BCC Minutes 04/12-13/2011 R MINUTES
BCC
Regular
Meeting
April 12 - 13 , 2011
April 12-13, 2011
TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Naples, Florida, April 12-13, 2011
LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Board of County
Commissioners, in and for the County of Collier, and also acting as
the Board of Zoning Appeals and as the governing board( s) of such
special districts as have been created according to law and having
conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 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
Georgia Hiller
Tom Henning
ALSO PRESENT:
Leo Ochs, County Manager
Jeffrey A. Klatzkow, County Attorney
Crystal Kinzel, Office of the Clerk of Courts
Ian Mitchell, BCC Executive Manager
Mike Sheffield, Business Operations Manager - CMO
Page 1
COLLIER COUNTY
Board of County Commissioners
Community Redevelopment Agency Board (CRAB)
Airport Authority
AGENDA
Board of County Commission Chambers
Collier County Government Center
3299 Tamiami Trail East, 3rd Floor
Naples FL 34112
April 12, 2011
9:00 AM
Fred W. Coyle, BCC Chairman; Commissioner, District 4
Jim Coletta, BCC Vice-Chairman; Commissioner, District 5; CRAB Chairman
Donna Fiala, BCC Commissioner, District 1; CRAB Vice-Chairman
Georgia Hiller, BCC Commissioner, District 2
Tom Henning, BCC Commissioner, District 3
NOTICE: ALL PERSONS WISHING TO SPEAK ON AGENDA ITEMS MUST
REGISTER PRIOR TO SPEAKING. SPEAKERS MUST REGISTER WITH THE
EXECUTIVE MANAGER TO THE BCC PRIOR TO PRESENTATION OF THE
AGENDA ITEM TO BE ADDRESSED. ALL REGISTERED SPEAKERS WILL
RECEIVE UP TO THREE (3) MINUTES UNLESS THE TIME IS ADJUSTED BY
THE CHAIRMAN.
COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 2003-53 AS AMENDED BY
ORDINANCE 2004-05 AND 2007-24, REQUIRES THAT ALL LOBBYISTS
SHALL, BEFORE ENGAGING IN ANY LOBBYING ACTIVITIES (INCLUDING
BUT NOT LIMITED TO, ADDRESSING THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS), REGISTER WITH THE CLERK TO THE BOARD AT THE
BOARD MINUTES AND RECORDS DEPARTMENT.
Page 1
April 12, 2011
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."
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 PROCEEDING 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, THE PROVISION OF CERTAIN
ASSISTANCE. PLEASE CONTACT THE COLLIER COUNTY FACILITIES
MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT LOCATED AT 3335 EAST TAMIAMI TRAIL,
SUITE 1, NAPLES, FLORIDA, 34112-5356, (239) 252-8380; ASSISTED
LISTENING DEVICES FOR THE HEARING IMP AIRED ARE AVAILABLE IN
THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' OFFICE.
LUNCH RECESS SCHEDULED FOR 12:00 NOON TO 1:00 P.M
1. INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
A. Reverend Bruce Frogge - First Christian Church
2. AGENDA AND MINUTES
A. Approval of today's regular, consent and summary agenda as amended
(Ex Parte Disclosure provided by Commission members for consent and
summary agenda.)
B. March 11, 2011 - BCC/EDC Workshop
c. March 11,2011 - BCC/Strategic Planning Workshop
D. March 22, 2011 - BCC/Regu1ar Meeting
Page 2
April 12, 2011
3. SERVICE AWARDS
4. PROCLAMATIONS
A. Proclamation designating April 15 and 16, 20 II as Relay for Life Days.
To be accepted by Melissa Wolf, Community Representative; Kathleen
Coppola, Event Chairman and Mary Jo Thurston, Survivor. Sponsored by
Commissioner Fiala.
B. Proclamation designating April as Water Conservation Month. To be
accepted by Paul Mattausch, Water Department Director and Lisa Koehler,
Community Outreach and Media Specialist from South Florida Water
Management District. Sponsored by Commissioner Fiala.
C. Proclamation designating April, 20 II as Sexual Assault Awareness Month.
To be accepted by Eileen Wesley, Victim Service Coordinator. Sponsored
by Commissioner Coyle.
D. Proclamation designating April 13 through April 23, 2011 as our official
participation in "Taking it to the Streets SWFL" and April 19, 2011 as
"Try Transit Day". To be accepted by Michelle Arnold, Alternative
Transportation Modes Director and Glama Carter, Alternative
Transportation Modes Manager. Sponsored by Commissioner Coletta.
E. Proclamation designating April 10 through April 16, 2011 as National Crime
Victims Rights Week. To be accepted by Lisa Reddick and Linda Oberhaus,
Shelter for Abused Women and Children; Angela Larson, Collier County
Sheriffs Office; Betty McGuire-Ardaya, State Attorney's Office; and Shaina
Hicks, Project Help, Inc. Sponsored by Commissioner Fiala.
F. Proclamation designating April, 2011 as National Financial Literacy Month.
To be accepted by Victoria Stephan, President of Junior Achievement of
Southwest Florida, Inc. and M J Scarpelli, Special Events Coordinator,
Junior Achievement of Southwest Florida, Inc. Sponsored by Commissioner
Hiller.
G. Proclamation designating April 22, 2011 as Earth Day in Collier County.
Page 3
April 12, 2011
To be accepted by Dan Rodriguez, Solid Waste Management Director, Staff
from Solid Waste Management and the Public Utilities Division. Sponsored
by Commissioner Fiala.
H. Proclamation congratulating Naples Land Yacht Harbor for receiving the
Waste Reduction Awards Program (WRAP) Award. To be accepted by Dan
Rodriguez, Solid Waste Management Director; Staff from Solid Waste
Management; Mary Butler, President of Naples Land Yacht Harbor Board of
Directors and Jenny and Neil Gunner. Sponsored by Commissioner Coyle.
5. PRESENTATIONS
A. Presentation of the Collier County "Business of the Month" award to
Fischer International. To be accepted by Andrew Sroka, CEO & President.
B. Recommendation to recognize Tona Nelson, Senior Administrative
Assistant, Parks and Recreation Department as the Employee of the Month
for February, 2011.
6. PUBLIC PETITIONS
A. Public Petition request from Mr. John O. Elliott asking the Board to consider
an adjustment to his water bill.
B. Public Petition request from Ms. Kathleen Reynolds regarding funding for
the Early Learning Coalition of Southwest Florida.
C. Public Petition from Ms. Laura DeJohn representing the East Naples
Foundation requesting coordination of efforts with the County.
Item 7 and 8 to be heard no sooner than 1:00 pm unless otherwise noted.
7. BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
A. This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided bv Commission
Members. Should a hearin2 be held on this item. all participants are
required to be sworn in. DOA-PL2010-1052: 01de Cypress Development,
LTD and Vita Pima, LLC, represented by Chris Mitchell of Waldrop
Engineering, P.A. and Richard D. Yovanovich of Coleman, Yovanovich &
Page 4
April 12, 2011
Koester, P.A., request a change to the previously approved Olde Cypress
Development of Regional Impact DR!, in accordance with Florida Statutes,
Subsection 380.06(19). The proposed modifications add 63.9 acres into the
DR! boundary, amend Map H and remove the 3.9 acre park requirement to
incorporate this change. Subject property consisting of 602::l:: acres is located
in Sections 21 and 22, Range 48 South, Township 26 East, Collier County,
Florida. (Companion to PUDZ-PL2010-1054 and PUDA-PL2010-388)
8. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. 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. PUDZ-PL2010-1054: Vita Pima, LLC,
represented by Christopher R. Mitchell, P.E. of Waldrop Engineering, P.A.,
and Richard D. Y ovanovich, Esquire, of Coleman, Y ovanovich & Koester,
P.A., request a Rezone from the Residential Planned Unit Development
(RPUD) Zoning District with a Special Treatment (ST) Overlay for a
project known as the HD Development RPUD, and the Agricultural (A)
Zoning District, to a RPUD Zoning District to allow for development of a
maximum of 125 single-family residential units and 33 multi-family units,
and associated accessory uses. The 65.29::l:: acre subject property is located
along the north side of Immokalee Road (CR 846) approximately 330 feet
east of Olde Cypress Boulevard in Section 21, Township 48 South, Range
26 East, Collier County, Florida. (Companion to DOA-PL2010-1052 and
PUDA-PL2010-388)
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. PUDA-PL2010-388: Olde Cypress Development,
L TD, represented by Chris Mitchell of Waldrop Engineering, P.A. and
Richard D. Yovanovich, Esquire, of Coleman, Yovanovich & Koester,
P.A., request a PUD Amendment for the Olde Cypress PUD. The PUD
Amendment request is to reduce the project density from 1,100 dwelling
units to 942 dwelling units and remove the requirement of trails and a park
(3.9 acres minimum) within the Olde Cypress PUD/DRI. Subject property is
located in the Olde Cypress Subdivision, Sections 21 and 22, Township
48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. (Companion to DOA-
PL2010-1052, 01de Cypress DRI and PUDZ-PL2010-1054, HD
Development RPUD)
Page 5
April 12, 2011
C. Petition CP-2008-5, requesting amendments to the Immokalee Area Master
Plan and Immokalee Area Master Plan Future Land Use Map, to make
revisions to the entire Master Plan to include: increases to commercial
acreage, industrial acreage and allowable residential density; elimination of
some existing designations; creation of a new designation for the Immokalee
Regional Airport site; and re-designation of approximately 103 acres to
the Immokalee Urban Area from the Agricultural/Rural within the Rural
Lands Stewardship Area as identified on the countywide Future Land Use
Map. Additionally, staff requests amendments to the Future Land Use Map
and Map Series of the Future Land Use Element to show the re-designation
of the 103 acres to the Immokalee Urban Area. (Adoption Hearing)
9. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
A. Appointment of members to the Tourist Development Council.
B. Appointment of members to the Forest Lakes Roadways and Drainage
Advisory Committee.
C. Appointment of members to the Animal Services Advisory Board and a
change of category for an existing member.
D. Appointment of a member to the Ochopee Fire Control District Advisory
Committee.
E. Supreme Court of Florida's Court Ruling on Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County vs. Dwight Brock, dated November 10,
2010. (Commissioner Henning)
F. Recommendation to discuss possible amendments to Ordinance No. 75-16,
as amended, relating to the meetings of the Collier County Board of County
Commissioners that will introduce rules of decorum and civility.
(Commissioner Henning)
G. 2010 Census Count for Lee, Collier and Hendry Counties (Commissioner
Henning)
10. COUNTY MANAGER'S REPORT
Page 6
April 12, 2011
A. Recommendation to approve the application of a Housing and Urban
Development (HUD) Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) in
the amount of$I,790,000 to construct a Community Center at Eagle Lakes
Community Park; authorize the necessary leveraging associated with
restricting the land on which the facility would be built; and authorizing
the Parks and Recreation Director to serve as the certifying representative
for the application. (Barry Williams, Parks and Recreation Director)
B. Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to sign Agreement
#B-II-UN-12-003 with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development to accept entitlement funding for Neighborhood Stabilization
Program 3, in the amount of$3,884,165 and approve associated budget
amendments. (Marcy Krumbine, Housing, Human and Veteran Services
Director)
c. Recommendation to adopt a resolution authorizing condemnation of
easements necessary for construction of a replacement bridge on White
Boulevard and new bridge on 23rd Street SW, both over the Golden Gate
Main Canal, together with the realignment of the intersection of White
Boulevard and 23rd Street SW. (Transportation Bridge Repair and
Replacement Program, Project No. 66066.) Estimated fiscal impact:
$550,000. (Jay Ahmad, Transportation Engineering Director)
D. Request to reconsider award ofRFP #10-5450 - Asphalt Roadway,
Concrete, Curb, Sidewalk and Driveway Installation. (Estimated annual
expense is $2,000,000) (Steve Carnell, Purchasing Director)
E. Recommendation to approve contracts for Request for Proposal (RFP) 09-
5262 - S for Engineering Services for Collier County (estimated annual
expenditures $2,000,000). (Steve Carnell, Purchasing Director)
F. Recommendation that the Board approves prepayment of the Series 2008
Conservation Collier Bonds in the amount of $ 7,126,908, plus interest
accrued. (Mark Isackson, Corporate Financial and Management Services
Director)
G. Recommendation to approve a form Easement Agreement for use between
Collier County and the Beachfront Property Owners requiring the Property
Owners provide public beach access in exchange for publicly funded major
Page 7
April 12, 2011
beach renourishment, vegetation planting and dune restoration to the
subject property. (Gary McAlpin, Coastal Zone Management Director)
H. Recommendation for the Board of County Commissioners to adopt three
Resolutions and approve the related lease agreements for newly-elected
government officials to utilize County-owned office space for the annual
revenue of$30. (Skip Camp, Facilities Management Director)
11. COUNTY ATTORNEY'S REPORT
12. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
13. AIRPORT AUTHORITY AND/OR COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY
14. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS
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. GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION
1) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the water and sewer
utility facilities for Lely Cultural Parkway and to authorize the County
Manager, or his designee, to release any Utilities Performance
Security to the Project Engineer or the Developer's designated agent.
2) Recommendation to grant final Conditional approval of roadway
(private) and drainage improvements for the final plat of Heritage
Bay Phase Two-A, pursuant to Section 10.02.05 C.8 of the Land
Development Code with roadway and drainage improvements being
privately maintained and authorizing release of the maintenance
Page 8
April 12, 2011
security except to the extent necessary to ensure completion of the
final paving improvements.
3) Recommendation to accept and approve the completed alternative
road impact fee calculation study, conducted in accordance with the
provisions of Section 74-204 of the Collier County Code of Laws and
Ordinances, the review completed by Tindale-Oliver and Associates,
Inc., and the resulting Road Impact Fee rate of $68,393 per 1,000
square feet for the Taco Bell restaurant being constructed at 4201
Tamiami Trail East.
4) Recommendation to award Invitation to Bid (ITB) #10-5588R for
Purchase and Deliveries of Fungicides, Pesticides and Herbicides to
Alligare LLC, Diamond R Fertilizer Co., Inc., Forestry Resources
Inc., Helena Chemical Company, Red River Specialties Inc., and
Univar USA Inc., in no particular order. Estimated annual expenses:
$350,000.
5) Recommendation to award ITB #11-5651 "Hurricane Shutters for
the Traffic Management Center and Maintenance Building" of the
Growth Management Division to Storm Smart Building Systems Inc.
and approve a necessary budget amendment in the amount of$68,750.
6) Recommendation to approve an amendment to Contract #10-5455
Management Contract for the Collier Area Transit (CAT) Fixed
Route and Paratransit Program, to clarify ownership rights to Zonar@
equipment purchased by the contractor, Tectrans, Inc., and installed in
CAT vehicles and authorize an Agreement amongst Zonar@ Systems,
Inc., Tectrans, Inc. and Collier County that assigns Tectran's current
annual Zonar@ subscription to Collier County at no cost.
7) Recommendation to approve an Addendum to Software License and
Services Agreement and Customer Support Agreement Between
RouteMatch Software, Inc. and Collier County; to update licensing
and TD trip planning and dispatch software with a current version
compatible with Windows 7 at an estimated cost of$33,260.
Page 9
April 12, 2011
8) Recommendation to enter into an Interlocal Agreement with Lee
County to coordinate a public transit link that is being implemented
by Lee County between Lee and Collier Counties.
9) Recommendation to adopt the Collier Area Transit Mobility
Management Plan and authorize the County Manager, or his designee,
to implement suggested recommendations; not to exceed $46,000
from Federal Stimulus Grant (ARRA FTA Section 5311).
10) Recommendation to approve the Selection Committee's Ranking in
response to Request for Proposal (RFP) #11-5621, for design services
for the Collier Area Transit (CAT) Passenger Transfer Facility (Radio
Road), and direct the County Manager, or his designee, to bring a
negotiated contract back to the Board for approval.
11) Recommendation to recognize FY 2010/2011 Federal Transit
Administration Section 5311 additional revenue in the amount of
$28,798 to Collier Area Transit Fund (426) and authorize all
necessary budget amendments.
12) Recommendation for the Board of County Commissioners to approve
a FY2009/2010 5309 Federal Transit Administration (FTA) grant
award in the amount of $274,000 for capital improvements to the
secondary transfer facility located on Radio Road and approve a
budget amendment to recognize and use these funds.
13) Recommendation to enter into a contract for services with AIM
Engineering to complete a feasibility study with conceptual plans
for pedestrian or bicycle facilities at the I-75 and Immokalee Road
Interchange in an amount up to $315,000. (FDOT Project #416237-1-
38-0 1 )
B. COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
1) Recommendation for the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA)
to approve and execute a Sweat Equity Grant Agreement between the
CRA and a Grant Applicant within the Bayshore Gateway Triangle
area. (3180 Caledonia Avenue, Fiscal Impact: $1,000)
Page 10
April 12, 2011
C. PUBLIC UTILITIES DIVISION
1) Recommendation to authorize the County Manager or designee to
notify the Florida Department of Environmental Protection of the
intent to decline a proposed funding to the State Revolving Fund Loan
Agreement (DWllll 030) for the South County Regional Water
Treatment Plant 12- Million Gallons per Day Reverse Osmosis Plant
Expansion Project. (Project #700971)
2) Recommendation to approve Hazard Mitigation Grant Program
Contract Agreement #11HM-3E-09-21-01-026, with State of Florida
Division of Emergency Management, in the amount of $240,000, to
apply towards costs associated with the installation of 1,430 linear
feet of six-inch high density Polyethylene Leachate Pipe at the Collier
County Landfill, and authorize corresponding budget amendments.
3) Recommendation to approve conveyance of an easement to Florida
Power & Light Company for providing electric services for the North
Collier Recycling Drop-off Center facility, at a cost not to exceed $27.
4) Recommendation to approve conveyance of an easement to Florida
Power & Light Company for providing electric services and fiber
connection for construction of the landfill gas-to-energy facility at the
Collier County Landfill, at no cost to the County.
5) Recommendation to reject proposals received under RFP #11-5648
for Disaster Recovery Assistance Services to ensure compliance with
the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act
and Federal Highway Administration requirements for state and
federal contracts that qualify for reimbursement, and authorize staff to
re-solicit a modified RFP.
D. PUBLIC SERVICES DIVISION
1) Recommendation to approve a change order for a project award
extension in excess of six (6) months for grant-related residential
rehabilitation activities funded by the Collier County Neighborhood
Stabilization Program.
Page 11
April 12, 2011
2) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to sign four
(4) 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 the developer to owner occupants
with a continuing fiscal impact of $59,065.45.
3) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to sign one
(1) release of lien for deferral of 100% of Collier County impact fees
for an owner occupied affordable housing dwelling unit that has been
repaid in full.
4) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to sign one
(1) Satisfaction of Mortgage an owner occupied affordable housing
dwelling unit that has been repaid in full to Collier County.
5) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to sign
three (3) grant agreements accepting the Continuum of Care Homeless
Assistance grant award from the U.S. Department of Housing and
Urban Development (HUD) totaling $330,761 and approve budget
amendments to recognize funds associated with this award.
6) Recommendation to approve electronic submittal of the Senior Corps.
Retired and Senior Volunteer Program (RSVP) application for grant
renewal to the Corporation for National and Community Service, for
continuation of the Collier County sponsored RSVP program in the
amount of$68,152.
7) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to sign
agreements with the David Lawrence Center and the National
Alliance on Mental Illness of Collier County, Inc. to operate the
Criminal Justice, Mental Health and Substance Abuse Reinvestment
Grant and associated budget amendments. Funding is provided
through Memorandum of Understanding #LHZ25 from the Florida
Department of Children and Families.
8) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to sign the
Summer Food Service Program Grant Agreement in the amount of
Page 12
April 12, 2011
$769,208.83 for FY 2010/2011 and approve associated budget
amendments.
9) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to sign a
Settlement Agreement and Mutual Release with Johnson Engineering
for $134,000, to resolve any and all claims and issues associated with
the Goodland Boat Park and approve and authorize the Chairman to
sign award of Contract #09-5262-S to Johnson Engineering for
Engineering Services for Collier County.
E. ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DIVISION
1) Recommendation to authorize the sale of Collier County surplus
property on April 30, 2011.
2) Recommendation to approve procurement of background checks and
fingerprinting from the Florida Department of Law Enforcement and
the Federal Bureau of Investigation as the sole source provider for an
estimated annual amount of$IOO,OOO.
3) Recommendation to accept reports and ratify staff-approved change
orders and changes to work orders.
F. COUNTY MANAGER OPERATIONS
1) Recommendation to approve and authorize acceptance of a Volunteer
Fire Assistance Grant award to the Ochopee Fire Control District in
the amount of $4,125 for the purpose of purchasing fire hose for brush
vehicles and Class A Foam.
2) Recommendation to adopt a resolution approving amendments
(appropriating grants, donations, contributions or insurance proceeds)
to the Fiscal Year 2010-11 Adopted Budget.
3) Recommendation to authorize a Budget Amendment appropriating
$37, II 0 that will provide funding for the Legal Aid Society within the
Court System to cover Article V revenue shortfalls for FY 2011.
4) Recommendation to authorize a representative of the County Tourism
Page 13
April 12, 2011
Department to file a claim in the sum of $450,000 on behalf of Collier
County for lost tourist development tax revenue in the multi-district
litigation relating to the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. (Civil Action
No. 10-9999, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana)
G. AIRPORT AUTHORITY
1) Recommendation to approve a budget amendment for engineering,
consulting and design services required for repairs to taxiway alpha
wiring and replacement of the rotating beacon at the Immokalee
Regional Airport. ($6,230)
2) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to execute a
Resolution authorizing execution of "Master Joint Participation
Agreement #201 I-A" with Florida Department of Transportation,
to fund projects at the Everglades Airpark, Immokalee Regional
Airport and Marco Island Airport and authorize associated budget
amendments. ($70,000 to recognize grant funds and $17,500 to
transfer local match)
3) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners, acting as
the Airport Authority, approve and authorize the Chairman to execute
Contract #10-5600, Construction, Engineering and Inspection (CEI)
Services for the Marco Island Executive Airport Taxiway Project in
the amount of $484,195 with URS Corporation Southern.
4) Recommendation to authorize the County Attorney to take all
necessary action, including filing a lawsuit, to evict Gregory Shepard
from his present location at the Immokalee Regional Airport, and to
pursue any hold-over rent, damages, and costs that may be due and
owing to the Airport Authority.
H. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
1) Commissioner Coletta requests Board approval for reimbursement
regarding attendance at a function serving a Valid Public Purpose.
He attended the Marine Corps League "Honor the Free Press Day"
Luncheon at the Hilton Hotel in Naples, FL on March 16,2011.
$30 to be paid from Commissioner Coletta's travel budget.
Page 14
April 12, 2011
2) Commissioner Coletta requests Board approval for reimbursement
regarding attendance at a function serving a Valid Public Purpose.
He will attend the 9th Annual Paradise Coast Tourism Star Awards
Luncheon at the Marco Island Marriott Resort, Marco Island, FL on
May 11, 2011. $30 to be paid from Commissioner Coletta's travel
budget.
3) Commissioner Henning requests Board approval for reimbursement
regarding attendance at a function serving a Valid Public Purpose.
He will attend the Big Cypress Chapter Community Service Award
Ceremony at the Country Club of Naples, Naples, FL on April 15,
2011. $20 to be paid from Commissioner Henning's travel budget.
4) Commissioner Henning requests Board approval for reimbursement
regarding attendance at a function serving a Valid Public Purpose.
He attended the Chabad of Naples Annual Benefit Evening & Gala
on April 10, 2011 at the Ritz-Carlton Hotel in Naples, FL. $150 to be
paid from Commissioner Henning's travel budget.
5) Commissioner Fiala requests Board approval for reimbursement
regarding attendance at a function serving a Valid Public Purpose.
She attended the 2011 Retired & Senior Volunteer Program (RSVP)
of Collier County luncheon on March 30, 2011 at the Naples Hilton in
Naples, FL. $25 to be paid from Commissioner Fiala's travel budget.
6) Commissioner Fiala requests Board approval for reimbursement
regarding attendance at a function serving a Valid Public Purpose.
She attended the Chabad of Naples Annual Benefit Evening & Gala
on April 10, 2011 at the Ritz-Carlton Hotel in Naples, FL. $150 to be
paid from Commissioner Fiala's travel budget.
7) Commissioner Fiala requests Board approval for reimbursement
regarding attendance at a function serving a Valid Public Purpose.
She will attend the 9th Annual Paradise Coast Tourism Star Awards
Luncheon on May 11, 2011 at the Marco Island Marriott Resort,
Marco Island, FL. $30 to be paid from Commissioner Fiala's travel
budget.
8) Commissioner Hiller requests Board approval for reimbursement
Page 15
April 12, 2011
regarding attendance at a function serving a Valid Public Purpose.
She attended the Chabad of Naples, Annual Benefit Evening & Gala,
on April 10, 2011 at the Ritz-Carlton Hotel in Naples, FL. $50 to be
paid from Commissioner Hiller's travel budget.
9) Commissioner Hiller requests Board approval for reimbursement
regarding attendance at a function serving a Valid Public Purpose.
She will attend the 9th Annual Paradise Coast Tourism Awards
Luncheon at the Marco Island Marriott Resort, Marco Island, FL
on May 11, 2011. $30 to be paid from Commissioner Hiller's travel
budget.
I. MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
1) Miscellaneous items to files for record with action as directed.
J. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
1) To obtain Board approval for disbursements for the period of
March 5, 2011 through March 11, 2011 and for submission into the
official records of the Board.
2) To obtain Board approval for disbursements for the period of
March 12, 2011 through March 18, 2011 and for submission into the
official records of the Board.
3) To obtain Board approval for disbursements for the period of March
19, 2011 through March 25, 2011 and for submission into the official
records of the Board.
4) Recommendation that the Board accept the investment status update
report for quarters ending December 31, 2010 and March 31, 2011.
K. COUNTY ATTORNEY
1) Recommendation to authorize the County Attorney to file a lawsuit on
behalf of the Collier County Board of County Commissioners, against
Max Stankeveh and Oliver Scott Vanoy, in the Circuit Court of the
Twentieth Judicial Circuit in and for Collier County, FL, to recover
Page 16
April 12, 2011
damages incurred by the County for repair to a traffic signal cabinet
damaged by them in the amount of$15,417.81, plus costs of
litigation.
2) Recommendation to authorize the County Attorney to file a lawsuit on
behalf of the Collier County Board of County Commissioners, against
TODD SONDRINI, in the Circuit Court of the Twentieth Judicial
Circuit in and for Collier County, Florida, to recover damages
incurred by the County for repair to a County Emergency Vehicle that
was struck by a vehicle owned by TODD and KESIA SONDRINI,
and driven by TODD SONDRINI in the amount of$2l,060.50, plus
costs of litigation.
3) Recommendation to authorize the County Attorney to file a lawsuit on
behalf of the Collier County Board of County Commissioners, against
SURETY CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, in the Circuit Court of the
Twentieth Judicial Circuit in and for Collier County, Florida, to
recover damages incurred by the County, as a result of contracted
work for repair to Pollution Control Laboratory in Building H, 3rd
Floor, in the amount of $99,492.99, plus costs of litigation, including
reasonable attorney fees.
4) Recommendation to authorize the County Attorney to file a lawsuit on
behalf of the Collier County Board of County Commissioners, against
ACCI/API Joint Venture and Bob's Barricades, Inc., in the Circuit
Court of the Twentieth Judicial Circuit in and for Collier County,
Florida, to recover damages incurred by the County for repair to a
water force main damaged by them in the amount of$63,676.09, plus
costs of litigation.
17. SUMMARY AGENDA - THIS SECTION IS FOR ADVERTISED PUBLIC
HEARINGS AND MUST MEET THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA: 1) A
RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL FROM STAFF; 2) UNANIMOUS
RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL BY THE COLLIER COUNTY
PLANNING COMMISSION OR OTHER AUTHORIZING AGENCIES OF
ALL MEMBERS PRESENT AND VOTING; 3) NO WRITTEN OR ORAL
OBJECTIONS TO THE ITEM RECEIVED BY STAFF, THE COLLIER
COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION, OTHER AUTHORIZING
AGENCIES OR THE BOARD, PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF
Page 17
April 12, 2011
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 ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission
members. Should a hearin2 be held on this item. all participants are
required to be sworn in. PUDZ-2009-AR-14425, an ordinance of the
Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, amending
Ordinance Number 2004-41, as amended, the Collier County Land
Development Code, which includes comprehensive zoning regulations
for the unincorporated area of Collier County, Florida by amending the
appropriate zoning atlas map or maps by changing the zoning classification
of the herein described real property from a Rural Agricultural (A) Zoning
District to a Mixed Use Planned Unit Development (MPUD) Zoning District
to allow for the development of up to 135,000 square feet of commercial
development and/or retirement communitylgroup housing at aFAR of .60
and/or a hotel/motel of an intensity of26 units per acre for a 23.33+1- acre
parcel to be known as the Addie's Corner MPUD, located in the northwest
quadrant of the intersection of Immokalee Road (CR 846) and Collier
Boulevard (CR 951) in Section 22, Township 48 South, Range 26 East,
Collier County, Florida; and by providing an effective date.
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. PUDA-PL2010-854, Naples Daily News BPPUD,
an ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County
amending Ordinance No. 06-49, the Naples Daily News Business Park
Planned Unit Development (BPPUD), located at 1100 Immokalee Road, by
amending Section 2.9 of 06-49, to allow a change in the plant materials in
the landscape buffer; and providing an effective date.
C. Recommendation to adopt an Ordinance amending the Collier County
Consolidated Impact Fee Ordinance, Ordinance No. 2001-13, as amended, to
incorporate a provision clarifying the imposition of Water and Sewer Impact
Fees on geographic areas within the Collier County Water-Sewer District
until such a time when connection to the regional water and/or sewer system
is anticipated within a ten-year period as identified by the most current
Page 18
April 12, 2011
Public Utilities Water and Wastewater Master Plan Updates and the 20 I 0
Annual Update and Inventory Report.
D. Recommendation to adopt an Ordinance amending Ordinance No. 2006-03
(Collier County Airport-Type Screening Ordinance) to expand airport-type
security searches to include individuals entering the Immokalee Government
Center (Courthouse) and the James V. Mudd Emergency Services Center.
E. Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners adopt an
ordinance to amend Conservation Collier Ordinance No. 2002-63, as
amended, which provides for the ability to increase funding of the
Conservation Collier Management Trust Fund (174) by removing the
annual cap of ad-valorem taxes that may be appropriated and allow for the
transfer of funds into Fund 174 from Conservation Collier Acquisition
Trust Fund (172).
18. ADJOURN
INQUIRIES CONCERNING CHANGES TO THE BOARD'S AGENDA SHOULD
BE MADE TO THE COUNTY MANAGER'S OFFICE AT 252-8383.
Page 19
April 12, 2011
April12-13,2011
MR.OCHS: Mr. Chairman, you have a live mike.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Thank you, Mr. Ochs.
Ladies and gentlemen, Board of Commissioner meeting is now in
seSSIon.
Would you please stand for the invocation by Reverend Bruce
Frogge from First Christian Church.
Item #lA
INVOCATION & PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - REVEREND
BRUCE FROGGE. FIRST CHRISTIAN CHURCH
REVEREND FROGGE: As we enter into this time, I'm
reminded of the words of Mahatma Gandhi who said, "The best way
to find yourself is to lose yourself in service to others."
Let us pray.
When the gentleness of spirit calls us from lives lived for self
alone, may we respond in humble dedication for the sake of those
whose voices would otherwise go unheard.
Oh, Holy One, I give thanks for the commissioners who serve
this county and the people who live here. May the questions they ask
seek to reveal what is not easily seen, may their discussions be honest
and forthright while always seeking to understand others before they
seek to be understood themselves.
May each decision give rise to a greater sense of community
among all while creating opportunities for the unemployed and those
who feel overwhelmed with hopelessness.
From the mundane to the complicated, from the contentious to
the humorous, many recommendations will be made and votes taken,
but amidst everything we pray for your spirit to guide this work, that it
may be respectful to the environment, sensitive to the least among us,
and responsive to each person who brings his or her ideas before this
Page 2
April 12-13, 2011
commISSIon.
I offer these words with hopeful expectation that the decisions
made here today will encourage each person of Collier County to find
new and creative ways in enjoying, celebrating, and broadening the
rich diversity and beauty that makes this a great place to live. Amen.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you.
Please remain standing for the Pledge of Allegiance.
(The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And, Commissioner, may I just
interrupt one second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Of course.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, thank you very much. I just
want to -- I just want to say hello to my cousin who's watching. He's
sitting in the hospital. He came down here from Atlanta, had surgery
yesterday, came through very well, and so I just want to say, "Hi,
George. "
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Hi, George.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Hey, George.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Hope you recover quickly.
County Manager, do you have some changes to the agenda
today?
Item #2A
TODA Y'S REGULAR, CONSENT AND SUMMARY AGENDA AS
AMENDED - APPROVED AND/OR ADOPTED W/CHANGES
MR.OCHS: Yes, Mr. Chairman. Good morning,
Commissioners. Several changes this morning for the Board of
County Commissioner meeting, April 12, 2011.
Commissioners, the first three changes are all companion items
Page 3
April 12-13, 2011
on your advertised public hearings. They're Items 7 A, 8A, and 8B.
Again, all three companion items relating to a requested change to the
o Ide Cypress development of regional impact, a related rezone
request under Item 8A for the residential planned unit development
called HD Development RPUD, and Item 8B, which would be the
amendment requested of the 0 Ide Cypress PUD.
All three of those items are being continued at the request of
Commissioner Henning. We have it listed, Commissioner, for
continuance to the next meeting, April 26, 2011. If there's no
objection from the board, we'll continue that to the next meeting.
Commissioner Henning, are you okay with that date, or would
you like to move it to a different date?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, the problem is I may have
to attend a hearing on that date, and I don't want my colleagues to
second guess my feelings on this item.
I would like to continue to April 8th (sic) -- April 26th if I'm here
or, otherwise, in the first meeting in May, if that's all right with the
others.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Any objections?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's it.
MR.OCHS: Very good.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I presume the petitioner has no objection
to the continuance.
MR. OCHS: That's correct, Mr. Chairman. I believe the
commissioner (sic) is here. And if we have to move to the first
meeting in May, that still keeps us within your five-week readvertising
requirements, so we're okay even if we slide to the first meeting in
May.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Thank you very much.
MR. OCHS: The next item on your agenda is to withdraw Item
lOG. It's a recommendation to approve a form easement agreement
for use between Collier County and beachfront property to owners,
Page 4
April12-13,2011
and that item is being withdrawn at staffs request.
Next change is to move Item 16A13 to Item 10J on your regular
agenda. It's a recommendation to enter into a contract for services for
AIM Engineering to complete a feasibility study with conceptual
plans for pedestrian or bicycle facilities at the 1-75 and Immokalee
Road interchange in an amount up to $315,000. That move is at
Commissioner Henning's request.
Next change is to continue Item 16C2 to the April 26, 2011, BCC
meeting. It's a recommendation to apply costs associated with the
installation of some high-density leachate pipe at the Collier County
Landfill, and that item is being continued at staffs request, again, to
the April 26, 2011, BCC meeting.
Next change is to move Item 16D9 from your consent agenda to
Item 101, and that item would be heard immediately following Item
10E on your agenda this morning. It's a recommendation to approve
and authorize the chairman to sign a settlement agreement and mutual
release with Johnson Engineering for the total value of$134,000 to
resolve any and all claims and issues associated with the Goodland
boat ramp -- excuse me -- boat park.
Next change is to move Item 16G4 to Item 13A under your
Airport Authority item of your regular agenda. Further, this item has
been requested to be heard at 11 :30 a.m. time certain. It's a
recommendation to authorize the county attorney to take all necessary
action, including filing a lawsuit, to evict Gregory Shepard from his
present location at the Immokalee Regional Airport to pursue any
holdover rent, damages, and costs that may be due and owing to the
Airport Authority. That item is being moved at Commissioner
Coletta's request.
Next change is to move Item 16H4 to 9H. Commissioner
Henning requests board approval for reimbursement regarding
attendance at a function serving a valid public purpose. Again, that
item is being moved at Commissioner Henning's request to Item 9H.
Page 5
April 12-13, 2011
Next item is to continue Item 16K3 to the April 26, 2011, BCC
meeting at the request of the County Attorney's Office. It's a
recommendation to authorize the county attorney to file a lawsuit on
behalf of the board against Surety Construction Company.
One agenda note this morning, Commissioners, on Item 16A 7,
Section 3, Page 4 of the addendum of that item should be revised to
state, in part, quote, "Unless either party provides the other with at
least 60 days notice of nonrenewal rather than 180 days." This change
is for consistency with the original agreement and to promote ease in
tracking by staff, and that is requested at both the county manager's
staff and the County Attorney Office.
And we have three time-certain items this morning, Item 9G to
be heard at 11 a.m., Item 13A to be heard at 11 :30 a.m., and, again,
Item 8C to be heard at 1 :00 p.m.
Those are all the changes I have, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Thank you very much.
County Attorney?
MR. KLA TZKOW: Yeah. I just wanted to clarify both the
calendar and your resolution on the continuance of Items 7 A and 8A
and 8B. Usually we give a date certain on this one so the public
would know so they won't come for one meeting when we're just
going to continue it for another meeting. So I would ask we do it for
May 8th. This way, just in case there are any issues with the prior
meeting, we wouldn't have public showing up for nothing.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
MR. OCHS: That would be, I believe, May 10th.
MR. KLATZKOW: I'm sorry, May 10th.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: My preference would be April
26th, and I just ask my colleagues, if I'm not able to be here so we can
dispose of this item, is to move it to the next meeting in May, which is
May 10th.
MR. KLATZKOW: So it's--
Page 6
April12-13,2011
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Do you understand?
MR. KLATZKOW: It's a date certain April 24th then? April--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: April 26th.
MR. KLATZKOW: April 26th.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Not date certain, to be continued
to April 26th, and just a footnote for my colleagues, if I'm not able to
be here --
MR. KLATZKOW: We'll continue it again.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- we'll continue it again.
MR. KLATZKOW: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Does that adequately address it--
MR. KLATZKOW: Yeah, I understand now.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- if there's any conflict there. Okay.
Very well.
And we'll go to the commissioners. We'll start with
Commissioner Hiller.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: In terms of ex parte?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah, in terms of any further changes to
the agenda and ex parte.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No changes to the agenda, and
with now the revised agenda, ex parte as to 1 7 A on the summary
agenda, meetings and emails, and with respect to 17B, meetings and
emails.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. 17 A, I just had
correspondence on that and, 17B, I've also had correspondence.
I have no further items on the agenda to be changed or corrected.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. And with respect to Item 17 A, I
have the Collier County Planning Commission report and a notice of a
neighborhood information meeting. And with 7B (sic), I also have
reviewed the CCPC staff report only. And that is all of the ex parte
Page 7
April12-13,2011
they have.
Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. Good morning,
Commissioner Coyle.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Good morning.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I have no changes to the agenda,
and on 17 A and 17B, the only disclosure I have is that I reviewed the
staff report.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Chairman, I have no further
changes to today's agenda. I do have ex parte communication on 17 A.
I spoke to the petitioner's representative, I've spoken to staff, reviewed
the Planning Commission's meeting packet, and with 17B, spoke to
Nick Casalanguida and reviewed the Planning Commission's packet
and recommendations. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Thank you very much.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: With that, I'll make a motion to
approve today's agenda as amended.
MR. MITCHELL: Sir, we have a public speaker before the
agenda.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. But we do have a motion. Is
there a second?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: There's a second by Commissioner
Coletta. Okay . We will withhold the vote until we hear from the
speaker.
MR. MITCHELL: The speaker to 16A9 is Andrew Michna.
MR. MICHNA: Good morning.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Good morning.
MR. MICHNA: I'd like to thank all of you for at least allowing
me to speak to you this morning.
The reason why I'm actually here this morning is that I'm in --
Page 8
April 12-13, 2011
consideration of the -- I actually heard your last meeting about the
expansion of -- possible expansion of the Collier Transit Authority,
and I was wondering if possible, if the commissioners, the board, I
should say, would also consider the fact that -- in consideration of,
with the expansion and the budgeting with it as well, if you could
consider the possibility of expanding the actual hours of the bus
system.
Presently -- see, I live over at -- over on Bayshore, and basically
the bus system actually stops at 6:30. There's one bus that actually
runs in the entire city that runs till 9:00 to my knowledge, and that's
only the Immokalee bus.
And I was just wondering if this is something that the board at
least could consider when taking all the -- you know -- you know,
with regards to the ruling.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. We'll get an initial reaction right
now.
Good morning.
MS. ARNOLD: Good morning. Michelle Arnold, Alternative
Transportation Mode Director.
The item that's on the agenda is more for mobility management,
trying to inform the public about our system and find ways to engage
the public and various agencies that utilize our system. It really isn't
in reference to the request being presented to you today.
These -- we do have -- or just recently went through
transportation dis- -- I mean, transportation -- transit development plan
process, and we're going to be going through that, and at that time
would -- requests such as this about expansion of the service should be
considered.
And so I'll take this gentleman's name and inform him of that
process so that he can be engaged in that process.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
MS. ARNOLD: All right.
Page 9
April 12-13, 2011
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's great, good. Make sure -- in fact,
you can meet Michelle in the back of the room right now, if you'd like,
and give her your name and telephone number.
MR. MICHNA: Thank you, sir.
MS. ARNOLD: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Have a good day. Thank you.
No other speakers on the agenda, right?
MR. MITCHELL: No, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. We have a motion on the floor.
All in favor, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: The motion passes unanimously.
Page 10
Agenda Changes
Board of County Commissioners Meeting
April 12, 2011
Continue Item 7 A to April 26. 2011 BCC Meetine:: This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by
Commission members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all participants are required to be sworn in.
DOA-PL2010-1052: Olde Cypress Development, LTD and Vita Pima, LLC, represented by Chris Mitchell of
Waldrop Engineering, P.A. and Richard D. Yovanovich of Coleman, Yovanovich & Koester, P.A., is
requesting a change to the previously approved Olde Cypress Development of Regional Impact DRI, in
accordance with Florida Statutes, Subsection 380.06(19). The proposed modifications will add 63.9 acres into
the DRI boundary, amend Map H, and remove the 3.9 acre park requirement to incorporate this change.
The subject property consisting of 602l:acres is located in Sections 21 and 22, Range 48 South, Township 26
East, Collier County, Florida. (Companion to PUDZ-PL2010-1054 and PUDA-PL2010-388) (Commissioner
Henning's request)
Continue Item 8A to April 26. 2011 BCC Meetine:: This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided
by Commission members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all participants are required to be sworn in.
PUDZ-PL2010-1054: Vita Pima, LLC, represented by Christopher R. Mitchell, P.E. of Waldrop
Engineering, P.A., and Richard D. Yovanovich, Esquire of Coleman, Yovanovich & Koester, P.A., is
requesting a Rezone from the Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) zoning district with a Special
Treatment (ST) Overlay for a project that is known as the HD Development RPUD, and the Agricultural (A)
zoning district, to the RPUD zoning district to allow for development of a maximum of 125 single-family
residential units and 33 multi-family units, and associated accessory uses. The 65.291:acre subject property is
located along the north side of Immokalee Road (CR 846) approximately 330 feet east of Olde Cypress
Boulevard in Section 21, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. (Companion to DOA-
PL2010-1052 and PUDA-PL2010-388) (Commissioner Henning's request)
Continue Item 8B to April 26. 2011 BCC Meetine:: This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by
Commission members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all participants are required to be sworn in.
PUDA-PL2010-388, Olde Cypress Development, LTD, represented by Chris Mitchell of Waldrop
Engineering, P .A. and Richard D. Y ovanovich, Esquire of Coleman, Y ovanovich & Koester, P .A., is
requesting a PUD Amendment for the Olde Cypress PUD. The PUD Amendment request is to reduce the
project density from 1,100 dwelling units to 942 dwelling units and remove the requirements of trails and a
park (3.9 acres minimum) within the Olde Cypress PUD/DRI. The subject property is located in the Olde
Cypress subdivision, Sections 21 and 22, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida.
(Companion to: DOA-PL2010-1052, Olde Cypress DRI and PUDZ-PL2010-1054, HD Development RPUD)
(Commissioner Henning's request)
Withdraw Item lOG: Recommendation to approve a form Easement Agreement for use between Collier
County and the Beachfront Property Owners requiring the Property Owners to provide public beach access
in exchange for publicly funded major beach renourishment, vegetation planting and dune restoration to the
subject property. (Staffs request)
Move Item 16A13 to Item 10J: Recommendation to enter into a contract for services for AIM Engineering
to complete a feasibility study with conceptual plans for pedestrian or bicycle facilities at the 1-75 and
Immokalee Road Interchange in the amount up to $315,000 (FDOT Project #416237-1-38-01).
(Commissioner Henning's request)
Continue Item 16C2 to April 26. 2011 BCC Meetine:: Recommendation to approve a Hazard Mitigation
Grant Program contract, agreement number 11HM-3E-09-21-01-026, with the State of Florida, Division of
Emergency Management, in the amount of $240,000, to apply towards the costs associated with the
installation of 1,430 linear feet of six-inch High Density Polyethylene leachate pipe at the Collier County
Landfill; and, to authorize the corresponding budget amendments. (Staffs request)
Move Item 16D9 to Item 101 (to be heard immediatelv followine: Item 10E): Recommendation to approve
and authorize the Chairman to sign a Settlement Agreement and Mutual Release with Johnson Engineering
for the total value of $134,000 to resolve any and all claims and issues associated with the Goodland Boat
Park and approve and authorize the Chairman to sign award of Contract 09-5262-S to Johnson Engineering
for Engineering Services for Collier County. (Staffs request)
Move Item 16G4 to Item 13A: and has been requested to be heard at 11:30 a.m.: Recommendation to
authorize the County Attorney to take all necessary action, including filing a lawsuit, to evict Gregory
Shepard from his present location at the Immokalee Regional Airport, and to pursue any holdover rent,
damages, and costs that may be due and owing to the Airport Authority. (Commissioner Coletta's request)
Move Item 16H4 to Item 9H: Commissioner Henning requests Board approval for reimbursement
regarding attendance at a function serving a Valid Public Purpose. Attended the Chabad of Naples Annual
Benefit Evening and Gala on April 10, 2011 at the Ritz-Carlton Hotel in Naples, Florida. $150 to be paid
from Commissioner Henning's travel budget. (Commissioner Henning's request)
Continue Item 16K3 to April 26. 2011 BCC Meetine:: Recommendation to authorize the County
Attorney to file a lawsuit on behalf of the Collier County Board of County Commissioners, against SURETY
CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, in the Circuit Court of the Twentieth Judicial Circuit in and for Collier
County, Florida, to recover damages incurred by the County, as a result of contracted work, for the repair to
the Pollution Control Laboratory in Building''H',3rd Floor, in the amount of $99,492.99, plus costs of litigation,
including reasonable attorneys fees. (County Attorney Staffs request)
Note:
Item 16A 7: Section III, page 4 ofthe Addendum shall be revised to state, in part: "... unless either
party provides the other with at least sixty (60) days notice of non-renewal' rather than one hundred and
eighty (180) days. (This change is for consistency with the original agreement and to promote ease in
tracking by staff.) (Staffs request)
Time Certain Items:
Item 9G to be heard at 11 :00 a.m.
Item 13A to be heard at 11 :30 a.m.
Item 8C to be heard at 1 :00 p.m.
4/12/2011 8:48 AM
April 12-13, 2011
Item #2B, #2C AND #2D
MINUTES FROM THE MARCH 11, 2011 - BCC/EDC
WORKSHOP MEETING; MARCH 11, 2011 - BCC/STRATEGIC
PLANNING WORKSHOP MEETING AND MARCH 22, 2011 -
BCC/REGULAR MEETING - APPROVED AS PRESENTED
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That brings us to the March 11, 2011,
BCC/EDC workshop minutes. Does the board have any changes to
make?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion to approve.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion to approve by Commissioner
Coletta.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Second by Commissioner Fiala.
Any further questions?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All in favor, please signify by saying
aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: The motion passes unanimously.
March 11, 2011, BCC strategic planning workshop. Any
changes to that -- those minutes?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Motion to approve.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion to approve by Commissioner
Fiala, seconded by Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
Page 11
April 12-13, 2011
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I didn't realize I said it, but I
did.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All in favor, please signify by saying
aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It passes unanimously.
March 22, 2011, BCC regular meeting minutes.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion to approve by Commissioner
Coletta, second by Commissioner Fiala.
Any discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All in favor, please signify by saying
aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It passes unanimously.
That brings us to proclamations, County Manager.
Page 12
April 12-13, 2011
Item #4
PROCLAMATIONS - ONE MOTION TAKEN TO ADOPT ALL
PROCLAMATIONS (ITEM #4A THROUGH ITEM #4H)
Item #4A
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING APRIL 15 AND 16,2011 AS
RELAY FOR LIFE DAYS. ACCEPTED BY MELISSA WOLF,
COMMUNITY REPRESENTATIVE; KATHLEEN COPPOLA,
EVENT CHAIRMAN AND MARY JO THURSTON, SURVIVOR.
SPONSORED BY COMMISSIONER FIALA - ADOPTED
MR.OCHS: Yes, sir. Item 4A is a proclamation designating
April 15 and 16, 2011, as Relay for Life Days, to be accepted by
Melissa Wolf, community representative; Kathleen Coppola, event
chairman; and Mary Jo Thurston, survivor. This item is sponsored by
Commissioner Fiala.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Who's going to hold this for the picture?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Looks like purple's the color.
Thank you. Thank you for all you do for all of us.
(Applause.)
MS. THURSTON: Thank you, Commissioners.
For the record, I'm Mary Jo Thurston. I'm a cancer survivor. I
am a retired 3D-year Collier County employee, and I'm also a
committee member on the Survivorship Caregiver Committee for this
year's event.
As you know, American Cancer Society is a wonderful
organization. The Relay for Life is an opportunity for all of us to
come together, and it gives all of us a chance across the United States
to actually celebrate the lives of people who have battled cancer,
Page 13
April12-13,2011
remembered loved ones lost, particularly our very own Jim Mudd,
John Yonkosky, and Judy Bodine.
This year's event, the 2011 Naples Relay for Life, is going to take
place again at Gulfview Middle School. It's this Friday and Saturday.
It kicks off at 4:30. The survivors can register in the school's
cafeteria, and then the survivor lap will begin at 6:00. And it's going
to be led by Collier County's very own Luis Trujillo. Luis is from the
public utility's division, and he's the male survivor of the year for our
event this year.
So, again, please come out. It starts at 4:30 this Friday. We'll
register, the survivor lap is at 6:00. The luminary, which is in memory
of our loved lost ones, begins at 9:00. This is a great opportunity to
fight back against this devastating disease and to raise funds.
So thank you, Commissioners, so very much for recognizing this
special event, and you, Commissioner Fiala, for sponsoring us again
this year. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you.
(Applause.)
MS. COPPOLA: I hope to see you all there, and thank you so
very much for your continued support. And we really hope to raise the
awareness and educate the Naples Community about your options
when you are fighting cancer.
Thank you. I'll see you at relay.
(Applause.)
Item #4B
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING APRIL AS WATER
CONSERVATION MONTH. ACCEPTED BY PAUL
MATTAUSCH, WATER DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR AND LISA
KOEHLER, COMMUNITY OUTREACH AND MEDIA
SPECIALIST FROM SOUTH FLORIDA WATER
Page 14
April 12-13, 2011
MANAGEMENT DISTRICT. SPONSORED BY
COMMISSIONER FIALA - ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: Item 4 B is a proclamation designating April as
Water Conservation Month, to be accepted by Paul Mattausch, Water
Department Director, and Lisa Koehler, Community Outreach and
Media Specialist from South Florida Water Management District.
This item is sponsored by Commissioner Fiala. And Clarence Tears is
also here.
(Applause. )
MR. TEARS: Good morning, Commissioners. Just a brief
remark.
I appreciate the proactiveness of this commission and the county
staff for moving forward with alternative water supply and some of
your efforts on utilizing 100 percent of your reuse. These are things
that really protect the resource.
We're in a severe drought right now. I came to you a couple
months ago letting you know that it would be a dry year. And here we
are; we have one of the dryest five-month periods on record in the past
eight years. So we all need to do our part.
We're currently in water restrictions, two days a week watering.
We need everybody to do their part to protect the resource. And we'll
get through it, and we just have to look forward to the rainy season.
But, again, I thank code enforcement for their efforts, your staff
for being so proactive, and this commission for supporting your staff.
Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you, Clarence. Thank you for
being here.
MR. MATTAUSCH: And, Commissioners, Paul Mattausch,
Director of the Water Department.
I'd like to pick up where Clarence left off and just give you a real
brief rundown of what we are doing. And I do appreciate South
Page 15
April 12-13, 2011
Florida Water Management District and Big Cypress Basin, Mr.
Tears. And we have done -- collectively together, we've done an
excellent job on water conservation in Collier County over the last
decade, saving one out of every four gallons of water that we've used.
Weare under a modified Phase II restriction. The effective date
was March 26th, so we're several weeks into this now. And it
primarily affects the use of water for irrigation, outdoor water use.
And as Clarence said -- and I want to make sure for our viewing
public that we get this up, and I'm going to leave this up for a few
seconds just to make sure.
Odd-numbered addresses are Wednesday and Saturday, and
even-numbered addresses can water on Thursday and/or Sunday. And
it's for an eight-hour period of time. It's from midnight to eight a.m.
And I just want to make sure that people are aware that we've gone
from the Collier County ordinance which did allow us three days of
irrigation to now two days of irrigation. And, again, Wednesday and
Saturday for odd-numbered addresses, and Thursday and Sunday for
even-numbered addresses.
And what we are doing -- and Clarence mentioned the education.
What we're doing for the first month of implementation is on-site
education and voluntary compliance. If we find somebody irrigating
outside of those windows, we stop by, we provide educational
material, we allow them to shut the sprinklers off, voluntary
compliance.
And then beginning April 26th, our first visit will include the
on-site education and voluntary compliance, and a second visit on a
violation will receive a Notice of Violation.
And for any additional information that you want regarding
precipitation or condition of aquifers or specifics as far as the Phase II
modified restrictions that are in place, South Florida Water
Management District has a website. It is also posted on the Collier
government website, and you can always call our utility billing and
Page 16
April 12-13, 2011
customer service number to get those answers.
And, again, for those of you viewing, it's 239-252-2380. And
thank you, Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you, Paul.
Thank you, Clarence.
Item #4C
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING APRIL, 2011 AS SEXUAL
ASSAULT AWARENESS MONTH. ACCEPTED BY SHAINA
HICKS, PROJECT HELP, INC. SPONSORED BY
COMMISSIONER COYLE - ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, Item 4C is a proclamation
designating April 2011 as Sexual Awareness Month to be accepted by
Eileen Wesley, Victim Service Coordinator. This item is sponsored
by Commissioner Coy Ie.
(Applause.)
MS. HICKS: Good morning.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Good morning.
MS. HICKS: Eileen Wesley with Project Help could not be here
today, but I'm Shaina Hicks, and I'm happy to accept this on behalf of
Project Help and survivors of sexual assault.
We really appreciate the Collier County Board of County
Commissioners for their support, also for the support of Sheriff
Rambosk and his entire office. We appreciate the support of our
Project Help's board of directors, our hard-working volunteers, our
staff, and the community for their continued support.
And please check out our website for our -- we have a ton of
events going on in the month of April for Sexual Assault Awareness
Month and then also for National Crime Victims Rights Week. And
you can check out our website at projecthelpNaples.org.
Page 1 7
April12-13,2011
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you very much.
MS. HICKS: Thank you.
(Applause.)
Item #4D
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING APRIL 13 THROUGH APRIL
23,2011 AS OUR OFFICIAL PARTICIPATION IN "TAKING IT
TO THE STREETS SWFL" AND APRIL 19,2011 AS "TRY
TRANSIT DAY". ACCEPTED BY MICHELLE ARNOLD,
ALTERNATIVE TRANSPORTATION MODES DIRECTOR AND
GLAMA CARTER, ALTERNATIVE TRANSPORTATION
MODES MANAGER. SPONSORED BY COMMISSIONER
COLETTA - ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: Item 4 D is a proclamation designating April 13
through April 23, 2011, as our official participation in "Taking it to
the Street Southwest Florida," and April 19, 2011, is "Try Transit
Day," to be accepted by Michelle Arnold, Alternative Transportation
Modes Director, and Glama Carter, Alternative Transportation Modes
Manager. This item is sponsored by Commissioner Coletta.
(Applause.)
MS. ARNOLD: Thank you, Commissioners. Everybody's busy
working today, so I was the sole spokesperson for "Transit Try It."
We have two events. The "Taking it to the Streets" event is
actually a regional event that all the counties within the Southwest
Florida region are participating in, trying to encourage folks to, from
workplaces, transit of companies, municipalities, colleges, and et
cetera, to promote a healthier, less-costly transportation mode.
So we're encouraging folks to, during that week, ride their bikes
more, use transit more, walk more.
And our efforts during that week is a transit-try-it day. We did
Page 18
April 12-13, 2011
one last year. This year we're trying to promote the two new routes
that we just implemented earlier this year, one along Pine Ridge Road,
the other one that goes along Golden Gate Parkway and Goodlette
Road. So we're encouraging folks to utilize those two routes and see
how they can work it into their day-to-day activity.
So -- and thank you for recognizing our efforts.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you, Michelle, for doing such a
good job.
(Applause.)
Item #4E
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING APRIL 10 THROUGH APRIL
16,2011 AS NATIONAL CRIME VICTIMS RIGHTS WEEK.
ACCEPTED BY LISA REDDICK AND LINDA OBERHAUS,
SHEL TER FOR ABUSED WOMEN AND CHILDREN; ANGELA
LARSON, COLLIER COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE; BETTY
MCGUIRE-ARDAYA, STATE ATTORNEY'S OFFICE; AND
SHAINA HICKS, PROJECT HELP, INC. SPONSORED BY
COMMISSIONER FIALA - ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: Item 4 E is a proclamation designating April 10
through April 16, 2011, as National Crime Victims Rights Week, to be
accepted by Lisa Reddick and Linda Oberhaus, Shelter for Abused
Women and Children; Angela Larson, Collier County Sheriffs Office;
Betty McGuire-Ardaya, State Attorney's Office; and Shaina Hicks,
Project Help, Incorporated. This item is sponsored by Commissioner
Fiala.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Who's going to accept this? Linda?
MS. OBERHAUS: Sure.
(Applause.)
Page 19
April 12-13, 2011
MS. OBERHAUS: Hi, good morning. I just want to thank the
commission on behalf of the shelter, the Collier County Sheriffs
Office, and the State Attorney's Office. We all work in partnership
together here in the community to be sure that victims are safe and
that perpetrators are held accountable.
So, again, thank you for the acknowledgment.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you.
(Applause.)
Item #4F
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING APRIL, 2011 AS NATIONAL
FINANCIAL LITERACY MONTH. ACCEPTED BY VICTORIA
STEPHAN, PRESIDENT OF JUNIOR ACHIEVEMENT OF
SOUTHWEST FLORIDA, INC. AND M J SCARPELLI, SPECIAL
EVENTS COORDINATOR, JUNIOR ACHIEVEMENT OF
SOUTHWEST FLORIDA, INC. SPONSORED BY
COMMISSIONER HILLER - ADOPTED
MR.OCHS: Item 4F is a proclamation designating April 2011 as
National Financial Literacy Month, to be accepted by Victoria
Stephan, President of Junior Achievement of Southwest Florida,
Incorporated, and MJ Scarpelli, Special-Events Coordinator, Junior
Achievement of Southwest Florida, Incorporated. This item is
sponsored by Commissioner Hiller. Please come forward.
(Applause.)
MS. SCARPELLI: Thank you very much, everybody, County
Commissioners, and people in attendance.
Junior Achievement was started back in 1919 in this country to
teach economics to students in the classroom. Today we understand
that students learn faster than anything. They have media, they have
texting, they have everything available to them, but the basics of
Page 20
April 12-13, 2011
understanding personal finance is something that they are not taught
on a day-to-day basis.
Junior Achievement takes students from kindergartens through
grade 12 to teach personal financial literacy , work readiness, and
entrepreneurship.
The one thing that is interesting is back in 1975 Junior
Achievement started in Collier County. They started with one class
with 24 students. We were incorporated in 1994, and we are now at
the end of this school year reaching out to 10,000 students in
Charlotte, Lee, and Collier County.
The one thing that we needed to do is make sure that national
financial literacy becomes a part of every student's life from beginning
of kindergarten through grade 12 so that we start the students out on
the right foot from something that is just so basic. It's not texting; it's
not high technology. It's something basic, and each one of us can help
not only our students but our own children.
So thank you for the proclamation. We appreciate it, and sorry
that Vicki Stephan couldn't be here today, but I'm more than happy to
accept. Thank you.
(Applause.)
Item #4G
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING APRIL 22, 2011 AS EARTH
DAY IN COLLIER COUNTY. ACCEPTED BY DAN
RODRIGUEZ, SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT DIRECTOR,
STAFF FROM SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT AND THE
PUBLIC UTILITIES DIVISION. SPONSORED BY
COMMISSIONER FIALA - ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: Item 4G is a proclamation designating April 22,
2011, as Earth Day in Collier County, to be accepted by Dan
Page 21
April 12-13, 2011
Rodriguez, Solid Waste Management Director, staff from Solid Waste
Management, and Public Utilities Division. This item is sponsored by
Commissioner Fiala.
Hello, gang.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We're going to lose half our audience
when this is over.
Who's going to accept this?
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER FIALA: While Dan is getting up to the
podium, let me just say, I have the pleasure each year of conducting
some tours for people, anybody who, in the county, wants to go and
see some of our facilities, and they get such a kick out of seeing all of
these guys and what they're doing over at the landfill and over at the
recycling center and all that they're doing.
You know, they're unsung heros. We never see them at all unless
we -- you know, we have our garbage picked up or something. We
don't ever think about it, but, boy, they're an important part of the
fabric of our community.
And these guys are so nice when I bring my tours in.
Everybody's just so friendly to everybody. And we even took a trip
over to Pembroke Pines to see how they then dispose of the
single-stream recycling program.
So I thought I would just say that. Thank you for all you do.
MR. RODRIGUEZ: Absolutely.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And I would like to add, for the benefit
of the public, that Commissioner Fiala sponsors a lunch on top of the
landfill.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Free.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: If you would like to join her there, she
would love to have you participate.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: All the food you can eat.
Page 22
April12-13,2011
MR. RODRIGUEZ: Thank you, Commissioners. Appreciate
that.
Just briefly, on behalf of the Public Utilities/Solid Waste
Management Department, I would like to thank you for the
opportunity to recognize this national environmental day known as
Earth Day. And this event, held throughout our nation, reflects
America's commitment to preserving natural resources and ensuring
that generations to come have the opportunity to enjoy these -- great
environmental scenery.
But, briefly, what I'd like to do is recognize some of the
individuals in the departments that help contribute to this greater
Collier County. I'd like to thank the utility billing customer service
group who respond to and track the many calls that we get from our
citizens relating to solid waste, water, and wastewater; your Code
Enforcement Department who continuously respond to citizens' calls
and search out areas in need of improvement; your road and bridge
section who daily strive to keep Collier beautiful by their hard work
and dedication; and your Facilities Management Department for their
energy-conservation efforts being recognized as leaders in the nation
for this achievement.
In addition, I'd like to recognize your waste-reduction section,
specifically Jodi Walters who sponsors annually many neighborhood
cleanups. But most importantly, just recently three weeks ago, Jodi
was part of a partnership with FDEP where they collected over 10,288
tires from Collier County within seven days. This was a great event.
They removed tires from canals, ditches, back-yards, reducing a
breeding haven for mosquitoes, but also the eyesore. The really good
news is, it was all paid for by the Florida Department of
Environmental Protection. Good news.
Thank you again, Commissioners, for your support and your
direction of our essential services, projects, and programs.
You and our citizens continue to make Collier County one of the
Page 23
April12-13,2011
best, safest, cleanest communities of, not the nation, the world. Thank
you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you, Dan. Good job.
(Applause.)
Item #4H
PROCLAMATION CONGRATULATING NAPLES LAND
YACHT HARBOR FOR RECEIVING THE WASTE REDUCTION
AWARDS PROGRAM (WRAP) AWARD. ACCEPTED BY DAN
RODRIGUEZ, SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT DIRECTOR;
STAFF FROM SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT; MARY
BUTLER, PRESIDENT OF NAPLES LAND YACHT HARBOR
BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND JENNY AND NEIL GUNNER.
SPONSORED BY COMMISSIONER COYLE - ADOPTED
MR.OCHS: Item 4H is a proclamation congratulating Naples
Land Yacht Harbor for receiving the Waste Reduction Awards
Program award. This to be accepted by Dan Rodriguez, Solid Waste
Management Director, staff from Solid Waste Management, and Mary
Butler, President of Naples Land Yacht Harbor, Board of Directors,
and Jenny and Neil Gunner. This item is sponsored by Commissioner
Coyle.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Who is going to accept all these awards?
We have awards for everybody. Is there anybody else who would like
one of these?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Boy, they're beautiful.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: How about this pen? Does that
go with it?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: No, no, that pen stays here.
MR. GUNNER: And the check is in the mail, right?
Page 24
April 12-13, 2011
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes, it is. It should arrive momentarily.
MR. GUNNER: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you.
MR. GUNNER: Neil Gunner.
Commissioners, I would like to thank you, but there's another
352 people that could not be here today, and they are the members
within Naples Land Yacht Harbor.
Six years ago, when Jenny and I came down to Naples Land
Yacht Harbor in Naples to live for six months, I noticed that very few
people actually recycled. Although we had recycling bins, they did
not partake in that market, let's say.
So I'm very passionate about recycling. And when you think that
23 million bottles, plastic bottles, per hour go into the trash or into the
dumps and 46 million plastic bags also find their way into the garbage
dump, you can -- it's easy to become passionate.
This past six months in Naples Land Yacht Harbor we have
recycled just over 5 tons, and I think that's great, and the people of the
park are to be thanked for this.
So thank you very much again for this award.
(Applause. )
MR.OCHS: Commissioners, may I have a motion to adopt the
proclamations, please.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Motion to adopt the proclamations.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Fiala makes a motion to
adopt the proclamations. Seconded by?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioner Henning.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Henning.
All in favor, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
Page 25
April 12-13, 2011
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign.
(N 0 response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It passes unanimously.
Item #5A
PRESENTATION OF THE COLLIER COUNTY "BUSINESS OF
THE MONTH" AWARD TO FISCHER INTERNATIONAL.
ACCEPTED BY ANDREW SROKA, CEO & PRESIDENT -
PRESENTED
MR.OCHS: Commissioners, your next item is Item 5,
presentations. 5A is a presentation of Collier County Business of the
Month A ward to Ficsher International. Accepting the award will be
Andrew Sroka, the CEO and president.
(Applause.)
MR. SROKA: Good morning. Andrew Sroka from Fischer
International. I'll try to be very brief, as I need to get back to work
today, like everyone else.
On behalf of more than 100 employee of Fischer International
around the world, I'd like to thank the commission for this recognition
and, of course, the Economic Development Council who, with their
support and assistance over the many years that we've been here, we
couldn't have done it without.
Fischer has been proud to be part of Naples and the Collier
County business community since 1982, and we look forward to
continued growth and success both globally and locally.
And this is an award that the commission gives to organizations
for several reasons, the ability to innovate, their sense of
entrepreneurship, their contribution to economic diversity within the
county, all principals at Fischer has lived and breathed for the last
Page 26
April12-13,2011
30-odd years (sic).
From our creation of the very first PC security solution in 1983 to
our award-winning identity management solutions that we provide
today, innovation and entrepreneurship have been critical parts of our
DNA, our history, and our success.
At its heart, Fischer International is a company of technology
visionaries, all with a common purpose to provide unparalleled value,
and this commitment has been part of our corporate culture since day
one.
As a global leader in identity management technology, Fischer
understands that behind every one of the millions of personal
identifies that float around us in ether every day are people; people
with rights, responsibilities, with a requirement for security and a
requirement for privacy. It is our innovations that allow those
customers to safeguard that data and, in turn, safeguard the privacy of
all of us.
It is a commitment that we take very seriously to protect our
customers and, in turn, their customers, from unauthorized eyes, from
predators, from hackers, from hostile foreign governments, from
individuals that don't have a right to that information, and it is, again,
something that we take very seriously.
In most of our 30 years, we have focused on providing those
services across all vertical industries. In the last several years, we've
added a focus on the education community, colleges, universities,
community colleges, technical schools, and K through 12. These are
markets that we've identified as underserved, underbudgeted, and offer
understaffed.
In doing so, we continue to walk in the shoes of our founder's
primary philosophy which was to provide unparalleled value and
security to everyone, regardless of their size, of the complexity of their
organization.
At Fischer we also believe that economic diversity is critical for
Page 27
April 12-13, 2011
sustaining our community and our way of life. I believe that it's
everyone's obligation and responsibility in this community to create an
environment where businesses can thrive and survive despite
temporary economic hardships, no matter how great or small they are.
In creating this vibrant, multifaceted economic community, we
are, in fact, being self-serving and ensuring our own success and
longevity by contributing to the community in which we live and
work.
We believe that sound governance, reasoned growth, and the --
excuse me -- and the willingness to explore nontraditional
opportunities are fundamental to the health and welfare of both our
customers, our employees, and the community at large.
So, once again, for all of us at Fischer, we thank you for this
recognition. Thank you.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Mr. Sroka, we greatly appreciate your
being here in Collier County.
MR. SROKA: Thank you, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you.
Item #5B
RECOGNIZING TONA NELSON, SENIOR ADMINISTRATIVE
ASSISTANT, PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT AS
THE EMPLOYEE OF THE MONTH FOR FEBRUARY, 2011 -
PRESENTED
MR.OCHS: Commissioners, 5B is a recommendation to
recognize Tona Nelson, Senior Administrative Assistant, Parks and
Recreation Department, as the Employee of the Month for February
2011. Tona?
(Applause.)
Page 28
April 12-13, 2011
MR.OCHS: Commissioners, Tona's been an employee of the
county since 2003 working for our Parks and Recreation
Development. She consistently looks for ways to improve the
department and to enhance her responsibilities in that department.
She's responsible for organizing and updating the department's
vast number of standard operating procedures. This is, in no small
measure, a great contributor to the department recently receiving
reaccreditation from the commission on accreditation of Parks and
Recreation, only one of 90 throughout the country holding that
distinction.
In addition to supporting the leadership team, she also provides
assistance during the budget process and develops informational
packets for the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board.
One of her biggest accomplishments to date is the development
of the monthly Parks and Recreation employee newsletter. I'm told
she has a very unique way of keeping the staff motivated and
encouraged over at Parks and Recreation, and that's particularly
appreciated during these difficult economic times.
Tona's truly deserving of this award, and it's my honor,
Commissioners, to present Tona Nelson to the Board of County
Commissioners as the employee of the month for February 2011.
(Applause.)
MR.OCHS: Thanks, Tona. Congratulations.
Item #6A
PUBLIC PETITION BY MR. JOHN O. ELLIOTT ASKING THE
BOARD TO CONSIDER AN ADJUSTMENT TO HIS WATER
BILL - MOTION TO BRING BACK AT A FUTURE BCC
MEETING - FAILED DUE TO LACK OF SECOND;
PETITIONER TO WORK WITH THE PUBLIC UTILITIES
DIVISION TO ADDRESS BILLING MATTER
Page 29
April12-13,2011
MR.OCHS: Commissioners, that moves us to Item 6 on your
agenda this morning. It's public petitions. First public petition is 6A.
It's a request from Mr. John O. Elliot asking the board to consider an
adjustment to his water bill. Mr. Elliot?
MR. MITCHELL: Mr. Chairman, could we just point out that
anybody that's signed up as a public speaker to any of these petitions,
they won't be heard until Item 14.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes. Okay. That doesn't apply to you,
Mr. Elliot. You can speak now.
MR. ELLIOT: Thank you very much. I'm John Elliot, and I
wish to thank the board for the opportunity to speak here today. I'm
really sorry that I was not able to present my presentation earlier in the
year. My brother developed bone cancer and passed away recently.
My wife, Victoria, and I own property at 799 Crossfield Circle in
Naples. As citizens and for the welfare and protection of the fellow
Collier County residents, respectfully wish to make known an
abnormally high water bill in the amount of $1,100 we were assessed
at our 799 Crossfield Circle Maplewood villa development residence
for no apparent reason on our part. Pardon me.
This occurred for billing period September the 18th to October
19, 2010, as registered by the electronic LCD digital water meter that
was installed at our residence.
During this billing period, the meter began steadily registering
high levels, approximately 4,250 gallons per 24-hour period, and then
suddenly stopped on its own. It stopped without any intervention on
our part. It was as if we had a miracle or an intervention of God.
Let me say we dutifully regard water to be a precious resource
worth saving and recognize that Florida, as well as many states, are
doing their part to prevent unnecessary use of a precious commodity,
and so are we.
The registered usage for the $1,100 water bill is out of line with
Page 30
April 12-13, 2011
our average water consumption over the last 18 months. Our average
water usage has registered approximately 7,000 gallons of water per
month. The reading usage of the $1,100 will -- of the water bill
indicates in excess of 127,000 gallons of water was registered through
our meter. This would fill approximately six swimming pools 14 by
42 foot, 6 foot deep at the deepest end and 3 foot deep at the shallow
end. We do not own a pool.
When we received the $1,100 water bill, we contacted our
neighbor to immediately inspect our home inside and out because we
were not in town at the time. He found no evidence of running water
or water damage. He also checked to make sure no water had entered
our home from the outside perimeter.
Our neighbor also checked -- we have a chain and padlock on the
outside water valve to ensure that it was securely locked and in place.
It is installed as a security measure to prevent unwarranted use of
water from our outside water valve when we are away. It was locked.
We continued -- contacted a professional plumbing company,
Coastal Plumbing, who checked inside and outside of our property for
leaks. None were found.
Also, we contacted our irrigation system company, Gulf Coast
Irrigation, who checked our sprinkler system for operational defects,
our homeowner contracts with the landscape company to provide
outside lawn landscape maintenance. We contacted the landscape
company, Mr. Larry Cisco, and he confirmed his landscape team
maintains our property a minimum of two times a week and found no
unusual water-damage evidence during the water billing period.
Our landscape company is contracted through our villas
Mapleswood's Association, which Mr. Ed Boot of Greenwood
Management Company is the manager. No evidence of leaked water
or excessive water damage was found by any of these professionals or
our neighbor during these inspections.
To our knowledge, we're the only residence in our Maplewood
Page 31
April12-13,2011
villa development with an electronic LCD digital water meter, and
suspect the meter and! or the data reading may have experienced a
technical abnormality which resulted in a water reading of
approximately 127,000 gallons of water.
Our research of abnormally high water bills includes other
Florida residents also received high water bills during the same period,
as well as residents utilizing the electronic water meters in other states.
Huge water bills have been recorded in Tampa; Cleveland, Ohio;
Charlotte, North Carolina; as well as Brockton, Massachusetts.
Causes include meter-read errors, equipment failures due to broken or
malfunctioning meters, human errors, billing multiplier errors, meter
installation discrepancies.
CNN publicized this investigation of abnormally high water bills
received in Atlanta Georgia, by one resident in particular, Ms. Wilda
Cobb, and she's an attorney for the entire -- Environmental Protection
Agency, and she was billed in excess of over $10,000.
With this being said, I'm asking the commission to take the
following actions: I wish to respectfully petition the board to review
our water-usage history and to consider an adjustment to our $1,100
water bill based on average water usage over the last 18-month period.
I also respectfully petition the board to further investigate for a
root cause to determine what caused our electronic digital water meter
to register such an abnormally high reading. We just don't want this
happening again.
In addition, I respectfully petition for the further investigative
reviews, evaluation, and testing of the function of electronic LCD
digital water meters be accomplished so as to ascertain their reliability
before being installed in any other Collier County water customers.
In closing, I'd like to leave you with this quote from our past
president, Ronald Reagan. "There are no easy answers, but there are
simple answers. We must have the courage to do what we know is
morally right." Thank you.
Page 3 2
April12-13,2011
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you, Mr. Elliot.
Does the utilities department have anything to say about this?
MR. BELLONE: Yes, Commissioners. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And you have to make it brief, because
we generally do not hear the full presentations at public petition point
in time. You understand?
MR. BELLONE: Yes, I do, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
MR. BELLONE: For the record, Joe Bellone, Manager of Utility
Billing and Customer Service.
For the board's information, we do have other Master Brand
digital read smart meters installed. There are six others on Crossfield
Circle, and there are three other smart meters, that is meters that retain
usage information through computer chips, as well.
I have the data logs from these -- from these meters that show the
actual usage, the date and the times that those water -- water passed
through the meter, so we're confident the information obtained from
those meters is correct.
That meter was installed in the ground about a year before, and it
functioned absolutely normally from November of2009 until Mr.
Elliot's incident, then it performed in the ground absolutely perfectly
thereafter until it was removed at the customer's request at the end of
January, at which point he wanted an analog read versus a digital read.
If you'd like me to put those data logs on the visualizer, I can do
that for you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, we need some information to
indicate whether or not there was something wrong with the meter,
whether -- did you have any evidence as to what resulted in this high
reading?
MR. BELLONE: Yes, sir. We did have -- when we did remove
that meter at the customer's request, we did take it back to the shop,
and the water department put it through a bench test, and the results of
Page 33
April 12-13, 2011
that bench test show that it was functioning accurately.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. And why did he have this sudden
large use of water?
MR. BELLONE: Once we've determined that the water has
passed through the meter, it is then on the customer's side of the meter,
and it would be -- it would be guessing on my part. He said that he's
had the water to the home locked, so we just can assume that it was
outside somewhere.
The water -- the irrigation system was operating. That is outside.
It's not locked. We know that that -- through the usage patterns, we
know that the irrigation system was operating during the time that they
were not in residence.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Does anyone want to have this
brought back for a full hearing? Commissioners?
I don't think we've got all the information that is relevant to this
issue. I will make a motion that we bring this back for a full hearing.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, okay.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second then.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And let me just add. The reason I
threw in my second is, although we've received quite a bit of
information, it is a puzzling situation and yet at the same time we don't
want taxpayers to pay for something that either this gentleman didn't
have control over or anybody else. Obviously water wasn't being
stolen or anything. We just don't know what happened. So I wouldn't
mind investigating further.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. All right. So we have a motion to
bring it back for a full hearing and try to reach a resolution on Mr.
Elliot's concerns by me and a second by Commissioner Fiala.
Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. Mr. DeLony, am I missing
Page 34
April 12-13, 2011
the point, or didn't these spikes occur during the time that people
normally water their yards and their right-of-ways?
MR. DeLONY: For the record, Jim DeLony, Public Utilities
Administrator.
The period of concern that had the unusual water usage pattern
was in September/October, which is a normal irrigation time for us
here. And we actually have, as Joe mentioned earlier, the logs that
show that the irrigation was on throughout this period at this
residence.
He did have -- according to his statement, he had locked the
valve which allows water to go in the home. But the irrigation system
is between the meter and the home; therefore, it was in use throughout
this period. So, yes, the answer is "yes" to your question.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: The water usage was not
something that happened indiscriminately; it was at predictable times?
MR. DeLONY: The logs -- and we have those that show that
they -- you can see where irrigation kicked on at a certain time of
night, and then it kicked off after its use, so it's cycled through. What
is anomalous to this not that -- the irrigation coming off, it's the fact
throughout the period of time, there was about a 3-gallon-per-minute
usage every hour on that system, which indicates a potential leak in
that irrigation system or some other part of that irrigation system that
was not locked, which was, you know, between the meter and the
home, a sprinkler head, a malfunction of the manifold. About three
gallons per minute is what's registered through the period 19
September, I believe, until the 20th of October.
And so that aggregates to this high water usage. It wasn't the
irrigation kicking on and off as it was a steady usage of -- which could
be explained several ways. But the bottom line is, it's difficult, as Joe
said, to do anything other than guess because, you know, we're not
there, they're not there, the water -- when the water passes through the
meter, we can't account for it beyond that.l
Page 35
April 12-13, 2011
The meter won't register one thing unless there's water passing
through it. If the meter fails, it stops registering. That's the
manufacturer's certification from Master meters.
We looked at all the anomalous issues of the CNN .com report.
None of them were applicable to our specifics either in Collier County
or, more specifically, in the case of the Elliots.
Regrettable situation all around; there's no doubt about it. We
don't like high water bills. In fact, it's the opposite of what we just had
a presentation on with regard to conservation, which means using less
water.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Didn't we have similar
situations like this in the past where we --
MR. DeLONY: Yes, sir, we have.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- try and get paid--
MR. DeLONY: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- and--
MR. DeLONY : We've had several. And typically the ones that
have high water usage on this order -- and it's about this order that is --
is typically when residents are not home and there's no one there to
monitor every day what happens, whether it's a running toilet -- which
is six gallons per minute, by the way -- or a leaky faucet, or most
probably -- you know, one of the toughest things -- and we discussed
this the last time we had a high bill -- these automatic pool fillers.
These folks don't have one.
But there are a number of things behind that meter that are under
the control of the resident that has to be monitored on a near daily
basis to prevent this type of issue occurring and then having this high
water bill.
You've given me wonderful discretion with regard to
adjustments, which we have applied full bore to the Elliots' bill.
You've given me wonderful authority to extend payment plans for as
long as necessary to not engender a more than difficult -- more than
Page 36
April 12-13, 2011
manageable hardship on the family. They have a payment plan. They
are current with a payment -- their payment plan. So we've done
everything possible to mitigate this impact on them and their
residence.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. One last thing, Mr.
DeLony. If I understand it correctly, anything that goes through the
meter is the responsibility of the customer. And that's always been the
case?
MR. DeLONY: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. And the other thing is,
the meter would only record something that actually happened?
MR. DeLONY: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: There's no way that it could on
its own?
MR. DeLONY: Yes, sir. This particular brand of meter, which
is a Master Meter, when it malfunctions, they stop registering. I
mean, they just stop registering if there's a malfunction. In fact, in
2009 their meter had a problem, and that's the reason this new meter
was installed at their house in 2009, this particular meter.
What makes this more difficult for me to understand is that we --
when we took the meter out in January at their request -- they asked us
to do that, and I said, you know, fine. We took and bench tested that
specific meter, and it passed three different flow tests on the bench
test.
So I believe with all my heart there's nothing wrong with the
meter. I don't believe there's anything wrong with the register. I
believe that the water passed through the meter, there was an
anomalous situation on the other side of the meter, and that's a fact.
There was no one home to verify that, and that's where we're
stuck. I mean, if I could explain it better than that --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You verified -- you verified the
new meter that was put in with a bench test also?
Page 37
April12-13,2011
MR. DeLONY: Not the -- the new meter's certified. It's from the
manufacturer. We had no problem -- what's difficult about this one--
and -- is that everything's fine, then there's this anomalous period of
utilization, then it goes away and everything's fine.
Sir, it's not the meter. The meters don't do that. They fail. They
stop registering. And we have meters which fail and they stop
registering, and we get a zero read. We go out and replace that meter.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And, Chair, if I may make a
comment?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Sure.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm going to vote against the
motion, but if it does fail, I hope that Jim DeLony's department will go
and change this meter out and do a bench test on it, and if they find
anything different, bring it back to us.
MR. DeLONY: The one they have now is not the one that was
the problem before.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Oh, it's not?
MR. DeLONY: No, sir.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. Then that--
MR. DeLONY: That's already been done.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Withdraw that.
MR. DeLONY: Sir, that has already -- what you requested has
already been done.
CO'MMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. Thank you.
MR. DeLONY: We did that in January, and it passed.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I know you've worked really
hard, and we can't see any problems. I know you've done all of your
due diligence to this, and I understand that the gentleman wasn't even
there, and he did all of the things he could to try and check it out.
I had made a suggestion when I spoke to you about this situation
that possibly some of these home-watch agencies, when they go in,
Page 38
April 12-13, 2011
should also check the water system. But, you know, I was thinking
about it since then. In this case, being that he sent a plumber out and
he sent an irrigation guy out and they never saw any water leaks, and
our people checked it out and we never saw any, I don't even know
how it could be identified. It is rather mysterious.
MR. DeLONY: Commissioner, if I may?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
MR. DeLONY: He sent a plumber and irrigation people by the
evidence he -- you know, the record he showed. It was in January. It
wasn't in October. It wasn't at the point of concern.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh,oh. Okay.
MR. DeLONY: It was subsequent to that.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
MR. DeLONY: And I don't really know anything more than -- in
his public petition, he provided two letters, one from a plumber and
one from his irrigation folks, and both those were actions taken in
January.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I see, okay.
MR. DeLONY: It wasn't proximate to the event.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So they couldn't identify what the
leak was because it was too far along?
MR. DeLONY : Well, it had actually -- it actually, in my -- if I
may, ma'am? It had cured itself because the meter registers the
correct -- I mean, the normal usage subsequent to the 20th of October.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And my final comment is, you have
worked out a payment plan with this gentleman?
MR. DeLONY: Yes, ma'am, I have.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. So that he would be able to
pay that off.
MR. DeLONY: And we'd be willing to sit down with him again
and extend that, the terms of that. You've given me great latitude with
regard to the duration, zero interest, with regard to these, because we
Page 39
April 12-13, 2011
know this works a hardship on families when these things happen.
And you've given me great authority to do that, and we exercise it to
the best benefit of everyone.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Mr. DeLony, could you please put
up the graphs that you were referring to --
MR. DeLONY: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- in the earlier presentation.
MR. DeLONY: I'll ask Joe to put those up here on the -- or Leo.
The one that the -- the most telling one, if I may, Joe, is the one that
deals with the actual usage over the period of concern. And this is an
aggregate chart that speaks to daily usage by bar charts. And I
apologize that they may be a little small, but they give you a pattern
over this period.
There was also in the public petition -- and you have this in your
packet. And I don't remember exactly what page it is, but it's a log
that actually takes this chart and shows you by day what those meter
readings were, by days.
These meters are smart meters in that they aggregate data on
historical basis both in terms of the aggregate daily flows, but also
gives us an idea of what happens hour by hour. And I actually have
on this next chart the hourly-usage pattern on the -- let's see. This is
for the 10th -- the 9th of October -- if you would, Joe -- from midnight
till midnight, and you can see the irrigation kicking on right here.
You know, these meters are very helpful that -- to help us and the
residents work through this anomalous situation, because it shows the
patterns not just on a read, but it says, hour by hour, what's passing
through that meter. And that's what this represents.
And, see, what's anomalous about this is you see here about three
gallons per minute aggregating over an hour period. It's about -- what
is that, about 200 gallons -- 180 gallons per hour. That's the leak, best
Page 40
April 12-13, 2011
I can tell. Don't know where it is. My only proposal would be it's in
the irrigation somewhere.
When the irrigation crew came on that day that it stopped, they
found it, they fixed it, they moved on. Whether they reported that to
management or not, I can't explain it. But that's a -- we've been
challenged several times by the customer -- and it's certainly within
his right to do that -- for a root cause, and that's my best understanding
of explaining it.
If the water had not gone through the meter, you know, that
would be one thing. The meter fails and the closed -- in terms of the
register, it stops.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'm sure that there are other people
that have, you know, leaks in their irrigation system that have similar
meters. Is this pattern consistent with an irrigation leak?
MR. DeLONY: This particular pattern is. Where you see this
large spike of use in one hour and it trails off the subsequent hour,
that's the irrigation kicking on and kicking off. This is anomalous,
because that's the equivalent of three -- 180 gallons per hour
continuous, and that's unusual, unless you're filling a pool or
something like that.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So if there was a leak in the
irrigation system, what you're -- where your pencil is pointing right
now, would not be what we would see on someone else's property?
MR. DeLONY : Well, you might. It depends. You know, if
you're home and you're taking showers or you're using it for cooking
or whatever, it's mixed into the flow. I can't really segregate the
irrigation flows from the other flows. Three gallons a minute.
And so is that -- is that three gallons per minute consistent with
what; is that your question?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: What I'm asking is, you basically
have an elevated level of usage.
MR. DeLONY: Yes, ma'am. Oh, this right here?
Page 41
April12-13,2011
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, no. The -- yeah, exactly,
where your pen is pointing.
MR. DeLONY: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That, under normal circumstances,
would not be there.
MR. DeLONY: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. So my question is, where
you have those elevated bars, not the three spikes but -- or the two
spikes, but the elevated bars, is that consistent with a leak in the
irrigation system?
MR. DeLONY: You know, again -- you know --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I mean, because I --
MR. DeLONY: I guess. I guess if you have a leaking head or a
leaking manifold that's continued under pressure, your timer gets stuck
and it keeps a zone on or a particular area on, absolutely, three gallons
per minute -- three gallons per minute or 180 gallons for hour, yes,
ma'am, that would be.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So that would be consistent with
one zone staying on the entire --
MR. DeLONY: Potentially, yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- duration --
MR. DeLONY: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- and then it spikes. So -- and
you've seen things like this happen before?
MR. DeLONY: Yes, I have.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Looking -- where homeowners
have had similar meters, the same pattern emerges --
MR. DeLONY: Yes, ma'am, it does.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- in an instance like that? Okay.
MR. DeLONY: I have one on my home, my own home. I was
the guinea pig for the county. And I'd had irrigation problems and
high water bills from lack of maintenance to my irrigation system, and
Page 42
April 12-13, 2011
so I -- yes, this is very consistent to my own personal experience as
well as what we've had in the system.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And the volume would be
consistent with one irrigation head or --
MR. DeLONY: Yes, ma'am. I don't have the flow rates in my
head, but three gallons per minute for irrigation -- a series of irrigation
incidents would not be a big number.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay.
MR. DeLONY: If you would look here at the 600 gallons per
minute for a particular zone or two zones coming on over that hour
period, you know, 15 to 20 minutes per zone.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Can you show me the graph of
what it looked like when the situation was corrected?
MR. DeLONY: Do I have that? Yes, I do. You can see at about
11 o'clock on the morning of the 20th the leak was fixed.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And it's been like that ever since?
MR. DeLONY: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: When you said in 2009 this meter
was installed at the request of the customer in the first place --
MR. DeLONY: No, ma'am. We did that -- his older meter either
failed or there was a reason for a change-out. Do we have that data?
Do you have that, Tom?
But the bottom line is, 2009 there was a problem with his existing
water meter and when -- it stopped reading, okay. So we installed the
meter that's in question in 2009.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay.
MR. DeLONY: The meter we installed in January of2011 at his
request --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Was the one that replaced -- that
was the analog that replaced the digital.
MR. DeLONY: It has analog readout. Same register, different
readout.
Page 43
April 12-13, 2011
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Got it. Okay. Thank you so
much.
MR. DeLONY: And I tested -- and we tested the second, that
one in between.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I think I'm going to just pull my
second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So--
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We have a motion that dies for lack of a
second.
So, Mr. Elliot, we do not have sufficient support on the board to
bring this back for a hearing. I would encourage you to take
advantage of the time payment plan. And if you need more assistance
on that, if you need to extend the time payment plan, I'm sure --
MR. DeLONY: We'll take care of it, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- that Mr. DeLony will work with you
cooperatively and try to ease this burden on you, okay.
MR. ELLIOT: Thank you for your time.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you for being here.
MR. DeLONY: Thank you, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
Okay. Let's go to the -- we're going to the next petition, right?
MR.OCHS: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
Item #6B
PUBLIC PETITION BY MS. KATHLEEN REYNOLDS
REGARDING FUNDING FOR THE EARLY LEARNING
COALITION OF SOUTHWEST FLORIDA - MOTION TO FUND
THE FULL REQUEST OF $25,000 RECOGNIZING ITEM AS AN
Page 44
April12-13,2011
ECONOMIC INCENTIVE AND TO FURTHER DISCUSS A
POSSIBLE PARTNERSHIP FOR FUTURE FUNDING REQUESTS
A T THE MAY MEETING BETWEEN THE BCC AND THE
SCHOOL DISTRICT - APPROVED
MR.OCHS: It's Item 6B. It's a public petition request from Ms.
Kathleen Reynolds regarding funding for the Early Learning Coalition
of Southwest Florida.
MS. REYNOLDS: Good morning. I'm grateful for the
opportunity to address you. We've spoken with each of you
individually regarding this matter. And there is a handout that was
given out.
I am here on behalf of the approximately 1,200 Collier County
children and their families who are currently receiving school
readiness services, services that allow their parents to pursue
economic self-sufficiency by either securing employment or enrolling
in workforce training.
I want to emphasize that the mission of school readiness is
twofold. It is an economic development program that does not
promise future jobs but one that guarantees, by virtue of eligibility
requirements, that the parents of children enrolled in school readiness
are working right now and, therefore, contributing financially to the
Collier community and not requesting other forms of public
assistance.
We've had conversations about whether or not it's education or
economic development. Of course school readiness has an
educational component. The coalition and its partners, over 150
childcare agencies in Collier County, absolutely seek to improve
outcomes for children. Moreover, the data is collected over multiple
years that confirm both a beneficial impact to children enrolled and
the increase in childcare in Collier County.
The fiscal development of school readiness is confirmed by
Page 45
April 12-13, 2011
Governor Scott's fully funding early-learning coalitions in his
proposed budget also, happening right, now presently ongoing debate
in the Florida legislature about where coalition should be placed.
Should we be with Department of Education or should we be with the
new agency that's focused on developing Florida's economy?
The bottom line is that school readiness program is and does
both. It can't be separated any more that you can separate a wave
from the water that makes the wave.
The question that I'm asking you here today is whether or not the
Board of County Commissioners, as the elected leaders of Collier
County, wish to continue receiving some $2.3 million annually that
funds childcare for a category of low-wage workers that's identified as
working poor, that is those whose income is at or below 150 percent of
the federal poverty level.
To continue receiving these funds, coalition staff must secure a 6
percent match, which is approximately $150,000 for that $2.3 million
investment in Collier's economic development annually.
In a previous appearance before you I was directed to speak with
the school board, which I did, and they verified that they do not have
discretionary dollars that would allow them to support this level of
economic development in our county.
I was also asked to speak with Naples Children and Education
Foundation, the founders of the Naples Winter Wine Festival. I also
did that, and I'm really pleased to tell you that NCEF has agreed to
support the required match at a level of $250,000 dispersed over the
next five years with $75 (sic) committed for this present fiscal year, as
well as $50,000 to be used as in-kind from projects all supported by
the Naples Children Education Foundation.
And so my request to you today, as I have discussed with each of
you in person, is a commitment of $25,000 for this fiscal year, which
coupled with the NCEF funds in the amount of $75,000, will
immediately allow us to start enrolling some of the 2,000 Collier
Page 46
April 12-13, 2011
children currently on our wait list.
I seek your support further in engaging in conversations with
county staff to identify future scenarios that will allow the continuance
of this multimillion-dollar investment in Collier's economic
development.
The usual return on investment for counties across the state is
$16.67 for each dollar the county invests. With the Naples Children
Education Foundation's commitment of $250,000 over five years, that
return on investment for these five years is increased to approximately
$34 for each dollar that the county invests.
As I've shared with you, over 1,100 people in Collier directly
employed in childcare as a result of the coalition's investment, an
additional 1,600-plus people are able to go to work because their
children are enrolled in quality care.
As of March, in school readiness, that was 231 to 232 children in
District 1, 132 children in District 2, 323 children in District 3, 243
children in District 4, and 347 children in District 5.
On behalf of these families and their childcare staff who support
them, I request your positive response to the request for $25,000
funding for this fiscal year and for the establishment of an approach to
ongoing fiscal support that will permit Collier residents to continue to
receive these multiple millions of state and federal dollars that flow
into our economic development.
With me today are the following individuals who will also
respond if you have any questions: Donice Dawson, who is a governor
appointee to our board of directors of the Early Learning Coalition;
Kathryn Canfield, also a member of our board; Howard Olshansky,
who is the new executive director of the Naples Children Edu- --
Naples Wine Festival; Todd Fahey, also of the Naples Children
Education Foundation; and Tom Bamrick of our partner organization,
Community Coordinated Care for Children.
I thank you for listening to me, and I'd be happy to respond to
Page 47
April 12-13, 2011
any questions.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. Thank you, again, for
being here. I know a couple of times before you came forward and
you made the pitch and you were less than successful, but let's hope
that your third time is a little more meaningful.
And, Commissioners, I got a proposal for you I'd like you to give
serious consideration to. We got a long history of not getting involved
in social-service organizations. I mean, we try to avoid that for the
simple reason, once we breach that, how do you say no for everyone
that's out there? I'm correct on that; I know I am, because I've heard
this argument time and time again.
This is not a social-service issue. I want to approach it as an
economic development issue. We're talking about 500 jobs. Now, I --
what my proposal would be is that in May we're meeting with the
school board, and I'd like to be able to place this on the agenda so that
what we can do is come up with a partnership deal with the school
system to be able to split the cost on this. And I've identified funds
within the state target industrial program. There's $20,000 in there.
So we could take, you know, 12,500 from there, the school system
match it, with the understanding that this is a one-year event, that we
would approach it again next year if we thought there was justification
for it, but not an entitlement, and only for economic development, and
somehow we have to come up with something to be able to come up
with some sort of matrix to be able to prove that it produces as many
as 500 jobs, give or take a little, to be able to get to where we need to
be. That would be my proposal.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Is that a motion?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, I want -- I -- yes, I'll make
that into a motion, that we take it to the school board and that we offer
them -- to split it with them as an economic incentive or an economic
issue rather than a social issue.
Page 48
April 12-13, 2011
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And we do that in our May meeting.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: In our May meeting with them.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Which is next month.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. We have a motion by
Commissioner Coletta to discuss this issue with the school board at
our May meeting and attempt to get matching funds to meet the
$25,000 requirement for this fiscal year, seconded by Commissioner
Fiala.
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I'll support the motion.
It's my opinion the board's position on economic development and
jobs are high-wage jobs, okay.
I definitely don't want to set precedence here, although this item,
the return on investment for the community as a whole is great.
And I -- Kathleen, I would ask you, with the motion on the floor,
to bring this back for a discussion item at the workshop of the school
board, is that fitting to your time frame, or would you like to see other
direction?
MS. REYNOLDS: Thank you, Commissioner Henning. Our
fiscal year ends June 30th, so it was certainly my hope, given the
$75,000 commitment that the Naples Children Education Foundation
has already put on the table for this fiscal year and with an additional,
really, from my perspective, minuscule request of $25,000, that we
would be able to take some children who are currently on the wait list.
With regard to whether or not there are jobs, we have to comply
with both state and federal law. We are not allowed to commit these
funds for childcare unless we have absolute proof that these people are
either working or enrolled in workforce development. So there's -- we
can absolutely guarantee that your funding is supporting people who
are going to work right now.
So while I appreciate the discussion, truthfully, May will be too
Page 49
April 12-13, 2011
late to help us out for this fiscal year.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. And I don't want to miss
the opportunity to partnership in some way in this. So I appreciate the
motion, but from what we hear, is it might not fit the bill.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: The goal of the county with
respect to economic development is to get rid of unemployment.
MS. REYNOLDS: Correct.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Not only with respect to
unemployment at the higher level, but also unemployment at the
low- income level, and I think any opportunity to get people working
in these difficult times is essential.
We actually, as a county, do give a great deal away to nonprofits.
By example, we're currently giving away free legal representation to
an organization by the name of PLAN. We give zero-cost ground
leases on very expensive land to nonprofit organization -- nonprofit
organizations, rents worth, you know, millions in accumulated dollars.
We're actually, right now, proposing to give away free space to
our recently elected state and federal officials, and they have money,
but we're going to give them free space, free utilities, 30 bucks a year,
okay.
We've got a one-billion-dollar budget. Our General Fund, where
this would come from, I think, this year -- Leo, how much is it, 300
million, 400 million? What is it right now, 300 --
MR. OCHS: It's about 326 million.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. Three hundred twenty-six
million.
I think we can afford 25,000 to match the 75,000 given by NEC
-- or what's the name of your organization?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: NCEF.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: NCEF, sorry. I was thinking of
the horses.
Page 50
April 12-13, 2011
How much does Lee County contribute?
MS. REYNOLDS: Naple- -- Lee County contributes the full
match, $250,000. It's in their regular budget, because they really
understand the value of keeping all these people employed.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I think there's real value in keeping
these people employed, because when I consider the cost to
government of unemployment compensation, I think it far exceeds the
cost of this investment. So, quite frankly, I support it 100 percent.
And I would ask -- because you made it very clear that the school
is -- that the school board is not going to be able to match these funds
because they don't have the ability to match.
MS. REYNOLDS: Right.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So I don't even know why we're
considering that. So I would like to ask -- and I know a motion is on
the table, but I'm going to ask Commissioner Coletta if he would
restate his motion, if he would be willing to consider restating his
motion, to award the full 25,000.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, you know, originally in
past years I've done that, but here's the gist of what's happening here,
just so we can be clear. And I'm sorry I didn't explain it a little more
fully -- is the Wine Festival, like many other organizations, is trying to
wean people off the dole so that they can move on to other things, or
maybe some day it might actually cease to exist, so by getting
government to share a part of it -- and as you heard, Lee County picks
up the whole kit and caboodle.
If the school system came in for a lousy 12,500, if something
comes back next year and the ante goes up to, say, $100,000 because
they're going to be going in stages to wean us off, now we've got a
partner we can share it with.
And as far as the school system not being able to do it, that's
absolutely incorrect unless something's changed from about nine years
ago when I got them to partner with us on school nursing.
Page 51
April 12-13, 2011
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So we need --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And what we did is we came up
with a $1,000 grant from this commission to entice them, one-time
grant, to be able to get them involved in it. And since then, they took
it on, and they've been doing it ever since.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So is there -- can you explain why
Commissioner Coletta believes that the school can do it and they're
representing to you that they can't?
MS. REYNOLDS: I really can't, but I can just say, school nurses
are employees of the school district.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Naples Community Hospital.
MS. REYNOLDS: Okay. And nursing, you know, in many
places in this country, is a part-and-parcel function of what happens in
public schools.
I had shared with you previously economic impact statements on
the role of school readiness in Collier County. And, for example, the
Agency for Workforce Innovation, the agency we now answer to that's
not going to exist anymore after July 1st, they have estimated that for
each family we can put into school readiness, taxpayers are saving a
minimum of$10,000, because they're not going on welfare, they're not
getting housing assistance, they're not getting food stamps, and they're
not getting unemployment insurance.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Absolutely.
MS. REYNOLDS: I mean, I think the economics of this is so
clear.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Which is why I think Rick Scott
supports it.
MS. REYNOLDS: Yes. You know, I -- this is not a great
advocate for social causes, and this is why school readiness is part and
parcel of his economic development initiatives.
And so I ask your support, because we'd really like to start
placing those families right now. We want to put them to work right
Page 52
April12-13,2011
now.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, thank you. Let me put it plain
and simple. I want to go for the $25,000 as an economic development
incentive to keep our people back at work. Something that hasn't been
mentioned throughout this conversation is we're also talking about
safe childcare. Right now we have children who are left in
automobiles because the parents need to work, and they don't have a
safe place to be or they're in locations that probably shouldn't be
housing children.
And so I feel that this is extremely important to the welfare of the
children in our community as well as the employees.
So, Commissioner Coletta, my second is -- I have seconded you,
but I would prefer you to change your motion to read that we would
donate $25,000 to this for this year.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. Let's go one step further.
I got no problem with the $25,000. I'm just worried about next year.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I understand that. That's why I used
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. That we donate the
$25,000 but we still bring it up as a discussion item with the school
board to get them aboard for next year when it's going to be more than
$25,000.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: We can do that. At least we're
going to take care of this now while it still matters.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And then in May we can talk with
the school board.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And we've got $20,000 already
in an account that we can use for this, so I change my motion to that.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. And then my second will
reflect that.
Page 53
April 12-13, 2011
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. County Manager, you have a
source of funding to do this?
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, it will be General Fund dollars. I
think what Commissioner Coletta is referring to, you have a fund that
funds your Economic Development Incentive Program and your
annual transfer to the public/private partnership with your Economic
Development Council.
Within that budget there's an allocation annually for what's called
the local match to the state's qualified target industry program if we
have an eligible applicant. We have none that we know of this year so
that, theoretically, those dollars are not committed and could
potentially be available, but they are General Fund dollars ifunspent
would otherwise go to beginning cash balance for next year's budget.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
MR. OCHS: And then with respect to Commissioner Coletta's
suggestion, I might encourage the board, not only could you speak
with the school district about next year's program, but I think there's
nothing that stops you on the 25th, if that's the day that you agree to
meet with them, to also talk about a partnership for the current year.
Ms. Reynolds' problem is just one of timing, not necessarily that
the school board couldn't be asked to be a funding partner for both the
current fiscal year and in the future, if you want to have that
discussion.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. You want to add that intent to
your motion --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes--
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- I thought I did about the
discussion. But if that clarifies it, by all means.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, okay. I think it probably does.
So we have a revised motion by Commissioner Coletta, seconded by
the Commissioner Fiala, that essentially says that Collier County will
Page 54
April 12-13, 2011
commit the $25,000 for this fiscal year, and during our meeting with
the school board in May, we will discuss with them the possibility of
partnering not only for this year but for subsequent years. Is that a fair
statement of the motion and intent?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Except that when we're saying
$25,000, I think we should add as an economic incentive.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay--
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Correct.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- so that we take it out of the --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Social services.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- not-for-profit.
MS. REYNOLDS: Right.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And my motion includes those
words.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, very well.
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. I'm assuming the county
manager's -- by the motion, is understanding that he's going to do a
budget amendment, bring it back to the Board of Commissioners on
the next agenda?
MR. OCHS : Yes, sir, we'll do that budget amendment and report
it as we do on our normal report to the board on budget amendments.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Very well.
All in favor, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: The motion passes unanimously.
Page 55
April 12-13, 2011
MS. REYNOLDS: Thank you so much.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Congratulations.
MS. REYNOLDS: Thank you.
(Applause.)
MS. REYNOLDS: May I just add one point. We are--
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We're going to take $1,000 off for every
other minute you take.
MS. REYNOLDS: Oh, no, no. We are preparing a community
development block grant request for next year. And as I've discussed
with Commissioner Henning particularly, I'd like to come back from
time to time, just a couple times a year, and really fill you in on what
we're accomplishing for your kids.
Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thanks.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I think that's a great idea.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And so we're going to have a 10-minute
break. We'll be back here at 10:45. Thank you.
(A brief recess was had.)
MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, you have a live mike.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Thank you very much.
MR. OCHS: You're on Item 6C, sir.
Item #6C
PUBLIC PETITION BY MS. LAURA DEJOHN REPRESENTING
THE EAST NAPLES FOUNDATION REQUESTING
COORDINATION OF EFFORTS WITH THE COUNTY -
APPROVED
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. We go to 6C, the last item in our
public petitions.
MR.OCHS: Yes, sir, public petition for Ms. Laura Dejohn
Page 56
April12-13,2011
representing the East Naples Foundation, requesting coordination of
efforts with the county . Laura?
MS. DeJOHN: Good. Thank you and good morning. Thanks
for the opportunity to be here this morning. I am here on behalf of
East Naples Foundation, which is a private, nonprofit,
community-based organization.
And they request that you consider authorizing county staff to
meet with the foundation to explore options to partner in seeking
community planning grants.
This isn't a request for funding at this time. It's just a request to
get together and explore the potential to maybe seek grants together.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Move to approve.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion to approve by Commissioner
Henning.
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 HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Great presentation, Laura.
MS. DeJOHN: Thank you. Thanks for your motion. And I
expect when the foundation does get with staff, then it may come back
to you with a formal strategy for how maybe it would work out to seek
grants together.
Great, thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you.
Page 57
April 12-13, 2011
Item #9A
RESOLUTION 2011-67: REAPPOINTING CLARK WAKEFIELD
HILL AND ROBERT A. MILLER TO THE TOURIST
DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL - ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, that moves us to Item 9 on your
agenda this morning, Board of County Commissioners.
9A is an appointment of members to the Tourist Development
Council.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Move to approve Clark Hill and
Robert Miller.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Reappointment.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: A motion to approve Clark Hill -- and
who was the other one?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Bob Miller.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Bob Miller, who are current members --
by Commissioner Henning, and second by Commissioner Fiala.
All in favor, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: The motion passes unanimously.
Item #9B
Page 58
April 12-13, 2011
RESOLUTION 2011-68: APPOINTING KENNETH EMIL BLOOM
AND KEVIN MCKYTON TO THE FOREST LAKES
ROADWAYS AND DRAINAGE ADVISORY COMMITTEE-
ADOPTED
MR.OCHS: 9B is appointment of members to the Forest Lakes
Roadways and Drainage Advisory Committee.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. We have -- we have two
members and we have two applicants. Is there --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Motion--
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- any choice? Motion to approve both
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Motion to approve the committee
recommendation of these two applicants.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Motion by Commissioner Fiala to
approve --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- the two applicants, second by
Commissioner Coletta.
Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All in favor, please signify by saying
aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: The motion passes unanimously.
Page 59
April12-13,2011
Item #9C
RESOLUTION 2011-69: APPOINTING MARJORIE BLOOM (AT-
LARGE CATEGORY W/TERM EXPIRING APRIL 13,2012); RE-
APPOINTING SERGEANT DAVID ESTES (LA W-
ENFORCEMENT CATEGORY W/TERM EXPIRING APRIL 13,
2015); AND RELOCATING EXISTING BOARD MEMBER
JAMES RICH, FROM THE "AT-LARGE" CATEGORY TO THE
"ANIMAL ACTIVIST GROUP" CATEGORY W/TERM
EXPIRING APRIL 13,2015 TO THE ANIMAL SERVICES
ADVISORY BOARD - ADOPTED
MR.OCHS: 9C, appointment of members to the Animal
Services Advisory Board and the change of category of an existing
member.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Before we begin this, could I just
ask a question on this one?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Sure.
MR.OCHS: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: It says in here that they wanted to
move James Rich to animal -- to the category of animal activist
because they needed that category filled, which then would open up
whatever category he works in now.
Will we then be readvertising -- God bless you --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- for that particular position?
MR. MITCHELL: No, Commissioner, because of the other
applicants that had applied for the vacant positions, they were both--
they were considered qualified to be considered for that, and it's their
recommendation that we take one of those.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, okay. Fine. So the
recommendation is Marjorie Bloom and David Estes, and so I make
Page 60
April 12-13, 2011
that motion.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second the motion.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Motion by Commissioner Fiala to
appoint Marjorie Bloom and David Estes, seconded by Commissioner
Henning.
I'm not sure I follow this, but --
MR. KLATZKOW: Are we taking the committee's
recommendation then?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I think so. The committee's
recommendation is--
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Would it be easier for you?
MR. KLATZKOW: It is the motion, yes.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah, committee recommendation is --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Easier if I just follow the committee
recommendation? Okay.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah, it would be easier, because
committee recommendation is sort of lengthy and convoluted, but I
think you understand the issue, but -- okay.
The motion by Commissioner Fiala is to accept the committee's
recommendation. Okay.
MR. MITCHELL: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And it's seconded by Commissioner
Henning.
Any discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All in favor, please signify by saying
aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
Page 61
April 12-13, 2011
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It passes unanimously.
Item #9D
RESOLUTION 2011-70: APPOINTING JOEL ANTHONY DAVIS
TO THE OCHOPEE FIRE CONTROL DISTRICT ADVISORY
COMMITTEE - ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: 9D is appointment of a member to the Ochopee
Fire Control District Advisory Committee.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion to approve the
committee recommendations of Joel Davis.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Motion by Commissioner Coletta
to approve the appointment of Joel Anthony Davis, seconded by
Commissioner Fiala.
Any further discussion?
(N 0 response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All in favor, please signify by saying
aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It passes unanimously.
Page 62
April 12-13, 2011
Item #9E
SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA'S COURT RULING ON
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER
COUNTY VS. DWIGHT BROCK, DATED NOVEMBER 10,2010.
MOTION TO HAVE THE CLERK AUDIT THE $230 MILLION
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN FUND - MOTION FAILED
DUE TO LACK OF SECOND
MR.OCHS: 9E is Supreme Court of Florida's court ruling on
Board of County Commissioners of Collier County versus Dwight
Brock dated November 10, 2010. Commissioner Henning has placed
this item on the agenda.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I think this item may take more
than four minutes, but I don't have much to say under this.
I know that it was the discussion of the majority of the board to
potentially put it on the agenda. I put it on the agenda for the
commissioners' knowledge and the public's knowledge that the Clerk
of Court, affirmed by the Supreme Court of the State of Florida, has
jurisdiction under performing audits without the permission of the
Board -- Board of Commissioners. That was a -- in my opinion, a
lengthy battle, and I'm glad it's over with.
I do -- since this is on the agenda, I do have a concern about one
particular department, and that is our water and sewer district. I
believe we have $230 million in capital improvements.
Mr. DeLony, you do not have to come down here.
Terri, it's a pleasure to have you back.
The -- that is a five-year capital improvement to replace
infrastructure that is in there -- in the privy of it. I know that we have
-- Commissioner Fiala says it all the time -- that we have updated our
sewer system so we don't have the stuff coming over the sides. We
have redundancies within our water system based upon Commissioner
Page 63
April 12-13, 2011
Coyle's and the board's agreement to have some redundancies on
there. I question whether that these -- $230 million capital
improvement plan is necessary.
So, therefore, I make a motion that we request the Clerk of
Courts to audit the capital improvement plan and report back to the
board on the necessity of that $230 million capital improvement plan.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: What?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I have -- ifhe reports back on the
necessity for it, would that be an opinion of what -- you know, of
whether we're saving up for future things or -- how do you get an
opinion out of an audit? I'm not quite sure. I don't really understand
what you're saying.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: His finding then, opinion.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Findings?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Findings.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Findings? Ifwe need to save up for
future -- I'm just not following it. I'm sorry. If we need to save up for
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You want me to clarify it?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, please.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Commissioner Fiala, I
question whether the $230 million capital improvement, five-year
capital improvement plan, is needed, okay.
Request that the Clerk look, examine, those capital improvements
and report back to the board if those capital improvements are
necessary .
CHAIRMAN COYLE: How did we jump from audits to the
Clerk making decisions about capital improvements in Collier
County? That's the purview of the Board of County Commissioners,
and it's very, very clear.
If we don't procure the services properly, if we don't account for
the money we spend properly, that is fair game for the Clerk to audit
Page 64
April 12-13, 2011
to see if we've done it properly. The Clerk is not responsible for
making decisions about capital improvements in Collier County.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That isn't what I said.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, it's exactly what you've said.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: May I ask a question?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah. Go ahead, Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. Help me with this,
Commissioner Henning. Don't we have an understanding that the
Clerk has the right to audit us whenever he thinks it's necessary?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes. He has -- he doesn't have
to come to the board, and that's what the Supreme Court affirmed.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So why are we going through
this little exercise? If there's something that he has to audit, then let
him audit. Why do we have to invite him? I'm curious. I'm trying to
find out where we're going with this.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm telling you that I have a
concern that the $230 million capital improvement is not necessary,
and I want a second opinion.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Is that a motion?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Wait. Can I --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You got a motion? Is that a motion?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I did.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. There's a motion. Is there a
second?
Motion dies are for lack of second.
Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Commissioner Coletta said it
correctly. The Clerk has the ability to independently determine if he
wants to audit anything for whatever reason he feels the need.
And to that end, if he perceives a need to audit the reserves in the
utility department, he can do so.
I think I understand your question, Commissioner Henning, but
Page 65
April12-13,2011
I'm not sure that evaluating the reserves that we have built up there are
needed for future capital improvement projects is something that we
would -- I mean, would be something he would even consider
auditing. I'm not sure that he would. I could be mistaken, but I don't
know.
But I see your point, and that is, you want to be sure that we are
not building up reserves unnecessarily and you basically want some
sort of analysis that would justify the reserves at the level they are. Is
that what you're asking about?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's correct. But in doing so,
you need to find out whether those reserves are -- and they are
dedicated for capital improvements. You would have to verify
whether those capital improvements are necessary.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, I would have to agree with
Commissioner Coyle that, you know, whether or not a capital
improvement is needed is something that the board would decide. But
I certainly think it might be something you want to bring back on a
future agenda and ask staff to justify, you know, what they see as
future needs and present that to us so that we better understand why
the reserves have to be at the level they're at.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We're going through a budget process.
We're getting involved in our next fiscal year budget where all those
kinds of things have to be justified. So I don't understand why we
can't get those questions answered.
Now, if you've got concerns, then yes, you're entitled to answers.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And we should get those answers.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And -- but our staff should provide those
answers to us. And if we find the answers to be not credible, then we
have the option to do whatever we think is necessary to get credible
answers from the staff.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: May I respond to Commissioner
Hiller?
Page 66
April 12-13, 2011
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Of course, go ahead.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioner Hiller, I don't
know if anybody on this board has the expertise to determine whether
a particular capital improvement needs to be done or not.
We are relying on staff, so where is the checks and balances
provided to make sure that capital improvement needs to be replaced?
After all -- again, based upon all the capital improvements that we
have done in water and sewer over the last eight years -- has been
tremendous. That's where my concerns are, that a lot of these capital
improvements put into those systems have been done. Why are we
spending $230 million to replace some of those?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And maybe that's something that
would be addressed through the AUIR process and, you know, if we
have a need or if we identify that we don't have a need, or if we're not
sure whether we do or we don't have a need, maybe -- I mean, I hate to
say, you know, go and get a consultant, but if we can't make a
determination ourselves and we can't rely on staffs expertise then, you
know, bring in someone independent who can make an evaluation as
to, you know, what is the existing capacity, what's the future capacity,
and if there's a deficiency, you know, do we have the monies to cover
it or do we have too much, and we don't need to --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And we need to move on.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The--
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I just want to address your
concern, and I want to make sure I completely understand.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: These are not capital
improvements to --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- increase capacity.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: All right.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: These are capital improvements
Page 67
April12-13,2011
to replace items.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Like repairs and maintenance?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. So anyways, we can
move on.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, being that we're going to be
moving on, I just wanted to say in comment -- in a comment to
Commissioner Henning, I would be fearful that we would go back to
where we were when they were afraid to save any money up to do
anything back in the '90s, and so then we were presented with the
pleasant gift of having to bring up to date everything that was not
accomplished before because no money was set aside to do it. I don't
want to see us go back there.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I think we covered it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We covered it, okay.
Let's move on to the next item.
Item #9G
2010 CENSUS COUNT FOR LEE, COLLIER AND HENDRY
COUNTIES - DIRECTION GIVEN TO THE COUNTY
ATTORNEY TO LOOK INTO THE ISSUE AND BRING BACK A
REPORT TO THE BOARD CONSISTING OF HIS
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER ACTION -APPROVED
MR.OCHS: Yes, sir. That takes you to your 11 a.m.
time-certain. That is Item 90 on your agenda this morning. It's the
2010 census count for Lee, Collier, and Hendry counties. This item
was placed on the agenda by Commissioner Henning.
Page 68
April 12-13, 2011
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioners, actually the
county attorney has been assisting me gathering other information.
And I want to first start out by saying that because of a Naples Daily
News article in the recent past about the questioning the -- on how the
census was taken in the tri-county region, it prompted me to contact
somebody that I know that was employed by the Census Bureau and
was a supervisor for the Census Bureau. That person did confirm
what was stated in the Naples Daily News and is a part of your
backup.
I do want to provide the board members with other news articles,
concerns of how the census was taken.
We do have a couple people here that was involved in the census
taking, and they will testify today that they were directed to take
seasonal units in their district or area where they're counting -- and by
the way, they'll tell you that they have 100 or so numerators or people
that are hired under them under their control. But they were directed
to change seasonal units to vacant units.
I don't know what the effect is at as far as the, you know, shared
revenue from the federal government, but I do know that it gives
Collier County and Southwest Florida a black eye as far as the
reporting on vacancy.
I've also been working with Connie Mack's office to find out
what can be done. They have confirmed to me that we can appeal to
the Census Bureau to have a recount.
I would like to get to the bottom of why this happened and also
direct the county attorney to assist the board to contact the Census
Bureau to have that recount. But I also would like for -- indulge the
board to -- and it may take more than three minutes per speaker.
People hopefully have signed up to speak on this item to give you any
additional information that you need to move this forward.
MR. MITCHELL: Sir, we just have one speaker registered.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, the other two need to sign
Page 69
April 12-13, 2011
up. One is David, and the other one is Mary Casanova. And we'll get
somebody to instruct you how to fill out a speaker slip afterwards.
So, Mr. Chairman, I would like to indulge to have Mary
Casanova and David -- David, I apologize, I don't have your last name
-- for speakers on today's -- this item.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Let's hear from the speakers. If
you haven't already registered, we -- subject to the majority vote of the
board, we will waive our rule and allow you to register after this has
begun. Is there an objection to that from the board?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, no objection.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All right. So anyone who wants to
register now may do so.
MR. MITCHELL: Sir, the first speaker will be Mary Casanova.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll pass them out.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Is that your letter?
MS. CASANOVA: No. This is something from one of the two
leaders on her observation.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We're not going to have time to read
this, so it's -- go ahead.
MS. CASANOVA: You want to start? Okay.
I was a supervisor for the Census Bureau. I started in the very
beginning, which that has -- really has nothing to do with this. But my
district was from Pine Ridge, down to Gordon and then up to 41 and --
but most of it is the beach area, which it was vacant. As you all know,
during the summer, this is a ghost town, and this happened in July.
And we were instructed to make -- anything that we did not
speak to the resident of the housing unit, instead of usual home
elsewhere, meaning that they have another residence and they're just
seasonal, make them vacant regular. According to the book, vacant
regular is a house that is for sale, for rent, foreclosure, not seasonal.
Page 70
April 12-13, 2011
So if we did not speak to the homeowner, we were instructed to
make them vacant regular, which in the paper that I just gave you, as
you can see, what it was originally -- it's just one day's work.
Originally it was 58 percent. With the new procedure that the office
gave us, it made it to 4 percent.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Wow.
MS. CASANOVA: Which is a big difference. So we made an
illusion that Collier County is a ghost town as far as how many homes
we have.
And in the letter that I addressed to George Grande stating that --
why would anybody come and invest in our county by making this
illusion -- and, you know, the people really need to know. Are they
going to be walking away from their home? You know, they have two
jobs, three jobs, how many jobs they have in order to maintain their
mortgage, and now they're going to read in the CNN Money that it's
going to be into 2032 before Collier County comes back. A lot of the
people are going to say, you know what, I'm out of here, and that's not
really fair.
As you can see, we did request it in writing, and they did give it
to us, because falsification in any, you know, government or anywhere
-- it's really falsification and has severe penalties.
So David and I refused to have any of our -- we had crew leaders,
crew leader's assistant, and enumerators. We were not going to
instruct them to falsify when we've been telling them constantly,
falsification, Title 13, pie (sic), you know, it has a big risk and
penalties, you know, jail time, money. So now they want us to go
ahead and falsify or alter data, which was totally wrong.
David and I got terminated because we refused, and we held on
to those. Out of seven supervisors, David and I were the only ones
who said, "No way . We're not doing this."
We did get terminated. We did notify the OIG and George
Grande. And on the 20th, over the weekend, we got hired again, and
Page 71
April 12-13, 2011
we were told, okay, "Y ou're going to go ahead and do it the correct
way. "
So we went on, back to our crew, we're doing it the correct way.
They never instructed the rest of the five supervisors that the law -- so,
I mean, it went on for days and days and days. We can't say how
many.
We were also told that a lot of the paperwork that came in the
field done correct was changed in the office. We were not allowed to
go into the office. We were supposed to go -- just go into a little
room. In the beginning we didn't know why, because before we were
all mingled with everybody else. But then we were just into this one
tiny little room.
Well, you know, thinking back, well, maybe they didn't want us
to know what was going on in the backroom.
So a lot of investors -- and, you know, we tried our best to
contact the media. The first time we went to the media -- what was
that girl's name? Well, the first article, they gave her the run-around.
There was two articles. One was in the beginning, and then this one
that we called them again and said, Hey, you guys need to get on this,
on the ball, and we spoke to the editor, and they did. It wasn't really
that great of a report, but at least it got the message out there.
The Board of Realtors was going to bring it up to them, because
the Realtor that was on that article in the Naples Daily News when we
contacted her, she says that the first day, she has gotten two contracts
that were canceled because of that CNN Money article saying that
Naples was the worst in the county -- in the country. Naples was
number one, Collier County, by 32 percent vacancy.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yep.
MS. CASANOVA: And Lee County, 30 percent. You know, we
know that that is not the truth. You know, we were there. We were
on battleground. We were on the field, so we know what those
numbers were. Yes, we have a high foreclosure rate. We have a high
Page 72
April 12-13, 2011
vacancy rate. But, you know, like whoever couldn't afford or lost
their home, like, in Golden Gate Estates moved to Golden Gate City.
So, I mean, the vacancy rate as far as, you know, the homes, yes,
there are high but not to that extreme. Not -- there's no way . We
know.
And, you know, why -- we kept asking why, and they kept
saying, vacant is vacant. And we kept saying, well, vacant is not
vacant because we have two vacancies that we can elect in that -- our
questionnaire, but only one occupied. There's got to be a reason why
there's two vacancies.
MR. KAISER: And I'm David Kaiser, by the way. They told us
basically that -- usual home elsewhere, whenever we found that, it was
always going to be vacant regular, and that's the bottom line. And we
just did not agree with it at all.
It was not what the book said. Everybody else in all the other
counties were doing it differently, so it changed all our numbers, and
it was falsification. And so we know the numbers that came in are not
right, and we should not be the worst in the country.
Somebody did this. Somebody came down and said, "You guys
will change these." They said the numbers weren't matching up, and
they sat and had everybody erase them.
MS. CASANOVA: They also told us that it was an order from
Washington.
MR. KAISER: Which never came about.
MS. CASANOVA: Which it was not. I knew other people from
other offices. We started out in Sarasota, which branched out. And I
called the other branches, and I said, "Are you guys doing it this
way?" And they said, "Absolutely not, absolutely not."
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Thank you very much.
Commissioner Fiala, I think you were first, weren't you?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah. I was just going to make a
statement. This is another example of how figures are made to lie.
Page 73
April12-13,2011
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All right, yeah, yeah.
Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I would -- I'd like to hear from
staff to try to get -- try to get some perspective on this. I mean, this is
subj ect matter that comes up once every ten years, and you never quite
get the expertise on it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Oh, we've got two more speakers. I
don't know if you want to wait to listen to those or not.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'll be happy to wait. By all
means.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
MR. MITCHELL: Sir, the next speaker is Chuck Mohlke.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
MR. MOHLKE: For the record, my name is Chuck Mohlke. I
am a resident of Commission District 4.
If it pleases this honorable board, I had prepared some
information that the manager has available for your review and
comment. If you wish to include it in the public record, I think it will
be an opportunity to address the issue of how unusual or, to use a
word that came to your attention earlier in the meeting, how truly
anomalous is this situation when compared to the year 2000.
The differences are modest. If one were to look at the overall
vacancy rate -- and forgive me while I find my glasses -- in the year
2000 the total vacancy rate in Collier County was 28.76 percent. In
the year 2010 the vacancy rate, as revealed by the census and
confirmed in Google Reporting that the manager has a copy of, the
vacancy rate was 30 -- let me see. Let me do this correctly now--
32.499 percent, a relatively modest increase of percentage points,
3.743 percent. Not at all unusual.
The unusual aspect of this is that although there was only a
modest number of housing units increased in the City of Naples, 795,
2000 to 2010, the vacancy rate in the city went from 36.284 percent to
Page 74
April 12-13, 2011
42.37 percent.
And the calculations are all clear on the spreadsheets. And I
think the number of units in the city that, for whatever reason, were
declared either to be held for occasional use or, as it's usually
accompanied according to our previous speaker, as usual home
elsewhere.
The issue, just to conclude these remarks on vacancy, is an
important issue, of course, and the board will address it as it sees --
deems appropriate, but it does not impact at all the overall population
of the area in terms of issues that are of concern to the board for
infrastructure planning, for redistricting, for grant purposes, and a
wide variety of other things.
And if one were to go back into the record in the 1970s and look
at a well-known case, Dillon versus Greensboro, what the census is is
what the census is. It is for the purposes of declaring the full-time
domiciled population of the area for purposes as outlined previously,
and particularly before you shortly, will be the matter of redistricting.
I, representing only my personal opinion, find that that should not
impact at all your use of the census information for purposes, again, of
planning, redistricting, or grant application and distribution.
I thank the board.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, thank you. Who's next?
MR. MITCHELL: Duane Billington.
MR. BILLINGTON: I waive.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, thank you.
That's the last speaker?
MR. MITCHELL: That was the last speaker, yes.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I think Chuck explained it very
well. I understand now how all this comes together. I have no other
questions.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Hiller.
Page 75
April 12-13, 2011
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Chuck, are you saying that the
mischaracterization of units as vacant when, in fact, they're not is not
material to the question of redistricting?
MR. MOHLKE: I am.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Can you explain that?
MR. MOHLKE: The issue of vacancy, whether it's determined
after careful review that our previous speakers argued persuasively
for, will not affect -- in my view, will not affect the full-time
domiciled population.
I can expand on that more if you wish. But if we're talking about
vacancies, that will not have any material impact on the full-time
domiciled population that you will be using, again, for the purposes of
planning, redistricting, grant application, and reallocation.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So if I understand, if someone was
on vacation and they weren't contacted, that house is deemed vacant.
They might be a permanent resident but they're gone or go, you know,
out of town, they're permanent residents but maybe they go for a
month to a vacation home or to visit their parents, they're not
considered permanent and that's okay; it won't affect the redistricting?
MR. MOHLKE: First, let's establish the fact that the
enumeration process begins only after people complete their census
forms. If a census form is incomplete, as I understand the process,
after April 1 or in that general vicinity, then the enumerator visits the
residence, and it may be the case that absent of the -- a resident being
home, a proxy is found who makes a judgment as to whether or not --
and reports it to the enumerator that the residence was occupied as of
April 1 st.
The issue then as to whether or not that occupancy was that of a
seasonal resident who uses that particular unit for occasional use
domiciled elsewhere has taken them off of the list of those whose
permanent residence here will be used by you and others for the
purposes of redistricting.
Page 76
April 12-13, 2011
So the enumerating process is, in a certain sense, rather limited.
You have the experts here. They will comment on that, I'm sure. But
it only happens when the census form is not completed and returned to
the census for purposes of counting households and individuals who
reside within those households.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you. Can I ask the
counters, can you explain your position on this --
MS. CASANOVA: Sure.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- so I better understand.
MS. CASANOVA: We had the biggest district for NFU, which
is non- follow-up response, and it's those people who did not respond
to their questionnaire. A lot of people do not respond to a
questionnaire because they're asking them income, they're asking them
a lot of personal. A lot of people feel uncomfortable with that.
And if they just say, you know what, we just need to find out
how many people live there, a lot of people would -- homeowners
would have responded, a lot -- they don't.
We got -- when we went to the doors, we got a lot of them that
said, here, take this back. I'm not filling it out. I'm not asking (sic)
you any questions. You know, as supervisor, we kept coming back to
these people that said, get off our property. We had to call the
Sheriffs Department because we got threatened. Not us personally,
but our enumerators. People did not want to do anything with the
census.
I mean, the census this year was really, you know, negative about
the government because of, you know, how everything is going. So
this made a lot of impact. People are saying, you know what, I'm
losing my house, you guys didn't care. I'm not going to answer this.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Can you address how you would
respond to the same question that I asked Mr. Mohlke? I mean, how
does this question of redistricting?
MR. KAISER: Well, if somebody was not home and they had
Page 77
April12-13,2011
changed the answer and made it a vacant, that person never would
have been counted.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I see.
MR. KAISER: That's what would have happened.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And that was my concern. That's
exactly what I am afraid of.
MR. KAISER: The bottom line here is, they forced us to change
the numbers, and it's not accurate.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I mean, that in and of itself
concerns me.
MR. KAISER: We are the worst--
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I mean, the integrity of the process
is obviously in question. And -- so to accept anything with -- that is
such a significant impact such as redistricting or funding and to rely
on numbers which we now know to be --
MR. KAISER: False.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- false is problematic in and of
itself. But I do see that there is an implication with respect to
redistricting.
MR. KAISER: Yeah. And the one other thing my supervisor
said to me, and said to all of us on the phone, was that the numbers
were not matching up, okay. That's when they started changing all of
the information and erasing. If you look at these numbers here from
the years before, that doesn't mean anything to me. If they did it the
same way they did it this year, those numbers are false.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Sure.
MR. KAISER: And I wouldn't go by those numbers.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, I appreciate that.
MR. KAISER: That's all I'm saying. I know the numbers here
that they have this year are not true. We were there.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's significant. That's very,
very significant. And they basically acknowledged that by saying that
Page 78
April 12-13, 2011
they would allow you to change your numbers to report the way you
wanted and left the others different. If they had kept you consistent
with the others, I mean, it would have been arguable, but very clearly
that's not the case.
MR. KAISER: As these numbers were coming in, they were all
put in the computer, and they could see exactly what the percentages
were coming in as. They said, "The numbers aren't coming in right.
We have to change the numbers. Start erasing."
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, I know the community is
very concerned about that and the article that came out in the Naples
Daily News that articulated the 30 percent vacancy was brought up at
a public hearing -- a public meeting, I should say, that I attended, and
they questioned me, and I said, "I really don't know. I don't know how
they came up with that number." And there was a staff member who
was presenting, doing a separate presentation on a separate issue at
that same meeting, and they asked that person the same question, and
that person said, well, you know, I'm not really sure. It seems very
high.
MS. CASANOVA: It is very high.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Henning?
MS. CASANOVA: Like we had said, you know, during the
summer, a lot of people take summer vacation. And, you know,
they're gone with kids. Summer -- you know, summer is here. So a lot
of these vacant homes -- and I know this because we talked to a proxy.
Well, according to a new procedure, proxy says, if we talk to
somebody other than the household member, we're going to make
them vacant regular.
MR. KAISER: Period.
MS. CASANOVA: Period.
MR. KAISER: So proxies didn't matter. If there was proxy, it
was automatically vacant regular is what the new rule was.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I understand.
Page 79
April 12-13, 2011
MR. KAISER: So everybody was vacant regular.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, I hope the newspapers
consider investigating this.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The seasonal vacancy and the
regular vacancy has not been reported for the 2010 census by the
Census Bureau. That is my understanding. When it is reporting--
when it is reported, I want an accurate report, and I trust these people
of telling us, this is what occurred. They have nothing to gain, nothing
to lose, by making their statements. And I -- and I feel that they're
truthful in their statements --
MS. CASANOVA: Oh, absolutely.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- and, actually, I think, have
been crying out there for a long time and saying, there's -- this is
wrong.
So I would ask the county attorney: Based upon what you heard
and your knowledge of this item, what would your recommendations
be?
MR. KLATZKOW: I share Commissioner Hiller's concern. I
mean, the purpose of the census is to get an accurate count. We're
being told here we do not have an accurate count. I don't know what
the remedy is at this point in time, but we can look into it if that's the
board's desire.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, I would -- with that I
would make a motion to direct the county attorney to take a look at
this, bring back his recommendations to get a true and accurate count
and also would like you to assist the board on how do we get the
reason why this took place.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. That's a motion. Is there a
second?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'll second it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Seconded by Commissioner Hiller.
Page 80
April 12-13, 2011
Okay. Commissioner Coletta, your light's on?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, sir. Thank you.
Mr. Mohlke, may I address you, sir? If you'd be so kind. I'mjust
trying to put together the rationale about how everything comes
together and what makes this whole system work.
First, is this a federal issue or a county issue?
MR. MOHLKE: That's a very tough question, because you have
certain responsibilities in regard to how you utilize census
information, and obviously you want to have the very best information
available to you. But in terms of an appeal or the finding of fact
beyond the time of this meeting and the documentation already
available to you, it's a federal issue.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay.
MR. MOHLKE: Asking the question is entirely appropriate, it
seems to me, and you have sincere people who have made a
presentation today putting on the record their concerns. They have
firsthand information. That has to be, in some manner, a matter of
interest to the board.
But I still repeat my earlier claim that for purposes of your
current use of census information of the persons who are full-time
domiciled residents of Collier County, I think you have a census count
that you can proceed with for the purposes of planning redistricting,
grant application, and allocation.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. Now, sir, if you'd be so
kind, too, on redistricting, have you seen the preliminary numbers
from the elections office?
MR. MOHLKE: I have.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And they indicate that, the way
I understand it, that everyone's supposed to have 20 percent of the
population within a given district.
MR. MOHLKE: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And if you have less or more,
Page 81
April 12-13, 2011
then district lines have to be adjusted.
MR. MOHLKE: And I'm sure that process is well under way
with your very competent comprehensive planning staff.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Now, if we were to come up at
some point in time in this discovery process with a formal protest,
would that, in effect, also, very likely, stop the redistricting?
MR. MOHLKE: I see no reason why it should.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: But would it?
MR. MOHLKE: Well, you're going to have options presented to
you. Those options can proceed. It would seem to me that if a
judgment is made later on that adjustments have to be made,
adjustments can be made.
I don't know how I can proceed beyond that, because what you're
down to are either census tract and census block determinations of
where the population is, and then you will use either those -- that
information or that that's been available to you through the voter
tabulation district, or VTDs, that were developed back in February of
2009 by the Supervisor of Elections Office for the purposes of keeping
communities of interest intact, that are compact and contiguous areas
that sometimes, sometimes are divided rather arbitrarily by census
geography.
And the argument well made way back in 1975 with Public Law
94.171 which controls the use of census information for purposes of
redistricting was designed to use these voter-tabulation districts that
looked surprisingly like precincts, but they're not. They are simply an
attempt to keep intact communities of interest.
You can proceed with that with minimum difficulty; I think. And
if adjustments have to be made in the process, they will be made, I'm
confident. But I don't think it's necessary to bring anything to an
abrupt stop.
If -- the key to this may be looking at the incorporated
municipalities that have very substantial numbers of condominium
Page 82
April 12-13, 2011
units. And if I may be permitted to just give two examples from a
much, much earlier census.
Now, you realize I stand to be corrected. I'm relying on my
memory here.
But in the 1980 census, for example, a very -- for Collier County,
a very thorough one -- because our population increased 125 percent
between '70 and '80. In Census Tract 110, which is Collier Boulevard
South on Marco Island, only 36 percent of the units that were owned
and occupied at the time of the census were occupied by
census-domiciled residents in Collier County.
In Census District 4 B, which is what I will call the former
unincorporated part of Park shore, absorbed into the City of Naples in
1989, only 40 percent of those units were lived in by census-domiciled
residents.
And there are other examples: 47 percent in Pelican Bay and so
on, indicating that we have a substantial community of seasonal
residents who own and occupy those units, live in them -- although
their technical domicile is somewhere else, improve our local culture
and economy enormously, and yet we do not count them for purposes
of redistricting or any other full-time-domiciled census population.
We're grateful for them. They are not subject to homestead
exemption. They pay substantial real estate that assists us in a wide
variety of ways. We welcome them. We're grateful for their being
here, but we don't count them for other purposes.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Sir -- okay, that's fine, sir. But
the question I got is, if we proceed with asking some more questions
and starting a process, my big concern is that we'll end this
redistricting that will bring the balance back into Collier County.
My district and District 3 have grown quite a bit in comparison to
the other districts who have to make up populations. And if we reach
the 2012 election cycle and this is still in dispute, then we have to fall
back on the districts that already -- lines that already exist, and a
Page 83
April 12-13, 2011
number of people will not be getting the representation they should be
getting.
Now, that's my concern. Now, are we heading down towards
that path, or the way we're going here there's nothing to be concerned
about?
MR. MOHLKE: My answer to that question is no, you're not
heading down that path. You will proceed in the normal way in
regard to all of these matters that have to do with redistricting and the
other uses of census information, and adjustments can always be
made.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. So the motion that we
have before us is not threatening in any way as far as the 2012 election
cycle goes as redistricting?
MR. MOHLKE: In my view, no. That's my view.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: County Manager Ochs?
MR.OCHS: Commissioner, we would essentially concur with
that assessment, but I'll ask staff to comment briefly.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay.
MR. OCHS: Again, this is a question of permanent population
versus subcategories of vacant units.
MR. BOSI: Mike Bosi, Comprehensive Planning Manager. Just
to -- for informational purposes, next -- your next meeting on the 26th,
myself and David Weeks will be coming before you asking the board
to approve the criteria for redistricting and initiate the process.
Related to the question at hand, what you're directing the County
Attorney's Office to do is to explore what options are available. I
think during that period of discovery there may be options that are
presented to this Board of County Commissioners based upon the
findings that are uncovered by the county's attorney's office, that one
of those options may -- may affect the redistricting effort. I'm not sure
what the discretion or what the desire of the Board of County
Commissioners will be based upon that discovery.
Page 84
April 12-13, 2011
What we're going to ask you on the 26th would be to initiate the
process. The discovery that's provided by the county's attorney's
office may have some sort of material affect upon that. I'm not sure.
I'm not sure what the process is.
What I know is what -- and what I heard was that there is a
distinction between how the vacant units were classified. The issue at
hand is related to the permanent population.
I guess one of the points made was, if there was not a respondent
surveyed that was provided for an individual residence and it was a
permanent population, and if that person was not home, on vacation,
then that could be a miscount for the permanent population. I'm not
sure what percentage point that could represent of our permanent
population. But if there was more than 1 percent, I would be
surprised. But, regardless, it could have an effect. It could have an
effect upon that number.
What we're going to ask you to do on the 26th will be to initiate
the process. What the county's attorney's office will present you at
some later point after the discovery is what those options are related to
the issue that was brought before you.
So it doesn't -- I can't provide you a direct answer whether it will
or whether it won't other than it could potentially, based upon the
majority and the decision and the discretion of the entire Board of
County Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Hiller.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I think you're right; it could
potentially, and that's the problem. And to that end, the -- I'm sure
that there's a legal process in place when there are discrepancies
identified in census counts, and I'm sure that there is a mechanism that
we -- you know, some sort of appeal and a request for a recount where
errors are identified.
I mean, it's very clear. I mean, we don't know that these are the
only errors, but we know just that these errors have been confirmed as,
Page 85
April 12-13, 2011
in fact, true.
So I'm actually very concerned about this, because anything that
compromises the integrity of that process does have an effect on all
other matters that we are going to rely upon the results of this census.
So, I mean, I think the involvement of the county attorney and his
analysis -- and, quite frankly, I think -- what did you say the criminal
penalties were for falsification?
MS. CASANOVA: Two hundred and fifty thousand dollars and
five years imprisonment.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Have you reported this to the legal
authorities, I mean the law enforcement authorities?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You need to be at a microphone to
answer these questions. Excuse me.
MR. KAISER: We reported it to the OIG, and it was under
investigation, and all of a sudden they came back and told us they
couldn't talk to us anymore.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. Who is --
MR. KAISER: We have the emails we sent to them, we have the
emails they sent back to us. We have everything.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: What does the OIG stand for?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Office of Inspector General.
MR. KAISER: Office of Inspector General. That's who you're
supposed to report things like this to. We also reported it to our boss,
George Grande, who was in charge of the census.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. I think we've got all the
information we need. I would just like to say, from my standpoint, I
have never, ever seen an accurate census. I have never expected the
census to produce accurate counts just because of the way it happens
and just for the reasons you stated earlier about people not really
wanting to volunteer a lot of information. It's impossible.
But -- and furthermore, the differences in vacancies between
2000 and 2010 percentage-wise, is to me, amazing. There is no huge
Page 86
April 12-13, 2011
difference between the vacancies reported in 2000 and vacancies
reported in 2010. It's a very small difference, and the difference
ranging from 3 to 6 percent, and that could easily be explained by the
huge number of bankruptcy in Collier County in a number of vacant
homes. And certainly, condominiums have been hit very hard from
that standpoint.
So I don't see that there's a substantial and urgent change in our
situation here that can't be explained. Nevertheless, I don't think we
should accept people making decisions that they know to be wrong --
and I think we probably should take some action on that -- but to go
through the process again, I think, would be expensive, and I don't
know that we would -- we would achieve any substantial refinement
of the vacancy issue.
As I said, I am -- I am quite surprised that there's such a small
percentage difference between 2000 and 2010 considering our
economic circumstances.
But the motion is to ask the county attorney to bring back to us, I
think, a recommendation as to what kind of protest or inquiry we
should submit to the federal government to see if we can't get accurate
information. It's inexcusable that the maximum effort isn't made to
get accurate information. But the census, by its very organization, is
imprecise, and it will never be entirely accurate.
So we've got the motion on the floor. It's been seconded.
Is there any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All in favor of the motion -- which will
be coming back to us, by the way, in the form of a recommendation
from the county attorney, right?
All in favor, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
Page 87
April 12-13, 2011
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. It's done.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you.
Item #13A
THE COUNTY ATTORNEY TO TAKE ALL NECESSARY
ACTION, INCLUDING FILING A LAWSUIT, TO EVICT
GREGORY SHEPARD FROM HIS PRESENT LOCATION AT
THE IMMOKALEE REGIONAL AIRPORT, AND TO PURSUE
ANY HOLD-OVER RENT, DAMAGES, AND COSTS THAT
MA Y BE DUE AND OWING TO THE AIRPORT AUTHORITY -
MOTION TO CONTINUE W/TENANT MEETING WITH THE
AIRPORT DIRECTOR AND THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S
OFFICE NO LATER THAN FRIDAY, APRIL 15, 2011 TO WORK
THROUGH ISSUES - APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, that takes you to your next
time-certain item, which was 11 :30 a.m. It's Item 13A on your agenda,
was formerly 16G4. It is a recommendation to authorize the county
attorney to take all necessary action, including filing a lawsuit, to evict
Gregory Shepard from his present location at the Immokalee Regional
Airport and to pursue any holdover rent, damages, and costs that may
be due and owing to the Airport Authority. This item was moved from
the consent agenda by Commissioner Coletta.
And would you like Mr. Curry to make a presentation, sir, or did
you have some specific questions?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I don't think it would hurt,
because we're going to have speakers, I assume. Do we have any
Page 88
April 12-13, 2011
speakers on this?
MR. MITCHELL: Sir, we have two speakers.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I was expecting more, but that's
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Is the first speaker Mr. Curry?
MR. MITCHELL: No, sir.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No. Mr. Curry would be the
presenter.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All right.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Just so everybody's up to speed
on this, would you give your account for how everything came
together at this point in time? Then I'm going to make a
recommendation.
MR. CURRY : Yes, Commissioner Coletta, I can. Chris Curry,
Collier County Executive Director, Airport Authority.
I do have some pictures I want to load as well. But to kind of
recap where we are today, Mr. Greg Shepard is a tenant at Immokalee
Airport, and his lease expired December 31 st of last year.
We met in the middle of December to discuss renewing his lease,
and we met again in January after the lease had expired.
I extended his term an additional two months to allow for
negotiation. So it was extended January and February to allow for
negotiation.
Mr. Shepard has been unresponsive in setting a time and a date to
meet with me; therefore, I've decided to work with the county attorney
to file an eviction from his present location at the airport.
This is a picture that I have of the entrance area of the airport. As
you can see to the far left, there's a very old trailer that's not a very
pleasing sight for the entrance of the airport, in my opinion.
To the right there is a shed area which has been referred to as a
museum. This is a picture of the front of the museum. This is a
picture of the rear of the museum. And, again, it's right at the entrance
Page 89
April 12-13, 2011
of the airport. This is a better picture of the trailer that's there.
The intent of the airport is really to relocate him to another
position on the airport that may be better suited for his activity and to
also renew his lease but not under the terms and conditions that his
previous lease was.
F or example, we had the appraisal done last year by the county
appraiser and a third-party appraiser, and the land at Immokalee was
evaluated at 14 cent per square foot. In Mr. Shepard's current lease,
he pays 4.8 cent per square foot.
We have had a debate over whether he is an aeronautical activity
or non-aeronautical activity. This is important because the airport may
charge less than fair-market value rate if it is an aeronautical activity.
I have concerns as to whether it is or not, but that was all part of the
negotiations that we were planning.
There was another picture on here. But Mr. Shepard also owns
some fuel tanks, and the fuel tanks are located on the airport in a
position where they're in the future expansion of the runway
protection zone. According to the airport layout plan, which is part of
the airport master plan, this area is to be free of obstacles, and the fuel
tanks are definitely an obstacle in that area.
So, again, my intent is to relocate him from the position on the
corner of the airport to another area on the airport and renegotiate his
lease with his payments being in accordance with fair-market-value
terms ifhe is a non-aeronautical activity, and we will consider a
slightly reduced rate if he is.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. And if I may?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Sure, go ahead.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Some observations that I have
seen along the way.
There was quite a backlash yesterday at the advisory group
meeting there for the Airport Authority. I think everyone was very
much opposed to this foreclosure taking place.
Page 90
April 12-13, 2011
Mr. Shepard was there and he stated his case, and he feels that he
wasn't given a fair chance to be able to present his side and that he had
some arguments that he offered back to me in an email that I can't
validate and I can't deny; however, it's obvious for one thing, there's a
relationship here between our director and a tenant that is beyond
anything that can be solved by either one of them alone.
And I'd like us to give consideration to -- for this case at least, to
be able to appoint somebody from county staff, preferably either Nick
Casalanguida or David Jackson who both have experience with
business, to be able to go forward on our behalf and meet with Mr.
Shepard to be able to see what can be done to be able to allow him to
continue in business for a reasonable period of time -- and some of
these things that were mentioned. Some of his concerns were the fact
that the buildings that are on the property, they want them to leave, are
buildings that he put on there or he paid for, and when he moves he
can't take them with him. He could, but it's not economically feasible
to disassemble them and try to reassemble them.
We were trying to -- I was working with him trying to find a
buyer for those buildings for a new tenant. N ever came around. I
mean, trying to match it up -- finding a tenant to begin with is difficult
enough, less one that would also assume responsibility for buying the
buildings.
So here we are. We've got a piece of prime property at the
airport that at some point in the future deserves very strong
consideration for some other use maybe than a museum, but that
future isn't quite now.
Also we have a runway expansion that we all want to see happen
and we talked about many times, talking about the fuel tanks at the
end of the runway when they expand it. And that's going to happen,
but we still don't have a time table for that to come together. You
know, we don't own the land at this point in time past that point. We
-- there's some other matters that enter into it that's work in progress.
Page 91
April 12-13, 2011
I think if we could bring a fresh face in this to be able to talk to
Mr. Shepard we could show a good-faith effort to try to put something
onto a more level playing field where he may feel a comfort level,
come back to the table to be able to work. So that's my suggestion at
this point in time.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I don't mind considering what
you stated about having other staff members assist the airport director,
but the fact is Mr. Shepard has not come to the table to negotiate his
lease. Okay. That is the fact.
So when do you want to bring this back, and how long do you
want to give Mr. Shepard to come to the table?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's a good question,
Commissioner Henning. I would think that a month's time would be
more than adequate to allow for a relationship to be able to develop
between Mr. Shepard and one of our county employees to be able to
see if something is salvageable here, if something could be worked out
that would still fall within the direction of the master plan for the
airport and what's allowed under FAA.
I'm sure that something could be reached. But if not, it wouldn't
be for the lack of trying. Meanwhile we've got the Immokalee
community very, very dissatisfied with it. In fact, the CRA has even
written a letter claiming that the Airport Authority is not being a good
neighbor.
And I'm just trying to make an outreach to bring new faces into
this at this point in time to try to settle everything down to be able to
go forward, and I welcome any suggestions anybody can give.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, if could make a couple of
observations. Number one, this is not a museum.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I would tend to agree with you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: This is not a museum. It looks like a
junk pile. And it's not going to enhance the airport or the attraction of
Page 92
April 12-13, 2011
other tenants to the airport to do what we want it -- want the airport to
do.
The other problem I have is taking someone who really doesn't
understand FAA regulations and airport operations and telling them
they should negotiate a contract without involving the airport director
is, I think, probably the bad way to go.
I believe that Mr. Curry has shown flexibility in negotiating with
other tenants at this airport. And I would -- I would ask that you not
try to bypass him, because he hasn't even had a chance to work with
the tenant of this building.
And if the tenant of the building is going to ignore Mr. Curry and
wait until some third party is appointed to act in Mr. Curry's absence,
then I don't think any of us gain by that.
I believe that the tenant should be instructed to sit down with Mr.
Curry within the next week and work out an acceptable lease. And if
you're unnecessary -- you're unable to do that, bring it back to us and
let us break the deadlock.
We really are the only authority that can do something different
from what the airport director wants to do.
And so I would just like to cut through all the garbage here.
There's been a subterfuge about a museum and all that sort of
business. I've been flying for 50 years, and I've never seen a museum
like that.
So if you're going to have a museum, let's have a museum, and
let's make sure it's advertised and open to the public, and maybe you'd
get some funds to properly maintain it.
But the issue is not to bypass the airport director but to get the
tenant to sit down and talk. And I think Mr. Curry has presented a
proposed lease, and if you don't like it, you respond to it. And if you
run into an impasse, then come back and let us make that decision.
That's at least the way I would like to see it.
But I know it's in your district, and I don't want to prejudice. But
Page 93
April 12-13, 2011
I believe the best solution will result if we have the tenant talk with the
airport director. I really do.
Commissioner Hiller.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you. I agree with
Commissioner Coyle. Your role is to negotiate these leases and bring
them back to the board for approval. I think introducing an
intermediary in this situation sets a precedent for future situations,
which is problematic.
The tenant always has the ability to appeal to the board through
the petition process if no resolution is achieved through you.
I just wonder, where is the tenant today?
MR. CURRY: He's here, Commissioner Hiller. The --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Can he speak?
MR. CURRY: Sure.
MR. MITCHELL: He's one of the registered speakers,
Commissioner.
MR. CURRY: The other person that I would like to have at the
negotiation would be somebody representing the County Attorney's
Office, because in our past communication, there's been some
confusion as to what has been said. So that would be the other person
that I would recommend attend that meeting.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I would agree with that. I think
that makes a whole lot of sense.
Would the tenant like to speak?
MR. SHEPARD: Yes, I would.
MR.OCHS: He's registered.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Hasn't signed up.
MR. MITCHELL: Yes, he's a registered speaker.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Is he? Then I think we should
hold off on making any decision till we hear him speak. Maybe he
has something to offer.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Come on up, sir.
Page 94
April 12-13, 2011
MR. MITCHELL: Sir, Gregory Shepard.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah, you can take that one.
MR. SHEPARD: Hello, board. I'm Gregory Shepard. We do
have a museum. We're a 501(c)3 registered with the State of Florida.
And we -- Mr. Curry keeps using this word "museum," but we're
a maintenance and storage facility. What he hasn't presented is the
pictures of my 5,000-square-foot building and my 10,000-square-foot
building, which holds MIG-15s, 17s, and 21s, which is flyable aircraft.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: On the same parcel?
MR. SHEPARD: No. On a separate parcel in the airport. This
-- I purchased these from a crop duster, and this is just an open T
hangar we use for storage.
The trailer you see, I asked the last executive director for three
years if I could move the trailer. I have sheet metal sitting on the
other side of the airport to redo this building.
Weare a nonprofit organization. We do have aircraft. Weare
available. And as far as trying to deal with Mr. Curry, I'm still waiting
for Mr. Curry to give me something in writing. I'm always available.
I've always been available. And he just keeps trying to take this
corner away from me.
First off, I believe that it -- because it was a non-aeronautical use.
I'm an aeronautical use. And I, Greg Shepard, purchased the buildings.
I'm a director of a museum. I donate this property for use to the
museum.
And then at our last meeting in Mr. Coletta's office, Mr. Curry
stated that I'm in a safe zone. Well, I went up to the same people who
did your master plan and have it in writing that I am not in a safety
zone. My fuel tanks are in a safety zone, and that is only if you
petition the FAA, get approval, for a GPS flight zone, which is three
years down the road minimum, and probably another year after that, if
you get permission, if you have the funding, if you buy that extrarproperty .
Page 95
April 12-13, 2011
Now, as far as the fuel tanks, I've never used them. I bought this
from a crop duster. These fuel tanks are sitting there. I've maintained
them, $2 million insurance, everything I'm supposed to do.
This building, I can improve. The trailer, I can move. I--
somebody just needs to allow me to move the trailer, let me restore
this trailer. It's a 1994 trailer. It is not old. It went through a
hurricane. It has, you know, some different problems with it. But we
were going to side it, we're going to put a Florida roof on, a porch.
We're going to use it for our office.
Right now it is used as an office. It has electricity, everything.
It's not derelict. But I actually agree; that is an eyesore for the airport.
I wish to move this trailer, and I wish to move it to the other side. I
wish to re-side it, reroof it, put it in a presentable place which is
acceptable to everybody. I wish to not have to move this building; I
wish to improve this building. Somebody can just set some
guidelines.
It's -- all this is not a problem for me. The problem is that I get
no response from Mr. Curry. Mr. Curry constantly keeps saying that
I'm nonresponsive, I'm nonresponsive. Today I'm waiting one month
for his lease agreement in writing, which I don't have.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, we can solve that.
MR. SHEPARD: Thank you.
MR. CURRY: Commissioner, I have -- I have sent him three
letters in writing since December that is probably in the file I have
with the county attorney.
Mr. Shepard talks about all these things that he could do, but he's
had seven years to do it, and he hasn't done any of that in the seven
years. He does have another hangar on the property, and that hangar
is an enclosed hangar -- I'm not sure what's stored inside of the hangar
-- but that's not the issue, because I don't have a problem with the
location of that particular unit.
I just want the area that I have shown you to be relocated in the
Page 96
April 12-13, 2011
area closer to that other hangar that he has.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
MR. SHEPARD: And I might add that I've only been at the
airport for five years. I've only owned this building for five years.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Would it be okay if we set -- help set a
time to get the two parties together with the county attorney's
representation? You okay with that?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That would be fine by me.
Anything we do to start the talks going so we exhaust all possibilities.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Can you get a mutual time set up within
a week?
MR. SHEPARD: I'm available anytime.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
MR. CURRY: I am available anytime as well, and I will --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
MR. CURRY: -- coordinate with Mr. Shepard.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Let's say that no later than Friday of this
week the two of you, with the county attorney's assistance, will get
together and start talking and resolve this issue. Is that okay with
everybody?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: If it's resolvable.
MR. MITCHELL: Sir, we have one more public speaker.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: One more public speaker?
MR. MITCHELL: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
MR. MITCHELL: Marvin Courtright.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Wherever you want to go.
MR. COURTRIGHT: Here's fine, thank you.
Good morning, Commissioners. My name is Marvin Courtright.
I am a licensed aircraft mechanic, multi-engine jet, reciprocating in all
other types, and an inspector of the same aircraft, and I'd like to
confirm at this point that the prerequisite for a museum requires, to get
Page 97
April 12-13, 2011
a reduced rate and all, that the display items be either flyable or static.
But if they are flyable, then they are qualified for a reduced rate and
that's here in the FAA compatible land-use aerospace protection
section and the compliance manual from the FAA.
I certify here that the aircraft that Mr. Shepard is referring to are
flyable, certifiable aircraft, and they qualify as a museum item.
I further would like to point out that it's an unfortunate situation
in that for years and years the community, including the government,
did not understand the relationship between the FAA and airports,
specifically airports that are funded by federal funds.
Believe it or not, the county doesn't literally own that airport.
You have a contract with the FAA, and it has two stipulations, and
only two, that that airport will be maintained as an airport and meet all
the prerequisites of an airport and that it will be made available -- the
second one is, it will be made available for aviation-oriented activities
to the public. That's -- it's in writing.
So please extend the courtesy to Mr. Shepard as a viable business
on the airport with the best of intent. He needs help, he needs your
review, and hopefully you'll assist him in some way.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Motion to continue this item.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Say it again.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: A motion to continue this item.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: There's a--
CHAIRMAN COYLE: There's a motion already on the floor.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Oh, there is?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I can -- how about motion to
continue this item -- I drop my motion. Motion to continue this item
with the county attorney proceeding with working with them in
negotiations and see what can be done?
Page 98
April 12-13, 2011
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Sure.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: No. Later than Friday of this week?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well--
CHAIRMAN COYLE: They both say they're available. Let's
quit playing games. Let's do it.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, you've got the county
attorney who hasn't said he's available.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: He's available. I can see him. He's
available.
MR. KLATZKOW: We'll make somebody available if I'm not.
This isn't hard.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's -- I second your motion.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. All in favor, please signify by
.
saYIng aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign.
(No response.)
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, but I would just like to add that
I hope that code enforcement takes a look at them, too. Everything I
saw there was -- certainly looked like a lot of code violations there.
As long as we're talking about working on this property, I think code
enforcement has a strong part to play.
You asked what -- you don't know what to do. Well, code
enforcement will tell you what to do.
MR. SHEPARD: Codes been. It passes current code.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. We are breaking for lunch. We'll
be back at -- I'm sorry, what else?
MR. OCHS: Just a reminder you have a one p.m. time-certain on
Page 99
April 12-13, 2011
the Immokalee Area Master Plan or 1: 10, whatever --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It will be a 1: 11 time.
MR.OCHS: 1:11.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: 1: 11 time-certain.
MR. OCHS: That's what I said; you have a 1: 11 time-certain.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, good. Thank you.
(A luncheon recess was had.)
MR. OCHS: Commissioner, you have a live mike.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Ladies and gentlemen, Board of
County Commission meeting is back in session.
I presume we're going to go to 8C, time-certain, at 1: 11.
MR. OCHS: That's correct, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
Item #8C
PETITION CP-2008-5, AMENDMENTS TO THE IMMOKALEE
AREA MASTER PLAN AND IMMOKALEE AREA MASTER
PLAN FUTURE LAND USE MAP, TO MAKE REVISIONS TO
THE ENTIRE MASTER PLAN TO INCLUDE: INCREASES TO
COMMERCIAL ACREAGE, INDUSTRIAL ACREAGE AND
ALLOWABLE RESIDENTIAL DENSITY; ELIMINATION OF
SOME EXISTING DESIGNATIONS; CREATION OF A NEW
DESIGNATION FOR THE IMMOKALEE REGIONAL AIRPORT
SITE; AND RE-DESIGNATION OF APPROXIMATELY 103
ACRES TO THE IMMOKALEE URBAN AREA FROM THE
AGRICUL TURAL/RURAL WITHIN THE RURAL LANDS
STEWARDSHIP AREA AS IDENTIFIED ON THE
COUNTYWIDE FUTURE LAND USE MAP. ADDITIONALLY,
STAFF REQUESTS AMENDMENTS TO THE FUTURE LAND
USE MAP AND MAP SERIES OF THE FUTURE LAND USE
ELEMENT TO SHOW THE RE-DESIGNATION OF THE 103
Page 100
April 12-13, 2011
ACRES TO THE IMMOKALEE URBAN AREA. (ADOPTION
HEARING) - MOTION TO CONTINUE UNTIL AFTER THE
IMMOKALEE CRA'S MEETING (TO INCLUDE THE AIRPORT
AUTHORITY) ON APRIL 20, 2011 AND BRING BACK TO THE
BOARD WITH RECOMMENDATIONS AT THE MAY 24,2011
MEETING - APPROVED
MR. OCHS: 8C is CP2008-5, petition requesting amendments to
the Immokalee Area Master Plan, the Immokalee Area Master Plan,
Future Land Use Map, to make revisions to the entire master plan to
include increases to commercial acreage, industrial acreage, and
allowable residential density, elimination of some existing
designations, creation of a new designation for the Immokalee
Regional Airport site, and redesignation of approximately 103 acres to
Immokalee urban area from agricultural rural within the Rural Land
Stewardship Area as identified on the countywide Future Land Use
Map.
Additionally, staff requests amendments to the Future Land Use
Map and Map Series of the Future Land Use Element to show
redesignation of the 103 acres to the Immokalee urban area.
And this is an adoption hearing, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
MR. OCHS: And the petitioner is here.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It will require four votes.
MR. OCHS : Yes, sir.
MR. MULHERE: Good afternoon. For the record, Bob Mulhere
here this afternoon representing the Immokalee CRA. There's a
number of CRA staff, including the executive director -- Penny
Phillippi is here, and a fair number of board members and interested
members of the public are here as well.
The slide that I have up on the visualizer now is -- indicates that
this is a six-plus- process. I think it's actually more like an eight-year
Page 101
April 12-13, 2011
process. But the current consulting team has been involved for just
slightly over two years.
We've had well in excess of 75 public meetings in this process
leading up to the point that we're at right now, which is -- as Leo
indicated, is the adoption hearing.
Just a little bit of background. The -- we did receive an ORC, an
Objection, Recommendation, and Comments report from DCA. It
was a relatively, I thought, favorable ORC. It had only two
comments. And being experienced with receiving ORC reports from
DCA, that actually was, I thought, a pretty good letter in that it didn't
have a lot of major issues.
The two issues that it did raise, we spent probably six months
communicating back and forth with DCA, in concert with staff, and
we believe that what you have before you resolves their issues as it
relates to that, and they've given us an indication as much as they can
without a formal response, that it does address their issues.
There are -- and so I thought, with your approval, I would not
have a lengthy presentation, but I would get into the three outstanding
issues that I think need some consideration by the board before
adoption.
The first issue is, at your transmittal hearing the topic of density
blending with respect to the environmental overlay within the
Immokalee Area Master Plan for properties that straddled the RLSA
and the urban area of Immokalee, they could avail themselves of
density blending.
There was testimony put on by a consultant on behalf of the
major landowner within that environmentally sensitive area, which is
the Lake Trafford/Camp Keais Strand Wetland Overlay System. And
at the Planning -- at the EAC, there was support to allow -- both at the
transmittal and adoption hearings, to allow the density-blending
provision to go forward as part of this plan.
The Planning Commission had concerns over the amount of data
Page 102
April 12-13, 2011
and analysis that had been provided relating to the impacts on the
RLSA with this potential additional acreage.
The board, at transmittal, said, we're going to -- we're going to
leave that density-blending provision in the plan for transmittal, but
you go and -- to the consultant on behalf of the property, you go and
collect some additional data and analysis and come back during the
adoption process, and we'll evaluate it at that point in time.
And that's what occurred. And the EAC still supported including
the density-blending provisions at their adoption hearing. The
Planning Commission did not support including those provisions.
The consultant is in attendance -- the consultant on behalf of the
major property owner is in attendance. If you feel that you need some
testimony from him, he is here.
I will say that staff was of the opinion that the additional data and
analysis did demonstrate that it was not a substantial impact on the
RLSA and still supported including the density-blending provision in
the plan and that the consultants for the CRA also support including
that. So that's one issue.
The other issue deals with the same area -- or the second issue
deals with the same area, but it deals with the preservation standards
that should be applied to that area, the Lake Trafford/Camp Keais
Strand Wetland System Overlay.
During the EAR, the most recent EAR process, the Planning
Commission asked staff to evaluate native-vegetation requirements
that would apply to the Lake Trafford/Camp Keais Strand System
Overlay, and staff did that evaluation. The problem was that there's a
reference in Policy 6.25 in the Conservation and Coastal Management
Plan Element that says that the preservation standards should be those
provided for within the RLSA provisions -- excuse me -- within the
rural fringe mixed-use district preservation provisions.
But there are several different provisions in that area, and it didn't
specify which one should apply to this land. There is neutral
Page 103
April 12-13, 2011
provisions which require a 60-percent preservation not to exceed 25
percent of the site -- or 45 percent of the site -- excuse me -- and there
are sending provisions that require between 80 percent and 90 percent,
depending on whether you are NRP A sending or just regular sending,
and the policy didn't state which one we should apply to this area.
So there is some confusion there. And staff felt it was important
to get that straightened out, and they did evaluate this area.
There are some differences between the sending lands and the
neutral lands in the rural fringe mixed-use district and these lands in
Immokalee. The major difference is that these lands in Immokalee are
in an urban area. Since they're in an urban area, they allow up to four
units per acre base density, whereas in the rural fringe mixed-use
district, the underlying zoning was ag., and those lands allow one
dwelling unit per five acres. So much lower density.
So when we look at a preservation standard and the impacts of
that preservation standard, there is some concern over -- applying an
80 or 90 percent preservation standard would not allow those property
owners, even in a clustering condition, to achieve that density.
So the staff recommendation was to apply the neutral standard,
which was 60 percent not to exceed 45 percent of the site.
And let me make sure I get this right. The Planning Commission
felt that that was -- that that would be okay if there was additional
analysis done in the next EAR-based process because there might be a
totally different standard that would be adopted that would be more
appropriate to this property.
I would defer to Carolina to add anything that I'm sure I forgot in
that area, but I just wanted to give you sort of a background as to how
we got to where we're at. Carolina?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Bob, one of the things I'd like to
do is swear in everyone who's going to be giving testimony today. So
will you all please -- all of you who are planning on speaking and
giving testimony on this item, please stand, raise your right hand, or
Page 104
April 12-13, 2011
both hands, and be sworn in.
Terri, go ahead.
(The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.)
MS. VALERA: Carolina Valera, Principal Planning with the
Planning Services Department. There was no need to swear in people,
but it doesn't hurt since this is a legislative matter. But it doesn't hurt
to do it.
As Bob mentioned --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I got a note from somebody that says,
swear them in. Who was it?
MR. KLATZKOW: Swearing in is good.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. See, County Attorney says
swearing in is good. Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, he just said swearing is good.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Oh. Well, I can manage that.
Okay, go ahead.
MS. VALERA: As Bob mentioned, the Planning Commission
felt that we needed a bit more analysis in terms of what percentage,
what is that percentage of native preservation will be appropriate for
these lands within the Lake Trafford/Camp Keais System Overlay.
We did -- after the Planning Commission, we did meet with the
Conservancy of Southwest Florida. We do have already a draft
language to bring back to you either during the EAR-based
amendments or the next GMP-cycle amendments. So we have already
worked on that, but, you know, we will ask you to please, you know,
let us know, or to direct staff to initiate those amendments.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Thank you.
MR. MULHERE: So that brings us to the third item and I think
probably one that is not as easy, I think, to resolve and will require a
little more discussion.
During the deliberation of development of the plan, one of the
issues that was discussed by the CRA and the Immokalee Area Master
Page 105
April 12-13, 2011
Plan Committee, which is no longer in existence but was at the time,
was the proliferation of nonconforming mobile homes both inside and
outside of mobile home parks.
Because a lot of land in Immokalee had a -- an agricultural
overlay -- or excuse me -- an agricultural zoning with a mobile home
overlay, there are a lot of sort of individual mobile homes that are in
some state of probably disrepair, and that was a concern, and then also
the fact that there were still nonconforming mobile home parks.
And as just some history, going back into even the '90s, the early
'90s, '93, there was a process adopted by the board that would allow
owners of mobile home rental parks to go through a process of --
nonconforming mobile home rental parks, to go through a process to
bring those up to various specific county standards and improve them,
and then they would become legal conforming uses.
Some mobile homes availed themselves of that process. Others
did not. And the process still exists today in the LDC. The
opportunity to go through that process still exists today in the LDC.
The discussion at the CRA and the -- and with the Immokalee
Area Master Plan Committees resulted in a policy that restricts the
location for any new, new mobile home rental parks or new mobile
homes in Immokalee to very specific areas, those subdistricts that also
allow residential uses. So it's very limited.
But having adopted that policy, we then needed to also adopt a
policy that dealt with existing nonconforming mobile homes and
mobile home rental parks, and that brought us to Policy 6.7, okay,
which is -- which is on the screen now.
And this was a little bit complicated, so it's broken down into
three separate concepts, the first being that existing mobile home
parks located on individual lots or parcels not within an approved
mobile home park or subdivision may continue in any subdistrict but
they may only be enlarged, altered, or improved under the provisions
of the existing Section 9.03.00, which is the county's nonconforming
Page 106
April 12-13, 2011
use and nonconforming structure language.
So basically that language ultimately wants these nonconforming
uses to go out of existence, but it provides for reasonable provisions
for them to continue to make repairs and alterations over a long period
of time.
Paragraph B deals with existing mobile home parks that have an
approved Site Development Plan or Site Improvement Plan. Those
ones that went through the process would then be allowed in all
subdistricts -- and here's the -- one of the problematic phrases. And it
says, "That allow residential development." It's been called to our
attention that a mobile home park that might have gone through that
SIP process that isn't in a residential district would have invested some
money and some time and some effort to go through that process and
really should then be allowed to continue subject to the
nonconforming, general nonconforming provisions of the code.
So one way to remedy that would be to strike through that -- that
last phrase there that says "that allow residential development" so that
they would -- if they went through and got an SIP or an SDP
approved, they can continue under the general nonconforming
provisions of the code.
Then we get to C, and it says, additionally, within two years of
the effective date of this policy, the county will amend the LDC to
extend the SIP process an additional two-year period and would allow
mobile home parks or subdivisions to go through that process but
only, again, only if they're within a residential subdistrict.
There was a lot of discussion over a particular mobile home park
that's owned by the Blockers, Jerry and Kimberly Blocker, that was in
an industrial zoning district and that was also the subject of some
litigation. I'm certainly not going to get into the legal issues. That
falls outside of my purview.
But there were a number of efforts during the process to make an
exception for that park to allow that park to go through the SIP
Page 107
April 12-13, 2011
process. And, in fact, at the transmittal hearing before the Planning
Commission, there was some exception language in the CCPC's
recommended transmittal language, which is the language that you see
under Option 2 there, which was specific to that mobile home park.
And part of the reason was, it's the only one that is zoned
industrial, so there was a unique characteristic of it that it's the only
nonconforming mobile home park zoned industrial out there.
Almost immediately after the Planning Commission's transmittal
hearing and before the board's transmittal hearing, this issue was,
again, raised at the CRA advisory board meeting, and there was a vote
taken to not support that language by a vote of 6-2.
And then ultimately at the board hearing, at the transmittal
hearing, this language was eliminated from the transmitted version of
the plan.
I know there are an awful lot of questions and an awful lot of
people who have information as it relates to this. I don't want to take a
lot of your time.
I hope that that's -- the issue now is both a general one and a
specific one. Let's start with the general one. Our -- my objective
here on behalf of CRA is to find a way to let the
eight-year-in-the-making Immokalee Area Master Plan move forward
with a -- at least four votes so that it can be adopted, and we are
certainly willing and able, standing here before you, to try to find an
option that will allow that to occur today.
And these two options that you have before you, with maybe
some tweaking, could result in, we hope, a vote to support the
Immokalee Area Master Plan and would address the concerns of this
property owner and maybe, with some tweaking, any property owner
who invested in the SIP or SDP process or who would invest in that
process during this now two-year window that they're going to have
once this is adopted.
That maybe doesn't cause nonconforming mobile home parks to
Page 108
April 12-13, 2011
go away as quickly as the CRA committee would have liked or maybe
as quickly as many people would like, but it does cause them to be
improved during -- through the SIP process to address any
health-safety issues and aesthetic issues, and that's certainly better
than what we have today, and they would still be subject to the general
nonconforming provisions of the code.
And we understand that, and if that can be resolved in a way that
can be supported with at least four votes, then we're prepared to work
with you today to cause that to happen.
These are our two suggestions. We know there are some issues
related to this. For example, you know, we may not have to be
specific -- in Option 2, we may not have to be specific as to the
Blocker property. We could be more general in that and just allow
any existing mobile home park located -- period. Not only within an
industrial use, but any existing mobile home rental park to go through
that SIP process, and that would address any private property concerns
that might -- that might arise.
Our intent was always not to impact or take away anyone's rights
in this process, and largely we did that, but I will tell you that in this
specific instance the committee was aware of that fact that they were
eliminating some rights and wanted to do that.
Now, moving forward, we have an issue here. We want to
resolve that issue. And I think -- and they -- and I think Penny agrees
-- Penny?
MS. PHILLIPPI: I do.
MR. MULHERE: She does -- that if we at least cause a
nonconforming mobile home park to adhere to the SIP process and
improve those standards, we will have gained something significant in
the process. So -- and I apologize for taking more time than I intended
to.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioners, do you want to
listen to the public speakers first, or would you --
Page 109
April 12-13, 2011
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Why don't we?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioner?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Just go ahead.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Just a question for Mr. Mulhere.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And I do too.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The policy you were speaking
about, Land Development Code, Section 9.03, that's in our existing
code; is that correct?
MR. MULHERE: The general nonconforming provisions, yes,
that's in the existing code.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: In the result of adoption of the
Golden Gate area plan, are we going to have Immokalee's own Land
Development Code?
MR. MULHERE: No. You will not have a separate Land
Development Code for Immokalee. We're presently working on and
just about ready to complete -- although we'll make some changes as a
result of this discussion, a -- basically a new overlay.
There are six or seven overlays in Immokalee, zoning overlays,
and what we're doing is combining them and then updating them. So
you're not going to have a new LDC, but you will have an enhanced
overlay document for Immokalee.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That will be inserted within the
Land Development Code?
MR. MULHERE: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. So that would still apply.
MR. MULHERE: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And that was my biggest
concern.
MR. MULHERE: Yes. We -- 9.0 -- nonconforming provisions
will still apply, yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah. Go ahead, Commissioner Coletta.
Page 110
April 12-13, 2011
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Bob, correct me if I'm wrong,
but I mean, isn't the general objective of this whole thing is to try to
get what the will of Immokalee wants as far as themselves, to be able
to come up with a plan that meets their own needs? Isn't that what the
process has been for eight years that we went through?
MR. MULHERE: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. Now, when's the last
time that there's -- was a meeting where the plan was specifically
discussed? I mean, we had the Planning Commission take some
things out and change some things around. We got feedback before
we transmitted originally, so we knew what they were looking for, and
we inserted things back in.
Now, there's no new guidance, am I correct, or is there any
guidance that you can --
MR. MULHERE: From the Immokalee Area -- from the CRA
committee?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, I guess the CRA and the
Immokalee Master Plan are almost the same group.
MR. MULHERE: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So, I mean, the CRA could step
in and say, okay, you know, this is the direction we'd like to see it go.
This is where I'm having some problem with the whole thing.
You know, like I told everybody many, many times in the past,
it's your plan. And the end of the day, you're going to be the ones that
are going to put it in place, and that's what I'm going to approve. I
might not agree with every item in the whole thing, I might not like
certain things of it, but the truth of the matter is, it should be the -- it
should be -- the Immokalee Master Plan should belong to the people
of Immokalee, people that helped draft it, eight years in the process.
N ow it's being altered again, and we're not getting that input back
from Immokalee.
I don't know about everyone else up here, but I would feel a lot
Page 111
April 12-13, 2011
more comfortable if we could put this off for two weeks and they
could call an emergency meeting of the Immokalee Master Plan -- or
not the master plan, the CRA, if they don't have a regular scheduled
meeting, and go through it and hand it back to us what they'd like to
see with these three or four issues that have been changed since the
time that it originally left Immokalee, at least get their guidance so we
know what we're doing.
MR. MULHERE: Well, I think that's certainly a very viable
option, and we would have no objection to that, although I'm sure, you
know, we'd feel better if we left here this afternoon with an approval.
But if it requires a short continuance --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, I can't be sure we're going
to hit the nail on the head. I mean, I'm hearing a difference of opinion
all over the place. At the end of the day, I'd like to have the -- what do
you want to call it, the quasijudicial government body of Immokalee,
the CRA, to be able to come forward and say, okay, judging by
everything that's taken place and everything we heard, you know, all
the facts that are out there, including the Planning Commission's
recent recommendations, this is our finding in these three or four
directions, and we'd like to have these things addressed at the meeting
to be able to make sure this is the will of what we're looking for, and
that's what I'll support.
MR. MULHERE: Okay. I mean, I think that's obviously the
board's decision, if that's their -- any direction or information that we
can carry back from you, of course, will help them.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: There's more than just the issue
of a trailer park. There's a couple of other issues, too, you stated
beforehand.
MR. MULHERE: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: What's the guidance? Has
anything changed since that last meeting they held in the master plan
where they came up with the guidance to give us before transmittal?
Page 112
April 12-13, 2011
MR. MULHERE: On those two issues -- I think on those two
issues we don't have any disparity, because the CRA advisory board
had recommended approval of the density-blending language.
They probably did not -- you're correct, they probably did not
specifically take any action or know of the preservation requirement,
but the landowners who have been impacted were in attendance at
these meetings, so --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I understand.
MR. MULHERE: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And today we're going to have a
number of speakers step forward, and they're going to tell us what
everybody wants. But once again, it would be wonderful to have the
CRA convene and be able to deal with this issue and come back with
some recommendations that will give us the true sentiments. I mean,
why are we going to go with certain political pressures up here at this
point in time to put things together in a way that we see advantageous
for us politically?
I think it would be best to hear from them, and whatever comes
back from Immokalee, just get behind it and say, that's it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Is your motion to continue this item until
the CRA can meet --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- Immokalee CRA can meet and
provide recommendations?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's correct, and then bring it
back to us, and then we'll go forward.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. That's a motion. Is there a
second?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Second by Commissioner Henning.
Commissioner Hiller, your light is on. Do you have anything to
address the motion, or is it something else?
Page 113
April 12-13, 2011
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I would like to address the motion.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Commissioner Coletta, you were
questioning, I guess, when this was last brought up, you know, why
there was a change, I guess, with respect to the mobile home issue.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Not really. See, the last time we
heard from the Immokalee Master Plan was back when they struck
that one provision out, 6.1.7.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: There's been nothing new since
then. Meanwhile, there's other considerations that they may want to
take into account in offers to their guidance. Because if we just act on
this -- if we put that in there, we're going to have certain parts of the
community saying, why weren't we consulted in a meaningful way
and other parts of the community will come out and say, you know,
yeah, it sounds like the right thing.
But I'd, one more time, just like to see it go back to the CRA and
get their guidance to move forward.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah, I would agree with you. I
think it does make sense. I have a lot of other issues that I would like
them to consider as well, that just being one of them.
But with respect to it going back to the CRA, I actually pulled the
minutes of when the change was made that, you know, obviously is a
concern raised by Mr. Mulhere today, and the one thing that I noted
that actually causes me some concern on how that happened is that I
believe we have the -- is the code enforcement officer here? Mr.
Snow? Is Mr. Snow here?
Mr. Snow actually is the code enforcement officer that is citing
these mobile homes with violations, and he's also sitting on the CRA
board. And I think that he actually was the one that recommended that
that provision be removed that is, you know, causing the concern, and
from my perspective, a very serious legal concern.
Page 114
Apri112-13,2011
And so I just -- I somehow feel that there's somewhat of a
conflict there with having the code-enforcement official also sitting on
the CRA board recommending, you know, the elimination of a process
to cure code-enforcement defects, and I would like to have the board
consider that when it does send this matter back to the CRA, that
maybe Mr. Snow could recuse himself from the debate, because I --
there is obviously an issue there that I'm concerned about.
MS. FLAGG: Diane Flagg, Code Enforcement Director, for the
record. Mr. Snow's participation with the CRA board is part of the
requirements of the CRA board when it was formed.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I was unaware of that.
MS. FLAGG: Yes. And I can send you that documentation if
you'd like.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I appreciate that. I was not aware
of that. But it just seems like such a fundamental conflict, you know,
to have him out there citing -- and it's nothing personal towards him.
It's just, you know, objectively analyzing the situation where, you
know, he's actually citing violations against these property owners and
then proposing the removal 0:[, you know, basically law that would
allow them to cure, and that concerns me.
MS. FLAGG: I'll send you those documents.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you. I appreciate it. I'd
love to see some way that maybe he could be removed from voting on
this particular subj ect while preserving his position on the board,
because I do believe there's a conflict there.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah. There is nothing that would
prohibit him from recusing himself.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Exactly. And that's what I mean.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: He could stay on the board and recuse
himself.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Absolutely, absolutely, and that's
what I mean. I want to clarify that. He shouldn't have to remove
Page 115
Apri112-13,2011
himself from the CRA advisory board. Just merely recuse himself on
this subj ect.
Can I -- if we are going to vote on this, can I mention just a few
.
Issues.
MR. MULHERE: That would be -- I think it would be very
helpful.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, I would suggest that maybe some
of the other commissioners have some points too. Would it be too
inconvenient for the commissioners if you were just to provide them
in writing to them, and we can incorporate that request into the
motion.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: The only reason I'd like to mention
it is for the benefit of the people here so that they know what my
concerns are. Sure, I can put it in writing, but I'd like to make sure
that the audience knows what I'm thinking as well.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Let's just try to expedite it.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And could I just ask, are we -- when
are we going to hear the speakers?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, we won't -- if we continue this,
you won't hear the speakers --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- because you want it to go through the
CRA. That's the intent of your --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, I have no problem hearing
the speakers if they traveled this far. They might want to give
guidance to the CRA.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah, but all the CRA representatives
are, perhaps, not here, and they'll have -- they'll have to do that at the
CRA meeting to get it on the official record for the CRA.
So why would we spend an hour taking public comment on
something we're not making a decision on today and have that
Page 116
April 12-13, 2011
comment be given to the CRA and then to us when we actually
consider it?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, you bring up a good point,
sir, but we've got to remember, we're still going to be voting on
something here.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I know, but we'll be voting on it the next
time.
All we're saying here, based upon your motion, is that we want to
gather the -- we want to follow the chain of command. We want to
push it back down to the people who came up with this thing in the
first place, get their recommendations, have them listen to the public
input, have them tell us what they want to do, then we have a hearing
as to whether or not we're going to adopt it, and we'll have people who
will then provide input to us at that point in time.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: County Attorney?
MR. KLATZKOW: Well, we're required to hear the speakers
when you're going to take an action item. This is not an action item.
This is a continuation. Having said that, if it's the will of the board to
hear them since they're here, there's three votes, so whatever the
majority wants.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yep. It's just you're going to be doing it
twice.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: May I make a suggestion?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Sure, go ahead.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I mean, judging by the fact that
we're going to be moving on to the CRA, most people may have the __
wish just to waive and to address it there, but why don't we give them
the opportunity to see if they'd like to speak to address our motion?
They might want us to do something more permanent and definite
today rather than just continuing it. That would be a suggestion, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Then why don't we hold off
making our concerns known to the CRA until we find out what the
Page 11 7
April 12-13, 2011
outcome is of our vote, which will come after the opportunity for
public input.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Let's call the first -- let's try to
clarify this. Whatever you tell us today, let's be frank, won't make any
difference, okay . We're not going to make a decision today . We're
merely going to vote on whether we send it back to the CRA, and
those are the people you need to be talking with at the time they meet
to revise their recommendations to us, and then it will come back to
us. And then if you want to speak to us, you'll have a chance to do it
then.
Speaking to us now probably won't do you much good. It might
make you feel better. If it's going to make you feel better, come up
here and talk to us, okay. If not, we'll go ahead and vote.
So why don't you call the first speaker, and we'll see --
MR. MITCHELL: We'll be using both podiums, so I'll call two
names, and if the people can come up. The first speaker is Marvin
Courtright, and the second speaker is Nicole Johnson.
MS. JOHNSON: I waive.
MR. MITCHELL: So we're looking for Jerry Blocker --
MR. COURTRIGHT: Commissioners, my name is Marvin
Courtright. I'm here to address the petition, CP2008-5, only to clarify
the status of the sixth line down which says that for the Immokalee
Regional Airport site, I -- and I'm going to start this out by
apologizing initially to Mrs. Phillippi and also to Mr. Mulhere.
MR. MULHERE: Bob.
MR. COURTRIGHT: Bob Mulhere. On occasion I have had the
experience of a heated discussion with you too, and if I was rude or
improper, I apologize. I also accept the fact that Ms. Phillippi made a
comment to me explicitly that -- "Marvin, you don't know what you're
talking about." She was right, and I want her to know that.
I tried -- I try to do my homework. Unfortunately, this item
Page 118
April12-13,2011
which is on the agenda today, I was at the Airport Authority meeting
yesterday. Noone mentioned the fact that this was going to be on the
agenda today. I feel that the Airport Advisory Board and our new
executive director should have at least addressed it or mentioned it.
And I'm only -- I have a few questions I'd just like to ask, and that's
all.
Number one is, who owns the 103 acres that is addressed here as
relative to the Immokalee Regional Airport?
MR. MULHERE: To the best my knowledge, that's owned by
Collier Enterprises or some entity thereof.
MR. COURTRIGHT: Thank you. That's as I expected to hear.
All right. What impact will providing your organization the 103
acres have upon the subject that was discussed yesterday at the Airport
Advisory Board for plans to extend the runway and to install flight
systems and, in general, the airport itself?
MR. MULHERE: Okay. Changing the land-use designation to
include this 103 acres into the Immokalee urban area simply allows
for -- if it is acquired by the airport, or Collier County, under the
auspices of the Immokalee -- of the Collier County Airport Authority,
that it could be then incorporated into the airport property, the airport
plan, and would -- and would then allow for that extension to occur.
The information I have been told is that that's necessary for that
runway extension.
MR. COURTRIGHT: So why is it hidden -- well, I shouldn't use
the word "hidden." Why is it in the middle of this particular item
without explanation of the direction you want to go with -- we're very
interested. The airport people, the community would like to see the
airport runway extended. We'd like to see a tower.
MR. MULHERE: What policy are you talking about? I'm lost.
MR. COURTWRIGHT: Well, this is the second time. The other
one was when I couldn't explain to you what the -- I'm done. You
actually answered the question.
Page 119
Apri112-13,2011
MR. MULHERE: Okay.
MR. COURTRIGHT: Who owns that land? And it's not the
airport, so I don't understand why this item isn't a separate entity
addressed individually. Why is it mixed in with the CRA?
MR. MULHERE: It's not really mixed in with the CRA. This is
the -- this is in a master plan for the community that the CRA has
been, really, directed to oversee the -- that process. But in reality it's
the Board of County Commissioners that will approve the Immokalee
Area Master Plan.
And part of the master plan process is to facilitate the expansion
or extension of that runway for economic development and for airport
reasons, aviation reasons as well, and in order to do that, this land is
necessary, and it required that the Comprehensive Plan designation be
changed so that it could be incorporated into the Immokalee Airport
PUD. And that's why the change. Nothing's hidden. I mean, it's been
discussed for at least seven or eight years that I'm aware of.
MR. COURTRIGHT: Is the airport supposed to buy that land?
MR. MULHERE: I don't know who's going to buy it. That
decision hasn't been made.
MR. COURTRIGHT: That's what I thought. Okay, thank you.
MR. MITCHELL: Jerry Blocker will be followed by Randy
Johns.
MR. BLOCKER: Hi, there. Jerry Blocker for the record. I
really have no problem with what everybody's decided to do today. I
think we can work together as much as we can and come up to a
resolution with this thing.
So I appreciate your concerns, and I would like to have the
chance to address these at the -- back at the CRA.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Jury of your peers.
MR. BLOCKER: Thank you.
MR. MITCHELL: Mr. Johns will be followed by Tim Durham.
MR. JOHNS: Randy Johns. I think that we can address this with
Page 120
April 12-13, 2011
the CRA, and I think Bob's right, with changing some of the -- in the
options, taking this residential use out of this and allowing it for all
jurisdictions over there to have these mobile homes to be able to come
into compliance, I think it will work well if they'll come to this
agreement. I think in Jerry's case he just hasn't been offered that
opportunity yet. And I think once that happens, we can settle this.
Thank you.
MR. DURHAM: Tim Durham waives.
MR. MITCHELL: Okay. Floyd Crews, and he'll be followed by
Michael Facundo.
MR. CREWS: He said everything I want to say, so thank you
all, both of us.
MR. MITCHELL: Michael Facundo.
MR. F ACUNDO: I would echo what Floyd Crews said.
MR. MITCHELL: Thank you. Bob Juster, and he'll be followed
by Carrie Williams.
MR. JUSTER: I'm Bob Juster. I represent the TMI building in
Immokalee, and I represent my partner, Walt Burdick. The reason I'm
standing up here is there are a number of us in Collier County
community/Naples Community that really care about Immokalee.
I just want to say, the purpose of my standing up here is the
importance of moving on and getting a decision on this master plan.
My partner and I have been involved in this process of the master plan
since 2005. We have constructed a 30,000-square-foot facility in the
Trademark -- Trade Port Technology Park, and we presently have
tenants in there such as the National Guard and the school district and
people of that nature, and we, fortunately now, have worked with the
CA T system, and we have the bus system coming in, but the point of
my bringing it up, my partner and I -- I'm just going to be straight up
about this.
My partner and I have invested $3 million of private money. We
really want our building to be a catalyst for growth in Immokalee.
Page 121
April12-13,2011
There are a number of people, NCF, just Sunday they're launching an
initiative of $8 million in Immokalee. Texas Roadhouse is coming to
Immokalee on Thursday, and they're launching an initiative. There
are an awful lot of people in the Naples/Collier County area that really
care about Immokalee.
And this master plan to us has -- really has to come to a decision
point so that it can move forward. We're all for moving forward.
And in closing, and it's a very selfish remark, I'm 75 years old.
My partner's 79 years old. We're running out of runway. We've got to
have a decision on this.
Thank you very much.
MR. MITCHELL: Carrie Williams, and she'll be followed by
Pam Brown.
MS. WILLIAMS: I'm Carrie Williams, and I'm on the CRA
committee, and I just wanted to say thank you for allowing the
opportunity to take it back to the citizens of Immokalee and getting
their input. Thank you.
MR. MITCHELL: Pam Brown? You're waiving. Okay. Fred
Thomas, and he'll be followed by Patrick White.
MR. THOMAS: You will give me the opportunity to do what I
got to do otherwise?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I sure will.
MR. THOMAS: Okay. Then I'll yield right now.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I'm going to call on him for something
special in a little bit.
MR. MITCHELL: Okay.
MR. WHITE: Waive.
MR. MITCHELL: And Patrick White's waived, okay.
Flavel Paul? I don't think he's here. Okay. He's waived. And
Pastor Jean Paul.
PASTOR PAUL: I think I'm doing the same thing.
MR. MITCHELL: Okay, thank you. And Marjorie
Page 122
April 12-13, 2011
Student-Stirling.
MS. STUDENT-STIRLING: Waive.
MR. MITCHELL: Sir, you've no more speakers.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. I would like to make a special
request for the new president of the Chamber of Commerce out in
Immokalee.
MR. THOMAS: Why don't you vote on the--
CHAIRMAN COYLE: No, no, no. We're going to hold that in
suspense.
Tell us about the annual harvest festival event in Immokalee.
He's promised me he'll do it in two minutes.
MR. THOMAS: Folks, we're trying to revolve, revive, the
old- fashioned harvest festival we have in Immokalee, and we're doing
it with a three-day event. Friday at the Seminole Casino in their event
tent we've having the queens contest. We've got several young ladies
that are competing and do everything you do in a beauty contest,
everything, talent, all kinds of good talent. One's a ballerina, et cetera.
The next morning our Commissioner Coletta will be riding in our
parade which will feature vehicles, automobiles from different classes
that will be judged and given trophies.
Classics will be 1939 and older; war time, 1940 to 1970; baby
boomers -- remember, I'm 72 so I'm before the baby boomers -- baby
boomers when they started driving between '71 and 2000; and then the
off-road vehicles, the big Immokalee Cadillacs, if you understand
what I mean, and other vehicles like that.
They're going to have the bounce house, entertainment all day
long on Saturday. It's going to be a wonderful affair for the whole
family, and there's going to be a fashion show put on by the tribal
members.
For you bikers and gamblers, there's going to be a poker run too,
poker tournament, on Sunday morning. You've got a big prize pool
that will be developed. In the poker run you'll go to three of our
Page 123
April12-13,2011
outstanding restaurants, Lake Trafford, and our drag strip. And while
you're at the drag strip, if you want to, you can race and get a trophy
for the fastest bike on the strip, okay, and then come back and
compete. The top 70 players will compete in the poker tournament.
We're trying to help people understand that not only can we be
the industrial hub to South Florida, we can be the tourist destination,
number-one tourist destination to South Florida.
And they forced me back in the seat of being the president of the
chamber again, so I'm going to be working hard to correct the
mistakes we've made in the past for not getting Jackson Labs, and so
we can have all this wonderful industrial, agricultural industrial, that
don't need fire, don't need police, don't need Parks and Recreation, and
put that money back in our coffers. We got to get back on that track.
Give it back to the CRA so they can bring it back to you and let us
roll. Okay, folks?
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thanks, Fred. Sounds like a lot of fun.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Now, Commissioner Hiller and
Coletta, your lights are still on. You want to turn them off?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, I wanted to mention some of
the things I'd like you all to discuss.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, go ahead.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: A couple of things. I mean,
obviously this issue about the mobile home, you know, residential,
SIP, all that good stuf:f, like we've already discussed, Bob, in our
previous meetings -- and if you need me to share those in more detail
with you, I can put that in writing.
The other thing is, I had a little bit of a concern about the
incentivization plan. And what I would recommend is that you really
look to incentivize development at the heart of Immokalee rather than
in, you know, that -- whatever you call it, water-flow area or whatever
Page 124
Apri112-13,2011
it's called.
MR. MULHERE: Oh, yeah. No, I agree.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I mean, it -- I don't know if that's
been changed, but I just think that you're going to get more bang for
your buck if you have -- you know, if you -- I mean, you'll keep
people out of the areas that you want to preserve by incentivizing
them to be in the areas.
The RLSA really hasn't worked well. I think, you know, if you
focus on downtown development, incentivize that, you'll be better off.
I also have some concerns about the road map. I met with, you
know, leading members of the community, like the, you know, new
leader of their Chamber of Commerce, and I think -- I think that you
really need to revisit the road design that's being proposed, because
right now the way the road is designed, all the traffic cuts through
downtown, and that's going to, I think, overburden you as you begin to
develop and grow the area. I don't think you're going to have the
capacity to absorb the traffic.
And what you really need is some sort of a road that circles the
community so that you basically, you know, create a hub as opposed
to dissecting the downtown and as a result, you know, bifurcating the
community.
I've got a little drawing here for you with some suggestions.
And, of course, you know, everything is subject to financial feasibility
and -- but if you'd like to take a look at it, I think --
MR. MULHERE: Yeah. I'll come up and get it.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- it does reflect, you know, the
will of some of the business leaders of the community.
MR. MULHERE: And we're aware of that, and there is a plan
for a bypass to go around Immokalee.
MR. THOMAS: Loop road, loop road.
MR. MULHERE: But it's -- loop road, excuse me. But the
funding is not there right now. So that had some bearing on what we
Page 125
April 12-13, 2011
showed on the master plan. But it's still-- there is a -- there is
currently a -- you know, a proposal for that to occur.
And as far as downtown, actually the long-term plan would be to
reroute all the truck traffic.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right. And I think that --
MR. MULHERE: And just -- and actually make a two-lane
roadway through Immokalee.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And that's kind of the concept that
I have there. I mean, that's the intent, to basically take that truck
traffic out of downtown, take the congestion out of downtown, and let
it, you know, really develop more as a business community. Does that
make sense, what you see in the drawing?
MR. MULHERE: It does, it does.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Do you want to put it on the board
so people can see it? Because there might be people who don't agree.
There might be people who agree.
MR. MULHERE: Well, it's talking about --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right. And this is -- and just so
you know, this is not my original idea. This is coming from the
business community representatives who feel that way.
MR. MULHERE: There's--
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKERS: Not all of us.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, no, I understand that. I know.
Oh, I understand that. I'm just --
MR. MULHERE: You know, we'll go back and we'll have that
discussion. But the issue has to do with as much financing and
funding than what you show on a master plan, because if we show this
stuf:f, then we get back into problems with DCA.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Sure. And I mean, that's up to
them to decide. I'm just throwing out some issues that have been
brought to my attention.
MR. MULHERE: And I'm sure Nick will talk to me later about
Page 126
April12-13,2011
that as well.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Are we finished? Commissioner
Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. Well, this has all been
very interesting. I'm glad you brought up something that nobody ever
thought of before. We've held so many meetings out there about
rerouting the traffic and coming up with it.
Nothing's new. It's something that we're working on as a
conceptual plan. We ran into some issues with the EP A. Still
working forward on it.
As people in Immokalee already know, I've been working on this
for a number of years with them. We've had numerous meetings, so
thank you very much for supporting our goals in Immokalee.
Now, everything you just heard, all the direction you were given,
take them under consideration and do what you damn well please. It's
your plan. You got to make it work in the end. Whatever you bring
back I'm going to support, and I don't want to change one thing on, so
do it right. Okay?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Is there any prohibition that I
attend the CRA meeting that they're going to discuss this at?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Other than the fact I'll already
be there.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That wasn't for you,
Commissioner Coletta.
I don't know when it is. But, County Attorney, is there any
prohibition for me to --
MR. KLATZKOW: No. You shouldn't speak at it. If you want
to attend as a member of the audience, just make sure John Torre
knows. We'll just notice it that way just in case.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That I'm going to be there. I
don't want any sharpshooter --
Page 127
April12-13,2011
MR. KLA TZKOW: That there may be multiple commissioners
present.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- know that I'm there.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All you have to do is notice it two or
more commissioners are likely to be there, without being specific. But
we want you all to know that Commissioner Henning is going to be
there.
MR. MULHERE: I'll give you the date and time, just for the
public as well then. It's on the 20th of April at 8:30 a.m. at the
Immokalee Career and Services Center.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
MR. MULHERE: Which is now called Southwest Florida
Works.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Will that be televised? Could it be
televised? Is there any way -- do we have our -- we can't have a
video?
MR.OCHS: Not live, ma'am. We could tape it for rebroadcast,
perhaps.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: It would really be nice, because I
know a lot of people work, and especially at that time of day, i:f, you
know, a lot of people can't be there, it might be -- or either that,
schedule it in the evening so people can attend after work, I mean, if
you want the community involved.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It's up to you.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'll be honest with you,
Immokalee's a little bit different than Naples. Everything's pretty well
centered. People show up for these meetings on a regular basis
because it's a short distance from their work.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So that's okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You're still going to have a good
turnout, and they can give comments ahead of time too.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Could they tape it so we could
Page 128
April 12-13, 2011
listen to it?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm sorry?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Could they tape it so we could
listen to it?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I have no problem with it if we
have the physical resources to do it, to tape it and play it back. I'm
sure everybody would be on their best behavior if we taped it.
It's -- the county manager, what do you think?
MR.OCHS: Certainly.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Good. All right. We have a motion on
the table. All in favor, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: 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 very
much.
MR. MULHERE: Thank you.
MS. VALERA: Commissioners, just one more item. We do
need -- and we will speak with the Department of Community Affairs
to let them know that we are working on just a few more issues to get
it -- and get them resolved, but I will please ask you to bring it back,
you know, for your consideration as soon as possible, meaning
probably the second hearing in May, given that the CRA meeting will
be on the 20th.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I would be willing to support the second
meeting in May. Can we do that, County Manager?
MR. OCHS: Sure.
Page 129
April 12-13, 2011
MS. VALERA: Oh, okay. Bob is saying that actually you will
save some money for the CRA since they will not have to readvertise.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Good. Commissioner Hiller.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. One more thing. Mr.
Courtright brought up a very good point, and that is the airport
advisory authority should have the opportunity to hear, you know, the
airport element of the plan so that they're able to be brought up to
speed on what's being proposed.
MR. KLATZKOW: I don't think--
MR. MUDD: We do invite them to every meeting. We'll invite
them to this meeting too.
MR. KLATZKOW: I don't think they're -- they don't meet as a
board for another month.
MR. MULHERE: We can invite them to this meeting, and--
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Then you would have to notice
that too. You know, John Torre would have to say that you have
members --
MR. MULHERE: Other -- members of other advisory board --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah, and like the Airport
Advisory Board, so that they can speak.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: I already notice that because we
have two or more members that are on the CRA board and --
MR. MULHERE: Okay. So what's being said --
MR. THOMAS: What she's saying is the CRA has so many
other board members on there that they notice, publicly notice, all
their meetings because we're also going to have some other people on
various advisory boards at the meetings in Immokalee. So that's going
to be taken care of when we do that.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Just to make sure the Airport
Authority, or the Airport Advisory Board is included.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
Page 130
April 12-13, 2011
MR. THOMAS: Commissioner Coyle, I'll see you this weekend.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You're going to have the Irish dancers
there? Good, okay.
MR. THOMAS: See you this weekend.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Are we ready?
Item #9F
AMENDMENTS TO ORDINANCE NO. 75-16, AS AMENDED,
RELATING TO THE MEETINGS OF THE COLLIER COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS THAT WILL
INTRODUCE RULES OF DECORUM AND CIVILITY - MOTION
TO AMEND MEETING ORDINANCE REGARDING
AGENDA/MEETING PROCEDURES AND COUNTY
ATTORNEY TO BRING BACK FOR REVIEW - APPROVED;
STAFF TO INCLUDE ON THE AGENDA CHANGE SHEET WHY
AN ITEM WAS PULLED, CONTINUED OR WITHDRAWN ON A
TRIAL BASIS; COUNTY ATTORNEY TO BRING BACK
RESOLUTION OF WHAT DEFINES A CONSENT AGENDA
ITEM FOR THE BCC TO UPDATE DUE TO THE AGE OF THE
CURRENT ONE
MR.OCHS: Yes, sir. That would take us back to Item 9 on your
agenda, 9F. It's a recommendation to discuss possible amendments to
Ordinance No. 75-16 as amended, relating to the meetings of the
Collier County Board of County Commissioners that will introduce
rules of decorum and civility, and Commissioner Henning brought this
item forward.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you. This item is not to
point any fingers at one commissioner, because I know that finger
pointing only points four back at myself.
Page 131
April 12-13, 2011
And also on the way down to the meeting today, I was listening
to Moody's radio station and thought about Matthews 7:3, so I'm not
going to be hypocritical of anybody.
This item on the agenda, the request of the majority of the board
present at a past meeting, that is why it's on the agenda.
Nor am I going to -- I want any -- any of this item on today's
agenda for any commissioner to have more power than any other,
because I know that it is a representative form of government.
N or do I want to limit any commissioner at any time with the
county manager, because I know this is against Florida law.
Nor am I going to ask any of my colleagues to swear on a Bible,
because whatever you state is your opinion.
And at the end of the meeting, members present agreed that I
would place this item on the agenda, and that's why it is on the
agenda.
Commissioners, you read the backup material on today's agenda.
It is my opinion that we don't need any more language to tell us how
to govern ourselves individually and as a representative of your
district, but I know that in the community there are several comments
on how we conduct ourselves, and that's really all I have to say.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Thank you very much.
Commissioner Coletta, you had distributed a one-way communication
indicating some things you wanted to discuss under this item. I think
you've got some good ideas.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, they're basically ideas. I
see that we have certain things here we could do better when it comes
to doing the people's business. Sometimes we have a tendency to get
bogged down without any controls in place.
And I sent you this ahead of time hoping you've had some time to
read it. I know there hasn't been a lot of time. This is one of the
things that's big to me is about notifying somebody ahead of time.
Page 132
April 12-13, 2011
Now, you haven't had a lot of notice on this, but at least I got it mailed
to you, like, the day before.
But if you go through this thing piece by piece -- and just for
discussion purposes to see where it's going to take us. One item that
needs to be resolved is how commissioner items are placed on the
agenda and commissioners' use of the county manager's staff time and
other members of the county staff on such items.
At the beginning of a board meeting, prior to the approval of the
agenda, commissioners can question any agenda item for clarity
and/or substance to promote passing such an agenda item. If a
commissioner recommends an item be removed from the consent
agenda, that item would have to be approved by a simple majority on
the regular agenda.
Flagler County meeting order of business states the following:
"Removal of an agenda item, any commissioner, the county
administrator, or county attorney may request that an item be pulled
from the agenda, and the commissioners shall vote by consensus
whether or not to delete the item from the agenda."
Now, the way this could be avoided would be simply to involve
staff in a meaningful way so that we can make sure that they're
prepared for it and possibly a position paper put along -- put out there
with it and enough backup so that we know what we're dealing with at
the beginning.
I mean, it's very disturbing to come to an item on the agenda and
try to second guess exactly where the item's supposed to take you.
And only the person that placed it on the agenda has the knowledge in
the direction they want to go. I think a lot more detail should be given
to that.
Also, staff time is a valuable limited resource that shouldn't be
nominated by -- dominated by anyone commissioner without the prior
approval of simple majority of the board.
Prior to eliciting the assistance of staff through the county
Page 133
April 12-13, 2011
manager, commissioners should seek approval from the board on all
issues that will require more than one hour of staff time. At no time
can the scope of work differ from what the board authorized by a
majority vote.
Commissioner aides do not work under the county manager and
would be exempt from this restriction. Staff time up to one hour can
be granted by either the county manager for his staff, or the CRA
directors, or the director of the Airport Authority, the MPO director, or
the BCC office manager for his resources.
And, of course, the reason for that, too, is to make sure that our
staff time is being utilized fully and truly what it is. Many times I
come to you beforehand and I tell you what my visions are and what
I'd like to do before I proceed to be able to make sure I can have staff
time for it.
Probably three out of four times you say yes, and one out of four
times you tell me to go away and leave you alone, and I do so
because, I mean, we're here to work as a group to come to some sort of
consensus on many different issues out there.
Chairman's protocol for the right of commissioners to have the
floor. The chairman should be authorized to interrupt a board member
who has the floor if the board member is being repetitive or if another
board member calls a question and receives a second.
Ambush debates by commissioners is strongly discouraged. That
is when a commissioner engages in a major discussion point without
first conferring with the appropriate staff to first get an answer to the
question and/or preparing a position paper that will accompany the
agenda item so that all board members and interested parties may
prepare in advance.
Time availability of information. Information that comes to the
commission's attention too late to provide advance notice to other
board members and interested persons may be considered at the
discretion of the board, or the agenda item may be continued so that
Page 134
April 12-13, 2011
such information could be reviewed in advance of any discussion on
the item. Even today we were receiving things; people handed it to us
across the dais.
Board member swearing in by court reporter. Now, this may be
contentious, but I still think we need to consider it. Each official
board member (sic) will commence with the board member being
sworn in by the court reporter. I remember somebody brought this up
to me before. They wondered why we were swearing them in when
we weren't sworn in.
It is recommended that the ethics ordinance be amended so that
any knowingly or willful material, false, fictitious or fraudulent
statements made during an official meeting of the board may subject
the offending board member to a fine not to exceed $500,
imprisonment in the county jail for a term not to exceed 60 days, or
both fine and imprisonment.
Setting of the agenda. Once the agenda is set on the Wednesday
afternoon immediately prior to the next scheduled board meeting, an
item may only be moved from the consent agenda after discussion at
that scheduled meeting with approval by a majority of the Board of
County Commissioners.
So you'd have to get some justification to be able to move it.
And I'm sure that if we've seen enough concern in it, probably most of
the time we wouldn't have a problem, rather than just arbitrarily
moving it when nothing more than a simple question would suffice.
Too many times we've seen it where the question that's asked--
and a couple questions asked could have easily been answered by
staf:f, and they just -- a person either didn't take the time or they
weren't listening when they asked the question.
So there you have it. For what it's worth, that's my suggestions,
my thoughts, and I'd like to hear yours.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. First of all, I think -- going
Page 135
April 12-13, 2011
to the issue of the consent agenda, I think the board has historically
used the consent agenda to avoid public debate of items that deserve
public debate, and that's unacceptable.
The consent agenda isn't something that is supposed to catch
everything, and only by exception should things be put on the regular
agenda. The consent agenda is supposed to be for minor issues, issues
that aren't of a material financial concern. For example, recurring
items like, for example, if you have a lease and the lease recurs year
after year and you have to, you know, ensure that you want to renew
that lease for the next year. That's the kind of thing that goes on the
consent agenda where it's not being rebid or anything like that.
So, really, the description that you have in your paper,
Commissioner Coletta, is actually backwards to the way things are
supposed to be done.
The nonmaterial, minor items that are not deserving of public
debate are placed on the consent agenda, and everything else is
supposed to be on the general agenda.
With that, the decision as to, you know, the -- getting permission
to put things on the general agenda and limiting it to approval in the
way that you're describing basically is preclusive of representative
government. I, as a commissioner, who, you know, represents my
constituents, as you do yours, may want to bring something forward
that's, you know, very important to my district, and now all of a
sudden I can't bring it forward because you're going to subject me to a
vote. That's just not an option.
With respect to staff time, there's a clear statute on, you know,
what the rights of individual commissioners are with respect to staff
time, and I specifically cite 125.74, Subsection 1, Subsection C, and
that is that we can -- we have the individual right to request the
information of the county administrator and his staff to the extent
necessary for us to make an informed decision, and to limit our ability
to get the information from staff or for the county manager not to
Page 136
April 12-13, 2011
provide that information or to provide it selectively goes directly in
the face of statute.
With respect to cutting off debate basically where you're
suggesting that if a board member calls the question and receives a
second, that debate should be cut off, that violates Robert's Rules, and
Robert's Rules govern us.
In fact, you need, in effect, a supermajority vote to cut off debate,
not a, you know, three-man vote as was exercised in the past when an
attempt was to -- when an attempt was made by this board to cut off
my ability to speak on an issue where I had a differing viewpoint.
In fact, Robert's Rules provides for two rounds of debate, ten
minutes apiece in each round. And I don't think we should do anything
to limit any board member's right pursuant to Robert's Rules to fairly
debate any issue which comes before this board.
The public has the right to hear our representative positions, be
they for or against whatever is presented.
With respect to preparation, you know, and providing supporting
information or a position paper, there are many issues which, you
know, don't require a position paper, and there are many issues where
the information has already been reviewed by this board, and I've
noted, you know, Commissioner Coyle has presented items where
there's nothing, you know, behind the one sentence he has and, quite
frankly, I really don't have a problem with it.
In terms of timing, there really is a problem with, you know, the
timeliness of getting things on the agenda and making that agenda
available to the public. I actually have a concern that the agenda
comes out so late that the public doesn't have the time to inform
themselves of what's going on.
And, you know, maybe we've got too much on these agendas and
maybe, you know, the agendas need to come out earlier with the
backup so the public has the right to review it and come and talk to
staff and come and talk to the commissioners.
Page 137
April 12-13, 2011
You know, releasing the agenda on Thursday with the meeting
being Tuesday morning doesn't give the public really any opportunity
to set up meetings and come and talk to us and address their concerns
and have us represent them accordingly. So I really do have a problem
with the timing but in a very different fashion.
And the other thing is, there doesn't seem to be a consistent
cut-off when things get on the agenda. You know, if the cut-off is
Wednesday -- you know, I was told the cut-off is five o'clock. Well,
you know, I'm anticipating to turn something in at four because I have
meetings in the morning, and something has come to my attention in
that particular day, and all of a sudden I find I can't do it.
I think there needs to be a consistent hour of the day and that it
shouldn't be some floating hour but rather, you know, if we're going to
cut it off at four in the afternoon on Wednesday -- I actually think it
should be earlier, say, the week before, say -- or Monday, say, four
o'clock Monday. That gives the public, you know, an entire week to
vet their concerns. That's certainly a much fairer approach in the
interest of the public's right to know.
With respect to swearing in, well, I think everybody should be
sworn in. I think staff should be sworn in. If we're going to go the
route of swearing in, if we're talking perjury here and if we're saying
that, you know, whatever is being presented is material to our
decisions being made and we're all relying on it, then I think staff
should be sworn in, I think the public should be sworn in, I think we
should be sworn in. I mean, if we're going to take it to that level,
there's nobody above the truth and, quite frankly, it's -- that is really a
debate in and of itself.
So as I said, you know, with respect to your last item, setting the
agenda -- and I addressed that a little earlier, should be a time-certain,
should be well ahead. The consent agenda -- oh, another point about
the consent agenda. I'm finding things, you know, show up on the
consent agenda in the last minute where, you know, had I known, I
Page 138
April 12-13, 2011
would have maybe pulled that item and put it on the regular agenda,
but because I, you know, received the finalized agenda with a consent
already set, you know, I basically have lost my right to pull something
without a vote. That's just not an option. That's just not an option.
We -- you know, we really want to preserve the ability to have
the review of what's on consent before the agenda is finalized so we
can recommend to the county manager if we'd like it moved. But,
again, it goes back to, you know, the definition of what should be on
consent, and consent should not be for material items. So, you know,
that issue of whether something should be on consent really should be,
you know, very insignificant.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Coletta, were you
next?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, sir.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Oh, can I mention one last thing?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I mean, obviously, if we're talking
about amending the ordinance, you know, after -- if we go through all
of this and decide somehow the ordinance needs to be amended, then I
think, you know, we would have to, you know, proceed along the
direction for any, you know, formal ordinance amendment, that we
can't do anything with respect to any of this, you know, without a
formal hearing.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Of course.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Coletta, were you
next, or was that Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I was just saying the word "of
course" to the last statement. But no, go ahead. I spoke earlier, but I'll
speak again later. Commissioner Henning was next.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And -- well, Commissioner
Fiala, you don't mind?
Page 139
April 12-13, 2011
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, you're first.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. The -- Commissioner, I
-- Coletta, I don't know who helped you put this together, but I want to
point out the first item that you mention about removing items from
the agenda quoting Flagler County states, "Any commissioner or
county administrator or county attorney may request the item be
pulled from the agenda," and this will be voted on by a consensus of
. .
commISSIoners.
What you're turning that information around is a commissioner
cannot remove an item from the consent agenda and put it on the
regular agenda. So I mean, it really doesn't -- it doesn't match up. But
I know that whoever helped you with that was trying to put it on the
consent.
It was just like last night. I received an email from a constituent
that had a concern on the consent item. After I looked at the concern
and looked at the consent item, I agreed with that constituent, and it is
on the regular agenda. So that refers back to your last item, which the
agenda is set on Wednesday afternoon. Immediately prior to the next
scheduled board meeting, the item may only be moved to the consent
agenda or continued to a future agenda after discussion of a scheduled
meeting and approved by the majority of the board.
Sometimes, like Commissioner Hiller stated, the public doesn't
get to review -- Nicole -- the item until Thursday. Nicole sends me an
email-- no, that's after Wednesday. So I want to address -- have the
opportunity to address Nicole's concerns.
And as far as staff time, that doesn't belong in the County
Commissioners' meeting ordinance. If you want to put it in there, it
needs to be put into the county manager's ordinance. But as
Commissioner Hiller pointed out, it's against state law.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah, it is. Totally against state
law.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You know, and my last --
Page 140
April 12-13, 2011
COMMISSIONER FIALA: What's--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It's against state law.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: To?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: To limit a county
commissioner's ability to learn about things dealing with the county
government, and that is in the front page, Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, I have your stuffhere, but--
and I was just searching for Lee County where they do have a time, so
I was just --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I will cite you the -- you want
me to cite you the Florida statute?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, that's all right.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. And the last thing --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: If you don't mind, I'd like it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Let's see. I put this in --
down on a piece of paper. Florida Statute 125.75, the county
administrator's powers and duties, parens 1, C, provide the board or
individual members thereof, upon request, with data or information
concerning county government and to approve in advance
recommendation of the county government operations to the board.
So individual members has the right to ask questions about county
government.
And, you know, it doesn't say that you have to do it within an
hour. It doesn't say that at all. It might take less than an hour; it might
take more than an hour. But I think we were elected to address -- we
were elected to represent the people, and if it takes -- whatever time it
takes is whatever time it takes.
But looking at this -- and one person did comment to me that -- I
don't know how they got it last night -- that this appears to be an attack
on Commissioner Hiller of her questioning. And in my opinion, if we
start addressing these by making law, there will be ramifications by
doing this. That's my only personal opinion and opinion of somebody
Page 141
April 12-13, 2011
I talked to last night, so --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Go ahead.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: First of all, it's been mentioned here
first that the meetings were too long and then there wasn't enough
time, then people didn't have enough time to question or they should
get their advance work done. I, for one person, feel that I would not
want to drag everybody's time on and on and on if I can get my
questions answered beforehand, and then I can bring out any concerns
I have. Once I've done all of my homework, once I've done all of my
research, you know, that to me is very important.
One of the things that we've found, especially if -- and I'm sorry
to just put the finger on you for a minute, but I just have to do this.
One day you went on for about 45 minutes, and somebody told me,
they said, after the first ten minutes, I didn't hear anything else
because it went on for so long. And that is true. I didn't mean to
example you, but that is what happens.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Did I speak for 45 minutes?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, oh, yeah.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Or was I asking questions?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You know what, after a while we
lost but--
,
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Hiller, don't interrogate
her. Let her speak, please. That's one of the problems we have.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: When you go on too long -- when
you go on too long, actually, you lose the interest of the audience. I
don't care whether you're at a speech -- that's why whenever you go
out to give a speech to a group, you try and keep it to 20 minutes.
Page 142
April 12-13, 2011
You don't want to say anything any more than that, because you lose
them. That was one thing I wanted to say.
I personally believe in preparing in advance because -- for the
sake of efficiency. That's my own personal belief. I think that that's
important.
I think that we were talking about decorum and, you know -- and
also civility. One of the things that we need to be -- that we need to
keep upmost in our mind, in my opinion -- in my opinion, is respect.
We should always treat each other with respect.
We should never be sarcastic to one another, and we should
never be name calling. We should never make accusations and --
because that's not only unkind, but that isn't even productive. All it
does is incite people.
And what's happened to the people in our audience right now is,
they've gotten very disgusted with us, very disgusted with the
demeanor that we have reduced ourselves to, and that's pretty sad. We
don't need sarcasm; we don't need demeaning remarks.
I think we can conduct business in an upright and honest fashion
and treating each other with respect and with civility and be
considerate of each other at all times. These, to me, are things that we
should be considering all the time.
We should never try and play gotcha. We should never try and
hang somebody out to dry. I mean, that isn't -- what do you
accomplish by that? Maybe you can beat your own chest, "Look what
I've done," but it really hasn't been productive, and it really doesn't
help anything.
So as we talk about civility and decorum, I think that, in my
opinion, that's something that we should most certainly do. And I try
and treat each one of you with respect always. I don't ever want to
treat anybody in any other way, and same with our staff. Our staff
members deserve that, deserve respect and consideration.
And so that's my speech for this moment.
Page 143
April 12-13, 2011
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Do I get a chance?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, you do, sir.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You sure do.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I think we do need -- I think we do need
some changes to the way we conduct the business here. One of the
overriding issues is that we should, of course, do it in a way that is
transparent and in a way that communicates as much information as
we possibly can to the public, and that certainly hasn't occurred in a
number of cases.
So what I would suggest -- and I don't believe this would, in any
way, limit the commissioners in their ability to perform their jobs. I
think it would substantially enhance it, and it would enhance the
efficient, expeditious accomplishment of our service to the public.
And Commissioner Coletta's comments on some of these, most
of these, are right on target, and to bundle them all together and say
that nothing should be on this agenda without adequate backup for the
public, the staff, and the other commissioners to review in advance --
when these -- the agenda goes to print on Wednesday afternoon, it
should contain all available information associated with any topic that
any commissioner wants to put on the agenda. That gives the other
commissioners an opportunity to read the backup material, become
informed, and be prepared to reach a resolution and make a decision
when it comes up for debate.
It permits the staff to prepare and provide commissioners with
appropriate information and staff recommendations if they're asked.
It serves no purpose to come into this chamber and throw a bunch
of stuff at the staff or at other commissioners when they're not
forewarned, they're not prepared to respond. No decisions can be
made, so it just lingers there and we have to have another meeting to
resolve the issue. That is highly inefficient, and it serves no purpose
whatsoever.
So I would like to ask for the board to make it very, very clear
Page 144
April 12-13, 2011
that when we put something on the agenda, and when the staff puts
something on the agenda, all available information should be available
as backup in the agenda, and we shouldn't be hit with information at
the very last minute before we have a chance -- when we don't have
sufficient chance to consider it.
Our job, after all, is to fully evaluate each of those issues in
public, in a public hearing, and let the public know what decision
we're making and why, and we can't do that when we have these
ambush kinds of presentations.
So -- and that pretty much would cover probably three of the
items; it would solve three of the issues that Commissioner Coletta has
suggested in his memo. And I would strongly recommend that we
adopt those changes, if necessary, by ordinance to make sure that
these agenda packets are properly assembled and information
provided to the public and everyone else.
Yes, Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, sir. I'd like to second your
motion.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I went out of order. I should have called
Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Oh, forgive me. Call
Commissioner Henning.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So to summarize what you're
saying is when a commissioner brings something on the agenda, bring
information to read?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Backup information.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Backup information.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yep.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Similar to the census
information?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I don't know.
Page 145
April 12-13, 2011
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, the item that I had about the
census bureau and the count in the county?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah, that was fine.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's an example of it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah. That was an example, a good
examine, of what we should do.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: But there was more information.
I just -- it just kept on coming.
To our best ability, to have all that backup information ahead of
time so we have a -- an idea what the item is about and a clear
direction where we're going to go.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Not just we, but the public, because it--
those agendas are available to the public.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And we need to communicate that
information to everybody as early as we can, and Wednesday evening
is sort of the cut-off, because that's when we start making copies of all
this stuff.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And my last question.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Klatzkow, do you think
that's appropriate to put that amendment into the meeting ordinance?
MR. KLATZKOW: You can do that. It's all board policy. You
can do that by ordinance; you can do that by resolution. It probably
fits best in the ordinance itself.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
MR. KLATZKOW: But--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I'll make that motion that
we amend the ordinance for items on agenda, have as much backup
material as possible in a clear executive summary, not only for the
board, but the public and the staff.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Executive summary and backup
Page 146
April 12-13, 2011
information ifbackup information is available and appropriate. I
mean, it's not -- it would not be adequate to just write an executive
summary in a very, very vague and abbreviated manner so that people
don't know what you're talking about.
People should be -- come here to this meeting prepared to debate
the issue. They shouldn't come here and have things sprung on the
public and the board and then take another meeting to have an
appropriate response prepared. We need to make sure that staff is
prepared to answer our questions, and they can't be prepared to ask
(sic) our questions if they don't know what the questions are.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. And I think we're saying
the same thing.
MR. KLATZKOW: Yeah. I think I understand. I just --
sometimes these things happen in a very quick manner, and like I was
dealing with Commissioner Henning and these things were going back
and forth, so not everything did hit the agenda.
Do you want to give yourselves the discretion to just -- if
something pops up, just to waive it with three votes so you can hear it?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes, we should always have the ability;
if something comes up that is of sufficient importance and we don't
think that we are depriving the public or the staff of important
information, then we should have the ability to put it on the agenda.
But too often it has become sort of a practice to come in here and
ambush somebody.
So that's -- I think that sort of thing would solve a lot of the
problems we have with respect to conflicts.
Now, I would be remiss if I didn't bring up one other item which
is clearly going to be a bit contentious, because it happened just a few
moments ago.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We don't have a second to the
motion.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We do. Yes, we do.
Page 147
April 12-13, 2011
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I was waiting for an
opportunity. Go ahead, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Oh, that's right. I'm talking too much.
Go ahead. Let's get that motion--
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You're doing a fine motion.
And, Commissioner Henning, you're on the right direction,
exactly what I'm thinking. And you are too. You've got to have the
ability to be able to accept new evidence as it comes forward where
everybody says, okay, under these circumstances, we realize this is
important, and because of the fact it's late for this reason, by all
means, let's enter that into the discussion.
But rather than all these handouts coming at the last minute --
there's no way on God's earth you can read four or five pages while
you have the person in front of you. Meanwhile, you've got the
documentation in front of you so they can always claim later, well,
they had the documentation. They didn't read it. It's not my fault.
They did have it in their possession.
So we have to be very careful at all times to make sure when we
do receive something, we understand what we're receiving, and that
gives us the ability to be able to accept something or deny it.
If anybody walks in here and you know they could have been
better prepared and they drop something on the dais going up and
down that's a hundred pages deep, we can refuse to accept it or
continue the meeting till -- that part until another future meeting we
have time to absorb everything. Just a better way of doing business.
If you take this into consideration in your motion, then I'm there
with you, and I'll give you a second.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I mean, that was already -- that
was already said. But we have stuff given to us by the public and staff
all the time.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And if you start boxing yourself
Page 148
April 12-13, 2011
into a corner, it's -- it's going to be contentious. But I hear you. I don't
like those things either. Some of the things that you -- we just need to
accept, that we're going to get stuff ahead of time.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah, I think -- yeah, you're right. I
think we can make common-sense interpretations of that.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You got it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: If something -- if staffs comes up with
something last-minute, you know, okay we accept it. We don't need
to chastise them about it, but we don't want people intentionally
withholding information. We want it to be available in this book
which is available for public review. And if you want to vote on that
now --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, just one thing. Of course,
the county attorney is going to go back and refer to the ordinances to
find something that already has worked someplace, I'm sure of that,
and we'll be able to view it again --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- to be able to come to some
logical decision.
Do you have enough information on this one particular item?
MR. KLATZKOW: Yes, I understand this one. I think I
understand the direction. Of course, we're not going to advertise the
ordinance. We're going to come back to you for your review of it, and
then it will be modified, then we'll advertise.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And you've got a motion and a
second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Then all in favor of the motion.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, just a minute.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Oh, I'm sorry.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You were going to say something
else.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I was, but I didn't want to interfere with
Page 149
April 12-13, 2011
this motion. If we can get this motion passed, then we can go on to
another motion.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, okay.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: If you'd like -- which might fail.
Okay. So all in favor of this motion, please signify by saying
aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. It passes unanimously.
Now, I was going to go on and say two other things. One is, I'm
not here, and I don't think the others are here, to try to demonstrate
how smart we think we are. I -- I go to great pains to get my questions
to the staffby email before this meeting certainly no later than Sunday
night and -- so that I don't have to take up the time of this board to
answer questions that I can get answered.
And I would -- I can't see putting this in an ordinance, but I
would just make the request of the board members to please do that. It
bogs things down when we spend a lot of time asking the staff
questions about something that we could have gotten answered before
we ever came into this meeting.
And for that reason, you know, I don't even mention those things.
If the staff has answered my question adequately, the issue never
comes up again for me. It's done. It's solved. I know what it is.
Now, the other thing that I was going to bring up was that a
comment was just made that we have used the consent agenda for the
purpose of avoiding debate on things of great importance. Now, that
might be an opinion of someone, but we can't let that statement stand
Page 150
Apri112-13,201l
as fact because it is -- fact is untrue.
We go to great lengths to make sure that we give as much public
information as we possibly can. And the evidence of success of that is
demonstrated by the fact that we seldom have anyone in the public
who wants to talk about something that is on the consent agenda. It is
very rare that anybody has a concern with anything on the consent
agenda. Even the commissioners commonly will only pull from the
consent agenda one or two or three items, and I think we should
continue to let the commissioners do that.
But there is no -- no attempt to slip things through in the consent
agenda because we want to conceal it. That simply isn't true. And if
we took time to debate everything that was in the consent agenda, we
would have to plan these meetings for four or five days in length, and
I doubt seriously if there'd be anyone out there who would want to sit
through that and listen to it.
We try to do things efficiently, and I think we've been very, very
successful at doing that in the past.
But we must find a way -- without getting really contentious, we
must find a way of confronting these kinds of remarks and accusations
and correcting them so that the public doesn't think that that's the way
we do business. And that has been a problem now for six months, and
I hope that it will go away, but it may not. And if it doesn't, I think
we're going to have to consider some of the other suggestions that
Commissioner Coletta has recommended.
So I would be very much in support of that. And -- but at the
present time, I think I've gone as far as I want to go. But I think we
should take a good look at your recommendations concerning willful
material, false, fictitious, and fraudulent statements. That's something
I think we might want to keep in mind as we go forward.
So -- nevertheless, now we've got a whole board lit up. They
want to talk. So, Commissioner Fiala, you get to go first.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. Thank you, because I wanted-
Page 151
April 12-13, 2011
to follow you. You'd mentioned about emailing your questions and so
forth, and I think that that's very important, because by emailing our
questions to staff members in advance, everything becomes a matter
of public record. So no matter what questions anybody has
afterwards, they can ask for public-records request, and it's all right
there. It's not done in private or anything. It's all in writing, and
anybody can obtain them, as long as you use your county computer, of
course, and -- which is something I always do.
And so I think that that was something great to say, as well as the
consent agenda. Heck, our meetings are lasting so long now as it is.
If we -- if we didn't have our consent agenda to absorb some of these
things that are minuscule, you know, code-enforcement cases and
satisfaction of liens and, you know, and so forth, my goodness, we
would go on forever and ever, and that was the reason for the consent
agenda in the first place.
Now, I don't know about anybody else here, but I read the whole
consent agenda. I always know what's going on there. Not only that,
we get it in advance, because they start preparing this thing well
before it goes to the printer.
So if anybody -- and we can all find it right in our iPads, what's
being planned for the agenda and so forth. If we don't like something,
we can always ask the county manager about it. If we still don't like
it, we can still say, pull it, put it on the regular agenda, before it's even
gone to print or anything. So those are ways that we can deal with it
and still try and improve the efficiency and timeliness of our meetings.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. I do believe we probably
accomplished a lot today, just having the discussion, an open
discussion.
One of the things, though, like pulling an item from the consent
agenda, when the staff pulls it, they usually give some sort of remark
Page 152
April 12-13, 2011
why it was pulled and some consideration of it. Wouldn't it serve us
well if an item's going to be pulled from the consent agenda, that we
would get some prior notice from the commissioners just
for-your-information one-way communication?
I'm pulling this item because I have concerns over dadada,
dadada, and staff was unable to answer those questions. And then,
fine, now we come into the meeting. We know what we're supposed
to be looking for and what we're supposed to be able to deal with, and
so does the public. The public's not sitting out there saying, okay, I
wonder why this item was pulled. What part of it did they object to?
I might object to the same thing, and they might not be able to sit here
through the whole meeting to wait to hear about it.
But if we could have that ahead of time, and then we'll know
everybody did due diligence, that you have contacted staff and it
wasn't a simple yes-or-no answer or how many widgets were in this
place or that. We've got something to be able to work with, and we
can all go forward totally prepared.
And let's forget at this point in time of trying to remove items
that people pull from the consent agenda and put it back, and let's just
come up with an understanding rather than even putting an ordinance
together, that from here on forward, if we're going to pull something
from the consent agenda, we'll state the reason why, hopefully in an
email well in advance so staff can be prepared or, like Commissioner
Henning said, information coming in at the very last moment and you
want to pull it up here on the dais, and when you pull it at that time
saying, this is the reason why. I got a constituent and they stated these
particular facts are a great concern to them, and I'm pulling it for that
reason. Okay. We're all fine with the world. We can go forward. We
know what we're dealing with. Can we agree to that?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah. Does anybody have --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah--
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- without making a motion and
Page 153
April 12-13, 2011
second?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Anybody have objection to doing that
just as a practice?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, I think that's a good idea.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You have objection to it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Sure, yeah.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Sure, you have an objection to it?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You don't have to give -- you don't want
to give a reason as to why it's being pulled?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, because the statements here
were not factual, and let me tell you why.
I had a concern on pub- -- the summary agenda on public
utilities, and all of a sudden staff pulled that item. Now, it wasn't
explained to anybody why it was being pulled and continued. Nobody
knew that. The--
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Wouldn't you like to have that
explanation, though, from staff?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Why?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Why?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I mean, it's coming back. Why
would you want to -- you're going to be hearing an item when we're
going to vote on the item. Why would you want to discuss it twice on
the agenda? A lot of times things can be addressed real quick during
the discussion of that item, but now you want to talk about it twice.
The second thing is -- the second thing is, and more important,
about the consent agenda. I know for a fact -- and this has been
verified by our staffs in the County Commissioners' office, when
certain commissioners have a concern about an issue, other
commissioners know that concern in advance and discussed in private
meetings. That doesn't allow transparency. Those items of concern
Page 154
April 12-13, 2011
should be brought up in the public and discussed in the public.
And let me tell you one last thing. I have asked questions of
staff, and those questions or concerns got back to land-use attorneys.
Now, I was talking to that staffmember, not a land-use attorney. So
I'm going to govern myself accordingly so we can get, you know, the
truth, and don't try to stifle a conversation to get a consensus what we
should be doing for the public.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Let me try to clarify something.
There might be a misunderstanding.
At least my thought was that on this agenda change sheet that
when somebody wants to pull something from the consent agenda and
place it on the regular agenda, that they would mention why here, not
privately or anything else, but here, and we get that when we come in
here. So we're not going to debate it at -- twice. We're just going to
see it and treat it just the way we did today when we said -- it says that
-- Commissioner Henning's request, and three things were actually
continued, and other things were moved from the consent agenda.
If someone said, Commissioner Henning's request because of
concerns about the cost or the method of procurement or something
like that, that would be helpful to us all. But you find that
objectionable?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That isn't what was stated just a
few minutes ago. And I appreciate you using me as an example, but
the example that I brought that was on the consent agenda was
continued by staff. Are you saying staff is to --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Absolutely--
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, absolutely.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- to do that?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Exactly.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I'd like to know why staff continues
things. I'd like to know whether it's because of an advertising
Page 155
April 12-13, 2011
problem, whether it's because sufficient information or incorrect
information was provided or, in one case that I think I'm familiar with,
it was because something wasn't completely staffed and they figured,
hey, maybe this isn't the time we ought to be debating this. We ought
to finish staffing it properly.
So that would be helpful to all of us, I think, to know those kinds
of things.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Especially the public. Public has a
right to know. And not only that--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The public's not going to see the
changes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- for transparency.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The public doesn't see --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: But we read them, and people know why
they were pulled or why it was changed.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And my last thing, we're getting
off the topic on the agenda, you realize that?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And we -- have we really
addressed civility and decorum?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, I did.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes, you did. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes, you did. And I think the changes
that we have agreed to have improved the chances of that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And while we're off the topic,
do you think it's getting warm in here?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Feel my hands. I'm icy cold.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I'm comfortable. You're just having a
hot flash.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. Drink some water.
Yeah. Can we come to an agreement to what to do on this one
last issue? The rest of these can sit until some point in the future.
Page 156
April 12-13, 2011
CHAIRMAN COYLE: The one last one was the one we were
just talking about?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Right, right. We haven't come
to any agreement. We didn't put it in the form of a motion because we
were trying to get a consensus across the board just to do it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, let me just ask the question.
Would the commissioners find it objectionable if we included on our
agenda change sheet the reason that things were either pulled from the
consent agenda, or summary agenda, or withdrawn or continued? It
would just be a brief statement as to why it was done.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I don't have no objection.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Does anybody have an objection?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I have no problem with that. I think
it's a great idea.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Henning has a --
obviously has a problem.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No. I didn't say anything.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Are there any objections to this?
Okay.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'm concerned about the extent to
which -- I mean, from a staffs perspective, I don't see a problem, but
I'm just concerned about commissioners in some way communicating
their vote ahead of the issue being presented in the public forum in
these communications, and I'm not sure if that will lead to that. So
I've got a concern about that.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, I don't think it's commission---
commissioners aren't necessarily communicating a concern any more
so than they are by pulling in the first place. When it's pulled, you
know the commissioner's got a problem with it.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: But you're asking for the reason
why.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah, that's right.
Page 157
April 12-13, 2011
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And there you're, you know -- I
don't know. I think there's a potential problem. Staffs reason for
doing something, I don't see any problem with that, but the
commissioners revealing their positions ahead of the public debate in a
public vote appears leading.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: We could -- I'm sorry. I didn't
mean to jump in front of you if you weren't done.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. Jeff, this would be a
one-way communication, wouldn't it? So it wouldn't be any kind of
problem to do it, would it?
MR. KLATZKOW: Well, I mean, Commissioner Hiller raises an
issue. I don't know from -- I would not suggest you put this in an
ordinance or resolution.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah.
MR. KLATZKOW: I would see if -- you see if it works.
Commissioner Hiller may be right. You don't want to inadvertently
communicate a vote here. We're not going to know until we live with
this for a while whether that's an issue or not.
From staff perspective, I think it's a great idea to give the reason
why something's been continued.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: If the staff -- yeah, okay, okay. Let's try
it for a while and see what happens.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Try it in which way?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Try it -- let the staff give reasons for
each of the things that have been pulled by the staff.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And then--
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And leave the others alone for a while.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And then can we -- can we
direct the county attorney to come back with a little more detailed
opinion in maybe a month or so?
MR. KLATZKOW: Well, what I'm hearing is, at this point int
Page 158
April 12-13, 2011
time you want to limit it to staff. So if we continue it, we'll give you
the reason?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, but that's kind of empty,
you know, I mean, because we're looking for everybody's reasons.
That's where we're falling short on this. I'm willing to do it as a
voluntary type of thing. I do think we can handle just saying,
whatever information it is, a brief little thing, send it to your office
first, and you make that decision. I don't know. But I do want to be
able to know what I'm dealing with when I walk in this room.
MR. KLATZKOW: I mean, it could be as simple as, the concern
was raised as to the financial impact.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's fine.
MR. KLATZKOW: Simple as that.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: At least that's something. Then
I would concentrate on the financial-impact part of the whole thing if I
wanted to do my own discovery.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And let's face it. If -- say, for
instance, you pulled something off the consent to put it on and a
reporter called and said, you know, I saw you pulled it off and you
give him an answer, then everybody knows it anyway. It doesn't make
any difference Commissioner What or you're interviewed on a TV
program or you're interviewed on a radio program or you're giving a
speech. I mean, everybody knows what it is. You're not talking to one
another, but they all know what you just said. So, you know, those
things -- it's really no different.
I think what we're all trying to do is say, we want complete
transparency and we want --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Amen.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- the public to know what's going
on. We want the public to have a right to know what we're doing,
what we're thinking, and how we're going into the meeting. It's all
about being open in open government.
Page 159
April 12-13, 2011
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. All right.
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Nothing.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Did you have anything else?
Commissioner Hiller, did you have anything else?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. I'd like to make a motion.
I'd like to make a motion that the ordinance be amended to include a
definition of what constitutes a consent-agenda item, and I think we
can look to guidance to Robert's Rules of Order for that, but basically
it should be those items that do not need discussion or debate because
they are either routine procedures or already have unanimous consent.
Specifically, the items which are routine and procedural and also
decisions that are likely to be noncontroversial. It would include
examples like the approval of the minutes, which we now spend time
approving by open vote; final approval of proposals of reports that the
board has been dealing with and are -- are really more informational in
nature rather than reports that will lead to specific action; routine
matters such as appointments to committees, staff appointments,
requiring board confirmation unless there's some, you know, public
debate required with respect to that; correspondence requiring no
action; grant applications for a threshold amount that's de minimis,
like, for example, under a hundred thousand; expenditures which are
under a certain threshold, for example, $25,000 or 50,000, whatever
would seem reasonable; routine renewals of contracts, such as leases,
things of that nature.
And, of course, we can, you know, have the county attorney
propose something and bring it back.
MR. KLATZKOW: There's a board resolution that created the
consent.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'm sorry? Well, then, you know
what, I'd like to -- if there's already --
Page 160
April 12-13, 2011
MR. KLATZKOW: I'll forward that to you.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'd like to see it because I --
MR. KLATZKOW: It needs work. It's very old.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So maybe that's what we need to
do. Thank you for mentioning that. Ifwe could bring that back,
maybe send a copy to all the commissioners, get their input, and then I
think what we need to do is redefine what is on the consent agenda.
And I'm just giving you a few examples.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Henning, did you
-- you raised your hand because you wanted to be excused or because
you wanted to speak?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'd like to -- well, then I'll just wait
and I'll bring this up at the next meeting, because I would like to see
the --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We need to take a break. We're way
overdue here.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, just one quick suggestion
here.
Commissioner Hiller, could you put it in some sort of dialogue
for us to read beforehand?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, Jeff is going to do that.
MR. KLATZKOW: I'm going to send you each a copy of the
resolution, and if any of you want to bring it back at a future date, you
know, we can bring it up as a regular agenda item that way.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I would like to. I'd also like to
bring up as an agenda item in the future the release of the actual
agenda itself to the public. I think it needs to be moved up ahead. I
think the public deserves a full week to review the agenda and the
backup.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: How are you going to do that, Buddy?
Page 161
April 12-13, 2011
COMMISSIONER FIALA: We're never going to be able to do
that.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: They do it in other jurisdictions. I
understand -- I think Miami does it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah. Other jurisdictions don't do
nearly as good a job as we do of getting these things documented.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, if we --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: But we're taking a break because we're
30 minutes overdue.
MR. MITCHELL: Mr. Chairman, could I just make a quick
comment about that? Because that week I had to let Commissioner
Hiller down because there was an item she wanted on the agenda. We
were running late and we had technical problems. And in the end, the
item didn't hit the agenda.
F or the commissioners, I would ask, until you resolve when the
agenda's going out, that the agenda closes at 12 noon on the
Wednesday before the board meeting.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
MR. MITCHELL: And it's only if it's an emergency that it
would go on after 12 noon on the Wednesday, and that would help
with -- for Commissioner Hiller because, as I said, we didn't have time
to resolve it for her.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
MR. MITCHELL: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We're taking a break now for you, Terri.
Enjoy it.
MR.OCHS: How long, sir?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Ten minutes.
(A brief recess was had.)
MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, you have a live mike.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Ladies and -- do we have a live mike?
Ladies and gentlemen, I -- before we continue with the agenda,
Page 162
April 12-13, 2011
it's important that you witness something that you probably will
seldom witness in the future, a person reaching such an advanced age.
Someone here is having a birthday today or soon -- two people are
having birthdays here, Commissioner Fiala and Ian Mitchell.
And so we're going to sing Happy Birthday to both of them.
(Happy Birthday was recited in unison.)
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. Where do we go, County
Manager?
Item #9H
COMMISSIONER HENNING'S REIMBURSEMENT
REGARDING ATTENDANCE AT A FUNCTION SERVING A
V ALID PUBLIC PURPOSE. HE ATTENDED THE CHABAD OF
NAPLES ANNUAL BENEFIT EVENING & GALA ON APRIL 10,
2011 AT THE RITZ-CARLTON HOTEL IN NAPLES, FL. $150 TO
BE PAID FROM COMMISSIONER HENNING'S TRAVEL
BUDGET - MOTION TO APPROVE COMMISSIONER
HENNING'S EXPENDITURE - APPROVE; COUNTY
ATTORNEY TO DEVELOP A POLICY FOR
REIMBURSEMENTS AND TO LIMIT IT TO FOOD AND
BEVERAGE ONLY
MR.OCHS: Sir, we're on Item 9H, which was previously Item
16H4, regarding a reimbursement for travel expense. This one was
moved at Commissioner Henning's request.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes, thank you. I'm really
confused by conversations I had with County Attorney -- I believe it's
County Attorney's Office and Ian Mitchell.
I received an invitation to attend the event held by Naples Sabot.
Page 163
April 12-13, 2011
This event occurred; I paid out of my personal expenses $150. The
invitation stated on -- the event cost $150. I just want to make sure
that I did everything right by submitting that document to be
reimbursed for $150.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And I also did that.
MR. KLATZKOW: My opinion is that you completely followed
the ordinance on this, yes. You -- it was appropriate and right.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay, great. And if anybody --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion to approve.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Second.
And we have Commissioner Hiller.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. I actually -- where's my
mike? I submitted $50, and the reason is, is because when I ask for
reimbursement, I don't include the charitable-donation portion,
because when I'm attending these events, it's not me personally going
there or in some way going there to financially support that charity,
but I'm going there as a public official and I'm being invited because
I'm a public official.
So when I request for reimbursement, I always ask, what portion
of the total ticket relates to the food and beverage, because they
always want to give it to me for free, and I say, no, I can't. I have to
pay for, you know, the cost of any food and beverage. But obviously I
don't think it's appropriate to use public funds to make a charitable
donation, which is what the balance of the total bill is.
So I actually take a different approach, and I always, you know,
make sure that the cost of anything that's being provided to me for
attending is covered, but I don't use the public funds to make the
charitable donating portion -- you know, to pay the
charitable-donation portion of the ticket.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That raises another question
then, because I believe our ethics ordinance says that we cannot accept
anything for a discount that is not offered to the public, something of
Page 164
April 12-13, 2011
that nature.
MR. KLATZKOW: Yeah. We -- this is your ordinance, so you
can give direction to us. But our office has always interpreted that to
be that you've got to pay the same price as the general public. So if
John Q. Public is paying $100, then you've got to pay $100. We've
never broken it down between cost of the food or part of it that might
be a contribution. But that's our interpretation of your ordinance.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And that's actually different than
what you shared with me, because when I brought this issue up at the
very beginning -- and I think we have a -- I'm not sure. I think we have
em ail communications on it. I can have Jennifer pull it -- you made it
clear to me that we could go either way on this, and I took the position
-- and, quite frankly, it's not the same as John Q. Public, because the
$100, for example, with respect to the 150 that's paid is a charitable
deduction for John Q. Public, and he can, you know, actually get part
of that money back on his tax return, and we don't.
So, I mean, if you want to be correct, then you would look at us
paying, you know, the equivalent of the, you know, deductible
amount, whatever that is.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, you're right,
Commissioner Hiller.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So I think you've got a problem
there. And, again, I mean, we're going there, you know, on -- I'm not
the same as John Q. Public. I mean, I'm going there because I've been
-- it's for a public purpose. That's why it's being paid for by the
county . We're not getting preferential treatment. We're paying for the
cost of whatever they're giving us, but we're not using public funds to
make private donations to charitable causes.
That's -- and we spoke about that, and you said you had no
problem with it. And I've been consistent. And so whatever I pay --
and the organizations that I attend also have no problem with that. So
that's how I do it.
Page 165
April 12-13, 2011
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. I'm glad we had this
discussion.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So should we have a policy?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah. I was just going to suggest that.
You know, this becomes more important when we get into some of the
really high-priced events like $500 or $250 a person, and you know
that you're not getting $250 of food, so it's got to be going somewhere
else. And maybe we should develop a policy.
I -- I think all three people who attended this event have been
open. They have not tried to confuse the issue, and I -- because the
invitation didn't say part of this is a contribution, as many of the
invitations do say -- and we need to make a policy as to how we
handle this, because the questions are likely to arise. But clearly I
don't see how anybody really benefited whether they put in for a
reimbursement for $50 or for $150. The point is, the money was
spent. But $100 of it was spent as a political donation -- not as a
political donation --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Charitable donation.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- a charitable donation, and I don't think
we should use taxpayer money to make charitable donations to
organizations. So we have to find a way so that we're also not accused
then of accepting something at less cost than the general public and
thereby being accepting of a gift.
MR. KLATZKOW: And you've got to remember that this
ordinance was put in place after Stadium Naples.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes, I know.
MR. KLATZKOW: And so to take, as an example, you know,
somebody offers you golf for $25 and somebody else has to pay $125
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes, yeah.
MR. KLA TZKOW: -- it's a very difficult issue to try to mete
Page 166
April 12-13, 2011
each and every one of these.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I don't think it really is, and I
actually think it's even more significant at this time because we have, I
guess, two or maybe even three people sitting at the dais who are
running or will be running for election, and I believe that there is --
isn't there some provision that says you can't donate as a candidate to a
charitable organization that you haven't been involved with for, like,
six months or something like that? Isn't there a statute that -- there's a
statutory provision, I believe.
And the problem there is, you know, are these people donating to
a charitable cause they haven't been involved with? I think the
solution is very, very simple. You know, we don't have the ability to
have the benefit of the tax deductibility of the donation portion. We're
going there because we're being asked to do it as -- you know, as a --
it's a business purpose. I mean, the other people are going because
they voluntarily want to contribute to the charity.
Every -- all these charities break out what portion is deductible
and what portion isn't. And I think we should, as a matter of policy,
just, you know, state that the portion which is food and beverage is the
portion that, you know, we reimburse.
MR. KLATZKOW: It's your policy. Whatever direction you
.
guys gIve.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I think it makes it easy and then it
eliminates, you know, the notion that, you know, we are actually using
public funds to make donations to private charities.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'm next.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. Yes. First of all, you made a
comment about how much some of these things cost, $500. I know
I've even made it a practice -- because -- well, you know I'm involved
in every organization in town. And I make it a practice if anything
costs more than $150, I just don't go because I can't afford to do that.
Page 167
April 12-13, 2011
So if we do put a policy together, that might enable me to go to
some of these things. Like the chamber banquet, for instance, or the
hospital ball. I never go to those things. They're way too expensive to
go and -- but maybe then if it's just for the dinner portion, I could go.
So I appreciate us moving forward trying to find a policy for all of us
and -- yes, that's it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. I think we're heading in
the right direction. There's a couple things we need to keep in mind.
There are some cases there may be more than the food involved.
There's the rental of the hall, there's some entertainment that's going to
take place.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No. That's all captured in the
food-and-beverage portion.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm sorry. One more time.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's all captured, like, in their
food and -- that's all --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. That's fine. Ifit is, that's
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's usually -- they break it out.
And what they do is, you know, basically, that -- the portion that they
define as the donation is the deductible portion that goes directly to
the clarity and has nothing to do with underwriting the event.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. Then this is a good thing
you brought up. Now, here we are. We're at a point in a juncture
where we're going forward. We have a motion on the floor to approve
Commissioner Henning's because this is the rules that existed in place
for some time, and there's some things that are still in the work--
works that probably haven't come forward before this commission.
So what we need to do is to, one, go ahead and approve
Commissioner Henning's expense because he acted in good faith;
number two, direct the county attorney to come back with something
Page 168
April 12-13, 2011
that will give us the ability to be able to react and then start notifying
everybody when it comes time to attend these events, that we can only
pay for that portion of it that's the actual expense and not the donation,
and I think we're good to go.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I would second that.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. Well, then that's the
motion.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I think I already made that motion.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Maybe we can even have a
printed-up form or something that we can -- that our secretaries can
send to this place. You know, we can RSVP, but only under these
conditions or something.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And it also includes
Commissioner Henning's reimbursement.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, yes.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. All--
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I think I already made that motion.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm sorry?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I made the motion, you know, that
we should do it --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Oh, forgive me. I didn't mean
to jump in front of you.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's okay. You can just second
it.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay, I second it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: But we've got two motions.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Wait a minute. Let's make sure we
know what the motion is. What was your motion, Commissioner
Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: My motion is that for
reimbursements to these events, that the reimbursable portion is
limited to the food and beverage and will not include the charitable
Page 169
April 12-13, 2011
donation to the charity.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: See, that leaves Commissioner Henning
$100 out of pocket.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No. No, no, no, no. We had a
separate motion to approve all of our expenditures, or Commissioner
Henning's expenditure.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I did make that motion.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, that was the first one, but then
you made a second. So we never voted on the first one.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right. So there are two motions
on the table. One with respect to Commissioner Henning's
expenditure as-is, and then one for a revision to the ordinance, or
wherever this is addressed to --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: We shouldn't interrupt.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- provide for the future.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Let's just -- let's just do the first one.
Let's call the question for the first motion which is to --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I made, you seconded.
Commissioner Henning.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You seconded it?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, I made the motion.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: He made it. I seconded it.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That was before all the other
discussion started. I know Jeffs looking--
MR. KLATZKOW: Could we have a motion for Commissioner
Henning's item first?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Right.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We did.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: So we have a motion by Commissioner
Hiller to pay Commissioner Henning's--
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay, whatever.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- cost $150; is that right?
Page 170
April 12-13, 2011
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I don't care who made it. Yes.
Let's just get it done with.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And would you second that motion or
did --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'd be happy to second it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. That's good.
All in favor, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Henning's--
Commissioner Henning abstains from the vote.
So now we want to ask the county attorney to take a look at this,
see if we can find some reasonable way to handle this.
MR. KLATZKOW: I'll come back with a proposed amendment
to your ordinance.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. All right. Thank you very much.
Okay. Where do we go now?
MR.OCHS: Sir, that takes you to lOA.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Didn't we have a time-certain at
three?
MR. OCHS: No, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. I'm sorry.
MR. OCHS : We changed that this morning.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: lOA?
Item #10A
Page 171
April 12-13, 2011
THE APPLICATION OF A HOUSING AND URBAN
DEVELOPMENT (HUD) COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,790,000 TO
CONSTRUCT A COMMUNITY CENTER AT EAGLE LAKES
COMMUNITY PARK; THE NECESSARY LEVERAGING
ASSOCIATED WITH RESTRICTING THE LAND ON WHICH
THE FACILITY WOULD BE BUILT; AND AUTHORIZING THE
PARKS AND RECREATION DIRECTOR TO SERVE AS THE
CERTIFYING REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE APPLICATION-
APPROVED
MR.OCHS: lOA is a recommendation to approve the
application of a Housing and Urban Development/Community
Development Block Grant in the amount of$1,790,000 to construct a
community center at Eagle Lakes Community Park; authorizing the
necessary leveraging associated with restricting land upon which the
facility would be built; and authorizing the Parks and Recreation
director to serve as the certifying representative for the application.
Mr. Barry Williams, your Parks and Recreation director --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Move to approve.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Second.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion to approve by Commissioner
Henning, second by Commissioner Coletta.
Any discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All in favor, please signify by --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'd like to -- I have my light on.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. I have some concerns,
because this block grant is not going to allow the full 1.79 million to
be used for construction of the community center, as I understand at
Page 1 72
April 12-13, 2011
the planning meeting that we had at the parks planning --
MR. WILLIAMS: Yes, ma'am. For the record, Barry Williams,
Parks and Recreation Director.
We don't know exactly what the dollar is for the Community
Development Block Grant. Those numbers haven't been released.
Historically that number has been right at $1.1 million, so that's kind
of what we're looking at.
Weare bringing an item back April 26th, though, for your
consideration that would look at existing projects that we have where
we might be able to shift monies to pay for our debt service for the
next five years and also identify funds that could be used for this
project. So that will be coming back on the 26th for you.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And I guess that's part of my
concern because, you know, obviously 1.1 million doesn't cover the
project cost, nor does -- nor have we identified the source of funding
to carry this project. And one of my concerns has always been that
these capital projects are basically, you know, popping out of the
ground like a mushroom but then, you know, that's it. Where's the rest
of the money going to come from?
So, I mean, I would like to see this brought back with the full
picture. You know, how is -- where's the rest of the money going to
come from, and how is this project going to be carried forward once
it's out of the ground, before I could support it.
MR. WILLIAMS: Ma'am, I would suggest -- just from the sense
of time frames, the application's due April 15th. So our ability to
bring it back would keep us from meeting the deadline to have the
grant application. If we were to apply for the grant and receive
favorable notice, this item would come back to you again through the
Human Services Department that would bring the recommendations
forward to you to approve.
So we've got a bit more time to kind of flesh out those details.
We do know that the operating expense associated with this
Page 1 73
April 12-13, 2011
community center, we've projected a budget, a business plan, if you
will. We have the ability to gain revenues from some summer camp,
VPK, after-school programming, but we're looking still at a net cost to
the General Fund of approximately $167,000. So it's still that question
of where we could find that funding.
But if we were allowed to apply for the grant, I guess my point is
that you'll have another opportunity as this comes back to you to have
that discussion about how we'll fund the operations.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And where would the balance of
the money come for the construction?
MR. WILLIAMS: Ma'am, that's, I guess, still the question that
we want to bring back to you April 26th. We do have some
recommendations that we want to bring forward.
We have a number of projects that we've done where we've
realized some savings that have remaining dollars in the project. So
what we're recommending on the 26th is to take those funds, place
them in reserve, that would allow us to pay our debt through 2015, but
also identify funds that we might also be able to apply to this project
in case we weren't able to successfully get 1.79 million.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And my last question is, is how
does this relate to Commissioner Coletta's project? Because I was,
you know, at that meeting in his community as well, and they have the
-- you know, a similar need, and you're telling me you've got savings
coming from, you know, these projects that you're dedicating to
Commissioner Fiala's needs, but, you know, what about
Commissioner Henning -- I mean Commissioner Coletta?
MR. WILLIAMS: Well, I would say, the Community
Development Block Grant, first of all, when we were evaluating the
potential for this grant -- and one of the aspects of the grant is that it
serve low- and moderate-income individuals.
So the area in and around Eagle Lakes meets that criteria, we felt,
and we felt like that was the best place for us, you know, to apply for
Page 174
Apri112-13,2011
the Community Development Block Grant.
To answer your question about Big Corkscrew Island Regional
Park and whether any of the monies that are in this item that we're
bringing back to you April 26th, there is some consideration there for
Big Corkscrew Island Regional Park. There have been some
discussions from the standpoint of the settlement agreement with
South Florida Water Management about a potential of using those
funds in a way that might help that park.
That's not something that's been identified or part of the 26th, but
that's a point of discussion that's also out there.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah, I have a real problem with
that. I mean, we promised those A TV' ers land. I mean, this
settlement was, you know, to provide funding for the acquisition of
land for them. To start diverting it and basically, you know, leaving
all these people out in the cold after all they've been through and all
they've waited for, I just -- wow, I would really have a problem with
that.
MR. OCHS: Commissioner, we're asking for authorization to
apply for the grant. When we come back --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah, but I need to understand the
whole picture.
MR.OCHS: I understand. When we come back on the 26th, as
Barry said, we're going to share some information on our existing
capital projects --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah, but we're applying for the
grant specifically for the benefit of Commissioner Fiala, and I have
concern about Commissioner Coletta's -- I need -- in order for me to
make the decision, I need all the information to be able to.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I really don't use the park, by the
way. It's for the benefit of the children of East Naples.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And there are children in Eastern
Collier in the Estates.
Page 175
April 12-13, 2011
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I forgot.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. That's all right.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: But I was next.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. And so we were talking about,
you know, expenses involved with running the place, once we have a
building there and because of the poverty level in this particular area,
we would then be eligible for other grants to help us run it as well as
maybe Wine Festival grants, as well as community-center grants, as
well as, like, this morning, the gal that was up here who has these
VPK programs. I love your VPK program over at the East Naples
Community Park. It's just filled with little children, and it's such a
good program to reach out.
But anyway, so those are other funding sources that might help
up in this park. But, of course, until we have a building, we can't
apply for any of them. So I just wanted to throw that in.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. And I really do
appreciate, you know, you looking out for the park and Orangetree,
because that's a very, very important thing to me; however, this
particular grant is tied into a certain amount of low-income housing
that, in all likelihood, does not prevail in the Orangetree area to be
able to track this grant.
And you're right about what money's going to be there to be able
to be supplement it past that point, when we get to that point.
Commissioner Fiala and I have a real good understanding. We're
very supportive of each other on these parks. And it's going to work
out towards the end. I mean, we haven't got all the answers. We're
still putting it together. But they don't know if they're going to get the
grant money.
But thank you for bringing that up.
Page 176
April 12-13, 2011
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Hiller.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Commissioner Coletta answered
the question. Is that correct, there's no low-income housing out by
Corkscrew that would qualify for this loan?
MR. WILLIAMS: When we evaluated the grant application in
the process, not that there's -- to say there's not low- and
moderate-income families in that area, but part of the criteria is
looking at a percent of low- and moderate-income families or
households.
The grant stipulates that we serve greater than 51 percent of folks
who are 80 percent or below the median household income. So for us,
the Eagle Lakes community and the community in and around Eagle
Lakes met the criteria.
The Big Corkscrew Island Regional Park did not. Most of the
neighborhoods that are in and around Big Corkscrew Island Regional
Park, if you're familiar with that area, Waterways, Orangetree. Those
household incomes didn't meet that criteria.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. We've got a motion.
MR. MITCHELL: Sir, we do have one public speaker.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Call the public speaker.
MR. MITCHELL: Marjorie Student-Stirling, and --
MS. STUDENT-STIRLING: Yes. For the record --
MR. MITCHELL: Yolanda Herrera has ceded her time to --
MS. STUDENT-STIRLING: For the record, first of all, I'm here
speaking for myself. I'm a 23-year resident of East Naples. And I feel
that we need -- we have an older county community facility, and I feel
very strongly that we've had a lot of development in East Naples and
that we need a newer facility there. And so I personally strongly
support pursuing the grant application for the facility in East Naples.
And Ms. Yolanda Herrera, who's our homeowner association
person at Habitat for Humanity, couldn't be here this afternoon, but I
did turn in a slip for her. And I spoke with her by telephone, and she
Page 1 77
April 12-13, 2011
asked me to put on the record for her, as a representative of the
Habitat for Humanity homeowners' associations, that they also
strongly support the application grant going forward for the facility in
East Naples.
Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you, Marjorie.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Wow, that's great.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All in favor, please signify by saying
aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. The motion passes unanimously.
Item #10B
AGREEMENT #B-11-UN-12-003 WITH THE U.S. DEPARTMENT
OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT TO ACCEPT
ENTITLEMENT FUNDING FOR NEIGHBORHOOD
STABILIZATION PROGRAM 3, IN THE AMOUNT OF
$3,884,165 AND ASSOCIATED BUDGET AMENDMENTS-
APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, lOB is a recommendation to
approve and authorize the chairman to sign agreement
#B-11-UN-12-003 with the U.s. Department of Housing and Urban
Development to accept entitlement funding for the Neighborhood
Stabilization Program 3 in the amount of $3,884, 165 and approve
Page 178
April 12-13, 2011
associated budget amendments.
Mr. Ramsey's available to present or answer questions.
MR. RAMSEY: Good morning, Commissioners. For the record,
Frank Ramsey, your Housing Manager.
I have prepared a brief presentation I can run through or simply
answer questions any of you commissioners may have.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any questions, Commissioners?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'd like to see the presentation.
MR. RAMSEY: The overview of this item, Commissioners, is,
approval of this item will authorize the chairman to sign the funding
approval and grant agreement for participation in the Neighborhood
Stabilization Program 3.
Your Affordable Housing Advisory Committee was presented
this plan yesterday and voted unanimously in its support. Approval of
this also -- excuse me. Approval of this item would also authorize the
associated budget amendments.
How we got NSP3. NSP3 was funded through the Wall Street
Reform and Consumer Protection Act, and the program was
established under the Housing and Economic Recovery of 2008.
Collier County's allocation is approximately 3.9 million with the
purpose of arresting decline, stabilizing neighborhoods, reducing
blight, target and reconnect neighborhoods, stimulate economic
activity, and provide long-term affordability.
There's some program requirements associated with the receipt of
the funds. There are five eligible uses. Financing mechanisms,
purchase and rehabilitation, which is the trademark use of the funds,
land banking, demolish blighted structures, and then the kind of
catchall category of redevelop demolished or vacant properties.
Twenty-five percent of the funds must be used to benefit
households earning not greater than 50 percent of the area median
Income.
The final program requirements, to highlight for you,
Page 1 79
April 12-13, 2011
Commissioners, is that we must target and reconnect neighborhoods.
HUD established a risk score index with zero being no risk and 20
being great risk for future decline, and all the neighborhoods we assist
must meet the -- meet an 18, 19 or 20 score.
We were partly eligible for these funding based on the success of
the Neighborhood Stabilization Program 1 awarded in 2008, and we
must deeply target this money and the -- finally the expenditure
deadlines, which is spend 50 percent of the funds within two years and
100 percent of the funds within three years.
Based on the aforementioned two-slide requirements from HUD,
we located the following three areas that met the requirements of
HUD as well as that funding was sufficient to meet the impact
requirement HUD provided.
Those neighborhoods or areas loosely defined as Golden Gate
City, the Bayshore Gateway Triangle, and Naples Park. These areas,
aside from being eligible, provide nice opportunity for success.
We've made great strides in Golden Gate City under NSP 1.
These funds are unique from other HUD funds in that we can serve up
to 120 percent area median income, so we found an opportunity to
further support the redevelopment of the Bayshore Gateway Triangle
by seeking to target higher- income-level housing in that neighborhood
for our workforce.
And, finally , Naples Park provided a very small impact rating
according to HUD, and so we thought it provided an opportunity to
move in an area of the county we're not currently in and yet be able to
meet the requirements of HUD.
Very briefly, Commissioners, to just put the face to the program
this is an NSP 1 success story of a family of seven born and raised in
Collier County. The husband is a mechanic for our school board, and
they are a great example of our continuum of housing. They outgrew
a Habitat home as their family grew, and they've graduated into an
NSPl home.
Page 180
April 12-13, 2011
We provided assistance in the form of a soft second mortgage
that's recorded against the property, and the final sales price of this
property was approximately $92,000.
That's my -- that concludes my presentation, Commissioners, and
I'd be happy to answer any questions.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. What's your budget
allocation for these dollars if you were to get this grant?
MR. RAMSEY: The budget allocation for these dollars -- the
acquisition and rehabilitation for income up to 120 percent median
income, would be $1.2 million.
The budget for the low-income set aside, which is what I
mentioned as the requirement to spend 25 percent of the funds on
households earning not greater than 50 percent of area median income
would be 772,000.
The land banking of properties, which is setting aside vacant land
for future redevelopment within the next ten years, was $150,000.
Demolition in the event that we find blighted structures that are
beyond repair is a limited budget of $50,000.
And then finally in, again, that catchall category, we have
redeveloped housing for households up to 120 percent area median
income at $223,750, and they develop housing for the low income set
aside of $200,000.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And that -- yeah, go ahead.
MR. RAMSEY: Oh, I was just going to say, finally,
Commissioners, the grant does allow us to retain 10 percent of the
award for administrating (sic) the program.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And how many houses would that
represent approximately? Do you have an idea of how many, you
know, parcels of land and housing you're thinking of acquiring with
that?
MR. RAMSEY: That's an excellent question. I've use the data
Page 181
April 12-13, 2011
we have now for over two years of operating Neighborhood
Stabilization Program 1. And with that initial allocation, I'm
estimating we can assist 24 properties.
As we sell the properties, we generate revenue from the sales.
That number will increase. But when I submitted the application that
this board approved in February to HUD, it committed to 24
properties.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And I guess that's part of my
concern, because when I look back and I see that we currently have
inventory for unsold homes -- we actually -- we own 74 unsold homes
that we've acquired and rehabbed, and the value of that currently is 4.8
million.
I'm not sure how that translates into 24 homes. And my second
question, you know, 24 homes for 3.8 million and, of course, we
separate -- or let's say 3.5, you know, taking out the administration.
And then my other question is is, you know -- I'm not sure that
we should be in the business of acquiring these homes when we can't
even sell the 75 homes that we have right now.
And I understand that it's grant money, but at the same time, I'm
not sure that we should be in the housing business. So I have -- I have
some serious concerns about that. Not to mention -- and I talked to
Marcy about this, about, you know, the carrying costs of all these
properties.
While it's true that the funds are available to carry these homes,
that's only true to the extent that we have funds left over to do that.
And then the question will come up, where are we going to get the
funds to carry all these unsold homes once the grant money runs out?
And we're facing a budget deficit. I mean, we're going to have
insurance, you know, electrical, lawn maintenance. I mean, it's going
to start adding up when we're carrying, you know, what we're
proposing will be, you know, well over a hundred vacant homes
month after month.
Page 182
April 12-13, 2011
So I do have some concerns about it. And, you know, what
actually the projected carrying costs are and the sellability and why
we're doing this.
MR. RAMSEY: Thank you, Commissioner. And those are
fantastic and excellent points that deserve full and -- full
understanding.
I put something on the over -- in the podium computer, County
Manager.
Just to give you some -- more of an idea of where we sit on the
intake. I hope -- is that large enough for the commissioners to view?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Let me get a little closer.
MR. RAMSEY: Let me see if I can zoom in. That's all right.
Commissioner Fiala will read it to me.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I can.
MR. RAMSEY : Well, I'll summarize it for you. This is a
summary of the application intake process we've conducted since
opening NSP 1. We've received a total of 132 applications, and we've
approved 34 of those applications that have been approved by us and
the bank.
Of those 10 that have reserved homes, 5 are under contract and
19 awaiting reservation. What that means is that there's not a home
currently available that's been rehabbed and completed that they can
reserve.
Also, what I'd like to note is that of the 51 homes that we have
sold -- excuse me -- the 51 properties that are single-family residences,
the multi-family are going to be more rental for our nonprofit
agencies, and 10 land bank, of course, will just be subject to future
development.
Of the 51 single-family properties we developed, 22 are available
and assigned to clients while 19 are unaccounted for, and those will go
towards these -- excuse me. I'm sorry . We have a three -- we have a
Page 183
April 12-13, 2011
MS. KRUMBINE: It's the other way around.
MR. RAMSEY: Other way around. We have 22 properties
available and 19 of these clients awaiting reservation. So once the
homes are -- rehab is completed, they'll be given access to those
homes to view them and pick which is best for them.
So, really, when it all shakes out, we have a three-property
overage at this point.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Does anybody have a motion?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Motion by Commisioner Coletta
to approve, second by Commissioner Fiala.
All in favor, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. It passes 3-2 with Commissioner
Henning and Hiller dissenting.
Item #10C
RESOLUTION 2011-71: CONDEMNATION OF EASEMENTS
NECESSARY FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A REPLACEMENT
BRIDGE ON WHITE BOULEVARD AND NEW BRIDGE ON
23RD STREET SW, BOTH OVER THE GOLDEN GATE MAIN
CANAL, TOGETHER WITH THE REALIGNMENT OF THE
INTERSECTION OF WHITE BOULEVARD AND 23RD STREET
SW. (TRANSPORTATION BRIDGE REPAIR AND
REPLACEMENT PROGRAM. PROJECT NO. 66066.) - ADOPTED
Page 184
April 12-13, 2011
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, Item 10C is a recommendation to
adopt a resolution authorizing the condemnation of easements
necessary for the construction of a replacement bridge on White
Boulevard and a new bridge on 23rd Street Southwest, both over the
Golden Gate Main Canal, together with the realignment of the
intersection of White Boulevard and 23rd Street Southwest.
Mr. Jay Ahmad, your Transportation Engineering and
Construction Management Director, will present.
MR. AHMAD: Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, good afternoon.
I'm Jay Ahmad, for the record. I'm your Director of Transportation
Engineering and Construction Management.
This item is a condemn- -- is a recommendation for -- to
condemn properties for the White and 23rd bridges. I'll give you a
little brief history. And with me also is Marlene Messam, who's going
to be presenting some technical information that needs to be on the
record as well.
But I'll give you a brief history of the project. There are a few
residents in the audience here, and they're concerned citizens, and
we've been meeting with them. And for the benefit -- for their benefit
and others who are watching this, I'm going to go through some brief
history here.
The project was initiated as a result of the Florida Department of
Transportation ongoing two-year program to inspect our bridges.
They inspect our bridges every two years. They give us a report
annually, so every bridge is inspected once every two years.
This bridge came up as a critical deficient bridge. The White
bridge came as a critical deficient bridge on that list of FDOT. So the
option to rehab it or replace it is upon the county. What DOT does,
essentially, is a brief report of the condition of the bridges.
We hired Cutrone & Associates -- Cutrone & Associates, an
engineering firm in this area, to give us a more detailed condition of
Page 185
April 12-13, 2011
this White bridge.
And as a result, they came back with a recommendation that the
bridge needs to be replaced. It's -- it was built in 1965, and Marlene
will show you some pictures of the bridge. It's in dire need of repair or
replacement. And for cost-efficiency reasons and for health index of
the bridge and sufficiency ratings, it was recommended that it would
be replaced.
After that recommendation we came back to you with an RFP,
and this board approved a consultant, CME, as a result of the request
for proposal and selection committee selecting CME Consultants to
design White bridge and 23rd bridge; 23rd was chosen because of ease
of construction of the White bridge itself.
Two public meetings have been held to date for the replacement
of White bridge and the new bridge on 23rd. One on April 22, 2010,
and the second is on January 27, 2011. I know Commissioner Coletta
was in attendance in one of those meetings, I believe.
The proposed new bridge on 23rd was vetted through many
public hearings as -- I believe at least four public hearings were held
to have that bridge on the Growth Management Plan.
The Planning Commission held a meeting on May 20th and
October 7,2004. This board held meetings on October 7 and October
26, 2004, to adopt a Growth Management Plan, and it was adopted
together with the Golden Gate Area Master -- Golden Gate Area
Master Plan back then.
And I'm going to let Marlene speak to the technical aspects of the
two bridges, if you'll allow me, Mr. Chairman.
MS. MESSAM: Thank you, Jay.
Good afternoon, Commissioners. For the record, Marlene
Messam, Growth Management Division, Transportation Engineering
Department.
The project for consideration before you lies within the East
Golden Gate Estates, which is east of County Road 951 and just south
Page 186
April 12-13, 2011
of Golden Gate Boulevard.
Sorry about that.
All right. The existing White Boulevard bridge. There are two
bridges on White Boulevard, but the one under discussion this
afternoon spans the Golden Gate Main Canal. The new bridge that is
to be constructed will connect 23rd Street Southwest, also across the
Golden Gate Main Canal.
You have heard our director provide some of the reasons why
we're moving forward with this project. And for your consideration
this afternoon, I would like to point out five major areas for your
consideration.
One, the evaluation of construction alternatives; two, the
evaluation of structure-type alternatives; three, safety factors; four,
environmental factors; and five, cost.
The need for these improvements arose, as you've heard, because
we receive biannual reports from DOT providing us with the
conditions of these structures.
With the White Boulevard bridge, it was rated low in three major
categories: For sufficiency, for functionality, and overall health.
What we've done is we've hired, through consultants, to give us a
detailed condition assessment of this bridge, and the study evaluated
three repair alternatives. They recommended a total replacement.
And as you've also heard, the 23rd Street bridge was identified back in
2004 as part of your approved GMP.
I would like to show you now some of the current conditions of
the White Boulevard bridge. What you're seeing here on this bridge is
rutting and wearing of the surface cores, and this is caused because the
post tensioning in the beams are -- have been lost; therefore, when
traffic travels over this bridge, this is the result. Because of the
unbalanced traffic loading, you have wearing and rutting of the
pavement surface. Also we have leakage along the joints on thisabridge.
Page 187
April 12-13, 2011
The railings that are currently attached to the bridge do not meet
current safety standard. The width of the bridge also does not meet
current standard. This bridge, as you've heard, was built 46 years ago.
So what we have asked you to concentrate on is how we have
provided for the replacement of this bridge and the new bridge. So we
looked at what we call the construction methodologies, and I'm going
to list four of them. We've looked at a stage alternative. This would
require us to demolish half the bridge at a time and route traffic on the
remaining half. The issue with that is we have to stabilize the
remaining portion of the structure. In order to do that, we would need
to have additional shoring of the existing structure, which will result in
additional costs, of course.
The other alternative that we looked at was to use a temporary
bridge. The use of a temporary one-lane bridge would require
permitting of this temporary bridge and will also cost at least a third to
one half the cost of putting a permanent bridge in.
You will also have to have additional right-of-way easement in
order to construct this temporary bridge. With that said, the cost--
none of these costs are recoverable. They will all be throw-away for a
temporary bridge.
We looked at the detour option. The detour would require 10
miles deviation from where the current point of destination is.
Here are the -- one of the other factors we looked at in terms of
construction methodology is to use what is called an accelerated
bridge construction, and that is the option we are recommending to
move forward with.
The accelerated bridge construction technique basically is
prefabricating the elements of the bridge off site and then assembling
them off site. This would require far less construction time, of course.
Here are the properties that we're asking you to consider in this
resolution. There are four properties in the immediate vicinity of the
White Boulevard bridge. There are four properties within immediate
Page 188
April 12-13, 2011
vicinity of the 23rd Street Southwest new bridge, and then there are
three other properties required for the intersection realignment of
White and 23rd Street.
And this slide really just shows you the concept of the
realignment, if it wasn't very clear on the previous slide.
For 23rd Street, one of the things that we also considered doing is
to improve the one-mile section of 23rd Street Southwest, as we will
be increasing the traffic volume when that bridge is opened.
So the 23rd Street bridge improvements will have two distinct
roadway cross-sections. The one will be an urban cross-section,
meaning curb and gutter will be installed for the first one-third of the
bridge from Golden Gate Boulevard south, and the next section will
be a rural section, no curb and gutter there, and we will use roadside
swales.
We also, at the request of the property owners through the public
information meetings, is including a five-foot sidewalk on the west
side of 23rd Street, because they were concerned with the safety of
their children now that we were opening up a local roadway to
through traffic.
One other thing is that we are utilizing an existing dry detention
pond that is at the corner of Golden Gate Boulevard and 23rd Street
Southwest. We have already met with the Water Management District
and have shown them this design concept. Weare confident that this
will be permitted. And what this allows us to do is to minimize any
further right-of-way acquisition other than what has been shown to
you.
Okay. So the other factors we looked at, of course, are
alternative-structure type. What you're looking at here is a new beam
that was developed by the Precast Concrete Institute. It's called the
Next Beam. This is one of the beams that we feel very sure that we
could use for this project; however, because it was so new and none of
the fabri- -- local fabricators within our county had the forms yet, we
Page 189
April 12-13, 2011
start to rethink the use of this beam.
The other beams we looked at were used by the Texas
Department of Transportation. We also looked at a beam that Florida
Department of Transportation uses. This was used on the 13th Street
Southwest bridge, but the recommended design will be a combination
of the Next Beam and a modification of the Old Florida Double Tee.
Safety factors. This project, of course, is being designed with all
the requirements meeting AASHTO, FDOT, and FHW A guidelines.
We have identified all the permits that would be required for this
project, and there are no listed or endangered species that are being
affected with this project.
And lastly, the cost considerations are now here before you. For
the White Boulevard bridge, we estimate that the total, just the bridge
and the roadway improvements, will be about $2.2 million.
Now, if a temporary bridge is needed to provide traffic control,
you are looking at a cost of $1.2 million. This cost is not recoverable.
So the total cost of just doing the White Boulevard bridge will be $3.4
million. The 23rd Street bridge and the subsequent roadway
improvements would be $4.1 million. These funds are being paid out
of impact fees, not the General Fund.
Our recommended option then is to construct the 23rd Street
bridge southwest and the roadway improvements, open that to traffic,
and then completely close White Boulevard and demolish that bridge.
You wouldn't have to have any temporary bridge, no additional
right-of-way will be required, and you certainly can realize some
savings there.
I'm open to your questions, Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You mentioned the consultant
had three recommendations.
MS. MESSAM: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You mentioned there was one
Page 190
April 12-13, 2011
recommendation for the White Boulevard bridge, and that was to
replace it.
MS. MESSAM: There were three repair alternatives provided,
and they recommended, based on cost analysis, that a total
replacement would be the best option.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. I want to finish my
question.
MS. MESSAM: I'm sorry.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, let me restate my
question.
MS. MESSAM: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You said there was three
recommendations by the consultant. One was replace the bridge; you
did that presentation. What were the other two recommendations?
MS. MESSAM: I said there were three alternatives evaluated,
and the recommended option was to replace the bridge. The other two
alternatives was to do a substantial repair to the superstructure of the
bridge, and the cost of that option was as much as replacing the bridge
totally and would only give us about a ten-year life after that point.
And the other alternative was, of course, to do minor repairs to
the wearing cores and as -- some of the repairs you have just shown.
So in terms of feasibility, we felt like the recommended
alternative was the way to go.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: When the RFP was on the
board's agenda, it was pointed out from citizens, you really need to get
the report by the three consultants that looked at this bridge, which I
did obtain. Two of the consultants said the bridge needs to be
repaired. The last consultant stated the bridge could be repaired, and
one of his alternatives was replace the bridge.
MS. MESSAM: I'm sorry, sir. I'm -- you've -- I don't know
where that information came from.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It came from transportation.
Page 191
April 12-13, 2011
MS. MESSAM: There was only one consultant that was hired to
look at the condition assessment study for White Boulevard, and that
report is on record and was provided by whomever had requested it.
When we went to RFP, the RFP was to replace the bridge and to
build a new bridge at White Boulevard.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Correct.
MS. MESSAM: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I remember the RFP, but I'm
saying -- it was given to me by staff that it had three recommendations
by three different consultants; two of them said repair the bridge, the
other one said repair the bridge, one of the alternatives was to replace
it.
The -- now, I mean we're replacing the White Boulevard bridge
or, no, we're replacing the 23rd Avenue (sic) bridge because the White
Boulevard bridge, what you're saying, needs to be replaced.
If we didn't have to replace it, we would not have to put in the
23rd bridge, because that -- that's your recommendation, except for,
you're stating in the Growth Management Plan it says it needs to be
put in. But what it really states is -- it strongly recommends that we
put in an interchange at 1-75 and/or the 23rd Street bridge.
MS. MESSAM: Excuse me, Commissioner. There is no--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And do you have the language
there?
MS. MESSAM: There is no bridge at 23rd Street Southwest.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Oh, maybe I misunderstood it.
Maybe I misstated it. You're putting in a new bridge at 23rd, because
we finally got a consultant that says that the bridge needs to be
replaced at White Boulevard, so those residents could get in and out.
The Growth Management Plan states that the bridge on 23rd
should be put in or -- and/or 1-75 interchange for better access through
the community.
MR. AHMAD: Commissioner Henning, you're correct. I mean,
Page 192
April 12-13, 2011
the reason we are doing 23rd bridge now is because we are in dire
need to repair White bridge.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Repair, yes, I agree.
MR. AHMAD: Repair or replace. It is the recommendation by
the consultant to replace it.
Now, if we weren't going to -- if we didn't have a bridge on
White that is failing and deficient, this issue of bringing 23rd may be
done a few years from now or in the future. It's what you're referring
to. The Growth Management Plan always recommended it. It had it
as a Priority No.1 to have this bridge on 23rd. But it isn't a priority
today without White, you're absolutely right.
We're using 23rd as a maintenance of traffic to be able to build
White. We build 23rd, we put traffic on it, we construct White, and
now instead of building a temporary bridge or another means of
maintaining traffic, we have a bonus of getting that Growth
Management Plan recommendation completed.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I was invited out there by
residents, looked at the columns, and there was no cracking or scoring
of the columns. The only issue that we're talking about is the top of the
structure that really doesn't need to be replaced, according to the
consult- -- the other two consultants, of, you know, repairing the
existing bridge. And I -- you know, I have a concern of spending this
kind of money at this time when we don't have a necessary need to do
so.
MR. AHMAD: I can assure you that there is a need to replace or
repair, immediately, White bridge. The fact is, as -- the tension bars in
the bridge have eroded and actually kind of broke off. So each beam is
acting individually. You may not see -- you look at the beam and you
may not see these, because they are in the concrete. And our
consultant says you need -- FDOT every year -- it's been on the list of
FDOT since 2006, you must repair, you must repair, you must repair.
And we finally -- and what FDOT recommendation is, it's almost
Page 193
April 12-13, 2011
like, you've got to do something. And by -- we found that some of
these bridge reports, the FDOT inspections, they may not -- mayor
may not have gone into the in-depth investigations.
We found that on the Goodland bridge, for example. We -- you
know, the FDOT came, do the repair, do the repair. And when we
hired a consultant, yeah, we need to do the repair, but not to the degree
that they said, and that's why we went into Cutrone, and they hired a
subconsultant who actually physically did that in-depth investigation
of this bridge, and those are your consultants and our consultants that
we hired, and they come back with a recommendation, replace the
bridge, replace the bridge. It's cost feasible, and you are, at the same
time -- and from our perspective, you are building 23rd, which is part
of your Growth Management Plan, and it's been on the books for a
long time.
So it is my personal opinion -- and I'm a professional engineer as
well as the other ones -- is for this board to replace this bridge. Not
just repair it and patch it like we did with Chokoloskee. Chokoloskee,
we went through that approach, sir, and I am having to replace it
again, like three years later. I'm working on a bridge replacement of
that bridge.
This is -- it's not the way to go. It's -- you could repair it, you
could patch it, but you're not going to end up with a -- you'll end up
three years later having me come down here with maybe a
recommendation to replace.
MS. MESSAM: Can I also say one more thing, Jay -- is that,
Commissioner, when that bridge was designed 46 years ago, the
standards used are different from what they are today.
One of the things you have to look at is a bridge lifespan. Back
in 1965 when this bridge was built, the typical lifespan of a bridge was
50 years. Now bridges are being designed to last 75 years.
So as far as the White Boulevard bridge is concerned, it's coming
to the end of its useful life. And doing repairs to it for, like, throwing
Page 194
April 12-13, 2011
away a million dollars, as you've heard our director say, is not, you
know -- and you know that -- know this yourself, it's not cost feasible.
Again, I would like to clarify that only one consultant was hired
to evaluate, that I'm aware of, the White Boulevard bridge condition
assessment. We received that study. And I don't know what other two
consultants made recommendations for repairs, but there was only one
study done for White Boulevard bridge across the Golden Gate Main
Canal.
MR. AHMAD: I'm open to other questions.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: How many speakers do we
have?
MR. MITCHELL: We have three speakers, sir.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Can I reserve my time after the
speakers?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Sure, sure. Call the first speaker.
MR. MITCHELL: The first speaker is Donna Sadler, and
Carolina Mosher has ceded her time to Ms. Sadler.
MS. SADLER: Commissioners, my name is Donna Sadler, and I
have lived on 23rd Street Southwest for 26 years and in Naples for 35
years.
My concerns are of safety and cost. I'm here today to ask you
not to approve of any more funds for this project. Of course, now I
see that they came up with my same estimate. I would appreciate it
very much if you would please read the material that I have written. I
have given to Ian to -- you don't have to read it now.
Everything that I have said I have research to back it up. I cannot
understand why in this downed economy, why the Transportation
Department wants to spend $6 million for this White Boulevard bridge
project to replace a bridge that does not have to be replaced at this
time -- it is not scour critical. It is only functionally obsolete, which
means that a bridge does not meet the current road-design standards --
Page 195
April 12-13, 2011
and only being recommended to be replaced with a modern structure.
The White Boulevard bridge only needs minor repairs, and even
if it does have to be replaced, there are other solutions that will not
waste an enormous amount of taxpayers' money. The modified
Florida Double T bridge for accelerated bridge construction, which is
planned on being used for the replacement, can be done in 90 days.
A temporary bridge is all you need over the canal at 23rd Street.
Then you would not have to have any road improvements, which is
the most expensive part of this whole thing is the 23rd Street bridge
and the road improvements.
And this is where the safety comes in. They're only going to put
underground drainage and sidewalks on one side of this street. We
have deep ditches on both sides of this street.
I was wondering why 23rd Street Southwest was chosen to have
the deep drainage ditches dug due to the widening of Golden Gate
Boulevard if this bridge was planned. Was anyone who was involved
in Policy 6.1.1 aware of the deep drainage ditches? Were they aware
of the cost that was involved in not only the ditch work, but the
culverts and cement aprons that were replaced and now will have to be
redone if this bridge is built?
As far as Policy 7.3.1 for evacuation, there are five north
accesses and no southern accesses. A bridge should be further south to
connect Golden Gate Parkway or City Gate Boulevard.
Even the chicanes on 13th Street Southwest that cost taxpayers
$291,000 will have to be removed, which is still another expense,
because many residents will use this street as a detour, because two
cars cannot pass through the chicanes safely.
This recession is not over yet. We will be up and down for the
next five years. Hopefully in 15 years we will know exactly where we
stand in our economy.
The three alternatives. Alternative A is to repair at
approximately $300,000 and will extend the life for 15 years and does
Page 196
April 12-13, 2011
not require a detour. It's right here in the bridge-inspection report.
Alternative B, at a cost of approximately 1.2 million, will extend
the life of the bridge for 15 to 20 years, and it addresses the
substandard width and lack of pedestrian and bike paths. It also
addresses the piling, jacking, and -- and it says that they expect it to
last 15 to 20 years.
Alternative C is to replace the bridge, and that cost depends on
whether you use a temporary over 23rd or if you built a permanent
over 23rd.
They had the same estimate I had at $4 million just for the 23rd
Street Southwest bridge. I feel at this time in this economy the
federal, state, and local governments are having enormous financial
budget shortfalls. In the past two years, we have lost 54.6 million in
property tax revenue. Home prices have dropped and will continue to
drop. More than one-fifth of American households are upside-down
on their mortgages. Gas prices will, yet again, affect our economy.
Public safety is being compromised by delaying more important
bridges that were identified in the horizon bridge study. Based on
agency rankings, Bridge 2 and 3 scored the highest and are
recommended that these two are installed first.
And there are other important bridges in the horizon study, too,
that rank higher than the priority of the 23rd Street bridge. I don't
understand why they are pushing for the need of this 23rd Street
bridge in this economy.
Thank you.
MR. MITCHELL: The next speaker will be Ron Mosher.
MR. MOSHER: It's almost good evening, but thank you for the
opportunity. It's been an enlightening day. I haven't done this in a
while.
I live on 23rd, and I agree with some of the things Donna was
saying, and I understand where they're coming from, but I think
they're looking at it -- in this economy, we need to really look at, is
Page 197
April 12-13, 2011
this the best way to go? They've mentioned themselves you have the
accelerated bridge program. Information I got from them, in Colorado
they built a bridge like this in 48 hours, over a weekend, and their
price was under a half a million dollars.
For what I know, Southwest Florida, the saying is, everything's
higher west of 41. So it must be south of 4 everything's higher.
I think we need to look at some of these other things they said
that couldn't be built down here. Well, if we believed in that, a lot of
things that we've seen in our lifetime wouldn't be done if we kept
saying you can't do it or it won't work. There's ways of doing it.
I'm not saying that bridge doesn't need to be replaced, but is that
the best way to expend all the money, build that bridge and then build
a bridge on my street and put traffic through there?
I just think you need to look at it more on a fiscal way and see if
there's not a way of doing -- achieving what we need. I'm not saying
maybe 23rd doesn't need to be done some day, but does it really need
to be now based on what's south of there? The traffic's not there as it
was a couple years ago.
I thank you for your time.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you.
MR. MITCHELL: That was your last speaker, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. Ifwe could, please, Jay,
this process, how long has it been going on till we reached the
conclusions that we did as we went forward? Would you just walk us
through it real quick where we've been, how long we've been in this
process, the public meetings and so on.
MR. AHMAD: We've been at this since 2006. We've been
getting these reports from FDOT and, frankly, you know, we finally
start doing something about our bridges that are decaying in this
county. And no matter what we do, sir, there's going to be somebody
who lives on that street that is not going to like what we do.
Page 198
April 12-13, 2011
And, unfortunately, here is the case. You know, there are folks
who are concerned about the additional traffic on their streets, and that
will happen as a result of opening the 23rd Street bridge.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And we have been through a
lengthy process, and we've been through this only -- really one time in
the last 10 years before, and that was when we did 13th many, many
years ago.
MR. AHMAD: This -- absolutely, sir.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And we've talked numerous
times about the need for interconnectivity within Golden Gate Estates,
how we need several different bridges out there at a number of
different places. The only thing that stops us; it's not money, it's the
lack of money; am I correct?
MR. AHMAD: Correct.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And so the little bit of money
you've got, you're trying to find the very best location to be able to
meet a need that's upcoming, and you identified White Boulevard as
one that was -- took a precedence over everything else; is that correct?
MR. AHMAD: Absolutely. We started this bridge program
about three years ago, actually. I looked at the -- these bridges, and
we weren't doing much to them for many years. And these sufficiency
ratings and health-index ratings are scary. And, frankly, this bridge,
you know, there is a health index of84.7, for example. 84.7 is a poor
-- it's not your grades in school. It's a very poor level.
The sufficiency level of 44.4 -- the standard is 60 or higher. We
are failing miserably, and we need to start attending to some of these
bridges here.
And now finally we are -- we did Chokoloskee, as you know.
We did Goodland. We have under contract coming up to you soon Oil
Well east of29. We are attending to only what I would call the
emergency bridges in the county. We're not having a wish list of
adding bridges or repairing bridges that don't need repair. Only the
Page 199
April 12-13, 2011
very, very critical out of the 106 bridges that we have in the county,
we're only doing a few because of budget. And this bridge is certainly
on top of that list.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Now, Jay, when we talked
before and we met with the residents out there, we -- one of the
concerns -- in fact, I think it was one of the meetings we had in my
office with some of the residents regarding what was being done to be
able to provide for the safety of the residents, and one of the things
was about a traffic light --
MR. AHMAD: Yes, sir. You saw in one of our presentations,
we are installing -- for the safety of the residents, we widened -- as we
open 23rd -- the current street width is 18 feet. We're going to widen it
a little bit to II-foot lanes, plus going to put a sidewalk and a traffic
light at the intersection of Golden Gate and 23rd, 23rd Street.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Are we anticipating any other
measures to be able to slow down speed and maybe when the other
road -- the White Boulevard bridge gets put in, to be able to encourage
people to use that rather than drive all the way through 23rd?
MR. AHMAD: Yes. In addition to that, for calming devices, we
are putting speed humps similar to the one on St. Andrew,
Commissioner Fiala knows. We are -- we're not going to put chicanes,
just like 13th. This bridge is going to look, and the street's going to
look like 13th. Thirteenth Street, if you look at it, is not really a scary
__ from a traffic standpoint, there's no heavy volume per se. It
provides connection to the residents. A lot of the people who live there
are glad that 13th is built. This is going to be similar.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, at the time it was going to
be built, there was a lot of dissention, I can tell you that for a fact,
because I personally held meetings right out there on the street. I
know the pain everybody was going through. Like you say, a lot of
people in time got -- accepted it. I imagine there's still some people
that have regrets on it.
Page 200
April 12-13, 2011
I mean, one of the things that's obvious today, I mean, when you
look at who's here, when we had our first meetings, there was
numerous people. This room was filled. You answered the questions
over and over again. A lot of hysteria that came forward, you and
your staff have handled it quite well meeting individually with people
and -- collectively with them, going over item by item. And where you
couldn't (sic) make changes to be able to meet the needs of the public,
you've done so, and I admire you for that.
MR. AHMAD: And we continue to do that. We invited Mrs.
Sadler and Mr. Mosher, actually, into our office. We spent over three
hours and discussed all the issues. We explained to them -- and Nick
was there, my staff, almost everybody that needed to answer questions
was at that meeting. We answered the questions.
I don't believe we can satisfy Mrs. Sadler. I really don't. I think
it's -- we're opening a bridge on her street. She's definitely impacted
by this project. And, you know, it is one of those things like the
people on 13th Street.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And I want to remind you, Mrs.
Sadler has served a very big purpose in this. If it wasn't for her, some
of the amenities that are being placed on that street probably would
not have happened.
MR. AHMAD: Oh, absolutely. I think she had come up with
great ideas.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So I encourage people to get
involved in these processes that go forward.
Fellow Commissioners, as you heard, there is concern over
money. It's a big concern, and it's not going to go away for some time.
Meanwhile, there's a health-safety issue here that just has to be
answered. And to put this off with some temporary repair and have to
face it another 10 years down the road is not what I'd like to see, and I
make a motion for approval.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
Page 201
April 12-13, 2011
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I still had questions.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Do we have any other speakers,
Ian?
MR. MITCHELL: Sir, we don't.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Go ahead, Commissioner Hiller.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Just a couple of questions. The
first question I have is, why are you using urban instead of rural
gutters?
MR. AHMAD: It's related to drainage, Commissioner. The first
one-third of the street we have no place to put the water, so we have
that pond that was identified in one of the slides existing when they
built Golden Gate Boulevard, so we are actually directing traffic to go
north to get into this lake. And the rest of the drainage is going to be
taken by swales and treated in those swales to the canal. It's drainage
related.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Ms. Sadler presented, you know,
different numbers than the numbers you presented, and she indicated
that in the study that, you know, there was a $300,000-repair option, a
1.2 million. What were the -- can you read those to me again.
MS. SADLER: Three hundred thousand just for Alternative A,
which is just to repair it --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right. When was --
MS. SADLER: -- to last the -- to make the bridge last --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: What was the 1.2 million?
MS. SADLER: The 1.2 is Alternative B, which addresses all the
problems with the bridge. And I want to correct him. In 2000 --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Wait one second. And that would
last for how many years?
MS. SADLER: They -- we would expect the service life to be
extended 15 to 20 years if Alternative B is used.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And what was the third
alternative?
Page 202
April 12-13, 2011
MS. SADLER: That's to replace the bridge.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And that's the replacement, okay.
MS. SADLER: And that depends on if you use a temporary over
23rd. My--
MS. MESSAM: What was the cost? Could you --
MS. SADLER: I have pictures of what the--
COMMISSIONER HILLER: What was -- what would the cost .
be to do the replacement, the full replacement?
MS. SADLER: The full replacement? It depends on if they go
with the full -- the 23rd Street bridge I came out with around 6
million. But if they go with a temporary, which you can rent from
other counties or you can actually purchase one and reconstruct it and
use it at other places.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: But we're talking about two
bridges, not -- I'm not talking about that second bridge. I'm talking
about the existing bridge.
MS. SADLER: I didn't have -- they didn't have any price on
Alternative C. What Alternative C said was it replaces the entire
bridge to accommodate proper lanes.
MS. MESSAM: Excuse me, Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aren't we talking about two
bridges?
MS. MESSAM: You asked her about the report that was done on
White Boulevard bridge, the existing bridge. There is no bridge
currently at 23rd Street Southwest.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I understand that, but there is a
bridge at White.
MS. MESSAM: There are three repair alternatives, and she's
provided you from the study the cost of the two alternatives. What
she is not telling you is the cost of the recommended alternative, okay.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Which is what?
MS. MESSAM: The second alternative --
Page 203
April 12-13, 2011
THE COURT REPORTER: I can only take one at a time.
MS. SADLER: Which I don't have.
MS. MESSAM: -- was a little over a million, and the third
alternative was about $3.2 million.
So if are you going to repair something for over a million dollars
when you could replace it for two and get a 75-year life as opposed to
doing cosmetic repairs for over a million dollars and get a shorter life,
it would make sense, to me, to follow the engineer's recommendation
for replacement. And I do not believe that report stated that it could
be replaced if you use 23rd Street as an alternate.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: But now we also have other
bridges that are in need of repair, correct?
MS. MESSAM: Yes. I want to give you an example. Golden
Gate Boulevard. We currently have a study going on Golden Gate
Boulevard. There are two bridges, one over the Golden Gate Main
Canal and one over the Miller Canal. Those bridges are load posted,
okay. They cannot carry the current legal load limits that is
recommended, okay.
If we allow White Boulevard to continue in this present state, that
is what will happen. We need to do something about this bridge. The
DOT and the engineers that we have hired have carefully pointed that
out.
And I understand Mrs. Sadler's passion. If I were living on 23rd
Street Southwest, I would be just as passionate. But the greater good
of the community has to be looked at as opposed to just one person's
need to keep her street closed.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And if I may ask, what is the cost
of repairing the other two load-posted bridges?
MS. MESSAM: The current estimate is -- we're looking at $5.7
million for the total replacement of those two bridges.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Of those two. And that's not under
consideration today?
Page 204
April 12-13, 2011
MS. MESSAM: We are --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Do you want to call the question?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, no, no. I mean, I heard --
she said there was no bridge on 23rd, but now she wants to replace it.
So is there a bridge on 23rd?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No.
MS. MESSAM: There is no bridge on 23rd.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So we're not replacing the
bridge on 23rd?
MS. MESSAM: We're not replacing any bridge on 23rd because
there is no bridge there.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's the new proposal. That's the
$4 million new proposal.
MS. MESSAM: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: You're talking about the, you
know, repair or replacement of an existing bridge on White plus the
addition of a new bridge at 23rd, and then we're also learning that
there are several other bridges that are in critical disrepair.
I'm sorry?
MR. MOSHER: More critical than White.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, I'd like to call the question,
please.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes, okay. Very well.
All in favor of the motion, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. It passes 3-2 with Commissioner
Henning and Hiller dissenting.
Page 205
April 12-13, 2011
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'd like to explain why I voted no.
I feel that the bridge does need to be repaired, as the engineer
recommended. My concern is, given that we've identified, you know,
two other bridges that are in critical -- in a critical state of disrepair,
the load-posted bridges, for another 6 million, and we don't have an
immediate need for that second bridge that doesn't exist, I mean, I
really think with the limited funds we have, that we ought to be
redirecting the money to the troubled bridges.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Two separate funding sources.
MR.OCHS: Commissioners--
COMMISSIONER HILLER: What's that?
MR. OCHS: Commissioner, are we moving on, sir, or what are
we --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yep, moving on.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'd like clarification.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Ma'am, it's two separate funding
sources. For the record, Nick Casalanguida. One is impact fees, one
is general fund. Impact fees can't be used on replacements.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Oh. So you're strictly using the
impact fees for the construction of the new bridge.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Correct, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Is that what it is?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Correct, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Do we have the impact fees to do
that?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: We do, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Really? Okay.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yeah.
MR. OCHS: Do we go on, sir?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Do you need a break, Terri?
THE COURT REPORTER: I'm okay.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We're going to try to go through to five
Page 206
April 12-13, 2011
o'clock, and then we're closing it down, because we've got two
commissioners who have to leave here to go to another meeting.
MR.OCHS: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Let's go to the next one.
Item #10D
AWARD OF RFP #10-5450 - ASPHALT ROADWAY,
CONCRETE, CURB, SIDEWALK AND DRIVEWAY
INSTALLATION. (ESTIMATED ANNUAL EXPENSE IS
$2,000,000) - MOTION TO DENY CONTRACT - FAILED;
MOTION TO CONTINUE UNTIL NEXT MEETING WITH
CLARIFICATION FROM BOTH THE CLERK'S OFFICE AND
COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE TO STATE WHAT THEIR
CONCERNS ARE - APPROVED
MR. OCHS: 10D is a request to reconsider the award of RFP
10-5450, asphalt roadway, concrete, curb, sidewalk, and driveway
installati ons.
Mr. Carnell is here to answer questions.
MR. CARNELL: Yeah. I'll just briefly comment that this was
awarded by the board on March the 8th, and on March the 22nd the
board voted to reconsider the matter. So we're here to answer any
questions from the board.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Hiller.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'd like to make a motion to deny.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And the reason -- thanks -- and the
reason why is that I have a concern. You know, I know this was an
issue that you were trying to resolve with Crystal, and I guess it hasn't
been resolved, as I understand.
And, you know, I have a problem with the fact that we already
Page 207
April 12-13, 2011
have two existing contracts and, you know, statutorily we can't agree
to pay more for the same service, which is basically what's being
proposed here.
So I just don't know why this is happening the way it is, and I just
can't support it till you resolve the financial issues and the statutory
issues that limit you in -- with respect to making this happen.
MR. CARNELL: Well, if I could clarify. You're making a
motion to deny the reconsideration?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, making -- no. I'm making--
not to deny the reconsideration, but to deny the approval of this
contract. So I'd like to clarify that. I really think it needs to go back
to the drawing board.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Steve, have you been unable to reach
agreement with the Clerk's Office about how this contract should be
structured?
MR. CARNELL: Yes.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Have we asked them to tell us in writing
what they want to change?
MR. CARNELL: No, sir. It's been a verbal dialogue. We've put
it in writing.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: No, not the verbal dialogue, okay. Let
the Clerk tell us in writing how he would write this contract to meet
his requirements and then bring it back to us as quickly as possible.
Now, we do have a motion on the table.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: What is the motion, again, please?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, the motion is to deny the contract
by Commissioner Hiller and seconded by Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Obviously the Clerk is not going
to approve it. He's not going to approve the expenditures based on the
way it's been let.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, the point is that --look, if the
Board of County Commissioners makes a decision to procure services
Page 208
April 12-13, 2011
and it is legal to do so, then the Clerk has an obligation to make the
payment.
Now, if the Clerk feels they don't have the sufficient information
or terms in the contract to measure whether or not the appropriate
services have been delivered, then the Clerk has an obligation to tell
us in no uncertain terms exactly what they need. And this business of
bickering back and forth is silly.
Now, we've heard from Crystal what she thinks she needs. Well,
write it down. Write it into a contract and tell us what the contract
should say, and then we'll take it under advisement.
But we're getting nowhere this way. So if you think you can
write this contract better so that you feel comfortable writing a check
for it, then get it done. Okay?
MS. KINZEL: Commissioner Coyle, for the record, Crystal
Kinzel. First of all, the Clerk really isn't in the position of writing the
contracts for the Board of County Commissioners. We only have to
look at the payments and the process, and we do try to determine the
legality of payment.
We've been working very closely with Steve. We've not been
bickering or fighting back and forth. We've been having a true and
honest dialogue with numerous staff members, including the County
Attorney's Office.
We have some concern, especially since there are existing
contracts that are out and let for similarly let and structured services.
There is a contract for driveway and pavement. There's a good
contract enacted for concrete. There's another contract that just
expired that had an option for renewal also for asphalt. There is a
contract that is active for potholes and milling for the similar services.
We need to understand, are those contracts being terminated, and
what pricing are we going to be judging any let item to?
Steve indicates, well, that's going to be on the purchase order.
The current contract that's put out there did not include in the bid
Page 209
April 12-13, 2011
package even a pricing or cost for equipment.
Steve and I have talked about this, and perhaps the contract needs
to include FDOT rates or some comparable equipment rate that is
standardized and expressed so that when we try to validate a payment
against the contract, we have a pay structure to validate to.
I don't think these are unreasonable questions or concerns. And
we have been working with staff. We just have not reached resolution
at this point, and the contract terms haven't been totally clarified that
we feel at this time we could make payment.
I think it's perfectly appropriate for us to put that forward to staff,
and we tried to do that up front before a contract is let to resolve these
issues so that the board has a clean product to approve. And we are
moving forward with that, but --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Look, this has been going on, I think, for
the third time, now; is that correct?
MR. CARNELL: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's over a month and a half, two
months?
MR. CARNELL: Uh-huh.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: There's no reason why the two offices
can't reach agreement on something like this over two months. And if
you're telling me you're not going to put it in writing, you're not going
to give us a checklist about the things that we need to do to meet your
requirements, then you're being an obstructionist.
MS. KINZEL: Commissioner Coyle, we've not refused to put it
in writing. We have just worked back and worth with emails, and I
think on a very agreeable nature. We've refused to do nothing.
We've been working with staff. We'll be glad to put that in
writing.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, it seems to me if staff has to come
back here time and time again to get us to approve the contract over
your objections, something isn't working here, okay.
Page 210
April 12-13, 2011
MS. KINZEL: We would agree.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And so we need to get it working, and
we can get it working if you will tell us in writing what it is you need,
and then we'll have Mr. Carnell respond to us as to how he's going to
get it done for you, okay?
MS. KINZEL: We'll be glad to do that.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. Then let's do it.
Okay. I'm sorry. Go ahead, Mr. Coletta -- Commissioner
Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Meanwhile we've got a motion
to deny. Shouldn't it be to continue?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, the motion is the motion. You
know, Commissioner Hiller made the motion to deny. Commissioner
Hennings has seconded it. So unless Commissioner Hiller is willing
to change her motion, we're going to call the motion.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I don't think really -- I don't think
__ yeah, I don't think there's any need to change the motion. I think we
should deny it as it is. It's going to be redone to conform with the law.
It will be brought back in a new form that satisfies the law, and then
we can vote on whatever the new contract is whenever it comes back.
And it may not even come back because, like I said, we have two
existing contracts on point, so it may not even need to come back till
those existing contracts expire.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Go ahead, Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you.
Mr. Klatzkow, do you still have a concern on this item as we
spoke --
MR. KLATZKOW: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- prior. Okay. And that's
based upon why I put it on the agenda.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Our legal counsel has a concern
Page 211
April 12-13, 2011
on this and, from what I understand, it's the same as the Clerk. I think
it needs to go ~ut, the -- how it was done in the past. Nobody had a
problem with it. County Attorney's Office didn't; Clerk's didn't.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All in favor of the motion, please signify
by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All opposed, signify by like sign.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. I would like to make a motion--
the motion fails with Commissioner Hiller and Henning voting in
favor of the motion to deny and Commissioners Fiala, Coyle, and
Coletta voting in opposition to the motion to deny.
I make a motion that we continue this item until the next meeting
and we get some definitive answers about what it is we need to get.
And if you've got some concerns, we need to hear what those are too,
and we need to put them in writing.
MR. KLATZKOW: I can give them to you right now if you
want.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I don't need them right now because it's
not going to get settled right now. What I'd like to do is continue it
until the next meeting and get back here with very specific needs from
the Clerk's Office, from your office, and replies by Mr. Carnell as to
how we're going to meet those requirements.
So that's a motion.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Second by Commissioner Fiala.
All in favor, please signify by saying aye.
Page 212
April 12-13, 2011
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I still think there are several
people who want to speak.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You want to speak about the motion; is
that what you want?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah, I do.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I think that, you know, your
suggestion to continue this without allowing Mr. Klatzkow to put forth
the issues is not appropriate. I think if -- I would like to hear what Mr.
Klatzkow has to say and why this is problematic. I think it will shed
some light on whether or not this is something that will be continued
or will not come back at all.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. The motion is to continue. If you
have an argument about the motion to continue, you've made it.
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm not going to support the
motion.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, wait a minute. Let me
finish. All right?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, go ahead.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Can I finish?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Sure.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Great. Because the county
attorney wanted to address his concerns, we can dispose of this item
and move forward. And what we have, we're going to discuss this
item again, okay. And then I feel at the end of the day that we're
going to have to go out for another RFP. Weare, in my opinion, not to
offend anybody, waisting time of getting to the bottom of the
resolution, and that is getting a lowest and best price, okay?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, yes. And I'll respond to that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, I'm just telling you why I'm
Page 213
April 12-13, 2011
voting no on it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah, okay. Well, I'm going to respond
to it. There are three people, three groups here who have to get
together to work this out, the county attorney, the Clerk's Office, and
Steve Carnell and his office. It's not going to do any good for the
county attorney to tell us what his concerns are unless we can address
the Clerk's concerns.
I want to get them all together and get this thing resolved once
and for all. This is absolutely crazy that we go through this time after
time after time. And I'm not blaming anybody for it. I'm just saying,
get together and get this thing resolved. That's all we're asking you to
do. And come back to us with the resolution--
COMMISSIONER FIALA: By next week.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- next time -- by next week, next
meeting.
Commissioner Coletta, do you have anything to say?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No. I think you said it all.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Then all in favor of the motion,
please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: The motion for continuance and
hopefully a final resolution among all parties passes by a vote of 3-2,
with Commissioner Fiala, Coyle, and Coletta voting in favor, and
Commissioner Hiller and Henning voting against.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Before you leave, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah. Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: We have some people, I think,
Page 214
April 12-13, 2011
that want to speak under public comments. If we could do that now
rather than make them come back tomorrow, I think it might be a
great idea.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I would like to make a comment.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: With respect to this last vote, first
of all, two issues with respect to how you've chaired this agenda item,
Mr. Coyle. The first is, I take exception to you calling Crystal an
obstructionist. We had a discussion about decorum and good will, and
name calling is out of order.
The other problem I have with the way you've managed this
situation is you've denied me the right to hear what the county
attorney has to say. I want to hear it, I want it on the record, and I
want it now.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you very much.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And by that I mean I would like
him to have the opportunity to tell me now, and I don't feel you should
have the right to deny me that information.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We have finished with this item and
we're through with the debate.
We're going on to another item. We're going to have public
comment --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioner Coyle?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- on general topics.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioner Coyle?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: During -- prior to this item
discussed, it was said that two commissioners have to leave early and
we're going to table the meeting and continue it tomorrow.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We'll continue it tomorrow morning,
yeah.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. I don't see where it is the
Page 215
April 12-13, 2011
chairman's prerogative to continue the meeting without the support of
the majority of the board.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: If I knew you were going to do
that, I wouldn't have scheduled meetings for 11 o'clock tomorrow.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I think I sent a memo to all the
commISSIoners.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You sent a memo yesterday.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Afternoon.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And my appointment was made
Monday morning.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: But I still don't think that you
have the prerogative to convene this meeting--
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Would you like to have a vote?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I think --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We could ask the county
attorney. I just don't think that you have the ability to do that. It's the
board's meeting.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, I'm willing to put it to a vote.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion to continue the meeting
after we hear the public petition (sic).
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: It will call for a two-thirds vote.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And comment.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: No, it doesn't.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I think it will.
Page 216
April 12-13, 2011
CHAIRMAN COYLE: No, it doesn't.
Okay. There's a motion to adjourn the meeting after the public
comment on general topics because of commitments by two other
. .
commISSIoners.
All in favor, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. It passes, a vote of3-2 with
Commissioner Fiala, Coyle, and Coletta supporting the continuation
of the meeting until tomorrow after we hear public comments.
Now, public comments, I understood, were to talk about public
attendance at the meeting concerning the mobility plan. Is that true or
is there some other topic that people who wanted to speak --
MR.OCHS: Commissioner, if I might, there was a request to
have a time-certain for the public comment portion of the meeting for
-- some stakeholders to the Master Mobility Plan wanted to address
the board about opening the meetings to the public. That decision was
made and communicated before the meeting this morning, so we had
no need to make the public comment -- or request the board to make
the public comment section a time-certain.
Item #14
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS
MR. OCHS: So you have public comment on general topics
open to any public comment at this time.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. How many -- how many people
Page 217
April 12-13, 2011
do we have speaking?
MR. MITCHELL: Five people.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Let's call the first person.
MR. MITCHELL: The first person is Duane Billington, and he's
going to address Item 6B, which was the Early Learning Coalition.
MR. BILLINGTON: Good evening, Commissioners. For the
record, Duane Billington. I have a couple questions here on process.
Past meetings that I've been to -- and there have been many over the
years -- when you have public petition, typically what happens is there
is no public comment allowed. One of the reasons for that is, there's
not going to be a board action taken.
Typically public petition is to listen to that petitioner for the --
and then the board determines whether that should be scheduled for a
future meeting to be heard on the regular agenda.
This morning under that particular item having to do with 25,000
going to a charitable concern, that didn't happen. One, the public was
not allowed to be heard, two, you had a vote and acted on it, and you
spent public funds.
I find this to be extraordinary. I don't believe that -- or I question
-- I have serious questions as to whether that conforms with your
policy or it: in fact, it's not in direct contradiction to your rules and
operations and your policies, and I'd like the county attorney to opine
on that.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You want the county to do that, or do
you want me to do that?
MR. BILLINGTON: Hey, you guys can take turns on me. You
always do.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: The key word is typically. Very, very
frequently we resolve issues under public petition by vote of the board
if we can do so within a reasonable period of time.
We typically do not like to get into long, long debates about
something and have a full hearing unless the -- there's sufficient
Page 218
April 12-13, 2011
support on the board to bring it back for a full hearing.
Today there seemed to be a number of commissioners who felt
that they could resolve the issue very quickly, and they made a motion
to do so, and that is not unusual.
As a matter of fact, the budget amendment for the allocation of
that money will come back on an agenda in the future, and if you wish
to comment on it, you will have an opportunity to do so at that point in
time.
MR. BILLINGTON: Okay. I will appreciate that and avail
myself that opportunity.
I do have one further question. How did you-all find out that __
how you-all were going to vote on that particular item prior to the
meeting for it to be scheduled on that public petition part of it?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I don't think anybody found out.
MR. BILLINGTON: So if you already knew where you were
going, there had to be some communication there.
MR. KLATZKOW: This isn't fair. This was -- they couldn't
bring this one back, sir, because she had a deadline. There was
discussions about taking it to the school board. She said, no, I've got a
deadline; I can't do that.
The problem here was that the board couldn't bring it back, the
woman had a deadline, and this was outside the norm, quite frankly. I
don't -- we didn't violate procedure. We really don't have a proceed
for something like this.
MR. BILLINGTON: So what I'm hearing from the county
attorney then is that one person's deadline can negate somebody else's
right to be heard.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: No. You have a right --
MR. BILLINGTON: Because of her deadline--
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You're being heard right now, and you'll
be heard again when the time comes to approve the budget resolution
for the 25,000.
Page 219
April 12-13, 2011
MR. KLATZKOW: And if the board does not approve the
budget resolution, the money's not going to get spent.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's right.
MR. BILLINGTON: That budget resolution has about 10,000
items on it, and I doubt whether this board is going to spend much on
that particular one item. I'm saying you violated process. You really
ought to recognize it.
MR. KLA TZKOW: Yeah, but that's not true either, sir.
MR. BILLINGTON: Thank you.
MR. MITCHELL: The next speaker will be Nancy Payton.
MS. PAYTON: Good afternoon. Nancy Payton, representing
the Florida Wildlife Federation. And I had contacted you and
Manager Ochs about -- on behalf of not only the Federation but the
Conservancy and the Golden Gate Civic Association about appearing
under the public comment section to discuss the Master Mobility Plan
and public participation.
Thankfully that issue has been resolved, and I'm here to say
thank you on behalf of the three organizations and also I'm sure
residents in our community who also appreciate the opportunity now,
if they so desire, to openly and actively participate in all aspects of the
Master Mobility Plan.
So this is a feel-good comment, and I hope you appreciate it, that
we came and we said thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And so on the one hand we're taking
away the opportunity for public comment; on the other hand, we're
giving you greater opportunity for public comment, right?
MS. PAYTON: That's right. I guess we're good lobbyists.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'd like to comment.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That was really -- and she waited all
day long to tell us too.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes. Thank you.
Commissioner Hiller wants to comment.
Page 220
April 12-13, 2011
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. I understand what Mr.
Billington is saying. I mean, I'd like to, just for my own education,
under the public petition process -- I mean, if we're allowed to vote on
it or not and whether or not we can bring something back on the
agenda that -- or bring something up to vote on that isn't on the
agenda, which is really the secondary question.
So, you know, if I could have clarification on that just for my
own education.
MR. KLATZKOW: General rule on public petition is that the
only decision the board makes is whether to bring it back or not, and
that's true for the vast majority of them. This one had a time deadline,
so we veered off -- we veered off what was traditionally -- what we
would do.
You couldn't bring it back. We either made the decision today or
you were going to make no decision at all.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I understand.
MR. BILLINGTON: And no decision at all has been made.
MR. KLATZKOW: Well, it's the board prerogative.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner--
COMMISSIONER HILLER: But -- and the only other thing I
want to say is, you know, I appreciate Nancy's comments, and I think
in the spirit of full transparency, it was a fantastic decision on the part
of staff to open it all up, and I think it will build good will and greater
support for the Master Mobility Plan. So I have to commend staft:
you know, and Leo for doing that.
MR.OCHS: Thank you.
MR. MITCHELL: Sir, your last speaker is, again, is Duane
Billington. He's going to speak to the East Trail Master Plan.
MR. BILLINGTON: I waive.
MR. MITCHELL: Do you want to -- no, he's waiving, okay.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's it?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You said five speakers.
Page 221
April 12-13, 2011
MR. MITCHELL: Yes, that's -- we've finished now.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. We're finished. Okay.
MR. MITCHELL: Sir, before you --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You said five speakers, Ian.
MR. MITCHELL: Because, sir, when I looked at the speakers,
Mr. Billington had signed himselfup a couple of times for the same
item so--
,
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Isn't Mr. Thompson signed up to speak
or not?
MR. MITCHELL: Nope.
MR. THOMPSON: Yeah, I did.
MR. KLATZKOW: He did.
MR. MITCHELL: Pardon? Well--
MR. KLATZKOW: I know he did.
MR. MITCHELL: Well, that's the strange one. Yeah, so -- okay,
it's Kenneth Thompson.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Mr. Thompson.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: We're going to forgive you today,
Ian, because it's your birthday.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: But otherwise. Just kidding.
MR. THOMPSON: My name is Kenneth Thompson.
MR. MITCHELL: Sorry, Mr. Thompson.
MR. THOMPSON: I live at 2831 Becca Avenue. And I come
here really to get you to help. I talked to Diane Flagg about it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Mr. Thompson, if could talk more
directly into that microphone --
MR. THOMPSON: Yeah, I talked to Diane Flagg about it a
while ago. But then when I got home, I dropped -- I got a bombshell
dropped on me. If you don't do something with this other lady that
works with her, Michaelle Crowley, she knows -- or just drop code
enforce permanently, because she's over there just -- people won't
Page 222
April 12-13, 2011
clean up their damn trees, and I'm having to pay other people to take
care of their property.
Trees have -- coming over to me, but I got the idea now that the
whole yard is just loaded with trees that they've chopped up. Stumps
design their yards. And I told her, why don't -- if they can cut the stub
down and get it to this far, why can't they put it out for the trash truck?
They won't put their stink in' garbage out. You smell it from a mile
away, and it is just -- one guy cut the whole back of his house out over
there, and he -- no permits, and then he built a thing all the way
around his house with no permit, a walkway.
He knows about it, and he built -- I give him some palm trees,
and he put them on a pile -- on top of a pile of logs and growing them,
so I've already cut two of his palms trees down. I went out and --
yeah, I did. I got the permission from the county.
They came over my fence. I cut them off right at my fence to let
them fall in the yard. Cost me $150 a piece to clean them up. You
come over my fence, and I got the idea, I'm going to go home, I'm
going to hire the guy again and chop them off and fall them right in
his yard.
His name is John M. He's 2815 Becca Avenue. He don't want to
do nothing. He'll run around and tell you he's got enough money to
burn two -- to last him two lifetimes.
And then -- there's one other thing. We need a sheriff bad.
Damn if we don't need a sheriff bad. I have dealt with every captain
in this sheriffs department to try -- to help me to try to get the patrol --
Captain Gerret (phonetic). He's the patrol. He won't do nothing to
help you.
This place right in front of me, that boathouse, you should see it.
A maggot won't live in it. I'm not kidding. You open the door and
they'll snatch you back to, they're so bad. She's living with nine cats.
And she turns over enough men every night -- I mean, I never seen a
woman like this. She's running her own cat house there. I hate to say
Page 223
April 12-13, 2011
that. There's too many ladies in here. You know, my momma
wouldn't allow that, me talking like that.
But you gonna to have to do something with 2854 Becca
Avenue. There's a lady that ought to go, them trees are growing up
huge, huge.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Mr. Thompson, your time has expired.
We've got the gist of it. We understand it. Okay.
MR. THOMPSON: Get Diane Flagg to get rid of this Michaelle
Crowley, because you really need somebody.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Thank you very much.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: One thing. I just wanted to see
if there's any way we could accommodate Commissioner Henning's
schedule. Is there -- is there a possibility your meeting starts at eight
and it might get over a little bit after nine?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, no. It starts at 11. It's about
a case coming up, and I can't change it.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No. It's your personal business
and I didn't ask you to. I just want to know if we -- we can't meet
earlier than nine o'clock?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I can't.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I mean, I'm willing to come here
at eight --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I can't.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- on the account of
Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I have children I have to get to
school.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, quite frankly, I don't know why it
would take us more than an hour to get through this if we'd get
through it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, if we could just clip along,
let's just do it.
Page 224
April 12-13, 2011
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, we can't do it now.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: But we could do it tomorrow morning at
nine o'clock. I don't know why we couldn't be finished by 10:00 or
10:30. Would that give you enough time?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Why don't we meet in the
afternoon instead?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well--
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's -- whatever it takes to
make it work for everybody.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: What works for your schedule,
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I have to be somewhere in
downtown Naples at 11 o'clock.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: But could you meet in the afternoon
is what I'm trying to say, like at 1 :00 or 1 :30?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I cannot change my
appointment from 11 until the afternoon.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. No, she was talking about us
changing.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, I mean us. We'll change ours
for you.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I got two meetings. I
have one that I told you I had at 11 and then the board meeting, so I'm
not sure which one you're talking about, Commissioner Fiala.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Let me try to get this --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I must not be saying it right.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Ifwe start at 9:00 and finish by 10:30,
would that give you enough time to get to your meeting?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Ifwe finish at 10 minutes to 11,
it would give me enough time.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: There you go.
Page 225
April 12-13, 2011
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Why don't we start at 9:00
tomorrow morning and decide that we're going to finish at no later
than 10:30. That will give you time to get through it, okay? All right?
Everybody okay with that?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Sure.
MR. MITCHELL: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I must not have said it right. He
was thinking --
MR. MITCHELL: Commissioner Coyle, before you finish the
meeting today, Commissioner Fiala and I have been fortunate enough
that we're celebrating birthdays, but in actual fact today's is the
anniversary of Tony Hiller's dealt, and it's been a very difficult day for
Commissioner Hiller, so I'd just like to read something to her, if it's
okay.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, very well.
MR. MITCHELL: There is peace within a garden,
A peace so deep and calm,
That when the heart is troubled,
It's like a soothing balm.
There's life within a garden,
A life that still goes on,
Filling the empty places,
When older plants are gone.
There is glory in the garden,
That every time of year,
Spring, summer, autumn, winter,
To fill the heart with cheer.
So ever tend your garden,
Its beauty to increase,
For in it you'll find solace,
And in it you'll find peace.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you very much.
Page 226
April 12-13, 2011
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Wow.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That was very nice, Ian. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. We are -- we've already taken a
motion to adjourn, so we are finished.
We are in recess until tomorrow morning at nine o'clock.
*****
There being no further business for the good of the County, the
meeting was recessed by order of the Chair at 5: 13 p.m. until April 13,
2011 at 9:00 a.m.
Page 227
April 12-13, 2011
TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Naples, Florida, April 12-13, 2011
LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Board of County
Commissioners, in and for the County of Collier, and also acting as
the Board of Zoning Appeals and as the governing board( s) of such
special districts as have been created according to law and having
conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 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
Georgia Hiller
Tom Henning
ALSO PRESENT:
Leo Ochs, County Manager
Jeffrey A. Klatzkow, County Attorney
Crystal Kinzel, Office of the Clerk of Courts
Ian Mitchell, BCC Executive Manager
Mike Sheffield, Business Operations Manager - CMO
Page 228
April 12-13, 2011
Day 2 (April 13. 2011)
MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, you have a live mike.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Ladies and gentlemen, the Board of
County Commissioners meeting is back in session.
We're going to begin with what item, County Manager?
Item #10E (April 13, 2011)
CONTRACTS FOR REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (RFP) #09-5262 -
S FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR COLLIER COUNTY
(ESTIMATED ANNUAL EXPENDITURES $2,000,000)-
APPROVED
MR.OCHS: 10E, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: 10E, okay.
MR.OCHS: It's a recommendation to approve contracts for
Request for Proposal #09-5262-S for Engineering Services for Collier
County .
Mr. Carnell will present.
MR. CARNELL: Good morning, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Good morning.
MR. CARNELL: Members of the board, Steve Carnell,
purchasing services director. This is a follow-up item to a previous
action from the board in which the board had selected several firms,
15 to be specific, to receive contracts under RFP 59-5262, and we are
bringing the contracts back for your approval this morning.
We also have a companion item with it involving Johnson
Engineering, which was one of the firms selected, that had some
issues that we're going to resolve in the companion item with you this
morning. So I'm here to answer your questions.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. This does not fall in the same
Page 229
April 12-13, 2011
category as Item D that we dealt with yesterday.
MR. CARNELL: No, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. There's no dispute concerning--
with the Clerk's Office --
MR. CARNELL: Not that I'm aware of.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- about how things will be reimbursed?
Okay. All right, very well.
Any questions? Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Is there a contract with -- for
this item with Johnson Engineering?
MR. CARNELL: It's with the companion item, sir, to follow. I'll
be happy to -- I'll take a moment and explain.
MR. OCHS: Hold on.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No. I mean, I just -- I didn't see
it in this executive summary, so it's the one that was on consent?
MR. CARNELL: It's the one that will follow that we moved to
regular, yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That will -- is actually a part of
this?
MR. OCHS: It will be heard right after this item, sir. Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Should we then make our approval of
this contingent upon approval of the subsequent item since we're not
hearing them both at the same time?
MR.OCHS: I don't think you need to do that.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You sure?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion for approval.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion for approval by Commissioner
Coletta, second by Commissioner Fiala.
MR. MITCHELL: Sir, we do have a public speaker.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Very well. Let's call the public
speaker.
Page 230
April 12-13, 2011
MR. MITCHELL: Jeff Dennison -- Davidson.
MR. DAVIDSON: Sounds like I better pass. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I see he's a smart man.
MR. MITCHELL: Sir, he was the -- he was your only speaker.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We might even award him a contract for
paSSIng.
Any discussion by commissioners?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All in favor, please signify by saying
aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: 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 #101 (April 13, 2011)
A SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND MUTUAL RELEASE
WITH JOHNSON ENGINEERING FOR $134,000, TO RESOLVE
ANY AND ALL CLAIMS AND ISSUES ASSOCIATED WITH
THE GOODLAND BOAT PARK AND AWARD OF CONTRACT
#09-5262-S TO JOHNSON ENGINEERING FOR ENGINEERING
SERVICES FOR COLLIER COUNTY - APPROVED (STAFF'S
RECOMMENDA TIONS
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, that takes you to the companion
item that was just referenced, and that was previously Item 16D9 on
your consent agenda, moved at staffs request to become Item 101, and
Page 231
April 12-13, 2011
it's a recommendation to approve and authorize the chairman to sign a
settlement agreement and mutual release with Johnson Engineering for
the total value of$134,000 to resolve any and all claims and issues
associated with the Goodland Boat Park, and to approve and authorize
the chairman to sign Award of Contract 5262-S to Johnson
Engineering for engineering services for Collier County.
Mr. McAlpin will present.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
MR. McALPIN: Thank you, County Manager.
Gary McAlpin, Coastal Zone Management, for the record.
Mr. Chair, this item is broken down as a $50,000 cash settlement,
a $50,000 in-kind settlement, where Johnson Engineering will perform
engineering services for the county, and the reimbursement will be to
the Goodland boat project instead of -- instead of Johnson
Engineering, and then $34,000 for additional engineering services at
the Goodland Boat Park that were provided by Johnson Engineering
without county compensation.
I'll answer any questions that you have at this time on this item.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Questions, board members?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: No questions. Is there a motion?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion to approve by Commissioner
Fiala, second by Commissioner Coletta.
Any discussion?
MR.OCHS: Commissioners, that's approval of the staff
recommendation to include the award of the contract?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yep.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'm sorry I didn't say that clearly.
Yes, that's exactly what the motion is.
MR.OCHS: Thank you, ma'am.
Page 232
April 12-13, 2011
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All in favor, please signify by saying
aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: 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.
Item #10F (April 13, 2011)
PREPAYMENT OF THE SERIES 2008 CONSERVATION
COLLIER BONDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $7,126,908, PLUS
INTEREST ACCRUED - APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, that takes us to 10F on your
agenda. It's a recommendation that the board approves prepayment of
the Series 2008 Conservation Collier bonds in the amount of
$7,126,908 plus interest accrued.
Mr. Isackson will present.
MR. ISACKSON: Commissioners, staff has, over the past
several months, continued to look at our debt structure, the potential
for interest savings that may exist. We've kind of scraped the barrel at
this point, but we do have one potential candidate which is before you.
We're asking your permission to prepay the 2008 Series Conservation
Collier bonds in the amount of 7.1 million.
This will provide some interest rate -- interest savings of about
$131,000 if we prepay that on April 29th of this month.
Any questions?
Page 233
April 12-13, 2011
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Is there a motion?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion to approve by Commissioner
Fiala, second by Commissioner Coletta.
Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah, Mark. There's been some
discussion on the part of the citizens involved with Conservation
Collier to consider another bond issuance. How does that play into
this payoff?
MR. ISACKSON : You're talking about continuation of the
program after it sunsets in 2013, ma'am? That doesn't have any
relationship to this particular --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: If this wasn't paid off and they
wanted to continue the program into 2013, would it inhibit their ability
to get maybe as much as they wanted?
MR. ISACKSON: You're talking about in terms of--
COMMISSIONER HILLER: If they're issuing -- if they would
want to issue more debt going forward.
MR. ISACKSON : You have a quarter mill that's wrapped up
right now. And by paying off this debt, you're essentially freeing up
that -- part of that quarter mill to go back into the Acquisition Fund,
which is Fund 1 72, going forward.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So basically that would allow
them to generate another issuance, another bond?
MR. ISACKSON: Well, it all depends on what they would be
asking for, ma'am. If they come to this board and ask for another
referendum per se, that expends beyond 2013, if it's going to be a
quarter mill, is it going to be part of a quarter mill ? We don't know
what that is, and I don't think you do at this point until somebody
comes before you and flushes it out a little bit.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right.
Page 234
April 12-13, 2011
MR. ISACKSON: But this is simply taking the existing bond
issued, and there's another Series 2005 issued that we've got. We can't
touch that one, pursuant to the bond covenants, but we can touch the
2008. We can prepay it; we can have some interest savings.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. All in favor, please signify by
.
saYIng aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion passes unanimously.
MR. ISACKSON: Thank you, commissioners.
Item #10H (April 13, 2011)
RESOLUTION 2011-72: A LEASE AGREEMENT WITH STATE
REPRESENTATIVE KATHLEEN PASSIDOMO, DISTRICT 76,
FOR OFFICE SPACE WITHIN THE COLLIER COUNTY
GOVERNMENT ADMINISTRATION BUILDING, SUITE 304-
ADOPTED;
RESOLUTION 2011-73: A LEASE AGREEMENT WITH STATE
REPRESENTATIVE JEANETTE NUNEZ, DISTRICT 112, FOR
OFFICE SPACE WITHIN THE COLLIER COUNTY
GOVERNMENT ADMINISTRATION BUILDING, SUITE 305-
ADOPTED;
RESOLUTION 2011-74: A TWO-YEAR LEASE AGREEMENT
WITH UNITED STATES CONGRESSMAN DAVID RIVERA FOR
OFFICE SPACE WITHIN COLLIER COUNTY'S GOLDEN GATE
Page 235
April 12-13, 2011
COMMUNITY CENTER, 4715 GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY,
SUITE 1 - ADOPTED
MR.OCHS: Commissioners, our next item is 10H. It's a
recommendation for the Board of County Commissioners to adopt
three resolutions and approve related lease agreements for newly
elected government officials to utilize county-owned office space for
an annual revenue of$30.
Mr. Camp will present.
MR. CAMP: Good morning, Commissioners. For the record,
Skip Camp.
F or approximately 25 years, the BCC boards have directed staff
to provide office space for legislative offices as a convenience for the
citizens of Collier County. Often citizens have a particular issue and
do not know where to go. This allows them to come to the
government complex and work in a one-stop-shop environment. This
is a -- typically what we'd consider routinely customary kind of
agenda item.
If you have any questions, I'll be happy to answer them.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Not a question so much as a
statement. There's been some counties that have had less
advantageous working relationships with their legislators, and they
priced them out of their building. And, of course, when you do those
types of things, you do nothing but cause all sorts of dissension, and
you got a feedback, a negative feedback that keeps coming back and
biting you.
It's so wonderful to be able to step across the hall and to be able
to touch our various legislators or go down one floor and catch the rest
of them, you know, as far as their aides go.
I hate to -- I don't want to see that practice jeopardized in any
way, so I'm making a motion for approval.
Page 236
April 12-13, 2011
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Motion for approval by
Commissioner Coletta, second by Commissioner Fiala.
Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: What is the value of the space and
the utilities that we're providing to them?
MR. CAMP: The -- if you look at the fair-market value, it's
typically about $18.25 a square foot; that includes the CAM, the
common area maintenance. And it averages about $6,000 per
legislative delegation or legislative office per year.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Per year.
MR. CAMP: Yeah, that's the value.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And the over -- the utilities, like
the electrical and all that?
MR. CAMP: It's all included in that, and it's very minimal,
especially on this campus where we have things like thermal storage.
And our cost per square foot for electric and water on this campus is
very little.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's great. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All in favor, please signify by saying
aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: The motion passes unanimously.
Item #10J (April 13, 2011)
Page 237
April 12-13, 2011
CONTRACT FOR SERVICES WITH AIM ENGINEERING TO
COMPLETE A FEASIBILITY STUDY WITH CONCEPTUAL
PLANS FOR PEDESTRIAN OR BICYCLE FACILITIES AT THE
1-75 AND IMMOKALEE ROAD INTERCHANGE IN AN
AMOUNT UP TO $315,000. (FDOT PROJECT #416237-1-38-01)-
MOTION TO DENY PETITION WITH COUNTY ATTORNEY TO
OBTAIN TEMPORARY HIRE TO COMPLETE THE PROJECT-
F AILED DUE TO LACK OF A SECOND; MOTION TO
CONTINUE AGENDA ITEM - APPROVED
MR. OCHS: The next item is Item 1 OJ. It was previously
16A13. It was moved from the consent agenda at Commissioner
Henning's request.
It's a recommendation to enter into a contract for services for
AIM engineering to complete a feasibility study with conceptual plans
for pedestrian or bicycle facilities at the 1-75 and Immokalee Road
interchange in an amount up to $315,000.
Mr. Casalanguida will present.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: I guess I'm here to answer questions,
as this was on consent. Nick Casalanguida, for the record.
Commissioner?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The -- nowhere could I find how
long the sidewalk is going to be. How long is it? I mean, it's saying
from N orthbrooke to Livingston Road. How long is that?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: I don't have that exact dimension, sir,
but it was about a mile, approximately.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. That's what I thought, it
was about a mile --
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- for -- and this contract is
$315,000.
Page 238
April 12-13, 2011
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: For a 60-percent design?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: That's correct. And I can explain that
if you'd like me to go in detail, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I mean, I just have a hard time
spending $315,000 for designing, partially designing a sidewalk.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Me too. I can tell you why it's
expensive in area -- in that location.
I'll give you a little history first. I think it's important for the
board to understand the history, because it tells you kind of why it
would be that price.
This was originally $315,000 for landscape funds at that
interchange. When that project was originally constructed, the
Pathway Advisory Committee and the Naples Pathway Coalition came
in front of MPO board and said, we don't want to see landscape before
you address the pedestrian functions of this interchange.
And if you remember the history of Immokalee/I-75, we jumped
on that proj ect only to have DOT take it away and make it their
interchange. We worked with -- worked with Lee County MPO to
take $2 million and actually expand this project. And in doing so, we
constricted the pathways to get more lanes under the road.
During that project, we were not allowed to make any designs
variances under a new interchange. Federal Highway, FDOT, had told
us, you're not going to get a design variance because it's new
construction. You can come after the fact, and if it's completed and if
proved there's any deficiencies, you can move forward.
So the Pathway Advisory Committee and Pathway Coalition
came in front of the MPO and asked for that money to be transferred
from landscaping to a sidewalk feasibility study and design.
The issue, why it's so expensive, is because you're dealing with
Federal Highway, FDOT, and you're at an interchange. Any concepts,
anything we submit, has to go through two other agencies. Unlike
Page 239
April 12-13, 2011
typical sidewalk projects that are county reviewed, county approved,
this requires quite a bit of time with dealing with FDOT and Federal
Highway.
If you notice, in the way that fees are broken down, the
alternatives analysis is 95,000; public involvement, 39,000; and
feasibility study final report is 26,000, leaving roughly half to be the
design price, up to 60 percent. So at any point in time during the
project, if feasibility doesn't work out, we would terminate the project.
But the reason for the cost, Commissioner Henning -- and it's
difficult because it's a LAP agreement, it requires a lot of time
management. Sometimes I -- you know, in low projects like this, I
think we only get the benefit of 30 or 40 cents on the dollar because
we spend so much time complying with LAP rules.
But you are dealing with Federal Highway, and you are dealing
with FDOT, so their restrictions are quite extense (sic).
COMMISSIONER HENNING: What -- can't we do this
in-house or hire somebody temporarily? I mean, I'm looking at the
senior -- let's see. Senior engineer is going to put in 973 hours for a
cost of $150,000.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Under LAP --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I would say that we can hire
somebody temporarily for a lot less, and that doesn't include the
project manager, engineer, transportation planner, environmental
science, a designer, a surveyor, and a three-man crew.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: We're actually getting away from
doing things in-house, sir, and that's the problem. To maintain that
quality of staff in-house to do these kind of jobs -- we're going the
opposite direction.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, can't we hire somebody
temporarily to do this project at a -- less than $300,000?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: You potentially could, but then you'd
have to let the person go, and it's -- it's a full staff. You've got a
Page 240
April 12-13, 2011
design crew, CAD crew, survey crews. It's not just one person.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Oh, I realize that, but, you
know, a senior engineer for $150,000 -- wow. I mean, I would rather
see if we can hire somebody temporarily to take up the -- most of the
burden of this instead of spending $300,000 of taxpayers' money.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Sir, I can only tell you these are the
contract-negotiated rates. It's for a project that's a LAP project with
DOT and requires Federal Highway approval.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right, I understand.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: And you know, if that's the direction,
on a lot of projects I think we're going to come to the board and show
you that our CEI by doing it in-house is more cost effective in that
sense. But we have, over the past year, been going in the opposite
direction of outsourcing projects rather than bringing them in.
So it's one of those where I would need direction on -- for
consistently (sic), because bringing someone in for one proj ect
wouldn't be -- you know, cost-to-benefit-wise wouldn't make sense for
us.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You know, the employment the
way it is, I -- if it was legal to bet, I would bet you that you could find
somebody and do it for a lot less.
So I'm going to make a motion not to approve this item and direct
the county manager to seek a temporary employee to complete this
project.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Is there a second?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. The motion dies for lack of a
second.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Let's keep on spending.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Let's -- is there any indication, even an
estimate, as to the total cost of building the sidewalk?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: You won't get that, sir, until you get
Page 241
April 12-13, 2011
into the feasibility study.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Nobody has even a guess?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Well, until you choose an alternative,
I would hate to hazard a guess in front of this board, sir. Part of this is
the public involvement, and then you'll get -- you'll get a proposal, and
at that point in time we'll have an engineer's estimate.
We've always said with this project, if we go through the
feasibility at any stage, if it doesn't come back to be feasible, we
would terminate the project.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, if we're spending $315,000
studying the project and a design, preliminary design, and it's costing
us that much money, it's got to be probably over a million dollars to
build this sidewalk.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: I would think it -- depending on how
you cross 1-75, it could be that expensive.
But I think the way we've looked at this project is, in our first two
alternatives, if nothing comes back feasible, we'd come back to the
board and say, we -- you know, we don't have a project. We wouldn't
go through the whole expenditure of$315,000 if there's no project.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, the point I'm getting at is, is it
worth the amount of money that we think we're going to have to pay
for this sidewalk?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: That's a subjective question.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Is there a significant utilization of the
sidewalk even if it is built? I mean, the reason I ask that question is, I
drive up into Lee County and I see sidewalks going along 41 for miles
and not a single living soul on them at all, and I just constantly
wonder, you know, how much money has been spent on sidewalks
that nobody ever uses.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Commissioner Coyle, I echo your
concerns, especially since part of your MPO box funding right is now
directed towards how the 2 to $3 million is, but I would tell you that
Page 242
April 12-13, 2011
this -- sitting as the MPO board, has heard that discussion with, you
know, Joe Bonness and the pack, and you made that decision to go
from landscaping to sidewalk, and it's a community desire that's vetted
through the advisory committees and then comes to you as the MPO
and then comes to you as the board.
So I echo your concern. It's a community issue.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Then I'll ask one other question. This is
in Commissioner Henning's district, isn't it?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: I believe it is, sir, yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Two districts.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: And Commissioner Hiller's.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It's split between Commissioner Henning
and Commissioner Coletta -- or Hiller.
MR.OCHS: Commissioner Hiller.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes, Hiller. Okay. Then I would
depend upon the guidance of those two commissioners to tell us if
they want to spend this kind of money on that sidewalk. And this is
just the beginning of the expenditure.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: I'm okay with that, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. So Commissioner Henning has
said let's try to find another way to get it designed that's cheaper,
which is certainly a fair thing to do, but even that is going to cost a lot
of money.
So I'll go to Commissioner Fiala since she is next.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I was just -- I was just hoping to see
if Commissioner Henning had an idea what he felt could be saved. He
mentioned putting people to work, but there would be five people to
work on this one. So that would be five others. Are we hoping to save
$15,000, $100,000, $200,000? What? You know, what do you
venture a guess at that, Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Is your question how many
people we employ to design this?
Page 243
April 12-13, 2011
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, no, no, no, no. My question is,
how much do you hope that we can save by hiring different people to
do this?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I'm hoping to save as
much as we can.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, that's a good answer.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Is that with one zero or two zeros?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Any other question?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Hiller.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Mr. Casalanguida, I have a
concern, because you say this has gone in front of the MPO?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And their Pathways Committee as
well, and that both the Pathways Committee and the MPO fully
supported this.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yes, ma'am. And the MPO approved
this, and then the board approved the LAP agreement last July, and
then the board approved the selection committee this February 22nd.
So this would be the third time it's been in front of you, once as the
MPO and twice as the board. This is the final step which is just
issuing the contract, so --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And the board on the previous
occasions, when I was not involved, approved it?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: It was approved in July when you
were not here, and it was approved in February when you were here
for the ranking and to direct us to design and go into contract
negotiation. So the MPO had approved it in front of the MPO and
then --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And when it was approved as part
of the ranking, that was part of the consent agenda?
Page 244
April 12-13, 2011
MR. CASALANGUIDA: It doesn't say in notes here. But I
believe it would be a consent-agenda item since there was no financial
involved.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And the only reason is, is I mean, I
don't believe it's something that you and I have had time to review.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: No, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I need to have a detailed
understanding of it. I'm concerned, because it appears that this board,
you know, made up of these same commissioners here who are
expressing concern against this project, supported it at the MPO.
So I would -- I would like to continue this item, and I would like
to educate myself more to understand, you know, why we're at this
stage if we've got these objections that are being put forth by several
. .
commISSIoners.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Commissioner, I have no problem
with that. In that fairness, I think, you know, you have the pack here
and the folks from the bike peg group that would like to speak.
Because if they thought the project was going away, I'm sure they'd
have a lot to say so --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right. And I think in all fairness
they should have the opportunity to express, you know, where is the
value for this investment, because it obviously will be a substantial
investment. And I want to review what the MPO approved and what
the argument there was to accept this project--
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Sure.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- before I can say yes or no.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Is that a motion to continue?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yes, it is.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Is there a second? I'll second it.
Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All in favor, please signify by saying
Page 245
April 12-13, 2011
aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Very good.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We've continued it. And in the
meantime, you'll be answering questions from commissioners, I
presume, and then the advisory committees will be in to talk with us --
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Absolutely.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- about this. I would hope that you'd
give them guidance to look at this from a cost-feasibility standpoint
and you'd give us some indication of the usage.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Will do, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Who it will serve and how frequently
and how many and that sort of stuff.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Sure, very good.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And, actually, I was disappointed to
see the landscape go away. I really wanted to see that there, so -- but I
went along with the people in the crowd who said that they wanted
biking, so --
MR. CASALANGUIDA: And we're only following down that
path, Commissioners, as well, too.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We'll go through that again, I'm sure.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Nick, can I ask one last question?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Sure.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Go ahead.
Page 246
April 12-13, 2011
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Ultimately, if this project were to
be approved, the funding for the actual construction would come
from?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Could come from your MPO box
funds, it could come from payment in lieu, it could come from
General Fund, it could come from grants. There's -- you know, at that
point in time, we'd have a 60-percent design we would take for grant
application or your MPO would dictate that the box money would be
used for a project like that. So it has many funding sources.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, I think it -- there are funding
sources, but whether those will be available for something like this has
to be very carefully evaluated, and I think that's something that we
need to address with that group.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Sure.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That they understand that I think
we have to limit the sources of funds that are available for something
like this in light of the scarcities.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Sure. Very good.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. We're finished with it. Thank
you.
And we have no other items on our agenda other than
communications; is that correct?
MR.OCHS: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
MR. OCHS: That takes us to --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It's your turn.
Item #15 (April 13, 2011)
STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS
Page 247
April 12-13, 2011
MR. OCHS: -- staff and commission general communications. I
have two brief items for the board this morning.
The first is just a reminder. A couple of meetings ago the board
indicated their willingness to meet with the Collier County School
Board in a joint meeting. The school district has requested a meeting
on the 25th of May. That's a date that Mr. Mitchell, I believe, has
reserved on all of your calendars. And unless the board objects, we'll
go ahead and schedule that meeting for May 25th.
They've asked for a two-hour meeting in the morning here in the
commission chambers, so we'll be moving forward with that.
And the second item, is a few weeks ago I received a letter that
all of the commissioners were copied on from Mr. Y ovanovich on
behalf of some of his clients, developer clients, in the community that
had made a suggestion on how we might, as a staff and a board,
consider a change in the payment schedule for transportation impact
fees.
Our staff has been evaluating that over the last few weeks. We
would like to bring back that item for discussion with the board and
some options for the board's consideration. If there's at least three
nods to allow us to work on that, bring it back, we'd like to do that
sometime in the next month.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioners, do we have three people
who are --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Sure.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- willing to pursue it?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Always open to discussion.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Looks like you've got it, yeah.
MR.OCHS: Very good. That's all I have.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. County Attorney?
MR. KLATZKOW: Yeah. In my mind, anyway, it's a minor
matter.
Page 248
April 12-13, 2011
Just for future direction, if we have existing litigation -- and
they're all different, all right -- I just want to know if the board is
comfortable if I was to have a meeting that might include settlement
discussions with one of the commissioners on that existing litigation
or if you want me to first come to the board and seek direction before
we have that meeting. And I just want to --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I would think that would be appropriate,
yes, that you would come to the board. Because the board has to
approve --
MR. KLATZKOW: Well, you have to approve the actual
agreement. The agreement would come to you either through a shade
session, or usually through the consent, one of the two. But what I'm
saying is before we come to that, if there -- if there is a meeting, like --
in the past I had these with Commissioner Halas on an ongoing matter,
and David was the attorney at that point in time.
But I just want to know that, for me as county attorney and for
you as this board, do you want me to first come to you and say, "Are
you comfortable with this on that particular litigation?" or am I free
simply to meet with that commissioner and have that meeting?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, some other commissioners have
their lights on now, but I would just like to express a brief opinion. I
think first the Board of County Commissioners should make a
decision about that. It should be brought to the Board of County
Commissioners. If we feel that it is appropriate then to designate a
single commissioner to engage in those kinds of discussions with you
-- you and that commissioner engage in those kinds of discussions
with a third party, then we could authorize it at that time. I think that
would be the proper way to do it.
I don't think it is appropriate for commissioners to just take it
upon themselves to engage in discussions such as that, because it
places the board in a very awkward position. The board will not have
had any notice of that proceeding, the board will not have had an
Page 249
April 12-13, 2011
opportunity to provide any guidance to the commissioner who is
engaging in those things, and it can result in uncertain outcomes.
And so my position would be that we should -- that should come
to the board, and the board would have the opportunity to designate a
particular commissioner or to say that we all want to be involved in
that in a shade session. So that would be my position.
Commissioner Coletta had his light on.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. Just -- are we talking
about generalities or something specific?
MR. KLA TZKOW: No. It's just for future -- just for my future
direction.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. That's all I had.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Hiller.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. It's an interesting question
because, for example, take the litigation with Southwest Florida Water
Management District, and there were members of the Southwest
Florida Management District Administration who came and spoke to
me prior to our shade session. And my understanding is, from
speaking with them, that they were meeting with all the
commissioners. And, obviously, they were talking about that
litigation.
So my question is, is that the kind of thing that's disallowed?
Because you've got these guys who are making appointments and
spoke to everybody. I mean, I think they spoke to you. I remember
they said -- I think they were -- they had just spoken to you and were
just about to speak to, I think, Commissioner Coyle.
So how does that work?
MR. KLATZKOW: I don't have an issue with that. That's up to
each individual commissioner whether they want to meet, or the board
can make a policy on that. It's just when -- it's my relationship with
the board here.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So any individ- -- as long as you're
Page 250
April 12-13, 2011
not involved in the discussions, it's not an issue?
MR. KLATZKOW: I don't have an issue with it.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So it's really only when you're
brought into the discussion that you feel it changes its character?
MR. KLATZKOW: It changes its character, yes.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. So as long as you're
excluded, then you have no problem with individual commissioners
speaking to get information, find out what's going on, but as long--
the minute you're involved in it, then you feel it needs to come to the
board because you're concerned about your involvement in the
process?
MR. KLATZKOW: Correct.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Got it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The -- what about if a county
commissioner wants to talk to you about litigation and a possible
settlement without any third party?
MR. KLATZKOW: I'm okay with that as well.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Oh, okay.
MR. KLATZKOW: It's the actual settlement meeting with the
other parties being there with their attorneys.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Now, in the past commissioners
have had items for settlement with no backup material on the agenda
and discussing settlements. Is that -- is that kind of dangerous since
you don't know any particulars of the issue?
MR. KLATZKOW: I got to tell you, none come to mind, sir, and
I have a hard time to place --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll talk to you later about that.
MR. KLATZKOW: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: The only -- only issue I would have is I
recall the South Florida Water Management District people didn't have
Page 251
April 12-13, 2011
their attorney with them.
MR. KLA TZKOW: That's right. That was client on client.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's right. That was client on client.
Any time somebody's attorney comes into my office and wants to talk
about settlement or terms, I just shut down and say, "I'm not going to
talk with you about that issue. That's an issue that has to be decided by
the board."
And I do that because it is, in my opinion, dangerous for a single
commissioner to start giving terms of settlement to the other side.
You wouldn't do that normally in a business environment, and I don't
know why we would do that here.
It gives them, perhaps, false hopes about getting certain
settlement terms when they come before the Board of County
Commissioners, and that's a bad thing to do.
So I would just -- I would like to see us have a policy that we
don't individually sit down and talk with people about legal
settlements without you present, and if we do so, it should be
authorized by the board.
MR. KLATZKOW: Well, that will brings back to Commissioner
Hiller's concern, like with the water district meeting with you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: There was -- their attorney was not there.
It was an informational meeting.
MR. KLA TZKOW: As long as it's client on client, you're fine. I
understand.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah. That's my position, but
Commissioner Hiller might have a different position.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. I don't -- I don't think it
makes a difference if it's, you know, client on client or with an
attorney present.
I really don't think it should be barred. I think you should be
present. I think anything that furthers settlement is to be encouraged.
I mean, the whole goal is to get rid of litigation. No commissioner can
Page 252
April 12-13, 2011
bind the board without the board's vote, so I don't see a problem there.
You know, there's no -- there's not going to be any disappointment.
They all know that they have to go before the board and there has to
be a public vote.
But to try to, you know, resolve litigation and have the county
attorney present is not a negative. Bring back the information to the
board. The board can accept or reject as the case may be. There's -- I
don't think there's a problem with that.
From a legal standpoint there certainly isn't, and in business it's
done that way all the time. So I don't see an issue there. It's very -- I
mean, practically in business it's done all the time. So I think, you
know, it's not an issue. And I don't think it would compromise you,
Jeff, in any way.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. We all come from such a
different mindset. Each one of us has a different way of approaching
everything. And so it -- Jeff, if you wanted one of us to be meeting
with you to meet with a client who is involved in a case, if that's what
you were talking about, my goodness, each one of us would have such
a different approach. I don't know how you would get a cross-section
from one of us unless it concerns --like when somebody was suing me
just recently, well, then naturally, you know, you'd have to be there.
That was that fellow that was claiming I was somebody else or
something.
But other than that, you know, I mean, when you're definitely
defending us, other than that, maybe if you wanted to rotate -- if you
wanted a commissioner meeting with you, you could rotate, because
you'd certainly get different opinions.
Also, I know when anybody involving litigation comes in to my
office to talk about anyone of the legal procedures -- and I have no
legal background whatsoever -- I'm very, very cautious about saying
anything that could in any way jeopardize us as a county commission
Page 253
April 12-13, 2011
or allow anybody to think that that's the way we collectively are
thinking about something. I think that's not my place to do that, and I
don't want to give any false hopes or false denials, just because of my
. .
opInIon.
Not only that, I feel it's very dangerous to get into something
when we're in a legal procedure without you present.
I remember just recently I had somebody in my office, there were
a couple people in my office, and they started talking about something
that I felt was out of my perview. And so I called your office, and
bless them, they just came right down and sat in there and helped me
along with that, and I appreciated that.
So I don't know if that gives you any kind of an answer from my
perspective, but that's the way I approach things.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. Commissioner Fiala, I
follow the same basic rules that you do, too, as far as it goes. I'm
careful not to commit the county to anything. I express my own
opinion all the time, tell people what I think up front. And I won't
meet with someone who has got litigation against us who brings his
attorney in, unless I have Jeff there. Always done that. I mean, didn't
make any -- doesn't make any sense. You're at a terrible disadvantage.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Right.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: In this particular case, Jeff and I
had not conferred about this beforehand, so this is all pretty new to
me. I think he's referring to Water Management, the possible offer of
a settlement, it must be, from the way the direction's going.
You're shaking your head no. You know more than I know.
Okay. Well, then if that's not it, I won't go any farther with that
scenario of events.
But my thoughts was, is because of my closeness to the whole
situation for so long, to bear witness to it --
Page 254
April 12-13, 2011
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You'd be the one, yeah.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- rather than --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Absolutely.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: But, you know, so I'm a little
confused on the whole thing, where we're going with it. I'm open for
several different directions where we should have some uniformity.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah, I agree.
Commissioner Hiller.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. To use the example of the
Water Management, the situation that's being proposed here is that
you would not be able to talk to Water Management even with Jeff
present unless it came first to the board for a vote to allow you to
speak to Water Management with Jeff. That's what's being presented
here. That's what Jeff is asking.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, I couldn't buy into that.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, of course not.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm not going to surrender my
right of communication.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Exactly, and that's my point
exactly.
MR. KLA TZKOW: Let's take one of our construction cases, for
example, Armadillo, okay, where the other side wanted to, you know,
sit down with their attorney and, you know, see if they could hash out
a settlement -- which has not happened, but -- would you be
comfortable if one of the commissioners on their own wanted to
engage in settlement conversations of that nature, or would you want
the board to first make the decision whether or not it was appropriate
for that commissioner to do it or not?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah. And let me respond to that.
That's exactly the problem we have. If I were an attorney suing the
county or contemplating suit for the county and I could go to board
members and gather from them what they're willing to give up in
Page 255
April 12-13, 2011
order to reach a settlement, then now I know where the weaknesses
are, and I'll just push a little harder. I know how hard I can push. I
know how -- the issues that I can push harder on. That is clearly not
in the best interest of the taxpayers.
So I think we need to adopt a policy very similar to the policy we
have with people who are bidding on contracts. We don't talk to them.
We can't talk to them. We're not allowed to talk to them.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No. It's actually they're not
allowed to talk to us.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, that's true.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: It's the opposite way around.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And you can't sit down in your office
and not have one of you talk. So it's important that we have a policy.
And it's not a matter of talking and gathering information. It's a matter
of engaging in settlement discussions. And the situation that we're
talking about here really is one that relates to you. I mean, you're not
at fault here, but the -- a meeting was held last week to discuss with
the Blockers and their attorneys a settlement on their situation.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's false.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And it's important that we apply some
kind of rules concerning the things that we do there, because there are
lots of bad things that can happen as a result of that.
So it's important that we establish a policy. And if we want to say
that it applies only to settlement discussions, I think that's fine. But it
-- you're right, it should not inhibit a commissioner's ability to sit
down and talk with people, but it is just simply foolish to sit down and
talk with the lawyer of a litigating party and try to reach agreement on
a way to get rid of the litigation individually. So that's something that
must be left up to a determination by the Board of County
Commissioners.
So that's what we're really talking about here.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Oh, okay. Truth in Sunshine is
Page 256
April 12-13, 2011
not evident in this room at the moment.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's right, that's right.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You know -- and forgive me.
I'm talking out of turn. Commissioner Hiller's supposed to be next,
but what I'd like to have from Commissioner Hiller is a summary of
what took place at that meeting, who was there, what was discussed,
because I've had several people come up to me and tell me a
settlement was reached.
One called me up very elated in Immokalee telling me that the
whole thing had been resolved, and I was completely dumbfounded.
It was Fred Thomas. And he said, this has all been worked out, thanks
to Commissioner Hiller.
Thank you for working it all out, but now tell us what you did,
because I really would like to know, and who was at the meeting--
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Absolutely.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- and how long did it go.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Of course. It would be my
pleasure. First of all, it was not a settlement agreement. Second of all,
I'm surprised Mr. Thomas said that to you, because I had lunch with
him yesterday, and he, by no means, thought anything was settled.
There was no discussion of any of the pending litigation with the
Blockers. The issue that was being addressed was the issue of the
wording in the Immokalee master plan. And, quite frankly, the only
people that were invited to that meeting were Mr. Norm Feder -- who
else was invited to that? The -- Mr. Jerry Blocker -- yeah, Nick, would
you come up? Who was the other person that we -- oh, yeah. And I
was supposed to have -- Bob Mulhere and Penny Phillippi. Only
reason was for informational purposes to find out what was going on.
Unbeknownst to me and uninvited by me, a lot of other people
showed up. And why don't you take it from there?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Sure. At the meeting we held, I guess
it was one-on-one last --
Page 257
April 12-13, 2011
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Oh, and by the -- before you start,
let me just make it very clear that there were no settlement discussions
to any degree, and that was confirmed by Patrick White, who was also
in attendance. And I'm going to enter an email from him on the record
that clearly says that he was not directly invited to talk. He said -- let
me just read this.
I have received the message, merely add that although not
directly invited, I was asked by my client to attend to assist in assuring
the factual and procedural history of the matter were most accurately
and completely understood, which was readily and repeatedly evident
from the commissioner's statements.
And as an aside, we never understood the meeting before, during,
or after to be in the nature of a settlement discussion, only
informational to aid in the anticipated BCC hearing on the lAMP
adoption, which was all that was discussed. That parenthetical is
.
mIne.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Who was there at the meeting?
I still don't have a list.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: He's going to give you the list.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: I was not at the meeting, but I can tell
you -- from what I've been told, I can tell you who was there at the
meeting representing our staff.
At the Friday one-on-one Norman and I attended with
Commissioner Hiller, the Blockers were there, and we discussed the
issue with them. That's when a follow-up was scheduled for the
Wednesday to take place. And the Blockers requested Mr. Mike
Sawyer and, I believe, Diane Flagg to attend, and no yes or no was
said, but we said we'd have staff available to discuss any
inconsistencies that they have.
Diane attended. Mike Sawyer did not attend. Bill Lorenz
attended in his behalf. Carolina Valera, who is the planner for the
Immokalee Area Master Plan, attended, because she needed to hear
Page 258
April 12-13, 2011
what was going on, representing the plan. Mr. Norman Feder attended,
he was requested, and Jamie French attended on my behalf.
I guess, additionally -- Jeff, am I missing anybody else? There
were several people from the Blocker--
MR. KLATZKOW: There were a large number of people in the
room.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Right.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So the code enforcement guy was
there too.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Kitchell.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Kitchell was there too.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Right. He was accused by the
Blockers of not treating fairly, so he was there to answer any questions
that they had said. So I think that's the intent of staff being there.
Some of them were requested to be there, and some were there
because material information that was presented about staff was there
so they could respond to it.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And it was all for purposes of
gathering information for my benefit. I wanted to know what was
going on. I have very serious concerns about what's going on.
In fact, I want to make it very clear for the record, my concerns
relate to what I think that the county potentially will be doing wrong.
It doesn't address any current litigation.
I believe that if the wording in the Immokalee Master Plan is left
as is, it will have the effect of irregulatory takings. I think that the
Blockers are being targeted. There was -- based on everything I'm -- I
can see, there's clear evidence of a prejudicial bias against them to the
end that they would be deprived of their right to cure code violations
which everybody else has been given the ability to cure pursuant to
the -- I believe it's called a Site Improvement Plan provision in the
Land Development Code, and with the ability to cure these defects, be
grandfathered in as a nonconforming use as provided for by the Land
Page 259
April 12-13, 2011
Development Code.
So I have very, very serious concerns, not about any pending
litigation, but about action that would have the effect of takings were
the Immokalee plan approved as presented.
So I wanted to inform myself as to what exactly was going on. I
made a request for the information because of my concern about a
potential illegal act on the part of county government.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Sure. Ms. Hiller's correct in that she
scheduled the meeting as a fact-finding meeting. What she just said
was that she felt that the Blockers were being mistreated. Diane Flagg
was there to provide information to assure that they were being treated
equally like everybody else in Immokalee. That was the intent of
gOIng.
Now, what that meeting turned into, I can't comment on. Jeffhas
made clear he thought it turned into a settlement discussion. It was
scheduled as a fact-finding. It was scheduled for staff to rebut what
the Blockers had said.
The Blockers had told Commissioner Hiller that they were being
singled out, and Diane had the facts to point out that they were not.
They were being treated like everybody else in Immokalee. So that's
my recollection of what I know.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Actually, the facts seemed to
suggest that they, in fact, were being singled out. And the evidence
that was presented, the documents that I saw in that meeting
suggested, in fact, that similarly situated properties were being dealt
with differently than their property was.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: He's the only one in an industrial
zone but--
,
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That doesn't matter.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I, too, when the Blockers first
came into my office, I don't know, a few months ago, or only time
Page 260
April 12-13, 2011
they came into my office actually -- they came in a while back, and so
I wanted to go out and take a look at the property myself. I wanted to
talk to the people involved. I also wanted to talk to people in
Immokalee.
What is being singled out are slum conditions. That's what this is
all about. They're trying to improve Immokalee. They're trying to rid
itself of slums.
And so when I went out to take a look at the Blockers' property,
it certainly did qualify for the slums. Not only that, but it was very
dangerous for those little children that I saw playing there. You know,
with all these piles of derelict cars and all of the -- all of the trash in
that place next door, and then to be right on this industrial street and
these big trucks going by -- and these little kids have no playground or
anything. They just play in the street with all of these trucks. And I
thought, oh, my gosh. This is so dangerous.
I went out to see some of the other slum -- slumlord facilities as
well in the area. When I talked to the Blockers, he said he never had a
chance to fix up his property. And he says he bought it and then he's
never been given a chance. But actually, when I did some research, I
found that he was offered the SIP agreement.
And we were working with him even though he was on that
property. Now, he's owned the property almost nine years, and he
hasn't done anything to it.
Now, if that's singling somebody out after they've never done
anything, then, you know, I'm -- I'm at a loss to figure out why and
why anybody would want to.
The Blockers, essentially, why would anybody want to continue
to foster such unsafe living conditions? I don't know that. Not only
that, they can take this property -- as I learned later, they can take this
property, clear it oft: and they can turn it into industrial park, which is
definitely needed there.
And I pointed that out to them as well. You can make this an
Page 261
April 12-13, 2011
industrial park, and you can make plenty more money. Half of those
trailers were empty sitting there with broken windows and stuff like
that. I said, "Y ou can make plenty more money turning it into what
it's zoned for. You don't even have to rezone it or anything."
And so those -- I'm definitely showing my cards on this, but I just
-- I just feel we cannot help the Immokalee community clean itself up
and better itself by fostering conditions like this, especially when this
property owner can make plenty more money changing it into what it's
supposed to be.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. You know, it was very
disturbing what took place after that meeting in Commissioner Hiller's
office.
Right away there was a meltdown of the whole team that had
been putting together the master plan which consisted of eight years,
and God knows how much money, half a million or more dollars was
put into it. A community effort that's been unsurpassed.
The Blockers had a piece of -- paragraph inserted in the master
plan that the master plan committee, 6-2, rejected for all the reasons
that Commissioner Fiala mentioned, plus others.
So when we had them -- everybody here in the room, I knew this
was going to be a lost cause as far as trying to get the -- what the
master plan was as far as Immokalee goes as their vision; I knew it
wasn't going to happen. There was too many things that have been
damaged there by Planning Commission, by other people trying to
insert their vision in this community.
Now, when people put that much effort into something, you
know, you've got to look at this thing and say, okay, we're going to
make this work for you the way it is, rather than trying to make it our
own image by the vision of a one or two other people on the outside.
The reason I asked for it to go back to the CRA is to give
Page 262
April 12-13, 2011
everybody a little time to be able to think about this. Now, I don't
know what's going to happen, because right now they're running
scared in Immokalee. They're mad as anything that they have to insert
this back in, but they don't want to lose eight years of work and the big
investment that they have.
So I'm not too sure what the CRA's going to do at the end. It's
going to be a little bit of interesting discussion. I'm going to be there
to witness it, and I believe Commissioner Henning's going to be there
too, and I invite anybody else to come.
But at the end of the day, I hope that when this thing comes back
before us and the CRA can stand before us and tells us, we
unanimously approve this plan as it is now, that we won't try to
micromanage it and tell these people how they've got to live their
lives.
It's a completely different community than coastal Collier
County. You can't take your standards and try to put them on this
community, and you can't say, well, it's Immokalee, so it's all right if
migrant laborers live in substandard housing. That isn't the case at all
that we're going to accept here today.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, thank you.
Commissioner Hiller.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you. First of all, the
Planning Commission reviewed the Immokalee Master Plan, and they
recommended the wording be inserted. Their concerns mirrored mine.
Immokalee is different than the local community, but not in the
eyes of the constitution.
The law with respect to takings is clear, and whatever your
personal agendas are to clean up a community, you can't take private
property the way you're proposing to do so. It's just plain illegal.
The Land Development Code provides a mechanism for
non-conforming mobile to be grandfathered in after they've been
rezoned and to become code compliant.
Page 263
April 12-13, 2011
The county has slapped the Blockers' property with code
violation after code violation and has attempted to effectively bar
them from curing those violations. You can't do that.
Now the county wants to foreclose on their property without
giving them the legal right to cure the defects which become the basis
for that foreclosure. It just doesn't work that way. So I have a
problem with that. And it's not just with respect to the Blockers. It's
with respect to how our government is dealing with private-property
rights. It's unacceptable.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: If you would let me ask a question of the
county attorney.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'm going to introduce the Collier
County Land Development Code section that I'm referring to into the
record.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: County Attorney, are you at all
concerned that we have violated the law here?
MR. KLATZKOW: No.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Are you concerned that there is a valid
takings argument here?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: You know what, introduce--
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Excuse me. Let us finish this,
please.
MR. KLATZKOW: No.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. You are the county attorney,
right, not Commissioner Hiller? You are the county attorney; is that
right?
MR. KLATZKOW: Yes.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. So you don't feel that there is any
substantial issue here with respect to the legality of what Collier
County has done, but Commissioner Hiller will continue to maintain
otherwise.
Now, I just wanted to get a clarification that despite
Page 264
April 12-13, 2011
Commissioner Hiller's pronouncements that we have acted illegally,
that there is no legal foundation for that. And if she wants to portray
herself as a lawyer fighting against the interests of the Collier County
Commission and the taxpayers, then I guess she has the right to do
that.
But Commissioner Fiala is next.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. Commissioner Hiller just said
something about we cannot -- we cannot be involved in a taking of
something, something to those words, but I think we were all sitting
right here just a couple months ago when we took -- what is his name,
Martel, what's his name, that slum guy?
MR. KLATZKOW: Claude Martel.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes -- his property, because it was a
slum. And we told him over and over and over again to clean up his
property and, of course, he didn't, and it was becoming dangerous to
those living in the same neighborhood right down the end of
Bayshore, and our code enforcement laid it on him, and told him --
they even told him they'd help him to clean it up. And, nope, he just
didn't.
Just like they gave the Blockers a chance with this SIP . We've--
it's -- he's had nine years. It's not like it's -- we're just forcing this upon
him in the last couple months.
And it's wonderful that you want to foster slums, that's great, but
I want to see the cleanup of Immokalee, and I want to support these
people in their efforts to help themselves. I see nothing wrong in this
taking when we've given them every opportunity, just as we did Mr.
Martel, and then finally had to take his property and clean it up
ourselves, and we had all the pictures of all of the trash and debris and
crud that we took off of that and took to the dump.
We just had to do that, because sometimes people have a problem
just helping themselves. And so -- and then we had to take the
property and we had to sell it to pay offhis code liens.
Page 265
April 12-13, 2011
So I disagree with the fact that we have -- we don't have takings,
because we do.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. Nick Casalanguida? We
don't have Diane Flagg here, who's intimately involved in this, but I'm
sure you're fairly involved -- been involved with the whole situation.
This thing has been through two court cases, in which case the
county has won both times. As far as code violations and the offers to
be able to try to solve this situation, could you give us a briefing --
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Sure.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- of the knowledge that you
have?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: I want to thank you for the
opportunity. I get to read it, and a lot of these things -- I've never done
so much reading in my life.
I'll tell you, I read the magistrate hearing. I found a couple
interesting things. I expressed it to Commissioner Fiala as well. I
said, you know, Bob Mulhere's opinion, the magistrate opinion, the
property was legally nonconforming. It expanded, and the magistrate
found that they had ample opportunity to apply through the process,
but they didn't take advantage of it.
I think that's what I read that I found interesting, that the
Blockers bought the property, knew there were issues with it, bought
the property with some legal nonconforming status, had the
opportunity to move forward and chose not to.
I expressed to Commissioner Hiller these issues, and she brought
up some really valid points that I found I agreed with her on and said,
"I'll look at those as well too." But in the end I said, "I think you need
to hear what Diane has to say and look at the magistrate finding." It
tells a lot, that the Blockers didn't act when they could have acted and
chose to act later now at a time and say, look, I'd like to come forward
now and clean it up in the, you know, 11th hour.
Page 266
April 12-13, 2011
So the history on it is they didn't act when they could have acted,
and now they find themselves, through a couple court cases, behind
the eight ball, and now they want to comply. You know, that's the
board's decision if they choose to put in the language to allow them to
comply.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. The question is, where
do the Blockers go from here if this master plan goes forward without
them in it? They've already been to court twice. Where could they go
next?
MR. KLATZKOW: Commissioner, my direction is to foreclose
on the Blockers. And, you know, the Blockers' defense has been all
these issues that have been raised here, and so far they have not
prevailed in that.
At the end of the day, that's my direction. At the end of the day,
unless the Court says no, we are foreclosing on the Blockers, and we
will demolish those trailers. That's the direction we're heading. That's
board direction.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And, of course, we could reach
a settlement well before that if the Blockers wanted to come forward
and negotiate a reasonable settlement that would be for the betterment
of Immokalee?
MR. KLATZKOW: It takes three votes, Commissioner. I mean,
three votes from this board. And whatever direction you want, that's
what we'll do. If you want to settle it, if you want to foreclose on
them, it's -- this is a board decision.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Hiller.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. The county attorney and I
do disagree on matters. To give you a perfect example, I believe that
the litigation carried on by this board and through Mr. Klatzkow
against the Clerk of the Courts was completely without merit, and in
that particular case, the Courts ruled, as I thought they should rule, in
favor of the Clerk.
Page 267
April 12-13, 2011
So are we going to have differences of legal opinion? Yes. And
I have a very, very big case where my opinion is -- was the prevailing
opinion of the Courts, not yours. So in terms of right and wrong, I
would look to history.
With respect to the issue that we're discussing right now, the
issue that we're addressing hasn't been litigated by the Blockers. The
Blockers, during the pendency of the litigation that was just described,
were precluded, as I understand, from being able to apply through the
SIP process to be able to cure the code violations that were being
brought against them.
You know, I would like to make a public records request, and I
would like to make it to the county manager and the county manager's
staff: the county attorney, the county -- and the county attorney's staff,
as well as to the board. And I'd like to ask for the copy of the opinion,
the zoning opinion that was rendered by Susan Miller, I believe her
name was.
MR.OCHS: Murray.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Murray, forgive me, Murray. I've
never had a chance to meet her. I'd like a copy of her opinion as well
as all the backup materials that she based her opinion on. I'd also like a
copy of the zoning maps, okay, for that parcel, every single zoning
map that you have through the present from the beginning of time to
now for that particular area. I would really appreciate that.
This board has chosen to ignore the recommendation of the
Planning Commission on this matter. The Planning Commission
obviously viewed this as a matter of concern. This board is also
choosing to ignore the opinion of Bob Mulhere; and I've introduced
his opinion as part of a study with respect to this site as an exhibit for
today's record. Bob Mulhere, I may add, is also the planner who
prepared the Immokalee Master Plan.
I think we have a very serious issue here today, and to deprive
this gentleman, this property owner, the opportunity of participating in
Page 268
April 12-13, 2011
a program that other similarly situated properties have had the
opportunity to participate in and thereby deny him the ability to
continue to use his property the way these other properties are being
used is obviously problematic.
The whole situation goes against private-property rights. And,
you know, whatever your objective is will be accomplished by
allowing this gentleman to cure the code violations and bring the
property up to the current code standard, and at such point in time that
there's a hurricane and these trailers are wiped out, or some other
natural disaster, there won't be any future trailers on the property, or at
such time that the property owner voluntarily wants to get rid of the
trailers and begin to use the site for industrial purposes.
But I may add that there's absolutely no infrastructure around the
site right now to support industrial development. So you're basically
denying him his, you know, vested income-producing rights by
denying his ability to participate in the SIP plan and to cure the defects
that he wants to cure.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Fiala, you get to go next.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Did you -- did you say -- did I just
hear you say that there's no industrial around there?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, that's not what I said.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: What did you say?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I said the ability to use his
property as industrial when he chooses to.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, I heard that part, but then you
said --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: What I said, that there isn't
adequate infrastructure in place. That's the whole objective of the
Immokalee Master Plan, to develop the infrastructure to support the
rezoning classifications that are proposed.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Can you tell me what you mean by
industrial infrastructure?
Page 269
April 12-13, 2011
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Not industrial infrastructure.
Infrastructure to support his use. And actually, no, I'm not going to
answer any more questions.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, I didn't understand that
because being that he's surrounded with industry, it's an industrial
section and there are industrial buildings right there --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Actually, he's got ajunkyard,
which is an illegal use, beside his property.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, on the other side of the street,
though, where they have the cement trucks and things coming and
gOIng.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Apparently it's a chemical plant,
and it's questionable now based on some determinations, I guess, by
the fire chief whether that building should even be close to where any
businesses are.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, that's exactly right. That was
one of the points. That's why it's a safety certain --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That would be --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- for people living there, and that
was another concern with having the residential in this industrial
section.
But being that there's only industry there, I wasn't quite sure what
you meant about industrial infrastructure. It just didn't make any
sense. And you were saying something about if they -- if the trailers
ever were injured with a hurricane, but I'm here to tell you they're
going to fall apart before they ever get there anyway in the condition
that they're in.
And you said -- you mentioned something about given the
opportunity -- nobody's given them the opportunity. But not only
have we given them the opportunity and implored them to fix their
property and then cited them because they didn't, but they've had nine
years to do this. It's not like they've never been given the opportunity.
Page 270
April 12-13, 2011
They've been given every opportunity, and even to the point where
we've tried to force the issue through code violations and through the
magistrate, and it still never happened.
So it's wonderful that you're coming to their defense, but I just
don't understand why.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. I'll tell you what. I'm
very --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And we need to -- do need to bring this
to an end.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I agree, that's about -- that was
going to be one of my statements there.
Thank God we got this discussion going now, so -- the people in
Immokalee are running scared. They're convinced that they might
have to insert this back into the master plan just to be able to be
assured of four votes and have to live with something they wanted to
remove.
We'll find out what's going to happen when we have the meeting
down there, the CRA meeting, and they go through this whole thing.
They may still insert it back in there. I don't know. I highly doubt it,
but I can't tell you that for a fact.
I will tell you this: Whatever they put into that plan at the end of
the day is what I'm going to be supporting before this commission.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm ready to move on.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Welcome back. You ready to move on?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. We haven't yet really given Jeff
the guidance. But I let this discussion go on for a long time because I
thought it was important that people got a clear understanding of what
went on here, and I think there is the impression of most of the people,
if not all the people, except Commissioner Hiller, that the meeting
Page 271
April 12-13, 2011
morphed into a settlement discussion --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Not at all.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- but by Commissioner Hiller's own
admission, she stated that the county had mistreated the Blockers, that
we had violated the law, that we had not given them an opportunity to
do things, which are entirely contradictory to the opinions of our
county attorney and to our staff who have repeatedly stated that they
have tried to work with the Blockers over time.
So the information that was provided at that meeting was, in fact,
misleading and false, and we now find ourselves defending the county
against the Blockers and against Commissioner Hiller. So that is the
reason we need some policy concerning how these things happen.
One commissioner should not place themselves in the position of
trying to negotiate with a litigant without the involvement of the
Board of County Commissioners and their guidance.
So that's what Jeff has asked guidance on. And so I would -- I
would be willing to say that we should not allow any commissioner to
be involved in settlement discussions concerning pending or
threatened litigation unless the Board of County Commissioners has
authorized it in advance.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I agree.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. So that is a motion and a second.
Is there any discussion? Commissioner Hiller.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yes. Again, for the record, it was
not a settlement -discussion meeting. There were no discussions about
settlement. There is no pending or threatened litigation on the issue
that I was addressing, a very narrow issue; however, boy, if I was
them, I would consider suing.
That being said, it is also the opinion of Norm Feder, who
participated in this meeting, that it was not a settlement agreement. It
was also the opinion of Patrick White, the attorney who represents the
Blockers, that this was not a settlement meeting.
Page 272
April 12-13, 2011
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: As far as information presented,
the information that was presented was presented by staff, by Mr.
Mulhere, and if you're suggesting that the information that they
presented is false, then that's disturbing. But, you know, I didn't have
information. And the bulk of the information that I base my opinion
on comes from staff and from our hired planner.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And, like I said, again, with
emphasis, no settlement discussion. I invited Jeff as a courtesy, but I
will remember in the future not to do that. I certainly made a mistake
in inviting him.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, since you did invite him, let's ask
him how he would characterize the discussion.
MR. KLATZKOW: Commissioners, I'm just asking for future
direction. That's all. I'm not saying --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I'm just asking you a direct question.
How --
MR. KLATZKOW: It was my view that -- the longer I was
there, the longer I got the impression this was a settlement conference.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
MR. KLATZKOW: All right. Now, Commissioner Hiller has a
different view. That's fine. All right. That was my view.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Thank you very much. Okay.
We have a motion.
All in favor, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: (No response.)
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign.
Page 273
April 12-13, 2011
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Could you repeat the motion.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: The motion is that no commissioner will
engage in settlement discussions with any litigant or potential litigant
without the prior authorization of the Board of County
Commissioners.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That goes contrary to what
Commissioner Coletta wanted, because he wants to have the ability to
freely speak with litigants.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Then -- no, it doesn't go contrary.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, it doesn't go contrary.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. So you wouldn't be able to
speak with South Florida Water Management.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, they came and visited us
door to door. I don't think that quite fits into this thing.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah, it does. It absolutely does.
Based on the motion here, it doesn't matter whether they come and
visit you or you go and talk to them. I mean, if --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. Based upon that, then if
that's the case --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That is the case.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- then it would be the case then
too.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'm sorry?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That would be the same case
then. In the future you wouldn't be able to meet with Water
Management.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's okay. No problem.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: All right.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: From hereforth on.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, don't confused the two.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And what is the definition of a
Page 274
April 12-13, 2011
settlement discussion?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Don't confuse the two. If somebody --
Clarence Tears wants to brief you on something, that's fine.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Unrelated to the litigation.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: But if somebody wants to talk with us
about litigation settlement or if we want to talk with someone about
litigation settlement, then we should come to the board and get
permission to do so.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's fine. It's well understood.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. So let me ask another
questions.
Commissioner Coyle, I guess you've been talking to Steve
Feldhaus about litigation-related issues and the drafting of some sort
of a settlement agreement?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Absolutely not.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: You haven't? Or who -- has
anyone on this board?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No. You're going way back in
the past before you were here.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, it's going on right now. Or
forgive me. Leo, is anyone talking to Mr. Feldhaus about settlement--
about some settlement agreement?
MR. OCHS: The staff has had discussions with Mr. Feldhaus
about an agreement that would help govern future water
quality-management issues and issues related to dredging at Clam
Pass.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: But it's a settlement agreement
related to litigation. I mean, it makes reference to --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Oh, you're referring to when I
went to Water Management?
MR. OCHS: No.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, this is a different issue.
Page 275
April 12-13, 2011
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That doesn't have anything to do with
you.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So no one on the board has been
involved in those discussions? Mr. Feldhaus, I thought, had shared
with me that he was --
MR.OCHS: Not to my knowledge, ma'am. I think you were in
the only meeting that I'm aware of.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Or -- no? Okay. So how do we
define settlement discussions for purposes of this determination?
MR. KLATZKOW: We're talking pending litigation.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: You're talking pending litigation?
MR. KLATZKOW: Pending litigation--
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So no discussions about pending
litigation.
MR. KLATZKOW: That's my understanding of the motion.
MR.OCHS: Mr. Chairman?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes.
MR. OCHS: If I might, just for my own clarification. What
about active code cases? You know, my concern as a staff member is,
if I send my staff to a meeting at the request of a commissioner for
information and the other party is there with their attorney, you know,
I'm uncomfortable with my staff without the county attorney or the
board's legal representatives being there to represent the board's
interest, if you will, and that's a slippery slope for me.
We certainly want to provide all the information that's being
requested, rightly so. When you get into that fine line about, you
know, what's informational and what might be moving into an area of
either pending litigation or an existing code case that is unresolved or
is in review, I certainly don't want my staff making some statement
that an attorney sitting across the table would use at some future date
to jeopardize the board's previously stated position on the matter.
And that's -- that's something that I'm trying to avoid by getting
Page 276
April 12-13, 2011
some guidance from the commission on this.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Leo, I think it's easy for you to do that.
The county attorney understands the risks of doing those kinds of
things. And I think you should advise your staff that if they're invited
to a meeting and there is an attorney and there is the possibility of
litigation involved, that the staff say, I won't attend or I won't stay for
the meeting unless we get the county attorney.
County attorney then can make a judgment as to whether or not
this is something that should come to the Board of County
Commissioners before that kind of meeting takes place. Would that
help you?
MR.OCHS: Yeah. And that's essentially the direction that I've
given the staff.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And I think that's what you do, that's
right, in most cases, yeah. In some cases you're surprised, but yeah.
MR.OCHS: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All in favor, please signify by saying
aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Does the --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We already did that, didn't we?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I just want to clarify that the
motion includes a definition of settlement discussions.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It doesn't include a definition of
settlement discussions.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: It doesn't?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It includes getting the county attorney
involved, and he'll make a decision.
Okay. Any opposed, by like sign. Okay.
Page 277
April 12-13, 2011
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I oppose it for lack of clarity.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Then it passes 4-1 with
Commissioner Hiller dissenting.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I wouldn't be able to under- -- I
mean, I don't understand what was just decided. Can you explain it to
me, Jeff?
MR. KLATZKOW: My understanding of the board's motion is
that when we have existing ongoing litigation, that a commissioner is
not authorized to engage in settlement negotiations or settlement
conference without first going to the board for direction or approval.
That's my understanding of the board's motion.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's right.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: All right. Then I support that. I
change my vote.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Anything else?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Now, we go to -- anything else, Jeff?
MR. KLATZKOW: No, no, no.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's enough.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's enough?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All right. This time we start with
Commissioner Henning, because he might have to leave here shortly.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Just a few things. I took this
picture this weekend of a sign in the right-of-way, and I know that
we're working on trying to resolve that. I did call the phone number.
They're a local business trying to get some free advertising.
I want to thank Nick Casalanguida for the meaningful discussion
we had in our one-on-one on Monday.
The board received a report on Clam Pass bridge. I don't see
anything with the main concern about the one piling. I would just --
that was that one piling that was crooked. So I just want to make sure
that that engineer did recognize that one crooked piling as okay.
Page 278
April 12-13, 2011
That's all.
MR.OCHS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Because if -- God forbid if
something happened, we would like to explain ourselves.
It was brought to my attention by a constituent that our parks
ordinance is conflicting to state law regarding Florida Statutes 790.
S poke to the county attorney on this, and he would like -- Jeff, correct
me if I am wrong -- some guidance on whether the board wants to
remove the conflict.
MR. KLA TZKOW: You have a, I'll call it a policy, okay,
because it's unenforceable. You have a policy within your ordinance
that forbids firearms in your parks. You are preempted by state law,
which came after the ordinance, from instituting that type of
ordinance.
So we don't enforce it, but it's still on the books as sort of your
policy; you don't really want to have guns.
And, you know, we can keep it in there as an unenforceable right,
or we can get rid of the whole issue, and I can amend the ordinance
and take it out. I mean, probably the best practice is to take it out,
since you are preempted.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I have a question. Is there a difference
in definition of parks that we should, perhaps, try to address? I
understand why people have petitioned to have guns in national parks
where they are subject, perhaps, to attack by large animals.
MR. KLATZKOW: Yeah, I got chased by a grizzly, and also,
once upon a time, wish I had a gun.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's exactly right. Now -- but having a
park -- a playground or something at the water park, a gun at the water
park, that clearly should not be permitted.
MR. KLATZKOW: Well-- but you're preempted by the state on
this. People have the right to carry firearms even in parks if they
want.
Page 279
April 12-13, 2011
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I understand that, but I wonder if they
really were talking about playgrounds and the parks like we have here
in Collier County.
MR. KLATZKOW: You're preempted--
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We're preempted on everything, huh?
MR. KLATZKOW: -- on that.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: There is no distinction?
MR. KLATZKOW: No.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It's crazy.
Okay. Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, just a brief comment. We
could always raise this to the level of next year's legislative initiatives
that we wanted to pursue. Just a suggestion.
And Commissioner Fiala, you might wish to bring this up to one
of the board meetings of the Florida Association of Counties to see
how the membership feels about it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, that's great. I'm going in June,
so I'd be happy to do that, yeah.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. All right.
Sorry. Commissioner Henning, are you finished?
MR. KLATZKOW: Did you want me to come back with a--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We didn't give any direction.
As far as Commissioner Coletta's comments, I can tell you, you're
going to have local groups, constitutional people, Tea Party people,
aware of the, you know, U.S. Constitution and the right to bear arms,
will make an issue out of this.
MR. KLATZKOW: It's a flashpoint issue.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm just trying to remove -- not
to make a big deal out of it. I agree, what's the purpose of carrying a
gun in a playground? There is none. It's an issue of what some people
perceive a constitutional issue, a right to bear arms.
And my opinion, I would like to remove that conflict from --
Page 280
April 12-13, 2011
conflict from state laws. There is penalties, according to our
ordinance, if I recall. And I was just about to look it up.
MR. KLATZKOW: And I will tell you, if suit's brought against
us on that, as it being unconstitutional, we will lose that suit and we
would be liable for attorney's fees.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And so I would like to give
guidance to the county attorney to bring it back to amend the
ordinance striking those provisions.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Can we -- would you be willing to say
removing from the ordinance any conflict with federal law?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, federal --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And state --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- and state law.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- and state law.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes, absolutely. Let's don't
make a big deal out of it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah.
MR. KLATZKOW: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You've got three nods.
Okay. Finished?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I believe so. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yep. I got several different
things. I sent everybody a copy of the -- of my trip to Tallahassee and
some meetings with Florida Association -- excuse me -- the
Conservancy and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. I just wanted to
share it with you again, and if you have any questions or suggestion.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, thank you. Good report.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, that's one of the -- and I
apologize for the fact I didn't even -- I didn't send it out just a little bit
sooner. I would like to have got that to you a week ahead of time, and
Page 281
April 12-13, 2011
I'll make an effort to do that in the future.
Also, too, this was a couple meetings ago I was supposed to bring
this up, but because of other considerations, I wasn't able to. This is
from the Productivity Committee where I sit on as the liaison from the
commission, and it's their suggested work plan.
And if I could take a minute to go down through there to make
some suggestions. The first one on there is a recent report from the
Blue Ribbon Commission evaluating the possible consolidation of
EMS and the fire district. Would the commission like us to perform
such an analysis as far as the savings during 2011 ?
I would suggest that we wait on that to find out what happens
with the shell bill. But remember, we do have a stake in this in that
we have two fire departments and EMS that would figure into this
whole equation.
And then -- I'll go through the whole list if you don't mind, and
any questions or suggestions would be appreciated.
County employment health -- county health insurance, the
expenses, other benefits with comparison with public and local private
entities; review of the BCC budget's internal performance measures
and report to ensure the department of division -- departments and
divisions appropriately focus on achieving strategic operational
objectives.
Number 4, the investigation -- investigate the economic
development program and incentives of competing counties, including
identification of their public-versus-private funding. I would suggest
we hold off on any consideration of that until after we hear back from
the EDC, and at that point in time we can make a decision on that.
Review any Collier County master plans to determine the extent
to which they reflect the current economic situation and outlook.
Well, that's an interesting one. We just put the Golden Gate Master
Plan off to some time in the future. And if something could be
reviewed by this group just to be able to see about how far out of sync
Page 282
April 12-13, 2011
it is with what is needed, it might be something to be considered.
Review of various county impact fees and their projected funding
requirements. And staff has done something to that nature, so I'm not
too sure exactly what level they would come in on that, but it's there
for your judgment and call.
Investigate possible savings through specific outsourcing and
future possible -- possibilities of in-sourcing services now outsourced.
In other words, re-evaluating where we are in today's world in this
economy as far as the value of outsourcing or, in some cases, bringing
it back in-house.
Review the options for renewing the $75 million Waste
Management contract due for negotiations in 2011. That's a big-dollar
item. Something we might want to consider to have another set of
independent eyes looking at it.
Then, of course, any other topic of interest that the commission
may have.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Did you want recommendations on
which ones we would --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, I want to give it some sort
of direction.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Hiller.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. I'd like to talk about No.1.
I do agree that it makes very little sense to do any sort of consolidation
feasibility study before we find out whether the legislature will allow
for consolidation to occur; however, I do think we can do a study with
respect to the dependent fire districts and whether or not a
consolidation is an opportunity there.
We don't need any enabling legislation to consolidate the two
dependent districts. And, obviously, I mean, if there are savings to be
achieved with consolidation, looking at it as between two districts
would have value.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: If I may ask a question. You
Page 283
April 12-13, 2011
suggested possibly that we use the shell bill, something similar like
North Naples is planning to do. We could do it where we could
consolidate EMS and the two fire districts and be the vessel of the
shell bill. Is that what you're thinking of?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, that's not what I'm saying.
What I'm saying is, we're talking about -- I'm talking strictly about the
consolidation of the two dependent fire districts.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I don't know if that would be
any real savings in itself.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: But why don't we have them
analyze that and make that determination? I mean, if consolidation
has the potential to produce savings and eliminate duplication of
functions, why not -- why not run the numbers on the two dependent
fire districts and see what savings can be generated.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: May I--
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And the nice thing about it is that
we could actually consolidate those two fire districts into one if --
because we don't need enabling legislation to do that, and that's within
our jurisdiction.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Right. The problem is, is to
give direction on that without having someone here from the Ochopee
Fire District and the Isle of Capri Fire District would be a little
difficult. It might be an item we want to bring back for discussion at a
-- the next meeting.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No. I'm saying that it's a study
that the Productivity Committee would do.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, I hear you.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'm not proposing it. I'm just
saying that this is -- oh, they're the ones who would interview
Ochopee and not us.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I don't know if it's going to be
something they'd even want to do. But we could bring that back for
Page 284
April 12-13, 2011
discussion at the next meeting when we have people from the -- our
fire districts here to see if that's already been looked at and if there's
any kind of reason for doing it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, I still think your earlier
observation of waiting until all-- the Blue Ribbon Committee
recommendation gets settled down. We've got too many studies going
in different directions already on fire districts.
I'd just as soon -- in my opinion, I'd just like to hold them and let
this Blue Ribbon Committee and the fire districts that are currently
working on the --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Sure.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- bill in Tallahassee and see how it all
shakes out, rather than complicating factors with another one.
But Commissioner Henning is next.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you. The -- and I agree.
I don't think No.1 is a high priority.
Commissioner Hiller's comments, being a former fire
commissioner, I'm not sure if it's still there, but in the state law I think
it's a prohibition when you don't have two independent (sic) fire
districts where their borders touch. There's a huge enclave in between
those two districts.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Dependent districts?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Dependent or fire districts.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So they couldn't be consolidated?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: If I remember right, and if it's
still there. I mean, it always was an issue where these independent
(sic) fire districts would go after each other's little boundaries, so that's
why I have a little knowledge of it.
Now, as far as No.7, outsourcing and possible -- of in-sourcing
(sic) service, now outsource, I've been looking at that in the recent
past, and I have a lot of information from it that I would like to
forward to the Productivity Committee and my colleagues as a
Page 285
April 12-13, 2011
one-way communication.
In fact, last night my elder son provided me a Y ouTube video
from other communities that have outsourced a lot of services and
saved a lot of money.
So I'm really in favor of taking a look at that. Of course, I could
provide it to the county manager too.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You going to outsource the county
manager; is that what you said?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, we already outsource the
county manager.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I agree with Commissioner
Henning.
First of all, I do like the idea of having them look into No.7. I
think that's a great idea. Also, with the combining of -- over the
consolidation of the two dependent, they both have such different rate
structures; one and a half percent on Isles of Capri and 4 percent in
Ochopee. That would -- that could become a real problem.
So I prefer, too, to wait to see what the state is going to be doing
so that we even know if there's a possibility of any of this stuff to take
place --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- before we get people nervous
about them having to pay more of a tax for a fire department that
doesn't serve them.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Just for simplicity so we can keep
track of this, can we go through this and get a consensus on what we
don't want --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Good.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- them looking at. Number 1, I think we
already have enough people, commissioners, who don't want to do No.
1.
Page 286
April 12-13, 2011
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: At this time.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And No.4, Commissioner Coletta
doesn't think that is appropriate at this point in time, and neither do 1.
If there's another one.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Me.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Then that one is sort of out.
Review of various county impact fees and their protected funding
requirements. We have our consultants do this. That is an extremely
complex and detailed process. I don't know that the Productivity
Committee is qualified to do that other than to review the results of the
consultants' recommendations to see if there are any differences, and
they have done that in the past with some regularity.
So if we were to do that, could I suggest that we change the
wording "to review the results of the consultants' recommendations"?
And --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, let's stop for a second--
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All right.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- and try to take one off the
table.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I agree with you on that.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All right.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Ifwe get three nods, we can
give that as a direction.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Do we have three nods?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And I'll say yes, as long as when
we're saying review the consultants' figure, the thing is figures
sometimes tell a story depending on what outcome you want to hear.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's right.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And so I think it's a good idea forw
Page 287
April 12-13, 2011
the Productivity Committee to look at it and see what was the basis of
the figures that were used in the analysis.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Agreed.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I agree with that entirely. I think they're
well qualified to do that.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, I do too.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: So we've got three nods for -- well, we're
going to keep that on there, but we'll modify the wording. Is that
correct?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Michael is taking notes.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Henning, we have
essentially so far agreed to eliminate No.1 and No.4 as tasks,
proposed tasks, for the Productivity Committee. We have three nods
to eliminate both of those.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Commissioner Henning, can I ask
you a question? Do you ever get the feeling that these three nods
make us kind of -- I mean, I love the way Commissioner Coyle just
goes, "We've got three nods, we've got three nods." I mean, I don't
know where you're getting -- I guess it's one, two, three, right?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, no.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I just wanted to --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Henning nodded.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Oh, good.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, no.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes, he did, on No. 1.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes, I did, on No.1. I don't
want -- I don't feel that's --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And you did nod --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Number 7.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- on No.7.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: You know, we could save a lot of
time. We could just email our votes in, and, you know, three nods.
Page 288
April 12-13, 2011
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, you need discussion.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Really?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Now, investigate -- you're
saying No.4, investigate economic development programs and
incentives to competing counties, included -- including identification
of public-versus-private funding?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Gosh. Who came up with that
one?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's right. That's my concern also.
Well, first of all, the -- we did not select the Productivity Committee
for their skills in economic development. We chose them primarily
for their ability to perform financial analyses, and I don't see anything
wrong, as we did the last time, submitting any financial analysis
related to economic development programs to the Productivity
Committee, but to investigate economic development programs and
incentives, I think that the Productivity Committee is not really -- they
don't have the skill set to do that, quite frankly.
So in any event, are there three nods?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Uh-huh.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yep.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, all right. We've got three nods.
That one's out.
So how about the review of the Collier County master plans?
You want them to review that? Now, this gets close to what
Commissioner Henning was expressing a concern about yesterday
about plans for capital improvements. You know, do you want them
to take a look at capital-improvement programs to see if they can
make some recommendations concerning the costs and timing of
those? Does that make sense to anybody or not?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Commissioner Henning?
Page 289
April 12-13, 2011
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, if the Clerk doesn't have
the expertise, do we know that anybody on the productivity has any
expertise on waste -- water and water capital replacement?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I don't know that they do, quite frankly.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: But they have been engaged in the
analysis of expenditures within Collier County Government, our
portion of the government, in the past, and they might have gathered
some experience to offer recommendations.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, as far as that particular
concern that I have, I would welcome anybody objectively look at --
independently look at those capital-replacement expenditures.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Leo, the Productivity Committee
is going to be reviewing the budget proposals, right?
MR.OCHS: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Will that be a topic that they would
normally take a look at, capital-improvement programs?
MR.OCHS: Generally, Commissioner, and if you want to have
them emphasize a particular area of the budget, I'm sure they would
take your -- the board's guidance on that.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Why don't we do that. Does
anybody have an objection to that?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, go ahead.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You okay with that? Just to say that
during their budget review that they should -- that there should be a
special emphasis on capital-improvement expenditures? Is that okay?
MR. OCHS : Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. I think we have probably have
enough nods on 7 to do something with at least investigating
in-sourcing and out-sourcing and so forth. Are there any -- anyone
opposed to that?
(No response.)
Page 290
April 12-13, 2011
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Review the options for the $75
million Waste Management contract.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That sounds like it would be
great for them to take a look at to give a second set of eyes on it. It's a
big deal. It goes for many years.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Utility director seems to think it's
a good idea, so --
MR. DeLONY: Absolutely, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: So he says let's do it. I'd be willing to go
along with that. How about everybody else?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Sure.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, all right. Then we'll do that one.
And other topics? We can also come up with other topics later,
but what did we miss now, Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Two and three.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I think we've done 2 before.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
MR. OCHS : Yes, sir, we have, and we just completed that
review internally as well and are preparing to share that with all the
board members here as part of your budget --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
MR. OCHS: -- preplanning cycle.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Then unless there's some
objection, let's -- let's keep our current analysis. I know what it shows
compared to at least the other public and private local entities, but --
and No.3 is a review of the budgets. That's something they almost
always do for us.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Make sure--
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And we'd just add in the special focus on
capital improvements there.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Uh-huh.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Good work.
Page 291
April 12-13, 2011
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And we'd get that done.
So No.5 is the one that is still ambiguous. I think we've covered
the concern about some plans in our budget approvals in No.3. And if
-- and since we've postponed the Immokalee Area Master Plan, I think
it might not be appropriate timing for them to start taking a look at the
master plans right now. What do you think?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I--
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Everybody else?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You're right.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, all right. Then -- okay. We can
eliminate the master plans. And so what we have -- what we have is
we have eliminated No.1, No--
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Two.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- No.2, No.4, and No.5.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Correct.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Is that right? Is that what
everybody agrees with? Okay.
Do we have a motion that we will then under- -- ask the
Productivity Committee to consider the other options here and advise
us as to --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'll make that motion.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, all right.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. And I'll second the motion.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Motion and seconded. And
Commissioner Fiala or Hiller; who was first?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I don't know.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I have nothing to say.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I think that was from before.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: From before, okay.
Any discussion about these?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All in favor, please signify by saying
Page 292
April 12-13, 2011
aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: They pass unanimously.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: One more thing.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. Earlier, or yesterday
rather, I brought forth a list of suggestions, and I really appreciate the
discussion that took place. Gave a little bit of clarity and some
thought to it.
One of the things I would like us to consider at this moment in
time is consider directing the county manager and the county attorney
to include in their future closing comments a summary of staff time
spent for each commissioner's projects. It has not -- that has not been
previously approved by the commission and -- to be able to know
where it's going, what the subject matter is, just a brief little follow-up
to it rather than the commissioner have to do it like we were
suggesting originally.
I think it would be able to give us a grip on it. In other words,
anything over two hours staff time, just a suggestion, there would be a
brief little thing. In other words, I had Commissioner Coy Ie come
forward, and we worked on an issue dealing with bears in the woods.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You did?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well-- and we spent two hours,
two-and-a-half hours of staff time on it. Just -- and then we keep right
on moving. But the whole thing is is that it brings everything into
perspective, and it makes every commissioner aware -- and
Page 293
April 12-13, 2011
Commissioner Henning did this for me years ago.
When I first became a commissioner, you, Commissioner Fiala,
and Commissioner Henning all came on at the same time. I was
getting my feet underneath me, and I was using a tremendous amount
of staff time going to meetings.
And Commissioner Henning reminded me of the fact that staff
time is a very valuable commodity. And we had quite a discussion,
and then I pared back considerably between the amount of staff time. I
wasn't bringing everybody and his brother to every single meeting I
went. I was handling it on my own or trying to keep it as concise as
possible, and just keeping it in mind for that fact. We never came up
with a rule, but I followed that parameter that was set some time ago
and continued it to the future.
And so that's my suggestion at this time. It will be a simple thing
for the county manager and the county attorney to do just to be able to
acquaint us as to what's actually happening out there. And if
something starts to go amok all of a sudden where there's like a 10- or
12-hour staff time that arises on one subject matter, we might be able
to ask some questions on it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. How does the board feel about it?
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I would like to know what
Commissioner Hiller did to upset you that you're continuing to do this.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, I'm sorry, Commissioner
Henning. The issue has to do with the amount of staff time that's
being expended and how it's being done. And you did this to me
before many, many years ago, like about eight or nine years ago.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: He's getting you back.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm getting you back. No, not
really. I think it's a good thing to do and to be able to be conscious of
what takes place now.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: What harm --
Page 294
April 12-13, 2011
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Let me make it really easy.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Just don't --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: It's truth--
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, no. I'm going to take it easy.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Hiller --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: It's true -- truth in packaging.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- do not interrupt.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: True transparency. The public
-- the public has a right to know what's taking place behind those
closed doors. And now we're going to be able to get a brief little
summary, eight hours were spent on this, 10 hours were spent on that.
But if the commission recognizes the going project, they just --
you know, a commissioner comes before you say, listen, I'm going to
be going such and such place, I want to do this, I want to do that, the
commission says okay --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm not finished yet.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You see --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I covered it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- there's nothing that you can
do about that information. If a commissioner needs information about
the day-to-day operation of the county, by state law, that
commissioner is allotted that --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- information. So the reason I
ask that, because you have knowledge -- I brought it up yesterday --
the Florida law -- you had knowledge that, with -- you can't limit. So
obviously you want to do something for a certain commissioner that
you feel is using too much staff time. And the bottom line is, you
can't do anything about it.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: We're -- once again--r
Page 295
April 12-13, 2011
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So that information is only to
move away from civility and decorum.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Oh, really, Commissioner
Henning. This is a report on what already happened. It's not a case of
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Let me try to resolve this issue. Let's
assume that Commissioner Henning is correct, then you have every
right to request right now that on a regular basis the county manager
and the county attorney --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Absolutely.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- report to us at the end of a meeting
about the expenditure of staff time for any single commissioner over
one hour or two hours. If you want to request that, then you have
every right to do it, and they will -- are supposed to provide it to you,
okay. Would you like to do that?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. Then I would like to do
that.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Then you've heard his request,
guys.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And I'd like to speak, if I may.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. As far as the use of my
time of staff, it's all calendared. I used to meet with Jeff and Leo. I've
canceled both those meetings. It really isn't productive; doesn't really
give me any information.
And my limited time with staff really is getting to the point
where I'm not really getting any information from you anyway. So,
quite frankly, I'm going to dispense with all my meetings with staff,
and I will limit all my discussions to the public forum where they
properly belong, and I will ask as many questions as I need to properly
inform myself.
So you don't have to worry about me using staff time. I'm done.
Page 296
April 12-13, 2011
I don't need you, I don't need you, I don't need any of you. I can read
the material independently. I will publicly vet the material in front of
the -- in front of the citizens of the community, who should hear this
dialogue, okay. So as far as I'm concerned, we're done.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Good. Okay.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So I hope you're pleased.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Do you have something else?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, I do, as a matter of fact.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Good. You've accomplished a
great deal. I appreciate you asking the question.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Commissioner Hiller, it's
amazing how you've taken something that was supposed to brief
everybody on what's taking place and turned it into a negative where
you can operate behind closed doors --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, no.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: He has the floor.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- and play "got you" again by
just walking in here, never consulting with anybody, and here it is,
we're going to deal with it right here, no advanced information coming
to anyone, no consulting with staff. It's completely contrary to what is
the right way to be able to do business, out in the open in front of the
public with knowledge shared with everyone else out there so we can
come to a good opinion.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'm glad you said that, because
when I ask my next question, I expect full information from you. So
when my turn to speak comes, I'll put forth my questions.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's okay. Is it my turn, or do you
have more?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, I'll cede to you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, good. All of you received a copy
of a letter from Bob Tober concerning changes that should occur
within our emergency management operations in coordination with
Page 297
April 12-13, 2011
the fire departments.
He is -- he is suggesting that a number of changes be made. And
you've all read the letter. What I would like to do is have the board act
on this and make this board policy rather than merely the medical
director's policy.
It has always been my contention that since the medical director
works for the board, policy changes should be ratified by the board
and communicated to the appropriate agencies.
So if the individual board members want to take some time to
consider this, then we can schedule it for our next regularly scheduled
meeting and discuss it in an advertised public forum. But if you feel
that this is action that has to be taken quickly then, perhaps, we can at
least ratify it temporarily until we have that meeting.
So what is the pleasure of the board? Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Your latter, I think, is more
appropriate, because we can't interfere with the day-to-day business.
And, of course, I haven't had an opportunity to look at that, but it
probably is appropriate to direct it to the county manager and say,
please address it in a future meeting.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Or schedule it for a future meeting. He
-- county manager can't address it, but --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: He can dress it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, I don't know ifhe can or not.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Can you? A little Wonder
dressing on it?
MR.OCHS: Well, I think the intent here is since Dr. Tober's an
independent contractor to the board --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: The board.
MR. OCHS: -- through the county manager. The board would
give the direction.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah. All the county manager would do
is put it on the agenda if we -- if we direct that that be done.
Page 298
April 12-13, 2011
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And, again, I haven't had a
chance to read it. Does it have anything to do with the protocol of
EMS?
MR. OCHS : Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes, sir, quite a lot.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Well, isn't that your
purvey (sic), I mean you?
MR. OCHS: I would -- I would implement the direction from the
board or of the medical director through the board, yes, sir.
Operationally it is ultimately my responsibility, but --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Jeff? I'm always referring to
you. I appreciate it.
MR. KLATZKOW: No. The board needs to approve the policy,
but Leo implements.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
MR. KLA TZKOW: So it's appropriate that Leo bring it to the
board for direction.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay, great. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And do we have enough nods to put it on
the agenda next time?
MR.OCHS: (Nods head.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. That's all I have.
Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You can skip me. I'll be the last.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Hiller.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, I'll be the last.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, I wanted to -- if you don't
mind?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, I do mind.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay, fine. Then I just wanted to
say thank you to my --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Wonderful birthday?
Page 299
April 12-13, 2011
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No. Yeah, it's a -- what a start to a
birthday. I just wanted to say -- it's kind of personal, but I'm glad my
cousin is home from the hospital. He made it through surgery down
here okay and, you know, that's what's most important are the good
things in life.
And thank you for the little birthday celebration yesterday. I
appreciate that. And, anyway, as far as comments go, I have none,
just to thank everyone.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And thank God for my cousin's safe
surgery .
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Good. I'm glad everything turned
out okay.
Commissioner Hiller.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. I have just a few things.
With respect to the backup material, the backup material needs to
also be provided to the advisory boards. To give an example, the TDC
was never presented with a contract for Paradise, you know, actually a
2.3 or -- I can't remember -- I think it was 2.3 million, and they
approved that contract sight unseen.
And, quite frankly, I think we need the RFP, the proposal, and
the contract in the backup, and given that everything is electronic, I
think that should be included in every instance that a contract is being
presented for approval. So that's number one.
Number two, with respect to what I was saying earlier about my
use of staff time, I have everything calendared, so if anyone ever
wants to see my calendar, they're welcome to. I absolutely do not
intend to use staff time any longer; however, I will not bar staff from
speaking with me. If anybody from staff wants to speak with me, I
have an open-door policy with respect to everybody, the public, the
staff, whoever on whatever issue.
And, of course, I will note that if my time is used, I will reflect it
Page 300
April 12-13, 2011
as the use of my time, not the use of your time if you request to come
and see me, because obviously it works both ways.
Now, with respect to full disclosure and basically, you know,
meetings behind closed doors, I would like, right here, right now, full
disclosure on all the county's dealings with Arthrex. I want to know
about all the meetings that you have had with Arthrex, when you've
met with Arthrex, what you've discussed with Arthrex, where we are
with Arthrex, and where we're going with Arthrex. So I want a full
disclosure right now on that point.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: County Attorney, could you
please advise at this point in time? We're at some very interesting
points of negotiation. What kind of information is needed at this point
in time?
MR. KLATZKOW: Commissioner, you're free to discuss or not
to discuss. It's your -- it's your decision.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, in -- out of respect for the
people involved at the other end, private conversations that are going
forward to try to assure the continuance of business in Collier County,
I respectfully will not comment at this time, but when everything is
done, I'll give you a full report.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Staff?
MR.OCHS: Sure, Commissioners. There's been a series of
meetings with officials from Arthrex about potential plans for them to
expand their business, and we have shared information about the
board's incentive programs with them.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: What specifically have you
offered?
MR.OCHS: Haven't offered anything.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: What programs are you presenting
as options?
MR. OCHS: The ones that have existed for years, the incentive
programs for job creation, job retention, impact fee payment
Page 301
April 12-13, 2011
assistance, or property tax stimulus, and those are options that have
been presented to the principals at Arthrex.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And what value of incentive are
we looking to give them?
MR. OCHS: That hasn't been determined. They need to make a
bunch of decisions, in my opinion, before we can put pencil to paper
and determine what, if anything, they're asking for and what value that
has.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And what's the deadline for going
back to them with a proposal?
MR.OCHS: Well, there is no deadline. There's been no
commitment, as far as I know, from them to expand at this point. I
think they're doing their due diligence, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Is that it? How many meetings
has staff had?
MR. OCHS: I don't know; probably half dozen.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'd like the calendar of all meetings
MR.OCHS: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- and all notes related to all those
meetings, please.
Mr. Casalanguida?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: You asked for disclosure, ma'am. My
staffs working with them on their site plans and parking exemptions,
anything that they can expand their parking at their current location
and have a meeting with the Arthrex development manager -- next
week to go over his parking requirements.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So it's strictly parking in your
case?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: That's all I'm working on right now.
He had mentioned he's looking at an additional floor and what the
review process would be and time line, but we haven't had that meeting
Page 302
April 12-13, 2011
yet.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you for your candor.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Comment?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'd like to continue.
With respect to information, Mr. Feldhaus; he's continuously
representing to the citizens of Pelican Bay that he's been in
negotiations with the county and is coming close to a settlement. I
would like to know what is being discussed with whom and what this
settlement -- what these settlement discussions are about.
I've asked the county attorney, and he says he's not aware of
anything, but obviously Mr. Feldhaus is making recommendations to
an entire community. I don't know anything from you, Mr. Ochs, or
from the other members of this board.
So, again, I'm directing the question to members of this board. I
want to know when you have met and spoke to Mr. Feldhaus about
this settlement agreement -- which a while back, I believe when I first
came on board, you gave me a copy of, Leo. And I'd like to know
from you, Leo, you know, what you and your staff are doing with
respect to this matter.
And by the way, I'd like a copy of your calendar highlighting all
your meetings with Arthrex.
Go ahead.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And if I could, I'd like a copy of that,
too, because I'm not aware of any of those. We've discussed this, and
you gave me information, but --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: You mean on Feldhaus or on
Arthrex?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Feldhaus.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. So I'd like to know what's
going on with this matter.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Are you finished?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'd like the question answered by
Page 303
April 12-13, 2011
everybody.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, all right.
Commissioner --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Just one comment.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Your light was on first. Go
ahead, Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. Regarding Arthrex,
remember back some time ago when we had the money we were
returning from -- that we were going to use for impact fees to defer,
and I brought up the question, took it off the consent agenda and put it
on the regular agenda, you and several of the commissioners agreed at
that time that I should start meeting with Arthrex.
And I followed that direction, and I've been doing it ever since.
And I can tell you, it's been a very, very refreshing event of
circumstances that is going forward.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Good.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you for that direction
earlier.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I -- you'll have to provide
me the minutes on when we talked about Arthrex. I don't remember
that.
But to answer Commissioner Hiller's question, I'm not offended
one bit about your question. It's an issue in your district and very
important to you.
I did have a brief conversation with Steve expressing my opinion
about the channel markers that I hope that they didn't have the -- you
know, work out a deal where they would have those big monstrous
navigational markers. That was the extent of my conversation with
Steve Feldhaus.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Commissioner Coyle, you've
never had any discussions with anyone at Pelican Bay or Mr. Feldhaus
Page 304
April 12-13, 2011
about these markers or anything else?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Steve Feldhaus only, as a matter of fact.
He did meet with me here in the office one day briefly and told me
that he was working on an agreement between the people in Seagate
and Pelican Bay to try to find an acceptable solution to the marker
.
Issue.
I have never had any discussions with respect to a settlement
agreement with the county relative to any legal issues. I'm not aware
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Or anything related to Clam Bay?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Nothing.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Clam Pass?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: No. That's the only meeting I've had,
and it was very general. It expressed the hopes that they were getting
close to an agreement with the Seagate people, which is very
important to me. So that's --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And, of course, by meetings I
mean discussion also, not just limited to physical.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's it.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. Leo?
MR.OCHS: Yes. I've had one meeting with Mr. Feldhaus
regarding his concerns on behalf of the Pelican Bay Foundation
relative to issues surrounding the renewal of the permit for the
dredging -- maintenance dredging of Clam Pass and the water-quality
studies that have been initiated in upper Clam Bay.
He believes that by virtue of their -- when I say their, I mean
Pelican Bay Foundation's deed restrictions and the restrictive
covenants on the 400 acres that the board owns in Pelican Bay that
they have standing in that matter, and we've had lengthy discussion
over years now about that.
And County Attorney's Office has been assisting us in trying to
determine how we bring that to a resolution so that we can renew the
Page 305
April 12-13, 2011
expired permit, so that if there is a storm or something else that closes
up Clam Bay, that we have a permit in place that would allow the
board to allow the staff to re-open that pass so the mangroves don't die
off, and that's the extent of my personal meetings.
Staff has been working towards some type of agreement with the
foundation in that regard.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's the information I would
like. I'd like to know specifically what staff and who are they working
with on the foundation and, you know, to what end. I'd like full
disclosure on that. I actually would like it brought back as an agenda
item with full disclosure because, like I said, he's been representing to
the Pelican Bay community that he's been negotiating with the county,
and I mean since I've been elected, and that they're close to a
resolution, and obviously he's not talking to members of this board
and he's not negotiating with you on this point, so I'd like to know
who he's negotiating with and who's close to a settlement agreement
on what.
MR.OCHS: Yeah. Ms. Ramsey and Mr. McAlpin from my
staffhave had the bulk of the discussions on this issue with Mr.
Feldhaus.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Could they -- I'd like to bring it
forward as an agenda item, and I'd like them to briefus on exactly
what those are.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And one other point of confusion might
be that he is -- as I understand it, has been meeting fairly frequently
with representatives from Seagate and perhaps the City of Naples
concerning the resolution of the marker problem.
I have not attended any of those meetings intentionally. But I am
certain that he has been talking with the people from Seagate, because
I've talked with the Seagate people, and they have said they've talked
with him.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And I think you're correct about
Page 306
April 12-13, 2011
that, Commissioner Coyle. The representations he's making is
specifically with reference to the county.
So if you could please put that on the agenda and have a
presentation made fully disclosing all these discussions and where we
are today in this matter --
MR. OCHS: Certainly.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- as it relates, obviously,
specifically to that document you gave me a copy of.
MR. OCHS : Well, I think the one that he emailed you several
weeks ago is the only one I have, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right. Well, that -- you know,
surrounding that issue. So I would appreciate that.
When are we going to hear from you, Mr. Coletta, on Arthrex
since you're withholding that information from us?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You'll hear with me -- from me
just as soon as I have something to report. A certain amount of
confidentiality has to remain with this -- until that point in time that
it's -- there's something to report.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Confidentiality? On what basis?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm sorry?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Hiller, this is not the time
to interrogate.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, it's not interrogating. I just
want to know what the basis is.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: He's answered your question.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. It's starting to sound like
Jackson Labs.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. You finished?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yep.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. When we were asking for full
disclosure what the county did, you mean full disclosure from county
Page 307
April 12-13, 2011
staff and all board members? Okay. So each one of us produces
whatever meetings we've had with Arthrex and with Steve Feldhaus
and everything that we've -- and everybody who's involved in that? Is
that what we're supposed to be doing?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yep.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay, fine. I mean, mine's going to
be kind of empty.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's good.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I've already disclosed mine, so my
disclosure is complete.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Motion to adjourn.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Motion to adjourn.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Second by Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Can I just add one --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I hope there's no debate about this.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No. I just wanted to say, I'm sorry I
didn't write my report from Tallahassee, but I'm glad you did, and I
better get to it. Better get hopping. Okay. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You'll have to go back and update it
now, go back to Tallahassee.
Okay. We are adjourned. Thank you very much, and have a
good day.
*****
* * * * * Commissioner Henning moved, seconded by Commissioner
Coletta and carried unanimously that the following items under the
Consent and Summary Agendas be approved and/or adopted on April
12,2011. *****
Page 308
April 12-13, 2011
Item #16Al
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE WATER AND SEWER UTILITY
FACILITIES FOR LEL Y CULTURAL P ARKW A Y AND
RELEASE OF ANY UTILITIES PERFORMANCE SECURITY TO
THE PROJECT ENGINEER OR THE DEVELOPER'S
DESIGNATED AGENT
Item #16A2
RESOLUTION 2011-64: FINAL CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF
THE ROADWAY (PRIV ATE) AND DRAINAGE
IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE FINAL PLAT OF HERIT AGE BAY
PHASE TWO-A PURSUANT TO SECTION 10.02.05 C.8 OF THE
LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE WITH THE ROADWAY AND
DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS BEING PRIV A TEL Y
MAINTAINED AND RELEASE OF THE MAINTENANCE
SECURITY EXCEPT TO THE EXTENT NECESSARY TO
ENSURE COMPLETION OF THE FINAL PAVING
IMPROVEMENTS
Item # 16A3
THE COMPLETED ALTERNATIVE ROAD IMPACT FEE
CALCULATION STUDY, CONDUCTED IN ACCORDANCE
WITH THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 74-204 OF THE
COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES, THE
REVIEW COMPLETED BY TINDALE-OLIVER AND
ASSOCIATES, INC., AND THE RESULTING ROAD IMPACT
FEE RATE OF $68,393 PER 1,000 SQUARE FEET FOR THE
TACO BELL RESTAURANT BEING CONSTRUCTED AT 4201
TAMIAMI TRAIL EAST - LOCATED AT THE INTERSECTION
Page 309
April 12-13, 2011
OF LAKEWOOD BLVD. AND U.S. 41
Item #16A4
AWARD INVITATION TO BID (ITB) #10-5588R FOR
PURCHASE AND DELIVERIES OF FUNGICIDES, PESTICIDES
AND HERBICIDES TO ALLIGARE LLC, DIAMOND R
FERTILIZER CO., INC., FORESTRY RESOURCES INC.,
HELENA CHEMICAL COMPANY, RED RIVER SPECIAL TIES
INC., AND UNIV AR USA INC., IN NO PARTICULAR ORDER.
ESTIMATED ANNUAL EXPENSES ARE $350,000 - UTILIZED
BY MANY COUNTY DEPARTMENTS INCLUDING THE
AIRPORT AUTHORITY, PARKS AND RECREATION, PELICAN
BAY, ROAD AND BRIDGE AND WASTEWATER
Item #16A5
AWARD ITB #11-5651 "HURRICANE SHUTTERS FOR THE
TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT CENTER AND MAINTENANCE
BUILDING" OF THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION TO
STORM SMART BUILDING SYSTEMS INC. AND NECESSARY
BUDGET AMENDMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $68,750-
PROTECTING THE COUNTY'S TRAFFIC CONTROL
EQUIPMENT FOLL WING A STORM EVENT IS CRITICAL TO
RECOVERY EFFORTS
Item #16A6
AN AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT #10-5455 MANAGEMENT
CONTRACT FOR THE COLLIER AREA TRANSIT (CAT) FIXED
ROUTE AND PARA TRANSIT PROGRAM TO CLARIFY
OWNERSHIP RIGHTS TO ZONAR@ EQUIPMENT PURCHASED
Page 310
April 12-13, 2011
BY THE CONTRACTOR, TECTRANS, INC., AND INSTALLED
IN CAT VEHICLES AND AN AGREEMENT AMONGST
ZONAR@ SYSTEMS, INC., TECTRANS, INC. AND COLLIER
COUNTY THAT ASSIGNS TECTRANS' CURRENT ANNUAL
ZONAR@ SUBSCRIPTION TO COLLIER COUNTY AT NO
COST - THE PROGRAM WILL CONDUCT PRE AND POST
TRIP INSPECTIONS, RUN NUMEROUS REPORTS
MONITORING THE CONDITIONS OF EACH VEHICLE AND
TRACK THE WHERE-A-BOUTS OF EACH BUS
Item #16A7
AN ADDENDUM TO SOFTWARE LICENSE AND SERVICES
AGREEMENT AND CUSTOMER SUPPORT AGREEMENT
BETWEEN ROUTEMATCH SOFTWARE, INC. AND COLLIER
COUNTY; TO UPDATE LICENSING AND TD TRIP PLANNING
AND DISPATCH SOFTWARE WITH CURRENT VERSION
COMPATIBLE WITH WINDOWS 7 AT AN ESTIMATED COST
OF $33,260 - FOR SCHEDULING TRIPS ON THE
PARA TRANSIT PROGRAM
Item #16A8
AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH LEE COUNTY TO
COORDINATE A PUBLIC TRANSIT LINK BEING
IMPLEMENTED BY LEE COUNTY BETWEEN LEE AND
COLLIER COUNTIES - TO CONNECT COLLIER AREA
TRANSIT AND LEETRAN BUS SYSTEMS
Item # 16A9
THE COLLIER AREA TRANSIT MOBILITY MANAGEMENT
Page 311
April 12-13, 2011
PLAN AND IMPLEMENTING SUGGESTED
RECOMMENDATIONS; NOT TO EXCEED $46,000 FROM
FEDERAL STIMULUS GRANT (ARRA FT A SECTION 5311)
Item #16A10
THE SELECTION COMMITTEE'S RANKING IN RESPONSE TO
REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (RFP) #11-5621 FOR DESIGN
SERVICES FOR COLLIER AREA TRANSIT (CAT) PASSENGER
TRANSFER FACILITY (RADIO ROAD), A NEGOTIATED
CONTRACT BACK TO THE BOARD FOR APPROVAL - STAFF
IS RECOMMENDING THE SELECTION OF PBS&J
Item #16All
RECOGNIZING FY 2010/2011 FEDERAL TRANSIT
ADMINISTRATION SECTION 5311 ADDITIONAL REVENUE
IN THE AMOUNT OF $28,798 TO COLLIER AREA TRANSIT
FUND (426) AND AUTHORIZE ALL NECESSARY BUDGET
AMENDMENTS - FOR THE CAT OPERATION OF THE
IMMOKALEE CIRCULATOR ROUTE 8A AND 8B
Item #16A12
THE FY2009/2010 5309 FEDERAL TRANSIT
ADMINISTRATION (FTA) GRANT AWARD IN THE AMOUNT
OF $274,000 FOR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS TO THE
SECONDARY TRANSFER FACILITY LOCATED ON RADIO
ROAD AND A BUDGET AMENDMENT TO RECOGNIZE AND
USE THESE FUNDS - FOR SECURITY EQUIPMENT,
REHAB/RENOVATION, SHOP EQUIPMENT, CONSTRUCTION
MANAGEMENT AND EMPLOYEE TRAINING
Page 312
April 12-13, 2011
Item # 16A 13 - Moved to Item # 1 OJ (Per Agenda Change Sheet)
Item #16Bl
A SWEAT EQUITY GRANT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE
CRA AND A GRANT APPLICANT WITHIN THE BA YSHORE
GATEWAY TRIANGLE AREA. (3180 CALEDONIA AVENUE;
FISCAL IMPACT: $1,000) - FOR EXTERIOR BUILDING
UPGRADES INCLUDING REPLACEMENT OF FACIA AND
GUTTERING AND NEW PAINT
Item #16Cl
NOTIFING THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION OF THE INTENT TO
DECLINE A PROPOSED FUNDING TO THE STATE
REVOLVING FUND LOAN AGREEMENT (DWllll 030) FOR
THE SOUTH COUNTY REGIONAL WATER TREATMENT
PLANT 12-MILLION GALLONS PER DAY REVERSE OSMOSIS
PLANT EXPANSION, PROJECT #700971 - AS DETAILED IN
THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item # 16C2 - Continued to the April 26, 2011 BCC Meeting
(Per Agenda Change Sheet)
A HAZARD MITIGATION GRANT PROGRAM CONTRACT,
AGREEMENT NUMBER IIHM-3E-09-21-01-026, WITH THE
STATE OF FLORIDA, DIVISION OF EMERGENCY
MANAGEMENT, IN THE AMOUNT OF $240,000, TO APPLY
TOWARDS THE COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE
INSTALLATION OF 1,430 LINEAR FEET OF SIX-INCH HIGH
Page 313
April 12-13, 2011
DENSITY POLYETHYLENE LEACHATE PIPE AT THE
COLLIER COUNTY LANDFILL; AND THE CORRESPONDING
BUDGET AMENDMENTS
Item #16C3
CONVEYANCE OF AN EASEMENT TO FLORIDA POWER &
LIGHT COMPANY FOR PROVIDING ELECTRIC SERVICES
FOR THE NORTH COLLIER RECYCLING DROP-OFF CENTER
FACILITY, AT A COST NOT TO EXCEED $27 - EASEMENT
AREA MEASURES A TOTAL OF APPROXIMATELY 15,861
SQUARE FEET
Item # 16C4
CONVEYANCE OF AN EASEMENT TO FLORIDA POWER &
LIGHT COMPANY FOR PROVIDING ELECTRIC SERVICES
AND FIBER CONNECTION FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF
THE LANDFILL GAS-TO-ENERGY FACILITY AT THE
COLLIER COUNTY LANDFILL, AT NO COST TO THE
COUNTY - EASEMENT AREA MEASURES A TOTAL OF
APPROXIMATELY 16,745 SQUARE FEET
Item #16C5
REJECT PROPOSALS RECEIVED UNDER RFP NO. 11-5648
FOR DISASTER RECOVERY ASSISTANCE SERVICES TO
ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH THE ROBERT T. STAFFORD
DISASTER RELIEF AND EMERGENCY ASSISTANCE ACT
AND FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
REQUIREMENTS FOR STATE AND FEDERAL CONTRACTS
THAT QUALIFY FOR REIMBURSEMENT AND STAFF TO RE-
Page 314
April 12-13, 2011
SOLICIT A MODIFIED RFP
Item #16Dl
CHANGE ORDER FOR A PROJECT AWARD EXTENSION IN
EXCESS OF SIX (6) MONTHS FOR GRANT-RELATED
RESIDENTIAL REHABILITATION ACTIVITIES FUNDED BY
THE COLLIER COUNTY NEIGHBORHOOD STABILIZATION
PROGRAM - TO SECURE FINAL PAYMENT TO THE VENDOR
FOR WORK PERFORMED
Item # 16D2
FOUR (4) 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 $59,065.45 - FOR
REGAL ACRES, LOTS 8 AND 13 AND LIBERTY LANDINGS,
LOTS 134 AND 136
Item #16D3
ONE (1) RELEASE OF LIEN FOR DEFERRAL OF 100 PERCENT
OF COLLIER COUNTY IMPACT FEES FOR OWNER
OCCUPIED AFFORDABLE HOUSING DWELLING UNITS
THAT HAVE BEEN REPAID IN FULL - REPAID AMOUNT OF
$13,149.98 FOR LOT 39, CHARLEE ESTATES
Item #16D4
Page 315
April 12-13, 2011
ONE (1) SATISFACTION OF MORTGAGE FOR OWNER
OCCUPIED AFFORDABLE HOUSING DWELLING UNITS
THAT HAVE BEEN REPAID IN FULL TO COLLIER COUNTY -
FOR LOT 39, CHARLEE ESTATES
Item #16D5
THREE (3) GRANT AGREEMENTS ACCEPTING THE
CONTINUUM OF CARE HOMELESS ASSISTANCE GRANT
AWARD FROM THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND
URBAN DEVELOPMENT (HUD) TOTALING $330,761 AND
BUDGET AMENDMENTS TO RECOGNIZE FUNDING
ASSOCIATED WITH THIS AWARD - BENEFITING ST.
MATTHEW'S HOUSE WOLFE APARTMENTS, THE SHELTER
FOR ABUSED WOMEN AND CHILDREN'S TRANSITIONAL
HOUSING AND HHVS' HOMELESS MANAGEMENT
INFORMATION SYSTEM
Item #16D6
ELECTRONIC SUBMITTAL OF ATTACHED SENIOR CORPS
RETIRED AND SENIOR VOLUNTEER PROGRAM (RSVP)
APPLICATION FOR GRANT RENEWAL TO THE
CORPORATION FOR NATIONAL AND COMMUNITY
SERVICE, FOR THE CONTINUATION OF THE COLLIER
COUNTY SPONSORED RSVP PROGRAM IN THE AMOUNT OF
$68,152 - FUNDS AVAILABLE BEGINNING SEPTEMBER 30,
2011 THROUGH SEPTEMBER 29, 2012, WHICH IS THE THIRD
YEAR OF OUR THREE YEAR GRANT PERIOD
Item #16D7
Page 316
April 12-13, 2011
AGREEMENTS WITH THE DAVID LAWRENCE CENTER AND
NATIONAL ALLIANCE ON MENTAL ILLNESS OF COLLIER
COUNTY, INC. TO OPERATE THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE,
MENTAL HEALTH AND SUBSTANCE ABUSE
REINVESTMENT GRANT AND ASSOCIATED BUDGET
AMENDMENTS. FUNDING HAS BEEN PROVIDED THROUGH
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING #LHZ25 FROM THE
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES-
FOR PERSONS WHO ARE IN, OR AT RISK OF ENTERING,
THE CRIMINAL OR JUVENILE JUSTICE SYSTEM
Item #16D8
THE SUMMER FOOD SERVICE PROGRAM GRANT
AGREEMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $769,208.83 FOR FY 2010-
2011 AND ASSOCIATED BUDGET AMENDMENTS-
REIMBURSING AGENCIES THAT SERVE FREE MEALS TO
CHILDREN IN QUALIFING NEIGHBORHOODS (ALL OF
IMMOKALEE, EVERGLADES CITY AND MANY IN NAPLES)
Item #16D9 - Moved to Item #10I (Per Agenda Change Sheet)
Item #16El
THE SALE OF COLLIER COUNTY SURPLUS PROPERTY ON
APRIL 30, 2011 - CONSISTING OF OFFICE EQUIPMENT AND
FURNITURE
Item #16E2
PROCUREMENT OF BACKGROUND CHECKS AND
Page 317
April 12-13, 2011
FINGERPRINTING FROM THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
LAW ENFORCEMENT AND THE FEDERAL BUREAU OF
INVESTIGATION AS THE SOLE SOURCE PROVIDER FOR AN
ESTIMATED ANNUAL AMOUNT OF $100,000
Item # 16E3
REPORT AND RATIFY STAFF-APPROVED CHANGE ORDERS
AND CHANGES TO WORK ORDERS - FOR THE PERIOD OF
FEBRUARY 16,2011 THROUGH MARCH 24,2011
Item #16Fl
ACCEPTANCE OF THE VOLUNTEER FIRE ASSISTANCE
GRANT A WARD TO OCHOPEE FIRE CONTROL DISTRICT IN
THE AMOUNT OF $4,125 FOR THE PURPOSE OF
PURCHASING FIRE HOSE FOR THE BRUSH VEHICLES AND
CLASS A FOAM - GRANT #VF AG 10-11
Item # 16F2
RESOLUTION 2011-65: APPROVING AMENDMENTS
(APPROPRIATING GRANTS, DONATIONS, CONTRIBUTIONS
OR INSURANCE PROCEEDS) TO THE FISCAL YEAR 2010-11
ADOPTED BUDGET
Item #16F3
BUDGET AMENDMENT APPROPRIATING $37,110 THAT
WILL PROVIDE FUNDING FOR THE LEGAL AID SOCIETY
WITHIN THE COURTS SYSTEM TO COVER ARTICLE V
REVENUE SHORTFALL FOR FY 2011
Page 318
April 12-13, 2011
Item #16F4
A REPRESENTATIVE OF THE COUNTY TOURISM
DEPARTMENT TO FILE A CLAIM IN THE SUM OF $450,000
ON BEHALF OF COLLIER COUNTY FOR LOST TOURIST
DEVELOPMENT TAX REVENUE IN THE MULTI-DISTRICT
LITIGA TION RELATING TO THE DEEPW A TER HORIZON OIL
SPILL (CIVIL ACTION NO. 10-9999, U.S. DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA) - FILING
DEADLINE IS APRIL 20, 2011 FOR REVENUE LOST BETWEEN
JULY AND SEPTEMBER 2010
Item #16Gl
BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR ENGINEERING CONSULTING
AND DESIGN SERVICES REQUIRED FOR REPAIRS TO
T AXIW A Y ALPHA WIRING AND REPLACEMENT OF THE
ROTATING BEACON AT THE IMMOKALEE REGIONAL
AIRPORT. ($6,230)
Item # 16G2
RESOLUTION 2011-66: EXECUTION OF "MASTER JOINT
PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT 2011-A" WITH THE FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TO FUND PROJECTS
AT THE EVERGLADES AIRPARK, THE IMMOKALEE
REGIONAL AIRPORT AND MARCO ISLAND AIRPORT, AND
ASSOCIATED BUDGET AMENDMENTS. ($70,000 TO
RECOGNIZE GRANT FUNDS AND $17,500 TO TRANSFER
LOCAL MATCH)
Page 319
April 12-13, 2011
Item #16G3
CONTRACT #10-5600 CONSTRUCTION, ENGINEERING AND
INSPECTION (CEI) SERVICES FOR MARCO ISLAND
EXECUTIVE AIRPORT TAXIWAY PROJECT IN THE AMOUNT
OF $484,195 WITH URS CORPORATION SOUTHERN - TO
WORK WITH A SUB-CONSULTANT TO DEVELOP THE SOIL
MIXING MONITORING PLAN AND REVIEW THE
CONTRACTOR'S GROUND IMPROVEMENT PLAN
Item #16G4 - Moved to Item #13A (Per Agenda Change Sheet)
Item #16Hl
COMMISSIONER COLETTA'S REIMBURSEMENT
REGARDING ATTENDANCE AT A FUNCTION SERVING A
VALID PUBLIC PURPOSE. ATTENDED MARINE CORPS
LEAGUE "HONOR THE FREE PRESS DAY" LUNCHEON AT
THE HILTON HOTEL IN NAPLES, FL ON MARCH 16,2011.
$30 TO BE PAID FROM COMMISSIONER COLETTA'S TRAVEL
BUDGET - LOCATED AT 5111 TAMIAMI TRAIL NORTH
Item #16H2
COMMISSIONER COLETTA'S REIMBURSEMENT
REGARDING ATTENDANCE AT A FUNCTION SERVING A
VALID PUBLIC PURPOSE. ATTENDING THE 9TH ANNUAL
PARADISE COAST TOURISM STAR AWARDS LUNCHEON AT
THE MARCO ISLAND MARRIOTT RESORT, MARCO ISLAND,
FL ON MAY 11, 2011. $30 TO BE PAID FROM
COMMISSIONER COLETTA'S TRAVEL BUDGET
Page 320
April 12-13, 2011
Item #16H3
COMMISSIONER HENNING'S REIMBURSEMENT
REGARDING ATTENDANCE AT A FUNCTION SERVING A
VALID PUBLIC PURPOSE. HE WILL ATTEND THE BIG
CYPRESS CHAPTER COMMUNITY SERVICE AWARD
CEREMONY AT THE COUNTRY CLUB OF NAPLES - NAPLES,
FL ON APRIL 15,2011. $20 TO BE PAID FROM
COMMISSIONER HENNING'S TRAVEL BUDGET - LOCATED
AT 185 BURNING TREE DRIVE
Item #16H4 - Moved to Item #9H (Per Agenda Change Sheet)
Item # 16H5
COMMISSIONER FIALA'S REIMBURSEMENT REGARDING
ATTENDANCE AT A FUNCTION SERVING A VALID PUBLIC
PURPOSE. ATTENDED THE 2011 RETIRED & SENIOR
VOLUNTEER PROGRAM (RSVP) OF COLLIER COUNTY
LUNCHEON ON MARCH 30, 2011 AT THE NAPLES HILTON IN
NAPLES, FL. $25 TO BE PAID FROM COMMISSIONER
FIALA'S TRAVEL BUDGET - LOCATED AT 5111 T AMI AMI
TRAIL NORTH
Item #16H6
COMMISSIONER FIALA'S REIMBURSEMENT REGARDING
ATTENDANCE AT A FUNCTION SERVING A VALID PUBLIC
PURPOSE. ATTENDED THE CHABAD OF NAPLES ANNUAL
BENEFIT EVENING & GALA ON APRIL 10, 2011 AT THE
RITZ-CARLTON HOTEL IN NAPLES FL. $150 TO BE PAID
FROM COMMISSIONER FIALA'S TRAVEL BUDGET -
Page 321
April 12-13, 2011
LOCATED AT 280 V ANDERBIL T BEACH ROAD
Item #16H7
COMMISSIONER FIALA'S REIMBURSEMENT REGARDING
ATTENDANCE AT A FUNCTION SERVING A VALID PUBLIC
PURPOSE. WILL ATTEND THE 9TH ANNUAL PARADISE
COAST TOURISM STAR AWARDS LUNCHEON ON MAY 11,
2011 AT THE MARCO ISLAND MARRIOTT RESORT ON
MARCO ISLAND, FL. $30 TO BE PAID FROM COMMISSIONER
FIALA'S TRAVEL BUDGET
Item # 16H8
COMMISSIONER HILLER'S REIMBUSEMENT REGARDING
ATTENDANCE AT A FUNCTION SERVING A VALID PUBLIC
PURPOSE. ATTENDING THE CHABAD OF NAPLES, ANNUAL
BENEFIT EVENING & GALA, NAPLES, FL. $50 TO BE PAID
FROM COMMISSIONER HILLER'S TRAVEL BUDGET - HELD
AT THE RITZ-CARL TON HOTEL LOCATED AT 280
V ANDERBIL T BEACH ROAD
Item #16H9
COMMISSIONER HILLER'S REIMBURSEMENT REGARDING
ATTENDANCE AT A FUNCTION SERVING A VALID PUBLIC
PURPOSE. ATTENDING THE 9TH ANNUAL PARADISE
COAST TOURISM AWARDS LUNCHEON AT THE MARCO
ISLAND MARRIOTT RESORT, MARCO ISLAND, FL ON MAY
11,2011. $30 TO BE PAID FROM COMMISSIONER HILLER'S
TRAVEL BUDGET
Page 322
April 12-13, 2011
Item #16Il
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 323
.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
April 12, 2011
I. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS TO FILE FOR RECORD WITH ACTION AS DIRECTED:
A. Minutes:
I) Collier County Coastal Advisory Committee:
Minutes of January 13,2011.
2) County Government Productivity Committee:
Agenda of September 15,2010; October 1,2010 - Library Impact
Fee Review Subcommittee; October 13,2010 - Government
Buildings and Law Enforcement Impact Fee Review Subcommittee;
October 20, 2010; November 17, 2010; December 15, 2010;
January 19,2011; February 16,2011.
Minutes of September 15, 2010; October 20,2010;
November 17,2010; December 15,2010; January 19,2011;
February 16,2011.
.
3)
Land Acquisition Advisory Committee:
Minutes of February 14,2011.
.
April 12-13, 2011
Item #16Jl
DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD OF MARCH 5, 2011
THROUGH MARCH 11, 2011 AND FOR SUBMISSION INTO
THE OFFICIAL RECORDS OF THE BOARD
Item #16J2
DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD OF MARCH 12, 2011
THROUGH MARCH 18,2011 AND FOR SUBMISSION INTO
THE OFFICIAL RECORDS OF THE BOARD
Item # 16J3
DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD OF MARCH 19,2011
THROUGH MARCH 25, 2011 AND FOR SUBMISSION INTO
THE OFFICIAL RECORDS OF THE BOARD
Item #16J4
THE INVESTMENT STATUS UPDATE REPORT FOR THE
QUARTERS ENDING DECEMBER 31,2010 AND MARCH 31,
2011 - AS DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item #16Kl
A LAWSUIT ON BEHALF OF THE COLLIER COUNTY BOARD
OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, AGAINST MAX STANKEVEH
AND OLIVER SCOTT V ANOY, IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF
THE TWENTIETH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR COLLIER
COUNTY, FLORIDA, TO RECOVER DAMAGES INCURRED BY
THE COUNTY FOR THE REPAIR TO A TRAFFIC SIGNAL
Page 324
April 12-13, 2011
CABINET DAMAGED BY THEM IN THE AMOUNT OF
$15,417.81, PLUS COSTS OF LITIGATION - DUE TO AN
ACCIDENT ON FEBRUARY 28,2010 AT THE INTERSECTION
OF GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY AND SUNSHINE BLVD.
Item # 16K2
A LAWSUIT ON BEHALF OF THE COLLIER COUNTY BOARD
OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, AGAINST TODD SONDRINI,
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE TWENTIETH JUDICIAL
CIRCUIT IN AND FOR COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, TO
RECOVER DAMAGES INCURRED BY THE COUNTY FOR THE
REP AIR TO A COUNTY EMERGENCY VEHICLE THA T WAS
STRUCK BY A VEHICLE OWNED BY TODD AND KESIA
SONDRINI AND DRIVEN BY TODD SONDRINI IN THE
AMOUNT OF $21,060.50, PLUS COSTS OF LITIGATION - DUE
TO AN ACCIDENT ON SEPTEMBER 27,2009 AT THE
INTERSECTION OF LIVINGSTON ROAD AND V ANDERBIL T
BEACH ROAD
Item # 16K3 - Continued to the April 26, 2011 BCC Meeting
(Per Agenda Change Sheet)
A LAWSUIT ON BEHALF OF THE COLLIER COUNTY BOARD
OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, AGAINST SURETY
CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF
THE TWENTIETH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR COLLIER
COUNTY, FLORIDA, TO RECOVER DAMAGES INCURRED BY
THE COUNTY, AS A RESULT OF CONTRACTED WORK, FOR
THE REPAIR TO THE POLLUTION CONTROL LABORATORY
IN BUILDING "H" 3RD FLOOR IN THE AMOUNT OF
$99,492.99, PLUS COSTS OF LITIGATION, INCLUDING
Page 325
April 12-13, 2011
REASONABLE ATTORNEYS FEES
Item #16K4
A LAWSUIT ON BEHALF OF THE COLLIER COUNTY BOARD
OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, AGAINST ACCI/API JOINT
VENTURE AND BOB'S BARRICADES, INC., IN THE CIRCUIT
COURT OF THE TWENTIETH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND
FOR COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, TO RECOVER DAMAGES
INCURRED BY THE COUNTY FOR THE REPAIR TO A WATER
FORCE MAIN DAMAGED BY THEM IN THE AMOUNT OF
$63,676.09, PLUS COSTS OF LITIGATION - RELATING TO
THE WIDENING OF I-75, NEAR IMMOKALEE ROAD
Item # 1 7 A
ORDINANCE 2011-08: PUDZ-2009-AR-14425, AMENDING
ORDINANCE NUMBER 2004-41, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER
COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, WHICH INCLUDES
THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING REGULATIONS FOR THE
UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
BY AMENDING THE APPROPRIATE ZONING ATLAS MAP OR
MAPS BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF
THE HEREIN DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTY FROM A RURAL
AGRICUL TURAL (A) ZONING DISTRICT TO A MIXED USE
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (MPUD) ZONING DISTRICT
ALLOWING FOR DEVELOPMENT OF UP TO 135,000 SQUARE
FEET OF COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT AND/OR A
RETIREMENT COMMUNITY/GROUP HOUSING AT A FAR OF
.60 AND/OR A HOTELIMOTEL OF AN INTENSITY OF 26
UNITS PER ACRE FOR A 23.33+/- ACRE PARCEL KNOWN AS
THE ADDIE'S CORNER MPUD LOCATED IN THE
Page 326
April 12-13, 2011
NORTHWEST QUADRANT OF THE INTERSECTION OF
IMMOKALEE ROAD (CR 846) AND COLLIER BOULEVARD
(CR 951) IN SECTION 22, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26
EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; AND BY PROVIDING
AN EFFECTIVE DATE
Item #17B
ORDINANCE 2011-09: PUDA-PL2010-854, NAPLES DAILY
NEWS BPPUD, AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 06-49, THE
NAPLES DAILY NEWS BUSINESS PARK PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENT (BPPUD), LOCATED AT 1100 IMMOKALEE
ROAD, BY AMENDING SECTION 2.9 OF 06-49 ALLOWING A
CHANGE IN THE PLANT MATERIALS IN THE LANDSCAPE
BUFFER: AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE
Item #17C
ORDINANCE 2011-10: AMENDING THE COLLIER COUNTY
CONSOLIDATED IMPACT FEE ORDINANCE, ORDINANCE
NO. 2001-13, AS AMENDED, TO INCORPORATE A PROVISION
CLARIFYING THE IMPOSITION OF WATER AND SEWER
IMPACT FEES ON GEOGRAPHIC AREAS WITHIN THE
COLLIER COUNTY WATER-SEWER DISTRICT UNTIL SUCH
A TIME WHEN CONNECTION TO THE REGIONAL WATER
AND/OR SEWER SYSTEM IS ANTICIPATED WITHIN A TEN-
YEAR PERIOD AS IDENTIFIED BY THE MOST CURRENT
PUBLIC UTILITIES WATER AND WASTEWATER MASTER
PLAN UPDATES AND THE 2010 ANNUAL UPDATE AND
INVENTORY REPORT
Page 327
Apri112-13,2011
Item #17D
ORDINANCE 2011-11: AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 2006-03
(THE COLLIER COUNTY AIRPORT-TYPE SCREENING
ORDINANCE) IN ORDER TO EXPAND THE AIRPORT-TYPE
SECURITY SEARCHES TO INCLUDE INDIVIDUALS
ENTERING THE IMMOKALEE GOVERNMENT CENTER
(COURTHOUSE) AND THE JAMES V. MUDD EMERGENCY
SERVICES CENTER
Item #17E
ORDINANCE 2011-12: AMENDING THE CONSERVATION
COLLIER ORDINANCE NO. 2002-63, AS AMENDED, WHICH
PROVIDES FOR THE ABILITY TO INCREASE FUNDING OF
THE CONSERVATION COLLIER MANAGEMENT TRUST
FUND (174) BY REMOVING THE ANNUAL CAP OF AD
VALOREM TAXES THA T MAY BE APPROPRIATED AND
ALLOWING FOR TRANSFER OF FUNDS INTO FUND 174
FROM THE CONSERVATION COLLIER ACQUISITION TRUST
FUND (172)
Page 328
April 12-13, 2011
*****
There being no further business for the good of the County, the
meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 11: 15 a.m. on
April 13, 2011.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALSIEX
OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF
SPECIAL DISTRICTS UNDER ITS CONTROL
'1uLw~
FRED COYLE, CHAIR AN
A ~TgST
.<"J:hViGl1T E. BROCK, CLERK
'~[\ (
'," \(~~
, ,- W:, ';s.t,J~ to Ch4 I rill4lt , .
. "" :' it9/l~lIre on,.
- - '. \ "1'~'
These minutes 'Wproved by the Board on \'\1~ I OJ 2 t> 1\ , as
presented ~ or as corrected
c/
TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF GREGORY COURT
REPORTING SERVICE, INC., BY TERRI LEWIS, COURT
REPORTER AND NOTARY PUBLIC.
Page 329