BCC Minutes 09/11-12/2007 R
September 11 - 12,2007
TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Naples, Florida, September 11,2007
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 district as has 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: Jim Coletta
Tom Henning
Frank Halas
Fred W. Coyle
Donna Fiala
ALSO PRESENT:
Jim Mudd, County Manager
David Weigel, County Attorney
Crystal Kinzel, Office of the Clerk of Court
Page 1
COLLIER COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY BOARD (CRAB)
AGENDA
September 11 - 12, 2007
9:00 AM
Jim Coletta, BCC Chairman, District 5; CRAB Vice-Chairman
Tom Henning, BCC Vice-Chairman, District 3
Donna Fiala, BCC Commissioner, District 1; CRAB Chairman
Frank Halas, BCC Commissioner, District 2
Fred W. Coyle, BCC Commissioner, District 4
NOTICE: ALL PERSONS WISHING TO SPEAK ON ANY AGENDA ITEM
MUST REGISTER PRIOR TO SPEAKING. SPEAKERS MUST REGISTER
WITH THE COUNTY MANAGER PRIOR TO THE 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.
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.
REQUESTS TO ADDRESS 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."
Page 1
September 11-12, 2007
ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THIS BOARD
WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS 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.
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, TO THE PROVISION OF
CERTAIN ASSISTANCE. PLEASE CONTACT THE COLLIER COUNTY
FACILITIES MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT LOCATED AT 3301 EAST
TAMIAMI TRAIL, NAPLES, FLORIDA, 34112, (239) 774-8380; ASSISTED
LISTENING DEVICES FOR THE HEARING IMP AIRED ARE AVAILABLE IN
THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' OFFICE.
LUNCH RECESS SCHEDULED FOR 12:00 NOON TO 1:00 P.M.
1. INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
A. Captain Alejandro Castillo, Salvation Army
2. AGENDA AND MINUTES
A. Approval of to day's regular, consent and summary agenda as amended. (Ex
Parte Disclosure provided by Commission members for consent and
summary agenda.)
B. July 24, 2007 - BCC/Regular Meeting
C. July 25,2007 - BCC/Regular Meeting (Continuation of July 24,2007 BCC
Meeting)
D. July 25,2007 - Value Adjustment Board Meeting
3. SERVICE AWARDS: (EMPLOYEE AND ADVISORY BOARD MEMBERS)
A. Advisory Committee Service Awards: 5-Year Recipients: Lowell Lam-
Utility Authority Jerry Morgan - Utility Authority Sheri Barnett - Utility
Authority Robert Mulhere - Development Services Advisory Committee
Ann Keller - Contractors Licensing Board
Page 2
September 11-12,2007
4. PROCLAMATIONS
A. Proclamation for Patriot Day to be accepted by Greg Speers, Kevin
Rambosk, Jim Elson, Peter Kraley and Don Peacock.
B. Proclamation Mr. Peter Thomas Day, to honor Mr. Peter Thomas for his
unselfish dedication and service to the community. To be accepted by Mr.
Peter Thomas.
C. Proclamation for Collier County Firefighter Appreciation Week to be
accepted by Angelique Flynn, Program Coordinator, Muscular Dystrophy
Association
D. Proclamation NAACP Freedom Fund Day to be accepted by Anthony
Denson, President, NAACP and Cheryl Seals-Gonzalez, Freedom Fund
Dinner Chair.
E. Proclamation for National Preparedness Week to be accepted by Rick
Zyvolski, Emergency Management Coordinator and Joe Frazier, Homeland
Security Coordinator.
F. Proclamation for Industry Appreciation Week to be accepted by Tammie
Nemecek, Julie Schmelzle and Dick Grant.
G. Proclamation for Water Reuse Week to be accepted by Dr. George Yilmaz,
Dale Waller, Jon Pratt, Millie Kelley and Ray Ognibene.
5. PRESENTATIONS
A. Provide the Board of County Commissioners with an update ofthe progress
of the East of County Road 951 Infrastructure and Services Horizon Study
Public Participation Master Committee.
B. Santa Barbara Boulevard - the expansion and improvement of Santa Barbara
Boulevard from four (4) lanes to six (6) lanes for 4.0 miles and Radio Road
from two (2) lanes to four (4) lanes for 1.22 miles.
C. Recommendation to recognize Michele Mosca, Principal Planner,
Comprehensive Planning, as Employee of the Month for August 2007.
Page 3
September 11-12, 2007
6. PUBLIC PETITIONS
A. Public petition request by Freeman & Freeman Construction, Inc. to discuss
rezone fees for 428 and 432 13th Street, Immokalee, FL.
B. Public petition request by Alex Brown to discuss the lack of solar power
sources.
C. Public petition request by James King to discuss storm/wastewater drainage
on Captains Cove.
D. Public petition request by Richard Eckstein to discuss the distribution of a
chemical free fertilizer in Collier County.
E. Public petition request by Jim Kramer to discuss removal of traffic control
signs upon completion of construction.
F. Public petition request by Jim Schulze to discuss the TDR Conservation
Program.
G. Public petition request by Joe Hamilton to discuss Collier Conservation
purchase of Hamilton property.
Item 7 and 8 to he heard no sooner than 1:00 p.m., unless otherwise noted.
7. BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
A. This item reauires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte
disclosure be provided bv Commission members. PE-2006-AR-l 0551,
DeVoe Family Limited Partnership II, represented by Sandra Bottcher ofQ.
Grady Minor & Associates, P.A., is requesting a parking exemption for the
DeVoe Suzuki dealership. The exemption seeks approval of an off-site
employee parking area on a residentially-zoned lot to serve the De V oe
Suzuki dealership in the adjacent commercially-zoned district. The subject
property, consisting of 0.23 acres, is located at 1397 Trail Terrace Drive, on
the northwest corner of 14th Street North and Trail Terrace Drive,
approximately 500 feet south of Solana Road, in Section 22, Township 49
South, Range 25 East Collier County, Florida.
Page 4
September 11-12, 2007
8. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Recommend Adoption of an Ordinance of Collier County, Florida,
Amending the Collier County Noise Ordinance, Ordinance Number 90-17,
as Amended; Changing Six Definitions; Clarifying Two Exceptions;
Deleting References to ASA and ANSI Standards; Authorizing Regulation
of Two Types of Noise Without use of Testing Equipment Except when
such Noise Is Commonly Emitted from a Permitted Business, Profession or
Occupation; Providing for Conflict and Severability; Providing for Inclusion
in the Code of Laws and Ordinances; Providing the Effective Date.
9. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
A. THIS ITEM TO BE HEARD WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 12, 2007
AT 9:00 A.M. Board of County Commissioners to interview County
Attorney Recruitment Search Firms.
B. Appointment of member to the Contractors Licensing Board.
C. Appointment of members to the Fire Review Task Force.
D. Appointment of members to the Rural Lands Stewardship Area (RLSA)
Review Committee.
E. Appointment of members to the Collier County Airport Authority.
F. Appointment of member to the Isles of Capri Fire Control District Advisory
Committee.
G. To appoint a Commissioner and an Alternate to serve on the County
Canvassing Board for the 2008 Elections.
H. Appointment of members to the Affordable Housing Commission.
I. Appointment of members to the Housing Finance Authority.
J. Appointment of member to the Emergency Medical Services Advisory
Council.
Page 5
September 11-12, 2007
K. Recommendation for the Board of County Commissioners to approve filling
a vacant position in the Board's Office.
10. COUNTY MANAGER'S REPORT
A. Receive and approve the Progress Report for the Year 2006, Collier County
Floodplain Management Plan, Section 7 of the Collier County Hazard
Mitigation Plan. (Robert Wiley, Principal Project Manager, Engineering
Services Department)
B. Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners direct staff to
amend the Conservation Collier Ordinance No. 2002-63 in order to make
various procedure related changes so that efficiency and cost effectiveness
will be increased, and to make various non-substantial changes for
consistency and clarification. (Alex Sulecki, Principal Environmental
Specialist, Facilities Management)
C. This item to be heard at 11:00 a.m. immediatelv foIlowill!! Item 14A.
Recommendation for the Collier County Board of Commissioners (BCC) to
approve a Resolution authorizing the Collier County Community
Redevelopment Agency (CRA) to enter into a $9,000,000 Revolving Line of
Credit Agreement with Wachovia Bank; approving the actions taken by the
CRA with respect to its approval of the Line of Credit Agreement; and
authorize all necessary budget amendments. (David Jackson, Executive
Director, Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA)
D. This item to be heard on or about 11:00 a.m. A Resolution of the Board
of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, acting as the
Governing Body of Collier County, Florida and the Forest Lakes Roadway
and Drainage Municipal Service Taxing Unit, authorizing the issuance of not
exceeding $6,250,000 in aggregate principal amount of Collier County,
Florida Limited General Obligation Bonds (Forest Lakes Roadway and
Drainage Municipal Service Taxing Unit), Series 2007, to finance the costs
of certain roadway lighting, roadway-related drainage and roadway
restoration within the Forest Lakes MSTU and to pay certain costs and
expenses incurred with the issuance of the Series 2007 Bonds; Providing for
the payment of said Bonds from ad valorem taxation levied in an amount
which shall not exceed four mills on all taxable property within the
boundaries of the MSTU; Making certain covenants and agreements in
connection therewith; Providing for the rights of the holders of such bonds;
Page 6
September 11-12, 2007
authorizing the awarding of said Series 2007 Bonds pursuant to a public bid;
Delegating certain authority to the Chair for the award of the Series 2007
Bonds and the approval of the terms and details of said Series 2007 Bonds;
Authorizing the publication of a notice of sale for the Series 2007 Bonds or a
summary thereof; Appointing the paying agent and registrar for said Series
2007 Bonds; Authorizing the distribution of a preliminary official statement
and the execution and delivery of an official statement with respect to the
Series 2007 Bonds; Authorizing the execution and delivery of a continuing
disclosure certificate with respect to the Series 2007 Bonds; Authorizing
municipal bond insurance for the Series 2007 Bonds; and providing an
effective date. (Mike Smykowski, Director, Office of Management and
Budget)
E. Recommendation to award contract #07-4176, South Regional Library to
DeAngelis Diamond Construction for the construction of the South Regional
Library, project 54003, in the amount of$6,5l9,8l3 and approve the
necessary commercial paper loan and budget amendments. (Hank Jones,
Senior Project Manager, Facilities Management)
Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners considers and
directs staff to make changes to the County-Wide Impact Fee Deferral
Program. (Jeff Klatzkow, Assistant County Attorney)
F. Recommendation to award RFP #07-4126, Janitorial Services to OneSource
Facility Services, Inc. ($2,144,446.68) (Damon Gonzales, Facilities
Manager, Facilities Management)
G. Recommendation to accept the Report on Review of Bid No. 07-4127
"Office Supplies," submitted by the Collier County Office of Management
and Budget. (Laura Davisson, Budget Analyst, Office of Management and
Budget)
H. That the Board of County Commissioners approves the award Bid 07-4127
for Office Supplies to Corporate Express. (Steve Carnell, Director,
Purchasing Department)
I. Recommendation to award Bid No. 07-4179 Marco Island Recycling Center
to Vanderbilt Bay Construction, Inc. in the amount of $1 ,299,975 for
construction of the new Marco Island Recycling Center, Project Number
59003. (Dan Rodriguez, Director, Solid Waste)
Page 7
September 11-12, 2007
J. Recommendation to award Bid # 07-4173 Gordon River Water Quality Park
in the amount of$9,852,655.04 to Kraft Construction Company, Inc. and
allocate $9,852,655.04 to construct the Freedom Park (aka Gordon River
Water Quality Park), Project Number 510185, Bid No. 07-4173. (Norman
Feder, Administrator, Transportation Services)
K. Request to the Collier County Board of County Commissioners for Approval
of a Resolution clarifYing the County's prior 2002 Resolution regarding use
of Interest earned on the investment of County Funds.
11. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS
12. COUNTY ATTORNEY'S REPORT
13. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
14. AIRPORT AUTHORITY AND/OR COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY
A. This item to be heard at 11 :00 a.m. Recommendation that the Collier
County Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) approve selection of
Wachovia Bank to provide a $9,000,000 Revolving Line of Credit to
purchase real property and finance various capital improvement projects
within the Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA; approve a Resolution
approving the form of a Line of Credit Agreement and Master Note;
authorize the CRA Chairman to sign other documents in connection
therewith and make draws against the Line of Credit as needed; pledge
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA Tax Increment Funds (TIF) and other
legally available moneys as the loan repayment source; and authorize all
necessary budget amendments (Companion to Item 10C) (David Jackson,
Executive Director, Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA)
15. STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 8
September 11-12, 2007
A. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
1) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the water and sewer
utility facilities for Park Central North
2) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the water and sewer
utility facilities for Saturnia Lakes, Phase 2
3) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the water and sewer
utility facilities for Saturnia Lakes, Phase 1B
4) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the water and sewer
utility facility for Saturnia Lakes, Phase 3
5) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the water and sewer
utility facilities for Addison Reserve
6) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the water and sewer
utility facilities for Saturnia Lakes, Phase lA
7) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the water and sewer
utility facilities for Oakridge Middle School
8) Recommendation to grant final approval of the roadway (private) and
drainage improvements for the final plat of Wilshire Lakes, Phase
Two, the roadway and drainage improvements will be privately
maintained.
9) Recommendation to grant final approval of the roadway (private) and
drainage improvements for the final plat of Charlee Estates. The
roadway and drainage improvements will be privately maintained.
10) Recommendation to grant final approval of the roadway (private) and
drainage improvements for the final plat of Charlee Estates Phase
Two. The roadway and drainage improvements will be privately
maintained.
11) This item reQuires that ex parte disclosure be provided bv
Commission Members. Should a hearinl!: be held on this item, all
Page 9
September 11-12, 2007
participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to
approve for recording the final plat of Tracts S-l and S-2, Vineyards
Unit 3, Replat
12) Recommendation to approve the Release and Satisfaction of Lien for
payments received for the following Code Enforcement actions.
13) Recommendation to award Bid #06-4013 -- Background Check
Annual Contract to Sterling Testing Systems, Inc. and Ad-VANCE
Screening Solutions, Inc. for an estimated annual expenditure of
$75,000.00.
14) Recommendation to approve the Release and Satisfactions of Lien for
payments received for the following Code Enforcement actions:
Circle K Corporation.
15) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the water and sewer
utility facilities for Classics Plantation Estates, Phase 2A.
16) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the water and sewer
utility facilities for Remington Reserve.
17) Recommendation to grant final approval of the roadway (private) and
drainage improvements for the final plat of Grey Oaks Unit
Seventeen. The roadway and drainage improvements will be privately
maintained.
18) Recommendation to grant final approval ofthe roadway (private) and
drainage improvements for the final plat of Grey Oaks Unit Eighteen.
The roadway and drainage improvements will be privately
maintained.
19) This item reQuires that ex parte disclosure be provided bv
Commission Members. Should a hearinl! be held on this item, all
participants are reQuired to be sworn in. Recommendation to
approve for recording the final plat of Biscayne Bay at Heritage Bay
Unit Four, approval of the standard form Construction and
Maintenance Agreement and approval of the amount of the
performance security.
Page 10
September 11-12, 2007
20) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approves,
and authorizes its Chairman to sign, an Easement Use Agreement
which would allow construction of improvements over a portion of a
drainage easement held by Collier County at 140 Via Napoli Drive.
21) This item reQuires that ex parte disclosure be provided bv
Commission Members. Should a hearinl!: be held on this item, all
participants are reQuired to be sworn in. Recommendation to
approve for recording the final plat of Silver Lakes Phase Two-G
22) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners of Collier
County, Florida, approve the subordination of an existing lien held by
the County pursuant to Collier County Ordinance No. 2003-61.
23) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners authorize
the County Manager or his designee to create two (2) permanent Full
Time Equivalent (FTE) positions within the Community Development
and Environmental Services (CDES) Division to replace the existing
two State of Florida Department of Environmental Protection FTEs
who provide enhanced environmental resource permitting assistance
currently employed by the Florida Department of Environmental
Protection, South District Office.
24) This item reQuires that ex parte disclosure be provided bv
Commission Members. Should a hearinl!: be held on this item, all
participants are reQuired to be sworn in. Recommendation to
approve for recording the final plat of Ave Maria Unit II, Del Webb
at Ave Maria Parcels 106, 110, 112, 113 & 115, approval of the
standard form Construction and Maintenance Agreement and approval
of the amount of the performance security.
25) Recommendation to award a professional service retainer contract 07-
4150 for Grant Writing & Project Management Oversight Services.
26) To receive the Board of County Commissioners approval to award a
contract to White & Smith, LLC Planning and Law Group to work
with staff to update and re-write identified sections of the Land
Development Code. The contract amount of$150,000 would be
funded from previously Board approved and budgeted capital funding
Page 11
September 11-12, 2007
within CDES, specifically the Zoning Department.
27) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners of Collier
County, Florida approve an agreement between Collier County and
the Economic Development Council of Collier County (EDe) for
continuation of the Economic Diversification Program by providing a
contribution to the EDC of up to $400,000 for Fiscal Year 2008, and
authorizing the Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners to
sign the agreement on behalf of Collier County.
28) Authorize the Chairman or his designee to sign a letter of support for
the updated Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS)
prepared by the Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council's
Economic Development Strategy Committee.
B. TRANSPORTATION SERVICES
1) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approve
the Landscape Maintenance Agreement between Collier County,
Florida and the Ivy of Naples Grande Community Development
District for landscaping within the right-of-way on Golden Gate
Parkway.
2) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approve
the attached budget amendment and Reimbursement to Bayvest,
LLC., and to authorize the Chairman of the Board of County
Commissioners to execute said reimbursement to Bayvest, LLC. in
which Collier County would be responsible for a total estimated cost
of $99, 125.21 for design and construction of the pole relocation.
3) Recommedation to award Bid #07-4157 "Golden Gate Blvd. Phase 3
(13th Street SW to Wilson Blvd.)Landscape Maintenance Annual
Contract" to Vila & Son Landscaping in the amount of $54,276.10,
Fund # Ill, Cost Center 163815.
4) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners adopt a
Resolution approving, and authorize its chairman to execute, a
supplemental agreement to amend a Local Agency Program (LAP)
agreement previously entered into with the Florida Department of
Page 12
September 11-12, 2007
Transportation for construction of roadway lighting on State Road 84
(Davis Boulevard).
5) Approve the purchase of 2.51 acres (Parcel #215) of unimproved
property which is required for the construction of a stormwater
retention and treatment pond for the Oil Well Road widening project.
Project No. 60044 (Fiscal Impact: $251,755.00)
6) Recommendation to approve an amendment to the Development
Agreement with Stock Development, LLC., (Developer) and Collier
County (County) to provide options for access and circulation to the
commercial parcels adjacent to Collier Boulevard and Grand Lely
Drive.
7) Recommendation to approve an Interlocal Agreement between the
School District of Collier County, collectively referred to as "District,
and Collier County, herein referred to as County, to construct the
traffic signal at the intersection of Veterans Memorial Boulevard and
Livingston Road.
8) Recommendation to approve an Interlocal Agreement between the
School District of Collier County collectively referred to as "District,
and Collier County, herein referred to as County, for improvements at
four elementary schools within Collier County.
9) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approve a
Resolution authorizing the Chairman of the Board of County
Commissioners to execute a Local Agency Program Supplemental
Agreement with the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT),
for the purchase and installation of prefabricated pedestrian bridges
crossing the Cocohatchee River and one of its tributaries on the west
side of Vanderbilt Drive within the existing right-of-way. ($586,500)
10) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approve a
Resolution authorizing the Chairman of the Board of County
Commissioners to execute a Local Agency Program Supplemental
Agreement with the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT),
for the purchase and installation of two (2) prefabricated pedestrian
bridges crossing the Santa Barbara Canal on both sides of Golden
Gate Parkway within the existing right-of-way. ($262,500)
Page 13
September 11-12, 2007
11) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approve a
Resolution authorizing the Chairman of the Board of County
Commissioners to execute a Local Agency Program Agreement with
the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT), in which Collier
County would be reimbursed up to $704,375 for the construction of
sidewalks on Roberts Avenue from North 9th Street to North 18th
Street (Dupree Drive) and on North 9th Street from State Route 29 to
Immokalee Drive. (Project # 601202)
12) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approve a
Resolution authorizing the Chairman of the Board of County
Commissioners to execute a Local Agency Program Agreement with
the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) in which Collier
County would be reimbursed up to $170,625 for the construction of a
sidewalk on North First Street from Roberts Avenue to State Route
29. (Project # 601202)
13) Approve the purchase of 2.81 acres of improved property which is
required for road right-of-way for the Vanderbilt Beach Road
Extension Project. Project No. 60168 (fiscal impact: $384,792.50)
14) Recommendation to approve Change Order No.2 to add $605,379.00
for continuing Inspection Services for PBS&J under ITN 05-3583
"CEI Services for Collier County Road Projects" for Project No.
66042B - Immokalee Road six laning project from US41 to 1-75.
15) Recommendation to approve a budget amendment in the amount of
$82,775 for a Work Oder to PBS&J to provide Professional Services
for the Palm River Unit #8 Stormwater Improvements (Project No.
511361)
16) Recommendation to approve a reconveyance ofa real property
interest in accordance with Section 255.22, Florida Statutes (Fiscal
Impact: None.)
17) Recommendation to Approve the FY 2007 Transit Development Plan
(TDP) Annual Progress Report.
Page 14
September 11-12, 2007
18) Recommendation to accept a funding agreement with the South
Florida Water Management District to share in a portion of the
construction costs of the Gateway Triangle Stormwater Improvement
Project in the amount of $1 00,000, Project 518031.
19) To present to the Collier County Board of County Commissioners for
approval, the additional paratransit operator selected by McDonald
Transit Management, Inc., operating as Collier Transit Management,
Inc., d/b/a! Collier Area Transit to perform paratransit services in
Collier County.
20) Report to the Board of County Commissioners outlining the year end
FY 2007 closure of certain MSTU Project Funds (Funds 132, 136,
150, 155, 156, and 160) which were identified within the approved FY
2006-2007 budget; request approval of all necessary FY 2007 Budget
Amendments intended to close said project funds; and direct the Clerk
of Courts Finance Section to transfer residual cash from each project
fund to the corresponding MSTU cost center fund ( Either Fund 142,
153,158, 159,162 and 163) established within the approved FY 2007
budget.
C. PUBLIC UTILITIES
1) Recommendation to adopt a Resolution acknowledging: (1) certain
specified actions related to the administration oflow interest State
Revolving Fund loans involving the exercise of independent judgment
thereby requiring Collier County Board of Commissioner approval
and (2) actions related thereto that are administrative or ministerial in
nature and authorizing the County Manager or his designee to take
appropriate action.
2) Recommendation to approve a Budget Amendment appropriating
additional revenue received in the Mandatory Trash Collection Fund
for trash collection services and Collier County Landfill tipping fees
during FY 2007. Fiscal impact to Fund (473), Mandatory Trash
Collection, is $410,500.
3) Recommendation to approve the acquisition of a 4,113 square foot
Utility and Access Easement near the southwest corner of 3811 7th
Avenue SW for a public water supply well site easement, at a cost not
Page 15
September 11-12, 2007
to exceed $25,500, Project Number 700661.
4) Reject the result of Bid #07-4147, attained by Jan Mac Construction,
Inc., for Acoustical Improvements at the Carica Pump Station, Project
Number 710081.
5) Recommendation to approve acquisition of Utility Easements required
for the replacement and rehabilitation of the water distribution system
serving Cypress and Dalton Mobile Home Parks on Auto Ranch Road
at an estimated cost not to exceed $2,200, Project Number 710103.
6) Recommendation to approve Change Order 4 to Contract 05-3766R
with Douglas N. Higgins, Inc. for the construction of a Pigging
Station for Immokalee Road 30-inch Force Main in the amount of
$135,594.00. Project 73943.
7) Approve an Assignment and Assumption Agreement between
lmmokalee Disposal Company, Inc. and Choice Environmental
Services of Collier, Inc. to assign and transfer to Choice
Environmental Services of Collier, Inc. all interest in the District II
Franchisee Agreement for solid waste recyclable materials, and yard
trash collection services with Collier County.
8) Approve payment of non-bid driveway related construction items to
NR Contractors Incorporated under Bid #05-3872 Repair of
Driveways.
D. PUBLIC SERVICES
1) Approval of Facility Use Agreements between Collier County Public
Library and Collier County Supervisor of Elections for use of Naples
Branch Library and East Naples Branch Library as polling precincts
and authorization for Library Director to sign the agreements.
2) Recommendation to approve the after-the-fact submittal of the
attached Wildflower grant application to the Florida Wildflower
Foundation to develop wildflower planting areas at Eagle Lakes
Community Park.
Page 16
September 11-12, 2007
3) Recommendation to approve a budget amendment appropriating
$40,000 from 306 reserves for entry road lighting upgrades at East
Naples Community Park.
4) Recommendation to enter into an Interlocal Agreement with The
School District of Collier County and to approve a project in the
amount not to exceed $400,000 to install lighting to improve existing
facilities associated with property at Veterans Memorial Elementary
School.
5) Recommendation to approve a Florida Recreation Development
Assistance Program(FRDAP)Grant Agreement in the amount of
$200,000 for development of Delasol Neighborhood Park and
necessary budget amendments.
6) Recommendation to approve a Florida Recreation Development
Assistance Program (FRDAP) Grant Agreement in the amount of
$200,000 for improvements to Golden Gate Community Park and
necessary Budget Amendments.
7) Recommendation to approve the after-the-fact submittal of the 2007
State of Florida Homeless Housing Assistance Grant known as
HHAG application to the Department of Community Affairs Office
on Homelessness.
8) Recommendation to approve a Florida Clean Vessel Act Grant
Agreement in the amount of$30,379 for development ofa Vessel
Pump Out Station at Caxambas Park and necessary budget
amendments.
9) Recommendation to approve the after-the-fact submittal of the
Community Libraries in Caring Program grant application to the
Florida Department of State, State Library and Archives of Florida for
a Immokalee Library Homework Help Grant, in the amount of
$10,000.
10) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approves,
and authorizes its Chairman to sign, a Resolution amending the State
Housing Initiative Partnership (SHIP) Local Housing Assistance Plan
(LHAP) for Fiscal Years 2007-2008, 2008-2009 and 2009-2010, as
Page 17
September 11-12, 2007
required by the Florida Housing Finance Corporation.
11) Recommendation to waive formal competition and to approve a
contract with Whitewater West Industries for supply and installation
of the 5th slide at Sun n Fun Lagoon in the amount of $180,000.
12) Recommendation for the Board to approve and authorize the
Chairman to sign the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD) entitlement funding agreements for Community
Development Block Grant (CDBG), HOME Investment Partnerships
(HOME), American Dream Downpayment Initiative (ADD!) and
Emergency Shelter Grant (ESG) funds for FY 2007-2008.
13) Recommendation to provide after-the-fact approval of a Certification
of Local Government Approval required for a Federal Emergency
Shelter Grant as requested by the Sheher for Abused Women and
Children.
14) Recommendation to authorize the Chairman to sign the agreement
between Collier County Board of County Commissioners and the
Area Agency on Aging for Southwest Florida, Inc. and approve a
budget amendment to reflect an increase of$2,158 in the Alzheimers
Disease Initiative program.
15) Recommendation to authorize the Chairman to sign the agreement
between Collier County Board of County Commissioners and the
Area Agency on Aging for Southwest Florida, Inc. for the Home Care
for the Elderly grant in the amount of$115,329 and approve a budget
amendment.
16) Recommendation to authorize the Chairman to sign the agreement
between Collier County Board of County Commissioners and Area
Agency on Aging for Southwest Florida, Inc. and approve budget
amendments to reflect an overall increase of$9,353 in the Community
Care for the Elderly program.
17) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approves,
and authorizes the Chairman to sign, a lien agreement with Marie
Alcime (Owner) for deferral of 100% of Collier County impact fees
for an owner-occupied affordable housing unit located at Lot 138,
Page 18
September 11-12, 2007
Independence Phase II.
18) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approves,
and authorizes the Chairman to sign, a lien agreement with Habitat for
Humanity of Collier County, Inc. (Developer) for deferral of 100% of
Collier County impact fees for an owner-occupied affordable housing
unit located at Lot 31, Trail Ridge.
19) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approves,
and authorizes the Chairman to sign, a lien agreement with Habitat for
Humanity of Collier County, Inc. (Developer) for deferral of 100% of
Collier County impact fees for an owner-occupied affordable housing
unit located at Lot 32, Trail Ridge.
20) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approves,
and authorizes the Chairman to sign, a lien agreement with Habitat for
Humanity of Collier County, Inc. (Developer) for deferral of 100% of
Collier County impact fees for an owner-occupied affordable housing
unit located at Lot 33, Trail Ridge.
21) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approves,
and authorizes the Chairman to sign, a lien agreement with Habitat for
Humanity of Collier County, Inc. (Developer) for deferral of 100% of
Collier County impact fees for an owner-occupied affordable housing
unit located at Lot 34, Trail Ridge.
22) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approves,
and authorizes the Chairman to sign, a lien agreement with Habitat for
Humanity of Collier County, Inc. (Developer) for deferral of 100% of
Collier County impact fees for an owner-occupied affordable housing
unit located at Lot 35, Trail Ridge.
23) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approves,
and authorizes the Chairman to sign, a lien agreement with Habitat for
Humanity of Collier County, Inc. (Developer) for deferral of 100% of
Collier County impact fees for an owner-occupied affordable housing
unit located at Lot 36, Trail Ridge.
24) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approves,
and authorizes the Chairman to sign, a lien agreement with Habitat for
Page 19
September 11-12, 2007
Humanity of Collier County, Inc. (Developer) for deferral of 100% of
Collier County impact fees for an owner-occupied affordable housing
unit located at Lot 130, Trail Ridge.
25) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approves,
and authorizes the Chairman to sign, a lien agreement with Habitat for
Humanity of Collier County, Inc. (Developer) for deferral of 100% of
Collier County impact fees for an owner-occupied affordable housing
unit located at Lot 168, Trail Ridge.
26) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approves,
and authorizes the Chairman to sign, a lien agreement with Habitat for
Humanity of Collier County, Inc. (Developer) for deferral of 100% of
Collier County impact fees for an owner-occupied affordable housing
unit located at Lot 169, Trail Ridge.
27) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approves,
and authorizes the Chairman to sign, a lien agreement with Habitat for
Humanity of Collier County, Inc. (Developer) for deferral of 100% of
Collier County impact fees for an owner-occupied affordable housing
unit located at Lot 170, Trail Ridge.
28) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approves,
and authorizes the Chairman to sign, a lien agreement with George
Langkil Jr. (Owner) for deferral of 100% of Collier County impact
fees for an owner-occupied affordable housing unit located at Lot 199,
Trail Ridge Naples.
29) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approves,
and authorizes the Chairman to sign, the annual Certification for
Implementation of Regulatory Reform Activities by the State Housing
Initiatives Partnership (SHIP) Program.
30) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approves,
and authorizes the Chairman to sign, a lien agreement with Anthony
McClain and Angelique McClain (Owners) for deferral of 100% of
Collier County impact fees for an owner-occupied affordable housing
unit located at Lot 201, Trail Ridge Naples.
Page 20
September 11-12, 2007
31) Recommendation to approve a request to apply for a Florida
Recreation Development Assistance Program Grant in the amount of
$200,000 for improvements to Immokalee Sports Complex.
32) Recommendation to authorize the Chairman to sign the agreement
between Collier County Board of County Commissioners and the
Area Agency on Aging of Southwest Florida, Inc. and approve budget
amendments to reflect an overall increase of $2,911 in the Older
Americans Act program.
E. ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
1) Recommendation to adopt a resolution approving the FY'08
Pay/Classification Plan providing a wage adjustment & a merit
increase on 10/1/07; to continue the creation/modification/deletion of
classifications/assignment of pay ranges from the FY'08
Pay/Classification Plan.
2) Report and Ratify Staff-Approved Change Orders and Changes to
Work Orders to Board-Approved Contracts.
3) Recommendation to approve Appendix 3 and 4 for the purchase of
additional SAP licenses according to the terms of the SAP Public
Services, Inc. Software End-User License Agreement. ($290,891.25)
4) To authorize payment of invoices submitted by Sunshine Pharmacy,
which were submitted out of alignment from the contract
requirements.
5) Recommendation to award contract 07- 4142 Fixed Term Value
Engineering Services to two firms.
6) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners authorize
the Human Resources Department to research, draft, and advertise an
amendment to the Collier County Fingerprinting Ordinance No. 04-52
to require fingerprinting for all Collier County employees and certain
County contract employees as defined by 125.580 I, Florida Statutes.
7) Recommend that the Board of County Commissioners approve
purchase of Stertil-Koni mobile automotive lift systems from Heavy-
Page 21
September 11-12, 2007
Duty Lift and Equipment as a sole source distributor without the
formal bid process in FY 2007 and FY 2008.
8) Recommendation to approve an Agreement for Sale and Purchase of
Lots II and 12 in the North Naples Research and Technology Park to
house an EMS Facility at a cost not to exceed $690,375, Project
Number 55170 I, and to approve commercial paper for the purchase of
the land and associated expenses, including preconstruction costs for
design modifications and civil engineering, in the net amount of
$875,000.
F. COUNTY MANAGER
1) Board ratification of Summary, Consent and Emergency Agenda
Items approved by the County Manager during the Board's scheduled
recess. (In Absentia Meetinl!: dated AUl!:ust 14, 2007)
a) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners
approves, and authorizes the Chairman to sign, a lien agreement
with Marco Bay Homes, LLC (BUILDER) and Cheriee Moore
(DEVELOPER) for deferral of 100% of Collier County impact
fees for an owner-occupied affordable housing unit located at
East 75' of the West 180' of Tract 66, Unit 42, Golden Gate
Estates.
b) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners
approves, and authorizes the Chairman to sign, a lien agreement
with Adis Esteves (Owner) for deferral of 100% of Collier
County impact fees for an owner-occupied affordable housing
unit located at Lot 118, Trail Ridge, Naples.
c) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners
approves, and authorizes the Chairman to sign, a lien agreement
with Mildania Hinojosa (Owner) for deferral of 100% of Collier
County impact fees for an owner-occupied affordable housing
unit located at Lot 73, Independence Phase II.
d) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners
approves, and authorizes the Chairman to sign, a lien agreement
with Jose Segura and Maria D. L. Segura (Owners) for deferral
Page 22
September 11-12, 2007
of 100% of Collier County impact fees for an owner-occupied
affordable housing unit located at Lot 144, Independence Phase
II.
e) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners
approves, and authorizes the Chairman to sign, a lien agreement
with Elsa Luevano (Owner) for deferral of 100% of Collier
County impact fees for an owner-occupied affordable housing
unit located at Lot 143, Independence Phase II.
f) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners
approves, and authorizes the Chairman to sign, a lien agreement
with Jean Joseph and Marie Joseph (Owners) for deferral of
100% of Collier County impact fees for an owner-occupied
affordable housing unit located at Lot 139, Independence Phase
II.
g) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners
approves, and authorizes the Chairman to sign, a lien agreement
with Marie Saint-Hilaire and Loundy Saint-Hilaire (Owners)
for deferral of 100% of Collier County impact fees for an
owner-occupied affordable housing unit located at Lot 130,
Independence Phase II.
h) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners
approves, and authorizes the Chairman to sign, a lien agreement
with Vanessa Duckworth (Owner) for deferral of 100% of
Collier County impact fees for an owner-occupied affordable
housing unit located at Lot 17, Trail Ridge, Naples.
i) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners
approves, and authorizes the Chairman to sign, a lien agreement
with Sadilia Frederic (Owner) for deferral of 100% of Collier
County impact fees for an owner-occupied affordable housing
unit located at Lot 137, Independence Phase II.
j) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners
approves, and authorizes the Chairman to sign, a lien agreement
with Clement Garcon and Idelette Garcon (Owners) for deferral
of 100% of Collier County impact fees for an owner-occupied
Page 23
September 11-12, 2007
affordable housing unit located at Lot 136, Independence Phase
II.
k) Recommendation to award Bid #07-4155 for the Installation of
"Bayshore Drive Irrigation Effluent Conversion" - to Hannula
Landscaping, Inc. in the amount of $217,354.04.
I) Recommendation that the Collier County Board of County
Commissioners (BCC) approve an Agreement between Florida
State University Board of Trustees (FSU) and Collier County,
Florida, implementing the FSU medical project (the project) in
Immokalee as approved by the Community Redevelopment
Agency (CRA) and the BCC on May 22,2007.
m) Recommendation to approve the purchase of one fixed-route
bus as a scheduled replacement to be operated by Collier Area
Transit ($336,326)
n) Recommendation to approve a budget amendment in the
amount of $2,056.89 to recognize additional revenue received
from the Area Agency on Aging for the Older American's Act
Title III-E program budget for FY 06-07.
0) Recommend Approval of Brochure Distribution Contract with
Florida Suncoast Tourism Promotions, Inc. in the amount of
$4,800.
p) Recommendation to approve Memorandum of Understanding
between Collier County and The Salvation Army.
q) Legal Support for Orangetree Utilities Case.
r) Recommendation to approve an agreement with the District
School Board of Collier County for transporting school-age
recreation program participants not to exceed $40,000.
s) Recommendation to approve a Budget Amendment in the
amount of $345,000, allowing a transfer of funds in the amount
of$165,000 from the Collier County Water-Sewer Operating
Fund (408) Reserve for Contingencies, $70,000 from
Page 24
September 11-12, 2007
Collections, $20,000 from Wastewater Administration, $35,000
from Irrigation Quality Maintenance, and $55,000 from
Irrigation Quality Administration for unanticipated operating
expenses incurred by both the North County Water
Reclamation Facility (NCWRF) and the South County Water
Reclamation Facility (SCWRF).
t) Recommendation to extend Contract #03-3444, "Janitorial
Services", with OneSource Facility Services, Inc. through
September 30th, 2007.
u) Recommendation to Approve a Blanket Purchase Order with
Siemens Water Technologies for Maintenance and Repair of
Odor Control Units at Both the North County Water
Reclamation Facility and the South County Water Reclamation
Facility, in the Amount of$ 129,980.
v) Recommendation to Approve an Agreed Order for Payment of
Expert Fees in Connection with Parcels 720, 820A, 820B and
920 in the Lawsuit Styled Collier County v. Elhanon Combs, et
a!., Case No. 03-2352-CA (Golden Gate Parkway, Project
#60027) Fiscal Impact: $11,760.25.
w) Report and Ratify Staff-Approved Change Orders and Changes
to Work Orders to Board-Approved Contracts.
x) Recommendation to approve an Agreed Order Awarding Expert
Fees and Costs as to Parcels 815 and 915 in the amount of
$1437.00 in the lawsuit styled Collier County v. Colonnade on
Collier Blvd. LLC., et a!., Case No. 05-109l-CA (South County
Regional Water Treatment Wellfield Project #70892). (Fiscal
Impact: $1437.00).
y) Recommendation to award contract 07-4135 to L3
Communications Inc.; EMA, Inc.; Executive Alliance Group,
Inc.; and Idea Integration Corp. for On-Call Project
Management for IT
z) Recommendation to approve a Lease Agreement with Cali
Realty Investment Corporation for the continued use of a
Page 25
September 11-12, 2007
building utilized by the Sheriffs SWAT Team at an annual cost
of $60,000.
aa) Recommendation to award Contract# 07-4 I 45,"Museum
Exhibit Design and Creation to Advanced Staging
Technologies, Inc., to Design, Fabricate and Install Educational
Exhibits at the Collier County Museum.
bb) Recommendation to award Work Order No. PBS-FT-3971-07-
16 under Contract No. 06-3971, "Annual Contract for General
Contractors Services", to Wall Systems, Inc. of Southwest
Florida, d/b/a/Professional Building Systems (PBS) for the
construction of the Primary Data Center in the amount of
$179,484.00.
cc) Recommendation to award Work Order No. WJV-FT-3971-07-
13 under Contract No. 06-3971, "Annual Contract for General
Contractors Services", to William 1. Varian Construction Co.
for the construction of the Backup Data Center, in the amount
of $199,149.00.
dd) To approve a budget amendment for $2,500,000.00 to reduce
the amount of transfer from the Solid Waste Disposal Fund to
the Solid Waste Capital Fund.
ee) Recommendation that Board of County Commissioners
approve a budget amendment in the amount of$52l,435.90 for
insurance proceeds received by the Collier County Airport
Authority to reconstruct the T-hangar building and the sheriffs
dwelling at Everglades Airpark that were damaged by hurricane
Wilma.
ff) Recommendation that Board of County Commissioners
approve a budget amendment associated with an increase of
$112,506 to a previously accepted Federal Aviation
Administration grant for the construction of Taxiway "c" at the
Immokalee Regional Airport
gg) Recommendation that the Collier County Board of County
Commissioners approve a budget amendment in the amount of
Page 26
September 11-12, 2007
$76, I 05.51 to fund the increased cost of construction for
Taxiway "c" at the Immokalee Regional Airport
hh) Recommendation to approve deductive Change Order No.2 in
the amount of$244,372.51 to Contract #07-4122 issued to
Vanderbilt Bay Construction, Inc. for the Naples Jail
Improvement Project.
2) Board ratification of Summary, Consent and Emergency Agenda
Items approved by the County Manager during the Board's scheduled
recess. (In Absentia Meetin2 dated AU2ust 28, 2007)
a) Recommendation to approve Memorandum of Understanding
between Collier County and Harry Chapin Food Bank under
emergency situations.
b) Recommendation to approve Memorandum of Understanding
between Collier County and Goodwill Industries of Southwest
Florida, Inc. under emergency situations.
c) Approve the necessary budget amendment to recognize and
appropriate revenue in the amount of $40,000 to purchase a lift
for the fire boat and to purchase fire truck equipment and minor
associated supplies needed to bring the vehicles into NFP A
compliance.
d) Report and ratify Property, Casualty, Workers' Compensation
and Subrogation Claims settled and/or closed by the Risk
Management Director pursuant to Resolution # 2004-15 for the
third quarter of FY 07.
e) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners
approves, and authorizes the Chairman to sign, a lien agreement
with Hector Velasco and Haida Castro de Velasco (Owners) for
deferral of 100% of Collier County impact fees for an owner-
occupied affordable housing unit located at Lot 2, Trail Ridge.
1) Recommendation to declare a vacant parcel of land on 10 acres
as surplus property and to take the appropriate steps to sell the
Page 27
September 11-12, 2007
property. Project #60 l7l.(Fiscal impact $300.00.)
g) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners
approves, and authorizes the Chairman to sign, a lien agreement
with Maccelus Emmanuel and Estermilia Hyppolite (Owners)
for deferral of 100% of Collier County impact fees for an
owner-occupied affordable housing unit located at Lot 6, Trail
Ridge.
h) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners
approves, and authorizes the Chairman to sign, a lien agreement
with Frances Jackson and Edward Jackson (Owners) for
deferral of 100% of Collier County impact fees for an owner-
occupied affordable housing unit located at Lot 115,
Independence Phase II.
i) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners
approves, and authorizes the Chairman to sign, a lien agreement
with Yves Multidor and Marie Multidor (Owners) for deferral
of 100% of Collier County impact fees for an owner-occupied
affordable housing unit located at Lot 197 Trail Ridge Naples.
j) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners
approves, and authorizes the Chairman to sign, a lien agreement
with Joseph Thermidor (Owner) for deferral of 100% of Collier
County impact fees for an owner-occupied affordable housing
unit located at Lot 26, Independence Phase II.
k) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners
approves, and authorizes the Chairman to sign, a lien agreement
with Nadeje Dumel (Owner) for deferral of 100% of Collier
County impact fees for an owner-occupied affordable housing
unit located at Lot 134, Independence Phase II.
I) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners
approves, and authorizes the Chairman to sign, a lien agreement
with Ermilus Doly and Emanette Doly (Owners) for deferral of
100% of Collier County impact fees for an owner-occupied
affordable housing unit located at Lot 149, Independence Phase
Page 28
September 11-12, 2007
II.
m) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners
approves, and authorizes the Chairman to sign, a lien agreement
with Rafael Bustamante and Margarita Bustamante (Owners)
for deferral of 100% of Collier County impact fees for an
owner-occupied affordable housing unit located at Lot 150,
Independence Phase II.
n) Recommendation to award Bid No. 07-4172, "Purchase and
Installation of Cat Cages for DAS" to Schroer Manufacturing
Company in $117,975.00
0) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners
approves, and authorizes the Chairman to sign, a lien agreement
with Jermila Griffin (Owner) for deferral of 100% of Collier
County impact fees for an owner-occupied affordable housing
unit located at Lot 115, Trail Ridge Naples.
p) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners
approves, and authorizes the Chairman to sign, a lien agreement
with Manuel Cueto and Anastacia Cueto (Owners) for deferral
of 100% of Collier County impact fees for an owner-occupied
affordable housing unit located at Lot 119 Trail Ridge Naples.
q) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners
approves, and authorizes the Chairman to sign, a lien agreement
with Rogelio Dominguez and Yanet Carracedo (Owners) for
deferral of 100% of Collier County impact fees for an owner-
occupied affordable housing unit located at Lot 123, Trail
Ridge Naples.
r) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners
approves, and authorizes the Chairman to sign, a lien agreement
with Onoyde Guerrero and Nilda Estrada (Owners) for deferral
of 100% of Collier County impact fees for an owner-occupied
affordable housing unit located at Lot 124, Trail Ridge Naples.
s) Recommendation to approve a $60,000 budget amendment to
cover unexpected salary expenses by the Isles of Capri
Page 29
September 11-12, 2007
Fire/Rescue.
t) Approve Budget Amendments.
u) Recommendation to approve Commercial Excavation permit
No. 59.800-3 "Improve the Lely Main Canal SW ofUS41 and
construct a spreader lake at the downstream end.", located in
Sections 19,23,24,25,26, & 36, Township 50 South, Ranges 25
& 26 East.
v) Approve a Budget Amendment for $49,680.00 to fund
increased costs to complete the transfer of thirty-six (36) acres
purchased for panther mitigation to the State Department of
Forestry, to satisfy the United States Army Corps of Engineers
permit requirements for development at the Immokalee
Regional Airport.
w) Recommendation to approve a Budget Amendment to
appropriate Building Maintenance Special Service revenues
totaling $159,856.19 for reimbursement of personal and
operating expenses in Fiscal Year 2007.
x) Recommendation to consent to the re-assignment of Contract
06-3995, "Employee Assistance Program" from the J.D. Allen
Group, Inc. to Horizon Behavioral Services.
y) Recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners to
accept terms of settlement agreement between the Department
of Children and Family Services and Immokalee Community
Park in the amount of$800.
z) Recommendation to approve a Budget Amendment in the
amount of $1 00,000 to transfer funds within the South County
Water Treatment Plant cost center from Personal Services to
Operating Expense to cover Fiscal Year 2007 sludge pond
cleaning costs.
aa) Recommendation to approve a budget amendment to transfer
funds in the amount of $120,200 from Operating Expenses to
Capital Outlay in the Road Maintenance MSTD General Fund
Page 30
September 11-12, 2007
(Ill)
bb) Approve a Budget Amendment for $2,200.00 to fund a change
order to complete the replacement ofthe Fuel Farm at the
Marco Island Executive Airport.
3) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approves
an Agreement with American Medical Academy, Inc., which would
allow paramedic students to participate in skill training and field
experiences under the supervision of the Collier County Emergency
Medical Services Department.
4) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners A ward
Bid #07-4158 in the amount of$58,300 for the Purchase and Delivery
of Pine Straw Mulch to Custom Pine Straw, Inc.
5) Recommendation to approve the annual five percent (5%) increase in
Consultant Fees for the Medical Director of Emergency Medical
Services as described in the Emergency Medical Services Medical
Consultant Contract for a total of $1 00,485 for FY 08.
6) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approve
budget amendments in the amounts of $20,000 to reduce the transfer
of excess funds from the Law Library Fund (640) to Court
Innovations Fund (192); reduce reserves in Court Innovations Fund
(192); and approve the purchase of books for the Law Library.
7) Recommendation to approve an Agreement between the Florida
Department of Community Affairs and Collier County accepting
$8,403 for the preparation of Hazards Analysis Reports for facilities
storing extremely hazardous substances within the County and
approve the Budget Amendment necessary to recognize and
appropriate $8,403 as revenue.
8) Recommendation to approve the Interlocal Agreements between
Collier County and East Naples Fire Control and Rescue District and
Collier County and North Naples Fire Control and Rescue District for
an Advanced Life Support Engine Partnership Program.
Page 31
September 11-12, 2007
9) Recommendation to adopt a resolution approving amendments
(appropriating grants, donations, contributions or insurance proceeds)
to the Fiscal Year 2006-07 Adopted Budget.
10) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approves
the attached Interagency Agreement between Collier County and the
Department of Juvenile Justice regarding confidentially ofrecords and
authorizes the Chairman to execute said agreement.
11) Recommendation to approve a Lease Agreement with North Naples
Fire Control and Rescue District for shared use of the Countys
Heritage Bay Public Safety Facility at no annual cost.
12) Recommendation to adopt a Resolution authorizing the borrowing of
an amount not to exceed $16,500,000 from the Pooled Commercial
Paper Loan Program of the Florida Local Government Finance
Commission pursuant to the loan agreement between the Board of
County Commissioners and the Commission in order to finance the
construction of the Collier County Sheriff's Special Operations
Building; authorizing the execution of a loan note or notes to evidence
such borrowing; agreeing to secure such loan note or notes with a
covenant to budget and appropriate legally available non-ad valorem
revenues as provided in the loan agreement; authorizing the execution
and delivery of such other documents as may be necessary to effect
such borrowing; and providing an effective date.
G. AIRPORT AUTHORITY AND/OR COMMUNITY
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
1) Recommendation for the Community Redevelopment Agency to
approve the purchase of a residential (mobile home) lot in the
Bayshore area of the CRA as part of a CRA residential infill project;
to approve payment from and authorize the CRA Chairman to make a
draw from the Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA Wachovia Bank Line
of Credit in the amount of $90,000 plus cost and expenses to complete
the sale of subject property; and approve any and all necessary budget
amendments. Site address: 4000 Harvest Court ($90,000).
H. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Page 32
September 11-12, 2007
1) Proclamation designating September 24,2007 as Family Day - A Day
to Eat Dinner with Your Children. To be mailed to Joseph A.
Califano, Jr., National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at
Columbia University.
2) Commissioner Coletta requests approval for reimbursement for
attending a function serving a valid public purpose. Commissioner
paid in advance to attend the Blue Foundation Grant/Provider's Staff
Appreciation Lunch on September 19,2007 and is requesting
reimbursement in the amount of$15.00, to be paid from his travel
budget.
3) Commissioner Fiala requests Board approval for reimbursement for
attending a function serving a valid public purpose. Will attend the
Naples Press Club: Taxes, Terror & Trenchcoats Luncheon on
Thursday, September 27,2007 at the Collier Athletic Club; $20.00 to
be paid from Commissioner Fiala's travel budget.
4) Commissioner Coletta requests approval for reimbursement for
attending a function serving a valid public purpose. Commissioner
paid in advance to attend and present awards at the EDC Amazing
Place - 2007 Excellence in Industry A wards Evening Gala Celebration
on September 13,2007 and is requesting reimbursement in the
amount of $40.00, to be paid from his travel budget.
5) Commissioner Coletta requests approval for reimbursement for
attending a function serving a valid public purpose. Commissioner
paid in advance to attend as Master of Ceremonies at the Southwest
Florida Workforce Development Board Awards Dinner on September
14,2007 and is requesting reimbursement in the amount of$25.00, to
be paid from his travel budget.
I. MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
1) To file for record with action as directed.
J. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
1) To obtain Board approval for disbursements for the period of July 07,
2007 through July 13,2007 and for submission into the official
Page 33
September 11-12, 2007
records of the Board.
2) To obtain board approval for disbursements for the period of July 14,
2007 through July 20, 2007 and for submission into the official
records of the board.
3) To obtain Board approval for disbursements for the period of July 21,
2007 through July 27,2007 and for submission into the official
records of the Board.
4) To obtain Board approval for disbursements for the period of July 28,
2007 through August 03,2007 and for submission into the official
records of the Board.
5) To obtain board approval for disbursements for the period of August
04, 2007 through August 10, 2007 and for submission into the official
records of the board.
6) To obtain Board approval for disbursements for the period of August
11, 2007 through August 17, 2007 and for submission into the official
records of the Board.
7) To obtain Board approval for disbursements for the period of August
18, 2007 through August 24, 2007 and for submission into the official
records of the Board.
8) Recommendation that the Board Of County Commissioners Approve
an Agreement Authorizing the Collier County Sheriffs Office to have
Traffic Control Jurisdiction over Private Roads within the Heritage
Greens Subdivision.
9) Recommend that the Board Authorize the Extension of the Tax Roll
Before Completion of the Value Adjustment Board Hearings Pursuant
to Section 197.323, F.S. Tax Collector's Request.
10) Authorize the Chairman to execute the sales order with Election
Systems and Software to purchase new voting system and to allow the
recognition of revenue from the Department of State and to approve a
budget amendment.
Page 34
September 11-12,2007
11) To obtain approval from the Board of County Commissioners to
prepay Community Development and Environmental Services capital
debt.
12) To obtain Board approval of EMS banking service fees associated
with outsourced billing processes with ADPI.
K. COUNTY ATTORNEY
1) Recommendation for the Board of County Commissioners to approve
and ratifY the payment of invoices from Garvin & Tripp for
professional services rendered in the litigation cases Brock v. Collier
County, et aI., Case No. 04-941 consolidated with Case Nos. 05-953
and 05-1506; and Collier County v. Brock, Case No. 07-1056, now
pending in the Twentieth Judicial Circuit.
2) Recommendation to Approve an Agreed Order Awarding Expert Fees
and Costs Relating to Parcel 163 in the Case Styled Collier County v.
Thomas F. Salzmann, et aI., Case No. 03-2550-CA (Golden Gate
Parkway Project #60027) (Fiscal Impact: $4,000.00).
3) Recommendation to approve a Stipulated Final Judgment for Parcel
Nos. 806 & 706 in the lawsuit styled CC v. James M. Brown, et aI.,
Case No. 06-0525-CA (Santa Barbara Boulevard Project No. 62081).
(Fiscal Impact $16,607.55)
4) Recommendation to approve a Stipulated Final Judgment for Parcel
129 in the lawsuit styled CC v. West Coast Development Corporation
of Naples, Inc., et a!., Case No. 06-0708-CA (Santa Barbara
Boulevard Project No. 62081). (Positive Fiscal Impact of $19,314.35).
5) Recommendation to Approve a Stipulated Final Judgment in the
Amount of $15,000.00 for the Acquisition of Parcel 815 in the
Lawsuit Styled Collier County v. Myrtle Preserve LLC, et a!., Case
No. 07-0463-CA (Lely Area Stormwater Improvement Project
#511011). Fiscal Impact: $6505.00)
6) Recommendation to approve a Mediated Settlement Agreement and
Stipulated Final Judgment for Parcel Nos. 127,827,727 A & 727B in
the lawsuit styled CC v. Napoli Luxury Condominiums P.O.A., Inc.,
Page 35
September 11-12, 2007
et aI., Case No. 06-l299-CA (County Barn Road Project No. 60101).
(Fiscal Impact $204,888)
7) Recommendation to adopt a resolution approving the County Attorney
Office 2008 Fiscal Year Pay and Classification Plan, providing for a
general wage adjustment and merit increase effective on October I,
2007 (the first day of the first pay period in Fiscal Year 2008).
8) Request by the Housing Finance Authority of Collier County for
approval of a resolution authorizing the Lee County Housing Finance
Authority to issue single-family mortgage revenue bonds to assist
qualified buyers of single family homes in participating counties,
including Collier County, and authorizing the Collier Authority to
enter into an interlocal agreement with the Lee Authority.
17. SUMMARY AGENDA - THIS SECTION IS FOR ADVERTISED PUBLIC
HEARINGS AND MUST MEET THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA: 1) A
RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL FROM STAFF; 2) UNANIMOUS
RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL BY THE COLLIER COUNTY
PLANNING COMMISSION OR OTHER AUTHORIZING AGENCIES OF
ALL MEMBERS PRESENT AND VOTING; 3) NO WRITTEN OR ORAL
OBJECTIONS TO THE ITEM RECEIVED BY STAFF, THE COLLIER
COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION, OTHER AUTHORIZING
AGENCIES OR THE BOARD, PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF
THE BCC MEETING ON WHICH THE ITEMS ARE SCHEDULED TO BE
HEARD; AND 4) NO INDIVIDUALS ARE REGISTERED TO SPEAK IN
OPPOSITION TO THE ITEM. FOR THOSE ITEMS, WHICH ARE QUASI-
JUDICIAL IN NATURE, ALL PARTICIPANTS MUST BE SWORN IN.
A. This item reQuires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte
disclosure be provided bv Commission members. Recommendation to
approve Petition A VPLAT-2007-AR-11897, to disclaim, renounce and
vacate the Countys and the Publics interest in a 14 foot wide Fire Access
Easement over Tract A4, Wilshire Lakes Phase Two, a subdivision as
recorded in Plat Book 27, Pages 24 through 27 of the Public Records of
Collier County, Florida, situated in Section 31, Township 48 South, Range
26 East, Collier County, Florida, and being more specifically described in
Exhibit A.
Page 36
September 11-12, 2007
B. Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners adopt a
Resolution revising the Collier County Water-Sewer District Utilities
Standards Manual and adopt an Ordinance to amend the Collier County
Utilities Standards and Procedures Ordinance.
C. This item reQuires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte
disclosure be provided bv Commission members. PUDEX-2005-AR-
8894,1-75 Associates, LLC, represented by Fred Reischl, AICP, of Agnoli,
Barber & Brundage, Inc., are requesting two 2-year PUD Extensions for the
Golden Gate Commerce Park PUD. The subject project is located on the
northwest quadrant of the intersection of Collier Boulevard (CR-95I ) and
Magnolia Pond Drive, in Section 34, Township 49 South, Range 26 East,
Collier County, Florida.
D. Recommendation to adopt resolutions approving the preliminary assessment
rolls as the final assessment rolls and adopting same as the non-ad valorem
assessment rolls for purposes of utilizing the uniform method of collection
pursuant to Section 197.3632, Florida Statutes, for Solid Waste Municipal
Service Benefit Units, Service District No. I and Service District No. II,
Special Assessment levied against certain residential properties within the
unincorporated area of Collier County pursuant to Collier County Ordinance
2005-54, as amended. Revenues are anticipated to be $17,288,400.
E. This item reQuires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte
disclosure be provided bv Commission members. Recommendation to
approve Petition A VESMT-2007-AR-11657, to disclaim, renounce and
vacate the County's and the Publics interest in a 20 foot wide Lake
Maintenance Easement, Irrigation Easement & Drainage Easement over a
portion of Lot 97, Lot 98, and Tract K, Marbella Lakes, a subdivision as
recorded in Plat Book 46, Pages 77 through 82 of the Public Records of
Collier County, Florida, situated in Section 19, Township 49 South, Range
26 East, Collier County, Florida, and being more specifically described in
Exhibit A.
F. This item reQuires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte
disclosure be provided bv Commission members. Petition: PUDEX-2005-
AR-7944 Victoria Estates, Ltd., represented by R. Bruce Anderson, of
Roetzel & Andress and Ralph Abercia, represented by Richard Y ovanovich,
of Goodlette, Coleman & Johnson, are requesting two 2-year PUD extension
of the Collier Boulevard Mixed Use Commerce Center PUD. The subject
Page 37
September 11-12, 2007
property, consisting of70.2 acres, is located in the southwest quadrant of the
intersection of Collier Boulevard and Magnolia Pond Drive, in Section 34,
Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida.
18. ADJOURN
Page 38
September 11-12, 2007
September 11 - 12, 2007
MR. MUDD: Ladies and gentlemen, if you'd please take your
seats.
Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, you have a hot mike.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you, Mr. Mudd.
Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to the Board of Collier County
Commissioners' regular meeting on September 11, 2007.
We'll begin this meeting as we begin all our meetings, with an
invocation. And the invocation today will be given by Captain
Castillo from the Salvation Army.
Sir, would you please come forward.
Please stand.
CAPTAIN CASTILLO: Let's pray. We pray today as we
remember that from the ashes will rise a new spirit of beauty and unity
in America. Already all across this nation, our hearts have been united
together into a new tapestry of one America.
Because of this tragedy, we have been bound together by a silver
correl, hope in brothers and sisterhood. For what's made to drive us
apart has already drawn us together, may we also remember, amen.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Fiala, would you lead
us in the Pledge of Allegiance.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'd be happy to.
(The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you.
Mr. Mudd, turn this over to you --
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
Item #2A
APPROVAL OF TODA Y'S REGULAR, CONSENT AND
SUMMARY AGENDA AS AMENDED - APPROVED AND OR
ADOPTED W /CHANGES
Page 2
September 11 - 12, 2007
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: -- for the changes to the agenda.
MR. MUDD: Any changes, Board of County Commissioners'
meeting, September 11, 2007.
Item 10D. In the executive summary, the first sentence under
considerations should read, on November 7, 2006, a majority of all
qualified registered electors within the boundaries of the Forest Lakes
roadway and drainage MSTU approved a referendum for the issuance
of general obligation bonds and finance -- to the construction of
certain capital improvements within the Forest Lakes municipal
services taxing unit, MSTU.
Also, the financial impact should read, the pledge for this bond is
the Forest Lakes MSTU tax levy as approved by the voter referendum
not to exceed four mills.
The final maturity of these bonds will be January 1,2022, and
that clarification is at Commissioner Coyle's request.
The next item is to add item 1OL. It's a request to the Collier
County Board of County Commissioners for approval of a resolution
clarifying the county's prior 2002 resolution regarding use of interest
earned on the investment of county funds, and that add is at staffs
request.
Next item is item 16A23. The legal considerations portion of the
executive summary was omitted and should read as follows: The draft
letter, dated September 12, 2007, terminating the intergovernmental
agreement between the county and the Department of Environmental
Protection dated March 24,2004, meets the termination requirements
of paragraph six of that agreement, and that clarification is at staffs
request.
Next item is to withdraw item 16B16. That's a recommendation
to approve a re-conveyance of a real property interest in accordance
with section 255.22 of the Florida Statutes, fiscal impact none. That
item is being withdrawn at the petitioner's request.
The next item is 16D 1. This item should be amended to seek
Page 3
September 11 - 12, 2007
approval of facility use agreements between Collier County, Florida,
and the Collier County Supervisor of Elections for use of the Naples
branch library and the East Naples branch library as polling precincts
and for authorization for the chairman of the Board of Commissioners
to sign the agreements rather than the library director, and that
clarification is also at staffs request.
The next item is to withdraw item 16D4. That's a
recommendation to enter into an interlocal agreement with the school
district of Collier County and approve a project in the amount not to
exceed $400,000 to install lighting to improve existing facilities
associated with property at Veterans Memorial Elementary School,
and that is being withdrawn at staffs request.
The next item is to move item 16D 11 to 10M, and that's a
recommendation to waive formal competition and approve a contract
with White Water West Industries for the supply and installation of
the fifth slide at Sun-N-Fun Lagoon in the amount of$180,000, and
this item is being moved at Commissioner Fiala's request.
Then we have some time certain items, Commissioners, for
today. And we have a time certain item for tomorrow.
The first is item 9 A to be heard Wednesday, September 12, 2007,
at nine a.m. Board of Commissioners to interview county attorney
recruitment search firms.
The next item with a time certain is item 10C to be heard -- and
all the ones that I'm going to talk about following have a time certain
on or at 11 a.m. for today.
This is 10C to be heard at 11 a.m. following item 14A and 14B.
And when you talk about 14A and 14B, you'll be wearing the hat of
the CRA.
It's a recommendation for Collier County Commission, BCC, to
approve a resolution authorizing the Collier County Community
Redevelopment Agency, CRA, to enter into a $9 million revolving
line of credit agreement with Wachovia Bank approving the actions
Page 4
September 11 - 12, 2007
taken by the CRA with respect to its approval of the line of credit
agreement, and authorize all necessary budget amendments.
Item lOD, also to be heard on or about 11 a.m., is a resolution of
the Board of Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, acting as the
governing body of Collier County, Florida, and the Forest Lakes
roadway and drainage MSTU unit, authorizing the issuance of, not to
exceed, $6,250,000 in aggregate principal amount of Collier County,
Florida, limited general obligation bonds, which is the Forest Lakes
roadway and drainage municipal services taxing unit, series 2007, to
finance the cost of certain roadway lighting, roadway related drainage,
and roadway restoration within the Forest Lakes MSTU, and to pay
certain costs and expenses incurred with the issuance of the series
2007 bonds.
For simplicity and because of the length, this is not the complete
title. It runs almost a page, and we'll read that later when we get to it.
But again, item 10D, on or about 11 a.m. this morning.
Next item is item 14A to be heard, again, at 11 a.m., and it's to be
heard prior to the companion, 10C. It basically talks about that $9
million loan. And in this capacity at 14A, the board would be acting
as the CRA.
Next item is to move item l6Gl to 14B, which would be heard
on or about 11 a.m. by the CRA immediately following 14A, and it's a
recommendation for Community Redevelopment Agency to approve
the purchase of a residential mobile home lot in the Bayshore area of
the CRA as part of a CRA residential infill project, to approve
payment from and authorize the CRA chairman to make a draw from
the Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA, Wachovia Bank line of credit in
the amount of $90,000 plus costs and expenses, to complete the sale of
subj ect property and approve any and all necessary budget
amendments.
The site address is 4000 Harvest Court, and the price is $90,000.
And this item is being moved at staffs request, and it all has to talk
Page 5
September 11 - 12, 2007
about the line of credit in the Supreme Court case, and we'll discuss
that in great length at 11 a.m.
That's all I have, Mr. Chairman, Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you, Mr. Mudd.
Mr. Weigel, anything on today's agenda?
MR. WEIGEL: Just one note, thank you, and that is, at the last
meeting I discussed with the board, the board discussed with me, a
desire to go forward with a closed session relating to the fee officer,
budget officer lawsuit with the clerk, and all preparation had been
done pursuant to the sunshine law to go forward today for a closed
session at noon.
Everything was prepared for the agenda. You'll note that it's not
in the agenda because I had received communication of a desire not to
go forward with that.
The county attorney is always available to hear from
commissioners and the board in regard to going forward pursuant to
the closed session aspect of the sunshine law board. And if the board
should have desire at any future meeting, including the next meeting,
we can prepare to do that. But it's not in the agenda today. Thank
you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you, Mr. Weigel.
Now it's time for the commissioners, for their ex parte disclosure
on the summary and consent agenda, and changes to the regular
agenda.
And with that, we'll start with Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Just a question or clarification
on today's regular agenda. On the Source 1 contract, that's an RFP.
Has the contract for '08 been -- is it in part of our agenda today?
MR. MUDD: Is the Source 1 '08 contract, yes, sir. It's under
item 10, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. That's an RFP, so it's
actually the contract also.
Page 6
September 11 - 12, 2007
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I have ex par -- communication
on today's summary agenda, 17C, Golden Gate Commerce Park. I
met with the petitioner and his representative. Also would note the
same on 17F.
That's all I have.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you, Commissioner Henning.
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I have -- 17C, Golden Gate
Commerce Park, I did meet with the petitioner and his -- and his
representative. And I also have 16A2l, which is Silver Lakes. We've
discussed it a number of times here on the commission as well, but
I've also met with the people involved and with the owner of Silver
Lakes, and I think everything has been resolved.
So I just -- you know, I don't want to pull it or anything. I'm just
declaring that I have met with them.
Vineyards, 16A1l, I also have had a meeting with them. And
lastly item -- oh, no. 7 A is different. Okay, thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you, Commissioner Fiala.
And I myself have -- l6A21 I've received emails on. l7C, had
meetings, correspondence. And just to play it safe, next to the last
page here. And that concludes my disclosures.
Commissioner Halas.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Good morning, Commissioners --
good morning, Commissioners, it's good to be back.
As far as my ex parte on the consent and summary agenda as
follows: 16A11, I've had no disclosures on that; 16A19, no
disclosures; 16A2l, in the past I've had meetings and emails in regards
to that item; and 16A24, no disclosures.
As far as the summary agenda, nothing on -- excuse me. On 17 A
I did have meetings and correspondence and email, and on 17C I have
no disclosures. 17E, I have no disclosures, and also no disclosures on
AGENDA CHANGES
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' MEETING
September 11. 2007
Item 10D: In the executive summary, the first sentence under Considerations should read: "On
November 7, 2006 a majority of all qualified registered electors within the boundaries of the
Forest lakes Roadway and Drainage MSTU approved a referendum for the issuance of general
obligation bonds to finance the construction of certain capital improvements within the Forest
lakes Municipal Services Taxing Unit (MSTU)." Also, the Fiscal Impact should read: "The
pledge for this bond is a Forest lakes MSTU tax levy as approved by voter referendum not to
exceed 4.0000 mills. The final maturity of these bonds will be January 1, 2022." (Commissioner
Coyle's request.)
Add Item 10l: Request to the Collier County Board of County Commissioners for approval of a
Resolution clarifying the County's prior 2002 Resolution regarding use of interest earned on the
investment of County funds. (Staffs request.)
Item 16A23: The "legal Considerations" portion of the Executive Summary was omitted and
should read as follows: "The draft letter, dated September 12, 2007, terminating the
Intergovernmental Agreement between the County and the Department of Environmental
Protection dated March 24, 2004, meets the termination requirements of Paragraph 6 of that
Agreement. (Staffs request.)
Withdraw Item 16B16: Recommendation to approve a reconveyance of a real property interest in
accordance with Section 255.22, Florida Statutes (Fiscal Impact: None.) (Petitioner's request.)
Item 16D1: This item should be amended to seek approval of Facility Use Agreements between
Collier County, Florida and the Collier County Supervisor of Elections for use of the Naples
Branch Library and the East Naples Branch Library as polling precincts and for authorization for
the Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners to sign the agreements (rather than the
Library Director.) (Staffs request.)
Withdraw Item 16D4: Recommendation to enter into an Interlocal Agreement with the School
District of Collier County and to approve a project in the amount not to exceed $400,000 to install
lighting to improve existing facilities associated with property at Veterans Memorial Elementary
School. (Staffs request.)
Move Item 16D11 to 10M: Recommendation to waive formal competition and to approve a
contract with Whitewater West Industries for supply and installation of the 5th slide at Sun-N-Fun
lagoon in the amount of $180,000. (Commissioner Fiala's request.)
Time Certain Items:
Item 9A to be heard Wednesday. September 12.2007 at 9:00 a.m.: Board of County
Commissioners to interview County Attorney Recruitment search firms.
Item 10C to be heard at 11 :00 a.m. followinQ Item 14A and 14B: Recommendation for the Collier
County Board of Commissioners (BCC) to approve a Resolution authorizing the Collier County
Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) to enter into a $9,000,000 Revolving Line of Credit
Agreement with Wachovia Bank; approving the actions taken by the CRA with respect to its
approval of the Line of Credit Agreement; and authorize all necessary budget amendments.
Item 10D to be heard on or about 11 :00 a.m.: A Resolution of the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier Count y, Florida, acting as the Governing Body of Collier County,
Florida and the Forest Lakes Roadway and Drainage Municipal Service Taxing Unit, authorizing
the issuance of not exceeding $6,250,000 in aggregate principal amount of Collier County, Florida
Limited General Obligation Bonds (Forest Lakes Roadway and Drainage Municipal Service Taxing
Unit), Series 2007, to finance the costs of certain roadway lighting, roadway-related drainage and
roadway restoration within the Forest Lakes MSTU and to pay certain costs and expenses
incurred with the issuance of the Series 2007 Bonds; (For simplicity and because of the length,
this is not the complete title.)
Item 14A to be heard at 11:00 a.m. and to be heard prior to companion Item 10C:
Recommendation that the Collier County Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) approve
selection of Wachovia Bank to provide a $9,000,000 Revolving Line of Credit to purchase real
property and finance various capital improvement projects within the Bayshore Gateway Triangle
CRA; approve a Resolution approving the form of a Line of Credit Agreement and Master Note;
authorize the CRA Chairman to sign other documents in connection therewith and make draws
against the Line of Credit as needed: pledge Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA Tax Increment
Funds (TIF) and other legally available moneys as the loan repayment source; and authorize all
necessary budget amendments. (David Jackson, Executive Director, Bayshore Gateway Triangle
CRA.)
Move Item 16G1 to 14B. which will be heard at 11:00 by CRA immediately followinQ Item 14A:
Recommendation for the Community Redevelopment Agency to approve the purchase of a
residential (mobile home) lot in the Bayshore area of the CRA as part of a CRA residential infill
project; to approve payment from and authorize the CRA Chairman to make a draw from the
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA Wachovia Bank Line of Credit in the amount of $90,000 plus cost
and expenses to complete the sale of subject property; and approve any and all necessary
budget amendments. Site address: 4000 Harvest Court ($90,000). (Staffs request.)
September 11 - 12, 2007
l7F.
And that's all I have, and I'm satisfied with today's agenda.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you, Commissioner Halas.
Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Mr. Chairman, I have no further
changes to the agenda.
With respect to the consent agenda, I have ex parte disclosure for
16A21, which is the final plat of Silver Lakes phase 2-G. I received
emails concerning that item.
On the summary agenda, for both 17C, which is a two-year PUD
extension -- or two two-year PUD extensions for the Golden Gate
Commerce Park PUD, and two two-year PUD extensions for the
Collier Boulevard mixed-use commerce center under 17N. In both of
those cases I have met with the petitioner and his agents, and they
include Mr. Bruce Anderson, Randy Benderson, and Dave Gustafson.
And that concludes my disclosure.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you, Commissioner Coyle.
And with that, can I get in a motion for the approval of today's
regular, consent, and summary agenda as amended.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So moved.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: So moved.
Page 8
September 11 - 12,2007
Item #2B, #2C, and 2D
MINUTES OF JULY 24, 2007 - BCC/REGULAR MEETING; JULY
25,2007 - (CONTINUATION OF JULY 24,2007 BCC MEETING);
JULY 25, 2007 - VALUE ADJUSTMENT BOARD MEETING
APPROVED AS PRESENTED
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And also the July 24,2007, BCC
regular meeting; the July 25,2007, BCC regular meeting that was
continued to July 24,2007; and the July 25,2007, Value Adjustment
Board Meeting. And do I have a motion?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. You want two motions for
those, one for today's agenda and changes and then --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Can we have that all in one motion,
Mr. Weigel?
MR. WEIGEL: Yes, you may.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. I think you have a motion
and second by Commissioner Halas and a second by me.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Then we recognize the motion
maker and the second.
And with that, any discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Seeing none, all those in favor,
indicate by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And the ayes have it unanimously.
Page 9
September 11 - 12, 2007
Okay. Mr. Mudd?
Item #3A
SERVICE AWARDS
MR. MUDD: Sir, that brings us to service awards, and this has
to do with advisory -- advisory members today. We are very fortunate
to have hopefully five here today to receive awards.
The first recipient is Lowell Lam, and he is -- and he has done
five years worth of great work for the utility authority. Mr. Lam.
(Applause.)
MR. MUDD: Sir, I believe that Commissioner Coletta's got
something to give you, sir.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Right over here. It's my pleasure to
give you this pin, and we thank you very much for your service to the
county.
MR. LAM: My pleasure.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: It's been our pleasure. Without your
contribution, we wouldn't be able to do it.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Thank you for your service.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Mr. Lam, thank you so much.
MR. MUDD: Mr. Lam, if we could get a picture, please. I
promise you we can get you a copy of it.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: This won't hurt.
MR. LAM: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you, sir.
(Applause.)
MR. MUDD: The next recipient of advisory committee service
award is Jerry Morgan. It's for five years worth of hard work, again,
for utility authority. Mr. Morgan?
(Applause.)
Page 10
September 11 - 12,2007
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Thank you and congratulations.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Oh, sir.
MR. MUDD: We've got to get a picture.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Mr. Morgan, if we could get you to
stand right back here, we'd like to get a picture. Save it for the rest of
your life.
(Applause.)
MR. MUDD: The next-five year recipient is Sheri Barnett, and
it's for five years on the code -- on the Collier County Code
Enforcement Board.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: IfI was on that end of the dias, I
could give you a hug.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well deserved.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So good to see you.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You guys do a good job.
(Applause.)
MR. MUDD: The next recipient is Robert Mulhere for five years
worth of work on the Development Services Advisory Committee.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Good morning, Robert.
Congratulations.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you.
(Applause.)
MR. MUDD: And the next recipient is Ann Keller for five years
worth of hard work on the Contractor's Licensing Board. Ms. Keller?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We'll catch up with that one later.
MR. MUDD: Okay. And that completes our service awards for
today, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: By the way, if anyone would like
Page 11
September 11 - 12, 2007
autographed copies of those pictures, they can be had for an extra five
dollars.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And for $10, we'll remove
Commissioner Coyle's face out of the picture.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: They'll pay for that.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I know. It's going to be a long day.
Item #4A
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING PATRIOT DA Y - ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioners, that brings us to proclamations.
Our first proclamation today is very appropriate for the day. I
remember six years ago when we were in this exact room when we
found out that the Twin Towers had been struck, so it brings back
some not -- that day it wasn't some very good memories, but this is a
very appropriate proclamation today.
It's a proclamation for Patriot Day to be accepted by Greg Speers,
Kevin Rambosk, Jim Elson, Peter Kraley, and Don Peacock.
Gentlemen, could you please come forward.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Gentlemen, it's a pleasure to
present this proclamation for you to receive today.
Whereas, in December 2001, Congress approved a joint
resolution to designate September 11 of each year as Patriot Day; and,
Whereas, during this observance, Americans are urged to
remember those who perished in the terrorist attacks of September the
11th, 2001 and never forget how Americans responded in New York
City, at the Pentagon and in the skies over Pennsylvania with heroism
and self-sacrifice; and,
Whereas, on that day and its aftermath, we saw the greatness of
America and the bravery of the victims, in the heroism of first
responders who laid down their lives to save others, in the compassion
Page 12
September 11 - 12, 2007
of people who stepped forward to help those they had never met, and
in the generosity of millions of Americans who enriched our country
with acts of service and kindness;
Whereas, from the tragedy of September the 11 th emerged a
stronger nation, renewed by a spirit of national pride and a true love of
country; and,
Whereas, those whom we lost on that tragic day will forever hold
a cherished place in our hearts and in the history of our nation; and,
Whereas, as we remember September 11, 2001, we reaffirm the
vows made in the earliest hours of our grief and anger. As liberty's
home and defender, America will not tire, will not falter, and will not
fail in fighting for the safety and security of the American people and
a world free from terrorism; and,
Whereas, the Board of County Commissioners would like to
recognize our Armed Forces who have pursued the war against
terrorism with valor and skill and join the president of the United
States in officially recognizing today as Patriot Day.
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that September 11, 2007,
be designated as Patriot Day.
Done and ordered on this 11th day of September, 2007, Board of
County Commissioners, Collier County, Florida, James Coletta,
Chairman.
Mr. Chairman, I make a motion we accept this proclamation.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I have a motion by Commissioner
Coyle and a second by Commissioner Halas.
Any -- any discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: All those in favor, indicate by saying
eye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
Page 13
September 11 - 12,2007
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you very much. The ayes
have it unanimously.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And do we have a spokesperson in
the group?
MR. ELSON: 1'11 say a few words.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And on your way up, Commissioner
Fiala would like to make a comment.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, if you don't mind.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Please do.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. I mentioned to Jim --
Commissioner Coletta a few minutes ago, I just wanted to say that as
we sat here this morning and I looked at the time, I remembered
exactly that day, we were all sitting here then.
And Mr. Mudd was sitting in Leo's seat and Tom Olliff was the
county manager, and we saw him answer the telephone -- usually
people don't call in here -- and his face looked odd, and he furiously
wrote something and handed it to the chairman and he passed it all
down.
A plane had hit one of the towers. And we thought, oh, my
heavens, what a horrible accident. We continued on, and within a very
short time he got another call and this time his face looked very grim,
and that's when we heard about another plane, and then -- and then
another.
And by this time, it was hard for us to concentrate on what was
going on in the room because all we could think about was, our nation
Page 14
September 11 - 12, 2007
is under attack. And we were sitting here, but we wanted to know
what was going on, we wanted to sit by a television and watch, as I'm
sure everybody else was doing at the same time. It was such a fateful
day.
And I remember it was so hard to concentrate on each and every
person's concerns, as valid and as much as it meant to them, because
all we could think of is today our nation is changing forever. And I
just wanted to express that this morning. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you, Commissioner Fiala.
And I think we all agree that our nation was under attack at that time
and it remains under attack as we speak today.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, it does.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: With that, we thank you very much
for being here today.
MR. ELSON: Thank you, Commissioners. And on behalf of the
Veterans Council and the fire and police, emergency services, we
support this proclamation and appreciate your issuance of it.
One of the things, as president of the Veterans Council the last
five years, I've had the distinct honor of meeting the young men and
women from Collier County who have volunteered to join the military
service, who have gone overseas to fight the battle and to support the
troops, whether it be overseas or in the United States, but something
new has happened is that these veteran soldiers are coming back to
live in Collier County.
Twenty years ago when I came here that was not the case, but
now we have a new group of residents within Collier County that have
gone off to fight and serve our country and then come back to Collier
County to raise their family and to become good citizens of this great
town.
So with that, it's my pleasure to work and to greet these folks to
come back. They very much appreciate the support of our town.
Thank you.q
Page 15
September 11 - 12, 2007
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Jim, before you leave --
MR. ELSON: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- could you remind our listeners
and those in the audience about the memorial ceremony to be held this
afternoon.
MR. ELSON: Yes. The Veterans Council, along with police and
emergency services, has organized a memorial service to be held at
5:30 today at the First Baptist Church auditorium, which is at Orange
Blossom special-- special? That's the train -- Orange Blossom Drive.
It should be on the train -- Orange Blossom Drive and Livingston
Road.
We have speakers that will be there from the fire department in
New York City, Mr. Jonas, who was involved in the rescue, a survivor
that was on the 71st floor of the North Tower, a representative from
the police department, and from our point in the military, an Air Force
officer who was at Pentagon during its rebuilding rededication, who
also served as a troop commander in Iraq and is now with central
command and is coming here specifically for our program.
So I believe it will be a wonderful and appropriate remembrance.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Thank you, Jim. Thank all of you.
MR. ELSON: Thank you, Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: With that note --
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I think everyone here on the
commission plans to attend that particular event, so why don't we
make a definite time certain that we're going to end the meeting,
continue it again tomorrow, quarter of five; that would give us 45
minutes to be able to get there, park, and get into place; is that
agreeable?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, that's good.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's great. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yep.
Page 16
September 11 - 12,2007
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you.
Item #4 B
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING MR. PETER THOMAS DAY,
TO HONOR MR. PETER THOMAS FOR HIS UNSELFISH
DEDICATION AND SERVICE TO THE COMMUNITY-
ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to our next
proclamation for today. It's a proclamation for Mr. Peter Thomas
Day, to honor Mr. Peter Thomas for his unselfless (sic) service and
service to the community, and we're also glad the person to accept it is
Mr. Peter Thomas. Mr. Thomas, if you could please come forward.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We would love to have you say a
couple words, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Be blessed to hear your voice.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Ifwe could get you to just stand here
for a moment.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Ladies and gentlemen, it gives me
great pleasure to read this proclamation for Peter Thomas, a great
patriot, a great supportive citizen, generous citizen of Collier County.
He's done much for our community, he and his wife Stella. So I will
read this proclamation.
Whereas, on behalf of Collier County residents, the Collier
County Board of County Commissioners would like to recognize Mr.
Peter Thomas for the significant philanthropic contributions he has
made; and,
Whereas, Mr. Thomas's dedication to his country became
apparent many years ago when he joined the army in 1943 and was
assigned to the First Infantry Division in Europe; and,
Page 1 7
September 11 - 12, 2007
Whereas, Mr. Thomas was selected as one of the 28 replacement
soldiers in his unit and was sent to Omaha Beach on June the 7th
1944, the day after the infamous World War II D-Day invasion and
went on to earn a bronze star, a Purple Heart, five battle stars, the
French Croix de Guerre, and the French Legion of Honor medal,
among many other medals and service awards; and,
Whereas, his life-altering experience as a soldier gave him a
deeper appreciation for fellow service members, his country, and
freedom; and,
Whereas, he is a devoted veteran who has dedicated himself to
improving the community through volunteer charitable work as well
as serving in many local and national boards, including the National
D-Day Memorial Foundation, the MIA Society, the Collier County
Veterans Council, and the Veterans Scholarship Fund at Hodges
University, as well as in the 50th anniversary Veterans of Naples
Parade; and,
Whereas, Mr. Thomas is a well-known narrator of television
programs, including Nova and the Forensic Files, who volunteered to
record a 30-second commercial for the Collier County Freedom
Memorial which will air on local television stations and it is available
in Collier County government's website; and,
Whereas, the Collier County Board of County Commissioners
would like to officially recognize Mr. Thomas for his unselfish
dedication and service to our community.
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that September 11,2007,
be designated as Mr. Peter Thomas Day.
Done and ordered on this 11th day of September, 2007, Board of
County Commissioners, Collier County, Florida, James Coletta,
Chairman.
Mr. Chairman, I make a motion we approve this proclamation.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second.
Page 18
September 11 - 12, 2007
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We have a motion by Commissioner
Coyle and a second by Commissioner Henning.
All those in favor, indicate by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And the ayes have it unanimously.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And I would also like to recognize
Stella Thomas. She's in the audience today.
(Applause.)
MR. THOMAS: I'd like to add, she's been my companion for 61
years.
(Applause.)
MR. THOMAS: Chairman Coletta and fellow commissioners,
thank you so much for this honor. It means so much. And I know that
I speak for all veterans when I thank you for the Freedom Memorial. It
will mean so much to all the veterans of Collier County, their families,
and everyone.
Fred Coyle, a fellow combat veteran, thank you for everything
you've done to bring this about, and also another loyal veteran, Sandra
Arnold, who has worked so hard recording and preserving the stories
of our Collier County veterans. Thank you, Sandra.
It is 9/11 day, a day we remember and honor those who died and
those who did so much to help others. On that day six years ago, I
wrote a poem about 9/11.
Page 19
September 11 - 12, 2007
New York. That skyline. Oh, how it stirred the soul. An open
door to the poor, to the downtrodden of the world, a beacon of hope,
the last farewell to those men and women sailing off to war. A
welcome home to those who returned.
New York. For over 50 years I've walked its streets, ridden
through miles of underground tunnels, reveled in the majesty of its
tallest buildings and the beauty of all its seasons.
New York. It's vibrancy, its excitement, its uniqueness, its
generosity, its art, its theater, its churches and synagogues, its spirits,
the opportunity, the fulfillment it has given to millions.
We have all been wounded, flames of death, crashing steel and
mortar, the breath of life snuffed out, a gray brooding cloud settling
around us, death, destruction, pictures seared into our memories.
The furry of hatred has invaded our land. America, attacked by
cowardly vipers whose fangs struck deep, so many dead, innocent
men, women and children, families left behind, our lives shattered, our
world changed forever.
But with God's help we will rise again. With God's help, we will
mend. With God's help, we will heal rededicating ourselves to
courage, duty, freedom, justice to the values our nation holds dear.
God bless New York, God bless America, the land ofthe free.
Thank you so much.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Thank you, Peter.
(Applause.)
Item #4C
PROCLAMA nON DESIGNATING COLLIER COUNTY
FIREFIGHTER APPRECIA nON WEEK - ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, the next proclamation is a
proclamation for Collier County Firefighters Appreciation Week, to be
Page 20
September 11 - 12,2007
accepted by Angelique Flynn, the program coordinator for the
Muscular Dystrophy Association.
Come on forward, Ms. Flynn.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, it's going to be difficult to
try to top that voice, but we must recognize the hard work our first
responders, our, yours and my, local firefighters have done for their
continuing support of muscular dystrophy.
Whereas, fighting fires is one of the most hazardous professions
and requires physical strength, stamina, extensive training, courage,
and self-concern (sic) for the welfare of our citizens; and,
Whereas, in addition to their daily services to the community,
firefighters throughout the state and across the nation have joined
Muscular Dystrophy Association for the past 53 years in a fight
against neuromuscular disease; and,
Whereas, Muscular Dystrophy Association is extremely grateful
to firefighters of Collier County with their Fill-the-Boot Campaign
that will assist Muscular Dystrophy Association in providing services
for its local clinics, summer camps, research grants, support groups,
and public education seminars at no cost to the local children and their
families; and,
Whereas, in honor of the efforts of the firefighters of Collier
County, the Muscular Dystrophy Association in sponsoring Collier
County Firefighter Appreciation Week, the week of September 16,
2007; and,
Whereas, it is appreciative (sic) of all Collier County citizens to
join Muscular Dystrophy Association in their tribute to our
firefighters.
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of Commissioners
of Collier County, Florida, that the week of September 16, 2007, be
designated as Collier County Firefighter Appreciation.
Done in this order, the 11th day of September, 2007.
Mr. Chairman, I make a motion that we move this proclamation.
Page 21
September 11 - 12,2007
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We have a motion by Commissioner
Henning and a second by Commissioner Coyle.
Any discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Seeing none, all those in favor,
indicate by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And the ayes have it, 5-0. Thank you
very much.
(Applause.)
MS. FLYNN: And I just wanted to say sorry that the --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Ifwe can get you to step up to the
podium.
MS. FLYNN: Podium, okay.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Sure, so everybody can hear your
message.
MS. FLYNN: Sorry that the firefighters couldn't be here today.
Obviously with September 11 th, they had ceremonies, trainings, and
events to go to, so they weren't able to come and accept the award but
-- or the proclamation, but thank you very much for having me here to
accept it on their behalf.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Angie, were you here for East
Naples Fire representing them?
MS. FLYNN: Oh, yeah, thank you.
Page 22
September 11 - 12, 2007
MS. DAVIS: I was out doing the boot drive also.
MS. FLYNN: Oh, great. Thank you so much. Yes, we had
collected a lot of money so far this year from our boot drives, over
$30,000 from Collier County. So thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you.
(Applause.)
Item #4 D
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING NAACP FREEDOM FUND
DAY - ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, the next proclamation is the
NAACP Freedom Fund Day, to be accepted by Anthony Denson,
president of the NAACP, and Cheryl Seals-Gonzalez, freedom fund
dinner chair.
MR. DENSON: Cheryl's not here.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Please, sir. Right up here, please, and
face the audience. Thank you for being here today.
Whereas, the National Association for the Advancement of
Colored People, NAACP, will hold its 25th freedom fund dinner and
awards ceremony on Saturday, September 29,2007, at the Naples
Hilton and Towers; and,
Whereas, proceeds of this event will be used to ensure that
economic, political, education, and social equality remains strong
within our community; and,
Whereas, this Silver Anniversary event also serves to
acknowledge the founders of the NAACP Collier County branch and
recognizes many achievements over the year. Be it resolved that the
public is invited to attend and share in this celebration of freedom
from all.
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of Collier County
Page 23
September 11 - 12,2007
Commissioners, Collier County, Florida, that September 29,2007, be
designated as NAACP Freedom Fund Day.
Done and ordered this, the 11th day of September, James Coletta,
Chair.
And I make motion for approval.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We have a motion for approval by
myself, Commissioner Coletta, and a second by Commissioner Fiala.
Any discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Hearing none, all those in favor,
indicate by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: The ayes have it, 5-0.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you. And would you take a
moment to tell us more about the banquet.
MR. DENSON: I sure will. Thank you so much.
Good morning. I would like to thank you on behalf of Naples --
I'm sorry -- NAACP of Collier County. We thank you for an
acknowledgement; we thank you for the proclamation.
This -- well, not this coming Saturday, but the 29th will be the
25th year that we'll be having this particular fundraiser. And this
fundraiser gives us the opportunity to help our children, a lot of our
at-risk kids.
And being able to do that, I think about some of the things where
Page 24
September 11 - 12, 2007
-- some of the people that I have met here in Naples, young people,
young black people, young white kids, that life and people had just
given up on, and that touched me to see kids that, at 14 and 13 years
of age, with no hope because no one's there with them and no one's
there to encourage them on.
Well, we try to reach out to these at-risk kids. Through a lot of
different sponsors and other agencies and organizations, we're able to
reach these kids. We're able to pull most of them in.
With help from our colleges like FGCU, now a huge university,
these -- these organizations, these colleges give the kids an
opportunity to go to college. They've granted over 100 two-year
scholarships to some of our at-risk kids.
These are our heros, those people that are able and willing to help
our youth. We still fight discrimination, but it comes in so many
forms now, from our senior citizens not having adequate medicine, not
having a decent place to live. There's a lot of different discriminations
that we must fight together. One organization can't do it alone.
But I'm glad to be in Collier County because everyone here
seems to be so cooperative and so understanding of the issues that we
have here at hand. So I would like to applaud commissioners today
and all of you all out here who support and involve yourselves in these
different type endeavors. So thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you.
(Applause.)
Item #4 E
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING NATIONAL
PREPAREDNESS WEEK - ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: The next proclamation is for National
Preparedness Week, to be accepted by Rick Zyvoloski, emergency
Page 25
September 11 - 12, 2007
management coordinator, and Joe Frazier, Homeland Security
coordinator.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Gives me great pleasure to --
obviously today is a very important day, and so this kind of falls in
line with everything else that we've discussed so far.
Whereas, the National Preparedness Month is a nationwide
coordinated effort sponsored by the U.S. Department of Homeland
Security each September to encourage Americans to prepare for
emergencies in their homes, businesses, and schools; and,
Whereas, this event aims to increase public awareness concerning
the importance of preparing for emergencies and to pursue individuals
to take action; and,
Whereas, during the month of September, the Collier County
Bureau of Emergency Services will urge residents to take simple steps
to make themselves and their families better prepared for emergencies;
and,
Whereas, being prepared includes creating an emergency supply
kit containing items that will allow you and your family to survive for
at least three days in the event of an emergency, developing a plan that
addresses sheltering in place or evacuating the area, staying informed
about different threats that could affect your community and getting
involved by training in first aid and emergency response; and,
Whereas, throughout the years, the emergency management
coordinator, Rick Zyvoloski, promotes emergency preparedness by
maintaining Collier County's designation from the National Weather
Service as storm ready and managing and maintaining Collier County
Skywarn Spotter Program, training community emergency response
teams on disaster preparedness as well as maintaining the Collier
County emergency management website and the comprehensive
Emergency Management Plan; and,
Whereas, the Homeland Security coordinator, Joe Frazier, was
instrumental in helping the county earn an achievement award from
Page 26
September 11 - 12, 2007
the National Association of Counties for the implementation of the
disaster response unit trailers. Mr. Frazier researched, coordinated,
and purchased 11 disaster response units that are fully equipped with
backup generators, blankets, and other essential equipment and
supplies to comfortably support our citizens in the time of disaster,
evacuation, and shelter activation; and,
Whereas, the Board of County Commissioners would like to
officially recognize the Collier County Bureau of Emergency Services
and its community partners, including the Citizens Corps Advisory
Board, the Collier County Airport Authority, and the District School
Board of Collier County, and the many other volunteers and civic
organizations that routinely offer their invaluable service to our
community.
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that the month of
September, 2007, be designated as National Preparedness Month.
Done and ordered on this 11 th day of September, 2007, Board of
County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, James Coletta,
Chairman.
And Chairman, I make a resolution that -- or I make a motion
that we should -- excuse me -- that we -- I make a motion that we --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll second it.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. We have a motion--
COMMISSIONER HALAS: We'll get it out.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Motion by Commissioner Halas, and
quick save, second motion by Commissioner Henning.
Any discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: All those in favor of the motion,
indicate by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
Page 27
September 11 - 12, 2007
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And the ayes have it, 5-0. Thank you
very much.
(Applause.)
MR. ZYVOLSKI: Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, we're both
deeply honored for this distinction and really thank you. And we
understand that we just represent the team, you know, and we
appreciate the support that you've given us in representing the team.
You know, your county folks here, your governments, your cities and
all, you know, have excelled, and we've tried to move forward as best
we can earning distinctions like public utilities, you know, being one
of those.
Very few agencies, one of the two in the state, that have received
FEMA approval for their planning efforts, you know, a model for the
state. Y Oil know, your other divisions, community development
administrative services coming forward with getting distinctions for
their damage assessment program. Hopefully we don't have to use
that tool. But should we need those tools, you know, we're ready.
And the proclamation said it all about the community needing to
move forward now. Your government here, with your support, has --
we've done our best, and now the people need to, you know, the first
72 is up to you, you know, and that's what we'd like is the community
also to help us do our job, recover from disasters should they come,
and be prepared. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you.
(Applause.)
Item #4 F
Page 28
September 11 - 12,2007
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING INDUSTRY APPRECIATION
WEEK - ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioners, the next proclamation is for
Industry Appreciation Week, to be accepted by Tammie Nemecek,
Julie Schmelzle, and Dick Grant.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Good morning. It's a pleasure to
see your smiling faces.
MS. NEMECEK: Good morning.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Starting off this proclamation.
Whereas, the industry of Collier County -- whoops, 1'11 wait.
Sorry about that.
Proclamation: Whereas, the industry of Collier County is vital to
the community's economic health; and;
Whereas, the Collier County existing industries are the key to a
prosperous future; and,
Whereas, the Collier County industry helps sustain our quality of
life, exemplifies the high standards in excellence, and a positive,
responsible approach to economic diversification and community
enhancement; and,
Whereas, public knowledge of the contributions made by the
industry is essential to maintaining of good community industry
relationships.
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that September 17th to the
21 st, 2007, be designated as Industry Appreciation Week, and urge all
residents to salute our industries and their employees for their
contribution to our community.
Done and ordered this 11 th day of September 2007, Board of
County Commissioners, Collier County, Florida, James Coletta,
Chairman.
Page 29
September 11 - 12, 2007
And Chairman, I make a motion to approve this proclamation.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: We got through it this time.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We have a motion by Commissioner
Halas for approval and a second by Commissioner Fiala.
Any discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Seeing none, all those in favor,
indicate by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: The ayes have it, 5-0. No surprises
there.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you for being so involved.
Hey, Tammie.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Thank you very much.
(Applause.)
MR. GRANT: I'll say a few words, if I could, Commissioners.
I'm Dick Grant, the chairman of the EDC. And we thank you for
recognizing Industry Appreciation Week.
I feel a little bit humbled here in light of all the other
presentations that have preceded us today. It seems to me that -- a
little difficult to talk about economic development today, but I'm
going to do it.
And today more than ever, probably given the state of our
economy in Florida in light of market conditions, I think people
Page 30
September 11 - 12, 2007
recognize even more so than they always do the need for economic
diversification, which is the mission of your EDC.
We believe that we have made some progress in the past year in
implementing programs and changes and methods of doing things that,
in the future, are going to lead us to being even more successful than
we have in the past in attracting externally generated business and
diversifying the economy with high-wage paying industry.
It is not something that is going to happen overnight. It isn't
something that's happened overnight in the past. It's a process. We
value very much the community's support and we value very much the
support of this commission. It's an important mission, and one that we
all believe in and hope will succeed and I'm comfortable will.
The one thing of note I would -- I'd like to mention is that in the
realm of diversification, it's not completely new to Collier County, but
it is a new thing.
HMA opened a brand new hospital this year on State Road 951,
and it was part of the economic development diversification programs
in our community, the fast track program, and it received -- has
received a governor's award for diversification for the establishment of
that facility here in Collier County. One of, I believe, 10 in the state.
So that's something to brag about.
And I wanted to thank you again for your support. Thank you
(Applause.)
Item #4G
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING WATER REUSE WEEK-
ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, our last proclamation for today is
the Water Reuse Week, to be accepted by Dr. George Yilmaz, Dale
Waller, Jon Pratt, Millie Kelley, and Ray Ognibene.
Page 3 1
September 11 - 12, 2007
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And I have the pleasure of reading
this one. I'm so glad because these guys are near and dear to my heart.
Whereas, safe, clean, and sustainable water resources are
essential to Florida's environment, economy, citizens and visitors; and,
Whereas, Florida's water supplies are essentially finite while our
population and our need for water resources continue to increase; and,
Whereas, water reuse provides a means for conserving and
augmenting Florida's precious water resources; and,
Whereas, the Florida Department of Environmental Protection,
the five water management districts, the Florida Department of Health,
the Florida Public Service Commission, and other state agencies have
implemented an award winning water reuse program; and,
Whereas, Florida's water reuse program was honored by the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency with the 2006 Water Efficiency
Leadership Award; and,
Whereas, Florida's permitted reuse capacity exceeds 1.3 billion
gallons per day. Whoo, that's a lot of gallons. Over 52 percent of
Florida's total permitted capacity for all domestic water -- wastewater
treatment facilities; and,
Whereas, Collier County's water reclamation facilities will, in
fiscal year 2008, distribute over 5.5 billion gallons of reclaimed water
for beneficial reuse, offsetting the use of precious potable water for
irrigation; and,
Whereas, the 2007 water reuse symposium sponsored by the
Water Reuse Association, the Water Environment Federation, and the
American Waterworks Association will be held in Tampa, Florida, on
September 9 through 12,2007.
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that the week of September
9th be recognized as Water Reuse Week, and Collier County, Florida,
is calling upon each citizen and business to help protect our precious
potable water resource by becoming more aware of the need to protect
Page 32
September 11 - 12,2007
and conserve our precious potable water resources.
Done and ordered this 11th day of September, 2007, Board of
County Commissioners, Collier County, Florida, Jim Coletta,
Chairman.
And I make a motion to approve, Mr. Chairman.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Motion by Commissioner Fiala and a
second by Commissioner Halas.
Any discussion?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I see Clearance Tears back
there, and I see Mr. DeLony back there. Maybe they should be up
here, too --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I think so, too. Come on up.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- to be recognized a little bit --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: By all means.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- for all of their help and support in
this effort.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And while they're on the way up, all
those in favor, indicate by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: The ayes have it, 5-0. Thank you.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Clarence, good to see you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Good to see you again, John.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Need some rainy days, huh?
Page 33
September 11 - 12,2007
COMMISSIONER FIALA: How far are we down?
MR. TEARS: A lot, six to eight inches.
MR. YILMAZ: For the record, George Yilmaz, your public
utilities wastewater department director.
Good morning, Commissioners, and thank you very much for the
proclamation. It means a lot to us and a lot to our team members, 360
strong.
This year we have become aware more than ever how valuable
our water resources are and how important the need for water
conservation is. Recognizing this, the Collier County Water/Sewer
District will remain and claim approximately 5.5 billion gallons of
water from our wastewater reclamation facilities to reuse for irrigation
and environmental management in fiscal year '08.
Every gallon of water we can reuse relieves precious -- pressure
on our water resources and potable water aquifer system.
Now, I'd like to invite Clarence Tears, our Big Cypress Basin
Board executive director, for his comments and acknowledgement as
well. Thank you.
MR. TEARS: Good morning, Commissioners. I just want to
thank Collier County for being a leader in protecting our water
resources and using alternative sources.
This is an extremely demanding year. And you know, we go
through extremes. And every time I tell you, I'm still waiting for an
average year in Collier County. Last year we were dealing with
flooding at this time. This year we're dealing with an extreme
drought, and this drought isn't over. Based on current conditions in
Collier County, this drought could be even worse next dry season.
You know, we're at such a deficit now and the water levels are so
low that, you know, we need some rain, but that's where Collier
County has the foresight. These alternative sources of water get us
through these seasons.
This year we're in phase two water restrictions. This time of year
Page 34
September 11 - 12,2007
last year we were trying to get rid of the water. But we're currently in
phase two water restrictions. And this reuse water, you know, you see
it throughout Collier County. It's the purple pipes.
You know, this is treated effluent and it's a water -- it meets
secondary quality standards, and it meets some of our non-potable
needs and it protects our water resource that we need to distribute to
the public.
And I just thank you all for your efforts and continued support to
protect our water resources in Collier County. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you.
(Applause.)
Item #5A
PRESENTATION REGARDING AN UPDATING ON THE
PROGRESS OF THE EAST OF COUNTY ROAD 951
INFRASTRUCTURE AND SERVICES HORIZON STUDY
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION MASTER COMMITTEE-
PRESENTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to presentations, and
your first presentation today is to provide the Board of County
Commissioners with an update on the progress of the East of the
County Road 951 Infrastructure and Services Horizon Study Public
Participation Master Committee, and I believe Mr. McDaniel, the
chair of that committee will present.
MR. McDANIEL: You are correct, sir.
Good morning, Commissioners. For the record, I'm Bill
McDaniel and chair of the East of 951 Horizon Study Master
Committee. We have a PowerPoint presentation, and Mike Bosi, our
government liaison, is going to be helping me hit the proper buttons in
order to change pages and go through.
Page 35
September 11 - 12, 2007
And with your permission, I'm just basically going to read off the
PowerPoint and then answer any questions that you may, in fact, have.
Does that fit?
Okay. From the executive summary, the committee will address
issues related to, number one, assist in drafting the polling
questionnaire to be presented to the public based upon the options
presented within the preliminary report of the East of 951 Horizon
Study that you've already taken advantage of.
We're going to assist in selecting venues for public participation
-- excuse me -- assist in determining the structure and timing of the
future public participation meetings, assist in developing the
presentations and the forums for the public participation meetings. All
of those things we have, in fact, been doing as we've been going
forward.
The committee has 10 times -- has met, excuse me, since -- has
met 10 times since September of '06 when we were originally created.
In October through February we were in organizational meetings,
the majority of which we held out at the ago center on Immokalee
Road north of Orangetree.
March of '07 was our first public utilities -- public utilities
presentation. And just as a point of clarification, what we do in each
one of the items that are contained within the study is we ask staff,
that was participatory in preparation of the original study to come and
speak to the committee, and then we have a separate meeting, a
second meeting, after the committee has had an opportunity to review
and ask questions of staff for the information that they've provided.
Then -- now, all of these meetings are public -- are open, in fact,
to the public, but then we have the public meeting where folks come
and ask questions of the staff along with the committee. So that's the
order with which we go through this process. And all of these are
basically the same.
So just to repeat, we had our public utilities presentation in
Page 36
September 11 - 12, 2007
March, and then in April we had the presentation, and it was our first
public presentation and quite a pep rally, I might add. There were 110
people in attendance, and the majority of that meeting revolved around
the installation of utilities, water and sewer, into the Golden Gate
Estates area.
A resounding "not necessary right now," by the way, if you were
wondering what the outcome of that particular meeting was.
In May of '07, we had a presentation from parks and libraries.
June, law enforcement came, gave us a presentation. Then in July 2nd
-- or, excuse me, in July we had the second meeting with parks,
library, and law enforcement, and they came, and we had
approximately 40 people plus in attendance there as well.
August of '07, EMS came, gave us a presentation and, of course,
that was currently on the heels of the things that were traveling along
with the potential moratorium and that sort of thing, and rather
interesting discussions that transpired.
Last night we had -- the Golden Gate and Big Island Corkscrew
fire districts came and gave us their presentation. October 8th, I
believe, is our next meeting, and it will be at the ago center, and that
will be the joint effort of EMS and the fire districts coming to talk to
us about issues that revolve around their world and the geographic
area of our study, which, as you know, revolves in the eastern part of
the county, east of951.
November we're going to review and -- the progress of the
company that you have utilized to develop the interactive growth
model that we're going to theoretically plug this information that we're
acquiring into to assist you in your decision making going forward.
December we're going to have the first of our transportation
presentations, and we've approached the folks in Immokalee that are in
charge of the master planning committee out there, to go to
Immokalee and have staff come there and make that presentation to
our committee in Immokalee proper.
Page 37
September 11 - 12,2007
And then in January, we'll have our fourth public participation
meeting, and that will basically revolve around transportation, and that
will be -- that will be a fun one for you to watch. I mean, a large
portion of this adventure, as you've already seen, and you may, in fact,
remember from the study that's already been completed, we're looking
at in excess of a million people living in Collier County by 2045,
2050, and north of 70 percent of those folks are going to be residing
east of951.
And we've been charged to poll the folks that live out there now
along with the people that serve on your committee who are basically
from that area, and provide information back to you as to how to plan
for this growth and development, and a large issue that revolves
around that is support for that inevitable growth and development
that's coming to our community.
And it's imperative that we start to plan now for that and make
appropriations for that. There are -- there are huge expenditures,
hundreds and hundreds of millions of dollars that are going to be
required in support of the infrastructure that's going to need to be
coming to our group to support this inevitable growth that's, in fact,
commg our way.
Back onto the deal, February will be our public schools
presentation from the -- from the public schools. March we'll have a
presentation open to the public and review, again, Collier County
public schools presentation.
In April, we'll begin processing and tabulation of the surveys and
the information that we have, in fact, acquired, and may have
discussion review of the draft. And June we'll have a final report and
I'll get to come back again shortly thereafter and give you that -- if you
want me to anyway, and give you that information.
From a time line standpoint basically we are on track. I want you
to be assured that the committee, and myself as its chairperson, have --
are hugely diligent in acquiring the information that you're going to
Page 38
September 11 - 12,2007
need, and our government leaders are going to, in fact, need in order
to make decisions going forward.
There may be a necessity for an extension of time that we've --
that we've allotted here. It's not our goal at this particular juncture, but
I want to assure you that we are going to take whatever time is
necessary. If it necessitates multiple public meetings in order to allow
the folks that live in this area an opportunity to have their say-so, ask
their questions, put forth the information, and offer us their opinions,
we're going to do what's necessary in order to accomplish the goal that
you've charged us with. With that --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Just wanted to tell you, Mr.
McDaniels, I appreciate what you and your committee are doing. It's
-- these type of committees are absolutely necessary. I know when we
first started it up, a lot of people said, well, we just got through with
the master plan for Golden Gate. They're working on the master plan
for Immokalee. Ave Maria's already come up with their development
of regional impact and got approval from the commission. Why are
we going through these steps? And the reason is very simple. It's to
engage the public on a continuous basis.
It's -- the plan is never final. The plan is never done. We're
always moving forward. And if we try to pick some point in time in
the future where we say, yes, we're going to solve all the problems in a
day's time, it's never going to happen.
So what you're doing and what your committee's doing is
indispensable as far as the well-being of Collier County, and I just
want to give you my personal thanks for the time you're devoting to it.
And I want you to know that if you follow this out to completion,
we'll double your pay.
MR. McDANIEL: Great, thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Which is zero, by the way.
MR. McDANIEL: I understand that, I understand that. And ifI
may add, just as a point. It's very important, as we go through this
Page 39
September 11 - 12, 2007
process, we've been charged to assimilate this information and put it
together in a package with which you can utilize going forward and
add it into the interactive growth model that we have.
And as you said, Mr. Chairman, the dynamics of our community
at large are such that you can't just pick a spot in time and go there.
It's going to require a tremendous amount of communication, a
tremendous amount of cooperation, both from yourselves and from
your staff and our county leaders going forward to make the decisions
that aren't necessarily of a popular basis.
There are going to be some difficult decisions that are going to be
required that are going to need to be implemented in order to support
this inevitable growth and development that we are going to incur
going forward.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: First of all, how delighted I am that
you're involved in the public so often and so much and that you're
getting good response. I think that's wonderful.
As you discussed the transportation, something that the
commissioners, especially Commissioner Halas and Commissioner
Coletta, have been pushing for is that bypass, the 82/29 bypass to --
and all of those people moving out there would be so much easier to
get to that than to come in town. Are you going to be working on
that?
MR. McDANIEL: With specificity, Commissioner, no. We're
going to -- at this level. That doesn't mean I'm not going to be doing
something over here. But at this particular level with this task that we
have in front of us, we're more global with what we're, in fact,
entailing.
And one of the -- one of the tricks, if you will, that we've been
charged with is polling a populous to ascertain what, in fact, needs to
occur to support the growth and development that's coming to our
community of people who aren't here yet.
Page 40
September 11 - 12,2007
I mean, you know, I had an opportunity to speak with Mr. Cohen
in the hallway earlier. And, you know, Golden Gate Estates is, I don't
know, 45,50 percent built out at this particular stage, and we've
slowed down quite some time (sic), but geographically, it's the largest
area of our study area.
Populous, it's the largest on a percentage basis of the population
that exists out there right now. But on the other side of it, there's a lot
of the decisions that revolve around Golden Gate Estates that are
basically already done. That doesn't mean that things can't be
effectuated, changes can't occur and that sort of thing.
But with respect specifically to your question about the bypass
and about infrastructure at large, it's -- we are hugely lacking in that
area. This -- and this is my little coined phrase, and it follows along
the lines of, this isn't of movies. It's not the field of dreams where, if
you build it they will come. The truth of the matter is, they're coming,
and we have to build and support for that now and plan for that now.
So that maybe is a roundabout answer to get to where you're
going, but that -- with what we're, in fact, doing, we're acquiring
information to be able to help support infrastructure ideas and thought
processes that are out there on a geographic basis.
Advise your planning staff on how to promote our community
and growth and development within our community to necessarily
lessen the impacts of the infrastructure that currently already exists in
placing schools and fire stations and EMS stations and commercial
support for this growth and development that's, in fact, coming to our
community.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you very much for your
contribution to Collier County.
MR. McDANIEL: Absolutely. Thank you, sir.
Item #5B
Page 41
September 11 - 12, 2007
PRESENTATION REGARDING SANTA BARBARA
BOULEVARD - THE EXPANSION AND IMPROVEMENT OF
SANTA BARBARA BOULEVARD FROM FOUR (4) LANES TO
SIX (6) LANES FOR 4.0 MILES AND RADIO ROAD FROM TWO
(2) LANES TO FOUR (4) LANES FOR 1.22 MILES - PRESENTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioners, your next presentation will be on
Santa Barbara Boulevard, the expansion and improvement of Santa
Barbara Boulevard from four lanes to six lanes for four miles, from
Radio Road -- and Radio Road for -- from two lanes to four lanes for
1.22 miles.
Mr. Jay Ahmad, are you going to introduce the speaker?
MR. AHMAD: Yes. Good morning, Mr. Chairman,
Commissioners. Good morning, again, and I have a speaker with me
here from Astaldi Construction company to -- Philipe, who will
present to you the status of this project. The project is going on time,
on schedule, and we're pleased to have our contractor with you this
mornmg.
MR. PORRO: Good morning. My name is Philipe Porro. I'm
project manager of Astaldi Construction. And I'm going to be
presenting the Santa Barbara Boulevard project, the status.
Before I begin, I'd like to say that we look forward to
successfully completing this project and performing future contracts
with the county.
I believe I speak on behalf of the county's project manager, the
county's consultants, and Astaldi when I say that we've developed a
relationship that is -- involves team work, partnering, and respect with
the collective goal of completing this project on time, within budget,
safely, and with the smallest possible impacts to the public and
businesses, and so forth.
So with that said -- and I believe that's a key ingredient in the
recipe for successfully completing any project. I'll continue with this.
Page 42
September 11 - 12, 2007
I have an illustration here just of the location, the project limits,
which is from Davis Boulevard along Santa Barbara, from Davis
Boulevard to Copper Leaf Lane, which is just north of Golden Gate
Parkway, from four lanes to six lanes on Santa Barbara. Also, we're
widening Radio Road from just west of Santa Barbara to Davis
Boulevard from two lanes to four lanes. You can see right there we go
over 1-75 as well.
This is just a -- sorry. It's a project overview. Basically the
original budget is 62 million, just over 62 million. We -- at this time
we're not expecting any increases to that. Weare also expected to be
complete on August 23rd of2009. We don't expect to see any delays
to that at this time either.
The project was started on February 5, 2007, and we are
currently 24.3 percent complete. We've -- our value of work is over--
just over $15 million.
I have a couple typical sections here just to give an idea of what
we're doing. We're widening, like I said before, Santa Barbara from
four lanes to six lanes. It will involve three lanes -- three 12- foot lanes
in each direction with a four-foot bicycle lane in each direction and
six-foot sidewalks on both sides.
Radio Road is very similar. It will be two 12- foot lanes in each
direction with a four-foot bicycle lane in each direction and a six-foot
sidewalk in each direction.
And just briefly, the bridge is the same; three 12-foot lanes. Both
bridges over 1-75 and over the Golden Gate Canal, three 12-foot lanes.
This one has a five-foot-six shoulder on each side and a six-foot
pedestrian sidewalk.
Just a quick illustration of our project organization. Myself, the
project manager. We have an officer manager, safety manager,
Marceloto Toldeo; project engineers, inventory clerk, and we have
three superintendents for bridge, structures and roadway, and I believe
this is a -- yeah, this will be -- will lead to a successful project.
Page 43
September 11 - 12, 2007
This is the key elements of the project, and show you where we
are with completion. Keynote there is the contract time used to date is
22.3 percent. We've com -- our value of work completed is 24.3
percent, and it shows you there where we are along the way with the
roadway improvements, the signalization, the lighting, the signing and
markings, the structures, utility relocation, et cetera.
Keynote is that the utility relocations, which is basically what
needs to be complete before we can really chomp, you know, on all
facets of this proj ect. We're at -- as far as the Collier County utilities
that we're performing are at 75.7 percent. In addition to that, FP&L,
Embarq, Teco, ComCast and FGOA (sic), they're all nearing
completion of their locations. We're expecting that they'll all be
complete by November, and at that point is when you can really see
the surge in our completion. That's when you really see the impacts.
Most of what they're doing is underground. Most of what we've
done to date is underground as well. And when all this is complete,
hopefully by the end of the year, you will see a big surge. And even
with those obstacles, I mean, we're still ahead of the game with 24.3
percent versus the 22.3 percent of time. So I think we're doing well.
With that, 1'11, if you have any questions, be more than willing to
answer them.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Good morning, sir.
MR. PORRO: Good morning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Our office received phone calls
and concerns about the barricades in front of the shopping center at
Santa Barbara and Golden Gate Parkway where Eckerds are (sic)
concerning about limited amount of work being done in that area and
wanting to see what the board can do to gain better access in a more
timely fashion at working in that area.
MR. PORRO: Okay. As of approximately four weeks ago,
we've reopened that entrance to that CVS plaza. Most of the work that
Page 44
September 11 - 12, 2007
was being done was underground, not visible to the regular traveling
motorist.
It has been reopened, that's -- that particular entrance. At this
time we have no entrances to any buildings closed. We're
continuously looking for improvements on business access and access
to certain areas.
Just to give you an idea, recently the business manager of Naples
Christian Academy attended one of our progress meetings, and she
was -- I guess she was concerned with the access for her students
coming into the school. We -- with short notice we made very good
improvements to the northbound left-hand turn access. We added a
lane designated solely to the entrance of that school, and I think you
would find, if you spoke to them, they're very pleased. They sent us
an email thanking us.
And Berkshire Commons, we don't have any entrances closed at
this time. We've reopened that entrance, and we're striving to improve
it wherever we can. We have new business signs, business
information signs, and we look forward to, you know, doing more
whenever possible.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: How many lanes do you have
closed on Golden Gate Parkway east of Santa Barbara going west?
MR. PORRO: East of Santa Barbara going west? We have two
through lanes. We have two designated left-hand turn lanes, and we
have a right-hand turn lane. The project--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Designated right-hand turn
lane?
MR. PORRO: Designated, yes, for the time being.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
MR. PORRO: The project was originally designed with one turn
lane, two -- well, one turn lane, one designated through lane, and one
joint use through and right-hand turn. We've added -- we added those
extra two lanes, which is the additional left-hand turn, and the
Page 45
September 11 - 12, 2007
designated right as a -- when the concerns -- and because of the traffic
impacts. So we went that extra step and added those two lanes back.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you, sir. Appreciate you being
here today.
(Applause.)
Item #5C
PRESENT A nON TO RECOGNIZE MICHELE MOSCA,
PRINCIPAL PLANNER, COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING, AS
EMPLOYEE OF THE MONTH FOR AUGUST 2007 -
PRESENTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, the next presentation is to
recognize Michelle Mosca, the principal planner for comprehensive
planning, as the Employee of the Month for August of2007.
She was nominated as the Employee of the Month for August,
2007. Michelle is an invaluable member of the comprehensive
planning department. She often goes far beyond her normal duties.
She is proactive, solution oriented, and an excellent team player.
Recently Michelle was assigned as the liaison to the Collier
County school working group. The group's mission was to prepare an
interlocal agreement pertaining to school concurrency, as well as the
public school facilities element for the growth management plan.
Originally a regular member of the group, Michelle assumed the
major responsibility of coordinating the project. This role caused her
to work many extra hours, including nights and weekends.
Her dedication to this project paid off in the development of an
interlocal agreement that was presented to the Collier County School
Board. The agreement protects the interests of Collier County and its
residents.
Page 46
September 11 - 12, 2007
The county is fortunate to have her wealth of knowledge and
planning expertise, and Michelle should be commended for this
accomplishment that will benefit the county for years to come.
In addition, her hard work and dedication on many other projects
demonstrates her commitment to Collier County, and as a result,
Michelle is worthy of this prestigious honor.
Ladies and gentlemen, I'd like to present to you Michelle Mosca,
the Employee of the Month for August of2007.
(Applause.)
MS. FILSON: Commissioner?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Oh, Michelle, I'm sorry. I have one
more thing to give you. Something to hang up on the wall. And you
can have Commissioner Halas's parking spot.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: It's going to be a long day.
Item #6A
PUBLIC PETITION REQUEST BY FREEMAN & FREEMAN
CONSTRUCTION, INC. TO DISCUSS REZONE FEES FOR 428
AND 432 13TH STREET, IMMOKALEE, FL
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to public petitions.
The first public petition today is --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Before we go to the public petition,
we're going to take a 10-minute break. We can stay right on schedule.
(A brief recess was had.)
MR. MUDD: Ladies and gentlemen, if you'd please take your
seats.
Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, you have a hot mike.
Commissioner, we're on the public petition point of this agenda.
The first public petition is a request by Freeman and Freeman
Construction, Inc., to discuss rezone fees for 428 and 432 13th Street,
Page 47
September 11 - 12, 2007
Immokalee, Florida.
Sir, if you'd state your name and -- for the record, and--
MR. FREEMAN: Good morning. My name is Ernest Freeman.
I'm the owner of Freeman and Freeman Construction in Immokalee.
And currently we've been doing business in Immokalee for 14
years. And out of eight of those, we've been really concentrating on
affordable housing. I don't really have to go into much as far as
explaining how important affordable housing is in Collier County, and
that is one of the things that my business has currently been really
focusing on. I would have to say at least 85 percent of the homes that
we do are affordable housing.
We have a unique situation interest on 428 13th Street and also
lot 432. In that area is zoned mobile home only, however, in the area
we have probably about seven, eight, nine houses that are CBS
construction and frame construction. And not getting into the past
very much, I believe the zoning was changed in the early '90s from
village residential to mobile home only.
Currently we have a -- I have went to one of the preplanning
meetings there to discuss, what would it cost to get the rezoning done
for these two lots only. And while I'm talking, I'll ask you to put this
on.
MR. MUDD: Certainly.
MR. FREEMAN: That yellow area there on the screen and the
lot below it by the blue line are the two lots that we are discussing
right now. Thank you.
When I discussed the amount for the fees with the plan -- the
planning department at the county, they said the planning fees were
charged -- would be charged in the -- in the area of 8- to 10,000
dollars. Both clients that have been preapproved by the USDA for
homes on this property are considered very low, and they wouldn't be
able to afford those fees.
So what I'm asking the board is, is either some type of solution,
Page 48
September 11 - 12, 2007
help, anything that could be considered that we can actually maybe
move forward and build the homes on these two lots before the
homeowner may lose their preapproval for construction.
I had briefly noted in the petition that I brought before the board
that I would even consider, at the end of the construction when we
came in to do the final closing, even having your fees come out of
there for the rezone if that would be a possibility. And, of course, I
would be -- possibly part of my profits that I'm considering to forfeit
towards the rezone fees. But right now there's no way to -- I have it or
the homeowner has the monies to go forward with building the two
homes over here on that area.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Mr. Mudd, could we get someone
from staff to comment on what the possibilities of what Freeman's
proposing would be.
MR. FREEMAN: Well, I wanted to comment and ask Ms.
Mosca not to leave, but we had that break right after, and I believe she
took off. So it would have probably been really, really good timing if
she could have remained, but --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: That's okay. I'm sure Mr. Schmitt
could -- because I know that there's all sorts of financial
considerations on the county's part, too. And I agree with you,
affordable homes are extremely important, and especially in
Immokalee.
You know, I love to see things happen, but at what point in time
can we make an exception to the rule for one thing and not have it
countywide and jeopardize what remaining income stream we've got.
But I don't know any of those answers, all I know is the question that
you proposed.
Let's hear from Mr. Schmitt for just a minute.
MR. SCHMITT: For the record, Joe Schmitt, your administrator
of community development/environmental services division.
And I do note that Mr. Freeman did attend the preapp. meeting.
Page 49
September 11 - 12,2007
At that meeting it was noted for this rezone it would be a $6,000 fee
plus a -- potentially another 1,000, almost $1,100 in advertisement
costs. So approximately 7,000 in costs to go through the rezoning.
And, of course, that's to carry this through the petition, through the
public hearing process before the Planning Commission and, of
course, before the Board of County Commissioners. And that is the
cost for all the reviews and for staff time involved in this.
The issue here is that, as you well know, I'm a fee-for-service
organization, and I have to charge the fees up front in order to provide
the service.
I don't -- I do not have any type of loan program or any type of
deferral program to cover this. I just asked Marcy. I don't know if
Mr. Freeman has gone into her department at all and asked for some
kind of a grant or a loan. I don't know ifhe's gone down that road.
But in regards to deferral of fees, of course -- if the board directs
it. But the issue here is, what happens -- and there's no guarantee, but
what happens if he goes through the public hearing process and the
petition's denied, and I'm stuck trying to collect monies owed to the
county for the services rendered.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Mr. Schmitt, I know the master plan
for Immokalee has been undergoing for some time.
MR. SCHMITT: Yes.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I'm not too sure at what point they
are. But isn't one of the goals of the master plan of Immokalee to try
to simplify the permitting process and come up with a more general
use for the land that would allow people to be able to qualify without
having to go through a conditional use?
MR. SCHMITT: Well, one of the objectives is to look at the
entire Immokalee area, to answer your question, yes, to look at the
Immokalee area and to create either an overlay or an amendment to
the Immokalee Area Master Plan.
In order for that to go through, quite frankly, you're talking at
Page 50
September 11 - 12,2007
least a year to a year and a half or longer. The plan still has to be
finalized, and it still has to go through the GMP amendment cycle.
So that's -- we're a ways away from that ever being finalized.
You have to go through the GMP amendments, and then you have to
go into the land development regulations that have to be developed in
order to implement those GMP amendments. So any type of action by
the Immokalee Area Master Plan overlay is years away, at least 18
months.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And I know we're looking for a more
permanent solution with the master plan. But be that as it may.
Let's go to Commissioner Halas, then to Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes, I have a question. Normally
the developers have to come up with this money anyway. I mean, it's
not so much the individual that's buying the house, but it's the
developer that has to come up with that. And I realize that then it's
tacked onto the cost of the house.
Is this -- is this two families or is this going to be one family
that's going to have this?
MR. FREEMAN: (Indicating.)
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. Are they both in the same
predicament?
MR. SCHMITT: My understanding, it's two different -- two
separate lots which Mr. Freeman wants to build, basically stick-built
homes or, you know, custom homes.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: So we're looking at basically
foregoing the fees on this until such time as the buildings are built, and
then as they're closed upon --
MR. SCHMITT: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, then how do we know we're
going to get the fees if they're so close right now with getting their
mortgage?
MR. SCHMITT: I'd have to defer --
Page 51
September 11 - 12,2007
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Because, you know, $7,000 is quite
a bit, especially when somebody's going to move in a brand new
home.
MR. FREEMAN: Well, the fees -- the USDA has already
preapproved the two homeowners. The fees are there. They are
approved. I have the preapprovalletters.
Commissioner Halas --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: So--
MR. FREEMAN: Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Go ahead. If they're approved, that
meant that they met the guidelines even thought the permitting and
everything else is involved; isn't that true?
MR. FREEMAN : Well, most of the time they're preapproved
before they even have a lot. They come in and they go to the USDA,
which is a government entity that approves them for home mortgages.
They bring that preapprovalletter to myself. And I've built, over the
course of the last three years, maybe like 15 or 16 homes for the
government.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: But -- okay. And my question is,
before you go any farther here, they -- the people that put in for these
particulars loans from the USDA, they had an idea going in what the
cost of the home was going to be, right, with all the -- with everything
involved from you, the builder?
MR. FREEMAN: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, then I don't understand, if
they knew this ahead of time and that was part of the application to
this grant, then why is there a problem?
MR. FREEMAN: They did not have any idea that the -- I would
have to rezone the lots. I didn't even know until I put in for
permitting, and this was after the fact. I bought the lots unknowing
that they were zoned mobile home only because, like I said
previously, there are homes on this street, and I just bought the lots
Page 52
September 11 - 12,2007
without doing my research. It's sort of like my fault I didn't research
these lots and knew that that area of Immokalee was mobile home
only, especially after I built three houses on the next street over.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Let's go to Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, thank you. Is that 7,000 price
tag for rezoning for each lot, or can it be divided between the two,
being that they're connected?
MR. MUDD: For each lot, ma'am.
MR. FREEMAN: So what you're saying, it's going to be a total
of 14 --
MR. MUDD: Seven thousand dollars for both lots.
MR. SCHMITT: Just, it's -- the $7,000. It'd come in as a
combined petition for both lots.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Good, that makes more sense. So it
would be like $3,500 for each home.
MR. FREEMAN : Yes, indeed. I would -- and I'm not being, I
guess, saying trite or nothing, but I would like to see this in writing
because that's not what I got from the first meeting, and then I can
probably address that, because I had a whole different understanding.
It was going to maybe be in excess of maybe 10 grand.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. So this is -- this is good news
then to you --
MR. FREEMAN: Yes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- thirty-five hundred dollars --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Let's clarify it, because there's a lot
more to this than meets the eye, I'm sure.
MR. SCHMITT: Well, they may have talked to him about 10
grand because he would also have to put the petition together and
submit that, which he'd probably have to hire a consultant to do that.
We're in the business of review and bringing those petitions forward to
the respective boards, so he's going to have to probably hire someone
to do -- put the package -- that's something that staff -- as the review
Page 53
September 11 - 12, 2007
element, we do not -- we don't act as petitioner, then as reviewer, if
you understand what I've just explained.
So it's not -- it's not us -- he doesn't hire the county to do that type
of work for him, so he's going to have to have some additional costs.
So $7,000 for the -- for the actual application, and it's going to
probably cost a couple thousand dollars to hire a consultant to put the
petition together and package it and represent the owner or the
applicant before you, before the Planning Commission, and before the
Board of County Commissioners.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. So that might be $4,500 a
lot.
MR. SCHMITT: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Now, did Marcy -- you asked
Marcy, did she have any grants available to help something like this
along? What was your answer?
MR. SCHMITT: He never -- he has never come in and asked for
any type of grant through her pro -- any of her programs.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, I know he didn't.
MR. SCHMITT: I don't know. I'd have to defer to Marcy
because she basically said, first she's heard of it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, okay. Sometimes she has
things there that we don't even know are available.
MR. KRUMBINE: Marcy Krumbine, housing and human
services. First let me clarify that the clients that he's already got
qualified are also qualified for our impact fee deferral program and
SHIP down payment assistance, so they will be getting both of those
types of assistance, which would probably be in excess of 25- to
$35,000 on those units. And so they are -- they are qualified for those
programs.
In -- for example, in Copeland and in other situations, we have
assisted in paying for some fees. And so we could conceivably look at
that if the board directs us to.
Page 54
September 11 - 12,2007
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. So actually then he hasn't
met with you at all, and he probably didn't know to. Maybe if you
guys met after this, you can guide him through this process, and we
can get through it. And already his fees are cut in half just from some
of the information we're learned. Maybe you can help him through
the rest of it.
MS. KRUMBINE: I was at the preplanning meeting, and so we
did discuss some of that then, but we didn't discuss the request of
granting some more money.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yeah, in may, I have another
question. I mean, this is all fine, if everything came together, but
undoubtedly there's probably going to be some bumps along the way.
And we want to try to see ifthere's some way we can be
accommodating within the system.
I mean, undoubtedly, homes are a much bigger asset to a
community than trailers. They depreciate as time goes through. But
be it as it may, we still have a process to go through.
Is there a possibility that the CRA might be able to have some
sort of bridge loan if it came down to that where it would be a small
loan that would be able to take place to be able to offset this to be able
-- and be paid back at a very -- in the very near future when this thing
concluded? You probably wouldn't know the answer.
MR. KRUMBINE: I couldn't speak to the CRA.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Mr. Schmitt, would you know?
MR. SCHMITT: Certainly that's an option, but Mr. Freeman
would have to approach the CRA for that support through the advisory
board out in Immokalee. I don't know ifhe's--
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, I mean, when you asked--
MR. SCHMITT: -- if he's talked to Fred or anybody else out on
the board to see if there was -- and that would be the solution, some
kind of a bridge loan.
Page 55
September 11 - 12, 2007
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yeah. But -- and maybe they
misunder -- misinterpreted it as a grant that he was looking for that
would be forgiven. But a bridge loan would be something where it
would be --
MR. SCHMITT: Right.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: -- a small amount of money that
would come back at a very short period of time that would allow him
to go forward. Just something that we might be able to look at if these
other alternatives don't work out the way we had hoped they would.
MR. SCHMITT: And I know Fred's been aware of this rezone.
His frustration was, why can't they build a house because it already
has a mobile home. Fred and I have talked about this. And I said,
Fred, it's the zoning. I mean, it's -- we need to change the zoning for
the area. And that has to go through the public petition process,
neighborhood information meeting, all the -- all the perfunctory
requirements. It would have to go through a typical rezone petition.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We need to encourage them to get
their master plan together as soon as possible.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. I just wanted to try to
clarify the process. I think we're on the right track. Maybe if there's
some way that we can find some grants or other funding assistance to
assist in this process.
But the process that is being proposed to us where we would
waive these fees in return for a lien on the property, I think, has a lot
of complications associated with it, and let me give you an example.
Let's suppose the people who want to buy this property are
preapproved for $110,000 mortgage. Let's just use that as an example.
Now, you've already indicated that you didn't know that these
fees would be charged for the rezone. You didn't know that the rezone
costs were there. So there's no way they could have anticipated that
cost when they applied for their preapproval.
Page 56
September 11 - 12, 2007
So now, if you come back and you say, all right, we're going to
attach a lien to your property that is $7,000, you know, that -- they
don't have that money to pay even if we have a lien attached to their
property, and they couldn't qualify for a loan of that amount. If they're
preapproved for 110-, they might not be able to get approval for a
mortgage of 117,000.
So I don't see how the process you're proposing would pay the
fees to the county. I don't see how that can be obtained.
MR. FREEMAN: Well, like I said earlier, once we get to the
table and the house is completed for construction -- because on a lot of
houses I do get my own financing -- then I sell the house on the end,
which is called an end loan. And we sit down at the table, let's say,
for instance, like you said, the house is 110-, I only borrow 80,000.
When we sit down at the table there, there's still 30,000 left.
I'm saying, at closing there's a document stating there from your
county that will say, with that closing, 7,000 is to come out of here
towards the rezone fees. You would get your money back at closing.
You guys would be happy, I would be happy, and the homeowner
would be happy.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So it's really coming out of --
MR. FREEMAN: My profits.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- your profits?
MR. FREEMAN: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And so the agreement would really
have to be -- well, okay. I guess it could be arranged either way.
I guess my only concern is that the government is sort of setting a
precedent of getting involved in negotiating loans with builders to
finance their construction, and I don't know that that's really what we
want to do.
But why don't we try solving it the way we just suggested and see
if we can't get you some assistance, and let's make sure that the fees
that we've quoted are, in fact, correct, and they're not twice that, and
Page 57
September 11 - 12, 2007
then see if you can't get some kind of a bridge loan from the CRA if
that's possible. That's really the right way to approach it.
MR. FREEMAN: Okay. I'll approach it that way, and I agree
with you. But once more, I had already made -- and I'm responding to
what Mr. Schmitt said. I did sit down -- and we do our own
paperwork in the office for the rezone. This is not the first one that
we've attempted to proceed on. So the $2,000 for a consultant wasn't
a consideration. We can do that in-house.
But I would like that document, if I can -- and I'll get with him
later -- stating that it's only $7,000 to get the whole product done as far
as the rezone and fees. And I'm pretty much done.
I wanted to make one comment. I met with you guys maybe like
a few months ago on a lot that I asked for you to waive some fees on.
I don't know if you remember that because you do so many meetings.
It was in Immokalee. Remember the water/sewer bought some
property, and there was some liens that were on there from code
enforcement, and I asked that you waive them and you said you
couldn't waive them because I wasn't a nonprofit.
It's just ironic, those lots in the same little corridor -- and Mr.
Coletta had mentioned that we could probably do like a joint venture
thing with -- Cormac was involved in the home -- in the affordable
housing project. So I would have ran into the same problem then that
I'm doing now for the same project because it's still zoned mobile
home, and then I would have been included with the other lots. So I'm
glad I didn't make that step.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Halas, do you have
anything else to add?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: No. I just wanted to basically
agree with Commissioner Coyle that, as was discussed earlier, I
believe maybe if you go to the CRA and see about a bridge loan, I
think that will help you out immensely.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you.
Page 58
September 11 - 12, 2007
MR. FREEMAN: Well, that's what I'll do.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And could we ask that the staff
give him a statement in writing concerning the costs associated with
this?
MR. FREEMAN: Thank you, Commissioner.
MR. SCHMITT: Commissioner, for the record, he has that.
That was part of the preapplication notes. There's a full disclosure.
The costs are listed here. All the blocks are checked and -- but we
also -- issues with environmental, that he may have to incur some of
those costs, whether it's -- you know, he has a wetland delineation, I'm
not sure what the issue is there. These are all just things that we noted
that may come up as costs. Wildlife survey for burrowing owls.
MR. MUDD: Joe, can you write him a letter that basically lays
out the fees for these two lots --
MR. SCHMITT: Yes.
MR. MUDD: -- for the rezoning and for any public meetings
that we need to do either for the planning committee and this board?
MR. SCHMITT: Yep, I will do that.
MR. MUDD: And if you'd do that, I think that basically covers
the issues that --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Mr. Mudd, I'd like to be copied on all
that correspondence.
MR. MUDD: Sure.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you, Mr Freeman.
MR. FREEMAN: Thank you.
Item #14A
RECOMMENDA TION FOR THE COLLIER COUNTY BOARD
OF COMMISSIONERS (BCC) TO APPROVE A RESOLUTION
AUTHORIZING THE COLLIER COUNTY COMMUNITY
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA) TO ENTER INTO A
Page 59
September 11 - 12, 2007
$9,000,000 REVOLVING LINE OF CREDIT AGREEMENT WITH
W ACHOVIA BANK; APPROVING THE ACTIONS TAKEN BY
THE CRA WITH RESPECT TO ITS APPROVAL OF THE LINE
OF CREDIT AGREEMENT; AND AUTHORIZE ALL
NECESSARY BUDGET AMENDMENTS. (DAVID JACKSON,
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BA YSHORE GA TEW A Y TRIANGLE
CRA) - MOTION TO CONTINUE INDEFINITELY - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to time certain items
that we have today. But as we go to the time certain items, I'm going
to ask you to switch gavels, if that would be okay, and to adjourn from
the board meeting and go to the CRA side of the house because we
need to start with 14A, then to go to 14B, and then we'll come back to
10C and IOD.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. We adjourn--
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Recess it or --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Recess?
MR. WEIGEL: Recess would be better.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We'll be recessing the Board of
Collier County Commissioners' meeting.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And I call to order the meeting of
the --
MR. WEIGEL: You do need to take a vote to recess, however.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Oh, okay. Do I hear a motion?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second. Okay. I have a motion
from Commissioner Coyle, a second by Commissioner Halas.
Any discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Seeing none, all those in favor,
indicate by saying aye.
Page 60
September 11 - 12, 2007
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: The ayes have it. Okay. With that.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. And now I call to order the CRA
board meeting.
MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am. The first item is 14A. This item to be
heard at 11 a.m. It's a recommendation that the Collier County
Community Redevelopment Agency approve selection of Wachovia
Bank to provide a $9 million revolving line of credit to purchase real
property and finance various capital improvement projects within the
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA; approve a resolution approving the
form of line of credit agreement and master note; authorize the CRA
chairman to sign other documents in connection therewith, and make
draws against a line of credit as needed; pledge Bayshore Gateway
Triangle CRA tax increment funds, TIF funds, and other legally
available monies as the loan repayment source; and authorize all
necessary budget amendments. This is a companion item to 10C. Mr.
David Jackson, your executive director of the Bayshore Gateway
Triangle, will present.
MR. JACKSON: Good morning, Madam Chairman and CRA
commissioners. David Jackson, executive director of the Bayshore
Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Agency.
It is with great angst today that I bring to you today's message.
On Thursday, September 6th, the Florida Supreme Court reversed a
27-year-old decision affecting 187 Florida CRAs. The decision
directly affects Collier County CRA projects and activities currently
in effect, and specifically affects items 14A, 14B, and 10C.
Page 61
September 11 - 12, 2007
Steve Miller, the Collier County and CRA bond counsel from
Nabors, Giblin, and Nickerson is here today as well as the assistant
county attorney, Margie Student-Stirling. They're here to discuss the
Supreme Court ruling for you if you have any questions or you want
some clarification.
In the following few minutes of my three minutes here today, I
want to inform you of the impact of that Florida Supreme Court
decision on the items that are on the agenda today.
In March, 2007, the CRA approved a purchase of 1.66 acres for
$3.5 million in the Davis triangle. On March 27th, the Board of
County Commissioners and the CRA approved the RFP, request for
proposals, for up to a $9 million line of credit from a bank, a financial
institution.
Due to circumstances beyond the Board of County
Commissioners' control and CRA's control, in June, 2007, the CRA
approved a purchase extension of that property until September 25th
of2007.
In August 2007, the CRA team completed an RFP for $9 million
line of credit. We received a response and we've selected a bank, thus
14A on the agenda for approval.
In September, 2007, today, we have required all-- we have
completed all required tasks and we are complete and ready for
approval, then on Thursday the ruling was published.
The impact ofthat ruling is as follows: Today the CRA cannot
approve item 14A, the RFP for the selected bank as it is presented.
Item 10C on today's agenda becomes moot.
If the CRA decides to create a bank note for future
redevelopment purposes, you can go to referendum in January of 2008
and ask for a vote of the public for an amount yet to be determined by
the CRA. And if so, you decide to take that direction, I would
recommend that you table item 14A until the referendum results is
known. The bank has agreed to extend its offer until that
Page 62
September 11 - 12, 2007
determination is made.
Secondly, on September 25th, two weeks from today, the CRA
will not be able to complete the closing on that 1.66 acres of blighted
land in the Davis triangle. We have insufficient reserves and funds on
hand, cash, to make that transaction. The result of -- that's why we
went for the RFP, and we got that completed.
The jeopardy will be the loss of $100,000 or earnest money
deposit. Your options -- and this may not include all of them, but the
ones I happened to have gone through the thinking process on, is we
can request an extension of the seller. That has been done through the
seller's agent. Response has not been received; however, if I do
receive response by September 25th, your next meeting, we will get
that on your agenda for your review and approval.
Secondly, you could assign the property to another party. That
offer has been made to an adjacent property owner. Response has not
been received, and we don't know what the implications of that may
be. If there is a response to that, I will, again, bring that back to you
on September 25th agenda.
The third option would be county interim financing assistance.
There's other implications with that from the budget office, Mr. Mudd,
and bond counsel.
Following this will be item 14B. It was removed from the
consent agenda and brought to the regular agenda, and the purpose for
it I will discuss at this moment, is because of the implications of the
Supreme Court ruling. Because in the agenda executive summary, it
said it would be drawn -- the money to pay for that land would be
drawn from the line of credit we currently have. We cannot do that,
so we would need to motion on that one when we adjourn this agenda
to the next one, motion on it to purchase it from existing reserves,
along with two other properties that you have previously approved to
come from a line of credit from reserves, and the budget office is here
to back us up on that one. So that's just a follow-on.
Page 63
September 11 - 12,2007
So in summary, as your CRA representative charged with
executing the redevelopment master plan, and under the
recommendations of your local advisory board for the Bayshore
Gateway Triangle area, the CRA has proactively pursued a strategy to
redevelop a blighted acreage, 14 acres, in Collier County. Today that
strategy is at an impasse because of the Supreme Court ruling.
I'm here to receive your direction as the CRA board and as to
your desired course of actions, and as a reminder, bond counsel is here
to answer any questions you have on the implications of the Supreme
Court ruling.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes. I -- we have the lights all lit up.
Looks like a Christmas tree over here, but I was the first one, so I'm
going to ask first even though I'm chairman and I know that that isn't
really according to protocol.
Who all has to vote on this -- on the referendum?
MR. JACKSON: Bond counsel can discuss that with you but--
and he will reaffirm that it has to be the electors of Collier County.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: The entire county?
MR. JACKSON: Yes, ma'am.
MR. MILLER: Steve Miller with Nabors, Giblin, and Nickerson.
I'll give you a lawyerly response. We believe it would have to be
countywide. There's no law on this point.
Until Thursday, there had never been a requirement that you
would have to have an election for CRA financing. So there's no law
out there as to who would vote in it. We've thought about it and
talked about it since this came out, and our initial opinion is, it
probably would have to be countywide.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: So in a blighted area such as
Commissioner Coletta's, Commissioner Coyle's, or myself who have
these areas, extremely blighted --
MR. MILLER: Right.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: -- and trying to pull themselves up, those
Page 64
September 11 - 12, 2007
who aren't even acquainted with these areas would then decide to vote
on them?
MR. MILLER: Let me give you the example why, too. A
general obligation bond, if the county were doing a general obligation
bond that you were going to add a mill or a half a mill or something
like that, that would be tacked on to everybody's tax bill in the county,
so you'd have a countywide election for that.
For an MSTU, which you have on the agenda today, for an
MSTU the only people whose tax bill is getting affected is the people
in the MSTU. For a CRA, despite the fact that it's just based on the
taxable value within that CRA, it's a sliver of the overall county
millage that's going into that fund, which effectively is -- means less
money to the county on a countywide basis.
And as I said, there's no law on this, but our own analysis of it,
and from the Supreme Court's strong language in this case, we believe
you'd be kind of hard pressed to take the position that it's only the
CRA residents that would be able to vote.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, I'd just like to pursue that a
bit further.
MR. MILLER: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: The CRA has expenses.
MR. MILLER: Uh-huh.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: The salary of the CRA director is
paid from those expenses.
MR. MILLER: Right.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Or paid from the revenue --
MR. MILLER: Correct.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- from tax increment financing; is
that correct?
MR. MILLER: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That doesn't have to be put to a
Page 65
September 11 - 12,2007
vote of the entire county, does it?
MR. MILLER: No, no. This is just the matter of issuing debt
that's going to be payable from those ad valorem taxes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Now, in reference to the
term issuing debt, does that mean bonds?
MR. MILLER: It means all debt, loans, bonds, certificates,
whatever you want to call it.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So tax increment financing cannot
be used to pay for any interest on a loan or any principal on a loan, no
matter how the loan is structured?
MR. MILLER: Correct.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Is that correct?
MR. MILLER: Unless there's a referendum election and the
voters approve it.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Is there opportunity for the
taxpayers to vote on the creation of an agency that has the authority to
do that?
MR. MILLER: That's a good question. We haven't visited that
yet. That's something we'll be looking into.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
MR. MILLER: Now, in may, kind of the public input on this or
their interest in this, you know, if you're going to do a GO deal where
you're going to raise people's millage, you know, it makes sense to us,
and the Constitution requires it, that they would have to vote on that.
Do they want an extra tax on there?
In this case, no one's asking to raise anybody's taxes. They're just
saying, hey, you know, there's a piece of this millage that we are
throwing into this CRA fund, and we want to use it as security for a
debt.
So I would think from the public standpoint, if you could do a
good education process with them, their taxes aren't going up.
Nothing's going up, nothing's getting raised. It's just a matter of, can
Page 66
September 11 - 12, 2007
we use these ad valorem taxes that have been designated for the CRA
to service debt. That's the question.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And we -- you own some other
property in the Bayshore area. It has some value. How does that
value relate to the value of the property that you're seeking to
purchase?
MR. JACKSON: Could you clarify that for me, sir? Relating to
-- you mean the total value, total dollar value?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes.
MR. JACKSON: The total debt that we have incurred in real
property right now is greater than the amount of debt that would be
incurred by the purchase of this parcel.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. I guess I'm more concerned
about the equity you have in the other property.
MR. JACKSON: Yes, sir. We have enough equit -- we have
more equity in real property now than what would be on the purchase
of this property, if that's answering your question.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Can you swap land under this
process without going to the referendum?
MR. MILLER: If you're saying, could he exchange land for
another parcel of land? I think you probably could.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Could he sell the land and use the
profits from that sale --
MR. MILLER: Sure, sure.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- to purchase the new property in
the mini triangle?
MR. MILLER: Sure, sure.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
MR. MILLER: This is all just about debt.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, okay. Now, is there a way
that you can do that? Do you have enough -- is there a way you can
do that, David?
Page 67
September 11 - 12, 2007
MR. JACKSON: Yes, sir. We can sell current parcels oflands
that the CRA owns, and with that cash, we can either payoff the
current debt loan that we have or use it to purchase or expend on other
projects.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You don't want to pay off the
current debt loan because it's already approved.
MR. JACKSON: Correct.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay?
MR. JACKSON: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Now, what I'm looking for is a way
that we can use the equity in the other land that you own for the
purpose of getting -- the purpose of paying for the property that you
wish to acquire in the mini triangle.
MR. JACKSON: I would say that you would be able to do that.
The only thing keeping it from occurring before the closing date of the
current property is that we have to advertise that because it's a sale of
public lands, just like the county would do on its property. That
would be a process that we would have to go through that
advertisement part of it.
However, if we had a parcel that was of greater value than the
current parcel and we put it up for -- advertise it for sale and a private
party came in and the CRA board agreed to sell it to them, then yes,
sir, that money could be used to purchase this property.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Why don't we pursue that a little
bit. I mean, not here, but can you begin to evaluate the ramifications
of doing that and how -- whether it will be sufficient to do the job?
MR. JACKSON: Well, it's -- it would be more than enough
funds -- it would be more than enough funds to sell and purchase the
parcel in the triangle, yes, sir, it would; however, the time issue would
be the only issue that I'd have to work out. One is, first, advertising it;
second, finding a party, and then getting the agreement accomplished
through the board and through the legal processes, and then the
Page 68
September 11 - 12, 2007
money, once it goes to closing, can be transferred as if you were
buying one house and then another and transferring the money again.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Exactly. But what I'm suggesting
to you, that it is probably less cumbersome to go through the process
of arranging this kind of transaction than it would be to go through the
process of a public educational process, a referendum, and then
waiting for the referendum before you can begin to take any action on
anything. The only important thing is that we make sure it's legal and
it's sufficient.
MR. JACKSON: Yes, sir. We always follow the rules. We
always do everything legally. If that is the direction of the CRA
board, I will pursue on that track.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah, this brings up another part of
the question. Instead of selling the property -- because obviously what
you're trying to do is put together a group of properties to build the
overall plan that you have.
If the property that we own presently is of higher value than
when we purchased it, or the CRA purchased it, is it possible just to
use that property as collateral and not have to get rid of the property?
As long as the property value is higher than what you paid for it.
MR. MILLER: Collateral in the sense of securing what though?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Securing -- securing the money to
purchase this other property.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's the problem.
MR. MILLER: I think that would almost look like -- if what
you're suggesting is the seller of the new would be, in effect, giving
you -- and taking a note back from you. I mean, they're almost selling
it to you on an installment basis with the other property as collateral. I
think there's a couple problems with that. I think the court might view
that as debt because it's paid out over time.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: But the property is of more value
Page 69
September 11 - 12, 2007
than they purchased it, after they bought it, cleared it off, then it's just
sitting there, but now the value has gone up.
MR. MILLER: Right. But I'm saying, the person who's selling it
for $3 and a half million wants $3 and a half million on the closing
date, and if you're asking them to maybe take it over time where the
CRA could pay him over time from his normal ad valorem collection
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Using that with the bank to make
sure that the person that's going to sell it to you then says -- the bank
looks at it and says, yeah, we're not going to lose on this because the
property that you're going to put up as collateral will be sufficient and
we can payoff the debt of the person that you're trying to buy the
property from.
MR. MILLER: Yeah. We'd have to look into that a little more.
The other problem with that is, as you know, that local governments
can't put liens or mortgages on their property, and I don't know if that
would end up violating that constitutional concept.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'm just trying to think outside the
box.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Good.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: If what the courts are saying,
that they're treating TIF monies as ad valorem dollars, I think there's
prohibition on time on how long those ad valorem dollars can be
bonded and secured for under the Constitution.
MR. MILLER: And that would be part of the referendum.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right.
MR. MILLER: When you do a referendum election, you usually
layout the length of time.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Wouldn't it be better to ask the
legislators to clarify ad valorem or clarify section 9 in the
constitution?
Page 70
September 11 - 12,2007
MR. MILLER: Well, the problem -- you hit the problem though.
It's a constitutional question. It's not a legislative question.
The legislature all the time passes laws that the Supreme Court
comes back and says, sorry, that's unconstitutional. And that's
effectively what they're saying, because under Chapter 163, it lays out
all of the CRA rules, and it says that you can issue debt payable from
TIF monies without a referendum --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So they're saying the legislators
MR. MILLER: They're saying that that's --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- the statutes doesn't conform to
the Constitution?
MR. MILLER: Correct, to the Constitution, which is -- you
know, not to belabor, but I mean, in 1980 --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, this isn't complicated.
MR. MILLER: In 1980, the Supreme Court of Florida said it
was fine, and that's been the law of the land for 27 years, and there
really is a distinction between TIF dollars and levying a new millage
to make people service a debt.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Correct.
MR. MILLER: And it was a 7-0 vote, and everyone's shocked.
And there is -- there is a move to have a rehearing. Escambia County,
I believe, is going to ask for a motion for rehearing. Our firm had
issued an amicus brief in the earlier case, and we're asking for a
rehearing. So hopefully some of this will get clarified. I mean, I
wouldn't keep my fingers crossed that after a 7-0 vote they're going to
turn around and go the other way, but we're hoping for some
clarification on things like, who would have to vote in a referendum
and, you know, items like that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. Now, do we want to hear
from the attorneys for our county, or do you have any comments?
Page 71
September 11 - 12, 2007
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Madam Chair, I think
Commissioner Coyle gave some good guidance, and I think at this
point, as the CRA board, that we need to continue these items
indefinitely.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I think we need to work on two
fronts. I think we should look at the language in case we have to go to
the ballot so that we do have something available for the upcoming
primary, just as a backup, and then I think we also need to make sure
that the resources that we have within the county here, county attorney
and whoever else, to investigate exactly, you know, what -- where this
puts us so that we can work on that section. And then if we do run
into a problem, then at least we've got time to get it on the ballot, and
it will be up for vote in -- January 29th.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: So do you have clear direction -- yes, Mr.
Mudd.
MR. MUDD: Ma'am, I don't -- Commissioner Coyle gave some
-- was talking about selling property we already have, okay, as long as
it's sold for the purposes for the CRA and it meets in the Growth
Management Plan, and Mr. Jackson said that.
Mr. Jackson has some more pressing needs though. He has a
contract out to buy a particular property for $3.5 million, and you have
$100,000 hanging, okay. He basically stated in his presentation to you
that he has asked the seller if they would extend the sale agreement so
we wouldn't lose our $100,000 until such time as we could hold the
referendum and go through this particular item if you so choose to
continue it.
To get at Commissioner Halas's particular issue, your deadline
for referendum to the Supervisor of Elections for the 29 January,
2008, vote that's going on out there is the 4th of December. So that
language would have to be already vetted to you as a board and
approved and drafted by our county attorney staff in order to make
Page 72
September 11 - 12, 2007
that happen, in order to get that done.
Now, one of the other options that Mr. Jackson did not ask -- say
to you is, if the seller will not extend through the referendum, will the
seller forgive us for the $100,000 that's promised as kind of our --
because of the Supreme Court judgment that just transpired, which we
had no idea was going to transpire and has taken everybody by
surprise, and that's one option that Mr. Jackson didn't basically relay
to the board, but I would recommend that the board have that as a
backup, if the seller will not extend through the referendum for us, and
that's there, would he forgive us on the $100,000 because of the
Supreme Court decision.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Any other comments by
commissioners?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Do you have direction? Do you need it
clarified?
MR. JACKSON: In may, Madam Chairman, is just express
what I've heard, is to proceed with advertising to sell current
properties that may have an equal or greater value and see what the
results are of that, continue my dialogue with the seller and seller's
agent, continue dialogue with adjacent property owners, and then also
work on the language for referendum and bring that back to you if that
is the final course of action to go on those things.
So I've got my tasks laid out for me here to report back on the
25th of September with an update of what's going on with that. Is that
-- did I miss anything in that lineup?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah, I think the $100,000 about
seeing what the seller -- if the seller will --either a couple of options
where -- since the Supreme Court ruling came out, that maybe they'll
be nice people and give us back the $100,000, or if the -- hold on until
we figure out the best course of action in regards to acquiring this
piece of property.
Page 73
September 11 - 12, 2007
MR. JACKSON: Yes, sir. That will be included in my dialogue
with the seller and the seller's agent.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Very good.
MR. WEIGEL: Madam chair, I would ask that the board take a
motion and vote approving that direction so it's officialized.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I have a motion to approve.
MR. MILLER: Could I clarify a point --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes.
MR. MILLER: -- just one second on Commissioner Coyle's
suggestion, which I thought was a good one. Depending upon which
parcels we're talking about, you have -- the CRA has an existing line
of credit with Wachovia right now that they've purchased some land
from. Pursuant to that agreement, sales of land that were financed, the
acquisition of which was financed by that line, are supposed to be
used to pay down the line.
So to the extent that you're talking about parcels that have
already been financed with that line of credit, you may have some
restrictions. Now, we could always go back to Wachovia, explain the
situation, and see if they'd be willing to amend those provisions or
waive them for a particular parcel, and they may, but that is part of
their security and they had intended that the line get paid down with
land sales if those -- if the land was bought with the line of credit.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You could deal with that by giving
them an interest in the lands that you're purchasing in the mini
triangle, so you can swap interests, if you wish, okay. But there are
ways to do this, yeah.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I have a motion on the floor by
Commissioner Halas and a second by Commissioner Coletta (sic).
Any further discussion?
(No response.)
Page 74
September 11 - 12,2007
CHAIRMAN FIALA: All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you very much. And the CRA
board meeting --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We need a --
MR. MUDD: Madam chair--
CHAIRMAN FIALA: -- will continue.
MR. MUDD: You could -- if you could vote to continue item
14A indefinitely, that would be good, too.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So moved.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I have a motion to continue
indefinitely. All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign?
(No response.)
Item #14B
RECOMMENDATION FOR THE COMMUNITY
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY TO APPROVE THE PURCHASE
OF A RESIDENTIAL (MOBILE HOME) LOT IN THE
Page 75
September 11 - 12,2007
BA YSHORE AREA OF THE CRA AS PART OF A CRA
RESIDENTIAL INFILL PROJECT; TO APPROVE PAYMENT
FROM AND AUTHORIZE THE CRA CHAIRMAN TO MAKE A
DRAW FROM THE BA YSHORE GATEWAY TRIANGLE CRA
W ACHOVIA BANK LINE OF CREDIT IN THE AMOUNT OF
$90,000 PLUS COST AND EXPENSES TO COMPLETE THE
SALE OF SUBJECT PROPERTY; AND APPROVE ANY AND
ALL NECESSARY BUDGET AMENDMENTS. SITE ADDRESS:
4000 HARVEST COURT ($90,000) - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Next item, ma'am, is the move of item 16Gl to
14B. Again, an on-or-about 11 a.m. It's a recommendation for the
Community Redevelopment Agency to approve the purchase of a
residential mobile home lot in the Bayshore area of the CRA as part of
a CRA residential infill project to approve payment from and
authorize the CRA chairman to make a draw from the Bayshore
Gateway Triangle CRA Wachovia Bank line of credit in the amount
of $90 thousand, plus and expenses, to complete the sale of subject
property and approve any and all necessary budget amendments.
Site address is 4000 Harvest Court, and Mr. David Jackson, your
director of the CRA, will present.
MR. JACKSON: Thank you, Mr. Mudd. David Jackson,
Bayshore Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Agency.
Madam Chairman, this item was moved to the regular agenda
because in the executive summary it stated that it was a line of -- to be
taken from the line of credit from Wachovia, which is issuing debt.
Based on the previous discussions we have, we're not allowed to do
that at this time.
With this -- and I'm asking for a favorable motion from the CRA
board to not only include this property but two other parcels. I don't
have their addresses at the present moment, but they're on Van Buren,
that you have already approved the contract and we were going to
Page 76
September 11 - 12, 2007
closing next week.
So it would be two of the parcels already approved, in contract,
completed, just waiting for the closing date and this property also, and
they would come from CRA budgeted capital improvements line. We
have sufficient funds to cover the expenses of the purchase of these
properties and the associated closing cost fees. All the work has been
completed except for going to closing.
This would complete our residential infill property acquisitions,
and we will then RFP the properties again out to the building
community and have them build the gap housing, essential services,
workforce housing, in that area, removing mobile home trailers from
sites -- these are fee simple lots -- and putting them on with current
building code houses and get them back on the market under
ownership and back on the tax rolls.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I have a motion to approve by
Commissioner Henning, a second by Commissioner Halas.
Any discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign?
(No response.)
FIALA COLETTA: Thank you, David.
MR. JACKSON: Thank you.
FIALA COLETTA: Okay. Now with that, we adjourn the CRA
board meeting, and I return the gavel to Commissioner and Chairman
Page 77
September 11 - 12, 2007
Coletta.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you. We reconvene the
regular Board of Collier County Commissioners meeting.
Item #10C
RECOMMENDATION FOR THE COLLIER COUNTY BOARD
OF COMMISSIONERS (BCC) TO APPROVE A RESOLUTION
AUTHORIZING THE COLLIER COUNTY COMMUNITY
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA) TO ENTER INTO A
$9,000,000 REVOLVING LINE OF CREDIT AGREEMENT WITH
W ACHOVIA BANK; APPROVING THE ACTIONS TAKEN BY
THE CRA WITH RESPECT TO ITS APPROVAL OF THE LINE
OF CREDIT AGREEMENT; AND AUTHORIZE ALL
NECESSARY BUDGET AMENDMENTS. (DAVID JACKSON,
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BAYSHORE GATEWAY TRIANGLE
CRA) - MOTION TO CONTINUE INDEFINITELY - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, I need -- this is another item, it's
10C. It's on or about 11 a.m. It's a companion to the CRA item --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Motion to continue.
MR. MUDD: Indefinitely, right, sir?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Indefinitely.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We have a motion by Commissioner
Henning to continue it indefinitely, and a second by Commissioner
Halas.
Any discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Seeing none, all those in favor,
indicate by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
Page 78
September 11 - 12, 2007
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And the ayes have it, 5-0.
Item #10D
RESOLUTION 2007-246: A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY,
FLORIDA, ACTING AS THE GOVERNING BODY OF COLLIER
COUNTY, FLORIDA AND THE FOREST LAKES ROADWAY
AND DRAINAGE MUNICIPAL SERVICE TAXING UNIT,
AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF NOT EXCEEDING
$6,250,000 IN AGGREGATE PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA LIMITED GENERAL
OBLIGATION BONDS (FOREST LAKES ROADWAY AND
DRAINAGE MUNICIPAL SERVICE TAXING UNIT), SERIES
2007, TO FINANCE THE COSTS OF CERTAIN ROADWAY
LIGHTING, ROADWAY-RELATED DRAINAGE AND
ROADWAY RESTORATION WITHIN THE FOREST LAKES
MSTU AND TO PAY CERTAIN COSTS AND EXPENSES
INCURRED WITH THE ISSUANCE OF THE SERIES 2007
BONDS; PROVIDING FOR THE PAYMENT OF SAID BONDS
FROM AD VALOREM TAXATION LEVIED IN AN AMOUNT
WHICH SHALL NOT EXCEED FOUR MILLS ON ALL
TAXABLE PROPERTY WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF THE
MSTU; MAKING CERTAIN COVENANTS AND AGREEMENTS
IN CONNECTION THEREWITH; PROVIDING FOR THE
RIGHTS OF THE HOLDERS OF SUCH BONDS; AUTHORIZING
Page 79
September 11 - 12, 2007
THE AWARDING OF SAID SERIES 2007 BONDS PURSUANT
TO A PUBLIC BID; DELEGATING CERTAIN AUTHORITY TO
THE CHAIR FOR THE AWARD OF THE SERIES 2007 BONDS
AND THE APPROVAL OF THE TERMS AND DETAILS OF
SAID SERIES 2007 BONDS; AUTHORIZING THE
PUBLICATION OF A NOTICE OF SALE FOR THE SERIES 2007
BONDS OR A SUMMARY THEREOF; APPOINTING THE
PAYING AGENT AND REGISTRAR FOR SAID SERIES 2007
BONDS; AUTHORIZING THE DISTRIBUTION OF A
PRELIMINARY OFFICIAL STATEMENT AND THE
EXECUTION AND DELIVERY OF AN OFFICIAL STATEMENT
WITH RESPECT TO THE SERIES 2007 BONDS; AUTHORIZING
THE EXECUTION AND DELIVERY OF A CONTINUING
DISCLOSURE CERTIFICATE WITH RESPECT TO THE SERIES
2007 BONDS; AUTHORIZING MUNICIPAL BOND INSURANCE
FOR THE SERIES 2007 BONDS; AND PROVIDING AN
EFFECTIVE DATE - ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, the next item which has an 11 a.m.
on or about time certain, is a resolution of the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, acting as the governing
board of Collier County, Florida, and the Forest Lakes roadway and
drainage municipal services taxing unit authorizing the issuance of not
to exceed $6,250,000 in aggregate principal amount of Collier County,
Florida, limited general obligation bonds, Forest Lakes roadway and
drainage municipal services taxing unit, series 2007, to finance the
cost of certain roadway lighting, roadway-related drainage, and
roadway restoration within the Forest Lakes MSTU and to pay certain
costs and expenses incurred with the issuance of the series 2007
bonds; providing for the payment of said bonds from ad valorem
taxation levied in an amount which shall not exceed four mills on all
taxable property within the boundaries of the MSTU; making certain
Page 80
September 11 - 12,2007
covenants and agreements in connection therewith; providing for the
rights of the holders of such bonds; authorizing the awarding of said
series 2007 bonds pursuant to the public bid; delegating certain
authority to the chair for the award of the series 2007 bonds; and
approval of the terms and details of said series 20007 bonds;
authorizing the publication of a notice of sale for series 2007 bonds, or
a summary thereof; appointing the payment agent and registrar for
said series 2007 bonds; authorizing the distribution of a preliminary
official statement and the execution and delivery of an official
statement with respect to the series 2007 bonds; authorizing the
execution and delivery of a continuing disclosure certificate with
respect to series 2007 bonds; authorizing municipal bond insurance for
the series 2007 bonds; and providing an effective date.
Mr. Michael Smykowski, your director of the office of
management and budget, will present.
MR. SMYKOWSKI: Good morning, Commissioners. For the
record, Michael Smykowski, OMB director.
First of all, I'd like to start with a record correction, just for folks
who may be viewing. Mr. Mudd, I think, noted it in the change sheet
this morning. The initial published executive summary talked about a
countywide tax levy. This was the last of the 250 items on today's
agenda that was put together, and I used a Conservation Collier, which
is a countywide debt, executive summary as a template for this and
neglected to change the countywide language to that specific, to the
Forest Lakes MSTD.
So I want to be very clear. The repayment is solely going to be
borne by the folks within the boundaries, property owners within the
boundaries of the Forest Lakes MSTU based on the four mills that was
specifically approved via referendum on November 7,2006. It is not
a countywide levy, so I wanted to make that very clear and up front.
As Mr. Mudd noted, this is for roadway and drainage
improvements within the MSTD. The schedule calls for a competitive
Page 81
September 11 - 12, 2007
bid process that would -- the bonds are expected to be sold on
September 25,2007.
The millage is in place. There is a specific debt service millage
that would generate the funds required for the repayment of the
principal and interest on these bonds. Again, solely borne by the
property owners within the Forest Lakes roadway and drainage
MSTU.
There is a total of 4 mills levied for operations and maintenance.
The proposed millage is 2.7532 mills for fiscal year '08, which would
generate an estimated $650,000 which would be sufficient to repay the
principal and interest on this bond.
And the term of the bond is not to exceed 15 years from the --
date of issuance, excuse me. And the total amount of the bonds is not
to exceed the amount of $6.25 million, which is consistent with the
voter referendum that was approved in November of2006.
And with that, I'll entertain any questions, if you have any. And
the county's financial advisor is available, as well as bond counsel.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Coyle, I'm not too sure
if your light was on from earlier or not.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It was on previously but I do have
a question.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Please do, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Since we just discussed the use of
MSTU funds for certain things and it was approved by the MSTU
only, is there any way to create an MSTU in our redevelopment areas
that would permit them to allocate a portion of their taxes that would
not be in conflict with the court's rule?
MR. MILLER: (Nods head.)
MR. SMYKOWSKI: I'll defer to Mr. Miller. That may call for
some legal opinion.
MR. MILLER: No. I think that's another alternative that -- I
mean, you can create MSTU's for a variety of purposes, and as long as
Page 82
September 11 - 12,2007
it was created -- and I believe those are subject to referendum, and
then whatever debt you issue to finance the improvements would also
be subject to referendum.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
MR. MILLER: That would be another avenue.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Could we throw that into the pot
for evaluation for potential solutions to this problem? Does the board
have a --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, that's good.
MR. MILLER: The intent making smaller the group of
electorates that had to vote in the referendum.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: The people who are spending the
money for their benefit are the people who should be making the
decisions about how to do it, and it just might be that we'd have to
revise the way we set up redevelopment areas in the future.
MR. MILLER: Correct, correct.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm going to make a motion to
approve this resolution and directing staff to assign a number to the
resolution.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. We have a motion by
Commissioner Henning, second by Commissioner Coyle.
Any discussion? Yes, Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah. Just to follow up on
Commissioner Coyle. Would it be better off maybe to look at an
MSTBU, therefore, if we have any more tax cuts that are going to be
passed down, that an MSTBU would be better because that way there
wouldn't be any loss of revenue?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. I would just say, whatever
is the most appropriate for the situation, yeah.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Now -- excuse me.
Page 83
September 11 - 12, 2007
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Go ahead, Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. One of the -- one of the things
is, in this particular area, these are blighted areas and the tax increment
funding comes off of their tax base, right? I mean, above their tax
base.
Now, how would you do an MSBU or whatever? Because it's
already a blighted area that can't afford anything, and we're using this
to improve the area so that it brings it up to at least a safe community
standard.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, I think our hands are
somewhat tied, so we can't use TIF funds. So we have to figure out
what else there is available, and it could be a very small millage. It
doesn't have to be something that would be with excruciating pain, but
it would be something that they could still get after to rebuild the
community.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah. Isn't there a way possibly
that we can discover wording that would accomplish the same purpose
with the same dollars without charging the people in that area?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, it wasn't my intent to--
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- charge people additional taxes.
It was only my intent to give them a voice in how they use the taxes
that they've had in very much the same way that we made a decision
to carve out a certain amount of millage from our property taxes to
allocate to stormwater, and I think there are imaginative ways to deal
with this issue, and I wasn't proposing a complete solution. I was
merely proposing an idea that should be evaluated.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. Thank you for clarification.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, I believe today it's got immense
ramifications, okay, to the CRA issue. You know, the one thing -- I'm
sitting here and I listen to bond counsel basically talk to you about,
because it's a TIF and it has impacts and it has to do with ad valorem,
Page 84
September 11 - 12, 2007
all I could think about was the City of Naples' new parking garage that
they're going to take a loan for and they need now a referendum in
order to take that loan, countywide, not just the city, because they're
getting our TIF dollars. And I'm kind of going, this is -- this is going
to have -- it's going to be painful, and it has large ramifications across
the state.
And, you know, what -- God bless David Jackson. He was trying
to bundle stuff together in order to get everything together and to get
this thing moving in the right direction in the Bayshore Gateway
Triangle, and it had an initiative to it, and it was really moving
forward. And it's like, well, we took three steps forward. Now we're
taking four steps backwards as we're trying to get through that.
And I believe Mr. Jackson, bond counsel, and everybody else,
will examine this particular item to the 'nth degree and take a look at
every particular option that we could possibly get ahold of, because
countywide referendums are difficult. They can be expensive if you
have to go through a PR campaign to educate the electorate on the
particular issue, and that's going to be over and above the item before
you even get there.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Right. And to just finish what I was
going to say, our people -- the people of Collier County I don't think
even understand what a TIF fund is. I would bet most of the people
sitting in the audience don't. They're just not familiar with it if it
doesn't affect them directly, and that would be a major challenge as it
is just trying to explain what they're voting on. And when people don't
understand, they vote no.
MR. SMYKOWSKI: Yes, ma'am. And to give you an extreme
example, you know, you talk about the Naples parking garage or even
Mr. Jackson buying property, if you're forced to go to a countywide
referendum, just think of the person who lives in Immokalee or the far
reaches of Golden Gate Estates in the eastern part of the county, in
terms of a marketing campaign, what's their incentive to vote for a
Page 85
September 11 - 12,2007
parking garage in downtown Naples, even though it does not result in
a millage increase to them, you know, the--
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Which goes back to what I said
initially.
MR. SMYKOWSKI: Exactly. You know, that court ruling has
ramifications far and wide for CRAs, and we're going to have to put
our thinking caps on, and we'll see if there's any rehearing of this issue
toward clarification as Mr. Miller noted as well, and that may provide
some guidance as well.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, not to be disrespectful, but
maybe this issue or issues surrounding it would be better discussed in
a workshop. Weare on a different item than the CRA, and we have a
lot of people here that we need to hear from.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: In any case, we do have a motion on
the floor, I believe it was Commissioner Henning --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: -- and seconded by Commissioner
Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: (Nods head.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Any other discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Hearing none, all those in favor,
indicate by -- I'm sorry. Did you have --
MS. FILSON: I'm just watching for a vote.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. All those in favor, indicate by
saymg aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
Page 86
September 11 - 12, 2007
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: The ayes have it, 5-0.
MR. SMYKOWSKI: Thank you.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us back to public
petitions.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Probably got time for one more.
Item #6B
PUBLIC PETITION REQUEST BY ALEX BROWN TO DISCUSS
THE LACK OF SOLAR POWER SOURCES - DISCUSSED
MR. MUDD: It's 6B. It's a public petition request by Alex
Brown to discuss the lack of solar power sources.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yes, Mr. Brown. Please come up and
state your name for the record.
MR. BROWN: Yes. Good afternoon, I'm Alex Brown. And as
you've noted, we've had -- everybody's aware about the global
problem of warming coming on with all our burning of the fossil fuels
lately.
And I'd like to recommend that we put into our building codes
that we try to use some solar heating in all new homes that are going
in and commercial buildings and put it into our building codes for all
the commercial things.
It's going to be cutting down the cost of 15 to 30 percent, as I
generally understand, that most of it's going into the electric is
basically what most of us use, and not propane, which is used up
north, but around here, and we should be the leader of the country
really, and mostly the state.
Southwest Florida is the sunshine state, and we're wasting all this
sunshine and we're burning electricity to heat water. And basically in
Page 87
September 11 - 12, 2007
a new house, it's only going to cost maybe $1,500 commercially,
maybe $3,000 on the research we've done in basically looking around
on it.
And we're wasting all this fuel just to heat water, and here we are
in Southwest Florida, and we can use the solar hot water on the new
construction and have it mandated into a building code and maybe
give some kind of, you know, grants or assistance that people catch up
later on and save this, you know, from burning the old fossil fuels that
are being used just to heat water.
It's kind of ridiculous. Here we are in the sunshine state and not
using that -- and try to catch up and build an industry here that we can
have building these units even and selling them maybe just statewide
and make Collier County a leader in the state, if not the country, and
show that we can show some initiative, you know, and pollution, and
start the environmental front runners and have clean industry coming
here and show some green, and maybe the first step, I think, should be
that way, that -- if we go that way we can maybe start making it
mandatory that we go even -- even it go a step further later on and
make it a backup system for electrical. Even then -- hurricanes come
by, then people are going to be independent from the power grid, you
know, that way everybody would have their -- basically. It wouldn't
run everything, but they'd still have the refrigeration and TV set or
radio or something, away from the power grid, and they wouldn't have
to worry about the refrigeration. They'd still have everything else, and
maybe even a battery system or something at night, but at least during
the day they would be able to have their refrigeration.
If they even have that, it would still keep their things good. And
if it was a -- mandatory here around the middle of the, you know,
hurricane zone -- and when they're not running it, they could sell it
back to the power company.
And we're wasting all this solar energy that we'd have, and we
could even build a market here if we -- start it right here in Collier
Page 88
September 11 - 12, 2007
County. I got several ideas about how to do that -- as well as using
this high energy that's coming in here from the sun.
I've been working with some people from -- that I know in
Switzerland. We've been working on a theory and have worked out
several different ideas how to use the high powered sun that we've got
down here. If we can get enough relays and systems through the
magnifying -- just heavy-duty magnifying system to heat in a series,
that we can get such hot water to come out that we can heat it up
almost to 5,000 degrees, we can separate the molecules in there and
make hydrogen fuel, that we can get liquid hydrogen fuel and possibly
make a plant where we could actually turn out some liquid hydrogen
and get a fuel system going, but that would be later down the line, too.
That would be a big project.
But I think we could start maybe making Collier County a leader
in the system here and make it really a very solar energy type system
here in the entire county. And that would probably be the first really
step to make it a mandatory system that all new structures in the entire
county be, you know, all -- why waste all this thing just to heat water
and waste all that beautiful sunshine on nothing and waste electricity
and burning oil and coal just to heat water and -- here in the sunshine
state.
Something that took Mother Nature 65 million years to make in
oil, we're burning away on just simply nothing.
And it's just a simple waste of nothing. For 65 million years that
it took Mother Nature to burn, we've burned it up in a hundred years.
We've already burned -- almost half the oil in the world is already
gone, and that's a fact. We all know that by now. And it's polluted the
air. We should be the leader in the country, I think, and start
something.
That's basically what I've had to say. I wish I had more to give
you in simple designs, but we haven't got really everything back on a
hard design for the hydrogen plant. But I think the first step should
Page 89
September 11 - 12,2007
really be to get that hot water system going. There's several designs on
the market, but simple things like even just a 55-gallon drum sitting
right outside, you can just put that outside just for the sample yourself,
and you can see how hot that gets. It's simple systems like that. It's
not going to add much cost to a house down here, a $500,000 house.
You know, $1,500 extra cost is going to save you that much money in
a couple years. You're going to get the money back and then it's going
to start saving money.
That's basically all I have to say right now.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, you said a lot, Mr. Brown. And
I want to tell you, everything you said -- I'm more impressed with
your presentation today than I've been with many presentations I've
heard in many months now.
You got -- you're hitting the nail right on the head. What are we
doing? We're doing very little. I don't know. Is there an initiative
underway for green buildings in Collier County? Anything at the
county level? I know Sarasota, I toured one there back about four
months ago and was extremely impressed with it. Are we doing
anything in Collier County to work towards this direction?
MR. MUDD: Sir, you don't have anything per se on your books
for green buildings, and I don't want to speak out of turn, unless Mr.
Schmitt knows of any. Government buildings, we institute green
processes where they make sense. For instance, we basically use ice
for the air-conditioning that -- we do that particular issue in the county
when we do a new building.
When you get into green processes, it normally increases the cost
of construction on that particular issue, so it gets into the increase in
cost based on a repayment that you'll get in the future.
One of the things that I've talked to staff about, and Mr. French is
here, is the Public Services Commission and some drives in the state,
and I know the governor is also pushing the environmental particular
cost.
Page 90
September 11 - 12, 2007
I believe one of the biggest distractors from solar power right
now in this state is the fact that when you have your solar power
system up on your home and you're using the electricity in your home,
everything is fine. When there's extra electricity from your solar
power cells -- and I believe that the speaker, Mr. Brown, alluded to a
battery system. You know, sometimes that gets to be a little
complicated and a little bit cumbersome in a house in Florida that has
no basement.
But it would be nice if you had extra power, you could sell it
back to the electrical providers of the state, and then maybe we
wouldn't have to build expansions to our power plants.
Right now when it gets sold back to the power providers in the
state, they give you pennies on the dollar as far as the market value of
that particular electrical energy that you basically made.
And a perfect example of that is the Lee County garbage
incineration system that makes electricity. And one of the things that
they haven't been able to get over is the fact that they're getting about
10 cents on every dollar's worth of power that they're generating.
So it's going back to the utility company, they give them 10
cents, and then they sell the power that's generated for a dollar, and
they make a profit. If there was some kind of market incentive
through the Public Services Commission of the State of Florida and
they tackled that whereby you can at least get a market rate for what
you produce that's extra to your needs on your house so that if you had
extra during the daytime and at nighttime you wanted to turn on your
lights, that you could use that, and it was almost a one-to-one swap,
then I believe there'd be -- it would be incentivized throughout the
entire state without having to go through a grant process, so --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Mr. Mudd, I understand there's more
to this than meets the eye. I mean, there's all depths of it. There's
simple things like solar collectors to be able to just heat your
swimming pool. I mean, many of us already do it. Some of the more
Page 91
September 11 - 12, 2007
affluent neighbors that we have in this community don't bother. They
just use natural gas, propane, or electricity without any concerns of,
you know, the environment or the natural supply of that particular
energy source. I like what Mr. Brown's saying.
MR. BROWN: And there's also a thing about -- excuse me.
There's also putting in a reserve tank, too.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, I know that, Mr. Brown. That's
all the details to get you to where you have to be in the future with
this. The thing is is that Collier County government is not doing
anything at this point in time in that particular direction.
MR. BROWN: As far as I know, nothing.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yeah. What I wanted to say is that
I'm going to dedicate my remaining time on the commission, however
long that may be, working towards this direction. I hope that today's
discussion will lead us to a workshop and maybe eventually a
committee that will start to study these alternatives and how we can
start to get, through voluntary means, get our residents here to start
picking up on it. I'm sure there's numerous grants available out there.
There's all sorts of federal and state help that would probably jump at
the opportunity. There's other communities that have already stepped
forward and started this process going.
I really appreciate you being here today, and I have other
commissioners that want to speak. Well, I thought I had others. I got
one.
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. I don't have any
questions or comments to the speaker.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: What about a workshop sometime in
the future; would you be opposed to that?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I would like to know how
many in the room has any alternative resources that they're using
today?
Page 92
September 11 - 12, 2007
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, that's what a workshop's all
about. Mr. DeLony, he's using quite a bit.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay, Commissioner. I think I
have the floor.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I got it, you know, to a limited
degree. I heat the swimming pool with it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You know, those resources are
available for people today, and maybe a promotional campaign like
what the community of Orlando is doing for green buildings instead of
government mandating it.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: No. I didn't say anything about
mandating. You're reading something into what I'm suggesting. I'm
suggesting --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Again, I have the floor --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: You go right ahead, Commissioner
Henning. Just don't misinterpret what I'm saying.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. And I didn't say you.
We're talking about what is asked by the public. The petitioner is
asking us to mandate.
MR. BROWN: I'm saying an ordinance. I mean, what do you
want to have a legacy be though?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Chairman, you understand
that I'm not saying that you're mandating. I'm responding to --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Please continue, Commissioner
Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: But I think there's other ways to
approach it by strongly suggesting instead of another government
mandate. And of course, we know how we like that. Right now I
have a heat exchanger on my system, and I use solar. That's an option
out there. I don't think government needs to mandate.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I agree with you about mandate. And
also, too, I just wanted to mention, I do think that there's an
Page 93
September 11 - 12,2007
educational process that the public would benefit by greatly if a
workshop was to take place. And at that point in time would be the
determination of this commission based upon the public input that
they got. But by no means would I be agreeable to a mandate.
Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Only thing I'll say, to chime in
here, is that I think everybody in the future, as power costs go up, I
think that then it becomes cost effective.
At this point in time, I think I understand where you're coming
from. It's something that we all should look at, but I think we also
need to look at ways of selling this commodity back to the power
company, as brought up by the county manager, and that the citizens
who get involved in this, that it's affordable and effective for them to
get the cost that they're going to incur into this brought into -- being
able to sell it back to the power company. So I think we have to look
at the cost effectiveness when we get involved in this also.
MR. BROWN: Now, that's -- you're talking about electrical?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Electrical power, yes, sir.
MR. BROWN: But I'm talking about just one step, just taking
hot water. That can save your electric bill 15 to 20 percent, up to 30
percent.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Solar heat.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Mr. Brown, we heard you. And
Commissioner Halas, we appreciate your input back. Let's leave it
where it is right now. You have awoken the public conscience out
there as to what the possibilities are. Let's see what the next step may
be down the road, okay?
MR. BROWN: All right. I appreciate your time.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you for coming here today.
And with that, we're going to take a one-hour lunch break, and
we'll reconvene here at 1:01.
MR. BROWN: Okay. Thank you.
Page 94
September 11 - 12,2007
(A luncheon recess was had.)
MR. MUDD: Ladies and gentlemen, if you'd please take your
seats.
Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, you have a hot mike.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Mr. Mudd, let's proceed with the
public petitions and finish them off.
MR. MUDD: Okay. And then we'll go to the Board of Zoning
Appeals and advertised public hearings.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: All right.
Item #6C
PUBLIC PETITION REQUEST BY JAMES KING TO DISCUSS
STORM/W ASTEW A TER DRAINAGE ON CAPTAINS COVE -
DISCUSSED
MR. MUDD: This brings us to 6C, which is a public petition
request by James King to discuss storm and wastewater drainage at
Captain's Cove.
MR. KING: Good afternoon. First let me start by thanking the
commissioners, and especially Commissioner Coyle's office, for
allowing me the opportunity to address you.
MR. MUDD: State your name, sir.
MR. KING: My name is James King. I live at 3308 Captain's
Cove. I don't know if this will come up for the audience or not.
MR. MUDD: I probably can get it up there.
MR. KING: Okay. To give you a brief summary, I've left a
package here for the commissioners last week.
Last August I was doing some redevelopment work on our
properties at 3308 and 3318 Captain's Cove. At that time I applied for
a right-of-way permit to put in new driveways. The right-of-way
department came right out. They examined it, they informed me that I
Page 95
September 11 - 12,2007
needed to put in swales and culverts. No problem.
Upon completion of that, the engineers in right-of-way noted that
the catch basin which is at -- located at the end of my driveway with a
pipe that goes under Captain's Cove exiting at 3307 -- we got weird
numbers down there -- needed to be cleaned out.
Road and bridge showed immediately up, hydro vac'ed
everything, and the man looked and said, well, we need to redo the
drainage ditch, taking the stormwater out to Haldeman Creek where it
was supposed to go. That's when the problem started.
Shortly afterwards they notified me that upon research, they
found that there are no right-of-ways from the end of Captains Cove to
Haldeman Creek for any stormwater drainage.
The new properties in our entire area are being affected by this
because of the redevelopment in the Bayshore area, new people are
coming in, older houses are being tore down. They are putting in their
houses to, you know, county specifications at this time.
The problem that we've found is when this subdivision was
originally platted sometime around 1953 -- it was called Sable Palms
-- this was not even a consideration, I guess, at that time.
I have dealt with numerous county departments. I have to say
everybody I've talked to has been more helpful than anything. They
have been pleasant. No problems. But nobody has the authorization
or the -- the word I'm looking for -- rank to do something about this.
Not anybody from stormwater drainage, road and bridge, anybody.
None of them have the right or the power to authorize anything to be
done.
I have not talked to the County Attorney's Office. I was relayed
a message from them by a gentleman from road and bridge that
basically stated, we should try to work out the problem ourselves.
When you're coming into putting in a right-of-way for drainage,
it's not anything that we know about on the end of our street. We're
not attorneys. We don't know the legal ramifications, the proper
Page 96
September 11 - 12,2007
documentation, you know, that needs to be done for this.
And it's just not Captain's Cove. It's every street on that one
section to the south of Areca running -- running down Areca on the
south side of Bayshore. Every street there, from what I can see on the
property appraiser's GIS maps, there is no drainage right-of-way, so
all the water's going to flow out.
I asked the road and bridge department where they received their
authorization to do this type of work, and they referred me to a 1920s
proclamation to the county commission, or from the county
commission, that gives the commissioners the right to do any rightful
and necessary work within the county.
I was unable to find that actual proclamation going through your
records here in the administration building. I do know, though, I do
need to file a permit to build a bomb shelter, and it must be removed
within 30 days after cessation of hostilities.
The only thing I could find was in the -- it's there. You find some
nice stuff in there.
Under the flood hazard reduction on the county ordinances, under
62-61, subparagraph 2, it states that no significant water is permitted
to flow from subject premises onto abutting properties in the county.
It also gives statutory authorization under section 62-26, governed by
the Florida Statutes under chapter 125.
We have several -- a lot of young children in our area. Two of
them are very disabled. One is almost legally blind. The other has
muscular dystrophy. I've got water backup big time, just after little
rains. If we had a tropical depression, this water would even flow
farther up onto the streets. And I believe -- you know, then I'm
starting to look at a health hazard and other stop -- you know, matters
that go involved.
I'm just asking that the commissioners can delegate to somebody
who has the authority to work with the owners, and the owners at
3300 Captain's Cove, which is the property at the very end that is
Page 97
September 11 - 12,2007
empty now, and the owner at 3307 Captain's Cove, they're willing to
talk, work with somebody so we can eliminate this problem of water
backing up, and at the same time, look at the other streets in our area
to eliminate this problem from happening, you know, in the near
future when other people are building and putting in the required
drainage that they have to under zoning. That's my -- what I'm asking
for.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. The county attorney has, I
think, rendered an opinion on ownership. Tell us why we can't get a
right-of-way to improve the stormwater drainage in this area.
MR. KLATZKOW: Well, you can get it if they want to give it to
you.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. So is the owner of that
property on the end here today?
MR. KING: No. The owner lives in Wisconsin. I have spoken to
his agent here in the area. He owns several properties in that area. He
is willing to work with the county, as I had informed road and bridge,
along with the owner at 3307, Sharon King. She lives on the property.
The current ditch runs through her property, and there is a very
large Royal Poinciana tree growing in the middle of it, which kind of
tells you the last time anything was done in that area which, to our
knowledge, nothing has been done sometime since it was platted out
from the '50s.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Now, how widespread is the
flooding that's caused by this particular problem?
MR. KING: Well, if you look, it backs up from 3307 underneath
the road, and then it backs up in the ditch. This year we've had no
tropical depressions, no really heavy rain, but after a normal afternoon
rain, I have water backing up all the way to 3318.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Let me make sure I understand.
3318is--
Page 98
September 11 - 12, 2007
MR. KING: Is the property right next door to 3308.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So there are, perhaps, two or three,
maybe four properties that are affected by this?
MR. KING: Under normal rain, three. In front of 3307, our
property at 3318, and our rental property at -- or our property at 3308,
excuse me, and our rental property at 3318.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. County Manager, what are
our guidelines with respect to the -- our so-called stormwater utility,
and how do we allocate funds to solve stormwater problems?
MR. MUDD: Sir, if it's a tertiary issue, which I believe this is,
they have funds for maintenance in order to do that, and that -- and
that's part of the process. This isn't necessarily a capital project. It
seems like this has to do with swales and cleaning those particular
issues out.
I believe what the gentleman is talking about is the fact that we
don't have the rights-of-way for the swales, and we -- there is a lot of
that in the Bayshore Triangle area where we don't have that. In those
particular cases where we don't, we can talk with the landowners that
are there and see if they're willing to give us the properties, the
easements, in order to put those swales in, and we can go about and do
that.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Here's my only concern,
and I know we're not supposed to try to reach a solution to this today,
it's just to decide whether or not we're going to go forward with it.
But I would like to express one concern. There are stormwater
problems all over Collier County. We've got to be careful that we
don't establish a precedent as to how we handle some of them.
Everybody should be treated the same.
And I think we've got to make sure that our policies for the
resolution of stormwater issues are developed and implemented that
way, and I would be happy to leave that determination up to you,
County Manager.
Page 99
September 11 - 12, 2007
But my proposal here is that -- is that the board just ask the
county manager and staff to get together with the property owners and
contact them, see if -- see if there is a solution that the county can --
can implement that is consistent with our policies with respect to
stormwater. And if possible, get the necessary rights-of-way and
solve the drainage problem. That's -- that would be my proposal.
MR. KING: That's all -- all we're asking is just -- everybody I've
talked to in the county staff, and they've all been very polite, very
helpful, returning calls. I've been very pleased with dealing with
them. They just lack the authority to move any farther ahead on a
project than what their job description entails.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, and that's -- they've done the
right thing. We have to make the policy decisions, but I don't think
any of us here want to make exceptions to the policy decisions for one
or two or three homeowners. We want to treat everyone the same
way.
MR. KING: Well, as I also brought out though, I am just
petitioning to try to solve our problem on Captain's Cove. But by
looking at the GIS maps, this is a problem in that whole section. It
was tabled to Sabal Palms in the '50s.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, Mr. Chairman, I would just
like to ask the board if they would agree to direct the county manager
to explore this problem and come back to us with solutions. He can
provide several if he wishes that -- we could choose among those.
And I'd just ask that they be consistent with our policies countywide.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: My only concern, which you
mentioned earlier, was the fact that we -- this isn't a unique situation.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It's not.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: You have Willoughby Acres, which
has had flooding for, my gosh, just about forever. I've got Golden
Gate Estates, which is the whole, what, about probably -- the
populated part of the county. It's probably about 20 percent, you
Page 100
September 11 - 12, 2007
know. And there's a tremendous amount of work that needs to be
done there. And I know everything is predicated upon availability of
dollars and how it fits.
Now, as far as stafflooking at it, I got no problem with them
telling them what the problem is. It doesn't mean that we're going to
come up with the money to fund it.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I understand that, and that was the
intent of my caveat that it be accomplished in accordance with our
policies in the county. I'm not asking for special consideration here
for one or two homeowners. But if this is a problem that should have
been taken care of by the county at some point in time, then I think we
at least ought to come up with a solution. The scheduling of the
solution is another problem.
There is also the possibility, I would presume, of an MSTU for
all of those people who live in these areas where this sort of thing is
occurring. And I think that could be part of the potential solution.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: My question would be is, is there
anything that prevents the neighbors from getting together and
working with the county to be able to make their own improvements?
MR. MUDD: No, sir, there's none. And what I've heard
Commissioner Coyle say, or his recommendation is, staff take a look
at it, come back with solutions to this board that are within the present
policies and give you some options to take a look at particular issues,
but not to take any action without it coming back to the board and
chopping off on it.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. I can live with that.
Let's go to commissioner -- I'm not too sure of the order here.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: It was me, then Halas, then
Henning.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Commissioner Fiala--
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: -- Halas, and then Henning.
Page 101
September 11 - 12, 2007
COMMISSIONER FIALA: As they look at it, maybe we can
address -- Mr. King said that people were willing to donate that
right-of-way, and I would think that that should play an important part
in how we possibly address -- address not only this situation, but
further ones. If people want our help to extend some of these swales
and so forth, if they want to help themselves by then donating the land
for a swale, maybe that could play an important part in the decisions.
And --
MR. KING: Yes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- it might help us out financially.
MR. KING: Oh, and I agree, and I believe that, you know, both
property owners are willing to work with the --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
MR. KING: I'm willing to work in whatever I can do. It's just,
you know, as far as putting in a whole ditch all the way from the one
section of Haldeman Creek and do it in accordance with county
standards, you know, the sodding, et cetera, et cetera, that would be,
you know, another issue involved.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: The land donation would certainly
help. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I think it's pretty clear, what
Commissioner Coyle stated is, work within the existing boards, adopt
a policy, and what more can you ask? Not asking for any special
consideration. So, yeah, I mean, I think it's a great suggestion and
solution.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah. Maybe I read something
into this that is not really there. I believe what I read in the summary
here was that there was a pipe at one time that went across the
neighbor's property and emptied into Haldeman Creek; is that correct?
MR. KING: No, sir. The pipe --
Page 102
September 11 - 12,2007
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
MR. KING: -- goes underneath Captain's Cove and empties in
front of the property, and then there was a ditch --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
MR. KING: -- that ran to the end of the pro -- to Haldeman.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you. I think we've given
sufficient direction to staff. Thank you very much for being here.
MR. KING: Thank you very much for your time.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Thank you. And if I could ask that
the county manager -- yeah, if the county manager could just keep me
informed as to the evaluation. Thank you.
MR. KING: Thank you.
Item #6D
PUBLIC PETITION REQUEST BY RICHARD ECKSTEIN TO
DISCUSS THE DISTRIBUTION OF A CHEMICAL FREE
FERTILIZER IN COLLIER COUNTY - DISCUSSED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, the next public petition is a public
petition request by Richard Eckstein to discuss the distribution of
chemical free fertilizer in Collier County.
MR. ECKSTEIN: Hello. My name's Richard Eckstein, Infinity
Fertilizer dot com. The reason I was wanting to petition the Collier
County government, that all the fertilizers that are being spread over
Collier County and the problems with the water. I have a natural
fertilizer. It's basically -- it's an ammonium nitrate-free fertilizer. I'd
like to gift it to Collier County to be able to distribute through the
county to the residents and businesses of Collier County.
And this product would be shipped down here via truck. And if
it's any way possible to do this, I'd like to talk to the county
Page 103
September 11 - 12,2007
commissioners to do this project.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah. I believe that staff is
presently working on some kind of a fertilizer ordinance that's going
to be coming before the Board of County Commissioners. So I think
it's a little premature in regards to where you're going with this and I
think we need to address that particular issue before we can go any
farther, but we are concerned about it, especially in the estuary
system, waterways. So there is some -- I believe staff is looking at
something of this nature.
MR. ECKSTEIN: So is it possible to be able to gift this product
to the county, distribute it to the residents?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: As I said earlier, right now it's a
little premature. I think we have to find out what the -- what's going
to be written in the ordinance and what's going to -- what we're going
to accept.
MR. ECKSTEIN: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: But I think it's, like I said, at some
later date, maybe we can look at that. But I appreciate your time here.
MR. ECKSTEIN: Okay. All right. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. Have you met with staff at all
and -- sir?
MR. MUDD: Sir, Mr. Eckstein?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Have you met with staff at all to let
them know of your product? Maybe they're not familiar with it, and
of the price that isn't involved or whatever, so that it might -- it might
help them. As long as they're meeting right now, it might help them in
their decision-making process. So I don't know who it is in staff that
would meet with you, but -- Mr. Mudd?
MR. MUDD: Ma'am, I would -- at this particular juncture two
people come to mind. Number one, the first one is Bill Lorenz, head
Page 104
September 11 - 12,2007
of environmental, okay, and number two is Marla Ramsey. She's got
more grass to fertilize than any person I know that we have around, so
-- and if there's a product that's out there that we might know, we can
get tested, we can try it out, and there's some things --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And if it's free, it might help Marla
to -- maybe even Marla can meet with him outside here. She's in the
back of the room right now.
MR. ECKSTEIN: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And at least learn of your product
and so forth. Okay. Thank you.
MR. ECKSTEIN: Yes. I also gave the county manager some
information about this product, that -- its makeup and testimonial
letters from different parties that have used it, commercial enterprises.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah. I read your letters in here,
thank you.
MR. ECKSTEIN: Okay. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. I think we need to make
sure that the process is fully understood. You know, the county
commissioners don't procure things. We have a procurement
department and they are required to go through competitive proposals
to procure materials and services for government by law. And
although you're giving the soil free, there is a shipping charge.
MR. ECKSTEIN: Yes, correct.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Ninety-four dollars per ton or
something?
MR. ECKSTEIN: Seven hundred dollars a ton.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Seven hundred dollars a ton.
MR. ECKSTEIN: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So there is -- there's a cost
associated with this. And we're not going to be able to make any
decisions about procuring things like this unless we go through the
Page 105
September 11 - 12, 2007
proper processes. And you'd have to start with the staff. You have to
provide them with a proposal outlining all the costs associated with it,
and then they might very well wish to consider other companies and
other products and other circumstances that have a competitive
procurement. That's the way we have to work under the law. So we
just can't arbitrarily say, you've got a good idea, let's buy it. It just
doesn't work that way unfortunately.
MR. ECKSTEIN: Yeah. I have free samples of this for the
county manager to disperse to whoever they need to do primary tests
on this product, so --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay, good.
MR. ECKSTEIN: And this is totally natural, there's no
ammonium nitrate in it, no synthetic fertilizer in it. It's a plant-based
fertilizer. It's been around for 15 years. I've sold a lot of it on the
Internet at Infinity Fertilizer dot com, and I'm trying to start up a new
website that will -- free fertilizer dot com, and the premises on that is
it's free, free from chemicals, free from basically damaging the
environment, algae blooms, fish kills, all that stuff that goes along
with chemical fertilize and ammonium nitrate fertilizer. So hopefully I
can get this project going.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you, sir. Appreciate you being
here today.
Item #6E
PUBLIC PETITION REQUEST BY JIM KRAMER TO DISCUSS
REMOV AL OF TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNS UPON
COMPLETION OF CONSTRUCTION ~ DISCUSSED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, the next public petition is 6E,
public petition request by Jim Kramer to discuss removal of control
Page 106
September 11 - 12,2007
signs upon completion of construction.
MR. KRAMER: Good afternoon, Commissioners. I'm Jim
Kramer from Naples Mobile Estates.
Close your eyes for a minute and picture this: What's the most
prevalent feature of landscape design in Collier County? Bob's
Barricades. There's cones, triangles, squares, hexagons, blinking
lights, et cetera, all designed to do one thing, warn us that construction
is ahead.
These are temporary traffic safety signs and they should be just
that, temporary, but you know that's not true. All over the county they
remain on the side of the road. Sometimes alone, sometimes piled up,
sometimes bent and broken left to distract us from our drive.
And your deputies are using these zones to sets speed traps. I
know we need some revenue but this is the wrong way to get it.
I recommend you ask staff for a report on the temporary traffic
controls that are no longer needed to protect us after construction is
complete. Get them off the streets, out of sight, and let us enjoy the
roads free and clear of these distractions. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you, Mr. Kramer. Okay.
MR. KRAMER: Oh, by the way, I find these signs in the public
right-of-way. Did we give permission? I see the guy on Collier TV
all the time telling us not to put these signs in the right-of-way. Do we
give permission to somebody to put these signs there?
MR. MUDD: If they apply for a permit, sir, and they do it the
right way, they can be permittable.
MR. KRAMER: Like, for instance, the water district?
MR. MUDD: But if they're -- but if they're not, then our code
enforcement people go out there, check the permits, and if they're not
permitted, they pick them up and put them in their truck and dispose
of them.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Those are snipe signs.
MR. SCHMITT: Snipe signs, exactly. We pick up about 100 to
Page 107
September 11 - 12,2007
150 a weekend.
MR. KRAMER: Okay. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm sure Mr. Kramer would be
happy to help you out.
MR. SCHMITT: I'd love to have his assistance, Commissioner.
We'll give him a call, pickup truck, and he can help us. Be great.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll give you his cell phone
number.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Next, Mr. Mudd?
MR. MUDD: I just learned a new term, a snipe sign.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I never heard that before.
MR. MUDD: Haven't heard of snipe sign before.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It's in section 5.06.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Mr. Mudd, next?
Item #6F
PUBLIC PETITION REQUEST BY JIM SCHULZE TO DISCUSS
THE TDR CONSERVATION PROGRAM - DISCUSSED
MR. MUDD: Next item is 6F. It's a public petition request by
Jim Schulze to discuss the TDR conservation program.
MR. SCHULZE: 'Afternoon. Let's see. I'm -- first I want to
warn you, I got a C in speech, so don't expect a whole lot here.
The purpose of the TDR program is to establish an equitable
method of protecting and conserving lands. This includes large (sic)
connected to wetland systems and significant areas of habitat for listed
speCIes.
Sending lands are those lands that have the highest degree of
environmental value and sensitivity and generally include significant
wetlands, uplands, and habitats for listed species, or habitat for listed
Page 108
September 11 - 12, 2007
speCIes.
On the sending lands, there are approximately 150 parcels in the
north and south Belle Meade that are 4.5 acres or less. Under the
current program, unless these parcels were severed prior to October
19, 1974, the parcels do not qualify for TDRs. I challenge anyone to
find the date on the LDC. The date that everyone is familiar with is
June 22, 1999.
The purpose or the intent of the TDR program is to provide a
viable mechanism for property owners of such environmentally
valuable lands to recoup lost value and development potential which
may be associated with the application of environmental preservation
standards to such lands. My comment would be, how can this be so --
with so many parcels not included in the program?
Prescribed ownings of lands surrounding these parcels, not
including the TDR program, would be impossible because of the risk
of involving private lands. Also because the state or county do not
have the right to go onto private lands to remove exotics, the exotic
control in the vicinity of these parcels will be ineffective.
The wind-blown seeds from exotics on privately held lands
would be a constant source of new exotic growth on the public lands.
Finally, if the owners of these parcels decide to participate in any
of the activities the county does allow, for example, farming, any
wildlife management program in the vicinity will be negated.
The creation of TDR credits. TDR credits are generated from
RFM use sending lands at a rate of one TDR credit per five acres of
RFM use sending land or for those legal non-conforming lots or
parcels of less than five acres that were in existence as of June 22,
1999, at a rate of one TDR credit per legal non-conforming lot or
parcel.
This implies that if a lot or parcel was in existence as of June 22,
1999, it qualifies for the TDR program. No mention of the date
October 19, 1974, can be found anywhere in the LDC.
Page 109
September 11 - 12, 2007
The Collier County appraiser shows the values of these lands to
be exactly the same as parcels severed prior to October, 1974.
Obviously if you cannot build on a lot, the value of that lot is
significantly less than the one you can. If the taxes are the same,
should not the rights be the same?
It goes on explaining the receiving lands and the densities and
how you transfer TDRs. Basically -- and there's no mention --
nowhere in the LDC is there any mention of October 19, 1974, to
qualify for legal non-conforming lots.
RFM use sending lands are those lands that have the highest
degree of environmental value and sensitivity and generally include
significant wetlands, uplands, and habitat for listed species. RFM use
sending lands are the principle target for preservation and
conservation.
If this is truly a conservation program, would not it service better
to control as much of the Belle Meade area as possible? If you have
the potential to put another 150 parcels -- you have the potential to put
another 150 into the TDR program.
There are no title exceptions on these illegal nonconforming lots.
The property taxes are exactly the same as the legal nonconforming
lots.
When I asked, how am I supposed to find out about this date,
1974, I was told, the only way you can really find it is if you Google
the date. And I'm like, how can I Google a date that I don't know
about? You know, but that was my answer. That was the only thing
that they could really give me.
I did talk with Nancy Payton with the Florida Wildlife
Federation. She emailed me. I emailed her my concerns. Her reply
to me: Hi, Jim. I immediately had the same question as you. Why
1974 and not 1999?
I am one of the authors of the Belle Meade -- North Belle Meade
overlay. I always understood June 22, 1999, as the ruling date with no
Page 110
September 11 - 12, 2007
exceptions. Based on what you sent me, I also question the 1974 date
for excluding certain parcels from the TDR program and request a
clarification from Collier County.
I cannot speak at the public petition. You may quote this email.
Nancy Payton.
One more thing I'd like to go over is, under the sending lands,
permitted uses. Agriculture -- and one that I found interesting was
detached -- and I'll read this word for word here. Detached
single-family dwelling units, including mobile homes, where the
mobile home overlay exists at a maximum density of one dwelling
unit per 40 acres or one dwelling unit per lot or parcel of less than 40
acres, which existed on or before June 22, 1999.
For the purpose of this provision, a lot or parcel which is deemed
to have been in existence on or before June 22, 1999, a lot or parcel
which is part of a subdivision recorded in the public records of Collier
County, a lot or parcel which has fixed -- limited fixed boundaries
described by metes and bounds or other specific legal description, the
description of which has been recorded in the public records of Collier
County on or before June 22, 1999, or a lot or parcel with limited
fixed boundaries for which the agreement for deed was executed prior
to June 22, 1999.
Nowhere in this is the date 1974, which basically is saying, from
what I'm reading, is that I can't get a TDR for my 2.5 acres, but I can
build a house on it now. So I'd just like you to look at this.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Why don't we do this. Let's
go to our attorney.
Jeff, could you comment on this?
MR. KLATZKOW: Yeah. My understanding is the only real
issue here is the smaller parcel, .38. I went to the property assessor's
website and I -- to locate it, and this is what I found. It's actually that
line -- that line.
MR. SCHULZE: That's one of them. I have another 2.5 acres
Page 111
September 11 - 12,2007
that's probably one section over from my other 2.5 acres.
MR. KLATZKOW: In may finish. So I blew it up a little bit
and you can see. That was a right-of-way easement and utility
easement for many years. Going through the property records,
apparently it was required by Mr. Townsend November, 2004.
Obviously from when you want to transfer development rights, you
have to have something that you can develop, and this property is not
developable for residential. It's 11 feet.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Be a problem with setbacks, right?
MR. KLATZKOW: If you put a to-foot setback -- even if you
waived it, it would just -- real narrow, real narrow house. So that -- I
don't know what to tell you. This is an undevelopable piece of
property.
MR. SCHULZE: But I also have a 2.5-acre lot that was turned
down also because it was severed in 1976, and it's less than -- it's
maybe a mile from my other 2.5 acres that was approved. And it's not
just my property either. There's 150 of these parcels out there at least.
MR. KLATZKOW: Any legal lots of record that you could have
developed on, you can get these development rights transferred. Any
illegal lots, and that's the key term, illegal lots, you're not going to do
it.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Wait. Let him finish, sir.
MR. KLATZKOW: That's just the ordinance. I don't know what
else to say.
MR. SCHULZE: There's nothing in here to describe an illegal
lot though. What's an illegal lot? I have a folio number. I have a
legal description. I'm paying taxes on it. I mean, doesn't that make it
legal?
MR. KLATZKOW: It's an illegal building lot.
MR. SCHULZE: That's not what the LDC says.
MR. KLATZKOW: It's an illegal building lot. You can farm on
that if you'd like, you can recreate on that if you'd like. You just can't
Page 112
September 11 - 12, 2007
put a house on that at this point in time.
MR. SCHULZE: I understand what you're saying, but what I'm
saying is, on the LDC, if you read it, it does not say anywhere in there
about a non-conforming illegal lot being considered a lot that's not
buildable. And if you read my permitted uses, it says right here in
black and white that ifit was before 1999, I can build a house on it.
All right? I can show it to you right here if you want to see it.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Is this -- okay. Let's go to
Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I was just going to say, I don't think
we should -- we can solve this today. Maybe we should be bringing
this back.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, it sounds like it's a legal issue.
I mean, the fact that Nancy Payton weighed in on it, and we haven't
heard you come out and specifically identify that part of our laws and
ordinances that says it. It's not something that wouldn't be eligible for
the transfer of development credit program.
MR. KLATZKOW: If you could--
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I don't know what to tell you, Jeff,
other than the fact --
MR. KLATZKOW: Yeah, if you could build a house on it, you
could transfer it, that's true.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: That's what it says? You have to be
able to have a piece of land that's buildable. In other words,
swampland wouldn't be buildable, so they couldn't apply?
MR. KLATZKOW: No. It's -- if you've got -- if you've got
sufficient acreage that you're allowed to put a house on, even if it's
swampland in Collier County, which always amazed me, you're
allowed to transfer those development rights off of those lands onto
another one. And the question then becomes, was this a buildable lot?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. We're not going to solve
Page 113
September 11 - 12,2007
this now, but I am interested in what the LDC of the growth
management says. So Mr. Klatzkow, in your free time, if you can
email me some information on where I can find this, what you're
referring to as buildable lot versus platted lot, I would like to --
MR. KLATZKOW: Sure.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. So at this point in time I guess
that's the direction. Mr. Klatzkow, would you share that -- would you
share that with all the commissioners?
MR. KLATZKOW: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And also to the person that petitioned
us today?
MR. KLATZKOW: Oh, yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And at that point in time, if there's
something that doesn't sit right, we'll take it up at another commission
meeting.
MR. KLATZKOW: We'll give a full analysis.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you. Thank you for being here
today.
MR. SCHULZE: Thank you.
Item #6G
PUBLIC PETITION REQUEST BY JOE HAMIL TON TO
DISCUSS COLLIER CONSERVATION PURCHASE OF
HAMILTON PROPERTY - DISCUSSED AND PROPERTY
OWNER CAN RESUBMIT PARCEL FOR RECONSIDERATION
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, the next public petition is 6G. It's
a public petition request by Joe Hamilton to discuss Collier
Conservation purchase of Hamilton property.
State your name for the record, sir.
Page 114
September 11 - 12, 2007
MR. STOKES: Good afternoon. I'm Julian Stokes with Integra
Realty Resources, Southwest Florida.
I'm here representing Joe Hamilton regarding a property -- I don't
know if you're familiar. It's commonly known as the Wind Dancer
parcel. It's east of -- and adjacent to Collier Seminole Park right there
at the curve. I've got a, not a great locational map, but it should give
you an idea. You can see it's just south and east of the -- I think that's
State Road 92 into Goodland.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: That land that has a right angle to it?
MR. STOKES: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay.
MR. STOKES: And is kind of hatched marked out there.
At the present time the property is or was being considered for
purchase by Collier County through the Collier Conservation program.
It is considered an important parcel in regards to preservation. It
represents a property of significant environmental concern, we feel.
And I think -- I don't know if we have representatives here from
Collier Conservation, Alex Sulecki, or with the Collier Seminole State
Park. I don't know if they want to say anything or they're just --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We want to hear you out first, sir.
And then at that point in time --
MR. STOKES: Okay. Certainly, certainly.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: -- we'll determine whether we want to
hear them or not.
MR. STOKES: Absolutely. Mr. Hamilton was originally asking
4.2 million on the form that he submitted to Collier Conservation.
They had appraisals done in accordance with their guidelines. The
appraisals came in and supported an offer of 1.7 million for the parcel,
which represents $8,760 per acre.
Mr. Hamilton is now asking the Board of County Commissioners
to consider an offer of 2.4 million, which represents a substantial
reduction in his offer of approximately $12,370 per acre.
Page 115
September 11 - 12, 2007
I'd like to say that -- first I'd like to thank you for your time and
consideration. I don't want to say that there's some urgency associated
with this, but there are other parties looking at the property,
specifically the Seminole tribe is presently doing their due diligence
on the property, and they're strongly considering purchasing the
property. My client thinks it should be preserved. But he's in, you
know, a position he'd like to sell the property.
So, again, if anybody has anything else to say, that's basically all
I have to say unless you have any questions from me.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I do believe that we have a regular
process we go through, but let me ask Alex to come up here and
comment on when you've said. I'm not too sure, but if this could go
back for reconsideration of the committee or --
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, I need to bring to your attention,
Mr. Stokes is not a registered lobbyist on the list that I was provided
by the Clerk of Courts, and he was lobbying the board and he's
representing a client, so --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay, sir. Technically you can't
come before -- well, not technically. You can't appear before this
commission unless you pay a $25 fee at the -- what is it, fourth floor?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Clerk's office, fourth floor.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Fourth floor. Just to remind you. I'm
not going to make an issue of it, but when you come back here again, I
would appreciate it very much if you'd make sure that you're
registered.
MR. STOKES: I will. As a matter of fact, I'll go upstairs and do
that now.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: That would be very much
appreciated, and if you would -- we'll take it from here. Thank you
very much.
You can sit down. If we have any questions, we'll call you back.
MS. SULECKI: Good afternoon. For the record, Alex Sulecki,
Page 116
September 11 - 12, 2007
coordinator of Conservation Collier. It's pretty much as Mr. Stokes
told you. The property went through our procedures. We had an
appraisal done, and in the early part of this year we made an offer to
the owner, April 9th, and we received an email on May 9th saying that
they would not accept our offer. At that point it was dropped off the
list, and this is the first that I've heard of anything beyond that.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: What was the offer?
MS. SULECKI: The offer was for 1,625,000, was the average of
two appraisals.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And is this something that you would
take back to the committee for reconsideration?
MS. SULECKI: Our ordinance says that parcels can come back
into the cycle. If they wanted to bring it back into the cycle, we would
probably go through that again, but we have a little bit of a gray area
about when offers are refused and then they want to come back and
have a new appraisal.
We have addressed this in our proposed changes to the purchase
policy that says that they would pay for that because, in essence, it
would turn out to be appraiser shopping or appraisal shopping.
So if they wanted to resubmit it, it would go through the process
and they would likely need to provide funds for us to reappraise it, and
then we would make that offer again. We -- our offer -- our policy is
not to negotiate.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. And so there's quite a bit of
difference between even the present offer and what we offered
previously, correct?
MS. SULECKI: That's true.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: What would be your
recommendations on this, considering the property itself and what you
do know?
MS. SULECKI: Well, I think we have a good policy, and I think
it's fair to everybody when we offer appraisal value, and we want to
Page 117
September 11 - 12, 2007
do the same for everybody.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: What is this property; is it
wetlands?
MS. SULECKI: It is wetlands, yes. And I can show you a map.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. No real development could
be done on it, is there?
MS. SULECKI: There is a little bit of development on it. It's got
a continual use. It's got an airboat tour operation. The rest is
wetlands.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: If I may ask an additional question.
If the Seminole Indian nation was able to secure this property, would
they be bound by our rules and regulations, state regulations and
federal regulations, or do they have free say of what they do?
MS. SULECKI: That I don't know, I'm sorry. It's more of a legal
question. Can't answer it, sorry.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Mr. Weigel, you look like you know.
MR. WEIGEL: Thank you, Alex.
Well, I think that -- I think that they're owning property that's not
reservation land, so until further notice, I'd say that it's subject to the
county regulations.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Any other suggestions from
the commissioners? Yes, Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I think we've always stuck
with our policy. We've tried to treat each one of these the same way
in a fair way, and I don't think we really should deviate, quite frankly.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: What would prevent them to come
back at some future date and just say, the offer you originally made,
we decided to accept it? Would that be something that would -- go
back to consideration? Just asking questions because I'm sure there's
more answers out there than we know of. It's just the right questions
Page 118
September 11 - 12, 2007
haven't been asked.
MS. SULECKI: Well, the appraisals are good for a certain
amount of time. One of our appraisals actually says it's good for up to
a year. The other appraisal doesn't say, but the inference is about six
months, which is an industry standard. So if they came back -- they're
already past the six months by a couple of days. If they came back
now, we'd only have technically one good appraisal. We'd still have
to redo it.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, how about if they were willing
to pay for the second appraisal and you pick the appraiser? Just--
MS. SULECKI: I would say that would work.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Just a suggestion. I'd hate to
tell --
MS. SULECKI: And then we'd make that offer.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: There might be an opportunity here
that may be a disaster in the making if the Seminole tribe can do what
they want to do separate from our codes and regulations, and I got a
feeling that they do have a certain amount of latitude. Do we really
want a casino to be going into that place? And it's just something for
thought as we go into this. I'm sorry I'm not giving you direction. I'm
MS. SULECKI: I can't comment on a casino. I don't know.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: -- just asking questions.
Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah. Who is this Joe Hamilton?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Joe Hamilton -- Joseph Hamilton. I
don't know. Related probably to the Hamiltons of Everglades City.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. That's what I was
wondering if there was any relation there.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yep. Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. I don't see any takers on
the board. Myself, I don't know if we need to solve it now, but I agree
Page 119
September 11 - 12,2007
with you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: What do we agree with? That's the
thing I'm trying to say. In other words, not to do anything or to allow
the petitioner at some point in time to be able to make an offer and
then be considered at that time? I see Commissioner Fiala --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Not to do anything.
Commissioner Fiala said it right. We have a great policy, and I don't
think that we need to --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Right.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The policy is the policy.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I don't mind if they want to come
back the way our policy states and make, you know, make this offer,
but I'd like to stick with our policy, yes.
MS. SULECKI: Thank you.
MR. MUDD: And I believe, Ms. Sulecki, just for clarification
for the board, because of the delay in the refusal to accept the offer,
they now have the ability to resubmit their parcel to be considered for
Conservation Collier; is that correct?
MS. SULECKI: You can certainly do that.
MR. MUDD: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay, fine. That gets us to where we
need to be.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you very much. Any other
questions?
MS. SULECKI: Thank you.
Item #7 A
RESOLUTION 2007-247: PE-2006-AR-10551, DEVOE FAMILY
LIMITED PARTNERSHIP II, REPRESENTED BY SANDRA
BOTTCHER OF Q. GRADY MINOR & ASSOCIATES, P.A., IS
Page 120
September 11 - 12, 2007
REQUESTING A PARKING EXEMPTION FOR THE DEVOE
SUZUKI DEALERSHIP. THE EXEMPTION SEEKS APPROVAL
OF AN OFF-SITE EMPLOYEE PARKING AREA ON A
RESIDENTIALLY-ZONED LOT TO SERVE THE DEVOE
SUZUKI DEALERSHIP IN THE ADJACENT COMMERCIALL Y-
ZONED DISTRICT. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, CONSISTING
OF 0.23 ACRES, IS LOCATED AT 1397 TRAIL TERRACE
DRIVE, ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF 14TH STREET
NORTH AND TRAIL TERRACE DRIVE, APPROXIMATELY 500
FEET SOUTH OF SOLANA ROAD, IN SECTION 22, TOWNSHIP
49 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA -
ADOPTED W /STIPULA TIONS
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, this brings us to Board of Zoning
Appeals. This is 7 A. It requires that all participants be sworn in and
ex parte disclosure be provided by commission members.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. All those that wish to
participate in this particular agenda item, stand at this time and be
sworn m.
MR. MUDD: This is the DeVoe family limited partnership,
represented by Sandra Bottcher of Q. Grady Minor & Associates,
requesting a parking exemption for the De V oe Suzuki dealership. It's
PE-2006-AR-I0551.
(The speakers were duly sworn.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Now, my fellow commissioners, there
for ex parte disclosure, we'll start with Commissioner Coyle.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes. I have met with Rich
Y ovanovich, Wayne Arnold, and Dick De V oe on this item, and I also
have emails from people who mostly were opposing this development.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Thank you. The only thing I
received on this was emails and talking with staff and, of course,
Page 121
September 11 - 12, 2007
reading the summary agenda.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. I talked to staff, I talked to
members of the Planning Commission, I had meetings with
Y ovanovich, Arnold, and DeVoe, and received emails.
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I've received emails.andI.ve
had a meeting also with Mr. De V oe, Mr. Y ovanovich, and Wayne
Arnold, and apparently I've even had a call. It's written down, but I
don't -- maybe when they called to make an appointment or
something.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I received an email.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: That's it?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's it.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And with that, please continue, Mr.
Arnold.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, and I'm sorry. I received
something that was handed to us at the desk today.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Same here. I think that's true
with all us commissioners.
Mr. Arnold, please.
MR. ARNOLD: Good afternoon. I'm Wayne Arnold with Q.
Grady Minor & Associates and representing the De V oe family
partnership today. With me is Rich Yovanovich, Dick DeVoe, we
also have Sandra Bottcher from our office who's worked on the site
planning for the DeVoe properties, and we also have Julian Stokes in
attendance, who is an appraiser who has worked for the De V oe
family.
Before you today is a petition for a parking exemption which
would allow us to locate a small parking facility immediately across
from the existing Suzuki dealership.
I'll put up an aerial just to give a point of reference. Highlighted,
the two principal properties. When we first started this process, the
Page 122
September 11 - 12, 2007
Suzuki dealership that's located at the intersection of Solana and
Goodlette-Frank Road was under construction. Since this time the
property immediately to the south has also brought in -- has been
brought in as part of the Suzuki dealership, and we have a site plan
approval for that. And if you've visited the site, you'll see that it's
nearing completion right now.
What we're proposing, again, is a 14-space parking facility that
would only be for employees of the Suzuki dealership. The DeVoes,
as some of you may know, currently operate another off-site parking
facility that services the Saab and Isuzu dealership that's located on the
corner on 14th and Solana Road.
That off-site parking facility has been there for many years. It's
operated quietly and efficiently for the DeVoe family, and I think for
the neighbors. I'm not aware of any complaints that they've received
regarding the existing facility that they operate.
In this particular case, you know, there are criteria in the code.
We clearly meet the criteria to ask for your permission to do the
parking exemption.
And there were two primary issues that I think staff raised in
their staff report and executive summary that we'd like to address. I
don't want to go through every one of the criteria because we
addressed them. Some of them don't seem to be really relevant to the
specific petition, so I think I'll just focus really on what staffs major
concerns seem to be.
And the first of those, I guess, is that they contend that we have
excess parking and, therefore, we really don't need the additional 14
parking spaces. And your executive summary and staff report
package identified parking ration and calculations whereby they have
indicated we have 80-plus excess parking spaces on the existing
Suzuki dealership.
And I went back and reviewed the site plans that our firm
prepared for them and that the county approved, and based on the code
Page 123
September 11 - 12, 2007
requirements, we have no excess parking that were approved as a part
of those approvals.
The parking that's required by code relates to what's required for
customer parking. The Suzuki dealership parcel that's located to the
south -- and I'll put up a copy of that site plan just so you can have a
point of reference for that, too.
This is everything that's adjacent to Goodlette-Frank Road.
You'll see the Suzuki dealership that's on the left side of that page.
Everything that's shaded in dark was the amended SDP that we had
filed that demonstrates that that is going to be a display area for the
dealership.
Your parking requirements by the LDC require us to calculate
parking, one, on the amount of square footage dedicated to the sales
building, and secondly, based on the amount of area that is devoted to
the vehicle display and sales area.
And those calculations it's hard to read, but they're all on that
sheet. And your code would require for that site plan 20.8 parking
spaces. We provided 21 dedicated parking spaces. Those are
primarily for customers, maybe presumably also employees.
But when the De V oe family looked at this, they're looking at this
from almost 40 years of operating car dealerships in our community
and what it takes to effectively run one. And for them to have a
display area that commingles their employee and customer parking
isn't that efficient for getting customers in and out of the site safely.
But it's not really, I don't think, in keeping with how car
dealerships operate today. I think when our code was written, maybe
it wasn't accurately contemplating how they function, and maybe
that's just been a functional change over the last 15 years of how auto
dealerships manage their properties.
But in this particular case, for Suzuki, for instance, each franchise
is required to display a certain number of vehicles, and then
operationally, Mr. DeVoe would like to at least have a selection of
Page 124
September 11 - 12,2007
vehicles on site that might represent what the buyers want to buy so
that he doesn't have to have an off-site parking lot to have to store
them or to be in a position to order these as people come in. They'd
like to have that convenience to buy the vehicle that they see on the
lot, so that's how they operate.
And in this particular case, because we don't have dedicated
employee parking on our site, it makes it the most efficient way to
operate to look to the adjoining properties. It's no different than what
was approved for the other dealership that they operate where Saab
and Isuzu are located at the corner of Solana and 14th.
I think we've got photos, and I hope some of you have visited the
site. Just to show you visually, we've prepared a landscape plan that
demonstrates that that lot can be well landscaped.
This shows different angles, but adjacent to the residential
property, on two sides we've proposed a wall with a 15-foot wide
landscape buffer. On the two sides adjacent to the other streets we
have 10- foot landscape buffers that are extensively planted.
I think when you drive by the other off-site parking lot that they
own, it's well maintained, well landscaped, nice, mature vegetation
and always kept clean.
So from the standpoint of need, we don't have excess parking by
code, as staff contends in the staff report. We believe we have exactly
what your code requires and that we need more.
The other issue that was raised was one of, I guess it was called
commercial creep by some into the neighborhood. And first of all, let
me say that your LDC allows us to come and ask you to use
residential properties to support commercial uses.
This one in particular is not the first parking exemption of its
kind. In fact, I'm not aware of any other parking exemption that's
come before you that didn't try to use residential properties for a
commercial use.
And in this case because it's -- it's really a temporary parking lot
Page 125
September 11 - 12, 2007
in the sense that it's used only during business hours, it's not going to
detract from the neighborhood in any way during the evening hours.
And I think Mr. DeVoe's gone on record of saying that he's willing to
accept any and all operational standards that are going to make sure
that you're convinced it's a good neighbor for the neighborhood.
When you look at -- your staff report has a copy of the zoning
map, but you'll note that the existing dealership on Solana Road
encroaches west of 14th considerably into what staff has determined
to be the residential area.
I look at it as more of a transitional area because 14th Street, for
instance, it serves all commercial properties that are adjacent to
Goodlette-Frank Road. Those properties don't have direct access to
Goodlette-Frank Road. Their primary access is 14th and Solana.
Those streets at both ends serve not only commercial uses, but
residential uses. So the street, to me, functions not really and truly as
a residential street. It functions to satisfy both the commercial and the
residential demands on the street.
One of the other things that we heard was that we're going to be
increasing traffic in the neighborhood because of these 14 extra
parking spaces, and that's not necessarily true. And, in fact, it's not
true because those same employees are going to be going to the
Suzuki dealership regardless.
This is going to allow Mr. DeVoe to organize his vehicles in a
manner that's going to keep it looking good for his customers and the
public and also then to have an adequate space so he doesn't have to
look hard to find other parking spaces and make it look unattractive
for the public.
And I think if you have visited his other properties, you'll find
that he keeps them extremely well and he wants them to look good
and function well because he needs to attract customers, not turn them
away.
So I think those two issues, I don't think that we -- we clearlyy
Page 126
September 11 - 12,2007
don't agree, and I don't think you have to see it as staff has presented it
in their report. And in fact, many of the issues we've heard at our
Planning Commission hearing really didn't seem to be related directly
to the parking exemption request that we had before us anyway, a lot
of neighborhood issues of speeding and things that aren't attributable
to the De V oe family itself or the operation of their existing automobile
dealerships. It's really one of, the neighborhood has concerns and we
understand that. We're trying to be good neighbors.
There was a petition that was handed out at that meeting and I
think -- I only noted one property owner that was adjacent to this
particular property that had signed that petition in opposition to it, and
the majority of those seem to be farther to the west and south of this
property .
I think also the testimony at the Planning Commission was that
there is traffic on this street. It's not just the DeVoes. And this is a
very easy trip to go from Goodlette-Frank Road all the way to US. 41
either straight through on Solana or to go south on 14th to Cypress
Woods, which comes out at Parkshore Drive on US. 41. All ends of
this are commercial.
So there happens to be residential in the middle, but I don't think
it's fair to say that the DeVoes have created any traffic problems in the
neighborhood. And in fact, I don't think those comments are founded
by fact.
With that, Rich, I don't know if I -- I think I've hit the high points
of that and I -- I'd be happy to answer any questions, and obviously we
have an opportunity to rebut after we hear from the public and your
staff.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. We have two commissioners
that have, I believe, questions they want to ask now. Commissioner
Fiala, then Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. One of the things that we
received today is, there was someone that wrote a note and said
Page 127
September 11 - 12, 2007
something about, look at fence, and they showed us pictures and that's
on the existing parking lot.
Would you be willing to clean that up and make it look better so
that -- I'll tell you, I went over. I took a look at the property. I took a
look at the neighborhood. I drove up and down the streets. The
property that they have now to park the employees cars looks very
nice. It's nice and clean. They have trees and shade trees there. They
have bushes around there, and it's well maintained.
The property that they are now talking about looks awful. In my
opinion, it would look a heck of a lot better than what it looks like
now. Not only that, but when I sat there and looked at it -- and there's
the rental duplex, I think, behind it and -- which was not in very good
shape.
But even if it was say, for instance, they were fixing it up to be
their own private house, right across the street on the other side of this
little thoroughfare that leads into it, they're already building part of
this car dealership.
Now, if I were going to be building something, I would want to
be shielded from it, quite frankly. So I would think that by building
this place and then putting this wall and hedges in would actually
shield the properties down the street and help them rather than have
them then facing -- who's going to -- who's going to buy a lot across
the street from a car dealership? Well, who wants to live next to it?
I think if I were -- if it were me, I would want those hedges and
wall there just to cut me off from the commercial end. That's my
opmIOn.
And I'm sorry, Marilyn. I've known Marilyn for years and years
and years and -- more years than I should mention.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Don't get into that now.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: But this is how I feel.
MR. ARNOLD: Mr. Chairman, if! might. We didn't receive a
copy of what might have been handed out. Would it be too much to
Page 128
September 11 - 12, 2007
ask to see a copy of that just so we're familiar with what you're
asking?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Not at all.
MR. MUDD: There you go.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yeah. Keep yours, Commissioner
Fiala.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, okay.
MR. ARNOLD: Thank you. We agree with you, Commissioner
Fiala, that this, in fact, is a transitional use. I think I've characterized
it as not uncommon to what you find in Old Naples where you really
have a high mix of commercial and residential where you end up with
these smaller pocket parking lots that serve a very real function and
aren't detrimental at all to the neighborhood.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: But you will put in a nice wall or a
fence there that will be attractive and -- I'm sure that De V oe doesn't
want anything to besmirch their name either. I'm sure that they would
want it to look good, and I'll go by and take a look every once in a
while just to make sure, and I'll knock on a door if it isn't. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, Commissioner Fiala
answered one of my questions. The property to the -- to the west,
what is the zoning on that? Is that single-family or multifamily?
MR. ARNOLD: All of the zoning immediately around it's
RMF-6. I believe it's a duplex structure immediately to the west.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Are you proposing to
fence in this property?
MR. ARNOLD: We would have fencing on the two sides that
are adjacent to the residential property, and on the two sides adjacent
to the street it would just be landscaping.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: What I understood you to say
previously is you're going to put a wall there, but now you're putting a
fence?
Page 129
September 11 - 12,2007
MR. ARNOLD: Fence, wall? I don't think they'd allow us today
to put in a wooden fence. I can defer to staff on that, but I believe it
will have to be a wall.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. So nothing's going to be
fenced then, right? You've got four sides. You'll put a wall on two
sides.
MR. ARNOLD: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And you have the rest of it
open.
MR. ARNOLD: That's correct. It's landscaping, similar to what
you see on the other corner parcel, the landscape with hedge and trees
adjacent to the road front.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Who do you -- I mean, you're,
in the resolution, calling out for restrictions for this use. Who's going
to enforce that, restrictions?
MR. ARNOLD: I'm assuming your staff will enforce those like
they would for any other zoning-related case. Those were offered by
staff. I don't believe we've had any input. I think we probably would
offer some slight revision to some of the language that's there because
it specifically references Suzuki, and not knowing exactly how
dealerships change or there could be others that we might want to
more specifically, or generally, reference the DeVoe property, et
cetera.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: What's the hours of operation?
MR. ARNOLD: Generally seven to seven, Monday through
Saturday.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So seven to seven Monday
through Saturday. Yeah, I think the county manager goes home about
that time.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, he stays till 8:30.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: 8:30?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah.
Page 130
September 11 - 12,2007
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, he could enforce that.
What would happen if somebody parks there after hours? Who
would enforce that?
MR. ARNOLD: I'm assuming that your code enforcement staff
would based on a complaint, but I do think that, too, one of the staffs
conditions was that we had to provide for security gating for that so
that it couldn't be utilized after employee hours. We would post it
with signage, and then also provide a secured gate type entrance.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. So code enforcement
would enforce it, restrictions?
MR. ARNOLD: I believe so unless the county manager is going
to be doing that on his way home.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Mr. Arnold, if! may.
MR. ARNOLD: Yes.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: The greenery and the amenities that
are going to be there, the wall, they're all going to require upkeep.
Vegetation's going to have to be, I imagine, irrigated. Is there
something that's built into this that we have an insurance that this will
be done, or is this something that would be put into place and then it
would be at the will of whoever the owner may be in the future
whether it's maintained or not?
MR. ARNOLD: Well, we would have to come through your site
development plan process to make the improvements for this as a
parking lot. With that, of course, is a requirement for a landscaping
plan that would have to show the wall and the landscaping. We've
provided this conceptual plan that was on the visualizer over here
demonstrating how we could provide the wall, the landscaping,
between hedges and trees, to demonstrate that it's not going to be a
negative to the adjacent residential uses.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And then there's such things as
trimming of the hedges. If it's not maintained in an orderly fashion,
then we can rely on code enforcement to act on it?
Page 131
September 11 - 12,2007
MR. ARNOLD: I'm assuming that you would, just as anybody
else. Your code typically establishes minimums, and you have to
adhere to those minimums. If there are some other standards that we
can sit here and agree to that are more than reasonable to assure you of
the De V oes' intent, and we'll continue to be good neighbors, we'll be
happy to do that.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And I got to admit that I haven't been
down there to take the tour, but Commissioner Fiala's explanation of it
and the details that she shared made the existing parking facility sound
quite appealing as far as its upkeep and all that.
But I was just concerned. You know, I mean, nothing's forever.
Ownerships change, new people come in. And I -- just looking for
some assurance that when that does happen, that we would be able to
rely on maintenance to keep taking place and to keep the amenities of
the bushes and fences in place.
MR. ARNOLD: I just put up on the visualizer for you. This is a
view from 14th that shows the existing vegetation that's there. It's
mature, it's well maintained, and it's very clean. I think you can
expect that the other parking lot that we wish to improve would be
kept in a very similar manner. And I just saw the photos of the fence.
I'm not sure what the issue was. I didn't read everything, but I think
you'll be assured that with the newer plan, that will be done probably
without the wooden fence, and it would be a concrete or a wall
masonry-like material.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah. Obviously the -- some of
my commissioners feel this is a great idea. My concern is this is zoned
RMF-6, and this might be a good possibility for leaving it RMF-6 to
address some of our housing issues that we have within Collier
County, being that it's located very close to the Towne Center on
Goodlette- Frank and just south of Solana there.
My concern is that, with all due respect, anybody that's been in
Page 132
September 11 - 12, 2007
the car business for 40 years, I would think that they would realize
that when they were going to -- since this was a brand new dealership
that's being expanded here, that they would have had better planning
in regards to how much area they were going to have.
Now, maybe something's changed in the course of time since
they laid out this dealership, maybe they're taking on another line of
cars or something, but I would think that there would have been better
planning in regards to saying, hey, we need additional parking when
you've already got an additional parking lot. So it sounds to me like
you've already addressed that, and I'm not sure why you need another
one.
And then, of course, I'm concerned about the infringement into
residential property. And as you stated, the piece of land that you
presently have, it's kind of in disrepair. But as I said, I hate to see us
change the zoning from RMF -6 to commercial. And I have some real,
real problems with that, and I've -- some of the email that I've gotten
from the residents, they're not too happy either. So that's where I
stand.
MR. ARNOLD: We understand some of their concerns. In this
particular case, just to be clear, we're not asking for a zoning change.
The zoning will continue to be residential multifamily. This would be
park exemption to allow employee parking to be utilized on the
residential site.
And through the zoning resolution, you can tie it to the continued
use of this particular property. Should the use change, you could ask
for it to be brought back. It may not be an appropriate consideration if
somebody wanted to just put their office building here.
But I think given their track record and the fact that they operate
another employee parking lot that has the exact same circumstances as
this, I don't think Mr. De V oe thought that there was going to be an
outcry of opposition to do the same thing that he had done previously
a dozen years ago that's functioned well and complaint free as far as I
Page 133
September 11 - 12,2007
know.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Does that conclude your presentation,
sir?
MR. ARNOLD: It does.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. And I believe we have staff
making a presentation.
MR. MUDD: John David, if you'd come on up.
MR. MOSS: Good afternoon, Commissioners. John David Moss,
department of zoning and land development review.
Staff has conducted an evaluation of the parking exemption
based upon the criteria that are outlined in the LDC and is
recommending denial based upon the fact that the dealership already
exceeds the LDC parking requirements by 98 spaces.
The proposed use would encroach into an existing residential
neighborhood by crossing 14th Street, which presently separates the
commercial from the residential uses thereby negatively impacting the
character, quality, and future development of the neighborhood.
Approval of the use would pose increased pedestrian and
vehicular safety risks since users of the parking lot would have to
cross 14th Street in order to reach the dealership. But most
importantly, the dealership already has more viable parking
alternatives to accommodate its intensive parking needs, such as the
vacant commercially zoned property that already exists just south of
the Suzuki dealership.
The PC heard this petition on June 21, 2007, and voted 4-3 in
favor of recommending denial. And staff has received five letters of
support from the neighboring property owners; however, five letters of
objection were also received in addition to a petition opposing the
project that was signed by over 100 property owners.
I wanted to clarify a couple points that were brought up during
the initial speaker's presentation. A six-foot high masonry wall would
be required, and that was discussed in the staff report. There was one
Page 134
September 11 - 12, 2007
shown on the conceptual development plan, but it was only shown on
the northern and western property boundaries. It wasn't shown on the
southern side, so that would be required if this application were given
a recommendation of -- or given an approval.
As Mr. Arnold already mentioned, one of the development
conditions does require a gate to be on the parking lot site, so no one
would be able to park there after hours. That was the purpose of that
development condition.
And finally, as mentioned in the staff report, the applicant was
only proposing a three-foot wide sidewalk on the site plan, and they
need to be five feet wide, so that was another -- another condition that
needs to be incorporated if the board is considering approving this
petition. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. With that, we've got
Commissioner Halas with some questions.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah, could you tell me again, it
exceeds the parking by how much?
MR. MOSS: Yeah, according to the LDC parking standards, and
these are -- there's a table on the staff report on 3 and 4, on pages 3
and 4, showing what the parking criteria are. And according to the
calculations, they are going to be 98 spaces -- they are currently 98
spaces overparked, and they're going to be 112 over the requirement
of the LDC if this parking exemption is approved.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. Got 98.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Give me just a second here. Seemed
to be some division in the Planning Commission on it. The people
that voted in favor of it, they didn't have objections. What was their
thoughts on it? I'm just curious. I know it was very much outlined as
far as the Planning Commission and staffs objections to it, but I'm
curious to what they found that was the redeeming quality on it.
MR. MOSS: I really don't know. They only expressed what the
opposition was to it, and it was for the reasons that I outlined in my
Page 135
September 11 - 12, 2007
presentation.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I have one other question I could
ask.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yes. Go ahead, Commissioner Halas.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Is there --
MR. KLATZKOW: I do know why they voted because I have
the transcript.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yeah, may we?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Oh, sure.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Then we'll come right back to you.
MR. KLATZKOW: Yeah. The reasons for denial were public
safety concerns, encroachment into the neighborhood. And the reason
for approval was that it's already a heavily trafficked area and that
they didn't believe that the De V oe dealership was causing all the
problems.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. I appreciate that. That gives us
the kind of insight that we need. I don't see any more lights. Are you
through with your presentation?
MR. MOSS: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Then we'll go to the public speakers.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I just wanted to finish up.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Forgive me, Commissioner Halas. I
turned off your light and I thought I turned you off.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: You did, temporarily.
With the spaces that are allocated now through the LDC, do you
feel that that's enough to accomplish the task that they need as far as
the dealership, as far as the customers, and for the employee parking?
One of the questions I have, and I don't know if you can answer
it, is the parking lot that they presently have for their employees, is
that filled to capacity, or is there still room that they can use people
(sic) there?
MR. MOSS: That I can't answer, and my evaluation was only
Page 136
September 11 - 12, 2007
based on the criteria that are in the LDC, and that's how I determined
that they were overparked by 98 spaces.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: So they have 98 spaces more than
would be -- and this is for a car dealership?
MR. MOSS Yes:
COMMISSIONER HALAS: So therefore they have the area to
accommodate their employees and their customers along with --
MR. MOSS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: -- a floor plan for their cars?
MR. MOSS: Well, they should have, but what they said in their
application was that their franchiser was now requiring 60 display
spaces, which was why they didn't have the space now to
accommodate parking for their employees.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: So is there another car line coming
in here, or we don't know?
MR. MOSS: Well, that's what they're wanting to reserve the
property to the south for is an expansion of the existing dealership or
maybe to open up another dealership. I really don't know.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. As I said earlier, that if they
had contemplated this and been in the business for 40 years, I would
think they'd have a lot better planning in regards to what they were
going to need for space.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Oh, I'm sorry.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner Henning, you want to go to public
speakers?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, I just wanted to ask one
question of staff. The way the lot is zoned right now, it's RMF-6, so
they could -- somebody could build a six-plex on there, right? I mean,
to house six families on this particular lot, which then would generate
more traffic, and they could be coming and going all day long rather
than parking all day long is the way I understand it, and that could be
six rental units; is that correct?
Page 13 7
September 11 - 12, 2007
MR. MOSS: Well, that's what it's zoned for. I don't know if a
house that size or condo that size that provides six units could actually
be fit on that property, but it is zoned RMF-6.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, you could do three stories and
get it on there, yeah. I guess. Okay. Just asking the question.
MS. FILSON: Speakers?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. We'll have plenty of time to
ask more questions. Let's go to public speakers.
MS. FILSON: The first speaker -- Mr. Chairman, first of all, we
have eight speakers.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: That's fine.
MS. FILSON: The first speaker is Therese Viosin.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Once again, when you come up,
would you please state your name for the record, and you have three
minutes. No, no. Right up here at the podium, ma'am. We have to be
able to hear you.
MS. FILSON: She will be followed by Jean Neils.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: You can pull the microphone down a
little bit so it's closer to you.
MS. VOISIN: I'm Therese Voisin. I've lived on Trail Terrace
for the last 23 years, and I've seen that neighborhood change, not for
the best. The traffic is terrible. The speeds, don't mention it, for the
children and even older people. There's noise all night, early in the
morning and late at night with big trucks. And as I say, speed is really
terrible. That's all I have to say.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you, ma'am.
MS. VOISIN: Thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Jean Neils. She'll be followed
by Marveta Shaw.
MS. NEILS: Good afternoon, good afternoon. I'm Jean Neils.
My family and I have been living here for over 35 years.
We have a community of families living here side by side in
Page 138
September 11 - 12, 2007
harmony. As a business, buying up lots on corners any opportunity
they can for businesses one after another is not residential.
We welcome you, Mr. De V oe, to build a home on these lots, and
you're welcome to live in our community as a family.
We've been here first, before you. And we value our properties
and our homes and our families. Don't fence us in and don't fence us
out.
And thank you for your time. Thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Marveta Shaw. She'll be
followed by Marilyn Janns.
MS. SHAW: Hi, I'm Marveta Shaw, and I've lived on Trail
Terrace for 42 years, and I've seen a lot of changes, as Therese said,
not for the good.
Our concern is for our children, the dogs and bikes and people
that are walking in the neighborhood on the streets because there's no
sidewalks. And these dealerships that have taken over a motel, a thrift
shop, a day care, a restaurant, and a home have all been replaced by
cars so that now the traffic coming down Trail Terrace is not only a lot
more, but they're going faster because they're in a hurry. They don't
see that 25 speed limit sign.
The big rigs that are loaded with cars are coming through the
street day and night. I followed one home at 9:53 one night. They do
not pull off the street to unload. They are in the street to unload, and
you have to drive around them at your own risk so that these petitions,
the people have signed these petitions because they have the same
concerns. They've written the letters requesting denial of this parking
lot -- or now that they're talking the fences and the walls and trees,
would put a blind corner in there trying to see the traffic come down
on 14th Street.
They have two parking lots already on -- in a residential area.
There's one on Solana and 14, but there's a larger one on 10th and
Solana, which is the length of five homes.
Page 139
September 11 - 12,2007
So to have more cars coming in there as potential customers, test
driving the cars that they might want to buy, test driving the cars they
work on, they come through here all the time, and we're just
concerned with the safety of our kids, our dogs, and people that walk
in the neighborhood. Thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Marilyn Janns. She'll be
followed by Bob Krasowski.
MS. JANNS: Hi. My name's Marilyn Janns. I happen to be the
property owner of the not-so-beautiful duplex that might eventually
get developed into something really pretty.
But I will say this regarding the property, it might be RM-6 (sic).
Mine is RM-6 as well, I believe. As far as I know I could only build
two and a half duplexes, and it's hard to live in a half a duplex.
So I know that I handed out these little pictures to everybody. I
hope everybody took a little bit of time to take a look at it. I
particularly like the picture of the supposed beautification fence,
which Mr. DeVoe told me was on the Solana property and that I
should go take a look at it to see how beautiful the piece of property
next door to me would be.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I don't mean to interrupt you, but
we're discussing something that the public can't see. Would Mr.
Mudd take a minute and put that on the viewfinder?
MS. JANNS: Absolutely. With my little notes on the bottom.
This is the fence that I'm speaking of that obviously isn't very
beautiful, nor has it been well kept. Then the next picture actually, the
one behind, it shows more of the fence.
MR. MUDD: This one, ma'am?
MS. JANNS: Yes -- shows more of the fence. And obviously the
owner of the -- I think it's a six- or eight-plex next door, thought so
much of it he had to build a -- he had to plant a huge --
MR. MUDD: Bush.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Bushes.
Page 140
September 11 - 12,2007
MS. JANNS: A huge what?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Bushes.
MR. MUDD: Ficus hedge.
MS. JANNS: Ficus hedge, yeah. Thank you. I'm a little nervous
-- which takes up four feet into their property, and it's about six or
eight feet tall in certain areas, just to cover up the beautiful fence that
the DeVoes put on the Solana property.
Now, I'm going to cheat and read my notes. Mr. DeVoe owns the
corner of Solana and 14th Street north and had turned it into a park
area, as we can see. There's no security at this parking lot.
Two blocks south he's purchased the corner of Trail Terrace
Drive and 14th Street North. Mr. DeVoe owns the property on the
other side, which is pictured there, too, actually. There's some other
pictures that you could probably just show as I read.
This particular picture is looking down 14th Street. Now, I think
it's sort of a no-brainer that if the piece of property adjacent to my
complex on Trail Terrace and 14th Street North is turned into a
parking lot and 5 -- or less than 500 feet down to Solana and 14th is
another parking lot, that eventually Mr. DeVoe will be like a little
PacMan and eat up the other residential properties along 14th Street
and build other parking lots.
And we have no idea whether they will be for employees or
whether -- you know, he might want to try to slip a few used cars over
there to sell or what might happen. But it was already stated by
Wayne, whose name I'm sorry I don't remember, the last name, that
the property has commercial value on the residential side. So you
know that that's what they're planning. And I'm totally opposed it.
I mean, as it turns out right now -- let's see. If the corner of --
well, I already said that. Anyway, it could be used for anything.
This is why the lot on the corner of Trail Terrace Drive and 14th
Street North should not be allowed an exemption for a parking lot. It
will --
Page 141
September 11 - 12,2007
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Please wrap it up, ma'am. Right up
front here.
MS. JANNS: Yeah. It's going to lower the value of the
neighborhood. In addition, it would be much nicer for somebody to
build a pretty complex property or triplex property on that corner, and
then the rest of the people might clean up what they're doing on 14th
as well.
Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Bob Kraskowski. He'll be
followed by Timothy Dieterle.
MR. KRASKOWSKI: Good afternoon, Commissioners. For the
record, my name's Bob Krasowski. I'm a 20-year resident of this
neighborhood. I live a little bit to the south and a little bit further west
on 41.
But if you're to approve this, it's an insult to affordable housing
and -- which you always espouse as being in support of. And there's
teachers living in this community, there's workers. DeVoe's own
employees at times have lived in this area.
Some of this -- these houses are older, they're old flat-roof
small-box houses, but they provide housing for the working middle
class in Collier County. Some of the best students in Naples High
School live in the families that live there.
The specific -- the reason this property is blighted, that you saw,
Ms. Fiala, is because De V oes took it over. Before that, there was a
nice little house, flat-roof house there. A single mom raised two boys.
One was one of the highest achievers in math in -- at Naples High
School. He's gone on to college and stuff, and the other boy is doing
well. He used to be on my Little League team years ago.
And then this woman, while she did that, living in this less
expensive housing, went to school, got a CPA, and now she's -- they're
all doing much better.
Page 142
September 11 - 12, 2007
So these are the type of stories that exist. This is the middle class
American Naples experience. A car dealership, he can do all the
business he wants. He shouldn't come across the line. This is for
housing and for residences. Some of it's not so good, but a lot of it is
very, very good.
And I've had the pleasure of living in that community. It's very
safe. There's very little crime. Once in a while we get -- a certain
element will move in, and you know what that can be like if you have
a --like, you know, a problem with the neighbor, but that usually
doesn't last very long.
So -- and there are many, many people that have been in there for
years and years and years. This is salt of the earth. These are the
people that you, as representatives, should most represent. Forget
these business guys. They can make out just fine and move forward
on their projects and make their living wonderful. Stay out of existing
residential neighborhoods. What else can I say? Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you.
MS. FILSON: Timothy Dieterle. He'll be followed by C. Angel
Marks.
MR. DIETERLE: Good afternoon, Commissioners. My name is
Timothy Dieterle. I live at 1386 Highlands Avenue, which is
adjacent, just to the north of the property that's being proposed to be
rezoned.
I support the rezoning for several reasons, is, you know, a lot of
people have mentioned a lot of, you know, good points about the
speeding traffic and other things like that, and I do see a problem with
that every once in a while, and most of the speeding and traffic that I
see is of other people that live in the community and -- or using it as
the cut-through to 41, convenient cut-through, but a lot of times there's
a lot of speeding involved.
His other lot that was discussed also that's across the street from
us, directly across the street that's on Solana -- between Solana and
Page 143
September 11 - 12, 2007
14th on the corner there, is -- seems to be an excellent place for people
to walk down 14th to walk their dogs and not have -- you know, let
their dogs do their business on other people's property, but yet on like
a -- you know, an unused basically piece of property.
The pictures that we'd seen earlier were a little deceptive
because, you know, a fence like that, you know -- actually, I think it
looks very nice, and it's what I see across the street from my house
every morning and when I come home every afternoon. It doesn't
bother me a bit. I believe -- I mean, it looks fine. It looks -- it looks
nIce.
If anything, you know, we've -- Angel and I have just purchased
this house in January, and we've -- spending a lot of money upgrading
the interior of it and haven't been able to really get around to the
exterior of the house yet, because I know you did mention before that,
you know, it needs a little fixing, you know, but we're working on it.
And I think that the property behind us, that if it was, you know,
approved into a parking lot, that it would also give another angle for
people to walk their dogs and have a little safe, you know, step off of
the easement there to -- you know, that would be offthe street a little
bit.
And I also agree that, you know, that use that the other -- the
north parking lot for the police to set up, you know, sit there and
watch speeders up and down Solana, and I think this would be an
excellent opportunity for them to sit there also and watch people going
up and down 14th, which is actually a lot -- you know, people really
speed in that area. And I think that, you know, it might help slow this
down a little bit.
We've never had a problem with aesthetics and you know -- and I
think most of you know the De V oe partnership has a very high
standard in -- you know, in their aesthetics of their properties. I
welcome the fact of them beautifying the neighborhood a little bit
more.
Page 144
September 11 - 12, 2007
And I think that, you know, it would be beneficial to everybody
around in our neighborhood. I thank you for your time. You have a
good day.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Angel Marks. She'll be
followed by Wesley Ceeley.
MS. MARKS: Hi. I'm Angel Marks, and as my other half
explained to you, we reside on the corner of 14th and Highlands
Drive. We did buy our duplex in January, but I personally have lived
there for six years.
And even during the hurricane at Wilma when De V oe's fence
was knocked down, within 24 hours they had it fixed, back up, and
repaired. I've never had a problem. I've found them to be very good
neighbors. They are always upkeep -- they keep their parking lots
clean. Their landscaping is constantly taken care of. Anytime I've
seen a situation I've called and they've taken care of it.
I personally think it would be a benefit to our neighborhood and
its beautification to have that lot fixed up, landscaped, and to look
good. As a person who lives with the back of my property on that, it
would be beneficial not to have to look out and see the street so that
my people that live in the back apartment, when they have children,
don't have to worry about them running out to the street. They'd have
a buffer to stop them. And thank you for your time.
MS. FILSON: And your final speaker, Mr. Chairman, is Wesley
Ceeley.
MR. CEELEY: Wesley Ceeley. I'm a landowner on 14th Street.
And the two problems I see is the existing Saab employee parking lot,
number one, is bordered by three streets and that two-story apartment
building. Totally different situation than what they want to do here,
which is encroach into the neighborhood into a residential lot.
And also incorrect is that 10 years ago the Orion Bank tried to do
the same thing. They tried -- and the problem with it is that once
you're contiguous, you can go and buy the house next to that, then
Page 145
September 11 - 12, 2007
next to that. That's a problem. I mean, this is a neighborhood. Some
of it's not so pretty, but it's still a neighborhood. And this happens, we
run into it about every five, 10 years, someone tries to do the -- pull
the same thing. And I'm completely opposed to this. Thank you.
MS. FILSON: That's your final speaker, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, that's from before.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: That's from before, okay.
MR. YOV ANOVICH: Commissioners, as part of our rebuttal,
Mr. De V oe is going to address some of the comments that were made,
and then I've got a few closing comments after Mr. De V oe.
MR. DeVOE: I'm Dick DeVoe, the general partner of the DeVoe
Family Limited Partnership II that's requesting the variance. I would
like to address several comments that have been made Bob Picar,
Marilyn Johns (sic), and Mrs. Shaw.
Mr. Picar stated, De V oe employees drive 70 or 80 miles an hour
in this neighborhood and that three kids have been hit by cars in the
last 10 years. Our employees are directed in writing to never test drive
vehicles in the neighborhood south of Solana Road where Mr. Picar
lives.
After researching the Collier County Sheriffs Department
records, we could find no record of any child being hit by a car in the
39-and-a-halfyears we have been located on Solana Road. There
have also been no insurance claims for any of the dealerships in the
Solana area related to accidents.
Mr. Picar presented a petition against the De V oes with 180
unverified signatures. This petition is invalid.
Marilyn Johns -- Janns presented her concerns about property
ownership by the De V oes based on -- entirely on assumptions. One of
the basic rules to live by is, make no assumptions.
Marilyn Janns was very cordial in our conversation always trying
to sell me her property for $650,000, which I feel is three to four times
Page 146
September 11 - 12,2007
its value. When I informed Marilyn I was in no position to buy her
property, she told me I had a fight on my hands.
Marveta Shaw wants more neighborhoods parks and green space.
I see no relationship with our petition. She has some great ideas, but
none of them address our petition for a parking exemption.
The De V oe family has been in business on Solana Road for over
39 years. We have always tried very hard to be generous with our
community, which has been very, very good to us.
As of 12/31/06 we had 364 employees with gross wages of
$19,701,903.32. For over 39 years we have acquired property and
upgraded that property in Southwest Florida. This benefits
everybody. In the year 2006, the DeVoe dealerships paid $615,740.92
in property taxes.
Our petition will result in a tremendous upgrade to the property, a
beautifully landscaped buffer, both visually and audibly, between the
commercial and the residential.
I respectfully ask for your support of this petition. Thank you.
MR. YOV ANOVICH: And Commissioners, I wanted to address
a couple of statements made by John David in response to a couple of
questions. I think there was some confusion.
I believe Commissioner Halas asked him if there were 98 parking
spaces in addition to the floor plan area. And as I understand it, the 98
spaces are the floor plan area. Those are our vehicles that will be
eligible to be purchased by the general public.
So those 98 spaces are for inventory. They're not 98 parking
spaces available for use by the general public or for employees. So
that's part of the planned display area for the property.
John David mentioned property to the south that would be
eligible for parking. There is no property to the south eligible for
parking. That's part of the existing Suzuki SDP that Wayne Arnold
showed you as part of the approved parking lot that's already out
there. So there's no more land out there to put additional parking
Page 147
September 11 - 12,2007
spaces on.
If the commission believes that another fence along Terrace
needs to be provided, which is the south boundary, we'll put -- I'm
sorry, wall, we'll provide a wall along that south boundary as well so
you'll have it on three sides.
The landscaping that one of your speakers referred to on the
other side of the wood fence is, in fact, our landscaping, because we're
required to plant both sides of the fence or wall. So we would have to
provide a buffer, landscape buffer, on both sides of the wall that we
would be putting on this property, so neither of our neighbors will
have to look at the wall we build. They'll be looking at landscaping
that will hide that wall. So that will all be addressed in the SDP
process.
We have Julian Stokes here who can testify that we are not doing
anything that will hurt the property values. In fact, if you look at the
landscaping plan that we're proposing for this, I think that
Commissioner Fiala hit it on the head that we'll actually be providing
a nice buffer between the C-4, which is your most intensive
commercial category, from the residential neighborhood. So we're
providing a nice buffer to Ms. Janns and her parcels and anybody
further to the west.
Weare requesting that you approve our off-site parking requests.
And with that, we're available to answer any more questions you may
have regarding the specifics of our petition.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. We'll start with Commissioner
Halas.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes, staff, could you come up there
for a minute. I want to make sure that I was clear in what I stated or
what I was trying to get across. I believe you said that there was 98
additional parking spots above the requirements of the LDC for a
dealership, auto dealership; is that correct?
MR. MOSS: Yeah. The parking required by the LDC, section
Page 148
September 11 - 12, 2007
4.05.04G, shows that they would be required to have -- well, initially
they came in asking -- they would need 14 spaces, and then beyond
that, they came in to amend their SDP for another seven spaces. So
that is where I got the 21 spaces total. And they have 119 shown on
the site plan.
Well, if you count the 60 display spaces that you need and the 21
parking spaces, that's still 81 parking spaces, and they're showing a
total of 112.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. So what they need by the
LDC requirements is 88?
MR. MOSS: Eighty-one.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Eighty-one. And they have what
now, 112?
MR. MOSS: They've got 112, or -- they've got a hundred--
excuse me. They've got 98, and if they get the additional 14 spaces, it
will bring them to 112.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. But the requirement for the
LDC is 81; is that correct?
MR. MOSS: Well, looking at the requirements in the LDC, it
says that one space per 400 square feet of building area, and then one
space per 2,000 square feet of outdoor display area, and that gives
them a total of 14 spaces initially. When they amended their SDP in
December, they asked for seven more. And then with their 60 display
places -- display places that they say they need now, that brings them
to 81. So they're still asking for more than they need.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. That's where I'm trying to
get at is the bottom line.
MR. MOSS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: The amount of spaces that they
need for a dealership to meet the requirements of our LDC is 81; is
that correct?
MR. MOSS: It's 21, it's 21.
Page 149
September 11 - 12, 2007
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Wait a minute, 21?
MR. MOSS: Yeah. They'd like to try and clarify, if I'm
misunderstanding something.
MR. YOV ANOVICH: I rarely try to help staff, but I'm going to
try to. I think your question is, what does the code require.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: What does the code require in the
LDC for the size of this -- of this area? How many parking spots do
they need to meet the LDC requirement?
MR. YOV ANOVICH: Well, that's the confusing part,
Commission, because a lot of the property that he's counting as
parking spaces are, in fact, spaces that we will be parking our new and
used cars that will be for sale to the general public.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, that's -- but there's got to be a
requirement for how many spots --
MR. YOV ANOVICH: There is.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: -- on a parking garage -- for a
dealership.
MR. YOV ANOVICH: There is no code requirement that says,
you can only have X number of vehicles for display. What they do is
they take your display area, and that comes up to -- hang on. That
display area is the square footage that will result in how many
customer spaces you need.
So you take our display area plus our office area and all that, and
that results in 21 spaces for customers. So the remaining spaces that
we're going to utilize will be for our Suzuki new cars as well as the
used cars that we will have on that site.
And what we're telling you is, although he says I have 98 extra,
we're going to have all of those spaces utilizing either new or used
cars for sale to the general public.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Do you have something to add to
this, Jeff, so I'm not confused?
MS. ISTENES: I can't resist. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Susan--
Page 150
September 11 - 12, 2007
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I just want to get this cleared up.
MS. ISTENES: I think what may be the misunderstanding that's
coming about is you have code required spaces --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Right.
MS. ISTENES: -- and that has to be provided at a minimum. So
over and above that minimum whatever the dealership wants to have
for their display is what they can have provided they can still meet the
minimum. So if they start increasing their display area, the minimum
code requirements are going to go up based on the code.
But -- so in other words, they've got to meet the minimum, and
then if they want a larger display area, that's up to them, as long as
they continue to still meet the minimum parking. So in a sense, it is
extra because it's extra area where they can park their display cars.
So if it's 81 spaces extra, then they can park 81 spaces there and
display 81 cars. If it's 60, they can only place 60. They have to meet
the minimum.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And they already have two
additional employee lots; is that correct?
MR. MOSS: No, they don't -- not for this dealership they don't
have an additional employee lot. They do for their other dealership.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I thought there was -- the combined
dealerships over there, the Saab and this one, there's a total of -- isn't
there two dealer -- two parking spots right now for employees?
MR. ARNOLD: For the record, Wayne Arnold. Just try to
clarify. This off-site parking lot that we're requesting is specifically
for the Suzuki dealership.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I understand.
MR. ARNOLD: They do operate another off-site parking lot
serving the Saab dealership, and it has been there for, oh, at dozen
years that I'm aware of.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: At one time there was a Buick
dealership, too.
Page 151
September 11 - 12,2007
MR. ARNOLD: Yes, that's correct. If I could offer one other
comment just to help clarify where Susan Murray was headed with her
statement.
John David used the reference to 60 dealership requirements.
Each car dealership requires you to be able to demonstrate you can
display a certain minimum number of vehicles in order to get a
franchise, and I think that's where some of the confusion comes in
because it's not a simple addition of math to say 60 plus 21 equals 81,
that's our need, because the 60 represents new. There's also a used car
component that doesn't factor into the franchise agreement, but that's
been a historical use of the De V oe property on that corner for many
years, and that will continue.
So it's not just the simple addition of that math. What we -- what
we do is that, if you look at the site plan that was approved, we have
the provision of the 21 required parking spaces based on the
requirement to park your display area and your showroom area.
We have those, and the site plan distinguishes which areas will
be for auto display by having a circle on those parking space numbers,
and we have a square around those that are tied directly to the parking
calculation needed for customer parking. So to me it's very clear, we
don't have excess parking based on your code.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Well, ladies and gentlemen,
here we are.
Commissioner Coyle, you look like you were ready to push the
button.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You know, I'm still confused. But
let me see if I've got this right. There's a minimum parking
requirement but there's no maximum parking requirement. And the
maximum parking requirement is determined by whatever else --
however many automobiles the dealership wants to put on display,
both new and used. So if they wanted to put 5,000 on display, that's
okay, right?
Page 152
September 11 - 12, 2007
MR. MOSS: As long as they meet the minimum. That's what the
code says, the minimum.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. So we can't really say that
they're asking for too many under the code, can we?
MS. ISTENES: I think what you can say is the excess is for their
convenience, to be used for their convenience. So if the claim is that
there's not enough parking, perhaps it's because they've decided they
wanted more cars than the site can accommodate. I'm just throwing
that out as a possibility.
So the excess is for their convenience. I think you are on the
right track in your description, Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
MR. MOSS: And I was just basing my evaluation on the
information that I received in the application. In the application it
clearly states that they needed these additional parking spaces because
they were suddenly required by their franchiser to have 60 vehicle
display spaces. So 60 above the 21 required.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I have to believe that there is some
sound business reason for wanting to have the parking for employees
separate from the parking for clients.
Now, let me see if I've got this right. Number one, just for traffic
flow, you don't want employees coming and going and interfering
with the traffic of clients; but number two, I wouldn't want employees
coming and going in somebody else's vehicle that I don't sell and have
my clients watching them driving in and out in a competitor's vehicle.
It would cause me to wonder, why are the employees here driving
somebody else's vehicles.
So it seems to me that there are logical reasons to have parking
for employees in a different location from parking for prospective
clients.
Now, that now that brings us to the issue of whether or not there's
a solution to this problem. Now, I've noticed on the drawings and the
Page 153
September 11 - 12,2007
photographs that I was shown when I met with the petitioner that there
were about 13 or 14 parking spaces on I 4th Avenue North that are
being eliminated. They are diagonal parking spaces, I believe, on the
street.
Now, my question is going to be, is, why can't you use those?
And then you wouldn't have a need to go across the street and put
them on that residential lot. That's a question.
MR. ARNOLD: Oh, I'm sorry.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It requires an answer.
MR. ARNOLD: For the record, Wayne Arnold. I think the easy
answer is, that I don't know the history of those particular parking
spaces. I don't know if they were originally tied to the Kitty Coral use
or not, but your code specifically prohibits parking spaces from
backing out into local streets for any commercial use. Residential is
your only exception. So under your code, those would not be
creditable parking spaces, so by us providing an off-site lot to get
those parking spaces displayed in a safe and orderly fashion that meets
your code.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And parallel parking, how many --
how many could be accommodated along the street for that -- the
entire length of that property?
MR. ARNOLD: I would have to just take some gross
measurements, and I could give you an estimate, but it would be quite
a large number.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Now, you see, that is my
primary concern with the petition is that there do seem to be some
alternative ways of getting the necessary parking without going over
to that -- without getting a waiver to park on residential property.
I find the other requirements -- the business requirements seem to
be sound. I think Mr. De V oe and his family are reputable
businessmen. They've done a wonderful job. They've -- I think they
have treated our community well, but we do have residents who feel
Page 154
September 11 - 12, 2007
that they're going to be adversely impacted by this particular plan, and
that naturally causes me some concern.
And so my question is, is there another way to solve this
problem? The long-term fear, I'm sure, of the other residents, is that
it's going to be a domino effect. I think we all hope that Mr. DeVoe's
car dealership is going to continue to grow and be successful, and is
there going to be another house that's going to be taken over and
another house and another house and another house.
It's a -- it's a reasonable concern. And what I'm hoping we can do
is find a way to address the needs of the residents who are fearful
about what might happen to their community and Mr. De V oe's valid
business considerations of how he deals with parking.
MR. ARNOLD: Okay. Could I address one comment that you
made, sir? And I think I misunderstood your comment on the parallel
parking, and I don't think that staff would permit us to put parallel
parking within the county right-of-way on that local street. I do
believe that would have to be incorporated somehow into our site with
a landscape buffer adjacent to the road. I don't think it's a simple -- I
thought the simple question was, how many spaces could be relocated
there, and it's, I don't believe, quite that simple, and I don't think your
code would permit us to do that.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: The parking spaces exist now,
unless you've wiped them out. They existed before you began
renovation of the property.
MR. ARNOLD: Yes. I believe they're now gone.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Maybe that was a mistake.
MR. ARNOLD: I think we ended up with a sidewalk in lieu of
those parking spaces. So I think some of the other issues raised by the
community -- you know, there is a positive associated with that
development because they now do have a sidewalk on that side of the
street.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. There is no alternative other
Page 155
September 11 - 12,2007
than the one that's being proposed then?
MR. ARNOLD: I think we can address the issue that you had
about the -- you know, going and buying more parcels. I think that's
an easy commitment for Mr. De V oe to make.
I don't know the issue of -- I think as you said, I think the
business reason is a sound one. I don't believe there's another
alternative to providing dedicated employee parking other than the
parking exemption that we've offered, if we're trying to distinguish our
employee parking from the customer parking and/or the service area
and the display parking.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Are you suggesting that if this were
to be approved today that there would never be another request for a
parking exemption on residential property on this neighborhood?
MR. YOV ANOVICH: From -- well, related to the automobile
dealership and the properties controlled by Mr. De V oe, yes. I mean, I
-- yes, is the answer to your question. As far as Mr. De V oe or
anybody who buys the property from Mr. De V oe, if somebody buys
the franchise, you could make it a condition on the approval of this
particular off-site parking, that we could not ask for another one. He's
willing to make that commitment.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Let's talk about how we
buffer the private property owners who are adjacent to this property as
well as the other one that already exists.
MR. YOV ANOVICH: Right.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I gather that the owners of the
property who are adjacent to the first one, the one that exists now, are
reasonably happy with it.
T ell me about the buffering requirements and the wall
requirements for the new parking lot that we're discussing right now.
MR. ARNOLD: Okay. The buffering requirements that we--
we had a landscape exhibit that's here, and it references two IS-foot
wide landscape buffers adjacent to the other duplex units that are
Page 156
September 11 - 12,2007
there. Within that IS-foot buffer, you would have a concrete wall and
then --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: How high?
MR. ARNOLD: I believe it's allowed to be eight feet high, and I
don't know -- six feet? It's shown at six feet high. That's, I think, your
minimum for commercial. There's a maximum of eight.
But you have -- so you would have a masonry wall located
within those two buffers. Staff indicated that they preferred to also
have a wall along Trail Terrace frontage of that road because there is
another duplex unit to the south. And I believe Mr. De V oe indicate
that he's perfectly amenable to providing that wall as well.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So except for the gate going into
that parking lot, it would be completely surrounded by a wall and
shrubbery on both sides of the wall, or only on the outside of the wall?
MR. ARNOLD: It would be both sides of the wall. Your
requirement is to have landscaping both inside and outside. There's
also -- just to make it clear, I don't think the proposal included a wall
on the 14th Street side adjacent to the car dealership. I think staffs
interest was having it on the two residential sides --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I understand.
MR. ARNOLD: -- as well as the Trail Terrace side.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So it would be on three sides, but
not on 14th?
MR. ARNOLD: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And the entrance is going to be off
14th, of course.
MR. ARNOLD: That's correct, off 14th.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And the gate will be locked in the
evening?
MR. ARNOLD: That's correct. And I understand one of staffs
other conditions that they had offered if you're going to offer a
recommendation to approve would be to also sign it so that it's
Page 157
September 11 - 12,2007
specifically for use for the Suzuki dealership, so that it's not
considered to be just an open parking lot for everybody's use.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And then one other thing we want
to make very clear is, you're not requesting that this be rezoned. This
is not a rezone. This is an exemption to allow parking on a residential
parcel.
MR. ARNOLD: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: To allow commercial parking on a
residential parcel, and that exemption disappears if the dealership no
longer exists, if they move away; that reverts back to residential use,
and that exemption does not continue in force.
MR. YOV ANOVICH: That's correct. And if the -- if someone
came in with a different C-4 use, the exemption wouldn't apply to that
different C-4 use. It's only for this -- this dealership and any successor
dealership that may occur on the site. So you can't change the uses
and now all of a sudden you have 14 parking spaces for a different
type use.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And so this dealership will agree
that they will not expand into any other residential areas if this one is
approved; is that correct?
MR. DeVOE: We will not expand at this site.
MR. YOV ANOVICH: Yes. Dick, you've got to -- you've got to
be on the --
MR. DeVOE: The answer is yes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I like those details.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, simple. Okay.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We're going to close the public
portion of the meeting just to make sure we've got that behind us,
right.
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. I just have one further
Page 158
September 11 - 12,2007
question. Are you talking about a dual use on this property? I mean,
you're retaining multifamily?
MR. YOV ANOVICH: And the underlying zoning would be
multifamily.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right.
MR. YOV ANOVICH: We -- the use on the site would be this
off-site parking to serve the dealership across the street. If we -- the
only use we would have if we decided not to use the property as
parking, we'd have to -- we'd take away the parking lot and we would
replace it with the zoning allowed use, which is RMF-6.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: There are examples in the
county where there's dual uses, and you're --
MR. YOV ANOVICH: We're not talking about a mixed use
where we'd have parking and then also try to put a structure, a
residential structure on the same lot.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. And actually it came in
through the same petition you have a parking lot, and then later on,
they built a duplex. But that's a prohibition in the resolution, I take it?
MR. YOV ANOVICH: Yes. And we would not be able to fit the
two uses on the same site. You need to make it -- if you need to make
sure it's a condition that we're not going to put a residential structure,
that's a condition we can obviously live with.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
MR. YOV ANOVICH: If that's a concern.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. Because you could have
two employee parkings, or three or four or whatever, up to 14, and
still have it as another use.
MR. YOV ANOVICH: Right. I see what you're saying, but no,
that's -- we're a parking lot with appropriate landscape buffering and
walls.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. All right. Well, this is a
real tough one for me anyways. I thought it was a no-brainer, but it is
Page 159
September 11 - 12,2007
real tough on the neighborhood, and the existing family business has
been in here for Collier County. And this is Commissioner Halas's
district, so I'll defer to him.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: No, this is in Commissioner
Coyle's district.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I wish it were in Commissioner
Halas's district. It really is in his district.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Halas, did you wish to
speak?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. I'm very concerned. We
understand that we're getting some commitments from the dealership
in regards to not expanding. My concerns are that there'll be other --
the possibility that other commercial identities may come in and want
the same thing, and the next thing we do is we have a domino effect.
And it was brought out earlier that this is an area that may not be
the most prosperous place, but it does provide where people can reside
and live. And I don't care how good the parking lot is, that eventually
it does have an effect on the people that live in this community.
And so I'm very concerned in regards to the citizens that have
lived there for a number of years. We heard some people talking that
they've been there for 30-some years, some for 40-some years.
So I have some real concerns, and I'm not sure where this is
going to go, but I'd like to make a motion for denial on this because of
the fact that I feel that since this is RMF-6, it has the potential of
hopefully addressing some of the affordable housing issues, that we
can put up, not so much a six-unit apartment, but we can probably put
something in there that could be a duplex.
So my motion is that -- I make a motion to -- for denial on this
based on how -- the adverse effect it will have on the community and
also I believe we might be granting special privileges here for -- that
may have a great effect on the populous in this area.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We have a motion by Commissioner
Page 160
September 11 - 12, 2007
Halas. Do we have a second?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. The motion dies for the lack
of a second.
I'm going to make a motion for approval. I'll tell you, this has
been -- like Commissioner Henning said, this has been an extremely
difficult one. And after weighing all the circumstances that we've
been talking about, I do believe that this is the best alternative, not
only for the dealership, but for the residents, too, and what's going to
be there. It's going to be a well-maintained piece of property that may
help set standards for the rest of the street.
I would include in my motion the five-foot sidewalk, the
masonry wall to be continuous to the south side in addition to what's
already been agreed to on the other two sides, that the petitioner will
not, at any time in the future, this dealership -- and it would be -- this
would be carried on to whoever the new owners would be -- plan any
additional expansion into the residential neighborhoods. I believe we
agreed to that.
The only thing I got questions about, is the -- what Commissioner
Henning was talking about was the possible double use of the
property, which I found to be, you know, counterproductive where
you have a parking lot and a house at the same time. I was a little bit
concerned that at some point in time conditions change and the
dealership goes away, that that property could convert back to
residential. I mean, it would be a shame to maintain a parking lot if it
was nothing it was going to be used for.
MR. YOV ANOVICH: I think -- my understanding was that if
we did -- the dealership did go away or we didn't want to use that as
parking anymore, then the only use we would have is the residential.
We just couldn't do both at the same time.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Is that what you meant?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That was my concern, is there
Page 161
September 11 - 12,2007
would be a dual use there. And you're going to put in a condition, if it
ceases as -- using for -- no, not that. Don't want to do it that way.
There shall be no dual use for this petition, and that would cover --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It has to be one or the other. It
can't be both.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And what are we missing? We talked
about several different things. I believe that about covered it though.
Was there any other odds and ends?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I think the way we have it structured
right now, it protects the neighborhood from their fears and their
concerns and also buffers them from what is just about to be built
across the street. They've already cleared the land to do that.
I think we've got everything in that motion, so I second it.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Do we have a second?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Uh-huh.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. We have a motion by myself,
Commissioner Coletta, and a second by Commissioner Fiala for
approval with the conditions as outlined.
Any -- Commissioner Coyle? I'm sorry, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. Just one last comment. I am
still concerned about the potential unfavorable impact on the residents
and on this community. And I agree with Commissioner Halas, if you
let these things continue to go on, it's going to destroy the
neighborhood. One lot will not do that. But if we continue to do this,
we're going to do bad things to this neighborhood, and if we do it in
others, we'll have the same -- same result.
So I just want to be very firm about this. If this one passes, I
hope nobody gets the impression that we're going to support this sort
of thing in the future.
So if we can put a stop to it here, no more expansions, I'm willing
to support this. But I am not willing to go beyond this one. This is it.
Page 162
September 11 - 12, 2007
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. You made a statement that I
think's been well understood by everyone that was listening.
Any other comments?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Do you want to add that into your
motion?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I don't -- no, you can't.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I don't think you can.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: There's no way you can.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: How can you obligate some future
commission with somebody other than DeVoe? You know, I don't
know how you would do it.
Okay. So we have a motion, we have a second. Everybody's
made their comments.
With that, all those in favor of the motion, indicate by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Let the record show Commissioner
Halas was in opposition. And with that, we're going to take a
10-minute break.
MR. YOV ANOVICH: Thank you.
(A brief recess was had.)
MR. OCHS: You have a hot mike, Mr. Chairman.
Item #8A
ORDINANCE 2007-61: AN ORDINANCE OF COLLIER
COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE COLLIER COUNTY
Page 163
September 11 - 12, 2007
NOISE ORDINANCE, ORDINANCE NUMBER 90-17, AS
AMENDED; CHANGING SIX DEFINITIONS; CLARIFYING
TWO EXCEPTIONS; DELETING REFERENCES TO ASA AND
ANSI STANDARDS; AUTHORIZING REGULATION OF TWO
TYPES OF NOISE WITHOUT USE OF TESTING EQUIPMENT
EXCEPT WHEN SUCH NOISE IS COMMONLY EMITTED
FROM A PERMITTED BUSINESS, PROFESSION OR
OCCUPATION; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICT AND
SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR INCLUSION IN THE CODE
OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES; PROVIDING THE EFFECTIVE
DATE - ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: Your next item is item 8A, advertised public
hearing. Recommended adoption of an ordinance of Collier County,
Florida, amending the Collier County noise ordinance, ordinance
number 90-17 as amended; changing of six definitions; clarifying two
exceptions; deleting references to ASA and ANSI standards;
authorizing regulation of two types of noises without use of testing
equipment except when such noise is commonly emitted from a
permitted business, profession, or occupation; providing for conflict
and severability; providing for inclusion in the code of laws and
ordinances; and providing the effective date.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Who's presenting?
MR. OCHS: I believe Mr. Palmer from your County Attorney's
Office is presenting.
MR. PALMER: Good afternoon, Commissioners. For the record,
Tom Palmer, assistant county attorney.
I think the executive summary and the ordinance pretty much
explains to what extent and what's in the scope of what this proposes
to amend in noise ordinances, so I don't think I need to repeat that
unless you want. And then I'm here to answer any questions.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, I tell you something, I'm going
Page 164
September 11 - 12, 2007
to be right up front. This is something I've been looking for for six
years now. We talked about it and we re-talked about it. We went
through the issue, not only of the A TV s, but of the roosters out in the
far reaches of Collier County, of the barking dogs, the parties that
were too loud, all these issues, and we finally have a mechanism.
Maybe it's not totally perfect yet and might need to be revised as we
go forward, but at least it's a mechanism to help us get there.
I'm going to make a motion for approval, then my fellow
commissioners, if we get the second, can go ahead and ask all the
questions they'd like.
Is there any speakers?
MS. FILSON: No, sir.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You've got a second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. A motion by myself,
Commissioner Coletta, and a second by Commissioner Fiala. Okay.
Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Does this have any effect -- it says
amplified music. Does this mean just coming out ofa private
residence or does this mean coming out of the commercial
establishment that abuts to a residential area?
MR. PALMER: Commissioner, if the source of the noise,
unamplified noise, is a commercial establishment, this ordinance
cannot be applied. It must be tested.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. The reason I asked is that
there are cases where, in a quiet neighborhood, all of a sudden you
have an encroachment by a commercial identity that ends up having
music and carryings on, and it may not be to the point where it's with
-- it's not in the guidelines of a code enforcement issue but it is to the
point where -- the noise is to the point where it's affecting the residents
MR. PALMER: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: -- and their well-being.
Page 165
September 11 - 12, 2007
MR. PALMER: If it's a commercial -- a permitted business, a
lawful business, they cannot require it to be reduced unless it's tested
with equipment.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
MR. PALMER: That is so that we won't be shutting down or
dumbing down commercial enterprises based on these subjective
judgments.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. I think one of the areas that
-- and I think Commissioner Coletta hit the nail on the head is, this is a
start, and I think we have some areas that we need to address because
of the standards that are presently used. We use the A-weighted scale,
and I believe that what we may have to look at down the road is a
C-weighted scale in regards to some of these commercial
establishments whereby they pose a real nuisance to the citizens that
live fairly close. In a lot of cases, the citizens have been there a lot
longer than some of these commercial establishes, so --
MR. PALMER: Well, certainly staff can take a look at any
possible improvement to the noise ordinance in the future.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Let's go to Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I appreciate the efforts on this,
but I'm concerned about using subjective standards on our residents to
where we use other information such as pictures, permits, those other
types of things on other compliance issues, and noise is a compliance.
I just cannot support using subjective information to prefer residents,
and I think it just puts a real burden on our employees, too, but I
appreciate your efforts.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. With that, any other
comments?
MS. ARNOLD: Commissioner, can I just make one comment?
Commissioner Halas had indicated that he would like staff to look into
some other things with regard to the A-weighted scale, and I would
Page 166
September 11 - 12, 2007
just request, at this point if you could, in addition to considering the
approval of this proposal, this proposed amendment, direct staff to
look at the noise ordinance a little bit further, because that would be
something that we would like to entertain.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: You just need nods?
MS. ARNOLD: Yes.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I think you're getting them, yeah. We
thank Commissioner Halas for bringing that up.
Commissioner Coyle, you're getting ready to speak. Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just
would like to pursue the issue of the subjective testing a little bit
further. I'm not sure -- I agree with Commissioner Henning that we
should not be very subjective in this process, that we should have
fairly clear methods of measuring the sound, and I just am wondering
where that subjectivity is found in this ordinance and what we can do
to tighten it up.
MR. PALMER: Well, Commissioner, the operative words are,
there are only two classes of noise that this applies to. In order for it
to be a -- it's limited to certain known noise sensitive areas and certain
sources of noise.
Well, the operative word is, in order for it to be turned -- the
noise to be, say, dumb down the noise or shut the noise off if it can't
be modulated, is it must be clearly, unreasonably loud, raucous, or
jarring, which is described as clearly annoying or clearly disturbing to
any individual of normal sensibilities at that site. That's one of the
tests.
If it doesn't meet that test -- and it's got to be conferred in by a
complainant and by the responding officer, either a code enforcement
officer or a law enforcement officer. He's got to concur that that
standard has been met.
And the second standard is a nuisance noise, and that's described
as, without reasonable justification, is unreasonably interfering with
Page 167
September 11 - 12, 2007
the peace and quiet of any individual of normal sensibilities at that
site.
If it doesn't clearly meet one or both of those standards, then they
cannot enforce the ordinance. They must have noise testing. And the
truth of the matter is that this ordinance probably will not be used on
many occasions because on most -- anything that recurs day to day or
a business, you can go out and you can test it with noise testing
equipment.
These are by and large fleeting, transitory situations that if you
don't stop it now, there's not going to be an opportunity to come out
next day or next week to noise test it.
So the thing is, is not to have this narrow exception swaddle the
rule by having broad exceptions to the noise testing standards. So this
ought to be used sparingly and only in these particular cases,
residential property, hospitals, schools, courts in session, and that sort
of thing. Not commercial property, not industrial property. Can't be
used there. And the noise must come from domesticated animals,
noise producing devises or vehicles. And if it isn't one of those things,
then this -- you must have it noise tested.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. I think I understand a little
better now. The other concern I have here is that this does not include
objectionable noise coming from vehicles.
MR. PALMER: Right, unless the vehicle is off the road. And
the classic example is somebody revving an A TV in their front yard
without mufflers on it. But if it's on the road, it can only be enforced
by law enforcement officers.
In fact, the state statute, which the officers are familiar with, sort
of trumps this ordinance. The standards are really somewhat lower
than this, so if this was going to be enforced, you would necessarily be
violating the state statutes as they apply to vehicle noises on roads,
because their standards are like clearly audible within 25 feet, which is
a lower standard than the standards here.
Page 168
September 11 - 12, 2007
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It appears to me that those laws
aren't being enforced here. There are a lot of automobiles on the road
today that I can hear from a block or more away, and I'm wondering
how we can pass a law that will require that those cars be seized and
immediately destroyed, along with their drivers.
MR. P ALMER: Or at least impounded for at least a week.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Longer than that.
MR. PALMER: That's at the discretion, of course, of the sheriff
and his enforcement out on the -- on the roads. It's a question, I guess
prioritization of effort. But the state statutes are there. I'm assuming
that the law enforcements (sic) are aware of them and can enforce
them at their discretion.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. And I, for one, think that this
is the first bite of a mighty big problem that's out there. I don't think
we -- we haven't had an opportunity in the past to be able to narrow it
down where we can start to remove some of these problems. I thank
staff for spending so much time to bring this forward.
With that, no other comments?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: All those in favor of the motion,
indicate by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
MR. MUDD: I don't think there is.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I'm sorry?
MR. MUDD: There is no motion, I don't believe, sir.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, there is. He made the motion, I
seconded it.
Page 169
September 11 - 12,2007
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: There was. I made the motion,
Commissioner Fiala seconded it. Maybe I should have repeated it
agam.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. And Mr. Mudd, next time wait
till we finish the part there, and then we'll -- okay. All those in favor,
indicate by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, wait a minute. What's the
motion? Is it motion to deny? Is it a motion --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Motion to approve, and that's what I
just said in the very beginning when I made the motion and
Commissioner Fiala seconded it.
Okay. And with that, we're going to give it another try. Any
other comments?
Anybody want to know the time of day or the weather outside?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: All those in favor ofthe motion,
indicate by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Let the record show that the motion
passed 4-1. Commissioner Henning was the dissenting.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, the next item on the agenda is 9A,
but we all know that that's a time certain item, and that will be
conducted at nine o'clock tomorrow morning in these chambers.
Item #9B
Page 170
September 11 - 12,2007
RESOLUTION 2007-248: APPOINTMENT OF MEMBER TO THE
CONTRACTORS LICENSING BOARD - REAPPOINTING
MICHAEL E. BOYD - ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: The next item on the agenda is 9B. It's
appointment of a member to the Contractor's Licensing Board.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Motion to approve Michael E.
Boyd. It's a reappointment.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I second that.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. We have a motion by
Commissioner Halas and second by Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Any discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: All those in favor of the motion,
indicate by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed?
MR. MUDD: Opposed?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Motion passed, 5-0.
Item #9C
RESOLUTION 2007-249: APPOINTMENT OF MEMBERS TO
THE FIRE REVIEW TASK FORCE - APPOINTING ANGELA
Page 171
September 11 - 12,2007
DA VID AND CHUCK MCMAHON - ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Next item is 9C, appointment of members to the
Fire Review Task Force.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Motion to approve Angela Davis
and Chuck McMahon.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Do I hear a second?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Motion by Commissioner
Fiala, second by Commissioner Henning.
Any discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: All those in favor of the motion,
indicate by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMANCOLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: The ayes have it, 5-0.
Item #9D
APPOINTMENT OF MEMBERS TO THE RURAL LANDS
STEWARDSHIP AREA (RLSA) REVIEW COMMITTEE -
MOTION TO CONTINUE ITEM - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Next item is 9D, appointment of members to the
Rural Land Stewardship Area, RLSA, Review Committee.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Before anybody makes a motion, we
Page 172
September 11 - 12,2007
have -- we have a little bit of an issue. I've received phone calls from a
number of landowners out there, including Barron Collier, Collier
Enterprises, Russell Pritty. They're all concerned with the fact that -- I
know this was duly advertised, but they never got word of it. They're
asking that this be continued so that we can be assured that
landowners are also represented on here, and they're asking for a
continuance so they can open this up to be able to have their
applications go in.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Motion to continue.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. A motion to continue by
Commissioner Coyle, a second by Commissioner Fiala.
And Commissioner Henning, your light's on.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. Well, I didn't receive any
phone calls, but yeah, I think that representation from landowners
need to be there.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. And if we may give direction
to Ms. Filson. I don't think we have to have everyone that's already
applied reapply. This would be opening it up for any additional
people.
MS. FILSON: So do you want me to readvertise or send the
press release to specific --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Whatever you need to make this
legally sufficient, do it.
MS. FILSON: Okay. So I'll do the same thing I did the last time.
I'll advertise, put it on the web page. And any of those companies can
apply to receive my press releases on the web page. In other words,
they subscribe to receive --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And also clarification that the
people that already applied do not have to reapply.
MS. FILSON: Yes, yes.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Exactly. With that, all those in favor
Page 173
September 11 - 12,2007
of the motion, indicate by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And the motion passes, 5-0.
Item #9E
RESOLUTION 2007-250: APPOINTMENT OF MEMBERS TO
THE COLLIER COUNTY AIRPORT AUTHORITY -
APPOINTING LLOYD A. BYERHOF AND JAMES W. MURRAY
- ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, the next item is 9E, appointment of
members to the Collier County Airport Authority.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Make a motion that we appoint
Lloyd A. Byerhof.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. So we -- and I -- well, okay.
We got one motion at a time.
All those in favor of Lloyd indicate by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed?
Page 174
September 11 - 12, 2007
(No response.)
MS. FILSON: Well, we need a second for that one, don't we?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yes, Commissioner Fiala. And I've
got to say it out loud. Commissioner Henning made the motion;
Commissioner Fiala made the second.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'd like to nominate James W.
Murray for the second spot on that -- on the Airport Authority.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'll second that.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: He was one of my picks.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. So we have a motion by
Commissioner Halas and a second by Commissioner Fiala.
Any other discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Seeing none, all those in favor,
indicate by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: The ayes have it, 5-0.
Item #9F
RESOLUTION 2007-251: APPOINTMENT OF MEMBER TO THE
ISLES OF CAPRI FIRE CONTROL DISTRICT ADVISORY
COMMITTEE - APPOINTING JAMES J. GAULT - ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Next item is 9F, appointment of a member to the
Page 175
September 11 - 12, 2007
Isle of Capri Fire Control District Advisory Committee.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Motion to approve the committee
recommendation, James Gault.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We have a motion by Commissioner
Fiala and a second by Commissioner Coyle.
Any discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Seeing none, all those in favor,
indicate by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: The ayes have it, 5-0.
Item #9G
TO APPOINT A COMMISSIONER AND AN AL TERNA TE TO
SERVE ON THE COUNTY CANVASSING BOARD FOR THE
2008 ELECTIONS - APPOINT COMMISSIONER COYLE AND
APPOINT COMMISSIONER HALAS AS AN ALTERNATE-
APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, the next item is 9G, to appoint a
commissioner and an alternate to serve as the county Canvassing
Board for the 2008 elections.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Motion to approve committee
recommendations --
Page 176
September 11 - 12, 2007
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Motion to recommend --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Go ahead, go ahead.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: -- Fred Coyle, and I'll be the
alternate.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Well, I don't have a
problem with that, but please understand that I will not be available --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That's why we've got an alternate.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: In late January and early February.
MS. FILSON: And October.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And in October and in August and
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Are you retiring or what?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll second Commissioner
Halas's motion.
MS. FILSON: And just -- and the two of you are going to be
scheduled to attend class. I believe it's in November in Orlando.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Of course he will be.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Just tell them to send me the books.
I'll read them.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'll tell you -- let me just throw --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I've been on that before.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Please, go ahead.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I did this last year. I've never done
this before, and of course, the three of us can't because we're all
running for reelection, so it's up to them.
It was one of the most interesting things I ever did. I was just -- I
was overwhelmed. I had no idea all of that stuff was involved. I
learned more, and you can learn too, Commissioner Coyle. I learned
more in that thing. It was so interesting -- and how many people's
votes do not get counted.
And I'm going to say this on the record, and I hope that people in
the audience are listening, so many people's votes didn't get counted
Page 177
September 11 - 12,2007
because they didn't sign the outside of their -- the envelope on the
outside of their ballot, and they were -- they were omitted -- they were
eliminated. So please, folks, when you're voting, make sure you sign
the outside. Not print, not put your return address label. You have to
sign it. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And one further note on that. As you
age, like Commissioner Coyle, your signature may change. If it does
start to change, you want to go back to the Supervisor of Election and
get the new signature on file. Because I sat on the canvassing board,
and we would look at these scrawls trying to find the similarity of a
letter with the signature on file to be able to okay that person's vote,
and many times you couldn't do it, you just couldn't.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's right. Some had a stroke,
some had gotten elderly and couldn't write very well anymore,
arthritis. Listen, you can go on and on and on like this. We can say
something.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I don't know about sending him to
Orlando for this course. It's hard to teach old dogs new tricks.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I just want you to know that I was
initially reluctant, but I can't tell you how excited I am now to serve in
this capacity. I'm looking forward to this. It's going to be one of the
most wonderful experiences in my life, I am sure.
MS. FILSON: And actually both of you will need to attend
class.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I second the motion.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. With that, we have a motion
by Commissioner Fiala, right?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And a second by Commissioner
Henning.
And all those in favor of the motion, indicate by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
Page 178
September 11 - 12,2007
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Let the record show that
Commissioner Coyle was in opposition, and the motion passed 4-1.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, next item is--
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Could I interrupt just -- could I just
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Again?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: You sure may.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I just wanted to say, way back with
the fire board, the lady that was sitting here, her name is Angela
Davis, and we've already gotten her in there. I just wanted to say that
she was so intense, as was the man from -- Lloyd from the airport
authority, that they sat here most of the day. And I just want to give
them credit for doing that. That's all. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Great.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: We ought to get credit for sitting
here every day, every Tuesday.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. I'm going to give you credit
right now.
Item #9H
RESOLUTION 2007-252: APPOINTMENT OF MEMBERS TO
THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING COMMISSION - APPOINTING
JAMES A. W ARKEN AND SALLY A. MASTERS - ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Next item, Commissioners, is 9H, appointment of
members to the Affordable Housing Commission.
Page 179
September 11 - 12,2007
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Motion to approve committee's
recommendations.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We have a motion by Commissioner
Henning, a second by Commissioner Coyle.
Any discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Seeing none, all those in favor,
indicate by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And the ayes have it, 5-0. Thank you.
Item #9I
RESOLUTION 2007-253: APPOINTMENT OF MEMBERS TO
THE HOUSING FINANCE AUTHORITY - APPOINTING
GEORGE C. MOHLKE, JR. AND RA YBURN CADWALLADER
AND REAPPOINTING SUZANNE BRADACH - ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, the next item is 9I, appointment of
members to the Housing Finance Authority.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Motion to accept committee's
recommendations and appoint George Mohlke, Raymond
Cadwallader, Suzanne Bradach.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
Page 180
September 11 - 12, 2007
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. So we have a motion by
Commissioner Halas -- Coyle, excuse me, and a second by
Commissioner Halas.
And with that, any other discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Seeing none, all those in favor,
indicate by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: The ayes have it, 5-0.
Item #9J
RESOLUTION 2007-254: APPOINTMENT OF MEMBER TO THE
EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES ADVISORY COUNCIL -
APPOINTING KATHLEEN MARR - ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, the next item is 9J, appointment of
a member to the Emergency Medical Services Advisory Council.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Motion to approve Kathleen Marr.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We have a motion by Commissioner
Halas, second by Commissioner Fiala.
Any discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Seeing none, all those in favor,
indicate by saying aye.
Page 181
September 11 - 12, 2007
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: The ayes have it, 5-0.
Item #9K
RECOMMENDATION FOR THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS TO APPROVE FILLING A VACANT
POSITION IN THE BOARD'S OFFICE - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, next item is 9K, a recommendation
for the Board of County Commissioners to approve filling a vacant
position in the board's office.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. We have a motion to approve
by Commissioner Henning and a second by Commissioner Fiala.
Any discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Seeing none, all those in favor,
indicate by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMANCOLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
Page 182
September 11 - 12, 2007
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And the ayes have it, 5-0.
Item #10A
RECEIVE AND APPROVE THE PROGRESS REPORT FOR THE
YEAR 2006, COLLIER COUNTY FLOODPLAIN
MANAGEMENT PLAN, SECTION 7 OF THE COLLIER
COUNTY HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, the next item is lOA, receive and
approve the progress report for the year 2006, Collier County
Floodplain Management Plan, section 7 of the Collier County
hazardous (sic) mitigation plan.
Mr. Robert Wiley, your principal project manager for
engineering services department, will present.
MR. WILEY: Good morning, Commissioners. For the record --
good afternoon, rather. For the record, Robert Wiley with your
engineering services department.
As a part of c. r. s. participation in the National Flood Insurance
Program, we have to come to you at least once a year between January
and September with a progress report on the previous year's
Floodplain Management Plan, so we have a little PowerPoint
presentation for you today to go through just those very things, if we
could.
As I said, we're part of the community rating system. We have to
report on this to the local governing body. So what you're going to
see is a brief report here explaining what we've done this year. The
purpose of the report is to make sure that we continue having
responsive flood planning, management planning and implementation
processes for our flood insurance program.
Page 183
September 11 - 12,2007
Where is that Floodplain Management Plan located? We have to
make sure that's available to the public, so it's in section seven of the
county's hazard mitigation plan. That's a very thick document. You
can go find that in hard version in the emergency management
department office. We also have it in development services. But you
can go to the county's website. It's available there for anyone to look
at. Section seven is the Floodplain Management Plan within the
hazard mitigation plan.
What did we get accomplished in 2006? The progress continued
on the new flood insurance rate maps. We're working with Tomasello
Consulting Engineers. We kept making more and more progress. We
hope to finish those things sometime in the near future.
We know it seems like it's an ongoing process that never has an
end to it, but we have had a lot of discussions, a lot of going back and
rehashing with FEMA, and so we keep working at it month after
month.
That finished product, the schedule we have going right now, as
you can see, we are coming close to having all the setup threes
approved, we have five of the seven interior basins through that stage
with FEMA. We still have the coastal model. We had to go all the
way back almost to setup one and discuss back through them with,
again, all the coastal storm parameters. That took basically all of the
last year.
But we have worked that process through bringing it back up to
speed. We still have the Cocohatchee and the Ave Maria areas to
bring up to setup three. Setup three is where we actually pull together
all of the modeling for the calibration and verification. Once we get
everything through setup three, we'll put all the models to the design
storm event. That will then begin to tell us the base flood elevation of
the new maps. And we are making progress.
This really is the peak of the mountain for us to get through setup
through everything. Once we get through that, the end's in sight, at
Page 184
September 11 - 12,2007
least our portion of the end.
Now, we get to FEMA, they've got over a year to actually
produce those maps once we give the information to them. So it
doesn't mean everything happens instantaneously, but it is a progress
that we keep making on it.
Repetitive loss properties. Weare required as the Floodplain
Management Plan to address repetitive loss. We have one severe
repetitive loss property in the county, and there was a grant
opportunity that came up last year for us to use FEMA funding to 100
percent fund the purchase of that.
We thought everything was a go with the owners, but when it
came right down to signing on the dotted line, they backed out, and
they sold the property within two weeks to another investor. So we
lost that one. It's still on the books as a severe repetitive loss.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Where is this located?
MR. WILEY: Well, I can tell you when I get to your office, but
it's considered confidential information by FEMA, so I don't want to
make it on public record.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Is it coastal property or is it inland
property?
MR. WILEY: It is -- it's fairly close to the coast but it's an inland
property .
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Thank you.
MR. WILEY: But I'll be glad to meet with you to show you the
address, but I just don't want to make it public information here.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Just whisper it.
MR. WILEY: As far as having regular repetitive loss properties,
we had two of them this past year that were demolished by the owner
in anticipation of future rebuilding. We had one repetitive loss that
went through a Code Enforcement Board case. It is intended to be
demolished as a result of that case. There's some follow-up permitting
Page 185
September 11 - 12, 2007
to be done on that before the demolition will take place.
And then we also talked to several owners of repetitive loss
properties, made them aware of the situation for what they can apply
to get federal funding, but there's a few procedures that they have to
go through, so we're trying to make sure that information is available
to the public.
Changes to the LDC Code of Laws and Ordinances, we had
incorporated to the LDC this year some limitations of fill pads. That
will help to reduce reduction of floodplain so you don't have such
huge mounds but leaves some storage space available.
We intended to go and make some changes to the flood damage
prevention ordinance because of work we have been doing all year
long with the Floodplain Management Planning Committee. We were
unable to get to that. We intend to do that during this coming year as
we finish up with the revisions to the Floodplain Management Plan.
In talking with Skip Camp, vertical construction standards, they
were adding in additional flood proofing and green building elements
even into the vertical standards for public buildings that we build, so
they are starting to address flood proofing in those buildings.
We tried to get a lot of information out to the people. Those of
you who are on the county water/sewer building program, you
received a newsletter called the Flood Protection News. It went out to
over 60,000 addresses a couple times this year, giving information.
Also the emergency management department produces an All
Hazards Guide which addresses not only flooding, but all the hazards
that we face. So that was, again, providing information on flooding
and flood insurance program.
Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Program, they acquired
29 acres of open space, environmentally sensitive lands. That's to
remain as open space. So, again, we're purchasing property here
through that program to prevent it from reducing the area of the
floodplain.
Page 186
September 11 - 12,2007
Now, we've come up with an action plan in the '06 plan that will
be incorporated into the '07 right now. And the first one is the
renovation, revision, rewriting, whatever you want to call it, of the
Floodplain Management Plan, and the committee is working on that.
We intend to come before this board in December with a totally
revised, much-improved version of the Floodplain Management Plan.
This will then be incorporated into the new section seven of the
Hazard Mitigation Plan.
The second item that we're recommending out of the '06 plan is
development of the new digital flood insurance map, flood insurance
rate maps affirms. That's what Tomasello's working on, which is what
we talked about.
We're looking right now -- we'll be through setup four in late '07,
early 2008. These firms should then have an effective date in late
2009 or early 2010 because of the huge publication times it takes for
FEMA to process it through all of their federal mandates. Weare
saying as part of this recommended action plan, continue to provide
the support and staffing funding for the completion of this project.
The third item for the recommended action plan is repetitive loss
properties. There's 32 of them in Collier County. We have one severe
repetitive loss.
We want to start bringing to you as we come through the
Floodplain Management Planning Committee discussions on setting
up programs to help people with the ability to fund mitigation
activities to remove them from being repetitive loss. FEMA requires a
certain percentage of funding up front from the property owner, but
quite often those are the people that can't afford it.
We have brought this to you before in a workshop, and we got
your support for it, so we look forward to your continued support as
we bring it through the Floodplain Management Plan, through the
Planning Commission, everybody, working up the ladder to get to you
later on.
Page 187
September 11 - 12, 2007
The fourth item in the recommended action plan is higher
regulatory standards. And as we bring those through the Floodplain
Management Planning Committee and the other review boards coming
up, we would ask for your support. We have already workshopped
those same standards with you also, and so we look forward to coming
to those in 2008 before you.
The fifth item is the watershed management plans. It is a
separate entity whatsoever from the Floodplain Management Plan. It
is separate from the development of the flood insurance rate maps, but
yet they all talk about the same issue. And FEMA in its floodplain
management planning wants things to be addressed on a watershed
basis. So as a part of our Growth Management Plan, the EAR-based
amendments, we have started work on the development of those plans
so we ask for your continued support in that effort.
As -- a requested board action for today is to receive and approve
this progress report for 2006, Collier County Floodplain Management
Plan, section seven of the Collier County Hazard Mitigation Plan, and
we're also asking you to provide the county manager with direction on
accomplishing the five recommendations that we just went through in
the action plan.
And with that, we're open for questions.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you. The flood plan, is
that a land management, or is it a land regulation?
MR. WILEY: It -- more than anything else it's a document
which identifies what regulations and planning efforts are already
incorporated within other departments within the county. It's basically
a public information type document. But of itself, it does come up
with making some recommendations for both planning and regulation
by incorporating out into the other regulatory areas the county has. It
itself is not a regulatory document. It's more of a planning document.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. And then ultimately the
Page 188
September 11 - 12,2007
board has to implement those policies under the plan similar to what
we do in our Growth Management Plan?
MR. WILEY: Very similar, yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Now, would this take a -- should
this be incorporated into our Growth Management Plan because it is a
policy?
MR. WILEY: It would not be necessary for you to do that
because you incorporate it into your Hazard Mitigation Plan. And
that, of itself, gives it the footing then to give the direction for things
to be taking place through the other planning efforts and regulatory
efforts. But it, itself, does not have to be incorporated into the Growth
Management Plan.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, since it's a policy, and
with policy comes the implementation, should it not be in a Growth
Management Plan?
MR. WILEY: It could be referenced in the Growth Management
Plan quite readily, if that would be your direction.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. I just don't know -- I
mean, when you start having a whole bunch of documents out there
that the public has to go to for information, it just makes it confusing
and duplicative to put it in one planning document as a policy
document, being our Growth Management Plan. Unless there's
compelling evidence that we shouldn't, that would be my preference.
MR. WILEY: Well, I would give a suggestion. When we bring
this plan to you in the end of the year, that you look at what it says.
And you'll have time to review it even before that to look to see what
the action plan is within it, what the goals, objectives, and policies are
that have been identified by the committee. So at that point you give
us direction. We'll be glad to take it that way for you.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
MR. WILEY: But this really is prepared as a requirement of the
flood insurance program. It's a totally separate issue from the Growth
Page 189
September 11 - 12, 2007
Management Planning.
MR. SCHMITT: I just want to add to that, Commissioner. And
that's what we do. This comes back to you based on the committee.
Some of this is already in the CCME portion of our Growth
Management Plan, but the specifics are presented to you. You then
provide staff guidance to amend the GMP or any regulatory guidance
in the LDC. So you're directly on point here and on target.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. So you're looking for
directions in the form of a motion?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll make a motion that we
accept the report. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I've got a question.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Of course. Go ahead, Commissioner
Halas.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I -- we're under the understanding
that the main reason for this is to try to lower the flood insurance
premium here in Collier County; is that correct?
MR. WILEY: Well, it's related to that issue, but that's not the
primary -- it is a requirement for us to prepare this Floodplain
Management Plan because we are a participant in the community
rating system with a class seven rating, and we have at least 10
repetitive loss properties.
Now, being within the community rating system, that is an effort
to produce the lower flood insurance premiums. That's where we get
our percentage discount. The amount of efforts that we expend in this
CRS program determines what our percentage discount is. Right now
in a class seven community, we have a 15 percent discount for those
people who are in a special flood hazard area; five percent for those
who are in the X zone. So this is all related to it, but it -- this
particular report is just mandated because of us being in it, in the CRA
program.
Page 190
September 11 - 12, 2007
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: When you took this stuff on the road
and had your community meetings out there, what was the public's
perception of what was taking place?
MR. WILEY: Well, what we took on the road was to gather
input for the preparation of a revised Floodplain Management Plan.
We did not take the 2006 plan out there to explain to them what it is,
because they understand we're doing a rewrite of it; however, all those
evening meetings that we had -- we had 10 of them spread throughout
the county -- we went to the people, we showed them what we were
talking about as far as making improvements to the plan. We wanted
to get their input, their experiences for any type of flooding, however
they chose to define flooding.
Meetings varied widely. We had meetings attended by over 30
people. We had meetings attended by one person. So the input we
received also depended upon the people who showed up. Some
people were very skeptical at first, but once we went through the
program, explained what we were doing, people began to open up.
They began to talk quite freely, and it was very useful information we
have. That information they gave us is being put within the revised
plan, as well as giving us direction for helping us to calibrate the
models even. So it's very good information we got from the people.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Now, at this point in time, are we on
schedule as far as FEMA's concerned?
MR. WILEY: As far as FEMA's concerned for which -- for this?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, I mean as far as, they -- some
time ago we had a total meltdown with FEMA related to what Collier
County was doing as far as the maps that were out there for the floods
and everything that was taking place. I take it that by buying into
their program and doing this particular exercise, that we are granted
more time to be able to come up with the final results?
MR. WILEY: Well, this is a totally separate issue from the
Page 191
September 11 - 12, 2007
development of the flood insurance rate maps with FEMA. This is an
annual report that, every year we have to come before you and tell you
the progress we made in the previous year.
Now, the study that we have going on with FEMA, we are on
schedule with them. Weare talking to them on a weekly basis. They
are very well aware of the issues that they throw in our face, and we
have to resolve them.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And what happens if you fail to file a
report or the report's incomplete?
MR. WILEY: If! do not file this report, if! don't present it to
you and then file it with them, come October 1 st, we go to a class 10
community in the CRS program, which reduces our 15 percent
discount. So it's mandatory I present this report to you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: But once again, this is all predicated
on what it's going to cost our residents in Collier County --
MR. WILEY: That's correct.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: -- the fact that we go through the
motion. Fine. I don't have a problem.
Any other questions, comments? We have a motion by
Commissioner Henning, a second by Commissioner Fiala to accept
the report.
With that, seeing no comments, all those in favor, indicate by
saymg aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: The ayes have it, 5-0. Thank you very
much for your time and effort.E
Page 192
September 11 - 12, 2007
Item #10B
RECOMMENDATION THAT THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS DIRECT STAFF TO AMEND THE
CONSERVATION COLLIER ORDINANCE NO. 2002-63 IN
ORDER TO MAKE VARIOUS PROCEDURE RELATED
CHANGES SO THAT EFFICIENCY AND COST
EFFECTIVENESS WILL BE INCREASED, AND TO MAKE
VARIOUS NON-SUBSTANTIAL CHANGES FOR
CONSISTENCY AND CLARIFICATION - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, our next -- our next item is lOB.
It's a recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners direct
staff to amend the Conservation Collier ordinance, number 2002-63,
in order to make various procedure-related changes so that efficiency
and cost effectiveness will be increased and to make various
nonsubstantial changes for consistency and clarification.
Ms. Alex Sulecki, your principal environmental specialist in
facilities management, will present.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We have a motion to approve by
Commissioner Henning and a second by Commissioner Halas.
Did you have anything you need to read into the record?
MS. SULECKI: No, sir.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I just have one question.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yes. Go ahead, Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you. Where is says, removes
reference to board approval of purchases by resolution, could you tell
me that means, please?
MS. SULECKI: Yes. We do not get purchases approved by
Page 193
September 11 - 12,2007
resolution. It's approved by vote.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. We've got Commissioner
Coyle here, too.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. Alex, with respect to site
visits, I understand the difficulty in getting group site visits done, but
it's very important that we get a couple different perspectives on what
the site actually offers.
Is there any way, without spending a lot of money, you can get
some consultant or group of consultants who will do these evaluations
for you so that you can get a fairly comprehensive view of the
property and what its value is to the conservation program?
MS. SULECKI: We could farm it out to consultants. I think
we're actually doing a pretty good job in-house, and we do take the
committee members to the sites. We just take them individually as
they're able to.
I've had sites where different committee members go at different
times to the same site, so -- and then they add to my presentation when
we get to the Conservation Collier Committee.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, that's fine, but it is
time-consuming. But I don't know if it would be -- if it would be less
expensive to do it through a consultant who could go there and get it
done during one visit, perhaps, and give you a comprehensive report
as opposed to you having to -- or you or another employee having to
take committee members individually to the same site to make
assessments.
MS. SULECKI: I've only done that once. Usually it's just one
committee member. And one of the things that's important for me,
because I'm presenting the properties and answering questions, is that
I go to the sites. So I've -- I think it would be difficult for me to
present properties if I haven't seen them.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I would agree, but taking only one
Page 194
September 11 - 12, 2007
committee member there doesn't necessarily provide the breadth of
review that I would like to have, but nevertheless. You're the one
making the recommendations.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. With that, we have a motion.
We have a second.
Any other comments, questions?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Seeing none, all those in favor,
indicate by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: The ayes have it, 5-0. Thank you.
MS. SULECKI: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thanks for all your work, Alex.
MS. SULECKI: You're welcome.
Item #10E
RESOLUTION 2007-256: RECOMMENDATION TO AWARD
CONTRACT #07-4176, SOUTH REGIONAL LIBRARY TO
DEANGELIS DIAMOND CONSTRUCTION FOR THE
CONSTRUCTION OF THE SOUTH REGIONAL LIBRARY,
PROJECT 54003, IN THE AMOUNT OF $6,519,813 AND
APPROVE THE NECESSARY COMMERCIAL PAPER LOAN
AND BUDGET AMENDMENTS - ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, the next item is 10E, a
Page 195
September 11 - 12, 2007
recommendation to award contract number 07-4176, South Regional
Library, to DeAngelis Diamond Construction for the construction of
the South Regional Library project, 54003, in the amount of
$6,519,813, and approve the necessary commercial paper loan and
budget amendment.
Mr. Hank Jones, your senior project manager from facilities
management, will present.
MR. JONES: Good afternoon, Commissioners. For the record,
Hank Jones from facilities management, senior project manager. I'm
presenting this project for Ron Hovell, who has left Collier County for
employment in another county position up in Georgia.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I didn't know that.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Georgia.
MR. JONES: Georgia. Gwinnett County, Georgia, actually.
We have prepared a previous presentation covering the key
elements of this project. And if you'd like me to proceed with that
brief presentation, I'd be glad to.
I have -- the first slide shows the combined slide showing the
layout of the site, which is a combined site with the emergency
services center to the rear of the property, as you can see towards the
top of the screen, and the South Regional Library site towards the
front of the screen.
The history of the project is such that the design contract was
originally approved back in October of '05, Site Development Plan
was approved in November of'06, site construction was approved in
December of '06, and Kraft Construction began the site development
in January.
As you can see, the site is quite far advanced. The library site, in
fact, is about 75 percent complete, about as far as we can go without
starting the building.
The building permit is ready for pickup. We only have to have
an award to a contractor. The general contractor would have to pick it
Page 196
September 11 - 12, 2007
up and fill out some additional forms. The state grant of $500,000 is
ready to be executed, and that requires that we give a notice to
proceed to a contractor by this December.
The project went out to bid, and bids were received on August
15th. We had eight bids originally submitted. One was disqualified
for leaving out some information. The seven bids are there before
you. And the low bid, low qualified bid, is from DeAngelis Diamond
for $6,519,813.
This is a shot of what the building will look like, artist rendering
at the top, and just an overall floor plan at the bottom of it.
The project estimate budget is there, and it shows the 6,716,300
in the building construction. There are some additional costs that were
lumped into that line item. In addition to the DeAngelis Diamond
contract, there is utility hookup fees and some other builder's risk
insurance and a few other odds and ends related to the actual
construction of the project.
As you see the approved budget is 10,245,000, and we have an
estimated shortfall of 2,254,000.
The requested board action in our recommendations is to approve
the $6,519,813 contract with DeAngelis Diamond, to authorize the
issuance of the commercial paper loan in the amount of 5,969,600,
and to approve $2,254,500 budget amendment from the general fund.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Motion to approve by Commissioner
Fiala and a second by Commissioner Henning.
Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah. I think it's a great project.
My problem is that we have hiring freezes, and I believe what I read in
the executive summary, that we may not be able to staff the library
with people and also possibly not having adequate funding for putting
books in there. So has there been anything in regards to how we're
Page 197
September 11 - 12, 2007
going to address this issue?
MR. JONES: I think I'd ask the -- Marilyn Matthes, library
director, to address that question.
MS. MATTHES: Marilyn Matthes, library director. We do have
funds for books. They're in our regular impact fee funds, so we would
have money to purchase materials for the library. Staffing is a
decision that the board would have to make.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. In other words, we may
have to shutter some libraries to take on responsibility of staffing this
particular library once we get it completed; is that your understanding
then?
MS. MATTHES: That's a decision the board would have to
make.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. Obviously we're going to
have to figure out what's going to happen on -- when we work through
what's taking place up in Tallahassee. Normally we would be able to
have no problem with this, but obviously we're going to be pinched
pretty good here. So there are going to be some areas that we're going
to have to look at seriously throughout the whole county, I would
think. I'm just trying to -- so right now we do -- we possibly could
have a problem. We just have to wait and see how this all shakes out.
MS. MATTHES: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Where does the money that -- the
two million-plus transfer from general fund come from?
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, what we did in 301, knowing that
we had -- we had monies that we needed extra from when we did the
-- when we did the Golden Gate City library over and above because
of the -- you know, the prices that we're getting on particular vertical
construction.
I made sure that I held off on about 2.3. I think it was 2 point --
Page 198
September 11 - 12,2007
yeah, just about $2.3 million in 301 just because this contract, we
thought it was going to come forward at the end of June, and then we
though it was going to be in July, and it's coming in September, so I
basically -- I fenced it off. I didn't -- I didn't have any allocation to it
because I didn't know what this project was going to do, and I'm glad I
did fence it off.
So that 301 is the monies that you give me to maintain the
facilities. We get some -- we get capital for parks out of there, we get
capital for IT and that kind of business, so I made sure I fenced that
off. Plus we pay -- plus we have a significant portion of that 301 fund
that's going to debt. We also do capital projects for sheriff out of
there, Supervisor of Elections, that kind of business.
So I made sure I sheltered part of that money off. It was
one-time money. It wasn't reoccurring. I'm going to need that 2.3
million to payoff debts next year our of the capital fund -- or excuse
me -- for commercial paper debt that you've got. But it was there, it
was sheltered just in case we needed it, and certainly we did in this
particular case.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. So you've got money
identified for the construction, and I presume for the furniture and for
the books and all the things like that, but you're saying to us that you
don't know how you're going to open it and operate it.
MR. MUDD: Well, right now you have a hiring freeze on,
Commissioner, so if! lost a librarian, I wouldn't hire a librarian that
would -- you'd do without. So there's several ways that you could get
about staffing this particular facility. You could -- you could modify
your hours at other facilities. Instead of being open five days, they'd
be open three days. You can open this one up for four days instead of
seven. There's ways you can get around it if we're still in a hiring
freeze.
You just -- you would open a facility in a particular part of the
county to be amenable to the residents that live in the neighborhood of
Page 199
September 11 - 12, 2007
that particular facility, but it might not be a seven-day-a-week kind of
operation.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. What are the possibilities of
getting additional volunteers from the Friends of the Library?
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, we're going to work all of those
particular issues.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Well, my concern is the
same as Commissioner Halas's concern. Building something and then
developing a plan to operate it is bad business. I think we ought to
develop that plan now so that we know what we're going to with that
building when it's completed.
And so I would really like to see the plan and have you make
some of the decisions and evaluate the alternatives. We need to do
that before we've committed to building the facility.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, we have a motion on the floor.
What would be your suggestion for an alternate motion if that time
does come?
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, when you -- how about --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I would like to talk about the
motion.
MR. MUDD: I want to make sure that, as you lay that thing out
-- you're asking us to basically predict the future. Commissioner, I
can't tell you what they're going to do on 29 January, and if they pass
that amendment, we've got a $25 million cut that we're going to have
in the budget.
To try to predict that and the ramifications for it, you know, I'll
go in there and we'll get after it, but that's something that you can't
predict. This board next year, you know, by super -- by unanimous
vote you can change the millage. You don't have to go with the law.
Lee County decided to keep their millage the same and not to
reduce taxes this year because of the vote that they made. There were
10 other counties that did that same kind of thing.
Page 200
September 11 - 12, 2007
I can't predict that, what the board's going to have and what
you're going to have on your plates when you get to look at that next
July when you set the millage rate.
There are things out there that I -- that I cannot predict. I know
that we have the dollars in order to build this particular facility. I
know that this particular facility has been out there on the -- on the --
in East Naples and Marco Island for a long time as far as a regional
library that's there. I mean, they were talking about this back in 2000
when Mr. Jones was still alive, so -- but I can't predict how you're
going to staff it with what we have. We're going to have to deal with
those as we come upon them.
You know, there's ideas that have been out there that said there
could be a couple of branches. There's one on Vanderbilt Beach Drive
that doesn't have the patronage that some of the other libraries do.
The East Naples small library where people get golf balls hitting up
against their car isn't necessarily a high usage patronage. Those
particular libraries might go on a very modified schedule, and you use
the librarians for those facilities to man this particular one, along with
the Friends of the Library and a large volunteer effort. And I believe
we're going to have to have that if we're going to maintain the
continuous service that we need to have in our libraries. And I mean
to --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So we approve the money to build
it and then hope for the best, right?
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir, unless you can tell me how the 29
January voter thing's going to work on the amendment, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
MR. MUDD: I can't -- I can't predict that.
MS. MATTHES: The libraries are also trying to work on some
projects that will save some staff time. We're looking into purchase of
self-checkouts that will help slow the need for additional employees,
also some PC management reservation type software that will also
Page 201
September 11 - 12, 2007
save staff time. We're looking at those kind of things, as well as Mr.
Mudd said, encouraging more volunteers and recruiting more
volunteers to work.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Commissioner Henning, then
Halas.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I think it's a good
preparation of the anticipation of what may happen, but it may not
happen. And we've been preparing this facility for years. In fact, the
public records that I found, the County Manager's Office was trying to
speed up the process, so there must be a reason why that happened.
And I personally don't think that the -- there's going to be a -- 60
percent of the people in the State of Florida that's going to pass it.
Yeah, you know, in my perspective, let's build it, and if the -- if the
Buggaboo happens, then try to figure out how to staff it.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Commissioner Halas, you're
back on.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I think that we'll address that about
how we're going to staff it. I would think that right now it's probably a
good time to build this even though it may have to sit there, because it
will be a heck of a lot cheaper to build it today than if we build it three
or four years from now.
So as far as building it and if it sits there, fine. But if it -- if we
can find a way of accommodating the use of it, that's great. We'll just
have to wait, because not only the 29th of January, but I think we're
going to have some very serious issues when they do come up with the
special session. We know that's been postponed.
I just want to make sure that everybody understands what's out
there. And I think all of us as commissioners understand, but we want
to make sure the people out there realize what may be coming down as
far as unfunded mandates. And I believe that the legislature is already
looking -- putting together their agenda for next year, and there may
be some other cuts that come up.
Page 202
September 11 - 12, 2007
And as county manager said, you know, we've got that option to
say, hey, we're not going to follow the law. So I think it's good to
make sure that we get everything out on the table so that everybody
has an understanding exactly what's going to happen, because if we
build this thing and can't -- can't man it, then we want to make sure the
people understand, because of the restrictions that's been placed upon
us. So I just want to make sure everybody gets the idea.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I think we do.
MR. MUDD: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make one correction to
Commissioner Halas's statement. We always follow the law, sir, and I
don't believe that's what you meant to say. What you meant to say is
there are other options in the law that this board could take where
you've got some options. You might take a different option than you
did last year.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Right. I'm sorry. You're right.
You're absolutely right.
MR. MUDD: I just wanted to correct that for the record.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Without going into a lot of detail, I
think this is a wonderful project, and it's going to -- it's going to make
us do things that we wouldn't probably do otherwise, so I'm going to
vote for it.
And with that, hearing no other comments, all those in favor,
indicate by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And the ayes have it, 5-0.
Do you need a short break? We're going to go for -- till quarter
Page 203
September 11 - 12, 2007
of.
THE COURT REPORTER: I'm okay.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Whatever we take on next,
Mr. Mudd, we want to keep in mind the fact that we're going to be out
at 4:45.
Item #lOF
RECOMMENDATION THAT THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS CONSIDERS AND DIRECTS STAFF TO
MAKE CHANGES TO THE COUNTY-WIDE IMPACT FEE
DEFERRAL PROGRAM. DISCUSSED ON 9/11 AND
CONTINUED TO 9/12 BCC MEETING (FOLLOWING TIME
CERTAIN ITEM)
MR. MUDD: Next item, Commissioners, is 10F. It's a
recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners considers
and directs staff to make changes to the countywide impact fee
deferral program, and Mr. JeffKlatzkow, assistant county attorney,
will present.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Motion to deny.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. We had a motion right out of
the box there by Commissioner Henning to deny, and I didn't hear a
second, so that motion fails at this time.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Make a motion for approval.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second, except for some
modification.
MR. MUDD: Do you want to talk about it?
MS. KRUMBINE: We didn't ask you to decide on anything, so
what are you approving? I'm confused.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I'm sorry. Let's -- we got a motion on
the floor for approval and -- by Commissioner --
Page 204
September 11 - 12, 2007
COMMISSIONER COYLE: They didn't ask us to approve
anything.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, I think you need to give staff some
direction here, and I don't think there's just a --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I understand, but I'm trying to get __
who made the motion?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I made the motion.
MS. KRUMBINE: I'm not the only one confused.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Halas made a motion.
Commissioner Coyle seconded the motion for approval.
Now, Commissioner Coyle, you've got the floor.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: You want to make some comments
before we go to staffs presentation?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, I want to make a couple of
comments.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yeah, please do.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I think -- I think we have to deal
with the issue of whether or not they're going to bring these things in
individually or as a group. I don't understand the consequences of
either of those.
Suppose we tell you that we ought to bring them in -- I'm on page
3 of 31 of the executive summary, okay, third paragraph down. One
approach is that the applications may come in individually or by unit
by -- for each developer. What are --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Chairman, I'd like to pull my
motion. Okay.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. We no longer have a motion.
Let's go ahead and do this the right way.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Well, that's what I'm trying
to do. We want -- they asked for guidance -_
COMMISSIONER HALAS: You going to pull your second?
Page 205
September 11 - 12, 2007
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I've pulled my motion.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Ifwe can, why don't we go to
staffs presentation first so everybody knows what we're talking about.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I apologize.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: They don't have a presentation.
They asked us a bunch of questions in the executive summary. They
want us to answer them. I'm trying to answer the blasted things.
Right?
MS. KRUMBINE: Yes, but what we'd like to do is just give you
a quick overview so we could channel a discussion. Would that help?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yeah, let's do that.
MS. KRUMBINE: For the record, Marcy Krumbine, director of
housing and human services.
Commissioners, just as a little bit of a history -- and I'm just
trying to go back to my notes now and remember this. On July 24th,
Ave Maria came to you with a public petition on the impact fee
deferral program on their specific needs with impact fee deferrals, and
you directed staff at that time to come back to you to discuss the issue
of the rental part of the impact fee program and any other issues that
we saw with the program.
So staff, and that consists of myself, the County Attorney's
Office, and its impact fee program, have met together, and we
identified a few issues that we wanted to bring before you so that you
would give us some direction.
Now, just as a way of general overview, the impact fee deferral
program has actually three components to it.
The first component is the program that we have with the
developer. The second component is with the owner-occupied
individual, and the third with rental units.
When we're dealing with the developer as the program exists
today, a developer could come in and request 50 deferrals on 50 units,
Page 206
September 11 - 12,2007
50 lots that they're doing and -- as long as they agree to sell it to an
income qualified person within six months of CO.
And right now the way it's set up is they could pay for it -- first,
they could pay for those impact fee deferrals, and once it goes through
our system of deferral -- and you see those on your consent agenda of
every meeting -- then we would issue a refund if their application was
approved.
Now, the next program that we have is with our owners, and
those are for individuals that income qualify at 80 percent of the
median income, and that's adjusted for household size.
We're very strict following board direction, legal residents only,
and my staff will actually eyeball their U.S. citizen information. We
see it, original copies, before anything is done, and you see also that
verification and your executive summaries when you approve it.
And the only time that that impact fee deferral is paid back is
when that individual sells, refinances, or loses their homestead
exemption. So those are two programs that are associated with owner
occupancy.
And then the third section was the one that we originally were
probably the most concerned about, and that's our rental program, and
that's when a developer decides to build an apartment building, okay,
and they say, well, we want to build it, we want to make sure that it's
going to be affordable. We're going to guarantee that it's going to be
affordable for 15 years, and we will income qualify every person that
goes in there.
And that program is actually -- the deferrals are paid back.
They're tied to a T bill, and they're paid back in six years and nine
months. So that's the program as it exists today.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay.
MS. KRUMBINE: Let me just give you some numbers. Last
year we did 139 impact fee deferrals. The average deferral was a little
over -- just under $17,000.
Page 207
September 11 - 12, 2007
Next year we expect the average deferral to be around $26,000,
which means, if we do the math, that we'll be able to do about 88
deferrals. And to date we've done over 11 million in the rental
deferrals.
And this owner occupied deferral is really only since 2005.
Before 2005 the impact fees were actually paid with our SHIP
allocation. So we've only been deferring them, aside from the
Immokalee program, since 2005. We've done almost four million in
deferrals. And of that, about 20,000 has been paid back, meaning
people have not moved, sold, or lost their homestead exemption.
So now we have the issues. We want to put those up on? Okay.
MR. KLATZKOW: The genesis of this discussion was when
Ave Maria came to us seeking to get into some form of impact fee
agreement, and when I looked at it, I realized that intent would be to
put in 1,900 or more units, that we did not have a cap on the rentals
and that we really don't have a mechanism for what they wanted to do.
My understanding of what they wanted to do was they wanted to
buy individual units, individual complexes, and then rent them out to
students or to their faculty or grad students.
And it doesn't really fit into the current program. And although I
thought it was a really, really good idea, I really think we need to
amend the ordinance if we're going to do it. And if we're going to do
it for Ave Maria, we might want to think about maybe doing it for the
school boards, for their teachers or for the fire districts, for their
employees, or the sheriff or their employees, and we're getting to a
point where we're getting well beyond the scope of the ordinance, and
so we look for board direction on that.
The other piece, of course, being, we need to cap the rental to
something. We have a 3 percent cap on the homeowners, something
in that neighborhood for the rental would be legally sufficient. You
can't get too high on these things because what's happening is that
you're starting to water down everybody else's payments because
Page 208
September 11 - 12, 2007
they're not coming due until six years, nine months, and people come
in, they're paying their impact fees, they're expecting the infrastructure
to come in, but if you defer too much of that, you can't put in the
infrastructure really that they paid for. So we can do a relative de
minimis type of deferral, but the more you get out, the more you start
stretching the envelope.
Those were the two first two issues. And I'd like to also direct
the board's attention to the fifth issue, and that one's really my issue
more than staffs issue. And it occurred to me we do bonus density
based on affordable housing, and they have to put in that housing
anyway.
And my question to the board was, when we put in that program,
do we intend for them to also get these impact fee deferrals? Because
it's a limited pool of money we have. Marcy's estimating that maybe
we'll have 88 of these next year.
And if we're going to continue to allow people to combine these
different programs, we're really cutting down on the number of people
who can actually participate in these programs.
Issues three and four really are staff issues, and I'll defer to staff
on those.
MS. KRUMBINE: I'd like to just add another side of issue five,
and that is that really in order to make these homes affordable, we
have no choice but to layer the different programs. And my feeling on
this is that when we're -- the county -- the county -- the county and
county staff are not developers, we're not builders, and I don't believe
that the direction of the board is for us to start manufacturing housing.
So we count on profit builders, for-profit builders, non-profits
and the like to partner with us to reach that thousand unit goal every
year of affordable housing. So to me, whatever programs and
initiatives that we could come up with to help them achieve their
goals, we're working together on it. There are community partners,
and they need to layer these programs in order to do that.
Page 209
September 11 - 12, 2007
For issue number three, my concern is that right now a developer
could come in and do 50 units at a time. Now, up until this point,
really the only game in town was Habitat for Humanity, and we're
pleased to partner with them. They do a great job. But because we
have other initiatives -- we have now Ave Maria, we have Lennar
Homes, we have Marco Bay Homes, we have a number of other
developers that are stepping up to the plate, and what could
conceivably happen come October is we have two come in, ask for 50
each, and that's it for the year, and so nobody else really has the
opportunity to avail themselves of this, and so then here we are trying
to encourage our community partners, and we've shut off the faucet, so
to speak.
And who wants to speak on the impact fee refunds? Either one.
I asked her to bring her baby, and what was up with that? That would
have been perfect, don't you think?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Would have been absolutely
wonderful.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Boy or girl?
MS. PATTERSON: Girl. Amy Patterson, for the record.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, congratulations.
MS. PATTERSON: Thank you very much.
Regarding the refunds of impact fees, currently what's happening
now is the developer can come in fully intending for the unit to be a
deferral, an affordable housing unit, but they don't have the person to
do the deferral at the time of issuance of the building permit when the
impact fees are required to be paid, so what they do is they go ahead
and pay the impact fees in anticipation that they will have the
qualified participant within six months of the CO being issued on that
unit.
It's problematic for staff because obviously we have to track
these. You have the money issue that, you have -- if it crosses over
fiscal years, you're tracking money from a previous fiscal year or the
Page 210
September 11 - 12,2007
current fiscal year, and also, on the developer's side or the builder's
side is that now we're so limited on the funding that there's a
possibility that they could pay those impact fees fully thinking and
making a business decision that they're going to be able to have a
refund and there won't be money available.
So whether or not they could get a qualified participant, likely
there won't be money for us to give them back, and we can't double
charge. It's going to cause problems for not only the developer, but
also for that homeowner because he won't be able to have his deferral
agreement, and that puts the money issues square on the shoulders of
that qualifying participant going into that unit.
I don't know if I've covered all your points. That's all Marcy's
staff that has to handle these things and make sure that we're tracking
them, so if she had anything else to add -- but those were our issues
with the refunds.
MS. KRUMBINE: So Basically, Commissioners, our
recommendation is that what we'd like to do is we'd like to get your
direction on some of these issues and bring it back with a proposed
modified change in the ordinance in a one-package deal. So ask away.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. If! may, I'm going to go first,
then I'm going to go right down the line because I don't have a light to
turn on or I would have turned mine on first.
Yeah. Listen, observations I've been making. One, there's a
tremendous backlog of properties out there, many of them would fit
the needs of people in the 100, 150 percent; paper's full of them, you
know. It's not a case that you have to keep building these houses.
There's an inventory, a tremendous inventory, empty houses, new
houses, condominiums, rentals, there's no end to it.
And so meanwhile, we're incentivizing the program to build more
houses while the inventory's out there, and who is this benefiting?
Meanwhile, things haven't changed for those people in the 80 percent
and below. These are still people that can't afford housing under
Page 211
September 11 - 12, 2007
normal circumstances.
So when the resource gets low, we have to be able to see which
way it's best directed to be able to make sure that we get the best bang
we can for our buck. Ifwe go out there and we say, okay, when the
money's expended, that's it until more money comes in in the
following year and everybody's got that uncertainty of where we're
going to go.
But we still have the problem with the fact that people have
certain -- certain expectancies. They expect that if they've already
entered into a deal and they're in the process of doing it, that they
should be able to bring that thing to completion and be able to have
the money there for everything up to the 150 percent.
We're going to have to make adjustments according to what the
real need of the market is out there and how our people are going to be
best served. There's not an endless supply of money.
Obviously rentals are going to raise a real problem in the whole
system where they've been accepted. I don't know at what point in
time we can cut it off and say, okay, you got it to the door too late.
You're no longer eligible.
But there is no more money. I mean, where is it going to come
from? I mean, the only thing I can think of is a limited amount maybe
from a CRA in Immokalee to help some people out there in the upper
parts over 80 percent. But even at that, they're going to be -- they're
going to be challenged. We can only get so much money out of that
CRA before we get to the point where we hurt our income base even
further.
Now, I didn't give you solutions. I probably gave you more
problems, but I did want to share my own personal viewpoint on this.
And with that, I believe Commissioner Fiala was first, Henning --
Halas and then Henning, and Coyle is gone. Okay, fine.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Fiala and then
Page 212
September 11 - 12, 2007
Henning.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Excuse me, Henning -- Fiala, Halas,
Henning. Okay, got it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Just for clarification. We spoke of
rentals and we spoke of owner occupied. We also said it's estimated
that 26,000 might be the average next year, so that would allow us 88
units. Does that mean 88 units of owner occupied only? So how many
units then do we have for rental?
MR. KLATZKOW: At this point in time you have no cap.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: It's an unlimited amount, and that's
why you're talking about capping that. I thought you were taking that
out of the 88. I see. That's separate. Okay, so -- and we should deal
with each one of these issues separately because they -- we can't just
group them together at all. Okay. Now that was my first.
And being that there -- you've mentioned a few of them in here,
Lennar and Marco Bay and Habitat and Ave Maria, and I thought, you
know, everybody should get their fair share also.
Now, this Marco Bay, I've just seen them come up a couple times
in our -- on our consent for deferrals. That must be like the new guy,
and it seems like he's just building one here, one there. Obviously he
doesn't have too much money. Maybe this Freeman, Freeman is the
same way --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: He does the same thing.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- just a little bit at a time, and those
people who are really trying and can only do a little bit shouldn't have
the pot taken away before they get a chance to sip a little bit of it as
well. And I think we need to be fair about that.
So I don't know what the answer is to that. I'm just saying that
maybe we could divvy it up somehow so that somebody large can
only take -- because we've got three large ones right here. Maybe they
could only take one-fourth, one-fourth, one-fourth and let the other
Page 213
September 11 - 12, 2007
fourth go for the little guys who can only build a few a year so that
they have an opportunity to have some also. It seems like it might be
a fair way.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, I don't want to jump in front of
you, but we're not here to serve the developers. We're here to serve
the homeowners.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Right. And so -- and this way we're
-- we're giving everybody an equal opportunity, depending on where
they're living. Not everybody can qualify for Habitat. Not everybody
can qualify for Ave Maria, so we have to give everybody, I think, a
fair opportunity. I'm throwing that on the table now as a way to
address that particular one.
And I agree, we do need a cap on the rentals, because we've got
to think about that road system out there. If we don't have our roads
leading to these places, then we're shooting ourselves in the foot. And
I'm sure if EDC comes up here, they're going to say the same thing
because they want to -- they want to encourage business, or at least
they should be saying the same thing, if they aren't -- anyway, they
want to encourage business, they want to encourage high-wage jobs.
Those people have to live someplace, and they have to get there. And
if we don't have the roads and infrastructure in place, then they've shot
themselves in the foot if they go any other way.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And speaking of shooting ourselves
in the foot, before we go any farther, I'm here for as long as
commissioners want to stay in these chairs. But quarter of five was
the time we were going to try to leave to be able to make it to that 911 I
ceremony. I just want to remind you. We can continue this again
tomorrow, or we can continue till we exhaust everything that's here.
With that --
MS. KRUMBINE: I just wanted to clarify that our current -- in
our current program, we're only serving up to 80 percent of the median
income for that -- those are the only people that qualify for current
Page 214
September 11 - 12,2007
impact fee deferrals, period.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Then that makes that a little
eaSIer.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: See?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: See, I already accomplished the main
goal.
Okay. Let's go to Commissioner Halas, then Commissioner
Henning. And if you don't mind, keep an eye on the clock.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Number one, I'd like to see that
instead of 80 percent of the wage earn -- of the cost of living or wages
here in Collier County, I'd like to see that lowered to 60 percent so
that the people that really need the housing are addressed on it, and I'd
like to see that the rental units are taken out of the system and this is
only for affordable housing units.
And if we give the developers credits for building additional
density, then I think that they don't qualify as far as -- because we've
already given them an incentive so, therefore, they wouldn't be
eligible to come in to get to the deferred impact fees.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Henning, then if --
with everybody's permission, we'll break.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. We have some speakers
on this item, and I don't think it's fair, personally, to give guidance, but
I do have questions.
Was it your understanding Mr. Gable was asking for deferrals on
rentals?
MR. KLATZKOW: That was my understanding, yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. I think we need to have
some numbers on what the projections of impact fees that are going to
come in based upon the permits. How much money is going to be
available?
MS. KRUMBINE: That's -- those are the figures that I did give
you is that the -- the amount next year will be very comparable to this
Page 215
September 11 - 12,2007
year, $2.3 million, and that's why I projected 88 deferrals.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Even with the new construction
down?
MS. KRUMBINE: Yes, because the impact fees went up.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, but I --
MS. KRUMBINE: It kind of balanced out.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's fine.
MS. KRUMBINE: Next year might be worse.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's -- we're working on --
that's my question is, is next year, 2008.
MS. KRUMBINE: Oh, I'm talking about two years then.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Two years.
MS. KRUMBINE: We're already doing next year. For next year
-- October 1 will be next year, and that will be approximately $2.3
million.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So you're banking these impact
fees, deferrals?
MS. KRUMBINE: No, you won't start seeing them till October
1. We're just trying to give you our best projections.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I see. Okay, all right.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: With that --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll put a bet on that.
MS. KRUMBINE: A bet on if we're banking them?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, no, no, not that.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. With that, what we're going to
do is continue this item tomorrow after our 9 o'clock time certain. I
apologize to everyone that was here to speak, but we do have some
other commitments we have to go to, and we hope you join us. We're
going to be going to the 9111 ceremonies at the First --
MR. MUDD: First Baptist Church on Orange Blossom and
Livingston Road.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Orange Blossom Special.
Page 216
September 11 - 12,2007
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We're recessed until tomorrow.
*****
There being no further business for the good of the County, the
meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 4:46 p.m. and
continued to 9:00 a.m. on September 12, 2007.
Page 217
September 11 - 12, 2007
TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Naples, Florida, September 12,2007
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
district as has 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: Jim Coletta
Tom Henning
Frank Halas
Fred W. Coyle
Donna Fiala
ALSO PRESENT:
Jim Mudd, County Manager
David Weigel, County Attorney
Crystal Kinzel, Office of the Clerk of Court
Page 218
September 11 - 12, 2007
MR. MUDD: Ladies and gentlemen, please take your seats.
Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, you have a hot mike.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you, Mr. Mudd. This is a
continuation of the Board of Collier County Commissioners meeting of
September 11 th, and we're going to start this meeting with the Pledge of
Allegiance. Please stand.
Commissioner Henning, would you lead us.
(The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Before we begin, I just want to tell you
that the ceremonies that were held at the First Baptist Church at Orange
Blossom and Livingston yesterday evening were absolutely
remarkable. And Commissioner Coyle, once again, excelled and
shined, and the whole group did. It was an absolutely wonderful,
wonderful ceremony.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: It was marvelous.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you for your part in that.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman, but
I would like to point out that it really was the task force that did that.
They put that all together. They selected the participants, and I think
they've done a wonderful job. They just keep making the performance
-- or the memorial better every single year. And thank you for
attending, by the way, to all of the commissioners. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you. And with that, we'll go to
the item for the time certain, Mr. Mudd.
MR. MUDD: That's right, Commissioner. Thank you.
Item #9A
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS TO INTERVIEW
COUNTY ATTORNEY RECRUITMENT SEARCH FIRMS -
RECOGNIZE WATERS-OLDANI AS THE SEARCH FIRM TO BE
HIRED - APPROVED 5/0; PURCHASING DEPARTMENT TO
Page 219
September 11 - 12, 2007
ENTER INTO CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONS WITH W A TERS-
OLDANI - APPROVED
This is item 9A, and it is to be heard 12th of September at nine
a.m., and it's the Board of County Commissioners to interview the
county attorney recruitment firm -- search firm, and Mr. Carnell will
present.
MR. CARNELL: Good morning, Mr. Chairman, members of the
board. Steve Carnell, purchasing and general services director. We've
scheduled presentations from the two firms that responded to our RFP
to provide these services, and you'll be hearing from both of them this
morning. We'll be referring to the firms as Argus Legal and
Waters-Oldani respectively.
Before we begin, just a quick fly-over of the process here, want to
get consensuses from the five of you in terms of how we proceed. Our
intent this morning is to give both firms an opportunity to make a
IS-minute presentation to you. And you should have handouts from
both of them already. If not, we'll make sure you have them before
they begin.
We're going to hear the presentations from the both of them, and
then there will be a question and answer period to follow. After we've
completed the question/answer period with both firms, then I will ask
the chairman to poll the board. And when I say poll the board, we'll
kind of do that in two steps.
We want you to try to follow the process that we use for staff
selection committees, since that's the process, in this phase of the
process, and that will be that each of the five of you would offer any
comments you wish to make, good, bad, indifferent, about either of the
firms, and that way the five of you collectively hear your observations,
the individual observations of each committee member.
When you're done offering comments, then I'll -- then the
chairman will ask you to give your ranking. And you were provided
Page 220
September 11 - 12, 2007
with a scoring form previously. If anybody needs a copy of the scoring
forms, we have them available. But if everybody's got one, then that
would be the point in time that you fill out your scoring form and you
would announce your number one firm, and we would essentially tally
the results right there, and then go from there in terms of what the
process will be next for negotiating a contract.
So with that, if there are any questions from the board, we can
address those right now or we can begin the presentations.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Before we do begin the presentations,
Commissioner Henning has a question.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, a concern that the -- it's not
normal that the board does that, and your staff does this all the time
with the assistance with whatever issue it is. And I would just ask you
to help us, guide us through the process as it's supposed to be done.
MR. CARNELL: Very good. We're prepared to do that.
All right. With that, Mr. Weigel, did you have --
MR. WEIGEL: Yes. Thank you, Steve.
To the extent that you've received scoring forms prior to the
meeting today and to any extent that you have, through your review of
the materials provided you, provided initial scoring, I would suggest,
advise, that you may have created a public record and, therefore, if you
are to alter scores of that which has previously been indicated, rather
than a removal by erasure or some other form of the preliminary score
that you may have set down, that you -- if you choose to change any
scoring, that you cross through and indicate a new score, a revised
score, so that the old score is still visible. We want to avoid any
potential for a claim of a deletion or removal of a public record. Thank
you.
MR. CARNELL: Okay. With that, Mr. Chairman, we're going to
proceed the way we normally would, which is in alphabetical order, so
we'll call Argus Legal at this time to make their presentation.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Good morning.
Page 221
September 11 - 12, 2007
MS. CLERMONT-LARSEN: Good morning, and thank you for
the opportunity to present to you what Argus Legal has to offer Collier
County. During our presentation, we will demonstrate how Argus takes
a demon -- and consultative approach in recruiting which has shown to
yield superior results.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Would you state your name for the
record, please.
MS. CLERMONT-LARSEN: Yes. I want to introduce myself.
My name is Sabrina Clermont-Larsen, and I am originally from New
York City. I wanted to give you a little bit of background for myself. I
attended the University of South Florida where I received my
bachelor's degree in sociology. I then attended the University of
Florida, Levin College of Law, where I received my J.D.
After I graduated from law school, I took the unconventional
route. Instead of practicing law, I obtained my real estate license. This
is something I always wanted to do, dealing with contracts and dealing
with a lot of -- interacting with a lot of people, two things I enjoy
tremendously.
A few years later I joined the Argus team as a legal search
consultant and to continue to what I do best, interacting with lots of
people, and now it's with my legal peers.
MS. GARCIA: Good morning. My name is Lisa Garcia. I'm a
legal search consultant with Argus Legal as well. And by way of
background, I'm a Washington, D.C., native. I received my
undergraduate from the University of Virginia in foreign affairs and
Spanish. I received my J.D. from the National Law Center of George
Washington University.
After law school I worked for a short time in a law firm, took a lot
of time off to raise my family, moved to Florida, and 2003 I joined
Argus Legal. Very happy to be there.
MR. PERHOSKY: Hi. Thank you for your time. My name's
David Perhosky, and I am director of operations for Argus Legal.
Page 222
September 11 - 12, 2007
Originally from Pittsburgh. And my responsibility is the overall
guidance of the staffing firm, which it comprises Dental Power as well
as Argus Legal.
MS. CLERMONT-LARSEN: Now, what exactly is an Argus?
When I first -- when I began working at Argus, a friend of mine asked
me, what is Argus? And to my dismay, I had no idea. So as soon as I
went home, I Googled it to find out the definition of it.
Argus is Latin from Greek Argus, a giant with 100 eyes that was
made guardian of Io. It also means an alert and watchful person. So
whenever you think of Argus, think of, that we have an eye on your
staffing needs.
MS. GARCIA: And I'd like to present a little background about
Argus, the birth of Argus. In 1999 Argus Legal, along with its parent
company, Dental Power, was founded in Tampa as an entrepreneurial
private venture. Today Argus Legal has become one of the leading
search firms in Florida. Our enviable loyal customer base has produced
many satisfied clients and candidates.
You might ask why we've been successful. From inception, the
primary reason for our success is due to the way we treat our candidates
and clients.
Most of our job orders now come from referrals. We take the time
to listen to your concerns during the process. When we recruit for your
position, we are representing Collier County. You want search
consultants about whom you can feel confident and proud.
MR. PERHOSKY: We thought we would point out the
organization chart of our company. As Lisa mentioned, we are a
Tampa-based firm but do work throughout Florida and also throughout
the southeast.
The firm was founded by Dr. Nick Kavouklis, who was a
practicing dentist and now is a successful entrepreneur.
As the organization chart demonstrates, there are two parts of the
company. There's Dental Power, which is a dental staffing company,
Page 223
September 11 - 12, 2007
as well as Argus Legal, which is why we're here, which is the attorney
support services firm.
Lisa and Sabrina are attorney recruiters. We also have a support
staff, which places paralegals and on down, and that is staffed by Lynda
Hood and Kristin Waldrop, but we have administrative people that help
us with the organization.
Dental Power, as I said, is a dental staffing firm, places hygienists
and dentists, and et cetera, and that is a separate -- separate entity.
Okay.
MS. CLERMONT-LARSEN: The National Association of
Professional Services lists six factors that companies should use in
determining and selecting a placement firm.
Number one, focusing on a niche group. As David just
mentioned, Lisa and I perform only for attorney recruitment. We do
trend analysis to see what type of attorneys would be high in demand in
our marketplace. We also provide salary surveys to educate our clients
as well as our candidates to what realistic salary would be in this
market.
Number two and three is a philosophical compatibility with
professionals and the partnering capability with the firm, and it is our
goal by the end of our presentation, that we will answer those questions
for you.
Number four is, the placement firm should have good references,
reputation, and be respected in the marketplace. We have many clients
who are happy and willing to provide you with references that speak
highly of our reputation in the marketplace.
And also, the Professional Association Affiliation. Argus is a
member of the National Association of Legal Search Consultants which
adheres to a higher code of ethic than the rest of the legal industry. It
also allows us to keep our finger on the pulse of ever-changing needs
and wants as well as the up-to-date programs and cutting-edge
technology not only to run our business efficiently, but to also better
Page 224
September 11 - 12, 2007
serve our clients.
We are also members of the local bar association to keep abreast
of what's going on in the legal community.
And lastly, number six, the placement firm should tell you the
process that they use to conduct research, recruit candidates, and get
results. So in the next two pages, I will show you the Argus difference,
the Argus way.
Number one, let's just -- I'm going to just give a scenario that you
choose us as your recruiter of choice, and I will -- and I will go over
how we do our recruiting.
Number one, you will -- you'll give us a job order. Already that --
we know that it is for a county attorney position. And with that county
attorney position, we did some preliminary search already, and usually
you look for people with about 10 years of experience as an attorney,
five years experience with local government, and including with land
use law and growth experience.
And as we go forward, you'll tell us if there's a certain number of
years that you need or the educational background that you require.
Afterwards we do an on-site client visit. And this is something
that we think that's one of the crucial parts of our process. It allows us
to understand the intraoffice (sic) culture.
During our visit we try to be as thorough as possible to determine
what candidate that will fit your -- in your company. We don't only
match qualified candidates with great -- that looks good on paper. We
like to also match personalities. Because, let's face it, we like to work
with people that we like, not people who just looks (sic) good on paper.
So during our client visit, we would like to know who are the
candidates who you'll be working with, the type of person that they will
be working with so it will better serve us so we can find the better
candidate for you.
Number three, what we do, we start our candidate search and we
conduct Internet research locally and nationally to identify potential
Page 225
September 11 - 12, 2007
candidates. We begin our process by recruiting passive and active
candidates through industry associations, networking events and, of
course, referrals.
Now, once we've selected the qualified candidates, we begin our
candidate screening. And this is another crucial part of our process and
this is what I like to call connecting with our candidates.
Now, this is a second crucial part of our process. At Argus, we
pride ourselves on giving potential candidates individual attention. We
personally interview our candidates rather than have support staff
conduct the interview, a practice that other search firms use.
By conducting our own interview, Lisa and I tend to have the
candidates feel at ease for them to divulge some information to us that
they would usually not divulge to other people in different settings.
For instance, I had a candidate once tell me that -- because a lot of
law firms, they require a lot of -- a lot of billable hours. And she said,
it's very important for her not to spend too much time in the law firm
because she is a member in a band. And it was very important to her
that she has time for her personal time. Now, this is not something that
she will do -- and say during an interview, but since she confided in me,
I can find a law firm that will best suit her.
Another thing is, part of our duties is not only to sell the position,
but to sell the position to our candidates. Once the -- one of our
strategies is to make the position as appealing as possible and as well as
the city. And Naples, being the Florida -- being Florida's last paradise,
there are a few things that we have discovered. National Golf Digest
placed -- named Naples the gulf capital ofthe world. Forbes.com put
Naples the top 100 places for businesses in 2006. And of course, your
beautiful beaches, and now I can personally say you have wonderful
restaurants and lush landscapes, which is absolutely gorgeous.
So through the Argus difference, we deliver results our -- the
Argus way, and by that, our results are 99 percent of placement
retention through our prorated guarantee period. We place candidates
Page 226
September 11 - 12, 2007
in the partner level with $1 million portable business. And Lisa also
added (sic) to me, $2 million portable business as well. Our clients
consist of boutique firms to international law firms.
In its eighth year since its inception, Argus continues to grow by
leaps and bounds. Our 2000 numbers indicate that we are on our way
to surpassing last year's goals. And with your help, and if we earn your
business, you will help us do that as well.
In conclusion, we would like to thank you for the opportunity to
present Argus difference to you. And remember, Argus Legal always
has an eye on your legal needs. Thank you so much.
Now is this the time for questions or--
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Oh, okay. Give us just a second while
my fellow commissioners -- Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. Would it be appropriate if
I ask a question at the same time, after the other presenters?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: In other words -- yes. I don't know
why that would not be possible. After we have the other presentation,
so we have them all here at the time, and then -- the only thing is, I'll
ask that, if we are going to ask questions of them, that we alternate who
goes first and who goes second to try to come up with something in the
way of --
MS. CLERMONT-LARSEN: Okay. Thank you so much.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Do you agree, fellow commissioners?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yep.
MR. CARNELL: All right. Now you can hear from the other
firm competing, Waters-Oldani, at this time.
MR. BORSGDORF: Good morning.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Good morning, sir.
MR. BORSGDORF: Mr. Chairman, members of the commission,
my name is Del Borsgdorf. I'm here on behalf of the Waters
Consulting Group, better known in the public sector recruiting business
Page 227
September 11 - 12, 2007
as Waters-Oldani. Mindful of your schedule both yesterday and today,
so we'll try to be respectful of your time in terms of keeping to the
presentation limits and do the same in your questions and answers. But
it's a pleasure to be here.
Let me tell you first that Waters Consulting is a public sector
human resources consulting firm, so the entire business of Waters
Consulting is around hiring, keeping, training, compensating the public
sector workforce nationwide.
Now, I will confess we have strayed a couple of times into the
ACECE, which is the Chamber of Commerce professionals, both in
terms of search and compensation. But again, very much a public
sector to focus firm.
It has been in the executive recruitment business for over 30 years.
The principals, both Waters and Oldani, are, in fact, live people who
are heading the firm, Rollie Waters and Jerry Oldani, both long-time
friends and now co-workers in the firm who lead the practice.
And the CEO of the executive search side is Chuck Anderson.
And I mention Chuck just to add to my own resume a bit. I'm what you
would call a recovering city manager having spent most of my life in
one of these chairs.
After 35 years I'm happy to tell you I'm high mileage but still
physically fit. So I've spent hours and hours in these kinds of meetings
as a career professional. But the reason I'm here for Waters is because
they are very focused in their -- what I would call their career learning
path as a firm to keep the city managers, who have either retired or who
are willing, actively engaged with the firm. So I've been more
connected with Waters as a client than I have as an advisor or as a
consultant.
Chuck Anderson was the city manager of Dallas in one of his
lives. He then ran the Dallas area rapid transit system, he ran the
Michigan Education Association, and spent a number of years for the
International City/County Management Association in Europe and is
Page 228
September 11 - 12,2007
now the CEO of the recruiting arm of Waters-Oldani.
Ted Benavides' name you'll see on one of the pages of our
presentation, also a former city manager of Dallas at the time that I was
the city manager of San Jose, California.
So we're cluttered up with public sector careerists, and I think
that's the -- one of the particular characteristics we want to point out to
you.
One of the things about being a human resources consulting firm
is it lets you expand that executive search wing into understanding
compensation issues, organizational issues, tenure, fit, finish, if you
will, and to understand my generation, the people who are, in fact,
retiring left and right across our country. So we're very mindful of
succession planning and the issues that are important in terms of who's
in the queue to take key public sector leadership roles like the county
attorney.
There's, on page 3 and 4, a sampling of our clients.
Waters-Oldani, because they've been in the public sector search
business nationally for a long time, always has a struggle picking out
which ones do you highlight. Fortunately, in a number of these, I
happen to have been an employee as the city manager of a couple of the
jurisdictions, so I can speak directly to them.
But the firm, if you've gone through the full proposal, has over
230 client references. About 20 of those sorted out by city attorney or
county attorney, and then references geared specifically to your search
in this particular case.
The importance of the long list in the proposal is the number of
times you see repeat work with the same city or county. I think it's the
hallmark of Waters Consulting and the reason they've been in business
for 30 years is the amount of repeat business they get after doing the
search.
The team is arrayed on page 5, starting with Chuck Anderson, the
CEO. I would single out the resume of Andrea Sims who will be the
Page 229
September 11 - 12, 2007
lead consultant on this engagement, should we be privileged to get your
business. But again, the list is there because that group of people meets
every Friday, and they manage the entire search process from the
standpoint of the proposals that are before you and other government
agencies, the work that's in progress, the workload of each consultant,
the professional skills and match so that it is a very interactive, highly
engaged firm in terms of executive recruitment in the public sector.
Let me just tell you briefly about the approach that we take. It
obviously starts with you in the development of the profile for the
county attorney so that we -- step one is spending time here, getting that
right, getting it on paper and, frankly, making it look very good.
I've been very surprised even in my own career how many times,
despite in our own communities, especially one as beautiful as Collier
County, you think that people would be instantly attracted. They will be
if they can see it or feel it or get a sense of it, and that's not always the
case. So we do recruiting brochures for that express purpose.
And I can tell you, a number of times in my career, I have lost
really top, number-two and number-three people because there was a
very good looking brochure stuck on the wall in the office.
We obviously chase a great many people individually, and I have
to tell you, that's especially true in Florida recruiting because, frankly,
professionals take a deep breath before they send a resume in Florida
since their employer will be the first person discussing it with them as a
matter of public record. So there is that motion to getting that good
picture and a good sense of what this community is about up front to
attract clients even though you'll discover many of the best ones come
in at the very end of the process.
The second task is our marketing strategy that is targeted both
passively and actively in terms of ads targeted to the municipal and
county attorney market, a narrow and specialized market, and the
national market for those folks, which is less specialized, needs that
Florida translation, and we understand that.
Page 230
September 11 - 12,2007
But there is less movement certainly among county and city
attorneys than there is among county and city managers, but there is
some, and that will produce, we think, some excellent candidates for
you as well.
We do something that we think is singular in the business, and it's
a product of being in the human resource consulting business. We have
a trademark product. And if you need a quick shorthand hook to it,
think Myers-Briggs or something like that. But it's a validated
instrument that we give finalist clients that focus on their fit for the
position, not the resume or their references so that it goes to learned
skills, innate skills, relationship building talent, what kind of person
you are on the job and how you build your staff.
You'll find, as we have, some of our top candidates when they first
look at this are a bit taken aback. They didn't plan to take a test to be a
finalist. When they take it, it changes immediately because it's clearly a
career-building, personal-enhancement tool as well as a direct insight
for you into the candidates, and up to as many as 10 finalists will do
this kind of product and provide it directly to you, so you'll have
something in addition to resume references and sort of skills and
abilities and track record.
The diversity of our candidates pool is a very strong suit for
Waters. So if you're looking for a firm with a track record in terms of
diversity, we are clearly it in the public sector. We're the largest
privately-held firm of our type that's in the public sector recruiting
business, and again, as I indicated, have some 30 years of experience
doing this.
When we complete that career navigator component of the job and
come to you with the final candidate pool, that's an interactive process
with us so that the final list has your fingerprints all over it before you
get the final list. We stay with the process to the very end.
And let me conclude with what I think is, at least as a long-time
public sector employee and hirer of consultants and executive search
Page 231
September 11 - 12, 2007
firms, there's one thing that Waters provides that is unique, and we call
it right up front in our proposal, the triple guarantee. What that is, this
is a fixed-fee process when the contract is inked and you get a
candidate that meets your satisfaction. And should that candidate be
terminated or resign during the first year, we come back, no
professional fee, expenses only. Second year, 50 percent of the
professional fee and expenses so that the product -- we stay with you
until this is a successful product. The first search obviously complete
to your satisfaction, but then there's the follow-up guarantee.
The second thing that we do is not recruit candidates we have
placed so that our interest is in the tenure of the candidate in a
long-term, and I think at least from a county commission standpoint,
that fixed-fee guarantee is something that can be comforted.
Obviously the variable here is expense negotiation. We'll do that
immediately after selection, but you'll know the final price that will be
the final price throughout the product until you're satisfied.
So it's a pleasure to have the opportunity to be here, and I'll join
Argus in answering your questions in whatever order you'd like to do
that. Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you, sir.
What we'll do as we go through the questions, is there -- that
concludes all the presentations, the two -- is we'll keep Argus right over
at this side, and I'm going to ask you to take this side of the room there
with that podium. And what we're going to do, I'm going to ask you to
remember, whoever leads off, the next time, the next question comes
up, the other party will lead off so we can have some balance and
fairness to this as we go forward.
Commissioner Henning, you raised the first question to begin
with, so we're going to go with you first. Then we're going to
Commissioner Halas.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you. I'll probably have
about three questions.
Page 232
September 11 - 12,2007
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: That's fine, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Sir, you mentioned that the lead
person will be doing the search. Can you give me that person's
background?
MR. BORSGDORF: Yes. Andrea Sims is -- leads our practice
out of our Cleveland office. Andrea is what is a, at this point in her
career, an executive recruitment specialist in the public sector. She's
been in that business for six years, but she has an extensive background
in information technology.
I would, I think without contradiction in the firm, suggest she may
be the brightest person that works for us. But her background is in a
variety of executive roles in public sector information technology, for
the last six years focusing entirely on public sector executive search.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Being a former manager of a
municipality, where did that municipality get its authority? What legal
authority or what law did they get their authority?
MR. BORSGDORF: San Jose is a home rule city, a charter city in
California, so it -- but it's a creature of the state, as are all city
governments.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: What's your understanding that
Florida counties, where do they get their authority?
MR. BORSGDORF: From the state, but there are a number of
charter counties as well, which would be analogous to my mention of
San Jose, California, where I worked last as a city manager. I live in
Sarasota County, which is a charter county, which provides a much
broader base, as you know, of what I would call municipal authority
and power.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. The Argus team, where
does the county get its authority, legal authority?
MS. GARCIA: I'll be honest with you, I'm not sure ofthe answer.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Let me -- let me ask about
fees. Fees -- you're a percentage fee; is that correct?
Page 233
September 11 - 12,2007
MS. CLERMONT-LARSEN: Correct.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And in -- all your costs are
included into that?
MS. CLERMONT-LARSEN: Correct.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
MR. PERHOSKY: A contingency based.
MS. GARCIA: We don't get anything unless we find you the
candidate.
MR. PERHOSKY: Our job is finished when you select the
candidate.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. I'm assuming you're not
just --
MR. PERHOSKY: But then we have a -- we have a -- our job --
we earn our money once you finish the final candidate.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. And you're not going to
bring us one candidate, I'm sure.
MR. PERHOSKY: No, sir, no, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Is it Price Watershouse?
Water --
MR. BORSGDORF: Waters Consulting.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm sorry.
MR. BORSGDORF: I used to work for Coopers and Lybrand, so
I'm perfectly fine.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Tell me, you're a flat -- fat -- flat
fee --
MR. BORSGDORF: Certainly not fat, but definitely flat.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So it's going to be a low fee plus
costs?
MR. BORSGDORF: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: What do you consider costs?
MR. BORSGDORF: Costs are direct costs, not marked up. So
they're advertising where we have agreed with you where that's going
Page 234
September 11 - 12, 2007
to be placed. It's travel based on -- and if Southwest and Airtran keep at
it, you can go anywhere in the country right now for $79. But these are
actual costs of travel for the consultant to be here with you in the
appropriate meetings, face-to face meetings with candidates,
advertising, the brochure I mentioned.
So it's a specific agreed-to schedule of expenses in advance of
incurred (sic) them, so we are definitely a public sector focused, flat
fee, this is what it will cost, and we're done when you're satisfied. And
in our case, that could be at the end of two years.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The -- the costs that you're
incurring to do this search, is there a markup on that cost?
MR. BORSGDORF: There's a flat fee for the professional fees.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right. Now, I'm talking about,
in doing your search, like if you have to do travel or something like
that, is that -- is it the fee that you're incurred (sic) or is there a --
MR. BORSGDORF: It's a fee we incur, but we, like a
government, have the same sort of what I would call indirect cost
structure that attaches to that. So we have an administrative overhead,
or in some cases it's an innerfund charge. I'm sure you're familiar with
it, having suffered through budget times lately. But that's -- other than
that, these are direct costs and you see them all when you get the bill.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
MR. BORSGDORF: And we'll negotiate those in advance of
incurring them so you'll know what kind, what's the overhead charge or
the indirect fee cost for administration in advance.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you. That's all. Thanks.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yeah. At this point I want -- this is for
administration here. The scoring sheet where it's 100 possible points,
that would be 100 possible points divided between the two candidates,
or 100 points possible for each candidate?
MR. CARNELL: That would be the latter, 100 points per firm
total.
Page 235
September 11 - 12,2007
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Thank you.
MR. CARNELL: Make sure I said that right. The max -- each
firm can get a maximum score of 100 each. They're separate.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. I understand.
Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. This is for Argus. I'll start off
with you and then I'll bank questions.
In your search, I believe you said that you're looking for someone
that has at least 10 years experience as a lawyer; is that correct?
MS. CLERMONT-LARSEN: Well, the preliminary research that
I have found is, for a county attorney, is usually 10 years. But after we
receive your -- we receive the job order, you will tell us exactly what
you're looking for.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. Is this lawyer going to be --
basically your search area going to be prominently in Florida so that the
person can understand the laws that we have here in Florida?
MS. CLERMONT-LARSEN: Correct, sir. It will first start in
Florida. And Florida being a large state, I'm sure that we can find a
county attorney to come to beautiful Naples.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. And in your case, what
experience level are you looking for for the start ofthis search?
MR. BORSGDORF: It's our estimation looking at County of
Collier, both budget and issues, and that literally ranges from budget
challenges to impact fees, that there's a premium on experience because
of the complexity of this government. So we would be looking for
somebody clearly at or above the 10-year level in a comparable or at
least in a county attorney position, preferably in Florida, but we would
encourage you to be open, at least in the first round, to candidates from
elsewhere.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. I believe it's important that
the attorney that we select has a very good working knowledge of Bert
Harris claims. I also believe that the person also needs to know a lot in
Page 236
September 11 - 12, 2007
regards to the Florida laws and regulations of the state, so I think that
may help limit your search. Being that you've been in the public sector,
you realize some of the things that -- the challenges that are on an up --
day-to-day basis.
MR. BORSGDORF: I do, and I've spent a good deal of time with
Mr. DeMarsh in Sarasota County watching him deal with those, and my
respect for the challenges of county attorney has grown because I've
watched those, so I think your advice is well placed.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: In your firm, do you have any
guarantees?
MS. CLERMONT-LARSEN: We have a 60-day prorated
guarantee.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. And your guarantee is?
MR. BORSGDORF: It's -- we will -- we do the search, should
you be unhappy or terminate the candidate within the first year at no
professional fee, and second year, 50 percent plus expenses.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. We're hoping not to have to
go through this search again, that whoever this -- whoever we pick, that
it's going to be a long-term tenure.
MR. BORSGDORF: Well, we would certainly support that. You
know, we do a lot with public sector employees and the top jobs. Mr.
Mudd's job, for example, nationally, it's about five years. We're hoping
for obviously a long tenure, especially in a county attorney. But it
tends to turn out to be relationship based and communication focused as
opposed to resume result, if you will, which is why we are promoting
this career navigator tool to help you.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: What county was the last county,
either here in the State of Florida or other states, that you fulfilled the
obligations of finding a county attorney?
MS. CLERMONT-LARSEN: Well, sir, we haven't done that yet,
and we will have the privilege of doing that if you select us.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
Page 237
September 11 - 12,2007
MS. CLERMONT-LARSEN: So you will be our first.
MS. GARCIA: Our sister company, Dental Power, works with
many government agencies, so we do have the experience within our
company, but we have never placed a county attorney.
But just the thing I just wanted to emphasize is, we only focus on
attorneys. We know -- that's all we do. And throughout the state we
know county attorneys. We know many people. We've seen the
resumes. So I was telling Sabrina, I know I've seen some come through
before. So I feel confident that just because we focus on that, we will
have success in finding somebody.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: What's -- when's the last time your
firm has fulfilled --
MR. BORSGDORF: The most recent, I believe -- and this may
not be chronologically perfect, but was San Bonito County, which was
adjacent to Santa Clara, where I served as the city manager in San Jose.
But there are 12 specific city attorney references or county attorney
references for you to double-check. So there may be a chronological
one that turns up more recent than that.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: In your -- in the information that
was given to me prior to this session, basically it all related to the city
attorneys, and I'm looking to see if there's -- if any of you had any
experience in finding a position for a county attorney.
MR. BORSGDORF: Yes, sir. That's the one I referenced. The
most recent county attorney search was in San Bonito County, which
was a county immediately south of Santa Clara coming down there.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: When was that?
Mr. BORSGDORF: I couldn't give you the dates. I'll get those for
you.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah, I'd be interested.
What is your success rate of people that take on a job? What's the
success rate of those people staying there?
MS. GARCIA: We have a 99 percent -- we did the numbers
Page 238
September 11 - 12, 2007
before we left. Ninety-nine percent within the guaranteed period,
which is 60 days. But I take great pride in that. I think only one over
the five or six years that I've ever -- that I've been doing this ever
returned to her prior firm. It was a personal relationship issue. So we
are very -- we pride ourselves on placing people and having them stay.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. And this is only in the realm
of attorneys for law firms or some -- but never in regards to a county
attorney.
MS. CLERMONT-LARSEN: That's correct.
MS. GARCIA: That's correct, in corporations and law firms.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And what has been your success
rate?
MR. BORSGDORF: I don't have the statistics for you, so let me
get back to you. But again, our time horizon aims at five years as a
success factor. And obviously we guarantee the first two, so we're well
into the multiple-year range, but I'll have to get you the exact number.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Do you know what the percentage
of success rate is for the five years?
MR. BORSGDORF: I don't, but we do -- we did have that, I just
don't personally know the answer to that.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And -- I'm sorry. You finished?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I've got one other question.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yes, go ahead, Commissioner Halas.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And what do you feel is the time line
to fill this position from your past experience?
MR. BORSGDORF: It is always more optimistic than it turns out,
is my candid assessment of that. We have a schedule that says this can
be done in slightly over 90 days. It would not surprise me or you if that
90 days turns into 120.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. And same question to you,
what is your timeline?
Page 239
September 11 - 12,2007
MS. CLERMONT-LARSEN: I agree, 60 to 90 days, but when we
get more information, we can actually assess that time line a little bit
better. Because right now we don't have all the information to give you
a better timeline. So once we have the client visit with you and the job
order, then we're able to tell you a more realistic time frame.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. Thank you very much, both
of you, for your time.
MS. GARCIA: Thank you.
MS. CLERMONT-LARSEN: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And what I'd like to know is, the
contract that you're presenting to us for consideration, does it have a
timeline that we're locked into? And if you fail to produce a suitable
candidate, does the contract expire at a certain point in time without any
financial burden to the county? We'll start with you, Mr. -- from
Waters.
MR. BORSGDORF: Sure. The fee schedule is phased to match
the work so that there isn't -- you incur no obligations unless there's
work being performed. So although it's a fixed fee, you don't pay it
until the phase is complete, and you hold 10 percent until the selection
is in the chair and you're satisfied. So you're in charge of that.
It really is very much a partnership because there will be some
challenges, depending on how well we work together immediately on
the profile, and ads, and then sometimes there are -- when we get to the
Q&A interactively with you with the finalists, there may be some
questions about individual candidates that take a little additional work.
But, again, you hold the checkbook and the keys to the timeline.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: But we would still be paying fees up
front if costs were incurred?
MR. BORSGDORF: You pay in phases. So you pay -- there's a
30 percent of the fee when the project begins. You don't pay the
second 30 percent until we've completed satisfactorily the second
phase, so at the start of our third phase of work. So it's -- there's a little
Page 240
September 11 - 12, 2007
calendar in the proposal. And the fees are -- again, you hold them until
the phase is complete to your satisfaction.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Is there a drop-dead date in the
contract where, if nothing comes forward, that it would expire on its
own?
MR. BORSGDORF: It would not, although you certainly could
take exception to that. But your obligation to pay is based on
completed work, not on the passage of time.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yeah. But what I'm saying is, if your
firm went forward and dropped back candidates that this commission
did not find acceptable, and after a six-month period or a nine-month
period or a year period, this commission lost faith in your particular
firm, are we still locked in with working with you?
MR. BORSGDORF: Well, this would be a -- this is a
hypothetical that I have not seen or heard of in Waters experience. But
obviously client satisfaction is what keeps us in business so that if we
have not hit that mark satisfactorily on your time frame, I don't think
we'll have any difficulty in you terminating the contract.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Same questions to the Argus--
MS. GARCIA: Okay. I think the benefit of working our pay
scheme is that you don't pay anything until we produce, and we feel
very comfortable with that. We'll travel, we'll -- we'll travel to
Washington, anywhere we have a candidate. You will not incur a fee
unless we produce results.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay.
MS. GARCIA: You're not obligated. And you can put a timeline
on the contract.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. So the contract is open-ended
to begin with?
MS. GARCIA: Sure.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And it's up to the client to set a point
where it can be renegotiated?
Page 241
September 11 - 12,2007
MS. GARCIA: Absolutely.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Let's
pursue the payment process a little further. In the brochures I notice that
Argus has a flat percentage, I think 25 percent of the candidate's first
year of total salary and, of course, you anticipate any guaranteed
bonuses or anything of that nature in that fee. But you're saying that
that fee is not payable until we sign the contract to hire the candidate?
MS. CLERMONT-LARSEN: Correct.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. And that fee will cover any
expenses you might incur in the search process?
MS. CLERMONT-LARSEN: Correct.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. For Waters it is different. I'd
like to understand the differences a little more clearly, please.
MR. BORSGDORF: If you've had an opportunity to look at the
proposal we submitted, the detailed one, it's on page 9, and there's an
outline that starts -- that lists the particular -- this is page 9 of the -- if
you have the full proposal that will we submitted. If not, it's simple to
tell you.
When the -- when the contract is signed, the county is obligated
for 30 percent of the fixed fee cost. When we have completed the first
phase and are at the implementation stage of phase two, which is the
actual candidate screening process, there's a second 30 percent that's
due, and the third 30 percent at phase three, you hold 10 percent of the
fee until the work is entirely completed to your satisfaction. So there's
actually four checks right in order of the work.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. And this particular fee is the
fee that you would propose for this search?
MR. BORSGDORF: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Now, what is your personal
involvement in the search if we were to select your firm?
MR. BORSGDORF: I'm the -- I guess you'd call it the Florida
Page 242
September 11 - 12, 2007
guy. So because I live and work in Sarasota County and am active in
all kinds of governmental adventures -- but I'm an advisor not a paid
employee of Waters at that point.
So my role is professional expertise. I serve on a board of
advisors. There are about a dozen of us. And each of us has a public
sector specialty that we bring. So the chair of that board is the CEO of
an engineering firm, for example, civil engineering firm, former city
manager ofFt. Worth, Bob Kerchert (phonetic).
So we each bring a quality control advice path to the county's
association, path to the Florida League of Cities, path to, you know,
places to find good people and get good reference checks.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: The person who would actually be
doing the search is located where?
MR. BORSGDORF: Cleveland. Andrea Sims, actually
personally lives there.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. How do you go about
determining the level of understanding of the candidate of the
challenges facing Florida counties?
MR. BORSGDORF: Two ways. The first way is, one of our
principal up-front work activities is the development of the profile for
the job with you and with others on your professional staff and the
attorney's staff to identify not only the profile of the person, but the
challenges they face so that, you know, looming (sic) a special session
has got to be on the list along with the whole property tax environment.
And you know, it will be quite a detailed list of challenges that the
county faces.
And we'll do not much different than what you're doing here with
us, that is, face to face with the candidates. Tell us about your
experience and hands-on approach to these kind of problems. That's
why I share your view that this is more likely to be a Florida centric
search because of the kinds of challenges that we face.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. And for Argus, how many
Page 243
September 11 - 12, 2007
placements do you take on at one time, that is, the search team that will
be working for Collier County, how many placements would that
search team be taking on at one time?
MR. GARCIA: Sabrina and I together or --
MS. CLERMONT -LARSEN: Or separate?
MS. GARCIA: At least nine or 10.
MS. CLERMONT-LARSEN: Nine or 10.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay, all right. How would you go
about assessing the level of knowledge and understanding of a potential
-- or a candidate for this position with respect to land use laws and
growth management in the State of Florida?
MS. CLERMONT-LARSEN: First, after we do -- we do our
client visit, we'll see exactly what you're looking for in the candidates,
then afterwards, we'll get the references from the candidates and check
those as well. And another thing that, because of our referral base and
our networking, we can also ask county attorneys to see what they also
look for in county attorneys so we can interview the candidates a little
bit more efficiently.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: How do you go about determining
the level of performance of a candidate that is currently employed
elsewhere?
MS. GARCIA: Well, obviously we do an extensive interview
with them, and I think because of our legal background, we have
certain knowledge that -- particular to an attorney. And also, I'll be
honest with you, we educate ourselves. We have a huge network of
professional acquaintances that will tell us more about the candidate.
Of course, we check their references, but usually that's not enough. We
talk to our network and find out the real story behind the candidates
with regard to their performance.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Do you feel that in the process it is
appropriate to ask a potential candidate for a brief on a subject such as
the challenges facing Collier County from the standpoint of growth
Page 244
September 11 - 12,2007
management and land use?
MS. CLERMONT-LARSEN: Absolutely.
MS. GARCIA: We usually ask for a writing sample as well of
work that they've done. And you know, definitely that's one way you
can see -- you can see that.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And will both of you be active on
this search?
MS. GARCIA: Absolutely.
MS. CLERMONT-LARSEN: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Are there any other support
personnel that would be assisting you in that?
MS. CLERMONT-LARSEN: Yes. We have an administrative
assistant in the office that does the administrative aspect of our job. But
Lisa and I are the ones who conduct the interviews and who deals
personally with the candidates.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Thank you very much, both
of you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Fiala?
MR. BORSGDORF: Do you want me to hop around on a couple
of those or --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: You haven't had a chance to speak yet.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, I just wanted to ask a couple
little things. For instance, your company -- actually I read this about a
month and a half ago when we first got it, so I've had to try and refresh
my memory. It's been a long time. But one of the things that struck me
was, it referred to dental a lot. Is that -- that must have been your main
focus at some point in time before you became Argus Legal?
MS. GARCIA: Dental Powers is our parent company, but Argus
Legal started at the same time. It's just the way the corporation's set up.
But we have exclusively focused on attorney placements since
inception.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, okay, fine. Thank you.
Page 245
September 11 - 12, 2007
And I'm not going to say what they are, but on both of these forms
I found quite a few little spelling errors that I though, oh, my, we would
want to make sure that you're a little more -- a little -- a little bit more --
MS. GARCIA: Show us when we're done, if you would, please.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I would be happy to. Okay, thank
you. That was all, because you've asked the other questions that I had
concerning the hiring.
And I did -- I do remember, I think it was you that mentioned, if
that person does not work out the first year, they leave for any kind of a
reason, without any extra charge, you go back in and you find us
another candidate.
MR. BORSGDORF: That's correct, we're back for no
professional fee. Expenses only.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You don't do that?
MS. CLERMONT-LARSEN: We have a -- go ahead. We have a
prorated guarantee, so if our candidate does not work out, we prorate
you the money that we -- that we took from you, the 25 percent.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. And I'm sorry, sir, I
interrupted you. I didn't mean to do that.
MR. BORSGDORF: Oh, not at all, no. From a guarantee
standpoint, you have our -- correct. That is if there's a separation, either
resignation or termination in the first year, we're back, no professional
fees, expenses only. And then in the second year, it's 50 percent fee
and expenses. So we're with you for two years.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
MR. BORSGDORF: And we're hopeful that the candidate will be
with you for a lot longer than that.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I'm sorry. Commissioner -- I'm sorry.
Were you through, Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Henning?
Page 246
September 11 - 12, 2007
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm sure the county attorney will
correct me if I'm wrong, but it's my understanding, since this is a
contract or search firm for the Board of Commissioners, your work will
be subject to Sunshine Law, and you must keep that for any inspection
that the public may wish. Is that a problem?
MR. BORSGDORF: Not for us. We'd be guided by your
attorney, and we're in the public sector everywhere. Florida's sunshine
is a bit brighter, but we understand that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It's not a bad thing.
MR. BORSGDORF: No, no.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's all.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Coyle--
MR. WEIGEL: Commissioner Henning, and commissioners, may
I provide a little further discussion on that? The
Government-in-the-Sunshine Law, of course, is a rule of the legislature
upon county and city governments, and it requires, if there is a
delegation and decision making for the Board of County
Commissioners, in this case with a recruiting firm, that the selection
process, the culling out of candidates, things of that nature, must be
held in the sunshine which is more than mere inspection but involves,
in fact, public meeting, no different than the type of public meeting that
you have with the three requirements of advance notice, public access
to a public facility, and minutes of such meeting being taken.
So if there is a -- in the delegation of authority that occurs with the
contracting procedure here, each of these firms, whichever of these
firms with the authorization to act on behalf of the board, in a recruiting
process and in a distillation, that is elimination of certain candidates
prior to bringing final candidates to you will, in fact, have to have a
public meeting and will need to be able to address how and where
they're going to do that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: That concludes the questions. Oh, I'm
Page 247
September 11 - 12,2007
sorry, Commissioner Coyle. Forgive me.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: We did not give the Waters
representative an opportunity to answer two of the questions that I had
asked the Argus representatives, and those involve how you would
evaluate the qualifications of a candidate with respect to the challenges
facing Collier County in the land use and growth management areas.
MR. BORSGDORF: Part of the profile obviously would include,
as I indicated earlier, our list of challenges that the county faces. Those
would be, if not at the top of the list, near the top of the list. We would
do that a number of ways, first with the one-on-one directly with the
candidate to assess understanding of the issues; two, just my own
experience in Florida would suggest we'd also do it with the
community, where the business community's been very active on issues
around land use. We've got ballot propositions in Florida around land
use so that we think sort of a community sense of how the advice is
flowing to the board and how certainly the board feels about it, so it's
an interactive process with the candidate, so we keep active and good
candidates in the process. But I think you're on point, and we certainly
would not be at all bashful about questionnaires, writing samples, or
some exposition of skill around those issues.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: In order to judge an appropriate
response to either of the questions either of you pose to a candidate,
you have to understand what we're looking for and what level of
knowledge is essential. How does that knowledge and capability get to
the people who are directly involved in questioning and screening the
candidates? And I'll pose that question to both of you. Why don't we
start with Argus.
MS. GARCIA: I think I understand your question now. For
example, I've placed a land use attorney as a partner, or actually senior
associate of a law firm. I learned a lot about land use at that time. I
feel like I understand some of the issues, but I will educate -- we will
educate ourselves even further and more specifically to your needs.
Page 248
September 11 - 12,2007
So a land use attorney for a law firm will be different than a
county attorney for you, but you will help us to, you know, notice what
the differences are, the nuances of the position.
MR. BORSGDORF: You've identified perfectly that job
description I have in this process, and that's the issues identifier,
clarifier, make sure our firm and its search team, who are all executive
recruitment specialists, understand the local government climate in
Collier County, so that's the -- what I bring to the table.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah, I have a question for both
firms, so I'll let this gentleman start the answer first, and then followed
up by your answer.
As you've probably found through the questioning here that we're
looking for someone that excels in a lot of areas. And one of the areas
that I think is very, very important -- and that is full working
knowledge of the Constitution of Florida's statutes. Due to the fact that
we're faced with many challenges in the future with unfunded
mandates, how are you going to address that with the candidate?
Start off with you.
MS. GARCIA: Can you make the question a little bit more
concise for me.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. As I said, we're going to be
-- we're going to be -- all the counties in Florida are going to be
challenged by unfunded mandates. We need someone that can find the
loophole so that it doesn't pass down to the county.
MS. GARCIA: I understand.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
MS. GARCIA: Well, I guess in the interview process we're going
to have to find that candidate that understands that. We'll have to
understand that. And we will do our research.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
Page 249
September 11 - 12,2007
MR. BORSGDORF: I think you've nailed a painful and
permanent relationship with our friends in Tallahassee.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes, I have.
MR. BORSGDORF: So that we will be looking for a candidate
who knows not only the laws, the bills that are pending and the
legislature scheduled with the players and the people and the likely
outcome and its potential impact on the county, so you can weigh in
early and often.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah. One of the, it seems, popular
things that has risen to the surface amongst the development
community has been the use of the Bert Harris Act, and we've been
faced with it quite a bit recently. And I believe, in my opinion anyway,
we're going to need somebody who knows the ins and outs entirely of
that particular law and how to work with it to our best interests. And I
would suggest to you that as you're looking for somebody, that would
be a very important aspect of the search.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And in may, our county attorney has
been very good in interacting with different organizations, plus the state
legislative body with his recommendations on some cases on an almost
daily basis, what's taking place, and following what takes place in
Tallahassee with tremendous amount of legal feedback.
I would say that the candidate that we're going to be looking at has
to have some political ability to be able to read what's taking place and
to be able to decipher it and give reports back to the commission on a
timely basis, and also we expect that person to be active in the state
organizations, state attorney organizations, especially Florida
Association of Counties.
I'm just mentioning that as a point of reference so that when we go
forward with this that we keep that in mind because just having a
county attorney that works within the office dealing with the legal
Page 250
September 11 - 12, 2007
matters that the county deals with on a day-to-day basis, it falls a little
bit short of what we need for a final product.
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, just one more thing. And
again, I guess we're not supposed to be making suggestions, but here I
am making another one and that is that our David has a lot of history, a
lot of background, works well with people in Tallahassee. I personally
don't want to see him go. He has -- he has -- he's part of the fiber of our
county government.
So if there is another candidate that is -- I mean, as you're
searching, I want to know how well they can work with keeping David
here because I, for one, don't want to lose him, even ifhe's working,
you know, under that person. And sometimes, I guess, new people
want to just wipe the slate clean, and I don't really want to see that
happen. But that's my own personal opinion.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you. I think each and
every one of us have strong opinions on who we should have sitting in
the County Attorney's Office. I think those opinions, if it's appropriate,
to pass them on to our purchasing agent to give to the final selection
firm.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So that -- those people know
what's important. But other than that, I'm not sure. I know if it's a
personal opinion, it probably should be shared with the candidates
individually.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yeah. I would suggest then if we're
going to be giving any directions to purchasing regarding the selection
process that is going to go forward, that we give it at this meeting and
not outside it so that we're all privy to it --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, sure.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: -- rather than a whole bunch of
Page 251
September 11 - 12, 2007
different people making suggestions. But I agree with you,
Commissioner Henning and Commissioner Fiala.
MR. BORSGDORF: Mr. Chairman?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Is there anything staff wanted to
comment on that?
MR. BORSGDORF: I was just going to say --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Before we go to you, sir, I just to--
let's see. We just made some statements, and I want to make sure
they're in line with what the process is all about. If we could get some
guidance on this so that we don't transgress where we shouldn't be.
MR. CARNELL: Yeah. Mr. Chairman, what I would suggest
you do at this point is conclude your question and answer, poll the
board, see if there's any more questions of either firms to be asked.
And when you're done that, then the five of you discuss, deliberate
what you've just seen and observed, share your observations, and then
let's get to the scoring process. And when we're done with that, then we
can, perhaps, follow up on the point just being raised about where we
go from here and direction to the staff.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Sounds like a wonderful idea. We'll
do that. Okay. And with that, is there any other questions ofthe
candidates?
Commissioner Henning, are you pushing the button? Do you
have questions?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm just ready for the next
process.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: But no other questions for the
candidates?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. I just see you posed at the
button, and I'm anticipating you pushing it.
Commissioner Fiala, behave yourself.
Okay. And with that, would the candidates please be seated.
Page 252
September 11 - 12, 2007
MS. CLERMONT -LARSEN: Thank you.
MS. GARCIA: Thank you very much.
MR. BORSGDORF: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. And at this point in time,
discussion amongst the commissioners. We'll start with Commissioner
Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Chairman, I -- the questions
of my colleagues helped me -- guide me through the process of scoring
my sheet, and I appreciate that.
I'm going to make available all the information that was handed to
us along with my scoring sheet, but there are no notes in the
information. I didn't write any notes down. I just --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: That's fine. You're not obligated to
write notes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's it.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Notes are a wonderful thing if you
want to use them for your guidance, but that's about it. Go ahead.
That's it?
Any other comments from my fellow commissioners or -- that
they want to share back and forth?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: So at this point in time, I would
assume that you have your scoring sheets completed. What we'll do is
have them collected.
MR. CARNELL: What I would encourage you to do is go ahead
and finalize your scores individually, and then if everyone's there, then
just -- we'll have each individual share their ranking with the group, and
then we can finalize the determination at that point.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Fine. Would you take these score
sheets?
MR. CARNELL: I will take the sheets when we're done, but you
can actually just verbally say who your first and second firm are, I
Page 253
September 11 - 12,2007
think.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. That's fine.
MR. CARNELL: I think this is simple enough with just two firms
involved to where we can figure that out, but I'll take the sheets as a
matter of public record when we're done.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: That's fine. We'll start with
Commissioner.
MR. WEIGEL: Please let me note also that the sheets themselves
should have the identification of each commissioner who has created
such sheet or scored such sheet.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I would assume that would be the
signature under -- at the bottom left-hand corner.
MR. WEIGEL: That would be correct.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Where it asks for it.
MR. WEIGEL: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Henning, we'll start
with you.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. I put my name on the
upper right-hand corner, as I learned in grade school. But my first
choice is Waters and the second is Argus.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. This was very difficult because
they both presented so very well, but my first choice is Waters, my
second is Argus.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. And once again, I want to
compliment staff for doing a wonderful job of bringing two very
capable candidates forward. In my case, it was very, very close. My
first place was Argus and my second was Waters.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I want to thank everybody that
participated in this. I want to thank staff for putting together the two
groups to come before us. I found it very informative and it's a great
Page 254
September 11 - 12,2007
process to go through.
As I listened to all the answers and as I listened trying to figure out
what's best for us here in the county, I came up with Waters first choice
and Argus second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, I scored this kind oflike I
would a boxing match with the top rank getting the total available
points and the second one getting somewhat less, and the scoring has
turned out that Waters is first place and Argus is second.
MR. CARNELL: Okay. At this point you have four votes for
Waters-Oldani first, one vote for Argus first. Now, when we make a
decision at this point in a selection committee, we do it by consensus,
not strictly majority. So really I'm just asking, Mr. Chairman, is there a
consensus of the board at this point to proceed with Waters as the
number one firm?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Consensus being the obvious, would
be that it's 4-1. So I would say that Waters would be the firm of choice.
Now, do you need that in the form of a motion?
MR. CARNELL: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So moved.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We have a motion by Commissioner
Henning and a second by Commissioner Halas to recognize Waters as
the firm to be hired.
And with that, any discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Seeing none, all those in favor,
indicate by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
Page 255
September 11 - 12, 2007
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And the ayes have it, 5-0.
MR. CARNELL: All right, thank you. Now one more item for
discussion which is the direction you wish to give the staff going
forward. You could consider an option here of designating the
chairman to conduct the negotiations, or some other commissioner, or
you could designate your contract administration staff within the
purchasing department or, perhaps, a designated commissioner and a
member of the administration staff to conduct the negotiations. What
would be your preference?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I see several advantages, and I
definitely think that staffhas to be involved. I don't think it would hurt
to have a commissioner appointed to this. Personally I would like to
see Commissioner Coyle be the person that would be put on there, but I
don't know how my other commissioners feel about it. The only one
I'm not going to ask is Commissioner Coyle.
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. I have trust in our staff to
do the negotiations and bring a final product back. If we choose one of
the commissioners, those meetings need to be in the sunshine, and I
think that our staff is capable of bringing something back to us without
a commissioner being involved.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Mr. Weigel, any comments?
MR. WEIGEL: As few as possible. In regard to a sunshine
requirement if you have a commissioner involved, the commissioner is
not involved in selection, but it is negotiation, but it's all coming back
to the board.
It's a tough -- it's a tough one. And to the extent that staff typically
negotiates and brings things back to the board generally, it removes any
Page 256
September 11 - 12, 2007
question or any potential for a complaint to be raised to be responded to
if the staff were to do that.
Staff itself, in selection processes, does, in fact, adhere to the
Sunshine Law in any event. In this case, selection is over and its
negotiation. That is done typically in -- as an administrative role
without -- without being in the sunshine.
But a commissioner probably could be there without the sunshine
requirement. There may be desires, requests of the public, you know,
to wish to be there, and we'd have to look and see if -- I don't believe
that it would require the sunshine -- the sunshine requirements of
absolute allowance and notice to be there. It just gets a little -- it can be
a bit problematic and require the desires of those who may wish to see
what the commissioners are doing.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Commissioner Coyle is going
to give us some guidance.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. I think it's more important to
have a commissioner involved in the actual contract negotiation with
the selected participant than it is to involve them in the contract
negotiations with the recruiting firm. The purchasing department does
that all the time, they negotiate contracts with vendors, and I think
they're quite competent to do that.
And they can always get input from individual commissioners.
They can meet with us individually and try to get our views as to what
we would like to see in that contract, and I think we could provide
guidance there. But I do think it's important to involve either all of the
commissioners or a representative of the board in the actual contract
negotiations with the person you intend to hire, and we can cross that
bridge when we get to it.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Would you make a motion, sir, and we
can move this thing forward.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Sure. I would make a motion that
we have the contracting department, or purchasing department, enter
Page 257
September 11 - 12, 2007
into negotiations with Waters-Oldani Executive Recruitment Services
for the purpose of developing an appropriate contract that would be
brought back to the commissioners for our review and approval.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We have a motion by Commissioner
Coyle --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: -- and a second by Commissioner
Henning giving staff sufficient direction to be able to go forward and
negotiate the contract.
And with that, Commissioner Henning, is your light still on from
before, or do you have some other comments?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: (Shakes head.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. And no other comments at this
point in time, would -- all those in favor, indicate by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: The ayes have it, 5-0. I believe that
concludes your business, or do you have something else?
MR. CARNELL: We're done, yes.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Fine.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Do want to collect these?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yeah. You really do need to take the
material back with you. And what we're going to do before we go on to
the next item, rather than just start it and then have to break, we're
going to take a break now about 10 minutes sooner than normal.
Page 258
September 11 - 12,2007
(A brief recess was had.)
MR. MUDD: Ladies and gentlemen, please take your seats.
Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, you have a hot mike.
Item #lOF - Continued from September 11,2007
RECOMMENDATION THAT THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS CONSIDERS AND DIRECTS STAFF TO
MAKE CHANGES TO THE COUNTY-WIDE IMPACT FEE
DEFERRAL PROGRAM DISCUSSED ON 9/11 AND
CONTINUED TO 9/12 BCC MEETING DIRECTION TO STAFF
TO RECEIVE GUIDANCE FROM THE AFFORDABLE
HOUSING COMMISSION AND TO SEND FORTH
RECOMMENDATIONS/SUGGESTIONS TO THE BCC -
APPROVED
Commissioner, this should bring us back to item 10F, which is the
recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners considers
and directs staff to make changes to the countywide impact fee deferral
program, and Mr. Jeff Klatzkow and -- from the County Attorney's
Office and Marcy Krumbine from our public services division were
presenting yesterday.
Just bear with me here. Let me have the visualizer back one more
time.
MS. KRUMBINE: Sorry.
MR. MUDD: And I'm going to --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: You break it, you pay for it.
MR. MUDD: And what -- no, they didn't break it. They're just
hitting buttons.
But what you were -- what you were basically talking about
yesterday were these five particular issues that staff was asking for
directions, and the first has to do with a cap on the amount of impact
Page 259
September 11 - 12,2007
fees that can be deferred by your rental unit impact fee deferral
program, because there is none right now, that board consider
amending the rental unit impact fee program to expressly allowed for
qualified local government entities such as fire districts.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: We can read those.
MR. MUDD: Okay. They're there. They were on -- they were on
last night. There was -- there was questions from the Board of County
Commissioners. We never got to public speakers; is that correct, Ms.
Filson?
MS. FILSON: That's correct, and I have six speakers.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. In could, I have one question
before we go right to the speakers. Has this been vetted through our
task force there, the affording (sic) housing committee.
MS. KRUMBINE: No, because we had -- we were coming to you
first for direction. And once you give us direction, then we will vet it --
we'll work through the process --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yeah, I understand that.
MS. KRUMBINE: -- talk with them and get -- you know, we're
already working with the Affordable Housing Commission on the
inclusionary zoning ordinance, so we would go back. But we wanted
more from you as to direction as to where you wanted to go.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. And -- but forgive me, but we
-- in understand the problem, it has to do with the limited source of
money and what's the best way to be able to divide it up to get the best
punch, best effect for the little bit of money that's going to be there.
It's a compounded problem, but the problem is, who gets what
share and how do you come up with something that's fair. And you
have numerous players out there, and those players all work through
that Affordable Housing Committee.
It would seem to me that they would be the first avenue to be able
to explore it and then come back to us with it, with their
recommendations, other than the recommendations can't be go out and
Page 260
September 11 - 12, 2007
get more money because there isn't more money. It's how do you
divide it up that's going to be -- serve the community in the best way.
That's my thoughts, and we'll get into that kind of discussion in just a
little bit.
We're going to go first to Commissioner Coyle, and then we're
going to get right into the speakers, and then I'm sure there's going to be
a lot of questions, and we're probably going to go right till noontime.
Go ahead, Commissioner Coyle.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Just very briefly, I agree
with what you're saying. I understand where you're going with that.
But in the past what has happened is that the staffs take up an issue and
it goes down a path, and then we jump in and say, we don't like that.
And in this case, the staff is trying to make sure that we are in
agreement with their concept before they go through the process of
developing some recommendations.
I think that there is a midpoint here where we can say -- we can go
through these five items and we can say, yes, we agree that there is a
problem here and we would encourage you to proceed with developing
a range of solutions or, as in number four, that we eliminate the ability
of a developer to receive an impact fee deferral refund. I would say no,
I don't want to stop that because, suppose they paid it in error?
Suppose they're due a refund. Are we just going to prohibit them from
having a refund?
So those are the kinds of guidance issues I think we could go
through here fairly quickly. We can't resolve these today. We could sit
here for the next four or five days talking about this and we'd still not
reach a conclusion because we do need the input of those other people.
But for general guidance to say, yeah, we're in support of the concept,
go ahead and go down that path and come back with a range of
alternatives, I think we can say that fairly easily with these five items,
but we have to listen to the public first.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yes, we do. And how many public
Page 261
September 11 - 12, 2007
speakers do we have?
MS. FILSON: We have six, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. They'll be three minutes apiece.
When you come up to speak on this subject, please state your name for
the record.
Would you call the first speaker.
MS. FILSON: The first speaker is Dottie Cook. Tammie--
MS. NEMECEK: She's not here.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: She sent a letter.
MS. FILSON: Tammie Nemecek. She'll be followed by Ken
Kelly.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Once again, Dottie Cook did send an
email to all the commissioners, which will be part of the public record.
MS. NEMECEK: Good morning, Tammie Nemecek, president of
the Economic Development Council of Collier County. Thank you
very much, Mr. Chairman, Commissioners for allowing me to speak
this morning on this issue.
I've been in front of you several times talking about affordable --
or workforce housing over the last year and am still excited about the
opportunities that we have to comprehensively address this issue.
The fact that we continue to talk about it, I know there's been a lot
of discussion that -- the downturn in the economy in the lower housing
prices. You know, maybe the problem is solved. I would challenge you
on that to say, look long-term and know that for the last 20 years we've
been talking about it. And we hope that, you know, in the next year we
can bring all of these programs comprehensively back to you. And so
the next 20 years maybe we can just see the product of those programs
rather than discussing the challenges.
Reading the minutes from the meeting on July 24th, there were
some key things that were brought up, and I wanted to talk, if I could,
about a couple of those. One is that -- the issue of agreeing to do
affordable housing at the onset of talking about doing a residential
Page 262
September 11 - 12, 2007
development. And because you agree to do that affordable housing, it
would preclude you from participating in these programs.
I would consent wholeheartedly that the incentive programs are a
necessity in order to be able to build the housing at an affordable price
range. We explained that in the workforce community demonstration
project as far as how much it costs to build the housing, how you need
to layer the programs one on top of the other in order to be able to get
the housing price down to an affordable price range for the workforce
here in the community.
So I would encourage you to continue to allow those that either
are maybe mandated, those that agree to do affordable housing up front
to participate in the programs and not preclude them from participating
in them, because it is a necessity.
The other issue deals with the fact of being an owner-occupied
versus a rental unit and how you work with the deferral program with
regards to those two. I think that there was probably concurrence that
the owner-occupied program has a cap of 3 percent on it right now. I
think everybody -- in reading the minutes and in discussions that we've
had with the Affordable Housing Commission and with our group, that
that program seems to be working just fine.
The question is, what do you do with the rentals because the
rentals don't have a cap on them, and how do you accommodate
making sure that our impact fee program is made whole and that we
can build the infrastructure as we need to build it but still accommodate
the need for those deferrals and the impact fee on the rental side.
And I think the discussions internally have said, yes, there
probably does need to be a cap on that. How do we work that out?
What's that number? Lots of discussion still needs to happen on that,
and that's why I would recommend that we send this, based on your
guidance today, to the Affordable Housing Commission, allow the
public and the private sectors to work together to vet those out, analyze,
review, and recommend changes to those programs.
Page 263
September 11 - 12, 2007
If I can have one more second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Please wrap it up.
MS. NEMECEK: There was also discussion on July 24th the fact
of the -- the developer piece of it, or, you know, how those impact fee
deferrals are actually getting to the person that really needs to benefit
from them the most. And I would contend to you whether or not it's an
owner-occupied or a rental unit, the benefactor of that deferral program
is the person living in that home.
And so whether or not you need to be able to figure out a better
process for allowing for deferral programs when you're dealing with
somebody up front who may not have the renter or the buyer on the
back end yet, the process is where it might be broken and where it
needs to be analyzed and fixed, not necessarily that it's benefitting the
person who's actually constructing the home. It's the person who's
living in the home that's actually the benefactor of that.
So I would -- I would contend that we probably need to have a
better analysis or probably maybe a different recommendation of how
this program is worked. Maybe it's not a deferral. Maybe it's worked
like our incentive programs are worked where there is an allocation of
funding for impact fees, and those impact fees are paid on behalf of the
person who lives in the unit rather than it being a deferral program.
So those are things that I think that, through the work of the
Affordable Housing Commission, we can all work together in coming
up with solutions that can work, and then bring them back to you for
consideration.
Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Don't go yet.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker. I'm sorry.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Just one second.
Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah. I understand where you're
coming from Tammie, and I know it's a problem, but we've got an
Page 264
September 11 - 12, 2007
awful lot of affordable housing that's been approved that hasn't come
out of the ground. And I'm -- and I'm very concerned about this that
they still come forward and tell us that, oh, we've got to have this,
we've got to have that, but it's not being done.
The only other people that are doing this is Habitat for Humanity.
Well, there is -- there is some home -- houses coming out. And I'm
getting to the point where we need to -- we need action instead of
words.
MS. NEMECEK: I wholeheartedly agree, and I think that's why
we're working with the Affordable Housing Commission and county
stafflooking at the inclusionary zoning program, looking at, you know,
the mitigation fee program, again, looking at the programs that we've
been talking to you about over the last several months and making sure
that, at the end of the day, we all get what we want, and what --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: But it's there. The housing -- we've
approve the housing but it hasn't happened.
MS. NEMECEK: I would contend that a big number of those are
part of Ave Maria, and I would say that you probably have -- and I
would have Marcy talk about this, where the status of those are. But I
would say that a lot of those are in permitting process right now, and a
lot of them are going to come back to you and ask for impact fee
deferrals, and how are we going to be able to accommodate that when
they actually want to be constructed? So I would -- I would turn that --
that question I would turn over to Marcy.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Let me do that. I do think since -- I do
believe there's some misunderstandings on that as far as it is, because
I've been to a number of openings of affordable housing in the area. I
do know there's still a lot on the books to be able to get done.
Marcy, would you comment on that? I know we've received a
report in the not-too-distant past on this.
MS. KRUMBINE: I don't have the numbers in front of me, but in
addition to Habitat, we did do 60 units at Botanical Place of affordable.
Page 265
September 11 - 12, 2007
We did 16 at Bristol Pines. You were at that opening. We have
Lennar Homes that is doing 190, and they're vertical now. The first
building of 10 is getting ready to close in October. That's on
Immokalee Road and 951 in Heritage Bay. Serus Point is in a
permitting stage.
A lot of -- a lot of what's left on the books is in community
development at various points of that process. And from what I could
see, it takes about three or four years from the day they come before
you and approve it to get to the point where they could build. And I
don't think it's, you know -- and maybe Joe can answer this. I don't
think it's at all just because of affordable. I think this is across the
board that, you know, through our process, it -- sometimes it just takes
that long, you know, whether it's an affordable, whether it's part
affordable or not.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yeah. To save a lot of discussion on
this, Marcy, could you supply the commission with an up-to-date--
MS. KRUMBINE: Sure.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: -- tally sheet of what's out there, what's
being done and what --
MS. KRUMBINE: I did it in May, and I'd be happy to do it again.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yeah. And who's behind what's not--
what's not happening that was promised.
MS. KRUMBINE: We have a chart--
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We need to be able to put this--
MS. KRUMBINE: -- and I'll update it and --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: -- in the proper perspective. I got a
feeling that a lot of stuff that's happening out there, the only market
that's out there is affordable housing at the moment, you know, for the
MS. KRUMBINE: No. I will update the board with our
spreadsheet, and you'll know exactly the status.
CHAIRMAN COLETT A: Yeah. Commissioner Fiala?¿
Page 266
September 11 - 12, 2007
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, thanks. Tammie, I know we're
looking for a solution with the rental, and this is just something to toss
around maybe with even the Affordable Housing Commission.
In some of the places -- and I'm going to just pick on Whistler's
Cove, for instance. When they built it, they built it with the least
quality building materials that they could find. They got a lot of money
from the state and the federal government to build it and yet they
charge -- the last time I checked, and that was at least a year ago --
$1,200 a month for rent and -- for a two-bedroom, two-bath --
two-bedroom, one-bath.
And, of course, who making $5.75 an hour can afford $1,200?
Heck, I'd have trouble affording $1,200 a month. So then they have to
double and triple up and rent out to other families.
Is there a way that we can limit impact fees -- and this is to staff,
too -- to rental units only when they charge a fair -- not median income,
but median-wage fair-rental price?
MS. KRUMBINE: The units that are -- that go up under rentals
are usually low-income tax credit units, and they are charged to keep
the unit affordable for 15 years within a certain scope.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: But judged on median income --
MS. KRUMBINE: Right.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- which allows them to charge
$1,200 a month and walk away really with their pockets jingling, and
these people can't afford it, so then we have another crime area.
MR. KLATZKOW: Well, this is your program. If you want to
put that as a condition of getting impact fee deferrals, you can.
Now, the problem with that is going to be that Marcy also ties this
into federal programs who have different criteria. But aside from that,
this is your program. You can do whatever you want with it.
MS. NEMECEK: In the original analysis that we did with the
workforce demonstration project, the owner-occupied homes were
actually probably in -- more in the 80 percent range. We had a -- when
Page 267
September 11 - 12,2007
we looked at it we said, you know, you've got to have rental units in
there, and those are really the starter units for the lower-income
individuals and needed to be priced at that, and I think they were
actually about $900 in our demonstration project.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I think -- I think that that would --
MS. NEMECEK: I mean, I think it needs to be considered,
because not everybody is suitable for home ownership. You've got to
have the rental units there for them.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Right, right. But if we -- if a price
that -- a median wage earner --
MS. NEMECEK: Right.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- can't afford what's charged, then
you have this double and triple family occupying units. And again, you
have the crime and the litter.
MS. NEMECEK: Or you're leaving out -- you have a big gap of
people who need a place to live and can't get it because they can't
afford the payments, yeah.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Right, right. Gee, I was in Ohio, and
they charge $350 a month for little places, and I thought wow, what a
difference.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yeah. But that would be a long
commute. Yeah, but --let's go on with the other speakers.
MS. NEMECEK: Thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Ken Kelly. He'll be followed
by Blake Gable.
MR. KELLY: Good morning. Ken Kelly, chairman of the
Affordable Housing Commission.
I just wanted to read quickly just a piece of the ordinance that set
up our subcommittee under your jurisdiction. This is section 2-972 of
ordinance 91-65, subchapter 6.
It says, number one, our functions, powers, and duties, the
commission shall monitor and advise the Board of County
Page 268
September 11 - 12,2007
Commissioners and the city council regarding the goals, objectives, and
policies of the county's housing element in the county's Growth
Management Plan and the city's comprehensive plan, and any other
program, means, or directives which would assist or encourage the
provision of affordable housing in Collier County and its
municipalities.
Might I also add that in our commission, we've gone through some
folks who have moved out of the area or have further resigned, and we
are now completely full with what I find as probably the best
combination of qualified people to sit on this commission.
We have the immediate past housing and grants manager, who
Marcy has now stepped in and taken over that role to help. We have
somebody who is the president of our local urban land institute who
works directly with developers and who's an architect and has
incredible success in getting low-income housing built throughout the
country .
We have somebody who works for the Collier Enterprises as an
actual developer. We have somebody who was a CEO of a Fortune
500 company also on the Collier County Productivity Commissioner --
Committee.
We have somebody who's a local area civic association member,
and we have a local business owner. We have somebody representing
the real estate market.
We get together monthly. We have subcommittees also monthly,
and we've been able to, in a very concise and clear way, take in all of
this information and come back to you with what we feel is the best
options for the county.
I believe since we are in the sunshine and further governed by
those rules and we do directly report to you for your behalf, I feel that
it's a natural place for all of these things to be discussed and
recommended. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you for your service to Collier
Page 269
September 11 - 12, 2007
County .
MR. KELL Y: We1come.
MR. GABLE: I'm going to waive, Mr. Chairman.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Blake Gable.
MR. GABLE: I'll waive unless anybody has questions.
MS. FILSON: Sam Durso. He'll be followed by Jim Fields.
DR. DURSO: Good morning, Commissioners. I guess we're the
folks of action, not words, because we've built lots of affordable
housings (sic) here. I've been doing this for 15 years. I remember when
we didn't have any impact fees.
But for many years, the impact fees were actually paid out of the
SHIP funds. That worked out fine, but then as impact fees got higher, it
became difficult to do that, so that brought on the current program.
One other program that existed for a couple of years that worked
real well was, in Immokalee, there was a program where the impact
fees were deferred based on the TIF.
And so I'd like to look at that, at least have that one of the options
that's looked at again and see if we can find a funding source for that,
because that would take some of the impact fee stress out of the
situation.
You know, we don't have a position on rental housing. Obviously,
we sell our houses, and the payments are only $500 a month. And most
of the people we sell our houses to are living either in lousy places or in
places where they're paying the $1,100 and $1,200.
So we would love to see rental housing at a lower rate, and I
certainly agree with Commissioner Fiala, that would be great if you
could figure out a way to do that, okay?
But we obviously feel that owner-occupied housing is the best
way to go. The problem we have now, there's a limited pot of money,
so you need a short term solution and a long-term solution. Long term,
the current program probably will work fine. When the real estate
market turns around and there's plenty of impact fee money out there,
Page 270
September 11 - 12, 2007
the current program will work.
Right now, ifthere's not much money, the money should go where
the need is the greatest. We feel the need is the greatest for those
making 60 percent of median income and below, and that's what
Habitat serves.
I have the list of the last -- the 1 -- we've closed on 120 homes in
the last fiscal year that ended June 30th. We have a list of all their
employers, and you know, tons ofthem are employed by the county, a
lot of them employed by the school department. They're all working
folks. They're all legal. They've all lived here for at least a year.
We're very successful in what we do. Obviously what helps us a
lot is the fact that we have volunteers. We can build our houses much
more cheaply, and we raise a lot of money and we bring a lot of other
money m.
So we obviously would love to see, in the short-term, the program
limited to possibly 60 percent of median income and below.
We love Ave Maria. They've done a great job. We encourage
whatever you can do to help them out. We don't know what to do about
rental housing, but we have been a tremendous partner of Ave Maria.
Our current subdivision in Immokalee, Liberty Landing, the land was
given to us by Ave Maria as part of their DR!, and that's been a great
partnership and we've already got a -- you know, that was given to us
about two years ago. We've got 20 houses already completed there,
and we'll complete the 150 houses there by next summer.
So our plan is to continue building 125 homes a year. We hope
we can do it. Obviously if we can't get impact fees on all of them, it's
going to be a problem for us.
One solution for us would be to -- we still target the 60 percent
and below. If we go over that number, then we would probably end up
paying the impact fee in that, and we could probably survive that. But
we would love to stay targeted with the 60 percent and below, and we
obviously will take part in -- in the Affordable Housing Commission#
Page 271
September 11 - 12, 2007
when they have these discussions.
But thank you for all your support, and we're going to keep
building out there, building houses, no matter what happens, so -- thank
you.
MS. FILSON: Your final speaker, Mr. Chairman, is Jim Fields.
MR. FIELDS: Good morning, Commissioners. For the record,
my name is Jim Fields. I'm the managing partner of Serus Point. We're
fortunate to have 32 units of affordable housing, 11 units at 50 percent
of median income and 21 at 60 percent.
Giving you -- I'm really here to talk about the layering and how
important that is from our perspective. Donna, you, when we first
started out Serus Point, you basically said, hey, we're in a CRA. We're
in an area that we want something that really -- that would be very nice,
a nice adjunct to the community, basically provide an example of what
can be done, and that's what Serus Point is intended to do.
We have basically received a $320,000 grant into this project. We
are -- just recently we were awarded another half million dollars by the
federal home loan bank for the purposes for 16 units at Serus Point.
We're looking at another -- we've put in for another grant, we will be
putting in for another grant for another 380,000.
All that is layered in. If you take all that into consideration and
note that my construction costs are probably around $256,000 a unit,
those affordable units will sell for 150- and 175-. So what we're trying
to do is offset that, in other words, cover that shortfall, at the same time
come up with a program that really is a community that provides a
high-quality home for a lot of very different people.
I think right now we're sitting probably around 350,000 to 150- in
terms of pricing. So we're there. We're on the verge of getting our
SDP, and we're looking forward to going vertical if we can sell all those
units. So thanks.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Hi.
Page 272
September 11 - 12, 2007
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yes. Commissioner Henning, go
ahead.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. I would like to direct our
staff to -- well, our attorney staff and affordable housing staff, to get
some direction from the Affordable Housing Commission and bring it
back to us.
My personal concern, the market has changed, and I think that we
need to reflect that in our deferral program. I don't want to compete
with the market. I don't think that we should be doing that. But it was
just recent that it has been changed, so I'm looking for some guidance.
And I can tell you, from my perspective, it was -- and my
understanding, Ave Maria was -- always was going to build affordable
housing, but it was my understanding that they were afforded the same
thing that was afforded to everybody else, so I hope we can do that for
this great community.
But, you know, we need a shift. We don't have the funds that we
used to have, and they should be targeted where they're going to be best
used.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I'll second your motion, Commissioner
Henning, if it is a motion.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And maybe we can get some
clarification as we go through our discussions here --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Sure.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: -- before we take a vote on it.
I believe, Commissioner Fiala, you're next?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. It was stated that -- that we
should target the money for the greatest need, but I go back to
something that I've contended, and maybe alone, do we know where
the greatest need is? Do we know what percentage of our workforce is
in each category, which is something we have never determined?
And each section of our workforce, each category, I believe, also
Page 273
September 11 - 12,2007
needs housing and there are some that, no matter where they are -- like,
for instance, a reporter doesn't fall into 60 percent and below but they
need housing when they're a brand new reporter who's just gotten out of
school just as much as anybody else. They just --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Says who? We do our own
reporting.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Anyway, my point is, maybe in your
discussions you could determine what percentage of our workforce is in
each category so that maybe we can direct them to the greatest need in
those percentages. Thank you.
MS. KRUMBINE: Can --let me give you some of the data that
we came up with since last night that kind of answered some of this 50,
60 percent of the median income.
Last year we did -- 56 percent of the impact fee deferrals we did
were for 50 percent or below in the median income and 44 at low
income, which is 51 percent to 80. We do not delineate just for 60
percent.
And there are still owner -- builder-developer agreements that
haven't turned over yet to the owner-occupied, so we haven't done those
yet.
One option we have here on the bottom here is that we said
yesterday, if we were to defer 100 percent, we would do about 88
households. Well, if we defer 75 percent of your impact fees, we could
do 118 households. If we defer 50 percent, we could do 177.
Now, we can look at the things, Commissioner, that you're
suggesting, but let me show you this. I don't know if I can make it any
bigger -- because I want to give you a feel for what these income levels
are.
You want to target between 50 and 60 percent of the median
income. For one person we're looking at not exceeding 24,450 at 50
percent of the median income. That means that person can afford a
$75,000 home.
Page 274
September 11 - 12, 2007
Now, none of our partner developers can bring their house down
to $75,000. That's what our programs are for. We have to subsidize the
difference to get them down to the level, that 50, 60 percent ofthe
median income, and it goes down from there. It goes -- you see for a
family of two we're at 83,7-, family of three, 94,2-, and most of the
developers are still in the anywhere from 125- to 175- range.
So the difference between what they're building and what these
individuals can afford is what our impact fee deferral program hits and
what our SHIP down payment assistance hits. And then, as Jim Fields
just said, they're looking at even other grants to layer in so that it could
come down to the affordable housing layer.
Now, I will point out the difference. You've got -- you already
have two developers, both of whom were doing developments at 50 to
60 percent of the median income, both around the same price range.
There is a significant difference though. Habitat, because of the way
they do business and how large they are, they're their own bank, so they
provide mortgages at no interest, a set fee; whereas, the people that are
going to be trying to getting into Serus Point and those at 50 and 60
percent of the median income that we put into Bristol Pines and Phil
McCabe's Botanical Place, they had to go out to the regular world and
get a mortgage, and so that meant that they had to make sure that they
qualified with one plus one equals two in a mortgage market to afford
those mortgages for those houses, so that's quite a difference.
So we can go back and look at your workforce. At 24,450, at the
50, 60 percent of the median income, you're looking at our retail
workers, you're looking at landscapers, maintenance men, that level.
When you go up to 80 percent of the median income, you're looking at
your first-time teachers, you're looking at our, you know, young nurses,
you're looking at some people even in the sheriffs department, the
county departments. Those are how it breaks down, the real, live
people that you've got going into these places.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Go ahead. You've still got the floor.
Page 275
September 11 - 12, 2007
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. In the household sizes here,
what is the average that you deal with as far as -- so which category
should we be looking at as the one that's used more often as far as
household size?
MS. KRUMBINE: Well, I've been doing this for 10 years and--
of putting actual people -- you know, I was your person that was
putting people into homes for 10 years, and I would say between 50 to
75 percent of the people I dealt with was a family of one.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Wow.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Wow. I never would have guessed
that.
MS. KRUMBINE: And we now have a new outreach coordinator,
and she's the same way. She says the same thing, that most of the
people she's dealing with is the family of one. Now, that's not true of
Habitat. Habitat looks for families of three and four, and that's part of
their -- that's part of their criteria. I'm not misspeaking, am I Sam? But
for the people --
DR. DURSO: That's not what we look for.
MS. KRUMBINE: Oh, it isn't, but --
DR. DURSO: We can't do that -- that's illegal. The greater need
IS.
MS. KRUMBINE: The greater need for you, you're saying, is
families.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I'm sorry. The discussion from the
floor -- I mean, we'd love to have you bring into it--
MS. KRUMBINE: I'm sorry. I apologize.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: -- but you'd have to do it from the
microphone.
MS. KRUMBINE: I didn't want to put words in their mouth. But
the greatest that I see is family of one.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. I'm sorry.
MS. KRUMBINE: For home ownership.
Page 276
September 11 - 12, 2007
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That was it. That one knocked my
socks off.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And Marcy, this is one of reasons -- I
mean, this is a very complicated thing. There's many solutions. No
one's right, no one's wrong. The idea of coming up with percentages to
make it go farther is all good. Possibly when it goes before the
Affordable Housing Committee, if it gets to that point, they could come
up with something that's weighted going up the scale.
I don't know how to come up with something that's fair. Whatever
we do, it's not going to be fair for that person that does not get the full
amount. And of course, the person that does get the full amount is
going to be very pleased with us. But we've got to work within the
income that we have, and we have to try to balance it against the real
need.
I'm really looking for the expertise of the people that serve on the
committee that's been working on it for so long, like Commissioner
Henning's motion stated.
But with that, let's go to Commissioner Coyle.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Could we have your questions on
the screen again and let's see if we can't get them answered? That's
what this item is all about.
Number one, all you're concerned with -- well, one of the things
you're concerned about is that we have enough money to meet the
demand and we don't over commit ourselves on the demand side. I am
supportive of you doing that, finding a way to balance what we can
afford to defer and how much money we have going in.
And to explain that for those who are listening, we are shooting at
a moving target. When we started this big push on trying to address
affordable housing, the median price of a home in Chica -- in Collier
County was moving close to $500,000. That's no longer true. It's
almost, almost, $100,000 less. There are lots of homes now available
in the 150- to $250,000 range, and there wasn't any three or four years
Page 277
September 11 - 12, 2007
ago.
The land prices have even started going down now. The problem
is that people are losing their jobs, too, so their salaries are likely to be
going down.
So we're even finding that cost of construction is going down. If I
remember, what Norm Feder's told me, he's getting bids for contracts
that are lower than what they anticipated now rather than 50 percent
higher than what they were.
The market is changing. We have to adapt to that and use our
money where it achieves the greatest advantage. Maybe what we don't
want to do is provide deferrals for purchasing homes for people who
make $24,000 a year. Maybe we want to help them with rentals.
Maybe it's not possible to have a home built for $75,000 that those
people can afford to buy. There is nothing that guarantees every living
soul in Collier County a house to purchase.
So let's make some logical decisions. Do we want to limit the
home purchase deferrals to people above the 60 percent and we provide
rent subsidies of some kind to the people below that because they can't
qualify to buy a house here? Those are the kinds of things I'd like to
see.
So, yes, number one, if we -- we're trying to balance the need for
deferrals against the available income to support the deferrals, then I'm
supportive of that.
I am supportive, number two, of providing some preference for
local government entities to provide housing for essential workers. I'm
also in favor of giving veterans a preference for getting those kinds of
deferrals.
With number three, owner-occupied impact fee deferral program
and the ability of people to get these en masse, I think that, again, is a
balancing act. How much money do we have? How much can we
provide.
I think there is some logic to saying first come first served,
Page 278
September 11 - 12, 2007
because it encourages people to get in there and get it done and get
built, and you're going to get the deferrals. The people who don't do
that and who, for one reason or another, delay three or four or five
years in getting it built, are not going to get any. So maybe that's
something you have to evaluate.
Number four I've already addressed. It's too broad. I think if a
developer has incorrectly paid an impact fee, they should get a refund if
it's fair, if it's something that they should do, but maybe you have
something else in mind.
And as far as multiple affordable housing incentives are
concerned, once again, I would like to see those given to people who
are going to get the job done quickly, and maybe we have these things
phased. If it's not online in three or four years, then these things phase
out, you just don't get it. And you weigh those things to the people who
will put them on line quickly. Again, first come first served.
So -- now those might not be good answers, but that's my input. I
think you're on the right track. You're trying to balance what we -- the
money we have with the need to provide the deferrals and the housing
assistance. That's a good thing to do. I commend you for doing it. We
don't have all the answers, but I would support a motion to tell you that
-- pursue this with the advisory committee, come up with some
solutions.
And I would support the motion if the motion includes this general
guidance; otherwise, you've got no guidance at all.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Henning, youjust
heard Commissioner Coyle as far as--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, it took him a long time,
but --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I was going to go like this to him,
too.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I've been trying since yesterday to
give you my recommendations for this, and we keep getting off on
Page 279
September 11 - 12, 2007
tangents somewhere.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We've got to tie your hands.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So I just took seven minutes and did
it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. The motion is to take
these questions to the affordable housing and bring it back to us with
the recommendations.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Without any guidance from the
board?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, yeah. I just shared my--
absolutely. That's exactly what it is, but I did share my concerns.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And this would be --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: But it -- you know, we have a
committee to do all this stuff. We don't have to debate this out here.
Take these questions to the affordable housing board, bring it back to us
and see if we need to do any changes.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I'd just like to add. As the
committee deliberates, I think they should think very seriously about a
cap on rental only because we have to make sure that our infrastructure
program stays in place, and we can't undermine that program.
Secondly, I don't agree at all with Commissioner Coyle about
number three, the owner-occupied and first come, first served, because
-- unless there's a caveat that says, only to the people who have already
bought.
But Mr. Developer could come in and say, and I want 50, so he
takes 50 right off the top, and that only leaves 38 for everybody else to
divide amongst themselves. And there are little guys like this one I've
been reading about, Marco Bay Builders or something like that, who
just does one at a time and nestles in between.
And then people like that -- and Freeman and Freeman. They,
don't get an opportunity at all to build anything. We've got so many
Page 280
September 11 - 12, 2007
that are coming up between Ave Maria and Heritage Bay and Habitat
and others, I think that we ought to be fair about it and not allow
somebody to just take a block of them when they don't even have
buyers yet. I think a name should be associated with every deferral.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I think the idea would be is to share
what commissioners have said here today with the understanding that
we're still looking for their input on a vast variety of subjects and that
what we have said up here today does nothing more than the comments
that we were looking at at that point in time that they can take in their
consideration for their advice.
I don't want to limit them to the point where they can't consider
this, they can't consider that. They may come up with something that's
extremely inventive, something that's very original. So meanwhile we
have Commissioner Henning's motion on the floor. Do you agree with
what I just said as far as passing that on?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We're all saying the same thing.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We are.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: But we're just making comments
on what our personal feelings are.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. We're going to go to
Commissioner Halas, then hopefully at that time we'll be able to take a
vote.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I guess all I want to interject in this
conversation is that whatever guidance is given to Affordable Housing
Commission, that they're not spinning their wheels so they come before
us and say, here's what we come up with and then we say, no, that's not
going to work, and then we're back to square one. I think a lot of
people have spent a lot of time on this trying to address this.
So I hope that when we give them guidance that it's the right
guidance and that we're not going to have them just waste a lot of time
on this.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, let's not get to the point where
Page 281
September 11 - 12, 2007
we contradict everything we've been saying. I think we've got a motion
on the floor. Be it as it may, we can vote it in, we can vote it down.
And any other comments?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Seeing none, all those in favor of
Commissioner Henning's motion, seconded by myself, indicate by -- is
that correct? I did second it, yes -- indicate by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMANCOLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Let the record show that it was 5-0,
that everyone was in favor.
Thank you very much. I know it's been difficult. We're looking
for the Affordable Housing Commission --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Thanks for what?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: -- to do great things as far as their
suggestions.
Mr. Mudd, where are we in the agenda now?
Item # lOG
RECOMMENDATION TO AWARD RFP #07-4126, JANITORIAL
SERVICES TO ONE SOURCE FACILITY SERVICES, INC.
{$2, 144,446.68) - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to lOG, which is a
recommendation to award RFP 07-4126, janitorial services, to
OneSource Facility Services, Inc., for $2,144,446.68.
Page 282
September 11 - 12, 2007
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We have a motion to approve by
Commissioner Fiala, and a second by Commissioner Fiala.
Any discussion?
Commissioner Henning, is this -- your light on from before?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. All those in favor, indicate--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, that's not -- I'm sorry. It's for
this.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Freeze. Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Control your lights, please.
The -- I just want to thank our staff for writing a great contract,
and I trust that Skip Camp will enforce the contract.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Thank you.
And with that, all those in favor, indicate by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And the ayes have it, 5-0.
Item #lOH
RECOMMENDATION TO ACCEPT THE REPORT ON REVIEW
OF BID NO. 07-4127 "OFFICE SUPPLIES," SUBMITTED BY
THE COLLIER COUNTY OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND
BUDGET - APPROVED
Page 283
September 11 - 12,2007
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, next item is 10H. It's a
recommendation to accept the report on review of bid number 07-4127,
office supplies, submitted by Collier County Office of Management
and Budget.
Ms. Laura Davidson, budget analyst for the office of management
and budget will present.
MS. DAVIDSON: Good morning. For the record, Laura
Davidson with office of management and budget.
Anticipating the conclusion of the current contract for office
supplies, the Collier County Purchasing Department recently received
and evaluated bids for this service.
After comparing the bids, they recommended to you that the
contract be awarded to Corporate Express, and that recommendation
was subsequently protested by Marco Office Supply. At your request, I
have conducted a review of the bid process.
The review addressed the following questions:
Was the bid process developed and executed in accordance with
the Collier County purchasing policy?
Was the bid evaluated accuracy in accordance with the guidelines
set forth in the Invitation to Bid?
And is the recommendation to award the contract consistent with
the terms of the Invitation to Bid?
One of the most important aspects of competitive bidding is that
you're able to make a direct comparison among the bidders. Oftentimes
they say apples to apples. And the Invitation to Bid, or the ITB, is the
means by which you set up the ground rules for creating that
companson.
And two such ground rules were integral in looking at this
particular bid process. The first is the ITB states that any respondent to
the bid who has concerns regarding the bid or the invitation or the way
it's to be executed is required to file a written protest with the
purchasing director prior to the opening of the bid.
Page 284
September 11 - 12,2007
Neither of the vendors utilized this method of recourse, signaling
their acceptance to the terms and the conditions to the Invitation to Bid.
The second ground rule is that the award -- according to the
Invitation to Bid, the award would be made to the firm who offered the
highest discount, qualified and responsive bidder. That's fairly explicit
on how they intend to award the contract.
The ITB sets up the comparison among the bidders by asking
them to submit their discount beyond the catalog price that they offer.
In order to create a second comparison, the purchasing department asks
that vendors submit their prices, the prices being the catalog price less
the discount, for a sample market basket of high-use products.
After reviewing the bid documents and independently tabulating
the bids, the conclusion of the review was that, yes, the bid process was
developed and executed in accordance with the purchasing policy; yes,
the recommendation to award was consistent with the terms of the
Invitation to Bid; and although the OMB tabulation was slightly
different than that of the purchasing department, the conclusion was the
same, that Corporate Express is the lowest, best-qualified responsive
bidder.
Not only did Corporate Express offer a greater discount, 61
percent versus 52 percent from Marco Office Supply, but the pricing on
the sample of high-use products proved that they were the lower bidder
as well.
At this point I'd be happy to answer any questions or concerns that
you have regarding the report.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. We do have four public
speakers, but Commissioner Fiala will go first.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. When you stated that one of the
qualifications was it had to be a discount price on their catalog, did that
limit how many people could bid? Because I notice you didn't have
anything from Office Max or Office Depot or Staples or -- because they
publish their own catalog. It seems that that was kind of weighted
Page 285
September 11 - 12,2007
toward just one firm, the only firm that does publish a catalog.
MS. DAVIDSON: I did not find that that -- that that was a
concern. I have in my possession here a catalog from Corporate
Express, of course, a catalog from Marco Office Supply, and also a
catalog for Office Depot. It's my understanding that most firms publish
catalogs. Having a catalog is almost a necessity from an end-user
perspective. In other words, we need to know what you offer so that
we can purchase it. So it's my experience that most vendors would
offer a catalog.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I had a few more questions. I
thought it was interesting as I looked through here, the original
document that we received with the bids -- and I marked them all up. I
went through all of them. And it was interesting that actually the end
prices, Marco Office Supply was the lowest bidder on everything that I
have marked in orange here.
Now, when they were back and did the second one, I noticed it
was interesting that there were quite a few of those lower bids omitted
and on others for -- somehow Marco's price changed from what it was
before. And then on the last one that was done by -- well, the third
thing they omitted a bunch of them, most of all of the ones that Marco
Office Supply was lowest on, and the other figures changed again.
Who was changing the figures from the original figures?
MS. DAVIDSON: Okay. What you have there are three
particular -- we call them bid tabs, bid -- it's a tabulation of the bids that
vendors supply. The first -- the original bid tab is strictly taken directly
from their bids. Whatever the purchasing department received from
either Corporate Express or Marco Office Supply is then transferred
onto that original bid tab.
The second one that looks almost identical is -- was also created
by the purchasing department, and what they do is they go through and
they'll make any changes according to purchasing policy and also the
Invitation to Bid. They have the right to make any changes regarding
Page 286
September 11 - 12,2007
mathematical calculations, if there's something incorrect, they can
change that.
The other thing that they ran into a lot of times is, the Invitation to
Bid specifically asked for their prices, your catalog price less your
discount. And it's fairly explicit in that regard. So if that was not the
number that was supplied, then it was changed to whatever that might
be.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So let me ask then. Say, for instance
-- and I don't know what happens. I'm throwing this out, okay. Say, for
instance -- well, I'll say bidder A has a catalog and they give you 61
percent off, and bidder B comes -- looks through his catalog and
actually quotes lower prices than what his catalog allows and then
discounts those prices, which is going to be the price that we're going to
be paying anyway, but that -- that way his price does come lower.
Certainly isn't the same as in his bid, but it's lower than what we could
ever do. Do we then disqualify that bid because he has reduced it
before he even started discounting even though it would be lower than
the other?
MS. DAVIDSON: I think I see what you're saying. What we do
is -- and you noted on the very last tabulation a lot of the items were
taken out. That's in an effort, as I said before, to create that true
comparison. It needs to be a direct comparison. And so for the
purposes of open and competitive bidding, we're strictly looking at the
catalog less the discount or, as the Invitation to Bid states, the highest
discount. The market basket of supplies is really an additional
comparison to add to that.
Now, a lot of times vendors can offer a greater discount than what
is in their catalog on products that may not be featured in the catalog or,
you know, a special might come along for a month of the year, they can
offer a greater discount on something. But for the purposes of
competitive bidding, we can't necessarily quantify that. And so in the
bid, you have to look at a snapshot in time and say -- and make a direct
Page 287
September 11 - 12, 2007
comparison among vendors, and I believe that was the goal in the way
that it was written.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Even though then the -- okay. So if
you charge a higher price to give you a better discount, right, you
charge $10,000 for something and -- but you can give them a 61
percent discount or you already hone your figures down and you only
charge $6,000 and you take a 52 percent, still your rate is lower but the
other guy gives you a bigger discount because he uses a higher figure to
start off with.
MS. DAVIDSON: Yes. I see what you're saying. And that was --
I think, perhaps, that is why the Invitation to Bid was written in such a
way that it would look at, first of all, the discount, but then also that
sample pricing. And in my review, the conclusion was the same as that
of the purchasing department that in both regards Corporate Express
was the low bid.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. My big concern here is --
MS. DAVIDSON: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- you're going to pay a lot more
because of our restrictive bid process, not saying we're looking for the
lowest price and you can -- you give me the lowest, but we've restricted
it to some kind of a catalog with percent, even though somebody else
can offer lower prices and discount those lower prices.
So we're actually, as I look through here, what -- we're going to
pay a lot more money for our stuff, and it really concerns me that the
process has come to that. So that's -- I'll just offer that and I'll stop right
now.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, you opened up the door,
Commissioner Fiala. I need to have an explanation. Is the bidder that
-- and just to clarify what Commissioner Fiala just asked. The bidder
that you have chosen is charging a higher price in the end for the
product. Is that what it is?
MR. CARNELL: No.
Page 288
September 11 - 12, 2007
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I see you shaking your head no and
Commissioner Fiala shaking her head yes. One of you got it right.
MR. CARNELL: All right. The -- you have to put together what
Laura said and make sure you understand it completely.
The situation is this: Corporate Express gave a global discount of
61 percent. Marco Office Supply gave a discount of 52 percent
globally. So right there Corporate has a 9 percent advantage.
Now, what Laura referenced earlier was, as part of making that
line-by-line apples-to-apples comparison, you have to look at all the
items in the market basket, but the market -- it wasn't just a matter of
providing a discount. The bidders had to identify the item in the
catalog, the correct citation number of the project. And what we found
and what we told you in July originally was, we could not make that
match for 25 items for Marco Office Supply. We could not.
When Ms. Davidson did the match, she couldn't make the match
for 57. We were more generous than she was, frankly, in terms of -- we
essentially gave a little bit of faith to Marco Office Supply on a few
items, gave them the benefit of the doubt on some things that -- where
we looked in the catalog. But we could not in good conscience find a
match on 25.
Now, when you go to this apples-to-apples comparison, I would
disagree, Commissioner Fiala, with the idea you're floating that Marco
Office Supply has lower costs in the end because not only did we not --
first off, we had that match problem of not being able to match the
items, so therefore they're not responsive to the specification. They
didn't provide what we wanted. They may have put a number there, but
we can't verify the number's real. That's the issue there.
The other issue was that the -- remember we said they were asked
to provide a global discount. When you look at the language of the bid
specification, it's discount, singular. We asked for one discount. We
did not ask for multiple discounts. We asked for a single discount.
Now, both bidders made comment in different ways that they were
Page 289
September 11 - 12,2007
going to go beyond the discount. Corporate Express made a global
statement that said, we'll give you additional discounts as we go. They
didn't cite a number though, and nor did we ask them to cite a number
because, this is back to Laura's point, you've got to freeze it in time at
some point for the sake of comparison.
Now, Marco -- the way Marco did it was, they took the market
basket and they put additional discounts in and offered different
numbers. And they didn't disclose the discount. They simply wrote a
different price in that you -- than you could find in the catalog. So
they're either not pricing the same item -- and in some cases we could
not make the match on the serial number -- and in other cases their --
you would assume their intent is to give you a better discount above
and beyond.
What we're telling you is that when you take the non-responsive
items out of the analysis -- back to Laura's point, apples to apples -- that
whether it's the purchasing scenario where we had 94 matches, or hers,
where she had 62 matches, when you do the math, Corporate Express is
lower, and she's saying the same thing, correct?
MS. DAVIDSON: (Nods head.)
MR. CARNELL: Yes. So that's--
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. I guess I didn't understand
then, because in the beginning -- I'm just starting at the top of your --
letter copy paper, and it shows the exact number and how many -- on
each side, it shows the exact number here, and Corporate Express bid
$102,000, and Marco Office Supply bid $64,000. Same thing, apples to
apples.
Next one down, copy paper -- and again, it gives the exact number
and quantity and so forth, and it shows Corporate Express, 9,700;
Marco Office Supply, 4,800.
MR. CARNELL: If you look at the evaluated tabulation, in other
words, back to Laura -- Laura told you we had an initial bid tabulation
that's just a straight result of what the two -- just a record of what they
Page 290
September 11 - 12, 2007
said on paper they were bidding, and then we went back and looked at
compliance with the specification. When you go to compliance with
the specification, I don't even know if the copy paper's in there, because
I'm not sure -- I think if you look in that revised tabulation, if you look
at Laura's revised tabulation, that item may be excluded because that
may be one of the items where Marco didn't give us a responsive serial
number, if you will, for the product. So at that point it's out of the
analysis if you're going to hold people to the specifications.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: They eliminated a lot of those where
the price was definitely a lot lower. They're just eliminated.
MR. CARNELL: Yeah. It has the effect, Commissioner, of, oh,
I'm going to give you a better deal, but I'm really not telling you where
I'm getting it from or what it is. And the other problem here is, this
market basket that we started with was 119 items. We buy potentially
-- there's thousands of items in these catalogs. It's not just 119.
We took 119, we tried to get a big enough list ofthe higher-use
items so that could mitigate one factor. What we could have done, we
could have just had them bid discount. We could have just said, give us
your best discount, not even open the catalog and just said, okay, 61
versus 52, you go home and win.
But we also asked for the market basket because we wanted to, in
case there was some kind of significant swing or pivot between the
catalogs, that they were different, then we would take that into account.
So that's why -- but in order to do that, you've got to be talking,
again, apples to apples. You've got to be comparing the same items
within the two bidders' groups, so that's why it was done that way.
MS. DAVIDSON: In could add just one thing. I told you I had
the two catalogs for the vendors. I also have the additional catalog for
Office Depot. Without looking at discounts, without looking at, you
know, what they mayor may not want to offer as a deal to us, just
straight catalog pricing, on a sample of items, Office Depot and Marco
Office Supply are within 1 percent of each other on pricing and
Page 291
September 11 - 12, 2007
catalogs, and Corporate Express is, across the board, is about 3 percent
lower than that.
So there's not a big difference, or a significant difference probably,
in catalog pricing, which is why we -- I think the purchasing
department looked at the discount.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Carnell, you made a
statement that I'm not sure what it means. They provided the number
but we could not verify.
MR. CARNELL: Yes. They were asked to identify -- they
provide their catalog, then they're asked to identify the item number in
the catalog of the particular item in the market basket. In other words,
you can have pens, you could have different kinds of pens, you can
have ballpoint pens, felt tip pens, whatever, and so we had them specify
what brand name they had in mind and the order number that goes with
that, and they were given the chance also of even submitting an
approved equal of it, say a generic brand product. But they had to say
what it was. They had to say so that anybody -- any guy, any
reasonable person, could open their catalog and say, oh, it's this one on
page 17, and that we had a reference number. That's what I'm talking
about, and that's where we ran into an issue with the Marco Office
Supply bid. It did not name, in many instances, a reference number that
we could match to their catalog.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Are you saying they put a dollar
amount down and didn't put anything in there where you couldn't (sic)
find it?
MR. CARNELL: We either -- there was either no number or there
may have been a number that we could not match to the book.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Now, was this a -- the
ranking just like we, the board, accomplished, with the --
MR. CARNELL: This was a sealed bidding process.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Pardon me?
Page 292
September 11 - 12,2007
MR. CARNELL: This was a sealed bidding process.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. So there wasn't a ranking?
MR. CARNELL: Correct. The ranking is by price. It's by
accumulating the dollar totals on the individual prices times the
estimated quantities to arrive at a total bid for each bidder. That creates
your order.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We have four speakers. Would you
call the speakers.
MS. FILSON: Yes, sir. The speakers are registered for 10H and
101.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yes. County Attorney, can we call the
speakers one time to cover both items since they're related?
MR. WEIGEL: You may.
MS. FILSON: Your first speaker is Cindy Carroll.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And I'll ask you when you come up,
you have your choice of podiums, to state your name for the record.
MS. FILSON: Cindy will be followed by Terry Sterck. I'm sure I
got that wrong.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And you have three minutes.
MS. CARROLL: Okay. Good morning. I'm Cindy Carroll, and
I'm an account manager with Corporate Express.
During the July 24th meeting, several questions and concerns were
addressed, one being the presence of Corporate Express in Collier
County. And I just wanted to let you know a few businesses that we do
do business with on a regular basis, we are under contract.
One would be the NCH Healthcare System, which consists of
Naples Community Hospital and North Miami -- North Naples
Hospital, which was formerly known as North Collier; Physicians
Regional, formerly known as the Cleveland Clinic; the new HMA
hospital on Collier Avenue (sic), and the Collier County school district.
We also do business with RCMA in Immokalee, and we are a sponsor
Page 293
September 11 - 12,2007
of their golf tournament that they have each year as a fundraising
project for the Head Start program.
I have been with Corporate Express for 23 years, and I am just one
of many employees in our office who have been with the company for
over 20 years. Three of them are our delivery personnel. And it's
unusual to have someone in that job role with the time with the
company that they do. And two of those drivers would be the delivery
personnel for Collier County. And I think that the longevity of the
employees speaks volumes for the company that Corporate Express is.
Going back to the proposal that we submitted. Just to clarify, there
was 119 items listed on the spec., and we quoted 119 items of the
product that was requested, the very specific products.
In addition, where we could, such as the toners, we offered a
substitute item and we priced them using our pricing matrix of 61
percent because the bid spec. clearly stated that the discount requested
was for valuation purposes only.
We also stated that on these high-use items we would be willing to
offer an additional discount, such as paper. You know, paper is a very
high-use item; 20 percent of your spend is probably paper, if not
greater. And in most cases, we can give you a higher discount than 21
percent. But because the bid spec. stated that this was for valuation
purposes, that is how we priced it.
Thank you for the opportunity.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Terry Sterck. He'll be followed
by Ralph Reyes.
MR. STERCK: You had it right the first time. It's Sterck. Thank
you.
Appreciate your time this morning. My name is Terry Sterck. I'm
the vice-president of sales with Corporate Express in South Florida.
And I just wanted to clarify a couple of points. We were very
diligent during the Invitation to Bid and the RFP process to make
absolutely sure that we submitted a proposal that was outlined in the
Page 294
September 11 - 12, 2007
guidelines. Having been through many commercial and private sector
bid processes, we realized that in our industry office supplies can be
many things to many people and it can be very convoluted.
Our catalog encompasses 13,000 products. The discount that you
will be receiving, the 61 percent, pertains to those items in that
particular catalog. It's not a smaller version. It's not a larger version. It
is a nationally published, one-time-of-year, all encompassing catalog
for Corporate Express.
To Commissioner Fiala, all of our competitors all have a similar
catalog, okay. Our industry is standardized on a very large phone book
based, enormous amount of skews, content catalog. It is an industry
standard.
We based that submission -- the discount is off of manufacturer's
list price. We do not set list prices. We get those direct from the major
manufacturers in the industry.
So we feel like our proposal is directly in accordance with the
policy. It is 100 percent accurate, as Cindy outlined. We made
absolutely sure that we submitted like items in reference to the
particular request that came with the direct Invitation to Bid.
Having 13,000 items in a particular catalog, you can playa show
game and who and what's what of particular projects. We were very
clear, very direct in our response so that it would be a clear evaluation.
And I think we also were consistent with the terms.
So with that, I just wanted to say, thank you again for allowing us
to submit a proposal. I would also like to just ask for the record, this
has been office supply 101 for you, I'm sure, but if there are further
questions that do come up, we would be able to, or at least be able to
afford a response, quite possibly. Is that possible?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We'll weigh that when the time does
come when the questions come up.
MR. STERCK: Okay. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you sir.
Page 295
September 11 - 12, 2007
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Ralph Reyes. He'll be followed
by Philip Penzo.
MR. REYES: Good morning. My name is Ralph Reyes. I'm a
sales manager for Corporate Express in South Florida, and I was
actually hoping to speak first because I had first-hand implementation
in this bid, along with Cindy Carroll, but my colleagues stated it as well
as I could have ever.
We looked at the bid, we looked at the requirements and actually
struggled. We said, do we give a lower price that we could have seen
initially? Commissioner Fiala, you could have put a lower price on
those items because some of those are competitive and market driven;
however, we looked at the list price that the manufacturer sets for us
and applied our discount according to the bid guidelines, and that's
where we came -- our net price on each item.
So I would just like to say, it's a legitimate bid. We think that
we've won the bid by 9 percent overall. Yes, we can negotiate further
pricing at a later time with the county. But for evaluation purposes, I
think we submitted what was required of our organization.
And thank you very much. Have a good day.
MS. FILSON: Your final speaker is Philip Penzo.
MR. PENZO: Thank you for your time. I'm Philip Penzo,
president of Marco Office Supply.
Yes, everybody has a catalog we give out, but Office Max, Office
Depot and Staples catalogs are net price catalogs, not list price catalogs.
They're not going to mark it -- give you a discount off the list.
Unfortunately, my catalog is printed by a national wholesaler. It's
got 24,000 items, not 12-. I can't control the prices in it like Corporate
Express. They said their price is determined by the manufacturer, but if
you look through their catalog, they've got plenty of items that are their
brand items. Corporate Express items they control the list price on.
Letter pads, list price, $24 in their catalog. Sixty-one off of that, you're
paying $12 a dozen. Everybody else sells them $6 a dozen. So what's
Page 296
September 11 - 12, 2007
61 percent mean?
My problem is, I bid this. Like I said, I don't have the choice of
what's in my catalog. So all those items that they didn't count in my bid
I had samples. They put in there, you could send a sample of
compatible item. They had a sample of every item I bid in there with
the price. That copy paper, every one of those pens. There was a
sample in a box numbered to that item. You guys are currently buying
them from me. So to say no because I can't find them in your catalog
that you don't print and I don't control the price and what's in there, why
would you not allow those items?
That one item, the copy paper, if you took those items and added
the columns up, I was 85,000 cheaper on that bid.
Now, you know, you threw those items out, fine. So what I'm
saying is, okay, you know, discount off the list maybe is not the way to
go; that's the way you did it. But then they put in here that they're
going to give the county 61 percent off everything. All I said last time
we met is, I said, get a letter from them, they're here now, that they'll
give you 61 off HP brand products, which is what they bid in the
catalog, and I'll be happy to walk away from this bid.
If they're not willing to do that, their bid should be thrown out
because they didn't agree to the terms. They put that down in their bid,
that that's what they were giving you, and HP brand products when you
compared it to mine.
If they're not willing to do that, you should throw their bid out. It
should be awarded to me. Thank you.
MS. FILSON: That was your final speaker, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Questions of staff?
Commissioners? Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Obviously this is -- your department
has a huge undertaking in all bids, in all processes. Is this also
overlooked, or did you, if you have problems, did you consult the
county attorney on these items?
Page 297
September 11 - 12,2007
MR. CARNELL: Oh, yes, we do where appropriate, yes.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. So has this been thoroughly
investigated as far as you're concerned?
MR. CARNELL: Yes, it has, it has.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Was the county attorney or anybody
involved in this process or not?
MR. CARNELL: I've had a limited conversation with the County
Attorney's Office. Have not gone through the same review that OMB
did.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
MR. CARNELL: If I could just clarify something here. I just
want -- I know this may sound a little confusing to you all, but let's
understand what the contract is. There are, as I said -- as Laura pointed
out as well, there are thousands of items in the catalog. Weare -- this is
a contract for use by all board departments and it's piggybacked off of
and used by other agencies as well.
The idea is to be able to buy from anywhere within the catalog,
and we have not prescribed to any user what level of item they can buy.
We have not set a specific standard, nor do we intend to. That would
just not be productive. So that's one thing you have to understand. The
usage of the contract is totally up to the user, and they can order
anything in the catalog.
Again, we took a small sliver of the catalog, tried to take the
higher-use items, and tried to get people to give us a prevailing discount
and then point us to those items so that we could credibly compare --
make that comparison that Laura was talking about.
The reason I mentioned what I just said is, you're going to hear
comments from people saying, well, I can sell you this lower, I can sell
you that lower. Well, yeah, if you keep flipping through the catalog,
you can find, in many instances, something that constitutes a pen,
something that constitutes Post-it notes at a lower price. You know,
you can pick from anywhere in the catalog, and you may be able to get
Page 298
September 11 - 12,2007
a lower price, or you may be able to go outside the catalog and get a
lower price.
But we weren't allowing for that here, that latter step. We were
trying to keep everybody within the catalog so, as Laura said, you
could do this apples to apples comparison.
And I think the other point Laura made that I want to reiterate, and
I said this to you in July as well. This bid invitation was on the street
for a month. We disclosed the methodology in writing. We received
absolutely no comments from the protester about the methodology prior
to the opening.
All of the analyses that you've seen in his protest, any other
comments, has all been after the fact. It's after the bids have been
opened that we've been kind of questioning and reinventing history a
little bit. And all these concerns about catalog pricing, retail,
wholesale, none of that was brought up while the bid was on the street.
And as Laura said, there is a provision in the invitation that says, if
you've got a problem with how we're pricing it, how we're competing it,
if you've got a problem with the Invitation to Bid, you are to notify the
purchasing department prior to the bid opening. That didn't happen.
So, as Laura said, when the bids open, you assume that
everybody's good with the rules of the game. So if there's going to be
any questions at that point, it's really more, did you apply the rules the
way you said you were? And I believe Ms. Davidson's telling you the
purchasing staff did, I'm telling you the purchasing staff did.
So we believe -- oh, the other thing that I mentioned in July as
well is that when you -- when you run the numbers as a whole with the
responsive items -- and again, we're saying this today as well -- the
calculation in Corporate Express comes out lower. And, again, I would
just leave you with the fact that we did not receive any objections to the
method the way we were pricing it prior to the bid opening.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Just one simple question, in
may, then I'm going to turn it over to Commissioner Fiala.
Page 299
September 11 - 12, 2007
Forget everything that's been said for the moment. When you get
down to the bottom line, the people we represent are the taxpayers and
we're supposed to be able to produce the cheapest product that we can
with their money, to get the best bang for the buck. That's what the
whole thing's all about. The product that we got before us now and the
system the way it's set up, can you categorically say without any
reservations that this bid here from -- Corporate Express, is it?
MR. CARNELL: Yes.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: -- is the lowest bid and it's going to
save the taxpayers money?
MR. CARNELL: I believe it will, yes, I do.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: You do or you believe?
MR. CARNELL: I do.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: You believe it, okay, fine. That's what
I wanted to know.
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. Mr. Penzo said that he would
go away and not protest anything if Corporate Express would guarantee
in writing that they would discount 61 percent off of all of their HP
projects; is that what you said?
R. PENZO: That's what they said.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. Will they do that?
MR. STERCK: Yes, we would.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And you'll give that to us in writing?
MR. CARNELL: They had already represented that to us
verbally, but we can get that in a letterhead from them.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. And is there a way that we
can just go back and check to -- well, that's all right. I'll say no more. I
just wanted to make sure -- I feel just like Commissioner Coletta, and
I'm sure Commissioner Henning, I just want to make sure we get the
lowest price. And when you can see $85,000 difference between one
and the other, it just doesn't seem like we're getting the lowest price.
Page 300
September 11 - 12, 2007
MR. CARNELL: I'm going to say one thing in follow-up to that,
which is that you heard Corporate Express this morning express the fact
that they would be willing to confirm further reductions later, cost
savings, additional cost savings in writing. I'm going to take them up
on that.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay.
MR. CARNELL: But anyway.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. I think we're at the point now
where we need a motion.
Commissioner Halas, I believe you're the one that wants to make
it?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah. I'll make a motion to approve
this contract.
MR. MUDD: No. Let's do it -- you have two items. First is lOH,
and that's a recommendation to accept the report on review of bid
number --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: 10H.
MR. MUDD: And that's the one that Ms. Davidson did. So we'd
like to go -- to do that one first.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yep.
MR. MUDD: To accept --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Motion to approve 10H.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We have a motion by Commissioner
Halas to approve 10H, and a second by --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: But I'd like to also say that I think
that we're getting ourselves in a situation here, Commissioners, where,
when we go out for bids on large products here, such as buildings -- and
there's bids, and all of a sudden somebody says, hey, I can build this
building after the bids are in and they understand what the guidelines
are and then come before the Board of County Commissioners.
Page 301
September 11 - 12, 2007
So just -- I just want to kind of bring it to everybody's attention
that we could be ending up bringing everybody that bids and plays by
the rules and then feels that they've been -- possibly didn't get the fair
shake, they could be coming before us and saying, hey, I can build that
building for $100,000 cheaper.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: They do already.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I believe that's their -- that's their right.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that's -- but I'm going to let you
know that that is the procedures that you have right now.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That's right.
MR. MUDD: A bid can be protested to the purchasing director.
The purchasing director looks at the protest and he makes a -- he makes
a decision and a directive. When that is done, the next step, if the -- if
one of the bidders still thinks he's been slighted by any stretch of the
imagination, can come to this board and appeal the purchasing
director's decision, and that, I believe, happened in this particular case.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It was just covered. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. So we have a motion on the
floor and a second.
Any other discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Seeing none, all those in favor,
indicate by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And let the record show that the vote
was 4-1 with Commissioner Fiala being the dissenting vote.
Page 302
September 11 - 12, 2007
Next item?
Item #101
THAT THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
APPROVES THE AWARD BID 07-4127 FOR OFFICE SUPPLIES
TO CORPORATE EXPRESS - APPROVED W /STIPULA TION
MR. MUDD: It's 101. This has to do with the same item. It says
the Board of County Commissioners --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Motion to approve.
MR. MUDD: -- approves the award of bid number 07-4127 for
office supplies to Corporate Express.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Motion to approve.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: With the condition about the written--
COMMISSIONER HALAS: With the letter saying that on the HP
products we'll get the 61 percent discount.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. I'll second that.
Commissioner Halas made a motion, I second it.
Any comments? Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You know, I don't have those
warm, fuzzy feelings, but I'm going to support the motion.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay, fine. And with that, any other
comments?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Seeing none, all those in favor of the
motion, indicate by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed?
Page 303
September 11 - 12, 2007
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And the ayes have it, 5-0 (sic).
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I'm sorry. Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I was the aye against, sorry about
that.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. At this point in time, what do I
do? I have to bring it up for reconsideration, go through that whole
particular maneuver?
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, I believe you just heard -- you just
heard the vote wrong, that's all. The vote was 4-1.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. The vote was 4-1, record's
corrected, vote 4-1, with Commissioner Fiala being the dissenting vote.
Item #10J
RECOMMENDATION TO AWARD BID NO. 07-4179 MARCO
ISLAND RECYCLING CENTER TO V ANDERBIL T BAY
CONSTRUCTION, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,299,975 FOR
CONSTRUCTION OF THE NEW MARCO ISLAND RECYCLING
CENTER, PROJECT NUMBER 59003 - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, the next item on our agenda is
number lOJ, and that's a recommendation to award bid number
07-4179, Marco Island Recycling Center to Vanderbilt Bay
Construction, Inc., in the amount of$I,299,975 for the construction of
the new Marco Island Recycling Center, project number 59003.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We have a speaker on that.
MR. MUDD: State your name for the record, sir.
MR. ATKINSON: Dayne Atkinson, project engineer for public
utilities.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Fine. Let's see if there's any questions
Page 304
September 11 - 12, 2007
from the commissioners or if they'd like to hear a full presentation.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. We have a motion by
Commissioner Halas, a second by Commissioner Coyle, and we have
one speaker.
MS. FILSON: Yes, sir. The speaker is Jesse Olsovsky.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yes. Would you come forward,
please.
MR. CARNELL: In could, while Mr. Olsovsky's coming
forward -- Steve Carnell, purchasing director. Mr. Olsovsky's filed--
you can take that podium, sir -- has filed a protest of the award. He's
one of the bidders, Core Construction, and he's going to -- he's going to
give you a summary of his protest, and then I'm going to give you the
protest -- a summary of the protest decision, which was provided to
each of the five of you under separate cover last Friday.
So go ahead and hear from your protester.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: In could have you state your name for
the record, and you have three minutes, sir.
MR.OLSOVSKY: Can I take that just in case I want to show you
something?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Sure, go ahead, please. You may use
that podium there.
MR. OLSOVSKY: All right, thank you. For the record, my name
is Jesse Olsovsky, and I am with Core Construction. Thank you for
taking your time hearing our protest today.
This is my first experience with this type of protest. The basis of
our protest today is the fact that Core Construction's bid has been
thrown out for consideration of the Marco Island Recycling Center. I'm
hoping to share with you the facts and appeal to your reasonable sides
in this matter.
The bids were due in back on August 28th at 2:30. The market's
Page 305
September 11 - 12, 2007
pretty tough right now. Core Construction's not looking to get this job
as a revenue stream, but more to keep our employees employed and in
their homes.
Through a lot of hard work, Core Construction solicited 930 local
subcontracting companies to bid on the project, along with also
receiving bids based on our name being on the county's bid solicitation
website.
Core's, along with three other general contractors in the area were
present to submit the bids. Core's bid was opened first and set the tone
for what was to be expected in the prices for the remaining other bids.
The cost came in as follows: We were at 1.28 million; Vanderbilt
Bay was at 1.299; Bradanna at 1.37 and change, and Jan Mac at almost
1.5.
Even though we were told at the bid opening that our bid was not
put on the form, quote-unquote, they were expecting, they said that
they would take a day or two to consider it and let us know. In our
minds, meaning that we may not be wrong, but they were going to
think about it.
I've been to other county bid openings and seen bids thrown out
for very small reasons. For example, during the library bid opening
that you guys heard yesterday, Wright Construction's bid was thrown
out during the opening because they didn't fill out their list of materials
manufacturers, so they didn't list who they were going to buy their
plywood from, et cetera, and all the months' worth of work that they did
leading up to that day was thrown out. They weren't low bidder, but
nonetheless, it was thrown out for something very small.
So the following day, the day after the bid at 3: 15, I received an
email from Mike Hauer saying that the bid was being deemed
non-responsive because of a form they said we didn't fill out.
His email reterences that we needed to be in accordance with
section 2 of the bid documents page GCIB1. If you read this
referenced section, it specifically says, the bids must be submitted on
Page 306
September 11 - 12,2007
the standard form herein furnished by the owner, pages GCPl through
GCPI2, which is of the bid proposal forms, as included in the bid
documents.
Nowhere in the bid form, bid instructions, bidder's checklist or any
agenda is this form referenced, nor was it -- not knowing that -- of this
additional form, our bid was per plans and per specifications, and it
included the trash compactor and the three-year maintenance program
as the plan and specs. reference that we were supposed to include in our
total bid.
The bases I'm hearing for them having to throw out our bid is
because they didn't -- because they did not know how much our bid for
the compactor maintenance was. The only deduction I can make is,
from the questions, is that they want to be able to purchase the
compactor directly to maybe save a few dollars.
The compactor costs about $35,000. The difference between us
and the second low bidder is 20,000. I don't think they can do that.
Real quick, in closing here, the purchasing department's defense
was that it isn't fair to the other bidders who used the, quote-unquote,
correct form. In most cases there are hundreds of drawings and
thousands of sheets of specs. to go through.
And our defense -- our defense is that it isn't fair to us or the
taxpayers that we completed everything as was asked for (sic) us in
writing verbatim, and they want to approve a higher bidder.
Since this is a publicly heard bid process, the instructions need to
be very clear, fair, balanced for everyone involved. So I guess that's the
bases for right now.
I thank you for your time.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you very much. Thank you, sir.
We appreciate you being here today.
MR. OLSOVSKY: And I do have the -- I do have the bid
documents and instructions here to show you that we did follow it line
for line exactly.
Page 307
September 11 - 12,2007
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. That's part of public record
now. I need you to turn that in to our court reporter.
MR. OLSOVSKY: Sure.
MR. CARNELL: Let me show you -- I'll show you exactly what
happened. It's not complicated.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay.
MR. MUDD: Just give it to me and I'll put it on.
MR. CARNELL: It's tough to get good help these days. All right.
The page that you see on the visualizer is the page out of what we
call the proposal section of the bid package. And it says, bid schedule,
Marco Island Recycle Center, bid number 07-4179.
Now, if you move down the page you will see it is blank, all right.
The reason it's blank -- normally this is a starting point document for
the purchasing staff. They will go and create the bid schedule. This is
a blank form that appears in the template document, and they will input
-- they will input typically here the price schedule, which is normally a
page or two. Often it's just a single page with the pricing for the
bidders to bid.
Now, in this case, this was a bid that was issued electrically. If
you all remember, you've given us funding this year to create an on-line
bidding system which we implemented in the spring. In this case, the --
Mr. Mudd, let me have you show them this form.
That -- this was the form that was actually issued, and it was
issued electronically, and it's called, bid schedule. Now, the protester
said to you that there's hundreds of pages of plans and specifications,
and that's true.
But there's four documents, and one of them is called bid
schedule. This is called bid schedule. And this has -- you may not be
able to read this, or those watching in the audience may not be able to
read it in detail, but there are 17 line items that make up the minimum
scope of work, and that's called part one. And there's a subtotal for part
one. And then there's part two, which is add alternates, and most of
Page 308
September 11 - 12, 2007
you are familiar with add alternates. These are additional line items of
work that we take bids on that are not part of the minimum scope of
work but we add to the work the desirable things we want to do, and if
we can afford it in the bidding process, then we can elect one or more
of the alternates. All right. That's the form that all bidders were
supposed to use.
Now, I said -- I mentioned a moment ago this was an electronic
process for downloading the bids. All four bidders downloaded this
form, including the protester. He downloaded this form, this and three
others, and he downloaded -- I can -- through the modern magic of
technology, I can tell you he downloaded it July 31st at eight a.m. on
the dot. That's a month before the opening. So he had the form in his
posseSSIOn.
Now, Mr. Mudd, if you can show them this form. This is -- this is
what Core Construction actually tendered. Remember the blank page a
moment ago? You see that -- you'll recognize the header. He typed in
this language called base bid, and then he hand wrote in his bid offer,
all right? He used the words base bid which do not appear anywhere in
the plans or specifications of the bid invitation.
And then last, Mr. Mudd, if you could put this up. When the bids
-- when the bids came in, what you see here are the results. I said a
moment ago, we had four bidders, three of them followed the
instructions, they entered in all the line items we asked for.
You saw what Core Construction did. They're the blank column
on the right-hand side. Now, remember, there's part one and part two.
If you're me, where do you put Core? Do you put their price under part
one or part two or grand total? I can't tell.
He uses the word base bid. Again, that appears nowhere in the
document. Base bid, in our vernacular, when we do use it in Collier
County, and most of the world, base bid means the minimum scope of
work. It does not include the add alternates.
So you've got two choices here in terms of how you interpret his
Page 309
September 11 - 12, 2007
bid. And my problem is, I can't -- I can't determine which way to
interpret it. But there's two possibilities. He's either giving you a bid
on part one or he's giving you a bid on the total work. You can't tell.
Ifhe's -- what he's arguing is that he bid the total work, but you--
you can't -- I don't believe you can reasonably conclude that based on
how his bid is tendered.
Ifhe bid the total work, he's arguably $19,000 lower than the other
guys because he's giving you the three alternates as well as the base.
But ifhe bid just the core work, no pun intended, the minimum work,
part one, then he's the second low bidder, and he's got his alternates
unpriced.
Now, in addition to that, even if you were to accept his price, you
have no idea of the value of any of this work. There are 17 line items
within the base level work or what we called part one in this document,
and we have no idea what any of those 17 are worth.
Now, there was a purpose for asking for these items to be broken
out. They're all lump sum prices. It's all intended to make sure that we
can verify that the pricing is balanced and correct. That's the reason we
don't just always ask for a single lump sum.
So that's the dilemma I'm in here is, I do not believe -- and I've
talked to the County Attorney's Office as well on this, and they are in
concurrence that you cannot make a clear interpretation as to his intent.
That's my problem.
I'm very pleased that Core Construction bid. They've been bidding
other jobs. I hope they'll continue to bid, but I don't believe we can
recommend award to them in this case.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Let's go to Commissioner
Fiala.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah. I was just wondering in this
analysis that our department wrote back to them, they said something
about, it is important to note that all other bidders correctly determined
the intent of the bidding documents. Is there some way you can word it
Page 3 10
September 11 - 12,2007
so that people don't have to just determine what the intent is but
actually spell it out? I know in were filling something out, I'd want it
to be very clear to me.
MR. CARNELL: I think there's -- yes, Commissioner, that's a
good question. I think there's a simple learning point here to improve
the process in the future. On that blank page, we'll put a reference to
the bid schedule that tells them to go to the other place on the document
to tender their bid.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. With that, we have a motion on
the floor and a second.
Any other discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: All those in favor, indicate by saying
aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: The ayes have it, 5-0.
Mr. Mudd, before we go on, I just want to quickly query the
commission. I think we may have as much as an hour to hour and 15
minutes left.
MR. MUDD: More than that.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I have no idea how long item number
-- the add-on there, 10L, may last for. I'll leave it up to you. Did you
want to take a quick lunch and come back or did you want to continue
for another hour, hour and a half?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Could we at least get K out of the
way?
Page 3 11
September 11 - 12, 2007
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Why? You're not going to be here
much longer?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I've got a meeting. In fact, I'll be
late right now.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yeah, I know. Did you want to -- you
want to come back then?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I don't want to come back. I want to
do K, and then after that --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: You don't care.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I don't care.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: But then we're going to lose
Commissioner Halas.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'm -- yeah, I'm going to be going
now, so -- well, we can do it -- you've still got four commissioners left.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: We can do it -- we've got four.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Commissioner Coyle that -- K
may run awhile, too. We do have a speaker on it.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's three minutes.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. How do you feel,
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I'm going to take 10
minutes on that, you know, if you don't mind. Just kidding. I'm ready.
Let's go.
Item #10K
RECOMMENDATION TO AWARD BID # 07-4173 GORDON
RIVER WATER QUALITY PARK IN THE AMOUNT OF
$9,852,655.04 TO KRAFT CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC.
AND ALLOCATE $9,852,655.04 TO CONSTRUCT THE
FREEDOM PARK (AKA GORDON RIVER WATER QUALITY
Page 312
September 11 - 12, 2007
PARK), PROJECT NUMBER 510185, BID NO. 07-4173-
APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, item 10K is a recommendation to
award bid number 07-4173 Gordon River Water Quality Park in the
amount of$9,852,655.04 to Kraft Construction Company, Inc., and
allocate $9,852,655.04 to construct the Freedom Park a/k/a the Gordon
River Water Quality Park, project number 510185, bid number
07-4173.
And Ms. Bishop from your stormwater department -- she's the
principal project manager -- will present.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Hold off on the presentation for a
moment. Commissioner Coyle, do you want the presentation?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No, I don't need a presentation. I
merely want a clarification, okay. And Norm Feder is the guy I need to
get the clarification from.
Norm, we have consistently told people that there is not going to
be any intersection there at the entrance of the park that provides access
into south of Golden Gate Parkway. Are we still consistent with that?
MR. FEDER: Yes, we are, Commissioner. What I have asked
staff, and made sure that as we look at the development of the
Fleischmann parcel to the south, that, in fact, any access will come
down, go west on the south side of Golden Gate and cross at the
intersection at Golden Gate and Goodlette-Frank.
So they're not looking at any access point here. I discussed that
with the city council. I told them I wasn't in a position to say never, but
that that is not in our design. It's not what we're structuring this for.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And it's not in the approval of this
particular contract?
MR. FEDER: That's correct, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Good. That's all I needed to
know.
Page 313
September 11 - 12,2007
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. I have a question. The -- this
particular agenda, does this in any way interfere with the possibilities to
be able to negotiate a deal for the Pullman (sic) property?
MR. MUDD: (Shakes head.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. No relation?
MR. MUDD: (Shakes head.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Not even close?
MR. MUDD: Not even close.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Do I hear a motion,
Commissioner --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, wait--
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: No, that's okay. Motion to approve
and a second by Commissioner Fiala.
Call the speaker, please.
MS. FILSON: Henry Kennedy.
MR. KENNEDY: My question was answered, Chairman.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Thank you, Mr. Kennedy. I
was hoping you'd say that.
Okay. With that, any other discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Seeing none, all those in favor,
indicate by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: (Absent.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Those opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Let the record show that the vote was
Page 314
September 11 - 12,2007
4-0, with -- Commissioner Halas left the dais.
Okay. What do you think lOL is going to involve as far as time
goes? I don't want to get these people having a sugar low where I have
to deal with them.
MR. MUDD: I think it's going to be short. It will be 10 to 15
minutes max.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Shall we continue?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay with me.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Fine with me.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: My lunch date is sitting at the end
there.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Oh, okay.
Item #10L
RESOLUTION 2007-257: REQUEST TO THE COLLIER
COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS FOR
APPROVAL OF A RESOLUTION CLARIFYING THE
COUNTY'S PRIOR 2002 RESOLUTION REGARDING USE OF
INTEREST EARNED ON THE INVESTMENT OF COUNTY
FUNDS - (SEPTEMBER 12, 2007) : ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, 10L is a request to the Collier
County Board of County Commissioners to approve a resolution
clarifying the county's prior 2002 resolution regarding use of interest
earned on the investments of county funds.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay.
MR. MUDD: Commissioners, if you remember, on -- I know,
Jacqueline will present, but I just want to make sure I introduce it
correctly.
Page 315
September 11 - 12, 2007
Thursday night during the first budget hearing I made inklings to
the point in time that on this agenda -- this agenda today that we would
be coming back with a clarifying resolution to the 2002-227 item that
has to do with interest --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I don't mean to interrupt. I only got
three commissioners here. I don't feel comfortable with going forward.
Commissioner --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: She'll be right back.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Did Commissioner Halas indicate he
was going to be coming back?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: He's not coming back?
MS. FILSON: He didn't indicate.
MR. MUDD: He didn't indicate, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Why don't we advertise this in a
public hearing, therefore the public can weigh in on it?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, no, I know that. I'm just very
concerned about the fact of participation. We have one commissioner
still away from the dais. This is something that requires -- should
require all five commissioners here. I wished I knew if Commissioner
Halas was going to return. Possibly his aide might be able to tell us
that.
MS. FILSON: Commissioner Halas will be back at one o'clock,
but then I believe Commissioner Coyle will be out.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: There's no winning on this situation, is
there?
Go ahead. We'll take -- it is what it is.
MS. HUBBARD: Actually, it's a lot simpler than it may seem.
Back in 2002, Commissioners, this is -- I'm Jacqueline Hubbard,
assistant county attorney, and our office has put forth a clarifying
resolution, and there's a very simple reason for the need for the
clarifying resolution.
As you know, we have one pending matter remaining involving
Page 316
September 11 - 12, 2007
litigation with the Clerk of Courts, and that is the fee versus budget
officer dispute.
Back on August 24,2007, there was argument by counsel for the
county and counsel for the clerk on a motion for summary judgment
that had been filed by the county. At the conclusion of that hearing,
which went on for some hours, my recollection -- and I put this in a
motion -- was that counsel for the clerk stated, or made allegations, that
the county had approved the use of interest earned on surplused --
surplus county funds as revenue that could be used at will by the clerk.
In fact, the 2002 resolution of the Board of County
Commissioners pertaining to interest income required all money earned
except for investment-related cost under the policies of Florida Statutes
section 218.415 to be returned to the county.
In opposition to the clerk's position at that hearing that the board
authorized the clerk to use as revenue for his office, the interest earned
on surplus county funds, the following documents were filed with the
court:
First was a copy of a 2002 complaint that had been filed by the
Clerk of Courts in April of 2002. Also there was a discussion of that
lawsuit before the board on May 14,2002. And at that discussion, and
as verified by the verbatim minutes, the Clerk of Courts assured the
board that he would not use any of the money that was earned as
interest income on the county's surplus funds.
Secondly -- which means that the clerk's counsel in the litigation is
interpreting the resolution that you approved in 2002 contrary to the
discussion that was held by the board prior to the approval of that
resolution.
So what is before you today is simply a resolution that clarifies the
earlier resolution so that it is clear that your intention is as you stated it
at the time. That is the only thing that's before you today.
You're not reversing any resolution. You're not changing any
resolution. You're simply clarifying what you said in the verbatim
Page 317
September 11 - 12, 2007
minutes through this resolution so that there's no further discussion as to
what you meant when you passed it the first time.
And so this new resolution simply says -- and this is all very
pursuant to Florida law as we understand it. And let me -- let me cite
for you, if I could, quite succinctly, what that is.
The law in Florida is very clear that although the Board of County
Commissioners may instruct the clerk by resolution to invest the
surplus funds, ordinarily interest earned -- earned follows the principal.
Now, the law in Florida simply is that if the clerk is directed to
invest your surplus funds, unless you tell the clerk specifically by
resolution that the clerk may keep those funds, that is the interest
earned on your money, the clerk is not entitled to keep those funds.
And this has been the law for some time. It's not anything new.
In summary, you may -- what you have done, you have the
discretion to determine whether you will turn over to the clerk the
authority to invest your surplus money, that is money that is not
immediately needed to run the operations of the county, and it amounts
to literally millions of dollars.
Now, just by giving the clerk the authority to invest your surplus
money doesn't mean that you gave the clerk the authority to take the
interest earned and use it as he sees fit. That money that you allocated
to the clerk to invest and secure interest on remains county board funds.
So until you direct the clerk to use that money, the Clerk of Courts
has to return the interest earned back to the county for the county's use
as determined by the Board of County Commissioners.
Now, during the discussion of the earlier resolution, questions
were asked regarding this very fact, particularly by Commissioner
Fiala. The Clerk of Courts came over to see you and stood in front of
you and essentially said, I cannot touch any of this money yet you're in
a situation where the stance that's been taken in the remaining litigation
is directly opposite to what the clerk actually said when he appeared
before you.
Page 318
September 11 - 12, 2007
Now, the rationale for taking the opposite position now is, as I said
earlier, it is, the clerk is saying in the lawsuit that when you passed that
resolution, you intended to allow him to take the money earned on the
interest and use it as he sees fit.
Now, historically from 19 -- from 2002 until just recently, the
clerk has abided by the promise that he made to you in 2002. He has
taken your surplus money, he has vested it, he has returned to you at the
end of the year your own money, the interest earned on board and
county money, in a lump sum, and it comes out to millions and millions
of dollars every year.
But what needs to be made clear is that that was the understanding
of the transaction, as I read the minutes, when the resolution was passed
in 2002.
And so the new resolution is quite simple. It basically says that
the clerk has not been -- the clerk has been authorized to invest your
surplus money. It says he has not, however, been authorized to retain
the interest earned on that money. That interest earned remains county
money and subject to the discretionary spending power of the board.
You have the authority from the Florida statutory and
constitutional law, to determine by virtue of your discretion how county
money is to be spent. That money that is earned in interest remains
county money. I just wanted to make that clear, and that's what the
resolution says.
Also, Florida statutory law has set forth what items can be claimed
by the clerk as fees to his office, and they're set forth in chapter 28.
Interest earned on county surplus money is not a fee. And that's -- I
need to be as clear as I can about that; therefore, the interest -- the fifth
thing that the resolution says is that the interest collected by the Clerk
of Courts on behalf of the county for subsequent distribution back to
the county and invested prior to this distribution back must be credited
to the county along with the principal.
Now, this resolution is consistent with your investment policy
Page 319
September 11 - 12, 2007
which clearly says that money that is to be invested by the clerk will be
invested in the name of the county. And what has happened is, in terms
of your budgetary reporting methods, we have -- you have permitted --
which is fine, legally, to permit the clerk to state as a source of revenue
in his budget, the money -- the interest earned from investing the
county's money.
But consistent with his agreement in the past, that money is then,
at the end of the year, transferred back to the county for your use, not
the clerk's use, and there's no express resolution permitting the clerk to
seize $6 million of that money. It appears that it's about 5,200,000 that
has been claimed by the clerk.
And so, the resolution is important for a number of reasons. I
think it clarifies the position of the county, that the county's been quite
consistent in taking; and two, it removes this issue, because it's clear
from the record that's what you intended at the time the first resolution
was passed, at least that's what the language in the verbatim transcript
indicates.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. I have one -- no, two speakers.
Commissioner Henning, then Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm curious to why this is on the
county manager's side of the board's agenda and not the county
attorney's side of the board's agenda.
MS. HUBBARD: I honestly have no idea.
MR. MUDD: Because it's a budgetary item, sir, and that's how I
introduced this particular issue. I mentioned on Thursday that we have
a $10 million difference --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thanks. You answered my
question.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, it just smells like another
lawsuit.
MS. HUBBARD: Well, this is very interesting because the clerk
Page 320
September 11 - 12, 2007
-- okay, go ahead.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: This new lawsuit is for the clerk
-- or for the courts to clarify whether he's a budget officer or a fee
officer.
MS. HUBBARD: However, the clerk has interjected into that
lawsuit his 2008 budget request and he -- which our lawsuit initially
wanted to determine whether he was a fee officer or a budget officer up
through 2006.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You see, I think we already
determined that through the budget hearings when the county manager
said, ifhe wants to be a fee officer, let him be a fee officer, and we'll
just take that --
MS. HUBBARD: That's fine.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- 5.5 away.
MS. HUBBARD: That's fine. I--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Which it sounds like an
equivalent -- it's equivalent to what is -- what you feel that is not turned
back.
MS. HUBBARD: No. The only difference that I think we have,
which I'd like to make clear in could, is that if you are a fee officer,
our interpretation of Florida law is that you must run your office from
your fees.
Now, historically the Clerk of Courts has run his office on about
67 percent of budget transfers from you, from the county. He hasn't run
his office strictly based upon the fees that he collects. So we've treated
him historically as a budget officer. We've appropriated money for the
clerk, the clerk has used the money, and what have you.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I understand that. I understand
where the county is on that. I really do.
MS. HUBBARD: Right. And then going forward--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The resolution -- the resolution
that we passed two years ago --
Page 321
September 11 - 12, 2007
MS. HUBBARD: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- what is it, 28.32 or something
like that?
MS. HUBBARD: 33,28.33.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: What is your interpretation of
what that statute says?
MS. HUBBARD: Okay. My -- mine or the office? Well, I guess
we're the same, one in the same. But my interpretation is this: That
28.33 permits the Board of Commissioners to allow the Clerk of Courts
to invest surplus county money, and it also says that that investment
must be pursuant to another statutory provision which provides that
county investments will be subject to, among other things, certain costs
of investing.
Now, that statute does not go so far as to say that the Clerk of
Courts may then use the interest that's earned on the money that the
board has allowed him to invest. It doesn't go that far. And in fact, the
statutory interpretation of both the courts and the Attorney General's
Office clearly say that that money remains money of the county and
that the clerk may keep that money only as directed by the Board of
County Commissioners.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I've seen other AGOs that
says just the opposite. Is there anything in statute 28 that says the clerk
may keep those interest (sic) to run his office?
MS. HUBBARD: No. There is nothing in 28.33 that says --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Is there anything in section 28 of
the statutes that says that the clerk can keep those interest monies to run
his office?
MS. HUBBARD: No. 28.33 merely provides for the booking of
the interest.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, all of 28.
MS. HUBBARD: All of28? Not to my knowledge, no, but 28
does set forth what fees are permitted by the clerk as Clerk to the
Page 322
September 11 - 12,2007
Board, and this is not one of them.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Interesting.
MS. HUBBARD: It is interesting, because--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So being that the board, through
the resolution, took away operations of the clerk as Clerk of the Board
that -- I think 5.5, and now it appears that we're going to try to take
away this interest. I think what we're telling the public is, we want to
limit the clerk in what he can do because we're not giving him the funds
to do it.
MS. HUBBARD: Well, you can give the clerk the funds to do it.
That's a choice that you can make. The problem is that if you give the --
if you give the funds to the clerk to operate his office, he becomes a
budget officer, something he doesn't want to do.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Well, let me restate that.
I know the statute says those are his interest monies for operating his
office.
MS. HUBBARD: No. Well, okay. I guess we just differ.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. And I know there's -- I
know that there is a correspondence from then Chairman Barbara
Berry, we wish the clerk to provide his budget ahead of time, in which
he does and continues to do. To me -- and I think the general public
will look as -- this is a way for the clerk not to do certain provisions that
he must do.
MS. HUBBARD: Well, that is not -- okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And there's certain people that
want to control what he does and does not do.
MS. HUBBARD: Well, I'm not privy to any of that, and I
certainly don't make policy for the board. I simply litigate the issues
and take them as they are presented to me. I can tell you that as early
as 1995 an opinion was given by Carlton Fields, I believe, it was --
MR. WEIGEL: Correct.
MS. HUBBARD: -- to the county, which is almost identical to the
Page 323
September 11 - 12, 2007
position we're taking in court today, and that is that interest earned on
investments by the clerk of nonsurplus funds may be retained as
income of the office of the clerk. The clerk must follow the resolution
-- in order for it to be as income of the clerk, the clerk must follow the
resolution of the board with regards to surplus funds.
It is within the discretion of the board to, by resolution, direct that
surplus funds be invested and the interest, therein, be credited to the
clerk's office. But the clerk may not, without resolution of the board,
keep the interest of surplus funds as income to the clerk's office. This is
simply the law that it's -- it's been the law since 1975. I can cite to you
two AGO opinions, which is AGO 075-241 and AGO 075-241A, and
I'll just read the last paragraph of this opinion which says --
MR. WEIGEL: Jackie, I've got it right here if you want it.
MS. HUBBARD: I have it right here.
MR. WEIGEL: Okay.
MS. HUBBARD: And I'm happy to give these to you. But here's
what the AGO said in 1975, and I just read to you what Carlton Fields
said in 1995. In sum -- this is what the attorney general said. In sum, the
Circuit Court clerk is entitled to retain as income of his office the
earnings on investments of his own funds. And bear in mind, the clerk
collects non-court related recording fees which are considered his own
income. As -- those fees are the clerk's fees as recorded to the board.
Those are not, you know, ad valorem tax money or general fund
money, such as fees and commissions, so -- and the investments of
surplus county funds when specifically authorized by resolution of the
Board of County Commissioners to invest such funds and to credit the
interest thereon as income of his office. That has not occurred.
However, the county commission may, by resolution, direct the
Circuit Court clerk to invest surplus county funds in designated
investments and to credit the interest thereon to a particular fund of the
county, which you have done.
And the interest on public money collected by the Circuit Court
Page 324
September 11 - 12, 2007
clerk on behalf of the county for subsequent distribution thereto and
invest it prior to the distribution must be credited to the county along
with the principal. I mean, that's just what the law is.
Now, what happened -- in may for a moment. In 2002 you were
sued by the clerk. The clerk filed a lawsuit against the county in 2002,
and in that lawsuit he made the same allegation, that he would
essentially be entitled to the interest earned on the account.
The board, after about two or three meetings, voted to approve the
resolution in 2002, and there was discussion. And we believe that any
true reading of that resolution is that the clerk may invest the county's
money, earn interest on that money, but return the interest to the board.
This resolution today merely clarifies that issue and takes it out of the
litigation.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Before we go any farther, we're
going to take a five-minute break. It's been way past that hour and a
half that we agreed to some time ago for the court report. So we're
going to take a five-minute break. Please come back.
(A brief recess was had.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We're going to go to Commissioner
Coyle, then we'll come back to you, Commissioner Henning.
Commissioner Coyle, you're on.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. I would just like to remind
the commissioners that we're not here to debate a legal issue. We're not
here to debate Florida Statutes. We're here merely to determine what
our intent was when we passed a resolution in 2002. That's the only
thing that we should be discussing.
The record is very, very clear, and I would like to say to you that
this issue came up because the clerk wanted to launder the money. He
wanted to take the interest that was earned from investing excess
property taxes, impact fees of all kinds, and keep that interest from
going back to those funds. He wanted that interest to go into the general
fund where he alleged, correctly, that the county commissioners would
Page 325
September 11 - 12, 2007
have more flexibility with how we allocated it, and that is all true. So
the people who have paid millions and millions of dollars in impact
fees and other revenue paid by our taxpayers do not get the benefit of
that interest.
I think it's unfair. I'm amazed that there hasn't been a lawsuit filed
by somebody to recover that, but in any event.
With respect to that, the clerk said very clearly on page 254 of our
minutes of May the 14th, 2002, and when you go through the entire
process of what we're doing, the Clerk of the Circuit Court will not get
one, I mean not one penny of the interest that we're referring to. Every
penny of that will come back to you with much more or much greater
discretion as to how to spend it when you had -- than you have had in
the past.
And Commissioner Henning asked, for the record, your name, sir?
And the person who said that responds, my name is Dwight Brock,
Clerk of Circuit Court.
There is no question about what was intended. We said that in our
resolution. We've been saying it all along. The clerk has been
conducting himself that way for years and this year has decided that
he's just going to grab on to $5 million and do whatever he wants to
with it.
Now I would say to you that any other governmental agency that
tried to do that would be faced by a lawsuit by the Clerk of Courts.
We have been told repeatedly that the Board of County
Commissioners cannot let people take money and spend it as they wish
unless the Board of County Commissioners has ruled that it is a legal
expenditure for a valid public purpose.
So this is a fiduciary responsibility of the Board of County
Commissioners. It's not a battle between the clerk. If the clerk needs
money to offset his investment expenses, absolutely. Let's approve it
for him so it is a legal expenditure for a valid public purpose, but that's
not happening here. He's not coming to us to get that approval that he
Page 326
September 11 - 12,2007
demands for every other governmental agency here. He demands it of
us in everything we do, and we have to do it for him also, and I'm
amazed that he wants to circumvent that process.
So it's clear from the record. I make a motion we approve this
clarification of the resolution. There is no ambiguity here. Everybody
knows what's going on. And I would like to think that as soon as
possible we'll get back to the point of withdrawing this entire resolution
because I think it's unfair to the taxpayers and it's also unfair to the
people who have paid money into the funds that are being invested and
not getting the benefit of the interest.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: It just has been reported by the Naples
Daily News that Mike Davis has passed on, our representative, state
representative.
With that let's just have a moment of silence.
Thank you. There will never be a man to be able to fill his shoes,
that's for sure. Terrible loss.
Sorry to interrupt you with something of such magnitude.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's okay. That's much more
important.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: There's a motion on the floor.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. There is a motion on the
floor.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: There's a motion on the floor.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I second the motion.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I would like to say that our
condolences go out to his family. His son Christian helped me on my
campaign several years ago. He was a lot of help to us.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We have a motion by Commissioner
Coyle and a second by Commissioner Fiala.
I just got to add just my two cents to this. And you eloquently
presented it. I was here in 2002, and I can tell you without any
reservations that I understood exactly what the clerk was going to do
Page 327
September 11 - 12,2007
and what he was supposed to do, and I never would have agreed to go
forward with the investment money if the clerk had said that I can use
this money for my own purpose. He never said that.
And with that, we're going to go to Commissioner Fiala, and then
Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And I remember that day very
clearly, I was very concerned because we'd had at the time very grave
concerns about the condition of our road system and how far behind we
were financially. And we were thinking that interest needed to go there
so we could continue to build roads, and I mentioned that concern.
And that's -- I think Dwight came down then and assured us that
I'm not going to take your money. That's going to stay there with you,
and that's what swung my vote actually is knowing that we wouldn't
lose that money, although it was going into the general fund. I didn't
even like that too, too much. I wanted it to stay with the parks, with the
libraries, because that's the stuff that's going to finance the employees
who work in our libraries.
But anyway -- but as long as it went to the general fund and we
could use it for such, then they had my vote. So I remember that very
clearly myself.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I guess we approve all the
constitutional budgets and there shall be line items. That's what you're
referring to, Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No. Commissioner Henning, I'm
not going to get into a discussion of what we do with others. I am
discussing this particular resolution. There are different categories of
funds. And to the extent that a constitutional officer assesses fees or is
otherwise allowed by law to keep fees, then they do that. This is a very
new and sudden change in tactics by the Clerk of Courts, and we must
get it clarified. And our intent was very clear in 2002 and it is very
clear today.
Page 328
September 11 - 12, 2007
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I just find it ironic that
we're talking about the same amount of money that was previously
budgeted for him as a Clerk of the Board. And I just don't -- I don't
think this clarification resolution is really working for the public. It's all
about money and power, and that isn't why I am here.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, I would disagree. It's all about
fiduciary responsibility. We are required under law to certify that funds
are being spent legally and for a valid public purpose. We cannot
certify those funds for that purpose if it is not presented to us for
approval.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. I might add something that you
said earlier. When it comes to the Clerk of Court and the duties of his
office, we'll do the funds for him. We'll make sure --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Absolutely, absolutely.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: -- that it's there. It's not a question of,
we want to see the clerk's job go away. We know it's a very important
function, and it has to be financed in a meaningful way; however, the
issue of whether -- a fee officer or budget officer has to be resolved.
In the meantime, we have our responsibility to be caretakers of the
taxpayers' funds.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, it's clear by law that we're
supposed to do that. We should not relax those standards for anyone.
And I would even go a bit further and say that I would be happy to vote
for some funds for specific audits. If the clerk has concerns about the
expenditure of funds and he brings those concerns to us, I have
absolutely no hesitation in authorizing --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- the funding for those kinds of
audits.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Absolutely.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And we provide the opportunity in
our agenda package here for any constitutional officer to come in to this
Page 329
September 11 - 12, 2007
commission any meeting and inform us of any problems or concerns
they have. And I'd be pleased to have the clerk do that rather than
finding out about it through a court order that he's attempting to file.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, I think we've vetted this subject
long --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I think so.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: -- enough. If there is no other
comments, we're going to call for the question.
All those in favor of the resolution as --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Clarification of the resolution.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: -- clarification of the resolution, as
motion maker Commissioner Coyle made and I -- and Commissioner
Fiala seconded, indicate at this time by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: (Absent.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Let the record show that the vote was
3-1. Commissioner Halas was absent and Commissioner Henning was
in opposition. Thank you.
MS. HUBBARD: Thank you, Commissioners.
Item #lOM
RECOMMENDATION TO WAIVE FORMAL COMPETITION
AND TO APPROVE A CONTRACT WITH WHITEW A TER
WEST INDUSTRIES FOR SUPPLY AND INSTALLATION OF
THE 5TH SLIDE AT SUN-N-FUN LAGOON IN THE AMOUNT
OF $180,000 - APPROVED
Page 330
September 11 - 12, 2007
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, next item is 10M, and that's a
recommendation to waive formal competition and approve a contract
with Whitewater West Industries to supply and install -- for the supply
and installation of the fifth slide at the Sun-n-Fun Lagoon in the amount
of$180,000.
Mr. Barry Williams, your director of parks and rec., will present.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Let me just jump right in here. I was
the one that pulled it. I had a call from a constituent who wanted to be
here and comment on it, and he actually -- and I'll say why he wanted
to do that. He felt that the money should, right now in our tight budget
times, should go to our services for seniors or some other outreach
program that the county has instead.
He isn't here, nor does he have a representative here, so that's --
you don't even have to bother to go into the explanation.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Do we hear a motion?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Motion to approve.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We have a motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And a second by Commissioner Fiala.
Motion was made by Commissioner Coyle.
Any discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Hearing none, all those in favor,
indicate by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: (Absent.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Let the record show the vote
was 3-1, with Commissioner Halas absent, Commissioner Henning in
Page 331
September 11 - 12,2007
opposition.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: We should have discussed it?
Item #l1A
MR. KENNETH THOMPSON - REGARDING GARBAGE ISSUES
AND NEIGHBORHOOD CONCERNS
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. We're under the public
comments.
MS. FILSON: Mr. Chairman, I have two speakers registered for
public comment. The first is Kenneth Thompson. He'll be followed by
Bob Krasowski.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Mr. Thompson, state your
name for the record, and you have three minutes for your presentation.
MR. THOMPSON: I ought to get 10. I waited all day. My name
is Kenneth Thompson, and I live at 2031 Becca Avenue. And you
know, when Mr. Halas put this thing in for the garage, I didn't hear
nobody state that them dumpsters had to be 280 feet from somebody's
house.
And I'm telling you, this guy coming out there at four o'clock in
the morning, five o'clock in the morning, and now he's got a new thing
going. He comes out there at five o'clock and dumps till six and then
leaves, and then comes back at 10. I don't understand what kind of--
the whole situation needs to be straightened out. I'm going to tell you
right now, I want it stopped because I'm not in too good a shape.
These doctors are trying to put a morphine pump inside of me
because the pain has got so bad I can't stand it anymore. But you got --
them pictures I give Mr. Mudd there, it belongs to 2815 Becca Avenue.
I've done everything in my power to make this man cut that hedge.
And any Eddie trained to Tom Keagan to come out there, and I think
Tom Keagan is a good fellow. But every time he told me to put it on
Page 332
September 11 - 12,2007
paper, and they would get it taken care of. I put it on paper. Nobody
comes around. Nobody does nothing. All they do is, when I put it on
paper, Tom Keagan comes up and takes a picture of me under my
house number.
So I've got a couple of people telling me all about it, you know,
how I'm turning them in. Well, you should have thought about that
back in the '90s when you were doing me in. So what's good for me is
good for you.
Then you got EMS. It would be a blessing if somebody would
take EMS off of the road and make house calls with doctors, because
EMS is a dangerous thing. The fire department is even worse. They
come to my house whipping them sirens, acting stupid, and last
Saturday or Saturday before last, they come whipping them sirens, the
fire department, went over on Davis Boulevard and started collecting
money. Two minutes later, here comes EMS whipping the sirens and
goes to Home Depot selling T-shirts. Now, this is the truth. So it's --
somebody needs to stop this thing.
I've talked to Jeff about it, but you get nowhere. You get nowhere.
But I told Jefn was going to sue EMS, but I wouldn't sue nobody. I
have no reason to sue nobody.
But somebody needs to take care of this. These are the pictures
that -- where this man will not cut that hedge, he won't do nothing, and
you should see the one on down farther of --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yeah. Mr. Thompson, your time's up,
but we definitely take what you said seriously, and the county manager
will direct the appropriate staff to look into it and we'll report -- have
him report back to you.
MR. THOMPSON: Well, EMS needs to be stopped, and I'm -- I
ain't too hot --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, we thank you for being here
today.
MS. FILSON: Your next speaker is Bob Krasowski.
Page 333
September 11 - 12, 2007
Item #l1B
MR. BOB KRASOWSKI - AL TERNA TIVE ENERGY SOURCES
AND DISCUSSED VETERAN ISSUES/CONCERNS
MR. KRASOWSKI: Good afternoon, Commissioners. I was very
impressed with Mr. Brown's comments yesterday about solar, use of a
solar manager, and thrilled to see that you have such an interest in it,
Commissioner Coletta.
So what I'm going to do is submit an application to make a
presentation at the next county commission meeting with Mr. Mudd
and address those issues.
There's much been going on in relation to climate change, global
warming, to whatever extent you want to believe in that stuff or think
that it will have an impact on us. The Century Commission of Florida,
state-level organization, has been addressing these issues. The Energy
Commission itself, an advisory group to the legislature, has been
addressing all of these issues, and the governor's action team, which
Senator Saunders, right across the hall here, has been involved in.
So it's good to see that, you know, the local government, that
you're getting involved now. You know, this stuffs been going on
since the '70s, but more recently over the past couple of years, and it's
good to see that you're taking an interest now.
We do have building codes, and that's what he was referring to.
And the local building codes, of course, you know, do sync up to the
statewide building codes, and all these organizations are looking to
have an impact on that.
I, as a member of the Florida Alliance for Clean Environment,
which we're a DBA, doing business as, an extension of the Zero Waste
Collier County Group? Remember us? We're the ones that provided
leadership for the county, new county manager, new public utilities
Page 334
September 11 - 12,2007
director, in our Zero Waste efforts and the county -- bringing
information to the county, and the -- you know, our school recycling
program, our participation in the development of non-residential
recycling ordinance and many other efforts we've made.
We also would like to contribute to your effort at understanding
these issues, Mr. Chairman. We're very much impressed that you want
to learn about this.
So be talking to you next week about that in more detail two
weeks from now.
Also, I have a little bit of time. Some of Commissioner Coyle's
comments -- as a vet, as a former medic, very safely in Japan, serving
Japan in '67, am very much aware of the difficulty that some vets have
when they come out of the service securing work or housing location,
especially individuals.
You know, there's a whole lot of homeless vets, and it's not by
choice. It's just that I learned that in the past there used to be an
infrastructure of boarding houses and apartments available to people,
and this was part -- just part of the regular culture when individual men
find themselves living alone; whereas, now that's not available to them.
So it's -- it pushes them into the street.
So I think it would be great if -- within the housing realm and in
the work realm, too -- I'm very much interested in organizations that
take exiting medics and put them into the hospital industry, in the
medical industry, you know. I think it's a good thing we should do for
these people.
And so I'm looking forward to further conversations on that. See
you later. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you.
MS. FILSON: That's your final speaker, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Mr. Mudd?
Item #15
Page 335
September 11 - 12, 2007
STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS
MR. MUDD: Okay. Commissioners, you probably read about it
in the paper. Mr. Pulling came to see us on Monday. Now, there was
one thing that wasn't quite true about that meeting. I wasn't there. I
was with you at your one on one.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: That's right, you were.
MR. MUDD: Even though the paper -- you know, you can't
believe the paper says everything that's true because I can't be in two
places at one time.
But Mr. Ochs did have a meeting with Mr. Pulling at around nine
o'clock on Monday morning. And he basically said that he is interested
in forming a partnership, so to speak, with the Board of County
Commissioners whereby he would give the property to us if we build a
Caxambas Pass-type boat launch on that seven acres.
It was very preliminary, the discussion. There's nothing final.
What I'm asking the board for is permission to continue those
discussions to try to put some meat on the bones of this particular
proposal so that we can come back to you and let you know exactly
what it is and what it's not.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I think you're getting enough nods,
four nods.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Hearty nods.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I mean, I have some other
ideas, but I'm not sure if Mr. Pulling is amenable to that. So I mean, I
would like to talk to him. And I think there's other ways to do it with --
to get it done quicker. You know, I'm just concerned about installing a
boat ramp and the permitting process to do so, but I'll give him a call.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. Just to let you know that conversation did
transpire, laid out an idea, and we would just like to be able to flesh that
Page 336
September 11 - 12,2007
idea out some more, and I need your permission in order to do so.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Just a point. I'm a little bit concerned.
We're going to have the County Manager's Office talking to him to
flesh out the ideas. If we have you out there as a free agent, I kind of
wonder if that's not going to send the wrong message.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, that is not. The board is not
directing me as a member of the board. I just -- I mean, I have a right to
meet with anybody, and I'm going to talk to Mr. Pulling and make some
suggestions and see ifhe likes it or not. Ifhe doesn't like it, fine. Ifhe
does like it, I'm sure he'll tell Mr. Ochs what he likes and doesn't like.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Fair enough, Commissioner Henning.
I know that you're very involved in the boating community.
What else, Mr. Mudd?
MR. MUDD: The -- while you were gone over the summer a
mayor in Florida, Mayor Hersh basically filed a lawsuit against the
state that basically talks about the property tax reform, and I just
wanted to make sure that you are aware of that particular lawsuit that's
been filed.
Mr. Weigel might be able to put more details to it, but there has
been a -- there has been a lawsuit that's been filed from a city manager
-- or city mayor that basically says that the tax proposal, the law that
was done, plus the Constitutional amendment that's going to be voted
on in January, he believes it's unlawful.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Mr. Weigel, would you please send
any information you have directly to all commissioners so we can share
it with one and all?
MR. WEIGEL: I will. You should have one in your in-baskets
even right now regarding that. Pasco County has been looking at but
determined ultimately not to intervene. The Florida Association of
Counties is looking at it. The Florida Association of Counties and
county attorneys may get involved at the appellate process but thus far
have not become involved at the trial process. A hearing is coming up
Page 337
September 11 - 12, 2007
in about two weeks on that.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you. Anything else?
MR. MUDD: That's all I have, sir.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Anything from the county attorney?
MR. WEIGEL: Just to say that the longer one knows Mike Davis,
the more one is blessed, and his work in the community and for the
state has certainly touched so many people in a wonderful way, and I'm
sorry to hear the news. That's all. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Henning, any
comments? Anything you want to share with us?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I was under the
understanding that the county manager was going to bring up some
other stuff about the winter wine festival group.
MR. MUDD: I can, if --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I mean, that's what I was under
the understanding, meeting with Dudley Goodlette and Councilman
Sorey. Was that -- your understanding different?
MR. MUDD: My understanding was different, that they were
going to meet with you and ascertain, at least describe --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, let me --let me bring this
up, because they're going to be asking the Board of Commissioners to
put something -- as far as a referendum. That document that everybody
had, I shared it with some soccer moms, and they're a little bit
concerned about the information in there. Mr. Goodlette and
Councilman Sorey has no problem with our Productivity Committee to
take a look at that and give the board recommendations about that
document.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Of course, Commissioner Fiala.
Please go ahead.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I, too, had great concerns. I studied
that for over eight hours in the comfort of my home up in Ohio.
I brought that to the attention of Dudley and John when they were
Page 338
September 11 - 12, 2007
in my office this week, and they weren't aware of it. And it -- and just
to gloss over and tell you, they used that 30,000 units short as a -- as a
base, which meant that there are 30,000 families that weren't accounted
for as far as children goes because they're not considered having any
housing.
We know that they do. We've determined that all of Golden Gate
City, 90 percent ofImmokalee, and a huge amount of East Naples all
were not in the count, but they all have children. And so this makes
that report -- I think there's so much more that goes into the report about
the needs for our children in the community.
I also suggested to them two other things; maybe they could study
some type of a scholarship type of a fund to fund children to go to day
care centers.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. You've taken enough of
my time.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. Sorry.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: All I'm asking is for the board to
ask the Productivity Committee, study the document, report to the
board.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Good. I think that's great.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Do you have a problem with
that?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: No problem at all. Of course, the
Productivity Committee could reduce, but I doubt that they will.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Oh, yeah. You're absolutely
correct.
The next thing is, I notice on the agenda, the summary agenda,
that the PUD extension reso's required for supermajority. I could be
wrong, but what I see in our Land Development Code, a supermajority
vote requires on a rezone a conditional use or PUD.
And then, naturally, it's silent on the PUD extension and also is
silent on variance and parking extension. It only takes a simple
Page 339
September 11 - 12, 2007
majority.
Since this is the first reso. with a supermajority on a PUD
extension, I would like to find out in the future, not right now, of why
these are supermajority and not the others.
The other thing is, I would hope the board, through the chairman,
would send a letter to the 9/11 group thanking them for the wonderful
servIce.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Sure.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I thought it was absolutely --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: It was remarkable.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- great. I have a concern. One
of the items that we had yesterday was, in the resolution -- it was
actually the parking extension -- it puts restrictions on it that the county
needs to enforce. I'm concerned, with all the resolutions and ordinances
out there that we're giving too much to the county manager to manage,
and I just hope that that could change in the future, because with those
delegations of -- well, diligently managing the board's resolutions and
ordinances, it becomes a fee to manage all that stuff, and that's going to
be difficult in the future to do so. You know what I mean?
I mean, like you brought up the example on the parking extension
into that lot, well, what about if the landscaping is not correct? Well,
the petitioner said the code enforcement would do that, and it's just like
those employees parking, and just the regular ordinance that is -- and
resolutions that we passed. We've got to be aware that the law says the
county manager shall diligently enforce, and I'm just concerned about
having enough staff to do all that stuff. That's all.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Very good concerns. Anything else?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, that's it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I have three items. First item, county
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I'm sorry. Commissioner Henning
used your time.
Page 340
September 11 - 12, 2007
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: No, go ahead.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, I used part of it on
Commissioner Henning's time.
Okay. First one is about the county vehicle. I've -- I guess there's
a policy -- I don't know if there's a real policy or not, but our county
vehicle that we can share -- just recently Commissioner Halas, I believe
it was, was going to use the county vehicle, and he was going to take
his wife up with him.
Well, apparently because he's going to take his wife up there,
some concern that she might drive the car or that she might use the car
while he's in meetings. And so now he's going to have to spend a lot of
extra money to get up there so that he doesn't use the car, and I thought,
we ought to probably address that.
I mean, I think that we're all adult enough, if our spouse is going
to use the car while we're in meetings, we can pay the gasoline for it or
something, I mean, we -- anyway, I just think that that is something that
we need to address at some point in time. If you're going up and you're
taking Maryann, you should be allowed to do that.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, at first when we found out what
the rules were as far as using it -- because these trips are very
troublesome for me. I hate to make them alone. They're an
inconvenience to me to leave home. I don't necessarily like going to
Tallahassee. In fact, I don't like going to Tallahassee.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Right.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I do it because it's part of my job
description. If my wife can accompany me, it has a tendency to lessen
the pain of what it's all about, we have some quality time riding up.
What we've been doing is using our own personal time and then
just billing the county back for the miles that are used, and we book --
we take the miles directly from here to Tallahassee and Tallahassee
back.
So if along the way my wife decides she wants to do some
Page 341
September 11 - 12,2007
shopping or if we want to take a side trip coming back to go someplace
for dinner out of the way, the county doesn't pay the bill. They just pay
for the actual mileage that's there. And I know what you're saying
about the county car. It's just --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: He's taking your time.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: No. I'm just making some
observations myself.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, I think it's something--
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I don't know how you get around it
without opening up a real liability issue, because you would have to
make the same exception for every county employee.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, I don't know. Maybe we could
just talk to somebody about it. I don't know if that's the case or not.
David just shook his head yes.
Just say, for instance, you've worked all day long and then you
have to drive up for a meeting the next morning, and that's a long drive
anyway, so you need Maryann to help you drive. Maybe there's some
kind -- I think it's something that we should address.
But I know I have a really old car. I don't know how often it could
make that trip. And if I would want to take my husband along, it would
be great. That's my first thing, let's have the county attorney take a
look at it.
The second thing, we've talked about -- and I've gotten wind of
this. Committees, we have alternates on a lot of our committees, but I
was asked, what is my opinion about an alternate on a committee?
Should they be attending all of the meetings or do they only have to go
to a meeting if somebody is absent?
And then I understood that they never get an agenda of any of the
subjects that are being discussed at these committees. And I thought I'd
throw it out to the other commissioners just to think about. I personally
have always thought that if I was an alternate or I put an alternate on a
committee that they would attend all the meetings. In case somebody
Page 342
September 11 - 12,2007
no shows, they're right there, and they're familiar with what's going on.
But apparently -- and if they don't get an agenda or anything, then how
do they even know what's going to be on the subject?
MS. FILSON: And then I'll wait till you're finished, but then if
you could just let me add something.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
MS. FILSON: Are you finished?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, well. I've said what I have to
say.
MS. FILSON: Okay. And I believe Commissioner Fiala's
referring to the EDC, and they've actually put that in the LDC, so it's in
the Land Development Code.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So do we send them an agenda, the
alternates, and do we encourage them to go too?
MS. FILSON: No, sir. I mean no, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
MS. FILSON: The EDC -- I'm not sure about the other alternates
serving on other committees, but I know the EDC has written it into the
LDC that they only want them at the meetings and they only send them
the agenda for the meetings when the regular members are absent.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I'd like to see that changed, for one.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, me too.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. I'm not familiar with EDC
alternate. On what?
MS. FILSON: I'm sorry. It's the Environmental Advisory
Council.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: EAC?
MS. FILSON: I'm sorry, EAC. I apologize.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Oh, okay. So they don't get any
information?
MS. FILSON: Yes.
Page 343
September 11 - 12, 2007
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The alternate.
MS. FILSON: It was brought to my attention because they
currently have an alternate member who would like to apply to be a
regular member. And he said he's only served a couple of meetings,
and I said, well, that might be a factor when the board goes to appoint
you as a regular member if you haven't been attending. And he said,
well, it was written that they only attend when the regular members are
out. So I have a copy of that section of the LDC, and that is the way it's
written. And I can provide that to you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So maybe we should talk about that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, let's talk about that.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: At a public meeting. But can we do
that at another time also?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Sure.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We can do anything you want.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, thank you. Well, then.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I thought you said you had three items.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, yes, the third one, and that's
Port Au Prince. You probably have read about it in the paper. I'm just
asking to -- for your approval to ask our county attorney to finally find
out who owns those canals.
I've seen pictures of them and -- well, Jeff could you get up and
explain just a little bit about this? Jeffhas worked closely with it, but
he can't move any further without our approval.
MR. KLATZKOW: Yeah, this comes from a public petition some
time ago. I believe Don Smith was his name. And the board asked
County Attorney's Office and staff to work with Mr. Smith and the
community to see if we can't help them with their water hyacinth
problem.
Initially the idea was to provide dumpsters where the community
can come together and remove them. That turned out not to be feasible
for various reasons. And the more I talked to Mr. Smith and staff and
Page 344
September 11 - 12,2007
everybody else, the odder the ownership issue became.
I've done some preliminary research, and I understand that there
are 160 lots there. It looks like it very well may be that the county
owns those waterways.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I thought you'd be interested in that.
MR. KLATZKOW: And -- but before we proceed and give you a
definitive opinion on that, we'd like board direction to actually spend
time on this. I may need Mr. Mudd's staff to help us on this. Again,
there are 160 parcels.
What happened was, the developer put together a very poor
development. The county was asked to create an MSTU for the roads.
When they started putting in the work, they realized that all the surveys
were wrong. So what happened was, the county put all the deeds from
the 160 lots into a deed trust, put together a plat that wasn't done right,
and then when it was done, the county then deeded it back to the
property owners, but I'm not entirely sure we deeded back to them the
canals, which they originally had. I don't think that was the intent.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Property appraiser.
MR. KLATZKOW: But I think that might have been the
unintended consequence of what the county did. And if that's the case,
we may own those waterways. Understanding that way back when,
you could actually go from those waterways all the way out to the Gulf.
There was a navigable canal along 951. That has long since gone.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: It's almost Christmas. Can we give it
to them as a gift?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: It's been closed off. And not only
that, but what kept the waterways clean was the saltwater coming into it
and kept the water hyacinths out. The state blocked that off so that
that's then allowed the water hyacinths to flourish. And then on the
property appraiser's map, you can see this their properties end right at
the beginning of the canal rather than into the middle of the canal, so --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. I think we ought to give
Page 345
September 11 - 12,2007
them direction and look at --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- that and see if we own it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We can't leave that hanging out there.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I knew you'd get a kick out of it.
Wow. Thank you very much, Commissioners.
(Commissioner Halas entered the board room.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay, thank you. And I'm last, but not
least.
I just wanted to mention that Mr. Gene Schmidt from the Airport
Authority has just recently retired, finished his last meeting, and he's
served the county very well, not only as a board member, but for a short
time as the manager, and I didn't want to let this meeting pass without
recognizing that.
And also, too, while you were gone, we found out Mike Davis
passed away.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Wow. Sorry to hear that.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We all are. I'm not -- the other items
are of no real importance. I'm not going to go into that.
Commissioner Halas, did you have any final comments before we
leave?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'm sorry I had to leave, but I made
an appointment with the juvenile justice, that's why I wasn't -- couldn't
make it here for -- to finish up with the -- what was going on here this
morning, so I hope that everything went accordingly, so --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Oh, well, without your guidance, we
almost lost it a couple times. But if we could, I'm not too sure what our
schedule is. Maybe the county manager might be able to keep us
abreast of what we can expect in the future. I don't know if -- tight
schedules where we're going to run over to Wednesdays so we can
adjust our schedule accordingly, because sometimes heavy issues corne
Page 346
September 11 - 12,2007
up and --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I have a solution to that.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I know, I don't like the solution.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Put a timer on the Board of
Commissioners, individuals.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Put a what?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's a good idea. I'll bring a
kitchen timer.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I think there's some issues that we
need to put on the consent agenda, because I can see that our agendas
are getting larger and larger to the point where they're almost taking
two days. And I know that a lot of us have other commitments on the
outside. So I think that might be something we might want to look at
down the future to see if -- what we can do to try to downsize our
agenda.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You know, I agree. I was thinking
about that myself, and I thought, maybe if we all had our aides just
clear Wednesdays after a board meeting, at least -- at least the morning
and just don't plan for anything --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: One o'clock.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- then all of a sudden it might be a
gift to us, you know, like extra time.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I think that's a wonderful idea.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. That probably concludes
everything. Do you want to say good night?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I think the meeting should be
adjourned, sir.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you. I'll take your advice.
We're adjourned.
Page 347
September 11 - 12, 2007
****Commissioner Halas moved, seconded by Commissioner Coyle
and carried unanimously, that the following items under the
Consent and Summary Agendas be approved and/or adopted ****
Item #16Al
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE WATER AND SEWER UTILITY
FACILITIES FOR PARK CENTRAL NORTH
Item #16A2
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE WATER AND SEWER UTILITY
FACILITIES FOR SATURNIA LAKES, PHASE 2
Item # 16A3
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE WATER AND SEWER UTILITY
FACILITIES FOR SATURNIA LAKES, PHASE IB
Item #16A4
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE WATER AND SEWER UTILITY
FACILITY FOR SA TURNIA LAKES, PHASE 3
Item # 16A5
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE WATER AND SEWER UTILITY
FACILITIES FOR ADDISON RESERVE
Item # 16A6
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE WATER AND SEWER UTILITY
Page 348
September 11 - 12, 2007
FACILITIES FOR SATURNIA LAKES, PHASE lA
Item #16A7
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE WATER AND SEWER UTILITY
FACILITIES FOR OAKRIDGE MIDDLE SCHOOL
Item # 16A8
RESOLUTION 2007-222: ROADWAY (PRIVATE) AND
DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE FINAL PLAT OF
WILSHIRE LAKES, PHASE TWO, THE ROADWAY AND
DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS WILL BE PRIV A TEL Y
MAINTAINED
Item #16A9
RESOLUTION 2007-223: ROADWAY (PRIVATE) AND
DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE FINAL PLAT OF
CHARLEE ESTATES. THE ROADWAY AND DRAINAGE
IMPROVEMENTS WILL BE PRIV A TEL Y MAINTAINED
Item #16AI0
RESOLUTION 2007-224: ROADWAY (PRIVATE) AND
DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE FINAL PLAT OF
CHARLEE ESTATES PHASE TWO. THE ROADWAY AND
DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS WILL BE PRIVATELY
MAINTAINED
Item #16All
Page 349
September 11 - 12, 2007
RECORDING THE FINAL PLAT OF TRACTS S-l AND S-2,
VINEYARDS UNIT 3, REPLAT
Item #16A12
RELEASE AND SATISFACTION OF LIEN FOR PAYMENTS
RECEIVED FOR THE FOLLOWING CODE ENFORCEMENT
ACTIONS
Item # l6A 13
AWARDED BID #06-4013 BACKGROUND CHECK ANNUAL
CONTRACT TO STERLING TESTING SYSTEMS, INC. AND
AD- VANCE SCREENING SOLUTIONS, INC. FOR AN
ESTIMATED ANNUAL EXPENDITURE OF $75,000.00
Item #16A14
RELEASE AND SATISFACTIONS OF LIEN FOR PAYMENTS
RECEIVED FOR THE FOLLOWING CODE ENFORCEMENT
ACTIONS: CIRCLE K CORPORATION
Item #16A15
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE WATER AND SEWER UTILITY
FACILITIES FOR CLASSICS PLANTATION ESTATES, PHASE
2A
Item #16A16
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE WATER AND SEWER UTILITY
FACILITIES FOR REMINGTON RESERVE
Page 350
September 11 - 12,2007
Item #16A17
RESOLUTION 2007-225: FINAL APPROVAL OF THE
ROADWAY (PRIVATE) AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS
FOR THE FINAL PLAT OF GREY OAKS UNIT SEVENTEEN.
THE ROADWAY AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS WILL BE
PRIVATELY MAINTAINED
Item #16A18
RESOLUTION 2007-226: FINAL APPROVAL OF THE
ROADWAY (PRIVATE) AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS
FOR THE FINAL PLAT OF GREY OAKS UNIT EIGHTEEN. THE
ROADWAY AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS WILL BE
PRIV A TEL Y MAINTAINED
Item #16A19
RECORDING THE FINAL PLAT OF BISCA YNE BAY AT
HERITAGE BAY UNIT FOUR, APPROVAL OF THE
STANDARD FORM CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE
AGREEMENT AND APPROV AL OF THE AMOUNT OF THE
PERFORMANCE SECURITY
Item #16A20
EASEMENT USE AGREEMENT WHICH WOULD ALLOW
CONSTRUCTION OF IMPROVEMENTS OVER A PORTION OF
A DRAINAGE EASEMENT HELD BY COLLIER COUNTY AT
140 VIA NAPOLI DRIVE
Page 351
September 11 - 12, 2007
Item # 16A21
RECORDING THE FINAL PLAT OF SILVER LAKES PHASE
TWO-G
Item #16A22
SUBORDINATION OF AN EXISTING LIEN HELD BY THE
COUNTY PURSUANT TO COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE
NO. 2003-61
Item # 16A23
COUNTY MANAGER OR HIS DESIGNEE TO CREATE TWO (2)
PERMANENT FULL TIME EQUIV ALENT (FTE) POSITIONS
WITHIN THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES (CDES) DIVISION TO
REPLACE THE EXISTING TWO STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION FTES
WHO PROVIDE ENHANCED ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE
PERMITTING ASSISTANCE CURRENTLY EMPLOYED BY
THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION, SOUTH DISTRICT OFFICE
Item # 16A24
RECORDING THE FINAL PLAT OF AVE MARIA UNIT 11, DEL
WEBB AT AVE MARIA PARCELS 106, 110, 112, 113 & 115,
APPROVAL OF THE STANDARD FORM CONSTRUCTION
AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT AND APPROVAL OF THE
AMOUNT OF THE PERFORMANCE SECURITY
Page 352
September 11 - 12,2007
Item #16A25
PROFESSIONAL SERVICE RETAINER CONTRACT 07- 4150
FOR GRANT WRITING & PROJECT MANAGEMENT
OVERSIGHT SERVICES
Item # 16A26
AWARDED CONTRACT TO WHITE & SMITH, LLC PLANNING
AND LAW GROUP TO WORK WITH STAFF TO UPDATE AND
RE- WRITE IDENTIFIED SECTIONS OF THE LAND
DEVELOPMENT CODE. THE CONTRACT AMOUNT OF
$150,000 WOULD BE FUNDED FROM PREVIOUSLY BOARD
APPROVED AND BUDGETED CAPITAL FUNDING WITHIN
CDES, SPECIFICALLY THE ZONING DEPARTMENT
Item #16A27
AGREEMENT BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY AND THE
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL OF COLLIER
COUNTY (EDC) FOR CONTINUATION OF THE ECONOMIC
DIVERSIFICATION PROGRAM BY PROVIDING A
CONTRIBUTION TO THE EDC OF UP TO $400,000 FOR
FISCAL YEAR 2008, AND AUTHORIZING THE CHAIRMAN OF
THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS TO SIGN THE
AGREEMENT ON BEHALF OF COLLIER COUNTY
Item #16A28
SIGN A LETTER OF SUPPORT FOR THE UPDATED
COMPREHENSIVE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY
(CEDS) PREPARED BY THE SOUTHWEST FLORIDA
Page 353
September 11 - 12, 2007
REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL'S ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY COMMITTEE
Item #16Bl
LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT BETWEEN
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA AND THE IVY OF NAPLES
GRANDE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT FOR
LANDSCAPING WITHIN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY ON GOLDEN
GATE PARKWAY
Item #16B2
BUDGET AMENDMENT AND REIMBURSEMENT TO
BA YVEST, LLC., AND TO AUTHORIZE THE CHAIRMAN OF
THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS TO EXECUTE
SAID REIMBURSEMENT TO BA YVEST, LLC. IN WHICH
COLLIER COUNTY WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR A TOTAL
ESTIMATED COST OF $99,125.21 FOR DESIGN AND
CONSTRUCTION OF THE POLE RELOCATION
Item #16B3
AWARDED BID #07-4157 "GOLDEN GATE BLVD. PHASE 3
(l3TH STREET SW TO WILSON BL VD.)LANDSCAPE
MAINTENANCE ANNUAL CONTRACT" TO VILA & SON
LANDSCAPING IN THE AMOUNT OF $54,276.10, FUND #111,
COST CENTER 163815
Item # 16B4
RESOLUTION 2007-227: SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT TO
Page 354
September 11 - 12,2007
AMEND A LOCAL AGENCY PROGRAM (LAP) AGREEMENT
PREVIOUSL Y ENTERED INTO WITH THE FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FOR CONSTRUCTION
OF ROADWAY LIGHTING ON STATE ROAD 84 (DAVIS
BOULEVARD)
Item #16B5
PURCHASE OF 2.51 ACRES (PARCEL #215) OF UNIMPROVED
PROPERTY WHICH IS REQUIRED FOR THE CONSTRUCTION
OF A STORMW A TER RETENTION AND TREATMENT POND
FOR THE OIL WELL ROAD WIDENING PROJECT. PROJECT
NO. 60044 (FISCAL IMPACT: $251,755.00)
Item #16B6
AMENDMENT TO THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH
STOCK DEVELOPMENT, LLC., (DEVELOPER) AND COLLIER
COUNTY (COUNTY) TO PROVIDE OPTIONS FOR ACCESS
AND CIRCULATION TO THE COMMERCIAL PARCELS
ADJACENT TO COLLIER BOULEVARD AND GRAND LEL Y
DRIVE
Item #16B7
INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE SCHOOL
DISTRICT OF COLLIER COUNTY, COLLECTIVELY
REFERRED TO AS "DISTRICT, AND COLLIER COUNTY,
HEREIN REFERRED TO AS COUNTY, TO CONSTRUCT THE
TRAFFIC SIGNAL AT THE INTERSECTION OF VETERANS
MEMORIAL BOULEVARD AND LIVINGSTON ROAD
Page 355
September 11 - 12,2007
Item #16B8
INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE SCHOOL
DISTRICT OF COLLIER COUNTY COLLECTIVELY
REFERRED TO AS "DISTRICT, AND COLLIER COUNTY,
HEREIN REFERRED TO AS COUNTY, FOR IMPROVEMENTS
AT FOUR ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS WITHIN COLLIER
COUNTY
Item #16B9
RESOLUTION 2007-228: LOCAL AGENCY PROGRAM
SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH THE FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (FDOT), FOR THE
PURCHASE AND INSTALLATION OF PREFABRICATED
PEDESTRIAN BRIDGES CROSSING THE COCOHA TCHEE
RIVER AND ONE OF ITS TRIBUTARIES ON THE WEST SIDE
OF V ANDERBIL T DRIVE WITHIN THE EXISTING RIGHT -OF-
WAY. ($586,500)
Item #16BI0
RESOLUTION 2007-229: LOCAL AGENCY PROGRAM
SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH THE FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (FDOT), FOR THE
PURCHASE AND INST ALLA TION OF TWO (2)
PREFABRICATED PEDESTRIAN BRIDGES CROSSING THE
SANTA BARBARA CANAL ON BOTH SIDES OF GOLDEN
GATE PARKWAY WITHIN THE EXISTING RIGHT-OF-WAY
($262,500)
Item # 16B 11
Page 356
September 11 - 12, 2007
RESOLUTION 2007-230: LOCAL AGENCY PROGRAM
AGREEMENT WITH THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION (FDOT), IN WHICH COLLIER COUNTY
WOULD BE REIMBURSED UP TO $704,375 FOR THE
CONSTRUCTION OF SIDEWALKS ON ROBERTS AVENUE
FROM NORTH 9TH STREET TO NORTH 18TH STREET
(DUPREE DRIVE) AND ON NORTH 9TH STREET FROM
STATE ROUTE 29 TO IMMOKALEE DRIVE (PROJECT #
601202)
Item #16B12
RESOLUTION 2007-231: LOCAL AGENCY PROGRAM
AGREEMENT WITH THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION (FDOT) IN WHICH COLLIER COUNTY
WOULD BE REIMBURSED UP TO $170,625 FOR THE
CONSTRUCTION OF A SIDEWALK ON NORTH FIRST STREET
FROM ROBERTS AVENUE TO STATE ROUTE 29 (PROJECT #
601202)
Item # 16B 13
PURCHASE OF 2.81 ACRES OF IMPROVED PROPERTY
WHICH IS REQUIRED FOR ROAD RIGHT -OF - WAY FOR THE
V ANDERBIL T BEACH ROAD EXTENSION PROJECT.
PROJECT NO. 60168 (FISCAL IMPACT: $384,792.50)
Item #16B14
CHANGE ORDER NO.2 TO ADD $605,379.00 FOR
CONTINUING INSPECTION SERVICES FOR PBS&J UNDER
Page 357
September 11 - 12,2007
ITN 05-3583 "CEI SERVICES FOR COLLIER COUNTY ROAD
PROJECTS" FOR PROJECT NO. 66042B - IMMOKALEE ROAD
SIX LANING PROJECT FROM US41 TO I-75
Item #16B15
A BUDGET AMENDMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $82,775 FOR
A WORK ODER TO PBS&J TO PROVIDE PROFESSIONAL
SERVICES FOR THE PALM RIVER UNIT #8 STORMWATER
IMPROVEMENTS (PROJECT NO. 511361)
Item #16B16 - Withdrawn
Item #16B 17
FY 2007 TRANSIT DEVELOPMENT PLAN (TDP) ANNUAL
PROGRESS REPORT
Item #16B18
FUNDING AGREEMENT WITH THE SOUTH FLORIDA WATER
MANAGEMENT DISTRICT TO SHARE IN A PORTION OF THE
CONSTRUCTION COSTS OF THE GATEWAY TRIANGLE
STORMW A TER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT IN THE AMOUNT
OF $100,000, PROJECT 518031
Item #16B 19
RESOLUTION 2007-232: ADDITIONAL PARATRANSIT
OPERATOR SELECTED BY MCDONALD TRANSIT
MANAGEMENT, INC., OPERATING AS COLLIER TRANSIT
MANAGEMENT, INC., D/B/A/ COLLIER AREA TRANSIT TO
Page 358
September 11 - 12,2007
PERFORM PARATRANSIT SERVICES IN COLLIER COUNTY
Item # 16B20
YEAR END FY 2007 CLOSURE OF CERTAIN MSTU PROJECT
FUNDS (FUNDS 132, 136, 150, 155, 156, AND 160) WHICH
WERE IDENTIFIED WITHIN THE APPROVED FY 2006-2007
BUDGET; REQUEST APPROVAL OF ALL NECESSARY FY
2007 BUDGET AMENDMENTS INTENDED TO CLOSE SAID
PROJECT FUNDS; AND DIRECT THE CLERK OF COURTS
FINANCE SECTION TO TRANSFER RESIDUAL CASH FROM
EACH PROJECT FUND TO THE CORRESPONDING MSTU
COST CENTER FUND ( EITHER FUND 142, 153, 158, 159, 162
AND 163) ESTABLISHED WITHIN THE APPROVED FY 2007
BUDGET
Item #16Cl
RESOLUTION 2007-233: (1) CERTAIN SPECIFIED ACTIONS
RELATED TO THE ADMINISTRATION OF LOW INTEREST
STATE REVOLVING FUND LOANS INVOLVING THE
EXERCISE OF INDEPENDENT JUDGMENT THEREBY
REQUIRING COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONER
APPROVAL AND (2) ACTIONS RELATED THERETO THAT
ARE ADMINISTRATIVE OR MINISTERIAL IN NATURE AND
AUTHORIZING THE COUNTY MANAGER OR HIS DESIGNEE
TO TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION
Item # 16C2
BUDGET AMENDMENT APPROPRIATING ADDITIONAL
REVENUE RECEIVED IN THE MANDATORY TRASH
Page 359
September 11 - 12, 2007
COLLECTION FUND FOR TRASH COLLECTION SERVICES
AND COLLIER COUNTY LANDFILL TIPPING FEES DURING
FY 2007. FISCAL IMPACT TO FUND (473), MANDATORY
TRASH COLLECTION, IS $410,500
Item #16C3
ACQUISITION OF A 4,113 SQUARE FOOT UTILITY AND
ACCESS EASEMENT NEAR THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF
3811 7TH AVENUE SW FOR A PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY WELL
SITE EASEMENT, AT A COST NOT TO EXCEED $25,500,
PROJECT NUMBER 700661
Item # 16C4
REJECT THE RESULT OF BID #07-4147, ATTAINED BY JAN
MAC CONSTRUCTION, INC., FOR ACOUSTICAL
IMPROVEMENTS AT THE CARICA PUMP STATION, PROJECT
NUMBER 710081
Item #16C5
ACQUISITION OF UTILITY EASEMENTS REQUIRED FOR THE
REPLACEMENT AND REHABILITATION OF THE WATER
DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM SERVING CYPRESS AND DALTON
MOBILE HOME PARKS ON AUTO RANCH ROAD AT AN
ESTIMATED COST NOT TO EXCEED $2,200, PROJECT
NUMBER 710103
Item # 16C6
CHANGE ORDER 4 TO CONTRACT 05-3766R WITH DOUGLAS
Page 360
September 11 - 12, 2007
N. HIGGINS, INC. FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A PIGGING
STATION FOR IMMOKALEE ROAD 30-INCH FORCE MAIN IN
THE AMOUNT OF $135,594.00 (PROJECT 73943)
Item #16C7
ASSUMPTION AGREEMENT BETWEEN IMMOKALEE
DISPOSAL COMPANY, INC. AND CHOICE ENVIRONMENTAL
SERVICES OF COLLIER, INC. TO ASSIGN AND TRANSFER
TO CHOICE ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES OF COLLIER, INC.
ALL INTEREST IN THE DISTRICT II FRANCHISEE
AGREEMENT FOR SOLID WASTE RECYCLABLE
MATERIALS, AND YARD TRASH COLLECTION SERVICES
WITH COLLIER COUNTY
Item #16C8
NON-BID DRIVEWAY RELATED CONSTRUCTION ITEMS TO
NR CONTRACTORS INCORPORATED UNDER BID #05-3872
REPAIR OF DRIVEWAYS
Item #16Dl
FACILITY USE AGREEMENTS BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY
PUBLIC LIBRARY AND COLLIER COUNTY SUPERVISOR OF
ELECTIONS FOR USE OF NAPLES BRANCH LIBRARY AND
EAST NAPLES BRANCH LIBRARY AS POLLING PRECINCTS
AND AUTHORIZATION FOR LIBRARY DIRECTOR TO SIGN
THE AGREEMENTS
Item # 16D2
Page 361
September 11 - 12, 2007
AFTER-THE-FACT SUBMITTAL OF THE ATTACHED
WILDFLOWER GRANT APPLICATION TO THE FLORIDA
WILDFLOWER FOUNDATION TO DEVELOP WILDFLOWER
PLANTING AREAS AT EAGLE LAKES COMMUNITY PARK
Item #16D3
BUDGET AMENDMENT APPROPRIATING $40,000 FROM 306
RESERVES FOR ENTRY ROAD LIGHTING UPGRADES AT
EAST NAPLES COMMUNITY PARK
Item #16D4 - Withdrawn
Item #16D5
FLORIDA RECREATION DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE
PROGRAM (FRDAP)GRANT AGREEMENT IN THE AMOUNT
OF $200,000 FOR DEVELOPMENT OF DELASOL
NEIGHBORHOOD PARK AND NECESSARY BUDGET
AMENDMENTS
Item # 16D6
FLORIDA RECREATION DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE
PROGRAM (FRDAP) GRANT AGREEMENT IN THE AMOUNT
OF $200,000 FOR IMPROVEMENTS TO GOLDEN GATE
COMMUNITY PARK AND NECESSARY BUDGET
AMENDMENTS
Item #16D7
AFTER-THE-FACT SUBMITTAL OF THE 2007 STATE OF
Page 362
September 11 - 12,2007
FLORIDA HOMELESS HOUSING ASSISTANCE GRANT
KNOWN AS HHAG APPLICATION TO THE DEPARTMENT OF
COMMUNITY AFFAIRS OFFICE ON HOMELESSNESS
Item #16D8
FLORIDA CLEAN VESSEL ACT GRANT AGREEMENT IN THE
AMOUNT OF $30,379 FOR DEVELOPMENT OF A VESSEL
PUMP OUT STATION AT CAXAMBAS PARK AND
NECESSARY BUDGET AMENDMENTS
Item #16D9
AFTER-THE-FACT SUBMITTAL OF THE COMMUNITY
LIBRARIES IN CARING PROGRAM GRANT APPLICATION TO
THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF STATE, STATE LIBRARY
AND ARCHIVES OF FLORIDA FOR A IMMOKALEE LIBRARY
HOMEWORK HELP GRANT, IN THE AMOUNT OF $10,000
Item #16DI0
RESOLUTION 2007-234: AMENDING THE STATE HOUSING
INITIATIVE PARTNERSHIP (SHIP) LOCAL HOUSING
ASSISTANCE PLAN (LHAP) FOR FISCAL YEARS 2007-2008,
2008-2009 AND 2009-2010, AS REQUIRED BY THE FLORIDA
HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION
Item #16Dll - Moved to Item #10M
Item #16D12
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN
Page 363
September 11 - 12,2007
DEVELOPMENT (HUD) ENTITLEMENT FUNDING
AGREEMENTS FOR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK
GRANT (CDBG), HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIPS
(HOME), AMERICAN DREAM DOWNP A YMENT INITIATIVE
(ADD I) AND EMERGENCY SHELTER GRANT (ESG) FUNDS
FOR FY 2007-2008
Item # 16D 13
AFTER-THE-FACT APPROVAL OF A CERTIFICATION OF
LOCAL GOVERNMENT APPROVAL REQUIRED FOR A
FEDERAL EMERGENCY SHELTER GRANT AS REQUESTED
BY THE SHELTER FOR ABUSED WOMEN AND CHILDREN
Item #16D14
AREA AGENCY ON AGING FOR SOUTHWEST FLORIDA, INC.
AND APPROVE A BUDGET AMENDMENT TO REFLECT AN
INCREASE OF $2,158 IN THE ALZHEIMER'S DISEASE
INITIATIVE PROGRAM
Item #16D15
AREA AGENCY ON AGING FOR SOUTHWEST FLORIDA, INC.
FOR THE HOME CARE FOR THE ELDERLY GRANT IN THE
AMOUNT OF $115,329 AND APPROVE A BUDGET
AMENDMENT
Item #16D16
AREA AGENCY ON AGING FOR SOUTHWEST FLORIDA, INC.
AND APPROVE BUDGET AMENDMENTS TO REFLECT AN
Page 364
September 11 - 12, 2007
OVERALL INCREASE OF $9,353 IN THE COMMUNITY CARE
FOR THE ELDERLY PROGRAM
Item #16D17
LIEN AGREEMENT WITH MARIE ALCIME (OWNER) FOR
DEFERRAL OF 100% OF COLLIER COUNTY IMPACT FEES
FOR AN OWNER-OCCUPIED AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNIT
LOCATED AT LOT 138, INDEPENDENCE PHASE II
Item #16D18
LIEN AGREEMENT WITH HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF
COLLIER COUNTY, INC. (DEVELOPER) FOR DEFERRAL OF
100% OF COLLIER COUNTY IMPACT FEES FOR AN OWNER-
OCCUPIED AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNIT LOCATED AT LOT
31, TRAIL RIDGE
Item #16D19
LIEN AGREEMENT WITH HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF
COLLIER COUNTY, INC. (DEVELOPER) FOR DEFERRAL OF
100% OF COLLIER COUNTY IMPACT FEES FOR AN OWNER-
OCCUPIED AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNIT LOCATED AT LOT
32, TRAIL RIDGE
Item #16D20
LIEN AGREEMENT WITH HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF
COLLIER COUNTY, INC. (DEVELOPER) FOR DEFERRAL OF
100% OF COLLIER COUNTY IMPACT FEES FORAN OWNER-
OCCUPIED AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNIT LOCATED AT LOT
Page 365
September 11 - 12, 2007
33, TRAIL RIDGE
Item # 16D21
LIEN AGREEMENT WITH HABIT A T FOR HUMANITY OF
COLLIER COUNTY, INC. (DEVELOPER) FOR DEFERRAL OF
100% OF COLLIER COUNTY IMPACT FEES FOR AN OWNER-
OCCUPIED AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNIT LOCATED AT LOT
34, TRAIL RIDGE
Item #16D22
LIEN AGREEMENT WITH HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF
COLLIER COUNTY, INC. (DEVELOPER) FOR DEFERRAL OF
100% OF COLLIER COUNTY IMPACT FEES FORAN OWNER-
OCCUPIED AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNIT LOCATED AT LOT
35, TRAIL RIDGE
Item #16D23
LIEN AGREEMENT WITH HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF
COLLIER COUNTY, INC. (DEVELOPER) FOR DEFERRAL OF
100% OF COLLIER COUNTY IMPACT FEES FOR AN OWNER-
OCCUPIED AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNIT LOCATED AT LOT
36, TRAIL RIDGE
Item # 16D24
LIEN AGREEMENT WITH HABIT A T FOR HUMANITY OF
COLLIER COUNTY, INC. (DEVELOPER) FOR DEFERRAL OF
100% OF COLLIER COUNTY IMPACT FEES FOR AN OWNER-
OCCUPIED AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNIT LOCATED AT LOT
Page 366
September 11 - 12,2007
130, TRAIL RIDGE
Item #16D25
LIEN AGREEMENT WITH HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF
COLLIER COUNTY, INC. (DEVELOPER) FOR DEFERRAL OF
100% OF COLLIER COUNTY IMP ACT FEES FOR AN OWNER-
OCCUPIED AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNIT LOCATED AT LOT
168, TRAIL RIDGE
Item #16D26
LIEN AGREEMENT WITH HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF
COLLIER COUNTY, INC. (DEVELOPER) FOR DEFERRAL OF
100% OF COLLIER COUNTY IMPACT FEES FORAN OWNER-
OCCUPIED AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNIT LOCATED AT LOT
169, TRAIL RIDGE
Item #16D27
LIEN AGREEMENT WITH HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF
COLLIER COUNTY, INC. (DEVELOPER) FOR DEFERRAL OF
100% OF COLLIER COUNTY IMPACT FEES FOR AN OWNER-
OCCUPIED AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNIT LOCATED AT LOT
170, TRAIL RIDGE
Item #16D28
LIEN AGREEMENT WITH GEORGE LANGKIL JR. (OWNER)
FOR DEFERRAL OF 100% OF COLLIER COUNTY IMPACT
FEES FOR AN OWNER-OCCUPIED AFFORDABLE HOUSING
UNIT LOCATED AT LOT 199, TRAIL RIDGE NAPLES
Page 367
September 11 - 12, 2007
Item #16D29
ANNUAL CERTIFICATION FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF
REGULATORY REFORM ACTIVITIES BY THE STATE
HOUSING INITIATIVES PARTNERSHIP (SHIP) PROGRAM
Item #16D30
LIEN AGREEMENT WITH ANTHONY MCCLAIN AND
ANGELIQUE MCCLAIN (OWNERS) FOR DEFERRAL OF 100%
OF COLLIER COUNTY IMPACT FEES FOR AN OWNER-
OCCUPIED AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNIT LOCATED AT LOT
201, TRAIL RIDGE NAPLES
Item #16D31
FLORIDA RECREATION DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE
PROGRAM GRANT IN THE AMOUNT OF $200,000 FOR
IMPROVEMENTS TO IMMOKALEE SPORTS COMPLEX
Item #16D32
AGREEMENT BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND THE AREA AGENCY ON
AGING OF SOUTHWEST FLORIDA, INC. AND APPROVE
BUDGET AMENDMENTS TO REFLECT AN OVERALL
INCREASE OF $2,911 IN THE OLDER AMERICANS ACT
PROGRAM
Item #16El
Page 368
September 11 - 12,2007
RESOLUTION 2007-235: FY'08 PAY/CLASSIFICATION PLAN
PROVIDING A WAGE ADJUSTMENT & MERIT INCREASE ON
10/1/07; TO CONTINUE THE
CREA TION/MODIFICA TION/DELETION OF
CLASSIFICA TIONS/ ASSIGNMENT OF PAY RANGES FROM
THE FY'08 PAY/CLASSIFICATION PLAN
Item # 16E2
RATIFY STAFF-APPROVED CHANGE ORDERS AND
CHANGES TO WORK ORDERS TO BOARD-APPROVED
CONTRACTS
Item # 16E3
APPENDIX 3 AND 4 FOR THE PURCHASE OF ADDITIONAL
SAP LICENSES ACCORDING TO THE TERMS OF THE SAP
PUBLIC SERVICES, INC. SOFTWARE END-USER LICENSE
AGREEMENT. ($290,891.25)
Item #16E4
INVOICES SUBMITTED BY SUNSHINE PHARMACY, WHICH
WERE SUBMITTED OUT OF ALIGNMENT FROM THE
CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS
Item #16E5
AWARD CONTRACT 07- 4142 FIXED TERM VALUE
ENGINEERING SERVICES TO TWO FIRMS
Item # 16E6
Page 369
September 11 - 12,2007
HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT TO RESEARCH, DRAFT,
AND ADVERTISE AN AMENDMENT TO THE COLLIER
COUNTY FINGERPRINTING ORDINANCE NO. 04-52 TO
REQUIRE FINGERPRINTING FOR ALL COLLIER COUNTY
EMPLOYEES AND CERTAIN COUNTY CONTRACT
EMPLOYEES AS DEFINED BY 125.5801, FLORIDA STATUTES
Item #16E7
PURCHASE OF STERTIL-KONI MOBILE AUTOMOTIVE LIFT
SYSTEMS FROM HEAVY-DUTY LIFT AND EQUIPMENT AS A
SOLE SOURCE DISTRIBUTOR WITHOUT THE FORMAL BID
PROCESS IN FY 2007 AND FY 2008
Item # 16E8
RESOLUTION 2007-236: AGREEMENT FOR SALE AND
PURCHASE OF LOTS 11 AND 12 IN THE NORTH NAPLES
RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY PARK TO HOUSE AN EMS
FACILITY AT A COST NOT TO EXCEED $690,375, PROJECT
NUMBER 551701, AND TO APPROVE COMMERCIAL PAPER
FOR THE PURCHASE OF THE LAND AND ASSOCIATED
EXPENSES, INCLUDING PRECONSTRUCTION COSTS FOR
DESIGN MODIFICATIONS AND CIVIL ENGINEERING, IN THE
NET AMOUNT OF $875,000
Item #16Fl
APPROVAL OF THE FOLLOWING DOCUMENTS BY THE
COUNTY MANAGER IS SUBJECT TO FORMAL
RATIFICATION BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
Page 370
September 11 - 12, 2007
COMMISSIONERS. IF THE DECISION B THE COUNTY
MANAGER IS NOT RATIFIED THE BOARD, THE
DOCUMENT(S) SHALL BE ENFORCEABLE AGAINST
COLLIER COUNTY ONLY TO THE EXTENT AUTHORIZED BY
LAW IN THE ABSENCE OF SUCH RATIFICATION BY THE
BOARD
Item #16F1-A
LIEN AGREEMENT WITH MARCO BAY HOMES, LLC
(BUILDER) AND CHERIEE MOORE (DEVELOPER) FOR
DEFERRAL OF 100% OF COLLIER COUNTY IMP ACT FEES
FOR AN OWNER-OCCUPIED AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNIT
LOCATED AT EAST 75' OF THE WEST 108' OF TRACT 66,
UNIT 42, GOLDEN GATE ESTATES
Item #16F1-B
LIEN AGREEMENT WITH ADIS ESTEVES (OWNER) FOR
DEFERRAL OF 100% OF COLLIER COUNTY IMPACT FEES
FOR AN OWNER-OCCUPIED AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNIT
LOCATED AT LOT 118, TRAIL RIDGE, NAPLES
Item #16F1-C
LIEN AGREEMENT WITH MILDANIA HINOJOSA (OWNER
FOR DEFERRAL OF 100% OF COLLIER COUNTY IMPACT
FEES FOR AN OWNER-OCCUPIED AFFORDABLE HOUSING
UNIT LOCATED AT LOT73, INDEPENDENCE PHASE II
Item #16F1-D
Page 371
September 11 - 12, 2007
LIEN AGREEMENT WITH JOSE SEGURA AND MARIA D. L.
SEGURA (OWNERS) FOR DEFERRAL FO 100% OF COLLIER
COUNTY IMPACT FEES FOR AN OWNER-OCCUPIED
AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNIT LOCATED AT LOT 144,
INDEPENDENCE PHASE II
Item #16F1-E
LIEN AGREEMENT WITH ELSA LUEVANO (OWNER) FOR
DEFERRAL OF 100% OF COLLIER COUNTY IMPACT FEES
FOR AN OWNER-OCCUPIED AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNIT
LOCATED AT LOT 144, INDEPENDENCE PHASE II
Item #16F1-F
LIEN AGREEMENT WITH JEAN JOSEPH AND MARIE JOSEPH
(OWNERS) FOR DEFERRAL OF 100% OF COLLIER COUNTY
IMPACT FEES FOR AN OWNER-OCCUPIED AFFORDABLE
HOUSING UNIT LOCATED AT LOT 139, INDEPENDENCE
PHASE II
Item #16F1-G
LIEN AGREEMENT WITH MARIE SAINT-HILAIRE AND
LOUNDY SAINT-HILAIRE (OWNERS) FOR DEFERRAL OF
100% OF COLLIER COUNTY IMPACT FEES FOR AN OWNER-
OCCUPIED AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNIT LOCATED AT LOT
130, INDEPENDENCE PHASE II
Item #16F1-H
LIEN AGREEMENT WITH VANESSA DUCKWORTH (OWNER)
Page 372
September 11 - 12, 2007
FOR DEFERRAL OF 100% OF COLLIER COUNTY IMPACT
FEES FOR AN OWNER-OCCUPIED AFFORDABLE HOUSING
UNIT LOCATED AT LOT 17, TRAIL RIDGE, NAPLES
Item #16F1-I
LIEN AGREEMENT WITH SADILIA FREDERIC (OWNER) FOR
DEFERRAL OF 100% OF COLLIER COUNTY IMPACT FEES
FOR AN OWNER-OCCUPIED AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNIT
LOCATED AT LOT 137, INDEPENDENCE PHASE II
Item #16F1-J
LIEN AGREEMENT WITH CLEMENT GARCON AND
IDELETTE GARCON (OWNERS) FRO DEFERRAL OF 100% OF
COLLIER COUNTY IMPACT FEES FOR AN OWNER-
OCCUPIED AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNIT LOCATED AT LOT
136, INDEPENDENCE PHASE II
Item #16F1-K
AWARDED BID #07-4155 FOR THE INSTALLATION OF
"BA YSHORE DRIVE IRRIGATION EFFLUENT CONVERSION"
- TO HANNULA LANDSCAPING, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF
$217,354.04
Item #16F1-L
AGREEMENT BETWEEN FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY
BOARD OF TRUSTEES (FSU) AND COLLIER COUNTY,
FLORIDA, IMPLEMENTING THE FSU MEDICAL PROJECT
(THE PROJECT) IN IMMOKALEE AS APPROVED BY THE
Page 373
September 11 - 12,2007
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA) AND THE
BCC ON MAY 22, 2007
Item #16F1-M
PURCHASE OF ONE FIXED-ROUTE BUS AS A SCHEDULED
REPLACEMENT TO BE OPERATED BY COLLIER AREA
TRANSIT ($336,326)
Item #16F1-N
BUDGET AMENDMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $2,056.89 TO
RECOGNIZE ADDITIONAL REVENUE RECEIVED FROM THE
AREA AGENCY ON AGING FOR THE OLDER AMERICAN'S
ACT TITLE III-E PROGRAM BUDGET FOR FY 06-07
Item #16F1-0
BROCHURE DISTRIBUTION CONTRACT WITH FLORIDA
SUNCOAST TOURISM PROMOTIONS, INC. IN THE AMOUNT
OF $4,800
Item #16F1-P
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN COLLIER
COUNT AND THE SAL VA TION ARMY
Item #16F1-Q
LEGAL SUPPORT FOR ORANGE TREE UTILITIES CASE
Item #16F1-R
Page 374
September 11 - 12,2007
AGREEMENT WITH THE DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD OF
COLLIER COUNTY FOR TRANSPORTING SCHOOL-AGE
RECREATION PROGRAM PARTICIPANTS NOT TO EXCEED
$40,000
Item #16F1-S
BUDGET AMENDMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $345,000,
ALLOWING A TRANSFER OF FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT OF
$165,000 FROM THE COLLIER COUNTY WATER-SEWER
OPERATING FUND ( 408) RESERVE FOR CONTINGENCIES,
$70,000 FROM COLLECTION, $ 20,000 FROM WASTEWATER
ADMINISTRATION, $35,00 FROM IRRIGATION QUALITY
MAINTENANCE, AND $55,000 FROM IRRIGATION QUALITY
ADMINISTRATION UNANTICIPATED OPERATING
EXPENSES INCURRED BY BOTH THE NORTH COUNTY
WATER RECLAMATION FACILITY (NCWRF) AND THE
SOUTH COUNTY WATER RECLAMATION FACILITY
(SCWRF)
Item #16F1-T
CONTRACT #03-3444, "JANITORIAL SERVICES", WITH
ONESOURCE FACILITY SERVICES, INC. THROUGH
SEPTEMBER 30TH, 2007
Item #16F1-U
BLANKET PURCHASE ORDER WITH SIEMENS WATER
TECHNOLOGIES FOR MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR OF
ODOR CONTROL UNITS AT BOTH THE NORTH COUNTY
Page 375
September 11 - 12,2007
WATER RECLAMATION FACILITY AND THE SOUTH
COUNTY WATER RECLAMATION FACILITY, IN THE
AMOUNT OF $129,980
Item #16F1-V
AGREED ORDER FOR PAYMENT OF EXPERT FEES IN
CONNECTION WITH PARCELS 720, 820A, 820B, AND 920 IN
THE LAWSUIT STYLED COLLIER COUNTY V. ELHANON
COMBS, ET AL., CASE NO. 03-2352-CA (GOLDEN GATE
PARKWAY, PROJECT #60027) FISCAL IMPACT: $11,760.25
Item #16F1-W
REPORT AND RATIFY STAFF-APPROVED CHANGE ORDERS
AND CHANGES TO WORK ORDERS TO BOARD-APPROVED
CONTRACTS
Item #16F1-X
AWARDED EXPERT FEES AND COSTS AS TO PARCELS 815
AND 915 IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,437.00 IN THE LAWSUIT
STYLED COLLIER COUNTY V. COLONNADE ON COLLIER
BLVD. LLC., ER AL., CASE NO. 05-1091-CA (SOUTH COUNTY
REGIONAL WATER TREATMENT WELLFIELD PROJECT
#70892. FISCAL IMPACT: $1,437.00
Item #16F1-Y
AWARDED CONTRACT 07-4135 TO L3 COMMUNICATIONS
INC.; EMA, INC.; EXECUTIVE ALLIANCE GROUP, INC.; AND
IDEA INTEGRATION CORP. FOR ON-CALL PROJECT
Page 376
September 11 - 12,2007
MANAGEMENT FOR IT
Item #16F1-Z
LEASE AGREEMENT WITH CALI REALTY INVESTMENT
CORPORATION FOR THE CONTINUED USE OF A BUILDING
UTILIZED BY THE SHERIFF'S SWAT TEAM AT AN ANNUAL
COST OF $60,000
Item #16F1-AA
AWARDED CONTRACT #07-4145 "MUSEUM EXHIBIT
DESIGN AND CREATION TO ADVANCED STAGING
TECHNOLOGIES, INC., TO DESIGN, FABRICATE AND
INSTALL EDUCATIONAL EXHIBITS AT THE COLLIER
COUNTY MUSEUM
Item #16F1-BB
AWARDED WORK ORDER NO. PBS-FT-3971-07-16 UNDER
CONTRACT NO. 06-3971, "ANNUAL CONTRACT FOR
GENERAL CONTRACTORS SERVICES", TO WALL SYSTEMS,
INC. OF SOUTHWEST FLORIDA. D/B/A PROFESSIONAL
BUILDING SYSTEMS (PBS) FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF
THE PRIMARY DATA CENTER IN THE AMOUNT OF
$179,484.00
Item #16F1-CC
AWARDED WORK ORDER NO. WJV-FT-3971-13 UNDER
CONTRACT NO. 06-3971 " ANNUAL CONTRACT FOR
GENERAL CONTRACTORS SERVICES", TO WILLIAM J.
Page 377
September 11 - 12,2007
VARIAN CONSTRUCTION CO. FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF
THE BACKUP DATA CENTER, IN TH AMOUNT OF $199,149.00
Item #16F1-DD
BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR $2,500,000.00 TO REDUCE THE
AMOUNT OF TRANSFER FROM THE SOLID WASTE
DISPOSAL FUND TO THE SOLID WASTE CAPITAL FUND
Item #16F1-EE
BUDGET AMENDMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $521,435.90 FOR
INSURANCE PROCEEDS RECEIVED BY THE COLLIER
COUNTY AIRPORT AUTHORITY TO RECONSTRUCT THE T-
HANGER BUILDING AND THE SHERIFF'S DWELLING AT
EVERGLADES AIRPARK THAT WERE DAMAGED BY
HURRICANE WILMA
Item #16F1-FF
BUDGET AMENDMENT ASSOCIATED WITH AN INCREASE
OF $112,506 TO A PREVIOUSLY ACCEPTED FEDERAL
A VIA TION ADMINISTRATION GRANT FOR THE
CONSTRUCTION OF TAXIWAY "C" AT THE IMMOKALEE
REGIONAL AIRPORT
Item #16F1-GG
BUDGET AMENDMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $76,105.51 TO
FUND THE INCREASED COST OF CONSTRUCTION FOR
TAXIWAY "C" AT THE IMMOKALEE REGIONAL AIRPORT
Page 378
September 11 - 12, 2007
Item #16F1-HH
DEDUCTIVE CHANGE ORDER NO.2 IN THE AMOUNT OF
$244,372.51 TO CONTRACT #07-4122 ISSUED TO
V ANDERBIL T BAY CONSTRUCTION, INC. FOR THE NAPLES
JAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Item # 16F2
APPROVAL OF THE FOLLOWING DOCUMENTS BY THE
COUNTY MANAGER IS SUBJECT TO FORMAL
RATIFICATION BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS. IF THE DECISION B THE COUNTY
MANAGER IS NOT RATIFIED THE BOARD, THE
DOCUMENT(S) SHALL BE ENFORCEABLE AGAINST
COLLIER COUNTY ONLY TO THE EXTENT AUTHORIZED BY
LAW IN THE ABSENCE OF SUCH RATIFICATION BY THE
BOARD
Item #16F2-A
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN COLLIER
COUNTY AND HARRY CHAPIN FOOD BANK UNDER
EMERGENCY SITUATIONS
Item # 16F2- B
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN COLLIER
COUNTY AND GOODWILL INDUSTRIES OF SOUTHWEST
FLORIDA, INC. UNDER EMERGENCY SITUATIONS
Item #16F2-C
Page 379
September 11 - 12, 2007
BUDGET AMENDMENT TO RECOGNIZE AND APPROPRIATE
REVENUE IN THE AMOUNT OF $40,000 TO PURCHASE A
LIFT FOR THE FIRE BOAT AND TO PURCHASE FIRE TRUCK
EQUIPMENT AND MINOR ASSOCIATED SUPPLIES NEEDED
TO BRING THE VEHICLES INTO NFP A COMPLIANCE
Item #16F2-D
REPORT AND RATIFY PROPERTY, CASUALTY, WORKERS'
COMPENSATION AND SUBROGATION CLAIMS SETTLED
AND/OR CLOSED BY THE RISK MANAGEMENT DIRECTOR
PURSUANT TO RESOLUTION 2004-15 FOR THE THIRD
QUARTER OF FY 07
Item # 16F2- E
LIEN AGREEMENT WITH HECTOR VELASCO AND HAIDA
CASTRO DE VELASCO (OWNERS) FOR DEFERRAL OF 100%
OF COLLIER COUNTY IMP ACT FEES FOR AN OWNER-
OCCUPIED AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNIT LOCATED AT LOT
2, TRAIL RIDGE, NAPLES
Item # 16F2- F
DECLARE A VACANT PARCEL OF LAND ON 10 ACRES AS
SURPLUS PROPERTY AND TO TAKE THE APPROPRIATE
STEPS TO SELL THE PROPERTY. PROJECT #60171, FISCAL
IMPACT: $300.00
Item # 16F2-G
Page 380
September 11 - 12, 2007
LIEN AGREEMENT WITH MACCELUS EMMANUEL AND
ESTERMILIA HYPPOLITE (OWNERS) FOR DEFERRAL OF
100% OF COLLIER COUNTY IMPACT FEES FOR AN OWNER-
OCCUPIED AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNIT LOCATED AT LOT
6, TRAIL RIDGE, NAPLES
Item #16F2-H
LIEN AGREEMENT WITH FRANCES JACKSON AND
EDWARD JACKSON (OWNERS) FOR DEFERRAL OF 100% OF
COLLIER COUNTY IMP ACT FEES FOR AN OWNER-
OCCUPIED AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNIT LOCATED AT LOT
115, INDEPENDENCE PHASE II
Item #16F2-I
LIEN AGREEMENT WITH YVES MUL TIDOR AND MARIE
MULTIDOR (OWNERS) FOR DEFERRAL OF 100% OF
COLLIER COUNTY IMPACT FEES FOR AN OWNER-
OCCUPIED AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNIT LOCATED AT LOT
197, TRAIL RIDGE, NAPLES
Item #16F2-J
LIEN AGREEMENT WITH JOSEPH THERMIDOR (OWNER)
FOR DEFERRAL OF 100% OF COLLIER COUNTY IMPACT
FEES FOR AN OWNER-OCCUPIED AFFORDABLE HOUSING
UNIT LOCATED AT LOT 26, INDEPENDENCE PHASE II
Item # 16F2- K
LIEN AGREEMENT WITH NADEJE DUMEL (OWNER) FOR
Page 381
September 11 - 12, 2007
DEFERRAL OF 100% OF COLLIER COUNTY IMP ACT FEES
FOR AN OWNER-OCCUPIED AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNIT
LOCATED AT LOT 134, INDEPENDENCE PHASE II
Item # 16F2- L
LIEN AGREEMENT WITH ERMILUS DOL Y AND EMANETTE
DOL Y (OWNERS) FOR DEFERRAL OF 100% OF COLLIER
COUNTY IMP ACT FEES FOR AN OWNER-OCCUPIED
AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNIT LOCATED AT LOT 149,
INDEPENDENCE PHASE II
Item # 16F2- M
LIEN AGREEMENT WITH RAFAEL BUST AMANTE AND
MARGARITA BUST AMANTE (OWNERS) FOR DEFERRAL OF
100% OF COLLIER COUNTY IMPACT FEES FOR AN OWNER-
OCCUPIED AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNIT LOCATED AT LOT
150, INDEPENDENCE PHASE II
Item #16F2-N
AWARDED BUD NO. 07-4172, "PURCHASE AND
INSTALLATION OF CAT CAGES FOR DAS" TO SCHROER
MANUFACTURING COMPANY IN $117,975.00
Item # 16F2-0
LIEN AGREEMENT WITH JERMILA GRIFFIN (OWNER) FOR
DEFERRAL OF 100% OF COLLIER COUNTY IMPACT FEES
FOR AN OWNER-OCCUPIED AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNIT
LOCATED AT LOT 115, TRAIL RIDGE, NAPLES
Page 382
September 11 - 12, 2007
Item # 16F2- P
LIEN AGREEMENT WITH MANUEL CUETO AND
ANASTACIA CUETO (OWNERS) FOR DEFERRAL OF 100% OF
COLLIER COUNTY IMP ACT FEES FOR AN OWNER-
OCCUPIED AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNIT LOCATED AT LOT
119 TRAIL RIDGE, NAPLES
Item # 16F2-Q
LIEN AGREEMENT WITH ROGELIO DOMINGUEZ AND
Y ANET CARRACEDO (OWNERS) FOR DEFERRAL OF 100%
OF COLLIER COUNTY IMP ACT FEES FOR AN OWNER-
OCCUPIED AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNIT LOCATED AT LOT
123, TRAIL RIDGE, NAPLES
Item #16F2-R
LIEN AGREEMENT WITH ONOYDE GUERRERO AND NILDA
ESTRADA (OWNERS) FOR DEFERRAL OF 100% OF COLLIER
COUNTY IMP ACT FEES FOR AN OWNER-OCCUPIED
AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNIT LOCATED AT LOT 124, TRAIL
RIDGE, NAPLES
Item #16F2-S
$60,000 BUDGET AMENDMENT TO COVER UNEXPECTED
SALARY EXPENSES BY THE ISLES OF CAPRI FIRE/RESCUE
Item #16F2- T
Page 383
September 11 - 12, 2007
BUDGET AMENDMENTS
Item # 16F2- U
COMMERCIAL EXCAVATION PERMIT NO. 59.800-3
"IMPROVE THE LEL Y MAIN CANAL SW OF US 41 AND
CONSTRUCT A SPREADER LAKE AT THE DOWNSTREAM
END", LOCATED IN SECTIONS 19,23,24,25,26, & 36,
TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGES 25 & 26 EAST
Item #16F2- V
BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR $49,680.00 TO FUND
INCREASED COSTS TO COMPLETE THE TRANSFER OF
THIRTY-SIX (36) ACRES PURCHASED FOR PANTHER
MITIGATION TO THE STATE DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY,
TO SATISFY THE UNITED STATES ARMY CORPS OF
ENGINEERS PERMIT REQUIREMENTS FOR DEVELOPMENT
AT THE IMMOKALEE REGIONAL AIRPORT
Item # 16F2- W
BUDGET AMENDMENT TO APPROPRIATE BUILDING
MAINTENANCE SPECIAL SERVICE REVENUES TOTALING
$159,856.19 FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF PERSONAL AND
OPERATING EXPENSES IN FY 2007
Item #16F2-X
RE-ASSIGNMENT OF CONTRACT 06-3995, "EMPLOYEE
ASSISTANCE PROGRAM" FROM THE J.D. ALLEN GROUP,
INC. TO HORIZON BEHAVIORAL SERVICES
Page 384
September 11 - 12, 2007
Item #16F2-Y
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE DEPARTMENT
OF CHILDREN AND F AMIL Y SERVICES AND IMMOKALEE
COMMUNITY PARK IN THE AMOUNT OF $800
Item #16F2-Z
BUDGET AMENDMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $100,000 TO
TRANSFER FUNDS WITHIN THE SOUTH COUNTY WATER
TREATMENT PLANT COST CENTER FROM PERSONAL
SERVICES TO OPERATING EXPENSE TO COVER FY 2007
SLUDGE POND CLEANING COSTS
Item #16F2-AA
BUDGET AMENDMENT TO TRANSFER FUNDS IN THE
AMOUNT OF $120,200 FROM OPERATING EXPENSES TO
CAP IT AL OUTLAY IN THE ROAD MAINTENANCE MSTD
GENERAL FUND
Item #16F2-BB
BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR $2,200.00 TO FUND A CHANGE
ORDER TO COMPLETE THE REPLACEMENT OF THE FUEL
FARM AT THE MARCO ISLAND EXECUTIVE AIRPORT
Item #16F3
AGREEMENT WITH AMERICAN MEDICAL ACADEMY, INC.,
WHICH WOULD ALLOW PARAMEDIC STUDENTS TO
Page 385
September 11 - 12,2007
PARTICIPATE IN SKILL TRAINING AND FIELD
EXPERIENCES UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF THE COLLIER
COUNTY EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT
Item #16F4
AWARD BID #07-4158 IN THE AMOUNT OF $58,300 FOR THE
PURCHASE AND DELIVERY OF PINE STRAW MULCH TO
CUSTOM PINE STRAW, INC.
Item #16F5
ANNUAL FIVE PERCENT (5%) INCREASE IN CONSULTANT
FEES FOR THE MEDICAL DIRECTOR OF EMERGENCY
MEDICAL SERVICES AS DESCRIBED IN THE EMERGENCY
MEDICAL SERVICES MEDICAL CONSULTANT CONTRACT
FOR A TOTAL OF $100,485 FOR FY 08
Item #16F6
BUDGET AMENDMENTS IN THE AMOUNTS OF $20,000 TO
REDUCE THE TRANSFER OF EXCESS FUNDS FROM THE
LAW LIBRARY FUND (640) TO COURT INNOVATIONS FUND
(192); REDUCE RESERVES IN COURT INNOVATIONS FUND
(192); AND APPROVE THE PURCHASE OF BOOKS FOR THE
LAW LIBRARY
Item # 16F7
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
COMMUNITY AFFAIRS AND COLLIER COUNTY ACCEPTING
$8,403 FOR THE PREPARATION OF HAZARDS ANALYSIS
Page 386
September 11 - 12, 2007
REPORTS FOR FACILITIES STORING EXTREMELY
HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES WITHIN THE COUNTY AND
APPROVE THE BUDGET AMENDMENT NECESSARY TO
RECOGNIZE AND APPROPRIATE $8,403 AS REVENUE
Item #16F8
INTERLOCAL AGREEMENTS BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY
AND EAST NAPLES FIRE CONTROL AND RESCUE DISTRICT
AND COLLIER COUNTY AND NORTH NAPLES FIRE
CONTROL AND RESCUE DISTRICT FOR AN ADVANCED
LIFE SUPPORT ENGINE PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM
Item # 16F9
BAR RESOLUTION 2007-02: AMENDMENTS
(APPROPRIATING GRANTS, DONATIONS, CONTRIBUTIONS
OR INSURANCE PROCEEDS) TO THE FISCAL YEAR 2006-07
ADOPTED BUDGET
Item #16FlO
INTERAGENCY AGREEMENT BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY
AND THE DEPARTMENT OF JUVENILE JUSTICE
REGARDING CONFIDENTIALLY OF RECORDS AND
AUTHORIZES THE CHAIRMAN TO EXECUTE SAID
AGREEMENT
Item #16F11
LEASE AGREEMENT WITH NORTH NAPLES FIRE CONTROL
AND RESCUE DISTRICT FOR SHARED USE OF THE
Page 387
September 11 - 12,2007
COUNTYS HERITAGE BAY PUBLIC SAFETY FACILITY AT
NO ANNUAL COST
Item #16F12
RESOLUTION 2007-237: BORROWING OF AN AMOUNT NOT
TO EXCEED $16,500,000 FROM THE POOLED COMMERCIAL
PAPER LOAN PROGRAM OF THE FLORIDA LOCAL
GOVERNMENT FINANCE COMMISSION PURSUANT TO THE
LOAN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS AND THE COMMISSION IN ORDER TO
FINANCE THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE COLLIER COUNTY
SHERIFF'S SPECIAL OPERATIONS BUILDING; AUTHORIZING
THE EXECUTION OF A LOAN NOTE OR NOTES TO
EVIDENCE SUCH BORROWING; AGREEING TO SECURE
SUCH LOAN NOTE OR NOTES WITH A COVENANT TO
BUDGET AND APPROPRIATE LEGALL Y AVAILABLE NON-
AD VALOREM REVENUES AS PROVIDED IN THE LOAN
AGREEMENT; AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION AND
DELIVERY OF SUCH OTHER DOCUMENTS AS MAY BE
NECESSARY TO EFFECT SUCH BORROWING; AND
PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE
Item #16G1 - Moved to Item #14B
Item #16H1
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING SEPTEMBER 24, 2007 AS
F AMIL Y DAY - A DAY TO EAT DINNER WITH YOUR
CHILDREN. TO BE MAILED TO JOSEPH A. CALIFANO, JR.,
NATIONAL CENTER ON ADDICTION AND SUBSTANCE
ABUSE AT COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY - ADOPTED
Page 388
September 11 - 12,2007
Item # 16H2
COMMISSIONER COLETTA REQUEST REIMBURSEMENT
FOR ATTENDING A FUNCTION SERVING A VALID PUBLIC
PURPOSE. COMMISSIONER PAID IN ADVANCE TO ATTEND
THE BLUE FOUNDATION GRANT/PROVIDER'S STAFF
APPRECIATION LUNCH ON SEPTEMBER 19,2007 AND IS
REQUESTING REIMBURSEMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF
$15.00, TO BE PAID FROM HIS TRAVEL BUDGET
Item # 16H3
COMMISSIONER FIALA REQUESTS REIMBURSEMENT FOR
ATTENDING A FUNCTION SERVING A VALID PUBLIC
PURPOSE. WILL ATTEND THE NAPLES PRESS CLUB: TAXES,
TERROR & TRENCHCOA TS LUNCHEON ON THURSDAY,
SEPTEMBER 27,2007 AT THE COLLIER ATHLETIC CLUB;
$20.00 TO BE PAID FROM COMMISSIONER FIALA'S TRAVEL
BUDGET
Item #16H4
COMMISSIONER COLETTA REQUESTS REIMBURSEMENT
FOR ATTENDING A FUNCTION SERVING A VALID PUBLIC
PURPOSE. COMMISSIONER PAID IN ADVANCE TO ATTEND
AND PRESENT A WARDS AT THE EDC AMAZING PLACE -
2007 EXCELLENCE IN INDUSTRY A WARDS EVENING GALA
CELEBRATION ON SEPTEMBER 13,2007 AND IS
REQUESTING REIMBURSEMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF
$40.00, TO BE PAID FROM HIS TRAVEL BUDGET
Page 389
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
September 11, 2007
1. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS TO FILE FOR RECORD WITH ACTION AS
DIRECTED:
A. Districts:
(1) Port of the Island Community Improvement District: Minutes of May
11, 2007; Agenda for May 11, 2007; Minutes of June 8, 2007;
Proposed FY2008 Budget.
(2) Heritaoe Greens Community Development District: Minutes of
February 5, 2007; Agenda for February 5, 2007.
(3) Naples Heritaoe Community Development District: Additional
Documents from April 10, 2007.
(4) Immokalee Water & Sewer District: Registered Agent and Office
Letter; 2007 - 2008 Meeting Schedule; FY 08 Budget.
(5) East Naples Fire Control & Rescue District: Audited Financial
Statements September 30, 2006.
(6) Quarry Community Development District: Minutes of May 21, 2007;
Agenda of May 21, 2007. FY 2008 Proposed Budget; Management
Letter.
(7) South Florida Water Manaqement District: Tentative FY2008
Budget.
B. Minutes:
(1) Collier County Airport Authority: Letter for Notice to Proceed for NC
Parking Apron Expansion Design at Marco Island Executive Airport -
Change Order #1 Dated July 19, 2007. ~ISC Corres
Date oC) -{ I-oJ
'temllJloI I
H:\DATA\FRONT DESK - 2007\2007 Miscellaneous Correspondence\091 107 mise eorr.doe
\,~c07;s to:-
(2) Bayshore Beautification M.S.T.U. Advisory Committee: Agenda for
July 11, 2007; Agenda for September 12, 2007; Minutes of May 9,
2007;
(3) Collier County Domestic Animal Services Advisory Committee:
Minutes of June 19, 2007.
(4) Collier County Planninq Commission: Agenda for July 19, 2007 P.M.
Meeting; Agenda for July 19, 2007 A.M. Meeting; Minutes of June 7,
2007; Minutes of June 21, 2007; Agenda for August 2, 2007; Agenda
for August 16, 2007.
(5) Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Advisory Committee: Minutes
of June 11, 2007.
(6) Collier County Historic and Archaeoloqical Preservation Board:
Agenda for July 18, 2007; Minutes of June 20,2007.
(7) Habitat Conservation Plan Advisory Committee: Agenda for July 12,
2007; Agenda for August 8, 2007.
(8) Isles of Capri Fire/Rescue Advisory Board: Minutes of July 5, 2007;
Agenda for July 5, 2007; Minutes and Agenda for August 2, 2007.
(9) Fire Steerinq Committee: Agenda for July 26, 2007; Minutes of June
28, 2007.
(10) Lely Golf Estates Beautification M.S.T.U.: Agenda for July 19, 2007;
Minutes for June 21, 2007; Agenda for August 16, 2007; Minutes of
July 19, 2007.
(11) Radio Road Beautification M.S.T.U.: Agenda for September 18,
2007; Minutes of June 18, 2007.
H:\DA T A \FRONT DESK - 2007\2007 Miseellaneous Correspondenee\09 I 107_ mise _ eorr.doe
(12) Bayshore Gateway Trianqle Local Redevelopment Advisory Board:
Agenda and Minutes for June 5, 2007; Agenda and Minutes of July
10,2007.
(a)Agendas for By-Laws Subcommittee, incentives Subcommittee,
and Marketing and Promotions Subcommittee for July 10, 2007;
Minutes of By-Laws Subcommittee of July 10, 2007; Minutes of
Marketing Subcommittee of July 10, 2007; Minutes of Incentives
Subcommittee of July 10, 2007.
(13) Collier County Hispanic Affairs Advisory Board: Minutes of May 24,
2007; Agenda for May 24, 2007.
(14) Environmental Advisory Council: Agenda for August 1, 2007; Agenda
and Minutes of July 11, 2007.
(15) Pelican Bay Services Division Board: Agenda for July 11, 2007;
Minutes of June 6, 2007; Agenda for August 1, 2007; Minutes of July
11, 2007; Agenda for August 15, 2007.
(a) Clam Bay Committee: Minutes of June 6, 2007; Agenda for
June 26, 2007; Minutes of June 26, 2007.
(16) Golden Gate M.S.T.U. Advisory Committee: Agenda for August 14,
2007; Minutes of July 10, 2007.
(17) Forest Lakes Roadway and Drainaoe M.S.T.U. Advisory Committee:
Agenda for August 8, 2007; Minutes of July 11, 2007 (No Meeting
Due to Lack of Quorum).
(18) Collier County Fire Review Task Forcer: Minutes of August 7,2007.
(19) Collier County Citizen Corps Advisory Committee: Minutes and
Agenda for June 20, 2007.
(20) Collier County Public Vehicle Advisory Committee: Agenda for
August 6, 2007.
H:\DA T A \FRONT DESK - 2007\2007 Miseellaneous Correspondenee\091 107_ mise _ eorr.doe
C. Other:
(1) Collier County Department of Community Affairs/Florida Wildlife
Federation/Collier County Audubon Society: Minutes of June 27,
2007.
H:\DA T A \FRONT DESK - 2007\2007 Miseellaneous Correspondenee\091 107_ mise _ eorr.doe
September 11 - 12,2007
Item # 16H5
COMMISSIONER COLETTA REQUESTS REIMBURSEMENT
FOR ATTENDING A FUNCTION SERVING A VALID PUBLIC
PURPOSE. COMMISSIONER PAID IN ADVANCE TO ATTEND
AS MASTER OF CEREMONIES AT THE SOUTHWEST
FLORIDA WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT BOARD AWARDS
DINNER ON SEPTEMBER 14,2007 AND IS REQUESTING
REIMBURSEMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $25.00, TO BE PAID
FROM HIS TRAVEL BUDGET
Item # 1611
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE - FILED AND/OR
REFERRED:
The following miscellaneous correspondence, as presented by the
Board of County Commissioners, has been directed to the various
departments as indicated:
Page 390
September 11 - 12,2007
Item # 1611
DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD OF JULY 07,2007
THROUGH JULY 13, 2007 AND FOR SUBMISSION INTO THE
OFFICIAL RECORDS OF THE BOARD
Item # 1612
DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD OF JULY 14,2007
THROUGH JULY 20, 2007 AND FOR SUBMISSION INTO THE
OFFICIAL RECORDS OF THE BOARD
Item # 1613
DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD OF JULY 21, 2007
THROUGH JULY 27, 2007 AND FOR SUBMISSION INTO THE
OFFICIAL RECORDS OF THE BOARD
Item #16J4
DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD OF JULY 28, 2007
THROUGH AUGUST 03, 2007 AND FOR SUBMISSION INTO
THE OFFICIAL RECORDS OF THE BOARD
Item #16J5
DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD OF AUGUST 04, 2007
THROUGH AUGUST 10, 2007 AND FOR SUBMISSION INTO
THE OFFICIAL RECORDS OF THE BOARD
Item #16J6
Page 391
September 11 - 12, 2007
DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD OF AUGUST 11,2007
THROUGH AUGUST 17,2007 AND FOR SUBMISSION INTO
THE OFFICIAL RECORDS OF THE BOARD
Item # 1617
DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD OF AUGUST 18, 2007
THROUGH AUGUST 24, 2007 AND FOR SUBMISSION INTO
THE OFFICIAL RECORDS OF THE BOARD
Item # 16J8
AGREEMENT AUTHORIZING THE COLLIER COUNTY
SHERIFFS OFFICE TO HAVE TRAFFIC CONTROL
JURISDICTION OVER PRIV A TE ROADS WITHIN THE
HERITAGE GREENS SUBDIVISION
Item # 16J9
EXTENSION OF THE TAX ROLL BEFORE COMPLETION OF
THE VALUE ADJUSTMENT BOARD HEARINGS PURSUANT
TO SECTION 197.323, F.S. TAX COLLECTOR'S REQUEST
Item # 1611 0
SALES ORDER WITH ELECTION SYSTEMS AND SOFTWARE
TO PURCHASE NEW VOTING SYSTEM AND TO ALLOW THE
RECOGNITION OF REVENUE FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF
STATE AND TO APPROVE A BUDGET AMENDMENT
Item # 16111
Page 392
September 11 - 12,2007
RESOLUTION 2007-238: PREPAY COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
CAP IT AL DEBT
Item #16112
EMS BANKING SERVICE FEES ASSOCIATED WITH
OUT SOURCED BILLING PROCESSES WITH ADPI
Item #16K1
PAYMENT OF INVOICES FROM GARVIN & TRIPP FOR
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES RENDERED IN THE LITIGATION
CASES BROCK V COLLIER COUNTY, ET AL., CASE NO. 04-941
CONSOLIDATED WITH CASE NOS. 05-953 AND 05-1506; AND
COLLIER COUNTY V BROCK, CASE NO. 07-1056, NOW
PENDING IN THE TWENTIETH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
Item #16K2
ORDER AWARDING EXPERT FEES AND COSTS RELATING
TO PARCEL 163 IN THE CASE STYLED COLLIER COUNTY V.
THOMAS F. SALZMANN, ET AL., CASE NO. 03-2550-CA
(GOLDEN GATE P ARKW A Y PROJECT #60027) (FISCAL
IMPACT: $4,000.00)
Item # 16K3
STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT FOR PARCEL NOS. 806 &
706 IN THE LAWSUIT STYLED CC V. JAMES M. BROWN, ET
AL., CASE NO. 06-0525-CA (SANTA BARBARA BOULEVARD
PROJECT NO. 62081) (FISCAL IMPACT $16,607.55)
Page 393
September 11 - 12, 2007
Item #16K4
STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT FOR PARCEL 129 IN THE
LAWSUIT STYLED CC V. WEST COAST DEVELOPMENT
CORPORATION OF NAPLES, INC., ET AL., CASE NO. 06-0708-
CA (SANTA BARBARA BOULEVARD PROJECT NO. 62081)
(POSITIVE FISCAL IMPACT OF $19,314.35)
Item # 16K5
STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF
$15,000.00 FOR THE ACQUISITION OF PARCEL 815 IN THE
LAWSUIT STYLED COLLIER COUNTY V. MYRTLE
PRESERVE LLC, ET AL., CASE NO. 07-0463-CA (LEL Y AREA
STORMW A TER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT #511011) FISCAL
IMPACT: $6505.00)
Item # 16K6
MEDIATED SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND STIPULATED
FINAL JUDGMENT FOR PARCEL NOS. 127,827, 727A & 727B
IN THE LAWSUIT STYLED CC V. NAPOLI LUXURY
CONDOMINIUMS P.O.A., INC., ET AL., CASE NO. 06-1299-CA
(COUNTY BARN ROAD PROJECT NO. 60101) (FISCAL
IMPACT $204,888)
Item #16K7
RESOLUTION 2007-239: COUNTY ATTORNEY OFFICE 2008
FISCAL YEAR PAY AND CLASSIFICATION PLAN,
PROVIDING FOR A GENERAL WAGE ADJUSTMENT AND
Page 394
September 11 - 12,2007
MERIT INCREASE EFFECTIVE ON OCTOBER 1, 2007 (THE
FIRST DAY OF THE FIRST PAY PERIOD IN FISCAL YEAR
2008)
Item # 16K8
RESOLUTION 2007-240: AUTHORIZING THE LEE COUNTY
HOUSING FINANCE AUTHORITY TO ISSUE SINGLE-FAMILY
MORTGAGE REVENUE BONDS TO ASSIST QUALIFIED
BUYERS OF SINGLE FAMILY HOMES IN PARTICIPATING
COUNTIES, INCLUDING COLLIER COUNTY, AND
AUTHORIZING THE COLLIER AUTHORITY TO ENTER INTO
AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH THE LEE AUTHORITY
Item #17 A
RESOLUTION 2007-241: PETITION A VPLAT-2007-AR-11897,
TO DISCLAIM, RENOUNCE AND VACATE THE COUNTY'S
AND THE PUBLIC'S INTEREST IN A 14 FOOT WIDE FIRE
ACCESS EASEMENT OVER TRACT A4, WILSHIRE LAKES
PHASE TWO, A SUBDIVISION AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK
27, PAGES 24 THROUGH 27 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, SITUATED IN SECTION 31,
TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY,
FLORIDA, AND BEING MORE SPECIFICALLY DESCRIBED IN
EXHIBIT A
Item # 1 7B
ORDINANCE 2007-60: REVISING THE COLLIER COUNTY
WATER-SEWER DISTRICT UTILITIES STANDARDS MANUAL
AND ADOPT AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE COLLIER
Page 395
September 11 - 12, 2007
COUNTY UTILITIES STANDARDS AND PROCEDURES
ORDINANCE
Item #17C
RESOLUTION 2007-242: PUDEX-2005-AR-8894, I-75
ASSOCIATES, LLC, REPRESENTED BY FRED REISCHL, AICP,
OF AGNOLI, BARBER & BRUNDAGE, INC., ARE
REQUESTING TWO 2- YEAR PUD EXTENSIONS FOR THE
GOLDEN GATE COMMERCE PARK PUD. THE SUBJECT
PROJECT IS LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST QUADRANT OF
THE INTERSECTION OF COLLIER BOULEVARD (CR-951)
AND MAGNOLIA POND DRIVE, IN SECTION 34, TOWNSHIP
49 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
Item # 1 7D
RESOLUTION 2007-243 (District 1) and RESOLUTION 2007-
243A (District 2): PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLLS AS
THE FINAL ASSESSMENT ROLLS AND ADOPTING SAME AS
THE NON-AD VALOREM ASSESSMENT ROLLS FOR
PURPOSES OF UTILIZING THE UNIFORM METHOD OF
COLLECTION PURSUANT TO SECTION 197.3632, FLORIDA
STATUTES, FOR SOLID WASTE MUNICIPAL SERVICE
BENEFIT UNITS, SERVICE DISTRICT NO. I AND SERVICE
DISTRICT NO. II, SPECIAL ASSESSMENT LEVIED AGAINST
CERTAIN RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES WITHIN THE
UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY
PURSUANT TO COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE 2005-54, AS
AMENDED. REVENUES ARE ANTICIPATED TO BE
$17,288,400
Page 396
September 11 - 12,2007
Item # 1 7E
RESOLUTION 2007-244: PETITION A VESMT-2007-AR-11657,
TO DISCLAIM, RENOUNCE AND VACATE THE COUNTY'S
AND THE PUBLIC'S INTEREST IN A 20 FOOT WIDE LAKE
MAINTENANCE EASEMENT, IRRIGATION EASEMENT &
DRAINAGE EASEMENT OVER A PORTION OF LOT 97, LOT
98, AND TRACT K, MARBELLA LAKES, A SUBDIVISION AS
RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 46, PAGES 77 THROUGH 82 OF
THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA,
SITUATED IN SECTION 19, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 26
EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AND BEING MORE
SPECIFICALL Y DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT A
Item # 1 7F
RESOLUTION 2007-245: PETITION: PUDEX-2005-AR-7944
VICTORIA ESTATES, LTD., REPRESENTED BY R. BRUCE
ANDERSON, OF ROETZEL & ANDRESS AND RALPH
ABERCIA, REPRESENTED BY RICHARD YOV ANOVICH, OF
GOODLETTE, COLEMAN & JOHNSON, ARE REQUESTING
TWO 2- YEAR PUD EXTENSION OF THE COLLIER
BOULEVARD MIXED USE COMMERCE CENTER PUD. THE
SUBJECT PROPERTY, CONSISTING OF 70.2 ACRES, IS
LOCATED IN THE SOUTHWEST QUADRANT OF THE
INTERSECTION OF COLLIER BOULEVARD AND MAGNOLIA
POND DRIVE, IN SECTION 34, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE
26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting
was adjourned by order of the Chair at 1: 16 p.m.
Page 397
September 11 - 12, 2007
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS/EX
OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF
SPECIAL DISTRICTS UNDER ITS CONTROL
JIM OLETTA, Chairman
ATTEST:
DWIGHT,E':]'3'~~K, CLERK
..
:". -'"
, .
. , .-
~""",""..".;,:,
"- - - - ; ~ -.,'
. . '-. ,,\'
. '" . ""'.
Attest'., to. '.
~19nat\Jrt' ~\.0"
These minutes approved by the Board on Q-;}5-0l , as
presented ~ or as corrected
TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF GREGORY COURT
REPORTING SERVICES, INC., BY TERRI LEWIS.
Page 398