment Program established by Ordinance No 2021-23
and authorize the necessary budget amendment; and to authorize the
County Manager or designee to sign the Letter of Agreement in an
amount not to exceed the total of $6,687,755 with the Agency for
Health Care Administration to participate in the Local Provider
Participation Fund that will provide additional health services for the
citizens of Collier County. (All Districts)
Resolution 2021-197
4) Recommendation to approve an “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 to Revise Attachment VIII Budget and
Rate Summary. (All Districts)
5) Recommendation to approve and authorize the chairperson to sign
eighteen (18) mortgage satisfactions for the State Housing Initiatives
Partnership loan program in the amount of $232,450 and the
associated Budget Amendments. (All Districts)
6) Recommendation to approve an agreement in the amount of $443,611
with the Agency for Health Care Administration and an agreement
with Collier Health Services, Inc., and authorize necessary Budget
Amendments to participate in the Medicaid Low Income Pool
Program, generating $572,728 in federal matching funds that will
provide additional health services for the citizens of Collier County.
(All Districts)
Page 12
September 28, 2021
7) Recommendation to accept and appropriate a one-time donation of
$100,000 from the Friends of the Library of Collier County, Inc., to
the Collier County Public Library for the purchase of eBooks and
eAudio to enhance the Library’s electronic materials collection, and to
authorize the necessary Budget Amendment. (All Districts)
8) Recommendation to approve the submittal of the FY21-22 State Aid
to Libraries Grant and authorize the Chairperson to sign the Grant
Agreement #22-ST-08 and all certifications required for the
submission of the grant application to the Florida Department of State
Division of Library and Information Services for funding in the
estimated amount of $163,954. (All Districts)
9) Recommendation to approve Year 1 of a 3-year Centers for Disease
Control grant award to support the Prevention Community Health
Workers for COVID-19 Response for Resilient Communities Program
in the amount of $421,744 and authorize the necessary Budget
Amendment. (All Districts)
10) Recommendation to approve the “After-the-Fact” electronic submittal
of two (2) State Department of Economic Opportunity (DEO)
Community Development Block Grant Mitigation (CDBG-MIT)
Infrastructure applications to the State Department of Economic
Opportunity in the amount of $29,362,941. (All Districts)
11) Recommendation to authorize a Budget Amendment recognizing
$25,000.01 in program income under the U.S. Housing and Urban
Development Community Development Block Grant Program. (All
Districts)
E. ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
1) Recommendation to approve the administrative reports prepared by
the Procurement Services Division for change orders and other
contractual modifications requiring Board approval. (All Districts)
2) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to execute a
Resolution adopting the Pay and Classification Plans for the County
Manager’s Agency and County Attorney’s Office effective October 1,
Page 13
September 28, 2021
2021; to provide a general wage adjustment to eligible employees; and
to approve the creation of new classifications, modification and/or
deletion of classifications, from July 1, 2021 forward, using the
existing point-factor job evaluation system. (All Districts)
Resolution 2021-198
3) Recommendation to approve the administrative report prepared by the
Procurement Services Division for disposal of property and
notification of revenue disbursement. (All Districts)
4) Recommendation to approve the purchase of Liability, Automobile,
and other insurance coverage for FY 2022 in the estimated premium
of $897,494. (All Districts)
5) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approve
and authorize the Chairman to execute a Florida Emergency Medical
Services County Grant Application, Request for Grant Fund
Distribution Form requesting grant funds be remitted to the Collier
County Board of Commissioners and Resolution for the funding of
Training and Medical/Rescue Equipment in the amount of
$66,374.00, confirming that the grant funds will not supplant the EMS
budget. (All Districts)
Resolution 2021-199
F. COUNTY MANAGER OPERATIONS
1) Recommendation to recognize Jared Del Re, Public Services
Department, Library Division as the August 2021 Employee of the
Month.
Recognized
2) Recommendation to adopt a resolution approving amendments
(appropriating grants, donations, contributions or insurance proceeds)
to the FY20-21 Adopted Budget. (All Districts)
Resolution 2021-200
3) Recommendation to renew the annual Certificate of Public
Convenience and Necessity (COPCN) for Ambitrans Medical
Transport, Inc. to provide Class 2 Advanced Life Support (ALS) inter-
facility transport ambulance service for a period of one year. (All
Page 14
September 28, 2021
Districts)
4) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chair to execute a
Federally Funded Subgrant Agreement to accept the Emergency
Management Performance Grant-American Rescue Plan Act (EMPG-
ARPA) G0245 in the amount of $13,926 for emergency management
planning, response, and mitigation efforts and to authorize the
necessary budget amendments. (Project No. 33770) (All Districts)
5) Recommendation to approve a Resolution supporting the Bureau of
Emergency Services, Emergency Management Division working with
its partner agencies and County divisions to participate in nuclear
power plant drills and exercises in conjunction with the Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Florida Division of Emergency Management (FDEM),
and Florida Power and Light. (All Districts)
Resolution 2021-201
6) Recommendation to authorize the County Manager to enter into a
short-term lease for commercial and/or industrial space for the
purposes of offering monoclonal antibody therapy delivered by the
Florida Division of Emergency Management in cooperation with the
Florida Department of Health Collier County and authorize any
necessary budget amendments. (All Districts)
Continued to the October 12, 2021 BCC Meeting (Per Agenda Change Sheet)
7) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to sign the
Extension and Amendment of the Agreement with The Partnership for
Collier’s Future Economy, Inc. (“Partnership”) in continued support
of the established public-private partnership designed to advance the
County’s economic development efforts. (All Districts)
G. AIRPORT AUTHORITY
1) Recommendation to approve the Collier County Airport Authority
Standard Form Lease Agreement with Global Flight Training
Solutions, LLC for aeronautical use office space at the Marco Island
Executive Airport (District 1)
2) Recommendation to approve the submittal of the attached Federal
Page 15
September 28, 2021
Aviation Administration (FAA) American Rescue Plan Act Grant
applications to request eligible funds in the amount of $59,000 for the
Marco Island Executive Airport (MKY) and $32,000 for the
Immokalee Regional Airport (IMM) and designate the County
Manger as the authorized representative to submit the application and
accept the award electronically. (District 1, District 5)
3) Recommendation to approve the attached Change Order #1 to
Agreement No. 20-7726 with Atkins North America, Inc., “CEI
Services for Immokalee Regional Airport Runway 18-36 and Taxiway
C Extension Projects,” to extend the schedule for CEI Services for the
Runway 18/36 Rehabilitation project by 85 days. (District 5)
H. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
1) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chair to sign the
Eleventh Amendment to the Agreement for Medical Examiner
Services (Agreement No. 11-5776 - Medical Examiner), which will
extend the term of the Agreement to September 30, 2022. (All
Districts)
I. MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
1) Miscellaneous Correspondence (All Districts)
J. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
1) 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 September 2, 2021 and September 15, 2021 pursuant
to Florida Statute 136.06. (All Districts)
2) Request that the Board approve and determine valid public purpose
for invoices payable and purchasing card transactions as of September
22, 2021. (All Districts)
3) Report to the Board regarding the investment of County funds as of
the quarter ended June 30, 2021. (All Districts)
Page 16
September 28, 2021
4) Recommendation to approve Tax Collector request for advance
commissions in accordance with Florida Statute 192.102(1) for
FY2022. (All Districts)
5) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approve
Amendment No. 1 to Contract No. 14-001 with First Florida Integrity
Bank to extend the contract term for depository banking services and
authorize the Chair to sign the attached agreement. (All Districts)
6) Recommendation to extend the 2021 Tax Roll at the request of Tax
Collector Rob Stoneburner. (All Districts)
7) Recommendation to approve an Amendment to the Interlocal
Agreement for Election Services for the February 1, 2022, City of
Naples General Election. (District 4)
K. COUNTY ATTORNEY
1) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners reviews
and approves the proposed FY 2021-2022 Action Plan for Jeffrey A.
Klatzkow, County Attorney. (All Districts)
2) Recommendation to appoint a member to the Parks and Recreation
Advisory Board. (All Districts)
Resolution 2021-202: Appointing Kenneth Lee Dixon to fill a
vacant seat which expires on December 31, 2022
3) Recommendation to appoint a member to Conservation Collier Land
Acquisition Advisory Committee. (All Districts)
Resolution 2021-203: Appointing Karyn Allman to fill a vacant
seat expiring on February 24, 2024
4) Recommendation to reappoint two members to the Collier County
Citizen Corps. (All Districts)
Resolution 2021-204: Re-appointing Reginald Buxton (Chamber
of Commerce) and Walter Jaskiewicz (Coast Guard Auxiliary) to
terms expiring November 5, 2025
5) Recommendation to reappoint three members to the Lely Golf Estates
Beautification Advisory Committee (District 1)
Page 17
September 28, 2021
Resolution 2021-205: Re-appointing Tony Branco, Linda Rae
Jorgensen and Kathleen Slebodnik all w/terms expiring on
October 1, 2025
6) Recommendation to approve a Stipulated Final Judgment in the
amount of $245,000 plus $42,938 in statutory attorney and experts’
fees and costs for the taking of Parcel 230FEE, required for the
Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension Project No. 60168. (All Districts)
7) Recommendation to approve a Stipulated Final Judgment in the
amount of $15,000 plus $11,271 in statutory attorney and experts’
fees and costs for the taking of Parcel 1259RDUE, required for the
Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension Project No. 60168. (All Districts)
8) Recommendation to approve a Stipulated Final Judgment in the
amount of $70,000 plus $20,374.25 in statutory attorney and experts’
fees and costs for the taking of Parcel 1106FEE, required for the
Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension Project No. 60168. (All Districts)
9) Recommendation to approve a Stipulated Final Judgment in the
amount of $15,000 plus $7,500 in statutory attorney and experts’ fees
and costs for the taking of Parcel 1269RDUE, required for the
Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension Project No. 60168. (All Districts)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Adopted – 4/0 (Commissioner McDaniel absent)
A. Recommendation to amend Ordinance No. 2002-52, as amended, which
established the Immokalee Beautification Advisory Committee, to reduce
Page 18
September 28, 2021
quorum requirements at meetings from four to three members. (District 5)
Ordinance 2021-30
Moved to Item #9C (Per Agenda Change Sheet)
B. This item requires 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 Ordinance Number
2004-41, as amended, the Collier County Land Development Code, which
established the comprehensive zoning regulations for the unincorporated
area of Collier County, Florida, by amending the appropriate zoning atlas
map or maps by changing the zoning classification of the herein described
real property from a Rural Agricultural (A) Zoning District to a Residential
Planned Unit Development (RPUD) Zoning District for the project to be
known as Soluna RPUD, to allow construction of up to 108 dwelling units
on property located southwest of the intersection of Tree Farm Road and
Massey Street, in Section 35, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, consisting
of 18.5± acres; and by providing an effective date. [PL20210000093]
(District 5)
Continued to the October 12, 2021 BCC Meeting (Per Agenda Change Sheet)
C. A Resolution of the Board of County Commissioners proposing
amendments to the Collier County Growth Management Plan, Ordinance 89-
05, as amended, relating to the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District Restudy and
specifically amending the Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential
Fringe Subdistrict and the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District of the Future
Land Use Element to require Transfer of Development Rights for
Comprehensive Plan amendments for increased residential density;
amending the Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Fringe
Subdistrict to remove the density bonus cap on residential in-fill and remove
the requirement to use Transfer of Development Rights within one mile of
the Urban boundary; and amending the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District of
the Future Land Use Element to change development standards and
requirements, to increase density on Receiving Lands located along
Immokalee Road, increase density on Receiving Lands for affordable
housing, add Transfer of Development Rights Credits, add uses in Receiving
areas, and add a conditional use for recreation in Sending Lands, and to
amend development standards for Rural Villages; and create the Belle
Meade Hydrologic Enhancement Overlay; and furthermore directing
transmittal of the amendments to the Florida Department of Economic
Opportunity. [PL20200002234] (District 1, District 3, District 5)
Page 19
September 28, 2021
D. Recommendation to adopt a resolution approving amendments
(appropriating carry forward, transfers and supplemental revenue) to the
Fiscal Year 2021-22 Adopted Budget. (All Districts)
Resolution 2021-206
E. Recommendation to adopt a resolution approving amendments
(appropriating carry forward, transfers and supplemental revenue) to the
FY20-21 Adopted Budget. (All Districts)
Resolution 2021-207
18. ADJOURN
INQUIRIES CONCERNING CHANGES TO THE BOARD’S AGENDA SHOULD
BE MADE TO THE COUNTY MANAGER’S OFFICE AT 252-8383.
September 28, 2021
Page 2
MR. CALLAHAN: Madam Chair, you have a live mic.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Good morning, Collier County. It's
a beautiful morning. I was reminded that I think September 21st was
the fall solstice, and it sure feels like fall in southwest subtropical
Florida today.
So I think what we'll do now is -- I'm just listening in the back
here to see if -- no. I believe that Commissioner McDaniel is caught
in some traffic right now, so I was waiting to see if he --
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Again? Really, seriously? A
dog ate his homework? Come on. What's going on?
Item #1A
INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: So we're going to ask Father Edward
Gleason of Trinity by the Cove to come up and give us our
invocation and, after that, I'd like Commissioner Saunders to lead us
in the Pledge. Thank you.
FATHER GLEASON: Let us pray. Almighty God, teach our
people to rely on your strength and to accept their responsibilities to
their fellow citizens; that they may elect trustworthy leaders and
make wise decisions for the well-being of our society; that we may
serve you faithfully in our generation and honor your holy name.
We pray you heal those in our community who are sick, shield those
who are healthy, and send down upon those who hold office in this
county the spirit of wisdom, charity, and justice; that with steadfast
purpose, they may faithfully serve in their offices to promote the
well-being of all people. We offer these, our petitions and desires,
through your holy name.
(The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.)
September 28, 2021
Page 3
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you very much.
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
MR. CALLAHAN: Thank you, Madam Chair. That takes us
to Item 2, which is the approval of today's regular, consent, and
summary agenda as amended with the reminder that any ex parte
disclosure on the consent agenda can be provided.
Staff does have a few proposed agenda changes to go through.
The first is to continue Item 17C to the October 12th, 2021, BCC
meeting. That was a resolution of the Board of County
Commissioners proposing amendments to the Collier County Growth
Management Plan Ordinance 89-05, as amended, related to the Rural
Fringe Mixed Use District Restudy and specifically amending the
Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict, and
Rural Fringe Mixed Use District of the Future Land Use Element to
require Transfer of Development Rights for Comprehensive Plan
amendments for increased residential density.
The second recommendation is to continue Item 16F7 to the
October 12th, 2021, BCC meeting. That was a recommendation to
approve and authorize the Chairman to sign the extension and
amendment of the agreement with the Partnership for Collier's Future
Economy in continued support of established public-private
partnership designed to advance the county's economic development
efforts. That's at Commissioner Taylor's request.
September 28, 2021
Page 4
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: And with -- as an addendum here, I
believe you all have a copy of the letter from Michael Dalby agreeing
to this continuance. Thank you.
MR. CALLAHAN: Thank you, Madam Chair.
The third proposed change is to move Item 16B1 to Item 11D.
That is a recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners,
acting as the Community Redevelopment Agency Board, approve a
resolution renaming the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Site
Improvement Grant Program to the Single-Family Improvement
Grant Program and updating eligible activities and process. That
item is being placed on the regular agenda at Commissioner Solis'
request.
And the final proposed change from staff today is to move
Item 17B; that will become Item 9C. That is an item related to the
recommendation to approve Ordinance No. 2004-41, as amended, the
Collier County Land Development Code, which established the
comprehensive zoning regulations for the unincorporated area by
amending the zoning -- appropriate zoning atlas maps or maps by
changing the zoning classification of the herein described property
from a Rural Agricultural "A" zoning district to a Residential Planned
Unit Development zoning district for the project known as the Soluna
RPUD. And that is being placed on the regular agenda at staff's
request.
And those are all the proposed changes we have for now,
Madam Chair.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you very much.
I will start with Commissioner Saunders. Any ex parte?
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I have, on the summary
agenda, on Item 17B, had some e-mails and some meetings, and I
have no other changes to the agenda.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you very much.
September 28, 2021
Page 5
Commissioner LoCastro.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: On 9A I just had meetings.
Nothing -- no disclosures on the other items.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. Commissioner Solis.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: No changes to the agenda, and
with 17B now being 9C, no disclosures on the consent agenda.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: And I would agree, with the
movement of -- well, brought it to -- I guess it's 17B to 9C, I'll
declare it at that time. And other than that I have no other -- other ex
parte declaration until we hear the actual item itself.
Any changes to the agenda, gentlemen?
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Would it be appropriate, I
just wanted to make a comment on something on the consent agenda;
not a change or anything, just a comment.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Of course.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: So -- and really, Sean, it's
directed to you from a conversation that we had yesterday. It
concerned 16B. You know, you educated me on the CRA and how
we want to provide funds to certain areas of Collier County that we
see might be in distress and make it maybe more advantageous to
homeowners, right? I know I'm summarizing; probably more basic.
But just homeowners to increase the appearance, and we've made
some changes here to maybe tighten so we don't give money to
people that maybe don't need it.
And I wanted to make a generic statement is, you know,
taxpayer money -- you know, our job's really to keep an eye on
taxpayer money. And so, you know, I just want to say, let's make
sure we use the right kind of filter. You know, we're not paying for
mulch for someone who owns three Bentleys and is in an area that's
already been improved. And I'm using an example that's not a real
example. But you know what I'm saying. We had a good
September 28, 2021
Page 6
conversation yesterday.
So I would just say, as you watch the oversight here -- it's a
great program. It has made Bayshore and lot of other areas so much
more improved, and the things that we're doing here is doing exactly
what I'm asking; let's really watch the taxpayer money. But, you
know, somebody's got to be minding the store. This could be
something that could easily be on autopilot. Anyone that applies
automatically gets it, you know, that sort of thing.
And this is more for being on the record, because we had a great
conversation of you educating me on this program and how this is an
improvement to make sure we don't do that. But, you know, I just
wanted to reiterate, I think we all care about, you know, not wasting,
you know, money, and if somebody, you know, wants to make their
place look nicer, they don't necessarily have to, you know, tap the
county, you know, for it. But it's a great program.
MR. CALLAHAN: Not to interrupt, but I just -- that was one
of the changes on the agenda. That's actually going to be discussed
on your regular agenda --
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Okay.
MR. CALLAHAN: -- today as Item 11D, if it's approved by
the Board here.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Okay. Well, thanks anyway
for meeting yesterday. It was very helpful, so...
MR. CALLAHAN: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Okay, great. I'll look for
that then, thank you.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: And that is just -- that's
why -- that's actually why I wanted to pull it and have a discussion
about it.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Oh, perfect. Okay. Great.
I'm with you. All right.
September 28, 2021
Page 7
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: So do I hear a motion to approve the
agenda as --
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: So moved.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Second.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: There's a motion on the floor and a
second. All those in favor, say aye.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Those opposed, like sign.
(No response.)
Proposed Agenda Changes
Board of County Commissioners Meeting
September 28, 2021
Continue Item 17C to the October 12, 2021 BCC Meeting: A Resolution of the Board of County
Commissioners proposing amendments to the Collier County Growth Management Plan,
Ordinance 89-05, as amended, relating to the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District Restudy and
specifically amending the Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict and the
Rural Fringe Mixed Use District of the Future Land Use Element to require Transfer of
Development Rights for Comprehensive Plan amendments for increased residential density;
amending the Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict to remove the
density bonus cap on residential in-fill and remove the requirement to use Transfer of Development
Rights within one mile of the Urban boundary; and amending the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District
of the Future Land Use Element to change development standards and requirements, to increase
density on Receiving Lands located along Immokalee Road, increase density on Receiving Lands
for affordable housing, add Transfer of Development Rights Credits, add uses in Receiving areas,
and add a conditional use for recreation in Sending Lands, and to amend development standards
for Rural Villages; and create the Belle Meade Hydrologic Enhancement Overlay; and furthermore
directing transmittal of the amendments to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity.
[PL20200002234] (District 1, District 3, District 5) (Staff’s Request)
Continue Item 16F7 to the October 12, 2021 BCC Meeting: Recommendation to approve and
authorize the Chairman to sign the Extension and Amendment of the Agreement with The
Partnership for Collier’s Future Economy, Inc. (“Partnership”) in continued support of the
established public-private partnership designed to advance the County’s economic development
efforts. (All Districts) (Commissioner Taylor’s Request)
Move Item 16B1 to Item 11D: Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners, acting
as the Community Redevelopment Agency Board (CRA), approve a resolution renaming the
Bayshore Gateway Triangle Site Improvement Grant Program to Single Family Improvement
Grant Program and updating eligible activities and process; and placing the remaining residential
grant programs in the Bayshore Gateway Triangle Community Redevelopment Area on hold until
further notice. (District 4) (Commissioner Solis’ Request)
Move Item 17B to Item 9C: This item requires 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 Ordinance Number 2004-41, as amended, the Collier County Land
Development Code, which established the comprehensive zoning regulations for the unincorporated
area of Collier County, Florida, by amending the appropriate zoning atlas map or maps by
changing the zoning classification of the herein described real property from a Rural Agricultural
(A) Zoning District to a Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) Zoning District for the
project to be known as Soluna RPUD, to allow construction of up to 108 dwelling units on property
located southwest of the intersection of Tree Farm Road and Massey Street, in Section 35,
Township 48 South, Range 26 East, consisting of 18.5± acres; and by providing an effective date.
[PL20210000093] (District 5) (Staff’s Request)
Note:
Time Certain Items:
10/13/2021 3:27 PM
September 28, 2021
Page 8
Item #2B
SEPTEMBER 9, 2021 – BCC BUDGET HEARING MEETING
MINUTES – APPROVED AS PRESENTED
MR. CALLAHAN: Motion to approve the minutes from the
September 9th budget hearing as well.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: We'll do that second.
All right. Carries unanimously.
Motion to approve the minutes.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: So moved.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Do I hear a second?
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Second.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: There's a motion on the floor and a
second. All those in favor, say aye.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Those opposed, like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you very much.
MR. CALLAHAN: Thank you, Madam Chair.
Item #4A
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING OCTOBER 1, 2021, AS
NAPLES BETTER GOVERNMENT DAY IN COLLIER COUNTY.
THE PROCLAMATION WILL BE MAILED TO SALLY
TIFFANY, PRESIDENT, NAPLES BETTER GOVERNMENT –
PRESENTED
September 28, 2021
Page 9
MR. CALLAHAN: That takes us to the proclamations item on
your agenda. You do have one proclamation. This is a
proclamation designating October 1st, 2021, as Naples Better
Government Day in Collier County. This proclamation will be
mailed to Sally Tiffany, who is the president of Naples Better
Government.
And if you'll bear with me, on your consent agenda that you just
approved, there was a recognition of your August 2021 employee of
the month. If I could just read a short passage about Mr. Del Re.
Jared Del Re is an applications analyst in the library division in
public services and has been with the county since 2014. In early
2021, Jared completed the division-wide installation and
implementation of the new copy, print, scan, and fax equipment and
software platforms at the library.
As the library's dedicated application analyst, Jared showed
exceptional work ethic in the coordination and execution of this
installation project, often working during nights, weekends, and
hours beyond his regular workweek.
Jared's accomplishment of the implementation as well as his
diligence, knowledge, collaborative spirit, and dedication to duty are
just several reasons why he's so deserving of this Employee of the
Month award.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Congratulations to Jared. He's not
here, is he?
MR. CALLAHAN: He's not, no, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: We do have Ms. Tiffany here from
Greater Naples leader [sic]. Would you like to come up?
MS. TIFFANY: Sure.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Better Government.
MS. TIFFANY: Thank you, Penny. Just a couple words.
On behalf of Naples Better Government Board of Directors, I, Vice
September 28, 2021
Page 10
President Dennis Sanders --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Oh.
(Commissioner McDaniel is now present in the boardroom.)
MS. TIFFANY: -- Treasurer Mary Waller, want to thank you
very much, the Board of County Commissioners, for acknowledging
our existence and recognizing the hard work that we have put in over
the last 30 years keeping this organization running, always looking
forward to keeping better government in the eye of everybody at the
local, at the county, and at the state level. We thank you very much.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you very much.
MS. TIFFANY: Thank you.
Item #7
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS NOT ON THE
CURRENT OR FUTURE AGENDA
MR. CALLAHAN: Madam Chair, that takes us to Item 7,
which is public comment on general topics not on the current or
future agenda and, Troy, I believe we have several public speakers.
MR. MILLER: Yes, we have eight registered speakers at this
time, Madam Chair. Your first speaker is Dan Cook. He'll be
followed by Jackie Keay. I'll remind the speakers you can use both
podiums.
MR. COOK: All right. Good morning, Commissioners.
First I'd like to thank Commissioner Saunders for the opportunity to
meet with the County Attorney. We'll be meeting tomorrow to
discuss the Tenth Amendment and my thoughts on that.
I did want to bring to the Board's attention the mandatory
vaccinations policy that many companies, including NCH and David
September 28, 2021
Page 11
Lawrence Center, are implementing.
I've heard from a lot of workers from these places over the past
couple of weeks, and I think it's important that the Board knows
about this. It's not -- I'm sure it's not just NCH and David Lawrence
Center. I'm sure there's lots of corporations. There's probably lots
of government entities that are probably following through with this
whether it's on their own discretion or whether they're following
through with -- you know, with what the Biden administration is
recommending, but I think it's going to continue the divide that we
see in our country. I think that it's very sad that we are having to
discuss this idea of freedom once again. You know, if you want to
take, you know, a shot in the arm to protect you for something, you
absolutely have that right.
Now, I know that the government itself, the Collier County
Government, is not, you know, forcing this, and I know
Commissioner Saunders has said in the past that mandates won't
happen in Collier County, but I would just like to maybe just implore
to the Board to -- I don't know. I don't know if you guys want to
speak out or make a stance on this or maybe consider, does the
county have a relationship -- business relationship with NCH and
David Lawrence Center and, if so, is that appropriate when these
companies are mandating the vaccination on employees? That's just
a question that I think needs to be brought out into the discussion, and
I just hope that you guys would take some consideration into that.
I have some personal -- how do I put this? Personal, I guess,
dealings with the David Lawrence Center, so I understand mental
health is important. I lost my ex-wife to mental health. She was in
and out of David Lawrence Center several times. And,
unfortunately, the system wasn't able to help her. So I think, you
know, mental health is a very important subject. I know the Sheriff
has come out saying it's an important subject.
September 28, 2021
Page 12
So for, I guess, just David Lawrence Center in particular to
threaten people's jobs and be willing to let go of employees who are
doing this important work based on their refusal to get a vaccination,
I think that causes a problem. And I hope that as the leaders in this
community, that you guys would speak up for workers' rights, health
freedom, and I'm just going to leave it at that. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Jackie Keay. She'll be
followed by Nancy Lewis.
MS. KEAY: Good morning.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Good morning.
MS. KEAY: It's wonderful to see you all again, so...
Many families in Naples are one paycheck away from homelessness.
A significant contributor to homelessness is a lack of critical housing
that is affordable, stable, and safe.
Due to the sale of Gordon River Apartments, we now have 95
families and their children who are facing the reality of becoming
homeless. Because of poverty, families must often choose between
paying for housing or other necessity. Homelessness occurs when
people lack a stable, appropriate, and safe place to live. FYI, we
have over 800 homeless students in Collier.
Children living in poverty are at great risk for food insecurity,
abuse, and neglect, behavioral problems, educational deficits.
Homelessness is traumatic to children, especially as it relates to
family dynamics and moving around.
The lack of affordable housing is also a risk factor for
homelessness, particularly for families who devote more than
50 percent of their household income to paying rent or those who
experience foreclosure.
Several solutions to this problem include increasing minimum
wage, excuse me, job skills, training, and, most importantly,
September 28, 2021
Page 13
affordable housing.
And now a moment in my life history. Although I never
thought I was homeless, I did not live in a stable and always safe
environment during my four years of high school. I lived with
various extended family members and friends. I lived in three
different locations in Gordon River alone, and I knew I had to leave if
the property manager found out that I was living there without
authorization. It was not a matter of if but a matter of when I had to
leave. I would then have to find another place to live. You learn to
be hypervigilant to stay safe, and you are always in a fight or flight
mode.
The greatest lesson I have learned in life is that our pain and
suffering gives birth to our purpose and calling. I understand what
it's like to feel helpless, hopeless, invisible, and unloved. I still
remember the soul crushing pain of the realization people hated or
resented me simply because I was born with brown skin or born into
poverty.
If sharing my heart and story today helps even one child in the
community, then it is worth it. My character and actions embody
love, kindness, and respect, which are the changes I wish to see in the
world.
It was Steve Jobs that said those people who think they are crazy
enough to change the world are the ones who do, and I am crazy
enough to do that.
Thank you all very much, and it was wonderful to see you-all
today, even Commissioner McDaniel. Thank you-all. That's love.
That's love. If I didn't love you, I wouldn't tease you.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And then there's that.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Nancy Lewis. She'll be
followed by Rich Schroeder.
MS. LEWIS: Good morning, Madam Commissioner, County
September 28, 2021
Page 14
Commissioners. For the record, my name is Nancy Lewis. I am a
resident of District 2, North Naples. And this morning I'd like to
comment on the draft amendment revisions for regulatory relief for
housing currently under review by Growth Management staff before
coming to the Planning Commission and this board for hearings
within the next few months.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: We, unfortunately, can't accept that,
because you are commenting on something that's coming before us.
You're going to have to leave --
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Not on today's agenda.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: No, no, or on a future agenda, on a
future agenda, and it will be on a future agenda, not just this agenda.
It's the will of the Commission, but that's the rules.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Madam Chair?
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yes.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I'm not sure I even
understood that rule. And it may be -- and I'm not saying that's not
the rule. I just -- I never understood that. I always thought you
could speak on items that were not on today's agenda.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Today's.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I understand it because they -- you
know, you want to focus -- and excuse us for a second -- you want to
focus on what the task is at hand, and if it's going to come in the
future, then folks need to lead -- reserve their comments until a future
agenda.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: But, I mean, just about
anything that a citizen comes up with is something that may come up
before the Board. Mr. Cook just talked about vaccine mandates.
Now, we're not going to be doing any vaccine mandates, obviously,
but that may be a topic that may come up at some point. We've had
people come talk about problems in their neighborhood.
September 28, 2021
Page 15
So I'm not sure I understand the rule and, if that is the rule, I
don't know that it's a good rule. I don't know the harm in having
people speak on items that may come up in the future.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Well, it's the -- we can discuss that at
another time, but let's just see if there's a will of the Commission to
go forward at this time with Ms. Lewis' remarks.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I would say yes.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Yeah. I'd concur, yes.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I'm comfortable with it. Thank you.
MS. LEWIS: Thank you, Commissioners.
The apparent objective of these initiatives is to create incentive
for developers to provide more units of housing that is affordable.
One new GMP initiative in this is meant to streamline
commercial-to-residential conversions under certain "housing that is
affordable" criteria.
The new policy permits conversion by right to the developer
under certain conditions, allows by right 16 units per acre and
eliminates the public hearing process. This proposed amendment
takes away the public's right to comment and definitely impacts
residents in your districts. It can also leave you, as commissioners,
powerless in certain zoning situations.
These initiatives add language to the Land Development Code to
define the program's intent and define its criteria. Its purpose, to
increase densities to developers who guarantee provision of
affordable units that align with households and specific incomes.
The requirement? Perpetuity? No. Thirty years? No. Fifteen
years? No. It's a period of five years. Its resident eligibility, they
must, not may, must be employed by Collier County as essential
services personnel, ESP or required ESP.
I wonder how many ESP workers may not qualify for the
specified income levels of projects based on their income for a
September 28, 2021
Page 16
family, or is it to say that ESP workers are deemed to be the only
ones in need of housing that is affordable in Collier. These are
incentives that are carrots, but the carrots go away. What does it
actually accomplish? Increased densities, new urban areas. Under
certain conditions, zoning by right, more entitlements, less say for
public.
More importantly, where is it going to leave Collier with lots of
market-rate conversions and a new, never-ending cycle of the need
for housing that is affordable. Is this the intent?
Commissioners, I urge you to take the time to carefully review these
proposed revisions in advance of the hearings to fully understand the
impact they will have on your voting public and the future of Collier
County.
Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Richard Schroeder. He'll
be followed by Lisa Hunsberger.
MR. SCHROEDER: Good morning, Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Good morning.
MR. SCHROEDER: Richard Schroeder, retired physician.
Topic, the vaccination mandates. I am old enough, actually, to have
had the opportunity to serve our country in the Navy during the wind
down of the Vietnam War.
As a physician, doing emergency room duty at a large Naval
hospital on the West Coast, I encountered at that time Naval
personnel with Guillain-Barre syndrome, a very serious and disabling
neurologic disorder proven to be caused by inoculations for a
mysterious infectious disease called, at that time, the swine flu. That
vaccination campaign, spearheaded by the Ford administration, was
terminated for safety reasons after an estimated 25 percent of the
country had been vaccinated.
Fast forward half a century to today, and I am experiencing
September 28, 2021
Page 17
more than a little deja vu. For one thing, I feel the winds of war
again, only this time it's not a bloody war in a foreign country but a
diabolically clever worldwide war against all of us that many people
appear not to notice.
I also see a familiar viral threat of dubious origin. I see
governmental and quasi-governmental agencies shaming, bullying,
bribing, threatening, and mandating our military, and we, the people,
to take an experimental DNA-altering injection to which the
Dictocrats in Washington, D.C., have largely exempted themselves,
by the way. Surprise, surprise. And, unbelievably, all this is
happening in the face of data from their own Center of Disease
Control vaccine adverse event reporting system showing 726,965
adverse events, 99,410 serious injuries, and 15,386 deaths from the
COVID-19 injections from the program rollout December 14th, 2020,
through September 17th, 2021. That's nine months. Compare that
to the 58,220 Americans estimated to have died in the Vietnam War
over a period of two decades, and it appears we are well on our way
to another national tragedy.
Can you blame anyone, particularly those in the healthcare field,
for not wanting to take an experimental injection hastily developed
under emergency use authorization? Now we have in our own
community NCH and the David Lawrence Center mandating the
emergency use inoculations as a condition of employment, causing
tremendous morale problems and risking mass exodus of employees
from these critical safety-net organizations.
I emphatically urge you to uphold we the people's freedom of
choice in our own healthcare decisions. Pass a resolution, speak out,
take actions outlined in the e-mails that you-all received on this issue.
The inappropriate actions of these two nonprofits that Collier County
does business with are clearly disrupting the effectiveness of their
organizations, the livelihood of their employees, and the safety of the
September 28, 2021
Page 18
community.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Lisa Hunsberger. She'll
be followed by Meagan Maddux.
MS. HUNSBERGER: Hi, good morning. My name is Lisa
Hunsberger. I'm newer to Florida. This is my first time. I see I
have three minutes. I did prepare about a 15-minute speech. If I
can, I will leave you-all with copies.
I recently moved here. I was -- also served in the Army, active
duty, as a military police officer.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
MS. HUNSBERGER: Thank you. I have 20-plus years’
experience in the counseling field, mental health, working with very
vulnerable populations.
I was a therapist in the Children's Crisis Unit at the David
Lawrence Center up until last week when I was informed that I was
terminated for e-mails inquiring about policies and their lack of. I
wasn't given a reason why I was terminated other than they don't
have to give me a reason.
My supervisor, who will be -- my ex-supervisor, who will be
speaking next, was also unable to obtain any information as to why I
was terminated.
For time purposes, I just kind of want to fill you in how the
mandate came about. It was an ambush. We were blindsided.
Midday, working on our computers, as I work in a crisis unit. Also
within a few days of receiving the news of this mandate, many of us
organized to establish a grievance per the company policy.
Out of the 300-plus David Lawrence Center employees, 50 of us
read and signed the grievance, which was then presented to the
administration. The grievance containing employees' signatures
September 28, 2021
Page 19
quickly became a hit list, and I do mean that, as we became targets.
Contained in the grievance, it was requested that the employees could
meet with the board members and administration to address concerns
and obtain clarification. Administration informed the board that
board members would not be involved and that administration team
would only be willing to meet with employees over Teams, which is
the Zoom, comparable to Zoom, from their own personal offices.
Administration set the date and time of the meeting. Each one
of the administrators joined from their own private office behind their
own private computer despite being the next building over, which is
about a two-minute walk, which many of us make daily.
Many of the employees joined together in the conference room
on the crisis unit while some joined virtually. Employees expressed
concerns for the new mandates, even presenting research from
credible sources supporting our concerns. Employees took turns
expressing their experiences, including, but not limited to, being
bullied, policy clarification, because we've learned they have a very
limited amount of policies. They do make it up as they go, and I
have full documentation to support everything I'm saying.
We wanted to know how the exemptions would be handled.
Administration dismissed our concerns, provided no clarification, and
we were advised, and this is a quote, that David Lawrence Center is
leaders in the community and, further, that we will be following
NCH's lead.
David Lawrence Center is a needed facility, but the policies and
lack of leadership is terrifying. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Chad Taylor. He will be
followed by Steven Bracci.
MR. TAYLOR: She's next.
MR. MILLER: Meagan Maddux. Oh, I'm sorry. I skipped
September 28, 2021
Page 20
ahead.
MS. MADDUX: That's okay.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Mr. Bracci, hang on for one second.
Who's --
MR. MILLER: It will be Meagan Maddux, Chad Taylor, and
then Steven Bracci.
I'm sorry. Ms. Maddux, you have three minutes.
MS. MADDUX: Hi. My name is Megan. I just wanted to
come today and to let you all know that I am also a former employee
of David Lawrence Center. I resigned last week due to the events
that Lisa just informed you about. I won't reiterate everything that
she just said.
But it really did have a large impact on my staff. We all felt
that we were bullied. We felt like we were subject to belittlement,
and when I approached HR about it -- and two different occasions,
actually, the first occasion was collectively when we had that meeting
with them over Teams. The second was done with myself and
another staff member as my witness.
Nothing seemed to be done about this. The environment
continued to be hostile. I no longer felt comfortable going to work
because of my choices with the vaccination.
And to be honest with you, I just -- I can't even begin to express
my disappointment. I worked for them for over a year. I really
enjoyed it. My first year there I was a therapist. I started out as a
therapist. I was promoted to a supervisor. I very much enjoyed my
role there.
As soon as the mandate came out, there was just a huge shift that
came with the -- with the environment and the atmosphere as a
whole.
And I also wanted to point out, this mandate was made before
the Biden administration made their mandate. It was probably about
September 28, 2021
Page 21
a week or so before that mandate came out. And I want to point that
out because that is important when noting how this was rolled out and
how this affected us as a whole and how deeply it made all of us
really consider, you know, do we want to inject something into
ourselves that we don't agree with, or do we want to keep our jobs.
And I just wanted to bring you that information today. I wanted
to attest that what Lisa Hunsberger said is true, as her direct
supervisor, and also just to encourage you to take this information
into consideration.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you very much.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Chad Taylor. He'll be
followed by Steven Bracci.
MR. TAYLOR: Hello. Thank you for allowing me to speak
today.
The fundamental God-given right to manage your own health
has been used against working people. People across the country are
losing their job if they refuse the COVID vaccine or weekly testing.
Meanwhile, people on welfare, food stamps, or the Biden
administration have no requirements to collect their paychecks
which, ironically, comes out of working people's tax dollars.
Right here in Collier County, NCH and David Lawrence Center
are requiring COVID vaccines as a condition of employment. The
decision to wear a mask or receive a vaccine is not a matter of public
safety. Health is a matter of personal responsibility.
The consequences of wearing a mask for extended periods of
time will ultimately be placed on an individual's health. The
consequences of any side effects of the COVID vaccine ultimately
will be placed on an individual's health.
The consequences of choosing to be in a busy public space is
also placed on an individual's health. All of these decisions are
September 28, 2021
Page 22
made by individual choices. Health is a personal responsibility,
especially during a pandemic.
Fortunately, every single service or product can be obtained
online, by delivery, or in a drive-through. Anyone at risk of COVID
complications or anyone who lives with someone at risk can choose
to avoid public spaces and have their needs met.
What is best for my health may not be appropriate for yours. I
respect that fact, and I expect the same in return. A blanket medical
approach is dangerous to an entire population. Where there is any
health risk, the individual has the God-given right to choose their
own fate without coercion.
Found directly on the FDA website, the PCR tests will no longer
be authorized to diagnose COVID-19 in December. These tests have
been so unreliable the FDA will no longer accept them as a
diagnostic tool. In December, what happens to employees who
choose the weekly testing over the vaccine?
COVID can't be put back in the lab. COVID is here to stay.
Each time you leave your home you choose to run the risk of getting
COVID. All the testing, the masks, or vaccines will never eliminate
the risk of getting COVID. Holding people's livelihoods over their
head for a personal medical decision is criminal.
Respectfully, I ask our county government not to fund or do
business with NCH or the David Lawrence Center unless the vaccine
mandate is repealed.
Thank you for your time.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next and final speaker for public
comment is Steven Bracci.
MR. BRACCI: Thank you. I have a presentation up on the
screen.
I'd like to take issue with an e-mail newsletter that was sent by
September 28, 2021
Page 23
the -- Commissioner Taylor yesterday with respect to COVID. It's
ostensibly a good-news item starting with the second paragraph. It
says, it is always wonderful to get a good-news item on a Monday,
and so I thought I would forward it to everyone.
And then attached below is a statement from NCH Healthcare
from Matt Holiday, director of government relations. He says, these
are the reported numbers from Sunday, September 26th. The
unvaccinated remain the predominant driver of the total cases we see.
Thankfully we continue to see a solid decline in overall COVID-19
patients. And there's a graph with some statistics and showing the
decline of COVID cases overall.
Presumably, this was sent by Commissioner Taylor in order to
show good news that the cases or the hospitalizations are declining;
however, one wonders whether we couldn't have had a more
content-neutral topic here, because if you look at this, it's not just
saying the number of cases that are declining.
If you look at the next paragraph -- or the statement from
Mr. Holiday, it says, the unvaccinated remain the prominent driver of
the total cases we see. What does the term "the unvaccinated"
mean? Is that some new subclassification of Collier County
citizens? Is it intended to divide those who are vaccinated from
those who are unvaccinated?
Why is that the focus of this? Why not talk about the obese?
Why not talk about the lazy, those who haven't taken care of
themselves for the last three decades leading up to this situation?
Why do we have this classification based on the unvaccinated?
Curiously then, let's go and dig down into the data from NCH.
You'll see here it doesn't actually show COVID cases and then
non-vaccinated. It says non-vaccinated, including unknown. Well,
that's kind of curious, isn't it? Does that not show a little
institutional bias on behalf of NCH? So if somebody walks in, they
September 28, 2021
Page 24
don't say whether they're vaccinated or unvaccinated, and they just
presume that they'll put them in the unvaccinated column, thereby
increasing the number of cases. I mean, this is just flatout
misleading.
And I want to zoom this in further, because I seen it up on the
screen. I want to make sure people at home can see it.
Non-vaccinated including unknown. What kind of classification is
that?
I go back to this term "unvaccinated." It's sort of like calling
somebody the unwashed, isn't it? And in history that doesn't -- that
doesn't bode very well. It's a term that is patronizing, contemptuous,
and derogatory, and it's a term that should not be spread by this
commission and perpetuated and propagated onto the people of
Collier County.
I suggest that in the future these messages that are good news be
a little bit more content neutral with respect to dividing the people of
Collier County.
Thank you.
MR. MILLER: That was our final speaker under Item 7, public
comment.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you very much.
So I guess we are about ready to begin our meeting, but before
we do, I have an apology to make, and it's to Commissioner
LoCastro.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Oh, what did I do?
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: You didn't do. But at our last
meeting I misunderstood what I heard from you and thought you
were accusing a staff member of lying.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Oh, yeah. Okay.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: And I reviewed the tape, because I
was corrected by my colleague to the left, Commissioner Saunders,
September 28, 2021
Page 25
and discovered that you were correct. So I really want to offer you
that apology.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Accepted.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I don't like to throw stones where
they're not required.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Appreciate it. Accepted.
Thank you, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: You're welcome. You're welcome.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Madam Chair, before we go
to the regular agenda, we were just discussing when it's appropriate
for people from the public to come speak, and I think we need to kind
of clarify that. I don't know if this is a good time to do that.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I think -- what I'd like to do, with all
due respect, maybe not right this minute, but maybe talk to staff,
folks who have been here a little bit longer, to understand the reason,
the genesis of this, and then definitely come back at our next meeting
with some clarification.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Fine. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And one other little
housekeeping because of the accidents this morning again.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yes.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Forgive me for being late.
Two, one on Immokalee and then another one on Davis. But I have
no ex parte --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: And --
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: -- on the consent agenda, and
I saw the changes in the agenda.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. Good.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Just so you know.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: And you agree to the amendments to
September 28, 2021
Page 26
the agenda and --
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: -- also --
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes, yes.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: -- the minutes. Okay, thank you.
All right. Thank you very much.
Item #9A
ORDINANCE 2021-31: AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER
2004-41, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND
DEVELOPMENT CODE, WHICH ESTABLISHED THE
COMPREHENSIVE ZONING REGULATIONS FOR THE
UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA,
BY AMENDING THE APPROPRIATE ZONING ATLAS MAP OR
MAPS BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF
THE HEREIN DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTY FROM AN
AGRICULTURAL (A) ZONING DISTRICT TO A RESIDENTIAL
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (RPUD) ZONING DISTRICT
FOR THE PROJECT TO BE KNOWN AS BLUE CORAL
APARTMENTS RPUD, TO ALLOW DEVELOPMENT OF UP
TO 234 MULTI-FAMILY RENTAL UNITS, OF WHICH 70
WILL BE RENT RESTRICTED AS AFFORDABLE. THE
SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF
IMMOKALEE ROAD, APPROXIMATELY 1000 FEET WEST OF
JULIET BOULEVARD, IN SECTION 30, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH,
RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, CONSISTING
OF 9.35± ACRES AND BY PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
(PL20190001600) – ADOPTED
Item #9B
September 28, 2021
Page 27
ORDINANCE 2021-32: AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 89-05, AS
AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH
MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA
OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, SPECIFICALLY
AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT AND MAP
SERIES BY ADDING THE IMMOKALEE ROAD
INTERCHANGE RESIDENTIAL INFILL SUBDISTRICT TO THE
URBAN, MIXED USE DISTRICT TO ALLOW DEVELOPMENT
OF UP TO 234 MULTI-FAMILY RENTAL UNITS, OF WHICH 70
WILL BE RENT RESTRICTED AS AFFORDABLE. THE
SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF
IMMOKALEE ROAD, APPROXIMATELY 1000 FEET WEST OF
JULIET BOULEVARD, IN SECTION 30, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH,
RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, CONSISTING
OF 9.35± ACRES AND FURTHERMORE, DIRECTING
TRANSMITTAL OF THE ADOPTED AMENDMENT TO THE
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY;
PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY AND PROVIDING FOR AN
EFFECTIVE DATE. [PL20190001620/CPSS-2020-2] – ADOPTED
MR. CALLAHAN: Madam Chair, that will take us to the first
of our public hearings today. This item has been continued from the
September 14th, 2021, BCC meeting agenda. This item requires that
ex parte disclosure be provided by commission members, and when a
hearing is held on this item, all participants are required to be sworn
in.
Item 9A is a recommendation to approve an ordinance of the
Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida,
amending Ordinance No. 2004-41 as amended, the Collier County
Land Development Code, which established comprehensive zoning
September 28, 2021
Page 28
regulations for the unincorporated area of Collier County, Florida, by
amending the appropriate zoning atlas maps or maps by changing the
zoning classifications of the herein described real property
Agricultural Zoning District to a Residential Planned Unit
Development zoning district for the project to be known as Blue
Coral Apartments RPUD to allow development of up to 234
multifamily rental units, of which 70 will be rent restricted as
affordable.
The subject property is located on the south side of Immokalee
Road approximately 1,000 feet west of Juliet Boulevard in Section
30, Township 48 south, Range 26 east, Collier County, Florida,
consisting of 9.35 acres; and providing an effective date.
This companion -- this is a companion item to Agenda Item 9B,
which is an ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of
Collier County, Florida, amending Ordinance No. 89-05, as amended,
the Collier County Growth Management Plan for the unincorporated
area of Collier County, Florida, specifically amending the Future
Land Use Element and Map Series by adding the Immokalee Road
Interchange Residential Landfill Subdistrict to the Urban Mixed Use
District to allow development of up to 234 multifamily rental units,
of which 70 will be rent restricted as affordable.
The subject property is located on the south side of Immokalee
Road approximately 1,000 feet west of Juliet Boulevard in Section
30, Township 48 south, Range 26 east, Collier County, Florida,
consisting of 9.35 acres; and, furthermore, directing transmittal of the
adopted amendment to the Florida Department of Economic
Opportunity; providing for severability; and providing for an
effective date.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I believe the applicant is here and is
going to begin.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: We've got to swear everybody in,
September 28, 2021
Page 29
oh, and ex parte as well.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: That's right. I beg your pardon. So
let's go through and do the ex parte -- oh, let's do a swearing, and then
we'll do the ex parte. Anyone who wants to or contemplates on
testifying on this issue, you need to be sworn in. So please stand and
raise your right hand.
(The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.)
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you very much. So we'll start
with Commissioner McDaniel.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes, good morning. And I
do have -- I do have ex parte with meetings, e-mails, and phone calls.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner Saunders.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Thank you, Madam Chair.
Same thing: I had meetings, phone calls, and received a lot of
e-mails in reference to Item 9A.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner LoCastro.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Yeah, 9A, I just had
meetings.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner Solis.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Yes. And I've had meetings with
the applicant going as far back as 2019. I've had recent meetings
and e-mails from residents about the application.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: And I also have had meetings,
correspondence from residents, so -- I also have had several e-mails
about this, discussions with staff, and telephone calls about this issue.
Please begin.
MR. WRIGHT: Good morning, Commissioners, Madam Chair.
I'm Jeff Wright with the Henderson Franklin Law Firm here on
behalf of the applicant.
We have our team here today. I think we're having a little
trouble advancing the slide here. There it is. We have Greg Fusaro,
September 28, 2021
Page 30
the Applicant's Representative; we have Patrick Vanasse with RWA;
Norm Trebilcock, our Traffic Consultant; and Passarella is our
Environmental Consultant.
We're here seeking approval of companion applications; one for
GMP amendment, one to rezone property from ag to residential PUD
to allow the construction of an apartment community with 234 units
on 9.35 acres. That is equivalent to about 25 units per acre.
The property is located at near the southeast corner of
Livingston and Immokalee adjacent to the recently approved
Germain dealership on Immokalee Road.
We've reviewed the staff report and agree with their
recommendation of approval of both applications. The Planning
Commission also is unanimously recommending approval. We're
not requesting any deviations from the LDC, and we are in agreement
with all of staff's proposed conditions.
As I mentioned, the project's close to I-75, and it provides a
major public benefit, and that is the commitment to provide 70
affordable housing units -- that's 30 percent of the units would be
committed for a 30-year period to being affordable, and priority
would be given to essential services personnel.
The affordable units will be indistinguishable from the
market-rate units, same furnishing quality, amenities, everything.
And as I mentioned, I have Patrick and our team here today.
Patrick's going to give a brief presentation, including planning
testimony and more details on the affordable housing commitment
and some other project information. I don't intend to call any other
witnesses, but we're all available if any questions come up.
We appreciate the opportunity to present our case. And at this
time, I'll turn it over to Patrick. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
MR. VANASSE: Good morning. My name is Patrick
September 28, 2021
Page 31
Vanasse, Certified Planner with RWA Engineering. It's a pleasure to
be here this morning to discuss this project, Blue Coral Apartments.
And before you today we have two requests. One is a GMP
amendment to allow for the Immokalee Road Interchange Residential
Landfill Subdistrict, and what that subdistrict allows is for the
development of a luxury apartment complex. The maximum density
for that project will be 234 units or 25 units per acre. And the
additional density is granted because of the public benefit of
affordable housing. The affordable housing component is going to
be 70 units; that will be income and rent restricted for 30 years.
The companion petition is a PUD rezone which implements the
subdistrict and also allows for the development of that apartment
complex.
So, generally speaking, we think the project offers numerous
benefits, but one of the important points is the location, we believe, is
ideal for this type of project and higher densities. The project is
located right by an existing activity center where, as a county, we
have deemed those areas to be the best place for higher-density
projects.
It's on a major thoroughfare. It's also located close to
commercial goods and services, recreation, entertainment. It is
located also in close proximity to the I-75 interchange. And from an
access standpoint, we have a joint agreement with the German
dealership right next to us to provide one joint access point which
will reduce the number of access points along Immokalee and
enhance safety conditions.
So this is the general location. The subject property is
identified in orange. As you can see, the vacant parcel to the east is
where the future Germain dealership will be. Further out east is the
existing commercial, and to the west of us is multifamily residential.
We believe our property provides a great transition from the more
September 28, 2021
Page 32
intense commercial uses to the east to the less intense residential
component to the west.
As mentioned, the -- we've been through the review process
from staff. Staff has recommended approval. We have also been
before the CCPC, and they have recommended unanimous approval
for both petitions. We were asked as part of that process to reduce
our density. We initially came in at 30 units per acre. We were
asked to reduce that to 25. We were also asked to enhance our
buffer to the residential that abuts us to the west and to provide an
enhanced buffer of 25 feet with additional plantings. And, lastly, we
were asked to decrease our maximum height from 60 feet down to
50 feet zoned height. We are happy to comply with all those
recommendations, and those have been incorporated within our
petitions.
So what is this project? It's a luxury apartment complex. It
will have very well-appointed units, it will be highly amenitized, and
it's targeting young professionals, empty nesters. The location we
believe, again, is ideal from adjoining uses and really provides for
proximity to goods, services, entertainment, recreation, and easy
access to I-75.
The next few slides are renderings or pictures of existing
projects from the applicant. As you can see, the exterior finishes,
high-quality projects, and we are going to have both interior and
exterior amenities, as you can see on the slide.
The following slide is a project they recently completed in Lake
Mary, Orlando. As you can see, the quality of the finishes rival
luxury hotels, and that's what we're going to see here in Naples.
And this slide shows the interior of the units. As you can see,
condo-quality finishes, and this will be in every unit, including the
affordable units.
Generally speaking, our project mimics and tries to implement
September 28, 2021
Page 33
some of the recommendations from the ULI Housing Study that came
out a few years ago, and your staff also is coming forward with some
amendments to the Comp Plan to implement some of those
recommendations. So what this study said is that in order to
incentivize affordable housing in this county, it made sense to allow
higher densities in the right locations. As mentioned, we believe this
is an appropriate location.
The initial recommendation for ULI was maybe up to 30 -- 30
dwelling units per acre. Staff is coming in with a recommendation
for 25 units per acre within activity centers. In our case we abut an
activity center but, again, I think we are very consistent with the
intent from staff and from the ULI recommendations.
Just to clarify what our commitment is, it is 30 percent of all
allowed units; that is a maximum of 70 units. Of those 70 units, 35
will be at less than 80 percent AMI. The other 35 will be between
the 80 percent to 100 percent of AMI. And that's a category of
affordable housing that we haven't seen a lot of market-rate projects
offer. I've worked on several projects where we offered gap or
workforce housing, but this is really targeting an area of affordability
where we really don't have much of this in the county right now.
And just to reiterate, this is a commitment for 30 years rent and
income restricted.
We talked about the general location. I'm not going to reiterate
the points, but what's important to point out is, this is truly an infill
project. It's the last existing 10-acre parcel within that general
quadrant, so we know exactly what is surrounding us, and we can
design a project that is compatible with those surrounding properties.
So if you look here, this is a rendering of a concept that we've
developed. And it might change slightly as we develop the project a
little further, but the intent is to locate the apartment complex as far
away from Bermuda Palms, the residential to the west, as possible
September 28, 2021
Page 34
and to provide significant separation. What we're showing here on
this depiction is a separation of least 180 feet from our closest
structure to theirs, significant setbacks.
Also, to the south where we have Livingston Lakes, we have
located our preserve there to create significant buffer and separation,
and that width right there from our property line to the closest
building is 180 feet. As mentioned, we've enhanced our buffer to
Bermuda Palms. Also, when it comes to massing of the buildings,
where we face Bermuda Palms we've broken up the buildings so we
don't have one large mass. We've created these pocket amenity areas
where there's going to be some green space, going to be landscaping,
again, to soften that facade and make it compatible with the adjacent
use.
Also, I'd like to point out that we have one access point to the
project, and that's a shared access point on the boundary with the
future Germain dealership.
So just to quickly summarize the benefits of the project: A
significant affordable housing commitment for 30 years, an ideal
location for higher densities, a transition from more intense
commercial uses to less intense residential, joint access with the
adjacent property reducing access points along Immokalee.
We have conducted a transportation study. Our study
concludes that we have no significant impact on existing level of
service and the existing facilities, and staff concurs with our
conclusions.
And last but not least, as part of our review process and our
hearing process, there was discussion about interconnection with
adjacent properties. While we understand that the interconnections
are not required, this project is committed to providing those
interconnections. Should the neighbors want those in the future, or
should the county want those in the future, our project is willing to
September 28, 2021
Page 35
provide that.
So with that said, that wraps up our presentation, and we will be
available for any questions you may have.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I don't see any right now, so I think
we need to hear from staff, please. And including the staff -- or,
Mr. Bosi, if you can answer it. I see that Ms. Sonntag is here, and I
would like to get a clarification of those numbers. What does that
mean in dollars, today's dollars, this year's? But please go ahead,
Mr. Bosi.
MR. BOSI: Good morning, Commissioners. Mike Bosi,
Planning and Zoning Director representing staff's perspective on the
proposed GMP amendment as well as the proposed RPUD.
As Patrick has reiterated or has highlighted within his
presentation, they started out at 30 units per acre. Through
discussion with the Planning Commission and staff, we've lowered
that down to 25 units per acre.
The concessions in terms of setbacks, buffering, compatibility
with the adjacent properties to the west, the Bermuda Palms and the
other apartment complexes, I believe, has been significant to achieve
consistency with the land-use pattern that is higher intensity
residential and commercial going over to the activity center.
One of the main issues has been the establishment of an
interconnection frontage road along Immokalee. The PUD has been
adequately addressed to allow for that frontage road if the county and
the property owners would agree to it, but it's provided for
specifically not only on the master plan but within text of the PUD
that provides the extra assurance that, if we can -- if we can secure
the commitments from the adjoining property owners, that this PUD
would allow for that to go forward as well.
And another aspect -- and I will turn it over to Kristi and Jake
from the Housing Department -- the eligibility in terms of density,
September 28, 2021
Page 36
what they're asking for in their GMP amendment is, essentially, 112
units above what they could ask for right now by our density rating
system. And if you take that 112 additional units that they're asking
for and you compare that to the 70 that are going to be income
restricted, that's 63 percent of the additional density that they're
requesting within their GMP amendment; 63 percent are going to be
allocated to either 100 percent of AMI or 80 percent of AMI and,
from that perspective, the Zoning staff as well as the Housing staff
feels that there is a public benefit that is being conveyed.
And the land-use patterns within this general area of
high-intensity commercial blending over to an auto dealership to a
higher density residential project that offers public benefit of
affordable housing to a -- or to higher density multifamily, the same
type of product that's being proposed within the Blue Coral, we feel
that it's consistent. There's public benefit, and we recommend
support of both the GMP amendment as well as the PUD.
And staff would be available for any questions, or I could turn it
over to Kristi, and she can --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Let's hear from Ms. Sonntag, and
then we'll come back. I have a sense that we might have some
questions up here, too.
MS. SONNTAG: Good morning, Commissioners. Kristi
Sonntag, Community and Human Services Director.
Commissioner, could you clarify your question.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. Talk about AMI, how it
changes every year. What does it mean for 2021/'22? What is that
number?
MS. SONNTAG: Okay. The area median income is published
annually by the Housing and Urban Development, and it does
fluctuate every single year and, currently, for a family of four in
Collier County, that's 84,300.
September 28, 2021
Page 37
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: And that's --
MS. SONNTAG: That's 80 percent of your area median
income.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: So that means any member in that
household could contribute to that number, correct, as long as it's a
family of four?
MS. SONNTAG: Yes, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: All right.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: So just to clarify. So to make sure
we're all on the same page, the 84,000 is not the AMI. That's
80 percent of the AMI.
MS. SONNTAG: No, Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Okay. Because I thought that's
what you said.
MS. SONNTAG: Eighty percent of the area median income,
that income limit is 84,300.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Okay. So 80 percent is 80 percent
of the 84-. Okay. All right.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: No. Eighty percent equals 84,000.
MS. SONNTAG: Yes.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Well, this is what I was asking.
MS. SONNTAG: Yes. Eighty percent -- the AMI is 84,000.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: The AMI is 84,000.
MS. SONNTAG: Right. The area median income.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Is 84,000.
MS. SONNTAG: Assuming it's an 80 percent income for a
family of four.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: No, no, no. Talk about what
the -- what is the -- what is the area median income, period? What is
it?
MS. SONNTAG: 84,300.
September 28, 2021
Page 38
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Right. Okay.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: That's all.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Eighty percent of that is a
smaller number than 84,000.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yeah, so it would be a lot smaller.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Very good.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: So 80 percent of that -- every year
the -- every year you establish what -- the median income, and it
varies.
MS. SONNTAG: Right.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Right? And then 80 percent,
100 percent, 120 percent, 140 percent is another figure.
MS. SONNTAG: You are correct.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: So is the AMI separate and apart
from the 80, 100, 120, 140, what is that AMI figure.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: It's 84,000.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: No.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Plus-minus 84,000.
MR. CALLAHAN: Commissioner, I believe your question is
the area median income is about -- is 84,000, as Kristi outlined.
Eighty percent of that is around 67,000, off the top of my --
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Two
hundred -- 67,200 -- well, whatever the actual AMI is. It's --
MS. SONNTAG: What it would be for a family of four, for
80 percent is 67,450.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: There we go. Okay.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Great.
MS. SONNTAG: I'm sorry.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. No, no. You don't
have to apologize. It's probably my mistake.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: What was your question,
September 28, 2021
Page 39
Commissioner? I was trying to understand -- no, she misspoke when
she talked about it.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Right. I think your question was,
what was the AMI, right?
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I was wondering
what -- where you were going with your question.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Oh, because let's talk about -- so it's
80 percent. And, I'm sorry, the other one is what percentage? What
income bracket of ESP personnel is this project attracting? What is
their qualifications? So one would be a family of four that made a
total of $67,450 a year, and then I think 100 percent would be 84,300,
okay. Good.
Thank you.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: A hundred percent would be the
84,000.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Correct.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And 120 percent is 100,000,
100,001.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Right.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I have my calculator going
up there. It's not all right there.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. So, Mr. Bosi.
MR. BOSI: Yes.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Madam Chair, I do have a
question for Mr. Bosi and for the petitioner.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. So let's start with staff first, if
we can, and then go to -- it's up to you, sir.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: All right. So you have 70
units set aside for essential services personnel. And I won't go
September 28, 2021
Page 40
through the AMI again. I think we've beaten that subject to death.
So you have in some of these units, the 80 percent, and some
essential services personnel may qualify, and then you have the
higher limit. My understanding is that if a unit is not rented to an
essential services person that it would be open to other employees
and their families that meet that 80 percent.
MR. BOSI: The income qualification still is going to be done.
It's just they will be -- won't be employed in a job that qualifies as an
essential services personnel.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: So those 70 units, regardless
of whether they're filled with essential services personnel, will be
occupied by people that meet these income levels?
MR. BOSI: Correct. That's -- we made that clarification
within the GMP as well as the PUD.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Okay. Thank you. That
was my -- that was my question for the petitioner. I just wanted to
clarify that for the record.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. So, Commissioner Solis, let's
start.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Okay. A couple questions about
the interconnection, because when I first heard about this proposal a
couple years ago, that was an important issue for me, anyway. And
I'd like to understand exactly how this is going to work and what the
commitments really are.
I recall when the Germain PUD was coming forward that there
were maps shown and discussions about having a frontage road, and
somehow that's not in that PUD, which concerns me. But I just want
to make sure that we have a policy that we require these connections,
interconnections -- and this is, I think, important for Immokalee
Road, because everybody knows that's congested, and I want to make
sure that we're trying to follow that policy as well as we can given the
September 28, 2021
Page 41
situation.
So exactly how is the commitment structured?
MR. BOSI: And just for clarification, we do not require
interconnections. We encourage.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: We encourage.
MR. BOSI: Yes, we encourage.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Okay, encourage it.
MR. BOSI: Within the PUD within the master plan, they show
interconnection points on the master plan to both the east and to the
west, and there's specific text within the transportation commitment
that if the -- if agreeable to the adjoining property owners,
interconnection shall be provided to each of those to provide for that
frontage road.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Okay. And interconnection would
be whatever that means is sufficient for the traffic to get -- because
the whole idea was that folks that would want to take a left on
Immokalee Road would go to the Juliet Boulevard light and take a
left as opposed to making a U-turn there at the light instead?
MR. BOSI: And, more significant, the household needs of the
apartments that are to the west as well as to the Blue Coral proposed
facilities, those daily needs could be somewhat satisfied with an
interconnection and not have to even enter into the larger
transportation system because of the goods and services that are over
available at Walmart, per se, or some of the other restaurants. They
can be satisfied without having to impact the larger transportation
system on Immokalee, and that's the real value of that
interconnection, and that's the value of our Growth Management Plan
when we say we want to allow for higher density residential in close
proximity to our commercial uses, because we want to shorten those
trips, because of, you know, the trip length. Shortening the trip
length has a positive effect upon the entire transportation system.
September 28, 2021
Page 42
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Right. And somebody wanting to
get to the commercial area, not having to get out onto Immokalee
Road and then turn back into the commercial areas is important.
That was important to me.
Okay. So you feel confident that assuming that the continuing
discussions with the adjoining property owners come to fruition, that
we can make that connection?
MR. BOSI: Oh, yes. I'm confident that the language we've
provided, the extra assurance on the master plan, as well as the
commitment within the verbiage of the text for the transportation
development that we can most certainly -- and they have agreed that
they are willing to provide for that interconnection.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: And I do appreciate that they've
agreed to that. I think that's an important issue.
I do have one question for Mr. Vanasse, if I can. There was a
slide -- and maybe you can go back where you were talking about the
35 at 80 percent AMI, 35 at -- let's see. Right there, okay.
So there's 35 at 80 percent AMI; 35, 80 to 100; and then the last
bullet point says many of the remaining units will qualify as gap.
So can you clarify what "many" means? I mean, is
that -- you're talking about that's your price point for the market-rate
units, or what are we talking about here?
MR. VANASSE: I'll actually leave this up to Gregg Fusaro,
who is the applicant. I think he's run some models and, also, I think
he's got some good points about long-term affordability that's
important for the record.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Okay.
MR. FUSARO: Good morning, Commissioners. Thank you.
Greg Fusaro with Capital Investment Group, and I just wanted to also
point out that my partner, David Bastos is here this morning as well,
and I'm pointing that out just so that you know that the buck stops
September 28, 2021
Page 43
here. We are Capital Investment Group.
In response to your question regarding the interconnection, that
is a commitment that we've made in writing. It's in both
applications, and I just want you to know that from day one we
anticipated and understood that that was going to happen and have
supported that from the beginning. So as long as that property's
there, we're -- and it can happen, we will be a part of that.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: And thank you for that.
That's -- being the last -- kind of the last one in always presents its
issues, but I do appreciate you making that commitment.
MR. FUSARO: So in response to your question about other
units that will be in that -- kind of that gap range -- two things I want
to point out. Number one, as I think Commissioner Taylor pointed
out, the AMIs change from year to year. In fact, I have the 2020s
that four-person AMI was 82,3-, 2021 it's 84-something. It could go
down next year. So it varies, and those rents at the 80 and
100 percent will vary as the AMI changes.
In just looking at our projected rent schedule at this point, you
know, there are rents that range anywhere from $1,100 a month up to
about $2,500 a month.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: How many rooms? What are we
talking about bedrooms?
MR. FUSARO: We have everything from studios to
three-bedroom units, and the -- obviously, the rent is higher for the
larger units.
But my point is, there's, for example, rents that are $1,400 a
month, which is about $18,000 a year, which represents -- you know,
if you looked at that as, say, 30 percent or a third of income, you're
looking at an income of $50-some-thousand a year. So that's, again,
at 100 percent. So between that 100 and 140 percent, there's
affordability. I mean, in general, our rents are compatible with
September 28, 2021
Page 44
that -- that range between 100 and 140 percent. There's not many
units that are going to have a rent that's higher than what that median
income would be at the 140 percent level.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Okay. And that was really what
my question was was, what do you envision the market rate to be?
MR. FUSARO: Right. And that's, obviously, a factor of the
fact that incomes in this county are, you know, much higher than the
national average.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Okay, thank you.
MR. FUSARO: Sure.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner McDaniel.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes. My question or
comment was for staff more than anything. Just -- and it followed
along with Commissioner Solis' statement with regard to the
interconnectivity.
I would like to make sure -- and I think -- I talked with staff
about it yesterday, that -- and, again, I'm not into dictatorial policies,
and incentivization for interconnections is imperative, especially with
the stress we have on our existing road systems.
But minimum -- because it wasn't really a priority for a long,
long time in our community. We see circumstances like this all over
our community. So I would like for us to do two things. Number
one, give some consideration to enhancing incentivization somehow,
some way to provide for interconnectivity in an incentive-based form
some way, somehow, number one. Number two, as -- and I know
there's a lot of history that's going on with this particular piece of
property, and getting across the Germain piece is going to be a trick
somehow. We're not quite sure how that's all going to transpire.
But I would like to at least propose or suggest that while we're
negotiating with the contiguous property owners that there's some
kind of even pedestrian access for the residents to get over to the
September 28, 2021
Page 45
Walmart and the commercial center that's over there just -- again,
every single thing we can do to keep that extra car off of Immokalee
Road's going to be imperative. The folks that live here are going to
have to come out and travel east and then turn around. If their intent
is to go back to the west, it's going to be tricky at best.
So that's my -- it was more of a statement than anything. I just
wanted to -- I was thinking about it last night after I spoke with staff
about this, and, minimumly, if we can provide for pedestrian access
across to get over to the commercial, that will -- that will help.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
Commissioner LoCastro.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Yeah. I mean, I have similar
comments. My main concern isn't with the numbers and the AMI
and all that. I think all that, you know -- I think you've proven your
point. But it's safety. And that interconnection, keeping people off
Immokalee, is critical.
So, you know, Mike, to your point of we're continuing
discussions, they're going in the right direction and everything, but in
the end, this is really what the Germain team decides and thinks.
So, of course, Blue Coral wants the interconnection and people that
live there would want it. It keeps cars off of Immokalee. It lets
people get to all the surrounding stores without getting out on the big
road, so everybody sees the advantage.
But similar to what Commissioner McDaniel is saying, I'd really
like to see aggressive conversations with Germain, because they're
really the piece of the puzzle that is unsettled yet. So it doesn't give
me confidence to say, well, we're having conversations and it seems
like they're going -- I mean, to me this actually might be -- I don't
know want to use the term "deal breaker," but it's a pretty important
point.
And so I know your job is to bring the two parties together and,
September 28, 2021
Page 46
you know, try to have it be resolved on both sides, but Commissioner
McDaniel brings up a good point. That interconnection is so
important that let's exhaust every possible option. And I assume
you're doing that, but exhausting the options isn't with the Blue Coral
guys; it's with Germain. And so I don't see anybody here
representing them or, if somebody is, you know, if they want, you
know, come to the podium.
But I would like a more definitive type of thing that, hey, we
have some options. Maybe we haven't decided which one, but we
think in the group of options there is a winner. And it might not be
exactly the perfect thing that was in Plan No. 1, but it's -- something
is going to be agreed to at that interconnection to provide the safety
for people -- or the convenience. I mean, a lot of people that live
there, some of them are going to be seasonal, some of them are going
to be elderly, you know, and to get out on Immokalee every time they
want to go somewhere -- if we had an option of an interconnection,
and then to not have that happen.
So, I mean, yeah, it's more of a statement here, but really the
aggressive conversation's with Germain, and they hold all the cards.
Blue Coral wants it. We want it. But, you know, I can see
Germain's point of it really matters where it is in the property, and
there's not a million options.
So, you know, my point is, I'd like to hear something more
definitive from -- I mean, can you elaborate a little bit more? When
you say, you know, oh, we're in conversations, but do you have three
options and they're trying to decide one of the three and they're going
to pick one, or it's a little looser, you know, of a conversation?
MR. BOSI: And -- I would probably have to defer to Trinity Scott
in our Transportation Planning Department, who has been involved in
those conversations ongoing.
The -- right now the issue with Germain is that the proposed
September 28, 2021
Page 47
interconnection is about a quarter of the way to the south of their
property, and that impacts, I think, the functionality of how the
dealership can operate.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Space.
MR. BOSI: So we're trying to engage in a discussion that
would allow for maybe more flexibility that's going to allow for a
better site design so they can accommodate the interconnection
without having to forego a quarter of their parcel from being utilized
in a manner that they would feel appropriate as the property owners
and as a car dealership. So that's really the crux of the arguments.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Okay.
MR. BOSI: And what I would also remind the Commission,
and it was related to a reference to the ULI report that Mr. Vanasse
had put up, and it was recommending 30 units per acre, those
amendments that you heard earlier discussed at your public speaking,
we're proposing 25 units per acre in certain locations. But the other
aspect, and it relates directly to the public benefit of this proposal, 70
units are going to be income restricted. And why does that matter?
That ULI report, it estimated that 40,000 people, employees are
imported by this county every day to come from Lee County, from
Miami-Dade, from areas outside of Collier County to fill the work
obligations created by our land uses. That is a significant driver of
our transportation congestion.
And when we have opportunities in the right location -- I'm not
saying density at all locations is appropriate. But in this location of
an interchange activity center, and we are -- we're just outside of that
interchange activity center -- with higher residential multifamily
already existing to the west, with commercial in such close
proximity, this is where we want to provide for those opportunities.
And I know 70 units, well, what is that going to shave off; 150 of
those 40,000 people? Well, that's an improvement. And we're
September 28, 2021
Page 48
trying to find any areas for improvement. And we do think that this
applicant has provided a lot of flexibility and shown goodwill, and
we will take that -- your comments, your comments and the
Commission's desire for this interconnection and try to find the right
arrangement that's going to work for the needs of Germain.
Blue Coral is set up to be able to receive it. They've already
agreed to it to the properties to the east and to the west if the
Bermuda Palms Apartments did want to provide for. And they had
even suggested that they would allow for a gate towards where the
Bermuda Palm Apartments to the west could come and utilize their
access point to get to the commercial area, but to get back in you
would have to be a resident of the Bermuda Palms. So they have
shown a tremendous lot of -- amount of flexibility, and there is public
benefit that is being provided.
But we hear the direction loud and clear for the
interconnections, and we will do everything within our power to try
to accommodate and establish that, because everyone understands the
benefit that it will provide.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: I mean, has Germain showed
that flexibility? I mean, do you feel like you're getting that --
(Simultaneous crosstalk.)
MR. BOSI: Yeah. Just two months ago, speaking with the
land-use attorney who represents Germain, there was no
desire -- there was no desire to engage in any further discussion about
interconnection. Since we've pulled the petition, that has -- that
stance is starting to soften. So, yes, I think -- they're showing
flexibility.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: I mean, it might sound like
no big deal, but when you see those -- when those interconnections
happen, then, you know, you see how it creates a much more safer
environment as people traverse all these different commercial areas
September 28, 2021
Page 49
without having to get back on, you know, Immokalee or whatever.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Can I just -- maybe I can just shed
some light on it. You know, when this whole issue came up, I was
really the one that requested that it be continued so that we try to
work this thing out.
My discussions with Germain's representative is, now, that they
are actively looking at what they can do to make this work, and I feel
much better now that there is some -- you know, some movement
there. I feel -- I feel better. I won't say I'm confident that it will
work out, but I feel a lot better than I did before. I think there's some
sincere interest there. You know, there's maybe another issue on the
other property to the east, but I think --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: One property at a time.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Right. We've got to take one
small step at a time. But I just wanted to say that my recent
conversations with them is that they're -- they really are sincere in
looking at it.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner McDaniel.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Well, Trinity, do you want to
address Commissioner LoCastro, or do you want me to?
MS. SCOTT: For the record, Trinity Scott, Deputy Department
Head.
As of two weeks ago, the door was pretty much a no. And so we've
all had conversations with Germain, and they are at least open to
coming to the table with those options, as Commissioner Solis
discussed.
We will continue to actively pursue it. As we discussed,
Germain is -- as I've said, they're my largest hurdle right now because
they're kind of the hole in the doughnut, if you will. And then once
we can get through the Germain piece, then we can go have some
discussions with regard to the adjacent PUD, which it does have a
September 28, 2021
Page 50
PUD commitment. The Gaspar PUD does have a PUD commitment
for the interconnection.
I think through the years interconnections are evolving for us,
and you're seeing more specific language come into the PUDs as
you've seen in this one as far as requiring the access easement to
where we're taking a more stronger stance with regard -- up front in
the PUDs in trying to get those easements there so that 20 years down
the road, as all of these parcels develop, we can actually make those
connections. And it does take quite some time. We're still working
on the connection on Pine Ridge Road between Whippoorwill and
Livingston, and that's 20-plus years in the making. One parcel, one
little connection, and then we'll have that connection through. So
staff understands the importance of them and will continue to bring
those to your attention.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yeah. I just -- and that was
my thoughts. I wanted you to hear there are a couple of pieces to the
puzzle, as Commissioner Solis has elaborated on. And, you know,
we can't hardly accost a cooperative petitioner for somebody who's
not part of their petition other than -- other than saying out loud that
we will cooperate to the best that we can and offer incentives in order
to accommodate the cross-access, so...
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner Saunders.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Thank you. And I think this
is for Mr. Bosi.
If we make an assumption that there will be no interconnection
with the Germain property, what would be your recommendation in
reference to this petition, if you make that -- just make that
assumption?
MR. BOSI: If we made that assumption, it wouldn't change my
recommendation. The Transportation Department has already
indicated that it satisfies the concurrency management system, this
September 28, 2021
Page 51
volume to capacity on the road system. If they have an outfall or
they have an ingress/egress point only on Immokalee Road and not
an interconnection, we do recognize that it is a much better project if
that interconnection is provided for. But we would stand by our
recommendations even with only an access point on Immokalee
Road.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: And, Trinity Scott, same
question to you in terms of transportation.
MS. SCOTT: Certainly, sir. Our recommendation would not
change either. We actually evaluate it based on all the traffic going
out onto Immokalee Road as your worst-case scenario, because
whether it hits at this section or whether it hits at the light, it's still all
going to impact for this roadway link.
So we will evaluate further at Site Development Plan or plats
and plans for operational analysis, but we will evaluate based on all
of the traffic going out to Immokalee Road.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Okay. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I have a question for Mr. Bosi.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: I had, actually, one quick question
for -- but I can ask Mr. Bosi, and then I'll be done with my question.
And that was, the commitment now to have a single access point for
both the Germain -- I mean, Germain has agreed to that.
MR. BOSI: Yes.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: And that's of a significant benefit
so we don't have two curb cuts and more traffic coming in and out.
It will be a little more control?
MR. BOSI: Spoken like a transportation engineer. Exactly.
The two ingress points down to one ingress point's always going to
create less friction, less traffic, and something that we always want to
promote. So yes, absolutely.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: I'm not an engineer, but I play one.
September 28, 2021
Page 52
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Holiday Inn Express.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Mr. Bosi, can you talk and define
what infill is? It's a subject that I'm going to bring at public
comment, so I thought it was a great entry right now.
MR. BOSI: An infill is a term in the planning world where you
have properties that have been developed on one or either side within
the urbanized area when there is a full arrangement of infrastructure
that's provided for. And when you have infill property, we don't
want to see the next green field that's farther out removed from where
our infrastructure is developed.
So as a -- as a set of policies, what we want to promote is -- and
Commissioner McDaniel's talked about it in terms of the
interconnection, incentivization. So what we do when we have infill
properties, we have provisions that allow for higher densities, more
intensities because we want to -- we want to -- we want to promote
the market to recognizing that this property has a full arrangement of
infrastructures. We want to get that into an active land use so,
therefore, we're going to provide incentivization to create activity
from the marketplace to take action to promote that area.
So when we say infill, we really talk about how do we get better
utilization of a parcel that has all their infrastructure available but it's
not in active use. So we have provisions that incentivize that.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: All right. Thank you.
And then as far as the timing for this interconnect, is there a
time -- is there a clock on this in terms of -- at some point we can't
discuss for two or three months or it's up to the developer, I suppose,
but there will be a sort of a drop -- you know, we need to stop this
conversation. It's going to happen or it's not going to happen,
correct?
MR. BOSI: Well, there will become a time, but I imagine that
September 28, 2021
Page 53
the original -- the design of their -- of their facility will have to
contemplate that they have an access point on adjoining both sides,
that eventually they may have to -- they may have to provide for that
interconnection. So they're going to have to design their project to
accommodate -- and 10 years from now their PUD's saying that they
will provide for that interconnection. So the way that they design
their facility is going to have to anticipate that sometime in the future
it may be provided.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: So I think I'll ask Mr. Fusaro to come
up, please. Thank you.
MR. FUSARO: Yeah, that's a great question. I think that our
next steps, obviously, is to do our SDP. And as we go through that
process, we have initially planned that at the north end of the
property there is parking, there's a dog park, and there's also some
additional right-of-way. And so we have a lot of flexibility on the
north end of the property to kind of locate a connection road, service
road, if you will, in a lot of different areas. But our hope would be
that over that next six-month period that we're going through our
SDP that we could get that resolved.
If not, then again, we might have to make some modifications to
our plan or to our actual construction once it's completed. But,
again, we've got a lot of flexibility because we have always
envisioned that there would be some cross, you know, vehicular
access there, there will be some parking out there, and also we had a
green space set up in the front there along Immokalee.
So we do have a lot of flexibility. Obviously, it's better if that
happens sooner rather than later, but we do have the flexibility to be
able to accommodate it at any time.
There's also an existing curb cut, I'll call it, in the driveway at
Bermuda Palms that's been curbed and paved that anticipated a
connection coming east. And so I think initially we would try to go
September 28, 2021
Page 54
from where that existing curb cut is and head east.
There was also a plan presented, and this was in my
conversations with Commissioner Solis two years ago, that was
shown to us that showed that service road almost -- going in front of
Germain almost right up against Immokalee. I mean, there's
obviously some buffer in between. But it was very much pushed to
the north end of their property, which made sense to us. We thought
it made sense to them because, obviously, I understand their position.
They don't want traffic from Bermuda Palms, from our development,
coming right through the middle of their display field where they
have, you know, new and used cars. So we understand that, and
that's why we thought it was going to be positioned right at the north
end of the property.
Bottom line is, our development plan, even if that might change,
still has plenty of flexibility to accommodate that.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: North/south? You've got flexibility
north or south on your property, correct?
MR. FUSARO: Well, the south over one-point-something
acres is a preserve.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Correct.
MR. FUSARO: And that's the same way for Germain. Both
properties have undisturbed preserve on the south side of the
property, then development areas, and then the area in front. We
have a very -- I don't know. It's probably 300 feet of depth from
Immokalee coming south that we have programmed currently for
parking, green space, and some kind of interconnection.
So it would have to be -- at the end of the day, based on how
Germain, I think, would operate, that service road is going to have to
be at the north end of both properties. And all I'm saying is we have
plenty of space to do it, and it could move up or down some, but we
have plenty of flexibility to do that.
September 28, 2021
Page 55
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: But, again, you just -- you do
have -- you're flexible in your locations of where to site --
MR. FUSARO: Yes. Yeah, absolutely.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: -- site the connector roads?
MR. FUSARO: We have a lot of room up front, and
we -- again, we planned that initially because we anticipated that this
was going to happen.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you very much.
MR. FUSARO: Yes.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner LoCastro.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Sir, just one last question,
and this is really to, I guess, confirm your commitment and
understanding of what the safety and the convenience that the
connector provides to the residents of Blue Coral. Should
Germain -- this is a little hypothetical, but it's really to see how
committed you-all are. Should Germain agree to wherever that
location is, is Blue Coral committed to fully paying for the expense
of that connector? So Germain says, yeah, you can do it, but we're
not picking up any of the tab. Has that been part of the conversation
that you-all are committed to the full cost of the connector, or that's
not something that has happened?
MR. FUSARO: We have not had that conversation. I'm not
sure that would be fair and reasonable, but I like Commissioner
McDaniel's idea to incentivize the interconnections versus --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: There we go.
MR. FUSARO: -- versus us bearing the load of all of that.
And, again, just to be clear, it's been represented to us, until June,
when we met with CCPC, that there was going to be an
interconnection. And Germain presented an objection letter in June
because we referenced in our PUD and our GMPA application that it
would be provided. So, you know, we have operated from day one
September 28, 2021
Page 56
under the impression and the representation that that would be there,
and it would not be our cost to put that in.
A couple other points to note. The traffic study, just so you
know, indicates that for our development, if that interconnection does
not take place at peak p.m. hour, it's 20 additional cars on Immokalee
that would otherwise take the other route over to Juliet, and that's
significantly less than what another commercial development on that
site would be. Because, frankly, if I'm the owner, potentially highest
and best use is a commercial development there. Theoretically, you
could do 80,000 square feet of medical office or something like that.
It generates a lot more traffic.
So -- but, yes, we're committed and, I think, you know, we're
certainly willing to do our part, whatever that might cost. And even
if it's a year or two from now, we might incur a lot of additional costs
that we wouldn't expect, but we're certainly prepared to do our part.
I'll make one other comment, too, because I think it's important.
One other thing about the infill and the activity center in those
locations, our residents, which is a combination of all different types
of people and demographics, but one of the things that we try to do is
locate a property that has a high walkability score, and that means
that our residents can walk or bike to amenities, groceries, retail,
restaurants, parks, and that's what's great about this site.
You know, we drove through the park yesterday, and it's
like -- you know, it's a third of a mile, and the trail comes right up
Livingston and turns into the sidewalk on Immokalee. Even though
Immokalee's a lot to go across, there is a crosswalk, and our residents
can walk to Seed to Table. They can walk to the Publix. They can
walk to Walmart. They can walk or ride their bikes to the park.
What that does -- as Mr. Bosi said, that does have an impact on
traffic, and it's a favorable one. So we're excited about that.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: And a quick question before
September 28, 2021
Page 57
we -- management of your apartment building.
MR. FUSARO: We manage everything we develop.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Will there be a manager living on
site, or will it be done from another --
MR. FUSARO: Well, all our site personnel will live in this
area. Whether or not they live on site is really, you know, their
choice.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay.
MR. FUSARO: We don't -- we don't require that.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay.
MR. FUSARO: But in many cases they do. But we'll have a
full management staff here.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you very much.
MR. FUSARO: Yes, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: All right. Any other questions?
MR. CALLAHAN: Madam Chair, you do have a couple of
public speakers, and we're due a court reporter break.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you very much. How many
speakers do we have?
MR. MILLER: Four.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I think we will take a court reporter
break, and we will come back at 10:45.
(A brief recess was had from 10:35 a.m. to 10:45 a.m.)
MR. CALLAHAN: Madam Chair, you have a live mic.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you very much. I think we're
now moving into public comment.
MR. MILLER: Madam Chair, we have four registered speakers
for this item; two here in the room and two online. Your first
speaker is Nancy Lewis. She'll be followed by Barbara Kanter.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: And we can use two podiums, so if
Ms. Kanter's here, if you'd be -- thank you very much.
September 28, 2021
Page 58
MS. LEWIS: Again, thank you, Madam Chairman and
Commissioners. Again, for the record --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Do you want to pull down the -- there
we go.
MS. LEWIS: Nancy Lewis. I'm here today representing 256
residents who have signed a petition requesting the denial of the Blue
Coral Planned Unit Development. This request is based on its being
incompatible and inconsistent with neighboring residential PUDs and
only serves to endanger the public safety and welfare of Collier
residents by adding yet more cars and pedestrians to an already
compromised area.
The petition states in part, more traffic, longer lights, more
aggressive drivers, more accidents, longer evacuation times. It also
cites the county's recent Immokalee Road traffic study, I'm sorry, for
the corridor. The count, 43,000-plus vehicles a day, close to
capacity, jamming the street when it began its review, but in the first
quarter of this year the count reached over 60,000 near the interstate,
an increase of 17,000-plus units per day.
Commissioners, we fully understand every property owner has
the right to develop their property; however, there's nothing,
absolutely nothing that obligates this commission to deviate from the
Growth Management Plan. The Growth Management Plan allows
for a total of 65 units, not the 234 being requested.
In speaking with county zoning staff, the project is appealing
because of the affordable housing component. Staff went so far as to
make reference to the affordable housing initiative draft as
justification for the project; however, it's only a draft. Why would
you consider this when you haven't even seen the entire document or
approved it?
The petitioner bypassed the Land Development Code affordable
housing density bonus requirements by deviating with the GMP by
September 28, 2021
Page 59
requesting it. The applicant made no commitment to the types of the
units, the number of bedrooms, and the AMI levels. How many
other applicants have done this? Do we actually know how many
approved affordable housing units are in use?
I requested audit reports for the PUDs containing affordable
housing commitments. Housing staff provided me a commitment
tracking report that lists the numbers and types of units in each. But
there's no actual audit of the PUDs for affordable housing
commitments. One can only wonder how many units designated for
affordable housing, its intent, are actually rented at market rate.
Without knowing the actual status of the already approved
commitments, affordable housing should not be the basis to deviate.
This is about endangering the safety and welfare of residents by
allowing such a substantial increase of density to an already
compromised area and failing roadways. Please deny it.
I'd like to enter the petition into the record.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. You give it to our court
reporter, please. Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Barbara Kanter. She'll be
followed online by Brett Brosseit.
MS. KANTER: Hi. My name is B.B. Kanter. I am a resident
of Pelican Bay, and the reason -- I wasn't going to state this, but
Jackie reminded me of how my commitment to public housing and
my career started.
My parents and my grandparents and my great grandparents
grew up in New York City in tenements moving from place to place
because they were immigrants with no education. In 1964, they all
moved into workforce housing, which I think probably was in the
80 percent range, and their lives changed. So I grew up hearing
about how lucky I was that I always lived in a house and we always
had food on our table.
September 28, 2021
Page 60
So the reason Collier County has zoning and building codes and
such a good staff is so that unsubstantiated claims can be taken out of
the planning process. We all know what we've heard is substantiated
and what isn't substantiated.
Blue Coral meets all the code and zoning requirements.
They've been entirely -- again, this is hearsay, but the Planning
Department says that they have been very cooperative in trying to
meet all the standards of Collier County.
And then, lastly, we need to find places where people who
graduated from Collier County high schools can live, and most of
them probably will barely qualify to live in the 80 percent if they
have two working parents. So this is -- we want people who are
nurses and who are -- will be working in the dealership to be able to
live in the county because, if they don't, they're going to be driving on
Immokalee from the east and generating a lot of traffic. So I don't
see this as generating traffic. I see this as decreasing traffic.
But I, you know -- so, anyways, my last statement is, just like
homeowners like me and people who've always had a chance to be in
a stable place, renters want a stable, long-term place to live where
their children aren't -- don't have to change schools.
As everybody said, these 220 [sic] units are barely going to
make a difference, but building them will give other people the hope
that we can build more, and there are places that we can build more if
we want to, and if -- we have to be very careful to require that the
developers follow all of our rules. I don't want them if they don't
follow rules. I'm a HUD employee, so who knows more than I do
how important it is to follow the minimum property standards?
Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Brett Brosseit, followed
by Diane Doherty.
Brett, you're being prompted to unmute yourself. There you
September 28, 2021
Page 61
are, Brett, you have three minutes.
MR. BROSSEIT: Thank you, sir. I'm Brett Brosseit. I live in
Palm River just down the road from the proposed Blue Coral site.
I've lived and working in Collier County for the majority of my
career, which has involved working in various capacities in the real
estate and building industries, including the development of rental
housing financed with tax credits and other funding.
I believe the proposed Blue Coral rental community represents a
unique opportunity for Collier County to address the most pressing
housing -- its most pressing housing needs by providing the right
housing for our local families developed under the right program in
the right location.
Over the past several decades, Collier County residents have
been blessed with some of the most vibrant growth in the country,
contributing to the exceptionally high quality of life enjoyed by our
residents. That quality of life, however, is not equally shared by all
in our community, and local working families struggle daily to
survive under the high cost of living.
Those hardest hit by local housing costs often include
community members in essential roles such as teachers, first
responders, medical staff, and hospitality workers. This imbalance
presents not only a moral imperative but a tangible threat to the
strength and vitality of our community as the housing distress
experienced by many Collier County families ultimately pushes them
out of the area, adding to longer commuting distances, increased
traffic congestion, labor shortages, and other community-wide
problems. If it is to be a world-class destination with a vibrant local
community, Collier County will need to provide quality workforce
housing for its local families.
The economic realities of creating workforce housing in a
high-cost area like Collier County often make it difficult, if not
September 28, 2021
Page 62
impossible, to develop affordable rental housing for local families
with conventional financing.
The housing tax credit program is a sophisticated funding
mechanism that leverages private sector market dynamics to fund the
development of quality workforce housing in areas where the
economics would otherwise prove infeasible. A tax credit allocation
represents a valuable investment that addresses stubborn housing
issues affecting communities like ours.
Quality workforce housing financed with tax credits force
existing and future commercial development while addressing local
labor demands and advancing the quality life for local families.
As an additional benefit, the extensive monitoring, inspections, and
contractual obligations inherent in the tax credit program help ensure
the long-term upkeep and professional management of rental
communities.
These tax credits, however, are a scarce resource, and builders
must vie for them in highly competitive funding rounds where only
the best proposals succeed.
The competition is stiff, the process is onerous and, in my
experience, tax credit builders typically become stable community
members by virtue of their extensive long-term commitments and
guarantees. In other words, this is not development for the faint of
heart. It's not a quick-buck type of approach, and relatively few
builders maintain the expertise and dedication to specialize in tax
credit development.
The area surrounding the proposed site on Immokalee Road is
appropriately characterized by commercial and high-density
residential uses. In fact, the site's immediate proximity to potential
places of employment and shopping offer significant advantages to
both Blue Coral residents and the surrounding community creating
workforce housing in an essential area with an easy walking and
September 28, 2021
Page 63
biking distance as such prolific commercial growth not only helps
address local needs labor in key sectors critical to our local economy,
it really is the ever-increasing traffic congestion that results from
pushing housing-distressed families further out of area, an issue that,
unfortunately, has become a hallmark of our county.
Because the proposed Blue Coral rental community is the right
housing built under the right program in the right location, it will help
keep our working families where they belong, right here, our
neighbors, strengthening our community for generations to come.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you very much.
MR. MILLER: Madam Chair, your final speaker on this item is
Diane Doherty.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Ms. Doherty, it's very difficult for
you to hear the beeper, I think, speaking, but you do have a total of
three minutes. We will indulge you a little bit, but try to be
cognizant of that. Thank you.
MS. DOHERTY: My name is Diane Doherty, and I am the
president on the board of directors for Bermuda Palms. We have
several concerns, the first one being the access. We only have one
ingress and one egress into the Bermuda Palms. We are a small
community of 80 -- 80 condos. So we had done a petition earlier
that was signed by several of the residents that we do not want Blue
Coral to have access into our -- into our condo association.
Again, I have to stress that we've only got one way in and one
way out. You want another 234 units coming in and out of there?
That's ridiculous. It's not going to be too feasible.
We also have concerns regarding the traffic. We don't have to
belabor that. It's already been spoken about.
The other concern we have is density. We're 80 units. You're
going to put 234 units. And we're 80 units on, I believe, eight acres.
September 28, 2021
Page 64
They've got nine acres, and you're going to put 234 units?
That's -- that's really a big problem for us as well.
We have -- also would like to see more -- if this is going to
happen, we also have a problem with the landscaping. We need
more of a buffer. You're talking 23-foot trees, and you're talking a
50-foot -- you're talking 50 feet of a building. We want to see a little
bit more hedge, taller and thicker.
And one of the questions that I have is, why can't we use what's
already existing between Bermuda Palms and the proposed Blue
Coral development? You have got to understand that this
development, Bermuda Palms, has been here for 17-and-a-half years.
So I guess we're a little bit spoiled to not have anybody next to
us. We're not against the project, but we would like to see less than
25 units per acre. I don't know if that's feasible, but that's what
we're -- that's what we're requesting.
So with that, I don't really have much else to say. Yeah, there's
just no agreement from us on the ingress and the egress into Blue
Coral from our development.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you, Ms. Doherty.
MS. DOHERTY: You're welcome.
MR. MILLER: And that's our final speaker, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner Saunders.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I have a question for Trinity
Scott and then also a question for the developer.
And, Ms. Scott, the question I'm going to ask you deals with the
plans for Immokalee Road and the condition of Immokalee Road.
One of the speakers, I think, rightfully, suggested that there's a lot of
traffic congestion on Immokalee Road, and this is going to add to
that. So I'd like to have you spend just a moment on what we're
doing to address problems on Immokalee Road and what is the actual
impact of that particular project if it's approved.
September 28, 2021
Page 65
MS. SCOTT: So in our current Annual Update and Inventory
Report there are 450 remaining trips on this section of Immokalee
Road in the p.m. peak hour/peak direction, and this application would
be consuming nowhere near the 450. So there's still available
capacity on the roadway; however, during that Annual Update and
Inventory Report, we do look at projections based on historic growth
patterns. And so we do project that I believe it's 2028 in the current
Annual Update and Inventory that Immokalee Road would -- this
specific segment may exceed its capacity. Once again, those are
projections.
So we have initiated -- probably 18 months to 24 months ago we
initiated a corridor congestion study looking at Immokalee Road
from Livingston Road to Logan Boulevard to look at opportunities to
look at our interconnections to see how we can reconfigure our
existing intersections to more innovative intersections to where we
can actually have more throughput through that roadway so that we
can gain more capacity but maintaining our six-lane facility. That
actually is slated to come back to you in October for consideration.
We've already started working those improvements into the
Long-Range Transportation Plan as well, and so hoping that we
would be working toward getting those improvements in place over
the next five to 10 years.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: And then a question for the
developer. There was some discussion --
MR. FUSARO: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: -- from the last speaker
concerning buffering and sort of a sense that, perhaps, the proposed
buffering is not sufficient. Is that something where you have some
flexibility, and is there anything we can do to enhance that buffering?
MR. FUSARO: So that concern was expressed to staff about
three months ago. And I don't remember A, B, or C type buffers, but
September 28, 2021
Page 66
we had one type of buffer there. In response to this concern, staff
had asked us if we would consider doing a more intense buffer
that -- instead of one type of shrubbery, we had additional shrubbery,
a low set of trees, and a high set of trees, and we agreed to do that.
We would also look, if possible, to incorporate some of the
existing vegetation there, but all these sites along Immokalee are
three or four feet below the road and so, generally, the whole site has
to be built up, and that, you know, generally means that you have to
clear most of the site. But we'll certainly take a look at that. We'd
love to preserve the trees along the entire boundary, but it's just -- it's
very difficult today based on development requirements.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Thank you. Thank you.
MR. FUSARO: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
All right. So any questions? No questions. Do I hear a
motion?
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Do you want me to? Do we
want to hear them together? Because I'll make a motion to approve
both of the items, 9A and B, unless you have to have separate
motions.
MR. BOSI: No, I think you can have them all at once. I just
wanted to provide just a clarification in terms of the existing -- the
proposed affordable housing language. The County Attorney's
Office and staff had made very small changes and clarifications just
to clarify the income levels and that the units, if not rented to
essential service personnel, they would still be income restricted, as
we spoke about earlier, and I just wanted to put it onto the record, and
the applicant has agreed to this language, but I just wanted to get a
clear record for the action.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Good.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: My motion's still the same.
September 28, 2021
Page 67
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: I'll second the motion.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: And I'd like to say a couple things,
if I can.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yeah, and then Commissioner
Saunders.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: I'm sorry. Was your light on?
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: No, I just pushed the button.
You were quicker.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: He didn't push his button.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: You know, I think we spent a lot of
time with a ULI study looking at how we can address the
affordability issue. We even changed provisions in the LDC to
provide for activity -- the inclusion of residential housing in activity
centers because there's employment there, there's services there,
there's transportation there. And this -- this proposal does all of that,
to the applicant's credit. I mean, it really is a place to do what we
talk about a lot, which is smart growth, right? Walkable. And I
think this is -- this is a perfect example of that.
I think we've all gotten a copy of the Chamber's support for the
development. I think that's important. Yes, it's a small drop in the
bucket in terms of the total need for affordable housing, workforce
housing and all that, but it is a step, and I think it's an important step.
So, you know, I think with the study that's ongoing that we're
going to hear some suggestions about how to alleviate some of the
congestion there around I-75 in that corridor, I'm supportive of this.
I think it's what we talk about doing, and we should go ahead and do
it.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner Saunders.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Thank you. I'm going to
support the motion. I believe that there's a lot of good elements to
September 28, 2021
Page 68
this project. And I understand that the primary concerns of the
neighbors are -- buffering is one thing we talked about and, of course,
traffic on Immokalee Road.
A couple years ago I had asked staff to really expedite and do
this corridor study for Immokalee Road similar to what the staff had
done and is doing in reference to Pine Ridge Road. I'm going to be
asking staff to expedite some of those proposed improvements. I
know -- I think Trinity Scott just mentioned somewhere along the
10-year time frame there may be some work done. We'll try to
expedite that.
But I think the main bit of testimony that convinces me to
support this is that this is not going to result in a significant impact on
Immokalee Road. There's still going to be capacity there. We're
going to have other developments going in along Immokalee Road
that will impact traffic, as this will. And we do have a plan to begin
the process of improving Immokalee Road. And I think the
developer will work with the property owners in terms of the
enhanced buffering to make sure that there's at least some consensus
there.
So I'm going to support these -- this -- this motion for these two
items. I think they're in the public interest and will be good projects
for the county.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner LoCastro.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: I'm going to support these
two motions as well, but I wanted to address the residents who, you
know, took the time to sign the petition and the residents who live in
the adjoining residential property. A lot of times when we vote on
things up here and it goes against what your request was, you know,
you might leave here and feel like you weren't heard or, oh, you
know, they don't care about us; it's all about money and things like
that.
September 28, 2021
Page 69
But, realistically, I do like all the things that are in here. I think
the density has been reduced. I always feel like if the density was 30
units per acre and they went to 25, then the motion is, well, make it
20, and then if they made it 20, it's like, how about 15. And, you
know, the reality is, you have to own a calculator and run the
algorithm and look at the cost of the property, the cost of
construction, and whatnot. And not that everything's a cash cow, but
sometimes it's -- people that are against it will just say, well, just
make it smaller, just make it smaller. And, you know, the reality is,
when you run the numbers, then it's not something that's going to be
cost effective. You know, we can't take a $40 million -- and I'm
using a different example, but it's an example we voted on a few
months ago, but I'm not going to name it.
But you can't take a $40 million piece of property and turn it
into a park. You know, that's not the best use of taxpayer dollars.
And in the case here, it's about finding balance. And so I like all the
things that I heard. I hope you-all are true to your word with the
setback -- or the foliage and, you know, those sort of things.
But also, too, on the interconnection, I really think more of the
onus is on you and not Germain. So however you meet in the
middle, I mean, I think, the benefit is 99 percent good for you with
the interconnection and maybe 1 percent good for Germain. I don't
know too many customers that are going to say, oh, we can get
through and go visit, you know, people over at Blue Coral.
So, you know, keep that in mind. That interconnection is a big
safety, you know, type of issue. But, you know -- you know, I'll just
conclude by talking to the residents who took the time to sign the
petition and come to the podium. You are heard. These are things
where we're trying to find the balance, and some concessions are
being made and, also, no project is finished just when we vote here
and then we all, you know, are oblivious to it. We need to hold, you
September 28, 2021
Page 70
know, the developer accountable to make sure they do plant the right
trees, they do plant the right bushes, they have aggressive
conversations with Germain and with our county staff and whatnot,
and we see this thing all the way through to the end so it's the best
possible addition and improvement to that community.
I actually drove out there. I wanted to see the balance between
commercial and residential, you know, and this is a good balance.
This is a good balance. There's so much around there. I mean,
if -- people that live there are going to have so much convenience to
be able to shop in commercial.
But you-all for Blue Coral still have a bunch of homework
assignments that we're going to hold you to.
But to the residents, you know, you are heard, you're not
ignored, and there are concessions that have been made that I think
make this project favorable, and I support it.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Well, I also support it. I think the
developer has taken a concept and made it work here. I think this is
what we want to encourage more. I'm very impressed with your
sensitivity to the surrounding area, especially to, you know, aligning
your preserve area with Germain, which is only a plus for the people
to the south.
And I am sure -- I mean, I'm -- I understand infill. I understand
how difficult it is. And one of the things I'm going to talk about
under communications at the end is that we start looking at infill as a
different creature; that we are going to do more and more of infill,
and there -- and what is good for property that isn't infill, it may not
be good for a property that's infill because of the existing residents
around it.
I wanted to reassure our friends at Bermuda Palms that the
developer -- and I don't know if you heard this, but -- has agreed that
there would be a gate if you would agree to an interconnect. That
September 28, 2021
Page 71
gate would not allow anyone to come into your property but would
allow you to access an interior road which would be a safety issue for
your residents.
I think when this gets built and when Germain gets in and they
have their 50-foot -- 50-foot or 55-foot height walls or height of their
building, I think it's -- or is it 50? Fifty. I think the reason we're
doing this is going to be very clear. This is something that goes
from low to high and then goes to an incredibly dense area, which is
the north Walmart, which everybody shops in. It's extremely busy.
It gives you everything. It gives you food, it gives you clothes, and
it gives you fun things, and it gives you appliances, even.
So I think -- I look forward to that interconnect, I really do.
And on that, we have a motion on the floor and a second.
All those in favor, say aye.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Those opposed, like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: It carries unanimously.
Item #9C
ORDINANCE 2021-33: AMENDING THE APPROPRIATE
ZONING ATLAS MAP OR MAPS BY CHANGING THE ZONING
CLASSIFICATION OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED REAL
PROPERTY FROM A RURAL AGRICULTURAL (A) ZONING
DISTRICT TO A RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENT (RPUD) ZONING DISTRICT FOR THE
September 28, 2021
Page 72
PROJECT TO BE KNOWN AS SOLUNA RPUD, TO ALLOW
CONSTRUCTION OF UP TO 108 DWELLING UNITS ON
PROPERTY LOCATED SOUTHWEST OF THE INTERSECTION
OF TREE FARM ROAD AND MASSEY STREET, IN SECTION
35, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, CONSISTING OF
18.5± ACRES; AND BY PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
[PL20210000093] – ADOPTED
MR. CALLAHAN: Thank you, Commissioners. That takes us
to Item 9C. This item requires ex parte disclosure be provided by
commission members and that participants in the hearing be sworn
in.
Item 9C is a recommendation to approve Ordinance
No. 2004-41, as amended, the Collier County Land Development
Code, which established the comprehensive zoning regulations for
the unincorporated area of Collier County, Florida, by amending the
property, by amending the appropriate zoning atlas map or maps, by
changing the zoning classifications of the herein described real
property from a Rural Agricultural Zoning District to a Residential
Planned Unit Development Zoning District for the project to be
known as Soluna RPUD, to allow construction of up to 108 dwelling
units on property located southwest of the interconnection of Tree
Farm Road and Massey Street in Section 35, Township 48 south,
Range 26 east, consisting of 18.5 acres, and providing an effective
date.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner McDaniel, ex parte.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes. I have -- thank you. I
was doing something.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I'm sorry. We can start at the other
end.
September 28, 2021
Page 73
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: No, I'm ready. I'm ready. I
just wasn't thinking about you. I have had meetings and e-mails
with regard to this.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner Saunders.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Again, likewise, I've had
meetings and e-mails and discussions concerning this project.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner LoCastro.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: No, I've had no disclosures
for this item.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner Solis.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: And I just have numerous e-mails
from residents.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: And I have had a couple of e-mails
but no discussions.
So those wishing to testify, would you please stand and raise
your right hand.
(The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.)
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you very much.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Can I -- good morning. For the record,
Rich Yovanovich on behalf of the petitioner.
We were originally on summary agenda; therefore, I didn't set
any meetings with you-all. I didn't want to take up your time.
I'm not really sure what the issues are, and I don't know if there's any
registered public speakers. I did get one e-mail that I think
may -- that's the only e-mail I've seen on this project.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: The most recent.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Yes.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yeah, I think that highlights --
MR. YOVANOVICH: That highlights the issues.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: As far as I understand.
MR. YOVANOVICH: So what I'm going to do is just a real
September 28, 2021
Page 74
brief overview.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Do you have a copy of the
e-mail?
MR. YOVANOVICH: I do. It's -- I have it. I just -- I think I
can remember the comments. But I just want to have the whole
team here if you have any questions regarding the specifics. We
have our -- DR Horton is the applicant. RWA, Ken is our planner,
and Joel is our engineer if you have questions regarding engineering.
TR Transportation is here. We have our ecologist, and we have our
landscape.
What pretty much came up -- this is an 18-and-a-half-acre site.
I'm going to go to -- make sure where it is. It's at the end of Tree
Farm Road. You know, you've got Massey that basically connects
from Vanderbilt Drive Road all the way up to Immokalee Road.
And this is at the end of Tree Farm Road where the county just
recently built a roundabout. This is an infill parcel, and the request
is to go from basically the four units per acre to six units per acre.
And under your residential infill provisions in your Comprehensive
Plan, we are required to buy TDRs for the first of three eligible
density bonus units. We're only asking for two density bonus units.
So we have to buy 18-and-a-half TDRs to go from four to six
dwelling units per acre. There were comments raised by residents in
the Canopy, which is the Buttonwood PUD, which was approved at a
little over 200 [sic] units per acre, and it was mainly residents along
this border right here that came up with -- their concerns were what
would be the impact to their rear yards, because the developer of the
Canopy built a chain-link fence to about where the arrow is and
stopped. So they had concerns about security, and they had concerns
about the buffer, and they had concerns about overall project density.
So the person whose e-mail I saw came and raised all of those
issues at the Planning Commission. Originally, we were asking for
September 28, 2021
Page 75
130 units for the entire project. That person asked that we reduce
the density to six units per acre, which we did. We reduced it to six
units per acre, which is the 108 units.
They also asked us to do an enhanced buffer along the boundary,
that western boundary. We agreed to -- I think the base tree is
12 feet in height. We agreed to 16 feet in height to have the bigger
trees and to stagger those trees consistent with the trees that exist at
the Canopy project to make sure we fill in the holes in the landscape
buffer.
So we agreed to reduce the density based upon the number they
asked us to do. They asked us to do an enhanced buffer based upon
what they'd asked us to do.
Just so you're aware, this project right here -- and right here is
the same project -- that's a seven-dwelling-units-per-acre project.
We're asking for six under the infill.
And I'm just doing it at a high overview, because I think those
were the concerns that were raised in the e-mail that were also raised
at the Planning Commission and we thought adequately addressed,
because we gave the commenter everything they asked us for, which
was reduce the density to six units per acre and provide the enhanced
buffer.
We also agreed to continue the fence along the western
boundary to connect to their fence. So we put the fence in the
location they asked us to put the fence so there would be a security
fence along their western -- their eastern/our western boundary.
So I think those were the concerns in the e-mail that were sent to
you-all. We thought we had addressed that at the Planning
Commission. I didn't see anybody stand up in the audience as a
public speaker. I don't know if they're on Zoom to speak.
But this is the master plan. Another issue that came up with,
they preferred that we move our preserve over to the western
September 28, 2021
Page 76
boundary. Ms. Cook is here, and I think Ms. Cook made it very
clear that that's inconsistent with your Comprehensive Plan. We are
required to put it there because it has to be the largest, most
contiguous area of the best native lands. That's where that preserve
needs to be.
We're also doing enhanced water management, because our
project receives water, so we have to accommodate that within our
project. Those are other concerns that were raised during the
Planning Commission.
Discussion about relocating the preserve because, frankly, we
originally wanted the preserve on the western boundary because we
knew that the people from Canopy would prefer that. That is
inconsistent with your Comprehensive Plan. That's why the preserve
is where the preserve is.
And we've laid out the parcel where we've laid the parcel
out -- or the way we've done that. This is a little bit closer-in shot to
really show you that we're talking about five homes in the Canopy
that are on our western boundary, and that's where we've agreed to do
the enhanced landscape buffering to shield them from, basically, the
homes that are going to be kind of where the arrow is, coincidentally,
the townhomes that will be on that piece of property. We're already
in for our plat, so there's no mystery as to what's going to occur on
this site.
I think what Mr. Curran -- I think he's the one who wrote the
e-mail -- would like to see all the buildings go away where the yellow
arrow is, and that, obviously, would be a big reduction and bring the
project down by, I think, about -- how many units would we lose if
we lost all those? We would lose another 18 unit. It would bring it
to 90, and I think that's ultimately what his goal may be but is not
consistent with the plan.
We did get unanimous recommendation of approval from the
September 28, 2021
Page 77
Planning Commission. Your staff's recommending approval.
I think I've addressed what was in the e-mail. I think those were the
public comments. And hopefully you-all will follow the Planning
Commission's recommendation of approval, your staff's
recommendation of approval, because this project, in fact, helps with
the Rural Fringe Mixed-Use District goals and objectives, which is to
provide a market for TDRs, and we're in the market of buying TDRs
for this project to move forward. It's consistent with your infill
provisions in your Growth Management Plan.
And, with that -- I hope I've hit all the highlights. If you've got
more questions, happy to answer them. And if there is public
comment, I would like to be able to address any public comment.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I pretty much want to go
with -- I'd hear public comment, and then I'd like to have
address -- I'd like to address the e-mail that we all got -- several
e-mails that we all got with our staff just to ensure that as much as we
can do from a regulatory standpoint can be done.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. I think let's go to public
comment.
MR. MILLER: Madam Chair, I actually have two people
online. I believe one's a consultant. I'm efforting that right now.
But we do have one speaker, Katrina Curran. Ms. Curran, you're
being prompted to unmute yourself. And there you go. You have
three minutes.
MS. CURRAN: Okay. I'm one of the e-mails that
Mr. Yovanovich is talking about. He is correct, we had this
discussion at the previous planning committee, and they agreed to put
in higher trees and stuff; however, it was brought up at the
commission about a Type C buffer, which we were, unfortunately,
not made aware of that that was a remote -- even a possibility, so
even though we are getting the Type C buffer with the higher tree, I
September 28, 2021
Page 78
would like to revisit the issue as in a Type C buffer to allow a little
bit more space in between the two properties.
And in addition to that is, yes, they did give us a 6-foot
chain-link fence; however, as you know, people are six feet tall; that
could easily get scaled. There's a lot of young children around here,
and we are concerned for their safety of them climbing over or people
coming over onto our properties.
And the screening regarding the A/C units, I know they're
agreeable to that but -- and additional screening for the fence to
prevent -- even though they are putting bushes there, we would like it
to be thicker and higher up to prevent people from using -- it's a
combination between the fence and the bushes to thicken up so
people can't come over on both sides, for us to go over there or for
them to come over here. I should say children to go over there, and
to block lights and sounds.
Hello?
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: We're waiting on you.
MS. CURRAN: Oh, no. I'm good. I'm good.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay. Thank you,
Ms. Curran. I'm sorry.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I think we have two speakers.
MR. YOVANOVICH: The other is actually one of my
consultants.
MR. MILLER: It is. I confirmed that. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: So my -- I have comments
for staff, if I may. And, Jaime, prepare yourself.
So if you would, Sean, put up the letter that I believe
Ms. Curran's husband sent. I'm assuming. They have the same last
name. I won't be presumptuous. There may be a sister or
something. And this was an e-mail that came -- it didn't come in till
September 28, 2021
Page 79
yesterday, and I had little to no time to react to this, necessarily, other
than to talk with staff briefly about the concerns that were raised at
the Planning Commission. So I would -- if you would, please, go
through the process. Number -- you know, just to delineate, there's
already been a reduction in density requested that was adhered to at
the Planning Commission; yes?
MR. BOSI: Correct, yes.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Stormwater retention, who's
in charge of that?
MR. BOSI: The stormwater retention, they have a tentative
area where they show the stormwater on their master plan, but once it
goes to platting, we will have a stormwater department in which
Ms. Cook -- staff would review for compliance with the --
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And the thought process, and
due -- and I'm -- you know, I'm reading what Mr. Curran has said
here. But we already have requirements and regulations with regard
to stormwater retention as to how it's maintained, what pesticides are
allowed, insecticide -- I don't know. Do we regulate insecticides?
No. But we have Mosquito Control.
MR. BOSI: Yes.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: So that's -- and I see staff
lining up behind you there. So, necessarily, we have -- we already
have regulations in place for the stormwater retention that is proposed
here. This is a receiver site, if I'm not mistaken. It does take
additional stormwater for both the road and the contiguous properties,
if I'm not mistaken.
So the buffer on the west side, and this is -- this is a discussion
that I believe also came up during the Planning Commission, and it
was enhanced from what was originally proposed to what's actually
on the plan for today, correct?
MR. BOSI: Correct.
September 28, 2021
Page 80
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay. And taking it an
additional five feet at this last minute is -- along with the concessions
that the developer's already agreed to from enhancing the buffer from
what was proposed to what's actually being brought forward to us
today, is --
MR. BOSI: I mean, it's the discretion of the Board of County
Commissioners. Staff and the Planning Commission felt that the
improved enhancements were adequate to address the concerns
expressed by the neighboring properties.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay. Now -- and this
maybe is a question for Jaime. And it was brought up in the last
petition that we just heard, and that has to do with our elevation
requisites oftentimes require the elimination of natural vegetation
that's already, in fact, there. Is there any opportunity for a look at the
overall plan to maybe include that as a portion of their green space
just to try to not -- I just, I hate --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: The pine trees?
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes. I hate seeing properties
leveled because there's -- because there's an elevation issue when we
may be able to make accommodations to protect and have even
higher buffering in place.
MR. BOSI: What I would say is the preservation requirements
are being met by the current PUD. That would be an ask that's
above what our code would require. They've already provided for
additional enhancements to the buffer along the west side. But I
would have to defer to the applicant what other further restrictions or
preservations or allocations you would think appropriate to be able to
address the mature pine trees.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay. I'll get to them when
I'm done with you, then.
MR. BOSI: Okay.
September 28, 2021
Page 81
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And in regard to the 6-foot
fence that's there, I don't think we have the -- we have a list of
plantings that we're allowed to pick from to provide for sufficient
buffering there. Is this particular plant that's being described here
part of that list; do you know?
MR. BOSI: I do not know that, particularly, but you are
correct, the Type B buffer has a range of different shrubs and the
covers that would be required to be allocated when they go through
the platting process.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay. Well, we'll look at it
when we -- when I get to -- when I think Jaime's going to come up
and talk about it. And, again, the second part of that comes back
around from the Type C buffer, or the proposed Type B buffer, the
mature trees that are along the west side. If there's any
accommodations that we can do to allow for those to stay, I would
like to -- I would like to see that, without it becoming a health, safety,
and welfare issue or a negative impact across the -- I don't -- again, it
distresses me when we -- when we rip out natural vegetation and then
replant and then have that impact coming on the folks that are next
door that have to wait for those trees to grow up.
MR. BOSI: Well, what I would say is, as we've reiterated a
couple times, they are planting higher trees than what code would
require, and they are going to coordinate the placement of those trees
to correspond to wherever the blind spots or the holes are within the
Canopy's adjoining buffer.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And then on the last point is,
do we as a regulatory body have anything to say about the
homeowners association and what they can and can't do with regard
to the --
MR. BOSI: The planning staff would most certainly not
support a residential subdivision requiring that all the garbage cans be
September 28, 2021
Page 82
placed in the front yard. That's what they're asking for. They're
asking for -- that no garbage cans be placed in their side or rear yard;
that they would be placed in the front yard. We would not support
that position.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I don't think we can.
Okay. Let's have Ms. Jaime, if you don't mind, come up; talk to me
a little bit about the pine trees that are there. And is there any
flexibility for what we currently have in our regulations to
accommodate that?
MS. COOK: Jaime Cook, your Director of Development
Review.
So you're talking about the western property boundary along
Canopy?
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes.
MS. COOK: Because Canopy has existing Type B buffer, the
applicant is actually only required to do a Type A buffer, which is a
10-foot-wide landscape buffer; only trees 30 feet on center. So by
doing a Type B buffer, they have already enhanced their requirement,
and then they have additionally committed to installing higher trees
than would be required.
And they did commit at the Planning Commission to a fence.
And typically when planting any hedges or anything like that, they're
only required to be five feet tall. So they've -- by increasing the
height of the fence, they're also enhancing that buffer.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Well, the fence is six feet
high.
MS. COOK: Correct. So -- and as far as retaining the pine
trees, we would support them retaining as many as possible, but it
would depend on their construction. The more they retain, then the
less they would have to plant in the buffer later.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay. So the combination
September 28, 2021
Page 83
of the Type B enhancement that they're agreeing to includes keeping
as many of the natural pine trees that are, in fact, already there?
MS. COOK: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay.
MS. COOK: Yes.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: That's a simple answer to a
complex question, but it needs to be simple for me. I have no other
questions.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. Any other questions for staff?
MS. COOK: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you very much.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I do have a question for the
applicant, if I can. Do you want me to hit the button?
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yep.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: The one thing that was
raised -- and, again, everybody has a concern about -- about safety.
You're agreeing to extend the fence along the property line. I don't
necessarily think it's such a good idea to offset it into your property
any more than on the boundary itself. But you're going to extend
from the fence that's already, in fact, there?
MR. YOVANOVICH: (Witness nods head.)
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: What are the height of the
plants that you're going to plant along the fence in order to provide
for sight and sound barrier?
MR. YOVANOVICH: We can agree to maintain -- because we
have to -- you know, we put bushes in. We can agree to maintain
those at six feet. So, hopefully, not too many kids are going to climb
a fence and go through the hedge to try to get to someone's backyard,
on our side and vice versa. So I think that should be a sufficient
safety buffer between the two projects. So we'll -- and I'm sure the
neighbor didn't know about how we can agree to maintain the hedge
September 28, 2021
Page 84
at a height to provide additional -- to address her concern.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I think, personally, I mean,
looking at what you've agreed to do, the density reductions that were
requested at the Planning Commission, especially, again, if you can
accommodate in your processes trying to keep as many of the natural
trees that are already there, and -- I think those are going to be -- it's
going to be as best as we could possibly do short of not having
anything, which is what a lot of folks want, but --
MR. YOVANOVICH: And I should have pointed out, but we
also had an enhanced setback along the western boundary for a
principal structure of 30 feet, which is larger than the other PUDs
have in their PUD. So we were very sensitive to our neighbors to
the west.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Well, the actual buffer is
required at 15 feet. That's what the buffer is.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Right. And then we have a setback of
another 15 feet from that. So we have an enhanced setback, if you
will, along that buffer -- or property line, the western.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay. I have no further
questions.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. I don't see any other
questions up here.
No other speakers.
So do I hear a motion?
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Do you want me to do it?
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Yeah, I'll do it. I'll motion to
approve the application for the Soluna PUD.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Second.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. There's a motion on the floor.
Any other discussion?
(No response.)
September 28, 2021
Page 85
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Seeing none, all those in favor, say
aye.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Those opposed, like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: It carries unanimously.
MR. YOVANOVICH: All right. We thank you.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
Item #11A
AN EIGHTH AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT NO. 04-3673 WITH
CAROLLO ENGINEERS, INC., PERTAINING TO THE DESIGN
OF THE NORTHEAST COUNTY WATER RECLAMATION
FACILITY, IN THE AMOUNT OF $4,819,950 – APPROVED
MR. CALLAHAN: Commissioners, that will take us to
Item 11A on your regular agenda, which is a recommendation to
approve and authorize the Chair to sign an eighth amendment to
Contract No. 04-3673 with Carollo Engineers pertaining to the design
of the Northeast County Water Reclamation Facility in the amount of
$4,819,950.
Mr. Chmelik, your Public Utilities Engineering and Project
Management Division Director, is available to present or answer
questions at your discretion.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yes. Are you going to make a
motion?
September 28, 2021
Page 86
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I was going to.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Oh, I was going to ask a question, if I
may. Okay. So, more money. Why?
MR. CHMELIK: Commissioner, Tom Chmelik, for the record.
The funding for this project is needed to develop a third regional
water reclamation facility, a wastewater treatment facility, that will
be able to serve growth in the area in the northeast and further
towards the west to 951/Collier Boulevard. And what that enables
us to do is create more capacity or offload capacity at our north
facility, and there we have aging infrastructure that needs to be
replaced. So we gain more capacity in the northeast. We have
flexibility to shift flows from one facility to the other and repair and
maintain what we have that's up to 30 years old.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: And was this -- was this anticipated
when we originally let the contract?
MR. CHMELIK: Yes. This was anticipated all the way back
to 2003 when the property was purchased. In 2004 the contract was
created and was moving along to full design. At about 2007/2008,
the economic downturn occurred, and with that the project was put on
hold. I was waiting for the moment to reactivate, which we did in
2017 when growth resumed.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you very much.
All right. Any other questions?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Hearing none, there's a motion. Oh,
we don't have a motion. Do I have a motion?
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I'll make a motion for
approval.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I'll second it.
There's a motion on the floor and a second. All those in favor, say
aye.
September 28, 2021
Page 87
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Those opposed, like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: It carries unanimously.
Thank you.
MR. CHMELIK: Thank you, Commissioners.
Item #11B
AWARD INVITATION TO BID (“ITB”) #21-7899, “HAMILTON
AVENUE IMPROVEMENTS,” IN THE AMOUNT OF
$3,246,304.75 TO HASKINS, INC., AUTHORIZE THE CHAIR TO
SIGN THE ATTACHED AGREEMENT, AND APPROVE THE
NECESSARY BUDGET AMENDMENTS – APPROVED
MR. CALLAHAN: That takes us to Item 11B, which is a
recommendation to award Invitation to Bid No. 21-7899 for
Hamilton Avenue improvements in the amount of $3,246,304.65 to
Haskins, Incorporated, authorize the Chair to sign the attached
agreement, and approve necessary budget amendments.
Mr. Ed Finn, your Division Director of Facilities Management,
is available to answer questions or present.
MR. FINN: Good morning, Madam Chair. Edward Finn,
Facilities Management. I do have a brief presentation, but if the
Board wants to just go to a motion to approve, that would be fine.
This is for Hamilton Avenue.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Thanks, Ed. Motion to
September 28, 2021
Page 88
approval.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Second.
MR. FINN: Yes.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: It's well needed. It's been a long
time coming.
MR. FINN: Very good.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. There's a motion on the floor
and a second to approve. All those in favor, say aye.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Those opposed, like sign.
(No response.)
MR. FINN: Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. It carries unanimously.
Item #11C
AN UPDATE ON THE AMERICAN RESCUE PLAN (ARP) ACT
CORONAVIRUS STATE AND LOCAL FISCAL RECOVERY
FUND – APPROVED
MR. CALLAHAN: Commissioners, that will take us to
Item 11C, which is a recommendation to accept an update on the
American Rescue Plan Act, Corona State and Local Fiscal Recovery
Fund.
Ms. Kristi Sonntag, your Director of Community and Human
Services, is available and will give a short presentation.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Maybe.
September 28, 2021
Page 89
MS. SONNTAG: There we go.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: There we go. It's always a relief,
right?
MS. SONNTAG: Okay. Well -- all right. All right. Good
morning, Commissioners. Oops, I'm not really good at this, am I?
Kristi Sonntag, your Community and Human Services Director. The
item before you today is to provide you an update on the American
Rescue Act Performance Plan.
To circle back on the American Rescue Act, this was signed into
law by President Biden on March 11th of 2021, which included $350
billion for state and local recovery efforts. Of the $350 billion,
Collier County was awarded $74.7 million.
On May 11th, the Board authorized a funding agreement
between Collier County and the U.S. Treasury of which we've
received 50 percent of our appropriation, and we will receive the
balance in approximately June of 2022.
On June 22nd of this year, the Board approved the preliminary
performance and spending plan. In preparation for the submission of
our final plan, community input was required. A survey was
released in August, and 1,000 e-mails was distributed throughout the
community. Two hundred four responses were received, and the
community consensus was 98.5 percent favorable that the proposed
plan aligned with what the needs of the community were.
As a reminder of our eligible activities and what the funds can
cover, these include: Public health; negative economic impacts
serving hardest hit communities; replacing public sector revenue loss;
premium pay for essential workers; investment in water, sewer, and
broadband infrastructure. All of the programs are to focus on
recovery efforts within our community, thus allowing the community
to use these funds to expand existing or enhance programs and
services we offer through the redirection of funding.
September 28, 2021
Page 90
The U.S. Treasury set forth in the interim final rule program
parameters by which we have to report on an annual basis. All of
the funds must be -- I'm sorry. The funds must be expended in
qualified census tracts, of which Collier County has 11. And a
census tract is that where a poverty rate is of 25 percent or more.
Additionally, all programs and projects funded need to be evidence
based or must have an evaluation component. On their effectiveness
must include key performance indicators including outputs and
outcomes.
This is a comprehensive listing of all of the programs included
in our plan, and I'll go through them by Treasury category.
This particular 28.4 million is for public health activities which
include the monoclonal lease space, BPE for area hospitals, payroll
for EMS public safety personnel, mental health services, funding for
Physicians Led Area Network, and the Immokalee Coalition project.
Twenty-one point four million is to support negative economic
impacts, which include our Community Foundation Food Program;
household assistance including rent, utility, and mortgage; a
household eviction program; a small business assistance program; aid
to area not for profits; and funding for tourism, hospitality, and
through the museums.
The next is services to disproportionately impacted communities
in the amount of $9.8 million. This includes assistance to provide
tutoring, tech support, and enhancements to our library collection, as
well as program to support healthy eating and food education through
our museum and university extension.
Our 1.9 million for water, sewer, and broadband infrastructure
include the projects at Harbor at Holiday Lane, Naples Manor, and
the Lake Trafford Drainage Improvement Project.
And with that, I'd take any questions.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I don't think we have any questions.
September 28, 2021
Page 91
MS. SONNTAG: All right.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Pretty straight forward. All right.
MS. SONNTAG: All right.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: So with no questions, no public
comment. Yeah, a quick question. Two hundred six responses,
1,000 sent out, that's a pretty good average, as I understand, from that
kind of polling, correct?
MS. SONNTAG: Yes, it is. And the consultants reported that
they were very satisfied with the response that we received from the
community.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. All right.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: You want a motion to
accept? That's what they're asking for.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yes.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Make a motion to accept the
report.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Could I ask one quick
question? I'm sorry for being a little slow on this. I had made a
note and I just forgot to bring it up. The administrative expenses,
5.2 million, you may have gone through this in earlier times, but why
is that number so high? What's involved in the administrative?
MS. SONNTAG: The administrative cost includes the
evaluation piece, which will be done through Florida Gulf Coast
University through a sub-recipient agreement. That's $600,000,
approximately. In addition, the five million is to support the staff
that were appropriated as temporary staff, and it also includes the cost
of the Community Assistance Center lease space. And this is
through -- the funds are through 2026.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Okay.
MS. SONNTAG: So this will carry us through 2026, and at
any time, Commissioner, the funds can be reappropriate and
September 28, 2021
Page 92
redirected.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: All right. I'd like to just, as
we go forward with this, just get some more information about those
administrative expenses, and maybe there's a way to bring those
down a little bit. That just seems awfully high, even though it's
spread out over the next several years.
MS. SONNTAG: Absolutely.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. So I have a motion. I do not
have a second.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Second.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I have a motion and a second on the
floor. All those in favor, say aye.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Those opposed, like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: It carries unanimously.
Thank you very much.
MR. CALLAHAN: Thanks, Commissioners.
Item #11D
RENAMING THE BAYSHORE GATEWAY TRIANGLE SITE
IMPROVEMENT GRANT PROGRAM TO SINGLE FAMILY
IMPROVEMENT GRANT PROGRAM AND UPDATING
ELIGIBLE ACTIVITIES AND PROCESS; AND PLACING THE
REMAINING RESIDENTIAL GRANT PROGRAMS IN THE
BAYSHORE GATEWAY TRIANGLE COMMUNITY
September 28, 2021
Page 93
REDEVELOPMENT AREA ON HOLD UNTIL FURTHER
NOTICE - MOTION TO CONTINUE TO A LATER DATE AS A
REGULAR AGENDA ITEM AND KEEP APPLICANTS ON
HOLD – APPROVED
MR. CALLAHAN: That will take us to Item 11D, which is a
recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners, acting as
the Community Redevelopment Agency Board, approve a resolution
naming the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Site Improvement Grant
Program to the Single-family Grant Improvement Program, and
updating eligible activities in process, and placing the remaining
residential grant programs in the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle
community redevelopment on hold until further notice.
Ms. Forester, your CRA Director, is available to answer your
questions.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I think we've got some specific
questions. So let's start with Commissioner Solis; you pulled the
issue.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Right. I know when this came
up -- and I think Commissioner LoCastro brought up the last one of
these that we -- I think it was the last one of these that we approved in
terms of a grant for improving private property. I have the same
queasy feeling.
And I understand the purpose of the CRA is to address blight.
We had asked that staff kind of tighten this up somehow just to make
sure that, you know, there's a difference, I think, between giving a
grant to address blight and a grant, you know, to improve a property
that's probably worth a lot of money, you know.
So I really wanted to have a conversation with staff and talk
about the changes so that the public's aware of what the change is,
why we made the change, and is there any other room to tighten this
September 28, 2021
Page 94
up?
I mean, I've always had an issue with grants to -- it's taxpayer
money used to improve private property, and I think we have to be
very, very careful with that because there are legal issues, in my
opinion, with doing that.
MS. FORESTER: Okay. Good morning. For the record,
Deborah Forester, CRA Director.
So probably the biggest change that we made to this grant that
addresses that, I think, is to look at the value of the home that would
receive funds. So we use the SHIP purchase price level that is
established by the Florida Housing Coalition to set that standard. So
right now in Collier County, to qualify for SHIP funds, your house
has to be at $400,000 or less. So we're using that as the benchmark.
What we're also doing is that if you recently purchased your
house, which is defined within the last 12 months, we're going to be
looking at the purchase price, not the assessed value. That way for
someone that is coming in spending $700,000 on a home, they would
not qualify at least at that first year. If they hold onto the home, and
the second year the assessed value for that property happens to come
down below 400,000, they could qualify.
We do have a five-year period where if you sell your home
within that five years, you have to pay back the full grant amount.
So we don't give you any grace period. So that's one of the main
things we did.
We did not look at setting this up as an income-based grant
program. A couple of other CRAs throughout the state do use
income, so you have to be at that low to moderate level. I didn't feel
it was appropriate for CRA staff to be looking at folks' income levels,
excuse me. But if that was something the Board decided, we could
look at our housing group and partner with them to establish it as an
income-based program.
September 28, 2021
Page 95
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: And I think -- I mean, we have
staff that does that in terms of SHIP financing and things like that. I
mean, I really think that is something we should probably start doing
just because I -- you know, the lawyer worst-case scenario training
kicks in, and my immediate thought is, well, I'm an investor, what a
great place to invest in the Bayshore area.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: I buy a house, you know,
that's -- that needs some work. I get the CRA to fund it, you know.
And so I think -- I think we should look at that just to make sure that
we're doing everything we can to ensure that the money that we're
giving out as grants goes to improve the properties that really aren't
going to be improved in another way.
MS. FORESTER: I will say that the CRA Advisory Board had
looked at these changes before I brought them to you-all. One of
their comments was that if someone comes in to eliminate a blighted
house, then they were fine with recommending approval of that
investment provided that we got the funds back if, in fact, they did go
and sell the house; that it was only an investment.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Yeah, but I think the issue is then
we're financing it for a purchaser for five years at no cost to them.
So I really think that looking at income levels for applying to these
grants is the right thing to do. I really do.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner McDaniel.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes. And thank you for
pulling this. I'd sent a note to have it pulled as well. Just to expand,
I concur. The benefit of a CRA is to provide for enhancements to
the community and help reduce blight all the way across the board. I
have inherent objections to spending other people's tax money to
improve private property.
I -- specifically with regard to -- my notes that I had for having it
September 28, 2021
Page 96
pulled were just -- and I think probably to move this along, we ought
to -- you know, we ought to continue this item for further discussion,
have -- send it back to the drawing board a little bit, if you will. I
think there might be some other accounting things that the CRA
could give consideration to to benefit the residents that are paying
into the CRA as opposed to the enhancement of private property.
It's nice to reach out and grab a state-utilized number for a value
of a home, but that's -- it just is counterintuitive to me that that type
of value, sale price, purchase price would be given consideration to
actual grant monies.
So I had issues with it as well, and I think probably the short
answer is for us to continue this item and have further discussions.
It doesn't have to be approved today in order for us to go forward
with -- other than what you're being -- proposing, and I'm not
approving that, so...
MS. FORESTER: Well, right now, we have folks that are
interested in applying, but they've been on hold to bring those
applications forward to you until we made recommended changes.
So we're just on hold, and we can just continue that conversation with
the advisory board.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Well, I certainly -- if we have
to go along this line, I certainly like the income-based approach better
than a property-value approach. If we have to go along with this, I
would rather it be on an income base. I'm done.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner Saunders.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Okay. I agree. This
is -- I'm not ready to proceed with this application today, and I want
to thank Commissioner Solis for bringing this -- putting this on the
regular agenda. And when it does come back, I'd like to see it on the
regular agenda. This needs, I think, a lot of scrutiny.
I want to raise a couple issues. I want to thank Ms. Kinzel, our
September 28, 2021
Page 97
Clerk. She's raised an interesting financial issue, and I think it's one
that we just need to be aware of. A couple years ago there was an
effort to extend the life of the CRA for an additional 10 years. I
think it expires in 2030, and the effort was to make that go on for a
lot longer, and that would have generated, I'm kind of making up
numbers here, but probably a couple hundred million dollars for the
CRA over --
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Two.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: -- that time period
and -- which would be crazy for the Board to do that, and the Board
decided not to extend the CRA.
We do have financial obligations with the project at the triangle,
and I'd like to just know what the financial condition of the CRA is in
terms of preparing for that. I realize that this -- that's a long ways off
in terms of eight or nine years, but we will get to that point. And I
want to make sure that we're not impacting the General Fund with
any of that type of commitment. So, again, I want to thank the Clerk
for raising that issue.
But I need to know more about the financial commitments of the
CRA, what their long-term financial situation looks like before I
would be prepared to vote for these types of grant programs.
I also agree that it has to be income based. I can't imagine, you
know, you have a hedge fund in New York that buys up some
properties, then they've got investments of $150 billion, and they're
investing in these types of projects around the country and turning
them into Airbnbs, and they get a free driveway. I just -- it's got to
be income related. So I think this needs a lot of work.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner LoCastro.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Yeah, not to be redundant,
but to really just go on the record. You know, you drive all the way
around Collier County -- I realize that this is focused on this
September 28, 2021
Page 98
particular area, and Bayshore's really come a long way. So maybe
this project, you could say it's been successful because it has taken
areas and improved them.
But there's certainly areas all around Collier County that, you
know, could be considered, you know, eligible for something like
this. And, you know, when I hear the example of a 400,000 house, if
you buy a $400,000 house and it needs a whole lot of work and you
don't have the money to do it, then you probably can't afford
the -- then you can't afford the house, I mean, you know. And so I
don't think it's on the back of the taxpayers to -- if somebody can
afford the house, and then they get a free driveway, they get mulch,
they get this or that, you know, on the taxpayer dollar.
So I think we're all saying the same thing. I would definitely
support keeping everything on hold until we're a lot smarter on this
process, we have concurrence here, and we can really see the dollars
and cents and see if -- you know, how much longer does this need to
go.
And then, you know, for my own edification, you know, being
the newest person up here, how do other areas qualify for this? So
that's a separate meeting. But somebody get on my calendar
because, I mean, I drive around District 1, and I can tell you there's a
lot worse areas in District 1 than Bayshore. And so, you know,
it's -- the program has value, and I don't have the depth and the
knowledge of, you know, how -- the genesis of all of this, but,
certainly, at some point, you've got to cry uncle and go, you know,
we've invested a lot of taxpayer money in this area. It definitely
looks a lot better. Should we move on somewhere else? Should we
end this program? Should we keep it on hold? So, you know, that's
maybe a separate issue is, you know, come and talk with me. But I
would agree that I would like this to come back with a lot more detail
and staff recommendations as to, you know, what you would suggest
September 28, 2021
Page 99
as far as going forward and then hearing from us.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I have a question, and the question is,
of the applicants that are -- that are now in line waiting, what area are
they? Where do they live?
MS. FORESTER: They --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: The Bayshore area?
MS. FORESTER: The Bayshore area.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Nothing in the Gateway?
MS. FORESTER: I don't believe. We did fund one -- the last
one was in the Gateway/Triangle, I believe, but I believe the two that
are interested are both in sort of south Bayshore area.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: The hottest area of development is
that area, is Bayshore. Gateway, drive around the Gateway and see
what's there. That's where we need to focus our attention. That's an
area. And I'm not suggesting -- but there are people living there,
elderly people. They may have lived in their houses their whole life.
They can't afford an air conditioner, or they can't afford to repair the
roof. Those are the target -- that's what this is about, not to help
someone increase their investment in an area that should never be in
the CRA right now, because it's just booming. But the CRA did
what it was supposed to do. So I would agree with this.
And I guess we have a motion, Commissioner McDaniel.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I'm getting ready to make a
motion as soon as you finish.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Go ahead. I'm finished.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I'm going to make a motion
that we continue this item per the discussion that came here today and
bring it back at a later date when we've had an opportunity to review
it.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: And continue to keep the
applicants on hold --
September 28, 2021
Page 100
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Sure.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: -- who have something in the
system.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I mean, and I don't -- I mean,
you know, Commissioner Taylor this is an enhancement to an already
existing program that is out there with the CRA. So we can address
all those things when we bring it back through the continuance.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: The CRA needs to move into the
CRA district and, unfortunately, the focus is where this great success
is right now.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Motion to continue.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Could I just ask a quick
question. Did we ever get reimbursed by anybody that we've given
money to?
MS. FORESTER: Yes, actually. We had a shoreline
stabilization grant for $5,000, and we were reimbursed the whole
$5,000.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Okay. But that's still a small
amount compared to what we probably paid out, right?
MS. FORESTER: Well, since this was re-funded starting in
2020, we've given grants totaling about $35,000.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Okay.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: There's a motion, but there's not a
second.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Second.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: We have a motion on the floor and a
second. Any other discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: All those in favor, say aye.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye.
September 28, 2021
Page 101
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Those opposed, like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: It carries unanimously.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: And, Madam Chair, for when this
comes back -- and I don't know what the correct process would be to
make some amendments to this for staff to bring back some revisions
that would require some, you know, review of income eligibility and
that kind of thing.
MS. FORESTER: Would the Board like the concept that we
would partner with the housing program and perhaps give funds to
them that could go towards other SHIP-qualified recipients that
happen to be within the district?
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: That makes sense.
MS. FORESTER: That might be a good way to keep the
income piece that you seem to be interested in plus also tie it to
existing programs that the county offers.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: I think the key is showing the
need --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: -- to improve. So I don't know
how that would come back, if that needs to go through the CRA first
or what, but just a request to bring that back whenever this comes
back.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I think it's an option to be considered.
Commissioner Saunders.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: No, I was just going to say, I
think there's a whole lot of long-range planning that needs to be done
in terms of the future expenditures for this, and this is a very small
September 28, 2021
Page 102
piece of it. But, again, going back to the commitments that we have
in the triangle development, going forward after the CRA sunsets, I
just want to make sure we're not creating a financial burden for the
General Fund going forward. So it's a bigger picture than just this
little piece.
MS. FORESTER: And we'll bring that back. Just as a
reminder, we did pay off all of our outstanding debt, so we have no
debt commitment anymore with the CRA.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: But there's commitments further with
the triangle property, the TIF.
MS. FORESTER: Oh, the TIF. Yes, they do get a piece of the
TIF, you are correct.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: And the TIF goes away.
MS. FORESTER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: And that's what I'm
concerned about.
MS. FORESTER: Yes. Okay. We'll bring that back.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And that was where I was
talking about with regard to an overall accounting with regard -- and I
liked your suggestion of looking at the financial circumstances of the
CRA both now and long term. And I said it very clearly, but I'll say
it again. I have an issue with expending taxpayer money on private
property. If we have to do it, I would certainly like to see it be an
income-based process as opposed to a property-value process.
There are other obligations, as Commissioner Saunders has
expressed. There is still 17 acres. There's still the Del piece of
property -- Del's property that the CRA, in fact, owns. There's a lot
of things that come into that soup for us to be able to make a -- for
me to be able to make a decision on that.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: All right. Thank you.
So there's a motion on the floor, and we did that.
September 28, 2021
Page 103
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: We voted.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: So we're done, right? We just
continued the conversations. Any other questions?
MS. FORESTER: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Any comments?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
MR. CALLAHAN: Madam Chair, you're up right against your
lunch hour. We just have two items that I think can be taken pretty
briefly if you're okay with that, or we could break for lunch.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Ms. Court Reporter?
THE COURT REPORTER: I'm okay.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
MR. CALLAHAN: Thanks, Commissioners.
Item #12A
ANNUAL PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL FOR THE COUNTY
ATTORNEY – APPROVED
MR. CALLAHAN: That will take us to Item 12A, which is the
Annual Performance Appraisal for the County Attorney. So I think
at this point I'll turn it over to Mr. Klatzkow.
MR. KLATZKOW: Always my favorite item of the year.
Really, I mean, it's difficult to evaluate me without evaluating my
office. I have an outstanding office. We've managed to run our
office so that our budget is less than when I took over in 2008.
We've done that being very vigorously efficient from an HR
standpoint. My staff is very responsive to the County Manager's
Office. Ninety-five percent of all requests are handled within two
days.
September 28, 2021
Page 104
As a result of that, we do get feedback with our clients and so
that every attorney has a number of clients. We send out
performance evaluations. They come back, and we have 95 percent
exceeds expectations from that. So based on that, the County
Manager's offices are happy with my staff.
We've really kept the litigation down. We have not had a
material litigation since 2013. The reason for that is I assign
contracts to my deputy. Mr. Teach does an outstanding job working
with county staff to make sure that the contracts are tight, and we
have not had any contractual litigation in many years.
Heidi Ashton and I work with the land folks; primarily me with
the Planning Commission, Heidi with the staff over at Horseshoe to
make sure that the land-use items are tight. We haven't had land-use
litigation since I can't remember because of that.
We're very proactive. We think that if we spend time now
trying to figure out potential problems, we won't have to deal with
potential problems later. And sometimes the proactive can get on
people's nerves, and for that I apologize. But we really do try to
make sure that problems are resolved in the bud.
I'm very pleased with my folks. Right now we are finishing a
tremendous project. On condemnation along VBR, we have two
properties left out of 250. My staff has worked very diligently with
Robert Bosch and his staff to get that done. We expect to have full
property rights in that entire corridor within a couple weeks, and that
was 250 parcels.
What makes that exceptional is that we haven't done
condemnation in this county since, I think, Immokalee Road, so that
nobody in my office had experience with it. Those people had left
years ago or moved on to other things. So it was a learning process.
But it's difficult. It's going to be an expensive project. The money
will come down later. The thought process now is just to get title to
September 28, 2021
Page 105
the road so that staff can go in and start building the road, and we'll
worry about the money later.
As you know, property values have been soaring over the last
year or two here. I mean, I purchased a home six months ago. I'm
being offered $150,000 more than what I purchased it for. It's just
insane.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Minus that 10-foot that you --
MR. KLATZKOW: Minus the 10-foot fence, yeah. But it's
just absolutely insanity what's going on right now. We get
appraisals from our folks. They have to get updated almost monthly
because of the -- what's going on right now.
And, unfortunately, I've lived a life where I've seen the elevators
go up this fast, and they will come down again quickly, but that's
down the road.
In any event, I'd like to thank my staff. We're not a big office,
but I think we're as good as any office within the entire county. My
people care about the county. And just -- I couldn't be more proud
of them, and I couldn't be more proud to be your County Attorney.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I'd like to speak first, if you don't
mind, everyone.
And I just -- I have enjoyed my time working with you, County
Attorney. I find that you are very prompt in your responses. You're
always available for me to speak to. You don't pull any punches.
You really are -- you have -- you run a very efficient organization,
and it's a pleasure. And if I've learned anything in my years in office
is that you keep your attorneys really close, because you can get into
big trouble if you don't.
And you don't play favorites. You talk to me as you see it, not
as a commissioner, and I really appreciate the de-politicalization of
your comments to me, and I mean that sincerely. It's refreshing.
Thank you very much.
September 28, 2021
Page 106
Commissioner Solis.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: I was just going to say that, one, I
realize that I did not turn in my evaluation, and I wanted to make sure
that our County Attorney understood that there was no meaning in
that. It was a total oversight on my part. And just to say publicly
that, you know, the last two years has been challenging. I mean, the
issues that we have posed to our County Attorney in the last two
years, you know, there's no law for. And I think you've given us
some great advice. I have the utmost confidence in you and your
team. I mean, the team that you've assembled, Scott Teach and
others and Heidi and everyone, they really do a great job and are one
of the best assets we have in the county.
So I just wanted to say that publicly, that I didn't -- it was my
oversight not to turn that in. So thanks for everything you do.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner McDaniel.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Well, mine wasn't oversight.
It was -- I was preoccupied. Had nothing to do with anything other
than what I was taking care of with my family.
So -- but I also wanted to say thank you for what you do, do.
We don't agree all the time. You and I have had some rather
interesting conversations along the -- my coming on five years sitting
up here. But your office -- as you adeptly said at the beginning,
you're the one that gets to sit in the seat, but they're the ones that
make the buttons get pushed.
You've done an astounding job on -- in a very, very short time
frame on the acquisition of the necessary lands for direly needed
roads. A lot of the things that we sit up here and talk about have to
do with the quality of life of our residents, especially revolving
around traffic. And Vanderbilt Beach is going to be a huge
alleviator for Immokalee Road, for Pine Ridge Road, ultimately for
the entire community.
September 28, 2021
Page 107
So my not filling out the review had nothing to do with other
than my three-foot circle, not yours. And I applaud what your office
does, in fact, do -- you and your office do for our community.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner Saunders.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Yes. I have personal
knowledge as to how difficult it can be to sit in that chair, having
done that in the long distant past myself. And I realize and
understand, and I know Jeff understands, how important it is to keep
politics out of all these legal questions, and that can be very difficult.
You have to -- the County Attorney has to keep, just as the Manager
has to keep, at least three commissioners happy. So your job review
comes up every two weeks. Every time we're in session, your job
review comes up.
So I want to thank you for all that you do, and I want to thank
you for keeping politics out of your decision-making. That's a hard
thing to do, but it's the right thing, and you've done that very well.
And I also want to compliment your staff. Anytime I've had any
questions for any of the attorneys in your staff, I've gotten very quick
and accurate responses, and I appreciate that. And thank you for that
leadership.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner LoCastro.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: I want to go on record that I
actually filled it out, turned it in, 10 pages of comments, as you
know. No.
Actually, we had a good discussion in the office, and I did fill
out the evaluation and put in some comments that were, you know,
positive, and then some suggestions, just being sort of the new
person, and so I know that, you know, you appreciated those. They
weren't derogatory in any way. They were more of ideas.
But it's a thankless job, you know. I mean, how many times
have you heard the joke, you know, what do you call a thousand
September 28, 2021
Page 108
attorneys at the bottom of the ocean, right? You're tired of it.
But I echo, too, the thing I really value most is the sense of
urgency. You know, when citizens throw spears at us, I like to get
them back a quick answer, and a lot of times it's stuff that's been in
your court. And as we discussed yesterday, I just couldn't be more
pleased, you know, with the speed at which you get me an answer.
That helps me, then, you know, devise an answer to a constituent.
And then also, too, to use one example, the Marco Island
Executive, you know, airport terminal was one of the things on my
radar that I was sensitive to and, you know, the way you resolved that
quickly saved millions of dollars in taxpayer money, didn't drag it out
over a long period of time, which normally happens in other counties.
I've seen it happen, and we all have. And so that's just a small
example of just an incredible job you and your staff do. So if I'm the
only evaluation you've got, then you should just really look at that
one and take it as your report card.
But thank you, sir.
MR. KLATZKOW: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: And I will just -- I'll agree with
Commissioner LoCastro; that was a fantastic result for the county.
MR. KLATZKOW: And to be fair, I mean, years ago
Commissioner Saunders, I believe, brought this law firm to us that
we use outside counsel with, and the Clerk we work with, and a big
part of that was we simply withheld payments to put their feet to the
fire to resolve this. It was a team effort, really the Clerk's Office and
outside counsel, and those outside counsel fees were paid, so it didn't
cost the county anything. And Scott Teach did the daily laboring on
this. So it was a team effort to get that result.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Great result.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Okay. Back to work.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: So do I hear a motion to --
September 28, 2021
Page 109
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: There is no motion on this
one.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I think there is. I think we just have
to accept the review.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I'll accept his --
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Accept his --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: And I'll second. I'll second it. All
those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Those opposed, like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: It carries unanimously.
Item #14A1
AWARD OF INVITATION TO BID (“ITB”) NO. 21-7897,
“EVERGLADES AIRPARK-RUNWAY 15-33
REHABILITATION-GRANT FUNDED,” IN THE AMOUNT OF
$1,748,853.75 TO QUALITY ENTERPRISES USA, INC., AND
AUTHORIZE THE CHAIR TO SIGN THE AGREEMENT –
APPROVED
MR. CALLAHAN: Commissioners, the final item on your
regular agenda is Item 14A1. It's a recommendation to approve the
award of Invitation to Bid No. 7897 for the Everglades Airpark
Runway 15-33 rehabilitation grant in the amount of $1,748,853.75 to
Quality Enterprises USA and authorize the Chair to sign the attached
September 28, 2021
Page 110
agreement.
Mr. Bennett, your executive airport manager, is available
possibly to present or answer any questions that you may have --
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: We have the green screen of death.
MR. CALLAHAN: -- given the technical difficulties.
MR. BENNETT: For the record, Andrew Bennett, your
Executive Airports Manager. I'm happy to answer any questions or
provide you with an exceptionally brief presentation.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Do you want to see it? I've
already looked at it.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: I've seen it.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: So this rehabilitation, I'm sure it's the
runway; is that correct?
MR. BENNETT: Yes, ma'am, that is correct.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: And given the fact that it's in the
Everglades, are we raising the height of the runway at all?
MR. BENNETT: The runway height will remain the same.
The approach-ins will be elevated slightly to account for some of the
tidal flooding. But given the environmental impacts of both of the
approach-ins of the runway, we will not be able to raise it its full
intended height as we had originally anticipated.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. All right. And this money
come from the FAA; is that correct?
MR. BENNETT: Yes, ma'am. And the project is 100 percent
funded for construction, CEI, and post design services.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: And the FAA is like Hotel California;
once you're in there, you can never get out, correct?
MR. BENNETT: Well, ma'am, we are accepting AIP grant
funding and, as a result of that, we have to abide by grant assurances.
There are 39 of those assurances, and so we are obligated to abide by
various different components that do force us to adhere to various
September 28, 2021
Page 111
federal laws, policies, and different items of that nature.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: And my understanding, at least from
what's going to be discussed tomorrow at the Naples Community -- at
the Naples City Council meeting, that when you accept grants from
the FAA, if you decide as an airport that you do not want to accept
the grants, for instance, if you want to change anything, they'll give
you 20 years on your dime, correct? Meaning it's 20 years you don't
accept grants from anyone. You support the airport, and then they'll
consider moving it.
MR. BENNETT: Well, the grant 20-year cycle you're referring
to is dependent upon each grant you accept. So, as an example, we
accepted a grant for this project for design. We're on the hook for 20
years on that specific grant alone. Last board meeting you accepted
a grant for the construction of the project; therefore, we're on the
hook for an additional 20 years for the construction. So it's
depending upon each grant you take; it starts that clock over again for
20 years.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: So at this point with this
particular -- at this particular time frame, it's 40 years? Am I
understanding?
MR. BENNETT: No, ma'am. It's not 40 years.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: It overlaps?
MR. BENNETT: It overlaps.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. Good. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: The clock starts on every
single grant that you accept.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Right. But it's an overlap.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: That's a different discussion
than the Naples Airport with the grants that they've accepted over the
years and the potential relocation and all that --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Uh-uh. It's the same.
September 28, 2021
Page 112
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: -- they're doing. So I'll
make a motion for approval.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Second.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I'll second it. Motion on the floor
and a second. All those in favor, say aye.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Those opposed, like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: It carries unanimously.
Thank you.
MR. BENNETT: Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you, Commissioners.
Item #15
STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS
MR. CALLAHAN: Madam Chair, that takes us to Item 15,
Staff and Commission general communications. Nothing from staff
at this time.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. County Attorney?
MR. KLATZKOW: Nothing from me, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Mr. Miller?
MR. MILLER: I've got a green-screen-of-death problem to fix,
but other than that I'll be good.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner Solis.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: One thing. I would bring back an
September 28, 2021
Page 113
update from the TDC meeting yesterday. I think it was yesterday.
It seems like a long time ago. A continued great news on the TDC
side but a huge shout-out I'd like to make to Jack Wert, who is
retiring. Yesterday was his last TDC meeting. He's been the
executive director for 18 years? Eighteen years. I can't say enough
about what he was able to do and his staff in terms of all of the
minute by -- moment-by-moment pivoting that they did during the
pandemic to make sure that Collier County was putting its best foot
forward in terms of marketing it as a destination.
So congratulations to Jack, and thanks for everything you did for
the county over the last 18 years.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: That's very nice. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: That's it.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: I have nothing.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner Saunders.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I have nothing as well.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner McDaniel.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Nor do I.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Oh, well, then good, because I have a
few things.
We had discussed a Mosquito Control workshop or meeting. I
remember, sir, that you talked about a follow-up. Commissioner
McDaniel, I remember you talked about a workshop, and I don't
know what the will of the Board is. Do we want a workshop, or do
we want a meeting? Understanding we need to do it pretty soon.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Well, my only comment was
was I didn't want to take comments from folks that came to us and
spoke about items not on that day's agenda but coming up
potentially -- you know, this goes back to the rule that we were
talking about this morning. I just didn't want us to be making a
knee-jerk reaction without both sides being present and having the
September 28, 2021
Page 114
community, in fact, involved.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. So you don't care what the
format?
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: So how we get there doesn't
really matter. I mean, the issue with the workshop is, as you know,
we spent -- we spend time on something and then don't make any
decisions. We can't vote at a workshop. If we have it as an actual
agenda item, if there is someone who wishes to change their mind
with regard to the support for the Mosquito Control District's
expansion, we could actually do it.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: That's true. That's true.
So, Commissioner Saunders.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I think it's a fairly narrow
subject, so I don't think we need to set aside a workshop for that. If
we -- if we do set aside a workshop at some point in time, I think
things like the CRA that we talked about today, which is a much
larger issue, would be something to talk about, but we should have
more than just one item on a workshop. But I think this issue is
small enough or concise enough that we really don't need a workshop
to do that.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: So I'd rather have it at a
regular meeting and make decisions at that time.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: All right.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Concur.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: So let it be a meeting, and I'll let you
schedule it accordingly, but it should probably be in October.
MR. CALLAHAN: Just to give you an update, we had -- our
staff and the staff from the Mosquito Control District recently met.
We talked about how to bring that forward, and I think we'll be
prepared to when the time's right.
September 28, 2021
Page 115
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you very much.
The Everglades airport got me thinking a little bit about the
importance, I think, at this point to do a resiliency study for all our
Collier County airports, all of them, and I'm not talking about next
year looking at it. I'm talking about 30, 50 years from now. It takes
a great deal of lifting ability to move an airport, if we even want to,
but I think a resiliency study at this point would be a wise thing to do.
So I'd like to see if we've got support for that, of all the airports.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I'm not in support of that. I
don't think we -- I mean, I don't think we need to -- I don't think we
need to do a resiliency study on our airports. We've got -- I think we
can actually make some decisions along those lines as we go forward
with the compact that we've entered into with our other communities,
Dr. Savarese's model, and the information that we have coming. But
I don't think we need to spend money to do a resiliency study at this
stage. I think it's premature.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: And I would argue this is a stage to
do it, because we can't move it. You can't move an airport. It's
very, very difficult. Even if we want to -- and I'm not suggesting
that we do it, I just think knowledge is a very important part of going
forward of planning for the future, and the future is a significant
amount of sea level rise. How much, we don't know. But they've
already got tidal issues at the Everglades airport.
And, you know, the Immokalee looks pretty darn steady but it
just -- it wouldn't hurt.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I was just going to say,
Immokalee airport's one of the highest -- and that's one of my -- I
know that Marco and Everglades are coastal area airports, but
Immokalee's not even -- doesn't even need to be on the radar from a
resiliency standpoint.
Again, I don't see the validity for and until we have more data
September 28, 2021
Page 116
with regard to actually what's going to transpire. There's no
argument that sea level rise is real. But for and until we know how
much with more certainty, I'm not in favor of spending the money on
a resiliency study for that.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Is there any -- or let me back up.
Maybe what we ought to do is first see if there's -- if there's some
room in some of what we're already looking at in terms of resiliency
that could encompass that so we're not starting some new study or
something. I'm -- the compact --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: So it's not the knowledge you're
concerned about. It's more the expense of a study; is that correct?
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: I think so. I mean, I don't know
that we have enough -- yeah, I don't know what that would cost and
whether it's -- you know, now's the time to start. I mean, we've got
so many studies going on, it seems like, that I don't know that --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: ACUNE has -- ACUNE has that
information in terms of --
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Right.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: -- identifying vulnerable important
public areas within our county. They have that information.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: So maybe the issue would be is we
get -- we can get our airport director to review that information in
terms of the Everglades airport and Marco, and give us -- come back
to us with --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yeah. And I'm including the City of
Naples Airport also. I'm including that. It's the airports. The
airports are economic drivers within our community. I've got my
economic hat on. And so it's a question of planning for the future,
but that future is not next year. It's not in the next 10 years. It
might be in the next 30 or 50 years, but if we don't start looking now
at it, we are that much more behind.
September 28, 2021
Page 117
Commissioner McDaniel.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yeah. Just -- I concur with
Commissioner Solis, especially adding in the Naples Airport into a
resiliency study that's guided by us is not someplace I want to go by
any means. It's -- no. Just -- I mean, if there's something that we
can do to -- again, I'm all about getting data, but I'm not all about
going out and spending money on a resiliency study for and until we
have more information as to what the ultimate impacts are, so...
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. That's fair enough.
Commissioner LoCastro.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Yeah. I just think in
summary, I'd rather just take it in smaller steps and hear from our
own staff who work out at the airports every day and see what their
thoughts are.
I think of all the priorities in the county right now. So you can
get benefit from resiliency studies for all kinds of things, you know,
and I think the best way to spend our money, this wouldn't be in my
top 10. It doesn't mean it doesn't have value, but I think if it's
something we think's important, let's start with our own staff first,
have them come back to us with some thoughts on some things.
I agree with you, you know, one or two of the airports might not
even be anything that need to be on the radar, and if the staff and we
concur that we need to move forward in a much more aggressive way
with some more detailed study, then so be it. But I just think the
study would be sort of like Step 7 and, really, Step 1 is hearing from
our own staff and what they think.
So we're not ignoring the issue, but I think we're doing it in a
much more cost-effective way and, you know, starting from Step 1.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner Solis.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Just -- I thought -- I cannot
imagine that they're -- triple negative. I cannot imagine that there
September 28, 2021
Page 118
are not FAA funds or some federal grant monies to do these kinds of
things, and maybe that's just the place to start. Let's see if there's
something out there so we don't have to pay for it.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I like that idea a lot.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Step 1.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner Saunders.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Yeah, I agree that we should
continue this discussion in another direction, perhaps. And then I
don't want the City of Naples to think that we're looking at dealing at
all with the City of Naples Airport. And, quite frankly, if the Marco
Island airport or the Everglades City airport become flooded, I don't
think any of us are going to be looking for places to move them
anyway. So I agree that this would be something maybe for our staff
to keep advising us on but not to do a resiliency study at this point.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay, good.
The Tzu Chi Foundation were instrumental in bringing a
significant amount of money to this community during Irma. They
have their National Day of Proclamation on October the 12th. And
what we'd like to do because our next meeting -- it will not be in time
for our next meeting because our next meeting is the 14th, so we have
not created that proclamation.
MR. CALLAHAN: It's the 12th, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Oh, it is the 12th. It's on the same
day, okay.
So the idea is if there's concurrence up here among my board
members, that we develop and create the proclamation and send it to
them before you approve it. And what I could do is send you a copy
of it so that you would have an opportunity to look at it, because we
are a little bit behind on proclamations. And we've done -- we've
given them a proclamation ever since 2019. So this will be the
second year -- no, third year.
September 28, 2021
Page 119
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And it's specifically for them
for what they did for our community? Because if I recall, it was
close to $30 million.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: No. It was -- in -- they came in three
weeks after Irma and delivered half a million dollars to people in
Immokalee --
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Right.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: -- and Everglades City.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Thirty million was incorrect,
forgive me. It was a large sum of money. There were gift cards
being handed out to people that were in dire need.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yep.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And I'm assuming the
proclamation is going to be in appreciation for their efforts in helping
our community.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yes, in the friendship -- and when the
pandemic hit, they brought over a lot of masks to us, I don't
remember how many thousands of masks, to Collier County, in
friendship. So it's more -- it's important to recognize that cultural
bond we have.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: That's fine.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: All right. Would you like to see it in
advance?
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Sure.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay, okay, so in advance.
Okay. Then infill, I'd like -- I've spoken to Mr. Bosi about this,
and I'd like to see if I have concurrence up here. I'd like staff, not
tomorrow, to come back to talk about the uniqueness of infill in our
community and how certain development standards may have to be
changed in a more -- in a different way. For instance, we have a
September 28, 2021
Page 120
hotel that's being built, and we have an issue with the neighbors
because when that hotel has got three stories on it, the neighbors who
knew that there was a commercial property right across the small
canal that separates them from that were really shocked to understand
that there were lights on top of this building and, oh, by the way,
there's probably an outdoor speaker at the pool because it's a hotel
and, oh, yes -- no, we can't move our garbage can because we're not
going to -- we're not going to move our dumpster.
So there was one roadblock after another, and I just -- I would
like to see if there's any support as we go forward -- and this would
have -- this -- I'm not suggesting they bring it back to us next week or
even maybe this year, but I think we need to look at the effect of infill
throughout our community. As we grow, it's only going to become
more of an issue. We've heard it, frankly, this morning with folks
wanting different screening, taller trees, all of the above. So it's
really throwing it over to staff, but to get concurrence up here that
you would agree for staff to spend time on that.
You would agree?
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I would agree.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: You would agree?
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Sure, concur.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: I think we --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: So we have concurrence.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: No, we don't. I have a
comment.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Oh, I'm sorry.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I'm not in disagreement with
what it is that you're talking about. I don't know that we need to take
up our time on something that's already happening.
Our staff regularly reviews our GMP. Our staff regularly
September 28, 2021
Page 121
reviews projects as they come along. Our staff regularly makes
adjustments as we're -- as we're going forward. I don't -- I don't -- I
don't know what you're necessarily promoting or suggesting that our
staff do other than what we're already, in fact, doing.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I think -- I think looking at infill and
the impact it has on bordering properties and to determine whether or
not we need to increase, for instance, the buffers on properties, we
need to make sure that air conditioners are on a certain side of the
building if you're looking on a residential property that's, like with
Bermuda, that's been there for 16 years. If you're building a hotel,
you probably should think about locating that dumpster away from
people who enjoy the peace and quiet of their lives in their pool in
their own lanai so that it minimizes the impact of infill, because infill
is the name of the game right now.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Well, it's always necessarily
going to be, but I consider it redundant. We're already doing that.
We do that on every single project, try to make accommodations for
the neighbors. You heard it today on two of them that were coming
along. I don't think we need to take the time -- and unless you're
going to actually propose LDC amendments or GMP amendments
that I've got something to review, then that's --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Well, that's what I'm talking about,
but staff has to do it. That's exactly --
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: They do do that. They do do
that already.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Is there an example of
something where the staff, you know, missed a particular thing and it
created a --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: They didn't miss it.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: -- major problem, or --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: They didn't miss it. They did not
September 28, 2021
Page 122
have the LDC amendment. They did not have the regulations to tell
the developer to do this or that. For instance, we saw it today. We
saw it today with the folks in the Canopy. Now, I mean, it's five
homes, I get it. And, you know, to their credit, Mr. Horton or -- is it
DL [sic] Horton agreed to increase buffering.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Sure.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: But I think, as we go forward, we
need to -- I'm dealing specifically with one issue right now where the
commercial property, if it wasn't for staff finding out that there were
two parties involved in this -- and, oh, by the way, the developer of
the property also has to do something and they need to bring up the
hedging and whatnot. It's -- it's going to happen more and more.
We need to understand that this is a residential county, this is where
our bases of our taxes are, and the people who have invested here
have a right to a quality of life that they have invested in Collier
County to enjoy.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Right.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: And if they have commercial
properties or residential properties that they feel that will change that,
it's up to us, I think, to ensure as minimum disruption as we can
possibly do, and that's why I'd like to see if we can go into that
process and look at it.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Can I just -- because I think
we're -- there's really two issues. One is infill from a zoning
standpoint, and then there's -- what we're talking about -- what you're
talking about, I think, is more development standards --
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Right.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: -- and where things are going to be
and where they can be --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yes.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: -- when a developer that's
September 28, 2021
Page 123
redeveloping a piece or, like today, just developing an undeveloped
piece, comes in for their Site Development Plan process. I
mean -- and there's a lot of code requirements on where things go. I
mean, I think -- I agree with Commissioner McDaniel that maybe
what we need to do -- I don't know if this is a D -- I mean, I'm
looking at Jamie. I don't know if this is a DSAC issue we can ask
them to look at, I mean, but I think we could spend a whole day kind
of wandering around between zoning issues and development
standards and --
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Not get anywhere.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: -- we need a little focus, I think.
Maybe that's -- and I just threw Jamie under the bus.
MR. FRENCH: Big shoulders, sir.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Answer a vague question there.
MR. FRENCH: Thank you. And maybe to offer a little
clarification, I'm intimately involved with the example that
Commissioner Taylor brings forward. And, again, for the record,
Jamie French with the Community Development group -- or the
deputy department head for Growth Management.
What we're looking at is really design standards, and I think that's
what you're speaking of, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yes.
MR. FRENCH: And we are looking within our LDC cycles to
see how we might be able to address some of the concerns that have
been brought to our attention by the neighbors. This would not
impact the underlying uses, and it would not be in conflict --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: That's right.
MR. FRENCH: -- with what's already been adopted and been
codified by law by this board and by the State of Florida.
So working in coordination, and I'm -- and I echo what
Mr. Klatzkow said earlier, we do work very well with his office.
September 28, 2021
Page 124
They are -- they're really great partners to our organization and to the
community.
But we think that that might be best to be able to address some of
those design standards on some of these infill for both new
development as well as redevelopment within our LDC.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yeah. And I'm very comfortable
with that. And if I misspoke and caused confusion, forgive me, but
that's where I'm going. It's what -- how do we -- how do we enhance
our design standards, and -- but I do feel that there needs to be some
consensus up here, because it's staff time that will be -- not that
they're not doing it, but this is a little bit differently -- different right
now.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Well, that was my suggestion
when you brought it forward. I thought you were looking to bring it
back as an additional agenda item.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: No.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: It's something that they're
doing all day every day. You've got a site-specific issue that you --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I've got several site-specific issues.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Well, we all do. But the
reality is, is that's almost how -- how these things have to go. How
many people have come in here and said, don't cut down those pine
trees because they told me they were going to be there forever? I
mean, that's happened multiple times here since I became a
commissioner.
So I think our staff's already doing it. I don't see the need for us
to actually have an agenda item and do, as Commissioner Solis said,
is go round and round and round about something. If you've got
specific adjustments to the LDC or specific GMP amendments, then
bring them forward, and we'll debate them or talk about them and
come to a consensus and then go forth and persevere.
September 28, 2021
Page 125
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Before I do this with staff, I wanted
to be respectful of staff's time, because we are in a major
growth -- it's like this (indicating). County Attorney referred to it.
There's -- we've never seen anything like this. And their time is
precious. So if there's not consensus to do this, then now's the time
to say it. If there is consensus, then we'll turn it over to staff and let
them come back to us as they see fit.
MR. FRENCH: What would be helpful to us, if I might,
sir -- and agreeing with you, of course. But what would be helpful is
if this board directed staff to work on these type of LDC
amendments; these would be board sponsored. They would be
carried through the Development Services Advisory Committee on to
the Planning Commission before they even made it to this floor. So
we would bring that forward.
And, yes, sir, we're constantly looking at those. You had
spoken earlier about the Everglades airport. Well, we work
directly -- development standards, whether they be land, we take into
consideration those areas of critical state concern as well as whatever
flood maps may have been adopted at the federal level and then down
at the state level. So those design and development standards are
constantly in our business at an administrative level every day,
whether you're building a new home or whether you're building a
commercial site.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: So is there a consensus to?
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: So I think -- I think we hit the
middle ground between what you were saying and what
Commissioner McDaniel was saying. I think this is a process that's
ongoing. I mean, I think that would be --
MR. FRENCH: With Board direction, sir.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: -- a good idea. Yeah, with --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: With Board direction.
September 28, 2021
Page 126
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: To direct them to -- yeah.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: That's what I want.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Keep some focus on that.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: My thought, if you have a
happy idea, shoot it over to them. Then we get to look at the specific
LDC amendments and/or the GMP amendments.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yeah, but the happy idea needs
support. If there's not support up here, it's a waste of their time. It
is.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And, Commissioner Taylor,
again, this is -- the specifics are what I need to know, what it is that
you're actually thinking, so --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Right. But the process, to start the
process.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yesterday -- just to cite an
example of --
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: We're starting the process. I
think Commissioner Solis was okay with us having the dialogue.
That's three. That's a consensus.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And I'm not in disagreement
with you. Yesterday I said, when we were talking about the lack of
cross-access for the Blue Coral project, I said, we need to have some
discussions with regard to GMP amendments to incentivize that
cooperative effort amongst contiguous property owners. That's
something specific.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. All right. So I think you
would have -- do you want a motion or are you --
(Simultaneous crosstalk.)
MR. FRENCH: Ma'am, I'm going to rely on our County
Manager, but what I've heard is dumpsters, lighting --
September 28, 2021
Page 127
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Buffer, placement -- placement, air
conditioning.
MR. FRENCH: Amplified sound, you bet.
(Simultaneous crosstalk.)
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: That's a whole other world.
Amplified sound, yes.
MR. FRENCH: We know it well.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: That's a whole other world, and that
is something that, if they agree, I'll be working with you on that one.
Okay, good. Two more. Disposal of our property; there was an
Item 16E3 on our agenda, and I was asked to find out if we do
give -- give 501(c)3s the opportunity to benefit from property that we
have no longer a use for. And just maybe we can just find out how
that's done so that -- they feel like they've been kind of cut out, but I
understand at one point it was only one 501(c)3 that was receiving it,
so I know this is kind of very sensitive.
MR. CALLAHAN: That's something we'd have to look at and
be happy to bring it back if there's a recommendation --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
MR. CALLAHAN: -- and folks are interested in looking at
another way to dispose of property that involves nonprofits.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. Yeah, okay.
Okay. And then, finally, I gave you all a -- and I'll give this to
Terri -- Imagine Solutions, which has been around since 2010. They
have a conference coming up. They have contacted me. They're
interested in seeing if we could get some kind of county support.
With your concurrence, I'd like staff to perhaps work with them. We
did support Naples Next two years ago or three years ago financially.
This is something that might be -- this -- they're the -- they're here,
and it is an opportunity, I think, to look at it, because I do think it's an
economic driver.
September 28, 2021
Page 128
Commissioner Saunders.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I would support having staff
take a look at it but if and only if this could be classified as some sort
of a tourist-related expenditure. But in terms of General Fund, I
wouldn't be supportive of that.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: What's the investment? Do
you know the total?
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: We didn't talk numbers. And, again,
as economic chair, I want to turn it over to our Deputy County
Manager to really explore this based on what -- and maybe bring it
back -- what we've done, what we're willing to do, that kind of thing.
Commissioner McDaniel.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: We supported this
organization in the past?
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: No.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And when I saw your e-mail
come out yesterday, and then I'm looking at this information, I mean,
we have a -- we have a process through procurement for a vendor.
This is almost a vendor that's looking to do business with Collier
County. It necessarily needs to go through the proper channels and
not come before us for an approval before we approve it.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I'm not asking for it for approval.
I'm asking that we authorize staff and give staff a consensus up here
to spend their valuable time pursuing this. That's all I'm exploring.
That's all I'm asking.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I don't want to pursue this
until -- I don't want our staff to pursue this until it's gone through --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Right.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: -- normal proper channels --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: It has to come back to us.
September 28, 2021
Page 129
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: -- through procurement with
specificity as to what it is that they're wanting to do. I appreciate
what they're offering here. It all sounds really nice, but it's -- we
have a process, and this is a vendor that's looking to do business with
the county.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: I would just agree with
Commissioner Saunders. I think it would have to fit into -- and I'm
not sure how the Naples Next one fit into either one of these buckets.
But either a tourist development issue or economic development
issue. I mean, having staff evaluate whether this would fit, you
know, into what we've done in the past, I don't see any harm with
that --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Good.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: -- but I don't know that we need to
pursue it.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: "Pursue" was the wrong word.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: I think we just need to evaluate it,
just to evaluate whether --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Evaluate it, bring it back, talk about
what we can do or can't do.
MR. CALLAHAN: Yeah. We can look at our existing TD
grant processes and some other things and see if this fits any of those
buckets. Happy to do that.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: All right. Thank you.
Commissioner LoCastro?
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: No. And even outside
buckets. I mean, I'm just thinking out loud here, but maybe the
Chamber would want to do something or there's other agencies. It's
not just, you know, inside the walls of Collier County spending
money --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: All right.
September 28, 2021
Page 130
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: -- or investing in it, I should
say.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Well, that's it, correct? So any other
comments?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: We're adjourned.
****Commissioner Solis moved, seconded by Commissioner
LoCastro and carried that the following item under the Consent and
Summary Agendas be approved and/or adopted****
Item #16A1
RELEASE OF A CODE ENFORCEMENT LIEN, WITH AN
ACCRUED VALUE OF $42,059.28 FOR PAYMENT OF $5,000 IN
THE CODE ENFORCEMENT ACTION TITLED, BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS V. TAM THANH NGUYEN AND
TAMMY NGUYEN, RELATING TO PROPERTY LOCATED AT
5175 GREEN BLVD, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA – THE
VIOLATION WAS BROUGHT INTO COMPLIANCE ON MAY
18, 2021
Item #16A2
FINAL ACCEPTANCE AND ACCEPT THE CONVEYANCE OF
THE POTABLE WATER AND SEWER UTILITY FACILITIES
FOR RANCH AT ORANGE BLOSSOM PHASE 3B,
PL20200000486 AND 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 –
September 28, 2021
Page 131
THE FINAL INSPECTION ON AUGUST 10, 2021 FOUND THE
FACILITIES TO BE SATISFACTORY AND ACCEPTABLE
Item #16A3
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE POTABLE WATER AND
SEWER UTILITY FACILITIES AND ACCEPT THE
CONVEYANCE OF A PORTION OF THE POTABLE WATER
UTILITY FACILITIES FOR FOUNDERS SQUARE STORAGE,
PL20210001390 – THE FINAL INSPECTION ON JULY 9, 2021
FOUND THE FACILITIES TO BE SATISFACTORY AND
ACCEPTABLE
Item #16A4
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE POTABLE WATER AND
SEWER UTILITY FACILITIES AND ACCEPT THE
CONVEYANCE OF A PORTION OF THE POTABLE WATER
UTILITY FACILITIES FOR FOUNDERS SQUARE MEDICAL
OFFICE BUILDING, PL20210001144 – THE FINAL INSPECTION
ON AUGUST 10, 2021 FOUND THE FACILITIES TO BE
SATISFACTORY AND ACCEPTABLE
Item #16A5
CONVEYANCE OF A SIDEWALK EASEMENT (PARCELS
108SWE1, 108SWE2, 108SWE3) TO FACILITATE COLLIER
COUNTY’S MAINTENANCE OF THE PUBLIC SIDEWALK
ALONG THE SOUTH SIDE OF MAINSAIL DRIVE
Item #16A6
September 28, 2021
Page 132
CONVEYANCE OF A SIDEWALK EASEMENT (PARCELS
105SWE1, 105SWE2) TO FACILITATE COLLIER COUNTY’S
MAINTENANCE OF THE PUBLIC SIDEWALK ALONG THE
SOUTH SIDE OF MAINSAIL DRIVE
Item #16A7
AN ADOPT-A-ROAD PROGRAM AGREEMENT FOR THE
ROADWAY SEGMENT OF GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY FROM
SANTA BARBARA BLVD TO CR 951, WITH TWO (2)
RECOGNITION SIGNS AND TWO (2) ADOPT-A-ROAD LOGO
SIGNS FOR A TOTAL COST OF $200 WITH THE VOLUNTEER
GROUP, SELLSTARS AFFINITY REALTY
Item #16A8
ADOPT-A-ROAD PROGRAM AGREEMENT FOR THE
ROADWAY SEGMENT OF GOODLETTE FRANK ROAD FROM
GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY TO CREECH ROAD, WITH TWO
(2) RECOGNITION SIGNS AND TWO (2) ADOPT-A-ROAD
LOGO SIGNS FOR A TOTAL COST OF $200 WITH THE
VOLUNTEER GROUP, NAPLES HIGH SCHOOL
Item #16A9
RECORDING THE FINAL PLAT OF VALENCIA TRAILS
NAPLES – PLAT THREE (APPLICATION NUMBER
PL20210000755) APPROVAL OF THE STANDARD FORM
CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT AND
September 28, 2021
Page 133
APPROVAL OF THE AMOUNT OF THE PERFORMANCE
SECURITY – W/STIPULATIONS
Item #16A10
RESOLUTION 2021-192: AMENDING EXHIBIT “A” TO
RESOLUTION NO. 2013-238, AS AMENDED, THE LIST OF
SPEED LIMITS ON COUNTY MAINTAINED ROADS, TO
REFLECT SPEED LIMIT CHANGES AT THREE SEPARATE
LOCATIONS
Item #16A11
RESOLUTION 2021-193: AMENDING THE COLLIER COUNTY
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT
SERVICES FEE SCHEDULE, WITH AN EFFECTIVE DATE OF
OCTOBER 1, 2021, TO COMPLY WITH RECENT FLORIDA
STATE LEGISLATIVE CHANGES
Item #16A12
SELECTION COMMITTEE’S RANKING FOR REQUEST FOR
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES (“RPS”) #21-7877,
“CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING AND INSPECTION (CEI)
SERVICES FOR TIGER GRANT,” AND AUTHORIZE STAFF TO
BEGIN CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE TOP RANKED
FIRM, KISINGER CAMPO & ASSOCIATES CORP., SO THAT
STAFF CAN BRING A PROPOSED AGREEMENT BACK FOR
THE BOARD’S CONSIDERATION AT A SUBSEQUENT
MEETING
September 28, 2021
Page 134
Item #16A13
TOURIST DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL GRANT APPLICATION
REQUESTS FROM THE CITY OF NAPLES, THE CITY OF
MARCO ISLAND AND COLLIER COUNTY FOR FY2021-2022
IN THE AMOUNT OF $8,362,600; BUDGET THESE
EXPENDITURES; AUTHORIZE THE CHAIRMAN TO EXECUTE
AN AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF NAPLES; AND MAKE A
FINDING THAT THESE EXPENDITURES PROMOTE TOURISM
Item #16A14
ELECTRONIC SUBMITTAL OF THE 2020/2021 FEDERAL
HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION FLEXIBLE FUNDS GRANT
AWARD (SECTION 5307) IN THE AMOUNT OF $500,000 IN
THE TRANSIT AWARD MANAGEMENT SYSTEM FOR THE
PURCHASE OF A 40 FT. FIXED-ROUTE BUS AND
AUTHORIZE THE NECESSARY BUDGET AMENDMENT
Item #16A15
BUDGET AMENDMENTS REDUCING BUDGETED GRANT
REVENUES IN THE AMOUNT OF $499,402.50 AND
REALLOCATING FUNDS TO FUND CURRENT CONTRACTS
DUE TO THE TERMINATION OF FEDERAL EMERGENCY
MANAGEMENT AGENCY HAZARD MITIGATION GRANT
PROGRAM SUB-RECIPIENT AGREEMENTS #H0309 (SOLANA
RD), #H0379 (GORDON RIVER AMIL GATE), #H0393
(GOODLETTE RD), #H0452 (FREEDOM PARK PUMP
STATION), #H0459 (UPPER GORDON RIVER
IMPROVEMENTS) AND #H0501 (BIG CYPRESS GOLF AND
September 28, 2021
Page 135
COUNTRY CLUB) WITH THE FLORIDA DIVISION OF
EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT
Item #16A16
RESOLUTION 2021-194: LOCAL AGENCY PROGRAM
AGREEMENT WITH THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION IN WHICH COLLIER COUNTY WOULD
BE REIMBURSED UP TO $703,613 FOR CONSTRUCTION OF
CORKSCREW ROAD CURVE AT WILDCAT DR., AND TO
AUTHORIZE THE NECESSARY BUDGET AMENDMENTS
(PROJECT #60233), FPN #446323-1-58-01
Item #16A17
CHANGE ORDER NO. 2 TO CONTRACT NUMBER 21-7834
WITH THOMAS MARINE CONSTRUCTION INC., “FREEDOM
PARK BYPASS DITCH IMPROVEMENTS,” TO EXTEND THE
LENGTH OF THE CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT BY 60 DAYS
(PROJECT NUMBER 60102)
Item #16B1 – Moved to Item #11D (Per Agenda Change Sheet)
Item #16C1
CONVEYANCE OF A UTILITY FACILITY WARRANTY DEED
AND BILL OF SALE FOR POTABLE WATER
INFRASTRUCTURE ON COUNTY OWNED PROPERTY
LOCATED AT THE COLLIER COUNTY SPORTS COMPLEX
AND EVENTS CENTER, 3920 CITY GATE BLVD N, TO THE
September 28, 2021
Page 136
COLLIER COUNTY WATER-SEWER DISTRICT, AT NO COST
TO THE COUNTY
Item #16C2
TERMINATING A PORTION OF AN EXISTING COLLIER
COUNTY UTILITY EASEMENT TO JDA COURTHOUSE
SHADOWS, LLC, A SOUTH CAROLINA LIMITED LIABILITY
COMPANY, ASSOCIATED WITH THE DEVELOPMENT AT
COURTHOUSE SHADOWS
Item #16C3
RESOLUTION 2021-195: THE FY22 FEE SCHEDULES
ESTABLISHED IN THE 2021 SOLID WASTE RATE STUDY
AND FINANCIAL FORECAST REPORT APPROVED ON JULY
13, 2021 AND ESCALATION OF CONTRACTED FRANCHISEE
FEES
Item #16C4
A PURCHASE ORDER UNDER AGREEMENT NO. 19-7527 TO
TECHNICAL MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATES, INC., FOR THE
“TAMIAMI WELLS 9-16 MCC REPLACEMENT,” IN THE
AMOUNT OF $453,000 AND THE NECESSARY BUDGET
AMENDMENT (PROJECT NUMBER 70085) – NECESSARY FOR
THE SUPPLY OF RAW WATER TO THE COUNTY’S TWO
REGIONAL WATER TREATMENT PLANTS
Item #16D1
September 28, 2021
Page 137
RESOLUTION 2021-196: THE REMOVAL OF UNCOLLECTIBLE
RECEIVABLES OF $5,556.98 FROM THE FINANCIAL
RECORDS OF THE PARKS AND RECREATION DIVISION
UNDER RESOLUTION NO. 2006-252 AND AUTHORIZE THE
CHAIR TO EXECUTE THE RESOLUTION
Item #16D2
A BUDGET AMENDMENT RECOGNIZING PARK AND
RECREATION INSURANCE CLAIM #50-03262111294
PROCEEDS, IN THE AMOUNT OF $8,503.22 - FROM AN
ACCIDENT ON MARCH 26, 2021, WHEN A BOAT TRAILER
STRUCK THE NEW BOAT LAUNCH FEE METER AT
CAXAMBAS PARK
Item #16D3
RESOLUTION 2021-197: AUTHORIZING NON-AD VALOREM
SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ON HOSPITAL-OWNED PROPERTIES
OR PROPERTIES USED AS A HOSPITAL AS AUTHORIZED BY
THE LOCAL PROVIDER PARTICIPATION FUND FOR THE
DIRECTED PAYMENT PROGRAM ESTABLISHED BY
ORDINANCE NO 2021-23 AND AUTHORIZE THE NECESSARY
BUDGET AMENDMENT; AND TO AUTHORIZE THE COUNTY
MANAGER OR DESIGNEE TO SIGN THE LETTER OF
AGREEMENT IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED THE TOTAL
OF $6,687,755 WITH THE AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE
ADMINISTRATION TO PARTICIPATE IN THE LOCAL
PROVIDER PARTICIPATION FUND THAT WILL PROVIDE
ADDITIONAL HEALTH SERVICES FOR THE CITIZENS OF
COLLIER COUNTY
September 28, 2021
Page 138
Item #16D4
AN “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 TO REVISE ATTACHMENT VIII BUDGET AND
RATE SUMMARY
Item #16D5
EIGHTEEN (18) MORTGAGE SATISFACTIONS FOR THE
STATE HOUSING INITIATIVES PARTNERSHIP LOAN
PROGRAM IN THE AMOUNT OF $232,450 AND THE
ASSOCIATED BUDGET AMENDMENTS
Item #16D6
AGREEMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $443,611 WITH THE
AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION AND AN
AGREEMENT WITH COLLIER HEALTH SERVICES, INC., AND
AUTHORIZE NECESSARY BUDGET AMENDMENTS TO
PARTICIPATE IN THE MEDICAID LOW INCOME POOL
PROGRAM, GENERATING $572,728 IN FEDERAL MATCHING
FUNDS THAT WILL PROVIDE ADDITIONAL HEALTH
SERVICES FOR THE CITIZENS OF COLLIER COUNTY
Item #16D7
September 28, 2021
Page 139
ACCEPT AND APPROPRIATE A ONE-TIME DONATION OF
$100,000 FROM THE FRIENDS OF THE LIBRARY OF COLLIER
COUNTY, INC., TO THE COLLIER COUNTY PUBLIC LIBRARY
FOR THE PURCHASE OF EBOOKS AND EAUDIO TO
ENHANCE THE LIBRARY’S ELECTRONIC MATERIALS
COLLECTION, AND TO AUTHORIZE THE NECESSARY
BUDGET AMENDMENT
Item #16D8
SUBMITTAL OF THE FY21-22 STATE AID TO LIBRARIES
GRANT AND AUTHORIZE THE CHAIRPERSON TO SIGN THE
GRANT AGREEMENT #22-ST-08 AND ALL CERTIFICATIONS
REQUIRED FOR THE SUBMISSION OF THE GRANT
APPLICATION TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF STATE
DIVISION OF LIBRARY AND INFORMATION SERVICES FOR
FUNDING IN THE ESTIMATED AMOUNT OF $163,954
Item #16D9
YEAR 1 OF A 3-YEAR CENTERS FOR DISEASE CONTROL
GRANT AWARD TO SUPPORT THE PREVENTION
COMMUNITY HEALTH WORKERS FOR COVID-19 RESPONSE
FOR RESILIENT COMMUNITIES PROGRAM IN THE AMOUNT
OF $421,744 AND AUTHORIZE THE NECESSARY BUDGET
AMENDMENT
Item #16D10
THE “AFTER-THE-FACT” ELECTRONIC SUBMITTAL OF TWO
September 28, 2021
Page 140
(2) STATE DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY
(DEO) COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT
MITIGATION (CDBG-MIT) INFRASTRUCTURE
APPLICATIONS TO THE STATE DEPARTMENT OF
ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY IN THE AMOUNT OF $29,362,941
Item #16D11
A BUDGET AMENDMENT RECOGNIZING $25,000.01 IN
PROGRAM INCOME UNDER THE U.S. HOUSING AND URBAN
DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK
GRANT PROGRAM
Item #16E1
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS PREPARED BY THE
PROCUREMENT SERVICES DIVISION FOR CHANGE ORDERS
AND OTHER CONTRACTUAL MODIFICATIONS REQUIRING
BOARD APPROVAL – FOR THE FOLLOWING CONTRACTS:
#19-7540 QUALITY ENTERPRISES USA, INC. AND #18-7432-
CE Q. GRADY MINOR & ASSOCIATES
Item #16E2
RESOLUTION 2021-198: ADOPTING THE PAY AND
CLASSIFICATION PLANS FOR THE COUNTY MANAGER’S
AGENCY AND COUNTY ATTORNEY’S OFFICE EFFECTIVE
OCTOBER 1, 2021; TO PROVIDE A GENERAL WAGE
ADJUSTMENT TO ELIGIBLE EMPLOYEES; AND TO
APPROVE THE CREATION OF NEW CLASSIFICATIONS,
MODIFICATION AND/OR DELETION OF CLASSIFICATIONS,
September 28, 2021
Page 141
FROM JULY 1, 2021 FORWARD, USING THE EXISTING
POINT-FACTOR JOB EVALUATION SYSTEM
Item #16E3
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT PREPARED BY THE
PROCUREMENT SERVICES DIVISION FOR DISPOSAL OF
PROPERTY AND NOTIFICATION OF REVENUE
DISBURSEMENT – THERE WERE NO ON-LINE SALES OR
TRADE-INS THIS PERIOD BUT, THERE WERE 43 DISPOSED
ASSETS WITH THE NET BOOK VALUE OF $7,208.34
Item #16E4
THE PURCHASE OF LIABILITY, AUTOMOBILE, AND OTHER
INSURANCE COVERAGE FOR FY 2022 IN THE ESTIMATED
PREMIUM OF $897,494
Item #16E5
RESOLUTION 2021-199: A FLORIDA EMERGENCY MEDICAL
SERVICES COUNTY GRANT APPLICATION, REQUEST FOR
GRANT FUND DISTRIBUTION FORM REQUESTING GRANT
FUNDS BE REMITTED TO THE COLLIER COUNTY BOARD
OF COMMISSIONERS AND RESOLUTION FOR THE FUNDING
OF TRAINING AND MEDICAL/RESCUE EQUIPMENT IN THE
AMOUNT OF $66,374.00, CONFIRMING THAT THE GRANT
FUNDS WILL NOT SUPPLANT THE EMS BUDGET
Item #16F1
September 28, 2021
Page 142
RECOGNIZING JARED DEL RE, PUBLIC SERVICES
DEPARTMENT, LIBRARY DIVISION AS THE AUGUST 2021
EMPLOYEE OF THE MONTH
Item #16F2
RESOLUTION 2021-200: AMENDMENTS (APPROPRIATING
GRANTS, DONATIONS, CONTRIBUTIONS OR INSURANCE
PROCEEDS) TO THE FY20-21 ADOPTED BUDGET
Item #16F3
THE ANNUAL CERTIFICATE OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE
AND NECESSITY (COPCN) FOR AMBITRANS MEDICAL
TRANSPORT, INC. TO PROVIDE CLASS 2 ADVANCED LIFE
SUPPORT (ALS) INTER-FACILITY TRANSPORT AMBULANCE
SERVICE FOR A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR
Item #16F4
A FEDERALLY FUNDED SUBGRANT AGREEMENT TO
ACCEPT THE EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE
GRANT-AMERICAN RESCUE PLAN ACT (EMPG-ARPA) G0245
IN THE AMOUNT OF $13,926 FOR EMERGENCY
MANAGEMENT PLANNING, RESPONSE, AND MITIGATION
EFFORTS AND TO AUTHORIZE THE NECESSARY BUDGET
AMENDMENTS (PROJECT NO. 33770)
Item #16F5
September 28, 2021
Page 143
RESOLUTION 2021-201: SUPPORTING THE BUREAU OF
EMERGENCY SERVICES, EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT
DIVISION WORKING WITH ITS PARTNER AGENCIES AND
COUNTY DIVISIONS TO PARTICIPATE IN NUCLEAR POWER
PLANT DRILLS AND EXERCISES IN CONJUNCTION WITH
THE FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY
(FEMA), THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION,
FLORIDA DIVISION OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT
(FDEM) AND FLORIDA POWER AND LIGHT
Item #16F6
THE COUNTY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO A SHORT-TERM
LEASE FOR COMMERCIAL AND/OR INDUSTRIAL SPACE
FOR THE PURPOSES OF OFFERING MONOCLONAL
ANTIBODY THERAPY DELIVERED BY THE FLORIDA
DIVISION OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT IN
COOPERATION WITH THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
HEALTH COLLIER COUNTY AND AUTHORIZE ANY
NECESSARY BUDGET AMENDMENTS – THE 90-DAY LEASE
AGREEMENT WILL INCLUDE THREE 90-DAY RENEWALS
FOR AN APPROPRIATE LOCATION
Item #16F7 – Continued to the October 12, 2021 BCC Meeting
(Per Agenda Change Sheet)
RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE AND AUTHORIZE THE
CHAIRMAN TO SIGN THE EXTENSION AND AMENDMENT
OF THE AGREEMENT WITH THE PARTNERSHIP FOR
COLLIER’S FUTURE ECONOMY, INC. (“PARTNERSHIP”) IN
September 28, 2021
Page 144
CONTINUED SUPPORT OF THE ESTABLISHED PUBLIC-
PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP DESIGNED TO ADVANCE THE
COUNTY’S ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT EFFORTS
Item #16G1
COLLIER COUNTY AIRPORT AUTHORITY STANDARD
FORM LEASE AGREEMENT WITH GLOBAL FLIGHT
TRAINING SOLUTIONS, LLC FOR AERONAUTICAL USE
OFFICE SPACE AT THE MARCO ISLAND EXECUTIVE
AIRPORT
Item #16G2
FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION (FAA) AMERICAN
RESCUE PLAN ACT GRANT APPLICATIONS TO REQUEST
ELIGIBLE FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $59,000 FOR THE
MARCO ISLAND EXECUTIVE AIRPORT (MKY) AND $32,000
FOR THE IMMOKALEE REGIONAL AIRPORT (IMM) AND
DESIGNATE THE COUNTY MANGER AS THE AUTHORIZED
REPRESENTATIVE TO SUBMIT THE APPLICATION AND
ACCEPT THE AWARD ELECTRONICALLY
Item #16G3
CHANGE ORDER #1 TO AGREEMENT NO. 20-7726 WITH
ATKINS NORTH AMERICA, INC., “CEI SERVICES FOR
IMMOKALEE REGIONAL AIRPORT RUNWAY 18-36 AND
TAXIWAY C EXTENSION PROJECTS,” TO EXTEND THE
SCHEDULE FOR CEI SERVICES FOR THE RUNWAY 18/36
REHABILITATION PROJECT BY 85 DAYS
September 28, 2021
Page 145
Item #16H1
ELEVENTH AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT FOR
MEDICAL EXAMINER SERVICES (AGREEMENT NO. 11-5776 -
MEDICAL EXAMINER), WHICH WILL EXTEND THE TERM
OF THE AGREEMENT TO SEPTEMBER 30, 2022
Item #16I1
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
September 28, 2021
1. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS TO FILE FOR RECORD WITH ACTION AS DIRECTED:
A. DISTRICTS:
1) Ave Maria Stewardship Community District:
Proposed Budget FY2021/2022
2) Heritage Bay Community Development District:
Meeting Agenda 05/06/2021; 07/01/2021
Meeting Minutes 05/06/2021; 07/01/2021
3) The Quarry Community Development District:
Meeting Agenda 06/21/2021
Meeting Minutes 06/21/2021
B. OTHER:
INTP-2021-043 Advertising and Affidavit of Publication
Legal Advertising/Public Notification regarding INTP 2021-043
September 28, 2021
Page 146
Item #16J1
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 SEPTEMBER 2, 2021 AND
SEPTEMBER 15, 2021 PURSUANT TO FLORIDA STATUTE
136.06
Item #16J2
REQUEST THAT THE BOARD APPROVE AND DETERMINE
VALID PUBLIC PURPOSE FOR INVOICES PAYABLE AND
PURCHASING CARD TRANSACTIONS AS OF SEPTEMBER 22,
2021
Item #16J3
REPORT TO THE BOARD REGARDING THE INVESTMENT OF
COUNTY FUNDS AS OF THE QUARTER ENDED JUNE 30,
2021
Item #16J4
TAX COLLECTOR REQUEST FOR ADVANCE COMMISSIONS
IN ACCORDANCE WITH FLORIDA STATUTE 192.102(1) FOR
FY2022
Item #16J5
September 28, 2021
Page 147
AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO CONTRACT NO. 14-001 WITH FIRST
FLORIDA INTEGRITY BANK TO EXTEND THE CONTRACT
TERM FOR DEPOSITORY BANKING SERVICES AND
AUTHORIZE THE CHAIR TO SIGN THE ATTACHED
AGREEMENT
Item #16J6
EXTENDING THE 2021 TAX ROLL AT THE REQUEST OF TAX
COLLECTOR ROB STONEBURNER
Item #16J7
AN AMENDMENT TO THE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR
ELECTION SERVICES FOR THE FEBRUARY 1, 2022, CITY OF
NAPLES GENERAL ELECTION
Item #16K1
PROPOSED FY 2021 - 2022 ACTION PLAN FOR JEFFREY A.
KLATZKOW, COUNTY ATTORNEY
Item #16K2
RESOLUTION 2021-202: APPOINTING KENNETH LEE DIXON
TO THE PARKS AND RECREATION ADVISORY BOARD –
FILLING A VACANT SEAT WHICH EXPIRES ON DECEMBER
31, 2022
Item #16K3
September 28, 2021
Page 148
RESOLUTION 2021-203: APPOINTING KARYN ALLMAN TO
CONSERVATION COLLIER LAND ACQUISITION ADVISORY
COMMITTEE – FILLING A VACANT SEAT W/TERM
EXPIRING ON FEBRUARY 11, 2024
Item #16K4
RESOLUTION 2021-204: RE-APPOINTING REGINALD
BUXTON REPRESENTING THE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
AND COMMODORE WALTER JASKIEWICZ REPRESENTING
THE COAST GUARD AUXILIARY TO THE COLLIER COUNTY
CITIZEN CORPS - BOTH W/TERMS EXPIRING ON
NOVEMBER 5, 2025
Item #16K5
RESOLUTION 2021-205: RE-APPOINTING TONY BRANCO,
LINDA RAE JORGENSEN AND KATHLEEN SLEBODNIK TO
THE LELY GOLF ESTATES BEAUTIFICATION ADVISORY
COMMITTEE – ALL W/TERMS EXPIRING ON OCTOBER 1,
2025
Item #16K6
A STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF
$245,000 PLUS $42,938 IN STATUTORY ATTORNEY AND
EXPERTS’ FEES AND COSTS FOR THE TAKING OF PARCEL
230FEE, REQUIRED FOR THE VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD
EXTENSION PROJECT NO. 60168
Item #16K7
September 28, 2021
Page 149
A STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF
$15,000 PLUS $11,271 IN STATUTORY ATTORNEY AND
EXPERTS’ FEES AND COSTS FOR THE TAKING OF PARCEL
1259RDUE, REQUIRED FOR THE VANDERBILT BEACH
ROAD EXTENSION PROJECT NO. 60168
Item #16K8
A STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF
$70,000 PLUS $20,374.25 IN STATUTORY ATTORNEY AND
EXPERTS’ FEES AND COSTS FOR THE TAKING OF PARCEL
1106FEE, REQUIRED FOR THE VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD
EXTENSION PROJECT NO. 60168
Item #16K9
A STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF
$15,000 PLUS $7,500 IN STATUTORY ATTORNEY AND
EXPERTS’ FEES AND COSTS FOR THE TAKING OF PARCEL
1269RDUE, REQUIRED FOR THE VANDERBILT BEACH
ROAD EXTENSION PROJECT NO. 60168
Item #17A
ORDINANCE 2021-30: ESTABLISHED THE IMMOKALEE
BEAUTIFICATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE, TO REDUCE
QUORUM REQUIREMENTS AT MEETINGS FROM FOUR TO
THREE MEMBERS
Item #17B – Moved to Item #9C (Per Agenda Change Sheet)
September 28, 2021
Page 150
Item #17C – Continued to the October 12, 2021 BCC Meeting
(Per Agenda Change Sheet)
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS PROPOSING AMENDMENTS TO THE
COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN,
ORDINANCE 89-05, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE
RURAL FRINGE MIXED USE DISTRICT RESTUDY AND
SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE URBAN MIXED USE
DISTRICT, URBAN RESIDENTIAL FRINGE SUBDISTRICT
AND THE RURAL FRINGE MIXED USE DISTRICT OF THE
FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT TO REQUIRE TRANSFER OF
DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
AMENDMENTS FOR INCREASED RESIDENTIAL DENSITY;
AMENDING THE URBAN MIXED USE DISTRICT, URBAN
RESIDENTIAL FRINGE SUBDISTRICT TO REMOVE THE
DENSITY BONUS CAP ON RESIDENTIAL IN-FILL AND
REMOVE THE REQUIREMENT TO USE TRANSFER OF
DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS WITHIN ONE MILE OF THE URBAN
BOUNDARY; AND AMENDING THE RURAL FRINGE MIXED
USE DISTRICT OF THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT TO
CHANGE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND
REQUIREMENTS, TO INCREASE DENSITY ON RECEIVING
LANDS LOCATED ALONG IMMOKALEE ROAD, INCREASE
DENSITY ON RECEIVING LANDS FOR AFFORDABLE
HOUSING, ADD TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS
CREDITS, ADD USES IN RECEIVING AREAS, AND ADD A
CONDITIONAL USE FOR RECREATION IN SENDING LANDS,
AND TO AMEND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR RURAL
VILLAGES; AND CREATE THE BELLE MEADE HYDROLOGIC
September 28, 2021
Page 151
ENHANCEMENT OVERLAY; AND FURTHERMORE
DIRECTING TRANSMITTAL OF THE AMENDMENTS TO THE
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY
[PL20200002234]
Item #17D
RESOLUTION 2021-206: AMENDMENTS (APPROPRIATING
CARRY FORWARD, TRANSFERS AND SUPPLEMENTAL
REVENUE) TO THE FISCAL YEAR 2021-22 ADOPTED
BUDGET
Item #17E
RESOLUTION 2021-207: AMENDMENTS (APPROPRIATING
CARRY FORWARD, TRANSFERS AND SUPPLEMENTAL
REVENUE) TO THE FY20-21 ADOPTED BUDGET
*****
There being no further business for the good of the County, the
meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 12:49 p.m.
September 28, 2021
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS/EX
OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF
SPECIAL DISTRICTS UNDER ITS CONTROL
PENNY T LOR, CHAIRMAN
ATTEST
CRYSTAL K. KINZEL, CLERK
41?
ttest as to Chaiinnsii s
signature.only.
These minutes approved by the Board on Cciobor.)-6/Pqas
presented I, or as corrected
TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF FORT MYERS
COURT REPORTING BY TERRI L. LEWIS, RPR, FPR-C,
COURT REPORTER AND NOTARY PUBLIC.
Page 152