BCC Minutes 03/11/2008 R
March 11, 2008
TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Naples, Florida, March 11, 2008
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:
Tom Henning
Donna Fiala
Jim Coletta
Fred Coyle
Frank Halas
ALSO PRESENT:
Jim Mudd, County Manager
Sue Filson, BCC Executive Manager
JeffKlatzkow, County Attorney's Office
Crystal Kinzel, Office of the Clerk of Court
Page 1
COLLIER COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY BOARD (CRAB)
AGENDA
March 11,2008
9:00 AM
Tom Henning, BCC Chairman Commissioner, District 3
Donna Fiala, BCC Vice-Chairman Commissioner, District 1; CRAB Chairman
Jim Coletta, BCC Commissioner, District 5; CRAB Vice-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
March 11, 2008
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) 252-8380; ASSISTED
LISTENING DEVICES FOR THE HEARING IMPAIRED 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. Pastor J.R. Pagan, International Worship Center
2. AGENDA AND MINUTES
A. Approval of today's regular, consent and summary agenda as amended. (Ex
Parte Disclosure provided by Commission members for consent and
summary agenda.)
B. February 5,2008 - BCC/LDC Meeting
C. February 12,2008 - BCC/Regular Meeting
3. SERVICE AWARDS: (EMPLOYEE AND ADVISORY BOARD MEMBERS)
4. PROCLAMATIONS
A. Proclamation designating Thursday, March 13,2008 as Adria D. Starkey
Day, to be accepted by Dr. Jeff Allbritten, President, Collier Campus Edison
College.
Page 2
March 11,2008
B. Proclamation recognizing the Collier County Government Facilities
Management Department for their efforts and innovative techniques to
becoming "green". To be accepted by Ann Simpson and Damon Gonzales of
Facilities Management.
C. Proclamation designating March 12,2008 as Platinum Well Workplace
Award Day. To be accepted by Marilyn Hamachek, Collier County Wellness
Nurse.
D. Proclamation designating the week of March 16-22,2008 as Florida
Surveyors Week. To be accepted by Marcus Berman and David Hyatt.
E. Proclamation designating March 8, 2008 through March 15, 2008 as Panther
Awareness Week. To be accepted by Lisa Ostberg from the Friends of the
Florida Panther Refuge.
F. Proclamation recognizing the partnership between CHS-FSU and the Isabel
Collier Read Medical Campus for their contributions to the health care needs
of rural, elderly and other underserved populations. To be accepted by Steve
Weinman, Executive Vice President/COO ofCHS Healthcare.
5. PRESENTATIONS
A. Presentation of the Advisory Committee Outstanding Member Award for
February 2008 to Willis P. Kriz of the Conservation Collier Land
Acquisition Advisory Committee.
B. Recommendation to recognize Jack Najjar, Emergency Medical Technician,
Bureau of Emergency Services, as Employee of the Month for February
2008.
C. The American Heart Association would like to honor citizens who,
throughout the year, have made a significant difference in the outcome for
victims of sudden cardiac arrest.
D. Presentation by Paul Mattausch, Director, Water Department for the results
of the Naples Women's Club Water Days Experiment to be followed by
Commissioner Coyle reading the names of the students who are winners in
the 5th grade elementary school competition random drawing.
Page 3
March 11, 2008
6. PUBLIC PETITIONS
A. Public petition request by Richard L. Heers, I-HOPE, Inc., to discuss refund
of permi tting/licensing costs.
B. Public petition request by William Klohn to discuss adoption of a "Project
Specific" Impact Fee Deferral Program for Fountain Lakes Residential
Cooperative. (Companion item to 10D)
C. Public Petition request by Mr. Kris Dane to discuss road impact fees for
Calusa Island Marine.
Item 7 and 8 to be heard no sooner than 1:00 V.m., unless otherwise noted.
7. BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
A. This item has been continued to the April 22, 2008 BCC Meetinl!:. This
item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be
provided by Commission members. CU-2007-AR-11394, The Corporation
of the Presiding Bishop of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints,
represented by Matthew Vasilevski of Wedding, Stephenson, and Ibarguen,
Architects, Inc. proposing a Conditional Use allowed per LDC Section
2.04.03 of the Commercial Professional and General Office Zoning District
with a SR29 Commercial Subdistrict Overlay (C-I-SR29-COSD) for
Church/Place of Worship. The 16.747 acres Commercial Professional and
General Office Zoning District with a SR29 Commercial Subdistrict Overlay
(C-I-SR29-COSD) zoned site permits religious facilities as a conditional
use. The subject property is located at 635 State Road 29, in Section 32,
Township 46 South, Range 29 East, Immokalee, Collier County, Florida.
8. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. This item has been continued from the Februarv 26, 2008 BCC meetinl!:.
This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte
disclosure be provided bv Commission members. Petition: PUDZ-2006-
AR-IOI71 Eastbourne Bonita, LLC, represented by Laura Spurgeon, of
Johnson Engineering, Inc., and Patrick G. White, Atty. of Porter, Wright,
Morris & Arthur, LLP., requesting a rezone from the Agricultural (A) and
Special Treatment (ST) Overlay Zoning District to the Residential Planned
Unit Development (RPUD) Zoning District for project known as Brandon
Page 4
March 11, 2008
RPUD, for the development of204 single-family and multi-family
residential units. The subject property, consisting of 51.1 acres, is located on
the southeast corner of the intersection of Livingston Road and Veterans
Memorial Boulevard, Section 13, Township 48 South, Range 25 East,
Collier County, Florida.
B. This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte
disclosure be provided by Commission members. PUDZ-2007-AR-12248
Sabal Palm Development, LLC, represented by Robert L. Duane, AICP, of
Hole Montes, Inc. and Richard D. Y ovanovich of Goodlette, Coleman, and
Johnson, requesting a rezone from the Agricultural (A) to the Commercial
Planned Unit Development (CPUD) Zoning District for project to be known
as Napoli Village. The +/-8.97- acre site is proposed to permit an adult
congregate living facility, comprising two four-story buildings. The subject
site is located east of Tamiami Trail North (US 41), west of Sterling Oaks
PUD, and north of the Community Congregational Church, at 15450
Tamiami Trail North, in Section 9, Township 48 South, Range 25 East,
Collier County, Florida.
9. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
A. Appointment of member to the Contractors Licensing Board.
B. Appointment of member to the Emergency Medical Services Advisory
Council.
C. Request for reconsideration for MPP Shoreline Calculations, Item #2B was
heard at the February 19,2008 LDC Amendment Meeting. (Commissioner
Coyle)
D. Appointment of member to the Habitat Conservation Plan Ad Hoc
Committee.
E. Discussion regarding County Attorney interview process.
10. COUNTY MANAGER'S REPORT
A. This item to be heard at 11:00 a.m. To review the written and oral reports
of the Advisory Boards and Committees scheduled for review in 2008 in
accordance with Ordinance No. 2001-55. Advisory Boards: Animal Services
Page 5
March 11,2008
Advisory Board, Collier County Code Enforcement Board, Contractors
Licensing Board. and Golden Gate Beautification Advisory Committee.
(Mike Sheffield, Assistant to the County Manager)
B. Recommendation to approve the Southwest Florida Consortium 200S State
Legislative Priorities which will be presented by participating County
Commissioners in the Consortium to their respective Legislative Delegation
members in meetings, April 2, 200S in Tallahassee. (Debbie Wight,
Assistant to the County Manager)
C. Recommendation to approve Work Order #SCD-FT-3S50-0S-03,
Courthouse 5th and 6th floor redesign, retroactive to the Notice to Proceed
date of January IS, 200S, to Spillis Candela DMJM to provide for
architectural design services for the design of the 5th and 6th floors of the
Collier County Courthouse located at 330 I Tamiami Trail East in the
amount of$715,6S0. (Damon Gonzales, Facilities Manager)
D. Obtain direction from the Board of County Commissioners on waiving the
requirements of Ordinance 2007-S4 and on authorizing the Chairman to
sign, a commitment letter for MDG Capital Corporation (Developer) for
deferral of 100% of Collier County impact fees for 147 Community
Workforce Housing Innovative Pilot (CWHIP) program, owner-occupied
affordable housing units located at The Lords Way, mile east of the
intersection of Collier Boulevard and the Lords Way, Fountain Lakes
Residential Cooperative, Naples. (Frank Ramsey, SHIP Program
Coordinator) (Companion to Item #6B)
E. Recommendation to approve a $99,000 budget amendment for Fiscal Year
200S to make up for a shortfall of funds as a result of the policy decision not
to implement a proposed fee collection structure for the Emergency
Management Department. (Dan Summers, Director, Emergency
Management)
F. Recommendation to adopt a resolution authorizing the acquisition by gift or
purchase of the fee simple interests necessary for the construction of
storm water retention and treatment ponds required for the expansion of
Randall Boulevard from Immokalee Road to DeSoto Boulevard. (Project
No. 60065.) Estimated fiscal impact: $2,400,000.00. (Norman Feder,
Transportation Services Administrator)
Page 6
March 11,2008
G. Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) consider
input provided by the Code Enforcement Board during their February 12,
2008 meeting, in response to the BCC's request for guidance concerning a
fair settlement amount relating to the release of the code enforcement lien
imposed against Robert Lockhart, in Case No. 2004-26, relating to property
located 1361 Lake Shore Drive in Collier County, Florida. (Michelle Arnold,
Director, Code Enforcement, CDES)
H. Recommendation to approve Contract #08-5011 to D.N. Higgins,
Incorporated; Kyle Construction Corporation; Quality Enterprises,
Incorporated; Mitchell and Stark Corporation; and Haskins, Incorporated, in
the estimated amount of $2,000,000 for underground contractor services.
(Pam Libby, Operations Manager)
I. Recommendation to award Annual Contract #08-5020 to Southwest Florida
Mitigation LLC, Little Pine Island Mitigation Bank and Southwest Florida
Wetlands Joint Venture for Wetland Mitigation Credits and Southwest
Florida Wetlands Joint Venture for Panther Habitat Units. Bid No. 08-5020.
Projected Annual Expenditures: $1.5 Million. (Kevin Dugan, Project
Manager)
J. This item continued from the February 26, 2008 BCC meetinl!: and is
further continued to the March 25, 2008 BCC meetinl!:. Recommendation
to grant final approval of the roadway (private) and drainage improvements
for the final plat of Olde Cypress Unit One (Olde Cypress PUD). The
roadway and drainage improvements will be privately maintained. (Stan
Chrzanowski, Sr. Engineer, Engineering & Environmental Services
Department, CDES)
11. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS
12. COUNTY ATTORNEY'S REPORT
A. Request by the Collier County Health Facilities Authority for approval of a
resolution authorizing the Authority to issue revenue bonds for healthcare
facilities at Moorings Park. ($40 million) (Don Pickworth)
13. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
Page 7
March 11,2008
14. AIRPORT AUTHORITY AND/OR COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY
A. This item to be heard at 10:30 a.m. Recommendation for the Collier
County Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) to approve a Resolution
accepting the Cultural Needs Assessment Report and recommending the
BCC create by ordinance a Cultural District Boundary within the Bayshore
section of the CRA; authorize the CRA staff to continue to develop an
implementation package for the District; and return with recommendations
for approval. (David Jackson, Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA)
B. This item to be heard immediately followinl!: Item #14A.
Recommendation for the Collier County Community Redevelopment
Agency (CRA) to authorize the creation and funding of a Full Time
Employee (FTE) position (Operations Coordinator) for the
Bayshore/Gateway Triangle area in FY08; recommend that the BCC
approve a Fund 187 FY08 Budget Amendment for the position; and
authorize the Executive Director to advertise the position as an internal
transfer for applicants from the County Manager agency and hire a qualified
applicant. (Fiscal Impact: $31,020 FY08) (David Jackson, Bayshore
Gateway Triangle CRA)
C. This item to be heard immediately followinl!: Item #14B.
Recommendation for the Collier County Community Redevelopment
Agency (CRA) to authorize the creation and funding of a Full Time
Employee (FTE) position (Project Manager) for the Immokalee area in
FY08; recommend that the BCC approve an Immokalee Fund (186) FY08
Budget Amendment for the position; and authorize the Executive Director to
advertise the position as an internal transfer for applicants from the County
Manager agency and hire a qualified applicant (Fiscal Impact: $35,181
FY08). (Penny Phillippi, Immokalee CRA)
D. Collier County Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) selection of
Chairman and Vice Chairman for calendar year 2008.
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
Page 8
March 11, 2008
each item. If discussion is desired by a member of the Board, that item(s) will
be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered separately.
A. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
1) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the water utility
facility for Pebblebrook Commercial, Phase 4.
2) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the water and sewer
utility facilities for City Gate Commerce Center.
3) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the water and sewer
utility facilities for The Rookery at Marco Clubhouse.
4) Recommendation to grant final approval of the roadway (private) and
drainage improvements for the final plat of Bradford Lakes (Cypress
Woods PUD) with the roadway and drainage improvements being
privately maintained.
5) Recommendation to grant final approval of the roadway (private) and
drainage improvements for the final plat of Cotton Green (Marco
Shores / Fiddlers Creek PUD), the roadway and drainage
improvements will be privately maintained by the Fiddlers Creek
Community Development District.
6) Recommendation to accept a Proposed Settlement Agreement
providing for Compromise and Release of Lien in the Code
Enforcement Action entitled Collier County vs. Ronald Freeman,
CEB Case No. 2005-26.
7) Recommendation to grant final approval of the roadway (private) and
drainage improvements for the final plat of Grey Oaks Unit Eleven,
the roadway and drainage improvements will be privately maintained.
B. TRANSPORTATION SERVICES
1) Recommendation to approve an Agreement and accept a Drainage
Access and Maintenance Easement for the donation of property
required for the Bayshore Drive & Thomasson Drive Stormwater
Page 9
March 11,2008
Improvement Project. Project #511341.
2) Recommendation to Award Collier County Bid #08-5042 Diesel
Powered Lowboy Tractor to Wallace International Trucks. ($101,997)
3) Recommendation to award Contract(s) #08-5017, Annual Contract for
Countywide Exotic Vegetation Removal to the following firms:
Resource Restoration, Inc., Environmental Aquatic, Earth Balance
and Aquagenix. ($596,000 was spent in FY07)
4) Recommendation for the Board of County Commissioners to approve
a budget amendment to move the remaining balance of $200,000 from
the Tropicana Boulevard Bridge Project (#601621) to the Planning
Consultant Services Project (#601091) within the Transportation
Supported Gas Tax Fund.
5) Recommendation to approve a change order to Kraft Construction
Company, Inc. to move savings in the amount of $590,560.00 as a
result of value engineering to allowance line items amending contract
#07-4173 Gordon River Water Quality Park (Freedom Park) Project
No.5l018.
6) Recommendation to approve a change order in the amount of
$31,250.00 to Quality Enterprises USA, Inc. amending the St.
Andrews Blvd. Interconnect Stormwater Improvements Project
(Project No. 511401) construction contract.
C. PUBLIC UTILITIES
1) Recommendation to reject the result of Bid No. 08-5044, attained by
Professional Service Industries, Inc. to sample, analyze and report
data collected for the Golden Gate Groundwater Baseline Monitoring
Proj ect.
2) Recommendation to approve work order #QE-FT-3535-08-03 in the
Amount of$342,830.00 to Quality Enterprises USA, Inc., for
installation of JWC Fine Screens at South Collier Water Reclamation
Facility (SCWRF) under Contract #04-3535, Annual Contract for
Underground Utility Contracting Services, Project #73961 and to
Page 10
March 11, 2008
approve the necessary Budget Amendment, Project #72508.
D. PUBLIC SERVICES
1) Recommendation to accept funding from the 4-H Foundation Clubs,
Inc. in the amount of $38,000 for the 4-H Outreach Program managed
by the Collier County University of Florida/IF AS Extension
Department and approve a budget amendment in the amount of
$14,000.
2) Recommend Approval of a Coastal Advisory Committee (CAC), Sub
Committee to evaluate Wiggins Pass Modeling and make
recommendations for consideration by the TDC and BCC. (This
committee is to be chaired by Heidi Kulpa from the CAe).
3) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approves,
and authorizes the Chairman to sign, a corrective lien agreement and
release of lien 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 130, Trail
Ridge, East Naples.
4) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approves,
and authorizes the Chairman to sign, a lien agreement with Soyla
Maria Cruz (Owner) for deferral of 100% of Collier County impact
fees for an owner-occupied affordable housing unit located at Lot 33,
Liberty Landing, Immokalee.
5) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approves,
and authorizes the Chairman to sign, a lien agreement with Heather
Lynn Bugger (Owner) for deferral of 100% of Collier County impact
fees for an owner-occupied affordable housing unit located at Lot 36,
Liberty Landing, Immokalee.
6) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approves,
and authorizes the Chairman to sign, a lien agreement with Arturo
Lara Lara and Beatriz Lara (Owners) for deferral of 100% of Collier
County impact fees for an owner-occupied affordable housing unit
located at Lot 32, Liberty Landing, Immokalee.
Page 11
March 11,2008
7) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approves,
and authorizes the Chairman to sign, a lien agreement with Doreen
Annette Saunier (Owner) for deferral of 100% of Collier County
impact fees for an owner-occupied affordable housing unit located at
Lot 53, Trail Ridge, East Naples.
8) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approves,
and authorizes the Chairman to sign, a lien agreement with Jesus
Martinez and Irma Yadira Rodriguez (Owners) for deferral of 100%
of Collier County impact fees for an owner-occupied affordable
housing unit located at Lot 38, Liberty Landing, Immokalee.
9) Recommendation to approve an amended proposal for Disaster
Recovery Initiative Supplemental Grant funds to the Florida
Department of Community Affairs and to authorize signature
authority to the County Manager and designees to submit required
reports.
10) Recommendation to reject Bid #07-4098 for the Construction of new
Soccer Field at East Naples Community Park.
11) Recommendation to approve a Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation
Commission (FWC) Division of Marine Fisheries Management,
Artificial Reef Construction Grant Application in the amount of
$60,000.
12) Present to the Board of County Commissioners a summary of the
Impact Fee Deferral Agreements recommended for approval in FY08,
including the total number of Agreements approved, the total dollar
amount deferred and the balance remaining for additional deferrals in
FY08.
E. ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
1) Recommendation to authorize the sale of Collier County surplus
property on March 29,2008.
2) Report and Ratify Staff-Approved Change Orders and Changes to
Work Orders to Board-Approved Contracts.
Page 12
March 11,2008
3) Recommendation to enter into an Agreement with the Sheriffs Office
for the use of inmate labor.
F. COUNTY MANAGER
1) Authorize all necessary budget amendments that memorialize the
Board of County Commissioner's decision on February 26,2008
(Agenda Item #1 OF) to use General Fund Reserves to offset estimated
Emergency Medical Services Fund (490) transport revenue shortfalls
for the remainder ofFY08 and for FY09. The estimated FY08
shortfall is $2,237,200; General Fund (00 I) reserves for unfunded
capital requirements will be transferred to Emergency Medical
Services Fund (490) for the FY08 shortfall. Turn back of excess fees
from the Constitutional Officers from FY07 exceeded budgeted turn
back by $7,240,592. These excess fees will be appropriated and
$2,538,000 of that appropriation will be transferred to Emergency
Medical Services Fund (490) to offset the anticipated FY09 transport
fee revenue shortfall.
G. AIRPORT AUTHORITY AND/OR COMMUNITY
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
1) To have the BCC, acting in the capacity of the CRA, to review and
approve the 2007 Annual Report of the CRA required by Florida
Statue 163.356(3) (c), by March 31st and to direct the County
Manager or his designee to file the Annual Report with the County
Clerk and publish notice of the filing, as required by the Florida
Statutes.
H. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
1) Commissioner Fiala requests Board approval for reimbursement for
her annual membership to CREW Land & Water Trust serving a valid
public purpose; $25.00 to be paid from Commissioner Fiala's travel
budget.
2) Commissioner Fiala requests Board approval for reimbursement for
attending a function serving a valid public purpose. She will be
attending the 4th Annual Freedom of the Press Luncheon,
Wednesday, March 12,2008 at the Naples Hilton; $30.00 to be paid
Page 13
March 11, 2008
from Commissioner Fiala's travel budget.
3) Commissioner Fiala requests Board approval for reimbursement for
attending a function serving a valid public purpose. The
Commissioner attended the Girl Scout Cook-ie-OffFundraiser,
Sunday, February 17, 2008 at the Naples Beach Hotel & Golf Club;
$10.00 to be paid from Commissioner Fiala's travel budget.
4) Commissioner Fiala requests Board approval for reimbursement for
attending a function serving a valid public purpose. Commissioner
Fiala attended the Friends of Collier Fashion Show, Saturday,
February 23,2008 at the Royal Palm Country Club; $55.00 to be paid
from Commissioner Fiala's travel budget.
5) Commissioner Fiala requests Board approval for reimbursement for
attending a function serving a valid public purpose. The
Commissioner attended the East Naples Civic Association Luncheon
on Thursday, February 21, 2008 at Carrabba's; $21.00 to be paid from
Commissioner Fiala's travel budget.
6) Commissioner Coletta requests Board approval for reimbursement
serving a valid public purpose. The Commissioner attended the
Crystal Lake Resort Luncheon, March 3, 2008; $5 to be paid from
Commissioner Coletta's travel budget.
7) Commissioner Coletta requests Board approval for reimbursement
serving a valid public purpose. The Commissioner attended the
Hodges University Immokalee Site Open House, on Saturday, March
8,2008; $15.99 to be paid from Commissioner Coletta's travel budget.
I. MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
1) Miscellaneous items to file for record with action as directed.
J. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
1) Request that the Collier County Board of County Commissioners,
Naples, Florida, authorize the publishing of one public hearing
regarding Sheriff Hunter's recommended Ordinance to establish a
policy for the collection of administrative registration fees for the
Page 14
March 11, 2008
initial registration and re-registration of individuals required by
Florida Statute to register with the Sheriff as a career offender,
convicted felon, sex offender or sexual predator, and to place this
recommended ordinance on the Board's Summary Agenda.
2) To obtain Board approval for disbursements for the period of
February 16,2008 to February 22,2008 and for submission into the
official records of the Board.
3) To obtain Board approval for disbursements for the period of
February 23, 2008 to February 29,2008 and for submission into the
official records of the Board.
K. COUNTY ATTORNEY
1) Recommendation to accept an Offer of Judgment in the amount of
$16,000 for the taking of Parcel No. 143 in the lawsuit styled Collier
County v. Charles R. Wilson, et aI., Case No. 02-5 I 64-CA
(Immokalee Road, Project No. 60018). (Fiscal Impact: $4,521.00)
2) A recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners adopt a
Resolution relating to accessory structures in the Estates (E) Zoning
District, which directs the County Manager, or designee, to apply the
seventy-five (75) foot rear yard setback requirement, to designate any
accessory structure that has received a Certificate of Occupancy prior
to February 26, 2008, as legal nonconforming, and to require Type B
landscape buffering for any accessory structure under active
construction as of February 26,2008.
17. SUMMARY AGENDA - THIS SECTION IS FOR ADVERTISED PUBLIC
HEARINGS AND MUST MEET THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA: 1) A
RECOMMENDA TION 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
Page 15
March 11, 2008
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 by Commission members. VA-2007-AR-12629,
Sara De La Rosa is requesting an after-the-fact Variance of2.3 feet to permit
the encroachment of a single-family dwelling into the required 30-foot front
yard setback area of the Residential Single Family (RSF-3) Zoning District.
The 0.36-acre subject property is located at 1201 Camellia Avenue, Lot 24,
Block C of the Immokalee Highland Subdivision, in Section 33, Township
46, Range 29, of Collier County, Florida
18. ADJOURN
INQUIRIES CONCERNING CHANGES TO THE BOARD'S AGENDA SHOULD
BE MADE TO THE COUNTY MANAGER'S OFFICE AT 252-8383.
Page 16
March 11, 2008
March 11, 2008
MR. MUDD: Ladies and gentlemen, please take your seats.
Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, you have a hot mike.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Good morning. Welcome to the
Board of County Commissioners' regular meeting of March 11,2008.
Today our invocation will be given by Pastor G.R. (sic) Pagan of
International Worship Service (sic). And after that, we will do the
Pledge of Allegiance.
So would you all rise and join us?
PASTOR PAGAN: Good morning.
Father, I thank you this morning for this great opportunity that
you have given us to be over here. I ask you, oh, God, that you bring
the commissioners and the leaders of this community to take the best
decisions for it, Lord.
I ask you that you bless this community and that you take us
forward in victory getting the blessings that you want for our life and
this community.
I ask you all these things in the name of Jesus Christ. Amen.
(The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Pastor Pagan does a wonderful job of
delivering that in Spanish also.
County Manager, would you walk us through the change list
today.
Item #2A
REGULAR, CONSENT AND SUMMARY AGENDA-
APPROVED AND/OR ADOPTED WITH CHANGES
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
Agenda changes, Board of County Commissioners, March 11,
2008.
Item 7 A, the first sentence in the title should read: This item has
Page 2
March 11, 2008
been continued to the April 22, 2008, BCC meeting, and by approving
the continuance at the petitioner's request, the BCC is also remanding
item back to the CCPC for a rehearing.
Commissioner, when you get to that particular point during your
agenda today, we'd ask you to do a separate vote on that particular
item, please, just for the record.
Next item is to add item 9F, board discussion regarding the
potential revote of the presidential primary and the cost associated to
Collier County's budget. That item is added at Commissioner
Henning's request.
The next item is to withdraw item 16D2, and that's to recommend
approval of a Coastal Advisory Committee, CAC, subcommittee to
evaluate Wiggins Pass modeling and make recommendations for
consideration by the TDC and the BCC. This committee is to be
chaired by Heidi Kulpa from the Coastal Advisory Committee. That
item is being withdrawn at staffs request.
Next item is to move item 16K2 to 128. It's a recommendation
that the Board of County Commissioners adopt a resolution relating to
accessory structures in the Estates zoning district, which direct --
which directs the county manager or designees to apply the 75-foot
rear yard setback requirement to designate any accessory structure that
has received a Certificate of Occupancy prior to February 26,2008, as
legal nonconforming, and to require type B landscape buffering for
any accessory structure under active construction as of February 26,
2008. The item is being asked to be moved by Commissioner Coletta.
You have a series of time certain items today. The first item is
item lOA to be heard at 11 a.m., to review the written and oral reports
to the advisory boards and committees scheduled for review in 2008 in
accordance with ordinance number 2001-55.
The advisory boards for today will be the Animal Services
Advisory Board, the Collier County Code Enforcement Board,
Contractor Licensing Board, and the Golden Gate Beautification
Page 3
March 11, 2008
Advisory Committee.
Then you have a series of items that are going to happen around
10:30 on the schedule for time -- for time certain, and those are all
your CRA items, starting with item 14A to be heard at 10:30 a.m.,
recommendation for the Collier County Community Redevelopment
Agency to approve a resolution accepting the cultural needs
assessment report and recommending the BCC create by ordinance a
cultural district boundary within the Bayshore section of the CRA;
authorize the CRA staff to continue to develop an implementation
packet for the district; and return with recommendations for approval.
14A (sic) will be followed by 14B (sic) on or about 10:30, and
that is to -- a recommendation for Collier County Community
Redevelopment Agency to authorize the creation and funding of a
full-time employee position, operations coordinator, for the Bayshore
Gateway Triangle area in FY-'08; recommended that the BCC approve
a fund 187 FY-'08 budget amendment for the position; and authorize
the executive director to advertise the position as an internal transfer
from applicants from the county manager agency to hire a qualified
applicant. Fiscal impact is $31,020 in FY -'08.
14B (sic) will be followed by 14C (sic) on or about 10:30, and
that is to recommend -- it's a recommendation for the Collier County
Community Redevelopment Agency, CRA, to authorize the creation
of the funding of a full-time employee, FTE position, a project
manager, for the Immokalee area in FY-'08; recommend that the BCC
approve an Immokalee fund 186 FY-'08 budget amendment for the
position; and authorize the executive director to advertise the position
as an internal transfer for applicants from the county manager's agency
and hire a qualified applicant. The fiscal impact is $35,181 for
FY-'08.
And if I could make a recommendation -- it's not on your list --
but if 14C is followed by 14D, while you still have the gavel switched,
the board needs to appoint a chairman and vice-chairman for the CRA,
Page 4
March 11, 2008
and that's item 14D.
And that's all I have, Mr. Chairman, Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
County Manager (sic), do you have any changes to today's
agenda? County Attorney, I'm sorry.
MR. KLATZKOW: No, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I was looking your way, but I just
referenced the wrong -- wrong body.
Commissioner Coletta, do you have any changes or ex parte
communication on today's summary agenda?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I do have a disclosure on the
consent agenda. Item 16 -- that's less than clear, I'm sorry. That
would be 16 what?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: 168.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: B? Okay. Forgive me,
Commissioner Henning. This will be the last item that -- for
consideration. Oh,88. Well, that would be the consent agenda, okay.
Pages were a little out of order. Forgive me for that.
No, I have one disclosure. Summary agenda, item 17 A, I've had
meetings, correspondence, emails, and phone calls, and I have nothing
-- no other changes to the agenda.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I have no changes to the
agenda and nothing to declare on the consent or summary.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. I have no changes to today's
agenda, but I do have an ex parte communication on 17 A, email with
staff.
Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. I have -- on our summary
agenda, I have no disclosures, and on regular agenda today -- or our
consent agenda, I'd like to pulll6I1 onto the regular agenda.
Page 5
March 11, 2008
MR. MUDD: That would go to 10K, 16I1, sir.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Anything else?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That's it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I have no disclosures on the
consent agenda. On the summary agenda, item number 17 A, I did
receive correspondence, reviewed the staff report sent to the Planning
Commission, and I have no further changes to the agenda.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. With that I will entertain a
motion to accept today's agenda as amended.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So moved.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Coletta,
second by Commissioner Henning.
All in favor of the motion signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries, unanimously.
Page 6
AGENDA CHANGES
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' MEETING
March 11. 2008
Item 7 A: The first sentence in the title should read: "This item has been continued to the April
22, 2008 BCC meeting, and by approving the continuance at the petitioner's request, the BCC is
also remanding item back to the CCPC for rehearing." (Staff's request.)
Add on Item 9F: Board discussion regarding the potential re-vote of the Presidential primary and
the costs associated to the Collier County Budget. (Commissioner Henning's request.)
Withdraw Item 16D2: Recommend approval of a Coastal Advisory Committee (CAC), Sub-
Committee to evaluate Wiggins Pass Modeling and make recommendations for consideration by
the TDC and BCC. This committee is to be chaired by Heidi Kulpa from the CAC. (Staff's
request.)
Move Item 16K2 to 12B: A recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners adopt a
Resolution relating to accessory structures in the Estates (E) Zoning District, which directs the
County Manager, or designee, to apply the seventy-five (75) foot rear yard setback requirement, to
designate any accessory structure that has received a Certificate of Occupancy prior to February
26, 2008, as legal nonconforming, and to require Type B landscape buffering for any accessory
structure under active construction as of February 26,2008. (Commissioner Coletta's request.)
Time Certain Items:
Item 1 OA to be heard at 11 :00 a.m. To review the written and oral reports of the Advisory Boards
and Committees scheduled for review in 2008 in accordance with Ordinance No. 2001-55.
Advisory Boards: Animal Services Advisory Board, Collier County Code Enforcement Board,
Contractors Licensing Board, and Golden Gate Beautification Advisory Committee.
Item 14A to be heard at 10:30 a.m. Recommendation for the Collier County Community
Redevelopment Agency (CRA) to approve a Resolution accepting the Cultural Needs Assessment
Report and recommending the BCC create by ordinance a Cultural District Boundary within the
Bayshore section of the CRA; authorize the CRA staff to continue to develop an implementation
package for the District; and return with recommendations for approval.
Item 14B to be heard immediatelv followinq 14A: Recommendation for the Collier County
Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) to authorize the creation and funding of a full time
employee (FTE) position (Operations Coordinator) for the BayshorelGateway Triangle area in
FY08; recommend that the BCC approve a Fund 187 FY08 Budget Amendment for the position;
and authorize the Executive Director to advertise the position as an internal transfer for
applicants from the County Manager agency and hire a qualified applicant. (Fiscal Impact:
$31,020 FY08).
Item 14C to be heard immediatelv followinq 14B: Recommendation for the Collier County
Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) to authorize the creation and funding of a full time
employee (FTE) position (Project Manager) for the Immokalee area in FY08; recommend that the
BCC approve an Immokalee Fund (186) FY08 Budget Amendment for the position; and authorize
the Executive Director to advertise the position as an internal transfer for applicants from the
County Manager agency and hire a qualified applicant (Fiscal Impact: $35,181 FY08).
March 11, 2008
Item #2B and #2C
MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 5, 2008 - BCC/LDC MEETING AND
FEBRUARY 12, 2008 - BCC/REGULAR MEETING - APPROVED
AS PRESENTED
I make -- entertain a motion to accept the minutes of the February
5,2008, BCC/LDC meeting and February 12,2008, BCC regular
meeting.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: So moved.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion to accept by Commissioner
Halas second by Commissioner Fiala.
All in favor of the motion signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Carries unanimously.
And we're going to -
MR. MUDD: Proclamations, sir.
Item #4A
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING THURSDAY, MARCH 13,
2008 AS ADRIA D. STARKEY DAY, ACCEPTED BY DR. JEFF
ALLBRITTEN, PRESIDENT, COLLIER CAMPUS EDISON
COLLEGE - ADOPTED
Page 7
March 11, 2008
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- proclamations. First proclamation
is to designate Thursday, March 13,2008, as Andrea (sic) D. Starkey
Day. To be accepted by Jeff Allbritten, President of Collier County
Edison Community College.
MR. MUDD: Dr. Allbritten, come on up, please.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: All the way up to the front, Jeff. Hi,
how are you? It's good to see you.
Whereas, Adria D. Starkey has provided exceptional leadership,
loyalty, and dedication for advancement opportunities for the
community in education, healthcare, and the arts; and,
Whereas, she has served leadership, philanthropy, and advocacy
roles in education endeavors, including the University of Florida's
Harn Museum National Council, Collier County Education
Foundation Board, Florida Gulf Coast University Foundation Board,
and the Community School of Naples Board; and,
Whereas Adria D. Starkey has served as chairman of the
Economic Development Council of Collier County; and,
Whereas, being a part of the Southwest Florida Regional
Planning Council and the Naples Area Chamber of Commerce, she
forged strong bonds with members in the community; and,
Whereas, Adria D. Starkey has provided strong commitment and
dedication to youth advancement organizations, including Southwest
Florida Junior Achievement and the Boys and Girls Club, Inc.; and,
Whereas, she was the 2004 recipient of the Greater Naples
American Association of University Women of Achievement Award
for her hard work and dedication to education and to support women
in the workforce; and,
Whereas, she currently serves as a trustee to the Naples Children
and Education Foundation and the Shelter for Abused Women; and,
Whereas, the Board of County Commissioners is pleased to offer
a special transcribe to Adria Dr. Starkey whose vision and effort on
behalf of Collier County merit the recognition and gratitude of our
Page 8
March 11, 2008
citizens.
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that Thursday, March 13th
be designated as Adria D. Starkey Day.
Done and ordered this 11 th day of 2008, Board of County
Commissioners, Collier County, Florida, Tom Henning, Chairman.
And Mr. Chairman, I motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: There's a motion by Commissioner
Fiala to accept the proclamation, second by Commissioner Halas.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Carries unanimously. Thank you.
(Applause.)
DR. ALLBRITTEN: Thank you very much.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Is she here today?
DR. ALLBRITTEN: No.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Thank you for everything you're
doing, too.
MR. MUDD: Get your picture.
Item #4 B
PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING THE COLLIER COUNTY
GOVERNMENT FACILITIES MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
FOR THEIR EFFORTS AND INNOVATIVE TECHNIQUES TO
Page 9
March 11, 2008
BECOMING "GREEN". ACCEPTED BY ANN SIMPSON AND
DAMON GONZALES OF FACILITIES MANAGEMENT -
ADOPTED
Commissioner, the next proclamation is recognizing Collier
County Government Facilities Management Department for their
efforts in innovative techniques to becoming green. To be accepted
by Ann Simpson and Damon Gonzales of the Facility Management
Department.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Whereas, facility management is
dedicated to creating better and safer environments for maintaining the
county's assets and planning for the future by looking at
environmental and social impacts that affect county as a whole; and
whereas, Collier that affect the county as a whole; and,
Whereas, Collier County Government realizes that only through
effective resource management can we utilize and take advantage of
available and innovative strategies; and,
Whereas, Collier County, using these measures in educating
citizens and employees, will create healthier, more productive, and
enjoyable environments; and,
Whereas, to conserve water, facilities management has
implemented such innovations as installing waterless urinals and
low-volume toilets, aerators on toilets, and investing in the future by
renovating the main complex irrigation system to achieve the use of
IQ water; and,
Whereas, to save resources, the use of green cleaning solutions
and paper products has been incorporated in their daily janitorial
services to county facilities; and,
Whereas, the "Turn It Off' campaign is being implemented by
facilities management to encourage all employees in turning off lights,
computers, work station accessories, retrofitting lights with
energy-efficient bulbs, and setting the thermostats to 76 degrees thus
Page 10
March 11, 2008
promoting the effective use of energy; and,
Whereas, green initiatives, water-saving initiatives, and energy
saving initiatives are implemented to protect and save the earth. They
equally protect and save the taxpayer.
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that the facilities
management department be recognized for their efforts and innovative
techniques to become green.
Done and ordered this 11 th day of March, 2008, Board of County
Commissioners, Collier County, Florida, Tom Henning, Chairman.
Mr. Chairman, I make a motion we accept this proclamation.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: There's a motion by Commissioner
Coletta (sic) to accept this proclamation, a second by Commissioner
Fiala.
All in favor of the motion signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Carries unanimously.
Thank you.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Do you want to say a few words?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Are you going to make some
remarks? I'll read the names of the students who were winners.
MR. MUDD: It's the water issue. That's later.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
Page 11
March 11, 2008
Item #7A - Separate Motion Needed
CU-2007-AR-I1394, THE CORPORATION OF THE PRESIDING
BISHOP OF THE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTER
DAY SAINTS, REPRESENTED BY MATTHEW V ASILEVSKI
OF WEDDING, STEPHENSON, AND IBARGUEN,
ARCHITECTS, INC. PROPOSING A CONDITIONAL USE
ALLOWED PER LDC SECTION 2.04.03 OF THE COMMERCIAL
PROFESSIONAL AND GENERAL OFFICE ZONING DISTRICT
WITH A SR29 COMMERCIAL SUBDISTRICT OVERLAY (C-l-
SR29-COSD) FOR CHURCH/PLACE OF WORSHIP. THE 16.747
ACRES COMMERCIAL PROFESSIONAL AND GENERAL
OFFICE ZONING DISTRICT WITH A SR29 COMMERCIAL
SUBDISTRICT OVERLAY (C-I-SR29-COSD) ZONED SITE
PERMITS RELIGIOUS FACILITIES AS A CONDITIONAL USE.
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 635 STATE ROAD
29, IN SECTION 32, TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST,
IMMOKALEE, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA - MOTION TO
REMAND THIS ITEM BACK TO THE CCPC FOR ADDITIONAL
REVIEW - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Mr. Chairman, if I -- if I could just get a point.
When I did the agenda changes, I asked the board -- I made a
recommendation to the board that item 7 A on the change sheet, that it
would need a separate -- a separate vote to be continued because it is
advertised for today, and you're remanding it back to the CCPC. If I
could get that vote.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I thought what you meant was we're
going to do that when that item comes up on the agenda. If you -- if
you want to just go ahead and take care of it now, I don't have a
problem with that.
Page 12
March 11, 2008
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Entertain a motion to continue 7 A
and --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: So moved.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- send it back to the Planning
Commission.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: There's a motion by Commissioner
Halas, second by Commissioner Coyle.
Discussion on the motion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion, signify by
saymg aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Carries unanimously.
MR. MUDD: Thank you, sir. Appreciate that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
Item #4C
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING MARCH 12,2008 AS
PLATINUM WELL WORKPLACE AWARD DA Y. ACCEPTED
BY MARILYN HAMACHEK, COLLIER COUNTY WELLNESS
NURSE - ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: The next proclamation is a proclamation
Page 13
March 11, 2008
designating March 12,2008, as Platinum Workforce Award Day. To
be accepted by Marilyn Hamachek from the Collier County Well --
the Collier County wellness nurse. Again, it's the Platinum Well
Workplace Award Day.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And I have the pleasure of reading
this. Marilyn and I used to work together for years at the hospital, so
it's kind of a special thing to be able to do this.
Whereas, the Collier County Employee Wellness Program
received -- received the Wellness Councils of America Platinum Well
W orkplace Award -- let me say that again. America Platinum Level
Well Workplace Award -- on February 6, 2008; and,
Whereas, Collier County Government met a rigorous set of
criteria and received recognition as one of America's healthiest
organizations; and,
Whereas, Collier County Government, in winning the Platinum
W ell Workplace Award, successfully developed a comprehensive
work culture that supports the mental, emotional, and physical
well-being of all employees; and,
Whereas, Collier County Government captured the support of the
county manager to maintain such a culture; and,
Whereas, Collier County Government Human Resources and
Risk Management Department programs have driven such efforts;
and,
Whereas, the wellness program crafted an operating plan, chose
appropriate interventions, and consistently evaluated the respective
outcomes; and,
Whereas, Collier County Government received one of only 23
Platinum Level Awards awarded across the nation, and no other
county government has ever received the Platinum Level Award; and,
Whereas, this award distinguishes Collier County Government as
a leader and innovator in workplace health promotion.
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of County
Page 14
March 11, 2008
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that March 12,2008, be
designated as Platinum Well Workplace A ward Day in honor of
receiving this prestigious award.
Done and ordered this 11 th day of March, 2008, Board of County
Commissioners, Collier County, Florida, Tom Henning, Chairman.
And Mr. Chairman, I make a motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion to move this proclamation by
Commissioner Fiala, second by Commissioner Coletta.
All in favor of the motion signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Carries unanimously.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Think you can hold that?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: It's pretty heavy, Marilyn.
MS. HAMACHEK: I'd just like to say thank you to the Board of
Commissioners and to Jim Mudd, the County Manager, for your
support of the wellness program, and thank you for caring about our
employees' health and well-being. Thank you.
(Applause.)
MR. MUDD: Commissioners, that's a huge success story in this
county, okay, from where we were years ago to where we are today,
and a lot has to go to Marilyn and all those people that basically stood
up and clapped and congratulated her. And it has changed a lot of
things that we do in the county, and we do have a healthier workforce
because of it.
Page 15
March 11, 2008
Item #4 D
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING THE WEEK OF MARCH 16-
22, 2008 AS FLORIDA SURVEYORS WEEK. ACCEPTED BY
MARCUS BERMAN AND DAVID HYATT - ADOPTED
Item 4D is a proclamation designating the week of March 16th
through the 22nd, 2008, as Florida Surveyors Week. To be accepted
by Marcus Berman and David Hyatt.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Please come forward. Anyone else
that's in the business of being a surveyor. I welcome you gentlemen.
Whereas, the land surveyors are counted among the founding
leaders of our country and were instrumental in the formation of the
layout of property boundaries in the United States, which have
provided our citizens the enjoyment of property ownership; and.
Whereas, as George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and other
former presidents of the United States served their fellow colonists as
surveyors; and,
Whereas, the citizens of Florida recognize the value of
contributions of the surveying profession to history, development, and
the quality of life in Florida and the United States of America, and
make an important decision based on the knowledge and expertise of
licensed surveyors and mappers; and,
Whereas, the surveying profession requires special education,
training, knowledge of mathematics, and the related physical and
applied sciences, and requirements of the law of evidence; and,
Whereas, surveyors are uniquely qualified and licensed to
determine and describe land and water boundaries for management of
natural resources and the protection of private and public property
rights; and,
Whereas, the continual advancements of instrumentation have
Page 16
March 11, 2008
required the surveyor not only to be able to understand and implement
the methods of the past, but also to learn and employ modern
technology to find solutions to meet the challenges of the future.
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that the week of March
16th through the 22nd, 2008, be designated as Florida Surveyors
Week and recognize the many contributions and ongoing dedication of
surveyors to the citizens of Florida and to the United States.
Done and ordered this 11 th day of March, 2008, Board of County
Commissioners, Collier County, Florida, Tom Henning, Chair.
And Mr. Henning, I move that we approve this proclamation of
the surveyors.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Halas to
move the proclamation, second by Commissioner Fiala.
All in favor of the motion signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries unanimously. Thank
you.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Thanks, great profession.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Congratulations.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Great profession, thank you.
Thank you for everything you do.
Item #4 E
Page 17
March 11, 2008
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING MARCH 8, 2008 THROUGH
MARCH 15,2008 AS PANTHER AWARENESS WEEK.
ACCEPTED BY LISA OSTBERG FROM THE FRIENDS OF THE
FLORIDA PANTHER REFUGE - ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to our next
proclamation designating March 8, 2008, through March 15, 2008, as
Panther Awareness Week, to be accepted by Lisa Ostberg for the
Friends of the Florida Panther Refuge.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Whereas, the Florida panther is the
official state animal of the great State of Florida; and,
Whereas, the Florida panther is a magnificent species and a
symbol of natural character of the Everglades eco (sic) in Southwest
Florida; and,
Whereas, the Florida panther's decline occurred in -- prior to
1950 when it was still a legally hunted panther. It was listed as an
endangered species in 1967 and it's protected under the state and
federal law, and as of 2006, biologists estimate roughly 80 to 100
Florida panthers remain in the wild; and,
Whereas, it will be (sic) of the people of Collier County and,
therefore, a mission of their government to rescue the Florida panther
from the threat of extinction; and,
Whereas, because Collier County is a stronghold for a long-term
survival of the Florida panther and natural resource management (sic),
non-profit groups, citizens and businesses in Collier County want to
gather to celebrate this species of Southwest Florida's ecosystem; and,
Whereas, the Florida legislature established the third Saturday of
March as Save the Florida Panther Day; and,
Whereas, the educating of the residents of Collier County will
help co-exist (sic) safely in panther habitat and being alerted from the
-- dusk 'til dawn and wherever deer and other panther prey, such as
Page 18
March 11, 2008
raccoons and rabbits, et cetera, are active, keeping domestic animal
livestock secure, landscaping for safe -- safety, and consideration (sic)
of other deterrents such as outdoor lighting and hiking and biking with
a friend, we can accomplish that goal; and,
Whereas, there has never been a known attack of a human by a
Florida Panther, a cat moves primarily at night so keep your children
within sight and close to you and give the panther a way to escape. If
you cross panthers -- cross paths, do not run. It may be stimulated
through (sic) the panther's instincts to chase, to -- avoid crouching or
bending over to make you look smaller and try to appear larger by
waving your arms, open your jacket, and throwing stones or branches
without turning back, and fight back if you are attacked; and,
Whereas, it is proper and fitting for all Florida (sic) to pause and
reflect the plight of the Florida panther and the task of preserving a
sleek, lean, carnivorous and beautiful Florida panther species to enrich
the legacy of generations yet to come.
Now, there, be it proclaimed by the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that February (sic) 8, 2008,
through March 15,2008, be designated as Panther Awareness Week.
Done on the 11th day of 2000 and -- March, 2008.
And I make a motion to move this proclamation.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: There's a motion by Commissioner
Henning, second by Commissioner Fiala to move this proclamation.
All in favor of the motion signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
Page 19
March 11, 2008
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Carries unanimously.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you for what you do.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Thank you very, very much.
Item #4 F
PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING THE PARTNERSHIP
BETWEEN CHS-FSU AND THE ISABEL COLLIER READ
MEDICAL CAMPUS FOR THEIR CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE
HEAL TH CARE NEEDS OF RURAL, ELDERLY AND OTHER
UNDERSERVED POPULATIONS. ACCEPTED BY STEVE
WEINMAN, EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT/COO OF CHS
HEAL THCARE - ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioners, the next proclamation is
recognizing the partnership between CHS and FSU and the Isabel
Collier Read Medical Campus for their contribution to the healthcare
needs of rural, elderly, and other underserved populations. To be
accepted by Steve Weinman, Executive Vice-president, Chief
Operating Officer, of CHS Healthcare.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, good morning.
MR. WEINMAN: Good morning.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Whereas, Florida State
University, FSU, in partnership with CHS healthcare, has established
a training program focusing on rural health; and,
Whereas, FSU College of Medicine and CHS offers primary
healthcare services to the community, and provides educational
experiences to FSU medical students; and,
Whereas, NCH healthcare systems donated the
28,000-square-foot Isabel Collier Read building to help the effort, and
Ms. Isabel Collier Read endowed the medical school's educational
Page 20
March 11, 2008
program in Immokalee with a gift of $1 million which received
state-matching funds; and,
Whereas, the official grand opening of SFD's (sic) Isabel Collier
Read medical campus on March 18, 2008, will increase the capacity
of Immokalee's pediatricians from six exam rooms to 10; and,
Whereas, students from the school's six regional campuses
throughout the state will have the opportunity to do rural health
rotation in Immokalee, gaining a more complete understanding of
rural medicine while contributing to the health of the community; and,
Whereas, CHS-FSU partnership brings professional staff,
students, and significant operating and construction budgets to
Immokalee.
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of County
Commissioners, Collier County, Florida, that the CHS-FSU
partnership and the Isabel Collier Read Medical Campus be
recognized on Tuesday, March 18,2008, for their contributions to the
healthcare needs of the rural, elderly and underserved population.
Done and ordered this, the 11th day of March, 2008. Signed by
Chairman Tom Henning.
And I make a motion for approval.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Coletta to
move the proclamation, second by Commissioner Halas.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Carries unanimously.
Page 21
March 11, 2008
Congratulations.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you. Thank you very
much.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Congratulations. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Thank you for the work you do.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Would you like to say a couple
words, sir?
MR. WEINMAN: Yeah. Thank you very much for recognizing
us. The people of Immokalee appreciate all the support that we've
gotten recently, and particularly at this time I would like to recognize
the generosity of the late Mrs. Collier Read who loved the people of
Immokalee and has done an awful lot for us, and we're going to try to
make her very proud with this facility. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you, sir.
Item #5A
PRESENTATION OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
OUTSTANDING MEMBER AWARD FOR FEBRUARY 2008 TO
WILLIS P. KRIZ OF THE CONSERVATION COLLIER LAND
ACQUISITION ADVISORY COMMITTEE - PRESENTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that will bring us to presentations,
paragraph 5. The first presentation is of -- is a presentation of the
advisory -- the advisory committee outstanding member award for
February, 2008, to Willis P. Kriz of the Conservation Collier Land
Acquisition Advisory Committee, and I'll read the award
recommendation, if that would be okay with the board.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: That would be great.
MR. MUDD: Will has served as the chairman of the Ordinance
and Policy Subcommittee of the Conservation Collier for a number of
Page 22
March 11, 2008
years. His leadership and expertise has guided our committee in
creating draft resolutions for purpose policies for Conservation
Collier, draft resolutions for the disposition of properties with TDRs,
and recently a revision of the Conservation Collier main ordinance
correcting some inherent flaws discovered in the course of doing
business and smoothing out procedures.
Will chaired the Ordinance and Policy Subcommittee through the
most important tasks of the program, revising the ordinance and
purchase policy. The ordinance revision was delicate because only
those things not related to goals and criteria can be amended without a
public referendum.
Additionally, there were many stakeholders closely watching the
process to make sure changes were not made that would negatively
affect the program.
The purchase policy is critical and helps the program to be fair to
all. He attended every meeting, many times when others were not
able to be there, bringing his wealth of experience to the federal -- at
the federal level to the table.
He also brings an ironic humor to the process, helping to make
difficult work fun and a cooperative spirit that encourages wide
participation.
Recently Conservation Collier discussed the purchase of the
Starnes property, a large property adjacent to the Corkscrew Regional
ecosystem marsh. The property includes land leases for mineral rights.
Will Kriz, with his land-buying expertise from years with the National
Park Services, helps lead the committee on this issue.
The result was the committee elected to purchase the property
only if the property owner would remove the right to mine mineral
from the property, thus ensuring the citizens of Collier County will
have an untouched conservation preserve for generations to come
without the threat of surface mining.
As a member of the Conservation Collier and Ordinance and
Page 23
March 11, 2008
Policy Subcommittee, Will helped create guidelines for the purchase
of lands that is fair and equitable to all willing sellers programs and
kept Collier County from being put into a position of negotiating
prIces.
Our appraised price policy states clearly that we will pay an
appraised value of the site and no more, and no exceptions. Although
we have lost a few opportunities to purchase land as a result of this
policy, public trust in our program continues to be very high, and
nominations for conservation land keep increasing annually, and in no
-- and in no small part, Mr. Will Kriz has played large part in that
particular program to make it a success.
And ladies and gentlemen, Board of County Commissioners, I'd
like to present to you the February, 2008, Outstanding Advisory
Committee V olunteer Award to Mr. Willis Kriz.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Congratulations. Thank you for
your servIce.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you. In my district.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Congratulations. Thank you for
the work.
MR. KRIZ: Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: We've got to take a picture, Willis.
Commissioners, Mr. Kriz is just another example of bringing
expertise of his former life to Collier County to benefit the residents.
Mr. Kriz was in the purchasing agency, I believe, for the National--
MR. MUDD: Park Service.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- Park Services, and we're blessed by
many of the attributes that our public has and are willing to assist the
county commissioners in its endeavors.
Next one?
Page 24
March 11, 2008
Item #5B
RECOGNIZIMG JACK NAJJAR, EMERGENCY MEDICAL
TECHNICIAN, BUREAU OF EMERGENCY SERVICES, AS
EMPLOYEE OF THE MONTH FOR FEBRUARY 2008 -
PRESENTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, the next presentation is a
recommendation to recognize Jack Najjar, Emergency Medical
Technician, Bureau of Emergency Services as Employee ofthe Month
for February, 2008, and I'll read the consideration.
Jack Najjar, Emergency Medical Technician, has been nominated
as the Employee of the Month for February, 2008. Jack consistently
gives 110 percent of the performance of his duties. He excels in
custom satisfaction and represents himself and the organization in a
positive and productive manner.
In addition to being an EMT, Jack is an army reservist. His
training with the army reflects greatly on his work at EMS. Even
when Jack is off duty, he is willing to go above and beyond for the
citizens and visitors of Collier County.
This past December, while driving home from Christmas dinner,
EMT Najjar came upon a burning vehicle along the side of the
interstate. There wasn't an ambulance or any equipment, but that
didn't stop him from pulling over to help someone in need. His
actions that night are the reason that the driver of the vehicle is alive
today.
For this and all the people that he has helped, both on and off
duty, Jack truly deserves to be named Employee the Month. He is a
hero and an asset to this county.
Ladies and gentlemen, I present to you Jack Najjar, the
Employee of the Month for February, 2008.
(Applause.)
Page 25
March 11, 2008
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you very much.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Wow, that's wonderful, thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you, sir. I want to present this
letter on behalf of the Board of County Commissioners. That's a small
token of our appreciation, and something to hang on the wall. Thank
you for all you've done.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Thank you very much.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Good job, Jack. Thank you very
much.
Item #5C
THE AMERICAN HEART ASSOCIATION WOULD LIKE TO
HONOR CITIZENS WHO, THROUGHOUT THE YEAR, HA VE
MADE A SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE IN THE OUTCOME FOR
VICTIMS OF SUDDEN CARDIAC ARREST - PRESENTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, the next presentation, the
American Heart Association would like to honor citizens who,
throughout the year, have made a significant difference in the outcome
of victims of sudden cardiac arrest.
MR. WILLIAMS: Commissioner, for the record, Les Williams
with EMS assisting the American Heart Association in putting this
together.
Thanks to the continued support of the board and the county,
Collier County has a public AED external -- automatic external
defibrillator program that is been modelled in other communities
throughout the nation.
This AED program has trained thousands of people in public
CPR and the use of AED should emergency arise.
Today we're here to honor 11 citizens that have gone above and
beyond prior to EMS or fire departments arriving to assist in saving
Page 26
March 11, 2008
people's lives.
As I call your name, please come up.
Unable to attend today and join us are Walter and Michelle
Kopka, for their quick actions while in church during the spring of
2007.
Also with us, Virginia Mazzeo, Anthony Richicki, and Parks
Department Employees Denise Lee and Edna Snyder, for their
teamwork when a patient went into cardiac arrest while at a local
county park playing soccer.
Possibly unable to join us, Stephanie Donavan, who responded to
a cry for help at a neighbor's house when a two-year-old child was
found at the bottom of a swimming pool. She performed life-saving
procedures until EMS arrived, and the little two-and-a-half-year-old
boy is doing fine and running around.
Also joining us, Dave Burgham, Jim Kirk, and Parks Department
Employees Ramon Coriano and Ellen Barkin, for their quick actions at
the Golden Gate Recreation Center in May, 2007, when Jack Stalf,
also joining us today, went into cardiac arrest while playing
basketball.
All of their patients were successfully resuscitated and were
discharged from the hospital, thanks to the actions of these normal
citizens who are typically not in the medical field.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
(Applause.)
MS. STEWART: I can probably talk while the photos are being
taken. I'm Louise Stewart. I'm a volunteer with the American Heart
Association.
And Donna, I know you remember last year when I was here, we
were talking about the influence of AEDs in the community and how
Collier County is a benchmark community for putting AEDs in public
places and in the first responders' cars.
Today CPR is a good beginning, but without an AED, every
Page 27
March 11, 2008
minute that goes by, seven to 10 percent takes away their chance, that
amount per minute of their survival. So Collier County needs to be
proud of the effort that they're putting and doing.
And the American Heart Association, through the Heart Ball,
which I happen to be privileged enough to co-chair this year, makes an
effort to raise specific funds. And this year we hope to complete that
project to have 100 percent of the first responders' cars equipped with
an AED, which will be huge.
Anybody who participates with that program, especially all of
you, we congratulate you. You are outstanding citizens of the
community and we thank you very, very much.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER FIALA: We're shaking the hands ofa bunch
of heros, huh?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Congratulations. Thank God we've
got people like these around here.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Louise, it's so nice to see you again.
You're always doing something for the goodness of the community.
Bless your heart.
MS. STEWART: You, too.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: That's great news.
Item #5D
PRESENTATION BY PAUL MATTAUSCH, DIRECTOR, WATER
DEPARTMENT FOR THE RESULTS OF THE NAPLES
WOMEN'S CLUB WATER DAYS EXPERIMENT TO BE
FOLLOWED BY COMMISSIONER COYLE READING THE
NAMES OF THE STUDENTS WHO ARE WINNERS IN THE 5TH
GRADE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL COMPETITION RANDOM
DRAWING - PRESENTED
Page 28
March 11, 2008
Next is a presentation by Paul Mattausch, Director of the Water
Department, for the results of the Naples Woman's Club Water Days
Experiment to be followed by Commissioner Coyle reading the names
of the students who are winners of the fifth grade elementary school
computation drawing.
MR. MATT AUSCH: Good morning, Commissioners. For the
record, Paul Mattausch, Director of the Collier County Water
Department.
During the Board of County Commission meeting on January
29th, as you'll remember, agenda item 4B was a proclamation
presented and accepted by Lynn Hixon-Holley from the Naples
Woman's Club proclaiming February 19th and 20th as Turn It Off
Days; We're Counting Every Drop.
Ms. Hixon-Holley is here this morning. And I would like to have
her join me here at the podium. Lynn, would you come over here.
On February 19th and 20th, the four largest utilities in Collier
County agreed to enter into a water conservation competition to
determine which of the utilities' customers could reduce their per
capita consumption of potable water by the greatest percentage.
Here this morning are representatives of the other three
participating utilities, in addition to the Collier County Utility. And I
would like to have each of them join Lynn and me here at the podium
as I introduce them. They are Eva Deyo from Immokalee. Eva; Jim
Lang and Jeff Poteet from Marco Island; and Bob Reeder from
Naples. Bob, if you'll join me here.
The Naples Woman's Club sponsored a panel discussion on
February 13th to discuss the drought conditions and to bring water
conservation into the focus of the residents of Collier County.
As some of you may remember, we experienced a significant
rainfall event during the 24-hour period on February 12th and 13th,
amounting to as much as 5.9 inches in Marco Island and generally two
to four inches of rain elsewhere in Collier County.
Page 29
March 11, 2008
The four utilities had agreed to establish a base water demand
using those two days to use in calculating per capita consumption for
the contest days of February 19th and 20th.
All of us, all four utilities, agreed in advance that we would use
the dates of February 26 and 27th for additional water demand
comparisons. Well, guess what? We had measurable rainfall on five
of those six days, and rainfall has a significant effect on the use of
water and certainly was evident in all four utilities' consumption of
water.
The effect of the rainfall made it impossible to determine -- to
determine which of the four utilities was a winner.
The representatives of the four utilities all agreed on one thing,
that the customers in all of our service areas should be declared
winners because of their water conservation efforts, and that the
Naples Woman's Club is the real winner for bringing a focus on water
conservation to all of us in Collier County.
And you noted the weather out there today. If it will make it
rain, we have all decided that we'll gladly participant in any event
sponsored by the Naples Woman's Club.
And I'd like to reintroduce Lynn Hixon-Holley to you for a
couple comments, and then Commissioner Coyle is going to read the
winners of our children's contest.
Lynn?
MS. HIXON-HOLLEY: Thank you. The Naples Woman's Club
is considering changing its name to The Rainmakers.
We started this process planning it last July with the cooperation
of you folks, the board. You gave us the proclamation, which was the
kickoff, followed by the proclamation by the City of Marco, and then
followed again by the City of Naples proclamation, and then the
joining from Eva from the Immokalee Water and Sewer District.
We started off with the panel, which was a great success. The
ladies would very much like to hear more about water. They found
Page 30
March 11,2008
that water is not a dry subject. True. They said we're sorry it's over.
We want to ask more questions. We want to ask questions. They
loved the introduction given by the water panel.
The competition, due to the rain that we brought about, made us
all winners instead of just one. With the schools that we have, about
60 percent responded to our invitation. This was not a mandate. This
was an invitation for the children, the fifth graders, to participate, and
they did.
And so I wish to report, I think we have some very good young
citizens on the way up. They voluntarily learned and studied the
material given them, had their own contest, and we're very proud of
them and their good citizenship of those who participated.
Commissioner Coyle will read the names. I'm sure they're all
waiting to see who won the participation award. This was not a
what's-best thing. It's because you participated in a community effort.
And it was a random drawing to see who would win the coveted
water park tickets, which is the prize, which your parks and recreation
department so graciously gave us to award them, and we thank you for
that.
I want to close with just one other remark. This has been a very
rewarding experience to all of us. We've learned a tremendous
amount. I have learned that a tiny rain drop a thousand miles away
can make a difference in my personal water supply. I have also
learned that it isn't just a local situation. This is a global situation, and
we must, indeed, be aware of that.
I went to a speech given by Gorbochav up at Florida Gulf Coast
University a year or two ago, and it was a lengthy speech. You know,
he is touring the world in the name of peace. He was asked the
question at the end, what avenue or what did he see the next great
crisis for humanity? He said, there will be wars over water if we're
not careful.
So with that rather serious note, I think our taking the time out to
Page 31
March 11, 2008
do what we did to try to learn more about water locally and globally is
well worth our while. And we at the Naples Woman's Club thank
everybody with great cooperation. I didn't receive a single negative
no of any kind. So thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
MS. HIXON-HOLLEY: And no Commissioner Coyle, if you
will -- the waiting fifth graders would like to know if they won.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I would like to emphasize to the
viewing public these are all fifth grade elementary school students.
The first winner from Big Cypress Elementary, is Hannah Seitz;
from Corkscrew Elementary, Sara DePrisco, from the Estates
Elementary, Selena Salazar; Everglades, Trevyr Daniels; Golden Gate
Elementary, Leonardo "Junior" Chapa; Golden Terrace Elementary,
Terrell Danson; Laurel Oak Elementary, Leah Berning; Lely
Elementary, Eli Greenfield; Manatee Elementary, Leslie Flores;
Parkside Elementary, Karina Lopez; Pelican Marsh Elementary, Gwen
Swanson; Poinciana Elementary, Areli Ramirez; Sea Gate
Elementary, Sydney Harrington; Sabal Palm Elementary, John
Andrus; Tommie Barfield Elementary, Riley McGuire; and Vineyards
Elementary, Morgan Sutherland.
MS. HIXON-HOLLEY: Thank you.
(Applause.)
MR. MATTAUSCH: Commissioners, on behalf of each of those
students and the participating elementary schools and the utilities
represented with me here today and Lynn Hixon-Holley from the
Naples Woman's Club, we thank you for this time. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
Item #6A
PUBLIC PETITION REQUEST BY RICHARD L. HEERS, I-
HOPE, INC., TO DISCUSS REFUND OF
Page 32
March 11, 2008
PERMITTING/LICENSING COSTS - TO BE BROUGHT BACK
AND PLACED ON A FUTURE BCC AGENDA - CONSENSUS
Next item is 6 -- we're going into public petitions. The first
public petition is a request by Richard Heers on-HOPE, Incorporated,
to discuss the refund and permitting and licensing costs.
MR. HEERS: Good morning, Commissioners. It's an honor, a
privilege for me to be here today, again, to come before you on behalf
of our community.
And before I present my actual request, I want to say what a
pleasure it is, an honor, for me to see the way that you folks are --
have such a heart for our community on the outskirts of Collier
County out in Immokalee. As I serve on the Board of Collier Health
Services and seeing them recognized, and also serving with the CRA
by your purview and appointment and see them on your agenda and
knowing the things that, as I've lived there for the last 18 years, that
you have done for our community, it has truly been a wonderful
opportunity for me to serve the community and actually to serve you
as well.
But today I come asking for your help --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Your name for the record.
MR. HEERS: Yes, I'm sorry. My name is Richard Heers. I'm
the Executive Director on-HOPE.
I would like to come and request your consideration as you did
about a year ago when we came before this board, for the placement
of our first 28 mobile homes that were provided for families who had
been impacted by Hurricane Wilma on October 24,2005. Those
families are living in all of the trailers except for one right now, the
mobile homes, and we have you to thank in part for that, because one
of the things that you have done is to help us by providing an -- I
guess I would call it an abatement or forgiveness of permitting fees
that were covered under an affordable housing department fund that
Page 33
March 11, 2008
provides for -- to help families who are of low income be able to own
their own home by helping us pay their permitting fees.
We were given, by this board, $10,000 to offset the permitting
fees for those 28 mobile homes. To date we have spent about $8,500
of that money, and we are coming to ask that -- as we set up another
36 mobile homes, that we're asking for an additional $13,000 -- that's
a high estimate but I wanted to make sure we would have all of our
expenses covered because each of the permitting fees for the different
mobile homes cost a -- varying amounts.
We've not only received the benefit of your funds, but we've also
received wonderful support from the staffing at Collier building
department. They have gone -- bent over backwards to assist us with
our permitting costs, permitting directions, and assisting us in
providing affordable homes.
If you will notice on your brochure that you received that, on the
back of it, that it lists over a -- nearly a million and a half dollars that
has been received to help provide repairs for over 350 homes and also
replacement homes for 64 families in Immokalee. And this couldn't
have been done without the help and the assistance of our county
officials.
And so we would ask that you, once again, help us keep the costs
down for the families by enabling us to use this resource to be able to
pay for these permitting costs of these mobile homes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Questions, comments by the Board of
County Commissioners? Commissioner Coletta, then Commissioner
Coyle, Commissioner Halas.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Mr. Mudd, this fund that we
used before, it's an affordable housing fund?
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Is there money in the affordable
housing fund to be able to cover this?
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. This is -- if my memory serves me
Page 34
March 11, 2008
correctly, that we used the monies -- each municipality pays
affordable housing fees to the county to make sure that they're still --
could still be applicants and recipients of SHIP money and CDBG
money. And there's some money -- and the money that we used
before in this particular project was from the -- was from the
participation of Marco Island. And yes, there is money in that
particular fund this year from the same source, sir.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I hope my fellow
commissioners will agree with me that this is an item that should be
brought back for a future meeting.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. I would support bringing it
back. But when you bring it back, I would like to get an answer of
why you're holding title for only five years. You're giving someone a
$50,000 mobile home for $5,000, and you're holding title for only five
years.
We require that these things be held in an affordable housing
category for a lot longer than five years. So I'm not sure I would agree
to it on that basis.
So I would suggest when you bring it back, that we resolve this
of how long it is going to be retained as affordable housing.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I have the same concerns as
Commissioner Coyle does -- has in regards to, what happens after five
years? What happens with the homes or the trailers in this case? I
hope that we don't end up with a problem where they become in
disrepair and then it causes blight to the neighborhood. So those are
some questions I need to have answered.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah. I heard the same thing on
one-on-one with the county manager. So there seems like there's
enough support on here to bring it back with additional answers to our
questions.
Page 35
March 11, 2008
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yep.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: That is the consensus of the board and
the direction. Thank you for being with us today.
MR. HEERS: You're welcome.
MR. MUDD: And Mr. Heers, I'll get with you and set the date
up, okay.
Item #6B
PUBLIC PETITION REQUEST BY WILLIAM KLOHN TO
DISCUSS ADOPTION OF A "PROJECT SPECIFIC" IMPACT FEE
DEFERRAL PROGRAM FOR FOUNTAIN LAKES
RESIDENTIAL COOPERATIVE. (COMPANION ITEM TO 10D)-
DISCUSSED
Commissioners, the next public petition is a request by William
Klohn to discuss adoption of a project specific impact fee deferral
program for Fountain Lakes Residential Cooperative.
This also has a companion item of 10D on your agenda. If the
board chooses to hear this partic -- if the board decides that they want
to hear this particular item, because of some sensitivity as far as
grading of applications in Tallahassee, the board might determine that
they want to do and hear 10D.
If the board chooses not to hear this particular petition, then 10D
will be withdrawn.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: That's kind of impossible since we
approved the agenda with 10D on it.
MR. MUDD: But if the board chooses not -- if the board chooses
not to hear the particular item and the petition, then 10D would be
withdrawn. And that was -- and that was an agreement that I had with
Mr. Klohn when this basically came forward because of the sensitivity
of the packets that are in Tallahassee right now going through grading
Page 36
March 11, 2008
and other -- and other maturations, I guess.
Mr. Klohn?
MR. KLOHN: Good morning. For the record, my name is Bill
Klohn. I'm President of MDG Capital Corporation.
As you're all aware, we were an applicant in this year's 2007
CWHIP funding application for our Fountain Lakes
affordable/workforce housing project.
The last time I stood here, I told you that we believed that we had
a high score. Unknown to me at that time, we currently have, on a
preliminary scoring basis, the highest score in the State of Florida.
We have a 98 out ofa 100. So we remain cautiously optimistic that
we will garner the CWHIP funding for this project.
I'm here before you today on the public petition area to request
that you hear item IOD, which is a companion to this item, to further
discuss the approval of the impact fee deferral programs for this
project. Our pro forma in the CWHIP application does include the
impact fee deferrals. It is very important that we continue with the
deferrals for this project.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Question, comments by the Board of
Commissioners; Commissioner Coyle, Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Mr. Klohn, why is this such an
emergency issue right now? Your application is being evaluated. To
the best of my knowledge, it's not going to be considered in the
scoring of that application. Why is it so important that it has to be
taken up right now?
MR. KLOHN: The impact fee deferrals are actually a big part of
the scoring. They represent points in the application. Furthermore,
Commissioner, we intend to begin the housing fairs at the latter part of
March or the early part of April. The housing fairs will occur with
NCH -- well, you know who all the ESP members are. There's the
Sheriffs Department, et cetera.
With those housing fairs ongoing, we need to create printed
Page 37
March 11, 2008
information. And without the certainty of the impact fee deferral
program, we cannot say to a prospective purchaser, all of you folks are
at 140 percent or less of AMI; therefore, you qualify for the CWHIP
funds; therefore, you qualify for your pro rata share of the $25 million
bond; and, therefore, you qualify for the impact fees deferrals.
What we've tried to do is create a comprehensive housing
program that's one-stop shopping for the individual, so we --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: But Mr. Klohn, you're not going to
build all these instantly, okay. They're -- not all of these facilities are
going to be available at the same time. If -- whether we approve this
today or we approve it 60 days from today, it doesn't affect your
application in Tallahassee; is that true?
MR. KLOHN: I believe that I or we have made certain
representations in our application that CWHIP -- or I'm sorry -- that
impact fees deferrals will be available for this project on a
project-specific basis.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Whatever we do here is not going
to be submitted to Tallahassee to be included in your application
package because the deadline has already passed?
MR. KLOHN: No, the deadline is the 17th, this coming
Monday.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You're telling me this will go to
Tallahassee?
MR. KLOHN: Yeah. I will send additional documentation that
we now have part B complete for this project.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Then why wasn't it done when the
application was prepared and submitted long before?
MR. KLOHN: I don't think that we were eligible at that time or
hadn't thought through the details that Tallahassee requires on the
CWHIP application, that every "I" must be dotted and "T" crossed.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: We've already agreed that you're--
you are a designated CWHIP applicant, right?
Page 38
March 11, 2008
MR. KLOHN: Correct.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. The act of granting the
deferrals for the specific units can be done at any point in time based
upon your construction schedule. It is not something that has to be
done on an emergency basis in a public petition coming before the
board.
So I will be happy to hear it if you want to hear it, but what it
does is it locks up all of our deferrals. In fact, it exceeds the deferrals
that we have available. I don't think it's necessary to do that. These
homes are not going to be available next Monday. They're not going
to be available two months from now. We can deal with them as his
construction schedule begins to indicate that they'll be available.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And with all due respect, sir, I
agree with you on almost everything. It's just that we're going to the
point with the public petitioner, we're hearing the whole thing. Why
don't we move right into it, into the agenda item, and then get into the
deep discussions of what it's about rather than discuss the thing fully
and then go to the agenda item.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I don't want to discuss it anymore.
I'd just like to -- I just wanted you to under what my concerns were.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, my concerns are shared
with you, but I'd still like to have a lot more answers, and I'd rather do
it from the agenda item than from a public petition.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I would, too.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay, thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, my preference is, stay to the
schedule of the agenda, and it appears that this is an ongoing thing
where we have a public petition and then an action item on there.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: We also have other public petitioners,
too. So it's my preference to stay with the agenda, and heard (sic) it
Page 39
March 11, 2008
when we get to 10D. Okay?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well--
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It's okay with me.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Point of order, in may. We
need to establish what the procedure's going to be in the future, too.
So if they put something on there for -- on the agenda and it's on
public petition, I mean, that gives you the ability to be able to see if
there's enough merit to be able to carry it to the agenda.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: It is. There is enough merit.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Oh, there is. But I mean, I'm
covering other items in the future. In other words, it's not an
automatic guarantee that we're going to hear it if it's on the agenda.
We still have that option. I would think we reserve the option with
public petition. I just want to make sure that we stay within a certain
framework where at least we understand the rules.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah. And my comment was, we're
in public petition. I would like to continue the public petition and the
rest of the numbers in order.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Fine, sir. You're the chairman.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: No. It's a consensus of the board, and
that's what I heard from at least two other of my colleagues to the
right.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, and I just -- I said I was in
favor of hearing it. I was just to trying cover future procedures for
public petition, because some of your comments in the beginning were
that if it's already on the agenda and we approved it, then it stays on
the agenda regardless of the public petition. I just wanted to clear up a
point so that we weren't going to be in the dark --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Well, let's go to that item.
Let's look at that, Commissioner Coletta, and see what it says.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Sure.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: 10D says to obtain direction from the
Page 40
March 11, 2008
Board of County Commissioners on waiving requirements of
ordinance 2007-84, and authorize the chairman to sign the
commitment letter for MGD Capital Development for deferral of 100
percent of Collier County impact fees for 174 (sic) units.
MS. FILSON: Forty-seven.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: That's what I got is, we're going to
hear this item and we're going to vote yes or no. And the board gave
direction by consensus that we're going to hear this item.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Sir, I was in that consensus
agreeing we're going to hear the item.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All right. We're going to move on.
Item #6C
PUBLIC PETITION REQUEST BY MR. KRIS DANE TO
DISCUSS ROAD IMPACT FEES FOR CALUSA ISLAND
MARINA - MOTION TO APPROVE W/STIPULATIONS THAT
WILL BE OUTLINED ON THE MARCH 25, 2008 BCC
CONSENT AGENDA - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to public petition C,
which is a public petition request by Mr. Kris Dane to discuss road
impact fees for Calusa Island Marina.
MR. DANE: Thank you, Mr. Mudd. Good morning, all. For the
record, my name is Kris Dane. I stood here about a year ago, and we
made a deal on impact fees or came to an agreement.
The agreement was that we would pay some back fees, which we
agreed to pay, go down to -- and pay a fee of $441 per dry storage unit
at the Calusa Island Marina expansion, we would go down there, pay
those fees, pick up our permit, start construction, and during the
ensuing three or four months, until sometime around June, we had to
provide some backup data to support the interim fees that had been
Page 41
March 11, 2008
calculated by staff, $441.
All of us, except for Mrs. Fiala, are a year older now. And we all
know women don't age, but we did. And I'm 40 pounds lighter and a
year older, a little grayer.
What happened was this. Your staff did exactly their end of the
bargain. They issued a letter to the City of Marco that said, if Mr.
Dane comes down and pays you X number of dollars, give him a
permit.
I went down there with that letter and my checkbook, and the city
said, well, you know, we can't give you the permit now because issues
have been raised about your zoning, your right to build another 152
dry storage units and we want you to amend your PUD formally and
get sign-offs from all of the environmental interveners and all of the
state agencies, the secretary ofDEP, the secretary of DCA, before we
will approve your site plan for these additional units.
Well, that was pretty unexpected. It certainly gave us a question
whether we even had a project down there, and there was no sense for
us to supply transportation data to the transportation department if we
didn't even know we have a project.
So, now we know we have a project. The city council approved
our zoning in a final forum. And what I'm asking today is simply that
we pick up where we were a year ago, reauthorize your staff to send
out that letter to the City of Marco again with the $441 fee, and we
will subsequently -- we'll pick up our permit tomorrow this time for
sure, and during the next few months, we'll get some data to the
transportation department.
And they have also outlined for us a two-year study, which I
believe will probably serve as a basis for some revisitation of your fee
schedule for dry storage units, which we've agreed to do.
I got piling ordered. I need to pick up a permit. And I'm asking
for you to re -- I don't want to say rehonor because you have already
honored what we agreed to before. It's I who fell down on the details
Page 42
March 11, 2008
because of a change in circumstances beyond my control.
So I'm asking for the same help today that I asked for a year ago
January.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Questions, comments by the board;
Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'm a little confused. I believe I
remember vaguely you coming before the board, and we had
negotiated a price as $441 a slip. And I forget just at that point in time
how many slips it was.
But at that time you also stated that you were going to do a study,
and I think that that was supposed to start in June of 2007, and that
you were going to come forward with some additional data to see
whether $441 met the goal, whether it was -- whether maybe we were
asking too much money for the impact fee, but you were going to
provide that data. Where are we at the present time with that data?
MR. DANE: Mr. Halas, you have a very good memory. We
were to have provided -- between January when we met last time, a
year ago January, and around, and June, let's say -- some data from
our operation that demonstrates that, indeed, the trip generation rates
and the length of travels are in agreement with the $441.
As I explained, in hindsight I wish I had gambled that we were
going to have our zoning approved and would be able to go ahead
with our project. But without -- without a project to build -- if we had
no zoning for the 152 units, there was -- it was a moot issue.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. You got the 152 and you
said you were going to expand that?
MR. DANE: We already have 268. The 152 is the additional
dry storage units that we are wanting to build.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. So I think that probably you
would have to go through all the permitting process and -- to see if it
fits the needs, but --
MR. DANE: Well, we have. We have done all that now. The
Page 43
March 11, 2008
permit is waiting to be picked up pending a resolution of the impact
fee issue.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Commissioner -- or Mr. Dane,
you're going to do the study, you're going to write a check to -- is it
the City of Marco or County Commissioners on the --
MR. DANE: We'll write two checks. We're going to write a
check to the county commissioners for the old fees that we already
agreed had not been paid in the past on the boat docks and other
things, and that was what we worked out on that. We'll pay that check
to the board. And then we write the other check to the City of Marco
and -- as your agent, and then they send, I guess, part of the money up
here. I'm not sure how it works.
MR. MUDD: They send it up here, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Now, your study would -- that you do
and the conclusion of it and the outcome would be based on what is
there today or what you're going to build in the future? Let's say --
let's say it came out at 550. You're going to write a check for those
difference (sic) on the new slips or new dry storage you're going to
build today?
MR. DANE: On the new ones.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: On the new ones, okay.
All right. And Amy Patterson is shaking her head that that is
true, so --
MR. DANE: Good. I'm glad she wasn't shaking it that way.
MS. PATTERSON: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: No, no. I just want to make sure
everybody's on the same page.
Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. Nick, can you fill us in on
how you feel this is all shaking out?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: For the record, Nick Casalanguida
with transportation.
Page 44
March 11,2008
I think it's fair. We've met with Kris Dane and our impact fee
consultant and Amy Patterson with Tindale Oliver. We've outline a
couple points that Mr. Dane has agreed to.
I explained to Mr. Dane, as staff we didn't have authorization to
make this decision. It had to come back to the board, and his quickest
venue was a public petition.
So if we put on the record that Mr. Dane provides the log of his
location of residence for the new slips as they become filled, that
March of next year he provides a trip generation report, puts two
counts in three-day peak periods, and then the following year he does
an origin destination study as well as a trip count, and then we take
that analysis and reconcile that. We would go either higher or lower,
depending on the information we've found.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: What assurances that (sic) we're
going to have that this gentleman is going to fulfill his obligations in
regards to fulfilling the study requirements?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: That -- it's similar to the last board
meeting that you had regarding this item. The issue was always what
you would do to make that compliance happen. Other than Mr. Dane's
word, there is a difficult way of enforcing that, of saying he'll payor
refund that. That was the same issue you had when I read the meeting
minutes the last time was, how would you enforce something that's
controlled by the City of Marco with that respect.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Is this property in Marco or is it in
Goodland? It's right at the bridge there; is that correct?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Goodland, I believe.
MR. DANE: No. It's the one that's -- it's actually -- it's in the
City of Marco Island. Our fence is the city boundary. And it's not the
one under the bridge. It's the one -- as you're winding your way into
Goodland, it's the first right. But that is within the City of Marco
Island.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. What kind of assurances are
Page 45
March 11, 2008
you going to have to fulfill the obligation of the study, since you've
been to the board twice now?
MR. DANE: Well, sir, what would you like other than my word?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, you gave us your word
before, and we're in an area now where we haven't fulfilled that
obligation in a timely manner, okay. So I guess that's where I'm at
right now is, how soon will you get this study completed?
MR. DANE: The outline of the study, as Nick said, is over a
two-year period.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
MR. DANE: Starting -- starting now with the initial submission
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
MR. DANE: -- a year from now some traffic counts, and then a
year from then, a -- repeating the traffic counts with an origin
destination study on top of it.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: So you're saying that you need two
years, which would bring us to March 11, 201 O?
MR. DANE: I'm not saying I need that. That is what the
transportation department is -- seems to insist on that they want for a
study.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
MR. DANE: I'm happy to do a study in 90 days and bring it
back to you, but they want a longer period and a more detailed study.
My review --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Nick is shaking his head back
there.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: He wants a peak season study,
which is --
MR. CASALANGUIDA: It's difficult. He is a unique facility.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: So we said, in fairness to him -- and
Page 46
March 11, 2008
the opportunity was in fairness to him -- I said, if you open up the
facility and we can actually ground truth the exact facility and you're
willing to abide by those, then we'll have an actual trip generation
origin destination study that's consistent with that specific unique
facility, and that's what we requested.
So an assurance, maybe something we could record on the
property, a letter that could be filed would probably be --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I think that would be appropo if we
could do something of that nature.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner--
MR. DANE: Sure. We'd be happy to do that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala, then
Commissioner Coyle.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. Is this public boat storage?
MR. DANE: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: It's public boat storage?
MR. DANE: Open to the public, first-come first-served basis.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. And it will remain that --
MR. DANE: Not condominium, not a membership. Open to the
public.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And it will remain that?
MR. DANE: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. And Commissioner Halas,
it's really on the island of Goodland, but City of Marco got a little line
down the center of that road. One side is Marco Island and the other
side is Goodland. He's on the Marco Island side.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: So we can throw rocks at one
another, right?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah. You hold hands down the
street.
Anyway, I don't have a problem with this as long as he complies
with all of the criteria that we've just discussed.t
Page 47
March 11, 2008
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Is that a motion?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, it's a motion to approve, taking
into consideration all of the things that Nick has put on the record and
Mr. Dane has put on the record that he will comply with.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And Commissioner, does that also
mean that he will register a letter that -- in the March 11,2010, that
the study will be complete?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. You will do that, won't you?
MR. DANE: Well, if that is okay with Nick, except we're still--
we're collecting data then and it will take a little time to prepare the
report.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: 2010. I thought we'd be done by
then. March 11,2010.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: He will do the follow-up study for the
origin destination study when the place -- facility is full. So we'll have
a full count at that point in time. So if you were to put a date, it would
probably be approximately 90 days after that to give the staff a chance
to review it and comment on it.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Ninety days after he's -- fulfills all
of the slips.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Ninety days after March of201O.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: March, April, May, June.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: There's a motion by Commissioner
Fiala, Second by Commissioner Henning.
Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Nick, I'm not sure that I understand
what the guidelines for the study are. Are you looking for a peak
season study? And if so, I think you should specify a date for the
study as well as a time for the completion of the study.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: We usually do the study
approximately on March, April, May, in that time period, so --
Page 48
March 11,2008
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Are you going to make that part of
the record --
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- and is that going to be part of the
requirement?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Trip generation study next year, in
that three-month time period, with a follow-up trip generation an
origin destination study in the following year, in 2010, and have it
reviewed and approved by the county by June of2010.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. But the study next year
you're saying can be March, April, or May.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Around that time period, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: April and May, it gets into the
shoulder season. It's not a peak season count. The next year you're
requiring a peak season count.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Same time period. Around that time
period we provide --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It can't be March, April, or May
because we're saying he's got to have it completed by March the 11th,
got to have the measurements completed by March the 11 tho So we've
got to pin this down to get very, very specific; otherwise, we're going
to have a misunderstanding about when this is going to be done.
So what you have to do is provide us guidance on what is the
most accurate way to conduct a traffic study for peak season traffic
loads, and I would suggest you decide the month that this data is to be
collected.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: We are doing two alternative studies
right now. One that's begun and one that's consistent. They're being
done in March. So if -- we want to say for the record they'll be done in
March of both years.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And it's 90 days afterwards.
Page 49
March 11, 2008
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Then the report will be
finalized 90 days after the March study is completed
MR. CASALANGUIDA: That's fair.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'll second your motion there,
Commissioner, if somebody hasn't.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Somebody already did.
Mr. Klatzkow?
MR. KLATZKOW: This is starting to get -- I'm not sure this
record is going to be very clear at the end of the day on this. If staff
can come back at the next meeting with an executive study laying out
exactly what the requirements are going to be, as well as some form of
guarantee we can record, I think that would probably go a long way in
nailing this down.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah. What -- it was just clarified --
is the -- they're going to do a one-month study -- Commissioner
Coyle, help me out with my understanding -- and next year they're
going to finish that study within the same time, in March; is that
correct?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. I'm not sure it will be a
one-month study, but it will be conducted during the month of March.
Nick?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Why don't I put everything on the
record very clearly. In March of'09 you will do a three-day trip
generation study, followed by in March of201O, he will do a
three-day midweek, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday both times, trip
generation study and origin destination study consistent with our
impacts fee ordinance.
After he completes the study, within 90 days he will submit a
final report that will be approved by the county that will reconcile the
impact fees for this project. He'll provide call logs and logs of which
berth was purchased by whom, where the location is so we have a
Page 50
March 11, 2008
location of the boat and the owner.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: He's not purchasing. He's leasing.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Where the owner purchases the berth,
the buyer of the berth or the renter.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: He's not -- he's renting --
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- the berth, not purchasing.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Whoever's renting the berth, he'll
provide a location of where they're located, the residence, so we can
do an origin destination match of that location as well, too.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And ifhe is not built out and does
not have them all rented, what action are you going --
MR. CASALANGUIDA: We can interpolate it. Ifhe has 100
units, we can interpolate that study for those 100 units.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And now, what guarantee are you
going to require to make sure this gets done?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: He would --
MR. MUDD: Okay. First, what Mr. Dane has agreed to is he
will pay the impact fees that weren't paid on the existing slips,
correct? That's what I heard you say.
MR. DANE: I will pay the 36,000 that we had agreed to last
time.
MR. MUDD: That's right. He will pay -- he will -- he will pay
$441 per slip on the new slips that he's about ready to build --
MR. DANE: Correct.
MR. MUDD: -- and he will pay that money to Marco Island, and
we will write a letter that says, this is what we've determined until we
get rectification from the two studies, the ones that Nick has just
talked about to -- and those two studies will come and determine if the
impact fees were (sic) paid, were correct, i.e., they were reasonable or
they were too much or too little. Okay.
If they're too little, we'll get back with Mr. Dane and say, okay,
Page 51
March 11, 2008
the study basically has shown that you paid too little, and here's the
amount owed. If it was too much, we will come back to the Board of
County Commissioners and we'll ask them to have Mr. Dane
reimbursed for the fees that he already paid in excess of what is
determined by this -- it's basically an alternative impact fee study.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. My question was, what is
the penalty for Mr. Dane if he does not complete the studies.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Ms. Patterson just pointed out to me,
we also have a portion of our impact fee ordinance as a default section
if they don't complete the study. Also I'd recommend that he just
records an affidavit with the city records of Marco that he's agreed to
these terms.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, I tell you, I think we've done
a good job of explaining this, but it really would be good to get it in
writing and put on the consent agenda next time.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Happy to do that.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: But I'm not the motion maker or
the seconder. The motion maker will have to agree to that if --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, that's fine with me, to write it
out so that it's clear to all of us. I agree.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And then it goes on the consent
agenda next time, and that way we get a chance to read it, understand
it, Mr. Dane can see it before that point in time, and we'll all know
what we're doing.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And yet know that we are approving
this at that time, so you have that confidence. In fact, you can even
pay your check to Collier County for the back numbers right now in
anticipation of that vote.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: With interest.
MR. DANE: Yeah.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: The next board meeting would be the
25th, 26th?
Page 52
March 11, 2008
MR. MUDD: Twenty-fifty.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Twenty-fifth. So would you authorize
me to just prepare a simple executive summary to be included in that
agenda item?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, I do, as the motion maker.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Mr. Dane, do you have
anything to add to that? The 25th is two weeks from now, and that's
going to delay you for two weeks.
MR. DANE: It's a just a dead delay of two weeks, unless I can
get the city to issue me a foundation permit, and if based upon, you
know, the expectation that we'll have this whole thing resolved in two
weeks. But I certainly don't want to -- I don't want to make it any
more difficult or give you guys any more to consider. You've been
very -- you know, very patient up to this point.
I would say this. I have 200 people on a waiting list for 150
spots, and I think probably we'll be at 110 percent, or whatever it is,
occupancy next March, not March of 20 1 0, so --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. The motion accepts the
addendum, the second does.
Is there any reason why Marco Island can't issue a slab permit
without any vertical?
MR. DANE: I don't know the answer to that. I have not asked
that question, but I can leave here and --
MR. MUDD: He's going to look for the impact fees when he
lays the slab down, and that's the issue. There's no reason we can't
rewrite the letter that we've already read before and he can't pay the
bill for the impact fees at $441 for the new slips in order to get this
thing moving as we come forward with all the other details on the
consent agenda two weeks from now.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: So you're saying -- just let me clarify.
You're going to write a letter -- your staff is going to write a letter to
Marco Island encouraging them to approve a slab permit in
Page 53
March 11, 2008
anticipation of the board passing the outline in the consent agenda on
April 25th?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Once he pays the impact fees.
MR. MUDD: No. What I basically said is, we'll draft a letter
that basically said the impact fee is $441 pending the alternative study
for this particular issue, and please let Mr. Dane pay that amount, and
then we'll bring the consent agenda to you for all the other details, and
this way Mr. Dane then --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
MR. MUDD: -- can get his slab permit, and then we don't have
to have any exceptions to the rules between the municipality and the
county .
MR. DANE: I like that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: That's great. I think that way you can
move forward and we can get on with business, okay?
MR. DANE: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any further discussion? County
attorney's okay with that.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries unanimously. We're
going to take a 10-minute break before we get to our 10:30 time
concern, so be here at 10:48 (sic).
(A brief recess was had.)
MR. MUDD: Ladies and gentlemen, if you'd please take your
seats.
Page 54
March 11, 2008
Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, you have a hot mike.
Item #14A
CRA RESOLUTION 2008-60: RESOLUTION FOR THE COLLIER
COUNTY COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
(CRA)ACCEPTING THE CULTURAL NEEDS ASSESSMENT
REPORT AND RECOMMENDING THE BCC CREATE BY
ORDINANCE A CULTURAL DISTRICT BOUNDARY WITHIN
THE BA YSHORE SECTION OF THE CRA; AUTHORIZE THE
CRA STAFF TO CONTINUE TO DEVELOP AN
IMPLEMENT A TION PACKAGE FOR THE DISTRICT; AND
RETURN WITH RECOMMENDATIONS FOR APPROVAL -
ADOPTED
CHAIRMAN HENNING: At this time the Board of
Commissioners is going to recess the meeting to conduct the
Community Redevelopment Agency, then after we do those items,
we'll go back in the board's business.
So I'm going to hand the gavel over to the chairperson of the
CRA, Commissioner Fiala.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
CRA board is now in session.
MR. MUDD: Madam Chair, the next item is 14A. It's a
recommendation for the Collier County Community Redevelopment
Agency to approve a resolution accepting the cultural needs
assessment report and recommending the BCC create by ordinance a
cultural district boundary within the Bayshore section of the CRA;
authorize the CRA staff to continue to develop an implementation
package for the district; and return with recommendations for
approval.
Mr. David Jackson, your Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA
Page 55
March 11, 2008
Director, will present.
MR. JACKSON: Good morning, Madam Chairman, and good
morning, CRA Commissioners.
I am David Jackson, Executive Director, Bayshore Gateway
Triangle CRA component.
I'd like to take a moment here and give you 120 seconds of
introduction to a presentation and a little bit of background and a
couple of information bits.
Eight years ago this month the Collier County Board of County
Commissioners created the Collier County Redevelopment Agency in
its two component areas, Immokalee and Bayshore Gateway Triangle.
This was leveraged off of community support.
In 1998/1999, community visioning in the Bayshore Gateway
Triangle area, hundreds of people wanted to remove slum and blight,
and they also wanted to produce some economic development to
provide catalysts to bring in construction of new storefront and new
commercial ventures. They also talked about art and culture in those
meetings.
In 2004/2005 there was an effort to create an artist village in the
Bayshore area. It walked the halls of zoning and Comprehensive Plan,
it just never quite made it to the map. It wasn't ripe for prime time.
In 2007, here we go again, about 10 years later after the 1998
visioning, the citizens started a grass-roots campaign again. This
came up out of the community. These were residents, homeowners,
business owners, property owners, and they came together for almost
12 months and put together another visioning package and reaffirmed
that they wanted to remove slum and blight; they wanted to provide
better quality stock of housing in the area; they wanted catalyst
programs and incentives in order to build, construct, commercial
ventures; and they also talked a great effort on art and cultural, but this
time it was a different twist.
In the arts side of it, it wasn't just visual arts, but it had to do with
Page 56
March 11, 2008
performing arts. It had to do with music, play houses, Thespians, and
they also talked about providing educational services because we have
a great underserved community in the art and cultural venues in the
area that we're in.
So the CRA commissioned a study. We needed to go out and
document this feeling that the public had. And in there they -- we
documented in this study the needs, we verified some data, and we've
got some recommendations.
So I'm here today to present to you, or to introduce to you, Mr.
Arthur Greenberg of AMS Planning and Research, a nationally known
firm that does a lot of cultural and art studies across the nation from
coast to coast.
He's going to give you a lO-minute summary of his written report
that was in your package there of his findings and recommendations.
At the conclusion of his presentation, I will take 60 seconds to
summarize and hopefully we'll get a motion and second to pass the
resolution.
Mr. Greenberg?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Madam Chair, I'm going to
make a motion to approve 14A to speed up the process.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'll second.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I have a motion on the floor by
Commissioner Henning and a second by Commissioner Coyle. And
I've just been told we have 10 speakers.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'll second it only if the 10 speakers
waive. Okay, good.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: They're all waving.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Good.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. We have a motion on the floor and
a second, and I think most of you have already read the information
within our packet.
Is there any discussion on this subject?
Page 57
March 11, 2008
County Attorney, do we need anything on the record?
MR. KLATZKOW: Yes, only just read the names and have
them officially waive.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
MS. FILSON: Elaine Hamilton?
MS. HAMILTON: Waive.
MS. FILSON: Rick Edson?
MR. EDSON: Waive.
MS. FILSON: Sondra Quinn?
MS. QUINN: Waive.
MS. FILSON: Chellie Doepke?
MS. DOEPKE: Waive.
MS. FILSON: Erich Kunzel?
MR. KUNZEL: Waive.
MS. FILSON: Sylvain Chevalier?
MR. CHEV ALlER: Waive.
MS. FILSON: Michael Sherman?
MR. SHERMAN: Waive.
MS. FILSON: Margaret Chevalier?
MS. CHEV ALlER: Waive.
MS. FILSON: Robert Cahners?
MR. CARNERS: Waive.
MS. FILSON: Joel Banson (sic)?
MR. BANOW: Banow.
MS. FILSON: Banow.
MR. BANOW: Waive.
MS. FILSON: That's it.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Well, I just love this because we
all know this is a great thing, and here we've got a motion on the floor
and a second. We didn't even have to be talked into it.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
Page 58
March 11, 2008
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Very good.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Excellent presentation.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you so much for being here.
(Applause.)
MR. JACKSON: Calls for an early lunch, I think.
Item #14B
THE COLLlER COUNTY COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY (CRA) AUTHORIZES THE CREATION AND
FUNDING OF A FULL TIME EMPLOYEE (FTE) POSITION
(OPERATIONS COORDINATOR) FOR THE
BA YSHORE/GA TEW A Y TRIANGLE AREA IN FY08;
RECOMMEND THAT THE BCC APPROVE A FUND 187 FY08
BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR THE POSITION; AND
AUTHORIZE THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO ADVERTISE
THE POSITION AS AN INTERNAL TRANSFER FOR
APPLlCANTS FROM THE COUNTY MANAGER AGENCY AND
HIRE A QUALIFIED APPLlCANT. (FISCAL IMPACT: $31,020
FY08) - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, 14B is your next item. This item
to be heard immediately following 14A. It's a recommendation for the
Collier County Community Redevelopment Agency, CRA, to
authorize the creation and funding of a full-time employee, FTE,
position operation coordinator for the Bayshore Gateway Triangle
Page 59
March 11, 2008
area in FY-'08; recommend that the BCC approve a fund 187 FY-'08
budget amendment for the position; and authorize the executive
director to advertise the position as an internal transfer from applicants
from the county manager's agency and hire a qualified applicant.
Fiscal impact, $31,020 in FY-'08. Mr. David Jackson, your
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA Director will present.
MR. JACKSON: Good morning, Commissioners. The main item
that we wanted to bring up here was that this was -- we've been
growing ever -- the area. We've also been growing products and
programs. We've hired a couple extra people on it. We have a lot of
things going.
Right now, the three of us that are in the office are fully work
loaded, but we also have many other things that we'd like to do; we
just don't have the time do it. And there's a large administrative load
that we all share. And if we could free up a little bit more time, I think
in the area of the Gateway area and in the Bayshore area, we can put a
little bit more focus in some of the areas.
This item was not going to be requested for a funding until this
budget cycle for FY-'08, but we also know that there's an availability
of some personnel in the county manager's agency that is some talent.
We would like to tap into that talent now before they fritter away and
may go other places, and it's an opportunity for us to bolster the
system and be able to work on our mission and our goals.
MR. MUDD: Mr. Jackson, a correction to your statement, you
said this was a funding issue for '08, but I think you meant it was
going to be in '09, sir.
MR. JACKSON": I stand corrected. It was for this budget cycle
for fiscal year '09.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I have Commissioner Henning,
Commissioner Halas, and Commissioner Coyle.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Jackson, in our executive
summary it refers to exhibits, but I can't find any of the pages that are
Page 60
March 11, 2008
marked exhibits in our agenda. Can you help me out?
MR. JACKSON: I can't -- I don't have a package. I've not seen
what you've got in there, but you should have --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: All right. Let me go -- let me
further ask my question. It says in our agenda, as backup documents
provided and programming currently underway, attachments are the
Bayshore Gateway Triangle 2008 goals and objectives list as Exhibit
B, all right. Can you -- can you help me to understand what Exhibit B
looks like?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Mr. Chairman -- Madam Chair, if I
could be helpful?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It's the last page in that. It's the
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA Local Advisory Board 2008 goals
and proj ect list.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It's pages 7 of 8. The problem is,
these are not labeled as exhibits. The documents are here. They're
just not labeled as exhibits.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah.
MR. JACKSON: Then that is my administrative error. That's
why I need some help.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, good one.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: We have a motion to approve --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: -- and a second and a third.
Did you get your question answered then?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I got one of them, yes.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Can you tell me, and the CRA
Page 61
March 11, 2008
staffproject assignment list is -- what does that look like?
MR. JACKSON: It's in a landscape format and it has a couple of
dark bars on it. It lists out the projects on it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
MR. JACKSON: And it lists out not by who it is tasked with, but
those are our ongoing projects that we have currently on top that we
know we have to perform the work on; however, we're not able --
some of those are in the works. The others are on the shelf because
we haven't had the time to proactively engage them.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. And my last question is,
I think it's very noble to pick up employees that may -- their positions
may be cut in the agency, but wouldn't you want the best qualified
candidate for these positions?
MR. JACKSON: Absolutely.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So it's not -- it's not
automatically it's going to be one of our employees, the county's
employees?
MR. JACKSON: I may need some assistance from the County
Manager's Office on this one, is that the agreement, in talking with
some of the HR department, was that it would be advertised as an
internal transfer first, and if there was not somebody that met -- did
not apply, did not meet the skills needs, then we would advertise it
outside the County Manager's Agency for the most likely candidate
that would fill the position.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay, a follow-up question on
that. Is those skill needs in here, classified titles? Yes, it is.
Functions, essential functions, additional functions, minimum
qualifications.
MR. JACKSON: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay, great. You've answered
my questions. I'm ready to support the motion.
MR. JACKSON: Thank you.
Page 62
March 11, 2008
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Halas and then
Commissioner Coyle.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. I would assume that where
you're getting the funds to support this person is through TIF funds; is
that correct?
MR. JACKSON: Yes, sir. That's my only avenue. It's the only
revenues I have.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And you have enough funds in
2008 to accommodate a person for the six months?
MR. JACKSON: Yes, sir. The attached budget amendment in
their package shows that the money would come out of the budget.
We have ample reserves or ample money in the operating budget to
make that happen.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. And you don't anticipate
any serious budget problems in 2009?
MR. JACKSON: No, sir.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
MS. JACKSON: No. We're a pay as you go. We do not budget
greater than what we've got. We're a zero sum balance budget. We
are balanced. We stay balanced.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coyle, I'm sorry that I put
you last there, but it's your district, and so --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It's perfect because Commissioner
Halas brought up the issue that I was interested in addressing, because
it's not always clear to the public why we can approve hiring an
employee for you but we're cutting employees off our own staff, and
Commissioner Halas is absolutely correct. It's being done through the
community redevelopment area, and you are a separate -- essentially a
separate taxing district, and you're not raising taxes.
MR. JACKSON: No, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You have money in your budget to
Page 63
March 11, 2008
do that. We don't have money in our budget to do it. We're not
spending any of the county's money on helping you hire this person.
MR. JACKSON: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And so that's an important
distinction. So again, I'm in support of the motion.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, very good.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I didn't take your fire away?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No, you did it perfectly. I think that
was a good point to bring up.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: So I have a motion on the floor by
Commissioner Coyle and a second by Commissioner Halas.
Any further discussion?
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign?
(No response.)
Item #14C
COLLlER COUNTY COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY (CRA) AUTHORIZES THE CREATION AND
FUNDING OF A FULL TIME EMPLOYEE (FTE) POSITION
(PROJECT MANAGER) FOR THE IMMOKALEE AREA IN
FY08; RECOMMEND THAT THE BCC APPROVE AN
IMMOKALEE FUND (186) FY08 BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR
THE POSITION; AND AUTHORIZE THE EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR TO ADVERTISE THE POSITION AS AN INTERNAL
TRANSFER FOR APPLlCANTS FROM THE COUNTY
Page 64
March 11, 2008
MANAGER AGENCY AND HIRE A QUALlFIED APPLlCANT
(FISCAL IMPACT: $35,181 FY08) - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to lOC. This item
follows 14B. A recommendation for the Collier County Community
Redevelopment Agency to authorize the creation and funding a
full-time employee FTE position project manager for the Immokalee
area in FY-'08; recommend the BCC approve an Immokalee fund 186
FY-'08 budget amendment for position; and authorize the executive
director to advertise the position as an internal transfer for applicants
for County Manager's Agency; and hire a qualified applicant.
Fiscal impact's $35,181 in FY-'08. Ms. Penny Phillippi from the
Immokalee -- your Immokalee CRA director, will present.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Madam Chair?
MS. PHILLlPPI: Good morning, Commissioners. Thank you,
Mr. Mudd.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Madam Chair, I'd like to make a
motion to approve, if it's the same guidance as we did the previous
one, the '08 budget -- or no, '09 budget and --
MS. PHILLlPPI: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- and qualified applicant.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I have --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'll second that.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: -- a motion on the floor and a second by
Commissioner Coletta.
Did you want to say anything else, Penny?
MS. PHILLlPPI: I'm very happy that Mr. Jackson went first.
That made things much easier for me. But that is exactly what we
want to do. We need a project manager to get our CRA up off the
ground and running with all the projects and objectives that we have
in mind.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Very good.
Page 65
March 11, 2008
Any further discussion by board members?
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Very good. That passes.
MS. PHILLlPPI: Thank you.
Item #14D
COLLlER COUNTY COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY (CRA) SELECTION OF CHAIRMAN AND VICE
CHAIRMAN FOR CALENDAR YEAR 2008 - MOTION TO KEEP
DONNA FIALA AS CHAIRMAN - APPROVED; MOTION TO
ELECT JIM COLETTA AS VICE-CHAIRMAN - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, the next item is 14D. It's the
Collier County Community Redevelopment Agency, CRA, selection
of chairman and vice-chairman for calendar year 2008.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Motion to elect Donna Fiala to
remain as the chair.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, thank you.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll second that.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
Page 66
March 11, 2008
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed, like sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
MR. MUDD: Vice-chair, ma'am?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Vice-chairman. I motion to appoint
Commissioner Coletta as vice-chair.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed, like sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Very good. Thank you.
And now I think, with that, my duties for this meeting are
adjourned. So the CRA board meeting is closed, and we go back to --
how do you say that? We go back to the regular board meeting.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Return.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Reconvene.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Resume the regular board meeting.
MR. KLATZKOW: Reconvene.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Reconvene, thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Board of Commissioners reconvene.
It's March 12th -- 11th meeting, and we have a time certain at 11
o'clock, and it's close enough that I think that we can do that, correct?
Item #lOA
Page 67
March 11, 2008
REVIEW OF THE WRITTEN AND ORAL REPORTS OF THE
ADVISORY BOARDS AND COMMITTEES SCHEDULED FOR
REVIEW IN 2008 IN ACCORDANCE WITH ORDINANCE NO.
2001-55. ADVISORY BOARDS: ANIMAL SERVICES
ADVISORY BOARD, COLLlER COUNTY CODE
ENFORCEMENT BOARD, CONTRACTORS LICENSING
BOARD, AND GOLDEN GATE BEAUTIFICATION ADVISORY
COMMITTEE - MOTION TO APPROVE AS THE BOARDS
SERVE A V ALlD SERVICE TO THE PUBLlC AND TO ACCEPT
THE REPORTS - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. This item to be heard at 11 a.m. It's lOA.
To review the written and oral reports of the advisory boards and
committees scheduled for review in 2008 in accordance with
ordinance number 2001-55.
Your advisory boards for today are Animal Services Advisory
Board, the Collier County Code Enforcement Board, the Contractors
Licensing Board, and the Golden Gate Beautification Advisory
Committee.
Mr. Mike Sheffield, Assistant to the County Manager, will do the
introductions and present.
MR. SHEFFIELD: Good morning. Mike Sheffield from the
County Manager's Office.
As you know, your advisory committees are up for review every
four years on a rotating schedule in accordance with ordinance
2001-55. These reviews allow you the opportunity to determine if the
advisory committees continue to address the issues for which they
were established and to determine if any revisions are necessary.
This year you are reviewing nine committees, four today and five
at your March 25th meeting.
The written reports are included in your agenda packet. After
each presentation, it is requested that you make a recommendation to
Page 68
March 11, 2008
either accept the committee's report as presented or to propose any
changes that you would like to see happen with that committee.
And if there are no questions at this point, I'll -- we'll begin.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Please.
MR. SHEFFIELD: Okay. Your first speaker--
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. I would like to ask a
question. Is it possible -- we've all -- we've got the reports. We've all
read the reports, I presume. Can we deal with the approval of these
reports as a block?
MR. SHEFFIELD: I believe you may.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: You need to find a valid public
purpose for these advisory boards, so is that your motion?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, that is my motion. I find that
there is a valid public purpose for the advisory boards and I find,
based on their recommendations, that there are no changes that are
relevant.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. The motion by Commissioner
Coyle. Is there a second to the motion?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas has seconded
the motion.
Any discussion on the motion? We have -- I'm sorry. Sir, would
you --
DR. EISEL: I'm Dr. Randy Eisel. I was slated to speak on the
Domestic Animal Services Board meeting.
The report that you have was not prepared by the board itself,
and I do have some comments I'd like to make about the report itself,
so --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Did you sign up as a speaker?
DR. EISEL: I believe I'm --
MR. SCHEFFIELD: Well, as part of the item, he is one of the
Page 69
March 11, 2008
speakers to present.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: You're recognized as a speaker. Does
anybody -- any board member have an objection?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Sir?
DR. EISEL: Thank you, sir. Good morning, Madam Chairman
and Members of the Board. I'm Dr. Randy Eisel, again. I'm a private
practice veterinarian in Naples. I own the Animal Life Veterinary
Center. And it has been my honor and privilege to serve as president
of the Domestic Animal Services Advisory Board these past four
years since its inception.
The report that you have in front of you, in large part, you know,
I don't really have any comment on it. It lists a number of questions
about, you know, is it serving the purpose for which it was created,
and I believe that it is; whether it's adequately serving the
community's needs. I believe that over the past two to four years it
has.
And it lists some major accomplishments of the 12-month period.
I'm not going to bore you with a longer list of accomplishments. I
think that the board in four years has accomplished a great deal.
It gets into a question then about whether or not -- are there any
-- I'm sorry. There is -- about any other agencies or committees that
serve that purpose, and there are not.
But should the ordinance creating the committee or board be
amended to allow the committee to more adequately serve the purpose
for which it was created. And I believe that there should be a
consideration of some modifications of the amendment that created
this board, because I'm not convinced that the board represents the
public in the way that it was intended.
When the board was founded, there were issues, significant
issues, with Domestic Animal Services in, you know, mismanagement
and some things that were happening that, you know, really dragged
Page 70
March 11, 2008
down its public perception.
But now that a lot of those issues have been directed, or have
been corrected rather, the board is moving in a direction of expanding
out into some, you know, larger issues that affect the community as a
whole.
At its core, the Domestic Animal Services is a public health
organization. That's what it does. It protects the public. What it has to
protect the public from though is animals, whether those be domestic
animals, feral animals, wild animals. And there is not a public health
representative on the board.
You have the make-up of the board in your notes, and it includes,
you know, a member from the Human Society, which is the only
named organization to be represented on the board -- I'm not really
sure why that is -- a veterinarian technician, a law enforcement
representative, a citizen in pet retail or boarding, and a representative
from an animal rights group based in Collier County.
However, because it's a public health organization, I firmly
believe that there should be a public health representative on the
board. And since Domestic Animal Services is venturing into
discussions of some larger issues that I think should well be discussed,
like feral cat policies -- in fact, just yesterday there was an article in
the Naples Daily News about Collier County Domestic Animal
Services might change their feral cat policy.
These are not only, you know, esoteric issues, you know, about
animal ethics, but also environmental questions. And there are -- you
know, there was a -- you know, even representatives referenced in the
article from some of the wildlife organizations who have issue with
this.
And right now, the membership of the board, as it's become, you
know, more directed towards these ethical issues, you know, doesn't
represent at all any environmental group or any wildlife group. And I
believe that it should, and I believe that it rightly should because these
Page 71
March 11, 2008
are issues that Domestic Animal Services deals with on, you know,
probably a daily basis.
There are also some problems, I believe, in the application
process. We've had excellent applicants to the board being rejected
not because they are not qualified to sit on the board. The minimum
requirements to be on the board at Domestic Animal Services is
actually quite simple, but they're being rejected because of
philosophical differences that they may have with the larger number
of persons on the board.
And, you know, I don't think that that is -- when this board was
founded, what the actual goal of the board was to create a, you know,
monolithic, you know, single-issue board to exclude other opinions.
This is the only board I've ever sat on. I don't know what it's like
on other advisory boards. I think the Domestic Animal Services is
probably unique because it does touch on some, you know, very core,
you know, consciousness issues of people involving animals, and
they're very hot-button issues, emotional, and very personal to people.
And, you know, because of that, you know, I think there needs to be
some -- some -- you know, some guidelines more, I think, as to why
people should or shouldn't be allowed to be on the board.
There are some conflict-of-interest issues, I believe, because --
you know, regarding the Sunshine Law, because when you have larger
groups, whether it's an environmental group or whether it's the
humane society, that is represented on the board and they have large
volunteer bases to draw from, you know, if one of their -- you know, if
they decide to recruit from their volunteer base and essentially have a
number of representatives from that board -- now, I don't know what
the solution is to making sure that there isn't conflict of interest with
these, but I see in the future a potential for a problem with that.
And again, I think there have been good applicants who have
been eliminated because there have been other applicants that, you
know, members of the board have thought, you know, would probably
Page 72
March 11, 2008
be more inclined to support their agenda.
And the other thing is, as far as the law enforcement position on
the board, I think it's an excellent idea to have somebody on law
enforcement, but I think that that should be expanded to include Fish
and Game. You know, if we can have somebody who's a police
officer or a sheriffs officer, then an officer from Fish and Game
should be considered to be on the board too, because they probably
more directly deal with, you know, some of these issues, particularly
as we're talking, you know, things like no-kill shelters and
trap-and-release programs for feral cats.
And I think I've spoken myself out. So if the board has any other
-- any questions --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner--
DR. EISEL: -- I'd be more than happy to--
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- Coyle has a question.
DR. EISEL: Yes, please.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes. Dr. Eisel, I am confused.
DR. EISEL: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: This report here is signed by you.
DR. EISEL: When it was sent to me, it was given to me and
said, you know, this just has to be sent back to the commission, and I
signed it and sent it back. And I'm technically no longer a member of
the board. My last meeting was the last meeting.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, wait a minute, wait a minute.
DR. EISEL: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Wait a minute. It was signed by
you and it says, should the ordinance creating the committee board be
amended to allow the committee to more adequately serve the
purposes for which it was created, and you have said in this form, it is
believed that the Domestic Animal Advisory Board can operate
adequately and effectively under the existing ordinance.
Another question was, should the membership requirements be
Page 73
March 11, 2008
modified? You said, no modifications are needed for the tasks at
hand.
I don't understand why you sign a document that says one thing
and then you come here today not representing the board and saying
something entirely different.
DR. EISEL: When this document was given to me at the--
basically at the end of when I was going to be on the board -- and I
think when it was -- when it was given to me to sign, I don't know that
I was aware that I was going to have the opportunity to speak in front
of the board.
I didn't even know that there was, you know, a review document,
you know, that I was going to be presented with.
I think it -- when I signed it, you know, it was -- I'm sure my
decision to do so didn't involve a great deal of thought because I didn't
understand, you know, exactly what the document was.
I mean, let me rephrase that. I think I understood what the
document was, but the greater implications of it, I think, were
probably lost on me at the time.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Are you no longer the chairman of
the board?
DR. EISEL: Correct, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Are you on the board at all, now?
DR. EISEL: No, sir.
MS. FILSON: His term expired, I believe, April 17th.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So you are on the board until April
17th.
MS. FILSON: First part of April. I'm not sure about the date,
but it's April.
DR. EISEL: Technically I may be. I know that the last meeting
was last month that I was, you know, to attend.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay, thank you.
DR. EISEL: You're welcome.
Page 74
March 11, 2008
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Doctor?
DR. EISEL: Sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: The Board of County Commissioners
DR. EISEL: Oh, I'm sorry.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- appoint the members.
DR. EISEL: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: We don't really know and want to get
involved in the day-to-day politics on that board, so --
DR. EISEL: I understand.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- I just want to correct that
misstatement. This is a -- this is a domestic animal control, and you're
standing up there as, not president, but chairman; is that correct?
DR. EISEL: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
DR. EISEL: I'm sorry in misspoke.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Your statements are your opinion or
the advisory board's opinion?
DR. EISEL: I believe these are my opinions.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay, all right. Great.
I support the motion. Thank you.
DR. EISEL: May I make one comment to something that you
just said. I am aware that the board is the one who ultimately makes
the selection on the --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: The Board of Commissioners.
DR. EISEL: -- board's -- correct, the Board of Commissioners is
ultimately the one who, you know, says yea or nay, gives the thumbs
up or down to the applicant or the person that the board of Domestic
Animal Services has selected.
I guess my bigger concern is, you're not given really all of the
applicants to review it all. I know that that's -- you know, you have a
lot of time -- or rather you don't have a lot of time to deal with these
Page 75
March 11, 2008
day-to-day issues, and I don't believe that micromanaging that board
should be a part of what you do. But I would just like to see a little bit
more, you know, information presented to you as to who the
applicants are.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: There is. I mean, whether he's a
resident of the county.
DR. EISEL: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Full-time resident, being that you
have to be a voter. The person's background. Now, we don't care
what their political philosophy is.
DR. EISEL: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: That is none of our business. We care
on -- first of all, it's my opinion, and I think it's the rest of the board's
opinion too, we're thankful that the citizens want to be involved in
their government.
DR. EISEL: Absolutely.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And, you know, with that, I think that
we make a great decision on the appointments of our advisory board.
And I want to thank you for serving on the advisory board --
DR. EISEL: It's been my pleasure.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- not only as member, but as
chairman, sir. Thank you.
DR. EISEL: Appreciate that, thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Great. There's a motion on the floor
and second.
Is there any other discussion on the motion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion, signify by
saymg aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
Page 76
March 11, 2008
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motions carries unanimously.
Thank you, Mr. Sheffield.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Next item is 9?
Item #9A
RESOLUTION 2008-61: APPOINTING THOMAS L YKOS TO
THE CONTRACTORS LlCENSING BOARD - ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to 9A, and that's an
appointment of a member to the Contractors Licensing Board.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Motion to approve Thomas Lykos.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: There's a motion by Commissioner
Fiala to appoint Thomas Lykos, seconded by Commissioner Henning.
Discussion on the motion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Seeing none, all in favor of the
motion signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries unanimously.
Item #9B
Page 77
March 11, 2008
RESOLUTION 2008-62: APPOINTING TERRY CHARLES
HEATH TO THE EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES
ADVISORY COUNCIL - ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Next item is 9B, appointment of a member to the
Emergency Medical Services Advisory Council.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: The one applicant on there is Theresa
-- Terry Charles Heath.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Coletta,
second by Commissioner Fiala.
All in favor of the motion signify by saying.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries unanimously.
Item #9C
REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION FOR MPP SHORELINE
CALCULATIONS, ITEM #2B WAS HEARD AT THE
FEBRUARY 19,2008 LDC AMENDMENT MEETING-
RECONSIDER THE MPP SHORELlNE CALCULATIONS -
APPROVED; ITEM TO BE BROUGHT BACK TO THE APRIL
8TH BCC MEETING
Page 78
March 11, 2008
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. Next item is 9C. It's a request for
reconsideration of the MPP shoreline calculations, item 2B, heard at
the February 19,2008, Land Development Code amendment meeting.
The item is being asked for reconsideration by Commissioner Coyle.
I will tell you that in deciding where to put this, I asked if there
were any more Land Development Code meetings for the LDC
amendment cycle, and you had gone through all of them. So I was at
a loss of where to put this particular reconsideration. That's why it's
on this agenda today. And in five years as the county manager, I
haven't had this show up where I couldn't put it in the right place, so
that's where she sits.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You did good.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Under this item, according to
our rules, no hearing or debate on the motion for reconsideration. We
do have public speakers on --
MS. FILSON: We have three public speakers, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Hang on -- on this item, so that would
be a deviation from our policy.
Does the board want to waive our policy?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle, do you make a
motion?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I make a motion that we approve
the request for reconsideration.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I second that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. There's a motion by
Commissioner Coyle to reconsider the Manatee Protection PIan
shoreline calculation that was heard at our Land Development Code
amendment hearing on February 19,2008, and it was seconded by
Commissioner Halas.
All in favor of the motion signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
Page 79
March 11, 2008
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: The motion carries, 3-2, and I'm sure
the county manager would carry out the policy of the majority of the
board by our ordinance.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. And this will come back on the 8th of
April.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Pardon?
MR. MUDD: This will come back at -- the ordinance says that it
comes back two meetings after the reconsideration. So the second
meeting would be April 8th that this will be reheard.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
Item #9D
RESOLUTION 2008-63: APPOINTING ANTONIOS H.
KOKKINOS TO THE HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN AD
HOC COMMITTEE - ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: The next item is 9C (sic), and it's appointment ofa
member to the Habitat Conservation Plan Ad Hoc Committee.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: It's item 9D, as in David.
MR. MUDD: 9D, I'm sorry.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Motion to approve the committee
recommendation, Antonios Kokkinos.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Fiala.
Second by --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- Commissioner Coyle.
Page 80
March 11, 2008
All in favor of the motion signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Carries unanimously.
Item #9E
DISCUSSION REGARDING COUNTY ATTORNEY INTERVIEW
PROCESS - DEVELOP A PROCESS FOR THE INTERVIEWS
AND APPLlCANTS SHOULD BE SCHEDULED FROM 8:00 AM
TO 5:30PM - DISCUSSED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, the next item is 9E. It's a
discussion regarding the county attorney interview process.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioners, County Manager, the
-- talking with the Supervisor of Elections there is a concern of what
has (sic) happening in the national politics --
MR. KLATZKOW: 9E, sir.
MR. MUDD: This is 9E, sir. This has to do with the county
attorney interview process.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Oh.
MR. MUDD: I believe Mr. Filson has some questions --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: My apologies.
MR. MUDD: -- the board needs to answer.
We'll get to the Democrats in just a second.
MS. FILSON: This is the interview schedule that we've
scheduled for April the 9th, and I just need to get a consensus of how
Page 81
March 11, 2008
the interview flow will go. You've all received a memo from Scott
Teach -- addressed to Scott Teach with the legal in it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle, Commissioner
Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, the -- if I understand the
problem, it is that we have an attorney's opinion that says we cannot
exclude anybody from the interview process, so that means that all of
the applicants will be sitting here probably in the boardroom listening
to the questions that we ask each of them, so that those who are
questioned early on will be at a significant disadvantage to those who
are questioned later because the other applicants will have the benefit
of having heard all the questions. And we've apparently been unable
to agree on a way to do that.
And my suggestion is essentially the same as the one I've made
before, to handle the interview process, since they all have to be
present, in a way that many of the political campaign questioning is
accomplished where we have them all here, they're lined up, and first
question first time will start with the person on the left, next question
will start with the person on the right, third question will start in the
center and go to the right, and the other one will start somewhere else.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I always like to start from the right
myself.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Do you? I'd like to stay on the
right if we can do that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah, I'd stay on the right.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: In any event, if we could devise
something like that in a routine that we can follow consistently
through the questioning process, I think it assures that everyone has an
equal opportunity to answer the questions rather than gaining
advantage.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. I might add to that, if
Page 82
March 11, 2008
we're going to start from the right, what we can do is just keep rotating
the people from one end to the other and chairs.
But no, what I wanted to mention is that I'm going to have to -- I
may possibly have to leave the meeting when you take your lunch
break. I don't know what's going to be coming up at the Southwest
Florida Expressway Authority meeting, but I have directive from this
commission that I have to make sure it's carried out, and that may be a
critical meeting. I'll be weighing what the agenda's all about, but I
may not be here from 12 o'clock on.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I got a solution to that. Why don't we
just not participate in the Expressway?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. That's an idea.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Can we revoke his membership?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle gave direction.
I see nobody that disagrees with that direction. Is the correct direction
clear?
MS. FILSON: Yes, that direction is clear. I have a package
already to send to the applicants, so I will tell them to plan to be here
from 8:00 till 5:30 for interviews.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Sounds good.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Tell them we'll provide lunch.
MS. FILSON: We will? Who will buy?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Commissioner Coyle.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I will.
MS. FILSON: You want me to say that?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: We'll provide lunch.
MS. FILSON: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: What do you mean we? You got a
mouse in your pocket?
Page 83
March 11, 2008
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'll take it out of Commissioner
Halas's travel budget is what I'm going to do.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I'll second that motion.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Endless supply of money.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. With that said, we're going to
move to the one that I started.
Item #9F
BOARD DISCUSSION REGARDING THE POTENTIAL RE-
VOTE OF THE PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARY AND THE COSTS
ASSOCIATED TO THE COLLlER COUNTY BUDGET -
CHAIRMAN TO SEND A LETTER FROM THE BOARD TO THE
HOUSE SPEAKER AND GOVERNOR REGARDING THE
BOARD'S DISSATISFACTION OF UNFUNDED MANDATES
MR. MUDD: 9F, sir, and that's a board discussion regarding the
potential revote of the presidential primary and the costs associated to
the Collier County budget, and this is an add-on by Commissioner
Henning.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah. The -- a lot of discussion about
the revote for the seating of the delegates of the Democrats at a
national Democratic committee.
We've had a vote, and we encourage people to vote, but not at the
expense of Collier County taxpayers, and in my opinion, not at the
expense of the Florida residents.
We don't know what the legislators are going to do. We would
hope that they would not send an unfunded mandate that some might
consider, and I believe it's appropriate for the Board of Commissioners
to direct the chairman to write the Senate president and the House
leader and the governor and also copy our delegation that Collier
County encourages the process of voting and participation and
Page 84
March 11, 2008
recognize that the Democratic residents in Collier County had that.
But since the DNC does not recognize that, if a vote is to be
processed, again, to fit their rules, that they pay for that and the
taxpayers in Collier County are not to pay for that.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. And I could add a bit of
support in my clarification to that, is that I think the letter should very
clearly state that this is a problem that was caused by the Democratic
national leaders and that we believe that the Democratic vote should
count -- they should be able to vote their delegates and that any
expense be borne by the Democratic party because they caused this
problem. It was not caused by the voters of this state, and so I concur
with your assessment.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle, also, if I may
add, if the legislators allow this process to happen, whatever type of
voting mechanism they do to seat the Democratic delegates, I want to
mind (sic) you that only half of the Republican delegations will be
seated at the convention. That presents a problem of a fair and equal
to all.
And, you know, our Republican delegates deserve the same, but
the Republican National Committee has not made this an issue. It is
the Democratic National Committee and the candidates.
If you don't mind, after I go to Commissioner Halas, Tim
Durham from the elections -- Supervisor of Elections is here.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, Mr. Chairman, in carry that
just a little bit further. I think it is important that we let our legislators
know that we will defend against any unfunded mandate on this
county to hold an election that has to be paid for by our taxpayers. I
think they need to understand that we will, in fact, defend against such
action by them.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I have a -- kind of a different view
Page 85
March 11, 2008
of this in the sense that the legislators, when they took it upon
themselves to move the early primary, both sides said that there was
going to be some sanctions. And whether they took them serious or
not, this is what's put this whole thing into a dilemma.
And, again, I think that there should have been some thought --
should have been a serious thought process in regards to what the
outcome might be. And now we have people on both sides that can't
represent their party fully, and so I feel that's -- I think that's a real
detriment to the State of Florida.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Serious thought processes don't
occur in the legislature.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: So also included in the letter you
would like to say that everybody was aware of the potential sanctions
from the parties, national parties.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Both sides.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Political parties on both sides.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: They didn't take them serious.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Mr. Durham, do you have
anything to add?
DR. DURHAM: Thank you, Commissioner Henning. Tim
Durham, Deputy Supervisor of Elections. Jennifer gives her greetings.
She couldn't be here today due to a prior commitment.
I'd like to give you a little bit of an update on this particular issue.
As we all know, in the media a couple days ago, it started to get legs,
the idea of, perhaps, doing a do-over with a mail ballot-type election;
however, there's some very formidable obstacles with this.
Number one, there's no statutory authority for this to be done
whether the governor wants it or not. It's going to require new
legislation, and that legislation would have to be precleared, by the
way.
Secondly, although we're big proponents of balloting by mail, we
think it's a very good idea, we're not aware of that ever even being
Page 86
March 11, 2008
attempted in our state before.
Oregon has been doing it for 10 years, but this would be a very
new thing for us to do it on a statewide level in the middle of doing a
transition between getting rid of our touch screen voting machines,
which was mandated by the state, and trying to transition before the
presidential election to the new optical scan voting systems.
And there's a deadline issue here also. If they're going to do
balloting by mail, we need to mail out to our overseas voters about 45
days in advance of the election so that they have their ballots in a
timely fashion, and that will crunch -- if you start working those time
lines, that will crunch right up into the primary that's due to occur in
August.
And I read this morning in the media there's talk of the party
itself funding this and conducting the election themselves. I don't
know how practical that is. They'd have some very formidable
obstacles.
But another thing that's not been considered is there will be a lot
of crossover voting. I don't think that's been anticipated here. You
will have people change parties just to influence this particular
election, then go back to their normal --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Don't count on me to change my
party.
DR. DURHAM: No, wouldn't dream of it, sir.
And lastly, you've probably heard the figure bandied about in the
media that it would cost about $6 million. In talking with Jennifer,
talking with other supervisors around the state, we feel that's a very
low-balled figure. That's probably only taking into account actual
postage. But as you know, there's much more, even to a mail ballot
election, than postage. You have all the materials and the labor
involved of processing that material and getting it out in a timely
fashion.
I would like to end on a happy note, because our office is also
Page 87
March 11, 2008
very concerned about unfunded mandates. We think -- see things in
the current proposals and election law that would expand unfunded
mandates down to us. One is, the secretary of state proposing in a
recount full manual recounting of every single ballot voted in a race.
So those of you that remember what happened in 2000, imagine
Miami-Dade, Broward County physically, a human being, going
through every single ballot and recounting it. There's also a proposal
to expand Florida's audit rule. That's a post-election audit rule. And
instead of just auditing one race, 1 percent of the precincts, there's talk
of auditing seven or eight races, increasing the percentage, turning it
over to an independent body that could expand it into a full-blown
recount.
So we're keeping an eye on those unfunded mandate issues also.
And in my research -- and I'll give this to the county manager -- the
Florida Association of Counties, one of their priorities is to address
this unfunded mandate business. And they have a point of contact
here, but they're talking about a constitutional amendment correcting
the present situation.
From our perspective, election law is exempted from the
unfunded mandate prohibition. So if the legislature decides to do
something in election law, there's not a lot that you can do about it.
The Florida Associations of Counties, however, is proposing a
number of steps to make it more difficult for the state legislature to
imposed unfunded mandates on it.
So with your permission, I'll give this to the county manager and
be glad to entertain any questions you might have.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: No. I don't have any problem giving
that to the county manager. Maybe the county manager does.
MR. MUDD: No. I have no problem with receiving the
particular document, but let's make sure we get the costs so that this
board and the public understand what it's going to cost this county.
You mentioned the mail-in and the postage for $6 million. So
Page 88
March 11, 2008
you're basically talking a mail-in--
DR. DURHAM: That would be -- that's the statewide number
that's been given for a mail-in ballot. We think the actual cost to
Collier County would be approximately $150,000.
MR. MUDD: And if -- and if the state did precincts vote, i.e.,
not a mail-in, but everybody goes to precinct and votes, it's about three
times that amount; is that correct?
DR. DURHAM: That is correct, almost a half million dollars,
yes, SIr.
MR. MUDD: So a half million dollars for us, and for the state it
would go from that $6 million estimate to close to 18 or $19 million, if
that was proportionally across the state.
DR. DURHAM: And I've heard even as high as 25-. And one of
the -- we don't have this problem, but some counties are in the midst
of -- they've given over their old equipment to the state and they don't
have their new estimate yet, so it's not even sure how they would
accomplish this.
So with your permission -- if I may interject a funny anecdotal
thing. I'm a father of a nine-year-old third-grader, and I came home
last night, and I had -- my wife told me something that made my blood
run cold. And she goes, Cheyenne talked to a newspaper reporter
today. I'm like, well, do we need to get a U-Haul and move out of the
community?
But she was asked about FCA T and everything was fine. But I
was -- you never know what a nine-year-old's going to say.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas, do you have
anything to add?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: No.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. So is it a consensus of the
board, the chairman will draft a letter and send it to the president of
the Senate, the House speaker, and the governor, and copying our
delegation on our concerns about an unfunded mandate down to the
Page 89
March 11, 2008
voters of -- or the taxpayers of Collier County?
Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I do have one. You're saying that
right now, whether we send this letter or not, the unfunded mandate
will be passed down to us?
DR. DURHAM: Hard to tell, sir. This is a -- to give you a little
background. Normally in a special election, let's say, for Mike Davis's
seat, the way the law works in that particular area is, we initially pay
for it, the county. Later the state comes along and reimburses us for
that type of special election.
But what's being proposed here is a wholly new creature that isn't
even authorized in law. So I have no -- I can't honestly say whether
the counties would be expected to pay for this or the state would later
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Reimburse us.
DR. DURHAM: -- reimburse us. Don't know. Like I said, this is
-- this is a wholly new animal that would have to be created for the
first time.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. So we get back to the question
at hand. Is that what the board wants to direct the chairman to do?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's -- yeah, I think we're -- I'm
fine with it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: We need to go on record saying we
oppose having to pay for this.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Form ofa motion?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: No. I think it's just direction.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: May I --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes, please, Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- also ask, when we go up to
Page 90
March 11, 2008
Tallahassee, the contingent that goes up there -- oh, thank you -- that
we possibly could talk to our legislators about that as well?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: This item might be over by then, but
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- double protection is not a bad
thing. Okay. Great.
DR. DURHAM: Thank you, Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Move on to -- I believe that was the
last item on 9.
Item #10B
THE SOUTHWEST FLORIDA CONSORTIUM 2008 STATE
LEGISLATIVE PRIORITIES WHICH WILL BE PRESENTED BY
PARTICIPATING COUNTY COMMISSIONERS IN THE
CONSORTIUM TO THEIR RESPECTIVE LEGISLATIVE
DELEGATION MEMBERS IN MEETINGS, APRIL 2, 2008 IN
TALLAHASSEE: PRIORITIES NEED CLARIFICATIONS FROM
STAFF AND CONTINUED REFINEMENT OF THE LlST OF
PRIORITIES - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir, under 9. This would bring us to 10B.
This is a recommendation to approve the Southwest Florida
Consortium 2008 state legislative priorities will be presented by
participating county commissioners in the consortium to the respective
legislative delegation members in meeting April 2, 2008, in
Tallahassee.
Ms. Deb Wight, from the -- she was Assistant to the County
Manager, will present.
Page 91
March 11, 2008
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle, do you have
something prior to the presentation?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, I don't know that I need a
presentation. I've got the executive summary, and we list all the
priorities and the items here.
My only concern is that we are suggesting things and we're not
necessarily being very specific. Let me give you, as an example, item
number 5. Proposed changes to the Consultant's Competitive
Negotiations Act. We all know what that means, but without having
something very specific about what changes we want to make to that
act, it is subject to being ignored or misunderstood and consequently
no action being taken.
And the same is true about some of the other things, like fertilizer
rules. What things about the fertilizer rules do we not like and how
should we change it?
There are also issues on aggregate mining. But all I'm saying --
and finally, the issues on things like enforcing immigration laws, there
are a number of immigration bills, illegal immigration bills, that have
been introduced into the legislature or are planning to be introduced
into the legislature, and I think we should tell our legislators which of
those we support, encouraging them to support those specific bills
rather than just making some blanket statement like support our efforts
to stop illegal immigration because that's so easy to ignore.
If you give them something specific that they can act upon, I
think they'll understand it better and I think there's a better chance that
they will do that.
So if you would, I would say, let's approve these things, whatever
changes the board wants to make, but let's get more specific. Let's ask
the staff to get more specific about what we're asking for under these
categories.
MS. WIGHT: Commissioner, understanding what you're saying,
we do have specific position statements for each of these, and when
Page 92
March 11, 2008
we do, we do take those to the legislators.
And also, since talking with you yesterday on the immigration --
I think I sent you an email and I've also consulted with our lobbyists --
and there are 29 immigration bills. And between now and the trip to
Tallahassee, I'll get with you and go over, if it's -- if it is the agreement
of the board, we will go forth with what you're -- with what you
approve as far as the immigration, if it is --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. I don't want to be the only
one involved in making that -- providing that guidance to you. What
I'm suggesting is, if you have your specific statements, they should be
-- they should be reported to the board so the board knows exactly
what you're going to be giving legislators on each of these items.
MS. WIGHT: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And with respect to the legislative
agendas, we need to know what those bills are and maybe get the
staffs input as to which ones we should be supporting and which ones
we should be opposing. And there is time for us to do that, I believe,
before our meeting. Isn't there?
MS. WIGHT: Yeah. Well, there's 29 bills. I haven't been
through them all, but like I sent you the three that I had looked at.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah.
MS. WIGHT: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So I'm just -- I would just like to
understand what we're telling the legislators we want them to do --
MS. WIGHT: Okay, understood.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- rather than just general
statements. I'd like to see the specific requests that we're giving to
legislators.
MS. WIGHT: Okay, understood.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay, Commissioner Coletta,
Commissioner Fiala, Commissioner Halas.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. I agree, as the bills start to
Page 93
March 11, 2008
mature, as they go through the legislative body, it wouldn't be a bad
idea to track them, get some ideas which ones we want to seize and to
support.
But I do have concern over one item on here, and I'd like to know
exactly what it means. Under number one, fair and equitable tax
reforms, where -- about six bullets down, seven bullets down, no limit
on local sales tax. Exactly what are we saying there?
MR. MUDD: It basically says on page 5 of7, no limits on -- and
a lot of the -- a lot of the issues that Commissioner Coyle just brought
up as far as statements are concerned, starts on page 5 and goes
through 7, and we'll get a little bit more specific and a little bit more
direct on particular issues if we're too short on a particular project.
But it says, current law places total levy caps for various local
option taxes which may be adopted by counties. This provision of
unlimited local sales tax offers local governments more flexibility in
generating revenue along the lines provided by local option fuel taxes
or taxes on rental cars.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. Now you're talking
about a sales tax that could be approved at the commission level rather
than by the voters at large?
MR. MUDD: I didn't -- I wasn't--
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No. I'm just asking for
clarification --
MR. MUDD: Leo--
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- of where we're supposed to
stand on this.
MR. MUDD: -- you were in the discussions with the other
county managers during that day because I was -- I was out sick, but --
MS. WIGHT: I think this was the Sarasota, the Sarasota --
Sarasota just recently passed the sales tax.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: The voters passed it or the
commission?
Page 94
March 11, 2008
MS. WIGHT: The voters did.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, I don't have a problem
with the voters imposing a tax upon themselves, I just want to make
sure that that's clearly stated. I won't support an open sales tax where
Collier County Commissioners could ever impose it at their will.
MR. MUDD: I guess what I -- I guess what I'm saying to you is
-- or what this tells me in the first line is, is says, current law places
total levy caps by various local option taxes which may be adopted by
county. In other words, the voters approved the one-penny sales tax,
okay, for infrastructure for Sarasota. Sarasota's done, okay.
Collier County has the option because you haven't used all of
your cap, okay, on sales tax to go to a referendum and approve
something based on a particular purpose. What Sarasota's basically
asking for is that cap be removed. And if they want to go out and get
a referendum approved by the voters again for an additional penny
sales taxes, they could do so on a specific -- on a specific item.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: It wouldn't hurt if maybe the
example up there just had a couple more words in it to be able to be --
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Because you look at it and it
seems like -- it looks offensive, to be honest with you.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
MS. WIGHT: Okay. I'm sorry if that's not clear.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I was just -- I was -- I just
wanted to agree with Commissioner Coyle. I had a couple questions
yesterday myself when I spoke with the county manager just about
clarity, and I was concerned mainly with the concurrency issue and
some of the goings on, trying to eliminate part of that concurrency, but
then I was -- I was assured that that's in here, but I didn't see it, so I
agree with Commissioner Coyle about clarity. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas?
Page 95
March 11, 2008
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah. Just to bring my fellow
commissioners up to date. There's three items on here that are really
hot buttons with the Florida Association of Counties.
One is number five, the proposed change of the Consultant
Competitive Negotiation Act that Commissioner Coyle related to. We
have been pushing to have this addressed, and I believe it is on the
Florida Association of Counties agenda.
And we had -- Steve Carnell was up there and basically
convinced everyone, and everyone thought this was a great idea.
The other issue is retaining home rule impact fee authority.
There's an awful lot of action in regards to counties understanding
what may be coming in -- coming down as far as legislation. And
there's quite a lot of opposition by other county commissioners in
other counties in regards to taking away home rule, and this was
discussed at quite long lengths.
Tied in with that is aggregate mining where the state basically
would take over the authority and they would pick and choose where
the new mines would be, and they would supersede local home rule.
And this is a hot issue up in northern Florida, some of the rural
counties that have huge areas of forest, and the forests would probably
be gone. And, of course, again, this would -- they would overrule
home rule in regards to what the citizens in those particular counties
wanted their particular county to look like and the areas that would be
explored for aggregate mining.
This bill is being pushed heavily by the development industry.
And so I can tell you that it's a real hot subject in -- with Florida
Association of Counties.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, thanks for the clarification.
Before I go to Commissioner Coyle, I just want to address one
thing. It's stating that county and city staff from -- six members got
together in January in Lee County to address issues, common concerns
of our constituents. I'm not sure if this really does that.
Page 96
March 11, 2008
If you look at number one -- well, first of all let me say that in
Collier and Lee, well over 80 percent of the voters on January 29th
said that local government is too big.
On number one it says, gas tax indexing. I agree that position
was there. But here's where we're at today. Many families can't even
afford to fill up their gas tank. I don't think that is a concern of our
constituents.
The next one is Internet sales tax reform. There is no sales tax on
Internet sales; therefore, what you're saying is we need a new tax on
Internet. I don't think that really represents the constituents in
Southwest Florida.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Sir, I --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Now I'm not done yet. And the rules
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I just wanted to let you know that
these --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Sir? Sir?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: -- these are not in order.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: The rules of the board -- the rules of
the board is once somebody has the floor, he's not --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'm trying --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- to be interrupted.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: -- to tell you that these aren't in
order.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: The second thing is relevant to
property assessment, the partial -- the partial year assessment. I don't
believe that is the constituents' concern. Supporting a real estate
transfer fee, I know that is not a concern of the constituents in
Southwest Florida, the ones that I have talked to. That is a developer
issue; not -- not the constituents.
Limit of -- there should be limits of local sales tax, and so on and
so forth. Now, supporting local economic stimulus efforts, in my
Page 97
March 11, 2008
opinion, it is supported by our constituents, but an increase of --
increase of taxes is just the opposite of what our constituents want.
MS. WIGHT: Commissioner--
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Now, the -- I said that I would go to
Commissioner Coyle, and I understand now that Commissioner Halas
has something to say.
Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, I'll yield to Commissioner
Halas, I mean, if you -- if it's related to the same subject, if you want
to; otherwise, I'll go ahead.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: That's fine.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. I was merely going to try to
use some examples of how I thought you could clarify these things.
Just like no limits of local sales tax. I think it has more impact if you
were to say, the legislature should not remove the right of the voters of
Collier County to vote for a sales tax if they think one is necessary.
You know, that's a better statement of the problem, I think. I don't
think we were saying there that we wanted the option of county
commissioners just to impose a sales tax, did we? Is that what we
were talking about? It was not.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: It should say, like Commissioner
Coyle (sic) says, is allow the voters to increase the sales tax. That's
what it should say.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And -- well, that's just an example
of the clarification that I was talking about, and I think we can clarify
these things in a way that makes more sense, because really, I can read
these things and I can interpret them in a way that is not what you
intended, and so -- and I'm sure the legislators could too. So I'm just
trying to be as clear about this as we possibly can.
MS. WIGHT: In may -- in going back to Commissioner
Henning's comments, maybe I used the wrong word, constituent in the
executive summary. When we had this meeting with the county and
Page 98
March 11, 2008
city staff in Lee County, we all take our board-approved list of
priorities, state legislative priorities, which do come from the
commissions in our respective jurisdictions, and that's what we use.
We all -- we look at each of those lists and that's what we use to go by,
and that's why we've got some of ours, some of Sarasota's, some of
Lee's, some of those in common. So that's where we get those from,
Commissioner.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. But I can't -- you know, if the
board passes this, I'm not going to speak against it. But I represent the
citizens and the taxpayers of Collier County and they might be
different than other counties. And I know that Collier County is very
conservative and some of these issues do not represent the citizens in
Collier County.
MS. WIGHT: In all due respect, Commissioner, it's very
difficult when you have six counties. When Leo and I were there and
we brought up the issue of retaining home rule authority for impact
fees, it was very difficult because we had other counties there that did
not really respect that as a priority. And it was -- it was hard to get
that on the list because right now Lee County hasn't made the decision
nor has Charlotte County, but it is on the list.
And as far as the economic stimulus, there are different efforts
going on in different counties. And the buzz word right now is
economic stimulus. Senator Bennett, his economic stimulus act, the
Senate Bill 1966, it has crippling effects on the transportation
concurrency program in Collier County.
In fact, it is contrary to the straw ballot that went out to voters
two Novembers ago in which 80 percent -- 78 or 82 percent of the
voters said they want roads in place before development proceeds.
That was what the voters of Collier County said.
In this bill, I pulled up the Senate analysis this morning, prohibits
a local government from requiring that the transportation facility be in
place as a prerequisite to approval of the applicant's development;
Page 99
March 11, 2008
provides for the exception of a local government from the financial
feasibility requirements for transportation concurrency as prescribed
by state law for a specified period and under certain circumstances.
This is the mobility fee in lieu of paying impact fees,
proportionate share or proportionate fair share. I don't mean to go off
on a tangent, but it's a heck of a year for legislation. There's -- over
200 property tax laws have been filed, pieces of legislation, and that's
in the wake of the Senate president saying he didn't want to see any
this year. And Senator Haridopolos, his tax man, is one of the
senators filing them.
So, you know, I don't know what else to say. It's hard with the
consortium to get everybody in sync.
MR. MUDD: Commissioners, what we can do though is bring
this list back.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas was next.
MR. MUDD: We can bring this bill-- we can bring this bill
back, or this item back, and get more definitive about the statements
that are on pages 5 through 7 that support that particular list so the
board has some specificity ifthere's additional pieces that need to be
made so that when you -- when you -- when you approve or
disapprove, or whatever you want, on that list, then you'll know
exactly what those particular items are and how -- and what the
meaning was by everybody that was at that meeting that came up with
this list for the six counties.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. The Internet sales reform and
the reduced number of sales tax exemptions, this is something that is
being looked at very carefully by the tax reform group, and so they're
going to go after Internet sales because they feel that the State of
Florida is losing a tremendous amount of tax from Internet sales, and
they're also looking at -- looking at sales tax exemption, especially for
people who have sky boxes and so on.
Page 100
March 11, 2008
So this is some of the -- these items here are basically in regards
to the tax reform group that are looking at these areas, and I think
that's where everybody's looking at, because if the state can get more
money, that's less mandates that are going to come down here to us.
So if they can figure out a way of shoring up their budget without
getting into our wallets down here, I think we're better off.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Debra, are you saying on the Internet
sales tax that we oppose any taxes on Internet sales?
MS. WIGHT: No. They're saying that they want to impose.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah, see, that's where I have a
problem. I don't think that really represents Collier County.
Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, this discussion is interesting.
It begins to make me doubt the advantage of being part of a
consortium. If we can't get the other members of the consortium to
understand why counties have to have the right to establish impact
fees or why it is important to reduce the cost burden of our taxpayers
for illegal immigration, I begin to wonder if we really have the same
goals when we go to Tallahassee, and it bothers me a lot.
It does absolutely no good for us to participate with a group of
counties who will not actively support the things that we want done.
And by actively supporting, I'm saying it goes beyond just letting us
have it on the list. It gets to the point where you go in and you sit
down in a legislator's office and you say, all five or all six or seven of
these counties believe that we need to keep control of our impact fees
and we need to do something about illegal immigration and we need
to do this, we need to do that.
I'm gathering from this discussion that that's not happening. And
it's no criticism of our staff, because I know how hard you've worked
to try to get them to do that. But you're right, we probably can't force
them to do that. And I'm running into the same thing with the Public
Safety Coordinating Council meetings. Some of them allege that
Page 101
----.. "-"-'._-
March 11, 2008
although their jails are overcrowded and they don't have the money to
build other jails, they say, well, we don't have a problem with illegal
aliens. Well, give me a break. They just haven't counted them. Now
-- so that's the same problem you're running into here. And I'm
wondering whether or not we need to rethink our strategy on this.
MS. WIGHT: In may, Commissioner, you know, after that
meeting though I read news reports and checked on them. Charlotte
County and Lee County, there are commissioners who believe the
same way you do and support impact fees and retaining home rule, so
I haven't given up hope on that.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Is it that they aren't being
represented at these meetings? Is it that their county managers are
doing something different or what?
MS. WIGHT: I don't know about that.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
MS. WIGHT: I think though that the jury's still out and they
haven't made the decision yet. I think Lee County -- I know in
Charlotte County they were going to lose millions of dollars if they --
you know, if they rolled back or waived their impact fees. So I'm not
sure what happened with that case.
In Lee County, I think -- I had asked Amy. She hasn't heard yet
what they decided to do.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah.
MS. WIGHT: I do know Sarasota County, Commissioner
Thaxton was on the -- if you all -- Commissioner Halas probably
recalls, he was one of a -- he really was a leading proponent of our
position on impact fee task force. So I can't believe that he wouldn't
be supportive of what our position is in retaining home rule.
And the Florida Association of Counties believes in retaining
home rule for impact fees. So I -- I haven't given up on that. And I do
believe the consortium is a good thing, but that's just my opinion.
As far as immigration, it just -- I looked at everybody's priorities
Page 102
March 11, 2008
and it wasn't on there, but we can -- I know it's important to this
commission. We can move forward with that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala and
Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. On this same conversation,
first of all, maybe they're not as affected by immigration as we are.
We've heard that we have a lot more of a problem here in Collier than
other counties have anyway. So maybe that is the reason they're not
interested.
I'm having a lot of problems of understanding why every county
in this whole consortium wouldn't want to protect their home rule. To
me, that's what a county is all about. You must protect your home
rule. Not only that, but your source of revenue, your impact fees to
build your infrastructure -- and then why anybody would want to give
away or not defend vigorously their concurrency rules in order to get
your infrastructure in place before development takes place.
I don't know how anybody could support anything but that.
That's just such a common sense thing. But what I'm learn -- what I'm
realizing is that other counties don't care about retaining those things?
MS. WIGHT: It's very possible, because they saw it on our list.
And I reviewed their list and I didn't see it. But, you know, in all due
respect, too, there is a lot in the legislation, there are a lot of important
topics, and -- but there are 29 bills filed, so -- and I apologize for
going off on a tangent about the growth management but --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's terrible.
MS. WIGHT: There's a lot of things going on. But this is
important to the board, so we will pursue it. I've already, like I said,
talked to Brett and Keith about it, in emailsanyway.so --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas and
Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah. When you get together with
a consortium and you thrash out items that pertain to the group that is
Page 103
March 11, 2008
going to go up to Tallahassee, every one of these items might not fit
into the niche that we're interested in. But what it is is that we go up
with a larger voice than just Collier County.
We still have the ability as Collier County to sit down and write
up what our legislative issues are, but I -- a lot of times I don't think
that we're heard independently.
When we have addressed the issues of the tax rollback and they
just went ahead and did it, we all don't know what the full effect is
going to be on the rollback that was taking place in June. But yet if
we go up there and -- with one large voice in regards to some of these
issues that are on this list, I think that hopefully we'll be heard as a
consortium.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta, then I'm going
to see if we can get some consensus.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. And I -- Commissioner
Halas is right. If I may add that not all counties are in the same
position of Collier County. We have some needs that we met. We've
been very progressive. A lot of interior counties are very poor, and
they're very similar to what Collier County was 20 years ago. They're
looking for development. They want to try to make it flow. They
don't have any taxable value to be able to cover their costs. In some
cases, they're maxed out on their taxes. So they see something at a
different picture than we do.
However, with the idea that the best course of action would be to
draw back and stay here and not to go and to argue the case is
something we shouldn't do. We should be out there, we should be
trying to influence the outcome of it.
And I can tell you right now that Commissioner Halas has been
carrying the ball alone, regrettably. I mean, I wish to God -- I just got
too many things on my plate to be able to keep getting up there this
year. But we need to start being ever present because we can
influence the outcome. We've done it in the past. We've done it many
Page 104
March 11, 2008
times in the past. But one commissioner can't do it alone.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Well, it's my opinion, I'd
rather see for us to try to get our needs and our wants. I don't see this
list -- and I appreciate staff talking to other stakeholders in Southwest
Florida -- but it doesn't represent Collier County. Collier County is a
-- conservative. And I would preference (sic) that we would -- could
talk to our legislators in Tallahassee on our needs and not Southwest
Florida's.
And I'm going to make that in the form of a motion. Is there a
second to the motion? That fails.
Is there an alternative?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I'll make a motion that we
continue refining this list just a little bit more, but definitely, as
Commissioner Coletta just stated, we must go up there as a group
together united, not only with the group supporting all of their issues,
but definitely to speak of our own issues as well.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And I'll second your motion
with the idea that, in this case, isolationism isn't the answer.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Right.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: So there's a motion and a second to
give staff direction to further refine the list.
Commissioner Coletta, I don't know if you were saying in
response to my comment, I never said isolation. I said --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You didn't use the word, sir, but
that's what the outcome would be if we withdrew and just held back
and just pushed our own particular agenda. We have to try to
convince our fellow legislators in other counties to do the right thing
and to get behind us on these things. I don't think this is something
where we can just stand back and operate within our own sphere.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah. Well, I don't want to support
some liberal idea that really doesn't represent our community, and
there are some very liberal ideas up here, but Debra is going to work
Page 105
March 11, 2008
on that.
And Debra, just for clarification. You would have to go to the
other stakeholders in Southwest Florida and say, well, this is what my
commissioners want and this is what my commissioners don't want; is
that correct? Yes.
MS. WIGHT: I need to let them know if you approve or did not
approve this list. And if you -- my understanding -- well, are you
approving this but with more specificity?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Is that in your motion --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
MS. WIGHT: Need more refinement.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: In my second also.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And that's in your second, okay.
MS. WIGHT: And when we, the -- Commissioners Halas,
Coletta, and Fiala, when we go to Tallahassee, my understanding we
are also going to, the Collier contingent, address Collier's state
legislative priorities.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
MS. WIGHT: So we will craft out some time to do that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, and that's what I wanted to
emphasize. Maybe we can -- we can do it both ways. Of course, be
part of the consortium, but when we're in there talking with legislators,
we've got our list of top priorities that we're hitting. We're not going
to try to cover them all, because to cover all of these in a single
meeting with the legislature, legislator, is a complete waste of time.
If -- when you come back with the things that are specific to
Collier County and are high priority to Collier County, I would
suggest that that's what you present to the legislators when you're in
there.
Page 106
March 11, 2008
If you've got somebody from another county that wants to talk
about something else, they can do that. They have the right to do that.
But we ought to spend our time up there talking to them about
the things that are important to our constituents.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Any further discussion on the
motion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion signify by
saymg aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed?
Aye.
Commissioner Henning dissenting in the motion, but it carries by
a supermajority.
With that, I think it's time for lunch.
What do you think, an hour or what?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Hour and a half.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Hour and a half?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No. Hour will do it for me.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. So we'll be back at 12:07--
COMMISSIONER HALAS: 1 :07.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: 1:07.
Commissioner?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I was going to say maybe 1:10.
Give us an extra three minutes.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: 1:10.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: 1:10? 1:10, all right. We're recessed
for lunch.
(A luncheon recess was had.)
Page 107
March 11, 2008
MR. MUDD: Ladies and gentlemen, if you'd please take your
seats.
Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, you have a hot mike.
Item #8A
ORDINANCE 2008-13: PUDZ-2006-AR-I0171 EASTBOURNE
BONITA, LLC, REPRESENTED BY LAURA SPURGEON, OF
JOHNSON ENGINEERING, INC., AND PATRICK G. WHITE,
ATTY. OF PORTER, WRIGHT, MORRIS & ARTHUR, LLP.,
REQUESTING A REZONE FROM THE AGRICULTURAL (A)
AND SPECIAL TREATMENT (ST) OVERLAY ZONING
DISTRICT TO THE RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENT (RPUD) ZONING DISTRICT FOR PROJECT
KNOWN AS BRANDON RPUD, FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF
204 SINGLE-FAMILY AND MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
UNITS. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, CONSISTING OF 51.1
ACRES, IS LOCATED ON THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE
INTERSECTION OF LlVINGSTON ROAD AND VETERANS
MEMORIAL BOULEVARD, SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 48
SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST, COLLlER COUNTY, FLORIDA-
ADOPTED W/CCPC STIPULATIONS
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Next item is 8A.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. That's a -- item was continued from the
February 26, 2008, BCC meeting. This item requires that all
participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be provided by
commission members.
It's petition PUDZ-2006-AR-10171, Eastbourne Bonita, LLC,
represented by Laura Spurgeon of Johnson Engineering, Inc., and
Patrick G. White, attorney for Porter, White -- excuse me -- Porter,
Wright, Morris, & Arthur, LLP, requesting a rezone from the
Page 108
March 11, 2008
agricultural A and special treatment overlay zoning district to the
Residential Planned Unit Development, RPUD, zoning district for a
project known as Brandon R. PUD, for the development of 204
single-family and multifamily residential units.
The subject property consisting of 51.1 acres, is located on the
southeast corner of the intersection of Livingston Road and Veterans
Memorial Boulevard, Section 13, Township 48 south, Range 25 east,
Collier County, Florida.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All wishing to participate in this
discussion, please rise to be sworn in by the court reporter.
(The speakers were duly sworn and replied in the affirmative.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Ex parte communication by the board
members, Commissioner -- starting with Commissioner Coyle.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I have no ex parte disclosure on
this item.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Just give me one second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Go to me. I spoke to the petitioner's
agent and the petitioner.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I spoke from -- with both
people from Johnson Engineering, as well as Pat White. I've spoken
to staff on this as well, different staff members, and somehow I
believe I've had an email, but I don't have that in my correspondence
here.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. I had a meeting on 3/10
with Chris Hagan, Patrick White, and Laura Spurgeon, and I've
received emails, phone calls, and correspondence on it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. I have just emails on this, and
I talked with staff with this also.
Page 109
March 11, 2008
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Mr. White?
MR. WHITE: Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, Commissioners.
Patrick White, for the record, with the Naples office of Porter, Wright,
Morris, & Arthur here on the item that the county manager read into
the record.
I'm also here today with the managing member of Eastbourne,
LLC, Mr. Frank Chinnici, who's the owner of the property, drove
down from Sarasota this morning. We have Ms. Laura, formally
Spurgeon, now married, Ms. DeJohn, along with two other
representatives from Johnson, if we have questions regarding
engineering, environmental, or other aspects of the project.
Weare prepared with a full presentation, including PowerPoint,
if that's your desire. My preference would be to just give you a brief
overview of the one or two outstanding matters that have come to our
attention.
Based on discussions first with the County Attorney's Office, just
a housekeeping matter to conclude presenting the County Attorney's
Office and county with an indemnity agreement. That was required as
one of our conditions. We have done that. I have copies available if
anyone would like to see the executed and notarized document. It
essentially just implements the conditions found on page 3 of 4 in
your Exhibit F, which are the conditions in the PUD.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Would the board like a
full-blown presentation or a shorter version?
MR. WHITE: The only other item, Mr. Chairman -- I don't
mean to interrupt -- that I'm aware of had to do with our commitment
to the Affordable Housing Trust Fund. That's the only issue that I'm
aware of that was based on our discussion with commissioners.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: You can have the abridged version of
this. I do have a couple of questions in regards to --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Why don't we go to your questions.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. As I read through this, there
Page 11 0
March 11, 2008
were 17 items that were listed by the planning Commission. Are you
in concurrence with all these 17 issues, items?
MR. WHITE: Absolutely, Mr. Halas. In fact, we had addressed
all of them, other than having the executed indemnity agreement I
mentioned a moment ago, when we went back to the Planning
Commission for their consent agenda. So I believe, yes, the answer to
that is fully and wholly.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. And you've addressed all
the concerns of the property owners that were landlocked and now
they have -- now they have access, ingress and egress, out of their --
MR. WHITE: We have shown on our master concept plan in the
text of our PUD a way for access for those landowners. We worked,
as part of our Planning Commission process, to provide that.
I believe Mr. Bloom may be here representing one or more of
those landowners. He may want to make some comments on the
record; I don't know. But my belief is that we have satisfied their
concerns.
We will continue to do so if we have not at this point. But I
believe it's fair to say that all parties on both sides of this issue are, I
believe, awaiting this board's action today in order to be able to move
forward to the next step in terms of sales and other --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. The height of the
multifamily dwellings, what was going to be the height on them?
MR. WHITE: I believe that we had a three-story, and we have a
table that we revised. Based on Planning Commission discussion and
follow-on for multifamily --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. It was under 12, I believe;
40 feet and 35 feet; is that correct?
MR. WHITE: The zoned height is for --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Actual height it says.
MR. WHITE: Right. That would be, actual height is 55, no
more than three stories.
Page 111
March 11,2008
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, it says add actual heights of
40 and for -- 40 feet and for 35 feet zoned heights in Exhibit B --
Exhibit B of the table.
MR. WHITE: Depending upon which column you come down.
I used, the most extreme one is multifamily, the second from the right.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
MR. WHITE: And those are ones that are the subject of
discussion back and forth with Planning Commission and the staff on
how best to represent them in the tables. The meaning there for zoned
height is that it would be no more than 50. That's from grade to the
roof line, other than the accouterments on top, and then the actual
height overall, again, from grade to tippy top would be 55, no more
than three stories.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. I make a motion that we
approve --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Hang -- you've got a question over
here.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. I'm sorry.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's okay. Just a couple of
points, and I think I want to address these to staff. Mr. Mudd?
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I want someone to explain to me
the basis upon which the EAC voted 7-1 for a recommendation of
denial. I'd like to understand what that reason was.
MR. MUDD: Melissa Zone will-- is the staff representative.
She's -- this is the petition that she's supposed to --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I also have questions of staff, so --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
MS. ZONE: Good afternoon. Melissa Zone, Principal Planner
with the Department of Zoning and Land Development.
During the EAC, the Environmental Advisory Council meeting,
Commissioner Coyle, there was some discussion as to the site design
Page 112
March 11, 2008
of this project. And as you know, during the rezoning, we do more of
a bubble, and then the site design comes in for the Site Development
Plan process.
And EAC members were uncomfortable to vote or make a
recommendation because they felt they didn't have enough
information. They wanted to see the structures, the size of the homes.
And in the Planned Unit Development's document, the exhibits
showing the heights as well as the setbacks were there. They wanted
to see the actual structures.
And the applicants did not have that ready at that time, and so
they wanted more information, and that's where the denial came in.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, they asserted that 78 percent
of the property is existing wetland.
MS. ZONE: Right.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: What is the impact of the
construction on recharge of aquifers? We just had a workshop where
we were talking about, our aquifers were not being recharged, and we
are proposing development on property that is 78 percent wetlands?
MS. ZONE: Right.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No. This is a question of the staff.
MS. ZONE: Yeah. I was looking to see ifMr. Lorenz was here
from environmental services, and I don't see him.
I can't -- there was concerns about those impacts, but staff -- the
environmental staff had reviewed the petition and did recommend
approval and felt that -- and it was stated at the hearing, in fact, that
they didn't feel the impacts were as strong of a concern as the EAC
had.
I could get an answer to you prior to your vote, if you want.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That would be very helpful.
MS. ZONE: Sure.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: What I'm primarily interested in is
we have -- we have had staff and people from South Florida Water
Page 113
March 11, 2008
Management District tell us that one of our problems is that our
freshwater aquifers are not being recharged; they are declining, and
we, therefore, should try to protect wetlands. And I'm interested in
finding out why staff does not feel that is an important issue.
MS. ZONE: I will get an answer to you shortly.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. And now for the county
attorney, I'm confused about the issue on the so-called landlocked
owners, property owners. We've essentially required that the
developer hold us, the county, harmless from any future lawsuits
resulting from the lack of access by those property owners.
Mr. White has indicated that they have apparently solved part of
that by providing access. I don't see a clear answer to that in any of the
documentation here. And my feeling is that I would prefer to have
people granted access and removing any doubts about legal action
rather than have someone hold us harmless, if the landowners choose
to sue us.
MR. KLATZKOW: My understanding is that the plan's been
amended so that there is not now legal access to these landlocked
parcels, so that issue is resolved. Purpose of the indemnity is just in
case we've missed anything or a legal access issue --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
MR. KLATZKOW: -- becomes -- arises later, we don't get stuck.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It's just --
MR. KLATZKOW: It's sort oflike belts and suspenders. I
mean, my feeling is if the applicant wants to develop his property,
that's great, but I don't want to be involved in his lawsuit.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, yeah. Okay. All right.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle, what I
understood from -- I forget the name -- gentleman from the District,
South Florida Water Management. He said that wetlands don't provide
a quality recharge area. It doesn't have the characteristics of the
hydric soils for recharge. That's what I understood out of that, and I
Page 114
March 11, 2008
was quite surprised by that. That's kind of why I remember that.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. I recall that statement;
however, I don't believe that is a blanket guideline, otherwise there
would be no restriction on destroying wetlands at all.
So I -- I would accept his opinion that in all cases, perhaps,
wetlands are not the primary source of recharge. But he also said it's
the land lying around the wetlands that does provide the filtration.
And you don't have lands lying around wetlands if you don't have
wetlands, so that's -- there's a lot of confusion for me there.
But it was serious enough that the Environmental Advisory
Committee voted 7-1 for denial. And I need to get an understanding
of why there is such a variance between the positions of the
environmental committee, the staff, and the Planning Commission.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
MR. WHITE: May I address that to some degree, Mr. Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Sure. By all means.
MR. WHITE: Thank you. I think Ms. Zone properly indicated
some of the bases that the EAC ultimately based their decision on. I'd
like to put an aerial overview of the general location of our site
showing how developed all the lands are around us just to give you an
idea of where we are.
The subject site is generally indicated here, and you can see that
on the east side of Livingston, certainly it's one of an area where
environmental concerns are important. And, in fact, the idea of
maintaining hydrology and assuring that, you know, wetland function
remains are key aspects of what our proposal does do.
I note that by similar comparison, one of the projects just to our
east also, however -- excuse me, just to our west, but also east of
Livingston, was recently approved, De La Rosa, very similar
circumstances in terms of percentage wetlands.
And I think the key thing to understand about these wetlands is
that they are highly impacted with invasive exotics, a lot of dog hair
Page 115
March 11, 2008
Melaleuca.
So what -- our proposal is to go ahead and remove those, and like
De La Rosa, do what is necessary, not only to meet the county's rules,
but more importantly, I think, those of the South Florida Water
Management District and the Army Corps who regulate in the area of
wetlands.
We're also, I think, looking at the possibility that some of the
lands to our east that are ST where the more environmentally sensitive
lands are ones that we may potentially look to acquire.
I think as far as the landlocked issue goes, we have resolved all
of those concerns with those landowners. And next I'd like to just put
our master concept plan on the visualizer to show you the two points
where we agreed, as part of the Planning Commission process, to
provide access to them, and I will take just a second.
Those two areas are indicated by the arrows I'm now going to
point. They are the ones that were agreed upon in our discussions
with Mr. Bloom as to his clients that would provide for the appropriate
location for access to those properties in the event that they should be
desired for development.
Going back to the EAC's issues, as Ms. Zone had indicated, there
was a lot of discussion that I believe was not primarily related to
environmental concerns at the EAC about the project. In fact, they
had asked us for information that -- as far as the actual plan of
development goes, the product type, the location of those project, were
things that, quite honestly, we still haven't figured out.
There are things you cannot know the answer to until,
effectively, you've gone through wetland permitting in other aspects of
site development and platting process.
In any event, even the chairman of the Planning Commission
noted that some of the bases for their denial were ones that were
effectively beyond the scope of their normal area of consideration.
They looked at essentially the same kind of project as De La
Page 116
March 11, 2008
Rosa as far as wetland impacts, and a prior but slightly different
composed EAC voted unanimously in favor of that project and went
along with the staff recommendation, which we continue to have
today, that finds that this is appropriate and is consistent with your
regulations.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: So Ms. Zone, do you have a further
clarification for Mr. Coyle?
MS. ZONE: Yes, I do, Chairman. Okay. First this area is not in
the area for designation for the freshwater aquifers, the recharged area.
The EAC -- or staff does not review for the wetland permit. It's
done during the District and the Army Corps' process, review process.
And what they found with these wetlands was that the wetlands
on site are low quality and they contain between 51 and 75 percent
invasive exotics and that county regulations require that 150 percent
of stormwater, the capacity of 150 percent of stormwater, be contained
on site.
In addition to that, when they -- when staff -- this comes in
through the Site Development Plan process. Staff will review and
make sure the applicants comply with the recommendations with the
District Corps -- or with the south water Florida management district
(sic). I messed that up, excuse me -- South Florida Water
Management District and the Army Corps of Engineers
recommendations on how to handle this area's wetlands, and we will
ensure that they comply with those district permits.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay, Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Does that answer your question?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Not really. But if that's what we've
got, that's what we've got.
MS. ZONE: I'm sorry. If there's -- I know that Mr. Schmitt
could probably be a little bit more clearer in explaining this to you
Page 117
March 11, 2008
than 1.
MR. SCHMITT: Commissioner, questions, but basically what
Melissa said is, in fact, how we do this.
On one of the issues -- and this has been raised by the Planning
Commission as well. The EAC has been getting more and more into
land use stuff, and it's been somewhat of an issue of contention
between the EAC and the Planning Commission.
I think many of the items that came up on this project during
EAC, as Mr. White mentioned, had to do more with land use than they
did with the actual impact, which was part of the problem. But be that
as it may, they're your advisory council and they certainly are
empowered to provide information to you in their capacity.
As far as the wetland impact, as Melissa said, it's a district permit
and a Corps permit. We review the wetland impacts, but basically
only on our preservation requirements. They are required to preserve
areas in accordance with our coastal and conservation management
element of our GMP, and if those areas include wetlands, they will be
preserved as part of the preservation plan in concert with their district
and Corps permit.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: If that's what we've got, that's what
we've got.
MR. SCHMITT: I could -- I would have to defer to Chris Hagan.
He's the one that applies to the district and through the Corps for the
wetland impacts. They go through the jurisdictional review, the
permitting process and the review process, and the applicant could
probably provide more information on the impacts and the status of
those permits through the district and through the Corps.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I just will draw your attention to
our recent workshop on water.
MR. SCHMITT: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And there were concerns expressed
Page 118
March 11, 2008
about the fact that we are having to look for alternative sources of
water.
MR. SCHMITT: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And we're having to spend
substantially larger sums in order to do that but yet we don't seem to
be willing to make any land use decisions which are designed to
mitigate that problem.
We always seem to want to abdicate our responsibility to
somebody else. And so you're talking about quite a few more water
users here, and, yes, in fact, we're taking up wetlands to do that. The
fact that they happen to have Melaleucas growing in them didn't
eliminate the fact that they are, indeed, wetlands.
So you've got 204 more water users coming in here, and I haven't
seen anybody who's addressed the issue --
MR. SCHMITT: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- of how we're going to deal with
that.
MR. SCHMITT: We'll take board guidance if you want us to
come back with some kind of a program for wetland impacts, but
these are areas that we do not regulate at the county level. They're at
the district and the Corps, the state and federal level.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, I would suggest to you if we
don't start regulating them at the county level, they're never going to
get regulated.
MR. SCHMITT: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I think we know that already or we
wouldn't be having shortages of water, we wouldn't be under a
moratorium today, and we wouldn't have taxpayers asking us why
they're under a moratorium if we've got plenty of water.
So I think we need to start taking control of our own destiny here
and making decisions that are appropriate in this county.
MR. SCHMITT: Yes, sir.
Page 119
March 11, 2008
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas, and then
Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'm not sure whether staff could
answer this correctly for me or whether the petitioner -- when I look at
the overall picture of this particular development -- and on our agenda
it's page 76 of 273 -- it shows that there is a number of areas that are
designated wetland area and a preserve and also a number of lakes.
And I believe you have about 28 acres to develop; is that correct?
MS. ZONE: Twenty-eight acres in terms of the --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Residential areas.
MS. ZONE: Correct. There's 28.19 acres, correct.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. Out of that 28.19 acres, how
much of the wetlands was destroyed in order to put -- encompass the
development and the density in this area?
MS. ZONE: I think that -- who would best be would -- the
applicant to respond to that because they worked with the site
designers with Johnson Engineering to come up with the exact acreage
calculation.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. And I want to know how
much of the wetlands were destroyed, if any.
MS. ZONE: Right.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Or will be destroyed, excuse me.
MR. WHITE: The precise answer, of course, to your question,
Commissioner Halas, is we won't know until we're through the permit
process on wetlands. What your staffhas done is address your
concerns about native vegetation and preserves, and we've done
everything we can to put our preserve areas in a location that follows
the contours of the sheet flows that run generally from our east in that
square block here --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's not the question. The
question is, how much wetlands are --
MR. WHITE: I understand, sir.
Page 120
March 11, 2008
COMMISSIONER HALAS: -- being destroyed or displaced
with this development when you have 51 or 52 acres and you have 28
acres of development?
MR. WHITE: We understand the question. I'm just trying to
provide the contents while our expert comes up.
MS. ZONE: I'm not the expert, but in our EAC staff report it
says that the proposed site plan directly impacts 32.8 acres, which is
82.6 percent, of on-site wetlands. And the preserves that they're
proposing is 6.85 acres, which will be 17.4 percent of the wetlands.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you.
Mr. DeLony? You know, we need to know once and for all,
when it comes to the water situation, do you see a problem supplying
water to this particular development if it was approved?
MR. DeLONY: For the record, Jim DeLony, Public Utilities
Administrator. Sir, we have sufficient capacity to serve this client.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: In the past we've had many
water restrictions going back 20 years or longer, and we did run out of
water. What was the reason we ran out of water at those times?
MR. DeLONY: The rea -- in may, sir, in the six years I've been
here, starting with the first year I came here, we were insufficient in
terms of water resources in terms of the infrastructure to provide those
services to clients. That is, we didn't have sufficient wells nor pumps
nor pipes to meet the demand.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. So the water, unless we
got to some point where we had a catastrophe drought that would go
on many years past what we've seen now, there's sufficient water? It's
just a matter of transmitting the water from the ground and processing
it?
MR. DeLONY: The water permitting situation that we discussed
at the workshop is certainly dynamic in terms of how these resources
are to be allocated. It's for sure there is a finite amount of available
Page 121
March 11, 2008
water before we do some type of harm to either an existing user or the
environment, and that's the reason the permitting agents are very
cautious and very careful in their permitting decisions to first do no
harm or do nothing in light of that awesome responsibility they have.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Are there residents of Collier
County that have utilities in danger of running out of water in the near
future?
MR. DeLONY: No, sir. We're not in danger of running out of
water, but I tell you, currently you're not under a moratorium, but
you're under a water restriction period, and that water restriction
period is being enforced upon us as a matter of permit conditions for
South Florida Water Management District.
They believe that in certain areas of South Florida, globally there
is a situation whereby in certain locals, that there could be, not for
sure, could be damage done if we don't -- if we don't lessen the
withdrawal during this period of consideration, and that's the reason
you've seen stepped-up water restrictions, starting with phase 1, which
we have all the time in Collier County, phase 2, and last June --
excuse me, not June, but in -- in April when we went to phase 3 --
February, excuse me.
So the bottom line of it is, it's episodic and it's certainly very
local in its effect. Our water supply tables, the water tables, the level
in our wells -- Mr. Mattausch showed you a chart exactly where they
are. We're where we've always been in terms of them not being too
low or too high. They're where they should be. In fact, they're exactly
parallel to our 2006 experience, as I recall from that.
So the danger of running out of water in terms of the aquifer
itself, no, sir, we're not faced with any of that danger at all.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. And who can answer
questions as far as the preserve area that's being taken away, the --
what do you call it, the lowlands, the water retention areas, whatever?
Is there a negative impact that's going to happen from what these
Page 122
March 11, 2008
plans are? This is something that I'm looking at, and I'm having a
hard time rationalizing it out; then I've got one more question, and I
appreciate the commission's indulgence.
MR. DeLONY: The federal agencies and the state agencies that
are responsible for wetland permitting, look at that in the instant as
well as in the regional impacts, cumulative and singular, for every
permit they issue. Both South Florida Water Management District and
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers are in the wetlands management
business and issue these permits. And so with regard to those impacts
of this particular permit, it would be answered best by those permitting
agencIes.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. Now the other question
I've got is for Joe Schmitt.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, can I add one thing on your water
question real fast?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, please.
MR. MUDD: We talked about near term and the capacity that
Mr. DeLony has. One of the things that was in that workshop that the
board talked about was how much does it cost for an additional ounce
-- thousand gallons or whatever it is -- in the future for water versus
what that thousand gallons costs to put in the ground 20 years ago, i.e.,
cheap water versus expensive water.
The water that Mr. DeLony's crews go after right now comes out
of brackish sources and it gets processed with reverse osmosis which
costs more than freshwater refinement capacities or processes.
So it does cost more money, okay, when a new development
comes onboard for getting that water, and everyone in the water/sewer
district shares in that cost, and we've already talked about that
particular issue, too. So the increased cost is shared in everybody's
water bill.
And the last piece that I'd add is ifMr. DeLony ever gets to the
point in time, or Norman Feder ever gets to the point in time that you
Page 123
March 11, 2008
don't have impact fees in this county, okay, with the new development
coming on-line, that would mean that the existing ratepayers would
have to pay for providing this additional service and capacity for a
new development, and when that happens, I believe the board has a
bigger decision to make that's going to be more severe as far as, do we
zone this based on available water sources and what's the additional
cost to bring on that particular development. We're not there yet, but I
believe there are things in Tallahassee that are brewing that could put
us there.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I'd like to stay on task on this item.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. I am staying on this item.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: You are, you are.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I still have one more question --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Hang on, Commissioner Halas. I
have some questions, and I had questions.
Go ahead, please.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you. Mr. Schmitt?
MR. SCHMITT: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Just like my fellow
commissioners, I'm very concerned over the EAC's denial, especially
the large number of them that seem to be there. You mention the fact
that they got into other issues other than environmental issues.
MR. SCHMITT: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And the discussion got into a
number of things. Is -- and forgive me. I'm not -- I don't mean that
anybody would ever have a conflict of interest with this, but is there
something that may enter into this that we don't know, I mean, the
proximity where some of the members may live where this is possibly
their next-door neighbor or something?
MR. SCHMITT: That I don't know. Melissa Zone may know,
SIr. I was not in attendance at the EAC, so I'm not sure exactly --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I withdraw the question. It's
Page 124
March 11, 2008
something that's come up in some discussions I had, and I wouldn't
even know how to approach it. And I personally appreciate every
minute that the members of that board give to us. It's just that I want to
make sure that what we're getting from them is very directed to the
task that's been assigned to them in the beginning.
MR. SCHMITT: Our concern, of course, with the ST areas.
They are protected. They're on -- shown on the overlay. That was
one of the concerns. The other concerns are the listed species and
listed species habitat which, when integrated with wetland and
wetland impacts, are the areas that we will protect based on both our
assessment of listed species, listed species habitat, and then also the --
commensurate with the district permit from both the South Florida
Water Management District and the u.s. Army Corps of Engineers.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you very much, Mr.
Schmitt.
Thank you, Chairman Henning.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
MR. WHITE: May I respond to Commissioner Coletta's
question in part about the EAC, Mr. Chairman?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Please.
MR. WHITE: I believe the record reflects that one of the EAC
members does live in proximity to the northeastern corner of our
project in, I believe, what's known as the Links in the Strand. That is
a matter of the record.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay, thank you.
Ms. Zone, please. I'm trying to follow the Planning
Commission's recommendation with the exhibits. Is the access map, is
that marked Exhibit Z?
MS. ZONE: It was Exhibit Z at the hearing, but at the end of that
recommendation that I put on number one, it says that on the master
plan -- and that it would be added in to Exhibit F, which is the master
plan. And you'll see the arrows on the master plan. The applicants
Page 125
March 11, 2008
provided three access points.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And this is the master plan that we
have on our --
MS. ZONE: Correct, and it's on page 49.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: So we really can't accept that
condition in the Planning Commission if there is a motion.
MS. ZONE: No, it does, because it says that the applicant will
show the excess arrows on the master plan and add the commitment in
Exhibit F. That was part of the motion. Exhibit Z was what they were
calling it at the day of the hearing, so that the planning commissioners
-- we continued starting it as Exhibit Z so that they were aware of
what we were talking about. But the motion was for it to be put on the
master plan and be Exhibit F, which is the master plan.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. What about Exhibit E? Can
you show us Exhibit E?
MS. ZONE: There's two pages with requested deviations.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. The Exhibit E is -- is that in
the -- is this in the PUD document?
MS. ZONE: Correct. And the ones that show withdrawn right
after, Commissioner Henning, will be removed because those -- if this
board approves the Planning Commission's recommendations.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Right.
MS. ZONE: But we left them in so that you could see what the
applicants were requesting.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
MS. ZONE: But that is currently in the PUD document or
exhibits of the PUD.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: But there's other exhibits outside the
PUD though, right?
MS. ZONE: We made all the exhibits from the hold-harmless
agreement to the interlocal agreement all part of the PUD ordinance.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Is all the exhibits in the PUD, what
Page 126
March 11, 2008
we have in our packet?
MS. ZONE: Correct. Yes, you do. The only thing that you did
not get was the signed hold-harmless agreement, which the applicant
provided to staff and to this board today, and I have the actual signed
hold-harmless agreement, which was reviewed by our County
Attorney's Office.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. My Exhibit B is either an
autobiotic (sic) -- Laura Herrero is Exhibit B, which is page 120.
MS. ZONE: Right. Exhibit B is actually page 47. The one that's
on 120 on the environmental impact statement. We have several areas
where we have exhibits. And what you were looking at was of the
environmental impact statement, but Exhibit B is page 47 and page 48
of the -- of your packet.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Well, you just told me that all
of the exhibits in our packet are in the PUD.
MS. ZONE: Not of the EIS. Of the exhibits of the PUD
ordinance, which is your master plan, your development standards,
development commitments, the hold-harmless agreement, the
interlocal agreement. Those are the exhibits that are of the PUD
ordinance.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah, but I -- I was just trying to find
-- there's several exhibits.
MS. ZONE: Correct.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: So how would one follow that? How
would we follow that?
MS. ZONE: It's very difficult when everyone lists everything as
an exhibit, and certainly if there's a suggestion by this board to make,
instead of the PUD doc -- ordinance, have exhibits and have it listed as
something else or incorporate into the ordinance. We certainly will
comply.
Unfortunately, like I said, the EIS, sometimes your transportation
impact statement, also have exhibits.
Page 127
March 11, 2008
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Well, I know that you want us
to be knowledgeable on what is being asked of us.
MS. ZONE: Right.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: So when you got, you know, several
-- you know, like three Exhibit B's, I don't -- I don't know if that is
something that we should be doing in the future, but that's up to you
and your director and administrator, but I may keep on asking these
issues so I know what the Planning Commission is saying, what you're
asking us to do so we don't have another Pebblebrook issue.
MS. ZONE: And I don't want to overstep my position here--
CHAIRMAN HENNING: You guys do what you want to do.
Just -- you want us -- everybody to understand, right? And I'm just
pointing out, there's -- there could be some confusion.
MS. ZONE: Right. And there are suggestions that have been
offered to the County Attorney's Office, and I think they're agreeable
to it, which -- other places where I've worked have done, is instead of
making your ordinance have exhibits, you just incorporate it into the
ordinance body, that way if your ordinance is 10 pages, there's no
questions as to what exhibits are there.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah. I didn't want to take you off
track.
MS. ZONE: Sorry, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: The last one -- and by the way, I do
have one more ex parte communication -- is I did watch the Planning
Commission. And I seen where one of the planning commissioners
asked for affordable housing commitments and that's, I guess, exhibit
-- or 14, and now it is in the PUD, right?
MS. ZONE: Correct. It's on page 59 of your packet.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: So I guess a philosophical is (sic),
when is a donation a donation or when is it an exaction? And I think
that when somebody asks for it, it's an exaction. And I -- I mean, I
don't mind if somebody wants to donate, even this PUD, if they want
Page 128
March 11, 2008
to donate under a different vehicle than the PUD. But I just can't
understand why we have all these donations in our PUD.
MS. ZONE: I would like to defer that to our County Attorney's
Office.
MR. KLATZKOW: They're voluntary, sir. If for some reason
the petition does not comply with this, he doesn't comply with this.
We're not going to enforce it because they're voluntary.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: They're not voluntary when
somebody asks for it.
MR. KLATZKOW: I understand what you're saying, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And I witnessed it.
MR. KLATZKOW: I understand what you're saying, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: There was no question about it.
Commissioner Halas and Commissioner Fiala and Commissioner
Coletta.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah. I think maybe to make
things a little easier for staff, if you came up with a table of contents in
regards to all of the exhibits. And I think if it's right at the beginning,
that probably would help us a lot.
MS. ZONE: That's an excellent idea.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: The other idea or the other -- as I
was thinking about what Commissioner Coyle said -- and I have to go
-- I have to agree with you, Commissioner Coyle, I think that's a great
idea. We like to know how many wet -- what's the percentage or the
acreage of wetlands on the project and then what is the acreage of
wetlands that are going to be destroyed on a particular project. I think
that's what you were going at, isn't it, Commissioner?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's partially it.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yep. And I think that would be
good direction.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. As I -- as I did my reading --
Page 129
March 11, 2008
and I spoke with staff and I spoke with the petitioner, some of the
things that I had concerns with, access, for instance. That was a very
big concern. They've solved that problem, and it seems they've solved
that problem to the -- to the benefit of the surrounding property
owners and they have no disagreement with it anymore.
I heard nothing from the -- from the conservation people from -- I
heard nothing at all from our transportation people as far as any
problems went with it.
I was impressed that the CCPC approved this entirely, and so I --
quite frankly, I thought all of the -- all of the problems had been
working -- worked out. And I didn't know if there was a water
problem, being that there were -- there was so much of the wetlands
being destroyed. You hate to see that happen, but if it -- if it's in the
flowway and it could cause a detriment to the flowway, that would be
a big concern of mine.
So does it or does it not -- is it in that flowway and does it
somehow dam up the flowway? The rest of the problems, I think,
have been solved in my -- from my opinion.
MS. ZONE: I can't answer on the -- if it's going to prevent the
flowway or damage it in any way. It is part of that flowway system.
But as Mr. Schmitt had pointed out, that our regulations require that
they hold 150 percent of their stormwater capacity on site, treat it, and
then, you know, discharge.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah. But stormwater capacity's a
little bit different than flowway, and I just -- I just wanted to make
sure that -- you know, we've had a couple others, like Mirasol, for
instance, the flowway there, right? And that's been a big problem and
other flowways that have been interrupted, and we don't want to see
our water sources and our future water sources affected by somehow
interrupting or eliminating a flowway. So just assure me that that isn't
done.
MR. WHITE: Mr. Chairman, with your permission, we'd love to
Page 130
March 11, 2008
address Commissioner Fiala's question with an answer from our
expert, Johnson Engineering, who did testify at the EAC and has
reviewed this matter and, I believe, can give you the answers to not
only your question, Commissioner, but I believe to that of
Commissioners Coyle and Halas. If you want to do that now, Mr.
Chairman.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: If you don't mind, I think
Commissioner Coletta has a question of staff.
MR. WHITE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Oh, thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And then we'll go to it.
MR. WHITE: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you.
Mr. White, I'm going to ask you to stay there for just a minute.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Oh.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: This commission's been dealing
with this idea of either contributions or exactions for some time as far
as affordable housing goes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: There you go.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: We have no impact fee for
affordable housing, we have no mechanism to collect any funds for
affordable housing. These kinds of donations have made a big
difference in the past when we received land and other things.
Now, Commissioner, I'm not -- if it comes up with this thing here
and every time it's come up where affordable housing's been in or
been out of it, it has not been a consideration of myself or my fellow
commissioners how we voted for it; however, with that said,
Commissioner Henning did say one thing, that while he has objections
to this, he doesn't have problems with it if it got there by a different
vehicle.
Now, I'm not too sure what a different vehicle is. Maybe you
might have some suggestions.
Page 131
March 11, 2008
MR. WHITE: I believe that there was a prior and recent board
action where this, in a similar type of voluntary commitment, were
taken outside the scope of the rezoning request and were made
effectively an independent and voluntary type of agreement on the
record. And I don't know if that was supplemented with some
additional documents that were signed by the property owner in terms
of any kind of a commitment.
But my statement to this board, and one that our petitioner
supports, is that we're prepared to go in any direction that this board
would desire. If you want to keep it within the scope of the PUD,
we're comfortable with that. If you believe it's appropriate to take it
outside the scope of the PUD in that process, we believe that that
would be appropriate as well.
I think the reason we're having the question and potentially the
continuing discussion between applicants and the board is because
there is, as of yet, not a written policy. So we're doing our best to
meet what we see are the needs that the county and the community
have and stepping up to the plate to make those commitments, and
we'll continue to make those commitments in the manner that the
board believes is best.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And this is a very important
issue to me.
MR. WHITE: Understood.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And I hope the chairman
indulges me for a moment to ask the county attorney to possibly give
me his opinion on it and possible suggestions to how we might be able
to reach some satisfactory way to make this vehicle work for
everyone.
MR. KLATZKOW: Ultimately the board would have to pass an
ordinance sort of like an impact fee for affordable housing. Right now
my understanding is this is just an ongoing policy of the board that we
would like people to voluntary contribute towards affordable housing,
Page 132
March 11, 2008
but it is voluntary. And it isn't -- we will not be enforcing it. If -- you
can put it in a PUD, you can put it in a separate vehicle. If it's
voluntary, it's voluntary.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. So in other words, even
after they agree to it, when the time does come when it reaches that
point in time when it's due, it's still voluntary at that time?
MR. KLATZKOW: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. So if we pass this thing
as the Planning Commission's got with this in there with the words
added, voluntary, that would fall right in the lines with that you're
talking about?
MR. KLATZKOW: They don't have to pay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. I think we made that
plain and clear. But to eliminate it completely, in other words,
recognizing the fact that they made the offer, now whether they follow
through or not is totally up to them. It's like anyone that makes a
promise to their church or whatever that they're going to make a
contribution over a period of time, conditions change and they don't
make it, they're not civilly liable in any way.
MR. KLATZKOW: We can add voluntary to it if you like, if
that's what you're getting at.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, that's what I'm getting at,
and I don't know if this is the appropriate time to make a motion or
not, but that's what I would include in the motion if I was permitted to
make it at this time.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I think we're winding down. If you
want to make a motion, I think it's most appropriate.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: But I certainly would like the
answer to my question.
MR. WHITE: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm sorry, Commissioner Fiala.
I didn't mean to get in front of you.
Page 133
March 11, 2008
MR. WHITE: If! may introduce Kendra -- Kendra Willet
(phonetic). It's odd that this very morning at eight a.m. I was at the
South Water Management District and having a discussion about
cumulative impacts, so I can assure you that the district is very well
versed in addressing wetland and water recharge issues and looking at
them in a cumulative way.
But I want to let Kendra tell you more about our specifics in our
project and answer your questions directly.
Kendra?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Before she starts, are you okay?
You're not ready for a break?
THE COURT REPORTER: (Shakes head.)
MS. WILLET: Hi. I'm Kendra Willet with Johnson
Engineering. Just wanted to kind of just back up and talk a little bit
about the wetlands on site. The site is 51.1 acres. There are just under
40 acres, 39.66 of on wetlands on the site.
The proposal now is to impact 32.8 of those. Those requirements
are to meet the native vegetation requirement for Collier County.
As we move forward with the district permitting, what will
happen is the UMAM, which is the Uniform Mitigation Assessment
Method that the district uses, scores several things.
One of those things that they score is hydrologic connection,
they'll use the condition, and they'll use the location of the wetland,
and this all goes towards the function of the wetland. So basically to
give you a picture of what kind of wetland quality is on site.
So a good -- the top UMAM score is 10 and the bottom is zero.
The UMAM scores were submitted to the county staff for this project
and reviewed. None of the -- none of it scored higher than a four. So
when you talk about wetland function for this site, it's extremely
degraded.
The surrounding area, development and roads, has degraded that
sheet flow. It's not part of the major flowway out to the bay or
Page 134
March 11, 2008
anything like that. The site is surrounded by development which has
basically altered your hydrologic -- your hydro period on site.
So basically, layman's terms, you have less water on site for a
shorter period of time. That's going to affect your vegetation, that's
going to affect the function of the wetland. So these wetlands are
probably barely functioning as wetlands now.
As we move forward with the district, I wouldn't be surprised --
there is some potential that exists that there's even going to be less
wetlands on site because the district may not assert jurisdiction over
them, and it's basically because it's a site in transition. It's in transition
because it's surrounded by development and surrounded by roads.
The exotics on there -- you know, you mentioned earlier the
exotics doesn't mean that it's a function. You're exactly correct, but
that is a sign of the impacts to the hydrologic connection.
So I just -- this site is -- again, it's surrounding by development,
and the county -- you guys have, as an organization, have identified a
lot of areas that are environmentally sensitive, put different overlays
and everything on them, and this site is nowhere near any of those.
It's not in any protected species, zones for panthers or anything like
that, and there were no protected species observed on site.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You answered my question. Thank
you very much.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Wait a minute. Don't go away, don't
go away.
MS. WILLET: Uh-oh.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah. Commissioner Halas has a
question for you.
MS. WILLET: Certainly.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That's interesting in your analogy
of the impacted wetlands where due diligence wasn't done early on
when we were either constructing roads or doing other developments
and realized that there was a flowway there and then we've basically
Page 135
March 11, 2008
destroyed that flowway and impacted it in such a way that now they're
saying, guess what, it's not a wetland so you can do whatever you
want with it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah. Welcome to Southwest
Florida. I mean, that's been going on years and years.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well-- and it's because we need to
take a stronger march in regards to protecting those wetlands.
MS. WILLET: Yes, sir, and you're exactly right. And what I'm
talking about in the UMAM methodology is what they look at as far
as direct impacts. The district also considers cumulative impacts,
which is the past, present, and future impacts on a wetland. And so
this is kind of the secondary volume.
So on this site it will be looked at for that, and there's that whole
known -- that loss of wetland function. So even though we're
impacting these wetlands, there will be some on-site mitigation, and
there will also be some additional mitigation to mitigate the loss of the
wetland function. So that is considered.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: The mitigation -- I know this is an
easy way out, but the end result is, we lose that. You mitigate
someplace else that maybe we don't need it as much as in a particular
flowway. Am I right or wrong?
MS. WILLET: When they're looking at subbasins and the
district overall -- the South Florida Management District (sic) has, for
instance, the west bay basin, which will be divided into subbasins.
So you do lose some function on that particular site. But when
you're looking at long-term smart growth planning, which the county
has been very good and very active in, some of those wetland
functions -- right now that wetland is probably being utilized by very
common species, raccoons, gray squirrels, and everything where
you're not losing habitat for the listed species and most likely not
going to affect your water quality or it's not going to treat water that's
going out to the basin.
Page 136
March 11,2008
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
MR. WHITE: Could I ask Kendra a couple of questions, if you
don't mind, to try to maybe get us to the place where I hope we're
addressing what you see, Commissioner, correctly as a concern, and I
think Commissioner Coyle does as well, about what the board -- what
the Water Management District calls cumulative impacts.
And either I can explain what I believe I heard and understand to
be the regulations and how they're applied by those agencies, or I
could ask her a couple of questions.
If it's easier for me to just go ahead, I think the point simply is
that there is no net loss of wetland function once we develop this
project. If anything, what we do by removing the exotics is help to
enhance on site, to the degree that it's possible, the wetland function.
And to the extent that the natural and prior occurring function has
been diminished by both the development and the invasive exotics,
that would be restored either on site or off site, but it would be done
preferentially in the subbasin, in the immediate geographic area where
these waters tend to gather and flow towards the bay and then
ultimately towards the gulf.
So I believe we're doing that in concert with what your
environmental staff has seen are those potential concerns. And if I
may go back to the master concept plan where I pointed out before
where our preserve area is, you'll see that it's doing the best that it can
do -- just give me one second -- that the preserve area, which is the
large gray box, runs to the southwest from the big ST area here
immediately to our east.
The properties that Mr. Bloom's client, that he represents, own
largely in that ST, which is a very nice cypress dome.
So we're doing everything we can to improve the circumstance
that exists all around us, complying with the county's regulations
today, and anticipate that by going through the permitting process with
South Florida Water Management District and the Army Corps, we
Page 13 7
March 11, 2008
will actually have no net loss of wetland function and, in fact,
probably will be create more habitat for the type of species that
Kendra made mention of, so that I think there's a net environmental
and ecological benefit.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I got one question to ask. When
you look at this, you have the preserve area and then you have
Livingston Road. Is there any way for water to migrate from the east
side to the west side of Livingston Road?
MR. WHITE: Absolutely. It's a great question, Commissioner.
In fact, that is the case. The water will be allowed to travel beyond
both our interconnection roads and make it essentially through and
across Livingston as well, the county right-of-way.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Thank you.
MR. WHITE: You're welcome, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. With that I'll entertain a
motion, and to the motion maker, if it's Commissioner Coletta, Mr.
Klatzkow's statement that's saying these donations, whether they're in
the PUD or outside, cannot be enforced -- if the county manager
writes a memo to his staff, copies the Board of County Commissioners
directing them they can't hold anybody up for these donations,
whether any kind of request for permit, you could put anything you
want in there, because it really doesn't mean anything.
So, you know, I'm agreeable to how it is now as long as we have
something that states what Comm -- or Jeff Klatzkow stated, because
once you apply it, then there's no kind of quid pro quo. There's -- it's
just -- you know, if somebody reneges on their donation, they renege
donation. You understand what I'm saying?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Commissioner Henning, I think
you made that quite clear, and I understand where you're coming
from. I'm trying to give you a comfort level on it, but I'm not -- the
flip side is, I have every reason to suspect that these people are going
to be doing the right thing at the right time, and we'll see. I mean, it's
Page 13 8
March 11, 2008
just one of those things.
I'm not going to make the motion until you exhaust the other
commISSIOners.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah. I don't think there's anybody
in staff that holds a gun to anybody. I think this is brought up at the
different commission meetings, whether it's here or the Planning
Commission or whatever. But I don't believe that staff holds a gun to
anybody's head and says that you have to come up with these
donations.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Did I say that? Melissa, did I -- is
that what you got out of it?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That's what I got out of it, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. What I said, if the county
manager write (sic) a memo to his staff and say that he cannot hold
any request for permit because they haven't made a commitment to
their donation. That's what I said. Commissioner--
COMMISSIONER HALAS: County Manager's got --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'll make a -- oh.
MR. MUDD: Ma'am, I've got to get some clarification.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
MR. MUDD: I mean, we're at a place that I'm real
uncomfortable with right now, and the reason I need to get a
clarification is, we just did a workshop for affordable housing with
this board. We basically talked about 4,000 units that are unbuilt right
now that were basically donations by developers, and we counted that
to tell you that we don't really have an issue based on what's on the
multiple listing and what's out there that hasn't been built yet.
If what I just heard is correct, that this is a donation and it's not
mandatory -- so I got to get clarification. Is this -- is this a dollar
donation or --
MR. KLATZKOW: Just the dollar, just the dollar.
Page 139
March 11, 2008
MR. MUDD: Okay. The units are good?
MR. KLATZKOW: The units are good.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. So now I make a motion to
approve -- approve this -- what do you call it -- this petition with all of
the stipulations that the CCPC added to it.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I second that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: There's a motion by Commissioner
Fiala, second by Commissioner Halas.
Now, I need a clarification of the exchange that just went
through, and that was -- the dollar amount was recognized in our
affordable housing workshop. So what is it?
MR. KLATZKOW: What I'm saying is that we had density
programs where a person would agree that they would get extra
market units if they put up affordable housing, and that's still good.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Right.
MR. KLATZKOW: That's part of the deal. But this voluntary
contribution of a thousand dollars per unit built was always voluntary.
They're two different things.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Right. And I -- and I didn't want to
confuse that. So what are we going to do about these donations within
the PUD?
Are you going to enforce it, County Manager?
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, when we sit there and come
forward with the bond issues or whatever that comes on a plat that
comes in front of you, we now put those unkept pieces that are -- that
are still outstanding for the PUD and we let the board know what they
-- and we let the board know what they are, and the board can make
the decision to release the bond or to keep the bond based on the
particular issue, and that's a board item.
We can bring it to your attention, but we don't -- we don't, right
now, best that I know of -- because this is so relatively new -- we don't
tell people that they can't build or can't get a permit for the item
Page 140
March 11, 2008
because they haven't got the thousand dollars paid for. That has never
been an issue yet that I know of.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, once you start kicking it down
the road, it will be an issue.
MR. MUDD: Oh, yes, sir. And you know, what I just heard
from Mr. Klatzkow is, if somebody wants to make a monetary award
for affordable housing, they can, but it's not -- it's enforceable, but you
do have a GMP amendment out there that says, you will do lO percent
a year to the tune of a thousand units a year.
So if this -- and he also just told me that if it's documented in the
PUD where the density is there for affordable housing based on the
regular units, then it is enforceable. So based on that information,
you're never going to get to your GMP's 10 percent and your thousand
units a year if you're going to talk about a thousand-dollar
commitment per unit that isn't enforceable in order to get to that
particular end.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Hang on. I'm not quite done.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm just putting up my hand so
you know I'm here.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Yeah, I know you're here.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, here it is. You want me
to put it down?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I don't want to tell you where you can
put it, but -- anyways, but I have recognized you.
You know, this is -- the best way to do this is either on these
donations, is just have a DCA or the board pass some kind of rule on
the rational nexus of affordable housing.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: God bless you. May I speak?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah, but I still don't see where it is
needed, but go ahead.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. I think you might be on
the right track because this is an issue we've been skirting for some
Page 141
March 11, 2008
time now, and I'm glad we're getting it out in the open as far as how
we're going to handle it.
But I do have a question for you, Jeff. Not too long ago this
commission quantified the -- all sorts of donations that were in the
past with a special ordinance. What did we do at that point in time?
And what does this mean that we're doing now?
MR. KLATZKOW: I'm sorry. I'm not following you.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Didn't we have -- didn't we have
an ordinance that we brought back before this commission that
recognized the legal -- made the -- recognized the legal donations that
were received in the past?
MR. KLATZKOW: Yes, but it's voluntary. It's not required.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. That's confusing, but
that's okay. But meanwhile -- now Commissioner Henning is
suggesting that we bring this forward again at another time to be able
to capture this in a more meaningful way.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, let me tell you what my
thoughts are. Either -- either we pass an ordinance like it is an impact
fee or we don't and just, you know, remove this conflict from the
issues on our agenda. That's all.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I love the idea. I mean, is there
enough support here to be able to look into it?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Not from me. Is there anybody else?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I don't see anybody going anywhere.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'm satisfied with what we have at
the present time.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Sir?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'm just napping.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah. It has been quite long. Okay.
Melissa?
MS. ZONE: Commissioner Henning, I might have a suggestion
Page 142
March 11, 2008
here that might help you as well as Commissioner Coletta. In Exhibit
F, on page 59 of your packet, the affordable housing that's under the
developer's commitment, we can have that revised to say the
developer has agreed to make a volunteer (sic) payment of, and go
with that, and then that kind of -- we recognize it's a volunteer (sic),
but it is still part of the developer's commitment.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: But right now it says, the developer
shall.
MS. ZONE: We would revise that to say, the developer has
agreed to make a volunteer (sic) payment, and then continue with the
paragraph.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Can we say has offered a voluntary
agreement rather than agreed to?
MS. ZONE: Certainly, has offered, sure.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah. And there's consensus on the
board you ought to change it to offered.
MS. ZONE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay.
MS. ZONE: If the board agrees, I would make sure that's
revised.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Is that a part of your motion?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Your second?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I already seconded. But
Commissioner Coletta, do you feel comfortable?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, I feel that the item's open
for discussion in the future. My level of comfort has not increased
dramatically, but at least I'm not dismayed to the point that I want to
get up and run out of the room.
MR. WHITE: Mr. Chairman, I'll just represent on behalf of the
petitioner that we would accept those changes to the text. I feel I need
to say that. Thank you.
Page 143
March 11, 2008
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Great.
Any further discussion on the motion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion signify by
saymg aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries, 4-1. Commissioner
Coyle voting in the negative.
Item #8B
ORDINANCE 2008-14: PUDZ-2007-AR-12248 SABAL PALM
DEVELOPMENT, LLC, REPRESENTED BY ROBERT L.
DUANE, AICP, OF HOLE MONTES, INC. AND RICHARD D.
YOV ANOVICH OF GOODLETTE, COLEMAN, AND JOHNSON,
REQUESTING A REZONE FROM THE AGRICULTURAL (A) TO
THE COMMERCIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (CPUD)
ZONING DISTRICT FOR PROJECT TO BE KNOWN AS NAPOLI
VILLAGE. THE +/-8.97- ACRE SITE IS PROPOSED TO PERMIT
AN ADULT CONGREGATE LIVING FACILITY, COMPRISING
TWO FOUR-STORY BUILDINGS. THE SUBJECT SITE IS
LOCATED EAST OF TAMIAMI TRAIL NORTH (US 41), WEST
OF STERLING OAKS PUD, AND NORTH OF THE
COMMUNITY CONGREGATIONAL CHURCH, AT 15450
TAMIAMI TRAIL NORTH, IN SECTION 9, TOWNSHIP 48
SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA-
ADOPTED W/STIPULATIONS
Page 144
March 11, 2008
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to 8B. This item
requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be
provided by commission members.
It's PUDZ-2007-AR-12248, Sabal Palm Development, LLC,
represented by Robert R. Duane, AICP, of Hole Montes, Inc., and
Richard D. Yovanovich of Goodlette, Coleman, & Johnson,
requesting rezone from the agricultural A to the commercial planned
unit development, CPUD, zoning district, for a project to be known as
Napoli Village.
The plus or minus 8.97-acre site is proposed to permit an adult
congregate living facility comprising two four-story buildings. The
subject site is located east of Tamiami Trail North, U.S. 41, west of
Sterling Oaks PUD, and north of the Community Congregation
Church at 15450 Tamiami Trail North in Section 9, Township 48
south, Range 25 east, Collier County, Florida.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you, County Manager. The --
would everybody wishing to participate in this discussion, please rise
and be sworn at by our court reporter.
(The speakers were duly sworn and responded in the affirmative.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
Ex parte communications, Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, sir. I had meetings,
correspondence, emails, and phone calls, and I talked to staff.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I had -- I had meetings. I
think I met with Rich Y ovanovich and with Bob Duane, and I also met
with staff.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I spoke briefly to Mr. Y ovanovich on
this issue.
Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. I met with both Bob Duane
Page 145
March 11, 2008
and Rich Y ovanovich, and I also had emails on this, and I conferred
with staff on this as we were working through this agenda.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Just a question. I notice that we have
a unanimous approval from everybody but it's on our regular agenda.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. I think there's a -- there's a condition in
this particular item that talked about having an agreement in the
master plan annotated with access with the property to the south. I
think it's the church. And at the time that this was coming to the
board, there was a stipulation by the Planning Commission, and that
wasn't done as of the time that this was advertised to be today. So I
think it's the only outstanding item on this particular agenda.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Mr. Y ovanovich?
MR. YOV ANOVICH: Yes, briefly. For the record, Rich
Y ovanovich. Bob Duane is here and Dave Mola, if you have any
questions of them.
Here's what the issue -- when we were at the Planning
Commission there was -- there's a -- I'm sorry. There is an existing
easement between the property which is before you to be rezoned and
this church to provide an access, and you can see it. It's right here.
Our proposed master plan would change this access to where
there's a little bit better stacking which would benefit both our project
as well as the church. We haven't had a chance yet to finalize the
revised easement agreement.
What I thought the Planning Commission had agreed to is that we
either honor the existing easement in our master plan or we get the
revised easement prior to our Site Development Plan or our plat for
the development of this property.
I spoke to the chairman and he says, that makes sense. He
personally didn't have any objection to having that easement in place
at the time we do our Site Development Plan or our plat in lieu of
having it in place at the zoning at this point, because in dealing with
the church, they go through committees. We were concerned that we
Page 146
March 11, 2008
wouldn't be able to have it done by the time we got to the Board of
County Commissioners.
So we're asking that that requirement not be a requirement prior
to zoning but it become a requirement prior to doing a Site
Development Plan or a plat. The church is safe. They already have
access through our property. If they don't agree to realign it, we'll just
live with the existing easement.
So that's why we're not on the summary agenda. It's just the
timing of getting the new easement. We believe we'll probably have it
done next week, but you never know.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas, do you have
questions?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes, I do.
Rich, since I've met with you, and I was reading this in -- more in
depth this weekend, I have some concerns on -- this is an assisted
living facility, and basically you state that this is 55 and over.
How can we, the commission, be assured that this is going to stay
as an assisting living care facility, whether it's -- because I believe in
here you've got 175 independent living units.
And my question to you is, if something doesn't work out to
where this turns to be an upscale, 55-or-older community and not an
assisting living, how can we protect ourselves on this?
MR. YOV ANOVICH: Well, this is actually an independent
living facility with the ability to also do assisted living units if we
choose to do that.
Paragraph -- and I believe it's your page 25 of 51 in your
document. The intent of paragraph 1B, which is entitled the accessory
uses, it lists the accessory uses, which include dining room, small
meeting rooms, card rooms, in-door facilities such as rehabilitation
rooms, beauty shops, medical support facilities, exercise rooms.
All of those are to service the older population that will be living
here and are a requirement of the PUD, and there's actually a square
Page 147
March 11, 2008
footage requirement here that 20 percent of our floor area ratio has to
be dedicated to providing those facilities. You don't have those types
of requirements in standard multi-family above-55 communities.
We thought that those provisions provided a protection that we
were not going to fall back on this being just your -- I'll call it your
plain old vanilla apartment complex or your plain old vanilla
condominium project.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
MR. YOV ANOVICH: As we discussed, this is the type of
community that people will move into when they no longer want to be
in their stand-alone condo or their typical apartment because they're
going to be expecting types of additional facilities.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I just want to make sure that we
have this assisted living facility locked in so that it doesn't turn into an
upscale 55-and-older community and you only basically take care of
the people in the lower echelon so that -- and I'm talking echelon
where we -- they actually end up in assisted living and not just in a --
in a home, okay.
I'm talking about the 175 independent living facilities, so that
there's a direct connection with those 175 independent living facilities
with respect to being tied in with that community as an assisted living
PUD.
MR. YOV ANOVICH: Okay. I think we're confusing some
terms. You have independent living units which we are going to be
providing under this project. There's no requirement that we also
provide assisted living units, okay? This is an over-55 community.
We have the ability to provide assisted living. And the difference
is, is independent living units are not licensed by the state. Assisted
living units are licensed by the state. But we will be providing to these
people that are living in the independent living units additional
services, such as dining on site. We'll have a wellness center on site.
We're going to have all of those accessory uses to service those
Page 148
March 11, 2008
independent individuals.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: How about transportation?
MR. YOV ANOVICH: We will be providing group
transportation as well for people.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. That's not listed in here. So
group transportation to and from shopping areas or wherever else that
they need to go.
MR. YOV ANOVICH: Do you want to just add this to the list?
Yeah. We have no problem adding a requirement that we provide
group transportation to and from shopping and things like that.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. I would feel a lot
comfortable (sic) if that was added in there--
MR. YOV ANOVICH: That's a standard --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: -- if you had group transportation
for people, because I think you're restricted with the amount of
parking. That's one of the things that I want to make sure that we
understand, that since this is an assisted living facility, that your
parking requirements are less than what it would be for a normal
condominium project. Am I correct?
MR. YOV ANOVICH: That's true. And again, we're an
independent living facility. And the way it usually works is people
will move in here -- and these are the typicals. You'll have people
who are moving in here, and they're probably early to mid 70s, they're
generally single. They want to be around other people in the like
category. They're looking for companionship, so that's the reason you
only have a requirement of having parking for one car.
If they are a married couple that moves in there, they generally
only have one car anyway. They're sharing the car to go do whatever
they've got to do. We also provide the group transportation, so a lot of
times the car's there and it never moves, or rarely moves.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Susan, could you enlighten me on
this? Is the parking less for an assisted living area?
Page 149
March 11, 2008
MS. ISTENES: Sure. Susan Istenes, for the record. John
David's going to get me that information so I'll be sure I recite it (sic).
One thing I might comment on, Commissioner, is the way this is
structured, there is no requirement for ALF. And I'm not repeating
anything -- I'm not telling you anything I think Rich didn't already tell
you. I just want you to understand that there is no requirement in here
for an ALF. It is optional. So if they build all their units and they're
all independent living facilities -- independent living facilities, then
they are essentially not an ALF.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, that's where I'm trying to--
MS. ISTENES: That's what I thought.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: -- get to. That's the help I need --
MS. ISTENES: That's what I thought.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: -- to make sure that we can lock
this in, okay?
MS. ISTENES: If you want a part of this to be ALF, then my
recommendation would be that you require a percentage of the units
that are built to be an ALF, meaning licensed by the state; otherwise,
they have the ability to do all independent, which are not licensed by
the state. I think that's where you're going, so that would be my
recommendation if I understand your concern correctly.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay, yes. That they have to be
licensed by the state.
MS. ISTENES: For ALF, yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
MS. ISTENES: And to answer your question on parking,
independent living units are -- the requirement is one per dwelling
unit, and for assisted living units, it's .75 per assisted unit. So it's
slightly less for ALF independent.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: ALF is what now?
MS. ISTENES: Point 75 per assisted unit.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And then on the living (sic), the
Page 150
March 11, 2008
l75 units is what?
MS. ISTENES: Independent living units are one per dwelling
unit.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
MS. ISTENES: And they're asking for, I think, 175.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: May I ask you why you feel that there
has to be ALF facilities within?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Because that's what they're -- that's
what they're trying to permit is an ALF facility, and if all of a sudden
that -- the marketplace for an ALF doesn't exist, then automatically
they can have this as upscale 55-and-older, and it ends up that -- if
they qualify for that, then there's no school taxes paid.
MR. YOV ANOVICH: There's no school taxes paid by the fact
that you put an age restriction of 55.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
MR. YOV ANOVICH: No. Let me rephrase that. School taxes
are paid regardless. You're talking school impact fees are not paid
because they were 55. School taxes are paid--
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
MR. YOV ANOVICH: -- regardless of the age of people living
here. And again --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I wasn't ask -- done --
MR. YOV ANOVICH: I'm sorry.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- communicating with my friend to
the right.
So is it an issue that you want to collect school impact fees?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: No. I want to make sure that the --
that this -- this item, this PUD, is what it really is, and that is an
assisted living care facility.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay?
Page 151
March 11, 2008
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Other questions?
Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'd like to draw the board's
attention to the fact that -- that if this is an independent living facility,
it is not much different than a condo with 175 units in it. That's a
density of almost 20 units per acre using this requested floor area
ratio. To me, that is accessive.
I just think that if the applicant wishes to go ahead with this as an
independent living facility or maybe, whether it's an ALF at all, that I
don't think that there should be a deviation to the floor area ratio above
the .45 that is allowed for this. That just seems to be awfully dense,
particularly since there's no assurance that it won't be all independent
living units, which is a condo. Okay.
And how frequently have we approved those at a density of 20
units per acre? I don't know that we have. So I think the intensity
here is a little -- little severe. But in any event, I don't think you can
call it an ALF if it's going to be all independent living units.
MR. YOV ANOVICH: What I've put up on the visualize -- this
issue came up recently after the Planning Commission heard this
particular independent living facility petition.
A very similar issue came up on another one, it's the same thing,
and the commission, the Planning Commission asked, what
commitments will you make as far as the level of services you have to
provide so that this is not your garden variety condominium project?
And what I've put on the visualizer is what we committed to as
far as the level of services -- operational level of services that have to
be provided so that we don't fall back on being your garden variety
condominium project.
And if I can, I'll read them to you as far as, this is how we
assured people we were not a condominium project. We couldn't fall
back on a condominium project.
The first is, obviously we've got to be over 55. The second was,
Page 152
March 11, 2008
is a requirement that there be on-site dining. You don't have that
requirement in a regular old condominium project.
There's a requirement that we provide group transportation
service for residents to take them to the grocery store, to take them to
other shopping opportunities, and to coordinate transportation if they
want individual transportation to their doctor or to something else. So
that's a requirement in that particular project.
There's a requirement that there be an on-site manager/activities
coordinator, and that person is providing social opportunities for these
people on site in the clubhouse. They usually have on-site
entertainment and things like that. And also, coordinate other needs
that they may have. So we'll have that on-site person.
There's a requirement that there be a wellness center on site and
that there be fitness programs scheduled for the residents. That's not
something you see as a requirement in a condominium project.
There's also a requirement that each unit, individual unit, be fitted
with emergency pull cords so that EMS is ultimately notified if
something were to happen. That's not something that you would find
in a typical condominium proj ect.
And then finally, and I think the one that, I think, really hits to
what Commissioner Halas is saying and I think Commissioner Coyle
as well, is that each individual unit be properly designed so people can
age in place, so that if they need some additional services, like grab
bars or they become -- they're in a wheelchair, that they need their
kitchen retrofitted so that they can -- you know, it be handicap
accessible as far as the kitchen goes. That's also a requirement.
I hope that if we were to add these types of requirements in place
in this PUD, which we could simply add to, you know, the list of
permitted uses section of the PUD document, hopefully would get you
the assurances that this is not your typical condominium project, that it
is, in fact, servicing -- their healthier seniors, but they're being
provided a whole lot more services than in your regular condominium
Page 153
March 11, 2008
project.
And we've had no objections from anybody around us after we've
explained the type of operational services we're going to be providing
for older individuals in Naples. And frankly, a lot of them are looking
around and saying, where do we go next when we no longer want to
live in our condo and we're not ready for the nursing home or an
assisted living facility. Where do we go next where -- and I think that
this goes a long way to assuring that this is not your garden variety
condominium project.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Rich, I understand what you're
trying to convey to us, and I don't want to be argumentative, but I can
get most of these services at any number of motels or hotels here in
Collier County.
I can get ground transportation services. They have shuttles.
There's an on-site manager who will help me with my activities or
individual needs. There's almost always an exercise facility, and many
of them are, in fact, already equipped with kitchens.
But I understand the differences here. I also understand that we
still have in Collier County a failed hotel that we've been trying to get
converted to some economic use now for several years and it still isn't
finished.
My concern really is, what happens if maybe somebody in a few
years wants to just turn this into a condominium complex?
MR. YOV ANOVICH: Well, I had hoped if you had put these
provisions in the PUD, it couldn't become a condominium complex.
But let's -- let's try to give you the assurance that we'll have a blend
here of independent and assisted living units. Is that -- is that the
concern is we should have a blend of licensed versus unlicensed units?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I guess my real concern is
intensity. I don't like getting involved in trying to tell you how to
manage a facility. You ought to have the right to do whatever you
think is best to earn a profit off of the investment. But my real
Page 154
March 11, 2008
problem is intensity here.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: No, I'm done.
MR. YOV ANOVICH: Can I make a suggestion? If it sounds
like there needs to be a commitment here of a number of -- that some
of these units are, in fact, going to be assisted living units to justify the
increase in the floor area ratio -- because to provide all of these
amenities in appropriately sized units, we do -- the .45 is an antiquated
standard.
My client will agree that of whatever he builds there, if it's 175
units, 50 of those units will be assisted living units. The document
already says that we can go up to 225. So if we do 220,50 of those
units will be assisted. So hopefully a commitment that 50 of the units
of whatever we build there will be licensed assisted living units would
give you the assurance that this never would convert to your plain old
vanilla condominium project.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Any other discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Do we need a staffs presentation?
Mr. Moss?
MR. MOSS: Thank you, Commissioners. John David Moss,
Department of Zoning and Land Development Review.
This application was approved by the CCPC, as you stated
earlier. It was recommended for unanimous approval. It fulfills all
the requirements of both the Growth Management Plan and the LDC
except for the one requirement stipulating that it be .45 FAR. Of
course, the applicant is requesting a deviation of 0.65, which staff and
the Planning Commission recommended approval of.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Can I ask you a question?
The site plan is the last page in our agenda packet, Exhibit D, or do
you -- are you even going by our agenda packet?
MR. MOSS: Uh-huh.
Page 155
March 11, 2008
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Is that correct?
MR. MOSS: Uh-huh.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
MR. MOSS: It is.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Is that a part of the PUD?
MR. MOSS: Yes, it is. It's Exhibit C to the PUD document.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Oh, it's Exhibit C, but this one is
Exhibit D.
MR. MOSS: Oh, I'm sorry, I'm sorry. Exhibit D is the one that's
showing the differences between the two F ARs, the .45 and the .60.
That's just an exhibit to the staff report. It's not an exhibit to the PUD
document. I'm sorry.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. That's all right. Now --let's
see. I wonder what the difference is. Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: They look the same.
MR. MOSS: Yeah. Exhibit D was just inserted in the staff
report to show the Planning Commission the difference between the
.45 FAR and the .6 FAR in case they had any questions about how it
would look. But Exhibit C to the ordinance is the one that's included
with the other PUD documents. That's exactly the plan that's going
forward.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Exhibit C, is that more intense
than the example, Exhibit D?
MR. MOSS: No.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Just the opposite. Or it doesn't mean
anything, right? It's just a piece of paper.
MR. MOSS: It really doesn't. It was just like I said, to show the
Planning Commission in case they had any questions what the two
looked like. They basically look the same. There's not a tremendous
difference.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Oh, I see two -- is it two different
buildings?
Page 156
March 11, 2008
MR. MOSS: Right.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And one building, opposed (sic) to
two buildings?
MR. MOSS: Right.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. If you take a look -- if! may interject.
Jim Mudd, County Manager, for the record.
If you take a look at Exhibit C -- and I'll make sure everybody's
on the same sheet of paper. It's on page 50 of 51, okay? And when
you look at Exhibit C it says, floor area ratio .45, and it's over -- it's
over in this area right here in your document.
Take a look at the total area of each floor, and it talks about
21,500 square feet. The total area of the four buildings -- of the four
floors, excuse me, and then the total area of each building, which is
In,075.
Then you go to Exhibit D, which is the next page over, which is
page 5l, and you go to that same section, okay, and you look at floor
area ratio, .60, and you'll see that the square footages are significantly
increased on those three -- on those three points, and that's what it's
basically trying to show the Planning Commission at the time by the
staff, and that's the difference.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It's a 30 percent increase. The
problem is that you drew the buildings both the same size.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Right.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay? So it doesn't accurately
portray the difference between --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: See, I was looking at this one and this
one.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Exhibit C. I think that's what Mr.
Moss was talking about.
MR. MOSS: I thought you were talking about Exhibit C of the
PUD document. The one that's there.
Page 157
March 11, 2008
CHAIRMAN HENNING: But we were talking about Exhibit D
that wasn't within the --
MR. MOSS: Right, right.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- PUD.
MR. MOSS: I'm sorry. I don't have the same --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And Exhibit C is on the back side.
MR. MOSS: Right.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. The other Exhibit C, right.
MR. MOSS: We're going to start calling those attachments now
instead of exhibits.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Or you can just get questions from
me.
Is there -- Commissioner Fiala and Commissioner Halas.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I wanted to know actual --
floor area ratio doesn't mean a lot to me, so can you tell me the size of
the rooms at .45 and the size of the room at .60?
MR. MOSS: I can, actually.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It's a number of rooms --
MR. MOSS: The 225 units, if they were all the assisted living
facility units, would be 834 square feet, and if they were to do 175
units, those would be 1,072 square feet apiece.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: At which floor area ratio?
MR. MOSS: It's what they're permitted. And I'm sorry I didn't
do the calculations for the .45. But this is what is being proposed, just
to give you an idea. So obviously if it were the .45, it would be
significantly less than that.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So 800 square feet --
MR. MOSS: Right.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- or a thousand square feet?
MR. MOSS: Or a thousand square feet for the independent.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. That helps me a lot to
visualize it better. Thank you.
Page 158
March 11, 2008
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. What plan did the Planning
Commission approve? Did they approve the floor area ratio of .45 or
did they approve the floor area ratio of .6?
MR. MOSS: They approved the .6, and it was with this
conceptual master plan that's up here with that alignment to the church
to the south shown.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: One--
MR. MOSS: Oh, excuse me, no. Not the one that's up here.
This is the one that they wanted to have approved but did not get. The
one that's in your packet is the one that they actually approved and the
whole reason we had to come to the BCC today instead of going on
the consent agenda.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. I think Commissioner Coyle
brought up a good point here that, if you went to a floor area ratio of
.45, that the buildings would be somewhat smaller and that maybe the
setbacks would be of greater proportion; would you agree?
MR. MOSS: If the buildings were .45 FAR, if the setbacks
would be greater?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes.
MR. MOSS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. And that -- they wouldn't be
that massive; is that correct?
MR. MOSS: They could be, depending on how they configured
the building, but they do have a height limitation of 50 feet, so they
are constrained by that.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. And so if you used the floor
area ratio of .45, then what would that calculate out as far as the
density? Would you still have the 175 units?
MR. MOSS: Oh. Yes, they could, but the units would be
significantly smaller than what they are. Right now the assisted living
facilities, as I told Commissioner Fiala, they're 800 square feet with
Page 159
March 11, 2008
the .6 FAR, so --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. But they could limit the
amount of rooms if they went to .45 and had the same dimensions as
.60?
MR. YOV ANOVICH: Yeah, but we're forgetting an important
aspect here. If the units are too small, people will not want to move in
and live in the units. We're not asking for huge units. We're looking
at units a little over a thousand square foot.
So from a marketability standpoint, theoretically, on a .45 floor
area ratio we can get the same number of units which will be smaller,
and we'll have less amenities because we have less square footage to
provide the services that people will demand. So we will not --
nobody will not want to come live in this project at a .45 floor area
ratio.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: But if you used the.45 floor area
ratio and had this -- the rooms -- dimensions of the rooms or the
apartments as -- the same as the .6, then the density wouldn't be as
heavy; is that correct?
MR. YOV ANOVICH: And we would not be able to build
enough units to make the project financially feasible. So there's a
balance here between having the -- a number of units that makes the
project financially feasible and providing the unit types that people
will want to live in and providing the amenities and services that
people expect when they live in these communities.
And what I -- and I probably should have spent more time on it.
The current LDC standard of .45 was developed in the early '90s when
these units were much smaller and didn't have the level of services
that are currently provided to these types of residents.
It's an old standard. It doesn't work in today's market of what
people are expecting as far as unit size goes and services to be
provided on site.
So this is an issue not just for this project, but probably for every
Page 160
March 11, 2008
independent/ALF facility that's going to come in front of you. You're
going to be -- you're going to be seeing requests or deviations from the
.45, because that standard is an old standard, and we can't build the
types of units that people are expecting to live in.
And if you go around the community and look at the older
independent living facilities, you'll see, they're much smaller units and
they have less amenities than people are expecting today.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: One final question. If you went to
.45 and you gave the same dimensions of the rooms as you would for
.46 -- or 60, excuse me, what would be the units per acre?
MR. YOV ANOVICH: I don't know. I've never -- I don't -- I
know that they would be -- David, did you ever do the calculation of
what it would be?
MR. MOLA: Economically it didn't make any sense. We
couldn't put the amenities.
MR. YOV ANOVICH: We couldn't fit the amenities -- just -- if
you were to just take -- if it's a 30 percent difference, just assume it's
going to come out of the unit count for purposes of arguing, because
we've still got to provide wellness centers and all those other things for
people that want these services.
So reduce the number by 30 percent, and you're taking out 21
units, and it doesn't work. The project doesn't work. At 175 units, of
which now we have an obligation -- unless you don't accept the offer,
50 of those 175 have got to be ALF units now, so there's 125
independent, 50 ALF units, and we're asking for the ability to provide
unit sizes that people will want to live in and the amenities that they
expect.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Any further questions?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I'm going to close the public hearing.
Entertain a motion at this time. There's -- ifthere is a motion to
approve, the interconnection has to be dealt with at site plan or --
Page 161
March 11, 2008
MR. YOV ANOVICH: Plat.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- or plat. There is a --
recommendations of 50 units be ALF and, of course, you know that
we have our staffs and the Planning Commission's recommendations.
Mr. Klatzkow?
MR. KLATZKOW: Just for clarification, because Mr.
Y ovanovich put up these six things on the screen, is that part of the
motion or not?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, there is no motion right now.
MR. YOV ANOVICH: We offered that up to give the assurance
that was the -- that, combined with the 50 units of ALF, to assure
people that this is not a regular old condominium project. So we
include that in the PUD if it finds it's way in the motion.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas -- or Fiala?
First mistake I made.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I'll make a motion to approve
as long as 50 units set aside for ALF, to assure that that's what this is
going to be, and include these stipulations that you just submitted,
along with the stipulations from the Planning Commission.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala, before I second
the motion, does that address the interconnection at PPL or SDP?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, it does.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I'll second the motion.
Okay. Mr. Moss?
MR. MOSS: May I make a point of clarification? I think Mr.
Y ovanovich just committed to doing 50 ALF units and 175. Is that
what he was saying?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
MR. MOSS: So he's going to do both? Because the way it's
presented right now, they have the potential to do 225 units --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Right.
MR. MOSS: -- and only 175 may be independent living units, so
Page 162
March 11, 2008
that's already what's been on the table. So that hasn't changed.
MR. YOV ANOVICH: Yes, it has.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Right. It was at 175 independent
and 50 ALF.
MR. YOV ANOVICH: No. What I said is, at least 50 units of
whatever we build there will be ALF. So if we only build 175 units,
50 of those l75 will be ALF. And if we build -- if we do do the
maximum of225, then it will be 50 ALFs and l75 independent. Ifwe
do a different number, 50 of those will be ALF units.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You know what -- Mr. Chairman?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Could I ask Susan Murray to come
up for just a minute?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Istenes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Istenes, yes.
MS. ISTENES: I'm just confused because -- and I asked John
David to clarify. Two twenty-five is the maximum that they can have,
and they've already committed to 175 as independent. So the extra 50
are a given. They already had to do 50 if they built 225 as ALF. So
there's no -- nothing different here than was already presented. I'm
asking for clarification.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Here's what he said. He said, if they
decide to build 175 units, 50 of those would be ALF.
MS. ISTENES: Right.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: That's what he said.
MR. YOV ANOVICH: If I build less than 225 --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Say he build 50 --
MS. ISTENES: I understand that, but I don't think the whole
picture's being presented. They can do 225 and they can only do 175
independent. They have to do 50 if they do 225. Yes, that's what it
said.
MR. YOV ANOVICH: We do, but we -- can I -- here. Right
Page 163
March 11, 2008
now -- right now the site plan shows 175 units on it, okay. So under
175 units, under the PUD as written today, zero of those have to be
ALF. But what we're agreeing to today is of the 175 that we currently
are going to fit on that site, 50 of those will be ALF. Today I don't
have to do any of those as ALF, but if! do -- if! do 175 units, 50 of
those will be ALF. That's a very big difference from what the PUD
currently reads.
MS. ISTENES: So you're committing to maximum of 175 total
with at least 50 ALF, correct?
MR. YOV ANOVICH: Hang on a second. What I said was, if
we -- whatever number of units we build on that site, 50 of them will
be ALF. If! do 200, 150 could be independent, 50 will be ALF.
Right now under the current document, it would be 175 independent,
25 ALF. We're just saying that you're guaranteed that at least 50 of
the units -- and maybe we should take a five-minute timeout and I can
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, because --
MR. YOV ANOVICH: -- I can work with -- explain it, because
I'm not trying to confuse you. I'm trying to guarantee you that at least
50 of the units will be ALF units, when there's --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: When I see concern on Susan's face
MR. YOV ANOVICH: -- no requirement of that.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- I feel concern.
MR. YOV ANOVICH: Right. And let me -- if you can give me
a five-minute --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: No. We're going to take 10 minutes.
MR. YOV ANOVICH: Perfect.
(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.
Page 164
March 11, 2008
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Mr. Y ovanovich, before we start, I'm
going to go to Commissioner Coyle to give his ex parte
communication on this item.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I was out of the room when the
other commissioners gave theirs. I'd like to point out for the record
that I have met, on this item, with Mr. Y ovanovich, Bob Duane, and
David Mola, and we discussed the characteristics of this particular
development and they answered some of my questions.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Mr. Y ovanovich?
MR. YOV ANOVICH: Okay. I think Ms. Istenes and I have
written it simply -- that we all understand it now. We're going to
commit that the first 50 units we do have to be assisted living units
and then every unit over 175 have to be assisted living units.
So if we build the maximum of225, you will get 100 assisted
living units versus the 50 that's currently provided for. So hopefully
we -- that is acceptable as far as an intensity -- from an intensity
standpoint to assure that you're going to have basically an
aging-in-place community until they ultimately need skilled nursing,
and then they'll have to go to another facility for that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. Commissioner Halas, does
that give you a level of comfort?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That's a lot better than what we
started out as.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay, okay. Because this is his
district, and we really want to make sure that he feels comfortable
with it -- with what's going on. And Susan?
MR. YOV ANOVICH: Did I say it right?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. Then my motion stands.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Any further discussion? Who
seconded the motion?
Page 165
March 11, 2008
MS. FILSON: Commissioner Henning.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: That's what I thought. It's just -- it's
been so damn long ago, I couldn't remember.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It was a trick question.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Jim Mudd?
MR. MUDD: Sir, the -- Commissioner Fiala said her motion
stands, as modified by Mr. Y ovanovich with the promise that 50
affordable (sic) housing will be done first--
MR. YOV ANOVICH: Assisted.
MR. MUDD: -- and anything over 100 -- assisted living facility,
and anything over 175 will then be assisted living facility.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you for catching that. Bless
your heart. That's right.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And Commissioner, it also --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And that's in your motion and that's in
my second.
Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That's also the added verbiage that
was placed on the overhead, that's in your motion also.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: It is.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: She said that.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, yes. I had already included
that, but thank you for reinstating that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Just wanted to make sure.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Reiterating that, excuse me.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any further discussion?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And I think he also in there, which
wasn't in our information, was that you were going to provide
transportation for those people.
MR. YOV ANOVICH: That's on the list.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That's on the list?
Page 166
March 11, 2008
MR. YOV ANOVICH: That's on the list, yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay, good. All right.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Anything further?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Seeing none, all in favor of the
motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries, 4-1, with
Commissioner Coyle dissenting.
Item # lOC
WORK ORDER #SCD-FT-3850-08-03, COURTHOUSE 5TH AND
6TH FLOOR REDESIGN, RETROACTIVE TO THE NOTICE TO
PROCEED DATE OF JANUARY 18,2008, TO SPILLIS
CANDELA DMJM TO PROVIDE FOR ARCHITECTURAL
DESIGN SERVICES FOR THE DESIGN OF THE 5TH AND 6TH
FLOORS OF THE COLLIER COUNTY COURTHOUSE
LOCATED AT 3301 TAMIAMI TRAIL EAST IN THE AMOUNT
OF $715,680 - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to item 10C, and this
is a recommendation to approve a work order number
SCD-FT-3850-08-03, courthouse fifth and sixth floor redesign
retroactive to the notice to proceed date of January 18, 2008, to Spillis
Candela DMJM to provide for architectural design services for the
design of the fifth and sixth floors of the Collier County Courthouse
Page 167
March 11, 2008
located at 3301 Tamiami Trail East in the amount of$715,680.
Mr. Damon Gonzales, Project Manager from Facilities
Management -- from -- excuse me. Damon Gonzales, Facilities
Manager from your Facilities Management Department, will present.
MR. GONZALES: Good afternoon, Commissioners. For the
record, Damon Gonzales, Facilities Manager, Facilities Management
Department. We also have Linda Best here from the purchasing
department to assist with any questions.
Obviously this project's for the fifth and sixth floors of the
courthouse renovations. It's for the design.
The board approved the renovation of the fifth and sixth floors of
the courthouse during the budget process. Funding for this project for
the design portion is non ad valorem fund 181 out of the courts. It's
based on surcharges of noncriminal traffic infractions.
Spillis is selected -- was a selected architectural firm for the
entire complex based on BCC approved -- an RFP in '05.
Just a quick rundown of the program. The fifth floor is planned
for court administration and the main jury assembly room. The sixth
floor is planned for new courtrooms, new hearing rooms, and judicial
chambers. Staff negotiated a contract with Spillis Candela for 7l5,680
in January.
This project was missed. The county staff was a little
overzealous on this project, and we overlooked the $200,000 threshold
and we went forward without board approval, which it needed, which
is why we're bringing it back now.
I'll take any questions you have.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Questions? I have a question. Seven
hundred fifty thousand appears to be quite high. How many square
feet is that?
MR. GONZALES: This project we actually took it and
compared it to the fourth floor renovation, which we did about a year
ago, and this is just a quick breakdown.
Page 168
March 11, 2008
The fourth floor had a square foot cost of $362.70 per square
foot. And, again, this was courtroom space. The fifth floor has 5,400
square feet; 170 a square foot cost based on the estimates provided by
the designer.
The sixth floor is 18,800 square feet at a price of 399 per square
foot. The overall construction budget is 8.4 million. Again, the
design fees were 715 at a -- 8.5 percent based on the construction.
We took the guideline that was provided to us by the State of
Florida that shows that there's a 7.72 average for renovations. That's a
little small to see. The circled items at the bottom are things that are
not included in the 7.72, which is the average; things such as the
facility programming, the measured drawings of existing facilities,
graphic and signage design, detailed cost estimates, project residential
during construction -- or representation, I'm sorry -- and
postoccupancy inspections. We also added a line there that's also not
included which is any security features we add into the facility.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. But you're not going to have
any landscape architectural on these floors, are you?
MR. GONZALES: No, sir. This is only interior renovations.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah, I know. But if the calculation
is based upon the services below --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It excludes those below.
MR. GONZALES: Those are excluded. Those are not part of
the 7.72.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Oh, those are -- oh, okay. Those are
all exclusions.
MR. GONZALES: Those are not included, yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. And the ones you circled--
MR. GONZALES: Are things we are including as part of the
contract that we have with them that we're proposing.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. And it's a difference -- this is
__ it says, the calculated fee would be 650,000 below the circled 7.72?
Page 169
March 11, 2008
MR. GONZALES: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: In column C? So that's what -- is that
what it would cost?
MR. GONZALES: At 7.72, yes, based on the same construction
cost of 8.4 million.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. So it's a difference of about
$85,000?
MR. GONZALES: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And you get the -- does this include
all permits?
MR. GONZALES: Yes -- no. Just for the design.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: So that doesn't include the
construction?
MR. GONZALES: No.
MR. CAMP: That's correct.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Actual construction. So that -- well,
we all know how long that takes and that changes it could be.
MR. MUDD: The actual construction is going to be 8.4 million,
SIr.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: No, no, no. I'm not asking -- what I'm
asking is, this is a redesign.
MR. GONZALES: Correct.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: So it doesn't include taking it into
community development and getting all the permits?
MR. CAMP: That's correct.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Has that been budgeted?
MR. GONZALES: It's -- actually the actual construction has not
been budgeted yet. That's going -- just the design is what we're asking
for at this point, which has been budgeted.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Now -- and there is enough
fees collected to do this and the construction as you -- have you
estimated the --
Page 170
March 11, 2008
MR. GONZALES: The construction has not been budgeted for
at this point.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Skip, would you go to the --
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, what you -- what you basic -- if!
could interrupt for just a second.
And you're playing -- I'm listening to two voices going back and
forth over here to my left. What you basically have is, we're emptying
out the administration per se that's not court -- specifically court
related into the admin. building. That's going to free up the floors on
the court -- in the courthouse so that you could build additional
courtrooms and suites and things like that.
We don't -- we don't really get advance notice when the state
decides to give us two judges, okay? They just gave us three judges a
little while ago, and when you get them, then you've got to come up
with the courtrooms and the deliberations rooms and the suites and
things like that.
So when that particular issue transpires, what you have is, you've
got to -- you've got to do them. It's almost like an unfunded mandate.
You've got to provide the facilities. They provide the salary for the
judges.
And so you don't have a lot of negotiation room. And what
staffs trying to do is get the design laid out so that when that does
happen to us, then we're able to, as a board, as a county staff, come
back to you and basically react to that influx of new judges.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I'm aware of that.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I was just asking about the details of
this and what's going to take place from here. And Skip Camp said off
the record that the construction of it is going to take place next year,
so the fees --
MR. CAMP: I'm sorry. I didn't mean to interrupt.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Go ahead.
Page 171
March 11, 2008
MR. CAMP: For the record, Skip Camp, Facilities Management
Director. I'm sorry. What I meant to say is the design will be done
this fiscal year.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Right.
MR. CAMP: And then as soon as the finance committee's
involved and the commission approves it, sometime in the future, we'll
have a completed design. So whenever that time is, we'll be ready,
whether it's next year or the year after. Whenever the funding's in
place, the design will be ready to go.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. So you're saying we're going
to approve the design?
MR. CAMP: This is just for the design.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Are we going to approve the design --
is it going to come back to us --
MR. CAMP: No, this is -- no, it would not. This is an interior
design for the courtrooms. You've never seen this before. This is a --
and it will be similar to the current courtrooms and the judges' suites.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Right. You just made a statement on
the record. I was trying to clarify what we're going to come back and
approve next.
MR. CAMP: The next time you see this will be the construction
sometime in the future.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay, good.
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I had a little confusion on that first
thing you showed, one floor -- I can't -- I wish I could remember,
something like 5,400 square feet and the other one was 1,800 square
feet. I don't know if it was exactly. Oh, yeah. Oh, that's exactly what
it was. Can you tell me why one floor is little and the other one is
big?
MR. GONZALES: The fifth floor is mainly for administration
and for the jury assembly area. The sixth floor is the entire space
Page 172
March 11, 2008
basically, other than common space, and it's for courtrooms.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So both floors are the same size, but
you're only --
MR. GONZALES: The fifth floor is not the complete floor
renovation, no. It's only a portion of it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, okay, thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Entertain a motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Coletta,
second by Commissioner Halas.
Discussion on the motion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion signify by
saymg aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Carries unanimously. Thank you.
MR. GONZALES: Thank you, Commissioners.
MR. MUDD: Did a good job, Dan, thank you.
Item #10D
DIRECTION FROM THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS ON WAIVING THE REQUIREMENTS OF
ORDINANCE 2007-84 AND ON AUTHORIZING THE
CHAIRMAN TO SIGN, A COMMITMENT LETTER FOR MDG
Page 173
March 11, 2008
CAPIT AL CORPORATION (DEVELOPER) FOR DEFERRAL OF
100% OF COLLIER COUNTY IMPACT FEES FOR 147
COMMUNITY WORKFORCE HOUSING INNOVATIVE PILOT
(CWHIP) PROGRAM, OWNER-OCCUPIED AFFORDABLE
HOUSING UNITS LOCATED AT THE LORDS WAY, MILE
EAST OF THE INTERSECTION OF COLLIER BOULEVARD
AND THE LORDS WAY, FOUNTAIN LAKES RESIDENTIAL
COOPERATIVE, NAPLES. (COMPANION TO ITEM #6B)
MOTION TO DENY - APPROVED
Commissioner, that brings us to 10D, and that's to obtain
direction from the Board of County Commissioners on waiving the
requirements of ordinance 2007-84 and on authorizing the chairman to
sign a commitment letter for MDG Capital Corporation, developer, for
deferral of 100 percent of Collier County impact fees for 147
Community Workforce Housing Innovative Pilot, CWHIP, program
co-occupied (sic) affordable housing units located at The Lords Way,
mile east of the intersection -- a mile east of the intersection of Collier
Boulevard and The Lords Way, Fountain Lakes Residential
Cooperative, Naples, and it says on your agenda that Frank Ramsey's
going to present, but that isn't Frank. Ms. Marcy Krumbine, your
Director of Housing and Human Services, will present.
MS. KRUMBINE: Thank you. For the record, Commissioners,
Marcy Krumbine, Director of Housing and Human Services. I'd like
to just take a moment to explain to you how and why we got here
today, and then answer any questions that you had earlier in the day.
Back in November, Mr. Klohn came to you in a public petition
asking that you make a couple of changes to our county ordinances,
and you went ahead and directed staff to do so.
We came back in December with two changes that you approved,
one was to amend the impact fee ordinance to allow for deferrals for
the CWHIP program, so that would be for projects that have gotten
Page 174
March 11, 2008
funded through CWHIP up to 140 percent of the median income;
however, we tied that to also deferrals for rental units and capped that
at 225 units a year whether they be for CWHIP or they be for rentals.
And Mr. Klohn also asked for changes in the Local Housing
Assistance Program so that we would provide down payment and
closing cost assistance up to 140 percent of the median income.
You approved both of those things in December. Now Mr. Klohn
came to you and was asking for exceptions to the deferral program.
And since it was an exception, we had asked him to come to you, the
board, so we could get direction.
And the two exceptions that he's asking for is he's asking for the
commitment for the deferrals before he has been awarded the CWHIP
funds, and he's also asking for an exception to go over the amount, the
cap, that you've established. So the cap is established at 225, and he
wants to exceed that cap.
So those are the two exceptions that he asked you for earlier in
the day and that's why we brought this to you.
Now, he's brought this to you at a time when the application has
already been submitted for CWHIP. In the first round he scored 98
out of the 100, which is the highest in the state, and he's only one of
five applicants to go on for the second round of scoring.
And so he was concerned that during the cure period, that they
might bring this up as an issue. So he wanted to kind of make it clear
that you would approve these units and commit to these units as
deferrals.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, just a couple questions. When
__ if we would approve this -- and I forget how many -- 149 units or
something like that?
MS. KRUMBINE: A hundred and forty-seven.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Hundred and forty-seven units,
okay. Does -- that would -- oh, let me go back and say one other
Page 175
March 11, 2008
question first. There was another person that asked also to be included
in this CWHIP category that came before us -- and I don't remember
what the name of the project was -- because he wanted to also apply
for it. Was -- is he in that round of people that --
MS. KRUMBINE: No. He did not score high enough.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, okay, fine. So we don't have to
worry about him losing out.
Okay. The second question -- back to what I was asking in the
first place, the 147 units, does Mr. Klohn plan to build all of those 147
units in one year or should they be -- if they're not going to be, can we
split them up in two years so that somebody else might have an
opportunity to also use some of those units?
MS. KRUMBINE: That would be a question for the developer.
MR. KLOHN: Good morning, or good afternoon. For the record,
my name is Bill Klohn, President and Principal of MDG Capital
Corporation, the Private Partner in the Public Partnership of CWHIP.
The answer, Commissioner Fiala, is that, to create as much
affordability as possible, we can't wait and build a building at a time.
So when we launch this project, all of the 147 units will be built all at
once as fast as we can build it.
MS. KRUMBINE: Let me also, though, clarify that the CWHIP
funding will be announced July of 2008, and your fiscal year is over in
September of2008. So I'm not sure how many of those buildings will
be vertical in those just couple of months.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Question. Do we have the funds
allocated for all 147 units?
MS. KRUMBINE: This portion of the impact fee deferral
program is not by dollars. It's by units.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. Do we have enough units?
MS. KRUMBINE: We have -- no, we don't. He will-- if you
award this, you'll be exceeding the 225 units that you established.
Page 176
March 11, 2008
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Two-hundred-twenty-five thousand?
MS. KRUMBINE: Two hundred -- no, just 225 units. You've
already approved 96 units for Crestview Apartments in Immokalee,
and that -- so then you have the remainder for 129 units available. And
so he's asking for 147. So that's over and above the cap.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. How do we juggle this so
that -- right now we've just got 129 units. How do we make up the
difference? Is that going to be in the next fiscal year?
MS. KRUMBINE: That's really up to you to direct. If you --
you can either exceed the -- exceed it this year and then next year still
have 225, you could take it out of next year. It's your call.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Gee, thanks.
MS. KRUMBINE: No problem.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: So ifMr. Klohn doesn't get the
units built but yet has the units set aside, then that deprives someone
else; is that correct?
MS. KRUMBINE: That is correct.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta and
Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. Mr. Klohn, I've got a
couple concerns. The first one is a question to be directed to you.
At a point in time when we have a flood of units out on the
market that are unoccupied and are selling at great markdowns -- and I
know your market is all the way up to -- what is it, 140?
MS. KRUMBINE: Hundred and forty percent.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Hundred and forty percent. Are
we just creating more of a problem in the fact that we're taking --
creating new units to be able to put out there when there's units
existing that are going unsold? Is this -- I mean, I know there's a
rationale why the program is a good program, but is this the right time
Page 177
March 11,2008
for us to be going forward?
MR. KLOHN: I certainly believe wholeheartedly that this is a
perfect time to go forward with it. If we look back at the history of this
project, we began with the ESP Group back in November of'07. For
the viewing public, the ESP Group is the public partnership side of the
CWHIP program which includes the Sheriffs Office, the Collier
school system, NCH hospital, Regional Medical Hospital, and the City
of Naples. In totality their employment base is about 12,000 people.
We're building 147 units.
In looking at the history of this project, it's taken almost 18
months as we sit here today to complete the compo plan amendment to
create the subdistrict for this project and to garner the $25 million
bond to create additional affordability for these individuals, and to go
through the CWHIP project.
To just simply stop and say, gosh, I don't think we need any
affordable housing, by the time you realize it, you take another two
years to gear things up to produce the units.
One of the things that we find most attractive about the Fountain
Lakes project is that when you have a market rate price of, say,
212,000 and it's further brought down by the CWHIP dollars of
$34,000 per unit, further brought down by the impact fee deferrals of
about $15,000 per unit and potentially further brought down by
available SHIP funds, you can be as low as $130,000 as the entry fee,
if you will, or the mortgage price for the essential services folks, and I
think that that's well below what you might find in the marketplace
today, especially with nothing down.
Furthermore, we're finding -- and I'm attending the Affordable
Housing Commission meetings and the workshops, and the biggest
challenge that our folks have today that are looking for housing, it's
the mortgage crunch. We're all hearing the 20 percent down and the
tighter credit. With the Fountain Lakes program and the $25 million
tax exempt bond that we've got, it's the equivalent of moving into an
Page 178
March 11, 2008
apartment, about $3,000, and then the bond financing funds the
difference.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Question for Marcy.
Marcy, this income bracket, the 140 percent, what size house
could they afford if you were figuring it at 30 percent of their medium
income? And I know this is probably throwing a curve at you, trying
MS. KRUMBINE: Yeah. I don't have my numbers in front of
me. But it would be, I'm sure, at least -- depending on their debt ratio,
well over 200,000, 250,000.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. And these houses would
be selling, because we're subsidizing them, they'd be down below
2,000 (sic)?
MS. KRUMBINE: Well, Bill just said that he would bring them
down depending on the subsidies and the CWHIP and the impact fee
deferrals down to 130- to 150,000. And they would be cooperatives.
They're like condos but they're jointly owned.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Now, at the last meeting that we
had on affordable housing, we did the workshop, I think this
commission was pretty much in agreement that our target market for
the limited amount of funds that we had was going to be the 60
percent and below. Is any of this money that we're talking about
going to be coming out of that?
And I see Bill shaking his head no, but what's your answer?
MS. KRUMBINE: Well, it's not -- again, we have two programs,
for lack of a better term, for the impact fee deferrals. We have the
program that you're speaking of, which is 3 percent of the impact fees
collected the previous year that we're taking the dollar amount, and
we're using that to subsidize.
And your direction from the affordable housing workshop was to
come back with a resolution to do that for 60 percent or below. So
that's the dollar figure.
Page 179
March 11,2008
However, for the 225 units, the 96 units we approved -- you
approved previously, those are actually in one of Bill Klohn's
developments, and that is for low-income rentals. And so you would
be -- you wouldn't be able to approve any more low-income rentals
this year if a project came before you that was for low-income rental
housing. You would have used up your cap.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: But the low-income rentals that
we're going to be talking about here are also low-income rentals,
right?
MS. KRUMBINE: No. He could go up to 140 percent of the
median income. So it's not 60 percent of the median income.
MR. KLOHN: And they're not rentals.
MS. KRUMBINE: And they're not rentals. Those are home --
these are home ownership units.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. I understand where
you're coming from. Now, do you really need all these -- the
commitment for all these units? Do you actually have tenants for all
these units if they -- when they get built, or are they going to remain
empty? Because, I mean, with the way the real estate market is,
there's a lot of uncertainty on other projects. In this case, have you got
commitments from all the agencies out there that you've been talking
to?
MR. KLOHN: The way that affordable housing qualifying
works is that when you prequalify an individual to take occupancy,
that commitment or verification of income lapses or expires; I believe
it's 90 days.
So it's premature for us to go out and find the bodies today that
will occupy those units. But we believe, based upon all of the many
meetings that we've had with the ESP Group, Brian Settle, Tom
Eastman with the school board, that out of the 12,000 employees from
the five ESP members, that these units will fill very rapidly, especially
considering the fact that we have procured the bond from Mr.
Page 180
March 11, 2008
Pickwork's entity.
If that bond funded today, the 25 million, ifit funded today, the
interest rate fixed for 30 years would be in the 5 percent range. Even
with today's low interest rates and the availability of housing -- the
availability of housing is short-term, as we all know. This 30-year
bond provides end-loan financing for 147 people at a fixed interest
rate for the 30-year period. We think that's huge, especially in this
credit crunch that we're in.
We feel strongly that we'll have a waiting line for the Fountain
Lakes project. With the approvals that were in process at the Collier
County level-- and I was talking to Joe during one of the breaks, Joe
Schmitt. This project, with county approvals in mind, could launch as
soon as July of this year. It will take about II months to build. That's
how quickly this will happen. We're very anxious to get the project
going, take advantage of the bond financing that we have.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And last question I got for you,
Mr. Klohn, is if all these predictions that these houses will sell or rent,
whatever, do not become true, who is the person who is left holding
the bill? Is it your company?
MR. KLOHN: It's a combination of our company during the
period of construction. And we don't have a firm commitment yet, but
in the bond process you have to have credit enhancement. The credit
enhancement source that we're in discussions with through our
underwriter now is Fannie Mae. So if, in fact, five years from now or
lO years from now there's a vacancy or the equivalent of a foreclosure,
Fannie Mae is the guarantor.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And that means the taxpayers,
okay.
Now, a couple of things I think we need to -- need to be very
certain about. This is not the first effort to try to build homes
Page 181
March 11, 2008
specifically for targeted workforce employees. Lee County did that
and they found out they couldn't sell them, okay.
I hope we'll able to sell them here. I'm not going to debate that.
But what I want to do is get some very specific dates down on the
record.
Have you submitted a request for a plan or Site Development
Plan and has it been approved by community development?
MR. KLOHN: We have concurrently submitted our rezone.
Well, we've finished the compo plan amendment. We have our $25
million bond. Weare currently in the midst of the Site Development
Plan approval as well as zoning work, and because of the nature of the
affordability of the project, those two items are running concurrently.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Now, Mr. Schmitt, when do
you expect those to be approved?
MR. SCHMITT: Okay. In regard to your question on those to
be approved, I'm assuming you're related -- or the question is in
regards the site plans?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Site plans and zoning.
MR. MUDD: He said zoning.
MR. SCHMITT: Zoning -- the zoning he's going through
approval now. He is tentatively scheduled to have a hearing date --
and Bill, what date did I tell you?
MR. KLOHN: June 24th.
MR. SCHMITT: June 24th. He's tentatively scheduled for a
hearing date June 24th. There would be a Planning Commission about
four weeks prior to that. Those are the dates that I've established. That
certainly is dependent on both Mr. Klohn and his agent in responding
to some of our comments so that we can package this and get the staff
report completed, get it to the Planning Commission and, of course,
then after that, get it to you for your rezoning.
Now, there's a companion item as well associated with this
rezoning to remove the -- how many acres? There was a certain
Page 182
March 11, 2008
amount of acreage.
MR. KLOHN: Ten acres ofag., and that's being submitted
tomorrow.
MR. SCHMITT: There's a companion item to remove 10 acres
as well.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: How about the SDP?
MR. SCHMITT: SDP will be -- will not be approved until after
the zoning. And knowing the criticality of this project, we're doing a
concurrent review. We're going through an SDP review. And we're
reviewing that. Of course, that's at their risk, in case anything that
changes during the zoning process that mandates any changes in the
SDP.
So we'll hold that. So just -- to answer your question, we're
probably looking at July, late July approval for the site plan, provided
everything tracks, the zoning takes place, when the hearings take place
and there's no issues, we expect that the site plans should get through
approval in -- sometime in July, and he will be submitting building
plans concurrently.
And I'm not sure -- you're under design for building plans.
They'll be coming in under a master building permit. We'll review the
master building permit. If that works out, he -- it's possible he could
be pulling building plans as early as late August, early September, pull
building permits, I'm sorry.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Late August to early September.
MR. SCHMITT: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. That's 30 days before the
end of the fiscal year. Do you see 147 units being built before the end
of the fiscal year?
MR. SCHMITT: My personal assessment, no, but I don't know
what his schedule is.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I think he just said it's going to take
11 months.
Page 183
March 11, 2008
MR. SCHMITT: Yes. But as far as all the units being built at
one time, coming in --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's right.
MR. SCHMITT: -- coming in as one permit, I would doubt that
will come in all of the units prior to this fiscal year. I would anticipate
some going into next fiscal year.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Now, we've been told two things.
We've been told that from July it will take 11 months. Mr. Klohn said
it will take 11 months from July this year to finish this project.
MR. SCHMITT: Construction, yes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: We've also been told they're all
going to be built at the same time. So that means we'll start
construction sometime maybe late August early September, and
they're all going to be ready in June of next year based upon what has
been said on the record today.
MR. SCHMITT: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: There is absolutely nothing about
that schedule that requires us to commit all of our deferrals to this one
project this year. Absolutely nothing.
That doesn't mean we don't have an obligation to do it. We
promised Mr. Klohn that we would. The point is, why would we give
one company all of our deferrals for the entire fiscal -- remainder of
this fiscal year when he's not going to need them until probably, at the
very latest, late this year, in the next fiscal year, early on next year.
As he said, he can't prequalify people earlier than 90 days from
the time of occupancy in any event. So this does not make sense to
me, okay?
And I think that what we need to do is give Mr. Klohn
reassurance that we made a commitment, we designated him as the
CWHIP, and that he's got the right to get these things, but I am not
going to vote to exhaust our entire supply of deferrals on a project that
isn't even going to provide a single house for anybody to live in until
Page 184
March 11, 2008
next fiscal year. Just not going to do it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yep.
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. You mentioned jointly owned
and co-op apartments. Would you tell me what that means?
MR. KLOHN: Sure. I believe that that was Marcy's comment
when she said jointly owned.
The form of our home ownership is called a residential
cooperative, which is a recognized form of home ownership with
Florida Housing Finance Corporation.
Simply what a co-op allows us to do is have a master mortgage to
garner this $25 million bond. And our purchasers will assume a 147th
responsibility for that bond, and that helps them get the low interest
rate.
So the direct answer, Commissioner Fiala, is that it's a residential
cooperative. It's the form of home ownership. It's not rentals, it's not
cooperatively owned. It a residential co-op.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Kind of like a CDD when they go in
and they borrow the money on their CDD and then everybody has to
pay for it afterwards; is that the same thing?
MR. KLOHN: No, much different than a CDD. Ifwe can
picture a large pie with 147 slices with the big pie being the borrower
of the $25 million, and each of the respective homeowners assuming
the probability for their pro rata share or 1/147th of the pie. And if as
the teacher would sell in three years or five years, the slice of the
mortgage goes back into the pie, and then the policeman comes in and
purchases a unit, and we've preserved that low interest money in
perpetuity for the full 30 years of the program.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So when they purchase their
particular unit, they payoff their piece of the pie; is that what you're
saying?
MR. KLOHN: No. The piece of the pie simply is returned to the
Page 185
March 11, 2008
pie, and the next purchaser, when he or she purchases that slice of pie,
the remaining balance of that 30-year mortgage comes available to the
next purchaser at the same low, fixed interest rate. It's a wonderful
program.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: The reason for that is to try to keep
the housings (sic) affordable.
MR. KLOHN: Correct.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: That is the reason for that. And I
understand Commissioner Coyle and appreciate his observation about
these impact deferrals, that we shouldn't give them out all to one
project and not have it built till next year, but we also have an
opportunity to do a hybrid, some of those commitments this year and
some of those commitments next year.
MR. KLOHN: Chairman, may I chime in briefly? Because
there's really a big point that I need to make for the commissioners to
appreciate why now is proper as opposed to a later date in time.
If you can pretend to be a developer -- my goodness, you
wouldn't want to do that -- but if you can pretend that you're in the
development business and you're now moving forward to launch a
project, we've got, in addition to the bond money, about a $16 million
construction loan that is in place for the period of construction.
When I go to my lender, I can't say, well, I think I've got these
impact fee deferrals so -- but I'm not sure.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Mr. Klohn, that isn't what I said.
MR. KLOHN: I'm sorry?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: That isn't what I said. What I said is,
we can allocate some of those this year and reserve --
MR. KLOHN: Oh, I see what you're saying.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- some for next year.
MR. KLOHN: I see what you're saying. I apologize. Yeah, that
works.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any comments on my statement?
Page 186
March 11, 2008
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, what I was saying in the
beginning, could we pay half now and half next year? Is that kind of
what you mean?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah, or whatever percentage that
Marcy recommends.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Looks like we're all talking the same
thing.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, not really. No, we're not
talking the same thing. Are you going to get half of the units this year
and half of the units next year?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I mean, are they going to be built or--
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- or you mean deferred?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Built and deferred, okay? You're
allocating deferrals to buildings that haven't even been approved for
construction yet.
Let's suppose tomorrow somebody begins to build these -- build
some things. I mean, we've just seen cases where we've had to
provide impact fee deferrals for people who didn't apply for them. In
other words, they're already built. Habitat for Humanity is an
example. We had to give them substantial credits for deferrals
because they were entitled to them, but they didn't apply for them at
the right time.
So suppose we have one of the many affordable housing units
that we have already approved who wants to get started building next
week or next month. What are we going to do with them? I mean,
shouldn't the deferrals be somehow tied to when the units are going to
be available for people to purchase rather than tied to a developer's
desire to leverage the construction through borrowings and
government grants?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner?
Page 187
March 11, 2008
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. But he -- I thought I heard him
say that in order for him to leverage some of this and get his loans, he
would need to assure the bank that he was going to get some of this.
So I thought if we split it up, still leave some in the pot for anybody
else who might come in and need some of those units and, like, pay
part now and part later so that we can split it up and it's not so much of
a blow to anyone of us -- or, you know, to anyone program, yet leave
some remaining, and yet he'd still be able to get his loans.
MS. KRUMBINE: Can I just --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And I would -- I would say to you
that, don't you believe that would have been known at the time this
project came about in the first place? Don't you -- don't you believe
that the developer knew where he was going to get his financing and
what he needed to do to put it in place? He's done it lots of times.
Why are we being asked to do this at the very last moment, to do
it today through public petition, you know? I am not convinced that
this cannot wait until sometime closer to the point when we're really
going to see some buildings coming out of the ground.
MR. KLOHN: May I please chime in?
Ifwe recall, if we revisit last year's CWHIP program, it was fatal
because the impact fee deferral program, for whatever reason the State
of Florida chose to deny the recognition of the impact fee deferrals,
we then worked all summer with staff, and I think I could safely say
even this commission on this program. So Commissioner Coyle, this
isn't, by any stretch, last minute. This has been in discussions and
ongoing for months and months and months.
The first formal recognition was in October of '07 with the
Affordable Housing Commission recommending an impact fee
deferral program specific to this project. That was the formal-- the
first formal item. But we've been in discussion on this months and
months and months earlier due to what happened in CWHIP last year.
And this is not a belt-and-suspenders approach to not lose points
Page] 88
March 11, 2008
or hurt or CWHIP application this year. We're really ready to go. We
need to now begin -- the time is now. We need to begin our
construction planning. No -- and I have no problem with splitting up
the impact fee deferrals so long as this commission makes absolute
certain that when we need them that they're readily available. I just
need to be able to tell our teachers and our policemen and our firemen
when they're coming into our door that CWHIP is available to you
because you're under 140 percent of AMI, impact fees deferrals are
available to you at a -- under 140 percent of AMI, and the other
programs. It's really one-stop shopping.
If you take the time to analyze what's in our book, this is the first,
and in my opinion, the best comprehensive program that's one-stop
shopping for anybody and everybody that's under 140 percent of AMI,
and with little to nothing down to get in the door and have the
opportunity of home ownership and limited appreciation.
This program commits to affordable in perpetuity which, by
definition in the State of Florida, is 30-year affordability. So splitting
it up is not a problem so long as we have the commitment that they're
available.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Marcy, do you have a
recommendation?
MS. KRUMBINE: Well, I just -- I did want to clarify a couple of
things for the record. And I'm back to these two types of impact fee
deferral programs. One is the cap at 225 units, rental and CWHIP
together. And, Commissioners, again, the clarification that you were
asked to establish an impact fee deferral program specific to CWHIP,
and you did that. You know, what was requested in the public petition
back in November, you did that in December. You did answer that.
So -- and then the other thing that I'd like to go to Commissioner
Coyle, and that is that we typically do impact fee deferrals right before
a developer is going to get their building permits. That's when they
come out.
Page ]89
March 11, 2008
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's the way I think it should
work.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. And Marcy, is there any -- any
need to set aside the CWHIP deferrals today?
MS. KRUMBINE: I think that the main concern about doing it
today was for the cure period. And would you like to -- Bill, would
you like to talk about what the -- what the people who scored the
application said, if anything, about the impact fee deferral program?
MR. KLOHN: The purpose of to day's public petition and the
hearing that we're in now was twofold. Number one, because of last
year's challenge to the impact fee deferral program that we had in our
pro forma, we wanted to make absolutely sure that if in the scoring
process the scorers', ugly heads reared one more time and did not
accept our impact fee deferrals, that we had this opportunity during
the cure period to be able to fix that. That was purpose number one to
come before you today.
Purpose number two, equally important, is that -- and I don't
think that Mr. Coyle will agree with me, but we believe that the time
is now for the impact fee deferral set aside for this project so that we
can begin our work with construction lending and having our housing
fairs and talking to all of the folks that need housing.
The fact -- and I did state that the prequalification is only good
for a 90-day period. We'll probably have to do that twice. Why twice?
Because to get our construction loan, we have to have the equivalent
of presales and we'll have to demonstrate that we have warm bodies
that want to be in this project. And some of them, hopefully most of
them, will be there when the project's complete and we'll have to do
some requalifying.
So it was twofold. One, to remedy the CWHIP if there was a
challenge; and number two, because the project is ready for it.
And I believe that it's prudent and appropriate to provide the
Florida Housing Finance Corporation any and all documentation that
Page 190
March 11, 2008
we can provide which supports the ordinances and the resolutions that
we utilized in our CWHIP application in that book.
And I don't think that it costs Collier County any money -- and I
can ask Amy Patterson to speak to this. But the type of deferral
program that we're talking about is not the Habitat money, which is
real money. This is a deferral of impact fee deferrals, and it's simply a
time value calculation of money. If Amy'd like to come up.
MS. KRUMBINE: No, but -- Norm is --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle, then
Commissioner Fiala.
MS. KRUMBINE: Norm is trying hard not to come up here.
And I do want to state that this will be a deferral of over $2.3 million
of real money that then will not get paid to the different impact fees.
So, you know, I understand what Mr. Klohn is saying, but these
are dollars that will not be paid into other -- that will not be able to be
used in other funds.
So -- and then the other point that I will make, Chairman,
because you asked, and that is, you asked the question, do we need to
do this now? In the affordable housing workshop one of the things
that you all decided and you've asked for us to come back -- and we
will in April with this resolution -- is to turn things around and give to
60 percent of the median income for the other impact fee deferral
program.
Well, I want to remind you that Ave Maria, Lennar Homes, a
number of developers, have come to you with proposals and have
started to go vertical on units that are serving up to 80 percent of the
median income with the idea, in a first-come first-serve impact fee
deferral program, that they might apply for impact fee deferrals on
those. And so now they won't have that opportunity.
And so, you know, now you've got somebody else that's coming
before you and asking for that certainty, and you might be setting a
precedent in that situation.
Page 191
March 11, 2008
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioners Coyle, then
Commissioner Fiala, and then I'd like to see if we can come to a
consensus.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. I would just like to
emphasize something that Marcy has said. You typically give impact
fee deferral right before the person is pulling a building permit; is that
correct?
MS. KRUMBINE: (Nods head.)
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's how you've treated
everybody else, right?
MS. KRUMBINE: Yes, that's correct.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. I do not see the urgency
here.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I wanted to go back first to
what you were saying. That's exactly -- I haven't been really happy
about the idea of taking all of our impact fees and just giving it to 60
percent and lowering, because I know that we have -- we have to have
a better balanced community than just that.
And just because a reporter makes $35,000 doesn't mean that
then that reporter shouldn't be able to buy a home because they make
just a little bit over whatever it is, the amount. I just feel that we
should be spread it out. Especially, as you point out, Ave Maria,
Lennar Homes -- and I don't know who else even -- but they're all
looking for those impact fees.
So when it comes back, I don't know how happy I'm going to be
about it, so I'm just letting you know in advance, okay?
The second thing I wanted to say is, I hear your urgency and you
make it sound as if people are lining up to buy the homes, but I'm here
to tell you, I live in Lakewood right here. There are -- there are places
-- there are condos for $125,000 and they're cheaper than what you're
selling. There are villas in there at 140- to 164,000, and there are
Page 192
March 11, 2008
homes going from there up to two and a quarter. I'll tell you, there's all
-- there's a plethora of homes out there, and that doesn't even count all
of the things that are in the foreclosure market right now.
And Marcy's coming back, what, in July to tell us what the
figures are then and how many homes we have on the market. So it
isn't like there's -- ifthere was that much of an urgency, these things
would be scooped up. So I don't know how much of an urgency there
actually is.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, you can see the comments of
the Board of Commissioners, but a -- reluctantly say no. So at this
time I'll entertain a motion to deny item 10E.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'll make the motion to deny it
because it is inconsistent with our normal practices of giving impact
fee deferrals.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Oh, I'm sorry.
MR. KLOHN: Commissioner, before there's any action taken, I
can't --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: lOD, lOD.
MR. KLOHN: Are we in D? I think we're in D.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: 10D.
MR. KLOHN: I can't tell you how important it is for this
program to have the commitment of this commission for impact fee
deferrals. You don't know the hundreds of hours and the hundreds and
hundreds of thousands of dollars that are in this book for Collier
County to be the highest scoring CWHIP application in the state. And
I tell you as fact, is that if it's denied today, there will be huge
consequences to this application.
I think that I can make it very easy for you to simply say, Mr.
Klohn and Fountain Lakes Residential Co-op, when you need the
impact fee deferrals, they will be there and available for you. I don't
need a commitment that they come out of this fiscal or next fiscal
Page 193
March 1], 2008
year. I just need the commitment that, when we need them, that they'll
be there.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It's my understanding we made that
commitment when you submitted your application.
MR. KLOHN: Yes, sir, this commission did.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Why do we have to do it twice?
MR. KLOHN: If that's --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's what we've been arguing
about, Mr. Klohn. You said you needed them right now, okay. And
we -- I don't believe you need them right now unless you're just
approaching this project with -- on such a thin financial basis that it's
the only way you can get it going, and if that's the case, I'm very
concerned about it.
What we've been talking about the whole time is the fact that you
came here on public petition and said you've got to have them today.
You've got to have them right now. Now you're saying exactly what
we've been saying all along; we'll give them to you whenever you
need them. Now, we've said that -- we said that when, last December?
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So we've just wasted an hour here
talking about something that really wasn't true.
MR. KLOHN: Well, I don't completely agree with you. In your
packets there's a letter addressed to the Florida Housing Finance
Corporation. If that letter can be modified to state that the impact fee
deferrals for the Fountain Lakes Residential Cooperative project are
available whenever needed, we can accept that today.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I would suggest you can accept our
decision in December, and that's what you submitted for your
application. That's as far as I'm willing to go. We've already made
the commitment to provide the deferrals whenever they're needed.
And -- I think we need to treat you and others all in a consistent
way. And if we traditionally provide these deferrals right before
Page 194
March 11, 2008
you're pulling a building permit, that's when you'll get them. And I'll
do everything I can to make sure you get them at that time.
I am not trying to undermine the project. What I am trying to do
is to make sure we do these things in a fair and consistent manner and
to make sure that we have some deferrals for other projects that we
already know are going to be asking for them.
And you know the financial constraints we're under. We have to
be careful about parceling these things out. We just can't throw a
bunch of deferrals out there and have them obligated and sitting there
for months and maybe even a year, if not more, before they're actually
used. We can't afford to do that.
MR. KLOHN: I understand. What--
CHAIRMAN HENNING: We're going to end this discussion.
We're going to move on.
So does anybody want to make a motion at this time?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I made a motion that we deny the
request to allocate these units now and that we make them available as
required when the units get their building permit.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Is there -- is there a second to the
motion?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, I'll second.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'll second that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner -- motion by
Commissioner Coyle, second by Commissioner Halas.
Is there any further discussion on the item?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion signify by
saymg aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
Page 195
March 11, 2008
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries unanimously.
Item #10E
A $99,000 BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2008 TO
MAKE UP FOR A SHORTFALL OF FUNDS AS A RESULT OF
THE POLICY DECISION NOT TO IMPLEMENT A PROPOSED
FEE COLLECTION STRUCTURE FOR THE EMERGENCY
MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT - APPROVED
Next one is 10E, recommendation to authorize 99,000 budget
amendment for fiscal year 2008 to make up for the shortfall funding
(sic) and a result of the policy decision not implemented (sic) a
proposed fee collection structure for emergency management
department.
Commissioners, the reason I reconsidered this, this department is
definitely essential service. My -- my concern is twofold. We're
saying the wrong thing -- we're sending the wrong message to our
constituents, and the second thing, we're about to enter the fire season.
Emergency management is a very integral part in that operation
during that season and, therefore, I'm going to make a motion that we
approve this item.
Is there a second to the motion?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'll second it for discussion.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Second the motion for discussion, by
Commissioner Fiala.
Discussion? Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No. I didn't have discussion.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: You don't have any discussion.
Page 196
March 11, 2008
Commissioner Coyle, do you have any discussion?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, I would just remind you that
this budget amendment was requested, in my opinion, because the
staff failed to follow our proper budgeting procedures. I believe
there's money in this budget, Mr. Summers' budget, that can deal with
this, and I do not see any significant effort to try to cover this budget
shortfall through any other way other than to come back to us and ask
us to make up for money that was spent when we clearly said we're
not going to provide you the additional revenues for this.
That should have been -- that should have been clear enough and
-- but all I've heard is, well, yeah, but I didn't think you meant it, so I
went ahead and spent the money anyway. So that's not good enough
for me.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah. What happened was, is they
reduced their budget by the policy from last year and, in turn, they
replaced their budget with a fee, and the fee wasn't adopted by the
board.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's right.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Right.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's right.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: So it's, you know, trying to make that
department whole. And, you know, if it was a thing like public
relations or administration's things, I wouldn't have reconsidered it.
Being that it is, in my opinion essential services, that's why I didn't ask
to bring it back.
Any further discussion? Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. When they say it's to help
defray regular operational costs, what does that really mean? I mean,
are they operating now? I just don't understand what that really means.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Mr. Summers, would you answer that
question, please?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And without the $99,000, do you
Page ] 97
March 11, 2008
close down? I don't know.
MR. SUMMERS: Yes, ma'am. For the record, good afternoon,
Dan Summers, Director of the Bureau of Emergency Services and
Emergency Management.
If I may, I can go to a brief pie chart that would show you some
of those operational costs and some of those things, if you'd like for
me to go into some detail.
But they are, in fact, just the general staples of our department. It
maintains our FEMA lines of communication, it maintains our
two-way -- it maintains our two-way radio equipment, it maintains the
software programs that we receive for hurricane evacuation decision
making, it provides us the meteorological support that we need as we
interpret fire weather conditions and support the fire departments and
EMS with emergency response criteria.
It is all of our global emergency preparedness efforts. These are
basic operating costs to maintain the homeland security emergency
preparedness preparing to, responding, recovering, and mitigating
from the effects of disasters and major emergency events.
There are no -- when I say there are no enhancements to this is
that we barely meet minimum standard for the State of Florida
Division of Emergency Management for capability, and these
capabilities, again, are communication linkages, our software, our
publications that we do, education and outreach, the global support
that we provide and all the emergency management programming that
has been relatively traditional over the years. That's what these costs
are.
There are virtually no capital costs associated with that in terms
of radios or cars or vehicles or anything like that. There hasn't been
any substantial capital except for one two-way radio put in the
emergency communications room this year.
So with that, it is general operational. And I'll be glad to show
you some additional, if you want.
Page 198
March 1 ], 2008
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Dan, why did you decide to give up
the $99,000 for -- in regards to coming up with some kind of a
program that you were going to basically cover, I believe it was
commercial buildings; isn't that correct?
MR. SUMMERS: Sir, there was a series of actions that we
recommended as alternatives in this discussion related to the
budgetary discussion. You all apparently were not comfortable with
our charging of review fees for hazardous materials. The charging to
nursing homes and rest homes for emergency plan review -- again, a
general statute activity -- possibly even charging for the special needs
population to register with us, which is a fair amount of our expense to
make sure that we track and have the support mechanisms in place
during times of disaster for the special needs program.
We wanted to charge for hazardous materials and negligently
caused fire events that may cause an evacuation scenario or damage to
the environment were emergency expenditures needed to be made
outside of a presidential disaster declaration, or certainly in the cases
where we see less and less support from Tallahassee, state emergency
management and state resources as response to emergency events.
So there were a myriad of initiatives there that were a stretch but
certainly something that we could take a look at. And as you all have
addressed, your desire to maintain a readiness standard, a public safety
standard, health, welfare, we are part ofthat mix in emergency project
24 by seven.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. You -- were you -- at the
time that you decided to give up the $99,000, did you feel from the
board that there would be an ordinance passed to compensate for the
funds that you decided that you weren't going to use out of ad
valorem?
MR. SUMMERS: Sir, it was not necessarily an issue of giving
up 99,000. It was, how would we maintain budget guidance and
Page 199
March 11, 2008
address that 99,000 as a force to balance, if you will.
It was very clear to me -- and again, I've apologized to you for
any misunderstanding -- that it was very clear that the budget was
approved first with the 99,000 being included as part of our regular
operational budget, again, lower than it was last year, than the
previous year, and that at a later date an ordinance would be -- an
ordinance addressing those fee initiatives, a new fee revenue would
come back to you for discussion later after the beginning of the fiscal
year. And I brought that to you on October the 9th.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: So in reality, any way you cut the
pie, you're $99,000 short?
MR. SUMMERS: Yes, sir. And to looking at this chart here, I
think there were a couple things I'd like to share with you -- if we have
this on the visualizer -- that I think are very important for this
department and for you to see. Let me make this full size, please.
It's important that -- for our department this is the breakdown.
Our emergency office supplies and minor office equipment is only
$l6,000. Our communication support, around 9,000. If you'll notice
that we work hard -- you know, there was no capability here to
provide emergency sheltering and evacuation supplies here three years
ago. We brought that the very first year I was here, and we've
maintained some capability.
Thirty-one thousand dollars, a part of that 99,000, allows me to
very quickly get a jump start on renting supplies and equipment that
might be necessary for an event, a major event. If I don't use that
31,000, it goes back. I don't spend it. It is only for equipment
contingency rental for an event, a wildfire or a hurricane.
You take that $31,000 away from me and I come to you later for
funding for rental equipment, then I'm behind the eightball in our
ability to respond for the community. Special needs -- so that
event-dependent rentals comes back to you at end of the year.
Special needs client outreach includes mailing and
Page 200
March 11, 2008
communications, our drills and exercises. Our special projects,
$19,000. We're working with Robert Wiley and providing some
technical support for him on floodplain management, and other special
projects, and then uncontrollable or non-controllable costs, about
57,000 or 27 percent of our budget, such as fleet, information
technology administration -- I mean -- I'm sorry, operations and
overhead.
So what you see here is a very typical, albeit lean, emergency
management program. And with all of the out -- all of the things that I
venture into with looking after dependent fire districts, emergency
management activity, my support to EMS MedFlight and the medical
examiner, and maintain that emergency operations center and team
with a readiness posture, sir, I think we do a very good job of
leveraging the available funds that we have. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. I'm going to ask the
commissioners two questions. Number one, where does the money
come from to make up this $99,000 shortfall? And two, what are you
going to do when the next department head comes up with a budget
shortfall and wants you to make it up for them? What are you going to
do about that?
This was a case where Mr. Summers knew that we disapproved
the revenue, he knew that it was going to be a $99,000 shortage for
him, last year, right?
MR. SUMMERS: No, sir, I don't recall that whatsoever,
respectfully. I just -- that was not in the budget.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Let me ask it a different way, Mr.
Summers. When we refused to approve your increase in revenues,
what did that tell you?
MR. SUMMERS: Sir, it told me that -- and with all the
discussions that I had with the office of management and budget --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: What did it tell you when we voted
Page 201
March 11, 2008
not to approve your increase in revenues?
MR. SUMMERS: Sir, the message to me was clear that you did
not want emergency management charging for services, but I had no
understanding whatsoever that you had a desire to go back and change
a prior approved budget on an existing budget amount.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So if a budget is presented and we
say, the revenue that was budgeted for that budget is no longer
approved, doesn't that tell you something?
MR. SUMMERS: No, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You've got -- well, it tells me
something, and maybe you need to talk about -- talk to the county
manager about budgeting procedures.
But the point is that Mr. Summers said that all along he thought
that we were going to make this up with a general fund transfer, okay.
So he did know about it, he knew about the shortfall, and the county
manager had to tell Mr. Summers that he was out of whack on his
budget and he had to come in and get our approval to do something
with it. This was not a mistake.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I understand the time frame of it. We
didn't pass an ordinance to charge a fee. That's how he was making up
for what was reduced last year. So now he's coming in for a budget
amendment.
MR. SUMMERS: Sir, it was clear to me that it was a desire for
you to have or a desire for us to have a new revenue stream, and we
projected that revenue stream as 99,000. It was a revenue-generating
discussion, not an issue, as I understood, respectfully, not as an issue
of decreasing an operational budget by 99-, but to bring additional
revenue that would assist the general fund and the department.
And please, Commissioners, I would not deliberately move
forward in that direction with -- unless I thought the direction was
clear.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta?
Page 202
March 11, 2008
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you. Mr. Summers, I
believe you, and I know that this money is needed out in the field to
be able to cover those emergencies that are coming up. I -- the choice
is going to be ours. It's ours right now to be able to accept or refuse it.
That's how simple it is. And so what's the choices? Do we want to
do without the basic protection? I mean, we just went through this
with EMS.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Right.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: We can't live without it. I really
don't know where the issue is. I think there's been some
misinterpretation, some misunderstanding, but we need to get on with
this here and get Mr. Summers back there to work.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any further discussion on the item?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Seeing none, all in favor of the
motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries, 4-1.
MR. SUMMERS: Thank you, Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Apologize for that heated discussion.
Item #10F
RESOLUTION 2008-64: A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE
ACQUISITION BY GIFT OR PURCHASE OF THE FEE SIMPLE
INTERESTS NECESSARY FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF
STORMW A TER RETENTION AND TREATMENT PONDS
Page 203
March 11, 2008
REQUIRED FOR THE EXPANSION OF RANDALL
BOULEVARD FROM IMMOKALEE ROAD TO DESOTO
BOULEVARD. (PROJECT NO. 60065.) ESTIMATED FISCAL
IMPACT: $2,400,000.00 - ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to lOF.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah. lOF says --
MR. MUDD: It's a recommendation--
CHAIRMAN HENNING: The chairman will-- is asking for--
to adopt a resolution authorizing the acquisition of fee -- purchase of
fee simple interest necessary for the construction of stormwater and
treatment ponds required for the expansion of Randall Boulevard from
Immokalee Road to DeSoto. Project number 60065. Estimated fiscal
impact of $2.4 million.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Motion to approve.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: There was a motion by Commissioner
Fiala.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Second by -- Commissioner Coyle,
was it?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yep.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yep. Any discussion on the motion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion signify by
saymg aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
Page 204
March 11, 2008
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Carries unanimous.
Item # lOG
RECOMMENDATION THAT THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS (BCC) CONSIDER INPUT PROVIDED BY
THE CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD DURING THEIR
FEBRUARY 12,2008 MEETING, IN RESPONSE TO THE BCC'S
REQUEST FOR GUIDANCE CONCERNING A FAIR
SETTLEMENT AMOUNT RELATING TO THE RELEASE OF
THE CODE ENFORCEMENT LIEN IMPOSED AGAINST
ROBERT LOCKHART, IN CASE NO. 2004-26, RELATING TO
PROPERTY LOCATED 1361 LAKE SHORE DRIVE IN COLLIER
COUNTY, FLORIDA - MOTION TO ACCEPT 50% OF
REDUCTION OF FINES AND PAYMENT OF OUTSTANDING
IMP ACT FEES - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, the next item is lOG. It's a
recommendation the Board of County Commissioners, BCC, consider
input provided by the Code Enforcement Board during their February
12,2008, meeting in response to the BCC's request for guidance
concerning the fair settlement amount relating to the release of the
code enforcement lien imposed against Robert Lockhart in case
number 2004-26, relating to property located at 1361 Lake Shore
Drive in Collier County, Florida.
Ms. Michelle Arnold, your Director of Code Enforcement, will
present.
MS. ARNOLD: For the record, Michelle Arnold, Director of
Code Enforcement.
This matter is being brought back to you at your request. At a
prior meeting, a February 12th meeting, the board asked or gave
direction to ask the Code Enforcement Board for their
Page 205
March 11, 2008
recommendation as to how to settle this request for abatement of lien
from -- by Robert Lockhart.
The matter was brought before the Code Enforcement Board at
their last meeting, and there was a tie vote. There was a motion to
recommend a reduction to 25 percent of the outstanding fund, which
would bring the fee to l4,000, roughly, and that recommendation
failed 3-3.
The board members polled themselves, and of those three that
voted against the recommendation, two of them were in favor of a
reduction to 50 percent of the outstanding fine, and the third board
member was in favor of lOO percent of the fine being -- remaining.
So I just wanted to bring that back to the board so you all
understood what the Code Enforcement Board's recommendation was
and also to point out that there is an opinion from staff that there's
some outstanding impact fees that are due, and Mr. Lockhart has
presented, and it has been provided to you all for your review, his
position on that outstanding impact fee.
And in addition to asking your direction for what to do with the
proposal for abatement of fines, we would like to request that you all
direct staff as to what to do with the impact fee cost as well.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. I, for one, am not going
to allow an abatement of the impact fees when everybody else and his
brother has to pay them. I mean, if the man can prove that he's paid
them and we're at fault, that's a whole different story.
As far as the fines go, I still believe that the fine is exorbitant,
that something should have been done early on. Of course, let's be
honest, the gentleman's not that easy to work with sometimes, but it
doesn't remove the fact that it's an exorbitant fine.
And I still hold to the fact that I think 50 percent reduction would
be fair, and I'm just throwing that out for discussion. I'm not making a
motion at this moment.
Page 206
March 11, 2008
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Anybody else? Comments?
Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: After reviewing the process and
how belligerent this gentleman has been in regards to not paying his
fair share -- and also this gentleman has been on the Code
Enforcement Board. He should fully understand the obligations that,
as he stood -- or sat on the Code Enforcement Board, I'm sure that he
heard many cases in regards to something that was very similar to this.
And I, for one, because of the fact that he has been somewhat not
in a position to come to any real means on this, I have to go along with
what the Code Enforcement Board people were polled at, in that since
this has been carrying on he's had a chance to come to some kind of a
conclusion, we gave him an option, he didn't want to accept that, so
now I've come to the conclusion that he needs to pay the full amount.
And also I believe now we found out that there may be some impact
fees that have to be paid also.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas, can I ask you,
how has Mr. Lockhart been belligerent?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: He has been -- well, let me put it
this way. He has stated that he is not going to pay this, that he does
not feel that he owes this particular amount of a fine. I believe that
this has been an ongoing process and that he has not taken the
necessary steps to rectify the problem.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, that isn't what I got. He came
to us to ask if we can reduce the fine. That isn't saying that he doesn't
want to pay it.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: When--
CHAIRMAN HENNING: To me that's not belligerent at all.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, let me put it this way. I think
that when he came to us there was discussion by the board and they
were talking basically of dropping this down 25 percent. If I
remember correctly, Mr. Lockhart came back to the board and said he
Page 207
March ] 1, 2008
wasn't going to -- he wasn't going to pay the 25 percent.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, I mean, it's a matter of
settlement. Mr. Lockhart, did you sign up as a public speaker?
MR. LOCKHART: No, sir, I didn't.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
MR. LOCKHART: I thought being on the agenda -- but my
mistake again.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: No, no, that's fine. It's the board's
item on the agenda.
MR. LOCKHART: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Please stand.
Commissioner Coletta, I'm going to make a motion that we
accept the 50 percent reduction of fines and also that the impact fees
shall be paid.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'll be happy to second that if
Mr. Lockhart agrees to this and ends it at this point in time, that he's
going to pay it and that's the end of it. If he can't agree to that, then
I'm not going to just bring it down for further negotiation in the future.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: No. What happens -- no. What
happens if he doesn't accept it, it goes to 100 percent. That's what
happens if he doesn't accept it. It goes back to the full amount.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's part of your motion?
MS. ARNOLD: That's actually in there, that if -- whatever
reduction amount --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: It's reality.
MS. ARNOLD: -- it is, there's a 30-day period to pay it, and if
it's not paid after that time period, then it --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: My motion follows then
according to that. But I never want to see this come back again.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah, no kidding.
Michelle, I have a question. Is there a permit for this? Was he
March 11, 2008
MS. ARNOLD: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Don't you collect impact fees at
permit?
MS. ARNOLD: I believe that's the time that the impact fees are
collected.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
MS. ARNOLD: So -- Amy is here, that -- she can probably
answer that question a lot better than 1.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I know the answer to it. I don't know
why you're not doing what the board has asked you to do or -- not
you. Or why, you know, this wasn't collected at the time of permit.
That's all.
Mr. Lockhart.
MR. LOCKHART: Thank you for the opportunity to speak.
The issue regarding the impact fees was a surprise to me when I
got the letter January 16th -- when I got the permit in October and
paid for the fees when I picked up the permit.
They had made reference initially to square footage of the
building being based on the property appraiser's data. I provided, and
I believe you have a copy of it, information from the original survey
when the house was built back in '72. And using the CAD system,
computed the square footage with the accurate based on actual
surveyed measurements.
And the area of the house was larger than what the property
appraisers used as their database. To make a long story short, I fell
about 15 feet above or below, depending on the opinion of the
transition between the 1 ,500-square- foot home and over 1,500-square
foot home.
So bottom line, I have always thought that I paid all my impact
fees that were due. And my letter, I believe, speaks for itself that I
believe the correct square footages, if they were used, would prevail
with that statement.
Page 209
March 11, 2008
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Is impact fees based upon living area
or total area?
MS. PATTERSON: Amy Patterson, for the record. Impact fees
for all categories but fire are based on the living area of the home.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Can you -- is there any way to verify
what is really truly owed by square foot?
MS. PATTERSON: The information that I have available to me
is that of the original building permit application from 1972. I do have
a copy, and it was attached to your package, which reflects 1,482
square feet. That is consistent on the original drawing on the property
card, which was then adjusted up to 1,990 square feet of living area;
however, we do not have a building permit for that additional 5 --
400'ish, 500 square feet, which would have been the first time that he
pushed from the less than 1,500 square feet to over 1,500 square feet,
thereby triggering the assessment of additional impact fees.
We have another building permit for the 400 square, which,
again, it keeps him in the same category, but if we don't talk about the
first 500-square-foot problem, we still have the 400 square feet of the
2007 permit which would then push him over the tier.
And the only option I had here was to accept -- he did -- Mr.
Lockhart did provide a letter saying that the field notes reflect that the
actual living area of the home was 1,505 square feet. I have nothing
to show that, no proof to validate that, and I -- it's not within my
authority to accept a letter or something like this, and that's why this
issue is in front of the board. If they feel this is acceptable, that would
eliminate the need for him to pay additional impact fees. But I don't
have the authority to waive those fees myself.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Right. Well, we don't want to waive
fees. I think the concern is what is actually there on the ground.
MS. PATTERSON: I have a property card that reflects 1,990
square feet of living area on the ground, but only 1,482 of that do I
have a building permit for. So I have a 500-square-foot discrepancy
Page 210
March 11, 2008
of unpermitted space.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All right. Is there any way to take a
measuring tape and go over there and figure out the envelope?
MS. PATTERSON: I believe that's what the property appraiser
does by outside area. But I don't think the question is that. It's rather
when the additional 500 square feet -- we don't have a permit for it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. Michelle, I don't have a
release and satisfaction of lien in my packet. So the recommendation
here is that the chairman sign that release and satisfaction of lien.
MS. ARNOLD: Once you all determine what that percentage is
-- it was difficult for us to prepare one in advance or -- and we
wouldn't normally prepare one until the payment is received.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. I -- okay. The one that is
attached here in our packet is a release and satisfaction of lien for
$2,907.50. I want to make sure there is no confusion whatsoever.
Because if we approve the recommendations, which is to sign the
attached release and satisfaction of lien, then what we're approving is
a satisfaction and lien settlement of $2,907.50.
MS. ARNOLD: No, I'm sorry. That executive summary was
attached as an attachment. That was a previous one that you all had.
The new executive summary has a table before and the
recommendation --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah.
MS. ARNOLD: -- says -- it does say attached release, but there
isn't one that has been attached.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. But that can be very, very
confusing --
MS. ARNOLD: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- because that is the
recommendation of the board, according to this particular agenda,
because it has the date of March 11, 2008 on it. It doesn't have the
Page 211
March 11, 2008
original date on it.
MS. ARNOLD: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So let me make sure I understand.
We're talking about a payment by Mr. Lockhart of $29,575 plus the
$3,970.54 impact fee.
MS. ARNOLD: That's what the motion is, yes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Mr. Lockhart, do you have anything
before we --
MR. LOCKHART: Just again, there is no 500 square feet
missing. It's the garage that is the difference between the total square
footage that the property appraiser has of the 1,900.
And again, I do have, as I mentioned, the actual survey slab final
building that has the actual measurements, and the total house is 2,019
square feet, not 1,990. Again, the property appraiser's information is
rounded, as I talked to that department, and they typically don't
provide that information for the impact fee department to use. But
again, I'd be happy to resolve this today.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah. The -- you know, the motion is
to pay the impact fees, and all I'm asking for staff is to verify that's a
correct impact fee, okay?
All right. Any other discussion?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Could I just clarify something?
Would it make any difference if it's 1,900 or 2,100 square feet? The
difference is at the break of 1,500, if! remember correctly; isn't that
correct?
MS. PATTERSON: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So as long as it's over 1,500, it
doesn't make any difference what the figure is.
MS. PATTERSON: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: The impact fee is the same.
MS. PATTERSON: Correct.
Page 212
March 11, 2008
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So this argument of it's 2,100
square feet of 1,900 square feet is irrelevant to the calculation of the
impact fee?
MS. PATTERSON: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So there's no need to verify
anything because Mr. Lockhart has already said that his house is
bigger than 1,400 square feet.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: The only difference is living area
versus storage area, such as garage.
MS. PATTERSON: Correct. And we believe we have the
correct calculation. Again, I have an original building permit from
1972, which I'm required to use as my point of reference, referring to
1,482 square feet of living area. I have nothing to say the house is any
bigger until now when we are greater than 1,500 square feet, thereby
the need for the assessment of the additional impact fees.
Again, I can't accept a letter or original survey notes. That's
outside of my authority to accept those. But if there were other proof
that the home was bigger than 1,500 square feet originally when
constructed, then there wouldn't be additional impact fees owed. I just
don't have that proof.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All right. Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor ofthe motion, signify by
saymg aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries, 4-1; Commissioner
Halas dissenting.
Page 213
March 11, 2008
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Before we go to the next point
of business --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- Commissioner Henning?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: If I may?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: John Norman, would you please
approach the dais? Please, come this way, sir. John Norman is the
aide for David Rivera. He's been a great asset to this county for a long
time. Please come up front, sir. You can leave your coffee cup
behind.
MR. NORMAN: No.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. I don't blame you. Jim
DeLony looks like he might take it.
Today -- I believe it's today -- is John Norman's birthday.
MR. NORMAN: No.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Tomorrow?
MR. NORMAN: No.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: When?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It was three weeks ago.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, no. It's just around the
corner. It's the next couple of days, and we won't be here in session.
MR. NORMAN: Eleven more days.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Eleven more days, but we won't
be back in session before then. And I think that this commission
would like to wish you a happy birthday, sir.
MR. NORMAN: As long as you don't sing Happy Birthday.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Commissioner Fiala, what do
you think?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, I think we ought to honor that
wish.
Page 214
March 1], 2008
MR. NORMAN: And not sing it?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. Happy birthday, John.
MR. NORMAN: Thank you, sir.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you.
MR. NORMAN: Appreciate that.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you, Chairman.
Item #10H
CONTRACT #08-5011, TO D.N. HIGGINS, INCORPORATED;
KYLE CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION; QUALITY
ENTERPRISES, INCORPORATED; MITCHELL AND STARK
CORPORATION; AND HASKINS, INCORPORATED, IN THE
ESTIMATED AMOUNT OF $2,000,000 FOR UNDERGROUND
CONTRACTOR SERVICES - APPROVED
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Next item is lOH.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. It's a recommendation to approve a
contract 08-5011, D.N. Higgins, Incorporated, Kyle Construction
Incorporation -- excuse me -- the D.N. Higgins, Incorporated, and
Kyle Construction Corporation and Quality Enterprises, Incorporated,
and Mitchell & Stark Corporation and Haskins, Incorporated, in the
established amount of $2 million for the underground contractor
servIces.
Mr. Paul Mattausch, your Director of Water, will present.
MR. MATTAUSCH: For the record, Paul Mattausch, Water
Department. I think I was here just about seven hours ago in the same
place.
Our recommendation is to award the contract for underground
services in the estimated amount of $2 million and to authorize the
chairman to sign that contract after the review by the County
Attorney's Office.
Page 215
March 11, 2008
There are several departments that require these services for
underground contractors, and this is -- this is when a water main
breaks at three o'clock in the morning in the middle of U.S. 41 and we
need help. This is for our underground utility services contractors.
Services are provided either as a scheduled job, if it's something
that we know that we need ahead of time as a replacement of a broken
valve in the system. What we do is we get -- we get quotes from the
five contractors that are under the service, the annual service contract,
and we award to the lowest of those five bidders.
On an emergency basis though, these contractors are kept on a
rotating schedule and kept available for response for emergency
repairs, like U. S. 41.
Eleven vendors were notified, seven bidders downloaded, and the
committee -- the committee selected five top-rank firms. And it's my
recommendation to approve this underground services contract.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Questions? I have a question. Is
there any questions?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: The -- Paul, don't you have staff on
an emergency basis for these repairs?
MR. MATTAUSCH: We are -- we are neither trained, prepared,
nor equipped to handle this kind of thing. We don't have large
backhoes, excavators, that kind of equipment. It's very costly to do
that and to have staff trained to do that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Do you know if your counterpart
does, the guy on the other end? When it goes down the toilet, does his
crew have --
MR. MATTAUSCH: No. And this contract is for both the water
and wastewater departments, and transportation also uses this contract.
This is -- this is not just for the water department. I'm representing
those other departments.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I looked at the bids, and they're really
Page 2]6
March 11, 2008
close on the performance what -- how much it is per hour and stuff
like that. But the only thing is, on page 5 of 22, number 5, it's to
notice -- the county to the contractor shall be deemed -- shall be
mailed by registered mail, then the address, of Mitchell & Stark, and
that's just -- that's one of the contractors.
MR. MATT AUSCH: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: So is the other ones, the other ones
besides Mitchell & Stark, they're going to notify Mitchell & Stark?
Who's the other ones, Higgins?
MR. MATTAUSCH: I'm not sure I understand the question, sir.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, I believe -- I believe what you
have in your packet is an example of what the contract will look like.
This is not the actual one. And each one will change names by the
contractor that's put into the process.
MR. DeLONY: Mr. Mudd is correct.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: The first page says agreement and
then the number of agreement. It doesn't say example.
MR. DeLONY: Yes, sir. If! may, sir--
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas?
MR. DeLONY: Page l, sir, is an example. It -- and it is
agreement -- and there will be five of these. This particular example
that's on 1, page 4 of 22, is the one, for example, that Mitchell & Stark
will sign, but the other four firms will sign a same form of agreement
that is in this attachment, and they're all the same, just the names
change from one firm to the other.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. I make a motion for approval.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: There's a motion by Commissioner
Halas, second by Commissioner Fiala to approve the -- what are we
approving, the contract?
Page 2] 7
March 11, 2008
COMMISSIONER HALAS: We're approving --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: The contract.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: -- the contract of $2 million for
underground contractor services.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion, signify by
saymg aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries unanimously.
MR. MATTAUSCH: Thank you, Commissioners.
Item #lOI
AWARD ANNUAL CONTRACT #08-5020 TO SOUTHWEST
FLORIDA MITIGATION LLC, LITTLE PINE ISLAND
MITIGATION BANK AND SOUTHWEST FLORIDA
WETLANDS JOINT VENTURE FOR WETLAND MITIGATION
CREDITS AND SOUTHWEST FLORIDA WETLANDS JOINT
VENTURE FOR PANTHER HABITAT UNITS. BID NO. 08-5020.
PROJECTED ANNUAL EXPENDITURES: $1.5 MILLION -
APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Commissioners, the next item is number 10I, and
that's to recommend to award the annual contract number 08-5020 to
Southwest Florida Mitigation, LLC, Little Pine Island Mitigation
Bank, and Southwest Florida Wetlands Joint Venture for wetland
mitigation credits and Southwest Florida Wetlands Joint Venture for
Page 2]8
March 11, 2008
panther habitat units.
It's bid number 08-5020. Projected annual expenditures is around
$1.5 million. Mr. Kevin Dugan, your Project Manager for
Transportation, will present.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Mr. Chairman, can I ask a
question?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Sure, please, ask a question.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Before you do that, I'd like to ask
you a question. Is there a lower cost alternative to getting these kinds
of mitigation credits?
MR. DUGAN: For the record, I'm Kevin Dugan. I'm a Project
Manager with Transportation.
And to answer that, yes, there is, with the Conservation Collier
properties that -- you know, in particular with the Starnes property that
they've already acquired. We're starting negotiations tomorrow with
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to determine the amount of panther
habitat units we can acquire off that.
And our low number right now is about 7,000 PHUs. And for the
next couple years, that will keep us in panther units, and then we can
start looking at wetland units on these properties. These larger
properties, it takes a little bit longer. We'll probably be six months to
a year trying to work out wetland units.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Do you have an idea of how
much money that will save us over this particular proposal?
MR. DUGAN: Well, what we're looking at right now, like for
Golden Gate Boulevard, we're looking at 476 panther habitat units,
and that would have to be paid probably in the next eight months. So
with Starnes in place, we'd save that, you know, 400 -- 600,000 plus.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Good, good. Now, let me ask you
another question. If we approve these contracts with these mitigation
banks, why should we approve these if there is a lower cost
alternative?
Page 219
March 1], 2008
MR. DUGAN: Okay. These are like a stopgap method--
measure right now. Just because we sign a contract doesn't mean we
have to use it. But I mean, when we went out for this, it was just one
place that we could get panther habitat units. There were several new
banks coming on-line. We looked at those hoping to get competition,
better prices. Obviously we didn't. But I mean with -- you know,
with the Conservation Collier properties now -- you know, again,
Starnes has already been acquired -- we can start the process of, you
know, driving mitigation off those properties.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. So this is just a temporary
process? I mean, you can use them or not use them --
MR. DUGAN: Correct
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- as you see fit?
Then I make a recommendation for approval.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: There's a motion by Commissioner
Coyle, second by Commissioner Fiala. We do have a speaker.
MS. FILSON: Yes, sir, we have one speaker. Wilton White.
MR. WHITE: Hi. Good afternoon, everyone. Wilton White. I
represent the White Family Panther Conservation Bank, the banks that
Mr. Dugan is referring to.
We were the second least bidder. And my hope was that if you
are not yet able to use your own mitigation for panther habitats and if
the first-place bidder was somehow not able to provide those
stand-alone units -- because U.S. Fish and Wildlife has told me that
they're uncertain that they can sell stand-alone units not linked with
wetlands units -- that you would, perhaps, name a second and third
place award winner so that you could go down the list.
As Mr. Dugan will tell you, we are not yet approved, but here's
our bank proposal that went to U.S. Fish and Wildlife in October, and
we believe we're a matter of weeks, maybe a couple months away,
from being approved.
Page 220
March 11, 2008
So all I'm asking is to be second place if you need us. Thank
you.
MR. DUGAN: Well, in speaking with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, you know, they've agreed to work us with, that they will find
us the cheapest alternatives for the PHUs, and if need be, we can go
to, you know, amend this contract to, you know, find the cheapest
rates available.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: If this board decides to buy Pepper
Ranch -- and it's my understanding that we're going through seeing if
we can get some mitigation -- will this help drive the cost down?
MR. DUGAN: Let me put it this way. Ifwe acquire Pepper
Ranch and did a quick and dirty on the panther habitat units on that,
that's over 30,000. I doubt this county will ever need 30,000 panther
habitat units. Wetland units alone on that are over 300. So, I mean,
we won't need the services of mitigation banks ever again if -- once
we get those.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: What we're going to do is drive the
cost way down to where the county owns this and --
MR. DUGAN: Well, these would be -- I mean, the units that we
get off of these private -- or these public lands can only be used for,
you know, for public projects. We cannot sell--
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
MR. DUGAN: -- these projects to individuals.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Got it. Okay. So it takes --
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, when we -- years ago when we had
a different director of construction in transportation, we were talking
very seriously -- and Mr. Dugan was part of that discussion -- about
starting a county roamer, okay? And when we had that roamer
conversation with the banks, some of the banks that are listed on this
page, the going rate for wetland units and for panther units that came
along with them were around $20,000, okay. This is three times as
Page 221
March 11, 2008
much for wetland units as it was four years ago when we were having
a roamer discussion.
This board needs to have options, okay, or what happens is you
become -- you fall victim to an escalation. I'm not saying their prices
haven't risen in order to keep their restoration projects working, but I
believe the conservation program is your -- as you specified to staff,
has given you great leverage in this argument.
And I believe there's also continuing negotiations with the Collier
family out in -- out in the rural lands to talk about some other
opportunities for panther units and wetland units -- and wetland units
for the county.
But I don't have the details yet. We've talked concept but we
haven't got into very specifics.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Mr. Chairman, can I ask a
question?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Ask me? I probably won't be able to
answer it.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Oh, okay. You said we can't sell
any excess units that we might own to individuals. Can we sell them
to other governmental agencies?
MR. DUGAN: Yes. I mean, like school board and that sort of
thing, yes. But I mean --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Can we sell them to governmental
units outside the county?
MR. DUGAN: I believe for certain transportation ones we could.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's exciting. I like that. Okay,
good.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any further discussion?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And how about -- how about
wetland mitigation credits? Can we get any of those?
MR. DUGAN: It takes longer to get the wetland mitigation
because work has to be done to either restore or, you know, recreate
Page 222
March 11, 2008
the wetlands. So it generally takes longer than the panther habitat
units, which essentially is putting a conservation unit on the property
and, you know, you get the units for that.
You can get more by enhancing the property like removing
exotics. But again, you know, with the Conservation Collier, with
their ordinance, it requires that they do maintenance.
Anything over and above, like restoration of wetlands, the
creation of wetlands, the departments needing the mitigation can pay
for that or repay Conservation Collier for the efforts they've done.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Good. That sounds good. Thank
you.
MR. MUDD: The only -- the only piece I'd add to Kevin's
argument about wetland units, wetland -- wetland units are location
specific. People get real antsy when you want to do wetland
mitigation and you're using wetlands from -- you're disturbing down
here in South Florida and you're using a bank in North Florida. That
doesn't go. That doesn't fly and they won't -- so proximity when you
get into the wetland units. But because panthers roam, it's easier to
use in a wider area.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any further discussion on the
motion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion signify by
saymg aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
Page 223
March 11,2008
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Carries unanimously.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, the next item is 10J, and you'll
notice on your agenda that it's been continued until March 25, 2008,
further continued to then.
Item #10K
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE (MISCELLANEOUS
ITEMS TO FILE FOR RECORD WITH ACTION AS DIRECTED) -
MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM EXCEPT FOR SECTION #lB3 -
APPROVED
The next item on your agenda is 10K, and it used to be 1611,
which was miscellaneous correspondence -- miscellaneous items to
file for record with actions as directed. This item was asked to be
pulled by Commissioner Halas.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yep. One of the things that bothers
me, and that is changing of the minutes that do not reflect what was
written on -- what was written and also what was recorded.
And at this time I'd like to pass out to each of the commissioners
the written agenda or the written document of the minutes and at the
same time, I'd like to play the DVD.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I might be able to save some time.
And I don't know why this is a big issue. But Commissioner Halas --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Oops, excuse me.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Excuse me -- Halas informed me of
his conversation with Congressman Mario Diaz-Balart of what I said
on the record that I spoke to him about sidewalks. And, you know,
reflecting that, I didn't want to rebut him because I didn't see any sense
in it because he's correct, I didn't talk to him. I talked to his staff and
also talked to Congressman Mario -- or Congressman Mack's staff.
Page 224
March 11, 2008
So I wanted to correct the record to reflect of what actually did
happen. So I don't see any need to play the tape. And--
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I think it's important because I
think it --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: May I finish, please? It's -- a person
has the floor can talk (sic). I mean, I don't want to get you upset.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: You're not getting me upset, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: But -- well, it kind of appears that
way.
But anyways, I just want to reflect of the action that was taken
place, so that's why I wanted to put that -- the addendum to the
minutes in the miscellaneous correspondence.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Good. I believe that the full
readings of the minutes on this also shows that the -- Commissioner
Henning made an additional statement about the dialogue with
Representative Diaz- Balart, and I believe that you tried to cover that a
second ago.
I also believe that the -- Commissioner Henning identified a
personal conversation that took place the night before the meeting as
the point of contact with Representative Mack. And as we go through
the video, if the county manager would key that up so we can see the
video, I think you'll see that, I believe that your statements and the
way that the -- the way that you presented the facts could very well
have swayed the commission in regards to putting something on our
list -- the priority list that I questioned at some length with you.
And then if you remember when the vote was taken, I believe
that I voted no, and then you challenged me and said, when you go to
Washington, are you going to represent everything that was put on the
-- on the agenda, and I said, yes, I would.
And I think also that in that course of action I said that I didn't
feel comfortable with the added items because the prior visit told us
that items of this nature were not to be put on the agenda, okay.
Page 225
March 11, 2008
So would you roll the tape, and then you can also look at the --
what was written on the minutes.
(The DVD is being played.)
"MS. WIGHT: -- they are recommended by
our lobbyist, the Ferguson Group.
I can tell you that most of the nine are
continued projects that were on our agenda
from last year, and I also want to tell you
that our legislative program, I'm very
pleased, and the commission could be very
pleased. You do know that the '08 agenda, we
did get $3 million in awards for our projects,
six of the nine projects.
And with the WURTA authorizations, which
is another $5 million --"
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioners, this is going to take a
while. I mean, if I could just say that I did say Congressman Mario
Diaz- Balart and I did say Connie Mack. What I meant to say was I
did talk to Congressman Mario Diaz-Balart's staff and I did talk to
Congressman Mack's staff.
I don't see why this is a big issue. It's just correcting. But if
Commissioner Halas wants to make this an issue, we can go ahead and
listen to what it said and I can verify that I said it.
"COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- start going
over it with the Congressmen to the point
where you lose their attention.
I know recently the -- we met the
legislative committee for the Regional
Planning Council, and we reduced it down from
Page 226
March 11, 2008
like 55-some items down to about nine with the
idea being that, you know, some -- a lot of
items are repetitious, a lot of them, you know
you don't stand a chance to get, and it just
distracts from the ones that are most
important for the well-being of the community.
MS. WIGHT: And in supplementing that
comment, I did talk to Congressman
Diaz-Balart's legislative director. She
called me last night, and she was -- she had
spoken to our lobbyist, Amanda Wood, and
reviewed our proposed list, and she was very
pleased that it was down to nine or 10, and
she does understand pending board approval.
She said that a couple of large counties
came in with 30 and 50 and they just dreaded
it. And because of our preparation and
prioritized list, it was definitely -- it was
just well received and appreciated.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. First of all,
I want to comment that -- and I said this to
Jim Mudd and Debbie in my office the other
day, was -- when you guys first went up there,
what was it, three years ago, and you all went
up there just for one specific purpose to help
us, and when you found out that other counties
can -- are actually asking for money and we
weren't, that was the beginning of this, and
you've learned so much since you've come
along.
I think the list that you've honed it
Page 227
March 11, 2008
down to are essential items. They're not --
they're not flamboyant items. They're not
frivolous items. They're essential items that
need to be funded.
I think that our Congressmen will be able
to see that and support that as well. I think
you guys have done a terrific job bringing
home dollars, much needed dollars to our
community, especially in these tough economic
times, and I want to thank you.
MS. WIGHT: We thank you for your
support, Commissioner.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah. Debbie
brought up a good point. Two years ago when
we went to Washington, there was a county that
was in front of us, and a good example was
that they had about 40 or 50 items. And the
legislative assistant said, we can't address
this. You're going to have to figure out what
you feel is the most important.
So I just wanted to reiterate what Deb
brought up in the fact that they're very
pleased when we basically come up with nine --
seven to nine items. They can handle that.
And obviously they realized that since it's
been -- gotten board direction, the importance
that it is for not only Collier County, but
Southwest Florida.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Commissioner
Coyle, do you have anything?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Nothing.
Page 228
March 11, 2008
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Motion to approve.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: We have -- hang on.
We have a speaker?
MS. FILSON: Yes, Mr. Chairman. I have
one speaker. Patricia Spencer.
MS. SPENCER: Good morning, everyone.
I'm Patricia Spencer, and I'm here to ask you
to help make Golden Gate City a better place
to live. I'm hoping you'll choose Golden Gate
City's challenge of pathways as one of the
projects.
And I'm a member of the Golden Gate Civic
Association. I'm a member of their MSTU, the
beautification committee, and I'm also on the
Pathway Advisory Committee for Collier County,
and I've lived in Golden Gate City seven
years, and I ride my bike there every single
day.
Short history, Golden Gate City has
22,000 residents with a high dependency on our
network for sidewalks and bike lanes and
public transportation. Golden Gate City's CAT
bus route has one of the highest riderships
and customers get to the CAT stop on foot or
by bicycle. Most of our schools are
neighborhood schools. Buses are minimal, and
children all walk or bike to school.
What is the state of Golden Gate's
current pedestrian network? Well, most of the
existing pathways are asphalt, laid down by
the county about 20 years ago as a temporary
fix. Asphalt, when maintained --"
Page 229
March 11, 2008
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Can I just make an observation?
Jeff Klatzkow's tie is the same one it was that day.
MR. KLATZKOW: It's new.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: It is?
MR. KLATZKOW: Same style.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Oh, same style.
"MS. SPENCER: -- pathways are overgrown,
making them very narrow, and in locations, our
pathways have deteriorated completely.
They're washed out and they're covered with
loose sand and broken.
In many locations, it no longer provides
minimal service. In many locations, the
condition is unsafe, and in places, they're
not usable by those that are physically
challenged.
I have a couple of short personal
experiences riding my bike just recently in
Golden Gate City. I go to Golden Gate High
School and talk to the JROTC about community
involvement in civic duty, and I ride my bike
up Tropicana, which is the main artery to go
to Golden Gate High School, and it's striped
with one lane of traffic in each direction,
and then a narrow white line, and then there's
a pedestrian or biking lane beside that. And
one side of Tropicana has a sidewalk and the
children that are walking go on the sidewalk
and on the street.
But when I left Golden Gate City going
Page 230
March 11, 2008
north, there was no sidewalk, so I'm out there
in the bike lane riding my bike and there's
students walking up the bike lane because
there's no sidewalk.
And last month I worked at the polls in
the Golden Gate Library and I rode my bike to
and from via Coronado, which is another major
artery, and it has many attractions, such as a
library and two shopping centers. And the
pathway's in such poor condition that in the
daylight I chose to ride in the street,
sharing the lane of traffic because there's no
shoulder. So I shared the lane with all the
cars, and it was a pretty scary experience.
So when I came home, it was dark. And I
tried to ride my bike on the narrow overgrown
sidewalk dodging other riders and pedestrians.
And at one point, I just got off my bike and
walked it. It was very dark, and I didn't
feel it was safe.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Ms. Spencer, you need
to wrap it up, please.
MS. SPENCER: All right, I'm sorry.
Okay. So you can help turn this situation
around. I encourage you to make Golden Gate
City a better place to live and ask you,
please support pathway improvements for Golden
Gate City.
Do you have any questions?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah. I think that
we have where contractors put in -- money into
Page 231
March 11, 2008
a fund where they have, in lieu of building
sidewalks, they put in funds on that. Is that
possible for a way of addressing some of the
concerns out there in Golden Gate?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: For the record, Nick
Casalanguida, transportation planning. There
is a payment in lieu fund, and it's related to
when projects have no interconnectivity, and
it goes into a district fund with that impact
fee district. But it's limited, and usually
you're trying to do something in direct
relationship to the development that paid into
that fund.
But part of the projects that we've done
in Golden Gate City recently have come from
that fund as well, too.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay, thank you,
Ms. Spencer.
Commissioners, the pathways provided a
detailed needs map on -- in our agenda packet.
And a lot of these sidewalks are needed for
school kids to get to school safely.
There is a lot of families in Golden Gate
City that have limited transportation, and a
lot of kids need to walk to school.
I understand the long list, but I just
want to point out, going down the list, each
of the commissioners has something in their
district, and even Hilary Clinton has
something in here. But there's nothing here
for District 3.
And, you know, I would like to make a
Page 232
March 11, 2008
motion to approve the list and include the
needs map for Golden Gate City.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And include the
needs map?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah, the needs map.
There's two in here. There's an ADA map, ADA
improved map, and then there's a needs, which
is page 14 of 32. And that would assist the
children to get to school.
Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. First off,
I want to tell Commissioner Coy Ie down there,
stop pushing your button. It's not working.
Next I want to mention the fact that
you're right to be concerned, and I am also
concerned about Immokalee and the fact that
it's the number one community in the State of
Florida as far as pedestrian deaths go.
And I appreciate the fact that the MPO
committee that the lady that just spoke to us
and serves on has designated some of the money
in the past to go to Immokalee to build some
of the pathways and try to come up with ways
to limit the exposure of the people in
Immokalee, because it's a walking community,
to that.
However, with that said, the money is --
we do have a limited fund of money that's in
that MPO budget to be able to deal with these
types of situations, and they do it on a
prioritized basis. And thank God you're
sitting on that committee, and God bless Fred
Page 233
March 11, 2008
Thomas from Immokalee for sitting on that
committee.
But I think that's where the funds are
going to be. I'm afraid if we add this to
that, there will be another one and another
one to come up with to be able to reach out to
where we try to satisfy a greater need out
there than the money that's available.
You're right, it is a need within Golden
Gate City. I don't think you're going to get
there in the federal budget.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Ifwe take -- well,
you know, I mean, I have talked to our
delegation in Southwest Florida. They don't
have a concern with this item. But if we
fund -- if we have the feds fund this, that
means there would be more monies locally for
Immokalee, East Naples --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's a good
argument, Commissioner Henning.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- so on and so forth.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I can't dispute
that. Just one question, and then I may be
able to second your motion.
Is there anyone here that's going to want
to add any other items to this list? Okay.
Commissioner Coyle just raised his hand."
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Could I point out the person who's
doing the most talking on this tape?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I've got the most to say.
Page 234
March 11, 2008
"CHAIRMAN HENNING: But, you know,
Commissioner Coyle -- Coletta, you've got one,
you've got 1-75 on here, Everglades Boulevard,
the environmental study, you have Golden Gate
interchange, 1-75 and 84. But where do you
see something in District 3?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, there's
several things.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Can I interject
here?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah, as soon as I'm
done with Commissioner Coletta, Coyle.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Coletta. No,
Coletta.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: The other C.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Do you know which
one you're on?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Do you mind if we
finish this?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I forget -- I'm
losing my train of thought with these
interruptions, you know.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Going back to
that, there is some benefits to your district.
I grant you, it might seem like it's weighted.
But you've got to remember the Interstate 75,
Collier Boulevard thing, the healthcare access
for uninsured plan. Probably your district is
right up there with mine for the people that
Page 235
March 11, 2008
tap into this particular venture.
Water interconnects. You're a boater --
oh, no. I'm sorry. This is water for
utilities. Forgive me, Vanderbilt Lagoon.
That's something that's improving the
waterways for people that recreate on the
waterways.
There are things in here that are related
globally to everything that's out there. The
interchange at 75, I know that's something
that you might say is predominantly District
5, but it's not. It takes pressure off the
road that will affect the whole system and
make more road capacity available for everyone
else.
If I thought yours was the only new item
that was going to be added to this, I probably
wouldn't mind. I'm most scared that all of a
sudden this list is going to grow to the point
we're going to have something that's unwieldly
and something that's going to be meeting the
shredder at a number of different offices in
Washington. That's the only thing,
Commissioner Henning.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, I see--
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Keep your
option -- your motion.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I see there's no
support to second my motion, so I'm going
to --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, no, no. Can
you just withdraw it for the moment and let's
Page 236
March 11, 2008
see what Commissioner Coyle has to say down
there?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Right. I'm going to
remove my motion.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. But it
doesn't mean it can't be reinstated by someone
else.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. Commissioner
Henning, I would support your motion for
getting this done but maybe not in this
particular submission for these federal funds,
and here's why. Last year, we jointly made
the decision that the Gordon River green belt
pathway and bikeway would be consolidated, we
would consolidate all of those into a single
comprehensive plan and we'd go try to get some
federal money and try to get a federal grant
to try to help move that along.
And essentially, I think we were told
that, look, at the federal level, there are
more -- there are higher priority issues
primarily dealing with highways and bridges
and things of that nature, that --"
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas, we're spending
a lot of time on this. Can you tell us what the point is?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I just want the commission to
watch this, okay?
"COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- argue for
funding for pathways and bikeways because
Page 237
March 11, 2008
they're not as critical as the other things.
Now, there's some argument to that, and I
understand the safety issue in Golden Gate
City to -- and I think that's a worthwhile
project. We should try to find a way to
pursue it.
But what I'm suggesting to you is that I
think going to the federal government and
asking them to allocate funds away from major
transportation infrastructure projects and
give it to us to build pathways and bike paths
will mean we won't get any at all, and that
money will be lost.
So I would suggest that we go with the
list that we have and we jointly try to work
out a way, locally and at the state level, to
fund the bike paths in Golden Gate City, to
try to get the Gordon River greenway thing
done, maybe package all of those together, and
it might be a more powerful request, and get
some money to do it, and I'd be happy to
support that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah. Can I ask you a
question?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Sure.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Obviously -- is it an
opinion that they're not going to fund it, or
was you told that they're not going to fund
it?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I recall some
feedback that indicated that there are high
priority projects that are likely to have the
Page 238
March 11, 2008
best chance of success and that bikeways and
pathways were not on the high priority list at
the federal level.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Right.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That it might be at
the state level.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Right. And I can tell
you my conversation with Connie Mack last
night and my continued conversation with Mario
Diaz- Balart, is contrary to what you just
said.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All right? And in,
fact, Mario Diaz- Balart is excited about it.
But I understand where you got your
information, and it is what it is, and I'll
entertain a motion.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, let me --let
me -- if you don't mind, let me provide
some --"
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Do we still need to continue,
Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I think that my Board of
Commissioners --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Should we stop it?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: No. Let's just -- we've got about
two more minutes in this.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: We've got a lot of time.
"CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- sure. I mean -- I
mean, I agree with that, supplemental to what
Page 239
March 11, 2008
we have here?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, yeah. Ifwe
can get them interested in doing it, why not
do it?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I agree.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Very good. That's
it, because I think four of us have walking
communities. All of us are in need of
sidewalks. Some have never had any at all,
and it becomes a dangerous situation anyway.
By grouping them all together, it would make
it a bigger --"
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I think we can stop it at this point.
I think the point that I'm trying to make here is that Commissioner
Coyle made a statement that there was no money that was going to be
allocated -- excuse me -- from the federal government in regards to
pathways and sidewalks and et cetera.
And as soon as you made the comment that you had a personal
conversation with Diaz-Balart, that immediately changed the
complexion of this board to the point where then it was voted on to
take the issue of pathways/sidewalks to Washington. And I believe
with the combination of everything put together, it ended up to be
about $100 million.
And obviously I can tell you that it was a very strong
embarrassment for me to go to Washington when they basically told
us in the years past that items of this nature did not have to come
forward.
And I have some concern because you want to change the
minutes which I consider as a public record, and you were very
adamant that you had this conversation, and I believe that the trust of
this board is in regards to what is recorded on the minutes and also
Page 240
March 11, 2008
what is recorded on the video.
And I was concerned about where we're going, and I also have
some other concerns about you as the chair where you're very
manipulative, you're -- you try to -- yeah, manipulate the facts, you try
to manipulate the commission, and I think you misused the consent
agenda to bring forward the changing of the minutes where it should
have been brought out in front.
And I think it's a violation of trust. And I think also where I'm
concerned about is the fact that you continually make condescending
remarks to both -- or to not only the Board of County Commissioners
but you also do it to staff and you also do it to the county manager,
and I feel that it's not in good taste to do the people's business and sit
up here and have a condescending attitude.
And at that, I feel that you should probably step down from the
Board of County Commissioners as the chair and that we should elect
a new chair starting today.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, I'm sorry I've upset you,
Commissioner.
Now, I think -- you know, the item that was on the agenda and in
our needs packet did not get approved and what it was is a safety need
for all of Collier County.
And like I said, people could check my emails of correspondence
with Congressman Marco Diaz's (sic) staff, that those -- it was -- it
was that request that produced the needs map in Golden Gate. So I
understand, that's what I said on the record, and I admitted it even
before we had to go through this 10-minute iteration of what was said,
and I understand that it upset Commissioner Halas, and that's why I
thought, you know, I'll try to correct that. And I apologize that you're
all upset.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, I'm not all upset. It's not a
personal matter. It's a matter in regards to dealing with the business
here of the citizens of Collier County.
Page 241
March 11, 2008
Just today you made a gesture, or not a gesture, but you made a
comment to Commissioner Coletta that really upset me. And that's
why I feel that we need to have someone on this board that will
conduct business in a more civil manner than has been conducted
since we've -- since you've been here.
The first time that I think all of us were upset, at least three of us,
was the night that we had a hearing of the LDC amendments and you
immediately adjourned the meeting, and there was people here that
were here to speak and out the door you went.
So I make a motion that we move in the direction of appointing a
new chair on the Board of County Commissioners here in Collier
County .
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, I think it's out of line, but I'll
ask for a second before we go to discussion.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Discussion without a second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Sure.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I can understand some of the
issues that Commissioner Halas is bringing up, in fact, not knowing
exactly what was taking place. On that issue that happened earlier
today, I even outlined it and had my secretary type it up. I was going
to bring it up under commissioner comments at the end of the meeting
because I was upset about it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Oh. Well, I apologize.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And you know, you have your
own management style that's quite a bit different than what I've seen
in the past with other people, and sometimes it does rub against --
graze against us in the wrong way.
You know, I don't know if -- this is coming right out of the blue
for you and for everybody here. I don't know if we're prepared to be
able to make a decision of this magnitude today. Maybe this is
something that you should have time to prepare for and we should
bring back as a regular agenda item at another meeting.
Page 242
March 11, 2008
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, Commissioner--
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You'll have some time to be
able to think it over and be able to offer a defense to some of the
things that took place in there.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Y eah. You and I have known each
other for a long time.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Twenty years probably.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah. And we joke around. And last
year, I recognized that was still going on, the joking around, and that's
the way that I am, is joking around, with you. There's no offense.
I always tell your constituents how well you serve them, and I
would hope they would have shared that with you. You know, but we
can ask the county attorney, that we're beyond a reconsideration on an
item that was on the agenda.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm sorry. I don't think there's
any need to reconsider the item.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You're right. And it would do
us harm in Washington, D.C. if we suddenly brought back a revised
agenda telling them we removed something from it. The last thing
they want to hear is the squabbling going on within this group.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah, you know -- and --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I would --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I mean, it's two issues, Commissioner
Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm very troubled by all this and
I'm very troubled with the idea of even thinking about replacing the
chair. It's kind of a final action that you do when there's no other
recourse.
I'd be very much for bringing this back at the next meeting to be
able to discuss it at greater lengths when everybody's prepared, rather
than trying to reach a final decision today.
Page 243
March 11, 2008
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I think you need to get guidance from
the county attorney what can be done.
MR. KLATZKOW: I'm looking over your ordinance. The
ordinance provides that the chairman and the vice-chairman serve at
the pleasure of the board. I read that as meaning anytime the board
wishes a new chairman or new vice-chairman, a motion can be made.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: But there was a motion earlier for a
chairman and a vice-chair. There was. There was an agenda item on
the -- on the agenda the first of the year.
MR. KLATZKOW: Yes, there was, sir. But according to the
ordinance, the -- both the chairman and the vice-chairman serve at the
pleasure of the board.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Oh, I see. Okay.
Well, you know, any of the commissioners is welcome to put
something on the agenda.
Commissioner Coletta, you know, again, we've been -- known
each other for a long time, and it's maybe the delivery, but it's always
in jest. Also had great respect for you and -- I mean, I just can't
believe the people that I talk to in Golden Gate Estates don't tell you --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm sorry, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- the positive things I say about you.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's true. And I'm sure that
the same thing applies here. But we're dealing with a situation at hand
that's right at this moment in time.
Rather than trying to come to a final conclusion tonight and
dismissing it and leaving everything hanging, I think we'd be a better
commission if we dealt with it at the next meeting. But I would not put
it on the agenda by myself. I would have to have my fellow
commissioners agree that it would be a healthy thing to do.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah. The--
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I feel very uncomfortable with
ever seconding a motion to have you removed from this position. I
Page 244
March 11, 2008
really do.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, just a point of order. We have
an item on the agenda that was pulled off of the regular agenda to
approve the miscellaneous correspondence and somehow we got into
this item. I think you need to dispense of the item on the agenda
before we get to any other -- any other discussion.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Mr. Chairman?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Could I make a comment
concerning that? I don't know how we can approve item -- agenda
item 1611 because it's not a correction of an incorrect minute. It is
actually changing the minute. I think we've seen that, in fact, you did
say that you had talked with the principals, and you've clarified that.
I think what we need to do is to disapprove this change of the
minutes because that's not what -- we shouldn't be doing that. We
should not change the record if it was accurately depicted. And what
will appear on the record today is a clarification of that with your
statements here. So I think it's been taken care of as far as a record
issue is concerned.
So I think all we would have to do is vote to disapprove this item
because it really would be an inappropriate kind of thing because
we're actually going back and changing the record. We're not
correcting it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, I --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: See what I'm saying?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: My mistake. I apologize, but I
thought we had the ability to correct the agenda. And like you said,
we did that here today.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, yeah. In this case, the
agenda is correct. There's nothing to correct about it. It was
accurately transcribed and accurately videotaped, so it would be
improper for us, I think, to change the wording there. I think we must
Page 245
March 11, 2008
leave the wording as it currently is in our minutes and let the
clarification from this meeting deal with the misunderstanding issue.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Commissioner Coyle, I think what
we need to do is pass 16IA 1, or A series, and the two items above, but
on the 1611B3 we disapprove and leave the minutes as is, I believe, is
how that's written.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I don't follow you there, but --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, hold on.
MS. FILSON: I think he means he's going to approve the
miscellaneous correspondence agenda item minus --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Oh, I see.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Minus this particular item.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Then I will make that -- I
will make that motion. I will make a motion to approve the
miscellaneous items to file for the record with the action as directed
with the exception of item B3, which was amendment to the February
12th agenda minutes by Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And I second that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any discussion on the motion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion, signify by
saymg aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion passes, 5-0.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. The other part of this is,
Page 246
March 11, 2008
what are you going to do before we decide if this is going to come
forward on another meeting? Myself, I think it should come before
another meeting, but I'm tired of this condescending --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: -- remarks to the county manager
and to staff when the staff comes up here to try to get a point across.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas, you're more
than welcome to put something on the agenda.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. I can tell you that I don't
believe that's true, but I will look at today's meeting and see where I
have gone wrong.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: It's not only just today's meeting.
It's continuing from the onset. And I think the last meeting you were
pointing your finger at the county manager and threatening him with
taking away some of his money, and I don't think that was a joke.
And I can tell you that the people out there that watch this program, I
think, are to the point where they're wondering what kind of people
that we're having that's running this board, that I believe that we need
additional civility so that we don't get carried away in regard to --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Let's talk about that item. You see
that has to do with Pebblebrooke. And I went and got more
information on that, and the petitioner, Karen Bishop, or the agent,
stood up there with a document that staff sent to her that was different
that (sic) was in our agenda packet.
Now, from my conversations from the county manager and the
county attorney, that staff members knew the correct sequence of what
happened. Karen Bishop stood there thinking that she had the same
document as we had in our agenda on Pebblebrooke and to where
somehow a different PUD got into our agenda packet which we
approved.
She had the correct one of what the Planning Commission had,
and County Manager -- after County Manager talked to Karen Bishop
Page 247
March 11, 2008
and met with Larry Farese. And right now, what we have,
Commissioner, is somebody out in the public, Karen Bishop, is
looking like she coerced somebody when, in fact, she was an innocent
party and the staff was responsible for that mistake.
And I cannot, you cannot, direct the county manager to discipline
a -- an employee. But there's enough mistakes out there that is
affecting the residents, not only in District 3 but others because of
staffs mistake.
The only person that we can hold accountable is the county
manager. And the public feels that the board has the right to discipline
or fire staff members, and we don't, so we have to hold the county
manager accountable.
But the fact is, Karen Bishop (sic) name is blemished and it
hasn't been straightened up, and there's a lot of people in this room
that know the true story of what happened, and it's not being
straightened out. That's a concern of mine.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I think there's other ways that you
can approach this without being so condescending from the dais.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, Commissioner, again, you're
more than welcome -- I'm accountable to my citizens. And when a
member of the county manager's staff does something, I would expect
he would straighten it out.
So I'm still waiting. I'm going to hold the county manager
accountable. He's been very responsive of needs that -- like the
agenda is much better than it has been in the past, and that's because of
my concerns. We talked about that.
But there are still some other issues that needs to be straightened
out. That's all. Can we move on?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah. What's the choice of the
board?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, Commissioner Henning
said that we can -- this could be brought back at any point in time that
Page 248
March 11, 2008
any commissioner wants to.
My whole thing is, is maybe just giving thought might be --
there's things that we can approve up on the dais here. There's a lot of
things we could do better, I think every one of us. If not an item on the
agenda where we aren't going to head in any particular direction,
maybe a workshop to be able to find out the correct manners to be
used and the removal of little innuendos, how we conduct ourselves.
Just an open discussion from one end to the other might be an answer
to get to where we need to be.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And maybe a thing to do is to look at
how we're not staying on task on the item on the agenda in order to
improve that. I mean, there's several ways that we can improve doing
the public's business; wouldn't you agree with that?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, very much so. I don't
think there's ever a point in time we've reached a level of perfection;
however, I got to be honest with you, there were several times even
today that I had issues over the way I got treated at this end.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: You know, Commissioner, I'm going
to change that because I always thought it -- personally, it's in jest.
But if you're taking it the wrong way --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- I need to do some things different.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Let me give you example.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: No.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You're doing it again.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All right. Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You have a tendency to cut me
off, and you tell me all the time that -- when I'm talking, you've
reminded me before that when a commissioner has the floor, they
have it without any obstructions. But I'd get interrupted during that,
you know, and try to --lose my train of thought on a continuous basis.
But today -- and I had no idea we were going to get to this kind
Page 249
March 11, 2008
of a discussion. Under agenda 6B, public petition by Bill Klohn,
Commissioner Henning, raised the issue that since it was already on
the agenda, item lOA (sic), and was approved as an agenda item at the
beginning of the meeting, that he didn't need to petition, Bill Klohn --
we didn't need to have the petitioner, Bill Klohn, ask for the agenda
item to be added.
Commissioner Coyle spoke first, he raised good questions,
agreed to move forward to agenda -- move the agenda item 10D
forward. I spoke and agreed with Commissioner Coyle on both his
concerns and my support to hear it under 10D.
It was the consensus ofBCC that we hear 10D. At that point I
asked for clarification of the ground rules regarding future agenda
items being confirmed -- items eligible under public petition process,
because it came up as a good question.
Commissioner Henning either misunderstood the question and
forgot that I was in agreement to hear the item; the question still
remains on the ability to be able to reserve approval of hearing an
agenda item by public petition.
And I just got cut off and -- you know, at that point in time. And
you know, it was like everything I said was completely ignored. And
I felt lost on the whole part. And I wrote it down just so at the end of
the meeting I could talk about it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And that's appropriate to talk about at
that time. But that's what I mean about staying on task is we were
talking about the item on the agenda today, and you were talking
about how should we do this in the future.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Correct.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Because I was concerned. I
didn't know if what you were suggesting had legal merits or not.
Maybe we should never allow a petitioner to bring it forward.
Bill Klohn might not have had any reason to be there because it
Page 250
March 11, 2008
was already on there and approved. I couldn't get the answer because I
got cut short, and that was a concern. And I did want to get it to you
by the end of the meeting.
Like I say, no one thing is a killer, but it sure would make life
flow a little smoother.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Actually I wanted to talk about that at
the end of the meeting because it seems to be -- and I will, and I'll
leave it at that. We'll talk about that 6 -- those public petitions and
items on the agenda.
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: One of the things I think that we all
need to keep in mind is to treat each other -- because we work together
all the time -- with respect, to treat our staff with respect, to treat
others as we would have them treat us.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Amen.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Are we done with that item?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Can we move on?
Item #11
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to public comments
on general topics. Ms. Filson?
MS. FILSON: I have no one signed up for public comment.
Item #12A
RESOLUTION 2008-65: A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE
COLLIER COUNTY HEALTH FACILITIES AUTHORITY TO
Page 251
March 11, 2008
ISSUE REVENUE BONDS FOR HEALTHCARE FACILITIES AT
MOORINGS PARK. ($40 MILLION) - ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to paragraph 12,
12A. It's a request by the Collier County Health Facilities Authority
for approval of a resolution authorizing the authority to issue revenue
bonds for healthcare facilities at Moorings Park. The estimated bond
amount is $40 million. And Mr. Don Pickworth -- there he is -- will
present.
MR. PICKWORTH: Good evening, Commissioners. I'm Don
Pickworth. I represent the Collier County Health Facilities Authority.
And we're here pursuant to the requirements of the internal
revenue code which requires that before any private activity bonds are
issued within a jurisdiction, that the government -- that the -- I think
the word used is the applicably elected representative, must approve
the issuance of the private activity bonds.
The project is the Moorings Park facility, as your executive
summary says. This is, I think, the ninth or tenth bond issue that has
been done by the authority for Moorings Park dating back to 1980.
If there are questions about the process, I can answer those. If
there are questions about the Moorings Park facility, Guenter Gosch,
the executive director of Moorings Park is here certainly to discuss a
project which we, as an authority, are extremely proud of.
As it's stated in your executive summary the Moorings Park
project is the -- was the first project in the United States and, perhaps,
maybe to this day is the only life care facility in the United States. It
has a stand-alone investment grade rating from the major rating
agencies in New York. It's a fairly major thing.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. Don, you and I have talked
briefly about this. I just think we need to make sure that when we
prepare the executive summaries in the future, when there's -- there's a
Page 252
March 11, 2008
property in another jurisdiction, that we at least explain that that
jurisdiction is supportive and has been involved and has approved the
project and that sort of thing, and that way it would remove any
confusion and would provide full disclosure.
So with that, I will recommend approval.
MR. PICKWORTH: Thank you, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: There's a motion on the floor by
Commissioner Coyle. Is there a second on the motion?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, I'll second it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Second it. Commissioner Fiala
seconds, and she has a question.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I was just wondering, being
that they annexed into the city, why they were coming to the county
for this approval. I didn't quite understand. Is that what you were
referring to?
Mr. PICKWORTH: That was the question. The answer is this,
under the internal revenue code, the -- a private activity bond must be
approved by the elected -- local elected representative of the unit with
the jurisdiction over the agency that approves the issuance of the
bonds.
In this case, the bonds are issued by the Collier County Health
Facilities Authority, which has countywide jurisdiction whether a
project is inside or outside of the city, and the agency which created
and which appoints the members of the health facilities authority is the
Board of County Commissioners.
So they are -- and I have also checked with the bond lawyers on
this, and they assure me that yes, it -- that proper local elected
representative approval would require the approval of the Board of
County Commissioners.
Now, let me say this. The authority, as a matter of routine, on
any project, regardless of whether it's located in the unincorporated or
the incorporated area of the county, always inquires and adjudicates
Page 253
March 11, 2008
whether or not that project has the approval of the local government of
appropriate jurisdiction.
And in this case, the government of general jurisdiction would be
the City of Naples, and we do analyze that in the course of -- and in
this case, the project is, as I suggested in the executive summary, this
is a reimbursement/rest of construction fund financing. The project is
already under construction.
It has all its permits from the City of Naples. The City of Naples
has issued all the approvals with respect to this project that the City of
Naples would have jurisdiction to issue.
And as I say, we look at that -- even if it's a county project, like
Coyle was saying, I mean, we look to make sure he's got discretionary
local approval from you before we approve the bonds.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any further questions?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any discussion on the motion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion, signify by
saymg aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(N 0 response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Carries unanimously.
MR. PICKWORTH: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Mr. Chairman, I think our court
reporter needs a break. She's been going for a long time. But we're
getting to the end.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Why don't we take a 10-minute break.
Page 254
March 11, 2008
(A brief recess was had.)
MR. MUDD: Ladies and gentlemen -- you have a hot mike, Mr.
Chairman, Commissioners.
Item #12B
RESOLUTION 2008-66: A RECOMMENDATION THAT THE
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ADOPT A
RESOLUTION RELATING TO ACCESSORY STRUCTURES IN
THE ESTATES (E) ZONING DISTRICT, WHICH DIRECTS THE
COUNTY MANAGER, OR DESIGNEE, TO APPLY THE
SEVENTY-FIVE (75) FOOT REAR YARD SETBACK
REQUIREMENT, TO DESIGNATE ANY ACCESSORY
STRUCTURE THAT HAS RECEIVED A CERTIFICATE OF
OCCUPANCY PRIOR TO FEBRUARY 26, 2008, AS LEGAL
NONCONFORMING, AND TO REQUIRE TYPE B LANDSCAPE
BUFFERING FOR ANY ACCESSORY STRUCTURE UNDER
ACTIVE CONSTRUCTION AS OF FEBRUARY 26, 2008.
MOTION TO MAKE AMENDMENT TO LDC - APPROVED
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Next item is 12B.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. That used to be 16K2, and that had to do
with the rear setbacks. It was an item that the board had directed staff
to come back with the resolution. It's a recommendation the Board of
County Commissioners adopt a resolution relating to accessory
structures in the Estates zoning district which directs the county
manager or designee to apply a 75-foot rear yard setback requirement,
to designate any accessory structure that has received a Certificate of
Occupancy prior to January 26,2008, as legal non-conforming and to
require type B landscape buffering for any accessory structure under
active construction as of February 26, 2008, and that was the board
meeting that the board asked us to bring the resolution back.
Page 255
March 11, 2008
And I believe Mr. Klatzkow is here and Susan Istenes, and
Commissioner Coletta asked for this item to be moved to the regular
agenda.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Right. And I do appreciate you
taking the time, and it will just take a moment.
Jeff, the one thing I have concerns over -- and you can tell me so
we can offer it up to the commission as a possibility -- is the fact that,
one, this is not the fault of the people that live out there. For 20 years,
the county has a -- had a policy in place recognizing the 10- foot
setback.
We finally get caught up on it; it's supposed to be 75 foot. We
got X number of unknown structures out there that are within 10 feet
-- or between 75 and 10 feet of the property lines, rear setback lines,
of the lots out in the Estates; however, in 20 years' time, we've only
had one complaint, and the one complaint has been resolved through
some of the action that we have in here.
However, I'm very concerned over the fact that we don't have a
provision in here to allow for -- if they have some damage happen to
their building, especially if it's 51 percent, or even if the building's
totally destroyed, they have the inability to be able to build back on
that slab. So they're going to take serious loss from what's there.
Mind you, once again, one complaint in 20 years, limited number
of one, we've come up with a solution here to be able to take care of
any new ones. And the one complaint's been addressed.
Jeff, is there something that could be added to this so that people
in perpetuity would be recognized for the -- that -- where their
non-conforming structure is that was placed there by county error?
MR. KLATZKOW: You've got a couple alternatives. These are
now legal nonconforming, so under our code, if there was a storm, for
example, that severely damaged them, they'd have to be brought back
into code compliance, which is the 75-foot setback, and we could
amend the LDC to make an exception for these particular units.
Page 256
March 11, 2008
In the interim we could, sort of like zoning in progress, have the
board declare that until the LDC is amended, should the structures be
damaged, they would not have to be brought back.
Another alternative would be to come back with some sort of
ordinance that would give staff the authority to administratively grant
variances for these things as they -- as they came through.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I mean, chances are over the
next 20 years, I don't think you're going to see more than a couple of
them, but it's just taking away the rights of somebody who assumed
that they had the rights to be able to have peaceful ownership of their
property to be able to use it as they see fit, and they followed all the
rules. That's the only concern.
How do my fellow commissioners feel about it?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Can we just simply grandfather
them without an LDC amendment? Can we say, rather than shall be
considered legal nonconforming structures, shall be grandfathered?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Just this instance?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Huh?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Just this instance?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, just for these structures that
were built before February 26, 2008.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Who wants to answer that?
MS. ISTENES: I can try to. Susan Istenes. I think you can,
Commissioner; however, I don't think you can do it without an LDC
amendment.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Oh, really?
MS. ISTENES: You know, I mean, if the board -- and now I'm
looking back at Jeff. If the board just wants to declare that as their
policy until the amendment comes through.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, I was just hoping that would
be a board policy decision rather than a change to LDC, because we're
Page 257
March 11, 2008
not affecting anything other than this specific situation. It's not a
general LDC.
MR. KLATZKOW: If you do it by resolution though a new
board can come in --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And reverse it.
MR. KLATZKOW: -- and reverse it. The nice thing about doing
it by the LDC is, I think we cement it.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Go ahead, County Manager. I'll
wait.
MR. MUDD: Just to give you an idea. Susan and I were just
talking about it. For instance, if you had a hurricane and it was
coming -- and you know how you'd make a declaration of emergency
when you go through the procedures? When you declare, can you
also declare in that emergency protocol -- and we can bring the
specific issue up about the legal nonconforming in the Estates so that
you're covered in the interim that you're getting your Land
Development Code piece done. And I think that gives you some
comfort in between. And that's the only thing I have to offer.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: My concern is, if we set a
precedent in the Estates, then other people who are coming in around
the other areas of the county who may have a nonconforming building
will then say, well, if you did it here, I want to have that same ability,
even though they know they've got a nonconforming building.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you. Yeah, I hear you,
but the circumstances here are quite a bit different than somebody that
just builds it on their own and ignores the rules and regulations we
have.
But as far as just allowing for it at the time of a hurricane or
Page 258
March 11, 2008
natural disaster doesn't quite cut it, because first you got to make that
declaration. Second, what happens if there's an independent disaster
like a fire or a tornado that comes through? And you know, you can't
be declaring that -- you know, probably a spot tornado or just heavy
winds and repairs have to be made and they're past the 51 percent.
That's the only problem I have with doing it that way. And plus, it
leaves it open for reinterpretation later.
But you were talking about just as a Band-Aid til that point then?
MR. MUDD: Just in the interim until you can get your Land
Development Code updated to bring it into compliance, and that's
what Susan and Jeff were talking about.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. But couldn't we just
come up with a board decision that we keep this whole thing where it
is until that point in time that the LDC comes? I mean, if somebody
comes between now and the time we get the LDC amendment, can we
allow them to go ahead and rebuild? I just -- I don't want to put them
in jeopardy, I really don't.
MR. KLATZKOW: Sir, I'd be comfortable with board direction
to that effect. I think staff would follow that.
MR. MUDD: Zoning in progress.
MR. KLATZKOW: If the board directs staff to make an LDC
change as we've discussed, and in the interim, to -- should anybody
suffer a loss, you know, that they wouldn't have to move back to
setback, I think that would be fine.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. I'll make that into a
motion.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. I'll second that motion, if
that's --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah. Commissioner Coletta's given
direction to do an LDC amendment and --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, commission direction.
I'm asking it as a motion.
Page 259
March 11, 2008
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta is the motion
maker -- do an LDC amendment, and second by Commissioner Fiala,
and recognizing that it's zoning in progress; therefore, if there's any
natural disasters -- or I guess it would be if somebody sets a building
on fire, that would apply too, that that structure could build back; is
that correct?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's correct.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Discussion?
Anybody mind if I go next?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: The only problem that I have with
this whole thing -- and you know, I was just going to vote no on the
whole consent item, but since Commissioner Coletta pulled this one
off, which I'm not in agreement is, is you're giving -- you're giving
some, which is a minority, more benefit than the majority, and we
never knew -- and I know it's a big subdivision to count on how many
problems there are out there.
But, you know, our staff is going to come back and say that it
doesn't comply to our Growth Management Plan. And I think that we
should be fair to all.
But anyways, since I said my piece. Commissioner Coletta -- or
Commissioner Coyle then Commissioner Halas.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: County Attorney, I'd like -- I mean,
County Manager, could you prepare a sign that says Coyle and an
arrow to the right, please, and I'll present it to the chairman at our next
meeting?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: You must admit I was doing better
than previous meetings though, till the end.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: At least he's not calling you Fiala.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's true. Thank goodness.
Well, isn't the situation here that we were improperly interpreting
our own code because we were unsure what to do, or we really
Page 260
March 11,2008
thought it was something less than 75 feet? Isn't this largely our fault?
MS. ISTENES: Like I said in the presentation, my theory is that
there was somewhat of a conflict in the regulatory language in the
code between what was commonly recognized as accessory structure
setbacks for single-family homes and what was stated in the Estates
zoning district. And my theory is somebody made an executive
decision a long time ago to use that setback table for single-family
homes, which got you to the 10 feet versus the 75.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So this isn't a case where most
people really intentional by violated the law; it's something that we
actually approved because we were interpreting the law that way?
MS. ISTENES: Correct.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So they shouldn't be penalized.
But Commissioner Henning is correct, if there are other
circumstances, other neighborhoods, where the same sort of thing has
happened, they are likely to come forward and say, wait a minute, you
did the same thing to me so I'd like to have that same benefit.
So there is some interest in trying to establish some limits on this
flexibility, I believe. And without understanding how widespread this
problem might be, it's almost impossible to craft something that would
adequately address it. Is there anything the staff can do to help us
understand the potential ramifications of this proposal that we're
talking about?
MS. ISTENES: If! understand, the proposal is essentially to
allow -- do an LDC amendment to allow those properties who built --
lawfully built accessory structures at less than 75 feet -- because
they're not all built at 10. It's just less than 75 -- to remain and to be
able to be rebuilt in the event of any type of destruction or any extent
of destruction. And then from January '08 on forward, to require
anybody coming in to pull building permits to then construct to the 75
foot or greater; is that correct? Do I understand?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes, yeah.
Page 261
March 11, 2008
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: How about if we just find out how
many of these structures are nonconforming and send them a letter out
stating that you can leave your structure there, but if it's more than 50
percent destroyed -- because most of the lots we're talking about are of
great size. They're not confined to a small residential area -- and just
say -- send a letter out to them saying, if something is -- happens with
the structure that doesn't meet the criteria for the setbacks -- and we
realize that there was a mistake, but you have to bring that lot or that
building back into -- into conformance.
MS. ISTENES: Well, you just touched on something that I think
is probably a really great idea. And when you were talking I was
thinking about what we did with the sign ordinance where we
essentially put people on notice that they had -- there was a point in
time when their signs were going to become nonconforming or be
unlawful, really, and that they were going to have to replace them.
And maybe we could modify that so that, essentially, you do put
people on notice that they have a structure that is -- does not meet the
current setback criteria and that maybe at a point in time, like perhaps
you allow rebuilding up to a certain period of time and then afterwards
you don't. Something to that effect. I'm just -- I'm just formulating an
idea, not coming up with a total solution.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Whether it's burned down or
somebody tears it down or the wind blows it down, as long as they
realize that there was a mistake, but that once the building comes
down, because of the lot sizes out there, I think that they can probably
bring it into conformance.
MS. ISTENES: Essentially you allow them to amortize their
investment --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Exactly.
MS. ISTENES: -- over period of times, and put them on notice.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta has some,
Page 262
March 11, 2008
Commissioner Coyle.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's not the intent of what I'm
trying to accomplish. You got to remember that if something happens
to the building, they're going to get insurance to be able to cover the
repairs to the building. They're not going to get money for the slab,
they're not going to get the money it's going to take to relocate all the
utilities there are to that building. That's going to be something they
would have to bear.
Whose fault was it? It's not their fault. It's the county's fault for
20 years going with the idea that it was 10 feet -- lO-foot setback
rather than 75. It's -- they went in there in good faith, they got the
permits, they were approved, and they're out the door. They built
what they said they were going to build, and now we're -- we can't go
back and tell them, well, something happens, it's your bad luck
because we made a mistake. That's why I want to try to keep these
people whole.
It's different than signs. The signs are out in everybody's face.
You can see them. Some ofthem are offensive, and that's why they
had to change them. These are structures that are well hidden. You
can't see your neighbor to save your life with all the trees between
you. And we love it out there like that. And we've only had one
complaint in 20 years. And wasting the county's resources to even
identify where all these are is -- would be a travesty in itself.
MS. ISTENES: The easy solution is just to change the setback to
10 feet for accessory structures, and there's no issue.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Let's don't go there yet.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: After you -- after Commissioner
Coyle, I would like to comment on that.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes. This is different than the
signs. And the signs, the interest was to let them get some value out
of the sign they'd already put up, and you let them keep it there for a
while, but ultimately they had to take it down.
Page 263
March 11, 2008
But in this case, if something gets destroyed, they're going to
have to put it back up, so it's going to be very expensive for them to
put it back up. Yes, they'll get some insurance money, but depending
upon how it's insured, they might not get full coverage.
So in this case, it does them no good to be given this period of
amortization because when they have to rebuild, they've got to pay the
whole cost of doing the whole thing, so it really doesn't help them
much financially.
So I guess I would like to find some way to deal with this in a
permanent basis without opening the door for every violation in the
county to come in and justify approval.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
MS. ISTENES: I guess -- you know, in your purpose and intent
or in some line of your communication, you could just make it clear
that your intent is clearly to only deal with this issue in the Estates due
to these specific set of facts surrounding the Estates zoning
classification and that it's not intended to address any similarly
situated situation in another zoning district.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That would make me happy, yeah.
MS. ISTENES: I mean, that might be adequate for the record so
that you could always fall back on that if somebody did come in.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I would buy that.
MS. ISTENES: By the way, I didn't think the amortization idea
was bad because I just recall my insurance company sending me a
nice little letter saying, oh, by the way, we're not going to cover your
pool cage anymore. And so, guess what, if it blows down, you better
either have the money to replace it or don't replace it. That was a nice
notice to get that I had to save some extra money if I want my pool --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, I didn't replace mine.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: That might change next year.
I just want to remind everybody that in the executive summary, I
don't know if it's true today, that it said, if we go to a 10-foot setback,
Page 264
March 11, 2008
it wouldn't be compliant with the Growth Management Plan.
MS. ISTENES: There isn't a specific criteria for a dimension in
the Growth Management Plan, but yeah, I mean, I think I already
advised you in the last report that that essentially -- I mean, the
lO-foot setback is essentially an urban setback in a semirural area, so
-- but that's the board's decision to make really ultimately as to what
the Growth Management Plan says.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah, that's true.
Okay. There's a motion on the floor by Commissioner Coletta,
second by Commissioner Fiala.
Any further discussion on the motion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor ofthe motion, signify by
saymg aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries, 3-2, Commissioner
Halas and Commissioner Henning, or the H's, dissenting on it.
And that is something different than what's on our agenda, but I
think we addressed that. Do we have to -- do we have to vote on this
resolution?
MR. MUDD: I think you -- I think you voted on what was in the
agenda packet and you told the board -- and you told us to come back
with a Land Development Code amendment to cover the
grandfathering. And while that's going on, we treat it as zoning in
progress, is what I'd call it in the short term.
MR. KLA TZKOW: Yes. The question now becomes, do you
still want to go forward with the resolution, because the resolution
Page 265
March 11, 2008
takes care of all the other issues.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. I mean, with the exception
of the part where it says that -- you know, it has to deal with the fact
that you can't build, or it doesn't even address that, does it?
MR. KLATZKOW: No.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. By approving the
resolution, we haven't undermined what we just agreed to do, right?
MR. KLATZKOW: No, you haven't.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. Then I make a motion to
approve the resolution.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. I'll second the motion.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Coletta to
approve item 16K2, second by Commissioner Fiala.
Discussion on the motion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion signify by
saymg aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
Aye.
Commissioner Henning dissenting on the motion. The motion
carries 4-1.
Item #15
STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Now we're in --
MR. MUDD: Staff.
Page 266
March 11, 2008
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- staff communication.
MR. MUDD: -- and commissioner general communications, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: County Manager, do you have --
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir, and I don't mean to belabor this point,
because we spent a long time on it already today.
This has to do with the letter that the Florida Housing Finance
Corporation is asking for the chairman of the Board of County
Commissioners -- and Commissioner Henning's name is at the bottom
signature. And we're just trying to make sure that this is the board's
desire.
It basically asked our CWHIP applicant to confirm that the GMP
amendment has cleared the 11 -- or excuse me -- the 21-day vetting
process and that there were no appeals to the GMP. And so what
we're basically -- what we're basically asking the board to authorize
the chairman to do here is to send this letter and just confirm that
particular information application to Florida Housing Finance
Corporation.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Does anybody have any concern of
me signing that letter on behalf of the Board of County
Commissioners?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Nope, okay. Seems like you have
consensus.
MR. MUDD: The other issue -- the other issue that I have -- and
I know it's -- and I know it's far out there, but if you take a look at -- if
you take a look at November, you'll notice that Veterans Day is on the
11 th, which is the Tuesday that we'd normally have our meeting. And
I was hoping that maybe somebody would see this and make it
Monday instead of Tuesday, but they haven't done that so far.
And then you get into the Thanksgiving week and things like
that, my recommendation is that the board consider that we have one
meeting in November in the middle, and that would be on the -- that
Page 267
March 11, 2008
would be on the 18th of November, and then we two meetings in
December, the first Tuesday of December and the third Tuesday,
which would be the 2nd and the 16th.
Just think about it a little bit. We don't need a decision today, but
that gives you a -- we normally do two in November and one in
December. But because Veterans Day's falling on that Tuesday that
would normally be a board meeting, you've got the Thanksgiving
thing in between.
I'm suggesting that we have one meeting in November and two in
December and we do it the first week in -- first Tuesday in December
and the third Tuesday in December, and it stays away from Christmas
all those holidays, particular issues.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: What date in November?
MR. MUDD: The date that I'm recommending is that it would be
the 18th, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And when is Thanksgiving?
MR. MUDD: Thanksgiving is the last Thursday, which would be
17th of November, sir.
MS. FILSON: And we already have all these dates marked on
the commissioners' calendars.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Then why are you asking us?
MR. MUDD: Well, sometimes--
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You just tell us where we're
supposed to go and we go there, right?
MR. MUDD: Sir, I just wanted to -- I figured the change of the
year, somebody would notice and they'd make a change, and I told
Sue when we talked about it, I said, we've got some ugliness in
November and December. We'll wait and see if somebody changes --
you know, could be the Democratic Primary, you know, that would
change it or something. I don't know.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Just don't make it a two-day
meeting on the 18th.
Page 268
March 11, 2008
MR. MUDD: No, sir. But that's my recommendation, you do
one meeting on the 18th of November and then you do the two in
December, the first week and the third week, and you avoid the
holidays, you avoid the Veterans Day holiday, and you still have
Christmas and New Year's as planned.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. I mean, I think you have a
consensus today --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yep.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- that that's what we're going to want
to do.
MR. MUDD: Okay. That's all I have, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. County Attorney?
MR. KLATZKOW: A small matter.
Board directed that I come forward and amend the Bayshore
Avalon Beautification Advisory Committee Ordinance to add an
alternate to the board. The board would actually like to go from five
to seven members. And rather than coming forward with an ordinance
for an alternate, like to know if the board would just as soon just add
two members to it before I advertise.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I think that's a good idea.
MR. KLATZKOW: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yep.
MR. KLATZKOW: Thank you. That's all.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes, sir. All of the commissioners
are aware of the Holocaust Museum and the boxcar that they were
able to get, it was dedicated, and I think all of you were at that
dedication.
Our museum -- Ron Jamro was asked to prepare a spot for the
boxcar. And the foundation that owns the museum from whom we
lease and rent the museum would not consent to placing the boxcar
where Mr. Jamro suggested that it be placed.
Page 269
March 11, 2008
And as a result we couldn't get permission to do that, and Jamro
was going to be faced with some substantial costs to place it in the
area that the Heritage -- or the foundation that owns the museum had
designated.
Instead, the Holocaust Museum suggested that we just put it on a
lowboy trailer and that way it can be moved wherever it should go,
and they can use it for their educational program at schools and other
places to tow the trailer from one place on another.
And there was a lowboy flatbed trailer on our surplus equipment
list, and what I would like to do is to approve the transfer of that
lowboy trailer to our museum, let it become museum property for a
while, and let them use it for the purpose of holding the boxcar and let
the Holocaust Museum tow that to the various locations they want to
use it without charging them a cost to do it.
It actually saves us money because it helps us -- we create the
exhibit at the museum without having to spend money to repair or
rebuild a place to accommodate the boxcar.
So I think it's a cost effective way to do it, and all I'm asking is if
we could just donate the use of that trailer, leave it owned by our
museum, it will be county property, continue to be county property, it
just won't be disposed of, and give the Holocaust Museum the right to
use it to tow their exhibit from one place to another.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'll second your motion.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay, thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Go ahead, Commissioner
Halas.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: How about if we sell them the
trailer for a dollar and then it belongs to the museum?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, I don't see any problem with
that, but I don't know if the museum would ultimately like to use it
anyway, but if they did, they could return it to them. But I'm at the
board's pleasure. I don't feel strongly one way or the other. I don't
Page 270
March 11, 2008
know how much the trailer is worth. And I just thought it would be
simpler to let the museum own it, and then let them let the Holocaust
Museum use it for free.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That's what I'm saying. We sell it
to the museum for a dollar, then it's out of our hands and the museum's
got it.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, there's some advantages to
that, but the precedent that it establishes is, maybe somebody else
comes in and says, well, wait a minute. I'd like to have that truck that
you've got out there. Would you give me that truck for a dollar.
Some other nonprofit organization might do that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: May I help you, assist you? The item
on the agenda, the information that I got, we can -- or Steve Carnell
can donate to a nonprofit any items on there --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- or donate it to a government
agency, and there's no criteria on that. So ifit is a not-for-profit true
501 C-3, that can be done. So, you know, if -- you made a motion,
Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, I seconded Commissioner
Coyle's motion.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. If you would include either
giving it to the Holocaust Museum if they're a 501 C-3 or to the
museum, I think it would be covered, and let them figure it out.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Let me make this one more
statement. If you donate it to the museum, one day they're going to
have their own museum, they're going to put the boxcar there, then
they're going to have a flatbed trailer that they're going to have to
dispose of. They might want to get the revenue for that, I don't know.
But on the other hand, Ron Jamro might need it or might like to have
it for one of the tanks we've got sitting around and maybe he could
take those around for some kind of an exhibit from time to time.
Page 271
March 11, 2008
Yeah, so I don't know.
County Manager, tell me what you would prefer.
MR. MUDD: The only issue I have with our museum taking it
and holding it and let the Holocaust Museum take the rail car around
is, the time that they -- they, Holocaust Museum has the rail car on a
county trailer, there's a liability issue. So far we haven't talked about
that at all, okay. Because they're driving it around. It's out of our
particular issue.
If they have a breakdown, somebody gets in an accident or
whatever, the county's not held harmless at this particular juncture.
If the board decides you want to donate this to the Holocaust
Museum and say, because you're a 501 C-3 and this is the way you
want to take this surplus trailer -- and then they can use it, and that's
fine.
You could have an agreement with them that it's donated, and
you could have something that says, okay, when you're done with it,
you could turn it back to the county and you could give it back to us
for the same one dollar and we'll dispose of it for you. There's several
ways to craft this.
The way it stands right now with the motion, I've got a liability
Issue.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay, all right.
MR. MUDD: And I don't know how that --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Suppose I change the motion, that I
ask the board to approve a donation of the flatbed trailer to the
Holocaust Museum?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: My second agrees.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah. There's a motion by
Commissioner Coy Ie to donate the flatbed to the Southwest Florida
Holocaust Museum, second by Commissioner Coletta.
Discussion? Commissioner Halas.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: How about, does that -- does that
Page 272
March 11, 2008
get us offthe ropes for liability, or should we say that they have to
purchase it for one dollar?
MR. MUDD: Doesn't make a difference. The liability's no issue.
If you're donating it and they accept it, it's theirs.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: So then the liability falls on their
shoulders.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: What about the way that -- all I'm
doing is just looking at all aspects of this. I'm not sure what shape this
trailer's in, whether they're going to take on the maintenance of
bringing -- making sure this trailer is up to standards to take it on the
road, just so that something doesn't happen and we end up saying,
well, it was a county trailer and the county didn't have this up to
standards, okay? I just want to make sure that we make sure that
we're completely open on this.
MR. KLATZKOW: With the board's pleasure, I'd like to get in
contact with the museum and just find out exactly what form of entity
they are and then come back to the board with a recommendation at
the next county meeting.
And I don't know if they're a charity or not. I just don't know.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, in the meantime, they're
going to want to use it, so -- they have an event coming up fairly
quickly, I think.
MR. KLATZKOW: We've got a liability on that still.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: The motion, I think, is a pretty good
motion because if they take title to it, the Board of Commissioners are
out of any kind of liability.
I'm sorry, sir.
MS. FILSON: I think you have a workshop on Friday, ifhe
could bring it back.
MR. KLATZKOW: I can do it by Friday. I just want to verify
that they're a charitable entity.
Page 273
March 11, 2008
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. What's that noise?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I don't know.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Make it part of your motion.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Where we at? There's a
motion by Commissioner Coyle and second by Commissioner Coletta
to donate the lowboy to the Holocaust Museum of Southwest Florida.
Any further discussion?
MR. MUDD: I want to make -- I want to clarify. Steve Carnell
has the delegated authority to donate to a 501 C- 3 . You as the Board
of County Commissioners can donate whatever you want irrespective
if they're a 501 C-3 or ifthere's somebody going to use a trailer to
teach kids as long as you're convinced that it's a good cause and it
serves the community, okay? You don't have a 501 C-3 issue. You're
the board. It's only Steve Carnell that's got that issue, and he's got to
make sure that that is, indeed, the case.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I just want to make sure that when
we donate this that there's no way they can come back on the county
in case of a liability, okay? And that's what I'm trying to make sure
that we're addressing when we're going -- I think it's a great idea, you
know, but I just want to make sure that we don't -- they don't have --
somebody can't come back on us.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala's going to answer
your questions.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. Why don't we just, when we
donate it, we write up the papers to say that there is no liability; we're
happy to donate this to you. Then we've solved that problem.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Jeff can deal with that by Friday.
MR. KLATZKOW: We'll take care of that. I'll just take care of
it. If that's the board's direction, I can just take care of it.
MS. FILSON: And I stand corrected. On Friday is MPO. The
next workshop is next Tuesday.
Page 274
March 11, 2008
COMMISSIONER COYLE: We don't want to do it then. Want
to do it this week.
MR. KLATZKOW: I'll take care of it.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion, signify by
saymg aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries unanimously.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle, do you have --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No, that's it for me.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Nothing.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, one little thing here.
Maybe you all got the same email from -- Senator Bill Nelson's office
called and would like my opinion as to what's the most pressing issues
from Collier County for his town hall meeting in 3/26. Please advise,
four -- I don't think that should be me. That should be probably just
stating the legislative agenda, correct?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I wouldn't say so.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: What would you like, or don't
you?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Most important, illegal
Page 275
March 11, 2008
immigration.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Just that?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, but I really think that ought
to come from the chairperson.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. Then why don't we go
ahead and you take care of it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Where is this town hall
meeting?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I don't know. That's to be
announced.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Oh, it is. And the time? The time is
going to be announced? The 26th. I don't know what I'm doing, but
in my -- if I can't make it, we'll have to check with the vice-chair.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Excuse me, Commissioner
Henning. They need a reply. I didn't reply to it because of the fact I
didn't feel I was authorized to do so. So rather than wait for the town
hall meeting, if you could get a reply out tomorrow.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Sure.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And if the county manager -- or
Paula, my aide, has information which will demonstrate that illegal
immigration is costing the citizens of Collier County at least $70
million every year. If we could get something done on a national level
about that issue, think of how much better we'd be from a budgetary
standpoint.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I agree.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Do you want to provide direction in
there as well saying something about, you know, building walls or--
CHAIRMAN HENNING: No, you just need to fix this problem.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, just fix it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. Some people think to fix it
they should legalize everybody.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's probably true. He probably
Page 276
March 11, 2008
feels that way.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I don't.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Do we need to -- do we need
to address what the resolution is to the immigration problem?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm happy with what
Commissioner Coyle just said, you keep it simple and just a directive.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Send them back to the country
where they came from illegally and then have them go through the
necessary steps to enter this country legally.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's it. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, I have nothing for this board,
but I'd like to say welcome to my cousin George. He's probably
watching. They just arrived from Atlanta.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Hey, George.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Hay, George.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Good.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's all.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
The board asked me to write David Weigel, the County Attorney,
about the interim of appointing a new chief county attorney.
David Weigel did reply to me. He would like to continue as
chief county attorney, but also within that, he would like to continue
to be assistant county attorney for a couple of years, and would --
what I gather in his contract -- like to work with the Board of County
Commissioners to see that happen.
There is some attributes that David brings. Well, first of all, I
want to say that's going to kind of hamstring our future county
attorney, whoever that is. But David has a lot of knowledge in
crafting MSTUs and MSTBUs, annexation incorporation. Definitely
Page 277
March 11, 2008
been involved in the Florida Association -- Florida Association of
Counties and was president of the Florida Association of Counties --
county attorneys thing there and the Sunshine Law, which I think is
very important.
So that is the message. And at this point I don't know what you
want me to do. Commissioner Coletta, Commissioner Fiala, and then
Commissioner Coyle, and then Commissioner Halas.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, if we did anything -- and
your concerns are justified. You know, we've got a new county
attorney that's coming in. He may, or she may, resent the fact that
there's still the old regime there. That may be a problem.
What we may do is give recommendation that the new county
attorney, whoever it is, give serious consideration to it, and it would
be something that the hiring and firing would be within his or her own
purvIew.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Some of the things that you could
add to your list, he has a wealth of background in the community and
knowledge of the community as well as a lot of history about the
subjects that we address constantly, and so I would like to see him be
able to use that information to our benefit and to the new county
attorney's benefit. I'll just add that to the list.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I think it's absolutely essential that
we make that decision after we have selected a new attorney and only
after consultation with the new attorney. We're going to be holding a
new attorney responsible for the operation of the office. I think it's
very dangerous and unfair for us to dictate how he organizes, he or she
organizations, and administers the office.
I do agree wholeheartedly that David has a lot of good skills that
we could use, but I would ask that we postpone this decision until after
we've made a decision on who the next county attorney will be.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas?
Page 278
March 11, 2008
COMMISSIONER HALAS: My prior experience in the private
sector when either somebody gets demoted or whatever and is left in
that particular organization, it ends up being very disruptive and the
new person can't really accomplish the tasks set forward. And I can
tell you that I've experienced that a number of times, and I don't think
it's fair for whoever is going to be the new county attorney to put them
under that kind of a stress because they can't get things accomplished
because there'll be people onboard that will still have an allegiance to
that particular individual, and it doesn't work. Okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: What was your comments about
where I should go with that? I forget. And I understand that -- what
we have here, but I don't remember what you said.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Basically I was in agreement
with Commissioner Coyle that we wait till that point in time that we
get a county attorney on and make the suggestion that he give
consideration. But I'd leave it up to him and have him -- ifhe's
interested and to what scope he'd want to hire him, and he'd have the
ability to be able to have the contract set, hiring and firing as he sees
fit. I mean, Dave has a lot of attributes. But once again, I wouldn't
want to hamstring the new county attorney, whoever it may be.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I'm sorry. You gave some attributes.
Was there any direction on that?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: No? Just giving some attributes?
Yeah. And it looks like the consensus is, you know, is status quo until
we seat a county attorney. Right? Okay.
MR. MUDD: I want to make sure. He did accept the offer that
he would remain the county attorney in the interim until a new county
attorney got selected; is that correct?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: No.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That's what I -- I thought that's
what I heard.
Page 279
March 11, 2008
CHAIRMAN HENNING: No. He would accept it under the
conditions that he continues his employment with Collier County for
at least two years.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Oh, there were conditions to it.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: No.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Oh, no, no.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Sorry.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I didn't hear that.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, I didn't get that either.
Okay. I don't think -- I don't think we can -- we can accept those
conditions.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. So now we don't have a chief
county attorney. So what -- what's the alternative? Commissioner
Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Day by day.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, I heard from -- what the board
says is we will -- we will decide -- we'll make that suggestion to the
chief county, the new chief county attorney, about David's
employment, consider it.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Could we -- I feel nervous about
the board making suggestions or recommendations to the new county
attorney about hiring somebody. I think we should leave it up to the
new county attorney to make the decisions, but if we start staying we,
as a board, want you to do this or want you to consider this, I think
that's probably going too far.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I apologize. I thought it was
understood that we was going to suggest --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, even suggesting, I think, is a
bit too far.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: In my opinion, at least. I think
Page 280
March 11, 2008
we've got to give the new county attorney as much flexibility as we
can if we're going to hold him responsible. And if he wishes to take
advantage of that resource, which is David's knowledge, then, you
know, that's fine. But ifhe wishes not to do that, I think that's --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Or she.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Or she, yeah -- then I think -- we
have to lean heavily on that person we select to make this decision.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. So what do we do in the
meantime?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Suppose we -- suppose we respond
to David and tell him that we do respect his knowledge and skills and
we -- but in fairness to the new county attorney, it's essential that we
leave those kinds of decisions up to that person, and that the new
county attorney or -- he should feel free to contact the new county
attorney and talk with him about the possibility of continuing.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And in the interim?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And I'd be delighted to have him
continue in the interim until we appoint the new county attorney.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I feel the same way. Without
stipulations.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Mr. Klatzkow, do you have anything
to add?
MR. KLATZKOW: No, no. My only issue is that David's
contract expires March 22nd, and as of the following day you will not
have a county attorney, and that will be prior to your next meeting.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, we have a workshop Tuesday,
Sue?
MS. FILSON: Next Tuesday.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And that's before the 22nd, isn't it?
MS. FILSON: Tuesday is the 18th.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. So we can revisit it then,
Page 281
March 11, 2008
huh?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Can't take a motion, but we can sure
give direction under consensus.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
MR. MUDD: The only -- the only issue I have, Mr. Chairman,
Commissioners, is I want to make sure that if David doesn't accept,
let's make sure we don't put Jeff in a position where -- if you have four
people that are outside the organization, he's the only internal -- and I
understand what he's doing right now because our county attorney is
getting -- having some eye work done, and that's what he's supposed
to do as the deputy. But if you appoint Mr. Klatzkow the acting
county attorney in the interim before you do your selection, the other
four could say he had an undue advantage, and I don't want to put Mr.
Klatzkow --
MR. KLATZKOW: I don't want to be acting. I really don't. I
don't -- for the week or two or three interim period, I don't mind taking
a caretaker role for the office, but I don't want to be acting.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Do we have to have it --
MR. MUDD: No, but what I'm trying to say to the board is, if
you're going -- if you have to have one for some strange reason -- and
so far I haven't seen why we need to have one because you have a
deputy and you have -- you have Scott Teach and Jeff, and they're
working the office pretty well right now. But if you have to have an
acting for some strange reason, okay -- and Mr. Klatzkow will tell us
that or not -- then let it be Scott Teach for that three-week period of
time just to make sure that you don't put Mr. Klatzkow at a
disadvantage in the selection process.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Or a lawsuit for the county.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. So I'll contact him tomorrow
and try to get a -- hopefully a revised comment.
Page 282
March 11, 2008
Commissioner?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm sorry. There was one more
item, for some reason -- I talked to Sue Filson about it. For some
reason I thought she was going to bring it up. I don't know whatever
gave me that idea. It has to do with a memo that came to all of us
regarding dual office holders. And Sue --
MS. FILSON: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- could you go over it briefly
with the commission, and maybe we could come up with some sort of
directions so that we don't get into some sort of box later?
MS. FILSON: Yes, sir. I sent the commissioners all a memo
around attaching a memorandum that I received from David Weigel
regarding dual office holding which, in essence, says that if you serve
on a quasijudicial committee, you can only serve on one committee at
a time.
I have four members who serve on two quasijudicial committees.
And I prepared letters and sent them a copy of David's memorandum
to me, and they're upset, and that's very understandable, and I told
them to contact their commissioner. And I don't know ifthat was the
case with you, Commissioner Coletta.
And I've also told Jeff that we -- that I though Commissioner
Coletta was going to bring this up under communications so that he
could prepare a response to let you know what you could do, if
anything.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I would like to see the response.
MS. FILSON: I'm sorry. I believe he's just prepared to give you
a verbal response, correct?
MR. KLATZKOW: Yeah. And I spoke with David on this one,
and we're of the same mind. If what you want is absolute certainty
that you have no issue, then you would go along with David's opinion
and not allow dual office holders for these quasijudicial boards.
Having said that, there are no court decisions on this issue, just a
Page 283
March 11, 2008
couple of attorney general decisions. And sometimes the court gives
them some weight and sometimes courts don't. You've never had an
issue with this before. It just came up -- well, Susan brought it up.
MS. FILSON: Yeah. I brought it up. Someone had sent me
something from the City of Naples and they had that written on theirs.
And after I read it, I called David and I said -- or I called David's
office, and I said, this is what the City of Naples has written on their
press releases, and I've never heard of that, and they said that they
were unaware of it as well. And after they did the research, then they
sent the memo.
MR. KLATZKOW: So the decision really is, do you want
absolute certainty, in which case we'll just have the one member per
advisory -- per quasijudicial board or -- I'm not going to lose any sleep
if we continue our current practice, because we've had no issues raised
over the next -- over the last 20 years. But it's really the pleasure of
the board.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Is it the law? I mean, is it our --
MR. KLATZKOW: It's an attorney general opinion. It's not a
court opinion. Attorney general gives opinion all the time. If this ever
gets into a court case, somebody will try to rely on it. Sometimes the
courts look at it and sometimes they really don't.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Who are we hurting if we do abide
by the attorney general's --
MR. KLATZKOW: You're not hurting anybody excepting those
four committee members who would like to keep both roles.
MS. FILSON: Yeah. And I talked to at least three of them, and
they really don't want to resign from either board.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Why?
MS. FILSON: Well, one of them who's on the Planning
Commission and the Board of Adjustments and Appeals said that
they're just getting that going the way it should have been, and they're
all anxious about it, and he -- and I'm sure that that's the one they're
Page 284
March 11, 2008
going to resign from as opposed to the Planning Commission. But
they were just real excited and wanted to stay on that committee, or
board, I should say.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You know, I'd prefer to be safe,
quite frankly.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
MS. FILSON: Well, I've already sent the letters out, so they are
aware of it.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'm in the same boat.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah. Let's stick to the legal opinion.
Okay. The second thing is something that Commissioner Coletta
brought up about a public petitioner putting -- asking something to be
put on the agenda, like happened today, and also be a public
petitioner.
County Manager couldn't support it because it wasn't our policy,
and I think we all support the -- support the item. But, you know, my
opinion, why do we want to hear the item twice, like we did today?
In the future, a member of the public always has the ability to
contact a county commissioner and say, hey, can you put this on the
agenda so I can come and discuss it with them, and that way it doesn't
put the county manager in a tough position. We can put it on number
9. Is that okay?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Excellent. That's what I was
looking for.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah. I know today I got a little bit
confused because we were talking about the same issue in two
different parts of the agenda, and I didn't realize -- I didn't understand
the need for public petition and that.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: We've got to remember that this
was presented as if it were an emergency, and that's what the county
manager was trying to do. He was trying to deal with something that
Page 285
March 11, 2008
he had been told was an emergency, we had to do it right now, and it
really wasn't the case. But I think that's how that one came about.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Right. Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Commissioner Henning brought
up a good point. I'm sure that anyone of the commissioners here, if
they were requested to do it, would put it on the agenda, and then we
don't have the problem who has the authority to be able to do that.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. I wouldn't have a problem
with that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. And Commissioner, the reason
I didn't address it now, because it didn't -- it had nothing to do with the
item on the agenda, and I try to keep everybody focused on the item
on the agenda. And a commissioner might -- might say something out
of character in that, and I just don't respond to it because it has nothing
to do with the item on the agenda.
So if you want me to change that, we can go ahead and talk about
other things that doesn't pertain to the item on the agenda.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I was -- excuse me for speaking
out of turn, but I was just trying to establish whether it had any right to
be on the agenda. That was the only thing I was doing is trying to do
that. And I felt at that time that, by the answer I got -- first I got -- the
answer I got ignored the fact that I was supportive of moving it
forward, like everyone else was, and then next thing I got was no
answer to the question. Be very easy at that point in time to just say,
well, let's save this for commissioner comments at the end of the
meeting. I'd have no problem with that either.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. What I heard is, what do we
do in the future with items similar to that.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Just say, refer it to
commissioner comments, and we'll deal with it then.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: So I guess I'll continue to try to keep
things on track and hopefully we get there. I mean, it's not only us.
Page 286
March 11, 2008
It's others that try to -- I mean, that -- it's similar things on the agenda
but not quite the same thing.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I don't know. And I really don't
want to ask for the agenda items, start reviewing the tape. I still feel
that I was on the short end of the receiving end of that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah. And I apologize for that.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's okay. Your apology's
accepted. I'd just as soon forget it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. And with that, I don't think
there's any other business or comments.
Entertain a motion to adjourn.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion to adjourn.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion, signify by
saymg aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: We're adjourned.
****Commissioner Henning moved, seconded by Commissioner
Coletta and carried unanimously that the following items under the
Consent and Summary Agendas be approved and/or adopted ****
Item #16A1
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE WATER UTILITY FACILITY
FOR PEBBLEBROOKE COMMERCIAL, PHASE 4 - W /RELEASE
OF ANY UTILITIES PERFORMANCE SECURITY
Page 287
March 11, 2008
Item #16A2
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE WATER AND SEWER UTILITY
FACILITIES FOR CITYGA TE COMMERCE CENTER -
W/RELEASE OF ANY UTILITIES PERFORMANCE SECURITY
Item #16A3
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE WATER AND SEWER UTILITY
FACILITIES FOR THE ROOKERY AT MARCO CLUBHOUSE-
W/RELEASE OF ANY UTILITIES PERFORMANCE SECURITY
Item #16A4
RESOLUTION 2008-55: FINAL APPROVAL OF THE
ROADWAY (PRIVATE) AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS
FOR THE FINAL PLAT OF BRADFORD LAKES (CYPRESS
WOODS PUD) WITH THE ROADWAY AND DRAINAGE
IMPROVEMENTS BEING PRIV A TEL Y MAINTAINED -
W/RELEASE OF THE MAINTENANCE SECURITY
Item # 16A5
RESOLUTION 2008-56: FINAL APPROVAL OF THE
ROADWAY (PRIVATE) AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS
FOR THE FINAL PLAT OF COTTON GREEN (MARCO SHORES
/ FIDDLERS CREEK PUD), THE ROADWAY AND DRAINAGE
IMPROVEMENTS WILL BE PRIV A TEL Y MAINTAINED BY
THE FIDDLERS CREEK COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DISTRICT - W /RELEASE OF THE MAINTENANCE SECURITY
Item #16A6
Page 288
March 11, 2008
A PROPOSED SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT PROVIDING FOR
COMPROMISE AND RELEASE OF LIEN IN THE CODE
ENFORCEMENT ACTION ENTITLED COLLIER COUNTY VS.
RONALD FREEMAN, CEB CASE NO. 2005-26 - FINES
TOTALING $22,896.26, OF WHICH $4,271.26 HAVE BEEN PAID
Item #16A7
RESOLUTION 2008-57: FINAL APPROVAL OF THE
ROADWAY (PRIVATE) AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS
FOR THE FINAL PLAT OF GREY OAKS, UNIT ELEVEN, THE
ROADWAY AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS WILL BE
PRIV A TEL Y MAINTAINED - W /RELEASE OF THE
MAINTENANCE SECURITY
Item #16B1
AN AGREEMENT AND ACCEPTANCE OF A DRAINAGE
ACCESS AND MAINTENANCE EASEMENT FOR THE
DONATION OF PROPERTY REQUIRED FOR THE BA YSHORE
DRIVE & THOMASSON DRIVE STORMW ATER
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT. PROJECT #511341 - FISCAL
IMPACT OF $30.00 FOR RECORDING
Item # 16B2
BID #08-5042, DIESEL POWERED LOWBOY TRACTOR TO
WALLACE INTERNATIONAL TRUCKS. ($101,997) - TO
REPLACE A VEHICLE IN THE ROAD MAINTENANCE
DEPARTMENT
Page 289
March 11, 2008
Item #16B3
AWARDING CONTRACT(S) #08-5017, ANNUAL CONTRACT
FOR COUNTYWIDE EXOTIC VEGETATION REMOVAL TO
THE FOLLOWING FIRMS: RESOURCE RESTORATION, INC.,
ENVIRONMENT AL AQUATIC, EARTH BALANCE AND
AQUAGENIX. ($596,000 WAS SPENT IN FY07)
Item # 16B4
A BUDGET AMENDMENT TO MOVE THE REMAINING
BALANCE OF $200,000 FROM THE TROPICANA BOULEVARD
BRIDGE PROJECT (601621), TO THE PLANNING
CONSULTANT SERVICES PROJECT (601091) WITHIN THE
TRANSPORTATION SUPPORTED GAS TAX FUND - TO
COVER NON-RECURRING EXPENSES FOR THE
EV ALUA TION OF LAND USE AND DRI TRAFFIC FORECASTS
EAST OF 951
Item #16B5
A CHANGE ORDER TO KRAFT CONSTRUCTION COMPANY,
INC. TO MOVE SAVINGS IN THE AMOUNT OF $590,560.00,
AS A RESULT OF VALUE ENGINEERING TO ALLOWANCE
LINE ITEMS AMENDING CONTRACT #07-4173 GORDON
RIVER WATER QUALITY PARK (FREEDOM PARK) PROJECT
NO. 51018 - LINE ITEMS INCLUDE CIVIL, LANDSCAPING,
ARCHITECTURAL, STRUCTURAL AND SITE DEVELOPMENT
Item # 16B6
A CHANGE ORDER IN THE AMOUNT OF $31,250.00 TO
Page 290
March 11, 2008
QUALITY ENTERPRISES USA, INC. AMENDING THE ST.
ANDREWS BLVD. INTERCONNECT STORMWATER
IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT (PROJECT NO. 511401)
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT - NEEDED TO RELOCATE A
DETERIORATING W ASTEW A TER PIPE TO MAINTAIN THE
HYDRAULIC FLOW LINE
Item #16C1
REJECT THE RESULT OF BID NO. 08-5044, ATTAINED BY
PROFESSIONAL SERVICE INDUSTRIES, INC., TO SAMPLE,
ANAL YZE AND REPORT DATA COLLECTED FOR THE
GOLDEN GATE GROUNDWATER BASELINE MONITORING
PROJECT - THE LOWEST BID EXCEEDS THE AMOUNT
BUDGETED FOR THIS PROJECT; IT WILL BE RE-
ADVERTISED WITH A RESTRUCTURED BID PACKAGE
Item # 16C2
WORK ORDER NO. QE-FT-3535-08-03 IN THE AMOUNT OF
$342,830.00 TO QUALITY ENTERPRISES USA, INC., FOR
INST ALLA TION OF JWC FINE SCREENS AT SOUTH COLLIER
WATER RECLAMATION FACILITY (SCWRF) UNDER
CONTRACT 04-3535, ANNUAL CONTRACT FOR
UNDERGROUND UTILITY CONTRACTING SERVICES,
PROJECT 73961 AND APPROVAL OF NECESSARY BUDGET
AMENDMENT, PROJECT 72508 - TO GRIND AND FILTER THE
WASTEWATER SO IT CAN BE PUMPED AND PROCESSED
THROUGH THE PLANT
Item #16D1
Page 291
March 11, 2008
FUNDING FROM THE 4-H FOUNDATION CLUBS, INC., IN
THE AMOUNT OF $38,000 FOR THE 4-H OUTREACH
PROGRAM MANAGED BY THE COLLIER COUNTY
UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDAlIFAS EXTENSION DEPARTMENT
AND APPROVAL OF A BUDGET AMENDMENT IN THE
AMOUNT OF $14,000 - FOR A FULL TIME POSITION'S
SALARY AND BENEFITS
Item #16D2 - Withdrawn
A COASTAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE (CAC), SUB
COMMITTEE TO EVALUATE WIGGINS PASS MODELING
AND MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CONSIDERATION BY
THE TDC AND BCC. THIS COMMITTEE IS TO BE CHAIRED
BY HEIDI KULPA FROM THE CAC - TO RECOMMEND AN
APPROPRIATE REMEDY TO CONTAIN THE EROSION AND
KEEP THE PASS OPEN TO BOATERS
Item #16D3
A CORRECTIVE LIEN AGREEMENT AND RELEASE OF LIEN
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 130, TRAIL
RIDGE, EAST NAPLES - DEFERRING $19,372.46 IN IMPACT
FEES
Item # 16D4
A LIEN AGREEMENT WITH SOYLA MARIA CRUZ (OWNER)
FOR DEFERRAL OF 100% OF COLLIER COUNTY IMPACT
Page 292
March 11, 2008
FEES FOR AN OWNER-OCCUPIED AFFORDABLE HOUSING
UNIT LOCATED AT LOT 33, LIBERTY LANDING,
IMMOKALEE - DEFERRING $12,442.46 IN IMPACT FEES
Item #16D5
A LIEN AGREEMENT WITH HEATHER LYNN BUGGER
(OWNER) FOR DEFERRAL OF 100% OF COLLIER COUNTY
IMP ACT FEES FOR AN OWNER-OCCUPIED AFFORDABLE
HOUSING UNIT LOCATED AT LOT 36, LIBERTY LANDING,
IMMOKALEE - DEFERRING $12,442.46 IN IMPACT FEES
Item # 16D6
A LIEN AGREEMENT WITH ARTURO LARA LARA AND
BEA TRIZ LARA (OWNERS) FOR DEFERRAL OF 100% OF
COLLIER COUNTY IMP ACT FEES FOR AN OWNER-
OCCUPIED AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNIT LOCATED AT LOT
32, LIBERTY LANDING, IMMOKALEE - DEFERRING
$12,442.46 IN IMPACT FEES
Item # 16D7
A LIEN AGREEMENT WITH DOREEN ANNETTE SAUNIER
(OWNER) FOR DEFERRAL OF 100% OF COLLIER COUNTY
IMPACT FEES FOR AN OWNER-OCCUPIED AFFORDABLE
HOUSING UNIT LOCATED AT LOT 53, TRAIL RIDGE, EAST
NAPLES - DEFERRING $19,372.46 IN IMPACT FEES
Item #16D8
A LIEN AGREEMENT WITH JESUS MARTINEZ AND IRMA
Page 293
March 11, 2008
Y ADIRA RODRIGUEZ (OWNERS) FOR DEFERRAL OF 100%
OF COLLIER COUNTY IMPACT FEES FOR AN OWNER-
OCCUPIED AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNIT LOCATED AT LOT
38, LIBERTY LANDING, IMMOKALEE - DEFERRING
$12,442.46 IN IMPACT FEES
Item # 16D9
AN AMENDED PROPOSAL FOR DISASTER RECOVERY
INITIATIVE SUPPLEMENTAL GRANT FUNDS TO THE
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS AND
AUTHORIZING SIGNATURE AUTHORITY TO THE COUNTY
MANAGER AND DESIGNEES TO SUBMIT REQUIRED
REPORTS - THE GRANT TOTALS $2,814,698.15, APPROVAL
WILL F ACILIT A TE THE APPROVAL OF OUR GRANT
APPLICATION WITH DCA
Item #16D10
REJECT BID #07- 4098 FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF NEW
SOCCER FIELD AT EAST NAPLES COMMUNITY PARK -
BIDS RECEIVED WERE TOO COSTLY FOR THE PROJECT
Item #16D11
A FLORIDA FISH AND WILDLIFE CONSERVATION
COMMISSION (FWC) DIVISION OF MARINE FISHERIES
MANAGEMENT, ARTIFICIAL REEF CONSTRUCTION GRANT
APPLICATION IN THE AMOUNT OF $60,000 - FOR THE
ENHACEMENT AND EXPANSION OF RECREATIONAL AND
COMMERCIAL FISHING AND DIVING OPPORTUNITIES
Page 294
March 11, 2008
Item #16D12
A SUMMARY OF THE IMPACT FEE DEFERRAL
AGREEMENTS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL IN FY08,
INCLUDING THE TOTAL NUMBER OF AGREEMENTS
APPROVED, THE TOTAL DOLLAR AMOUNT DEFERRED
AND THE BALANCE REMAINING FOR ADDITIONAL
DEFERRALS IN FY08 - AS DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
Item #16E1
THE SALE OF COLLIER COUNTY SURPLUS PROPERTY ON
MARCH 29, 2008 - THROUGH ATKINSON REALITY &
AUCTION, INC.
Item # 16E2
REPORT AND RATIFY STAFF-APPROVED CHANGE ORDERS
AND CHANGES TO WORK ORDERS TO BOARD-APPROVED
CONTRACTS - FOR THE PERIOD OF JANUARY 25,2008
THROUGH FEBRUARY 21, 2008
Item # 16E3
AN AGREEMENT WITH THE SHERIFFS OFFICE FOR THE USE
OF INMATE LABOR - FOR NON-VIOLENT, MINIMUM RISK
OFFENDERS TO PERFORM CERTAIN TASKS; SUCH AS
CLEANING PARKING DECKS, CLEANING KENNELS AND
WASHING CARS
Item #16F1
Page 295
March 11, 2008
ALL NECESSARY BUDGET AMENDMENTS THAT
MEMORIALIZE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMISSIONERS'
DECISION ON FEBRUARY 26, 2008 (AGENDA ITEM lOF) TO
USE GENERAL FUND RESERVES TO OFFSET ESTIMATED
EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES FUND (490) TRANSPORT
REVENUE SHORTFALLS FOR THE REMAINDER OF FY08
AND FOR FY09. THE ESTIMATED FY08 SHORTFALL IS
$2,237,200; GENERAL FUND (00l) RESERVES FOR
UNFUNDED CAP IT AL REQUIREMENTS WILL BE
TRANSFERRED TO EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES FUND
(490) FOR THE FY08 SHORTFALL. TURN BACK OF EXCESS
FEES FROM THE CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS FROM FY07
EXCEEDED BUDGETED TURN BACK BY $7,240,592. THESE
EXCESS FEES WILL BE APPROPRIATED AND $2,538,000 OF
THAT APPROPRIATION WILL BE TRANSFERRED TO
EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES FUND (490) TO OFFSET
THE ANTICIPATED FY09 TRANSPORT FEE REVENUE
SHORTFALL - AS DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
Item #16G 1
THE 2007 ANNUAL REPORT OF THE CRA REQUIRED BY
FLORIDA STATUE 163.356(3)(C), BY MARCH 31ST AND
DIRECTING THE COUNTY MANAGER OR HIS DESIGNEE TO
FILE THE ANNUAL REPORT WITH THE COUNTY CLERK
AND PUBLISH NOTICE OF THE FILING, AS REQUIRED BY
THE FLORIDA STATUTES
Item #16H1
Page 296
March 11, 2008
COMMISSIONER FIALA'S REIMBURSEMENT FOR HER
ANNUAL MEMBERSHIP TO CREW LAND & WATER TRUST
SERVING A VALID PUBLIC PURPOSE. $25.00 TO BE PAID
FROM COMMISSIONER FIALA'S TRAVEL BUDGET - HELD
ON FEBRUARY 20, 2008
Item # 16H2
COMMISSIONER FIALA'S REIMBURSEMENT FOR
ATTENDING A FUNCTION SERVING A VALID PUBLIC
PURPOSE. COMMISSIONER FIALA WILL BE ATTENDING
THE 4TH ANNUAL FREEDOM OF THE PRESS LUNCHEON
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 12,2008 AT THE NAPLES HILTON.
$30.00 TO BE PAID FROM COMMISSIONER FIALA'S TRAVEL
BUDGET
Item # 16H3
COMMISSIONER FIALA'S REIMBURSEMENT FOR
ATTENDING A FUNCTION SERVING A VALID PUBLIC
PURPOSE. COMMISSIONER FIALA ATTENDED THE GIRL
SCOUT COOK-IE-OFF FUNDRAISER SUNDAY, FEBRUARY
17, 2008 AT THE NAPLES BEACH HOTEL & GOLF CLUB.
$10.00 TO BE PAID FROM COMMISSIONER FIALA'S TRAVEL
BUDGET - LOCATED AT 851 GULF SHORE BOULEVARD
NORTH
Item #16H4
COMMISSIONER FIALA'S REIMBURSEMENT FOR
ATTENDING A FUNCTION SERVING A VALID PUBLIC
PURPOSE. COMMISSIONER FIALA ATTENDED THE FRIENDS
Page 297
March 11, 2008
OF COLLIER FASHION SHOW SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 23,
2008 AT THE ROYAL PALM COUNTRY CLUB. $55.00 TO BE
P AID FROM COMMISSIONER FIALA'S TRAVEL BUDGET -
LOCATED IN THE LEL Y COUNTRY CLUB COMMUNITY
Item # 16H5
COMMISSIONER FIALA'S REIMBURSEMENT FOR
ATTENDING A FUNCTION SERVING A VALID PUBLIC
PURPOSE. COMMISSIONER FIALA ATTENDED THE EAST
NAPLES CIVIC ASSOCIATION LUNCHEON ON THURSDAY,
FEBRUARY 21, 2008 AT CARRABBA'S. $21.00 TO BE PAID
FROM COMMISSIONER FIALA'S TRAVEL BUDGET
Item #16H6
COMMISSIONER COLETTA'S REIMBURSEMENT SERVING A
VALID PUBLIC PURPOSE. COMMISSIONER COLETTA
ATTENDED THE CRYSTAL LAKE RESORT LUNCHEON,
MARCH 3, 2008. $5 TO BE PAID FROM COMMISSIONER
COLETTA'S TRAVEL BUDGET - WITH IMMOKALEE
HABITAT FOR HUMANITY CREW, LOCATED AT 14960
COLLIER BOULEVARD
Item # 16H7
COMMISSIONER COLETTA'S REIMBURSEMENT SERVING A
VALID PUBLIC PURPOSE. COMMISSIONER COLETTA
ATTENDED THE HODGES UNIVERSITY IMMOKALEE SITE
OPEN HOUSE ON SATURDAY, MARCH 8, 2008. $15.99 TO BE
P AID FROM COMMISSIONER COLETTA'S TRAVEL BUDGET
- LOCATED AT 1170 HARVEST DRIVE
Page 298
March 11, 2008
Item #1611 - Moved to Item #10K
Item #1611
THE PUBLISHING OF ONE PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING
SHERIFF HUNTER'S RECOMMENDED ORDINANCE
ESTABLISHING A POLICY FOR THE COLLECTION OF
ADMINISTRATIVE REGISTRATION FEES FOR THE INITIAL
REGISTRATION AND RE-REGISTRATION OF INDIVIDUALS
REQUIRED BY FLORIDA STATUTE TO REGISTER WITH THE
SHERIFF AS A CAREER OFFENDER, CONVICTED FELON,
SEX OFFENDER OR SEXUAL PREDATOR, PLACING THIS
ORDINANCE ON THE BOARD'S SUMMARY AGENDA
Item # 16J2
DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD OF FEBRUARY 16,2008
TO FEBRUARY 22,2008 AND SUBMISSION INTO THE
OFFICIAL RECORDS OF THE BOARD
Item # 1613
DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD OF FEBRUARY 23, 2008
TO FEBRUARY 29, 2008 AND SUBMISSION INTO THE
OFFICIAL RECORDS OF THE BOARD
Item #16K1
AN OFFER OF JUDGMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $16,000 FOR
THE TAKING OF PARCEL 143 IN THE LAWSUIT STYLED
COLLIER COUNTY V. CHARLES R. WILSON, ET AL., CASE
Page 299
March 11, 2008
NO. 02-5164-CA (IMMOKALEE ROAD, PROJECT NO. 60018).
(FISCAL IMPACT: $4,521.00) - FOR ADDITIONAL
COMPENSATION AND ATTORNEY'S FEES
Item #16K2 - Moved to Item #12B
Item #17A
RESOLUTION 2008-58: V A-2007-AR-12629, SARA DE LA ROSA
IS REQUESTING AN AFTER-THE-FACT VARIANCE OF 2.3
FEET TO PERMIT THE ENCROACHMENT OF A SINGLE-
F AMIL Y DWELLING INTO THE REQUIRED 30-FOOT FRONT
YARD SETBACK AREA OF THE RESIDENTIAL SINGLE
FAMILY (RSF-3) ZONING DISTRICT. THE 0.36-ACRE
SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 1201 CAMELLIA
AVENUE, LOT 24, BLOCK C OF THE IMMOKALEE
HIGHLAND SUBDIVISION, IN SECTION 33, TOWNSHIP 46,
RANGE 29, OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
Page 300
March 11, 2008
*****
There being no further business for the good of the County, the
meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 6:54 p.m.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS/EX
OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF
SPErST CTS.UNDER ITS CONTROL
TOM HENNING, Chai an
ATTEST:
DW llTE:,aROCK, CLERK
>.. , .r
i:.:jt > ,~, to Clw. triIII I
~ j~ilt" .1,< .
These minutes approved by the Board on Lf 16/05
presented V or as corrected
, as
TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF GREGORY
COURT REPORTING SERVICES, INC., BY TERRI
LEWIS.
Page 301