Loading...
BCC Minutes 03/19/1996 R REGULAR MEETING OF MARCH 19, 1996, OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COHMISSIONERS LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Board of County Commissioners in and for the County of Collier, and also acting as the Board of Zoning Appeals and as the governing board(s) of such special districts as have been created according to law and having conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:02 a.m. in REGULAR SESSION in Building "F" of the Government Complex, East Naples, Florida, with the following members present: CHAIRPERSON: John C. Norris VICE CHAIRPERSON: Timothy L. Hancock Timothy J. Constantine Bettye J. Matthews Pamela S. Hac'Kie ALSO PRESENT: W. Neil Dorrill, County Manager David C. Weigel, County Attorney Sue Filson, Administrative Assistant Lieutenant Paul Canady Item #3 & #3A AGENDA AND CONSENT AGENDA - APPROVED AND/OR ADOPTED WITH CHANGES CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Call the county commission meeting to order on this March 19, 1996. Mr. Dotrill, invocation and a pledge, please. MR. DORRILL: Heavenly Father, we thank you, as always, this morning for the opportunities that you will create for us today. We hope that we are equal to that task and, as always, that you bless our time here together. We ask your special blessings on the elected leadership of this community and the county commission as they make the important business decisions for Collier County and its people. We give thanks for all the wonders that you've created and for your grace. And, again, we'd ask that you bless our time here together today, and we pray these things in Jesus' name. Amen. (The pledge of allegiance was recited in unison.) CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Mr. Dorrill, do we have any changes to our agenda today? MR. DORRILL: Yes, sir. Good morning, Commissioners. We have several changes this morning. I have three add-on items, and I have one item that I would like to move off the consent agenda onto your regular agenda for presentation. The first add-on item is under the Board of County Commissioners at the request of Ms. Matthews pertaining to a discussion of the possible continuance of the LDC meeting scheduled for 5:05 tomorrow evening. I also have a request to add item 10(D) under the county commission which is an update regarding the status of the bond issue that was discussed last week and some associated budget amendments. Item ll(A) under other constitutional officers is for the board to ratify those budget amendments and appropriate funds for the payment of the arbitrage rebates at the request of the clerk. And then the item that is on the consent agenda under community development, 16(A)(6) is moving and will become 8(A)(1) which is a consideration of some modifications to the grant for the transportation for the disadvantaged program. There are several items that I need to bring up under communications today, and I will mention those at the appropriate time, but that's all that I have, Mr. Chairman. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Commissioner Matthews, do you have anything additional? COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: No. No, thank you. No, I don't, sir. Thank you. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Commissioner Hancock? COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: No, sir. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Commissioner Hac'Kie? COHMISSIONER MAC'KIE: No, sir. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Commissioner Constantine? COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Mr. Chairman, I have no changes. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Then we need a motion on our agenda. COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Mr. Chairman, I'll make a motion we approve the agenda and consent agenda as amended. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Second. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor, signify by saying aye. Those opposed? Item #4 HINUTES OF REGULAR HEETING OF FEBRUARY 20, 1996 - APPROVED AS PRESENTED We have some -- COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Mr. Chairman, motion to approve the minutes of February 20, 1996, regular meeting of the Board of County Commissioners. COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: Second. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor, signify by saying aye. Opposed? There are none. Item #5B EMPLOYEE SERVICE AWARD - NOT PRESENT DUE TO ABSENTEEISM Our service award recipient is not here today, I understand? COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: I understand he's ill. COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: Mr. Jerry Hamm is to receive a 15-year service award, and apparently he's out sick today so -- COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: The whole thing has been cancelled now. COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: So -- COHMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Forget it. COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: I certainly understand being ill today. COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: We'll try and catch Mr. Hamm on a better day. Item #5C TOM HCDANIEL, GRAPHICS SECTION, COHMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION RECOGNIZED AS EMPLOYEE OF THE MONTH FOR MARCH, 1996 CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Then we'll move on to 5(C). This is our employee of the month award. Let me read the letter to our employee of the month this month. It's Tom HcDaniel. Tom, are you here? MR. HCDANIEL: Yes, I am. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Tom, would you come up and face the camera for us, please. Dear Mr. HcDaniel, it is indeed a pleasure for us to announce your selection as Collier County's employee of the month for March 1996. This -- Well, March is not even over and you've already won it, Tom. That's pretty good. This well-deserved recognition is for your valuable contributions to the county through your work in the community development department. This honor includes an exceptional performance plaque as well as a $50 cash award which I am proud to present to you. On behalf of the Board of County Commissioners, I offer our sincere congratulations and also our gratitude for your dependability and dedication. Tom, you get this nice plaque and a $50 check. MR. MCDANIEL: Hey, dinner. Thank you very much. COHMISSIONER HAC'KIE: Thank you, sir. COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Well done. MR. HCDANIEL: Thank you. COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: Congratulations. MR. HCDANIEL: Thank you. COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: Thank you. Item #SA1 TRANSPORTATION DISADVANTAGED PROGRAM FARE STRUCTURE AND PRIORITIZATION POLICY CHANGES AND AUTHORIZATION TO UTILIZE ADDITIONAL LOCAL GRANT FUNDS FOR THE TD PROGRAM - APPROVED CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Our next item is the item that was moved off the consent agenda. 16(A)(6) has become 8(A)(1). Mr. Perry. MR. PERRY: Good morning, Mr. Chairman. For the record, my name is Jeff Perry of your planning services department and also the metropolitan planning organization coordinator. This item is the reconsideration or additional consideration from an item that you heard in December of last year. You may recall that we came before you for the annual review of the transportation disadvantaged contract with TECH, Incorporated. There is a -- there was normally a $75,000 contribution that the -- that the board made to the program. The board approved that in December. In addition, there was a request from a local coordinating board for an additional $25,000 that the board I'll say tentatively approved subject to reconsideration of the fare structure and the priority schedules that has been established by the local coordinating board. In doing that, the board asked staff to go back and work with the coordinating board to review the fare structures and the schedule of priorities and to come back to you at some later date. We have done that. The -- I'm pleased to report to you that the fare structure has been modified. We have reduced the fares on certain kinds of trips to make it a little bit more affordable for those people and also modified slightly the prioritization schedule that allows for certain kinds of group-sponsored or group-organized trips, recreational types of trips to be a little bit higher up on the priority list, still not as high as some of the more important trips like medical and employment trips, but it's certainly a little bit higher than the unscheduled or unorganized recreational types of trips. That should all be in your backup material, and if you have any additional questions about the program, I'll be happy to try and answer them for you. I also have John Lawson from TECH in the audience to answer any specific questions about the program or its operations that you have. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Commissioner Hancock. COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: Mr. Perry, what's the predominant area of growth that we've seen in the number of trips? Is there a certain segment? Are we dealing with more senior citizens? More disabled? I mean, is there -- is there a single area that seems to be growing more than others that we're responding to? MR. PERRY: I -- I'd probably like to ask John to answer that because he sees those numbers every day as far as the types of trips that are being offered as well as -- COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Okay. MR. PERRY: -- as the membership role. That is increasing daily, and I think he's probably prepared to answer that. MR. LAWSON: For the record, I'm John Lawson, the executive director of TECH and the coordinator for transportation disadvantaged services in Collier County, Mr. Chairman. We're the -- As to the additional people that are coming into the program, those are largely from the elderly population, and their needs are directly related more to shopping and medical, and we -- we tend to address their medical needs as a priority. So in the growth of the program, those are the largest numbers, and we do during the season receive an additional number during the seasonal population growth that we experience here. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Thank you. COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS: I don't have any comment. I mean, I've been through the discussion of this, and I think we're all aware that last fall we were looking at $6 per trip expenses, and -- and many of our citizens who wanted to make recreational trips were unable to get them because of the priority on the -- on the listing. The priority for recreation is still not very high but, however, the cost has reduced, and that's one of the reasons that the LDC has recommended that the $25,000 that were set aside last fall be go ahead and funded. There's just not any way to keep the trip costs down without accessing those funds as well. It's kind of, I guess, a pay-me-now or pay-me-later program. It's -- There's just so much money available to do what we need to do. And if there's not any other questions regarding it, I'd like to move approval. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Commissioner Constantine. COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Just a comment, and I'll second that. Just a comment as we go into the fall or as we go into our spring and summer budget season and prepare for next fall, I know Mr. Dotrill has been talking with Lee County about Lee Tran and public transportation and so on. It seems to me we have two issues that are not related that can be related, and that is the transportation disadvantaged program we've clearly had some difficulty with this year and need to address immediately. The public transportation and Lee Tran, I know at least a couple of members of this board have expressed some concern. While the idea is a good one as we get into a budget-crunch year, transportation is a money loser in every single community that it's in in the United States, and now might not be the time to start a regular bus line, particularly with -- We just had before the MPO last month a gentleman who is starting a regular bus route privately, and he has a regular circular route around the county with a couple of wings out on it, and if he is starting that with zero tax dollars, I'm not sure we need to compete with him with tax dollars. And my thought is, there are grant funds available for transportation disadvantaged that may not necessarily be available for general transportation, and we need to focus in on those. But I think if we're going to take on any additional expense for transportation this coming year, we need to straighten out the transportation needs that are already there and make sure that's covered because those are the people who are clearly in the most need and make sure we take care of that first. And if we're going to prioritize the two -- and my concern is going into this year on a tight-budget year, I'm not sure we can do both. And so if it comes down to a choice of straightening out the transportation disadvantaged and taking care of the people with medical needs and employment needs and so on, that is a much higher priority than experimenting with a public transportation system and competing with a private one that is just starting. COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS: Can I pick up on that? Because an interesting thing was -- was happening over the weekend while I was in the Washington D.C. area. An amazing thing was occurring. Even though I was ill, I was watching the news, quite a bit of it really. But, anyway, it seems that the Washington metropolitan transportation authority is withdrawing some of its routes around that area because they are unsuccessful as far as ridership is concerned and monetarily as well. I mean, the ridership is low; therefore, the fares are low, and the -- the -- and the routes can't support themselves. The most amazing thing that's happening, though, is a private company is investigating picking it up, and they think they can make it profitable. So is there a lesson to be learned here? I think so, but it's something to watch. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Okay. Thank you. I believe -- COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: We have a motion. I'll second the motion. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: You seconded; right? COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: I did. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: We already have a second. We have a motion and a second to approve. All those in favor, signify by saying aye. Opposed? None. MR. LAWSON: Thank you. Item #8B1 REPORT PRESENTED REGARDING STORMWATER IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMS IN ANTICIPATION OF THE SUHMER'S RAINY SEASON CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: We'll go to 8(B)(1), stormwater improvement update. COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Is that your visual, John? Adding a little pizazz to the presentation? MR. BOLDT: Good morning. For the record, this is John Boldt, the stormwater management director. I have my raindrop tie on again this morning to remind you that it will rain again in Collier County and hopefully not as much as it did last year. It was an unusual event. But in case it does, we'd like to brief you a little bit on some of the things that we've already done or are planning to do to prepare for next season's rainy season. Last November you had action to accelerate our program to allow us to fund additional staff, give us additional monies to handle situations, and we'd just like to bring you up to date. The first thing we did is we hired a coordinator in my department, Bruce HcNall, and Bruce is out working this morning. He had a really early appointment, and he thought he could get here soon. But Bruce has been with us since the end of January and is on staff, and he's got a number of projects assigned to him, and you'll see more of him if you haven't already met him. We also have hired a fourth two-man crew that's going to really greatly assist us in a lot of our projects, particularly those involved in our water level control structures and stormwater pumping stations and brush removal, and that crew is functioning and has been real busy here recently. And a new addition just this last week was the purchase of our new long-reach hydraulic excavator. This had been delayed somewhat in getting down here, but it was delivered last week, and this morning it's sitting out south of the building if you didn't get a chance to go by it. We're really excited about it. The operators have about a week on it so far, and he says it's a great tool, and he's really excited about what he can do over the summer. We have a number of projects lined up that we will be discussing with you. Some of the things we have done to date so far -- I'll just go through them real quickly. On the Lely main canal southwest of U.S. 41, we have earlier had our older dragline in there, and it did what it could. About three-quarters of the work was done. We ran into soft soils down there. It was a little bit towards the tail end of the rainy season. So we pulled out, waiting for the new long-reach, and that's what we'll be doing this morning. We're going to finish up that job. It will only take about five days to do that. We also got involved in a project at the Westlake subdivision up between -- it's between Goodlette and U.S. 41 south of Pine Ridge, and we thought it was a real simple Brazilian pepper removal project when we first got involved, but it's magnified beyond that. It turns out that the outlet to the drain subdivision -- they had a great deal of flooding last summer. They had two or three foot in the cul-de-sacs for weeks on end. We discovered the outlet pipe was buried in about four foot of sediment. So we excavated that. We got checking the pipe upstream from there, and just even yesterday we discovered a piece of pipe in the storm drain is missing. Apparently the homeowner in putting their pool in dug out the pipe, so there's no pipe there. We had other blocks. And so we've been -- spent a great deal of time in the last several weeks between the Brazilian pepper and -- excavating that and putting some catch basin lids on and those sorts of things so -- COHMISSIONER HAC'KIE: Don't you tell the neighbors who had been complaining that it was their neighbor who had taken out a piece of the pipe? COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: Let's not start wars. MR. BOLDT: I think -- Yeah. We have a subdivision leader out there. When we get all done, we'll brief him on all the things we do so they can pass it on to their homeowners' association. I'm sure they'll appreciate that. Another project we've completed recently is Riviera Golf Estates, unit number four which is along the south side of Crowne Pointe. We had some power pole protecting pipes in there. They were very controversial over the years. We've finally got FP and L's permission to remove them. So the culverts have been removed, and our crews went in and reshaped it, and we riprapped around the poles and opened up that waterway. So that removes that possible conflict. Also we'll be talking more about this in our next presentation. We've removed three unnecessary culverts in the open ditch up in the northeast side of Immokalee, and I have a map, and I'll share those later on. We've completed phase four of the Brazilian pepper removal program. That's been done successfully, and we're in the process of getting ready for phase five. Projects that are currently under way, we have engaged the services of a consultant to do the surveying and incidental design work for the Sperling Court storm drain, the Cypress Way East storm drain, Oakes Boulevard drain swale, and the Lely/St. Andrews berm and swale projects. Those are all under way. We've got most of the surveying done on those, and they're plotting up the surveys, and we're still hopeful we can get most of that work completed before the rainy season. They all are related to some problem areas on our map that we have identified last summer. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Excuse me, John. MR. BOLDT: Yes, sir. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: That -- Item D, the St. Andrews berm/swale, is that the one that's near the intersection there of Forest Hills? MR. BOLDT: No. This is up off St. Andrews. The road into the high school is called -- CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Okay. MR. BOLDT: It's northerly and easterly of there. What happens, that big wetland out east of there floods and is going through those people's yards into the roads. We're going to try to berm it off and separate that water. We're going to be looking for our office of capital projects management department to give us assistance in coordinating these projects. We've also -- staff with our own resources and the county surveyor have completed the surveys and designing a Goodlette Road cleanup, Solana to Pine Ridge. There's a lot of sediment there, up to two-foot deep, and we're going to try to get that work completed. There's also surveyed a berm and swale potential along the east side of Kings Lake, intercept the water that comes out of Crowne Pointe and is causing them some flooding. Those are two projects we're hoping to get the assistance of the transportation department and their equipment to do that earth-working. We have got the bid package ready to go. It's over in purchasing, and we're reviewing it for phase four and then probably our last phase, our Brazilian pepper removal program. We've got 14 more sites selected, and for now that's pretty well going to clean up the major problems we have of Brazilian pepper. Now it's a matter of kind of keeping it under control. We're also going to give to you in a few minutes a proposal on State Road 29 culvert improvements. We've already started work on the Immokalee Airport Road -- airport ditch -- airport. And, again, I'll show you that map in a little bit. That's going to tie that all together. We have a problem area up near Ridge and Rosemary Court. There's an area up there that's been a depressed area as far as elevations, a lot of ponding. We're doing some survey work to see if we can't relieve that. We also have a cooperative effort going on in the dredging project in the Cocohatchee Canal along the north side of Immokalee Road as it turns and goes northwest along Palm River area. Kevin Dugan from natural resource management department is doing an excellent job of coordinating that between the transportation department, the hospital site. Big Cypress Basin is going to provide some equipment, and Kevin has been doing all the permitting activities with DEP, and we hope to get that under way to remove those sediments in that area. Proposed projects that we still hope to get under way -- not necessarily getting them complete before the rainy season because of the long involvement and the work. We've got major projects planned for the Avalon School outfall ditch, the Kelly outfall, and the Shadowwood ditch. Those are going to be on line soon but probably won't get completed until next fall. We also have a situation up off of Wiggins Pass Road and north up through the whole series of projects of the Village -- Bentley Village and the Audubon where the water has been stacking up. We think we've isolated where the problem is. It's going to involve the removal of some exotics and removal of some sediment that's accumulated in a natural flowway, and we're going to make sure that gets done before the summer. We've gone out and -- and rented for four, five weeks a small tractor backhoe, and we have a number of projects that were -- already got that involved in. First of all, Westlake -- it was instrumental in cleaning out the sediments out there and installing a piece of pipe. It's now working on the Wilderness outfall along the south side of the Wilderness, enlarge that, and direct more water from Goodlette east into the Gordon River, and then we're going to also do the same thing up along the north side of Burning Tree, east of Goodlette Road. There's a nattower ditch up there that we're going to hopefully be able to use the backhoe. And in the Poinciana subdivision, the outfall that goes south and then over to the Gordon River as it crosses the Coachhouse Lane and the Hodges property, there's quite a narrowing of the ditch there. We've got Mr. Hodges' cooperation to use a small backhoe and widen that out and give that a better outfall. Some of the others things we're planning to do -- Clear out on the east side of Golden Gate Estates south of the alley there's a branch of the Prairie Canal that we're going to put a little bid package together and see if we can get private contractors interested in doing a clearing and snagging project out there, not necessarily excavating but just try to open the thing up to see what we've got, remove a bunch of debris dams that we know are in there. That particular ditch hasn't been touched in some 30 years and is causing some problems out there. So hopefully in the next month or so we're going to get back to you with some reasonable bids for private contractors to do that work. Then we have two or more other projects we're going to get the long-reach involved with. One is the Manatee School ditch on the East Trail, that we have all the necessary permits we need now and easements to do that. At this point, unless you have some questions, I'd like to turn it over to Paul Van Buskirk who would like to brief you on the activities what the Big Cypress Basin, South Florida Water Management District is doing. Questions? CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Commissioner Matthews. COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS: Mr. Boldt, thank -- thank you for the update. You -- You seem to be all over the county which is indicative of our water problem last year; it was all over the county. I see two -- two projects here that I think I'd like to know a little bit more about, and that is item seven under C, coordination of dredging project on Cocohatchee Canal at Palm River, and I'm aware that some work needs to be done there, but isn't the Cocohatchee Canal under the control of the Big Cypress Basin? MR. BOLDT: Yes, ma'am. I think it's been declared -- It works with the basin -- COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS: Right. MR. BOLDT: -- east of their water level control structure which is by the motel there and Palm River. COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS: And they're building another water-control structure. MR. BOLDT: East of there. This work is in a tidal area. Below that it's really not part of the works of the basin. Paul can address that. There was some sedimentations occurring over the years, but it was greatly accelerated when we four-laned Immokalee Road and some other construction activities of the structure. It's gotten now to be a problem. So we have a cooperative effort. COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS: Okay. MR. BOLDT: The county is permitting it. The transportation department is going to build the spoil berm. The Big Cypress Basin is going to put their Aquamog in it unless it's done up at Bonita, and then it's going to convert it to a dredge. So we're all working together on it. COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS: That's fine. And the other question deals with the Prairie Canal. Is that not part of the Big Cypress Basin responsibility also, the maintenance of that? MR. BOLDT: The main Prairie Canal -- This is one of the lateral branches that goes off from the main, and it goes up to Broken Wing Ranch, Cliff Fort. Are you familiar with that situation? It's a small ditch. It's only about 20, 30 foot wide, but it serves that area. That's not part of the Big Cypress Basin area. COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS: Okay. I just wanted to be sure that we're talking about a branch of the Prairie Canal. MR. BOLDT: Correct. COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS: Thank you. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Commissioner Hancock. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Mr. Boldt, I have one item to add to your consideration now that the long-reach has arrived. MR. BOLDT: Yes, sir. COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: We had a washout at Germain Avenue and Vanderbilt Drive in North Naples. It's on the west side of the road. It's where there was an outfall. We had a washout of sediment in that area that the sediment ended up in the canal. We couldn't get the sediment out because we didn't have the long-reach equipment to get over the existing mangroves to pull that material out. Now we have the equipment. If we wait until the wet season when we get more flow into that canal, it's going to push that sediment down the canal. So it's at Getmain Drive and Vanderbilt Drive in the Vanderbilt Beach area. If you would please look at that and see if the equipment we have now will allow us to do that work, that's the only -- only problem in completing that -- that refit down there. MR. BOLDT: Okay. We'll take a look and see how accessible it will be. COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: Thank you. MR. BOLDT: This -- As you can see, that -- that new excavator is on crawlets. It takes quite a bit to move it around, but something like that if it's critical -- COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: I don't know if it would be appropriate, but if it is, I'd appreciate knowing. MR. BOLDT: Very good. COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: Thank you. COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: As long as we've got you here, driving and walking the County Barn area, it looks like you've done some work done there as well, just some basic cleanout work on County Barn; is that accurate? MR. BOLDT: Transportation may have done that. Our department was not involved. COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: On the east side? COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Yeah. COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: Yeah. COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: And then just -- Can you explain for me -- I know as part of the widening of Davis, they're doing some with the drainage on the way down. Can you give me a 30-second synopsis on the impacts that will have on those -- MR. BOLDT: Well -- COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: -- all those communities? MR. BOLDT: Quite honestly, I'm a little nervous about -- We're in this awkward state of construction. We had a system in there that was working barely as far as the water on the north side and passing through the culverts along County Barn, Crowne Pointe. Construction activities, you know, interrupt that, different stages as they perform construction of the storm sewers and so on. At this -- this particular moment, we're vulnerable. If we had a big rain today, we would have some problems, but we're working with them, make contacts with the construction manager to make sure this thing is put into good shape so we can handle it this summer. COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Once construction is completed, you're fairly comfortable with -- or maybe not. MR. BOLDT: I have reviewed their plans before they went out to bid. We made a special trip to Orlando to talk to the consultant and expressed a lot of our concerns. They assured me that they were taking all these things into consideration, and once the system was all together, then it was going to work. I'm still going to watch real close because there's -- it doesn't take much backup north of there to back water all the way up to Radio Road. It's so flat and so vulnerable, and the only thing we've got at this point near the Osprey Landing and Crowne Pointe is that 24-inch culvert. If we don't keep that completely open and free flowing, we're going to have some problems. COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Thank you. COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: Mr. Chairman, I've got one more question. Mr. Boldt, something that -- that I've been hearing about for the last couple of months -- and I'm sure my colleagues have too -- is a suggestion coming from South Florida Water Management District that they want to direct water from the Imperial River Basin into the Cocohatchee River Basin, and that water undoubtedly will have to cross Lee County/Collier County line in order to accomplish that, and I'm -- I'm a little bit concerned, and if -- if you could spend the time to give us a report of -- of what you see as the pros and cons of bringing that water into the Cocohatchee Canal system, and do we already have all the infrastructure that will let that water come in a controlled manner and not just over whatever land it happens to flow over. MR. BOLDT: I'll be glad to address that. Mr. Van Buskirk could do it with much more authority than I can because he's intimately involved in that. That is their system along Immokalee Road. They have various plans. Things have already been completed and other plans to complete systems that I feel once they're in place, that might be a viable alternative to divert some water south into the Cocohatchee once it's been improved. He can fill you in on what they're doing to ensure that that's going to happen. COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: You said a very key word there, "might," and -- and that's what I'm concerned about. We're talking about accepting water, volumes of it, from another jurisdiction into our jurisdiction, and once we agree to accept it and divert it in this direction, Collier County or the Big Cypress Basin is going to have to find a way to deal with it and -- and -- MR. BOLDT: That's true. COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: -- and I -- I would just like your assurances as our stormwater management person to give me your opinion of what they're doing and that you consider it will work and we're not going to inundate our residents with additional water. MR. BOLDT: We're going to monitor it closely as they go through the study phase. There is a basin boundary of sorts along the county line and -- under normal circumstances, but when we get into cases like we did last summer when the water built up to a point, that boundary disappears. The Imperial -- COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: I know that. MR. BOLDT: -- Cocohatchee is one big water body. COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: I'm well aware of that, but right now the boundary for the Big Cypress Basin is a political boundary, not a hydrological boundary, and I'm just concerned that if the -- the Big Cypress Basin as a work of the basin or the South Florida Water Management District as one of their works is going to do some work in Lee County that's going to direct that water in our direction on -- and -- and burden the taxpayers of Collier County with it, I -- I want to know that everything is properly planned for so that we're going to deal with this water if we agree to accept it. MR. BOLDT: And I'm sure that that would be a decision that's going to be long thought out with much study, and I share your concerns. We're kind of looking over their shoulder, and I know Paul has got his people working on it real hard to make sure that it all happens properly. COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: I -- I would just hate to see our citizens ten or 15 years from now saying, geez, you know, this was done back in 1996 and should never have happened, and if good planning had been done, it would not have happened, and I -- I just want to make sure the planning is being done. MR. BOLDT: We're watching it quite closely. COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: Okay. Thank you. MR. BOLDT: Paul. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Mr. Van Buskirk, good morning. MR. VAN BUSKIRK: Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, just briefly our -- our staffing and our equipment remains somewhat the same as it was the last rainy season. We're adding some ten-wheeler dump trucks to our fleet. We've essentially done all the necessary herbiciding and the routine maintenance to be sure the flowways are open and free. We've cleaned all the water-control structures to be sure they're operational. We've had two water-control structures that were blown out in Tropical Storm Jerry. That was Golden Gate number six and Fakaunion number five. They've since been repaired, and we had several washouts in the system, and they too have since been repaired. The Cocohatchee number two water-control structure is essentially complete and will be operational before the rainy season. We are proposing to replace the undersized culverts on the Cocohatchee Canal at Rose Nursery and Bay Nursery. The current culverts there in the crossing there have acted like dams essentially, and they have really aggravated the flooding that's taken place in that area. We had tremendous sheet flow and sheet flooding from sheet flow in that entire area. The channel improvements will not take place this rainy season but will take place next rainy season. We've done the geotech surveys. We're doing the land surveys. The contract specifications and drawings will be completed and will be out to bid, and that part of the channel from 1-75 as we go east up to the quarry will actually be under construction for the following rainy season. Likewise, on C.R. 951 where we experienced, again, a lot of flooding, particularly from Vanderbilt north to Immokalee Road, we'll be replacing -- temporarily replacing three culvert crossings there that also act like dams. Also we're going to be cleaning out and blowing out two existing ones that have silted up with debris and et cetera, and that will help that flow for this coming rainy season. The following rainy season we'll have the channel improvements in place in C.R. 951. So that whole area should be -- should be relieved from the tremendous amount of flooding that we've experienced this past -- past year. We only have 60-some days to the hurricane season so it's almost here. It's almost upon us. The other things that we've done in -- in -- in -- to -- to address the coming rainy season is that we've developed the operational plan describing the elevation of our water-control structure, the criteria methods for lowering the water during the wet season and storm events, and periodic distribution of status of water-control structures will be disseminated to the public agency and the public at large. That will be in draft form presented to my board a week from Friday, and at the same time I'll be presenting it to the county staff for their review and for their comments, and then we'll finalize that report, and then that report will be available on a monthly basis to -- to county staff, to -- to yourselves as commissioners as well as the general public and to the media. The other activity that we hope to have under way prior to the rainy season is that we're -- we're converting our rain and stage gauge stations to telemetry. We have something in the order of 60 stations out there, rain stations and stage stations for our canals, and we're going to put 16 of them on telemetry, and we'll able to instantly recall data at any point in time to determine the amount and location of rainfall and the staging of the water levels in our canal and the effect on the system. This is relatively important for -- for many reasons, to get instant recall and one -- it's kind of an early warning system that we can determine the intensity of rain in the various parts of the county and then be ready for that part or those systems. They're going to have to accept that conveyance or what the magnitude of that conveyance may be. Since I came here as director, I have kind of focused our efforts on trying to develop good relationships with the county, with the county staff, with the county commissioners and coordinating our resources so we can get the most bang for the dollar for the people for Collier County. I need your help in this area in particular because we need to put up a 150-foot tower to pick up the telemetry from all these stations and then to record it, and that will -- and that will be transmitted to our computer here on -- on -- on Aviation Road. And, likewise, we can transmit it to your -- to your county staff too. And the county has a piece of land up there. I think it's a 40-acre parcel up there, and we need a piece of about -- I don't know -- maybe 75 feet by 75 feet to put the tower in, and we need to -- to file our license as soon as possible with the FCC so that we can have that tower up and operational for the rainy season. So -- So we appreciate any support or any help you can give us in that area. COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS: Question. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Mr. Van Buskirk -- up here. You hear it from back there, but we're actually really up here. The -- Oh, a couple of months ago, I guess, we were talking about getting a cooperative effort together with your group and the -- and the district and -- and DEP and trying to go ahead with this Lely area -- MR. VAN BUSKIRK: Right. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: -- canal. Have we made any progress on that? MR. VAN BUSKIRK: Yes. I've been meeting with your staff on that and talking to the various parties on it, and -- and John has informed me that he's -- he's developed somewhat of a scenario of the participants and the scenario of the -- of the dollars that are required to do the project and -- and what contributions those players may make for that. And John tries to caution that it's a scenario form so, you know, we don't want to get excited about, well, why do we contribute that much money and they're contributing so much, but in order to get the discussion going and get the program going -- and John says he'll be presenting that pretty soon as part of the comp plan, capital improvement plan update. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Okay. MR. VAN BUSKIRK: I -- I reviewed it with John, and even as a scenario I think it looks pretty good. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Well, good. That -- that -- MR. VAN BUSKIRK: We feel good about our participation and -- and the -- and the magnitude of order that we'll participate in that program and look forward to it. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Okay. Thank you. Commissioner Matthews. COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Van Buskirk, for coming today. I've just got a couple of questions though. The canal improvements or the channel improvements along 951 you've indicated will be made for the rainy season 19977 MR. VAN BUSKIRK: Correct. COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: And those are the improvements that will deepen the northern end of the canal -- MR. VAN BUSKIRK: Correct. COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: -- at 951 -- MR. VAN BUSKIRK: Yes. COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: -- and move that water south instead of north? MR. VAN BUSKIRK: Right. Correct. COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: Okay. The other question I have deals with the other culvert along Immokalee Road at Longshore Lake, and I was at the Big Cypress Basin Board meeting when the board directed that that culvert be taken out. It's still there. MR. VAN BUSKIRK: That -- That's the construction one? COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: Yes. And there's a fence along there now, so there's -- no trucks are going to use that. MR. VAN BUSKIRK: Right. COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: I mean, it's -- it's closed off, yet it's also a significant dam -- MR. VAN BUSKIRK: Yes, it is. COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: -- and -- and yet that -- that -- I haven't read that that's coming out in this plan. MR. VAN BUSKIRK: We'll have that included before this coming rainy season. COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: Okay. MR. VAN BUSKIRK: Thank you for reminding me. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Commissioner Hancock. MR. VAN BUSKIRK: I appreciate that. COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: First of all, I'd like to thank Mr. Van Buskirk for the increased communication. We sat down about 45 minutes and went through this plan in detail, and I appreciate that level of involvement. I think it's going to be more important as we enter the hurricane season and the rainy season that your staff, as we discussed, communicate with the county in a manner much better than we had last year. That was one of our -- our primary problems, is really not knowing what was going on. So that focus I appreciate. I also wanted to just more or less mention something that you and I discussed. I think it's important to a couple of -- of residential areas, and that is, we're dealing with a traffic problem on Immokalee Road, having safe access in and out of Palm River, and you and I had discussed possibly having a -- up to a two-year window before weir number three on the Cocohatchee is -- is completed for us to resolve that matter, and I just wanted to make sure there were no changes in that because we are moving ahead with a safer traffic plan in that area, and I'll keep you informed as we go through each step, but I want to thank you for your flexibility in that. The folks in Palm River certainly appreciate it. MR. VAN BUSKIRK: Right. And we have that programmed in there too. Also one of the things that we discussed was -- is to develop some landscaping along that slope, and we started that process, and I certainly think the appearance looks a lot better, and the neighborhood feels a lot better about it, and we've still got a lot more to do there, but we're working toward that. COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: And, again, thank you. MR. VAN BUSKIRK: You're welcome. MR. DORRILL: Mr. Chairman, you do have one speaker. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Okay. Let's go to the public speaker at this time. MR. DORRILL: Mr. Erlichman. MR. ERLICHHAN: My name is Gil Erlichman. I reside in East Naples, and I -- I'm representing TAG. I'm very glad to hear that the Big Cypress Basin and the -- part of which is part of the South Florida Water Management District is putting in this telemetry equipment so that they can monitor the -- I guess the level of water in the canals and the areas that are affected by the flooding, but I would -- I would still like to know, Mr. Chairman -- they're talking about improvements in 1997, but here we are in 1996, one year from 1995, and that -- last year during the August/September flooding, the weirs -- all the weirs were not open. Some of the weirs were welded shut. According to Mr. Hancock, he observed that -- well, a few weirs were welded shut at that time; is that correct, sir? COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: Not entirely. We had a couple people here that said they observed some were welded shut in the eastern part. I noted the one on Airport Road was not full open. When I called South Florida, the indication then was it's wide open, and it wasn't. So, yeah, that's partly -- MR. ERLICHHAN: Thank you. COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: -- correct, Gil. MR. ERLICHHAN: Right. In other words, we were -- we were given misinformation by Big Cypress or South Florida Water Management District. And, of course, it's put mildly when we say that we'd like to have improved communications. COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: That was the public part of what we discussed in private. MR. ERLICHHAN: Thank you. So I would -- I would like to be assured, Mr. Chairman, that that is not going to be -- that is not going to happen again this year or the following year or the year after. I don't want to wait until 1997 for any improvements in that situation. One question -- Another question I have, sir, is, is the area south of 1-75 between 1-75 and Port of the Islands -- is that still going to be flooded -- are those canals going to be blocked off and so forth to flood that area so that the animals in that area are going to be deprived of their -- the area that they live in right now and are going to have to be either shipped north or -- or the -- the panthers are supposed to be taken north where -- northern Florida where they will be able to have more game for food. That was in -- That was in the paper or on the radio. There was a spot announcement of that about two months ago. I have been trying to get information about that situation about flooding that area, and no one seems to be able to tell me whether it's true or not. Could anybody answer that question? CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Not on this board. You'll need to talk to the Big Cypress Basin people or the South Florida Water Management people. MR. ERLICHHAN: I -- I tried that, sir, and I get -- I get no answer. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: But I can't help you, Gil. COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Mr. Van Buskirk is right here. I assume he'll be willing to either answer -- MR. VAN BUSKIRK: I'd be very happy to. If you'd like to come up to our office or call so we can make an appointment and -- and -- MR. ERLICHHAN: Could you answer that question now, sir? MR. VAN BUSKIRK: -- we'll give you an update. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Well, Gil, we're trying to have a meeting. Would you mind getting with Mr. Van Buskirk -- MR. ERLICHHAN: Okay. COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: Mr. Erlichman -- CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: -- privately and ask him that question? COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: Mr. Erlichman -- MR. ERLICHHAN: Yes, ma'am. COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: -- the Big Cypress Basin Board meets in this room this coming March 29 at 9 a.m., and they have the same public process we do. MR. ERLICHHAN: Thank you. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Thank you, Mr. Erlichman. That was the only public speaker? MR. DORRILL: Yes, sir. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Mr. Boldt, do you have a wrap-up for us? MR. BOLDT: I have a wrap-up. First of all, my assistant, Bruce McNall, is here. He finished his chores. If you'd like to stand up, Bruce. For those of you who have not met him, Bruce has been on staff now about six weeks and is doing a great job. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Good. MR. BOLDT: Also as part of our executive summary, we have an attachment from the transportation department that Mr. Archibald put together. If you'd like to have anything of that addressed, he's available; otherwise, that concludes our presentation. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Okay. Thank you. Are there any questions for Mr. Archibald then? If not, we'll move on to the next item. Thank you very much, Mr. Boldt. Item #882 RESOLUTION 96-146 ESTABLISHING A POLICY ON CANAL CROSSING IMPROVEMENTS AFFECTING PUBLIC STORMWATER CONVEYANCE AND DIRECTING STAFF TO IMPLEMENT THE POLICY FOR EMERGENCY CROSSING IMPROVEMENTS ALONG SR-29 CANAL FROM IHMOKALEE TO 1-75 - ADOPTED WITH STIPULATIONS COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: Next item, Mr. Boldt. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Go right ahead. MR. BOLDT: The next item involves specifically State Road 29 in the Immokalee area. I'd just like to brief you a little bit on what happened there last summer and what we're trying to accomplish. The Immokalee area is kind of a high piece of ground. It sheds water in several directions. The western portion goes towards Trafford. The eastern portion, although we're going to discuss it in more detail, is collected by a ditch along the northeastern side of Immokalee and then routes its way down State Road 29 along the east side of the road clear on down to Everglades City. There's a considerable amount of flooding in the urban area around Mockingbird Lake. The systems are backed up. Mr. Archibald has been very busy up in that particular area replacing some culverts and cleaning them out and getting down to the main canal that runs along the south side of the vacant property. We've done several things up in the area we'd like to brief you on and get your permission to do some more. First of all, we've gone -- There are three different culvert locations in that canal that we have removed. They were serving no longer any useful purpose. We got landowner permission to remove them. And also we've been working long and hard on cleaning out the road -- excuse me -- not the ditch, but there's an old agricultural ditch along the north sides and on the east sides of Immokalee Airport. It runs -- This is the ditch I was making reference to that we've removed culverts at this location, that one and that one. So we've taken some of the bottleneck out. This is the area that was flooded. There's a considerable amount of agricultural water from the Gopher Ridge Citrus Grove that comes from the north and presently comes down along their access road and joins up with this Immokalee ditch that goes south under 29 and then comes down and then parallels 29 down by Farm Workers Village. We have initiated a cleanout on an agricultural ditch that connects with that citrus grove water, and we're hoping to divert it along the north side and along the east side of the Immokalee Airport, an existing ditch. We've got a cleanout under way which brings it back underneath 846 to 29. So instead of the water coming down and competing with the urban water, we're trying to route it around and then down and out the other way, and we have that partially completed. We used our dragline to do this portion, and the long-reach within the week or so will be back to complete this portion there, and we're hoping that's going to take a lot of the pressure off the northeast portion of the area. The other problem we have is involving the culverts along State Road 29, and in the executive summary that we put together we do have a map that will give you a better idea of what we're talking about in its entirety. Back on page five, you can see the -- there's a number of crossings along the east side of State Road 29 from the Immokalee area clear on down across 858 all the way down to Alligator Alley. There's a series of culverts and bridges. And the purpose of our presentation this morning is to point out to you that some of these things are in very poor shape, are in critical shape, had failed even last summer and are in great need of an emergency expenditure of some funds to get those replaced before the rainy season in order not to back up the water into the Immokalee area. Robert Wiley from capital project management has been working long and hard on this project and has made quite a bit of contact with property owners. We have no established policy at this point in time. We have some precedent but no policy on cost sharing of the replacement of these private crossings across a facility that the county has been maintaining such as State Road 29. This particular facility, State Road 29, borrow canal, is even on private property. We don't have even all the easements along that canal. It was something that Barton Collier himself constructed way back in the 1920s as part of the construction of the -- of State Road 29 which became then the major facility for the area, and the crossings have been put in by private property owners over the years and now are -- some are in a state of failure. So we -- we've had some precedence in the past of working out cooperative agreements with property owners wherein they would purchase material for the crossing, and the county forces would install it, and it's been unofficial, but there's some precedent involved. So one of the other directions we'd like to receive today is moving towards an official policy, get it in document form, and coming back to you at some later date with the resolution that would formalize what we'd do in these situations when we have private crossings on public facility canals. I'd like to draw your attention, I guess, at this point to the table that's on page four. Mr. Wiley has outlined the nine separate crossings that we're recommending at this point need some emergency work in order to relieve the situation or remove some obstacles, and we have assigned a priority to them. The total cost of the repair, including the materials, the installation cost, the backfill and the head walls, et cetera, is about $278,000. And in our conversations with property owners who have volunteered to contribute the price of the materials, the owner participation is $38,000, and so we're looking for county expenditure of funds of around $240,000. Our recommendation is the fiscal impact -- There are funds available in fund 111 reserves that we feel would be appropriate to expend for this emergency type of a -- of a project. So at this point in time we're asking for your direction on a policy. We're also asking for your authorization to prepare appropriate budget amendments to fund the work and then to authorize us to proceed with the process of preparing the final plans, the bidding documents, and getting the permits to replace the culverts that are outlined in the table. With that, I guess I'll ask if there's any questions. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Commissioner Hancock. COMHISSIONER HANCOCK: Mr. Boldt, there's an explanation here on why Rain Crow Groves has a zero amount in the owner participation column, but Mr. Robert Wells I don't see an explanation. Why would he not have any financial participation in this? MR. BOLDT: I'll let Mr. Wiley address that. MR. WILEY: Robert Wiley with the capital projects office. We have been totally unable to contact either by telephone or through registered mail Mr. Robert J. Wells. We have no contact with him. That's one of the reasons that that project is listed as the lowest priority. It is also the farthest south of all the system, and north of his structure is the Okaloacoochee Slough which does cut and go to the east. So it could carry a considerable amount of water through the slough rather than allowing it to go -- continue on south on State Road 29. COMHISSIONER HANCOCK: Do you think if we began removing the structure he might contact us? MR. WILEY: I have no idea on how to answer that one other than we have been to the property appraiser, to the telephone directory. No way do we know how to get ahold of him. COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS: Part of the problem here, though, is that the canal itself, the banks of the canal are private property; is that correct, Mr. Boldt? MR. WILEY: That is correct. COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS: The water in the canal belongs to somebody else, and these culverts belong to private people who may not be the people who own the banks of the canal so -- I mean, we've got three entities involved in some of these. MR. WILEY: Generally speaking, the landowners of the culverts are the ones immediately to the east. COMHISSIONER MATTHEWS: Generally speaking. MR. WILEY: Generally speaking. Right. And that's why we're -- Through the real property management department, we are addressing the easements. COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS: It's not as easy as -- MR. WILEY: So they're in the process of that. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: I'm not implying it's easy, but I'm also saying that I'm not satisfied with zero owner participation on a $38,000 item. I know your efforts to find this gentleman have been -- have been longstanding, but we'll -- we have to find a way to redo this. MR. WILEY: Well, I hadn't given up, but at the time we wrote the executive summary, I had to give you the status. COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: I understand. MR. WILEY: We haven't given up yet. COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: Well, I -- I presume he pays his taxes, doesn't he? MR. WILEY: Well, that's the address that we used -- COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: Okay. MR. WILEY: -- and it came back nonreceived. It said "Return to Sender" stamped right on it. COHMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Well, we can find people. Obviously -- you know, I hate to say it, but lawyers do it every day. I mean, you hire a P.I. For God's sakes. COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: Particularly if their bills are outstanding they do. COHMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Yeah. COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: Yeah. COHMISSIONER MAC'KIE: We find them if they didn't pay. MR. WILEY: Well, that's what we sort of intended to do if we got direction to proceed, but at this point we didn't feel we should do that until you gave direction. COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: He apparently receives his mail when he gets his tax bill because he's paying his taxes. MR. WILEY: That's the same address we used. That's correct. COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: Yeah. But he's not receiving the mail when it doesn't come from the tax collector. Put your notice in a tax collector envelope. COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: I'm kind of sorry I went down this road. I was just asking why there was a zero in the column but -- You mentioned fund 111 reserves. MR. BOLDT: Yes, sir. COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: Mr. Dorrill, what's our status on fund 111, and comparatively what kind of hit does this -- this give us in that fund? MR. DORRILL: Fund 111 would -- would probably be the preferred source subject to your authorizing us to proceed. It is -- is an awkward situation. We have other board policy that specifically restricts my ability to work on private property using public funds, and I think the -- the distinction that we would ask you to make here, though, is that the entire northeast quadrant of Immokalee has this canal as its source of outfall, and so if you go far enough upstream, you find a public benefit. But as we explore this further, I think there are a couple of things we need. We need written agreements as opposed to verbal assurances. I'm not sure what a verbal assurance is. I think to the extent that we can, we ought to chip away at these, and that's why I had asked the staff to rank them in the priority that benefits the urban Immokalee area the most. And then, finally, I don't think we ought to be doing work on private property unless you get a public drainage easement for that with a property that that owner owns in return for your then improving the public's culverts under those -- those east-west accessways. But those would be the three conditions that I would have, and I think between the 301 fund and the unincorporated area general fund, I think you ought to leave alone the road and bridge fund and also the general fund. I -- I don't believe that we should use those two sources. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: My last question, Mr. Boldt, for you is, you had talked about an interceptor ditch around the airport, in essence, to -- to bleed off a certain portion of that water. Have we looked at the concept of an interceptor reservoir on any county-owned land along 29 to reduce the downstream burden? MR. BOLDT: No, sir, we have not. It would take quite a bit of studies. There's tremendous volumes of water there. The citrus grove water originates out of a reservoir. It's funneled down by a control structure. So that's part -- COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: And it may not be cost-effective. I just -- I just felt the need to ask the question, is if an interceptor ditch is -- is plausible, an interceptor reservoir providing greater capacity may be in part a solution but, again, just asking if we had considered that with any weight. MR. BOLDT: No, sir, we had not. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Okay. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Mr. Boldt, I understood Mr. Wiley to say that we could divert the water around Mr. Wells' property and still make everything function; is that -- that correct? MR. BOLDT: The flow along the east side of State Road 29, the Okaloacoochee Slough -- I slaughtered that name again -- comes down and actually can cross underneath State Road 29 and go west into Fakahatchee Strand or continues along the east side, and Mr. Wells' culvert is south of that point. So it does serve as a bottleneck. What will happen is water will stack up and force over into the slough underneath the road. It's not a good situation. It's like a safety valve. As a matter of priority, we put that last. It was a matter of expenditure of funds. It's something that really is an obstacle to flow on down south where we want it to go. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Okay. Thank you. Do we have any public speakers on this? MR. MCNEES: Yes, you do. Russell Priddy. MR. PRIDDY: I'm just here in support of the staff and the improvements being done. I will tell you that drainage easements are -- are ready to be signed. So in this addition to the dollar contributions -- At least on -- on the John E. Price portion, you're getting two and a half miles of drainage easement which we have been cooperative over the years with the county coming in and coming on our private property to help maintain the ditch because it was -- the canal because it was in everyone's benefit to -- to do that but -- and I understand also that from the Johnson family and the Collier family on down the -- 29, that those easements are either back in-house or soon will be. So there won't be any -- you know, that problem in the years -- We've -- We've operated it for many, many years with -- on a cooperative effort without, you know, the easements actually being in place. And as a matter of background, I can't speak for every one of those culverts, but most of those culverts were paid for by private landowners 30 years ago and installed by the county, and I think what we're attempting to do here now is -- is maybe go back with some concrete culverts which are maybe 10 or 15 percent higher in cost, but this will be the last time that we'll -- we'll have to -- to do this. COHMISSIONER HAC'KIE: Do you know Mr. Wells? MR. PRIDDY: I do not know Mr. Wells. I -- I was surprised to see that name on there because I was -- was unaware that there was even a private landowner that far south. Host of that land is already in -- in public hands, and I was unaware that there was a little guy still down there. MR. BOLDT: I think it's a hunting club of some sort -- COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: Mr. Priddy -- MR. BOLDT: -- privately owned, and with a very absentee owner. COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: $38,000 for a hunting club access. Time to get a four-wheel drive, Mr. Wells. COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: Mr. Priddy, have -- have you been able to be in contact with the Rain Crow Groves and whether they feel the same way about the easements? MR. PRIDDY: I have -- have not, but I would -- could only offer that -- that -- with the work that was done last year, that that should not be a -- COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: Should not be a problem? MR. PRIDDY: -- should not be a problem with -- with getting -- getting that easement. The only easement that exists between Farm Workers Village and 1-75 is the 1,599-foot easement I had to give you when I built my convenience store. So there's -- there's that little -- little bit of easement and about 20 miles of -- 20 miles of road, but I -- I don't -- I don't see easements being a -- a problem. I think we would -- would get all of them back in here. COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: So if we were to make easements a condition of doing this work, you wouldn't see a problem? MR. PRIDDY: No. No. COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: Okay. Thanks. COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: It doesn't sound like we have a lot of choice here. By not taking action or taking action only on a part of this, we still have a system that isn't working. So, Mr. Boldt, you're asking for a couple of things. You're asking for authorization to proceed, and I'm going to '- I'm going to exempt Mr. Wells' portion from any approval today. I think we need to either have further investigation, contact, or -- or look at options around Mr. Wells' property before spending $38,000 on it. So excepting priority number nine, you're looking for board direction or a motion, Mr. Boldt, or are you just -- MR. BOLDT: Yes, to authorize us to proceed with this repair work, also to direct staff to prepare budget amendments to fund the work, direct the county attorney to prepare the appropriate joint participation documents for the funding arrangement between property owners -- we want to formalize that into a written document -- and also direct the county attorney and staff to finalize and bring back a policy in the form of a resolution of which we have a draft here, bring it back, you know, in a formalized form for you. So that's -- COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: I wouldn't dare try to repeat that, so I'm going to make a motion to that effect excepting priority number nine, Robert J. Wells' property. COHMISSIONER HAC'KIE: How about the easement condition? COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: For the easement. COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: Including the easements to go, you mean, to -- to make it around that? CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Can I ask the motionmaker to make all of that motion contingent on receiving the easements for all this work? COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: Why, you certainly can, and I'd be happy to. The motionmaker accepts. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Second. COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS: I -- I'd like to ask the board to give direction to Mr. Boldt to make several more efforts to get ahold of Mr. Wells, and if we can't get ahold of him, then the best thing, if that culvert is going to impede the flow of water, it's a public access problem and causing water backup on other people, take it out. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I bet Dave can help with that. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Yeah. I think as a part of the motion we're identifying Mr. Wells as a problem area that needs to be investigated further, and that direction is included in the motion. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: So you're not changing your motion? COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: I think that's a clarification. I -- I -- That's -- That's included in the motion. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Okay. Mr. Weigel -- MR. WEIGEL: Yes. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: -- if we go out and do this work on Mr. Wells' property, do we have the ability to levy an assessment for a portion of that work? MR. WEIGEL: No. Not -- Not -- Not immediately. It's -- We have to be careful in getting on and making improvements on -- on private property or we could get into an inverse condemnation allegation. So I -- I would suggest the county attorney office can assist, I think, to some degree Mr. Boldt and his office to make the proper notification and see if we can get Mr. Wells on board, and if we can't, then we would -- I would suggest that we come back to the board for authorization for the next step which would be a more unilateral step with the county but keep the county advised as to potential impacts with that next step that we take. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Okay. COHHISSIONER MATTHEWS: If I could ask Mr. Weigel a question. If we make these improvements to these other eight culverts and we find that in the rainy season Mr. Wells' culvert causes the water to back up and flood areas to the north of him, are we within our rights to remove that culvert? MR. WEIGEL: Potentially, yes. I really wouldn't want to give a definitive answer without having the ability to review these things rather closely, but I think there's -- there is the potential that we would have that ability. The county does have in several of its ordinances the health, safety, welfare powers that allow it to go forward. COMHISSIONER MATTHEWS: I -- I just want to clarify that that's available. We may not want to do it -- MR. WEIGEL: That's right. COMHISSIONER MATTHEWS: -- but it's available. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor, signify by saying aye. Opposed? There are none. Thank you, Mr. Boldt. Item #8C1 BCC TO DETERMINE IF COUNTY DESIRES TO SELL THE PROPERTY AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF ORANGE BLOSSOM DRIVE AND AIRPORT PULLING ROAD NORTH, THE LOCATION OF THE COUNTY'S ANIMAL CONTROL DEPARTMENT - STAFF DIRECTED TO INVESTIGATE FURTHER AND REPORT BACK Our next item is 8(C)(1). Who has this one? COMHISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Mr. Olliff, before you get started, let me just make sure I've got a couple of points straight from the summary here. If the property were liquidated, it's expected that it would have a value of somewhere around $575,000? MR. OLLIFF: We anticipate a larger value than that. That was the last appraisal that was done. I think generally we've found that in a lot of cases the appraisal of value based on its current zoning versus what its actual market value is when you actually put it out for sale are probably two different things. We anticipate a much larger return than that. We would hope so. COMHISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Well, how much? I mean, are we talking 700,000? Are we talking ten million? The only number I see in the summary here was five seventy-five, and I realize we changed to a different -- If that were used as commercial, it would hold a much greater value but -- MR. OLLIFF: Really what we're looking for this morning is direction to actually have a project and to go out and do some of that work, and -- and I wanted to be able to authorize the real properties department to update and do a current appraisal and a market analysis of properties that sold in the area so that we could have a better feel for that and actually have some direction, spend some staff time looking at other alternative sites so when we approach the budget session you would have a little better idea about some hard and fast numbers. COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: I certainly don't have any objection to doing the research. Just when I saw that number on a one and a half million dollar project -- MR. OLLIFF: To a half million dollar revenue. COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Yeah. There's a million dollars we have to come up with somewhere there that we're already having problems with. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Having -- Having represented some private property buyers and sellers in the neighborhood, I -- I think we could -- this could be a win, fiscally a win. We definitely ought to investigate it anyway. COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: You're just looking for direction to be able to go do that research? MR. OLLIFF: Yes, sir. We're looking to basically create a project. I'll tell you that in long-range planning we have been looking at the idea of -- eventually that use is going to become incompatible with its neighbors as the area becomes more urbanized. In 1982 when the property was purchased, it was out there. It's no longer out there, and I think the time with the Airport Road six-laning is a good time, and there seems to be some market interest in that property, and it seems like a good time to go ahead and do the research and bring back to you a formal proposal. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Commissioner Hancock. COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: I'll make a motion we -- I'm sorry. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: I just wanted to ask -- COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: I won't. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: -- with the number of calls animal control runs, obviously having a facility central to where most of their calls occur is important. MR. OLLIFF: Yes. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: How does this location compare with -- I assume when we're talking about moving, we're moving to the east? MR. OLLIFF: Yes. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: The central portion of calls, will it be to the east of the current location or -- or -- I'm -- Again, I'm looking at a functional standpoint for animal control. MR. OLLIFF: We are -- We are looking to the east. We're looking at agriculturally zoned property where this kind of thing can occur. More and more of our calls are in that growing planning community of the Golden Gate Estates area, and we're looking for something probably in that 951/Immokalee Road type area, somewhere in that location, but hopefully we're looking for something also that still has some frontage so we can continue to have an adoption center that's available to the public. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: If we get close to 951 and Immokalee, would we be able to close down the 951 operation for animal control, or is that still -- do you think that still would be necessary? You have -- You have two animal control locations right now. MR. OLLIFF: One in Immokalee and -- COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: One in Immokalee and -- MR. OLLIFF: -- Airport Road. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Right. I'm saying if we're out at Immokalee Road and 951, would we be able to secure and close the -- the Immokalee operation and centralize it. MR. OLLIFF: Probably not. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Okay. MR. OLLIFF: You probably need to have at least a small operation there. We don't have much of an operation in Immokalee. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: It's a one-person show basically. MR. OLLIFF: Yes. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: I understand that. MR. OLLIFF: Yes. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Okay. COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: I'll make a motion we go ahead and give staff the direction to do a little further investigation and utilize staff time necessary to put a real value on this to be able to bring back some dollars for us -- COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS: I'd like to second -- COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: -- at budget time. COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS: I'd like to second that motion, but I've got a question for Mr. Weigel, and -- and I'm going to ask it in public forum because that's where I am. This is ag property on what is going to be on a six-lane road. Is it appropriate for the county to fezone this property before we sell it? MR. WEIGEL: I think -- I think that it may be appropriate, and I think it's been the parameter of what you can do. COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: Because, I mean, ag property only attracts a certain price per acre, and if we fezone it into what it's really going to be -- MR. WEIGEL: Right. COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: -- at our expense, we can sell it for a considerably higher price. MR. WEIGEL: Yeah. I -- I think that's a good question, and I don't have any problem with looking forward -- looking into that and -- and reporting back to you with a more definitive answer, but offhand it would appear it's something you can do. It's in the interest of the county. It's in the interest -- arguably in the interest of your fiduciary responsibility to do the best you can with the land, et cetera. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: We have a public speaker before I call the question? MR. HCNEES: Yes, sir. You have one. Mr. Erlichman. MR. ERLICHHAN: Good morning again. Gil Erlichman, East Naples, representing TAG. I'm glad that -- that Commissioner Matthews raised a point about rezoning the property before doing any -- anything about it. It's agricultural now, sir -- Mr. Chairman? CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Yes. MR. ERLICHHAN: Okay. I'd like to give someone the -- any commissioner the information that I managed to obtain myself on the location of this in this area. It's right opposite the -- almost opposite the Italian American Club, and I -- Over the past seven, eight years, I've been -- I've been there for dinners, for Sunday afternoon fund raisers, et cetera, and I haven't heard any -- didn't hear any adverse noise or any reason for a complaint that was referred to here on the executive summary. I couldn't hear anything and it's -- I've been there during the daytime, nighttime, et cetera. So I don't see any reason why the executive summary said there's some complaints about the surrounding -- from the surrounding areas. Number two, the property is located approximately half a mile south of Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension, and north of that -- just north of the Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension -- in fact, bordering it is Pelican Marsh. That's a 2,000-acre development extending from 41 across to the future Livingston Road Extension. On airport in the plat that I have -- the plat that I have, they're going to have a -- an activity center of 80 acres. That's a mall, shopping mall, 5,000 -- 500,000 square feet of retail, 350,000 square feet of office, and 280 hotel rooms. Residential -- Residential area is 858 acres and 5,600 units. We have a major, major area for potential business in the area between Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension and Pine Ridge Road. So this to me would make this property that we have now -- it's 9.23 acres -- very valuable, and I -- I just want to make sure that -- that Mr. Olliff knows that -- about this information about Pelican Harsh. And does anyone know who's expressed an interest in the property at this point? COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: We would have to put it up for bid. COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: It's not for sale at this point. MR. ERLICHHAN: Pardon? COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: It's not for sale -- MR. ERLICHHAN: No. But no one -- COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: -- and we'd have to put it up for bid. MR. ERLICHHAN: No one has expressed an interest in it? COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: Not to my knowledge. MR. ERLICHHAN: And what -- what I've read in the -- in the executive summary, it says the -- in 1995 the estimated market value of 560 -- $576,000 for the land alone. That amounts to about 62,000-plus dollars an acre. That's -- That seems like a pittance for a portion of that property considering that this Pelican Harsh plat -- area has dated back -- dates back to '94, to PUD-94-9, and the plat that I have is from 1995. So I think that any property along Airport Road between Pine Ridge and Vanderbilt Beach Extension is going to be very, very valuable. I would like to make sure that the county takes advantage of that. Thank you. MR. HCNEES: You have one more speaker registered, Stan Olds. MR. OLDS: The name is Stanley Olds, and I am a representative of TAG. What Mr. Erlichman said was many of the things I wanted to say too, but he has already said them. But I'd would like to ask Mr. Olliff, there have been no complaints about this animal preserve or whatever it is, and I don't know why you're even going into the development of finding another place. If you're going to find another place, why don't you get another satellite and keep this one there because, as far as I know, complaints are not evident from what you've said, and the reason why you're going to do it I don't know. What is your real reason? MR. OLLIFF: The real reason is exactly as stated in the executive summary. One, our original intention was to hold the property -- In fact, I can show you some five-year long-range plans that we have prepared as long as two and three years ago where within this five-year period we had anticipated selling this property so that we could move out to a more compatible neighborhood with ourselves, and we do have complaints. I have couples who have even been to my office who have bought homes directly adjacent to there, and occasionally we will get loud animals. We will get a donkey on occasions, and we will get animals that simply make a lot of noise. And as a use, that particular use simply is not going to continue to fit in with that urbanized area, and we realized that, and there is a point where you can hold property too long, and we want to make sure that we're trying to hold it when we can get its best market value out of it so hopefully we can take that money and move someplace more appropriate and actually buy land and/or a facility from the money that we realize. COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Mr. Olliff, it's not complaint-driven? It's -- The most sufficient way to run our animal control department is to be more centralized and to have a better facility? MR. OLLIFF: Yes, sir. COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: And we can do that without expending funds over and above the value of this property, we think? MR. OLLIFF: Yes, sir. COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: That's what we're asking you to research? MR. OLLIFF: Exactly. MR. OLDS: And it's really basically a research problem that you are going on. MR. OLLIFF: Yes, sir. MR. OLDS: But I would like to emphasize the fact that I'd like to see it stay there because that was there way before all those condominiums were put in there. And it's just like at the airport. So many people have moved to an airport after the airport is built -- COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Mr. Summer [sic] -- MR. OLDS: So I can't understand why -- COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Mr. Summer -- UNKNOWN VOICE: Olds. COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: -- Mr. Olliff just said it's not complaint-driven. We're not moving because of complaints. We're moving to better be able to do the service -- MR. OLDS: Hake some money on it? COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: -- of animal control. MR. OLDS: And I hope if you do it, it's for money. After all, that's what we need in this county because we're spending so much anyway. MR. OLLIFF: One other consideration so you know, we're at the point where we probably need to have more kennel space. We need more kennel space because right now we simply are in a position of having to put down animals in a lot of instances where we could have held onto them longer if we had had more kennel space, and we don't want to make an investment in that property and build anything in addition there when we know in the long term that's probably not the best location for the site. So we are at a decision point for a lot of other operational reasons as well. COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: I think, Mr. Olds, we're actually trying to do what you're asking for. We're trying to improve service, make more efficient use of our staff and resources by moving it to a location closer to where most of the calls are and to do so without spending an additional dime of taxpayer money. COHMISSIONER HAC'KIE: And can I -- can I just say it's really odd, that you need to think this through a little better. This is a really valuable piece of property in Collier County that we have a dog pound on. That just seems really stupid to me. We ought to have a dog pound on a less valuable piece of property. So, please, let's go look into it. COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: It's more than a dog pound. It's got a huge grazing area for the donkeys and the goats and what have you. MR. OLDS: I haven't heard of that donkey thing but -- COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: As the conversation continually degrades -- CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Is that it, Mr. Olds? MR. OLDS: Pardon me? CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Are you finished? MR. OLDS: Just one more thing. My suggestion of making a satellite and keeping the property but having another satellite, now you say you only have one on Immokalee Road. Why couldn't you get one further east and south? So that -- that would be my only other suggestion. Thank you very much. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Thank you. COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: Thank you. COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: The one thing -- and -- and, Commissioner Hac'Kie, you'd hit on it earlier. At 60-some-odd thousand dollars an acre in a density area of four units an acre, we're talking $15,000 per unit land cost, unheard of in this area. So when we look at the appraisal value of this property, it may be appraised as ag, but we need to know what the appraisal value is at residential densities of three and four units an acre. COHMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Or potentially commercial depending on what's happened in the neighborhood commercial as we go through the EAR. COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: Right. So as a part of that research, I just want to make sure that -- not just an ag piece of property in that location but what the potential uses are and what the potential value associated with those uses may be is going to be key. MR. OLLIFF: When we revalue it, we'll do it at its highest and best use as opposed to ag. COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: I -- I was going to ask if -- if -- if the motionmaker would -- would include -- I've already seconded it, but if the motionmaker would include in his motion that we have our staff, either community development or real property, develop an appraisal based on highest and best use. COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Yeah. I'm sorry. That was the intent anyway. So thank you for -- COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS: And then we -- COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: -- clarifying that. COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS: And then if -- if it's good, we initiate a zoning change. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Okay. We have a motion and a second. All those in favor, signify by saying aye. And opposed? There are none. We'll take a short little break and be right back. (A short break was held.) Item #8El PRESENTATION OF THE COLLIER COUNTY TOURISH COHMITTEE TO UPDATE THE BCC ON THE TOURISH MARKET IN COLLIER COUNTY - PRESENTED CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: We'll reconvene the county commission meeting, if you could please take your seats. Ladies and gentlemen, if you'll please take your seats, we're ready to go here. Hiss Gansel, if you would. MS. GANSEL: Good morning, Commissioners. Jean Gansel from the budget office. The Collier County Tourism Committee has -- has requested an opportunity to make a presentation to the Board of County Commissioners regarding the use of category B tourist development funds. The presentation will focus on the revenues collected in fiscal year '94 and allocated in '95. Judy Keller from the Naples Chamber of Commerce is here to present the information and activities from the Naples area, and Cartie Zimmerman is here to make -- from the Zimmerman Agency to make a presentation on the activities of Marco Island and Everglades. If you don't have any questions for me, if Miss Keller would like to begin her presentation. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Please do. MR. REYNOLDS: I'm not Judy Keller, but I'm going to start this off. COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: Your tan gave it away. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Lack of. MR. REYNOLDS: Well, good morning, Mr. Chairman and Commission. My name is Alan Reynolds, and it's my pleasure to speak to you this morning as president of the Naples Area Chamber of Commerce, and I'm going to introduce the program for you this morning. I'm here on behalf of our 2,000-member businesses and 40,000 employees that constitute the Naples Chamber, and a good portion of them are -- are here today to -- to participate in this. We're here this morning to share some good news with you. We have had several years now of what we consider to be an outstanding success in the tourism promotion fulfillment efforts that have been funded through the tourist tax, and we wanted to share some of that story with you, and we have a presentation to make. In 1993 to the Naples Chamber, the Marco Chamber, and many of the industry representatives and businesses got together and created specific bureaus that would handle the administration of the tourist tax that fund the advertising and the fulfillment services. That division of the Naples Area Chamber of Commerce is known as the Naples Area Tourism Bureau, and in Marco Island it is the Marco Island Convention Visitors' Bureau. I want to introduce a few people that are here this morning that have contributed a lot of their time and talent and, in some cases, some of their tax revenues to this effort. So if you would please just -- when I call your name, if you would just stand. First of all, I want to introduce Sukie Honeycutt. Sukie Honeycutt is the vice president of tourism activities for the Naples Area Chamber of Commerce. Hike Watkins who chairs the Naples Area Tourism Bureau Steering Committee is here. We also have members of the Naples Area Tourism Bureau Steering Committee, Nancy Jane Tetzlaff, Joe Dinunzio, Jerry Thirion, and John Ayres. We also have professional staff here. First of all, Steve Wheeler. We refer to him as the accidental tourist. He's been doing a lot of traveling, and he is the director of tourism for the chamber, does a fantastic job. Also Amy Gravina and Allison Blankenship are here with Gravina Associates. They are professionals in the marketing and advertising campaign as well as Cartie Zimmerman who, likewise, serves that purpose for the Marco Island bureau. We also have a number of people in the audience here this morning that are leaders in some of the affiliated industries of restaurant, accommodations, the attractions associations, and I wanted to identify a few of them in particular. First of all, we have the president of the Florida Restaurant Association for this year here, Michael McComas. I know you all know Michael, and he's serving in that capacity this year. It's quite an honor. We also have the president of the Naples Area Accommodations Association, Jim Gunderson, and we have the general manager of the Ritz-Carlton, George Gonzalez, and the general manager of La Playa Resort, Garvin O'Neil. And if I introduce everyone else, I'm going to use up all the time we have, so I'd ask everyone else who is here on behalf of the industry to please stand so that you can see all of the other representatives that we have. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Who's watching the store? MR. REYNOLDS: Good question. We're going to present a brief overview for you this morning and an update of the activities of the Naples Tourism Bureau and the Marco Island bureau, and what I'd like to do is turn it over now to Judy Keller to make the presentation for the Naples Area Tourism Bureau. Thank you very much. MR. KELLER: Good morning. Thank you for this opportunity to update you on tourism in Collier County. I'm Judy Keller, executive director of the Naples Area Chamber of Commerce; however, this morning I'm joining you as a board member of the Naples Area Tourism Bureau. With me also this morning is Cartie Zimmerman. She's from the Zimmerman Agency on behalf of the Marco Island Convention and Visitors' Bureau, and together we represent the entities to which you have allocated category B tourist tax dollars since 1994. The NATB is a volunteer coalition of tourism organizations and tourism-related businesses. We are structured under the umbrella of the Naples Area Chamber of Commerce and include representatives from the Naples and Golden Gate chambers, the Naples Visitors' Bureau, the Naples Area Accommodations Association, and the Florida Attractions and Restaurant Associations. Our goal in bringing these groups together is to maximize visitors' services while promoting the Naples, Golden Gate, and Immokalee areas as a premiere destination. In 1995 these tourism partners welcomed more than 117,000 visitors and encouraged them to stay longer in Naples, all at no cost to Collier County. Since its beginning in 1994, the NATB'S sole function is to increase the number of visitors during the summer and shoulder seasons of April through November. To do this, the NATB had to create a public awareness of Naples. Our first challenge was to develop an in-depth visitors' guide with area attractions, sports, beaches, and, of course, accommodations. We printed 500,000 copies in English and 50,000 copies in German. Next was an image for Naples in travel trade publications, newspapers and magazines around the world urging people to call the toll free telephone numbers for the U.S., U.K., and Germany -- and call they did. In 1994 the NATB registered more than 12,000 calls between May and December. 1995 was the first complete year for the NATB's full advertising program. Target audiences were carefully chosen by industry professionals, and through cost-sharing programs, the NATB reached 19 million potential visitors on a budget of only $115,000. The response was tremendous. Almost 39,000 calls came in, and more than 120,000 brochures were distributed in the U.S., U.K., and Germany. The NATB also began -- excuse me -- also began a focus public relations plan to bring journalists to the Naples area to write feature travel stories. More than 100 journalists from nine countries around the world have visited Naples to date. As a result, more than 150 travel articles were printed in 1995 about Naples, reaching at least 30 million potential visitors. Naples was chosen by the Brazilian office of the Florida Division of Tourism to host a Master Card travel promotion. The promotion introduced Naples to more than 17 million Brazilian viewers through a special TV show. Naples went on to host journalists from Argentina, Colombia, and Venezuela. During the past year, the NATB has expanded its tourism vision to partner with Marco Island and Lee County. The groups established a Southwest Florida destination theme and began sharing booth space at international shows. The bureau recognized the need to inform the community of Naples' tourism activities and successes. A quarterly newsletter is now mailed to 400 community leaders in Collier County while the Naples Daily News runs an NATB column on the cover of the business section every other week. The results speak for themselves. In 1993 there was no destination promotion for Collier County. The NATB first implemented the tourist tax funding in May of 1994, and the results began to show with the 7 percent increase in overall hotel occupancy April through November. In 1995, despite a wet summer, which discouraged travel, tourism to the Naples area still increased. The growth is significant when compared to 1993 figures prior to promoting Naples as a premier summer and fall destination. More importantly, the average daily room rate for area hotels increased by more than 11 percent in 1995. This not only expanded Collier County's tax revenues, but also added an average of $75 per day in restaurant and retail expenditures by tourists. At a time when international tourism to the State of Florida was declining as much as 10 percent, Naples international tourism increased by 8 percent in 1994. Last summer Naples had a record-breaking increase of 17 percent growth in international visitors. Also the county's tourist tax collections have greatly increased since Naples and Marco Island began promoting summer travel. During the last fiscal year, Collier County had almost a 10 percent growth in bed tax collections. In summary, Collier County dedicates 25 percent of the tourism tax dollars to advertising and promoting our pristine destination. Last year the county invested almost $500,000 in Naples through the NATB and in return received 39,000 phone calls from interested travelers; 120,000 brochures distributed to potential visitors; almost 49 million people were reached through advertising and public relations; increased international room nights by 17 percent; and boosted tourism tax collections by almost 10 percent. 1996 appears to be off to a strong start thanks to a bonus of funding from the previously collected bed tax. Promotional highlights include -- at least 1.7 million Master Card and Visa credit card holders will find promotional travel information about Naples in their spring billing statements. Naples and Marco Island are the sole features of an LTU advertising campaign in Germany this spring. Together the two groups will receive a two-for-one ratio for their advertising dollars. The tourism bureau's international advertising campaign has already generated 4,000 calls in two months, primarily from ads in prominent London newspapers. In January NATB ran a four-inch square ad in the Mail on Sunday, a London-based newspaper. More than 1,000 calls were generated. The response was so heavy that Sprint United had their repair people checking the circuits, and the newspaper opened its own voice mailbox to accommodate reader calls. Two weeks later, a similar ad appeared in the Sunday Times, a London paper equivalent of the New York Times, and again the bureau was flooded with interested callers, registering at least 600 responses, with calls still coming in. With such a positive start for 1996, we anticipate returning to you at this time next year with the news that Naples has again exceeded its goals. Your time and interest this morning are greatly appreciated, and I'll be happy to answer any questions at the end of the presentation. And at this time, it's my pleasure to introduce Cartie Zimmerman of the Marco Island Convention and Visitors' Bureau. Cartie. MS. ZIMHERMAN: Okay, y'all. Hold -- Cross your fingers. Stand by. You're going to come help me if I need it; right? There we go. This has been sitting here for three hours, so we have to kind of -- CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: When -- When you speak, Miss Zimmerman -- MS. ZIMHERMAN: Okay. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: -- you're going to need to be on one of those microphones. MS. ZIMMERMAN: Thank you. My name is Cartie Zimmerman. I've been introduced about five times, I think, to you this morning. So, again, I'm here on behalf of the Marco Island and the Everglades Convention and Visitors' Bureau. We have -- I'll scoot over a little bit. We have a little bit of an unusual organization down there on that end. The chamber as well as the convention and visitors' bureau as well as all the hoteliers and the restaurateurs, none of whom are here, but are here in heart and mind and soul wanted to make sure that you know how closely together we are working with everything that's going on with Naples and Immokalee. Even though you're seeing two different presentations, I think you will see how everything is integrated. As you had seen prior to -- a lot of the numbers are collected for the county, so what I'm going to invest a lot of time is in going over some tactics with you that are used to help get all these visitors' numbers here that you've seen. Again, a lot of the things that you'll see are done both by the Marco Island area as well as the Naples area. Again, to mirror the same challenge, summer season and our shoulder seasons are still where we need the business more than anywhere else, and everything from a marketing standpoint are concentrated in those areas. The marketing results for this past year, again, in looking at what you have seen -- you can just kind of keep going -- is that the 9.6 percent increase is for the county as a whole. And, again, what that does is give us other sources of revenue from the sales that's generated from that. We have had at the -- Marco Island and Everglades, the convention and visitors' bureau and the chamber is set up to take those inquiries at this point. We've had 105,000 inquiries this past year. Forty percent increases -- I want to make sure you understand what this is because we have only a handful of hoteliers that, you know, we're working with within that area. Two different hotels just this past year in the German market alone had 40 percent increases in that from an international traveler standpoint. We have one hotel that for 1996 is already projecting a -- over 50 percent increase over what they had done in 1994 in international travel. So, again, if that has been part of our focus, we're certainly seeing some successes in that area. In cost per response, we'll talk a little bit about advertising and a little bit about P.R., but I think this is very significant for y'all to take a look at because certainly all your dollars being used wisely is of very much importance to you. Typically in the industry the average cost per response is $4. This past year in the Marco Island and the Everglades area, the cost per response was only 47 cents. So, again, against industry standards, that has been a tremendous Success. Advertising tactics for this year are very different. We wish we had it. It's in post-production up North someplace, but we will be running television for the first time for the Marco Island/Everglades area. It's going to be cable spot buy primarily in the northern markets around New York and Chicago. Again, where they don't customarily come for summer visitation, that's what we are trying to push and see if we can create some kind of emerging market from there. Certainly then print will support everything that occurs in that from an advertising standpoint, both domestically in trades -- A perfect example, Southern Living. A small-space Southern Living ad ran in December, and we've already received 2,500 phone calls through time to date in January and February just from that one ad in Southern Living. So, again, the responses are continuing to kick in. We both international print as well as domestic print. Public relations -- again, when you're dealing typically with a little bit smaller budget, you have to rely more on your public relations efforts, and that's exactly what we've done as well as -- I believe Naples has put a lot of emphasis into because you can -- you can try to get more for your money. You're going to see a lot of dollar figures up on the screen, and what I want to remind you is when you're looking at these, these are the equivalent advertising values. So if we had purchased the print or the video that you're -- that you're going to see, this is how much it would have cost, but you did not spend these dollars. Again, from a print publicity standpoint in 1995, we hit -- more than 50 million people were reached through your publicity and print alone. That's 55 magazine features and 90 newspaper articles in the U.S., U.K., and Germany. We, unlike the Naples side, have not started tackling any kind of the Latin American market. Again, with limited funds, we're trying to keep as focused as we can at this point but looking and -- and seeing what can happen up here on this side and see if it might be something we want to generate more on the Marco Island side also. Some of those highlights -- and as you can see, we split those both into domestic and as well as international. I won't even try to explain or pronounce some in the right-hand column. But, again, all of the publications, when we count those are when they're full exclusive features opposed to being, you know, one or two sentences within something else exclusionary of that. So print publicity is certainly something that everybody is familiar with. Another area that we have invested a great deal of time in and just this last year alone, we had almost a million dollars in broadcast features on the Marco Island and Everglades area, and y'all need to get a television in here. Anyway, we would show it to you if you had a TV monitor for us to show it to you on. Wish You Were Here which is U.K.'s number one travel show -- it penetrates 90 percent of the whole island as far as the United Kingdom -- came here and did a whole segment on Marco Island and the Everglades. The Today Show has actually done two different segments. Now that Willard Scott's gone, we're missing a good person. I'll explain to you a little bit later where he is very -- gotten very involved with some different programs we've done. And the Travel Channel which is in the United States came and did an entire segment, then went to 90 different stations with primary AVIs all over the country. Media development -- again, knowing that domestic, U.K., and German are the primary markets that we've been going after, we have gone over just this past year alone and conducted 100 one-on-one interviews, not trades shows or anything where you're kind of tripping people and talking to them along the way, but these are interviews in their office that we have gone and spoken to these people. Here are some examples of the people that we have met with. We were actually on live on London radio, Modern Bride, Parent Guide, Mini, Family Circle, all of these have already produced just from 1995 efforts. Sixty-six percent have produced already even though the German trip was as late as October of last year. Media tours -- again, a lot of these things you're very familiar with when we -- when we brought editors in. In 1995 we brought in 14 different international and domestic independently of things that we also did with the division of tourism and other entities but just out of utilization of your dollars. Again, some of those that attended, Bella which is very much like a Cosmopolitan or a Vogue magazine, You and Your Wedding which is the largest U.K. -- Bridal publication, Family Circle again which is -- very much that mirrors our Family Circle. As you can see when you look at this list, we very much try to hit the family entity as well as the bridal market and -- and try to keep some degree an upscale range. Of those fam participants, 78 percent thus far -- again, two of our last trips were in the final quarter of the year -- have produced their stories already. There's kind of boards here and there, and you can see again what some of the articles are and again how we've -- we've taken Marco Island and the Everglades and combined that and really made it a -- a natural resource and call it a natural paradise and take advantage of the ecology factors that we can tie into that. Another point too I believe -- and -- and I think Naples could show you some numbers also on this -- is we look at it as our role as your convention and visitors' bureau to try to save you as many dollars as possible. Therefore, we pursued different airlines to complimentary -- provide tickets for all of these trips. So, again, this last year alone -- whoops -- This last year alone you received $20,000 in complimentary tickets from the airlines that were our partners. This year we've got two more airlines in Europe that are also going to be providing us tickets throughout the year. Radio promotions, very quickly -- summer business. We look at the best opportunity for summer business coming from in the state. No new idea, but a great way to get through to those people are through radio promotions. We have not spent a dime to get you the $475,000 in radio promotions. All of those have been negotiated at no cost. So we go in and through give-aways and promotions, negotiate that, and we've actually also done some in London as well as Germany in which they call them competitions instead of promotions. Except for Chicago, you can see most of our things are concentrated within the summer drive market with demographic stations that match who we want to try to achieve getting here. Again, your 475,000 is at no cost to you. Same thing on the partnerships that you're about to see, and this is something that we've really put a lot of emphasis into in 1995. In '94 we were just building the ground. Most people just didn't even know what Marco Island and Everglades was. So even if we did a promotion, they didn't know where they were going. This next year we put in a new -- This last year we put in a new phase of that, and that was to really get involved with promotional partners, again of which we got almost $900,000 of their money in promotional consideration without spending any of our money at all. We've done promotions with Gayfers throughout the United States; American Express; Hatrods department store which is well known in the United Kingdom; McCalls is -- has just come out; and, in fact we've got one coming out in Family Circle in April; House Beautiful which is exactly like our House Beautiful, but in the United Kingdom, gave us full-page coverage at no cost; and then also Mach Mal Pause which is in Germany, and it's a women's publication similar to a Family Circle basically. Save the manatee because -- I hope all of y'all read Florida Trend this month, and it's talking about how Florida really needs to come -- get a turnaround from a tourism standpoint. Just having mouse ears and a lot of attractions is not going to do it for us. We can't survive on that. But -- And what it did talk about is taking advantage of our natural attributes. And, again, I believe that's what this whole organization has been about since the beginning. So two years ago and then we continued it last year, and I'll tell you what we're doing this year. We started a whole program about saving the manatee. No, we are not into charitable issues, but it's a great way to get some visibility. The first year what we did was we tied in -- There's an organization called Save the Hanatee Club. They already have a whole program together that if you make a donation, you get to adopt a manatee. You get a picture and a newsletter and everything else. Since we didn't have the capabilities to put the program together, we tied in with the club that already existed. Every time -- Two years ago every time someone in a certain time period in summer stayed in one of the hotels in the Marco Island and Everglades area for more than three nights, they got the opportunity to adopt a manatee. So they were going home feeling like they had collected something other than seashells. That got so much publicity. That -- That one program alone got 18.5 million in circulation in print alone. It was also featured on the Today Show as well as Good Morning America. Then American Express this year found out about it and got excited about it, and in two months American Express is dropping a whole thing on the Marco Island and the Everglades Save the Hanatee program. It will go specifically to past guests that have spent a certain proportion of money, have a propensity to travel to this part of the state but have never come in this time period before. So, again, we've gotten a co-partner now to help to underwrite all the costs for the things. And, again, the Save the Hanatee has been a big push for us. Results highlights -- you saw this again, but I wanted to bring it up to you again to point out that through direct sales efforts and advertising and public relations, that your money is being spent well. The last slide that we have for you -- COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Just curious before you go to the last slide -- MR. ZIHMERHAN: Yes, sir. COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: -- the 40 percent increase in international, what are the real numbers on that? MS. ZIHMERHAN: I would have to get those for you. The Marriott actually tracked those for us, so I could tell you what the years prior were that they raised it up 40 percent, and then the Radisson -- Are you hurt? Then the -- Then the Radisson is the one that's projecting over 50 percent for this year, and I can get you those real numbers. COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Great. Thanks. MS. ZIHMERHAN: I do not have those with me. The last thing, public relations return on investment -- again, because so much of the money that you do attribute to the Marco Island/Everglades area is put toward public relations, we wanted to again show that your money is being spent well. You've received $4.1 million in value in exposure in public relations. What that has given you is 31 times your investment. So your return on investment and expenditures has been 31 times what you have actually allocated for the marketing of the Marco Island and the Everglades area. So, again, hopefully not only is it generating occupancy, increasing rev par and some of the other things that are important, but we're spending your money wisely, and I think a lot of times when you do have a limited budget, it's -- it's as important to kind of be aggressive at how you utilize the dollars, and I think both instances -- both north and south have again given you a lot of good results on that part. So I'm going to get Judy back up here and just see if y'all have any questions at all. Thank you. Does anyone have any questions? COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: Yeah. Twice I saw 47 cents per response. Okay. Now, one of my jobs in college was working in the mail room at the convention and visitors' bureau at Tampa, Hillsborough. With even third class postage and print costs, I don't fiscally see how it's possible to respond to anything on an average of 47 cents. Help me with that. MS. ZIHMERHAN: Okay. The -- The response that we're referring to has not been what -- We're not including the dollars that it then takes for us to mail back out the information. So combined advertising and combined public relations expenditures, the marketing expenditures -- COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: Dollars spent marketing for phone calls received. MS. ZIHMERHAN: Exactly. COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: Okay. Thank you. I thought you were doing something tricky with the U.S. Mail service there. MS. ZIHMERHAN: We're hand delivering. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Any other comments? MS. ZIHMERHAN: That's the only question? CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Any other questions? COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: Thank you very much. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: You did such a good presentation, we don't have any questions. MS. ZIHMERHAN: Thank you. Appreciate it. COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: You're doing a great job too of getting phone calls and requests. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Are there public speakers, Mr. Dotrill? MR. DORRILL: Yes, sir. Mr. Reynolds. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: He passes. MR. DORRILL: Mr. Dougherty. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: John Dougherty. MR. DORRILL: John Dougherty. Miss Zimmerman. That's all. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: That's it. Okay. Well, thank you very much for the presentation. That was very nice. And we move forward to Mr. Smykowski on a report on revenues. Item #8E2 REVENUE REPORT FOR THE FIRST QUARTER OF FISCAL YEAR 1996 - PRESENTED MR. SMYKOWSKI: Good morning, Commissioners. For the record, Michael Smykowski from the budget office. I have before you today a report on revenues for the first quarter of fiscal year 1996. In general terms within the intergovernmental revenues which are sales and gas taxes, there are no major variances projected from the budget at this time -- again, those based on three months of information. Within the enterprise fund revenues, additional ambulance fee revenue is projected. As the executive summary indicates, there were problems with our converting to electronic billing systems that were encountered last year. So our revenue was not quite what we had -- Our actual receipts were less than what we had anticipated but we -- Again, as we indicated last year, we anticipate making those ambulance fees up this year with our billing system up and running. Building permits, there's a projected surplus there, and that's a function of the revised fee schedule not being implemented until early December. The Airport Authority, there's a shortfall projected there, and that's associated with the Everglades and Immokalee airports. They were budgeted to be on line for ten months of FY '96. COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Mr. Smykowski, two questions. MR. SHYKOWSKI: Yes, sir. COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: County gas tax, seventh cent is up 19.4 percent where dollar-wise that's up by 40-some-odd thousand over -- MR. SHYKOWSKI: 33. Correct. Two sixty-five versus the two twenty-two. I take that back. 43. COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Does that help us in a small way? I mean, that's not a lot of money, but does that help us in a small way for this year about having to transfer funds to deal with our road issues and so on? Is that a good sign? MR. SHYKOWSKI: It is, but, again, it is only -- we're not projecting at this point -- COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: I understand. MR. SHYKOWSKI: -- anything more than budget so -- But obviously if that trend continued, yes, that would help us. COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: And along the same lines, the ambulance fees, if we've actually collected more than we have anticipated, does that mean we have had to subsidize less than we anticipated by roughly $100,0007 COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: If that trend continued. COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Right. MR. SHYKOWSKI: That -- That would in theory, but what we're actually short -- In FY '95 -- the -- the FY '95 final revenue report, I had reported that we were short in ambulance fees. So we're making up for the revenue that was not collected in the last fiscal year. So this surplus will bring us back even. COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Thank you. MR. SHYKOWSKI: Again, for the Airport Authority, that was budgeted to be on line for ten months of the fiscal year at both Everglades and Immokalee. There were problems encountered due to -- with environmental permitting, construction document review up in Tallahassee by the aviation division, as well as just the ground being saturated which caused some delays in site prep work due to the flooding last year. However, while -- revenue will be short because at this point Mr. Drury indicates will only be -- should only be up and running about four months of the year versus the ten that was budgeted. Obviously there will be offsetting expense reductions because obviously we have not hired staff in that period to man those facilities until the -- You know, we will have a slight training period prior to those facilities actually opening for business, but in general terms our expense reductions would offset those shortfalls in revenue due to the delays encountered in opening that facility. Impact fees, overall there are -- we do have some shortfalls projected at this point, although those are a difficult revenue source to project as they're based in part on the -- both the timing of the building permit issuance as well as the type of development to occur. As reported in the newspaper as well over the last three months, major commercial construction activity has been down slightly. So at this point we are projecting some shortfalls. We're going to monitor that closely and would make any proposed budgetary adjustments at the conclusion of the second quarter which would -- would be basing our -- our budget forecast on numbers through -- halfway through the fiscal year. Finally, beach parking fees, as the executive summary indicates, there's a -- a shortfall there in terms of revenue, and that's been a function of a number of things, delays in implementation of the program, purchase of meters. The meters weren't installed for a few months until after the beginning of the fiscal year. Cold weather has been encountered as well obviously. At this point we're projecting approximately $300,000 versus the nine thirty-eight that was budgeted. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: 90 percent under. MR. SMYKOWSKI: 68 for the year. That was -- COMHISSIONER MAC'KIE: 87 for the quarter. MR. SMYKOWSKI: For the quarter. Correct. COMHISSIONER CONSTANTINE: As long as we don't have any more cold weather. MR. SMYKOWSKI: That is true. COMHISSIONER MATTHEWS: Mr. Smykowski, if -- if the delay in getting parking meters and so forth installed accounts for $200,000 of this and cold weather and so forth, what accounts for the other $400,000 in the decreased projection? COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Lee County people staying home. MR. SMYKOWSKI: The park staff -- As the executive summary indicates, the ratio of out-of-county visitors to county visitors at the beach parking sites has also been much less than anticipated. COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Or families that can't afford to go to the beach now. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: With the free parking sticker? They can't afford a free parking sticker? MR. SHYKOWSKI: Just as there were offsetting expense reductions in the airport area, there were also some major expense reductions to be seen here which will offset a portion of the revenue shortfall. COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: Well, when -- when the revenue projections were put together last year, was there consideration given to the fact that if we started charging beach parking fees, that Lee County residents, instead of coming to our beaches free, would go to their own beaches because the fees were nearly identical, was there -- was there thought given to that? COHMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Apparently not adequate thought given to it even if there were. MR. OLLIFF: We -- If you will recall, when we put together this budget, we told you how difficult this number was to try and tag. We had not had a fee in a number of years, and we had never had a fee as large as $3. So we could never tell you exactly with any assurance what the impact was going to be. And, as you'll also recall, there was a lot of public pressure on both ends of that spectrum, some saying that the number that we projected was woefully short of what we would get and some others saying that it was woefully too high, and I think when we figured we had not satisfied both edges of the group, then we'd probably come up with a pretty good number. I think there are a lot of factors that go into the reasons the revenues aren't what they are, and I think a lot of those are actually how the system is structured in some cases. In Lee County their system allows for a per-hour charge of 75 cents per hour as opposed to a flat $3 rate. In some cases, someone who wants to come in to just see the sunset or just walk the beach is a lot more willing to pay the 75 cents and go to the Lee County side of the line as opposed to going to the Barefoot side of the line. We've talked about the opportunity to buy parking passes as well for either seasonal or six-month residents which we don't have the opportunity for now. The parks and rec advisory board had recommended that you get as much of a full year of revenue under the current system under your belt before they make some adjustments in the system so that you would at least have something of a baseline to be able to compare it to. So we have not brought to you any adjustments in the rates. COHMISSIONER MAC'KIE: How many -- How long of a baseline? One year? MR. OLLIFF: They wanted to try and have it as close to a full year's worth, and I think what they -- COHMISSIONER MAC'KIE: A full year's. Every time you say that, I think you're saying four years. MR. OLLIFF: No. Full. I'm sorry. COHMISSIONER MAC'KIE: A full year's worth. MR. OLLIFF: A 12-month period. COHMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Thank you. COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: I would venture to say that even in the first year you're going to have the sticker shock. It was free last year. I have to pay $3 this year. And there's going to be in my -- typically when you implement something like this, there's a drop, and then there's stabilizing later, and it may not stabilize where we expected it to initially. But, yeah, there is an initial impact when you institute new fees that does not perpetuate itself in the following year. So that may be a part of this also that -- that wasn't factored in. COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Between the meters and any personnel that work at any of our little parks now in this regard, how much does it cost to operate this program annually? MR. OLLIFF: 150,000. COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: So at least -- at least we're somewhere in the black. MR. OLLIFF: Oh, you are in the black. COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: If woefully short of what we had estimated, at least we are somewhat in the black. MR. OLLIFF: You are in the black, and we -- we anticipate receiving between 300 and $350,000 in net profit from the program, if you will, this fiscal year which is very much short of what we had anticipated, but it is still money that is going into your park program to offset some expenses that otherwise would have been ad valorem supported. COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS: I've got a question. Now, you said net profit, and these are revenues. There's a difference. MR. OLLIFF: Yes, there is. I -- Net profit as compared to the $150,000 expense number. COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS: This is only $300,000 in revenue. MR. OLLIFF: We anticipate between 300 and 400,000. It all depends on -- This is the season. I mean, this is the peak three months that we're looking at right now. So I think a lot of this program is going to be swung one way or another based on what we get through March and all the way through Easter, and it can be that high of a swing but -- I mean, it can be anywhere a net profit of 250 to as much as $350,000, depending on what that actual revenue number ends up being. MR. DORRILL: March has been red tide month so far. I -- I would think you would -- COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Can we get sent another problem? COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS: I -- I guess my -- my concern is that Mr. Smykowski and our budget office is estimating $300,000 worth of revenue. You're estimating $350,000 worth of net profit with $150,000 worth of expense. So, Mr. Smykowski, should the revenues really be up around four fifty? MR. OLLIFF: No. COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS: I mean, I'm seeing a discrepancy here. MR. OLLIFF: No. No. The revenues should not be up around four fifty. The revenue should be somewhere between the three fifty and $400 mark, and -- and we will see where that is probably at the end of this quarter. COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS: And your net profit will be $150,000 less -- MR. OLLIFF: -- less than whatever -- COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS: -- than whatever the revenues are? MR. OLLIFF: Correct. COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: Okay. Mr. Chairman, if you don't mind, I've got one more question regarding the gas taxes. Mr. Smykowski, are they formula-driven, the -- the gas taxes that -- that we receive? MR. SHYKOWSKI: Yes. COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: And you would apply the same formula to -- to all of these taxes? MR. SHYKOWSKI: No. There's a number of varying formulas for each of the individual taxes to what gallons they apply. Some are weighted based on your sales in the county versus sales in the state as a whole, et cetera. They -- They vary widely -- COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: Well -- MR. SHYKOWSKI: -- by source. COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: The seventh cent tax and the ninth cent tax are taxes that were, I presume, voted on by the residents of Collier County? MR. SHYKOWSKI: Yes. COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: And they're -- And we get all of that minus whatever -- 7 percent or whatever it is the state charges us to administer it. I guess my question is, the seventh cent tax has a 19 percent increase yet the ninth cent tax from the same source, I presume, only has a 2 percent increase. MR. SHYKOWSKI: Yes, and I can explain that. COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: Thank you. MR. SHYKOWSKI: With the state last year, there were some excess distributions in the seventh cent that were continuing on for the first three -- three or four months of this current fiscal year and then would taper off. So, one, we see that anomaly. In addition this year, the state is changing the -- The administrative charge has previously always been just -- for all the gas taxes have been applied to the seventh cent alone. So you were taking the full brunt of the collection fees for all the gas taxes out of one source. That -- I forget which month. I -- I believe it's changing mid year, that the state is now going to be charging the -- whatever percent it is at -- among each of the gas taxes rather than just hitting the seventh cent for the collection administration costs for all of the gas taxes. COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: So that -- that's -- that's why the seventh cent is up so much higher than the others? MR. SHYKOWSKI: Correct. COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: Okay. Fine. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Okay. Any other questions? MR. SHYKOWSKI: Thank you. Item #10A RESOLUTION 96-147 APPOINTING GARLAND EDHONSON TO THE BLACK AFFAIRS ADVISORY BOARD - ADOPTED CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Thank you, Mr. Smykowski. We'll move on now to item 10(A), appointment of a member to the black affairs advisory board. COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: We have one qualified person who is an elector and qualifies for appointments. I move that we move to nominate Garland Edmonson. COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: I'll second that. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: A motion and a second. All those in favor, signify by saying aye. Opposed? There are none. Item #10B RESOLUTION 96-148 APPOINTING PENNY ADAMS FIELD TO THE COUNCIL OF ECONOMIC ADVISORS - ADOPTED Item 10(B), appointment of member to the council of economic advisors. COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: Mr. Chairman, we have a recommendation from the council of economic advisors to appoint Penny Adam -- Penny Adams Field. Without any other comment, I would move that Miss Field be appointed. COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: Second that. COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: I -- Sorry. I just got ahead of myself. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Motion and a second. All those in favor, signify by saying aye. And opposed? Being none, Commissioner Matthews. Item #10C DISCUSSION OF THE POSSIBLE CONTINUANCE OF THE LDC-EAR MEETING SCHEDULED FOR MARCH 20TH - MEETING TO BE HELD AS SCHEDULED COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: Yeah. I -- I wanted to ask the board to discuss a possibility -- and I know it's advertised -- but to delay our hearing tomorrow night on the EAR, and the reason for that is that a very, very short time ago we -- we all got two four-inch binders to review this thing to be ready to discuss it tomorrow morning, and I know that staff is going to give us an excellent presentation, and I know when they went before the Planning Commission, it probably covered two meetings to make the presentation, but, frankly, I'm about 60 to 70 percent through the first book, and I haven't looked at the second book. So I -- If the board wouldn't mind considering or at least discussing some way that we can adequately cover -- COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: I -- I don't disagree we asked our citizens group to take seven months or eight months to -- to do this work along with our staff, and we've had it for three days. So I don't mind having an extra week to actually complete my reading of it. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Commissioner Hancock. COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: My only -- My -- not really concern. My only question really is that there are a lot of items in that EAR that are I would say not terribly controversial, fairly easy to understand on the surface. We have a publicly advertised meeting. People may have made special arrangements to be here tomorrow night. And in the past -- Mr. Dotrill, correct me if I'm wrong -- but we have rarely gotten through everything in one evening meeting anyway, and I'm wondering if it wouldn't -- if it wouldn't suff -- well, look at those binders again a week from now -- the chance that we're going to get through it all in one evening. I'm just thinking maybe it's a better option to go ahead and continue with the scheduled hearing, and those items that are outstanding or that are -- you know, that we have questions on, that we, you know, continue those until a later date. That's my personal preference rather than just put the whole thing off. I don't think we're going to get through it in one night anyway, but that -- that would be my preference and, again, the will of the board. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Well, sure we're going to get through it if we have to stay here all night. We're going to get through it and -- COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: Bring your jammies. COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: Well -- CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: I've looked through the material. I'm prepared to go forward. I have no objection to going forward. And -- and I agree with you that there's -- you know, people have made plans, and -- and they expect this to happen tomorrow night, and I really -- I feel we should go ahead. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I think we should. I think that we could start, Commissioner Matthews, and -- and maybe staff could give us some recommendations on what are some of the more straightforward issues, and maybe we ought to try to inform the public that some of the more complicated -- for example, the conservation -- coastal I know is complicated. Future land use is complicated. Maybe we'll try to hit the easy ones first and -- and allow more study time for the more complicated ones if -- if they can separate them that way for us. MS. CACCHIONE: Basically what we've done is we've separated -- For the record, my name is Barbara Cacchione with comprehensive planning. We've separated the information into two books. The first book contains all the items that we think we can get through rather quickly. There aren't a lot of changes. They're mostly updating, and that would be -- The first book contains -- starting with the aviation element through the mass transmit element. One through 12 are those that we would consider to be changes that are of -- somewhat of a minor nature. The biggest one in there would be drainage, and it could be your option whether you want to hear that on the first hearing or if you want to continue that to the second hearing. The second book starts with the conservation element and has the future land use element in it as well. One suggestion may be that we have two -- and you don't have to have evening hearings. They can also be during the day if you choose to continue. So you have lot of flexibility as to how you schedule it. I will also tell you that the region is expecting to give us comments on our preliminary report on March 27. So we would want to come back to you and report those comments to you. But understanding that we were late in our submittal, we wanted to try to move it along as quickly as we could, and our suggestion may be that, you know, we do the first book one night with those ones that we think we can get through rather quickly and then the second book at a subsequent meeting perhaps. COMHISSIONER MATTHEWS: I -- I guess what Miss Cacchione was saying concerns me even more, but if the first book has what are considered to be the easy ones -- and I'm only 70 percent through after ten days so -- and -- and I -- I've had the books for -- for ten days and -- and I'm -- this is -- You know, it even adds more weight to -- to my desire to want to delay it. But if -- if the more difficult ones are in the second book, I haven't even looked at that one yet, and if we're not going to try to tackle that tomorrow night, you know, I can probably live with that, but I -- I wouldn't want to begin to tackle those tomorrow evening then. MS. CACCHIONE: We also prepared an executive summary which is in the front of the book which identifies in a summary format the changes proposed for each element to kind of help guide you along. I realize it is over 1,000 pages. It is pretty extensive. COMHISSIONER MATTHEWS: Also the -- the -- the thing that -- that's taking my time as well in going through the book is looking at the CPC -- the CCPC recommendations and -- their recommendations and then going to the individual element because often all they're doing is saying we agree or we disagree or they accept parts of it and reject other parts, and that's causing coordination -- at least for me -- because there's not a true summary of -- of what the CAC recommended and what the CCPC recommended. I've got to physically read them and put them together. MS. CACCHIONE: We did try to provide a summary of that in the executive summary, but we did want to present to you both recommendations so that you would have all the information. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Thank you. Mr. Dorrill. MR. DORRILL: If it appears that we're going to continue for the first hearing, at least get started -- yesterday -- one of the reasons I stepped out this morning was Mr. Putzell was here and asked me to request of the board tomorrow as part of your first hearing -- apparently they are within two weeks of being complete with the FOCUS community fair process, and at least if we begin the hearing and we -- we continue or have a second hearing, you would have the benefit of what has been this communitywide effort visioning, and he said that within one week from the conclusion of their efforts on March the 31st that they will have all of their goals and objectives and some indication of the priorities on a spreadsheet a week following their final fair meeting, and I told him that I would mention it tomorrow evening, but since this came up, it's -- if you're -- if you're going to get started and look like you have a continuance, we ought to probably continue it for three weeks so that -- if you want, and you'd at least have the benefit of the conclusion of the community FOCUS effort. COHMISSIONER HAC'KIE: I'm very interested in that. Frankly, that's almost a reason to postpone until we get it. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Miss Cacchione has told us that we need to have our first public hearing so we can get comments back to the region, that there are some time constraints on this so -- COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: The only down side -- I think you understand that I've been very supportive of the FOCUS efforts. I continue to think that it's -- it's going to be important to -- as a -- as a picture of what the community wants to become. But to place the FOCUS efforts on the same or higher level than what our CAC has produced, these citizens that work for the CAC, if we're going to kind of throw away their recommendations and supplant them with FOCUS, if we're going to make significant changes that the CAC has not had the ability to look at or the Planning Commission has not reviewed, that that would be my -- you know, I think the FOCUS input is important, but it's probably going to be more important in the coming year than at the late date it's entering this cycle. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: And -- And I think the important thing to remember is that this is -- that what we're dealing with is a report, and we're not taking final action on the plan until some later date so -- COHMISSIONER HAC'KIE: Although I was getting some advice from Harjorie Student earlier today about the extent to which we're bound by some of the -- some of the policies that we adopt in the EAR so that -- I think we have to be really careful. It is just a report, but we are going to be bound by it with regard to some future amendments to the comp plan, and I couldn't -- I don't for a second want to discount all these -- a year's worth of work people have done on the advisory committee but I -- COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: The adoption won't be until April 3 though; is that right? COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: That the FOCUS -- What I -- Just to finish what I was saying, is that the FOCUS information is critical to me. It's very important and -- and wonderful that we do have that final adoption. COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Just -- and -- and maybe I'm missing your suggestion here, but if we go ahead this week and start the process moving, FOCUS -- I think Neil just said FOCUS will be completed by the 31st, have it ready -- COHHISSIONER MATTHEWS: A week later. COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: -- and -- not for a week later. COHMISSIONER MAC'KIE: A week after the 31st. COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: A week after the 31st. COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Okay. That's what I meant. I'm sorry. COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: And -- And then we need time to digest it. I mean, we -- we need time to -- to think about the report -- report FOCUS puts out and -- and -- COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Obviously I don't want to get into a situation where we're ignoring all that work, but I think Commissioner Hancock -- COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: Absolutely not. COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: I think Commissioner Hancock is correct, though, in that the CAC had a particular task and -- and fulfilled that, and the Planning Commission went through their paces with it in great detail and so I think -- One of the things we started doing this past year and I think we need to do maybe every six months is stay clear on what our goals and objectives are, and -- and I think FOCUS and the results of that are perhaps most appropriately first addressed through our goals and objective process rather than first addressed through the EAR, and -- and they may well become part of our long-range county codes and plans and -- and Land Development Code, but I think the first step needs to be in our goal and objective process. COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: But I -- I -- I share Commissioner Hac'Kie's concern, though, that -- that if -- if in the process of adopting the EAR we are adopting a section of it on April 3 or whatever it is and we don't have the FOCUS report until April the 6th or 7th and there's something contained in the FOCUS report that brings attention to an item that we should not have adopted in the EAR and -- and yet we're going to be constrained from that point on. COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Mr. Dorrill, if we find something that's radically different from what we approve as policy in the EAR, what's the process for us to make an alteration in that and what time frame would that fall in? MR. DORRILL: I think we would otherwise be eligible for the biannual comp plan amendment cycle that is a normal ongoing -- COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: So every six months we -- MR. DORRILL: Yes, sir. COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: -- have that opportunity anyway? MR. DORRILL: Or unless you determine under some emergency provision. And my understanding thus far is that -- that the -- the growth -- no growth-related issues are going to manifest themself in the density issues and some review of the coastal zone and conservation element, and I think pretty much that's where we're headed, and that's no surprise to anybody. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: It's important to remember that the EAR is the vehicle that we couch our goals. We -- We word what we hope to achieve in the final adoption of the Growth Management Plan. So it's not as if we're adopting verbatim growth management statements by -- by the EAR. The other thing to remember -- and I feel like I need to say this because the -- the apparent weight that -- that Commissioners Mac'Kie and Matthews are putting on the FOCUS effort -- is that adoption into the comprehensive plan is not always the most effective measure to get things done. If -- You know, I -- I've called the comprehensive plan the stick we give the state to beat us with. COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS: Yeah. I don't want to give them additional sticks though. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: So if there are things that come out of FOCUS that we want to adopt as -- as goals of this board, they don't necessarily have to be part of the camp plan, and I'm currently working with a couple of people to try and find what vehicles are available to take some of those things that the community has said they want and create the mechanism for them to have a track and a path to come to fruition, and I don't think the camp plan in all cases is going to be the document to achieve that. So it's not do it now or never do it. There may be other ways to accomplish it. So I -- I'm not down playing the importance. I'm just saying I don't know that this is the only way and the only time that that can happen. It's probably going to take a lot more careful thought that we can afford in even two weeks to bring FOCUS into -- into our long-term planning. COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS: Can I ask Miss Student to give us the -- the benefit of her advice that Commissioner Mac'Kie received as to what the -- MS. STUDENT: That was just -- COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS: -- support of this -- MS. STUDENT: -- based upon the recommendations and the report. The law states that the amendments which have to come within a year of that time have to be based on the report. Now, it says shall in the statute. I do not know what extent because this is a new process for us, you know, what latitude we might have with DCA, but that's what I was discussing with Commissioner Mac'Kie. COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS: So for the next year -- COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Thou shall match your camp plan amendments with your EAR. MS. STUDENT: Yeah. I -- I feel that we need -- You know, that's the strictest interpretation. I feel that there should be some flexibility in it because as you look from element to element, some parts of it contain actually a strike through and underline language. Another element might just recommend changes to certain policies or objectives and is silent on others. So I do feel that we've got to read some reasonableness into this, and when it comes down to the actual amendment, we do need some latitude to take into account takings issues, private property rights issues, and things like that. COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS: So -- So what I just heard you say, then, I think, is that any amendments we choose to make next fall will have to be EAR based. MS. STUDENT: It has been to be -- Our EAR amendments have to be based on our report. COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS: Right. So -- MS. STUDENT: And we have a year to -- We have a year to do them from the time we adopt this report, but it is -- does take up one of our -- one of our cycles to do them, but we have one year, and we can also ask DCA for a six-month extension if we need it so -- CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Let me offer the -- the observation that -- that both the FOCUS meetings and the CAC meetings were by citizens who represented a very broad spectrum of the community and, therefore, are highly unlikely to have any major conflicts, and as we've heard Miss Student and Miss Cacchiane both tell us, we have opportunities to amend if one of these little conflicts does come up in the future and -- COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS: That's not what I just heard. MS. STUDENT: Excuse me. The law states that the EAR-based amendments have to be based on the EAR. The strictest interpretation of that is line for line, word for word, comma for coma, period for period. It has to match what's in the report. It's my feeling that we need to read into that a rule of reasonableness but not just totally discard what was in the EAR and, you know, come up with something different. COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Well, how have we ever accomplished any changes to the comprehensive plan then? I mean -- COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: If it's not included in the EAR process, it can be a stand-alone amendment at a later date once the EAR is found -- MS. STUDENT: Well, we could do a stand-alone amendment at a later date. Yes. COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS: This is the first EAR. This is the first EAR. MS. STUDENT: That can be part of an EAR amendment. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: I know, but once the EAR -- Once we're found in compliance, we are back in the pattern of biannual -- or is it annual? I'm sorry. MR. CAUTERO: Biannual. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Biannual. MS. STUDENT: Biannual and is sufficient. Sufficient is supposedly a lesser standard of review by the DCA than the in-compliance review; however, I think the history that we have from other local jurisdictions is that they're pretty rigorous so -- COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: And, again, I feel the need to remind -- Putting it in the camp plan doesn't make it happen, you know. That's probably the least effective thing we can do, is stick it in the camp plan and then say, "Look what a good job we did. We put the community goals in our camp plan." That's not going to make it happen. If there are things from FOCUS that we think that the community thinks are important and we want to make them happen, we as the board have the ability to do that. I'm willing to bet most of those things are already consistent with our Growth Management Plan. COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS: We don't know that. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: But -- Well, the meetings I've been to -- CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: The meeting's for tomorrow. As I was saying -- As I was saying before these minor interruptions here, as we just heard reiterated, we do have an opportunity to amend our plan on a biannual basis. So if we get caught in cross-purposes, we can certainly do that, but I am not prepared at this time to tell all these people on the CAC who worked so long and hard on this, our citizens who helped us with this that we're -- we thank them very much for their job, but we're not going to act on it, and we're going to take the FOCUS meetings over and above that to integrate it into EAR before we take any action. I'm just not prepared to do that. So I would prefer to go forward with the process. COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS: I don't think anybody suggested that we do that. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Well, that's exactly what's being suggested here. COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS: I -- I beg to differ. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: That's exactly what's being suggested, is to -- COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS: Well, the hearing -- CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: -- hold up the EAR until you can integrate it with the FOCUS meeting. Is that what you said, or is that not what you said? COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: That's your interpretation of what was said. What was said was that I'm looking for something that may be in the FOCUS report that by adopting the EAR earlier may prohibit us from implementing some portion of what our citizens have said they want. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Okay. And you're suggesting that we delay the EAR meeting tomorrow night so that we can integrate those? COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: Well, actually no. My suggestion to continue the meeting tomorrow night is -- is essentially to give -- to more properly read 1,000 pages of information that were given to us just a very short time ago, and -- and that's essentially what it's -- what it's about and nothing more and while -- CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Then what was all the FOCUS discussion that you had -- COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: Mr. Dorrill brought that up. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Mr. Dorrill. COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: Mr. Dorrill brought up the discussion that Mr. Putzell had out in -- out earlier with him. COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Neil, would you quiet down over there? COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: My -- My suggestion is that we merely continue it so that we have time to -- to properly look through the material we've been given. COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: I'm -- I'm confident that if we don't feel that we are ready to make a decision on an individual element tomorrow night, that we will delay that element until we are comfortable, and with that, I think we need to close this discussion at some point. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: I'm ready. COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: Now is a good time. COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: 10(D). MR. DORRILL: So we -- we are on tap, then, for tomorrow evening -- CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: That's correct. MR. DORRILL: -- and I can tell Mr. Putzell that we are anxiously awaiting the completion of the FOCUS efforts -- CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Absolutely. MR. DORRILL: -- and in all probability will incorporate those at some appropriate meeting after they've had a chance -- the first week in April. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Absolutely. COHMISSIONER HAC'KIE: Is there a possibility that this proposed agenda might get circulated somehow publicly so people who are interested in conservation and coastal management element and future land use element might see that it's not terribly likely we'll get to it on the first night? Mr. Hart? COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: There -- There are these media folks in the back of the room that just might do that. COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: And perhaps we can announce that at the beginning of tomorrow night's meeting so they don't sit for a couple of hours. COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: Let me ask you then. Is there a proposal then -- what I'm hearing now an agreement amongst this board that we're not going to get to book two tomorrow tonight? I -- I can deal with that. I don't want to have to deal with 1,000 pages. I can deal with the remaining 100 pages of the 500 in the first book. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: We are going to go through our meeting tomorrow night as scheduled. That's what I hear from the board. I don't know that there was ever any -- any suggestion that we would take one book one week and one book the other week. I don't know if that was the case. Mr. Dotrill, was that -- was that the intention? COHMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I -- I'd like to make that suggestion just because I don't think it's reasonable that we'll get through everything in one night. And since the conservation, coastal, and the future land use are the more complicated ones and it's likely that we're going to drag beyond, you know, ten o'clock tomorrow if we try to do it all in one night, I wish that we would consider doing those two later. COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: How about we play it by ear? CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: We can make a decision on that tomorrow night -- COHMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Yeah. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: -- depending on how our time goes. COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: We'll play it by ear. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: We will play it by -- COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: -- by the E-A-R, huh? COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Okay. Now, let's move ahead to item ten -- or -- yeah -- 10 -- What are we at? 10(D). Commissioner Matthews, you have a bond issue you want to talk about? MR. DORRILL: Mr. Keller had indicated he wanted to speak on this past item. MR. KELLER: The reason why I'm asking some questions -- CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Could you identify yourself, sir, for the record? MR. KELLER: George Keller. I'm representing the Golden Gate Estates Civic Association as their spokesman before this commission. And I -- I would like to know -- I -- I've gone over some of this comp plan thing, only what was involved with the estates because the rest of it is so all-encompassing that I don't think one person could possibly make a decision on the whole thing, and it's mostly -- Mostly it's carryover from former comp plans. Now, what I'm interested in knowing is, are you just going to discuss the changes that are proposed to be made from the normal comp plan that we have been going on using for years, or are you going to discuss the whole comp plan to get the public and information what the comp plan is all about? Because the comp plan as -- as Commissioner Matthews said, is two big books. The Golden Gate portion of it was about that thick, and it's only two and a half pages I believe the changes that are proposed. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: I believe it's -- I believe it's the former, Mr. Keller. We are going to be focusing on the changes to the comp plan tomorrow night, not -- not really a workshop on what the comp plan is all about. MR. KELLER: Well, if you were only working on the changes, I can't see that you're going to have such a tremendous amount of work to do because the changes -- the changes in the whole Golden Gate plan is only about two and a half pages. So that -- that -- I went through the whole Golden Gate plan, and I made about five or six pages of notes, and most of the stuff is what's already in the plan; so, consequently, I can't see that it's going to take that much time, but I -- I don't want to sit here for two or three hours to listen to a bunch of stuff about -- about environmental and -- and stuff that we've gone through for years, but I do -- but I do want to get it across what the people in Golden Gate Estates want in their plan. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Thank you. MR. KELLER: So -- So should I be here or not? COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS: I don't know. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: You never know what's going to happen, but I would suggest you be here. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Is there anywhere else you'd rather be? MR. KELLER: No. No. As a matter of fact, I hate to tell you this, but I don't even like to come to these meetings. The only reason why I come to them, over the years I've done -- I've done considerably good for Collier County. Thank you. COHHISSIONER HANCOCK: I'm tremendously hurt, George. COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: Mr. Keller, Golden Gate master plan is in book two? MR. KELLER: It is in book two. COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: It is in book two. And Hiss Cacchione indicated that we may get through item 12 tomorrow evening. MR. KELLER: I can't take a chance of you getting -- COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: That's right. MR. KELLER: -- into the Golden Gate plan when I'm not here because I'm supposed to represent them. COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: Well, that's part of what I was asking for a commitment from this board, that we only do a portion of it tomorrow night and not try to make this meeting go until midnight or one o'clock but -- CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Perhaps, Mr. Keller, you could formulate a schedule for us and have it for us tomorrow night. MR. KELLER: I'm -- I'm -- I'm open all night if that's what you want. COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Will -- Will -- Jerry, will Colony be here tomorrow night? JERRY: I'll bring the camera down and set it up. COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: And then leave. COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: All joking aside, Mr. Keller, you might -- you might just kind of keep an eye on the television if you don't want to sit through the others. MR. KELLER: I don't have cable because I think it's -- it's not worth it, but the point is very -- is very, very, very simple, very simple. I do not come here to speak because I want to become a television star. I've made my life, and I've made my -- my goals in this life, and I don't need that. I come here to protect the public. Thank you. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Thank you. Item 10(D). MR. DORRILL: No. You've got one more 10(C). MS. STRATON: Chris Straton. I -- I'm probably sorry I'm doing this, but before you move on to the next item, if there's any chance that certain items are not going to be discussed tomorrow night, I think it would serve the public and the public's perception of the government's willingness to address their issues if that decision was made. If you plan on going through the whole thing tomorrow night, then we'll all be here if it's two o'clock. The public needs to know that. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Well, let me explain the problem. We've been told that the first 12 items are fairly innocuous changes. We may be through with that by six o'clock. What are we going to do? Quit and go home? I mean, I don't think that's reasonable. If we're going to have an evening meeting, let's continue it on at least to make it worthwhile. MS. STRATON: I -- I don't have any problem. It's just that for purposes of -- if the public -- It's very important that the public show up tomorrow night and -- and that they be told we will get through this whole agenda or we -- or, you know -- COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: That -- That's tough to say, Chris, because -- MS. STRATON: Well, I realize it's tough to say. COHHISSIONER HANCOCK: -- we don't know what the board's level of understanding may be on a certain issue, and it may take some public input on that issue to determine whether or not a decision can be made that evening or if it needs to be delayed to another time. So I think what Commissioner Norris and what the board is saying is that we will start with item one, and for each item that the board's level of understanding is sufficient and we're comfortable, we will move to the next item, and we will go as far as we can go tomorrow night. And should we get to the conservation and coastal management element and this board is not comfortable in making a decision or moving ahead, then we will probably delay at that point and I -- I -- I -- It's tough to say whether that will or won't happen tomorrow night. It's -- It's -- It's almost like trying to give a time certain on an agenda. You just really can't bet on it. MS. STRATON: Well, yeah. I -- COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Chris, I -- I understand your point. I guess the irony is, depending on how much public input there is, how -- is a great dependent on how quickly we'll move through the agenda, and if there is a great amount of public input and we find ourselves here at 10:30 and we're only up to item eight, then -- I mean, I don't care. I'll stay until 3 a.m., but it's probably a fair bet that that's not the most effective way to do it, and until we know what our understanding of individual items are and what the public's concern of individual items are, it's very difficult to say. I would suggest, though, tomorrow night, as we move along -- COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: Yes. COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: -- we'll probably have a good idea. If there's a room of 200 people here and they're getting up on each item, we're going to have a good idea an hour into it, gee, we're moving at X, Y, Z pace, but I don't think we can do that today. MS. STRATON: Or the other thing is perhaps to reverse the agenda and put the -- the more -- what you anticipate could be controversial items at the beginning of the agenda. COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: All those things that you haven't read, we'll put those first. COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: That's fine. MS. STRATON: Well, you know, it's just -- it's very -- You know, there are going to be members of the public that will be showing up, I hope, with an expectation that items will be discussed, and if they don't get discussed, they will walk away, and the impression they walk away with is not necessarily what this board wants them to think about their local government. So that's -- that's my only concern. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Well, everybody -- COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: When they come and they sit for six hours and we say, no, we're not going to hear it tonight -- MS. STRATON: That's right. COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: -- we'll hear it another week. I understand. MS. STRATON: So that -- that's just my concern and -- and I -- you know, at the risk of incurring great wrath, I had to say that. This was my moment. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Well, we're in the same position as the public though. We don't know what the schedule is going to go like tomorrow night because we can't control how the discussion is going to go. We've been sitting here for 25 minutes discussing whether we're going to have a meeting or not. So you know -- MS. STRATON: Thank you very much. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: So we can't -- MS. STRATON: I'll see you tomorrow night. Item #10D UPDATE REGARDING THE STATUS OF THE BOND ISSUE - TO BE PLACED ON AGENDA MARCH 26, 1996 CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: -- can't really tell. And now can we move on to 10(D)? Hiss Matthews, you had a bond issue? COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: Yeah. It's not really a bond issue. Last week at the close of our discussion on the arbitrage, I had asked for the county manager to give us a report on those two bond issues that were causing the arbitrage payment to have to be so quickly made, and my question is, has he gotten the report ready, and if it is, can we hear it. That's all. MR. DORRILL: The answer is no, because we had requested some information from Mr. Mitchell concerning documents that were part of the official statement, and we have not yet received any of those. COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: And can I ask this to be put on next week's agenda as well then? MR. DORRILL: You spoke to him. You -- COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Just as -- as part of it, as you do a background on this, one thing that stood out that he mentioned last week was -- We need to do a little homework here with Coopers and Lybrand, I think. But in August of 1992, prior to any of these five people being on the board, the audit report from Coopers and Lybrand indicated arbitrage was a concern and indicated some steps that needed to be taken. Two things. I'd like to pinpoint why those steps weren't taken, and I'd like to pinpoint why Coopers and Lybrand didn't take note of that in the following years, and I think both of those points are very important that we follow up on and have some answers to as well to prohibit such a thing from happening again in the future. COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: And I think we'll find some correspondence that may give those answers. I've seen bits of it, but I haven't put it all together yet. MR. HCNEES: Hike HcNees from the county manager's office. Maybe it would be good for us to clarify it a little bit. I'll tell you the what it is we're looking into and make sure it is exactly what you're asking. We were looking into the specific documents, and there was -- were some statements made last week regarding accountability and responsibility for different parts of this arbitrage calculation, and it's those documents that we've been seeking and have yet to this point not received from the clerk's office. COHMISSIONER HAC'KIE: Wouldn't it just be in the bond covenants? I mean, you're talking about whose responsibility was it to do the calculations. MR. HCNEES: It's my understanding that what was referred to last week was from a specific document called the arbitrage certificate which is one of many that's executed. In fact, my understanding it is not -- COHMISSIONER HAC'KIE: It would be in the book. MR. HCNEES: -- executed by the chairman but, rather, executed by a representative of the clerk's office, and we do not have that in our possession. I've gone through what documents we do have and -- and -- COHMISSIONER HAC'KIE: You don't have the binders from the -- in the bound sets? MR. HCNEES: I do have for one of the issues, but I didn't find the arbitrage certificate in that set. So we've asked for those specifically and have not yet received them, and I'll be -- We can -- We'll continue to try to get those. And as far as some of the other issues, there are some that we can answer, and there are some questions obviously the clerk will have to answer. So -- COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Just kind of a wild idea, but what if the manager's office and the clerk's office all sat down together this week since we're all serving the same taxpayer and -- and all working for the same -- MR. DORRILL: We did that last week. There was a bond closing last week, and at that same meeting we asked specifically if Mr. Hitchell could go back and -- and find those, and he said that he would, and I don't have any reason to believe that he won't. COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: I'm sure he is, but what Commissioner Constantine was mentioning a little bit earlier may broaden your scope a little bit, Mr. HcNees, and that is that there was a 1992 report by Coopers and Lybrand that showed -- that -- that indicated there's an arbitrage problem somewhere. COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: That -- That -- Excuse me. That's not just a report. That's a management letter in the CAFR. COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: Right. And -- And then there was some correspondence following it that indicated roles between the county and the clerk's office, and those may be a part of this to -- because if we did something wrong in-house, I want to know it. MR. HCNEES: And that's fine. COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: That's all I'm asking for. MR. HCNEES: We can certainly get you to that management letter and to -- to that information. What we may not be able to bring you from the manager's office is what -- why was a particular response to the management letter because those management comments would be management comments regarding the clerk, not regarding the manager's office, and we may not be able to tell you why certain things didn't happen. COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: I'm just -- And that's where I'm going with this, is getting everybody sitting down at the same table because I don't care if it was in the clerk's office or in the county manager's office, I want to know who is responsible, and I want to make sure that we don't do that again. And as long as we keep pointing fingers from the clerk to here and here to the clerk, that doesn't do any good, and I think that's what you're suggesting anyway, but I just want to make sure that's what's going to happen. MR. HCNEES: As Mr. Dorrill said, Mr. Mitchell and I did meet, and we are both in complete agreement that there's no purpose to finger pointing, and no -- no -- no one is served by that, that we'd like to understand the situation. COHMISSIONER HAC'KIE: So maybe it should be on the agenda next week, and we'd ask the clerk, Mr. Mitchell to be here, and you'd be here, and the county manager would be here, and we could ask these questions, and whoever has the answers could answer them. What a concept. COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: That's what I'm asking for. I -- I just wanted to make sure that my request for a report on how this came to be doesn't -- didn't get lost. MR. HCNEES: No. It has not been ignored. We're pursuing that information. COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: And why don't we see it on the agenda, then, for next week, and we can pursue this -- the same course of questioning. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Can we handle that, Mr. Dotrill? MR. DORRILL: Absolutely. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Okay. Thank you very much. Item #11A BCC TO RATIFY THE BUDGET AMENDMENTS THAT APPROPRIATE FUNDS FOR THE PAYMENT OF ARBITRAGE REBATE AND SERVICES RENDERED BY ARTHUR ANDERSON LLP IN CONNECTION WITH THE ARBITRAGE CALCULATIONS - APPROVED Next item is ll(A), arbitrage, strangely enough. COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: This is just the confirmation of the -- COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: We don't have a heck of a lot of choice in this one at this point since the checks have been written, do we? MS. LEAMER: My name is Jo-Anne Leamet from the finance department. I'm just here to answer any questions you have about the specific budget amendments. They've already been approved, but we just needed your final approval on the details. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: You're from the finance department? MS. LEAMER: Yes. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: How long have you been there? MS. LEAMER: Since 1992. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: 1992. In that time who has handled the arbitrage calculations? MS. LEAMER: It was handled by the prior controller, Cathy Riehm. I believe she did several calculations, and while I was a staff accountant in the department, there were talks about hiring an outside person to do the calculations -- CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: And that '- MS. LEAMER: -- which did not happen. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: That holds true for all of these issues in question? MS. LEAMER: Yes. Right. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Okay. Thank you. COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Motion to approve the item. COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS: Second. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Motion and a second. All those in favor, signify by saying aye. Opposed? Being none. PUBLIC COMMENT - PRESENTATION BY THE LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS REGARDING OPPOSITION TO EMINENT DOMAIN ISSUE MR. DORRILL: We do have a -- CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: That gets us through our morning agenda right on time. MR. DORRILL: We have a public comment today -- CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Okay. MR. DORRILL: From the League of Women Voters. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Okay. MR. DORRILL: Go right ahead. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Go right ahead. Miss Fitch, is that you? MS. FITCH: We were concerned to see that this issue has gone to Tallahassee, and we were hoping that the Board of County Commissioners -- CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Excuse me. What issue and -- Give your name for the record, please, and what issue you're talking about. MS. FITCH: Excuse me. Dorothy Fitch representing the League of Women Voters. As you know, we have objected to the eminent domain issue that was presented at the legislative delegation meeting, and it was our impression that the senators were not in favor of this, and we have two or three concerns. One is that the public has had no opportunity to discuss this issue. It was mentioned at the annexation session last week that the city had, but that's about it. We feel that this would be establishing a disastrous precedent, and we anticipate speaking to Senator Dudley when our delegation goes to Tallahassee. Thank you. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: This is the -- the eminent domain in which the -- apparently the House of Representatives that were here that day said they would put it on the floor, but the senate had no interest in putting it on the floor, if I remember correctly. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: If I could, I was going to bring this exact issue up on the next item of staff communication, and thank you for bringing it up. MS. FITCH: Oh, I'm sorry. Well, I -- CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: That's okay. MS. FITCH: That's what I was -- CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: That's okay. Now is a good time to discuss it. MS. FITCH: Okay. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: When the legislative delegation was in session right here in this room, I stood where Ms. Fitch is now standing and -- and voiced my disapproval for this proposal, and, as she stated, the representatives seemed favorable, but both of our senators voted against it at that point. Since that time, it's my understanding that Representative Saunders has introduced this on the house side and that Senator Dudley authored the companion bill on the senate side, and what I was going to propose under communications is that -- that we -- If the board is so inclined, if we agree to send a resolution out to the -- I think it's the house committee on community affairs and the same thing in the senate and to the -- to the Florida Association of Counties and -- and perhaps even send a resolution individually to -- to all of our legislators because this I -- I think would be very bad policy and bad legislation. What -- What really is being suggested here is that a lower -- a lower level of government impose restrictions on a higher level of government, and I just don't think that's a precedent that you could ever get away with. COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: And I think Miss Fitch made a good -- good point. It is setting precedent. This isn't simply an issue about Pelican Bay or an issue about Collier County. This is an issue that can affect counties throughout the State of Florida and -- As a matter of fact, you mentioned sending something to Florida Association of Counties. I have a conversation scheduled later this week with them on this topic because this is something that can impact virtually every county in the State of Florida. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: This is special purpose legislation whose broad impact is well beyond what -- what is reasonable, and I'm surprised at Senator Dudley's response after what we heard in this room and I'll -- I -- I'll be in Tallahassee Thursday and Friday, and I'm meeting with Senator Dudley. COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS: I was just going to ask, when's our -- when's our next person go. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Thursday and Friday. COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS: Thursday and Friday. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Thursday and Friday. So this will be a -- a -- COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS: You have a message. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: -- topic de jure. MS. FITCH: Well, this is an issue that the league will support wholeheartedly. We were astounded that it was even suggested to the legislative delegation. We had no inkling of this at all, and I'm sure you didn't either. So that it's too bad that it's gotten to this stage. COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Mr. Chairman, if you want to prepare a resolution between now and next week, I'll be happy to support it. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: Second. MR. DORRILL: If I could, I was contacted last week by the Florida Association of Counties as part of their just review process and wanted to know if we were aware of the bills, and I said I understood there was a house bill, and she said, well, no, there is a senate bill, and while we don't normally get involved in local bills, we have grave concerns about the implications for reason that y'all already mentioned. The name of the lobbyist at the FAC who is responsible for this is Marsha Jordan. I indicated to her that I would speak to the chairman, and then it was my understanding that we would discuss this today. I've also -- was contacted later in the week by a staff member of the House Community Affairs Committee that was charged with writing an analysis, and I told her and sent her copies of the minutes of the meeting where you voice some concern that we had never been provided a copy of the bill, that it otherwise appeared to us to preempt a power that is available to you under general law and that it was our understanding that a delegation hearing -- that because both senators voted against it, that we weren't sure what the progress of the bill would be. So I told her all of that and told her and sent her copies of the minutes from the meeting where I believe either Mr. Constantine or Mr. Norris said, I'll be at the meeting, and I'll speak in opposition to it. She did indicate to me that they do -- or have been provided a resolution from the city and that this may go to a community affairs subcommittee this week. And so if you're going to send a resolution, you need to authorize the attorney to draft that today, and we need to fax it up there today and reserve a resolution number for that because there is the possibility that that is going to be put on the calendar of the subcommittee, and then it -- it will just -- my understanding is almost go through the regular committee as a consent agenda-type item on its way to the floor to be voted on. COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Can we continue today's meeting until -- COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: Tomorrow evening? COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: -- 5:05 tomorrow night? Just have the resolution at 5:06, vote on that, and then have it in their hands officially Thursday? COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: And I -- I currently have a meeting scheduled with every representative from our delegation plus two others on Thursday. I just set up -- a setting up meeting with Marsha at FAC for Friday morning, and I will on top of that hand deliver to each of those and then even drop them off for all the committee members while I'm up there Thursday and Friday. So we'll do it as quickly as possible that way. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: When did you say the committee -- the committee would hear that? MR. DORRILL: It had not been calendared -- CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Okay. MR. DORRILL: -- when I spoke to the lady on Friday, and if you would like for me to, I'll recontact her today and make sure that it's not scheduled to be heard late this afternoon or tomorrow but before Mr. Hancock can get there. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Okay. Then if there's no objection from the board, we will continue this particular item until 5:05 tomorrow night where we'll take an official vote. COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: So we're -- we're giving direction to draft a resolution -- CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Right. COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: -- and to -- to bring it to us tomorrow night? Do -- Do we have the appropriate senate and house bill numbers to include in that to make sure we don't get lost in titles? MR. WEIGEL: Well, I know we've got the house '- I'm David Weigel. I know we have the house bill number. I don't have the senate number, but we should be able to obtain that rather easily. COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: Senator Dudley probably has it. MR. WEIGEL: We will be needing that for the resolution. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: You may call Senator Dudley's office. COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: Yeah. I -- CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: I bet he would have that. COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: I'd like to make sure that the bill numbers are included in the resolution so that it doesn't get lost in a description of titles. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Okay. That does it for that item. MS. FITCH: Thank you. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Thank you very much, Ms. Fitch. That was very kindly of you. How about -- let's see -- communications from board members. Commissioner Matthews, anything further? COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: No. I have nothing else. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Commissioner Hancock? COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: No, sir. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Hac'Kie? COHMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Nothing. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Constantine? COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Mr. Chairman, I have no other items. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Mr. Dorrill. Item #15 (2) & (3) LEGISLATIVE ISSUES AFFECTING COLLIER COUNTY - RESOLUTION TO BE PREPARED REGARDING EMINENT DOMAIN AND PRESENTED AT 3/20/96 5:05 P.M. MEETING FOR ADOPTING; DISCUSSION REGARDING UNIFORM FIRE DISTRICT ACT; ALTERNATIVE EXPENSE REDUCTIONS HR. DORRILL: Two other legislative items -- in fact, three, also as part of that same conversation with FAC. They had asked our office to review a house bill, 877, as it pertains to other special district divisions and comment on it. I -- I had reviewed it, and I can't find that it -- it really applies or would have a particular interest to you, but I think I'll make a copy of this available this afternoon. It has to do with audits and the auditor general's office as it pertains to special districts, and only unless you tell me will we then bring this or get back in touch with FAC on that. I have been provided and was also contacted by the attorney and lobbyist for the Special Districts Association of Florida as it pertains to the Uniform Fire District Act which is a bill that Senator Dudley has sponsored. COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: It's back? MR. DORRILL: It is back and in a very major way, and I need some direction again so that at least at staff level you would tell me what, if anything, you want to do, and you may want to pursue this. Under special powers for independent fire districts, section eight, sub one which is modified from last year, it says independent special fire control districts shall establish and maintain emergency, medical, and rescue response services and acquire and maintain rescue, medical, and other emergency equipment pursuant to provisions of chapter 401 of the Florida Statutes. County approval shall be obtained prior to the provision of any emergency transport service. Specifically that would allow any independent fire district to get into either basic life support or advanced life support EMS service. And the North Naples fire district is the major sponsor or requester on behalf of special districts all over the county. This has been filed, and my understanding again is that there is a house bill, and the Florida Association of Counties is already on behalf of counties involved in this, but they specifically want to know, because it's generated within our delegation, what, if any, role Collier County intends to play. And you have not officially discussed this prior to today, but I indicated again to Ms. Jordan that I would bring it up today to see whether you wanted to give us some direction. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: The response I've received on this is all negative. It, in essence, removes the local taxpayers' ability to control the destiny of their either independent or single districts. It just -- CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Wait a minute. Let's -- Let's talk about that point. I don't think that's the case. Mr. Dotrill, this puts a general cap of -- what -- three and a half mills, right, on -- That's in the legislation? General cap of three and a half mills, but still under the establishment of these independent districts any -- any of their specific caps still have to be referendum approved; is that correct? MR. DORRILL: I honestly don't know. The bill's almost 30 pages long, and it deals with other special powers concerning special assessments. The thing that tripped me was in the request of me from FAC was to review the EMS provision. I, frankly, have not reviewed the entire bill. COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS: It seems to me too, though, if -- if -- I haven't read the bill this year either, but I did read it last year, and -- and it includes provisions for fee assessments and so forth that don't have to go to referendum, if I remember right. So, I mean, it's not just a millage cap being increased that would have to go to referendum but assessment of various fees and so forth as well as -- as the EMS question of establishing essentially an EMS service in competition with our own. COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: I'm a little concerned about the turf war of -- of fire-provided EMS services versus the county system and that impact and so forth and it just -- I just don't really -- What the bill's -- What the bill's trying to achieve is not terribly clear to me. COMHISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Well, help me here. If -- If -- Say North Naples wants to establish their own and say others do, if -- if we don't compete, if we allow them to do that -- and it's their elected fire commissioners who would have to institute those fees and other things. There's still direct accountability to the public through that election -- what's the down side? I'm not suggesting we compete with them, but why do we wrestle every time -- Maybe you have a legitimate answer, but I don't know what it is. Why do we wrestle every time and say, no, we've got to hang onto this? COHMISSIONER HAC'KIE: So that we can -- So that we can support it with ad valorem taxes. I have that question too. I don't get it. COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: If a fire service decides to provides EHS, does that mean we as a county can absolve ourselves of the responsibility of providing the necessary units for that district? Unless it's done by mutual contract, we cannot. So, in essence, we are still -- You know, unless we agree to give that service over to that fire district, we are still responsible to those taxpayers as we are on the rest of the county to provide base EHS services. However, the revenues generated from the -- the -- the billing of those services is now cut in half or cut -- COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: Going to decrease. COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: -- in a third or decreased yet the cost of providing the units for coverage remains the same. COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: My recollection, though, is that the fire districts have actually been game in discussions in the past for signing that over for saying, okay, we'll provide the service. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Let me ask a couple of questions here. I think, first of all, the fire departments can't operate EHS without a certificate of need which comes from the board of County Commission; is that correct? MR. DORRILL: This would preempt your ability to do that unless they wanted to transport -- The current provision would only allow your approval as part of their wanting to transport patients. They would otherwise be unable to create and operate independent fire district EHS systems, but then it would -- As I understand it, your approval would be subject to whether or not you would allow them to transport from the scene to the hospital. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Well, let me make this suggestion. It appears that we don't know very much about this bill, so we don't know whether to support it or oppose it. if we -- if we want to consider making a recommendation on this bill, why don't we at least get a report at some future date and -- COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: How about one week from today? CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: -- and look over the report and decide whether we want to oppose or support it. COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: How about placing it on the agenda for next week? COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Sounds great. I'd be interested in hearing perhaps from a representative from the North Naples fire district as -- what their intent is as well. MR. DORRILL: That would be my desire as well. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Okay. MR. DORRILL: The final item that I have, Mr. Chairman, was to -- to report to you again from the association of counties that the -- the partial-year assessment bills have been determined to be unconstitutional by the staff attorneys in both the house and the senate and would appear to be dead on arrival because of constitutional issues that are new or different from other problems that these bills have had in the past. So if -- if we're going to get on with our first-year service fee, I have given the direction to the staff budget director that that would appear to be necessary and be in a position to be implemented prior to October the 1st. And, again, I'll -- I'll share this information with you under just routine interoffice correspondence. COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: I think -- I think it might be good too if -- if we're going to go ahead and do that interim -- interim government service fee, that we share whatever innovative process we've been through to institute it with any other county that wants to, and I'm sure we would -- CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: For a fee, of course. COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: For a fee. But -- But since this is an interim government service fee and not ad valorem taxes, they're not deductible on anybody's tax return. MR. DORRILL: That's correct. COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: And let's -- let's start looking at that in this way and encourage our -- our -- our sister counties to adopt this, and maybe we can get it passed that way. COHMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Mr. Dorrill, are we talking about having this be adopted as part of the next budget cycle? MR. DORRILL: Yes. COHMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I think that's generating a lot of concern. What will be the -- What will be the public hearing process for that? Are we going to -- Here's my concern. Here's my problem. Last year -- The last year's budget process -- I was surprised by the fact that the beach meters were sort of in there as an assumption as we went through the budget process before we had a real debate on do we want to have beach parking or not. Are we going to have the same thing come up with this partial-year fee, or are we going to have a hearing on that and discuss it before we make the decision? COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: We just did our budget assumptions a couple of weeks ago. So I think that is going to be in there because that's the direction we gave. COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: We gave that direction. COHMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I know, but are we going to adopt that -- I think that it's not as simple as -- as, you know, give a policy direction. There will be details to be worked out on it. Are we going to work those out before or after the budget process, is my question. MR. DORRILL: Well, prior. And that direction was given by me to the budget and DOR directors, and I said if necessary, one or both of you are going to go to Palm Beach to review the -- what I'm calling the nexus work that was done behind that so that we can discuss it as part of the board's financial budget workshop sessions that are going to occur in June, but we would then have to go to a subsequent advertised public hearing and create by ordinance the first-year service fee in advance of October the 1st. And I can tell you, the industry is already well aware of it, and they have requested my presence at an executive board meeting I think in about two or three weeks. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Okay. MR. DORRILL: Okay. I'm done. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Mr. Weigel. MR. WEIGEL: Just to say that in regard to the legislation you're talking about concerning Pelican Bay and the reduction of county government power that's included in that bill, I'm going to be attending and will be providing you my permission slip to attend the regional county attorney conference a week from this Friday. It's with about nine or ten counties, coastal, including Hillsborough and Pinellas County along the Southwest area, and they -- they allow for discussion of hot topics, and in as much as this does have other county -- other counties may have an interest to at least follow this, if not do some of their own research and provide some information. I'd like to introduce that as just one of the topics that we are considering right here and to point out some of the legal issues that I think that exist. I don't necessarily have to take a pro or con or -- or engage anyone from other counties to assist us, but that is kind of a subset of the Florida Association of County Attorneys, and I expect that they'll have some interest in that too. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Thank you. Item #15(1) BUDGET REVIEW DATES - WORKSHOPS SCHEDULED FOR JUNE 19, JUNE 20, JUNE 21 AND THE FOLLOWING WEEK IF NECESSARY MR. DORRILL: Mr. Chairman, I need to back up and -- and just at least get your concurrence with the -- with the budget workshop review dates and ask Mr. Smykowski to share those with you. MR. SHYKOWSKI: For the record, Michael Smykowski. We had talked preliminarily about setting aside the -- the third week in June for workshops and then have the fourth week available if, you know, there were protracted discussions, depending on where we're at millage-wise, et cetera. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: Wonderful. Just tell me where to be and when. MR. DORRILL: And then you're taking the first two weeks in July as part of your recess. MR. SHYKOWSKI: Last year we had about I believe about 16 hours spread across three days. COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Are you looking at particular days that third week? Wednesday, Thursday, Friday, or Monday, Wednesday, Friday or -- We'll be here whenever it is but I'm just -- MR. SHYKOWSKI: Wednesday, Thursday, Friday would be fine. We can do that. MS. FILSON: Commissioner Constantine, just so that you know, I have RPC on the calendar for Thursday of that week. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: We skipped -- We had to skip it, both of us, last year because of that. COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Yeah. And we might have to again this year. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: We might have to again. COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: Oh, the misery. COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: What? The RPC or the budget hearings? CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: No. The RPC. The other option would be Monday, Wednesday, Friday of that week. COHMISSIONER MATTHEWS: And that -- that would leave us the entire fourth week if we had any -- any sort of runover. COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: I like the continuum of -- of three days in a row for the simple reason that you're -- you're fresh and you're going to -- CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: That's it. We'll just tell them they're out of luck at the RPC. Miss Filson, anything further? MS. FILSON: No. CHAIRPERSON NORRIS: We're adjourned. ***** Commissioner moved, seconded by Commissioner, and carried unanimously, that the following items under the consent agenda be approved and/or adopted: ***** Item #16A1 LINE ITEM AND PROJECT NUMBER PROVIDED IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING SECTION BUDGET TO RECOGNIZE DONATIONS RECEIVED AND APPROPRIATE FUNDS FOR THE BUILDING IHMOKALEE TOGETHER/MAIN STREET PROJECT Item #16A2 RESOLUTION 96-141 RE FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE ROADWAY, DRAINAGE, WATER AND SEWER IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE FINAL PLAT OF "SAN RAPPEL" See Pages Item #16A3 WATER FACILITIES FOR HELROSE GARDENS -WITH STIPULATIONS Item #16A4 - This item has been deleted Item #16A5 RESOLUTION 96-142 RE ROADWAY, DRAINAGE, WATER AND SEWER IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE FINAL PLAT OF "PINE RIDGE CROSSING SHOPPING CENTER" See Pages Item #16A6 - Moved to Item #SA1 Item #16B1 BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR UTILITY DESIGN AND PERMITTING SERVICES FOR THE VANDERBILT DRIVE FOUR-LANING IHPROVEHENT PROJECT Item #1682 SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT NO. 3 WITH CH2H HILL FOR ENGINEERING DESIGN SERVICES RELATING TO THE PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS TO PINE RIDGE (C.R. 896) BETWEEN AIRPORT-PULLING ROAD (C.R. 31) AND LOGAN BOULEVARD - IN THE A_MOUNT OF $194,420.00 See Pages Item #1683 BID #96-2477 AWARDED TO MITCHELL & STARK CONSTRUCTION CO., INC. TO CONSTRUCT DISINFECTION SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS FOR HANATEE AND GOODLAND WATER SYSTEMS - IN THE A_MOUNT OF $327,000.00 Item #1684 BIDS 96-2484, 96-2485 AND 96-2486 TO PREPURCHASE EQUIPMENT RELATED TO EFFLUENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS AT THE SOUTH COUNTY REGIONAL WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY - AWARDED TO CONTRACTORS LISTED IN THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Item #1685 SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT TO GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY SIX-LANING IMPROVEMENTS CONSULTING ENGINEERING SERVICES AGREEMENT (JCT. GOODLETTE-FRANK ROAD TO JCT. C.R. 31) CIE NO. 05 - WITH KIHLEY-HORN & ASSOCIATES, INC. IN THE A_MOUNT OF $14,500.00 See Pages Item #16C1 BUDGET AMENDMENT TRANSFERRING FUNDS FROM FUND 301 RESERVES TO REPAIR EAST NAPLES BRANCH LIBRARY ROOF - IN THE A_MOUNT OF $37,000.00 See Pages Item #16D1 RESOLUTION 96-143 RE EXECUTION AND ACCEPTANCE OF AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COHMUNITY AFFAIRS AND COLLIER COUNTY FOR STATE AND LOCAL (SLA) EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT ASSISTANCE FOR FY 1996 See Pages Item #16D2 REJECT ALL PROPOSALS RECEIVED UNDER RFP #96-2471 (MASTER LEASE CONTRACT) Item #16D3 PURSUANT TO RFP #94-2271 ENTER INTO A CONTRACT WITH PERCONTI DATA SYSTEM INC. FOR PURCHASE OF AN INTEGRATED MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEM FOR THE COHMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION - IN THE AMOUNT OF $260,000.00 See Pages Item #16D4 LEASE AGREEMENT BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY AND SHADOWLAWN ASSOCIATION, INC. FOR RADIO TOWER SPACE ON A COUNTY-OWNED TOWER See Pages Item #16D5 CANCELLATION OF CLAIM OF LIEN FOR KAREN STONEBURNER ERBE See Pages Item #16D6 SATISFACTIONS OF NOTICE OF PROMISE TO PAY AND AGREEMENT TO EXTEND PAYMENT OF SEWER SYSTEM IMPACT FEES See Pages Item #16D7 RESOLUTION 96-144 RE SATISFACTION OF LIENS FOR CERTAIN RESIDENTIAL ACCOUNTS WHEREIN THE COUNTY HAS RECEIVED PAYMENT AND SAID LIENS ARE SATISFIED IN FULL FOR THE 1992 SOLID WASTE COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL SERVICES SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS See Pages Item #16D8 RESOLUTION 96-145 RE SATISFACTION OF LIENS FOR CERTAIN RESIDENTIAL ACCOUNTS WHEREIN THE COUNTY HAS RECEIVED PAYMENT AND SAID LIENS ARE SATISFIED IN FULL FOR THE 1994 SOLID WASTE COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL SERVICES SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS See Pages Item #16D9 REPORT RE THE SALE AND TRANSFER OF ITEMS ASSOCIATED WITH THE COUNTY SURPLUS AUCTION OF FEBRUARY 17, 1996 Item #16El BUDGET AMENDMENTS 96-267 AND 96-282 Item #16G1 CERTIFICATE OF CORRECTION TO THE TAX TAX ROLLS AS PRESENTED BY THE PROPERTY APPRAISER'S OFFICE 1990 REAL PROPERTY TAX ROLL NO. DATE 365 2/23/96 1991 REAL PROPERTY TAX ROLL 288 2/23/96 1992 REAL PROPERTY TAX ROLL 213 2/23/96 1993 REAL PROPERTY TAX ROLL 239 2/23/96 1994 REAL PROPERTY TAX ROLL 197 2/23/96 1995 REAL PROPERTY TAX ROLL 206 2/23/96 208 2/28/96 209 3/08/96 Item #1662 SATISFACTION OF LIEN FOR SERVICES OF THE PUBLIC DEFENDER See Pages Item #1663 MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE - FILED AND/OR REFERRED The following miscellaneous correspondence as presented by the Board of County Commissioners has been directed to the various departments as indicated: There being no further business for the Good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by Order of the Chair at 12:22 p.m. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS/EX OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF SPECIAL DISTRICTS UNDER ITS CONTROL JOHN C. NORRIS, CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK These minutes approved by the Board on as presented or as corrected TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF DONOVAN COURT REPORTING BY: Christine E. Whitfield, RPR C