BCC Minutes 03/09/2010 R
March 9, 20]0
TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Naples, Florida, March 9, 2010
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:
Fred Coyle
Jim Coletta
Donna Fiala
Frank Halas
Tom Henning
ALSO PRESENT:
Leo Ochs, County Manager
Michael Sheffield, Assistant to the County Manager
Sue Filson, BCC Executive Manager
Jeffrey A. Klatzkow, County Attorney
Page ]
COLLIER COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
and
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY BOARD (CRAB)
AGENDA
March 9, 2010
9:00 AM
Fred W. Coyle, BCC Chairman Commissioner, District 4
Frank Halas, BCC Vice-Chairman Commissioner, District 2
Jim Coletta, BCC Commissioner, District 5; CRAB Chairman
Donna Fiala, BCC Commissioner, District 1; CRAB Vice-Chairman
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 PRESENT A TION OF THE AGENDA
ITEM TO BE ADDRESSED. ALL REGISTERED SPEAKERS WILL RECEIVE
UP TO THREE (3) MINUTES UNLESS THE TIME IS ADJUSTED BY THE
CHAIRMAN.
COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 2003-53, AS AMENDED BY
ORDINANCE 2004-05 AND 2007-24, REQUIRES THAT ALL LOBBYISTS
SHALL, BEFORE ENGAGING IN ANY LOBBYING ACTIVITIES
(INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, ADDRESSING THE BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS), REGISTER WITH THE CLERK TO THE
BOARD AT THE BOARD MINUTES AND RECORDS DEPARTMENT.
REQUESTS TO ADDRESS THE BOARD ON SUBJECTS WHICH ARE NOT ON
THIS AGENDA MUST BE SUBMITTED IN WRITING WITH EXPLANATION
TO THE COUNTY MANAGER AT LEAST 13 DAYS PRIOR TO THE DATE OF
THE MEETING AND WILL BE HEARD UNDER "PUBLIC PETITIONS."
Page 1
March 9, 2010
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
TAMIAMI TRAIL, NAPLES, FLORIDA, 34112, (239) 252-8380; ASSISTED
LISTENING DEVICES FOR THE HEARING IMPAIRED ARE AVAILABLE IN
THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' OFFICE.
LUNCH RECESS SCHEDULED FOR 12:00 NOON TO 1:00 P.M.
1. INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
A. Pastor John Boutchia - Gospel Baptist Church
2. AGENDA AND MINUTES
A. Approval of to day's regular, consent and summary agenda as amended (Ex
Parte Disclosure provided by Commission members for consent and
summary agenda.)
B. February 9, 2010 - BCC/Regular Meeting
3. SERVICE AWARDS: (EMPLOYEE AND ADVISORY BOARD MEMBERS)
A. 5 Year Attendees:
1) Ana Salazar, lmmokalee Enterprise Zone Development Agency
Page 2
March 9, 2010
2) Tony Pires, Land Acquisition Advisory Committee
4. PROCLAMATIONS
A. Proclamation designating March 14,2010 through March 20, 2010 as Save
The Florida Panther Week. To be accepted by Tom Murray and Lisa
Ostberg. Sponsored by Commissioner Coletta.
B. Proclamation designating March as Guardian Ad Litem Month. To be
accepted by Frank Prado, Guardian Ad Litem Program Director and Lorrie
Moore, Collier County Volunteer Supervisor/Team Leader. Sponsored by
Commissioner Fiala.
C. Proclamation designating March 14,2010 through March 20, 2010 as
Sunshine Week in Collier County. To be accepted by Heather Grimshaw on
behalf of the Collier County Board of County Commissioners and Crystal
Kinzel, Director of Finance and Accounting on behal f of Dwight E. Brock,
Clerk of Courts. Sponsored by Commissioner Henning.
D. Proclamation recognizing the Corkscrew Swamp Sanctuary and the Panther
Island Mitigation Bank for being designated as a "RAMSAR Wetland of
International Importance". To be accepted by a representative from the
Audubon Society. Sponsored by Commissioner Coletta.
E. Proclamation designating March 10, 2010 as A Day of Heightened
Awareness of Wildfire Danger in Collier County. To be accepted by Peter
Gaddy, Mike Ramsay, Tim Nance, and Jim Flanagan. Sponsored by
Commissioner Coletta.
5. PRESENTATIONS
A. Recommendation to recognize Mark Martin, Senior Crew Leader, Road
Maintenance Department as the Employee of the Month for February 2010.
B. This item to be heard at 11:00 a.m. Presentation by representatives of the
Collier County Foreclosure Task Force concerning various legislative
proposals introduced in the 2010 Florida Legislative Session.
Page 3
March 9, 2010
6. PUBLIC PETITIONS
Item 7 and 8 to be heard no sooner than 1 :00 p.m.. unless otherwise noted.
7. BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
8. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. The a2enda item was advertised for consideration bv the BCC on
March 9, 2010. At the direction of the County Mana2er this item has
been moved to the BCC A2enda for March 23, 2010. Recommendation to
adopt amendments to the Capital Improvement Element of the Collier
County Growth Management Plan.
9. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
A. Appointment of member to the Environmental Advisory Council.
B. Appointment of member to the Contractors' Licensing Board.
C. Appointment of member to the Collier County Coastal Advisory Committee.
D. Appointment of member to the County Government Productivity
Committee.
E. Discussion regarding space needed for upcoming Census count.
(Commissioner Coletta request)
F. Discussion regarding delineation of public and private property and
access/use rights on and along County beaches. (Commissioner Halas
request)
10. COUNTY MANAGER'S REPORT
A. This item to be heard at 10:15 a.m. Recommendation to approve the
revised conceptual site plan for the Bayview Boat Park Expansion Project.
(Gary McAlpin, Coastal Zone Management Director)
Page 4
March 9,2010
B. This item to be heard immediately folIowin2ltem #IOA.
Recommendation to authorize the County Manager or his designee to
execute Change Order #2 to Work Order No. 4500101030 to Johnson
Engineering in the amount of$117,857 and permitting fees estimated at
$13,000 to complete the engineering and permitting for the Bayview Park
Expansion.(Gary McAlpin, Coastal Zone Management Director)
C. This item continued from the February 23, 2010 BCC Meetin2.
Recommendation to award Request for Proposal (RFP) No. 09-5262 for
Engineering Services for Collier County (estimated annual expenditures
$11,365,000). (Steve Carnell, Purchasing Department Director)
D. Recommendation to ward a construction contract in the amount of
$2,904,563 for the North County Regional Water Treatment Plant Finished
Water Quality and Odor Control Compliance Project to Cardinal
Contractors, Inc., Bid #10-5423, Project No.71 002. (Steve Carnell,
Purchasing Department Director)
E. Recommendation to accept the findings ofthe Safety Evaluation of
Proposed Golf Cart Crossing at the Intersection of Airport-Pulling Road at
Estuary Drive / Halstatt Drive and not authorize golf carts crossing Airport
Road. (Norman Feder, Transportation Services Administrator)
F. Recommendation to adopt a position on proposed Senate Bill 1454 which
provides that interest on county funds invested by the Clerk of Court is
income of the Office of the Clerk. (Debbie Wight, Assistant to the County
Manager)
11. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS
12. COUNTY ATTORNEY'S REPORT
A. To provide the Board a survey of vehicle immobilization rates (booting)
charged by other jurisdictions to assist in the Boards consideration of
whether to change the current twenty-five dollar vehicle immobilization rate
established by Resolution No. 2009-271 pursuant to Ordinance No. 08-47.
Page 5
March 9,2010
B. Report on pending foreclosure legislation.
13. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
A. This item to be heard at 9:45 a.m. Presentation of the Comprehensive
Annual Financial Report for the Fiscal Year ended September 30,2009.
14. AIRPORT AUTHORITY AND/OR COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY
A. This item to be heard at 1 :00 p.m. Recommendation that the Board of
County Commissioners (BCC) acting as the Community Redevelopment
Agency (CRA) approve the creation of a business development center at the
Airport in Immokalee as a collaboration between the lmmokalee CRA and
the Collier County Airport Authority; approve the Inter-local Agreement;
authorize the expenditure of $1 00,000 in FY 2010 from CRA Trust Fund
186 as seed money; and authorize all necessary budget amendments.
B. This item to be heard immediately folIowin2ltem #I4A.
Recommendation that the Collier County Board of County Commissioners
(BCC) acting as the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) approve the
after-the-fact submittal of the attached Community Development Block
Grant (CDBG) Home Investment Partnership (HOME) grant application to
Collier County Housing & Human Services (HHS) for the first years
operational and start-up expenses of the Immokalee Business Development
Center (IBDC) in the amount of $11 0,500.
C. This item to be heard immediately folIowin2ltem #148.
Recommendation that the Collier County Board of County Commissioners
(BCC) acting as the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) approve the
Public Realm Plan for the Immokalee Central Business District.
D. This item to be heard immediately folIowin2 #I4C. Recommendation that
the Collier County Board of County Commissioners (BCC) acting as the
Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) approve the after-the-fact
submittal of a Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)/Home
Investment Partnership (HOME) grant application to Collier County
Housing & Human Services (HHS) for land acquisition expenses necessary
Page 6
March 9, 2010
for the development of a downtown public plaza in the amount of $400,000.
15. STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS
16. CONSENT AGENDA - All matters listed under this item are considered to be
routine and action will be taken by one motion without separate discussion of
each item. If discussion is desired by a member of the Board, that item(s) will
be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered separately.
A. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
1) Recommendation to approve final acceptance ofthe water utility
facilities for Bobcat of Naples.
2) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the water and sewer
utility facilities for Verona Walk, Phase 4A.
3) Recommendation to approval final acceptance of the water and sewer
utility facilities for 3500 Corporate Plaza.
4) Recommendation to approve the Release and Satisfaction of Lien in
the Code Enforcement Action entitled Board of County
Commissioners vs. Samuel Lee Miller, Jr., Case No. 2006030716,
relating to property located at 4814 Myers Road, lmmokalee, Florida.
5) Recommendation to approve the Release and Satisfaction of Lien in
the Code Enforcement Action entitled Board of County
Commissioners vs. Teudis Zamora, Case No. 2006120209, relating to
property located at 3471 2 Avenue S.E., Naples, Florida.
6) Recommendation to approve the Release and Satisfaction of Lien for
payments received for specified Code Enforcement actions.
7) Recommendation to approve, and authorize the Chairman to sign, a
Satisfaction of Lien, related to impact fees, due to the deferred impact
fees being paid in full, in accordance with the lmmokalee Residential
Impact Fee Deferral Program, as set forth by Section 74-201 (g) of the
Page 7
March 9, 2010
Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances.
8) Recommendation to approve the Release and Satisfaction of Lien in
the Code Enforcement Action entitled Board of County
Commissioners vs. Diana Hall, CEB Case No.2003-036 relating to
property located at 790 12 Street N .E., Naples, Florida.
9) Recommendation to approve the Release and Satisfaction of Lien in
the Code Enforcement Action entitled Board of County
Commissioners VS. William L. Greeman, Case No. 2007070239,
relating to property located at 48 Flamingo Drive East, Naples, FL.
B. TRANSPORTATION SERVICES
1) Recommendation to approve an Easement Agreement, a Temporary
Construction Easement Agreement, and a Subordination of Easement
Interest and Agreement for Facility Relocation for a utility easement
which is required for the Gateway Triangle Stormwater Improvement
Project No. 51803 (Fiscal Impact: $19,525.00)
2) Recommendation to provide authority to make payment in the amount
of$135,625.00 to CH2MHill for Professional Services for Design
Services for the lmmokalee Road, Collier Blvd. to 43rd Ave. (Project
No. 60018)
3) Recommendation to approve a Resolution supporting the
Transportation Planning Department's application to add the
Immokalee Regional Airport as an Emerging Facility on the Strategic
Intermodal System (SIS)
4) Update regarding the Contractors implementation of method and
means to achieve cost savings with regard to the acquisition of fill for
the Oil Well Road widening project and its relationship to the
Supplemental Agreement for the Sale ofFill with Ave Maria
Development, LLLP. (Project No. 60044)
5) Request for authorization to advertise a proposed amendment to
Ordinance No. 92-40, as amended, which created the Immokalee
Beautification Municipal Service Taxing Unit, to expand its purpose
Page 8
March 9, 201 0
to include "stormwater and drainage."
6) Recommendation to enter into an Interlocal Agreement with Lee
County to coordinate a public transit link between Lee and Collier
Counties subject to available funding.
7) Recommendation to approve an amendment to an existing developer
agreement related to the Collier Boulevard Mixed Use Commerce
Center and the expansion of Collier Boulevard between Davis
Boulevard and the Golden Gate Main Canal regarding stormwater
management improvements. (Project No. 60092)
Fiscal Impact: $158,450.50
8) Recommendation to approve a budget amendment in the amount of
$50,000 moving dollars from Lely MSTU Fund (152) Reserves to the
appropriate Fund (152) capital account for a project known as the
Warren Street Irrigation Re-Use Water Source Modification.
9) Recommendation to approve the purchase ofa road right-of-way,
drainage and utility easement (Parcel No. 293RDUE) which is
required for the expansion of Golden Gate Boulevard from two lanes
to four lanes between Wilson Boulevard and DeSoto Boulevard.
(Project No. 60040) Fiscal Impact: $2,770
10) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to sign a
Compliance Agreement with MDG Capital Corporation, developer of
Arrowhead Planned Unit Development, in order to extend deadlines
set forth in Planned Unit Development Ordinance No. 02-40, as
amended, Paragraph L, Sub-Paragraph 2 and 3 and Paragraph M for
three years.
C. PUBLIC UTILITIES
1) Recommendation to approve a Fifth Amendment to the Landfill
Operating Agreement between Collier County and Waste
Management, Inc., of Florida, providing administrative changes to
clarify definitions that are consistent with Florida Administrative
Code, Chapter 62-701, Solid Waste Management Facilities; to align
current business processes; and, to restructure payment formulas due
Page 9
March 9, 2010
to the implementation of alternative daily cover materials including
Posi-Shell, mulch, and other Florida Department of Environmental
Protection agency approved alternative cover materials to maintain
odor control, landfill airspace preservation, and to provide estimated
annual operating cost savings of $266, 141, and estimated annual
airspace savings valued at $736,285.
2) Recommendation to authorize the Chairman to sign a grant contract,
Agreement #IOHM-88-09-21-01-012 with the State of Florida,
Division of Emergency Management, and to authorize the necessary
budget amendments, to spend up to $46,773 to install aluminum roll
down shutters and supporting equipment on the Collier County
Environmental Compliance and Landfill Scale House facility.
3) Recommendation to award Bid #10-5395, Telemetry and Electrical
Upgrades to 13 Lift Stations, to E. B. Simmond's Electrical, Inc., in
the base bid amount of$837,113.97 for Project No.73922, Collections
Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition Improvements. Authorize a
budget amendment of$545,912.21 from Project No. 72549,
Collections Lift Station Mechanical Improvements, to Project No.
73922.
4) Recommendation to authorize a budget amendment to reallocate funds
in the amount of$900,000 from Reserves, to the South Reverse
Osmosis Raw Water Wellfield Pipeline Repair, Project No. 70030.
D. PUBLIC SERVICES
1) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to sign
seven (7) lien agreements for deferral of 100% of Collier County
impact fees for owner occupied affordable housing dwelling units
located in Collier County. Approval of this item will transfer
previously approved deferral agreements from developer to owner
occupants with a continuing fiscal impact of$149,645.62.
2) Recommendation for the Board of County Commissioners to approve
and authorize the Chairman to sign a Florida Fish and Wildlife
Conservation Commission Grant.
Page 10
March 9,2010
3) This item continued from the February 23, 2010 BCC Meetin2.
Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to sign a
modification to Disaster Recovery Initiative Agreement #07DB-3V-
09-21-0 l-Z0 1 between the Florida Department of Community Affairs
and Collier County to reallocate $135,657.85 in unused project funds
to the Disaster Recovery Initiative Single Family Rehabilitation
Program.
4) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to sign a
modification to Disaster Recovery Initiative Agreement #08DB-D3-
09-21-01-A03 between the Florida Department of Community Affairs
and Collier County and associated contract amendments with sub-
recipients. This modification will update the current project work
schedules and extend the grant periods.
5) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to sign an
amended release of lien to correct date and official records citations of
previously recorded impact fee deferral release of lien.
6) Recommendation to approve the Community Development Block
Grant-Recovery (CDBG-R) template and authorize the Chairman to
sign four (4) sub-recipient grant agreements providing American
Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) funds for projects to assist
low and moderate income citizens throughout Collier County.
7) Recommendation to accept a report of the full accounting of Disaster
Recovery Initiative grant-related costs incurred for the replacement of
four homes severely damaged by Hurricane Wilma.
8) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to sign a
Declaration of Deed Restriction between Collier County and the
Empowerment Alliance of Southwest Florida Community
Development Corporation for a project known as Hatcher's Preserve
in lmmokalee, Florida.
9) Recommendation to authorize a budget amendment not to exceed
$65,000 for mitigation work associated with the fuel tank replacement
at the Port of the Islands Marina and to recognize revenue from the
Page 11
March 9, 2010
sellers escrow account to repay the County for the required work.
E. ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
1) Recommendation to award contract for Invitation to Bid (lTB)
No. 09-5273, Generator Maintenance, Repair, and Installation, to
Power Pro-Tech Services, Inc., as primary; Metro Power Systems,
Inc., as secondary; and Clean Fuel & Tank, Inc., for fuel polishing
(cleaning) in the estimated annual amount of $400,000.
2) Recommendation to approve a First Amendment to Lease Agreement
with Hometown Landmark Estates, LLC, for the continued use of
vacant county owned land for vehicle parking with a first years
revenue of$2,500.
3) Recommendation to approve Collier County's participation in a
Partnership Agreement that was submitted by the Collier County
School District for a Readiness and Emergency Management for
Schools Grant.
4) Report and Ratify Staff-Approved Change Orders and Changes to
Work Orders to Board-Approved Contracts.
F. COUNTY MANAGER
1) Recommendation to recognize an insurance refund and approve the
necessary budget amendment for the Ochopee Fire Control District in
the amount of $4,600 for the purpose of replacing stolen items.
2) Recommendation to adopt a resolution approving amendments
(appropriating grants, donations, contributions or insurance proceeds)
to the Fiscal Year 2009-10 Adopted Budget.
G. AIRPORT AUTHORITY AND/OR COMMUNITY
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
1)
Recommendation to the Collier County Board of County
Commissioners (BCC) acting as the Community Redevelopment
Agency (CRA) to approve the after-the-fact submittal of a
Page 12
March 9, 2010
Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Disaster Recovery
Initiative (DRI) grant application to Collier County Housing &
Human Services (HHS) for the partial design and construction of the
lmmokalee Storm Water Master Plan in the amount of$4,840,604.
2) Request that the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) acting as the
Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) approve a Resolution
changing various sections of the Immokalee CRA Commercial Facade
Improvement Grant Program Policies and Procedures Document,
Application and Recipient Agreement.
3) Recommendation to the Collier County Board of County
Commissioners (BCC) acting as the Community Redevelopment
Agency (CRA) to approve a grant request from the Eastern Collier
County Chamber of Commerce (ECOC) for funding totaling
$43,875.00 for the expenses associated with the 50th Annual Harvest
Festival scheduled March 20, 2010.
4) Recommendation to approve and execute a Site Improvement Grant
Agreement(s) between the Collier County Community
Redevelopment Agency and a Grant Applicant(s) within the Bayshore
Gateway Triangle Community Redevelopment area. (2818 Gulfview
Drive)
H. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
1) Commissioner Henning requests Board approval for reimbursement
regarding attendance at a function serving a Valid Public Purpose.
Attended the Greater Naples Chamber of Commerce Wake Up Naples
event at the Hilton Hotel - 5111 Tamiami Trail North, Naples, FL on
February 16,2010. $20 to be paid from Commissioner Henning's
travel budget.
2) Commissioner Henning requests Board approval for reimbursement
regarding attendance at a function serving a Valid Public Purpose.
Attended the East Naples Civic Association Luncheon at the Hamilton
Harbor Yacht Club on February 22,2010. $18.00 to be paid from
Commissioner Henning's travel budget.
Page 13
March 9, 2010
3) Commissioner Coletta requests Board approval for reimbursement
regarding attendance at a function serving a Valid Public Purpose.
Commissioner Coletta attended the Launching of lmmokalee Housing
& Family Services on November 17,2009 in Naples, FL. $50.00 to be
paid from Commissioner Coletta's travel budget.
4) Commissioner Coletta requests Board approval for reimbursement
regarding attendance at a function serving a Valid Public Purpose.
Commissioner Coletta will be attending to the Honor the Free Press
Day on March 17, 2010 in Naples, FL. $30.00 to be paid from
Commissioner Coletta's travel budget.
5) Commissioner Coletta requests Board approval for reimbursement
regarding attendance at a function serving a Valid Public Purpose.
Commissioner Coletta will be attending on April 10, 2010 to the 2010
Gulf Citrus Gala in Labelle, FL. $120.00 to be paid from
Commissioner Colettas travel budget.
6) Commissioner Coletta requests Board approval for reimbursement
regarding attendance at a function serving a Valid Public Purpose.
Attended Eastern Collier Chamber of Commerce on February 3, 2010
at 506 1st St, in Immokalee, FL. $15.00 to be paid from
Commissioner Coletta's travel budget.
7) Commissioner Coletta requests Board approval for reimbursement
regarding attendance at a function serving a Valid Public Purpose.
Attended Wake Up Naples breakfast at Greater Naples Chamber of
Commerce on February 16, 2010 date at 5 11 1 Tamiami Trail North in
Naples, FL. $25.00 to be paid from Commissioner Coletta's travel
budget.
I. MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
1) Miscellaneous items to file for record with action as directed.
J. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
1) Recommend authorization of a budget amendment to transfer funds
collected for the Collier County Juvenile Assessment Center to the
Page 14
March 9,2010
Sheriff in the amount of $59,000 to be used exclusively for the
operation of the Juvenile Assessment Center.
2) Recommend approval of the Sheriff's Application for Homeland
Security Fiscal Year 2010 Operation Stonegarden and designate the
Sheriff as the Official Applicant, and the Sheriff's Office Staff as
Grant Program and Financial Managers to accept, receive and expend
grant funds, and approve and submit applicable budget and program
modifications.
3) To obtain Board approval for disbursements for the period of
February 20,2010 through February 26,2010 and for submisson into
the official records ofthe Board.
4) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approve
the State of Florida Annual Local Government Financial Report for
Fiscal Year 2008-2009 as required by Florida Statute 2 1 8.32.
K. COUNTY ATTORNEY
1) Recommendation to approve a Stipulated Final Judgment in the
amount of$48,700 for Parcel209FEE in the lawsuit styled Collier
County v. Pablo M. Sardinas, et at., Case No. 07-2824-CA .(Oil Well
Road Project No. 60044) (Fiscal Impact $8,000)
2) Authorize the County Attorney to advertise two ordinances for future
Board consideration which would: (1) amend Ordinance No. 76-57
(the Public Solicitors Ordinance), so as to prohibit public solicitors
from misrepresenting that they are veterans of the military or
soliciting in military uniforms when they are neither present nor
former members of the military; and (2) amend Ordinance No. 87-60
(which regulates solicitation in the public right-of-way), as amended,
to require charitable organizations soliciting in military uniform or a
distinctive part of a military uniform to provide evidence of present or
former military service for each solicitor when applying for a permit.
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
Page 15
March 9, 2010
RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL BY THE COLLIER COUNTY
PLANNING COMMISSION OR OTHER AUTHORIZING AGENCIES OF
ALL MEMBERS PRESENT AND VOTING; 3) NO WRITTEN OR ORAL
OBJECTIONS TO THE ITEM RECEIVED BY STAFF, THE COLLIER
COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION, OTHER AUTHORIZING
AGENCIES OR THE BOARD, PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF
THE BCC MEETING ON WHICH THE ITEMS ARE SCHEDULED TO BE
HEARD; AND 4) NO INDIVIDUALS ARE REGISTERED TO SPEAK IN
OPPOSITION TO THE ITEM. FOR THOSE ITEMS, WHICH ARE QUASI-
JUDICIAL IN NATURE, ALL PARTICIPANTS MUST BE SWORN IN.
A. This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte
disclosure be provided by Commission members. RZ-PL2009-469 East
Naples Fire Control and Rescue District No. 26, represented by Robert L.
Duane, AICP of Hole Montes Inc., is requesting to rezone from Rural
Agriculture (A) and Commercial Intermediate (C-3) zoning districts to the
Public Use (P) zoning district for a Fire Station and accessory uses. The
subject property is 3.68 acres and is located in Section 20, Township 51
South, Range 27 East, Collier County, Florida.
B. This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission
members. Should a hearin2 be held on this item, all participants are
required to be sworn in. Recommendation to approve Petition V AC-
PL2009-1 025, to disclaim, renounce and vacate the County's and the
Public's interest in a portion of a 30-foot wide alley along the southerly line
of the plat known as Pettit Subdivision, as recorded in Plat Book 2, Page 88,
of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida, in Section 18, Township
52 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida, and being more
specifically described in Exhibit A.
C. Recommendation to adopt an ordinance amending Ordinance No. 2004-03,
the Collier County Airport Authority Ordinance, for the purpose of
designating the Board of County Commissioners as the governing body of
the Airport Authority.
D. Recommendation to adopt an ordinance creating the Airport Authority
Advisory Board for the purpose of providing advice and recommendations
to the Board of County Commissioners, as the governing body of Collier
County Airport Authority, regarding the Marco Island Executive Airport,
Page 16
March 9,2010
lmmokalee Regional Airport, Everglades Airpark and any future publically-
owned airports that are within the authority and control of Collier County.
18. ADJOURN
INQUIRIES CONCERNING CHANGES TO THE BOARD'S AGENDA SHOULD
BE MADE TO THE COUNTY MANAGER'S OFFICE AT 252-8383.
Page 17
March 9,2010
March 9, 2010
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Ladies and gentlemen, the Board of
County Commissioner meeting is now in session.
Would you please stand for the invocation to be given by Pastor
John Boutchia of the Gospel Baptist Church.
PASTOR BOUTCHIA: Father in heaven, we come before you
today. We thank you for your love for us and your graciousness that
is shown every day. Thank you for this beautiful area that we live in,
Southwest Florida, specifically Naples. Uniquely, we're placed here,
and we thank you for the beauty of this place and the opportunity to
give service to this city and this county.
We pray for some of the things that are being mentioned here
today. We thank you for those that have given their service to this
place, those that will be recognized here today, Ana Salazar and Tony
Pires, and Mark Martin who will be brought up as February Employee
of the Month. We thank you for these people. They give their life for
this place.
We'd ask for these commissioners, that you would just give them
wisdom here today in the things that they decide upon and that they
look at, things of community development and transportation and
environmental issues and many other things.
Lord, we recognize the book of Proverbs is clear when it says
that only wisdom comes from you, and so we look to you for your
guidance and for your strength in this meeting. And above all we
recognize the fact that though these things that we decide on and we
hold in our hands are fleeting, we are mindful of the fact that eternal
life can be gained through Jesus Christ who died for us, and if we put
our faith and trust in him, he'll be our savior.
Thank you for this time, bless this meeting. We pray in Jesus'
name, amen.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you. Now please join us in the
Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.
(The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.)
Page 2
March 9, 20]0
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you. We will now have any
changes to the agenda.
Item #2A
TODA Y'S REGULAR, CONSENT AND SUMMARY AGENDA
AS AMENDED - MOTION APPROVING CONSENT AGENDA
AND ITEMS #17A & #17B ON SUMMARY AGENDA-
APPROVED; MOTION APPROVING ITEMS #17C & #17D ON
THE SUMMARY AGENDA - ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: Good morning, Mr. Chairman, members of the
board.
Agenda changes for the March 9,2010, Board of County
Commissioners' meeting. First change is to withdraw Item 9E. That
was a discussion of space for the upcoming census count, and that
withdraw was at Commissioner Coletta's request.
Next item is an add-on item, Item 12C. It's an offer of judgment
in a lawsuit between the county and a property owner regarding the
Santa Barbara Boulevard extension.
Next change is Item 16BI0, paragraph 3 of the proposed
compliance agreement should be revised to strike through the phrase,
need more detail, that was in parens in that particular paragraph.
Next change is Item 16Hl. This was a request for reimbursement
for valid public purpose for attending the Greater Naples Chamber of
Commerce event at the Hilton Hotel by Commissioner Henning, and
the original receipt showed that -- the amount as $20 to be paid from
Commissioner Henning's travel budget. That was revised. A revised
invoice has been received showing the correct amount as $25.
An agenda note, Item 5B, which is a presentation from your
Collier County Foreclosure Task Force concerning various legislative
proposals introduced in the 2010 Florida legislative session and Item
Page 3
March 9, 2010
12B, which is a report from your county attorney on pending
foreclosure legislation as well will be considered companion items and
heard together, so the board can consider all of those at one time.
Then we have six time-certain items this morning,
Commissioners. Items 5B and 12B, as I just mentioned, will be heard
together at 11 a.m. Item 9F will be heard at 1 :30 p.m. Item lOA, to be
followed then by lOB, will be heard at 10: 15 a.m. Item 12A on your
agenda will be heard at 2:30 p.m. Item 13A will be heard at 9:45 a.m.
And finally, CRA Items 14A, B, C, and D will be heard in order,
beginning at one p.m.
Those are all the changes I have, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Thank you very much.
County Attorney, do you have any changes?
MR. KLA TZKOW: No, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. We'll start with the changes by
commissioners and ex parte disclosure.
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I have no changes to the agenda,
and as far as disclosures go, nothing on the content agenda. On the
summary agenda, on item number 17 A, I have received
correspondence. And that's all I have to declare, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you.
Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Good morning, Chair.
As of any changes on today's agenda, I have none. And as far as
ex parte on the summary agenda, I only have 17 A in that regards to
correspondence that I had on this particular issue, and I have nothing
else to bring forth as far as ex parte.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, thank you.
And I have no further changes to the agenda. And with respect to
Item 17 A, I have received and reviewed the Collier County Planning
Commission's staff report only.
Page 4
March 9, 2010
Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, sir. Good morning.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Good morning.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: The -- I have no changes to the
agenda and nothing to declare except for 1 7 A where I've had a staff
report on it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you.
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Ditto.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, good.
Then we will have -- I would entertain a motion to approve
today's regular --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Motion to approve.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Wait a minute. Let me --let me read the
whole thing. Motion to approve today's regular, consent, and
summary agenda as amended.
All in favor, please signifY by saying -- we've got three --
MR.OCHS: Hold on, Commissioner.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah.
MR.OCHS: Sue has some speakers on--
MS. FILSON: Three speakers.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes, that's right. We do have -- we have
three speakers now rather than one?
MS. FILSON: Yes.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. All right. Let's call the speakers.
MS. FILSON: The first speaker is Michael Klein. He'll be
followed by Brian Meade.
MR. KLEIN: Good morning, Commissioners and everyone. I
serve on the Collier County Airport Authority, and I'd speak briefly on
items on the consent agenda, Items 17C and D.
And I was just wondering if it might be more appropriate, since
we're in the -- right now in the process of recruiting and hiring another
Page 5
March 9, 2010
executive director, to perhaps table this item for -- to come back at
some future time after the new executive director is in place for the
Airport Authority.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Could I ask what the reason would be for
tabling it?
MR. KLEIN: Well, I think there's -- probably needs to be some
further discussion on -- with the airport -- with the executive director
on how things will be structured and how reporting processes will take
place and how the Airport Authority, which would come to your
advisory board, how they will interact with the new executive director
and how the County Commissioners will then -- what their position
would be with that new director. I think a lot of the -- probably might
be subject to some clarification.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Thank you very much. We have
other speakers?
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Brian (sic) Meade. He'll be
followed by Jim Murray.
MR. MURRAY: Excuse me. I'd like to give my time to Byron
Meade.
MR. MEADE: I won't need it.
Commissioners, during the past year the county -- the Collier
County Airport board, we've done a lot of different things. We've
contracted with the National Guard to have the permanent residence --
to have a permanent residence at the Immokalee Airport. We feel this
is going to be a big help to Immokalee.
During the same period of time, we have started the program to
build the USDA building at the airport to bring in more new
businesses.
At Everglades City Airport, the new hangars have been
completed, and on March 31 st we will have a dedication of those new
hangars.
Also at the Marco Airport we have just let the contract for the
Page 6
March 9, 20]0
expansion of the new parking area so that the new taxiway can be
started next.
It is the express feeling of myself and the board that the
amendment to 17C or 0 -- I thought it was 0 -- will slow down our
present program and future construction projects. At times we've been
frustrated at the slowness of the bureaucracy, both state, county, and
federal, in getting the approval for our different projects. Now we're
getting ready to review applicants for the new airport director.
Human resources is giving us this afternoon 30 (sic) qualified
applicants. They had a total of 80 apply, and they have eliminated 30
of them. Tomorrow morning at nine o'clock we will further qualify the
applicants until we have the three best prospects for the director's job.
You asked us to present you with three names to consider for the
job. We look forward -- and we look forward to working with the new
director which you select.
The board is asking that you table the amendment of 17C or D
while a new executive director that you approve has time to settle in
on the new job with the help of the current board. Myself and the
board feel that over the past few years we have done an excellent job
in representing the commissioners and the taxpayers of Collier County
at all three airports. The entire board feels that the citizens and the
taxpayers of Collier County would best be served if the 17D
amendment was tabled for six months to let us get up and running
with the new director. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Mr. Meade, can I ask you a question?
MR. MEADE: Sure.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Are you going to resign from this board
if we make this change?
MR. MEADE: No.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any of the other members going to
resign from the board if we make this change --
MR. MEADE: No.
Page 7
March 9, 20]0
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- to your knowledge?
MR. MEADE: Not to my knowledge, no.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: How would your participation change if
we approved this today?
MR. MEADE: That's a good question. We don't know, and
we're not quite sure why you want to make the change. Why do you
want to make the change?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, it's fairly simple, and we've gone
through this in our other meetings. We've discussed this in public
meetings.
MR. MEADE: But I haven't seen any change. Why the change?
Everything you say -- I've read all the reports, but I don't see where
anything's being changed except the name. The director is still a
county employee. You still have the option to fire him. He will still
report to the commissioners, plus he'll have to -- still have to report to
the board at the airport.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, yeah, and that's the problem. The
individual is our employee --
MR. MEADE: Yes.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- but you, the board, under its current
composition, can fire that person without any consultation with us at
all. So that is the primary issue. You've placed an airport director in a
position of being employed by the Board of County Commissioners
but being terminated by the Airport Authority. So what we're trying
to do is clarify --
MR. MEADE: Are you suggesting that the last director, that we
fired him, fired her?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Of course not.
MR. MEADE: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's not what we're saying.
MR. MEADE: All right.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You know as well as I do that she went
Page 8
March 9, 2010
voluntarily to another job that she felt offered her a better opportunity.
MR. MEADE: That's right.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: So we're trying to clarify -- and she
specifically stated that the reporting relationship caused her difficulty
from time to time. So we're trying to solve that problem. And I, quite
frankly, don't see that there is any change in the responsibilities other
than that with respect to the Airport Authority becoming an advisory
board to the commission. I just don't see the point.
But nevertheless. We've -- I think we've explained that before.
But nevertheless.
Any questions by commissioners?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, I had --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'm inclined -- I know if it were me
and I was on a board, I don't care what board it is, and we were about
to hire somebody new, I wouldn't want to be making all of these
changes all at one time, and I am inclined to go along with tabling this
for six months until they get the new airport director up and in place,
and work with them on this.
The airport director is only responsible to us. We only -- the
Board of County Commissioners only guide three people: County
manager, the county attorney, and the airport director. That's it,
period. It's always been that way, and that's the way it's going to be.
But I would like to wait until we have that airport director in place
before we move forward.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Then I need to ask you a question.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Who has the authority to terminate either
of our redevelopment agency Directors, Ms. Phillippi and David
Jackson?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Let me ask you a question back.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: No, no.
March 9, 2010
COMMISSIONER FIALA: When has the Airport Authority --
when has the Airport Authority ever terminated anyone?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's not the point.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, I think it is.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: They have the authority to do so.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: They do, they do.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Does anybody have the authority to
terminate any of our other employees other than us?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, thank you.
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Sometimes you try and fix
something with a sledgehammer when it's only a mosquito.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I don't want to be adversarial. I
agree. I mean, this gives it clarity, it gives it consistency with other
policies that we have, and I don't want to delay it, and especially the
fact that we're going to have a new airport director. I think that's more
important to take the action here. So I'm not -- I'm not willing to delay
this action as requested.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. There's one thing I'd like to do. It
is absolutely true they've done a good job. We are not criticizing the
job that you have done. And if we need to have a proclamation to
recognize that fact, I would be happy to sponsor one.
We're very happy with the job that the Airport Authority has
done for us --
MR. MEADE: Commissioner, is that the only problem, that two
-- two agencies could fire the director?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: As I say, it's one of the problems. I think
some of the other commissioners had raised issues about economic
development and a focus on economic development and coordination
with EDC and some other areas, but that is one of my primary
concerns, clarifying --
Page ] 0
March 9, 20]0
MR. MEADE: Commissioner, EDC, you know, we've got an
EDC at Immokalee now who is -- are working with us doing a very
good job, and much better than -- well, let's not go there.
Anyway, if that's -- if that's your main thing, why don't you say --
just change it to say that the -- you have the -- you are the only entity
-- only commission that can fire the airport director? That would
solve your problem.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I'm not sure that the other -- some of the
other commissioners who support the change would agree with me on
that. But nevertheless. Does anyone -- Commissioner Fiala, you want
to speak again?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, I would, as a matter of fact,
and that is -- and I'm going to just put it flat out on the table. I just
don't understand how the Economic Development Council can be
doing the airport work, and they're the ones that are determining what
we do with the airports, and that bothers me a lot, so I'm going to just
flat out say it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. I don't think that's what they're
doing, but --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, it seems that that's what
started it with Commissioner Coletta, and it's been going on since
then, and --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Make a motion and I'll second it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I would like to table these two
items, 17C and D, for six months.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I second that.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Motion to table these two items
for six months by Commissioner Fiala and seconded by Commissioner
Halas.
Any further discussion? Do we have another speaker on this
item?
Page 1 ]
March 9, 20] 0
MS. FILSON: No, sir. He gave his time to this person.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Then all in favor, please signifY
by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All opposed, by like sign?
Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: The motion fails 3-2.
Okay. Thank you very much.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll make a motion that we
approve today's agenda as amended.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion by Commissioner Henning to
approve today's regular, consent, and summary agendas as amended,
seconded by Commissioner Coletta.
Any discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All in favor, please signifY by saying
aye.
Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. The approval of the minutes are
-- IS --
MR. KLATZKOW: Wait a sec.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You got a problem.
Page ] 2
March 9, 2010
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I do?
Isn't it supposed to be four, a supermajority in there?
MR. KLA TZKOW: Let me just double check. I believe you
might have on your summary.
MS. FILSON : Yes.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, I don't see how that affects the
issue. Those items are going to stay on the agenda, and then they will
have a --
MR. KLATZKOW: The summary agenda was--
CHAIRMAN COYLE: The summary agenda.
MR. KLATZKOW: So you have the consent agenda, which is
three, and then your summary agenda, your items require four. Take a
separate motion for the summary agenda.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Then we will entertain a motion.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And Mr. Chairman, I make a
motion that we leave, on the summary agenda, 17 A and 178. The
other two are ordinances. Doesn't -- it's not a land-use item.
Is that correct, Jeff?
MR. KLATZKOW: Yes.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. So we have a motion to approve
the summary agenda, 17 A and 1 7B --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Correct.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- is that what you're saying?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Leave it on the summary
agenda.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Leave them on the summary agenda.
Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm sorry. Question, if I may?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: The summary agenda has four
items on it. We're only approving two. Then what happens to the C
and D?
Page ] 3
March 9, 20]0
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Again--
MR. KLATZKOW: My understanding is the opposition is to C
and D on the summary.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes.
MR. KLATZKOW: Otherwise, my understanding is the board is
unanimous with the remaining items on both consent and the
summary .
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That's correct.
MR. KLATZKOW: With that under---
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You're going to have to be a little bit
more specific.
MR. KLA TZKOW: My understanding is that the two opposition
votes were only for 17C and 17D which deal with the Airport
Authority .
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes.
MR. KLATZKOW: That the entire board is otherwise
unanimous with respect to the rest of the consent agenda and the rest
of the summary agenda.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes. So how are we going to get it
properly approved?
MR. KLATZKOW: I think the motion would be that --let's
make two motions. We'll make a motion for both the consent agenda
and the summary agenda except for C and D, and then we'll make a
separate motion on C and D, which is going to be the 3-2 vote.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, all right. Very well.
Then Commissioner Henning, you were going to make that
motion. Do you understand what --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, I'll repeat it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I make a motion that we
approve today's consent, and summary agenda A and B.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
Page 14
March 9, 20]0
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. We have a motion to approve
today's summary agenda -- consent and summary agenda, including
17 A and B by Commissioner Henning and a second by Commissioner
Halas.
Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All in favor, please signify by saying
aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It passes unanimously.
Now, County Attorney, you say we need --
MR. KLA TZKOW: Could I have a motion on 17C and 17D?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Move to approve 17C and D.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion to approve Item 17C and D by
Commissioner Henning, seconded by Commissioner Coletta.
Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All in favor, please signify by saying
aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye -- sorry.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
Page ] 5
March 9, 2010
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Erase that, erase that.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Erase that first one. Only the second
one.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It's approved by a vote of 3-2, with
Commissioner Fiala and Commissioner Halas disagreeing.
Page ] 6
Agenda Changes
Board of County Commissioners Meeting
March 9, 2010
Withdraw Item 9E:
Coletta's request)
Discussion of space needed for upcoming Census count. (Commissioner
Add on Item 12C: Authorize the making of an Offer of Judgment to Respondent, C & T Properties
Unlimited, for Parcel Nos. 126FEE and 126TCE in the amount of $501,000 in the lawsuit styled Collier
County, Florida v. Alexander G. Christou, et 0/., Case No. 07-4923-CA (Santa Barbara Boulevard
Extension Project No. 60091) (Fiscal Impact $116,200). (Staff's request)
Item 16B10: Paragraph 3 of the proposed Compliance Agreement should be revised as follows:
In exchange, Developer agrees that it will concurrently apply for a Right-of-Way permit (need 1f19J'8
~ from the County when an application is made for a Development Order as defined by the Land
Development Code in the existance at the time of application for real property described in Ordinance
No. 02-40, as amended, Paragraph L. Property Description is attached as Exhibit B, hereto.
Item 16H1: Commissioner Henning requests board approval for reimbursement regarding
attendance at a function serving a Valid Public Purpose, attending the Greater Naples Chamber of
commerce Wake Up Naples event at the Hilton Hotel. The original receipt received shows the amount
as $20 to be paid from Commissioner Henning's travel budget. A revised invoice has been received
showing the corrected amount as $25.
Note: Item sB Presentation by representatives of the Collier County Foreclosure Task Force
concerning various legislative proposals introduced in the 2010 Florida Legislative Session and Item
12B Report on pending foreclosure legislation are to be considered companion items and will be
heard together, with the below mentioned time certain of 11:00 a.m.
Time Certain Items:
Items sB and 12B to be heard at 11:00 a.m.
Item 9F to be heard at 1:30 p.m.
Item lOA and Item lOB to be heard at 10:15 a.m.
Item 12A to be heard at 2:30 p.m.
Item 13A to be heard at 9:45 a.m.
Items 14A, 14B, 14C and 140 to be heard at 1:00 p.m.
3/9/2010 8:37 AM
March 9, 20]0
Item #2B
MINUTES FROM THE FEBRUARY 9, 2010 ~ BCC/REGULAR
MEETING - APPROVED AS PRESENTED
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Now, we have approval of the
minutes for the February 9, 2010, BCC, regular meeting.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion to approve by Commissioner
Halas --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- second by Commissioner Fiala.
Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All in favor, please signify by saying
aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I think we got a unanimous vote on that
one.
Item #3A
EMPLOYEE SERVICE AWARDS - 5 YEAR ATTENDEES -
PRESENTED
MR. OCHS: Commissioner, that takes you to Item 3A, which is
Page 17
March 9, 2010
your service awards, and this is advisory committee service awards.
You have two this morning, both for five years of service.
Your first recipient is Ana Salazar with the Immokalee Enterprise
Zone Development Agency.
Is Ana here?
(No response.)
MR. OCHS: I don't see her, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
MR. OCHS: Second five-year service award recipient is Tony
Pires from your Land Acquisition Advisory Committee. Tony?
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Congratulations.
MR. PIRES: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You need to get your picture taken,
Tony.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Send it to the post office.
MR. PIRES: Should I get sideways?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We'll get it both ways.
MR. PIRES: Thank you. Thank you very much.
(Applause.)
Item #4
PROCLAMATIONS - ONE MOTION TO ADOPT
Item #4A
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING MARCH 14,2010 THROUGH
MARCH 20, 2010 AS SAVE THE FLORIDA PANTHER WEEK.
ACCEPTED BY TOM MURRAY AND LISA OSTBERG.
SPONSORED BY COMMISSIONER COLETTA - ADOPTED
Page ] 8
March 9, 20]0
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, that takes us to Item 4,
proclamations. Item 4A is a proclamation designating March 14,
2010, through March 20, 2010, as Save the Florida Panther Week. To
be accepted by Tom Murray and Lisa Ostberg, and this item is
sponsored by Commissioner Coletta.
Would they please come forward to accept the award?
(Applause.)
MR. MURRA Y: Thank you very much. Lisa Ostberg is not me
of course. I'm Tom Murray. Lisa is in Washington and sorry she
couldn't be here. What do we do?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You have to get a picture for the
photographer and then smile.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: A couple words, sir?
MR. MURRAY: Yes. I'd like to --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, at the podium.
MR. MURRAY: At the podium.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And your name first, please.
MR. MURRAY: My name is Tom Murray, and I'm the
executive director of the Friends of the Florida Panther Wildlife
Refuge, and I'd just like to say how fortunate we are to be the primary
habitat for the most endangered large mammal in the United States
and also the location of the National Wildlife Refuge, which was
established by the U.S. Government to preserve them.
There are about a -- between lOO and 120 Florida panthers left in
the wild, down from maybe 1,300 100 hundred years ago and 5,000
going back to their natural habitat a number of years before that. And
last year was not one of the better years for Florida panthers; 17 -- 24
were reported dead, 17 of those by vehicle strikes, and one, believe it
or not was shot, which is probably the first time in 50 years a Florida
panther has been shot and killed.
But having said that, there is encouraging news. The Florida
Page 19
March 9,2010
panthers are bearing kittens, they are reproducing, and large
landowners have joined together with conservation groups for the first
time to work together to mitigate habitat loss. And we welcome the
Collier County Government to be a third leg on that three-legged
stool.
I invite all Collier citizens and the commissioners, of course, to
an event that we're having this Friday at the Rookery Bay where we're
going to have members of the Florida Capture -- the Florida Panther
Capture Team present to describe how all that works and what the
status of the panthers are, and it will be a wine and cheese and silent
auction as well.
And last, but not least, next Saturday is our annual open house on
the refuge where we invite everybody to come for lectures and buggy
tours and bird walks and swamp walks, orchid swamp walks and so
forth.
So thank you very much, again, for the proclamation. We
appreciate it very much and hope to see you at both events.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you very much. I understood
Commissioner Coletta was organizing a youth hunt for -- oh, that was
for pigs. That's not for panthers, right?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you for the honorable
mention. Oh.
Item #4 B
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING MARCH AS GUARDIAN AD
LITEM MONTH. ACCEPTED BY FRANK PRADO, GUARDIAN
AD LITEM PROGRAM DIRECTOR AND LORRIE MOORE,
COLLIER COUNTY VOLUNTEER SUPERVISOR/TEAM
LEADER. SPONSORED BY COMMISSIONER FIALA ~
ADOPTED
Page 20
March 9, 20]0
MR. OCHS: 4B is a proclamation designating March as
Guardian Ad Litem Month. To be accepted by Frank Prado, Guardian
Ad Litem program director, and Lorrie Moore, Collier County
volunteer supervisor and team leader. This item sponsored by
Commissioner Fiala.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Good morning. How are you? Who's
going to accept this?
Turn around and take your picture.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Did you want to say a couple
words?
MR. PRADO: Thank you very much. My name is Frank Prado.
I'm the Circuit Director for the Guardian Ad Litem Program.
Our program here in Collier County currently represents roughly
450 children that have been abused, abandoned, or neglected, and we
do so through the use of 175 volunteers now in Collier County. I want
to say that again. We have 175 volunteers. And the reason that we
have so many volunteers serving so many of our children is because of
your support.
Over the past two years, we have received enormous support
from you guys, from the County Commissioners, and from our county
manager as well, and we've been able to hold several volunteer
trainings here in Lee County -- in Collier County, and as a result of
that, our numbers have grown from about 90 volunteers two years ago
to 175. So that's very good.
The number of children that we're serving has also increased
because of that, and this wouldn't be possible if it was not for your
support and for the support of the community down here in Collier
County .
Thank you very much, and we hope we can continue our
partnership in the future.
Page 21
March 9, 2010
(Applause.)
Item #4C
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING MARCH 14,2010 THROUGH
MARCH 20, 2010 AS SUNSHINE WEEK IN COLLIER COUNTY.
ACCEPTED BY HEATHER GRIMSHAW ON BEHALF OF THE
COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
AND CRYSTAL KINZEL, DIRECTOR OF FINANCE AND
ACCOUNTING ON BEHALF OF DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK
OF COURTS. SPONSORED BY COMMISSIONER HENNING -
ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, Item 4C is a proclamation
designating March 14,2010, through March 20,2010, as Sunshine
Week in Collier County. To be accepted by Heather Grimshaw on
behalf of the Collier County Board of County Commissioners and
Crystal Kinzel, director of finance and accounting on behalf of Dwight
E. Brock, Clerk of the Courts. This item's sponsored by Commissioner
Henning.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Worked every time (indicating).
MS. KINZEL: Just very quickly, Commissioners. Crystal
Kinzel, for the record. Mr. Brock apologizes. He had a previously
scheduled speaking engagement, but he appreciates the recognition,
and thank you very much.
Item #4 D
PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING THE CORKSCREW SWAMP
SANCTUARY AND THE PANTHER ISLAND MITIGATION
BANK FOR BEING DESIGNATED AS A "RAMSAR WETLAND
Page 22
March 9, 2010
OF INTERNATIONAL IMPORTANCE". ACCEPTED BY A
REPRESENTATIVE FROM THE AUDUBON SOCIETY.
SPONSORED BY COMMISSIONER COLETTA - ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, that takes us to Item 4D. It's a
proclamation recognizing the Corkscrew Swamp Sanctuary and the
Panther Island Mitigation Bank for being designated as a RAMSAR
Wetland of International Importance. This proclamation is sponsored
by Commissioner Coletta and accepted by Mike Knight and Bill
Barton.
Gentlemen?
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Who's going to take this? You both can
hold it. You want to say something?
MR. BARTON: I'll say a few things. Good morning,
Commissioners. And first let me express our appreciation, both the
Audubon and Panther Island, for recognizing this important
recognition of the site.
Very quickly, I'll tell you, RAMSAR is an international
committee made up of an international tree of approximately 40
different countries in the world, and their primary objective in life is to
identify and recognize wetland areas of international importance.
This designation is only the fourth that has occurred in Florida,
26th in the United States, and its primary focus as we all expect and
appreciate is for our wonderful Corkscrew Sanctuary.
I hope that everyone in this room has availed themselves of the
opportunity to experience that wonderful piece of environmental
property that we have in this county. It's been a great pleasure and
perhaps one of the most rewarding things in my life, and I think I can
speak for all of us in Panther Island, that we had an opportunity to
restore and enhance some 2,700 acres immediately adjacent to
Corkscrew. And as we go through the process, that will all become
Page 23
March 9, 2010
part of Corkscrew Swamp Sanctuary.
It's all been restored now, and we are -- just for the world's
information, we are working right now on permitting in partnership
with Audubon another 1,700 acres also immediately adjacent to
Corkscrew.
So we're pleased and honored -- as a little pat on our back, we are
the first mitigation bank ever to have received this designation as part
of an International Wetland Designation.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Congratulations.
MR. BARTON: Thank you again very much.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's excellent.
(Applause.)
Item #4 E
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING MARCH 10,2010 AS A DAY
OF HEIGHTENED AWARENESS OF WILDFIRE DANGER IN
COLLIER COUNTY. ACCEPTED BY PETER GADDY, MIKE
RAMSAY, TIM NANCE, AND JIM FLANAGAN. SPONSORED
BY COMMISSIONER COLETTA - ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, Item 4E is a proclamation
designating March 10,2010, as a Day of Heightened Awareness of
Wildfire Danger in Collier County. To be accepted by Peter Gaddy,
Mike Ramsey, Tim Nance, and Jim Flanagan. This item sponsored by
Commissioner Coletta.
Gentlemen?
You can get your award first and get a picture.
MR. GADDY: Picture.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes. We have procedures that have to
be followed. You've got to get your award and then picture before
Page 24
March 9, 2010
you can speak.
What's wrong with your right hand there?
MR. NANCE: I broke my finger. My wife doesn't tolerate that
much.
MR. GADDY I want to express my thanks to the County
Commission. Peter Gaddy, president of the Golden Gate Estates Area
Civic Association.
I want to thank Commissioner Coletta for all his effort in putting
together this workshop. He did a great job. He even showed up at
five a.m. in the morning to start off the Wink morning news on
February 2nd. Thank you for that.
We have so many people who were involved in this that I want
Tim Nance to read the list so we don't miss anyone.
MR. NANCE: Yeah. We'd like to recognize all the different
people that put together the wildfire workshop from February. The
workshop was graciously filmed through John Torre's office to be
broadcast to the residents. We feel like, that the wildfire threat is the
most serious natural disaster threat to most of the interior of Collier
County, and it's been a great kickoff to development ofa Community
Wildlife Protection Plan that's going to be developed, coordinated by
Victor Hill and the Florida Division of Forestry that's going to allow
us to become possibly eligible for federal grants for wildfire
management.
So I'd like to --I'd like to, once again, thank Commissioner
Coletta as a workshop sponsor. This is the second year that he's helped
us coordinate this effort. I'd like to recognize Victor Hill; Joe Lecea;
Johnny Bryson and Hank Graham from the Florida Division of
Forestry; Chief Rita Greenberg and Michael Ginson from Big
Corkscrew Island Fire and Rescue district; Chief Robert Metzger from
Golden Gate Fire and Rescue; Sheriff Kevin Rambosk and Lieutenant
Tim Pratt, our District 4 substation officer, from the Collier County
Sheriffs Office; Dan Summers and Maryann Cole from Collier
Page 25
March 9,2010
County Emergency Management; Diane Flagg from Collier County
Code Enforcement; our manager, County Manager Leo Ochs; Norm
Feder and Connie Dean from Collier County Transportation Services;
Nick Casalanguida from Community Development and Environmental
Services; Mr. John Torre from Collier County Communication; Linda
Hetrick from University of Florida Institute of Food and Agricultural
Sciences; and Jenelle Shriner, executive producer, and Kyle Jordan
and Renee Stoll, reporters, with Wink News. These people helped us
put this together in a video that's going to help our citizens throughout
the year for this threat.
Thank you very much for your support in this effort.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It's a good job. Thank you very much.
MR. GADDY: Thank you, Commissioners. Have a good
meeting.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Before you go --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Oh, yes. Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. Then Commissioner Fiala
also wants to -- I want to personally thank Peter Gaddy and the
Golden Gate Estates Civic Association. You heard all the names that
were read off. In order to be able to coordinate it, it took a central
group to be able to make this happen.
Now, we put these on in the past with great difficulty. But with
the Golden Gate Estates Civic Association and the leadership of Peter
Gaddy and Tim Nance and the other members there, Jim Flanagan and
Mr. Ramsey, this thing came together flawlessly.
This is the second year that this came across. And gentlemen, the
day's going to come when we're going to have that eventual fire that's
going to burn through the Estates, and it's going to be serious. But
we'll be able to stand back at that time and realize the fact that we
have made a difference. That day might not be this year with the rains
coming, the weather conditions the way they are, but it will happen
some day.
Page 26
March 9,20]0
And I know the county government is playing this video of the
event -- of the meeting itself to be able to keep our citizens aware.
But please, don't -- we have to make sure that our citizens don't rest
their guard, that there's still a tremendous danger out there in spite of
the rains we've been receiving.
If they don't clear around their houses, if they don't take the
necessary precautions, then they may be the casualty that will happen
at the next fire.
Thank you so much for all that you put into this. I do appreciate
it.
MR. NANCE: Thank you very much.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. And you as well,
Commissioner Coletta, for continuing to spearhead this thing.
I had a question though. I don't know if you'll have the answers.
But with the strange weather we've had, first of all, all of the really
cold weather that has dried everything out so all the green is gone,
everything is burned, which makes it very, very dry, yet we've had
enough rain, do you know how that's going to affect this fire season?
MR. GADDY: Yeah, definitely. We have a fire expert, Mike
Ramsey. He can tell you a little bit about that.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Great.
MR. GADDY: Because he sets fires, so he knows a lot about it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, but legally he does that, right?
Let's just make that clear.
MR. GADDY: He even wrote a song for the workshop.
But -- go ahead, Mike.
MR. RAMSEY: Yes, ma'am. Mike Ramsey, Golden Gate
Estates Civic Association.
Basically what's happening is with the rain -- we've had freezes
that's killed the plants, but we have rain. The only thing it's done is
Page 27
March 9,2010
delay the inevitable danger.
What was happening in the last four years, we had severe
droughts we're coming out of. This year we've got some rain coming
in, but in March and April, the typical dry months, you're going to see
the same fire ignition risk. It's going to get that bad again. It always
does. You still have to prepare for it. We've had a couple of fires that
kind of got out of hand real fast. It still has that potential to get worse.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And is that due to the coldness that
has burned these plants and dried them out?
MR. RAMSEY: The freezes, when they kill the plants and they
turn them dead and they become brittle, they become a higher fire risk
faster. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Thank you very much.
MR. RAMSEY: I'm not going to sing the song.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Why not?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you.
MR. RAMSEY: I can't sing.
MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, if we could get a motion on the
proclamations.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Motion to approve.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Motion to approve the
proclamation, Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Second by Commissioner Halas.
All in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Passes unanimously.
MR. OCHS: Thank you.:
Page 28
March 9, 2010
Item #5A
RECOGNIZING MARK MARTIN, SENIOR CREW LEADER,
ROAD MAINTENANCE DEPARTMENT AS THE EMPLOYEE
OF THE MONTH FOR FEBRUARY 2010 - PRESENTED
MR. OCHS: That takes us to 5A on your agenda, which is a
recommendation to recognize Mark Martin, senior crew leader, Road
Maintenance Department, as the Employee of the Month for February,
2010.
If Mark could please come forward.
(Applause.)
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, I'll read a few words about Mark
on his way up.
Mark's been an employee with the county for over four years
working, of course, in our Road Maintenance Development.
As a Florida certified spray technician, Mark is responsible for
controlling aquatic vegetation in the county's 400 miles of stormwater
drainage, canals, and ditches. Every day he sees the damage that
illegal dumping does in our waterways.
Congratulations.
Mark took the initiative and looked for a way to help clean up the
debris left in the water. When weather conditions kept him away from
his regular spraying duties, he worked on and installed a half-ton
hydraulic hoist to the Aquatics Department airboat. Mark did all the
work in-house and was able to save the money on its construction.
The use of this hoist enabled him to remove submerged items
efficiently and safely, and it will also save the county thousands of
dollars in recovery fees to salvage contractors.
Mark's a team player who regularly goes above and beyond his
work responsibilities, has a great attitude, and the county is, indeed,
Page 29
March 9, 20]0
fortunate to have such a dedicated employee. And, Mark, you're very
deserving of this award.
Commissioners, I present to you Mark Martin, Employee of the
Month for February, 2010.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you, Mark.
(Applause.)
MR. OCHS: Thank you, Mark.
Item #13A
PRESENTATION OF THE COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL
FINANCIAL REPORT FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED
SEPTEMBER 30,2009 - MOTION TO ACCEPT REPORT-
APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, that would take us to your 9:45
a.m. time certain, which is Item 13A. This is a presentation of the
Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the fiscal year ended
September 30,2009.
Ms. Crystal Kinzel, Director of Finance and Accounting for the
Clerk of the Courts, will begin the presentation.
MS. KINZEL: Good morning, Commissioners, and thank you.
For the record, Crystal Kinzel, Finance Director.
We're here this morning with another good-news item, and that's
the presentation of the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report,
otherwise referred to as the CAFR.
We provided you copies earlier, and we will have a presentation
from our external auditors, Ernst and Young.
But first, before we get into that, I would like to recognize a few
people. The finance staff, now that we're in this building, we did
bring them. And these are the individuals that work all year to prepare
Page 30
March 9,2010
this document and to keep the accounts straight for Collier County.
So, stand up.
(Applause.)
MS. KINZEL: And we'd also like to thank the county manager,
the county manager's staff, and all of the staff in the departments. We
work well all year to get this document pulled together for you and for
Collier County.
We would also like to thank each of the constitutional officers.
They prepare their financial statements individually, and we combine
those into this document. So we get the cooperation countywide from
everyone to make sure that we have a good CAFR year.
We've received the Government Finance Officers' Association
Award for 23 years. We'll submit this product and this book for the
24th year, and hopefully we'll be successful in that and bring that back
to you.
But with that, I'd like to introduce Mr. John Disanto. He's the
executive director with our external auditors, Ernst and Young, and
he'll make a short presentation.
MR. DISANTO: Thank you. Good morning, Commissioners.
Again, for the record, my name is John Disanto. I am an Executive
Director with Ernst and Young, and I was the partner in charge of
your audit this year.
We have put together a brief presentation for you. It's a lot of
pages. I'm not going to cover all of the information on all of the
pages. I'm only going to highlight and point out the things that I think
are of the most importance to you.
The document I'm going to be talking off of, you've also been
presented with a hard copy this morning. It's titled, Collier County,
Florida, 2009 Financial Statement Audit Results.
If you first turn to Page 4 in the document, this is a summary of
the reports that we issued as a result of our audit. We did issue clean
or unqualified audit opinions on the basic financial statements of the
Page 3 ]
March 9, 20]0
county of each of the constitutional officers and of the separate water
and sewer district. We also issued separate attestation reports or
agreed-upon procedure reports over numerous activities of the county
as well.
With respect to internal control communications, we did issue a
report on internal control over financial reporting and compliance with
laws and regulations in accordance with government auditing
standards. In that report we pointed out that there were no significant
deficiencies or material weakness in internal controls, and there were
no instances of noncompliance with statutes that were noted.
We also issue certain other matters and report on other matters as
required by the Florida Auditor General. And again, in that report
there were no instances of noncompliance that were reported.
Lastly, we do issue a management letter on opportunities for
strengthening internal controls over financial reporting, and I'm going
to talk about that briefly a little bit later on.
We also put in this year's presentation some summarized
financial information as well as a comparison of audit results to prior
years. This is the third year that Ernst and Young has performed your
audit, and we really just wanted to give a snapshot and a comparison
of what the audit results were and how those results compared to the
prior two years.
As far as audit adjustments, both recorded and unrecorded, there
were a total of eight in 2009. There were a little bit less in 2008. But
as you can see, in 2007 it was over 30 audit differences.
As far as findings that were considered to be significant
deficiencies or material weaknesses in internal controls over financial
reporting, there were zero in 2009; and I think we started with three of
those in 2007, it was reduced to one in 2008, and now it's zero in
2009.
As far as single audit findings, those are the findings resulting
from our audits of compliance with the various federal and state grant
Page 32
March 9, 2010
programs that are received by Collier County. We had a total of six
findings. Two of those findings were deemed to be significant
deficiencies, and one -- and three of them -- sorry -- three of them
material weaknesses in internal controls. That was fairly consistent
with 2008 but still significantly improved back from 2007.
And as far as the management letter comments go, we had four
management letter comments. None of them were really significant.
Again, they're really just for -- opportunities for strengthening controls
in certain areas.
There were zero in 2008, and there were six back in 2007. So
again, that just kind of gives you a snapshot of what the audit results
were and how it compared to the prior two audits.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Could I ask a question, just a quick
one?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Henning had light on
first, but --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll wait after the presentation.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, mine's just quick. On this -- on
single audit findings.
MR. DISANTO: Yes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: It says you had six findings, two
were significant, three were material. What about the other one?
MR. DISANTO: The other one was -- it was insignificant but it
was something that we're required to report as a result of the audit.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
Thank you, Commissioner.
MR. DISANTO: Okay. We also put in here, as I mentioned,
some real brief high level comparison of information that we thought
might be of interest to the Board of County Commissioners.
This one here is a comparison of the general fund and how well
the general fund unreserved balance and total balance covers the total
expenditures for the year. And again, you see the trend there. It's not
Page 33
March 9, 2010
unexpected. We understand in this difficult budget environment that's
affecting all governments in Florida, that many governments are
starting to use some of the reserves that have built up over the years.
The point being, 2007, that fund balance covered -- the
unreserved fund balance covered about 120 days of expenditures. It
was reduced to about 90 in 2008; in 2009 it was reduced to about 60.
You know, the information is there. Again, it's for your information
as you're making policy decisions going forward.
As a rule of thumb, the Government Finance Officers'
Association recommends, you want to be in about that 45- to 60-day
range. Collier County's currently, at the end of2009, at 60 days. So,
again, just consider that as you make your decisions going forward.
We also want to then show how that compares to some of your
peers. There are only two peer counties here that we included,
Manatee and Sarasota County, and that's because they're the only
other counties who have issued and published their CAFRs for 2009 to
date. And we thought going back to 2008 would provide stale
information. But you could see that their general -- general fund
balance covers a lot more of their annual expenditures. Again, it's
really for your informational purposes only. We thought you might
find that of interest.
One of the other things we wanted to compare was just some
information on debt. And really what we showed, the last line there,
the outstanding debt per capita. And again, you see for Collier County
it's really been fairly consistent from 2007 to 2009.
You know, the thing that is of interest is when you look at the
next page how that compares to some of those peer counties, Manatee
and Sarasota.
I will point out here that the Collier County number should really
be the amount that was on the prior page of2000 (sic), $286, not the
982; 982 is Manatee County. So when you look at that as the whole,
you see on a per-capita basis, Collier County's outstanding debt per
Page 34
March 9, 2010
capita's a little bit higher than those two other counties. And again, I
really put -- we really put this together for you just for your
information.
And the last thing that we wanted to show you was some net
asset comparables. And on a per-capita basis, the net assets of both --
of all three, Collier as it relates to Manatee and Sarasota. And you
will see that on a per-capita basis. Your net assets are higher on a
per-capita basis than those other two counties. Again, we thought this
information might be of interest.
Next I'll ask, if you'll turn to Page 12 if you're following along.
It's titled, Required Communications. These are the matters, the
results of the audit that I'm required to communicate to oversight
bodies such as the Board of County Commissioners that impact the
results of the audit.
I'm not going to cover each and every one of these. You
certainly can read them yourself. There are a couple that I just want to
highlight for you.
As far as the auditor's responsibilities under generally accepted
auditing standards, I do like to point out a couple of things here. First,
as you should be aware, the financial statements are the responsibility
of management, and Ernst and Young's responsibility is to issue an
opinion on those financial statements.
Let -- the other thing I wanted to point out is that with respect to
internal controls, our responsibility is to evaluate, study, and test those
internal controls to the extent necessary to plan and perform our audit,
not to issue a separate opinion on those internal controls.
And as I pointed out at the very beginning, we did issue clean or
unqualified audit opinions on all of the county's financial statements.
As far as significant difficulties encountered in dealing with
management when performing the audit, there were none. We do
continue to receive excellent cooperation from both the clerk's finance
staff and the county manager's staff, and that enables us to actually be
Page 35
March 9,2010
here much earlier. I think a month earlier than we were in 2008, and
two months earlier than we were here in 2007. So again, we continue
to receive that excellent cooperation.
Unrecorded audit differences, there really were just two of them.
I think they're back on Page 34. Those differences are unrecorded
because management determined them to be insignificant or
immaterial to the financial statements, and we concurred with
management's position on that. I don't plan on going over them unless
somebody would like me to. Then I'd be happy to do that.
There were no disagreements with management in performing
our audit.
Significant audit adjustments that were recorded. There were six
recorded audit adjustments, none of which were very material at all or
worth even discussing with you, but they were just some differences
we noticed, a few small errors that were corrected and recorded in the
financial statements by management.
As far as consultations with other accountants, we're not aware of
consultations that management may have had with other accountants.
And that's a situation where if there's a significant transaction that
takes place, management wants to account for it one way, we as the
auditors believe it should be accounted for differently, so then
management goes out and does what's called opinion shopping. They
start calling up other accounting firms to see if they find one that will
give them the answer that they'd like to hear. Again, we were not
aware of any of those conversations that may have taken place. If
there was, I would need to communicate that to you.
As far as independence, Ernst and Young is independent of the
county in both appearance and fact to enable us to perform your audit.
And I will also point out here that Ernst and Young's independence
policies with respect to its clients are more strict than those that are
required by industry standards.
Adoption of our changes in accounting principles. There was just
Page 36
March 9, 2010
one accounting standard that was adopted during the year. It was
GASB statement number 49 on pollution remediation obligations. It
had absolutely zero impact on the county's financial statements, but it
was evaluated by management.
Fraud and illegal acts. The result of our procedures did not
identify any fraud or illegal acts that may have occurred.
As I pointed out earlier, significant deficiencies and material
weaknesses in intentional controls, over financial reporting, zero, and
it was one last year. In the single audit area, the audits of the federal
and state grants, we had, again, as I pointed out earlier, a total of six
findings, two that were deemed to be significant deficiencies and three
that were deemed to be material weaknesses.
The next several pages are just findings and observations. This is
really for your information. We identify, as part of the audit, key risk
areas, and we identified what some of those risk areas were and a
summary of the procedures we performed and our audit findings.
Again, there's really nothing in here that I think's worth bringing to
your attention, but ifthere is anything you'd like me to highlight or go
over or discuss further, I'd be happy to do so.
Same thing on Page 21 on critical policies, estimates, and areas
of emphasis. Again, you know, this lists out the areas where
management made key estimates and judgments. That resulted in the
recording of certain account balances and what the -- what procedures
we performed and, again, what our findings were there. And again,
nothing -- nothing in that that I believe requires me to bring to your
attention. Went pretty smoothly.
Page 23 is just information relative to fraud risk and the risk of
management override of controls. This just lists out some of the
procedures that we are required to perform and that we did perform.
And you'll recall earlier that I did point out that we did not identify
any areas of fraud or irregularities that I need to bring to your
attention.
Page 37
March 9, 2010
In this looking ahead section, this section on the next several
pages really just deals with accounting standards that have been issued
but are not yet effective but will be effective in the future that could
impact the county. Really in going through these, there's just one on
Page 26, GASB statement number 54 on fund balance reporting, and
that's really going to change in your governmental funds, including the
general fund, the terminology that's used for the various categories of
fund balance. The goal there is really to standardize and make it more
uniform among all governments.
So that's a standard that will have a significant presentation
impact, if you will, on your financial statements. It is required to be
adopted in fiscal 2011.
And I believe most of -- our recommendations to most county
and municipality governments in the State of Florida are, start taking a
look at 2009 and recasting your fund balances in 2009 into the new
definitions, the new categories of fund balance, and begin early with
the discussions between management and the boards and oversight
bodies so that they understand what was previously in reserved fund
balance, where that now shows up in this new hierarchy of fund
balance. So I know management is working on that, and they will be
discussing that with you at some point in the near future.
Appendix A, which is Page 32, this is the timing of required
communications. Again, for your information only. I am required to
communicate to you those matters that I went over earlier with you at
least annually; however, certain of these communications I'm required
to communicate to you when or if the event occurs. An example of
that is, if I become aware of material fraud that takes place, I can't just
wait till the end of the audit and tell you, oh, yeah, by the way, there
was one significant fraud that I need to make you aware of. That's
something I have to communicate when I become aware of the fact
that the event occurred. So again, this is for your information so you
know when we're required to communicate those matters to you.
Page 38
March 9, 20]0
Appendix B is our summary of audit differences. These are the
two unrecorded audit differences. Again, you'll see the road impact
fund, about $61,000. And you'll see on the government activities on
the government-wide financial statements, $458,000. And that
458,000, it related to assets that were capitalized in the past that did
not meet management's criteria for capitalizing assets. And that entry
was actually reversed during the year or those assets were written off
or expensed during the current year.
But because they are related to the prior year, our audit
difference is saying, the adjustment really should have been to
beginning net assets because it affected prior periods rather than run
through current-year expense. So again, management did record the
entry. Just because it related to prior periods, it should have affected
the beginning net asset balance, not current-year expenditures.
But again, these were determined to be immaterial by
management. And as I pointed out earlier, we did concur with
management on that position.
Appendix C and I believe also Appendix D, these are just
information that we are required to provide to you under government
auditing standards as a result of our audit. And, again, they're really
there for your information purposes. We have previously provided
this information to you as well.
And that really concludes my presentation, and I'll just ask if
anybody has any questions on the results of the audit, the financial
statements, or any other matters.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, first a comment. I'm a
little concerned about the budgeted versus actuals of each department.
My question is, I'm hearing two different things about tourist
development dollars. Are they the Department of Revenue or are they
the county's monies?
MR. DISANTO: Can you explain that a little bit further? I'm
Page 39
March 9, 2010
not --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Tourist development dollars is a
tax that we tax the visitors of our county.
MR. DISANTO: Right. Yeah, those are county funds; however,
that are some restrictions on the way that they have to be used.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Statutorily?
MS. KINZEL: Correct.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Statutorily we are restricted, just
like we're statutorily restricted on general funds on how we spend
them. But they are county funds?
MR. DISANTO: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: In your presentation you seem to
put up a flag in regards to maybe our reserves are getting close to
being low? Is that --
MR. DISANTO: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: -- how I interpreted this, that
maybe we ought to address some of our reserves?
MR. DISANTO: Again, the -- yeah, the information's really
there for you to consider. I did point out that the Government Finance
Officers' Association does recommend somewhere between 45 and 60
days of unreserved general fund balance.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Right.
MR. DISANTO: You kept there. You're about at that level now.
I could argue, as a Florida coastal county you probably should be
higher perhaps than the 60. That's why we put in some of the peer
comparison so you could see where some of your peers are. I would
suggest that as the CAFRs become available for some of the other
counties that you would consider to be your peers, that management
expand that to let you see how you -- how you measure up against
counties in addition to both Sarasota and Manatee Counties.
Page 40
March 9, 2010
But I do think you're getting to that level where -- and if you've
seen over the three years, basically 30 days of expenditures have been,
you know, used up or used to balance your budget each year. You
know, if you do that again in 2010, I mean, you'll be down to 30 days.
And if you do that in 2011, there'll be no more unreserved fund
balance left.
So I would say the trend is certainly going in a -- it's going in an
adverse direction, and it's certainly something that I think you're
probably cognizant of but you really need to pay attention to.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Especially if we have some kind of
a wind event.
MR. DISANTO: Absolutely. Between the wind and the threat
of hurricanes and everything else --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That's like a hurricane --
MR. DISANTO: -- that goes on in Florida here, absolutely. And
that's why I would argue that Florida coastal counties anyway
probably want to be above that 60 days.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Thank you.
MR. DISANTO: You're welcome.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Do you have a comparison against our
peers with respect to the general government debt ratio?
MR. DISANTO: We only did it on the basis of per capita. I do
know that in the Finance Department and the County Manager's
Office, they are putting -- they do put statistics together on that. They
probably can better ask that question. But I do think that that's
information that certainly the board should be looking and monitoring
to look at that. I mean, I do think, you know, certainly relative to
Manatee and Sarasota on a per-capita basis, a little bit higher.
Whether that's bad or not, again, that's really something for the board
to determine and react if determined necessary.
I also audit Pinellas County and Hillsborough County, and
Hillsborough County is a lot higher. Pinellas County has very little
Page 4]
March 9, 2010
debt, even less than Manatee or Sarasota County.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, thank you.
Any other questions?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All right. Thank you very much.
MR. DISANTO: Again, I appreciate your time. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Do we need a motion to accept this
CAFR?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Motion by Commissioner Halas
to accept the CAFR report, and second by Commissioner Fiala.
Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All in favor, please signify by saying
aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It passes unanimously.
MR. OCHS: Thank you, Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you.
MR. OCHS: Commissioner, we have a 10:15 time certain. I
don't know if you want to take a quick break before that or if you want
to keep moving and --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Let's keep moving and try to get maybe
some of the committee appointments.
MR. OCHS : Yes, sir.
Item #9A
Page 42
March 9, 2010
RESOLUTION 2010-54: APPOINTING DAVID BISHOF AS AN
ALTERNATE FOR A TERM EXPIRING JULY 28, 2011 TO THE
ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL - ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: That takes you to 9A, Board of County
Commissioners' appointments. 9A is appointment of member to the
Environmental Advisory Council.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Move to approve David Bishof.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Henning, a motion
to approve the committee recommendations, I believe, and second by
Commissioner Fiala.
Any discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All in favor, please signify by saying
aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It passes unanimously. Thank you.
Item #9B
RESOLUTION 2010-55: APPOINTING ROBERT P. MEISTER III,
REPRESENTING THE CITY OF NAPLES (SPECIALTY
CONTRACTOR CATEGORY) TO FULFILL THE REMAINDER
OF A VACANT TERM EXPIRING FEBRUARY 28,2012 TO THE
Page 43
March 9, 20]0
CONTRACTORS' LICENSING BOARD - ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: 9B is appointment of member to the Contractors
Licensing Board.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Move to approve David -- or
Robert Meister.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion to approve Robert Meister by
Commissioner Henning, second by Commissioner Fiala.
Any discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All in favor, please signify by saying
aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It passes unanimously.
Item #9C
RESOLUTION 2010-56: APPOINTING JOHN ARCERI
(REPRESENTING MARCO ISLAND) TO FULFILL THE
REMAINDER OF A VACANT TERM EXPIRING MAY 22,2012
TO THE COLLIER COUNTY COASTAL ADVISORY
COMMITTEE - ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: 5C (sic) is appointment of member to the Collier
County Coastal Advisory Committee representing the City of Marco
Page 44
March 9, 20]0
Island.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Motion to approve John Arceri.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion by Commissioner Halas to
approve committee recommendations, or Marco Island
recommendation, Mr. John Arceri, seconded by Commissioner Fiala.
All in favor, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It passes unanimously.
Item #9D
APPOINTMENT OF MEMBER TO THE COUNTY
GOVERNMENT PRODUCTIVITY COMMITTEE - MOTION TO
RE-ADVERTISE - APPROVED
MR. OCHS: 9D is appointment of member to the County
Government Productivity Committee.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Ladies and gentlemen, I've been
informed that Larry Magel has withdrawn his application. He was the
committee recommendation. That leaves only one qualified applicant
for this position. I would suggest we readvertise.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Readvertise.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Motion to readvertise by
Commissioner Halas.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
Page 45
March 9, 2010
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Seconded by Commissioner Fiala.
Any further discussion?
All in favor, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It passes unanimously.
Okay. You want to go to something else?
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir.
Item #10E
THE FINDINGS OF THE SAFETY EVALUATION OF
PROPOSED GOLF CART CROSSING AT THE INTERSECTION
OF AIRPORT-PULLING ROAD AT ESTUARY DRIVE /
HALSTATT DRIVE AND NOT AUTHORIZE GOLF CARTS
CROSSING AIRPORT ROAD - MOTION TO APPROVE STAFF'S
RECOMMENDATION TO NOT ALLOW CROSSING AT THAT
LOCATION - APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Commissioner, I'd like to go to Item 10E, if
possible, that -- with Mr. Feder on the recommendation to accept the
findings of the safety evaluation of proposed golf cart crossing at the
intersection of Airport-Pulling at Estuary Drive, Halstatt Drive, and
not authorize golf cart crossing at Airport Road.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Move to approve.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Make -- the motion to approve the
committee suggestion -- I mean the staffs suggestion?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. And I second that.
Page 46
March 9, 2010
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. A motion to approve staffs
recommendation that golf cart crossing at that location not be allowed.
Motion's made by Commissioner Henning, seconded by
Commissioner Fiala.
Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We have no public speakers?
MS. FILSON: No, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. All in favor of the motion, please
signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It passes unanimously.
MR. FEDER: Thank you.
MR. OCHS: Thanks, Norm.
Item #lOF
ADOPTING A POSITION ON PROPOSED SENATE BILL 1454
WHICH PROVIDES THAT INTEREST ON COUNTY FUNDS
INVESTED BY THE CLERK OF COURT IS INCOME OF THE
OFFICE OF THE CLERK - MOTION APPROVING THE
BOARD'S POSITION THAT INCOME ON FUNDS INVESTED
BY THE CLERK OF COURTS ARE DEEMED INCOME OF THE
COUNTY - APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Commissioner, we can go to Item 10F, ifit pleases
Page 47
March 9, 2010
the commission, and that is a recommendation to adopt a position on
proposed Senate Bill 1454, which provides that interest on county
funds invested by the Clerk of Courts is income of the Office of the
Clerk.
I could take this one. Sir, again, the staff is looking for some
direction from the board on this particular bill that was filed after the
commission had considered its legislative priorities for the 2010
Florida legislative session. And this bill was filed subsequent to your
opportunity to discuss that, so we're looking to get a position from the
board in the event that the commissioners are asked to address this
when they go up on the F AC legislative day later in the month.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Any discussion on this,
Commissioners? Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I agree that the interest
should follow principal, and I'm happy this year that somebody's
coming to the board instead of making that decision by a consensus.
I'm very much in favor of it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Good. Thank you very much. Any
further discussion? Is there a motion to approve the staffs adopting a
position on Senate Bill 1454 that encourages that the legislation leave
the interest income earned from investment of our reserves as county
funds?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Move to approve.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Henning makes a
motion to approve, Commissioner Coletta seconds the motion.
Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All in favor, please signify by saying
aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
Page 48
March 9, 20]0
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It passes unanimously.
MR. OCHS: Thank you, Commissioners. That--
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We can probably get the entire agenda
going -- finished up if we just keep going.
Item # lOC
REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (RFP) NO. 09-5262 FOR
ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR COLLIER COUNTY
(ESTIMATED ANNUAL EXPENDITURES $11,365,000)-
MOTION TO APPROVE W/STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS
AND MOVE PROCESS FORWARD; COUNTY ATTORNEY'S
OFFICE TO RENDER OPINION, GUIDANCE AND REPORT
BACK REGARDING LEGALITIES - APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Yeah. We're just about done here.
Next item then would be your regular agenda item, lOA, and this
was an item that was continued from the February 23,2010, BCC
meeting, and it was a recommendation to award request for proposals
number 09-5262 for engineering services for Collier County. Annual
estimated expenditures, $11,365,000.
MS. FILSON: And I have speakers on this item.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. How many speakers do we have?
MS. FILSON: Two.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Let's hear the speakers first.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Steve Carnell's not here.
MS. FILSON: The first speaker is Jeff Davidson.
Page 49
March 9,2010
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Oh.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Steve Carnell's not here. He's
going to present that.
MS. FILSON: And he'll be followed by Tim Hancock.
MR. DAVIDSON: Good morning, Commissioners. We're a
small, relatively small, local engineering firm, 16 people in our
company. Seven engineers, 12 degreed people. We're important to
the economy here in Collier County.
And I was disappointed we weren't selected or not on the list.
And we worked with Mr. Carnell. We think there were some problems
with the process, and we don't -- I don't think we have enough time
here to go into all the details of that, but we'll continue working with
him to try to get to a point in the future where it will be more closely
considered by staff, because staff is not really that familiar with our
process because we haven't done work for Collier County before, even
though we've done a lot of work for the county. And we're very
familiar with the county process, because most of our work's done in
Collier County.
And I'm here because we were close to being selected, but we
weren't quite. And I have a lot of people that rely on my leadership
abilities in our company, and I appreciate it. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Are you -- do you have an office in
Collier County? Are you entitled to the local --
MR. DAVIDSON: Our only office is in Collier County.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, all right. And this is not a bid
protest that you're --
MR. DAVIDSON: Well, we did protest, and we had reasons for
that protest. But I really don't think that we would be understood at
this point. If I had time to spend with you individually, I'm sure you
would understand our problem and why we weren't selected, but I
don't think I could make it here -- clear here in the short amount of
time we have.
Page 50
March 9, 2010
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Would it be appropriate to
suggest that the county manager ask our staff to work with this
gentleman to make sure there's a clear understanding of --
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir, be very happy to.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- what they do and how they do it and
how they can be of benefit?
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir. We will do that.
MR. DAVIDSON: Thank you, sir.
MR. OCHS: Thank you.
MS. FILSON: Your next speaker is Tim Hancock.
MR. HANCOCK: Commissioners, thank you. Good morning. I
was really just here for technical backup for Jeff. I work for him.
You've already addressed the issue and he's outlined it, and we
do appreciate -- I do want to say that we have brought our protest to
Mr. Carnell's office. He has taken the time to meet with us. There are
parts of the process that he has admitted maybe could have been
clearer, and our lack of familiarity also contributed to some of that.
And we'll continue to work with him to try and make sure that we
have ample opportunity in the future. We're born and raised here.
We've got 17 folks, 16 of which go home every night right here in
Collier County. And we -- this is a three- to five-year contract, so it's
kind of a long window to get shut out of any future opportunities.
But we have nothing but praise for your purchasing staff in their
willingness to work with us, and we'll continue to work with them and
hopefully get any issues resolved for the future. But thank you very
much.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Thank you, Tim.
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I go back to what I've always
said. Here's a company that's here locally, and -- were they beaten out
by companies that were located on the other coast? Is that fair?
They're trying to support their families right here in Collier
Page 51
.<...".-_._ W'__'_"<"'_"_"~'.______,..__"_..,___"."_.__",__.._'~~"~"__'__'_"'_'''_'_'__''''m''_'
March 9, 2010
County instead of coming over from another coast, and I'm very, very
concerned about that. I -- I just hope that local people are first on the
list.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: County Manager, can you address any of
this for us?
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir, and we also have Ms. Price and Mr.
Johnson here from your purchasing department.
But, again, this is a selection under your Competitive Consultant
Negotiation Act. There is an opportunity to provide some credit for
location. But by your own policy -- and we had this discussion at the
last meeting -- a local vendor preference is not part of the policy and
not allowed in the state statute, as I understand. You can give some
points for location, but you can't give a preference in the event of a tie,
for example.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, let me follow up then. Like,
for instance, PBS&J, they have to come over from the other coast.
How much do they charge us then, and is that figured into this? How
much do they charge for transportation over here, for room and board
while they're here, and is that figured in compared to the companies
who live here and don't have any transportation or rooming charges?
MR. OCHS: And Commissioner, again, as required by the state
law under this particular selection process, this is all qualification
based. We're not allowed to ask for pricing when we make these
original selections.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And yet it's obvious that there's
going to be that cost involved, even though you're not allowed to ask it
and yet we don't take a local company but we take somebody that's
from the other coast. That -- I have a strong problem with that.
MR. OCHS: Ma'am, we have many, many companies in your
attachment on all these contracts that are local firms, so -- most of the
firms here, I believe, are local firms.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And remember, I think I'm correct when
Page 52
March 9, 2010
I say this, that the clerk is now holding up payments to some firms
because we might have granted local preference to someone and we
should not have. So that's -- that is an item of dispute, and I think that
it's going to have to be resolved between our attorney and the clerk
and --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, I hope then it's taken into
consideration when we're assigning these jobs how much it's going to
cost us to bring a company over from someplace else because, you
know, we're also talking about a deficit here and what our
expenditures are and about the lack of, you know, the lack of reserves.
And I hope we're not just giving this stuff away. And I'm sure the
clerk feels the same way; they want to make sure that we're spending
our money wisely.
MR. OCHS: Yes, ma'am. That's the reason why we initiated the
best-value offer process and took it to the board back in January of '09
to be able to give you not only prequalified firms, but also give you
some indication of the pricing that we would have to be assessed by
those firms.
So that's the hangup right now with Mr. Brock and the state law
to make sure that that's legally defensible under the state statute.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah. And just one other brief remark.
We have in the past attempted, through our legislative process, to
change these procedures so that we can take into consideration cost. It
is a very strange state law that requires us to make decisions of this
type without placing a significant emphasis on cost. But nevertheless.
That's something that is to be dealt with.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Let me ask one more question then,
if! may, and that is, this is a three- to five-year contract. Is there any
way that we could readdress it in another year when possibly we've
found a solution to some of these questions and maybe consider
adding other companies that we cannot now?
MS. PRICE: Yes. We certainly can, as well as, if the law does
Page 53
,-,"!,"--,..
March 9, 20]0
change, we might be able to utilize that with the existing set of
contracts where we might at some point be able to ask for price as one
of our considerations.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Good, okay.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. I just want to make sure that
Board of County Commissioners understands why PBS&J was hired
in the first place. We had some very strange problems that were
taking place in Wiggins Pass, and the firm that normally was doing
this, obviously we had some serious problems that were taking place
by losing a lot of land that didn't belong to us, it belonged to the State
of Florida.
And so we decided that it was time to bring forth a company that
maybe had some greater, better ideas in regards to addressing some of
these particular issues. And obviously, I think that their study group
and the way that they're -- they've attacked this concern, I think, is
going to be beneficial to all of us, and hopefully it will end up
stopping the erosion of the shoreline that's taking place on the north
side of the Wiggins Pass area.
So that's one of the reasons that they were included over here to
start with because of the study that was taking place, and we were
losing many, many yards of sand out into the Gulf.
So I just want to make sure that people understand why we
brought a firm from the other side over here.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, thank you.
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Just to stay on the topic, there's
a difference between preference and location. CCNA allows location,
not preference.
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's what we failed to do.
And in fact, I went through the minutes of the June meeting of last
Page 54
-~-..--_..,.- _...._-'_._---_..._._-_.._..~._-~--_._._---"-~. -,-,_.
March 9,2010
year, and I made the motion to approve option three, which gave that
location. Commissioner Coletta, Commissioner Fiala, was very much
in support of location in the professional contracts.
So this is a lot different than what the board, the majority of the
board, gave direction.
MS. PRICE: This particular contract is for fixed term over the
course of the year without identifying specific projects.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And this --
MS. PRICE: The plan, when we put this forward, was to use
location in each individual award; however, because the best-value
offer process that we were going to use it for has come into question,
we're going to have a problem with that.
We do use location frequently in specific awards where location
would make a difference, something that would not be impacted by
what Commissioner Halas was referring to.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The board in our discussion in
June specifically said to sunset these professional contracts, and it was
agreed on. It was all because of location.
The presentation was about preference of material and services,
but we got into the discussion of location and these professional
engineering contracts. The record is clear. The problem is, it wasn't
followed.
The BVOA (sic) process -- BVO process has nothing to do with
this location that we talked about. That is something that was dreamt
up, never was adopted by the Florida legislators (sic), and we need to
correct that. That has nothing to do with this topic.
And I feel it is necessary in these economic times that we support
local companies just like everybody in the State of Florida's doing,
especially in Southwest Florida.
I cannot support this executive summary.
MR. CARNELL: If I could, sir, let me just address one point. I
won't belabor it. We may have to agree to disagree, Commissioner
Page 55
,..._....-.-._____".~..,.___,._"____ ,_,_,_ ._~. __. ._._..u_ .., ~,~..,,_. ~._~___......__~_~~. ,_.~....~...~.._~
March 9, 2010
Henning.
I've read the minutes several times and -- by the way, Steve
Carnell, your Purchasing Director.
There are multiple times in that discussion where I paraphrase
back to the board what the board -- desired board direction was, and
what the direction was, as I understood it was, we were not going to
change the policy to include local preference for CCNA transactions
and that, secondly, we were not going to use location if it was in any
way going to jeopardize, and prospectively or potentially, any contract
where there was federal grant funding where it could be perceived or
understood to be local preference or any instance where location
might be anticompetitive.
And what the logic was, that on the front end of the competitive
process, which is really what you're dealing with today -- that's the
award of the contracts through the initial open public-wide process,
that we would -- we would not necessarily include location. What we
said though, and what I said back to you a couple time in those
minutes was, you want me to include location wherever I can provided
I don't put the county at risk legally or I don't create an
anti competitive consideration.
Now, to amplify what Ms. Price just said, the intention was to
consider -- remember -- think of it as a two-step process. This is the
first step today, awarding the fixed-term contracts. The second step is,
as projects come up and tasks that fall in this -- basically it's a zero to
$200,000 range, what our intention is, that for projects above
$100,000, 100,000 to $200,000, we were going to use the best-value
offer process. And below 100,000, we were not intending to do that
because of the time and effort it takes to do the BVO process. We just
didn't think it warranted doing that on smaller tasks.
And that was the intention. That's the way the RFP read,
although the RFP also has a caveat to use other -- it allows us to use
alternative procedures. So you're not in any kind of legal bind in that
Page 56
March 9, 2010
respect.
But what I'm saying is, at that point, our intention was to consider
location when we did these best-value offer solicitations. And that is
our intention going forward, and I don't think we've done anything
here that has -- that is counter ultimately to the desires of the board, as
we discussed in June, to consider location wherever we can within
those boundaries that were set forth.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. I have a question for you. Is
there any need that these contracts, this particular award be awarded
for such a long period of time? Is there a possibility of reducing the
period of time --
MR. CARNELL: Absolutely.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- so that we can make adjustments to
this more promptly as we get additional information and as we
evaluate the effects?
MR. CARNELL: Yes, sir. There's two ways to do that.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
MR. CARNELL: One, the contracts have a potential five-year
window, but they're renewable on an annual basis. So we can always
not to (sic) elect to renew in advance of what would be next March.
All right, that's one way. And that gives us between now and March.
And we can come back to the board and have a discussion about what
would you like to do, and we would do that. We wouldn't do that in
March. We would do that a few months in advance of March. So
we'd have a discussion in the fall sometime. That's one way.
The other way is that, even more sooner (sic) than that,
expediently than that is, if there were a decision for the board -- from
the board to change direction in any way, shape, or form, we can
terminate the contracts. I think it's 30 days' notice.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. But is that fair to the companies
who have bid expecting that they will get a one-year contract?
MR. CARNELL: I would say it's not a good business move --
Page 57
'"1",..------...-- '. '--"--'-,'-'-- _.....>_.,,-~""..,._,_.,--- - .,,-.- -,,~_.-~_ '_^~"__"'~~'_~"""'~_'__"._,"....
March 9, 2010
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's right.
MR. CARNELL: -- if we could avoid it, and especially when
you look at -- we've spent probably over a thousand hours of staff time
evaluating all these as well, and you're kind of putting -- throwing
good effort at bad if you're not going to get a full year's worth of value
out of it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. There are a couple of things that
can happen. One is that the board can, based on an accumulation of
additional knowledge or legal interpretations, make a change that
we're required to make, okay. And we can do that at any point in
time, I presume. Or alternatively we can review this policy within the
next 12 months and make a decision as to whether or not we're going
to pursue it beyond that period of time.
MR. CARNELL: Are you talking about the policy or the
contracts, I'm sorry?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: The contracts themselves.
MR. CARNELL: Okay, yes.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes. So -- and that would be fair to the
people who have gone through the process of bidding on it. They will
have the opportunity to have a one-year contract, and if we don't
change the process in light of any legal considerations, they can get
extensions. I presume we can also bring other people in, is that true,
at the end of that period of time?
MR. CARNELL: You mean without re-competing it?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: The whole contract you would have to
recompete?
MR. CARNELL: I would need to discuss that with Mr.
Klatzkow.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
MR. CARNELL: But I -- it's possible, sir. I don't have a clear
answer for you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, then I guess my question -- I guess
Page 58
March 9, 20]0
the way that I would like to proceed is, I'd like to get some additional
information, an interpretation from the county attorney --
MR. CARNELL: I'm sorry. Let me clarify one thing. I think we
could. Let me give you a better answer. I think we could do what you
-- that we could bring other firms in. We'd probably have to do a
separate solicitation, but you could retain the existing contracts while
you did that.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All right. Well, I think we need to
understand the potential implications of the clerk's refusal to pay some
of these contracts. We need to understand what the chances are that
we might be in violation of the state guidelines, and we would have to
compete these without consideration for cost, which I think is
ridiculous, but that's entirely possible.
So can I suggest to the board that we have Mr. Carnell come back
with a report jointly with the county attorney and to give us a legal
assessment as to what changes we might be required to make in this
process, and then we'll make a final decision concerning this, if that
pleases this board.
And Commissioner Coletta, I believe, was the next speaker.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I think you're closer to it than
we were before. And it's such a fine balance we're trying to reach.
We want to remain legal. We want to be able to satisfy the local
needs. We want to be able to protect the interests of the taxpayer. It's
very difficult.
I'd like to take just a moment and ask Tim Hancock ifhe'd come
back up for just a minute.
I heard you talking about the fact that there has been ongoing
dialogue, and it seems like there is some directions that may be able to
be reached. And you heard what happened here today.
As a former commissioner, as a land planner, and as a
businessman, tell me what you take out of everything that you heard.
Am I putting you on the spot? Am I going to make you lose your job,
Page 59
March 9, 2010
Tim?
MR. HANCOCK: No, sir. If this economy can't kill us, I don't
think this board can.
In all candor, the process itself -- and please understand, private
sector and government obviously -- I've seen both sides of that coin,
and we do operate differently.
The process, as we've come to understand it -- and please
understand there is no criticism aimed at Mr. Carnell, your purchasing
staff. There was no malice in this process. But what we discovered
going through the process is, if you're a firm like ours that has
experienced growth over a period of time and you have now got the
ability to step into the arena and serve government because you now
have the staff and the capability to do that and it's, in essence, your
first real foray in that area, you have some challenges. People that
have done this time and time again, that have been awarded
government contracts, that know exactly what government expects,
you're competing in a different arena.
There were things that we just weren't aware of that weren't
obvious to us in print form in the RFP that we felt maybe gave us a
slight disadvantage that, had we known that -- but you know, we didn't
even know what questions to ask, to be honest with you.
And there wasn't one issue through this whole process that I can
point to and say, gee whiz, if that had been done differently, we'd be
on the list.
I do think as a local firm, and I mean through truly local -- you
know, when you look at the list of charities we support, they're here.
They're not in Orlando, they're not in Tampa. Our firm is -- and Mr.
Davidson is very gracious in what he has done with his company and
with this community. It -- to be honest, it just kind of hurts a little bit
to see -- to see other firms that -- this list is interesting. This list is not
to grant work to anybody. It's a list to tell a group of firms they have
the opportunity to be granted or compete for work with Collier
Page 60
March 9,20]0
County .
So I guess it could have been a little bit broader. There might
have been a way to include firms. I don't think Mr. Carnell expected
to get 80-some-odd responses to this. The committee had 64 to go
through. And I think the task was awfully cumbersome, and I think it
could have been divided into smaller groups in retrospect that might
have given firms like ours a greater opportunity. We're not going to
compete with PBS&J, Mr. Halas. You know, they do work at one
level, and we're down here making stuff work at the local level. And I
don't think that distinction was made.
So I do think there's some things in the process that maybe, if we
were able to come back a year from now and discuss with your
purchasing staff some of those things that we've seen that we
understand, and if they agree that they could be done better and maybe
open up another avenue, I think that's more than fair. We certainly
don't think anybody on this list doesn't deserve to be there. That's not
the point of our being here. But we do think we deserve to be there.
We just don't think the process was set up in such a way that it works
for a firm of our nature.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Then you'll work with us as we
carry this thing forward for review?
MR. HANCOCK: Yes, sir, we absolutely will. As much as your
purchasing staff will be willing to listen to us, we'll talk to them.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. Then if you want to
make a motion including that, I'd be happy to second it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I'd like to hear from Commissioner
Halas first, if you don't mind.
Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. Steve, how many hours do
you have in this whole process, would you say, you and your staff?
MR. CARNELL: Well, we have an estimate -- is it 900 hours,
Scott? We estimated 900 hours, and that's -- we had nine selection
Page 61
m_'"l"'~_n,",-__~-"_~"",'m<~'..'_"",'____'~_'~__'_.,,,_"_'_,". ......,.. _~"_"~_'___'_'~",~~___~_",~__.__....,__~
March 9, 2010
committees. We broke the task into nine disciplines and groups. We
had 35 staff members, and some of them who served on multiple
committees. So our calculation, when you include all their time and
the purchasing department's time, it is at 900 hours.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. Compared to what we had
last year, do we have more or less local firms on this list?
MR. CARNELL: We have more.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: So we did do due diligence.
MR. CARNELL: Yeah, yeah. We--
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And the other question I have for
you, what was your head count a year ago and what is your head count
now?
MR. CARNELL: In terms of numbers of firms?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: No, no. Head count that you that --
MR. CARNELL: Oh, oh, yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: A year ago what was your --
MR. CARNELL: A year ago it was probably about 18. I think
we're down to 14 now. We were at 21 two years ago.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. So I think that's something
that we've got to take into consideration is the amount of time that
staff has on this with the amount of assets that are there at the present
time.
So you're telling me that on this particular item on the agenda,
that we have more local firms than we've had in the past?
MR. CARNELL: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay, thank you. That answers my
question.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Thank you very much.
Commissioner Coletta, you asked me to make a motion. I will
make a two-part motion. I'll make a motion to approve this particular
item with guidance to staff that they will come back to us with an
assessment of the process that we have followed in view of the clerk's
Page 62
March 9, 2010
objections and concerns and provide us some advice as to how we
should proceed with respect to modifying the policy if necessary. And
that would be my motion.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'll second that.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. All right.
There's a motion by me to approve with guidance to staff to
provide with us an assessment of the legalities of the way we select
these and an interpretation by the county attorney concerning the
requirements of law associated with this award, seconded by
Commissioner Coletta.
And Commissioner Halas, you have questions?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah. Could you clarify exactly
what we're trying to get accomplished here?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, yeah, yeah. The -- the situation
that I believe we are in is that we already have payments being held up
for professional firms --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That's correct.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- by the clerk.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That already have contracts.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's right, that already have contracts,
and the payments are being held up because we might have used price
competition in making those decisions, and there are people who
allege that you cannot use price competition under these kinds of
contract awards. And while I'm suggesting we approve this award for
COMMISSIONER HALAS: This--
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- Item 10, that we approve this, as Mr.
Carnell has pointed out, the contracts can be terminated or extended
depending upon what we need to do legally and otherwise.
So I'm asking him to come back and tell us with the county
attorney, are we in violation of the state statute by trying to use price
as a method of awarding contracts or not. And if we are in violation,
Page 63
March 9, 2010
what must we do when awarding specific contracts for these firms to
corne into compliance.
MR. CARNELL: And if I could be clear about one thing, what
you're voting on today has nothing to do with price. There are no
prices in these contracts.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: But they will be --
MR. CARNELL: I'll distribute the work going forward.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- when you go forward and you corne
up with a project and you say, okay, you're on our approved list.
MR. CARNELL: Right.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Now we want -- we want to know what
it's going to cost us.
MR. CARNELL: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I think it's always been the case in
regards to making sure --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: It certainly should be.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: -- that we get the best bang for the
buck for the taxpayers --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Taxpayers.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: -- here.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I'm not sure it's always been the process
for the state statutes. The state statutes do it a little differently. We go
to the first person on the list and say, what's your price? They give us
a price, we think it's too high. We say, well, we're not going to accept
that. We go to the next one. What's your price?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, the state has got to address
that issue.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: But we have to get the state to address it.
But you go to the second one, and their price is higher, you don't get
the option of going back to the first one and selecting the lower price.
You see? The state statutes lock you into having to take the last bid
that you get. So the people can just keep jacking up the price as you
Page 64
March 9, 2010
go down the list. It's crazy. But nevertheless. We are not going to
solve that right now. But anyway.
Any further comments, Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, just a question. Oh.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I thought you were going to ask me.
If over this, the next year, if there are local firms that you feel
could be added to the list, is that part of this motion?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's what we want them to give us an
assessment about.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. I just wanted to make sure
that if you felt that there was an opening for a local firm that could be
added -- thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, the motion doesn't address
how we proceed forward. I mean, the work that -- under the BVO
process is already done. We have firms that have basically shut down
on our projects; is that a correct statement?
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir. We have three or four contractors who
have not been paid for work performed, and we've got stop work
orders on those contracts until we can get this payment issue resolved,
that's correct.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The issue --
MR. OCHS: But that's unrelated to this award.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I know, but it's included
into this motion and award coming back. I think the more prudent
thing to do is ask our staff to go to those contractors and get pricing
for the work that -- to complete the job instead of best-value offer.
You see what I mean?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: No.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, these people are not
getting paid because there's concerns that it doesn't meet the Florida
Page 65
'~""~-->--'~---~"'~--"---~'~"'.<'-'-'-'_.'--_.'------'_.~~""""'--
March 9, 2010
Statutes, okay? That is what it is. So how do you address getting
these projects back in line? That's the issue. And how you're going to
do that is ask those contractors to give their pricing for the work to
complete the job. You understand?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah, I do, but I don't see how that gets
the problem solved.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It doesn't get the problem that's
already created solved, but it solves the problem of getting the work
started back up.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I don't know that it does, Commissioner
Henning, because we're dealing with work they've already performed,
not what they're going to be doing in the future. We're trying to get
them paid for the work they've already performed, and we've got to
resolve that through coordination with the clerk and the resolution of
legal issues associated with that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And I agree with that.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: But how do you get the job
complete? How do you get it started back up? Because there's a stop
work order on it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah.
MR. CARNELL: If I could, you're both right, but let's clarify
this. The -- there are a number of purchase orders open under the
contracts that previously existed where we used this best-value offer
process to distribute the work, and we have invoices that are being
held. In most cases, the invoices are partial payments. There's still
work to be done. Maybe not in every case, but in many of those cases.
And Commissioner Henning's right that we've got to find a way
to get the balance of the work done, because we have -- we've issued
stop work orders out of fairness to the consultants until we could get
this issue resolved.
And I think the answer there, we're not going to be able to solve
Page 66
March 9,2010
that today. I need to have a conversation with the Clerk's Office and
figure out how we can deal with that and also, I think the county
attorney and the clerk are also talking in terms of pure legal aspects
there in terms of what we can do in good faith and determine that.
So the -- what I will tell you is that we're going to -- if you award
these contracts today, we've suspended our BVO process in terms of
any new best-value offers being solicited or awarded, and we're going
to essentially go back to the old method where we are rotating the
firms, and that continues to give people a fair shot at the business.
And we'll use that rotation method until we get this best-value offer
resolved for new work. And for the work you're talking about,
Commissioner Henning, where, for example, somebody has an
$80,000 work order open and they've done $40,000 worth of work that
they've billed, we've done a stop work so that other 40- is not being
performed. And we do want to work with the Clerk's Office. What can
we do to reopen that work, to unclog the pipeline for stuff that's
already been procured, if you will.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And that's what I have asked you to do
in my motion is to resolve that and then move forward in the way that
makes the most sense with respect to our past contract -- or existing
contracts as well as these contracts.
Commissioner Henning, anything else?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. All right. All in favor of the
motion, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. It passes 4-1 with Commissioner
Page 67
March 9, 2010
Henning dissenting.
And we're now -- County Manager, you chose the wrong item.
MR. OCHS: Yes, I did. I chose poorly, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You chose poorly, sir.
MR. OCHS : Yes, I did.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Now we've had people waiting for over
30 minutes for a time-certain item that should have been held at 10: 15.
MR. OCHS: And your court reporter needs a little break, I
believe.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Needs a break, I believe. Yes, she does.
MR. OCHS: Ten minutes, sir?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, all right, ten minutes.
MR. OCHS: Thank you.
(A brief recess was had.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: County Manager?
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir.
Item # lOA
THE REVISED CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN FOR THE BA YVIEW
BOAT PARK EXPANSION PROJECT - APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, this is your 10:15 time certain,
Item lOA, to be immediately followed by lOR And lOA is a
recommendation to approve the revised conceptual site plan for the
Bayview boat park expansion project.
Mr. McAlpin, your Coastal Zone Management Director, is
available to either present or answer questions, whatever the board
would prefer.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Does the board -- give us a brief
overvIew.
MR. McALPIN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Page 68
March 9, 2010
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And I emphasize the word brief.
MR. McALPIN: Will definitely be brief. For the record, Gary
McAlpin, Coastal Zone Management.
You directed us to develop a plan which would maximize on-site
parking. We did that, Mr. Chair. We came back. We had three
neighborhood information meetings. We developed a plan that had 59
boat trailer parking spots on site; 14 single car parking spots and nine
on -- spaces on Danforth Road. This plan took into account the
aesthetics for the neighborhood and also the environmental impact.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Gary, I'm sorry to interrupt you. Do you
have an overhead you can provide there so that everybody can see
what you're talking about?
MR. McALPIN: So Mr. Chair, what we did is we developed this
plan. This plan has -- with the grass filled pavers and the green
spaces. We have -- 50 percent of the land space will be green. We
would utilize -- we will utilize pavers in here in an environmental way
so that we can get maximum recharge to the aquifer, porous filled
pavers. We've got a -- we've got a sidewalk that -- a walkway all
around the park. We keep all of the big trees except for one. So what
we really have tried to do is work with the community to develop this
plan which maximizes the footprint but still makes it an
environmentally sound project for us.
We had three neighborhood information meetings. We believe
we have community support for this program. And I'll answer any
questions that you may have, Mr. Chair.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Gary, we spoke briefly
yesterday. The Collier Boulevard/951 boat ramp has 100 parking
spaces.
MR. McALPIN: Yes, Mr. Chair (sic), in that range. I don't have
the exact numbers, but that is approximately correct.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And the Goodland has 75?
Page 69
March 9, 2010
MR. McALPIN: Goodlette (sic) has 75.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And this has 59.
MR. McALPIN: This has 59 plus nine on the road, for a total of
68, Mr. Chair -- Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And how many -- how many
boats can you launch at one time at Collier Boulevard?
MR. McALPIN: We have two lanes on Collier Boulevard there
that would -- we typically allow for 36 boat launches per day per lane,
so that's a total of 72 launches at Collier Boulevard.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And Goodland, how --
MR. McALPIN: We have two there also. That's 72.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And what you're proposing at
Bayshore?
MR. McALPIN: Bayshore we have three lanes, so that would be
a total of 108.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. If Bayshore has a total of
68 and Collier has 100-plus -- I think that's what you said to me
yesterday -- you would think that we'd have at least four places -- four
people could launch at the same time.
MR. McALPIN: Say that against, please, Mr. --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, my point is, why -- why
expand how many boats that launch at Bayshore when we just
finished a boat launch with a bigger capacity for people to go at that
facility because of the parking? And it has -- the same number of
people can launch at the same time as you have at Bayshore now with
less parking.
It just seems like it's not fiscally responsible to expand something
that's going to take a whole bunch of permitting to do, and it's not
consistent with what we have provided in the past.
MR. McALPIN: The permitting is already in place for the -- for
the boat launch, the three ramps for the seawall, and also for the
docks. We have an existing permit there which we -- which would
Page 70
March 9,2010
allow us to have -- put 40 spots on site.
Board asked us to maximize the footprint. We originally went
from two boat ramps to three, because this is one of our most popular
parks. We get out a lot quicker at this facility. And as we go in and
we look for the future and we build for the future, there may be a
possibility that there is additional parking. Not necessarily within the
neighborhoods here, but at some point in time. So we're also looking
at that relative to the long-term aspect of this.
While we're in there doing the water work, it's relatively
inexpensive to put three ramps in as opposed to two.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And I'm just looking at the
common sense of Collier Boulevard, 100-plus parking spots,
availability to launch two at the same time. Even if you expanded this
to 100, it's not consistent with what we just have completed, that's all.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I wanted to know, you had
mentioned --
MR. McALPIN: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'm sorry. Leo, did you--
MR. OCHS: No. Go ahead, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: There are buildings on that property
right now, bathrooms, and I don't know what else is on there. Are
those -- will those remain?
MR. McALPIN: Yes, ma'am. We will keep the pavilions, the
bathrooms, all the picnic tables, all the amenities we will keep on site
there, so we're not taking any of the amenities away. The parking will
be reduced. The park site will be reduced. We will have a very small
park. Probably in the area for one -- one apparatus for the children to
play, and that -- and that was, you know, in our attempt to maximize
the footprint, and that was clearly communicated with the
neighborhood relative to -- you know, we would -- when we maximize
the footprint, the park would be minimized as a result of that,
Page 7]
March 9, 2010
Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I had just a comment before we go
to our speakers and that is, one of the things -- I've been going to the
park maybe every other day now just to see what kind of activity is
over there, and what amazes me no end is how much it's used by local
people to fish and to just have picnic luncheons or just picnics
themselves. They go there to watch the sunset. It's really a highly
utilized park for more than just boaters, which I was not aware of. I
thought it was only a boating park. And so I'm just putting that
comment on the record. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, thank you very much.
Gary, I want to commend you on the hard work you've put into
it.
Commissioner Fiala, you're to be commended in how you've
been working so long with the neighborhood to try to come up with
some sort of balance that will meet everybody's needs.
I do have some questions just to be able to bring myself around to
a comfort level. Commissioner Henning brought up some good points
regarding, you know, cost, money and all that. And that's true, we've
always got to be cognizant of the fact that we have less money now
than we've had in the past.
So my questions to you are, I know this is -- you're planning to
do this in several stages. When would the financial burden of this fall,
and is money already set aside?
MR. McALPIN: Money is set. We have the -- originally we had
$681,000 for this. We do have a $400,000 grant for this project as we
move forward. We do not have all the funds in place currently to build
out the entire facility, but we expect that those -- those funds would be
available as we -- as we move forward with regional park impact fees.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Really? I thought we were--
we had our impact fees for parks committed for some time into the
Page 72
_...,.----_.__...~-'._."--'^----~------"----_.._. .',._,--._-
March 9, 2010
future.
MR. OCHS: No, Commissioner, you don't. You're not -- you're
not loaning any general fund dollars to your park impact fee debt
service funds.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. So--
MR. OCHS: They're one of the few that -- they're one of the few
that --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: There would be funds to be able
to do it?
MR. OCHS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. And this -- the nice thing
about this amenity is that it not only offers more for the boating
public, but it also cleans up something that's been around for what
now, 25, 30 years.
MR. McALPIN: A considerable amount of time, Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And the place is very well used.
It's -- it looks it, too. It definitely needs some work to be done on it,
and I commend you on moving this thing forward; however, with that
said, there's some things that you, myself, the public, and everyone
needs to realize is that the end results, where we're heading now, is
going to be a deficiency in parking compared to what it is at present.
Now, of course, the present, they're parking along the side of the
road. We've got a total of a hundred and -- with the extra nine there --
excuse me. Let me get my -- something like 78 parking places. And I
mean, that's great. But the thing is is that the maximum amount that's
used on weekends is about 100-some different trailers coming in there,
vehicles with trailers, or do you see that -- this being staggered during
the day where this place could still meet it based upon present usage?
MR. McALPIN: Well, we have -- when we have done parking
counts, we have -- on weekends we have park counts that are around
100 boat trailers using the facility, and weekdays about 56. So there
are going to be -- there are going to be times when -- you know, this is
Page 73
March 9, 20]0
the maximum amount we could fit on site, and there -- there will be
parking that will still happen, not necessarily on Danford Street, but
on the Hamilton Drive up in front.
And we are not saying that they're not -- will not be times when,
on weekends and holidays, that there will be -- the park will be filled
and we'll have to have parking on the street, not Danford Street. So
that -- we just don't have the space on site to accommodate the
transactions that we would have.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well-- and I got thinking about
this. And first I was very, very concerned. Then I was listening to
Commissioner Henning, and he was reminding us about all the other
boating opportunities we have coming online. 951, tremendous
increase there in space. Goodland's going to be online. We recently
picked up Port of the Isles. There's an inventory out there that's pretty
substantial what's going to be there.
So I imagine probably on extremely busy boating days that
people will make adjustments to where they're going to go depending
upon what they think the spaces will be available.
What we may want to think about, too -- and this is purely
suggestive at this point in time -- you might want to take it back to one
of the advisory groups -- is maybe what we could do is have some sort
of way that people could track this on the internet what spaces are
available. I'm sure there's some simple way it could be done. So
when they get ready to leave their homes, they know where they're
going to go, to what boating place to be able to launch their boats with
a probability of being able to get in.
And I realize that that would only be on certain weekends. But,
hey, this is a working community, and that's -- the majority of the
people only get out on weekends.
MR. McALPIN: We could certainly look into that and see how
we can do it, if we can do it, Commissioner, absolutely.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you for your efforts.
Page 74
March 9, 2010
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Any other questions by
commissioners before we have public speakers? We've got two public
speakers.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Let's call the speakers.
MS. FILSON: The first speaker is Tim Hancock.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You sure?
MS. FILSON: Uh-huh, lOA and C. The second one is Philip. I
don't know if it's --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Litow.
MS. FILSON: -- Litow or Liton.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Litow.
MS. FILSON: Litow?
MR. LITOW: Good morning, Commissioners. My name is
Philip Litow. I live on Danford Street. And after much back and forth
with Coastal Management and with Johnson Engineering and many,
many meetings, I think we in the neighborhood, for sure, and almost
everyone involved, and the outer neighborhood as well, feel that this
current plan is a win-win-win situation. We think it's a win for
boaters, who now are going to be able to park close to the park, in and
right adjacent to the park.
It will only be on the extremely unusual weekend when they're
even going to have to park on Hamilton Way (sic) at all, because if
you go down there on almost any weekend, even a nice Sunday,
you're not going to see more than 30 trailers parked along the street.
Maybe on a holiday weekend, yes. But 95 percent of the time this is
going to take care of the boaters. It's going to be good for them.
And even if there're more, with a third ramp, it will be quicker
turnover. People will be able to get in and out.
For the immediate neighborhood of Danford and Bay Streets, this
saves our neighborhood, it keeps it a residential area, which is what it
has been for many, many years, before this park issue began.
Page 75
March 9, 2010
And as Commissioner Fiala said, for the use of the larger
neighborhood, using it for fishing and for play and for just hanging
around, this readvised plan keeps the nature of the park more as it was
before. It doesn't just totally destroy it and make it a complete parking
lot. It retains the nature and the character of the park. And eventually,
we think that there should be a fourth wing, and that is, as we have
understood from informal talks with Mr. McAlpin and with Mr. Barry
Williams of Parks and Recreation, that when prices do come up, when
the real estate market improves, these -- the properties that the county
has already acquired will be sold back to the public and the county
will get monies from the initial sale, as well as these properties will be
again on the tax rolls.
So we're entirely in favor of it. We think that this is just a
wonderful compromise among all of the different interests.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Thank you very much.
MS. FILSON: That was your final speaker, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Very well.
Mr. McAlpin, you want to affirm your position concerning this?
MR. McALPIN: I think he said it, Mr. Chair. We have
community support for this program.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, good, good. Very well.
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm going to go ahead and make
a motion to approve except for the expansion of the boat launch to be
consistent with the other parks.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Is there a second?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. The motion fails for want of a
second.
I will make a motion that the revised conceptual plan be
approved as is.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
Page 76
March 9, 2010
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. So motion by Commissioner
Coyle to approve Item lOA as it stands, and seconds by a whole host
of commissioners.
Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All in favor, please signify by saying
aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It passes unanimously.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you very much.
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, Item --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Congratulations, Donna.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And Fred, he worked real hard on it,
too.
Item #IOB
CHANGE ORDER #2 TO WORK ORDER NO. 4500101030 TO
JOHNSON ENGINEERING IN THE AMOUNT OF $117,857 AND
PERMITTING FEES ESTIMATED AT $13,000 TO COMPLETE
THE ENGINEERING AND PERMITTING FOR THE BAYVIEW
PARK EXPANSION - APPROVED
MR. OCHS: lOB is the recommendation to authorize county
Page 77
March 9, 2010
manager or his designee to execute change order number two to work
order 4500101030 to Johnson Engineering in the amount of$117,857,
and permitting fees at $13,000 to complete the engineering and
permitting for the Bayview Park expansion.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion to approve by Commissioner
Halas, second by Commissioner Coletta.
Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All in favor, please signify by saying
aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It passes unanimously.
MR. McALPIN: Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Item #5B (Discussed with Item #12B)
PRESENTATION BY REPRESENTATIVES OF THE COLLIER
COUNTY FORECLOSURE TASK FORCE CONCERNING
VARIOUS LEGISLATIVE PROPOSALS INTRODUCED IN THE
2010 FLORIDA LEGISLATIVE SESSION - PRESENTED AND
DISCUSSED
Item #12B (Discussed with Item #5B)
Page 78
March 9, 2010
REPORT ON PENDING FORECLOSURE LEGISLATION
MR. OCHS: Commissioner, now that takes us to your 11 a.m.
time certain. We have two companion items that you're going to hear
together. The first is under Item 5 on your agenda, 5B, which is a
presentation by representatives of the Collier County Foreclosure Task
Force concerning various legislative proposals introduced in the 2010
Florida legislative session, and also you're going to hear at this time
Item 12B, which is a report from your county attorney on pending
foreclosure legislation.
So I think we'll look for Mr. Klatzkow, if that's all right with you,
Mr. Chairman, to kick this off, and then Mr. Pat Neale from your
foreclosure task force is also here to present.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Mr. Klatzkow?
MR. KLATZKOW: And I think I really would like to hear from
the task force first.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Have them go first?
MR. KLATZKOW: Yes.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. You want to flip a coin?
MR. OCHS: You're up, Pat.
MR. NEALE: What's the routine, who's on first?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah, yeah. No, who's on second.
MR. NEALE: For the record, I'm Patrick Neale. I'm a member of
the foreclosure task force; however, today we're appearing, I'm
appearing, really as an independent private citizen as opposed to a
member of the task force, that -- because we really didn't have an
opportunity to bring the task force together and vote on any
recommendations because of the nature of the time span that we
looked at it, because we only got this -- we only got this homework
assignment last Tuesday. So with a number of us traveling and such,
it's been a little difficult.
What I have done as part of this is prepare a spreadsheet that
Page 79
March 9, 2010
addresses some of these issues. I'll -- what I can do is put the
spreadsheet up on the overhead and then also hand out copies to
everyone.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Whoa, that's easy to read.
MR. NEALE: Yeah, we had some technology issues this
morning and, frankly, without my glasses, I barely can read it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, Leo's got it enlarged a little
bit.
MR. NEALE: But basically what we did is go back and -- after
we had spoken to the County Commission last Tuesday -- and
researched the various different legislative proposals that are out there
regarding foreclosure.
These represent the four major tracks of bills that are going
forward. What we did is put down the House bill number and the
companion Senate bill number as shown in the legislature's website.
What we've got here are four, as I say, basic tracks that are going
forward. There's probably, when you do the -- if you do the search,
you'll probably find ten different bills that really are, in one way,
shape, or form, looking to impact the foreclosure issue that's going on.
What I'd like to -- first, before I get into this, thank greatly the
people who are sitting over here. Maureen Aughton, Ellie Krier,
Kathleen Passidomo, and Diane Flagg, who have all helped me a great
deal in doing this research. Without them, we wouldn't have been able
to even get through all these bills, so I really want to thank them for
that.
Leading into this, as we reported to the commission last week,
the foreclosure crisis continues here in Collier County and throughout
the State of Florida, and one of the things that's being done is the
legislature is taking steps to attempt to address it, but each legislator
seems to have their own different view on how it should be addressed.
So what we've done, as I say, is put together a summary here that
covers the various tracks. The first one is Senate Bill 1820 that we
Page 80
March 9, 2010
want to take a look at, and that's -- was -- had a companion House bill
of 581 which was withdrawn. That bill basically does relate directly
to foreclosure but really impacts more the -- it impacts the deficiency
judgment issue and it creates a foreclosure mortgage diversion
program which allows the mortgagee to get an -- the mortgagee, that is
the bank, to get an extended statute of limitations on deficiencies by
participating in this program, and what it does is it takes forth the
homeowner and allows them to go into a negotiation, essentially, with
the mortgage company on the -- on the terms of the mortgage.
Maureen did the review on this, and the mortgagor has to provide
that they retain an attorney in the state to assist, that the mortgagor has
retained a Florida licensed real estate broker to assist with a short sale.
They don't mention the attorney has to be licensed, which I think is
sort of interesting. So it -- what's a concern in my mind about that
particularly is there are a number of law firms, or they call themselves
law firms, that are not licensed in this state that represent themselves
as being law firms, and their attorneys are not licensed here but are
representing people on foreclosure issues. So that's a concern in this
bill.
But there has to be a financial hardship affidavit filed, an
estimated HUD, et cetera. And then the mortgagor has to -- the
mortgagee has to refrain from foreclosure activity for a minimum of a
year after the acceptance of the mortgagor's package. And the
mortgagee has to give the preapproved sale price, partial payment
amount.
What's interesting about this -- and I won't go through all the
details because we'll provide you a more detailed summary tomorrow
-- is this one really mirrors to some extent some of the federal
programs that are going through, I believe, some of the HAMP
programs and so forth, except that it provides for this mortgage
diversion program.
You know, it's -- nothing ever gives and takes equally. It gives
Page 81
March 9, 2010
the time of suspending the foreclosure, but it also extends the
deficiency period for five years. So at this point the way the statute
reads, the deficiency runs in one year, the period of time they can go
after a deficiency. And according to this, it can go with -- for a period
of five years.
It indirectly encourages the payment of homeowners and
condominium associations' dues by -- by promoting the lenders -- by
limiting the lender's obligation but making them have to pay a certain
amount. So it does -- it does put that -- but what it does do is if
everybody agrees to the modification, the homeowner can stay in their
home. So it's a balancing act. It's one that I think we need to look a
little bit more deeply in what the impact would be and how that would
go forward.
The second set of bills that we looked at were House Bill 1523
and the companion Senate Bill 2270. These bills were introduced on
the House side by Representative Gray, on the Senate side by Senator
Bennett. The House bill is called the Homeowner Relief Act, and the
Senate bill is called the Nonjudicial Foreclosure Act for
Non-homestead Properties. But according to the website and
according to my reading, they're essentially identical. There's a
couple of minor differences, but they're essentially identical.
It does greatly change the way foreclosures are done in the State
of Florida particularly for non-homestead properties. What it creates
is a mechanism of what's called nonjudicial foreclosure. Essentially a
nonjudicial foreclosure goes forth in that the bank issues a notice of
foreclosure, has it delivered to the homeowner, the property owner,
and the property owner has an ability to object to that. In both of the
bills they have an ability to ask for an informal meeting, and they also
have the ability to file a separate lawsuit. But if none of those things
are done, essentially they file the one notice, and between 90 and 120
-- between 90 days and a year after that, depending on how hard they
push it, the person's out of their house, or the house is taken over by
Page 82
March 9, 2010
the bank.
Both bills put forth that they exclude homestead properties. The
Senate bill specifically refers to the section of the Florida Constitution
that refers to homestead. The House bill in the body of the bill doesn't
refer to it in any place, but I think that was probably a drafting error
more than anything else because in the title of the bill they actually do
mention that it excludes homestead.
If -- both of them do eliminate a -- the ability to get a deficiency
judgment. The House bill does its -- or eliminates a deficiency by the
foreclosing creditor if the debtor acts in good faith, and they define
good faith in there; however, it does not eliminate deficiencies for
second mortgages as far as I can tell by the drafting of the bill.
The Senate bill eliminates it for homestead -- homestead
residence purchase money debt, which is sort of a very narrow
reading, because what that says is, if you've gone out and you have a
homestead that you're living in, during the time the market was going
up you refinanced it, they could still go after you for a deficiency.
So that's one that I think -- it isn't immediately apparent when
you first read the bill, but when you get into the bill, that's something
that could have a significant impact on homeowners in that they think
they're getting out of the deficiency, but no, they're really not because
they refinanced their house somewhere along the way during the time
it was homestead. So I think that's a concern in that bill.
It doesn't have any apparent impact on the collectability of condo
association fees other than the fact that it may, I emphasize may,
speed the process for non-homesteaded properties to go from owned
by the -- by the property owner to owned by the bank. How that will
work, we don't know.
They do provide, as I say, for this informal meeting process
where, if there's a notice filed in the process, the bank -- the mortgagee
has to meet with the homeowner and attempt to work something out.
But it's nonbinding and it doesn't prejudice it one way or the other.
Page 83
March 9, 2010
There's a couple of other bills, couple of other tracks. The one --
the next one over, which is House Bill 35, Senate Bill 1384, it directly
relates to foreclosures, but it's a very short bill. By the way, this was
the stack of things that we went through over the last week, so -- it
was a very short bill. It's only a couple pages. But what it does do is
prohibits deficiency decrees and final judgment foreclosure actions on
homestead property. Just blanket prohibits them on a homesteaded
property, which is -- I don't know -- I don't have a lot of comment on
that. It's -- and it's a policy matter, if that's something that is deemed
to be a good approach.
The next track -- and the companion bill, the 1384 out of the
Senate is identical, effectively.
The next track is House Bill 75, companion Senate Bill 1778, and
that is -- both bills are entitled, the Foreclosure Bill of Rights. They
define the rights and limitations on what can be done in a foreclosure.
They mandate that mediation be done. It makes changes to judicial
foreclosure as to the homesteaded properties, and it eliminates
deficiency judgments, as were in Bill 35 and 1384 as to homestead.
Again, doesn't have any apparent impact.
The difference -- one of the differences in here is the homestead
definition in these bills is somewhat marginally different than the
homestead definition in the Grady and Bennett bills in that they define
homestead statutorily, as in Section 196.021, where it's defined as the
160 acres outside of a municipality, half acre within, the definition
that would be used in an exemption case. The other is the
constitutional definition. That's a relatively minor difference.
But all of these are -- have positives and negatives. I think at this
point we're not prepared, at least I'm not prepared, to make a specific
recommendation on anyone of these bills to support or not support.
What I would suggest is that the commission look more at a general
process or a general concept to support as opposed to anyone of these
bills, because anyone -- all of the bills have something good. All of
Page 84
March 9,2010
the bills have something bad in them.
And so I would suggest that the commission ask for and obtain a
further report on this as to what the -- what the areas of concern are
and what appears to be -- what would appear to be best for our
community.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. I have a couple questions for you
MR. NEALE: Sure.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- with respect to that issue. Ifwe were
to go down the left column here and try to identify which of those is
beneficial to our community and then adopt a general policy statement
that says, we will support whatever bills incorporate these principles,
and -- because trying to deal with this many bills, and as they change
through the process, there's no way we'll catch up to them. They're
going to be always ahead of us and they'll be different than what we
thought they were.
But if we can at least provide a target for our legislators to shoot
for and they know what we're looking for, then we, I think, stand a
better chance of success.
But what we will need is your recommendation concerning, what
are the important issues? Is a change in the judicial process
important? And if so, what are the changes?
The elimination of deficiency, is that a good thing? How are we
going to get the condo associations made whole or help them get some
reimbursement and those kinds of things? If you could help us
identify what those principles should be, then it would be easier for us
to do that.
MR. NEALE: I'd certainly be happy to do it, and I think the rest
of the --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
MR. NEALE: The rest of the group would be happy to take a
look at these and identify areas of concern and recommendations
Page 85
March 9, 2010
rather than trying to recommend a particular kind of legislation.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes.
MR. NEALE: Because, you know -- or a particular piece of
legislation, because as you correctly pointed out, Mr. Chairman, the --
these are in the committee process right now and, you know, sausage
is being made as it's going forward, so --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And it ain't pretty.
MR. NEALE: And it's not pretty.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, thank you.
Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. I think you covered most of
it. I was just going to also reiterate that these bills are going to change
immensely, and if we could have maybe your group be the guiding
principle for us as we start to work through this legislative session and
maybe come back and either report to us or maybe send each of the
commissioners a correspondence prior to us going up to Tallahassee to
make sure that we carry the message that needs to be carried up there.
So we're looking kind of like for guidance from your group to --
as this goes through the process. And obviously, even though when
we go up there in March there's still going to be some rewriting of the
bill, but by that time we should have a pretty good idea of what the
final bill would be. All there would be is just additional tweaks. And
if you could let us know, that would be great.
MR. NEALE: Yeah. We'd be happy to. I think -- you know,
again, it's not an official position of the task force. The task force is
doing -- remains apolitical and is a volunteer group. And certainly as
a group of citizens, we'd be happy to work with you.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And I'm not trying to put you in a
-- I'm not trying to put you in a bind.
MR. NEALE: I understand.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Just, we're looking for guidance
also. And I think that your group, being associated with this, knows
Page 86
March 9, 2010
the good and the bad of a particular bill, and you don't have to put
your name on it. We'll go up there and carry the water for you.
MR. NEALE: Appreciate that. Thank you, Commissioner.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: County Attorney, you have some input?
MR. KLATZKOW: No. I think you really have ajob crisis
more than you have anything else. And until that happens, you're
going to have foreclosures, and you're going to have banks keeping
inventory of these properties because there's nobody to sell them to,
which is unfortunate.
You know, I would rely on the task force for their -- for their
input on these bills. They've been living this on a daily basis it seems,
and --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: How quickly can you get us a brief list
of recommendations?
MR. NEALE: There's people running out of the room right this
very instance.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: No, they're not. The doors are locked.
MR. NEALE: I would -- I would say that we can probably by --
by next week we can probably get you something that -- because
we've already done the initial review, and we'll put a group together
and put our heads together and come up with at least a spreadsheet.
We'll work off of this kind of spreadsheet, actually make it legible this
time and go forward.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah, Monday morning would be fine.
MR. NEALE: Monday morning?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Monday morning; early, early Monday.
MR. NEALE: Early Monday morning?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Early Monday morning would be really
good.
MR. NEALE: And that's Monday sometime in the middle of
May, right?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: No, no. Only the government can do
Page 87
March 9, 2010
that.
MR. NEALE: Oh, okay. We'll put our--
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Private citizens can't do that.
MR. NEALE: We'll put our nose to the grindstone and certainly
work with the County Attorney's Office.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: The reason I'm suggesting that is that, as
we all recognize, these things are going through the legislative process
now, and the faster we can get an opinion to them, the better off we
will all be, because it is entirely likely once they resolve conflicts
among all these in committee, they're going to lock in on a particular
approach, and once they're locking in on that, it's going to be very
hard to change it.
So I'd rather be in the early phases of this than the latter phases of
it. And I would hope that you could submit something that the board
would authorize me to send to Tallahassee in advance of our visit up
there for the legislative session.
MR. NEALE: We'll make every effort to get it done as soon as
we can.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you very much. I appreciate it.
And thank you all for the good work you do. We just couldn't do this
without you, so we do appreciate your input.
MR. NEALE: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thanks a lot.
Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah. One of the things that the
county attorney just brought up, and that is that there's a lot of homes
out there that are for sale, but there's nobody to buy them. I feel that
that kind of might be a bogus statement, because there is a lot of
people that want to buy homes that are coming down here, but the
banks won't release them. And I got a real problem with that because
the end result is that the home continues to deteriorate because they
shut the electric power off, they shut the A/C off. Some of the
Page 88
March 9, 2010
swimming pools look like cesspools. And I don't understand what the
problem is.
In some cases people go all the way to foreclosure to where
they're ready to buy the thing, and then at the last minute the bank
says, no, I'm not going to sell it.
Can you -- can you relate to why this is happening, and is it
because they don't want to take the large writeoff, or what is it?
Because the end result is, they have to demolish these homes if they
stay in the inventory.
MR. NEALE: I have a private comment and I have a public
comment on that. I'll give you the public one.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'd like the private one.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I'll cover up my microphone.
MR. NEALE: No, it's -- I think what's happened, frankly, is the
banks are so overwhelmed with the numbers that they're dealing with
that they -- certain properties get lost that -- they don't have the
systems in place. They're starting to catch up. And it's become, at
least in my experience and my practice, and I think the other people
who practice in this area would say the same thing, it's become almost
bank specific. Certain banks are doing an extremely good job of
moving properties through, getting them onto the market, getting them
cleaned out, and other banks are not doing such a good job. And that
changes almost on a weekly basis, as they start to catch up, start to
figure out where they are.
I think some of the newer programs, some of the ones that are
coming into effect April 1 will help a lot, some of the new government
programs as far as the home affordable programs, the fact that some of
these new programs are now going to require banks to specify what
they're willing to accept on a short sale more quickly. They're going
to have to go to close more quickly. There's programs to address the
second mortgage issue, which is a big issue on a lot of them. So I
think as these programs come through, it's going to help a lot.
Page 89
March 9,2010
But certainly, Commissioner Halas, what you say is a major
concern. Diane Flagg, of course, and her group have done a
phenomenal job here in the county of helping prevent the blight, but
it's still -- it's still an issue.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, yeah. The blight is internal,
and the blight is in the pool or whatever else.
And, of course, the other thing that -- yeah, they try to keep the
lawns mowed. But as far as keeping up the landscape in general, it's
deteriorating, and that really detracts from the value of the home, not
only the neighborhood, but the value of the home itself. And the
longer they let this thing sit there, it's deteriorating at a faster rate.
MR. NEALE: And there are programs that have been introduced
in other -- in other areas in the state that have addressed some of these
issues on the east coast and other parts of the state where they have
worked with banks to do rental programs and things like that, so --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Maybe if -- when you go through
this process of looking at all the bills that are there, maybe you can
give us some direction of things that you feel that we should take up to
Tallahassee to make sure that at least our voices are heard. And what
needs to be written in the bill, hopefully it will be beneficial for the
citizens here in Collier County so that we can get a lot of this
inventory moving at a quicker rate than it is right now.
MR. NEALE: We'll certainly at least address the issue as much
as we can.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Any other questions, comments
by commissioners?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Then -- I don't know that we need a
motion, but we would like to thank you for your help.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Definitely.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And be looking forward to your report
Page 90
March 9, 2010
8:30 Monday morning.
MR. NEALE: Thank you very much for allowing us to make
this presentation.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I though you said early, five in the
mornmg.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thanks a lot.
MR. NEALE: I don't have a weekend anyhow.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You've done a great job. Thank you very
much.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Is that 5A and 12B?
MR. OCHS: Yes.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah, that's two of them.
Choose wisely.
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir.
MS. FILSON: We only have one left.
MR. OCHS: We only have two, so I'll take a crack at 10D.
MS. FILSON: We have four speakers.
MR. OCHS: Pardon me?
MS. FILSON: We have four speakers for that.
MR.OCHS: Four speakers.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: 10D? Okay.
Item #10D
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT IN THE AMOUNT OF $2,904,563
FOR THE NORTH COUNTY REGIONAL WATER TREATMENT
PLANT FINISHED WATER QUALITY AND ODOR CONTROL
COMPLIANCE PROJECT TO CARDINAL CONTRACTORS,
INC., BID #10-5423, PROJECT NO.71002 - MOTION TO AWARD
BID TO MITCHELL & STARK - APPROVED
MR. OCHS: 10D, yes, sir. It's a recommendation to award a
Page 91
March 9, 2010
construction contract in the amount of $2,904,563 for the North
County Regional Water Treatment Plant finished water quality and
odor control compliance project to Cardinal Contractors, Incorporated,
bid number 10-5423, project number 71002.
Mr. Carnell?
MR. CARNELL: Good morning again, Commissioners. This
project was identified in your 2008 water master plan update and
includes replacing the existing de-gasifier system and adding an odor
control system at the North Regional Water Treatment Plant.
There are several important reasons to award this contract and
award it today so that we can commence the project promptly. A
couple things, this is going to provide you improved water quality
treatment at the plant. It's going to reduce your operating costs,
recurring operating costs, we estimate, between 4- and $500,000 a
year.
And if we can get this done before the onset of the peak season,
then you will have all these benefits and you'll also have a plant with
up-to-date equipment prepared to handle peak load next year.
With that in mind, the invitation to bid this project was issued at
the very end of December. We had more than 1,100 notices we
distributed; 165 firms downloaded the plans and specifications. And
on February the 5th we had a very robust competition. We opened
sealed bids. Received eight of them. And the apparent low bidder
was Cardinal Contractors, Inc., who tendered a bid offer of2,904,563.
We have received a protest to the recommended bid award, and
your protestor is here today. Before we go to the protest, I do want to
just emphasize again, there's a lot of good news here with this project.
It's not often that you get to approve a project that is going to improve
quality of your -- the performance of your utility system, and you're
going to get it really for a song.
The engineer's estimate on this project was around $4 million,
and we're getting it for less than 3. And you're getting -- we have --
Page 92
March 9, 2010
and we have a good contractor that we're recommending for award.
The protestor is also an excellent contractor as well.
So from a technical standpoint, staff would be perfectly
contented with the award to either firm in performing the work here.
With that, let me talk about the protest briefly. A protest has
been received from Mitchell and Stark, who was the second low
bidder in the initial competition. Their bid offer was a little over $3.1
million; 3,116,416, or about $211,000 more than Cardinal's.
In the bidding process -- and by the way, the protest and the
purchasing director's decision are part of your backup package.
In the protest -- well, wait a minute. I'm sorry. Before we get to
the protest, in the bidding process of February the 5th, the apparent
low bidder, Cardinal Contractors, submitted a local vendor preference
affidavit pursuant to your policy in which they essentially declare in
writing that they believe they fall under the definition of local as set
forth in your policy.
In that affidavit, however, they had listed an address of Sarasota.
It was listed next to their signature in their bid submission and the
affidavit submission. And the purchasing staff saw that address and
read it to mean that the contractor did not have a local address.
And at that point, the second lowest bidder, who was Mitchell
and Stark, who does have a Naples address and indicated such in their
bid offer, was contacted per your local vendor preference policy. Their
bid, as I mentioned, a little over $3.1 million, is about 7 percent higher
than the bid from Cardinal, and so they fall within the 10 percent
range in which they are afforded the opportunity under the policy to,
what we call, a right to match or an offer to match the price from the
low bidded, which we perceived at that point to be nonlocal.
That offer was made to Mitchell and Stark, I think it was the first
business day after the bid opening and was accepted that same day,
next day, from Mitchell and Stark. And we at that point were under
the assumption we were going to proceed with an award to Mitchell
Page 93
March 9,2010
and Stark.
Well, two days later staff received an email from Cardinal
Contractors in which they asserted that they were, in fact, a local
vendor, and I believe they qualified under the Collier County local
vendor preference policy per their affidavit. We immediately
scheduled a meeting with them, and we met with Mr. William
McDevitt, who is the President of Cardinal Contractors, and this was
all a very quick period of time.
In the meeting Mr. McDevitt told us that Cardinal Contractors
has had an activity presence in Collier County since 1991, and that --
and you'll remember in the preference policy there's three tests, if you
will, that a contractor has to meet to be considered local. They need to
have held an occupational license or business tax receipt in Collier
County for a full year prior to competing on a given bid, secondly,
they're to have a local physical business address, and third, they are to
have a verifiable and measurable impact upon the im- -- on the
economy of Collier County.
In our meeting with Mr. McDevitt, he mentioned again that they
had had a presence in Collier County for the better part of 19 years
and that they had previously held occupational licenses in Collier
County in 1993, '94, and '95. And Mr. McDevitt held up copies of
those occupational license receipts in the meeting.
He also stated that they were presently working under contract
with the City of Marco Island for a wastewater expansion project and
gave an address of 771 Elkcam Circle as the location of the plant and
where they were situated with a construction trailer, which they were
operating as an office.
They'd been on that site for better than a year, and Mr. McDevitt
had indicated they were going to be there a better part of another year.
In addition to that, Mr. McDevitt indicated that Cardinal had
sought to renew their occupational licenses in Collier County in recent
years. I think he said 2005, and our conversation was where he had
Page 94
March 9, 2010
attempted to do so, but had been advised by the Tax Collector's Office
that it was no longer necessary for him to have an occupational
license, and I'm presuming because he wasn't showing a local address
at the time.
So they -- in addition to that, in their affidavit Cardinal
Contractors indicated that they have 20 employees who are Collier
County residents. And related to that, they provided a list of
employees, and I counted 24 that had either Naples or Immokalee
addresses listed in the document.
We reviewed this information submitted by Cardinal and we
found it to be strikingly similar -- what do they say, deja vu all over
again -- to a circumstance we encountered in September of 2008 with
the award of the Santa Barbara Boulevard extension project to Astaldi
Construction.
At that time, Astaldi had approached the staff as to whether they
qualified as a local vendor and, in fact, they were very, very proactive.
They asked us weeks before the bid opening the question. And we at
the time, you know, we were all newbies to local vendor preference.
We were about three months into the usage of the policy. And we
brought the issue to the board prior to and separate of an award and
asked the board -- told the board the facts. And again, the facts were
very similar. Astaldi had attempted to get an occupational license
from the tax collector, had been advised they didn't need to. Astaldi
was operating a construction trailer on another job and that they had
been here for several months. They were mobilized, and that they had
Collier County residents on their payroll working for them.
So the board -- we brought that information to the board and the
board gave it consideration and decided to deem Astaldi to be a local
contractor under the policy, and the contract was awarded to Astaldi at
that point.
So here we are today. And I will tell you Mitchell and Stark was
the apparent second low bidder at that time as well. And today we've
Page 95
March 9,2010
got the same set of facts more or less in front of us. And really, there's
a central question for the board to consider.
And again, the good news is, you've got a very affordable project
from either contractor. They're a good, capable contractor. You're
looking at a project that's going to save you operational costs, and
your capitalization of it's going to be much less than originally
thought. That's all the good news. What we need to determine today
is really one central question in the staffs view, is Cardinal
Contractors local under the local vendor preference policy?
Staff believes the circumstances between the two situations are
virtually identical and that we accordingly would recommend award
to Cardinal. We would be comfortable with award to either firm from
a technical or performance standpoint.
And if you have any questions, I'll be happy to answer them.
You may want to hear from your protestor and any other registered
speakers.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Seeing no questions, Ms. Filson,
call the first speaker.
MS. FILSON: The first speaker is Anthony Pires. He'll be
followed by Bill McDevitt.
MR. PIRES: Mr. Chairman, members of the board. If I may,
Tony Pires, for the record, Woodward, Pires, and Lombardo
representing Mitchell and Stark. If I may, with the board's indulgence,
have five minutes on behalf of the protester.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I was thinking in terms ofa minute to
minute and a half.
MR. PIRES: Can we stretch that a little bit more? And with the
opportunity for rebuttal if there are any new facts.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
MR. PIRES: Thank you very kindly, Mr. Chairman.
And Steve -- for the record, I just want to make sure -- I think
Steve had indicated he had provided a copy of our written protest and
Page 96
March 9, 2010
all the attachments and as well as our followed up March 3, 2010,
objection to the protest decision as well as our March 4th letter.
And an important factor, I believe, in this particular case, is -- in
this particular instance, the policy, we think, is very clear as to what is
required to be provided in order to establish that you qualify as a local
business.
The executive summary discusses it and it states that local
business means, one -- I'm adding the one -- local business means the
vendor has a valid occupational license issued by Collier County at
least one year prior to bid or proposal submission to do business
within Collier County that authorizes the business to provide the
commodities or services to be purchased, and a physical business
address located within the limits of Collier County from which the
vendor operates or performs business.
And I would contend that those two are interrelated. You can't
get an occupational license if you don't have a physical business
address located in Collier County. I think that's the crux of the
problem with Cardinal.
As of yesterday evening, Cardinal still had not applied for an
occupational license or business tax receipt in Collier County.
In the Astaldi situation, they had applied and even obtained one
prior to coming before you-all. And you had just recently adopted the
policy.
I think another significant difference, that's why it's not strikingly
similar -- I think it's dissimilar -- is, again, indicating lack of a
physical business address in Collier County and lack of the ability to
get an occupational license because of that fact on Cardinal's behalf is
Cardinal has not paid one dime, according to our research, in tangible
personal property tax in Collier County. That's a tax imposed on
furniture, fixtures, and equipment in the ordinary business in which
you are engaged, and it's imposed in the county where the property is
situated.
Page 97
March 9, 2010
As I indicated in our protest, Mitchell and Stark since 2003 has
paid $950,000 in tangible personal property tax in Collier County,
about $136,000 per year. Cardinal has not paid a dime in tangible
personal property tax in Collier County, and I would submit to you
again, does not have a physical presence -- physical business address
in Collier County.
The fact that they are using the City of Marco Island's utility
plant site as a mailing address, again, that is not a physical business
address. The fact that they had an occupational license 16 years ago
does not mean they have a physical business address today.
Our position is, if they had a real office, they would have a
physical business address and would be paying tangible personal
property taxes on furniture, fixtures, and equipment at a real office, at
a physical business address in Collier County and, therefore, they
would be eligible to apply or would be in a position to have an
occupational license or business tax receipt.
Also, having an occupational license in Collier County and a
physical business address, it means you have a solid investment in
building, furniture, fixtures, and equipment, getting back to a physical
business presence. Our position is they do not have one and that the
policy is clear that they need to have both.
Furthermore, this policy has been in effect since June of2008.
So -- and it's well known that there have been issues with regards to
this particular requirement in Collier County.
What we would request, therefore, based upon the fact that
Cardinal, in our position, in our opinion, does not qualify as a local
business or for the local vendor preference, request the board award
the bid to Mitchell and Stark, apply the criteria and provisions of your
policy as to the local vendor preference and determine that Cardinal,
in fact, is not a local business.
Once again, it's a relatively simple matter. And as far as the
employee count, I counted employees that were deemed to be active
Page 98
- ~t'_"h'~>.'_
March 9, 2010
by Cardinal in their submittal, and there are two in Collier and 11 in
Lee.
But again, they do not have a physical business address; they
can't get an occupational license. They've not even tried since this
issue arose to get one. They've not paid a dime in tangible personal
property tax, which again, is on furniture, fixtures, equipment situated
in this county, versus the $950,000 paid by Mitchell and Stark over
the last seven years or so.
I would submit to you and request your consideration of
awarding the contract to Mitchell and Stark and abiding by the policy.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Thank you very much.
MS. FILSON: Your next speaker is Bill McDevitt. He'll be
followed by Pat Rainey.
MR. McDEVITT: Good morning, Commissioners. My name's
Bill McDevitt. I'm President of Cardinal Contractors. As you've
heard, Cardinal Contractors was the low bidder at bid time.
By coming forward to bid in Collier County, we saved the county
$211,000. Without our presence, that would not have been afforded to
the county. You would have paid a premium for the project had we
not bid it.
We've been in Collier County since 1991. We built, as the staff
knows, many of your plant projects, similar to this project here.
During the course of 1991 to today, the occupational license we
had and maintained converted into what is currently known today as
the occupational license, which is the qualifier certification, which we
maintain even today.
As far as our presence in Marco Island goes, we have a
vice-president there who operates projects in Broward County as well
as in Collier County. He's stationed there. He lives in Naples. He's
been with us for 15 years. He's a resident of Collier County.
We've spent over $10 million to local vendors. We've paid them
for goods and services over the past five years. We spent over
Page 99
March 9, 2010
343,000 man-hours to local employees who reside in Collier and Lee
County .
Weare an active member of the business community in Collier
County . We have been since 1991. We also maintain occupational
licenses in Lee County, which they have converted now into their
local business tax license, and that's current in Lee County.
So we feel that we're an impact in the community. We -- I
realize that our home office is up in Sarasota, Florida. But we come --
been coming down here for almost 20 years to perform work for all of
you, and we feel we do a good job.
We've never defaulted. We've delivered on time. The project's
always top quality, and give you the best price.
So with that, I'd like you to reconsider this protest and award this
job to Cardinal Contractors. You've already extended that type of offer
to Astaldi as we just heard years before. Our situation is quite similar.
The occupational license is a $162.50 charge. A bid team costs
over $20,000 to put together a bid for your community. I spent that
$20,000 in good faith thinking I would come down here and continue
to do business as we always have in the past, serving the community,
saving you almost $211,000 on this project.
To look at spending $20,000 on a bid team or $162.50 on an
occupational license, that's an easy business decision. I would have
bought the license had I known about it. But we were told by the tax
office that this is rolled over, that we can use our current certification
in lieu of that, and we've had that confirmed. And I brought that to the
staffs attention.
So I'm here to ask you-all to please continue to award the job to
Cardinal Contractors so we can continue to bid in your community.
We're not always going to be low, but when we are, we do a good job,
as has been witnessed in past.
So thank you for your time. Thank you for allowing me to speak.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you.
Page 100
March 9, 2010
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Pat Rainey. He'll be followed
by Brian Penner.
MR. RAINEY: Good morning, Chairman and Commissioners.
My name is Patrick Rainey with Encore Construction Company. And
I don't have -- I'm not actually involved in this Cardinal/Mitchell,
Stark dispute, but we are a general contractor that specializes in water
and wastewater treatment plant construction.
We've done a number of projects in Collier County throughout
the years. And the purpose of my time today is to urge the
commission to reconsider the local preference ordinance that you've
enacted. Just as one of the contractors who's now excluded from
bidding in Collier County, I'd like to present -- you know, respectfully
present, you know, the view of those contractors.
You know, we've done several jobs, as I mentioned, one of them
being the north county water reclamation facility liquid stream project,
which dated back to 2002. It brought us down here. We were
mobilized in Collier County at that time for a period of three years.
At that time our bid, which was in the neighborhood of $25
million, was over a million dollars lower than any local contractor was
able to provide the county.
Ifwe went back and looked at all the projects that we've been
successful in providing and building for Collier County over the years,
it would run into several million dollars' worth of savings that we've
brought Collier County over the years, you know, by bidding your
jobs and continuing to bid them.
Unfortunately, we decided not to bid in this particular project
because there's -- you know, if you've got to give a local guy a 10
percent advantage, you know, it's just not there. It's a waste of our
time. We don't have $20,000 to spend developing a bid to submit it to
you so that a local contractor after the bid decides, well, okay, maybe I
can do it for that.
It's just not fair. It leaves a bad taste in everybody's mouth, you
Page 10 1
March 9, 2010
know, all the contractors' mouths. It's just -- there's no way that's fair.
It's like you're the kid who got a Christmas present and then, you
know, somebody comes in and takes it away from you because,
maybe I do like that.
That's all I really had to say. And, you know, I just hope that in
the future as you, you know, put other jobs out for bid that you might,
you know, open it back up and let some contractors who -- you know,
that have provided fair service to Collier County throughout the years
continue to do that.
So thank you very much.
MS. FILSON: Your next speaker is Brian Penner.
MR. PENNER: Hello. My name's Brian Penner. I'm CEO of
Mitchell and Stark. I'm here just to ask you to follow your ordinance.
It's very clear, the ordinance, what is required, and I want you to
follow your ordinance.
When we go to Sarasota County, bid to Charlotte County, I'm at
a disadvantage, you know -- you know. So I hear what they're saying,
but, you know, what's fair for them when they're in their home
territory ought to be fair for me when I'm in my home territory.
And -- so I hear what they're saying, but you're putting me at an
economic disadvantage if you don't follow your ordinance because
then I'm at a competitive disadvantage when I go to Charlotte County,
Sarasota County.
I'd like to ask you to consider the ordinance. Thank you.
MS. FILSON: That was your final speaker, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: This is one of the problems that
I've been concerned about is where we have contractors that spend, in
this case, $20,000 to propose a bid and they end up coming in low,
and then someone locally goes out and says they don't come in at the
same price. And so we say, okay, can you match this price?
And the end as a result is, they say, yeah, we can match this
Page 102
March 9, 2010
price. But the original bidder that came in low doesn't have that
opportunity to come back and meet that again.
And I understand that everybody's trying to bid for jobs, and I
think that Mitchell Stark Construction Company had just gotten a big
-- awarded a contract here to start on Oil Well Road.
The concern that I have here is, as we've been going through this
protest, we've been losing time as far as getting this plant -- getting
this construction done at this plant.
I was out there at this water treatment plant, and what they're
trying to accomplish there is to get this moving forward before this --
the -- get this back online before next season, the tourist season, when
we have a huge capacity here.
And we're also looking to hopefully get this project done so that
it's -- conforms to the state standards and also that we have -- we're
making sure that we have the quality of water that's coming out of this
plant ready to go next season.
So my understanding is that we've already set a precedent with
Astaldi, and I think that if we waiver from this, I think that we may be
in jeopardy of holding up this project even longer.
So I'll defer to my other commissioners as they speak on this
subject.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I make a motion that we award
the contract to Mitchell and Stark.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. We have a motion by
Commissioner Henning to recognize the protest and award the
contract to Mitchell and Stark, and it's seconded by Commissioner
Fiala.
County Attorney, is there any other legal requirement that must
be met concerning the protest itself?
MR. KLATZKOW: No.
Page 103
March 9, 2010
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Is there any discussion? I'll-- I'd
like to ask one question of staff. Is there any way this contract could
be split?
MR. CARNELL: Let me ask the -- Mr. DeLony or Mr. --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You've got two phases that look like
they're different things, but --
MR. DeLONY: Good morning. Jim DeLony, public utilities
administrator.
No, sir. Given the nature of -- the close-in nature of this work,
the restricted work space in which we have to do -- work it, plus the
nature of this being really -- really a large procurement of equipment
and then subsequent installation of the equipment subject to
dismantling the in-place equipment, this is not a splittable project
where you can divide the baby here in that regard. The scope is really
tight, the time is tight, and we've already talked to the purpose.
So I appreciate the opportunity to discuss that with you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Thank you very much.
Okay. All in favor of the motion, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. It looks like it passes 3-2, with
Commissioner Coletta and Commissioner Halas dissenting.
Okay. That's it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Lunch.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You mean we're done for the
day?
MR. DeLONY: Clarification.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah, we are adjourned.
Page 104
- 't-~_.,.....~.,.
March 9, 2010
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Careful.
MR. OCHS: Mitchell and Stark.
MR. DeLONY: Mitchell and Stark, right, at the lowest price.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes.
MR. DeLONY: Yes, sir, thank you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: We're not adjourning; we're just
going to take a recess?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You better clarify.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I was just kidding.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You were hoping that we were
adjourned.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: No. He just asked the question, are we
adjourned now, and I said, yeah, we're adjourned.
MR. OCHS: We are adjourned till one clock, sir, for your 1:00
time certain?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes. Well, recessed until one o'clock.
MR. OCHS: Yes, I'm sorry.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: 1 :07.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: 1 :07.
MR. OCHS: 1:07, excuse me.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's right.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, we need those seven minutes.
(A luncheon recess was had.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Ladies and gentlemen, the Board of
County Commission meeting is now back in session.
County Manager?
Item #14A
THE CREATION OF A BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT CENTER
AT THE AIRPORT IN IMMOKALEE AS A COLLABORATION
BETWEEN THE IMMOKALEE CRA AND THE COLLIER
Page 105
March 9,2010
COUNTY AIRPORT AUTHORITY; APPROVING THE INTER-
LOCAL AGREEMENT; AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE
OF $100,000 IN FY 2010 FROM CRA TRUST FUND 186 AS
SEED MONEY; AND ALL NECESSARY BUDGET
AMENDMENTS - APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, this takes us to
Item 14A on your agenda to be heard at one p.m.
It's a recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners,
acting as the Community Redevelopment Agency, approve -- excuse
me -- approve the creation of a business development center at the
Immokalee -- excuse me -- at the airport in Immokalee as a
collaboration between the Immokalee CRA and the Collier County
Airport Authority, approve the interlocal agreement, authorize the
expenditure of $100,000 fiscal year 2010 from CRA Trust Fund 186
as seed money and authorize all necessary budget amendments.
And Ms. Penny Phillipi, your Executive Director from your
Immokalee CRA, is here to present.
MS. PHILLIPPI: Thank you. Can we bring the picture up?
MR. OCHS: Yes, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, wait a minute, wait a minute. This
is an action by the Community Redevelopment Agency.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. So I'm going to turn the gavel
over to Commissioner Coletta, who is the chairman of the
Redevelopment Agency Board. Okay.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Wait, wait, wait.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Oh. I got to have the official -- please
proceed.
MS. PHILLIPPI: Thank you. I thank you for hearing this and
considering the possibility of having a business development center at
Page 106
March 9, 2010
the Immokalee Airport.
This is a partnership that we've been working on for quite some
time between the Immokalee CRA and the Airport Authority right up
until Theresa Cook left, and fortunately Debbie picked up the ball and
kept running with us, as did the Airport Authority Board.
What we're proposing is to build a learning laboratory for
entrepreneurial enterprise in Immokalee. And basically there's just
three components to this business development center. We're talking
about building many partnerships, we're talking about the CRA
administering the program, and then creating the program.
So when we talk about the partnerships, they're already there.
We simply need to get them in place at the incubator, and it's our
Board of County Commissioners and it's the workforce board, it's all
the people that we already know, are out there doing these kinds of
things in the community.
And when we talk about the CRA oversight, we see our role as
working to generate new businesses -- as you know, that's the top goal
of the Immokalee CRA -- and to help those businesses become
self- reliant.
We're going to work on the budget, the internal controls, the
payments, and getting the rents and all those kinds of things, and then
we're going to garner and administer grants to keep it up and running.
We're going to hire the personnel and manage that personnel.
We're going to promote -- we're going to promote the incubator by
marketing it to the public and to potential folks who could move into
that incubator.
So we're going to do all the -- we're going to set up training
programs, we're going to do all of the intake. And we have a
wonderful partner with the Fort Myers business incubator and Mr.
Tom Scott who has -- who we have leaned on very heavily and who
has agreed to continue to work with us till we get this thing up and
running, and he's very experienced. He's been doing this for 12 years
Page 107
March 9, 2010
very successfully. So we're fortunate that he's working with us.
And the biggest advantage to businesses is not only the low rent,
a lower rent -- because rent is very high for commercial properties in
Immokalee -- but the on-site T A, how to do a business plan, how to set
up your books, how to do everything that you need to do and have that
safety net to know that there's someone there who's always going to be
on site to help you become successful with your business.
The Airport Authority Board, as you saw, signed a resolution
agreeing to commit to allow us to use available spaces. They're going
to let us use the receptionist, and they're going to maintain the
property at its current level. So the things we asked from them were
not so onerous that they couldn't provide them.
As far as the budget and the funding, I put a budget in the booklet
that I provided to you, and we believe the first year it's going to cost
$110,500 to get this -- to just have seed money to get it going.
We -- as you know, we -- I think it's the next item on your
agenda, but we applied for a grant for that exact amount from human
services, and we received a conditional letter saying that, depending
on Board of County Commissioner approval and Department of
Community Affairs, or US HUD approval, we'll receive that funding
to start our program.
The airport's in-kind commitment is about 60 grand. And
Hodges has applied -- Hodges University has applied for several
grants and offered us work study students to the tune of about
$300,000 of support for this program.
So that's what we're asking today. We'll answer your questions,
but we're requesting that you approve the creation of a business
incubator at the Immokalee Airport.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you, Penny.
We have three speakers. Why don't we go to the speakers first,
unless you've got a question you want to --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I have questions, but I could
Page 108
March 9, 2010
wait.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you.
MS. FILSON: One of the speakers is for 14C, and Jim Wall, is
this the item you wanted to speak on for the Immokalee CRA?
Okay. And he'll be followed by Richard Rice.
MR. WALL: For the record, it's Jim Wall, and I'm with the
Immokalee CRA. I'm also the business development director for the
Southwest Florida Workforce Development Board, and I think most of
you know our executive director, Joe Paterno.
Our agency has been involved with the CRA and specifically
with this business development park or the incubator for a number of
years. I've only been involved with two years. And the only mentions
I want to bring to the commissioners this year -- here today is that, in
my two years that I've been involved, I keep hearing this is Fred
Thomas' plan and this is Fred Thomas' baby, and I just want to know
(sic), every commissioner here, that we have members not only that
operate in the career and service center for the Immokalee area, but
FGCU small business development, and there are very, very many
talented and educated people that have had their input in this.
So it is not just the Fred Thomas plan. It is truly a community
effort, and I encourage you to support not only the incubator, but the
Immokalee Master Plan also. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And to that I might add, we've very
appreciative for Fred Thomas' input on this.
MR. WALL: No doubt about it. He's the leader of the band. I
just want to make sure everybody knows that there are all -- there are
others --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: There's a couple other people.
MR. WALL: There are other -- few other folks in there that are
working hard to push this through too, so thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: But so that we'll know how to vote,
was it approved by Fred Thomas?
Page 109
.'..,....---.'..
March 9, 2010
MR. WALL: I'm not sure how to answer that, which way to go.
We're eagerly waiting for your approval and coherence to move
forward.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I think you better leave it right there.
Mr. Rice?
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Richard Rice.
MR. RICE: Yes. For the record, I'm Richard Rice, Executive
Director of the Eastern Collier County Chamber of Commerce.
Some time back the Immokalee Chamber of Commerce
recognized the fact that growth in Collier County was going to be
eastward, and Immokalee was going to be the area where people were
going to be settling. Realizing that fact, we felt that we should be in a
position to better market Eastern Collier County, so consequently we
changed our name in January of 2009 to the Greater Eastern Collier
County Chamber of Commerce. We embraced Ave Maria, we will
embrace other communities as they come online out in that area.
One of the real strong movements came when we hired Penny as
the executive director of the CRA. This effort has been building, and
we feel that this is the way that we are going to be able to exercise that
growth in Eastern Collier County.
The Airport Authority, the CRA, the Chamber of Commerce,
jointly working together, will make this happen. And so we strongly
endorse this effort. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you for your contributions.
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you.
Penny, I have some questions on your budget.
MS. PHILLIPPI: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You have no money set aside
for electric and water and sewer?
MS. PHILLIPPI: That is correct.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Who's going to pay for that?
Page 110
March 9, 2010
MS. PHILLIPPI: As far as the individual renters, they would pay
for their own water and electric.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. So your use of having --
well, the combined use with the airport and the CRA, there will be no
need for a land line, electric, water and sewer?
MS. PHILLIPPI: Water and sewer, no, but the -- I did -- I did
budget for a computer system, so there will be -- I'm sorry. I'm not at
that page. I'll have to get to that page. I did budget for a computer
system because I assumed it would be freestanding from the county
system.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, 4,500 for data processing.
MS. PHILLIPPI: Uh-huh.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
MS. PHILLIPPI: And a cellular phone for director, and
hopefully a staff.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: But I mean, you have a
secretary or receptionist with no cost of a phone planned.
MS. PHILLIPPI: The receptionist is there in place. That's what
the airport is contributing.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
MS. PHILLIPPI: And this will be in addition to her current
duties.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. So that's -- the airport's
going to pay for that land line?
MS. PHILLIPPI: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Now, Hodges is going to
provide incubator consultant work study students and training and
technical assistance; is that how it's read?
MS. PHILLIPPI: Yes. And these are grants that they've written.
They've written a grant for micro enterprise loans so that they can
provide small loans to businesses. The work study students are about
18,000, and then the business inc- -- the training and technical
Page 111
March 9, 2010
assistance is $100,000. These are USDA grants they've applied for.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Now, who is the
incubator consultant? Is that a grant from somebody?
MS. PHILLIPPI: Well, now that we have the grant for the 110-,
that could easily come from the CRA if necessary. But that will be an
other fund that we will have to search for.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Oh, you're just budgeting it, but
no source?
MS. PHILLIPPI: No. We have a source, but I didn't name the
source here because I wasn't sure that we would get the $110,000. But
since we have received a conditional letter, I can now tell you that that
would undoubtedly come out of the CRA.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay, okay. That's the only
question I have. Thank you.
MS. PHILLIPPI: Okay. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you. I'll tell you one thing,
Ms. Phillippi. You really know how to stretch a penny.
MS. PHILLIPPI: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Somebody got that. Okay, great.
It would be my pleasure to --
MS. PHILLIPPI: At least you didn't call me a bad penny. That
was good.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Oh, I see. Commissioner Halas,
please?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Penny, I want to thank you and all
the people that got involved in this thing. I think it's commendable for
what you have accomplished in the short period of time that you've
been there at the Immokalee CRA. And I'm amazed -- every time that
you and I have a one-on-one, I'm amazed at the things that are
happening out there.
MS. PHILLIPPI: Thank you, sir.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And you and everyone out there,
Page 112
March 9, 2010
including the mayor, Fred Thomas; really appreciate all the efforts that
you guys are making in that direction, and we're hoping that we can
follow up by hopefully building some infrastructure out there like
roads, like State Road 82 and 29, to that in there, because that's really
going to be really helpful to get Immokalee moving in the direction it
needs to. But you've done an outstanding job with what you had to
work with so far.
MS. PHILLIPPI: Thank you, sir.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Penny, you've made the point in
the executive summary that these are going to be short-term leases for
companies that are going to locate there. Why would you designate
them as short-term leases? If it's a successful company, don't you
think they might want to stay there for a while?
MS. PHILLIPPI: Well, I think it was four years that we were
talking about, and part of the -- part of the whole program as it's
written is that you write a business plan, and then quarterly you meet
with the director and make sure you're following that progress route.
Just -- it's a self-sufficient plan by any definition. And at the end of
four years, then you need to go into the private sector, because this is
not meant to be a competition with the private sector but a laboratory
to grow new businesses and then send them out.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That is exactly the point of my
question, good. Thank you very much.
MS. PHILLIPPI: You're welcome.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Now, because it's a relatively
short-term use, I don't think there should be a problem, but I seem to
recall in my distant past that sometimes there are problems with
federal and state grants to airports if you divert airport property to
non-aviation uses. Are you aware of any current requirement?
MR. KLATZKOW: We've looked into the issue and we can't
locate any such problem.
Page 113
March 9, 2010
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. All right, good. Thank you
very much.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I'd like to make a motion for
approval.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We have a motion for approval by
myself, Commissioner Coletta, and a second by Commissioner
Henning.
Any discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Seeing none, all those in favor,
indicate by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And the ayes have it unanimously.
Thank you.
MS. PHILLIPPI: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Next item?
Item #14B
THE AFTER-THE-FACT SUBMITTAL OF A COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) HOME
INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIP (HOME) GRANT APPLICATION
TO COLLIER COUNTY HOUSING & HUMAN SERVICES (HHS)
FOR THE FIRST YEARS OPERATIONAL AND START-UP
EXPENSES OF THE IMMOKALEE BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT
Page 114
----.,..,-.---...--
March 9,2010
CENTER (IBDC) IN THE AMOUNT OF $110,500 - APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Commissioner, the next item is 14B. It's a
companion item of 14A. It's a recommendation that the Collier
County Board of County Commissioners, acting as the Community
Redevelopment Agency, approve the after-the-fact submittal of the
attached Community Development Block Grant/Home Investment
Partnership Grant application to the Collier County Housing and
Human Services Department for the first year's operational and startup
expenses of the Immokalee Business Development Center in the
amount of$110,500.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Move to approve -- second,
third.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Motion to approve by Commissioner
Henning, second by Commissioner Coletta.
Any discussion?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And this is really merely approval
to submit the request for the grant?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Not quite.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Right?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: After the fact.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: This is after the fact.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: After the fact.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, after the fact, yes. Approve,
legitimize the --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Right.
MS. PHILLIPPI: Yes, exactly.
MR. OCHS: Prior submission.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- questions already addressed, yes.
MS. PHILLIPPI: Precisely.
MR. OCHS: Yes.
Page 115
March 9, 2010
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Any other discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: All those in favor, indicate by saying
aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And the ayes have it unanimously.
Next item?
Item #14C
THE PUBLIC REALM PLAN FOR THE IMMOKALEE CENTRAL
BUSINESS DISTRICT - APPROVED
MR. OCHS: 14C, sir, is a recommendation that the Collier
County Board of County Commissioners, acting as the Community
Redevelopment Agency, approve the Public Realm Plan for the
Immokalee central business district.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
MS. FILSON: And I have one speaker.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Why don't -- we also have
Commissioner Henning that wants to make some comments, but I do
recognize a motion to approve by Commissioner Halas, second by
Commissioner Fiala. But we did have a speaker.
And Penny, just for the benefit of the public out there, would you
Page 116
March 9, 2010
give us a brief description of what this is?
MS. PHILLIPPI: I have a briefPowerPoint if you want to go
through it. Most of you have seen it with our annual report, but I'll be
happy to run through it.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yeah, if you could hit on the
highlights of it, I think it will be of benefit to the public.
MS. PHILLIPPI: Yes, that's what it is. It's actually 45 slides or
so but--
,
MR. OCHS: Pick out five.
MS. PHILLIPPI: What I want to say is, this is really the vision
for Immokalee, and there's really no other way to put it.
When I first came to this position, a lot of what I have heard was,
you know, we've been working on a master plan for six years. We're
not getting anywhere. We're just kind of trudging along. And the
reason is because people keep changing their minds.
So I felt like at that point it's very important for us to say, what
exactly is the vision? Can we put it on paper? Can we draw a picture
of it? And can we put this out into the public and get the community
to accept the vision for this community?
And that goal, I think, we've accomplished with this -- with this
master plan. And -- I mean with this Public Realm Plan. So it talks
about the vision, and it defines a central business district from the
casino up to Highway 29 and down to 9th Street. It brands the
community. It makes it -- it displays the character and the personality
of the community. It talks about public plazas, because we're in a
community that expects to see a plaza, and we don't have a plaza or
gateways into our community. So this helps define that.
And then it does a beautiful streetscape to start to -- although we
have a nice streetscape the MSTU folks have been working on for
many years -- it's much better than it was I'm sure -- but this -- this
augments what's already been done and helps define it exactly in the
direction that the community wants to go, and then it creates some
Page 117
_......__.__..."_.__.w....___..,.... .~. ._..,,~".~~_,'"_,,~",.,~_......~...,.-<~,..._~_..__
March 9, 2010
guidelines so that we can implement this plan.
And the guidelines, what I wanted to say about those is, these --
this is an internal document that's going to help us create land
development codes that are complementary to this public realm plan.
So that's basically what this plan talks about.
You know the vision for the community. This picture defines the
central business area that I just described to you.
And then we talked about the elements that we used for branding
the community. The agrarian heritage, the ranching cultural, the
various cultural influences, Native American, Central and South
American, and we used a lot of those bold colors and geometric
designs.
The plazas, we were talking about putting a plaza at 1 st and Main
on either side of the street. This will be the gateway into Immokalee,
and another one on 9th Street. And again, as you know -- it will show
up in a minute -- but we've had some injuries with pedestrians and
bicyclists because this is a pedestrian community. And so these
gateways will actually work as a traffic calming device and help with
that problem.
This is the beautiful plaza that we talked about on 9th Street. We
went into detail on that. And I believe you'll see that on your agenda
on the 23rd as we attempt to close on that property. We're very excited
about moving ahead with this beautiful neighborhood plaza and park.
This is what the 1 st Street plaza will look like. In the center, a
medallion, and it's very -- it's really quite beautiful. Again, we talked
about we had 16 fatalities in three -- I mean three fatalities and 16
injuries, so the county transportation department did a safety study,
and this Public Realm Plan addresses every single issue that was
brought up in that safety study.
And we talked about parallel parking way down the road. We
have an interim streetscape and a long-term streetscape. There goes a
little bicycle; some bicycle paths. And then features, just things that
Page 118
March 9, 2010
will make it beautiful, tiles and pavers and benches that are -- that are
complementary to our personalities, urns and planters.
And then the bump-outs. And the bump-outs were pretty
important when it came to pedestrian safety because they were moved
in such a way that the pedestrian didn't have to cross the street quite so
far. The distance was shorter. And they're beautiful pictures. This
would be the median.
And the plant palate, as you know, we're pretty much a green
community, and that's why a lot of people live in Immokalee. We
want to keep it green, so we're going to use native plants that are
drought tolerant.
And we want to have gateways. We want to have some beautiful
gateways into the community, maybe some signs that say, home of
Adrian James or this is the way to the airport, this is the way to Lake
Trafford, that sort of thing. And so those were different samples.
And then this, of course, were the form-based guidelines that
we're working on and the reason we're doing them.
Facade grants. As you know, we did $159,000 worth of facade
grants last year. And this is exactly what we tell them. This is what
you look like now. This is what you could look like. These are
examples of things that you could do, what the composition could be
of a McDonald's.
More guidelines.
And this is actually a picture or conceptual picture of the 1 st
Street and Highway -- 1st and Main as you come into Immokalee, so
this is our conceptual design.
And that's pretty much the pictures that I brought forward to you,
and you have your huge document that you got in your packet, I'm
sure.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you very much, Penny.
MS. PHILLIPPI: Okay. You're welcome.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We -- and I appreciate everybody
Page 119
March 9, 2010
from Immokalee came down here to support this plan today.
We have a motion by Commissioner Halas and a second by
Commissioner Fiala.
Any other discussion?
MS. FILSON: And we have a speaker, sir.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Oh, we do. Okay. Please call the
speaker.
MS. FILSON: Pam Brown.
MS. BROWN: I'll pass.
MR. OCHS: She waives.
MS. FILSON: Okay. She passes.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Waive. Thank you, Pam.
With that, all those in favor, indicate by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And the ayes have it, unanimously.
Thank you.
One last item.
Item #14D
THE AFTER-THE-FACT SUBMITTAL OF A COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG)/HOME
INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIP (HOME) GRANT APPLICATION
TO COLLIER COUNTY HOUSING & HUMAN SERVICES (HHS)
FOR LAND ACQUISITION EXPENSES NECESSARY FOR THE
DEVELOPMENT OF A DOWNTOWN PUBLIC PLAZA IN THE
Page 120
~,.~.,--
- ,-, .... ..-......-.....-..-----'.-.----- --'--.-,..~.",.~.,...__...__~"._M._."_"__,
March 9, 2010
AMOUNT OF $400,000 - APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir. It's item 14D. It's a recommendation that
the Collier County Board of County Commissioners, acting as the
Community Redevelopment Agency, approve the after-the-fact
submittal of the attached Community Development Block
Grant/Home Investment Partnership Grant application to Collier
County Housing and Human Services for land acquisition expenses
necessary for the development of a downtown public plaza in the
amount of $400,000.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Move to --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Motion to approve by Commissioner
Coletta, second by Commissioner Henning.
Any discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Any speaker?
MS. FILSON: No, sir.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. All those in favor, indicate by
saymg aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And the ayes have it. Thank you very
much.
MS. PHILLIPPI: Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Appreciate you-all being here.
And at this point in time, I turn the power and the gavel back
over to Commissioner Coyle.
Page 121
'-....,.....-..-.. --, ,'._---,_... --"'--~"~"._.~--_._-".~"._._.,.,-." _...._""-,.._..~.-....._--_._.._~_..".,
March 9, 2010
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you very much, Commissioner
Coletta.
We're going to go to 9F now, Mr. Ochs, right?
Item #9F
DISCUSSION REGARDING DELINEATION OF PUBLIC AND
PRIVATE PROPERTY AND ACCESS/USE RIGHTS ON AND
ALONG COUNTY BEACHES - MOTION TO DIRECT STAFF TO
TAKE STEPS FOR THE REMOVAL OF CONES/SIGNS AND
DRAFTING AN ORDINANCE WITH REGARDS TO NOT
FUNDING BEACH RENOURISHMENT PROJECTS FOR
PROPERTIES THAT RESTRICT BEACH ACCESS - APPROVED
MR. OCHS: That's correct, Commissioner Coyle.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Now, there are a lot of people
here who are here for this particular item. Our procedures require that
if you wish to speak on the item, that you fill out a speaker slip and
hand it in before the item discussion has begun. We already have a
number of speakers registered.
MS. FILSON: Thirteen.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thirteen speakers registered. Each
person will get three minutes. So if you have them, you can turn it in
to Ms. Filson right there. So please do so now.
I would say to you that it is not necessary for all 16 or 20 people
to tell us the same thing because I'm going to ask you a couple of
questions right up front as soon as we settle down a bit.
Could I see the hands all of the people who are here to speak in
opposition to the action taken by Moraya Bay? Okay.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Opposition?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Opposition to the action that they have
taken.
Page 122
-"-"'1"'"~'-'--
."."--<.._,."~-_.,--<.,_.........."",--_.,...",,.._-,..~,,_."
March 9, 2010
Now, tell me -- tell me how many people here approve of the
action taken by Moraya Bay?
Okay. I've just been told that there are 40 people in the human
resources overflow seating area, so we've got a big crowd. I don't see
anyone here in this room who is going to speak in support of Moraya
Bay. Okay.
Now, if -- we are. I just want things to settle down a little bit.
Folks, that are some seats up front up here. You're welcome to
use those.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Be a good time to have Sunday
servIce.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah, particularly pass the collection
plate would be a good time.
Okay. County Attorney, go ahead. Give us an overview of
where we are with this item.
MR. KLATZKOW: And I'll try -- and I'll try to be brief. Jeff
Klatzkow, County Attorney, just to give an overview of what the issue
is. And I got many of these documents this morning, so I didn't have
time for a PowerPoint, so I'll have to do it the old-fashioned way.
That's an overhead of Moraya Bay, and the black line there is the
erosion control line, which is the boundary point to the property. This
erosion control line is consistent all the way up and down Vanderbilt
Beach, and I'm going from Immokalee Road or Bluebill; I'm down
towards Vanderbilt Beach Road. So it's a fairly consistent line straight
on down towards the end. And I'll save you from the rest of the
photographs because they're all pretty much the same.
The typical plats there are also all the same. They are lots that go
out to the ocean with the description -- and it's too small, so I blew it
up -- having all the lots basically going to the, well, erosion control
line, and that's all the way up and down the beach as well.
The latest deed for Moraya Bay says the same thing, that their
property extends down to, in excess, the erosion control line.
Page 123
-',--.--^..--. -~..._- -'.-"-, ~,.--.,' - -"~"'-'-'~'"~-"'~""'____'__"_~'_M""_'
March 9, 2010
We took a few photographs to give you some flavor. Staff did
anyway. This is over a couple-day period. This is a view looking
towards the state park, and you can see where the people are. They're
sitting from the water line all the way up to the dunes.
And now I've got the view the other way where the beach has
been marked off. And some more view. This one will give you
another flavor. So we basically have an empty beach now from the
dunes down to the erosion control line, with the bulk of the public now
being between the erosion control line and the water's edge. This is at
a relatively low tide. If it was high tide, these people would have no
place to go.
And the last picture. And you'll notice on these pictures, you'll
see these cones, and this is what the cones say. Moraya Beach,
private.
It's an interesting issue you have before you. I've been practicing
law since 1984. This is the first time I can tell my client, you've got
an issue that might make it to the U.S. Supreme Court. You have a __
you have a private property rights issue, and private property rights
are important. They're the foundation of our personal liberties. You
also have, however, public access to the beach.
The leading case on Florida, and I'll put it up here, is back in
1974. And this is the law of Florida. And what it's basically saying is
that, if the public has customarily used a beach for as long as people
can remember, then they continue to have the right to use that beach.
And the private owner has to share that beach with them. The private
owner doesn't lose his private property rights, but he has to share the
beach with the public. In other words, those cones would need to be
gone.
To my knowledge there has never been a case that has
successfully implemented this particular law of Florida, the
Customary Use Doctrine. There are other states that have it. Oregon
being the first one that did this. And it stands alone. Is this case still
Page 124
..,~_~.__.___._._w,_,._. .. ""_~'___" _._ .._.._,._...__,_'.._....~ ~._._ ._._~~',__,
March 9, 2010
good law in 2010? I don't know. If the Supreme Court heard this,
would they uphold this law? I don't know. I can just tell you that as
we speak, that is the law of Florida.
If the board wishes to preserve this as a public beach, you have
two alternatives. One is, we can take action along the Customary Use
Doctrine, and the other is eminent domain.
And I asked staff to give an estimate, and it's a rough estimate, of
what the cost would be to acquire this from the owner.
And, Leo, could you turn it?
And staffs estimate on this portion of the beach would be $5.6
million. If you were to extend that from here all the way down to the
end, the cost would simply be prohibitive for the county to do that.
It's a board decision. These are very difficult issues for the
board. I will tell you that litigation is uncertain, and it will be lengthy.
You're looking at five to seven years here. My gut tells me that you
would have people coming all over from the state on both sides of this
issue, both from the development community and the
right-to-beach-access people. This would be a national case in its
scope, and you would be biting on a -- a significant and serious case.
I could keep your costs low. We could do most of this in-house.
We'd want to get some outside attorneys, but this would be a lot of
office time and a lot of time here. And it's going to be a fight. It's
going to be a big, nasty fight.
And I did read the article, or the editorial in today's Naples Daily
News, and I couldn't agree with it more. I'm sorry that it's happened--
had to have that happen this way, but it is they who, no pun intended,
drew the line in the sand. And unless they wish to remove those
cones, I don't know what else to do.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Thank you very much.
I have Commissioner Henning first who would like to ask a
question.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Surely there must be some
Page 125
____""_'Om.
.... ..~._.._.,-_.....__..__._._,-_._-~-,,,..._-- '"'...-.---.--.--..-.-
March 9, 2010
Supreme Court decisions on this issue.
MR. KLATZKOW: Not on this doctrine, no. This is a--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The doctrine you mean by
customary use?
MR. KLATZKOW: Customary use, yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: But there must be some
decisions by the court, the highest court, on public use of the beach
versus private property?
MR. KLATZKOW: There is a decision that will be coming
down from the Supreme Court anytime now that will be discussing
public access to the beach. It also involves a Florida case. It might
impact this; it might not impact this.
Now, I'm not asking the board to bring an action based on
prescriptive easement. I don't think that, at the end of the day, it
would be a successful case because --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Why not?
MR. KLA TZKOW: -- you would have to show that the property
owner consented -- not consented, but the property owner did not
consent to the use, that the use was open and hostile. And my
understanding, that the property owner here previously allowed the
public on the beach.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes.
MR. KLA TZKOW: And I think that defeats that action. I think
it'd be a waste of time.
The claim here is customary use, and you'd have to show, and I'd
need testimony, that this beach has been open for as long as people
can remember to the public for the public's use.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: When you say customary use,
would it be considered, or taken under consideration, the customers of
the old Vanderbilt Inn because they -- Jeff, they charged a parking fee
MR. KLATZKOW: Yes, they did--
Page 126
---......-...,,,.,-~~,- '''-''''~._--''--'''''---~. '--"""'---"'-'-""-'~-'~.~~_',_-"_,_"_-~-_,,,_--
March 9, 2010
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- at the hotel?
MR. KLATZKOW: -- which gets rid of the -- also goes against
the Prescriptive Use Doctrine. What I'm saying is, as long as it's been
in Naples, okay, even before the Vanderbilt Inn, before Moraya Bay,
people have been using this beach almost as a public beach.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yep.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: How -- can we clearly
demonstrate that? You see, my concern is, losing this case, we may
set up ourselves to lose all the way up and down the coast.
MR. KLATZKOW: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And we want to -- I want to
proceed cautiously. This is -- this is a huge issue for our community,
and the people who visit our community. Ifwe lose this, we're going
to be losing a lot. So I'm reluctant to rush into this until I'm assured
that we can win this case, more than 50 percent assurety (sic) that we
can win this.
MR. KLA TZKOW: Okay. I don't know that I'll be able to give
you that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I -- yeah, I could just see
where we're going to have, just in our parks, be able for the public to
use that.
Now, one of those -- I believe it was a plat on Connors Park, I
believe it said, along the water's edge.
MR. KLATZKOW: Yeah, they vary between along the water's
edge to the high water mark to a couple things. I'm taking it to mean
the erosion control line straight on down.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, the -- but from the
Moraya Bay's case it said along the water's edge.
MR. KLATZKOW: Let me double-check.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And if we look at the pictures of
where the cones are placed versus the erosion control line, I think it's
Page 127
"--<"\"'-<-'" .,,--, -~---'-'-"'-"'----'---'-""--'--'-' - ......"........".-+-.--.......- ------~"--"'.__.-
March 9, 2010
MR. KLATZKOW: That is their deed.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. High mean water. So
that's coastal.
MR. KLATZKOW: Erosion control line basically.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Erosion control line.
MR. KLATZKOW: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And -- when was the building
CO'd, or when was the property CO'd for its present use?
MR. KLATZKOW: I don't have that answer. It was maybe two
years ago, thereabouts.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: About a year ago.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I think that's very
important because maybe this is not an issue of exercising property
rights. Maybe it's an issue, what I'm hearing, is rumors of -- because it
doesn't look like they're going to get approval for their beach club.
That's more the issue. Have you heard that?
MR. KLATZKOW: Yes, I have.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So there's ways to possibly
settle this so it doesn't come to a court decision.
MR. KLATZKOW: If the owners of Moraya Bay were
amenable to sharing the beach with the public, then yes, you have a
settlement.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. I think you didn't answer
my question, but that's fine.
MR. KLATZKOW: I'm sorry. I misunderstood then. It's--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No.
MR. KLATZKOW: To answer your question, yes, there is--
there is a way that we can avoid having to litigate this thing. I agree
with that. But it takes two sides here.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Correct. Is there any way that
we can get a cost estimate on what it would cost us to litigate this
beyond the Florida courts?
Page 128
. ."t--~-'.~-''"
March 9, 2010
MR. KLATZKOW: Outside counsel costs would not exceed
$100,000. As far as my office time, it would depend how vigorous the
defense was. It could be an awful lot of time.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And what would be the source
of funding?
MR. KLATZKOW: Ad valorems.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Not tourist tax?
MR. KLA TZKOW: My office is funded by ad valorems at this
point in time for all matters.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Well, I guess my biggest
concern is losing. I'm done.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. All right.
Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Jeff, I'm thankful that you looked
into all this. My concern has been, ever since I've been on this Board
of County Commissioners, is to try to save access to the waterways
and to the beaches.
And one of the first things that came up on the agenda when I got
elected is, we lost a marina with 450 boats in a highly residential area,
and now it looks like we're going to lose beach access.
I want to make sure that people understand that I was solicited by
a lobbyist in regards to Moraya Bay in December, and I had a couple
of witnesses that said, if you don't approve the beach club, we're going
to cut off access to the beach. And I believe I brought this to your
attention, to the county manager's attention. And I said, basically, as
far as I was concerned, that was blackmail.
And as far as cutting a deal with them where they get a beach
club for opening the rights to the beach that was always there, I've got
a real problem. Ifwe don't address this problem now, there's going to
be other associations that are going to say, if Moraya Bay can do this,
then everybody else can do this. And the end result is, all the beach
will -- beaches in Collier County up in District 2 will be shut off to the
Page 129
.-......,.....-'^.
^~ ~"'~"""'"'-----"'-"--'----~''''''~-'~--''~''-~--'''''''''''-~---...-
March 9,2010
public other than the state park and Barefoot Beach. Other than that,
there won't be any beach access.
And I believe that one of the things that attract people to this
community and even tourists is the fact that we have open beaches and
they all can go there. When you look at a billion dollars that was
brought to this community every year of people who come and visit,
and not just live here but just visit, to me, this is -- this is a -- would be
a huge deficit to -- to the economic environment here in Collier
County.
And I believe that we need to address this issue and we need to
take it to court because it's not going to stop --
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER HALAS: -- until we get this under way.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Good for you.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And if somebody tells me that
we're going to cut off the beach access if you don't approve of the
beach club -- and there's no way that they -- they don't even have the
parking for it. In fact, they've got -- they've got butler apartments in
there, and I don't know where they're going to accommodate those
people.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Wow, Commissioner Halas, you
just about said it all. But the truth of the matter is, if this is not
challenged in the courts -- I mean, sure, we could work a deal out.
Deals are worked all the time in the better interest of the public;
however, you can't work a deal out in an entity like this, because what
are you going to do with the properties on each side and the ones
down the beach?
This has to be established in court. You have to be able to set a
precedence (sic) that says that the public's right to these beaches is
infinite, that it's not going to end at any point in time, that there's never
going to be another challenge to it. So let's get this up and over with.
Page 130
March 9, 2010
I know we're going to be -- we're at a very tight budget for this
coming year. We don't have enough money to be make a lot of things
work, but this is something that the public expects. I mean, we go out
of our way to make sure that there -- the beach passes that are given to
the general public out there, the taxpayers of this county, are free, and
the reason being for that is we recognize that one of the reasons they
moved down here was the ability to be able to get to the beaches and
enjoy them.
So it would be absolutely crazy at this point in time to start
negotiating with every single property owner down there. Let's just
get this up and over with and set a precedence.
Now, the Supreme Court made the definition of this as far as the
right to access. This is back in the '70s?
MR. KLATZKOW: 1974.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And it's only been challenged
once?
MR. KLA TZKOW: It's, to my knowledge, never been
challenged.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Never been challenged. Well,
it's about time, and it should happen right here in Collier County.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Could I ask the staff to address
something for me? We have a lot of other commercial organizations
on the beach and they have not put out cones and tapes restricting
access. I'd like to understand whether Moraya Bay is in violation of
our codes by putting out the cones. Somebody going to answer that
one for me?
MS. RAMSEY: Well, it's not really my department, but I did
talk with the environmental services -- staff did talk with
Environmental Services. And what we understood was, you know,
every time we go on the beach, whether it's with a vehicle, whether it's
to stake out a sea turtle nest, we have to have a permit to do that.
Page 131
-...-,....-.--...---.--.----.----.--,....----...-...----......-..~_.__._"-_.._._-<--"
March 9, 2010
Collier County Government has to get that permit in order to put those
things in the ground.
And my understanding, as we understand our code, is that the
environmental look at this as being debris. So if we had a high tide or
if we had a storm event, that the stakes, the cones, et cetera, would get
washed out into the Gulf, which would become debris. So it seems to
me that they would also need to have a permit in order to place these
on the beaches.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. And is that the official
interpretation of our code requirements?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: For the record, Nick Casalanguida
with Community Development.
Sir, an individual has the right to mark off their property line. To
which extent they do that, they have to comply with our codes. And I
could look into that for you.
But a surveyor can place a survey marker, and if an applicant
wants to say, you know, beware, stay off property, keep off my
property, as long as they meet the requirements of the code in terms of
signage, they can do that. But I can answer that in more detail and
come back to the board on that.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. I would like to get a clear
understanding. There are survey markers all over the beach.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: That's right.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: So that wouldn't be anything new. Signs
and cones and tape are an entirely different issue. And I don't think
we have permitted those anywhere along the beach.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Cones, correct, but signage is a
different animal. To notice keep off, no trespassing, people can post
their property. They'd have to do that within the extent of the code,
and I'd have to do a little research to make sure I come up with the
correct answer for you, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. I would appreciate an
Page 132
- ..~ "'_._._~~-_._-,-_._---._-,-_._."._.,._._--_..~,--_.-
March 9, 2010
interpretation on that very quickly.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Will do.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Because I believe that there is an
opportunity to have those cones removed tomorrow morning. It's that
simple.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And that doesn't require a lawsuit.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: No, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. It shouldn't require any expense
at all. So I think we need to get on that pretty quickly.
But the issue of the lawsuit is an entirely different thing and has
more serious implications. Maybe we can get where we want to go
much faster and a bit simpler.
Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah. I think this also opens up
Pandora's box as far as beach renourishment and the amount of money
that we spend here in this county. I think the last time it cost us like
$26 million to have the beach renourished. And ifthere's no access,
then how can we -- if we leave it up for tourist development tax
dollars to pay for the beach renourishment.
The question I have for the county attorney, is there any way that
we can use TDC funds to assist in this lawsuit since this involves the
tourists and the residents and that we use money to improve access
points?
MR. KLATZKOW: Yeah. I think you might be able to.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. I think that might be a
funding source, because obviously -- is there any hoteliers that aren't
located on the coast that are present here this afternoon? I'm surprised
that hoteliers that don't have access, direct access, to the beach are not
here because it seems to me this would be a huge impediment to them
as far as getting rooms rented if we should end up losing all the access
to the beaches.
Page 133
March 9, 2010
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Using public funds to improve
private property? I guess my question is, what kind of approval did
our staff get to renourish the beach? I don't know if I really need that
now, but--
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I can answer part of that question for
you. We encountered that same situation in Naples ten years ago. We
had to get permission from each of the property owners to enter their
property and to renourish the beach. A number of property owners,
either because they were not present or they did not want to respond,
wound up with no beach renourishment for a fairly long period of time
and there were big holes in the beach right in front of their homes.
But it's certainly -- I believe there are all kinds of opportunities to
resolve this short of a long, extended lawsuit. I really do.
MR. KLATZKOW: And I would urge the board to exhaust those
before starting down this road.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes. And here's my suggestion, then I'll
go to Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I--
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Oh, I'm sorry. Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- want to finish up what you
said.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The law doesn't permit us to use
public funds to improve private property. So was there approval to
recognize that as a public use property? That's my point.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah. I -- I believe that, yes, you're
right, that it was approved as public use property, and that's the only
reason that public funds were used for the purpose of replenishment,
and that is exactly the point.
We have within our power to do several things. I believe we can
force the removal of the cones and the tape, anything else they put out
Page 134
March 9, 2010
there that is temporary in nature. We can also assure that there will be
no beach renourishment taking place at that location unless private
access is allowed. We -- I believe we can do that by ordinance.
And so I think that there are a number of ways that we can, we
can take action that will encourage compliance with public use of the
beach short of having to spend five years getting to the Supreme
Court.
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, I'm just going to weigh in and
say that I stand with Commissioner Halas, with you, Commissioner
Coyle, with Commissioner Coletta, and I would say that they couldn't
have -- they couldn't have hired a firm to have a worse public relations
coup than this.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Oh, I'm sorry, go ahead.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: So I think now, since we've
discussed this, I think it's time that we hear from the public speakers.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Why don't we get a motion?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I think we'll listen for the -- have
the public speakers speak, and then we'll have a motion.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. At least can we get a sense of
how the board feels? Does anybody on the board approve of what
Moraya Bay has done?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: No.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Good.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. So I'm not going to try to
discourage you from not (sic) getting up and speaking, but if you get
up and speak, it's going to be another hour or so before we ever get a
chance to make the decision that we really have already made, I think.
So if you would like to waive and have us get on with the
Page 135
^...._-~--....~.._..~...._,-_...~-~,~._-~-----_._~ "--'-~--'-,-~~,-----",--~,-~.,~-~,,-~-, .--
March 9, 2010
business of solving this problem, then when your name is called, just
say I waive, and then that doesn't mean this (indicating). But just tell
us that you waive, and then we'll get on with taking the vote, which I
think is what you want us to do.
Ms. Filson?
MS. FILSON: You going to have one at each dais?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah. We'll have one person come up to
each podium if we're going to have anybody who doesn't waive.
MS. FILSON: The first speaker is Ronald Pascucci. He'll be
followed by Mary Lou Smart.
MR. PASCUCCI: May I give a copy of my statement?
MS. FILSON: I can pass that out.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Why don't you just put it -- we won't
have time to read it now. If you'll give it to the court recorder (sic).
COMMISSIONER HALAS: You have to state your name, sir.
MR. PASCUCCI: Ronald Pascucci. I live right across the street
from Moraya Bay in Vanderbilt Landings. I obviously can't go
through this whole thing. It's not necessary. When you read it, you'll
see what we feel -- how we feel.
As taxpayers -- I'll just read the last paragraph. Commissioners,
as taxpayers, we need your help. The insanity must stop. The
neighborhood has had enough. Special treatment of this developer
must stop. We're here to ask you today to reinstate the public beach.
Moraya Bay has become Pariah Bay.
(Applause.)
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Mary Lou Smart. She'll
followed by Emily Maggio.
MS. SMART: Hi. I'm also here to represent a group called -- a
citizens group call KOBO, Keep Our Beaches Open, and I've been
working on beach access issues for well over a year now. And what
really got me started on all this though -- and I think it should be on
the record as -- I'm glad you're all with us today, but what -- what we
Page 136
March 9,2010
had with the Vanderbilt Inn was a treasure, we all knew it was a
treasure, and I started getting more involved when I woke up one day
and I realized that the Vanderbilt Inn had sold and not one
commissioner had bid on it, not one.
And so I started asking people, and they said, well, in Vanderbilt
Beach there's a rule -- parks and rec told me this, a few people. You
will never sell land to Collier County. So I asked around, is it true? Is
it true?
Well, I saw a memo from Halas that said, it would have been
nice if there was any interest by the citizens because we had the
money to buy it.
Then other people said, well, nobody presented a proposal.
Nobody asked for it.
It's very -- well, let me just go on and not get detracted (sic). But
-- it was too expensive. That's what it came down to. But, well, this
developer may have paid $72 million for it, but I believe the bidding
started around nine. And the point is, you took your eyes off the
beach. Everybody ran inland and built a water park that cost a huge
amount of money, and we're still at the beach.
I don't know anyone in Naples Park that uses it. I'm sure the
water park's a great thing, but we're at the beach.
And he might have paid $72 million for it, but he acts like he
bought the moon. And why wouldn't he? The county's been giving
him one variance after the next. That building's allowed to go higher,
it's allowed to go wide. We lost our parking.
(Applause.)
MS. SMART: But -- we lost our parking. It's probably the most
used parking in the county, and in some lawsuit we lost that. People
like to park, run on the beach for a quick walk. We -- apparently we
lost that.
So what you've put at risk by not buying this place, by giving
away the parking, all that, it's shocking. The only reason I'm bringing
Page 137
March 9, 2010
this up is, a long time ago we lost -- the Vanderbilt Beach, that whole
area's only about five miles long. We lost about three and a half
because some commissioners gave away all access to Pelican Bay,
and now we don't have that much left. The dynamic of Vanderbilt is
screwed up because we only have two access points, so --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Ma'am, your time has expired.
MS. SMART: Even ifI'm representing a group?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes, ma'am.
MS. SMART: I just have one statement. I encourage Collier
County Commissioners, which you just said you would do, but take
whatever steps possible in court and by the powers vested by you and
the public to oppose this developer's measures to strong-arm you.
Thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Emily. She'll be followed by
Mary Pent.
MS. MAGGIO: Good afternoon. My name is Emily Maggio,
and I don't live in Little Hickory Shores. I've been a resident of Collier
County for, oh, come July 1st will be 41 years, and I can attest that
those beaches have been historically used by the public. I used them
when there wasn't a condo in sight.
I think I'm going to borrow a line from that famous orator, Yogi
Berra. This is like deja vu all over again.
In September/October of 1978, I went to the beach one day.
And, of course, then you had to park on the Lee County side. And this
was right after Lely bought the property from Gulf America.
And 10 and behold, coming right off the dune and into the water
was a fence. They made a statement. Same thing. Well, the county
made them take it down. They also made them remove their beach
chairs that Lely Barefoot put out there because they interfere with
turtles. It's not just -- you know, you have a Land Development Code
rule against it.
And to answer you, Commissioner Henning, it's always worth the
Page 138
March 9, 2010
time and the money. When I started with the Barefoot Beach
guardhouse, it took 16 years of my life. I don't know how much time
and my own personal money to pay an attorney. Believe me, it's
always worth it.
(Applause.)
MS. MAGGIO: Over the years -- over the years, previous
commissions -- and I have sat in this chamber many times -- have
failed to provide adequate public access for the public. They've
passed the buck, passed the buck, and here you sit with that lousy,
dirty buck in your hands.
You don't need me to tell you you are stewards of these public
trust lands. We look to you to protect our interests. It's hard to get
people to come out. The fact that all these people came today shows
you something. And believe me, I know something about trying to get
people to come out to meetings.
Please, this is the time. You heard your attorney. I agree with
Commissioner Coletta. You draw that line in the sand and don't you
budge.
(Applause.)
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Mary Pent. She'll be
approximately followed by --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Ladies and gentlemen, please hold your
applause until the end of the meeting. We can't really hear the
announcement of the next speakers. Let's not delay it any longer than
necessary .
MS. PENT: My name is Mary Pent, and I'm a proud homeowner
and taxpayer, and I've been here 38 years. When I first came to
Naples, I -- with my two granddaughters, I says, where's the best
beach to go to for children? They said Vanderbilt Beach, and they
told me the way to get there.
I was a stranger in town. I came from Miami where I lived for 40
years. And you know what Miami is, no beaches.
Page 139
~..""""_..._'
March 9, 2010
But this beach was very heavily used there 38 years ago. And
any time you read something in the paper about people going to the
beach and what a good time they had, the tourists, they went to
Vanderbilt Beach because it was such a clean, wide, safe beach for the
children.
And this picture that they had up there with that line drawn, if
we're -- and to the ocean side of that line, at low tide that's okay, but at
high tide, there's no beach. And so I just feel that the property owners
and the taxpayers should have what they're paying for.
Now, I live in a condo of over 500 condos, which is about 750
residents, and every condo here has a pool. But when they have
guests, they go to the beach. They don't go to the pool. They go to
the beach.
Most of the people in Collier County, the tourists, are from the
middle of the country, have never seen a beach. All they've seen is
dry land.
I was born and raised in South Florida, and I've lived here all my
life. My parents and my grandparents were born and raised in South
Florida. And I'm just a proud Floridian, that's all there is to it. But
please, don't let them take our beach. Thank you.
(Applause.)
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Graham Ginsberg. He'll be
followed by William Dobbins.
MR. DOBBINS: I'll waive. William waives.
MS. FILSON: Okay. Then he'll be followed by Armand Dirro,
Pirro. Okay.
MR. GINSBERG: For the record, Graham Ginsberg. Familiar
faces. Haven't been here for a long time.
The big difference between this project and the Ritz-Carlton
parking lot is when I was working on that in this commission, we
didn't have this kind of support. But we got that parking lot built with
your help. I do appreciate that. We got a lot of access to the people
Page 140
., -\",,,",,.-
March 9, 2010
inland.
But this crowd here is very supportive of access in the north. I
don't need to be here. There's plenty of people to do exactly what I did
in the Vanderbilt area, and I ask that you take this to court. I don't
know if you have much ofa choice, as mentioned. Not only that, the
five commissioners that are sitting here at this present time were
involved in this transaction with this developer. And should this fall
to privatization, I think this will be your legacy in Collier County,
unfortunately.
So I do suggest that you move forward and do what's right for the
public good and that is to make this area legally public for everyone
and set a precedence in Collier County. Thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Armand Pirro. He'll be
followed by Rainer Olbrich.
MR. PIRRO: Thank you, commissioners. My name is Armand
Pirro from Vanderbilt Landings in Collier County.
As we know, there are signs and stakes and cones sectioning off
300 feet of linear beach. At low tide it's a small but wet passage
between the stakes and the water's edge. When the tide is in on a
windy day, the wave action and water actually reaches the stakes. On
the same windy day with wave action, there's a safety hazard now.
There are great many older people, young children, that go to the
beach, and if they have to walk through water when the wave action is
high, it becomes a -- really a dangerous situation. It's an accident
waiting to happen.
So I think what you're proposing, what you're thinking about
doing today, is going to be beneficial for all of us people who now live
here in Florida. We can have a safe beach to go to. And I think the
safety factor is something that we should all consider and which I'm
sure everyone does, but we haven't talked about it today. So let it be
one of the major items for the beach. Thank you.
(Applause.)
Page 141
March 9, 2010
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Rainer Olbrich. He'll be
followed by Charles Hennigar.
MR. OLBRICH: Good afternoon. I'd just like to read for the
record a brief letter. Dear Collier County Commissioners, I have been
a long-time and full-time resident of Collier County since 1988. I'm
very, very concerned about what is happening at the beach in front of
the newly constructed Moraya condominium in North Naples. That
property owner/developer is attempting to diminish Collier residents'
right of unrestricted use of one of our renowned beaches, something
all of us have enjoyed for many, many years.
What is going on really sets an unparalleled precedent. Just last
week, last Monday, while visiting this particular beach, I heard several
of our tourists complaining to me and making negative statements
about this attempt of privatization of one of their prized possess- __
beaches here in North Naples, and one told me that he had been
coming here for many years.
Dear Commissioners, do we really want Collier County to
become known as a tourist unfriendly county? This will certainly and
adversely affect our number one industry here, tourism, if left
unchecked.
Further, other beachfront owners are surely watching and they
may follow suit and do what Moraya seeks to accomplish unless the
county and the Florida legislature take a strong and unequivocal
position that protects the continued rights of the public residents and
tourists alike as it relates to beach access and enjoyment.
I believe this is not entirely a legal issue but something that may
affect the economic viability of not only this community but possibly
the entire State of Florida in the future, and I know that many others
share my concerns.
Finally, therefore, I sincerely hope that you, Board of Collier
County Commissioners, individually and collectively, will be among
the first to pro actively address this issue and make your position
Page 142
" -..,.--~...,.
March 9, 2010
known not only to the residents, but to our state legislature and the
governor.
Thank you so much.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Charles Hennigar. He'll be
followed Rita Foos.
MS. FOOS: Rita waives.
MS. FILSON: She'll be followed by Kathleen Robbins.
MR. HENNIGAR: Charles Hennigar. I live in 5 Bluebill
Avenue. I've been coming here since '78.
I'm representing Baker Carol Point, 632 units. You know, they
can't cut us off. That's why we all came here. The man, when we
went to a meeting, he invited us to a meeting and -- where we spoke
and he was very careless with the truth, because he told us at that the
meeting nothing would happen to the beach. See what happened?
You make a deal with him, it's all through. He won't ever live up to
the deal in my opinion. Thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Kathleen Robbins. She'll be
followed by David Galloway.
MS. ROBBINS: For the record, Kathleen Robbins. I'm secretary
of the Vanderbilt Beach Residents Association. I'd just like to bring
out one point that hasn't been mentioned.
This parcel was covered by the Bert Harris Settlement
Agreement. And as part of that settlement, the county was granted __
citizens of the county were granted easements for beach access and for
a turnaround, and the developer contributed $500,000 for a public
restroom facility.
It is incongruous and it shows bad faith for the developer to then
restrict access to that selfsame beach that these easements and funds
were meant to allow. This is just another loophole that this developer
is trying to exploit, and it's one more example ofthis developer's lack
of care or interest in Collier County and in the neighborhood. Thank
you.
Page 143
. n""'-r_"_"'" ,.,._.."'..._,..~._'__'___._,__~_.~._,_~_.__,~~____
March 9, 2010
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is David Galloway. He'll be
followed by Josee Bruce.
MR. GALLOWAY: Thank you. David Galloway. Also a
member of the board of Vanderbilt Beach Residents Association, but I
also live on the beach in a condo. In fact, one of the buildings I live in
is probably the closest to the Gulf of any of the buildings along the
golf course -- the Gulf coast there in Vanderbilt Beach.
I'm very much opposed to this only because of the fact that, one
of the reasons we chose the beach, we like the beach. And I don't
want to shut off our beach in front of our residence. That's not the
proper thing to do.
Commissioner Halas mentioned about economic aspects for the
Collier County, but it's also what's -- really what's right for the citizens
and right for everyone at that -- that comes to the Collier County. It's
not always about economic issues.
We need to keep beaches open to the public. The beach in front
of my residence is open to the public. I welcome people there.
They're great conversation pieces once in a while, not all the time, but
once in a while. And I think what it is is it's an issue of being
strong-armed by just one or two developers in our Collier County --
county, that I think the only way to preserve our beaches is to fight
them head on so that we protect our past rights, our present rights, and
the rights of the future taxpayers of Collier County.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Josee Bruce. She'll be
followed by Lew Schmidt.
MR. SCHMIDT: Lew Schmidt waives.
MS. FILSON: She'll be followed by Donna Caron.
MS. BRUCE: Yes, hello. I'm here to talk about the tourist side
of it because we're tourists here. We've been coming to Naples for ten
years, and for the last four years we've been coming three months,
from January 1st to March 31st.
When Friday, two weeks ago, we were thrown out of that beach,
Page 144
March 9, 2010
we kind of thought that maybe it's time for us to go on the east side
where the beaches are still public, and we're going to go where our
money is wanted, to shop on the other side, to go to the beaches, to go
to the golf clubs. They're sentimental that -- so when I wrote to the
Naples Daily and to Wink News and I saw that everything backed me
up and -- KOBO KOBO--
, ,
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Keep our beaches.
MS. BRUCE: Yeah. Embarking (sic) in that, we were happy to
know that, and we feel supported as tourists.
But Mr. Coyle, when you were mentioning the refurbishment of
the beach, you're still right even if they have their cones. They put the
cones away, you raid their beach, and you put their cones back. So I'm
wondering about that, who's paying for that. Anyway, thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Donna Caron waives.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Donna Caron.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: She waives.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: She waives.
MS. FILSON: Gina Downs. She'll be followed by Joseph Rich.
MS. DOWNS: Good afternoon. Gina Downs, and I'm required
to say I'm also running for commissioner for District 2, Republican
candidate for Frank Halas' seat. He's not running.
I applaud your decision today. What I'd -- what I'd like to point
out is the lesson to be learned here today is the coveted beach access
and boat facilities in this county have slipped through our fingers time
and time again.
I think in the future it has to be a steadfast commitment of the
commissioners to take advantage and purchase these types of
properties at every chance that you get.
My understanding of the history of this property is it was
available for $5 million to the board before this one in the 1990s. And
what a shame to be spending money on the other end to defend that
when it could have been purchased for a few million dollars back then.
Page 145
March 9, 2010
So let's just go into the future with our eyes wide open.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Joseph Rich. He'll be
followed by Robert Leher. And he will be your final speaker.
MR. RICH: Hi. My name is Joseph Rich, and I reside at 9700
Gulfshore Drive.
I would like to ask the board if there was ever an impact study
that was done with regard to this situation. The reason I ask that
question is because I can think of a couple negatives right off the bat
that probably would affect the community and large (sic), and that is
property values. I'd like to ask the board if they have an idea of what
would happen to the property values in that area as a result of no
beach.
I can say one thing, and that is that I have a friend that purchased
at Surf Colony, and the reason he purchased there was because of the
access to that beach. Now he tells me today that had he known that he
would not be able to go to that beach, he would not have purchased
the property.
The second thing is, I think what you're going to find is a lot of
people are not going to stop going to the beach. They're going to still
try to get to the beach and they're going to go down further, and
they're going to try to get into some of those access areas, and what's
going to happen is you're going to find people parking in some of the
condominium association areas, and it's going to create a problem.
So if it's not asking too much, I wonder if some of these issues
could be studied by the board and maybe presented to the people at a
later date. Thank you.
MS. FILSON: Your final speaker is Robert Leher.
MR. LEHER: A good afternoon, my name is Robert Leher,
L-E-H-E-R. I've been a resident of Collier County for ten years. My
wife brought me down here in 1983 to meet the parents, and they took
me to the chickee hut at Vanderbilt Beach, and they told me that they
had been coming there since it was the Ramada Inn.
Page 146
_.~,.,-.""",._--
March 9, 2010
And at sunset, I and all the other people walked through there,
not just through the Vanderbilt Inn, a legal issue that came up, but on
both sides of it, and went to the beach.
As to Commissioner Henning's question about, is this a winner or
a loser? I look at this and I say, I wouldn't want to be on the other side
on the continuous use issue, because the continuous use issue is really
clear.
What are your costs going to be? I think the continuous use issue
is so clear that you're going to be able to bring on pro bono attorneys
from all over this country, environmental law -- law schools will want
to write briefs on this. I think if you get the right person to get in
charge of the legal -- getting pro bono legal support, you can really
keep the costs down, and you can make precedent.
If you remember the Naples Zoo. We saved Jungle Larry's. We
saved it. That was the legacy of the decision makers and the voters at
that time, and that's where you-all are, and I'm with you. That's where
we all are right now to save this, and you've got to have some guts.
And I think we can do it. They have trespassed, they have trespassed
on our property. This thing is upside down.
As to those cones -- and you ought to go there and look at them.
It makes you sick. As to those cones, all you have to do is put up
some signs right in front of them and say, this is public property. Let
them be the bad guys. Let them file the lawsuit. Let them, at their
meetings, be thinking about the millions of dollars, because they're not
going to get pro bono help. They're not going to get law schools to
write briefs and help all the staff attorneys here.
I thank you for your time. I just hope we save this like we saved
the zoo. Thank you all for your time.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You were first.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Halas?
Page 147
...--t'".-...~..._""
March 9, 2010
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Commissioners, I think it's time to
make a motion that we direct staff to take every possible move to
remove these cones, and if this is not successful, then I think that we
need to proceed on with a lawsuit.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second that motion.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Could I make a friendly amendment to
that motion?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Sure.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I think we should also add a change to
our ordinance which would prohibit beach renourishment in those
properties that are trying to restrict public access.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'll put that straight -- I'll put that in
the motion -- that's in my motion. Is that in your second?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That would be in my second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We purchased the zoo, right?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We did. And by the way, it was this
board that put it on the referendum so you could vote for it. So this
board, okay --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And we're not asking to
purchase this property.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's right. We're not asking them to
purchase this property.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Was we ever offered this
property?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: No.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: As stated.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No. We were told we weren't--
they would never sell it to us.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I don't remember it coming up.
It wasn't offered to us. So -- Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah.
Page 148
March 9,2010
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I have the floor.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I just want to --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And you'll be -- as soon as I'm
done.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I'll call on you.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And you can have the chairman
call on you.
So, you know, the issue is, I think everybody's sensitive to the
public's right to the beach. Access is there. Utilization is the question.
So my issue is, I don't want to lose it, because it we lose it, it's
going to set precedence up and down. So I want to proceed
cautiously. That's my only issue. Proceed cautiously.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. I just --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No. Let Commissioner Halas
go first. I'll follow up.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Commissioner Henning made a --
asked a question in regards to were we offered this property.
Before I was on this board, I went to the commissioner at that
time who represented District 2, and the Vanderbilt Inn was rumored
-- this was about 2000 -- rumored that it would be for sale for about
$12 million.
I talked to that commissioner. I said that we needed to buy that
piece of property, and that -- I was told that it was too much money
and that they didn't have the money.
There was also a piece of property south of that location, which
was an empty lot next to some residential units. That was for sale for
$5 million. I was also told that the county didn't have money to buy
that either.
So that's why when I came on this board, that I felt that the most
important thing for all the citizens in Collier County was water access,
and that's why I've been so adamant about making sure that we have
Page 149
-"'~_"_'___'___._~_'___""'___'_.___""'_'_'_'_~'C.._"~_"_._'_~.__._". ,~....____.
March 9, 2010
water access either by boat or that we have beach access for not only
the residents in all the county, but also for our tourists. So I just want
to make sure that's on the record.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. One of the things that
got me to be a commissioner -- and some people said I was a
troublemaker, but I like to call myself a civic activist.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: No. He's still a troublemaker.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's right, I am. That guy
from the far eastern regions of Collier County.
But are you people resolved to see this solved? Are you really
resolved, or are you just coming to one meeting and that's going to be
the end of it? Well, I hope not. Because the truth of the matter is, this
thing is going to move very slowly as it goes forward. Public opinion
has to be garnished, we got to be able to go forward on this, and it's
going to be a spontaneous movement on your part that's going to make
it happen.
Now, what I'm proposing, and if you're against it, then we'll drop
it right here. This Saturday between five and seven, let's have a
spontaneous demonstration in front of Moraya Bay carrying signs.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Let's express our indignation
with that they're doing out there. Let's let them know that we're not
going to accept it. And the reason I'm picking five to seven is for
several reasons. One, I don't want to conflict with the St. Patrick's
Day Parade and, two, I figure if we're going to go all through this
trouble, we should be able to enjoy a nice sunset.
So five to seven, show up, bring your homemade signs, be
spontaneous, pick some leaders, and we'll follow your direction.
Okay? See you there Saturday?
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It can't be spontaneous if it's
Page 150
March 9, 2010
premeditated. So you're going to have to forget about it until that day,
all right?
We need to get to a vote, folks. We can't keep saying the same
things over and over.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Call the question.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: r hope that Lieutenant Frisco will
be down there to help make sure that everything goes very calmly.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And make sure anybody who turns right
on red gets a ticket. That will help fund our -- that will help fund our
legal fund to challenge this, right?
Okay. We've got a motion to instruct our staff to take whatever
action is necessary to get those cones and markers out of there and to
bring forth an ordinance which will provide that no beach
renourishment will be provided for any landowner who refuses to
allow the public on the beach or tries to restrict public access to the
beach, and then we'll evaluate it from there and see if that
accomplishes it.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And if we can't -- if we don't have
enough muscle, then we need to proceed with a lawsuit.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's right.
Okay. All in favor, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
THE AUDIENCE: (Chorus of ayes.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Your votes don't count. Was it an aye
Page 151
March 9, 2010
from you -- did you approve?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: (Nods head.)
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I want to.
Thank everyone coming out today in support of this. This is a
very important part of this community. And I'm very surprised that
we didn't have any hoteliers that have accommodations that are inland,
because this is going to greatly affect them and I would hope that the
tourist development association would get behind this also, and also
the Chamber of Commerce. It's very, very important, because this has
a big, huge impact on everything that runs in Collier County. Thank
you.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Give yourself a hand. See you
Saturday.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you very much.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: We better take a break right now,
eh?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah. We'll take a ten-minute break.
(A brief recess was had.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We're back in session, ladies and
gentlemen.
We're going to 12A. County Manager?
Item #12A
PROVIDING THE BOARD A SURVEY OF VEHICLE
IMMOBILIZATION RATES (BOOTING) CHARGED BY OTHER
JURISDICTIONS TO ASSIST IN THE BOARD'S
CONSIDERATION OF WHETHER TO CHANGE THE CURRENT
TWENTY-FIVE DOLLAR VEHICLE IMMOBILIZATION RATE
ESTABLISHED BY RESOLUTION NO. 2009-271 PURSUANT
TO ORDINANCE NO. 08-47 - MOTION FOR STAFF TO BRING
BACK A REPORT WHICH INCLUDES STIPULATIONS-
Page 152
.~.....,.....~-~,,-,"-_.,..,~_..._._-,_._._". ,---"-.,-. ,,,-",_..,-
.'....._."..__..,,~,.._,_......_"_.._,-,_.."'-~-,.
March 9, 2010
APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir, Mr. Chairman. 12A is a 2:30 time certain,
and it is to provide the board a survey of vehicle immobilization rates
charged by other jurisdictions to assist in the board's consideration of
whether to change the current $25 vehicle immobilization rate
established by resolution number 2009-271 pursuant to ordinance
number 80 -- excuse me, 08-47. A county attorney item.
MR. KLATZKOW: And we're here to take direction from the
board.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Going to take direction from the
board. Okay. So I'll just start off then and I'll say that I had a group of
gentlemen come in to visit with me a little while ago. Now, I had
been totally against booting and towing and everything because I'm all
into this neighborly business, until they explained to me that they did
have some problems in their communities, and when they started
towing, that was a -- that was a method by which to reduce some of
the problems they were having, mainly people that would rent out
their places to four, five, and six people, and all of the cars would be
strewn around as well as having other parking problems and people
not obeying the laws within their gated communities.
And then they found that the towing wasn't working as well as
booting would be, so they decided to go into the booting aspect of it
rather than the towing. And we then stepped in about that time
because we had so many complaints -- watch for this. It's going to
dump -- excuse me. And we felt that $160 for a boot would -- was too
much, so we dropped it way down to 25.
These gentlemen then came into my office and said they -- that
the booting company really wouldn't do this for $25, and they said
they really needed to have some type of enforcement, because they
found such a great response when they did have enforcement. They
were able to get things under control in their individual communities.
Page 153
"__"~_'___,.__.____...___.~__,~"._,.,w._,._~~....~,.~
March 9, 2010
They asked if I would reconsider at least the rate, and I said,
yeah. You know, we could talk about it. They said the only other
alternative they had would be to go back to towing, and that wouldn't
be good. They didn't want to do it, and I didn't want to see them do it
because towing costs so much more money, and then the people have
to find a ride down to get their vehicle, and then it costs more to store
their vehicle. So I thought, well, you know, they had a good point
there.
I asked the other commissioners if they would allow me to bring
this back onto the agenda. They all agreed. Everybody unanimously
said okay, and so here we are today.
I asked to bring -- for the county manager to make sure to give
everybody a copy of how much the towing companies, or rather, the
booting companies in other areas charge, and they provided us all with
that so we would have a good idea of what other people charge, and
now I turn it over to whomever is going to conduct this to say, what
would you like to do on that, Commissioners?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: What would you like to do,
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, first of all, I'd like to hear the
speakers, but then I would like to suggest that we raise the rate a little
bit so that we can -- you know, whatever will work for the booting
companies and yet what is fair to our communities.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. We have six speakers.
Commissioners, would you like to hear the speakers first?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Could I answer--
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Sure.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: -- Commissioner Fiala's question?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes, go ahead.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: How about 35 to $45, someplace in
that range?
Page 154
March 9, 2010
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That--
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That pertains to --
MS. FILSON: We have seven because he couldn't get to the
speaker slips because of the crowd.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. I think we could discuss that.
That would be -- I had between 35 and 55 range marked on my sheet
here.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, let's listen to the speakers. Three
minutes each. One person at each podium.
MS. FILSON: Chene Thompson, to be followed by Jack
Hedenstrom.
MS. THOMPSON: Good afternoon, County Commission
members. My name is Chene Thompson, and I'm one of the attorneys
with the Condo and HOA Law Group. As our name would suggest,
we represent only condo and homeowners associations in Lee, Collier,
and Charlotte Counties. Of course, we pride ourselves in being
responsive to our hundreds of clients, thousands of homeowners, and
residents of all three of those counties.
As you may imagine, the issue of booting or towing within a
private community is one that tends to spark debate. Of course, as you
are aware, the associations and their board of directors are charged
with enforcing the rules of these associations. And as the honorable
councilwoman pointed out, some of these associations are faced with
the daunting task of having to basically enforce their rules and
regulations with homeowners that aren't necessarily happy about it,
but they are still responsible for doing so.
In regards to parking restrictions, there are two reasons why it's
important to enforce parking restrictions. It's reasonably related to the
health, safety, and welfare of the community, as we all know, and
something that probably the commission members don't realize is that
parking violations cost the association a tremendous amount of
money.
Page 155
March 9, 2010
For example, all of my clients are all non-for-profit entities,
which means that when anything breaks or sprinklers or grass gets
driven on, it is their responsibility to repair or replace those items, and
in some cases, they have to specially assess their association members
in order to be able to do so.
For example, we represent an association where Whitestone
Security came in and assisted us because there was a tremendous issue
with illegally parked vehicles that were there.
The association had spent $59,000 in one year to repair irrigation
equipment and sod. That is a cost of $155 per unit in a 380-member
complex.
Now, a significant portion of these costs were attributable from
the residents' tenants or guests parking on the grass, as specifically
mentioned. We brought in Whitestone Security. Whitestone Security
has honestly been -- has been a godsend to our particular association.
Since bringing in Whitestone Security, they have been able to
reduce the amount that the association has spent by anywhere from 25
to 40 percent. That is a direct reduction in costs to the association
members, those members that are abiding by the rules.
I point out to the commission that I recently had the opportunity
to review the document that was provided to me, entitled Sampling of
Booting Rates, which, again, the honorable councilwoman provided.
The least cost of these is Broward County at $25, which Collier
County's currently at right now. The most is $115, being in
Montgomery County. The average of these is $56.80. So, therefore,
just on the information provided by the councilwoman, our costs here
in Collier County are way below. It is half of what the average is.
I would submit to the association (sic) that this is an important
issue and that -- I would ask that it be raised significantly. I don't
agree that it would be 30 or $40. I believe it's appropriate in the
neighborhood of $1 00. And Whitestone Security can address the
reasons why.
Page 156
.--.-."-.-.-.------... --~._."---->.~ .._.,._~._.._-._-~--,-
March 9,2010
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Thank you very much.
MS. FILSON: Okay. The next speaker is Jack Hedenstrom.
MR. HEDENSTROM: Hedenstrom.
MS. FILSON: He'll be followed by David Lupo.
MR. HEDENSTROM: Good afternoon. My name is Jack
Hedenstrom. I'm the Community Association Manager at Positano
Place in Naples. I've lived at Positano since the community was
developed in 2006, and I've been a full-time resident of Naples for 15
years.
I served on the board of directors at Positano Place up until a
year ago when I resigned that position to become the community
association manager. With many units going into foreclosure, many
of the owners of these units had tenants in their units, were paying
them cash rent, and they weren't paying us their assessments.
Owners like me and these other Positano owners here today were
paying for their tenants' water, for cable TV, and for us to maintain the
amenities that their tenants enjoyed. We had abandoned out-of-state
vehicles with expired tags, tenants were subleasing units, and previous
management didn't require lease renewals, so we basically had no idea
who was living there.
We interviewed a security company that would monitor the
vehicles coming onto our property and park overnight. We gave the
entire community two months of letters, notices, et cetera, informing
them of the changes to come about. We even had a two-week grace
period when the program was implemented.
People got the message very quickly: If you don't have a
board-approved lease for your tenant, their vehicle will be booted. If
you owe the association 5- or 10,000 and you're not paying your
assessments, we'll use the assignment of rents clause in our leases
agreement and take the assessments from your renter.
Our board feels that booting vehicles is a more friendly approach
to dealing with the people who violate the rules. With a boot, your
Page 157
~...."-.,....,._._--~--_.,,-._-,-._--~.,,_.,.,_.._----_..- ~------"""~-"'"-"~~"-~-~-~-'--~---"~"""_. - ...-..........-
March 9, 2010
vehicle never leaves the property, you don't have to pay 150 or
whatever it is for a tow, plus the storage costs, and you don't have to
find somebody to take you to the impound lot.
Are there times when we would tow vehicles? Absolutely. If
you're parked in front of a fire hydrant or you're blocking a garage,
your vehicle's going to be towed.
We all know the vocal minority who has appeared on the
broadcast journalism news pieces. Are there out-of-control boards out
there who boot somebody that's one inch over the line? Perhaps. But
we can't control them. It just doesn't seem appropriate to prevent a
booting company from doing its job because of some unruly board.
Our neighborhood is beginning to go downhill after five months
of no booting. I'm asking you, on behalf of Positano Place, to
reconsider the $25 fee to a more appropriate fee for condominium
communities such as ours and allow us to enforce our own rules and
regulations within our community and do that with the assistance of a
security company that boots vehicles.
Thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is David Lupo. He'll be
followed by Brian Mayberry.
MR. LUPO: Good afternoon. My name is David Lupo. I'm an
attorney with Cohen and Grigsby. We represent the Whitestone
Group.
The Whitestone Group is, as you may know, a company which
provides immobilization services in Collier County. There are various
other speakers from different associations who will address why that is
needed here in Collier County, but I would like to address what I
believe to be a misconception by the commissioners, and that is
simply that the cost of immobilization is drastically or significantly
different than the cost of towing.
And I think something that must be understood is the cost of
these immobilization devices is essentially 700 to $1,000 per device.
Page 158
_..~--"^_.-
March 9, 2010
These devices are not used ad infinitum or for 20 years. The average
number of times a device can be used in Collier County by the
Whitestone Group is essentially 12 times. After the 12th time, on
average, it needs to be replaced at an additional cost of $700 to
$1,000. The reason for that either is that it is irretrievably broken by
someone trying to remove it, or the parts simply degrade and they
cannot be used again because it can't effectively be removed.
That, therefore, leads to essentially 15- to $20,000 a year just
spent on the booting devices themselves. A Class A wrecker used is
essentially that price, so there is not a significant or drastic difference
in the cost of towing -- the cost to tow a vehicle for a company as a
cost to immobilize a vehicle for a company.
What we are requesting is that the commissioners examine or
allow us to sit down with the County Attorney's Office to examine the
actual costs associated with immobilizing a vehicle for these
homeowners associations, which are private property, to enforce the
rules and regulations that they themselves have adopted for their own
property so that we can continue to provide this service which we
believe is the least intrusive and effective manner to provide any type
of support to these associations.
We would also suggest that the City of Gainesville, which I
believe is one of the most recent municipalities outside of Your
Honors to address this issue in 2009, established a rate of $125 . We
believe that is a rate which is appropriate and would allow us to
continue to provide this service. They did this rate after doing what
we are suggesting, allow us to sit down with either -- through some
type of session to provide to you all the various costs which are
associated, and then make a reasoned and informed decision.
The $25 rate which essentially was boot-strapped in by Orlando,
Broward County, those counties had some significant problems with
booting. Those rates were adopted with the express intent to
essentially prohibit booting in those counties. Is that your desire?
Page 159
, .~.,-.~--'- ~ -_.-----~,_.__.-..,--_...._..~,,"....>.~_.._----~
March 9, 2010
Then there's not much we can do about that. There is existing
litigation.
But if the desire is to effectively regulate the industry, to set a fair
price, which takes into account the costs associated with
immobilization, we would urge the board to reconsider.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Brian Mayberry. He'll be
followed by Arthur Moore.
MR. MAYBERRY: Hi. For the record, Brian Mayberry with
the Whitestone Group, also Collier County resident.
Really don't have anything additional to add versus what Dave
had said. We are just, you know, doing what the boards have asked us
to do and with what they're contracted for with the definition of what's
in their bylaws. So thank you for your time.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Arthur Moore, sorry. He'll be
followed by Cynthia Lee.
MR. MOORE: Hi. My name is Arthur Moore. I'm the president
of the Fairway Condominium Association on Immokalee Road.
We brought in Whitestone Group as a security company back in
the middle of the last summer. We're a community of 264 units. I'm
an original owner, having paid what would -- some would think was a
ridiculous price in 2005. When we're all said and done, we might
have 40 original owners when this crisis is done.
At the time we considered Whitestone, it was for the same reason
as Positano Place. We, unfortunately, did not have the money to
employ a full-time security company.
As part of the parking immobilization program, Whitestone does
provide us with security. Yes, it is subsidized by the immobilization,
but they are providing us with a service that's paid for by people who
are breaking our rules.
We had the same result as Positano Place did. We had illegal
tenants come to the office. They didn't even know they were illegal
Page 160
_._,..,....'~"....,.,"
March 9, 2010
until such time as we indicated, you couldn't have a parking pass until
their owners contributed to the association by way of the renter paying
directly or getting on a payment program.
This was successful. We didn't have as many problems as
Positano, as it turned out, and we did the same thing. I noticed our
residents nine times before the program went into place. And I
believe in the whole time the program was in place, which was quite
short because the rule -- you set the fee to -- I'm an accountant, so you
set the fee to a rate that is at a loss for Whitestone, so they can't
provide the service anymore. But we had maybe eight or nine boots.
That's it. It wasn't a huge issue, and people realized when they got the
boot that, yes, they didn't bother coming into the office to register or
they -- that was the most part, they just didn't bother. I mean, and
some people will do that.
So the vast majority of our residents are happy with -- we're
happy with the service, they continue to be happy with the service,
although they don't even realize it's not in place at the moment
because I didn't even tell our residents.
With respect to the fee (sic) that Commissioner Fiala distributed,
I would also -- I would like to point out that a lot of those jurisdictions
that are listed are campus police, jurisdictions where they have
full-time officers who are being subsidized by a taxpayer or by the
university to patrol a small lot. Whitestone drives around the whole
county, so they do need some extra money to come back and unboot a
vehicle within an hour, which is what is required by, I believe, state
law. Thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Cynthia Lee. She'll be
followed by Robert Jennings.
MS. LEE: Good afternoon. My name is Cynthia Lee, and I'm
the community coordinator for Pebblebrooke Lakes Master
Association. We're a 350-door community at the corner of Collier
Boulevard and Immokalee Road.
Page 161
-'--r--' ".
March 9, 2010
At Pebblebrooke Lakes, we've been successfully utilizing
Whitestone booting services for over a year, and it has been
immeasurably better for our residents than towing had been in the
past.
In the opinion of the Pebblebrooke Lakes board, booting is
inherently better than towing for at least three reasons. It is cheaper at
$160 per boot versus $250 per tow. And in this economy, we need to
be cognizant of this issue when at all possible.
Booting protects our residents' property because the car and all
contents remain on the premises following boot, while it disappears
from everyone's sight when the cars are towed.
Booting leaves no question as to the validity of the infraction. In
the past, once the car was removed from the property, the residents
often claimed that the car was not illegally parked. Some of the tow
companies took less than clear pictures, so the community could not
be sure whether the tow was valid or not. With a boot, they can't
claim that they weren't parked legally (sic) if it is sitting right where
they left it.
The final issue is why we need to control street parking in
general. Pebblebrooke Lakes needs to control her street parking for a
number of reasons, but the most important ones are, our streets are
developed too narrow for cars to be parked on the streets. If two cars
are parked on opposite sides of the streets, emergency vehicles cannot
pass. The only way we have been able to control this street parking in
our community has been to boot or tow.
Our community has very short driveways, and most residents use
their garages for storage. For these reasons, for a family of four with a
two-car garage and thus driveway, that means that two cars are always
going to be parked in the street.
When you get 350 homes, putting this many cars on the streets,
you can see why this is such an important issue. Thank you very
much.
Page 162
March 9, 2010
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Robert Jennings.
MR. JENNINGS: Good afternoon, Commissioners, and thank
you for allowing us to speak.
I represent the Milano Association, which is 274 units up on
Livingston, and I'm here to support the folks who are here regarding
the towing and the booting situation.
Needless to say, you've heard it from everyone else here. We
have about 40 percent of our units that are either in foreclosure or
people just not paying their assessments. The folks that live there like
myself, who I'm really representing at this point in time, are doing
everything we can to save and maintain our communities in a way that
makes sense.
We are not a gated community. I mean, we have people coming
and using our pools, jumping over the fences and everything else, and
we're working like the dickens to make sure that we keep the value of
that community up as best we possibly can. It's a great community.
It's centrally located. And we're basically fighting for our lives in
these situations.
We -- in the four years that I've been there, with the towing that
we've had, we've had two tows that were done for the wrong reasons,
if you will, and they were -- they were compensated for the tows that
they had to pay the money for. But that's over a four-year period. The
booting is very -- really powerful because it can be a first-strike
mechanism with people. As they said, we photograph everything, we
make sure it's done right. And this is all being done by volunteers in
the community, as well as the towing company.
With the booting and the towing, it's now required for a member
of the board to go out and sign off on the tows and on the boots. I
mean, you know, you get a call at three o'clock in the morning to go
out and do this, it's not what you really want to do. But it's the only
way to protect the community and improve its value.
And I would suggest to you that it's not unreasonable to allow us
Page 163
March 9, 2010
to have tools that we need to protect our community, protect the folks
in that community, keep up the quality of life, and make sure that we
keep up the value of the community as best we possibly can, given the
economic conditions that we're living in right now.
And I thank you for your time.
MS. FILSON: That was your final speaker, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you.
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, this is really a -- the
Sheriffs Department issue, so we need to hear from the Sheriffs
Department.
But I looked online on some of the Florida cities and counties,
and what I found was the ones that were low did not require them to
have a towing license. The ones that you were referring to demanded
they have a towing license to do a booting. So I think that's the
disparity there. There's more -- more of the checks and balances in
there, more requirements to do such a thing.
So if we're going to do that, let's change the ordinance to -- if
we're going to raise it, let's change the ordinance so that the boots --
booting company would have to be a licensed towing company.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. I have a couple things of
concern. And I'm going to take Commissioner Fiala's direction on this
because she's been right on top of it from day one, and I trust her
instinct on it.
But we, at some point in time, should review this again, because
the atrocities that took place before were really bad, and I don't want
to see it happen again. I mean, this thing has to be regulated in some
form, but I'm not wanting to put a thousand different regulations on
you. Citizens of the community will do that as time goes along.
If we're talking about taking care of the people that are illegally
living in the community, that's fine, to be able to bring it into
Page 164
March 9, 2010
compliance, reasonable fee, and it's got to be enough to be able to
cover the cost of it, there's no doubt about that. There's no way on
God's earth they're going to expect somebody to do it for $25 or even
$35. That's realistic. But I'm not going to see that you ever get $200
for it. That's absolutely ridiculous.
So there's going to have to be some happy mediums in there, and
there's also going to have to be some catchalls if we start to see this
thing go south again, and the rights of people are being violated that
we can respond in a fashion to be able to rein this in again.
I'm sure Commissioner Fiala has given this a lot of thought, and
I'd like to have that enter into the discussion.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah. I would agree. I have to -- we
have to make sure that what we're doing -- we're all about being fair. I
think everybody up here always wants to make sure that we're being
fair to the communities.
I have some questions. Is there -- do you ever put a warning on
these vehicles first before you start booting them? Is that a
requirement? Maybe that would be something that would make it
more of a neighborhood friendly -- first, put a warning on. Don't do
this again.
The lady was saying that in her community, they have such short
driveways, and that's what's been happening in a lot of these
communities, they build very short driveways now just enough for a
car to fit in there. But if people use the garages for storage, then
there's no place else for anybody who drops in to see them. Like the
minister that I was talking about the last time who was visiting the
woman whose husband just died, and so he had to park in the street
and they towed his car away. Well, you know, things like that, there
should have been a warning on the car rather than that because the --
possibly the person who was reporting everybody didn't realize there
was an urgent issue there.
Page 165
March 9, 2010
So I would think that maybe if we could suggest to each and
every community, before you ever boot anybody, put a note. You
know, have something from your homeowner association, put a note
on them that says, this is just a warning, please don't do this again
because the next time you'll get booted.
So then having said that -- and I'm seeing some nods here. I
think the other -- the people agree that that is a good idea. Possibly
the high end I would ever go would be 75, to be perfectly honest with
you. And I think that -- and they suggested 100 or 125.
And as one gentleman said, something about how many
thousands and thousands of dollars it costs for these boots. You know
what, I have a real problem believing that. You know, if you could
only boot 12 times and it costs you $10,000, I don't think so. So it's
probably a little bit of an exaggeration there.
Anyway, do booting companies have to be licensed?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, not according to our
ordinance.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay, fine. So that isn't any extra
expense to them. Do you feel, Commissioners, that a booting
company should be licensed? And I don't know what they'd be
licensed for, but that's my question.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I think they should be.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I just gave you my research, and
they required --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, it was interesting because I'd
never heard that before. That's a good -- you know, that's a thing to
mention. And if they are licensed, are they licensed so that -- I don't
know. What are they licensed for?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Do we have somebody from the Sheriffs
Department who'd like to address this?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, look at that.
MR. HEDBERG: Good afternoon. My name is Mike Hedberg.
Page 166
March 9, 2010
I'm here representing Sheriff Rambosk, and I'd only like to address it
from the standpoint that, we brought this issue before to the county
because it was involving deputies that were having to go to
altercations involving the booting incidents and things like that, and
we've discovered that it was unregulated. We thought that it needed to
be a regulated industry in terms of how it was affecting the citizens in
the community.
Myself and members of the County Attorney's Office met with
Whitestone and discussed the regulation, allowed them to view the
ordinance. And from the sheriffs perspective, we only asked that
some -- that it was regulated but the fees would be reasonable.
And we did reach some discussion about what a reasonable fee
was, although we differed on what a reasonable fee would be. So that
was why it was brought to the board in the manner it was and for the
board to weigh in on what they thought a reasonable fee was.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Did you want to mention what the
differences in reasonable fee were, or would you like us to just wander
on in on our own?
MR. HEDBERG: Well, we left that to the board because we
didn't want to be the one to tell you how much they should charge.
We suggested at the time being in line with what the minimum tow
fees were. And Whitestone at the time didn't immediately agree to
that and made their own presentation. It was different from, I think,
what we had talked about at the meeting.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. Can you tell me, does a
booting company or towing company need a license?
MR. HEDBERG: Not to my knowledge, other than a regular
business license.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I see. So there's -- do we even have
such a license in Collier County?
MR. HEDBERG: I can't answer that question.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. Fine. Well, so--
Page 167
-,-, -", '-"-~""~-->'.'~',--"""',---
March 9, 2010
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And it's a state requirement.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- ask them to have something that
we don't already supply here, I guess.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It's a state requirement.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, it is?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Correct. You have a deputy, I'm
sure, that's not here that works with the towing companies?
MR. HEDBERG: We do.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's -- if we can just give
direction.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. You say $75. I say, have
some kind of licensing like the towing companies. Really should be --
like the attorney for the sheriff said, it should be the -- whatever the
minimum towing is within our ordinance. Those are the things you
need to really take a look at.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: What is the minimum towing?
MR. HEDBERG: I think it was 125 at the time, and we thought
that would be --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh. See, I wouldn't go that high,
yeah.
MR. HEDBERG: And we really wanted the board to look at all
of the options and make a determination of what they thought was
reasonable.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And give direction that the
booting shall -- actually should be the towing always, unless it is
health, safety, and welfare, such as blocking a fire hydrant, that they
do have a warning.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's what the direction should
be.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, that would be what my
Page 168
-'-'--~'--"'-- "'_'_'_-"_'_'_"'''_.._...~._,-_.._._..__._._-_._,..-'--'-"""-'--~--"-~--'-'->-"---'-'""-""~--~'-
March 9, 2010
motion would say. And so do you have any other comments,
Commissioners? I know I'm kind of taking over, and I don't mean to
do that, Commissioner Coyle, but --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: No. Just looking at it from a standpoint
of administration, I can't imagine how you could really administer the
warning requirement very easily because you'd have to maintain
records of all of the cars that you've given warnings to, and then
before you put a boot on, you've got to go through the records to make
sure you gave them a warning sometime. And when was the last
warning? Was it five years ago or was it three days ago? There's--
you know, those are -- those are complicating factors. I don't know
how you -- you get somebody to effectively administer that sort of
thing.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I would guess that they each have
committees in their communities that already go about identifying
vehicles that are violating. I mean, how would the -- violating some
of the rules and regulations of their community. Is that true?
MR. JENNINGS: If! may address the board.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You'd have to come to a
microphone, sir.
MR. JENNINGS: Sorry.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Because if they have that, then they
could just have a community -- you know, a group that --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah, but it's still a recordkeeping
requirement. Somebody's got to take the time to go do it before you
put a boot on, and you might want to get a boot on right now.
MR. JENNINGS: Robert Jennings from Milano. You're
absolutely right. It's a logistical nightmare, okay. But we do have, as
you well know, seeing it at the Moraya tower situation which you
folks had, you have people in every community that are totally
committed to making sure that these things are done the right way.
And we're fortunate to have a of couple people in our community that
Page 169
March 9, 2010
do that as well.
We have a double problem, because when Pulte walked out of
there -- we're four independent communities under one master
association. So each one of those has a different management -- I
mean, I don't have to tell you. You know it, okay.
What we're doing is that we notify everybody with a 30-day
notice when we change anything, okay. The local boards are open to
talk to anybody about what's going on inside a community.
I think what you'll find -- are there people that are reckless with
authority? Sure, we know that. That happens. But I think you'd
almost look at it by a community-by-community basis. If a lot of the
complaints are coming out of a specific community as opposed to all
the others that we're talking about here, then you know where you
have to zero in on what you need to do. It's not so much about the rest
of us.
We put warning notices, we knock on doors. Commissioner
Fiala, absolutely, we try to be a friendly community. What you will
have, as you well know, okay, it's a slippery slope, all right. When you
have people sneaking in and they're only supposed to -- our
community says we're only supposed to have two cars per unit even if
you have a two-car garage.
Now, you well know, the Florida legislative (sic) last year said
that as a member of a board, you have to enforce the rules of the
community or else you can be brought up on charges, all right. So
we're volunteers. We're trying to do the right thing. And it is tough.
I've been on the board for four years. I can't get off it, like some of
you can't get off the commission because nobody else wants the job.
And I'm asked to constantly come back and serve again. So I don't
want to let the community down.
And I will tell you this. We have found it's taken us a long time
to get traction with ourselves, amongst ourselves as a community.
The folks that are there now that are living there on a full-time basis,
Page 170
,....~._.~_._-_... "--"""'---"^'-~"-~------~"""--~-"'~~'.~----"'.'--'".......--.-..-.. ..--
March 9, 2010
okay -- which is about 40 percent of the community, which is not a
lot, okay -- we have to watch people trying to break into units. We
have a lot of things. We have our neighborhood watch association.
We work very closely with the Sheriffs Department. We try to do the
right thing.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Can I make a motion?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Sure.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Make a motion -- thank you.
Make a motion we direct staff to look at the fee schedule not to exceed
$75, have requirements for licensing like they do the towing
companies, and we do need a warning system.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. I'll second the motion.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Halas, you had
your light on.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah. I was probably going to
make a motion for $100 because of the fact that obviously we've heard
testimony saying that there's more to this than meets the eye, but I also
think there has to be some form of regulation and there also has to be
some warning system, and I think that should be not left up so much to
the homeowners' group, but I think it should be left up to the booting
company. If they're called out there and they look at a situation, I
hope that they would make a quick judgment if it's endangering life,
limb, and property, such as somebody parked at a fire hydrant, that if
-- they would immediately move it n move the vehicle.
If it was just illegally parked for a small period of time, then
they'd have a warning. And if it happens again, then obviously they
take the necessary measures.
So when you look at all the aspects of what's going to be required
of them, I think $100 would be more in justification of approaching
this issue to protect all the homeowner groups, whether they're gated
or ungated.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Fiala?
Page 171
.... .-- '",. -.-,_>__,________._.__.~_"_,,..,. ."~~ ..".m....'..>_~_._.~~._._,~__.....__--",_.......,_".,' _. ..~'^_.
March 9, 2010
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I -- whatever you
commissioners decide is fine with me. I feel $75 is it appropriate.
There's only two -- there's the City of Chicago and Montgomery
County, Maryland, who are higher than $75. Everybody else is $75 or
under. And if all of these other -- Broward County and Kansas City
and State of Utah, District of Columbia, if they can all charge $75, I
think that that's appropriate for us as well.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. The motion is for $75. Now,
could I ask a question, clarification? You said that they should have
licensing like a towing company.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Correct.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: The business is quite a bit different. Is it
-- are you merely wanting to say they should be licensed, or are you
saying they have to have a towing company license in order to
practice booting?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: They have to have a towing
company license, because my review of the MUNI code on
communities that have this -- the low fee, like the $25 fee, the $35 fee,
you don't have to have that requirement. But the ones that have a
higher fee like is in our executive summary -- Broward doesn't require
it, but Miami/Dade does. You have to have a license just like a towing
company.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Now, the other question I have
for you is, is it going to be the same charge if it's booted for a week as
it is if it's booted for a day?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It would be the same charge?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Sure.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Now, the towing company -- or the
booting company has their device tied up for a whole week there.
They could have it somewhere else making money for them, but they
can't do it because it's tied up there for a whole week for one charge of
Page 172
March 9, 2010
$75. Do you want to do that? Is that what you want to do?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You know, I don't know anything at
all about booting. Maybe if the community saw it for three days and
they felt that was unjust, then they would have it towed away, if they
felt it was an abandoned car or something like that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Can I make a suggestion,
Commissioner Coyle? You make a good point, have our staff take a
look at that. Look at other --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- other communities on those.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You might want a sliding scale.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. If you would include that in the
guidance to staff in the motion, that would --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That is in part of my motion.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- you'd get my support.
Okay. All in favor of the motion, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye, because I don't think we have
all the information at this point in time.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Well, the staff is going to come
back with us -- to us with a report about that. But, okay. It passes,
4-1, with Commissioner Halas objecting.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I hope that that's okay, gentlemen.
Will that work for all of you? Nod.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It's going to come back.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Good.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah, it's got to come back.
Page 173
. ...,..--"..~-,--",---_._...,_.,-~.__. ._-~-,~._~,,~_. _.~_.. ~-",'---"~"~-'-"
March 9, 2010
MR. JENNINGS: So we come back again?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, it will be publicly advertised. I'd
hate to tell you not to come back and then have us do something you
don't want. But it's always good to watch us, because we're sneaky.
You know, we could do something in a heartbeat that would put you
in a lot of trouble.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Don't give the newspaper ideas.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: How does one communicate with
staff?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: To answer your question, it will be
-- it will be in the newspaper or you'll have fair warning that it's
coming back to us so that you can then address this issue again after
they come back with their information to help guide us in the direction
we need to go.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I make a motion to approve
12A.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Just one second, please. You asked
a question about, how do you communicate with staff. Would he
contact -- or would anybody then contact Scott, Scott Teach?
MR. KLATZKOW: Yeah, we're taking care of that.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay, fine. Thank you. Because
these people might want to have contact with somebody. That would
be the County Attorney's Office, Scott Teach. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, good. Thank you very much.
Item #12C
AUTHORIZING THE MAKING OF AN OFFER OF JUDGMENT
TO RESPONDENT, C & T PROPERTIES UNLIMITED, FOR
PARCEL NOS. 126FEE AND 126TCE IN THE AMOUNT OF
$501,000 IN THE LAWSUIT STYLED COLLIER COUNTY,
FLORIDA V ALEXANDER G. CHRISTOU, ET AL., CASE NO. 07-
Page 174
March 9,2010
4923-CA (SANTABARBARA BOULEVARD EXTENSION
PROJECT NO. 60091) (FISCAL IMPACT $116,200) - APPROVED
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And we have a motion to approve Item
12C by Commissioner Henning. Is there a second?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Second by Commissioner Fiala.
Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All in favor, please signify by saying
aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It passes unanimously. And that's going
to take us?
Item #11
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Public comment.
MR. OCHS: Public comment, sir, on Item 11.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Do we have public comments?
MS. FILSON: No, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We have no public comments.
Item #15
Page 175
'~""'-"-""'--"^-.-._-' .- ""-'~-~'~~--_"'-"-"._-"-"""-"--'
March 9, 2010
STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That brings us to communication by staff
and the commissioners. And do you have anything, County Manager?
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir, just one item. I received in the mail a
letter from Mr. Y ovanovich -- I'm putting it on the visualizer here --
requesting a reconsideration of a decision on a conditional use the
board made at its February 23rd meeting. I believe Commissioners
Halas and Fiala would be -- either one of those would have to be the
commissioners that would vote for the reconsideration. And I'll ask
the county attorney for some more guidance.
MR. KLA TZKOW: Yeah. Either Commissioner Fiala or
Commissioner Halas would have to make a motion for the
reconsideration.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'm not going to make a motion for
reconsideration on this.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I talked with these people in my
office, and I haven't had anybody that lived in the area -- I haven't had
anybody complain about it. On the other hand, I did mention that he's
still got two towers up there.
And so if you would want to talk about it again and reconsider, I
would go along with that. Just -- I don't know how I would feel about
it. I don't know if I would vote or not vote for it, but I wouldn't -- you
know, if you want to talk about it again, that's fine.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So you're making a motion for
reconsideration?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'll second it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. All in favor, please signify by
saymg aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
Page 176
March 9, 2010
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: (Absent.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Then it passes 3-1.
MR. OCHS: Thank you. We will--
MR. KLATZKOW: We'll need to advertise that.
MR. OCHS: -- readvertise and come back at the April 13th
meeting, I believe.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, my birthday.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: No. You can't do it on April 13th.
That's Commissioner Fiala's birthday.
MR. OCHS: Oh, my goodness.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We're taking a half day off that day,
remember?
MR. OCHS: For the parade, you mean?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes, yes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: For the parade.
MR. OCHS: Thank you. That's all I have.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: No. It's going to take us half a day to
blowout the candles.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, gosh. A stab in the heart.
MR. OCHS: I can't beat that. That's all I have, Commissioner.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Anything else, County Manager?
MR. OCHS: No, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: County Attorney?
MR. KLATZKOW: No, I talked enough today, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Birthday girl?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, I have nothing. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Thank you.
Commissioner Halas?
Page 177
__H__"____"__..~__.m'_'m.._..__.__..__~._,.,_..."_ '_~W' ,_.,.,__ ., ....._.._r.,.._..._~~~.,..._~.."______..,,____.~,w__..,,,._~
March 9, 2010
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. I just want to give you a
quick synopsis of our trip to Washington, D.C., along with the county
manager, Leo Ochs, and aide, Debbie Wight.
When we went there, it was kind of interesting. The atmosphere
that's presently there in Washington. And, of course, when we talked
about transportation issues, we found that no one's really taken an
initiative to do anything about writing a new transportation bill.
So it's kind of like, well, we're going to find out who ends up in
power. And so the end result is, I'm not sure what's going to happen
with our concerns as far as addressing some of our transportation
issues.
The other thing that was interesting -- and this is for
Commissioner Fiala -- I lobbied heavily for getting funding for the
Immokalee Airport. We found out that --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: The Marco Airport?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Marco Airport, not Immokalee.
Excuse me, Marco Airport, in regards to the taxiway -- and in fact, it
falls in with the Immokalee Airport -- and that is that because this is a
general -- both of them are general aviation airports this, again, falls
under the jurisdiction of transportation.
And we were more or less told that as far as trying to get funding
for those two airports, it was going to be next to impossible because
commercial airports come in line quicker than general aviation
airports.
So I just wanted to bring -- make sure that you had an
understanding on that. We said, how about Immokalee Airport, since
there was -- been a letter written in regards to getting the National
Guard there, and whether that's going to play heavily and weigh
heavily into getting transportation funding for Immokalee, I'm not
sure.
So we'll just have to see how the -- how the National Guard --
what kind of power they got as far as getting that type of funding
Page 178
March 9, 2010
there.
The other thing that was interesting though is, I think that the
medical for indigent healthcare plan, that seemed to have a lot of
interest with Senator Bill Nelson's office, and they were quite -- they
were listening quite intently, and also Congressman Diaz-Balart was
very interested in that. So I think that that was one of the things that is
going to be moving forward on our agenda.
The other thing that we were cautioned by not only our lobbyists
but also some of the people that we met, and that is that next year
when we go forward with our legislative agenda, that we should limit
it to four items instead of eight to ten items like we had this year, that
it -- we're better off if we prioritize just four items and carry that
forward, that we'll probably get a little more traction than when we
come up there with eight, which I thought we did a very good job,
because there are some cities and counties that go forth with 30 items
and, of course, I don't think they probably even are heard on a lot of
them.
But other than that, it was a whirlwind trip. It was very cold up
there. And we weren't sure we were going to get out of there on time.
As we were going to Dulles Airport, which is an airport a lot different
than Reagan in the fact that it was about 30 miles out in the country.
As we were going back to Reagan, we started to see snow flurries, and
I think everything passed through our mind about, we might be mired
in here for the night.
But we were fortunate. We got out of there, I think, about 8:30,
quarter to 9:00, and then I think we got back here about 1 :30, 2:00 in
the morning.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Could I ask a question, please?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: With the Marco Airport, being that
that permit expires next year and we've had our request in for the grant
money, were they aware that we could lose -- we could lose this
Page 179
March 9, 2010
permit, I mean -- we've worked so many years for?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I think the grant money is one
thing. That would be -- the grant money doesn't enter into this. This
was just where we could get funding for the taxiway and, because of
the fact that that falls under the auspices of transportation, that's why
they said -- and this is a general aviation airport, that's why they didn't
give us a lot of confidence that that was going to move forward.
But I think if the Airport Authority can move forward and find
some grant money, that's a whole different -- that sheds a different
light on this whole project.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: They might just lose that.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, thank you, sir. I do have
two items.
Nick, would you be so kind as to come up? Hey, Nick?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Wake up.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: As you know, we're
approaching that juncture that we started back many years ago, and --
better than ten years ago actually -- but on the FEMA flood maps. It's
going to be major. One of the things that we're finding is that there's
an opportunity out there for the county to be able to assist
homeowners out there. And I'm not talking about paying for the
surveys that need to be done to qualify, but being able to come up
with a vendor type of agreement so that our homeowners can get the
best possible price --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: For surveying.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- as far as the surveying goes.
Nick, would you give us a little more details on it? We've been
talking about this for some time.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Sure.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Now seems like it's the time to
move it forward.
Page 180
March 9, 2010
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yeah. I've discussed this with
Commissioner Coletta, and it's actually his idea to try and, you know,
formalize this into something that has a public benefit in the sense that
when these letter-of-map amendments come forward or these
elevation certificates, they're not written in a way that, you know, a
homeowner can easily understand them. It requires professional
servIces.
And so the discussion with the commissioner has been, what if
there was a way to have a significant amount of preapproved vendors
list that were prequalified to help these people in the future? In
discussion with the County Attorney's Office, it has to be a valid
public purpose.
So in doing so, in getting a list prepared, we could help out the
homeowners of the county so they'd know where to go, what to
expect, and a reasonable fee to pay. And I think it's a real good idea.
We're expecting the maps to be delivered in a couple weeks, and
there's a 30-day period, and we'll be in front of you, Commissioners,
in about four weeks to review the maps with you before we go through
the public meeting process. And I would expect at that point in time
the community as a whole is going to have a lot of questions.
County Manager has directed John Torre in our office to get a,
you know, communications plan ready, and we'll walk you through
that as well, too. But the biggest heartache the homeowner's going to
have is how to fill out these forms and who to go to. So having a list
preapproved would help out a lot.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And -- okay. Well, we've got
two nods.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Three.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Oh, three, four.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Three nods. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And I have one more item.
MR. OCHS: Sir, I'm sorry. I just -- I'm looking at Mr. Klatzkow
Page 181
. -'_.. "__'~_''+_'''"''.________'' ',<_._. .__~_,,_..~,.. ..~. _."__m"."~'__'_~",,,_,_~_,_,__,___,~___,,,,,_,,,,,_,,,, _.__.
March 9, 2010
to make sure we've got --
MR. KLATZKOW: We'll be coming back on executive
summary. That will just delineate exactly what the program is for the
board to approve.
MR. OCHS: And to further confirm the public purpose and--
MR. KLATZKOW: Exactly.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Once again, I think we better
mention it, because there's going to be people listening with a little bit
of panic in their thought process.
This is a process that's been going on forever, and the hammer's
about to fall. This is a federal issue that we're trying to intercede in
the best possible way we can. And what we're looking to do is to put
together a program that will enable you to access surveyors at a
reasonable price and be sure that you're going to be able to qualify for
every kind of exemption or discount you can when these flood maps
kick in.
The county is not setting itself up in any way to make a profit
from this. Okay. No. That has to be said because I mean,
immediately they're going to think it's your red light cameras again.
MR. KLATZKOW: No. This will be like a lawyer referral type
idea.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Then the other issue, a little bit
different, has to deal with our pending court case before the Supreme
Court with the Clerk of Courts regarding his ability to be able to do an
audit, secondary audit, on issues that are out there. The way it's going,
it's very likely we're going to win this particular case, but --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Never count your chickens till they
hatch.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, I understand that. But
whether we win or not, I would like to be able to get you thinking at
this point in time about allowing me or any member of this
commission to carry this forward to the Florida Association of
Page 182
~'---~'-'-"'._~"._'~-'-'-----~--'---'"""~---,"~--'
March 9,2010
Counties to work in conjunction with the Clerk of Courts Association
to come up with something that will meet the needs of everyone.
I truly believe that the clerk, under certain circumstances, should
have the ability to be able to do a secondary audit; however, it
shouldn't be something that's a blank check to be able to go out there
at any point in time and be able to pick things out, start a fishing
expedition.
I've been meeting with the clerk personally several times,
developed a little bit of a relationship with him, got into this thought
process, and he would like to explore this possibility. We could put it
together in such a way that there would be an oversight on it.
In other words, there would be an authority, possibly a judge, that
would have to have some sort of due cause to be able to go forward.
There would have to be a likely reason for this to be able to be carried
to the next step.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Can I just say that I think maybe
what we ought to do is wait to see what kind of a ruling comes down,
and then what's entailed with the ruling before we go ahead and do
this?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Sure.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I think that's the fair thing to do is
to make sure that we look at the ruling, see what all is encompassed
with the ruling, and then we can make a decision.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You're absolutely correct, and
not a thing could be done this year. As anything -- you could never get
anything before the state legislative body at this point in time. This is
over.
Between now and the 2011 session, there'll be plenty of time to
give thought to it, but I'd like you to give plenty of thought process to
it. I am very involved in the Florida Association of Counties. I was
their policy chair back three years ago, and I don't think I --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That explains why we're in such bad
Page 183
,,--_. '",--.-'--- -"'"---"-'---'.-" ",_."-'__'"~-_,,,,__,_,~-,,,_-,,,."'''...,,>,._~--',,_."'
March 9, 2010
trouble now.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah. But yeah, I think what we'll
do is, let's wait till we get the ruling, and then I think we can then go
into more discussion on that.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's very good. But I just
wanted to broach the subject.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Could I just --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: When are you going up to
Tallahassee? Aren't you guys going up to Tallahassee?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah, we're going up.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: One day, some day.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: The 28th, isn't it?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah, I think the 28th. It's late in the
month.
Here's the thing that I think we have to wrestle with. I don't think
you or I have ever been concerned about an independent audit of what
we're doing. Nobody has ever tried to stop that or interfered with it or
anything.
The problem that we all have is that -- we get an independent
audit every year. There it is. We just got it. It's an independent audit
by an outside accounting firm. Now, the problem is that if the clerk is
going to audit on a post-payment basis, he is auditing payments that he
authorized.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That is not an independent audit, and
that's what gives me concern, aside from the fact that some of these
appear to be politically motivated.
But without getting into an argument about that, I think we need
to work with the clerk to find a way so that he can do his prepayment
audits to make sure that we don't pay anything that is not proper, and
he does that, but it could be that he doesn't have enough people to do a
100 percent audit as closely as he'd like there.
Page 184
'~-"-"""-'-"-"'--'''-'-----'-' ---_.__._~._..- ._--~--_..~~.~_.., -.-....._-_.,....~,,~-'""~-~,,~....~"~...~.._.~_.- -,-
March 9, 2010
But when it comes to a post-payment audit, it is an audit not only
of our decisions, as it was with the Immokalee Road where -- the clerk
was actually challenging our authority to make a decision about
awarding a contract. It wasn't an audit about money. And when you
get to those kinds of things, it truly should be an independent agency.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, that's a discussion for
another day.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I want to try to remove the egos
out of this so that when the time does come it's something that's got--
it's covered under Florida Statutes and it will get us from Point A to Z.
I'll tell you what, if we do absolutely nothing, there will be a
Florida Statute to be able to fill in that blank spot, and it might not be
to our advantage.
So I would rather preempt this by -- given the thought process
going forward to see what we can do to come up with some sort of
solution that meets everybody's needs out there and does it in a way
that's most cost-effective to our taxpayers.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I will support it as long as it is an
independent audit.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Once again, a discussion for
another day.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. All right.
Anything else?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. I'd like to say, I want to thank
my fellow commissioners for support today on a very, very important
situation that I think is going to have a marked decision in regards to
what's going to happen here in Collier County with our beaches, and I
think it was the right thing.
And I'm very surprised that Jack Wert and some of the people
from the tourist industry were not here, that they should have been
here in support one way or the other, especially hoteliers that don't
Page 185
March 9,2010
have property on the beaches. And I think maybe the Chamber of
Commerce should have also maybe weighed in on this.
It's a very important thing. It has huge ramifications of what
could take place if people do not have -- and all people do not have
access to the beaches.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Commissioner, I'm not making
excuses now, but I understand that there were about 400 (sic) people
that weren't able to get into these chambers that were in the hall --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Was that--
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- over in risk management or over
in HR. That's what somebody had told me, and so possibly some
hoteliers were out there.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. But I --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I don't know that, but, you know --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. I'll give them the benefit of
the doubt, but I think it should have been very much important to all
the people involved in the tourist industry.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, it is. It's an important thing.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Anything else?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And real estate, too.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Motion to adjourn.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We're adjourned.
****Commissioner Henning moved, seconded by Commissioner
Halas to Approved/Adopted Consent Agenda, plus Item #17A and
#17B; Commissioner Henning moved, seconded by Commissioner
Coletta to Adopt Item #17C and Item #17D (Commissioner Halas
and Commissioner Fiala opposed) - Adopted****
Item #16Al
Page 186
March 9, 2010
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE WATER UTILITY FACILITIES
FOR BOBCAT OF NAPLES ~ W/RELEASE OF ANY UTILITIES
PERFORMANCE SECURITY (UPS)
Item # 16A2
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE WATER AND SEWER UTILITY
FACILITIES FOR VERONA WALK, PHASE 4A - W /RELEASE
OF ANY UTILITIES PERFORMANCE SECURITY (UPS)
Item #16A3
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE WATER AND SEWER UTILITY
FACILITIES FOR 3500 CORPORATE PLAZA - W/RELEASE OF
ANY UTILITIES PERFORMANCE SECURITY (UPS)
Item #16A4
THE RELEASE AND SATISFACTION OF LIEN IN THE CODE
ENFORCEMENT ACTION ENTITLED BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS VS. SAMUEL LEE MILLER, JR., CASE NO.
2006030716, RELATING TO PROPERTY LOCATED AT 4814
MYERS ROAD, IMMOKALEE, FLORIDA - WAIVING $10,600
IN ASSESSED FINES
Item # 16A5
THE RELEASE AND SATISFACTION OF LIEN IN THE CODE
ENFORCEMENT ACTION ENTITLED BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS VS. TEUDIS ZAMORA, CASE NO.
2006120209, RELATING TO PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3471
2ND AVENUE S.E., NAPLES, FLORIDA- WAIVING $26,750 IN
Page 187
March 9,2010
ASSESSED FINES
Item #16A6
THE RELEASE AND SATISFACTION OF LIEN FOR
PAYMENTS RECEIVED FOR SPECIFIED CODE
ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS - A RECORDING COST OF $10.00
PER RELEASE, TOTALING $190.00
Item #16A7
A SATISFACTION OF LIEN, RELATED TO IMPACT FEES, DUE
TO THE DEFERRED IMP ACT FEES BEING PAID IN FULL, IN
ACCORDANCE WITH THE IMMOKALEE RESIDENTIAL
IMPACT FEE DEFERRAL PROGRAM, AS SET FORTH BY
SECTION 74-201 (G) OF THE COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF
LAWS AND ORDINANCES - FOR LOT 27, INDEPENDENCE
PHASE L IMMOKALEE
Item # 16A8
THE RELEASE AND SATISFACTION OF LIEN IN THE CODE
ENFORCEMENT ACTION ENTITLED BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS VS. DIANA HALL, CEB CASE NO.2003-036
RELATING TO PROPERTY LOCATED AT 790 12TH STREET
N.E., NAPLES, FLORIDA- WAIVING $341.84 IN FINES
Item # 16A9
THE RELEASE AND SATISFACTION OF LIEN IN THE CODE
ENFORCEMENT ACTION ENTITLED BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS VS. WILLIAM L. GREEMAN, CASE NO.
Page 188
March 9, 2010
2007070239, RELATING TO PROPERTY LOCATED AT 48
FLAMINGO DRIVE EAST, NAPLES, FLORIDA - WAIVING
$31,950 IN ACCURED FINES
Item #16Bl
AN EASEMENT AGREEMENT, A TEMPORARY
CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT AGREEMENT, AND A
SUBORDINATION OF EASEMENT INTEREST AND
AGREEMENT FOR FACILITY RELOCATION FOR A UTILITY
EASEMENT WHICH IS REQUIRED FOR THE GATEWAY
TRIANGLE STORMW A TER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT.
PROJECT NO. 51803 (FISCAL IMPACT: $19,525.00) - FOLIO
#00386240005 (LIBERTY BANK)
Item #16B2
PAYMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $135,625.00 TO CH2MHILL
FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FOR DESIGN SERVICES FOR
THE IMMOKALEE ROAD, COLLIER BLVD. TO 43RD AVE.
PROJECT (NO. 60018) - DUE TO P.O. #005281 BEING CLOSED
Item #16B3
RESOLUTION 2010-50: SUPPORTING THE TRANSPORTATION
PLANNING DEPARTMENT'S APPLICATION TO ADD THE
IMMOKALEE REGIONAL AIRPORT AS AN EMERGING
FACILITY ON THE STRATEGIC INTERMODAL SYSTEM (SIS)
Item # 16B4
AN UPDATE REGARDING THE CONTRACTORS
Page 189
-'-~------_._._-_.-'---_._~-..,._---_. '" .....,~ -...' --._. ,",._.'-,-"",,, _...~~._--,"",'--'~'--"""-~~'-'
March 9, 2010
IMPLEMENTATION OF METHOD AND MEANS TO ACHIEVE
COST SAVINGS WITH REGARD TO THE ACQUISITION OF
FILL FOR THE OIL WELL ROAD WIDENING PROJECT AND
ITS RELATIONSHIP TO THE SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT
FOR THE SALE OF FILL WITH AVE MARIA DEVELOPMENT,
LLLP. PROJECT #60044
Item #16B5
ADVERTISING A PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO ORDINANCE
NO. 92-40, AS AMENDED, WHICH CREATED THE
IMMOKALEE BEAUTIFICATION MUNICIPAL SERVICE
TAXING UNIT, EXPANDING ITS PURPOSE TO INCLUDE
"STORMW ATER AND DRAINAGE"
Item #16B6
AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH LEE COUNTY TO
COORDINATE A PUBLIC TRANSIT LINK BETWEEN LEE AND
COLLIER COUNTIES SUBJECT TO AVAILABLE FUNDING -
TO DEFINE HOW THE ROUTE WILL BE ESTABLISHED AND
COORDINATED ONCE FUNDING IS SECURED
Item #16B7
AN AMENDMENT TO AN EXISTING DEVELOPER
AGREEMENT RELATED TO THE COLLIER BOULEVARD
MIXED USE COMMERCE CENTER AND THE EXPANSION OF
COLLIER BOULEVARD BETWEEN DA VIS BOULEVARD AND
THE GOLDEN GATE MAIN CANAL REGARDING
STORMW A TER MANAGEMENT IMPROVEMENTS. (PROJECT
NO. 60092 - FISCAL IMPACT: $158,450.50) - FOR INSTALLING
Page 190
March 9,2010
A PIPE ALONG THE SOUTH SIDE OF MAGNOLIA POND
DRIVE TO CONVEY THE STORMW A TER FROM THE
TREATMENT POND
Item #16B8
A BUDGET AMENDMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $50,000
MOVING DOLLARS FROM LEL Y MSTU FUND (152)
RESERVES TO THE APPROPRIATE FUND (152) CAPITAL
ACCOUNT FOR A PROJECT KNOWN AS THE WARREN
STREET IRRIGATION RE-USE WATER SOURCE
MODIFICATION
Item #16B9
THE PURCHASE OF A ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY, DRAINAGE
AND UTILITY EASEMENT (PARCEL NO. 293RDUE) WHICH IS
REQUIRED FOR THE EXPANSION OF GOLDEN GATE
BOULEVARD FROM TWO LANES TO FOUR LANES
BETWEEN WILSON BOULEVARD AND DESOTO
BOULEVARD (PROJECT NO. 60040). FISCAL IMPACT: $2,770
- FOLIO #39331480001
Item#16BI0
A COMPLIANCE AGREEMENT WITH MDG CAP IT AL
CORPORATION, THE DEVELOPER OF ARROWHEAD
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, IN ORDER TO EXTEND
THE DEADLINES SET FORTH IN PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE NO. 02-40, AS AMENDED,
PARAGRAPH L, SUB-PARAGRAPH 2 AND 3 AND
PARAGRAPH M FOR THREE YEARS - IN ORDER TO MEET
Page 191
March 9, 2010
THE REQUIREMENTS FOR INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS
AT LAKE TRAFFORD ROAD AND CARSON
Item #16Cl
A FIFTH AMENDMENT TO THE LANDFILL OPERATING
AGREEMENT BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY AND WASTE
MANAGEMENT, INC., OF FLORIDA, PROVIDING
ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES CLARIFING DEFINITIONS
THA T ARE CONSISTENT WITH FLORIDA ADMINISTRATIVE
CODE, CHAPTER 62-701, SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT
FACILITIES; ALIGNING CURRENT BUSINESS PROCESSES;
AND, RESTRUCTURING PAYMENT FORMULAS DUE TO THE
IMPLEMENTATION OF AL TERNA TIVE DAILY COVER
MATERIALS INCLUDING POSI-SHELL, MULCH, AND OTHER
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION AGENCY APPROVED AL TERNA TIVE COVER
MATERIALS TO MAINTAIN ODOR CONTROL, LANDFILL
AIRSPACE PRESERVATION, AND AN ESTIMATED ANNUAL
OPERATING COST SAVINGS OF $266,141, AND ESTIMATED
ANNUAL AIRSPACE SAVINGS VALUED AT $736,285 - AN
ESTIMATED SAVINGS OF UP TO $266,141 PER YEAR OVER
THE NEXT 30 YEARS
Item # 16C2
A GRANT CONTRACT AGREEMENT 10HM-88-09-21-01-012
WITH THE STATE OF FLORIDA, DIVISION OF EMERGENCY
MANAGEMENT, AND THE NECESSARY BUDGET
AMENDMENTS, TO SPEND UP TO $46,773 TO INSTALL
ALUMINUM ROLL DOWN SHUTTERS AND SUPPORTING
EQUIPMENT ON THE COLLIER COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL
Page 192
March 9,2010
COMPLIANCE AND LANDFILL SCALE HOUSE FACILITY -
TO PREVENT OR LIMIT LOSSES DURING FUTURE STORMS
AND DISASTERS
Item # 16C3
AWARD BID NO. 10-5395, TELEMETRY AND ELECTRICAL
UPGRADES TO 13 LIFT STATIONS, TO E. B. SIMMONDS
ELECTRICAL, INC., IN THE BASE BID AMOUNT OF
$837,113.97 FOR PROJECT NO. 73922, COLLECTIONS
SUPERVISORY CONTROL AND DATA ACQUISITION
IMPROVEMENTS. AND A BUDGET AMENDMENT OF
$545,912.21 FROM PROJECT NO. 72549, COLLECTIONS LIFT
STATION MECHANICAL IMPROVEMENTS, TO PROJECT NO.
73922 - IN ORDER TO MONTIOR AND OPERATE THE LIFT
STATIONS REMOTELY DURING STORM EVENTS
Item # 16C4
A BUDGET AMENDMENT TO REALLOCATE FUNDS IN THE
AMOUNT OF $900,000 FROM RESERVES, TO THE SOUTH
REVERSE OSMOSIS RAW WATER WELLFIELD PIPELINE
REPAIR PROJECT, #70030 - DUE TO A PIPELINE FAILURE
THAT OCCURRED ON FEBRUARY 19,2010 LOCATED
ALONG THE FP&L EASEMENT
Item #16Dl
SEVEN (7) LIEN AGREEMENTS FOR DEFERRAL OF 100% OF
COLLIER COUNTY IMP ACT FEES FOR OWNER OCCUPIED
AFFORDABLE HOUSING DWELLING UNITS LOCATED IN
COLLIER COUNTY. APPROVAL OF THIS ITEM WILL
Page 193
March 9, 2010
TRANSFER PREVIOUSLY APPROVED DEFERRAL
AGREEMENTS FROM DEVELOPER TO OWNER OCCUPANTS
WITH A CONTINUING FISCAL IMPACT OF $149,645.62 - FOR
PROPERTY LOCATED WITHIN LIBERTY LANDING, LOTS 54,
65 AND 121; NAPLES MANOR ADDITION, LOT 9, BLOCK 4,
LOT 18, BLOCK 6, LOT 9, BLOCK 13 AND LOT 18, BLOCK 6
Item # 16D2
A FLORIDA FISH AND WILDLIFE CONSERVATION
COMMISSION GRANT - CREATING THREE NEW 300 TON
ARTIFICIAL REEFS ACCESSIBLE VIA GORDON PASS,
DOCTORS PASS AND WIGGINS PASS
Item #16D3
A MODIFICATION TO DISASTER RECOVERY INITIATIVE
AGREEMENT #07DB-3V-09-21-01-Z01 BETWEEN THE
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS AND
COLLIER COUNTY TO REALLOCATE $135,657.85 IN UNUSED
PROJECT FUNDS TO THE DISASTER RECOVERY INITIATIVE
SINGLE F AMIL Y REHABILITATION PROGRAM - PROVIDING
INCOME QUALIFIED FAMILIES WITH HURRICANE
MITIGATION ACTIVITIES SUCH AS ROOF REPLACEMENT
AND THE INSTALLATION OF IMPACT RESISTANT DOORS
AND WINDOWS
Item # 16D4
A MODIFICATION TO DISASTER RECOVERY INITIATIVE
AGREEMENT #08DB-D3-09-21-01-A03 BETWEEN THE
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS AND
Page 194
O....~_'.m_.'"_.____,._"_"__ _._,"_'_ ...._ .__ ," .... ,." .~__""_'__"__''''~''~'_~,=,".______ _",'__
March 9,2010
COLLIER COUNTY AND ASSOCIATED CONTRACT
AMENDMENTS WITH SUBRECIPIENTS. THIS
MODIFICATION WILL UPDATE THE CURRENT PROJECT
WORK SCHEDULES AND EXTEND THE GRANT PERIODS
Item #16D5
AN AMENDED RELEASE OF LIEN TO CORRECT DATE AND
OFFICIAL RECORDS CITATIONS OF PREVIOUSLY
RECORDED IMPACT FEE DEFERRAL RELEASE OF LIEN -
ORIGINALL Y RECORDED ON DECEMBER 9, 2009
Item # 16D6
THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT-
RECOVERY (CDBG-R) TEMPLATE AND FOUR (4)
SUBRECIPIENT GRANT AGREEMENTS PROVIDING
AMERICAN RECOVERY AND REINVESTMENT ACT (ARRA)
FUNDS FOR PROJECTS TO ASSIST LOW AND MODERATE
INCOME CITIZENS THROUGHOUT COLLIER COUNTY
Item #16D7
A REPORT OF THE FULL ACCOUNTING OF DISASTER
RECOVERY INITIATIVE GRANT-RELATED COSTS
INCURRED FOR THE REPLACEMENT OF FOUR HOMES
SEVEREL Y DAMAGED BY HURRICANE WILMA - TOTAL OF
$603,886.67 IN FEDERALLY-FUNDED SUPPLEMENTAL
DISASTER RECOVERY SUBGRANT DOLLARS
Item #16D8
Page 195
'.'"~-'-'-'-' ""-~--"~-'","._'_... .._."---~" -.". -,.-,- -,--~.~._._-~,--.~-,...,.,,_._---~. .-.-----.-------
March 9, 2010
A DECLARATION OF DEED RESTRICTION BETWEEN
COLLIER COUNTY AND THE EMPOWERMENT ALLIANCE
OF SOUTHWEST FLORIDA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
CORPORATION FOR A PROJECT KNOWN AS HATCHERS
PRESERVE IN IMMOKALEE, FLORIDA - TEMPORARILY
SUSPENDING CONSTRUCTION WHICH PREVENTS THE
COUNTY FROM CLOSING THE PROJECT, KNOWN AS
HA TCHER'S PRESERVE, DUE TO A LACK OF LOW AND_
MODERATE-INCOME HOUSESOLDS
Item # 16D9
A BUDGET AMENDMENT NOT TO EXCEED $65,000 FOR
MITIGATION WORK ASSOCIATED WITH THE FUEL TANK
REPLACEMENT AT THE PORT OF THE ISLANDS MARINA
AND RECOGNIZING REVENUE FROM THE SELLERS
ESCROW ACCOUNT TO REPAY THE COUNTY FOR THE
REQUIRED WORK
Item #16El
CONTRACT FOR INVITATION TO BID (ITB) NUMBER 09-
5273, GENERATOR MAINTENANCE, REPAIR, AND
INSTALLATION, TO POWER PRO-TECH SERVICES, INC., AS
PRIMARY; METRO POWER SYSTEMS, INC., AS SECONDARY;
AND CLEAN FUEL & TANK, INC., FOR FUEL POLISHING
(CLEANING) IN THE ESTIMATED ANNUAL AMOUNT OF
$400,000
Item # 16E2
A FIRST AMENDMENT TO LEASE AGREEMENT WITH
Page 196
March 9, 2010
HOMETOWN LANDMARK ESTATES, LLC, FOR THE
CONTINUED USE OF VACANT COUNTY OWNED LAND FOR
VEHICLE PARKING WITH A FIRST YEARS REVENUE OF
$2,500 - CONTINUING THE CURRENT LEASE UNTIL
AUGUST 14,2019
Item # 16E3
COLLIER COUNTY'S PARTICIPATION IN A PARTNERSHIP
AGREEMENT THAT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE COLLIER
COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT FOR A READINESS AND
EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT FOR SCHOOLS GRANT - TO
PROVIDE ADDITIONAL ICS TRAINING TO TEACHERS,
ADMINISTRATION STAFF, CUSTODIAL AND PLANT
MANAGERS
Item # 16E4
RATIFY STAFF-APPROVED CHANGE ORDERS AND
CHANGES TO WORK ORDERS TO BOARD-APPROVED
CONTRACTS - FOR THE PERIOD OF JANUARY 14,2010
THROUGH FEBRUARY 10,2010
Item #16Fl
AN INSURANCE REFUND AND BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR
THE OCHOPEE FIRE CONTROL DISTRICT IN THE AMOUNT
OF $4,600 FOR THE PURPOSE OF REPLACING STOLEN
ITEMS - REPLACING HAND TOOLS, A LAWN MOWER, A
GENERA TOR AND A NEW VEHICLE PUMP
Item # 16F2
Page 197
March 9, 2010
RESOLUTION 2010-51: AMENDMENTS (APPROPRIATING
GRANTS, DONATIONS, CONTRIBUTIONS OR INSURANCE
PROCEEDS) TO THE FISCAL YEAR 2009-10 ADOPTED
BUDGET - BA #10-152
Item #16Gl
THE AFTER-THE-FACT SUBMITTAL OF THE ATTACHED
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG)
DISASTER RECOVERY INITIATIVE (DRI) GRANT
APPLICATION TO COLLIER COUNTY HOUSING & HUMAN
SERVICES (HHS) FOR THE PARTIAL DESIGN AND
CONSTRUCTION OF THE IMMOKALEE STORM WATER
MASTER PLAN IN THE AMOUNT OF $4,840,604 - COVERING
COSTS FOR ENGINEERING, PERMITTING, RIGHT-OF-WAY
ACQUISTION AND CONSTRUCTION OF THE DOWNTOWN
PORTION
Item #16G2
CRA RESOLUTION 2010-52: CHANGING VARIOUS SECTIONS
OF THE IMMOKALEE CRA COMMERCIAL FACADE
IMPROVEMENT GRANT PROGRAM POLICIES AND
PROCEDURES DOCUMENT, APPLICATION AND RECIPIENT
AGREEMENT - REQUIRING A MANDA TORY PRE-
APPLICATION MEETING AND FOR THE CRA BOARD TO
MAKE THE FINAL DECISION
Item #16G3
A GRANT REQUEST FROM THE EASTERN COLLIER
Page 198
'_.,--_.~..__......_._.__."---~------_._-._-
March 9, 2010
COUNTY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE (ECOC) FOR FUNDING
TOTALING $43,875.00 FOR THE EXPENSES ASSOCIATED
WITH THE 50TH ANNUAL HARVEST FESTIVAL SCHEDULED
MARCH 20, 2010 - HELD IN DOWNTOWN IMMOKLAEE
Item # 16G4
A 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 (2818 GULFVIEW DRIVE) - TO
INSTALL IMPACT RESISTANT DOORS AND WINDOWS AT
2818 GULFVIEW DRIVE
Item #16Hl
COMMISSIONER HENNING'S REIMBURSEMENT
REGARDING ATTENDANCE AT A FUNCTION SERVING A
VALID PUBLIC PURPOSE. HE ATTENDED THE GREATER
NAPLES CHAMBER OF COMMERCE WAKE UP NAPLES
EVENT AT THE HILTON HOTEL - 5111 TAMIAMI TRAIL
NORTH, NAPLES, FL ON FEBRUARY 16,2010. $20 PAID
FROM COMMISSIONER HENNING'S TRAVEL BUDGET
Item # 16H2
COMMISSIONER HENNING'S REIMBURSEMENT
REGARDING ATTENDANCE AT A FUNCTION SERVING A
VALID PUBLIC PURPOSE. HE ATTENDED THE EAST NAPLES
CIVIC ASSOCIATION LUNCHEON AT THE HAMILTON
HARBOR YACHT CLUB ON FEBRUARY 22,2010. $18.00 PAID
Page 199
,._._,,-_._,,----"'-"--~. .---.----,,--.,,-.-..^ "'---"._,'- ~----- .. ---_._,,~"-.
March 9, 2010
FROM COMMISSIONER HENNING'S TRA VEL BUDGET -
LOCATED AT 7065 HAMIL TON AVENUE
Item # 16H3
COMMISSIONER COLETTA'S REIMBURSEMENT
REGARDING ATTENDANCE AT A FUNCTION SERVING A
VALID PUBLIC PURPOSE. COMMSSIONER COLETTA
ATTENDED THE LAUNCHING OF IMMOKALEE HOUSING &
FAMILY SERVICES ON NOVEMBER 17, 2009 IN NAPLES, FL.
$50.00 PAID FROM COMMISSIONER COLETTA'S TRAVEL
BUDGET - HELD AT THE NAPLES YACHT CLUB, LOCATED
AT 700 14TH AVENUE S.
Item #16H4
COMMISSIONER COLETTA'S REIMBURSEMENT
REGARDING ATTENDANCE AT A FUNCTION SERVING A
VALID PUBLIC PURPOSE. COMMISSIONER COLETTA WILL
BE ATTENDING TO THE HONOR THE FREE PRESS DAY ON
MARCH 17,2010 IN NAPLES, FL. $30.00 PAID FROM
COMMISSIONER COLETTA'S TRAVEL BUDGET - HELD AT
THE HILTON HOTEL, 5111 T AMIAMI TRAIL NORTH
Item # 16H5
COMMISSIONER COLETTA'S REIMBURSEMENT
REGARDING ATTENDANCE AT A FUNCTION SERVING A
VALID PUBLIC PURPOSE. COMMISSIONER COLETTA WILL
BE ATTENDING ON APRIL 10,2010 TO THE 2010 GULF
CITRUS GALA IN LABELLE, FL. $120.00 PAID FROM
COMMISSIONER COLETT AS TRAVEL BUDGET - HELD AT
Page 200
March 9, 2010
THE LABELLE CIVIC CENTER, 481 STATE ROAD 80
Item #16H6
COMMISSIONER COLETTA'S REIMBURSEMENT
REGARDING ATTENDANCE AT A FUNCTION SERVING A
VALID PUBLIC PURPOSE. HE ATTENDED EASTERN
COLLIER CHAMBER OF COMMERCE ON FEBRUARY 3, 2010
AT 506 1ST ST, IN IMMOKALEE, FL. $15.00 PAID FROM
COMMISSIONER COLETTA'S TRAVEL BUDGET - HELD AT
THE SEMINOLE CASINO
Item # 16H7
COMMISSIONER COLETTA'S REIMBURSEMENT
REGARDING ATTENDANCE AT A FUNCTION SERVING A
VALID PUBLIC PURPOSE. HE ATTENDED WAKE UP NAPLES
BREAKFAST AT GREATER NAPLES CHAMBER OF
COMMERCE ON FEBRUARY 16,2010 DATE AT 5111
TAMIAMI TRAIL NORTH IN NAPLES, FL. $25.00 PAID FROM
COMMISSIONER COLETTA'S TRAVEL BUDGET
Item # 1611
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 201
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
March 9, 2010
I. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS TO FILE FOR RECORD WITH ACTION AS DIRECTED:
A. Districts:
B. Minutes:
7)
8)
9)
10)
I) Collier Mosquito Control District:
2010 Meeting Schedule; Final Annual Certified Budget for 2010.
1)
Bavshore Beautification MSTU Advisorv Committee:
Minutes of May 13,2009; July 8, 2009; August 4,2009;
September 1,2009; October 6.2009; November 3, 2009;
December 1, 2009; January 5, 2010.
2)
Bavshore/Gatewav Triangle Local Redevelopment Advisorv Board:
Minutes of March 3, 2009; July 7, 2009; August 4,2009;
September 1,2009; October 6,2009; November 3, 2009.
3)
Collier Countv Code Enforcement Board:
Minutes of November 19, 2009.
4)
Collier Countv Planning Commission:
Minutes of January 7, 2010.
5)
Contractors Licensing Board:
Minutes of December 16, 2009.
6)
Development Services Advisorv Committee:
Minutes of January 6, 2010.
Environmental Advisorv Council:
Minutes of December 2. 2009; January 6, 2010.
Floodplain Management Planning Committee:
Minutes of September 28,2009; October 5, 2009.
Golden Gate Communitv Center Advisorv Committee:
Minutes of January 4, 20 I O.
Historical! Archaeological Preservation Board:
Agenda of February 17, 2010.
II) Isles of Capri Fire Control District Advisory Committee:
Minutes of January 7, 2010.
12) Land Acquisition Advisory Committee:
Minutes of January II, 20 I O.
13) Vanderbilt Beach Beautification MSTU Advisory Committee:
Agenda of January 7, 2010; February 4, 2010.
Minutes of December 3,2009; January 7, 2010; supplements to file
with November 5, 2009 minutes.
C. Other:
I) Special Magistrate Code Enforcement:
Minutes of January 15, 2010.
2) Special Magistrate Intersection Safetv Program:
Minutes of January 8, 2010.
March 9, 2010
Item # 1611
A BUDGET AMENDMENT TO TRANSFER FUNDS
COLLECTED FOR THE COLLIER COUNTY JUVENILE
ASSESSMENT CENTER TO THE SHERIFF IN THE AMOUNT
OF $59,000 USED EXCLUSIVELY FOR THE OPERATION OF
THE JUVENILE ASSESSMENT CENTER
Item # 16J2
THE SHERIFF'S APPLICATION FOR HOMELAND SECURITY
FISCAL YEAR 2010 OPERATION STONEGARDEN AND
DESIGNATING THE SHERIFF AS THE OFFICIAL APPLICANT,
AND THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE STAFF AS GRANT PROGRAM
AND FINANCIAL MANAGERS TO ACCEPT, RECEIVE AND
EXPEND GRANT FUNDS, AND SUBMIT APPLICABLE
BUDGET AND PROGRAM MODIFICA TIONS ~ NO REQUIRED
MATCH
Item # 1613
DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD OF FEBRUARY 20,2010
THROUGH FEBRUARY 26,2010 AND SUBMISSON INTO THE
OFFICIAL RECORDS OF THE BOARD
Item #16J4
THE STATE OF FLORIDA ANNUAL LOCAL GOVERNMENT
FINANCIAL REPORT FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 2008-2009 AS
REQUIRED BY FLORIDA STATUTE 218.32 - SUBMITTING
THE REQUIRED STATUTORILY MANDATED REPORTS
Page 202
March 9, 2010
Item #16Kl
A STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF
$48,700 FOR PARCEL #209FEE IN THE LAWSUIT STYLED
COLLIER COUNTY V. PABLO M. SARDINAS, ET AL., CASE
NO. 07-2824-CA (OIL WELL ROAD PROJECT 60044) (FISCAL
IMPACT $8,000) - FOR A .758 ACRE ROAD RIGHT -OF- WAY
Item # 16K2
ADVERTISING TWO ORDINANCES FOR FUTURE BOARD
CONSIDERATION WHICH WOULD: (1) AMEND ORDINANCE
NO. 76-57 (THE PUBLIC SOLICITORS ORDINANCE), SO AS
TO PROHIBIT PUBLIC SOLICITORS FROM
MISREPRESENTING THAT THEY ARE VETERANS OF THE
MILITARY OR SOLICITING IN MILITARY UNIFORMS WHEN
THEY ARE NEITHER PRESENT NOR FORMER MEMBERS OF
THE MILITARY; AND (2) AMEND ORDINANCE NO. 87-60
(WHICH REGULATES SOLICITATION IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT-
OF-WAY), AS AMENDED, REQUIRINE CHARITABLE
ORGANIZATIONS SOLICITING IN MILIT AR Y UNIFORM OR A
DISTINCTIVE PART OF A MILITARY UNIFORM TO PROVIDE
EVIDENCE OF PRESENT OR FORMER MILITARY SERVICE
FOR EACH SOLICITOR WHEN APPLYING FOR A PERMIT
Item #17A
ORDINANCE 2010-09: RZ-PL2009-469 EAST NAPLES FIRE
CONTROL AND RESCUE DISTRICT NO. 26, REPRESENTED
BY ROBERT L. DUANE, AICP OF HOLE MONTES INC., A
REZONE FROM RURAL AGRICULTURE (A) AND
COMMERCIAL INTERMEDIATE (C-3) ZONING DISTRICTS TO
Page 203
March 9, 2010
THE PUBLIC USE (P) ZONING DISTRICT FOR A FIRE
STATION AND ACCESSORY USES. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY
IS 3.68 ACRES AND IS LOCATED IN SECTION 20, TOWNSHIP
51 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
Item #17B
RESOLUTION 2010-53: VAC-PL2009-1025, DISCLAIMING,
RENOUNCING AND VACATING THE COUNTY'S AND THE
PUBLIC'S INTEREST IN A PORTION OF A 30-FOOT WIDE
ALLEY ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF THE PLAT
KNOWN AS PETTIT SUBDIVISION, AS RECORDED IN PLAT
BOOK 2, PAGE 88, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER
COUNTY, FLORIDA, IN SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 52 SOUTH,
RANGE 25 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AND BEING
MORE SPECIFICALLY DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT A
Item #17C
ORDINANCE 2010-10: AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 2004-03,
THE COLLIER COUNTY AIRPORT AUTHORITY ORDINANCE,
FOR THE PURPOSE OF DESIGNATING THE BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AS THE GOVERNING BODY OF
THE AIRPORT AUTHORITY
Item #17D
ORDINANCE 2010-11: CREATING THE AIRPORT AUTHORITY
ADVISORY BOARD FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROVIDING
ADVICE AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, AS THE GOVERNING BODY OF
COLLIER COUNTY AIRPORT AUTHORITY, REGARDING THE
Page 204
March 9, 2010
MARCO ISLAND EXECUTIVE AIRPORT, IMMOKALEE
REGIONAL AIRPORT, EVERGLADES AIRPARK AND ANY
FUTURE PUBLICALL Y-OWNED AIRPORTS THAT ARE
WITHIN THE AUTHORITY AND CONTROL OF COLLIER
COUNTY
*****
There being no further business for the good of the County, the
meeting was adjourned by order ofthe Chair at 3:43 p.m.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS/EX
OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF
SPECIAL DISTRICTS UNDER ITS CONTROL
~w.c+
FRED COYLE, Chairrrian
.,."";.,, "
,""',.,,('.:'1,1":':.' '
A T<:r-EsT?~ .:~,
DWKiFlT.J~':..BROCK, CLERK
~..,~
~.. .,"
r:;...............:....,}b~~
At '.t ,.'to';h~" ~ .
. ~., '"," .
dan"tur" nn. ~
These minutes approved by the Board on t-f I J 3 /1.-0 I/), as presented
.....---- or as corrected r
TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF GREGORY COURT
REPORTING SERVICES, INC., BY TERRI LEWIS.
Page 205