BCC Minutes 12/15/2009 R
December 15, 2009
TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Naples, Florida, December 15, 2009
LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Board of County
Commissioners, in and for the County of Collier, and also acting as
the Board of Zoning Appeals and as the governing board( s) of such
special district as has been created according to law and having
conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 a.m., in
REGULAR SESSION in Building "F" of the Government Complex,
East Naples, Florida, with the following members present:
CHAIRMAN:
Donna Fiala
Fred Coyle
Jim Coletta
Frank Halas
Tom Henning
ALSO PRESENT:
Leo Ochs, County Manager
Michael Sheffield, Assistant County Manager
Jeffrey A. Klatzkow, County Attorney
Sue Filson, BCC Executive Manager
Page 1
COLLIER COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
and
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY BOARD (CRAB)
'-0'"'\ I /'..;,
1 ~
r ( II \1, .......
)1 ,,\
AGENDA
December 15, 2009
9:00 AM
Donna Fiala, BCC Chairman Commissioner, District 1; CRAB Vice-Chairman
Fred W. Coyle, BCC Vice-Chairman Commissioner, District 4
Jim Coletta, BCC Commissioner, District 5; CRAB Chairman
Frank Halas, BCC Commissioner, District 2
Tom Henning, BCC Commissioner, District 3
NOTICE: ALL PERSONS WISHING TO SPEAK ON AGENDA ITEMS MUST
REGISTER PRIOR TO SPEAKING. SPEAKERS MUST REGISTER WITH THE
COUNTY MANAGER PRIOR TO THE PRESENTATION OF THE AGENDA
ITEM TO BE ADDRESSED. ALL REGISTERED SPEAKERS WILL RECEIVE
UP TO THREE (3) MINUTES UNLESS THE TIME IS ADJUSTED BY THE
CHAIRMAN.
COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 2003-53, AS AMENDED BY
ORDINANCE 2004-05 AND 2007-24, REQUIRES THAT ALL LOBBYISTS
SHALL, BEFORE ENGAGING IN ANY LOBBYING ACTIVITIES
(INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, ADDRESSING THE BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS), REGISTER WITH THE CLERK TO THE
BOARD AT THE BOARD MINUTES AND RECORDS DEPARTMENT.
REQUESTS TO ADDRESS THE BOARD ON SUBJECTS WHICH ARE NOT ON
THIS AGENDA MUST BE SUBMITTED IN WRITING WITH EXPLANATION
TO THE COUNTY MANAGER AT LEAST 13 DAYS PRIOR TO THE DATE OF
THE MEETING AND WILL BE HEARD UNDER "PUBLIC PETITIONS."
Page]
December ]5,2009
PUBLIC PETITIONS ARE LIMITED TO THE PRESENTER, WITH A
MAXIMUM TIME OF TEN MINUTES.
ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THIS BOARD
WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS PERTAINING THERETO,
AND THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD
OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE
TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED.
IF YOU ARE A PERSON WITH A DISABILITY WHO NEEDS ANY
ACCOMMODATION IN ORDER TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS PROCEEDING,
YOU ARE ENTITLED, AT NO COST TO YOU, TO THE PROVISION OF
CERTAIN ASSISTANCE. PLEASE CONTACT THE COLLIER COUNTY
FACILITIES MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT LOCATED AT 3301 EAST
T AMIAMI TRAIL, NAPLES, FLORIDA, 34112, (239) 252-8380; ASSISTED
LISTENING DEVICES FOR THE HEARING IMPAIRED ARE AVAILABLE IN
THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' OFFICE.
LUNCH RECESS SCHEDULED FOR 12:00 NOON TO 1:00 P.M.
1. INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
2. AGENDA AND MINUTES
A. Approva] of to day's regular, consent and summary agenda as amended (Ex
Parte Disclosure provided by Commission members for consent and
summary agenda.)
B. November 3,2009 - BCC/AUIR Meeting
C. November ]0, 2009 - BCC/Regular Meeting
3. SERVICE AWARDS: (EMPLOYEE AND ADVISORY BOARD MEMBERS)
20 Year Attendees
A. George Yi]maz, Wastewater
Page 2
December ]5, 2009
4. PROCLAMA TIONS
A. Proclamation congratulating the Collier County Public Utilities Division's
Water Department for the receipt ofWateReuse Award of Merit. To be
accepted by Paul Mattausch, Water Department Director.
5. PRESENTATIONS
A. Presentation on building more disaster resistant community by Jeff Johnson,
Executive Director of Retrofit Southwest Florida, Inc.
B. Presentation of National Association of Counties (NaCO) Achievement
Award to the Collier County Code Enforcement Department for their Blight
Prevention Program.
C. Presentation of the posthumous Advisory Committee Outstanding Member
Award for the month of November 2009 to Charlie Abbott. To be accepted
by Mrs. Linda Abbott.
D. BCBE Construction Co., Inc. presentation on Goodland Boat Park Project.
6. PUBLIC PETITIONS
A. Public petition request by Patrick White to discuss GMP A CP-2008-3, for
Naples Christian Academy and Goodwill Industries.
B. Public petition request by Roberto Millet to discuss permit for car wash on
property located at 4990 Golden Gate Parkway.
C. Public petition request by Jean Benoit to discuss paving ofS.E. 30th Avenue
on Everglades Boulevard.
D. Public petition request by Ervin Garriga to discuss paving of S.E. 30th
Avenue on Everglades Boulevard.
Item 7 and 8 to be heard no sooner than 1:00 p.m.. unless otherwise noted.
7. BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
Page 3
December ]5.2009
8. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Recommendation to adopt an Ordinance amending Chapter 74 of the Collier
County Code of Laws and Ordinances (The Collier County Consolidated
Impact Fee Ordinance) by providing for the incorporation, by reference, of
the impact fee study entitled Collier County Trip Characteristics Study Mine
Land Use, amending Schedule One of Appendix A to reflect the new
Mine/Commercial Excavation land use category and impact fee rate and
providing for a delayed effective date of March 16, 20 lOin accordance with
the notice period requirements of Section 163.3180 I (3)( d) Florida Statutes;
this action is in furtherance to the direction provided by the Board of County
Commissioners on June 23, 2009.
B. This item reouires that all participants be sworn in, and ex parte
disclosure be provided bv Commission members. County Attorney report
on the Town Market property located at 7770 Preserve Lane in the Olde
Cypress PUD and whether the U-Haul business operated at the site is
comparable in nature to other C-3 uses allowed in the PUD and whether
there is sufficient parking to accommodate this use.
9. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
A. Appointment of members to the Isles of Capri Fire Control District Advisory
Committee.
B. Appointment of members to the Development Services Advisory
Committee.
C. To discuss Section 8 of the Collier County Ethics Ordinance No. 2004-5
regarding Collier County Post-Employment Restrictions. Due to the existing
economic climate, consider either temporary suspension of Section 8 of the
Ordinance for a defined period of time or consider permanent removal of
Section 8. For review of the full Ordinance please go to
http://apps.collierclerk.com/BMR/docview.aspx?id= I 4976 (Commissioner
Henning)
10. COUNTY MANAGER'S REPORT
Page 4
December ]5, 2009
A. Recommendation to establish the schedule of impact fee update studies for
Calendar Year 2010 in accordance with prior direction of the Board of
County Commissioners. (Amy Patterson, Impact Fee Manager)
B. Recommendation to award a construction contract in the amount of
$34,977,999.18 to Mitchell & Stark Construction Corporation and reserve
$4,207,000.00 on the purchase order for funding allowances, for a total of
$39,184,999. I 8 for Bid No. 09-5287 Oil Well Road Immokalee Road to
Camp Keais Road, Project No. 60044. (Norman Feder, Transportation
Services Administrator)
C. Report to the Board detailing the status ofFY 2010 capital project funding.
(Mark Isackson, Corporate Financial and Management Services, County
Manager's Office.)
D. This item to be heard at 11 :30 a.m. Recommendation to adopt a resolution
authorizing the condemnation of a fee simple interest parcel and a temporary
construction easement parcel required for the construction of redesigned
improvements to the intersection of Collier and Davis Boulevards. (Collier
Boulevard Project No. 60092 and Davis Boulevard Project No 60073).
Estimated fiscal impact: $285,500. (Norman Feder, Transportation Services
Admini strator)
E. Award of Contract No. 10-5366 to Stevens and Layton Inc., for the Gateway
Triangle Area Drainage Improvements Project Phase 2, Project #51803 in
the total amount of $2,694,473.35 plus a ten (10%) contingency totaling
$2,963,920.69, and approve necessary budget amendment of $350,000.
(Norman Feder, Transportation Services Administrator)
F. This item to be heard at 2:30 p.m. Recommendation to approve actions
required to complete the development ofa comprehensive management plan
for the Clam Bay Estuary. (Gary McAlpin, Coastal Zone Management
Director)
11. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS
12. COUNTY ATTORNEY'S REPORT
Page 5
December ]5, 2009
A. This item to be heard at 12:00 noon. Notice is hereby given that pursuant
to Section 286.011(8), Fla. Stat., the County Attorney desires advice from
the Board of County Commissioners in closed attorney-client session on
TUESDAY, DECEMBER 15, 2009, at a time certain of 12:00 noon in the
Commission conference room, 3rd Floor, W. Harmon Turner Building,
Collier County Government Center, 3301 East Tamiami Trail, Naples,
Florida. In addition to Board members, County Manager Leo Ochs, County
Attorney Jeffrey A. Klatzkow, and Assistant County Attorney Steven T.
Williams will be in attendance. The Board in executive session will discuss:
Settlement negotiations in the pending litigation cases of Craig Grider and
Amber Grider v. Collier County, Case No. 08-7794-CA and Craig Grider
and Amber Grider v. Collier County, Case No. 09-3 I 64-CA, both which are
now pending in the Twentieth Judicial Circuit in and for Collier County,
Florida.
B. This item to be heard at 1:00 p.m. For the Board of County
Commissioners to provide direction to the County Attorney regarding
strategy related to settlement negotiations in the pending litigation cases of
Craig Grider and Amber Grider v. Collier County, Case No. 08-7794-CA
and Craig Grider and Amber Grider v. Collier County, Case No. 09-3164-
CA, both which are now pending in the Twentieth Judicial Circuit in and for
Collier County, Florida.
13. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
14. AIRPORT AUTHORITY AND/OR COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY
A. A Resolution of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County,
Florida, sunsetting the Immokalee Master Plan and Visioning Committee,
and recognizing and memorializing the automatic repeal of Ordinance No.
04-62, as Amended.
15. STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS
16. CONSENT AGENDA - All matters listed under this item are considered to be
routine and action will be taken by one motion without separate discussion of
Page 6
December] 5, 2009
each item. If discussion is desired by a member of the Board, that item(s) will
be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered separately.
A. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
1) This item reouires that all participants be sworn in, and ex parte
disclosure be provided bv Commission members. Recommendation
to authorize the Chairman to sign a Resolution of the Collier County
Board of County Commissioners designating 7,414.0 Acres in the
Rural Lands Stewardship Area Zoning Overlay District as a
Stewardship Sending Area with a designation as BCI/BCP/SI SSA 13
pursuant to the terms set forth in the Escrow Agreement, Stewardship
Sending Area Credit Agreement for BCI/BCP/SI SSA 13, and
Stewardship Easement Agreement for BCI/BCP/SI SSA 13;
approving a Stewardship Sending Area Credit Agreement for
BCI/BCP/SI SSA 13; approving a Stewardship Easement Agreement
for BCI/BCP/SI SSA 13; approving an Escrow Agreement for
BCI/BCP/SI SSA 13; and establishing the number of stewardship
credits generated by the designation of said Stewardship Sending
Area.
2) Recommendation to grant final approval of the roadway (private) and
drainage improvements for the final plat of Mediterra Parcel I 10, with
the roadway and drainage improvements being privately maintained.
3) Recommendation to direct the County Manager or his designee to
provide a refund in the amount of $ I ,052.28 for a portion of the
petition fee received for a recently withdrawn 2007-2008 Cycle
Growth Management Plan Amendment petition.
4) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the water and sewer
utility facilities for Mediterra Maintenance Facility.
5) Recommendation to approve the request by the Economic
Development Council of Collier County to allow Atomic Machine
and EDM, Inc. to participate in the Fast Track Program for the
building permit required for their tenant improvement at the Market
Page 7
December ]5,2009
Center project.
6) Recommendation to develop and advertise for Board consideration an
amendment to Ordinance No. 2004-58, known as the Property
Maintenance Ordinance, and to bring back an amendment in
conjunction with removal of rental registration provisions.
7) Recommendation to grant final approval of the roadway (private) and
drainage improvements for the final plat of Quail West Unit One,
Replat Block C Second Addition with the roadway and drainage
improvements being privately maintained.
8) Request to approve the proposed Letter of Understanding that
delineates Growth Management Plan (GMP) major issues that will be
addressed in the County's Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) as
required by Section 163.319 I of the Florida Statutes and direct the
County Manager or his designee to enter into a formal agreement with
the Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA).
B. TRANSPORT A TION SERVICES
1) Recommendation to recognize FY 2009/2010 Federal Transit
Administration Section 53 I I additional revenue in the amount of
$30 1,8 I 7.00 to Collier Area Transit Fund (426) and authorize all
necessary budget amendments.
2) Recommendation to recognize FY 2009-20 I 0 State Public Transit
Block Grant additional revenue in the amount of $8,876.00 to Collier
Area Transit Fund (426) and authorize all necessary budget
amendments.
3) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approves a
Resolution authorizing the execution and submittal of the Federal
Transit Administration Section 53 10 FY20 I 0/20 II grant application
and applicable document and to accept the grant if awarded.
4) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approves a
Resolution authorizing the execution and submittal of the Federal
Transit Administration Section 53 I I FY20 I 0/20 I I grant application
Page 8
December ]5,2009
and applicable document and to accept the grant if awarded.
5) Recommendation to approve the purchase of a Perpetual, Non-
exclusive Road Right-of-Way, Drainage and Utility Easement which
is required for the construction of the proposed four-Ianing
improvements to Golden Gate Boulevard from just west of Wilson
Boulevard to just east of DeSoto Boulevard. Project No. 60040 (Fiscal
Impact: $3, 100.00).
6) Recommendation to approve the purchase of a Perpetual, Non-
exclusive Road Right-of-Way, Drainage and Utility Easement which
is required for the construction of the proposed four-Ianing
improvements to Golden Gate Boulevard from just west of Wilson
Boulevard to just east of DeSoto Boulevard. Project No. 60040 (Fiscal
Impact: $2, I 22.00).
7) Recommendation to approve an Amendment to Agreement allowing
former owners of a property purchased by Collier County for the
Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension Project (Parcel 133) the option to
further extend their post-closing occupancy of the property for an
additional three month period. Project No. 60168 (Fiscal Impact:
Revenue in the amount of $4,500 will be credited to the gas tax and/or
impact fee accounts).
8) Recommendation to approve a Purchase Order for payment of
invoices totaling $52,206, submitted by Precision Contracting
Services, Inc. for Traffic Operations Ethernet Conversion performed
in FY 07/08 with reimbursement from the Florida Department of
Transportation.
9) Recommendation to award ITB #09-53 10 Motorola Central Control
Irrigation Supplies & Services to Ag- Tronix Inc. for an estimated
annual amount of$65,000.
10) Recommendation to ratify an emergency purchase order previously
approved by the County Manager for electrical services under annual
contract #07-4083, On-Call Electrical Repairs and New Installation to
E. B. Simmonds Electrical Inc., Naples, FL, in the amount of
Page 9
December ]5, 2009
$ 127,760.90.
C. PUBLIC UTILITIES
1) Recommendation to approve Amendment No. I to South Florida
Water Management District Agreement No. OT061098 to monitor
ground water in Collier County. (Estimated Revenue $ I 16,000
annually.)
2) Recommendation to adopt a Resolution to approve the Satisfactions of
Lien for Solid Waste residential accounts wherein the County has
received payment and said Liens are satisfied in full for the 1994,
1995, and 1996 Solid Waste Collection and Disposal Services Special
Assessment. Fiscal impact is $48.00 to record the Satisfactions of
Lien.
3) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairmen to sign a
Pre-award Cost Request Form requesting a pre-award credit of
$ I 21,290.99 in staff time and emergency repair expenditures as an
update to the grant application to the Florida Department of
Community Affairs for the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program for up to
$320,000 to construct a six-inch High Density Polyethylene leachate
pipe at the Collier County Landfill.
4) Recommendation to award RFP #09-5201, an annual contract for
Underground Utilities Supplies to Ferguson Waterworks, Inc.
D. PUBLIC SERVICES
1) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to sign an
agreement with Collier Health Services (CHS), and an agreement with
the Agency for Health Care Administration (AHCA) to participate in
the Low Income Pool Program. Participation in this program will
require the County to send $207,127 to AHCA, which will generate
an additional $432,944 in Federal matching funds to be paid directly
to Collier Health Services for medical services for the most medically
needy in Collier County. Collier Health Services will receive a total
distribution of $640,07 I from the State.
Page] 0
December ]5, 2009
2) Recommendation to approve the FY05 and FY06 Annual Reports to
the Florida Department of Highway Safety Motor Vehicles for the
Choose Life Specialty License plate.
3) Recommendation to provide after the fact approval for the submittal
of the 2010 Continuum of Care (CoC) Grant application to the U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for CoC
programs assisting and benefiting the homeless population in Collier
County.
4) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to sign an
agreement with the Collier County Child Advocacy Council, Inc.
(CCCAC) to provide for State mandated services identified under
Florida Statute 39.304(5). Fiscal impact of$70,000.
5) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to sign an
agreement with the State of Florida, Department of Children and
Families accepting a Challenge Grant in the amount of$96,000; and
authorize the necessary budget amendments associated with this
action. The non-profit subrecipients: Saint Matthews House, The
Shelter for Abused Women and Children, National Alliance on
Mental Illness, The Collier County Hunger and Homeless Coalition
and Youth Haven, Inc.
6) Recommendation to authorize Disaster Recovery Initiative awards in
excess of fifty-thousand dollars and authorize the Purchasing Director
to issue purchase orders in excess of fifty-thousand dollars, for site
preparation activities required to replace homes severely damaged by
Hurricane Wilma. These activities will benefit three (3) income-
qualified households in Collier County. (Fiscal impact $ I 78, I 42.75)
7) Recommendation to repeal Resolution No. 2007-190 and adopt the
attached revised Resolution No. 2010- that lists new fines and
fees for Collier County Public Library.
E. ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
1) Recommendation to award ITB #09-5325 On-Call Electrical Repairs
and New Installation to AC Electric ofSW Florida, Inc., Bentley
Page] ]
December ]5, 2009
Electric Company of Naples, Fl, Inc., E. B. Simmonds Electrical Inc.,
Gulf States Electric, Inc., and Professional Highway Maintenance,
Inc. ($230,000)
2) Recommendation to approve the purchase of Group Health
Reinsurance coverage for calendar year 20 lOin the amount of
$1,018,777 which equates to a reduction of 19.9% over prior year's
premIUm.
3) Recommendation to authorize the on-line auction of Collier County
surplus property.
4) Recommendation to approve payment of$3,666.66 which is 2/12ths
of the IRS allowable annual contribution amount, to the deferred
compensation account of former County Manager, James V. Mudd, in
accordance with his contract, to be processed January 20 I O.
5) Recommendation to approve an Agreement for Sale and Purchase
with Frank 1. Fisiorek, Jr. and Kathleen E. Zielinski for 1.14 acres
under the Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Program at a cost
not to exceed $ I 9,300.
6) Recommendation to award Bid No. 09-5323 On-Call Plumbing
Contractors to Shamrock Plumbing and Mechanical, Inc. as primary,
Precision Plumbing Services, Inc. as secondary, and Four Star
Plumbing Contractors, Inc. as tertiary at an estimated annual cost of
$210,000.
7) Recommendation to authorize an offering of the Voluntary Separation
Incentive Program pursuant to Collier County Ordinance No. 09- I 3
for two employees not previously notified of eligibility in July 2009.
8) Report and Ratify Staff-Approved Change Orders and Changes to
Work Orders to Board-Approved Contracts.
9) Recommendation to approve an Agreement not to exceed $10,000
between the GAC Land Trust Committee and the Big Corkscrew
Island Fire Control and Rescue District for the purchase of the BullEx
Page] 2
December] 5, 2009
Fire Extinguisher Training System.
F. COUNTY MANAGER
1) Recommendation to approve a fiscal year 2010 budget amendment
establishing dedicated appropriations covering anticipated contractor
and administrative expenses associated with the Intersection Safety
Program. Fiscal Impact $841,000.
2) Approve budget amendments.
3) Recommendation to approve use of all interest earnings on Tourist
Tax Funds for destination advertising, marketing and promotion for a
period of three fiscal years and approve all necessary budget
amendments.
4) Recommendation to adopt a resolution approving amendments
(appropriating grants, donations, contributions or insurance proceeds)
to the Fiscal Year 2009-10 Adopted Budget.
5) Recommendation to adopt a Resolution #20 10- and approve and
authorize the Chairman to sign a lease-purchase agreement and all
accompanying documents with Government Capital Corporation for
the replacement of one (I) ambulance for Emergency Medical
Services for five (5) annual payments of $4 I ,575.74 for a total of
$207,878.70.
G. AIRPORT AUTHORITY AND/OR COMMUNITY
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
1) To approve and execute Commercial Building Improvement Grant
Agreement(s) between the Collier County Community
Redevelopment Agency and a Grant Applicant(s) within the Bayshore
Gateway Triangle Community Redevelopment area (2800 Davis
Boulevard).
2) To approve and execute a Site Improvement Grant Agreement(s)
between the Collier County Community Redevelopment Agency and
Page 13
December] 5, 2009
a Grant Applicant(s) within the Bayshore Gateway Triangle
Community Redevelopment area (2445 A-B Thomasson Drive).
3) To approve and execute a Sweat Equity Grant Agreement(s) between
the Collier County Community Redevelopment Agency and a Grant
Applicant(s) within the Bayshore Gateway Triangle Community
Redevelopment area (2938 Cypress Street).
4) Recommendation that the Community Redevelopment Agency
approve an Event Policy and Procedures Manual to govern all event
activites for the Bayshore Gateway Triangle.
5) Recommendation for the CRA to approve the sale and consumption of
alcoholic beverages (beer and wine) during the CRA Board approved
Bayshore Cultural Festival of the Arts event on January 23,2010 on
the CRA owned parcels.
6) Request that the Collier County Redevelopment Agency approve the
application and recipient agreement for the Immokalee Community
Redevelopment Agency (CRA) Commercial Facade Improvement
Grant Program for reimbursement of $20,000 for facade
improvements to Little Caesars Pizza located at 525 North 15th Street
in Immokalee, Florida.
H. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
1) Commissioner Fiala requests Board approval for reimbursement
regarding attendance at a function serving a Valid Public Purpose.
Attended the East Naples Civic Association Luncheon on November
19,2009 at Hamilton Harbor in Naples, FL. $23.00 to be paid from
Commissioner Fiala's travel budget.
2) Commissioner Fiala requests Board approval for reimbursement
regarding attendance at a function serving a Valid Public Purpose.
Attended the Marco Island Area Chamber of Commerce Christmas
Gala on December 6, 2009 at the Old Marco Inn on Marco Island, FL.
$75.00 to be paid from Commissioner Fiala's travel budget.
Page ]4
December] 5, 2009
3) Commissioner Fiala requests Board approval for reimbursement
regarding attendance at a function serving a Valid Public Purpose.
Attended the Marco Island Historical Society Holiday Luncheon on
December 8, 2009 at the First Baptist Church on Marco Island, FL.
$20.00 to be paid from Commissioner Fiala's travel budget.
4) Commissioner Henning requests Board approval for reimbursement
regarding attendance at a function serving a Valid Public Purpose.
Attended the EDC Pre-Legislative Luncheon on November 24,2009
at the Club at the Strand in Naples, Florida. $25.00 to be paid from
Commissioner Henning's travel budget.
I. MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
1) Miscellaneous items to file for record with action as directed.
J. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
1) Recommendation to approve the return of funds for the 9 I I
Microwave Circuits Grant, #S-08-07-31 to the State of Florida on
behalf of the Collier County Sheriff's Office.
2) To obtain board approval for disbursements for the period of
November 2 1,2009 through November 27,2009, and for submission
into the official records of the Board.
3) To obtain board approval for disbursements for the period of
November 28, 2009 through December 4, 2009, and for submission
into the official records of the Board.
K. COUNTY ATTORNEY
1) Authorize the making of an Offer of Judgment to Respondent,
Platinum Coast Financial Corp., for Parcel No. 825 in the amount of
$79,250 in the lawsuit styled Collier County v. Myrtle Cove, Inc., et
aI., Case No. 07-5038 (Lely Area Stormwater Improvement Project #
51101.1) (Fiscal Impact $21,350).
Page ] 5
December ]5, 2009
2) Recommendation to authorize a Stipulated Final Judgment in the
amount of$375,000 for Parcels 104 and 604 in the lawsuit styled
Collier County, Florida v. Highland Properties of Lee and Collier,
Ltd., et aI., Case No. 06-0563-CA (Santa Barbara Boulevard Project
#6208 I) (Fiscal Impact $304,542).
3) Authorize an Offer of Judgment to Respondent, Luis Pineros, for
Parcel No. 204RDUE in the amount of $20,832 in the lawsuit styled
Collier County v. Joseph Noel, et aI., Case No. 07-3200-CA (Oil Well
Road Project # 60044) (Fiscal Impact $12,432).
4) Recommendation to authorize the County Attorney to advertise and
bring back for Board consideration an Ordinance establishing the
Habitat Conservation Plan Advisory Committee to assist the Board of
County Commissioners in determining the feasibility of developing
and implementing a Habitat Conservation Plan to protect red-
cockaded woodpeckers in the North Belle Meade Overlay area.
17. SUMMARY AGENDA - THIS SECTION IS FOR ADVERTISED PUBLIC
HEARINGS AND MUST MEET THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA: 1) A
RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL FROM STAFF; 2) UNANIMOUS
RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL BY THE COLLIER COUNTY
PLANNING COMMISSION OR OTHER AUTHORIZING AGENCIES OF
ALL MEMBERS PRESENT AND VOTING; 3) NO WRITTEN OR ORAL
OBJECTIONS TO THE ITEM RECEIVED BY STAFF, THE COLLIER
COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION, OTHER AUTHORIZING
AGENCIES OR THE BOARD, PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF
THE BCC MEETING ON WHICH THE ITEMS ARE SCHEDULED TO BE
HEARD; AND 4) NO INDIVIDUALS ARE REGISTERED TO SPEAK IN
OPPOSITION TO THE ITEM. FOR THOSE ITEMS, WHICH ARE QUASI-
JUDICIAL IN NATURE, ALL PARTICIPANTS MUST BE SWORN IN.
A. This item reouires that ex parte disclosure be provided by
Commission members. Should a hearing: be held on this item, all
participants are reouired to be sworn in. Recommendation to
approve Petition V AC-PL-2009- I 023, Nature Point Lot 8, to disclaim,
renounce and vacate the County's and the Public's interest in that
portion of a 25-foot wide drainage easement along the rear of Lot 8,
Nature Point, as filed in Plat Book 20, Pages 20-22 of the Public
Page 16
December 15, 2009
Records of Collier County, Florida, situated in Section 35, Township
49 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida, the vacated portion
being more specifically depicted and described in Exhibit A and
accept the replacement drainage easement shown on Exhibit B.
B. Recommendation to adopt a resolution approving amendments
(appropriating carry forward, transfers and supplemental revenue) to
the Fiscal Year 2009- I 0 Adopted Budget.
C. Recommendation to adopt an Ordinance amending Ordinance No.
2001-43, as amended (The Vanderbilt Beach Beautification Municipal
Service Taxing Unit), per the Board's December 1,2009 direction
under Agenda Item 16B5 to incorporate provisions to facilitate the
ongoing conversion of overhead utility distribution facilities to
underground service within the MSTU boundaries.
18. ADJOURN
INQUIRIES CONCERNING CHANGES TO THE BOARD'S AGENDA SHOULD
BE MADE TO THE COUNTY MANAGER'S OFFICE AT 252-8383.
Page] 7
December 15, 2009
December 15,2009
MR.OCHS: Ladies and gentlemen, if you'd please take your
seats.
Madam Chairman, you have a live mike.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you.
Good morning, everyone, and welcome to the December 15th
Board of County Commissioner meeting. We welcome you-all here
today. We hope the audience remains full the entire day. And with
that, we're going to ask -- Leo, are you going to say the prayer for us
this morning?
MR. OCHS: Yes, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I'm going to ask you to rise. Leo will lead
us in prayer, and then Commissioner Halas will lead us in the pledge.
MR. OCHS: Our Heavenly Father, we ask your blessings on
these proceedings and all who are gathered here. We ask this, a
special blessing, on this Board of County Commissioners, guide them
in their deliberations, grant them wisdom and vision to meet the trials
of this day and the days to come.
Bless us now as we undertake the business of Collier County and
its citizens, that our actions will serve the greater good of all citizens
and be acceptable in your sight.
These things we pray in your name, amen.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Would you put your hands over your
hearts, please.
(The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you very much.
Jim Coletta, did you have an announcement?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. We're very fortunate today
to recognize Sue Filson, who's birthday was yesterday at 29 years old.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: She's been with us almost as long as she
is old, right?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's correct.
Page 2
December 15, 2009
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Twenty-nine years.
And, Commissioners, before we start meeting, I would just like
to say that as we move forward with this meeting and all of the
meetings in the future, I would like us to all keep in mind that we set
the tone for the rest of the county, that we should always treat each
other with respect, and we should address each other with respect as
well as all of our staff members, making sure to respect them, and all
of our constitutional officers and their staff members, as well as the
people in the community, because it is we, much of the highest--
many of the highest elected officials, who set the tone and the standard
for the rest of the county. And I would ask that we all keep this in
mind as we move forward.
And with that, Mr. Ochs.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You're taking all the fun out of
being here.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Do you mean you sharpen your teeth on
this meeting?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes.
Item #2A
TODA Y'S REGULAR, CONSENT AND SUMMARY AGENDA
AS AMENDED - APPROVED AND/OR ADOPTED W /CHANGES
MR. OCHS: Good morning, Commissioners. Agenda changes,
Board of County Commissioners' meeting, December 15, 2009.
Item 10C, Page 15 of 19, project number 80605, is identified as
the Delason neighborhood and it should read Delasol neighborhood.
That was at Commissioner Fiala's request.
Next item is to move Item 16Al to 17D, your summary agenda.
This item should have been placed under 17, summary agenda, as it is
an advertised public notice. That move is at staffs request.
Page 3
December 15,2009
Item 16B3. The last sentence on the last page of the resolution
should read, this resolution adopted after motion, second, and majority
vote favoring same, this 15th day of December, 2009, rather than the
first day of December, 2009.
Next item is to continue Item 16D2 to the January 12, 2010, BCC
meeting.
Next item is to move Item 16D6 to lOG, and that is a
recommendation to authorize Disaster Recovery Initiative Awards in
excess of $50,000 and authorize the purchasing director to issue
purchase orders in excess of $50,000 for site preparation activities
required to replace homes severely damaged by Hurricane Wilma.
This item is being moved at Commissioner Henning's request to the
regular agenda.
The next item is 16D7. The title should read, recommendation to
repeal resolution number 2007-190 and adopt the attached revised
resolution number 2009 rather than 2010. That's at staffs request.
Next item is to withdraw Item 16E 1 due to a bid protest. That's
at staffs request per your bid protest policy.
Item 16E6, award of invitation to bid 09-5323 for On-Call
Plumbing Services, the following clarification needs to be read into
the record. Staff requests that the contract be awarded to the
recommended vendors in no particular order rather than on a primary,
second, or tertiary basis as set forth in the written executive summary.
That change is at staffs request.
Next item is 16F5. The title should read, recommendation to
adopt resolution number 2009 rather than 2010. Again, it's staffs
request.
Next item is 1611. The corrected figure of$354,357.01 rather
than $373,505.01, plus any additional accrued interest, is the amount
to be returned to the grantor agency. A project closeout budget
amendment would be replacing the current submitted budget
amendment. And this change is made at the Sheriffs Office request.
Page 4
December 15,2009
Next change is to move Item 16K4 to 12C under county attorney
regular agenda. It has to do with an ordinance establishing the Habitat
Conservation Plan Advisory Committee.
And we have five time-certain items, Madam Chair. First is Item
10D to be heard at 11 :30 a.m.
Next is 10F, to be heard at 2:30 p.m; Item lOB to be heard at
three p.m.; Item 12A to be heard at 12 noon; and 12B to be heard at
one p.m.
Those are all the changes I have, Madam Chair.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: That's a bundle. Thank you, County
Manager.
County Attorney?
MR. KLA TZKOW: No changes, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you very much.
And Commissioners, do you have any changes or additions to the
agenda or any ex parte on the summary or consent agenda? We'll start
with you, Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No ex parte communications on
today's summary agenda or consent agenda, no further changes.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. No changes to the agenda
and no -- nothing to declare.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you.
Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Good morning, Chair.
I have nothing on the consent agenda nor anything on the
summary agenda, and I have no changes to the agenda at all today.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Let me read the sign down there. Who is
that? Oh, yes. Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: His light's on, too.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I wish you could see this. Would you
please hold that up? He has -- last meeting I stumbled over his name,
Page 5
December 15,2009
so he has a sign to make sure I remember who he is and when his light
is on and when it's off.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I always thought his lights were out
all the time.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Now, remember what she said
about being respectful.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Pretty good though.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: But it was good, yeah.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coy Ie?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I have no further changes to the
agenda, and I have no ex parte for the consent or the summary agenda.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. And I, too, have no further
corrections or additions to the agenda, nor do I have anything to
declare on the consent or the summary agenda.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Move to approve today's agenda.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, thank you, fellows.
We have a motion to approve and a second. All in favor?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Great. We move forward.
Page 6
Agenda Changes
Board of County Commissioners Meeting
December 15, 2009
Item 10C: Page 15 of 19, Project #80605 is identified as the Delason Neighborhood and it should read "Delasol"
Neighborhood. (Commissioner Fiala's request.)
Move Item 16Al to 170: This item should have been placed under 17 Summary Agenda, as it is an advertised Public Notice.
(Staff's request.)
Item 16B3: Last sentence on the last page of the Resolution should read, "This Resolution adopted after motion, second and
majority vote favoring same, this 15th day of December, 2009." (rather than 1" day of December, 2009.") (Staff's request.)
Continue Item 1602 to the Januarv 12. 2010 BCC meetin.: Recommendation to approve the FYOS and FY06 Annual Annual
Reports to the Florida Department of Highway Safety Motor Vehicles for the Choose Life specialty license plate. (Staff's
request.)
Move 1606 to lOG: Recommendation to authorize Disaster Recovery Initiative awards in excess 01 fifty-thousand dollars and
authorize the Purchasing Director to issue purchase orders in excess of fifty-thousand dollars, for site preparation activities
required to replace homes severely damaged by Hurricane Wilma. These activities will benefit three (3) income-qualified
households in Collier County. (Fiscal Impact $178,142,75) (Commissioner Henning's request.)
Item 1607: Title should read: "Recommendation to repeal Resolution No. 2007-190 and adopt the attached revised
Resolution No. 2009- _' . ." (rather than 2010). (Staff's request.)
Withdraw Item 16E1: Award of ITB 09-5325 for On Call Electrical Repairs. Withdrawn due to a bid protest. (Staff's request.)
Item 16E6: Award of ITB 09-5323 for On Call Plumbing Services: The following clarification needs to be read into the record:
"Staff requests that the contract be awarded to the recommended vendors in no Darticular order rather than on a
primary/secondary/tertiary basis as set forth in the written executive summary". (Staff's request.)
Item 16FS: Title should read: "Recommendation to adopt a Resolution #2009-_. . ." (rather than 2010). (Staff's request.)
Item 16J1: The corrected figure of $354,357.01 (rather than $373,505.01) plus any additional accrued interest is the amount
to be returned to the grantor agency. A Project Closeout Budget Amendment will be replacing the current submitted Budget
Amendment. (Sheriff's Office request.)
Move Item 16K4 to 12C: Recommendation to authorize the County Attorney to advertise and bring back for Board
consideration an Ordinance establishing the Habitat Conservation Plan Advisory Committee to assist the Board of County
Commissioners in determining the feasibility of developing and implementing a habitat Conservation Plan to protect red-
cockaded woodpeckers in the North Belle Meade Overlay area. (Commissioner Fiala's request.)
Time Certain Items:
Item 100 to be heard at 11:30 a.m. Recommendation to adopt a resolution authorizing the condemnation of a fee simple
interest parcel and a temporary construction easement parcel required for the construction of redesigned improvements to
the intersection of Collier and Davis Boulevards. (Collier Boulevard Project No. 60092.)
Item 10F to be heard at 2:30 O.m. Recommendation to approve actions required to complete the development of a
comprehensive management plan for the Clam Bay Estuary.
Item lOB to be heard at 3:00 o.m. Recommendation to award a construction contract in the amount of $34,977,999.18 to
Mitchell & Stark Construction Corporation and reserve $4,207,000 on the purchase order for funding allowances, for a total
of $39,184,999.18 for Bid No. 09-5287 Oil Well Road Immokalee Road to Camp Keais Road, Project No. 60044.
(Commissioner Coletta's request.)
Item 12A to be heard at 12:00 Noon: Closed attorney-client session to discuss settlement negotiations in the pending
litigation cases of Craig Grider and Amber Grider v. Collier County, Case No. 08-7794-CA and Craig Grider and Amber Grider v.
Collier County, Case No. 09-3164-CA.
12/15/20098:36 AM
Item 12B to be heard at 1:00 o.m. For the Board to provide direction to the County Attorney regarding strategy related to
settlement negotiations in the pending litigation cases of Craig Grider and Amber Grider v. Collier County, Case No. OB-7794-
CA and Craig Grider and Amber Grider v. Collier County, Case No. 09-3164-CA.
12/15/2009 8:36 AM
December 15, 2009
Item #2B and #2C
MINUTES FROM THE NOVEMBER 3, 2009 - BCC/AUIR
MEETING AND NOVEMBER 10, 2009 - BCC/REGULAR
MEETING - APPROVED AS PRESENTED
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I make a motion that we
approve the November 3,2009, BCC/AUIR meeting, and November
10, 2009, BCC regular meeting.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Second?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Thank you. A second from
Commissioner Coletta.
All in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you.
And we shall move forward then.
Item #3A
EMPLOYEE SERVICE AWARDS: 20 YEAR ATTENDEES -
PRESENTED
MR. OCHS: Commissioner, that takes us to Item 3 on your
agenda, service awards. We have one service award to present today
Page 7
December IS, 2009
for 20 years of service. George Yilmaz, your wastewater director.
George?
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you so much, Sue. Sue, our
birthday girl.
Hi, George. George, we just love all the service you offer us and
your great attitude always. Between us and staff and everyone else in
the county, thank you for your service.
MR. YILMAZ: Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Congratulations.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Congratulations. Thank you very
much.
MR. YILMAZ: And sir, thank you.
MR.OCHS: Photo.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Picture time.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Keep him straight.
(Applause.)
Item #4A
PROCLAMATION CONGRATULATING THE COLLIER
COUNTY PUBLIC UTILITIES DIVISION'S WATER
DEPARTMENT FOR THE RECEIPT OF WATEREUSE AWARD
OF MERIT. ACCEPTED BY PAUL MATTAUSCH, WATER
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR - ADOPTED
MR.OCHS: Commissioners, that takes us to 4A, proclamations.
Proclamation congratulating the Collier County Public Utilities
Division's Water Department for the receipt of Water Reuse Award of
Merit, to be accepted by Paul Mattausch, water department director.
Paul?
Page 8
December IS, 2009
(Applause.)
Bring your guys up, Paul.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Paul was playing in the orchestra at the
Living Tree the other day. I was watching you on the screen. You
looked wonderful. You want to bring the rest of your guys up?
MR. MATTAUSCH: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Congratulations.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Congratulations.
MR. MATTAUSCH: Would you come up, Steve?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Bring them all up here.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you, guys.
(Applause.)
MR. MATTAUSCH: If! may, Commissioner, for just a minute.
I'd like to recognize the project delivery team that was up in front with
me, and there's a couple other people in the room that I'd like to
recogmze.
Steve -- Steve Messner is here. Steve is the Plant Manager. He's
the person responsible for running this facility on a day-to-day basis
after it was turned over to us.
Curt Pfeffer is here and Albert Mameese (phonetic) is here from
Hazen and Sawyer. They were our consultants and the engineers on --
the design engineers on the project.
Ron Dillard is here. Ron was the Project Manager from Public
Utilities Planning and Project Management for the well field portion of
this project, which was a significant part of the project producing raw
water to the reverse osmosis water treatment plant.
And Phil Gramatges is in the room. Phil is the Director of
Planning and Project Management. Phil was responsible for the
project management of the water treatment facility itself.
And also Jim DeLony is here. Jim is the Public Utilities Division
Administrator, responsible for keeping this whole -- keeping this
whole plan together. Jim, thank you.
Page 9
December IS, 2009
I just want you to know -- and some of you have been in this
facility -- this facility received this award. This is a -- this is very
significant, actually international recognition of the reverse osmosis
water treatment facility that we have. And I just want you to know
what we have here in Collier County has been recognized nationally
and internationally.
We held the American Membrane Technology Association
conference here in Naples last summer, and the reason why that -- that
group came to Naples was because of the types of facilities that we
have here. Normally they are in venues like Las Vegas and Anaheim,
but they hosted their international conference here simply for the fact
that we operate two reverse osmosis water treatment facilities.
And as of this month, December of2009, we have been operating
reverse osmosis facilities for ten years. That's a decade worth of
producing water using alternative water supplies, taking the stress off
of the freshwater supplies and being environmentally aware and being
good stewards of our resources.
And I just want you to know that the 20-million-gallon-a-day
facility that received this award is one of actually fewer than a handful
of facilities of this size on the North American continent, and we are --
we are proud to have that here and your foresight as a board to do the
right thing and remain in the forefront in producing high-quality
drinking water. And I want to thank you for that.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, my goodness. That's just wonderful.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. I think we shouldn't stop
there, Paul. I think the public needs to understand what our utilities
department has done here with respect to reverse osmosis water
treatment.
You can get water out of the ocean and run it through a reverse
osmosis treatment system, and that is very expensive. But knowing
Page 10
December IS, 2009
that our underground freshwater aquifers had limited capacity, our
utilities department devised a plan to drill deep wells down into
brackish aquifers so that we wouldn't draw water from our freshwater
aquifers, and we would treat the brackish water using the reverse
osmosis system.
Now, what that did, it not only saved the taxpayers tens, if not
hundreds, of millions of dollars for the cost of using saltwater directly
out of the ocean, but it extended the life of our freshwater aquifers,
and today our utilities department is supplying the treated reverse
osmosis water, and that represents about 50 percent of our entire
freshwater supply in Collier County.
Most people do not know that we have reverse osmosis systems
in Collier County. And, yeah, the board approved a lot of that, but
you guys are the ones who came up with the idea of doing it in a way
that is most cost effective for the taxpayers of Collier County.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Well said, well said.
MR. MATTAUSCH: Very well stated. And if} might add one
thing. The water that we deliver today to our customers,
approximately one-third of that water, the total water picture that we
deliver, comes from freshwater supply; another one-third of it comes
from that brackish water, deep water from reverse osmosis; and
another third, one gallon out of every three, is reclaimed water that we
are redistributing for irrigation, and that -- that whole picture together
has -- has effectively utilized the resources of Collier County. And I
can say that we really lead the nation in water resource using.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I'm so glad we did this this morning
because, as Commissioner Coyle said, many people are not even
aware that we have reverse osmosis. I can't tell you how many letters
we five commissioners get all the time saying, why don't you do
reverse osmosis? Well, you know, we keep telling them we've had it
for many years. So I'm glad we had this presentation this morning.
Thank you very much.
Page 11
December IS, 2009
MR. MATT AUSCH: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And before we go further, County
Manager, I meant to mention as we were -- as we were talking about
the agenda, that under agenda Item 10C, I plan on bringing up the
Marco Museum request under your item for disclosure of all the
different funds that we have available, and I think -- I think that was a
recommendation by somebody that I just mention that at the beginning
of the meeting, so I have done that.
And -- oh, I wish Marla were here. Is Marla Ramsey in this
audience someplace? No. Are we going to give her an award for
them being nominated, or rather accredited?
Let me tell the audience this. Out of -- there are -- out of all the
cities and the counties across the United States of America who have
requested to be accredited, we, Collier County, are one of only 88
departments across the entire United States of America who have
received that accreditation. And let me further say, there were only
144 criteria to be met. We met every single one of them, ] 00 percent,
144 points. And I'm just so proud of our people in parks and rec. ]
wish Marla was here so I could tell her. I at least want to tell the
audience.
MR.OCHS: Thank you very much, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you.
MR. OCHS: Appreciate that.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: We should give them an award.
MR.OCHS: We will, we will. We'll get it scheduled.
Item #5A
PRESENTATION ON BUILDING A MORE DISASTER
RESISTANT COMMUNITY BY JEFF JOHNSON, EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR OF RETROFIT SOUTHWEST FLORIDA, INC -
PRESENTED; MOTION FOR STAFF TO PREPARE A
Page 12
December IS, 2009
PROCLAMATION AND DIRECT STAFF TO LOOK INTO
USING HOUSING FUNDING TO ASSIST WITH PROGRAM -
APPROVED
MR. OCHS: That takes us to presentations this morning. The
first presentation is SA. Presentation on building a more disaster
resistant community by Jeff Johnson, executive director of Retrofit
Southwest Florida, Inc. And that doesn't look like Mr. Johnson. I'm
sorry .
MS. DUSEK: He's not -- he wasn't able to make it this morning.
I'm Bobbie Dusek.
And good morning, Commissioners, County Manager, County
Attorney, and staff, and thank you for allowing us to come this
morning and make this presentation to you.
This past January I was at a meeting in Orlando, and I heard
about a program that they did in Pensacola, Florida, called Rebuild.
This was a program set up by the citizens of Pensacola to rebuild
homes that had been devastated by Hurricane Ivan. I was so
impressed with this program that I came back to Collier County, I
spoke to several citizens, and they were excited about doing
something in Collier County.
And I'mjust going to interrupt myself right now to say, I am so
proud of this county for the things that I've heard just this short period
of time this morning. We have the best county in the country, and I
am so proud of them.
Well, having said that, we organized a group called Retrofit.
Retrofit is a pre-disaster program. We're being proactive. The
program in Pensacola was post-disaster. The program in Pensacola
worked with FEMA. FEMA gave them 75 percent of the costs to
rebuild those homes.
Now, with Retrofit Southwest Florida, we want to go in and
retrofit all homes in Collier County which qualify, we want to bring
Page 13
December IS, 2009
them up to a category three hurricane status. We have been in touch
with FEMA. They are very excited that we want to do this in Collier
County. They, again, will be willing to pay 75 percent of the costs.
The other 25 percent would be paid by the homeowner. And if a
homeowner is unable to pay the 25 percent, then we will look forward
to getting grants, public and private funding.
We have organized, we are incorporated, we are a 501 C3
non- for-profit organization, and we're just coming today to ask you for
your endorsement of this program. We already do have some
endorsements, and one of the main endorsements that FEMA said we
had to get was from the emergency management department. We
have met with them on several occasions and we now have their
endorsement. And you'll be hearing from them, I hope, after we give
our short presentation, because they are also very excited about this.
And one thing to keep in mind, this is just a win-win for
everybody because it makes the homes safer for people, it's at no cost
to most people, and for every dollar that's put into this program, $4 is
returned in the emergency management program for evacuating and
whatever has to be done after a hurricane.
And as I said, we are trying to do it before we have a disaster
and, therefore, we're looking to getting the endorsement of the
commissioners. And obviously, we're looking for some funding as
well so we can get the program started. And that's the basis of it.
We'll be happy to answer questions, but one of our board
members is going to give a PowerPoint presentation for you to see,
kind of summarizing what I've just said today.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. We just have a few minutes left.
Will you be --
MS. DUSEK: Okay.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Thank you.
MR. JONES: Good morning, Commissioners. Thank you very
much for allowing us to make this presentation to you this morning.
Page 14
December IS, 2009
As Bobbie mentioned, this is truly a win-win situation for the
homeowners of our county, for our county economy in terms of the
jobs it's going to create, and also for our local government because
permit fees will be paid for each house that we undertake to harden.
So I'd like to start out just with our -- briefly with our goal, to
build a more disaster-resistant community consistent with each local
emergency management mitigation plan. And I can't go further
without thanking Dan Summers who got onboard with us early on in
our organizational meetings and helped us and gave us guidance
throughout the process and also his endorsement. Thank you for that,
Dan.
The benefits of wind mitigation are starting to become more
known as people realize how it can impact their individual insurance
rates. But what we want to do is we want to make homes safer from
any type of high windstorm. We want to reduce the likelihood of
damage, and we want to reduce the likelihood of displacing
homeowners from their homes to shelters and evacuation routes.
We also want to significantly decrease the homeowner's recovery
time following a storm. It's a lot easier to take down shutters than to
replace your roof.
The benefits of wind mitigation, as Bobbie mentioned earlier, are
well established. Every dollar we spend on mitigation and prevention,
we save $4 during a disaster, and that's significant and I think one of
the reasons that FEMA is leaning more toward giving money
pre-disaster to prevent the high expenditures of a post-disaster recover.
The other thing that we can't emphasize enough is the impact on
our local economy. This is going to create jobs. This is going to
require the normal permitting process with permit fees, and it's also
going to provide work for the building supply people who will have to
supply the building materials to harden these homes.
There we go. I'll go to that one. Retrofit is, as Bobbie
mentioned, a 501C3, not-for-profit organization. We're doing this to
Page IS
December IS, 2009
help the fellow citizens of our county. Also, thanks to Dan's direction,
he suggested that we expand our scope to include eventually other
counties on our borders, both from a funding impact and from the
ability to expand the good we can do for our citizens into other
counties. But we want to focus on Collier County to start with. That's
where we are all from, and we want to make it work here first.
We want to provide this service directly to homeowners who will
apply to our organization. And we will take care of submitting the
information to FEMA, getting the credits back, and getting the work
done. Typically we try to do this in 30 days from the start of the
application and approval by FEMA to the complete hardening of each
home. And, again, we want to compliment local mitigation strategies
in the process.
So we just take a look briefly at the economic impact. Obviously
we reduce homeowners' damages and stress, we reduce the disruption
of the community, required to repair and fix homes that are damaged
during storms, obviously sheltering and housing costs. We're going to
create, as we've mentioned, jobs in the community. We're going to
generate fee and sales tax revenue and hopefully lessen the impact on
our state treasury, especially our famous CAT fund, which doesn't
have the money to pay for all these damages.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Are you close to completing this?
MR. JONES: I am.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Thank you.
MR. JONES: Okay. Just real briefly, as Bobbie mentioned, we
are modeled after an organization in Northwest Florida that's up and
running. They've gotten over $20 million from FEMA. They've
hardened over 4,000 homes. So we aren't starting from scratch. We're
planning to get their software, their application process, and their
connections to FEMA so that we can be up and running much more
quickly.
We've been through most of this, so we'll just move on, other
Page 16
December IS, 2009
than to point out that the program has created 120 full-time jobs, 7,000
per week in local permitting fees, and 5,000 per week in sales taxes.
That's been the impact up in the Panhandle.
We won't spend a lot of time on this, but this basically says that
what we do is typically about 6- to $8,000 per home. The first thing
we do is we strap down the roofto make sure that it is secure. Those
are primarily homes that are prior to 2002 where the construction
codes meet category three or better.
We replace exterior doors, especially those that open in. Garage
doors are an important part of hardening a home, because once you
lose your garage door, typically you lose your roof.
We do window protection primarily in the form of shutters, and
then for those roofs that have gables, we brace the ends so that the
wind can't come in and lift the roof off.
What are we looking for today? We are looking, hopefully, for
your endorsement which will help us to go out into the private sector
and the public sector and try to raise enough money. We'd like to do
eight to ten homes so that we can get our processes and our local
permitting, inspection. We can get all those bases covered. Prior to
getting any significant funding, we want to show we can do it, and
hopefully we'll be ready when disaster money comes to us, hopefully
sometime next year.
Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, just stay there for a minute, because I
have a couple commissioners wanting to ask questions.
Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: The term funding entered into the
language, and I'm wondering what our obligation or requirements
would be, being the county.
MR. JONES: You know, we are -- obviously money is very tight
right now. We would like to really -- we're going to start to go out
into the private sector and try to raise some funds to get this operation
Page 17
December IS, 2009
started. We're looking --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I would encourage you very much
to go that way. Obviously we have some real concerns on meeting
our budget requirements in the upcoming year. So I'm glad to hear
that, and I hope anything that I can do to help stimulate private money
to help enter into this, I think, is great.
MR. JONES: We hope so. And we think your endorsement will
help us a great deal with our credibility to go to local private sources
and see if we can get our money started.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Thank you. You had a very nice
presentation.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. It's a shame that we had
to rush through this. The positive impacts of this newly formed
organization, volunteer organization, is a true benefit to our citizens in
Collier County. Hardening homes would not only keep people safe,
but also our community rating would be increased. I don't think it
would -- that was really mentioned.
Actually, I would like to make a motion to direct our staff to
prepare a proclamation supporting the organization, also direct staff to
look at the possibility of using CDBG funds or those home funds for
something of this nature, hardening homes. We do it anyways, right?
MR.OCHS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So why not -- why not uses
those -- see if we can use that for the general community. I
understand Commissioner Halas' concerns about using, I would
assume, property tax dollars because of the shortfalls that we have, but
if this organization is going to be using federal funds for hardening
homes, and we should encourage that, because isn't it better to be
proactive than reactive in this case? I think so.
MR. JONES: One thing I might add is that the homeowners
individually have experienced at least a 40 percent decrease in their
Page 18
December IS, 2009
insurance premiums after they go through the hardening process.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And more they can spend in the
community, correct?
MR. JONES: Correct, and quicker they're paid back.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So that's my motion, Madam
Chair.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Would you state the motion one more
time, please?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The motion is to direct our staff
to prepare a proclamation endorsing the efforts of the organization,
and separate from my motion is to direct staff to take a look at any
available funds through the housing department for assisting the
organization.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Do I hear a second?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'll second it.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I have a second from
Commissioner Coyle.
Commissioner Coyle, you were next.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. Commissioner Henning
stole my script. That was what I was going to suggest.
But with respect to the -- to funding, I'd like to point out that
whatever guidance we give the staff, it will have to come back to this
board for approval, so that does not obligate the county to provide any
funding at the present time because, as everybody knows, we're short,
as Commissioner Halas has said. But I will support the proclamation,
the motion, in its entirety.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. And there's -- there's a
whole bunch of great things about this that I'm very excited; going to
put a lot of people to work as we go forward.
But one of the things we're going to have to look at very carefully
is, there's no, what do you want to call it, uncommitted funds out
Page 19
December IS, 2009
there. It's a matter of establishing priorities when it comes down to
where funds are applied and where they're not applied. At this point
in time, a good amount of the funds that we have taking place are
being spent on the conversion of foreclosed homes into homes for
people to use.
So when we get into the discussion, when we bring this back for
discussion -- I think it's worthy for discussion -- we have to keep in
mind the fact that where's the balances going to take place in here?
What's going to be best for the community as a whole? Get a report
from where we are with the foreclosed housing situation, what kind of
funds were available, are available.
We recently put a cap on any further money going from our
impact fees towards the affordable housing effort after this last batch.
So we want to be careful that we don't get to the point that we
completely neuter the affordable housing programs. But I'm sure staff
will come back with quite a few recommendations.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. And I had a question. And maybe
Dan could come up. I can see him kind of waiting in the wings
anyway. It looks like he's in the batter's cage, right?
MR. SUMMERS: Yes, ma'am. Warmed up. Dan Summers,
Director of the Bureau of Emergency Services, Emergency
Management.
Briefly, we are -- our local mitigation working group has met
with this organization. We're real excited. I worked some of these
initiatives previously in North Carolina. They can be very beneficial.
They can also address other weatherization issues as well, such as
energy. So that's one source of funding.
Real quick about the mechanics. Understand, please, that the
Stafford Act, which is our Disaster Recovery Act, allows the regional
or FEMA administrator to contract directly with a private nonprofit.
So all -- I want to make sure that we're -- that you understand that
there's a lot of compartmentalization with these funds.
Page 20
December IS, 2009
So as they look for FEMA pre-event funding to get some retrofit
done, that's a direct relationship between FEMA and the organization
or other community-based resources.
I will tell you that FEMA has told us now that they are not going
to engage in activities where properties are in foreclosure as part of
their housing stock unless they're like HUD- or V A-owned properties.
So I want to just make sure that you understand that we
compartmentalize for wind retrofit primarily occupied residents,
housing stock. Vacant homes and foreclosure right now FEMA is not
going to engage in that environment. It's too much paper and it's too
challenging.
And then, of course, if we get into a post-disaster environment
where we're doing repair of housing stock as part of that repair, then
there will be additional mitigation activities, again, that this
organization can help with.
So just understand that it is a little bit sallowed because of the
way that FEMA is set up, the way some of the other housing programs
are set up. We'll work with that. We're excited to see them come
forth. And I'm a pretty good bloodhound, so I've been looking for
funds out there. We haven't come across anything yet. It's a tough
time for them to do startup, but if they can get up and running, get
those federal dollars in, get some of these programs going or go to the
community for some assistance, it will be a great thing. So we look
forward to working with them in part of our overall mitigation
strategy. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Sounds like a win-win to me, doesn't it?
We have a motion on the floor and a second. Any further
discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
Page 21
December IS, 2009
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: That's a 5-0. Thank you. And thank you
for working with them, Dan. We really appreciate it. I'm sure if
anybody can find some of those funds hiding around there, you will.
Thank you. Thank you. And thank you for bringing this forward to
us. I'm sorry that I had to move it along.
MR. JONES: That's all right.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you.
Item #5B
PRESENT A TION OF NA TIONAL ASSOCIATION OF
COUNTIES (NACO) ACHIEVEMENT A WARD TO THE
COLLIER COUNTY CODE ENFORCEMENT DEPARTMENT
FOR THEIR BLIGHT PREVENTION PROGRAM - PRESENTED
MR.OCHS: Commissioners, 5B is a presentation of National
Association of Counties Achievement A ward to the Collier County
Code Enforcement Department for their Blight Prevention Program.
This will be accepted by department director, Diane Flagg, and the
entire code enforcement staff.
MS. FILSON: And Madam Chairman?
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Hi, how are you. Thank you for all your
work. Thank you. You guys are just wonderful. There's so much to
do in my community, and you guys just do it so willingly.
Where's Diane Flagg? Diane, we're going to pass this up because
this is what you have to --
Page 22
December IS, 2009
MS. FLAGG: Hand it to Mario.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Huh? Okay, okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Are you in the picture, Donna?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I'm going to go like this.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah.
(Applause.)
MS. FLAGG: Commissioners, briefly, before everyone goes,
good morning. Diane Flagg, Director of Code Enforcement.
I just kind of wanted to give you a brief update on where we are.
In Collier County, since January of2008, there's been 15,555
foreclosures filed in Collier County. Since the Blight Prevention
Program has started, which is -- it's just over a year old. Last month
was a year since the commencement of the program -- the banks, the
banks, have expended one million, one hundred -- five hundred
seventy-four dollars in Collier County to abate 803 code violations.
So again, this is the banks spending the money to keep Collier County
the way that we've always known Collier County to be to prevent
blight.
Additionally, the department's receiving more than 100 new
cases every week. I would also like to thank our community and
agency partners who are very effective in making the community task
force team successful.
And lastly, we'd like to thank Mario Bono who's the gentleman
holding the plaque that the department received from the National
Association of Counties for the National Achievement Award for this
Blight Prevention Program. Mario was recently hired by Bank of
America --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: What?
MS. FLAGG: -- to replicate the program, the Blight Prevention
Program in Collier County, to replicate it in the states of Florida,
Georgia, and Alabama.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Wow.
Page 23
December IS, 2009
MS. FLAGG: So that's a testament to the program. And,
Commissioners, most of all, we thank you for your support for the
code enforcement department.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I want to tell you this code enforcement
department is wonderful, and we all appreciate what they do for our
community. They've got the toughest job of all, don't they? And you
guys are all smiling. You are just wonderful to work with, and we all
thank you very, very much for all your hard work. And Diane, thank
you for leading them so well. Thank you.
Good to see you, Mario.
MR. BONO: Nice to see you guys.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Congratulations. I hope we see
you in the future.
MR. BONO: I'm sure you will.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: It's always been a pleasure. Yeah. We
work well together. Diane, great leader.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Madam Chair, we need to go back
to item number four. I make a motion that we approve today's
proclamations.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And a second. Thank you. Thank you
very much.
All in favor, signifY by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you.
Page 24
December 15, 2009
Item #5C
PRESENTATION OF THE POSTHUMOUS ADVISORY
COMMITTEE OUTSTANDING MEMBER A WARD FOR THE
MONTH OF NOVEMBER 2009 TO CHARLIE ABBOTT.
ACCEPTED BY MRS. LINDA ABBOTT - PRESENTED
MR.OCHS: Commissioners, that takes us to 5C, which is a
presentation of a posthumous Advisory Committee Outstanding
Member Award for the month of November, 2009, to Charlie Abbott,
to be accepted by Mrs. Linda Abbott.
(Applause.)
MRS. ABBOTT: Thank you. Thank you so much.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Congratulations.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Good to see you. We miss him.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: He was a great guy. Good sense of
humor. Always -- always there with the history stuff. He and the kids
were out there with the civil war stuff. It was so cute.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: We'll get a picture.
(Applause.)
MRS. ABBOTT: I asked if I could just say thank you
personally. It's an honor to be here on Charlie's behalf because I can't
tell you how thrilled and pleased he would be to be recognized and
how much he loves Collier County. And. Loved being on the DSAC
committee. And the members of DSAC are here and members from
CBIA. And he loved all of you, and it was just, every day, a pleasure
for him to try harder to try to contribute more. And I know he's thrilled
and so grateful. Thank you.
(Applause.)
Item #5D
Page 25
December 15, 2009
BCBE CONSTRUCTION CO., INC. PRESENTATION ON
GOODLAND BOAT PARK PROJECT - PRESENTED
MR.OCHS: Commissioners, 5D is a presentation by BCBE
Construction Company on the status of the Goodland Boat Park
Project. Mr. Clint Perryman from your Coastal Zone Management
Department will begin presentation.
MR. PERRYMAN: Good morning, Commissioners. For the
record, Clint Perryman, Coastal Zone Management Department.
I'm here to introduce and present to you the contractor, BCBE,
being represented by Mr. Henry Ashton, and he's going to take you
through a PowerPoint presentation of the Goodland Park Boat Project.
With that said, Henry Ashton.
MR. ASHTON: Good morning, County Commissioners, county
attorneys. Let's try that again.
Good morning, everyone. My name is Henry Ashton. I
represent Boran Craig Barger Engel Construction Company . We're
based here out of Naples, Florida.
And first off I just wanted to say thank you for the opportunity to
do this project for Collier County. We're actually doing the security
lobby addition downstairs also. We've had the pleasure to work with
the team for Collier County for coastal management, Clint Perryman,
and we've also had the pleasure to work with Hank Jones and Bob
Pierce on the security lobby.
I wanted to thank my team over at the job site, Angel Napolis
(phonetic) and Chuck Anders and Harry Engel and Melvin for the
support that we've had throughout the life of the project.
Now, with that said, the project itself is located in Goodland,
Florida. I don't know if you guys are familiar with what Goodland,
Florida, is, but it's a neat little community. It's southeast of Marco
Island. If you have not gone there, I highly recommend that you do.
It's definitely an interesting neighborhood, and we're actually really
Page 26
December 15, 2009
excited about the project.
I know that the locals, as they've seen the progress of the project,
they have become positive believers of all the positive that this project
will bring to the area.
The slide that you see up on the screen right there, that's actually
an aerial photograph. It has a super-imposed image of what the
project will eventually look like once it is completed. Right now
we're projecting completion March of 20 1 0, which is not too far
around the corner.
I'm going to move along with the presentation. Again, I'm Henry
Ashton. I am the project manager. I did do the estimate on the project.
I'm very much involved in the project. I attend the weekly meetings
with Clint and the rest of the team.
The design consultant is Johnson Engineering. Their project
manager is Chris Hagan. The client is Collier County Coastal Zone
Management Department, and the project manager is Clint Perryman.
The project scope, the site development, it's basically the site
development ofa 5.22-acre parcel, and it includes the following: It
has a -- 75 boat trailer parking spaces, which you saw in that previous
aerial shot; it has 16 regular vehicle spaces; it does have a two-lane
boat loading ramp; there's a boat dock with a viewing deck; a fishing
deck; handicap access boat ramp; finger pier with 12 wet boat slips; 11
wet slip docks.
There is a dockmaster facility being constructed -- we're actually
in the process of constructing that structure right now. It's turning out
to be quite nice -- which includes the bait tanks. It has a small store,
retail store, where people can purchase miscellaneous items, and it
does have rest room facilities and a meeting area in case they want to
conduct any meetings at the dockmaster facility area.
There's also a picnic pavilion. It's a covered structure where
people -- there will be picnic tables located inside that structure, and
people can have small picnics at that location. There are bicycle racks,
Page 27
December 15, 2009
and there is a paver sidewalk that basically surrounds the entire site so
people could walk the whole area.
There are landscaping improvements involved which, again, will
beautify, make the area much prettier, and there are storm and water
management components that we are adding to the project as part of
the scope of the work.
The project milestones. The conditional use was issued on
March 23,2005. The DEP ACOC permits, their dates of issuance was
October 15,2008. The SDP was issued on January 29, 2009. The
NTP date of issuance was March 16, 2009.
Right now we're currently at about 60 percent complete, as of
November 25, 2009. And the projected date of completion, again, is
around March 6,2010.
This slide right here shows an aerial photograph when we were
doing the site clearing. You can see the water areas along the left-hand
side where you see the mangrove vegetation. There's also going to be
a slide further along in the presentation that will actually show all the
-- all the docks and the piers that have been installed from when this
shot was taken. You can see some of the neighboring residences, the
residences. We're well acquainted with all of them and, again, they've
all been very supportive of the project.
This shows a conceptual rendering of a dockmaster building and
picnic pavilion. It's a plan view. It kind of gives you an idea of what
this building will look like once it's fully constructed. It shows the
retail space, the meeting areas, the rest rooms, and adjacent to the
right, that's the picnic pavilion. It's approximately 4,500 square feet.
These show -- this slide here shows the elevation of the
dockmaster and the picnic pavilion. As you can see, it's a neat little
building. It does have a standing metal roof. It has Hardie board
siding, it has wood decking all throughout. It's a neat structure. If you
get a chance, take a ride out there. I would recommend it. It's -- you
can see the progress that we've made.
Page 28
December 15, 2009
This is a plan view showing the boat dock, the boat slips, and the
boat ramp. We've highlighted in green to kind of give you an idea of
where the docks are, the boat slips.
This is a landscape plan showing the landscaping components
that are being added to the project.
This is the SOP site plan showing the different components that
were part of the SDP approval process.
And this photograph here is the current aerial photo, and it shows
the job progress at 60 percent complete. You could actually see the
dockmaster facility under construction. That's actually already been --
we actually got our truss inspection yesterday, so we are actually
moving forward with the installation of the standing seam metal roof
on that structure.
The picnic pavilion is 100 percent complete, and you can see
some of the retention ponds in the bottom left-hand corner and some
of the other components coming into place.
And that's it. Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you.
MR. ASHTON: Appreciate it.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: A couple questions.
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Just one correction. The client is
the Board of County Commissioners on behalf of the citizens of
Collier County.
MR. ASHTON: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. This has been a long time
coming. I can remember when this was originally designed to be a
condominium site. Remember that?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, yeah. Oh yeah.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And we refused them, they took
us to court, we made a settlement where we bought it with the support
Page 29
December 15,2009
of the residents in the area. Long, long time coming. And I can't tell
you how pleased I am.
I do have one question, and it's a minor one that you might not
even know the answer. But how are they going to handle the cleaning
the fish when people come back from fishing; how are they going to
be able to do it at this site?
MR. ASHTON: I'm glad you asked that question. We're actually
going to have a fish-cleaning station directly next to the dockmaster
facility .
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And there'll be water?
MR. ASHTON: Yes, yeah.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Wonderful.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Is that the fish-cleaning station where it
goes down, or is it the -- the vacuum one, or which kind of
fish-cleaning station is it going to be?
MR. ASHTON: I'm going to defer that question. It's a fresh one.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm sorry. One more time.
MR. PERRYMAN: Again, Commissioners, Clint Perryman, for
the record.
It will be the first one, Commissioner Fiala, where the fish
carcasses will go directly in the tube underneath the water, and
consistent with DEP guidelines.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, that's wonderful, because
I -- for a while I know we had a little bit of a run-in over what was
acceptable and what wasn't, and they removed them from all the
county parks, boat parks, and recently have reinstated them, and I
thank you for that.
Today I'm going to be speaking to the Naples Fishing Club at
their annual Christmas banquet, and this subject will be of great
interest to them, and I'll share the good news. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Maybe you could get some of the pictures
to take along.
Page 30
December 15, 2009
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Sure. I would love that.
MR. ASHTON: Absolutely.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Make my presentation a little
easier. I hope nobody listened to it that's going to the banquet tonight,
or else it will just be a repeat of everything you said, and I want to be
original. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you very much.
MR. ASHTON: You're welcome. Thank you.
Item #6A
PUBLIC PETITION BY PATRICK WHITE DISCUSSING GMP A
CP-2008-3, FOR NAPLES CHRISTIAN ACADEMY AND
GOODWILL INDUSTRIES - DISCUSSED; MOTION TO MOVE
ITEM TO THE IMMOKALEE AREA MASTER PLAN CYCLE
AND PETITIONER TO PAY FOR ANY ADDITIONAL
ADVERTISING COSTS - APPROVED
MR.OCHS: Commissioners, that takes you to public petitions.
6A is a public petition request by Patrick White to discuss Growth
Management Plan amendment CP-2008-3 for Naples Christian
Academy and Goodwill Industries.
MR. WHITE: Good morning, Madam Chairman,
Commissioners. I wish you the happiest of holidays to you and yours,
and take this opportunity at the end of the year to thank you-all for
your service to the community throughout.
Patrick White with the Naples office of the law firm of Porter,
Wright, Morris, & Arthur.
Item 6A is the public petition request to have our item on the
current '07/'08 master plan for Golden Gate moved from the '07/'08
cycle to the Immokalee Area Master Plan's timing for its cycle.
The purpose for the request is to afford us time to work with the
Page 31
December 15, 2009
Golden Gate Area Civic Association Board and its membership on the
issues of concern to them, that notwithstanding the two neighborhood
information meetings we've had, we believe that in order to address
things that are of concern, we can do that in the time frame afforded
by moving this to essentially mid February date.
We see the mid date -- mid February date of the 16th for the
Planning Commission not being in conflict with the Immokalee Area
Master Plan as what we would envision is, we would actually be
carried over from that date to March I st, which is the rollover date that
the Planning Commission already has on its schedule.
We're appearing today at the request of the staff to come and get
your approval, seek your indulgence, to move this -- to move our
petition into the Immokalee Area Master Plan cycle timeline. We
would not be heard at the same time as the Immokalee Area Master
Plan. They would be heard at distinctly different times, such that if
the Planning Commission desired to have its workshop tomorrow out
in Immokalee, they could do so. Additionally, we believe that the
additional couple of weeks will afford us some needed time to work
with the neighborhood association.
I represent the petitioners here, of course, which are Naples
Christian Academy and Goodwill Industries. Bill McDaniels is here
today from Goodwill. I think it's a pretty straightforward request, but
I'm happy to answer any questions you might have.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: That's good because we have a couple.
MR. WHITE: Great.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. If I may, Mr. Schmitt. I
guess the question's simple, I mean, Goodwill has been an
unbelievable asset to the Collier County community for many, many
years. Anything we can do to keep moving them forward with their
mission is always a positive; however, there's always concern.
Will this -- is this a doable thing? Is this something that we can
Page 32
December 15,2009
do without impacting the Immokalee Master Plan and the completion
of it?
MR. SCHMITT: For the record, Joe Schmitt, community
development, environmental services division. Answer your question,
yes.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You don't see any problem?
MR. SCHMITT: No problem. We've already coordinated with
Mr. White. The next meeting where the public -- the public hearing
will be advertised is February 16th. His petition would be part of that
public hearing -- now I'm going to say the confusing part -- but it
wouldn't be heard actually on the 16th. We would delay his until the
regular meeting on the 18th of February, continue it because the
Immokalee Area Master Plan public hearing for the Planning
Commission is going to take place in Immokalee. We're not going to
ask Mr. White and his clients to come out. We'll just continue it to the
18th.
But we've already been coordinating, my staffs already been
coordinating with Mr. White. We would just include this petition in
that cycle. It's simply nothing more than customary to ask the board to
allow the cycle to be open to allow this petition to be inserted into the
Immokalee Area Master Plan.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I make a motion that we do so.
MR. SCHMITT: And I do want to -- for the record, Mr. White,
if he would state on the record he agrees to pay for any additional
advertising, because most likely we will have to advertise this petition
in a separate advertisement as part of the required advertisement for
the GMP amendments.
MR. WHITE: We certainly would agree to do that, Madam
Chair and Commissioners. We realize there's a small credit we get
because we're not part of the advertising process for '07/'08. But
whatever those additional costs are for an independent quarter page ad
is what we've been informed by staff would be necessary, gladly pay.
Page 33
December 15, 2009
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I include that in my motion.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Do I hear a second? Second.
Okay. We have next -- I'm sorry. Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. I'm glad that, Joe, you're still
up there. I've got some questions on this.
Patrick, were you in a cycle before you're asking for this
particular amendment?
MR. WHITE: The petition, Commissioner, is currently in the
'07/'08 cycle --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes.
MR. WHITE: -- and that is the reason why we had had already
two neighborhood information meetings.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Wasn't that taken care of before
you started this process where you -- you were in line before; is that
correct?
MR. WHITE: We've been in line working this project certainly
since '08.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. And so what took place that
now it's become an emergency on our part?
MR. WHITE: I think the best answer to that is one that goes
back to the circumstance that arose where there wasn't complete notice
of all of the property owners within a thousand feet.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: So that was --
MR. WHITE: When that took place --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: -- something that you didn't do due
diligence on; is that correct?
MR. WHITE: I don't think that's accurate, but I don't know that
we want to get into a debate of whose job wasn't performed properly.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well--
MR. WHITE: Suffice it to say that we ended up --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: What I'm getting at is, as you
know, we've got a lot on our plate this year in growth management
Page 34
December 15, 2009
issues. So I just want to make sure that it wasn't something that we are
guilty of -- we, the county -- that's held up your process here. And if
it's something that you did because you didn't do due diligence on and
now want forgiveness, I've got some concerns about that.
MR. WHITE: 1--
MR. SCHMITT: Can I?
MR. WHITE: I'll defer to Mr. Schmitt --
MR. SCHMITT: Commissioner, I think this is in the best interest
of the community. Pat White had an additional -- him and his client
had an additional neighborhood information meeting. A lot of issues
came up. Rather than delay the cycle to await him and his petition, it's
just as easy to bump this forward to the next cycle. But it was mainly
because the residents, who I don't think were really quite attuned to
what was going to happen until this actually -- began to see it in front
of their face and -- sort of with the calendar and the time frame, and it
was -- frankly, this is -- this is a good thing, probably not for staff
because we're going to help move this forward, I mean, from a
standpoint of having to bump it into another cycle, but good for the
community and good for the residents to provide input to Mr. White
and his client so that they can formulate a GMP amendment that will
be compatible and certainly conform to the interests of those in that --
in the surrounding community.
MR. WHITE: Commissioner--
COMMISSIONER HALAS: You understand where I'm at on
this --
MR. SCHMITT: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: -- because of the fact that we've got
less staff and also that, on our plate, is an awful lot of items that are
going to be coming up in the coming year. What I don't want to get
the staff and the Board of County Commissioners in is where
everybody's going to rush in here and say, hey, by the way, I want to
slip this in and I want to slip that in, okay.
Page 35
December 15,2009
I can understand the situation, but I hope that we're not getting
ourselves in a position where people are concerned about what may
come up on the 2010 ballot and all ofa sudden come to us and say, we
want to get in the cycle and we want to insert ourselves in with
someone else. That's where I'm getting at.
MR. WHITE: Commissioner, ifl understand the intent of your
comment, we will actually fall on the other side of that ballot initiative
if we stay on this track with the Immokalee Area Master Plan. So that
is not the basis for the request.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. All right. Thank you for
correcting that.
MR. WHITE: And in fact, we have performed all of the tasks
that we were aware of we needed to do at the times that they were
required to be done.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Schmitt, I'm -- it's my
understand that the applicant has failed to do a proper needs
assessment for commercial by not including the redevelopment area of
Santa Barbara, and I need to -- I need to know what impacts it's going
to be on that redevelopment area. Well, it's not a redevelopment, but
it's an overlay.
MR. SCHMITT: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right.
MR. SCHMITT: I think it's best not to debate that issue here --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I know that.
MR. SCHMITT: -- because that will be a subject when it goes
through the public hearing where we discuss and they present the
needs analysis to support their petition.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. I just -- I'm looking for
that information.
MR. SCHMITT: Yes. We will provide that. When Mr. White
Page 36
December 15,2009
submits his application and we prepare it for the public hearings, that
will be part of the staff analysis.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay, thank you.
MR. WHITE: Let me just say, Commissioner Henning, that to
the degree there is a concern, we will find out what that concern is
from staff, and we will address it at the earliest opportunity.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I have a motion on the floor and a
second.
Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: All in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I have -- one opposed? Okay. Very good.
4-1 vote.
MR. WHITE: Thank you, Commissioners.
Item #6B
PUBLIC PETITION BY ROBERTO MILLET DISCUSSING A
PERMIT FOR CAR WASH ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 4990
GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY - DISCUSSED; MOTION TO
APPROVE A TEMPORARY USE PERMIT FOR THE SITE AND
REVIEW IN 1 YEAR - APPROVED
MR.OCHS: Commissioners, 6B is a public request by Roberto
Millet to discuss permit for a carwash on property located at 4990
Golden Gate Parkway.
Page 37
December 15,2009
MR. MILLET: Good morning, everyone. I just wanted to thank
you for giving me the opportunity to come up here and speak about
the permit that I'm looking for for my carwash.
I just wanted to give a little history first. This building that we've
owned since 2000 has been a carwash/drive-through convenience
store since 1988. When we purchased it from the original owners, we
continued the use of the business as a carwash and a convenience
store, but we were forced to close in 2003 when my mom was
diagnosed with cancer.
You know, we maintained the property as much as we can. I just
-- I was away at college, so I couldn't help with the family business,
and my parents also had a flooring business. At the time the
construction industry was booming, so we've focused on the tile alone.
But in 2008, I decided to take full realm of the carwash and
convenience store and re-open. I had no knowledge that by closing in
2003 we would -- that we had to continue the use of the license to be
able to still use it as a carwash and convenience store. When I tried to
re-open it, I had to go through a Site Improvement Plan to re-open.
With our current economic situation, the drive-through business
alone is struggling, so I just wanted to see if I can open the carwash
again to pump some more income into my property, because as of
right now I'm currently getting close to begin to foreclose my property
because I'm -- like I said, the drive-through convenience store alone is
just not working for me.
So I wanted to see if you guys would help me with this, get a
permit for the carwash as well.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you.
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Leo and I looked at this. The
issue is, is the parking. There is not enough parking for the
drive-through carwash. The property, as Mr. Millet has said, he's
Page 38
December 15, 2009
always had a carwash, two-bay carwash and the drive-through
convenience store.
And as long as I lived in Golden Gate City, or since they built the
facility, there's never been an overflow of parking because you're --
you know, you're driving through, getting a beer or whatever you get
or, you know, you're in the carwash washing a car.
My concern is in Golden Gate City, an economically depressed
area, this is one of several buildings that may close because of the
economic impacts. If the Millet family can make a go of it and keep it
going with a carwash and the other ancillary facilities that goes along
with it, I would like to know how we can provide assistance without
having to go through a site plan amendment, since he'd done that two
years ago; is that correct? Was it two years ago?
MR. MILLET: Yeah, almost two years ago.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Maybe two years ago to open up
the convenience store, the drive-through convenience.
MR. MILLET: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So I would like to see what we
can do to put off a Site Improvement Plan because of financial
difficulties.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Could I ask a question? Did he have one
before with the carwash? Could he just bring that back and use that?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, staff is saying that you
need extra parking for the drive-through/carwash. And I'm sure he
can demonstrate that as the previous owner did, you know, the
attendant at the drive-through was also the attendant for the carwash.
MR. MILLET: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: But anyways, it's still a financial
burden to do that, and I'm sure they can do that once, hopefully, the
business is starting to thrive.
So my request would be to delay some Site Improvement Plan
and -- for a couple years. I would -- any body's guess at where the
Page 39
December 15, 2009
economy's going to be.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. I'm going to probably ask you
some questions, and then I'll go to -- revert to Joe Schmitt.
MR. MILLET: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: The carwash, when you bought this
property, did you maintain it as a carwash?
MR. MILLET: I sure did.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And then, is it still today
functioning as a carwash?
MR. MILLET: No, it's not.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And what is it -- what's it
functioning as today?
MR. MILLET: It's just now functioning as a drive-through
convenience store. When we had to do the Site Improvement Plan, we
weren't allowed to have the carwash.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. And so what are -- what are
you doing with the two bays today?
MR. MILLET: They're just sitting there dormant.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. Is that true, Joe, that the
bays are dormant and all they need to do is just -- the equipment's still
there?
MR. SCHMITT: Again, for the record, Joe Schmitt. The issue
was -- in front of you is the best that I can put on here right now, is the
site plan.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
MR. SCHMITT: The two bays for the carwash are right in this
location, one of the parking spaces -- when this came in for -- it was
converted from a carwash to a convenience store. When it came in for
a drive-through convenience store and -- the drive-through entrance
came through here, and the convenience store, and they drove out.
There's parking along here. He already has an existing parking
Page 40
December 15,2009
reduction for this site plan. The site plan was approved as a
convenience store with no carwash. The two bays that are existing
here were labeled as storage.
And since we're talking about -- I believe his partner he was
working with -- and there was a -- without getting into the details, we
know there was a dispute between him and his partner or -- and they
were doing some work in the bays, but they were cited by code
enforcement for doing work that was not part of the original business.
But he wants to open up these bays again for the carwash which
would eliminate this parking, and all we would have to do again is
review whether there's sufficient stacking and review the traffic flow
through the site. That's just a simple process, again, of amending the
site plan and, of course, that is costly. It could cost probably
anywheres up to a thousand dollars to hire a design professional to
redo and amend the site plan.
But ifhe wants to open up the bays and, if! understand, have
both the car wash and the convenience store -- I know he's been
working with my staff for probably six months. My citizen liaison,
Evi, you've been working with. Evi's been out on site. Evi Ybeceta's
been out there, and I know he's been working with you, and we've
tried to walk through the process.
But unfortunately what the rules say is that he has to amend the
site plan. If you want to waive that and provide staff guidance -- my
concern, frankly, is -- are the issues with health, safety, welfare as far
as enforcing of the code. It may be -- is there enough sufficient room
for fire apparatus and other type of things.
I just don't want to put the board in a position of being subject to
any kind of retribution if something were to happen on site where the
board approved it and waived the rules. I mean, that's --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: So are you telling me he's not --
he's going to keep the store open --
MR. SCHMITT: I don't know. I don't know if he intends to
Page 41
December 15, 2009
keep the store open.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Is the store going to stay open?
MR. MILLET: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. So you need to have so
many parking spots for the store; is that correct?
MR. MILLET: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: So you've already addressed that
issue, and now you want to open up the carwash again --
MR. MILLET: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: -- and, therefore, you have to meet
some of the requirements. What's the timeline of getting something
like this done?
MR. SCHMITT: Let me turn to Susan. It's her staff. She can --
MS. ISTENES: The timeline -- Susan Istenes, for the record,
Zoning Director. Once it's submitted, it's really a one-page change,
very simple. There's going to be two processes, so you're looking 30
to 60 days, Commissioner?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Can it be done any quicker than
that?
MS. ISTENES: I would say 30 days is going to be the minimum.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And what would be the cost of
something like this?
MR. SCHMITT: Well, the cost will be his cost to hire a design
professional. That's something my staff -- I don't have a design
professional on my staff to do that. And then the other one would be
the parking -- he'd have to do an administrative parking reduction.
MS. ISTENES: Sorry about that.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, my concern is, I just don't
want to get ourselves in a situation where we circumvent codes, and
then all of a sudden this becomes an avalanche. That's my concern.
I understand the gentleman's concern, but I also realize that I'm
here to, you know, support other people here in the county. And so
Page 42
December 15,2009
we have a -- as somebody said earlier, we have a great county here,
and I just don't want to get into a position where we start relaxing the
code, and then all of a sudden there's other people that come in and
have the same concern. I know it's a tight economics situation, but if
we let this go for a couple of years and then he comes back, what's --
what are we going to gain out of this?
MR. SCHMITT: I'm ready to help him out any way I can. I
mean, we've been trying to work with him. We under- -- and my staff,
certainly Susan's staff, we want to help the guy out. We certainly do.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And I want to make sure that we
abide by the codes and regulations. And as long as it's not something
that's going to encompass six months' time or four months' time -- if it
can be done in 30 days, I think that's the direction that we really
should go.
MR. SCHMITT: The 30 days -- he's going to have to, like I said,
hire a design professional, which is a -- either a registered architect or
an engineer to do the site plan, and then that would have to be done in
accordance with the code. And, of course, it would go through our
review and it would go through fire review.
And -- now, as far as opening the carwash, I don't know what
interior work would be required, if it's going to require any type of
additional building permits or any other type of electrical or
mechanical.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Is the equipment still there?
MR. SCHMITT: I don't know.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Is the equipment still there?
MR. MILLET: No, sir.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: So you'd have to buy all new
equipment and everything?
MR. MILLET: Yes. Well, we have some of the equipment still
left over. There's just the small things that we'd have to add into it.
Nothing major.
Page 43
December 15, 2009
MR. SCHMITT: And I know we've been working with Mr.
Millet and --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I just -- my concern is -- and I'll
wrap it up. My concern is that we need to work with this person, but
we also have to realize that ifthere are some financial concerns here
that, in regards to paying for the service here in the county, that it has
to be addressed since we have laid off so many people in your area,
and I think there's probably going to be some others.
But the end result is -- and I also want to try to keep our codes
intact. We worked very, very hard to try to make sure that our codes
are intact. And I think that's probably why -- one of the reasons we
don't have a high crime rate here is because Collier County what it is.
MR. SCHMITT: And one of the greatest concerns would be the
stacking for the carwash, the entry, traffic flow through the site; and
then also, normally with a carwash, you have to provide additional
space for -- where people will do some detail work after washing their
car, dry off the car, towel off the car, those kind of things.
And normally, in manner or form, you identify that on your site
plan through a site -- an amendment to the site plan. But let me turn it
over to Susan for questions.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I've got a few more questions
coming up, or a few more commissioners want to ask questions; is that
okay?
MR. SCHMITT: Okay. Yes, certainly.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And Susan, stay right there because I'm
sure that you'll be needed to answer them.
Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, thank you. I think
everyone realizes that the staff is doing everything they can do. If
they exceeded their authority, then we'd be holding them accountable
down the line; so that's why it's coming before the County
Commission, and that's why we're weighing all these factors.
Page 44
December 15,2009
I personally would like to help you if it's doable without
endangering public safety or undermining the stability of future code
enforcement actions.
Mr. Klatzkow, our county attorney, you've been listening to our
conversation going back and forth. Have you got any advice for us as
a commission?
MR. KLA TZKOW: Yeah. The only question I have is, are you
suggesting you'll go back to the business you once were?
MR. MILLET: Yes, sir.
MR. KLA TZKOW: And there's no -- there's going to be no
difference between the business you once were than from the business
you're proposing?
MR. MILLET: Absolutely.
MR. KLA TZKOW: I don't know what the issue is. We already
approved it once before.
MS. ISTENES: No, that's incorrect. The site plan shows it as
storage. There was no site plan. This is a very old building, or older,
relatively speaking. There was no site plan approved.
In '08 he did get an SIP that showed the drive-through store and
the remaining bays as storage. Now the questions is, he wants to turn
those remaining bays into what to -- to two carwash bays.
We need a one-page change, an administrative parking reduction,
to show that change. Staff recognizes, this is -- it's a huge building on
a very small site. We just need to ensure that the site circulation and
the parking is working. We need to revise the administrative parking
reduction because that was predicated on a convenience store
drive-through only with the remainder as storage.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: As can you see, everybody really wants
to support you. So few times anybody in Golden Gate City, so few
businesses ever ask for help, so we're all eager to help you, and we'll
find a way somehow before we finish this subject.
Commissioner Coyle?
Page 45
December 15, 2009
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You have another site plan there.
Which is the most accurate site plan?
MR. SCHMITT: Well, that's the -- that's the building plan. This
is the actual --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Now, what is the stacking
requirement for self-service carwash? That was cut off on the other
page. I couldn't read it.
MS. ISTENES: For auto/truck washing, one space for self-serve
wash facilities, and one per employee of the largest shift for automatic
wash facilities. Stacking for two vehicles per stall for self-service
wash bays and stacking for five vehicles per automatic carwash lane.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. All right. Now, let's take a
look at the site plan. Now, all you're planning to do, all he is planning
to do, is to reactivate those two bays and eliminate that one parking
space, that 9-by-18 parking space there at the front; is that a fair
statement?
MS. ISTENES: That's my understanding, but --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Is that right?
MR. MILLET: Yes, sir. You're talking about this 9-by-18?
Yeah, eliminate that so we can re-open up the two bays that are right
there.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. All right. And tell me how
we calculate the external parking for a drive-through building. How
many parking spaces are actually required for a drive-through
building?
MS. ISTENES: The code says for beverage center
drive-throughs, one per 250 square feet, stacking for five vehicles for
the first drive-through aisle, and two for each additional aisle.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. We only have what, one
drive-through aisle for the store itself; is that true?
MS. ISTENES: Correct, yes. He was granted an administrative
parking reduction. Like I said, when you get into these older
Page 46
December 15,2009
buildings, it's almost impossible to meet the parking. So he was just
for the store.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Well, I really don't
understand why we can't eliminate that one parking space and grant
him an administrative parking reduction right now. Can we do that,
the Board of County Commissioners do that?
MS. ISTENES: That's up to your county attorney that -- we have
a process, an approval process to do that, and we have -- if that
happens, we have no records of it, and we have no evaluation of it, so
MR. KLATZKOW: I don't have an issue with it.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. I don't either. As long as--
as long as he's returning to the use that he had before -- now, I
understand what you've said. He's actually expanded the building.
The building has changed substantially, right?
But I agree with Commissioner Henning. I don't want to put the
people out of business here, and I'm willing to accept something on a
temporary basis that might not be ideal for the long-term. How do we
solve this for a short term?
MR. KLATZKOW: You want to give him a temporary use and
then come back in a year and see whether or not there's been any
impact?
MS. ISTENES: That works for me.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah.
MR. KLATZKOW: I mean, at the end of the day, as far as
health, safety -- I mean, he's going to have to pass fire code. He's
going to be inspected, you know, by the building inspector. So I'm not
too concerned about that.
Whether or not he's generating too much traffic with respect to
the site, we'll know that in -- you know, in a year. And we can come
back -- if there's no issue, we can come back on consent and say there
was no issue. And if there is an issue, we can come back on more of a
Page 47
December 15,2009
public-hearing type issue.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. I would -- you would
pray that you would generate too much traffic, right?
MR. MILLET: Yes, sir, absolutely.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And I wish you well --
MR. MILLET: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- in that. Let me just tell you
some factual things. It was stated there wasn't a carwash there. Well,
I washed vehicles there in the past. It was a carwash at the same time
it was a convenience store.
The building size has not changed one bit. It is the same building
that it was built in the '80s as it is today.
What I am assuming has changed is our parking requirements for
those particular uses. Now, common sense would tell you that a
drive-through convenience store, you're driving through. You're not --
you're not parking, even a handicapped person would drive through
instead of parking in a handicapped place to get out to shop. You
drive your vehicle right through. There's a lane there, you drive your
vehicle through, you stop, pick it up, you pay for it.
Same thing with the carwash, that you drive in the bay, you wash
your car, you drive out. You don't park your car and then have
somebody pull it in there so you can wash your car. So I would
assume that our code requirements have changed.
So if we can -- so I make a motion that we -- I'm sorry. Ijust
wanted to correct some misstatements, somebody that's not familiar
with the neighborhood. We want to issue a temporary use for the site.
MR. KLA TZKOW: And we'll come back in a year with a report
as to whether or not the parking is an issue.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's my motion.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
Page 48
December 15, 2009
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And a second from Commissioner Coyle.
I'd just like to throw in too, if this functioned so perfectly before
-- and actually the demographics haven't changed much in Golden
Gate City. It's not like they've grown exponentially since then. It
functioned perfectly fine before. It should still be able to function, is
my guess. You haven't had a great increase in population, have you?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We've had a decrease in
population.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: So then it should work, right?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's the problem with the
drive-through is people are not working. They're not using that type of
convenience because they can't afford it.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: That's right.
MR. MILLET: That's right.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: But Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah. Just one quick question.
Any particular administrative work that you have to do is -- how much
is that going to entail? Depends upon how this vote comes out. And
where's the money going to come from?
MS. ISTENES: Are you talking about the temporary use permit?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes.
MS. ISTENES: There's a $75 charge for that, so he will have to
file the application, and he can do that over our front counter, so it will
be a day to get the permit.
MR. SCHMITT: Do you have your business tax license for the
business? Because we would have to modify that to show both the
carwash -- you'd have to go through the tax collector's office to identi-
-- and update your business tax license.
MR. MILLET: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. And what else -- is there
any other administrative costs that are --
MS. ISTENES: Sorry about that. That would be -- the zoning
Page 49
December 15,2009
certificate would be $125. The temporary use permit would be $75,
so it would be a $200 administrative cost.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
MS. ISTENES: While I have the opportunity, the administrative
parking reduction does provide a lot of flexibility, especially for these
older sites. So we do recognize that as staff.
And so I just want you to know that the code is very flexible
there even though the parking requirements seem pretty strict. There
is an administrative opportunity to look at the site the way it functions
and circulates and then reduce it pretty easily through the
administrative process.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you.
Anything else, Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That's it.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Then we have a motion on the floor and a
second. Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: All in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. That's a 4-1 vote. And it's 10:30.
Thank you very much for coming in, sir.
MR. MILLET: Thank you very much. Appreciate it.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Work with these people. They'll help you.
MR. MILLET: Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: It's 10:30. We'll take a ten-minute break.
Page 50
December 15, 2009
Thank you.
(A brief recess was had.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Would you-all please take your seats.
Item #6C
PUBLIC PETITION BY JEAN BENOIT DISCUSSING THE
PAVING OF S.E. 30TH A VENUE ON EVERGLADES
BOULEVARD - DISCUSSED
MR.OCHS: Madam Chair, that takes us to 6C under public
petitions. It's a public petition request by Jean Benoit to discuss
paving of Southeast 30th Avenue on Everglades Boulevard.
MR. BENOIT: Good morning, Chairman--
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Good morning.
MR. BENOIT: -- Commissioners, staff. My name is Jean, last
name is Benoit. I reside at 2840 30th Avenue Southeast. That's off of
Everglades Boulevard. That is in district -- commissioner number
five, Jim Coletta.
I'm here to discuss about the paving. Numerous residents in the
community have been discussing this with us. We've been in contact
with Commissioner Coletta's office about the situation.
The dust over there is unbearable in the summertime. I mean, we
have kids and children all over the place. They can't play. When cars
go by, just -- the dust is all in their face. And then during the rainy
season you've got potholes because -- I think it's limerock, and it's not
-- the stability is not a good, hard surface. So you can see there's
potholes and, as a New Yorker, I'm tired of potholes. I mean, it is
ridiculous in the rainy season about the pothole situation.
The area has grown since I've been down here. We have two
elementary schools recently built, Sabal Palm off of Everglades and
18th, in 2005, I believe; and then we have -- the middle school right
Page 5 I
December 15,2009
next to it, and we also have another elementary school in -- Palmetto
Elementary on 12th off of Everglades. So the population has
increased. There's a lot of children there, there's a lot of residents.
And when I was in contact with the Department of
Transportation about how the process works, they said they have a
schedule, a format, and we have to follow a certain format, but I
notice some streets have been repaved that were paved already. Take,
for instance, 28th Southeast. We discussed the situation of why that
street was paved and then they skipped our block which is 30th, and
they went to 32nd.
The answer was, our street is longer and that street was shorter.
So maybe somebody from the Department of Transportation can
explain that to me why.
As -- the dust is the health issue right now. As you drive down
that dust and you come into your garage or your driveway, it collects
inside your house, it goes inside your ducts. So when you have
children, plant life, and animals, it's unbearable.
Another issue I have is with the county as far as when we
complain about the dust, they come out there with the water tank and
they spray it down. And this is Florida, and I want to say, 45 minutes
it's hot. That water does not do anything. I believe it's probably a
waste of manpower doing that.
We have some residents that are here to discuss about the
situation. I just wanted to come here and express my feelings about
the situation.
Commissioner Coletta's office has been informative but, of
course, it comes into the -- in front of the board to discuss the
situation.
I understand the recession and the economic situation that's going
on, but as taxpayers, we still have to function, the government still has
to function, and the public still has to have the government do what
they can for the community.
Page 52
December 15, 2009
And basically that's all I have to say. Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. Stay there.
Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Y eah. Yeah, all the reasons that
you mentioned, they're all valid. And you're right, there is economic
considerations, and you're also right that there is an -- what do you
want to call it, a responsibility upon the commission to provide for the
safety, health, welfare of their residents.
Trying to strike all these balances has been very difficult in the
last two budget cycles. Prior to that when times were a little flush, we
were pulling down some serious money and being able to move these
roads forward in an expeditious pace.
In fact, Mr. Feder I'm going to get up (sic) in just a moment. But
of all the roads that were in need of paving when we started, 80
percent of the people that live on paved roads now -- or on unpaved --
limerock roads back seven years ago now have them paved. Of
course, the bad news is, you're not one of them.
So I guess the question is, is -- to answer your questions that you
had in your original request, I'm going to have Mr. Feder get up and
go over some of the questions that you had regarding the paving of
other roads that were already paved. The -- and it was some other ones
regarding the maintenance of the roads, and he'll get into that a little
bit.
But I want you to know I'm going to keep pushing. And it's one
of those things that, you know, we have to be very diligent about and
keep reminding everybody out there that -- how important this is to
the people the live on those streets.
Mr. Feder, your comments would be most welcome.
MR. FEDER: For the record, Norman Feder, Transportation
Administrator. I'll be fairly brief, but I do want to try and make sure I
answer the questions.
We've had a program we started about three or four years ago
Page 53
December 15,2009
trying to get at about a hundred miles of limerock, unpaved county
roads that were accepted as part of the Avatar proposition years back.
About half of those have been paved at this time. That was
through a concerted effort, particularly one year, when there was a lot
ofturnback dollars, and about seven-and-a-halfmillion was allocated
by this board to try and get heavily at it.
As you pointed out, we went after those facilities with the most
residents on the roadways to get the best return for the dollar spent.
We had hoped to continue the program, but it is funded with 111,
which is the MSTD general fund, and we are experiencing very, very
tight budgets, as the gentleman noted. And this last year there were no
fundings put for limerock roads even though it had been funded in
some previous years. And as I said, this board had added some
turnback when it found the additional funds available.
As to the cost, about 450,000 to convert from limerock to a paved
roadway . We do have, and I know it was brought up, a resurfacing
that we're doing in the area. That's about 90,000 to resurface a paved
roadway that was already paved, if you will. And we do have to
maintain them.
We do not go out and spray, and I agree with the gentleman that
it would be a waste to try and water down a limerock road. We do
that only when we're getting ready to go in and grade, which we do
periodically, acknowledging that we do have, unfortunately, with the
rain, ruts or depressions created within the limerock roads because
they are not paved.
So we're trying to respond to them. As we said, we're about
halfway down on that list. We went after the greatest occupancy
segments first. And right now we find ourselves with not the funding,
even though the board put some additional funding when it had dollars
available.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. But where would -- if the
program was instituted again in a very short period of time, where
Page 54
December 15, 2009
would Southeast 30th A venue be on that list?
MR. FEDER: It was coming up in the list. Your road and bridge
superintendent, Travis Gossard's, here. I believe it was fiscal year
'111'12 if we had continued the program as was previously structured.
Travis?
MR. GOSSARD: Travis Gossard, Road and Bridge
Superintendent, for the record. Yep, that would have fallen in
2011/' 12 fiscal years, both 30th Avenues, the respondents that are
coming in today. Both those streets would have fell in 2011/'12.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: All right. Well, how many
roads were before them? That would be a little more helpful.
MR. GOSSARD: Well, this year there would be six segments
that would be scheduled for '09/'10. '101'11 would be another six
segments.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. So we're talking about
six segments would have happened this year if the funding was there?
MR. GOSSARD: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And they would have been in
the next financial year, right?
MR. GOSSARD: Correct. The year after that, '11 and '12.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So they're something like
between '07 and' 12?
MR. GOSSARD: Actually about 12 streets before we would get
to them based on current funding of about 2.1 million.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. Well, it's -- I have to tell
you, this is something that I bring up before the commission, oh, as
Commissioner Coyle will probably tell you, every once in a while I
mention it, correct?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Every meeting.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Every meeting?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Several times during the meeting.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Several times during the
Page 55
December 15,2009
meeting. This is -- this is one of the things I keep pushing for, and I'd
appreciate any support I can get from you and the rest of the public
out there to make sure, as we go through our budget cycles each year,
to come before the commission and remind the necessity of keeping
this -- a road program of some sort going forward to meet the needs.
I mean, we spend untold millions of dollars on median
beautification, we spend million of dollars on our parks and our
libraries, and they're all necessary. But when we get down to it, where
are the priorities? Is it going to be health, safety, and welfare? Is it
going to be the physical enjoyment of our residents? Is it going to be
the beauty that Naples is becoming known for? There's many things
to weigh out. Your voice is appreciated today, and it will be
appreciated again in the future.
MR. BENOIT: I'm sorry, has it been suspended as far as paving?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: The correct word would be, it's
not funded.
MR. BENOIT: Okay. Not funded meaning it's frozen.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: In other words, the program's
alive but it's not well. There's no funding to run it. I guess -- would
that be a correct definition, Mr. Klatzkow?
MR. KLA TZKOW: I think it's just on hold waiting funding.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Which is good. I mean, it
doesn't have to be resurrected from zero. It can be done at that point
in time that the commission rearranges priorities to be able to
recognize this need.
And the reasons for that is political, and you're political. You
show up at the right times, it might happen.
MR. BENOIT: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you for being here.
Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. I appreciate you coming here
and basically being a spokesman for the people that live on your
Page 56
December 15, 2009
street. You said you were from New York?
MR. BENOIT: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: In New York City or whereabouts?
MR. BENOIT: I'm from Brooklyn, New York.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Brooklyn. And how long have you
lived out in the Estates?
MR. BENOIT: My parents lived in West Palm Beach. I came
down here in 2005.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: 2005.
MR. BENOIT: And then I relocated over here in 2006.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: At the time, you knew that there
was unpaved roads when you bought there or not?
MR. BENOIT: Oh, yeah, absolutely. My parents have property
out there.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Oh, okay. So -- and as
Commissioner Coletta said, that we're in deep economic times here,
and we've -- we're trying to figure out where -- if there is any extra
money floating around in somebody's pocket or whatever. We're
going to, in fact, have a discussion later on today about what we need
to do with that money.
And basically, I think that we need to make sure that we put it in
the pot to payoff our debts so that we don't have to impact the
residents with higher taxes. And what we're planning to do, as
Commissioner Coletta said, is that the time when the economy starts
to pick up and the tax base starts to get in a better position, then I think
we can address your concerns and get out there and make sure that we
take care of those roads. And I appreciate you very much for being
here today.
MR. BENOIT: I'm just here to say, don't forget about the little
guys. I understand you have palm trees and mulch and all that good
stuff that makes Florida look good and Naples, but we still have to
take care of the residents that live there and children that play in the
Page 57
December 15,2009
streets and drive their bikes -- or ride their bikes to the corner. And
there are certain things that are still being done that's not on hold, but
this is important to us, too.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes, I understand that.
MR. BENOIT: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you.
Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, before -- I just wanted to
-- I didn't want you -- I don't want Commissioner Halas to think I put
words into your mouth. I didn't. In fact, we never even met before
this other than --
MR. BENOIT: Never.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- communications back and
forth. So you're speaking as a person, an individual, and it's not
Commissioner Coletta just reciting the old gospel over and over again.
But who's here with you today? I'd like to know.
MR. BENOIT: I have two gentlemen down here.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Great. We've got a lot to talk
about very shortly.
MR. GARRIGA: I have one question.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Before you get up, sir, there's
another person that's signed up to speak. Is that you? I mean, under
public petition?
MR. GARRIGA: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. With your permission,
can we bring him up now?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Certainly.
Item #6D
PUBLIC PETITION BY ERVIN GARRIGA DISCUSSING THE
Page 58
December 15, 2009
PAVING OF S.E. 30TH A VENUE ON EVERGLADES
BOULEVARD - DISCUSSED
MR.OCHS: That would be your next item, ma'am, 6D.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, you needed to say that that into the
record?
MR.OCHS: Yeah, I'd like to. If you're finished with 10C (sic),
we can go to 10D (sic).
MR. BENOIT: Thank you very much, folks.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you.
MR. OCHS: I'm sorry, 6D, which is a public petition request by
Ervin Garriga to discuss paving of Southeast 30th A venue and
Everglades Boulevard.
MR. GARRIGA: Ervin Garriga, 3430 30th Avenue Southeast.
When I bought my property in '05, built it in '06,1 spent
$400,000 on that home. When I called road and bridges, they said
2009. That's the date that was given to me, so I said, I'll wait.
As time came by, I saw them pave 28th Avenue, and they
jumped to 32nd Avenue, which was always on the way. And that's the
question that I said; the road's about the same. Why did they jump
30th Avenue?
Like Mr. Benoit said, it's unbearable out there. You have to live
out there to see what I'm talking about. And I'm taking my turn. And
I want to know if, 2012 is going to come, you know, we don't get
skipped again. And then you've got roads out there that are being
repaved again. Like the gentleman said, it cost $90,000, but those are,
you know, streets where only cars go through. They're not that bad. I
mean, get -- like Mr. Benoit said, give the little guy a chance, pave our
road. And I don't mind waiting another ten years before you
resurface. At least we have something to keep the dust -- I can't open
the windows in my house. My wife can't breath, you know, because
of the dust. You know, you open the windows and it's -- the whole
Page 59
December 15, 2009
furniture, everything in the house is just dusty.
And that's all I have to say, just give us a break. You know, if
you said 2012, don't skip us. You know, it's unfair that you went from
28th to 32nd Avenue. And then when I called their office, bad
attitude, they say, well, you know, talk to the commission. 32nd
Avenue's shorter.
It's not. It's the same. There are over 12 homes just on my side.
I don't know how many homes are on his side. But, you know, we
pay taxes and, you know, just give us a break. So thank you very
much.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Thank you very much.
Item #9 A
RESOLUTION 2009- 303: RE-APPOINTING JAMES 1. GAULT
AND KIRK P. COLVIN TO THE ISLES OF CAPRI FIRE
CONTROL DISTRICT ADVISORY COMMITTEE - ADOPTED
MR.OCHS: Commissioners, that takes you to Item 9 on your
agenda, Board of County Commissioners. 9A is an appointment of
members to the Isles of Capri Fire Control District Advisory
Committee.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Madam Chair, I make a motion
that we appoint James Gault and Kirk Colvin.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Motion and second.
All in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: (Absent.)
Page 60
December 15, 2009
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Very good.
Item #9B
RESOLUTION 2009-304: RE-APPOINTING JAMES E.
BOUGHTON (TERM EXPIRING DECEMBER 14,2013);
APPOINTING RAY ALLAIN (TERM EXPIRING DECEMBER 14,
2011), HENRY REAGAN (TERM EXPIRING DECEMBER 14,
2011) AND DAVID HURST (TERM EXPIRING DECEMBER 14,
2013) TO THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ADVISORY
COMMITTEE - ADOPTED
MR.OCHS: 9B is appointment of members to the Development
Services Advisory Committee.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Madam Chair, I make a motion
that we accept the committee's recommendations to appoint James
Boughton and Ray Allain, Henry Reagan, and David Hurst.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Do I hear a second?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. A second from Commissioner
Halas.
All in favor?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: (Absent.)
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed?
Page 61
December 15, 2009
(No response.)
MS. FILSON: Commissioner Halas or Coyle?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Well, they were both saying, so this time
I gave Halas the nod.
MS. FILSON: Oh, okay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: The elder.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: The elder, yeah, right.
Item #9C
DISCUSSION ON SECTION 8 OF THE COLLIER COUNTY
ETHICS ORDINANCE NO. 2004-5 REGARDING COLLIER
COUNTY POST-EMPLOYMENT RESTRICTIONS. DUE TO THE
EXISTING ECONOMIC CLIMATE, CONSIDER EITHER
TEMPORARY SUSPENSION OF SECTION 8 OF THE
ORDINANCE FOR A DEFINED PERIOD OF TIME OR
CONSIDER PERMANENT REMOVAL OF SECTION 8. FOR
REVIEW OF THE FULL ORDINANCE PLEASE GO TO
HTTP://APPS.COLLlERCLERK.COM/BMR/DOCVIEW .ASPX?lD
=14976 (COMMISSIONER HENNING) - MOTION DIRECTING
THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE TO BRING BACK AN
AMENDMENT TO THE ETHICS ORDINANCE - APPROVED
MR.OCHS: Commissioners, 9C is to discuss Section 8 of the
Collier County Ethics Ordinance, number 2004-5, regarding Collier
County post employment restrictions.
Due to the existing economic climate, consider either temporary
suspension of Section 8 of the ordinance for a defined period of time
or consider permanent removal of Section 8. This item was placed on
the agenda by Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioner, the -- yeah,
there's two reasons why we did the -- in my opinion, the ethics
Page 62
December 15, 2009
ordinance. One was because we were training employees and then
some short time after that they would go to the private sector, and it
just wasn't economically feasible. We don't have that problem. In
fact, we're trying to encourage employees to retire and take an early
leave.
The other reason, in my opinion, it was -- we didn't want for
employees to be working on a special project to go to the private
sector and work -- continue to work on that special project in the
private sector. That, I think, we should keep.
For an example, you have employees in comprehensive planning
that is doing rural stewardship area, or an employee. Not to restrict
that employee from going into the private sector, but just for them to
petition the Board of Commissioners on that one particular issue.
That's what I would like to see. It's -- I don't want to discourage
the public from -- or former employees from gaining employment in
their profession. And what we have now it was.
So I would like to direct the -- I would like for the board to
request to direct the county attorney to amend our ethics ordinance to
provide our former employees some better employment opportunities.
That's all.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Is this under a short timeline, or is
this going to be forever?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, you know what, that's a
very good point, Commissioner Halas, and I think it does -- we need
to temporarily suspend, because hopefully in the future we'll find that
we're back and, you know, the economy's doing great and we want to
keep our employees employed and not to encourage them to go out to
the outside.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: The other thing was that -- one of
the other reasons that we instituted the ordinance, not only to make
sure that employees of the county weren't going to jump ship when
Page 63
December 15, 2009
things were good, but it was also to protect the rest of the citizens in
the county in regards to how these people were hired, and it gave the
developers at that time, I think, the upper hand, and there was a lot of
outcry by the citizens.
So as long as this is a temporary measure that we establish some
type of a timeline, I may not have a problem with this. But to just
give this as an a la carte and not have this come back on a timeline and
to readdress at a later time.
So I hope in your motion that you'll put a timeline in, and that
needs to come back before the Board of County Commissioners.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Maybe you can give me some
idea when the economy will come back.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, I'd say what we ought to do
is just look at this for a two-year period, and then we can readdress it
agam.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. I think Commissioner
Halas is right on target. Two years, you get a chance to reevaluate it,
and hopefully the economy has made a total turnaround. We might
consider there's no need for it. The reason we got there wasn't just to
keep employees from jumping ship. Going all the way back to 2000,
we had examples just prior to us coming in and when we were there of
former employees that left that came back after a very short period of
time, walked in like they still worked there, and walking permits
through, doing different things like they were acting as county
employees, and they were doing it for a fee for somebody.
So when we -- and I'm all for suspending this for a period of two
years, but we've got to make sure that the county manager has certain
safeguards in place so that the people that leave the county don't come
back and abuse privileges that they may have built up here as county
employees, and I'm sure that our county manager could do that.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And Commissioner Coyle?
Page 64
December 15,2009
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Everything we do has unintended
consequences. And probably some provisions of this ethics ordinance
have unintended consequences during bad economic times. So I think
we need to be flexible in adjusting to it.
But I would ask my colleagues to consider doing this: Rather
than telling the staff or the county attorney what to do to fix this,
because we really haven't studied it in depth or detail, to instead direct
the staff and the county attorney to come back with their
recommended solution to the problem.
I am sympathetic to the problem. I am uncertain as to exactly
how we should change the ethics ordinance and for how long,
permanently or temporarily, until I hear the arguments of the staff and
the county attorney about what the potential ramifications are and
what the unintended consequences might be.
So I think we can get there, but I would just ask that we direct the
staff and the county attorney to come back with recommendations
about how to solve the problem.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I can go along with that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, that's a great suggestion,
so I make a motion that we direct the county attorney to work with the
county manager to bring back some suggested revisions to our ethics
ordinance including, including a two-year, or whatever you, you know
__ whatever you recommend, whatever your suggestion is in when the
economy's going to turn around.
MR. KLATZKOW: We'll give you a list of alternatives, how's
that?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I have a motion on the floor from
Commissioner Henning, and a second from Commissioner Coletta.
Any further discussion?
(No response.)
Page 65
,_.__.___.__...___._,_o_____.___________..,,_.,_u____~_,.._._.---
December 15,2009
CHAIRMAN FIALA: All in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: That's a 5-0.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you.
Item #10A
EST ABLlSHING THE SCHEDULE OF IMP ACT FEE UPDATE
STUDIES FOR CALENDAR YEAR 2010 IN ACCORDANCE
WITH PRIOR DIRECTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS - APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, that takes you to lOA, county
manager's report. First item is a recommendation to establish the
schedule of impact fee update studies for calendar year 2010 in
accordance with prior direction of the Board of County
Commissioners.
Ms. Amy Patterson will present.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: This is just approval of the
calendar, right?
MS. PATTERSON: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I have a motion to approve and a second.
Any questions or anything from the commissioners?
(No response.)
Page 66
December 15, 2009
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Amy, it was a wonderful presentation.
MS. PATTERSON: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. All in favor, signify by
saymg aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign?
(No response.)
MS. PATTERSON: Thank you.
Item #10C
THE STATUS OF FY 2010 CAPITAL PROJECT FUNDING-
MOTION TO APPROVE STAFF'S RECOMMENDA nONS,
STAFF TO WORK WITH MARCO HISTORICAL SOCIETY,
PURSUE GRANT OPPORTUNITIES, ADVERTISE AND TO
BRING ITEM BACK AT A FUTURE BCC MEETING -
APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Why don't you stay up for the rest of these, Amy.
You're on a roll.
Next item is 10C, because lOB is a three o'clock time certain, so
that takes us to 10C, which is a report to the board detailing the status
of fiscal year 2010 capital project funding.
Mark Isackson from the County Manager's Office will present.
MR. ISACKSON: Thank you, County Manager Ochs. For the
record, Commissioners, Mark Isackson with the County Manager's
Office.
Now, before you this evening, or this morning, excuse me, is a
Page 67
December 15,2009
report which portrays the current status of capital project funding.
The information is a followup from a prior meeting between the board
and County Manager Ochs. Fiscal staff from a number of the
divisions got together and began a comprehensive review of our
current capital project funding as well as dollars which may be
available for priority purposes to determine the extent of capital
dollars for your review.
In your agenda packet today there is a series of exhibits for your
purview. The first that I'd like to offer up on the visualizer, ifl can get
some assistance from County Manager Ochs, is a -- kind of a review --
review of how we actually budget for capital projects during the
course of any particular fiscal year.
This graphic illustrates the progress that we went through
between 2009 and 20] 0, with this particular column being 2009, this
particular column being 20] O.
The -- in the spring of each particular budget cycle, there is an
undertaken review of all projects, grants, et cetera, and generally what
staff does is process budget amendments after that review is
completed to close out completed projects. Simultaneously, along
with that review going into the 20] 0 year, we also estimate revenues
and receive department requests for capital funding.
Leading back through to June, which the BCC workshops take
place, existing projects, in other words, projects that are in the
continuum, in the queue, are shown in the budget documents in the
forecast column. Leftover money is shown as adopted carryforward in
the new fiscal year, and you see the arrow going back up to the
estimated revenue, which may be available for new projects or added
to existing projects or placed back into reserves.
Now, this is a process that we go through, staff does, and
specifically those individuals who are involved with the capital
portion of our budget.
The interesting thing to note about this is that the -- I mean, I
Page 68
December 15, 2009
think it's germain to the discussion this evening, or this morning,
excuse me, is the fact that in anyone particular time frame, dollars
that are available for capital projects may change. And that all
obviously depends on the status of a particular project, if it's closed
out, ifthere are change orders issued, et cetera, et cetera.
Ultimately what happens is, back -- when we come through the
September adoption process, the board sees the available dollars that
are available for capital project funding, not only from the standpoint
of an adopted budget in terms of revenue, but also this phenomena of
unspent product roll into the next fiscal year.
And that is essentially money that, for existing projects that you
have the -- the available amended budget minus the actual
expenditures, that increment taken amongst all the capital projects that
we have in the continuum, is comprised and makes up that project roll
going into the next fiscal year.
The second chart I'd like to provide for board review is the
restrictive versus unrestrictive nature of our capital project funding.
You can see that on the continuum, the most restrictive types of
capital projects are obviously in the grant arena. You then move to
the impact fee arena. User fees and other restricted funding sources,
gas taxes and, of course, the least restrictive would be those capital
projects that are supported by ad valorem tax revenue.
What you have before you this morning in your recommendation
are those projects that are specifically related to ad valorem taxes, that
$64.1 million figure.
Exhibit 1 in your packet provides a breakdown -- if I can throw
that up on the visualizer -- by fund and funding source. And I
apologize for the difficulty in reading some of this stuff.
But you see the breakdown of the various types of funding
sources and the capital projects by particular fund. And I want to
focus in, if I can, on the ad valorem component in this particular
column here, because that really provides the genesis for our
Page 69
December 15, 2009
recommendations to you this morning.
There are four particular funds contained within that ad valorem
component. Fund 325 in the stormwater area; Fund 112 for landscape
capital; Fund 301 for countywide capital; and Fund 306 for parks and
recreation.
The recommendations this morning lead -- and it's in your
executive summary under summary -- indicates that -- if you go to
table number 2 in your executive summary it's -- I believe it's on Page
2 -- we've identified an available amount of money totaling three --
almost $3.6 million from the four funds that I've just identified in the
analysis.
Now, there are a number of staff recommendations tabled to the
left-hand column which depicts what our view of the capital world is
and where we think that money may be directed. Obviously the board
would be -- at their pleasure to have a discussion on that.
But predominantly what we're recommending is that $3.6 million
be diverted back to reserves with each of the particular funds where
you see designated there for future consideration. Once it's in reserves
within those particular funds, those funds cannot be touched unless
and until the board, by executive summary or board action, directs that
that money be utilized elsewhere.
There's an element of conservatism with the recommendation that
we're offering to you this morning. We believe it's -- it's the most
conservative approach, but it sti II allows us in times of an emergency,
for example, when the board's in absentia during August, ifthere was
a need for a roof repair or an A/C replacement or things of that nature,
county manager would have the ability to authorize the use of those
funds out of reserves, obviously, subsequently coming back to the
board for ratification of that action which took place. Obviously in a
hurricane situation or other where there's a declared disaster, you
would have the opportunity -- or we would have the opportunity to
appear before you in that declared emergency meeting where we
Page 70
- ,-_.~,_... .~._._._~_._._.-._.
December 15,2009
would talk about the particular budget amendments.
So in summary -- if we can throw up one more pie chart for the
board to review -- of the breakdown of capital projects some $564
million, you see these -- the portion or the slice that relates to ad
valorem capital projects is the amount of money that we focused in on
in our review. It's in your -- it's in your detail in your exhibit by
project, by specific project. And of that $64 million, we're
recommending that $3.6 million at least be available but fenced off in
reserves within each one of those funds for -- for your consideration.
Be happy to answer any questions the board may have. And we
have in the audience those individuals who are technical experts in the
accounting, budgetary, and implementation aspects of the particular
projects in case the board goes to specific projects or has some
information.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. And before I call on the
commissioners -- I've got three lights on already -- I understand we
also have seven speakers.
And I just want to say, at this time I want to bring up the fact that
-- well, this being my last meeting as your Chair, by the way, that I
start and end your meeting, that I have a very important request from
you, and that is to fund the Marco Island Historical Society Museum.
This is important to me; it's important to my district; it's
important to the museum system. And we've got a funding source
which has been offered to us by the Marco Island City Council. They
said they'll offer us $350,000, if we'll match it, to buy the -- to buy the
displays so that they can open this museum which is supposed to open
on the 4th of February. This is very important to us. This museum
will be going then into our museum system for all of us to use from
there on in.
And I ask that you consider taking money from this to apply
directly to that. I'm not asking for any new money. I'm just asking for
you to switch money out of pots that we have already and move it into
Page 71
December 15,2009
this pot to pay for this and be able to take advantage of the wonderful
offer that we've received from the Marco Island City Council.
And with that, and before I make any other -- any further
comments, you can call the speakers.
MS. FILSON: Thank you. The first speaker is Craig Woodward.
He'll be followed by Jerry Masters.
MR. WOODWARD: Yes. Actually I'll be followed by Rob
Popoff. But yes, this is Craig Woodward. I'm -- I've been a resident of
Collier County for 41 years, and I'm very involved in this museum, as
I think you know.
We're very, very pleased that the City of Marco rose to this
challenge that it -- when it looked like our museum, you know, was
going to open with some exhibits, very few, and probably won't pull in
the number of tourism that we wanted. And so the city council, as you
know, made a challenge of $30,000. And Rob Popoff, who's the
chairman of our city council, is here to present that to you.
I'm also very pleased that your TDC, your Tourist Development
Council, unanimously voted to support this proposition that the City of
Marco put up 350,000, and that the county use the funds that
Commissioner Fialajust mentioned to match the city's proposition. I
think the TDC realizes the importance to tourism here.
I'm also pleased that today's Naples Daily News -- there was an
editorial in the paper today, if you didn't catch it. They're supporting
this funding also. The Naples Daily News, we're very excited, gave
our museum their 1923 news truck that the -- originally that Barron
Collier had purchased, and it used to say -- and they're going to put it
back on there -- the Collier County News on the side of the truck, and
we're going to have that in one of our exhibit rooms with the creation
of Collier County, and the fact -- Tom Barfield was very involved in
that.
I also wrote a commentary in the paper today, and I hope that
you saw it, and it goes over how important this is, not just to Marco
Page 72
December 15, 2009
but to all of Collier County, the school children in Golden Gate, our
hotels, our restaurants.
I want to clear up one misunderstanding though. The
misunderstanding is that February 4th we having a grand opening, and
that is not really, really true. In fact, what we're having -- and the
name was changed a number of months ago. We're having what we
call a sneak-peak preview because we know this museum will not be
opening on February 4th. The exhibits will not be done. It will be --
but the buildings will be there, and people will be very impressed with
the buildings and what has been accomplished with the shell mound
and the lagoon and all of that.
So we're having a sneak-peak preview, and it's for our donors,
and you -- let's face it, this commission has been a very strong
supporter with the land and what you've done for us and the TDC's
contributions. And you know, we want you to come to this
sneak-peak preview.
We've been working with your staff, and I know your staff is
here to talk, but we'd like to go over, you know, why are we asking for
these funds? You know, what is the design we're looking at? What is
the budget? And how will this improve the economy of Collier
County at a time when we need the economy?
So I would ask that Council Member Popoff--
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Rob Popoff. He'll be followed
by Jerry Masters.
MR. POPOFF: Thank you.
Chairman Fiala and County Commissioners, hello, good
morning. Thank you for listening to us.
I'd like to read a brief letter into the record, but before I do so, I'd
like to say that I entirely understand what it's like to sit up there and
have somebody come up with a couple of hands out and ask for
money. We're very aware of that on the Marco Island City Council.
It happens every meeting.
Page 73
December 15, 2009
And with that in mind, we felt we would come and we would ask
for money, but not with two hands, but singly with one hand. As
such, the Marco Island City Council has committed up to $350,000 of
matching funds should the county acquiesce and match our funds.
We understand how difficult economic times are currently. I
share in Commissioner Henning's optimism that within a couple years
things may turn around, but I also serve on the TDC, and I've served
there with Commissioner Hennings (sic) and Chairman Fiala, and the
-- excuse me. I've got a little bit of a cold here -- the TDC has
unanimously supported funding of this project as well.
So I would ask the commission to take a very serious look at this.
In difficult times, we can't leave things laying dormant. This museum
sitting empty isn't going to do the county any good, it's not going to do
Marco Island or its businesses any good.
And with that, I'd like to read this brief letter into the record.
Dear County Commissioners, the new Marco Island Historical
Museum expects to open in February of 20 1 0 -- 1 think Mr.
Woodward just corrected that -- and it is in urgent need of funding for
exhibits to draw the public to the museum in the coming year.
Following a presentation by the Marco Island Historical Society
of December 7,2009, on the need for exhibit funding, the Marco
Island City Council voted unanimously to match funding up to
$350,000 from the county for exhibits and display.
City Council is asking that the County Commission give this
request priority and match or exceed this amount. Despite the difficult
financial issues facing this community, the city council approved this
extraordinary city match of funds to expedite the exhibits and to
emphasize the funding of exhibits as a priority to support tourism in
our county.
The exhibits are custom made and will not be ready in time for
the February opening, but funds available will allow exhibits to be
completed in the fiscal year 2010.
Page 74
December 15, 2009
We all appreciate your assistance with this urgent need and
appreciate the support you have given to the museum and city in the
past.
Thank you.
Did anyone have any questions?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: We have people with questions, but we'll
ask them after all the speakers. Thank you.
MR. POPOFF: All right. I thank you all very much. And
Happy Holidays.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Jerry Masters. He'll be
followed by Kathy Miracco.
MR. MASTERS: Thank you, Madam Chairman and
Commissioners. We on Marco are really excited and eager to open
our historical museum to see it completed and ready to go. Right now
it's a diamond in the rough, but when completed, it will be a sparkling
jewel in Collier County.
I have some pictures to show you of our proposed ideas for the
life-size dioramas that we are going to have. And I think it will give
you a good idea of what we are planning to do.
So if I may, Mr. Ochs. Thank you very much.
The first picture actually is kind of an overview of the entrance.
All of the pictures you're going to see are rough, rough drafts, as I
said, the diamond in the rough. But fortunately these diamonds will
come to fruition and something beautiful will appear.
But we're just going to look very quickly at the pictures that you
are seeing here. The Calusa intro panel. This is the Spanish discovery
area. And you can see a village at work and preparing. The Calusa's
were getting ready for the day starting out. This is building their
many homes and that area of construction. And finally we have this
one showing another exterior that will be provided.
Now, these will all contain life-size manikins, and it will be quite
a beautiful sight to see. It's -- this whole thing has got me so excited, I
Page 75
December 15, 2009
can hardly believe it.
One other final one showing more of the Calusa. And I guess we
have one other one even. So lots of Calusa here, but excellent --
excellent preparation for what we're planning to do.
The final thing I wanted to show you is actually the museum and
where it stands. Incidentally, the pictures that you saw -- these are the
rough designs that were completed by Advanced Staging
Technologies to give us an idea of where we were going, but now
we're all set to go.
At any rate, if you'll notice the very top of the photo is our
museum. It actually is two buildings, one being an administration and
museum, the other actually being a history hall.
The administration and the main museum are tied together by a
hallway. So it all works. They're all using the same air-conditioning.
Everything that's being used is going to be absolutely the same.
To the left, incidentally, is the library, if you can see it, and the
building of the Rose Hall right now, and that will be completed, I
believe, in January.
At any rate, I just wanted to share these possibilities with you to
show you where we're going and what we're going to do, and
hopefully our diamond in the rough will become a sparkling jewel in
Collier County.
Thank you very much.
MS. FILSON: Next speaker is Kathy Miracco. She'll be
followed by Betsy Perdichizzi.
MS. MIRACCO: Good morning. Hi. I'm Kathy Miracco, and
I'm going to follow up with what Jerry presented with a little bit of an
outline of the cost of these particular dioramas that Jerry presented to
you.
The first one, I guess, is the Calusa introduction panel which
would be 12-by-lO feet and introduce the visitor to the Calusa empire
with timelines, descriptions and Calusa geographic realm. The cost --
Page 76
_.....__._.__.,____,__~......~_..___..___~____..~._..u_."
December 15, 2009
estimated cost is 21,000.
The Spanish records panel and artifact cases, again, is a 12-by-1O
panel with certain recorder reports that contain recorder reports of the
Spanish discovery of the Ca1usa for 35,000.
Then the Cushing expedition panel and artifacts cases will
discuss the expedition and its findings. This panel will lead the visitor
to the three windows in the vault where artifacts on loan from other
institutions can be securely displayed. The cost for that was $55,000.
The vault graphics, there are six panels that will hide -- hang
behind the windows, and they'll describe what the artifacts will be,
and they're interchangeable, for a cost of 24,000.
And the next page, the Calusa Village -- and this is really where
we've been concentrating our efforts on because we believe that would
give us the best bang for our buck. That's where we have the artifacts,
the Marco Cat that was found on Marco, and we believe that will be
the biggest draw.
So that village, as Jerry said, will depict the daily life of the
CaIusa in a diorama style with vignettes based on six to ten functions.
For example, canoe travel, net making, hunting, cooking, home
construction, warfare, social structure.
The village will simulate the levels of the Calusa society from
slave to king. Right now that estimate is $395,000.
Then the design service for the Calusa village, which is the
master plan which Ron Jamro has suggested to us rightfully that we
need a plan for all of these plans for the villages. So that plan alone
would cost 19,412.
Then we have the art and the nonhistorical exhibit area for
I 1,500, then the project management for AST at this point would be
$95,000.
So the total estimated cost just for the Calusa village and the
project management and the master plan would be $65,912 (sic). So
that estimate cost included the research, the elemental design __
Page 77
.,,-.-"-'.......---.--- .- '_..- ".,-.,---~
December 15, 2009
CHAIRMAN FIALA: You said 655,000?
MS. MIRACCO: '5,000, right.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. You said 65-.
MS. MIRACCO: Sorry.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: That's all right.
MS. MIRACCO: That would really be good -- research,
elemental design, production design, engineering, fabrication, graphic
development and graphic fabrication, transportation and installation of
all the components.
It does not include the design services and fabrications for the
other two rooms in the museums, which are the pioneer and the
modern Marco room, or moving any existing Collier County or
Historical Society displays into the museum.
So that was a lot in one little quick sentence. Any questions?
We'll save them till the end. Thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Betsy Perdichizzi. She'll be
followed by Nancy Webster.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Congratulations on being Citizen of the
Year.
MS. PERDICHIZZI: Thank you, thank you. We, too, have
some facts and figures. It will be these.
I want you to know that the Marco Island Historical Society and
the museum supports tourism both in the state, in the county, and in
our community. And we've had the opportunity in the past year or so
to pull together some facts on tourism.
In Florida there is a $10 return for every dollar spent on historic
preservation, and a $7 return for every dollar spent on cultural
programs, and 74.9 percent of Florida tourists visit a museum or they
participate in some type of heritage or cultural activity while on
vacation.
Florida museums welcome over 28 million visitors a year. And
what we want to do is get some of those visitors right down to Collier
Page 78
December 15, 2009
County and to Marco Island.
Now, these facts have been pulled together by the American
Museum Association by using the model that Mr. Jack Wert uses for
the Tourist Development Council and from our own records of
visitations. We on Marco have two little hard-to-find, unguided, self--
self-manned museums on Marco Island, and in -- they have received --
we have -- in the year 2007, we had 4,200 visitors visit that year; 20
percent in Florida, and that was, I think, 60 percent out of state.
I don't need to give you -- you can see for yourself that the year
2010, we will have 10,000 visitors; in 2011, 20,000; up to 2013,
35,000. This represents millions of dollars in food, lodging, people
staying in hotels in beds. And we would solicit your support. Thank
you.
MS. FILSON: Your next speaker is Nancy Webster. She'll be
followed by Kris Hellend.
MS. WEBSTER: Gosh, I'm not from Marco Island. I am Nancy
Webster and I'm a docent at Palm Cottage. I do the walking tours, and
I always start with the Calusa. The Calusa mean a lot to me, but I also
volunteer at the Collier County Historical Museum. I've been at all
four museums, because history matters to me, and that's why I'm here
today.
We have an opportunity to tell our story to tourists with this new
Marco Museum. It's a unique opportunity to make a real difference
with quality exhibits, not two boards nailed together with plaster of
Paris and paint. And I think some of the exhibits that I've seen at their
little tiny museums that she just mentioned are not much better. But
we need to find the money and we need to get started now, because
there's a story to tell here in Collier County of Marco Island where the
Calusa presence was strong. And after all, not everyone who visits
likes the smell of roses at the Botanical Garden. Give us a choice,
make a good museum, please.
Tourists really want to know about the area they're visiting. It's
Page 79
December 15, 2009
at the background that they'd like to know. So I'm asking all of you to
step into history with us and make it happen.
Thank you very much.
MS. FILSON : Your final speaker is Kris Hellend.
MR. HELLEND: Thank you, Commissioners. And I'd like to
read to you a -- the editorial that was from the Naples Daily News this
mornmg.
Marco Island History buffs have a modest proposal for Collier
County Commissioners. Please match the $350,000 that this island
city council has offered to invest in exhibits for the new Marco
Museum that opens in February. And, of course, we've heard that it's
really not going to be opened as yet.
The museum needs an extra boost after raising four-and-a-half
million to get the rest of the job done, including construction of the
exhibits. Marco and its museums have quite a story to tell. Although
we think of Marco in terms of high-rises and actually dredging and
filling ofland in which many of the islanders now live, it has been
home to the Calusa Indians and some of the modern-day Collier first
inhabitants and traders.
Collier County was a network of museums -- has a network of
museums in place. It is educational for visitors of all ages, and
especially in Marco's case can help stimulate activity and business
through the island community.
In other parts of the county, including the City of Naples, the
county is looked upon as a lone or primary money source. Marco is
looking for a last-minute investment that would make the county a
proud and appropriate partner.
The city is adding some sweetener. These days of opportunity to
turn $350,000 into twice that much for the great public purpose is
mighty appealing.
And I'd liked to add that, think about it, we are -- this is going to
be a county museum, so we can add -- by adding 350,000 or more to
Page 80
December 15, 2009
the offer from the city, you are getting $350,000 of city money into
what will be a county museum. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. That was our last speaker?
MS. FILSON : Yes, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, fine. Very good.
And now, did -- were we supposed to hear from staff, or can we
just move on to commissioners?
MR. OCHS : Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. And I have a question for the
county attorney. Being that this item is involved with the other, do we
need two separate motions, County Attorney?
MR. KLA TZKOW: You need two separate motions. Your rules
provide that you may hear an item not on the agenda by majority vote
of the board, so that before any action be taken, I would recommend
you see if the rest of the board wants to hear this. If you get three
votes, then you can hear it and vote on it and discuss it. If you don't
get three votes, I would suggest putting it over to the next meeting.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I have to have three votes to discuss, or to
hear this one or to vote on this one or how --
MR. KLATZKOW: Yeah. Your rules say the board may take
no action on any matter that's not a part of the official agenda unless
the majority of the board present consents. So if the majority of you
consent to hear it now, you may do so.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: May I have some nods, please, from
everybody?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, discuss?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Sure, sure. We'll start with
Commissioner Henning. He was the first light on.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You know, I like this agenda
item. It lays it out -- lays it out pretty good. It also gives our residents
a feeling of, you know, we're doing our best to try to roll over some
monies. My question is, do we have a list of anticipated closeout
Page 81
December 15,2009
dates of future projects?
MR. ISACKSON: Commissioner, are you referring to the
attachment in the ad valorem funds that are in your packet in terms of
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. I mean, we have -- we
have some capital improvements going on today, and I'm -- I'm sure
they have a completion date. Is there -- does staff keep track of those
dates to see if -- where we're at?
MR. ISACKSON: I think that the answer to that question is, it's
a -- there's a regular discussion between the office of management and
budget, and though the individual divisions, there are fiscal staff
regarding the status of projects.
The determination of when to close a project out, obviously, is
triggered first down at the divisional level and then filters up to the
office of management and budget, and then there's decisions regarding
the available dollars, if any, and where those dollars go in any
particular fund.
What we're talking about here specifically is the ad valorem.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Correct.
MR. ISACKSON: And we scrub that list relative to closeout and
things of that nature and the dollars that might be available for you to
look at.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Correct.
MR. ISACKSON: I can't speak specifically on project by
project, but that's in general terms what we're --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Do you anticipate bringing
some other projects to the BCC after closeout for, you know,
reallocation? I'm not talking about gas taxes or anything. I'm talking
about ad valorem.
MR. OCHS: Commissioner, we'll continue to monitor these and
either bring them to you as part of your budget guidance in February
when we set guidance for next year, or we could do this, you know,
Page 82
December 15,2009
periodically during the year ifthe board would like on a quarterly
basis. But I think the point Mr. Isackson is making is that because of
the nature of these projects, the amounts that are in any specific
project fund at any given time would be the subject of draws by
contractors, change orders, whether there's delays in projects or
whether we're able to accelerate some projects.
So it's a fairly fluid continuum in terms of the amount that's in
there at any given point in time. But we can do that on a quarterly
basis if the board would like, or we could do it twice a year.
We -- as Mark said, we look at it every month with our project
managers to make sure that we have sufficient funding available and
that we're not overfunded at these projects.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Well, it sounds like you
got a handle on it. That's mainly my question.
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir. We monitor it closely.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. It's tough times. You
know, I appreciate the recommendations. I think we need to prepare
for the future, and we never know what the future's going to bring.
There might be some opportunities where the board wants to jump on
some things too, so --
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, I appreciate this little
exercise, I really do, but -- and I realize that we have a disaster
pending next year. I mean, this is the way it's looking right now as far
as our revenue stream goes?
MR.OCHS: Well, Commissioner, I think it's safe to say, based
on the preliminary information we're getting out of Tallahassee, that
there's going to be another reduction in taxable value that this board
and this staff will have to deal with in fiscal year 2011, yes, sir.
So we will be -- we'd be facing additional reductions in your --
not only your ad valorem revenues, but if the recession continues at
Page 83
December 15,2009
the state and local level, we may see challenges with your other
primary revenues, those being state-shared revenues, sales taxes,
gasoline taxes.
So not unlike the budget process that you-all just went through
this year.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So we're going through an --
these exercises to try to condition ourselves for -- put ourselves in a
better condition for what we see coming down the road? Is that what
you --
MR.OCHS: Yes, sir. I mean, simply stated, every dollar we can
save and set aside in this fiscal year to bring forward into the next year
reduces your need to raise additional ad valorem dollars in the
subsequent year.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. I do have some
questions, if I may.
On Page 15 of 19. It's a weird little thing down at the bottom. It
says, projects in need of funding, and it doesn't have anything in the
other columns, just under available for reserves. Can somebody
explain where that came in where there doesn't show any money
coming in, but it shows money going out?
MR.OCHS: Yes, sir, go ahead.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And it's kind of strange that
both of them are in my district.
MR. ISACKSON: Commissioner, I'll let Marla Ramsey -- she'd
be able to provide you some information on that.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Could you blow it up just a little bit
for older people, the senior citizens up here?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, you old fogies.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yeah, my 15 of 19 looks different than
his.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We did that on purpose.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. We don't all get the same
Page 84
December 15, 2009
information. We don't want to violate sunshine.
MS. RAMSEY: For the record, Marla Ramsey, Public Services
Administration.
The first item that you have is for the A TV ITNT park. And if
you recall, there was a resolution that we did that said we would help,
as our contribution to that project with Miami-Dade, we would pay the
permit fees. Permit fees are about $60,000, and we need about
$43,000 more in order to be able to make that transfer. That's what
the first item is for.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So what we're doing here is,
after all the work we did in recognizing the importance of an A TV
park and the commission agreeing to it, at this point in time we're
saying that's no longer an option, we're going to remove it from the
books and put it in reserve; is that correct?
MS. RAMSEY: No. What it says is that of those dollars we
were going to put into reserves, just be aware that there's these two
outstanding items that we still need some funds for that have not been
allocated directly to the project.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. So help me with this
now. These funds have never been allocated, so this is something
similar to what Commissioner Fiala's asking for, for funds over and
above what have originally been allocated to our budget process?
MS. RAMSEY: Well, we've done this after the budget process.
This is a resolution that came after the budget that said we were going
to provide those fees. We didn't really know what that fee number
was. That fee number's about $60,000 from the start to the end of this
first phase element that they have.
Joe could tell you more about what the specific fees are, but the
allocation's about 60,000 that we've committed. And right now we
don't have a project number in SAP that has the 60,000 sitting in it.
It's just a commitment that we've made. We don't have to pay it yet.
But when we do, we'll need to make a budget amendment in order to
Page 85
December 15,2009
do so from a reserve fund.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: But by doing this, we
effectively remove consideration unless somebody wants to try to
resurrect it from the dead?
MS. RAMSEY: No, I don't believe so, no.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, how can we move money
and not do it? We're doing one or the other.
MR. OCHS: Let me try to explain, sir. What we're doing is
moving that into a reserve fund, not into your general fund
contingency reserve, but a capital reserve fund. So if the project
comes forward in this current fiscal year, we can come back to the
board, ask for the board's permission to do a budget amendment to
take that funding out of that capital reserve for that project and spend
the money.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. And I'm not saying I'm
opposed to that because it has to come back before the board anyways,
and we know that. So in other words, this doesn't effectively put a
stake through the heart ofthis item?
MR.OCHS: No, sir, it does not.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And the same thing with the
Immokalee Airport Park?
MR.OCHS: Yes, sir, same thing. It doesn't kill the project.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Now, a question. On the
Immokalee Airport Park, is there a grant coming in from the CRA on
that or some other funds?
MS. RAMSEY: Yes. We've been working with the CRA to do a
match to this particular site plan, and this is the one where we're going
to take out the road and increase the parking and put in a little
pathway in there to help with the festivals that they have, because
currently during the festival they do it on both sides of the roads, and
what we want to do is make it safer for those festival goers by moving
the road.
Page 86
December 15,2009
It's about 190,000 is where the contract came in at, and CRA is
interested in helping with that. So it's about the $90,000 on behalf of
both of us. Yeah, it's about -- a little over 100,000 total.
And I believe that the Airport Authority is also going to help with
some fill. That's going to reduce the price as well. So it's a three-way
partnership.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So these two things. The money
does exist, so we're moving it to a reserve account to come back at a
point in time to be able to discuss it when it comes time to pay the
bills or to go forward with the contract?
MS. RAMSEY: We believe that of the $362,000 that we have
allocated here as could go into reserves, that we need about 150,000 of
the $362,000 for these two projects in order to have them go forward.
So we're just identifying of the 600 -- 362,000 that there's about 150
that we kind of have a project in the process but has not been officially
moved into the project account.
It's still sitting into reserves. We just didn't want them to get
totally wiped out and then not be able to go forward with the two
projects. We wanted to bring it your attention.
MR.OCHS: But to be cautious, Commissioner, we chose to
recommend to the board that we put that whole 3.5 million into the
capital project reserve funds so that those funds would not be spent
unless the board had visibility on them in the future and gave specific
authorization.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And I'm fine with that, because
we already do that. When everything comes back here, before we do
any contract and we spend any dollars, it still has to come back. So I
mean, we're just saying the same thing and repeating it twice.
How much different is it from the normal process that we go
through?
MR.OCHS: Well-- if that money is in the project budget and
not in the reserves, the staff can go ahead and spend that money up to
Page 87
December 15, 2009
the authorization levels that your purchasing policy provides for.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So in other words, these funds
can be diverted someplace else, and when the time did come, they're
no longer available?
MR.OCHS: No, no. They're going to go in the project reserve.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Let me jump on that, too. So say, for
instance, now -- as it sits, this money is dedicated to the -- I mean,
we've been looking for this A TV park for how many years, six years,
seven years, something like that? And we've wanted this money
dedicated to that. Now, if it goes into this fund and three
commissioners decide to vote against it, then do you just lose the
money?
I mean, just like, you know, I need their vote for this thing, and I
could just lose it. Would the A TV park or the lmmokalee park lose
the money if they didn't get -- now that it's in a pot rather than
assigned to a specific item, could they lose the money?
MR. OCHS: No, ma'am, not without the board's direction.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: See.
MR.OCHS: Because all these -- I'll ask Mark to elaborate, but
you're not losing the funding. It's still staying in 306, which is your
park capital project reserves.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: As long as everybody votes for it, you
can get it back out and put it to those things?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And you still have to vote for it
anyways. And so I don't see the difference.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Other than the fact we
designated, the fact we recognized that fund as a different entity.
MR.OCHS: Well, if the funding -- if the need doesn't
materialize in this fiscal year, then you have those funds sitting in that
project reserve that can roll forward to that project in fiscal year 2011.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And I guess that goes to the
Page 88
December 15, 2009
question, is that money going to be utilized this year? Do you know
where these projects are in the -- in the sausage maker?
MS. RAMSEY: Again, Marla Ramsey, for the record. We
anticipate that these two projects are going to come in this fiscal year;
we anticipate that. Of course, you know, GMP amendments and
whatnot are coming up for the TNT project, and so we're just in that
process right now.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. Another question.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: What's TNT?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: We see these two here--
MS. RAMSEY: That's the jetport A TV project. It's got different
names to it.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Why is it only these two
projects are listed here and not other ones? I'm curious about that. I
mean, you know, I know there's no plot out there against District 5,
but the fact that there's only two listed here and they're both District 5
gives me great reason for concern.
MS. RAMSEY: Because we didn't have any funding available
for the new fiscal year, so what our plan was is to take funds that were
savings in other projects and to apply them to these two projects
during the fiscal year.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm going to trust that
everything you're saying is exactly the way it is. And when this thing
comes back, I hope I'm not terribly disappointed along with the public
I represent. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Mark, where do we stand at the
present time with our reserves? Are we at a safe level?
MR. ISACKSON: Well, I think to answer that question you've
got to -- we segment our reserves by funds. And I know a lot of the
commissioners don't like to hear that, but that's how we do it in terms
of fund accounting across the organization.
Page 89
December 15, 2009
Your general fund contingency reserves are less than
2-and-a-half percent of your total expenses.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Right now?
MR. ISACKSON: That correct. Now, that's just in the general
fund. You know, your capital funds have reserves, but those reserves
are there and are a product of the budget cycle that -- this little graphic
that we had placed up on the visualizer before.
The reserves that I get concerned about, and I think County
Manager Ochs gets reserved (sic) about, are those that are in 111 and
001.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
MR. ISACKSON: Those are the reserves that I think get our
attention, certainly, as we go through the budget process.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: What kind of a shortfall do you
anticipate because of the economy in regards to meeting our
requirements for the debt service? What's your best guess, how much
we had a shortfall?
MR. ISACKSON: Well, I -- Ms. Usher has a couple of graphics
that we can put up on the visualizer regarding the debt that's being
incurred in 301, which is an ad valorem-based operation. And we can
give you a little depiction of what that would --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Where we're at with that.
MR. ISACKSON: Well, I'll let Susan walk through this. It's a--
to me it's a very good visualization of where we're at in terms of the
capital allocation.
MS. USHER: Good morning. Susan Usher from the Office of
Management and Budget.
Every year you give us about a third of a mill for general fund for
capital-wide, capital projects. This graph is showing how that
money's been spent over the last few years.
In 2006 the blue line, or the blue part of the graph, is showing--
we have debt out there for non-impact fee-related-type projects. This
Page 90
December 15,2009
-- and our third of a mill pays for that portion. So you can see that
blue solid line goes pretty much straight across for all the years.
The red are the impact fee loans that we've been doing over the
last couple of years. Because impact fee's funding has been dropping,
what we've had to do is use our third of a mill to backfill to make sure
that we can pay our debt service obligations.
And the green line is money that has actually gone into capital.
Those green -- that green chunky line is going to Skip for facilities
management to repair, to maintain, to renovate all our -- all our
facilities, it goes to Mr. Axelrod for IT infrastructure, and then it goes
to other -- like last year we repaired or we overhauled the helicopter.
Many years ago we bought a bus, an R V -type vehicle for emergency
management. So these like once-in-a-blue-moon-type capital projects
are also funded with cash, and that's all in the green line.
Now, as you can see, when impact fees were starting to fall and
we had to back fill that with our one-third of a mill, we had to stop
funding some of our capital projects.
And as you can see in 2010, we really didn't fund any capital
projects. We didn't give money for facilities or for IT or
once-in-a-blue-moon-type things. We've told everybody to please sit
tight under this situation.
Now, looking in 2011, if impact fees continue to fall, and as
you've heard earlier, as our taxable values, we anticipate are going to
fall again in 2011, I'm expecting that block that's just highlighted in
red, but it has a white color inside, the very top of that, the third of a
mill is not going to cover what I think we're going to need to help the
impact fee funds pay for their debt service.
So I mean, it's too early to tell. It's only December. We start the
budget process, and we come to you in June, and I'll have a better
idea. But I'm looking at this and thinking that there's a possibility that
we could be short out of the third of a mill to help the impact fee funds
pay for their debt. And that's also assuming that we have no money
Page 91
December 15, 2009
for capital to pay -- to give to facilities management or to IT.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: My other question is -- and maybe
Marla can answer this, or Mark, you might be able to answer this.
What do we have -- what kind of monies do we have set aside at
the present time for this Marco Museum?
MS. RAMSEY: Marla Ramsey, for the record. We have no
capital dollars set aside currently for the Marco Island Museum, but
we did put $80,000 into our operating budget in order to help with the
electricity and keeping the doors open of the buildings for when we do
open it and to provide one staff person for this fiscal year.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. My concern is that we have
a lot of issues on our plate in regards to -- we had people come today
and want -- looking for funding to harden buildings, we have people
that came here to address limerock roads, we have people that are
coming here in regards to the people at Marco that are looking for
money for the museum. And when I look at this bleak picture of
where we're headed -- and obviously we've got some big decisions to
make -- my feeling is, I'd just as soon -- like to put this money in the
bank and then put this museum on hold for a while until we figure out
where we're at, and maybe we can address this at a later date in
regards to coming up with the money.
I have some serious concerns here about the shortfalls that we're
going to have and how we're going to address them. And we were
able to raise the millage a slight amount last year, and we may have to
do that again this year, but I sure don't want to raise it because of the
fact that we're pushing money out the door.
I think that we have to do due diligence to make sure that we
address the issues of making sure we have enough reserves in case
something comes up, and we also have to make sure that we take care
of any unforeseen things that may come up in health, safety, and
welfare.
And I understand people are looking for money, but I'd really
Page 92
December 15,2009
like to see if we can't put this on a shel f and address it at a later time to
see where we're at after we go through the budget cycle.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioners Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Thank you very much, Madam
Chair.
Leo, this has been a good analysis, but I'm not sure it really gives
us all the information we need. You're concentrating on a fairly small
subset of our revenue and expenses, and I understand the reasons for
that.
But tell me how difficult it would be for you to provide us with
an overall analysis of the financial circumstances of the county if we
do sustain a 15 percent reduction in property tax revenue and, perhaps,
the same amount of reduction in gasoline tax and sales tax revenues.
And give us an -- not right now. I'm not looking for something on the
fly, okay.
MR. OCHS: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: But if you could give us an
indication of our overall financial condition making those assumptions
that you think are appropriate -- my figures might not be appropriate,
but I'm expecting a 15 percent reduction in property tax revenue. But
__ and then tell us how we service our entire debt with those kind of
reductions in funding. That's going to be very, very important.
Now, if you'll put this back -- that slide back up for a moment. I
think we need to point out something so that -- yeah -- that people
have a clear understanding of what we're doing here.
Although we're in very dire financial circumstances, we have
done some smart things here. For example, the loans that we're
making to pay the debt for impact fee funds, those are to be paid back
to us. We're merely helping the impact fee funds pay their debt for a
while, and we expect that money to be paid back to us. But you see
that we're running out of money to even do that. And there's no way
that we can get those impact funds to pay back the money anytime
Page 93
December 15,2009
within the next couple of years. So we need to find a way to survive
for that period of time.
So is that possible for you to get that information to us in a
relatively short period of time?
MR.OCHS: Yes, sir. We could have it back--
COMMISSIONER COYLE: By five clock this afternoon?
MR. OCHS: No, not that soon.
MR. ISACKSON: I think, Commissioner, based -- we can make
certain assumptions on taxable value, get you that information, begin
to calculate the potential impact. I mean, essentially what you're
doing is, we were planning on doing that as part of your budget policy
in February.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah.
MR. ISACKSON: It looks like you want it accelerated. We can
__ maybe the first or second meeting in January we can provide some
preliminary information leading into that policy, if that's sufficient.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That would be great. That will help
us formulate the budget policy a lot more clearly. That way we'll have
a good overall estimate of where we're going. And you guys are better
qualified than I to try to make estimates on impact -- well, impact fee
revenues and sales taxes and gasoline taxes. So if you could get that,
that would helpful.
Now, the other thing that we've sort of ignored in our discussion,
we actually have two questions before us. One is, what do we do with
this $3.9 million or so, and how are we going to address the needs of
the museum in Marco?
The Historical Society has done a wonderful job of raising
money and building a fantastic facility in Marco, and I would hope
that we would be able to find a way to help construct the necessary
exhibits so that the museum can open. But in saying that -- and I'll do
whatever I can to facilitate that. We have to do it in the right way.
And I -- that is not even on the agenda today. It hasn't been
Page 94
December 15, 2009
advertised. And as much as I know that Commissioner Fiala would
like to get this resolved -- it's an important project for her and for you
and for all of us -- I think that had it been advertised that we were
going to dole out $350,000 for a project this afternoon, or today, there
would have been people here saying, I want part of that excess money,
too. Can you give me some of this for limerock roads or for other
things?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Did you say limerock roads?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes, I did.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. I will not vote for limerock
roads, just to make it clear.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well--
COMMISSIONER COYLE: But anyway, the point I'm getting
at is, I would feel more comfortable if we advertised this issue so that
it could be argued completely with people in the audience who want to
hear that debate, because right now the issue of allocating money for
the Marco Island Museum is not on the agenda. It was not advertised
to be on the agenda. This was only a budget report of money that the
staff was recommended to be placed in reserves.
So I would urge you to let us do it at a publicly advertised
hearing. And I will make a commitment to Commissioner Fiala that
I'll do whatever I can to find a way to do it, but I don't know how we
come up with that kind of money this quickly. I would like to pursue
some additional grants and see if we can do it that way.
Now, let me tell what you I think would be helpful to us all. We
don't have a contract, to the best of my knowledge, or a bid even, to
construct these displays. We don't know how much it's going to cost.
Somebody has made an estimate. But do we have the people who are
going to do this work under contract? Have we competitively bid it?
For this amount of money, we should be competitively bidding this
stuff.
Page 95
~...>-,."._".,_.~..-".......---.__..._"_-_"_-"---'-"----"'- .
December 15, 2009
And so it's -- it would be helpful if we get to -- when we get to
the point of making a financial commitment if we know what our
financial commitment is going to be. Now, someone has proposed to
me, look, why don't you agree to match the $350,000 that the Marco
city government has promised and then specify that's the end of your
commitment for building displays. I don't know if that will work.
Maybe it will, maybe it won't. But in any event, we need to find out
what our commitment is. There's a lot of confusion about what Collier
County's commitment is. People have talked about a million-dollar
commitment here. There is no million-dollar commitment here and
never has been.
The only commitment in the contract, and this was six-and-a-half
years ago, was that we would build the displays, and that was a really,
really badly written contract because it doesn't say what the cost of
those displays is. So somebody can determine the cost of the displays
is going to be $5 million. They can interpret the contract as meaning
we've got to pay that. Well, you know, it doesn't work that way.
We've got to be in the approval process. And if we think the displays
are too expensive and we can't pay for it, we're going to have to
change the displays, and you're not going to like that, I don't think.
You've got a wonderful design, and I'd love to do it the way you've got
it laid out.
But rather than ramble on and on, those are the things that bother
me, and I'd like to take some time to fill in the gaps and get those
things done so -- but the last thing I want to do is to leave the people
who have put their own money and their time and their effort into
building this thing out on a limb. I think we should still maintain our
commitment to getting that museum built to the level of quality that
you all expect. It's just that we might need some more time to get over
these financial problems and maybe get some grants to help us along.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thanks for your support. I appreciate
that. You don't know how much I appreciate that. And we did apply
Page 96
December 15,2009
for grants, by the way. When we found that we didn't have any
funding sources available, we applied for a million-five, and we were
denied, which was sad, but anyway, we tried that.
And I just want to add before I call on the other commissioners,
I'm not even looking at new dollars. I'm not even -- I'm just taking
money that was left over that had been allocated out of our budget for
other projects and the budgets came in below -- or the projects came in
below budget. I'm just saying, take that money that we've already had
-- it's not new money or anything -- and let's apply it to this. I don't
want to see us losing $350,000. I want to see us moving forward so
that now we have a project that we can open and display.
I don't know how much longer we can -- how much time do you
need, the museum people -- where's Craig? Commissioner Coyle was
saying that he would like to bring this back -- well, now, of course, it
won't be till the second meeting in January, or to the first meeting in
January, if we could do that.
MR. WOODWARD: Yeah. I think that question may be better
answered by your own staff who knows how long it takes to get
displays than I do. So I would defer -- you know, I think Ron Jamro is
here, and he would be better equipped to answer that than I do (sic).
MR. JAMRO: Good afternoon, Commissioners. Ron Jamro,
your Museum Director.
The question maybe, how long is the Marco offer good? That
would be -- that's Craig's department again. I'm not sure about that.
But we're probably looking at design development and then final
completion, you need about five months.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Wow.
MR. JAMRO: Which is why I had hoped we would have already
started the first part with the TDC grant. We could have had the
answers to Commissioner Coyle's questions if we'd moved right along
and got that study under way with our exhibit firm. And we do have
an exhibit firm under contract to the county that we use, so there
Page 97
December 15, 2009
would be no bid from that point of view.
And their best guess, from what -- all the ideas they've heard
down on Marco and future improvements to the exhibits, one -- $1.5
million, but what we're discovering right now is that we're building
exhibits for -- very economically. Prices on everything have gone
down, and we're being pleasantly surprised at some of the prices we're
paying for plexiglass, and the high-tech things have really come down
in price, so that's good news.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Is there a way -- is there a way for us to at
least let them know that we're committing this $350,000 so they can
move forward without much of a delay and yet bring it back? I don't
know if something like that can even be done. I just hate to put this off
any longer.
MR. WOODWARD: As far as how long the city council -- we
have the chairman of the city council here so, you know, I can defer to
him. But my understanding from being at the city council meeting is
they saw it was important to get the exhibits funded in fiscal year 2010
and -- so that things can be done next year. It's going to -- they may
not -- it may not -- it may take longer to actually -- because -- to figure
out what you're going to do and how long it takes to design it. It may
take six, nine months. I think the five months may be really pushing it
a little fast.
So that's the museum. You know, we'd like to get it done this
summer and get it ready so next season it's -- there's something to
really see there. And of course, you know, people could see things
while it's being done. You could still go in. We have two little
museums. We'll be moving those items over. And you know, the
people can see that. But they need the -- there's a lot of enthusiasm, a
lot of enthusiasm, and we want to keep that enthusiasm, and it's -- we
truly believe -- you saw the data. We think this is money being spent
now that will pay back, you know. The restaurants and -- that's why
your TDC supported this.
Page 98
December 15,2009
And we really -- we really think it's -- you're spending -- it's like
a little stimulus plan, you know. I mean, I don't know how you --
whether we believe in that or not, you know, quite honestly, but
maybe that's the best approach to look at.
And, you know, after this match money's not available, and
again, our council chair is here, then, you know, there would -- it's not
going to be on the table indefinitely. The City of Marco has other
needs too, and this money could be used for many other things, but
then you'd going to be paying at full dollar rather than 50 cents.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you, Craig.
Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. Commissioner Fiala,
when we began this discussion, you made a motion to be able to
discuss it for consideration.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Uh-huh.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I second your motion. I hope it's
not a moot point, but I think it's -- nothing harmed by open discussion
to be able to keep it going forward.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Do I -- from that motion and
second, do I need to get nods or something that we discuss this?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We already did.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I know that, but I'm asking.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, I want to make it legal so
that it could be --
MR. KLA TZKOW: No, you're legal.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'm sorry. Can I speak?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: We're legal discussing it. My only
concern was to make a final decision without it being properly
advertised, okay. That was my only concern.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, I second Commissioner
Fiala's motion.
Page 99
December 15, 2009
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Thank you. Thank you very
much.
Let's see. I have Commissioner Halas again.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: The other thing that needs to be
brought up when -- Mark, when you bring all this back, is proposed
unfunded mandates that may be coming down from the state. I think
that we're going to be impacted heavily this year, and that's another
part of this equation with this bar graph that's here. So we don't know
how big this top chunk is. So I think that's another issue that needs to
be addressed, because there is going to be some additional unfunded
mandates coming down from the state.
And like I said, I don't -- I don't feel at all comfortable about this.
I believe that -- I understand where Marco Island is and I understand
what Commissioner Fiala's trying to address, but I'm also looking at
health, safety, and welfare, and I'm also looking at the bottom line as
far as what it's going to take to generate revenues to make sure that we
have a balanced budget.
And we're -- you know, we don't make money here. We're not
the federal government, and we have to come up with a balanced
budget. So I'm just looking down the road, and I -- I see storm clouds,
and I don't like it, okay?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm going to make a motion to
approve staffs recommendation.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And the reason I'm making it,
there's -- it doesn't close the door to do a budget amendment to do any
type of funding. That still could be done any particular time.
But what I hear, Commissioner, is there is enough support to
listen further and potentially fund the exhibits for the Marco Island
Museum.
But here's what I want, besides emailing that graph to me, you
Page 100
December 15,2009
know, I don't know if -- I mean, we hear it all the time about the board
opening up a building or putting in landscaping and that. Why are you
spending money at this time? You know, you're crying about you're
short and you don't have enough money and you're asking me for
more money but you're putting in this beautiful whatever it is.
So the question that I would have when it comes back is, is it -- is
it absolutely necessary for that type of a display? Not a cardboard
box. Something that, you know, that is sufficient for what's being
displayed.
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I mean, you have a lot of staff
that has done fitted buildings, and I'm sure they can give us that type
of analysis.
One thing I would hate to -- I would want to be proud, if I vote
for funding something that is not necessary in these economic times,
that the citizens are getting a bang for their buck.
So with that, I'm ready to vote on the motion so we can go to our
time certain.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Could I ask if the motion maker
would include in his motion direction to staff to at least pursue any
grant opportunities that might be appropriate for museums?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. I don't know if anybody's
-- who's supposed to be bringing this back. I mean, I heard Mr.
Woodward was going to bring it back, and I've heard -- I don't know
who's going to bring it back. Is it the citizens of Marco Island or is it
our staff?
MR. OCHS: I would suggest that we bring it back with --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
MR.OCHS: -- consultation with the historic society on Marco
Island. It is a joint venture, and we need to be front and center on this
with them.
Page 101
December 15, 2009
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. And part of my motion is
to direct staff to work with the Historical Society, bring that back for
funding of the displays, consider the commissioners' comments,
including grant opportunities, take a look at grant opportunities out
there.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: We've got -- he included this in his
motion, right?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No. We had a motion, you had
a motion.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, to discuss it. Oh.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, no. We discussed it, but we
never took a vote on the motion that you made and I seconded.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: What's your motion? I'm
confused.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: The motion was initially to discuss this
item, which we have just done, and Commissioner Coletta seconded
that. And although we've already discussed it, should we vote on that
motion?
MR. KLATZKOW: You can withdraw it and--
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Pardon me?
MR. KLATZKOW: Just consider it withdrawn. You've already
discussed it, so, you know.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. So we don't --legally we don't
need to have --
MR. KLATZKOW: No, you don't.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: -- that. Okay, fine. I'll withdraw my
motion.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And thank you, Commissioner Coletta.
Commissioner Coyle.
Page 102
December 15, 2009
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No, that was it. It was just left on
from last time. Whoops. My fault.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, okay. And while you're discussing
this and preparing this, I think the -- always the importance to tourism
should be -- should be -- you know, because we're talking about
money and what it does to generate, and so maybe this should be
included in the presentation when they come back.
Craig?
MR. WOODWARD: Yes, just very quickly. I wanted to
comment. Just so Commissioner Coyle knows, I did ask that this be a
specific item on the agenda and, you know -- said, you know, the
Marco Museum. I did ask for that. There was no intention not to
bring the public in. And I think we certainly realize that the whole
public should know.
And I think there is a difference between a lot of other people,
because a lot of people who come in front of you are not offering to
pay half of the freight.
Weare quite willing to work with your staff. And I'm not real,
real clear on what -- we've done our full presentation. I don't know
what more you need from us. Maybe your questions are more
directed to staff coming back for answers? We don't want to just have
to come back and put our presentation on again just so that the public
can hear it unless that's what you want. And I guess I'm asking, what
do you need from us, you know?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Our staff is going to be --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And by the way, he is right. He had asked
to have this as an agenda item and a time certain, and I sought advice,
and it was suggested that we didn't. We should couple it in this.
That's why it wasn't advertised. And in hindsight, it should have been,
and I'm sorry about that, because it -- not only was it suggested, but,
you know -- but anyway, that didn't happen.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I can assure you ifby chance the
Page 103
December 15, 2009
board should select me as the chairman next year, I will be happy to
facility it getting on the agenda for discussions. And what I would
like to see, and I think what I gather from the other commissioners, is
that they'd like to see an analysis -- and it's really going to have to
come from our staff -- of what our commitment is going to be.
You know, I think we just heard that if we chip in 350,000 and
the City of Marco chips in 350,000, we haven't even satisfied half of
the commitment for the construction of the exhibit. So we need to
know where this is going because we're not only making commitments
to build exhibits, but we're making commitments to operate and
maintain the museum over time.
And while in good times I would not be at all concerned about
that because it's well worth it, in bad times when we might default on
a bond or a loan, we have to be more careful. And timing then
becomes an issue.
So -- but from speaking for myself, I don't want anyone to
interpret my remarks of caution to be a failure of resolve in helping
you get this thing done.
MR. WOODWARD: Okay.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And I appreciate that. And you know --
and when we supported the zoo and when they wanted to eliminate
their rent -- and by the way, we thought that was the right thing to do
because we knew that the public would be able to enjoy that. And
yes, that's money that we don't have coming in every single year, and
we were happy to do that we -- because we -- it was the right thing.
The museum will be open to the public free of charge forever
every single day of the week. And I would think that we would want
to, again, support the museum.
MR. WOODWARD: I'm just here to clarify, because the people
on Marco are going to be asking us, you know, what is the position of
Collier County; because they -- they put 350,000 down and they're
asking the position of Collier County, so I need to go -- we need to be
Page 1 04
December 15, 2009
able -- the people in this room need to be able to go back and answer
that question.
And so you're basically looking for the staff to come back to you
with the dollars. As Ron Jamro mentioned, dollars are going a lot
further these days. So spending dollars now, you know, really goes a
lot further.
So the numbers, you know, we don't know what they're going to
do but, you know, your staff has got some preliminary numbers and
can get back to you on that. The total commitment -- and there's a
timeline issue. I understand the timeline issue because, you know,
you spent some money now, we can get the museum open. It may
take a number of years, quite frankly, depending on the economy.
We won't -- we're not -- the TDC monies is what we're looking
for to continue the exhibit funding, not this board, you know, and so
we understand your stresses. This is a one-time shot. We were
looking at TDC fundings, and a lot of those fundings went to
non-county museums. Unfortunately, our county museums are under,
you know, stress now, and that's why we're here.
So I'm looking for a clear answer so I can clarify to our
community what's going on. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Thank you.
So we have a motion on the floor and a second, and the motion
includes bringing this item back. It doesn't say when, but I would
guess ASAP, right? Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: 2011.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: No. Or is that your motion?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, let's vote.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
Page 105
December 15, 2009
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And so Leo, I would love it if you'd get it
back as soon as possible.
MR.OCHS: We will.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And also make sure you know
what our commitments for unfunded mandates are, too, because that's
going to be a part of the equation.
Item #12A
THE BOARD IN EXECUTIVE SESSION DISCUSSED
SETTLEMENT NEGOTIATIONS IN THE PENDING
LITIGATION CASES OF CRAIG GRIDER AND AMBER
GRIDER V. COLLIER COUNTY, CASE NO. 08-7794-CA AND
CRAIG GRIDER AND AMBER GRIDER V. COLLIER COUNTY,
CASE NO. 09-3164-CA, BOTH WHICH ARE NOW PENDING IN
THE TWENTIETH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR COLLIER
COUNTY, FLORIDA - CLOSED SESSION
MR. OCHS: Madam Chair, you have -- you had an 11 :30 time
certain and you have a 12 o'clock shade session that's announced. The
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And it was just pointed out to me that we
haven't had a break in about an hour and a half, right, and so -- will
this 11 :30 time certain go rather quickly; do you think?
MR. OCHS: Well, we've talked to the consultant who is here.
He can wait till after your one o'clock when you come back from your
session if you'd like, and if we could take that item just before you
start your advertised public hearings in the afternoon, we can go ahead
Page 106
December 15, 2009
and proceed to your 12 o'clock time certain.
Jeff, I think, has to make an announcement.
MR. KLA TZKOW: Yeah, just a very quick announcement for
the record, statutorily required. We're going to be breaking out and to
discuss the Griders in a closed session. I expect it to take about 20
minutes.
In attendance will be County Manager Leo Ochs, myself,
Assistant County Attorney Steve Williams, as well as the members of
the board.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you very much. We will return at
1 :30. Thank you. Yes?
MR. OCHS: One o'clock? 1 :30 you're coming back?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Do you -- you don't want to take an hour
for lunch? You want to just take a --
MR. OCHS: That's fine. It's the chair's prerogative. You've got
two more time certains this afternoon, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, okay. Well, we'll come back at one
o'clock then. We're all just here. We're not going anyplace.
MR.OCHS: Thank you.
(A shade session was had, and the proceedings continued as
follows:)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Would you all please take your seats.
Item #12B
DIRECTION TO THE COUNTY ATTORNEY REGARDING
STRATEGY RELATED TO SETTLEMENT NEGOTIATIONS IN
THE PENDING LITIGATION CASES OF CRAIG GRIDER AND
AMBER GRIDER V. COLLIER COUNTY, CASE NO. 08-7794-CA
AND CRAIG GRIDER AND AMBER GRIDER V. COLLIER
COUNTY, CASE NO. 09-3164-CA, BOTH WHICH ARE NOW
PENDING IN THE TWENTIETH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND
Page 107
December 15,2009
FOR COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA - MOTION FOR THE
COUNTY ATTORNEY TO DILIGENTLY DEFEND THE LOT
LINE ISSUE AND TO DISMISS THE APPEAL - APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Madam Chair, this takes you to your one o'clock
time certain, which is 12B, for the Board of County Commissioners to
provide direction to the county attorney regarding strategy related to
the settlement negotiations and in the pending litigation cases, it's
Craig Grider and Amber Grider versus Collier County, case number
08-7794-CA; and Craig Grider and Amber Grider versus Collier
County, case number 09- 3164-6A (sic), both -- which are now
pending in the 20th Judicial Circuit in and for Collier County, Florida.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Do I call on the county attorney
now?
MR. KLATZKOW: No. I'm seeking direction from the board.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Madam Chair?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'd like to make a motion to
direct the county attorney to diligently defend the board's previous
action to defend the lot line adjustment issue, and that would be the
only issue that we deal with on this issue.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. And do I hear a second? I'll
second that.
Okay. And we're not allowed to discuss this anyway, are we?
MR. KLATZKOW: Well, for clarification, I mean, do you want
us to continue the appeal or dismiss the appeal?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Dismiss the appeal.
MR. KLA TZKOW: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Is that what you need now,
County Attorney?
MR. KLATZKOW: Yes, it is.
Page 108
December 15,2009
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I have a motion on the floor and a
second. Any discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: All in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: That's a 5-0. Thank you.
Item #10D
RESOLUTION 2009-305: THE CONDEMNATION OF A FEE
SIMPLE INTEREST PARCEL AND A TEMPORARY
CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT PARCEL REQUIRED FOR THE
CONSTRUCTION OF REDESIGNED IMPROVEMENTS TO THE
INTERSECTION OF COLLIER AND DAVIS BOULEVARDS.
(COLLIER BOULEVARD PROJECT NO. 60092 AND DAVIS
BOULEVARD PROJECT NO 60073). ESTIMATED FISCAL
IMP ACT: $285,500 - ADOPTED AL TERNA TIVE #3
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, that takes you back to Item 10D,
which was an 11 :30 a.m. time certain. That was a recommendation to
adopt a resolution authorizing the condemnation of a fee-simple
interest parcel and a temporary construction easement parcel required
for the construction of redesign improvements to the intersection of
Collier and Davis Boulevard.
Mr. Jay Ahmad will present.
MR. AHMAD: Good afternoon, Madam Chair, Commissioners.
Page 1 09
December 15,2009
My name is Jay Ahmad, for the record.
This is a condemnation resolution before the board. We were
before you in 2008 where we -- where you adopted the resolution for a
condemnation. Since then we've been talking to the Florida
Department of Transportation, and we have devised the intersection of
Davis and Collier Boulevard.
There are actually two projects there, and we needed additional
right-of-way from the -- from the Hess gas station on the north side,
northwest corner of the intersection.
We must state certain things for the record. And I have with me
the engineer of record, Frank Scerbo with the firm, CH2MHill. I'd
like him, if you allow us, Madam Chair, to present and state certain
things in the record.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. Certainly.
MR. SCERBO: Good afternoon. As Mr. Ahmad said, my name
is Frank Sherbo. I'm with CH2MHill, the designer for the Collier
Boulevard improvements between Davis Boulevard and the main
Golden Gate Canal.
As part of this project, we're improving the northwest corner of
the Collier Boulevard/Davis Boulevard intersection.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Was that the stuff in yellow, by the way,
on the last one?
MR. SCERBO: On the existing condition slide? I'm sorry. On
the first one, yes. The limit of the project is shown in yellow on the
first slide, yes.
On the second slide we show the existing condition. And the
existing condition at this location, there are two right-turn lanes from
Collier Boulevard southbound to Davis Boulevard westbound.
Signing is present at this intersection, noting that trucks should use the
leftmost or inner right-turn lane, and cars should be using the
right-turn lane.
As shown on this graphic, a truck with the size classification of
Page 110
_"_,_..____"._'.._.M___.~..___,~".____~._.,.,_..,.......,...._. ..-"-.-".___'_.____"~~.___.,,____~.~.'__._n".___~____.".^'.__' ..,
December 15,2009
WB50 can make a right-hand turn from the inside right turn at the
same time as a car can make a right turn from the outside right-turn
lane.
The original design for this project is shown on this next graphic.
The design utilized 12-foot traveling lanes on Collier Boulevard and
maintained the two right-turn lanes from Collier Boulevard
southbound to Davis Boulevard westbound.
Regulatory signing along Collier Boulevard on the side of the
right-turn lanes was included requiring trucks to use the most -- the
leftmost right-turn lane and cars use the right-turn lane.
The roadway geometry was revised to allow a truck with a size
classification of WB50 to turn in the leftmost right-turn lane alongside
a car in the right side right-turn lane, this replicating the existing
condition.
In order to construct the roadway improvements under the
original design and including sidewalk improvements, acquisition of
right-of-way was required and obtained by the county in the form of a
fee taking and a temporary construction easement.
At the direction of the county, additional alternatives were
investigated. These alternatives are based on reducing the width of
the travel lanes on Collier Boulevard to 11 feet from the 12 feet that
exists today.
Based on this reduction in lane width, three additional
alternatives have been evaluated. The current slide shows alternative
one. The roadway geometry has been revised to allow a larger truck
with a design classification of WB62, and then a 15- foot inside
right-turn lane to make a right turn in conjunction with a passenger
vehicle in the outside right-turn lane.
The graphic shows -- the colored portion of the graphic shows the
turning pass of both vehicles. This alternative maintains the
right-of-way requirements of the original design. Enhanced signing,
requiring trucks to use the leftmost right-turn lane only, as well as
Page 111
December 15,2009
requiring vehicles in the outside right-turn lane to yield to trucks in the
adjacent lane is to be provided.
In alternative two, the roadway geometry has been revised to
provide even a larger truck with a classification of a WB67 in a
15-foot right-turn lane.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: What's a WB67?
MR. SCERBO: The design classifications are because on the
size of the vehicle. If you look at the top of the slide --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Are we talking of a six-wheeler or
you talking 18-wheeler?
MR. SCERBO: Eighteen. They're all 18-wheelers, and each one
has a larger trailer on the back of it.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: So we're talking 48-foot trailer and
a 53-foot trailer?
MR. SCERBO: Correct.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Could you define which one's a
48-foot trailer and which one is a 53-foot trailer? I think it will be
clearer for us, because we don't know all these nomenclatures, the
truck size and the weights and classifications.
MR. SCERBO: Sure.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
MR. SCERBO: WB67 is a 53-foot trailer, which is the largest
classification that we analyzed at this intersection, which is the
common vehicle that you'll see on the interstates is a WB67. A single
trailer 18-wheeler is a WB67.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. What's the difference
between -- other than the length of the trailer, a 53-foot and a 48-foot?
MR. SCERBO: The size of the trailer will determine how sharp
a turn the truck can make. So the longer the trailer, the larger the
radius or the turning path that the vehicle will have in making a right
turn. The shorter the trailer, the shorter the radius or the turning path
for the turning vehicle to make.
Page 112
December 15, 2009
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Thank you.
MR. SCERBO: And as we went through these alternatives, we
looked at comparing each tractor-trailer turning at the same time as a
car adjacent to it. So both vehicles could make the turn at the same
time is the basis of the three alternatives that we analyzed here.
So alternative two, we analyzed the larger truck, the 53-foot
trailer turning alongside with a passenger vehicle using a 15-foot turn
lane for the truck-turning lane. This alternative requires an additional
210 square feet of fee taking as well as an additional 69 square feet of
temporary construction easement to accommodate the roadway and
the sidewalk improvements.
This alternative will also include the enhanced signing requiring
the trucks to stay in the leftmost right-turn lane and the vehicles, the
cars, in the right turn -- the right side right-turn lane to yield to the
trucks as they turn.
Alternative three is similar to alternative two. We analyzed the
53-foot trailer, but we reduced the truck -- the width of the
truck-turning lane to 12 feet to see if that would allow any savings on
right-of-way.
By doing that, the right turn is still being able to be handled by a
tractor-trailer as well as a passenger vehicle at the same time. This
reduces the fee taking by 57 square feet from alternative two and
reduces the temporary construction easement by 20 square feet from
alternative two.
The enhanced signing requiring the trucks to use the left-side
turning lane as well as the vehicles to yield to the trucks as they turn
will be included. That's what's shown on this slide here showing the
pass there.
This is a summary of the existing conditions, the original design
and the three alternatives. Based on the analysis that we performed, it
is recommended that the design be revised to incorporate alternative
three with the enhanced signing. This alternative allows the largest
Page 113
December 15, 2009
truck that has been observed at the intersection to be able to make the
right turn simultaneously with the vehicle, a passenger vehicle, and
minimizes the amount of the additional right-of-way that would be
required at this location.
That concludes my presentation. I'll answer any questions you
may have.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. I have no questions from the
commissioners, so, Jay, did you want to -- you want to put anything
on the record?
MR. AHMAD: Yes, ma'am. We brought this before you
because we were before a judge on this matter, and the judge, through
the other experts that -- the owner, the property owner presented to us,
he made these issues known to the judge, and the judge wanted us to
investigate this.
So that's the purpose that you -- normally you won't have seen
that much detail as a presentation. You'd have seen it in public
information meetings and so forth. But to this detail, that's the reason
we're doing this.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. So then all you need from us is to
adopt the resolution and authorize -- authorize the budget amendment;
is that --
MR. AHMAD: What I'm asking is a staff recommendation for
this item, which is to adopt this resolution of a condemnation for the
parcels required.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I have a motion from
Commissioner --
MR. AHMAD: And approve alternative three as stated.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Alternative three.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And alternatively three?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That's in my second.
Page 114
December 15, 2009
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, very good. So Commissioner
Coletta made the motion, and Commissioner Halas seconded it.
Any discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: All in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: (Absent.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign?
(No response.)
MR. AHMAD: Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: That's a 4-0, thank you.
Item #8A
ORDINANCE 2009-71: AMENDING CHAPTER 74 OF THE
COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES (THE
COLLIER COUNTY CONSOLIDA TED IMPACT FEE
ORDINANCE) BY PROVIDING FOR THE INCORPORATION,
BY REFERENCE, OF THE IMPACT FEE STUDY ENTITLED
COLLIER COUNTY TRIP CHARACTERISTICS STUDY MINE
LAND USE, AMENDING SCHEDULE ONE OF APPENDIX A TO
REFLECT THE NEW MINE/COMMERCIAL EXCA V A TION
LAND USE CATEGORY AND IMPACT FEE RATE AND
PROVIDING FOR A DELAYED EFFECTIVE DATE OF MARCH
16,2010 IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE NOTICE PERIOD
REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 163.31801(3)(D) FLORIDA
STATUTES; THIS ACTION IS IN FURTHERANCE TO THE
DIRECTION PROVIDED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
Page 115
December 15, 2009
COMMISSIONERS ON JUNE 23, 2009 - MOTION TO APPROVE
STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS FOR IMPACT FEE WITH NO
MAINTENANCE FEE - ADOPTED
MR.OCHS: Commissioner, that moves us to your advertised
public hearings this afternoon. SA is a recommendation to adopt an
ordinance amending chapter 74 of the Collier County Code of Laws
and Ordinances, the Collier County consolidated impact fee
ordinance, by providing for the incorporation by reference of the
impact fee study entitled Collier County Characteristic Study, mine
land use, amending Schedule One of Appendix A to reflect the new
mine/commercial excavation land use category and impact fee rate
and providing for delayed effective date of March 16, 2010, in
accordance with the notice period requirements of Section
163.31S0 1 (3)( d), Florida Statutes.
This action is in furtherance to the direction provided by the
Board of County Commissioners on January 23, 2009.
And Mr. Casalanguida will present.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Good afternoon, Commissioners.
Nick Casalanguida with Transportation Services Division.
As part of our board meetings a couple years ago, we had
conditional use applications that came forward, and we talked about
road maintenance and road capacity issues with heavy-haul vehicles,
and one of the directions was for the board to legitimatize any sort of
impact fee that would come forward from the use of heavy-haul trucks
that use our roads.
With that said, we brought this item forward for your
consideration to direct us to come back with an ordinance amendment,
and we did. We actually continued the item to meet with some of the
folks from the industry to talk about some of their concerns, and
included that in this item.
What you have here is, currently there is no impact fee. And
Page 116
December 15, 2009
we're not talking about a new impact fee, a category for mining land
use. And so the rest of the industries that pay impact fees subsidize
the heavy trucks that use those roads. So anybody else who comes
forward and applies for a building permit and pays their impact fee
pays for part of the capacity that heavy-haul trucks use right now. So
it's not a new impact fee, but yet a new category.
One of the concerns of the industry was on-site reductions for
material that they would not bring on our roads, and we've addressed
that in our ordinance. And we also -- brought to our attention a
reconciliation if they had material that was waste, and they were given
a period of five years to deal with that reconciliation period to provide
us documentation to allow us to determine what that is.
We've lowered the fee from the adjustment factor because our
other impact fees did not have a truck adjustment factor in them. So
we're treating them almost like cars, even though for transportation
purposes, heavy-haul vehicles are almost given a 1.5 to two multiplier
for the fact that they move much slower than cars do.
So we have one of the most conservative impact fees rates around
the states, and it boils down to 26 cents a truck. One of the concerns
with this application was that they didn't want to have to pay for this
up front. They wanted to pay per truck. If you could equate it to
anybody else that pays an impact fee, it'd almost be like a McDonald's
or a gas station saying, we want to pay at the end of the day or the end
of the month and tell you how many people came in to shop for us.
Managing that number is difficult. You wouldn't collect any
money. And what you've set is a five-year period to pay impact fees.
And so we've said to the industry, five years is the amount of time you
have, and you have the ability to reconcile.
And remember, no other category has that ability right now.
Your other categories don't come back after a couple years unless they
go through a whole laborious process and say, we want to reconcile
our impact fees.
Page 117
December 15, 2009
So I think we've taken as many of the concerns the industry has
brought forward and been fair with this. I presented the issue of
maintenance as Item 1 in your executive summary, but the primary
issue here is an impact fee, and it's mostly for road capacity.
And with that, I'll answer any questions you have.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Actually we have four speakers,
and so before I --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: We'll wait.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: -- go to the commissioners, we'll hear
from the speakers.
MS. FILSON: The first speaker is Clay Brooker. He'll be
followed by -- and I think it's Brian Smalkoski; is that right?
MR. SMALKOSKI: That's correct.
MR. BROOKER: Good afternoon, Commissioners. Thank you.
My name's Clay Brooker. I'm with Cheffy Passidomo, and I'm here
today before you on behalf of Cemex and Barron Collier.
If this impact fee is adopted today, the mining industry, to the
best of our knowledge, will become the only business or industry in all
of Collier County singled out to pay two fees for road impacts.
The industry already pays a user fee of a dollar per truck. It's
commonly known as buck a truck. Buck a truck came into existence a
few years ago, and the county's justification for it was the fact that no
road impact fee was imposed on the industry. Now an impact fee is
being considered for adoption, but rather than replacing buck a truck,
it would be imposed in addition to buck a truck.
It is simply unfair to single out one industry to pay two fees.
Both an impact fee and a user fee require, in order to be legal, a study
of recent and localized data to ensure that the fees charged bear a
rational nexus to the actual impacts. In our opinion, the study behind
today's impact fee is flawed in a number of ways which unjustifiably
requires payment in excess of a mine's actual impacts.
Perhaps the easiest-to-understand example is the construction
Page 118
December 15,2009
cost of a lane mile of road. The study relies on the outdated
construction costs. The most recent indicator of to day's construction
cost is the bids received for the Oil Well Road project, but the study
ignores that data.
The payment schedule of the proposed impact fee is also flawed
in our opinion. A mine takes about three or four years of permitting
before it's even up and running. As drafted, the ordinance before you
today requires payment very early on in the permitting process, years
before the mine's up and running.
We acknowledge that staff attempted to address this problem by
including in the ordinance a true-up or reconciliation mechanism by
which a mine can prove, once it's up and running, what its actual road
impacts are. While this concept sounds good, the ordinance gives
only five years to true-up, and the five-year term starts to run early in
the permitting process long before the mine is up and running.
Therefore, the five-year true-up opportunity is meaningless since
we won't have time to prove what the actual impacts are, and we
would request that that term be increased to ten years if, in fact, an
impact fee ordinance is adopted today.
Finally, with respect to buck a truck, no study justifies the
one-dollar-per-truck number. The study doesn't exist. It's completely
arbitrary. In fact, by way of comparison, Lee County Commission did
a study which concluded that a defensible user fee, such as buck a
truck, would be 16 cents per truck, a far cry from a buck.
To put it simply, buck a truck is not legally defensible. But more
fundamentally, again, why is the mining industry being singled out to
pay a user fee like buck a truck? Mines pay their real property taxes
like everyone else. And by way of example, one mine that's up and
running has paid $400,000 over the last two years towards real
property taxes, which go to maintaining roads, a part of them go to
maintaining roads.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you.
Page 11 9
"-"--'~'-"-'----~--_._.._~,."-_.,
December 15, 2009
MR. BROOKER: So why -- two sentences. So why is the
mining industry being singled out unfairly? It shouldn't be, especially
if the impact fee is adopted today.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Brian Smalkoski. He'll be
followed by John Poeppelman.
MR. SMALKOSKI: Thank you, Commissioners. My name is
Brian Smalkoski. I'm a certified and a registered transportation
professional with Kimley-Horn & Associates.
We've reviewed the proposed impact fee ordinance and
associated studies prepared by Tindale Oliver. Tindale Oliver is a
recognized expert throughout the state in impact fees, and their
methodology is sound; however, there appears to be a lack of
familiarity with the mining industry and a lack of recognition of the
changed economic conditions, and these have led to some flawed
assumptions.
First, the assumption that all excavated volume is hauled off site
is incorrect. I know that the county's made some concessions to that
from permitted volume to excavated volumes. But, again, there are
some reductions from excavated volume to what's actually hauled.
Second, there is an assumption that smaller trucks are used than
are actually used to haul material off site. These two result in an
overestimation of trips generated from mines.
Third, the mines in the study that had the most trips also had the
longest trips. This results in an overestimation of trip lengths in the
trip characteristics study.
And lastly, as mentioned previously, the cost of road construction
has come down considerably from the data used in the study.
Individually, these are not very significant, but combined they
result in a calculation of a fee that is over twice what it should be. The
fees assessed should be equitable with an understanding of actual mine
trip characteristics and impacts. As proposed, these are neither
justified or supported by data.
Page 120
December 15,2009
Thank you. And if you have any questions, I'm free to address
those or also work with Tindale Oliver to address some of these
concerns.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you.
MS. FILSON: Next speaker is John Poeppelman. He'll be
followed by Bruce Anderson.
MR. ANDERSON: I'll waive.
MR. POEPPELMAN: Good afternoon. My name is John
Poeppelman, and I am the engineering manager for Cemex aggregate
operations primarily in Florida and have 40 years of experience in
how mines actually work and hopefully can impart a few points to
those aspects.
First, I want to touch on a short list of bullet points regarding the
way the proposed impact fee for mining operations in Collier County
is calculated, as I believe there's a disconnect between the way the
impact fee is calculated and the way mines operate.
Proposed impact fee initially calculated is initially calculated on
the amount of permitted and excavated material. The problem with
this approach is that mining deposit characteristics can and do vary
widely.
For instance, A, you have overburden depth. There's often and
usually material over the top and in layers within the deposit that have
to be removed to get to the sand and rock or whatever mined material
you're seeking. This overburden can be topsoil, compacted silt, dirt,
clay, muck, and other materials.
This material is excavated, but more often than not, a majority of
it never leaves the site. Most of this material is stored in site berms or
temporary spoil piles only to be returned to the excavated areas at a
later date used for revegetation, ground cover, lake edge sloping,
general restoration requirements.
The term overburden ratio is commonly used in this business. It
is very simply put, the amount of material that has to be wasted or
Page 121
December 15, 2009
spoiled compared to the amount of good material that can be
processed.
In my 40 years, I've seen this ratio vary from as little as zero to as
much as a 4-1 measure. And this can change not only from site to site,
but within the same boundaries of a given site.
B, the deposit depth of the material. The depth of the deposit can
vary widely, again, from mine site to mine site and within the mining
site itself.
Preliminary estimates of the actual thickness of a deposit are, at
best, an estimate. Mine sites are discovered through exploratory
methods such as core drilling. Even these programs are limited in
scope due to the cost and the share size of the property's involved, and
often due to the obstacles and encumbrances within the mine sites
themselves; the vegetation, crops, restrictions to the property.
As such, it is common to find areas within a mine site that are
unsuitable for mining as you work through the site. It is not
uncommon to visit a mine site today that's been active for some time
and find areas of land untouched or islands left behind within the
permitted area. The good stuff simply doesn't exist.
You have C, characteristics of the deposit. Items such as the grain
size, the proportion of the grain size, the hardness of the material, the
abrasiveness, and resistance to wear, the absorption, the cleanliness,
all factors that determine what you will actually get out of extracted
material and available for sale.
In my 40 years, I've seen this yield of good material from as little
as 30 percent to as much as 95 percent. Basing an impact fee on
extracted permitted area just doesn't make sense.
Thank you.
MS. FILSON: Your final speaker is Bruce Anderson.
MR. ANDERSON: Commissioners, I'll waive the right to speak.
I simply registered in case there were comments or questions that
needed to be responded to. Thank you.
Page 122
December 15, 2009
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Sure. Commissioners, I've got to
respond to some of those items. I think maybe it will clarify it a little
bit.
I think they brought up spoils quite a bit. You're going to get, this
is the only industry that gets that five-year reconciliation. Keep in
mind, it's not from the conditional use process. It's from when they
pull their actual excavation permit.
So when they start excavating, they have five years to figure out
that spoil rate that's in there. And if you equate it in fast foods, the
best I can tell you, remember, it's an average. You pull a fast food
impact fee, whether you're a McDonald's or you're some other fast
food restaurant that does half the business, they average out that
category. If they come in and they can show that they're much
different, they can do an impact fee study.
Your construction costs are consistent with your adopted impact
fee study. And we're doing an indexing that's coming up this year. So
whatever rate you adopted today won't go into effect until March, and
then the indexing comes up, and we'd catch that reduced construction
cost. So saying that our costs are coming down is a reason not to do
the study doesn't make any sense. We're going to catch that in the
indexing that's coming down.
Reconciliation, we talked about that, and the permit time.
Remember, we did not apply the 1.5 truck factor to this category.
They're being treated like cars.
And there's a simulation I can show you -- and I'm going to put it
up on the viewer, and I want you to see what it looks like a little bit, if
I can get the --
MR. OCHS: Podium?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Computer, actually, Mr. Ochs. And
it's a short little simulation. See if the viewer will pick it up.
Okay. That's an intersection operating right now with just cars in
Page 123
December 15, 2009
it alone. No trucks in it whatsoever. And it's a typical road. It's a
four-lane roadway by four-lane roadway. And as you can see, the cars
queue up normally, and they're processed through the intersection the
way they go right now.
We had them run a simulation now with a 10 percent truck
factor, and 10 percent's high. But a road like Collier Boulevard has
gotten that high in the past, and we'll probably get to that high again.
Just to see what the difference is. And when I say we've done that,
we've asked CH2MHill out of their transportation office in Orlando to
do that simulation.
Now it's processing with the larger vehicles, and it's a little hard
to see on your screen. I don't know if I can pump it up. I can see it
clearly here. But when the light turns green, the longer vehicles
representing the dump trucks process through the intersection much
slower.
An actual reduction in intersection capacity drops to about 299
less vehicles per hour. Now, remember when I said you're subsidizing
the mining industry. That reduction in capacity is being paid for by
somebody, and it's not being paid for by the mines right now. So
they're not being charged the 1.5 truck rate. They're being treated like
cars going through the intersection.
They're being given five years to reconcile their development to
come back and tell us what the overburden is, what the actual
production on the roads are. They're given a credit for the impact fee
so they can use it later when it changes to a different use, and we're
allowing them to pay it over five years. So I think we've covered
every aspect of this.
Saying that our construction costs are coming down, absolutely
true. And as the Oil Well Road bids become part of our process and
Collier Boulevard and Davis are reflected as well, too, that will lower
that rate as well, too.
So I think we've done, as staff with the consultant, a very good
Page 124
December 15,2009
job of addressing all of their concerns.
I don't know anything that would be done to delay this or change
it. I think when we come back with our full study in two years, we're
going to request that you go to the 1.5 multiplying factor because we
will have applied it to every industry that does this.
Something to keep in mind. They brought up the buck a truck.
That buck a truck is voluntary. And what we've done is said -- looked
around the rest of the country and said, what's going on? In
Vancouver, Washington, they had a fall conference, Northwest
Pavement Management Association, same problems we have. Heavy
trucks were tearing up the roads, and it's not covered by their gas tax,
it's not covered by the real estate taxes they pay. And what they
recommended was at conditional use applications you have a
pavement-wear agreement similar to our buck a truck because what
we say is take a geographic area, do an existing conditions report, and
agree to maintain those roads.
The problem is, when we took a geographic area, these trucks go
far outside that. So we said, it's your option. You can -- we can do a
significant location analysis and do a pavement analysis, and when
these roads fail, you can repave them or you can pay a buck a truck.
In Sonoma County, they spent three board meetings talking about
this, and they just adopted over a month ago. They were going to go
by tonnage, and they were at 56 cents a ton, and it equated out to
something like $20 a truck. And the board lowered it down to $2 a
truck, and that's what they finally adopted.
This is only for wear and tear and it does not cover capacity
issues. So again, two items before you; only one that's up for
consideration today.
So if you're asking staff to quantify that wear and tear, we've got
enough documentation now with what we've seen on the West Coast
that we can do a comprehensive study and do that. That has nothing
to do with the impact fee that's before you today right now.
Page 125
December 15,2009
And with that, I'll answer any questions you have.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you.
Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, thank you. Yeah, Nick, is
it true that this impact fee just applies to the new mines that are
coming on; doesn't apply to existing mines that have been permitted
for X number of acres?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: That's correct, only if those new -- the
existing mines go to expand that would this impact fee apply. But
anything that's permitted today right now is grandfathered.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. So yeah, what's
happened in the past can't be repeated quite in the future, but it does
cause a little bit of an economic imbalance with the people trying to
compete against one another. One's paying a fee, another one isn't.
Just wanted to point that out--
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Sure.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- as a point to be considered
when we go into this.
The five years they have to pay for this, during that time that they
get to do it, what's it broken down, five equal payments or--
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Five equal payments. And ifthey
come to us in the fourth year and said, I've worked with Mr.
Chrzanowski in community development -- as I said, five years is a
long time, more than enough time to actually determine what your
overburden is and recalculate a mine.
If they come to us on the fourth year and say, you know what,
we've overestimated by 60 percent, they'll get that credit. They'll have
to provide the documentation and show what was overburdened, what
the actual rate being taken off that site, and they can provide those
documented drawings -- and we have the ability through the ordinance
to reconcile that fee.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. That money that they
Page 126
December 15, 2009
pay in impact fees can be later applied to some other use on the land?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: The impact fee credit runs with the
land. So Heritage Bay is a good example, as I noted in the executive
summary. When they come back and they permit that application for
housing, they won't pay twice. There would be impact fee credits that
would apply and run with the land, and then when those homes come
online, they'll have that credit to allow for them.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: What about those areas that are
zoned in such a way or -- that you can't build on them afterwards? Or
is there no exception on them? Most of them have the ability to be
able to bring them back for development?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: I think in speaking to some of the
folks from the industry, every permitted mining, when they're done, is
going to have waterfront property that will have some value. I don't
know of one that's not considered their ultimate build-out condition to
have a second value to it or second use to it.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So that value accumulates with
the land itself?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: In other words, when you get
ready to sell it for development or develop it yourself, that money just
stays with the land and increases? Of course, it doesn't go up
interest-wise, but it would stay with the land; am I correct on that?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: It stays with the land, and that's a
value that would be transferred to the next landowner because that
credit runs with the land.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Now, I realize we're talking
impact fees and we're not talking really the dollar a bucket, but they
all kind of intermingle together. Would the dollar a bucket -- a truck,
still apply to the new mines?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Anything that comes in -- what I will
recommend to you, Commissioner, is that when a conditional use
Page 127
December 15,2009
comes in right now, we go to that model that the west coast is doing,
and they do a pavement-wear agreement. We're going to get a little
more in detail when they go to permit a mine and say, what are your
impacts and how far? We'll do a pavement-conditions report, and then
we'll bring back to you what Sonoma County did. And they based it
on tonnage, and they do it annually on a pavement-wear agreement.
So we'll do that separately if that's the board's direction.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Is it true at this point in time we
really don't have -- it's nothing more than a voluntary program for the
dollar a truck?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: What I've said to the industry -- and
they've welcomed a dollar a truck because that Somona County report
said it was 56 cents a ton. I'm doing quick math in my head. I know
some of those are 18-, 20-ton trucks, so you can start doing the math.
Gets to be 18 to $20 a truck. And they've done that through analysis.
So when I say, is it voluntary? Yeah, if you want to do a
pavement-conditions report and you agree that within this area when
that road fails or those pavement shoulders get splintered -- the board
will make that call. It won't be staff. You could say to them, you
have the opportunity to choose a buck a truck, which is going to be
less, I guarantee you, than that pavement-wear agreement --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: But we don't have a study at this
point in time that backs that up.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: No, sir. And if you could direct us to
do that, we would do that. But it's not material to the impact fee itself.
You could consider that at the conditional use stage when a new
application comes online.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm not saying I would want to
raise it above a dollar a truck, but I think the justification needs to be
there, because I've had people come before me and tell me that it's
only justified for like 16 cents. And, you know, and I can't argue with
them. I can't even discuss it. I don't know what the facts are.
Page 128
December 15, 2009
But we have a -- one of our -- the firms that we deal with do this
study. I assume that what we get back as far as data will be
meaningful and useful.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: In the meantime, Commissioners, it
would be our pleasure. I'll send you the Sonoma County report, and it
will give you a little bit to read on, and I will go through and find out
what it would take to do an analysis on that and bring it back to the
board for discussion.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, I kind of hope whoever
the motion maker is on this -- and I don't think we're at the point to
make a motion yet -- they'll include that in their motion.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Happy to do that.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you.
Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. Nick, we're talking about
most of these dump trucks, and they probably have a GVW of about
SO,OOO pounds; am I right?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: That's correct, sir.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: So that equates to about 40 tons.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: That's correct, sir.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. And when I start looking at
the weight per axle, we're looking at 23,000, little over 23,000 pounds
per axle. And that has a large effect on the road surface compared to a
4,000-pound vehicle such as a car that disperses the weight over two
axles at 2,000 pounds.
So I don't think that we're out of the ballpark as far as what we
feel is the detriment of these large trucks on our road in regards to
asphalt that normally is what we use on our roads. And when the
ambient temperature goes up, then we have a squish factor, and that
causes additional accelerated wear on our roads.
So I think we're looking at what, $26 -- or 26 cents a truckload
now?
Page 129
December 15,2009
MR. CASALANGUIDA: That's correct, sir. And I want to
make sure we're clear. That's for capacity. In that simulation, we
talked about how much vehicles will travel on -- in a peak hour, peak
direction on the county roads.
As Commissioner Coletta noted, I want to come back and I want
to follow up at some later time with the rest of the board because I
want you to see, the rest of the country's dealing with the same issue.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: And right now you're going to see
petitions coming from folks that are trying to go to triple truck trailers
on the highway system and --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I know that there's a bill out there
that's before Congress where they want to take and increase the GVW
from 80,000 to 144,000 on highways and on bridges, and our highway
system just cannot handle that.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: That's correct, sir.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: So, you know, when I look at--
and then also the wait time, as you brought out here in your
simulation, that also takes up road capacity in this area. So I think it's
a fair equitable user fee for using our roads that we spent so much
money for.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: How much have we collected
on this buck donation a truck?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Not much. Laurie, our planner's, not
here. I can tell you the last two collections I think were 14,000 and
8,000, so it was not a lot of money. And I'll reconcile that and make
sure there's a correction for the board. We'll forward that up to you.
But not a lot of money.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Have you looked at -- and those
are to repair roads, right?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Those stay in a separate fund and
Page 130
December 15,2009
would go to the road maintenance department to repair roads.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Have you looked at what the
mines are paying in taxes?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: I have not, sir, but I can tell you the
rest of the industry pays taxes as well as, too, in terms of other
businesses that pay impact fees as well. They also pay property taxes
as well.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right. Well, let me tell you,
Apex property is two parcels. The smaller parcel or less value, they
pay $32,000 in taxes. So you can safely say it's upwards of $60,000 a
year. How many homeowners do you know that pay $60,000 a year
or how many businesses do you know that pay $60,000 a year?
I mean, I -- the buck a truck idea is a good idea, but property
taxes are for maintenance of those capital improvements, so I'm not
sure if the recommendations for a buck a truck was a very prudent
one. It's kind of like double dipping, dual taxation issue.
So after hearing that, if this buck a truck ever becomes
mandatory, there's no way that I could support something like that.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: I think, Commissioner, the Sonoma
County report took into account that property taxes were much higher
there.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, I understand that's a left
coast, and I know there's never enough money for those people out
there. They're going broke.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So, you know -- but this is
conservative Collier County and, you know, what's fair is fair. If
somebody pays property taxes to -- they're paying property taxes on
the schools, and I don't know how many trucks go to school. Are you
sending your trucks to school? Doesn't make sense. It just doesn't
make sense to charge, double charge, somebody for using the public
assets and charging them twice.
Page 131
December 15, 2009
I mean, how many McDonald's are paying how many cents for
how many hamburgers they sell because their customers use the
roads? You know, that's just very, very unfair.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Would you like us as staff to come
back and --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I don't want to see it.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Okay, fair enough.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'd like to see it, please.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Okay.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Nick, you're charging an equivalent
of 26 cents per truck?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Eighteen cubic yards, 16-cubic-yard
truck, yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: For an impact fee --
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- which is a pro rata share of the
cost of building additional capacity to accommodate the traffic. How
then do you justify a dollar a truck for maintaining what you've
already paid to build?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Two -- again, in two different issues.
In this executive summary, it's about the impact fee, but when I say
that dollar a truck, what you look at is pavement wear and tear. Those
trucks, as they pointed out in the executive summary, can wear as
much as almost 10,000 cars.
So when you look at what a truck puts on the road -- we talked
about -- Commissioner Halas put it right on, you know, 80,000 pounds
-- coming down in a hot day, on a wet surface or wet underpavement
and stopping, it puts a lot more stress on that pavement than a regular
car does.
And even though their property taxes -- and I get that,
Commissioner Henning, I understand that. The amount of impact that
Page 132
December 15, 2009
they put on wear and tear goes way above and beyond what a vehicle
does.
So what I'm suggesting maybe for this board to consider is, this is
the impact fee discussion. You don't have to take any action, but let
me come back and provide you some information of what other people
have done and what they've noticed and a comparison so you can get a
feel for what's out there and what the problem is.
Preparing for this meeting I went through probably 50 different
executive summaries from different places, and DOT -- FDOT federal
highway reports, number one problem, heavy vehicles beat up the
road in a disproportionate way to cars, and it's an issue, and they're not
covered in a fair and equitable way.
And the higher that ESAL, that equivalent single axle load is, it's
not proportional. It's exponential. The more load they put on that
axle, the more wear and tear they put on the road pavement.
And so we can put aside the buck a truck because you're going to
get to see the conditional use, and you can tell staff, do a
pavement-wear agreement with the developer hand in hand, take a
look at what's out there, and come back to us with something that's fair
and equitable, and we can do that.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. I'd like to see that.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Now, the other -- other issue relates
to impact fee calculations. What data did the consultant use for
determining that impact fee?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: The most recent --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: What years?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: The most recent one that was adopted
which was -- Amy, correct me if I'm wrong -- was it this spring -- this
spring based on the last road bids that we came in. Now, you will get
indexing, and the board has approved, and this is where -- Amy, help
me out -- a faster indexing rate.
Page 133
December 15, 2009
So when this takes into effect in March, which you have no
applications that will probably be caught by this if it goes through,
you're going to get indexing this year coming up, and they will catch
any lower rates that we have, such as Oil Well Road, such as Santa
Barbara extension. They'll be caught in that faster indexing that you
asked us to do.
So when -- you can't set these studies to say, oh, you're going to
have to wait till the next road bid comes out. What you're doing is
saying, it will be caught in the indexing three to six months behind the
adoption of this rate category.
And I can tell you, in working with most of the landowners, most
of them will have been through conditional use process ahead of this.
They'll be grandfathered. I don't know of one mine that's coming
forward right now that hasn't heard of this and put their application in
community development that's not going to be grandfathered and
we're not going to catch them. This is -- we won't catch somebody for
a year or two.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, tell me what years -- what
historical cost periods are used in these?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: From the 2009 study, we used 2007,
2008, and 2009, early 2009 data for right-of-way costs, construction
costs. You will not have caught the Oil Well Road bid. That just
happened a month ago.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You're going to pick that up though
in the indexing?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And that will be done when?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: In about six months, Amy? Six
months, summer.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Now, how -- talk to me
about trip lengths. What trip lengths were used for the calculation?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: They actually went through the
Page 134
December 15, 2009
existing mines, and they used the existing mine trip lengths that are
right now -- that they're actually traveling. They went to those mines
and they actually interviewed the drivers and the tickets and saw how
far they went based on our existing mines right now. So it's whoever
those customers were on that given day they used for the trip lengths.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. But if you had a project
going on on that particular day that was on the coast, that would give
you an incorrect conclusion, wouldn't it? Why wouldn't you sample
some for different days over a period of a month or so?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: You did it over a three-day period,
and they did consider -- it's an average, because some of those trips
could have been to the person right around the corner.
As a matter of fact, one of the mines was providing material, I
think, to 951 or Santa Barbara, which is a shorter trip length. Some of
them were going to 1-75. So those are averaged in as part of that as
well, too. So you did get some short trips and you got some long trips
as well, too. And obviously there'll be fluctuations on year to year
depending on the project. But they are averaged and they are
averaged over three days from, I believe, three or four different mines,
and I can find out for you.
So you got a pretty broad sample. Tindale Oliver said we were
very conservative with this.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. So what you're saying
you're going to do is implement an impact fee that will be indexed
within six months.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Within three to six months after
you've adopted it, that's correct, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. And what -- when is the
adoption hearing?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: March 26th will be, I believe, your
adoption date when this becomes effective, and it's on your executive
summary. March 16th.
Page 135
December 15,2009
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So it will be sometime between
June and September that we'll get the update, right?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: That's correct, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Now, will this mine be in operation
at that point in time?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: They've applied for their conditional
use, which grandfathers them.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: So they wouldn't even pay a fee, that's
right. They would not even pay an impact fee. If they've applied for
their conditional use, they'll be considered grandfathered.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: What are we arguing about then?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: I'm not sure, sir.
MR.OCHS: Future.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: This will only affect petitions that
come to us sometime in the future --
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Petitions that are --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- not any mine that is currently
under consideration?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: No, sir. And so it won't even be a
petition that comes to you in the future that has a -- if they've gone --
if they've submitted an application to the county prior to March 16th,
they'll be considered grandfathered. That's how liberal we were with
this, understanding that catch period. So they would have to submit
an application after March 16th to not be considered grandfathered.
So you --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So you're telling me the one-dollar
fee is voluntary?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: It's voluntary because what we're
going to tell them is, we're going to say, here's haul-road agreements
done other places in the country, take that analysis, and you do a
pavement-wear analysis with us, and we'll present it to the board. If it
Page 136
December 15,2009
ends up being less than a dollar a truck, it will be presented that way.
If it ends up being more than a dollar per truck, we'll present it that
way and let the board decide what the appropriate rate should be.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And you're going to come back in
the future to do this?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yep.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You're going to provide us all the
data that results in that calculation?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: The next conditional use that comes
through us, we will go through a pavement-wear analysis with them.
We'll use the methodology that that's done so you'll have that
information as part of the conditional use to review. I think you'll be
surprised it will be more than a dollar a truck.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. I'll be interested in seeing
that data then. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Nick, you're telling us two
different things. You're saying that this will be -- this impact fee is
implemented during the -- when they pull the excavation permits.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: But now you're saying it's not
going to apply until you get -- apply for a conditional use.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: I can clarify that. Anybody that
applies for the conditional use will be considered in the grandfathered
section, will never have to pay a mining impact fee. The folks that
apply after March 16th --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: -- their fee won't come into place until
they pull their excavation permit, not the conditional use, but the
conditional use could take a couple of years from the conditional use
to the excavation permit.
So you will not be -- the fee won't apply for you if you have not
Page 137
----~._----".. -~_._-"_...__.._-
December 15,2009
pulled your application after March 16th; and after March 16th, it
won't -- the fee won't kick in until you pull your excavation permit,
which could be two years later from a conditional use.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Did the consultant talk to the
industry and address their concerns?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: The consultant spoke with staff, and
then staff met with the industry, and their primary concerns was how
they pay. They wanted to pay per truck instead of like the rest of the
categories.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We were hearing arguments
about the calculation of the fee.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: The trip length was one issue that they
discussed, and we talked about that. And the other was the
cost-per-road factor that they brought up, our cost basis, and we said
that will be clarified as part of our indexing as well, too.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Klatzkow, does this buck a
truck sound like affordable housing donations?
MR. KLA TZKOW: The buck a truck program needs to stop.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: We agree. We'll do a pavement-wear
analysis and you'll get that number to look at, and it could be 20 cents,
it could be $20, and the board can decide what they want to apply.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I think that's going to be very
problematic too, myself. It almost sounds like contract zoning, just
like the impact fee for affordable housing. Until the board adopts --
until there's a study and until the board adopts a fee, I don't see how
staff can do exactions out of people that are petitioning their
government for action.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Sir, I agree with you.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Well, that's fine. I mean,
as long as we -- as long as we consider an analysis on a fee and staff is
not trying to apply that fee, I'm okay it.
Page 138
December 15,2009
MR. CASALANGUIDA: I will not do that. Like I said, I've
done a lot of research on this. Like I said, I'd like to bring this
information back to you for your consideration, and you'll get a
chance to review those numbers, and it won't be staff. It will be
scientifically calculated, and you'll get a chance to look at what the
impacts are. And if the board feels they don't want to apply that, that
will be the board's direction, not staffs.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. And I agree with what's
being said, but also I got to say that staff never did anything without
coming here first, and we talked at great lengths. So staff never took
the initiate to apply any fees without getting this commission's
permISSiOn.
And those were in the documents and the deals that were put
together for the different mines, and they found it advantageous to go
with a buck a truck rather than with an impact fee at the time. So I
mean, we've got to be totally up front and honest about it and making
sure we're not directing anger in the wrong direction, where right here
it should be.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. The statement -- there
never was an impact fee for trucks. There is now.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: A dollar per truck.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Maybe. But there never -- they
never had a choice between a buck a truck and an impact fee. That's
not true.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: From my understanding, the
industry did not want an impact fee, and they agreed to a dollar a
truck.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: When we say the word impact, we've
got to be careful, because one is capacity and one is maintenance
impact.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, the fee.
Page 139
December 15, 2009
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: The buck for a truck.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Right. This was the first time --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That was a voluntary fee that
they took on themselves to offset an impact fee.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: To offset a road maintenance fee that
they would have to pay.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Maintenance fee.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: But you never at any point in
time put this together without our direction, right?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: You saw those and it was discussed
that it was their choice.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. I just want to make sure
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- because, I mean, there's been
implications here that staffs at fault, and I want to make sure we got
that correct.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: I think I'm pretty clear on what I've
heard from Commissioner Henning. I understand exactly what he told
me, and Commissioner Coyle, and all of you. I'll come back with the
documentation at the conditional use application, you'll be able to
review it, and it won't be arbitrary. It will be fully detailed.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, you know, quite frankly, I
like the idea of directing the anger at the staff rather than at the
commissioners. I think that should be our prerogative. We can blame
anybody we want to.
But you're going to bring this back to us -- you've got to tell me
what we're assessing and what we're not assessing here, because I'm
really confused, okay?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Okay. Very clearly, today is a road
Page 140
___._"__,_w_.w_.,._,.....~'_'..v._.'__>
December 15, 2009
impact fee for capacity. It's 26 cents per truck typical, and it's outlined
as it is in the executive summary, they would pay over five years and
they would get the ability to reconcile that, which averages about -- to
about 26 cents a truck. That's for the capacity.
When you're at an intersection, a truck goes through, that's for
them sharing the roadway with you and what it takes us to build that.
The dollar per truck or the maintenance will be addressed at the
conditional use stage. So when you get to look at a conditional use for
a mining application, as part of that will be a pavement-wear analysis
done by both the developer and the county, and you'll be able to look
at whether or not this boards wants to assess a maintenance fee on
them.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Now, that part isn't being
approved today?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: No, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: The maintenance fee is not being
addressed by any vote we make today?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Absolutely not.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Right? And I think County
Attorney had his hand up, Ms. Chairman.
MR. KLA TZKOW: Yeah. You're just considering the impact
fee or 26 cents a truck. Nick, he was talking about the maintenance
fee being a conditional use. I will tell you that if we're going to go for
a maintenance fee, it's going to have to be fair to everybody --
MR. CASALANGUIDA: That's right.
MR. KLATZKOW: -- not just for the new mines, so that it will
not be on the conditional use process. It will be a fee that is enacted
by this board, and it will impact every single mine in the county
equally.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, I don't want to go too far
down this path, but what's the difference between a fee on mining
trucks and a fee on any other 16-wheelers that are using the road? So
Page 141
December 15, 2009
why shouldn't we apply it to everyone on some rational basis for
maintenance of the roads, including automobiles? I don't want to go
there, but if we're going to think about this, we need to think about the
ultimate implications of such a step, okay?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Agreed.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So -- okay. I think I understand
what's happening.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yep.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Do you need a motion now?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: I do, ma'am, if that's the board's
direction.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm going to make a motion to
approve staffs recommendations knowing this fee was part of a study,
and part of my motion is there's not going to be a buck a truck and an
impact fee assessed; there's just going to be an impact fee assessed.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I have a question on that motion. Well, is
there a second to the motion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I have a question on the motion. Being
that the mines that are now in existence and everybody who has
applied for a conditional use, none of them will be paying this impact
fee anyway; but our roads will continue to get torn up by the trucks
that go out sometimes, you know, hundreds of them a day, and if you
eliminate buck a truck, then how do you pay for the maintenance of
the roads?
So do we have to go back to the taxpayers to pay for the
maintenance of the roads if you don't have a buck a truck? Then I'm
getting a little nervous.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, let me address your
concern. This is not going to be implemented unless there's a new
conditional use --
MR. CASALANGUIDA: That's correct.
Page 142
December 15, 2009
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- this impact fee. So that's not
going to be addressed. So the ones that are already committed to a
buck a truck, they're not going to be paying an impact fee.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes, but you just said eliminate buck a
truck.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No. I said, not charge both of
them for --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, I didn't understand that.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: I'm okay with -- I think staffs
perspective, I think I understand what Commissioner Henning's
saying. We're okay with that because the ones that are through the
conditional use process agreed to a maintenance fee will continue to
pay that. Staff will implement this road impact fee for capacity in
March. Anybody after the March date would pay that road impact fee,
and that gives us a little bit of time to come back to the board and give
you some follow-up information on maintenance responsibilities, and
the board can make an informed decision on where they want to go.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. So let me make sure I understood
your motion then. Your motion is to go ahead with this whenever,
March 16th or whenever it is, but for any new mines that are now
going to be charged an impact fee, they would not be charged buck a
truck, but all of the mines in existence that pay buck a truck now
would continue to do that? Is that what your motion said, in essence?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Correct, yep.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, great. I just -- I wanted to make
sure.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Question after Coyle.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Certainly. Mr -- Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'm -- I'm a little confused, yes,
because I'm not sure that the portion of the motion that says there
won't be a maintenance fee has any real meaning or relevance because
we could come back and meet next week and decide we'd develop a
Page 143
December 15, 2009
maintenance fee.
There's no way we can pass a motion that forbids us from making
a future decision. So I would support the motion that approves the
impact fee but does not approve the road maintenance fee until we get
some additional data from you and from the industry on which we can
make a rational decision about that. But I'm reluctant to say we can't
ever do that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I -- and we're always told
this, that we cannot take action that's going to bind future actions.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's right.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And I always thought that was
true. So the board can take further action in another two weeks to say,
okay, this -- we're going to implement whatever, a maintenance fee,
for all trucks.
But the issue is -- there are two different issues. There's a
capacity issue, what Nick is saying, and then there's a -- what he's
saying, a maintenance fee, which you pay through your taxes, your
gas taxes and your property taxes.
So -- but I don't want to see somebody having to pay what is --
some considered doing it twice. The action here is only adding a
category in our impact fee.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. That I support. Ifwe just
say, approve the impact fee study, then I'm all onboard with that. And
if you want to come back to us sometime in the future and try to
justify --
MR. CASALANGUIDA: A maintenance fee.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- a maintenance fee, I'd be more
than happy to listen to you.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: But I'm going to be very skeptical,
but I think we ought to have the flexibility to get your input on that in
the future. And I do want to emphasize that it's -- I think it's true that
Page 144
December 15,2009
you must give people credit in the calculation of the impact fees for
their payment of property taxes and any other fees that are likely to
contribute to the construction of capacity on the road.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: We do. We do, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. So you've taken into
consideration the payment of the property taxes and all that sort of
thing. So long story short, I support the motion to --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: So you second it then?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, I'll second the motion to --
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Adopt--
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- accept staffs recommendations
but not to approve any maintenance fee at this point in time.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Okay.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, I'm sorry. And I like the
way we're going, but I want to understand. Not approve the
maintenance fee for new mines coming on, or maintenance --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Any kind.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- fee across the board?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Any kind, yeah.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: That's fine.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah. I'm going to be very
interested to see in the wear study in regard to capacity of heavy
trucks, so -- and I think a good point was brought out that we need to
probably include all trucks, but especially the super heavy ones with
80,000 GVW. They do the most damage, especially along the
shoulders of the road.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Correct.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And so if you can get that data, I
think all of us will probably learn something from that. Thank you.
Page 145
December 15,2009
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Very good.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And what's a triple truck?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: I'm sorry?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: What is a triple truck?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: They're talking about right now
allowing -- if you've seen sometimes dual tractor trailers. They're
talking about going to triple trailers on some interstate highways and
allowing more routes to go with triple trailers and increasing the gross
vehicle weight. And Commissioner Halas is right, he follows the
industry a little bit. Most of your roadways and bridges aren't
designed to carry that, and they become a safety issue.
So on interstates in Florida, you're not seeing those triple trucks,
the tandem trailers, three in a row. There's a map that was provided
from a lobbyist that showed where in the United States they have that
ability, and they're petitioning Congress to expand that route map, and
that would come into Florida. So there's a little concern there that you
might see triple trucks on the highway pretty soon.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Wow. That's kind oflike a small train on
wheels, isn't it?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It's towing three trailers, you know.
One right after the other.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh my goodness. And what is GVW?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Gross vehicular weight.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Gross vehicle weight.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Thank you. I need to know all
those things before I can vote.
Okay. I have a motion on the floor and a second. All those in
favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
Page 146
December 15, 2009
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you.
Item #8B
COUNTY ATTORNEY REPORT ON THE TOWN MARKET
PROPERTY LOCATED AT 7770 PRESERVE LANE IN THE
OLDE CYPRESS PUD AND WHETHER THE U-HAUL
BUSINESS OPERATED AT THE SITE IS COMPARABLE IN
NATURE TO OTHER C-3 USES ALLOWED IN THE PUD AND
WHETHER THERE IS SUFFICIENT PARKING TO
ACCOMMODATE THIS USE - MOTION TO CONTINUE THIS
ITEM TO A FUTURE BCC MEETING - APPROVED
MR.OCHS: Commissioner, that takes you to 8B. This item
requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be
provided by commission members.
This is the county attorney report on the Town Market property
located at 7770 Preserve Lane in the Old Cypress PUD and whether
the U-Haul business operated at the site is comparable in nature to
other C3 uses allowed in the PUD and whether there is sufficient
parking to accommodate this use.
MR. KLA TZKOW: And I have photographs of the site, if you'd
like to see it.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Do we have to swear everybody in?
MR. KLA TZKOW: For this item, no.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: No? And we have to declare ex parte?
MR. OCHS: That's what I read on the item.
MR. KLA TZKOW: Okay, okay, let's do that.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: But we don't need to swear anyone in?
Page 147
December 15,2009
MR. KLATZKOW: Let's do both.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, fine. Would you swear -- anybody
who wishes to speak on this subject, please stand to be sworn in.
(The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, Commissioners. Commissioner
Coyle, we'll start with you.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Madam Chair, I have received
correspondence and telephone calls concerning this and, of course, we
have heard about this particular PUD in the past, so I've got a lot of
historical information on it.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. I received correspondence on
this. I also talked with staff and, of course, we've had other items in
regards to this PUD, so I think I got everything covered.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I've had correspondence with
Mr. Chami and Ms. Diane Ebert.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. And Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. I've had correspondence,
phone calls, and meetings.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. And I've had a letter from Mr.
Chami, of course, we've discussed it before, and I've also met with
staff.
Okay. Let's move forward.
MR. KLA TZKOW: And I'll be brief. This is the Town Market
property. It's located across the street from Gulf Coast High School
off Immokalee Road. It's a multi-use property. It's a -- primarily a gas
station with like a larger form mini-mart in it along with other stores.
At the present time, a U-Haul business is being conducted on the
property. The property is a PUD, zoned primarily for of C3 use. Our
LDC have these type of businesses being permitted in industrial and in
C5 and as a conditional use in C4; however, historically in the county
Page 148
--._._._.~----
December 15, 2009
from time to time there have been these uses in connection with
service stations in C3 property.
And I'm here to take any questions.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Do we have any speakers on this
subject?
MS. FILSON: Fourteen. Oh, I'm sorry. This is 8B. 8B, we
have two on this one.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: We have two speakers. Would you call
our speakers, please. Fourteen, that made me nervous.
MS. FILSON: We do have 14 on one item.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Let's not have them speak right
now.
MS. FILSON: The first speaker is Diane Ebert. She'll be
followed by George Chami.
MS. EBERT: Good afternoon, Commissioners. For the record,
Diane Ebert from Olde Cypress.
This property is located within our PUD. It sits outside of our
community. It sits kind of cross from the high school. It is one large
building. On the inside he has a bakery, a Subway shop, he has a dry
cleaners, a post office, which I'm sorry other people have discovered.
And around there are other office -- I don't want to say office -- retail
sites that sit alongside of it this way.
This one I've got to be in favor for. Behind it there is a storage
shed which I have seen U-Haul trucks bring storage there. I mean to
store the things. This has been there for a while. I have always found
places to park.
We have a lot of apartments around on Immokalee Road. And
it's not unsightly. And I mean, and there are days that there's hardly
any U-Hauls there at all. He has some trailers sitting sometimes, some
trucks, but they kind of come and go.
And I have to tell you, I just -- I can't really find anything wrong
with this application. I think it fits in well with the storage, with the
Page 149
December 15, 2009
apartments, and I can't find anything wrong with it. Thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is George Chami. And he's your
final speaker, ma'am.
MR. CHAMI: Hi. My name is George Chami, for the record.
Thank you very much for allowing me to speak today. It's not the first
time I'm here in front of you with regard to the Town Market, and I
really appreciate your patience and your support all the way.
I appreciate also the work the county attorney did with regard to
this report and showing basically that this particular U-Haul user truck
rental used to be also in C3s, and they are in some C3s in particular in
Collier County and all around the nation.
I believe the study, which the request was being made for the
county attorney to study this particular issue is to see if we can have
comparable use or for -- the U-Haul could be counted as comparable
use for this -- for what we have right now at Town Market, which is a
gas station. And I believe his recommendations are quite neutral, in
fact, trying to leave it in your hands.
I really need your help more than ever at this. U-Haul was not
for me usually big business, but right now end up being, yes, it is.
And I need anything right now to be able to support my business, to
support my employees and support my family.
For six years this business was in. For six years we never even
had a problem, not even a complaint. Nobody even knew about it.
We have many, many code enforcement visit our site. Never they
found anything wrong with it.
The problem we have right now here in this situation is -- and I
see the report basically from the staff who's basically we have six
parkings, in which -- since we have another issue with regard to, this
particular subject is, how many parkings we have. They're showing
that we have six available parkings, and they're saying basically we
have many -- based on the aerial photos, we had basically between
seven -- seven to 20 plus, I believe, U-Haul trucks.
Page 150
December 15, 2009
They failed to say how many available parking was available on
site. We had plenty of other at any given time. We had between 30 to
40 percent empty parking spots in our site besides on yesterday, which
was the busiest day of the year for us.
So I really appreciate your help, I appreciate your understanding,
and hopefully you will be able to find this particular U-Haul use
compatible with the gas station and the other uses we have inside this
particular PUD.
Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. I'm trying to find in the
PUD the language --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Would you like me to take Commissioner
Halas and come back to you?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No. You know, I can say it.
Diane Ebert has a pulse of the community around there, and what she
told me is that this operation is a -- an asset to the citizens up there.
And I asked her, I says, would you kind of go around and try to find
another U-Haul place in the area, and she said there is none.
Predominantly, gas stations have U-Hauls. Now, whether that is
the zoning or not, I don't know. I can't particularly agree with the --
it's an allowable use in C3, but it is a comparable and compatible use
with a gas station.
So I guess my motion is to find that a U-Haul is -- in this case is,
in the PUD -- here's what it says. Any other commercial uses or
professional services is comparable in nature with the foregoing use
and which the zoning service director finds compatible within the
district.
Well, I make a motion that the board finds it a comparable use
within the present uses.
MR. KLATZKOW: Yeah. And just so we don't set precedent
here, so that we have these spring up throughout the county, which
Page 151
December 15, 2009
would require an LDC amendment, this is a unique -- this is a unique
development. And--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right.
MR. KLA TZKOW: -- the way it's structured here. And to be
comparable within this particular PUD does not necessarily mean it's
comparable to all gas stations throughout all C3s throughout the
county.
So one approach is, we could limited it just to this PUD because
this is -- it's compatible within this PUD itself.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's what I was trying to say.
MR. KLATZKOW: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I don't think it's comparable to
the same use in C3 districts.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: My concern is, I think that this was
a code enforcement case that was brought before the code
enforcement in regards to another commercial business that realized
that this operation wasn't permitted and, therefore, whoever the person
was, brought that to the attention of the county.
I can assure you that as far as any type of trailer rental in my
district under C3, that's not going to set very well. So I'm glad to hear
that this is only in this case, but I still have some concerns about the
business that was obviously impacted, because there was a possibility
that the person who made the complaint didn't have enough parking
spots left for his business, and that right there basically raises a flag in
regards that I won't support that.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. My concern is -- and right now I
couldn't vote for it either because -- actually, he hasn't kept his
property up. He's got 80 percent of his landscaping out in the front
missing. And I would like to see either that part of the motion or, you
know, I would like to wait until he brings his property up to code.
That really bothers me a lot. So that -- I have a real problem with that.
Page 152
~. _.-_.,,-,--, " .. ..-, -- .-..'''-,.,,_..__....-~,-_.- .' ,._'._.~----,--~~_.._~
December 15,2009
Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. I'm probably the only
person sitting up here who owned a U-Haul dealership. I'm pretty
familiar with the problems.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You should recuse yourself.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: First opened it up, it was
extremely successful. I had all the storage area in the back of my
building. 951 was a two-lane highway. And Tim Constantine and I
had a falling out. When he became commissioner, he turned me in. I
didn't own the property, so I had to move everything back to the lot.
That's life, you know. But in any case, I was limited by the size of my
lot that I owned the whole thing, owned all the parking spots.
If! got too many trucks and trailers in. There I was limited and I
couldn't get my customers in, and I needed to be able to run the rental
business. So it was always a little bit of a back-and-forth dance to
make it work.
I guess my question is, is there a limited number of parking
places here for the U-Haul, or is it open to go anyplace it wants in the
lot itself? I'm curious to what the determining factor is for the business
itself. You know, like I say, I didn't have to share my building with
anyone. I had total call of where everything got to park.
But is there -- is it limited to a number of spaces?
MR. KLA TZKOW: I'd have to ask Susan that.
MS.ISTENES: Susan Istenes, zoning director. As I indicated in
the report, the required number of spaces for the existing businesses
minus the U-Haul, when you take all that into account, there's only six
extra. So theoretically, there would only be six extra spaces over and
above the code requirement where things could be parked, like
trailers.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, I understand that. But I
mean, if you get eight in, the other two parking spaces that aren't
there, if we don't put any -- if there's nothing on it to limit what's
Page 153
December 15,2009
taking place, this could consume the whole lot.
You have a very busy time usually before school starts.
Tremendous amount of trucks come from all over the country . Well, I
hope they do again some day. And it just about overwhelms you. You
have to make arrangements to get the trucks moved out or else there's
no place to go with them. I mean, they could be in the middle of the
lot and abandoned. People drop off their keys, their paperwork, and
they're gone.
So is there something -- if we could come up with something that
would limit it to six spaces to protect the integrity of the other people,
I don't think I'd have a problem with it. But if it's wide open, I can see
problems with the neighboring businesses. Six is a pretty generous
number, especially if it's trucks.
MS.ISTENES: Certainly if that's part of your comparability and
compatibility determination to limit the number of trucks that could be
parked on the site at one time, that would certainly be appropriate.
And like I said, there's six extra. So certainly there's at least six to use.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, no. I want to phrase it so
it has to do with parking places rather than trucks, because you might
have two small trailers that can take one parking place, so you don't
want to limit it in such a way that's it's not workable. That would be
my suggestion in consideration of the people, the other tenants that are
in the building.
MS. ISTENES: Certainly, then you could limit it to those -- to
six extra spaces, and then if you wanted to, also put a locational
requirement. In other words, the six -- six spaces along the west side
of the property, for example, which is towards the back. That way
you wouldn't interfere with the front. That's up to you, Commissioner.
There's a lot of different --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's fine. But six spaces -- I
don't want to get where six spaces are so dedicated they can't be used
for public parking because he may only have two trucks coming in
Page 154
December 15,2009
and out of there, and there'll be four spaces only U-Hauls can park.
We've got to be very careful with the terminology, because the idea is
to be able to accommodate the petitioner and still be able to meet the
needs of his neighbors.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you. Commissioner, I
can't find in our executive summary about the landscaping. Where did
you see that so I could follow you?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I know, but he was next.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'm just fixing it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll share it.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No, it's okay.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Actually it's here someplace. Let me just
find it for you because -- yes, it's on the last page. Page 5, the second
paragraph down. Discover that the required landscape buffers parallel
to Immokalee Road are now approximately 80 percent devoid of the
required vegetation, and the vegetation will need to be replaced.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Well, I mean, that's a
separate issue now, isn't it, really?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Well, you know--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: If you have a business on U.S.
41 that has a code enforcement issue, so would the landscaping. It
would be a separate issue. I mean, it's a -- he's not asking a deviation
from our landscaping. So that has to come up to code anyways, or it
has to -- it has to fit our code as it is existing.
But to accommodate you, I will put that in my motion that the
landscaping shall meet the minimum -- since it is a minimum code --
and the minimum of our Land Development Code, for the landscaping
that parallels Immokalee Road.
Now, as far as the limitation of the trucks, you want to give some
flexibility. I heard you say that. And you're going to have businesses
go in and out. And by the way, the tenants that are in there now are
Page 155
December 15, 2009
tenants ofMr. Chami. So ifhe doesn't make his tenants happy, he's
going to lose that business. You see what I mean?
So we want to dedicate it to six spaces unless he can get -- has to
meet our code as far as parking spaces for uses. That's existing now.
But you also don't want to -- you want to make it so that he can go to
staff like everybody else can for a parking deviation, so -- and part of
my motion is a dedication of six spaces, but that's not limited to it,
because if tenants changes, okay, and --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I understand what you're saying.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- and the different uses calls for
different smaller parking or even more, it still has to accommodate for
it.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: But what's the word dedicated?
Because you might not need six spaces. You might only be using two.
You can use the other four for some short-term parking of customers.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Say maximum.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, not a maximum, a
minimum. You want a minimum of spaces for -- I mean, you could
use them for dual uses. Let's say you want a dump truck that just paid
a buck a truck for maintenance, they could use it.
Does that work, Jeff, that motion?
MR. KLATZKOW: Well, it works for me. I mean, I don't know
if it works for Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm sorry. It was too vague.
Try it one more time, Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Your concern was --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That there be enough parking
places for his tenants. It doesn't matter that they're his tenants. They
still are people that have a reasonable expectation of adequate parking.
That's one of the reasons why we put the codes together to be able to
allow for it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, you know, we're not
Page 156
December 15, 2009
asking for a parking deviation for the trucks or the parking for the
existing businesses. Nobody's asking for that.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, we're not. I'm asking for
six spaces, maximum, to be used for U-Haul. Now, if a deviation can
step in, if he has all his tenants leave and there's parking places
available, I have no problem with staff dedicating those spaces. I just
want to make sure that we don't box in the tenants at some point in the
future where they come in through the front door and they'll say, how
come you can't protect our rights to be able to use an amenity we're
renting? And yeah, they might leave, but you know how difficult it is
to leave a building after you spend thousands of dollars setting it all
up?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I think we're saying the same
thing.
MR. KLA TZKOW: Yeah, I think you are. I think one approach
would be that, absent an exemption from the county, that the trucks
utilize no more than six spaces at one given time.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Absolutely.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay, that's fine.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. And Commissioner Coyle is
waiting, but I'll address this when it's my turn.
Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I would just like to go back in
history just a moment to clarify a couple of things before I make up
my mind on this one.
I've always been troubled by the fact that we don't consider a
place that dispenses a gasoline and has pumps, we don't consider it as
a service station, a gasoline station. Is there a substantial difference in
the impact that would have been paid had we classified this as a
service station or gasoline station at the very beginning? Who from
staff can answer that question for us?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Amy's not here.
Page 157
December 15, 2009
MR.OCHS: We don't have an answer for you.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Nobody. Okay.
MR. CHAMI: Can I answer this for you?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Oh, yeah. Mr. Chami did have
to address that.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Well, you have to come to
the microphone, Mr. Chami.
MR. CHAMI: Thank you very much. Basically, from my
understanding, but the collection before, if it's a gas station, you pay
less than it is a convenience store with significant food. If you have
convenience store with a gas station and significant food, you pay far
more than if it's a gas station by itself.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. So you paid a higher--
MR. CHAMI: Absolutely.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- impact fee because of nature of
classification --
MR. CHAMI: Absolutely.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- as opposed to what you'd had to
pay if we classified it as a gasoline station; is that correct?
MR. CHAMI: At the beginning we were being classified retail,
and then staff found us that we are not retai I. Weare a gas station
with convenience store and significant food, and then we had to pay --
first we paid, I believe, $56,000 impact fees. We had to pay 75,000
over and above to be able to be found gas station with convenience
store and significant food.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. And Jeff, those two
paragraphs that you just showed on the overhead--
MR. KLATZKOW: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- suggest that if this were a
gasoline station, they could have U-Haul trailers there, couldn't they?
MR. KLATZKOW: No. I mean, if you go strictly by our LDC,
you can't go in any less than a C4 zone, okay. This isn't straight
Page 158
December 15, 2009
zoning. This is PUD. So the analysis here is in this -- within this one
PUD, you know, we find that the U-Haul is comparable on the uses
already there.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
MR. KLATZKOW: As far as the impact fee goes, my
recollection is Mr. Chami's impact fee was heavily negotiated since he
has a very unique business. It's not a mini-mart like you see with the
ExxonMobil stations. It's -- it's a very unique business.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And under those circumstances,
we're going to rule -- or I presume we're going to rule if this motion
passes -- that they can have the U-Haul trailers there?
MR. KLATZKOW: Within the context of this particular PUD.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay, all right. All right. And
with those of you who remember the time when Commissioner
Coletta was a U-Haul dealer, you'll also remember that in those days,
all the U-Haul trailers were towed by horses.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: You're in pretty good form today.
I have a couple more questions before we vote on that. One of
the -- one of them is, I understand that there's a business that has built
onto that property but -- has built but never permitted; is that -- is that
the case, has never been permitted?
MR. KLA TZKOW: I don't know the answer to that.
MS. ISTENES: Yes. Susan Istenes. There is a pool store there
that went into an empty space that was either previously occupied or
intended to be occupied by a bank, and they made some changes --
some structural changes and have not pulled permits yet.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: See, and let me tell you what my problem
is here. Now we've just heard about this. You know, sometimes
people feel that they don't really need to adhere to things. In another
spot on this agenda package, which is number four, aerial photography
over various times reveals that at any given time there are
approximately seven to 25 trailers/trucks on the site, depending on the
Page 159
December 15, 2009
rental demand. We're limiting him to six. How do we know, number
one, that he's going to be limited to six? Because it seems like he kind
of takes matters into his own hand, being that he was never allowed to
have the trucks there in the first place and he's been parking them for,
as he said, six years. Then they've got somebody building on there
that never bothered to get the permits. Then he's never -- he's never
replaced his landscaping, which was a requirement of the PUD in the
first place. It's making me very nervous, to be perfectly honest with
you.
And let's see. And the last thing -- I even had another one here,
and that is that the -- it's not compatible with C3 permitted uses. So
anyway, these are my concerns.
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, those are separate issues.
There is an existing code enforcement that Joe Schmitt went in your
office later -- when the last time this was on here. That's a separate
issue. I'm just trying to keep a business open in my district,
Commissioner, just like --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And I respect that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We're trying to provide, you
know, capital improvements.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I respect that, just like this morning with
the Golden Gate. I respect that. I just want to make sure he follows
the law.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Those are separate issues. Now,
we cannot control how the executive summaries are written. He's not
asking for a deviation, again, from our landscaping. He's not asking
for a deviation for getting a permit on work that was done that was
unpermitted.
The issue about parking -- here's the reality. If you have a
parking problem and you're not -- you don't have enough spaces,
you're going to lose -- people are not going to go to that business.
Page 160
.,"~.__.__.._.__.'''' .-"-~~_."^---_.._^,_.'_.~
________._...~u__.,___".._..__....._" ,,--
December 15, 2009
They're going to go someplace else if they can't park.
So the reality is, ifhis U-Haul business is doing better than the
businesses in there existing, then he's better off to let that business
close, let's say the bakery close, and allow for more U-Hauls to be
parked there. He already has that ability.
So why would we want to micromanage businesses and how they
operate? We want our businesses to be successful for two reasons, so
they're not closed down and boarded up to cause blight in our
community and collect less property taxes. And by the way, he is a
retail business. He is going to collect sales tax. We do have revenue
sharing.
So they need that business up there in North Naples. I don't want
to have blight in my district.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I don't blame you, and I -- and I'm fine
with the business. We've limited him to six parking spots. He's been
using seven to 25 without the permission to even do so. What I'm
saying is, he set a standard that the rules don't really apply to him, and
I'm afraid if we vote on this, he won't bother to abide by the rules
anyway. That's what I'm trying to tell you. It's not that I want to -- I
do want to foster business. You know I've been a strong proponent of
keeping all employees, keeping businesses open and doing what we
can to keep the business in Collier County. I've worked with you on
this all along. It just makes me nervous that he feels the rules don't
apply to him.
Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I think I've got an answer for
you, Commissioner Fiala.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Because your vote's important,
so is your confidence.
And Mr. Chami is going to be -- is a respectable person. He's
going to do the right thing. We could put a year time on it to review it
Page 161
December 15, 2009
to make sure that he is doing it, and I think you're going to find that
he's been in total compliance at the end of a year. Would that give
you the comfort level you needed?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes, it will.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: It's up to the motion maker.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: As long as he complies. Yeah, it would
have to be up to the motion maker. That would be up to him.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No. We'd have to do that with
every business.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Well, we're going to have to--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And that's -- you know,
basically that's what code enforcement is for anyways.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You know, and I'm sure there's
a lot of businesses throughout Collier County that doesn't have a
parking -- a light that the fixture is missing in the parking (sic) that
should be there. But that's micromanaging our businesses, and I don't
want to do that.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'm beginning to get troubled by
this thing.
Ifwe think it's okay to let Mr. Chami just close down the rest of
his businesses and bring in more U-Haul trucks because he thinks
that's what he needs, would we be happy to just converting it to a
U-Haul facility? That is clearly not compatible with the permitted
uses in the C3 for this PUD.
So if we take that line of thinking to its ultimate extension, we're
essentially telling Mr. Chami, you can do what you want to do with
your other businesses, you can force them out, close them down. If
U-Haul turns out to be your most profitable line of business there, then
it can take up the entire site, and I think that's a dangerous way to go.
So I believe that from what I'm hearing from the other members
Page 162
December 15, 2009
of the commission, that a majority probably would like to help Mr.
Chami do something reasonable, but they're not willing to leave an
open door that will permit him to do whatever he wishes there.
So I would hope we could find a way to solve that problem and
get enough votes to keep the business viable.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Here's the solution. Ifhe closed
the bakery down, U-Haul's not comparable with a bakery. But ifhe
closes the service station, the gas pump service situation of it, then it's
not compatible, correct? Because we're finding it compatible with
service station. We're not finding it compatible with a bank which has
already closed and now a pool service that's going in there. Do you
see what I mean?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, I do, but I don't agree with
you, that's the problem. What I'm saying is, by saying to Mr. Chami
that you can use the facility for U-Haul without restriction, you're not
equating it to a bakery. You're merely saying to him that ifhe can
find more parking spaces through any means whatsoever, then he can
bring in more and more U-Haul trailers.
And I'm suggesting that U-Haul would be a good addition to his
business, but I wouldn't want to see the entire site turned into a
U-Haul facility. And if we could find a way to say to Mr. Chami, you
can do this with a certain number of spaces there, he could potentially
park excess trailers in another location and shuttle them over there as
they become needed. But with five or six or seven spaces, he could
keep some of them on the lot and maintain his other businesses, and
we would still have a mixed-use kind of business here rather than a
dedicated U-Haul trailer lot.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Can 1 --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I can enter into that one. It
doesn't work. It simply doesn't work. You've got to have a lot that's
going to be C4 or C5. I doubt you're ever going to get approval for C4
even. So it will probably be a C5 lot you're going to have to go to, it
Page 163
December 15, 2009
has to be an approved lot with a fence around it. I've been this route
before.
And U-Haul by itself is nothing more than a filling. There is no
one that can live on U-Haul alone. They all got some supporting
business there, and it's a little bit of a sideline. It's a great little buffer
there to bring in some extra income. I don't think there's any danger
of him going 100 percent U-Haul. He wouldn't be able to exist that
long. There's so much of a demand and that's it. And the demand
fluctuates tremendously with the time of the year and what's taking
place out there. It's not a dependable source of income. Great filler.
I believe that the best way is the six limited spaces, a one-year
review, quick review, put it on the consent agenda. Ifthere's no
problems with the code enforcement, we've got this up and over with
and we've got the comfort of this commission to be able to go forward.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I could vote for that.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: But we're already making a
serious departure from what our rules and regulations are. I don't
recall us ever doing this before.
I know I went through a lot of trouble to come up with a C5 place
where I could do all the things I wanted to do when I was in business.
Of course, that was then and this is now.
So let's look at this realistically. Let's put the -- enough controls
in there so that we can come back and review it. We're not
micromanaging it. We're micromanaging the code enforcement right
now. We're doing a departure from what's normal to try to help out,
so why not put some controls in there and give us that ability to be
able to step in if things go terribly wrong?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: There must be an echo in here.
That's exactly what I was saying.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, gosh. I speak with great
wisdom then.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes, yes, finally.
Page 164
December 15,2009
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Is there someone in here -- Joe is
not in here. I've got -- oh, there's -- I need some questions asked,
okay, and -- or answered, and that is, we've had some other problems
at this particular site through the years where Mr. Chami has got
involved in things and got caught at it, and he never -- and we had to
bring him in here to address these issues; am I correct on that?
MS. ISTENES: Susan Istenes. My recollection is there was a --
well, I know for a fact there was a sign issue where there was an
interpretative issue with a sign that was erected, and this board did
grant him the ability to have his sign over and above what staff
thought the code allowed.
Then there was the unpermitted work for the pool store. Then
the sign was --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Wasn't it the gas station, too? He
started off with --
MS.ISTENES: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: -- it just going to have a store, and
all of a sudden gas pumps showed up; am I right or wrong?
MS. ISTENES: Yeah, that goes back to the impact fees. I guess
there was -- I guess when the plans were submitted for impact fee
calculations, they failed to show the gas pumps on the plans, and there
is a significant difference when you add gas pumps to the site as far as
how much you pay in impact fees versus non-gas pumps.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: So he basically didn't show that we
had -- that he was going to put gas pumps in?
MS.ISTENES: I wasn't -- yeah, I wasn't directly involved, but
that was -- my recollection was that when the impact fees were
calculated, the plan that was submitted did not show the gas pumps,
and then it was later discovered there was gas pumps there, and that
was corrected.
Page 165
"'...--.~._~.-
December 15, 2009
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And so we went through that -- we
went through that exercise, and then I think we also made some
concessions on that, too, if I remember correctly.
MS. ISTENES: I know there were some very specific detailed
calculations, because as Jeff stated earlier, this was a pretty unique
use, and it was -- the gas pumps aside, the retail component of it was
not clearly defined as far as the impact fee ordinance goes, so there
was quite a bit of detailed calculation in that.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And I can understand where
Commissioner Fiala stands. That's exactly where I stand on this is --
because there's -- I understand he's a businessman, but he also has to
be upfront and honest, and he hasn't been in a lot of cases here. And
this is another example, along with this store where he's done some
work and didn't go through the permitting and basically had the
attitude, if[ get caught, fine. If I don't get caught, I'm ahead of the
game.
So I have some concerns because I think even today his sign is
out of -- out of -- out of the ordinance that we have, so --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Can we continue this? Can we
continue this item?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Sure. Sure we can.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And let me look at some of
those code issues --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Well, I'm saying sure. I better ask if we --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, we can do anything we--
it's up to the five of us --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- whether we want to continue
it. I want to look at those -- there's a lot of things being said. I don't
think they're true. I think they need to be straightened out. I
remember the item with the --
Page 166
December 15,2009
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Sign.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- the sign, the site plan with the
gas pumps. In fact, I would like to get the site plan. I think there's
some --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second your motion.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- things being said that -- from
our staff that are just not true.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Well, it's good that we bring it back then.
Do we have to do anything legally, or can we just withdraw the first
motion and --
MR. KLATZKOW: Withdraw the motion. Make a motion to
continue, and then --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. I'm going to withdraw
my motion, and I'm going to make a motion to continue.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Motion and a second to continue.
All in favor?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Great. And now we're going to take a
ten-minute break.
(A brief recess was had.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Would you-all please take your seats.
MR. OCHS: Ladies and gentlemen, please take your seats.
Madam Chairman, you have a live mike.
Item #12C
Page 167
December 15,2009
AUTHORIZING THE COUNTY ATTORNEY TO ADVERTISE
AND BRING BACK FOR BOARD CONSIDERATION AN
ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING THE HABITAT
CONSERVATION PLAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE TO ASSIST
THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS IN
DETERMINING THE FEASIBILITY OF DEVELOPING AND
IMPLEMENTING A HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN TO
PROTECT RED-COCKADED WOODPECKERS IN THE NORTH
BELLE MEADE OVERLAY AREA - MOTION TO CONTINUE
THIS ITEM TO A FUTURE BCC MEETING - APPROVED
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. County Manager and County
Attorney, I've just been approached by Judy Hushon, who was here
for item number 12C which is the RCW change to endangered species
item, and she has asked that we just pull it off this agenda and
continue it on to the January 12th, which takes one thing off of here.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Let's just not approve it.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Huh?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Let's just not approve it.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: So we will bring it back on January 12th,
okay?
MR. KLATZKOW: Well, do you want to make a motion to
continue?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yeah. Motion to continue.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Motion and a second to continue.
All in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
Page 168
December 15,2009
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed?
(No response.)
MR. OCHS: Thank you, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Was that an aye for or an aye opposed?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Huh?
MS. FILSON: I didn't get --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Four, and one opposed, right?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: No. There wasn't any opposed, was
there?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: We're all for it.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: No. It was a 5-0.
MS. FILSON: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Next I would like to say that we are now
on the 2:30 time-certain item, which is the Clam Bay issue, but there
are people here for the three o'clock time certain. Well, we only gave
the Clam Bay a half an hour, but we have how many speakers?
MS. FILSON: Thirty-one so far.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thirty-one speakers at three minutes a
person -- maybe we should try and cut that down to two or something
like that, because three minutes per person, that leaves us with 93
minutes, and that's before we even hear presentation from staff or
anything.
So for those of you who are here for the three o'clock time
certain, please know that it will not even be close to this time. We've
got at least an hour and a half to two hours before we get to your
subject. So that was something you mentioned.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Sure. You may want to take
advantage of our small little cafeteria down here, go down and get a
cup of coffee, get some fresh air, or you can stay here and watch us
perform.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Thank you so much.
Page 169
--~.~-->-~-,._-_.~".__.,.....,_..
December 15,2009
Item #lOF
COMPLETING THE DEVELOPMENT OF A COMPREHENSIVE
MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE CLAM BAY ESTUARY -
MOTION TO APPROVE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION #1, #3
& #4 REVISING #2 - APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Commissioner, that takes you to Item 10F.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you.
MR. OCHS: That's your recommendation to approve actions
required to complete the development of a comprehensive
management plan for the Clam Bay Estuary.
Gary McAlpin, your Coastal Zone Management Director, will
present.
MR. McALPIN: Good afternoon, Commissioners. For the
record, Gary McAlpin, Coastal Zone Management staff. The Clam
Bay Advisory Committee and the Coastal Advisory Committee is
recommending this afternoon that you approve the Clam Bay
Advisory Committee status report sent to you on September 25th as
the first item.
The second item we are requesting is that you resolve the status
of the Clam Bay Advisory Committee that is charged with the
development of a master plan and scheduled to sunset in two weeks.
John Arceri, the Chairman of the Clam Bay Advisory
Committee, will discuss this in detail in just a few moments.
The third thing we're asking for you to approve is the budget as
outlined in this report.
The fourth thing we're asking you to approve, Commissioners, is
to approve the PBS&J Clam Bay System Data Collection and
Analysis Report, and that has three parts to it.
The first recommendation is to move forward with a water
Page 170
December 15, 2009
quality monitoring program, the second recommendation is to move
forward with an additional sediment sampling and testing, and the
third recommendation is to move forward with a water circulation and
flushing model.
All these items were -- have been -- these three recommendations
were approved by the Clam Bay Advisory Committee and the Coastal
Advisory Committee.
The next item that we're asking for your consent on is to conduct
a peer review of the modeling program and the data collection analysis
report with a recognized expert from a non-consultant background.
This -- we would like this to be from an academic university
background, and this -- this expert would be jointly -- would be one
that was jointly acceptable to the Pelican Bay Services Division and
Coastal Zone Management.
There has been a lot of controversy associated with the Clam Bay
Data Collection and Analysis Report that was prepared by PBS&J,
and there's been a lot of discussion about the competency and
credibility ofPBS&J.
To refresh the BCC's memory, PBS&J was selected as a neutral
consultant that was initially endorsed by the Pelican Bay community
because Pelican Bay felt that Coastal Planning and Engineering was
biased on behalf of the county.
Dr. Dave Tomasko is one of the nation's leading experts on water
quality and coastal estuaries. He has headed up the program for many
South Florida Water Management District for many years before
going into consulting engineering.
Dr. Tomasko is highly recommended by the DEP, South Florida
Water Management District, and many of the sister counties where we
consult and do water quality studies on the estuaries.
Dr. Tomasko is going to talk to you about the report that he has
authored with PBS&J, and then, we're going to turn this over to John
Arceri, the chairman of the Clam Bay Advisory Committee.
Page 171
December 15, 2009
So with that, board members, Dr. Tomasko. And he didn't get
that gimp working at Clam Bay. He got it playing soccer.
DR. TOMASKO: Yeah. Something my wife's really proud of.
For the record, my name is Dave Tomasko. I'm the manager at
Watershed Sciences and Assessment Program in PBS&J. Just to
correct one thing. I was the manager of the environmental section for
the Southwest Florida Water Management District, not the South
Florida Water Management District.
Let me just get right into this, if! can. The project summary. The
things we were asked to do. Scope developed, full input from all
members of the Clam Bay Advisory Committee was assessing status
and trends of water quality and natural resources, a review of the
existing circulation models and studies, acquisition and analysis of
hydrodynamic data.
It's important to note, we did not do a model. We collected data
and we analyzed data. We did not do a circulation model and
recommendations concerning future monitoring and modeling efforts.
The general considerations we thought were important are that
Clam Bay and Moorings Bay are functionally different. I think some
controversy arose because of a rather simplistically worded executive
summary. But Clam Bay has a shoreline mostly intact. Most people
know this. Moorings Bay shoreline is almost entirely altered by
humans.
The water quality is different between the two systems, and some
of it is -- you know, it's going to be different because of the difference
in a flushing between the two; however, it's important to note as well
that Clam Bay is not, quote, pristine. We hear this a lot. People like
to call their places pristine.
We've had modifications to the circulation in Clam Bay. The
closure of circulation and tidal flushing in the north, closure and then
reopening and modification in the south.
The shoreline of Clam Bay is beautiful. I've snorkeled in every
Page 172
-------,.~.,._~_..__..._.".._,.,--_._---....,....._._..
December 15, 2009
single portion of Clam Bay. I've gone all the way up to Upper Clam
Bay. The shoreline's beautiful. The watershed is developed. The
watershed has condominiums, golf courses. It's a developed
watershed.
Stormwater treatment system in Pelican Bay does a great job at
doing treatment of the water that comes off of that, but the watershed
is developed certainly.
And the other thing is, there's a lot of wildlife in Clam Bay. I've
seen it. I've spent a lot of time in Clam Bay and Clam Bay. But
Florida Department of Environmental Protection, EP A, have processes
of grading estuaries that are based on water quality alone, and I think
that's what some of the controversy is.
If! could, just getting into the conclusions. The conclusions
about the water quality are that there's an awful lot of water quality
that has been collected in the Clam Bay system. It has not been put
into what is called the State of Florida Storage and Retrieval, or
STORET data base. That appears to be inconsistent with Florida
Administrative Code and Florida Statutes. I'm not a lawyer, but the
words are that local governments are to coordinate with Florida
Department of Environmental Protection to get appropriate water
quality data into STORET within one year of collection. That's been
on the books for a while. The data collected from Moorings Bay from
the City of Naples, however, is going into STORET.
The lack of the data going into STORET leaves you open to the
following: Having DEP come down and collect water samples on
maybe a short period of time and coming to conclusions about the
system's health that may be a little bit at odds with logic.
So for example, you have a TMDL -- apologize -- total maximum
daily load, that has been calculated for the Gordon River in your
county, and it says, you are to reduce the nitrogen loads by 30 percent.
The problem with that TMDL is that the reference sites failed the DO
standard, dissolved oxygen standard as well. So TMDL doesn't make
Page 173
December 15, 2009
sense. It's best to short circuit that kind of nonsense.
Rookery Bay. Most people believe Rookery Bay's a pretty
healthy system. It's declared verified impaired because of nutrients,
because of one year's worth of the sample collection the DEP did at
roadside ditches and bridges and boat ramps. And Max Hatcher with
your staff is a good person who has familiarity with that.
The Cocohatchee River in your county is declared impaired for
iron, all right. So now what stormwater loading source brings you the
iron? It's possibly a groundwater problem. But you do have impaired
water. You do have TMDLs. It's not something you should just
decide you don't want to participate in.
The data from the Pelican Bay Services Division, we originally
did calculate some of the water quality data in an earlier report we did
for you. We felt that it wasn't in the ideally located situation. So my
first feeling was to not analyze the data. But the consultant for Pelican
Bay said, hey, I've got five stations that I think are useful. Let's
analyze them. So we analyzed the data from five locations. Again,
they're not ideally situated.
But using these best located stations, most of Clam Bay, Outer,
Upper, and Inner Clam Bay, would be declared impaired for dissolved
oxygen because it doesn't meet state standards.
Now, oxygen being low doesn't mean that it's a polluted system.
But oxygen being low, the next step is to look at nutrient levels. And
the nutrient levels for nitrogen, in particular, are exceeded the majority
of times in some of these locations. So based on conversations we've
had with DEP, the probability is the data goes and gets into STORET,
they look at it, and you'll probably be declared verified impaired.
However -- and this is something that's in the report. And
frankly, I'll be honest. I do not understand this controversy. State
water quality standards are not likely to be appropriate for Collier
County waters. That's in the report. It's highlighted. But they are
there, and you have to work with the regulatory agencies to come up
Page 174
December 15, 2009
with your own standards. You have to have, I think, appropriate
located ambient water quality monitoring standards, sample locations,
excuse me. You have to put the date in STORET. It's not a matter of
whether you want to. And you have to work with DEP to get locally
appropriate standards. So you don't have TMDLs that ask your
municipal storm sewer systems to have a 30 percent load reduction,
because that could happen.
Another thing that got a little bit controversial, I guess, was that
we found a layer of fine grain sediments in Clam Bay. And I've
snorkeled throughout Outer Clam Bay. And what we found is that
there's a layer of silt, if you would, silty clay and silt that's found
throughout there. And it seems to be associated with a reduced ability
of oxygen to penetrate through a sediment. So what that means is that
there's fewer organisms that can live there.
And this sort of situation of fine grain sediments interfering with
the biology of a system was first noted in 1981 in this general area.
These sediments are there. We don't know if they're 50 years old,
they're 500 years old, or they're 5,000 years old. That makes a big
difference.
If you've got a layer of sediment that's 5,000 or 500 years old, oh,
well, that's the way the place is. But you cannot assume that it's a
natural condition until you get in there. And here's the reason why
you can't assume that. Go into the Seagate canals. Those things didn't
exist 50, 60 years ago, and they have five, six feet of muck. I mean,
I'm one of the few people probably who've snorkeled in the Seagate
canal systems.
So if the muck accumulation in the canals is an unnatural
phenomenon, then the possibility that it's in the Outer Clam Bay
system exists as well. So our recommendation was to age the
sediments and to do some toxicology. If there's no toxins in the
sediments, if they're 500 years old, boom, that's it, you're done, no
problem. If it's 50 years old and you've got elevated levels of copper,
Page 175
December 15, 2009
arsenic, lead, something like that, you won't be the first place that's
happened. You'd want to know that, we thought. So that was one of
our recommendations.
And the reality is, fine grain sediments tend to accumulate in
areas of reduced circulation, such as Seagate Canal. So if the
circulation in Clam Bay has been altered such that it becomes a
location where sediments settle out of the water column, then that's
something we thought would be appropriate to determine.
All right. The next part of it was a review of prior efforts that
have been done in this system, and there are studies and there are
models. We did not do a model. We did data collection analysis.
Circulation models were looked at because there were some prior
circulation models, and they were done to help come up with the kind
of activities that are required to address the mangrove dieoff, and that
was to increase the flushing and circulation.
You've dug canals, if you would, drainage features throughout
the mangrove canal in that system, and a lot of that was done based on
some of the models that were done. But the models that were done,
for example, that supported that, ended at Seagate Drive, as ifthere's
no connection between Clam Bay and Moorings Bay under Seagate
Drive, and there certainly is. Simplistic about storm water input -- but
I think the point is, there it was appropriate for its purpose, but it's not
appropriate for an assessment of how does water move between Clam
Bay and Moorings Bay, because it doesn't have water moving between
the two systems.
There have been some other studies, not models, that have
discussed, you know, functionality and -- of that sort of stuff, but not
much data that's been collected on the level that you'd need to
determine. And I want to just point out, again, we didn't do a model.
We did data collection. What we're asking for is that a model would
be appropriate, a fully functional system.
What we found in the efforts that we did with that, in Moorings
Page 176
December 15, 2009
Bay there was little to no attenuation of tides from Doctors Pass up to
Seagate Drive. There's a small delay as the tide propagates through
the system.
Clam Bay, it's kind of a different system. There's an attenuation
of tide, and there's a time delay as the tide propagates either to Seagate
Drive or up to the north Upper Clam Bay.
Now, the other findings that were interesting were that the
maximum current velocities flowing from north to south were ten
times higher than what we found flowing from north to -- from south
to north. We collected over the range of tides, including relatively
small tidal ranges and large ones, and at times on low tides, the water
is stacked up about a -- up to a foot and a half higher north of Seagate
Drive than south of Seagate Drive.
So Clam Bay water, higher than water in Moorings Bay as the
tide goes down, and that's what gives you flow through the culverts.
Well, that difference in water level is what gives you flow from the
culverts.
The net water circulation is from Clam Bay into Moorings Bay.
And we heard a lot of, you know, Moorings Bay is a sewer. It's
flooding and killing Clam Bay. The net movement of water that we
found was from Clam Bay to Moorings Bay.
The results are consistent with communication we've had with
local residents when we've asked them, what do you see happening in
terms of flow, and it's consistent with fishermen. And if you go out
there and talk to some of the fishermen, they'll tell you the same thing,
the water moves from north to south for most of the time.
And it could explain some of the lack of success of the flap gates,
which were kind of a mystery to us why they would put flap gates in.
The flap gates would be functioning to get water from Moorings Bay
to Clam Bay. The majority of the water moves the other way. That
might be one of the reasons why the flap gates didn't work in the first
place. It might have been valuable to look at this in the first place.
Page 177
December 15, 2009
The value of the hydrodynamic model was that is can analyze
times and conditions outside of the calibration period. We know what
water does during the time when we were there and during the tidal
ranges we were there, but if you want to play around with different
scenarios, can't do it without a model.
I could better understand the interactions between Upper, Inner,
Outer Clam Bay and Clam Pass and how that functions through
Seagate Drive with Moorings Bay and Doctors Pass, and ability to
analyze what-if scenarios. What if I did this, what would happen?
What if I did that, what would happen?
And finally just -- the recommendations were to establish an
ambient water quality monitoring program for the entirety of Clam
Bay, to make it coordinated with the City of Naples' efforts in
Moorings Bay, to work with DEP to get the appropriate data from the
Pelican Bay Services Division into STORET to work with DEP to
develop locally appropriate water quality standards, to conduct
additional studies on the sediments in Clam Bay, figure out how old
they are, figure out whether or not there's toxins. You do have some
toxin assessments that have been done, 1997 report. The problem is,
those samples were taken pretty much by the bridge pilings where you
have levels of copper, chromium, and arsenic, probably because that's
what's in pressures-treated wood. So get away from them, get out into
the middle of the bay, maybe you'll find nothing. And to develop a
comprehensive hydrodynamic model for the region from Upper Clam
Bay down to Doctors Pass.
And I wanted to point out that these recommendations or the
scope were reviewed, approved by the Clam Bay Advisory Committee
and the Collier County Coastal Advisory Committee.
And if you have any questions, I'm available, or if it's appropriate
to move to another thing just tell me to sit down. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: We'll probably wait until after the
speakers. Unless any of the commissioners have something they want
Page 178
__.,__._,__._____ ._.....~~__m_'_._'._,.,.__,_.*.....~~.".~_~,__'.__''''_K.
December 15, 2009
to ask immediately, we'll just wait till after the speakers.
Did you say you had something?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, okay. Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: The one interesting item that shows
up on Page 17 of 133 says, respect to water circulation and flushing in
the system. And this is something that I always thought existed, and
that is the Clam Bay system was impacted in the early 1950s by
construction of two roads, Vanderbilt Beach Road to the north and
Seagate Drive to the south.
And we have a serious problem in the Vanderbilt area because of
the fact that we no longer have any flushing action all the way up
there in the Vanderbilt lagoon. And we've been trying to get WRDA
money to figure out the best way to address that issue since that flow
has been cut off.
And I -- this is the first time I've found anything in print that's
stated that this really happened. There's been talk about, no, there was
never any connection and everything else, but I'm glad it came up in
this summary. Thank you.
MR. ARCERI: Good afternoon, Commissioners. I'm John
Arceri, Chairman of your Clam Bay Advisory Committee, and I'll be
real brief and try to cover this in less than 15 minutes, but it's an
extremely complex and critical issue, and try in -- less than one, yeah.
A year ago you gave us a three-part mission. One, you said,
determine the health of the entire Clam Bay Estuary; two, develop a
management plan that would restore and maintain the long-term
visibility; and third, decide who in the future should manage this plan.
I would like to speak to the Clam Bay Advisory Committee's
work in accomplishing this mission this past year. Our difficulties that
we saw and where I see the future of the committee.
I base my comments and recommendations on one year of
committee work as your vice-chair and chairman as well as dozens of
Page 179
December 15,2009
individual meetings with many constituents on both sides.
Very early on, we identified numerous personal agendas on this
issue, misinformation, and conspiracy theories that would make our
mission and keeping a focus on what is good for the estuary very
difficult. Although there are many agendas and theories, those driving
the behavior are mostly from Pelican Bay.
And I'd like to just expand briefly on what they are. There are
basically two personal agendas that we found. One is that Pelican Bay
in the past ten years has managed this estuary, and any new tests,
findings that would show a need for improvements would place blame
on them, as they see it, and jeopardize their continued management.
As such, we fully expected resistence to any new research on the
health of the estuary.
Second, the Pelican Bay Foundation made it pretty clear early on
that they wanted total control of this estuary, not the county. And as
such, we expected that there would be a resistence to all actions we
recommend that they didn't approve of.
As far as conspiracy theories go, there were two major ones that
were roadblocks. One was that the only reason to test for water
quality was to develop a circulation model which may result in more
dredging for flushing that, uh-huh, really is the purpose for dredging
for navigation.
The second conspiracy theory was that the other reason for
increased dredging is only to use the dredge sand to renourish the
Clam Bay Park beaches south of Pelican Bay.
It was pretty clear that the roadblocks were going to be ones of
winning, defending the past to shifting blame, power, and for a
number of other political reasons making the county look bad.
I want to make it clear, when I say Pelican Bay, I am not
referring to the community of Pelican Bay. I have many friends who
live there, and it's a great place to live with great people. I am
referring to the Pelican Bay leadership and a few of their residents
Page 180
December 15, 2009
who have decided to resist the mission of our committee.
Jim Carroll was our first chairman, and he knew that we would
have a tough mission ahead of us with these roadblocks. Jim was a
resident of Pelican Bay. He knew the importance of the mission. He
understood the need to represent all estuary constituents and keep the
committee focused on what was good for the estuary and to lead the
committee to accomplish your mission. He knew, Jim Carroll, that his
balanced approach would be met with great outcry from some of his
neighbors, but this was of no concern to him.
In all my years serving for municipalities, I have never met a
fairer, braver person than Jim Carroll. Although Jim paid a great price
for his devotion to the mission with personal attacks and intimidation,
he will be the first to tell you that it was all worth it.
I briefly want to comment on the committee's accomplishments
this year. We did work to satisfy open permit requirements, we did
develop a minimally invasive navigational marker plan, we did review
major maintenance programs such as that for mangroves, and we
developed programs for water quality and circulation research that
basically were the recommendations Dr. Tomasko covered, which
were the need to do water quality review tests and recording, the
sediment research he mentioned, and most importantly, the need for
that circulation model. We've always recognized as the most
important part of our work the need for the circulation model.
Without adequate tidal flushing, you're vulnerable to the pollutants
that have been mentioned.
And last was a peer review. Very important that we have a peer
review of what's done here for accuracy, credibility, community
buy-in, and as the Clam Bay Advisory Committee recommended, to
be done during or after the circulation model.
There were attempts, however, to stop this research work by
targeting the honesty and competency ofPBS&J. The Clam Bay
Advisory Committee in your status report made it clear that they fully
Page 1 81
...~...-,., ._,-"~-_._._.._,.~.,~,,...._---.~,,~._-,-~~,"_._"-_.,~~<--"~--_._--_.._.,-_._,,-
December 15, 2009
supported PBS&J.
There was also an attempt to stop any additional tests or fact
finding as not being necessary. I have repeatedly expressed publicly
my concern over how people who express a desire to improve the
estuary continue to resist doing any further testing.
Now, after PBS&J has made observations and recommendations,
the tactic is to attack their methodology, their people, their
competency. In my opinion, this was much more than just
constructive feedback.
I would now like to talk about recent events and the future of the
Clam Bay Advisory Committee, which is, by ordinance, scheduled to
sunset in two weeks. In September, the committee had recommended
that the Clam Bay Advisory Committee be extended for six more
months until June the 30th, 2010, so as to complete the three
remaining parts of its mission. Namely, one, review the final results
of the water quality sediment and circulation models and determine
what action is necessary to improve circulation. It could mean
dredging for circulation, it could mean programs for stormwater
control to reduce pollution, et cetera.
The second mission yet to be done is to utilize all of this work to
develop the full management plan for the estuary that will assure
restoration and long-term viability.
And third, finally, and one of the most important ones, is to
recommend who should manage this plan in the future. This estuary
has been managed by the Pelican Bay Services Division for the last
ten years, but you asked this committee to talk about who manages it
in the future.
Since September, however, when the Clam Bay Advisory
Committee made this recommendation, there's been a number of very
serious events that have happened that, in my mind, question the
viability of simply extending the term of the Clam Bay Advisory
Committee by six month.
Page 182
December 15, 2009
First, as I mentioned, Jim Carroll resigned in September, and we
lost his leadership and one of the fairest-minded members of our
committee.
Second, the level of political and personal attacks, threats of
lawsuits, misinformation, intimidation has increased significantly as
we close in on possible water quality issues.
Third, three more members of our committee has opted to not
serve beyond our December 31 st of this year. That's three of nine
we'll have left, in addition to Jim Carroll.
I believe that several other members will also resigned shortly.
The vice-chair himself, having been assigned to a subcommittee to
study public outreach in communication programs, reported with
much disappointment and disgust to the committee in October, quote,
don't waste your money on public communications like nothing he had
ever seen before on this issue. People just don't want to get the facts.
They don't want to hear information, unquote.
In the past two weeks, I have also obtained some information that
clearly show what the real agenda is of the Pelican Bay leadership,
what ends they will go to to complete their mission, and what we can
expect in the next several months as far as external pressures,
intimidation, and planned distractions.
The first document that I think received in the last two weeks was
a phone message that was left by Steve Feldhaus. Steve is secretary
and lead spokesperson for the Pelican Bay Foundation.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Madam Chair, may I say, I don't
know if this is really necessary to go on with this. I don't know that it
will --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'd like to hear the whole thing.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: n what it will accomplish by
attacking individuals from members of our advisory board, especially
on such a heated item. We all know it's heated. Are you acting as
capacity of the advisory board or individual?
Page 183
December 15, 2009
MR. ARCERI: As far as recommendations for the future, I'm
gIvmg you --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: In your comments, are you
acting -- because I'm concerned about lawsuits. Are you doing this on
your own?
MR. ARCERI: Well, yeah, I'm making these recommendations
to you as chairman based on my observations of what I've seen and
what I heard. And I think it's important that this commission
understanding the reality of where we go from here if we're going to
make recommendations on the future.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And I appreciate that. But the
personal attacks of individuals is concerning to me.
MR. ARCERI: I'm not personally attacking people. I'm saying
overall what's happening with the Pelican Bay -- I'm not mentioning
names --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I apologize.
MR. ARCERI: I'm not mentioning names, Commissioner. But I
think it's important that you see the reality of the situation right now,
and that's what I think I'm here to do. Can I go on?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Please do.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It's up to the chairperson.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes. And actually I've got nods from
everyone else that would like to have you finish.
MR. ARCERI: Fine. The first, as I said, is a phone message
from Steve Feldhaus who was secretary and lead spokesperson. I'm
not attacking him. I'm giving you what he has said so you get a
feeling for what is going to happen in the future here.
He left a massage on a phone for Ernie Wu. Ernie is president of
the Seagate Homeowners Association. This message was left after
Mr. Wu had been -- had refused to accept a proposal by Mr. Feldhaus
to modify the navigational markers that had previously been approved
Page 184
December 15, 2009
by the Clam Bay Coastal Advisory Committee and the Coastal
Advisory Committee.
"_- 312211, received at 12: 17 p.m --
Good evening, Steve Feldhaus. About
12:15. Ijust heard what's happened. I feel
like I've been completely sandbagged. I'm
sure you have valid reasons for doing what
you were doing -- what you're doing. And I
know you have a divergent group of people
that you represent, but I got to tell you,
you know, we're completely funded, and we
will fight this. And particularly, I had
everybody teed up to resolve it. I'm now
going to explain that we were double-crossed,
and there will be a pretty severe reaction, I
think, all through the community that will,
you know -- we've got the money, and we'll
see whether you've got any right at all to
access.
And I guarantee you that we will fight
your right to get out. This is not just
about markers anymore. You are raising the
stakes, and you're going to have to take the
consequences.
Good luck. Bye. II
MR. ARCERI: I don't think anything's clearer that Pelican Bay's
agenda is to completely cut off the ability of Seagate to navigate to the
Gulf of Mexico, a right they've had for more than 50 years, and to
destroy their quality of life and property values.
It is also clear that Pelican Bay's focus is not going to be on what
is best for the estuary, but how to stop any access by Seagate to the
Gulf of Mexico.
Page 185
December 15, 2009
The second document is one that inadvertently was sent to the
county from, once again, Steve Feldhaus, as spokesperson for the
foundation. Although Mr. Feldhaus requested the document be
destroyed, it was a public record and I had a right to see it.
You have a copy of his letter dated a few weeks ago, and he also
requested to destroy. You have that also.
In his letter Mr. Feldhaus mentions the Pelican Bay's Foundation
board and several independent lawyers, their plans to layout a plan for
massive legal assault as well as a huge public information campaign
over the next several months.
One can only expect that the attacks and negative pressure on the
committee members will even worsen as we try and address issues of
possible dredging for circulation and who manages the estuary in the
future.
I have personally no problem with taking on misinformation,
emotions, and personal attacks and agendas. I guess I've been very
well battle tested with the five-year bitter sewer battle on Marco
Island. We can also handle the attacks on our staff and on our
contractors, but what most seriously concerns me, however, is when I
see the committee itself becoming influenced by all of this noise. And
the last two committee members I have sensed less of a focus on doing
what is right for the estuary, and members appear to be becoming
more political and more defensive, and I understand it.
In my opinion, with many new members coming onboard with
increased external pressures and with more difficult issues to solve,
this committee will become dysfunctional next year and will not be
capable of completing the mission. The focus will become political
and emotional, and the majority of members' time and energy will be
spent dispelling misinformation and defending themselves.
New members who won't be onboard for several months will opt
to delay issues rather than take them head on. Also, in my opinion, I
don't think it's fair and would make sense at all to put members
Page 186
December 15, 2009
through this kind of environment and expect quality results.
Also, in my opinion, it is essential that this vital work of
completing the management plan be placed in the hands of a qualified
group of individuals that are as insulated and isolated from the local
politics on this issue as possible. For this reason, I strongly
recommend the option of allowing the Clam Bay Advisory Committee
to sunset at the end of this year in two weeks as scheduled by your
ordinance, and have the responsibility of completing the mission
assigned to the county's permanent Coastal Advisory Committee.
And I have just three quick major reasons for this
recommendation. First, the Coastal Advisory Committee is presently,
by your ordinance, the overseer of the Clam Bay Advisory
Committee's recommendations. They have reviewed and approved of
all Clam Bay Advisory Committee recommendations so far.
Second, the Coastal Advisory Committee is an ongoing county
entity broadly representative of the county's diverse constituencies and
is highly competent to complete this mission. Most of the legwork
and information to develop a management plan for this estuary has
been completed, and it's well within the charter of a Coastal Advisory
Committee to finish it.
And third, I personally served for several years on the Coastal
Advisory Committee, and in 2006 I was their vice-chair, and I know
first hand the capability of this committee and its highly focused
ability to handle difficult assignments in a nonpolitical manner.
There is presently an opening on the Coastal Advisory
Committee for a Marco Island appointment, and I will apply for that
opening in hopes that I can continue to serve the county in finalizing
the plan for Clam Bay as well as many other county coastal issues.
In summary, I would hope that you would support the following:
The need for the water quality program; the need for the additional
sediment research; the need for the development of circulation model;
most important, the need for the peer review; the budget to support
Page 187
--~~---"",,-,,---,-,----,---"-,-,,,~-'-'--""~-"~"~,,--,--,,--,-------'--"---'>"'-"-"-
December 15, 2009
this vital effort; and finally, the sunsetting of the Clam Bay Advisory
Committee by December 31 st and the assignment of the completion of
their mission to the Coastal Advisory Committee effective January I,
2010.
In addition, for the most part, the Clam Bay Advisory Committee
has worked to accomplish what you asked for. At this time, however,
we must be realistic about the best way to finish their mission.
I thank you for the opportunity to serve you and for giving me
the time to highlight the impressive accomplishments of the Clam Bay
Advisory Committee and what needs to be done to make sure its great
work to date is not wasted by the noise of blame, winning, power, and
control, but what is best for the estuary.
And I thank you, and I'll answer any questions at this time or
later.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Who is our next speaker? Now, we won't
have any questions right now until afterwards, okay? We've got 31
speakers to listen to as well.
Gary, do you have another --
MR. McALPIN: No more presentation.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, very good.
So then we will call our speakers. And speakers, I would just ask
all of you, if you have something new to say, great. If you have
something to repeat that somebody else said, if you would just say, I
agree or something like that, that will probably move it forward just a
little bit.
You don't want to repeat everything everybody else has said, so
that's all I ask. Thank you. Everybody has three minutes.
MS. FILSON: First speaker is John Sorey. He'll be followed by
Mary Bolen. Mary, do you want to come up and stand by, please.
MS. BOLEN: I cede my time to Georgia Hiller.
MS. FILSON: Okay. The next one will be Marcia Cravens.
MR. SOREY: Madam Chair, Commissioners, thank you for
Page 188
December 15, 2009
letting me speak today. For the record, John Sorey, Chair of your
Coastal Advisory Committee, and I am going to be quite brief. I think
this is a very simple issue. We have heard over the last several
months a great deal of this information multiple times, and I support
the recommendations of the staff, and I support the recommendations
of Mr. Arceri, and I appreciate the effort and the contributions from
the advisory committee.
But I think you should proceed to assign this to the Coastal
Advisory Committee. Obviously, I'm not real bright to make that
suggestion based on what you heard, but I think that with the ability
and intelligence of my committee members, we have the ability to do
this work, to bring you back completed staff work to do what's best for
this countywide system, part in the city -- and the city is part of your
county, and we're proud of that -- part in the unincorporated county,
and we look forward to serving you and completing this task and
doing what's best for the estuary. Whatever happens will happen. It
will be based on science, and we'll do our work. Thank you.
MS. FILSON: Next speaker's Marcia Cravens.
MS. CRAVENS: I believe some people are ceding time to me.
You have some materials before you n
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Well, let's -- before we -- you say people
are ceding time to you?
MS. CRAVENS: Yes.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Would you name all the people so that we
can then mark them off the list.
MS. CRAVENS: My husband for one.
MS. FILSON: Mark Cravens.
MR. BELIVEAU: Albert Beliveau.
MS. CRAVENS: And Pat Mullen, I believe.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. So that's 12 minutes, I believe.
MS. CRAVENS: Yes. Good afternoon, Commissioners, and
thank you for the opportunity to speak. As you know, I represent the
Page 189
December 15, 2009
Mangrove Action Group as the president of that organization. We
have a mission, and that is to advocate for the Clam Bay NRP A which
is full of wildlife and habitats that deserve protection. Also I represent
more than 2,000 petitioners who have signed signatures both on paper
and online. The online one continues.
We have made a number of position statements. I'm going to read
the last one that we wrote, in collaboration, Mary Johnson, one of my
board members, and myself. And while I'm doing that, Mary Bolin
here, who is also a board member of the Mangrove Action Group, will
be showing some things on the overhead.
I'll just kind of signal you when we do that.
But I do -- after having heard what Mr. Arceri said, it was really
very disturbing, not only to myself, but I'm sure a number of people
who all have in their interest, is to protect Clam Bay, to protect the
habitats and the wildlife of Clam Bay.
And if you're interested in knowing about certain conversations,
perhaps you might be interested in knowing that myself; Dr. Raia,
who is in the room; and Linda Roth, who is not here today but I'm sure
would attest to this, had coffee with Mr. Arceri in March of this year
in the early stages of the Clam Bay Advisory Committee.
He informed us he did not really want to be on this committee.
He was only doing it as a favor to our staff person here, Gary
McAlpin, who had requested that he be on this committee, and he felt
that he owed him a favor because he had helped him with Hideaway
Beach. So I'm a little concerned that, you know, you're -- it's very
disturbing.
Anyway, I'm going to proceed on here. And also, if you're
interested in hearing audio records, I have audio records of all the
Clam Bay Advisory Committee meetings, by which this was a
staff-driven effort. There is no conspiracy theory here. It is direct
observation and witness of things that occurred. There was a list that
was given to the Clam Bay Advisory Committee their very first
Page 190
"~'~'~'-"'" _..-,.._._._~-----"""--,_.,--
December 15, 2009
meeting, that was given to them by staff, they were told this was a list
of tasks for them do.
That list came from the Clam Bay Estuary Improvement
Discussion Group, which that group had been also given the list by
Mr. McAlpin, and there's plenty of documentation to that effect.
Anyways, as far as our recommendations go. One, redirect
remaining funding for modeling to study alternatives other than
solution by dilution that would focus on the need for storm water
management throughout the watershed.
And by watershed, the watershed of Clam Bay is clearly defined
in the hazard -- the firm reports, it's clearly defined on many maps and
historical documents. It does not include Venetian Bay or any of the
Moorings Bay system. That watershed drains out through Doctors
Pass. And they do need stormwater treatment there.
An extensive stormwater control system is already in place for
Clam Bay that does prevent direct discharges into the Clam Bay
natural resource protection area.
Recommendation two, reject any solutions that would
compromise the environmental values of the Clam Bay natural
resource protection area by altering its essential character as a shallow,
meandering estuarine and nature preserve system.
Recommendation three, restore the management of the Clam Bay
NRP A, including the inlet management, to the Pelican Bay Services
Division. This entity has successfully restored a mangrove forest,
gained extensive experience in managing the hydrology and the tidal
flushing, and learned how to best maintain equilibrium conditions that
prevent the need for frequent dredging.
Recommendation four. The highly successful 1998 management
plan for the Clam Bay natural resource protection area should be
updated. You don't need to fund a brand new study. You had a very
good one that was very successful for -- and it was intended to be
updated. You should go ahead and build upon the successes of that
Page 191
".....~----_..,.,... ,-,....,.... ,.",..~._--~-~.-->.,^,--,---~.------_._---".,~.,.
December 15,2009
management plan, and it should be done, once again, through
consultation with the Conservancy of Southwest Florida, Rookery
Bay, Audubon Society, the Mangrove Action Group, individual firms
and experts who likewise had created the '98 management plan. The
update to that plan should also be done by a team of technical experts;
it should not be a contracted firm such as what is being done here
today.
If you would go with that, please.
I just want to show you, there is already an update, so it's actually
even begun. It just needs to be tweaked. This is the 2007 update to
the 1998 Clam Bay Restoration and Management Plan. It's already
been paid for. All it requires is to improve it again with consultation
by the environmental organizations that have already indicated they're
absolutely interested and willing to help with it.
What we have up here -- and if we would turn the page, please --
I'll tell you what, I'll take it. This is from the 1999, a record of a
meeting here in Collier County held with the Board of Commission at
that time, and this was where they were reviewing how they were
going to respond to findings of noncompliance with the county's
Growth Management Plan by the Department of Community Affairs
at the time, and that was for the Division of Administrative Hearings.
Much of what they discussed had to do with noncompliance for
the conservation and coastal management elements of the Growth
Management Plan. There were remedial Land Development Code
amendments that were a part of that.
Judge Mealy (phonetic) is the one who ruled over that
proceeding. And the NRP A figured prominently in that case. Just on
Page 62 of that, I would like to read that. Our conservation Objective
1.3 with its policy establishes the NRP A program whose purpose is to
protect endangered or potentially endangered wildlife and plant life.
Then under item number 82, the focus of conservation Objective
1.3, and policy 1.3.1 is narrower. Limited to endangered species and
Page 192
December 15, 2009
potentially endangered species, and its promise of protection is
unconditional.
What he went on to opine is that Collier County had created a
NRP A program but had not really actually implemented the
protections that were necessary for that program, and he ordered
Collier County to develop meaningful protection for their NRP As.
Clam Bay was the first NRP A and it's still the only coastal
NRP A, and I find it very disturbing that every document that seems to
be produced by the Coastal Zone Management Department seems to
omit the designation ofNRP A.
The permit applications to Tallahassee and to Ft. Myers, they do
not mention that it is a NRP A. They do not mention that it is a special
aquatic preserve area. The executive recommendation that you have
in front of you today, nowhere on that page is the designation that it is
a natural resource protection area.
Now all we hear is the Clam Bay Estuary, and there seems to be
a -- either they are missing the boat here or it -- I don't know why, but
I find it disturbing.
And lest there be any doubt that Clam Bay still meets the
designation criteria for it to be a NRP A, I've been compiling list of
species. And this first document here is a compilation that I created
myself from earlier historical documents that I've compiled from
numerous reports that have been accepted by Collier County. One of
them is from the -- if you'd go on to the next one.
This one here is from the 9th Annual Biologic Monitoring Report
that's done for the Pelican Bay Services Division. It lists numerous
aquatic, marine, avian, and plant species.
The next one here is for the 1992 Coastal Zone Management Plan
that was adopted by Collier County as the guiding document for
implementing their conservation and coastal elements.
These are just a few images that I took myself of -- there's oysters
and clams and barnacles growing along the shoreline of Outer Clam
Page 193
,._.".,"-,-_.-*..,."-,......>---"_.~_..
December 15, 2009
Bay and on the mangrove roots.
You can go to www.ClamBay.net. and you will find links there
for all kinds of those sort of reports, and I've also put up a gallery of
photos that I've been collecting contributions for all the wildlife.
This next item here is the current map from the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service indicating FL64P, which is Clam Pass coastal barrier
resource area. That is why it became a NRP A because it was one of
the very few remaining undeveloped coastal barrier areas with
undeveloped beach, dune, backwater, wetlands. It was a -- it's a
complete unit, and there aren't very many of those in the State of
Florida anymore.
The next pieces that she's going to be putting up are indications
of seagrass, because we keep hearing that seagrass is ephemeral,
there's not really that much seagrass in Clam Bay now. It really
should not be much of a consideration anymore. And the fact is that
seagrass in Clam Bay, in the Clam Pass system is a persistent feature.
The only thing ephemeral about it is the location where it occurs from
year to year. If you'd keep going. That's a U.S. geological survey that
was included as one of the attachments to the application for dredging.
This next one is from the PBS&J 2007 report where they did
randomized sampling in Outer Clam Bay. They found 43 percent
occurrence in their randomized sites for positive identification of
seagrasses.
This is 2007, I believe, transect monitoring for the Pelican Bay
Services Division, and the next one is the 2008 transect monitoring for
them. Year after year after year we have seagrasses in the system.
And when it's not dredged, we get more lush fields.
Has that been 12 minutes?
I just want to say ifthere's any -- any doubt that says seagrass is
important, you might just want to look at the application. This was
applied for seagrass markers from Clam Pass entrance all the way
through Outer Clam Bay to the Seagate community. There are
Page 194
_ __,,_._M..___~...._'_"_'_~'"~"__".~_'_
December 15, 2009
numerous locations here the county applied to Fish and Wildlife
Conservation Commission to place these markers there to mark the
areas where the seagrass normally occurs.
And we are in favor of marking those areas because that's really
the best way to protect them. Thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Theodore Raia. He'll be
followed by David Roellig.
MR. RAIA: Thank you. My name is Theodore Raia. I'm a
member of the board of the Pelican Bay Services Division but do not
speak for them.
The first submission for dredging was for beach nourishment. I
don't know what that has to do with protecting the coastal area. That
was withdrawn. Then there it was required to put in navigation signs,
lateral navigation signs, on the grounds that this was a requirement of
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. When this was refuted, the
request was never rescinded. Now, we have navigation signs. Again,
I don't know what navigation signs has to do with protecting this
NRP A.
I have a question here. On this application for the signs, it says
the applicant agrees to save the Coast Guard harmless with respect to
any claim or claims that may result arising from the alleged
negligence of the maintenance or operation of the approved signs.
The Coast Guard is absolved of any responsibility. I want to
remind the county that they have now inherited the responsibility for
anything that happens there.
And you must understand that this pass has already been declared
non-navigable with a description in the Coast Pilot saying why it's
non-navigable, yet you go ahead and you put signs in there saying that
it's safe passage. I think you're incurring a lot of liability.
So is the next step going to be to dredge a canal for your signs?
One thing not mentioned is that Seagate has a lot to gain
financially by dredging a deepwater canal to their homes. There are
Page 195
December 15, 2009
about 77 homes there. They'll each increase in value by about a
million dollars if that's done. And this is not brought up, and I think it
ought to be given consideration.
Now, I consider this bad science. I am a radiologist trained -- I
was chief of radiology at Walter Reed for five years. I covered a
multi-million-dollar budget and was in charge of lots of research and
development in telemedicine and radiology. I know what good
. .
SCience is.
Let's look at this estuary as a patient. One does not treat a lab
result. You treat the patient. Somebody has a report here of
something in the sediment. Are you going to disturb the entire Clam
Bay to try to get a better lab result? That's doing -- that's backwards
science. And all due respect to Dr. Tomasko, that is not the way
things are done. You find something wrong and then you study why it
is wrong and what you can do to protect it, to improve it.
And if the cost is more than it's worth to improve it, you don't do
it. There is no limit to how much money those people are going to ask
you to pour into this hole. Thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is David Roellig. He'll be
followed Ronnie Bellone.
MS. BELLONE: I cede my time to Georgia Hiller; Ronnie
Bellone.
MS. FILSON: Okay. He'll be followed by Mary Johnson.
MR. ROELLIG: Hello, Commissioners. My name is David
Roellig. I'm one of the technical members of the Clam Bay Advisory
Committee, and I am shocked by Mr. Arceri's comments. We've had
discussions on how the future of this committee should be handled,
and his comments are completely at variance with anything we've
discussed.
This is controversial, yes. If it's too hot for you, maybe you
should stay out of the kitchen. I certainly don't think having him on
the Coastal Advisory Committee would be a plus, because I think ifhe
Page 196
December 15, 2009
feels that he's being pressured, well, that's unfortunate. I was on the
committee. I don't feel I've been pressured.
I think there's really serious problems in this area. We have a
report. One thing I want to mention to you, you have
recommendations approved by this committee and by the Coastal
Advisory Committee. Note its recommendations, not the report. The
report was never approved by the Coastal Advisory Committee or the
Clam Bay Advisory Committee because it was found by the majority
of reviewers to be seriously deficient.
There are literally dozens of pages of comments, adverse
comments, on this report. So there are a lot of problems here. If you
want to shuffle it off to somebody else to see if you could get a better
result, that's certainly your prerogative.
The other thing is, we have always a new idea about how many
water samples should be taken. Mr. -- Dr. Tomasko talks about
STORET and the reason for putting the data into STORET. The key
word is appropriate. There's literally thousands of water samples that
have been taken in Clam Bay.
Now, do you want to do more water sampling? Are you going to
spend hundreds of thousands of dollars more on water samples?
You've got the money. Go ahead and spend it. I'm a professional
geologist. I have no problem with collecting data. If you can afford it,
go ahead and do it.
The same with aging the sediment. If you want to do a study on
the age of the sediment in Clam Bay and Moorings Bay, go ahead and
spend the money, you know. I'm a taxpayer, but it's a very small
percentage of my taxes.
It's not a big surprise to anybody that lives in areas that has
dead-end canals that there's sediment in dead-end canals. There's no
amount of flooding -- or flushing that I'm aware of that's going to
solve that problem. The problem is caused by material coming out of
the canals that should be abating at the source, not at -- sir, my time is
Page 197
December 15, 2009
now up?
I certainly do not think it's a good idea to give this to the Coastal
Advisory Committee. I know a lot of people on the Coastal Advisory
Committee. They're nice people. They have no technical expertise in
this area whatsoever in my opinion. Thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Mary Johnson. She'll be
followed by Cyril Marks.
MS. JOHNSON: Good afternoon. Mary Johnson for the
Mangrove Action Group and a resident of Pelican Bay.
It's, unfortunately, Mr. Arceri's misrepresentations and attacks are
typical of the cynical disregard shown by those overseeing this project
when it comes to the legitimate concerns that have been expressed
about the potential damager to the Clam Bay NRP A, number one.
In the comments you have before you that have been submitted
by the Mangrove Action Group, you'll see that at least ten major
concerns have been raised about the directions and implications of this
study; exaggerated claims about the alarmingly degraded quality of
Clam Bay's water, which has been used to justify this study; the
efforts to show impairment where the accedences found are modest
and occasional, apparently driven by an effort to gain control over
estuary management; obfuscation about the true aims of the study to
resolve water quality problems elsewhere; and to extend the definition
of Clam Bay to include Venetian and Moorings Bay.
Questions about the adequacy of the latest data collection which
will be fed into a model to explore options ot increase flushing
through Clam Bay without any evidence that such flushing is needed
for the health of Clam Bay.
Concerns about the proposed actions to be explored in the model
simulations which prior studies have already revealed to be extremely
damaging to Clam Bay itself.
I won't go on further except to remind you of an old fable, the
Goose that Laid the Golden Egg. In the story, the farmer who owned
Page] 98
December] 5, 2009
the amazing goose became impatient with the steady production of
golden eggs. In his greed, he decided to cut open the goose to get
more eggs and, of course, the goose dies.
Clam Bay is already producing many golden eggs for Collier
County from the wise stewardship it has enjoyed, nature and habitat
conservation, shoreline protection, recreation, enhanced tax revenues
and tourism dollars from the attractiveness of the nature preserve for
surrounding residential and tourism development.
Now it is being asked to produce more eggs, ever more sand for
beach renourishment, expanded motorboat access, a solution to the
water quality problems that lie elsewhere.
Commissioners, is it really your intent to kill the goose that laid
the golden egg? Please take this opportunity to discontinue this work
in favor of a more transparent and accountable effort to address the
region's water quality problems primarily outside Clam Bay, and
please restore the stewardship role of the Pelican Bay Services
Division that has worked so well for Clam Bay in the past.
Thank you.
MS. FILSON: Next speaker is Cyril Marks. He'll be followed by
Marshall DeMott.
MR. MARKS: My name is Cyril Marks. I don't live in Pelican
Bay. I've been in Naples for the last 29 years. I have canoed and
kayaked up and down this beautiful estuarine.
I run a small business, an eco-tour business, I am a maust
naturalist, I'm an environmentalist, and I'm semiretired.
It is a beautiful area. Let's leave it alone. I -- the other day I had
a little put-put come along aimed straight for me. Canoes and kayaks
have little enough place where they can go and be in peace without
smelling all these engines and pollution that is really going to be put
into this estuarine with more and more boats, particularly if you put up
these great big three-by-three signs, or whatever they are. That won't
leave enough room for both kayaks and big boats.
Page ] 99
December 15,2009
And with that, I don't have much more to say. Just leave us alone.
Give us the space. Thank you.
MS. FILSON: Marshall DeMott. He'll be followed by Keith
Dallas.
MR. DeMOTT: Thank you, Commissioners. I'm Marshall
DeMott. I'm a fly-fishing guide and fisherman, and I'm a Naples
resident, and I moved here about, well, seven years ago from Maine.
And I request that you make sure that you support any efforts to
leave Clam Pass alone. I don't even like markers in the pass.
The other day I was fishing, and a couple of dolphin came in in
two feet of water. The sand is going to move and the sand is going to
shift, but these dolphin came right at me. I fish with flies and I fish
and I guide folks. And if you haven't been there and walked around
back there, it's a truly amazing natural place, and there is no place for
motorized boats, boats or anything with motors back there. Kayaks,
canoes are fine, and -- but there shouldn't be any man-made objects in
that at all. It should be left alone. It should be pole -- I don't think
there's any need for any navigation aids back there. It's a marvelous
place to walk around, and yes, through the seasons, the sands do shift,
and the tide does certain things to the -- in a natural way, and those
things are going to occur. So if we can try to grow some grass back
there, it will even be better.
So I believe Clam Pass will be damaged unless we act to preserve
is by excluding motorboats. And it's rebounding from their most
recent dredgings that it has had, and today you can fish it and catch
sea trout and snook and ladyfish and redfish. I saw a school of redfish
the other day, and baby tarpon.
And so I urge everyone to please go there and enjoy that and try
to preserve it the way it is. Thank you very much.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Keith Dallas. He'll be
followed by, I think it's Bruie (sic) Bowman.
MR. DALLAS: Hi. I'm Keith Dalas. I live at 7575 Pelican Bay
Page 200
December] 5, 2009
Boulevard. I am the vice-chairman of the Pelican Bay Services
Division, but I am here as an individual. I don't speak for the board or
any of my other members.
As far as the comment on which committees should control the
future studies, I'll leave that up to you. What I'd like to talk about is
the last item that's on that agenda, and that is the peer review. I
encourage you to approve the peer review, the funding of it, along
with the Pelican Bay Services Division, a review of the PBS&J report
and future studies that will come along.
Over the years, Pelican Bay has heard that the Pelican Bay is a
very pristine area. We've heard that it's -- we've done a good job,
given that it's mangroves, and it does have runoff from the mangroves,
which makes it unique. But otherwise it's a -- it's working very well.
We've worked very hard to filter the waters that run off from west of
41, and that seems to have worked well over the years.
The -- I think that because of that, most of us were very surprised
when the PBS&J report came out, because it sort of contradicted what
all of us had expected over the years, and particularly when we were
compared to Moorings Bay, which we know has runoff problems.
This may be a technical issue, but I think it just still upset a lot of
people; therefore, I would hope that a peer review would help to clear
some of the air, get more people onboard as to what's going on, maybe
lower some of the rhetoric that's been going on.
My hope is that we can -- if you approve the peer review portions
of this, that it will help the community, the county, Pelican Bay, work
together to find some of the solutions, and I think it will be money
well spent. I thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is --
MR. BOWMAN: Bruce Bowman.
MS. FILSON: Bruce.
MR. BOWMAN: My name is Bruce Bowman, and thank you for
letting me speak. I'm a part-time resident here recently, and I'm from
Page 20]
December 15, 2009
Maine, and I came here because of places like Clam Pass. I came here
about ten years ago, and I said, I just want to wade, I like to fly-fish. I
don't like to go out on a boat that much. Where can I go? And they
said, go to Clam Pass. It was a beautiful spot then; it's very beautiful
now.
As Marshall said, who just spoke, there's plenty of wildlife in
there. And it's not broken, so I don't -- I think we need to leave it
alone. We don't need motorboats in there. It doesn't need to be
dredged. It's one of the few places now where you can go where you
can actually -- don't have to spend a lot of money. You can walk and
you're not going on private property and you see all kinds of wildlife
and fishing. It needs to be protected.
Thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Jim Burke. He'll be followed
by Kathy Worley.
MR. BURKE: Commissioners, Jim Burke, Pelican Bay and the
Coastal Advisory Committee, but I'm speaking for myself.
I've been involved with Clam Bay for ten years; eight on the
service division board, two on the advisory committee. Clam Bay is
why I, ten years ago, volunteered to serve on the service division.
I have one agenda, the short- and long-term health of that system.
So I'm going to be very brief. I support completely what Councilman
Sorey said, back it up completely. I support what Chairman Arceri
said, it's time to move on. This has been dragging on for two years.
It's time to move it forward.
And by the way, John Arceri was reluctant to get on the Clam
Bay Advisory Committee, no doubt about it. But when he got on it,
he got on it right up to his eyeballs. He spent time talking to
everybody on both sides; understood the issues much better than I did.
So, please, move this forward. The system, the estuary system,
demands it. Thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Kathy Worley. She'll
Page 202
December 15, 2009
followed by Doug, I think, Finley.
MS. WORLEY: Hi. Kathy Worley -- Kathy Worley. I'm a
member of the Clam Bay Advisory Committee. I'm also the
codirector of science at the Conservancy of Southwest Florida.
I was also, like David Roellig, I little bit shocked to hear Mr.
Arceri's comments this morning, because the way we left the
committee was that we were going to recommend that we continue.
So -- and I also -- I'm also a little bit concerned that on the CAC,
there wouldn't be any technical advisers on that committee. I am
perfectly willing to continue serving on that committee. And I have
heard and gotten voice mails. It's definitely contentious. I've gotten
them from both sides, but it's not -- all of the stuff that I have has been
pretty -- that I've been -- that I have received has been pretty much
very diplomatic and not personal. I don't -- I'm sorry if people have
gotten personal comments, but personally, I haven't. I've just gotten,
this is what I think, from the public.
I did send you an email that you-all got, so I'm not going to
discuss that mainly because this issue came up. But I certainly think
that the Clam Bay Committee his served a purpose, and I think it can
continue to serve a purpose, and at least it should go back to the full
committee for a discussion if we were going to recommend
disbanding, because as far as I knew, we were going to recommend
continuing on.
Thank you for your time.
MS. FILSON: Next speaker is Doug Finley; is that correct, sir?
MR. FINLEY: Yes.
MS. FILSON: And he'll be followed by Sarah Wu.
MR. FINLEY: Doug Finley, City of Naples. All of you
commissioners know that over 12 years, I've kayaked Clam Bay a lot
of times. Probably almost a hundred times. I try to do it at least once
a month, so I want to make a couple points.
We, and by we I mean collier County, are finally into the process
Page 203
December 15,2009
of accumulating some of the most comprehensive science and data on
the Clam Bay system and adjacent waters, and I credit you for that.
Dr. David Tomasko is one of the most qualified persons to have
ever studied the Clam Bay system. As regrettable as it is, the Clam
Bay system is and will always be a managed system. The system lost
any ability for hand-off management or natural management when
Seagate Drive, and especially Vanderbilt Road, cut off restricted
flows. The Strand added to that impact.
Even the Pelican Bay berm is a part of the managed system, and
a managed system demands proactive, not reactive science and
management.
Seagate's right of boating access in the southern areas of Clam
Bay via Clam Pass was established in 1958, long predating the NRP A
or Pelican Bay.
Logic validates that good circulation and flushing is important to
the health of Clam Bay. Sediment testing is a vital component of the
science in a proactive management of Clam Bay, and a Clam Bay
committee should sunset, with duties transferred to the CAe.
And I do want to say, I have a great deal of respect for the
chairman, Councilman John Arceri. Thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Sarah Wu. She'll be followed
by Ernest Wu.
MS. WU: Hi. Good afternoon. My name is Sarah Wu, and I am
a resident of Seagate.
I think that all of us today in this room can agree that Clam Pass,
Clam Bay, is a beautiful, beautiful place. But I caution you with
having a hands-off approach. Rather, I would like for you to vote for
the three recommendations, the water quality study, the sediment
study, and the modeling study. The reason for that is, we need the
best science to ensure that the next management plan is as most
comprehensive as it can possibly be.
And please vote in favor of those three recommendations. I also
Page 204
December 15,2009
support all of the comments that were made by Chairman Arceri and
Chairman Sorey. Thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Ernest Wu. He'll be followed
by Meredith Dee.
MR. WU: For the record, Ernie Wu, Seagate resident. I was
going to come up here with a long list of counters to some of the
political spin and misstatements, but frankly, that's enough, all right.
Enough with the mud slinging already.
In summary, we fully support the recommendations made by
your chairman of the Clam Bay Advisory Committee, John Arceri, we
also fully support statements made by the chairman of your Coastal
Advisory Committee, John Sorey.
Please vote according to the recommendations. Thank you very
much, and Happy Holidays.
MS. FILSON: The next speak is Meredith Dee. She'll be
followed by Susan Calkins.
MS. DEE: Really short and sweet. Ditto what -- oh, I have to
come up. I was going to be short.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And you have to say your name.
MS. DEE: I'm sorry. Meredith Dee, Seagate resident, and I'm
also on the board. And I second everything that Ernie Wu and Sara
Wu said in addition to Mr. Arceri and Mr. Sorey. Thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Susan Calkins. She'll be
followed by Gary Price.
MS. CALKINS: Yes. I actually was going to cede my time, but
some of the comments that have been made have concerned me a
good deal, and I would like to just say a couple of things.
I live in the City of Naples. I go to Clam Pass every day. I have
been watching and paying attention since the seagrass study that Dr.
Tomasko did in 2007. I attended his presentations twice; once at
Pelican Bay and once at Rookery Bay where he gave that. And he
specifically talked about the fact that a good deal, ifnot most, of the
Page 205
December 15, 2009
problem with the water does, indeed, have to do with Seagate Drive.
And unless we plan on taking that out, I question, you know, the
whole issue of flushing the system.
The other -- that he specifically said -- and I dragged out myoid
notes, but I also have the report. He has said he doesn't advocate more
flushing, and there seems to be a good deal of talk about the
importance of a circulation model, the importance of dredging for the
health of the estuary, that the nutrient control is by volume control. I
assume he means by that that we need best management practices, and
we need more of them. We need them in Seagate, we need them in
Moorings Bay, and we all know that.
So I think that there has been, indeed, a lot of feeling in this
whole issue. And I've been party to it, and I know -- I sat at the same
meeting that Mr. Coyle sat at, that Mr. Sorey sat at, where Mr. Wu
was representing Seagate. We had Pelican Bay representing, and
there was an attempt to come to some agreement. And I think you
know that that phone call that was played was a response to the fact
that Seagate pulled out without coming to an agreement.
And so, you know, I think we do, indeed -- I care a great deal
about the health of the system. I understand the whole issue in concept
of an estuary, but I think we need to be very careful about how we go
forward with this, and I think we definitely need the technical
expertise, and we cannot assume that certain things are essential to the
health without that study. Thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Gary Price. He'll be followed
by Brad Cornell.
MR. PRICE: Thank you, Chairman -- Chairwoman Fiala,
Commissioners. My comments will take 14 seconds.
I fully support the recommendations of both chairmen, and
equally important, I support any effort by this board which will
continue to improve our natural resources. I also support and
encourage our continued efforts to foster better relations and
Page 206
December] 5,2009
communication with our neighbors and respect the rights of all of our
citizens.
Hopefully we can use all our energy, resources, and time to make
our community a better place. I'm confident that you'll make the right
decision, and I thank you for your service.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Brad Cornell. He'll be
followed by Mike Bauer.
MR. CORNWELL: Good afternoon. Madam Chair and
Commissioners, I'm -- I appreciate the opportunity to speak. I'm Brad
Cornell, and I'm speaking on behalf of the Collier County Audubon
Society .
And first I want to compliment you on making this discussion
today more public friendly by having the time certain. Lots of
speakers is a good thing for making a good decision. So thank you
very much. It's also a lot of work.
I also want to note that Collier County Audubon Society has no
objection to acquiring more data and information to support good
policy decision making like the proposals in front of you; likewise,
we're very supportive of peer review of analysis. This is -- you know,
good science should support good policy; however, Collier Audubon's
primary concern is that the current relatively natural -- I say relatively
natural -- past estuarine bay system of Clam Bay would be
significantly harmed by dredging the pass and back-bay channels for
navigation purposes. It is one of the very few shallow and natural
estuarine pass systems in the state, and that sustains a very unique
habitat landscape, and we want to see that remain. I think that's all of
our objective.
The question is, are we going to facilitate navigational dredging,
and that's what we're very concerned about. And what raises our
concern is that any management plan that's going to expand the
dredging criteria beyond the current, relatively successful model,
frankly makes us very nervous.
Page 207
December 15, 2009
So I'm raising a caution flag. It seems to us like there could be
problems with additional dredging. And we only have to look at
Wiggins Pass to see what overdredging does. That is a very negative
experience that we have had at Wiggins Pass. We don't want to repeat
that in other pass systems.
And my final note is that should the Clam Bay Management Plan
ever consider reconnection to the Vanderbilt Lagoon, first the poor
water quality of the lagoon must be addressed, and that's because the
watershed for the lagoon is filled with development that has very little
stormwater treatment because it's so old.
And I live in that development. I live in Naples Park. And we
contribute a lot of pollution to that Vanderbilt Lagoon because we
don't have any storm water. They didn't do that back then. So first
you've got to fix the water quality in Vanderbilt Lagoon before you
connect. Thanks.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Mike Bauer. He'll be
followed by Martha Dykman.
MR. BAUER: Good afternoon, Commissioners. Mike Bauer,
natural resources manager for the City of Naples.
A few years ago I was contacted by a resident of Seagate who
informed me that the annual monitoring reports connected with the
permit for the Clam Bay management were showing a continual
decline over the last several years in seagrasses.
Because of that, I went and took a look at Clam Pass, my first
time at Clam Pass, and I -- not Clam Pass, but Outer Clam Bay which
borders the city. I took my snorkeling gear and I went in, and I was
immediately struck by the water quality on a gross level. I couldn't --
not only could I not see my hand in front of my face, I was looking for
seagrasses. I had to go within one or two inches of the bottom to see
the bottom to see ifthere were seagrasses there, which there were.
I was struck that there's something not right about this system.
This has silt and sediment suspended in the water. I couldn't see
Page 208
December] 5, 2009
anything. I went back. I've been back on three or four occasions, and
I've always seen the same thing, same kind of conditions.
My first reaction was that this was caused by Moorings Bay. I
mean, we have this beautiful Outer Clam Bay, and it is beautiful. It's
lined by mangroves, and I thought, we've got Moorings Bay, which is
completely developed. My assumption was that this was coming as a
result of the Moorings Bay development putting in sediment, whatever
happened, but that was not based on data.
After that time, the city started doing water quality sampling.
We've sampled now for a year in the Moorings Bay system. What we
found, surprisingly, is that the Moorings Bay system does not exceed
any state standards. The water's pretty good. Now, that's not because
of anything we're doing in the city. It's because of Doctors Pass. That
water flushes very well. It moves fast, cleans that system out. But the
bottom line is the water quality's pretty good.
Now, Dr. Tomasko, since that time, also has looked at the water
quality data existing for Clam Bay, and he's found that the water
quality's not so good. There are issues with sediment. There are other
parameters that do not meet state standards.
More importantly, what he also found out with flow studies is
that that water flows from Clam Bay into Moorings Bay. It's not
Moorings Bay causing the problem.
So where are we now? We need to develop a model. We've got
to come up with some kind of a management strategy to improve
things in Outer Clam Bay. We can't do that without a model because
we can't -- we don't want to go in and start dredging everything.
That's not the idea.
lfwe have a models, we can start doing what-ifs. What if we do
this, play with the model and see what happens. It's a great
management tool for deciding what we can do. Now, that's just a tool.
It's not the solution. We have to balance that with reasoning and
looking at the data and using our professional experience to figure out
Page 209
December] 5,2009
what we need to do and start looking at things, not jumping into doing
anything at this point, but we need that tool. So I'd urge you to please
approve the plans to do a model. Before we can do anything we really
need that. Thank you.
MS. FILSON: Martha Dykman, she'll be followed by Rick
Dykman.
MS. DYKMAN: Martha Dykman. I was president of the
Seagate community when the 1998 permit was issued. And I think
about how our community worked with Pelican Bay when the
mangroves started dying at the north end of the system and how we
jumped in and supported them and helped them. We didn't blame
them. We could have tried to blame them. We could have talked to
their scientists and told them that their scientists were liars and
whatever. We didn't do that. We worked with them.
I was a member of the Mangrove Action Committee. I was
always asked to all the meetings. I was asked for my input. I was the
instrumental person that got the city to go along with a hydrology plan
to put the flat valves on Seagate Drive.
All of a sudden, once the permit got handed to Pelican Bay
Services Division, they've cherry picked. We want to do this, we don't
want to do that.
At the time we had -- our city environmentalists said, look we
will mark -- we will mark Lower Clam Bay and keep boats out of the
-- out of the seagrasses. Pelican Bay didn't want to do it. They didn't
mark the seagrasses.
They also said, go no wake. We've been going no wake for the
last 12 years. We've done our part. In that 1998 permit it said that
navigational markers should be put in the system. Pelican Bay didn't
want them. They didn't get put in. There were supposed to be sings at
the pass for people's safety at the pass so that boaters could go in
safely and not hurt anybody in the pass. They were not put in because
of Pelican Bay Services Division.
Page 2]0
December] 5,2009
So we have done our part. We were great partners with Pelican
Bay. Through the whole thing we worked with them. We encouraged
the county to work with them. We said we'd be willing to be on a
taxing district. We went to all the meetings, and we've been
completely treated, you know, like -- worse then stepchildren.
So please support Mr. Arceri. Please support John Sorey in their
comments. Mr. McAlpin's done a great job. He's tried to make it not
a political thing, but it's become so political it's impossible to go to the
meetings. Thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Rick Dykman. He'll be
followed by Jeff Fridkin.
MR. DYKMAN: Thank you very much. My name's Rick
Dykman. I'm currently on the board of directors of Seagate. I've lived
in Seagate since 1984, so I've been there a long time. I've seen a lot of
things happen.
You know, I sat here and I listened for a while, and people are
talking about boats and big boats and navigation and dredging. That's
not why we're here. We're here to ask to do some further testing. You
know, you go to your doctor and you get a physical and you get two
or three things that come back, you know, out of norma Icy, you say,
oh, well, what the heck. I'm not even going to worry about it. Well,
sure, you go get some more tests. I mean, that's what you do to get
things solved.
So obviously I support it. I support all my neighbors. We think
we need to move forward and get this testing done, and then we can
make decisions about whether or not there's dredging or markers or
anything else. I mean, you've got to start, you know, simple and move
up.
Thank you very much.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Jeff Fridkin.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: He had to go.
MS. FILSON: Sue Black. She'll be followed by Robert Rogers.
Page 21]
December] 5, 2009
MS. BLACK: Hi. Sue Black, resident of Seagate. I know that I
read somewhere there's seven steps to stagnation. One of them is, it
will cost too much. It will never work. We've never done it that way
before.
To me, hearing this back and forth, back and forth, back and
forth, is a step to stagnation. We need to make a decision. I support
the four recommendations or three recommendations that are on the
floor right now.
I live less than 25 feet from the canal. Most of those Pelican Bay
people live in high-rise condos. They don't see the water every day.
They don't have an eight-year-old son that fishes.
I want to know if that fish he catches is safe to eat. Ifthere's
toxins in that water, I want to know for the safety of my four children.
So please, vote for this recommendation to study the water. It just
makes sense. Thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Robert Rogers. He'll be
followed by Pat Muller.
MR. ROGERS: Robert Rogers, 5264 Seahorse Avenue.
I was on the Clam Bay Advisory Committee. It's a tad bit
intimidating. It's probably not so intimidating from the Pelican Bay
side, but on our side it's a little intimidating.
I agree with all John's comments. My house is located such that
literally Clam Bay is my backyard. I'm the last lot on Seahorse. You
know, in throw a rock and hit that, I would be in Clam Bay.
I wasn't nearly as surprised to hear that the water quality was not
so good. I was very surprised to hear there's two people in here that
have swum in it. That was very surprising to me. Or is it swam in it?
But I think Rick Dykman cleared it up pretty good, and I'm sure
Gary's going to. Today I don't think they're advocating any changes to
the system, just some further testing. And as a Seagate resident
concerned with two things primarily, that the estuary be used by as
many county residents as possible and that the estuary be as clean as
Page 2]2
December 15, 2009
possible -- and I don't want that to be to the detriment of anyone in
Pelican Bay. All their people that participate on the committee, I
found them to be very nice. I thought our meetings were good.
Again, a little intimidating.
So I'm hoping you will support the further studies just so we can
learn some more. And I'm sure eventually that's going to lead to some
recommendations that will be even dicier than today. But hopefully
you'll support those studies, and the estuary can be enjoyed, not by the
amount of people today, and by more people, and the estuary can be
cleaner; because in my view, as I said in one of the first meetings we
had, the water's putrid. It's not a clean system. It's not anything I
would let my three kids, all under the age of six, go in.
But, again, I hope you will support the further investigations.
And I really thank all of you for taking the time, because I realize it's a
dicey issue.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Pat Mullen.
MS. MULLEN: I ceded my time to Marcia earlier.
MS. FILSON: Michael Seef. He'll be followed by Georgia
Hiller.
MR. SEEF: Michael Seef. I live in North Naples, and I do have
-- I do have a son who has a place in Seagate, but we're pretty much of
like minds.
We've enjoyed the Clam Bay Estuary for ten years since we've
lived in the area. We kayak in it all the time. We just value the
scenery, we value the bird life, we value the fish life.
I also serve as a nature guide. We have daily walks that explain
the estuary and the mangroves and the wildlife in the area.
I'll just make it very short and say that if we can agree, as many
of the people have said, that our main interest is to preserve this
relatively pristine area now and forever, the whole community will be
well served. But there's a question of how we do that. Ifwe do
excessive dredging, if we do some of the other things that we're
Page 213
December 15, 2009
talking about that are unneeded, why spend -- I leave with a question.
Why spend $235,000 if we all agree that the estuary in Clam Bay and
Clam Pass are not really impaired? Thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Michael Seef.
MR. SEEF: That's me.
MS. FILSON: Oh, I'm sorry. The final speaker is Georgia
Hiller, and I have Ronnie Bellone and Mary Bolen who have ceded
their time to her. So she'll get nine minutes.
MS. HILLER: Commissioners, Georgia Hiller, candidate for
county commission, second district, chair of the North Naples
Community Alliance, and resident of Pine Ridge Estates.
To begin, what I'd like to do is -- Mary, if you would -- a handout
is being given to you. County staff requested comments on the Post
Buckley report from Humiston and Moore Engineers, the engineers
responsible for the design and successful implementation of the
CBRMP since 1998.
Those comments were not, from what I can see, included in your
agenda package and deserve consideration in your review of this item.
I would like to enter these comments into the record at this time.
The next thing is, Commissioners, is I would like you to observe
what's on the overhead. What you see in front of you is an aerial of
Clam Bay, Clam Pass, and the surrounding mangroves. This is
evidence today of the successful project undertaken by PBSD, the
single most successful mangrove restoration project in the State of
Florida. Please keep this in mind as I speak.
My presentation will be broken up into three parts. First I'd like
to give you a general statement about the state of affairs. Secondly I'd
like to get into a technical analysis, and thirdly, I'd like to give you my
conclusions on where we are.
To begin. Restoration and enhancement activities conducted in
the estuary for the past decade have shown that limiting dredging of
the pass is necessary to provide adequate flushing of the waters within
Page 2]4
--- ---,~-,- '''-'---.,-"-..,.-- --~"~'._-~_.,---,.._--". -.- - ' "~"~-~._--.,,,.- -.-.....,.-- .-. .',.,., --'''..'-.. ,'-..,-',. ""-",
December] 5,2009
the bays and to maintain the health of the mangroves; however, in this
case bigger is not better, as the studies have shown.
There is a point of diminishing returns when it comes to
dredging. If you dredge too much sand out of the pass, then the
flushing capabilities of the bay are not improved any further. Instead,
the larger pass dredging can cause serious erosion and other adverse
impacts to the adjacent beaches.
The larger opening could also exceed the pass's ability to
maintain itself and could, in fact, result in more frequent, costly
dredging and beach impacts like the county is dealing with at big __
Wiggins Pass. Sound science should be used when making decisions
which have the effect of seriously and adversely affecting one of
Collier County's very special places.
Science should provide the criteria for determining the dredging
schedule to support mangrove health. Arbitrary dredging should be
avoided. The Pelican Bay Services Division has over 11 years of
experience working with and enhancing this system. Their knowledge
and experience should be included in all decision making.
Commissioners, speaking more specifically to what is before you
today, the Clam Bay Advisory Committee Status Report that is in the
board agenda package on Page 6 of 133 states, in quotes, FDEP is
strongly considering requiring Collier County to model the system to
obtain the exact crosssection of the pass cut. If this is required, it
could lengthen the permitting time frame considerably due to, among
other issues, the controversy associated with the ebb shoal and the
width of the cut at Clam Pass.
DEP's consideration of requiring modeling is specific to the fact
that the county's dredging application included a report Gary McAlpin
had CP&E prepare to support dredging the ebb shoal.
Locally we are being told that dredging will be limited to the
limits of previous dredging; however, DEP is proceeding as if this is a
request for expanded dredging limits. Commissioners, you should
Page 2] 5
December 15,2009
find out what county staff intent is before approving this.
Based on good information, I understand that the issuance of a
DEP permit for the expanded dredging seems highly unlikely. The
technical explanation for why the expanded dredging is unlikely to
receive a permit is that stable dimensions to which the inlet can be
dredged are based on physical equilibrium with natural tidal energy.
The equilibrium inlet dimensions are dependent on the tide range
and size of the bay. No matter how wide the inlet is dredged, it will
not change the volume of water flowing in and out of the bay.
We already know that the natural equilibrium inlet side is close
to the dimensions that are being maintained under the 1998 Clam Bay
Restoration and Management Plan, known as CBRMP. The CBRMP
has efficiently managed the inlet by dredging it close to the
equilibrium size for this inlet bay system.
The inlet used to close frequently and used to be dredged every
year. Due to the success of the CBRMP, the inlet has not closed. The
mangroves have recovered, and the dredging is only needed at about
five-year intervals, and in fact, this time frame could even be longer,
since the county has always dredged the inlet to obtain sand before
dredging was actually necessary to keep the inlet open.
There is a straightforward formula for determining equilibrium
inlet cross-sectional area, and it does not require a costly sophisticated
computer modeling package like the Delph 3D. Advanced modeling
serves other purposes.
The proposed scope of work includes water quality monitoring to
determine ifthere are quality -- water quality problems in Clam Bay.
It would be logical to add circulation modeling to scope of work if and
when water quality problems are discovered.
Pelican Bay has used the coastal modeling system, CMS
software, developed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, to model
circulation in -- within Clam Bay. This was done to evaluate
implications related to freshwater inflow.
Page 2]6
December ]5,2009
At this time there are no identified water quality problems in
Clam Bay. Ifin the future a water quality problem in Clam Bay were
to be identified, the CMS model could be used to determine how to
improve circulation to address the issue.
It is, therefore, not clear why Delph 3D modeling is part of the
scope of project before you today. The CMS model used previously
in Clam Bay is one of a number of commercially available software
packages that are equivalent to Delph 3D, which raises the question of
why the Delph 3D model was exclusively specified, why a firm that
does not have that model was originally selected to do the work and
why Gary McAlpin has now indicated that the modeling will, in fact,
be done by CP&E.
Know what Page 8 of your agenda says. I quote again, a
best-value offer was solicited from all firms under the Coastal Zone
Management consulting contract. PBS&J and Johnson Engineering
responded to the solicitation, and PBS&J was selected by an
independent selection committee utilizing standard criteria, end of
quotes.
CP&E was listed to do the model for Johnson -- for the Johnson
Engineering team at a significantly lower price than PBS&J's price,
yet PBS&J was selected and is now using Johnson Engineering's
consultant. What's going on here?
Commissioners, my conclusions are on the overhead. Excessive
dredging beyond what has been engaged in under the CBRMP will
lead to serious beach erosion to the beaches to the north of the pass,
which will result in otherwise unnecessary beach restoration which, in
turn, lead to wasted TDC dollars to the tune of millions.
Management of Clam Bay and Clam Pass should be returned to
PBSD, an entity proven to be qualified and competent to handle the
job professionally and cost effectively.
DEP should not approve this permit without reviewing the 11
years of successful Clam Bay maintenance under PBSD, which will
Page 2] 7
December] 5, 2009
establish that what is being asked for by the county is without merit.
Specifically, Delph 3D modeling is costly and unnecessary.
Existing modeling supporting the existing level of dredging,
which has been a success, should be relied upon.
And finally, the county's bidding process should be audited to
determine compliance with CCMA. Therefore, based on the totality
of the above, Commissioners, I ask that you vote no on all three
counts. Thank you.
MS. FILSON: That was your final speaker, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, okay. Very good. You know, I think
it's time for a break right now before we even go further. Are you
okay, again? All right. We'll just give you a ten-minute break,
13-minute break.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's it.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Twelve-minute break. Let's see,
12-minute break would probably bring me up to about what, 4:55.
Let's do that.
(A brief recess was had.)
MR. OCHS: Ladies and gentlemen, please take your seats.
Madam Chair, you have a live mike.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Hi. Okay, we're back. We've heard our
speakers, and now, Gary, did you want to wrap up?
MR. McALPIN: Madam Chair, I think we're wrapped up, and
we'll answer any questions the board has at this point in time.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Very good.
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, one statement. I'm kind of
surprised by the public saying we should exclude motorboats in there
when we have -- I don't know if the issue is big boats, small boats, but
it always was motorboats from the Seagate residents. So I'm a little
puzzled from that.
I have several questions. The PBS -- or the Humiston Moore
Page 2]8
December] 5,2009
report, Mr. McAlpin, was this -- this was a request for you. Was this a
peer review?
MR. McALPIN: The -- I -- prior to the PBS&J report coming
out, they had analyzed the Humiston & Moore model. I sent that to
Ken Humiston as a courtesy and asked him -- told him this is what the
PBS&J report was, and this is what was going to be said, and I asked
him to comment on it.
So I was trying to get ahead of Mr. Humiston so that there were
no -- no shocks on his part and give him the information prior to the
fact.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We -- a part of the -- the
contract, we allowed for a peer review of this.
MR. McALPIN: We will have peer review, yes. That's one of
the requests that we are making of the committee to move forward
with.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right. The existing contract.
MR. McALPIN: The existing contract.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The existing contract we had, I
think it was like -- I could be wrong. I don't want to say it -- but we
had something in there for a peer review.
MR. McALPIN: Yes, sir, and that was never appropriated.
When we came in front of the Board of County Commissioners the
last time, you authorized $120,000; $90,000 of which was for data
collection, and there was another sum of money that was for -- it was
for -- the existing -- just to review the -- and analyze the data as we --
as is out there. You made it very specific to come back, look at the
existing data, analyze that, and come back to the Board of County
Commissioners, and that's what we've done.
So we never had any -- the peer review was not funded at that
point in time, Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Did you share this request from
Humiston & Moore, did you share that with the Coastal Advisory
Page 219
December] 5, 2009
Board and the Clam Bay Advisory Board?
MR. McALPIN: Yes, we did.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
MR. McALPIN : Yeah. And that was --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Is there a reason why you
excluded --
MR. McALPIN: And that was presented, and Ken Humiston was
at the CAC, and also the Clam Bay -- I know he was at the CAC. It
was discussed at the Clam Bay Advisory Committee, and Ken's
comments on the model. And -- and the -- both committees moved to
move forward with the acceptance of the report and to move forward
with a flushing and circulation model using PBS&J.
I would also say that PBS&J -- also we went through the BVO
process with PBS&J, and they were selected by a group of impartial
people. I was not on the selection committee at that point,
Commissioner, and they felt that PBS&J was the -- was heads up the
-- of the two parties, the one to contract with.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. I have some other
questions, and I don't want to bore my colleagues with them, so maybe
just to answer my questions directly would be appreciated.
MR. McALPIN: Sure. I thought I did. But I'll try to again.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you. Is there a reason
why this document wasn't in our agenda?
MR. McALPIN: We had -- we talked about it with all of -- we
had included it in the CAC, we had included it in the Clam Bay
Advisory Committee.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I know --
MR. McALPIN: Didn't think it was critical to put in this because
what we're -- didn't think it was critical to put in this agenda package.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay, thank you.
Mr. Tomasko, where was the nutrient loadings that you found,
higher nutrients, specifically in --
Page 220
December 15, 2009
DR. TOMASKO: The question -- this report didn't have nutrient
loadings. The 2007 report had a loading model that looked at loads to
Moorings Bay and loads to Clam Bay, and the pollutant loading model
was then cal -- calibrated's the wrong word. It was then modified.
The delivered pollutant load to Clam bay was modified by running it
through the stormwater treatment system that Pelican Bay has. So the
loads to Pelican Bay were divided by, we thought, an appropriate
attenuation by going through their stormwater treatment system.
As a result, net pollutant loads to Clam Bay are lower than the
net pollutant loads per acre of watershed to Moorings Bay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Was you asked to study
Moorings Bay and Clam Bay?
DR. TOMASKO: We were asked to study those influences on
Clam Bay. And as part of our process of getting familiar with the
system, we were told by many people in the audience, some of them
here today, that one of the biggest influences on Clam Bay was the,
quote -- it was either toilet or sewer or cesspit or something like that of
Moorings Bay that was bringing all this polluted water into Clam Bay.
So part of our assessment was to look at water quality data. And
what we found is that there was a longer term water quality data set in
Clam Bay, so we did not have 20 years of water quality in Moorings
Bay that we had in Clam Bay. So we used a surrogate for bottom
water hypoxia, which is muck. If you think of it, if you have a system
with very poor water quality, whether it's quote, you know, a sewer or
septic tank, whatever it was described as, you'd expect to find a layer
of anoxic muck on the bottom, so that's one of the reasons why we
started looking at Moorings Bay because reports that had been done
previously, not models, but reports that talk about an equal distance or
equal volume movement of Clam Bay to Moorings Bay.
So one of the reasons we looked in Moorings Bay was because of
the public's perception that Moorings Bay was adversely impacting
Clam Bay.
Page 22 ]
December 15, 2009
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Did -- when you did your study,
was it focused on the south side of Clam Bay because of those?
DR. TOMASKO: No. We actually did -- we actually did -- we
looked at the water quality data that was from Upper Clam Bay, Inner
Clam Bay, Outer Clam Bay, and we actually did fieldwork. We did
all the fieldwork in Clam Bay, and the consultants for Pelican Bay
Services Division did all the fieldwork down in -- throughout
Moorings Bay.
So we looked at both of them. Excuse me. All the way from
Upper Clam Bay all the way down to Doctors Pass.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: All the way down to Doctors
Pass.
DR. TOMASKO: Yeah. There were, I think, 25 sites from
Seagate Drive up to Upper Clam Bay and 25 sites from Seagate Drive
down to Doctors Pass.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Yeah, I recall us giving
direction to study Clam Bay and gave the geographical boundaries of
Seagate to Vanderbilt.
MR. McALPIN: In may, we have to -- when we look at Clam
Bay, we have to look at the influences of Clam Bay from the
watershed to the south, because we need to know what -- the velocity
of the water and the tidal flow of the water and what's coming in from
that point in time.
Also remember, Commissioner, if I just may real quick, you said,
is that the City of Naples paid for the sediment characterization study
for $23,000 that was what David Tomasko was talking about on the
sediment sampling that was done, and we graciously did 50 samples,
half of them in the Moorings Bay and also half of them in Clam Bay.
So we really only studied -- we really only studied Clam Bay, but
we looked at the effect from a tidal and a flow and a velocity point of
view that Moorings Bay would have on Clam Bay, and that's the only
way we can get a handle on the whole system.
Page 222
December 15, 2009
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So you're asking for a budget
amendment from other sources from Fund 111, the court recording
documents and costs? That's--
MR. McALPIN: Yes, we are. We -- for the -- that item is,
whenever we have the Clam Bay Advisory Committee or any of the --
we don't have any funds for court recordings or documentation costs,
and that's moving forward, Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Are these all from your
allocations?
MR. McALPIN: Currently. When you say your allocations, I'm
not quite --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, your department, Coastal
Zone Management. Are these allocations --
MR. McALPIN: I don't have these funds, Commissioner, in my
operating budget, and I'm looking for money to augment my operating
budget, $102,000, and these would be for these studies to support the
Clam Bay effort.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. You're asking -- or
maybe I'm not reading this right. Are you asking to expend the
moneys for these particular things, or are you asking for these monies
to come out of those different categories out of Ill?
MR. McALPIN: I'm asking for funding from 111, which would
be transferred into my budget, which would identify, which would
fund these items that are listed here, adding up to $102,400.
I'm also asking for -- that the addit- -- the funding from 195 for
$132,000 be approved for the optimization and flushing modeling. So
I'm asking for two sources of funds; $102,000 from 111, and 132,000
from TDC funds, 195.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You've applied for a permit for
dredging Clam Bay. How long do you think that will take to -- I'm
sorry. I said Clam Bay. That's everybody's biggest fear is dredging
Clam Bay. I meant Clam Pass.
Page 223
December 15, 2009
MR. McALPIN: We have a ten-year -- we've applied for a
ten-year permit to do tidal flushing, to dredge for tidal flushing, on the
exact same basis of what the current permit has been authorized under
for Clam Bay, and that is to -- so that moving forward over the next
ten years, when needed, when this master plan identifies the criteria on
when we should dredge again, we have a permit in place to dredge and
also that if this pass is ever closed due to an act of God or hurricane,
that we have the ability to open the pass.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That wasn't my question. I
didn't even ask my question. But my question is, how long will you--
how long will it take to get that permit.
MR. McALPIN: The permit will typically take between six and
nine months. We thinks it's closer to six months at this point in time.
We had --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And once you get to that permit,
are you going to start dredging?
MR. McALPIN: No. We will-- we won't dredge until we have
the master plan complete and we have identified the criteria on when
we need to dredge for the health of the estuary.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Will the -- the permit you
applied for is to maintain it for the health of the estuarine system.
MR. McALPIN: That is correct.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So I guess my point is, why not
get the permits -- why not dredge to the maximum depth of the permit,
and let's see what we get from there? Because doing a budget
amendment of a hundred and -- a hundred thousand dollars on
economic times for more studies when we were just considering not
having the adoption program for animals just doesn't seem right.
I mean, these -- I would like to see us move forward with the
dredge as submitted, than more studies that probably will take more
tax dollars away from items that I'm not sure is really necessary.
MR. McALPIN: The funding -- the request that we have for a
Page 224
December 15, 2009
ten-year permit is already -- has been approved, and we're moving
forward with that, and that's not included in this request that you have
here, Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Oh, I know it's not a part of it. I
made a statement. The statement was, let's not spend the money for
more studies. Let's provide improvements and not expend these
moneys and see how those improvements does to the system.
MR. McALPIN: Without the study to look at what-ifs and how
the system can best be optimized, the total system can best be
optimized, we will never know what those improvements need to be,
Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Not necessarily. I mean, Clam
Bay has been studied -- there's tons of studies done on it. And I know
there needs to be more work done, but also up and down the whole
coast.
Is it the best time to spend moneys on more studies, or is it the
time to keep our libraries open, keep our adoption program going, and
keep our parks going?
MR.OCHS: Commissioner, in might, the parks and your
libraries are primarily funded out of your general Fund 001, general
fund. This request is for your Fund 111, as you know.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: 111 -- 111 is for parks and rec.
MR.OCHS: Partially.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Libraries, I agree, is 001. But
we just went through a budget process where we were considering
doing a lot of things that we haven't done before historically, but we're
taking on more and more, and that's my concern of, you know, this --
your spending for more studies is going to result in more spending.
And is it the time, or do we need to start to pick and choose what we
spend money on?
MR. OCHS : Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We just went through a budget
Page 225
December 15,2009
process, and now we're just asking for another amendment of our
budget process.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Henning, we've got
another group of people waiting here yet. Is that -- are you about
finished with your subject?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: If you want me to be,
Commissioner Fiala.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I mean, if you have some other points to
make --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Go ahead.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: -- you know, fine. I don't want to cut you
off, but if this is your only point and you've made it, I would like to
move on. What do you say?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: If that's what you want,
Commissioner Fiala, that's fine.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Thank you very much, Madam
Chair.
You know, we've spent most of the day here talking about things
that are not even on the agenda or under consideration. I've heard
people tell me about the dangers of underdredging or overdredging,
about flushing, about all the other -- about boats being in Clam Bay,
and they shouldn't be. That's not what we're here to discuss.
We're here to discuss ratifying the Clam Bay Advisory
Committee Update Report dated September 25,2009, approving a
proposed budget amendment, and approve the Clam Bay System Data
Collection and Analysis Report and a peer review of this report
conducted by an independent expert jointly selected by Coastal Zone
Management and the Pelican Bay Services Division.
Approving this item does absolutely nothing with respect to
dredging. It doesn't address boating in Clam Bay. It doesn't address
Page 226
December 15, 2009
navigational markers in Clam Bay.
So all the discussion about the terrible things that people have
raised today is of no consequence because that's not what we're talking
about today.
So I'm going to make a motion that we approve the staffs
recommendations, and I'll read them one more time, and I'll make one
addition. We ratify the previously provided Clam Bay Advisory
Committee Update Report dated September 25,2009; we approve the
proposed 2010 budget of $234,917 and all necessary budget
amendments; and approve the Clam Bay System Data Collection and
Analysis Report Recommendations and a peer review of this report
conducted by an independent expert jointly selected by Coastal Zone
Management and the Pelican Bay Services Division, and then I will
add one more recommendation to this motion and this is, we will
permit the Clam Bay Advisory Committee to expire and the
responsibilities will be taken over by the Coastal Advisory
Commission (sic).
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I have a motion on the floor and a
second.
Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. I was quite concerned when
the person who is supposedly running for the candidacy of District 2
commissioner made charges that all we wanted to do was dredge, and
that had nothing to do with this thing and yet that person came in here,
made accusations, and now is gone. So I've got some concerns about
that, because I had some questions to ask in regards to where this
dredging idea came from and also the idea that we're going to
eliminate power boats and that we want to cut off access to -- for other
people to use this. So I just wanted to bring that up.
And I hope that we got the -- the other thing that concerns me is
that if we don't address these issues now and the state comes in here
Page 227
December 15,2009
and finds out that those waters are impaired, it's going to cost us a
whole lot more money than what it's going to cost us now, and we're
not going to have any choice in this matter. We're going to have to get
it done and get it done soon.
So we're better off going through a study and getting things taken
care of and making sure we have the data, and then we can make a
decision what need -- what's the best thing to do to address this.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So let me get this straight.
You're -- the motion is to approve staffs recommendations one
through four and also sunset the Clam Bay Advisory Board and have
the duties of Clam Bay to the CAC, Coastal Advisory.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's not quite correct. I mean, the
gist of it is correct. I'm actually approving recommendations one,
three, and four, and revising recommendation two.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That's the sunsetting.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, it's the sunsetting, yeah.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. So--
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It's already covered by the other
one.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So you're approving the -- to do
a budget amendment from TDC funds?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'm proposing --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And III? Because we're
supposed to be getting some kind of recommendations from the TDC
for expenditures of TDC funds.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I don't have any problem with
getting recommendations from them, but if the recommendations are
made in time to accomplish the budget allocation, that's okay with me.
But as I understand it, staff has already identified $234,917 for
the FY2010 budget, and that's what I'm recommending we approve.
Page 228
December 15,2009
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right. But they didn't get -- I
didn't see any recommendation from the TDC board, and by statutes,
that's a must.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'm sure the county attorney can
work out the legality of the transfer, right?
MR. KLATZKOW: (Nods head.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Okay. I have a motion on the
floor and a second.
Any further discussion?
MR.OCHS: Madam Chair?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes, sir.
MR.OCHS: I'm sorry to interrupt.
Commissioner Coyle, you had one through four.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, one --
MR.OCHS: I'm sorry, one, three, four, the budget amendments.
You didn't mention number five.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes, I did, because they're included
in number three. It says, approve the FY10 budget--
MR. OCHS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- and the money and all necessary
budget amendments.
MR. OCHS: My mistake.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So staff has repeated the
recommendations.
MR. OCHS: Sorry. Thank you, Madam Chair.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. All in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
Page 229
December 15, 2009
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. That is a 4-1 vote.
Thank you very much.
And now we move on to our three o'clock time certain.
Item #10B
A WARD OF A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT IN THE
AMOUNT OF $34,977,999.18 TO MITCHELL & STARK
CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION AND RESERVE
$4,207,000.00 ON THE PURCHASE ORDER FOR FUNDING
ALLOWANCES, FOR A TOTAL OF $39,184,999.18 FOR BID NO.
09-5287 OIL WELL ROAD IMMOKALEE ROAD TO CAMP
KEAIS ROAD, PROJECT NO. 60044 - MOTION TO APPROVE
ITEM AND FOR STAFF TO WORK WITH THE COMMUNITY
TO SETTLE THEIR CONCERNS. STAFF TO PROCEED WITH
MEDIATION FOR ADDITIONAL EASEMENTS AND TO BRING
BACK TO THE BOARD - APPROVED
MR.OCHS: Yes, ma'am. That would be -- that would be Item
lOB.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: We're trying to get Commissioner Coletta
over to his six o'clock speaking engagement.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: What item are you doing?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: lOB.
MR. OCHS: lOB. It's a recommendation to award a
construction contract in the amount of 34,977 ,999 .18, to Mitchell &
Stark Construction Corporation, and reserve $4,207,000 on the
purchase order for funding allowances for a total of $39, 184,999.18
for bid number 095287, Oil Well Road, Immokalee Road to Camp
Keais Road. Project number 60044.
Mr. Jay Ahmad will present.
MR. AHMAD: Good afternoon, almost evening, Commissioner.
Page 230
December 15, 2009
My name is Jay Ahmad, for the record. I'm your Director of
Transportation Engineering and Construction Management.
For you this evening, this Item lOB, which our county manager
just read, is to award the contract for Oil Well Road to Mitchell &
Stark Construction Company, a local construction company here in
Naples. And with me here as well is Brian Penner, one of their
officers, if you have any questions.
This project started with you approving the developer
contribution agreement in April, 2005. And with that agreement, Ave
Maria was to donate land to the county at no cost, that they would
fund the permits and the design of the project, and would also give us
the fill and -- the fill and embankment material that's required to
construct this project at their cost.
They've done so, and we are ready here today -- and they
permitted the project, they designed the project, and now it's our turn
to comply with that agreement to build Oil Well Road project.
Two segments of the project I'm showing on the monitor here
that are part of the bid package that went out, and now we're asking
for the award.
Segment two, which extends from Immokalee east to just east of
Everglades, distance of approximately 3.3 miles. Segment for 4A,
which starts at Oil Well grade road and heads east, just east of the Ave
Maria driveway, approximately 3.8 miles.
We went out to bid, and we've gotten good bids. We have a total
of nine bidders submitted bids for the project, the lowest being
Mitchell & Stark at 39,184,999, and highest bid being Phillips &
Jordan as shown on that map, that chart, 47,260,725.
The low bid is approximately 18 percent below what we thought
the engineer's estimates of the project.
With that, I'm available to answer any questions.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: We have nine speakers. Would you like
to call our speakers, please?
Page 231
December 15,2009
MS. FILSON: Yes, ma'am. Robert Buck. He'll be followed by
Nancy Wright.
MR. BUCK: Good evening. I'm Bob Buck. I live in
Waterways, and I chair the finance committee for our homeowners
association.
I would like to describe to you the monetary impact this is going
to have on our development. The obvious impact will be to the homes
that are located right next to Oil Well Road, but there will be a major
impact to all residents.
Just as a point of reference, our annual budget is just over
$700,000.
Like many other communities, we currently have 40 homes in
foreclosures, formally in foreclosure. It's about 10 percent of our
homes, and by extension, 10 percent of our budget.
We're further burdened with the associated legal fees and
maintenance costs on these properties.
Those 40 are actually formally in liens and foreclosures. We
have another 50 that every quarter are late. They pay. They pay
before we do anything formal like a lien. And it's not always the same
50. But it's roughly that same number every quarter.
To me, that's an indication of the stress that they're under. If they
can't make their quarterly payments on time, they make them but they
can't do it on time, they are stressed. Obviously any further impact to
them will make their distress just that much worse.
Current estimates from our own landscape architect and from the
county transportation staff are the known impacts to our berms and
landscaping and foliage and noise barriers, will be close to $500,000.
There would also be impacts to our entrance on Oil Well Road.
We might have to make it an exit-only entrance, remove the gates,
open the gates, close it entirely, and we could possibly lose the
left-turn in lane for traffic coming from the west. Ifwe have to close
the side entrance, that will require us to redesign and rebuild our main
Page 232
December 15, 2009
entrance on Immokalee Road, because that is not currently built to
accommodate large trucks and vans and trailers. They just can't fit
through it, so we'll have to rebuild it.
These costs to the entrances could push the total much closer to a
million dollars, and that's a huge amount for a community of 423
homes, especially when 10 percent of them aren't paying now.
The eminent domain process compensated us less than $86,000.
Obviously a small fraction of the potential costs. That would leave us
with the prospect of a special assessment on our residents, which
could be as much as 2- or $3,000.
Those 50 or so homes that are under stress, that may just tip them
over the edge, and we could be forcing them into liens and
foreclosure. That would more than double our current delinquency
problem. Right now we're running about an $80,000 delinquency
problem. We're able to cover that by suspending our reserve
contributions. But ifit were to double, 150-, 180-, we could not
possibly cover that.
So these are the repercussions; they are very real, very
quantifiable. They pose a huge problem. They would and could
seriously inhibit our ability to function as an association.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you, sir.
MR. BURKE: Thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Nancy Wright. She'll be
followed by Annette Wenowsky.
MS. WRIGHT: I cede my time, Madam Chair, to Mary Horesco.
MS. FILSON: Annette?
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Annette left.
MS. FILSON: Okay. Michael Whitt. He'll be followed by John
DePrisco.
MR. WHITT: Good afternoon, Madam Chairman,
Commissioners. I'm Michael Whitt. I'm with the law firm of Becker
and Poliakoff. We have the pleasure of being counsel to the
Page 233
December 15, 2009
Waterways of Naples Community Association. We've been working
with them on this problem.
I'm not sure if all of the commissioners are familiar with the
issue. It's not so much directly related to the award of the contract to
Mitchell & Stark but rather where this project is at getting underway
and this community being faced with some dire financial issues that
they're going to have to deal with.
As was mentioned by Bob, the association is going to have a
huge problem during and after construction, and there's going to be
anywhere from probably 750,000 to a million dollars worth of
uncompensated impacts on the association property that they're going
to have to deal with.
We've met with the county attorney and some of the assistant
county attorneys and staff. We've started trying to have some
communications about trying to work these things out.
We wanted to appear today to make sure that all of you knew of
this problem. We'd like to continue to have dialogue with
Commissioner Coletta to see if this can be worked out. Litigation is
what I do, but it's the last thing that I want my clients to have to be
involved in, so we would like to avoid that specter and be able to work
this out.
So I'm sure ultimately that we'll be back before you dealing with
this, if -- hopefully we can come to some agreement, some
arrangement with the county so that Waterways is treated fairly in this
process and gets the money that they need to put their landscaping
back, their berm, or some type of sound wall or something in to
mitigate the impacts of this project. Thank you.
MS. FILSON: John DePrisco. He'll be followed by Mary
Horesco.
MR. DePRISCO: Good afternoon, Commissioners. My name's
John DePrisco, resident of Waterways of Naples, about 11 years.
In 2005 I was the president of the homeowners association, and
Page 234
December 15, 2009
we became aware of this project. We're not against this award, but we
are kind of against what might be going on in the background. So I
wanted to make sure you guys knew what was happening and that you
understood our point of view.
In 2005 we found out that we might be losing our left turn in and
our left out from -- you know, into Oil Well, which is Mystic River.
And as was mentioned before, that is a straight road, and it's the only
way for trucks to get into our neighborhood. The Immokalee Road
entrance is curved and goes to a large gatehouse, and it would be a
significant -- it would not be trivial to try to change that so that trucks
could get in.
I met with Commissioner Coletta and two transportation officials
in 2005, and they brought forth the plans. And I asked, is there any
possible way we could get a left turn in at the very least; otherwise,
you would have trucks coming in from Immokalee, going down Oil
Well, making U-turns at the school to come back up to make the
entrance into Waterways of Naples.
Obviously this is not a perfect solution, and they said, sure, we
could probably give you a left-turn lane if you give us an easement
into your berm. I said, okay, you know. How much would you need?
They said, well, including the ditch and then maybe another 10 feet
into the berm. I said, okay. You know, I'm not an engineer, but I
know that the angle of incidence of a berm, you're going to change the
top. They said, not a problem. We'll put in a retaining wall, and you'll
maintain your berm.
The other option -- the obstacle was that we had vehicle stacking
at the gatehouse so that it doesn't impact the traffic, and they said that
that would not be a problem. There would still be enough room left to
stack vehicles.
And so, I mean, the whole meeting took, you know, maybe 15,
20 minutes. I said, sure, we'll do an easement. We went to our
attorneys at the time. They drew up some paperwork within a year.
Page 235
December 15, 2009
We thought we had an agreement, it was signed, whenever. We
approved it. But now I'm hearing that, you know, now the stakes have
shown that you're going to take all of our berm, that you went to
eminent domain, that we might lose our guardhouse, you know, that
we'll lose vehicle stacking.
You know, we were all individuals of good will and good faith.
So I'm asking you, you know, please honor your verbal commitment.
And I honestly don't believe that the word Collier County
Commissioners and eminent domain go together in the same sentence.
I really don't want to go there.
So please just look at what's going on behind this. We're not
against the awarding of the contract, per se. But there is a lot of stuff
behind it, and I want to make sure that it's clear to you, you know,
we're going to work with you. Like I said, we've done easements in
the past. You know, if -- we want to do what's right, but we really
need that left turn in, we need our berms, we need our gatehouse.
Thank you very much.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Mary Horesco, and Nancy
Wright ceded her time to her, so she gets six minutes.
MS. HORESCO: Good evening, Madam Chair and
Commissioners. Thank you for staying so late to hear us out.
I'm also a resident of Waterways. I moved here in 2001. And I
think, like most people that moved to Southwest Florida, we came
here under the basis that we would have our own piece of paradise.
And it sounds to me now that this piece has been threatened.
We've had a lot of issues in a growing community and a growing
county, but I don't think any of us had expected to, at some point in
time, have to deal with the possibility of being prisoners of our own
community .
And as John just said, in terms of what this plan involves, it's
going to be of serious detriment to all of us. I'm also a Realtor, and I
fought tooth and nail for these residents to get the best value for their
Page 236
December 15, 2009
property in the worst time, and this will do nothing to help our
property sales.
Seventy-five percent of the homes that have sold this year were
short sales or foreclosures. I don't want that to end up being 100
percent next year. And even so, picture a neighborhood that is totally
changed. When people come to buy, they look at appearance, the
ambiance of a neighborhood, okay. That is going to be devastated
with the proposed changes to our entrance.
So this is a proposal that is going to impact us for a long time to
come, not to mention the people that live along Oil Well Road in our
community .
Now, I have several state licenses, and with the two that I hold --
the other one is in nursing. I worked as an ER nurse, and I know how
critical time is. And if anybody ever has to make a U-turn into our
community to get to someone to save their life, that could kill them.
And EMS trucks have come in.
The other thing that I'd like to say is that I did attend those
meetings too, and I did see the plans that the county did give us, and
we went on good faith that they were going to come through with
these plans. Now they've been totally changed.
There's nothing in this plan that's going to help our home values,
that's going to help our neighborhood. It's going to push more people
into foreclosure, and it's going to stop the sales.
So please reconsider and look at all the facts before pushing this
through. Thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Kristi Bartlett. She'll be
followed by Gene Howarth.
MS. BARTLETT: Good evening, Commissioners. I'm Kristi
Bartlett with the EDe. I was just here to say that we fully support the
widening of Oil Well Road. It is essential to the economic
development diversification and ultimate sustainability of Eastern
Collier County.
Page 237
December 15, 2009
Thank you.
MS. FILSON: Gene Howarth. He'll be followed by Jake
Sullivan.
MR. HOWARTH: Evening, Commissioners. I am one of those
-- my name's Gene Howarth. I live at 3312 Fort Pleasant Court in the
Waterways. I am one of those people that borders Immokalee and Oil
Well Road.
And I didn't know up until two days ago that my berm was
disappearing. That's all I have between me and that road. I have two
young children. My son's castle sits right next to that berm.
So I'm here to ask you, at least review, hold off on awarding this
contract, and at least consider reviewing it and talking about
something we can do for our community to get -- either keep our
berm, give us a wall, do something.
I have a hard enough time keeping my two-year-old son in bed
past 5:30 in the morning because of the noise now. I can't imagine
what it would be without at least having a berm or a wall there.
So I ask that you take a look at this further before awarding the
contract. Thank you.
MS. FILSON: And your final speaker is Jake Sullivan.
MR. SULLIVAN: Good evening, Commissioners. Before I start,
I just wanted to say that while there doesn't seem to be a lot of people
here from Waterways, if you'd all stand up, please. This is what we
could rustle up on short notice, because most of the people in our
community are working families, both parents are working or
single-family folks are working -- thank you -- are working, and they
couldn't make it here at three o'clock, which if we'd known it was
going to go past five, we probably could have gotten a bigger crowd.
I just want to wrap up what everybody said. I think you're kind
of getting the picture here. When we entered into this issue back in
2004 and then, as John said, in 2005, we really -- when the ball really
started rolling, we knew that this road was going to be important to
Page 238
December 15,2009
economic development in the eastern part of Collier County. I mean,
there were a lot of projects going on at the time out there, and frankly,
it was kind of difficult to get out of our community because of the
traffic situation.
And we did negotiate in good faith. We honestly thought that
most of our berm was going to be maintained, we were going to keep
it, most of what was going to happen as was explained to us was that
they were going to put utilities in it.
After all, it was an easement. It was a utility and slope easement.
Nobody expected the thing to get nuked, disappear overnight.
So what we're here for is to ask you that while you're considering
this award, that you look at this through the eyes of the people that
live there. I mean, we've been subjected to a lot of development in
that part of the county over the last couple of years, and we're just
trying to keep our own piece of tranquility there.
There are a lot of issues that we'd like to see resolved, financial
burden to our residents, as was mentioned by Mr. Buck, a loss to the
berm and the landscaping, which was an issue concerning the resident
that's directly affected by this, Gene.
There are LDC issues as far as traffic stacking and things like
that. I mean, the gates and the road is -- the area is going to diminish
from what was within code when the development was built to out of
code. And we need to have assurances that those issues are going to
be resolved.
The moving of power poles from the south side of Oil Well Road
to the north side, to our side of the road, we don't understand why any
of that has to take place either, further diminishing our property
values.
So we'd ask that you just kind of look at this through the eyes --
think ofyourselfliving in that community and how this is going to
impact your community and help us out with this deal and give us an
opportunity to further negotiate with county staff to try and come to a
Page 239
~_...,,_.~-,--~'-""--'~- "._....._,..~-,.,~
December 15, 2009
happy medium here that everybody can live with over the years.
Thank you.
MS. FILSON: That was your final speaker.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, where to begin? One, Oil
Well Road has to be done. There's absolutely no way that this can be
delayed, not even a day, not in this economic climate, not with
everything we're up against. I can tell you that total support does not
exist for even building this road, and the longer it's delayed, the less
likely it could happen, I mean, if we put it off for two months while
we discussed it and you met with staff.
I think we're way past that point. The people you have to deal
with is the Collier County Commissioners that sit right up here today,
and that's why I sent the letter out to you, every member in Waterway
that has an email address, asking you to be here, and enough of you
are here to make a difference. You do have real concerns.
The truth of the matter is, when you weigh everything, staff did
what they said they were going to do. I wish there was a little more
follow-through with walking the berms and taking a look how it was
all going to come together. I was out there Sunday. Jake took me up
on the berm. It took a little while to grasp what the different color
stakes meant. But I can see what it's going to do. It's going to be
devastating. I don't understand how we got to that point, but we did.
And I listened to staffs explanation of it, and everything they did
was right according to Hoyle. Something was missing somewheres in
there, but none of that matters. What matters now is that the people
that we all represent, which is you, are going to be at the short end of a
project. Your community will not be the same if we just go ahead
with it the way it's planned now and everything is taken down and the
berms come down. You can't possibly build the berms back. Even if
you could, where are you going to put them? Right in the person's
back -- in their kitchen? It's not going to work.
Page 240
December 15, 2009
So the berms can't stay. I don't think there's a way that a
remaining wall could be built to be able to accommodate them, but
staff will be able to advise us on that.
We have to come up with a way to be able to try to make you
reasonably whole on this whole thing.
I'd like to see us, one, approve what we've got in front of us today
as is and have set-aside money. We've very fortunate. Thank you
very much for transportation for bringing this project in
eight-and-a-half million dollars below what the projection was. That's
an absolutely wonderful thing, and maybe that will work to our
advantage.
I'd like to see at least $750,000 put in a set-aside, and then we'll
talk to the people in Waterways to be able to see what can be done and
bring it back to the commission to see what kind of realistic things can
be done.
Now, I'm not talking about the impossible. I'm talking about
something that's practical. County staff would meet with you, you
would talk with them, you'd see all the different possibilities it would
be. This would be a retrofit after everything gets started. The road
can't be changed. I mean, to do it now would be disastrous. It would
probably kill the project. It's a design-build. Everything's on the
drawing board. It's been previously approved. Now, the only thing
we're approving now is the contract to let it.
So what I'd like to do is make a motion, one, to approve the
project; number two, ask my fellow commissioners to put aside
$750,000 to have negotiations take place between Waterway and staff
to be brought back to us for us to be able to take a look at it to see
what can be done, some sort of agreement to be able to move this
thing forward to make these people whole.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: You mean like a wall or something?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: A wall. I can't think of anything
else but a wall. A berm's not going to work. But I'm not going to say
Page 241
._ .,,~_,"d', _,_..._._...<._.."__,_~.,~.__._.~..__~.,....._",,,_.,.__'"'" "_"__,,__,_,,___,,~_,'_"W"
December 15, 2009
a wall. It might be a retaining wall on part of it, it might be a wall in
another part, and maybe in another part, some sort of berm might even
be able to stay in place. I have no idea at this point in time.
Ifwe wait until we analyze this thing to be able to come up with
it, it could be months away before we come up with some workable
solution.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'd like to support your motion but
I'd like to ask some questions to our transportation department--
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Please do.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: -- before we go -- before we go on.
But I think Commissioner Coyle's next.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes, he is.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: She never notices me anyway.
You know, if we didn't have to allocate all that money to paving
limerock roads, we could have taken care of this a long time ago.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Pass this down to Commissioner
Halas and have him stab him in the heart with it.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Wait a minute. I'm not going to be
an accessory to the crime.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's a private joke between me
and Commissioner Coletta.
Norm, you've got to give me some kind of a site plan here and
show us what's going on. Now, I've looked at the overall plan, but
you've got to get down and go through detail on this thing; because if I
were these people, I would be very weary of saying, okay, go ahead
and we'll talk to you later about solving it, okay. I think what we need
to --
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER COYLE: We need to at least take a look at it
and see ifthere are some reasonable solutions to their problem that we
can incorporate into the road construction project itself.
Now, the first thing I want to ask you is, why can't we
Page 242
December] 5, 2009
underground the power lines rather than just moving them from one
side of the road to another?
MR. FEDER: Well, first of all --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Let them applaud first.
(Applause.)
MR. FEDER: First of all, for the record, Norman Feder,
Transportation Administrator.
The issue late in the process was FP&L moving to the other side
of the roadway. As you know, they get to use our roadway
right-of-way for free, and they move their utilities as long as they're
not obstructing movement in traffic.
The berm impacts were shown, were staked out well before this
time. Almost four years ago they were fully staked. 7-0 association
vote to give us the right-of-way for a left-turn lane which we didn't
really want to put in because of its proximity to Immokalee Road but
understood the concerns of the community and tried to work with
them, and they were ready to provide the extra right-of-way, which we
showed would impact the berm at that time.
So we're ready to finish if the board's direction to try and work
with folks, talk about options, but I'm very concerned with the
statement that I hear, behind the scenes. And we have a presentation
here. We can go through it. There was nothing that wasn't brought
out, presented, very specifically throughout the process.
As a matter of fact, when we came with what was our original
design, which had a median, and with the design that required not only
the 10- foot easement for the utility, but the additional 15 feet to
provide the turn lane storage, we anticipated showing that actually
impacting the berm to be the basis for them to tell us no, we don't
want the left-turn lane; it is too impactive to our community. Instead,
7-0, the told us to proceed forward, which we included into our
designs.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Now, what I'm
Page 243
,_____~_,,____._'__'~o>_._'"......__._....._
December 15,2009
understanding you say is that you've told those people all of this
before, they perhaps didn't understand it, and so we're just not going to
change anything?
MR. FEDER: No. What I said is, we'd be happy to continue any
discussion to a possible orientation. The one gentleman particularly
that came up here I think is probably most impacted. And if he said,
and I'll take him at his word, that he wasn't very involved with these
discussions -- we worked with the association. Those that are right
close here with that berm coming down -- as we said, we thought that
would be impact to the point where maybe we didn't add the left-turn
lane, but the community wanted it, and so we modified the design
based on the action of the association.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Let's take them one at a
time.
MR. FEDER: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You want the left-turn lane.? Yes
or no?
THE AUDIENCE: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And you know by asking for
left -turn lane it results in taking of your berm, right? You understand
that?
THE AUDIENCE: We do now. We didn't then. That's our
contention.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: You have to be speaking into the
microphone.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, all right. Let me --
MR. AHMAD: Can I interrupt for a second?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No, no, no, no, no, no. But let me
ask the questions. Why can't you work with FP&L to underground the
telephone or the power poles in that area?
MR. AHMAD: Commissioner, I have a presentation for the
whole -- I will answer your question directly.
Page 244
December 15,2009
In the berm there exists -- we have to relocate a force main, a
10-inch force main as well as a ten-inch water main from under the
roadway.
The berm -- the purpose of the 10-foot slope and utility easement
is to move the 10-inch force main into that easement we got. And by
constructing that utility, essentially the berm is going to be impacted.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'm not talking about the berm. I'm
talking about the power poles. Why can't you put the power poles
underground, or the power lines?
MR. AHMAD: FP&L -- we will approach, if you direct us to
with FP&L. They certainly have that option. It's a very costly option.
We've tried it in the past, and they've said no, as Commissioner Fiala
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, we're doing it now in
Commissioner Halas' district, and they're underground.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: They're paying for it.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, I know somebody's paying
for it. But the point is that is it a possible solution and have you
looked at IT?
MR. FEDER: We haven't.
MR. AHMAD: It certainly is a solution, but it's not a solution --
we'll have to look at the design ifthere are other options.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Suppose we say we're going
to look at it.
MR. AHMAD: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Now, the other thing is, you
say you've got to take that berm. Is there an objection to having a
sound wall there, landscaped sound wall?
THE AUDIENCE: No.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Can we build a landscaped
sound wall there?
MR. FEDER: We can work with a wall, probably not a sound
Page 245
"..._._,._.M,~,__.__k_'_'^' ..~.- ..__.....,-~>
December 15, 2009
wall, because that has a specific demarcation and cost benefit that
we've done throughout the county, but, yes, a privacy wall, which will
be about six feet, and there is going to be some level of swale still
there that will make that a little bit higher, is an option.
Again, if the board's direction is for us to work with this
community, try to see what options are available, and we'll look with
FP&L and the utilities because they did -- pretty much to the end of
the project you find all has moved to the north side.
But I do want to make sure that this board understands that based
on the desire for the left-turn lane, we went through, presented all this,
staked all of it, videotaped it. It is not something that we surprised this
community with. But we'll be happy to follow through at this time.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Believe me, I have been through
this 100 times. No member of the public understands the impact of
complex projects until they begin to see it. You can talk about it all
you want to talk about it, and most people simply don't understand
what it's going to look like until they start experiencing it.
And if they're going to lose their berm, I think we ought to give
them some kind of privacy wall here along with landscaping. And,
yeah, I know there's some money involved with that sort of thing, but
I think we need to consider those things. We can't destroy the quality
of life of a community just to get a road wider.
MR. FEDER: We understand that.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And I think it's within our power --
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I wish you were in my district. But
no, really, we need to do something. We just can't say, we told you so
and now it's too late.
MR. FEDER: And Commissioner, what I will say, just so you
understand, we share your interest, said that we'd work with them.
First meeting we had, the dollar figure of 850,000 was based on us
paying for the land that they donated as well as a lot of these other
Page 246
December 15,2009
issues. We raised the issue of a privacy wall. What do you really
want, what can we do to try to make you whole; and the indication
was the whole realm of, you pay for all the land, you pay for all the
vegetation removed, you pay for more to come back, and that's where
we had some concern, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. So we had to pay for all of
that --
MR. FEDER: We did not pay for it. It was a swap relative to
providing the left-turn lane for them to provide an additional 15 feet.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, I think we ought to give them
a privacy wall for being such nice people, okay.
(Applause.)
MR. FEDER: If that is the will of the board.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Give them the option. Don't
make these decisions for them.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, what works for them best, I
think, is --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: They got it.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: But our budget is not unlimited,
okay. I'm not suggesting we just throw money at the problem,
because we've got money problems just like everybody else. But
under these circumstances, if they donated that property to us, in all
fairness, we need to do something for them really, and --
MR. FEDER: Yeah, they did except for the one section we're in
eminent domain that went past this donation for the left-turn lane.
They donated that part.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: All right. Can we say we will
work to our greatest ability to do something about those power lines,
do something to replace or to mitigate the removal of the berm so that
we can preserve the privacy of the community?
MR. FEDER: We'll be happy to work cooperatively with the
neighborhood to address options, see what we think works for them,
Page 247
December 15, 2009
bring those back to you, and let the board address it from there with an
idea of costs, and we'll work very hard with FP&L to see about the
possibility of bearing and what the costs will be.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Then with that
understanding, I will let the commissioner of the district make the
motion to proceed.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I have. I'm waiting for you to
second.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay, I'll second.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. We have plenty more discussion
gomg on.
Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. Where were the power lines
originally placed on this road?
MR. AHMAD: They exist on the south side, sir.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: They exist on the south side.
MR. AHMAD: Correct.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Then why are they moving them to
the north side?
MR. AHMAD: They are moving to the north side because we
are building a noise wall as part of the project on the south side for the
Orangetree community, and it's --
THE AUDIENCE: What about us? You've got to be kidding
me.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Quiet. Don't do that, please.
MR. AHMAD: And part of the hardening program, they are
required to make them concrete poles, so it was easier for them to
construct it on the north side than the south side. It wasn't our idea to
move it. They have the right-of-way and they --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. What I saw out there when I
drove out there is that the people on the south side were almost sitting
on the road to start with, okay.
Page 248
December 15, 2009
MR. AHMAD: Correct.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And so would they have had to
move the power poles ifthere wasn't a left-hand lane?
MR. AHMAD: Yes, they would.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: They would still have to move the
power poles?
MR. AHMAD: They would have to move the power poles
regardless.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. What about the other
underground stuff? Was that on the left -- was that on the north side
or was it on the south side?
MR. AHMAD: The other underground stuff is the Orangetree
Utility's which, as I mentioned, is lO-inch force main and lO-inch
water main. They're under the pavement. Actually one of them is
under the existing pavement and one just outside the pavement today.
But with the widening of the project, they will --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: On the north side or the south side?
MR. AHMAD: Basically in the middle of the roadway today and
on the north side.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. And so how long -- how
many times have you gone out to the community to address the
concerns -- have you done what you basically do in other districts
where you go out with 30 percent and 60 percent and 90 percent of the
engineering done?
MR. AHMAD: Yes, sir. As a matter of fact, when this issue
came about, I appreciate -- I think I know most of these people here --
we went -- Dale Bathen (phonetic), who's also in attendance here, my
engineer, the project manager and myself, we went to this community,
and these are some of the plans we took with us. We had two
concepts. A concept without a left-turn lane and a concept with a
left-turn lane and what the impacts would be. The impacts would be
additional 15 feet plus 10- foot slope and utility easements.
Page 249
December 15,2009
And they were -- decided to have the left-turn lane despite our --
basically this is not at standard in design what we have. We shortened
the left-turn lane, and this is not a standard design. And they were
thrilled to have that ability for their service vehicles and for -- to have
the second access, a left-turn lane on Oil Well.
In addition to -- that's in December of'05. And shortly after they
approved it, they asked me to stake it. And if! may, I can show you a
couple stakes.
At that meeting, the December, they said -- and I understand
some people cannot understand these engineering drawings, they
asked me if I could stake it for them. And we normally don't do that.
And we offered, yes, we do.
And at that date, I -- we staked it, we hired WilsonMiller and
staked it. You see it on the screen. The 15 foot -- this is near
Immokalee, and you see Immokalee Road was under construction in
2006. This is early 2006. That's a 15 foot you see for right-of-way
that we need and the 10-foot slope easement.
We've taken a bunch of pictures, and you can see where the stake
to the left, it's impacting the community, and that's the purpose we
staked it. We wanted to show what a 15-foot additional right-of-way
would do to this. Here you see a stake on the right is -- that's the
existing right-of-way, and the stake on the left is where the slope and
utility ends. And we've done up and down the --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay, a question I have -- I see
where you're at with this. Is there another entrance into this
community?
MR. AHMAD: Yes, sir. There is -- their main entrance is
actually on Immokalee Road, as they stated. It's just north of Oil Well
Road.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. Ifwe alleviated the left-turn
lane and they used Immokalee Road, then would we impact this area
that bad?
Page 250
December 15,2009
MR. AHMAD: Right now at this stage in design, we've put
utilities in those easements that we got. FP&L moved their poles in
that easement.
The engineers use the right-of-way for sidewalk, for -- the -- if
you eliminate the left-turn lane, you still are going to need this IS-foot
and the 10- foot easement.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Why?
MR. AHMAD: It's -- if you see the plans, you're designing four
lanes and a median, sidewalk, then you get into the berm, and then the
utility. There needs to be a separation --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I guess what I'm saying is, can't --
you put the utilities down, even though they're below ground, they're
not bothering anybody, can't you move the sidewalk back so that you
don't impact this berm this much and take the left-turn lane out?
MR. AHMAD: I do have a section here, if I can find it, which
shows the cross-sections, then you'll understand what I'm trying to tell
you.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
MR. AHMAD: In may.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
MR. WHITT: While he's doing that, can I address Commissioner
Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'm going to wait for him and then
I'll recognized you, sir.
MR. WHITT: Okay.
MR. AHMAD: What you see, Commissioner, is the
cross-section for the roadway. If you take the top one, for example.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
MR. AHMAD: Thank you. Yeah, you see this -- this is the
lO-inch force main, and this is the lO-inch water main. You see the
sidewalk. It is as close as possible to the roadway. We weren't
putting in buffers or anything. And you see their berm. This is the
Page 251
..v'''"",,_",,_____'_'''_''._' --.__"_,'.,,__._.,,,",__,..___.." .-..-.",..---~.~~-~, -.^~-..,-~..-~,~.-.-,._."--,~-.<,------,,~;>-"'--'", ."--"
December 15, 2009
existing berm that they have.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. That's what -- that's with the
additionalleft-hand-turn lane, is that correct, right now?
MR. AHMAD: Correct.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: So if you take that left-hand-turn
lane out, how much will that shorten the road up to the north?
MR. AHMAD: We are so far in design -- it would shrink it
somewhat, but you still need that -- you still need -- there is a 15- foot
separation between water main and sewer to keep them separate, and
that's really the purpose -- that's why we needed that additional
10- foot slope in utility easement.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I understand that. That's
underground. That doesn't hurt anybody. I'm just saying, if you took
the left-turn lane out and narrowed the road down, would you still
have to take the berm? The road would be short then, narrower?
MR. AHMAD: We are back to the original concept. Let me
show you, in may, what the original concept would do. What you
see is the original concept we had, and what you see in red is the
median that we were building, and the triple lefts westbound, one,
two, three lefts, and one right.
Originally all we needed, and they probably, their recollection is
correct, all we needed is a 10-foot slope in utility easements, and that's
what's shown on this, and that didn't impact much their berm. But for
them -- when they asked us for the left-turn lane, what it did is it
shifted everything 15 feet to the north.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That's what--
MR. AHMAD: So your -- the answer to your question, yes, but
it would require major redesign of utilities and send us back quite a bit
in designing of this project and would, of course, remove the left-turn
lane if that's their desire not to have it.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, it just seems to me that if
there's another way to get into this -- we had another situation in part
Page 252
December 15, 2009
of the county where they wanted a left-hand-turn lane in, and we
couldn't provide that, but there was another entrance into the
community .
So I'm just looking at the overall cost. It seems to me that if we
look at continuing on in the way we're going, that whether these
people understood or didn't understand the impact with this
left-hand-turn lane, that the end result is that I think this is going to
cost us a huge amount of money; am I right or wrong?
MR. FEDER: Commissioner, I'm not sure that it should, but at
the same time, we're going to come back to you after working with the
community, identify the options to try and address some of their
concerns, and then that can be evaluated by this board.
We need to move ahead on the contract, but at the same time,
trying to redesign it now, like I said -- when we went out, we're a little
bit surprised knowing that the berm and all that will be taken out. We
showed that in the graphics, as you can see here, which is exactly the
graphics brought out to the meetings, we then staked it.
But we are where we are now. And the fact of the matter is, to
try and go back, redesign, and modify, which eliminates the left turn
that they want and to have some level of need for and not to then
spend all that money to then try to go back on that orientation, delay
the project, we'd be better off, as Commissioner Coyle pointed out,
trying to find a way to help make this fit better with the community,
and we're willing to do so.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. But I just still want to make
sure that this doesn't end up costing us way more than is practical.
MR. FEDER: If we're four years down the road and had this
discussion, we'd be in different shape, but we're now four years further
out, and we want to be good neighbors as well. So rather than paying
all the costs to take away the left turn that they wanted in the first
place, we can try to look at what our options are.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
Page 253
December 15, 2009
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I don't want to be Scrooge
but I also don't want to be Santa Claus. I know it's so close to
Christmas. But I think we need to be fair to all our residents. I mean,
I got a community in my district that was screaming for a wall, and
study after study showed that it wasn't warranted.
So I don't know, you know, what we're doing here. You have a
30, 60, 90 design meeting. Why do we have those design meetings?
We got community input. They wanted a left-hand-turn lane. That
was the result of those design meetings.
So you got to have right-of-way for that for this left-hand-turn
lane, you know. There's a lack of communication. Jay Ahmad
wanted to show you the communication he's had. Commissioners
didn't want to see it.
I don't want to address this anymore. I want to see if we can try
to resolve this now. You have a -- seven citizens that are impacted
right against there.
Sir, you need to be a registered lobbyist with the Clerk of Court
to represent the community before the Board of Commissioners.
The -- so what can we do for those seven residents? And I can
see this coming back and we're arguing this over and over, and either
we don't do the road or let's sell it now. That's where I'm coming
from.
MR. FEDER: From a practical sense, a privacy wall, we've
already estimated about $110,000. We can talk to FP&L, although
they've got in that hardened system and they've already moved it to
the north, but we will explore that, see what the costs are. But I think
that may be costs that would be difficult for us to work with, but I
won't make that decision. Obviously the board will make that
Page 254
December 15,2009
decision.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Why don't the motion maker -- I
mean, what kind of privacy wall are we talking? How long will it
cover?
MR. FEDER: Basically much like the noise walls we have at
about a six-foot level, and you can see that you've got a rise on most
of that still, even though some of the berms are being cut down, all the
vegetation's going and some of the berms are going. So there would
be about a six-foot wall up on a rise.
Now, the road's coming up some, so it's still on that rise, you get
at least a six-foot plus privacy wall that they could build. I can't make
it a noise wall. It's not under the system. I know the concerns across
the street, but I do have more receptors closer together and closer to
the roadway. They've met the qualifications. These five to seven
homes would not meet it because of the spacing and the distance and
cost.
But they -- we could work with them on a privacy wall that they
could then go in and permit and build, or they could use funding like
that to go into heavier vegetation if that was their choice.
Those would be the only two viable options realistically. A berm
takes a lot of area space to build, and that would probably cut into
their yards more than they'd want to to re-establish a berm.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: What's the cost of the
left-hand-turn lane? Have you ever estimated that?
MR. FEDER: We have a cost of the left-turn lane that came into
our project, yes. The last time we looked at that, that was almost
1 OO-and-something thousand.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So there is a benefit to the
community for compensation of an easement?
MR. FEDER: There is, and that was what the original deal was
based on.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Bottom line is, you need to --
Page 255
-~.,----~~_._...._,.'-<. - _.. .....~~_..__.,--'^.--"..-,._. ."_..~-_.-
December 15,2009
you need to be fair and equitable to all. And they -- these residents
need to be compensated. It's a left-turn lane, and any moneys to abate
any kind of a noise, that's what we need to do. But it's not fair to
residents to provide a whole bunch of amenities to one community and
we don't do it to the other.
MR. FEDER: We understand, Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You know, so -- I mean, that's
the direction that we should be giving is to be -- treat these residents
fair and equitable just like we do everybody else. And I see that we
do have some room to do that. I'm done.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, I agree with you. I'mjust going to
take a little turn now. I know you're next.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Sure.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: But I just wanted to say, number one,
what's the difference between a noise wall across the street and a
privacy wall on this side?
MR. FEDER: It's basically height. You're a little higher on a
noise wall, but your Land Development Code -- and we had this
discussion with the board on a prior issue on a noise wall. If it isn't
warranted under the study process, which is decibels and then goes
into the cost-benefit analysis, which is usually where the issue lies, I
can't build it as part of my road project, even if they give me the
easement to build it on, because I'm going out of the Land
Development Code.
But the Land Development Code only allows for six-foot privacy
fences, so that's why I said that to you. I can't qualify it under a noise
wall, but we could provide them, which is a very substantial wall, but
six feet in height.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I see. They were pretty generous with --
it would have cost you $850 (sic) for that, right -- $850,000 you said
for the right-of-way, and they gave it to you.
MR. FEDER: That estimate was for right-of-way for the
Page 256
December 15,2009
vegetation, for a number of other things that was presented.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Right.
MR. FEDER: I don't have an estimate for the right-of-way, but I
know it was only a portion of that 850-.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I just thought that was interesting.
Underground -- Commissioner Coyle addressed burying the electric
lines. And I think I just read someplace in some of our paperwork that
some other community, because they already have an opening there or
they're going to bury the lines -- not your community, another one.
You were working with FP&L so you can bury the lines as long as
they're -- you know, you were digging it up anyway, and I think that
this would work.
MR. FEDER: And I assume that we've already been directed to
try and look at that option with FP&L.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. And my third and last comment is,
all of this is for a left-turn in, a left-turn out.
MR. FEDER: A left-turn in only.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Left-turn in only. What assurance do
these people have that in a couple years we won't take that left turn out
of there, out of the middle of the road?
MR. FEDER: Technically, the original agreement provided that,
should it become an operational problem, as is the case in most any
median opening, because medians are not a property right, that that
could be closed. Obviously that's going to be of grave concern, so you
may want to address that further.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Are you going to be writing that into the
contract that they won't lose that after going through all of this
procedure?
MR. FEDER: And what happens if you have major accidents,
major problems? I think it's still suited to make that statement. I try
not to use always or never. But I understand that -- I just tried to put
on the record, it would be very difficult to want to come back and
Page 257
December 15,2009
raise that issue after the concession was the provision of the
right-of-way to allow them to have that left-turn in.
Now, again, that left turn is close to the intersection, we had to
shorten up the storage. It's not a left turn that we necessarily wanted or
actually anticipated, given the impacts, was going to result, but it's one
the community said they wanted, and we've been trying to follow
through.
So understand, I know we're the ones that's not working with the
community. Strange part about it is, we're here because we tried to.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I think they need some kind of assurance,
because we've seen many left-turn lanes then eliminated over the last
few. And if we're going through all of this, we don't want to lose that.
MR. FEDER: Your assurance is basically written in there, if we
can come to the board and show that we have an operational and
safety problem that overrides other concerns to close this median off.
We'll make sure that that wording is clearly that way, that it has to
come to the board. But I would caution you to prohibit it from being
an issue; although, understand, I hope not to be standing up here
before you trying to change it.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETT A: Yeah. I think we have it pretty
well nailed down in the fact that I don't want to impose anyone
particular criteria on these people at this point in time. The reason
being, we want to get the road going forward, then we want to be able
to have them sit down and be able to work out at a reasonably leisure
__ and mind you, it's not going to be a comfortable thing when the
berm starts to come down and trees are removed. The place is going
to look real bad for a short while, a time until everything gets built
back. I know. I've been through this before.
Every road we have ever put in, we've always had an outpouring
of grief when the thing was in the construction stage. When it got
finally done -- lmmokalee Road was a good example. Many of you
Page 258
December 15,2009
probably called me many times wanting to know when it was going to
be done or why the sidewalk was where it was or any number of
factors, but it turned out to be wonderful in the end.
You're in charge of your own destiny, but I want to warn you of
something -- and forgive me. I'm probably out of place, but I'm going
to tell you anyways. If you go to a surgeon and you say, I got an ache,
he's going to operate. The same thing with a litigation lawyer.
Use common sense before you engage the attorney to the point of
no return. Just use common sense.
You have a commission here that's more willing to work with
you than I thought they would be. I thought this was going to be more
of an uphill fight than we have ever experienced before, and I didn't
even know if we were going to get to this point. I really didn't.
As it looks now, you're going to have that opportunity to be able
to be in charge of your own destiny, to work with transportation. I'll
be staying very close to the situation to be able to follow what's taking
place to see what can be done. You're going to check everything from
wires under the road, or wires -- the electric wires being put into the
median there with the pipes, you're going to check on the difference
between a privacy wall to a retaining wall. You're going to be able to
see all sorts of options, and there may be a number of different options
you want to bring forward. You're going to be able to look into the
variety of different plantings you can do, something you can never
handle here.
And with that, I kind of hope that we can call the question and
move on.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. And can you remember what your
-- what your motion was?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I certainly can. My motion was,
one, to approve the road construction as staff recommended and, two,
to set aside $750,000 and direct staff to go forward to the community
to see what their needs are and try to negotiate something to bring
Page 259
December 15, 2009
back to this commission for the decision to be made here if it's
something that falls within the parameters of what we can do.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That was not my second.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: What was your second?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: What was your second?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: My second was everything except
setting aside 700-and-something-thousand dollars. Okay.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: So then you withdraw your second, or do
you want to --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: If that's what the motion's going to
be, I'm going to withdraw.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's what the motion was in
the beginning. What would you suggest for an alternate?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I would suggest you do exactly the
same thing and just say that we will work with them to try to solve
their problems with privacy fences, with anything else we can do to
make them happy, just don't commit ourselves to a price, because if
we can get it done for $500,000, let's get it done for $500,000.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: But in that case --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Ifwe can get it done for 200,000--
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- it could exceed 750-.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Maybe if we've got 750-.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. Then I withdraw -- well,
you've got eight-and-a-halfmillion. I withdraw that part of the
motion, and I just make the motion that we direct staff to go out there.
We've seen what the sentiment of this commission is and the concerns.
And when this comes back us to, I'm hoping that we have a working
agreement.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You've got a second then.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. So a motion and a second. Now--
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Merry Christmas.
Page 260
December 15, 2009
CHAIRMAN FIALA: -- I've got -- now I've got two more
commissioners on deck.
Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Let me make this clear. Are we still
leaving the 750,000 in the pot?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay, good. Because it may only
cost us $100,000 or $150,000 for a wall, not a sound wall, but a
modesty wall or whatever to accommodate this.
My concern is that we've provided the community with a left-in,
and now it looks like we have to provide even more even though they
decided to give us that to accommodate their left-in.
So I'll go along with it so long as we don't exceed -- we're not
going to go no -- we're not going to go to $700,000. So whatever it
takes to address this particular issue.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Is it the intent of the motion
maker and the second to fairly compensate the residents for the
easement of land; is that what it is, or is it -- or is it to make them
happy?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: To make them whole. You can
interpret it several different ways, but I think all of the above.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's not really clear to me. I
think, again, we need to be fair to everybody. If it's to fairly
compensate the residents for the use of the land, which is an easement,
I'm all in favor of it. If it's to make them happy, I don't know what
that's going to take. I mean, you give that kind of direction, you're
going to have anything that comes back.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: May I respond?
MR. FEDER: Madam chairman?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: First I need to respond, Mr.
Feder. Thank you.
Page 261
December 15,2009
We don't know what that's going to be. It's going to come back
to you for direction, final direction on it. This is going to be worked
out between staff and the residents, and then we're going to hear back.
And if it's not workable, it's not workable.
Thank you, Mr. Feder.
MR. FEDER: To try and move forward and what we understand
to be the desire of the board, and staff shares that, we also still have
the condemnation proceeding on the other parcel that's further to the
east than what was the right-of-way donated relative to the left-turn
lane discussions.
I'm going to recommend that maybe you direct us to go to
mediation on that issue, and on what we can do relative to try and
address the five to seven homes that are impacted in the community,
and come back to you with the results of that mediation.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll go along with that.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'll go along with that.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Is that in addition to the motion
that I have?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Mr. Feder, you're saying my
motion is not valid? You're suggesting a substitute motion?
MR. FEDER: I would never presume to do so.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, no, it sounds like it. The
words --
MR. FEDER: I'm only offering up an item for consideration.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No. I'll tell you what's wrong
with it.
MR. FEDER: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Is the fact that it's not just four
or five properties owners; it's a whole community, and it's the whole
community we're going to interact with.
Page 262
December 15,2009
MR. FEDER: For the community then. But what I'm
recommending is, if you see what you have in your graphic here, that
yellow that the arrow is pointing to is the portion that's under
condemnation further to the east.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, I understand that, and I
have no problems with you going to mediation on that.
MR. FEDER: And that's what I'm saying. And as part of --
before we come back to you, go to mediation on that and on what we
can do to address the needs of the community relative to the overall
project and its impacts on the community.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I know we're only talking about this, but
how many other homes, as you continue the road down, how many
other homes will also be impacted in this same community? We
haven't even addressed that at all.
MR. FEDER: Not in the community. There's other communities
along the way, and they've been addressed, as we can, through the
process and we thought we'd addressed here, but we'll come back and
do what we can.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Because that could be -- that could be
very interesting, too.
Okay. I have a motion on the floor and a second.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Does that include the mediation
portion?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That includes the mediation
portion. How about you, second?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, it's okay. That'sjust
guidance to proceed with mediation, right?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: We'll have to approve it ifit--
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: We have to approve everything.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yep.
MR. FEDER: Yes.
Page 263
December] 5, 2009
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. All those in favor, signify by
saymg aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign?
(No response.)
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We just wanted to do that so
you couldn't make your --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: 5-0. And we're going to take a short
break, just a very short break. Commissioner Coletta's going to have to
leave us. He's guest speaker at six o'clock. He's going to have to
hurry .
COMMISSIONER HALAS: He's late. Time machine.
(A brief recess was had.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: We'll bring this meeting back in session.
Item #10E
AWARD CONTRACT NO.1 0-5366 TO STEVENS AND LAYTON
INe., FOR THE GA TEW A Y TRIANGLE AREA DRAINAGE
IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT PHASE 2, PROJECT #51803 IN
THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF $2,694,473.35 PLUS A TEN (10%)
CONTINGENCY TOTALING $2,963,920.69, AND NECESSARY
BUDGET AMENDMENT OF $350,000 - APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Commissioner, that takes you to 10E, which is an
award of contract number 10-5366 to Stevens and Layton, Inc., for the
Gateway Triangle area drainage improvement project, phase II,
project number 51803 in the total amount of $2,694,473.35 plus a 10
Page 264
December 15,2009
percent contingency totaling $2,963,920.69, and approve necessary
budget amendment of $350,000.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
MS. FILSON: I have a speaker, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Who? He waives.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And the speaker waives.
MS. FILSON: Did you waive, David?
MR. JACKSON: (Waves hand.)
MS. FILSON: Okay, speaker waives.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Hi, David.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Wonderful presentation.
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I thought it was our policy on
tertiary systems to make sure that we have a component ofMSTU or
something of that nature. What happened to our policy?
MR. COX: Did you say tertiary systems?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Sure.
MR. COX: This is a secondary, purely.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It's all secondary?
MR. COX: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And it's going to cost 1.9 -- or
2.7 --
MR. FEDER: 2.9.
MR. COX: Yes, sir. There's a pump station.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- million dollars for digging a
hole in the ground?
MR. COX: Well, it's a lot more than a hole in the ground. It's a
pump station, the piping, to bring the water to the ponds, additional
ponds.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Where's that going to be located
Page 265
,.,_._-,----~'~~-'-_._..-
December 15, 2009
at?
MR. COX: Pardon?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Can you show me where that's
going to be located at?
MR. COX: Sure can. If you'll look at the color graphics on this,
the blue shows the pond. The black line shows the old pond, which is
the segment to the west. The new pond section we'll be doing is the
one to the east, obviously. The green square is the pump station
location, and the red lines show where the discharge will be pumped
to its two outfalls.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Is that Bayshore Drive?
MR. COX: It runs down -- the east/west section is Linwood. It
runs over to Commercial, I believe that's Drive, and then goes north
and south. It splits.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: How close is it to the existing
ponds on Linwood? I mean, it looks like it's right -- is that Linwood
to the right of the screen?
MR. COX: The more -- the pond adds to the existing bond.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. So you're--
MR. COX: We're just digging the existing bigger.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: All right. So is that -- is that
including acquisition of the properties?
MR. COX: It's already been acquired.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Shane, would you state your name for the
record, please?
MR. COX: I'm sorry. For the record, Shane Cox, Senior Project
Manager, Stormwater Management Section.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. I didn't -- had no idea
where it was.
MR. COX: All in the same vicinity where we did the one two
summers ago. The original pond.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: What?
Page 266
December 15,2009
CHAIRMAN FIALA: You're finished?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. I'm not talking anymore.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Friendly, friendly.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You should have said that a
long time ago when we had our advisory boards up here.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: You must have eaten nails for breakfast.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, I didn't eat any nails. I'm
fine.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: No? We have a motion on the floor and a
second.
No further questions, all in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you.
MR. COX: Thank you, Commissioners.
Item #10G
DISASTER RECOVERY INITIATIVE AWARDS IN EXCESS OF
FIFTY-THOUSAND DOLLARS AND THE PURCHASING
DIRECTOR TO ISSUE PURCHASE ORDERS IN EXCESS OF
FIFTY-THOUSAND DOLLARS, FOR SITE PREPARATION
ACTIVITIES REQUIRED TO REPLACE HOMES SEVERELY
DAMAGED BY HURRICANE WILMA. THESE ACTIVITIES
WILL BENEFIT THREE (3) INCOME-QUALIFIED
HOUSEHOLDS IN COLLIER COUNTY. (FISCAL IMPACT
$178,142.75) - CONDITIONAL APPROVAL AND STAFF TO
REMIT COST REPORT - APPROVED
Page 267
December 15, 2009
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, that takes you to Item lOG, which
was formerly 16D6. That is a recommendation to authorize disaster
recovery initiative awards in excess of $50,000 and authorize the
purchasing director to issue purchase orders in excess of $50,000 for
site preparation activities required to replace homes severely damaged
by Hurricane Wilma. These activities will benefit three income --
excuse me -- income-qualified households in Collier County.
This item was moved to the regular agenda at Commissioner
Henning's request. And Mr. Frank Ramsey will present.
MR. RAMSEY: Thank you, sir. Good evening ing,
Commissioners. I welcome this opportunity to share with you one of
our more successful programs, especially in light of the conversation
this morning with the gentleman on public petition doing similar
activities. I'll keep this brief given the time frame.
This is just a brieftimeline to show you that on -- in April of
2008, the board executed agreements with the DCA to accept the grant
funding and outline the eligible activities. Later that month an
administrative plan was approved which, in part, provided up to 175
per site for home replacements. And then in June of 2009, the board
recently approved a contract with Idyll Construction to purchase
modular homes.
The purpose of the replacement is to replace homes severely
damaged by Hurricane Wilma when rehabilitation is not feasible or
possible. And you basically defer to FEMA on their rule of amount of
damage versus what would cost to repair.
We're providing safe hurricane-resistant modular homes for
income-qualified persons, we expend the grant funds for eligible
activities and improve the safety and appearance of homes throughout
the county.
The process is to contract with the vendor to purchase the
hurricane resistant -- hurricane-resistant modular home, contract with
Page 268
December 15, 2009
a vendor to site prep the location. In this case we are seeking your
approval to be consistent with the purchasing policy because the
contracts for this award exceed $50,000. The modular homes are
delivered and set, and we prepare them for the homeowners.
I won't go through this in detail. This is just some of the general
activities that are involved in this process, such as site preparation,
demolition, installation of various concrete structures, bringing in an
actual crane to lift the unit off and place it, landscaping, flooring,
heating and cooling.
This is the average cost for the replacements. For the complete
project, the average cost is roughly 156,000. And what I've done is
then broken it down by replacement activity there so you can see how
that -- we arrived at that total.
I would also say that these are exceptions in the program.
Overall the program so far, the average cost to hurricane harden and
assist the clients has been about $19,000. So these are our severe,
most needy clients.
These are some examples of the homes that are on your agenda
for approval to replace that have been deemed to be beyond repair.
And this is the example of the new unit that we will be putting in.
As you can see in one, in particular, we have a woman who is
handicapped, so you can see in the picture. Along the line -- along the
side they'll be able to put in a handicap ramp and make the home
completely handicap accessible. Her current unit, she cannot even use
the whole unit because she can't get through to it.
Now, that's all I have, Commissioners, and I'd be happy to
answer any questions for you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, I'll go after Commissioner
Henning. He was the one who pulled it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right. The -- the item -- the
item -- this doesn't include the cost of the modular homes?
Page 269
_._"~._..~.~u_=__=.~,"'__.__..____.__ .~,_._".__ _ ..____....".~._.. ..._..__,~...__^__,...,..._.,.,."'<M_'_' .
December 15, 2009
MR. RAMSEY: Correct.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And the modular homes are
going to be $50,000 each?
MR. RAMSEY: On this slide here you can see the breakdown
where the modular price on average came out to about $89,000.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. And it's going to be
approximately 155- per unit to replace it. And these are to replace
homes that are damaged by Hurricane Wilma?
MR. RAMSEY: Correct.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Wouldn't it be cheaper to -- it
would have been cheaper to give that money to Habitat for Humanity.
But here's what I got, and correct me if I'm wrong. This money
includes landscaping?
MR. RAMSEY: Correct.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Isn't there landscaping already
on the site? And what does that have to do with the grant?
MR. RAMSEY: The -- my understanding is that in order to
prepare for the set, the whole site needs to be leveled and cleared and
graded. And, Commissioner, we're not talking about any kind of
excessive landscaping. This would simply be to try to bring the
person back to where they were before we replaced their home.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. I have one here for
touch-up painting.
MR. RAMSEY: Correct. The homes are modular so they come
In pieces.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right.
MR. RAMSEY: So once they are joined together on the site,
there is just some minor painting to where the two pieces have met.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Why isn't that a part of the
contract for the mobile home, the contractor bringing it in and setting
it up? I mean, you have a lot of costs in here, what I see are part of the
setup, such as complete utility connections, painting, touchup. You
Page 270
December 15, 2009
have concrete footings in here, concrete stem -- block stem wall. You
know, I mean, I don't know whether this has to do with hardening or
replacing a home, for hurricane damaged home.
MR. RAMSEY: That's an excellent point, and perhaps I wasn't
clear. The item on your agenda today for approval would fund all of
those sorts of activities. The contractor purchased the home, is
literally just bringing an -- a finished unit in pieces and placing it
down. It doesn't include any of the site prep, any of the set work. So
it's almost like buying a vehicle and then having to bring it home and
not having -- having to build the damage and get ready to store your
car.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, when you buy your
vehicle, you're buying it with air-conditioning, tires, a battery and so
on and so forth, ready to go. Now, all you have to do is put gas in it,
have insurance.
I mean, these costs seems like there's -- there should be costs
already associated with the purchase of the home. I've never seen a --
well, it's just surprising.
And installing central heating and air-conditioning, cooling
system. I think these items are just out of the realm of what the grant
was for.
MR. RAMSEY: The grant -- and I should say that I understand
any concern that, perhaps, this funds could have been made available
elsewhere and had a larger impact, but the reason for this activity is
these particular -- one of the challenges in administering the grants for
me is to maximize the power of the grants. And with this particular
grant, acquiring an existing unit, for example, or -- is not an eligible
activity .
So because we were able to document that these clients were
impacted negatively by a hurricane, that allowed them to be eligible to
receive these grant funds, and the home replacement activity is an
eligible activity.
Page 27]
December 15,2009
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Recommendations to
authorize disaster recovery initiative award. The disaster was a
hurricane. I just don't see where some of these things are related to a
hurricane, and I don't see -- some of these things should be included in
the purchase of the home, so -- not something this sits well with me.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. I have some of the same
concerns. This is a lot of money for site preparation. You know, you
can prepare a site for a lot the size of the ones you just showed me for
a lot less than the amount of money we're approving here, and that's
what's bothering me a little bit.
These are not major sites to prepare. There's no excavation work
to speak of. There might be some fill work and some leveling and
even some demolition, but I just had a -- I didn't have it. There was a
house in my neighborhood, maybe a 4,500-square-foot home that was
completely demolished and hauled away inside a week. The concrete
pad was dug up and the place was leveled, and there are surveyors out
there today.
So I don't understand how you spend that money -- and heavy
equipment and an operator will cost you maybe 4- or $500 an hour. It
just is incredible to me that we'll spend that much money on site
preparation. And I would feel a lot more comfortable if I had
somebody's bid so I could see that bid and ask them to justify that
cost, because, quite frankly, what you really want to do is replace a
house, right? You want to give somebody a place to live?
MR. RAMSEY: Correct.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, where are they getting the
money to buy this modular unit? Where does the money come from?
MR. RAMSEY: It's from the same grant.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. But it's more money
though, right?
MR.OCHS: Yes, sir.
Page 272
December 15, 2009
MR. RAMSEY: Correct.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So you're going to spend $40,000
or more for the modular unit, I would presume, right?
MR. RAMSEY: The unit is roughly 88-.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: $88,000. And we're spending in
one case 71,000 for site preparation. That's $150,000. You could go
down in downtown Naples and buy a house for $ I 50,000 in some of
the communities in Lake Forest. I don't get it. I really don't. It's a lot
of money.
MR. RAMSEY: And I understand, Commissioner. It's an
excellent point. Unfortunately, with this grant, we could not -- It's not
eligible to offer these homeowners the ability to relocate and go
purchase a new unit somewhere else. The only option to assist them,
because their homes have been completely destroyed as a result of
hurricane damage, is to demo the existing dwelling unit and replace it
on site. That's a challenge we have with the grant.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Still, these -- how did you -- how
did you verify these prices?
MR. RAMSEY: It was through a -- we procured bids, and we
received three bids through the process, and we awarded it to the Idyll
Construction, Incorporated.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And you looked at the itemized
listings of charges? That's incredible, absolutely incredible. But
anyway -- okay.
MR. RAMSEY: If you would like, Tammy Hammer is a
rehabilitation specialist on my staff and also a general contractor. So
perhaps she could speak more to the specific activities under contract.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Please.
MS. HAMMER: Commissioners--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Before we do that. I would just
like an itemized bill, and I would like the addresses. I can't believe
you need a crane to where you could put a set of wheels under that.
Page 273
^.........."..._....,...~.._..._"._----""'-----,_._---,--._.~.~--..,...-
December 15,2009
You can't do it with the home down your street. These are -- these are
homes that you could put wheels under them and move.
MS. HAMMER: No. These are modular homes, sir, and they
will come in on a flatbed in three pieces. They'll be lifted with a crane
and they'll be lifted up over the top of lines or trees or whatever is in
the way, and they'll be placed onto the footers that have been set by
the set crew or by the modular set. It will be a concrete foundation
with concrete footers that will be on there. They will then be strapped
down so they will be secure for storms.
Those houses will no longer -- it won't be like a mobile home.
They'll no longer move. They'll be stationary on that property.
Some of these houses, also the price for the set includes fill
because we have to bring all these houses up to code, and they have to
be raised to -- for the -- the height for the water and for the flooding.
And the power and all has to be connected from the new unit to what
was originally there.
I have gone through and estimated how much these houses would
run us in the set crew, and these prices came in very close to what we
had estimated. Like Buddy said, we received three bids for each
house, and this is -- this is what we have. I mean, this was what we
felt was going to be the best thing for these homeowners.
Like Buddy said, we couldn't move them to some other location.
These are their homes. They own this property, and this is what we
were doing there.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, I agree with Commissioner
Henning. It would have been better to spend the money, if we could,
with Habitat for Humanity. They could provide a brand new home or
a refurbished home at far less cost than this, and you get more people
in homes than we do this way. It's just a shame that the government,
federal government, sets up programs like this and throws money
away, in my opinion, when we could use this amount of money and
service probably twice as many people. But nevertheless --
Page 274
,......_.._~--~~.,-'-----,-,.~-~".."_._,...~."~----
December 15,2009
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Is there any way that we can
delay this to get more of a breakdown cost?
MR. RAMSEY: I believe on these particular ones, time is of the
essence based on, one of the gentlemen, if not, I believe two, are code
enforcement referrals. And so they're accruing fines.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, wait a minute, wait a
minute. That's something that we can deal with. That's not a good
excuse. Give me a good excuse of why we can't delay this.
MR. RAMSEY: I'm sorry. I'm told they're already in
production, the units, as well.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Great, yeah. I mean, I just -- I
think that by providing us more information maybe -- to me some of
the cost seems to be exorbitant, and maybe the contractor can take a
better look at these costs, and maybe there is a mistake or something.
Well, then Tammy, you know what? It just doesn't set well for
me, so prove it, you know. That's all I need is proof that these are
actually costs. $ I 0,000 for permitting doesn't seem right. So I make a
motion that we continue for more information.
MR. RAMSEY: I would note, Commissioner, that prior to any
of these payments being issued to the contractor, the clerk's office
does a very thorough review.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No. As long as the Board of
County Commissioners approve these items, the clerk must pay for
them.
MR. RAMSEY: Understood.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: All I'm asking is that we can
delay this a little bit so we can take a look at these costs. They just
don't seem reasonable.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: What happens to the handicapped person
who can't get in the other part of her house while we delay it?
MR. RAMSEY: Show can only occupy, I believe, a portion of
the home because the other portion is inaccessible at this time to her.
Page 275
December 15, 2009
One of the person's home has been demolished already by code
enforcement, and so he is currently without a home. And the -- those
are the two specific examples that I know off the top of my head with
these three. I forget the third.
So it's a challenge. This is -- the disaster funds are challenging
because everything is, time is of the essence, and we're trying to --
although I know it's ironic to say when we're talking about
replacement from Hurricane Wilma. But it's a challenging grant to
administer.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: My big concern is -- and, you know, these
gentlemen make a good point. My big concern is, today's the 15th of
December. Our next meeting isn't until the 12th of January, so that's
another month away. And is there -- you know, what are these people
going to do without -- you know, without moving forward?
MR. RAMSEY: I mean, if! may suggest, you know, we could
certainly provide the board, if it would be the board's desire to move
forward with this project today, I could certainly forward a copy of the
bid spec with all the quite -- excuse me -- with all the quotes and all
the prices on a breakdown, and if there was anything that seemed
unreasonable with the set, that we could certainly try to work with the
contractor. But again, I'd be happy to provide any information,
whatever the board's direction is today.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Does permitting really cost $10,000 when
MR. SCHMITT: No.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: No, right? Are these only estimates?
And is this going to come in a lot lower than this? Can you bring this
back to us with what it actually costs, rather than $1 55,000? Could
you bring it back to, you know -- and tell us it only costs 71- or
whatever it was?
MR. RAMSEY: The only cost on here that I believe is going to
be an estimate is the permits. The price for the modular actual unit has
Page 276
December 15,2009
been procured, is under contract through purchasing, and the modular
set, again, as we've been discussing, has been procured.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, I see.
MR. RAMSEY: So those costs are fairly accurate. And these
are averages, of course.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I know Commissioner Halas, but let
Commissioner Henning finish.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I don't want to stop this project.
I just want to verify -- and I believe by more information that we're
going to get a more accurate price.
MR.OCHS: We'll bring the item back if that's the pleasure of
the majority of the board. We'll just continue it to the January
meeting.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, the problem -- the problem I
have or see here is that we have a handicapped woman who is living
in a dilapidated at the present time, and we have another issue where
they're already moved forward to move -- remove the building, and so
now the gentleman doesn't have a place to stay unless some body's
paying for his temporary housing.
But the question I have is, Joe, is there impact fees on this, and is
there -- what kind of -- what's the permitting cost on this? I assume
that you have to look at all the utilities and everything else because
you're basically starting over with a stem wall, you have to have the
utilities, you have to have the inspections and you've got to bring in
water and everything else; am I right on this or am lout of --
MR. SCHMITT: For the record, again, Joe Schmitt. The
$10,000 has to include impact fees. A permit like this is probably no
more than $800 for this type of replacement for a modular. So -- and
that permit includes all of the inspections. It's a residential property.
And I've just -- we were just chatting. This has to include the
Page 277
December 15, 2009
bump up in impacts fees ifthere's an increase in square footage
between what was existing and what is going to be placed on property.
But I don't know that. I was just trying to confirm that with Buddy.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Can you enlighten us that, do they
-- since these homes are, I would take it, the square footage is larger
than what was there originally -- because some of the pictures you
showed us was a single-wide mobile home, okay. And so what you're
showing us now, the -- are -- is basically a double wide or where this
is built in a factory in parts and they're brought here and assembled.
So the impact fees have to be paid on the increase in floor space; is
that correct?
MR. RAMSEY: Correct.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. And so that's where you're
coming up with the $1 O,OOO?
MR. RAMSEY: It's an estimate, yes, to include all of the
associated costs. I should have labeled it permits and impact fees. I
apologize.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. So the -- so then when we
look at -- that's part of the site plan?
MR. RAMSEY: It's part of the site preparation activities. We
just included the total costs -- I mean, excuse me. In part of the
replacement projects, we included the total costs just to give the board
an idea.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. Can -- I'm going to make a
motion to approve this with the -- but I think all of us need a detailed
report in regards to exactly what the expenditures are. And then I
think we can also address these concerns and hopefully maybe work
with the people if -- who are going to assemble these to see if there's
some way that we can address some cost-cutting moves, okay.
I'm concerned about being close to Christmas and you've got a
woman in a dilapidated house, and then you've got another gentleman
that basically doesn't have anyplace to stay. Hopefully we can get this
Page 278
December 15, 2009
thing moving. So that's my motion.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I'll second it.
Okay. Now, I have Commissioner Coyle and Henning. I don't
know which one of you is first.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: County Attorney wanted to --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, I'm sorry. I didn't even see him.
MR. KLA TZKOW: Just one approach you could take if you
wanted is you could conditionally approve it. They would get you the
facts and figures to review, and if any commissioner was unhappy
with it, then ask the county manager to put it on the next agenda. In
essence, conditionally approve it based on your review. If you're not
happy, you pull it again and it comes backs to you. If you're happy
with the report, it goes through. Just an approach.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That's kind of how my motion was
made, that, you know, bring it back, we see what we can do, and then
we'll try to see if we can negotiate any different costs if we feel that
it's still out of line after we get an itemized issue or itemized list in
regards to what's -- what the -- to spend all this money so that we have
a clear understanding of the 88- -- or the $71,000 for site development,
okay.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: But move forward with this?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: But move forward with it, yes.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: All right. Okay. I understand. Marla,
did you have something to say? I have two commissioners wanting to
ask some questions yet.
MS. RAMSEY: I just want to put something else on the record.
Marla Ramsey, Public Systems Administrator.
I think the reason that this is coming to you is it's over the
$50,000 mark as we did the division out of the various homes. So
that's one of the reasons it's coming at this point in time.
The modular homes have already been ordered. They're already
in production. They're due to be delivered on the 7th of January. Our
Page 279
December 15,2009
concern is is that if you don't -- if we're not going to approve this,
what am I going to do with the modular homes when they come here
to Collier County? I'm going to have to store them somewhere, I'm
going to have to then remobilize them to put them on the sites, et
cetera. So I've got a little timing issue that I just needed to put on the
record for you so you would understand where we're at with that. So
just FYI.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Now, I don't know who's first, Henning or
Coyle.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, I don't care.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Go ahead, start. You want to wrap it up,
Commissioner Coyle, also.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Whatever.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: He said his light's off, so I guess
I'll go.
Yeah. Again, I don't want to stop the process. All I want to do is
to make sure -- this is taxpayers' money. I don't care -- not property
taxpayers' money, taxpayers' money, and we're responsible for it.
If it's the costs are just, I have no problem with it, but they seem
to be unreasonable, so I want more information.
So if the motion maker is to conditionally approve it based upon
a just cost by staff providing us more detailed information, I will
second the motion.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I already seconded it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You already seconded it.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: She already seconded, but this was
in my motion basically.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes, it was.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Basically.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yep, to bring it back -- bring back
-- let us know exactly what it costs. We'll approve this with the idea
Page 280
December 15, 2009
they're going to tell us exactly what the problem -- concerns are. At
the next meeting we can look at these and see if there's any areas that
we need to justify or to see if we can work with the contractor who has
already got the lowest bid and see if we can work even closer to
bringing it down in cost.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. If you would include in
your motion that once staff provides us the information, if any
commissioners has concerns, talk to the county manager and put it on
the next agenda. Is that part of your motion?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That's what I said. I'll bring it back
the next --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I don't want to bring it
back unless there is any concerns.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: No, no, but we're going to have
that information, and then at that point in time, we can -- we or any
one of the commissioners can make that decision that we need to
discuss this and see if we can get the price even lower.
MR. OCHS: And if you want me to put it on a subsequent
agenda, then just let me know.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Do it.
MR.OCHS: I'll get you a staff report in the interim.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Do it.
MR. OCHS: All the breakdown of all the detailed information
that you want.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Do it, meaning you want it on an agenda?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Put it on --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I don't want it on an agenda
unless it has to be.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: But let's go ahead and move
forward with this.
Page 28]
December] 5, 2009
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I want to see Buddy with a
touchup brush in his hands.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You're not -- if you're going to wait
to approve the costs and then see if you can get the contract costs
down, that means you're not going to begin work, and if you don't
begin work, it won't be ready for the time when the modular unit
arrives here. So I don't know how that is going to work.
But let me tell you what I would be willing to do. I would be
willing to approve this in the interest of helping the people who don't
have a place to live, but get a full accounting for this after the fact so
that we'll have a clear understanding of how the money was spent.
We're in a position right now as if we want the site prepared in
time for the modular unit. You have to begin work now. You can't
wait for us to look at the contractor's costs, then decide whether or not
it's okay, and then tell the contractor that you've got to cut costs. It's
not going to happen.
So my real issue here is that we've got money coming from
several different sources that we use to help needy people get housing.
We've got this source of funds, we've got another source of funds that
Marcy is using to buy up homes and rehabilitate them. We have
another source of funds where we're granting or providing money to
contractors to buy up homes and renovate them, we've got money
going to Habitat for Humanity where they are buying up homes and
rehabilitating them.
What I would like from staff is a -- is a report which addresses
the sources of all the funds and the restrictions on the use of those
funds so that we can make some rational decisions about how we can
get the biggest bang for the buck so that if we decided that we wanted
to allocate all of this money to Habitat for Humanity because they can
do it cheaper and faster and we can get more people in homes, then we
ought to be able to do that.
Page 282
December 15, 2009
But just having us allocate money with different programs and
different requirements is a haphazard way to use the taxpayers'
money, and I would like that kind of a comprehensive report so that
we can make better decisions in the future.
MR. RAMSEY: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And I will support whatever
motion will get this work moving ahead now with the understanding
we want an accounting of the money that was spent and why.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Does everybody understand this motion?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yep, everybody --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Everybody should be satisfied
with the motion.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, fine. Everybody is. And so we
move -- we have a motion on the floor and a second. All in favor,
signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: 4-0. Thank you very much, Buddy.
MR. RAMSEY: Thank you, Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: We look forward to all the facts and
figures. Thank you.
MR. RAMSEY: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: How about public comments? Has
anybody waited it out till 7:07 in the evening?
MS. FILSON: No, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
Page 283
December 15, 2009
Item #I4A
RESOLUTION 2009-306: SUNSETTING THE IMMOKALEE
MASTER PLAN AND VISIONING COMMITTEE, AND
RECOGNIZING AND MEMORIALIZING THE AUTOMATIC
REPEAL OF ORDINANCE NO. 04-62, AS AMENDED -
ADOPTED
MR.OCHS: Takes us to 14A, Commissioner. A resolution to the
board sunsetting the Immokalee Master Plan and Visioning
Committee and recognizing and memorializing the automatic repeal of
ordinance number 04-62 as amended.
Penny Phillipi's here.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Did you want to hear her presentation
first?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, you know, she's been
waiting here for so long.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I know.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We should give her all the time
that she wants.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Only since nine o'clock this
mormng.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Thirty seconds.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll make a motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Thirty seconds and I'm out of here.
MS. PHILLIPI: Hi. My name is Penny Phillipi. I'm the Director
of the Immokalee CRA. And I just want to tell you that this started in
2004 in September, and you renewed it in 2007, and it sunsets right
now. And I really think that this group has worked really long and
hard to accomplish the task of the Immokalee Master Plan, and I think
it's time to let them have a rest.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Motion to approve.
Page 284
'-"-'~---'-~>"'-'-~-~.~~"""""""'--"'..,..-,,~-------_.,~"<
December 15, 2009
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Motion to approve -- second.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I have a motion to approve by
Commissioner Henning, a second by Commissioner Coyle.
Any discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: All in favor?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: 4-0.
Sorry you've been here all day long. You want to go out to
dinner afterwards?
MS. PHILLIPI: Yes, please.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Rum and Coke.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Who's buying?
Item #15
STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. And now we come to the portion
of our commission meeting where we close up and we hear our county
manager for any comments.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Can we skip that?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Huh?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Can we skip this part?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: No.
MR. OCHS: I just have two real quick items, Commissioners.
This first one was just to verify. I know that all the board members
Page 285
December] 5,2009
were copied on this letter from our tax collector, Larry Ray, advising
you essentially that after consultation with his attorney and a brief
meeting with Mr. Klatzkow and I, per the direction of the board, that
he is recommending that he not pursue the dot com class action
lawsuit at this time for the reasons that he indicated in this letter. All
the board got a copy, but I just wanted to verify that everybody
understood that intent. Thank you.
The other quick item is that Commissioner Fiala was good
enough to advise me that she received this letter recently back from
the Seminole tribe. You recall that the board has authorized the Chair
to send a letter asking for a direct meeting with the board and the tribe
regarding the gaming compact, and they've sent this letter back to
Commissioner Fiala suggesting that -- looking for times and proposed
dates for meetings between representatives of both parties.
Now, I don't know what they mean by representatives. I know
the board's original intent, if I understood it, was that they wanted a --
you wanted a face-to-face as a full board with representatives from the
tribe, but I don't know if they're yet willing to do that.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Can we just have the Chair --
designate the Chair to meet with -- along with the staff with the Shores
(sic).
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Which chair? This year's chair,
next year's chair? When are we going to meet?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: This chair. I don't care.
MR.OCHS: We don't have dates or times yet, sir, so it would
depend on when they could meet, I would imagine.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And then staff also?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yep.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Whoever the chair is.
MR. OCHS: So with the board's permission, I'll make the
Page 286
December 15, 2009
contact and try to set the meeting.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We should make Commissioner
Coletta the chair since he's not here.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No, no, no. You don't want to do
that.
MR. OCHS: That's all I have, ma'am. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. There was something else. Leo,
did -- that was that -- that one from the EDC?
MR. OCHS: We're not going to bring that -- I talked to Tammie.
We don't need a quick action on that resolution. We can do that at the
January meeting.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, fine. Okay. Thank you.
Okay. County Attorney?
MR. KLA TZKOW: I don't have anything, ma'am. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, that's good.
Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Nothing for me.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I just want to say, since we won't
be convening as a Board of County Commissioners until after the first
of the year, I want to wish each and every one of my fellow
commissioners a Merry Christmas, Happy Hanukkah, whatever fits,
and Happy New Year.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. The -- I had the privilege
of attending the lighting of the candle to start the festival of
Hanukkah, and it was quite nice. I'm glad it's in the community, and
Merry Christmas also to all. Happy Hanukkah and Merry Christmas.
I appreciate the board's indulgence on the discussion about that
last item. I'm glad we gave direction to kind of take at -- make sure
that we're spending the monies, even though it's federal monies, it's
still tax dollars, the proper way for this type of housing.
Page 287
December 15, 2009
The other thing I would like, I guess there was a staff
communication to the public about doing away with some PUD
monitoring meetings in the near future. Those -- there's a -- that's in
community development. There's fees associated with those PUDs;
they think have to pay fees for those monitoring reports and yada,
yada, yada.
So I would like all the information of -- because that was, I don't
know, a fee that was four or five years ago. I would like all the fees
collected annually, itemized annually, that total amount. I also would
like the expenses of PUD monitoring community -- PUD monitoring
department, their expenses.
MR. OCHS: Which period of time, sir?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: However long it's been going
on.
MR.OCHS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It hasn't been that long.
MR.OCHS: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We've just been approving
ordinances, and they haven't been monitored. So it's kind of upsetted
(sic) the community that those meetings are not going to be taking
place, and it's something we need to resolve in the future.
The next thing, I just want to talk about baseball, the Yankees.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yankees?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It's the Cubs.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It's the Cubs. I don't know why
it's not the White Sox. But what -- I think we should try to get ahead
of it, and then behind it, behind the ball; we should get ahead of the
ball. See if we can hit a home run.
So can we kind of direct staff to report back to us of further
actions that need to be taken? I'm kind of hearing about tourist tax,
and then I'm also hearing that tourist tax is not going to cover the
expenditures or the cost of a bonding. I'm also hearing that we're
Page 288
December 15,2009
going to get use of a stadium if it is approved. I think that parks and
rec. or other staff needs to kind of take a look at that whole thing. So
can we give some direction on that? He's not a Cubs fan. I know he's
not a Cubs fan.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I don't know who was first.
Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: First, yep.
I've approached one of the individuals, and he's coming in, I
think, to see me tomorrow, that's on this 5th A venue committee. In
the discussion that I had, I asked them, or asked that person, where
they thought they were going to get the money, and he said, we've got
a hundred million dollars already allocated for it, okay. Now, whether
that's true or not.
And I've also had telephone calls from newspaper reporters
asking me in was invited to that meeting. We've never been invited.
And I -- my concern is, we have this group that's out there and says
that they're looking at three pieces of land someplace in Collier
County, not in the -- and they make sure that it's not in the city, and
yet they've never approached me. Now maybe they've approached
other commissioners in regards to where these items are and what the
-- is the -- what's the land presently zoned for, who's going to pay for
the infrastructure, who's going to pay for the road impacts and
everything else.
So I'm just as concerned as you are. And if they -- because I've
pretty much made it very clear when I've been approached on this, that
we're not going to be looking at putting out a bond issue where this is
basically going to be taken care of by the taxpayers here in Collier
County.
Now, I said, as long as they're all private funding, I got no
problem with it. But don't come looking for public funds in regards to
this issue. So when somebody tells me they got a hundred million --
oh, excuse me -- hundred million dollars allocated for this, then I
Page 289
December 15, 2009
figure they got it covered.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: One of the risks of getting a seat at
the head of the table is that people are likely to hand you the bill. And
I can tell you that the people involved in these negotiations are savvy
businessmen and women.
I don't know that they want the government involved in the
discussion because if they do that, the discussion by the government
representatives has to be in public, and that means that they can't
discuss what they really want to discuss with you.
And -- but what I have gotten out of it is that it is -- that several
parcels are being evaluated. To the best of my knowledge, no parcel
has been selected. I have no more information than any of you have.
But I would -- I feel the same way Commissioner Halas does, that if
somebody can do this with private funds then, you know, I'd be happy
to jump in and help; but if they're going to ask us for a hundred
million dollars, you know, I've got bad news for them, and -- but I do
know that, I do believe, that their plan is to ask for at least a one-cent
increase in the tourist tax.
So it's -- they're going to be looking for some funds from the
government and the taxpayers. And it would be better if they could
fund it themselves, but that's what I know about it.
And I would be a little reluctant to say, let me get involved with
this at the present time; because I don't know where they're talking
about, I don't know what zoning is necessary, I don't know what Land
Development Codes have to be evaluated, you know. It's sort of
nebulous.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, let me -- I know there's
going to be a positive impact, a stadium, but also I know that for some
it could be a traffic impact.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I haven't heard a lot of outcry
Page 290
December 15, 2009
from the citizens on either side of it.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I have.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You know, there's a small group
that are in favor of it, but I would suspect there could be an even larger
group not in favor of it when you're talking about taxes. And when
you're talking about tourist tax, it could be the hoteliers.
Ijust think if we give our staff some direction to keep in front of
it, if they can, to advise us. I'd rather have that than the investors try
to advise us. That's the only thing I would like.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I don't have any problem with that.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Has anybody invited staff to be a part of
any discussions or even -- has anybody even approached staff
members?
MR.OCHS: I've had one meeting last week at the request of, I
think, the same local groups that are working the potential site
selections and some of the financing, and they asked for IS minutes
just to kind of bring me up to speed. There wasn't any specifics to
speak of, just letting me know that they believe that the Cubs are still
serious about Collier County as an option and that they were going to
have this meeting last evening, I guess, with a local group to try to
bring this thing a little bit closer to fruition and try to get some meat
on the bones over the next 60 days, and then they told me they were
going to try to be getting on each individual commissioner's calendars
to basically get them advised to the extent that they -- that they could
at this point.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: They were on mine.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: My point is, you want to
involve your staff because Leo can filter that out to tourism,
transportation, community development, office of the budget and
management, and advise us a little bit better instead of trying to do it
as the dais, that's all.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coyle?
Page 291
December 15, 2009
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. There's -- I don't see
anything wrong with that. There's one thing I think we need to be
careful of, and we always get caught in this public relations trap where
the newspaper writes something or the staff or an advisory board takes
some action or mentions something, and all of a sudden it morphs into
the county commissioners have approved something.
We have to be real careful with respect to discussions about
tourist taxes being approved or allocated for this, because none have
been, nobody's asked us for them, and there are no plans, to my
knowledge, that we're going to do that. So we've got to be careful
because the vice-chairman of the TDC is a member of that group.
So we've got to be careful that the involvement of a member of
the Tourist Development Council does not convey to the public that
this is officially sanctioned, okay.
I think we need to take -- make some notification of that and
make sure everybody understands it; otherwise, we're going to get
these rumors started and people are going to be taking potshots at, oh,
the commissioners are going to charge us for this, and that's certainly
not the case in my mind.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I just want to throw this out there
just to give you a little bit of flavor about when there's talk of stadiums
and there's talk about government involvement in stadiums. The state
that I come from, we now have three stadiums, and one stadium was
built by financing partly by the state, and then a lot of it was built by
the financing from the city.
And the -- there was a long-term contract. There was all this fluff
and buff that this thing is going to pay for itself, it's going to bring in a
certain amount of jobs, it's going to do all of this stuff; and after about
IS years, the contract was broke by a couple of big sports teams. In
fact, they couldn't make a go of it.
It was an 80,000-seat stadium. They tried to put the basketball
Page 292
December 15, 2009
team in there, they tried to put -- they had the football team in there.
They had concerts that came in there. They brought in tractor pulls.
They brought in all this other stuff, and the end result is, the city today
that put a lot of money back when things were good for them, they're
almost in total bankruptcy.
And then when the owner of the football team decided that he
could no long- -- he didn't want to stay there at this location, he then
championed to have the city -- another city and the state again come
up with funding to build a stadium. And the end result is, the
taxpayers are held with this -- with the bill.
So I have no qualms about us building -- having a stadium built
as long as it's done by private enterprise. It can be done by venture
capital groups, it can be done by all that.
But come to -- because of the experiences that I have seen with
stadiums, I just feel that -- and especially right now in this
environment, I don't think that we or the citizens here need to be
involved in public funds involved in a stadium. And I've seen too
much of what goes on.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I think that's what's appealing about this
is that they're going to get private funding. We in Florida had that
problem, I believe it was in the '80s when I was in the tourism
industry; and I think it was Hillsborough County, decided -- their TDC
at that time decided that they would devote 100 percent of their tourist
development taxes to build a stadium for five years, and they did,
indeed, do just that, and then -- but they didn't have a team that was
going to use it. They were hoping to attract a team.
You remember that, Leo?
MR.OCHS: Yes, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And then that stadium sat there empty for
years and years, but they had to maintain it because now their
investment was sitting in there. This is a lot more appealing that they
want to go about finding the funds to build it once they have a team
Page 293
December 15, 2009
committed to it. This sounds a lot better than what the poor
Hillsborough people had to deal with.
And so -- and who knows, they might even find the maintenance
money to go along with this thing.
So is that all, Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I've taken up a lot of time,
and I know I've had some help on that, but I appreciate the discussion.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Well, it was good that you brought it up.
I mean, we haven't done that before. Thank you.
And I'll bring up -- I'll be the last one to say Merry Christmas,
Happy Hanukkah to all. When we get back together again next year, I
hope that our new chairman has a less tumultuous meeting than we've
just had to deal with today, and -- but I wish you a good year -- well,
I'm looking at Commissioner Coyle because he's next up to bat, shall I
say. But thank you all for a great year. Staff, you-all have been
absolutely wonderful to work with, very, very supportive, and I
appreciate everything you've done to make this a good year for me as
your chairman.
And with that, goodnight. We adjourn.
MR. OCHS: Motion to adjourn, please.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Motion to adjourn.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: All in favor?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
Page 294
December 15, 2009
Item #16Al - Moved to Item #17D (Per Agenda Change Sheet)
Item #16A2
RESOLUTION 2009-291: ROADWAY (PRIVATE) AND
DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE FINAL PLAT OF
MEDITERRA PARCEL 110, WITH THE ROADWAY AND
DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS BEING PRIV A TEL Y
MAINT AINED
Item # 16A3
REFUND IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,052.28 FOR A PORTION OF
THE PETITION FEE RECEIVED FOR A RECENTLY
WITHDRA WN 2007-2008 CYCLE GROWTH MANAGEMENT
PLAN AMENDMENT PETITION - FOR PETITION CP-2007-2,
IMMOKALEE ROAD/OIL WELL ROAD COMMERCIAL
SUBDISTRICT GMP AMENDMENT
Item #16A4
WATER AND SEWER UTILITY FACILITIES FOR MEDITERRA
MAINTENANCE FACILITY - W/RELEASE OF ANY UTILITIES
PERFORMANCE SECURITY (UPS)
Item # 16A5
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL OF COLLIER
COUNTY TO ALLOW ATOMIC MACHINE AND EDM, INC. TO
PARTICIPATE IN THE FAST TRACK PROGRAM FOR THE
BUILDING PERMIT REQUIRED FOR THEIR TENANT
IMPROVEMENT AT THE MARKET CENTER PROJECT -
Page 295
December 15, 2009
CREATING JOBS IN A TOUGH ECONOMY BY HIRING
FORMER CONSTRUCTION WORKERS WHO ARE OUT OF
WORK AND WANT TO BE RETRAINED
Item # 16A6
DEVELOP AND ADVERTISE FOR BOARD CONSIDERATION
AN AMENDMENT TO ORDINANCE NO. 2004-58, KNOWN AS
THE PROPERTY MAINTENANCE ORDINANCE, AND TO
BRING BACK AN AMENDMENT IN CONJUNCTION WITH
REMOVAL OF RENTAL REGISTRATION PROVISIONS -
ALLOWING FOR INSPECTIONS BY REQUEST WITH A FEE
CHARGED FOR EACH UNIT INSPECTED CONSISTENT WITH
THE CDES FEE RESOLUTION
Item #16A7
RESOLUTION 2009-292: ROADWAY (PRIVATE) AND
DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE FINAL PLAT OF
QUAIL WEST UNIT ONE, REPLA T BLOCK C SECOND
ADDITION WITH THE ROADWAY AND DRAINAGE
IMPROVEMENTS BEING PRIV A TEL Y MAINTAINED - W /
RELEASE OF THE MAINTENANCE SECURITY
Item #16A8
PROPOSED LETTER OF UNDERSTANDING THAT
DELINEA TES GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) MAJOR
ISSUES THAT WILL BE ADDRESSED IN THE COUNTY'S
EVALUATION AND APPRAISAL REPORT (EAR) AS
REQUIRED BY SECTION 163.3191 OF THE FLORIDA
STATUTES AND DIRECT THE COUNTY MANAGER OR HIS
Page 296
December 15,2009
DESIGNEE TO ENTER INTO A FORMAL AGREEMENT WITH
THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS
(DCA) - JANUARY 2011 IS THE DEADLINE FOR THE
COUNTY TO COMPLETE IT'S EVALUATION & APPRAISAL
REPORT (EAR)
Item #16Bl
RECOGNIZE FY 2009/2010 FEDERAL TRANSIT
ADMINISTRATION SECTION 5311 ADDITIONAL REVENUE
IN THE AMOUNT OF $301,817.00 TO COLLIER AREA
TRANSIT FUND (426) AND AUTHORIZE ALL NECESSARY
BUDGET AMENDMENTS - TO OFFSET OPERATION OF THE
IMMOKALEE CIRCULATOR ROUTE 8A AND ROUTE 8B
Item # 16B2
RECOGNIZE FY 2009-2010 STATE PUBLIC TRANSIT BLOCK
GRANT ADDITIONAL REVENUE IN THE AMOUNT OF
$8,876.00 TO COLLIER AREA TRANSIT FUND (426) AND
AUTHORIZE ALL NECESSARY BUDGET AMENDMENTS - TO
BE APPLIED TO THE OPERATING COSTS OF THE COLLIER
AREA TRANSIT
Item # 16B3
RESOLUTION 2009-293: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE
EXECUTION AND SUBMITTAL OF THE FEDERAL TRANSIT
ADMINISTRATION SECTION 5310 FY2010/2011 GRANT
APPLICATION AND APPLICABLE DOCUMENT AND TO
ACCEPT THE GRANT IF AWARDED - FOR THE FUNDING OF
SIX (6) VEHICLES SCHEDULED FOR PURCHASE IN FYI0/11
Page 297
December 15, 2009
Item #16B4
RESOLUTION 2009-294: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE
EXECUTION AND SUBMITTAL OF THE FEDERAL TRANSIT
ADMINISTRATION SECTION 5311 FY2010/2011 GRANT
APPLICATION AND APPLICABLE DOCUMENT AND TO
ACCEPT THE GRANT IF A WARDED - FOR PARA TRANSIT
TRIPS IN RURAL AREAS OF COLLIER COUNTY
Item #16B5
PERPETUAL, NON-EXCLUSIVE ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY,
DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENT WHICH IS REQUIRED
FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE PROPOSED FOUR-
LANING IMPROVEMENTS TO GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD
FROM JUST WEST OF WILSON BOULEY ARD TO JUST EAST
OF DESOTO BOULEY ARD. PROJECT NO. 60040 (FISCAL
IMPACT: $3,100.00) - LOCATED AT GOLDEN GATES
ESTATES UNIT 50 W 180 FT OF TRACT 37
Item #16B6
PERPETUAL, NON-EXCLUSIVE ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY,
DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENT WHICH IS REQUIRED
FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE PROPOSED FOUR-
LANING IMPROVEMENTS TO GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD
FROM JUST WEST OF WILSON BOULEVARD TO JUST EAST
OF DESOTO BOULEVARD. PROJECT NO. 60040 (FISCAL
IMPACT: $2,122.00) - LOCATED AT GOLDEN GATE ESTATES
UNIT 77 E 150 FT OF TRACT 63 OR 643 PG 541
Page 298
December 15, 2009
Item #16B7
AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT ALLOWING FORMER
OWNERS OF A PROPERTY PURCHASED BY COLLIER
COUNTY FOR THE V ANDERBIL T BEACH ROAD EXTENSION
PROJECT (PARCEL 133) THE OPTION TO FURTHER EXTEND
THEIR POST-CLOSING OCCUPANCY OF THE PROPERTY FOR
AN ADDITIONAL THREE MONTH PERIOD. PROJECT NO.
60168 (FISCAL IMPACT: REYENUE IN THE AMOUNT OF
$4,500 WILL BE CREDITED TO THE GAS TAX AND/OR
IMP ACT FEE ACCOUNTS) - TO ALLOW SUFFICIENT TIME
FOR THEIR RELOCATION TO A REPLACEMENT PROPERTY
Item #16B8
PURCHASE ORDER FOR PAYMENT OF INVOICES TOTALING
$52,206, SUBMITTED BY PRECISION CONTRACTING
SERVICES, INC. FOR TRAFFIC OPERATIONS ETHERNET
CONVERSION PERFORMED IN FY 07/08 WITH
REIMBURSEMENT FROM THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION - WORK INCLUDED FIBER OPTIC
MODIFICATIONS, EQUIPMENT INSTALLATION, NETWORK
DESIGN AND ENGINEER SERVICES
Item #16B9
A WARD ITB #09-53 I 0 MOTOROLA CENTRAL CONTROL
IRRIGATION SUPPLIES & SERYICES TO AG-TRONIX INC.
FOR AN ESTIMATED ANNUAL AMOUNT OF $65,000 - THE
AUTOMATED CENTRAL IRRIGATION CONTROL SYSTEM
HAS PROVIDED THE FOLLOWING BENEFITS: WATER
CONSERVATION, REDUCED LABOR COSTS, OVERALL
Page 299
December 15, 2009
SYSTEM EFFICIENCY THROUGH ALARM REPORTING AND
STANDARDIZATION OF CONTROLLERS AND SPARE PARTS
Item #16BI0
RATIFYING AN EMERGENCY PURCHASE ORDER
PREYIOUSL Y APPROVED BY THE COUNTY MANAGER FOR
ELECTRICAL SERVICES UNDER ANNUAL CONTRACT #07-
4083, ON-CALL ELECTRICAL REPAIRS AND NEW
INSTALLATION TO E. B. SIMMONDS ELECTRICAL INC.,
NAPLES, FL, IN THE AMOUNT OF $127,760.90 - DUE TO THE
PREVIOUS PRIVATE DEVELOPER (AQUA PELICAN ISLE
WHICH HAS GONE BANKRUPT) FOR SIGNALIZATION
WORK AT THE INTERSECTION OF VANDERBILT DRIYE
AND WIGGINS PASS
Item #16Cl
AMENDMENT NO.1 TO SOUTH FLORIDA WATER
MANAGEMENT DISTRICT AGREEMENT NO. OT061098 TO
MONITOR GROUND WATER IN COLLIER COUNTY
(ESTIMATED REYENUE $116,000 ANNUALLY) - WITH TWO
ONE- YEAR OPTIONS TO RENEW
Item #16C2
RESOLUTION 2009-295: RESOLUTION TO APPROVE THE
SATISFACTIONS OF LIEN FOR SOLID WASTE RESIDENTIAL
ACCOUNTS WHEREIN THE COUNTY HAS RECEIVED
PAYMENT AND SAID LIENS ARE SATISFIED IN FULL FOR
THE 1994,1995, AND 1996 SOLID WASTE COLLECTION AND
DISPOSAL SERVICES SPECIAL ASSESSMENT. FISCAL
Page 300
December 15, 2009
IMPACT IS $48.00 TO RECORD THE SATISFACTIONS OF LIEN
- WITH THE RECORDING CHARGES TO BE CHARGED TO
COUNTY WATER/SEWER OPERATING FUND FOR
APPROXIMA TEL Y $48.00
Item # 16C3
PRE-A WARD COST REQUEST FORM REQUESTING A PRE-
AWARD CREDIT OF $121,290.99 IN STAFF TIME AND
EMERGENCY REPAIR EXPENDITURES AS AN UPDATE TO
THE GRANT APPLICATION TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT
OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS FOR THE HAZARD MITIGATION
GRANT PROGRAM FOR UP TO $320,000 TO CONSTRUCT A
SIX-INCH HIGH DENSITY POL YETHYLENE LEACHATE PIPE
AT THE COLLIER COUNTY LANDFILL - DUE TO A
LEACHA TE PIPE THAT HAD BLOCKAGE AND THREATENED
PUBLIC HELA TH AND SAFETY
Item # 16C4
AWARD RFP #09-5201, AN ANNUAL CONTRACT FOR
UNDERGROUND UTILITIES SUPPLIES TO FERGUSON
WATERWORKS, INC - ENSURING RELIABLE AND FULL
COMPLIANT WATER, WASTEWATER AND IRRIGATION
QUALITY WATER SERYICES FOR OUR CUSTOMERS AND
ENABLE STAFF TO OBTAIN SUPPLIES AND PARTS IN A
EFFICIENT, TIMELY, AND COST-EFFECTIYE MANNER
Item #16Dl
AGREEMENT WITH COLLIER HEALTH SERVICES (CHS),
AND AN AGREEMENT WITH THE AGENCY FOR HEALTH
Page 301
December 15,2009
CARE ADMINISTRATION (AHCA) TO PARTICIPATE IN THE
LOW INCOME POOL PROGRAM. PARTICIPATION IN THIS
PROGRAM WILL REQUIRE THE COUNTY TO SEND $207,127
TO AHCA, WHICH WILL GENERATE AN ADDITIONAL
$432,944 IN FEDERAL MATCHING FUNDS TO BE PAID
DIRECTLY TO COLLIER HEALTH SERVICES FOR MEDICAL
SERVICES FOR THE MOST MEDICALLY NEEDY IN COLLIER
COUNTY. COLLIER HEALTH SERYICES WILL RECEIYE A
TOTAL DISTRIBUTION OF $640,071 FROM THE STATE
Item #16D2 - Continued to the January 12,2010 BCC Meeting (Per
Agenda Change Sheet)
FY05 AND FY06 ANNUAL REPORTS TO THE FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAY SAFETY MOTOR YEHICLES
FOR THE CHOOSE LIFE SPECIALTY LICENSE PLATE-
WHICH A PORTION OF FEES ASSOCIATED FROM THE SALE
OF THE LICENSE PLATES WILL BE REAPPORTIONED TO A
QUALIFIED NON-GOVERNMENTAL NOT -FOR-PROFIT
AGENCY FOR SERYICES INCLUDING COUNSELING,
MEETING THE NEEDS OF PREGNANT WOMEN WHO ARE
COMMITTED TO PLACING THEIR CHILD UP FOR ADOPTION
Item #16D3
AFTER THE F ACT APPROVAL FOR THE SUBMITTAL OF THE
2010 CONTINUUM OF CARE (COC) GRANT APPLICATION TO
THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN
DEYELOPMENT (HUD) FOR COC PROGRAMS ASSISTING
AND BENEFITING THE HOMELESS POPULATION IN
COLLIER COUNTY
Page 302
December 15, 2009
Item #16D4
AGREEMENT WITH THE COLLIER COUNTY CHILD
ADVOCACY COUNCIL, INC. (CCCAC) TO PROVIDE FOR
STATE MANDATED SERVICES IDENTIFIED UNDER
FLORIDA STATUTE 39.304(5). FISCAL IMPACT OF $70,000-
WHICH REQUIRE THE COUNTY TO BEAR THE INITIAL
COST OF THE EXAMINATION OF AN ALLEGEDLY ABUSED,
NEGLECTED, OR ABANDONED CHILD WHO IS A RESIDENT
OF COLLIER COUNTY
Item # 16D5
AGREEMENT WITH THE STATE OF FLORIDA, DEPARTMENT
OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES ACCEPTING A CHALLENGE
GRANT IN THE AMOUNT OF $96,000; AND AUTHORIZE THE
NECESSARY BUDGET AMENDMENTS ASSOCIATED WITH
THIS ACTION. THE NON-PROFIT SUBRECIPIENTS: SAINT
MA TTHEWS HOUSE, THE SHELTER FOR ABUSED WOMEN
AND CHILDREN, NATIONAL ALLIANCE ON MENTAL
ILLNESS, THE COLLIER COUNTY HUNGER AND HOMELESS
COALITION AND YOUTH HAYEN, INC - PROVIDING
HOMELESS ASSISTANCE FOR COLLIER COUNTY CITIZENS
Item #16D6 - Moved to Item #10G (Per Agenda Change Sheet)
Item # 16D7
RESOLUTION 2009-296: REPEAL OF RESOLUTION NO. 2007-
190 AND ADOPT THE ATTACHED REVISED RESOLUTION
NO. ;mw 2009- THAT LISTS NEW FINES AND FEES FOR
COLLIER COUNTY PUBLIC LIBRARY
Page 303
December 15, 2009
Item #16El - Withdrawn (Per Agenda Change Sheet)
AWARD ITB #09-5325 ON-CALL ELECTRICAL REPAIRS AND
NEW INSTALLATION TO AC ELECTRIC OF SW FLORIDA,
INC., BENTLEY ELECTRIC COMPANY OF NAPLES, FL, INC.,
E. B. SIMMONDS ELECTRICAL INC., GULF STATES
ELECTRIC, INC., AND PROFESSIONAL HIGHWAY
MAINTENANCE, INC ($230,000) - FOR ON-GOING NEED FOR
ELECTRICAL SERVICES SUPPORTING DAIL Y OPERATIONS
Item # 16E2
PURCHASE OF GROUP HEALTH REINSURANCE COVERAGE
FOR CALENDAR YEAR 2010 IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,018,777
WHICH EQUATES TO A REDUCTION OF 19.9% OYER PRIOR
YEAR'S PREMIUM
Item # 16E3
AUTHORIZING THE ON-LINE AUCTION OF COLLIER
COUNTY SURPLUS PROPERTY - FOR THIRTY (30) DAY
SALE ENDING NO LATER THAN JANUARY 30, 2010 BY
CONTRACTED AUCTIONEER ATKINSON REALTY &
AUCTION
Item #16E4
PAYMENT OF $3,666.66 WHICH IS 2/12THS OF THE IRS
ALLOWABLE ANNUAL CONTRIBUTION AMOUNT, TO THE
DEFERRED COMPENSATION ACCOUNT OF FORMER
COUNTY MANAGER, JAMES V. MUDD, IN ACCORDANCE
Page 304
December 15, 2009
WITH HIS CONTRACT, TO BE PROCESSED JANUARY 2010
Item #16E5
AGREEMENT FOR SALE AND PURCHASE WITH FRANK 1.
FISIOREK, JR. AND KATHLEEN E. ZIELINSKI FOR 1.14
ACRES UNDER THE CONSERVATION COLLIER LAND
ACQUISITION PROGRAM AT A COST NOT TO EXCEED
$19,300 - FOR A PARCEL IN THE WINCHESTER HEAD
MULTI-PARCEL PROJECT WITH THE FOLIO #39955480005
Item #16E6
AWARDING BID NO. 09-5323 ON-CALL PLUMBING
CONTRACTORS TO SHAMROCK PLUMBING AND
MECHANICAL, INC. AS PRIMARY, PRECISION PLUMBING
SERVICES, INC. AS SECONDARY, AND FOUR STAR
PLUMBING CONTRACTORS, INC. AS TERTIARY AT AN
ESTIMATED ANNUAL COST OF $210,000 - FOR
MAINTENANCE, REPAIRS, AND REPLACEMENT OF
PLUMBING AND LINES AT Y ARIOUS COUNTY FACILITIES
Item #16E7
RESOLUTION 2009-297: OFFERING OF THE VOLUNTARY
SEPARATION INCENTIVE PROGRAM PURSUANT TO
COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 09-13 FOR TWO
EMPLOYEES NOT PREVIOUSLY NOTIFIED OF ELIGIBILITY
IN JULY 2009
Item #16E8
Page 305
December 15,2009
REPORT AND RATIFY STAFF-APPROYED CHANGE ORDERS
AND CHANGES TO WORK ORDERS TO BOARD-APPROVED
CONTRACTS - TO OVERSEE EXECUTION OF
ADMINISTRA TIVE CHANGE ORDERS AND CHANGES TO
WORK ORDERS PROMOTING ACCOUNT ABILITY IN THE
USE OF STAFF AUTHORITY
Item #16E9
AGREEMENT NOT TO EXCEED $10,000 BETWEEN THE GAC
LAND TRUST COMMITTEE AND THE BIG CORKSCREW
ISLAND FIRE CONTROL AND RESCUE DISTRICT FOR THE
PURCHASE OF THE BULLEX FIRE EXTINGUISHER
TRAINING SYSTEM - PROVIDING TRAINING TO ADULTS
AND CHILDREN WITH PROPER USE OF FIRE
EXTINGUISHER THAT USES WATER RATHER THAN DRY
CHEMICALS AND SHALL ONLY BE USED FOR TRAINING
PURPOSES, AVAILABLE AT THE COLLIER COUNTY FAIR
Item #16Fl
FISCAL YEAR 2010 BUDGET AMENDMENT ESTABLISHING
DEDICATED APPROPRIATIONS COYERING ANTICIPATED
CONTRACTOR AND ADMINISTRA TIYE EXPENSES
ASSOCIATED WITH THE INTERSECTION SAFETY
PROGRAM. FISCAL IMPACT $841,000
Item #16F2
BUDGET AMENDMENTS - FOR IMPROVEMENTS WITH THE
ROCK TOAD MSTU AND THE PURCHASE OF A SOUND
SYSTEM AND ASSOCIATED EQUIPMENT FOR MAX HASSE
Page 306
December 15,2009
COMMUNITY PARK IN GOLDEN GATE EST A TES
Item #16F3
USE OF ALL INTEREST EARNINGS ON TOURIST TAX FUNDS
FOR DESTINATION ADVERTISING, MARKETING AND
PROMOTION FOR A PERIOD OF THREE FISCAL YEARS AND
APPROVE ALL NECESSARY BUDGET AMENDMENTS
Item #16F4
RESOLUTION 2009-298: RESOLUTION APPROVING
AMENDMENTS (APPROPRIATING GRANTS, DONATIONS,
CONTRIBUTIONS OR INSURANCE PROCEEDS) TO THE
FISCAL YEAR 2009-10 ADOPTED BUDGET
Item #16F5
RESOLUTION 2009-299: ADOPTING RESOLUTION AND
APPROVE AND AUTHORIZE THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN A
LEASE-PURCHASE AGREEMENT AND ALL
ACCOMPANYING DOCUMENTS WITH GOVERNMENT
CAPITAL CORPORATION FOR THE REPLACEMENT OF ONE
(1) AMBULANCE FOR EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES
FOR FIVE (5) ANNUAL PAYMENTS OF $41,575.74 FOR A
TOTAL OF $207,878.70
Item #16Gl
COMMERCIAL BUILDING IMPROVEMENT GRANT
AGREEMENT(S) BETWEEN THE COLLIER COUNTY
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND A GRANT
Page 307
December 15,2009
APPLICANT(S) WITHIN THE BA YSHORE GA TEW A Y
TRIANGLE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AREA (2800
DAVIS BOULEVARD)
Item #16G2
SITE IMPROVEMENT GRANT AGREEMENT(S) BETWEEN
THE COLLIER COUNTY COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY AND A GRANT APPLICANT(S) WITHIN THE
BA YSHORE GATEWAY TRIANGLE COMMUNITY
REDEVELOPMENT AREA (2445 A-B THOMASSON DRIYE)
Item #16G3
SWEA T EQUITY GRANT AGREEMENT(S) BETWEEN THE
COLLIER COUNTY COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY AND A GRANT APPLICANT(S) WITHIN THE
BA YSHORE GATEWAY TRIANGLE COMMUNITY
REDEVELOPMENT AREA (2938 CYPRESS STREET)
Item #16G4
AN EVENT POLICY AND PROCEDURES MANUAL TO
GOVERN ALL EVENT ACTIVITIES FOR THE BA YSHORE
GA TEW A Y TRIANGLE - GOVERNING ALL EVENT
ACTIVITIES IN THE BA YSHORE GA TEW A Y TRIANGLE
Item #16G5
SALE AND CONSUMPTION OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES
(BEER AND WINE) DURING THE CRA BOARD APPROVED
BA YSHORE CULTURAL FESTIVAL OF THE ARTS EVENT ON
Page 308
December 15, 2009
JANUARY 23,2010 ON THE CRA OWNED PARCELS-
LOCATED AT FOLIO #61840960103 AND 61840960006 WITH
AN ALCOHOL EXCLUSION AREA IN AND AROUND THE
CHILDREN'S PLAY AREA
Item #16G6
APPLICATION AND RECIPIENT AGREEMENT FOR THE
IMMOKALEE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
(CRA) COMMERCIAL FACADE IMPROYEMENT GRANT
PROGRAM FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF $20,000 FOR FACADE
IMPROYEMENTS TO LITTLE CAESARS PIZZA LOCATED AT
525 NORTH 15TH STREET IN IMMOKALEE, FLORIDA
Item #16Hl
COMMISSIONER FIALA'S REQUEST FOR REIMBURSEMENT
FOR ATTENDING A FUNCTION SERVING A VALID PUBLIC
PURPOSE. SHE ATTENDED THE EAST NAPLES CIVIC
ASSOCIATION LUNCHEON ON NOVEMBER 19,2009 AT
HAMILTON HARBOR IN NAPLES, FL. $23.00 PAID FROM
COMMISSIONER FIALA'S TRA YEL BUDGET - LOCATED AT
7065 HAMIL TON AYE., NAPLES
Item #16H2
COMMISSIONER FIALA'S REQUEST FOR REIMBURSEMENT
FOR ATTENDING A FUNCTION SERVING A VALID PUBLIC
PURPOSE. SHE ATTENDED THE MARCO ISLAND AREA
CHAMBER OF COMMERCE CHRISTMAS GALA ON
DECEMBER 6, 2009 AT THE OLD MARCO INN ON MARCO
ISLAND, FL. $75.00 PAID FROM COMMISSIONER FIALA'S
Page 309
December 15,2009
TRAVEL BUDGET - LOCATED AT 100 PALM STREET,
MARCO ISLAND
Item #16H3
COMMISSIONER FIALA'S REQUEST FOR REIMBURSEMENT
FOR ATTENDING A FUNCTION SERVING A VALID PUBLIC
PURPOSE. SHE ATTENDED THE MARCO ISLAND
HISTORICAL SOCIETY HOLIDAY LUNCHEON ON
DECEMBER 8, 2009 AT THE FIRST BAPTIST CHURCH ON
MARCO ISLAND, FL. $20.00 PAID FROM COMMISSIONER
FIALA'S TRAVEL BUDGET - LOCATED AT 1450
WINTERBERRY DRIVE, MARCO ISLAND
Item #16H4
COMMISSIONER HENNINGS'S REQUEST FOR
REIMBURSEMENT FOR ATTENDING A FUNCTION SERYING
A VALID PUBLIC PURPOSE. HE ATTENDED THE EDC PRE-
LEGISLATIVE LUNCHEON ON NOVEMBER 24, 2009 AT THE
CLUB AT THE STRAND IN NAPLES, FLORIDA. $25.00 PAID
FROM COMMISSIONER HENNING'S TRAVEL BUDGET -
LOCATED AT 3840 STRAND BOULEVARD, NAPLES
Item #161
MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS TO FILE FOR RECORD WITH
ACTION AS DIRECTED
The following miscellaneous correspondence, as presented by the
Board of County Commissioners, has been directed to the various
departments as indicated:
Page 310
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
December 15,2009
1. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS TO FILE FOR RECORD WITH ACTION AS DIRECTED:
A. Minutes:
I)
Affordable Housing Commission:
Minutes of October 5, 2009.
2)
Collier County Coastal Adyisory Committee:
Minutes of August 13,2009.
3)
Collier County Planning Commission:
Minutes of August 20, 2009; August 25,2009 special session;
September 3, 2009 special session; September 3, 2009 regular
session; September 17, 2009;
4)
Development Services Advisory Committee:
Minutes of October 7, 2009.
5)
Immokalce Beautification Advisory Committee:
Agenda of October 28, 2009.
Minutes of September 23,2009.
6)
Isles of Capri Fire Control District Advisory Committee:
Minutes of September 3, 2009.
7)
Lake Trafford Restoration Task Force:
Minutes of January II, 2005; March 2, 2005; April 6, 2005;
May 4, 2005.
8)
Radio Road Beautification Advisory Committee:
Agenda of October 20, 2009.
Minutes of September IS, 2009.
9)
Vanderbilt Beach Beautification MSTU Advisory Committee:
Agenda of May 7, 2009; October 15,2009.
Minutes of April 2, 2009; May 7, 2009.
December 15, 2009
Item # 1611
RETURN OF FUNDS FOR THE 911 MICROWAVE CIRCUITS
GRANT, #S-08-07-31 TO THE STATE OF FLORIDA ON
BEHALF OF THE COLLIER COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Item #16J2
DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD OF NOYEMBER 21,2009
THROUGH NOYEMBER 27,2009, AND FOR SUBMISSION
INTO THE OFFICIAL RECORDS OF THE BOARD
Item # 1613
DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD OF NOVEMBER 28,2009
THROUGH DECEMBER 4, 2009, AND FOR SUBMISSION INTO
THE OFFICIAL RECORDS OF THE BOARD
Item #16Kl
OFFER OF JUDGMENT TO RESPONDENT, PLATINUM COAST
FINANCIAL CORP., FOR PARCEL NO. 825 IN THE AMOUNT
OF $79,250 IN THE LAWSUIT STYLED COLLIER COUNTY V
MYRTLE COVE, INC., ET AL., CASE NO. 07-5038 (LEL Y AREA
STORMWATER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT # 51101.1) (FISCAL
IMPACT $21,350) - FOR CONDEMNATION OF THE PARCEL
Item #16K2
STIPULA TED FINAL JUDGMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF
$375,000 FOR PARCELS 104 AND 604 IN THE LAWSUIT
STYLED COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA V HIGHLAND
Page 311
December 15, 2009
PROPERTIES OF LEE AND COLLIER, LTD., ET AL., CASE NO.
06-0563-CA (SANTABARBARA BOULEVARD PROJECT
#62081) (FISCAL IMPACT $304,542) - FOR THE TAKING OF
THE PARCELS
Item # 16K3
JUDGMENT TO RESPONDENT, LUIS PINEROS, FOR PARCEL
NO. 204RDUE IN THE AMOUNT OF $20,832 IN THE LAWSUIT
STYLED COLLIER COUNTY V JOSEPH NOEL, ET AL., CASE
NO. 07-3200-CA (OIL WELL ROAD PROJECT # 60044) (FISCAL
IMPACT $12,432) - FOR CONDEMNATION OF THE PARCEL
Item #16K4 - Moved to Item #12C (Per Agenda Change Sheet)
Item # 1 7 A
RESOLUTION 2009-300: PETITION V AC-PL-2009-1023,
NATURE POINT LOT 8, TO DISCLAIM, RENOUNCE AND
V ACA TE THE COUNTY'S AND THE PUBLICS INTEREST IN
THAT PORTION OF A 25-FOOT WIDE DRAINAGE EASEMENT
ALONG THE REAR OF LOT 8, NATURE POINT, AS FILED IN
PLAT BOOK 20, PAGES 20-22 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, SITUATED IN SECTION 35,
TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY,
FLORIDA, THE VACATED PORTION BEING MORE
SPECIFICALL Y DEPICTED AND DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT A
AND ACCEPT THE REPLACEMENT DRAINAGE EASEMENT
SHOWN ON EXHIBIT B
Item #17B
Page 312
December 15, 2009
RESOLUTION 2009-301: RESOLUTION APPROVING
AMENDMENTS (APPROPRIATING CARRY FORWARD,
TRANSFERS AND SUPPLEMENTAL REYENUE) TO THE
FISCAL YEAR 2009-10 ADOPTED BUDGET - SITUATED IN
SECTION 35, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST
Item #17C
ORDINANCE 2009-70: ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE
NO. 2001-43, AS AMENDED (THE VANDERBILT BEACH
BEAUTIFICATION MUNICIPAL SERVICE TAXING UNIT), PER
THE BOARDS DECEMBER 1, 2009 DIRECTION UNDER
AGENDA ITEM #16B5 TO INCORPORATE PROYISIONS TO
FACILITATE THE ONGOING CONVERSION OF OVERHEAD
UTILITY DISTRIBUTION FACILITIES TO UNDERGROUND
SERVICE WITHIN THE MSTU BOUNDARIES
Item #17D (Moved from Item #16Al (Per Agenda Change Sheet)
RESOLUTION 2009-302: DESIGNATING 7,414.0 ACRES IN THE
RURAL LANDS STEWARDSHIP AREA ZONING OVERLAY
DISTRICT AS A STEWARDSHIP SENDING AREA WITH A
DESIGNATION AS BCI/BCP/SI SSA 13 PURSUANT TO THE
TERMS SET FORTH IN THE ESCROW AGREEMENT,
STEWARDSHIP SENDING AREA CREDIT AGREEMENT FOR
BCIIBCP/SI SSA 13, AND STEWARDSHIP EASEMENT
AGREEMENT FOR BCI/BCP/SI SSA 13; APPROYING A
STEWARDSHIP SENDING AREA CREDIT AGREEMENT FOR
BCI/BCP/SI SSA 13; APPROYING A STEWARDSHIP
EASEMENT AGREEMENT FOR BCI/BCP/SI SSA 13;
APPROVING AN ESCROW AGREEMENT FOR BCI/BCP/SI SSA
13; AND ESTABLISHING THE NUMBER OF STEWARDSHIP
Page 313
,._-_..,.._..,,-~~_. --~-..~"._~~~~>.~",--",-.~.'----"-~-' ,-- --,-"--,,,,-,'--~--""-
December 15, 2009
CREDITS GENERATED BY THE DESIGNATION OF SAID
STEWARDSHIP SENDING AREA
*****
There being no further business for the good of the County, the
meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 7:30 p.m.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS/EX
OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF
SPECIAL DIS~RlCTS UNDER ITS CONTROL
f" J
/ .' .-
/:~_ JJct.tk
DONNA FIALA, Chairman
ATTEST if;'
'~.' ,.." .... :. ". C'~.J -"_ -':-.",
, . QlJ,:rE.~.~OyK, CLERK
:;.~_ {,;" I -." "
.' "i t . ~
These minutes approved by the Board on L I {zj (0 , as presented
V or as corrected
TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF GREGORY
COURT REPORTING SERVICES, INC., BY TERRI LEWIS.
Page 314