BCC Minutes 06/28/2011 R MINUTES
BCC
Regular
Meeting
June 28 , 2011
June 28, 2011
TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Naples, Florida, June 28, 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, Finance Director, Clerk of Courts Office
Ian Mitchell, BCC Executive Manager
Mike Sheffield, Operations Manager, CMO
Page 1
COLLIER COUNTY
Board of County Commissioners
Community Redevelopment Agency Board (CRAB)
Airport Authority
1..0"'\ 111/.
,.... I
.. ~ ~
.'
r
( ,Il' ---.
Jt '" \
AGENDA
Board of County Commission Chambers
Collier County Government Center
3299 Tamiami Trail East, 3rd Floor
Naples FL 34112
June 28, 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
June 28, 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 T AMIAMI TRAIL,
SUITE 1, NAPLES, FLORIDA, 34112-5356, (239) 252-8380; ASSISTED
LISTENING DEVICES FOR THE HEARING IMPAIRED ARE AVAILABLE IN
THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' OFFICE.
LUNCH RECESS SCHEDULED FOR 12:00 NOON TO 1:00 P.M.
1. INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
A. Reverend Charles McCracken - Naples Alliance Church
2. AGENDA AND MINUTES
A. Approval of to day's regular, consent and summary agenda as amended (Ex
Parte Disclosure provided by Commission members for consent and
summary agenda.)
B. March 8, 2011 - BCC/Closed Session Minutes
C. May 24, 2011 - BCClRegular Meeting
3. SERVICE A WARDS - EMPLOYEE
Page 2
June 28, 2011
A. 25 Year Attendees
1) Vickie Wilson, Parks and Recreation
B. 30 Year Attendees
1) Millie Kelley, Wastewater
2) Joseph Corbo, Road Maintenance
4. PROCLAMATIONS
A. Proclamation designating June 28,2011 as Dean R. Lind Day. To be
accepted by Dean R. Lind. Sponsored by Commissioner Coletta.
B. Proclamation designating June 28, 2011 as The Home Depot and the Project
V olunteers Appreciation Day for their selfless contributions to the Eagle
Lakes Community Park. To be accepted by Daniel Zurbrigg and Heather
Figard. Sponsored by Commissioner Fiala.
C. Proclamation designating June 28,2011 as Sgt. Linda Pierre Day. To be
accepted by family members of Sgt. Pierre. Sponsored by Commissioner
Coletta.
5. PRESENTATIONS
A. Presentation by the National Weather Service declaring Collier County
Storm Ready.
B. Presentation by SCORE on the "Business Impact 2011" Program. To be
presented by Chick Heithaus and George Ahearn. (Commissioner Coletta)
6. PUBLIC PETITIONS
A. Public Petition request from Lyle McCandless regarding the requirement of
building permits for work at private hunting camps located in preserves.
Item 7 and 8 to be heard no sooner than 1:00 pm unless otherwise noted.
Page 3
June 28, 2011
7. BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
8. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. This item has been continued to the Julv 26. 2011 BCC meetine:. This
item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided bv Commission
members. Should a hearine: be held on this item. all participants are
required to be sworn in. RZ-PL2009-25: The Gordon River Greenway
Park - 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 established 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
Rural Agriculture (A), Rural Agriculture (A) with an ST Overlay,
Conservation (CON), Conservation (CON) with an ST Overlay, Commercial
Intermediate (C-3), Residential Multi-Family District 6 [RMF-6(3)] and
Residential Multi-Family District 6 [RMF-6(3)] with ST Overlay zoning
districts to the Public Use (P) zoning district for a public park with an ST
Overlay to be known as the Gordon River Greenway Park; and by providing
an effective date. The 123.6+/- acre subject property is located on the east
side of Goodlette-Frank Road (CR-851) and south of Golden Gate Parkway
(CR-886), in Sections 27 and 34, Township 49 South, Range 25 East, Collier
County, Florida.
9. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
A. Appointment of member to the Collier County Citizens Corps.
B. Appointment of member to the Contractors Licensing Board.
c. Recommendation to approve a Resolution of the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, encouraging the Department of
Defense, Congress and the President to intervene to ensure fair
reimbursement rates to medical providers through the TRICARE system and
quality health care to our deserving active and retired military personnel.
(Commissioner Coyle)
Page 4
June 28, 2011
D. This item to be heard at 1 :05 p.m. Discussion regarding a request to
amend Stewardship Easement Agreement; Tract: HCLRP SSA 8 as provided
for in a paragraph of the Agreement. Amendment requested is to provide
Grantor the ability to withdraw the Stewardship Sending Area (SSA)
designation provided an application for such withdrawal is implemented
within 6 months of approval of the amendment. (Commissioner Coletta)
E. Advisory Board Vacancies as advertised in the Press Release of June 22,
2011
10. COUNTY MANAGER'S REPORT
A. This item to be heard at 11 :00 a.m. Recommendation to approve the
application by Arthrex, Inc. and Arthrex Manufacturing, Inc. to participate
in the Fee Payment Assistance Program, the Job Creation Investment
Program, the Advance Broadband Infrastructure Investment Program, and
the Fast Track Regulatory Process Program. (Fiscal Impact Estimate:
$2,282,969) (David Jackson, Executive Director, Business & Economic
Development)
B. Recommendation to award Agreement No. 11-5690 for Construction
Engineering and Inspection (CEI) and Related Services for SR84 (Davis
Boulevard) Radio Road to Collier Boulevard; SR84/SR951 Intersection
Improvements; Collier Boulevard (SR/CR 951) north to Magnolia Pond
Drive; and CR951 (Collier Boulevard) north to the Main Golden Gate Canal
to Atkins North America, Inc; Project No. 60073 & No. 60092, Fiscal
Impact $2,964,487.50. (Steve Ritter, Road Construction Manager, Growth
Management Division)
C. Recommendation that the Board adopt criteria for review of conceptual
plans and designs for major capital projects. (Len Price, Administrative
Services Administrator)
D. Provide the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) with an update of the
draft Administrative Code. (Fred Reischl, Senior Planner, Growth
Management Division)
E. Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) approves
a Land Development Code Amendment Cycle. (Fred Reisch1, Senior
Page 5
June 28, 2011
Planner, Growth Management Division)
F. Recommendation to approve a Resolution establishing an outdoor burning
ban in the unincorporated areas of Collier County in accordance with
Ordinance No. 2009-23, the Regulation of Outdoor Burning and Incendiary
Devices during Drought Conditions Ordinance. (Dan Summers, Director,
Bureau of Emergency Services)
11. COUNTY ATTORNEY'S REPORT
A. 12:00 P.M. Time Certain Notice of Closed Session. Notice is hereby given
that, pursuant to Section 286.011 (8), Fla. Stat., the County Attorney desires
advice from the Board of County Commissioners in closed attorney-client
session on TUESDAY, JUNE 28, 2011. The session will be held for a time
certain of 12:00 noon, in the Commission Conference Room, 3rd Floor, W.
Harmon Turner Administration Building F, Collier County Government
Center, 3299 East Tamiami Trail, Naples, Florida. In addition to Board
members, County Manager Leo Ochs, County Attorney Jeffrey A.
Klatzkow, and Litigation Section Chief Jacqueline W. Hubbard will be in
attendance. The Board in executive session will discuss: Strategy session
related to settlement negotiations and litigation expenditures in the pending
cases of (1) Jerry Blocker, et al. v. Collier County, Case No. 08-9355-CA;
and (2) Collier County v. Jerry Blocker, et aI., Case No. 09-1281-CA; now
pending in the Circuit Court of the Twentieth Judicial Circuit in and for
Collier County, Florida.
B. 1:00 P.M. Time Certain Return from Closed Session. For the Board of
County Commissioners to provide direction to the County Attorney
regarding settlement negotiations and litigation expenditures in the pending
cases of(l) Jerry Blocker, et al. v. Collier County, Case No. 08-9355-CA;
and (2) Collier County v. Jerry Blocker, et aI., Case No. 09-1281-CA; now
pending in the Circuit Court of the Twentieth Judicial Circuit in and for
Collier County, Florida.
12. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
13. AIRPORT AUTHORITY AND/OR COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY
Page 6
June 28, 2011
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 for recording the final plat of Vita
Tuscana, approval of the standard form Construction and Maintenance
Agreement and approval of the amount of the performance security.
2) Recommendation to approve the purchase of five (5) acres of
unimproved property which will be required for the construction of a
storm water detention and treatment pond for Phase II of the
Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension Project. Project No. 60168, Phase
II (Fiscal Impact: $50,450)
3) Recommendation to approve and ratify Staffs extension of Contract
#06-3969 with Stanley Consultants, Inc. and approval of Change
Order #2 to Work Order #4500110440, requesting an additional 30
days to process the Consultant's final invoice for work completed on
Gateway Triangle Stormwater Improvements, Project #51803.
4) Recommendation to approve an amendment to an easement agreement
for the purchase of a road right-of-way, drainage and utility easement
(Parcel No. 256RDUE) required for the expansion of Golden Gate
Boulevard from two lanes to four lanes between Wilson Boulevard
and DeSoto Boulevard. (Project No. 60040.) Estimated fiscal impact:
None.
5) Recommendation to provide after-the-fact approval for the submittal
of a Transportation Community and System Preservation Program
(TCSP) Discretionary Grant Application for the construction of five
Page 7
June 28, 2011
new bridges in Golden Gate Estates in a total amount of$17,000,000.
6) Recommendation to execute the Non Emergency Transportation
Medicaid Contract for the State 201112012 fiscal year; authorize a
budget amendment in the amount of $486,958 to recognize the
Medicaid grant funds; authorize a budget amendment in the amount of
$137,270 in order to fund the Paratransit Transportation
Disadvantaged program through the remainder of fiscal year 2011;
and, to direct staff to work with the Local Coordinating Board to
evaluate funding and service options for paratransit through Fiscal
Year 2012.
7) Recommendation to approve the submittal of a grant application in the
Federal Transit Administration (FT A) Financial and Grant
Management System (TEAM Web) and authorize a budget
amendment in the amount of $220,000 to recognize the 2008/2009
Congestion Management System/Intelligent Transportation
Stakeholders (CMS/ITS) grant funds awarded to Collier Area Transit
(CA T) for the purchase of a vehicle to be used to provide service on a
east-west corridor on the Fixed Route system.
8) Recommendation to approve and execute the FY2011112
Transportation Disadvantaged Trust Fund Trip/Equipment Grant
Agreement with the Florida Commission for the Transportation
Disadvantaged (CTD) in the amount of$625,170 with a local match
of $69,450 and authorize the Chairman to sign the Agreement, a
Resolution in support of the Agreement, and required budget
amendments. Grant funds will be used to cover a portion of the
operating expenses of the Transportation Disadvantaged Program.
9) Recommendation to authorize the use of the newly adopted
"Warehouse" Road Impact Fee rate for the United Materials, Inc.
expansion project, if the Building Permit for the proposed
construction is applied for prior to the effective date of September 1,
2011 for the new/revised land use rates.
10) Recommendation to approve and ratify staffs extension of Contract
No. 09-5229 "Consultant Services for Collier County Signal
Retiming Project" and a time extension Change Order to Work Order
Page 8
June 28, 2011
No. 4500113122 in order to process the Consultant's invoices for
work completed.
11) Recommendation to approve a Resolution authorizing the Chairman
of the Board of County Commissioners to execute a Local Agency
Program Agreement with the Florida Department of Transportation in
which Collier County would be reimbursed up to $550,963 for the
installation of wireless detection equipment for the expansion of the
adaptive traffic control system on Airport Road, from Club House
Drive to Golden Gate Parkway.
12) Recommendation to approve an impact fee reimbursement requested
by Two Lakes Development, LLC, totaling $869,132.69, due to the
cancellation of a building permit.
B. COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
1) Recommendation for the Board of County Commissioners (BCC),
acting as the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA), to approve
the relocation of Immokalee CRA Office, approve the master lease
with Barron Collier Partnership, LLLP, and authorize the Chairman to
sign the master lease agreement. (3120 15th Street North, Unit 2,
Immokalee ).
2) Recommendation for the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA)
to authorize a budget amendment to recognize a reimbursement of
$100,000 from a Seller's escrow account to reimburse CRA Fund 187
for the work required to mitigate an environmentally contaminated
site (4315 Bayshore Drive).
3) Recommendation for the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA)
to modify an existing Commercial Building Improvement Grant
Agreement between the CRA and a Grant Applicant by approving a
time extension and increase the grant award in the amount of $20,000.
(4097 Bayshore Drive, fiscal impact $50,000).
4) Recommendation for the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA)
to approve and execute a Landscape Improvement Grant Agreement
between the CRA and a Grant Applicant within the Bayshore
Page 9
June 28, 2011
Gateway Triangle area. (2705 Storter Avenue - $550)
C. PUBLIC UTILITIES DIVISION
1) Recommendation to adopt a Resolution approving Special
Assessment Hardship Deferrals for certain Sewer Special
Assessments for the 2011 tax year.
2) Recommendation to approve the Satisfaction of Lien for the 1996
Solid Waste Collection and Disposal Services Special Assessments
where the county has received payment in full satisfaction of the lien.
Fiscal impact is $20 to record the Satisfaction of Lien.
3) Recommendation to approve, execute and record Satisfactions of
Notice of Claim of Lien for Sanitary Sewer System Impact Fee.
Fiscal impact is $20 to record the Satisfactions of Lien.
4) Recommendation to approve the Satisfactions for certain Water and/or
Sewer Impact Fee Payment Agreements. Fiscal impact is $38.50 to
record the Satisfactions of Lien.
5) Recommendation to waive competition and authorize a sole source
contract renewal of $55,832 with GE Intelligent Platforms for utility
facilities control system software support. This software is used in all
Public Utilities Division treatment plants and distribution systems to
control, monitor, and manage critical processes. Funding is available
in Projects #72541 and #71056.
D. PUBLIC SERVICES DIVISION
1) Recommendation to approve a waiver pursuant to CMA #5311(M), to
authorize the Parks and Recreation Director's participation and service
as a member of the Early Learning Coalition of Southwest Florida,
Inc. Board of Directors.
2) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to sign
seven (7) lien agreements for deferral of 100% of Collier County
impact fees for owner occupied affordable housing dwelling units
located in Collier County. Approval of this item will transfer
Page 10
June 28, 2011
previously approved deferral agreements from Habitat for Humanity
to owner occupants with a continuing fiscal impact of$100,355.46.
3) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to sign one
(1) release of lien for deferral of 100 percent of Collier County impact
fees for owner occupied affordable housing dwelling unit that have
been repaid in full.
4) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to sign an
amendment to the 2009 Community Development Block Grant-
Recovery (CDBG-R) Subrecipient Agreement with the City of Naples
to be used towards landscaping improvements.
5) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to sign an
amendment to the 2010-2011 Community Development Block Grant
(CDBG) Subrecipient Agreement with the City of Naples in the
amount of $120,434 in order to incorporate revisions to the original
Subrecipient Agreement and complete improvements to Anthony
Park.
6) Recommendation to approve the Memorandum of Understanding
between the Retired and Senior Volunteer Program (RSVP) and its
Participating Agencies (Volunteer Stations), endorse the standard
form agreement and authorize the Housing, Human and Veteran
Services Department Director to be the designated signatory to
execute said document.
7) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners provide
after-the- fact approval of the amendments between Collier County
Board of County Commissioners and the Area Agency on Aging for
Southwest Florida, Inc., which reflects additional grant funding in the
amounts of $60,000 for the Community Care for the Elderly (CCE)
program and $8,668 for the Alzheimer's Disease Initiative (ADI)
program for FY 10-11.
8) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to sign
Amendment # 1 for three (3) subrecipient agreements to the State of
Florida, Department of Children and Families (DCF) 2011 Challenge
Grant approved by the Board on March 8, 2011 (Item #16D4).
Page 11
June 28, 2011
Amendment # 1 will allow for a full description of the DCF grant
terms and conditions.
9) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to sign an
amended Administrative Plan and Resolution for operating the
Neighborhood Stabilization Program to conform with revised and
newly issued rules, regulations, and guidance from the U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban Development resulting from the
enactment of the Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of
2010.
10) Recommendation to approve budget amendments for the Museum
totaling $83,725.04 to recognize tourist development tax revenue
received as a result of a class action lawsuit brought against on-line
travel agencies for $62,441.04 and other miscellaneous revenues for
$21,284 and appropriate funds for museum capital improvements.
11) Recommendation to approve the extension of the U.S. Department of
Housing and Urban Development (HUD) entitlement FY 2010-2011
grant periods for the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG),
HOME Investment Partnerships (HOME), and Emergency Shelter
Grant (ESG) by ninety days thereby changing the FYI0-11 fiscal
period from July 1,2010 through June 30, 2011 to July 1,2010
through September 30, 2011, authorize the continued payment of
grant expenditures, and change future fiscal periods for these grants to
begin on October 1st and end on September 30th.
E. ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DIVISION
1) Recommendation to approve Amendment No. 06 to the Agreement
with Collier County District School Board for the Driver Education
Program to provide $196,200 in funding.
2) Recommendation to adopt a Resolution and approve a Lease
Agreement with United States Senator Marco Rubio for use of
County-owned office space during his initial term for annual revenue
of $4,200.
Page 12
June 28, 2011
3) Recommendation to authorize the Chairman to execute a letter to the
South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) giving Century
Oil Inc., LLC permission to apply for a water use permit within the
Caracara Prairie Preserve.
4) Recommendation to conduct the Conservation Collier Annual Public
Meeting to provide the Board of County Commissioners and public
with an update on the Program's past activities.
5) Recommendation to approve a modification to the budget of the
Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant (EECBG) funded by
the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA), authorize the
County Manager, or his designee, to reallocate the funding within the
Board approved grant budget as necessary, and authorize the
necessary budget amendments. The proposed modification reallocates
budgeted funds from a traffic signalization activity and administrative
costs to complete lighting retrofits in several county buildings.
6) Recommendation to approve the Pepper Ranch Preserve Final
Management Plan under the Conservation Collier Land Acquisition
Program and direct the County Manager, or his designee, to
implement the plan.
7) Recommendation to approve a Final Management Plan for the Gordon
River Greenway Preserve under the Conservation Collier Land
Acquisition Program and direct the County Manager, or his designee,
to implement the plan.
8) Recommendation to approve a Final Management Plan for the Shell
Island Preserve under the Conservation Collier Land Acquisition
Program and direct the County Manager, or his designee, to
implement the plan.
9) Recommendation to approve a Right-of-Way Consent Agreement and
Memorandum of Right-of- Way Consent Agreement from Florida
Power & Light Company for access on, over and across a portion of
Calusa Bay South property located off Goodlette Frank Road in
Naples, Florida at an estimated cost not to exceed $50, Project
Page 13
June 28, 2011
Number 70062.
10) Correct Scrivener's error in bid tabulation for ITB No. 10-5573
"Traffic Sign Materials and Related Items".
F. COUNTY MANAGER OPERATIONS
1) Recommendation to approve two (2) Contractual Service Agreements
between Collier County and the East Naples, and Golden Gate Fire &
Rescue Districts to provide fire protection and rescue services within
the Collier County Fire Control District at a budgeted cost of
$175,200.
2) Recommendation to approve a Memorandum of Understanding
between Collier County and the Florida Division of Emergency
Management in support of the placement and use of a Resource
Logistics Support Trailer. The trailer will be for shared use in the
County and for other emergency situations in the region.
3) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to sign an
Agreement accepting the annual Emergency Management
Preparedness and Assistance Grant, in the amount of$91,805, to
update the Strategic Housing Plan and to authorize the necessary
budget amendment.
4) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners award Bid
#11-5704 for the amount of$685,605 for Pelican Bay Community
Crosswalks to Bateman Contracting, LLP and to approve a budget
amendment in the amount of $116,400. Source of funds is assessment
revenue paid by District property owners within the MSTBU.
5) Report to the Board of County Commissioners covering budget
amendments impacting reserves in an amount totaling $25,000 or less.
6) Recommendation to adopt a resolution approving amendments
(appropriating grants, donations, contributions or insurance proceeds)
to the Fiscal Year 2010-11 Adopted Budget.
Page 14
June 28, 2011
G. AIRPORT AUTHORITY
1) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners, acting as
the Airport Authority, approve and authorize the Authority's
Executive Director to execute the attached tie-down standard
agreements for the Everglades Airpark, Immokalee Regional Airport
and Marco Island Executive Airport.
2) Recommendation to approve attached Concessionaire Agreement
between the Collier County Airport Authority and Marco Aviation
Inc. for Specialized Aviation Service Operations at the Marco Island
Executive Airport.
H. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
1) Proclamation designating July 25,2011 as The Edgerrin James
Foundation Football Day in Immokalee. Sponsored by Commissioner
Coletta.
2) Commissioner Coletta requests Board approval for reimbursement
regarding attendance at a function serving a Valid Public Purpose.
Attended EDC 2011 Post-Legislative Delegation Luncheon at The
Grill Room, Moorings Park, Naples, FL on May 25, 2011. $15 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.
Attended the Collier Building Industry Association's Membership
Meeting on June 16, 2011 at Olde Cypress on Immokalee Road,
Naples, FL. $16 to be paid from Commissioner Henning's travel
budget.
I. MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
1) Advisory board minutes to file for record with action as directed.
J. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
Page 15
June 28, 2011
1) To obtain Board approval for disbursements for the period of May 28,
2011 through June 3,2011 and for submission into the official records
of the Board.
2) To obtain Board approval for disbursements for the period of June 4,
2011 through June 10, 2011 and for submission into the official
records of the Board.
3) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners serve as
the local coordinating unit of government for the Florida Department
of Law Enforcement's Federal Fiscal Year 2011 Edward Byrne
Memorial Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) Countywide Program and
authorize the Chairman to execute the Certification of Participation,
designate the Sheriff as the official applicant, Sheriffs office staff as
grant financial and program managers, approve the grant application
in the amount of$138,940 when completed, and authorize acceptance
of awards and associated budget amendments.
4) Recommendation that the Board concur with the Clerk's intent to
issue a request for proposal for the implementation of an accounts
payable improvement solution for SAP and authorize use of existing
funds in FY20 11 and tentatively budgeted FY 2012.
5) To obtain Board approval for year two (2) of Contract #09-5270,
"Auditing Services for Collier County", with Ernst and Young LLP,
in order to provide for Fiscal Year 2011 external audit and authorize
corresponding payment of $592,250 for services.
K. COUNTY ATTORNEY
1) Recommendation to Approve Agreed Order Awarding Expert Fees
and Costs in the Amount of$73,268.63 for the Acquisition of Parcel
III in the Lawsuit Styled Collier County v. NB Holdings
Corporation, et aI., Case No. 06-0658-CA (Santa Barbara Boulevard
Project No. 62081). (Fiscal Impact: $73,268.63)
2) Recommendation to approve a Mediated Settlement Agreement and a
Stipulated Final Judgment to be drafted incorporating the same terms
and conditions as the Mediated Settlement Agreement in the amount
Page 16
June 28, 2011
of $80,400 for acquisition of Parcels 838A and 838B and for all
counter-claims of Respondent in the lawsuit styled Collier County v.
Nancy L. Johnson Perry, et aI., Case No. 03-2373-CA (Golden Gate
Parkway Project #60027). (Fiscal Impact: $16,400).
3) Recommendation to approve a Settlement Agreement among all
parties in the case styled Burgeson v. Collier County, et aI., Case No.
2:09-CV-220-FTM-99-DNF, now pending in the United States
District Court for the Middle District of Florida, Fort Myers Division.
4) Recommendation to authorize the County Attorney to file a lawsuit,
including injunctive relief, on behalf of the Collier County Board of
County Commissioners, against Flamingo Bend Nursery, Inc.,
regarding Code Enforcement Violations for illegal dumping, digging
for irrigation permits without obtaining County permits and for illegal
dumping upon a separate parcel of property.
17. SUMMARY AGENDA - THIS SECTION IS FOR ADVERTISED PUBLIC
HEARINGS AND MUST MEET THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA: 1) A
RECOMMENDA TION FOR APPROVAL FROM STAFF; 2) UNANIMOUS
RECOMMENDA TION FOR APPROVAL BY THE COLLIER COUNTY
PLANNING COMMISSION OR OTHER AUTHORIZING AGENCIES OF
ALL MEMBERS PRESENT AND VOTING; 3) NO WRITTEN OR ORAL
OBJECTIONS TO THE ITEM RECEIVED BY STAFF, THE COLLIER
COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION, OTHER AUTHORIZING
AGENCIES OR THE BOARD, PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF
THE BCC MEETING ON WHICH THE ITEMS ARE SCHEDULED TO BE
HEARD; AND 4) NO INDIVIDUALS ARE REGISTERED TO SPEAK IN
OPPOSITION TO THE ITEM. FOR THOSE ITEMS WHICH ARE QUASI-
JUDICIAL IN NATURE, ALL PARTICIPANTS MUST BE SWORN IN.
A. This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided bv Commission
members. Should a hearine: be held on this item. all participants are
required to be sworn in. SV-PL2010-1995, Walmart, a Resolution of the
Board of Zoning Appeals of Collier County, Florida, granting a variance
from Section 5.06.04.F.4 of the Land Development Code concerning the
number of permissible wall signs and granting a variance from Section
5.06.04.F.4.a concerning the maximum sign display area, which signs are
located at 9885 Collier Boulevard in Section 3, Township 50 South, Range
Page 17
June 28, 2011
26 East, Collier County, Florida.
B. This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided bv Commission
members. Should a hearine: be held on this item. all participants are
required to be sworn in. PUDZ-PL2009-2496: Emmanuel Evangelical
Lutheran Church - 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 established 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
the Estates (E) zoning district to a Community Facilities Planned Unit
Development (CFPUD) zoning district for the project known as Emmanuel
Evangelical Lutheran Church of Naples, Inc. CFPUD, to allow 90,000
square feet of uses to include worship/church and related social services, a
300 person child and adult day care facility, job training and vocational
rehabilitation, a 450 person private school; or, in the alternative,
development of single family residential dwelling units, located on the south
side of Oil Well Road, in Section 19, Township 48 South, Range 28 East,
Collier County, Florida, consisting of 21.72+/- acres subject to conditions;
and by providing an effective date.
C. Recommendation to adopt a resolution approving amendments
(appropriating carry forward, transfers and supplemental revenue) to the
Fiscal Year 2010-11 Adopted Budget.
18. ADJOURN
INQUIRIES CONCERNING CHANGES TO THE BOARD'S AGENDA SHOULD
BE MADE TO THE COUNTY MANAGER'S OFFICE AT 252-8383.
Page 18
June 28, 2011
June 28, 2011
MR. SHEFFIELD: Mr. Chair, you have a live mike.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Ladies and gentlemen, the meeting of
the Board of County Commissioners is now in session.
Would you please stand for the invocation by Reverend Charles
McCracken from the Naples Alliance Church.
MR. McCRACKEN: Would you join me in prayer.
Almighty God, you said in your book that righteousness exalts a
nation, but sin is a reproach to any people. And, Lord, as part of this
great nation, we in Collier County would far rather be exalted than
reproached.
And so we ask you today to guide our commissioners and their
staffs and those who bring business before this committee, give us the
wisdom to know what is righteousness and then the courage to do it.
I ask this in the name of the Lord Jesus with thanks, amen.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Please remain standing for the Pledge of
Allegiance.
(The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Thank you very much.
One thing I would like to ask all of us to do is to keep the
granddaughter of Commissioner Fiala in your prayers today. She was
seriously injured in an accident last night. So we'd appreciate it if you
would include her in your prayers.
Let's go with the modifications to the agenda, County Manager.
MR. OCHS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Good morning,
Commissioners.
Item #2A
TODA Y'S REGULAR, CONSENT AND SUMMARY AGENDA AS
AMENDED - APPROVED AND/OR ADOPTED W/CHANGES
MR. OCHS: These are the changes for the Board of County
Page 2
June 28, 2011
Commissioners' meeting of June 28, 2011. First item is a staff request
to withdraw Item 1 OF. It was a recommendation to approve a
resolution establishing an outdoor burning ban. That has been
requested for withdrawal by staff based on an email received from
Chief Metzger representing the Collier County Fire Chiefs
Association yesterday.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Question?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, sir. We're going to have
quite an expansive summer where the commission won't be available
in case we have a sudden reversal of the rains. Is there a possibility
that my fellow commissioners may wish to keep this on there and
designate that if so necessary, that the County Manager would be able
to institute it?
My fear is is that we're going through a temporary recurrence of
the raining season, but if it suddenly disappears and we're not
available to institute a burn ban, it could raise a problem in July or
August.
MR. OCHS: Commissioner, we have an ordinance in place that
establishes a protocol for action taken by either the Chair or
Vice-Chair or members of the commission and, ultimately, the Clerk
of the Court in the event of an emergency. So I think we're very well
covered, Commissioner, in the event we would need to do that in the
board's absence.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Thank you.
MR.OCHS: Next item is to move Item 16Bl; it will become
Item 13A on your agenda under CRAs. It's a recommendation for the
board, acting as the CRA, to approve the relocation of the Immokalee
CRA office. That item is moved at Commissioner Henning's request.
Next change is to move Item 16E7 from your consent agenda to
become Item lOG. It's a recommendation to approve the final
Page 3
June 28, 2011
management plan for the Gordon River Greenway preserve. That item
is moved at Commissioner Henning's request.
Next change is to move Item 16A2 to become 10H on the regular
agenda. It's a recommendation to approve the purchase of five acres
unimproved property which would be required for the construction of
stormwater detention and treatment for the Phase II of the Vanderbilt
Beach Road extension project. That item is moved at Commissioner
Hiller's request.
Next change is to move Item 16Dl from the consent agenda to
become Item 101. It's a recommendation to approve a waiver to
authorize parks and recreation director's participation in service as a
member of the Early Learning Coalition of Southwest Florida. That
item is moved at both Commissioner Hiller and Commissioner Coyle's
separate request.
Next change is to move Item 16E3 to become 10J on the regular
agenda. It's a recommendation to authorize the chairman to execute a
letter to the South Florida Water Management District giving Century
Oil, Incorporated, permission to apply for a water use permit within
the Caracara Prairie Preserve. That item is moved at Commissioner
Hiller and Commissioner Coyle's separate request.
Next change is to move Item 16A9 from the consent agenda to
become Item 10K on your regular agenda. It's a recommendation to
authorize the use of the newly adopted warehouse road impact fee rate
for the United Materials, Incorporated, expansion project. That item is
moved at Commissioner Hiller's request.
The next change is to move Item 16E4 from the consent agenda
to become Item 10L on your regular agenda. It's a recommendation to
conduct the Conservation Collier annual public meeting. That item is
moved at Commissioner Coyle's request.
We have two agenda notes this morning, Commissioners. Item
16A 1 should have the preface that this item requires that ex parte
disclosure be provided by commission members. Should a hearing be
Page 4
June 28, 2011
held on this item, all participants are required to be sworn in. That
addition is made at the staffs request.
And, finally, Item 16Cl, the resolution in the printed agenda
packet shows the year 2010 and reads as follows: Resolution No.
2011-blank, Resolution No. CW2010-blank (sic), and it should read --
the corrected year should be 2011, and the 2010 -- CWS-20 1 0 should
be replaced with CWS-20 11. There's no material change to the
resolution itself.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
MR. OCHS: Just a correction on the year.
Finally, Commissioners, there are four time-certain items in your
agenda this morning. Item lOA on the Arthrex economic incentives is
scheduled to be heard at 11 a.m. At 12 noon the board will convene in
a shade session to discuss potential litigation. That's at noon; it's Item
l1A. Item lIB is a report out from the board of that shade session at
1 p.m. Then immediately after at 1:05 you will hear Item 9D.
And those are all the changes I have, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Thank you very much, County
Manager.
County Attorney, do you have any changes?
MR. KLA TZKOW: No. But just as a reminder, when you're
approving the consent agenda, it's the recommendation of the county
attorney that Commissioner Henning abstain on Item 16K3 involving
the Burgeson settlement, since he was a party.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, good. Thank you very much.
And I just would like to make one brief announcement to make
sure that those people who were here expecting to speak on the
transportation disadvantaged program understand that this item is on
the consent agenda, and what it is doing is actually approving the
funding for the remainder of this fiscal year and directing staff to
evaluate alternatives for the next fiscal year, which will be the result
of subsequent hearings.
Page 5
June 28, 2011
So is there anyone here who had anticipated speaking on this
issue? Okay. Good.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Then we will continue with ex parte
disclosure and any further agenda changes by commissioners, and
we'll start with Commissioner Henning this morning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I received correspondence from
planning staff to the Planning Commission on Items 17 A and B, and I
am abstaining on 16K3, as the county attorney's recommendations.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Thank you very much.
Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. On the summary agenda,
Item 17B, I've reviewed staff reports and had correspondence; 17 A,
reviewed the staff report; and no disclosures for AI, 16A 1; and I have
no changes to the agenda.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Thank you very much.
And I have reviewed staff reports for 17 A and 17B, and I have no
further ex parte disclosure, and I have no additional changes to the
agenda.
Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I have no disclosure for 16Al. I
have staff reports for 16A and -- sorry -- 17 A and B, and meetings on
8A.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Thank you very much.
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I have received
correspondence on Items No. 17A and 17B, and I would also like to
ask the other commissioners if I could add just one simple thing to the
agenda, and that is a proclamation that I would like to read to the
Marco Island people for the honor that they received last night. We
just found out that -- about this last week. It was way after the agenda
was printed.
Page 6
June 28, 2011
But I have the chairman of the city council here in the audience
with me, along with the fire chief. So if you would permit me, I
would appreciate that.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You want to add that to the agenda --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- under proclamations.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, sir.
MR. OCHS: It would become Item 4D, Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Very well. All in favor of--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Chairman, I make a motion
that we approve today's agenda as amended.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, very well. Thank you.
A motion to approve today's agenda as amended by
Commissioner Henning --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- 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.
Page 7
Agenda Changes
Board of County Commissioners Meeting
June 28, 2011
Withdraw Item 10F: Recommendation to approve a Resolution establishing an outdoor burning ban in
the unincorporated areas of Collier County in accordance with Ordinance No. 2009-23, the Regulation of
Outdoor Burning and Incendiary Devices during Drought Conditions Ordinance. (Staff's request)
Move item 16Bl to Item 13A: Recommendation for the Board of County Commissioners (BCC), acting as
the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA), to approve the relocation of Immokalee CRA Office, approve
the master lease with Barron Collier Partnership, LLLP, and authorize the Chairman to sign the master lease
agreement. (3120 15th Street North, Unit 2, Immokalee). (Commissioner Henning's request)
Move Item 16E7 to Item lOG: Recommendation to approve a Final Management Plan for the
Gordon River Greenway Preserve under the Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Program and direct the
County Manager, or his designee, to implement the plan. (Commissioner Henning's request)
Move Item 16A2 to Item 10H: Recommendation to approve the purchase of five (5) acres of
unimproved property which will be required for the construction of a stormwater detention and treatment
pond for Phase II of the Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension Project. Project No. 60168, Phase II (Fiscal
Impact: $50,450) (Commissioner Hiller's request)
Move Item 16Dl to Item 101: Recommendation to approve a waiver pursuant to CMA #5311(M), to
authorize the Parks and Recreation Director's participation and service as a member of the Early Learning
Coalition of Southwest Florida, Inc. Board of Directors. (Commissioner Hiller and Commissioner Coyle's
separate requests)
Move Item 16E3 to Item 10J: Recommendation to authorize the Chairman to execute a letter to the South
Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) giving Century Oil Inc., LLC permission to apply for a water
use permit within the Caracara Prairie Preserve. (Commissioner Hiller and Commissioner Coyle's separate
requests)
Move Item 16A9 to Item 10K: Recommendation to authorize the use of the newly adopted "Warehouse"
Road Impact Fee rate for the United Materials, Inc. expansion project, if the Building Permit for the
proposed construction is applied for prior to the effective date of September 1, 2011 for the new/revised land
use rates. (Commissioner Hiller's request)
Move Item 16E4 to Item 10L: Recommendation to conduct the Conservation Collier Annual Public
Meeting to provide the Board of County Commissioners and public with an update on the Program's past
activities. (Commissioner Coyle's request)
Note:
Item 16AI: 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. (Staff's request)
Item 16CI: The Resolution in the printed agenda packet shows the year 2010 and reads as follows:
Resolution No. 2011- _/Resolution No. CWS-2010-_. The corrected year should be 2011 and should read:
Resolution No. 2011_/Resolution No. CWS-2011-_. (Staff's request)
Time Certain Items:
Item lOA to be heard at 11:00 a.m.
Item IIA to be heard in the shade at 12:00 noon
Item lIB to be heard at I :00 p.m.
Item 9D to be heard at I :05 p.m.
6/28/2011 8:42 AM
June 28, 2011
Item #2B and 2C
MINUTES FROM THE MARCH 8, 2011 BCC CLOSED-SESSION
AND THE MAY 24, 2011 BCC/REGULAR MEETING-
APPROVED AS PRESENTED
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Now we have the March 8, 2011, BCC
closed-session minutes and the May 24,2011, BCC Regular Meeting
Minutes to be approved. Are there any changes to those minutes?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion to approve.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion to approve --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- by Commissioner Coletta, 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: Any opposed, by like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It passes unanimously.
That brings us to service awards, County Manager.
MR.OCHS: Yes, sir. Commissioners, are you going to join us
in front of the dais, please.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Sure.
MR.OCHS: Thank you.
Commissioners, this morning we're recognizing three employees
Page 8
June 28, 2011
for outstanding dedicated years of service to Collier County
Government.
Item #3A
SERVICE AWARDS -25 YEAR ATTENDEE: VICKIE WILSON
PARKS AND RECREATION - PRESENTED
MR. OCHS: The first awardee celebrating 25 years of service is
Vickie Wilson from parks and recreation. Vickie.
(Applause.)
MR. OCHS: She brought her own cheering section today. How
is she going to hold all that?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Vickie, congratulations. Thank you very
much for 25 years of service.
MS. WILSON: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Congratulations.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Congratulations.
MR. OCHS: Get your photo, Vickie. Got to get a photo.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You get your picture and
everything. You can hold those things up, even.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Can I hold the frog for you?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Higher, Commissioner Coletta.
MR. OCHS: Great.
(Applause.)
Item #3B
SERVICE AWARDS - 30 YEAR ATTENDEES: MILLIE KELLEY,
WASTEWATER AND JOSEPH CORBO, ROAD MAINTENANCE
- PRESENTED
Page 9
June 28, 2011
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, we have two employees
celebrating 30 years of service this morning. Our first awardee, 30
years of service for Millie Kelley from our wastewater department.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Congratulations. Thank you very much
for your years of service.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you for your years of
.
serVIce.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you for 15, then 25, now 30.
Isn't it wonderful? Thank you so much.
MS. KELLEY: Thank you.
(Applause.)
MR. OCHS: Congratulations, thank you.
Commissioners, also celebrating 30 years of service with county
government this morning, Joe Corbo from road maintenance. Joe.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Joe, how are you doing? Thank you very
much. Appreciate your service.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thanks for your years of
.
servIce.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thanks.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Looks like you need a watch, too.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Congratulations.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you so much.
MR. OCHS: Congratulations.
Commissioners, that concludes our service awards this morning.
Thank you.
Item #4 PROCLAMATIONS (One Motion Taken to Adopt All
Proclamations)
Item #4A
Page 10
June 28, 2011
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING JUNE 28,2011 AS DEAN R.
LIND DAY. ACCEPTED BY DEAN R. LIND - ADOPTED
MR.OCHS: Mr. Chairman, that takes you to Item 4 on your
agenda this morning, proclamations. 4A is a proclamation designating
June 28, 2011, as Dean R. Lind Day, to be accepted by Dean R. Lind.
And this item is sponsored by Commissioner Coletta.
Mr. Lind, please come forward to receive your award.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Dean, thank you so much for
being here.
MR. LIND: Commissioner Coletta, thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Congratulations. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: We appreciate all that you have
done all these years for the community. Let's get a picture with
everyone. If you don't mind, turn the proclamation facing the camera.
MR. LIND: They won't be able to read it.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You know, you're the first one
that caught that. In all these years, you're the first one.
MR. OCHS: Fantastic. Congratulations, Mr. Lynn.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Leo, would you give him the
mike, the portable mike over there.
MR. OCHS : Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. You got it. Okay, good.
MR. LIND: Thank you, thank you. Geez, I want to thank all of
you for being here. It's really a pleasure to be in Collier County and
work with a fine government here.
I've been involved in St. Matthew's House for close to 20 years
now, and it's been a true pleasure of my life. I get to do what I wanted
to do. In retirement I did what somebody told me. Now I'm doing
what I want to do and what really touches my heart, and that's helping
Page 11
June 28, 2011
those that are less fortunate. And being here, working with a county
which does the same thing, is a pleasure for me.
I hope you continue all the good work and, as a spokesman for
St. Matthew's House, we can continue to have a working relationship
to help the folks that really need help.
Thank you very much.
(Applause.)
Item #4B
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING JUNE 28, 2011 AS THE
HOME DEPOT AND THE PROJECT VOLUNTEERS
APPRECIATION DAY FOR THEIR SELFLESS
CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE EAGLE LAKES COMMUNITY
PARK, ACCEPTED BY DANIEL ZURBRIGG AND HEATHER
PIGARD - ADOPTED
MR.OCHS: Item 4B is a proclamation designating June 28,
2011, as the Home Depot and the Project Volunteers Appreciation
Day for their selfless contributions to the Eagle Lakes Community
Park. This proclamation to be accepted by Daniel Zurbrigg and
Heather Figard, sponsored by Commissioner Fiala.
Please come forward and receive your proclamation. Thank you.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You guys were just wonderful.
Thank you so much for all you did. You made a difference.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you very much.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, let me just tell you -- thank you
very much, Commissioner Coyle.
These wonderful people saw a need at Eagle Lake Community
Park -- Eagle Lakes Community Park, excuse me. Didn't have
benches for the parents to watch their children play. They didn't have
Page 12
June 28, 2011
any kind of shade structure to protect them at times when the sun is
really hot and so forth. And so they came in on their own, sought a
grant from somebody to buy the supplies, brought their -- brought
people in not only from the Home Depot here in Collier County, but
also went into Lee County.
MR. ZURBRIGG: Charlotte County as well.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Charlotte County as well. They all
came down and pitched in for two days and built all of these things
that were so needed at Eagle Lakes Community Park and made a
tremendous difference in, actually, the people that use that park. And
I want to thank you so much. And they gave unselfishly. They never
expected to get this.
So I thank you for everything that you've done. Thank you.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Let's get a picture. Okay. Thank you.
(Applause.)
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, I understand the family that was
going to receive the proclamation under 4C is not here yet, so with the
board's indulgence let's move to 4D and give a few more minutes for
the family to show up.
Item #4D
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING JUNE 28, 2011 AS
BEAUTIFUL MARCO ISLAND DAY, ACCEPTED BY VARIOUS
REPRESENTATIVES FROM MARCO ISLAND - ADOPTED
MR.OCHS: That would take us to Item 4D, which was the
add-on item this morning. It's a proclamation declaring Beautiful
Marco Island Day, and I'll turn this one to Commissioner Fiala for the
introductions of those that will be accepting the proclamation.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Very good. Come on, Mike, you
Page 13
June 28,2011
too. We have the president for the city council, and that's -- is it
Chairman of the City Council?
MR. GIBSON: Chairman.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Chairman, Jerry Gibson, and the
Fire Chief from Marco Island, Mike Murphy, and my Kiwanis pal as
well.
MR. GIBSON: He's our acting City Manager as well.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, is he?
MR. OCHS: He got a promotion.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you so much. And, Jerry, I
gave the other one away last night. We didn't -- and I wasn't supposed
to do that. And so this one doesn't have the seal on it yet, but this guy
over here is going to make sure it gets the seal and is done up right.
MR. GIBSON: I'll put my hand over it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. And what this award is for,
folks, is that Marco Island has been named one of the six -- I should
say -- should I say contestants or --
MR. GIBSON: Finalists.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Pardon me?
MR. GIBSON: Six finalists.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- finalists to become the most
beautiful city in the United States of America. And we will find out
the results on that the end of July, I believe.
MR. GIBSON: Correct.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: But the people that were here
yesterday were taking a look at it, and I think they were awestruck to
see the beauty -- to behold the beauty on Marco Island. So thank you
very much, gentlemen.
MR. GIBSON: Thank you.
MR.OCHS: Congratulations.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: A little closer. You two are
Page 14
June 28, 2011
friends, aren't you?
MR. MURPHY: He's an elected, and I'm a city manager.
MR. GIBSON: Thank you all so much.
(Applause.)
Item #4C
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING JUNE 28, 2011 AS SGT.
LINDA PIERRE DAY, ACCEPTED BY F AMIL Y MEMBERS OF
SGT. PIERRE - ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, Item 4C this morning is a
proclamation designating June 28, 2011 as Sergeant Linda Pierre Day,
to be accepted by family members of Sergeant Pierre, namely Cindy
Watson, sister; Jean Lamour, father; David Lamour, brother;
Will-Rose Etienne, cousin.
And I know that Commissioner Coletta would like to read this
proclamation. If we would ask you to please come forward and accept
the proclamation as it's read. Just come on up and face the audience,
please.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you so much for
traveling here today. I don't think we're ever going to reach a point in
life that we can honor the sacrifice that was made by your daughter
and -- enough. And so this is one more attempt by the community to
reach out to you.
Whereas, on April 16, 2011, while supporting Operation
Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan, Sergeant Linda Pierre, at the age of
28, gave her life, alongside with four other soldiers in the service of
her country; and,
Whereas, Sergeant Pierre was part of the Collier County family,
being a 2001 graduate from Immokalee High School and attended
Edison State College in Lee County for two years where she studied
Page 15
June 28, 2011
premed and was enrolled in Columbia Southern University, on-line
university, pursuing a criminal justice degree; and,
Whereas, Sergeant Pierre joined the army in 2004 at the age of
21 knowing she was going to fight for her country and wanted to be
deployed to Afghanistan to aid the battle on terrorism; and,
Whereas, while in the army, Sergeant Pierre was assigned to the
101 Special Troops Battalion, 101 Supplemental (sic) Brigade, and
101 Airborne Division, Ft. Campbell, Kentucky; and,
Whereas, Sergeant Pierre was on her first deployment oversees
where she served as a human resource specialist helping train Afghan
soldiers and was also engaged in carrying out foot patrols; and,
Whereas, today in Collier County and across the state and the
country we live out the joys and tribulation that life offers and yet
amidst us are our families we should honor who have daughters, sons,
wives, and husbands, protecting our great nation by putting
themselves in harm's way and too often, as with Sergeant Pierre's
family, experiencing the grief of loss; and,
Whereas, we extend our thanks and gratitude to the family and
friend (sic) members of Sergeant Linda Pierre for her service and
selfless sacrifice for our freedom;
Whereas, the army soldier creed is: "I am an American soldier. I
am a warrior and a member of a team. I serve the people of the United
States and live the army values. I will always place the mission first.
I will never accept defeat. I will never quit. I will never leave a fallen
comrade.
"I am disciplined physically and mentally, tough, trained, and
proficient in my warrior task and drills. I will always maintain my
arms, my equipment, and myself. I am an expert, and I am a
professional. I stand ready to deploy and engage and destroy the
enemy of the United States of America in close combat. I am a
guardian of freedom and the American way of life. I am an American
soldier. "
Page 16
June 28, 2011
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that on -- June 28,2011, be
designated as Sergeant Linda Pierre Day.
Done and ordered this, the 28th day of June, 2011, and signed by
our commissioner, Fred Coyle.
And thank you so much for your sacrifices and for all the
contributions that your family has made to making this country so
great.
And also, while I have everybody's attention, I'd like to draw
attention to a special scholarship fund that's been set up in the name of
Sergeant Pierre that will be a living memorial for her for years to
come.
You can contribute to this fund at Bank of America or by sending
checks directly to Tim Nance, Treasurer, P.O. Box 990129, Naples,
Florida.
Thank you, again, for what you -- all the service that your
daughter gave us.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Would a member of the family
-- oh, go ahead. We've got to get a picture first. Would somebody
like to say a few words?
MS. WATSON: On behalf--
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Oh, I'm sorry. You have to use
the mike, or we won't be able to pick it up on the public record.
MS. WATSON: My name is Cindy Watson. On behalf of our
entire family, we'd like to say thank you for everything that you've
done to honor my sister's memory. She would have been extremely
proud of everything, an outpouring of emotion and just everything. So
thank you.
(Applause.)
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, may I have a motion to accept the
proclamations this morning.
Page 1 7
June 28, 2011
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So moved.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Motion by Commissioner Coletta
to accept the proclamations, seconded 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 carries unanimously.
Item #5A
PRESENTATION BY THE NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE
DECLARING COLLIER COUNTY STORM READY -
PRESENTED
MR.OCHS: Commissioners, 5A is a presentation by the
National Weather Service declaring Collier County "Storm Ready."
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
MR. OCHS: Mr. Summers will make the introductions.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Is Mr. Summers going to make
the introductions?
MR. MOLLEDA: Good morning. I'm Robert Molleda. I'm the
Warning Coordination Meteorologist with the N ational Weather
Service, Miami Forecast Office.
MR. SANTOS: Good morning. I am Pablo Santos. I am the
Meteorologist in charge of the National Weather Service Office in
Miami.
Page 18
June 28, 2011
I am -- we are co-located with the Hurricane Center in Miami, on
the campus of Florida International University. And I am very much
pleased to be here today to recertify Collier County as storm ready.
That program started back as a grassroots program in Oklahoma
in 1999. And what it means is that it is a certification of the county
that the resources are in place and the operations are ready to handle
any emergencies. You know, it might be thunderstorms, floodings,
wire fires and, of course, hurricanes.
And this being the beginning of the hurricane season just a few
weeks ago, it's good to know that your county is, indeed, ready.
And so without any thinking -- without taking any more time, we
have your storm ready certification right here. It is valid for another
three years, from 2011 to 2014.
I might add to that that actually Collier County was the first
county in South Florida to be certified as storm ready back in 2002.
And since then, it has got recertified every three years, 2005, 2008,
and now 2011.
This is something definitely to be proud about. It is good for the
community to know that their County Emergency Management is
ready for any sort of hazard, weather-related hazard that might come
your way. So congratulations.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you very much. Appreciate it.
(Applause.)
MR. SUMMERS: Thank you very much. I'm sure we'd like to
get a picture, if you don't mind. I'd like to have pictures of the
forecasters as we go into hurricane season, just in case their
predictions are off.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: So we'll know who to blame, right?
You're going to join them, right, Dan?
MR. SUMMERS: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, good. Higher, Dan.
MR. OCHS : We'll send you copies of ours.
Page 19
June 28, 2011
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You should always have a supply of
batteries for hurricane season.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you very much.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Good seeing you. Thank you for
.
comIng.
MR. SUMMERS: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you, Dan.
MR. SUMMERS: Thank you, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you.
MR. SUMMERS: Commissioners, thank you. One of the -- Dan
Summers. One of the things that is so very important is to continue to
stress to our residents the importance of the NOAA Weather Radio.
That tone-alert weather radio allows us to get emergency information.
We have those in all critical facilities and schools, and that is an
invaluable device for us for our ongoing alert notification.
I'd like to thank also our many partners that help us in this
certification effort, and a special thanks to Rick Zyvoloski in our staff
who manages this program full time and makes sure that we're ready
24/7.
Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you, Dan. Appreciate your
preparedness.
Item #5B
PRESENTATION BY SCORE ON THE "BUSINESS IMPACT
2011" PROGRAM, PRESENTED BY CHICK HEITHAUS AND
GEORGE AHEARN - CHAIRMAN TO WRITE LETTERS OF
SUPPORT - CONSENSUS
Page 20
June 28, 2011
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, 5B is a presentation by SCORE on
the Business Impact 2011 Program, to be presented by Chick Heithaus
and George Ahearn. This item brought to the board by Commissioner
Coletta.
Good morning, sir.
MR. HEITHAUS: Good morning. Good morning,
Commissioners.
I need a little hand here getting my video.
This is worth putting up. It will keep me on time.
While we're getting loaded up, I'll just tell you that the reason
we're doing this is because somebody's going to stop you and thank
you, I think.
We have had, over the last two years, about 400 Collier County
businesses benefit from the program that, with little luck, I'll show you
here.
We started two years ago; 2009 was the first year. It was an idea
that started actually with Commissioner Coletta. The idea was that in
the really terrible economic downturn that we were experiencing at
that time, if we could do something to provide some help, some
counseling for Collier County businesses, that that would be good.
So -- wonderful. Thank you.
So we did. Here it is. We called it -- I forget what we called it in
2009, but we've gotten a little fancier with the graphics and a little
fancier with the title, and we've gotten a little better with the team.
It was just SCORE and Larry Ray's people the first year at the
Tax Collector's Office. We had such a good response that we knew
we needed some help, so we reached out to the SBDC, Dan Regelski,
who is known to most of you. And last year we partnered up with
them. SBDC, as you can see up here, is one of our -- one of the team
that makes us work. The responses actually go back to them for
tallying and sorting and tracking.
Collier County Tax Collector's very involved. Debbie Deblasie
Page 21
June 28, 2011
has been a terrific help, along with Larry Ray.
This doesn't cost the county anything. It doesn't cost the business
people anything. It costs us to print. We get a really nice price for the
printing from The Print Shop. That's their plug. And Barron Collier
Companies, under Blake Gable, paid that bargain price for the
printing.
The objective -- everybody who gets this mailing is in business,
so our objective is business retention, to stabilize employment, and
creates job growth. The way we do it is we promote business growth
through face to face business counseling.
SBDC and SCORE are both offering free services, unlimited, to
Collier County businesses who ask for it.
Some of you have personally or through relatives benefited from
that counseling, and I think that's one of the reasons we get such nice
support from just about all of you up there, and we appreciate that,
too.
SCORE, very briefly, is 58 volunteers now. All of them
entrepreneurs, corporate officers, men and women, employed, retired.
It's a wonderful group to be in charge of, which I have the honor to
be.
The SBDC is -- employs ten certified business analysts who
cover five counties, including Collier. Their strength is in academic
approach to business counseling. Ours is in terms of having been
there and experienced it.
The technique, very briefly; again, this is so that when they say
"thank you," you'll know what happened. What happened is the
30,000 license and permit renewals beginning about now are getting
mailed out through the summer. Every one of them will have this card
in it. This card asks the recipient if they are interested in having some
face-to- face help from counseling, from either SBDC or SCORE.
And, again, we've had about 400 of these returned. They're returned
to the SBDC business reply box. They're tallied into an Excel
Page 22
June 28, 2011
program. We assign them within 24 hours to a counselor. We
telephone and take care of them.
The benefit is obvious. I'm not going to read you the slide. And
that is it.
And I really appreciate your participation in this. The saddest
thing that ever happens as a SCORE volunteer is when somebody
comes in and says, boy, I'm in this terrible, awful mess. Can you help
me get out of it? And I realize that if we had just spent a little more
making people aware that we were there, they wouldn't have gotten in
the mess in the first place.
So thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Good. Thank you very much. I
appreciate it.
And, Commissioner Coletta, who has been a leader in this area
for a number of years, would like to make some comments.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Very much so. I thank you so
much for what you have done. And let's take a moment for you to
repeat the contact number for SCORE. SCORE's been a -- the reason
my involvement with SCORE goes back to -- in my early 20s, one of
my first business ventures.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Fifty years ago?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, getting close. Getting
close, Commissioner Coyle. I'm not quite up to your age yet, but I'm
working on it.
But ifit wasn't for the help I got from SCORE, some very
qualified business people, my first business would not have
succeeded. And it succeeded very well, and it went on for a number
of years, then I finally sold it and moved here to Florida. But if it
wasn't for SCORE, undoubtedly that first business would have failed,
and I don't know if there would have been a second one.
So I've always remembered that, and I always felt I had a debt to
pay back, and I am going to accept the invitation to join your advisory
Page 23
June 28, 2011
board, by the way. I'll let you know right now so we don't have to
start a bunch of communications going back and forth. And thank you
for that invitation.
But one of the things I'd like this commission to do is -- this did
not involve anything to do with Collier County funds. This was all an
outside effort using very limited resources from the county, and most
of it being from Larry Ray's Office.
I'd like to be able to direct the chair -- have this commission
direct the chair to write letters of thank you to the SBA and to the
Small Business Administration; SCORE; to Larry Ray; and to the
different sponsors thanking them for their personal involvement to
make this citizen initiative possible.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I would be delighted to do that if the
board agrees.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I think--
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Do we have sufficient support on the
board for me to write those letters? Does anyone object?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Looks like we've got unanimous
agreement.
MR. HEITHAUS: Thank you. And the answer is 430-0081.
Operators are standing by right now to take your call.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Just--
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Fiala, go ahead.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: SBDC, Small Business
Development --
MR. HEITHAUS: Small Business Development Center. It's
affiliated with FGCU, and Dan Regelski is the Chair. He couldn't
make it this morning. I talked with him yesterday.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you very much.
(Applause.)
Page 24
June 28, 2011
Item #6A
PUBLIC PETITION FROM LYLE MCCANDLESS REGARDING
THE REQUIREMENT OF BUILDING PERMITS FOR WORK AT
PRIVATE HUNTING CAMPS LOCATED IN PRESERVES-
MOTION TO BRING BACK AS A REGULAR AGENDA ITEM
AT A FUTURE BCC MEETING WITH STAFF
RECOMMENDATIONS - APPROVED
MR.OCHS: Commissioners, that takes us to Item 6A. It's
public petition. It's a public petition request from Lyle McCandless
regarding the requirement of building permits for work at private
hunting camps located in preserves.
Mr. McCandless here this morning? Please come forward.
State your name for the record, sir.
MR. McCANDLESS: Yes. My name is Lyle McCandless. I'm
here today representing myself personally and as president of the Big
Cypress Sportsmen's Alliance. I'm a 30-year resident of Collier
County. I moved over to the sleepy little City of LaBelle a few years
ago, and I reside there now.
By the way, my sympathies to you, Ms. Fiala.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you very much.
MR. McCANDLESS: So I thank the commissioners for allowing
me to speak here today. I appreciate it very much. I would like to
thank Commissioner Coletta in particular for his interest and input in
our effort here.
My purpose of being here today is an ongoing issue that has
come to the forefront very recently big time.
In the Big Cypress National Preserve there was some significant
fires recently, and it burned a few camps to the ground. And these
nice, traditional gentlemen and ladies who are trying to go forth to
redo what they've got there are getting unbelievable misery from all
Page 25
June 28, 2011
directions.
I'd like to put into perspective the situation as regarding hunting
camps and getaways -- and they're not just hunting camps. They're
getaway retreats in the preserve. Bottom line is, there's, plus or minus,
a couple hundred of them out there, over approaching a million acres.
If you do a little math on that, that breaks it down to about one camp
per 5,000 acres. Not a huge impact, that -- we should all keep that in
mind. We all should also keep in mind that these camps are used
maybe 10 percent of the year, maybe. Very low threshold of use.
And I say that with some pretty good authority. I'm a private
camp owner myself. I know a lot of other camp owners, so that 10
percent there, I think, would be very reasonable.
Those private-property camps out there that are privately owned
in the preserve, they are -- no services out there, no electric, no roads,
no anything. They're isolated out there by themselves.
I mean, even if a person goes through the process of getting a
permit, the area is -- it's unreasonable and inaccessible to the
inspectors. So it's a real difficult issue.
Now, I met for an hour and a half or so yesterday with county
staff, and we had a real nice conversation. And it is apparent now that
several other counties in the state have addressed this issue. And I
was pleased to learn that my county of Hendry County has set up their
own independent setup for the hunting camps, the zoning criteria and
everything, and it's also happened a good bit up through the state.
So I'm here today to formally request that you -- that the
commission put on next year's legislative priority list this item to be --
to be brought forward. And we would -- I know Representative Matt
Hudson very well. We're looking forward to getting connected with
him and have him kind of pursue this for us on the state level.
So we are very much looking forward to getting your concern to
the point of endorsing taking this step forward. And I would like to
divert just a hair, if I could. I would trust that you commissioners
Page 26
June 28, 2011
have been around here long enough to know what the situation is in
the Big Cypress Preserve in general.
I'd just like to make a couple of quick comments myself and the
camp owners and these guys who lost their camp, they can absolutely
not expect any positive help from the National Park Service. Those
hunting camps out there, bottom line, is like a huge rock in the shoe of
the National Park Service, and they are very much inspired to get rid
of that rock. So it's a sad situation.
They have no -- the National Park Service has no jurisdiction
over these private properties, but you will not believe the misery we
get as a whole from the Park Service. And here's an example of what
we face. The Addition Lands was purchased 1988 with our tax
dollars. The Addition Lands lays north and south of the alley up in the
northeast corner of Collier County. That property was acquired in
1988. There was supposed to have been a process developed within
two to three years of that date for the public to have our access in there
for our traditional rights of hunting and access. Didn't happen.
Twenty-three years later, the National Park Service -- after the
Fish and Wildlife Commission, Collier County emphatically, by
resolution, stating that they -- that they (sic) should absolutely be no
wilderness or back country primitive. Both of those disallows our
swamp buggy activities.
Park Service completely ignored Fish and Wildlife Commission
and the Collier County. The -- by the 1974 preserve creation
legislation, it is mandated that the National Park Service work with all
state agencies in management solutions and things in the preserve. It
never happened.
So now we're down to a situation where the Addition Land setup
was brought on board and signed by Superintendent Ramos on
February the 5th. So now we're looking forward to having 80 percent
of that Addition Lands either back-country primitive or wilderness,
which disallows our activities.
Page 27
June 28, 2011
We put out a huge effort -- myself and some other group leaders,
we put out a huge effort. I set up at Pro Bass in Fort Myers. We
created a couple of thousand individual written passionate comment
pleas regarding this situation in the addition lands. And -- but the
Sierra Club and others, on a national level, who've never seen the
preserve and probably never will, by clicking their computers and
what have you, they turned in about 20,000. And we've begged the
Park Service to please consider these local input comments seriously
-- more seriously because they're there. So it didn't happen.
So that's where we're at. And, again, I'm really looking forward
to answering any questions you might have here to try to convince you
good ladies and gentlemen that this is a worthy endeavor, this needs to
be pursued, we need to find a solution to this problem for our benefit
and the benefit of Collier County.
Any questions?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah. Mr. McCandless, I should point
out to you that our common practice is to merely vote on whether or
not we bring this back for a full hearing, because as you indicate, there
are likely to be some people who might disagree with you even though
we might support you fully.
We have a number of commissioners who have to ask questions,
and we'll do that, but I would encourage commissioners to very
quickly reach the point where we could make a motion.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Commissioner Hiller was first.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: It was actually on the last item, but
you didn't call me on that, so it's okay . You can remove my -_
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All right. I'll call you twice to the next
item.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: You're so kind. You're so sweet.
Thank you.
Page 28
June 28, 2011
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes. I've got to make up for that some
way.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you. That's right. Thank
you so much.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, it's Coletta's.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All right. Commissioner Coletta. All
right, come on. Make up your minds.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You better put your light back
on, Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Let's start over again.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. Ifwe sound confused,
we probably are.
But Commissioner Coyle's right, this item would have to come
back, and there's every good reason in the world to bring this item
back for consideration on two different fronts. One, to be able to see
what other counties have done to be able to work their way through
this and to be able to find ways to accommodate this tradition that's
been in place for 40 some years.
In order to reach these camps the travel times sometimes is in
excess of an hour on an A TV. It's very difficult getting anything in the
way of supplies in and out, much less the elaborate supplies that
would be required to build a dwelling that would -- is required by state
statutes in Collier County rules and regulations.
Now, what I'd like to do is see this come back with a full study
done to see what Hendry County and some other counties have done
to be able to put in local ordinances that would accommodate
traditional uses of the land such as you were experiencing out there.
There's no other -- you know, that would be one way.
And the other way is to come back with suggestions as far as
legislative priorities, that we might be able to include this in our
package when we go to Tallahassee to try to move it forward and, of
Page 29
June 28, 2011
course, we'll ask your friend and my friend, Matt Hudson, to
spearhead the movement, which I'm sure he will do, because he's been
very supportive.
But some of the facts that you need to know is that these camps
are only occupied part time. And as far as hurricanes and fires and all
that, you have to -- they won't even allow you access -- at different
times of the year when there's the dangers of the hurricanes and fires,
they can't even get access to their camps in the back country. So as far
as insurance goes, it's not an issue. The -- none of them are insured.
They're self insured, you might say. Just put the nails and nail them
back together again when they blow down.
But the danger to the neighbors is very -- is nonexistent because
they're separated by such a distance that if a structure did not meet
wind requirements and it blew down during the course of a storm, it
would cause no damage to neighbors' property.
The policy that the National Park Service has come up with has
been very restrictive. And the truth of the matter is, they've been
using our rules and state rules to try to limit the normal availability of
this type of property for traditional uses over the years.
And so my motion would be to bring this back for a full hearing
on those two different elements that I mentioned earlier having to do
with other counties' efforts that have found a way to make this work
and also talk about legislative priorities and how we might be able to
approach this in a legislative initiative.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. We have a motion by
Commissioner Coletta to bring this back for a full hearing.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And I'll second that motion and give
you my comment.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: My sons are campers, and they don't
want to camp in a Howard Johnson's or an elaborate house. They
want a camp when they're camping. Actually, one of my sons was
Page 30
June 28, 2011
just in Alaska camping this week until we got the call from -- but
anyway, that's neither here nor there.
And when you're studying this to bring it back to us, being that
this board has placed me on the board of directors for the Florida
Association of Counties, maybe you could investigate if I could take it
also to Florida Association of Counties and ask them to support this
effort as well.
MR. McCANDLESS: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The -- our Florida delegation is
going to be meeting in August, and we need to start getting on some
priorities. I think this should be one of them.
The issue is the Florida Building Code, and under Florida
Statutes 120.542 it talks about waivers and variances. And I need to
read the first sentence. Strict application of the uniform application
rule requirement can lead to unreasonable, unfair, unintended results
in particular instances.
So you have a way -- I mean, this goes right to the -- the water
heater issue. You know, I wish I had this statute before me when we
were talking about that, because that was surely an unintended
consequence from the strict application of the Florida Building Code.
That's another avenue that you can go, sir. But I'm fully in favor
of seeing -- letting our -- delegation weigh in on this to see what they
can do.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. We have a motion--
MR. McCANDLESS: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- to bring this back for a full hearing
and -- by Commissioner Coletta, and it was seconded by
Commissioner Fiala.
And there's a question by Commissioner Hiller.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I just want to clarify what staff is
Page 31
June 28, 2011
going to be required to do on this.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, actually, I think the motion was to
ask the staff to research the issues and bring back recommendations as
to how best to solve it.
Commissioner Henning made an observation that could be
incorporated into the motion if the motion maker wishes, that it be
placed as one of our legislative priorities for this next legislative
session, and Commissioner Fiala has asked for authority to bring this
up with Florida Association of Counties.
So if -- we can ask the motion maker and the second if they
would like to incorporate those two suggestions.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, yeah, incorporate them
with the fact that we already have two parts to the motion.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: One is the legislative priorities
and putting more detail to it, with Commissioner Henning's
suggestions, and the other one had to do with the researching what
other counties have done to be able to solve the problem.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And I think Commissioner
Fiala's idea, working through the Florida Association of Counties --
and, by the way, congratulations being reelected as the Director of the
Florida Association of Counties.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: It's an excellent idea, and I'd
like to include all that into the motion.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I just want to make sure that staff
understands clearly what the direction is and, you know, whether they
can do anything about this.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, they should bring that back for
consideration during the full hearing.
Page 32
June 28, 2011
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And there's little doubt that there will be
discussion about it, and we'll probably refine the issue at that point in
time.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Sure.
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.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Good work, Lyle.
MR. McCANDLESS: Thank you, Ladies and Gentlemen.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you for being here.
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, that moves you to Item 9 on your
agenda this morning, Board of County Commissioners.
Item #9A
RESOLUTION 2011-115: APPOINTING HEIDI RUSTER TO THE
COLLIER COUNTY CITIZENS CORPS. - ADOPTED
MR.OCHS: 9A is appointment of member to the Collier County
Citizens Corps.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Motion to approve the American
Red Cross recommendation of Heidi Ruster.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Motion by Commissioner Fiala to
approve the Red Cross Association's nominee. Is there a second?
Page 33
June 28, 2011
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Second by Commissioner Henning.
Any discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All in favor of the 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: The motion passes unanimously.
Item #9B
RESOLUTION 2011-116: RE-APPOINTING KYLE E. LANTZ TO
THE CONTRACTORS LICENSING BOARD - ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: 9B is an appointment of member to the Contractors
Licensing Board.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Motion to approve Mr. Kyle Lantz.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Motion by Commissioner Fiala to
reappoint Mr. Kyle Lantz, seconded by Commissioner Coletta.
Any discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All in favor, please signify by saying
aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
Page 34
June 28, 2011
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: The motion passes unanimously for the
appointment of Mr. Kyle Lantz.
Item #9C
RESOLUTION 2011-117: A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY,
FLORIDA, ENCOURAGING THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE,
CONGRESS AND THE PRESIDENT TO INTERVENE TO
ENSURE FAIR REIMBURSEMENT RATES TO MEDICAL
PROVIDERS THROUGH THE TRICARE SYSTEM AND
QUALITY HEALTH CARE TO OUR DESERVING ACTIVE AND
RETIRED MILITARY PERSONNEL - ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: Item 9C is a recommendation to approve a
resolution of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County,
Florida, encouraging the Department of Defense, Congress, and the
President to intervene to ensure fair reimbursement rates to medical
providers through the TRICARE system and quality healthcare to our
deserving active and retired military personnel.
Commissioner Coyle brought this item forward.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion to approve.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. A motion to approve by
Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Second by Commissioner Fiala.
Page 35
June 28, 2011
I would like to just briefly describe what we're doing here. What
has happened is that reimbursement rates for the TRI CARE Prime
Program for actually retired and active duty personnel have been
reduced to levels that are even below Medicare, and that has resulted
in many healthcare providers refusing to participate in the program.
It makes it more difficult for active duty and retired members of
our armed services to get healthcare, and it makes it more expensive
because it transfers more cost to them.
This is an issue that is being addressed nationwide. It does
impact hundreds, if not thousands of people in Southwest Florida. So
we would like -- I would like to make sure that we lend our support to
this effort to make sure that affordable and readily available healthcare
is provided to members of our armed forces.
So with that, I'll call the question. All in favor, please signify by
.
saYIng aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: (No verbal response.)
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 4-0, I think.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, I support it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. It passes 5-0. Thank you very
much.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And, Commissioner Coyle, thank
you for bringing this to our attention. I think some of us would have
not known had you not brought it up.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, there's something more that needs
to be known about this. Naples Community Hospital has graciously
established a policy which says that although they are not -- they do
Page 36
June 28, 2011
not have a contract with the Department of Defense to provide
healthcare services to veterans, they will provide that service and
make sure that those people who are treated by them are not charged
the higher amount of out of pocket cost.
So Naples Community Hospital has pledged to do that, and so
we're very happy with that. And hopefully it will work out for most
our people.
But the big problem is that there's a move afoot nationally --
there's a move afoot in Washington to cut healthcare costs of all kinds
dramatically in an effort to balance the budget. And my point is here
that the military personnel should not be treated as second-class
citizens. If we're going to reduce healthcare costs, then it ought to be
uniform, starting with the members of Congress who enjoy a very,
very expensive healthcare program.
So fairness is what we're looking for as veterans. So that's it.
We'll go on to the next item. Thank you very much.
Item #9E
ADVISORY BOARD VACANCIES AS ADVERTISED IN THE
PRESS RELEASE JUNE 22, 2011 - MOTION TO DECLARE
VACANCIES DUE TO ABSENCES - APPROVED
MR.OCHS: Next item, Commissioners, is Item 9E. It's
Advisory Board Vacancies advertised in the press release of June 22,
2011.
MR. MITCHELL: Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, we issued a
new press release on June 22nd for vacancies on a variety of advisory
boards, and what they constitute is the Affordable Housing Advisory
Committee currently has one vacancy, the Airport Authority Advisory
Board has four vacancies, the Black Affairs Advisory Board has four
vacancies, the Golden Gate Estates Land Trust Committee has one
Page 37
June 28, 2011
vacancy, the Hispanic Affairs Advisory Committee has two vacancies,
Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Advisory Committee has one
vacancy, and the Pelican Bay Services Division has one vacancy.
The Rock Road Improvement MSTU Advisory Committee,
which is a new committee, has three vacancies, and that's currently the
vacancies on your advisory boards.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, just a fast question, Ian.
Yesterday in my office Chris Curry was meeting with me, and I said I
was surprised to see that he had four vacancies on the advisory board,
and he said, no, he didn't. And I said, well, you know, that's what we
think. And he said, no. And I said, you need to talk to Ian and get
that straightened out. So I don't know if he was able to get over to you
or not.
MR. MITCHELL: Commissioner Fiala, he did speak to me.
What he didn't realize was he's got three terms that are expiring on
August 10th. Now, the process that we follow takes, you know, at
least two months. So letters have gone out to those three board
members, and it's been explained to them that their terms are expiring
and -- with a copy of the press release and an application form if they
wish to reapply.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, great.
MR. MITCHELL: The fourth vacancy was due to the
unfortunate death of one of the members.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. Thank you so much. I just
want to make sure that I got that all straight in my head, too. Thank
you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Ian, I think there might be a misprint
here. You say three of the new terms expire August 10, 2015.
MR. MITCHELL: Oh, sorry, yes. It should be 2011.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Eleven, okay. Very well. Thank you.
Commissioner Hiller?
Page 38
June 28, 2011
MR. MITCHELL: Oh, sorry. Commissioner Coyle, I need to
ask the board, the Historical and Archaeologic Advisory Board, we --
I would ask you to give me permission to declare a vacancy . We have
a member on that board and their board have discussed it, and they've
recommended that we declare a vacancy, as they have a member who,
in the past three years of 1 7 meetings, has only been present at two of
the meetings.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's an add-on onto the
agenda today?
MR. MITCHELL: Yes, it is, sir. If that meets -- I spoke to the
chairman yesterday.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: So we're adding that to the agenda?
MR. MITCHELL: If you have no objections.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah, okay. How do the commissioners
feel about that?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I don't have a problem.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Declaring the vacancy?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Is there -- I don't have an issue
with it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All right. Nobody has an issue with it.
So we'll declare a vacancy.
All in favor of declaring a vacancy because of the failure to
attend the meetings of the member that occupies that position, 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.)
Page 39
June 28, 2011
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. It passes unanimously.
MR. MITCHELL: Thank you, Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: We had discussion at our last
meeting about changing the number of members of the Black Affairs
Advisory Council because they were having difficulties achieving a
quorum, and I'm just wondering when we would like to bring that
back and help resolve that problem so that they can more readily do
their business.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We are making progress on that. Two of
the people that I had mentioned at that meeting have, in fact, applied
for the --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- Black Affairs Advisory Board, and
they're exceptionally well qualified individuals. So if they are -- if
their applications are acceptable to the board whenever we hear this,
which probably will be in July, then we will have at least two of those
positions filled by people whom I think will regularly attend the
meetings and participate.
MR. MITCHELL: Mr. Chairman?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And we'll have two more vacancies to
deal with, won't we?
MR. MITCHELL: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Hiller, your
conversation at the last board meeting really did sort of encourage
people to apply, and actually I've been able to give the Black Affairs
Advisory Board three applicants, all really good-quality people to
consider.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, we have two issues. One
was filling the openings. The other was, once those openings are
filled, having people attend the meetings.
MR. MITCHELL: Right.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And so that seemed to be a big
Page 40
June 28, 2011
problem also, because current members were having difficulty
attending, and that was why they were talking about the quorum.
MR. MITCHELL: Right.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So I think we have two issues
there, and it looks like we're making progress on one, and maybe we
can resolve the other by reducing the total number of members of the
board. They can always increase it if they choose to down the road,
but we don't want to impede their ability to move forward.
MR. MITCHELL: And as sort of an add-on to that,
Commissioner, I'll ask the staff liaison, Tamika Seaton if she could
actually put that on the agenda for the next Black Affairs Advisory so
they can discuss it themselves as well.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's a great suggestion. Thank
you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Where does that take us, County
Manager?
Item #10B
AWARD AGREEMENT NO. 11-5690 FOR CONSTRUCTION
ENGINEERING AND INSPECTION (CEI) AND RELATED
SERVICES FOR SR84 (DAVIS BOULEVARD) RADIO ROAD TO
COLLIER BOULEVARD; SR84/SR951 INTERSECTION
IMPROVEMENTS; COLLIER BOULEVARD (SR/CR 951)
NORTH TO MAGNOLIA POND DRIVE; AND CR951 (COLLIER
BOULEVARD) NORTH TO THE MAIN GOLDEN GATE CANAL
TO ATKINS NORTH AMERICA, INC; PROJECT NO. 60073 &
NO. 60092~ FISCAL IMPACT $2~964~487.50 - APPROVED
MR.OCHS: That takes us to Item 10, County Manager's Report.
Item lOB is a recommendation to award Agreement No. 11-5690 for
construction, engineering, and inspection and related services for
Page 41
June 28, 2011
Davis Boulevard and Radio Road to Collier Boulevard, the
intersection of Davis Boulevard and Collier Boulevard, Collier
Boulevard North to Magnolia Pond Drive, and Collier Boulevard
North to the main Golden Gate Canal, the award to Atkins North
America, Incorporated, for those project numbers at a fiscal impact of
$2,964,487.50.
Mr. Steve Ritter, road construction manager, Growth
Management Division, will present. Steve?
MR. RITTER: For the record, Steve Ritter, Manager of Road
Construction.
We're making a recommendation to award the agreement for
construction for eEl Services to Atkins North America. We've done
an RFP and evaluations, negotiations, and come to an agreed upon not
to exceed cost.
You -- the commissioners on June 14th awarded the contract for
construction to Astaldi Construction, and this Davis Boulevard/Collier
Boulevard project has got a JP A agreement with the state/FDOT for
$20 million. That's for construction and inspection services. That's
what the CEI is needed for per Florida Department of Transportation
rules and regulations.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You've got to be kidding me?
No. This is a requirement from the State of Florida.
MR. RITTER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: If this was a county road funded
by our funds, you would do the -- all the inspections yourself?
MR. RITTER: Correct.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And I know that would save a
lot of money, and you have well qualified people to perform that
operation. And it's really, really sad of big government regulations,
when you start improving their roads, you have to have consultants. I
bet you can do this for a third of the price that an outside consultant
Page 42
June 28, 2011
would perform.
MR. RITTER: FDOT has different recordkeeping than we do
and just the requirements that they have.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right. So I'm going to make a
motion to approve, reluctantly make a motion to approve. I know that
we could save a ton of money if we did it ourselves.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. A motion to approve by
Commissioner Henning --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- second by Commissioner Fiala, and a
comment by Commissioner Hiller.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you.
Could you explain how you followed the CCNA with respect to
this particular contractor?
MR. RITTER: Sure. We -- it was a request for a proposal, and
then there were three letters of interest received. It was Johnson
Engineering, Atkins North America, and AIM Engineering. And we
short-listed them, and the short list picked Atkins, at which time they
produced a time and materials schedule, come up with what they
thought it was worth. And we met and negotiated with them, and got
that knocked down to where we're at now, two, nine.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Great. Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You say you got them back down from
their estimate to where you wanted to be?
MR. RITTER: Yeah. I believe it started at about 4.2.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Million?
MR. RITTER: And this is a not to exceed, so in actuality,
hopefully, if things work right, we won't even use that amount. That's
their time and material as they use the people, as the inspection's
necessary. And if we don't need them, we don't use them, so
hopefully we won't spend that much.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, good. Do you get a percentage of
Page 43
June 28, 2011
the savings?
MR. RITTER: No, sir, but I'd be looking forward to it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I bet you would. Okay, all right. Thank
you very much.
All in favor of the 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: The motion passes unanimously.
Item #10C
BOARD ADOPTED CRITERIA FOR REVIEW OF CONCEPTUAL
PLANS AND DESIGNS FOR MAJOR CAPITAL PROJECTS -
MOTION TO APPROVE STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS WITH
CONCEPTUAL DRAWINGS AND PRELIMINARY DESIGN
BROUGHT TO THE BOARD ASAP BUT NO LATER THAN THE
30% MARK - APPROVED
MR.OCHS: Commissioners, next item is 10C. It's a
recommendation that the board adopt criteria for review of conceptual
plans and designs for major capital projects.
Ms. Len Price, Administrative Services Administrator, will
present.
MS. PRICE: Good morning, Commissioners. For the record,
Len Price, Administrative Services Division Administrator.
This item was brought to you on your request to determine a
criteria for bringing design -- conceptual designs and drawings to you.
Page 44
June 28, 2011
Our recommendations are to do that for your vertical construction.
Those are things you can see. And to do it we -- our
recommendation's set at the 30 percent mark. But in talking to some
of our professionals, we're suggesting that it be no later than the 30
percent mark, but at a point in time where we have conceptual
drawings, renderings, and construction estimates but -- so that they
haven't designed so much that if you want to recommend any changes
or ask for something to be changed differently, that the costs would
not be too high.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. The issue is the opportunity
to review these designs and these concepts in the most simple form
before we start investing monies. So to suggest that we should only
start reviewing them the way you're describing them after the 30
percent mark defeats the purpose, because now we've already invested
30 percent towards that particular project.
Also, when I was reading the backup material, you discuss the
peer review issue, which is really separate and apart. And the county
manager and I discussed that yesterday, and I'm sure he addressed that
with you, that that really is, really, separate and apart from the initial
question of what design and what concept should be considered before
we commit tax dollars to a project that, you know, we may not want to
commit to.
So I think that the policy needs to be revised, and I think that's
what Commissioner Henning was driving at when he brought this up
in the first place.
So I'm going to turn it over to Commissioner Henning and let
him give some details of how he envisions the policy ought to read.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: No, I will turn it over to Commissioner
Henning.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Oh, I'm sorry. Forgive me. Yes,
you will. You will, indeed. No doubt about it.
Page 45
June 28, 2011
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you very much.
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The phasing idea, transportation
does this with road projects all the time, and they have a 30, 60, and
90 percent design phase with public input, and I'm sure that's where
that concept leads to.
Now, when you do a vertical construction, you hire an architect
engineer firm to design it and permit it. You have the input from staff
who's going to be using that facility. A vertical would be a building.
MS. PRICE: Right.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Anything else would be?
MS. PRICE: Vertical construction would be a building, a plant.
You know, like I say, something that comes out of the ground and that
you could see.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: A tree?
MS. PRICE: Probably not a tree. We don't usually have too
many $5 million trees, no, sir. It would not be a tree. But it would be
a treehouse.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. I've heard about $5
million toilets in the -- but anyways, that's how the conceptual is. At
what point does the employee -- the users have input into the design
phase?
MS. PRICE: Commissioners, that's why I was talking about
revising the recommendation to say "no later than the 30 percent
mark." When we first put together a project, it's been budgeted, we --
what you're talking about is at a predesign phase, and depending on
the complexity of the project and the type of project, there might be a
point in time prior to the full 30 percent but at a point where we've
done that programming we've started to do -- the consultants have
started to do some drawings that we can look at that would show the
layout, the rooms, a rendering of what the outside might look like, and
that would be the point that we would bring it to you, at the point that
Page 46
June 28, 2011
we've got some drawings so you could see what we were doing and no
later than the 30 percent completion mark.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: When does --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I'm sorry. Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm sorry. When does the users
have their input?
MS. PRICE: Let me let you speak with the experts.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Great.
MR. CAMP: For the record, Skip Camp. The employees or the
occupants of the building are brought in absolutely as the first part.
It's called preprogramming. That's the first thing that happens. As
soon as you hire the architect, they come in, they program the
occupants. What are the expectations of the people that own the
building and that are going to operate the building and that are going
to occupy the building. It's predesign.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Well, to answer your
question, the time that we should have input on that is after the user
has their input, and that would be no later than 30 percent.
MS. PRICE: Absolutely no later than the 30 percent. Like I say,
after we've gotten the user input, then generally your architects and
engineers start doing some preliminary drawings, and that would be
the point that we would bring it to you.
And, Commissioner Hiller, to address the peer review, yes, I did
speak to Mr. Ochs, and we have decided to do exactly what you
suggested. We're in the process of doing a survey . We've gotten six
responses from other counties. We've got a few more on the way. So
we will bring back to you as a separate item a report, and then you can
give us recommendations as to how you'd like to see that.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Excellent. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. I'd like to make a motion
that we go with "The board shall review design plans at a 30 percent
Page 47
June 28, 2011
completion stage for all vertical construction projects with an
estimated project cost in excess of $5 million subsequent to any public
information meeting that may have been held," and No.2, "Vertical
construction projects in excess of $10 million will require a value
engineer review as referenced in attached Appendix IV to the
procedural administrative procedures."
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Motion to approve the staffs
recommendation by Commissioner Coletta.
MR.OCHS: Mr. Chairman?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes.
MR.OCHS: If I may, just -- Commissioner, if you'd consider
one minor revision to the motion with regard to number one, as we
just suggested. If we can get you concept drawings in advance of or no
later than the 30 percent design stage, but --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Right. I don't have a problem
with doing that.
MR. OCHS: -- if we could get it in advance --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I thought that was going to
come back as a separate item. That's fine.
MR. OCHS: No. The peer review would come back after we
complete our staff research and bring that back as a separate report,
but that would not limit your options here in Recommendations 1 and
2.
As Ms. Price said, we want to try to limit any change order cost
as a result of any changes that the board may make. So the sooner we
can get the concept drawings and the preliminary designs after user
review to the board the better, as far as we're concerned.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And I include that in.
MR.OCHS: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Let me ask you for further clarification
then. If concept drawings are the trigger point, why don't we just say
that we provide for our review at the time concept drawings are
Page 48
June 28, 2011
available but not later than 30 percent design?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I agree.
MS. PRICE: That would be my recommendation.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That would be mine.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's fine.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And that way the concept drawing date
is the trigger point.
MS. PRICE: Correct.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: But you can't go beyond 30 percent
without bringing it to the board, right?
MR.OCHS: That's fine.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Is that okay with the motion maker?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's fine.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And the second?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes, the second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Second. Okay.
Now, Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Nope, I --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- addressed these concerns.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Can you address the vertical and
the value engineering for 10 million? Why did you pick 10 million as
opposed 5 million? I mean, 10 million is a -- you know, a very large
project, but so is 5 million. Why would we wait to only do something
like this on a 10 million project when, you know, there could be
substantial savings on a $5 million project?
I'm just questioning why you picked $10 million as a threshold. I
would personally like to see it lower and be more conservative, and
we have to be very careful these days.
MS. PRICE: Absolutely, at the will of the commission. I used
the $10 million value simply because that was what we had put in the
Page 49
June 28, 2011
original protocol where it talked about it on a -- as a consideration. I
simply took that for discussion purposes; make it mandatory at that
point. Whatever levels the commission wants is what we'll do.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I would suggest that it be at a
lower level. I'm not quite sure what that low level ought to be, you
know, without studying it further. And it would be worthwhile, I
think, looking at what other counties use as a threshold. But in order to
be fiscally conservative, I think it's extremely important that we have
the lowest reasonable threshold. You know, obviously, too low
doesn't make sense. But, I'm not sure, maybe the board has more
experience and might have a better idea of what that threshold should
be or leave that portion off and bring that back after there has been
more study done to come up with a reasonable number.
But I would have an impossible time supporting 10 million as the
start for the value engineering and not make it mandatory for projects
under that.
MS. PRICE: Commissioner, if you'd like --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: County Manager, do you have some
guidance for us?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah, do you have some?
MR.OCHS: Well, sir, the value engineering provisions that you
see in the backup in your executive summary were developed in
concert with your Productivity Committee several years ago.
You had some members that you had asked to look at this
concept. We sat with them as a staff. They helped us decide on this
threshold of $10 million as a recommendation to the board. There was
a couple gentlemen who had quite a bit of experience in value
engineering in the private sector, and they thought that the $10 million
mark was the mark at which you could make some significant cost
reductions and justify the added cost of bringing a second engineer
review in for value engineering.
So I think that was the rationale behind 10 million, and it's the
Page 50
June 28, 2011
reason why we brought that number forward at this point to the board.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, could I suggest one thing? We've
got a motion to approve it as it is with a minor modification. Let's try
it. And if any commissioner believes that a project is moving through
the process that should be placed in a value-engineering category, then
let's deal with it at that point in time. And you'll have that shot at the
conceptual drawing or 30 percent phase --
MR. OCHS : Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- early on.
MR. OCHS: And, Commissioners, I might just remind you. In
the backup it talks about value engineering. It gives the flexibility in
that administrative procedure to pick any project for value engineering
if the staff or the board believes that that particular project would lend
itself at any cost estimate to savings through value engineering.
So we have that flexibility, and whenever we find a bid or a
proposal that comes in above the engineer's estimate or above the staff
estimate, obviously that would be a red flag to us that it would be
good candidate, perhaps, for value engineering.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You're going to bring something
back -- I don't know if it's going to be through an email or something
-- how other counties evaluate their value-engineering process?
MS. PRICE: That would be for peer review--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Peer review.
MS. PRICE: -- which is somewhat different from value
. .
engIneerIng.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Peer review is internal, correct?
MR.OCHS: It could be either, sir.
MS. PRICE: It could be either.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Are you going to do that in
executive summary, or will you be doing that in just a
correspondence?
Page 51
June 28, 2011
MR.OCHS: It would be a regular staff item on the agenda, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Those -- I think you have some
opportunities at that time to give guidance under a peer review on
those lesser amounts. And I do agree that we always have the option
at the time that we're reviewing it to give that guidance.
MR.OCHS: Correct.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: The only problem with that is that
it's subject to a majority vote, whereas if we establish a policy it's a
certainty that it will happen.
And right now, where we're so fiscally bound, I think we need to
do everything possible to ensure that we save as much as we can on
these large projects that are coming before us and also ensure that, you
know, the standards are being met and that, you know, the approach
being used is the right one, which goes more to the peer review.
I don't want to vote no on the first part of Mr. Coletta's motion,
but I don't feel comfortable with the threshold being as high on the
second part of his motion.
If you'd be willing, Commissioner, would you divide your
motion into two so I can support the first --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, I--
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- because I really don't want to
say no to everything, and I'd like to be able to say yes to the design--
the conceptual-design recommendation.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Sure. I appreciate your
comments. The reason why I don't think that's necessary is because
we haven't had any kind of conflict in the past when thresholds were
even higher, and I do think this is a reasonable alternative at this point
in time against the cost that we'd incur on a regular basis and the time
we would lose. It's a matter of balance, you know.
If there is an issue where we had problems over a period of time,
then by all means, your suggestions would be most welcome.
Page 52
June 28, 2011
CHAIRMAN COYLE: One of the problems of removing any
flexibility here is an issue that was addressed by the Productivity
Committee when they suggested that limit. And it -- as the county
manager has pointed out, it was a balance. It was an attempt to decide
how much it would cost to have value engineering and/or peer review
and compare that with the potential for savings.
If we remove the flexibility, we could very well be trapped into a
situation where we're forced to do value engineering or peer review
when our evaluation indicates that it will not result in a savings that
would offset the cost, and we might wind up paying more for it.
We have the flexibility to do it, and any commissioner can raise
that issue if it appears that there's substantial opportunity to save
money.
But to cast it in concrete and require the staff to take action
without applying reasonable evaluations of the potential cost benefit
is, I think, the wrong way to go.
But we'll call the question. All in favor of the motion, please
signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. It passes 4-1 with Commissioner
Hiller voting in the negative.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And just for the record, I want to
clarify. I support the first part of the motion. I don't support the
second part. I think the threshold should be lower. I think 5 million is
a very significant dollar amount, and value engineering should be
considered at that threshold as opposed to 10 million.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Thank you very much.
Page 53
June 28, 2011
We will now take a ten minute break for the court reporter, so
we'll be back here at 10:38.
(A brief recess was had.)
MR. OCHS: Ladies and gentlemen, please take your seats.
Mr. Chairman, you have a live mike. You have a live mike, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I hadn't noticed.
Ladies and gentlemen, Board of County Commission meeting is
back in session.
What's the next item, County Manager?
Item #10D
PROVIDED THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
(BCC) WITH AN UPDATE OF THE DRAFT ADMINISTRATIVE
CODE - UPDATE APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Commissioner, next item is 10D on your agenda.
It's an item to provide the board with an update to the draft
Administrative Code. Mr. Casalanguida and Mr. Reischl will report.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Good morning.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Good morning, Nick.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Good morning, Commissioners. For
the record, Nick Casalanguida.
First I'd like to apologize to the commissioners. We started this
process about a year ago, and it's hard to believe we've been down this
road a year and a half from the change from Transportation and
CDES.
Unfortunately, right after you blessed this project, Susan Istenes
took on a job opportunity someplace else, so it took us a few months
to get collected.
But I wanted to introduce Fred Reischl, who you remember,
some of you, from the past. He is now on board with Collier County,
Page 54
June 28, 2011
and he'll present these next two items. I'm excited to have him back,
because at least we have a very qualified person who's going to take
us down the road.
On the second item, real quick, County Manager has asked CBIA
and some of the building industry to work with our staff to look at
inefficiencies or processes within the code that don't work well with
trying to get development back up and running.
With the clear direction of the County Manager, the quality was
not to be sacrificed through this. So Fred will be talking about that as
well, too.
So, without hesitation, I'll bring Fred up front.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Nice to have you back, Fred.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah. Good morning, Fred. Welcome
back.
MR. REISCHL: Thanks, good morning. Mr. Chairman,
Commissioners, great to be back, too.
Fred Reischl with the Growth Management Division. And as
Nick said, this is a presentation to update you on the administrative
code. Currently your staff is reviewing the draft administrative code,
which was prepared by our consultant. We're comparing the draft to
the Land Development Code to ensure that nothing was added,
deleted, or significantly changed.
Currently the Land Development Code contains both processes
and regulations, and the administrative code will remove the processes
and translate them into plain English and organize them in user
friendly format. The resulting administrative code will contain
instructions for applicants, the public, and county staff.
The advantages of the administrative code, it will be written in
plain English, it will be organized by steps leading to the ultimate
goal, which will be the permit, as opposed to today where the LDC
has you jump around in various locations, and it will be adopted by
resolution, so it will be easier to change the process.
Page 55
June 28, 2011
The regulations themselves will still remain in the LDC by
ordinance, so those will remain with safeguarded public hearings.
Since this is an update, no board action is required, but I'll be
happy to answer any questions.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: We're going in the right
direction. I like what we're doing. Finally we've got something that
the public will be able to assess and be able to use as a user manual to
get there. And I'd like to make a motion at this time for approval.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion by Commissioner Coletta for
approval. Is there a second?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I will second that.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Fiala seconded.
Any further discussion?
MR. MITCHELL: Commissioner, we have a public speaker.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Only one?
MR. MITCHELL: Only one.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Let's call the public speaker.
MR. MITCHELL: Nicole Johnson?
MS. JOHNSON: That's for the next one.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. That's for the next item.
MS. JOHNSON: 10E.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. That's encouraging. Okay. So we
don't have a public speaker anymore for this item.
MR. MITCHELL: No, sir.
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.
Page 56
June 28, 2011
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you, Fred. Good presentation.
MR. REISCHL: Thank you.
Item #10E
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS (BCC) APPROVED A
LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT CYCLE -
MOTION TO APPROVE AS A CONCEPTUAL STARTING
POINT - APPROVED
MR.OCHS: Commissioners, next item is 10E. It's a
recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approves a
Land Development Code Amendment Cycle. Again, Fred Reischl
will present.
MR. REISCHL: Thank you, again. Fred Reischl, Senior Planner
with Growth Management Division.
And this is a request to direct the County Manager to begin an
LDC Amendment Cycle, fiscal year 2012.
During the review of the Administrative Code that I was just
talking about, we found several areas that had glitches in the Land
Development Code. In addition, as Nick mentioned, CBIA has some
suggestions for possible amendments, and amendments are also driven
by Growth Management Plan Amendments, the Evaluation and
Appraisal Report, and also State Legislation from the last Legislative
Cycle.
Of course, all amendments will be vetted at public hearings, and
the Planning Commission and you will hear them through public
hearings. And, of course, as always, staff is committed to maintaining
our community character while improving the efficiency of the
product.
Page 57
June 28, 2011
So we ask that you vote to initiate the LDC Amendment Cycle,
Fiscal Year 2012.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Fred, correct me if I'm wrong.
This is a way to streamline the process and using a little bit of
common sense?
MR. REISCHL: That's part of it, right.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
MR. REISCHL: As I said, they were also state mandated and
GMP mandated. But yes, the glitches are a way to maintain
community character and streamline the process.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. I mean -- and I have
some concerns, and I'm sure others do. I don't want to lose the
opportunities for creating a better document than one sector of the
community has suggested, to streamline the process. And I would
hope that we could open that up to others that have some input on that.
MR. REISCHL: Understood, yes. Our meetings will be open.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Which meetings?
MR. REISCHL: Any that we have at Growth Management
Division as well as, obviously, the public hearings.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. So they're -- those will
be advertised then?
MR. REISCHL: They'll be advertised through the website, I
believe, is how we would do that, colliergov.net.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: What's the name of the meeting
or the group or something like that?
MR. REISCHL: It will be Land Development Code
Amendments.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
MR. OCHS: Commissioner, we can put out media releases as
well about those meetings if the board would like that extra step. I
think it's a good idea.
Page 58
June 28, 2011
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. If you're going to take
input --
MR.OCHS: Right.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- let's get everybody's input.
MR. REISCHL: Understood.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No. I already spoke before.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. All right. All in favor of the
motion?
MR. MITCHELL: Sir, we do have a public speaker for this one.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's right, Nicole Johnson.
MR. MITCHELL: Nicole Johnson.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Are you sure it's not for the next item?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Do we have a motion on this
one?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah, we do, made by Commissioner
Coletta, second by Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. That was a previous one.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You didn't do that?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, sir, but I will. I'll make the
motion.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, wait till Nicole speaks. You might
want to change your mind.
MS. JOHNSON: Good morning. For the record, Nicole Johnson
here on behalf of the Conservancy of Southwest Florida, and we do
support setting this LDC Amendment Cycle.
We appreciate that CBIA, as one of the important stakeholders,
was drawn into the process early on, but we do want to remind
everyone that there are many other stakeholders who are very
interested in being part of the process, so we appreciate the comments
that you've made to make sure that everyone is included as this moves
forward.
Page 59
June 28, 2011
Certainly, the Conservancy wants to be part of the process, and
there are a lot of other interested citizens and stakeholders who also,
I'm sure, want to participate.
Regarding the amendments that have been proposed by CBIA,
they're still in concept form, and it's a good starting point, but I would
request that these amendments be just that, a starting point for
discussion. They still need to be further vetted before we decide that
those actually should be the amendment topics that move forward.
So we would just ask that this is a conceptual starting and that
everyone be involved. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you.
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I'll make a motion to approve
this item as a conceptual starting point and make sure that all the
stakeholders -- although I know you are already doing that -- all the
stakeholders are involved.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'll second it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Motion by Commissioner Fiala,
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: It passes unanimously.
MR. REISCHL: Thank you.
Page 60
June 28, 2011
Item #10G
FINAL MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE GORDON RIVER
GREENWAY PRESERVE UNDER THE CONSERVATION
COLLIER LAND ACQUISITION PROGRAM AND DIRECT
COUNTY MANAGER, OR HIS DESIGNEE, TO IMPLEMENT
THE PLAN - APPROVED W/STAFF'S AMENDMENT
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, that moves us to Item lOG on your
agenda this morning. It was formerly 16E7. It's a recommendation to
approve a final management plan for the Gordon River Greenway
preserve under the Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Program.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And it was pulled from the consent
agenda by Commissioner Henning so, Commissioner Henning, we'll
let you begin your questions.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Which -- formerly what?
MR.OCHS: It was 16E7, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. I got to get to that,
because I do have some highlighted items there.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And how many public speakers do we
have, Ian, for this one?
MR. MITCHELL: Sir, we've no public speakers.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, good. Could you turn offmy
light, please. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Did staff write this, the
management plan?
MS. HENNIG: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. It appears that you have
some items in here that -- actually, I need to get to the -- find the __
there was -- was it 54 pages to this management plan?
MS. HENNIG: Sixty-six.
Page 61
June 28, 2011
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Pardon me?
MS. HENNIG: Sixty-six, I think.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Sixty-six. That's a lot of
management. How many acres?
MS. HENNIG: For the record, Melissa Hennig, Principal
Environmental Specialist.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Each parcel needs to have it's
own management plan in it?
MS. HENNIG: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Why? Why can't it -- I mean,
it's one greenway. Why can't it have one management plan for the
greenway properties that Collier County owns?
MS. HENNIG: That was the way we were going to head. And
according to the Conservation Collier ordinance, we need to have a
Land Management Plan within two years, and then it gets updated as
we go.
The greenway parcel to the North, the Greenway Park and
Freedom Park, they received funding from FCT, and per that funding,
they're required to have a separate --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: FCT, for the public, is?
MS. HENNIG: Oh, Florida Communities Trust and per that
Grant Agreement, they need to have their own management plan for
those properties, and that management plan -- any revisions made to
those plans needs to go through the DCA, through the state. And
because we update our management plans a lot -- like, annually we
look at our plans, and we're required every five years to look at the
plan -- we thought it would be a problem if every time we updated our
plan they had to update theirs. So we have them separate.
But we are all working together, and we're, some day, going to
have an overarching plan for all of them.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. It just seems like a lot of
work, unnecessary work. And what you're saying is you're going to
Page 62
June 28, 2011
streamline that?
MS. HENNIG: What we'll most likely do is we'll all get
together, all the partners, when it's completed and have a -- kind of
like a management maintenance plan for the public-access portion of
it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You have a -- after the initial
exotic removal, then you have a three month management or three
month of continued maintenance; every three months you're going to
continually go in there and manage the exotics?
MS. HENNIG: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Is that normal?
MS. HENNIG: Yes. We normally -- it's very thick. And in the
Gordon River Greenway -- it's adjacent to Caribbean Garden, so a lot
of horticultural wastes grew and became invasive, so once you do an
initial removal, if you don't keep up with it quarterly, it's just going to
re-grow, and all that initial money you spent to get rid of it is wasted.
So normally we'll-- on something like that -- and at Freedom Park,
you stay on it quarterly for probably two years, and then you drop it
down to maybe every two -- twice a year, and then finally annually.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: But this management plan says
that you have to do it every three months.
MS. HENNIG: What page? Normally it's every three months
for two years, and then we drop it down.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Let me find that for you. I'm
sure I have that highlighted.
MS. HENNIG: I could--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You have an onsite manager.
There's going to be an onsite manager on this?
MS. HENNIG: There will be at Freedom Park, through--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Through parks and rec?
MS. HENNIG: Through parks and rec.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Let me get to the page. I
Page 63
June 28, 2011
apologize. This is Page 43 of the management plan, Item 1.4. It says,
enacting a regular maintenance event for a maximum of three months
after initial removal.
MS. HENNIG: Right. I could change that and make it more
clear that it's three months for two years, and then we'll readdress it.
And if so, we'll drop maintenance treatments to every six months.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. I think that's reasonable.
Page 45, Action 4.1, continue coordinating with design,
permitting, and planning with parks and rec through Kimley Horn. Is
there any end to that consultant?
MS. HENNIG: Is there any end?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: End working with the
consultant? When is the -- when -- this is a consultant to develop the
greenway.
MS. HENNIG: Right.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: When does that -- or are we
going to end any responsibilities?
MS. HENNIG: I'm going to turn it over to Alex Sulecki.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay, thank you.
MS. SULECKI: Good morning, Board. For the record Alex
Sulecki, Coordinator of Conservation Collier.
Sir, the consultant's role will end in the greenway after the Site
Development Plan is accepted.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Is there any way in the
future to have these management -- write these management plans so
they're not so bulky?
MS. HENNIG: We can work on streamlining them. These have
been -- we started in 2005 with our first plan, and we contracted that
first plan out, and we received a template. And that template is to be
used -- each one of these preserves will have these plans in perpetuity,
and every ten years they'll be reviewed officially, and they'll stay __
and the intent is to be able to hand this document over to just--
Page 64
June 28, 2011
anyone that just started, they can read it and be able to manage the
preserve.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: If you give them less pages,
they could read it quicker.
MS. HENNIG: True. But we did go -- I'll work with the
committee to see if we can streamline it. In the beginning -- they've
been through and they have actually added things to it, so we'll try.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I don't -- I'm not sure if you
really need the plant material in a management. The whole idea is to
manage the property. How you're going to, you know, keep the
invasive exotics out of there, anybody working on removing those
exotics hopefully knows what a native species is versus an exotic
.
speCIes.
Is there any way -- do you feel that we need to change the
ordinance? When you have different parcels, you're going to have
different management plans on there. Pepper Ranch has several
parcels on there. You're going to have a management plan for each of
those parcels?
MS. HENNIG: No. We normally have a management plan for
the preserve. If there's multiple parcels, it's one management plan.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So you're reading the ordinance
as per contiguous.
MS. HENNIG: Correct.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And not each parcel?
MS. HENNIG: Right.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Great, thanks.
So I'll make a motion to approve with the amendment suggested
by staff.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Is there a second?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion by Commissioner Henning to
approve staffs recommendation with the minor modification that has
Page 65
June 28, 2011
been placed on the record, seconded by Commissioner Fiala.
No further discussion, 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. And I would like
to point out that this one is complicated by the fact that there are
multiple agencies over which we have no control, the City of Naples,
Airport Authority and, of course, Conservation Collier. We have
administrative control over it, but it is a separate source of funding and
has separate requirements.
So the good thing about this is that we've been able to work all
that together, but we've had to develop different management plans
because of those reasons.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, we have one just prior to
that is -- the management plan is very bulky also.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, sometimes if you, you know, have
a complete plan and you want to make sure it's properly maintained,
you have to spell out the steps in some detail. But, nevertheless, it's --
thank you very much.
Item #10A
APPROVE THE APPLICATION BY ARTHREX, INC. AND
ARTHREX MANUFACTURING, INC. TO PARTICIPATE IN THE
FEE PAYMENT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM, THE JOB
CREA TION INVESTMENT PROGRAM, THE ADVANCE
BROADBAND INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT PROGRAM,
Page 66
June 28, 2011
AND THE FAST TRACK REGULATORY PROCESS PROGRAM.
(FISCAL IMPACT ESTIMATE: $2.282.969) - APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, you have an 11 a.m. time certain
item this morning. It's Item lOA on your agenda. It's a
recommendation to approve the application by Arthrex, Incorporated,
and Arthrex Manufacturing, Incorporated, to participate in the
Fee-Payment Assistance Program, the Job Creation Investment
Program, the Advanced Broadband Infrastructure Investment
Program, and the Fast Track Regulatory Process Program. The
estimated fiscal impact of these economic incentives is $2,282,969.
Mr. David Jackson, your Executive Director for Business and
Economic Development, will present.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: For all of you who are here to speak on
this item, I want to remind you how incredibly fortunate you are. We
seldom, if ever, start a time certain item at the time certain it's
advertised. So if you will allow for the fact that the clock is one
minute fast, we're right on time.
Okay. Thank you very much. David, go ahead.
MR. JACKSON: Good morning, Commissioners. David
Jackson, Executive Director of Business and Economic Development.
I'll be brief, hopefully brilliant, and definitely be gone by the end of
this session here.
Before you today is an Economic Stimulus Application from a
qualified applicant requesting to participate in four of the BCC
approved and fully recognized Economic Incentive Programs.
This is the first step in a two step process. This first step is the
application approval. The second step will be execution of an
agreement, and that will happen at a future date.
I recommend a motion, a second, and unanimous approval of this
application by Arthrex to participate in the Collier County Economic
Stimulus Program's Job Creation, Impact Fee Assistance, Broadband,
Page 67
June 28, 2011
and fast track permitting.
I'll make three points: Chapter 49, Economic Incentive Programs
requested in this application are programs that have been approved
and funded by the BCC since 2003. Arthrex exceeds the job
requirements. Arthrex meets the requirements for impact fee
assistance. Arthrex meets the broadband requirements. Arthrex meets
fast-track requirements; therefore, Arthrex is fully qualified to apply
for and be approved for participation in these programs. In my former
life, in my company of officers, we called this a no-brainer.
Point 2, all backup and statistical analysis is provided in the BCC
Agenda Package, including two independent economic analyses that
show the future impact on Collier County's economy in detail.
Point 3, staff received requests from members of the public for
additional information, of which we provided. And to answer a
commissioner's questions, we provided further backup showing our
math on how we got our answers. That information was forwarded to
all of you on the BCC by the county manager as additional
information.
Here's the "Be Gone" part. You have an approved set of
economic incentive programs, Chapter 49 . You have a qualified
applicant, Arthrex. You have a thoroughly vetted application by the
EDC and county staff. This is the first of a two step process.
At the end of the day, if the discussions last that long, there
should be a motion, a second, and unanimous approval for the
following recommendation: That the BCC approves the June 9,2011,
economic stimulus program application by Arthrex, Inc., and Arthrex
Manufacturing, Inc., to participate in: Fee Payment Assistance
Program, Job Creation Investment Program, Advanced Broadband
Infrastructure Investment Program, and Fast Track Regulatory Process
Program and for the BCC to task staff to return with agreements for
board approval.
Commissioners, that's the end of my summary. Representatives
Page 68
June 28, 2011
from the EDC, FGCU Electric (sic) Business -- the College of
Business, and Arthrex are here to assist you in this discussion, if
needed.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. This item has been vetted
out in the community. I appreciate the efforts of the EDC and the
Chamber of Commerce and all the citizenry that joined in the effort
going forward. And I think we ought to set the mood on this in the
direction we're going to help give some guidance to the speakers that
will be coming up.
And with that, I'd like to make a motion for approval.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Motion for approval by
Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And I will second that.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Second by Commissioner Fiala.
How many speakers do we have, Ian?
MR. MITCHELL: Sir, we have 16 speakers.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Sixteen speakers.
Okay. Commissioner Hiller, you want -- okay, go ahead.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you. I'm sure everyone's
wondering how I'm going to vote today and, obviously, there are a lot
of people who are here today who have asked me before today's vote
as to what my thoughts were and what I was going to do.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I didn't ask you.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, you didn't. Congratulations.
You're one of the few.
In all fairness, I understand, you know, the issues surrounding
this application, and so I actually took an extraordinary amount of
time to really study the law and the application to make sure that my
final decision was absolutely fair and based on the law, the facts, and
the numbers.
So with that I just -- I want to share a few things that I noted,
Page 69
June 28, 2011
because I think it's very, very important that this be on the record in
order to explain my position here today.
To begin, you know, Arthrex has been a really great corporate
citizen. They've made very significant positive contributions to the
community with respect to, you know, their expansion, with respect to
their research, and with respect to other contributions, which they
have cited in their application package.
And you know, philosophically, Reinhold Schmieding, who is
the principal of Arthrex, and I shared a common philosophy, and that
common philosophy -- and I'm just going to read a quote to you, and
this is directly from Mr. Schmieding in a September 17, 2010, article.
And he said, inequality and bias in funding single-enterprise corporate
welfare without a voter referendum is an unacceptable government
precedent that undermines justification for our further investment in
business expansion in Collier County. And that was on September
17th of2010.
And similarly on July 6 in 2010, he said, we fundamentally
oppose the use of taxpayer generated funding to subsidize individual
private enterprise in Collier County without a voter referendum.
And, by the way, this is the second time that Arthrex is applying
for an incentive. They had done so before, and they decided not to
pursue that.
So with that, I, you know, very carefully reviewed all the
material. And I want to start by saying the first threshold question --
and this goes to Mr. Jackson's presentation where you said that we
have a qualified applicant, and you explained the reasons why.
There's actually a threshold question that comes before what you
presented. And what the law provides is, with specificity, with respect
to the Fee Payment Assistance Program and the Job Creation Program
is that the application for the incentive program must be filed prior to
making the decision to locate or expand within Collier County. And
the reason for that is obvious; because it's intended as an incentive.
Page 70
June 28, 2011
We are intending to use public tax dollars to incentivize a company to
either relocate or expand in Collier County.
And, unfortunately, in the case of Arthrex's application, this
application comes after the decision was made by Arthrex to expand
in Collier County. And just to, you know, validate that, I've pulled
Arthrex's public announcement, which was made on April 15th of
2011, where they formally disclosed their commitment to expand in
Collier County, and specifically in Ave Maria. And their application
is dated May the 18th, 2011, and then Tammie's review, I believe, was
concluded in June, and then submitted to us.
So with respect to that threshold question, this application does
not qualify because it's not really an incentive.
But let me continue, because let's assume that if it did qualify,
how would we review this application?
The next issue of concern is the land, because one of the issues
that I think everybody needs to understand is that we are using public
tax dollars to pay for these incentives. This is not like we are not
going to be cutting a check, and because this has to be secured by liens
against land, we have to know who owns the land that we are using as
security to protect the public's investment.
And in that regard there are two issues in the application which
raise concern, and that is the ownership of two parcels, one of which is
the Ave Maria site that is described. And there is no evidence of
ownership on Arthrex's part. And I did meet with the -- well, the
leadership of Arthrex, and Arthrex's leadership team explained to me
that there was no ownership. There was no lease. So I'm not really
sure, you know, what the response to that is.
The second issue is the question of the rezoning. I spoke to staff
and, you know, this is a property which still has to go through a
rezoning approval before it can be developed as they would like to
develop. So there's no even -- there's no certainty there that that is
necessarily going to happen. That's a future act.
Page 71
June 28, 2011
And the other parcel that is of concern is actually a parcel owned
by the Naples Daily News, or it would seem that it's owned by the
Naples Daily News, but there's some confusion there, because even
though they said they're going to develop on it and the Naples Daily
News PUD clearly identifies them as being owners of the parcel, the
fact of the matter is, now we've got a different owner of that parcel,
and it begs the question why we haven't had a PUD Amendment.
But, you know, if they've got more information forthcoming that
would be beneficial. And that parcel is owned by Ocean Boulevard
Partnership.
So you've got, you know, questions about what we actually can
lien based on the disclosures and the ownership interest.
I then went ahead and I reviewed the calculations both for the Job
Creations Program and for the Fee Payment Assistance Program,
because part of this application is setting out the numbers, if you will,
as to what Arthrex would like to receive by way of incentive.
So first let me just very quickly address the Job Creations
Program. It's intended to stimulate the creation of high wage jobs, and
that's why in the application, you know, they want to ensure that at a
minimum you are going to create a certain number of those higher
wage jobs.
The calculation, however, of what that incentive ought to be is
based on actual jobs that pay those high wages. In other words, not
100 percent of the jobs of the entity, including those below the
ordinance threshold as well as above the ordinance threshold, but
including -- only to include those above the threshold.
So right now the incentivization is for a million two based on 600
employees at 2,000. In fact, you know, applying the objective and the
standards of the particular ordinance, my calculation would result in a
$600,000 incentive.
That ordinance, by the way, has a problem in it because it does
base it -- rather than allowing it -- the funding at the discretion of
Page 72
June 28, 2011
future boards, it provides, in effect, a mandate that the county manager
must appropriate based on fund availability . We've got a real problem
with that because we will never be out of funds. I mean, we're at,
what, 3.4 mills or whatever it is; we have up to 10 mills to go. So that
basically binds future boards. So the ordinance I think, that needs to
be looked at, but that's an aside.
The ordinance -- the incentive ordinance requires with specificity
the month and year that each job will be created. That hasn't been
identified with respect to this project.
And one thing I would do is I would really encourage Arthrex to
look at the state program, because at the state level they would get 1.8
million based on that criteria of which 1.2 million would come from
the state and only 600,000 would come from the county. So they
would make a lot more money if they took the state program's options
as opposed to Collier County's.
Also, look at Southwest Florida Workforce Assistance. They
would be able to get between four and five thousand dollars per
employee, and even just at 75 employees, they'd have between three
and four hundred thousand in incentives there, which would be very
positive. So those are my concerns with respect to that program.
The next issue is the impact fee program. And there was a lot of
confusion. When I spoke to a lot of people in the community, people
thought when you waive impact fees, there's no cost to county
government. There is an absolute cost to county government.
And I was very concerned about that, because we are currently in
a deficit position. We absolutely don't have the money. To give you
an example, our sheriff had to cut $4 million from his budget to
balance our next year's budget. That's just the sheriff.
So the question came up as to whether or not impact fees can be
legally waived, and that was asked to me by a lot of constituents. And
I asked the county attorney with respect to that. I had done some
independent research, and I wanted confirmation.
Page 73
June 28, 2011
County attorney's response to me on that was the board can pass
an ordinance, and the ordinance is presumed valid unless a court
strikes it down. Now, that obviously doesn't answer my question, but
that is how he chose to interpret that.
And what I went ahead and did -- and I found that our attorneys,
our outside counsel, Nabors Giblin, has actually put together an
excellent explanation of why the taxpayers are obligated when we
give impact fee waiver to a business to pay for that waiver using
property taxes to reimburse the impact fee fund. In essence, if we
don't it is considered an illegal -- the impact fees are considered an
illegal tax.
So everybody understands, when we are waiving it, it's not like
we're just waiving the impact fee and there's no check that has to be
written. The General Fund has to write a check using Property Tax
Dollars to reimburse the Impact Fee Fund and make it whole.
And I'd just add that, and I'll, obviously, provide this.
And, Jeft: you may want a copy of this. It's recent. I don't know
if you have one.
MR. KLATZKOW: I think I understand the law, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, you didn't explain it to me,
but that's okay.
MR. KLATZKOW: Well, it's just like that, ma'am. Youjust
chose not to listen, but that's fine.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I've got an email.No. sir.
Okay. So continuing.
So with respect to that, I very carefully evaluated what we are
offering to Arthrex and what Arthrex is -- or I should say what
Arthrex is asking for again in the application. And I had the
opportunity yesterday to review the numbers with staff. The
schedules that staff have were not included in the original backup
package. But staff was very helpful, and they really did an excellent
job explaining how they came up with their numbers.
June 28, 2011
I went back, reviewed the law, and the bottom line is, the -- there
are certain issues with the calculation of the impact fees. First of all,
the rate being used right now to calculate the transportation impact fee
is, in fact, a rate that has not yet been adopted.
If Arthrex goes forward with this application before that date, the
existing rate has to be used. You can't advance that. That would result
in about an additional 900,000.
The calculation of the impact fees on the western portion requires
that the General Fund be made whole with respect to approximately
the incremental value of impact fees on 80,000 square feet, which has
not been included, and that is very much a waiver program. It's a
redevelopment program. But, again, it has to be made whole. So that
would add additional incentives to somewhere under another million.
Then with respect to the time line for the payment that the county
has to make to reimburse the impact fee funds, it's got to match the
current ordinance, which it doesn't as presented. And also there is a
threshold with respect to what the maximum impact-fee assistance can
be, and that has to be based on -- and that's based on anticipated ad
valorem dollars to offset that.
And, unfortunately, the maximum as presented is not based on
taxable values, so it's higher, so the threshold is, in fact, lower.
So, potentially, we've got two issues with respect to the impact
fees, and one is that the impact fees are -- that the General Fund has to
reimburse to the impact fee fund substantially more than what's being
proposed, and the threshold that Arthrex would qualify under is lower,
meaning that Arthrex's contribution would have to be greater.
Additionally, we're dealing with two separate companies, not
with one company. And it goes to the issue, again, of liens and who
the checks are going to be cut to. The application morphs these two
companies together. You can't do that. You have to actually divide
the companies, divide the assets, you know, divide the liens, divide the
incentives.
Page 75
June 28, 2011
The project overview section wasn't completed. I mean, the
ordinance has specific requirements, again. It says you have to
provide the cost of the land. Land costs are not included. You have to
provide the month and year of substantial completion of each project,
and that's not provided. I mean, those are -- those are requirements of
the ordinance with respect to this application.
Overall, the concerns that I have with respect to the omissions --
while there are others, you know, that I could go into, I don't want to
go into that level of detail at this point. There -- I had mentioned the
rezoning, which wasn't discussed. Probably the most significant to me
and one of the things that caused me the greatest amount of concern
with respect to this application goes to one question specifically, and
that one question is as follows.
Okay. And this is the application, okay. And let me -- actually,
let me just begin by saying this: This application is -- was presented
by the Controller and Vice President, two separate individuals, and
there is an attestation, and the attestation is that "To the best of my
knowledge, the information included in this application is accurate."
And now I'm going to read the question. The question is: List
and explain any Criminal or Civil Fines or Penalties, recent or
ongoing Investigations and Lawsuits, Federal, State, and/or Local Tax
Liens and Environmental Issues that have been imposed upon the
company, its executives, or its affiliates, and any recent bankruptcy
proceedings of the applicant or its parent company.
Failure to disclose relevant information may mean automatic
disqualification. If there are no issues to be identified, answer "none."
Do not leave the question blank. And the answer was "none."
Now, ladies and gentlemen, the Naples Daily News last week
reported that Arthrex won a lawsuit. And when I read that article --
and I really appreciated that the Naples Daily News announced this --
I was reminded of the fact that Arthrex had indicated "none," but that
alone isn't the issue. The issue is is that last Thursday litigation which
Page 76
June 28, 2011
has been pending for years was decided, and it was decided against
Arthrex, and it resulted in a judgment against Arthrex to the tune of
$85 million.
And when I found that out and I found that Arthrex had not
disclosed their litigation knowing that a suit of this magnitude was
pending, it left me very concerned.
It raises the question as to why we are not asking for financial
statements of businesses that are applying for economic incentives. It
begs the question why a company that is facing an $85 million
judgment, an $85 million loss, would try to get what, in effect, could
very well amount to somewhere between three and four million
dollars with the adjustments that we discussed. Or let's just leave it at
the number that they're proposing of two million, say somewhere in
the range of two to four million, from a county that can't balance its
own budget, where we have to pay for these impact fees after we have
just cut spending in department after department.
We need to ask the taxpayers what they want to do by way of
supporting an incentive program and then have objective criteria to
ensure that we don't run afoul of the law, for example, with respect to
impact fees, and that is, in fact, in the Nabors Giblin opinion.
And so with that, I would like to hear what the speakers have to
say before I announce how I would like to vote.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Fiala, do you want to go
next, or you'd rather hear the speakers?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: If you would prefer, I could wait till
the speakers are finished.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Oh, I have no preference. If -- I just -- I
don't know; I can't contain myself sometimes.
But among many things that I disagree with that have just been
told to you is the statement that the county can't balance its own
budget. The county has to balance its own budget. It can't print
money. The county has no deficit. The county hasn't increased yourn
Page 77
June 28, 2011
taxes. We have balanced our budget every year for the past, probably,
40 or 50 years, and we have done so with substantially lower
revenues.
Our revenues have decreased dramatically with the economic
recession, and every year we come back to you without raising the
taxes, and we balance the budget.
So with that, I'll call the speakers. And we'll --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: May I?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: No. I'm calling the speakers. We'll
handle the rest of it later.
Go ahead, Ian.
MR. MITCHELL: The first speaker is -- we will use both
podiums, please.
The first speaker is Michael Reagen, and he'll be followed by Ed
Morton.
MR. REAGEN: Mr. Chairman and Commissioners, my name's
Mike Reagen. I'm the president of the Chamber of Commerce.
Not -- forgive me, I don't claim any legalistic, bureaucratic, or
rhetorical flourish in the comments I'm about to make. We've got
1,800 members in the Chamber of Commerce. They employ about
60,000 people.
We're in the midst of a bumbling recession. It is absolutely
critical that you be supportive of Arthrex. This is a world-class
company that is here because they choose to be here. They could be
anywhere.
We need to increase commerce. We need to have a friendly
approach within the law and have good intelligent debates.
And so bottom line is, this is something that you ought to do, and
you ought to explore all the niceties and everything very carefully.
I would urge you to have a unanimous vote to send a signal
across the United States that Collier County is open and welcoming to
this kind of business.
Page 78
June 28, 2011
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you.
MR. MITCHELL: Mr. Morton will be followed by Clark Hill.
MR. MORTON: Good morning.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Good morning.
MR. MORTON: My name is Edward Morton, for the record.
I've been a resident of Collier County for roughly 40 years now.
I stand before you this morning representing the business
community. I've been asked to represent the officers of the Chamber
of Commerce for the past 40,45 years here in Collier County.
We've reviewed the application, and we believe that it deserves
not only unanimous, but enthusiastic support. There are a number of
factors that I think we in the community need to look to to those types
of organizations and those types of facilities that will cause this
community to change its dependence upon Agricultural, Development,
and Tourism.
Arthrex is one of those companies. It integrates very well with
the academic community. I'm a board member of Florida Gulf Coast
University . We know very well how this will integrate with our
Department of Engineering and Science. Arthrex is an incredible
partner in education.
Two, it integrates very well with medicine. Medicine is a
flourishing industry here in Collier County. Without people like
Arthrex, we will not suffer the positive benefits of increased
performance in Orthopedic Surgery. They make just a phenomenal
member of our community in pursuit of medical excellence.
Lastly, they also integrate very well with the business
community, with the quality of life. They're a tremendous corporate
citizen and donated thousands, if not millions of dollars over the past
few years to this community.
Lastly, I'll leave you with this bit of wisdom from Thomas
Jefferson. Thomas Jefferson was talking about judges one day, and he
Page 79
June 28, 2011
said that if I, in this case, this project, am judged, be I judged by a jury
of common people trusting in their common sense and good judgment,
that I will be afforded justice rather than by those who confuse
themself with the truth by parsing with words.
Thank you very much.
MR. MITCHELL: Mr. Hill will be followed by Kathy Curatolo.
MR. HILL: Good morning, Commissioners, and thank you for
allowing me to speak.
I'd like to start by reading a letter that appeared in the Naples
Daily News recently. It reads: Editor of Daily News, on behalf of the
Collier County Lodging and Tourism Alliance, I want to say that
Arthrex is already a significant contributor to the tourism economy in
Collier County, and the announcement of plans to expand is great
news following several tough years in the tourism industry.
Arthrex brings some 10,000 healthcare professionals and
business travelers to Collier County every year, each of whom spends
an average of two nights in our hotels, motels, resorts, dines in our
restaurants and visits local attractions, and they're here throughout the
year, not just during peak tourism season.
The contribution from Arthrex to our tourism economy has
additional benefits for every citizen in Collier County because for
every dollar spent on accommodations, four pennies are collected in
tourist taxes. This generates the funds used to renourish our beaches
and operate county-owned museums, saving every household in
Collier County $631 in taxes annually.
Additionally, just has been the case with visitors who are
introduced to our area while vacationing or attending conferences,
visitors to Arthrex will purchase property, helping our real estate and
housing industries to recover.
Arthrex is a known quantity. Its leadership contributes more than
a million dollars annually to important local projects and
organizations.
Page 80
June 28, 2011
Today Arthrex distributes 5,000 products to 60 countries
worldwide, and demand for these products is growing exponentially.
Arthrex will operate with expanded capacity somewhere, and the 300
-- and the 30,000-plus taxpayers employed in our tourism industry
hope that it is here.
And if I may continue -- since I speak southern -- to finish up
here. And it's signed by Clark Hill, Naples, general manager of the
Hilton Naples, board member of the Collier County Lodging and
Tourism Alliance, but I'm also on the board of the Greater Naples
Chamber of Commerce and the Economic Development Council.
And I'll tell you that we are unanimous in our support of Arthrex.
And Arthrex, I learned yesterday, has requested a unanimous --
unanimous support of this issue. I thought to myself, why ask for
unanimous support from the board on this issue when it's not required?
I thought, are they trying to send a message, some sort of a message?
And then I thought better of that. What Arthrex is saying to us
has -- it's not about us. It's about Arthrex. Arthrex is getting ready to
decide on their permanent home. They'll be bringing in hundreds, if
not thousands of families and --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Wrap it up.
MR. HILL: -- and each of you represent the potential neighbors
that these Arthrex families will live next to.
Arthrex wants to know if they're welcome to our community and
not whether or not there are certain legal issues that may not be right
right now. Arthrex wants -- needs to know we need them.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Clark, you really have to wrap it up.
MR. MITCHELL: Kathy will be followed by Murray Hendel.
MS. CURATOLO: Good morning, Chair Coyle,
Commissioners, staff, and community members. I'm Kathy Curatolo,
and I come before you today representing the Collier Building
Industry Association.
Let me start by saying we are unanimous in our support of
Page 81
June 28, 2011
Arthrex not only because of the value that Arthrex will bring to our
community, but of the past history, the baseline from which we make
this recommendation.
I appreciate Commissioner Hiller's issues that we are to look at
all the avenues, but the reality is we must focus on the outcome, the
reality of our community, and what expansion of this corporation, a
quality corporation within our community, can do for all of us.
I urge you to unanimously support the expansion of Arthrex.
Help our community become what we know we can be. Let's take
advantage of this model and extend it to others.
Thank you so much.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you.
MR. MITCHELL: Mr. Hendel will be followed by Bob Murray.
MR. HENDEL: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, I
am the Chairman of the Collier County Presidents' Council. We have
39 homeowners associations and condo associations. We have access
to about 50,000 residents of Collier County.
These organizations range from the A ve Maria Association with
300 residents to the Gulf Shore Association OF Condominiums with
5,000 residents.
Our board of directors has unanimously endorsed the proposed
Arthrex expansion in Collier County.
Arthrex is an outstanding community asset. Without going into
other details, I implore the commission to vote unanimously to support
this project in this county. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you, Murray.
MR. MITCHELL: Mr. Murray will be followed by Robert
Mulhere.
MR. MURRAY: Good morning, Commissioners. Pleasure to see
you this morning, and staff.
I'm here today as a citizen of East Naples, but a citizen of Collier
County. I am past president of the East Naples Civic Association and
Page 82
June 28, 2011
currently your Director and Chair of its Economic Development
Committee.
I am also a member of the Foreclosure Task Force and have been
so for a number of years now. And in those situations and economic
conditions in our county, and the fact of foreclosures having impacted
us so severely, it is, in my mind and certainly many here, a ray of
hope to stimulate our economy by the addition of these jobs, this new
facility, these opportunities.
And although East Naples may not directly profit from such a
condition, it will profit, because all boats rise on that beloved tide.
We can go into a lot of details, and I'm sure that's essential, but
I'm also sure that those who develop the appropriate ordinances and
whatever mechanisms there are to make this a reality had no intent
whatsoever of creating a diversion or an opportunity to elude costs
that are appropriate.
As a commission, you have the authority to consider the law,
recognizing its implications, and doing what is correct for the
community. I do not mean that you should disobey a law but instead
should look at it clearly for what it obtains.
There are many here who may give you many, many facts. I'm
not going to recite a number of facts. You have those things before
you as well.
It would be an absolute shame if we lost this opportunity for this
additional growth, this stimulant that will give us the chance to go
forward again.
Potentially thousands of jobs can result from this activity. The
amount of money that is being requested is rather minute considering
the number of years and the amount of money that would be returned
to the community and the benefits in taxes that will result.
So I would hope, as others have stated, that you will give your
attention to this, consider the facts, but in the final analysis, please,
make it a 5-0. Let Arthrex know that it is welcome to stay here,
Page 83
June 28, 2011
because Reinhold Schmieding, who owns the company, can go
anywhere he wishes.
Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you.
MR. MITCHELL: Mr. Mulhere will be followed by Fred
Thomas.
MR. MULHERE: Good morning. For the record, my name is
Bob Mulhere. And this morning I'm here in my capacity as chair of
the Collier County Economic Development Council. I'm also a board
member of the Greater Naples Chamber of Commerce.
As has been mentioned, Arthrex has experienced unprecedented
growth since its beginnings in 1991 with three employees. Some 20
years later now, over 1,000 employees. And with this proposed
expansion, they are poised to become the largest private-sector
employer in the county.
They really set the bar for other entrepreneurial companies and
other folks who will look to grow their companies in Collier County.
These jobs fall within other sectors than the three major drivers in
our economy, which are subject to vagaries of weather and economic
cyclical downturns and so on and so forth; those being agriculture,
tourism, and construction. This is exactly the kind of employment that
we seek to attract to Collier County. And this is a home-grown
company.
Therefore, I respectfully request that each of you vote to approve
the requested economic stimulus incentives and ask that you keep in
mind that, although I think the risk, based on Arthrex's past
performance, is extremely, extremely low, nevertheless, there are
protections built into your economic-incentive programs whereby if
the company does not perform, they do not receive the benefits. So
there's really no risk. It makes all the sense in the world.
Thank you very much.
MR. MITCHELL: Mr. Thomas will be followed by Duane
Page 84
June 28, 2011
Billington.
MR. THOMAS: Good morning, Commissioners. Commissioner
Hiller, the rest of them know this, but I need you to know some things.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yes, sir.
MR. THOMAS: I, in 2002, finished 40 years of housing and
redevelopment across the country. I've been in Collier County since
'86, since '86, served as President of the Immokalee Area of Chamber
of Commerce, and they brought me back in just recently to become
the president of the Eastern Collier Chamber of Commerce.
I'm a taxpayer in the part of the county where the aggregate taxes
is 16.2 mill, where the average across the county is 14.8. I also know
that residential units, multifamily and single, have a greater drain on
fire, police, schools, parks and recreation, and all those facilities that
we pay taxes to pay for. Industry doesn't take that kind of money.
Ag. industry takes even less.
In Hendry County and any other county around here, we go out
begging for businesses to come to help us satisfy the needs of our
residential folks. We beg for them. Not in this county. Got to have
this kind of codes and this kind of rule and that kind of rule and this
kind of stuff and this kind of pretty at an industrial park. That does
not bring industry here.
And if industry wants to come out to Eastern Collier County
where it won't create any problem for you on the coast, please let it
come. Please let it come.
Nobody understands why Arthrex -- it's important for Arthrex to
get a unanimous decision. They need a unanimous decision so other
companies can want to come, and we need to be working on that kind
of a thrust so that we can do some things, because, remember, the
Roman empire fell, not because they didn't have the mightiest army in
the world; they stopped producing the necessities of Rome in Rome.
And we are at the hands of China, Pakistan, and the rest till we start
producing stuff here that the rest of us will beg us to have.
Page 85
June 28, 2011
It's vitally important that we take this kind of a step. It's vitally
important that we think in terms of what can we do to bring industry
here that doesn't have the biggest drain on our tax dollars and creates
some more jobs, brings more diversity for the people in this
community.
Please give us the unanimous vote. Help us. You understand?
Because I might end up living more -- longer than I want to be living,
and I want to be able to have a nice, decent community.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you, Fred.
(Applause.)
MR. MITCHELL: Mr. Billington will be followed by Tim
Nance.
MR. BILLINGTON: Good morning. For the record, Duane
Billington.
I'm going to start by asking a question. Is this for $2.823 million
in assistance and incentives, or is this an open-ended question that we
don't know today what it's going to come to?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's actually a very good
question. I mean --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Your three minutes. Use it any way you
wish.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, I would--
MR. BILLINGTON: It'd be nice to get some answers,
Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'd like to know that. Tammie -- or
for someone to answer that.
MR. BILLINGTON: If it's 2.82 million, I could rise in support
under the condition that we're not creating additional nonexisting
incentives or rates that don't exist at this time that others haven't been
able to come for.
I think our arguments should be based on reason, fact, and the
Page 86
June 28, 2011
rule of law. I've heard Thomas Jefferson cited. Well, I don't think
he's ever advocated ignoring the rule of law, I don't think he's
advocated that the end justifies the means, and he certainly wouldn't
advocate using rates not codified in an existing ordinance.
So are we -- do we have anything really solid here, or do we have
an example of -- another example of why there's systemic problems in
our so called partnership with the EDC? I think this is -- as much as
I'd like to be able to support this, we still have too many questions. I'd
like to see this continued.
Thank you.
MR. MITCHELL: Mr. Nance will be followed by Lois Bolin.
MR. NANCE: Good morning, Commissioners, Tim Nance. I'm
here today to speak in support of Arthrex as a participant in the Collier
economic- incentive program. You've heard many accolades presented
by earlier speakers, and I agree with all of them. They're certainly a
dynamic, progressive company, an asset to Collier and its residents.
I expect you to pass the motion today, but I'd like to speak to you
about a couple specific details, and the reason being that I think this is
probably the most important decision that you will make regarding our
economic-incentive program because it's the first significant applicant.
Arthrex alone cannot transform our economy as good and as
great as they are. And I agree with many -- most everything that's
been said about them. Looking forward to many applicants to follow,
their package and agreement will, no doubt, serve as a model and a
template for the future.
So moving past the singular application for a second, I'd like to
diverge, look at the big picture a second towards the multiple
applicants that we may have in the future and the millions of dollars of
activity that we're going to have.
I wish to mention three issues that I feel need clarification
regarding the benefits to taxpayers and residents and defined by our
economic development ordinance, the intent of you, as a board, and
Page 87
June 28, 2011
the final program agreement and administration.
The first one is jobs, which I think is the top issue of concern. As
defined in Section 49, it reads, Florida jobs, jobs in Collier County,
and, quotes, legal residents of the United States. Nowhere does it
specify jobs must be for Collier County residents, and I think you need
to clarify, if it matters to you, if the jobs in Collier County are actually
filled by residents in Lee and Hendry County. I think we need
clarification in the ordinance and the intent of the BCC.
Secondly, and those are program administration things. I think
that maybe -- they may be impacted by the final agreement. I need
you to look -- I think you need to look at funding through ad valorem
tax dollars and how they're shifted from one -- from district to another,
and how they relate to impact fees, who ( sic) are also shifting from
one district to another.
If there's a mechanism to repay fees that are transferred from
adjacent districts, I think we need to have an accounting of those
impact fee transfers.
In summary, I think the issue -- these issues aren't important if
the program isn't successful, but I'm requesting clarification on these
things in your final agreement with Arthrex hoping that the Arthrex
program is the first of many.
Thank you very much.
MR. MITCHELL: Lois Bolin will be followed by Chris Hudson.
MS. BOLIN: Hi. My name is Lois Bolin, and I'm here as a
resident, as co-founder of Naples Backyard History, and a member of
the Board of Directors of the Economic Development Council, which
plays a very vital role for this community.
I've sort of had to shift what I wanted to say because there was so
much information Commissioner Hiller came (sic) out, but I did find
an article about -- from Bloomberg talking about this $84 million that
just came down. There was also in the same week -- in the same week
this victory came down for the company that sued Arthrex, it said, the
Page 88
June 28, 2011
U.S. Court of Appeals in a separate case ruled that Arthrex didn't
infringe upon this. So now they've got two cases going against this.
So, you know, one of my favorite expressions is, we need a one
-- good one handed economist because they're always saying, on one
hand, it could be this, on the other hand it could be that. Well, the
same thing holds for the rule of law. When you start to really looking
at everything, it's whoever presents the best case or who has the most
time to prepare.
I'm delighted -- and I'm definitely here to support Arthrex for
many reasons. Where's Mr. Fred Thomas; is he still here? I wanted to
give him an "amen" on what he was saying, because he started to
sound like an Evangelical preacher there -- because there are many
things that are very good about this coming out into this area, and one
is what it will do for the children of that area to see a new way to
make a living and to make a life.
Eighty-eight years ago that area was known for bird pluming and
logging and all these various kinds of things, and we've almost now
come full circle back to where -- the birth of Collier County was
exactly in that area of Highway 29, and here Arthrex is coming back
with a new opportunity for revitalization for Eastern Collier County,
which opens it up in a whole new light.
I strongly encourage you to do this for a lot of reasons. We can
find as many reasons to go against it as we can in favor of it, and it's
going to depend upon how we choose to look at that.
What I do want to say in terms for the Economic Development
Council and Project Innovation, two years ago when Project
Innovation started, who was talking about economic development and
the things that sustained it? Well, we weren't really talking about it,
and that was part of a grassroot effort which led, unfortunately, for
people to think that Jackson Labs was Project Innovation. It was one
thing. Project Innovation is still going on.
And of March the 11 th of this year, the first time the EDC met
Page 89
June 28, 2011
with the Board of County Commissioners, you all have now started
the first Strategic Plan for Economic Development, which is
extraordinary. It is awesome.
What has happened just in the last year alone for the dialogue of
-- we didn't even -- we didn't know what we didn't know, where now
we're starting to learn that, as a county, as an EDC, and as a
community.
And I want to thank Arthrex for serving as that great model and
case study that will lead us into the future.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you.
MR. HUDSON: Good morning, Commissioners.
MR. MITCHELL: Mr. Hudson will be followed by Chuck
Marshall.
MR. HUDSON: Good morning, Commissioners. Most of you
know me through my extensive work on nation, statewide, and local
campaigns. I'm actually here because I felt this might be in my
wheelhouse.
Most of you campaigned onjobs. Do I need to actually say any
else?
The folks that I represent out in Collier County, the Golden Gate
Estates folks who happen to be under 30 years old, my friends that I
graduated from high school with, they're jobless. Unfortunate, but
they're jobless. And you can intend to ignore that these folks are
jobless or, as Bob Murray mentioned, that there's foreclosures in
District 5 and all over our county, or you can choose to create some
work. Give Arthrex its application, let them go forward, create jobs,
and we're better for it.
Second, speaking specifically to Arthrex, I understand that you
get folks in here day in and day out that make promises and
commitments. I think the guessing game is over. I think that they're
committed to us, and I think you need to commit to them. I think that
Page 90
June 28, 2011
they're going to create jobs. And, gosh darn it, I would really hate to
come and sit down and read the paper tomorrow and see that you
didn't pass this motion.
Thank you.
MR. MITCHELL: Chuck Marshall will be followed by Tara
( sic) Bragdon.
MR. MARSHALL: Good morning, Commissioners. For the
record, I'm Chuck Marshall.
Earlier many of the speakers spoke glowing words about Arthrex,
and I believe they're a great company, but what many of us learned is
they were -- when they were talking about how bad Collier County
needs them, what bad financial shape we're in, how we have to have
them, how we have to spend millions of dollars to keep them brought
to my mind, why is that? Why do we have to encourage Arthrex to
stay? What have we done as a county that puts us in that position?
And it comes to mind what many of the local citizens have said about
-- in businesses about how our regulations we've created and the fees
and the costs of starting a business has made it almost -- extremely
difficult for a company to get started. And so we aren't attracting
those companies either to expand or new companies in -- to come into
the county.
So I would like to suggest that there are two things that we need
to look at: Improving our regulations, streamlining them, and making
it more cost effective to companies to come into the county.
One of the other two things that this brings up is by us picking
Arthrex, a great company, we're going down that road of picking
winners and losers, we're ignoring the free-market economy, the
benefits of it, and that concerns me as a citizen because how many
other companies out there would come into the county or would
expand in the county when they see us favoring one company over the
rest?
The other thing that I'm concerned about is our ordinances that
Page 91
June 28, 2011
we have. There's two things that has to consider before you can have
what used to -- some people call the Chicago pay to play or Crony
Capitalism. That's a process in place that allows it to happen and then
unethical people that make it happen.
I'm concerned that we have put in place a process that enables
pay to play or crony capitalism, and I'd hate for us to go down that
path that entices either staff or commissioners to go down that -- to go
down that path of crony capitalism. That's all I have to say.
MR. MITCHELL: Mr. Bragdon will be followed by Tim
Cartright.
MR. BRAGDON: Commissioners, my name's Tarran Bragdon.
I moved to Ave Maria six weeks ago to run the new free-market think
tank called the Foundation for Government Accountability, and I'm
here to speak in support of Arthrex's application.
And I just want to make two quick points. I think at this time of
record unemployment this county needs to be looking at every --
removing every impediment possible to new job creation. We heard
from the previous speaker that this application would set up a system
of winners and losers. I would suggest that you should remove all
impact fees from all businesses trying to create new jobs. Approve
this application but change the policy going forward to all
entrepreneurs, saying jobs are on the way, but definitely approve this
application.
And, secondly, I heard from Commissioner Hiller that this seems
to be a question of money to government. And I would suggest it's not
about money to government. It's about jobs. Because the question is
not whether you're going to get the money; either you approve the
application and you get the jobs or you deny it and the jobs go
somewhere else. The question is whether or not this county is going
to get the jobs.
So I would strongly urge a unanimous vote in support of the
application. Thank you.
Page 92
June 28, 2011
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You don't work for the Chamber of
Commerce, do you?
MR. BRAGDON: I do not.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Good, thank you.
MR. MITCHELL: Mr. Cartright will be followed by Doug
Rankin, and Mr. Rankin will be your last speaker.
MR. CARTWRIGHT: Good morning, Commissioners,
Chairman Coyle. My name is Tim Cartright. I'm a Collier County
resident, business owner, and Chair elect of the Economics
Development Council of Collier County.
From my perspective, being active in the venture capital industry,
business success is very elusive. Less than one in ten startups obtain
Angel funding, less than one in ten Angel deals will see venture
capital funding, and less than one in 10,000 new companies will go
public.
When I look at the success of Arthrex in light of these statistics
and the often quoted small business failure rate being greater than 50
percent, it's really remarkable what Arthrex has accomplished. The
statistics that were read earlier, Arthrex began operations in Collier
County in 1991 with three employees and currently employs over a
thousand in Collier County.
Arthrex is a proven job creator and deserves unanimous support.
Thank you.
MR. MITCHELL: Mr. Rankin is your last speaker, sir.
MR. RANKIN: Good morning, Commissioners and Chairman. I
am a businessman. I belong to dozens of organizations here, ran
numbers of them, but on top of all that, I'm a capitalist. And what's
the number one word in capitalism? It's called competition. You do
not exist here in a vacuum. You exist in competition with other
communities. And I will tell you pretty much any other community
I'm aware of would kill to get these jobs. And if you vote this down or
it doesn't get almost a unanimous vote, you won't have to worry about
Page 93
June 28, 2011
these jobs and a whole bunch of others we currently have staying here,
because they're going to go somewhere else, because the message will
have been sent, and then you're really going to have to worry about
where you get the money to fund this county government and
everything else.
I sit on the Foreclosure Task Force with somebody else. I have a
whole stack of articles about foreclosures sitting in my office. Current
estimate, it's going to take ten years to straighten them out here in
Florida because of some of the things the banks did. That means one
of the legs of your famous three legged stool is in splinters, because
why should anybody build anything when they can buy a house and
lot for what -- basically what the lot's worth because the banks don't
care. It's not their money. They're just giving them away.
This is the only way you're going to get the construction industry
back. This is the only way you're going to get jobs here back.
I came -- I've been here 28 years. I came originally from
Bradenton. And this county is way behind the curve in terms of
attracting businesses. They were doing it in the '50s, '60s, and '70s.
And even they just lost two of their major businesses recently to
competition from another community.
So there will be blood in the water in the -- terms of other
communities smelling that if we do not approve this. And we need to
-- like the other gentleman says, I hope this is one of many -- first of
many applications. But if we don't give it resounding success, it's
liable not to be. And that's just the laws of economics and
competition.
We -- you know, ag's getting hurt by foreign competition and
citrus diseases. I already described the construction stool, and we saw
how quickly tourism could have a problem with the BP oil spill and
other factors.
This area of Florida used to be dependent on the industrial
northeast, and with all due respect, my question is what industrial
Page 94
June 28, 2011
northeast anymore?
We need to change this matter and change it quick, because this
recession, the first of many that have hit Florida, which is the only
one, basically, that Collier County has experienced, other than the 18
months in '83/'84, is a wakeup call, and I hope it's the last.
But it's something that is waking us up to the fact we can't
continue to do business the way we did before. And this is no
criticism to the current commission. I'm talking about decisions made
20, 30 years ago.
We've got to wake up, smell the roses, and compete, or we will
lose.
Thank you, Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you.
MR.OCHS: Mr. Chairman, Mr. Price, Scott Price has asked for
an opportunity to address the Board, Vice President of Arthrex, if the
board is so inclined.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I certainly believe they deserve an
opportunity to do that.
MR.OCHS: Yes, sir.
MR. PRICE: Thank you very much, Commissioners. Again,
Scott Price. I work for Arthrex.
I wasn't going to speak this morning but thought it necessary
after a few of the comments I heard.
First of all, Reinhold Schmieding can't be here today, with his
regrets; he's out of the country.
Secondly, we are very thankful and grateful at Arthrex, for the
community wide support we've gotten from the business community,
from this local government, and from the civic community as well. So
we're grateful and appreciative of that.
To address a few of Ms. Hiller's points, because I think they need
to be clarified because they're not factual. Arthrex was against the
Jackson Labs proposal because it was not being offered to all
Page 95
June 28, 2011
businesses but rather was focused on a single business and felt the
need for a voter referendum for that reason.
We previously had applied for impact fee assistance waivers, like
all businesses are allowed to do under the current ordinance, and we
were granted approval for that. We declined not ( sic) to use those fees
because we did not go forward at Ave Maria previously and went,
instead, with another building that we had purchased locally, the
Hi llerman- Titan (phonetic) building.
Also Ms. Hiller referenced that this application needs to be an
incentive for Arthrex to locate here. We very just completed
negotiations anticipating, hopefully -- not anticipating, but rather in
the wrong event that this board did not approve today, we've already
negotiated a building to purchase in Fort Myers for about $10 million
less than this cost of the facility at Ave Maria would be.
We don't think that's necessary, but we were preparing Plan B in
case this board was not supporting us today. So the fact is, this is an
incentive for us to locate here.
Reinhold Schmieding has spent his life here in Collier County,
his business career, most of it, developing a business and building the
number one Arthroscopy Company in the world. I'm privileged to
work for that company, as are another thousand employees, and
hopefully another 600 employees from Collier County will be
working for this company as well. Collier County's privileged to have
this company located here.
In terms of the investment risk that she pointed to, the $3 million
won't be paid until we've constructed the building facility and created
the jobs. Once that facility is constructed, the economic stimulus to
Collier County will be in the hundreds of millions of dollars from the
moment it is completed because of the construction dollars and the
multiplier effect that goes into that.
This is a zero risk investment by Collier County. The returns -_
again, the economic stimulus to this community already by Arthrex is
Page 96
June 28, 2011
in the hundreds of millions of dollars. Prospectively, we'll be in the
billions of dollars over tens of years.
This is the simplest investment decision Collier County could
ever make, and they actually can't afford not to make this decision.
It's not a question of affording this investment. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you, Mr. Price.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Mr. Coyle?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Fiala was first, please.
Let's go in order.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I just wanted to --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You'll get a chance. Just -- I think you're
next, right after Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you, Mr. Price. I really
appreciate that, clearing up some of these things. That was important.
There were many, many statements made, so -- and I took notes
as our speakers were talking. One fellow said something about
removing all impact fees, and that was nice that he suggested that. But
just in reply to him, even before I get into my other comments, and
that is, we have removed all impact fees from people who are buying
existing buildings, they're two years old or older, and no matter how
they change the business if it was a one-man operation and it happens
to then be 150 person restaurant, they don't have any impact fees to
pay. Not only that, we've taken the impact fees that exist and cut them
in half.
So we have tried to work out -- but the impact fees are also
important for future growth, because if companies do want to grow
and continue to grow, we got -- we must build the infrastructure. And
you don't want to pay for that infrastructure. You want the people
who are going to use it to pay for it. We don't want our taxes to go up,
and that's the purpose of impact fees.
Okay. And somebody else talked about crony capitalism. You
know, I don't know how it could even be referred to as that when you
Page 97
June 28, 2011
figure that this -- this opportunity, this program is for anybody and
everybody who wants to apply for it. It's not just for Arthrex. It's for
anybody who wants to open a business and qualifies. There are
criteria set in place. If you meet that criteria and you want to apply,
you can. There's no cronyism to that. Everybody can apply.
And it's only if you don't meet the criteria that you wouldn't be
approved; otherwise, we would love to have you. Because it's really
important to us.
As I've said before, you know, commercial pays taxes heavily,
and the important thing is your taxes stay low because commercial is
paying a heavy amount of taxes. And let me tell you that Arthrex
pays plenty, and they have helped keep your taxes low.
And, by the way, our budget is balanced. Just to make that clear.
N ow let me get down to the meat and potatoes of this whole
thing, cost and benefit. It has -- Arthrex has a positive impact right
now on our taxpayers because of the taxes they pay.
Secondly, as they expand, they're going to even have a greater
impact on our taxpayers because taxpayers will be -- will be able to
keep their millage rate low . We've kept this millage rate low for
forever, it seems; for all 11 years we've been on here.
And also, by supporting Arthrex today -- and really, I came into
all of this Arthrex stuff -- because I felt wounded from the Jackson
Lab business, and I had to stand up and put that aside. You know,
what is the best thing for the community? Not what my hurt feelings
might have been at the time. It's what's best for the community, and
what's best for the community is to support Arthrex.
And it also sends a message out there beyond our county lines
that says we're open for business, folks. Come on here. We're
offering you some incentives to place your business here rather than in
another county.
We slam the door on this, then we might as well say to all
businesses, we don't really want you here, but our taxpayers can pay
Page 98
June 28, 2011
the remaining things, or their taxes could continue to go up because
we don't attract businesses. I mean, it hits the taxpayers every time.
Let me say on behalf of Arthrex, they're a proven business and
proven business leader in our community. They contribute to the
county, oh, my goodness, dollars and dollars and dollars, over a
million dollars a year, plus they contribute in volunteerism, and that's
a very important thing, too.
And so I think I've said just -- they're going to also help us to
move forward as far as good things in future business and drawing
them here. I bet they'll draw some here themselves just to assemble
around them.
So anyway, thank you for giving me the time.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I've been reminded that Commissioner
Henning is supposed to go before Commissioner Hiller. So
Commissioner Henning, it's your turn.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No. I just had the desire to prior
to that.
The -- I'm going to support the motion to approve the application
by Arthrex and direct staff to develop the agreements to bring back to
the board after we do the zoning, which is, I understand, on the July
agenda.
But I want to address some of the concerns that was raised. The
email that I received and the other board members received from
Reinhold is not saying that we have made the decision. In other
words, we have made the decisions; now we're going to apply for the
application.
It clearly says, Arthrex, Incorporated, is pleased to announce that
we will seek expansion of its corporate facility and employment in
Collier County . We will seek the expansion.
And we heard from Scott; they are wisely seeking other avenues.
That's what you do when you run a business is you look at other
avenues, not just the one before you.
Page 99
June 28, 2011
The other thing about the lawsuit, and not disclosing that, the
federal court, it says -- and I'll read the headlines. Federal court favors
Arthrex patent infringements case.
And, in fact, Scott Schmieding -- or John Schmieding says, this is
a victory for the medical innovation and common sense, said general
counsel for Arthrex. It's not that Arthrex has a lawsuit, a deficit
against them. The federal court has said Arthrex is right.
So whether you disclose that or not is immaterial. The real issue
here is many friends and residents that I hear from always ask me,
Tom, do you know anybody hiring? And that is the real issue. It's
about jobs in Collier County. And we have a proven home-grown
company that has created jobs in Collier County and wants to continue
creating jobs in Collier County.
This is not a Jackson Labs issue. That was a real heated debate.
This is a common-sense approach to create jobs in Collier County.
And I agree with some that our ordinance -- ordinances need to be
changed, but Arthrex has done everything with the requirements in our
ordinance. So why wouldn't we say yes to a home-grown company?
What would we be saying to the rest of the world if we don't approve
a company that wants to expand, not locate, expand here in our
community?
So I'm very supportive of not only the application, but look
forward to the agreements and look forward to that building being
built in Ave Maria.
That's all I have.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you.
Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you.
First of all, with respect to the comment about the balanced
budget, the current year's budget is balanced. We're required by law
to balance our budget annually. Next year's budget has not, as yet,
been balanced. We haven't approved next year's budget. And in order
Page 100
June 28, 2011
to balance that budget, we will either have to cut expenditures to the
tune of millions or we will have to raise taxes.
With respect to the overall taxes, looking at the overall taxes in
Collier County, they are very high. The ad valorem component is not
the only component. The board has kept ad valorem down and has, on
the back side, raised fees, for example, to offset the need to raise ad
valorem.
Impact fees have been the highest in the state. The gentleman
who talked about the moratorium, I supported a moratorium. This
board voted against it. It was, as I recall, a 4-1 vote on that issue. So I
just want to highlight that.
I want to address what Mr. Price, Scott Price, the counsel (sic) for
Arthrex brought out, that this is different than Jackson Labs. It
actually isn't. Jackson Labs qualified under a program that was
approved by the state that had objective criteria. Jackson applied and
satisfied the qualifications required by that program and then, based
on qualifying for that program, came to Collier County and asked for
the matching funds.
It's no different with Arthrex. There is a program -- which wasn't
established by me, by the way. I didn't write this ordinance. This
predates me. I'm governed by the law that's before me today that was
drafted under this board. And that's the law I have to live with. If
you-all want to change that law, I support that. But what it is is what I
am bound by.
So with respect to saying that this is not like Jackson Labs and
that Jackson Labs was an attempt to support a single business, no, that
isn't the case. That isn't the case at all.
I completely am in support of Arthrex. I join you in the
unanimous support of Arthrex, which is what you all said. Arthrex
deserves to be supported.
The question today before us is not whether we support Arthrex
as a community but whether Arthrex -- Arthrex's application should be
Page 101
June 28, 2011
accepted based on the legal requirements and based on their
disclosures. That is a completely separate question.
We had discussions today about the rule of law. We had
discussions about the means justifying the ends, or the ends justifying
the means, whichever side you choose to look at that question on.
And the bottom line is, while it is important to do everything possible
to create jobs -- and I fully support that. I suggested another
economic-incentive program which the board didn't even want to
address, which the gentleman who's running against Bill Nelson
recommended as the kind of program a cash-strapped county like ours
should have, which is a property-tax incentive, okay? Again, the board
didn't want to hear about it.
Weare supposed to be redefining our economic-incentive
program to do what it is intended to do. This program as it exists has
been completely unsuccessful -- developed by this board.
If the program changes and if Arthrex wants to come back to
qualify under the terms of a program that works with what it wants to
do, that's fine. But as of today, based on all the facts presented -- and
by the way, I want to correct Commissioner Henning. You are right.
They did win in one case. But on June 23rd a judgment was brought
against them. It was a patent-infringement case in Oregon, and the
ruling against them was for an $85 million judgment against Arthrex
for patent infringement.
And with respect to the announcement, they didn't say they were
seeking. They said they made -- it was a very clear press release with
respect to coming to Collier or expanding in Collier County and
having made the decision to stay in Collier County. And that was on
April 15th that it was published in, you know -- the first time I saw it
being published, and that was in the Naples Daily News.
So I am bound by the law. There's nothing I can do about it. If
you-all want to change the law and create a different program, I would
support that wholeheartedly. If you would like to continue this to
Page 102
June 28, 2011
allow that to happen, I would support that wholeheartedly.
I would also support Arthrex looking at the other programs that,
for whatever reason, it refuses to look at, that would alleviate the
burden on Collier County.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. Wow, this has been a very
interesting meeting, and we're into lunchtime, but thank you very
much for allowing me a few minutes to speak, too.
My district, District 5, which represents over 80 percent of
Collier County, that's east of951, has experienced the devaluation of
over 70 percent in some areas. I mean, it's been unbelievable.
When you talk about the impact of the recent recession, it's been
District 5 that has taken the worst hit. That's where most of your
construction workers live. Many of your service people that lost out
on employment. Numerous people had to move in with relatives or
friends. A lot of people are now unemployed or underemployed.
There's empty houses throughout the whole area.
I mean, the area's devastated. Let's be honest about it. It's a very,
very trying situation to look at this. And what can be the answer?
There's no simple answer except to be able to, in some shape, way, or
form, to turn around the economy in some meaningful way, to be able
to show that there's a spark of life, that there's a -- that there's a
rainbow out there that's going to lead us to that prosperity that we used
to enjoy and never realized that we had it.
How you going to do it? The only way you're going to do it is to
be able to create jobs. Here's the perfect opportunity. And, you know,
we got to get down it. And I appreciate Commissioner Hiller's stand
on this and her beliefs on it. And I could -- I don't want to -- I'm not
going to -- the temptation to try to tear her argument apart would only
lead to a discussion that would probably run for another two hours and
would get nobody anyplace.
But the truth of the matter is, simply said, performance based.
Page 103
June 28, 2011
What does this mean? It means you don't get a darn nickel of taxes
that you probably would have had to pay until that point in time that
you prove that you met the criterias that are in there; in other words,
so many people at so many dollars per hour, that you build a building
at a certain point in time, and if you fail to meet those
performance-based criteria, you don't get the pay, you don't get the
payback on it.
So what are you getting paid back? Impact fees that you would
have to pay anyways? And if you fail to pay them -- or if you fail to
perform, then we'll come after you and get the impact fees, and we
know that. We all understand the rules of the game. The risk is very
minimal.
High wage jobs. I mean, we're never going to see another one
come down the pike like this. Arthrex is a company that's unlike any
other. I mean, how many companies do you know that have a
thousand-some people working for them that are owned by one single
person whose sole objective seems to be to take care of its employees
and those people that support him?
Wonderful company, a wonderful man. I can't think of a better
way to go for it. Six hundred jobs we're talking about. These are
items that we just shouldn't dismiss.
To any other entity that would be out there and would like to
grow their business, locally or come into Collier County, I want them
to know that the same commitment I made to every other business
that's ever come and talked to me and shown interest in Collier County
-- and that includes Arthrex -- I'll make that commitment to them on
my own personal time and energy to help it happen.
Folks, we got to get serious about this. We need those jobs.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. My light is on now, so you're
going to have to relax.
MS. NEMECEK: Stand down; should I sit?
Page 104
June 28, 2011
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Oh, you can stand there if you'd like.
I do want to just address a couple of points. Mr. Price is right,
this has nothing to do with Jackson Labs. It's not even similar. The
Jackson Labs proposal didn't ask for just job credits, didn't ask just for
waiver of impact fees. Jackson Labs asked for the money to build
their entire research facility. Arthrex is not asking for that. They're
putting up that money themselves.
Jackson Labs' proposal was supposed to be the subject of intense
negotiations between us and them and the state about what the terms
were. Nobody ever got to that point. It was never a project. That's
different than what is being proposed here.
We've got a program, they qualify for the program, and they
should be treated just like everyone else, despite the attempts by some
here to politicize the issue. This is about honorable behavior. And
talks about crony capitalism are nothing more than a cheap attempt to
politicize this issue.
Arthrex supported my opponent in my election -- my bid to be
re-elected. Are we cronyists, Mr. Price? Have we been doing
something together here that we shouldn't be?
The honorable thing is to put those kinds of issues aside. We're
talking about the benefit of the community. And I strongly support
Arthrex. They're a great company. They offer wonderful things for
our community.
And for people to get up here and start saying that our economic
development decisions are based on crony capitalism is absolute
ignorance, and it's nothing more than an attempt to politicize this issue
like some people politicized the Jackson Labs issue.
The important thing is to do honorably what we should do. You
can't have it both ways. You can't say, I support Arthrex, but there are
lots of things I'm concerned about here, and I'm not sure that they
should be given these incentives.
Listen, this document is very clear, the document that spells out
Page 105
June 28, 2011
what the incentives are. It's very clear. It's been used before. There's
nothing mysterious about it. Anyone who wants to read it will
understand that it's pretty clear-cut.
So I certainly am going to wholeheartedly support Arthrex,
because it's what the community needs. And I'm going to try to find
ways to make it work rather than searching for ways to try to
undermine their efforts particularly --
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- particularly those that wish to
undermine their reputation in the process. I think that is just
unforgivable.
So, Mr. Price, you've got my wholehearted support, even though
we're not cronies.
Okay, Tammie.
MS. NEMECEK: Tammie Nemecek, President of the Economic
Development Council.
I'd like to just reinforce the points, you know, that you're making.
The programs are very straightforward. They have specific criteria
for application process. The companies fill out the applications,
they're reviewed by both EDC and staff for compliance with that, and
as David so eloquently said in his opening remarks, this company does
qualify .
The determination on unanimous support is, I think, an important
one. And we do run the risk of this project not occurring in Collier
County if there is not unanimous support. And so I wanted to
underscore that one more time in this process, because this company
has been here since 1991, growing from three employees to over a
thousand.
The project that's before you today, the magnitude of this project,
in the last three years there have only been two others in the State of
Florida. And this project has a proven history of creating the jobs that
they said they're going to create in Collier County and have been
Page 106
June 28, 2011
contributors to the local economy.
So I encourage your full support of Arthrex today unanimously
for this project so that we can move forward and start creating jobs in
Collier County.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Everyone in favor of this
proposal, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. It passes 4-1 with Commissioner
Hiller dissenting.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And I just wanted --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: The person that they didn't help in
the election and voted -- didn't support voted for it, and the person
they did support voted against it.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'd like the record to reflect that
my vote is based on the fact that the application is incomplete in part,
incorrect in part, and false in part.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We'll be back at--
MR. OCHS: Commissioner, you have a --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We're going to a shade session.
MR. OCHS: Shade session. County attorney wants to make a
brief announcement.
Item #llA
THE BOARD IN EXECUTIVE SESSION WILL DISCUSS:
STRATEGY SESSION RELATED TO SETTLEMENT
NEGOTIATIONS AND LITIGATION EXPENDITURES IN THE
Page 107
June 28, 2011
PENDING CASES OF (1) JERRY BLOCKER, ET AL. V.
COLLIER COUNTY, CASE NO. 08-9355-CA; AND (2) COLLIER
COUNTY V. JERRY BLOCKER, ET AL., CASE NO. 09-1281-CA;
NOW PENDIN.G IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE
TWENTIETH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR COLLIER
COUNTY~ FLORIDA - CLOSED SESSION
MR. KLATZKOW: Yeah, just briefly. We're breaking to attend
an attorney client session. It involves the Blocker matter. In
attendance will be the five commissioners, County Manager Ochs,
myself, and Jacqueline Hubbard. We expect this to go about 45
minutes in total.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. We'll be back at -- sometime.
(A luncheon recess was had.)
MR. SHEFFIELD: Mr. Chair, you have a live mike.
Item #llB
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS TO PROVIDE
DIRECTION TO THE COUNTY ATTORNEY REGARDING
SETTLEMENT NEGOTIATIONS AND LITIGATION
EXPENDITURES IN THE PENDING CASES OF (1) JERRY
BLOCKER, ET AL. V. COLLIER COUNTY, CASE NO. 08-9355-
CA; AND (2) COLLIER COUNTY V. JERRY BLOCKER, ET AL.,
CASE NO. 09-1281-CA; NOW PENDING IN THE CIRCUIT
COURT OF THE TWENTIETH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND
FOR COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA - MOTION TO CONTINUE
WITH LITIGATION - APPROVED
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Ladies and gentlemen, Board of County
Commission meeting is back in session. We're going to Item No. lIB,
I believe it is.
Page 108
June 28, 2011
County Attorney?
MR. KLATZKOW: Yes, sir. And I'm just looking for direction
from the shade session.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I would like to offer a
motion for settlement, but understanding the will of the -- majority of
the commissioners during the closed door session does not want to
settle the -- this lawsuit; therefore, I'm reluctant to make that motion.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I would -- if you made that
motion, I would second it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I appreciate that, but that's
not what I understand from the majority of the commissioners.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay . Very well. I make a motion that
we continue the legal case and see where it leads us for the time being.
And is there a second?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Coletta seconds it.
Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Oh, I was going to ask what
Commissioner Fiala thought, because we hadn't heard from her. We
heard from Commissioner Coyle and Coletta.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay . Well, I was just going to call the
question, if you -- she can probably tell you.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I just wanted to hear what her
thoughts were.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah, we vote. You'll find out what it --
MR. KLATZKOW: It's time to vote.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Huh?
MR. KLATZKOW: It's time to vote.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yep. Can't be talking about the issue.
So either -- all in favor of the motion, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
Page 109
June 28, 2011
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. It passes 3-2 with Commissioner
Henning and Hiller dissenting.
Okay. Now we have a 1 :05 time-certain. We're right on time for
that one, too, I see.
Item #9D
REQUEST TO AMEND STEWARDSHIP EASEMENT
AGREEMENT; TRACT: HCLRP SSA 8 AS PROVIDED FOR IN A
PARAGRAPH OF THE AGREEMENT, AMENDMENT
REQUESTED IS TO PROVIDE GRANTOR THE ABILITY TO
WITHDRA W THE STEWARDSHIP SENDING AREA (SSA)
DESIGNATION PROVIDED AN APPLICATION FOR SUCH
WITHDRA W AL IS IMPLEMENTED WITHIN 6 MONTHS OF
APPROVAL OF THE AMENDMENT - MOTION FOR THE
COUNTY ATTORNEY TO BRING BACK AGREEMENTS FOR
THE BOARD'S CONSIDERATION - APPROVED
MR.OCHS: Yes, sir, Commissioners. That's Item 9D in your
agenda. It's a discussion regarding a request to Amend Stewardship
Easement Agreement Tract HCLRP SSA 8 as provided for in a
paragraph of the agreement. Amendment requested is to provide
grantor the ability to withdraw the stewardship sending area
designation provided an application for such withdrawal is
implemented within six months of approval of the amendment.
And, Commissioner Coletta brought this item forward.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. If I may, sir.
Page 110
June 28, 2011
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Sure, go ahead.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. This is a fairness issue.
They were the first ones in, basically, and everyone that came in
before had the right for reconsideration after -- I believe it's a five-year
period.
It was oversight on their part after they -- I believe as far as
asking for that to be included in there.
Mr. Y ovanovich, did you want to give us a brief description of
what we're doil)g here?
MR. YOV ANOVICH: Actually, yes. For the record, Rich
Y ovanovich on behalf of the applicant. Actually, we were one of the
first ones to come through the process in 2006, and the option to
escrow an easement agreement was not provided to us. The program
wouldn't allow for that. The program changed in later years to allow
for projects that came through subsequent to that to have their
easement agreement held in escrow pending their actually getting an
SRA to transfer the credits to and getting all the necessary permits.
Since we didn't have that option, we're asking for that option
now. The reality is the five years has passed. So we're asking, instead
of amending the agreement to come back and ask to terminate it, that
we just simply come back on a future agenda with an agreement to
terminate the existing Credit Agreement and terminate the existing
Easement Agreement for, you know, formal discussion, and approval
or not approval by the Board of County Commissioners at this time.
So we're just asking for what subsequent stewardship sending
area applicants were provided when that option was not available to us
earlier on in the program.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. I'd like to make a motion
to that effect. After discussing the stewardship easement agreement
amendment for Tract HCLRP SSA 8, direct Staff and County
Attorney to bring back to the board an amendment agreement for
approval.
Page 111
June 28, 2011
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. We have a motion to approve the
staffs recommendation by Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Now, it's --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Do we have a second?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. We have a second by
Commissioner Fiala.
And Commissioner Henning, go ahead.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, the motion isn't what was
stated, that the ap- -- or the landowner wants. He wants to not amend
the agreement. He wants to do away with the agreement. And, you
know -- and I can -- and I can support that request to direct staff to
bring back to dissolve the SSA agreement.
MR. YOV ANOVICH: And then there are actually two
agreements that need to be taken care of, the credit agreement as well
as the easement agreement.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: But the point that has been raised here is
that's not what the staff recommendation is.
MR. YOV ANOVICH: Correct.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Now, that causes me great
concern, because we advertised something with the recommendation
which is not what we're making a motion on.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: But we're bringing it back.
MR. YOV ANOVICH: We're bringing it back.
MR.OCHS: It's not a staff recommendation.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Can we ask the county attorney
for guidance?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah.
MR. KLATZKOW: There is no staff recommendations. This
was brought by Commissioner Coletta.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah, there is a staff recommendation.
MR. OCHS: This is under Board of County Commissioners, so
Page 112
June 28, 2011
COMMISSIONER HENNING: This is Commissioner Coletta's
item, not staff.
MR. KLATZKOW: This is Commissioner Coletta's item. But
we are bringing this back.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. Let me cut to the chase.
I have no problem incorporating Commissioner Henning's language
into it. I don't think it does any harm to anyone, and it goes right to
the point of what we're trying to get at. Instead of amending it, we're
dissolving it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You know, I'll let him do the second
also because he added that, and I'll just -- so you can pull my second
away.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. So Commissioner Henning,
would you second it under those circumstances?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Sure.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Now, does everybody understand
what it is we're voting on? Because I don't.
MR. MITCHELL: Sir, you have a public speaker.
MR. KLATZKOW: You're voting on our bringing back
agreements to you for your consideration as to whether or not, in
essence, to dissolve this SSA.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: So it is not an amendment agreement?
MR. KLATZKOW: No, that's not what they're asking for here
now.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: But that's what the staff executive
summary says.
MR. YOV ANOVICH: When this started, Commissioner Coyle,
the five-year period had not yet run. So when we were having these
discussions about coming forward with an amendment, we thought we
would actually add a period of time of five years, and then in the
future we would come back for the dissolving of the agreements;
Page 113
June 28, 2011
however, over time it took a little longer to get here in front of you all,
and the five year period ran, so it made no sense.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Wait a minute, wait a minute. This
Executive Summary didn't happen five years ago. It didn't happen a
year ago. It happened a week ago.
MR. YOV ANOVICH: Well, we were working with
Commissioner Coletta to get this in front of you all. And when we
started with discussions with Commissioner Coletta, we thought we
would -- we thought -- it's just -- we're just simply trying to terminate
the agreement.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All right. Executive Summary is wrong.
MR. YOV ANOVICH: Correct.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: The motion is correct?
MR. YOV ANOVICH: Correct.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It's what Commissioner Coletta would
like to see acted upon?
MR. YOVANOVICH: Yes.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And Commissioner Henning has
seconded it. We will be bringing it back. It will be debated in public
if necessary; is that correct?
MR. YOV ANOVICH: That is correct.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Public speaker.
MR. MITCHELL: The speaker is Nicole Johnson.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: She already spoke once today.
MS. JOHNSON: I promise it will be the last time today.
For the record, Nicole Johnson here on behalf of the
Conservancy of Southwest Florida.
We're not here to oppose the request for amendment or
termination of the SSA agreement. We understand that the landowner
really is in a rather untenable situation, but we do want to point out
that this new standard of revocable SSA agreements does deviate from
Page 114
June 28, 2011
the initial intent of the RLSA program.
During the adoption of the RLSA, we were told that these SSA
agreements would provide for the permanent and perpetual protection
of these SSAs upon designation. It's in the FLUE, which states that
once land is designated as an SSA and credits or other compensation is
granted to the owner, no increase in density or additional use
unspecified in the Stewardship Agreement shall be allowed on such
property. So it's once it's designated, not once credits are severed.
It's also in the LDC, which states, amendments to approve SSAs
shall only be considered if the application removes one or more
additional land use layers from the existing SSA. Under no
circumstances shall land use layers, once removed as part of an SSA
designation, be added back to the SSA.
So we thought the language was clear. This is something that
sets land aside forever. It's going to be protected.
Unfortunately, more of the recent SSA agreements have a
revocation clause in them. I don't really see how that clause is
consistent, but that's a County Attorney issue. And because Half
Circle Ranch did not have that clause, they really are put at a
disadvantage.
What I would like to suggest is that you take a look at this issue
of revocation clauses for future SSA agreements. These clauses,
obviously, protect the landowner, allowing them the ability to get out
of the SSA agreement under certain circumstances.
The Conservancy believes that if there's going to be such
revocation clauses for the landowner, the County should look at what
-- under what circumstances would revocation on the county side be a
benefit to the county, to the public.
Looking at intent ofSSAs, one benefit of these agreements was
to provide for the upfront assurance of protection of the land at no cost
to the public. The landowner received the ability to develop at a much
greater intensity and density elsewhere or sell the credits to do so in
Page 115
June 28, 2011
exchange for permanent protection of the SSA lands.
This revocation clause really is a game changer. By adding it in,
then there's the retained threat that the land may still be vulnerable to
development. And if the landowner chooses to nullify the agreement,
then development rights could be realized there. And it's really this
threat of development that could be used by the landowners to petition
the Federal, State Government to pay for an Easement or Fee Simple
Acquisition, essentially getting paid to limit uses which already should
be restricted through these SSA agreements. It's something that we've
seen going on, not by Half Circle Ranch, but by others.
So we see this as double dipping. We think that the county really
needs to take a very hard look at these revocation clauses. If, for
example, a landowner decides that they want to give an Ag Easement
to the Federal Government on S SA lands, then the County should take
a look at, perhaps, allowing the county to back out of the SSA
agreement and to retire the density credits that are attached to that
land. That could provide a benefit to the county.
So I toss that out there as something for you to consider as I wrap
up my comments.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. We'll have a chance to discuss
that in greater detail when it comes back, so you'll be here to see this
. h?
part, too, fIg t.
MS. JOHNSON: Okay. Thank you. Yes, oh, yes.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, good.
Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Nicole, I listened very carefully to
what you said. And not addressing this particular situation but, you
know, with respect to other such agreements going forward, are you
suggesting we not have a reversal clause or reverter clause or
whatever kind of clause in there?
MS. JOHNSON: Well, you know, ideally we would prefer not to
have the revocation clause because we don't believe that that was the
Page 116
June 28, 2011
intent of the RLSA; however, if--
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. It does put everything in
limbo. So what you're suggesting is going forward not providing it?
MS. JOHNSON: Well, either not providing it, or if the
landowner has the ability to back out of the SSA agreement, finding
those circumstances in which the county would want to have the
revocation ability. This is a policy decision that's really going to come
forward when the new RLSA amendments come forward, and I think
that it does deserve some additional discussion because, again, we
thought that these SSA agreements were going to be in place and
solid.
The benefit of that, for example, is that the federal government,
when they want to put panther crossings in, they want to make sure
that the land on both sides of the road is protected in perpetuity. They
don't want to spend the money unless they know it's protected.
These SSA agreements would provide that protection if it didn't
have the revocation clause. So for practical purposes, it's good to
know right up front if this is solid or not.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: There's no question, because it
does create a great deal of instability in the program if, taking -- the
description of the situation you just described would be at play with
every parcel. Thank you.
MS. JOHNSON: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. It's our understanding
that these lands would be protected in perpetuity, and we all joined
together, individually and collectively, that we created more lands in
Collier County that will not be built on.
But I do understand circumstances are different now than they
were then. But the understanding of a Land Development Code and
the Growth Management Plan for the SSA, I think, is very clear. I'm
glad we're doing this, but there has to be some clear understandingr
Page 11 7
June 28, 2011
within the Land Development Code what can and cannot be done and
what should be done as far as equality. If you're going to give
something and have the ability to take it back, then shouldn't we have
the -- the same ability? I think that's true, and that's something that
should be taken under consideration during future amendments.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, I do agree with
Commissioner Henning. This is a fairness issue. You can't extract
something that doesn't have a value to it.
What we did is, back when we -- this whole process started, the
trade off was, when you own sending lands and you wanted to
preserve them, you would be able to be assured of the fact that you
were going to receive a value for the development rights of those
lands.
Now, if there's no market for it and there's none in the
foreseeable future, then obviously that part of the agreement can't be
upheld. So we're kind of at a rock and a hard place, and it's just a way
of trying to make the world right.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. All in favor of the 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: It passes unanimously.
MR. YOV ANOVICH: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you.
Where does that take us, County Manager?
Page 118
June 28, 2011
Item #10H
PURCHASE OF FIVE (5) ACRES OF UNIMPROVED PROPERTY
WHICH WILL BE REQUIRED FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A
STORMW A TER DETENTION AND TREATMENT POND FOR
PHASE II OF THE V ANDERBIL T BEACH ROAD EXTENSION
PROJECT (PROJECT NO. 60168~ PHASE II) - APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, that takes us back to Item 10 --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: H.
MR.OCHS: -- 10H.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. And that was --
MR.OCHS: That's your next item. It was previously 16A2 on
your consent agenda. It's a recommendation to approve the purchase
of five acres of unimproved property which will be required for the
construction of a stormwater detention and treatment pond for Phase II
of the Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension Project.
Mr. Jay Ahmad can either present or answer questions. This item
was moved at Commissioner Hiller's request.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It was pulled by Commissioner Hiller, so
we'll ask Commissioner Hiller to get her questions answered.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Can you please present -- can you
please present?
MR. AHMAD: Good afternoon, Commissioner. Jay Ahmad, for
the record, your Director of Transportation Engineering.
I'll be happy to present, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you.
MR. AHMAD: This item is a parcel-- if I may, I can put
something on the display here -- is a parcel along the Vanderbilt
Beach Road Extension Project.
On the visualizer, ma'am, you see the pond site on the middle
bottom of the photo there. That's the parcel. It's approximately five
Page 119
June 28, 2011
acres. The county -- Board of County Commissioners approved the
alignment of Vanderbilt Beach Road in 2006 and directed staff to start
purchasing properties from homes impacted by the alignment as well
as pond sites.
And we're bringing -- these folks came to us and asked to -- for
their parcel to be bought and -- at appraised value, and we purchased it
-- or we're recommending the purchase at the appraised value of
approximately 10,000 an acre. It's 5 acres and approximately $50,000.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Where are we on the Vanderbilt
Beach Road extension project?
MR. AHMAD: This is in Phase 2 east of Wilson. You can see on
your right, it's -- 16th Street Northeast is to my right here, and north is
up. 12th Street -- 12th Avenue Northeast and -- 10th Avenue
Northeast on the bottom here and 12th on the top of the map.
Orangetree Canal is right where I'm showing my pencil. So it's
approximately -- maybe half a mile or a quarter of a mile east or west
of 16th Street Northeast.
The County Manager asked me what's the overall status of the
project.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right.
MR. AHMAD: The project essentially has been in the
right-of-way acquisition stage for a while now. We are --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: How long?
MR. AHMAD: I would say about two years. We designed the
project up to a level where we can identify the right-of-way
acquisitions. And as you can see on that visualizer, the right-of-way
has been identified by a professional engineer. WilsonMiller designed
this section, and CH2MHill designed the western section.
So the right-of-way acquisition's been going on since the 60
percent project's been designed. And to date we've acquired -- we've
acquired in Phase I -- Phase I is from Collier to Wilson -- from Collier
to Wilson, and that phase required 35 out of 143 parcels required. In
Page 120
June 28, 2011
Phase II we've acquired 15 out of 375 required.
We've spent close to $13 million, little bit over $13 million in
right-of-way acquisition.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Wow. It's a big number. And
when is this project supposed to be completed?
MR. AHMAD: There's no funding, ma'am, for construction.
The -- there's no funding next year for right-of-way acquisition. The
money that was funded in the prior years is what we used from
anybody that comes to us and says, please acquire my parcel. We're
not actively pursuing people.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And this is the project that was
going to involve all those takings?
MR. AHMAD: Correct.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: What's the total value of takings
that this project is anticipating again?
MR. AHMAD: Again, the last time we estimated the acquisition,
in Phase I, it's between 17 and 18 million -- this is in 2009 appraisals
-- and Phase II, same number, about $18 million.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's unbelievable. Mr.
Billington, you had a concern about this?
MR. BILLINGTON: Yeah. I'm registered to speak.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Did you register as a speaker to
express what your concern is?
MR. BILLINGTON: Yes. Will the chair allow Mr. Billington to
speak?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Sure, as soon as you get ready (sic)
asking questions. Are you ready for the speakers?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Sure.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. How many speakers do we have,
Ian?
MR. MITCHELL: One speaker.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Mr. Billington, it's all yours.
Page 121
June 28, 2011
MR. MITCHELL: Mr. Billington?
MR. BILLINGTON: For the record, Duane Billington.
I have a twofold interest in this project. Our Golden Gate Fire
District is trying to work something with the School Board that the
county mayor may not be involved in in the future, and it has to deal
with a joint facility.
The School Board's asking -- or last asking price for a parcel
that's not as prime a parcel as this was $300,000, and that was based
on, you know, peak value back during the -- right before the bubble
burst.
And part of the reason that I'm addressing this is to put on the
record that -- the real value for parcels of this type in today's market,
that's one.
The other thing is, we have a willing seller here, and we are
basing the price on an appraisal and the seller agreed to the appraisal.
There have been -- what causes me great concern, there have been
some deals in the past where we've heard from the staff, well, we have
to treat it as an unwilling seller even if it's a willing seller. Case in
point is Oil Well Road where the Colliers were allowed -- we agreed
to a credit of $50,000 an acre for agricultural land that during the peak
didn't even get 15,000.
And I hope that this is a change in practice that's going to be
consistent and we -- with willing sellers we go to -- and use the
appraised price and not automatically tack on what it would be if it
was an adversarial relationship.
I fully support the acquisition of this at the given price, and I
thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Do you have something to say on this
one, Coletta -- Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Motion to approve, second by
Page 122
June 28, 2011
Commissioner Henning.
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.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: But I would like to add one thing
for the record, and that is that I find that -- this proposed extension and
the takings absolutely mind boggling. I can't believe that -- the
numbers we're talking about in takings to accomplish this extension,
and I think it really needs to be looked at very carefully to determine
whether we truly need this extension as proposed.
And this was all done before my time, so I intend to look at the
history of it and inform myself. And if there's justification, then I
fully support it, but if there isn't, considering the number of homes that
are going to be affected by this, especially at these very depreciated
values, it's very concerning.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you.
And I would appreciate, before you make those statements in that
particular voice and manner of speech, that you did just a little bit
more research on it.
This has been a process that was going on -- Nick, would you
please come to the podium. I don't want to leave the public out there
with the idea that this commission was doing something devious and
without concern of the well being of the residents of that particular
corridor and of Collier County in general.
These takings, they were -- the ones that we purchased, most of
Page 123
June 28, 2011
them are houses. I think there was what, five of them?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: There was actually 18 homes that--
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Eighteen homes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: This is not on the agenda.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I know, but the issue has been
brought up, and we need to clarify it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Chairman, I'm requesting
that you have some governance.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You're trying to raise a point of order,
and I overrule it, because Commissioner Hiller raised the issue, and
the public deserves to have an answer. Is there any transparency that
you object to?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Are you asking me?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm asking to stay with the
agenda. That was my request.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Coletta, go ahead.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: It would help if we stayed with
the agenda the first time around, and we'd never be at this point.
But now that it's been brought out there in the public -- and the
perception is is that something terrible has been done wrong. Would
you comment on the -- how that whole situation was handled? I know
there was a lot of movement on the part of staff and this commission
over a period of many years to satisfy the needs of the people that
were being displaced, and most of them became willing sellers and
without ever having to go to foreclosure. But your memory on that is
probably better than mine.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Unfortunately, it is to a certain extent.
I lived that time of two years of planning and programming this
project.
It was adopted in the long range plan, and this commission took
great pain to hear -- I think there were 70 or 80 speakers, we were here
Page 124
June 28, 2011
for two or three hours one night and comments on the road project.
The board decided, along with staff, to go back a lot line, which is
behind homes, so we wouldn't take the front footage of a lot of these
homes.
The board also made a cognizant decision to say, set aside some
money, because now you have put a road project over some of these
properties, and if there are willing sellers, we want money available to
accommodate them. We have not done any forced takings on this
project. It's all been willing sellers.
I think you've heard in the past, we've actually paid more than --
as the market started to depreciate, they got quite a bit of money.
Some of them walked away quite happy, as a matter of fact; I think
with these people as well.
So we've gone out of our way to accommodate them, and now
that there is an alignment there, we're making sure that there's some
money available so if they do want to sell, we're there.
As far as the need, you would not get an Interchange at 1-75 or in
the future any federal money if you don't move forward and maintain
progression on your Long Range Transportation Plan.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. And I just want to make
it clear of the fact that not only you worked on it, but I met with just
about every one of them individually. In some cases I brought them
back to the commission after everything was supposedly done under
public petition and argued their cases to make sure they were made
whole way and above what would normally have happened during the
process.
But -- and it's just -- it's just unforgivable when people will bring
this up in a negative light for political reasons and just throw it out
there and leave it.
It's up to you now to be able to educate the new commissioner as
to what the history is on this so the next time she brings it up she can
bring it up in light of the facts.
Page 125
June 28, 2011
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Sure. I think in fairness to
Commissioner Hiller, I will spend some time with her and go over the
history and walk her through --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you very much.
Appreciate that.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Is there a motion to approve?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion to approve.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. By Commissioner Coletta. Is
there a second?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: There already was a motion and
a second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And the second was Commissioner
Henning, right.
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: It passes unanimously.
Item #101
WAIVER PURSUANT TO CMA #5311 (M), TO AUTHORIZE THE
PARKS AND RECREATION DIRECTOR'S PARTICIPATION
AND SERVICE AS A MEMBER OF THE EARLY LEARNING
COALITION OF SOUTHWEST FLORIDA, INC. BOARD OF
DIRECTORS - MOTION FOR THE PARKS & REC DIRECTOR
Page 126
June 28, 2011
TO SERVE OUT THE REMAINDER OF TERM ON THE BOARD
AND TO ABSTAIN FROM VOTING - APPROVED
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Let's go to Item 16D1 (sic).
MR.OCHS: Yes, sir. That's a recommendation to approve a
waiver pursuant to CMA 5311 to authorize the parks and recreation
director's participation in service as a member of the Early Learning
Coalition of Southwest Florida, Incorporated, Board of Directors.
This item was moved off the consent agenda separately by
Commissioners Hiller and Coyle.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Hiller, go ahead.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: The concern I have with this issue
is the conflict that arises when we have county staff on the boards of
these nonprofits where staff is making decisions with respect to these
nonprofits and then sitting on the boards of these nonprofits making
decisions on that side.
This isn't the only instance where this has happened, and the
gentleman who's actually being proposed for this position is a great
guy, and he sits on other boards of other nonprofits, or at least one
other one that I know of, the Naples Zoo, where that division and very
possibly that staff makes decisions with respect to, for example, you
know, the acquisition or the development with respect to parcels of
land, for example, affecting the Naples Zoo.
It's just a similar situation. Here with the Early Learning
Coalition, you know, the county is giving that group money, and now
a staff member is going to be sitting on the board voting on how that
money will be spent.
I think it really raises a question of the -- an actual conflict or at a
minimum a perceived conflict. And I think as a matter of policy, we
shouldn't be doing that, I mean, when we've got these nonprofits
actually doing business with the county.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And I agree. The statute essentially says
Page 127
June 28, 2011
that the Board of County Commissioners should appoint someone. It
doesn't require that we appoint someone who is a staff member.
MS. RAMSEY: No, that's correct. But in 2009 you did appoint
Barry for the two-year term.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah, but that was before we had the
new ordinance, and we created that ordinance because there was a
situation where we believed that there was a conflict of interest, and in
order to alleviate that conflict of interest, we passed the new
ordinance.
And so, the question arises as to whether or not we should grant
an exception to the new ordinance requirement, and my feeling is no.
But we have a public speaker. Who is the public speaker this
time?
MR. MITCHELL: Mr. Billington.
MR. BILLINGTON: For the record, Duane Billington. I'm here
to show again that Commissioner Coyle and I agree on more things
than we disagree on.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: He's undermining my reputation now.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Two peas in a pod.
MR. BILLINGTON: Commissioner Coyle's correct. The rules of
laws are specific. You don't have to appoint staff; you can appoint
somebody from the public. And there's other concerns here beyond
that.
Parks and Recreation -- there are three different locations where
the Coalition utilizes parks and recreation facilities. One is
Immokalee Community Park, the other is the YMCA Early Learning
Center at Veterans Park, and then finally Golden Gate Community
Center, which is supported in part by a local MSTU, which the
running of the center is 60 percent funded by the county and 40
percent funded by the MSTU. This further complicates or conflicts
his participation.
There are things beyond that. The coalition gives out a report
Page 128
June 28, 2011
periodically on how their client childcare centers are doing. Over the
three year period we had -- ten of them were reported as putting
children at severe risk. Some of those centers were terminated, some .
of them are still with the program. Over that same period, 11 of them
had 20 or more violations.
And, you know, I just think this is something we need to insulate
ourselves against. Pick somebody from a pool of the public that's
interested in this kind of thing and just remove this potential conflict
and everything that comes with it.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: County Manager, do you have
something?
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, just a quick point of clarification.
Mr. Williams was appointed to this board in December of2009 and
has been serving since that time.
We fully understand the concern in the CMA, and that's why
we're bring this forward for the board's consideration. We're certainly
not going to fall on our sword one way or the other.
From a practical standpoint, please understand, his term expires
at the end of this calendar year. They have two more board meetings
before the end of the calendar year.
As a practical matter, by the time you get back in September and
advertise and fill that -- or make that appointment, it will be almost
time for one of the other four counties to step up in 2012 and make
their appointment.
Mr. Williams or any other appointment that you make will only
be good through the end of this calendar year. And I just bring that as
a point of clarification. Certainly he could, if you so desire, a majority
of the board, he could abstain during those two meetings from any
votes or discussion having to do with the grant that the board awarded
to the coalition. But it is certainly the board's ultimate decision,
obviously, and we're willing to do whatever the board would like. But
Page 129
June 28, 2011
I wanted to bring those practical circumstances to bear.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Thank you very much.
Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I think you make some good
points, Leo, to the extent that he doesn't participate in discussions and
doesn't vote, then serving out the term and then no longer renewing it
does make sense.
There still remains the issue of other staff in similarly situated
positions, and maybe we need to bring that back and find out the full
list of all staff who are sitting on all these boards who are doing
business with the county and, you know, see that the ordinance as it's
currently written is implemented because, otherwise, we're just putting
ourselves in a bad situation going forward.
MR.OCHS: Yes, ma'am. I couldn't agree more.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you.
MR.OCHS: And I will do that immediately.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, then why don't we just have a
modified motion; rather than disapproving this one, we would say that
Mr. Williams should serve out his term but should abstain from voting
for the next two meetings.
MR. OCHS: Yeah, on any matter that relates to the grant that the
board awarded.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'll second that.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. So we have a motion by
Commissioner Coyle, seconded by Commissioner Hiller.
Commissioner Fiala, you want to say something?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, just a fast question.
Leo, you said -- in one of your replies, you said something along
the line that after these next two meetings, then another county will
step in. Is this something that all -- each county is expected to serve
on in succession or something?
MR.OCHS: Yes. Commissioner, the Statute requires that a
Page 130
June 28, 2011
Board of County Commissioners makes appointment on a rotating
basis. There's four counties that are part of the region for this Early
Learning Coalition. So two thousand -- the two year term between
2009 and 2011 happened to be Collier County's time to appoint a
member. It will now rotate to Hendry or Lee or one of the other
counties in the coalition beginning in January of2012.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. And do we have some type
of representation that go to these meetings; in other words, if they're
ever looking for input from us or things that we need or concerns that
we have or issues that we want to raise, do we have representation on
there? They don't have to be a voting member -- because I agree with
everybody here, especially when it comes to money. There is a
conflict of interest --
MR. OCHS: Sure.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- but I would want to make sure
that our issues are presented if we have any at one of these meetings.
MR.OCHS: Yes, ma'am. That won't be a problem. I don't
know if Marla has anything to add on that.
MS. RAMSEY: There are certain seats that have to be filled as it
relates to this particular coalition, and there are some private entities
that are filling some of the other seats that are associated that do live
in Collier County, but I can't tell you that there will -- that Collier
County will always have a seat based upon the stipulations of things
like, you know, being a faith based organization or Head Start
Director or Health Department or -- there are a number of them. But
currently you do have some other Collier County residents who are on
the Coalition.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. Just so that we have some
type of representation to present any issues or concerns we might have
that relate to -- especially to the children in our community.
MR.OCHS: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
Page 131
June 28, 2011
MR.OCHS: We have a -- obviously direct communication with
the Executive Director, and like any other board, if this board has a
position that they want to communicate, we could certainly, with the
majority vote of the board, have the Chair write a letter and express
that position.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
MR. OCHS: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. All in favor of the 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: The motion passes unanimously.
Item #10J
CHAIRMAN TO EXECUTE A LETTER TO THE SOUTH
FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT (SFWMD)
GIVING CENTURY OIL INC., LLC PERMISSION TO APPLY
FOR A WATER USE PERMIT IN THE CARACARA PRAIRIE
PRESERVE - MOTION TO CONTINUE ITEM - APPROVED
MR.OCHS: Commissioners, Item 10J was previously 16E3. It's
a recommendation to authorize the Chairman to execute a letter to the
Southwest Florida Water Management District giving Century Oil,
Incorporated, LLC, permission to apply for a water use permit within
the Caracara Prairie Preserve.
This item was moved from the consent agenda separately by both
Page 132
June 28, 2011
Commissioners Hiller and Coyle. Ms. Hennig is here to answer
questions or make a presentation.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Hiller, go ahead.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. My concern with this item
is that we basically have acquired preserve property, and in doing so
we have allowed the sellers to retain, as I understand, mineral rights; is
that correct?
MS. HENNIG: Correct.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And I see a real problem with that.
I mean other jurisdictions that have done that end up really losing the
preserve for the mineral rights, which defeats the entire purpose of
what we're doing. And I don't know to what extent we have the
jurisdiction to deny this, because there was a contractual agreement, I
thought, that reserved those rights to them.
I don't know if we're legally obligated. I mean, do we have
discretion or are we required by contract? And I just don't really
understand, you know, what's being proposed here and why we have
to approve it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And that was the reason that I pulled it
also, and I think the county attorney should answer that question. And
let me just --
MR. KLATZKOW: I think you would have paid more -- I think
you would have paid more for it --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: A lot more for it, yeah.
MR. KLATZKOW: -- if you would have taken this property
without that reservation of theirs. And if my recollection serves me
right, I think we're talking one oil drill on the property, so it has a --
MS. HENNIG: Correct, one oil pad.
MR. KLATZKOW: One oil pad, so it has a limited effect given
the entirety on the property.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: The question, though, is this: They
clearly have retained the mineral rights. Did they get any water
Page 133
June 28, 2011
rights?
MR. KLATZKOW: I'd have to come back. I don't know.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's the crux of my question.
MR. KLATZKOW: Okay. I'd have to come back.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: In other words, are we obligated to allow
drilling of a well so that someone can drill an oil well, or would that
be considered unreasonably denying them access to their mineral
rights? So it is a legal question and, you know, I would like
clarification on it.
MR. KLATZKOW: Yeah. I'd ask that you continue this item for
a meeting. We could look into that and get back to you.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And I'll make a motion to
continue.
MR. OCHS: Commissioner, I'm sorry . We have a little
information we could share briefly on that question. It might provide
some clarification, or if you just want to bring it back.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I would prefer to bring it back so
that we have the opportunity to discuss it with staff and make sure that
we have, you know, a clear understanding before we start debating
something we haven't had the opportunity to really understand.
MR. KLATZKOW: I'm going to want to go through the
executive summary. I'm going to want to go look at the board
transcripts. You know, I want to give you a full answer on this,
because it's an interesting question. I hadn't thought of that.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Well, the reason I'm interested in
doing that is that we have a contract. I would like to make sure that
we maintain our obligations under that contract. And if the contract in
any way implies that the drilling of an oil -- of a water well is
something that we should not unreasonably withhold, then I'd like to
know that. It would give me some more comfort about whether -- you
know, voting for this.
So there's a motion for continuation of this item by
Page 134
June 28, 2011
Commissioner Hiller, and I second the motion.
Commissioner Fiala, did you have anything else to add to that?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No. That was my motion.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Oh, from before. Okay.
Commissioners Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Why don't we just say no to the
request for permit? I mean, they still have the right, the oil rights, but
it doesn't mean that we have to agree to a permit to South Florida
Water Management.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, that's the question I think we need
to determine, if we are acting unreasonably in doing so. And we -- I
think we need to get that legal issue straightened out; would you
agree?
MR. KLATZKOW: Yeah, I agree.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All right. All in favor, please--
MR. MITCHELL: Sir, we have two public speakers.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Let's hear the public speakers.
MR. MITCHELL: Duane Billington, and he'll be followed by
Chris Stephens.
MR. BILLINGTON: For the record, Duane Billington. I
commend you on how you're heading on this.
One thing maybe you might want to consider addressing has to
do with panther mitigation credits and how in the process of the
drilling, the operation, the expansion, might affect panther mitigation
credits on our lands.
I know we have three wells operating on Pepper Ranch, and I've
been told that if there's an expansion of that it might entail putting in
an aboveground pipeline to a storage tank facility on Pepper Ranch,
and I find that very perturbing. And I think on all future purchases we
might want to look at the mineral right issue and see how that might
encumber what we have planned.
Thank you.
Page 135
June 28, 2011
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you.
Okay. We've got one more speaker.
MR. STEPHENS: Chris Stephens, ecologist with Earth Tech
Environmental representing Century Oil.
The site has already had construction on it. They have a 12-inch
conductor pipe put on. They construct the well pad. This -- the water
well is -- the request for water well is from the commissioners for the
land -- for the actual construction of the well. The water rights are
actually allocated by the South Florida Water Management District.
Once this -- if this is approved, this goes through an approval
process through South Florida Water Management District.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. One of the things that is unclear
from my standpoint is, what is our letter supposed to say? The letter
that is contained in our packet is -- actually doesn't say anything. It
doesn't talk about the construction of anything. It doesn't outline any
construction -- any structure to be built, to my knowledge.
MR. STEPHENS: Yes, Commissioner. The letter -- it's standard
with South Florida Water Management District. Whenever you apply
for any water use permit, if you are not the landowner, physical
landowner, that letter of authorization is required. It's basically
allowing the construction of the well, more the approval of being
present on the land, which the -- that has already been settled with the
construction of the well pad, the conductor pipe. We've relocated
trees per Conservation Collier.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah. Well, please understand I'm not
trying to be difficult, okay . You have rights to those minerals. I don't
think we should unreasonably interfere in your ability to do it, but the
problem here is that the letter that you're asking me to send merely
says that you, Chris Stephens, have been authorized to act on behalf of
Century Oil -- I don't have anything that shows me that that is the case
-- to apply for a water use permit.
You know, I don't know why we've got to send a letter to South
Page 136
June 28, 2011
Florida Water Management District telling them that you are applying
for a water use permit. If you're entitled to apply for a water use
permit, why can't you just do that?
MR. STEPHENS: I'm not entitled to without --
MR. OCHS: He's not the landowner.
MR. KLATZKOW: We own the land.
Okay.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: He needs our permission to do that.
MR.OCHS: To apply.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: To apply.
MR. KLATZKOW: Which is your original question, "Do they
have the right?"
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes, and that's what we're trying to sort
out. Okay.
MR. STEPHENS: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Once again, I'm not trying to deny you
access to your mineral rights. I just want to get the legal issues
straightened out here.
MR. STEPHENS: I just wanted to update you on the status of
the site. It is a one acre site. There's no more impact past the well pad.
If there is a -- it's an exploration, which is proposed to be drilled in
November. If it is a dry hole, which a lot of the wells have been in the
area, the road, the pad will all be restored back to its natural grade, its
natural condition.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Really?
MR. STEPHENS: And no trees at this point have even been
impacted from the construction of the well pad. They've been
relocated.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Will that mean that you can then go
somewhere else and drill another well?
MR. STEPHENS: Not on the site, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Not--
Page 137
June 28, 2011
MR. STEPHENS: There is other existing well pads in the
Section 30 of Collier County in the adjacent sections of land. Pepper
Ranch was brought up. There's three wells out there. And future
wells that would be drilled in this area would all come from this well
pad, this same one acre well pad within Caracara Preserve, any wells
they would extend directionally to those other well locations
underground.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, I understand. Okay, Chris.
Thank you very much. Appreciate your help.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Can I ask questions of Chris?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Sure. Chris?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Chris, what is your background?
Are you a geologist or --
MR. STEPHENS: I'm an ecologist.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: An ecologist.
MR. STEPHENS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. I just have a couple of
questions with respect to this. First of all, who owns the mineral
rights?
MR. STEPHENS: The mineral rights are owned by about 40
owners. Judge Starnes was the original owner of the property before it
was turned over to Conservation Collier. He owns a portion of the
mineral rights.
There's -- it is leased from a gentleman by the name of Mike
Cheeseman. He leases the mineral rights. And once oil is produced,
he locks in, basically, the mineral rights. Right now it's all leased
from one gentleman.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So it's leased, and then it's owned
by all these different people?
MR. STEPHENS: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: They have like -- it's, like, a
partnership of some sort of a security interest?
Page 138
June 28, 2011
MR. STEPHENS: It's like parcels underground that--
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Oh, okay. So it's --
MR. STEPHENS: -- because it's about 16,000 acres of the
mineral- right area.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So it's like a -- so these are like
security interests in these parcels, these underground parcels, if you
will?
MR. STEPHENS: Yes, ma'am. If you look at any warranty
deed, you would see the language in there, if the landowner retained
the mineral rights or if the mineral rights stayed with the original
owner.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Oh, I have some specific questions
regarding -- to the water well. Is it for extracting water or for injecting
waste? What are these wells for exactly?
MR. STEPHENS: The two wells -- and if this well-- if we --
you know, this is, you know, an issue where it does not go forward
with getting a well constructed. We do -- there are other options, and
one of them is to bring in water, which has a high cost, to the site.
The only time that the water well has a use -- the reason there are
two wells is for a backup. But the original well, during the first 45
days, is used to get through the boulder zone. And when they put in
the conductor pipe recently, they realized that the boulder zone's a lot
smaller.
So the amount of water is below 3 million gallons per month,
which doesn't even have an accounting purpose with the district. So
after the -- after the well is drilled, the only use to the water well
would be wash down purposes.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, I think we have to be very
careful that this permit is restrictive to, you know, a very limited use
and a limited period of time so we don't have something unexpected
happen through these wells.
And with what you were saying, it raises the question of the
Page 139
June 28, 2011
threat of contaminating the water supply. Is there any risk of that
occurring with this type of drilling?
MR. STEPHENS: The well pad itself is bermed currently, and
that's enough material to -- if there was any sort of spill, it is contained
in that area, and there's storage even for the road access that you
would be able to contain any sort of spill.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And how are we indemnified?
How are we -- or not indemnified. How are we protected if that
happens? I mean, what type of provisions have been put in place to
ensure that, you know, something like that can't occur, and if it does
occur, that you're responsible for cleaning the contamination?
MR. STEPHENS: This is very regulated through Florida
Department of Environmental Protection, oil and gas section. They've
approved the permit, so they basically oversee the project. They
oversee the ones at Pepper Ranch. They really handle ensuring that a
plugging account is put in place. If the well is drilled and there's no
oil, then you have to come back, and they oversee those operations.
And there's a lot of reporting and accounting, and this is really outside
of my --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Sure, I understand. But I think one
of the things the county attorney needs to think of in what we're doing
going forward with this well and future wells is to put some sort of a
provision in there that in the event there is contamination caused by
your drilling activity, that whatever remediation would be required
would be at your cost and not the county's cost.
MR. STEPHENS: And that would occur. And also, just in
regards to the depth of the well, the depth of the well is below -- is
below 80 feet from the surface. So there are surrounding wetlands,
but where the well location is, it's far enough buffered where there
isn't a drawdown effect on that wetland or --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Do you have monitoring wells to
determine that?
Page 140
June 28, 2011
MR. STEPHENS: We do have monitoring wells on site, yes, we
do. And we would be monitoring these wells as well. And, like I
said, originally the first 45 days is really the only use of this well.
After that, it's really just used for wash down purposes.
And the Conservation Collier had thought of, you know, when
we conduct prescribed burns on the property, that there could be some
value to having these wells and also that there are cattle on the site
currently, that there's some value --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: If I could have a diagram that
shows me where the location of these monitoring wells are, I'd
appreciate it. And you'd started indicating who monitors the drilling
and the operations. You said several --
MR. STEPHENS: They have a well driller. Again, this is outside
of my knowledge.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Sure.
MR. STEPHENS: I'm not speculating, but I've seen the sites at
Pepper Ranch, and they have an oil well driller that comes to the site.
He's there daily. There's 80 barrels a day being produced from Pepper
Ranch currently. And the well drillers on site ensure, you know,
there's no leakage. And, you know, they come -- they pick up the oil
once a quarter, I believe, at that site.
But I do have a picture of the two water wells.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I think that she wanted them.
We didn't want them.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, I want them.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So we can end this discussion
and move on.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I just -- I would like to see them.
Sure. I just want to be sure, because I mean, this -- we're dealing with
this issue across so many preservation parcels.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: But we will have another meeting. So
Page 141
June 28, 2011
we can --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah, but that's great. So thank
you. And any additional information you can bring to help, you
know, make sure we understand what's going on would be
appreciated.
Thank you for your time.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. That takes us to Item K.
MR.OCHS: Did you vote on it?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, we didn't.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Oh, no. I'm sorry. We've got to do this.
Okay. We are going to -- there's a motion to continue?
MR.OCHS: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Hiller --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yep.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- is that what you had -- want to do?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yep.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All right. I'll second it. So we have a
motion by Commissioner Hiller to continue, second by me.
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 Item Number-
Item #10K
Page 142
June 28, 2011
USE OF THE NEWLY ADOPTED "WAREHOUSE" ROAD
IMPACT FEE RATE FOR THE UNITED MATERIALS, INC.
EXPANSION PROJECT, IF THE BUILDING PERMIT FOR THE
PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION IS APPLIED FOR PRIOR TO THE
EFFECTIVE DATE OF SEPTEMBER 1,2011 FOR THE
NEW/REVISED LAND USE RATES - MOTION TO APPROVE
W/W AIVING ANY 90-DA Y NOTICE - APPROVED
MR.OCHS: 10K, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: 10K.
MR. OCHS: Previously 16A9, a recommendation to authorize
the use of the newly adopted warehouse road impact fee rate for the
United Materials, Incorporated, Expansion Project, if building permit
for the proposed construction is applied for prior to the effective date
of September 1, 2011, for the new land use rates.
And Ms. Patterson is here to present or answer questions. This
was moved at Commissioner Hiller's request, I'm sorry.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. The issue is pretty
straightforward. There is a statute that requires a 90 day notice period
before an ordinance that creates a new impact fee is put into effect.
And what this item is requesting is an exception be made for the
benefit of one company, United Materials, Inc., to allow them to avail
themselves of the future rate now.
And I don't think that's doable. I don't think we can make an
exception like that when there's a clear statutory provision. And so I'd
like to make the motion to deny.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I'll second that if it's true,
but I need to know that that is exactly what the statute says.
MR. KLATZKOW: No.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Now, I know there is a
limitation of imposing impact fees or changing impact fees. This is a
new category, so is it changing the fees?
Page 143
June 28, 2011
CHAIRMAN COYLE: County Attorney?
MR. KLATZKOW: What the Statute says is that notice be
provided no less than 90 days before the effective date of an ordinance
or resolution imposing a new or increased impact fee.
A county municipality is not required to wait 90 days to
decrease, suspend, or eliminate an impact fee.
We are not creating a new impact fee here. The impact fee's been
in place for many years. It's a transportation impact fee. What we're
doing is we've created a new subcategory within that -- within that
transportation impact fee which resulted in a lowering of the
transportation impact fee from that which would have been paid by the
applicant.
I mean, normally we try to avoid these discussions by simply
doing the 90 days and the heck with it, but here we actually had an
applicant who says, I'm ready to go right now.
One approach he could do would be to apply for a building
permit, pay the high impact fee, when the new impact fees go into
effect, cancel his building permit and come back with a new building
permit. That seemed rather senseless to us and, quite frankly, I don't
think it was necessary to begin with.
But I understand Commissioner Hiller's position. And, you
know, it's two sides of the same coin, quite frankly. And there are no
legal decisions on this that you can rely on.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm very confused now.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah, me too.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The only question is, are we
doing a lawful action?
MR. KLATZKOW: In my opinion, yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Is there anybody else in your
office who disagrees with your opinion?
MR. KLATZKOW: I'm the only one who looked at this, but we
Page 144
June 28, 2011
have talked with our outside counsel who agrees with this approach.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Then I can't second the
motion.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. The motion dies for lack of a
second.
Commissioner --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, I was just going to --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- Henning, had you finished, though?
Your light's still on.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll make a motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. We have a motion to approve by
Commissioner Henning, second by Commissioner Coletta.
Commissioner Fiala, did you have something?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I was just wondering if Amy had
something to add.
MS. PATTERSON: No, I don't, other than we vetted this with
outside counsel, which Jeff already stated. Thank you.
Amy Patterson, for the record.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Don't snatch defeat from the jaws of
victory .
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Can I ask a question?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Sure, go ahead.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: But based on that -- so now you've
approved it for this one company. Does any other company have to
come before the board to get exception to the statutory requirement to
-- because what you're saying is that -- you know, you're talking out of
both sides of your mouth. On the one hand you say the 90 day notice
period is required. And that 90 day notice period is required only if
there is a new category or an increase in the rate of an existing carrier.
You don't need the 90 day notice otherwise.
So my question is, if that's your opinion, counsel, then we don't
Page 145
June 28, 2011
need the 90 day notice, and put it in effect now and be done with it.
But either you have the 90 day notice and you respect it, or you
don't have it and everybody qualifies for it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right.
MS. PATTERSON: Okay. We had provided in the Executive
Summary that we would bring back anybody else similarly situated,
which we don't have.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's not the issue, you know.
The issue is, either it applies and it applies for everyone now, and we
don't have to bring anyone back, and we don't need the 90 days, or we
need the 90 days and you can't do it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I thought it was very clearly stated that it
was required only if a new or increased impact fee is enacted. Is that
what you said?
MR. KLATZKOW: This is not a new impact fee.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's right. So since it's not a new or
increased impact fee, it doesn't --
MR. KLATZKOW: It doesn't -- in my opinion, it doesn't require
it now.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, that's right. So it's fairly simple.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: But you have filed a 90 day notice.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: In an abundance of caution.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: We have filed a 90 day notice.
We are in that process right now.
MS. PATTERSON: We filed the 90 day notice because there
were other land uses anticipated under this fee schedule. This wasn't
the only one.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, you can eliminate this
particular one.
MS. PATTERSON: If that's the direction of the board, that
anybody that applies to use the warehouse rate from this point forward
gets the warehouse rate, then we're happy to follow the board's
Page 146
June 28, 2011
direction.
This wasn't the only item on that fee schedule.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah, but--
MS. PATTERSON: There were other land uses.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: But the -- any land use that you
created the same way as this one was created would not have to be
noticed based on counsel's argument.
So, whichever ones that you pulled out of an existing category
according to Jeff, doesn't have to follow the 90 day notice. So it's not
just this one. I mean, there was, what was it, light industrial or
manufacturing.
MS. PATTERSON: Manufacturing and Small Medical Office.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So those three categories now
don't need to have the 90 day notice according to counsel?
MR. KLATZKOW: If you're lowering the fee, it does not need
the 90 day notice. We do this out of an abundance of caution just in
case someone raises an argument like you do, all right? And I'm not
saying your argument is not without some validity. I'm just saying that
when you look at the impact fee statute in context of the legislative
history of it, all right, we believe that the Legislature did not intend for
somebody to have to wait 90 days for a decrease in their impact fees.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. All in favor, please signify by
saYIng aye.
MR. MITCHELL: Sir, we have a public speaker.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Who wants to do it? You don't want to
speak on this.
MR. BILLINGTON: Oh, yes, I do, Fred.
MR. MITCHELL: It's Duane Billington.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I think you're an Ex-Officio
Commissioner.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Oh, no. Let's not take that step.
MR. BILLINGTON: But we could sit next to each other.
Page 147
June 28, 2011
F or the record, Duane Billington.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Not for long.
MR. BILLINGTON: This is kind of interesting, and I can
understand the confusion. And I guess part of what I'm wondering is
with this change does this affect the -- what's being proposed for
Arthrex, what the total amount of incentive might be?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No. They're doing
manufacturing, not warehousing.
MR. BILLINGTON: Well, they're doing warehouse out there,
too.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: It's manufacturing. It's been
calculated under that rate.
Again, the irony of this is if someone applies for this rate and
then a month later comes to our shop and says, I want to cancel my
building permit, then they would instead get that refund.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: But isn't that true anytime we
change impact fees?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: But I'm lowering the rate. And if I
.
gIve you--
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: -- an example, that might clear this up.
Let's say I have fast food restaurants in my impact fee category,
which I do, and I do a study and I come up with fast food restaurants
with no outside seating and fast food restaurants with inside seating,
and it ends up being a lower rate. It's not a new rate. That person
would be taking advantage of that category if he falls under that new
rate at a lower price.
So I agree with the counselor that it makes no sense for us to do
the 90 days advertising if we're reducing the fee. And we did it in an
abundance of caution because, you know, we didn't want to be
challenged. But when we talked to outside counsel, they were very
comfortable with the fact that we were reducing the fee.
Page 148
June 28, 2011
MR. BILLINGTON: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. All in favor--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, no, no, hang on.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Oh, I'm sorry. Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioner Hiller does make
a valid point, and it sounds like staff agrees with us, let's not do the 90
day notice requirement, if it's legal.
So I'm going to amend my motion to approve, and not to include
the 90 day notice.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, you know, the -- oh, I'm
sorry. May I speak?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Go ahead. I'm sorry.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you. We have to deal with
what's before us today.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It is, right here.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, what -- no. Today the motion
is -- or this particular item is whether or not we should make the
exception for this particular business. So that's really the only thing
that we need to consider. And then we need to take a separate action
to -- if, in fact, this is not a new rate but merely a reduced rate --
although I will -- I still think it's a new impact fee -- eliminate the 90
day notice.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Are we doing 16-9A (sic)? If
we are, I'll read you --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: 16A9.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: 16A9.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: 16A9--
MR. OCHS : Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- The ordinances in the
paragraph to -- according to the 90 day notice requirements under
Florida Statute, blah-blah-blah. I'm saying, don't do the 90 day. Still
approve the agenda -- or the ordinance. It doesn't take a separate
Page 149
June 28, 2011
action to amend the ordinance by removing that amount, removing
that language.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: I think, Commissioners, for
clarification, which might help, is that your county attorney and
outside counsel said the 90 days doesn't apply. So, in effect, what
you're saying is, we're not changing the ordinance, is that we would
institute those rates today.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: And that's what you'd be making an
amendment to, is that there is no 90 day period required.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Correct. Okay. That's my
motion.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: What's the -- may I?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You just keep killing yourself, don't
you? Did you have a question?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, I do. What's the downside
in Commissioner Henning's motion?
MR. KLATZKOW: There is none. They are decreased fees.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Decreased fees.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So it really means nothing.
MR. KLATZKOW: These are decreased fees. There are no
downsides. There never was a downside.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah, we spent 30 minutes talking about
it.
MR. KLATZKOW: The concern was never decreasing impact
fees. The legislature's concerned with increasing impact fees on
businesses. That was -- the purpose for the 90 days notice was to give
people the opportunity to run and get a permit before the impact fees
were raised. That's why there's a 90 day notice.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Right, I understand that. But
you don't need a 90 day notice if you're going to be dropping them.
MR. KLATZKOW: That's right.
Page 150
June 28, 2011
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And then--
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Or if they're new.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's Commissioner Henning's
motion; if that's it, I second it.
MR. KLATZKOW: I don't have an issue with Commissioner
Henning's amendment to the motion.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All right. We've got a motion by
Commissioner Henning, a second by Commissioner Coletta.
And we have comments by Commissioner Hiller or not?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. I just want to clarify. So
you are saying that this is not a new impact fee, even though it's for
warehousing and for light industrial that we've never had before and,
therefore, we don't need the 90 days? I'm summarizing your
statement.
MR. KLATZKOW: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. And the reason you had the
90 day notice was -- notwithstanding the "yes," was just because you
do it as a matter of course regardless?
MR. KLATZKOW: No, because your argument is not invalid. I
understand your argument, all right. In an abundance of caution, we
decided to do the 90 days, never really thinking we'd get the permit in,
given the fact of to day's economy.
But the request came in, and so now the question is, well, do we
want a guy to go through the hoops of getting a permit, canceling a
permit, then getting a new permit for a decrease, or just to waive it?
So we came back to the board to say, look, we're asking you
here, you know, can we move forward with this permit at the reduced
rates?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Call the question.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All in favor, please signify by saying
aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
Page 151
June 28, 2011
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And if I --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Whatever it was, it was passed.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Can I just, for myself -- Jeff, could
I have a copy of the summary notes from your conversation with
outside counsel on this?
MR. KLATZKOW: I don't have summary notes.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: You don't take notes with outside
counsel?
MR. KLATZKOW: No, I don't.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Can you summarize what counsel
said for me --
MR. KLATZKOW: I believe it was an email.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- in an email?
MR. KLATZKOW: I'll forward you the email.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. On this issue?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We can do that offline.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'll take a look. I just want to
make sure I just have that for my file.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
Item #10L
CONDUCT THE CONSERVATION COLLIER ANNUAL PUBLIC
MEETING TO PROVIDE THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS AND PUBLIC WITH AN UPDATE ON THE
Page 152
June 28, 2011
PROGRAM'S PAST ACTIVITIES - MOTION TO ACCEPT
REPORT - APPROVED
MR.OCHS: Commissioner, that takes us to 10L. It was
previously -- it was a recommendation to conduct the Conservation
Collier annual public meeting to provide the Board of County
Commissioners and public with an update on the program's past
activity .
Ms. Alex Sulecki is here to answer any questions. This was
moved from the consent agenda at Commissioner Coyle's request.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah. I was concerned about this being
on the consent agenda because we're required to have a public meeting
for the purpose of providing a past and current activities report to the
board. I did not feel that just putting it in the consent agenda was an
adequate public hearing.
So if you can give us a brief report, then you will satisfy the
requirement in my mind.
MS. SULECKI: Very good. Good afternoon, Commissioners.
For the record, Alex Sulecki, coordinator of Conservation Collier.
It's my pleasure to come before you today and provide you and
the members of the public with the Conservation Collier Annual
Report.
I do have a short presentation, two items for the record. And the
photo you see here, I just want to point out, is the Limpkin Marsh
Preserve on Immokalee Road near Corkscrew Swamp, and it
represents our shifting focus from the acquisition of land to their
management and providing public access.
Some of the past and current activities that we've had, one thing I
just want to point out, we now have a logo. You see it in the top left
corner, and it's on the cover of your annual report. This was designed
by our Advisory Committee Member, Jeff Curl.
We're fortunate -- and this is one of the things I wanted to put on
Page 153
June 28, 2011
the record. We're very fortunate to have a great Citizens Advisory
Committee. We have members who have served multiple terms, and
so we have great continuity.
Throughout the years, we've had eight of our members awarded
the Outstanding Advisory Committee Award, including three of our
currently serving members. So I just wanted to take this opportunity
to say "Thank You" to them.
Another thing I'd like to put on the record, there was -- I would
like to correct something on your Executive Summaries. In the
considerations section at the bottom paragraph, the first sentence, it
says 18 of the 19 acquired projects are now under board approved
management plans. Actually 17 of the 19 are. One of them is wending
it's way through the approval process.
So where are we? We've completed seven acquisition cycles.
We've purchased 4,046 acres in 19 project locations. We spent about
$104.2 million.
We have received grant funding, close to $400,000, mostly for
Exotic Removal, Land Management Activities. We've developed a
hunt program at the Pepper Ranch Preserve, and we've also developed
a long range plan for management needs and development of our
public amenities.
The photo here is of the Pepper Ranch property and a visit by the
Caloosa Riding Club in February of this year.
Some of our planned activities, including continuing to develop
public access to our preserve lands as directed by the Conservation
Collier work plan which was approved by you June 14th.
Securing grant funding whenever possible. We are working on a
draft amendment to the parks and recreation ordinance regarding
preserve use. That was directed by you in December of last year. We
are continuing to hold public meetings for final management plans,
we're continuing to manage our lands as outlined in our plans, and
we're continuing to implement the hunt program at Pepper Ranch.
Page 154
June 28, 2011
And this photo is of the Alligator Flag Preserve Trail, which is
along Immokalee Road.
And, finally, I would just say that we ask you to accept our past
and current activities report as presented and to tell you that this photo
is Florida Panther 159, and it was taken by our wildlife camera at the
Caracara Prairie Preserve.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: How did they get a collar on it?
MS. SULECKI: It has a collar.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: They feed it.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You feed them.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And then take them for a walk.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You've got to pet them, you
know.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: With a leash?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. We have a public speaker?
MR. MITCHELL: Yes, sir, we do. Caitlin Weber.
MS. WEBER: Good afternoon. Caitlin Weber here on behalf of
the Conservancy of Southwest Florida.
The annual report before you today briefly references the use of
county preserve lands to obtain mitigation credits in the form of
panther habitat units, or PHU s. These credits are designed to offset
impacts to panther habitat elsewhere.
As this process moves forward, we may have recommendations
with regards to how such credits are obtained. We hope that the
implementation of a crediting system will be open for discussion.
We appreciate staffs willingness to work with us in the past, and
we'd like to be involved as this issue develops.
We ask that you accept the annual report with the understanding
that there may need to be future discussion on its content.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you. Okay. I make a motion that
we accept the report.
Page 155
June 28, 2011
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Motion to accept the report,
seconded by Commissioners Fiala, Coletta and Hiller. I have a feeling
it's going to pass.
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.
MS. SULECKI: Thank you, Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, thank you.
And that takes us to 13 A?
Item #13A
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS (BCC), ACTING AS
THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA), TO
APPROVE THE RELOCATION OF IMMOKALEE CRA OFFICE,
APPROVE THE MASTER LEASE WITH BARRON COLLIER
PARTNERSHIP, LLLP, AND AUTHORIZE THE CHAIRMAN TO
SIGN THE MASTER LEASE AGREEMENT (3120 15TH STREET
NORTH~ UNIT 2~ IMMOKALEE) - APPROVED
MR. OCHS : Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
Page 156
June 28, 2011
MR. OCHS: This item was moved from the consent agenda. It
was previously 16B 1. It's a recommendation for the Board of County
Commissioners, acting as the Community Redevelopment Agency, to
approve the relocation of the Immokalee CRA Office, approve the
master lease with Barron Collier Partnership, LLLP, and authorize the
Chairman to sign the Master Lease Agreement.
This item was moved at Commissioner Henning's request, and
Ms. Phillippi is available to present or answer questions.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: What is the existing square foot
charge that you're paying right now?
MS. PHILLIPPI: We're not paying anything right now.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Who's leasing the
building?
MS. PHILLIPPI: I assume it's being leased by County
Commission for Code Enforcement and the Commissioner's Office.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, there -- I mean, you're
moving into a building that's twice the size as you have now. And I
understand it's crowded in there. But why not look at a holistic
approach and bring all government entities into that newly expanded
building? Since there is no activities out in Immokalee it's going to be
hard to sublease any space.
MS. PHILLIPPI: Are you referring to the space we're in or the
future space?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Both. I'm referring --
MS. PHILLIPPI: We do intend to--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The existing space that you
have is overcrowded, and you stated that.
It wasn't clear who was going to occupy, except for the CRA, the
new building. You're doubling the space. The question is, why not
create a place for all those government entities, the CRA, the code
enforcement officers that are out there now, and the commissioner's
Page 157
June 28, 2011
office?
MS. PHILLIPPI: Well, the primary purpose of the move is to
make enough -- a professional space for the CRA and a professional
space for the Immokalee Business Development Center, which
requires classroom space, a computer lab, and those sorts of things,
and being able to lease to businesses who need to lease a space who
are enrolled in Immokalee Business Development Center.
So those were the folks that we were talking about subleasing the
units to.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Well, that wasn't clear in
your executive summary.
MS. PHILLIPPI: That's correct. And I received a request and
forwarded some information that perhaps you didn't get to see in your
email. But we put a list of the persons who are currently enrolled in
the Immokalee Business Development Center and who are interested
in subleasing office space.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And who's interested in
subleasing it?
MS. PHILLIPPI: There's four small businesses that are currently
looking for a space in Immokalee.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And you're going to sublease
them at the market rate?
MS. PHILLIPPI : Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
MS. PHILLIPPI: At the rate -- the same rate that we pay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. I didn't look at that email
because I think it's a violation of sunshine.
MS. PHILLIPPI: That was pointed out to me by your aide, and I
apologize for that.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Is that it?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. It answered my
questions.
Page 158
June 28, 2011
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner -- who was first,
Commissioner Coletta or Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I don't know.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Doesn't matter.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. Penny, would you -- first of
all, I'm not sure it's a good idea for us to be in the business of
subleasing space. You know, we certainly don't want to take on
responsibility for more space. We've already got so much empty
space as it is. And I don't mean necessarily in Immokalee, but just as
government right now because of the changes in our employment
levels.
So I don't see why the property owner doesn't just go ahead and
contract his own leases with, you know, these tenants that you may
have found.
Secondly, where's Commissioner Coletta going to be? I mean,
he needs space. I mean, if you're moving out -- you mentioned
yourself and you mentioned, you know, this other development group.
But where does that leave the commissioners' office out there? And
it's not for Commissioner Coletta. It is the commissioners' office.
The other question I have is, what about the constitutionals and
where are they located? Because I'm listening to what Commissioner
Henning said, and he makes a really good point. In North Naples we
actually have a Government Center, and we have the Tax Collector,
DMV, the Property Appraiser, the Supervisor of Elections, and the
Clerk of Courts, the Sheriff, and the Board of County Commissioners
all represented in that one location. It's one-stop shopping for the
citizens, and it's really a great amenity for the people in North Collier.
The space that you're talking about, I don't know where these
other constitutionals are. I'm not familiar with that. And maybe
Commissioner Coletta can explain. But it might be a wonderful
opportunity to bring everybody together. And I don't know what other
Page 159
June 28, 2011
commitments there are, so I'm really talking without knowledge. I'm
just throwing out the idea as a consideration.
And then it also begs the question, what's going to happen with
the space that you're vacating? And maybe it makes more sense that
you get 100 percent of the space that you're vacating and then let
Commissioner -- the commissioner for District 5 and the other people
occupy that space that you found as, like, the hub.
I'm just throwing ideas out. No commitments to any single one.
I just wanted your input for some of the thoughts that I had that might
work for you. And I'm just sharing my experience from North Collier,
which works really well.
MS. PHILLIPPI: Well, if you recall, we were going to -- when
we created -- when this commission created the Immokalee Business
Development Center, we, in essence, created a business incubator.
And in that incubator process we also talked about subleasing, which
is part of the program package that we provide to new businesses as
we teach them how to write business plans, do their marketing, to do
their budgeting, to the full spectrum of what it takes to become a
business, and then to have -- to go quarterly to them to review their
books. It's an entire program of growing a business.
Part of that package was to have a space that they could rent that
wouldn't be as expensive as the going rate, which is about 15.50 per
square foot annually in Immokalee; although our guidance says six to
twelve dollars is not real -- it's not real in Immokalee.
So we saw this as an opportunity to not have to -- because if we
go to the one stop to do presentations or the Entrepreneur School, we
have to pay $60 an hour for staff to stay there in the evenings while
we're doing this, or we have to go to the Community Center and set up
the tables and chairs.
This way not only would we have the professional setting that
we're seeking, we'd have teaching rooms, we'd have a boardroom
where the Advisory Board could meet, we would have a computer lab
Page 160
June 28, 2011
where we could actually teach how to use Quicken and all those sorts
of things, and still have, really, only three rooms left. So certainly the
commissioner could come into one of those.
But that was the general idea, to have one hub for businesses, and
as they come in -- a more professional setting when larger businesses
want to come in and talk about moving to Immokalee. So that was --
that was our thinking.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, you know, if we could get this
back on track, we're here to vote on your leasing space for the CRA.
MS. PHILLIPPI: That's correct.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We're not here to discuss the building or
the leasing of another government facility in Immokalee to
concentrate everybody into a bigger and more expensive building--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- for which we have no funds. So, you
know, I don't know how we get into these kinds of discussions. But,
quite frankly, we're talking about you renting space to do CRA
business and if Commissioner Coletta needs more space, then he
needs to deal with it himself, which I'm sure he will.
But as far as I know, you don't have money to give to
Commissioner Coletta for a new office, do you, or for the Tax
Collector or anybody else?
MS. PHILLIPPI: No, sir. And truthfully, we were interlopers in
that space.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah, okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, let me jump in.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Coletta, go ahead.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: This thing has a history that
goes way past Penny.
Back a number of years ago when I first started going to
Immokalee, I went to wherever Barry went, and that was the Clerk __
the Courthouse there. Well, the problem was, you went in the
Page 161
June 28, 2011
courthouse; for anybody to come and visit you, they had to go through
security. Nobody came.
So I moved it over to the Community Center, and they gave me a
room there with a broken down card table and a couple chairs, and it
went fine until school let out in the early -- in the late spring, and then
the kids took the place over, and you couldn't get anything done. I
mean, they were running in and out of the room all the time.
So I went to the County Manager and I asked him if I could get
an office, you know, someplace in Immokalee. He didn't respond, so I
wrote him a letter and I said, you know, Commissioner Henning had
an office, now Commissioner Fiala had an office, Commissioner
Halas had an office off site, and here I'm 40 miles away from the
county building, and I don't have an office.
I says, all I need is give me a desk, and I'll put it on the dock at
Lake Trafford, and I can use the restroom over at the marina. Well,
Mudd acted a little bit -- overreacted to the letter. Took it all wrong.
Next thing I know, I got a whole building on Alachua, and he kicked
parks and rec out of there. And he said, there's your building.
So I got code enforcement in there, I got the Chamber of
Commerce, I got the EDC. I brought a number of entities into that,
and they moved -- in time everybody moved on.
I only need a small space temporary. I would love to be able to
come over there, but you've still got this facility that's way
overutilized that code enforcement can use. And as far as an office
goes, I gave a big office I had -- I subdivided it. I gave half of it to
Penny -- no, I gave half of it to code enforcement. Then Penny came
along and she asked if she could have my half, and so then I moved
into the breakroom, and that's where I've been ever since. I'm happy.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. All right. You're happy.
Commissioner Henning, you started all this. Will you please
make a motion.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, no, no, no. I stayed on the
Page 162
June 28, 2011
item, on the agenda item.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So did I.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm not talking about being a
victim here. I'm just talking about this lease.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm not talking about
Constitutional Officers or anything like that.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Not yet.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm staying with the agenda.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Would you make a motion?
Would you approve this thing or not?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. I'm going to make a
motion to approve.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: But I also -- just a question. Are
these subleases going to come to the Board of Commissioners, or the
CRA board?
MS. PHILLIPPI: Yes, sir.
MR. KLATZKOW: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: They are?
MS. PHILLIPPI : Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: All right. I'll tell you what I'm
looking for. Don't take away from existing property owners over
there. In other words, if you have somebody, you know, paying a
little bit more and they want to just lower their rent, that's not a good
utilization of the TIF, my opinion. So that's what I'd be looking for.
MS. PHILLIPPI: I think that was the complaint when we were
thinking about moving the incubator to the airport, there were folks
who were concerned that we were competing with the private sector,
and that's a legitimate concern.
In this instance we're not competing with private sector.
Page 163
June 28, 2011
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, absolutely, you're not. Just
in the subleases, I would like for you to point that out for me.
MS. PHILLIPPI: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Motion by Commissioner
Henning to approve.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Seconded 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: It passes unanimously. And we're fast
approaching break time. We've got seven more.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Take a break.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You want to take a break now and come
back for correspondence?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Sure. We'll whip it off.
MR.OCHS: Well, we have public comments. I don't know if
there's any public comments today, sir.
MR. MITCHELL: We have two people registered to speak.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Let's hear the public comments,
and then we'll go on a break. Let's do them.
Item #14
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS
Page 164
June 28, 2011
MR. MITCHELL: The first speaker is Duane Billington, and
he'll be followed by Tim Hancock.
MR. BILLINGTON: For the record, Duane Billington.
I'd like to clarify something I said, and then it was kind of --
some spin was put to it.
When I referred to the $50,000 an acre that was applied to Oil
Well Road right-of-way and that was the value we allowed Collier
Development to use for that right-of-way. It had nothing to do with
the Vanderbilt, outside of that. I was using that as a comparison and
made a statement saying I was pleased that we no longer were using
an adversarial amount when we have a willing seller. So I just wanted
to clarify that.
One interesting thing I learned down here today is that the 1-75
interchange, in fact, is going to cost more than the cost of just the
interchange, because Commissioner Coletta stated that Vanderbilt is
required for the interchange, and there's quite a large supporting road
network that goes along with that interchange. So I would suggest in
the future that if we referred to it, that we use the total cost of what's
going to be required to support that interchange at Everglades
Boulevard.
Thank you.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I have to comment.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Go ahead. Your light's on.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Nick, come on up front here. I
mean, I don't know how we got from there to the supporting network
of roads. Well, there's some --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Can't we do this under
commissioners' comments?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It's the public's comments, not
commissioners' comments.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, now would be the time to
Page 165
June 28, 2011
answer it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah. Mr. Billington raised a specific
issue about Commissioner Coletta's comments, and Commissioner
Coletta should be allowed to respond to it.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you very much. I
appreciate that.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: I'll try and keep it short.
You can't apply for a project consistent, like the I-75/Everglades
interchange, as long -- if you're not executing your adopted long-range
transportation plan.
MR. BILLINGTON: Right.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: They're tied hand in hand. Vanderbilt
Beach Road is a parallel facility to 1-75 and an interlocal reliever.
Federal Highway would not consider you for a project like that if
you weren't actively moving forward with other projects in your long
range transportation plan. So your comment about that single project
would be more directed to everything within the LRTP, not just
Vanderbilt Beach Road.
MR. BILLINGTON: Oh, yeah. I agree wholly.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And roads are expensive, sir;
you're right there.
MR. BILLINGTON: And thank you for the clarification.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No problem. Glad to.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Mr. Hancock.
MR. MITCHELL: The next speaker's Tim Hancock.
MR. HANCOCK: Good afternoon Commissioners, for the
record, Tim Hancock with Davidson Engineering.
I understand this body went into shade session today on the
Blocker case, and I do understand the limitations of a shade session
and what you can and cannot discuss. So I'm not seeking discourse
with you on what occurred today at your closed door meeting.
But I think it would be remiss in not pointing out to you that in
Page 166
June 28, 2011
the full review of everything we can get our hands on in this case,
going back to the Code Enforcement Board action in 2006, the record
that was created there is the basis on which most of the court decisions
have been made since that time. That record was incomplete in that it
cited the lack of certain pieces of information that we subsequently
have found.
I've read in the media that this information has been around for
years, and I find that hard to believe since Mr. Johns put his hand on it
for the first time four weeks ago.
What we're seeking is exactly what you, Commissioner Coyle,
sought several weeks ago when Commissioner Hiller brought forth
information and you asked the County Manager and the County
Attorney to come forward with that information -- either it does exist
or doesn't exist -- and go from there.
Unfortunately, for some reason, that's the same thing we've been
asking for years is to have that open dialogue about what does and
doesn't exist, and we can't seem to get there.
And my primary concern is that we sat with your staff, Code
Enforcement and Planning staff, on Thursday of last week and were
handing them information across the table that they were making
copies of because they had not seen it. This was Thursday.
Today this board went into a shade session to have a very
weighty conversation that has the real effect of taking a person's
property. And my question to you is, if the information that does or
does not make up a complete and total record on this case is of
paramount importance before taking someone's property, was today's
discussion a little bit premature before the staff has had the ability to
review the full boat of information that was provided as recently as
Thursday of last week before coming to this body? And ask you to
consider that.
And I thank you again for your time and consideration.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, Tim. Thank you.
Page 167
June 28, 2011
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I didn't know that was going on.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You might -- I'm sorry. Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm sorry. I didn't know there
was discussions going on; otherwise, I wouldn't -- I wouldn't have
brought it up. If there was discussions with staff, I definitely wouldn't
have made a request for a closed door session.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. We're not going to discuss the
closed door session. But let me tell you at least my impression of
what you're saying, is that it is in substantial variance of the position
of our legal here. The legal staff has represented to all of the
commissioners that the information you're referring to has been
available from the very beginning and, in fact, was referenced in the
court hearings.
So there is a misunderstanding about something somewhere, and
it might be worthwhile to try to pin that down.
MR. HANCOCK: Yes, sir. And if necessary to possibly come
back to you under public comment and address that, we will certainly
do that. And I understand your legal counsel will be giving you
advice as to what you can and cannot discuss because of the legal
proceedings that are ongoing.
But I -- there is a significant variance there, sir, and we're
confident in our position.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. And -- okay, thank you very
much.
Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. Could you wait at the
podium, please, so I can make my comments, just in case -- if I have a
question.
My concern with the statement you just made, Commissioner
Coyle, is that if you're -- if that's your interpretation, they made public
records requests for those documents, or for that map, or all
documents, and that map was not produced. If we had that map for all
Page 168
June 28, 2011
this time and we didn't produce it pursuant to a public records request,
then we've got a public records violation.
MR. KLATZKOW: You know, we have a $2 million
counterclaim against us. That's why we called a shade session to have
this discussion. I can call another shade session.
Mr. Hancock, you're willing to visit with Ms. Hubbard, go
through everything you have; she will show you where it's been
before. If she is mistaken and this is new, we will reconsider it. All
right?
MR. HANCOCK: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And I would also like the question
answered as to -- since there were public records requests, why wasn't
this produced as part of it if we've had this all along? And I mean --
"we" meaning the county. Not the board, but records.
MR. KLA TZKOW: You're making the assumption that these
things were not produced.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, that's what I'm asking. I'm
asking you to share with me where is it proved that they were.
MR. KLATZKOW: I'm saying that if Mr. Hancock will meet
with Ms. Hubbard, all right, and she will show him where it was
previously.
Now, if there are documents that we were not aware of, okay,
that's fair, and I'll bring it back, all right. We're not -- we're not
prejudice against the Blockers here. I mean, you know, it will be a
full and fair hearing.
MR. HANCOCK: Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, thank you.
Okay . We're going to take a ten minute break, and then we'll be
back for what will probably be a very lengthy communications and
correspondence discussion that will take us probably till 5:30 or six
o'clock. So we'll be back at 3:12.
(A brief recess was had.)
Page 169
June 28, 2011
MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, you have a live mike.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. We -- the Board of County
Commission meeting is back in session.
Item #15
STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And we're going into correspondence
and communication, and we'll start with the County Manager, Leo
Ochs.
MR.OCHS: Thank you, Commissioner.
I have nothing for the board today except to wish you all a couple
of weeks of R&R, and we'll see you back here on July 26th.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. We'll go next to Commissioner
Hiller, but she's not here so --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'm here.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- we'll skip her completely today.
And, County Attorney, go ahead.
MR. KLATZKOW: I also have nothing, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I just want to say that I was really
pleased to see our names linked together on a number of agenda items.
I was very happy to see that. I thought it was a move in the right
direction. So thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I wish the feeling were mutual, but
nevertheless.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Hey, if looks could kill.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah.
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I have nothing to report,
nothing to say except have a nice -- have a nice summer, and a
Page 170
June 28, 2011
wonderfully joyous happy 4th of July, and be careful on the 4th of
July. Enjoy it with family and cook hot dogs, but watch out for those
fireworks.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: If she seems a little happier now than she
was earlier today, it's because she got some good news about her
granddaughter, who was injured in an accident, so --
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And I don't have anything.
Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm starting to feel guilty
because I have two things.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Uh-oh.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And they're going to require just
a little bit of discussion.
And first, Nick, would you please come up front here for just a
moment. As you know, we talked at a previous meeting about the $3
million that we have set aside for a -- hopefully an A TV park. And I
met with some of the users in an informal session -- and invited Nick
into it. I believe you were there, too, Jeff -- just to be able to try to get
a general idea what they're looking for.
And it was the opinion of the group that met with me that
because of the economy the way it is and the availability of land out
there -- in fact, we've had a couple of people already calling us, and
we can't even respond to them because we've got no matrix to work
. with yet -- that there may be opportunities that didn't exist before.
And what I would like to do is have you allow staff to be able to
come up with an A TV task force that would be able to come up with a
review of what they would expect to have as far as an A TV park
would be and what the matrix of the whole thing would be.
Nick, can you elaborate on that a little bit?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Sure. We discussed with the
commissioners and the gentlemens (sic) that were involved, and
Page 171
June 28, 2011
questions about the A TV money was that you probably wanted to put
that funds in a separate project or a specific project account and then
direct staff to begin evaluation of some -- of some sites, and maybe
even come back as part of an executive, say, $3 million will be
brought into Project XXX, and direct staff to spend up to, say,
$50,000 to employ some consultants to evaluate the county for
potential sites working with this ad hoc committee.
So we'd probably frame it in that sense and bring it back to you
for approval, and that way we'd have a little bit of framework to work
off of to look for some sites.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And this should be available by
the 26th, that we would have something together for you to look at.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm fine with that.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah, I'm okay.
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: They're busy out there talking.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Say "yes." Nod.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'm sorry, yes. What am I saying
yes to? I'm so sorry. I was so rude.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We'll fill you in later.
MR. KLATZKOW: Just for clarification, are we asking for the
creation of an ad hoc committee?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No. We're asking staff to work
with the users.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Asking the staff to work with--
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, yeah, that's good.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- stakeholders.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That would cut a lot of time off
it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Stakeholders would probably be a better
deal. If we keep an ad hoc -- appoint an ad hoc committee, it begins
to --
Page 1 72
June 28, 2011
MR. KLATZKOW: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- creates some problems for us. But if
staff would work with the stakeholders to come up with some ideas --
and one thing I'd like -- one observation I'd like to make. I think
Commissioner Coletta's absolutely correct that there is a possibility
that we can accomplish more now than we could have accomplished
in the past because, surprisingly, some of the regulatory agencies are
getting an exposure to common sense, and they might really be more
amenable to giving us approval to do something reasonable.
And so -- and that's been the holdup all along. It hasn't been
Collier County. It wasn't South Florida Water Management District.
It was the regulatory agencies that wouldn't give us approval to do
things.
But we just got a ten-year -- I think we're going to get a ten year
dredging permit that really hasn't been done in the past. We've had to
go in and do environmental analyses year after year after year in the
same area, and we've finally gotten a dose of common sense injected
into that process. And so maybe we can do that here, too. So
Commissioner Coletta's correct.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, thank you for your
support on that.
MR.OCHS: Commissioner, if I could, just so I'm clear on what
the expectation is for the July 26th meeting, because I got to tell you,
that agenda is beginning to get very lengthy. So if you want a roomful
of ATV proponents--
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You won't. You'll have
probably about ten people here at the most.
MR. OCHS: What is it that you want the staff to --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: What it is is coming up with a
matrix as far as what we're going to do is -- the direction we're going
to go. In other words, it might not even be a final report. I would kind
of hope we'd come up with a direction where we could actually start
Page 1 73
June 28, 2011
looking at different land opportunities that are out there, but we may
have to wait until our meeting in September for that. Staff would have
to make that determination. I wouldn't want to second guess them how
we have to get there in an equitable way that will meet all the
requirements of state statutes and our own ordinances.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah. Once again if I could just interject
something, the staff can control that issue, because if the staff comes
up with a complete solution by the July meeting, I would be greatly
surprised.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: That's not going to happen.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I wouldn't. I kind of expect it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: So there's not much point of coming
back in July and telling us, well, we've studied it, but we don't have
any recommendations for you.
MR.OCHS: That's fine.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: So, yeah. If you just come up with
something definitive that meets Commissioner Coletta's specifications,
that would be great. Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And I have--
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I just would like to comment on
that.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: You know, the idea of having that
committee -- can you come back to the podium so I can talk about
this.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Sure.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I really think the idea of having a
formal ad hoc committee is a very important one because there are so
many stakeholders, and sunshine would govern, and that way it would
be fully transparent. I would hate to see us go through the same thing
that you went through with the Master Mobility Plan where, you
know, there was citizen concern about lack of transparency, not being
Page 174
June 28, 2011
able to be part of the meetings or part of the discussion.
I really think that Commissioner Coletta's idea, and your -- or
your idea, as the case may be -- who's ever idea it was to create a
formal committee and appoint people to it to formalize the research
process given the dollar size and the land size involved and have it
governed by sunshine is the right way to go so there is full
transparency, and that way, you know, ATVers and non ATVers alike
can see through the whole process, because this has been a very heated
community debate for a very long time. I think to go into sort of a
shadow session now would be problematic.
And also there's -- and I don't know what -- I don't remember off
the top of my head what the rules are, but there is something about
sunshine applying to either setting price for properties or -- I forget
exactly what it is, but there's some sunshine rule about that. I don't
know quite off the top of my head.
But I just -- I bring up the point that I think we should have a
formal committee, I think all the deliberations should be in the
sunshine, all communications, you know, and all documents and
emails should be subject to public records.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Commissioner, I can work either way,
with either stakeholders or ad hoc committee. My intention would be
to bring back a framework, a plan, recognize the revenues into a
project account, authorize maybe limited expenditures for advertising
and maybe some consultant to do some work, and put together what I
would call a list of their needs.
You know, we had some suggestions at the meeting using canals,
power and light easements, you know, a trail system. We had all ideas
that we ran -- you know, we kind of ran through. So we would put
together a list of ideas that we would use as criteria to look for
properties.
So it's the board's pleasure whether it's just stakeholder meetings
or ad hoc committee.
Page 175
June 28, 2011
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Nick, may I make a suggestion?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Sure.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You know, I could go either
way. I don't have a problem. I am concerned about the time element.
When you come back, offer us both alternatives and with the
advantages. In other words, there's a time element with going through
an ad hoc committee, there's not -- that committee -- we'll have less
time, less money going the other way. We can still keep all the
records and do everything in the sunshine.
But bring it back both ways. You know what the end results is
we're looking for, and we'll see where we go with it from there.
MR. KLA TZKOW: You don't meet again for a month. I mean, I
think Commissioner Hiller brings up a very good point and, perhaps,
one way to do this is that Nick will get the stakeholders, they'll be
publicly noticed, anybody can show up who wants to talk about it,
we'll keep minutes of it and, you know, we'll sort of conduct it as if it
were an ad hoc committee. Whoever wants to show--
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And if I might suggest, you
might even want to consider two meetings so that you can really have
the subject material work over a period of time rather than try to do
everything in one shot with the stakeholders.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Commissioner, it will be a plan -- it
may take several meetings, so I would say we would continue on this
process until we found a site, so it could be three months, could be six
months, could be 12 months as we evaluate these sites and then come
forward. I think the reality is you're going to have $3 million and
people know it's there.
I think there are going to be some sellers that are going to be
interested in coming forward. So we'll-- you have real money now.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, let's go back and make
sure we know what we're going to bring back at the next meeting that
we have. Do we have that squared away rather than waiting two or
Page 176
June 28, 2011
three months to get a report back?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: No. I think the next meeting I'm
going to bring you back a plan --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay, fine.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: -- and a budget amendment to put
those funds in a secured project account and probably authorize the
expenditure of some research money, and then we'll, as Jeff pointed
out, set a schedule to meet with some of the stakeholders, say what do
you really need, and then we'll start doing some fact finding.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And also, please notify me of
those meetings. I've been with this subject material now for, oh my
God, eight years, nine year, and I'd really like to stay with it till the
end.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Okay, very good.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Then I have one other thing, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, go ahead.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And this is going to be the high
point of everybody's day. I just thought we'd end this thing on a very
positive note, and that's our physician for the public Health
Department. Dr. Colfer, would you come up front.
Florida, overwhelmingly, has the highest unintentional drowning
rate in the nation for zero to four-year-old age groups with a rate of
7.39 per hundred thousand population. Annually enough children to
fill four preschools' classrooms do not live to see their fifth birthday
due to drowning.
Florida residents under the age of ten are most likely to drown in
a swimming pool. Drowning is silent and is 100 percent preventible.
The average hospital stay is two days with a median admission of
$10,000 for those that do survive a drowning.
The monetary cost of drowning in Florida for a year is greater
than 16 million.
Page 1 77
June 28, 2011
And with that, there's your introduction.
DR. COLFER: Thank you, Commissioner Coletta.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, members of the board. For the
record, I'm Dr. Joan Colfer, your Collier County Health Department
Director.
As Commissioner Coletta indicated, I believe we have a problem
with drowning in our small children. And about a year ago, we
formed a coalition at the Health Department, along with a number of
other partners, 30 different agencies, called the Safe and Healthy Kids
Coalition, and I asked them specifically to look at drowning issues,
comparing Collier to the state.
So on the visualizer I think you can see that the blue right here is
our leading causes of death to children in Florida from ages one to
four. And about halfway up that blue mark, those are the drownings
compared to other things that kill children. There's some cancers on
there, I think respiratory illnesses is all the way -- all the way on the
very end, a very small one.
But, unintentional injuries is that big blue one and half of that big
blue is drowning. What that amounted to in 2009 for the State of
Florida, 63 deaths to children one to four years old and 166 what they
call near fatal drowning. Those are children that survive the
drowning, get put on life support, and mayor may not end up with
brain damage. And those are the kinds of things that are really hard to
get your hands around from a data perspective.
If we looked at what the age group is -- I don't know if you can
put it that way so that they can see the one to four. If you try and
analyze -- and I'm going to do this in, I promise you, three or four
minutes, and you'll be done here.
That peak is one to four, the top for the actual drownings, and the
bottom graph is for those that are in the near fatal drowning.
Then if we look at Collier's data -- now I -- this is children 18
years and younger and only for external causes. The dark green is the
Page 178
June 28, 2011
children that die from suffocation issues and co-sleeping. But the blue,
again, the dark blue, that's the drownings, and that's 2005 to 2009;
Collier has 10 drownings to children in that age group.
And then if you look, again, at the under 18-year-olds but break it
down by age groups, the first cluster, if you would, is under one. But
the second cluster is that one to four year olds, and you can see that
spike in the middle. That's our drownings to young children in that
one to four year age group.
What the Safe and Healthy Kids Coalition would like to do is to
start a pilot program in Collier similar to one that we went and saw in
Broward County. There in Broward they have been offering for a
number of years a program to their kindergarteners. Every
kindergartener is offered ten 30 minute classes of swimming and
water-safety lessons over a two week period. Their Swim Central
Program has taught this to 275,000 children in Broward, and not a
single child that's participated in that program has been a drowning
victim or a near fatal drowning victim.
And it was amazing. We went to see these kids -- you've met Dr.
Vedder. He's been here before and talked to you about this issue --
little tiny kids that you wouldn't believe would be able to swim. We
saw them, I think, Thursday, the next to the last day of their lessons.
But you could take them halfway across the width of the pool, not the
length, and some of them could actually swim. I was thrilled to see
that in these little tiny kids.
The others, you know, granted, might not have been as good, but
they weren't afraid of the water anymore. They had been taught to
reach and grab so that they didn't panic and drown in the pool. They
were practicing their breathing, you know, going up and down and
clearly were not fearful of the water anymore.
We would love to start this program here in Collier County.
We'd like to start small. Broward started with $82,000. That was all
the money they had when they started their program over ten years
hPage 1 79
June 28, 2011
ago.
So we would like to start. We'd like to target about a thousand
VPK, that's the voluntary prekindergarten kids. The basic cost of
doing this program is $4 per child per lesson or $40 per child. There's
other costs for transportation, and, you know, they need a program
director and things like that. But we think we can raise the rest of the
money.
What we're asking for is if we could have $10,000 from the
Board of County Commissioners to put in parks and rec's budget to
help fund 250 kids to start this program.
And I'll be happy to answer questions.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. May I elaborate just a
little bit more on that?
DR. COLFER: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: What it is is they're going to be
using mainly county pools for this training, and it would be county
staff. They have to make sure they have people there that's -- be able
to work with the kids.
And what we're looking for is some money that would stay
within the county system rather than have to go to a nonprofit, then
come back then. And I'd like to be able to bring this back at the next
meeting for more discussion.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Will you be able to which -- tell us
which pools you'll be concentrating on?
DR. COLFER: River Park was one of the pools. The YMCA
folks are involved with us and, you know, we would be using some of
their pools, and parks and rec's pools. But I don't know exactly which
ones right now, but we'd be able to tell you.
The target, again, is a thousand. Depends on how much money
we can raise, you know, how many -- how many places we can go and
how much we can do.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Henning?
Page 180
June 28, 2011
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm surprised at what always
comes up on commissioners' communications. I'm really surprised.
This really belongs in the budget discussion, not at a board
meeting. I'm surprised that a request did not come through -- you're
on our budget, right?
DR. COLFER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes. You are on our budget.
DR. COLFER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And it wasn't brought up then?
DR. COLFER: No.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No. But that's really where it
belongs. But I don't know why we're -- if this is the second cause of
fatalities in Collier County, why aren't you working on the first one
instead of the second one?
DR. COLFER: I am working on the first one. I have a whole
team of nurses and paraprofessionals that, through our Healthy Start
Program, when we go out and visit pregnant women and women that
are new mothers, that's one of the consistent messages is about the
co-sleeping, the positions the children are put in, you know, when they
sleep, and not, you know, putting all the padding, the bumpers around
the cribs and all of that. So we do that. We do that every day.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: But, you know, VPK (sic) is
something on the Early Learning Coalition that we just funded. You
know, there needs to be a better organization, and not under
commissioners' communications to deal with this.
Quite frankly, both of my sons had private lessons, swimming
lessons. That's what I consider responsible parenting, okay. That's the
parents' job. I'm not sure if it's government's job.
But there are avenues for that, and I think that you need to take a
look at the Early Learning Coalition, coordinate -- I mean, you have a
liaison with the county government as far as your budget. Why aren't
you working with them instead of doing this under commissioners'
Page 181
June 28, 2011
communications? I just don't get it, okay?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, if I may, that was the
same question I asked when Dr. Colfer came forward, but then again,
too --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Why isn't it working with staff
and -- the county staff instead of the county commissioner?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: In order to work with staff, we'd
have to give some direction to be able to make that happen.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, no. I mean, they work with
staff all the time. The doctors -- the Florida Health Department works
with staff all the time. Is this circumventing the staff to go over the
board or what?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I don't think so, Commissioner
Henning. This is an issue that should have come to us under budget.
It didn't. But I -- and I didn't want it to escape, so it's not Dr. Colfer's
fault that it's on this -- under communication. It was my choice to put
it there. I wanted to bring your attention to it to see if there's
something we could do.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, Commissioner, you need
to bring it under the budget, not under communication.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, we missed the -- we
missed the boat on the budget.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, we have another hearing.
MR. OCHS : You have three more hearings.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: But I want a heck of a lot more
information than was presented under commissioners'
communications.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, there you have it, Dr.
Colfer. You're invited back. Commissioner Henning was one, I'm
two, to come back to us under the budget and --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You need three.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- make a full presentation. We
Page 182
June 28, 2011
need three. Come on.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, I said this is where it
belongs.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: There's another one. We got
three.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's where it belongs, on the
budget. I didn't say to bring it back under the budget.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And if we can get
Commissioner Henning's buy in, I'll agree with him 100 percent, and
so we're heading in the right direction.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It's none of our business to bring
it on communication.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Just humor him and -- okay. We got it
done. All right.
DR. COLFER: Yes, sir. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Hiller, go ahead.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I just want to say that, you know,
this really is the job of the county manager. The county manager
should be -- you know, when he meets with the commissioners, if
there's something that comes up, he's the one who's working and
developing this agenda for us, and then, of course, subject to review
by the chair, and you know, our additions. But this is really where
you're instrumental in managing these kind of affairs and where topics
should be discussed.
So, I mean, if you could help out so that when you know a
commissioner or staff member is going to bring something up under a
category that isn't necessarily the best, you know, if you could please
lend your expertise and manage the agenda so it works in everybody's
interest.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And I did communicate.
MR. OCHS: I make all the suggestions I can to commissioners,
,
yes, ma am.
Page 183
June 28, 2011
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Sometimes we don't listen to him.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: How can you not listen to Leo?
He's so nice.
MR.OCHS: It's hard to believe, isn't it?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And, once again, Leo, in all--
out of respect for him, I got to tell you, I did talk to him, and he had
reservations about me bringing it up. But once --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, Leo, thank you. Then you're
doing your job.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Right. He's doing a wonderful
job. But, once again, it's my time. I get to bring up whatever I want
to bring up, and you are the victims and have to listen to it.
Now, you can buy into it, or you can reject it. But, once again,
we got the basic facts out, and we're going to be looking very much
forward to you coming back the next budget meeting.
DR. COLFER: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yep. And there's a state law that says
that you can do that.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: There is.
DR. COLFER: Thank you, Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: But, wait a minute, I've got a question --
DR. COLFER: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- for you. It's sort of about this.
I've had people ask me questions. They read about these cases
where children, or even in some cases adults, are trapped in swimming
pools either because the drains are not properly connected or for some
other reason, and they're actually killed by the water pressure or they
drown.
Now, can you tell us, who does a person go to to find out if their
pool is safe from that sort of thing happening?
DR. COLFER: Well, your first -- there's millions of -- well,
hundreds of pools in our county. The Health Department does inspect
Page 184
June 28, 2011
all of our public pools. And we have gone through a process this year
under the Virginia Graham Baker Act about, you know, replacing
drain -- main drain grate covers so that the public pools are protected.
But you're right, you need to be sure that your pool in your own
backyard is safe. I would say your -- you know, your first effort
would be whatever pool company you use, unless you, you know,
manage your own pool.
You can always call the Health Department. I have a couple
people there that are experts. They are the ones that go and inspect the
public pools. We'd be happy to talk to people about their main drain
grate covers.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: How about code enforcement people, do
they take a look at these kinds of things?
DR. COLFER: Nobody looks at the pool in your backyard.
That's your own responsibility.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Really?
DR. COLFER: Right, right.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That could be a very serious issue.
DR. COLFER: Can be. But that's -- I mean, that's not what's
drowning our kids in Collier County . We haven't had any of those.
You're talking about the entrapment issues.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah.
DR. COLFER: That hasn't been the case in any of these
particular -- particular drownings.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. All right. Thank you. I
appreciate the information.
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you. I need to correct
my ex parte communication. I did have communications under 16A 1.
It was a plat for Vita Tuscana. I had communications from our staff.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All right.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And, you know, Leo, the more
Page 185
June 28, 2011
and more I appreciate your assistance, you know, trying to keep
commissioners straight and putting things on where they belong, but
now I understand some are not listening to you. Okay.
We want to be all to all. And I know -- I know we've got a hefty
debt, and that is my concern. I want to whittle on that debt and not be
Santa Claus.
So with that, have a nice summer.
I make a motion to adjourn.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We -- Commissioner Fiala wants to
make one brief statement.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: It was so kind of Commissioner
Coyle to mention, so I'll just tell you real fast. As some of you know,
my granddaughter was in a really nasty accident Sunday night, and
they had to -- they had to ambulance her over to the other coast to the
Joe DiMaggio Children's Trauma Center there where they have brain
specialists, and we were -- we were pretty scared for her.
But just to narrow it all down, just earlier -- just a couple hours
ago a neurosurgeon told my daughter, who then called me, to say that
the neurosurgeon said she's on the right side of things. They don't
think they're going to need surgery after all, and so -- she'll still be in
ICU for a while, but, you know, I just want to say, I'm just -- I feel that
we're all so blessed, because she's alive, she's not paralyzed, and she's
coming on the right side of things, and so we all feel a lot better, and
thank you for your concern.
MR.OCHS: That's great. You're welcome.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Hiller, do you have
anything else you want to say?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Happy July 4th.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second to my motion to
adjourn?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: No, you can't say that.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I can't say that?
Page 186
June 28, 2011
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You can't say that, no.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: He is Dr. Negative. Boy.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. There's a second to
Commissioner Henning's motion to adjourn.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All in flavor, please signify by saying
aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All right. It passes unanimously. Let's
get out of here.
*****
* * * * Commissioner Henning moved, seconded by Commissioner
Fiala and carried unanimously that the following items under the
Consent and Summary Agendas be approved and/or adopted ****
(Commissioner Henning abstained voting on Item #16K3)
Item #16Al
RECORDING THE FINAL PLAT OF VITA TUSCANA,
APPROVE THE STANDARD FORM CONSTRUCTION AND
MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT AND APPROVE THE AMOUNT
OF THE PERFORMANCE SECURITY - W/STIPULATIONS
Item #16A2 - Moved to Item #10H (Per Agenda Change Sheet)
Item # 16A3
Page 187
June 28, 2011
RATIFY STAFF'S EXTENSION OF CONTRACT #06-3969 WITH
STANLEY CONSULTANTS INC. AND APPROVE CHANGE
ORDER #2 TO WORK ORDER #4500110440, TO REQUEST AN
ADDITIONAL 30 DAYS TO PROCESS THE CONSULTANT'S
FINAL INVOICE FOR WORK COMPLETED ON GA TEW A Y
TRIANGLE STORMW A TER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
NO. 51803 - NO FUNDS WERE INVOLVED IN THIS REQUEST
ONL Y ADDED TIME DUE TO UNFORSEEN CIRCUMSTANCES
AND COMPLICATIONS
Item #16A4
AMENDMENT TO AN EASEMENT AGREEMENT FOR THE
PURCHASE OF A ROAD RIGHTOF- WAY, DRAINAGE AND
UTILITY EASEMENT (PARCEL NO. 256RDUE) REQUIRED
FOR THE EXPANSION OF GOLDEN GA TE BOULEVARD
FROM TWO LANES TO FOUR LANES BETWEEN WILSON
BOULEVARD AND DESOTO BOULEVARD PROJECT #60040
(ESTIMATED FISCAL IMPACT: $0) - EXTENDING THE
CLOSING DEADLINE TO JULY 29, 2011 DUE TO DELAYS IN
OBTAINING THE MORTGAGE LIEN RELEASE ON PROPERTY
IN GOLDEN GATE ESTATES UNIT 51~ TRACT 22
Item # 16A5
AFTER- THE-F ACT APPROVAL TO SUBMIT A
TRANSPORTATION COMMUNITY AND SYSTEM
PRESERVATION PROGRAM (TCSP) DISCRETIONARY GRANT
APPLICATION TO THE US DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION FOR $17,000,000 - IF AWARDED IN
FULL THIS WOULD REQUIRE AN ESTIMATED LOCAL
Page 188
June 28, 2011
MATCH OF $5,000.000 AND WILL BE USED FOR DESIGN-
BUILD CONSTRUCTION OF FIVE (5) NEW BRIDGES IN
GOLDEN GATE ESTATES ON: 23RD ST. SW (1 BLOCK
NORTH OF WHITE BLVD); 16TH ST NE (SOUTH OF 10TH AVE
NE); 8TH ST NE (SOUTH OF 1 OTH AVE NE); 4 7TH AVE NE
AND 62ND AVE NE (WEST OF 40TH ST NE)
Item #16A6
AMENDMENT TO A NON-EMERGENCY TRANSPORTATION
MEDICAID CONTRACT FOR THE STATE 2011/2012 FISCAL
YEAR; AUTHORIZE A BUDGET AMENDMENT IN THE
AMOUNT OF $486,958 TO RECOGNIZE MEDICAID GRANT
FUNDS; AUTHORIZE A BUDGET AMENDMENT IN THE
AMOUNT OF $137,270 TO FUND THE PARATRANSIT
TRANSPORTATION DISADVANTAGED PROGRAM
THROUGH THE REMAINDER OF FY 2011; AND, DIRECT
STAFF TO WORK WITH THE LOCAL COORDINATING
BOARD TO EVALUATE FUNDING AND SERVICE OPTIONS
FOR PARATRANSIT THROUGH FY 2012 - RENEWING THE
AGREEMENT THROUGH JUNE 30,2012 AND BRINGING THE
TOTAL AMOUNT OF FUNDS AWARDED TO $1.753~009.00
Item #16A7
A GRANT APPLICATION IN THE FEDERAL TRANSIT
ADMINISTRATION FINANCIAL AND GRANT MANAGEMENT
SYSTEM (TEAM WEB) AND AUTHORIZE A BUDGET
AMENDMENT OF $220,000 TO RECOGNIZE 2008-09
CONGESTION MANAGEMENT SYSTEM INTELLIGENT
TRANSPORTATION STAKEHOLDERS GRANT FUNDS
A WARDED TO COLLIER AREA TRANSIT (CAT) TO
Page 189
June 28, 2011
PURCHASE A VEHICLE TO PROVIDE SERVICE ON AN
EAST-WEST CORRIDOR ON THE FIXED ROUTE SYSTEM-
FOR THE PURCHASE OF A 35' GILLIG FIXED-ROUTE BUS
COSTING APPROXIMATELY $375,000 AND WITH THE
REMAINING $155,000 BALANCE PAID FROM FYll FEDERAL
TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION 5307 FORMULA GRANT
MONEY THAT WILL SERVE RIDERS ON THE NEW ROUTES
ON PINE RIDGE & GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY
Item #16A8
RESOLUTION 2011-106: MEMORIALIZING A FYl1/12
TRANSPORTATION DISADVANTAGED TRUST FUND
TRIP/EQUIPMENT GRANT AGREEMENT WITH FLORIDA
COMMISSION FOR TRANSPORTATION DISADVANTAGED
FOR $625,170 WITH A $69,450 LOCAL MATCH; AUTHORIZE
CHAIRMAN TO SIGN THE AGREEMENT, THE RESOLUTION
SUPPORTING THE AGREEMENT AND REQUIRED BUDGET
AMENDMENTS. A PORTION OF FUNDS WILL BE USED TO
COVER OPERATING EXPENSES OF THE TRANSPORTATION
DISADVANTAGED PROGRAM
Item #16A9 - Moved to Item #10K (Per Agenda Change Sheet)
Item #16AI0
RATIFY STAFF'S EXTENSION OF CONTRACT #09-5229
"CONSULTANT SERVICES FOR COLLIER COUNTY SIGNAL
RETIMING PROJECT" AND A TIME EXTENSION CHANGE
ORDER TO WORK ORDER #4500113122 TO PROCESS THE
CONSULTANT'S INVOICES FOR WORK COMPLETED-
EXTENDING THE CONTRACT WITH V ANUS, INC. THAT
Page 190
June 28, 2011
EXPIRED AUGUST 25,2010 TO MARCH 31,2011 TO MEET
FDOT YELLOW AND RED CLEARANCE STANDARDS ON
RETIMING SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS ON U.S. 41 AND
CR 951 IN THE COUNTY AND CITY OF NAPLES
Item #16All
RESOLUTION 2011-107: AUTHORIZING THE CHAIRMAN TO
EXECUTE A LOCAL AGENCY PROGRAM AGREEMENT WITH
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION THAT WILL
REIMBURSE THE COUNTY UP TO $550,963 TO INSTALL
WIRELESS VEHICLE DETECTION EQUIPMENT REQUIRED
FOR OPERATING A TRAFFIC CONTROL SYSTEM ON
AIRPORT-PULLING ROAD FROM CLUB HOUSE DRIVE TO
GOLDEN GATE PKWY - FOR EXPECTED COMPLETION BY
DECEMBER 31. 2012
Item #16A12
AN IMP ACT FEE REIMBURSEMENT REQUESTED BY TWO
LAKES DEVELOPMENT, LLC, TOTALING $869,132.69, FOR
CANCELLATION OF A BUILDING PERMIT - FOR 2007
PERMIT NO. 20070526390 CANCELLED MARCH 9~ 2009
Item #16Bl - Moved to Item #13A (Per Agenda Change Sheet)
Item #16B2
RECOMMENDATION THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY (CRA) AUTHORIZE A BUDGET AMENDMENT TO
RECOGNIZE THE $100,000 REIMBURSEMENT FROM A
SELLER'S ESCROW ACCOUNT REIMBURSING CRA FUND
Page 191
June 28, 2011
187 FOR WORK REQUIRED ON AN ENVIRONMENTALLY
CONTAMINATED SITE (4315 BA YSHORE DRIVE) - FOR
COSTS TO REMOVE ABANDONED FUEL TANKS AND SOIL
AND WATER MONITORING REQUIRED BY FLORIDA'S
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
Item #16B3
RECOMMENDATION THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY (CRA) MODIFY AN EXISTING COMMERCIAL
BUILDING IMPROVEMENT GRANT AGREEMENT BETWEEN
THE CRA AND A GRANT APPLICANT BY APPROVING A
TIME EXTENSION AND INCREASING THE GRANT A WARD
IN THE AMOUNT OF $20,000 (4097 BA YSHORE DRIVE,
FISCAL IMPACT: $50,000) - EXTENDING THE COMPLETION
DATE TO OCTOBER 25, 2012 TO ALLOW FOR ADDITIONAL
MODIFICATIONS NEEDED TO MEET CODE REQUIREMENTS
Item # 16B4
RECOMMENDATION THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY (CRA) APPROVE AND EXECUTE A LANDSCAPE
IMPROVEMENTGRANTAGREEMENTBETWEENTHECRA
AND A GRANT APPLICANT IN THE BA YSHORE GA TEW A Y
TRIANGLE FOR PROPERTY AT 2705 STORTER AVENUE
(FISCAL IMPACT: $550.00)
Item #16Cl
RESOLUTION 2011-108/CWS: 2011-01: APPROVING
SPECIAL ASSESSMENT HARDSHIP DEFERRALS FOR
CERTAIN SEWER SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR THE 2011
Page 192
June 28, 2011
TAX YEAR - ACCOUNT #450508, #230605 AND #406808
(PROJECT NO. 51000)
Item #16C2
RESOLUTION 2011-109: SATISFACTION OF LIEN FOR THE
1996 SOLID WASTE COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL SERVICES
SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS WHERE THE COUNTY HAS
RECEIVED PAYMENT IN FULL SATISFACTION OF THE LIEN.
(FISCAL IMPACT: $20.00 TO RECORD LIEN SATISFACTION)-
ACCOUNT NO. 24361 (FOLIO #62151640001)
Item #16C3
SATISFACTIONS OF NOTICE OF CLAIM OF LIEN FOR
SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM IMPACT FEES (FISCAL IMPACT:
$20.00 TO RECORD THE LIEN SATISFACTIONS) - FOR FOLIO
NO. 61840400003 AND NO. 7726080008
Item # 16C4
SATISFACTIONS FOR CERTAIN WATER AND/OR SEWER
IMPACT FEE PAYMENT AGREEMENTS (FISCAL IMPACT:
$38.50 TO RECORD LIEN SATISFACTIONS) - FOR FOLIO
NO. 77262080008~ NO. 68345400006 AND NO. 00728160002
Item #16C5
SOLE SOURCE CONTRACT RENEWAL FOR $55,832 WITH
GE INTELLIGENT PLATFORMS FOR UTILITY FACILITIES
CONTROL SYSTEM SOFTWARE SUPPORT. THIS SOFTWARE
IS USED IN ALL PUBLIC UTILITIES DIVISION TREATMENT
Page 193
June 28, 2011
PLANTS AND DISTRIBUTION SYSTEMS TO CONTROL,
MONITOR AND MANAGE CRITICAL PROCESSES. FUNDING
IN PROJECTS NO. 72541 AND NO. 71056 - AS DETAILED IN
THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item #16Dl- Moved to Item #101 (Per Agenda Change Sheet)
Item # 16D2
SEVEN (7) LIEN AGREEMENTS FOR DEFERRAL OF 100% OF
COLLIER COUNTY IMPACT FEES FOR OWNER OCCUPIED
AFFORDABLE HOUSING DWELLING UNITS IN COLLIER
COUNTY. THIS APPROVAL TRANSFERS PREVIOUSLY
APPROVED AGREEMENTS FROM HABITAT FOR HUMANITY
TO OWNER OCCUPANTS WITH A CONTINUING FISCAL
IMPACT OF $100,355.46 - FOR PROPERTY ON LOTS 9,12,14,
17,19 AND 20 IN REGAL ACRES & LOT 135 IN THE LIBERTY
LANDING SUBDIVISION (ADDITIONAL FISCAL IMPACT: $0)
Item # 16D3
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 - A 2008 AGREEMENT IN THE
AMOUNT OF $19,305.88 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 303
CALLE AMISTAD STREET~ IMMOKALEE
Item #16D4
AMENDMENT TO A 2009 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
BLOCK GRANT-RECOVERY(CDBG-R) SUBRECIPIENT
Page 194
June 28, 2011
AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF NAPLES IN THE AMOUNT
OF $30,365 TO BE USED TOWARDS LANDSCAPING
IMPROVEMENTS-EXTENDINGTHECONTRACTTO
JANUARY 31,2012 TO INCORPORATE UPDATES IN THE
PROJECT LOCATED AT 15 5TH AVENUE NORTH ON A
VACANT UNDEVELOPED PARCEL IN ANTHONY PARK
Item # 16D5
AMENDMENT TO A 2010-11 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) SUBRECIPIENT AGREEMENT WITH
THE CITY OF NAPLES FOR $120,434 TO INCORPORATE
REVISIONS TO AN ORIGINAL SUBRECIPIENT AGREEMENT
TO COMPLETE IMPROVEMENTS AT ANTHONY PARK -
EXTENDING THE CONTRACT TO JANUARY 31, 2012 AND
REVISING THE PROJECT TO FOCUS WORKING IN ONE (1)
NEIGHBORHOOD PARK (VS.TWO ORIGINALLY), REDUCING
NUMBER OF NEW PARKING SPACES FROM TEN TO TWO
AND ADDING A TRAFFIC-TURN-AROUND
Item #16D6
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE
RETIRED AND SENIOR VOLUNTEER PROGRAM (RSVP)
AND ITS PARTICIPATING AGENCIES (VOLUNTEER
STATIONS), ENDORSING A STANDARD FORM AGREEMENT
AND AUTHORIZING THE HOUSING, HUMAN & VETERAN
SERVICES DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR AS DESIGNATED
SIGNATORY TO EXECUTE THE DOCUMENTS - UP TO
100 NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATIONS ARE EXPECTED TO
PARTICIPATE IN THIS PROGRAM THAT PLACES SENIORS IN
COUNTY AGENCIES FOR COMMUNITY SERVICE
Page 195
June 28, 2011
Item #16D7
AFTER- THE-F ACT APPROVAL OF AMENDMENTS BETWEEN
COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
AND THE AREA AGENCY ON AGING FOR SOUTHWEST FL,
INC., TO REFLECT ADDITIONAL GRANT FUNDS IN THE
AMOUNT OF $60,000 FOR THE COMMUNITY CARE FOR THE
ELDERLY PROGRAM AND $8,668 FOR THE ALZHEIMER'S
DISEASE INITIATIVE PROGRAM FOR FY2010-11 - FUNDING
ALLOWS AREA SENIORS TO REMAIN IN THEIR HOMES BY
PROVIDING HOMEMAKER SERVICES, PERSONAL CARE,
RESPITE, EMERGENCY ALERT RESPONSE, AND MEDICAL
SUPPLIES
Item #16D8
AMENDMENT #1 TO THREE (3) SUBRECIPIENT
AGREEMENTS FOR STATE OF FLORIDA'S DEPARTMENT OF
CHILDREN AND FAMILIES (DCF) 2011 CHALLENGE GRANT
APPROVED BY THE BOARD MARCH 8, 2011 (ITEM #16D4).
AMENDMENT #1 WILL ALLOW FOR A FULL DESCRIPTION
OF THE DCF GRANT TERMS AND CONDITIONS - TO
ENSURE FULL COMPLIANCE IS MET WITH TERMS AND
CONDITIONS FOR GRANT AGREEMENTS WITH YOUTH
HAVEN, INC., ST. MATTHEW'S HOUSE AND THE SHELTER
FOR ABUSED WOMEN AND CHILDREN~ INC.
Item #16D9
RESOLUTION 2011-110: AMENDED ADMINISTRATIVE PLAN
FOR OPERATING THE NEIGHBORHOOD STABILIZATION
Page 196
June 28, 2011
PROGRAM TO CONFORM WITH REVISED AND NEWLY
ISSUED RULES, REGULATIONS, AND GUIDANCE FROM U.S.
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
RESUL TING FROM ENACTMENT OF THE WALL STREET
REFORM AND CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT OF 2010
Item #16DI0
BUDGET AMENDMENTS FOR THE MUSEUM TOTALING
$83,725.04 TO RECOGNIZE TOURIST DEVELOPMENT TAX
REVENUE RECEIVED AS A RESULT OF A CLASS ACTION
LA WSUIT BROUGHT AGAINST ONLINE TRAVEL AGENCIES
FOR $62,441.04, OTHER MISCELLANEOUS REVENUES FOR
$21,284 AND APPROPRIATE FUNDS FOR MUSEUM CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENTS - TO COMPLETE CONSTRUCTION AND
INSTALLATION OF A NAPLES AIR FIELD/PROVINCETOWN
BOSTON AIRLINE EXHIBIT AT NAPLES DEPOT MUSEUM
AND CONTINUE LED LIGHTING ENERGY UPGRADES AT
THE MAIN MUSEUM, THE MUSEUM OF THE EVERGLADES
AND THE NAPLES DEPOT
Item #16Dll
EXTENSION OF U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING & URBAN
DEVELOPMENT (HUD) ENTITLEMENT FY 2010-2011 GRANT
PERIODS FOR THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK
GRANT (CDBG), HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIP
(HOME) AND THE EMERGENCY SHELTER GRANT (ESG)
90 DAYS, CHANGING THE FYI0-ll FISCAL PERIOD FROM
JULY 1,2010 - JUNE 30, 2011 TO THE PERIOD JULY 1, 2010
THROUGH SEPTEMBER 30, 2011, AUTHORIZE CONTINUED
PAYMENT OF GRANT EXPENDITURES AND TO CHANGE
Page 197
June 28, 2011
FUTURE FISCAL PERIODS OF GRANTS BY HAVING THEM
BEGIN ON OCTOBER 1ST AND END ON SEPTEMBER 30TH_
TO ALIGN THE FISCAL PERIOD OF THE GRANTS WITH
COLLIER COUNTY'S & HUD'S FISCAL YEAR, AID IN THE
BUDGET PROCESS AND TO ASSIST IN THE SINGLE AUDIT
Item #16El
AMENDMENT NO.6 TO THE AGREEMENT WITH COLLIER
COUNTY'S DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD FOR THE DRIVER
EDUCATION PROGRAM PROVIDING $196,200 IN FUNDS-
USED TO PROVIDE A SUMMER DRIVER EDUCATION
PROGRAM FOR PUBLIC AND PRIVATE COUNTY STUDENTS,
SUPPLIES, EQUIPMENT & FUEL FOR YEAR ROUND DRIVER
EDUCATION PROGRAMS AND PARA-PROFESSIONALS
Item #16E2
RESOLUTION 2011-111: APPROVING A LEASE AGREEMENT
WITH U.S. SENATOR MARCO RUBIO FOR COUNTY-OWNED
OFFICE SPACE DURING HIS INITIAL TERM AND ANNUAL
REVENUE OF $4,200 - FOR APPROXIMATELY 450 SQUARE
FEET OF RENOVATED SPACE IN SUITE 106 IN THE
ADMINISTRATION BLDG. ON THE MAIN GOVERNMENT
CAMPUS AND EXPIRING JANUARY 1. 2017
Item # 16E3 - Moved to Item # 1 OJ (Per Agenda Change Sheet)
Item #16E4 - Moved to Item #10L (Per Agenda Change Sheet)
Item #16E5
Page 198
June 28, 2011
MODIFICATION TO THE BUDGET OF THE ENERGY
EFFICIENCY AND CONSERVATION BLOCK GRANT FUNDED
BY THE AMERICAN RECOVERY AND REINVESTMENT ACT
(ARRA) FUNDING, AUTHORIZE THE COUNTY MANAGER,
OR HIS DESIGNEE, TO REALLOCATE THE FUNDING WITHIN
THE BOARD APPROVED BUDGET AS NECESSARY, AND
AUTHORIZE THE NECESSARY BUDGET AMENDMENTS.
REALLOCATES BUDGETED FUNDS FROM A TRAFFIC
SIGNALIZATION ACTIVITY AND ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS
TO COMPLETE LIGHTING RETROFITS IN SEVERAL COUNTY
BUILDINGS - CHANGES PROJECT ACTIVITIES BUT NOT
THE AMOUNT OF THE GRANT ALLOCATION
Item #16E6
THE PEPPER RANCH PRESERVE FINAL MANAGEMENT
PLAN UNDER THE CONSERVATION COLLIER LAND
ACQUISITION PROGRAM AND DIRECTING THE COUNTY
MANAGER, OR HIS DESIGNEE, TO IMPLEMENT THE PLAN -
AS DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item #16E7 - Moved to Item #10G (Per Agenda Change Sheet)
Item # 16E8
THE FINAL MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE SHELL ISLAND
PRESERVE UNDER CONSERVATION COLLIER'S LAND
ACQUISITION PROGRAM AND DIRECT THE COUNTY
MANAGER, OR HIS DESIGNEE TO IMPLEMENT THE PLAN -
ACCESSIBLE FROM SHELL ISLAND ROAD IN COLLIER
COUNTY'S URBAN BOUNDARY, WEST OF STATE ROAD
(SR) 951 AND SURROUNDED BY ROOKERY BAY NATIONAL
Page 199
June 28, 2011
ESTUARINE RESEARCH RESERVE
Item #16E9
RIGHT-OF-WAY CONSENT AGREEMENT & MEMORANDUM
OF RIGHT-OF-WAY CONSENT AGREEMENT FROM FLORIDA
POWER & LIGHT COMPANY FOR ACCESS ON, OVER AND
ACROSS A PORTION OF CALUSA BAY SOUTH PROPERTY
LOCATED OFF GOODLETTE FRANK ROAD - TO UPGRADE
IQ WATER INFRASTRUCTURE, IMPROVE BREAKDOWN
RESPONSE AND CONTROL CAPABILITIES AND TO
INCREASE COMMUNICATION (PROJECT #70062)
Item #16EI0
CORRECTION OF A SCRIVENER'S ERROR IN THE BID
TABULATION FOR ITB NO. 10-5573, "TRAFFIC SIGN
MATERIALS AND RELATED ITEMS" - AS DETAILED IN THE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item #16Fl
TWO (2) CONTRACTUAL SERVICE AGREEMENTS BETWEEN
COLLIER COUNTY AND THE EAST NAPLES AND GOLDEN
GATE FIRE & RESCUE DISTRICTS FOR FIRE PROTECTION
AND RESCUE SERVICES IN COLLIER COUNTY'S FIRE
CONTROL DISTRICT AT A BUDGETED COST OF $175,200-
TO PROTECT RESIDENTS IN UNINCORPORATED AREAS OF
THE COUNTY OUTSIDE EXISTING DISTRICT BOUNDARIES
FROM OCTOBER 1,2010 THROUGH SEPTEMBER 30,2012
WITH PAYMENTS DUE ON JANUARY 1,2011 AND APRIL 1,
2011
Page 200
June 28, 2011
Item #16F2
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN COLLIER
COUNTY AND THE FLORIDA DIVISION OF EMERGENCY
MANAGEMENT ENDORSING PLACEMENT AND USE OF A
RESOURCE LOGISTICS SUPPORT TRAILER FOR SHARED
USE IN THE COUNTY AND USED FOR OTHER EMERGENCY
SITUATIONS IN THE REGION - FOR USE OF A 53-FOOT
TRAILER OWNED BY FLORIDA'S DIVISION OF EMERGENCY
MANAGEMENT TO ASSIST WITH DELIVERY OF SUPPLIES
AND EQUIPMENT & HELP COORDINATE RELIEF EFFORTS
DURING ANY DISASTERS IN A THIRTEEN COUNTY REGION
Item #16F3
AN AGREEMENT ACCEPTING THE ANNUAL EMERGENCY
MANAGEMENT PREPAREDNESS AND ASSISTANCE GRANT,
IN THE AMOUNT OF $91,805 TO UPDATE THE STRATEGIC
HOUSING PLAN AND AUTHORIZE THE NECESSARY
BUDGET AMENDMENT - GRANT AGREEMENT #12-FG-09-
21-01-078 AND REQUIRING A DOLLAR FOR DOLLAR LOCAL
GOVERNMENT MATCH AUTHORIZED AND TAKEN FROM
OUR ANNUAL EMP A GRANT
Item #16F4
BID #11-5704 FOR THE AMOUNT $685,605 FOR PELICAN BAY
COMMUNITY CROSSWALKS TO BATEMAN CONTRACTING,
LLP AND APPROVE A BUDGET AMENDMENT IN THE
AMOUNT OF $116,400; PAID USING MSTBU DISTRICT
PROPERTY OWNER'S ASSESSMENT REVENUE - FOR THE
Page 201
June 28, 2011
INSTALLATION OF 14 CROSSWALKS, (6) SIX WILL BE DONE
THIS FISCAL YEAR AND REMAINING COMPLETED WHEN
FUNDS ARE AVAILABLE; THE PELICAN BAY FOUNDATION
HAS ALSO AGREED TO CONTRIBUTE TOWARDS COSTS OF
THREE (3) THE CROSSWALKS SERVICING FOUNDATION
FACILITIES
Item #16F5
REPORT TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
COVERING BUDGET AMENDMENTS IMPACTING RESERVES
IN AN AMOUNT TOTALING $25,000 OR LESS - BA #11-308,
FOR UPGRADING TWO-WAY RADIOS USED BY PERSONNEL
COMMUNICATING SAFETY~ EMERGENCIES AND DISASTER
Item #16F6
RESOLUTION 2011-112: APPROVING AMENDMENTS
(APPROPRIATING GRANTS, DONATIONS, CONTRIBUTIONS
OR INSURANCE PROCEEDS) TO THE FYI0-ll ADOPTED
BUDGET
Item #16Gl
THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, ACTING AS
THE AIRPORT AUTHORITY, APPROVE AND AUTHORIZE
THE AUTHORITY'S EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO EXECUTE
TIE-DOWN STANDARD AGREEMENTS FOR EVERGLADES
AIRPARK, IMMOKALEE REGIONAL AIRPORT AND MARCO
ISLAND EXECUTIVE AIRPORT - A COMMON INDUSTRY
PRACTICE THAT WILL ENSURE CONSISTENT TREATMENT
OF TENANTS AND A CONTINUOUS REVENUE STREAM BY
Page 202
June 28, 2011
MAINTAINING MAXIMUM TENANT OCCUPANCY
Item #16G2
A CONCESSIONAIRE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE COLLIER
COUNTY AIRPORT AUTHORITY & MARCO AVIATION INC.,
FOR SPECIALIZED AVIATION SERVICES AT THE MARCO
ISLAND EXECUTIVE AIRPORT - AS DETAILED IN THE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item #16Hl
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING JULY 25,2011 EDGERRIN
JAMES FOUNDATION FOOTBALL DAY IN IMMOKALEE -
ADOPTED
Item # 16H2
COMMISSIONER COLETTA'S REQUEST FOR
REIMBURSEMENT FOR ATTENDING A FUNCTION SERVING
A VALID PUBLIC PURPOSE -ATTENDED THE EDC'S 2011
POST-LEGISLATIVE DELEGATION LUNCHEON AT THE
GRILL ROOM, MOORINGS PARK, NAPLES, FL ON MAY 25,
2011. $15 TO BE PAID FROM COMMISSIONER COLETTA'S
TRAVEL BUDGET - LOCATED AT 120 MOORINGS PARK
DRIVE NAPLES~ FLORIDA
Item #16H3
COMMISSIONER HENNING'S REQUEST FOR
REIMBURSEMENT FOR ATTENDING A FUNCTION SERVING
A VALID PUBLIC PURPOSE. HE ATTENDED THE COLLIER
Page 203
June 28, 2011
BUILDING INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION'S MEMBERSHIP
MEETING ON JUNE 16,2011 AT OLDE CYPRESS ON
IMMOKALEE ROAD, NAPLES, FL. $16 TO BE PAID FROM
COMMISSIONER HENNING'S TRAVEL BUDGET - LOCATED
ON TREELINE DRIVE~ NAPLES
Item #1611
MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS TO FILE FOR RECORD WITH
ACTION AS DIRECTED
The following miscellaneous correspondence, as presented by the
Board of County Commissioners, has been directed to the various
departments as indicated:
Page 204
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
ADVISORY BOARD MINUTES
June 28, 2011
I. ADVISORY BOARD MINUTES TO FILE FOR RECORD WITH ACTION AS
DIRECTED:
A. Minutes:
I) Airport Authority:
Minutes of 4/11111
2) Animal Services Advisory Board:
Minutes of 3/15/20 II; 4/19/11
3) Collier County Citizens Corps:
Agenda of2/16/11
Minutes of 2/16/11
4) Collier County Coastal Advisory Committee:
Minutes of 3/10/11; 4/14/11
5) Collier County Code Enforcement Board:
Minutes of 3/24/11 (special session); 3/24/11 (regular session)
6) Collier County Planning Commission:
Agenda of 3/1 7/20 II
Minutes of 3/17/20 II
7) Collier County Special Magistrate:
Agenda of 4/1/11
Minutes of 4/1/11
8) Contractors Licensing Board:
Minutes of 4/20/11
9) Development Services Advisory Committee:
Minutes of 4/6/11
10) Environmental Advisory Council:
Minutes of 3/2/11; 4/13/11
II) Golden Gate Beautification Advisory Committee:
Agenda of 4/12/11
Minutes of 4/12/11
12) Golden Gate Estates Land Trust Committee:
Agenda of 3/28/11
Minutes of 3/28/11
14) Hispanic Affairs Advisory Board:
Minutes of 10/28/10; 11118/10; 1/27/11; 2/24/11
15) Immokalee Enterprise Zone Development Agency:
Agenda of 4/20/11
Minutes of 3/16/11
16) Immokalee Local Redevelopment Advisory Board:
Agenda of 4120/11
Minutes of 3/16/11
17) Land Acquisition Advisory Committee:
Minutes of3/14/11
18) Lely Golf Estates Beautification Advisory Committee:
Agendaof3/17/11; 4/21111
Minutes of2/17/11; 3/17/11
19) Library Advisory Board:
Minutes of2/16/11; 3/16/11
20) Ochopee Fire Control District Advisory Committee:
Minutes of3/14/ll; 4/11111
21 ) Parks and Recreation Advisory Board:
Minutes of 3/16/11
22) Pelican Bay Services Division Board:
Agenda of2/161l1 (Special workshop to discuss Clam Bay markers);
2/22/11 (Special workshop to discuss Clam Bay markers); 3/2/11;
3/ 18/11 (budget committee); 4/6/ II; 4/111 11 (budget committee);
4/12/11 (Clam Bay workshop)
Minutes of 2/16/11 (Special workshop to discuss Clam Bay
markers); 2/22/11 (Special workshop to discuss Clam Bay markers);
3/2/11; 3/18/11 (budget committee); 3/18/11 (MTSU budget
subcommittee); 4/6/11; 4/11111 (budget committee); 4/12/11 (Clam
Bay workshop)
23) Radio Road Beautification Advisory Committee:
Agenda of 4/19/11; 5/17/11
Minutes of 3/15/11; 4/19111
24) Radio Road East of Santa Barbara Blvd to Davis Blvd Advisory
Committee:
Agenda of 4/6/11; 5/4/11
Minutes of 4/6/11
June 28, 2011
Item #16Jl
DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD OF MAY 28, 2011
THROUGH JUNE 3, 2011 AND FOR SUBMISSION INTO THE
OFFICIAL RECORDS OF THE BOARD
Item #16J2
DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD OF JUNE 4, 2011
THROUGH JUNE 10, 2011 AND FOR SUBMISSION INTO THE
OFFICIAL RECORDS OF THE BOARD
Item # 16J3
DESIGNATING THE SHERIFF OFFICIAL APPLICANT AND
POINT OF CONTACT FOR U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE,
EDWARD BYRNE MEMORIAL JUSTICE ASSISTANCE GRANT
(JAG) FYll LOCAL GRANT, AUTHORIZING ELECTRONIC
SUBMISSION OF THE APPLICATION, ACCEPTING THE
GRANT FOR $91,097 WHEN AWARDED, APPROVING
BUDGET AMENDMENTS AND APPROVING THE SHERIFF'S
OFFICE RECEIVER AND EXPENDER OF FUNDS - USED FOR
THE JUVENILES AT RISK COMPREHENSIVE ACTION
PROGRAM AND WILL SUPPORT COSTS FOR EMPLOYING A
LICENSED MENTAL HEALTH COUNSELOR AND A PORTION
OF A JUVENILE AT RISK DEPUTY'S SALARY & BENEFITS
Item #16J4
BCC TO SERVE AS LOCAL GOVERNMENT COORDINATING
UNIT FOR FL DEPARTMENT OF LAW ENFORCEMENT'S
FEDERAL FYll EDWARD BYRNE MEMORIAL JUSTICE
Page 205
June 28, 2011
ASSISTANCE GRANT (JAG) COUNTYWIDE PROGRAM,
AUTHORIZE CHAIRMAN TO EXECUTE THE CERTIFICATION
OF PARTICIPATION, DESIGNATE THE SHERIFF OFFICIAL
APPLICANT AND THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE STAFF GRANT
FINANCIAL AND PROGRAM MANAGERS, APPROVE THE
GRANT APPLICATION FOR $138,940 WHEN COMPLETE AND
AUTHORIZE ACCEPTING THE A WARD AND ASSOCIATED
BUDGET AMENDMENTS - CONTINUING THE CHILD
ABUSE/SEXUAL OFFENDER/SEXUAL PREDATOR PROGRAM
BY SUPPORTING THE (MAJORITY) SALARY AND BENEFITS
FOR A DETECTIVE/INVESTIGATOR AND FOR A COMPUTER
FORENSIC ANALYST
Item #16J5
THAT THE BOARD CONCUR WITH THE CLERK'S INTENT TO
ISSUE A REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL FOR IMPLEMENTATION
OF AN ACCOUNTS PAY ABLE IMPROVEMENT SOLUTION
FOR SAP AND AUTHORIZE USE OF EXISTING FUNDS IN
FY2011 AND TENTATIVELY BUDGETED FY2012 - TO
STREAMLINE THE PROCESS AND IS ESTIMATED TO NOT
EXCEED $300,000 W/RECURRING ANNUAL MAINTENANCE
EXPENSES OF BETWEEN $30~000 AND $45~000
Item #16J6
THE SECOND YEAR OF CONTRACT #09-5270, "AUDITING
SERVICES FOR COLLIER COUNTY", WITH ERNST AND
YOUNG LLP, TO PROVIDE FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 2011
EXTERNAL AUDIT AND AUTHORIZE THE CORRESPONDING
PAYMENT OF $592,250 FOR SERVICES -AS DETAILED IN
THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Page 206
June 28, 2011
Item #16Kl
AN AGREED ORDER A WARDING EXPERT FEES AND COSTS
IN THE AMOUNT OF $73,268.63 FOR THE ACQUISITION OF
PARCEL 111 IN THE LAWSUIT STYLED COLLIER COUNTY V.
NB HOLDINGS CORPORATION, ET AL., CASE NO. 06-0658-CA,
SANTA BARBARA BOULEVARD, PROJECT NO. 62081.
(FISCAL IMPACT: $73~268.63)
Item #16K2
MEDIATED SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND STIPULATED
FINAL JUDGMENT TO BE DRAFTED AND TO INCORPORATE
THE SAME TERMS AND CONDITIONS AS THE MEDIATED
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT IN THE AMOUNT $80,400 FOR
ACQUISITION OF PARCEL 838A AND 838B AND FOR ALL
COUNTER-CLAIMS OF RESPONDENT IN THE LAWSUIT
STYLED COLLIER COUNTY V. NANCY L. JOHNSON PERRY, ET
AL., CASE NO. 03-2373-CA. GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY
PROJECT #60027. (FISCAL IMPACT: $16~400)
Item #16K3
A SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AMONG ALL PARTIES IN THE
CASE STYLED BURGESON V. COLLIER COUNTY, ET AL.,
CASE NO. 2:09-CV-220-FTM-99-DNF, NOW PENDING IN THE
US DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF
FLORIDA~ FORT MYERS DIVISION
Item #16K4
Page 207
June 28, 2011
COUNTY ATTORNEY TO FILE A LAWSUIT, INCLUDING
INJUNCTIVE RELIEF, ON BEHALF OF THE COLLIER COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, AGAINST FLAMINGO
BEND NURSERY, INC., REGARDING CODE ENFORCEMENT
VIOLATIONS FOR ILLEGAL DUMPING AND FOR DIGGING
FOR IRRIGATION WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING COUNTY
PERMITS AND FOR ILLEGAL DUMPING UPON A SEP ARA TE
PARCEL OF PROPERTY - AS DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
Item #17A
RESOLUTION 2011-113: SV-PL2010-1995, W ALMART, A
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS OF
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, GRANTING A VARIANCE
FROM SECTION 5.06.04.F.4 OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT
CODE CONCERNING THE NUMBER OF PERMISSIBLE WALL
SIGNS AND GRANTING A VARIANCE FROM SECTION
5.06.04.F.4.A CONCERNING THE MAXIMUM SIGN DISPLAY
AREA, WHICH SIGNS ARE LOCATED AT 9885 COLLIER
BOULEVARD IN SECTION 3, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE
26 EAST~ COLLIER COUNTY~ FLORIDA
Item #17B
ORDINANCE 2011-23: PUDZ-PL2009-2496, EMMANUEL
EVANGELICAL LUTHERAN CHURCH, AMENDING
ORDINANCE NUMBER 2004-41, AS AMENDED, COLLIER
COUNTY'S LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, WHICH
ESTABLISHED COMPREHENSIVE ZONING REGULATIONS
FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY,
FLORIDA, BY AMENDING THE APPROPRIATE ZONING
Page 208
June 28, 2011
ATLAS MAP OR MAPS BY CHANGING THE ZONING
CLASSIFICATION OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED REAL
PROPERTY FROM THE ESTATES (E) ZONING DISTRICT TO A
COMMUNITY FACILITIES PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
(CFPUD) ZONING DISTRICT FOR THE PROJECT KNOWN AS
EMMANUEL EVANGELICAL LUTHERAN CHURCH OF
NAPLES, INC. CFPUD, TO ALLOW 90,000 SQUARE FEET OF
USES TO INCLUDE WORSHIP/CHURCH AND RELATED
SOCIAL SERVICES, A 300 PERSON CHILD AND ADUL T DAY
CARE FACILITY, JOB TRAINING AND VOCATIONAL
REHABILITATION, A 450 PERSON PRIVATE SCHOOL; OR, IN
THE AL TERNA TIVE, DEVELOPMENT OF SINGLE F AMIL Y
RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS, LOCATED ON THE SOUTH
SIDE OF OIL WELL ROAD, IN SECTION 19, TOWNSHIP 48
SOUTH, RANGE 28 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA,
CONSISTING OF 21.72+/- ACRES SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS;
AND BY PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE
Item #17C
RESOLUTION 2011-114: APPROVING AMENDMENTS
(APPROPRIATING CARRY FORWARD, TRANSFERS AND
SUPPLEMENTAL REVENUE) TO THE FISCAL YEAR 2010-11
ADOPTED BUDGET
Page 209
June 28, 2011
There being no further business for the good of the County, the
meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 3:44 p.m.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS/EX
OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF
SPECIAL DISTRICTS UNDER ITS CONTROL
'1uJ-W. ~
FRED COYLE, CRAI AN
~TrE~Ta;~~'.""'"
rJW:J:ctJiT'~:~.~~~9CK, CLERK
~ "':' ':) '.~,:::'-:
~ .. - . \c., ,
'i.' { .... ..' .,,"
tst II'tj ~a-f....ari
11vnaturt ~';t. 4 .
These minutes app~ed by the Board on ~ ~ Q ~ J
as presented A or as corrected
."
~Ol \
TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF GREGORY COURT
REPORTING SERVICE, INC., BY TERRI LEWIS, COURT
REPORTER AND NOTARY PUBLIC.
Page 210